Thus far, the discussion of a statutory or constitutional guarantee of equality has assumed that some form of legal guarantee of equality is a worthy aim for women. It is worth reflecting on some of the criticisms of such a goal. Some feminist critiques of rights are summarised below. Recourse to the language of rights can give a rhetorical flourish to an argument, but it may provide only an ephemeral political advantage, obscuring the need for political and social change. The inadequacy of rights language Women's experiences and concerns are not easily translated into the narrow individualistic language of rights.
Rights talk overly simplifies complex power relations.
Moreover, the promise of rights may be thwarted by structural inequalities of power. Schemes of rights guarantees mean that rights are treated equally and often have to be balanced against each other. Some feminists have been concerned that allowing the judiciary to interpret and develop rights guarantees gives too much power to an unrepresentative, unaccountable institution, and encourages futile litigation. There are many problematic decisions to which they can point where judges have missed the point of an equality argument entirely. For this reason, some feminists have been more interested in lobbying the political arms of government for practical changes and working for social change, rather than legalising the issues.