scholarly journals Equal Rights, Special Rights, and the Nature of Antidiscrimination Law

1998 ◽  
Vol 97 (2) ◽  
pp. 564 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Rubin
2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (03) ◽  
pp. 830-854 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin M. Adam ◽  
Betsy L. Cooper

This study argues that rights discourse influences heterosexual public opinion in Washington State. We tested this through a survey experiment conducted in the 2011 Washington Poll. We broke interviewees into three groups, with each group exposed to a different frame: a pro–lesbian and gay equal rights frame, an anti–lesbian and gay special rights frame, and a control or no frame. Immediately following the treatment, we asked interviewees if they agreed with a pro–lesbian and gay policy: changing state antidiscrimination law to encompass those who identify as lesbian and gay. Overall, this study concludes that a special rights frame dampens support among some while an equal rights frame has no effect. Respondents who indicated that they were against same-sex marriage even more strongly opposed altering antidiscrimination policy to include sexual orientation when confronted with an equal rights frame than when confronted with the special rights frame or no frame at all.


2007 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-539 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siri Damman

AbstractIndigenous peoples tend not to benefit equally from development processes. This is partly due to lack of efforts by states and others to respect and protect their land and livelihoods, and to a failure to consider their equal rights and their special rights when policies related to development are designed and enacted. As the case of indigenous peoples and the Millennium Development Goal 1 (MDG-1) shows, development indicators and strategies may not properly capture and address their special circumstances and concerns. Information should be sought on the specific situations of the most marginalized, and development policies should be sensitive to national multicultural realities. The newly adopted UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples does, in addition to other human right instruments, provide guidance on how development processes, and in particular the process towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), may better respond to indigenous peoples' needs and development aspirations.


Author(s):  
Nancy Woloch

This chapter traces the changes in federal and state protective policies from the New Deal through the 1950s. In contrast to the setbacks of the 1920s, the New Deal revived the prospects of protective laws and of their proponents. The victory of the minimum wage for women workers in federal court in 1937 and the passage in 1938 of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which extended labor standards to men, represented a peak of protectionist achievement. This achievement rested firmly on the precedent of single-sex labor laws for which social feminists—led by the NCL—had long campaigned. However, “equal rights” gained momentum in the postwar years, 1945–60. By the start of the 1960s, single-sex protective laws had resumed their role as a focus of contention in the women's movement.


Author(s):  
Nancy Woloch

This chapter revisits Adkins and considers the feud over protective laws that arose in the women's movement in the 1920s. The clash between friends and foes of the Equal Rights Amendment—and over the protective laws for women workers that it would surely invalidate—fueled women's politics in the 1920s. Both sides claimed precedent-setting accomplishments. In 1923, the National Woman's Party proposed the historic ERA, which incurred conflict that lasted for decades. The social feminist contingent—larger and more powerful—gained favor briefly among congressional lawmakers, expanded the number and strength of state laws, saw the minimum wage gain a foothold, and promoted protection through the federal Women's Bureau. Neither faction, however, achieved the advances it sought. Instead, a fight between factions underscored competing contentions about single-sex protective laws and their effect on women workers.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 8
Author(s):  
Mohammad Ahashan ◽  
Dr. Sapna Tiwari

Man has always tried  to determine  and tamper the image of woman and especially her identity is manipulated and orchestrated. Whenever a woman is spoken of, it is always in the relation to man; she is presented as a wife , mother, daughter and even as a lover but never as a woman  a human being- a separate entity. Her entire life is idealized and her fundamental rights and especially her behaviour is engineered by the adherents of patriarchal society. Commenting  on the Man-woman relationship in a marital bond Simone de Beauvoir wrote in her epoch-making book entitled The Second Sex(1949): "It has been said that marriage diminishes man,  which is often true , but almost always it annihilates women". Feminist movement advocates the equal rights and equal opportunities for women. The true spirit of feminism is into look at women and men as human beings. There should not be gender bias or discrimination in familial and social life. To secure gender justice and gender equity is the key aspects of feminist movement. In India, women writers have come forward to voice their feminist approach to life and the patriarchal family set up. They believe that the very notion of gender is not only biotic and biologic episode but it has a social construction.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document