By 1995, many groups were already recognized in the Equal Opportunities in Employment Law (including gender, personal status, sexual orientation, age, race, religion, country of origin, views, affiliation with political party, participation in military reserve duty; in other statutes there are similar prohibitions with regard to disability and a prohibition of genetic discrimination). ... The flip side of the coin is that positive social networking that results from reserve duty is also discounted in discrimination claims, because direct discrimination against an individual in reserve duty should not be overlooked because of other positive externalities. ... The recognition of workers who must attend compulsory reserves as a group that suffers discrimination proved to be more effective than the recognition of the Arab minority, because the nature of equal-opportunities litigation is more appropriate for the type of discrimination suffered by workers on reserve duty. These include, inter alia, the greater role that human rights organizations are taking in the equal-opportunities project, compared to the negligible role of the trade unions; the rise of human rights NGOs and the applicable body of law at a time of decline in collective bargaining; the fragmentation of interests' representation more generally; and the strong individualistic thrust of the equal-opportunities litigation. ... This possibility receives theoretical support from the work of Khan and Blau who demonstrate that gender equality is strongly related to general equality in society and only to a lesser extent to the intensity of equal-opportunities legislation.