women's rights and equality essay

A global story

This piece is part of 19A: The Brookings Gender Equality Series . In this essay series, Brookings scholars, public officials, and other subject-area experts examine the current state of gender equality 100 years after the 19th Amendment was adopted to the U.S. Constitution and propose recommendations to cull the prevalence of gender-based discrimination in the United States and around the world.

The year 2020 will stand out in the history books. It will always be remembered as the year the COVID-19 pandemic gripped the globe and brought death, illness, isolation, and economic hardship. It will also be noted as the year when the death of George Floyd and the words “I can’t breathe” ignited in the United States and many other parts of the world a period of reckoning with racism, inequality, and the unresolved burdens of history.

The history books will also record that 2020 marked 100 years since the ratification of the 19th Amendment in America, intended to guarantee a vote for all women, not denied or abridged on the basis of sex.

This is an important milestone and the continuing movement for gender equality owes much to the history of suffrage and the brave women (and men) who fought for a fairer world. Yet just celebrating what was achieved is not enough when we have so much more to do. Instead, this anniversary should be a galvanizing moment when we better inform ourselves about the past and emerge more determined to achieve a future of gender equality.

Australia’s role in the suffrage movement

In looking back, one thing that should strike us is how international the movement for suffrage was though the era was so much less globalized than our own.

For example, how many Americans know that 25 years before the passing of the 19th Amendment in America, my home of South Australia was one of the first polities in the world to give men and women the same rights to participate in their democracies? South Australia led Australia and became a global leader in legislating universal suffrage and candidate eligibility over 125 years ago.

This extraordinary achievement was not an easy one. There were three unsuccessful attempts to gain equal voting rights for women in South Australia, in the face of relentless opposition. But South Australia’s suffragists—including the Women’s Suffrage League and the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, as well as remarkable women like Catherine Helen Spence, Mary Lee, and Elizabeth Webb Nicholls—did not get dispirited but instead continued to campaign, persuade, and cajole. They gathered a petition of 11,600 signatures, stuck it together page by page so that it measured around 400 feet in length, and presented it to Parliament.

The Constitutional Amendment (Adult Suffrage) Bill was finally introduced on July 4, 1894, leading to heated debate both within the houses of Parliament, and outside in society and the media. Demonstrating that some things in Parliament never change, campaigner Mary Lee observed as the bill proceeded to committee stage “that those who had the least to say took the longest time to say it.” 1

The Bill finally passed on December 18, 1894, by 31 votes to 14 in front of a large crowd of women.

In 1897, Catherine Helen Spence became the first woman to stand as a political candidate in South Australia.

South Australia’s victory led the way for the rest of the colonies, in the process of coming together to create a federated Australia, to fight for voting rights for women across the entire nation. Women’s suffrage was in effect made a precondition to federation in 1901, with South Australia insisting on retaining the progress that had already been made. 2 South Australian Muriel Matters, and Vida Goldstein—a woman from the Australian state of Victoria—are just two of the many who fought to ensure that when Australia became a nation, the right of women to vote and stand for Parliament was included.

Australia’s remarkable progressiveness was either envied, or feared, by the rest of the world. Sociologists and journalists traveled to Australia to see if the worst fears of the critics of suffrage would be realised.

In 1902, Vida Goldstein was invited to meet President Theodore Roosevelt—the first Australian to ever meet a U.S. president in the White House. With more political rights than any American woman, Goldstein was a fascinating visitor. In fact, President Roosevelt told Goldstein: “I’ve got my eye on you down in Australia.” 3

Goldstein embarked on many other journeys around the world in the name of suffrage, and ran five times for Parliament, emphasising “the necessity of women putting women into Parliament to secure the reforms they required.” 4

Muriel Matters went on to join the suffrage movement in the United Kingdom. In 1908 she became the first woman to speak in the British House of Commons in London—not by invitation, but by chaining herself to the grille that obscured women’s views of proceedings in the Houses of Parliament. After effectively cutting her off the grille, she was dragged out of the gallery by force, still shouting and advocating for votes for women. The U.K. finally adopted women’s suffrage in 1928.

These Australian women, and the many more who tirelessly fought for women’s rights, are still extraordinary by today’s standards, but were all the more remarkable for leading the rest of the world.

A shared history of exclusion

Of course, no history of women’s suffrage is complete without acknowledging those who were excluded. These early movements for gender equality were overwhelmingly the remit of privileged white women. Racially discriminatory exclusivity during the early days of suffrage is a legacy Australia shares with the United States.

South Australian Aboriginal women were given the right to vote under the colonial laws of 1894, but they were often not informed of this right or supported to enroll—and sometimes were actively discouraged from participating.

They were later further discriminated against by direct legal bar by the 1902 Commonwealth Franchise Act, whereby Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were excluded from voting in federal elections—a right not given until 1962.

Any celebration of women’s suffrage must acknowledge such past injustices front and center. Australia is not alone in the world in grappling with a history of discrimination and exclusion.

The best historical celebrations do not present a triumphalist version of the past or convey a sense that the fight for equality is finished. By reflecting on our full history, these celebrations allow us to come together, find new energy, and be inspired to take the cause forward in a more inclusive way.

The way forward

In the century or more since winning women’s franchise around the world, we have made great strides toward gender equality for women in parliamentary politics. Targets and quotas are working. In Australia, we already have evidence that affirmative action targets change the diversity of governments. Since the Australian Labor Party (ALP) passed its first affirmative action resolution in 1994, the party has seen the number of women in its national parliamentary team skyrocket from around 14% to 50% in recent years.

Instead of trying to “fix” women—whether by training or otherwise—the ALP worked on fixing the structures that prevent women getting preselected, elected, and having fair opportunities to be leaders.

There is also clear evidence of the benefits of having more women in leadership roles. A recent report from Westminster Foundation for Democracy and the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership (GIWL) at King’s College London, shows that where women are able to exercise political leadership, it benefits not just women and girls, but the whole of society.

But even though we know how to get more women into parliament and the positive difference they make, progress toward equality is far too slow. The World Economic Forum tells us that if we keep progressing as we are, the global political empowerment gender gap—measuring the presence of women across Parliament, ministries, and heads of states across the world— will only close in another 95 years . This is simply too long to wait and, unfortunately, not all barriers are diminishing. The level of abuse and threatening language leveled at high-profile women in the public domain and on social media is a more recent but now ubiquitous problem, which is both alarming and unacceptable.

Across the world, we must dismantle the continuing legal and social barriers that prevent women fully participating in economic, political, and community life.

Education continues to be one such barrier in many nations. Nearly two-thirds of the world’s illiterate adults are women. With COVID-19-related school closures happening in developing countries, there is a real risk that progress on girls’ education is lost. When Ebola hit, the evidence shows that the most marginalized girls never made it back to school and rates of child marriage, teen pregnancy. and child labor soared. The Global Partnership for Education, which I chair, is currently hard at work trying to ensure that this history does not repeat.

Ensuring educational equality is a necessary but not sufficient condition for gender equality. In order to change the landscape to remove the barriers that prevent women coming through for leadership—and having their leadership fairly evaluated rather than through the prism of gender—we need a radical shift in structures and away from stereotypes. Good intentions will not be enough to achieve the profound wave of change required. We need hard-headed empirical research about what works. In my life and writings post-politics and through my work at the GIWL, sharing and generating this evidence is front and center of the work I do now.

GIWL work, undertaken in partnership with IPSOS Mori, demonstrates that the public knows more needs to be done. For example, this global polling shows the community thinks it is harder for women to get ahead. Specifically, they say men are less likely than women to need intelligence and hard work to get ahead in their careers.

Other research demonstrates that the myth of the “ideal worker,” one who works excessive hours, is damaging for women’s careers. We also know from research that even in families where each adult works full time, domestic and caring labor is disproportionately done by women. 5

In order to change the landscape to remove the barriers that prevent women coming through for leadership—and having their leadership fairly evaluated rather than through the prism of gender—we need a radical shift in structures and away from stereotypes.

Other more subtle barriers, like unconscious bias and cultural stereotypes, continue to hold women back. We need to start implementing policies that prevent people from being marginalized and stop interpreting overconfidence or charisma as indicative of leadership potential. The evidence shows that it is possible for organizations to adjust their definitions and methods of identifying merit so they can spot, measure, understand, and support different leadership styles.

Taking the lessons learned from our shared history and the lives of the extraordinary women across the world, we know evidence needs to be combined with activism to truly move forward toward a fairer world. We are in a battle for both hearts and minds.

Why this year matters

We are also at an inflection point. Will 2020 will be remembered as the year that a global recession disproportionately destroyed women’s jobs, while women who form the majority of the workforce in health care and social services were at risk of contracting the coronavirus? Will it be remembered as a time of escalating domestic violence and corporations cutting back on their investments in diversity programs?

Or is there a more positive vision of the future that we can seize through concerted advocacy and action? A future where societies re-evaluate which work truly matters and determine to better reward carers. A time when men and women forced into lockdowns re-negotiated how they approach the division of domestic labor. Will the pandemic be viewed as the crisis that, through forcing new ways of virtual working, ultimately led to more balance between employment and family life, and career advancement based on merit and outcomes, not presentism and the old boys’ network?

This history is not yet written. We still have an opportunity to make it happen. Surely the women who led the way 100 years ago can inspire us to seize this moment and create that better, more gender equal future.

December 7,1894: Welcome home meeting for Catherine Helen Spence at the Café de Paris. [ Register , Dec, 19, 1894 ]
Clare Wright, You Daughters of Freedom: The Australians Who Won the Vote and Inspired the World , (Text Publishing, 2018).
Janette M. Bomford, That Dangerous and Persuasive Woman, (Melbourne University Press, 1993)
Cordelia Fine, Delusions of Gender: The Real Science Behind Sex Differences, (Icon Books, 2010)

This piece is part of 19A: The Brookings Gender Equality Series. Learn more about the series and read published work »

About the Author

Julia gillard, distinguished fellow – global economy and development, center for universal education.

Gillard is a distinguished fellow with the Center for Universal Education at the Brookings Institution. She is the Inaugural Chair of the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at King’s College London. Gillard also serves as Chair of the Global Partnership for Education, which is dedicated to expanding access to quality education worldwide and is patron of CAMFED, the Campaign for Female Education.

Read full bio

MORE FROM JULIA GILLARD

Advancing women’s leadership around the world

The gender revolution is stalling—What would reinvigorate it?

What’s necessary to reinvigorate the gender revolution and create progress in the areas where the movement toward equality has slowed or stalled—employment, desegregation of fields of study and jobs, and the gender pay gap?

The fate of women’s rights in Afghanistan

John R. Allen and Vanda Felbab-Brown write that as peace negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban commence, uncertainty hangs over the fate of Afghan women and their rights.

Media Relations
Terms and Conditions
Privacy Policy

Essay On Women Rights

500 words essay on women rights.

Women rights are basic human rights claimed for women and girls all over the world. It was enshrined by the United Nations around 70 years ago for every human on the earth. It includes many things which range from equal pay to the right to education. The essay on women rights will take us through this in detail for a better understanding.

Importance of Women Rights

Women rights are very important for everyone all over the world. It does not just benefit her but every member of society. When women get equal rights, the world can progress together with everyone playing an essential role.

If there weren’t any women rights, women wouldn’t have been allowed to do something as basic as a vote. Further, it is a game-changer for those women who suffer from gender discrimination .

Women rights are important as it gives women the opportunity to get an education and earn in life. It makes them independent which is essential for every woman on earth. Thus, we must all make sure women rights are implemented everywhere.

How to Fight for Women Rights

All of us can participate in the fight for women rights. Even though the world has evolved and women have more freedom than before, we still have a long way to go. In other words, the fight is far from over.

First of all, it is essential to raise our voices. We must make some noise about the issues that women face on a daily basis. Spark up conversations through your social media or make people aware if they are misinformed.

Don’t be a mute spectator to violence against women, take a stand. Further, a volunteer with women rights organisations to learn more about it. Moreover, it also allows you to contribute to change through it.

Similarly, indulge in research and event planning to make events a success. One can also start fundraisers to bring like-minded people together for a common cause. It is also important to attend marches and protests to show actual support.

History has been proof of the revolution which women’s marches have brought about. Thus, public demonstrations are essential for demanding action for change and impacting the world on a large level.

Further, if you can, make sure to donate to women’s movements and organisations. Many women of the world are deprived of basic funds, try donating to organizations that help in uplifting women and changing their future.

You can also shop smartly by making sure your money is going for a great cause. In other words, invest in companies which support women’s right or which give equal pay to them. It can make a big difference to women all over the world.

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

Conclusion of the Essay on Women Rights

To sum it up, only when women and girls get full access to their rights will they be able to enjoy a life of freedom . It includes everything from equal pay to land ownerships rights and more. Further, a country can only transform when its women get an equal say in everything and are treated equally.

FAQ of Essay on Women Rights

Question 1: Why are having equal rights important?

Answer 1: It is essential to have equal rights as it guarantees people the means necessary for satisfying their basic needs, such as food, housing, and education. This allows them to take full advantage of all opportunities. Lastly, when we guarantee life, liberty, equality, and security, it protects people against abuse by those who are more powerful.

Question 2: What is the purpose of women’s rights?

Answer 2: Women’s rights are the essential human rights that the United Nations enshrined for every human being on the earth nearly 70 years ago. These rights include a lot of rights including the rights to live free from violence, slavery, and discrimination. In addition to the right to education, own property; vote and to earn a fair and equal wage.

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

Download the App

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Women's Rights — Equal Rights for Women: The Ongoing Struggle for Gender Equality

Equal Rights for Women: The Ongoing Struggle for Gender Equality

Categories: Women's Rights

About this sample

Words: 613 |

Published: Mar 6, 2024

Words: 613 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

Expert in: Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1151 words

2 pages / 926 words

2 pages / 702 words

2 pages / 711 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Women's Rights

Abina and the Important Men, written by Trevor R. Getz and Liz Clarke, is a graphic history that tells the story of Abina Mansah, a young West African woman who was enslaved in the 19th century. The book provides a unique [...]

Abortion is a highly debated and controversial topic that has sparked passionate discussions worldwide. In today's society, where individual rights and freedoms are highly valued, the issue of abortion remains a divisive and [...]

Medically ending a pregnancy before it has the chance to result in the birth of a baby is abortion (Izugbara, Otsola, & Ezeh, 2009). Abortion is yet to be legalized in Kenya due to pro-life and pro-choice squabbles. Pro-life [...]

Feminism, the belief in social, economic, and political equality of the sexes, has been a prominent force in shaping society for many decades. Throughout its history, feminism has made significant advancements in women's rights [...]

Feminism is defined as “the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes and the organized activities on behalf of women’s rights and interests” (Merriam-Webster). This includes liberation from sexual, [...]

Feminism can mean a lot of things but what it mostly comes down to is gender equality, being able to control your own life and live the choices you make. It is not about hating men or thinking that women are superior. In this [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

138 Women’s Rights Research Questions and Essay Topics

🏆 best topics related to women’s rights, ⭐ simple & easy essay topics on women’s issues, 📌 most interesting research topics on women’s issues, 👍 good women’s rights research paper topics, ❓ research questions about women’s rights.

Women’s rights essays are an excellent way to learn about the situation of the female gender throughout the world and demonstrate your knowledge.

You can cover historical women’s rights essay topics, such as the evolution of girl child education in various countries and regions or the different waves of the feminism movement.

Alternatively, you can study more current topics, such as the status of women in Islam or the debate about whether women’s rights apply to transgender women.

In either case, there is a multitude of ideas that you can express and discuss in your paper to make it engaging and thought-provoking. However, you should not neglect the basic aspects of writing an essay, especially its structure and presentation.

The thesis statement is critical to your essay’s structure, as it has to be at the center of each point you make. It should state the overall message or question of your paper comprehensively but concisely at the same time.

Afterwards, every point you make should directly or indirectly support the claim or answer the question, and you should make the relationship explicit for better clarity.

It is good practice to make the thesis a single sentence that does not rely on context, being fully self-sufficient, but avoids being excessively long.

As such, writing a good thesis is a challenging task that requires care and practice. Do not be afraid to spend additional time writing the statement and refining it.

It is beneficial to have a framework of how you will arrange topics and formulate your points so that they flow into one another and support the central thesis before you begin writing.

The practice will help you arrange transitional words and make the essay more coherent and connected as opposed to being an assortment of loosely associated statements.

To that end, you should write an outline, which deserves a separate discussion. However, the basics are simple: write down all of the ideas you want to discuss, discard the worst or fold them into other, broader topics until you have a handful left, and organize those in a logical progression.

Here are some additional tips for your structuring process:

Frame the ideas in your outline using self-explanatory and concise women’s rights essay titles. You can then use them to separate different points in your essay with titles that correspond to outline elements. The outline itself will effectively become a table of contents, saving you time if one is necessary.
Try to keep the discussion of each topic self-contained, without much reference to other matters you discussed in the essay. If there is a significant relationship, you should devote a separate section to it.
Do not forget to include an introduction and a conclusion in your paper. The introduction familiarizes the reader with the topic and ends with your thesis statement, setting the tone and direction of the essay. The conclusion sums up what you have written and adds some concluding remarks to finish. The introduction should not contain facts and examples beyond what is common knowledge in the field. The conclusion may not introduce new information beyond what has been stated in the essay.

You can find excellent women’s rights essay examples, useful samples, and more helpful tips on writing your essay at IvyPanda, so visit whenever you are having trouble or would like advice!

Women’s Rights and the Advancement of Democracy The degree of citizen involvement in the political process, including the participation of various social groups in political parties and decision-making bodies, determines the quality of democracy in addition to the structure of current political […]
What Causes Women’s Rights Violation? Most women have been abused in modern societies due to illiteracy and lack of exposure to their rights. Most developing nations are struggling to adopt democratic policies and forget that women deserve the right to […]
“Women’s Rights Are Human Rights” by Hillary Clinton Hillary Clinton’s speech about women’s rights effectively convinces her audience that women rights are an indispensable part of human rights through the use of logical argument, repetition, historical facts, and emotional stories.
Women’s Rights in the 21st Century: Education and Politics The lack of equity in the specified areas affect women’s lives on range of levels, depriving them of the opportunities that they are supposed to be entitled to and posing a tangible threat to the […]
Foot Binding in China in Terms of Women’s Rights The practice of foot binding in China can be traced back to the Sung Dynasty that prevailed between 960-1280 AD, supposedly as an imitation of an imperial concubine who was required to perform a dance […]
Women’s Rights and Gender Inequality in Saudi Arabia Indeed, it is crucial to understand the importance of women’s rights, see the connections between the past, the present, the local, and the global, and realize how political and media discourse represents the social issue […]
Utilitarian Permissive Concept for Women’s Right to Choose Abortion Utilitarians believe that the right to choose abortion should be protected under the law as a matter of justice since a woman should have the right to make decisions concerning her own body and health.
Women’s Rights: Democratic Perceptions Therefore, it is proper to claim that women would not be able to exercise their rights and freedoms as frequently without the efforts of Democrats.
Abortion and Women’s Right to Control Their Bodies However, the decision to ban abortions can be viewed as illegal, unethical, and contradicting the values of the 21st century. In such a way, the prohibition of abortion is a serious health concern leading to […]
The Women’s Rights Movement and Indigenous People In this article, the author addresses the differences between the Euro-American and Native American societies and the role of women in them.
The Texas Abortion Law: A Signal of War on Women’s Rights and Bodies The purpose of this paper is to examine the structure and implications of the Texas Abortion Law in order to demonstrate its flaws.
Women’s Rights and Reform Impulses The reform impulses altered women’s place in society, making them equal to men in the ability to speak publicly, pursue their liberty, and attain their goals.
The Evolution of Women’s Rights Through American History From the property-owning women of the late 18th century to the proponents of the women’s liberation in the 1960s, women always succeeded in using the influential political theories of their time to eventually make feminist […]
Invisible Southern Black Women Leaders in the Civil Rights Movement Based on 36 personal interviews and multiple published and archived sources, the author demonstrates that black women in the South have played a prominent role in the struggle for their rights.
Injustices Women Faced in Quest for Equal Rights The source Alice Paul depicts the numerous contributions that she and her fellow suffragists made to the new rights of women.
Catharine Beecher and Women’s Rights Catharine Beecher’s “An Appeal to American Women” is a discussion kind of piece that considers the power of women in office and how the issue should be approached.
The Aftermath of the Progression of Women’s Rights Period At the end of the 1800s and the beginning of 1900s, women’s organizations and women struggled for social reforms, to gain the right to vote, and for diverse political and economic equality.
Lucy Parsons as a Women’s Rights Advocate and Her Beliefs She was a believer in anarchism and thought that it was the means to liberty and freedom. She wanted the constitution to be amended to say that men and women are equal in all aspects.
Women in Islam: Some Rights, No Equality Notwithstanding the principles of equality of men and women in Islamic tradition, women’s low status should be attributed not to the ideals set in the Quran but to the cultural norms of the patriarchal society.
Primary Source on Women’s Voting Rights The combination of statements that degrade the image of suffragettes and suffrage and quotes of leaders’ opinions is a way for the editor to influence the audience.
Syrian Conflict and Women Rights: Way to Equality or Another Discrimination The main reason for a low percentage of women in the workforce is Syrian social norms, which stereotypically reflect the role of women in homes serving their husbands and in the private sector.
Movement for Women’s Rights in Great Britain and the United States This essay analytically explores some of the conditions which helped bring about movement for women’s right in Great Britain and United States before the close of the last century. In addition, the most significant demand […]
Shirin Ebadi’s Perspective on Women’s Human Rights Activism and Islam It is worth noting that Shirin Ebadi’s self-identity as an Iranian woman and a Muslim empowers her experience and perspective in women’s rights activism.
Women in the Struggle for Civil Rights In other instants, women in the struggle for civil rights can also file a case in a court of law demanding the lawmakers to enact some policies of which they feel when passed will protect […]
The Success of Women’s Rights Movement They sought the equal treatment of women and men by law and fought for voting rights. The women’s rights movement was successful because they were united, had a strong ideological foundation, and organized campaigns on […]
Refugee Women and Their Human Rights According to the researches have been made by UNHCR, 1998, found that 80% of the refugees immigrating to the United States and other countries of second asylum are women or children.
Women’s Rights Movement in the 19th Century In this paper, the peculiarities of women’s suffrage, its political and social background, and further reactions will be discussed to clarify the worth and impact of the chosen event.
Women Rights: New Data and Movements For example, whereas the women’s health rights movement is a global affair, the fact that events related to the movement are mainly held in the US means that other countries do not feel the impact […]
Planned Parenthood and Women’s Rights It took decades for the government to acknowledge the necessity of the services offered in these clinics and even longer for the public to accept a woman’s right to reproductive health care, the establishment of […]
Understanding Women’s Right in Islamic World The role of women in the Islamic society during and soon after the death of Prophet Mohammed was similar to that of men.
Saudi Arabian Women’s Right to Drive: Pros and Cons The objective of this paper is to present the arguments from both sides of the discussion on the issue of whether women should be able to drive legally in Saudi Arabia.
Arab Spring’s Impact on Women’s Rights and Security The aim of the research is to define the effects that the Arab Spring has had on the perception of women in the Arab society.
Women’s Rights Since Pre-History to 1600 A.D In this regard, most women from the medieval times could determine their social and political destiny, but the responsibility to others mainly rested on the men.
Women’s Fight for Equal Human Rights According to the readings assigned, the term feminist could be used to refer to people who fought for the rights of women.
Women in New France: Rights, Freedoms and Responsibilities However, the development of New France was quite distinct due to peculiarities of the gender roles in the North America and France.
Women’s Family and Social Responsibilities and Rights The uniqueness of Addams and Sanger’s approach to discussing the rights of females is in the fact that these authors discuss any social responsibilities of women as the key to improving their roles in the […]
Women’s Rights in the Great Depression Period The pursuit of the workplace equality and the protection of women from unfair treatment by the employers were quite unsuccessful and slow due to the major division in the opinions.
Women’s Roles and Rights in the 18-19th Century America We can only do the simplest work; we cannot have a good job because that is the men’s domain, and they have the necessary training to do it.
Debate Over Women’s Rights At times, the problem is that there is bias and discrimination about the strength of the woman and no chance has ever been given to them to prove if the allegation is wrong.
The Women of the Veil: Gaining Rights and Freedoms The author chides the activities of the Western colonies in Afghanistan in restoring the rights of the women of the veil.
The Role of African American Women in the Civil Right Movement The role of women in the Civil Rights Movement started to change in the 1960s. Women in the Civil Rights Movement: Trailblazers and Torchbearers.
Hip-Hop Music and the Role of Women in It: Fight for Women’s Rights in Society While looking at the various roles of women in hip hop and rap, it is also important to note that the way women are presented has various effects on society.
Gender Studies: Women’s Rights in Saudi Arabia This paper will review the a issue of women’s rights in Saudi Arabia from the perspective of four different groups including the modern Saudi women, traditional Saudi women, Government officials, and international women’s rights organizations.
African-American Women and the Civil Rights Movement The key factors that left the Black women unrecognized or led to recognition of just a few of them as leaders are class, race and gender biases.
Women’s Rights – Contribution of E. Cady Stanton and S.B. Anthony The first significant and most important move was made by Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, on the other hand, was born in a Quaker family and her father was also quite a successful […]
Women’s Role in Contemporary Korea The effort of women to work in professional and high positions in different sectors, the government decided to boost their effort and maintain their morale.
Non Governmental Organization of Women’s Learning Partnership for Rights Development and Peace In most cases the rights of women which are mainly suppressed include the right to own property, the right to work or hold a public office, the right of receiving education, the right to vote […]
The Development of Women’s Rights However, she cannot agree to such distribution of the roles, and she calls upon all people to look again at the situation, connected to women’s rights, and provide all women with a chance to participate […]
Jane Cunningham Croly: Fighting for Women Rights The problem of women inequality with men had been considered in the society and Jane Cunningham Croly was one of those who wanted to contribute to the movement, and her journalistic activity was that measure.
Women’s Suffrage Discussion The entrenchment of equal rights of women and men and more noticeably the right of every American woman to vote came into being after the enactment of the nineteenth amendment.
Disclosing the Aspects of Female Authorship as Presented in Woolf’s Professions for Women and Wollstonecraft’s A Vindication of the Right of Woman In their works called A Vindication of the Right of Woman and Professions of Women respectively, they express their vigorous desire to liberate women from the professional taboos to enter female authorship imposed by the […]
Power of Women’s Rights How the Anti-Slavery Movement Challenge Established Notions of Manhood and Womanhood Kathryn Kish Sklar’s general idea in the book is to enlighten people on the role of women in the society during the 19th century, […]
Women’s Rights in the Muslim World Ahmed first focuses on the gender pattern in the Middle East prior to the emergence of the Islam in order to gain ground to describe the Islamic doctrine on women that were practiced in the […]
Afghan Women and Violation of Their Rights It is for this reason that the Taliban have been the party mostly blamed for the mistreatment of women in the country. The U.S.has the necessary resources to ensure that this is achieved therefore guaranteeing […]
Did Flappers Have a Positive Effect on Women’s Rights in America in the 1920s?
Abigail Adams’ Inspiring Rebellion for Women’s Rights
The Power of the Internet and Women’s Rights in Guatemala
Pencils and Bullets Women’s Rights in Afghanistan
Women’s Rights in Supreme Court Decisions of the 1960’s and 1970’s
Women’s Rights: A Path into the Society to Achieve Social Liberation
The Taliban: Deprivers of Women’s Rights in Afghanistan
Henrik Ibsen’s Description of Women’s Rights as Depicted in His Play, A Doll’s House
Perceptions on The Islamic Practice of Veiling: Relevance to the Quest for Women’s Rights
The Effects of Christianity on Women’s Rights in China
Women’s Rights in the 1920’s and Examples in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby
Pornography and Feminist Fight for Women’s Rights
The Progression of Women’s Rights from the Early 20th Century
Islamic Head Scarf: Women’s Rights and Cultural Sensibilities
The Women’s Rights Movement in England: 18th Century and Beyond
Comparing Cultures: the Development of Women’s Rights in China and Saudi Arabia
Mary Wollstonecraft and the Early Women’s Rights Movement
The Progression of Women’s Rights in the Middle East
Elizabeth Stanton’s Impact on Women’s Rights Movement
Women’s Rights in Latin America and the Caribbean
Women’s Rights and Their Importance to the Development of True Democracy
Women’s Rights Within A Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled Hosseini
Every Woman Has Her Day: The Women’s Rights Movement in 19th Century
Evolution of Women’s Rights Since 19th Century
Integrating Equality – Globalization, Women’s Rights, Son Preference and Human Trafficking
Analysis of the View of Opinions of Authors Advocating for Women’s Rights
Abolition of Slavery is Conducive to Women’s Rights Movement
Women’s Rights Violations in Afghanistan
Feminism and Women’s Rights in Post Colonial Africa and France
Social Justice in America: Women’s Rights
Horace Walpole and Samuel Johnson, Champions of Women’s Rights
Muslims Women’s Rights to Practice Their Religion
Women’s Rights and Hills Like White Elephants
Rhetorical Analysis of Hillary Clinton’s Speech, Women’s Rights Are Human Rights
Euripides Support of Women’s Rights
Women’s Rights in Afghanistan 1996 to the Present
Women’s Rights & Their Impact on the Development of Iran
Women’s Rights Between 1750 and 1914
Exploring The Women’s Rights Movement With Good Man Is Hard to Find by Flannery O´Conner
Progressive Era: The Era of Immigration, Race, and Women’s Rights
Women’s Rights in the United States in the 1700s
Which Countries Violate Women’s Rights?
What Was the Aim of the Women’s Movement?
How Did the Anti-Slavery Movement Contribute to the Women’s Rights Movement?
Who Were the 4 Main Leaders of the Women’s Rights Movement?
How Does Gender Inequality Affect Women’s Rights?
Who Fought for Women’s Right to Work?
What Was the Biggest Women’s Rights Movement?
What Are the Colors for Women’s Rights?
Why Women’s Rights Lost Ground at the End of World War Two?
What Is the Role of Lesbians in the Women’s Movement?
How Far Women’s Rights Have Come?
What Laws Help Women’s Rights?
How Were the Abolition and Women’s Rights Movements Similar?
What Are the Most Important Events in Women’s Rights History?
Who Is Responsible for Women’s Rights?
What Is the History of Women’s Rights?
What Were 3 Major Events in the Women’s Rights Movement?
How Margaret Fuller and Fanny Fern Used Writing as a Weapon for Women’s Rights?
How Did Race Impact African American Women’s Experiences During the Women’s Suffrage Movement?
What Was the Cause of the First Woman’s Rights Convention?
Why Is Education Important for Women’s Rights?
How Are Women’s Rights Linked to Economic Development?
When Did the Women’s Rights Movement Start and End?
Why Did the Women’s Rights Movement Emerge in the USA During the 1950S and 1960S?
What Are Women’s Cultural Rights?
Who Was the First Black Women’s Rights Activist?
When Was the First Female Vote?
What Was the Movement for Women’s Rights in the 1800S?
Who Was the Black Woman Who Fought for Women’s Rights?
Who Was the Biggest Women’s Rights Activist?
Civil Rights Movement Questions
Gender Inequality Research Topics
Women’s Suffrage Essay Ideas
Childbirth Titles
Gender Discrimination Research Topics
Motherhood Ideas
Personal Identity Paper Topics
Reproductive Health Essay Titles
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, March 1). 138 Women’s Rights Research Questions and Essay Topics. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/womens-rights-essay-examples/

"138 Women’s Rights Research Questions and Essay Topics." IvyPanda , 1 Mar. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/womens-rights-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2024) '138 Women’s Rights Research Questions and Essay Topics'. 1 March.

IvyPanda . 2024. "138 Women’s Rights Research Questions and Essay Topics." March 1, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/womens-rights-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "138 Women’s Rights Research Questions and Essay Topics." March 1, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/womens-rights-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "138 Women’s Rights Research Questions and Essay Topics." March 1, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/womens-rights-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

Basic site functions
Ensuring secure, safe transactions
Secure account login
Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
Remembering privacy and security settings
Analyzing site traffic and usage
Personalized search, content, and recommendations
Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

Remembering general and regional preferences
Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

Teaching Resources
Upcoming Events
On-demand Events

Women's Power in the Struggle for Freedom and Equal Rights

facebook sharing
email sharing

“Democracy is a universally recognized ideal based on common values shared by people across the world, irrespective of cultural, political, social and economic differences. As recognized in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action , democracy is based on the freely expressed will of the people to determine their own political, economic, social and cultural systems and their full participation in all aspects of their lives . Democracy, development, rule of law and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms are interdependent and mutually reinforcing.” - United Nations, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

The principles of democracy insist on, especially from a twenty-first century perspective, the inclusion of all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, or ability. And yet governments around the world have a history of barring certain classes of people from being heard, seen, and fairly represented. Throughout history this has been especially true for women. And yet, despite repeated and ongoing attempts to sideline women in society, there has always been a consistent female force, fighting for freedom, equality, and democratic ideals.

For example, Chilean women who lived during Pinochet’s dictatorship were under the threat of constant danger, but they resisted by creating dissident art and forming the Moviemento Pro Emancipación de la Mujer. The Turkish coup of 1980 inspired a feminist movement that existed in open rebellion. They decried their loss of freedom and organized mass protests, including a 1987 march against gender-based violence. And here, in the United States of America, one of the oldest modern democracies in the world, it took a staggering 144 years for women in the US to be granted suffrage with the passage of the 19th amendment in 1920. It would take 45 more years for the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to be passed before Black women gained full access to the vote. But the right to vote was not just granted to women—they had to fight for it.

There are endless examples of “the fairer sex” doing anything in their power to be seen as the equal sex—these examples are a testament to women's impact on society, government, and history. As we celebrate Women’s History Month in March, Facing History has curated a list of resources to showcase female upstanders who have fought for freedom, human rights, and promoted the principles of democracy, even under oppressive regimes and laws restricting them from representation.

The American Revolution and Challenging the Ideals of a Fledgling Democracy

Elizabeth freeman.

Entering the world as Mum Bett in the mid-sixteenth century, Elizabeth Freeman was born into slavery. As the white men around her—and notably her enslaver, Colonel Ashley—spoke of rights and freedoms amidst the creation of the Declaration of Independence and war with England, the idea of her own freedom took root. Freeman acquired legal representation in Massachusetts and sued for her right to be free. She became the first African American to win her freedom from the courts in Massachusetts, leading to abolition of slavery in that state. Learn more about Freeman’s life from the National Women’s History Museum and from the New-York Historical Society .

Judith Sargent Murray

Born into a wealthy family in 1751, Judith Sargent Murray was curious and intelligent, but was not permitted to attend school because of her gender. Undeterred, she turned to her family’s extensive library and became a self-taught intellectual and writer. Murray was a radical (at the time) advocate for white women’s rights, declaring that men and women held equal ability if given equal access to education. Murray penned her first essay, “On the Equality of the Sexes,” in 1770—it was finally published 20 years later.

This Facing History Reading , included in our US History Curriculum Collection , excerpts “On the Equality of the Sexes” and offers questions and exercises for deeper reflection and connection to the text. The entire essay can be found here .

Learn more about Murray’s life from the National Women’s History Museum .

Suffragettes and the Right to Vote

Frances ellen watkins harper.

In 1825 Frances Ellen Watkins Harper was born to free African American parents. Following the death of her parents, she was raised by her aunt and uncle, the latter of whom was an impassioned abolitionist. As a young adult she was mentored by her uncle’s friend William Still known as the “father of the Underground Railroad.” Harper then became a strong voice in the anti-slavery movement and a fierce supporter of women’s rights, publishing works based on these ideals and delivering speeches across the country.

This Facing History Reading excerpts one of her most famous speeches and offers connection questions for deeper learning.

Learn more about Harper’s life from the National Women’s History Museum .

Emmeline Pankhurst

It is perhaps no surprise that Emmeline Pankhurst became among the most influential suffragists in Great Britain. Born in 1858, she was raised by parents committed to the full expansion of rights to women. She went on to found the Women’s Franchise League and later the Women's Social and Political Union (WSPU) whose famous slogan was “Deeds not Words.” Pankhurst threw her body and mind into the suffrage cause including participating in a hunger strike and being jailed on multiple occasions for her provocative protests.

This Facing History Handout on Women in Edwardian Society includes excerpts from Pankhurt’s “Freedom or Death” speech and offers a wide range of connection questions.

Learn more about Pankhurst’s life from the National Park Service .

The Pursuit for Civil Rights and Racial Equality

Anti-apartheid movement.

Apartheid is an Afrikaans word meaning “apartness.” South Africans abolished slavery in 1834, but the colonial influence on the country made segregation the de facto state. It wasn’t until the National Party, which ran on a platform of Afrikaner nationalism, won the 1948 South African election that segregation was codified by law. One way that Black women in South Africa pushed back on segregationist policies was to protest the limitations placed on the free movement of Black Africans in the country. The 1950s saw the formation of the Federation of South African Women. In 1956 this grassroots movement enjoined a crowd 20,000 strong to march to Pretoria. Facing History’s Confronting Apartheid Collection provides a comprehensive set of lessons to explore critical moments in South Africa's history. This collection includes the Reading: Women Rise Up Against Apartheid and Change the Movement .

Mamie Till-Mobley

Mamie Carthan was born in Mississippi in 1921, but as a toddler she moved just outside of Chicago, Illinois with her parents. On July 25, 1941 she gave birth to her only child, Emmett Till. In the summer of 1955, when Emmett was 14, Mamie dropped her son off at the train station in Chicago to go visit her Uncle Moses’s farm in Mississippi and spend some time with family. He never came home. On August 28 Emmett was brutally murdered by a group of white men, led by the husband of a shopkeeper who was incensed that the young boy had allegedly whistled at his wife. The horrific death of her son, and the subsequent acquittal of Emmett’s murderers, resulted in Mamie Till-Mobley’s emergence as a leading activist for the civil rights movement.

Facing History’s “I Wanted the Whole World to See”: The Murder of Emmett Till Unit includes the following moving accounts of Mamie Till-Mobley as a mother and a civil rights pioneer. Reading: “ I Knew I Had to Give Him the Talk ” Lesson: " A Rallying Cry and a Cause "

Today’s Global Advocates for Human Rights

Anti-war sudanese organizers.

During the 30 year rule of President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, Sudanese women came out multiple times to protest the abhorrent treatment of women under his regime, often in open defiance of their family or the law. In 2019 it was estimated that two-thirds of Sudanese protesters were women. The military coup d'état in 2019 prompted the current devastating civil war between rival factions in Sudan, and again women face the biggest obstacles among the violence. Almost 90% of Sudanese people seeking refugee status in neighboring Chad are women. Learn more about the plight of Sudanese women today in these articles from Al Jazeera and the Norwegian Refugee Council . A look at the freedom and peace efforts of Sudanese women can be seen in these reports from the Christian Michelsen Institute and ReliefWeb .

Protest against the Islamic Republic of Iran's Regime

The 2022 arrest and death of Kurdish Iranian woman Mahsa Jhina Amini at the hands of Iran’s morality police has led to what some are calling a new Iranian Revolution. Since Amini’s death the people of Iran—including a flood of girls and women who have risked the same fate—have crowded the streets to demand an end to the brutal tactics and oppressive laws of the theocratic, dictatorial government. Even as the street protests have decreased, Iranian women continue to fight back through acts of civil disobedience including not following the strict veiling regulations or opting to go out publicly without a hijab altogether. The protest call of “Zan, Zendegi, Azadi” (Woman, Life, Freedom - shown above in Kurdish) continues to galvanize the movement, garnering support and participation from Iranians of all backgrounds in Iran and abroad. Learn more about the Iranian women mobilizing government resistance in these articles from Ms. and the Wilson Center . These quotes collected by Women’s Voices Now provide an inspirational glimpse at some of the individuals pushing for change.

You might also be interested in…

5 new books on women's history for 2022, 4 resources on refugee crises in global context, 10 virtual exhibitions on women's history, 6 new books on human rights, 5 new ya books on women's history, competing visions of black civic participation, remembering sidney poitier, 5 new ya books on black history and life, black athletes and civil rights: 6 upstanders to introduce to your students, eyes on the prize in the classroom: voices from the civil rights movement, ambassador samantha power: upstanding in a time of crisis, becoming an activist: a conversation with dolores huerta, donate now and together we'll build a better world, inspiration, insights, & ways to get involved.

Essay: Women’s Rights in the Late 20th Century

After World War II, women’s struggle for equality achieved a mixed record of success. The women’s rights movement won equal opportunities in higher education and employment relatively quickly in the 1940s and 1950s. The modern concept of women’s equality as “feminism” appeared in the 1960s, led by activists such as Betty Friedan. Some of its victories in the legislative arena were completely inadvertent, while one of its grandest objects and subject of its greatest efforts resulted in defeat. Moreover, the movement was dominated by an intellectual and professional leadership at some distance from ordinary women. Despite the vagaries of the movement, it was remarkably successful in fundamentally changing society and women’s roles as well as attitudes towards women.

World War II was instrumental in the origins of the Women’s Movement. The classic image of “Rosie the Riveter” reflected the fact that millions of women went into factories when men were mobilized into the military. However, many unmarried and poor women had already participated in the industrial economy for a century. With demobilization after the war, more than three million women quit their jobs to return to their roles as homemakers or were let go to make room for returning men.

There was a lingering split from the 1920s between future First Lady, Eleanor Roosevelt, and feminist leader of the National Women’s Party, Alice Paul. Roosevelt fought to keep protective legislation for women in terms of working hours or physical tasks, and Paul wanted an Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) that made women completely equal under the law. Paul was so frustrated by the lack of progress on the ERA that she resorted to “red-baiting” by labeling its opponents Communists and reporting them to the House Un-American Activities Committee.

Post-war American culture was rather conservative and supported traditional roles for women. The images of women as mothers and homemakers on the new media of television were quite reflective of the reality for many suburban women. The marriage rate was increasing, a Baby Boom resulted in more than 76 million births between 1946 and 1964, and the divorce rate dropped. The American people supported traditional roles for women, and as one post-war poll noted, 63 percent were opposed to married women working outside the home.

In 1963, feminist author Betty Friedan wrote a path-breaking book, The Feminine Mystique that challenged traditional roles for women.

She described the sense of dissatisfaction that many women felt as “the problem with no name” and wrote, “The problem lay buried, unspoken, for many years in the minds of American women. It was a strange stirring, a sense of dissatisfaction…Each suburban wife struggled with it alone. As she made the beds, shopped for groceries, matched slipcover material, ate peanut butter sandwiches with her children, chauffeured Cub Scouts and Brownies, lay besides her husband at night – she was afraid to ask even of herself the silent question – ‘Is this all?’” (Friedan, The Feminine Mystique , 1963).

Friedan’s book was a best-seller and struck a chord with many women, particularly of her social class. But, some women were poorer and did not have the luxury of choosing whether to work or not because necessity forced them into the workplace. Other women did not share Friedan’s dislike of women’s traditional roles as mother and housewife.

In the early 1960s, many changes were developing for women’s equality in employment and education. By 1960, the number of working women had risen to 35 percent of the workforce with increasing numbers of married women. This probably reflected the fact that many families wanted the extra disposable income to participate in the growing consumer economy more than an increasing desire of women to find personal satisfaction from working. Women were attending higher education in higher numbers, earning nearly 40 percent of the degrees by 1960 and the numbers would continue to grow. In May, 1960, the Food and Drug Administration approved the oral contraceptive, “the Pill,” for women, and millions of women were soon using it for birth control despite the fact that many states outlawed contraceptives. The Pill changed the sexual lives of women throughout the nation. Women’s careers would not be shortened by unanticipated pregnancies, and women would have fewer children.

The Pill became involved in constitutional issues when the Supreme Court took up the question. In 1965, the Supreme Court would overturn anti-contraception laws in Griswold v. Connecticut , arguing that the “penumbras” in the Bill of Rights—in the First, Third, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments—create “zones of privacy.” Moreover, the majority also used the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to argue that there are “certain fundamental rights” not listed in the Bill of Rights as the Ninth Amendment specifically recognizes. But, should the courts lay down new rights in decisions or should the people be the ones who would define those rights through the amendment process? Moreover, the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly states that, “The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article,” not the courts (The United States Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment, 1866). By overturning the anti-contraceptive laws of a vast majority of states, the Supreme Court undermined the rights of states to determine laws for their own citizens.

Women won legal equality in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The House Rules Committee Chairman, Howard Smith (D-VA), was a segregationist who may have attempted to halt civil rights for African Americans by including additional rights for women by banning discrimination in employment based on sex—although he claimed he supported women’s equality. To further muddy the waters, many northern liberals and labor unions supported protective legislation for women and opposed the amendments to the Civil Rights act that gave legal protection against discrimination to women. Nevertheless, the Civil Rights Act passed both houses of Congress and was signed by President Johnson to become law. The Act established the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), an executive agency that would be charged with enforcing the law.

In 1966, several feminists formed the National Organization of Women (NOW) and issued a “Statement of Purpose.” The NOW statement was primarily a call for an end to discrimination in education, employment, civil society, and culture. The Statement of Purpose sought to ban discrimination against women with legal and constitutional protections by the government.

It called upon “the power of American law, and the protection guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution to the civil rights of all individuals, must be effectively applied and enforced to isolate and remove patterns of sex discrimination, to ensure equality of opportunity in employment and education, and equality of civil and political rights and responsibilities on behalf of women” (National Organization of Women, “Statement of Purpose,” 1966).

Only a year later, at the second annual NOW conference, the organization called for a “Bill of Rights for Women” that included all the items in the Statement of Purpose and added a call for an Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), publicly-funded daycare centers across the nation, and a repeal of all laws banning abortion. Over the next few years, NOW devoted a great deal of its efforts to lobbying several different federal agencies for enforcing Title VII (part of the Civil Rights Act of 1965 that banned employment discrimination on the basis of race, sex, or national origin), to pressuring Congress to pass the ERA, and expanded its agenda to include other feminist issues such as recognizing that lesbian rights were “a legitimate concern of feminism.” The struggle for the ERA was the most public and significant battle in the quest for women’s equality. In 1972, both houses of Congress passed the ERA by overwhelming majorities to fulfill the two-thirds requirement for constitutional amendments. The ERA needed three-fourths of the state legislatures to ratify the amendment before 1979 (later extended to 1982) for it to become the law of the land. The proposed amendment was quickly ratified by dozens of states and then stalled, eventually winning ratification in 35 states just short of the necessary 38, and failed.

The struggle for the ERA was the most public and significant battle in the quest for women’s equality. In 1972, both houses of Congress passed the ERA by overwhelming majorities to fulfill the two-thirds requirement for constitutional amendments. The ERA needed three-fourths of the state legislatures to ratify the amendment before 1979 (later extended to 1982) for it to become the law of the land.

The ERA failed in large part due to the strong grassroots campaign called “STOP ERA” at the state and local level, spearheaded by a conservative lawyer and activist, Phyllis Schlafly. Schlafly advanced the view, embraced by many religious conservatives and other Americans, that the ERA would have baleful consequences for women. She said that the constitutional amendment would subject women equally to the military draft, end protections in child custody and divorce proceedings, lead to the decline of the traditional family, support abortion rights, back homosexual rights, and lead to unisex bathrooms. Whether or not it would have contributed these things, Schlafly organized a grass-roots campaign at the local and state level called “Stop ERA” which successfully defeated the ERA.

Feminists supported legalized abortion to protect women’s reproductive rights and the “right to control her own body.” They campaigned to overturn state abortion laws and then pushed cases to the Supreme Court in order to overturn all state laws. In the landmark case of Roe v. Wade (1973), the Supreme Court legalized abortion throughout the country based upon the precedent established in the Griswold decision. The movement to legalize abortion had adopted a lengthy and costly campaign to change abortion laws in the states, but then it shifted its strategy to the courts. Justice Harry Blackmun wrote the majority opinion for the Supreme Court, and much like Justice Roger B. Taney in the Dred Scott decision, sought to use the Court to settle a highly contentious social and political question. To that end, Justice Blackmun spent time at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota conducting medical and historical research on the topic. In a 7-2 decision, the Court decided that state laws banning abortion were unconstitutional. It created the trimester framework for pregnancy and stated that during the first trimester there was an unlimited right to abortion. After that, the state had a “compelling interest” in “protecting the potentiality of human life” and could regulate abortions though a physician’s approval. In the last trimester, the state could proscribe abortion except for the protection of the life or health of the mother.

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Byron White called the opinion “an exercise of raw judicial power” because, he argued, the Court “fashions and announces a new constitutional right” which overrides laws in a majority of states. “The upshot is that the people and the legislatures of the 50 states are constitutionally disentitled to weigh the [issue],” White wrote (Justice Byron White, Roe v. Wade Dissenting Opinion, 1973).

The Roe decision hardly settled the question in the minds of the American people and set off a decades-long battle in the public square on the highly contentious subject. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), the Court sowed perhaps more confusion.

4.7 man pickets outside new haven planned parenthood 1967

The Roe decision hardly settled the question in the minds of the American people and set off a decades-long battle in the public square on the highly contentious subject.

Yet, the Court declared that it must uphold a women’s right to have an abortion because it must always uphold precedent (previous decisions) or the court’s legitimacy would be questioned. However, only a few decades before, it purposefully and famously rejected precedent in the Brown decision that had the effect of overturning Plessy .

The struggle for women’s equality may have lost the battle of the ERA, but it won the war. Affirmative action, or giving preference to certain groups in hiring, for women was highly successful in employment, and women entered the professions in such numbers that it was commonplace. Disparities in pay for the same jobs began to disappear. Affirmative action in college and graduate school admissions was so successful that institutions of higher education had to begin looking for ways to attract more male students. Women entered politics and won higher and higher offices. Most of NOW’s original agenda was achieved, though feminists would still say that the “glass ceiling” for women prevented them from rising to complete parity with men at the highest levels of business or politics.

The women’s movement was on the whole successful in achieving equality for women, and women could now choose whether to have a traditional role or work outside the home professionally. Fifty years after Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique was published, American women continued to debate the meaning of feminism and its relevance to their lives once greater equality and liberty were achieved. While men have shouldered some additional burdens in the home and family, women still have not been released from their traditional roles cooking, cleaning, and caring for children even as they’ve assumed new roles in society. Women have found that although they won greater employment opportunities and equality, they are struggling to “have it all” by bearing the double-burden of traditional roles and work.

Women’s Rights in the Late 20th Century

Library of Congress
Research Guides
Multiple Research Centers

American Women: Topical Essays

The long road to equality: what women won from the era ratification effort.

Introduction
American Women: An Overview
Marching for the Vote: Remembering the Woman Suffrage Parade of 1913
Sentiments of an American Woman
The House That Marian Built: The MacDowell Colony of Peterborough, New Hampshire
Women On The Move: Overland Journeys to California
“With Peace and Freedom Blest!”: Woman as Symbol in America, 1590-1800

General Inquiries : Ask a Librarian

Have a question? Need assistance? Use our online form to ask a librarian for help.

Chat with a librarian , Monday through Friday, 12-4pm Eastern Time (except Federal Holidays).

Author: Leslie W. Gladstone, retired, Congressional Research Service

Note: This guide is adapted from the original essay in "American Women: A Library of Congress Guide for the Study of Women's History and Culture in the United States," 2001.

Created: December 2001

Last Updated: March 22, 2019

At a National Organization for Women (NOW) rally in Lafayette Park, across from the White House, on June 30, 1982, NOW president Eleanor Smeal rallied an estimated two thousand supporters, including seven hundred nurses in town for the American Nurses Association convention. 1 Although they were there that day mourning the defeat of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), Smeal urged them not to forget that “We are a majority. We are determined to play majority politics . . . . We are not going to be reduced again to the ladies' auxiliary.” 2

Meanwhile, in San Francisco, outside the Civic Center, about one thousand women counted down the ERA's last six hours, a rain-soaked vigil that was reported, filmed, and recorded by many women journalists and technicians. 3

That same night, at a party in a Washington, D.C., hotel, the ERA's demise was celebrated by opponents, fourteen hundred strong, as “a great victory for women.” 4 The Washington Post account of that evening describes the entrance into the ballroom of the leader of the ERA opposition, Phyllis Schlafly, as the band played “Somewhere over the Rainbow.” During the festivities, the crowd was entertained with renditions of “Ding, Dong, the Witch Is Dead” and “I Enjoy Being a Girl.” Triumphantly addressing the crowd, Schlafly called for “a mighty movement” that will “set America on the right path.” 5

What caused the rejection of the Equal Rights Amendment? Why the intense emotions that caused ERA proponents to write the names of opponents in pigs' blood on the floors of the Illinois state capitol or opponents to pronounce apocalyptically that if the amendment was ratified husbands would no longer have to support their wives, that women would be drafted, and that toilets would be made unisex? What, if any, was the legacy of the often bitter ratification campaign that divided American women for nearly a decade beginning in 1972?

The proposed Equal Rights Amendment, only fifty-one words in length, was contentious from its inception. In a form suggested by Alice Paul, a constitutional amendment was first introduced in 1923—only three years after the Nineteenth Amendment granted women the right to vote—unleashing sixty or more years of national debate. (For a discussion of records of women's rights organizations from this era that are held by the Manuscript Division, see Women's Rights in the Manuscript Division section.)

Paul was a militant leader in the suffrage movement. She founded the National Woman's Party, and for fifty years served as a tactician for the ERA. (See Women's Suffrage: Suffrage Organizations in the Manuscript Division section.) Her original wording, drafted in 1923, has been changed several times, but the text submitted to the states for ratification in 1972 is essentially hers:

Sec. 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex. Sec. 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Sec. 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.” 6

Almost immediately in 1923, a split developed between the more militant feminists whose goal was full equality under the Constitution and the social reformers and organized labor who feared that the amendment would be used to strike down laws that they had secured to protect women in the workplace. (See "Protective Legislation" in the Law Library section and Labor and "Progressive Reform" in the Manuscript Division section.)

Opposition to the ERA began to dissipate somewhat in the 1930s. Roosevelt's New Deal enacted social welfare laws that regulated wages and hours and instituted fair labor standards for both male and female workers, rendering protective laws less necessary. Yet the split continued, because certain groups—such as agricultural workers and domestics, areas where women workers concentrated—were still exempted from these standards. 7 According to Cynthia Harrison, “between 1945 and 1960, the proponents of the ERA and the defenders of protective labor legislation would not reconcile their views, based as they were in opposite philosophies of women's needs.” 8 The liberal-labor coalition's concerns about the threat to protective legislation were not finally removed until passage of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when a high volume of sex discrimination complaints and suits confirmed the argument that protective labor laws acted as a limitation on women's employment opportunities (see "Civil Rights" in the Law Library American Women guide ). 9

In the 1960s, the period generally referred to as the second women's rights movement began with John F. Kennedy's appointment of the first President's Commission on the Status of Women (PCSW), chaired by Eleanor Roosevelt [picture]. The work of this and other early commissions successfully focused public attention on a broad range of initiatives designed to address the unequal position of American women, both under U.S. law and in customary practice, issues which also found expression in numerous women's rights demonstrations. 10

According to Marguerite Rawalt, the only pro-ERA appointee, the creation of the PCSW, consisting almost entirely of women who still opposed the ERA, was intended to forestall consideration of the amendment. Labor's continued opposition to the ERA made it a politically risky issue for a Democratic president. Recollections of differences in perspectives and values between such commissioners as Rawalt, who at the time was president of the National Association of Women Lawyers, and Esther Peterson [picture], the highest-ranking woman in the Kennedy administration as director of the Women's Bureau and an assistant secretary of labor, can be heard on National Public Radio's 1981 program “The ERA in America.” 11

It has been argued that many of this first presidential commission's accomplishments were long-range. One was to make discussion of women's roles and status respectable and to give women's issues a prominent place on the national political agenda for the first time since ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment. 12 Possibly the most divisive issue for the commission, however, was the problem of how to achieve constitutional equality for women. After receiving divergent views from national women's organizations and labor union groups, the commission declared that equality of rights for all persons is embodied in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution and recommended that prompt judicial clarification of this principle be sought from the Supreme Court, which could confer equal rights to women by interpreting the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause to give sex the same “suspect” test as race and national origin. 13 It also found that an equal rights amendment “need not now be sought,” but protective legislation for women should be maintained and expanded. 14 (To read the full text of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, follow the links to the National Archives and Records Administration Web site under “The Long Road to Equality” on the Topical Essays External Sites page.)

“When would the government act?” was the activists' question, and “Now” became the mantra. Outraged by the refusal of the newly formed Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to prosecute job discrimination cases on the basis of sex through Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Marguerite Rawalt, Betty Friedan [picture], and others founded the National Organization for Women in 1966. Passage of the ERA was its first agenda item. 15 Four years later, on July 20, 1970, Representative Martha Griffiths, a Democrat from Michigan, collected enough signatures for a discharge petition, by-passing veteran House Judiciary Committee chair Emanuel Celler [picture], a liberal Democrat from New York with strong labor ties who had refused to hold hearings on the ERA for two decades. 16 Opening House hearings on the amendment on August 10, Griffiths pleaded, “Give us a chance to show you that those so-called protective laws to aid women—however well intentioned originally—have become in fact restraints, which keep wife, abandoned wife, and widow alike from supporting her family.” 17

Approved by 352-15 in the U.S. House of Representatives in 1971, the amendment moved to the Senate, where Senator Sam Ervin [picture], a Democrat from North Carolina and chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, was its chief opponent. A strict constitutionalist, Ervin in fact attacked the amendment on the basis of traditional views of gender. 18 Much anti-ERA literature subsequently was based on Ervin's public statements. 19 Despite continued opposition of some segments of organized labor, the ERA was passed by the Senate on March 22, 1972, and it was submitted to the states for ratification. 20

In the years between 1972 and 1977, the federal amendment proposing equal rights for women was considered by the legislatures of every state, in some cases more than once, and thirty-five of them ratified it. 21 In addition, between 1971 and 1978, fifteen states adopted equal rights amendments to their own constitutions, providing a legal basis for equal treatment to women in those jurisdictions. These served to demonstrate the protections that such an amendment could provide and as an argument for passage of a federal amendment. At the same time, other states began making changes in their laws to eliminate distinctions that unfairly precluded women from receiving equal treatment.

One problem encountered early in the ratification campaign was the portrayal of women and women's rights by the press generally, which seemed to enjoy making them subjects of heavy-handed jokes. When Gloria Steinem was invited to speak at a National Press Club luncheon in January 1972, a short time after the club had agreed to admit women journalists, she used the occasion to take up not only the serious issues of feminism and the ERA but also the crippling effect for both sexes of a male-dominated vision of the world. A tape of the session, held in the Motion Picture, Broadcasting, and Recorded Sound Division (MBRS), records her comments on the way men tended to assume that they represented the norm, so that when the press presented issues important to the lives of women, reporters seldom found it necessary to seek out women as sources. 22 As an example she cited a recent story on abortion in which the interviewees consisted of a number of men, plus one nun. Conservative women, on the other hand, particularly Schlafly, were convinced that the “liberal” press was on the side of the ERA. Other interviews illustrating the flavor of the debate over the ERA, also available in MBRS, are those with Gloria Steinem and Jill Ruckelshaus, both active in the ratification campaign, on Meet the Press, September 10, 1972 (RWC 7731 B2); and with Eleanor Smeal, president of the National Organization for Women, also on Meet the Press, November 20, 1977 (LWO 15563 1-2), and at the National Press Club, June 25, 1981 (RXA 1902 B).

Scholars have speculated about the causes of the dramatic slowing in the ratification process that followed the first three months of 1973. It has been suggested that the Supreme Court's decision on abortion in Roe v. Wade on January 22, 1973, coupled with nationwide admiration for Senator Sam Ervin's chairmanship of the Senate Watergate hearings [picture] that began in May, made ERA proponents' task much harder. Decriminalization of abortion angered fundamentalists and social conservatives, and Ervin, leader of the Senate opposition to the ERA since 1969 and now seen as a savior of the Constitution, became their champion in the southern states that refused to ratify the ERA. 23

Preparations for International Women's Year and its culminating event, the National Women's Conference in Houston in 1977, infused the ERA ratification effort with new energy. And just in time, for not only had ratification slowed markedly but five states had voted to rescind their previous ratifications. 24 The designation of 1975 as International Women's Year (IWY), a United Nations initiative, had come in response to the rising demand for women's rights, not only in the United States, but around the world. 25

The agenda for the national conference consisted of twenty-six items nominated for action by the state groups. The preceding year was spent researching and surveying particular aspects of gender discrimination, and 115 suggestions for remedial action were submitted to the president. 26 Included were recommendations on issues such as employment, reproductive freedom, the legal status of homemakers, rape, the media, and the proposed Equal Rights Amendment. All twenty-six agenda items were approved, but the only one totally unchanged by the delegates to the National Conference was the one that stated, “The Equal Rights Amendment should be ratified.”

Many more socially conservative women were politicized by the Houston conference. Shocked by the delegates' overwhelming support for the ERA, gay rights, federal funding of abortion, government-sponsored child care, and contraception for minors without parental consent, all advocated in the name of “women's rights,” they were also angered that this “feminist” convention was supported by taxpayers. 27 A privately funded opposition rally in Houston was held by Schlafly and her Stop ERA and Eagle Forum organizations. The ERA campaign was denounced as an assault on the family and on the role of women as wives and mothers. 28

An important offshoot of the IWY national conference was a new organization named ERAmerica, whose records are held by the Manuscript Division (see "Women's Rights" in the Manuscript Division section). 29 Created at the request of a number of nongovernmental groups, ERAmerica was set up as a private national campaign organization. Its role was to direct the final months of the ratification drive in the fifteen remaining unratified states. Throughout this ratification effort, ERAmerica worked with more than two hundred participating organizations. They:

lobbied for the amendment
mounted campaigns in unratified states where success was believed possible
organized a national educational program
served as a clearinghouse for information, and
did fund-raising and public relations.

In this way, ERAmerica and allied groups became agents for the hands-on engagement of numerous activist women with the nuts and bolts of political campaigning and with the political process at the state and local level.

The records of ERAmerica are a rich source of detail on the way much of the political training of pro-ERA volunteers was accomplished. Since ERAmerica could pay only a handful of professional staff, it was necessary to recruit volunteers from organizations within the targeted states, and these people represented a broad spectrum of backgrounds and interests. 30

By the same token, the anti-ERA effort had a strong educational value for conservative women, many of whom became effective lobbyists for their points of view. As the Reverend Jerry Falwell remarked the day after the ERA died, “Phyllis has succeeded in doing something nobody has ever done . . . She's mobilized the conservative women of this country into a powerful political unit.” 31

At the national level, the case for passage of the amendment was carried to the general public by magazine articles in such publications as Women's Day and Working Women . These stories discussed issues like:

discriminatory wages
battered wives
loopholes in a homemaker's right to spousal support
publicly funded boys-only schools and
the lack of protections for women in the areas of marital and property rights, child support payments, and credit access. 32

Also cited in the ERAmerica records was a speakers bureau organized for radio, television, and personal appearances by well-known figures like presidential daughter Maureen Reagan, White House press secretary Liz Carpenter, humor columnist Erma Bombeck, actors Alan Alda, Polly Bergen, and others who could attract an audience and articulate the rationale for improving the status of women.

Although the amendment was ratified by thirty-five states, it did not gain approval of the necessary three-fourths or thirty-eight states before the 1982 deadline.

There is no question, however, that public opinion regarding the need for change was substantially altered by the years of debate. Surveys taken by Louis Harris and by the Roper Organization from 1970 through 1985 show steadily growing support for strengthening the status of women. 33 The shift in viewpoints over time are reflected in differing answers to the question, “Do you favor most of the efforts to strengthen and change women's status in society today? ” At the beginning of the 1970s, 40 percent of women and 44 percent of men who responded approved the idea. Fifteen years later in 1985, 73 percent of women and 69 percent of men favored such changes.

Out of the gradual shift in public opinion, legislative gains followed, and a significant number of women's rights measures were passed in this period. Between the 92nd Congress, beginning in 1971, and the 95th Congress, ending in 1978, ten statutes were enacted prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex with regard to education, employment, credit, and housing, more than during any other period in the history of the Congress. 34 Other legislation focused on women's interests has been enacted in the years following.

Since the 1980s, with the major civil rights statutes in place, other legislative gains have included measures to:

provide pension rights and survivor benefits to divorced spouses under various public pension plans
strengthen the Fair Housing Act to ban discrimination against families with children
ban discrimination on the basis of sex in public jobs programs
fund training programs for men and women who are entering nontraditional occupations and for individuals who are single parents or displaced homemakers
improve child support enforcement programs
clarify the application of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in federally assisted education programs and activities (by restoring the broad coverage originally enacted)
provide for the protection of jobs and health insurance after childbirth or family health emergencies.

The Supreme Court of the United States also revealed an awareness of the ratification arguments and, in the 1970s and 1980s, moved toward a more rigorous standard of review in sex discrimination cases, although it fell short of applying the “suspect” category test it applied to race and national origin. The papers of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who in this period argued many landmark women's rights cases for the American Civil Liberties Union, are held in the Manuscript Division (see "Women Justices, Judges, and Attorneys" in the Manuscript Division section). 35 Copies of the final Supreme Court opinions (or decisions), records, and briefs can be found in the Law Library.

Between 1970 and 1990, the number of women winning elective offices increased markedly, and their influence was significant in promoting legislation supportive of women's interests. 36 The number of women mayors in cities with populations over 30,000 increased from 1.6 percent in 1973 to 18 percent in 1993.

In the same period, women in state legislatures grew from 5.6 percent to 20.4 percent, women in the U.S. House of Representatives went from 3.7 percent to 10.8 percent, and women senators from zero to 6 percent.

Other women established “firsts” as candidates. Shirley Chisholm [picture] was the first African American woman to run for president in 1972 and Patricia Schroeder ran in 1988. Geraldine Ferraro was nominated by a national party for vice president in 1984.

The importance of electing women to office at all levels is best revealed in the pattern that women officeholders established early on. Many of these women from both parties have tended to promote legislation having an impact on the lives of women, children, and families, in areas such as health, welfare, and education. Many others have supported women's rights generally. 37 Moreover, the influence of elected women has changed over time as their numbers have increased, and they have proved equally effective as men at securing passage of their legislative priorities. One notable woman legislator whose congressional career spanned two distinct periods, from 1965 to 1977, and again from 1990 to 2002, was Hawaii Representative Patsy T. Mink, whose personal papers in the Manuscript Division reflect not only her steadfast commitment to women's issues but the changing nature of women's political influence (see "Women Members" in the Manuscript Division section).

In the end, change over these years came from many quarters and for many reasons. The long public debate over the status of women and the call for a constitutional amendment heightened expectations that changes would be made, and changes did follow.

Women at the grass-roots level joined together in examining problems believed by some to have been caused by gender discrimination and women's less-than-equal status. They reached out for new solutions. Inevitably women on both sides of the ERA question became involved in the political process and began learning how the levers of power are activated at different levels of government. The cumulative effect of all these forces stimulated a chain of elective, legislative, and judicial actions that made, and arguably continue to make, a positive contribution to substantive changes in women's status in this country.

The American Nurses Association was one of the supporters of ERAmerica, the ratification campaign organization founded in Washington, D.C., in 1975 to sway support for the amendment in unratified states. Container 112, ERAmerica Records, MSS. Back to text
Sandra R. Gregg and Bill Peterson, “End of ERA Battle,” Washington Post, July 1, 1982, B-1 and B-2. All newspaper microfilm is found in the Newspaper and Current Periodical Room (N&CPR). Back to text
Katy Butler and Glennda Chui, “Deadline Passes: 1000 Women at S.F. Vigil for the ERA,” San Francisco Chronicle, July 1, 1982, p. 7. Back to text
Quoted in Barbara Ehrenreich, The Hearts of Men: American Dreams and the Flight from Commitment (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983; HQ1090.E36 1983 GenColl), 145. Back to text
Elisabeth Bumiller, “Schlafly's Gala Goodbye to ERA,” Washington Post, July 1, 1982, C-1. In her article “Victory is Bittersweet for Architect of Amendment's Downfall,” New York Timesreporter Lynn Rosellini reported that Phyllis Schlafly was committing her 50,000-member Eagle Forum to campaigns against sex education, against a nuclear freeze, and to rid school texts of feminist influence (July 1, 1982, p. A12). Back to text
Introduced in the 92nd Congress as H.J.Res. 208. See U.S. Statutes at Large, vol. 86 (1973) 1523. KF50.U5 LAW. Back to text
Susan Ware, Holding Their Own: American Women in the 1930s (Boston: Twayne, 1982; HQ1420.W33 1982 GenColl), 110. Back to text
Cynthia Harrison, “Prelude to Feminism: Women's Organizations, the Federal Government and the Rise of the Women's Movement, 1942 to 1968.” (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1982 MicRR), 131. Published as On Account of Sex: The Politics of Women's Issues, 1945-1968 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988; HQ1236.5.U6 H37 1988 GenColl). Back to text
Edith Mayo and Jerry K. Frye, “The ERA: Postmortem of a Failure in Political Communication,” in Rights of Passage: The Past and Future of the ERA, Joan Hoff-Wilson, ed. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986; KF4758.R54 1986 LAW), 82. Back to text
The President's Commission on the Status of Women was established under Executive Order 10980, 26 Fed. Reg. 12059, on December 14, 1961. The commission's purpose was to assess the progress of women in the United States and to make recommendations for “removing barriers to the full realization of women's basic rights.” An excellent collection of the commission's reports is held by the Library in the General Collections. See United States, President's Commission on the Status of Women, American Women: The Report of the President's Commission on the Status of Women and Other Publications of the Commission, edited by Margaret Mead and Frances Balgley Kaplan (New York: Scribner, 1965; HQ1420.A52 1965 GenColl). Five other presidential commissions or committees on women were created following the Kennedy administration: one each under Presidents Johnson, Nixon, and Ford and two under President Carter. For an account of the commissions, see Irene Tinker, ed., Women in Washington: Advocates for Public Policy (Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1983; HQ1236.W638 1983 GenColl), 21-44. For commentaries on sex discrimination in education and employment in this period, see U.S. Congress, House Committee on Education and Labor, Special Subcommittee on Education, Discrimination against Women, Hearings, 91st Congress, 2nd sess. (Washington: GPO, 1970; KF27.E336 1970 LAW). This committee was headed by Rep. Edith Green, whose reminiscences of her long, activist career can be found in the Association of Former Members of Congress Oral History Collection on tape (MBRS), in transcript (MSS), and on microform (MicRR). Back to text
Sound cassette (29 min.), “The ERA in America,” National Public Radio, Washington, D.C., 1981 (RYA 7666 MBRS). Back to text
Mary P. Ryan, Womanhood in America: From Colonial Times to the Present. (New York: F. Watts, 1983; HQ1410.R9 1983 GenColl), 308. During the economic and social upheavals of the 1930s, many women were appointed to influential positions in the government, leading to impressive gains for women as policy-makers, but they were divided over the Equal Rights Amendment. For discussions of feminists under the Roosevelt Administration, see Susan Ware, Holding Their Own, and Joyce A. Hanson, Mary McLeod Bethune and Black Women's Political Activism (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2003; E185.97.B34 H36 2003 GenColl). Back to text
Once the proposed amendment was before the Congress and the states, the Court cited this factor as a reason for noninterference. Gilbert Y. Steiner, Constitutional Inequality: The Political Fortunes of the Equal Rights Amendment (Washington: The Brookings Institution, 1985; KF4758.S73 1985 LAW), 37-40. Back to text
PCSW, American Women, 45. Back to text
Support of abortion rights was on NOW's second plank. As Betty Friedan recalled, “the Equal Rights Amendment and abortion were and are the two gut issues of the women's movement essential to real security—and equality and human dignity—for all women, whether they work outside or inside the home.” Betty Friedan, It Changed My Life: Writings on the Women's Movement (New York: Random House, 1976; HQ1413.F75 A34 1976 Gen Coll), 84. Back to text
A discharge petition is a device used to remove a proposed measure from a legislative committee to which it has been assigned. It has rarely been successful since half the total membership of the House or Senate, plus one, must approve. However, in this instance, the requisite signatures were obtained in five weeks. The papers of Emanuel Celler [catalog record] are held by the Library's Manuscript Division. The Association of Former Members of Congress Oral History Collection includes Representative Griffiths's reminiscences of the ERA (taped interview in MBRS [RYA 1064-1073] and transcript in MSS and on microform [microfiche 82/100 MicRR]). Back to text
U.S. Congressional Record, 91st Congress, vol. 116, part 21 (August 10-14, 1970) 27999 (LAW; MRR Alc). Replying to Martha Griffiths's opening statement, Emanuel Celler opposed the motion to discharge the Judiciary Committee on HR 264: “What we are being asked to do is to vote on a constitutional amendment, the consequences of which are unexamined, its meaning nondefined, and its risks uncalculated . . . ever since Adam gave up his rib to make a woman, throughout the ages we have learned that physical, emotional, psychological and social differences exist and dare not be disregarded . . . . The adoption of a blunderbuss amendment would erase existing protective female legislation with the most disastrous consequences” (28000-28001). Back to text
Senator Ervin delivered his speech against the ERA on the floor of the Senate on August 21, 1970. Note in particular his section on “Functional Differences between Men and Women,” U.S. Congressional Record, 91st Congress, vol. 116, part 22 (August 17-31, 1970), 29670 (LAW; MRR Alc). Ervin subsequently offered a copy of his speech in evidence at the Hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, noting “On Friday, August 21, 1970, I made a speech in the Senate on the House-passed equal rights amendment, which I called a potential destructive and self-defeating blunderbuss. I borrowed that description from a Law Review article by Prof. Leo Kanowitz, professor of law at the University of New Mexico.” Testimony of Senator Sam J. Ervin Jr., North Carolina, Equal Rights 1970: Hearings, 91st Cong., 2d sess., on S.J. Res. 61 and S.J. Res. 231 [before the Senate Comm. on the Judiciary], (Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970; KF26.J8 1970d LAW; MRR Alc), 1-28. Back to text
Mathews and De Hart, Sex, Gender, and the Politics of ERA, 36. The heavy use of speeches and writings by Sam Ervin in anti-ERA literature can be seen in the run of the Phyllis Schlafly Newsletter (Container 124, ERAmerica Records, MSS) and in Schlafly's book The Power of the Positive Woman (New Rochelle, N.Y.: Arlington House Publishers, 1977; HQ1426.S33 GenColl), reissued with an additional opening chapter as The Power of the Christian Woman (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing, 1981; HQ1426.S33 1981 GenColl). Back to text
The AFL-CIO's chief lobbyist continued to speak of the “potentially destructive impact” of the ERA on women's protective legislation in the Senate hearings. Steiner, Constitutional Inequality, 21. See the relevant portion of the testimony by Myra K. Wolfgang, vice president, Hotel and Restaurant Employees and Bartenders International, AFL-CIO, in behalf of Michigan Women's Commission in Equal Rights 1970: Hearings ... on S.J. Res. 61 and S.J. Res. 231, 30-45. Back to text
The first eight months in the ERA ratification process moved quickly, with twenty-two states ratifying by Thanksgiving 1972. Eight more states ratified between January and March 22, 1973, but no more that year; three in 1974; one in 1975; and one in 1977, a total of thirty-five. Steiner, Constitutional Inequality, 55. Back to text
Tape recording of National Press Club Luncheon, January 24, 1972 (RXA 1506, MBRS). Back to text
Steiner, Constitutional Inequality, 57-58. Mathews and De Hart, Sex, Gender, and the Politics of ERA, 51. Sam Ervin's opinions and style, as well as the attitudes and arguments of proponents and opponents, can be seen in the video Who Will Protect the Family?, a 1982 PBS feature on the unsuccessful struggle for ERA ratification in North Carolina (VBC 7099, MBRS). Back to text
Steiner, Constitutional Inequality, 63, 65. Back to text
A complete collection of IWY conference reports are found in the General Collections. See, for instance, Report of the World Conference of the International Women's Year, 19 June-2 July 1975 (New York: United Nations, 1976; HQ1106 1975 .R46 GenColl; also JX1977 .A2 E/CONF.66/34) and International Women's Year World Conference Documents Index (New York: UNIFO Publishers, 1975; HQ1106 1975 .I57 GenColl; MicRR). Back to text
See United States, National Commission on the Observance of International Women's Year, To Form a More Perfect Union . . . Justice for American Women (Washington: GPO, 1976; HQ1426.U55 1975 GenColl). Back to text
Rebecca Klatch,”Women against Feminism,” in A History of Our Time: Readings on Postwar America. Edited by William H. Chafe and Harvard Sitkoff (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999; E742.H57 1999 GenColl), 224-25, and the Phyllis Schlafly Report, May and August 1977 (Container 124, ERAmerica Records, MSS). Back to text
Asking the question “What's Wrong with ‘Equal Rights’ for Women?”, Phyllis Schlafly first attacked the ERA and “women libbers” in the Phyllis Schlafly Newsletter of February 1972 (Container 124, ERAmerica Records, folder labeled “STOP ERA and Phyllis Schlafly Report,” MSS). Following a spirited defense of traditional family values and American women's privileged position in American society, she alleged that the ERA would make women subject to the draft and that married women would lose their rights to support for themselves and their children from their husbands, as well as alimony in the case of divorce. The following year (May 3, 1973), Martha Griffiths attempted to answer some of Schlafly's arguments in a Vital History series point-counterpoint interview (RZA 760, no. 1, side A, MBRS). Schlafly's views were also discussed on the Larry King Show the day after the defeat of the ERA, July 1, 1982, when she declared that, despite laws requiring equitable treatment of working women, “the career most women want is marriage, home, husband, and children.” (RYA 5277, MBRS). Back to text
The records of ERAmerica were acquired by the Library of Congress in 1982. Back to text
Container 6, ERAmerica Records, MSS. Back to text
As quoted by Lynn Rosellini, “Victory Is Bittersweet for Architect of Amendment's Downfall,” New York Times, July 1, 1982, A12. N&CPR. Back to text
An example included in the ERAmerica records is Jill Newman, “The ERA—What It Would Really Do,” Women's Day, November 1979. See also Mary Schnack, “ERA: What It Will (Won't) Do for Working Women,” Working Woman's Magazine, November 1979. Many other articles both for and against passage of the ERA can be identified using periodical indexes (seePeriodical Indexes in General Collections section). Back to text
The Roper Organization, The 1985 Virginia Slims American Women's Opinion Poll: A Study (New York: Roper, [1986?]; HQ1420.A17 1986 GenColl), 16. Back to text
These included: The Comprehensive Health Manpower Act of 1971, prohibiting use of federal funds for health programs which discriminate on the basis of sex in admissions to professional schools; Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, prohibiting sex discrimination in educational programs and activities; the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972, extending coverage of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (banning sex discrimination) to employees of federal, state, and local governments, educational institutions, and any business or union with more than fifteen employees; the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, prohibiting sex discrimination in housing and credit and requiring lenders to consider the combined incomes of husbands and wives in extending mortgage credit; the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974, prohibiting discrimination based on sex or marital status in any credit transaction; the Small Business Act Amendments of 1974, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex or marital status in programs for loans and guarantees administered by the Small Business Administration; the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, prohibiting discrimination in the federal civil service on the basis of sex; the Equal Rights Amendment (Proposed); and the Extension of the Deadline for the Ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. Information on many of these statutes may be found in the personal papers of Hawaii Representative Patsy T. Mink, described more fully in the Manuscript Division section on Women Members of Congress. Back to text
Mathews and De Hart, Sex, Gender, and the Politics of ERA, viii, describe the suspect category test's application to sex discrimination. To use the Ginsburg Papers, which are restricted, it is necessary to apply for the donor's permission through the Manuscript Division. Back to text
Sue Thomas and Clyde Wilcox, eds.,Women and Elective Office: Past, Present and Future (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998; HQ1391.U5 W63 1998 GenColl), 2. Back to text
Ibid., 130-49. Back to text
<< Previous: “With Peace and Freedom Blest!”: Woman as Symbol in America, 1590-1800
Last Updated: May 24, 2024 11:36 AM
URL: https://guides.loc.gov/american-women-essays

Top of page

Collection Civil Rights History Project

Women in the civil rights movement.

Many women played important roles in the Civil Rights Movement, from leading local civil rights organizations to serving as lawyers on school segregation lawsuits. Their efforts to lead the movement were often overshadowed by men, who still get more attention and credit for its successes in popular historical narratives and commemorations. Many women experienced gender discrimination and sexual harassment within the movement and later turned towards the feminist movement in the 1970s. The Civil Rights History Project interviews with participants in the struggle include both expressions of pride in women’s achievements and also candid assessments about the difficulties they faced within the movement.

Gwendolyn Zoharah Simmons was a member of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), and one of three women chosen to be a field director for the Mississippi Freedom Summer Project. She discusses the difficulties she faced in this position and notes that gender equality was not a given, but had to be fought for: “I often had to struggle around issues related to a woman being a project director. We had to fight for the resources, you know. We had to fight to get a good car because the guys would get first dibs on everything, and that wasn’t fair…it was a struggle to be taken seriously by the leadership, as well as by your male colleagues.” She continues, “One of the things that we often don’t talk about, but there was sexual harassment that often happened toward the women. And so, that was one of the things that, you know, I took a stand on, that ‘This was not – we’re not going to get a consensus on this. There is not going to be sexual harassment of any of the women on this project or any of the women in this community. And you will be put out if you do it.’”

Lonnie King was an activist with the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) in Atlanta. He remembers meeting other students from the Nashville movement when SNCC became a nationwide organization in 1960. He recalls his surprise that Diane Nash was not elected to be the representative from Nashville, and echoes Simmons’ criticisms about male privilege and domination: “Diane Nash, in my view, was the Nashville movement and by that I mean this: Others were there, but they weren’t Diane Nash. Diane was articulate; she was a beautiful woman, very photogenic, very committed. And very intelligent and had a following. I never did understand how, except maybe for sexism, I never understood how [James] Bevel, Marion [Barry], and for that matter, John Lewis, kind of leapfrogged over her. I never understood that because she was in fact the leader in Nashville. It was Diane. The others were followers of her… I so never understood that to be honest with you. She’s an unsung... a real unsung hero of the movement in Nashville, in my opinion.”

Ekwueme Michael Thewell was a student at Howard University and a leader of the Nonviolent Action Group, an organization that eventually joined with SNCC. He reflects on the sacrifices that women college students at Howard made in joining the struggle, and remarks on the constraints they faced after doing so: “It is only in retrospect that I recognize the extraordinary price that our sisters paid for being as devoted to the struggle as they were. It meant that they weren’t into homecoming queen kind of activities. That they weren’t into the accepted behavior of a Howard lady. That they weren't into the trivia of fashion and dressing up. Though they were attractive women and they took care of themselves, but they weren’t the kind of trophy wives for the med school students and they weren’t—some of them might have been members of the Greek letter organizations, but most of them I suspect weren’t. So that they occupied a place outside the conventional social norms of the whole university student body. So did the men. But with men, I think, we can just say, ‘Kiss my black ass’ and go on about our business. It wasn’t so clear to me that a woman could do the same thing.”

Older interviewees emphasize the opportunities that were available to an earlier generation of women. Mildred Bond Roxborough , a long-time secretary of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, discusses the importance of women leaders in local branches: “Well, actually when you think about women's contributions to the NAACP, without the women we wouldn't have an NAACP. The person who was responsible for generating the organizing meeting was a woman. Of course, ever since then we've had women in key roles--not in the majority, but in the very key roles which were responsible for the evolution of the NAACP. I think in terms of people like Daisy Lampkin, who was a member of our national board from Pittsburgh; she traveled around the country garnering memberships and helping to organize branches. That was back in the '30s and '40s before it became fashionable or popular for women to travel. You have women who subsequently held positions in the NAACP nationally as program directors and as leaders of various divisions.” She goes on to discuss the contributions of many women to the success of the NAACP.

Doris Adelaide Derby , another SNCC activist, remembers that the challenge and urgency of the freedom struggle was a formative experience for young activist women, who had to learn resourcefulness on the job: “I always did what I wanted to do. I had my own inner drive. And I found that when I came up with ideas and I was ready to work to see it through, and I think that happened with a lot of women in SNCC. We needed all hands on deck, and so, when we found ourselves in situations, we had to rely on whoever was around. And if somebody had XYZ skills, and somebody only had ABC, we had to come together. We used to joke about that, but in reality, the women, you know, were strong. In the struggle, the women were strong.”

Ruby Nell Sales , who later overcame psychological traumas from the racial violence she witnessed in the movement, encourages us to look beyond the simplistic story of Rosa Parks refusing to move to the back of the bus in Montgomery. As she explains, Parks was a long-time activist who had sought justice for African American women who were frequently assaulted—both verbally and physically-- in their daily lives: “…When we look at Rosa Parks, people often think that she was – she did that because of her civil rights and wanting to sit down on the bus. But she also did that – it was a rebellion of maids, a rebellion of working class women, who were tired of boarding the buses in Montgomery, the public space, and being assaulted and called out-of-there names and abused by white bus drivers. And that’s why that Movement could hold so long. If it had just been merely a protest about riding the bus, it might have shattered. But it went to the very heart of black womanhood, and black women played a major role in sustaining that movement.”

The Civil Rights History Project includes interviews with over 50 women who came from a wide range of backgrounds and were involved in the movement in a myriad of ways. Their stories deepen our understanding of the movement as a whole, and provide us with concrete examples of how vital they were to the gains of the Civil Rights Movement.

Comprehensive Argumentative essay example on the Rights of Women

What You'll Learn

Women’s rights have been a significant focal point in the ongoing discourse on social justice and equality. The struggle for women’s rights is deeply rooted in history, marked by milestones and setbacks. While progress has undeniably been made, there remain persistent challenges that necessitate continued advocacy and action. This essay argues that the advancement of women’s rights is not only a matter of justice and equality but also a fundamental imperative for societal progress.(Comprehensive Argumentative essay example on the Rights of Women)

The historical context of women’s rights is marked by a legacy of systemic discrimination, limited opportunities, and societal norms that perpetuated gender inequality. From the suffragette movement to the fight for reproductive rights, women have consistently challenged oppressive structures. The recognition of women’s rights as human rights, as articulated in international conventions, underscores the global commitment to address historical injustices and promote gender equality.(Comprehensive Argumentative essay example on the Rights of Women)

One crucial aspect of women’s rights is economic empowerment . The gender pay gap and limited access to economic resources have persisted despite advancements in the workplace. Empowering women economically not only contributes to their individual well-being but also enhances overall societal prosperity. Research consistently demonstrates that economies thrive when women actively participate in the workforce and have equal opportunities for career advancement.(Comprehensive Argumentative essay example on the Rights of Women)

Education is a powerful catalyst for social change, and ensuring equal access to education for girls and women is integral to advancing women’s rights. When women are educated, they become catalysts for positive change within their communities. Educated women are more likely to make informed decisions about their lives, contribute meaningfully to society, and break the cycle of poverty.

Rights Securing women’s rights includes safeguarding their reproductive health and rights. Access to comprehensive healthcare, including reproductive services, is essential for women to have control over their bodies and make autonomous choices about family planning. Policies that prioritize women’s health contribute to a healthier and more equitable society.(Comprehensive Argumentative essay example on the Rights of Women)

Violence Against Women Addressing and preventing violence against women is a critical component of the women’s rights agenda. Gender-based violence not only inflicts harm on individual women but also perpetuates a culture of fear and inequality. Legal frameworks, awareness campaigns, and support services are essential tools in combating violence against women and ensuring their safety and well-being.(Comprehensive Argumentative essay example on the Rights of Women)

In conclusion, the advancement of women’s rights is not only a moral imperative but also a crucial factor in fostering societal progress. A comprehensive approach that addresses historical injustices, economic disparities, educational opportunities, reproductive rights, and violence against women is essential. As we strive for a more equitable future, it is imperative that individuals, communities, and governments actively support and promote women’s rights, recognizing that the empowerment of women is synonymous with the advancement of society as a whole.(Comprehensive Argumentative essay example on the Rights of Women)

80 Topic Ideas for Your Argumentative Essay

Universal Basic Income
Climate Change and Environmental Policies
Gun Control Laws
Legalization of Marijuana
Capital Punishment
Immigration Policies
Healthcare Reform
Artificial Intelligence Ethics
Cybersecurity and Privacy
Online Education vs. Traditional Education
Animal Testing
Nuclear Energy
Social Media Impact on Society
Gender Pay Gap
Affirmative Action
Censorship in the Media
Genetic Engineering and Designer Babies
Mandatory Vaccinations
Electoral College vs. Popular Vote
Police Brutality and Reform
School Uniforms
Space Exploration Funding
Internet Neutrality
Autonomous Vehicles and Ethics
Nuclear Weapons Proliferation
Racial Profiling
Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide
Cultural Appropriation
Socialism vs. Capitalism
Mental Health Stigma
Income Inequality
Renewable Energy Sources
Legalization of Prostitution
Affirmative Consent Laws
Education Funding
Prescription Drug Prices
Parental Leave Policies
Ageism in the Workplace
Single-payer Healthcare System
Bullying Prevention in Schools
Government Surveillance
LGBTQ+ Rights
Nuclear Disarmament
GMO Labeling
Workplace Diversity
Obesity and Public Health
Immigration and Border Security
Free Speech on College Campuses
Alternative Medicine vs. Conventional Medicine
Childhood Vaccination Requirements
Mass Surveillance
Renewable Energy Subsidies
Cultural Diversity in Education
Youth and Political Engagement
School Vouchers
Social Justice Warriors
Internet Addiction
Human Cloning
Artistic Freedom vs. Cultural Sensitivity
College Admissions Policies
Cyberbullying
Privacy in the Digital Age
Nuclear Power Plants Safety
Cultural Impact of Video Games
Aging Population and Healthcare
Animal Rights
Obesity and Personal Responsibility
Reproductive Rights
Charter Schools
Military Spending
Immigration and Economic Impact
Mandatory Military Service
Workplace Harassment Policies
Cultural Globalization
Criminal Justice Reform
Immigration Detention Centers
Antibiotic Resistance
Internet Censorship
Discrimination in the Workplace
Space Colonization

Brownlee, K. (2020). Being sure of each other: an essay on social rights and freedoms. Oxford University Press, USA. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=kTjpDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Argumentative+essay+example+on+the+Rights+of+Women&ots=oysLrPE6ux&sig=ANTnu_5AH4_3PMfGG0XdMzxBpLA

Start by filling this short order form order.studyinghq.com

And then follow the progressive flow.

Having an issue, chat with us here

Cathy, CS.

New Concept ? Let a subject expert write your paper for You

Previous post.

📕 Studying HQ

Typically replies within minutes

Hey! 👋 Need help with an assignment?

🟢 Online | Privacy policy

WhatsApp us

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

Publications
Our Methods
Short Reads
Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

A Century After Women Gained the Right To Vote, Majority of Americans See Work To Do on Gender Equality

About three-in-ten men say women’s gains have come at the expense of men

Table of contents.

Acknowledgments
Methodology

Pew Research Center conducted this study to understand Americans’ views of the current state of gender equality and the advancement of women around the 100th anniversary of women getting the right to vote. For this analysis, we surveyed 3,143 U.S. adults in March and April 2020, including an oversample of Black and Hispanic respondents. The adults surveyed are members of the Ipsos Public Affairs KnowledgePanel, an online survey panel that is recruited through national random sampling of residential addresses and landline and cellphone numbers. KnowledgePanel provides internet access for those who do not have it and, if needed, a device to access the internet when they join the panel. To ensure that the results of this survey reflect a balanced cross section of the nation, the data are weighted to match the U.S. adult population by gender, age, education, race and ethnicity and other categories. The survey was conducted in English and Spanish.

Here are the questions used for this report , along with responses, and the report’s methodology .

References to white and Black adults include only those who are non-Hispanic and identify as only one race. Hispanics are of any race.

All references to party affiliation include those who lean toward that party. Republicans include those who identify as Republicans and independents who say they lean toward the Republican Party. Democrats include those who identify as Democrats and independents who say they lean toward the Democratic Party.

References to college graduates or people with a college degree comprise those with a bachelor’s degree or more. “Some college” includes those with an associate degree and those who attended college but did not obtain a degree.

Views on how far the country has come on gender equality differ widely by gender and by party

A hundred years after the 19th Amendment was ratified, about half of Americans say granting women the right to vote has been the most important milestone in advancing the position of women in the country. Still, a majority of U.S. adults say the country hasn’t gone far enough when it comes to giving women equal rights with men, even as a large share thinks there has been progress in the last decade, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.

About three-quarters of Americans who say country has work to do on gender equality see sexual harassment as a major obstacle

Among those who think the country still has work to do in achieving gender equality, 77% point to sexual harassment as a major obstacle to women having equal rights with men. Fewer, but still majorities, point to women not having the same legal rights as men (67%), different societal expectations for men and women (66%) and not enough women in positions of power (64%) as major obstacles to gender equality. Women are more likely than men to see each of these as a major obstacle.

Many of those who say it is important for men and women to have equal rights point to aspects of the workplace when asked about what gender equality would look like. Fully 45% volunteer that a society where women have equal rights with men would include equal pay. An additional 19% say there would be no discrimination in hiring, promotion or educational opportunities. About one-in-ten say women would be more equally represented in business or political leadership.

In terms of the groups and institutions that have done the most to advance the rights of women in the U.S., 70% say the feminist movement has done at least a fair amount in this regard. The Democratic Party is viewed as having contributed more to the cause of women’s rights than the Republican Party: 59% say the Democratic Party has done at least a fair amount to advance women’s rights, while 37% say the same about the GOP. About three-in-ten (29%) say President Donald Trump has done at least a fair amount to advance women’s rights, while 69% say Trump has not done much or has done nothing at all. These views vary considerably by party, with Republicans and Republican leaners at least five times as likely as Democrats and those who lean Democratic to say the GOP and Trump have done at least a fair amount and Democrats far more likely than Republicans to say the same about the Democratic Party.

Seven-in-ten say the feminist movement has done at least a fair amount to advance women’s rights

Views of the role the feminist movement has played in advancing gender equality are positive overall, though fewer than half of women say the movement has been beneficial to them personally. About four-in-ten (41%) say feminism has helped them at least a little, while half say it has neither helped nor hurt them. Relatively few (7%) say feminism has hurt them personally. Democratic women, those with a bachelor’s degree or more education and women younger than 50 are among the most likely to say they’ve benefitted personally from feminism.

Views about how much progress the country has made on gender equality differ widely along partisan lines. About three-quarters of Democrats (76%) say the country hasn’t gone far enough when it comes to giving women equal rights with men, while 19% say it’s been about right and 4% say the country has gone too far. Among Republicans, a third say the country hasn’t made enough progress, while 48% say it’s been about right and 17% say the country has gone too far in giving women equal rights with men.

There is also a gender gap in these views, with 64% of women – compared with 49% of men – saying the country hasn’t gone far enough in giving women equal rights with men. Democratic and Republican women are about ten percentage points more likely than their male counterparts to say this (82% of Democratic women vs. 70% of Democratic men and 38% of Republican women vs. 28% of Republican men).

The nationally representative survey of 3,143 U.S. adults was conducted online from March 18-April 1, 2020. 1 Among the other key findings:

More cite women’s suffrage than other milestones as the most important in advancing the position of women in the U.S. About half of Americans (49%) say women gaining the right to vote has been the most important milestone in advancing the position of women in the U.S.; 29% cite the passage of the Equal Pay Act, while smaller shares point to the passage of the Family and Medical Leave Act (12%) or the availability of the birth control pill (8%) as the most important milestone.

A majority of Americans say feminism has had a positive impact on the lives of white, Black and Hispanic women. About six-in-ten or more U.S. adults say feminism has helped the lives of white (64%), Black (61%) and Hispanic (58%) women at least a little. But more say feminism helped white women a lot (32%) than say it’s done the same for Black (21%) or Hispanic (15%) women. About a quarter (24%) say feminism has helped wealthy women a lot; just 10% say it’s been equally helpful to poor women.

About four-in-ten Republican men think women’s gains have come at the expense of men. Most Americans (76%) say the gains women have made in society have not come at the expense of men, but 22% think these gains have come at the expense of men. That view is more common among men (28%) than women (17%). Republican and Democratic men are more likely than their female counterparts to say the gains women have made in society have come at the expense of men. About four-in-ten Republican men (38%) say women’s gains have come at the expense of men, compared with 25% of Republican women, 19% of Democratic men and 12% of Democratic women.

Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say that, when it comes to gender discrimination, the bigger problem is discrimination being overlooked. Two-thirds of U.S. adults say the bigger problem for our country today is people not seeing gender discrimination where it really does exist; 31% say people seeing gender discrimination where it really does not exist is the bigger problem. More than eight-in-ten Democrats (85%) point to people overlooking gender discrimination as the bigger problem; 46% of Republicans say the same.

Most Americans favor adding the ERA to the U.S. Constitution, even as many don’t think this would make much difference for women’s rights. About eight-in-ten U.S. adults (78%), including majorities of men and women and Republicans and Democrats alike, say they at least somewhat favor adding the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the U.S. Constitution. When asked about the impact they think adopting the ERA would have on women’s rights in the U.S., 44% say it would advance women’s rights, while 5% say this would be a setback for women’s rights and 49% say it would not make much of a difference. Even among those who favor adopting the amendment, 44% say doing so wouldn’t have much of an impact on women’s rights (54% say it would advance women’s rights).

A majority of Americans say the country has not gone far enough in giving women equal rights with men

The vast majority of Americans across demographic and partisan groups agree that women should have equal rights with men. More than nine-in-ten U.S. adults say it is very important (79%) or somewhat important (18%) for women to have equal rights with men in this country. Just 3% of Americans say gender equality is not too or not at all important.

Democrats and those who lean to the Democratic Party (86%) are more likely than Republicans and Republican leaners (71%) to say it is very important for women to have equal rights with men. Still, majorities of Republicans and Democrats, including at least two-thirds of men and women in each party, say this is very important.

Majority of Americans say the U.S. has work to do to give women equal rights with men

When it comes to giving women equal rights with men, a majority of adults (57%) think our country has not gone far enough, while 32% say things have been about right; 10% of Americans say the country has gone too far in giving women equal rights with men.

Women (64%) are more likely than men (49%) to say the country hasn’t made enough progress on gender equality. However, there is also a sizable party gap. Roughly three-quarters of Democrats (76%) say the country hasn’t gone far enough when it comes to giving women equal rights with men, compared with 33% of Republicans. Instead, 48% of Republicans – compared with 19% of Democrats – say things are about right when it comes to gender equality and 17% say the country has gone too far; just 4% of Democrats say things have gone too far.

Across parties, women are more likely than men to say the U.S. has not gone far enough in giving women equal rights with men. About four-in-ten Republican women (38%) say that gender equality has not come far enough, compared with 28% of Republican men. Still, about half of Republican men (51%) and 45% of Republican women say things are about right in the country when it comes to gender equality.

Among Democrats, 82% of women, compared with 70% of men, say the country still has work to do on gender equality. About a quarter of Democratic men (24%) say things are about right in the country when it comes to giving women equal rights with men, compared with 14% of Democratic women who say the same.

Growing share of Americans say the country has not gone far enough in giving women equal rights with men

Among Democrats, those with at least some college education are more likely than those with no college experience to express dissatisfaction with the current state of gender equality. About eight-in-ten Democrats with a bachelor’s degree or more education (82%) and 77% of those with some college education say the country hasn’t gone far enough when it comes to giving women equal rights with men, compared with 71% of Democrats with a high school diploma or less education. Among Republicans, there is generally more agreement across levels of educational attainment.

Overall, Americans express more dissatisfaction with the state of gender equality now than they did in 2017, when this question was last asked. Then, half said the country hadn’t gone far enough in giving women equal rights with men, while 39% said things were about right and 10% said the country had gone too far. Attitudes have shifted among men and women and Republicans and Democrats alike.

Most Democrats and Republicans say the country has made progress in giving women and men equal rights over the last 10 years

Majorities across parties, genders say U.S. has made progress in gender equality over last 10 years

While many Americans say there’s still work to be done to achieve gender equality, most say there’s been progress over the past decade. Majorities of men and women say the U.S. has made progress in the last 10 years when it comes to giving women equal rights with men. Still, 25% of Americans say things are the same as they were 10 years ago, and one-in-ten say the country has lost ground when it comes to equal rights for women.

Majorities of Democrats (60%) and Republicans (71%) say that, in the last 10 years, the country has made progress on gender equality. However, Democratic women are the least likely to say this: 58% of Democratic women say this, compared with 63% of Democratic men and 71% of both Republican men and Republican women. Instead, 28% of Democratic women say things are about the same as they were 10 years ago (21% of Republican women say the same).

About three-in-ten U.S. men think women’s gains have come at the expense of men

About four-in-ten Republican men say women’s gains in society have come at the expense of men

When it comes to the gains that women have made in society, most Americans (76%) say the gains have not come at the expense of men, but 22% – including 28% of men – think these gains have come at the expense of men.

Republican men (38%) are twice as likely as Democratic men (19%) to say the gains women have made have come at the expense of men. A quarter of Republican women also say this, less than the share of their male counterparts but higher than the shares of Democratic men and women (12%) that hold this view.

Among women, those without a bachelor’s degree are about twice as likely as college graduates to say gains have come at the expense of men (21% vs. 10%); educational differences are less pronounced, though still significant, among men: 30% of men with some college or less education say the gains women have made in society have come at the expense of men, compared with 24% of men with at least a bachelor’s degree.

Most who say the country still has work to do on gender equality say equality is likely in the future

On the whole, the majority of Americans who say that the country has not gone far enough to give women equal rights with men think it is very or somewhat likely that women in our country will eventually have equal rights with men. More than eight-in-ten Americans who say the country hasn’t made enough progress say this is very likely (31%) or somewhat likely (53%); just 16% say they think it is not too likely or not at all likely.

Higher share of men than women say gender equality is very likely

Large majorities of men and women and Republicans and Democrats who say the country has not yet achieved gender equality say it is at least somewhat likely that men and women will eventually have equal rights, but men (37%) are considerably more likely than women (26%) to say it is very likely.

Among Republicans who say the U.S. has work to do to achieve gender equality, 36% say gender equality is very likely, compared with 29% of Democrats. This difference is driven in part by Democratic women, who are among the least likely to say they expect men and women to eventually have equal rights. Among Democratic women who say the country hasn’t gone far enough to achieve gender equality, 23% say they think it is very likely that there will eventually be gender equality; 38% of Democratic men say the same.

Even among the small share of Americans who say the country has lost ground on gender equality in the last 10 years, 76% say it is very or somewhat likely that women will eventually have equal rights with men.

More cite equality in the workplace than any other example as a sign of a society where men and women are equal

Equal pay widely cited as a marker of a society with gender equality

When those who say it is important for women to have equal rights with men are asked what a society with gender equality might look like, about half give examples that focus on equality in the workplace: 45% specifically say equal pay, 19% cite no discrimination in hiring and promotion, 5% say men and women getting equal respect in the workplace, and 2% say better paid leave and paternity and maternity support are things they would expect to see in a society where women have equal rights with men.

About one-in-ten cite more or equal representation of women in leadership, with 6% specifically mentioning political leadership and 5% mentioning business leadership. Relatively few point to reproductive rights (4%) and less traditional gender norms (4%) as markers of a society where women have equal rights with men. (Respondents were asked to answer this question in their own words; for respondents who gave multiple examples, up to three responses were coded.)

For the most part, men and women who say equal rights are important have a similar picture of what a society with gender equality would look like, but a larger share of women than men cite equal pay (51% vs. 40%). Still, the gender pay gap tops the list for both men and women who say gender equality is important.

Among women, references to equal pay differ by age. Women ages 50 and older (56%) are more likely than women under 50 (45%) to mention equal pay when describing a society where men and women have equal rights.

Democrats who say gender equality is important are more likely than their Republican counterparts to cite equal pay when asked about a society with gender equality: 50% of Democrats say this, compared with 41% of Republicans. Democrats are also more likely than Republicans to say that more or equal representation in business and politics is a marker of equality (12% vs. 5%).

Wide party and gender gaps in views of the obstacles women face in achieving gender equality

About three-quarters cite sexual harassment as a major obstacle to gender equality

When Americans who say the country has not gone far enough in giving women equal rights with men are asked about the obstacles to achieving equal rights, sexual harassment tops the list: 77% say this is a major obstacle for women. Roughly two-thirds say women not having the same legal rights as men (67%) and the different expectations that society has for men and women (66%) are major obstacles, and 64% say the same about not enough women in positions of power. Some 43% point to family responsibilities as a major obstacle, while fewer cite men and women having different physical abilities (19%) and women not working as hard as men (13%) as major obstacles. Roughly two-thirds (64%) of those who say the country has work to do on gender equality say women not working as hard as men is not an obstacle to gender equality.

Perceptions of the obstacles to gender equality vary across genders. For example, while 71% of women who say the country hasn’t gone far enough in giving women equal rights with men cite not enough women in positions of power as a major obstacle to gender equality, 55% of men say the same.

Men and women differ over major obstacles to women having equal rights

A majority of women who say the country hasn’t made enough progress on gender equality also point to women not having the same legal rights as men (73%) and different societal expectations for men and women (72%) as major obstacles to women having equal rights with men. Fewer men who say this see each of these as major obstacles to gender equality (59% and 58%, respectively).

When it comes to the role sexual harassment plays in men and women having equal rights, women who say the country hasn’t gone far enough when it comes to gender equality (82%) are more likely than men who say the same (72%) to cite this as a major obstacle, though large majorities of both groups say this.

Among women who say the country hasn’t made enough progress on gender equality, those with at least a bachelor’s degree are more likely than those who have attended some college or less to say different societal expectations (81% vs. 67%) and not enough women in positions of power (80% vs. 66%) are major obstacles.

Among those who say there’s work to be done on gender equality, a majority of Democrats, but fewer than half of Republicans, see not enough women in power as a major obstacle

Democrats and Republicans differ over major obstacles to women having equal rights

Among those who say there’s more work to be done in giving women equal rights with men, Democrats and Republicans differ on the extent to which certain factors are holding women back. A higher share of Democrats than Republicans point to not enough women in positions of power (72% vs. 41%), women not having the same legal rights as men (73% vs. 51%), sexual harassment (81 % vs. 66%) and different societal expectations (69% vs. 57%) as major obstacles to women having equal rights with men.

Republicans who say the country has not gone far enough to give women equal rights (27%) are more likely than similarly minded Democrats (17%) to say differences in the physical abilities of men and women are a major obstacle to women having equal rights with men, although relatively small shares of each group say this is the case. Meanwhile, there are no significant partisan gaps when it comes to views of family responsibilities (44% of Democrats and 40% of Republicans see it as a major obstacle) or women not working as hard as men (13% and 15%, respectively).

Republican, Democratic women differ over extent to which not enough women in power hinders equality

Democratic women are particularly likely to see some of these as major obstacles, while Republican men tend to be the least likely to do so. For example, 78% of Democratic women say women not having the same legal rights as men is a major obstacle to equal rights, as do 65% of Democratic men and 58% of Republican women. In contrast, 42% of Republican men say this is a major obstacle.

And while 77% of Democratic women, 65% of Democratic men and 50% of Republican women say not enough women in positions of power is a major obstacle to gender equality, just 31% of Republican men say the same.

Democrats are nearly twice as likely as Republicans to say there are problems with gender discrimination being overlooked

Most Americans say bigger problem is gender discrimination being overlooked

When it comes to gender discrimination, by more than a two-to-one margin Americans say the bigger problem for the country is people not seeing discrimination where it really does exist, rather than people seeing gender discrimination where it really does not exist (67% vs. 31%).

The vast majority of Democrats (85%) say the bigger problem is people not seeing gender discrimination where it really exists. In contrast, more Republicans say the bigger problem is people seeing discrimination where it doesn’t exist (53%) than say the people overlooking discrimination is the bigger problem (46%).

There is a wide gender gap among Republicans. While a majority of Republican men (61%) say the bigger problem is people seeing gender discrimination where it doesn’t exist, fewer than half of Republican women (44%) say the same. Democratic men are also more likely than their female counterparts to say this (19% vs. 11%), but 80% of Democratic men and 89% of Democratic women agree that the bigger problem is people overlooking gender discrimination.

More cite women gaining the right to vote than other milestones as the most important in advancing the position of women

About half of U.S. adults see women’s suffrage as the most important milestone in advancing the position of women

When asked about milestones they see as important in advancing the position of women in the U.S., about half of Americans (49%) point to women gaining the right to vote as the most important milestone, a view that is more common among men (52%) than women (46%). Roughly three-in-ten U.S. adults (29%) cite the passage of the Equal Pay Act, while smaller shares say passage of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and the availability of the birth control pill are the most important milestones in advancing the position of women (12% and 8%, respectively).

White adults, as well as those with at least a bachelor’s degree, are more likely than Black and Hispanic adults and those with less education to see women’s suffrage as the most important milestone in advancing the position of women in the U.S. Some 53% of white adults say women getting the right to vote has been a more important milestone than the passage of the Equal Pay Act, passage of the FMLA or the availability of the birth control pill. Black and Hispanic adults are about as likely to cite the passage of the Equal Pay Act as they are to cite women gaining the right to vote.

Among those with at least a bachelor’s degree, 59% see women’s suffrage as the most important milestone, compared with 48% of those with some college education and 41% of those with less education. Even so, across educational attainment, more point to women getting the right to vote than to the other milestones as the most important in advancing women’s rights in the U.S.

White men and male college graduates are the most likely to cite women’s suffrage as most important milestone

These differences by race and ethnicity and educational attainment are also evident when looking separately at the views of men and women. A majority of white men (57%) cite women gaining the right to vote as the most important milestone, compared with 39% of Black men and 43% of Hispanic men. And while white women are less likely than their male counterparts to say this (49% do so), even smaller shares of Black (36%) and Hispanic (38%) women point to women’s suffrage as the most important milestone.

Similarly, men with at least a bachelor’s degree (64%) are more likely than women with the same level of educational attainment (54%) to say women gaining the right to vote was the most important milestone. Both are more likely than their less educated counterparts to say this.

Views on this vary little, if at all, by age or partisanship, but Democrats and those who lean to the Democratic Party are about twice as likely as Republicans and Republican leaners to say the availability of the birth control pill has been the most important milestone in advancing the position of women in the U.S. (11% vs. 5%). Similar shares of Democratic women (12%) and men (11%) say this, compared with 6% of Republican women and an even smaller share of Republican men (3%).

A third of Americans know what year women in the U.S. gained the right to vote

One-third of Americans correctly cite 1920 as the year U.S. women gained the right to vote

When asked in an open-ended format what year women in the U.S. gained the right to vote, 47% offer a year between 1915 and 1925 (within five years of the correct answer), including 33% who correctly identify 1920 as the year women gained the right to vote. About three-in-ten Americans (31%) say women gained the right to vote in 1926 or later, while just 7% say this happened before 1915. (Some 14% didn’t provide an answer.) Men and women give similar answers.

Those who say women gaining the right to vote has been the most important milestone in advancing women’s rights in the U.S. are not necessarily more knowledgeable about the timing of this milestone. An identical share of those who cite women’s suffrage or the availability of the birth control pill as the most important milestones correctly identify 1920 as the year women gained the right to vote (38% each). Similar shares in these groups offer a year between 1915 and 1925.

Educational attainment is related to knowledge of the year women in the U.S. gained the right to vote. About six-in-ten adults with at least a bachelor’s degree (61%) give a year between 1915 and 1925, with 41% correctly identifying 1920 as the year women gained the right to vote. Smaller shares of those with some college (47%) or with a high school diploma or less education (36%) give an answer within five years of the correct year, and a third and quarter, respectively, give the correct answer.

Adults ages 65 and older are more likely than those who are younger to give an answer within five years of the correct year. More than half of those ages 65 and older (55%) say U.S. women gained the right to vote between 1915 and 1925, compared with 49% of those ages 50 to 64, 42% of those ages 30 to 49 and 47% of adults younger than 30.

Majorities say the feminist movement and the Democratic Party have done at least a fair amount to advance women’s rights in the U.S.

Seven-in-ten Americans say the feminist movement has done a great deal (22%) or a fair amount (48%) to advance women’s rights in the U.S.; 59% say the same about the Democratic Party, including 12% who say it has done a great deal. In contrast, most Americans say the Republican Party (61%) and Donald Trump (69%) have not done much or have done nothing at all to advance women’s rights.

Wide partisan gaps in views of how much the parties, the feminist movement and Trump have done to advance women’s rights

Women (73%) are more likely than men (67%) to say the feminist movement has done at least a fair amount to advance the rights of women in the U.S., but large majorities of each group say this. Meanwhile, a larger share of men (40%) than women (34%) say the GOP has done at least a fair amount in this area.

There are far wider partisan gaps than gender gaps when it comes to these views. About three-quarters of Democrats and those who lean Democratic (73%) say the Democratic Party has done at least a fair amount to advance women’s rights in the U.S.; fewer than half of Republicans and those who lean to the Republican Party (42%) say the same. Conversely, two-thirds of Republicans – but only 13% of Democrats – say the GOP has done a great deal or a fair amount in this area. Similarly, a majority of Republicans (59%) say Donald Trump has done at least a fair amount to advance women’s rights, while just 6% of Democrats say the same.

When it comes to the feminist movement’s impact, majorities of Democrats and Republicans say it has done at least a fair amount. Still, Democrats are far more likely than Republicans to say this (80% vs. 58%).

For the most part, views on this don’t vary considerably by gender within each party. Republican women (62%) are more likely than Republican men (55%) to say the feminist movement has done a great deal or a fair amount to advance women’s rights, but more than half of both say this. And while Democratic men are more likely than their female counterparts to say their party has done at least a fair amount, about seven-in-ten or more of each group share this view (76% of Democratic men and 71% of Democratic women). Republican men and women give similar views when it comes to how much each of the political parties and Donald Trump have done, and there are no significant differences between Democratic men and women in views of the feminist movement, the Republican Party or Trump.

Majorities say feminism has helped white, Black and Hispanic women

More say feminism has helped white women a lot than say it has done the same for black or Hispanic women

In addition to saying the feminist movement has done at least a fair amount to advance women’s rights in the U.S., a majority of Americans think feminism has had a positive impact on the lives of specific groups of women. For example, about six-in-ten or more say feminism has helped the lives of white (64%), Black (61%) and Hispanic (58%) women at least a little, although there are more pronounced differences in the shares saying feminism has helped each of these groups a lot (32% vs. 21% and 15%, respectively). 2 Notably, just 41% of women say the movement has helped them personally.

A majority of Americans (57%) also think feminism has helped lesbian and bisexual women at least a little, including 23% who say it’s helped this group a lot. By comparison, 41% say feminism has helped transgender women, with just 11% saying this group has been helped a lot. About one-in-five (21%) say feminism has hurt transgender women, and 17% say the same about its impact on lesbian and bisexual women.

When asked about the impact of feminism on the lives of wealthy and poor women, 49% say it has helped each of these groups at least a little, but while 24% say feminism has helped wealthy women a lot , just one-in-ten say the same about the impact it’s had on the lives of poor women.

Opinions about how feminism has impacted each of these groups of women don’t differ significantly between men and women. In fact, the shares of men and women saying feminism has helped each of these groups at least a little vary only by 3 percentage points or less.

Majorities of white and Hispanic adults say feminism has helped white, Black and Hispanic women at least a little. Some 64% of Black adults also say feminism has helped white women, more than the shares who say it’s helped Black (49%) or Hispanic (48%) women. Black adults are the most likely to say feminism has helped white women a lot: 42% say this, compared with 34% of Hispanics and an even smaller share of white adults (29%).

Consistent with the difference in the shares of Republicans and Democrats who say the feminist movement has done at least a fair amount to advance women’s rights, Democrats are far more likely than Republicans to say feminism has helped each of these groups of women.

About four-in-ten women say feminism has helped them personally

Women with a bachelor’s degree more likely than those with less education to say feminism has helped them

When asked about the impact of feminism on their own lives, 41% of women say it has helped them at least a little, with one-in-ten saying feminism has helped them a lot; 7% say feminism has hurt them, while half say it has neither helped nor hurt. 3

Some 55% of women with at least a bachelor’s degree say feminism has helped them personally, compared with 41% of women with some college education and an even smaller share of those with a high school diploma or less education (30%). In turn, six-in-ten of those with no college experience and half of those with some college say feminism has neither helped nor hurt them; 36% of women with a bachelor’s degree or more education say the same.

Hispanic women (46%) are more likely than Black women (36%) to say feminism has helped them personally; white women fall somewhere in the middle (41% say feminism has helped them). There are also differences by age, with 47% of women younger than 50 saying feminism has helped at least a little, compared with 35% of those ages 50 and older.

Among Democratic women, half say feminism has helped them personally, while just 5% say it has hurt them and 43% say it has neither helped nor hurt. By comparison, 28% of Republican women say feminism has helped them, while a majority (60%) say it’s neither helped nor hurt; 9% of Republican women say feminism has hurt them.

Most Americans favor adding the ERA to the U.S. Constitution

In January 2020, Virginia became the 38th state to pass the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) , nearly half a century after it passed the Senate in 1972. While the ERA has now been ratified by three-fourths of the states, the number required for amending the U.S. Constitution, it is likely to face legal challenges as the deadline for ratification has passed.

Majorities of Democrats and Republicans support adding the ERA to the U.S. Constitution

The survey finds widespread support for adding the ERA to the U.S. Constitution: About eight-in-ten Americans (78%) say they favor it, including 35% who strongly favor it being added to the Constitution. Women are more likely than men to say they strongly favor adding the ERA to the Constitution (39% vs. 31%), but about three-quarters or more in each group say they favor it at least somewhat.

Democrats overwhelmingly favor adding the ERA to the U.S. Constitution, with roughly nine-in-ten saying they favor it strongly (51%) or somewhat (37%). There’s less support among Republicans: 66% say they favor adopting the ERA, with 16% expressing strong support for this. Republican women (75%) are far more likely than Republican men (58%) to say they favor adding the ERA to the Constitution. Views on this do not differ by gender among Democrats, but they do vary across other dimensions, including educational attainment, race and ethnicity, and age.

Large majorities of Democrats across levels of educational attainment say they favor adding the ERA to the Constitution, but those with at least a bachelor’s degree are the most likely to express strong support: 62% say they strongly favor adopting the ERA, compared with 55% of Democrats with some college and a smaller share of those of those with a high school diploma or less education (37%).

Among white Democrats, 58% say they strongly favor adding the ERA to the U.S. Constitution. About four-in-ten Black and Hispanic Democrats say the same (42% each). These gaps remain when taking differences in educational attainment into account.

And while more than eight-in-ten Democrats across age groups support adopting the ERA, those ages 65 and older are more likely than those who are younger to express strong support. About six-in-ten Democrats ages 65 and older (63%) say they strongly favor adding the ERA to the Constitution, compared with 46% of Democrats ages 18 to 29 and ages 30 to 49 and 52% of those 50 to 64.

These differences by age, educational attainment and race and ethnicity are present among Democratic men and women. Among Republicans, the only notable demographic split on views of adopting the ERA is along gender lines.

Many say adding the ERA to the Constitution wouldn’t make much difference for women’s rights

Many say adding ERA to the U.S. Constitution would not make much difference for women’s rights

Despite widespread support for adding the ERA to the U.S. Constitution, 49% of Americans say this would not make much of a difference when it comes to women’s rights in the country; 44% say this would advance women’s rights and 5% think this would be a setback for women’s rights.

Even among those who favor adding the ERA to the Constitution, a sizable share (44%) is skeptical that this would have much of an impact, while 54% say it would advance women’s rights and just 2% see it as a potential setback. Democratic supporters of the ERA are far more likely than their Republican counterparts to say this would advance women’s rights in our country (63% vs. 38%). A majority of Republican ERA supporters (59%) say adding it to the Constitution wouldn’t make much difference.

Overall, male and female supporters of the ERA offer similar assessments of the impact adding the amendment to the Constitution would have on women’s rights; 54% of women and 53% of men who favor adopting the ERA say this would advance women’s rights in the U.S. Women ages 18 to 29 are more optimistic than women in older age groups to say adding the ERA to the Constitution would advance women’s rights. About six-in-ten women younger than 30 who support the ERA (63%) say adopting the amendment would advance women’s rights, compared with about half of older women who favor the ERA.

For the most part, adults who oppose adding the ERA to the U.S. Constitution say doing so wouldn’t make much difference for women’s rights (69% say this), while 20% think this would be a setback for women’s rights and 10% say it would advance women’s rights.

For more details, see the Methodology section of the report. ↩
The shares who say feminism has helped each group of women at least a little may not add to the shares who say “a lot” and “a little” as shown in the chart due to rounding. ↩
The shares of women who say feminism has helped them personally at least a little may not add to the shares who say “a lot” and “a little” as shown in the chart due to rounding. ↩

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

Discrimination & Prejudice
Gender & Leadership
Gender & Politics
Gender Equality & Discrimination
Trust, Facts & Democracy

Americans’ views of offensive speech aren’t necessarily clear-cut

Cultural issues and the 2024 election, rising numbers of americans say jews and muslims face a lot of discrimination, how u.s. muslims are experiencing the israel-hamas war, how u.s. jews are experiencing the israel-hamas war, most popular, report materials.

19th Amendment Survey

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 | Media Inquiries

Research Topics

Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan, nonadvocacy fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It does not take policy positions. The Center conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, computational social science research and other data-driven research. Pew Research Center is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts , its primary funder.

Photo essay - Generation Equality: The time is now!

Date: 13 March 2020

The 64th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women took stock, assessed gaps, and charted a path forward for fulfilling the promise of gender equality enshrined in the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, 25 years after its adoption.

This photo essay is an adaptation of an exhibit at the United Nations Headquarters, running from 6 March – 20 April. It presents key milestones in the women’s rights movement, the progress and pushback, and voices and aspirations of women leaders from every corner of the world.

Women have always made a difference…everywhere

400 BC, Greece

10th – 11th Century, Japan

1199 – 1267, Tunisia

1581 – 1663, Angola

1648 – 1695, Mexico

1686 – 1755, Jamaica

1815 – 1852, United Kingdom

But they have faced many obstacles to equality.

Until women started to organize and protest inequality, the vast majority could not vote or run for office. They were prohibited from getting a loan or working where they choose.Even if they did the same work as men, they were paid less. And they inherited less, if at all. At home, domestic violence took place with no legal sanction. A married woman could not even prosecute her husband for rape.

So women decided “Let's make some change!”

United states.

Indignant over women being barred from speaking at an anti-slavery convention, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott congregate a few hundred people at their nation’s first women’s rights convention in Seneca Falls, New York. Together they demand civil, social, political and religious rights for women in a Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal.”

New Zealand

32,000 people sign a “monster” 270-metre-long suffrage petition presented to New Zealand’s Parliament. Soon after, New Zealand becomes the first self-governing nation to allow women to vote and inspires suffragists across the globe.

First International Women's Day

On 8 March, the first International Women’s Day amasses more than 1 million people for women’s suffrage and labour rights. In its early years, the Day becomes a mechanism to protest World War I. Most notably, in Russia, a large women-led demonstration breaks out demanding “bread and peace!” Four days later, the Czar abdicates. Some historians believe the Day ignited the Russian Revolution.

In the first-known campaign of its kind, the Egyptian Society of Physicians goes against tradition by declaring the negative health effects of female genital mutilation. It takes until the late 20th century before the practice is explicitly classified as a form of violence. Today, the United Nations, grass-roots women’s movements, civil society and others are working together to put an end to it.

Incensed by their social standing under colonial rule, Igbo women send palm leaves — similar to today’s Facebook invite — to their fellow sisters across South-eastern Nigeria. Together they descend in the thousands to “sit on” or make “war on” undemocratically appointed chiefs by publicly shaming them through singing, dancing, banging on their walls and even tearing down roofs. This eventually forces the chiefs to resign and results in the dropping of market taxes imposed on women.

What would you do without clean clothes for weeks? In 1945, Dubliners in Ireland learn the hard way. Tired of unhealthy work conditions, low wages, overtime and limited leave, around 1,500 unionized laundresses go on strike. Commercial laundries get hit, a big business at the time. More than three months (and lots of dirty clothes) later, the strike ends in victory and gives all Irish workers a statutory second week of annual holidays.

Dominican Republic

A symbol of popular feminist resistance, the Mirabal sisters — Minerva, María Teresa, and Patria — also known as Las Mariposas (the butterflies) form an opposition movement to openly protest the dictatorship of Rafael Trujillo. On 25 November, the sisters are assassinated. The reaction to the brutal murders shakes the dictatorship and contributes to its eventual downfall. Since then, people around the world have marked 25 November as a day to raise awareness of ending violence against women.

25,000 women, a tenth of the nation’s population, gather in Iceland’s capital, Reykjavik, to protest economic inequality. The “Women’s Day Off” puts the city’s services, schools and businesses at a virtual standstill.

A protracted civil war impels thousands of Liberian women to form a movement. Driven by activist Leymah Gbowee, the movement employs various tactics, most notably: a sex strike to pressure men to partake in peace talks. The movement is so successful it ends a 14-year civil war and leads to the election of Africa’s first woman head of state, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf.

In Uttar Pradesh state, a handful of bamboo-wielding women take matters into their own hands when they hear of a neighbour abusing his wife. Together, they force the husband to acknowledge the abuse and put a stop to it. A modest movement on domestic abuse snowballs into a statewide one: Today, a “gang” of tens of thousands of women dressed in pink (gulabi) collectively tackle social injustices against women in the state and are inspiring similar uprisings in the nation.

Arab Region

Streams of women vigorously protest for their rights as part of a broader uprising: the pan-Arab movement. The outcry thrusts women into the global limelight. In Tunisia, activism leads to gender equality being enshrined in the nation’s new constitution; in Lebanon, campaigning leads to the scrapping of a controversial law allowing rapists to avoid prison by marrying their victims.

3.5 to 5.5 million people globally attend the “women’s marches” on 21 January to show solidarity for women’s rights. They are among numerous mass movements that mark the decade, including: in India, following the gang rape of a student; across Latin America after a succession of femicides; and in Nigeria, following the kidnapping of almost 280 school girls

The movement goes global

Since the founding of the United Nations, a timeline of the landmark international agreements and conferences that pushed for women’s rights and gender equality.

BERTHA LUTZ from Brazil, one of only four women involved in drafting the UN Charter, argues for including women’s rights. Her position: “To deny women equal rights on the grounds of sex is to deny justice to half the population.”

The world is closer to gender equality than ever before. Still, we have much work ahead. Discriminatory laws in some places still mean that:

Women inherit nothing or less than their brothers
A woman’s testimony counts for half of that of a man’s
Labour laws restrict the types of jobs women can take
Women can be beaten with impunity
Women cannot pass on citizenship in the same way as men
Homosexuality is a criminal offense

FEMINIST MOVEMENTS HAVE FORMED DIVERSE ALLIANCES FOR GENDER EQUALITY

The rise of digital activism

The hashtags say it all: Women, girls and people of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities want a life free of violence and a gender-equal world. The digital space has amplified feminist voices, sparked transformations and brought a surge of young activists to the vanguard of movements for equality.

social media hashtags related to gender equality and women's empowerment around the world

Generation Equality takes the stage

2020 marks the 25 th anniversary of the Beijing Platform for Action, adopted at the 1995 Fourth World Conference on Women. It is a time to celebrate progress, but also to recognize that change has been too slow. Forces are at work to reverse some advances that have been made.

Not a single country today has fully achieved gender equality . Women everywhere still put more hours into unpaid care work, earn less, occupy fewer leadership positions, and risk violence at home and in public spaces. Adding to their struggles are complex and escalating crises, from conflict to climate change to narrowing hopes for decent work.

The movement for gender equality must continue and grow . Around the world, UN Women is connecting a vibrant young generation of women’s rights activists with the visionaries who created the Platform for Action, and everyone in between.

Together, they are Generation Equality. Their brave and energizing cry: finish the unfinished business of achieving gender equality . End imbalances in power and resources that have brought the world to the brink of a planetary crisis. Advance the rights of women and girls as indispensable to economic, social and environmental justice for all.

Progress and pushback. What needs to be done?

“My wish for all women is to enjoy the rights to which they are entitled as human beings.” ~ Justice Anisa Rasooli, the first woman to sit on the Supreme Court of Afghanistan

Remove discriminatory laws and practices

Progress: Between 2008 and 2017, 131 countries adopted legal reforms related to gender equality. Progress was most significant in sub-Saharan Africa.

Problem: Yet over 2.5 billion women and girls still live in countries with at least one discriminatory law. And even with legal equality on paper, gaps remain in upholding laws.

We can do better: Eliminate discriminatory laws. Close disparities in women and girls realizing their legal rights.

“Women are building the economy, yet denied their basic economic rights. Now women are rising up...so much so that governments are having to bend down.” ~ Sohini Shoaib, an activist with The Jan Jagran Shakti Sangathan, a union of landless rural workers, marginal farmers and youth in Bihar, India

Make economies work for women

Progress: More women are in the paid workforce than ever before.

Problem: Globally, the gender gap in labour force participation is still 31 percentage points. Women do three times as much unpaid care and domestic work as men. Those aged 25-34, many of whom have small children, are 25 per cent more likely than men to live in extreme poverty.

We can do better: Expand universal care services. Uphold labour rights and create more decent work. Extend social protection and financial services. Harness new technology sothat it empowers women and girls.

“We are committed to effective gender equality policies. Today, gender-responsive budgeting is a regular discussion point.” ~ Mimoza Dhembi, General Director of Budget at the Ministry of Finance and Economy of Albania

Invest real money to achieve gender equality

Progress: The Platform for Action was never costed, although a growing number of countries use tools such as gender budgets to track whether or not public spending aligns with gender advances.

Problem: Shortfalls in financing are obvious across the board, keeping girls out of school, slowing progress on maternal mortality and constraining the response to gender-based violence, among many other issues.

We can do better: Mobilize and allocate resources in ways that are progressive, sustainable and gender-responsive.

“It’s important to have women’s voices reflected in public policy, so that we don’t continue building a society from a male perspective.” ~ Francy L. Jaramillo Piedrahita, a human rights defender working on women’s rights, LGBTQ issues and peacebuilding in Colombia

Back women leaders at the forefront of change

Progress: Strong and autonomous feminist movements drive progress on gender equality. Women leaders have made their mark across public institutions, and in business, the arts, the media and beyond.

Problem: Spaces for women to lead and participate are shrinking. Some outspoken activists put their lives on the line. Globally, men control more than three-quarters of seats in parliaments. In 2018, only a dismal 7.7 per cent of peace agreements had provisions responsive to gender.

“The fight for social justice is not separate from the fight for environmental sustainability. The most impoverished people, rural indigenous women, for example, are most impacted by natural disasters.” —Maria Alejandra (Majandra) Rodriguez Acha, Co-Executive Director of FRIDA, The Young Feminist Fund, in Peru

For more voices from Generation Equality and to get involved, visit https://www.unwomen.org/en/get-involved/beijing-plus-25

Get involved

Join UN Women’s Generation Equality campaign today.

This is your chance to show the world that you stand on the right side of history. So, what are you waiting for? Voice your commitment to an equal future on social media, using #GenerationEquality! You can download cool GIFs, slogans and more in our social media package . Sign up for monthly newsletters for more stories from around the world.

‘One Woman’ – The UN Women song
UN Under-Secretary-General and UN Women Executive Director Sima Bahous
Kirsi Madi, Deputy Executive Director for Resource Management, Sustainability and Partnerships
Nyaradzayi Gumbonzvanda, Deputy Executive Director for Normative Support, UN System Coordination and Programme Results
Guiding documents
Report wrongdoing
Programme implementation
Career opportunities
Application and recruitment process
Meet our people
Internship programme
Procurement principles
Gender-responsive procurement
Doing business with UN Women
How to become a UN Women vendor
Contract templates and general conditions of contract
Vendor protest procedure
Facts and Figures
Global norms and standards
Women’s movements
Parliaments and local governance
Constitutions and legal reform
Preguntas frecuentes
Global Norms and Standards
Macroeconomic policies and social protection
Sustainable Development and Climate Change
Rural women
Employment and migration
Facts and figures
Creating safe public spaces
Spotlight Initiative
Essential services
Focusing on prevention
Research and data
Other areas of work
UNiTE campaign
Conflict prevention and resolution
Building and sustaining peace
Young women in peace and security
Rule of law: Justice and security
Women, peace, and security in the work of the UN Security Council
Preventing violent extremism and countering terrorism
Planning and monitoring
Humanitarian coordination
Crisis response and recovery
Disaster risk reduction
Inclusive National Planning
Public Sector Reform
Tracking Investments
Strengthening young women's leadership
Economic empowerment and skills development for young women
Action on ending violence against young women and girls
Engaging boys and young men in gender equality
Leadership and Participation
National Planning
Violence against Women
Access to Justice
Regional and country offices
Regional and Country Offices
Liaison offices
2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
UN Women Global Innovation Coalition for Change
Commission on the Status of Women
Economic and Social Council
General Assembly
Security Council
High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development
Human Rights Council
Climate change and the environment
Other Intergovernmental Processes
World Conferences on Women
Global Coordination
Regional and country coordination
Promoting UN accountability
Gender Mainstreaming
Coordination resources
System-wide strategy
Focal Point for Women and Gender Focal Points
Entity-specific implementation plans on gender parity
Laws and policies
Strategies and tools
Reports and monitoring
Training Centre services
Publications
Government partners
National mechanisms
Civil Society Advisory Groups
Benefits of partnering with UN Women
Business and philanthropic partners
Goodwill Ambassadors
National Committees
UN Women Media Compact
UN Women Alumni Association
Editorial series
Media contacts
Annual report
Progress of the world’s women
SDG monitoring report
World survey on the role of women in development
Reprint permissions
Secretariat
2023 sessions and other meetings
2022 sessions and other meetings
2021 sessions and other meetings
2020 sessions and other meetings
2019 sessions and other meetings
2018 sessions and other meetings
2017 sessions and other meetings
2016 sessions and other meetings
2015 sessions and other meetings
Compendiums of decisions
Reports of sessions
Key Documents
Brief history
CSW snapshot
Preparations
Official Documents
Official Meetings
Side Events
Session Outcomes
CSW65 (2021)
CSW64 / Beijing+25 (2020)
CSW63 (2019)
CSW62 (2018)
CSW61 (2017)
Member States
Eligibility
Registration
Opportunities for NGOs to address the Commission
Communications procedure
Grant making
Accompaniment and growth
Results and impact
Knowledge and learning
Social innovation
UN Trust Fund to End Violence against Women
About Generation Equality
Generation Equality Forum
Action packs

Goal 5: Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls

Gender equality is not only a fundamental human right, but a necessary foundation for a peaceful, prosperous and sustainable world. There has been progress over the last decades, but the world is not on track to achieve gender equality by 2030.

Women and girls represent half of the world’s population and therefore also half of its potential. But gender inequality persists everywhere and stagnates social progress. On average, women in the labor market still earn 23 percent less than men globally and women spend about three times as many hours in unpaid domestic and care work as men.

Sexual violence and exploitation, the unequal division of unpaid care and domestic work, and discrimination in public office, all remain huge barriers. All these areas of inequality have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic: there has been a surge in reports of sexual violence, women have taken on more care work due to school closures, and 70% of health and social workers globally are women.

At the current rate, it will take an estimated 300 years to end child marriage, 286 years to close gaps in legal protection and remove discriminatory laws, 140 years for women to be represented equally in positions of power and leadership in the workplace, and 47 years to achieve equal representation in national parliaments.

Political leadership, investments and comprehensive policy reforms are needed to dismantle systemic barriers to achieving Goal 5 Gender equality is a cross-cutting objective and must be a key focus of national policies, budgets and institutions.

How much progress have we made?

International commitments to advance gender equality have brought about improvements in some areas: child marriage and female genital mutilation (FGM) have declined in recent years, and women’s representation in the political arena is higher than ever before. But the promise of a world in which every woman and girl enjoys full gender equality, and where all legal, social and economic barriers to their empowerment have been removed, remains unfulfilled. In fact, that goal is probably even more distant than before, since women and girls are being hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Are they any other gender-related challenges?

Yes. Worldwide, nearly half of married women lack decision-making power over their sexual and reproductive health and rights. 35 per cent of women between 15-49 years of age have experienced physical and/ or sexual intimate partner violence or non-partner sexual violence.1 in 3 girls aged 15-19 have experienced some form of female genital mutilation/cutting in the 30 countries in Africa and the Middle East, where the harmful practice is most common with a high risk of prolonged bleeding, infection (including HIV), childbirth complications, infertility and death.

This type of violence doesn’t just harm individual women and girls; it also undermines their overall quality of life and hinders their active involvement in society.

Why should gender equality matter to me?

Regardless of where you live in, gender equality is a fundamental human right. Advancing gender equality is critical to all areas of a healthy society, from reducing poverty to promoting the health, education, protection and the well-being of girls and boys.

What can we do?

If you are a girl, you can stay in school, help empower your female classmates to do the same and fight for your right to access sexual and reproductive health services. If you are a woman, you can address unconscious biases and implicit associations that form an unintended and often an invisible barrier to equal opportunity.

If you are a man or a boy, you can work alongside women and girls to achieve gender equality and embrace healthy, respectful relationships.

You can fund education campaigns to curb cultural practices like female genital mutilation and change harmful laws that limit the rights of women and girls and prevent them from achieving their full potential.

The Spotlight Initiative is an EU/UN partnership, and a global, multi-year initiative focused on eliminating all forms of violence against women and girls – the world’s largest targeted effort to end all forms of violence against women and girls.

Facts and figures

Goal 5 targets.

With only seven years remaining, a mere 15.4 per cent of Goal 5 indicators with data are “on track”, 61.5 per cent are at a moderate distance and 23.1 per cent are far or very far off track from 2030 targets.
In many areas, progress has been too slow. At the current rate, it will take an estimated 300 years to end child marriage, 286 years to close gaps in legal protection and remove discriminatory laws, 140 years for women to be represented equally in positions of power and leadership in the workplace, and 47 years to achieve equal representation in national parliaments.
Political leadership, investments and comprehensive policy reforms are needed to dismantle systemic barriers to achieving Goal 5. Gender equality is a cross-cutting objective and must be a key focus of national policies, budgets and institutions.
Around 2.4 billion women of working age are not afforded equal economic opportunity. Nearly 2.4 Billion Women Globally Don’t Have Same Economic Rights as Men
178 countries maintain legal barriers that prevent women’s full economic participation. Nearly 2.4 Billion Women Globally Don’t Have Same Economic Rights as Men
In 2019, one in five women, aged 20-24 years, were married before the age of 18. Girls | UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Violence Against Children

Source: The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2023

5.1 End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere

5.2 Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation

5.3 Eliminate all harmful practices, such as child, early and forced marriage and female genital mutilation

5.4 Recognize and value unpaid care and domestic work through the provision of public services, infrastructure and social protection policies and the promotion of shared responsibility within the household and the family as nationally appropriate

5.5 Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decisionmaking in political, economic and public life

5.6 Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights as agreed in accordance with the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development and the Beijing Platform for Action and the outcome documents of their review conferences

5.A Undertake reforms to give women equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to ownership and control over land and other forms of property, financial services, inheritance and natural resources, in accordance with national laws

5.B Enhance the use of enabling technology, in particular information and communications technology, to promote the empowerment of women

5.C Adopt and strengthen sound policies and enforceable legislation for the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls at all levels

He for She campaign

United Secretary-General Campaign UNiTE to End Violence Against Women

Every Woman Every Child Initiative

Spotlight Initiative

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)

UN Population Fund: Gender equality

UN Population Fund: Female genital mutilation

UN Population Fund: Child marriage

UN Population Fund: Engaging men & boys

UN Population Fund: Gender-based violence

World Health Organization (WHO)

UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)

UN Education, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO)

UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Gender Statistics

Fast Facts: Gender Equality

Infographic: Gender Equality

The Initiative is so named as it brings focused attention to this issue, moving it into the spotlight and placing it at the centre of efforts to achieve gender equality and women’s empowerment, in line with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

An initial investment in the order of EUR 500 million will be made, with the EU as the main contributor. Other donors and partners will be invited to join the Initiative to broaden its reach and scope. The modality for the delivery will be a UN multi- stakeholder trust fund, administered by the Multi-Partner Trust Fund Office, with the support of core agencies UNDP, UNFPA and UN Women, and overseen by the Executive Office of the UN Secretary-General.

Related news

Press release| the world is failing girls and women, according to new un report.

Yinuo 2023-09-06T19:30:02-04:00 07 Sep 2023 |

The world is failing girls and women, according to new UN report New figure points to the need of an additional $360 billion in investment per year to achieve genderequality and women’s empowerment by 2030. [...]

Liberia, Mexico, Niger, Senegal and Sierra Leone to tackle barriers to the deployment of women in peace operations with the support of the UN Elsie Initiative Fund

Vesna Blazhevska 2021-04-28T13:20:09-04:00 28 Apr 2021 |

PRESS RELEASE 28 APRIL 2021 MEDIA ENQUIRIES [email protected] Liberia, Mexico, Niger, Senegal and Sierra Leone to tackle barriers to the deployment of women in peace operations with the support of the UN Elsie Initiative [...]

Women’s job market participation stagnating at less than 50% for the past 25 years, finds UN report

Vesna Blazhevska 2020-10-20T15:06:56-04:00 20 Oct 2020 |

New York, 20 October – Less than 50% of working-age women are in the labour market, a figure that has barely changed over the last quarter of a century, according to a new UN report launched today. Unpaid domestic and care work falls disproportionately on women, restraining their economic potential as the COVID-19 pandemic additionally affects women’s jobs and livelihoods, the report warns.

Gaza: WHO chief hails ‘massive success’ of polio campaign amid tragic reality

Around 560,000 children under ten have been successfully vaccinated against polio during the first round of an emergency campaign in the Gaza Strip, the UN World Health Organization (WHO) reported on Friday. Read Full Story [...]

Nigeria: Hundreds of thousands in need of aid as flooding wipes out homes – WFP

UN humanitarians are rushing to assist scores of newly displaced people in northeast Nigeria, after torrential rains caused a dam to collapse and flood the area, the UN World Food Programme (WFP) said on Friday. [...]

History & Society
Science & Tech
Biographies
Animals & Nature
Geography & Travel
Arts & Culture
Games & Quizzes
On This Day
One Good Fact
New Articles
Lifestyles & Social Issues
Philosophy & Religion
Politics, Law & Government
World History
Health & Medicine
Browse Biographies
Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
Environment
Fossils & Geologic Time
Entertainment & Pop Culture
Sports & Recreation
Visual Arts
Demystified
Image Galleries
Infographics
Top Questions
Britannica Kids
Saving Earth
Space Next 50
Student Center
Introduction

Prologue to a social movement

Reformers and revolutionaries.

Successes and failures

Where was Simone de Beauvoir educated?
What did Simone de Beauvoir write?

Elizabeth Cady Stanton and her daughter, Harriot--from a daguerreotype 1856

women’s rights movement

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

Council of Europe - Feminism and Women’s Rights Movements
64 Parishes - Women's Rights Movement
National Archives - Woman Suffrage and the 19th Amendment
The New York Times - The Complex History of the Women’s Suffrage Movement
The Canadian Encyclopedia - Women's Movements in Canada
Brookings - Leaving all to younger hands: Why the history of the women's suffragist movement matters
National Women's History Alliance - History of the Women's Rights Movement
U.S. House of Representatives - Exhibitions & Publications - The Women's Rights Movement, 1848–1920
Library of Congress - Women in the Civil Rights Movement
NCpedia - ANCHOR - The Women's Movement
women’s movement - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
Table Of Contents

women’s rights movement , diverse social movement , largely based in the United States , that in the 1960s and ’70s sought equal rights and opportunities and greater personal freedom for women . It coincided with and is recognized as part of the “second wave” of feminism . While the first-wave feminism of the 19th and early 20th centuries focused on women’s legal rights, especially the right to vote ( see women’s suffrage ), the second-wave feminism of the women’s rights movement touched on every area of women’s experience—including politics, work, the family , and sexuality . Organized activism by and on behalf of women continued through the third and fourth waves of feminism from the mid-1990s and the early 2010s, respectively. For more discussion of historical and contemporary feminists and the women’s movements they inspired, see feminism .

In the aftermath of World War II , the lives of women in developed countries changed dramatically. Household technology eased the burdens of homemaking, life expectancies increased dramatically, and the growth of the service sector opened up thousands of jobs not dependent on physical strength. Despite these socioeconomic transformations, cultural attitudes (especially concerning women’s work) and legal precedents still reinforced sexual inequalities. An articulate account of the oppressive effects of prevailing notions of femininity appeared in Le Deuxième Sexe (1949; The Second Sex ), by the French writer and philosopher Simone de Beauvoir . It became a worldwide best seller and raised feminist consciousness by stressing that liberation for women was liberation for men too.

The first public indication that change was imminent came with women’s reaction to the 1963 publication of Betty Friedan ’s The Feminine Mystique . Friedan spoke of the problem that “lay buried, unspoken” in the mind of the suburban housewife: utter boredom and lack of fulfillment. Women who had been told that they had it all—nice houses, lovely children, responsible husbands—were deadened by domesticity, she said, and they were too socially conditioned to recognize their own desperation. The Feminine Mystique was an immediate best seller. Friedan had struck a chord.

Initially, women energized by Friedan’s book joined with government leaders and union representatives who had been lobbying the federal government for equal pay and for protection against employment discrimination . By June 1966 they had concluded that polite requests were insufficient. They would need their own national pressure group—a women’s equivalent of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). With this, the National Organization for Women (NOW) was born.

The organization was not an instant success. By the end of its second year, NOW had just 1,035 members and was racked by ideological divisions. When the group tried to write a Bill of Rights for Women, it found consensus on six measures essential to ensuring women’s equality: enforcement of laws banning employment discrimination; maternity leave rights; child-care centres that could enable mothers to work; tax deductions for child-care expenses; equal and unsegregated education; and equal job-training opportunities for poor women.

Two other measures stirred enormous controversy: one demanded immediate passage of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the U.S. Constitution (to ensure equality of rights, regardless of sex), and the other demanded greater access to contraception and abortion . When NOW threw its support behind passage of the ERA, the United Auto Workers union—which had been providing NOW with office space—withdrew its support, because the ERA would effectively prohibit protective labour legislation for women. When some NOW members called for repeal of all abortion laws, other members left the fledgling organization, convinced that this latest action would undermine their struggles against economic and legal discrimination.

NOW’s membership was also siphoned off from the left. Impatient with a top-heavy traditional organization, activists in New York City, where half of NOW’s membership was located, walked out. Over the next two years, as NOW struggled to establish itself as a national organization, more radical women’s groups were formed by female antiwar, civil rights , and leftist activists who had grown disgusted by the New Left ’s refusal to address women’s concerns. Ironically, sexist attitudes had pervaded 1960s radical politics, with some women being exploited or treated unequally within those movements. In 1964, for example, when a woman’s resolution was brought up at a Student Nonviolent Coordination Committee (SNCC) conference, Stokely Carmichael flippantly cut off all debate: “The only position for women in SNCC is prone.”

While NOW focused on issues of women’s rights, the more radical groups pursued the broader themes of women’s liberation. Although they lacked the kind of coherent national structure NOW had formed, liberation groups sprang up in Chicago, Toronto, Seattle, Detroit, and elsewhere. Suddenly, the women’s liberation movement was everywhere—and nowhere. It had no officers, no mailing address, no printed agenda. What it did have was attitude. In September 1968 activists converged on Atlantic City , New Jersey , to protest the image of womanhood conveyed by the Miss America Pageant . In February 1969 one of the most radical liberation groups, the Redstockings, published its principles as “The Bitch Manifesto.” Based in New York City , the Redstockings penned the movement’s first analysis of the politics of housework, held the first public speak-out on abortion, and helped to develop the concept of “consciousness-raising” groups—rap sessions to unravel how sexism might have coloured their lives. The Redstockings also held speak-outs on rape to focus national attention on the problem of violence against women, including domestic violence .

Responding to these diverse interests, NOW called the Congress to Unite Women, which drew more than 500 feminists to New York City in November 1969. The meeting was meant to establish common ground between the radical and moderate wings of the women’s rights movement, but it was an impossible task. Well-dressed professionals convinced that women needed to reason with men could not unite with wild-haired radicals whose New Left experience had soured them on polite discourse with “the enemy.” NOW’s leadership seemed more comfortable lobbying politicians in Washington or corresponding with NASA about the exclusion of women from the astronaut program, while the young upstarts preferred disrupting legislative committee hearings. NOW leaders were looking for reform. The more radical women were plotting a revolution.

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 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: 15 September 2024

Cookie Policy
Privacy Policy
Legal Notice
Accessibility
[81.177.182.174]
81.177.182.174

Character limit 500 /500

Women and Men Empowerment for Gender Equality Words: 2364
Gender Equality: Do Women Have Equal Rights? Words: 1146
Contemporary Gender Equality Challenge Words: 1582
Gender Equality Cannot Be a Universal Concept Words: 2217
Addressing the Issue of Gender Equality Words: 1471
“Women’s Assessments of Gender Equality Critique” by Kurzman Words: 574
Gender Equality in Britain in the 20th Century Words: 1680
Gender Equality as Smart Economics’ Policy Agenda Words: 3229
Woman and Gender Equality in Canada Words: 314
Gender Inequality in Social Inequality Words: 1490

Gender Equality and Women’s Rights

The issue of gender equality in society has gained popularity in the precedent century with the rise of the feminist movement and women’s struggle for rights equal to those of men. The reason for the shift towards recognizing women’s rights in societal interactions is the changing ratio of males and females in the overall population on the globe with the growing number of women (Rothkopf, 2016).

Legal recognition of women’s rights, guaranteeing safety, and equality in employment and social issues are the most significant landmarks in the women’s struggle for gender equality. 2014 has become a historic year for women, as it was the year of the 20 th anniversary of the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development that first proclaimed the need for improving the lives of women. What is more, the participants “examined issues including access to decent reproductive health services, sexual health advice, and support and the elimination [of] harmful practices, such as female genital mutilation (FGM) and forced marriage” (Ford, 2014, par. 2). Together with that, in 2015, it turned 20 years since the 1995 Fourth World Conference on Women during which the participating states stressed the necessity of removing obstacles that kept women from equal participation in public and private life.

The topic of gender equality affects both men and women. Speaking of menfolk, what is mainly impacted by the shift towards gender equality is the masculine ego as historically these were men who ruled the world (Rothkopf, 2016). As of women, the role of sex equality cannot be underestimated as they gain the right to equal involvement in public life, payment for work, and social protection.

Moreover, the issue of gender equality is a representation of social stratification, namely gender stratification. Even though women’s struggle for equal rights has brought positive shifts in social interactions between men and women, gender stratification still exists. In everyday life, it may be seen nearly everywhere as women are almost always occupying lower and less paid working positions than men, for example, such as nurses, secretaries, receptionists, etc. That is why gender stratification leads to class stratification as women occupying lower positions have less income if compared to men. Except for income, females have less access to wealth, power, and occupational prestige than males that are all dimensions of social equality and criteria for class stratification (Macionis, 2012). That means that even though there were more positive shifts in achieving gender equality, women and men are still unequal.

In the end, I should say that I have chosen the topic of gender equality because I do believe that all people are and should be equal in their rights and access to social benefits such as education, social protection, healthcare, and equal remuneration for work. Moreover, anyone regardless of gender should have the right to choosing the way of spending the life and the person with whom to build a family. Before the study, I never realized that there are women somewhere out there who suffer from forced weddings or live with the consequences of female genital mutilation being the form of governmental family planning. Bearing in mind everything said above, I am strongly inclined to believe that the issue of women’s rights and equal social protection should gain further development on national and international levels so that it is guaranteed that women all over the globe have decent living conditions.

Ford, L. (2014). Why 2014 is a key year for women’s rights and gender equality . Web.

Macionis, J. J. (2012). Sociology (14th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education.

Rothkopf, D. (2016). The end of an era… for white males. Foreign Policy, 216 (1), 68-69.

Cite this paper

Chicago (N-B)
Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2020, November 29). Gender Equality and Women’s Rights. https://studycorgi.com/gender-equality-and-womens-rights/

"Gender Equality and Women’s Rights." StudyCorgi , 29 Nov. 2020, studycorgi.com/gender-equality-and-womens-rights/.

StudyCorgi . (2020) 'Gender Equality and Women’s Rights'. 29 November.

1. StudyCorgi . "Gender Equality and Women’s Rights." November 29, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/gender-equality-and-womens-rights/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Gender Equality and Women’s Rights." November 29, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/gender-equality-and-womens-rights/.

StudyCorgi . 2020. "Gender Equality and Women’s Rights." November 29, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/gender-equality-and-womens-rights/.

This paper, “Gender Equality and Women’s Rights”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: November 29, 2020 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

Essay on Women’s Rights

Students are often asked to write an essay on Women’s Rights in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Women’s Rights

Introduction.

Women’s rights are fundamental human rights that everyone should respect. They include the right to live free from violence, to be educated, to vote, and to earn a fair wage.

History of Women’s Rights

The fight for women’s rights began in the 1800s. Women protested for the right to vote, work, and receive equal pay. Their efforts led to significant changes.

Importance of Women’s Rights

Women’s rights are vital for equality. When women have the same rights as men, societies are fairer and more balanced.

There is still work to be done to ensure women’s rights worldwide. Everyone should strive to promote and protect these rights.

250 Words Essay on Women’s Rights

The historical context.

The fight for women’s rights has been a long-standing struggle. From the suffragettes of the early 20th century who fought for women’s right to vote, to the women’s liberation movement of the 1960s which sought economic and social equality, women’s rights have been a contentious issue throughout history.

Current Status

Despite significant progress, gender inequality persists in many parts of the world. Women are still underrepresented in political and corporate leadership, they are more likely to live in poverty, and they face higher levels of violence and discrimination.

Challenges and Solutions

The path to gender equality is fraught with obstacles, including deeply entrenched societal norms and institutions. However, change is possible. Education, legislation, and societal shifts in attitudes towards gender can play a significant role in promoting women’s rights.

The fight for women’s rights is a fight for human rights. As society evolves, it is crucial to continue advocating for gender equality, not just for the benefit of women, but for the betterment of society as a whole.

500 Words Essay on Women’s Rights

Women’s rights, a subject that has been at the forefront of social and political discussions for centuries, is a complex and multifaceted issue. It encompasses a wide range of topics, from the right to vote and work to reproductive rights and gender equality. This essay aims to delve into the evolution of women’s rights, the current state of these rights, and the challenges that remain.

The Evolution of Women’s Rights

Current state of women’s rights.

The progress made in the past century is undeniable. Women have achieved significant strides in political representation, educational attainment, and economic participation. However, the fight for equality is far from over. Globally, women still earn less than men, are underrepresented in positions of power, and are more likely to experience violence and discrimination.

Challenges and the Way Forward

The struggle for women’s rights faces numerous challenges. These include deeply entrenched patriarchal norms, religious and cultural beliefs, and structural inequalities that disadvantage women. To overcome these obstacles, it is essential to continue advocating for policy changes that promote gender equality, such as equal pay legislation, paid parental leave, and laws to prevent and punish gender-based violence.

In conclusion, while significant progress has been made in the fight for women’s rights, there is still much work to be done. The struggle for gender equality is not just a women’s issue; it is a human issue that affects us all. By continuing to advocate for policy changes and cultural shifts, we can create a world where all women have the opportunity to live free from discrimination and violence, and to realize their full potential.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

Happy studying!

Gender Matters

Feminism and women’s rights movements.

There are people who believe that we do not need feminism today, but nothing could be further from the truth. Women have struggled for equality and against oppression for centuries, and although some battles have been partly won - such as the right to vote and equal access to education – women are still disproportionally affected by all forms of violence and by discrimination in every aspect of life.

Jokes about feminism and stereotypes about feminists persist, and many of these are also homophobic and assume that being lesbian is something ‘bad’. In fact, being a feminist is not something particular to any sex or gender: there are women and men who consider themselves feminists, some are gay or lesbian, some heterosexual, bisexual or transgender - and some may identify differently.

The concept of feminism reflects a history of different struggles, and the term has been interpreted in fuller and more complex ways as understanding has developed. In general, feminism can be seen as a movement to put an end to sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression and to achieve full gender equality in law and in practice .

Women’s movements and the history of feminism

There have been many extraordinary women who have played an important role in local or world history, but not all of these have necessarily been advocates of women’s issues. The women’s movement is made up of women and men who work and fight to achieve gender equality and to improve the lives of women as a social group . In most societies, women were traditionally confined to the home as daughters, wives and mothers, and we are often only aware of women in history because of their relation to famous men. Of course many women throughout history did in fact play an important role in cultural and political life, but they tend to be invisible. An organised women’s movement only really started in the 19th century, even though women activists and the struggle for equality have always been part of all human societies.

One of the early pioneers, who thought and wrote about women as a group, is the Italian writer Christine de Pizan, who published a book about women’s position in society as early as 1495 . Christine de Pizan wrote about books she had read by famous men, who wrote books about the sins and weaknesses of girls and women, and questioned whether women were really human beings at all, or whether they were more similar to animals. Christine de Pizan’s work offers a good example of the early stages of the struggle for women’s equality. However, she was very unusual in being able to read and write, which was not at all common for women of that time.

The women’s movement began to develop in North America, mainly because women there were allowed to go to school earlier than in Europe - and women who can read and write, and who are encouraged to think for themselves, usually start to question how society works. The first activists travelled around North America and fought for the end of both slavery and women’s oppression. They organised the ‘First Women’s Rights Convention’ in 1848, and continued to campaign to improve the social position of all women. The movement also began in Europe with the same broad aims: activists collected signatures demanding that working women should receive their own wages and not their husbands’, that women should be able to own a house and have custody of their children.

First wave of feminism

The fight for women’s right to vote in elections is known as the ‘suffragette movement’. By the end of the 19th century, this had become a worldwide movement, and the words ‘feminism’ and ‘feminist movement’ started to be used from that point on.

This first wave of feminism activism included mass demonstrations, the publishing of newspapers, organised debates, and the establishment of international women’s organisations. By the 1920s, women had won the right to vote in most European countries and in North America. At around the same time, women became more active in communist, socialist and social democratic parties because increasing numbers of women began to work outside the home in factories and offices. Women were first allowed to go to university in the early 20th century, having both a career and a family . In certain countries, when fascist parties gained power the feminist movement was banned.

Women started organising again after the end of the Second World War, and they soon gained equal political rights in most European countries, with women’s emancipation becoming an important aim and most women being allowed to take on full-time jobs, divorce their husbands and go to university.

Second wave of feminism

The second wave of feminism also resulted in new areas of science : women’s studies became a discipline to be studied at university, and books began to be published about women’s achievements in literature, music and science, and recording women’s previously unwritten history.

Finally, the women’s movement played an important role in the drafting of international documents about women’s rights, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW, 1979).

Third wave of feminism

The third wave of feminism mainly refers to the American movement in the 1990s, and was a reaction to the backlash of conservative media and politicians announcing the end of feminism or referring to ‘post-feminism’. The term ‘backlash’ was popularised by Susan Faludi in her book Backlash. The Undeclared War against Women , published in 1991, and describing the negative reaction of the patriarchal system towards women’s liberation. This was hardly a new phenomenon: women’s movements had always been met with antagonism. However, in the 1980s, institutionalised forms of attacks on women’s rights grew stronger. The third wave of feminism can be characterised by an increased awareness of overlapping categories, such as race, class, gender, sexual orientation . More emphasis was also placed on racial issues, including the status of women in other parts of the world (global feminism). This was also a moment when a number of feminist non-governmental organisations were established , but focusing on specific feminist issues, rather than claiming to represent general feminist ideas.

Third wave feminism actively uses media and pop culture to promote its ideas and to run activities , for example by publishing blogs or e-zines. It focuses on bringing feminism closer to the people’s daily lives. The main issues that third wave feminists are concerned about include: sexual harassment, domestic violence, the pay gap between men and women, eating disorders and body image, sexual and reproductive rights, honour crimes and female genital mutilation.

Cyberfeminism and networked feminism (fourth-wave feminism)

The term cyberfeminism is used to describe the work of feminists interested in theorising, critiquing, and making use of the Internet, cyberspace, and newmedia technologies in general. The term and movement grew out of 'third-wave' feminism. However, the exact meaning is still unclear to some: even at the first meeting of cyberfeminists The First Cyberfeminist International (FCI) in Kassel (Germany), participants found it hard to provide a definition, and as a result of discussions, they proposed 100 anti-theses 52 (with reference to Martin Luther’s theses) on what cyberfeminism is not. These included, for example, it is not an institution, it is not an ideology, it is not an –ism.

Cyberfeminism is considered to be a predecessor of ‘networked feminism’ , which refers generally to feminism on the Internet: for example, mobilising people to take action against sexism, misogyny or gender-based violence against women. One example is the online movement #metoo in 2017, which was a response on social networks from women all over the world to the case of Harvey Weinstein, a Hollywood producer who was accused of sexually harassing female staff in the movie industry.

This term is very often present in feminist literature as well as in the media and everyday life, and it is an important concept in understanding feminism. Sexism means perceiving and judging people only on the basis of their belonging to a particular sex or gender . It also covers discrimination of a person on the same basis. It is important to note that sexism applies to both men and women, however, women are more affected by sexism than men in all areas of life. Everyday sexism takes different forms , sometimes not easily recognisable – for example, telling jokes about girls, commenting on the female body (objectifying women), reacting to the way women are dressed, assigning women easier tasks in Internet games or objectifying women in advertising.

The literature mentions three types of sexism 53

Traditional sexism: supporting traditional gender roles, treating women as worse than men, employing traditional stereotypes which portray women as less competent than men.
Modern sexism: denying gender discrimination (‘it is not a problem anymore’), having a negative attitude towards women’s rights, denying the validity of claims made by women
Neosexism: This notion refers to ideologies that justify discrimination towards women on the basis of competences – 'men are effectively better competent for some things' – for example in managerial or leadership positions, and not on a direct discrimination of women. Defenders of these ideas tend to ignore or deny the difficulties faced by women in society as having an influence on 'competences'.

If it is true that the situation of women’s human rights has improved in recent years, this does not mean that sexism has ended.

In March 2019, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe adopted Recommendation CM/Rec(2019)1 on preventing and combating sexism . The Recommendation defines sexism as

Violating the inherent dignity or rights of a person or a group of persons;
Resulting in physical, sexual, psychological or socio-economic harm or suffering to a person or a group of persons;
Creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment;
Constituting a barrier to the autonomy and full realisation of human rights by a person or a group of persons;
Maintaining and reinforcing gender stereotypes .

The Recommendation stresses that sexism is a manifestation of historically unequal power relations between women and men , which leads to discrimination and prevents the full advancement of women in society . The Committee of Ministers asks Governments of member states to take measures to prevent and combat sexism and its manifestations in the public and private spheres, and encourage relevant stakeholders to implement appropriate legislation, policies and programmes.

Women’s rights are human rights

Why do we need women’s rights, when these are simply human rights? Why do we need human rights treaties about women’s rights, when we have already general human rights instruments? Almost everywhere in the world, women are denied their human rights just because of their sex or gender. Women’s rights should not be seen as special rights : they are human rights enshrined in international human rights treaties and other documents, and include such rights as freedom from discrimination, right to life, freedom from torture, right to privacy, access to health, right to decent living conditions, right to safety, and many others . However, there are also human rights instruments that take into account the specific situation of women in society with regards to accessing or exercising their human rights, or which aim to protect them from violence.

52. 100 anti-theses 53. Based on: Todd. D. Nelson, Psychology of Prejudice, Pearsons Education, Inc. publishing as Allyn and Bacon, 2002

Themes related to gender and gender-based violence

The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)

The UN Security Council resolution 1325 on women, peace and security (2000) recognises the fact that armed conflicts or wars affect women differently than men, and highlights the specific role of women in peace building processes. This resolution was followed by 7 other resolutions subsequently adopted in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2013, and 2015.

At the level of the Council of Europe, the European Convention on Human Rights obliges member states to respect and promote all human rights in the Convention without discrimination on any grounds, including sex (Article 14 of the Convention). A further treaty, the Revised European Social Charter (1996), provides for equality between women and men in education, work and family life, and calls for positive measures in order to ensure equal opportunities and the right to equal remuneration.

The Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings

The Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence

Recommendation No. R (79)10 of the Committee of Ministers concerning women migrants , calls on member states to ensure that national legislation and regulations concerning women migrants are fully adapted to meet international standards. It also recommends that measures should be taken to provide relevant information to women migrants, to prevent discrimination in their working conditions, to promote their socio-cultural integration and to improve their access to vocational guidance and training. The Council of Europe Gender Equality Strategy for 2018 – 2023 foresees the review and update of this Recommendation.

Recommendation No. R (90)4 of the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers, on the elimination of sexism from language , calls on member states to promote the use of language reflecting the principle of equality between women and men and to take appropriate measures to encourage the use of non-sexist language, taking account of the presence, status and role of women in society. The Recommendation also calls on member states to bring terminology used in legal documents, public administration and education into line with the principle of equality, and to encourage the use of non-sexist language in the media.

Recommendation No (2012)6 of the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers on the protection and promotion of the rights of women and girls with disabilities asks member states to adopt appropriate legislative measures and to undertake other positive actions likely to encourage the participation of women and girls with disabilities in all areas of life. Noting that women and girls with disabilities may suffer multiple discrimination, the proposed measures cover areas such as education and training, employment and economic status, health care, access to social protection, sexual and reproductive rights, motherhood and family life, access to justice and protection from violence and abuse, participation in culture, sport, leisure and tourism, and raising awareness and changing attitudes.

Recommendation CM/Rec(2019)1 of the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers on preventing and combating sexism

5 Essays to Learn More About Equality

“Equality” is one of those words that seems simple, but is more complicated upon closer inspection. At its core, equality can be defined as “the state of being equal.” When societies value equality, their goals include racial, economic, and gender equality . Do we really know what equality looks like in practice? Does it mean equal opportunities, equal outcomes, or both? To learn more about this concept, here are five essays focusing on equality:

“The Equality Effect” (2017) – Danny Dorling

In this essay, professor Danny Dorling lays out why equality is so beneficial to the world. What is equality? It’s living in a society where everyone gets the same freedoms, dignity, and rights. When equality is realized, a flood of benefits follows. Dorling describes the effect of equality as “magical.” Benefits include happier and healthier citizens, less crime, more productivity, and so on. Dorling believes the benefits of “economically equitable” living are so clear, change around the world is inevitable. Despite the obvious conclusion that equality creates a better world, progress has been slow. We’ve become numb to inequality. Raising awareness of equality’s benefits is essential.

Danny Dorling is the Halford Mackinder Professor of Geography at the University of Oxford. He has co-authored and authored a handful of books, including Slowdown: The End of the Great Acceleration—and Why It’s Good for the Planet, the Economy, and Our Lives . “The Equality Effect” is excerpted from this book. Dorling’s work focuses on issues like health, education, wealth, poverty, and employment.

“The Equality Conundrum” (2020) – Joshua Rothman

Originally published as “Same Difference” in the New Yorker’s print edition, this essay opens with a story. A couple plans on dividing their money equally among their children. However, they realize that to ensure equal success for their children, they might need to start with unequal amounts. This essay digs into the complexity of “equality.” While inequality is a major concern for people, most struggle to truly define it. Citing lectures, studies, philosophy, religion, and more, Rothman sheds light on the fact that equality is not a simple – or easy – concept.

Joshua Rothman has worked as a writer and editor of The New Yorker since 2012. He is the ideas editor of newyorker.com.

“Why Understanding Equity vs Equality in Schools Can Help You Create an Inclusive Classroom” (2019) – Waterford.org

Equality in education is critical to society. Students that receive excellent education are more likely to succeed than students who don’t. This essay focuses on the importance of equity, which means giving support to students dealing with issues like poverty, discrimination and economic injustice. What is the difference between equality and equity? What are some strategies that can address barriers? This essay is a great introduction to the equity issues teachers face and why equity is so important.

Waterford.org is a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving equity and education in the United States. It believes that the educational experiences children receive are crucial for their future. Waterford.org was founded by Dr. Dustin Heuston.

“What does equality mean to me?” (2020) – Gabriela Vivacqua and Saddal Diab

While it seems simple, the concept of equality is complex. In this piece posted by WFP_Africa on the WFP’s Insight page, the authors ask women from South Sudan what equality means to them. Half of South Sudan’s population consists of women and girls. Unequal access to essentials like healthcare, education, and work opportunities hold them back. Complete with photographs, this short text gives readers a glimpse into interpretations of equality and what organizations like the World Food Programme are doing to tackle gender inequality.

As part of the UN, the World Food Programme is the world’s largest humanitarian organization focusing on hunger and food security . It provides food assistance to over 80 countries each year.

“Here’s How Gender Equality is Measured” (2020) – Catherine Caruso

Gender inequality is one of the most discussed areas of inequality. Sobering stats reveal that while progress has been made, the world is still far from realizing true gender equality. How is gender equality measured? This essay refers to the Global Gender Gap report ’s factors. This report is released each year by the World Economic Forum. The four factors are political empowerment, health and survival, economic participation and opportunity, and education. The author provides a brief explanation of each factor.

Catherine Caruso is the Editorial Intern at Global Citizen, a movement committed to ending extreme poverty by 2030. Previously, Caruso worked as a writer for Inquisitr. Her English degree is from Syracuse University. She writes stories on health, the environment, and citizenship.

13 Facts about Child Labor

Environmental Racism 101: Definition, Examples, Ways to Take Action

11 Examples of Systemic Injustices in the US

Women’s Rights 101: History, Examples, Activists

What is Social Activism?

15 Inspiring Movies about Activism

15 Examples of Civil Disobedience

Academia in Times of Genocide: Why are Students Across the World Protesting?

Pinkwashing 101: Definition, History, Examples

15 Inspiring Quotes for Black History Month

10 Inspiring Ways Women Are Fighting for Equality

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for Clean Water

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

COMMENTS

Women's suffrage, forgotten history, and a way forward
This is an important milestone and the continuing movement for gender equality owes much to the history of suffrage and the brave women (and men) who fought for a fairer world.
Essay on Women Rights in English for Students
Answer 2: Women's rights are the essential human rights that the United Nations enshrined for every human being on the earth nearly 70 years ago. These rights include a lot of rights including the rights to live free from violence, slavery, and discrimination. In addition to the right to education, own property; vote and to earn a fair and ...
Equal Rights for Women: The Ongoing Struggle for Gender Equality
Conclusion. Gender equality is not a distant ideal; it is a fundamental human right that must be upheld and protected. Achieving equal rights for women requires a collective effort from all sectors of society to challenge discrimination, promote empowerment, and create a more inclusive and equitable world for all.
138 Women's Rights Research Questions and Essay Topics
Abigail Adams' Inspiring Rebellion for Women's Rights. The Power of the Internet and Women's Rights in Guatemala. Pencils and Bullets Women's Rights in Afghanistan. Women's Rights in Supreme Court Decisions of the 1960's and 1970's. Women's Rights: A Path into the Society to Achieve Social Liberation.
Women's Power in the Struggle for Freedom and Equal Rights
Murray was a radical (at the time) advocate for white women's rights, declaring that men and women held equal ability if given equal access to education. Murray penned her first essay, "On the Equality of the Sexes," in 1770—it was finally published 20 years later. This Facing History Reading, included in our US History Curriculum ...
Gender equality and women's rights
Gender equality is at the very heart of human rights and United Nations values. Gender-based discrimination is prohibited under almost every human rights treaty. Despite much progress made in securing women's rights globally, millions of women and girls continue to experience discrimination and violence, being denied of their equality ...
Essay: Women's Rights in the Late 20th Century
The women's rights movement won equal opportunities in higher education and employment relatively quickly in the 1940s and 1950s. The modern concept of women's equality as "feminism" appeared in the 1960s, led by activists such as Betty Friedan. Some of its victories in the legislative arena were completely inadvertent, while one of its ...
5 Women's Rights Essays You Can Read For Free
Her 1792 essay A Vindication on the Rights of Woman represents one of the earliest writings on women's equality. In the Western world, many consider its arguments the foundation of the modern women's rights movement. In the essay, Wollstonecraft writes that men are not more reasonable or rational than women, and that women must be educated ...
5 Powerful Essays Advocating for Gender Equality
Activists are charting unfamiliar territory, which this essay explores. "Men built this system. No wonder gender equality remains as far off as ever.". - Ellie Mae O'Hagan. Freelance journalist Ellie Mae O'Hagan (whose book The New Normal is scheduled for a May 2020 release) is discouraged that gender equality is so many years away.
American Women: Topical Essays
Part of the American Women series, these essays provide a more in-depth exploration of particular events of significance in women's history, including the 1913 woman suffrage parade, the campaign for the equal rights amendment, and more. Part of the American Women series, this essay focuses on the proposed Equal Rights Amendment drafted by National Woman's Party president Alice Paul in 1923 ...
What does gender equality look like today?
A new global analysis of progress on gender equality and women's rights shows women and girls remain disproportionately affected by the socioeconomic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic, struggling with disproportionately high job and livelihood losses, education disruptions and increased burdens of unpaid care work. Women's health services, poorly funded even before the pandemic, faced ...
Women in the Civil Rights Movement
Many women played important roles in the Civil Rights Movement, from leading local civil rights organizations to serving as lawyers on school segregation lawsuits. Their efforts to lead the movement were often overshadowed by men, who still get more attention and credit for its successes in popular historical narratives and commemorations. Many women experienced gender discrimination and ...
PDF Home
Home | Projects at Harvard
Comprehensive Argumentative essay example on the Rights of Women
Comprehensive Argumentative essay example on the Rights of Women. Women's rights have been a significant focal point in the ongoing discourse on social justice and equality. The struggle for women's rights is deeply rooted in history, marked by milestones and setbacks. While progress has undeniably been made, there remain persistent ...
A Century After Women Gained the Right To Vote, Majority of Americans
A hundred years after the 19th Amendment was ratified, about half of Americans say granting women the right to vote has been the most important milestone in advancing the position of women in the country. Still, a majority of U.S. adults say the country hasn't gone far enough when it comes to giving women equal rights with men, even as a large share thinks there has been progress in the last ...
Photo essay
The 64th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women took stock, assessed gaps, and charted a path forward for fulfilling the promise of gender equality enshrined in the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, 25 years after its adoption. This photo essay is an adaptation of an exhibit at the United Nations Headquarters, running ...
United Nations: Gender equality and women's empowerment
Gender equality is a cross-cutting objective and must be a key focus of national policies, budgets and institutions. Around 2.4 billion women of working age are not afforded equal economic ...
Women's rights movement
Ask the Chatbot a Question Ask the Chatbot a Question women's rights movement, diverse social movement, largely based in the United States, that in the 1960s and '70s sought equal rights and opportunities and greater personal freedom for women.It coincided with and is recognized as part of the "second wave" of feminism.While the first-wave feminism of the 19th and early 20th centuries ...
Feminist Perspectives on Human Rights
Summary. 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 ...
Top 20 Issues Women Are Facing Today
Women's rights have improved over the years, but continued progress is not guaranteed. In a time of escalating conflicts, rising authoritarianism and devastating climate change impacts, women face many issues related to education, work, healthcare, legal rights, violence and much more. By understanding these issues, the world can work together to achieve gender equality, stronger […]
Gender Equality and Women's Rights
Gender Equality and Women's Rights. The issue of gender equality in society has gained popularity in the precedent century with the rise of the feminist movement and women's struggle for rights equal to those of men. The reason for the shift towards recognizing women's rights in societal interactions is the changing ratio of males and ...
Essay on Women's Rights
250 Words Essay on Women's Rights ... to the women's liberation movement of the 1960s which sought economic and social equality, women's rights have been a contentious issue throughout history. Current Status. Despite significant progress, gender inequality persists in many parts of the world. Women are still underrepresented in political ...
Feminism and Women's Rights Movements
At the level of the Council of Europe, the European Convention on Human Rights obliges member states to respect and promote all human rights in the Convention without discrimination on any grounds, including sex (Article 14 of the Convention). A further treaty, the Revised European Social Charter (1996), provides for equality between women and men in education, work and family life, and calls ...
5 Essays to Learn More About Equality
To learn more about this concept, here are five essays focusing on equality: "The Equality Effect" (2017) - Danny Dorling. In this essay, professor Danny Dorling lays out why equality is so beneficial to the world. ... LGBTQ+ rights, women's rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found ...