Last Updated:
Twisha’s case raises questions about how women are scrutinised after death, and why public sympathy often appears conditional on whether they fit the image of an ‘ideal victim’
A psychologist explains how words like ‘depressed’, ‘unstable’, or ‘mentally ill’ are often casually used to ‘discredit’ women in emotionally charged marital cases.
The death of 33-year-old Twisha Sharma — a Noida-based model-turned-actor — has triggered a familiar cycle in India’s public discourse around women who die under suspicious circumstances. Even before the investigation is complete, the focus often shifts away from the circumstances surrounding the death and towards the woman herself — her personality, relationships, mental health, social media activity and private conversations.
In recent years, several cases involving married women, alleged suicides, dowry deaths or marital abuse have followed a similar pattern. Instead of waiting for verified facts, public debate frequently turns into a posthumous character assessment of women.
The Twisha case has once again raised questions about how women are scrutinised after death, and why public sympathy often appears conditional on whether they fit the image of an “ideal victim”.
“The insistence on the ‘ideal victim’ stereotype is rooted in long-standing societal expectations of women within marriage expectations that equate virtue with silence, resilience with endurance, and dignity with sacrifice. A woman who fits this mould — submissive, non-confrontational, and visibly suffering more readily perceived as credible. Conversely, a woman who is assertive, independent, or expressive is often viewed with suspicion, her victimhood questioned or diminished. This dichotomy creates a dangerous hierarchy of suffering, where only those who conform to a narrow template are deemed worthy of empathy and justice,” said Rhythm Srivastava, Delhi-based lawyer and Supreme Court advocate.
The Battle Over Public Narrative Begins Early
One striking feature of many high-profile death cases today is how quickly competing narratives emerge online. Within hours, social media, television debates and anonymous “sources” begin circulating selective details intended to shape public opinion.
In the Twisha Sharma case too, online discourse began focusing on her personal relationships, emotional state, social media activity and private life. Fragments of alleged chats, claims by unnamed sources and speculative commentary started circulating before authorities had fully established the sequence of events.
Legal experts have repeatedly warned that such parallel public trials can distort perceptions long before any official findings emerge. In sensitive cases involving women, this often results in scrutiny shifting from the accused or the circumstances of death to whether the deceased woman’s behaviour appears “acceptable” enough to deserve public empathy.
“The impact of such stereotyping is not merely rhetorical; it has tangible consequences for how cases are investigated and prosecuted,” Srivastava added. In the absence of overt physical evidence, which is often the case in instances of psychological or emotional abuse, the credibility of the victim becomes crucial, she explained.
“However, when credibility itself is judged through the prism of social conformity rather than objective evidence, it places an unfair and often insurmountable burden on the victim even in death. Defence strategies frequently exploit this bias by constructing alternative narratives that portray the woman as emotionally unstable, incompatible with her marital home, or otherwise responsible for her own circumstances, thereby weakening the prosecution’s case despite statutory presumptions designed to prevent precisely such outcomes,” Srivastava pointed out.
The Familiar Scrutiny Of Women’s ‘Character’
In Twisha’s case and other similar ones involving allegations of dowry harassment, emotional abuse, or abetment of suicide, the narrative frequently shifts from examining the conduct of the accused to dissecting the life of the deceased woman. “Questions begin to surface not about the pattern of abuse or coercion she may have endured but about her personality, her choices, her independence, and even her social media presence. Was she ‘adjusting’ enough? Was she too outspoken? Did she have prior relationships? Such lines of inquiry, while legally irrelevant to the determination of guilt, become central to public discourse and, at times, seep into the investigative process itself,” Srivastava stressed.
This tendency reflects a broader societal expectation imposed on women in India. Public sympathy frequently appears tied to whether a woman fits traditional notions of victimhood — quiet, emotionally restrained, family-oriented and free from any perceived personal “flaws”.
Sociologists and gender researchers have long argued that women in such cases are often forced to prove not just what happened to them, but also that they were worthy of sympathy in the first place.
A University of Queensland research, including a 2019 study published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, indicates that rape complainants are deemed less believable if they do not exhibit expected distress.
The study is based on a comprehensive meta-analysis evaluating the “emotional victim effect”. It investigates how a sexual assault complainant’s emotional state influences how believable they are to legal professionals and jurors.
The study tests societal and judicial expectations that a genuine rape victim must exhibit intense, visible distress (such as crying or shaking) when recounting their assault.
How Leaked Chats And Social Media Shape Public Opinion
With digital communication being ubiquitous, leaked WhatsApp chats, Instagram posts, photographs and voice notes often become central to media narratives.
In many cases, these fragments are presented without full context, verification or clarity about authenticity. Yet once circulated online, they begin shaping public assumptions almost instantly.
Social media algorithms further intensify this. Content that appears emotionally charged, controversial or sensational spreads faster than careful reporting. Edited screenshots, speculative timelines and emotionally loaded commentary can quickly dominate public conversation.
“This environment fosters a form of parallel trial, where victims are frequently blamed and the accused defended without adherence to any evidentiary standards, highlighting a stark contrast with the judicial process; unlike courts of law, social media operates without rules of evidence, thrives on sensationalism, and reduces complex, layered experiences of abuse into simplistic, binary judgments that can significantly skew public perception,” said Srivastava.
The result is that investigations increasingly unfold alongside a chaotic online ecosystem where audiences consume partial information in real time.
How Men And Women Victims Are Treated Differently
The treatment of victims in cases of marital abuse, suicide, and divorce in India often reflects a “clear gendered imbalance”, shaped by both legal provisions and social attitudes, stressed Srivastava.
Women, on one hand, benefit from certain protective presumptions under laws like the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and evidentiary safeguards such as Section 113B Indian Evidence Act, which are designed to address their structural vulnerability within marriage. However, this legal advantage is frequently counterbalanced by intense scrutiny of their character and personal choices, especially in cases of suicide or dowry-related deaths, she added.
Men, on the other hand, often receive “comparatively less legal protection” in such matters and may find it difficult to assert claims of abuse, yet they “tend to attract greater social sympathy”, with their actions more readily attributed to external pressures like financial stress rather than personal failings.
“This duality creates a paradox where women are legally supported but socially judged, while men are socially empathised with but legally under-recognised as victims,” she pointed out.
While statutes attempt to address dowry related cruelty and abetment, forms of harm such as emotional abuse, coercive control, and gaslighting continue to remain largely under-recognised within the legal framework, primarily because they do not easily translate into concrete, measurable evidence, she further said. “As a result, despite the intent to shift the burden onto the accused, the evidentiary system still leans in favour of tangible proof, documents, injuries, or explicit records often sidelining the lived experiences of victims, thereby creating a disconnect between the spirit of the law and its practical enforcement.”
Why The ‘Ideal Victim’ Standard Still Exists
Why are women still expected to conform to a particular moral standard in order to receive empathy?
Gender experts say the “ideal victim” framework remains deeply embedded in public thinking. Women perceived as traditional, self-sacrificing or visibly vulnerable are often more likely to receive sympathy. Those seen as assertive, independent or socially unconventional may face greater scrutiny even after death.
This becomes particularly visible in cases involving marriage, relationships or mental health. Conversations frequently shift towards analysing the woman’s personality instead of examining broader structural issues such as emotional abuse, coercion, domestic violence or institutional failures.
Mental health, too, often becomes selectively weaponised in public discourse. Instead of encouraging nuanced conversations around depression, emotional distress or abusive relationships, online narratives sometimes reduce complex situations into simplistic judgments about the victim’s “stability”.
“The idea of the ‘ideal victim’ comes from criminology and social psychology. In many domestic violence, dowry harassment, or marital conflict cases, society unconsciously looks for a woman who appears unquestionably ‘pure,’ emotionally restrained, obedient, and psychologically flawless before extending empathy. The moment a woman appears assertive, emotionally expressive, independent, or has a mental health history, public sympathy often becomes conditional,” said Dr Jyoti Kapoor, senior consultant psychiatrist and psychotherapist, Manasthali Wellness.
Dr Kapoor explains how words like “depressed”, “unstable”, or “mentally ill” are often casually used to “discredit” women in emotionally charged marital cases. But “having depression or seeking psychiatric help does not invalidate someone’s lived experiences or allegations. In fact, mental health deterioration may itself be a consequence of prolonged emotional trauma,” she added.
What Needs To Change
The Twisha Sharma case is ultimately about more than one investigation.
Srivastava says, “Addressing the gap between law and reality in cases of dowry deaths and marital abuse requires both systemic and practical recalibration, beginning with investigative reforms where authorities must move beyond superficial fact-finding to adopt tools like psychological autopsies in suspicious deaths and specialised training to recognise patterns of coercive control.”
Equally critical is a shift in judicial approach, where courts must transition from assessing whether the deceased fits an “ideal victim” mould to examining the broader pattern of harm and conduct within the matrimonial relationship, she added.
Parallelly, stricter media accountability is essential, with penal consequences for selective leaks and posthumous character defamation, which frequently prejudice both investigation and trial, she said.
“Ultimately, however, the most fundamental change must occur at a societal level where instead of questioning why a woman did not leave, the inquiry must turn towards understanding the structural, emotional, and often coercive barriers that made leaving unsafe or unviable in the first place,” she stressed.
Dr Kapoor pointed out that though people understand visible injuries more easily than invisible psychological injuries. Emotional abuse, coercive control, chronic criticism, intimidation, gaslighting, and social isolation may not leave bruises, but they can profoundly affect the nervous system and mental health. Trauma psychiatry today recognises that sustained emotional stress can alter sleep, cognition, emotional regulation, self-worth, and even physical health.
“A person can simultaneously have emotional vulnerability, psychiatric symptoms, relationship conflict, and still be a victim of coercion or abuse. These realities are not mutually exclusive. Ethical public discourse requires restraint, empathy, and respect for due process rather than speculative psychological labelling,” she further said.
Stay Ahead, Read Faster
Scan the QR code to download the News18 app and enjoy a seamless news experience anytime, anywhere.
