Jurisprudence on Sex or Race Discrimination

Jurisprudence: Discrimination
Name:
Institution:
Course Code:
Date:
Introduction
The majority of the world population has difficulty embracing the idea that we all should receive non-discriminatory treatments or attention despite our differences. It seems natural to ascribe negative meanings to various differences and associate difference with supposed inferiority or superiority complex. However, such reactions are considered not natural since they can learn and unlearn. There should always be meaning accorded to various existing differences between individuals based on race, ethnicity, nationality, and the various negative effects have on the quality of life around the world. The issues also concern the continuing struggles that the people as moral beings undergo, therefore, calling for an understanding that would ultimately eliminate such vices as racism, discrimination, xenophobia, amongst others from the society.[Shobha, Arora. "Intersectional vulnerability in post-disaster contexts: lived experiences of Dalit women after the Nepal earthquake, 2015." Disasters (2020).]
The beginning of the war against discrimination on the grounds of race and sex demands that people have the right information at all times. Racism exists all over the world and is present in education, workplaces, health care as well as corridors of justice. Such discriminative actions are also found in media as well as the internet. The effects are seen in the stereotypes minority groups seem to hold on the majority, which may represent additional discrimination and suffering for women, children, or those with certain conditions. Racism and sexual discrimination are global realities that require a global response. This is because the victims of such vices in the society may differ in language and culture through sharing similar experiences of discrimination, exclusion, subordination, violence. This calls for all societies to stand and address such discriminatory acts in the forms that they manifest amongst the various populations and cultures. The major concern, in this case, is dealing with various common concerns that entail denial of equality to human beings on the grounds of their race, ethnicity, or nationality. The major challenge for the current generation is not to respond passively towards acceptance of the hand that history has played, but to put efforts towards positive changes that can assure positive impact for the posterity. Importantly, the current universal human rights era provides the necessary much-needed values and means for ending such inequalities, prejudices, and attitudes that sustain such vices.[Lee, C. Toxic waste and race in the United States. Routledge, 2019.] [Ibid (44)] [Levin, Michael. Why race matters. New century books, 2005.]
The past century successfully popularised the idea of universal human rights with the idea not fully understood. However, the essence behind the Universal Declaration of Human Rights focuses on the idea that everyone enjoys the full benefits of the same human rights and equal human dignity. There should be no aspect of denying human rights to individuals just because they are different from others, whether by sex, race, descent, ethnicity, culture, religion, or other grounds. The concept of racism alongside anti-racism is just but a battle for ideas. The current shared context of globalization does not fully encompass the idea of transformation. For instance, the level of communication alongside interconnectedness will not inevitably guarantee the reduction of racism. Therefore, there is a need for a deep intellectual and humane strategy to explore the various cultural roots of racism and discrimination.[Rita, Maran. "A report from the United Nations world conference against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance, Durban, South Africa, 2001." Social Justice 29, no. 1/2 (87-88 (2002): 177-185.]
Liberty
Admittedly, there is a need for all societies to explore the demands and commonalities of both new and old populations to avoid the assumptions on the existing differences. The law, in this case, plays the role of translating the principle of non-discrimination into binding rules that helps society understand the means of handling such matters. The various national and international rules are designed to provide legally binding protections and redress the various victims of such discriminative actions. Further, the rules also impose obligations on various government institutions not to allow discriminatory acts. Various countries have negotiated and ratified international laws in their quest to end racial and sex discrimination effectively over the past and current centuries.[Ibid (179)]
There have been sporadic efforts focusing on providing remedies towards years of segregation and discriminative culture across the globe. For instance, the application of affirmative action programs, which provides measures beyond just simple termination of various discriminatory practices, therefore, help in correcting or compensating for past as well as current discriminatory actions. However, the implication is that not all forms of discrimination present some injustice. It is not obvious that the law ought to intervene in cases relating to unjust discrimination in such a case. There are instances that provide good reasons that favor legislation when it applies to discrimination. Not all discriminative actions are wrong. For instance, places for dressing are always separated by gender or sex. To some extent, this is a clear discriminatory act, but equally not right to insinuate anything wrong with such a policy. Therefore, this calls for refining the term discrimination such that it is all-inclusive, not only referring to differential treatment of an individual on moral grounds. For example, gender-segregated changing rooms may be justifiable in the context that people undress, but race segregation in such context would be an aspect of discrimination.[Beauchamp, Tom L. "In defense of affirmative action." The Journal of Ethics 2, no. 2 (1998): 143-158.] [Ibid]
Gender or sex discrimination is commonplace across the global divide. There are still laws that exist, which deny women the right to represent matrimonial property, the right of inheritance, and the right to work or travel without their husband's permission. There are cases whereby women are subject to immoral actions such as physical abuse, making them suffer extensive discriminatory acts due to their race or sex. In such cases, sex discrimination occurs either directly or indirectly. Some instances take the form of victimization in employment, providing goods and services, housing, and activities related to public authorities. However, the law against gender discrimination does not provide positive discrimination in favor of a particular sex. For instance, employers are not allowed to only promote women recruiting in a particular position when it comes to employment. However, there are cases where the employer can prove the need for particular sex for a certain position. Therefore, this serves the purposes of occupational requirements, not considered sex discrimination. A good example is employing women as counselors within a women's refugee camp. The argument, in this case, could be that women would prefer to talk to other women with similar experiences.[Ibid]
Positive Discrimination
The aspect of treating an individual more favorably in comparison to others owing to protected characteristics is not allowed in most instances unless in the application of a strict occupational requirement. Some of the protected characteristics include but are not limited to gender, age, disability, race, religion, sexual orientation, amongst others. Some situations permit positive discrimination owing to an individual's disability. In such cases, positive discrimination presents an unlawful process that favors prospective employees from the protected characteristic group. Such cases arise where a job applicant or employee is accorded preferential treatment because they possess a protected characteristic regardless of individual merit or qualifications. Consequently, the employer could find it easier to flavoring applications, for instance, from women or ethnic minorities based on their gender or race rather than being the best candidate for a particular role.[Ibid]
Further, setting benchmarks within the recruitment process to take a proportion of people from a particular race or sex, or the act of promoting a specific number of people from a minority group overlooking their merits presents positive discrimination. If an employer treats an employee more favorably or a job applicant owing to sex or race, then they find themselves facing the act of unlawful discrimination. A good illustration may be borrowed from Mr. M Furlong v The Chief Constable of Chesire Police in the 2008 case. The claimant, a white heterosexual male, was unsuccessful in applying for an air force job despite emerging the best in interviews. However, several under-represented minority groups were considered. The court held that in an attempt to boost the diversity within the workforce, Chesire Police were found guilty of the charges of treating lesser from minority groups candidates more favorably.[Tom, Beauchamp. "In Favor of Affirmative Action." In The Affirmative Action Debate, pp. 225-239. Rou...