Turkish Forum

Tag: Women Issues

  • Feature: Women in politics

    Feature: Women in politics

    Saturday, 13, Dec 2008 12:01

    On this day in 1918, women voted in a British general election for the first time.

    Ninety years later and things still aren’t rosy. Until 20 years ago women never made up more than five per cent of MPs in parliament. Now they’re 20 per cent. It’s an improvement, but it’s not exactly half-and-half.

    The UK has fewer female MPs than Cambodia. It comes 15th for representation in national parliaments compared to the other 27 EU member states. In a country that’s otherwise so progressive, why do we still have so few women MPs?

    “It’s not harder for women,” says Jo Swinson, Liberal Democrat equality spokesperson. “It’s just harder for carers.”

    “The division of family duties in society is still very unequal. This is what we find all the time. Women get involved in politics in their twenties and then in their thirties they say ‘I’ll take time out’. But men don’t take that time out.”

    Ann Cryer, the Labour MP who dedicated herself to a campaign against forced marriage, agrees. “By its nature it’s difficult, because parliament is usually two or four hundred miles from where people live. That’s a problem for women with young children. It’s also a problem for men with young children but I think women have a stronger emotional attachment to their children than men have. That’s not to deride men, but you’re not going to get rid of that emotional attachment just like that.”

    You can see the truth of that by the culture of parliament as well as its composition. The old adage was that it had a shooting range, but no creche. No-one seems to know if that shooting range is still there, but there’s certainly no creche. Even today, the atmosphere in the House, and to a lesser extent in the halls and corridors of Westminster, retain an unmistakably male character.

    Swinson cites the response to Nick Clegg’s performance during this week’s prime minister’s questions as an example. Clegg got up to ask about a single mother who came to his surgery as an example of lower-income groups facing criminal penalties for being unable to pay back money given to them mistakenly in tax credits. He probably wasn’t thinking about the interview he gave to Piers Morgan nearly a year ago in which he admitted sleeping with about 30 women. MPs were. He only managed to say: “This week a single mother came to my surgery in Sheffield…” before someone on the other benches shouted: “Thirty-one”. MPs laughed for a good long time.

    “I was appalled they started laughing and applauding,” says Swinson. “I know he made those ill-judged comments a year ago, but you hear the phrase single mother and the first thing you think is sex? And then I thought – if this room wasn’t 80 per cent male would it be the same reaction? It was puerile. And puerile comes from the Latin word for ‘boy’.”

    Some observers also find something a little masculine about the way parliament is set out. Call it over-analysing, but there are a few people who think that represents a masculine way of doing things; a politics based on conflict rather than consensus.

    “I think it’s significant,” says Katherine Rike, director of women’s rights group The Fawcett Society. “Most new administrations [such as Scotland or Wales] have chosen not to construct their parliament in that way – they’re circular. We’re trying to fit women into an institutional design which is very masculine and there are limits to how much can change within that complex.”

    “It’s adversarial,” Cryers agrees. “And I think it’s more difficult for women to cope with that adversarial nature. It took me a year or two to feel sufficiently confident to stand up and speak without notes and just talk. I did find it hard at first because I’m a naturally quiet person and when you’re speaking in the Commons people will just shout at you.”

    It’s tempting to draw a conclusion about the link between our old building and our shoddy ranking in the international league table of women’s representation, but things are rarely that simple. Whatever the reasons, women are still facing a mountain when they decide to go into politics.

    “I’ve been on the Council of Europe where you sit down in a semi-circle with a proper desk and water and a microphone. It’s a more civilised way of doing things,” Cryer says.

    “But I’m not going to knock our parliament. It’s the best job in the world. I hope women will still feel they have a place in it. It’s so important women feel they can get in there.

    “My grandmother worked with the Suffragettes. She gave a great chunk of her life up for that and I think what she did is just now coming to fruition. So whoever’s reading this please do try for parliament. Don’t lose sight of it. It’s important.”

    Ian Dunt

    Source: www.politics.co.uk, 13 Dec 2008


  • Soul-Searching in the CHP: Baykal’s “Chador Opening”

    Soul-Searching in the CHP: Baykal’s “Chador Opening”

    Soul-Searching in the CHP: Baykal’s “Chador Opening”

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 5 Issue: 236
    December 11, 2008
    By: Saban Kardas

    Deniz Baykal, the leader of the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), kindled a controversial debate in Turkish politics when he introduced his new project to reach out to conservative circles. During a party meeting, Baykal pinned party rosettes on women wearing black chadors (carsaf), welcoming them to the CHP (www.ntvmsnbc.com, November 17). Since then, Baykal’s “chador initiative” has sparked a major debate within the CHP as well as between the CHP and other parties.

    The initiative was surprising to many, because the CHP, like Turkey’s military and higher echelons of the judiciary, has presented itself as a major defender of Kemalist principles, in particular the narrow interpretation of secularism. After all, it was the CHP that brought the case before the Constitutional Court earlier this year, demanding the annulment of legislative changes that would have enabled girls with headscarves to attend universities. The court, sharing the same worldview as the CHP, annulled those changes in June (EDM, June 5).

    Given the party’s previous position on the headscarf issue, criticism was expressed across the political spectrum over Baykal’s latest political move. Pundits in conservative and secularist camps slammed Baykal’s move: for the former, it was insincere (Vakit, November 23); and for the latter it was a regression from the gains of the Kemalist revolution and a step toward Shari’a rule (Hurriyet, November 20). Both camps believe that Baykal is seeking to make inroads into conservative circles but that the effort will be futile. Others also noted the women Baykal met were not representative of conservative women; they joined the party only because of their husbands’ opportunistic hopes of gaining political positions (www.internethaber.com, November 20).

    Some of the CHP’s political opponents found this initiative a tactical move to attract conservative voters in the forthcoming local elections. Ironically, Culture and Tourism Minister Ertugrul Gunay, who is a former secretary-general of the CHP and a member of the governing Justice and Development Party (AKP) since 2007, sharply criticized the move. “This is mere vote hunting. Far from being a [libertarian] opening, I see this as abuse,” he said. Gunay, however, also fired a few shots at his own party’s supporters, by referring to the chador as outmoded apparel for women (Sabah, December 6). Gunay’s position contrasted with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s sympathetic response to his archenemy Baykal. Erdogan congratulated Baykal for this courageous move and encouraged him to be vigilant against criticism (www.ntvmsnbc.com, November 25).

    In response to charges of pragmatism, CHP officials stressed that this development was sincere and was demanded by the party’s grass-roots supporters. In defense of his position, Baykal said, “Turkey is going through a healthy debate. This is not a [political] opening, but rather completely humanitarian and ethical behavior.” Noting that 70 percent of Turkish women cover their hair, Baykal added that chador was a traditional outfit in Turkey, not a political symbol. Arguing that the CHP valued people for their opinion, not their appearance, he added that his party was open to those who did not have problems with secularism and the state. (ANKA, November 26).

    When criticism from within the secularist camp continued unabated, Baykal took further radical steps and argued that the CHP should engage in self-criticism and come to terms with the mistakes in its past, acknowledging that there might have been undue interference in people’s private lives. Viewing people’s clothing as a challenge to the state “is a mentality of a one-party regime. Everybody has to abandon that obsession.” Noting that Turkey was already socially fragmented, Baykal confronted his critics and maintained that the CHP could not afford the luxury of dividing the country further by judging people based on their appearance (Yeni Safak, December 3).

    Nonetheless, the “chador initiative” has provoked enmity within the CHP. Baykal’s call for a critical reflection on the party’s past angered more radical voices. Necla Arat, a parliamentary deputy from Istanbul and one of the fervent advocates of the headscarf ban, disparaged Baykal. She said that “criticizing practices during the era of Ataturk and Ismet Inonu [the second president of Turkey] because of ‘one-party-rule’ is unfortunate. My friends and I have started wondering whether the party is betraying its heritage [reddi miras].” Scores of other CHP deputies reportedly share Arat’s opinion (Hurriyet, December 4).

    A rather surprising attack on Baykal came from the leader of the Nationalist Action Party (MHP), Devlet Bahceli, who said that this issue was, in fact, a non-issue and did not correspond to the real problems of the people. He said, “As part of the Greater Middle East Project, there is an attempt to shape Turkish politics through moderate Islam… The Right pillar of moderate Islam is the AKP…Is there an attempt to erect a Left pillar of moderate Islam through this opening?” (Anadolu Ajansi, December 9).

    Baykal issued a written response to Bahceli, in which he drew a distinction between a legitimate right to certain religious freedoms and moderate Islam as a political project. Baykal attacked Bahceli by saying, “only those who either abuse religion or come from a tradition of setting political traps [referring to the MHP’s controversial role in urging the AKP to pass the constitutional amendments on headscarves] will dislike this [the CHP’s defense of religious freedom]” (ANKA, December 10).

    Baykal indeed took a bold step by opening one-party rule to debate and indicating that the CHP would defend religious freedom, but there are grounds for being skeptical about the prospects of the “chador initiative.” As political scientist Bekir Berat Ozipek says, having ruled the country singlehandedly during the one-party-era (1923-1950), the CHP has not been able to adapt itself to competitive electoral politics since Turkey moved to multi-party rule in the 1950s (Today’s Zaman, December 8). Indeed, the CHP’s critical distance from the masses and their lifestyles and its modernization project of transforming Turkish society have shaped the identity of the party’s core grassroots. Therefore, even if Baykal’s intentions were sincere, many analysts like Ozipek are skeptical about the CHP’s ability to transform itself from a statist party to a liberal party embracing human rights and religious fr
    eedom.

    Skeptics also refer to Baykal’s track record. He promised in the 1990s to develop a new platform that would be called the Liberal Left or the Anatolian Left and would represent the conservative people. For some, this project failed because of Baykal’s low credibility and unprincipled pragmatism (www.internethaber.com, November 20). Ozipek believes that those steps were never taken, because such a move would contradict the identity and the ideology of the CHP’s core secularist constituency. Ozipek put it sarcastically: “a party leader could experience such enlightenment all of a sudden, but expecting a change in party politics in such a brief period of time would be naïve.”

    https://jamestown.org/program/soul-searching-in-the-chp-baykals-chador-opening/

  • Women rights activist arrested in Iran

    Women rights activist arrested in Iran

    According to the news from Tabriz, Iran, Mrs Shahnaz Gholami, journalist, member of Iranian women journalist
    Association (RAZA) and women rights activist was arrested 09.11.2008 by The Ministry of Intelligence Service.

    Mrs Gholami is headeditor of “Azar Zan” weblog and had been jailed 5 years 1990-1995 in Tabriz prison due to her political activities and later she was jailed once more for a month on june 2008 for participating in Khordad 85 movement anniversary. She also has been tortured in jail.

  • THE SECRETARY-GENERAL MESSAGE ON THE INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR THE ELIMINATION OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN

    THE SECRETARY-GENERAL MESSAGE ON THE INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR THE ELIMINATION OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN

    25 November 2008

    U N I T E D N A T I O N S N A T I O N S U N I E S
    THE SECRETARY-GENERAL
    —
    MESSAGE ON THE INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR THE ELIMINATION OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
    25 November 2008
    Across the world, in countries rich and poor, women are being beaten, trafficked, raped and killed. These human rights violations do more than harm individuals; they undermine the development, peace and security of entire societies.
    Women everywhere are at risk, but those living in societies experiencing armed conflict face even graver danger. As conflicts have become more complex, the pattern of sexual violence has evolved. Women are no longer in jeopardy only during periods of actual fighting; they are just as likely to be assaulted when there is calm, by armies, militias, rebels, criminal gangs or even police.
    We do not know the true number of victims, but we do know that there are far more crimes than ever get reported, and far fewer lead to arrests. In too many places, rape still carries a stigma that forces women to avoid the courts that should exist to protect them. In some countries, victims are brutalized twice: first during the crime itself, and then by the justice system, where they may face trumped-up charges of “adultery” and the possibility of subsequent punishment.
    Even when perpetrators are identified, they often go unpunished, especially if they are working in the police or military. At times, these crimes are particularly shocking. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo’s troubled North Kivu province, where some 350 rape cases are reported every month, victims are also sometimes subjected to genital mutilation.
    Even more disturbing is the age of many victims. In certain violent areas of Haiti, fifty per cent of the young women have been raped or sexually assaulted. Of the handful of courageous victims who do seek justice, one in three is under thirteen. During one particularly violent month earlier this year in Liberia, the majority of reported rapes were committed against girls under the age of twelve, some of whom were not even five years old.
    These examples come from countries where the United Nations has a peacekeeping presence. Thanks to the Security Council’s groundbreaking resolution 1820, adopted in June, the use of sexual violence as a tactic of warfare is now recognized as a matter of international peace and security. According to the resolution, peacekeeping missions, in particular those with mandates to protect civilians, must now include the protection of women and children from all forms of violence in their reporting on conflict situations. Resolution 1820 also requested stronger efforts to implement the vital zero-tolerance policy on sexual exploitation by UN personnel, and urged troop and police contributing countries to ensure full accountability in cases of misconduct.
    The adoption of resolution 1820 is part of a growing global trend to address this scourge. This past February’s Vienna Forum to Fight Human Trafficking, and the continued leadership of the General Assembly, are additional signs of international momentum.
    At the national level, more and more countries are meeting their obligations to protect women through comprehensive legislation, better services for victims, stronger partnerships and increased efforts to engage men and boys in addressing the problem.
    This progress is welcome, but there are still gaps. We need to do more to enforce laws and counter impunity. We need to combat attitudes and behaviour that condone, tolerate, excuse or ignore violence committed against women. And we need to increase funding for services for victims and survivors.
    I am determined to strengthen these efforts, including through my global campaign “UNiTE to end violence against women”, which aims to raise public awareness, increase political will and resources and create a supportive environment to make good on existing policy commitments.
    All of us – men and women, soldiers and peacekeepers, citizens and leaders – have a responsibility to help end violence against women. States must honour their commitments to prevent violence, bring perpetrators to justice and provide redress to victims. And each of us must speak out in our families, workplaces and communities, so that acts of violence against women cease.

  • Turkish court defends quashing Muslim scarf reform

    Turkish court defends quashing Muslim scarf reform

    By Ibon Villelabeitia
    REUTERS
    8:17 a.m. October 22, 2008

    ANKARA – Lifting a ban on women wearing the Muslim headscarf at university violates Turkey’s secular constitution, the country’s top court said on Wednesday, defending a decision against the ruling AK Party.
    In a legal reasoning that appeared to end any hope for the Islamist-rooted AK Party to revive the sensitive headscarf issue, the Constitutional Court said that while wearing a headscarf was ‘an individual choice and a freedom’, lifting the ban was ‘openly against the principles of secularism’.

    The Constitutional Court, a bastion of Turkey’s secular founding principles, overturned in June a constitutional amendment sponsored by the AK Party to lift the restriction, but only issued its long-awaited reasoning on Wednesday.The AK Party, which denies accusations by secularist opponents of harbouring an Islamist agenda, said it would respect the constitution. It had first reacted angrily to the ruling, accusing the court of violating the constitution.

    ‘We do not have any intention of undermining the republic’s essential principles,’ Justice Minister Mehmet Ali Sahin said.

    The headscarf issue is one of the most highly charged in Turkey, a predominantly Sunni Muslim country with a secular constitution, and has long been a source of political instability in the European Union applicant.

    Foreign investors, already dumping emerging markets assets due to the global financial crisis, are monitoring signs of political instability that could delay market-friendly reforms.

    The AK Party, which has its roots in political Islam, sees it as a question of religious freedom, while securalists see it as proof the government wants to impose sharia law by stealth. The party repeatedly denies those charges.

    The AK Party, which has a huge majority in parliament, passed the amendment earlier this year, angering a secularist establishment of judges and army generals.

    Another attempt to lift the headscarf ban would require a constitutional reform and broad social consensus, an unlikely event in a country deeply polarised over the role of Islam.

    ‘The amendments in articles 10 and 42 are openly against the principle of secularism because procedurally they mean using religion as a tool in politics, and breach other people’s rights and cause public disorder by content,’ the court said.

    The headscarf reform was seen as a catalyst for a separate case, in which the same court narrowly voted in July not to close the AK Party on charges of Islamist activities. The court is expected to issue the reasoning of that case this week.

    Cengiz Aktar, a professor at Istanbul’s Bahcesehir University, said the court’s reasoning ends any hope of bringing the headscarf issue back until a new constitution is written.

    ‘This ruling not only ends the headscarf debate, but also any attempt to reform the constitution and the secularist regime,’ Aktar said.

  • Are Turkey’s women too posh to push?

    Are Turkey’s women too posh to push?

    By Fazile Zahir

    FETHIYE, Turkey – Turkey is suffering from an epidemic that seems to out of control. Like many developing countries, as the level of wealth and standards of education increase there has been a reluctance to give birth naturally and, consequently, a staggering rise in the number of Caesarean-section births.

    The first recorded Caesarean, or C-section, in Turkey was in 1879. After 36 hours in labor, a Turkish mother cut her own belly and uterus open with a razor. The wound was sewn up by a neighbor and both mother and infant survived. Since then, C-sections have become increasingly common.

    In the late 1980s, 92% of women had natural births. By the mid-1990s this figure had dropped to 81%, and in 2004, normal births constituted 79%. But the past four years have seen an explosion

    in these figures and last year only 59% of women were giving birth naturally. It seems that Turkish women have become either too scared, or too posh, to push.

    The World Health Organization (WHO) has a recommended upper limit for medically justified C-section births of around 15% in any country – Turkey’s current level is more than double this. The figures are even more astounding if looked at on a geographical, educational or monetary basis.

    Asia Times Online :: Middle East News, Iraq, Iran current affairs.