House While Woman Grows

Abstract

Discourses on woman/space relations boomed in the 90s. The fundamental reason was to give support to the Feminist Movement. This trend which has had feeble effect on architectural design remained controversial. The comprehensive research expounded in this article which was based on an open-ended questionnaire that targeted at determining the gender roles at home, applied to female subjects who simulated the national demographics, clearly demonstrated that the home experience of an average Turkish woman basically consists of kitchens; the female who runs the house does not really have a place for herself at home. However she does not perceive her restrained, secondary role an issue worthy of struggling to change and she grants spaces for recreation and study to the male. The well-established civil laws conducive for equality has not changed this disturbing situation and do not seem to do so in the near future.

Keywords

• Mekan; cinsellik; kadın; ev; tasarım

-

Öz

90’lı yıllar kadın/mekân ilişkileri üzerine yapılan araştırmalar ve yazılan yazıların patlama yılları oldu. Bunun temel nedeni Feminist propagandalara mesleki açıdan destek verme arzusuydu. Gerçekte bu akımın doğrudan mimari tasarımı etkilemedeki rolü tartışılabilir olarak kaldı. Burada aktarılan geniş kapsamlı araştırmada ülkemiz demografisini taklit eden kalabalık bir kadın nüfusunun evdeki cinsiyet rollerini belirlemeye yönelik yapılan açık uçlu bir anket vasıtasıyla incelenmesinden, ortalama bir Türk kadınının ev deneyiminin büyük ölçüde mutfaktan ibaret olduğu, evi yöneten kadının aslında evde kendi yeri olmadığı ortaya çıkmıştır. Kadının bu sindirilmiş ikincil rolü, uğruna mücadele verilecek bir konu gibi algılamadığı, evin dinlenme ve entelektüel etkinliklere ayrılan mekânlarını zaten evin erkeğine uygun gördüğü, ülkemizdeki mevcut eşitlik yasalarının aile ve konut söz konusu olunca bu dengesiz durumu değiştirmediği ve kolay kolay değiştiremeyeceği sonucuna varılmıştır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Mekan, cinsellik, kadın, ev, tasarım

References

1. Appleyard, D. (1970). “Notes on Urban Perception and Knowledge”, EDRA Conference, pp. 97-101, Pittsburgh.
2. Bahadır, Ş. (1998). Konut Mekânlarına Yönelik Kullanıcı Tercihleri, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, KTÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Trabzon.
3. Barber, R. B. (2000). “Can Democracy Survive Globalization?” Government and Opposition, Leonard Schapiro Lectures, London School of Economics, pp. 276.
4. Berger, P. L. (1997). Four Faces of Global Culture. National Interest, 49, pp. 49.
5. Bloomer, J. (1992). “D’OR”, Beatriz Colomina (der), Sexuality & Space, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University School Of Architecture, pp.163-182.
6. Blunt, A. (2005). “Cultural Geography: Cultural Geographies of Home” Progress in Human Geography, 29(4), pp.505-515.
7. Bourdieu, P. (1985). The Genesis of The Concept of Habitus and of Field, Sociocriticism, 2, pp.11-24.
8. Bowley, S.; Gregory, S.; Mckie, L. (1997). “Doing Home: Patriarchy, Caring and Space” Women’s Studies International Forum, 20(3), pp. 343-350.

9. Burton, A. (2003). Dwelling in the Archive: Women Writing House, Home and History in Late Colonial India. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10. Chapman, T. (2004). Gender and Domestic Life: Changing Practices in Families and Households. Basingstoke, Palgrave: Macmillan.
11. Chase, V. (1996). 'Edith Wharton, The Decoration of Houses and Gender In Turn-Of- The-Century America', D. E. Coleman ve C. Henderson (der), Architecture and Feminism, New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
12. Churchman, A.; Altman, I. (der) (1994). Women and the Environment: A Perspective on Research, Design and Policy. New York: Plenum.
13. Colomina, B. (1992). “The Split Wall: Domestic Voyeurism”. Beatriz Colomina (der), Sexuality & Space: Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University School of Architecture. pp. 73- 131.
14. Domosh, M. (1998). Geography And Gender: Home, Again? Progress in Human Geography 22, pp. 276-82.
15. Duncan, J. S.; Lambert, D. (2003). “Landscapes of Home”. Duncan, J.S., Johnson, N.C. ve Schein, R.H. (der), A Companion to Cultural Geography, Oxford: Blackwell, pp.382-403.
16. Eisenman, P. (1991). "Strong Form, Weak Form". Architecture in Transition: Between Deconstruction and Newmodernism, Peter Noever ve Regina Haslinger (der). Munich: Prestel. pp. 32-43
17. Erikson, E.H. (1950). Childhood and Society. New York: Norton.
18. Erikson, E.H. (1968). Identity: Youth and Crisis. New York: Norton.
19. Erikson, E.H. (1975). Life History and the Historical Moment. New York: Norton.
20. Everitt, J.; Cadwallader, M. (1972). "The Home Area Concept in Urban Analysis: The Use of Cognitive Mapping and Computer Procedures as Methodological Tools," EDRA 03: 1.2.4-1.2.13.
21. Foucault, M. (1959). Archaeology of Knowledge, A. M. Sheridan Smith (çev), Londra: Routledge, 2002-orijinali Paris: Gallimard, 1969.
22. Giles, J. (2004). The Parlor and the Suburb: Domestic Identities, Class, Femininity and Modernity. Oxford: Berg.
23. Gill, B. (1987). Many Masks: A Life of Frank Lloyd Wright. New York: Putnam.
24. Gür, Ş. Ö. (2013). “How Children Describe Their Houses: Present vs. Ideal”, Child Indicators Research, September 2013, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp 493-525.
25. Gür, Ş. Ö. (1979). “Designing With Men-Women Social Relations in Mind”, ICEP Program Abstracts. Surrey U, Guildford, İngiltere, p.17.
26. Gür, Ş. Ö.; Aşık, Ö. (2004). “Diotima Ya Da Kadınlar”, Mimarist 14 /4 (Kış), pp.47-53.
27. Hasol, D. (1998). Dans Eden Bina, Yapı, İstanbul, YEM, 203, pp.69-78.
28. Hitchings, R. (2004). At Home with Someone Nonhuman. Home Cultures 1, pp.169-86.
29. Ho, M. (1992). “Without A Room of One's Own: Woman's Place in Culture And Space”. Arisitidis, A., Karaletsou, C. ve Tsoukala, K. (Der), Socio-Environmental Metamorphoses (Proceedings 12th International Conference of The IAPS), Chalkidiki, Greece, 11-14 July: Http://İaps.Scix.Net/Cgi- Bin/Works/Show?İaps_12_1992_1_281
30. Ingraham, C. (1992). Initial Properties: Architecture and the Space of the Line. Beatriz Colomina (der), Sexuality & Space: Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University School of Architecture. pp. 255-271.
31. İslamoğlu, H. (2003). Tüketici Davranışları, İstanbul: Beta.
32. Jacobs, J.M. (2003). Editorial: Home Rules. Transactions of The Institute of British Geographers NS 28, pp. 259-63.
33. Karalar, R. (2005). Çağdaş Tüketici Davranışı. Eskişehir: Birlik.
34. Mallett, S. (2004). Understanding Home: A Critical Review of the Literature. The Sociological Review 52, pp.62-89.
35. Molyneux, M. (1985). Mobilization Without Emancipation? Women’s Interests, State And Revolution In Nicaragua. Feminist Studies 11(2), pp.227-254.
36. Morris, M. (1992). Great Moments in Social Climbing: King Kong and the Human Fly. Beatriz Colomina (der), Sexuality & Space. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University School of Architecture. pp.1-53
37. Mowen, C. J.; Minor, S M. (2003). Consumer Behavior. New York: Prince Hall.
38. Morgan, D. (1985). The Family, Politics and Social Theory. Londra: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
39. Mulvey, L. (1992). Topographies of the Mask and Curiosity. Beatriz Colomina (der), Sexuality & Space. Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University School of Architecture. pp.53- 72
40. Nesbit, M. (1992). “In the Absence of the Parisienne…” Beatriz Colomina (der), Sexuality & Space. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University School of Architecture. pp. 307-325
41. Orleans, P.; Schmidt, S. (1972). “Mapping the City: Environmental Cognition of Urban Residents”, EDRA 03:1.4.1-1.4.9.
42. Pink, S. (2004). Home Truths: Gender, Domestic Objects and Everyday Life. Oxford: Berg.
43. Ponte, A. (1992). Architecture and Phallocentrism in Richard Payne Knight’s Theory. Beatriz Colomina (der), Sexuality & Space. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University School of Architecture. pp.273-307
44. Richter, J. (1990). Crossing Boundaries between Professional and Private Life. H. Grossman ve N. Chester (der). The Experience and Meaning of Work in Women’s Lives, Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. pp.143-163.
45. Schor, N. (1987). Reading in Detail: Aesthetics and the Feminine. New York: Methuen.
46. Sezgin, S. (1992). Global Pazarlama Yönetim Esasları. İstanbul: