Feminism, Globalization and Culture: After Beijing

In this article, Professor Obiora begins with the premise that the credibility of traditional legal frameworks has eroded, because the law remains unable to relieve the oppressions and polarization between cultures, even in the wake of global institutional transformations that seem to help the oppressed, particularly women. Professor Obiora offers the Beijing Platform for Action as a radical new solution for human rights protection, radical in that it is one of the first declaratives to transcend the previous dichotomy of issues among women by expressing a commitment to a global framework in which to address these issues, particularly the feminization ofpoverty. After a briefdescription of the Platform, the author asks whether it is really possible to provide such a global framework, given the inherently cultural and communitarian nature of feminist issues. In the second section, Professor Obiora argues that because the Platform for Action is not a legally binding instrument, and because traditional sources of monetary and social support may not be present, particularly in developing countries, alternative mechanisms for enforcement of the Platform must be explored As a solution, the author suggests that in order to realize the Bey\u27ing mandate, women need to collaborate and move to mechanisms outside traditional institutions. In the third section of the article, Professor Obiora responds to Aihwa Ong \u27s article, and begins by highlighting Ong\u27s concept offeminist imperialism as a starting context for a discussion of the role of culture in defining a feminist agenda for the alleviation of women\u27s oppression. Professor Obiora then argues that the international human rights regime is enhanced by culturally-sensitive approaches, as centrality is the framework for existence. Yet, Professor Obiora questions how to define and validate custom or culture in light of the inevitable effect of world economic, political, and cultural forces. Professor Obiora also questions how to reconcile the validation of cultural practices that are seen by Western feminists as oppressive to the women who practice them. Finally, in the fourth section, Professor Obiora attempts to integrate the previously raised issues with a discussion of a universalist-relativist framework. In doing so, the author suggests that the greatest challenge to developing a human rights regime that appeals to all cultures may be to negotiate a productive end for the recognition of difference, balancing the benefits of both universalism and relativism