Document Type

Article

Disciplines

International Law

Abstract

Our sisters in the East are justifiably concerned about the effects of gender-specific regulations in the workplaces of market-based economies. The pernicious history of protective legislation in the industrialized countries of the West tells a cautionary tale of restricted opportunities for women in paid employment, whether the restrictions are the product of rude bias, good intentions, or misguided hopes for universally improved conditions developing from gender-specific rules.' The legacy of this history is a healthy skepticism about any gender-based differentiation of employment terms.

We should not, however, automatically regard legal recognition of differences as inevitably harmful for women. Recent experience in the West suggests that, under the right conditions, narrowly tailored protective provisions benefit women as we struggle to transform the workplace from a man-friendly to a person-friendly environment. I have in mind the examples of affirmative action, maternity leaves, and state-supported child care. Concomitantly, there is reason to hope for a discerning response to genderspecific laws in the East. Women and men raised on the twin ideologies of social solidarity and gender equality are well-situated to recognize and resist laws which limit their opportunities and to promote regulations that take into account relevant differences in biology and social experience. The hard work ahead is to identify the criteria for assessing genderspecific provisions that advance women's long-term interests. These preliminary observations are offered in aid of this task.

Accessibility Requirements

1

Download

Share

COinS