MMAJ ACADEMY OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA

Mohd Mojammil Ansari

M.A (2ND SEMESTER)

TOPIC- WOMEN'S EQUALITY AND RELIGIOUS

FREEDOM: A THEORETICAL AND INTERNATIONAL
POLITICS PERSPECTIVES

SUBMITTED TO- PROF. MOHAMMAD SOHRAB

Introduction
Two of the building blocks of human rights, women's equality and religious
freedom, intersect in messy and frequently combative ways. Although both are
codified within international instruments such as the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR), in practice they operate very differently within
cultural, political, and religious contexts. This task analyzes women's equality
and religious freedom under the prism of political and feminist theory, along
with the currents of international politics. It identifies how theoretical
conceptions—e.g., liberalism, feminism, and postcolonialism—affect our grasp
of these subjects and how patterns of global power, state polity, and non-state
agents affect their enactment. The discussion is structured in three broad
sections: theoretical frameworks, global political forces, and case studies,
ending with considerations on how to balance these rights in a globalized world.

Part I: Theoretical Perspectives on Women's Equality and Religious

Freedom
1. Liberalism and Universal Human Rights
Liberal political thought, based in the Enlightenment tradition, focuses on
individual autonomy, equality, and the universality of human rights. From the
liberal standpoint, religious freedom and women's equality are universal rights
that must be safeguarded by the state regardless of religious or cultural
variation. John Locke's theory of natural rights and John Stuart Mill's defense of
individual liberty offer bases for believing that women must have the same
access to education, employment, and political involvement as men, but that
individuals should be allowed to live their religion without compulsion.
Yet liberalism's universalism tends to be blind to cultural and religious
particularities. For example, religious teachings might define gender roles in
ways incompatible with liberal ideals of equality, like prohibitions on women's
leadership within some faiths. Liberal theorists such as Susan Okin critique this
incompatibility, contending that multiculturalism—customarily touted as
liberal— affectively reinforces patriarchal practice within religious
communities. Okin's question, "Is multiculturalism bad for women?”
identifies the tension between group rights (e.g., religious freedom) and
individual rights (e.g., gender equality).
2. Feminist Theory: Intersectionality and Power Structures Feminist theory
offers a critical framework to examine the intersection of religious freedom and
women's equality. Intersectional feminism, as developed by Kimberlé
Crenshaw, focuses on how gender crosses with religion, race, and class to
determine experiences of oppression. Religious conventions tend to perpetuate
patriarchal frameworks, like sartorial codes (e.g., hijab or niqab) or limitations
on birth control, which feminist theorists contend curtail women's autonomy.
However, certain women also choose to adopt these practices as ways of
articulating religious identity, muddying feminist rebukes. Liberal feminism is
concerned with equal rights within current systems, but it can be ineffective in
exposing how religious institutions reinforce systemic inequities. Radical
feminism, on the other hand, sees religion itself as a means of patriarchal
oppression, and demands reform or rejection. Postcolonial feminism, as
developed by researchers such as Chandra Talpade Mohanty, is critical of
Western feminist discourses that represent religious women (for example, hijab-
wearing Muslim women) as necessarily oppressed.
This critique contends that these representations are based on imperialist
assumptions, without regard to women's agency in non-Western societies who
make their way through religious and cultural norms.
3. Postcolonial and Critical Theory: Postcolonial theory resists the Eurocentric
assumptions of liberal and feminist approaches, contending that international
discourses regarding women's equality and religious freedom are informed by
colonial histories. Gayatri Spivak's "strategic essentialism" proposes that
subaltern groups, such as religious women, can temporarily assume
homogeneous identities in order to resist domination, even if those identities are
based on religious practices that seem limiting.
For instance, women in certain Islamic societies employ religious writings to
campaign for gender equality by reinterpreting Quranic scripture to counter
traditional patriarchal meanings.
Critical thinkers such as Michel Foucault also shed more light on how power
works through discourse. The international story of "saving" women from
patriarchal religious practices—commonly linked with Islam in Western
media—is a power dynamic wherein Western powers present themselves as
saviors, yet omit their own histories of gender oppression. The discourse
informs global policies, including interventions in Afghanistan, where the rights
of women were invoked to legitimize military intervention, without necessarily
accounting for local dynamics.
4. Religious Freedom as a Double- Edged Sword: Religious freedom theories,
including those expounded by scholars such as Martha Nussbaum, place
particular focus on the capability approach, under which individuals ought to be
free to live their notion of the good life, including their religion. Religious
freedom can, though, destroy women's equality by defending patriarchal
practices. For example, exemptions permitting religious institutions to
discriminate on the grounds of gender (e.g., excluding women from priesthood
in Catholicism) bring out the conflict between group religious rights and
individual gender rights.

On the other hand, curbing religious practice, e.g., prohibitions on headscarves

in France, can unfairly disadvantage women by restricting their agency and
public participation.

Part II: International Politics and the Global Landscape

1. International Legal Frameworks
Global politics has a central role in influencing the rhetoric and application of
women's equality and religious liberty. Major tools are:
*Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948): Articles 2 and 18 guarantee
equality and freedom of religion, respectively, but lack binding power to
enforce.
*Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
(CEDAW, 1979): CEDAW advocates for gender equality but encounters
reservations by states based on religious or cultural reasons, especially by
Islamic nations.
*UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief (1981): This focuses on religious
freedom but doesn't specifically cover its intersection with gender.
These frameworks are an expression of a liberal consensus but find it difficult to
enforce because of state sovereignty and cultural relativism. For example, Saudi
Arabia signed CEDAW but left reservations under Sharia law, which shows the
difficulty of balancing universal rights and religious norms.
2. State Policies and Secularism: State policies towards women's equality and
religious freedom differ according to political systems and secularism models.
In secular states like France, laïcité (secularism) restricts religious expressions
in public spaces, such as banning hijabs in schools. While framed as promoting
gender equality, such policies often marginalize Muslim women, limiting their
access to education and employment. Conversely, theocratic states like Iran
enforce religious dress codes, restricting women’s autonomy under the guise of
religious freedom.
Both methods identify how state power can repress one right in pursuit of
another.
In multicultural democracies with multicultural policies, like Canada, religious
freedom is accommodated in the form of exemptions (e.g., permitting Sikh
women to wear headscarves in public institutions). Yet, such accommodations
raise questions about whether they perpetuate patriarchal norms among minority
groups. The tension illustrates a larger issue in international politics: how to
balance universal human rights with regard for cultural diversity.
3. Non-State Actors and Transnational Movements
Non-state actors such as religious bodies, NGOs, and feminist activism have a
remarkable impact on international discourse. Religious bodies tend to oppose
reforms to advance women's equality on the grounds of purity of doctrine. For
instance, the Catholic Church's opposition to women's ordination is indicative of
a transnational influence affecting gender norms across Catholic-majority
nations. By contrast, feminist transnational mobilizations like #MeToo or
Women Living Under Muslim Laws (WLUML) campaign for gender equality
with sensitivity to religion.
Terrorist groups and extremist organizations further complicate the situation.
Organizations such as ISIS have employed religious discourse to legitimize
gender-based violence, while counterterrorism strategies tend to define women's
rights as a security concern, such as in U.S. interventions in Iraq and
Afghanistan. These dynamics underscore how women's equality and religious
freedom are politicized in international conflicts.
4. Geopolitical Power Dynamics
Geopolitical tensions determine the promotion of women's equality and
religious freedom. Western nations tend to criticize non-Western nations (e.g.,
Iran, Saudi Arabia) for gender inequality based on religious practices, while
underplaying their own concerns, e.g., workplace discrimination or limits on
reproductive rights. Such selective attention indicates a power imbalance where
women's rights are used as a tool of moral superiority. Non-Western nations, in
turn, charge the West with cultural imperialism, justifying religious practices on
the grounds of national identity.
The ascension of populist and authoritarian governments makes things even
more complex. Governments in Turkey and India, among others, more and more
move towards religious majoritarianism (Islam in Turkey, Hinduism in India),
both challenging women's equality and religious minority freedoms. These
phenomena reflect how local politics intersect with international human rights
norms.

Part III: Case Studies

1. Iran: Mandatory Hijab and Women's Resistance Iran's theocratic government
imposes mandatory hijab regulations in the name of Islamic values, which
women see as an infringement on their freedom. The death in custody in 2022
of Mahsa Amini for dress code violations triggered nationwide protests under
the banner "Women, Life, Freedom." These protests express a call for both
gender equality and liberation from state-imposed religious strictures.
Theoretically, postcolonial feminists contend that Western media's emphasis on
the hijab simplifies Iranian women's agency because many utilize religious
discourses to push for reform.
In global politics, Iran's resistance to Western sanctions and human rights
criticism demonstrates how geopolitical tensions block progress toward
women's equality.
2. France: Headscarf Bans and Secularism France's 2004 ban on school
religious symbols and 2010 burqa ban are defended as upholding secularism
and gender equality. Yet, the policies unfairly target Muslim women, restricting
their presence in public space and perpetuating stereotypes. Feminist theorists
oppose the bans as paternalistic, claiming they undermine women's autonomy to
select their clothing. Internationally, France's policies have estranged Muslim-
majority nations and sparked controversy surrounding Islamophobia, illustrating
the international implications of policies that begin at home.
3. India: Triple Talaq and Religious Freedom
India's 2019 prohibition on triple talaq (instant Islamic divorce) was presented
as a triumph of Muslim women's equality. It provoked debate, however, among
Muslim communities who perceived it as a restriction of religious freedom.
According to postcolonial theorists, the Hindu-dominant government's move
reflects a larger project of minority marginalization. Globally, the case shows
how women's rights are co-opted for advancing nationalist interests at the
expense of complicating equality and religious freedom.

Part IV: Balancing Women's Equality and Religious Freedom

Balancing women's equality and religious freedom calls for a sophisticated
approach that honors both universal rights and cultural diversity. Theoretically, a
hybrid model that blends liberalism's focus on individual rights, feminism's
emphasis on intersectionality, and postcolonialism's challenge to power
relations provides a path forward. Such an approach would emphasize:
1. Contextual Universalism: Accepting universal rights but being willing to
accommodate cultural and religious contexts. For instance, implementation of
CEDAW might entail negotiations with religious leaders to reconcile gender
equality with the local context.
2. Empowering Women's Agency: Policies must empower the voices of women
within religious communities, advocating grassroots movements such as those
in Iran that reinterpret religious scriptures for equality.
3. Overcoming Power Distributions: Global actors need to overcome
geopolitical biases, eschewing the use of women's rights to legitimize
interventions or assert cultural superiority.
[Link] Secularism: States need to emulate models of secularism that
tolerate religious diversity but do not entrench patriarchal traditions, such as
Canada's multicultural model.

In global politics, multilateral organizations such as the UN need to enhance

enforcement measures, e.g., sanctions or incentives, to enforce human rights
standards. NGOs and transnational movements can act as bridges by facilitating
dialogue among secular and religious feminists, ensuring common objectives.
Conclusion
The nexus of women's equality and religious freedom is a complicated
landscape defined by theoretical discussions and global political forces.
Liberalism, feminism, and postcolonialism provide alternative but
complementary perspectives on how these rights can be harmonized, while
global power relations, state policies, and non-state actors shape their
enforcement. Case studies from Iran, France, and India demonstrate the varied
ways in which these problems present themselves, highlighting the necessity for
context-dependent solutions. By promoting dialogue, strengthening women's
agency, and overcoming geopolitical biases, the global community can move
towards a world where religious freedom and women's equality exist in
harmony.
This balance is not only a human rights issue but also a prerequisite for global
peace and justice.

References
• Crenshaw, K. (1989). "Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex."
University of Chicago Legal Forum.
• Mohanty, C. T. (2003). Feminism Without Borders: Decolonizing Theory,
Practicing Solidarity. Duke University Press.
• Nussbaum, M. (2011). Creating Capabilities: The Human Development
Approach. Harvard University Press.
• Okin, S. M. (1999). Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? Princeton University
Press.