opinion essay on human rights

30,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

Essay on Human Rights: Samples in 500 and 1500

• Updated on  
• Dec 9, 2023

Essay writing is an integral part of the school curriculum and various academic and competitive exams like IELTS , TOEFL , SAT , UPSC , etc. It is designed to test your command of the English language and how well you can gather your thoughts and present them in a structure with a flow. To master your ability to write an essay, you must read as much as possible and practise on any given topic. This blog brings you a detailed guide on how to write an essay on Human Rights , with useful essay samples on Human rights.

This Blog Includes:

The basic human rights, 200 words essay on human rights, 500 words essay on human rights, 500+ words essay on human rights in india, 1500 words essay on human rights, importance of human rights, essay on human rights pdf.

Also Read: Essay on Labour Day

Also Read: 1-Minute Speech on Human Rights for Students

What are Human Rights

Human rights mark everyone as free and equal, irrespective of age, gender, caste, creed, religion and nationality. The United Nations adopted human rights in light of the atrocities people faced during the Second World War. On the 10th of December 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Its adoption led to the recognition of human rights as the foundation for freedom, justice and peace for every individual. Although it’s not legally binding, most nations have incorporated these human rights into their constitutions and domestic legal frameworks. Human rights safeguard us from discrimination and guarantee that our most basic needs are protected.

Did you know that the 10th of December is celebrated as Human Rights Day ?

Before we move on to the essays on human rights, let’s check out the basics of what they are.

Also Read: What are Human Rights?

Also Read: 7 Impactful Human Rights Movies Everyone Must Watch!

Here is a 200-word short sample essay on basic Human Rights.

Human rights are a set of rights given to every human being regardless of their gender, caste, creed, religion, nation, location or economic status. These are said to be moral principles that illustrate certain standards of human behaviour. Protected by law , these rights are applicable everywhere and at any time. Basic human rights include the right to life, right to a fair trial, right to remedy by a competent tribunal, right to liberty and personal security, right to own property, right to education, right of peaceful assembly and association, right to marriage and family, right to nationality and freedom to change it, freedom of speech, freedom from discrimination, freedom from slavery, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of movement, right of opinion and information, right to adequate living standard and freedom from interference with privacy, family, home and correspondence.

Also Read: Law Courses

Check out this 500-word long essay on Human Rights.

Every person has dignity and value. One of the ways that we recognise the fundamental worth of every person is by acknowledging and respecting their human rights. Human rights are a set of principles concerned with equality and fairness. They recognise our freedom to make choices about our lives and develop our potential as human beings. They are about living a life free from fear, harassment or discrimination.

Human rights can broadly be defined as the basic rights that people worldwide have agreed are essential. These include the right to life, the right to a fair trial, freedom from torture and other cruel and inhuman treatment, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to health, education and an adequate standard of living. These human rights are the same for all people everywhere – men and women, young and old, rich and poor, regardless of our background, where we live, what we think or believe. This basic property is what makes human rights’ universal’.

Human rights connect us all through a shared set of rights and responsibilities. People’s ability to enjoy their human rights depends on other people respecting those rights. This means that human rights involve responsibility and duties towards other people and the community. Individuals have a responsibility to ensure that they exercise their rights with consideration for the rights of others. For example, when someone uses their right to freedom of speech, they should do so without interfering with someone else’s right to privacy.

Governments have a particular responsibility to ensure that people can enjoy their rights. They must establish and maintain laws and services that enable people to enjoy a life in which their rights are respected and protected. For example, the right to education says that everyone is entitled to a good education. Therefore, governments must provide good quality education facilities and services to their people. If the government fails to respect or protect their basic human rights, people can take it into account.

Values of tolerance, equality and respect can help reduce friction within society. Putting human rights ideas into practice can help us create the kind of society we want to live in. There has been tremendous growth in how we think about and apply human rights ideas in recent decades. This growth has had many positive results – knowledge about human rights can empower individuals and offer solutions for specific problems.

Human rights are an important part of how people interact with others at all levels of society – in the family, the community, school, workplace, politics and international relations. Therefore, people everywhere must strive to understand what human rights are. When people better understand human rights, it is easier for them to promote justice and the well-being of society. 

Also Read: Important Articles in Indian Constitution

Here is a human rights essay focused on India.

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. It has been rightly proclaimed in the American Declaration of Independence that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Created with certain unalienable rights….” Similarly, the Indian Constitution has ensured and enshrined Fundamental rights for all citizens irrespective of caste, creed, religion, colour, sex or nationality. These basic rights, commonly known as human rights, are recognised the world over as basic rights with which every individual is born.

In recognition of human rights, “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was made on the 10th of December, 1948. This declaration is the basic instrument of human rights. Even though this declaration has no legal bindings and authority, it forms the basis of all laws on human rights. The necessity of formulating laws to protect human rights is now being felt all over the world. According to social thinkers, the issue of human rights became very important after World War II concluded. It is important for social stability both at the national and international levels. Wherever there is a breach of human rights, there is conflict at one level or the other.

Given the increasing importance of the subject, it becomes necessary that educational institutions recognise the subject of human rights as an independent discipline. The course contents and curriculum of the discipline of human rights may vary according to the nature and circumstances of a particular institution. Still, generally, it should include the rights of a child, rights of minorities, rights of the needy and the disabled, right to live, convention on women, trafficking of women and children for sexual exploitation etc.

Since the formation of the United Nations , the promotion and protection of human rights have been its main focus. The United Nations has created a wide range of mechanisms for monitoring human rights violations. The conventional mechanisms include treaties and organisations, U.N. special reporters, representatives and experts and working groups. Asian countries like China argue in favour of collective rights. According to Chinese thinkers, European countries lay stress upon individual rights and values while Asian countries esteem collective rights and obligations to the family and society as a whole.

With the freedom movement the world over after World War II, the end of colonisation also ended the policy of apartheid and thereby the most aggressive violation of human rights. With the spread of education, women are asserting their rights. Women’s movements play an important role in spreading the message of human rights. They are fighting for their rights and supporting the struggle for human rights of other weaker and deprived sections like bonded labour, child labour, landless labour, unemployed persons, Dalits and elderly people.

Unfortunately, violation of human rights continues in most parts of the world. Ethnic cleansing and genocide can still be seen in several parts of the world. Large sections of the world population are deprived of the necessities of life i.e. food, shelter and security of life. Right to minimum basic needs viz. Work, health care, education and shelter are denied to them. These deprivations amount to the negation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Also Read: Human Rights Courses

Check out this detailed 1500-word essay on human rights.

The human right to live and exist, the right to equality, including equality before the law, non-discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth, and equality of opportunity in matters of employment, the right to freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, the right to practice any profession or occupation, the right against exploitation, prohibiting all forms of forced labour, child labour and trafficking in human beings, the right to freedom of conscience, practice and propagation of religion and the right to legal remedies for enforcement of the above are basic human rights. These rights and freedoms are the very foundations of democracy.

Obviously, in a democracy, the people enjoy the maximum number of freedoms and rights. Besides these are political rights, which include the right to contest an election and vote freely for a candidate of one’s choice. Human rights are a benchmark of a developed and civilised society. But rights cannot exist in a vacuum. They have their corresponding duties. Rights and duties are the two aspects of the same coin.

Liberty never means license. Rights presuppose the rule of law, where everyone in the society follows a code of conduct and behaviour for the good of all. It is the sense of duty and tolerance that gives meaning to rights. Rights have their basis in the ‘live and let live’ principle. For example, my right to speech and expression involves my duty to allow others to enjoy the same freedom of speech and expression. Rights and duties are inextricably interlinked and interdependent. A perfect balance is to be maintained between the two. Whenever there is an imbalance, there is chaos.

A sense of tolerance, propriety and adjustment is a must to enjoy rights and freedom. Human life sans basic freedom and rights is meaningless. Freedom is the most precious possession without which life would become intolerable, a mere abject and slavish existence. In this context, Milton’s famous and oft-quoted lines from his Paradise Lost come to mind: “To reign is worth ambition though in hell/Better to reign in hell, than serve in heaven.”

However, liberty cannot survive without its corresponding obligations and duties. An individual is a part of society in which he enjoys certain rights and freedom only because of the fulfilment of certain duties and obligations towards others. Thus, freedom is based on mutual respect’s rights. A fine balance must be maintained between the two, or there will be anarchy and bloodshed. Therefore, human rights can best be preserved and protected in a society steeped in morality, discipline and social order.

Violation of human rights is most common in totalitarian and despotic states. In the theocratic states, there is much persecution, and violation in the name of religion and the minorities suffer the most. Even in democracies, there is widespread violation and infringement of human rights and freedom. The women, children and the weaker sections of society are victims of these transgressions and violence.

The U.N. Commission on Human Rights’ main concern is to protect and promote human rights and freedom in the world’s nations. In its various sessions held from time to time in Geneva, it adopts various measures to encourage worldwide observations of these basic human rights and freedom. It calls on its member states to furnish information regarding measures that comply with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights whenever there is a complaint of a violation of these rights. In addition, it reviews human rights situations in various countries and initiates remedial measures when required.

The U.N. Commission was much concerned and dismayed at the apartheid being practised in South Africa till recently. The Secretary-General then declared, “The United Nations cannot tolerate apartheid. It is a legalised system of racial discrimination, violating the most basic human rights in South Africa. It contradicts the letter and spirit of the United Nations Charter. That is why over the last forty years, my predecessors and I have urged the Government of South Africa to dismantle it.”

Now, although apartheid is no longer practised in that country, other forms of apartheid are being blatantly practised worldwide. For example, sex apartheid is most rampant. Women are subject to abuse and exploitation. They are not treated equally and get less pay than their male counterparts for the same jobs. In employment, promotions, possession of property etc., they are most discriminated against. Similarly, the rights of children are not observed properly. They are forced to work hard in very dangerous situations, sexually assaulted and exploited, sold and bonded for labour.

The Commission found that religious persecution, torture, summary executions without judicial trials, intolerance, slavery-like practices, kidnapping, political disappearance, etc., are being practised even in the so-called advanced countries and societies. The continued acts of extreme violence, terrorism and extremism in various parts of the world like Pakistan, India, Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Somalia, Algeria, Lebanon, Chile, China, and Myanmar, etc., by the governments, terrorists, religious fundamentalists, and mafia outfits, etc., is a matter of grave concern for the entire human race.

Violation of freedom and rights by terrorist groups backed by states is one of the most difficult problems society faces. For example, Pakistan has been openly collaborating with various terrorist groups, indulging in extreme violence in India and other countries. In this regard the U.N. Human Rights Commission in Geneva adopted a significant resolution, which was co-sponsored by India, focusing on gross violation of human rights perpetrated by state-backed terrorist groups.

The resolution expressed its solidarity with the victims of terrorism and proposed that a U.N. Fund for victims of terrorism be established soon. The Indian delegation recalled that according to the Vienna Declaration, terrorism is nothing but the destruction of human rights. It shows total disregard for the lives of innocent men, women and children. The delegation further argued that terrorism cannot be treated as a mere crime because it is systematic and widespread in its killing of civilians.

Violation of human rights, whether by states, terrorists, separatist groups, armed fundamentalists or extremists, is condemnable. Regardless of the motivation, such acts should be condemned categorically in all forms and manifestations, wherever and by whomever they are committed, as acts of aggression aimed at destroying human rights, fundamental freedom and democracy. The Indian delegation also underlined concerns about the growing connection between terrorist groups and the consequent commission of serious crimes. These include rape, torture, arson, looting, murder, kidnappings, blasts, and extortion, etc.

Violation of human rights and freedom gives rise to alienation, dissatisfaction, frustration and acts of terrorism. Governments run by ambitious and self-seeking people often use repressive measures and find violence and terror an effective means of control. However, state terrorism, violence, and human freedom transgressions are very dangerous strategies. This has been the background of all revolutions in the world. Whenever there is systematic and widespread state persecution and violation of human rights, rebellion and revolution have taken place. The French, American, Russian and Chinese Revolutions are glowing examples of human history.

The first war of India’s Independence in 1857 resulted from long and systematic oppression of the Indian masses. The rapidly increasing discontent, frustration and alienation with British rule gave rise to strong national feelings and demand for political privileges and rights. Ultimately the Indian people, under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi, made the British leave India, setting the country free and independent.

Human rights and freedom ought to be preserved at all costs. Their curtailment degrades human life. The political needs of a country may reshape Human rights, but they should not be completely distorted. Tyranny, regimentation, etc., are inimical of humanity and should be resisted effectively and united. The sanctity of human values, freedom and rights must be preserved and protected. Human Rights Commissions should be established in all countries to take care of human freedom and rights. In cases of violation of human rights, affected individuals should be properly compensated, and it should be ensured that these do not take place in future.

These commissions can become effective instruments in percolating the sensitivity to human rights down to the lowest levels of governments and administrations. The formation of the National Human Rights Commission in October 1993 in India is commendable and should be followed by other countries.

Also Read: Law Courses in India

Human rights are of utmost importance to seek basic equality and human dignity. Human rights ensure that the basic needs of every human are met. They protect vulnerable groups from discrimination and abuse, allow people to stand up for themselves, and follow any religion without fear and give them the freedom to express their thoughts freely. In addition, they grant people access to basic education and equal work opportunities. Thus implementing these rights is crucial to ensure freedom, peace and safety.

Human Rights Day is annually celebrated on the 10th of December.

Human Rights Day is celebrated to commemorate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UNGA in 1948.

Some of the common Human Rights are the right to life and liberty, freedom of opinion and expression, freedom from slavery and torture and the right to work and education.

Popular Essay Topics

We hope our sample essays on Human Rights have given you some great ideas. For more information on such interesting blogs, visit our essay writing page and follow Leverage Edu .

Sonal is a creative, enthusiastic writer and editor who has worked extensively for the Study Abroad domain. She splits her time between shooting fun insta reels and learning new tools for content marketing. If she is missing from her desk, you can find her with a group of people cracking silly jokes or petting neighbourhood dogs.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Contact no. *

Leaving already?

8 Universities with higher ROI than IITs and IIMs

Grab this one-time opportunity to download this ebook

Connect With Us

30,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. take the first step today..

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

September 2024

January 2025

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

Search the United Nations

• Member States

Main Bodies

• Secretary-General
• Secretariat
• Emblem and Flag
• ICJ Statute
• Nobel Peace Prize
• Peace and Security
• Human Rights
• Humanitarian Aid
• Sustainable Development and Climate
• International Law
• Global Issues
• Official Languages
• Observances
• Events and News
• Get Involved
• Israel-Gaza
• Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a milestone document in the history of human rights. Drafted by representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world, the Declaration was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 ( General Assembly resolution 217 A ) as a common standard of achievements for all peoples and all nations. It sets out, for the first time, fundamental human rights to be universally protected and it has been translated into over 500 languages . The UDHR is widely recognized as having inspired, and paved the way for, the adoption of more than seventy human rights treaties, applied today on a permanent basis at global and regional levels (all containing references to it in their preambles). 

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, therefore,

The General Assembly,

Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction. 

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

• Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
• No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

• Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
• Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
• Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
• This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
• Everyone has the right to a nationality.
• No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
• Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
• Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
• The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
• Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
• No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

• Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
• No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
• Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
• Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
• The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

• Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
• Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
• Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
• Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

• Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
• Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.
• Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
• Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
• Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
• Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
• Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

• Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
• In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
• These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)

• Text of the Declaration
• History of the Declaration
• Drafters of the Declaration
• The Foundation of International Human Rights Law
• Human Rights Law

2023: UDHR turns 75

What is the Declaration of Human Rights? Narrated by Morgan Freeman.

UN digital ambassador Elyx animates the UDHR

To mark the 75th anniversary of the UDHR in December 2023, the United Nations has partnered once again with French digital artist YAK (Yacine Ait Kaci) – whose illustrated character Elyx is the first digital ambassador of the United Nations – on an animated version of the 30 Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

UDHR Illustrated

Read the Illustrated edition of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

UDHR in 80+ languages

Watch and listen to people around the world reading articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in more than 80 languages.

Women Who Shaped the Declaration

Women delegates from various countries played a key role in getting women’s rights included in the Declaration. Hansa Mehta of India (standing above Eleanor Roosevelt) is widely credited with changing the phrase "All men are born free and equal" to "All human beings are born free and equal" in Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

• General Assembly
• Security Council
• Economic and Social Council
• Trusteeship Council
• International Court of Justice

Departments / Offices

• UN System Directory
• UN System Chart
• Global Leadership
• UN Information Centres

Resources / Services

• Emergency information
• Reporting Wrongdoing
• Guidelines for gender-inclusive language
• UN iLibrary
• UN Chronicle
• UN Yearbook
• Publications for sale
• Media Accreditation
• NGO accreditation at ECOSOC
• NGO accreditation at DGC
• Visitors’ services
• Procurement
• Internships
• Academic Impact
• UN Archives
• UN Audiovisual Library
• How to donate to the UN system
• Information on COVID-19 (Coronavirus)
• Africa Renewal
• Ten ways the UN makes a difference
• High-level summits 2023

Key Documents

• Convention on the Rights of the Child
• Statute of the International Court of Justice
• Annual Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of the Organization

News and Media

• Press Releases
• Spokesperson
• Social Media
• The Essential UN
• Awake at Night podcast

Issues / Campaigns

• Sustainable Development Goals
• Our Common Agenda
• Summit of the Future
• Climate Action
• UN and Sustainability
• Action for Peacekeeping (A4P)
• Global Ceasefire
• Global Crisis Response Group
• Call to Action for Human Rights
• Disability Inclusion Strategy
• Fight Racism
• Hate Speech
• LGBTIQ+ People
• Safety of Journalists
• Rule of Law
• Action to Counter Terrorism
• Victims of Terrorism
• Children and Armed Conflict
• Violence Against Children (SRSG)
• Sexual Violence in Conflict
• Refugees and Migrants
• Action Agenda on Internal Displacement
• Spotlight Initiative
• Preventing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse
• Prevention of Genocide and the Responsibility to Protect
• The Rwanda Genocide
• The Holocaust
• The Question of Palestine
• The Transatlantic Slave Trade
• Decolonization
• Messengers of Peace
• Roadmap for Digital Cooperation
• Digital Financing Task Force
• Data Strategy
• Countering Disinformation
• UN75: 2020 and Beyond
• Women Rise for All
• Stop the Red Sea Catastrophe
• Black Sea Grain Initiative Joint Coordination Centre
• Türkiye-Syria Earthquake Response (Donate)
• Israel-Gaza Crisis

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights Essay

Before discussing any phenomenon or event, it is of crucial importance to identify the major factors, which contributed to it. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights should be analyzed within the context of the political, cultural, and religious situation, emerging in the middle of the twentieth century. As it is widely known, this act was adopted in 1948. According to this document, every person (or it would be better to say human beings) must be entitled to certain rights, which cannot take away from him or her (Weiss, 14).

At first glance, it may seem that this act should have been readily accepted by every nation; however, one should take into account that the Declaration of Human Rights was not received unanimously by all nations. For instance, representatives of some Islamic countries subjected it to heavy criticism. They stated that religious and cultural traditions were overlooked in this document (Ramcharan, 43).

The question arises of what prompted the United Nations Organization to develop and adopt this act. It stands to reason that first of all this declaration was the natural response to the events of World War II (genocide, violations of Genève convention, atomic explosion), which had proved that human rights could be easily violated even in the most developed countries. In addition to that, it became apparent that the international community did not come to a consensus about such a concept as “human rights”. As it has been pointed out earlier, Western and Eastern interpretations did not exactly coincide; therefore, some unification had to be achieved.

In this respect, we should explore the political situation in the Post-War period. Humankind was on the verge of a new conflict, the Cold War, but at that moment, the contradictions between the United States and the Soviets were not so aggravated, and both sides of the argument supported the idea of such declaration.

Regarding the religious environment, we should first say that the twentieth century is marked by a religious crisis, which means that to some extent, religion ceased to act as guidelines for people (the events of World War II eloquently substantiated this statement). Consequently, it was necessary to lay legal foundations, which were to ensure that at least basic human rights were preserved and protected (Asbeck,88). Naturally, we should not make generalizations because the religious crisis did not strongly affect Islamic countries but it was very tangible in Europe.

The events of World War II also showed that many people were not able to practice their religion. They were officially (or unofficially) prohibited to do it. In theory, the Declaration of Hunan guarantees that every person has religious freedom but it could not eradicate certain tacit laws, which still acted against some religious groups (Weiss, 134).

Furthermore, while analyzing the history of the twentieth century, scholars often attach primary importance to the so-called clash of cultures. At that moment, Easter and Western Worlds were only beginning to interact with each other but it was obvious that such notion as “human rights” was perceived in different ways. Partly, this declaration was aimed at strengthening the ties between the two most basic cultures or at least ensuring that they could efficiently cooperate (Ramcharan, 65).

New social developments also contributed to the adoption of this document. For instance, the growth of the feminist movement indicated that the roles of men and women should be reconsidered especially in terms of employment policies, and education. The adoption of the Declaration aroused a storm of protest in some Islamic countries because social equality of both sexes contradicted some tenants of the Muslim religion, especially regarding the role of women in the family and their dependence on their husbands.

In her book “A World Made New” Mary Glendon gives the reader insights into the atmosphere of that time. The author focuses on the role of Eleanor Roosevelt in developing this document. She was a member of the Human Rights Commission along with representatives of other countries. People, who were designated to draft this document, had to fight against insuperable odds, namely cultural-political, religious, and social controversies. It should be mentioned that even now this document is viewed as pro-Western and pro-American, though it seems its basic principles are universally applicable (Glendon, 33).

Nevertheless, the most important problem that Human Rights Commission had to resolve is how to make this doctrine applicable, in other words, whether this document had any legal force. Johannes Morsink in his book “The Declaration of Human Rights” argues that this legislative act was fully implemented only in the West; however, it did not become applicable in some other countries for example, in the USSR (Morsink, 8).

Thus, having analyzed political, religious, cultural, and cultural environment in the post-War Period we can arrive at the following conclusions: first Human rights commission had to resolve cross-cultural contradictions while drafting the declaration, especially different perceptions of human rights in the Western and Eastern cultures. However, the main problem that had to be resolved was the applicability of this legislative act. It seems that even now this issue remains very stressful because some countries only officially accepted the Declaration of Human Rights but even they do not follow its basic principles.

Bibliography

B. G. Ramcharan.Thirty Years After the Universal Declaration. BRILL, 1979.

Frederik Mari Asbeck. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Its Johannes Predecessors (1679-1948): And Its Predecessors (1679-1948). Brill Archive, 1949.

Morsink. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Origins, Drafting, and Intent. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000.

Mary Ann Glendon. “A World Made New: Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights” Random House, 2002.

Thomas George Weiss. “The United Nations and Changing World Politics” Westview Press, 2004.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, October 23). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights/

"The Universal Declaration of Human Rights." IvyPanda , 23 Oct. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'The Universal Declaration of Human Rights'. 23 October.

IvyPanda . 2021. "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights." October 23, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights." October 23, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights/.

IvyPanda . "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights." October 23, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights/.

• “Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen” and “Declaration of the rights of woman and the female citizen”
• Universal Declaration of Human Rights
• Postwar Change in American Society
• T he Role of Confidentiality in Psychometric and Educational Testing
• Twin Peaks and Misogyny
• Individual Rights vs. Public Order
• Summary of "Smokers Get a Raw Deal" by Stanley Scott
• Is Human Life Valuable Today?

5 Human Rights Topics For Your Human Rights Essay

When you’re writing a paper on human rights, you want to pick a topic that’s relevant and compelling. It seems like our world is heading in a downwards spiral, but writing about the issues provokes action, which in turn results in change. Here are five topics that have been getting attention (or aren’t getting enough attention) in recent years. These are all important; choosing one just comes down to what speaks to you most powerfully:

Police brutality in the United States

Violence by American police is a major issue in the human rights arena these days and data indicates it’s getting worse. According to Killed By Police, a website that tracks police killings, 2018 has witnessed more deaths than in the last five years over the same period of time. It most likely won’t get better, as the DOJ recently ended a program that helped keep corrupt police departments in check. Black Americans are most vulnerable; in 2012, they made up 31% of police-killing victims, while only comprising 13% of the total US population.

Questions an essay could answer: Why are African-Americans and other minorities at a higher risk of police violence than white people? What has been done to undermine efforts to change the policing system? What could reduce killings by law enforcement?

Global mental health treatment

We hear a lot about how the mental health system in America is broken, but on a global scale, it’s just as much of a problem. Close to 800 000 people die due to suicide every year, which is one person every 40 seconds. Not much has been done to treat this issue, though according to a World Bank study, poor mental health has a drastic effect on one’s quality of life. Most governments have very small budgets for mental health treatment. In a WHO study, around 47 countries (out of 191) do not have any kind of national legislation or policies on mental health.

Questions an essay could answer: What is the current state of mental health treatment around the world? What specific treatments exist? What effect does poor mental health have on a nation’s economy, culture, etc? Why hasn’t the United Nations taken more aggressive action?

US policy on refugees

Since President Trump took office and instituted increasingly harsh limits and action on refugees and immigration, the US has entered a dark time. Just nine months after entering office, he capped the refugee admissions number to 45,000. Other programmes have been completely eliminated, such as the Central Americans Minors programme, which let children from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras join their parents who are legally in the US. Those seeking asylum have also been met with significant opposition. The biggest story, of course, is how children are being separated and interned apart from their parents. These are just a few topics that a paper about the US refugee policy could cover.

Questions an essay could answer : How has the current US refugee policy affected other countries’ opinion on America? How is this policy different than America’s stance in the past? What are the potential consequences of letting so few refugees into the country, for them and for the United States?

Transgender rights in Europe

In recent years, transgender rights have been challenged in the political arena with legislation such as the Bathroom Laws and weakened legal protection against work discrimination. What’s happening in Europe? In many countries like Belgium and Switzerland, transgender individuals were until very recently legally required to undergo sterilization and surgery before obtaining new identification papers. What provoked this change?

Questions an essay could answer: What is the history of trans rights in Europe? What countries have made the most positive moves in accepting transgender individuals? What can the United States do to follow progressive European countries into a new era?

Disability rights in America

Though somewhat ignored by the media, disability rights are under attack in America. Various pieces of legislature include deep cuts to Medicaid and removals of protections for disabled workers and students. One of the biggest blows is the Medicaid work requirement, which is currently allowed in three states. In order to receive assistance, people must meet a certain number of hours, but those with disabilities or illnesses won’t be able to. In response, Americans with disabilities are rising up in protest.

Questions an essay could answer:  How are disability advocates fighting for their cause? What is the Trump administration’s response to activists? What can be done to protect those with disabilities?

You may also like

Apply Now for the United Nations The Hague Immersion Programme

The UN Immersion Programme Is Open for Applications!

The UN Young Leaders Online Training Programme is Open for Applications!

Apply now: Essex Human Rights Summer School (Fully Online)

17 International Organizations Offering Early-Career Opportunities

Gender Rights Jobs: Our Short Guide

Free MOOC on Children’s Right to Education in Armed Conflict

9 Online Courses on Leading Diverse Teams

40 Top-Rated Social Issues Courses to Study in 2024

10 Courses to Prepare for Your Human Rights Job

Register now: Global Institute of Human Rights Certificate Program

NGO Jobs: Our Short Guide

About the author, human rights careers.

Human Rights Careers (HRC) provides information about online courses, jobs, paid internships, masters degrees, scholarships and other opportunities in the human rights sector and related areas.

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Acquisition
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music and Religion
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business Strategy
• Business History
• Business and Technology
• Business and Government
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Systems
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Policy
• Public Administration
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter

8 Conclusion

• Published: August 2009
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

This book has presented an analytical account of the idea of human rights as it exists within global practice, together with a description of the kind of justification that human rights, so conceived, should be capable of. It proposed a schema to identify and organize the considerations it seems reasonable to take into account in reflection about what ought to be the contents of the public doctrine. These are considerations that follow from a grasp of the general purpose and role of human rights within the global practice. They relate to the importance of the interests that might be protected, the advantage of protecting these interests by means of policies that might be adopted by states, and the character and weight of the reasons for action available to external agents in cases in which states fail to protect the interests in question.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

• GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]
• Google Scholar Indexing

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code
• Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card.

• Sign in with username/password
• Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Conflict Studies
• Development
• Environment
• Foreign Policy
• Human Rights
• International Law
• Organization
• International Relations Theory
• Political Communication
• Political Economy
• Political Geography
• Political Sociology
• Politics and Sexuality and Gender
• Qualitative Political Methodology
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Security Studies
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Feminist perspectives on human rights.

• Laura Parisi Laura Parisi Department of Women's Studies, University of Victoria
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.48
• Published in print: 01 March 2010
• Published online: 30 November 2017

Feminism has provided some new perspectives to the discourse on human rights over the years. Contemporary feminist scholarship has sought to critique the liberalism on which the conception of formal “equality” in the international human rights laws has been derived on a number of grounds. Two of the most pertinent critiques for this discussion are: the androcentric construction of human rights; and the perpetuation of the false dichotomy between the public and private spheres. This exploration of the relationship between liberalism and women’s human rights constitutes a significant shift in which many feminists had realized that the emphasis on “sameness” with men was limited in its utility. This shift rejected the “sameness” principle of the liberal feminists and brought gender-specific abuses into the mainstream of human rights theory and practice. By gender mainstreaming international institutions and future human rights treaties, specific women’s rights could be defined as human rights more generally. Feminists have since extended their critique of androcentrism and the public–private dichotomy to the study of gender inequalities and economic globalization, which is an important systemic component of structural indivisibility. In particular, the broader women’s human rights movement has come to realize that civil-political liberties and socioeconomic rights are inextricable, though there is disagreement over the exact nature of this relationship.

• human rights
• women’s rights
• international human rights laws
• androcentrism
• public–private dichotomy
• economic globalization
• civil-political liberties
• democratization

Introduction

Feminist critiques of human rights seek to dismantle several hierarchies present in the human rights regime. By critiquing the basic assumptions of human rights as they were formulated in 1945–8 , feminists have revealed that these definitions are inadequate, that men and women have different relationships with the state, and that rights are not fixed and immutable. Rather, they are historically, socially, culturally, and economically contingent. This essay explores feminist contributions to the human rights discourse in several ways. The first half of the essay chronicles and analyzes the evolution of the “women’s rights are human rights” discourse as well as the development of the notion of the indivisibility of rights. The second half of the essay looks the feminist debates with regards to women’s human rights in three issue areas or contexts: globalization, democratization, and culture. The essay concludes with a discussion of the current challenges with regards to data collection in measuring the achievement of women’s human rights.

Although there are multiple feminisms, the terms feminist and feminism are used in a broad sense in this essay to connote a shared goal of seeking to re-articulate human rights in an effort to achieve gender equality, even though theoretical entry points into the discourse and resulting strategies may vary widely among feminists (Tong 2008 ). Similarly, the concept of human rights has been contested in many ways, but it is beyond the scope of this essay to delve into these debates. Rather, the focus will be on what feminists have understood human rights to be in theory and in practice.

Women’s Rights Are Human Rights: Evolution of the Discourse

During the “first wave” of feminism (loosely defined as late nineteenth century to early twentieth century ), theorists and activists paid particular attention to the gendered construction of citizenship that was employed to deny civil and political liberties to women and other minority groups. Writings by theorists and activists such as Mary Wollstonecraft , John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor , Lucretia Mott , Elizabeth Cady Stanton , and Susan B. Anthony dominated early feminism. However, many of the debates that took place during the first wave also spilled over to the immediate post–World War II era, particularly during the process of creating the United Nations (UN) as well as the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The central liberal feminist tenet that carried over to the post–World War II period is that men and women are the same in rational ability and capacity for individual autonomy and self-determination and therefore should be afforded full citizenship and its attendant rights, protections, and opportunities.

Yet, there were others who argued that women should be conceptualized as a group marked by sexual difference and that special protection was needed to “level the playing field”; only in this way could women advance individual self-determination and self-governance (Rupp 1997 :105; Lake 2001 :255). For many first wave liberal feminists, the primary way to achieve sexual equality (or parity) was through legislative means, i.e., suffrage, education, labor rights, etc. The liberal feminist ideal of “sameness” laid the groundwork for the future of women’s international human rights in the institutional arrangements in the United Nations as well as the drafting of the UDHR in 1948 . However, as we shall see, the theoretical tension between the competing feminist agendas of nondiscrimination and special protections had long-lasting effects in the women’s human rights movement.

The UDHR does not specifically address women’s rights but it does briefly address the idea of sexual equality in Article 2: “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.” Those who insisted on the inclusion of “sex” in Article 2 hoped that it would address the inequality of women by putting them on an “equal footing” with men (Johnson 1998 :61). There were, of course, others who felt the inclusion of the word “sex” was unnecessary given that the UDHR explicitly states the rights delineated in the document apply to “everyone.”

Although these may seem like minor occurrences and debates, they laid the theoretical groundwork for policy making within the UN Committee on the Status of Women (CSW) and the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights (UNHCHR) for many decades. In the years that followed the creation of CSW and the ratification of the International Bill of Rights, liberal feminists paid particular attention to securing civil and political liberties for women. It is important to note that the emphasis on civil and political liberties was pervasive throughout the UN system, particularly by Western powers and those countries allied with the United States during the Cold War. Consequently, given the power of the United States in the international system during the 1950s and 1960s, it is not surprising that several other human rights conventions which specifically addressed the status of women, such as the Convention on the Political Rights of Women ( 1952 ), emphasized civil and political liberties as the way to achieve sexual equality. Like the UDHR, these covenants emphasized “sameness” and did not take into account men’s and women’s qualitatively different experiences in the public sphere nor did they tackle structures that perpetuated gender hierarchies.

Contemporary feminist scholarship has sought to critique the liberalism on which the conception of formal “equality” in the UDHR and other international human rights laws has been derived on a number of grounds. Two of the most pertinent critiques for this discussion are: the androcentric construction of human rights; and the perpetuation of the false dichotomy between the public and private spheres. The public–private split “refers to the (artificial) distinction between home (private or reproductive sphere) to which women are assigned, and the workplace (the public or productive sphere) to which men are assigned” (Peterson and Runyan 1999 :259). These concepts are connected with both the radical feminism and the socialist feminism of the 1970s that was a response to the perceived inadequacies of liberal feminism. The issue of the relationship between gender and the public and private spheres is briefly touched upon in the 1979 UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which was developed during the UN Decade for Women ( 1975–85 ) in order to have a “single, comprehensive and internationally binding instrument to eliminate discrimination against women” (UNDAW n.d. ). However, it was not until the late 1980s that this relationship was fully theorized in terms of women’s human rights, development, and international law. The end result has been a major theoretical shift in both theory and practice.

Both androcentrism and the public–private split are embedded in patriarchy (another core theoretical concept of radical and socialist feminisms), understood here to mean the degree to which society is “male-dominated, male-identified, and male-centered” (Johnson 1997 :5). Many contemporary feminist analyses of human rights laws, institutions and practice are grounded in critiques of the broader construct of patriarchy. Since rights themselves are socially constructed in that they reflect a “distinctive, historically unusual set of social values and practices,” the context in which human rights were/are developed is an important analytical tool (Donnelly 1999 :81). For example, Charlesworth ( 1995 :103) suggests that

because the law-making institutions of the international legal order have always been, and continue to be, dominated by men, international human rights law has developed to reflect the experiences of men and largely to exclude those of women, rendering suspect the claim of objectivity and universality in human rights law.

The claim of androcentrism in the development of human rights is predicated on two issues that are raised by Charlesworth. The first surrounds the issue of the position of the speaker; it is important to evaluate who is making rights claims and on whose behalf (Rao 1995 ). In the case of human rights discourse, the historical record reflects that mainstream human rights has largely been influenced by masculinist liberal ideology, which reflects what is desirable or ideal, such as individual autonomy, in the social construction of human rights. Hence, the claim of objectivity must be questioned.

The second issue revolves around the liberal ideological foundations of human rights, inalienability and universality. These concepts are largely derived from John Locke ’s Second Treatise on Government ( 1690 ), in which he argues for the natural and inalienable rights of human beings – rights one has simply by virtue of being human. Cast in this light, rights of individual humans appear to be universal and should take precedence above all else (Locke 1980 ). State governance should not be guided by the “greater good” principle because it encroaches upon individual “opportunity to make fundamental choices about what constitutes the good life (for them), who they associate with, and how” (Donnelly 1999 :80). Embedded in this notion of the individual is the idea that individuals are rational enough to exercise these rights. During Locke’s era the “criteria” for rationality was ownership of private property, which excluded women, low-wage workers, and slaves from exercising rights, thereby severely undermining the notion of universality. Furthermore, since the principles of inalienability and universality were theorized in the context of elite male experience, the current traditional construction of human rights excludes the experiences of women and other marginalized groups. The male experience with, and definition of, human rights came to be accepted as the “norm,” and it is this social construction of human rights that feminists have sought to challenge and rearticulate.

The individualism and egalitarianism that are crucial to Locke’s liberalism may at first seem contradictory to patriarchy, which is predicated on gender hierarchies that presume that the subordination of women to men is based on “natural” characteristics. However, as Pateman ( 1989 :33–57) observes, Locke also provides a theoretical basis for the exclusion of women from individualist arguments. Locke makes a distinction between the political power of the public sphere and paternal power in the private sphere of the family. This move is grounded in his view that women’s subordination to their husbands in the private sphere is natural and non-political, and perhaps also “pre-political” (Rao 1996 :445). This “natural” subordination of women, which is condoned and supported by the state, suggests that they cannot at the same time be free and equal individuals. Therefore, Locke’s separation between public and paternal power effectively relegates women to the private sphere (Pateman 1989 :33–57), where they have little ability to claim rights in the public sphere (Romany 1994 ). In this way, the state is able to protect both the public and private interests of men (Peterson and Parisi 1998 :147).

The public–private distinction also rests on fundamentally different conceptions of citizenship for men and women that date back to the time of the ancient Greek polis and continue to be firmly embedded in liberal thought (Grant 1991 :12–13). As a result, “human rights law was gendered male: it protected a male subject, who experienced violations primarily directed at men, in largely male spaces” (Friedman 2006 :480–1). Since the public sphere is associated with masculinity, “the duties and activities of citizenship have strongly depended on manliness” (Voet 1998 :7). As citizens, men are/were accorded certain rights that women, relegated to the private sphere, are/were not. The association of the feminine with the private sphere has historically identified and still continues to identify women as non-citizens, and, hence, as less than fully autonomous beings. For example, laws governing the nationality of children in countries such as Kenya, which deem that the citizenship of children is determined by the father’s citizenship (and not the mother’s), reinforce the concept of citizen as male. The association of the feminine with the private sphere identifies women as non-citizens, and hence, as less than fully autonomous beings unable to make claims to rights (Romany 1994 ).

The emphasis on the public sphere as the proper realm of human rights depoliticizes women’s experiences in the private and reinforces androcentric constructions of human rights. The artificial distinction between the public and the private spheres also allows for the appearance of the state as non-gendered, and masks how formal legal equality in the public sphere contributes to states’ complicity in facilitating gender hierarchies in the private sphere. In general, states are discouraged by international law from intervening in the private sphere given the primacy placed on the sanctity of the family and the right to privacy (Sullivan 1995 :127). The result is that states are held accountable only for the human rights abuses they perpetrate and not for the conduct of individuals in the private sphere, where most gender-based violence occurs. Hence, gender-based violence in the home, until recently, was not considered to be a human rights abuse (Bunch 1990 ).

For example, marital rape has historically often not been considered a criminal act by the state, and this idea is still prevalent in many countries, such as the Bahamas and Zambia, where marital rape has yet to be criminalized. Although the International Bill of Rights guarantees the right of everyone to be free from torture and enslavement by the state, and explicitly prohibits rape of and assault against women in times of conflict, it does not guarantee women freedom from domestic abuse, which for many women is a form of torture and/or enslavement (Copelon 1994 ). The subordination of women in the private sphere is justified and naturalized as the patriarchal state, in accordance with the liberal maxim of individual freedom and the protection of private property, protects the private, individual interests of men. Under international human rights laws, states have often not been held accountable for their inaction (or inadequate action) that has enabled gender-based violence in the private sphere.

Due to feminist activism and scholarship in this area, gender-specific violence is now considered a legitimate human rights issue (Bunch 1990 ; Copelon 1994 ; Keck and Sikkink 1998 ; Joachim 2003 ; Merry 2006 ). As a result, there is now the UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women ( 1993 ), a UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women, and the statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has further codified violence against women as a punishable offense. Although these are all very positive developments, many feminists, such as Ratna Kapur ( 2005 ), worry about the implications of the framing of women as primarily victims of violence. Kapur ( 2005 :99) argues that while “the victim subject […] provides a shared location from which women from different cultural and social contexts can speak” and also “provides women with a subject that repudiates the atomized, decontextualized and ahistorical subject of liberal rights discourse, while at the same time furnishing a unitary subject that enables women to makes claims based on a commonality of experience,” the end result is a conceptualization of “women” that falls prey to gender essentialism, producing another type of “universal” subject that “resembles the uncomplicated subject of the liberal discourse, which cannot account for multi-layered existences and experiences” (Kapur 2005 :99). Kapur, and others such as Mohanty ( 1991 ) and Narayan ( 1997 ), also argue that the focus on the victim subject results in cultural essentialism, which will be explored in more detail at the end of this essay.

Another implication of the feminist critique of the public–private dichotomy is the presumed heterosexuality of the family unit in the private sphere (Rao 1996 ; Peterson and Parisi 1998 ). The UDHR’s Article 16 protects the right of adult men and women to freely and consensually marry, and the right to found a family, “without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion” (UDHR 1948 ). Article 16.3 locates the family as the “natural and fundamental group unit of society and [it] is entitled to protection by society and the state.” Although the UDHR does not specify that marriage must be between a man and a woman or that families must be heterosexual units, Article 16 specifies nondiscrimination only on the basis of race, nationality, and religion and excludes sexuality. The exclusion of sexuality as the basis for nondiscrimination in marriage reveals a hidden (or presumed) heterosexist bias, and also raises the question of what types of families should be protected. However, the Western, liberal construction of the heterosexual family has prevailed as the dominant interpretation of Article 16 because it maps neatly onto the gendered dichotomy of the public–private split, and the “family is viewed normatively as an arena for something other than rights” since it is “pre-political,” “sentimental,” and “noncontractual” (Rao 1996 :245). As a result, heterosexism has become naturalized and normalized in many mainstream international human rights documents, and this interpretation precludes protection of any other sexual identities by rendering them outside the “fundamental group unit of society” (Peterson and Parisi 1998 ). This positioning outside the protection of the human rights framework, as is well known, has had deleterious effects on sexual minorities in not only asserting their right to sexualities, but also in making claims to other individual and group rights (LaViolette and Whitworth 1994 ; Dorf and Perez 1995 ; Peterson and Parisi 1998 ).

At the Beijing conference, the issues of gender, sexual orientation, and the definition of family were hotly contested. The use of gender came under fire by conservative groups and states who rejected a social constructivist approach to the term in order to exclude sexual orientation from being read into the definition (Chappell 2007 :515). Instead, “gender” in the Platform For Action (PFA), and other international documents since then, is now understood to mean “the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society” (ibid.). While there are numerous problems with this definition of gender, for the purposes of this discussion, it is important to highlight that the intense wrangling had two significant and related impacts on the PFA. First, all explicit references to sexual orientation in the document were dropped. Second, the use of the term family, rather than families, stayed intact. Thus, the naturalized, patriarchal, heterosexual family delineated in the UDHR is preserved. It was feared that the inclusion of specific rights for sexual minorities would result in not passing the PFA at all. Although the PFA claims the right of women to freely determine their sexuality and recognizes the family in “various forms,” for many this wording is too ambiguous and hollow given that it also acknowledges that cultural, religious, national, and regional particularities must be considered in the implementation of these rights (Steans and Ahmadi 2005 :241). By invisibilizing sexualities, the PFA precluded the delineation of more explicit rights for sexual minorities with regards to property rights, children, and so forth.

Yet, at the same time, there has been considerable discussion about whether or not advancing of the agenda of sexual minorities in a rights based framework is useful and desirable (LaViolette and Whitworth 1994 ; Morgan 2001 ; Mertus 2007 ). Mertus ( 2007 ), in her study of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) advocacy in the US, demonstrates the reluctance of many groups to adopt a rights based approach since it may require them to accept set identity categories. LaViolette and Whitworth ( 1994 ) identify a similar tension more globally. Finally, Morgan ( 2001 ) also asks whether or not it is at all desirable to fight for inclusion in a decidedly heteronormative system in the first place. This response parallels the concerns of radical feminists working to achieve women’s rights in a system that is inherently patriarchal and not worthy of being retained in their point of view (Brems 1997 ). Instead, it might be more productive to disrupt patriarchal and heteronormative systems rather than focusing on inclusion in them (Morgan 2001 ).

Ultimately, however, the exploration of the relationship between liberalism and women’s human rights constituted a significant shift in which many feminists (especially cultural feminists) realized that the emphasis on “sameness” with men was limited in its utility. The shift entailed focusing on gender relations as a category of analysis, a valuing of difference, and delineating gender-specific experiences (Brems 1997 ). This tactic rejected the “sameness” principle of the liberal feminists and brought gender-specific abuses into the mainstream of human rights theory and practice. By gender mainstreaming international institutions and future human rights treaties, specific women’s rights could be defined as human rights more generally (Bunch 1990 ).

The Structural Indivisibility of Rights

By the 1970s the limitations of the emphasis on civil and political liberties for women became increasingly clear as the UN struggled with the issues of poverty, malnutrition, and population as it began its preparations for the World Food Conference ( 1974 ) and the World Population Conference ( 1974 ). The failure of the liberal feminist assumption that the achievement of political and civil liberties would translate into economic opportunity for women prompted a re-articulation of the relationship between civil and political liberties and socioeconomic rights for women. The argument shifted to the idea that women who lack food, shelter, education, property, health services, etc. cannot fully enjoy and exercise their civil and political liberties (Parisi 2002 ). In addition, the publication of Ester Boserup’s ( 1970 ) Woman’s Role in Economic Development , in which she documented the negative consequences of modernization programs on women’s lives, influenced liberal feminists to expand their focus on rights to include economic and labor issues. This approach eventually became known as “Women in Development” (WID) and it marked the beginning of the UN Decade for Women ( 1975–85 ).

Yet, the WID approach was roundly criticized by socialist-Marxist feminists and third world feminists for its adherence to the liberal framework of “sameness” discussed earlier by promoting an “add women and stir” model of development aimed at achieving gender equality. This approach fails to examine the structures that caused and perpetuated this inequality in the first place. In response to this critique and to the lack of a more cohesive vision for women’s rights and well-being, the fledgling “global” women’s movement began to develop an explicit vision of the indivisibility of human rights. This vision was ultimately reflected in the theme of the UN Decade for Women: “Equality – Development – Peace” (FLS 1985 : paragraphs 11–13). The three objectives formed a more sophisticated basis for women’s human rights and were, and still are, viewed as “internally interrelated and mutually reinforcing, so that the advancement of one contributes to the advancement of the others” (Pietilä and Vickers 1996 :49). The first attempt at encapsulating these ideals resulted in the World Plan of Action (WPA) that in turn provided an impetus and basis for the drafting of CEDAW, which passed in the UN in 1979 , and entered into force in 1981 . (For a comprehensive history of the events leading up to the UN Decade for Women and of the drafting of CEDAW, see Fraser 1999 .)

CEDAW extends women’s rights provisions in the International Bill of Human Rights in that it created an “international bill of women’s rights” that defines and addresses all forms of discrimination against women and is guided by the principle of what Otto ( 2001 :54) calls “structural indivisibility.” Structural indivisibility stresses “interconnections between the political, economic, environmental, and security priorities of the international order and violations of human rights” (ibid.). This vision is somewhat different than Bunch’s ( 1990 ) emphasis on the necessary interconnectedness between political, civil, socioeconomic and cultural rights in that it takes into account the systemic factors which link and influence the achievement of these rights.

The majority of the 30 articles of CEDAW are concerned with social, economic, and cultural rights embedded in the liberal feminist WID and non-discrimination framework that relies heavily on the principle of equality before the law; only four articles deal explicitly with the political and civil liberties of women. However, the preamble and some of the articles of CEDAW address additional concerns important to third world feminists, Marxist feminists, and radical feminists. For example, it reiterates the call for a New International Economic Order (NIEO) to tackle global economic inequality and demands the right to cultural self-determination and the end of imperialism, colonization, and racism. CEDAW also affirms the right of women to space their children – a victory for radical feminists involved in reproductive rights movements. Finally, and perhaps most significantly, it acknowledges the contributions to society that women make in the home, thus breaking down the distinction between the public and private spheres (the personal is political) and highlighting how traditional gender roles can be a source of women’s oppression.

The mission behind CEDAW is to recast women as subjects rather than objects of development, recognizing them as fully autonomous beings entitled to human rights widely enjoyed by men, yet at the same time recognizing that there are indeed differences between men and women, such as the ability to bear children, that have historically served as justification for discrimination against women. CEDAW is thus cast in a seemingly paradoxical framework that uses both the “measure of man” as a benchmark for equal rights and correctives to move the discourse from being gender-neutral to being gender-specific (Kaufman and Lindquist 1995 ; Friedman 2006 ; Arat 2008 ). As a result, feminists challenged the patriarchal and androcentric way in which mainstream human rights treaties had been conceptualized, which largely ignored the experiences of women and other marginalized groups, but also reaffirmed some of the androcentric conceptualizations of human rights. However, in acknowledging the contributions to society that women make in the home, CEDAW breaks down the artificial distinction between the public and private spheres (the personal is political) and highlights how traditional gender roles can be a source of women’s oppression. This important claim in CEDAW has been crucial in the CEDAW committee’s ability to identify and broaden the scope of violations of women’s human rights and to redress them through their general recommendations (Arat 2008 )

Gender and Human Rights in the Context of Globalization

One important systemic component of structural indivisibility is economic globalization. Feminists have extended their critique of androcentrism and the public–private dichotomy so pervasive in the human rights discourse to the study of gender inequalities and economic globalization (Youngs 2000 ). Although there are many issues that fall under this area of study, this section will focus exclusively on the topic of the relationship between gender inequality in socioeconomic rights and economic globalization. The next section deals with democratization and will make the link between socioeconomic and civil and political rights. Feminist human rights scholars have been concerned with how the deepening of capitalism affects the state and the state’s ability to fulfill its human rights obligations. However, the crucial point of departure in this literature is its explicit focus on how this transformation is gendered and has gendered consequences (Lothian 1996 ; Sen 1997 ; Sassen 1998 ; Peratis et al. 1999 ; Bayes et al. 2001 ; Rittich 2001 ; Elson 2002 ). More explicitly, economic globalization not only produces gender inequalities, but also maintains and relies upon these inequalities in a variety of contexts in order to deepen capitalism, as well as to rearticulate the state.

As Rittich ( 2001 :96–7) notes, there are several concerns to address when assessing the relationship between the state and the achievement of women’s human rights. One issue is the recognition that the women’s rights discourse and movement was and still is deeply embedded in and reliant upon the state-centered model of human rights. Even though feminist critiques of both the human rights regime and the state have revealed both their androcentrism and their complicity in preserving the public–private split which is profoundly gendered, the solutions posed by many feminists depend on the state to change its perspective, and consequently its behavior. As such, Chappell ( 2000 :245) suggests that feminists have moved to a middle ground with regards to the state, viewing it neither as “inherently patriarchal and oppressive” nor as “gender neutral,” but rather the emphasis is now on the “interaction between the state and gender,” in which each shapes the other. For example, Weldon’s ( 2002 ) research on cross-national variations of state policy responsiveness with regards to violence against women issues shows that strong, autonomous women’s movements have significant influence on state policy change.

Regardless, the state becomes the primary agent in promoting and implementing effective strategies to eradicate gender inequalities. Yet, implicit in this design is the assumption of an economically prosperous, democratic state or, at the very least, an effectual one that subscribes to a neoliberal economic agenda. Although the international covenants on human rights allow for “progressive realization” of human rights, this concept also hinges on the notion that states will consistently and persistently search for ways to reallocate resources to further the enjoyment of human rights. For feminists, this means taking seriously the ways in which the state contributes to gender inequality through its social policies, and relying on the state to correct itself.

This perspective, of course, is not unproblematic. As Sassen ( 1998 :94) suggests, the state is still viewed as the legitimate representative of the population in the international law arena, diminishing the contributions and limiting the participation of other nonstate actors. Furthermore, access to and influence over state policies is not uniform among women’s rights and human rights groups, and states are also subject to lobbying from other special interest groups, which may or may not be supportive of human rights based initiatives (Rittich 2001 :97). In addition to these problems, as Chappell ( 2000 :246–7) notes, there is a historic disjuncture among women’s rights activists in the first and third worlds, who have quite different views regarding the utility of achieving rights through the state, given the wide variation of states with regards to resources, effectiveness, and openness/repressiveness. However, given that the Beijing PFA ( 1995 ), which now operates as the dominant referent in international women’s rights law, places responsibility with states to realize and protect women’s rights in the face of potential negative consequences of globalization (rather than challenging globalization itself), and the increasingly “economistic turn” in the gender and development literature that conceptualizes “empowerment” as economic empowerment (Marchand 1996 :580), it appears that the “national-management framework” (Bergeron 2001 :993) is the primary one in place in both the first and third worlds, as an interactive site of resource allocation and resistance.

It is important to note, however, the framework utilized by the PFA has been challenged on many fronts, most notably by indigenous women, who, in their response to the PFA, roundly criticized globalization as recolonization and responsible for environmental degradation and continued poverty in indigenous lands and nations (Vinding 1998 ). They are explicit in their rejection of the strategy of trying to mitigate the negative effects of globalization, which is embedded in the interlocking systems of oppression of capitalism, patriarchy, and colonization (Kuokkanen 2008 ). Rather, for many indigenous women, there needs to be not only recognition of the structural violence that globalization perpetuates and sustains, but also a recognition of how the PFA and the contemporary discourses on women’s rights are complicit in maintaining this system.

A second, highly interrelated issue is markets. As Elson ( 2002 :80–1) suggests, the traditional neoliberal orthodoxy that began in the 1970s and prevailed in the 1980s, “presumes that the best way to give substance to human rights is to reduce the role of the state, liberate entrepreneurial energy, achieve economic efficiency, and promote faster economic growth.” The neoliberal emphasis on the retrenchment of the state as the best way to ensure the fulfillment of human rights seems contradictory to the human rights regime’s insistence of proactive state involvement in meeting its human rights obligations. Yet, as Bayes et al. ( 2001 :3) note, both economics and politics are linked through the rhetoric if not the practice of neoliberalism, which defines the current period. They argue that in theory, neoliberal economics assumes a separation between states and markets, in which markets operate with little intervention from the state. Brodie ( 1996 :384) suggests further that this theoretical relationship between states and markets is actually one of the public and private, in which the private is made up of two realms that are presumed to be out of the “natural” purview of the state: the capitalist economy and the patriarchal family.

However, as discussed earlier, the notion of a rigid public–private divide in the human rights regime has largely been deconstructed by feminists, and in using a similar line of reasoning, feminists suggest that the globalizing neoliberal capitalist world economy rests not on a division between the state (public) and the markets (private) but rather that economic globalization, in its current form, requires an interconnection between states and markets to further its goals. That is, economic globalization requires governments to “provide for the free movement of capital, the free movement of goods, unrestricted labor markets, responsible banking systems, stable monetary policies, limited fiscal policies, attractive investment opportunities, and political stability” (Bayes et al. 2001 :3). Through these practices, the “family and other aspects of private life [are subjected to] new forms of state scrutiny, regulation, and assistance” (Brodie 1996 :385). Thus, the “boundaries” of the public–private are renegotiated, rearticulated, and blurred through the interaction of states (especially liberal democratic ones) and markets.

Although state entrenchment with regards to the economy may be a conscious and pro/re-active strategy on the part of governments as a route to economic prosperity that in theory promotes the progressive realization of socioeconomic rights through more resource allocation, the neoliberal ideology effectively shifts the responsibility away from states to markets as the guarantors of rights. Markets have little accountability and regulation in the human rights regime, insofar as multinational corporations, a major force behind globalization, have little oversight in international law and, in many cases, national law. This development poses particular challenges for feminists, who argue that the neoliberal democratic state, coupled with international human rights law, represents the best hope for the redistribution of resources guided by prioritizing the goal of gender equality. This is not to imply that feminists view the neoliberal democratic state as “gender neutral” or unproblematic. Rather, as the earlier discussion of the human rights discourse reveals, many feminists find the liberal democratic state profoundly gendered.

Another major point of feminist theorizing about globalization is that economic globalization not only produces gender inequality but also requires gender inequality to flourish and to sustain itself. Indeed, there appears to be a general consensus that globalization exacerbates gender inequality, and thus the fulfillment of women’s socioeconomic rights in relation to men’s, in important ways. There are numerous other areas in which feminists have examined globalization’s impact on gender inequality and rights, such as household relations (Kromhout 2000 ; Gonzalez 2001 ; Sircar and Kelly 2001 ; Soni-Sinha 2001 ), migrants/migration (Anderson 2000 ; Chang and Ling 2000 ; Kofman 2000 ), sex work/trafficking (Pettman 1996 ; Hanochi 2001 ), informal labor (Prügl 1999 ; Benería 2003 ), resistance (Runyan 1996 ; Karam 2000 ; Lind 2000 ; Rowbotham and Linkogle 2001 ; Naples and Desai 2002 ) and identity (Peterson 1996 ; Kuokkanen 2008 ). However, these topics are beyond the scope of this project and, as such, will not be discussed in depth here.

As noted earlier, in order for states to remain economically competitive, they adopt strategies that increase the power of the private sector at the expense of the public sector. The result is the weakening of “many institutions that in the past have assumed responsibility for human welfare – while passing on to others burdens they cannot be expected to bear” (UNRISD 1995 :128). For many women, this situation is especially problematic because in order for states to uphold their obligations under CEDAW and the Beijing PFA, they must allocate resources for social welfare programs.

There have been two major responses by states facing the choice of economic competitiveness or guaranteeing socioeconomic rights. Industrialized countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom have deregulated the labor market and wages and cut social welfare programs in order to stimulate economic growth and employment (UNRISD 1995 :131). Developing countries have often adopted structural adjustment programs that implement severe economic austerity measures with the aim of jump-starting the economy at the expense of “non-profitable” public service programs. Feminist economists have shown that structural adjustment programs (SAP) have a differential impact on men and women in that women tend to absorb most of the shock of SAPs by increasing their domestic labor (through caregiving, altering the household consumption habits, subsistence farming, informal economic activities) and by entering the labor force to provide more income for the family (Elson 1991 ; Bakker 1994 ; Benería 2003 ; Çagatay 2003 ). As a result, there has been an increase in women’s poverty and economic inequality, and this constitutes a violation of women’s socioeconomic rights (Sadasivam 1997 ).

A second, interrelated issue is how economic globalization depends on a gendered sexual division of labor. The international sexual division of labor is predicated on the public–private split in which men’s work is considered to be “human” or real work, and women’s work is determined by their “nature” (Mies 1999 :46). Work is defined as a public masculine activity and women’s work (or non-work) is defined as a private sphere activity. However, women’s work in the private sphere is extremely important to the functioning of the capitalist system, yet despite this important role, women are undervalued in both the public and private spheres because of their identification as housewives, rather than as “workers” (Mies 1999 :116). Indeed, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) estimates that “the non-monetized invisible contribution of women is $11 trillion a year” (UNDP 1995 :6). This identification with the home as a site of “non-work” for women is also complicit in the violation of the rights of women who do work in the home for monetary gain, such as piecework. Because it is conducted in the “private sphere,” there is little international labor regulation around home based work, with the exception of the 1996 International Labor Organization Convention on Homework (Prügl 1999 ). However, only five countries have ratified it, which underscores the pervasiveness of the masculinized ideal of real, productive work that takes place only in the public sphere.

The sexual division of labor and its resulting sexism also helps maintain capitalism as system (Wichterich 2000 ; Campillo 2003 ). This has important consequences for women, because even when they do work outside the home they are usually cast in unequal terms. The implication is that capitalism necessarily depends on a certain amount of low-wage and unpaid labor to keep it functioning (Peterson 2003 ), as the “labor input in non-wage work ‘compensates’ the lowness of the wage-income and therefore in fact represents an indirect subsidy to the employers of wage laborers in those households” (Wallerstein 1988 :8). The identification of women with the private sphere helps keep capitalism’s costs low and at the same time provides a justification for this strategy.

The end result is limited economic opportunity for women since their labor is in the form of underpaid or unpaid labor in the capitalist system of profits and capital accumulation. Many labor sectors have become feminized, particularly the garment and electronics industries. Women are the preferred “workers” because they do not have to be paid as much as men. This is due in part to the devaluation of women’s labor (or the seeing of their paid labor as a natural extension of the private sphere) and the assumption that their wages are used for “extras” rather than to support the family (Mies 1999 :116). The state is complicit in perpetuating this sexism because of its need to stay competitive in global markets. Many women have their basic economic rights, such as the right to safe labor conditions and pay equity, denied because states would find it too costly to provide these opportunities to women. If the cost of production of goods increases, products would be less competitive on the international market. States are reluctant to hold multinational corporations accountable for their labor practices because the pressure for revenue is too great and the threat of relocation by multinational corporations (MNC) is real (Sen 1997 ).

The bottom line for many feminists is that economic globalization, operating within a neoliberal frame, both produces and exacerbates some forms of gender inequality. States are responding to globalization by shifting the burden onto women (and other marginalized sectors of society) to create their own social safety net. However, because women’s work is usually undervalued or unpaid given their identification with the private sphere, meeting basic needs requirements of food, shelter, health care, and clothing becomes especially challenging. In light of these gendered inequities, some feminist scholars, such as Elson ( 2006 :3) have suggested applying a gendered and rights based approach to the analysis of government budgets in order to “identify gender inequalities in budget processes, allocations and outcomes; and assess what States are obliged to do to address these inequalities” as a way to keep states accountable and responsive to women in the context of globalization.

Democratization

While the broader women’s human rights movement is in tacit agreement that civil-political liberties and socioeconomic rights are inextricable, there is disagreement over the exact nature of this relationship. Furthermore, if one takes the notion of structural indivisibility seriously, a rather complex picture of the relationship between the liberal democratic state, democratization processes, globalization, socioeconomic rights, and gender emerges. Utilizing Huntington ( 1991 ), some feminist analyses of democracies and democratization reveal that one important factor to consider with regards to gender equality is whether or not the state in question is in a period of democratic transition or of democratic consolidation (Jaquette and Wolchik 1998 ; Bystydzienski and Sekhon 1999 ; Hawkesworth 2001 ; Yoon 2001 ; Goetz and Hassim 2002 ). Many, but not all, of these studies show that women fare better in the transition phase (shifting from a nondemocratic type of government to a democratic one) than in the consolidation phase, which involves the establishment of rules, institutions, and political culture. However, there are also cases, such as in the post-communist states, where women have lost considerable economic and political power during the democratic transition phase (see, for example, Wolchik 1998 ).

Hawkesworth ( 2001 :223–6) suggests that the democratic consolidation phase in conjunction with liberal capitalist development has deleterious effects on gender equality, and thus the achievement of women’s rights, for two main reasons. First, developing countries, through modernization programs, are pressured to adopt a neoliberal capitalist model of development. This connects to the earlier discussion of economic development in the sense that modernization theory presumes that the adoption of capitalism will in turn produce a liberal democratic state, partially because liberal democracies are necessary to guarantee the private property rights that are crucial to global capitalism. A further assumption is that the combination of the deepening of capitalism and the consolidation of a liberal democracy will in fact elevate human rights fulfillment for the citizenry.

However, and this is Hawkesworth’s second point, the dominant model of Western liberal democracy that many countries seek to emulate has a weak record in achieving gender equality. With the exception of the Scandinavian countries, which Hawkesworth argues are more properly thought of as “social” democracies rather than liberal, women in advanced industrialized countries are still vastly underrepresented in the upper echelons of the public sphere. Although the advanced industrialized democracies guarantee equal rights for women and minorities, in reality the consolidation process has worked to produce and institutionalize a patriarchal elite class that undermines the principle of government for the people by the people. As the democratic consolidation process is coupled with the deepening of capitalism, political participation becomes the privilege of those who are economically empowered.

In her analysis, Hawkesworth ( 2001 :224) concludes that “democratization produces gendered redistribution of resources and responsibilities that make women worse off.” Given this scenario, it is not surprising that some feminists have linked the twin processes of globalization and democratization as detrimental to the achievement of human rights for women. Although one consequence of globalization is that more women are in the paid labor force, women have not been able to translate this into political empowerment because these economic “opportunities” are the result of having to make up for states’ inabilities to provide for basic needs. And, as noted earlier, gendered notions around work preclude the idea that more women in the labor force is a sign of increasing gender equality (Elson 2002 ). In short, globalization disempowers women economically, which in turn disempowers them politically by leaving little time, money, or energy to fully exercise civil and political rights.

Why, then, the insistence by the broader women’s human rights regime that the liberal democratic state remains the best hope for the achievement of gender equality in human rights? There are several answers to this conundrum that shed light on the further complexity of globalization, democratization, and women’s human rights achievement. First, no country has completed the process of democratic consolidation, and given that many of the countries do in fact guarantee civil and political rights, there are potential avenues to reshape the consolidation process to demand accountability. For example, feminist scholars have tracked the global diffusion of two notable policies: (1) the adoption of gender quotas in electoral processes, which more than fifty countries have done as a way to increase women’s participation in public life (Bauer 2008 ; Dahlerup 2008 ; Krook 2008 ; Sacchet 2008 ); and (2) the development of women’s policy agencies within the state (also known as “state feminism”) in over 165 countries (True and Mintrom 2001 ; Lovenduski 2005 ). While there are significant disagreements among feminists about the quality of women’s representation in these spheres as well as about the utility of both of these developments for the achievement of gender equality and women’s rights, they are cautiously viewed as positive developments nonetheless.

Second, and closely related to the first point, although globalization has had negative consequences, it also opens up spaces for women’s informal and formal political empowerment (Sassen 1998 ; Moghadam 1999 ; Bayes et al. 2001 ). Sassen ( 1998 :94) suggests that “globalization is creating new operational and formal openings for the participation of non-state actors and subjects,” which in turn provides for the possibility of reshaping ideas about representation, power, and authority. Third, although the role of the state appears to be diminishing or transforming in the wake of globalization, the unevenness of globalization has also ensured that human rights are a part of the permanent global agenda, and thus states are still crucial actors in this regard.

Fourth, and finally, as Rittich ( 2001 :96) observes, “human rights are now often mentioned in the same breath as market reform and development.” Some feminists have recognized this linking of human rights and markets as an opportunity to press for a refined state-management approach coupled with collective global governance to mitigate the negative effects of the global economy. However, others, such as Bergeron ( 2001 ), are skeptical of this approach because of the way feminist appeals to the state for “protection” frame the subjectivities and agency of women. Bergeron ( 2001 :995) suggests that when women are depicted as victims of globalization, an unintended consequence can be that the state will move to adopt “the traditional masculine role of protecting women and families.” This result is ultimately contrary to many feminist goals in achieving rights, and further points out the limitations of “victimization” rhetoric, as mentioned earlier, in accomplishing such goals.

Feminists have utilized the idea of indivisibility to challenge embedded gender hierarchies in the human rights regime to greatly expand the inclusiveness and, therefore, universality of rights (Otto 2001 :54–5). In particular, feminists have shown how the private and public spheres are interconnected, suggesting that economic, social, and political rights are necessarily linked – each one is key to the enjoyment of the other. Feminists have also identified international structures, such as security regimes and the global economy, as key variables to be examined, understood, and accounted for in relation to gender inequality in human rights. The “structural indivisibility” framework easily extends to all contemporary human rights regimes in that it provides an analytic tool for evaluating the impacts of globalization on gender inequality and socioeconomic rights.

The Question of Culture

The topic of cultural practice, traditions, and customary laws has occupied a central place of importance in feminist critiques and understandings of human rights. A central, well-known tension is between universal and cultural relativist positions on human rights. The universal position decrees human rights as inalienable and held by all members of the “human family,” whereas the cultural relativist position argues that “members of one society may not legitimately condemn the practices of societies with different traditions, denying that there can be valid external critiques of culturally-based practices and that no legitimate cross-cultural standards for the evaluating the treatment of rights exist” (Mayer 1995 :176). Many justifications for the denial of women’s human rights are framed in cultural relativist terms, and often positioned as an anti-Western, anti-imperialist response (Rao 1995 ; Brems 1997 ; Narayan 1998 ; Shacher 2001 ; Kapur 2005 ; Winter 2006 ; Bovarnick 2007 ). This paradoxical position frequently results in conflict between women’s individual rights and group cultural rights. Women may agree with the right of their cultural group to practice their culture, while at the same time disagreeing with how these cultural practices affect their personal autonomy and agency. Winter ( 2006 :385) notes that cultural relativist arguments are disproportionately deployed on the question of women’s rights, in that “those articles in UN treaties in favor of religious and cultural rights and the elimination of race discrimination do not appear to be as problematically ‘Western’ as those which defend women’s rights.” The literature on the topic of culture is vast and complex, and due to space constraints, there will be only a cursory and oversimplified overview of it here.

An important contribution of the feminist literature in this area is a deconstruction of the term “culture” itself. Rao ( 1995 :173) argues that culture is “a series of constantly contested and negotiated social practices whose meanings are influenced by the power and status of their interpreters and participants.” By identifying culture as a dynamic, political practice, it allows for a move away from cultural essentialism, or the idea that culture is somehow a homogeneous, static, internally consistent, natural, prediscursive given. Cultural essentialism, as such, is a form of cultural relativism in that it often positions itself as “traditional” and “authentic” and therefore not subject to critical examination. Furthermore, cultural essentialism can also mask “synecdochic substitutions” in which “‘parts’ of a practice come to come to stand in for a whole” and obscure the harmful nature of these “traditional” practices (Narayan 1998 :95). By defining culture as an ongoing process, feminist human rights scholars have revealed the gendered power dynamics embedded in the construction and perpetuation of cultural and religious practices. As Rao ( 1995 :168) notes, by understanding culture in this way, one can ask to what degree members of a cultural group are able to participate in the defining of culture as well as who benefits from a particular version of culture.

There is also considerable emphasis on the tension between universalism and cultural relativism (Brems 1997 ; Okin 1998 ; Bovarnick 2007 ; Freedman 2007 ; Steans 2007 ). Some feminist scholars suggest that the application of universal human rights has had little applicability in non-Western contexts. Bovarnick’s ( 2007 ) study of rape in Mexico and Pakistan reveals important insights into the question of cultural context and particularity when assessing whether or not universal human rights are useful in addressing violence against women. Positioning Mexico and Pakistan as non-Western countries in this study, her analysis reveals that while discourses around violence against women in both of these countries are in fact quite particularized, there are transcultural connections that can be made through the commonalities of “how traditional social mechanisms legitimize and reproduce violence against women” (Bovarnick 2007 :61). Despite their vast cultural differences, the two countries appropriate and regulate women’s bodies and sexuality in a similar fashion, highlighting the importance of addressing the global mechanism of which these different manifestations of violence against women are a part (Bovarnick 2007 ). Bovarnick seems to be suggesting that there are other transcultural universals emerging out of non-Western contexts that need to be taken into account in order to render a potentially different understanding and potential acceptance of universal rights.

Narayan ( 1998 ), however, suggests that for feminists to even use categories such as “Western” and “non-Western” is a culturally essentialist move in itself that can play right into the hands of third world fundamentalists, who often use cultural relativist and anti-imperialist justifications to deny women’s human rights, as well as of “Western cultural supremacists,” who support the idea that the West is morally and politically superior to all “Others” (Narayan 1998 :97). Furthermore, she takes issue with the notion that “equality” and “human rights” are inherently “Western values” to begin with. Narayan (ibid.) argues that “as a result of political struggles by […] various excluded groups in both Western and non-Western contexts […] doctrines of equality and rights have slowly come to be perceived as applicable to them, too.” For Narayan (ibid.), conceptualizations of rights and equality are not just products of Western imperialism but can be considered as products of struggles against internal and external forms of Western imperialism.

Many other feminist scholars are also currently engaged with trying to reconcile universalism with cultural particularism as a way to move past this polarizing dichotomy and to advance the goals of women’s human rights and gender equality. Nussbaum ( 2000 :100) argues for the capabilities approach which focuses on “what people are actually able to do and to be” rather than on what rights or resources individuals have, as one way to traverse this dichotomy. She builds a very complex argument that is oversimplified here due to space constraints, but at the crux of her work is development of the capabilities model, which is informed by the work of Amartya Sen , Marx , and Aristotle and others. Nussbaum argues that her list of basic human functional capabilities (life; bodily health; bodily integrity; senses, imagination, and thought; emotions; practical reason; affiliation; other species; play; control over one’s environment) are cross-culturally recognizable and desirable as well as necessary to the flourishing of human life ( 2000 :78–80). She suggests that by using capabilities, rather than rights, as the goals to be achieved, we will have the tools for developing a cross-cultural consensus for “determining a decent social minimum in a variety of areas” (Nussbaum 2000 :75). In her view, the capabilities approach is universal but not ethnocentric, for “ideas about activity and ability are everywhere, and there is no culture in which people do not ask themselves what they are able to do, what opportunities they have for functioning” ( 2000 :100). She further buttresses her claims by applying the capabilities criteria to the lives of two Indian women, and concludes they are already thinking, speaking, and acting in accordance with the language of capabilities ( 2000 :106–10). She also argues that capabilities can be realized in multiple ways according to context, etc., and that by positioning capabilities as the goal, the choice is left open whether or not to pursue the accompanying function ( 2000 :105). Nussbaum does not reject human rights discourse altogether, which she also suggests is not exclusively Western, even though it is often thought to be. Rather, she sees human rights frameworks as an important way to achieve capabilities because rights discourses can recognize and justify human capabilities, make claims of entitlement vis-à-vis the democratic state, and emphasize individual choice and autonomy.

To be sure, there have been many critiques of Nussbaum’s work, and I will address only a few critiques in cursory way here. Phillips ( 2001 ) worries that the capabilities approach takes us too far from an agenda of equality, which has been a central preoccupation for many feminists working in the human rights arena. Phillips warns that the capability approach is too focused on the question of freedom of choice, and this can result in unequal outcomes between the sexes. Phillips concludes as well that that there would be little redress for gendered inequalities that the capabilities approach might produce, if in fact a minimum standard of capabilities was in place for everyone. This does not imply equal capabilities but rather relational ones that could be fundamentally premised on sustaining gender inequalities.

Others, such as Quillen ( 2001 ) and Charusheela ( 2008 ), trouble Nussbaum’s attempts at developing a non-ethnocentric universal ethic by which to conceptualize the “human” in the capabilities model. Quillen ( 2001 :89) argues that Nussbaum’s adherence to liberal humanism actually undermines her project because it is an inadequate framework for understanding the intersections and sources of structural oppressions as well as for analyzing the self (see Nussbaum 2001 for her response to Quillen’s critiques). Charusheela ( 2008 ) argues that Nussbaum’s arguments for universality are in fact ethnocentric, due to their location in modernism, which posits a normative ideal based on Western liberal conceptualizations of the democratic state and capitalist system, and their attendant institutions, as the best way to deliver on capabilities. For Charusheela ( 2008 :13) the capabilities approach therefore rests on “an underlying set of assumptions about human nature that masquerades as universal – cognition expressed in particular ways, decisions made in specific ways, reason and voice deployed in ways appropriate to these institutions ” (emphasis in the original). Both Charusheela and Quillen suggest that we should be utilizing postcolonial feminist theories as the way to build a more collective response to social inequalities.

Some feminist human rights theorists are looking to social activism as a way to resolve the tensions between the particular and the universal. Ackerly ( 2001 ) argues that women’s human rights activists generate a cross-cultural theory of human rights that both invokes and contributes to the universal human rights project while at the same time being able to advocate these ideals in locally appropriate ways. Steans ( 2007 ) makes a similar point in her analysis, highlighting the role that conflict, contestation, and reflection play in feminist transnational advocacy networks in forging new understandings about the basis of collective identities and “shared” interests. She suggests that rather than challenging the notion of universal human rights for women, the conflict generated over cultural differences in feminist transnational advocacy networks serves to buttress universality as these conflicts potentially lead to resolutions that are “both more inclusive and better reflect the actual diversity of women” (Steans 2007 :17).

Reilly ( 2007 ) approaches this question through the lens of cosmopolitan feminism and argues that this theoretical perspective rejects the notion that women are united by a common identity or common experience, and can serve as a transformative political framework. Offering up the ICC NGO Women’s Caucus for Gender Justice and PeaceWomen Project focused on the passage and implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 (which gender mainstreams security issues) as examples, Reilly suggests that cosmopolitan feminism is a “process-oriented framework wherein the direction and content of feminist practice is determined in cross-boundaries dialogue within and across women’s movements” ( 2007 :182). Reilly suggests that through this framework, a global feminist consciousness can be developed that challenges “false universalisms” predicated on false, but powerful, binaries that construct and maintain gender, race, and class inequalities ( 2007 :187). In challenging these binaries through an intersectional framework, cosmopolitan feminism can “critically [reinterpret] universal values such as the rule of law, human rights, and secular democratic politics” ( 2007 :193).

The feminist cosmopolitan approach is not without its critics, however. Both Kaplan ( 2001 ) and Grewal ( 2005 ) argue that the global feminism envisioned by feminist cosmopolitanism produces a new type of Orientalism that is heavily predicated on rescue discourses, which serve to maintain, rather than transform, existing power inequalities. For example, Kaplan ( 2000 :222) suggests that the “cross-cultural dialogues” central to feminist cosmopolitanism are predicated on the view that “patriarchy and other forms of oppression are […] largely overcome in the metropolitan centers of the West,” necessitating a shift “to the spaces of ‘tradition’ and ‘barbarism’ in the margins – the ‘orient’ or the Third World.” Using Hillary Rodham Clinton ’s appearance at the 1995 Beijing Conference on Women as a focal point of her analysis, Kaplan illustrates how cosmopolitan feminism and its attendant discourses on human rights (which Kaplan argues are still primarily liberal in theoretical orientation) “travel” (literally and figuratively) to “other” parts of the world to facilitate cross-cultural dialogue, which ultimately feminizes and positions the third world as space that needs to be saved, or rescued (Grewal 2005 ).

As a result, “the ‘West’ is uncritically assumed to embody ‘equality’, ‘democracy’, and ‘freedom’ despite its serious involvement and investments in […] systems of oppression and power” (Russo 2006 :573). These critiques are amply demonstrated in two case studies of the Feminist Majority Foundation’s (FMF) work in relation to Afghani women’s rights, in which the FMF relied on rescuing and saving discourses while simultaneously highlighting its work with the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) as a project of global (cosmopolitan) feminism throughout its Campaign to End Gender Apartheid (Farrell and McDermott 2005 ; Russo 2006 ).

Grewal’s ( 2005 ) and Kaplan’s ( 2001 ) contention that the cosmopolitan feminist women’s human rights framework constructs difference and produces particular discourses of power and subjects in ways that exempt the West from critical interrogation of their roots in creating and maintaining interlocking systems of oppression are important points to consider in light of Reilly’s arguments, above, in terms of intersectional frameworks. How is difference in terms of intersecting identities as well as agency understood? And, does this approach enable the transcendence of binaries, or recast them, (re)producing both old and new inequalities? Finally, assuming these binaries are contested and transformed, whose “universal” values will be reinterpreted, by whom, and for what ends?

Feminist Futures: Measuring the Achievement of Women’s Human Rights

This essay points to a number of controversies, such as issues regarding culture, sexuality, and neo-imperialism, which need further consideration by feminists. However, the essay has not addressed methodological issues, which are also important for the study and achievement of women’s human rights. Data collection is an important component for a variety of methodological approaches and, as such, deserves further scrutiny here.

During the UN Decade for Women, feminist transnational networks argued for the need to collect sex-disaggregated data. Although heralded by many feminists at the time as a major breakthrough, this has increasingly come under scrutiny. First, there are many provisions in both women’s rights and human rights documents that guarantee a wide range of civil and political liberties and socioeconomic rights but there are actually few data to measure these particular rights. As argued in this essay, feminists conceptualize human rights as something far more complex than the equitable distribution of the presumed benefits and resources of economic development, globalization, and democratization, such as individual empowerment and capacity building, which are difficult to quantify.

Second, because human rights data are often outcomes based and reflect the performance of states, they are actually defined by the public sphere (as are data focused on legally based indicators). As noted earlier in this essay, one of the key insights of feminist human rights scholarship on gender inequality has been its insistence on the interaction of the public and private spheres, and the rejection of this binary as mutually exclusive. That is to say, what happens in the public sphere has ramifications for gender ideology and roles in the private sphere. As such, these measures simply cannot capture the gendered dynamics of the private sphere, which have ideological, physical, and material consequences for the achievement of rights. Because of their inability to capture gendered interactions between the public and private spheres as well as gendered relations within those spheres, the data are at best capturing sex discrimination within the confines of the neoliberal global order rather than the structural feature of gender oppression. In this case, sex is operationalized as an empirical category and gender is an analytical one; yet the sex-disaggregated data are being used as a substitute for “gender.”

Many human rights indicators (though not all) use male experience as the norm, and the achievement of women’s human rights is seen as relative to the rights that men have already achieved. Thus, the typical human rights data show that women are discriminated against in so far as they have not achieved the same rights as men, despite the efforts put forth by many feminists to expand and reframe notions of rights that take into account the difference of women’s and men’s lived realities. Barriteau ( 2006 ), in her study of the Commonwealth Caribbean, argues that composite human rights indicators, such as the Gender Development Index (GDI) and the Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM), place too much emphasis on the material relations of power (and empowerment) to the exclusion of the social and ideological relations of power. Thus, the high score of the Commonwealth Caribbean countries on both the GDI and GEM masks the daily realities of gender based oppression in many women’s lives. Because of this, it looks as if women’s human rights have been achieved, and therefore it is very difficult to mount a critical challenge against the indicators. Many feminists are concerned that this type of outcome creates “an impression that women no longer require assistance and that men are now much more needy beneficiaries” and as a result, there will be a “re-masculinization” of both the development and human rights discourses (McIlwaine and Datta 2003 :375).

Adding to these concerns about the type of data used to measure the success or failure of gender mainstreaming human rights, Wood ( 2005 ) raises the important point that the overall ideology of gender mainstreaming human rights in fact homogenizes both men and women and that this homogenization is often mistaken for commonality. Wood argues that the cost of the homogenization of gender in the policy process, even though it is an efficient and expedient way to gender mainstream human rights and development, is the neglect of “difference” within these homogenized categories of men and women. This is a crucial point because the rationale around gender mainstreaming is to understand how certain social and economic policies impact men and women differently, and the data constructed to evaluate this difference reflect this focus. Wood argues that in order for gender mainstreaming to be more effective, more attention must be paid to the differences among women (and by extension among men) in terms of class, race, ethnicity, sexuality, etc. By this logic, data collection would have to be transformed. For example, it is not enough to point to the increased numbers of women in parliaments and call it gender mainstreaming human rights success. Additional data need to be known about which women are in these positions, which women are not, and why. This would also tell us something about how patriarchal systems can accommodate a certain amount or type of women seeking power while excluding others (hooks 2000 ).

Gender inequality is not separate from class, race, ethnicity, age, and sexual inequalities. Yet, given the current construction of data, we are forced to construct and evaluate gender equality and the achievement of human rights in very narrow and rigid ways. Though this is already happening to some degree, a future task for feminist scholars and activists is to conceptualize and advocate for human rights data that can capture gender inequality in multidimensional and intersectional ways.

• Ackerly, B. (2001) Women’s Human Rights Activists as Cross-cultural Theorists. International Journal of Feminist Politics 3 (3), 311–46.
• Anderson, B. (2000) Doing the Dirty Work? The Global Politics of Domestic Labor . London: Zed Books.
• Arat, Z.F.K. (2008) Women’s Rights as Human Rights. UN Chronicle 45 (2/3) (Special double issue), 9–13.
• Bakker, I. (1994) Introduction: Engendering Macro-economic Policy Reform in the Era of Global Restructuring and Adjustment. In I. Bakker (ed.) The Strategic Silence: Gender and Economic Policy . London: Zed Books, pp. 1–29.
• Barriteau, V.E. (2006) Engendering Development or Gender Mainstreaming? A Critical Assessment from the Commonwealth Caribbean. In E. Kuiper and D.K. Barker (eds.) Feminist Economics and the World Bank: History, Theory, and Policy . London: Routledge, pp. 176–98.
• Bauer, G. (2008) Fifty/Fifty by 2020: Electoral Gender Quotas for Parliament in East and Southern Africa. International Feminist Journal of Politics 10 (3), 348–68.
• Bayes, J.H. , Hawkesworth, M.E. , and Kelly, R.M. (2001) Globalization, Democratization, and Gender Regimes. In R.M. Kelly , J.H. Bayes , M.E. Hawkesworth , and B. Young (eds.) Gender, Globalization, and Democratization . Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 1–14.
• Benería, L. (2003) Gender, Development, and Globalization: Economics as if All People Mattered . New York: Routledge.
• Bergeron, S. (2001) Political Economy Discourses of Globalization and Feminist Politics. Signs: Journal of Women and Culture in Society 26 (42), 983–1006.
• Boserup, E. (1970) Woman’s Role in Economic Development . London: Allen and Unwin.
• Bovarnick, S. (2007) Universal Human Rights and Non-Western Normative Systems: A Comparative Analysis of Violence against Women in Mexico and Pakistan. Review of International Studies 33, 59–74.
• Brems, E. (1997) Enemies or Allies? Feminism and Cultural Relativism as Dissident Voices in Human Rights Discourse. Human Rights Quarterly 19 (1), 136–64.
• Brodie, J. (1996) New State Forms, New Political Spaces. In R. Boyer and D. Drache (eds.) States against Markets: The Limits of Globalization . London: Routledge, pp. 383–98.
• Bunch, C. (1990) Women’s Rights as Human Rights: Toward a Revision of Rights. Human Rights Quarterly 12, 486–500.
• Bystydzienski, J.M. , and Sekhon, J. (1999) Introduction. In J.M. Bystydzienski and J. Sekhon (eds.) Democratization and Women’s Grassroots Movements . Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 1–24.
• Çagatay, N. (2003) Engendering Macro-Economics. In M. Gutiérrez (ed.) Macro-Economics: Making Gender Matter . London: Zed Books, pp. 22–41.
• Campillo, F. (2003) Unpaid Household Labor: A Conceptual Approach. In M. Gutiérrez (ed.) Macro-Economics: Making Gender Matter . London: Zed Books, pp. 106–21.
• Chang, K.A. , and Ling, L.H.M. (2000) Globalization and Its Intimate Other: Filipina Domestic Workers in Hong Kong. In M.H. Marchand and A. Sisson Runyan (eds.) Gender and Global Restructuring: Sightings, Sites, and Resistances . London: Routledge, pp. 27–43.
• Chappell, L. (2000) Interacting with the State: Feminist Strategies and Political Opportunities. International Feminist Journal of Politics 2 (2), 244–75.
• Chappell, L. (2007) Contesting Women’s Rights: Charting the Emergence of a Transnational Conservative Counter-Network. Global Society 20 (4), 491–520.
• Charlesworth, H. (1995) Human Rights as Men’s Rights. In J. Peters and A. Wolper (eds.) Women’s Rights, Human Rights: International Feminist Perspectives . London: Routledge, pp. 103–13.
• Charusheela, S. (2008) Social Analysis and the Capabilities Approach: A Limit to Martha Nussbaum’s Universalist Ethics. Cambridge Journal of Economics (Sep.), 1–18.
• Copelon, R. (1994) Intimate Terror: Understanding Domestic Violence as Torture. In R. Cook (ed.) Human Rights of Women: National and International Perspectives . Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 116–54.
• Dahlerup, D. (2008) Gender Quotas – Controversial but Trendy. International Feminist Journal of Politics 10 (3), 322–8.
• Donnelly, J. (1999) The Social Construction of International Human Rights. In T. Dunne and N. Wheeler (eds.) Human Rights in Global Politics . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 71–102.
• Dorf, J. , and Perez, G.C. (1995) Discrimination and the Tolerance of Difference: International Lesbian Human Rights. In J. Peters and A. Wolper (eds.) Women’s Rights, Human Rights: International Feminist Perspectives . London: Routledge, pp. 324–34.
• Elson, D. (1991) Male Bias in the Development Process: The Case of Structural Adjustment. In D. Elson (ed.) Male Bias in the Development Process . Manchester: University of Manchester Press, pp. 1–28.
• Elson, D. (2002) Gender Justice, Human Rights, and Neo-liberal Economic Policies. In M. Molyneux and S. Razavi (eds.) Gender Justice, Development, and Rights . Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 78–114.
• Elson, D. (2006) Budgeting for Women’s Rights: Monitoring Government Budgets for Compliance with CEDAW . New York: UNIFEM.
• Farrell, A. , and McDermottt, P. (2005) Claiming Afghan Women: The Challenge of Human Rights Discourse for Transnational Feminism. In W.S. Hesford and W. Kozol (eds.) Just Advocacy? Women’s Human Rights, Transnational Feminisms, and the Politics of Representation . New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, pp. 33–55.
• Forward Looking Strategies (FLS) (1985) Website at www.un.org/womenwatch/confer/nfls/Nairobi1985report.txt , accessed Sep. 2008.
• Fraser, A. (1999) Becoming Human: The Origins and Development of Women’s Human Rights. Human Rights Quarterly 21, 853–906.
• Freedman, J. (2007) Women, Islam and Rights in Europe: Beyond a Universalist/Culturalist Dichotomy. Review of International Studies 33, 29–44.
• Friedman, E. (2006) Bringing Women to International Human Rights. Peace Review: A Journal of Social Justice 18, 479–84.
• Goetz, A.M. , and Hassim, S. (2002) In and Against the Party: Women’s Representation and Constituency-building in Uganda and South Africa. In M. Molyneux and S. Razavi (eds.) Gender Justice, Development, and Rights . Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 306–46.
• Gonzalez, L. (2001) Mexico/U.S. Migration and Gender Relations: The Guanajuatense Community in Mexico and the United States. In R.M. Kelly , J.H. Bayes , M.E. Hawkesworth , and B. Young (eds.) Gender, Globalization, and Democratization . Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 75–94.
• Grant, R. (1991) Sources of Gender Bias in International Relations Theory. In R. Grant and K. Newland (eds.) Gender and International Relations . Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 8–26.
• Grewal, I. (2005) Transnational America: Feminism, Diasporas, Neoliberalisms . Durham: Duke University Press.
• Hanochi, S. (2001) Japan and the Global Sex Industry. In R.M. Kelly , J.H. Bayes , M.E. Hawkesworth , and B. Young (eds.) Gender, Globalization, and Democratization . Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 137–48.
• Hawkesworth, M.E. (2001) Democratization: Reflections on Gendered Dislocations in the Public Sphere. In R.M. Kelly , J.H. Bayes , M.E. Hawkesworth , and B. Young (eds.) Gender, Globalization, and Democratization . Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 223–36.
• hooks, b. (2000) Feminist Theory from Margin to Center , 2nd edn. Cambridge: South End.
• Huntington, S. (1991) The Third Wave . Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
• Jaquette, J.S. , and Wolchik, S.L. (1998) Women and Democratization in Latin America and Central and Eastern Europe: A Comparative Introduction. In J.S. Jaquette and S.L. Wolchik (eds.) Women and Democracy: Latin America and Central and Eastern Europe . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 1–28.
• Joachim, J. (2003) Framing Issues and Seizing Opportunities: The UN, NGOs, and Women’s Rights. International Studies Quarterly 47 (2), 247–74.
• Johnson, A. (1997) The Gender Knot: Unraveling our Patriarchal Legacy . Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
• Johnson, M. (1998) A Magna Carta for Mankind: Writing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In M. Johnson and J. Symonides (eds.) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: A History of its Creation and Implementation, 1948–1998 . Paris: UNESCO, pp. 19–75.
• Kaplan, C. (2001) Hillary Rodham Clinton’s Orient: Cosmopolitan Travel and Global Feminist Subjects. Meridians: Feminism, Race, Transnationalism 2 (1), 219–40.
• Kapur, R. (2005) Erotic Justice: Law and the Politics of Postcolonialism . London: Glasshouse.
• Karam, A.K. (2000) Feminisms and Islamisms in Egypt: Between Globalization and Postmodernism in Egypt. In M.H. Marchand and A. Sisson Runyan (eds.) Gender and Global Restructuring: Sightings, Sites, and Resistances . London: Routledge, pp. 194–208.
• Kaufman, N.H. , and Lindquist, S. (1995) Critiquing Gender Neutral Language: The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. In J. Peters and A. Wolper (eds.) Women’s Rights, Human Rights: International Feminist Perspectives . London: Routledge, pp. 114–25.
• Keck, M.E. , and Sikkink, K. (1998) Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics . Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
• Kofman, E. (2000) Beyond a Reductionist Analysis of Female Migrants in Global European Cities: The Unskilled, the Deskilled, and Professional. In M.H. Marchand and A. Sisson Runyan (eds.) Gender and Global Restructuring: Sightings, Sites, and Resistances . London: Routledge, pp. 129–39.
• Kromhout, M. (2000) Women and Livelihood Strategies: A Case Study of Coping with Economic Crisis through Household Management in Paramaribo, Suriname. In M.H. Marchand and A. Sisson Runyan (eds.) Gender and Global Restructuring: Sightings, Sites, and Resistances . London: Routledge, pp. 140–56.
• Krook, M.L. (2008) Quota Laws for Women in Politics: Implications for Feminist Practice. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State and Society 15, 345–68.
• Kuokkanen, R. (2008) Globalization as Racialized, Sexualized Violence: The Case of Indigenous Women. International Feminist Journal of Politics 10 (2), 216–33.
• Lake, M. (2001) From Self-Determination via Protection to Equality via Non-Discrimination: Defining Women’s Rights at the League of Nations and the United Nations. In P. Grimshaw , K. Holmes , and M. Lake (eds.) Women’s Rights and Human Rights: International Historical Perspectives . New York: Palgrave, pp. 254–71.
• LaViolette, N. , and Whitworth, S. (1994) No Safe Haven: Sexuality as a Universal Human Right and Gay and Lesbian Activism in International Politics. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 23, 563–88.
• Lind, A. (2000) Negotiating Boundaries: Women’s Organizations and the Politics of Restructuring in Ecuador. In M.H. Marchand and A. Sisson Runyan (eds.) Gender and Global Restructuring: Sightings, Sites, and Resistances . London: Routledge, pp. 161–75.
• Locke, J. (1980) Second Treatise of Government , ed. C.B. Macpherson . Indianapolis: Hackett.
• Lothian, T. (1996) Women’s Rights and Political Economy. Connecticut Journal of International Law 12 (1), 67–75.
• Lovenduski, J. (ed.) (2005) State Feminism and Political Representation . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• McIlwaine, C. , and Datta, K. (2003) From Feminising to Engendering Development. Gender, Place, and Culture 10 (4), 369–82.
• Marchand, M. (1996) Reconceptualising “Gender and Development” in an Era of “Globalisation.” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 25 (3), 577–603.
• Mayer, A.E. (1995) Cultural Particularism as a Bar to Women’s Rights: Reflections on the Middle Eastern Experience. In J. Peters and A. Wolper (eds.) Women’s Rights, Human Rights: International Feminist Perspectives . London: Routledge, pp. 176–88.
• Merry, S.E. (2006) Human Rights and Gender Violence: Translating International Law into Local Justice . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Mertus, J. (2007) The Rejection of Human Rights Framings: The Case of LGBT Advocacy in the US. Human Rights Quarterly 29, 1036–64.
• Mies, M. (1999) Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale , 2nd edn. London: Zed Books.
• Moghadam, V.M. (1999) Gender and the Global Economy. In M. Max Ferree , J. Lorber , and B. Hess (eds.) Revisioning Gender . Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp. 128–60.
• Mohanty, C. (1991) Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses. In C. Mohanty , A. Russo , and L. Torres (eds.) Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism . Bloomington: University of Indiana Press, pp. 51–80.
• Morgan, W. (2001) Queering International Human Rights Law. In C. Stychin and D. Herman (eds.) Law and Sexuality: The Global Arena . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 208–25.
• Naples, N.A. , and Desai, M. (eds.) (2002) Women’s Activism and Globalization: Linking Local Struggles and Transnational Politics . New York: Routledge.
• Narayan, U. (1997) Dislocating Cultures: Identities, Traditions, and Third World Feminism . New York: Routledge.
• Narayan, U. (1998) Essence of Culture and a Sense of History: A Feminist Critique of Cultural Essentialism. Hypatia 13 (2), 86–106.
• Nussbaum, M.C. (2000) Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Nussbuam, M.C. (2001) Comment on Quillen’s “Feminist Theory, Justice, and the Lure of the Human.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 27 (1), 123–34.
• Okin, S.M. (1998) Feminism, Women’s Human Rights, and Cultural Differences. Hypatia 13 (2), 32–51.
• Otto, D. (2001) Defending Women’s Economic and Social Rights: Some Thoughts on Indivisibility and a New Standard of Equality. In I. Merali and V. Oosterveld (eds.) Giving Meaning to Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights . Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 52–70.
• Parisi, L. (2002) Feminist Praxis and Human Rights. Journal of Human Rights 1 (4), 571–85.
• Pateman, C. (1989) The Disorder of Women: Democracy, Feminism, and Political Theory . Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Peratis, K. , Kerr, J. , Schneider, E.M. , and Vandenberg, M. (1999) Markets and Women’s International Human Rights. Brooklyn Journal of International Law 25 (1), 141–60.
• Peterson, V.S. (1996) The Politics of Identification in the Context of Globalization. Women’s Studies International Forum 19 (1/2), 5–15.
• Peterson, V.S. (2003) A Critical Rewriting of Global Political Economy: Integrating Reproductive, Productive, and Virtual Economies . New York: Routledge.
• Peterson, V.S. , and Parisi, L. (1998) Are Women Human? It’s Not an Academic Question. In T. Evans (ed.) Human Rights Fifty Years On: A Reappraisal . Manchester: University of Manchester Press, pp. 132–60.
• Peterson, V.S. , and Runyan, A.S. (1999) Global Gender Issues , 2nd edn. Boulder: Westview.
• Pettman, J.J. (1996) An International Political Economy of Sex? In E. Kofman and G. Youngs (eds.) Globalization: Theory and Practice . London: Pinter, pp. 191–208.
• Phillips, A. (2001) Feminism and Liberalism Revisited: Has Martha Nussbaum Got It Right? Constellations 8 (2), 249–66.
• Pietilä, H. , and Vickers, J. (1996) Making Women Matter: The Role of the United Nations , 3rd edn. London: Zed Books.
• Prügl, E. (1999) What Is a Worker? Gender, Global Restructuring, and the ILO Convention on Homework. In M.K. Meyer and E. Prügl (eds.) Gender Politics in Global Governance . Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 197–209.
• Quillen, C. (2001) Feminist Theory, Justice, and the Lure of the Human. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 27 (1), 87–122.
• Rao, A. (1995) The Politics of Gender and Culture in International Human Rights Discourse. In J. Peters and A. Wolper (eds.) Women’s Rights, Human Rights: International Feminist Perspectives . London: Routledge, pp. 167–75.
• Rao, A. (1996) Home-Word Bound; Women’s Place in the Family of International Human Rights. Global Governance 2, 241–60.
• Reilly, N. (2007) Cosmopolitan Feminism and Human Rights. Hypatia 22 (4), 180–98.
• Rittich, K. (2001) Feminism after the State: The Rise of the Market and the Future of Women’s Rights. In I. Merali and V. Oosterveld (eds.) Giving Meaning to Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights . Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 95–108.
• Romany, C. (1994) State Responsibility Goes Private: A Feminist Critique of the Public/Private Distinction in International Human Rights Law. In R. Cook (ed.) Human Rights of Women: National and International Perspectives . Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 85–115.
• Rowbotham, S. , and Linkogle, S. (eds.) (2001) Women Resist Globalization: Mobilizing for Livelihood and Rights . London: Zed Books.
• Runyan, A.S. (1996) The Places of Women in Trading Places: Gendered Global/Regional Regimes and Internationalized Resistance. In E. Kofman and G. Youngs (eds.) Globalization: Theory and Practice . London: Pinter, pp. 139–56.
• Rupp, L. (1997) Worlds of Women: The Making of an International Women’s Movement . Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Russo, A. (2006) The Feminist Majority Foundation’s Campaign to Stop Gender Apartheid. International Feminist Journal of Politics 8 (4), 557–80.
• Sacchet, T. (2008) Beyond Numbers: The Impact of Gender Quotas in Latin America. International Feminist Journal of Politics 10 (3), 369–86.
• Sadasivam, B. (1997) The Impact of Structural Adjustment on Women: A Governance and Human Rights Agenda. Human Rights Quarterly 19 (3), 630–65.
• Sassen, S. (1998) Globalization and Its Discontents . New York: New Press.
• Sen, G. (1997) Globalization, Justice and Equity: A Gender Perspective. Development 40 (2), 21–6.
• Shacher, A. (2001) Multicultural Jurisdictions: Cultural Differences and Women’s Rights . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Sircar, A. , and Kelly, R.M. (2001) Globalization and Asian Indian Immigrant Women in the United States. In R.M. Kelly , J.H. Bayes , M.E. Hawkesworth , and B. Young (eds.) Gender, Globalization, and Democratization . Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 95–120.
• Soni-Sinha, U. (2001) Income Control and Household Work-sharing. In R.M. Kelly , J.H. Bayes , M.E. Hawkesworth , and B. Young (eds.) Gender, Globalization, and Democratization . Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 121–36.
• Steans, J. (2007) Debating Women’s Human Rights as a Universal Feminist Project: Defending Women’s Human Rights as a Political Tool. Review of International Studies 33, 11–27.
• Steans, J. , and Ahmadi, V. (2005) Negotiating the Politics of Gender and Rights: Some Reflections on the Status of Women’s Human Rights at “Beijing Plus Ten.” Global Society 19 (3), 227–45.
• Sullivan, D. (1995) The Public/Private Distinction in International Human Rights Law. In J. Peters and A. Wolper (eds.) Women’s Rights, Human Rights: International Feminist Perspectives . London: Routledge, pp. 126–34.
• Tong, R.P. (2008) Feminist Thought: A More Comprehensive Introduction , 3rd edn. Boulder: Westview.
• True, J. , and Mintrom, M. (2001) Transnational Networks and Policy Diffusion: The Case of Gender Mainstreaming. International Studies Quarterly 45, 27–57.
• UNDAW (n.d.) Short History of CEDAW. At www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/history.htm , accessed Feb. 2009.
• UDHR (1948) United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. At www.un.org/Overview/rights.html , accessed Mar. 2009.
• UNDP (1995) Human Development Report . New York: Oxford University Press.
• UNRISD (1995) States of Disarray: The Social Effects of Globalization . London: UNRISD.
• Vinding, D. (1998) Indigenous Women: The Right to a Voice , IWGIA Document no. 88. Copenhagen: International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs.
• Voet, R. (1998) Feminism and Citizenship . London: Sage.
• Wallerstein, I. (1988) The Ideological Tensions of Capitalism: Universalism Versus Racism and Sexism. In J. Smith , J. Collins , T.K. Hopkins , and A. Muhammed (eds.) Racism, Sexism, and the World-System . New York: Greenwood, pp. 3–10.
• Weldon, S.L. (2002) Protest, Policy, and the Problem of Violence against Women: A Cross-National Comparison . Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
• Winter, B. (2006) Religion, Culture and Women’s Human Rights: Some General Political and Theoretical Considerations. Women’s Studies International Forum 29 (4), 381–93.
• Wichterich, C. (2000) The Globalized Woman: Reports from a Future of Inequality , trans. P. Camiller . London: Zed Books.
• Wolchik, S.L. (1998) Gender and the Politics of Transition in Czech Republic and Slovakia. In J.S. Jaquette and S.L. Wolchik (eds.) Women and Democracy: Latin American and Central and Eastern Europe . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 153–84.
• Wood, C. (2005) Different Commonalities: Gender Mainstreaming and the Marginalization of Difference in Economic Development. Canadian Journal of Development Studies 26, 593–603.
• Yoon, B.L. (2001) Democratization and Gender Politics in South Korea. In R.M. Kelly , J.H. Bayes , M.E. Hawkesworth , and B. Young (eds.) Gender, Globalization, and Democratization . Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 171–95.
• Youngs, G. (2000) Breaking Patriarchal Bonds: Demythologizing the Public/Private. In M.H. Marchand and A.S. Runyan (eds.) Gender and Global Restructuring: Sightings, Sites, and Resistances . London: Routledge, pp. 44–58.

Links to Digital Materials

Association for Women’s Rights in Development. At www.awid.org , accessed May 11, 2009. Women’s Rights NGO which provides up-to-date news about women’s human rights worldwide, resources, research reports and analysis, and job listings in the field.

Center for Reproductive Law. At www.reproductiverights.org/ , accessed May 11, 2009. A non-profit legal advocacy organization for the protection of reproductive rights worldwide. Provides information on current events related to reproductive rights laws globally, in-depth analyses by region, country, and issue information about litigation, and assessments of the UN and other international organizations.

Human Rights Watch, Women’s Rights page. At www.hrw.org/en/category/topic/women%E2%80%99s-rights , accessed May 11, 2009. Provides news updates and in-depth reports on a range of women’s human rights issues, such as domestic and sexual violence, HIV/AIDS, labor, security, and migration.

MADRE. At www.madre.org , accessed May 11, 2009. A women’s human rights NGO. Provides resource information and information on current campaigns.

UN Beijing Platform for Action (1995). At www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/beijing/platform/ , accessed May 11, 2009. Provides the full text to the PFA. Includes links to information about the Beijing Conference on Women, country statements, Beijing +5, and Beijing +10.

UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). At www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/cedaw.htm , accessed May 11, 2009. Provides the full text of the convention in all of the official UN languages. Includes a list of states, parties, and reservations to the convention, and country reports. Access to the text of the CEDAW Optional Protocol.

UN GenderInfo Database. At www.devinfo.info/genderinfo/ , accessed May 11, 2009. Searchable database of sex disaggregated statistics related to the following sectors: education, families, health and nutrition, population, public life, and work.

UN Office of the Special Advisor on Gender Issues and Advancement of Women Gender Mainstreaming Page. At www.un.org/womenwatch/osagi/gendermainstreaming.htm , accessed May 11, 2009. This page provides information on the concepts and definitions used to guide the practice of gender mainstreaming of women’s human rights in the UN system. Provides examples of good practices.

UN WomenWatch. At www.un.org/womenwatch/ , accessed May 11, 2009. Inter-agency information center on all women’s issues at the UN. Provides links to news and highlights, events, current campaigns, publications, websites and videos, statistical data, and all agencies working on issues related to women’s rights, development, and gender mainstreaming.

Women, Environment, and Development Organization (WEDO). At www.wedo.org/ , accessed May 11, 2009. A women’s human rights and development NGO which features an extensive online library on a variety of topics ranging from climate change to trade and their impact on achieving gender equality. Also provides in-depth reports and fact-sheets.

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to: Brooke Ackerly , the editor of the FTGS section’s contribution to the compendium, and Andrea Gerlak , Managing Editor of the ISA compendium, for their encouragement and support; Zehra Arat, for her helpful suggestions and coordination of the reviewers’ comments; the two anonymous reviewers, whose comments helped sharpen and deepen this essay; Shannon Mcleod , for her editorial and research assistance; and Mindy McGarrah Sharp , for her administrative assistance. All remaining errors and inaccuracies are, of course, attributable solely to the author.

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, International Studies. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 16 May 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|109.248.223.228]
• 109.248.223.228

Character limit 500 /500

Human Rights Essay for Students and Children

500+ words essay on human rights.

Human rights are a set of rights which every human is entitled to. Every human being is inherited with these rights no matter what caste, creed, gender, the economic status they belong to. Human rights are very important for making sure that all humans get treated equally. They are in fact essential for a good standard of living in the world.

Moreover, human rights safeguard the interests of the citizens of a country. You are liable to have human rights if you’re a human being. They will help in giving you a good life full of happiness and prosperity.

Human Rights Categories

Human rights are essentially divided into two categories of civil and political rights, and social rights. This classification is important because it clears the concept of human rights further. Plus, they also make humans realize their role in different spheres.

When we talk about civil and political rights , we refer to the classic rights of humans. These rights are responsible for limiting the government’s authority that may affect any individual’s independence. Furthermore, these rights allow humans to contribute to the involvement of the government. In addition to the determination of laws as well.

Next up, the social rights of people guide the government to encourage ways to plan various ways which will help in improving the life quality of citizens. All the governments of countries are responsible for ensuring the well-being of their citizens. Human rights help countries in doing so efficiently.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Importance of Human Rights

Human rights are extremely important for the overall development of a country and individuals on a personal level. If we take a look at the basic human rights, we see how there are right to life, the right to practice any religion, freedom of movement , freedom from movement and more. Each right plays a major role in the well-being of any human.

Right to life protects the lives of human beings. It ensures no one can kill you and thus safeguards your peace of mind. Subsequently, the freedom of thought and religion allows citizens to follow any religion they wish to. Moreover, it also means anyone can think freely.

Further, freedom of movement is helpful in people’s mobilization. It ensures no one is restricted from traveling and residing in any state of their choice. It allows you to grab opportunities wherever you wish to.

Next up, human rights also give you the right to a fair trial. Every human being has the right to move to the court where there will be impartial decision making . They can trust the court to give them justice when everything else fails.

Most importantly, humans are now free from any form of slavery. No other human being can indulge in slavery and make them their slaves. Further, humans are also free to speak and express their opinion.

In short, human rights are very essential for a happy living of human beings. However, these days they are violated endlessly and we need to come together to tackle this issue. The governments and citizens must take efforts to protect each other and progress for the better. In other words, this will ensure happiness and prosperity all over the world.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Human Rights: The Case for the Defence by Shami Chakrabarti review – freedoms fighter treads a fine line

The Labour peer and former Liberty director makes a clear, impassioned case for human rights law, but steers surprisingly clear of thorny political arguments

I t may sound a little melodramatic to say that human rights are under attack in Britain. But in the week I opened this book, it certainly didn’t feel that way. Parliament was locked in battle over the Rwanda bill, widely seen as driving a coach and horses through human rights obligations, with Shami Chakrabarti herself in the thick of the fray as a Labour peer. Nigel Farage was once again demanding Britain leave the European convention on human rights – the new passion project for Brexiters who would rather not talk about how Brexit itself is going, and who see the convention as a haven of suspiciously lefty values – while Rishi Sunak was bending over backwards not to rule that out. There’s still something faintly surreal about having to actively make a case for the right to life, liberty, or freedom from being tortured – who doesn’t automatically value these things? – but if Brexit taught us anything, it’s that liberals are surprisingly bad at defending truths that seem so obvious we’ve never given them much thought. This time, it pays to be ready.

Chakrabarti has already covered some of this ground in her brilliant first book, On Liberty , in which she reflected on her time running the civil liberties organisation of that name and somehow pulled off the rare feat of tackling extremely serious issues without taking herself too seriously. This third book, however, feels more like sitting through an undergraduate lecture, albeit an absorbing one.

It begins with a useful primer for the layperson, explaining the basic rights and principles underlying the sort of morally complex arguments – over free speech on university campuses, or whether the famously strict Michaela school can ban pupils from praying, or whether Israel has committed war crimes in Gaza, or whether a Christian baker can be fairly expected to bake someone a wedding cake for a same-sex couple – that keep hitting the headlines.

For Chakrabarti, however, the ECHR isn’t just a set of amalgamated legal safeguards but a source of “sheer poetic insight” into human nature: she sees a lyricism in the language and something moving in the way it flows from the rights of the individual to rights governing the way we interact as social animals, form families, speak to one another, or keep secrets. This is law essentially willing civilisation into action, and as with difficult music or the higher reaches of maths, there is a hidden beauty in it. What she describes is an extraordinarily delicate balancing act in which war can sometimes trump the right to life, and yet must still have its strictly ordained limits. (The right to be free from torture, for example, is still absolute even when soldiers are killing one another on the battlefield; or it is, at least, in theory). By the time the author announces her intention to defend this feat of moral engineering from “some extremely common and trenchant criticisms”, I was practically ready to man the barricades for poor misunderstood activist lawyers. And yet somehow, that moment never quite came.

Chakrabarti systematically picks apart a number of critiques – some technical, and some now decidedly niche, including an anti-capitalist attack on human rights law (for protecting the property interests of the super-rich and being employed against abuses in China or Russia) that reads remarkably like the radical left eating itself. She does touch on some fascinating arguments, though, about how to enforce human rights principles online, or how they might help guide a just transition to net zero.

But she circles only in surprisingly wide loops round the most common and most serious attack now made against the ECHR, that by getting in the way of things many Conservatives want to do – often to immigrants, or protesters – the law has made itself an enemy of the people, stopping democratically elected politicians doing what the public wants. Something similar happens in the chapter on what happens when rights clash, which reads at points as if it’s about to engage with the argument over transgender rights and women’s rights but never quite does.

Chakrabarti clearly didn’t want this to be a political book, to the point of apologising if any reader has found her too political. Though unusual for a former shadow cabinet minister, that’s nonetheless understandable: the whole point of human rights law is that it’s meant to be above such things. But since the nature of the attack is now intensely political, failing to confront it directly leaves the rebuttal feeling rather incomplete. The defence cannot, in the end, rest here.

after newsletter promotion

• Society books
• The Observer
• Shami Chakrabarti
• Human rights

Most viewed

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

ESSAY; HUMAN RIGHTS VICTORY

• Nov. 5, 1981

SafireWASHINGTON, Nov. 4 -The Reagan Administration intends to take the human rights issue seriously.

When the nomination of Ernest Lefever to the Human Rights post in the State Department was withdrawn (many believed his concern was limited to violations by Communist nations), the Reagan men took their time before sending a new name up to the Hill. Leo Cherne, Leonard Garment and the columnist Michael Novak were approached; each declined, but recommended ''somebody like Elliott Abrams.''

Mr. Abrams, 33 years old, is now Assistant Secretary of State for U.N. matters. His neo-conservative pedigree ranges from being the stepson-in-law of Commentary magazine's editor, Norman Podhoretz, to being a former aide to Senator Daniel P. Moynihan. At State, Mr. Abrams has been one tough cookie-pusher, and his nomination last week to the sensitive human-rights post signals Mr. Reagan's desire to live up to his 1976 campaign commitments.

Underscoring the significance of the Abrams nomination is the policy expressed in an ''eyes-only'' memorandum, dated Oct. 27, to Secretary Alexander Haig, from Deputy Secretary William Clark and Under Secretary for Management Richard Kennedy recommending the Abrams appointment. (I suspect the memo was drafted by Mr. Abrams, who will probably be blamed for being the source; he was not.)

''Human rights is at the core of our foreign policy,'' states the Clark-Kennedy memo. ''... We will never maintain wide public support for our foreign policy unless we can relate it to American ideals and to the defense of freedom.''

''The fundamental distinction'' between ourselves and the Soviet bloc is our sharply different attitudes toward freedom, says the memo: ''Our ability to resist the Soviets around the world depends in part on our ability to draw this distinction and to persuade others of it.'' The writers recognize that one cause of the wave of neutralism abroad is the notion of relativism: ''Why arm, and why fight, if the two superpowers are morally equal? Our human rights policy must be at the center of our response.''

Fine words, but to achieve credibility we will have to knock our friends occasionally. Here is how the new policy handles that: ''If a nation, friendly or not, abridges freedom, we should acknowledge it, stating that we regret and oppose it. However ... human rights is not advanced by replacing a bad regime with a worse one, or a corrupt dictator with a zealous Communist politburo.''

That is a necessary straddle, but activists will hail this passage: ''A human rights policy means trouble, for it means hard choices which may adversely affect certain bilateral relations. At the very least, we will have to speak honestly about our friends' human rights violations and justify any decision wherein other considerations (economic, military, etc.) are determinative. There is no escaping this without destroying the credibility of our policy, for otherwise we would be simply coddling friends and criticizing foes.''

In dealing with the Russians, Mr. Abrams appears to have extracted an internal concession to insure that his will not be a cosmetic role: ''... this Administration might possibly seek the repeal of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment,'' which links our trade concessions to Communist nations to their willingness to allow dissidents to emigrate. ''Abrams has made clear,'' reads the burn-before-reading memo, ''that he could only support such an effort in the context of the sort of agreement reached between Jackson and Kissinger in 1975. To seek repeal without such an agreement would, in his view, make a mockery of our human rights policy ...''

The memo contains the usual Haigian turfmanship, proposing that State head the Interagency Group on human rights, ''using Defense Attaches in some cases as part of our 'quiet diplomacy,' '' which may turn Defense Secretary Weinberger purple.

And there is a wistful paragraph suggesting ''we should move away from 'human rights' as a term, and begin to speak of 'individual rights,' 'political rights' and 'civil liberties.' '' Presumably this is because ''human'' rights have been mistaken by some to mean an entitlement not to starve, but the name-changing notion is wrongheaded: human rights is rooted in Locke's ''natural rights,'' put in the French phrase for ''the rights of man,'' and changed by Eleanor Roosevelt at the U.N. to ''human rights'' to include women.

In the Reagan espousal of that policy, the good guys have won. Hats off to the beleaguered Secretary of State; let us hope he does not find the public perusal of his interoffice mail too great a parannoyance. We should be prepared to wade through reams of soporific eyes-only or teeth-only memos (how do you get off Al Haig's distribution list?) to find one line like ''A human rights policy means trouble.'' Unless it means trouble, a human rights policy means nothing.

Human Rights Violation Essay Sample, with Outline

Published by gudwriter on January 4, 2021 January 4, 2021

Human Rights Violation Essay Outline

Introduction, elevate your writing with our free writing tools.

Did you know that we provide a free essay and speech generator, plagiarism checker, summarizer, paraphraser, and other writing tools for free?

Thesis: The enforcement and upholding human rights goes a long way in promoting justice, tolerance, mutual respect, and human dignity.

The law punishes heavily those people who violate human rights. Essays on violation of human rights can be tough to most students with the help of credible essay writing service like Gudwriter you get MBA essay writing for students who are struggling to complete their assignments or essays.

Paragraph 1:

There is a general agreement that fundamental human rights and freedoms should be accorded to people no matter the situation or circumstance.

• These rights include but not limited to civil liberties, political rights and most important the right to life.
• A violation of human rights denies individuals their basic moral entitlements.
• Some of the universal human rights abuses and those termed as crimes against humanity include, ‘genocide, torture, slavery, rape, enforced sterilization, medical experimentation, and deliberate starvation’.

Paragraph 2:

In times of warfare, there is often a widespread violation of human, political, and fundamental rights.

• In such situations, the worst violation of human rights and specifically the right to life include massacres, starvation of people, and genocide.
• The murder of individuals and causing them bodily harm, prevention of birth, or forcibly transferring children is a violation of human rights.

Paragraph 3:

Sometimes women face the worst form of human right violation through rape or forced into prostitution.

• Crimes involving sexual mutilation, humiliation, and forced pregnancy are common.
• Another case of human violation among women is that of trafficking where they are transported to long distances for prostitution.

Paragraph 4:

The police are also notorious for violating basic human rights.

• The most common violation of basic human rights by the police is brutality.
• It is a dangerous human right violation since even though it is considered illegal, it can be carried out under the color of law.

Paragraph 6:

 Protection of Human rights

• The question that ought to be considered is how these rights should be protected.
• When it comes to crimes against humanity, there should be a humanitarian intervention.
• Although it is a highly protested debate, humanitarian intervention will go a long way in ensuring that people are not subjected to inhuman treatment.
• The international community should also ensure that international standards related to human rights are promoted without having an interest in a nation but for the sake of the suffering citizens.

Understanding one’s rights goes a long way in preventing human rights violations.

• The citizens of any nation should have adequate knowledge of their rights to ensure that they are not violated.
• It is often said that knowledge is power which means that when people possess knowledge concerning their rights, they will know when their rights are violated and where to go to seek redress.

Paragraph 7:

Due to globalization governments should revise their laws to fight against human rights violation.

• In the wake of the 21 st century, there has been an increase in trading activities across borders meaning that non-state actors are more involves in issues related to human rights.
• Although globalization has enhanced the ability to carry out activities beyond borders, some people have found loopholes where they can violate human rights.
• Governments should ensure that they close such loopholes by the formation of laws that acknowledge the world as a global village.

  Paragraph 8:

All governments across the world should put in place strict penalties against people that violate human rights.

• For instance, when it comes to police brutality, the government through its arms should ensure that people who suffer receive justice.
• A restate of the thesis statement
• A summary of the main points
• A take-away  statement  made based on presented facts or information  

Human rights violation essay instructions – ways through which human rights are violated and what can be done to ensure human rights are protected.

Human Rights Violation and Protection

In every society, there are fundamental rights and freedoms put in place. A human right is a moral principle or a norm that describes or sets specific standards of human behavior and protected in a country’s constitution. There is also the concept of natural rights. Defined, natural rights are those rights that are believed all human beings and animals are entitled to as provided by natural law. Society often views these rights to be inalienable, implying it is almost impossible to take them away. Noteworthy, life, liberty, and property are the most important natural rights. When the U.S. was declaring itself independent from the British, “life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness” were mentioned as the natural rights. The Declaration of the Rights of Man too espoused the idea.

Those who supported the idea, including Thomas Jefferson and John Locke, believed that the government has the purpose of protecting the natural rights of people through a social contract. In such a contract, members of a society implicitly agree to pursue social benefits through mutual cooperation. However, different actions and practices often lead to violation of these rights. A violation of human rights is dangerous and illegal in any society since it defeats the purpose the rights were established in the first place. The enforcement and upholding of human rights goes a long way in promoting justice, tolerance, mutual respect, and human dignity.

There is a general agreement that fundamental human rights and freedoms should be accorded to people no matter the situation or circumstance. These rights include but not limited to civil liberties, political rights, and most importantly the right to life. The protection of human rights ensures that individuals are not treated inhumanely or indecently. A violation of human rights denies individuals their basic moral entitlements. That is, violation of these rights means that one is treated in an undeserving manner. Some of the universal human rights abuses and those termed as crimes against humanity, according to Ekpa (2016), include genocide, torture, slavery, rape, enforced sterilization, medical experimentation, and deliberate starvation.

In times of warfare, there is often a widespread violation of human, political, and fundamental rights. In such situations, the worst violation of human rights and specifically the right to life include massacres, starvation of people, and genocide. Defined, genocide refers to the killing of people of a particular race, ethnicity, or religious group en-masse (MacKinnon, 2017). The killing of people and causing them bodily harm, prevention of birth, or forcibly transferring children are all human rights violations. Genocide is considered as one of the most serious violation of human rights.

Sometimes, women face the worst form of human rights violation through rape or forced prostitution. At other times, the international community fails to consider sexual crimes that happen during times of war. However, crimes involving sexual mutilation, humiliation, and forced pregnancy are common (Bunch, 2013). Another case of human violation among women is that of trafficking whereby they are transported to long distances for prostitution. At times, these acts against women are performed intentionally. For instance, in the 1990s, the media proclaimed that rape and other sexual crimes were carried out deliberately during the Bosnian war.

The police are another group that are notorious for violating fundamental human rights. The most common violation of human rights by the police is brutality. Most of the times, the police are known to exert excessive violence when quelling riots and protests. It is a dangerous human rights violation since even though it is considered illegal, it can be carried out under the color of law. There are numerous videos and news article that show images of people being mistreated in the hands of people who should uphold and implement the very human rights.

Protection of Human rights

Undoubtedly, there are numerous cases of human rights violations . The question that ought to be considered is how these rights should be protected. When it comes to crimes against humanity, there should be a humanitarian intervention (Shelton, 2015). Although it is a highly protested debate, humanitarian intervention will go a long way in ensuring that people are not subjected to inhumane treatment. The international community should also ensure that international standards related to human rights are promoted without having an interest in a nation but for the sake of the suffering citizens.

Understanding one’s rights goes a long way in preventing human rights violations. The citizens of any nation should have adequate knowledge of their rights to ensure that they are not violated. It is often said that knowledge is power, which means that when people possess knowledge concerning their rights, they will know when the rights are violated and where to go in order to seek redress.

Due to globalization, governments should revise their laws to fight against human rights violation. In the wake of the 21st century, there has been an increase in trading activities across borders meaning that non-state actors are more involved in issues related to human rights (Shelton, 2015). Although globalization has enhanced the ability to carry out activities beyond borders, some people have found loopholes through which to violate human rights. Therefore, governments should ensure that they close such loopholes by adopting laws that acknowledge the world as a global village.

All governments across the world should put in place strict penalties against people who violate human rights. For instance, when it comes to police brutality, a country’s government through its arms should ensure that people who suffer receive justice. Sometimes, the government might turn a blind eye to such situations, but the situations brew catastrophe in the long run. In this light, the fight against human rights violation should start with the government and spread to other parties.

The enforcement and upholding of human rights goes a long way in promoting justice, tolerance, mutual respect, and human dignity. When human rights are violated, it means that there is a total disregard of basic human moral entitlements. Therefore, people should be educated on their rights and governments should play a role in protecting these rights without turning a blind eye to any situation involving human rights violation.

Bunch, C. (1990). Women’s rights as human rights: Toward a re-vision of human rights.  Hum. Rts. Q. ,  12 , 486.

Ekpa, S. (2016). Human rights violation. SSRN . Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2738447

MacKinnon, C. A. (2017). Rape, genocide, and women’s human rights. In  Genocide and human rights  (pp. 133-144). New York, NY: Routledge.

Shelton, D. (2015).  Remedies in international human rights law . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Special offer! Get 20% discount on your first order. Promo code: SAVE20

Related Posts

Free essays and research papers, artificial intelligence argumentative essay – with outline.

Artificial Intelligence Argumentative Essay Outline In recent years, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become one of the rapidly developing fields and as its capabilities continue to expand, its potential impact on society has become a topic Read more…

Synthesis Essay Example – With Outline

The goal of a synthesis paper is to show that you can handle in-depth research, dissect complex ideas, and present the arguments. Most college or university students have a hard time writing a synthesis essay, Read more…

Examples of Spatial Order – With Outline

A spatial order is an organizational style that helps in the presentation of ideas or things as is in their locations. Most students struggle to understand the meaning of spatial order in writing and have Read more…