Human rights are inherent attributes of a person, by its mere status of being without distinction of age, race, sex, nationality or social class. Human rights have the following characteristics:
- Universality: are inherent in all people, in all political, economic and cultural systems. Also cannot transferred to another person or give them up;
- Integrity, interdependence and indivisibility: Each with, the other rights are relate. Form a whole (civil, political, economic, social and cultural) and cannot sacrifice a specific right for defend another ; and
- Enforceability: to be recognized by States in international and national law. This permits require compliance and enforcement.
That says a legal doctrine and the general ground rules of modern Western societies; but there is a big gap between policy and practice, between equality of law and equality of real life. The rules of social order are consequences of social and cultural patterns and therefore the conception and implementation of human rights, was designed from its inception in male key: the man at the center of human thought, the historical development, as one actor, and parameter of humanity.
The rights of women were thought of as a particular universal male; and under a conception of women as a minority. Should be remembered, for example, that for a long time, women benefited from some rights by extension, being a citizen wives of male gender; or were denied rights such as suffrage, not recognized until the early twentieth century. This led to the historical exclusion of women, the invisibility of differences, diversity; and above all specificities and needs of the female population.
The gender perspective leads us to the characteristics of women and men, socially defined and molded by cultural factors, which is why they are amenable to transformation. Discrimination against women has been part of the history of mankind. The gender perspective helps us understand why the doctrine of human rights – in constant evolution and development – has provided conceptual extensions and explicit recognition of the rights of women.
So answering the question in the title: it’s a yes. But two aspects should be considered:
The size of the damage in the short term not be serious in real terms, because they affect the freedom and security of women. This is because the “ban” or “obligation” to do always generates a social disarticulation of those people they have not learned the new rules and their social context.
And knowing that: The real historical process demand primarily educational activities, not corrective. That the true conquest is achieved when a right becomes a moral axiom of conduct for all individuals. And this takes time.