DefinePK

Abstract

This research examines how Pakistani legal discourse constructs divergent legal subjectivities for women and men through gendered language. This is based on feminist legal theory and critical discourse analysis and examines the symbolic aspects of law by way of an analysis of selected constitutional provisions, statutory enactments, and court judgments. The study finds that legal writing often uses masculine generics, passive voice, and moralistic framing, placing men as normative legal subjects and women as passive, dependent, or morally judged characters. Even in progressive law, discursive patterns serve to shore up traditional gender hierarchies by situating women as objects of protection instead of independent agents of law. The discourse analysis also reveals discursive silences on issues like marital rape, reproductive rights, and structural violence that further push women to the periphery of the legal system. Simultaneously, the research identifies nascent counter-discourses in parliament debates and legal action by activists which contest the prevailing narratives and present alternative notions of justice and agency. Finally, the study contends that changing legal language is necessary to attain substantive gender justice in Pakistan since language not only represents but actually constructs legal reality.