Human Rights, International Ethics and Women
Human Rights, International Ethics and Women
The purpose of this literature review is to explore and analyse selected texts while aiming to address the question of whether rights conventions are appropriate in international ethics. I will write this essay in a feminist perspective and reframe the question to focus specifically on whether international rights conventions are appropriate in international ethics when it comes to women. The primary issue this essay focuses upon is whether an international human rights framework can better deal with issues of injustice than the internal domestic laws and cultures of states and I assert that the latter is more appropriate when it comes to dealing with issues of injustice. I will analyse some selected discourses within the framework this issue.
Feminists Hilary Charlesworth, Christine Chinkin & Shelley Wright (1991) argue that human rights are masculine and patriarchal and so in endorsing the universality of rights would be to reproduce male thinking. These authors believe that the whole conception of ‘rights’ is masculine in that it is men think in terms of rationality, rights and reason, whereas females think in terms of context and relationships (Charlesworth, Chinkin & Wright 1991). However, this line of thought is based upon their support of Carol Giligan’s model of development theory, which in itself is controversial as it ignores cross-cultural empirical realities and ignores that women too think in terms of rationality and reason. Furthermore, the conceptual ideal of rights has been contested by men in Western discourses as well as non-Western discourses.
For example, when the conception of ‘natural rights’ was created, Jeremy Bentham (cited in Bedau 2000, p. 263) opposed the idea of rights stating that it was, ‘nonsense upon stilts’. In a contemporary non-Western setting former leader Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore and Mohathir Mohamad of Malaysia stated that there is an incompatibility with Asian values and
The purpose of this literature review is to explore and analyse selected texts while aiming to address the question of whether rights conventions are appropriate in international ethics. I will write this essay in a feminist perspective and reframe the question to focus specifically on whether international rights conventions are appropriate in international ethics when it comes to women. The primary issue this essay focuses upon is whether an international human rights framework can better deal with issues of injustice than the internal domestic laws and cultures of states and I assert that the latter is more appropriate when it comes to dealing with issues of injustice. I will analyse some selected discourses within the framework this issue.
Feminists Hilary Charlesworth, Christine Chinkin & Shelley Wright (1991) argue that human rights are masculine and patriarchal and so in endorsing the universality of rights would be to reproduce male thinking. These authors believe that the whole conception of ‘rights’ is masculine in that it is men think in terms of rationality, rights and reason, whereas females think in terms of context and relationships (Charlesworth, Chinkin & Wright 1991). However, this line of thought is based upon their support of Carol Giligan’s model of development theory, which in itself is controversial as it ignores cross-cultural empirical realities and ignores that women too think in terms of rationality and reason. Furthermore, the conceptual ideal of rights has been contested by men in Western discourses as well as non-Western discourses.
For example, when the conception of ‘natural rights’ was created, Jeremy Bentham (cited in Bedau 2000, p. 263) opposed the idea of rights stating that it was, ‘nonsense upon stilts’. In a contemporary non-Western setting former leader Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore and Mohathir Mohamad of Malaysia stated that there is an incompatibility with Asian values and
References: Bedau, HA 2000, ‘“Anarchical Fallacies”:Bentham’s Attack on Human Rights’, Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 261-279. Beitz, CR 2006, ‘Human Rights as a Common Concern’, in RE Goodin & P Pettit (eds.), Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Anthology, Blackwell Publishing, Malden, pp. 350-364. Charlesworth, H, Chinkin, C & Wright, S 1991, ‘Feminist Approaches to International Law’, The American Journal of International Law, vol. 85, no. 4, pp. 613-645. Donnelly, J 1998, ‘Human Rights: A New Standard of Civilization?’ International Affairs, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 1-24. Donnelly, J 2007, ‘The Relative Universality of Human Rights’, Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 281-306. Goodhart, M 2008, ‘Neither Relative nor Universal: A Response to Donnelly’, Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 183-193. Shapcott, R 2010, International Ethics: A Critical Introduction, Polity Press, United Kingdom. United Nations 2000-2009, Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Violence Against Women: Declarations, Reservations and Objections to CEDAW’, viewed 1 May 2012, http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/reservations-country.htm. Winter, B 2006, ‘Religion, culture, and women’s human rights: Some general political and theoretical considerations’, Elsevier, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 381-393.