Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

A Sociotheological Analysis of Violence Against Women

Year 2025, Volume: 4 Issue: 2, 38 - 51, 30.12.2025
https://doi.org/10.62147/veche.1730024

Abstract

This study aims to critically examine how violence against women is associated with religious beliefs and traditional cultural practices through an analysis of the sacred texts and historical interpretations of the three major monotheistic religions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The research centers on the question of whether violence originates from religion itself or from patriarchal traditions that are legitimized through religious discourse. In this context, particular attention is given to methodological challenges such as prooftexting and the difficulty of distinguishing religion from tradition. The study adopts a qualitative research design based on textual and documentary analysis. Primary religious sources, including the Torah, the Bible, and the Qur’an, are examined alongside classical commentaries and contemporary religious discourses. Passages related to women, family structure, obedience, honor, and punishment are analyzed comparatively and within their historical and sociocultural contexts. The analysis also considers the dual role of religion as both a potential obstacle that may normalize violence and a moral resource that can empower women and challenge abusive practices. The findings indicate that although all three religions have produced interpretive traditions that, at certain historical moments, accommodated patriarchal norms and contributed to the normalization of violence against women, their foundational teachings emphasize justice, compassion, and human dignity. These ethical principles provide a theological basis for resisting violence and reinterpreting sacred texts in ways that support gender justice. The study concludes that rather than excluding religion from efforts to combat violence against women, critically reengaging with religious traditions and challenging patriarchal interpretations offers a more effective and culturally sustainable approach.

References

  • Abu-Odeh, L. (2000). Crimes of honor and the construction of gender in Arab societies. In S. İlkkaracan (Ed.), Women and sexuality in Muslim societies (pp. 363–381). Özgün Ofset.
  • Adams, C. J., & Fortune, M. M. (1998). Violence against women and children: A Christian theological sourcebook. The Continuum Publishing Company.
  • Alkhateeb, S. (1999). Ending domestic violence in Muslim families. Journal of Religion and Abuse, 1(4), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1300/J154v01n04_03
  • Allensbach Institute. (2012). Deutsche Einstellungen gegenüber dem Islam [German attitudes toward Islam]. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.
  • Altınay, A. G., & Arat, Y. (2008). Türkiye’de kadına yönelik şiddet. Punto Yayınları.
  • Berger, P. L. (1967). The sacred canopy: Elements of a sociological theory of religion. Doubleday.
  • Berktay, F. (1996). Tektanrılı dinler karşısında kadın. Metis Kadın Araştırmaları.
  • Berktay, F. (2006). Tarihin cinsiyeti. Metis Yayınları.
  • Bussert, J. (1986). Battered women: From a theology of suffering to an ethic of empowerment. Division in North America, Lutheran Church in America.
  • Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı. (2019). 8 Mart Dünya Kadınlar Günü münasebetiyle yapılan basın açıklaması. https://www.diyanet.gov.tr
  • Faith Freedom International. (n.d). Why critique only Islam http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/SKM/why_critique_only_islam.htm
  • Fortune, M. M., & Enger, C. G. (2005). Violence against women and the role of religion. VAWnet – National Resource Center on Domestic Violence.
  • Furlong, R. (2006, March 14). [News article]. BBC News.
  • Gilmore, D. D. (1987). Honor, honesty, shame: Male status in contemporary Andalusia. In D. D. Gilmore (Ed.), Honor and shame and the unity of the Mediterranean (pp. 90–91). American Anthropological Association.
  • Grady, J. L. (2001, January/February). Control freaks, and the women who love them. New Man Magazine.
  • Karaman, H. (2012). İslam hukuku. İz Yayıncılık.
  • Koğacıoğlu, D. (2007). Gelenek söylemleri ve iktidarın doğallaşması: Namus cinayetleri örneği. Kültür ve Siyasette Feminist Yaklaşımlar, (3), 117–145.
  • Kurtubî, M. b. A. (2006). el-Câmiʿ li-aḥkâmi’l-Kurʾân (C. 5). Beyrut: Müessesetü’r-Risâle.
  • Lerner, G. (1986). Women and history (Vol. 1, The creation of patriarchy). Oxford University Press.
  • Mernissi, F. (2000a). The Muslim concept of active women’s sexuality. In S. İlkkaracan (Ed.), Women and sexuality in Muslim societies (pp. 19–37). Özgün Ofset.
  • Mernissi, F. (2000b). Virginity and patriarchy. In S. İlkkaracan (Ed.), Women and sexuality in Muslim societies (pp. 203–215). Özgün Ofset.
  • Özgür, S., & Sunar, D. (1982). Social psychological patterns of homicide in Turkey: A comparison of male and female convicted murderers. In Ç. Kağıtçıbaşı (Ed.), Sex roles, family and community in Turkey (p. 357). Indiana University Press.
  • Smith, P. (1911). The life and letters of Martin Luther. Houghton Mifflin.
  • Sev'er, A., & Yurdakul, G. (2001). Culture of honor, culture of change: A feminist analysis of honor killings in rural turkey. Violence Against Women, 7(9), 964–998. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778010122182866
  • Taberî, M. b. C. (1992). Câmiʿu’l-beyân ʿan teʾvîli âyi’l-Kurʾân (C. 8). Beyrut: Dâru’l-Maʿrifa.
  • The New York Times. (1999, June 20). [Newspaper article].
  • Tracy, S. (2007). Patriarchy and domestic violence: Challenging common misconceptions. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 50(3), 573–594.
  • United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. (2002, November 12). When I call for help: A pastoral response to domestic violence against women. Author.
  • Walby, S. (1990). Theorizing patriarchy. Basil Blackwell.
  • Yalcin-Heckmann, L. (1991). Tribe and kinship among the Kurds. Peter Lang.
  • Yıldız, İ. (2002). Mormonizm. Danish Grove Publications.

Kadına Yönelik Şiddetin Sosyoteolojik Analizi

Year 2025, Volume: 4 Issue: 2, 38 - 51, 30.12.2025
https://doi.org/10.62147/veche.1730024

Abstract

Bu çalışma, kadına yönelik şiddetin dinî inançlar ve geleneksel kültürel pratiklerle nasıl ilişkilendirildiğini, üç büyük dinin (Yahudilik, Hristiyanlık ve İslam) metinleri ve tarihsel yorumları üzerinden eleştirel bir çerçevede incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırma, “şiddetin kaynağı din midir, yoksa dinin meşrulaştırıcı gücüyle desteklenen ataerkil gelenek midir?” sorusunu merkeze alarak, dinsel metinlerin bağlam dışı kullanımına (prooftexting) ve din–gelenek ayrımının metodolojik güçlüklerine dikkat çeker. Bu doğrultuda çalışma, nitel araştırma deseninde yürütülen metin merkezli bir doküman incelemesine dayanmaktadır. Başta Tevrat, İncil ve Kur’an olmak üzere kutsal metinlerde yer alan kadın, aile, itaat, namus ve ceza temalı pasajlar; tarihsel tefsir/yorum pratikleri ve çağdaş dinîsöylemlerle karşılaştırmalı biçimde analiz edilmiştir. Analiz sürecinde, dinin toplumsal cinsiyet eşitsizliğini kimi bağlamlarda meşrulaştıran bir “kurumsal dil”e dönüşebilmesi ile aynı dinî kaynakların şiddete karşı etik bir direnç zemini sunabilmesi birlikte değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular, üç dinin de aileyi koruma ve düzeni sürdürme hedefiyle ataerkil normlara açık kapı bırakan yorum gelenekleri ürettiğini; özellikle “itaat”, “boşanma yasağı”, “namus” ve “disiplin” temalarının şiddeti görünmezleştirebildiğini göstermektedir. Bununla birlikte, her üç dinin temel öğretisinde merhamet, adalet ve insan onuru vurguları güçlüdür; bu vurgu, şiddetin dinî meşruiyetini kırmada teolojik bir kaynak olarak kullanılabilir. Sonuç olarak çalışma, kadına yönelik şiddetle mücadelede dinin bütünüyle dışlanması yerine, geleneksel/ataerkil yorumların eleştirel biçimde yeniden okunmasının daha işlevsel bir strateji olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır.

References

  • Abu-Odeh, L. (2000). Crimes of honor and the construction of gender in Arab societies. In S. İlkkaracan (Ed.), Women and sexuality in Muslim societies (pp. 363–381). Özgün Ofset.
  • Adams, C. J., & Fortune, M. M. (1998). Violence against women and children: A Christian theological sourcebook. The Continuum Publishing Company.
  • Alkhateeb, S. (1999). Ending domestic violence in Muslim families. Journal of Religion and Abuse, 1(4), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1300/J154v01n04_03
  • Allensbach Institute. (2012). Deutsche Einstellungen gegenüber dem Islam [German attitudes toward Islam]. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.
  • Altınay, A. G., & Arat, Y. (2008). Türkiye’de kadına yönelik şiddet. Punto Yayınları.
  • Berger, P. L. (1967). The sacred canopy: Elements of a sociological theory of religion. Doubleday.
  • Berktay, F. (1996). Tektanrılı dinler karşısında kadın. Metis Kadın Araştırmaları.
  • Berktay, F. (2006). Tarihin cinsiyeti. Metis Yayınları.
  • Bussert, J. (1986). Battered women: From a theology of suffering to an ethic of empowerment. Division in North America, Lutheran Church in America.
  • Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı. (2019). 8 Mart Dünya Kadınlar Günü münasebetiyle yapılan basın açıklaması. https://www.diyanet.gov.tr
  • Faith Freedom International. (n.d). Why critique only Islam http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/SKM/why_critique_only_islam.htm
  • Fortune, M. M., & Enger, C. G. (2005). Violence against women and the role of religion. VAWnet – National Resource Center on Domestic Violence.
  • Furlong, R. (2006, March 14). [News article]. BBC News.
  • Gilmore, D. D. (1987). Honor, honesty, shame: Male status in contemporary Andalusia. In D. D. Gilmore (Ed.), Honor and shame and the unity of the Mediterranean (pp. 90–91). American Anthropological Association.
  • Grady, J. L. (2001, January/February). Control freaks, and the women who love them. New Man Magazine.
  • Karaman, H. (2012). İslam hukuku. İz Yayıncılık.
  • Koğacıoğlu, D. (2007). Gelenek söylemleri ve iktidarın doğallaşması: Namus cinayetleri örneği. Kültür ve Siyasette Feminist Yaklaşımlar, (3), 117–145.
  • Kurtubî, M. b. A. (2006). el-Câmiʿ li-aḥkâmi’l-Kurʾân (C. 5). Beyrut: Müessesetü’r-Risâle.
  • Lerner, G. (1986). Women and history (Vol. 1, The creation of patriarchy). Oxford University Press.
  • Mernissi, F. (2000a). The Muslim concept of active women’s sexuality. In S. İlkkaracan (Ed.), Women and sexuality in Muslim societies (pp. 19–37). Özgün Ofset.
  • Mernissi, F. (2000b). Virginity and patriarchy. In S. İlkkaracan (Ed.), Women and sexuality in Muslim societies (pp. 203–215). Özgün Ofset.
  • Özgür, S., & Sunar, D. (1982). Social psychological patterns of homicide in Turkey: A comparison of male and female convicted murderers. In Ç. Kağıtçıbaşı (Ed.), Sex roles, family and community in Turkey (p. 357). Indiana University Press.
  • Smith, P. (1911). The life and letters of Martin Luther. Houghton Mifflin.
  • Sev'er, A., & Yurdakul, G. (2001). Culture of honor, culture of change: A feminist analysis of honor killings in rural turkey. Violence Against Women, 7(9), 964–998. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778010122182866
  • Taberî, M. b. C. (1992). Câmiʿu’l-beyân ʿan teʾvîli âyi’l-Kurʾân (C. 8). Beyrut: Dâru’l-Maʿrifa.
  • The New York Times. (1999, June 20). [Newspaper article].
  • Tracy, S. (2007). Patriarchy and domestic violence: Challenging common misconceptions. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 50(3), 573–594.
  • United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. (2002, November 12). When I call for help: A pastoral response to domestic violence against women. Author.
  • Walby, S. (1990). Theorizing patriarchy. Basil Blackwell.
  • Yalcin-Heckmann, L. (1991). Tribe and kinship among the Kurds. Peter Lang.
  • Yıldız, İ. (2002). Mormonizm. Danish Grove Publications.
There are 31 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Women's Studies
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

İlhan Yıldız 0000-0003-3848-6723

Submission Date June 29, 2025
Acceptance Date December 24, 2025
Publication Date December 30, 2025
Published in Issue Year 2025 Volume: 4 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Yıldız, İ. (2025). Kadına Yönelik Şiddetin Sosyoteolojik Analizi. Veche, 4(2), 38-51. https://doi.org/10.62147/veche.1730024

Content of this journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License

29410