A belief in universal human rights is necessary for our ability to feel connected to each other in the face of our staggering diversity of culture, taste and thoughts. It inspires trust that others have similar moral compasses and that their actions should reflect this compass. This is the ideology behind the creation of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights which was written and agreed upon by members of various countries. Article 2.1 of the declaration emphasizes the importance of being able to access all human rights outlined in the document regardless of gender, age, religion or race.

But what happens when the Declaration is confronted with contradictory cultural norms that inhibit its implementation? This problem is evident in Saudi Arabia where some women report not having the freedom and independence they should be entitled to according to the Declaration. Recently, The New York Times published an opinion article featuring a documentary about the legislation that finally enabled women not only to vote, but to also run for positions in the Saudi government. This commentary on women’s rights in Saudi Arabia received varying reviews ranging from utter adoration to great disdain. This disparity in reaction questions how human rights fit in a world where cultural relativism is promoted.

Cultural relativism is the idea that there is no culture that is superior to the other. This applies to the moral rules of the culture as well. If people are to adopt this idea of cultural relativism, normally taken as a sign of respecting other cultures, they may accept Saudi Arabia’s gender-skewed laws as just another part of their culture that cannot be scrutinized by outsiders. The danger of this is that an extremist view of cultural relativism can act as a green light for oppressive and harmful practices and lead to a hesitation to draw the line between what is acceptable and what is not.

Most people agree that cultural relativism should not be an excuse for murder, physical or mental harm or repression. However, what they disagree on is who should draw this precarious line that separates acceptable and unacceptable cultural practices. In the article in question, the Western world is the one to draw the line. There is an obvious emphasis on Western feminism and a minimization of other perspectives.

Much of the article is composed of quotes from women who wrote to The New York Times explaining how they feel about the male guardianship system. Most of the quotes are from women who have experienced great injustice and even abuse at the hands of their male guardians. These quotes are important as they give a voice to women who feel that they are being minimized in society. The possibility of sharing their experiences with the world gives these women an outlet to release their frustrations. Nevertheless, there is only a small section of quotes for women who have opposing, more positive views about the guardianship system, demonstrating an imbalance in perspective and an underlying political agenda that compromises the ethics of journalism.

The response to the article from Saudi women living in and out of Saudi Arabia has been mixed. Some have praised the article for allowing women the freedom to talk about their struggles, while others have condemned the author of the article for skewing the image of their country in the eyes of the world. In the documentary, the journalist, after receiving indifferent reactions from some women about the new opportunity to vote, states that “even though I don’t live here, I think I care more about the opportunity to vote than they do.” As such, implicit messages of superiority over Saudi women are evident in the article.

The article also fails to acknowledge the advances Saudi Arabia has made in terms of women’s rights and instead zones in exclusively on its flaws. Many Saudi women report that the men in their lives also see how restrictive the guardian system is and do not impose it on them. These women also view the ability to vote and be elected as evidence of how far they have come. In the article, one woman proudly declares that “Saudi women have accomplished so much but do not advertise it. There is a long history of women that have worked tirelessly to help the society and build up the country.”

The idea of cultural relativism should be preventing the creation of a hierarchical structure, where certain cultures are considered the ideal and other cultures are condemned for not replicating the dominant culture. It should acknowledge that cultures do not have the same roots or course of development. Thus, differences are inevitable. What matters then is not how others feel about the culture, but what the people living in the culture think about it. Many women in Saudi Arabia do feel frustrated and restricted, and this demonstrates a need to reform culture. Reforms, in order to be sustainable, should never be forced upon a nation. People within a nation or a community need to rise up against their practices if they feel that they are outdated or no longer representative of their current mindsets. Excessive input from outsiders causes people to put up defense mechanisms and may result in the inhibition of change.