REAPPROPRIATION OF WORDS ABOUT BLINDNESS IN TURKISH AS A COUNTER-RHETORICAL STRATEGY AGAINST EPISTEMIC VIOLENCE

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, epistemik şiddete ilişkin kuramsal bir çerçeve sunmak, epistemik şiddete karşı kullanılabilecek bir retorik strateji olarak sözcüklerin yeniden sahiplenilmesini tanıtmak ve körlükle ilgili sözcükler aracılığıyla sözcüklerin yeniden sahiplenilmesine Türkçe'de örnekler vermektir. Bu amaçla Türkiye dijital medya araçlarında yayınlanan beş farklı içerikten örnekler seçilmiş ve beş farklı kör aktiviste ait bu içerikler içerik analizi yöntemiyle analiz edilmiştir. Sonuç olarak, körlükle ilgili kelimelerin Türkçe'de yeniden sahiplenilme sürecinin devam ettiği, henüz tamamlanmadığı, ancak yeniden sahiplenme çabasının Türkiye'deki kör aktivistler tarafından açıkça benimsendiği saptanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Epistemik şiddet
• Kelimelerin yeniden sahiplenilmesi
• körlük
• epistemik direniş

REAPPROPRIATION OF WORDS ABOUT BLINDNESS IN TURKISH AS A COUNTER-RHETORICAL STRATEGY AGAINST EPISTEMIC VIOLENCE

Abstract

The objective of this study is to establish a theoretical framework concerning epistemic violence and its relationship with the reappropriation of words as a rhetorical strategy to combat such violence. Moreover, the study aims to provide specific instances of word reappropriation pertaining to blindness in the Turkish context. To achieve these objectives, the content analysis method was employed to examine materials from five different blind activists, as featured in various Turkish digital media platforms. The findings demonstrate that the process of reappropriation of words related to blindness in the Turkish language is currently underway and remains an ongoing endeavor. Although not yet fully completed, it is evident that blind activists in Turkey have embraced and engaged in efforts towards linguistic reclamation as a means to challenge epistemic violence.

Keywords

• Epistemic violence
• Reappropriation of words
• blindness
• epistemic resistance

Kaynakça

1. Ahmed, S. (2016). Living a Feminist Life. Duke University Press.
2. Alcoff, L. M. (2005). Visible identities: Race, gender, and the self. Oxford University Press.
3. Alexander, I. (2020). Dismantling epistemic violence? exploring education academics conceptual understanding of decolonising the curriculum in higher education (Doctoral dissertation).
4. Altınok, K., & Altınok, S. Kör mü, görme özürlü mü, görme engelli mi, âmâ mı? Retrieved from http://selimkerim.com/kormugormeengellimiamami.html
5. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological bulletin, 117(3), 497.
6. BAYRAM, E. (2017). Kur’an’da “âmâ” kavramı. Akademik Bakış Uluslararası Hakemli Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (64), 414-424.
7. Berenstain, N. (2016). Epistemic Exploitation. Ergo, an Open Access Journal of Philosophy, 3.
8. Bezmez, D., Yardımcı, S. ve Şentürk, Y. (drl.). (2011). Sakatlık Çalışmaları Sosyal Bilimlerden Bakmak. İstanbul: Koç Üniversitesi Yayınları.

9. BlindLook. (2022, March 10). Görme engelli kime denir? BlindLook. Retrieved from https://www.blindlook.com/tr/blog/detay/gorme-engelli-kime-denir
10. Branson, J., & Miller, D. (1993). Sign language, the deaf and the epistemic violence of mainstreaming. Language and Education, 7(1), 21-41.
11. Buyurgan, S., & Demirdelen, H. (2009). Total kör bir öğrencinin öğrenmesinde dokunma, işitsel bilgilendirme, hissetme ve müze. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(3), 563-580.
12. Crenshaw, K. (2021). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: a black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. Droit et société, 108, 465.
13. Cudd, A. E. (2006). Analyzing oppression. Oxford University Press.
14. Çeperli, M. İ. (2018). Körlere ve körlüğe dair sıkça sorulan sorular. Gaia Dergi. Retrieved from https://gaiadergi.com/korlere-korluge-dair-sikca-sorulan-sorular/
15. Delgado, R. (1998). Storytelling for oppositionists and others. The Latino/a condition: A critical reader, 259-270.
16. Dotson, K. (2011). Tracking epistemic violence, tracking practices of silencing. Hypatia, 26(2), 236-257.
17. Dotson, K. (2012). A Cautionary Tale: On Limiting Epistemic Oppression. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, 33(1), 24-47.
18. Fanon, F. (1963). The wretched of the earth. Grove Press.
19. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977. Vintage.
20. Foucault, M. (2000). Özne ve iktidar. (Trans. I. Ergüden, O. Akınhay). Istanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
21. Freire, P. (2018). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Bloomsbury publishing USA.
22. Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press.
23. Galinsky, A. D., Hugenberg, K., Groom, C., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2003). The reappropriation of stigmatizing labels: Implications for social identity. In Identity issues in groups (Vol. 5, pp. 221-256). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
24. Görece, S. (2022, December). Kör mü, görme engelli mi? - Aydaki Adam: İlker Canikligil - Konuk: Sadriye Görece. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Az_fUROj_qY
25. Hall, J. M., & Carlson, K. (2016). Marginalization. Advances in Nursing Science, 39(3), 200-215.
26. Hall, N. (2020). “We’re here, we’re queer, we will not live in fear!”: A Content Analysis Exploring Gender Disparity in the Public Reappropriation of LGBTQ+ Slurs. Capstone Showcase. 1. retrieved from https://scholarworks.arcadia.edu/showcase/2020/soc_anth_cj/1/
27. Hebdige, D. (1979). Subculture: The Meaning of Style. Methuen & Co. Ltd., London. Jackson, J. M. (2007). Reclaiming queerness: Self, identity, and the research process. Journal of Research Practice, 3(1), M5-M5.
28. Kahraman-Güloğlu, F. (2022). Engellilik hakkında kavramsal karmaşanın nedenleri ve Türkiye’deki durum. Toplum ve Sosyal Hizmet, 33(1), 291-315. DOI: 10.33417/tsh.989123
29. Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465-491.
30. Link, B. G., & Phelan, J. C. (2001). Conceptualizing stigma. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 363-385. Lorde, A. (1984). Sister outsider: Essays and speeches by Audre Lorde. Crossing Press.
31. Lugones, M. (2003). Pilgrimages/peregrinajes: Theorizing coalition against multiple oppressions. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
32. Lugones, M. (2010). Toward a decolonial feminism. Hypatia, 25(4), 742-759.
33. Medina, J. (2012). The epistemology of resistance: Gender and racial oppression, epistemic injustice, and resistant imaginations. Oxford University Press.
34. Mignolo, W. (2002). The geopolitics of knowledge and the colonial difference. The south atlantic quarterly, 101(1), 57-96.
35. Neilson, D. (2021). Epistemic violence in the time of coronavirus: From the legacy of the western limits of Spivak’s ‘can the subaltern speak’to an alternative to the ‘neoliberal model of development’. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 53(8), 760-765.
36. Noe, S. C. (2016). Slut pride: The reappropriation attempt by SlutWalk. Quercus: Linfield Journal of Undergraduate Research, 2(1), 3.
37. Quijano, A. (2000). Coloniality of power and Eurocentrism in Latin America. International sociology, 15(2), 215-232.
38. Rimmerman, A. (2013). Social Inclusion of People with Disabilities National and International Perspectives. The USA: Cambridge Universtiy Press.
39. Santos, B. D. S. (2014). Epistemologies of the South: Justice against epistemicide. Routledge.
40. Smith, H. L. (2019). Has nigga Been Reappropriated as a Term of Endearment? A Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis. American Speech, 94(4), 420-477.
41. Snoddon, K. (2020). The social and epistemological violence of inclusive education for deaf learners. Canadian Journal of Disability Studies, 9(5), 185-213.
42. Sözen, M. (2019, August 19). İbneler ve körler. EEH Dergi. Retrieved from https://eeeh.engelsizerisim.com/yazi/78/ibneler_ve_korler
43. Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the subaltern speak? In C. Nelson & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the interpretation of culture (pp. 271-313). University of Illinois Press.
44. Şişman, Y. (2012). Özürlülük alanında kullanılan kavramlar üzerine genel bir değerlendirme. Sosyal Politika Çalışmaları Dergisi, 7(28), 69-85.
45. Taşcı, F. (2018). Sosyal Politikada Dezavantajlı Gruplar: Tarih, Yaklaşım ve Uygulama. İstanbul: Kaknüs.
46. Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2021). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Tabula Rasa, (38), 61-111.
47. Tuhiwai Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples (2nd ed.). Zed Books.
48. UNICEF Innocenti Research Center. (2007). Promoting the Right of Children with Disabilities. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unyin/documents/children_disability_rights.pdf
49. Yaralı-AKKAYA, A. (2018). DİLDE DİĞERLEŞTİRME; TÜRK Atasözü ve Deyimlerde Sakatlık Tanımları. Osmaniye Korkut Ata Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi , 2 (1), 89-98.
50. Yılmaz, E. (2019, May 14). Kör olmak, sana kaderin verdiği “yapamazsın” duygusu demek değil! Interview with Merve Yavuz. Retrieved from https://www.gencyorumdergisi.com/2019/05/kor-olmak-sana-kaderin-verdigi-yapamazsin-duygusu-demek-degil/
51. Ymous, A., Spiel, K., Keyes, O., Williams, R. M., Good, J., Hornecker, E., & Bennett, C. L. (2020, April). " I am just terrified of my future"—Epistemic Violence in Disability Related Technology Research. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-16).