Did you know that in 119 countries, more than half the countries in the world, have restricted freedom of expression? In the article, “Are Human Rights Universal?” Thomas N. Franck describes “cultural exceptionalism”, the act of violating human rights for the sake of preserving a culture or tradition. Cultural exceptionalism occurs across the world and has been negatively affecting the people in where it occurs, such as the Middle East. Frank opposes this ideology and believes that a society should not suppress a minority in order to maintain a tradition. Human rights, rights that should naturally be given to every person, have been stripped away from countless of innocent people simply because of where or how they were born. . People across …show more content…
In the article, Franck supports his ideology by describing about the many discriminatory and ruthless acts in the Middle East, one of which was the Taliban, an extremist group whose beliefs have violated countless human rights. Out of all the human rights violated, Franck emphasizes on the sexism displayed because of the Taliban’s tradition where the women are subservient to men. As a result, women are not only treated as secondary citizens, but are punished much more severely in comparison to men, violating Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states that “All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination.” According to Franck, women do not have the right to “leave home except when accompanied by a brother or husband” and forbids them from “all access of public education”, indicating the prejudicial beliefs of the Taliban, and proving the injustices that women have to face. Because of their lack of education, they are unable to realize the human rights robbed from them. This means that the only option to free these women from this discriminatory slavery is to instill human rights onto these types of societies. Because human rights forbids discrimination of any type, all people will be treated equally under the law. Only by doing so and reforming the unfair laws and traditions governing the society can we eliminate the bias that the minority has to endure on the daily
It is difficult to realize the harsh standards and obligations imposed upon women of different cultures. It is especially disappointing to note that women whom may seek to relieve themselves of such discriminatory practices, face little to no government support in terms of fighting inequality. Such as distinguished in text The War Against Feminism, women of Algeria must fight against patriarchal and incredibly sexist political movements, such as the “Islamic Salvation Front,” which although was banned, had won an election and the promotion of their platform’s ideas despite their notions consisting of extreme patriarchal views and their actual assassinations of individuals not compliant with their beliefs. I also strongly agreed with the United Nations decision to aid individuals from fear of the Taliban, in their stating of refusing to continue aid to Afghanistan if intense cruel practices were to continue. The interference of other government agencies in helping to promote the end of cruelty, such as was occurring by the Taliban, act as great movement of defiance against
One of the main controversies in this book is the plight of women and men’s struggles. Although both experienced different kinds of inequalities, women were the target of the Taliban. In 1978, women in Kabul were demanding their rights during the Afghan Women’s Year. The president who was in charge then was president Daoud, and he decreed, “The Afghan woman has the same right as the Afghan man to exercise personal freedom, choose a career, and fins a partner in marriage” (53). This decree was absolutely invalid when the Taliban expelled a humanitarian organization that was run by women, and because of that, the Taliban took over Kabul. Women were not allowed to work outside of home. Because of that, Latifa mentions that women in Kabul usually just bake bread, do embroidery,
Through the article “Saving Amina” the writer Alison M. Jaggar has tried to address the issue that when it comes to violation of rights of women only culture cannot be blamed as root cause rather there are other factors as well. She has tried to identify those factors by raising following issues:
Brown, A. Widney., and LaShawn R. Jefferson. "VI. ILLUSTRATIVE CASES." Afghanistan, Humanity Denied: Systematic Denial of Women's Rights in Afghanistan. New York, NY.: Human Rights Watch, 2001. 16+. Print
This quote explains how the women are “half-people”. Some dehumanize others in order to break their morals. The Taliban is no different by using this
“Stop Gender Apartheid in Afghanistan!” Feminist Majority Foundation. Online. The. 20 Feb. 2000. “Taliban publicly executes woman murderer.”
Governments often claim that they are helping women gain equality when they invade and impress their values on other cultures. In “Feminism as Imperialism”, Katharine Viner states that “Bush cut off funding to international family planning organizations [and then claimed he] bombed Afghanistan to liberate the women from the burkas” (1). However, the problem with wars claiming to “save” women is that the majority of the time women are just becoming victims of western misogyny as opposed to eastern misogyny (Viner, 2). Just because some women choose to wear head coverings doesn’t make them repressed, “liberation for [Afghani women] does not encompass destroying their identity, religion, or culture and many of them want to retain the veil” (Viner, 2). Therefore, using women to justify war is counterproductive because it still represses women and ignores what the women actually
The Islamic women of Afghanistan are denied many of the same liberties that Americans take for granted everyday. Although the religion that they have faith in, according to Janelle Brown’s “Terror’s First Victims”, “guarantee[s] women status in society as individuals and religious d...
Lila Abu-Lughod’s article titled, “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?” takes a closer look at the problematic ethnocentric approach many have when trying to gain an understanding of another culture that may be foreign to that individual. In this analytical paper, Lughod looks at women in Islam, specifically the treatment of women and how it might be utilized as a justification for invading into a country and liberating its people. The country Lughod refers to in her article is Afghanistan, and Lughod points out the misunderstanding from the people to the Bush administration like First Lady Laura Bush who believed that intervention was necessary to free women from the captivity of their own homes. It is important to consider the role that different lenses play into all of this, especially when one’s lenses are being shaped by the media. Depictions of covered women secluded from society leave a permanent image in the minds of many, who would then later support the idea of liberation. This paper will discuss that the practice of using propaganda when referring to the lifestyle in the Middle East is not exclusive to the U.S; rather it has been utilized throughout history. Additionally, we will take a closer look on the importance of symbols, such as veils in this case; help to further emphasize the cause to liberate. Finally, we will analyze Lughod’s plea towards cultural relativism and away from liberal imperialism.
The Taliban are still in power in many parts of the country, denying people the rights they deserve, and committing crimes against humanity. Women’s rights are nowhere near where they should be, they are treated like property, because that is how the culture sees women, there is violent acts committed on girls when they try to stand up for themselves, and people don't speak up against this ugly truth, nearly as much as they should as fellow human beings.
Some researchers have stated that the “the communist regime in Afghanistan was an example of what has been termed `'revolution' from above, i.e. the introduction and imposition of a set of changes by a radical group within the state apparatus committed to a forced modernization of the country.” (Halliday & Tanin, 1358). During this time period the communist government pushed through several laws aimed at modernization. It has been noted that some laws passed during this time period dealt specifically with progressing women’s rights and roles within society (Zulfacar, 35). Among these laws was Decree No. 7 “which was intended to end the oppressive situation of women in Afghanistan” (Zulfacar, 35). Through these examples, as well as those from the novel it is evident that the new communist government in Afghanistan sought the reform and progression of Afghan
There is such a thing as universality of human rights that is different from cultural relativism, humanity comes before culture and traditions. People are humans first and belong to cultures second (Collaway, Harrelson-Stephens, 2007 p.109), this universality needs to take priority over any cultural views, and any state sovereignty over its residing citizens.
ABSTRACT: This paper defends the claim that the contemporary canon of human rights forms an indivisible and interdependent system of norms against both "Western" and "Asian" critics who have asserted exceptionalist or selectivist counterclaims. After providing a formal definition of human rights, I argue that the set of particular human rights that comprises the contemporary canon represents an ethical-legal paradigm which functions as an implicit theory of human oppression. On this view, human rights originate as normative responses to particular historical experiences of oppression. Since historically known experiences of oppression have resulted from practices that function as parts of systems of domination, normative responses to these practices have sought to disarm and dismantle such systems by depriving potential oppressors of the techniques which enable them to maintain their domination. Therefore, human rights norms form a systematic and interdependent whole because only as parts of a system can they function as effective means for combatting oppression and domination.
The doctrine of human rights were created to protect every single human regardless of race, gender, sex, nationality, sexual orientation and other differences. It is based on human dignity and the belief that no one has the right to take this away from another human being. The doctrine states that every ‘man’ has inalienable rights of equality, but is this true? Are human rights universal? Whether human rights are universal has been debated for decades. There have been individuals and even countries that oppose the idea that human rights are for everybody. This argument shall be investigated in this essay, by: exploring definitions and history on human rights, debating on whether it is universal while providing examples and background information while supporting my hypothesis that human rights should be based on particular cultural values and finally drawing a conclusion.
The universal declaration of human rights declared that all people have equal rights, regardless of race, gender, religion, language, culture, birth status, national origin, or opinion. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. Universal human rights are often expressed and guaranteed by law, in the forms of treaties, customary international law, general principles and other sources of international law. International human rights law lays down obligations of Governments to act in certain ways or to refrain from certain acts, in order to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals or groups. (ohchr.org) The universality of human rights is a concept that allows everyone to have the same basic human rights no matter where the location. If that concept is true then why are people being tortured and ostracized. Why are people still afraid of going against their leaders, fearing that they will be found and killed. It is because some leaders