This study aims to debate gender issues in the Brazilian judiciary system through a case study of the controversial decision made by Judge Joana Ribeiro Zimmer in 2022. In her decision, she denied the right to abortion to an 11-year-old girl who had experienced rape. This decision, besides being contrary to Brazilian legislation which allows abortion for rape victims and contrary to international human rights norms to which the Brazilian state is bound, also exposes the socioeconomic implications of no gender-sensitive decisions from the Brazilian judiciary. Moreover, the case led to major social repercussions, including demonstrations from religious groups aiming at the continuation of the pregnancy of the 11-year-old girl. Starting from this case study, we intend to demonstrate why having more women in decision-making places sometimes does not promote gender equality, even when gender parity is on the agenda for these places. The theories of intersectionality and representation, as well as analyses provided by scholars on the Brazilian socioeconomic background will assist in the debate. The current political polarization in the country, as well as the rise of a religious right in the public debate, are key factors here, considering the patriarchal element in Brazilian politics of ‘us and them’. Therefore, this study discusses how the decision cannot be considered an isolated case but has to be understood within the broader current Brazilian social-legal context.