Devlet Hangi Yönleriyle Cinsiyetçidir?

Abstract

Sosyal günlük olaylar, çeşitli faktörlerin etkisi altında şekillenir. Bununla birlikte, en önemli faktörlerden biri, toplum tarafından oluşturulan ve düzeni koruma görevi üstlenen devlettir. Devlet, kurduğu kurallar ve yasalarla günlük yaşantımızdaki rutinleri şekillendirebilir, eğitim politikaları aracılığıyla yönlendirebilir ve medya kanalları aracılığıyla amaçlanan mesajları pekiştirebilir. Bu bağlamda, cinsiyet temelli devlet politikaları ile toplum arasında organik bir bağ bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışma, devletin yargı ve medya aracılığıyla sosyal günlük olaylar üzerinde nasıl bir etki yaptığını ölçme fikrinden ortaya çıkmıştır. Buradan hareketle, hem erkekleri hem de kadınları eşit şekilde ilgilendiren boşanma gibi toplumsal günlük bir olayın nasıl tasvir edildiğini incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu şekilde Yargıtay kararlarını analiz ederek, kimin kusurlu olarak kabul edildiğini belirlemek için hangi kriterlerin kullanıldığına ve kusurlu/ağır kusurlu olarak kabul edilen taraf için cinsiyet temelli bir politika etkisinin olup olmadığı sorularına yanıt aranmaktadır. Benzer şekilde, bu çalışma, Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’nin resmi yayın organı olan TRT tarafından sunulan haberleri inceleyerek, "boşanma" anahtar kelimesini kullanarak araştırma sorularına yanıt bulmayı amaçlamaktadır. Çalışma verileri 2018’den 2023’e kadar olan yılları kapsamakta olup, Yargıtay kararlarının fazla olması nedeniyle 100 kararın rastgele seçimi yapılmış ve tematik bir analiz gerçekleştirilmiştir. Medya görüntü analizi kapsamında 135 haber makalesi elde edilmiş ve hepsi incelenmiştir. Başlıklar tematik olarak analiz edilmiş ve görsel analiz yoluyla görüntüler incelenmiştir. Sonuç olarak, bulgular, Türkiye’de sosyal günlük olaylar konusunda yargının ve medyanın dolaylı ancak etkili bir yönlendirme rolüne sahip olduğu iddiasını desteklemektedir.

Keywords

• görsel çerçeveleme
• cinsiyet temelli devlet
• boşanma
• cinsiyet algısı
• tematik analiz

In What Ways is the State Gendered?

Abstract

Social daily events are shaped under the influence of various factors. However, among the most crucial factors is the state, formed by the society itself and tasked with maintaining order. The state can shape the routines in our daily lives with the rules and laws it establishes, direct through educational policies, and reinforce the intended messages through media channels. In this context, there exists an organic connection between the gendered state policies and the gendered society. This study originated from the idea of measuring how the state exerts an impact on social daily events through the judiciary and media. Proceeding from here, the aim is to examine how divorce, a phenomenon that could be considered a social daily event and concerns both genders (men and women) equally, is portrayed in judicial decisions and the media. In this way, by analyzing Supreme Court rulings, the intention is to seek answers to questions about what criteria are used to determine fault, and whether a gendered policy effect exists for the party deemed at fault. Similarly, by examining the news provided by the official broadcasting organ of the Republic of Turkey (TRT), using the keyword "divorce," the study aims to find answers to the research question. The study data covers the years 2018 to 2023, and due to the abundance of Supreme Court results, a random selection of 100 verdicts was made, and a thematic analysis was conducted. In the media image analysis, 135 news articles were obtained and all were examined. Headlines were analyzed thematically, and images were examined through visual analysis. In conclusion, the findings support the claim that in Turkey, regarding social daily events, the judiciary and media possess an indirect yet influential role in direction.

Keywords

• Visual framing
• gendered state
• divorce
• perceptions of gender
• thematic analysis

References

1. Adams, M., & Coltrane, S. (2007). Framing divorce reform: Media, morality, and the politics of family. Family Process, 46(1), 17-34. google scholar
2. Ahmetbeyzade, C. I. H. (2008). Gendering necropolitics: The juridical-political sociality of honor killings in Turkey. Journal of Human Rights, 7(3), 187-206. google scholar
3. Appadurai, Arjun 2002 Deep Democracy: Urban Governmentality and the Horizon of Politics. Public Culture 14(1):21-47. google scholar
4. Arslan, A. (2022). Relations of production and social reproduction, the state and the everyday: Women’s labour in Turkey. Review of International Political Economy, 29(6), 1894-1916. google scholar
5. Ayata, A. G., & Tütüncü, F. (2008). Critical Acts without a critical mass: The substantive representation of women in the Turkish parliament. Parliamentary Affairs, 61(3), 461-475. google scholar
6. Baker, M. and Milligan, K. (2008). How Does Job-Protected Maternity Leave Affect Mothers’ Employment?. Journal of Labor Economics, 26(4), pp.655-691. google scholar
7. Basow, S., 2004. The hidden curriculum: Gender in the classroom. Praeger guide to the psychology of gender, pp.117-131. google scholar
8. Bowen, E. A., & Capozziello, N. (2022). Faceless, nameless, invisible: a visual content analysis of photographs in US media coverage about homelessness. Housing Studies, 1-20. google scholar

9. Burul, Y., & Eslen-Ziya, H. (2018). Understanding ‘New Turkey’through women’s eyes: gender politics in Turkish daytime talk shows. Middle East Critique, 27(2), 179-19 google scholar
10. Butler, Judith 1992 Contingent Foundations: Feminism and the Question of "Postmodernism." In Feminists Theorize the Political. Judith Butler and Joan Scott, eds. Pp. 3-22. New York: Routledge. google scholar
11. Brantner, C., Lobinger, K., & Wetzstein, I. (2011). Effects of visual framing on emotional responses and evaluations of news stories about the Gaza conflict 2009. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 88(3), 523-540. google scholar
12. Cameron, Deborah 1997 Theoretical Debates in Feminist Linguistics: Questions of Sex and Gender. In Gender and Discourse. Ruth Wodak, ed. Pp. 21-35. London: Sage google scholar
13. Çığıraçan, İbrahim Hilmi. 1934b. İlk Kıraat, Sınıf 4. İstanbul: Türk Kitapçılığı Limited Şirketi. google scholar
14. Collins, James 1998 Our Ideologies and Theirs. In Language Ideologies: Practice and Theory. Bambi Schieffelin, Kathryn Woolard, and Paul Kloskrity, eds. Pp. 25S270. Oxford: Oxford University Press. google scholar
15. Comaroff, John L., and Jean Comaroff, eds. 1999 Civil Society and the Political Imagination in Africa: Critical Perspectives. Chicago: University of Chicago Press google scholar
16. Crehan, K., 2006. Hunting the Unicorn. The Seductions of Community: Emancipations, Oppressions, Quandaries, p.49. google scholar
17. Dökmen, Z. (2004). Toplumsal Cinsiyet-Sosyal Psikolojik Açıklamalar. İstanbul: Sistem Yayıncılık google scholar
18. Eley, Geoff 1992 Nations, Publics, and the Political Culture: Placing Habermas in the Nineteenth Century. In Habermas and the Public Sphere. Craig Calhoun, ed. Pp. 289-339. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. google scholar
19. Elias, J., & Rai, S. M. (2019). Feminist everyday political economy: Space, time, and violence. Review of international studies, 45(2), 201-220. google scholar
20. Enloe, C. (2004). The curious feminist: Searching for women in a new age of empire. Univ of California Press. google scholar
21. Enloe, C. (2017). The big push: Exposing and challenging the persistence of patriarchy. Univ of California Press. google scholar
22. Gal, Susan, and Gail Kligman 2000 The Politics of Gender after Socialism. Princeton: Princeton University Press google scholar
23. Geertz, C. and Banton, M., 1966. Religion as a cultural system. google scholar
24. GENZ, S. (2010). Singled Out: Postfeminism’s “New Woman” and the Dilemma of Having It All. The Journal of Popular Culture, 43(1), pp.97-119. google scholar
25. Giddens, A., 2013. New rules of sociological method: A positive critique of interpretative sociologies. John Wiley & Sons. google scholar
26. Gramsci, Antonio. (1971). Selection Of The Prison Notebooks. Quintin H. G.N. Smith (Ed.). London: Lawrence & Wishhart google scholar
27. GUPTA, A. (1995). blurred boundaries: the discourse of corruption, the culture of politics, and the imagined state. American Ethnologist, 22(2), pp.375-402. google scholar
28. Handler, Richard 1988 Nationalism and the Politics of Culture in Quebec. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. google scholar
29. Herzfeld, Michael 1992 The Social Production of Indifference: Exploring the Symbolic Roots of Western Bureaucracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. google scholar
30. Hunt, Lynn Avery 1992 The Farnily Romance of the French Revolution. Berkeley: University of California Press. google scholar
31. Kastellec, J. P. (2016). Empirically evaluating the countermajoritarian difficulty: Public opinion, state policy, and judicial review before roe v. wade. Journal of Law and Courts, 4(1), 1-42. google scholar
32. Keskinen, S. (2012). Limits to speech? The racialised politics of gendered violence in Denmark and Finland. Journal of intercultural studies, 33(3), 261-274. google scholar
33. Kirby, D. (1992). School-Based Programs to Reduce Sexual Risk-Taking Behaviors. Journal of School Health, 62(7), pp.280-287. google scholar
34. KİRMAN, E., (2011). Çok Partili Döneme Geçiş Süreci ve Türk Siyasal Kültüründe Muhalefet Olgusunun Gelişimi (1946-1950). (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Isparta, 2006. google scholar
35. Lens, V. (2003). Reading between the Lines: Analyzing the Supreme Court’s Views on Gender Discrimination in Employment, 1971-1982. Social Service Review, 77(1), 25-50. google scholar
36. Lundgren, Eva (2009). Şiddetin Normalleştirilme Süreci. Çev: B. Ekal. İstanbul: Rengahenk Sanatevi. google scholar
37. Mercan Küçükakın, P., & Engin-Demir, C. (2022). A critical analysis of discourses on gender equality in education: the case of Turkey. Gender and Education, 34(8), 940-956. google scholar
38. O’NEIL, J. (1981). Patterns of Gender Role Conflict and Strain: Sexism and Fear of Femininity in Men’s Lives. The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 60(4), pp.203-210. google scholar
39. Pomerleau, A., Bolduc, D., Malcuit, G. and Cossette, L. (1990). Pink or blue: Environmental gender stereotypes in the first two years of life. Sex Roles, 22(5-6), pp.359-367. google scholar
40. Robinson, R. (2014). Culture and Legal Policy Punctuation in the Supreme Court’s Gender Discrimination Cases. Policy Studies Journal, 42(4), 555-589. google scholar
41. Scott, S. and Chuyen, T.T.K., 2007, June. Gender research in Vietnam: Traditional approaches and emerging trajectories. In Women’s Studies International Forum (Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 243-253). Pergamon. google scholar
42. Sezgin, S. & Şenol, Selmin. (2010). Medyadaki Kadın İmgesi: Anne. 21. Yüzyılın Eşiğinde Kadınlar: Değişim ve Güçlenme (Cilt IV) içinde (ss. 459-463). İzmir: Uluslararası Multidisipliner Kadın Kongresi. google scholar
43. Sirman, Nukhet 1990 State, Village, and Gender in Western Turkey. In Turkish State, Turkish Society. Andrew Finkel and Nukhet Sirman, eds. Pp. 21-51. London: Routledg google scholar
44. Stice, E. and Shaw, H. (1994). Adverse Effects of the Media Portrayed Thin-Ideal on Women and Linkages to Bulimic Symptomatology. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 13(3), pp.288-308. google scholar Stoller, R. (1968). Sex and Gender. New York: Science House. google scholar
45. Taussig, Michael 1997 The Magic of the State. New York: Routledge. google scholar
46. Taylor, H.A. and Hansen, G.H., 1996. Perceived characteristics of successful family practice residency maternity care training programs. Family medicine, 29(10), pp.709-714. google scholar
47. Vieten, U. M. (2018). The new year’s 2015/2016 public sexual violence debate in Germany: media discourse, gendered anti-Muslim racism and criminal law. Media, crime and racism, 73-92 google scholar
48. Weber, Max 1968 Economy and Society, 2. Berkeley: University of California Press. google scholar
49. Young, Iris Marion 1997 Intersecting Voices: Dilemmas of Gender, Political Philosophy and Policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. google scholar
50. Karararama.yargitay.gov.tr google scholar
51. Trthaber.com.tr google scholar