The second-wave feminist movement called attention to the endurance of discriminatory laws that deny women equal rights and opportunities. Since the 1970s, most countries around the world responded to feminist demands and reformed family law, labor law, reproductive rights, national constitutions, and the welfare state. Yet almost nowhere do women enjoy the same status, power, and opportunities as men, and differences among women along the lines of class, racial identity, and region are pronounced. Why does the gap between women’s de jure and de facto status persist? Is there any connection between egalitarian laws and women’s agency on the ground? Which groups of women have benefited the most from the expansion of formal rights? What cultural practices and norms are most resistant to change? Are there unexpected, subtle, or contradictory ways in which legal change has shaped women’s work and women’s empowerment? The five papers in this Special Issue analyze historical and cross-sectional observational data to explore connections between gender-related legal regimes, women’s work, and women’s empowerment. They identify key factors that intervene between legal provisions and the status of women on the ground. The papers demonstrate that context matters: wealth inequality, social norms, infrastructure, political regimes, and labor market characteristics shape the ways that discriminatory and emancipatory laws take hold—or not—in society.

中文翻译：

---

社会政治特刊简介：法律制度、妇女工作和妇女赋权†

第二波女权运动呼吁人们关注剥夺妇女平等权利和机会的歧视性法律的持久性。自 1970 年代以来，世界上大多数国家都响应了女权主义的要求，改革了家庭法、劳动法、生殖权利、国家宪法和福利国家。然而，几乎没有任何地方女性享有与男性相同的地位、权力和机会，而且女性在阶级、种族身份和地区方面的差异非常明显。为什么女性在法律上和事实上的地位之间的差距持续存在？平等主义法律与当地妇女机构之间是否有任何联系？哪些妇女群体从正式权利的扩大中受益最大？哪些文化习俗和规范最难以改变？是否有意想不到的、微妙的、还是法律变革塑造妇女工作和妇女赋权的矛盾方式？本特刊中的五篇论文分析了历史和横断面观察数据，以探讨与性别相关的法律制度、妇女工作和妇女赋权之间的联系。他们确定了干预法律规定和当地妇女地位的关键因素。这些论文证明了背景很重要：财富不平等、社会规范、基础设施、政治体制和劳动力市场特征塑造了歧视性和解放性法律在社会中的地位——或不——的方式。妇女的工作和妇女赋权。他们确定了干预法律规定和当地妇女地位的关键因素。这些论文证明了背景很重要：财富不平等、社会规范、基础设施、政治体制和劳动力市场特征塑造了歧视性和解放性法律在社会中的地位——或不——的方式。妇女的工作和妇女赋权。他们确定了干预法律规定和当地妇女地位的关键因素。这些论文证明了背景很重要：财富不平等、社会规范、基础设施、政治体制和劳动力市场特征塑造了歧视性和解放性法律在社会中的地位——或不——的方式。