Present paper attempts to outline in great abstraction certain developments in legal systems of Central and Eastern European states regarding gender equality. It addresses a question whether the reforms have brought about real societal changes. Notably，I argue here that for different reasons，to be specified below，the extensive adoption of international and national norms concerning equal treatment of both sexes have remained empty in substance. People are responding to this complex situation invoking as determinedly as in beginning of 90’s the traditional gender roles. It is therefore difficult to forecast what will the recently achieved normative turn mean for real-life gender equality.

In the beginning of 90’s Central and Eastern European states found themselves in international arena as sovereign entities with possibility to freely acquire international obligations and choose the norm-systems that would guide expected legal reforms in these countries. This was no less the case in the field of standards of gender equality，where universal （United Nations） standards are complemented by regional systems of law （or in certain cases they are considered as alternatives）.

Most of these states immediately ratified the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.1609529 （CEDAW） as well as the majority of other human rights instruments. Yet the substantial shift in practice concerning treatment of male and female citizens and the legal response to it did not occur. One must emphasis here the particular experience regarding gender equality common to so-called former Socialist bloc countries and the countries occupied by Soviet Union. The well established and documented analyses maintain that although former Soviet Union highly valued gender equality to the point that traditional gender roles were seemingly weakened，minimum parity in decision-making was reached and most importantly high percentage of women became occupied in labour market already as early as 50’s，no real equality between women and men was reached nor was it a real objective of the authorities.1609530

The legal reform in the field of gender equality in this region has been triggered considerably more by European Union integration and the European standards of gender equality than international law （CEDAW or political undertakings such as Beijing +5 Principles）. This phenomenon is due to the fact that European Union law includes high standards which have developed more than 30 years alongside with women’s movement.1609531 Gender equality has long been recognised within the Community as a fundamental principle，since recently a fundamental right and is named as an ‘objective’ within the founding Treaty.

This developed is understandable for several reasons：the soft law like nature of international standards，where neither legal remedies nor norms of state responsibility are available do not pressure states sufficiently in order to change domestic laws and practices. More over the existing norms are not directly applicable before internal courts （either no creation of individual rights or lack of precision in wording） and remain distant for the intended beneficiaries. Then again in case of EU integration the Real Politik argument goes strong penetrating even the social law reform-joining supranational entity that provides economic and defence guarantees pushes candidate countries to stand up to standards adopted.

The process of transposing the acquis was already by period of 2002-2003 （just before the official joining date in 1 May 2004） well advanced in many candidate countries，in particular the Czech Republic，Lithuania and Slovenia，where even a number of further steps to original gender equality regulations were added in 2002.1609532 Some of the other candidate states lagging behind. As of today，however，the national laws of all new member states have been in essence harmonised with the acquis on gender equality.

I argue that by transposing European Union equality standards into the national laws the Member States have lead a very formalistic reform. The radical change in discourse have been taken place without any substantial support from people to whom new norms will apply and decision-makers have not really acknowledged a need to bring about the amendments to the domestic regulation. In other words the states have done everything to establish the formal accordance of national rules with their international counterparts while paying no attention to the real necessities deriving from particular practices and economical situations of the respective state. Most of these transition countries have since the beginning of 90’s experienced increased unemployment，poorer working conditions and cuts in public spending on health and childcare. The changes have disproportionately affected women，although the degree to which this is true differs substantially among the various countries. Paralleling to above said the issues like domestic and sexual violence that may have been even a greater problem to women from this region than attaining full employment and equal pay did not receive necessary attention in the beginning of 90’s.

Not regarding these alarming indicators have resulted in these societies being uneasy about numerous gender equality issues and they have not managed to become familiar with these common human rights standards1609533 not to mention the citizen empowerment. People from various social groups claim that changes have occurred without their approval-classical argument maintained even more often by women than men. Therefore the number of discrimination cases treated before national courts of the region has remained marginal showing no considerable change even after passing the first specialised equality acts. Labour market practices remain discriminatory towards to large amount of different social groups，gender pay gap is reported not to decrease but to increase1609534 etc.

Author of the present paper does not question the meaningfulness of legal reform in order to attempt achieving real equality （that is individual rights，new patterns of behaviour，as well as remedies，sanctions to oblige subjects to act in accordance with respective norms）. Yet it must be said that present metamorphoses of law have not reached the areas of society it should have and it remains a mystery whether it will. That is the formal rules of equality are there but deep structures of inequality remain intact for a long time.

Alongside with the questions that point to the legitimacy of feminist aspirations in all times and places or superiority of rights-based cultures above all others，one would like to contemplate on whether regional hard law standards should come with a package asserting positive gender difference （gender identities have become hopelessly confused and complex since the beginning of transition！—issue that needs to be treated separately） —something that feminist theory and women’s movement have had difficulties to come up with.1609535