1

Estella Jung
10.23.2014
Pol S 398 Midterm 1 Option A Question 1
Depending on the governmental structure of countries, the difference in rights
awareness may greatly differ. Despotic rulers do not have any intention to grant rights that
democratic societies guarantee because they want to uphold a top down structure in which the
elite hold the ability to decide. The concept of rights were first widely acknowledged in the 17th
century beginning with the European social contract theory and John Lockes Two Treatises of
Government. But in the second half of the 20th century as the world began to modernize, more
countries began to adopt democratic structures and rights became fundamental principles these
countries existed on, as could be seen in numerous political documents of the modern age.
However, the question that still remains today is whom these rights apply to and this leads to a
paradox University of Washington Professor Michael McCann refers to in terms of rights.
Although the laws in many areas of the world today guarantee rights on paper, the
interpretation and implementation of these rights is not so equal because it is subject to societal
perspectives and circumstances that might alter the ability of people to take action to preserve
their rights. Whether, animals should be granted rights, whether women and minority members
of society can actively protect their own rights, whether society wishes to grant rights, and how
far rights should be taken and applied is all a great puzzle today.
Animals and nonhuman being have begun to receive increased attention and rights in
recent decades. Rasmussen states in her article that the law can often conceal and justify
violence against animals as a consequence of a rational process. Also, advertisement of happy
meat causes consumers to think that their meat was attained through an ethical process even

though there is no confirmation that the conditions under which the animals were raised was
humane (Rasmussen Page 255). Although its been brought to attention in society that animals
are also living beings with feelings and should not be treated cruelly, laws are often overlooked
because it is in the economic interests of the sellers to have a large output of meat and it is in
the consumers interests to consume the meat. So as long as consumers receive a bit of
reassurance even if its false marketing, they may be easily persuaded. So the effectiveness of
the laws regarding animal cruelty is correlated to how strongly society wishes to enforce this.
Also, humans have prejudices against various types of animals as well; it is acceptable for a
majority of people to eat meats of animals such as cows and pigs but it is socially unacceptable
for people to kill and eat more attractive and adorable pet animals like dogs and cats. So some
animals receive more social protection to begin with than other animals. Also, animals are not
entitled to rights like humans are because they cannot make claims for themselves (Rasmussen
Page 258). In this sense immigrants and African slaves in the past resemble these animals
because the first group lacked the communicative abilities to make claims for themselves and
the latter group was not given recognition as human beings to make claims when they were
wronged. But now that rights are being extended to animals, how do we know how far we
should go in extending rights? It is a question as to rights should be extended to other living
organisms and even technology. McCann discusses that rights are light because they are
dynamic and open to reconstruction when exposed to other factors (McCann Page 248). It is
evident that rights are really transformable especially since rights have now been extended to
nonhumans. This is huge progress in society considering the struggle for racial equality and
rights recognition that occurred just a few decades back. However, the legal recognition of
rights did not solve all issues regarding race.

When examining the justice system in the United States today, there are still many flaws
regarding racial prejudice and inequality. African American people are subject to racial
profiling and unfair treatment far more than any other race because of societal perceptions that
these people are more likely to commit crimes because of their poor circumstances. Because of
continuous racial profiling and arrests, these people can never be free from the cycle of poverty
and resorting to a life of crime due to the lack of options as a felon. Because of this, African
Americans often live in certain areas together, which cause the children to attend the same
schools. This relates to Brown not effectively providing solutions for desegregation in the
schools after the Brown v. Board of Education case (Bell Page 533). Just because schools were
desegregated didnt mean that black children and white children would be intermingling all of a
sudden. The two groups of children continued to live in different neighborhoods and the
standard for the quality of education in the schools was not specified. So the more abundant
white communities still provided better education than did black communities. Although the
law prohibited segregation to level the playing field the lack of specification and
implementation did little to improve education for black children; this case is an example of
how changes in laws are not always effective in producing change. Also, black people wanted
to stop segregation but they often did not think to undo it because they had other priorities to
address first such as ending police violence, gaining jobs, and having access to capital (Bell
Page 531). Even though legally white and black people are supposed to be entitled to equal
rights, actual circumstances are far from equal simply because of differences in affluence and
other factors such as the inability of black people to take action to secure their rights and self
repression for survival. These factors make black people seem more subordinate and gives a
boost to white supremacy.

Just as African American people have been unable to secure their rights, women have
been subject to similar inability to act in situations of injustice. Contemporary
antidiscrimination policies are so that victims carry the responsibility of realizing and reporting
violations but the lack of resources and knowledge in addition to fear causes only a small
percentage of women to achieve a resolution for their claims (Bumiller Page 424). Because of
societal prejudices and judgments, women do not wish to be labeled as the victim and are
hesitant to speak up. Societal perceptions not only prevent women from speaking out about
assault but other forms of violence such as rape. The existing rape culture and slut shaming that
places the blame on the woman for getting raped, create a more negative image of victims.
Other fear factors include the lack of guarantee that they will be believed in court that there will
be a certain penalty for their opponent and they will receive protection from the opponents
anger (Merry Page 374). Women are hesitant because in a widely patriarchal society, it has
always been societal expectations that a wife should not call the police or testify against her
husband and with existing social frameworks and lack of womens knowledge on rights, it is
difficult for them to have the courage to act.
But aside from social factors, it is also very difficult for women to bring a dispute to
court if they are economically dependent on their significant other. Despite womens legal right
to bring disputes to court, they often do not utilize their rights because society creates
circumstances that prevent women from openly taking action. Societal support or creation of
conditions is important for people to claim their rights. The dominant groups in society must be
made willing regardless of whatever scenario makes this plausible in order for rights to be
freely sought out. But once a certain milestone is reached and material gain has been achieved
does not mean that movement is over, an example being the gay and lesbian communities

(Kandaswamy Page 718). Secure benefits and the dilution of social prejudices is crucial for
members of these communities to successfully integrate as rights bearing citizens. However,
there is also a need for progress and reform within the LGBT communities. In terms of gay
rights, white males were given greater recognition to begin with and there were instances of
discrimination within the LGBT community against homosexuals of color and homosexual
females. Similar occurrences took place for other issues such as suffrage; votes were extended
from white males to black males and finally to women. To extend rights across the spectrum to
everyone, people advocating for a unified cause should not think it is over and stop fighting
once they achieve their own rights and benefits. Also, when activists lead movements, they
must make people aware of their rights to effectively take action in claiming their rights.
Numerous societies around the world have transitioned into democracies over the past
century and their legal systems have integrated rights for their citizens. Rights have also been
expanding and changing as people began to speak up and advocate for change. But despite
these laws being in place to protect peoples rights, societal circumstances and prejudices often
prevent people from claiming their rights. The reason people often do not take action to assert
their rights is because they are not aware of those rights, do not have the resources to take
action, and are afraid of social judgment. Human rights have been expanding from one group of
elites to a large spectrum of communities across society, but the allocation of rights is
becoming a more difficult issue to address as rights are being extended to non-humans. Now it
is important to determine who rights should be given to and to determine how the situation
should be resolved if there is a conflict between rights entitled to different parties. However, in
terms of general rights, laws arent enough to enforce and effectively give access of rights to

people. There must be cooperation between law and societal attitudes to ensure that all people
are given the rights they are entitled to.

Bibliography
Bell, Derrick A., Jr. Brown v. Board of Education and the Interest-Convergence Dilemma.
Harvard Law Review 93.3 (1980): 518-33. Print.
Bumiller, Kristin. Victims in the Shadow of the Law: A Critique of the Model of Legal
Protection. The University of Chicago Press 12.3 (1987): 421-39. Print.
Kandaswamy, P. State Austerity and the Racial Politics of Sam-Sex Marriage in the US.
Sexualities 11.6 (2208): 706-25. Print.
McCann, Michael. The Unbearable Lightness of Rights: On Sociolegal Inquiry in the Global
Era. Law and Society Review 48.2 (2014): 245-68. Print.
Merry, Sally E. Rights Talk and the Experience of Law: Implementing Womens Human
Rights to Protection from Violence. Human Rights Quarterly 25 (2003): 343-81. Print.
Rasmussen, Claire E. Are Animal Rights Dead Meat? Southwestern Law Review 41 (2011
-2012): 253-64. Print.