In the journal, the writer explain that feminism is critique international human rights and fight for women rights while the cultural relativism critique the International Human Rights and fight for the culture. I do agree that in practice International Human rights is not universal especially for women since there is a lot of discrimination towards women. But I am not fully agreed with the writer, that state feminism can cooperate with cultural relativism. If the feminism could cooperate together since there are several things that could not be combine such as human right and culture. For example is the Female Genital Mutilation that known as the culture in some region but it was violating the women rights.
Oxford dictionary defines it as the advocacy of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes. One thing that is common for all definitions is that feminism doesn’t advocate the perception that women should be superior to men. It doesn’t plead for women to have all privileges which even men don’t seem to have. Men underachieving or men bowing down to women is not at all what feminists fight for. All it asks for, and all feminism stands for is equality.
The Due process Clause restricts states from depriving the people of life, liberty, or property without due process of law (Griswald, 96). The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is what the Court followed to make it required for states to uphold marriage licenses of same-sex couples from other states. The reasoning behind this being that the denial of same-sex couples to marry is the denial of same-sex couples’ equal protection under law. If the right to marry is guaranteed to opposite-sex couples, then the equal protection of rights and liberties need to be offered to same-sex
Cultural relativist uphold that culture is the principle source of any rights or rules, they argued that the existence of women’s human rights cannot be universally applied. As relativist reservations at the international forum that dominantly driven by religious objection which mostly based on Islam and Catholic values, they have also seen human rights as a specific ideology of western imperialism. The author believes that the presence of cultural relativist has become the obstacle of the protection and implementation of the international women’s human rights. Feminist, on the other hand, fully support the agendas of, in this case the
The fact that roles and symbolism associated with femininity together with patriarchal authority and masculine privilege are often made into cultural signifiers, places women’s individual rights in conflict with those seeking to impose ‘traditional’, ‘authentic’, or ‘national’ customs on their people. So, while one should be skeptical in accepting the human rights as formally universal, one should also not place undue reliance on culture which has often placed the burden of tradition solely on the shoulders of women, subjecting to
Women have not been included in ‘human’ of human rights. Reitman provides supporting idea from the feminist campaign “Women’s Right as Human Rights”. In the other hand relativist believes that human rights are imbued by culture which is now dominated the international community. Human rights are viewed as modern form of imperialism of Western value. Therefore the similarities exists on how both critiques’ perception on the image of human rights.
In 1926, the Turkish Civil Code was adopted and women were acknowledged as equals of men before the law. In 1934, women were given the right to vote and stand for election. Turkey was the 13th country among 35 others in the women’s suffrage movement, yet a study by the World Economic Forum indicates that Turkey’s global gender gap index was 130 out of 144 countries in 2016. Gender equality is an essential part of human rights and Turkey is regressing day by day with invisible barriers in politics, which prevent women from reaching their absolute potentials. Gender inequality has risen in Turkish politics and women are unable to practice rights which are birth rights, because different rules apply to women.
He maintained that affirmative action policies violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution which says that all citizens should have an equal protection of law. However, the court ruled out that the affirmative action policy is constitutional and can be used as a one of many factors in admissions processes. However, it should not be zero-sum, where the increased opportunities for the minorities come at the expense of the majority groups ( Brunner and Rowen
While the lack of this journal is a lack of examples of this discussion. Besides the lack of perspective in further discussion of international law. As theories of International Relations before, Feminism is not free from criticism. Feminism was considered too focused on women's issues which should focus on equality. But overall this journal provide information of interest to feminist criticism in international law itself It can be concluded that sex and gender differences is important to show where the God-given and construct society.
According to sexual and reproductive rights individuals have the right to choose their own partners without interference from anyone. If I being female made a conscious decision to be in a relationship with another female this would make me a lesbian. Does being a lesbian/gay mean that my human rights seize to exist? ‘’Currently the laws, and general societal attitudes, within Botswana prohibit ones' choice of sexual orientation.’’ (Anon., 2007).Given the laws of the country sexual and reproductive rights are like a stepping stone to human rights, I believe a violation of sexual and reproductive rights is a violation of human rights. For example if in the case of Botswana the laws of the country limit to what extent citizens get to enjoy their sexual and reproductive right to choosing a partner.