Introduction
In the Articles of Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the rights of human beings are clearly acquainted. This shows that every human being has his/her own rights for certain basic things, which help him/her to lead a peaceful life. As it is mentioned in UDHR, it is our right to get our basic needs to live, “including food, clothing, housing and medical care” (Article 25(1)). The common understanding of human rights is more important to give and get respect to rights that are proclaimed for others and us. While thinking of rights of sartorial, clothing has to be considered as one of the basic needs for every human being as we are all living in a century where clothing is considered as important think to show the standard of human beings from the barbarous life. It has to be a right of everyone to have his or her sartorial practices. Therefore, the basic need becomes a right. If we think about rights of sartorial, the several features like culture, religion, transnational aspects have to be taken in to consideration to describe the rights of sartorial. The religious ideas that affect the sartorial of women has prevented many Muslim countries from accepting the Articles of Universal Declaration of Human Rights as they insist their women to wear modest form of dress, usually hijab. If there is a right of sartorial, then all the problems regarding will come to an end.
Fashion, Feminism, and Rights
Feminism has jeopardy while discussing about the customs of dress and it made them to worry whether they are being empowered or disempowered. Feminists feel sartorial culture will influence the women’s lives and want to engage themselves in revising the approach towards sartorial practice. In Susan Brownmiller’s “Feminism,” she writes, “every wave of feminism has foundered on the question of dress reform” (Brownmiller, 79). While discussing about the fashion and feminism, it has to be considered whether fashion played a vital role in the oppression of women as a few countries and religion still showing their chauvinism over women by not allowing them to wear what they feel comfortable for them. Even in this ultra-modernistic century, people are still subjugating the freedom of women. Feminists are insisting that if every human being has the right t take decision about their life and future, women should have rights to take decision regarding their attire. A feminist questioned about the usage of gender specific words like his, him, he that found in the Articles of Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Her question is are women human beings or not, as she feels the rights are proclaimed only for men and not for women who still longing for their rights even to breath. In the name of religion, a few countries are still restricting freedom for women especially in the case of dress. They stick to their religious ideology to dominate the feeling of women. In the Article of Universal Declaration of Human Rights, we all have “right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion”; the freedom here means that we have “freedom to change religion or belief” (UDHR, Article 18). If the religion wants women to be under the rules of their religion even for their sartorial practices, which is a common need for all human being, then women have to take decision of moving to their comfortable vision. It will be better for women if they get their right over their clothes, then it will end up the all the torture they are facing. In the feminist perspective, it is essential for a right of sartorial to save women from clutches.
Declaration of Rights of Sartorial
Rights of sartorial have to be declared with the certain limitation for the welfare of tradition and culture of nation. Following are the rights that have to be included in the Articles of Universal Declaration of Human Rights will be better for the standard of living of many. Everyone has the right to freedom of wearing something up to his/her comfortable level, but it should carry with its special duties and responsibilities, and therefore, it may be subject to certain restrictions and these shall only be provided by law or are necessary for respect or for safety purposes. Clothing is one of the basic needs that differentiate humans from other living beings. If that need becomes a right, then no one can stop any one from wearing or taking decision wearing cloths of his or her own wish and comfort. Sartorial is a need, so every individual has his or her right over it to ask for.
Conclusion
Like food and air, clothing has become a part of the package of the basic need. It is debatable area whether clothing is a right or need. Anyhow, there is a need for a right of sartorial for various reasons. Under the Articles of UDHR, while exercising rights and freedom, it should be considered as everyone “shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedom of others” (Article 29(2)). Therefore, the right of sartorial can be amended with certain limitations to help save the tradition and culture. Amending right of sartorial will be the most welcoming one in many countries as it is a basic need of all human beings.
Works Cited
Darraj, Susan Muaddi. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. New York: Chelsea House, 2010. Print.
Edwards, Alison. Rape, Racism, and the White Women's Movement: An Answer to Susan Brownmiller. Chicago, Il.: Sojourner Truth Organization, n.d. Print.
Glendon, Mary Ann. A World Made New: Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. New York: Random House, 2001. Print.
Hashmi, Sohail H. Islamic Political Ethics: Civil Society, Pluralism, and Conflict. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 2002. Print.
Price, Daniel E. Islamic Political Culture, Democracy, and Human Rights: A Comparative Study. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1999. Print.
