International Human Rights

Lesson 7: Specific Rights (continued)

Session 7.3 - Suggestions for change.

Possible suggestions for change have focused on the possibility of dialogue. Calls have been made that forms of communication among women and others must provide for a specific context of women rights. The purpose is to force the issue of gender rights into the everyday discourse. Note as well that there are differing forms of feminist approaches that will influence the manner by which discourse is engaged. Liberal feminism calls for equal treatment to all, but fails to account for structural imbalance of power between the sexes. Cultural feminism celebrates distinctions between the sexes, but may marginalize women’s rights. Radical feminism transforms the masculine oriented world, but creates a strategic and implementation issue for the human rights system. All three approaches however might be necessary at different times depending on the situation and status of the women within the social realm.

The notion that women’s rights must become a respected part of culture and traditions can be conducted via internal discourse. Incorporating various sections of society would widen the possibilities and assist to create shifts in the overall approach. Human rights groups assist with these legal and social changes as well. Furthermore, cross-cultural dialogue raises the awareness of the issue and demonstrates how not all religious or cultural based issues are necessary or universal. Exchanging information is important for example within the Muslim world, especially when considering individuals from different states and societies. Individuals can discuss and demonstrate how treatment towards women differs across the board in various states, and how alternative explanations to religious texts exist.

There also have been attempts to re-characterize certain rights to make them more acceptable within particular societies. For example, the Human Rights Committee of the ICCPR defines non-discrimination using what is called a similar yet different approach. Situations must be similar yet the differences among people must be recognized.

Hence, differences are allowed based on reasonable and objective criteria, like physical size. The problem is that it tends to use a male standard of discrimination and forces women to be the same as men, or stress their differences thereby limiting their rights. It does not allow for the questioning of culture laws and religious traditions to challenge the system. It thus has been proposed that a disadvantage theory should be put in place.

Similarly, a social and economic rights orientation does not always address women’s disproportionate disadvantages, for example within the work place or access to greater benefits.

Altering personal laws is another avenue for change. Note however the public-private divide mentioned above and how they are linked in this instance. In addition, the matter would affect issues relating to property laws and family laws that would demand a major overhaul of legal systems that have been rooted for a long time in the state. The shoring up of international mechanisms is hoped to begin to address these problems. This is not only via individual communications, but also via the link of human rights not only to development and democracy, but also to gender issues. This would force states to consider and address the issue of gender rights in a proper context, especially if ties to aid or other forms of development support.

OPTIONAL READING: Steiner and Alston, 902-922