Open Access Research Article
REMOVAL OF GENDERED LENS IS A HUMAN RIGHT BY: ISHITA SEHRAWAT
Published Paper
Article Details
REMOVAL OF GENDERED LENS IS A HUMAN
RIGHT
AUTHORED BY: ISHITA SEHRAWAT
Abstract
Someone rightly said and I quote, “a
gender equal society will be one where the term gender does not exist.” Human
rights are certain inalienable rights inherent to all humans by birth
irrespective of their gender, caste, creed, etcetera. However, there are
certain rights which are denied to people on the basis of their gender or
rather they are not equally given the rights that should be based on their very
existence as humans. Article 1 of the UDHR states that all humans are born free
and equal. In spite of this provision the society and law has failed to
recognise this right for all humans. So, the question arises that whether human
rights can be guaranteed to all humans without the removal of gender lens from
the society. The paper will aim to answer in the question in a negatory
terminology by underlining the current scenario around the world and then
delineate how human rights have been denied to people on gendered perspective.
The paper will address gender-related concerns from a dual perspective.
Initially, it will examine discrimination based on individuals' biological sex,
and subsequently, it will explore issues arising from societal judgments
related to individuals' gender preferences.
Introduction
The introduction to the intersection
of gender and human rights is a crucial exploration of the fundamental
principles that underpin the equitable treatment of individuals across diverse
genders. In essence, it serves as a gateway to understanding how human rights
standards and principles apply to all, irrespective of gender. This discourse
delves into the challenges and inequalities faced by individuals based on their
gender, emphasizing the importance of recognizing and safeguarding the rights
of every person, regardless of their gender identity or expression. As
societies evolve, so too must our understanding and commitment to ensuring that
gender rights are firmly rooted in the broader framework of human rights,
fostering a world where equality, dignity, and justice prevail for everyone.
Gender and human rights are intertwined in a complex tapestry that reflects the
diverse experiences and struggles faced by individuals across the gender
spectrum. The introduction to this subject delves into the historical context
of how societal norms and structures have influenced the perception and
treatment of people based on their gender. It is essential to acknowledge that
traditional gender roles and stereotypes have often led to systemic
discrimination, denying certain individuals their basic human rights. The
comprehensive exploration of gender and human rights, it becomes evident that
discrimination manifests in various forms. This includes unequal access to
education, employment, healthcare, and political participation based on one's
gender. Moreover, issues such as gender-based violence and discrimination
against LGBTQ+ individuals highlight the urgent need for a rights-based
approach that encompasses and protects everyone. In recent decades,
international instruments and frameworks have emerged to address these
challenges. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), and other
treaties emphasize the inherent dignity and equality of all individuals,
irrespective of gender. However, implementation gaps persist, necessitating
ongoing efforts to translate the theoretical promise of human rights into
practicality.
Research
Methodology
To address the topic of "Removal
of Gendered Lens is a Human Right" in a systematic and comprehensive
manner, I utilised a mixed-method research methodology that combines
qualitative and quantitative approaches. This allowed for a holistic
understanding of the issue by examining both the societal perceptions and the
statistical data related to gender disparities.
1. Contextual Analysis:
-
Conducted
a literature review to understand the historical background of injustices
related to gender inequality.
-
Analyzed
existing laws and policies that impact gender equality.
-
Reviewed
case studies and reports on gender-based discrimination in various contexts.
2. Comparative Analysis:
-
Compared
the legal frameworks and societal norms related to gender equality in different
countries.
-
Examined
the impact of international human rights instruments such as the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and CEDAW on gender equality.
-
Identified
best practices and successful interventions for promoting gender equality and
removing gendered lens.
3. Policy Recommendations:
-
Based
on the research findings, developed policy recommendations for promoting gender
equality and removing gendered lens at the societal and institutional levels.
-
Proposed
advocacy strategies for raising awareness about the importance of gender
equality as a human right.
-
Suggested
measures for empowering marginalized groups and ensuring equal rights and
opportunities for all individuals.
By following this mixed-method research
methodology, I conducted a comprehensive analysis of the removal of gendered
lens as a human right, leading to informed insights and actionable
recommendations for promoting gender equality and social justice.
Historical
Background
Gender inequality dates to the period
when humans started living in civilisations. It all started with the men going
to hunt outside for the food and women stayed back to take care of the children
and other family members. Before anyone could analyse, an occupational bifurcation
was created where certain job roles were defined for the men and women on the
basis their gender. The logic used behind such differentiation was that certain
roles like labour required bodily strength and males possessed more of it
biologically. However, in my opinion, it was taking steps into the direction of
a patriarchal society. Later on, when the society was far more civilised and
the wars were taking place, women were merely reduced as trophies and subjects
to abuse whereas men fought the war[1]. The
society failed to recognise that the families were held together by women,
injured soldiers were taken care of by the women and that children were raised
without fathers. Women were subjected to injustice at times of war by being
tortured by the belligerents and at times of peace by the men of our very own
society. When sovereignty began to gain importance and monarchies started
dissolving, the very crucial aspect of voting rights came into play. Although a
political right, voting rights held as much as importance as any other human
right. The government systems particularly the democracies allowed the people
to choose their own representatives who will subsequently take important
decisions about life of the very same citizens and yet again women were deprived
of this right. They were not considered equal along with the mindset that they
were not capable of making of decisions about their own life. The suffrage
movement in the US got women the right but it took one hundred years to grant
them voting rights. In her essay, "Mainstreaming a Concern for the Human
Rights of Women: Beyond Theory[2],"
Felice Gaer writes of the work that international human rights organizations
have undertaken specifically to address women's human rights concerns. An
important concept that has emerged in these efforts is "gender
mainstreaming": the term signifies that policies must be examined as to
their implications for women and men. Just as certain human rights abuses
affect only women or women more than men, women have specific human right’s
needs. Thus gender, Gaer argues, must be linked with human rights
issues-whether violence, health care, or access to power—and gender issues must
be brought to the attention of the United Nations and other international bodies
Women and Human Rights
The society began with men and women
and yet women have been the targets of the gradual build-up of a patriarchal
society. There has been no substantial evidence on the evolution of a community
which considered men superior to women however, various theories have been laid
out to demarcate the reasons behind such stigma. It is important that we
understand that patriarchal society in itself is not a stigma (but a
hard-hitting reality) rather a culmination of pre-installed notions in people’s
head. According to Cambridge dictionary patriarchy is defined as “a society in
which the oldest male is the leader of the family, or a society controlled by
men in which they use their power to their own advantage.” In my opinion, this
definition does not fully depict the truth. It is not just the men coming
together to dominate women but women also being the full-fledged supporters of
the system.
For working class women, the risk and
frequency of delivery were a challenge. In almost all developed capitalist
nations today, women are choosing not to have many, if any, children. Even with
its limitations, our generation has never before imagined having access to
contraception. For some women, abstinence was the only way to avoid a lifetime
of unplanned and frequently repeated pregnancies. For those from the working
class, regardless of gender, giving birth was an inevitable experience, and in
such cases, they typically shared the desire to safeguard the mother. This
explains why women left the industry upon marriage and why the family wage was
a wage for males in a far more acceptable way than any explanation of male
conspiracies. It remains a truth that these actions severely hindered women's
ability to rise beyond their inferior social status. Although equality had been
promised by capitalism, the system was unable to bring equality to pass. Women
were atomized and sequestered in the house in the name of reproducing labour
force. It was believed that their labour benefited their spouses and family.
They were not allowed to be financially independent. For many working-class
women, this "ideal" was never their reality; they were always
employed as wage labourers. However, in order to ensure reproduction, the
dominant ideologies promoted the concept that the family is holy and imposed
the working-class caricature of the bourgeois family. Furthermore, the
stereotype was what men and women of working class saw as the "norm,"
even when it did not align with their actual experiences.
E.V. Ramasamy in his book “Why Were
Women Enslaved[3]” has
touched upon many factors like chastity, religious norms, property rights and
many others to portray how all humans have come together to form the men
dominated society. Women were supposed to be the be chaste and the rules were
not the same for men. The Ramayana from Hindu scriptures is the prime example
for showcasing the standards set for women by the religion. Goddess Sita who
was abducted by Ravana had to go through a fire test for proving her character
as she had been in the vicinity of another man for so many years. The matters
of religion are very personal to the people following it and as a matter of
this fact, a question certainly arises that if the goddess herself had to prove
her own character, it has left a deep-rooted impact on the society. Another
notion was that divorce and remarriage of a widow were seen as the greatest marks
on the honour of the families of the women doing so.
In addition to being a basic human
right, gender equality is also a precondition for a society that is affluent,
peaceful, and sustainable. Although there has been improvement in recent years,
gender equality will not be achieved by 2030 if current trends continue.
Half of the world's population is
made up of women and girls, who also account for half of its potential.
However, gender disparity still exists everywhere and impedes societal
advancement. In the worldwide labour market, women still make, on average, 23%
less than men, and they put in around three times as many hours performing
unpaid caregiving and household duties. The uneven distribution of unpaid care
and domestic work, sexual abuse and exploitation, and discrimination in public
service continue to be major obstacles. The COVID-19 epidemic has made all of
these areas of inequality worse: complaints of sexual assault have increased,
women have taken on greater caregiving duties as a result of school closures,
and 70% of health and social workers worldwide are female.
If current trends continue, it will
take an estimated 300[4]
years to eradicate child marriage, 286 years to eliminate discriminatory laws
and close legal protection gaps, 140 years to equalise the representation of
women in leadership and power positions in the workplace, and 47 years to
attain equal representation in national parliaments. The statistics show the
gravity of the problem that it would certainly take not only the efforts of the
government but a mental revolution in the society that will change the
perspective.
Property rights
Any unbiased examination of property
rights and gender highlights the appalling track record of emerging nations in
granting women equal access to land and other essentials of existence. When
compared to males, women have less access to food, water, housing, money,
education, and healthcare, which has contributed to what is sometimes referred
to as the "feminization of poverty." Even while more and more women
are heading their own homes, 70 percent of the 1.2 billion individuals who are
projected to be living in absolute poverty—defined as making less than $1 per
day—are women and girls. It is believed that the majority of impoverished
women, especially those who reside in cities, work in the unorganised sector.
Furthermore, in the underdeveloped countries, women only own an estimated 1-2
percent of all titled land. Unless there is a major change and strengthening of
laws, rules, and practices pertaining to property ownership and control, as
well as among methods adopted by donors and implementers supporting these
reforms, it appears that the problem of women living in poverty will persist. Enhancing
women's property rights is essential for economic development for all people
and goes beyond issues of gender equality and human rights. Numerous studies
have demonstrated that women who earn more money do so by raising household
spending, which benefits the economy as a whole. Men, on the other hand, tend
to spend a larger portion of their income on personal expenses[5].
Marriage and Dowry
Marriage is either a contract or a
sacrament across countries. This is the most hyped social institution known to
mankind which puts immense pressure on the stability of the parties involved. Not
particular to any country, marriage has been regarded as an important step in everyone’s
life. Although, a prevalent social practice, marriage has further contributed
in enslaving women. Globally, 15 million girls are married by age 18 each year;
by the year 2030, 950 million girls will have been married as children. In
India, 27% of 20–24?year old females are married by age 18, and 7% are married
by age 15[6]. A
woman, particularly in India is father’s property before marriage and husband’s
property after it. She is called to be the flagbearer of so-called honour which
has allowed society to view women as someone to be controlled and protected.
Specifically in India, the status of
women around marriage shows a major concern about how women are treated. India
has struggled with the concepts of early marriages and dowry. It has led to
various issues relating to health of the child and dowry deaths respectively.
Women are warded off to the husband’s family like a burden has been reduced and
the lack of education has increased the problem manifolds. School closures
during the COVID-19 pandemic threaten progress towards gender equality. They
have exposed girls to more gender-based violence, sexual exploitation,
adolescent pregnancy and forced marriage. Several practical obstacles prevent
married females from pursuing higher education, such as domestic duties, social
shame, being forcibly removed from school, and gender conventions that confine
them to the home. A common outcome of child marriage is teenage pregnancy.
Adolescent girls who are pregnant may face shame, a lack of assistance for
re-enrollment, and national legislation that force them to drop out or be
excluded from school.
Religion
Many times, religion is perceived as
impeding gender equity. Narratives abound of violence against women committed
in the name of religion. Because of this, the problems of gender equality and
religion are frequently written off as being too difficult to resolve. It seems
that there is no way to unravel this multi-institution, quite intricate system.
The capacity of women to participate in and contribute to the economy is
impacted by religious prejudice. Women have mostly remained passive students of
religious teachings and devoted practitioners of religious rites, while males
have dominated as messengers, translators, and recipients of heavenly messages.
Indian women's social and cultural surroundings have been defined and
influenced by attitudes around patriarchal interpretations of religious belief,
which has left them marginalised and treated as second-class citizens. Women in
India suffer the most from cultural attitudes, the influence of religion and
politics in their specific environment, and politics' use of religion as a
weapon to control the populace. As religion became entrenched as an institution
with inflexible dogmas inside the patriarchal systems that were already in
place, a rift between the episteme and practice emerged.
The Hindu holy code of conduct,
Manusmriti, paints women in a very negative light and is rife with disparaging
remarks about them. It promotes males having complete control over women in
their life. Additionally, it created castes within Indian culture, giving
privileges to the upper castes and sanctions to the lower. The way that
religious texts are interpreted through language, symbolism, and cultural
conditioning has led to a practice that alienates women and even encourages
violence and exploitation of them. In India, violence against women occurs in
families regardless of religion or caste, and it stems from ingrained views of
male dominance. One can only characterise accounts of domestic abuse against
women as horrifying. It begs the question of how women manage to live and care
for their families and homes. The accounts of beatings, suffocations, chokings
(even in pregnancy), sexual and emotional abuse, and other forms of violence
against girls are common. However, women now have access to legal assistance to
file claims against domestic abuse because to the powerful women's movement
that helped bring about legislative changes. The main form of gender
discrimination against Catholic women covered by the Code of Canon Law is their
ineligibility for ordination and all of the positions that come with it. It
emphasises Christ's masculinity rather than his humanity, elevating males over
women. Men and women do not have equal rights, even when it comes to the
non-ordained.
Role of law in promoting women’s
rights
On December 10, 1948, the United
Nations enacted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states that
every person has the equal right to dignity and is born free. Similar to this,
the Indian Constitution grants all of its inhabitants, regardless of gender, a
number of rights, including the right to equality under Article 14 and the
right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. Other than this the Indian
Constitution[7] has guaranteed
certain other rights for protection of women against exploitation such as:
1. Article 15(1) The state shall not
discriminate against any citizen of Indian on the ground of sex.
2. Article 15(3) The state is empowered
to make any special provision for Women. In other words, this provision enables
the state to make affirmative discrimination in favor of women.
3. Article 16(2) No citizen shall be
discrimination against or be ineligible for any employment or office under the
state on the ground of sex.
4. Article 23(1) Traffic in human beings
and forced labour are prohibited.
5. Article 39(a) The state to secure for
men and women equally the right to an adequate means of livelihood.
A society that is gender equal is one
in which men and women have equal opportunities, rights, and responsibilities
in various areas of life. equal access to education, social and economic
independence, decision-making equality, and the ability to pursue any career
path one chooses. Economic, social, and political empowerment of women is
essential to the development of any country as well as the defence and
upholding of human rights.
Hindu women's property rights in
India are governed by the Hindu Succession Act[8] of
1956 and the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act of 1937. Hindu widows'
property rights were the main focus of the 1937 Hindu Women's Right to Property
Act[9].
It made it possible for a Hindu widow to inherit the same amount from her
intestate husband's estate as her sons. Nevertheless, it did not provide Hindu women
coparcenary rights, nor did it address the concerns surrounding women's
property rights generally.
The Dowry Prohibition Act[10],
passed by the Indian government in 1961, outlawed the use of dowries in wedding
ceremony preparations. Nonetheless, several cases of dowry-related homicides,
suicides, and spousal abuse were reported. Many examples of this type of
scenario have been proposed since the 1980s. The laws known as the Dowry
Prohibition, which required the bride and groom to maintain records of their
affords, were established in 1985. These recommendations state that a signed
inventory of the gifts provided to the bride and groom at the time of their
marriage should be kept on file.
Any intestate ancestral property that
members of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) obtain is referred to as a
coparcenary property. Only three male lineal descendants—son, grandson, and
great-grandson—constituted the body of coparceners before to the 2005
Amendment, and they were the only ones with the right to purchase any coparcenary
property. Since women were not allowed to be coparceners, this implied that
they had no interest in the coparcenary property. For example, a coparcener's
sister did not obtain a stake in the coparcenary property, but his son did. But
the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 was revised in Section 6 by the 2005
Amendment, which also removed the long-standing discriminatory practice of
excluding women from the coparcenary system. According to Section 6(1) of the
1956 Act, a daughter of a coparcener will automatically become a coparcener in
her own right by birth, just as a son of a coparcener shall in any HUF
regulated by Mitakshara law. Thus, a coparcener's daughter is now a coparcener
in a HUF.
Although the above provisions show
that law has taken a positive step towards women’s rights but there are times
when the practical application of these provisions are not as effective as they
seem to be. Certain laws themselves discriminate women in a way that is prima
facie legal but, in its application, they tend to restrict equal rights for the
binary gender. In the case of Air India Vs Nargesh Meerza & Ors[11], air
hostesses were to retire when they reached age 35, or experienced their first
pregnancy or if they got married within four years of service. This was
challenged on the touchstone of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution as it
treated the male and female within the same job description differently. The
court ruled in the favour of the air hostesses but could not tackle the
underlying problem completely. It is the pre-existing notions about women and
certain standards according to which women should act.
Conclusion
Gender equality is a human right which
is guaranteed to all humans however, the law along with the society are trying
to attain gender equality through empowering women. I oppose this notion as
women are not supposed to be empowered. People are trying to achieve equity by
making a ladder equal to the pedestal on which men are kept but most certainly,
in my opinion, it shall be achieved by completely destructing the pedestal. The
real feminist movement is not about claiming that women are superior but that
they are equal from the very beginning. When everyone is born equal, one
section shall not have to fight for their inherited rights by birth. John Rawls
gave his theory of original position and veil of ignorance. It is the most
applicable theory in removing the gendered lens because it aims at visiting the
original position. If females are the ones being oppressed and as mentioned above,
they lack appropriate political representation, therefore male population is
the one making rules for reaching the so-called notions of “equality” which is
at best ironical and at worst lengthening the bridge of inequality furthermore.
[1] Margorie Agosin, Women, gender
and human rights
[2] Felice Gaer, “Mainstreaming a
Concern for the Human Rights of Women: Beyond Theory” Women, Gender and Human
Rights (2001).
[3] E.V Ramasamy, Why Were Women
Enslaved (The Periyar Self-Respect Propaganda Institution, 4th edn., 1933).
[4] Sustainable Developmental Goals https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/gender-equality/
(27 January,2024)
[5] Steinzor, Nadia. “Women’s
Property and Inheritance Rights: Improving Lives in a Changing Time,”2003
[6] Anita Raj, Students and Bride,
Article no.19 (2019)
[7] The Constitution of India, 1950
[8] Hindu Succession Act, 1956 Act
30 of 1956
[9] The Hindu Women's Rights to
Property Act, 1937 Act 18 of 1937
[10] The Dowry Prohibition act, 1961
ACT NO. 28 OF 1961
[11] 1982 SCR (1) 438
Article Information
REMOVAL OF GENDERED LENS IS A HUMAN RIGHT BY: ISHITA SEHRAWAT
Authors: ISHITA SEHRAWAT
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2025/03/01
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.