The political and philosophical idea of human rights finds its authentic origins in the seventeenth century in the

natural rights of John Locke’s issuance in 1689 of his Two Treatises of Government. However he distinguished
between state and family as civic entities. The family constituted a private sphere disconnected from a public or
political sphere, excluding women from participation. Common law held that married women could not own property,
or, if they did under an equity settlement it was under the control of men. Women intellectuals did not take lightly to
the contradictions inherent in Locke’s liberalism. One of the first to object was Mary Astell who argued that women
have the same potential for reasoning as men. Moreover, Olympe de Gouge responded with her own Declaration of
the Rights of Women and the Citizen in 1791. Article I went on to proclaim “Woman is born free and lives equal to
man in her rights.” The following year, 1792, Mary Wollstonecraft argued in her A Vindication of the Rights of
Women that educated women could intellectually be equivalent to their husband in society. This dominant liberal
view has historical roots in the writings of J. S. Mill, the subjection of women 1869 demanding equality before the law
for women. Although, Liberal feminism is unpopular in some quarters of feminist legal theory, has arguably always
remained a major driving force in many practicing feminist lawyers’ work and in law reform efforts across many
spectrums of legal work.

However, Linda Krieger points to two problematic assumptions behind this argument. First, what is problematic
about the assumption that there are no "real" differences between men and women. Second, she argues against the
idea that there are no characteristics unique to one sex. This development shows how women were granted access
to how Clare Dalton describes as ‘a world already constituted.’ In this setting comes Mary Ann Glendon in her book,
Rights Talk wants a new rights talk to recognise that human beings are social as well as self-determining, and that
small social settings are conducive to human flourishing. In Drucilla Cornell’s theory, the equivalent evaluation of
sexual difference should be demanded so that women are included in the moral community of persons.

Based on this connotation, Cultural feminists argue that there are differences between men and women which
should be celebrated. Psychologist Carol Gilligan identifies two moral codes known as ethics of justice (the
masculine code) and ethics of care (the feminine code). In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's
Development, she asserts that most men utilize principles of justice to resolve moral dilemmas, whereas most
women focus on care and concern for the well-being of others when resolving the same dilemmas. In cultural
feminists view, the feminine voice is just as rational and potentially public in scope. The ethic of care approach has
impacted on legal analysis in different ways. One of the most direct ways is through the mediation or the alternative
dispute resolution processes which are now much more prominent in litigation than ever before. Marilyn Friedman
and Virginia Held, propose combining the ethics of care with the ethics of justice, which they believe is appropriate in
the public realm.
Nevertheless, many query Gilligan’s findings, such as Catharine MacKinnon who sees ethics of care as affirming
powerlessness.’ As a radical feminist, she argues that women care because it suits men’s interests, in effect, the
idea of ‘what a woman is’ is constructed from the male point of view, from and by and in and through patriarchy. She
has famously said about ethics of care’s different voice:’ take your foot off our necks, then we will hear in what
tongue women speak.’ Radical feminism attempts to draw lines between biologically-determined behavior and
culturally-determined behavior in order to free both men and women as much as possible from their previous narrow
gender roles. Mackinnon says “Radical Feminism is…post Marxist. For feminism, according to MacKinnon, your
sexuality is taken away by patriarchal social construction and replaced by a false consciousness. However, Despite
its failings, the law can be used as a tool to empower women. MacKinnon puts forward the dominance approach as
the method to be used. This focuses on the inequality of power between men and women and structural patriarchy.

However, Post-modern feminists criticize attempts by feminists, such as MacKinnon, to produce a ‘grand narrative’
of feminist jurisprudence. Patricia Cain suggests that most feminist legal theories fall into the essentialist trap
because they focus on women’s sameness and thus ignore any differences. For instance ethic of care can
potentially fix the identity of ‘what it means to be a woman’ in stereotypical ways.

A focus on the eradication of oppression based on sex and gender alone is therefore deemed inadequate. Concerns
include the effect of globalisation on women’s economic position, their ethnicity, their lack of wealth and the
feminisation of poverty. Deborah Rhode suggests that the relationship between a wealthy white woman and her non-
white male domestic staff does not comport with MacKinnon's version of gender hierarchy.

Post-modern feminist such as Janet Halley suggest Taking a Break from Feminism relying on the critical theory.
However, it has been questioned about the risks of doing this in the ‘real world’ and not in theoretical academic
work. What about the concrete injustices women currently live through, for which political feminist activism may be
necessary as empowering tool. Some argue for the importance of retaining and strengthening ideas of individual
personhood for women (Nussbaum, 2000; West, 2003; Marshall). If women around the world are being treated in
ways which devalue their selfhood, what is needed is for it to be built up, not demolished.
Charlotte Bunch has set out four basic approaches to linking women’s rights to human rights 1) Women’s rights as
political and civil rights to highlight the issues of discrimination (Mauritian woman case) 2) Women’s rights as socio-
economic rights to highlight the feminisation of poverty (such as the implementation of Millennium and sustainable
Development Goals ) 3) Women’s rights and the law expands positive obligation of States, e.g. regional systems,
ECtHR in (MARCKS V Beligium) (AYDIN V TURKEY) ,the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of
Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) (AT V Hungary) and the political will shown by the prosecutors and judges
in the ICTY and ICTR to punish gender crimes . The prohibition of Gender-based violence (rape and other forms of
sexual violence) has been recognized as jus cogens (Askin) And 4) Feminist transformation of human rights.

Charlesworth and Chinkin conclude that international law should use existing mechanisms and principles wherever
possible to improve women's lives. At a strategic policy level, Nussbaum points out that, with the dramatic growth in
the movement to recognise women’s rights as human rights under international law, is just beginning to be realised.
For many, there is a revival of some aspect of liberal feminism in the idea of a universal and international human
rights framework (in particular work on sexual violence and conflict; and the developments in international criminal
court) though radical feminist are involved in this work too, as Andrea Dworkin and Catherine MacKinnon have
campaigned for anti-pornography and. Campaign like HASHTAG MeToo and Time’s up work and getting more
media attention. According to Linda Alcoff “The solution lies, in formulating a new theory within the process of
reinterpreting our position, and reconstructing our political identity, as women and feminists in relation to the world
and to one another.”