Feminist Critique Of International Human Rights

“Cultural Relativist and Feminist Critique of International Human Rights- Friends or Foes?” The journal, “Cultural Relativist and Feminist Critique of International Human Rights- Friends or Foes?” by Oonagh Reitman have the aim to know deeper about the two critiques towards the universal Human Rights by the two major theory, which are the Cultural Relativism and Feminism, how they see the universal Human Rights theory. The Journal address for the workshop discussion matter regarding to the similarities on critique of International human rights that made by the Cultural relativist and the feminist. “ Human Rights is the right that given and held by human simply because they are human, and it does not classified nor held by certain groups or not the subject to variation in culture”(Donnelly 1989: 109-110) From the introduction in the journal, the writer defines how the feminist and the cultural relativist express their idea of Universal human rights. The idea of Universal human rights from Donnelly were being reserve by Relativist, they argue that the human rights itself root from culture and due to the variation of culture, making the human rights not universal.

Rhetorical Analysis of “Women’s Rights are Human Rights” For a long time, women have been treated badly by the society that they live in. They have been killed because of dowry, they have been suffering from rape, and they haven’t been treated equal as men. Women were not allowed to take important decisions of their life, and they didn’t have a right to speak up for themselves. Therefore, Hillary Clinton was supporting women’s right in her speech, “Women’s right are Human rights” by talking about how women do not have equal rights as men, and how they have to go through tough situations.

“Human rights are not worthy of the name if they do not protect the people we don’t like as well as those we do”(Trevor Phillips). Everyone whether they are black, white, rich or poor is entitled to their humans rights.Therefore, it is an inhumane and unjust atrocity when millions of people around the world are denied their basic human rights based on exactly these physical, shallow, insignificant differences that outline sharp social status ' in our society. On September 5, 1995, Hillary Clinton addressed the issue of women’s rights by delivering a forceful speech as the First Lady of United States. In Hillary Clinton’s “Women Rights Are Human Rights” she effectively expresses that gender equality is important by creating a credible account

The issue of women’s rights and how different societies and cultures deal with it had been on the table for many centuries. In the United States of America during the 1800s, women began to move toward and demand getting equal rights as men, they decided to speak up and fight for their stolen rights. In the 1960s, continued working toward their goal, women broadened their activities through the women’s rights movement which aimed to help them in gaining their right to receive education, occupy the same jobs that were once titled only for men, and get an access to leadership positions. The women’s rights movement has a great impact on women today, although it started a long time ago, but it did not stop and women are reaping their fruit today,

This

This

This

This

This

This

This

This

This,

In “Rethinking Indivisibility” James Nickel presents a system that can provide a consistent explanation of the relationship between the expanding group of human rights. Nickel points out the UN’s Proclamation of Tehran which supports Henry Shue’s claim that people cannot enjoy rights without having security and minimum economical provisions. While Nickel agrees with Shue’s argument, he disagrees with the “grand claims that all human rights are interdependent and indivisible” . According to the author, it is necessary to divide human rights in seven families so we can see the relationship between them and how this relationship affects the strength and implementation of said rights.

This