Türkiye'de 'erkek işi' algısını sarsan kadınlar: Gazete haberlerinin eleştirel bir söylem çözümlemesi

Öz

Bu çalışma Türkiye'de kadınların cinsiyet açısından alışılmamış mesleklere geçişi hakkında dışlayıcı ya da dahil edici söylemleri araştırmak amacıyla, kendilerine özgü göstergebilimsel ve metinsel özellikleri ile betimlenen çevrimiçi haber söylemlerini incelemektedir. Eleştirel Söylem Çözümlemesi ve makro yapısal analiz (van Dijk, 1980) çerçevesinde, çalışmada kadınların erkek egemen mesleklerde çalışmaları hakkındaki çevrimiçi gazeteler ve haber portallarından oluşan veri seti, toplum algısını şekillendirmek amacıyla olası ayrımcı ya da destekleyici bir tavrı nasıl inşaa ettiklerini ortaya koymak amacıyla analiz edilmektedir. Bulgular toplumdaki 'erkek işi' algısının gazete haberlerinde alaycı ve kuşkucu bir tonla sorgulandığını ortaya çıkarmaktadır. Kadınların 'erkek işi' olarak adlandırılan mesleklerdeki başarılarına belirgin bir vurgu yaparak veri setinde yapıcı bir tutum sergilenmektedir. Kadınların cinsiyet olarak alışılmamış mesleklerdeki mevcudiyetleri ile ilgili kendi algılarına gelince, karşılaştıkları bazı zorlukları kabul etseler de anlatılarında kadınsılıklarını koruduklarına dair güçlü bir vurgu ile güçlerine ve azimlerine olan güvenlerini açık olarak ifade ettikleri görülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Medyada kadınlar
• Erkek işi
• Haber metinleri
• Söylem çözümlemesi
• Türkiye

Women shaking the concept of 'men's work' in Turkey: A critical discourse analysis of the news reports

Öz

This study explores online news discourses characterized by their unique semiotic and textual properties to unveil any discursive exclusionary or inclusionary constructions regarding women's movement to gender-atypical occupations in Turkey. Adopting the framework of Critical Discourse Analysis and macrostructural analysis of discourse (van Dijk, 1980), the study analyses a dataset of online newspapers and news portals on women working in male-dominated occupations to understand how they construct and proliferate a discriminatory or supportive attitude in shaping public attention. The findings reveal that the concept of 'men's work' is challenged in the news reports by an ironical and disbelieving tone to question the occupational gender segregation. A constructive attitude exists by an apparent focus on women's achievements in so-called 'men's work'. With respect to women's perception of their presence in gender-atypical jobs, though they acknowledge some difficulties they face, their confidence in their strength and perseverance is obvious in their narratives with a strong emphasis on keeping their femininity.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Women in media
• Men's work
• News reports
• Discourse analysis
• Turkey

Kaynakça

1. Achtenagen, L., & Welter, F. (2011). ‘Surfing on the ironing board’- the representation of women’s entrepreneurship in German newspapers. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 23(9–10), 763–786.,
2. Bilgin Ülken, F., & Yüce, N. (2020). Yeni medyada kadın bedenine yönelik ayrımcılık: Ekşi Sözlük Örneği. Mersin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 3(2), 40–79.
3. Eikhof, D.R., Summers, J., & Carter, S. (2013). “Women doing their own thing”: media representations of female entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 19(5), 547–564.
4. Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. London: Longman.
5. Fairclough, N. (1993). Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: The universities. Discourse and Society, 4, 133–168.
6. Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power (2nd ed.). London: Longman.
7. Fowler, R., Hodge, B., Kress, G., & Trew, T. (1979). Language and control. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
8. Gallagher, M. (2005). Who makes the news? Global Media Monitoring Project (GMMP) 2005. World Association of Christian Communication. [online]. Available: http://whomakesthenews. org/gmmp/gmmp-reports

9. Gallagher, M. (2010). Who makes the news? Global Media Monitoring Project (GMMP) 2010. World Association of Christian Communication. [online]. Available: http://whomakesthenews.org/gmmp/gmmp-reports
10. Happer, C., & Philo, G. (2013). The role of the media in the construction of public belief and social change. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 1(1), 321–336.
11. Jia, S., Lansdall-Welfare, T., Sudhahar, S., Carter, C., & Cristianni, N. (2016). Women are seen more than heard in online newspapers. PLoS ONE 11(2), e0148434.
12. Lee, J. (2005). Perception of women managers in Singapore: A media analysis. Asia Pacific Business Review, 11(2), 233–250.
13. McNair, B., Hiberd, M., & Schlesinger, J. (2003). Mediated access: Broadcasting and democratic participation in the age of mediated politics. Luton: University of Luton Press.
14. Metin Açer, T. (2020). Kamusal alanın yeni yüzü Ekşi Sözlük üzerinden toplumsal cinsiyet, iktidar ve beden analizi. Erciyes İletişim Dergisi, 7(2), 767–788.
15. O’Keeffe, A. (2011). Media and discourse analysis. In J. Gee, & M. Handford (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 441–454). London: Routledge.
16. Page, R., Barton, D., Unger, J. W., & Zappavigna, M. (2014). Researching language and social media: A student guide. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor & Francis.
17. Parsons, T., & Bales, R. F. (Eds.) (1955). Family, socialization and interaction process. New York Free Press.
18. Peng, A. Y., Hou, J. Z., KhosraviNik, M., & Zhang, X. (2023). “She uses men to boost her career”: Chinese digital cultures and gender stereotypes of female academics in Zhihu discourses. Social Semiotics, 33(4), 750-768.
19. Power, K., Rak, L., & Kim, M. (2020). Women in business media: A critical discourse analysis of representations of women in Forbes, Fortune and Bloomberg BusinessWeek, 2015-2017. Cadaad Journal, 11(2), 1–26.
20. Radu, M., & Redien-Collot, R. (2008). The social representation of entrepreneurs in the French press: desirable and feasible models. International Small Business Journal, 26(3), 259– 298.
21. Rakow, L., & Kranich, K. (1991). Women as sign in television news. Journal of Communication, 41(1), 8–23.
22. Rodríguez-Darias, A. J., & Aguilera-A ́vila, L. (2018). Gender-based harassment in cyberspace. The case of Pikara magazine. Women’s Studies International Forum, 66, 63–69.
23. Ross, K., & C. Byerly (Eds.) (2004). Women and media: International perspectives. Oxford: Blackwell.
24. Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to discourse. Blackwell Textbooks in Linguistics, Oxford: Blackwell.
25. Simpson, R. L., & Simpson, I. H. (1969): Women and bureaucracy in the semi-professions. In A. Etzioni (Eds.), The semi-professions and their organization. Free Press: New York.
26. Spencer, A., & Podmore, D. (1987). In a man’s world: Essays on women in male-dominated professions. London: Tavistock.
27. van Dijk, T. A. (1980). Macrostructures: An interdisciplinary study of global structures in discourse, interaction, and cognition. Hillsdale, NJ Erlbaum.
28. van Dijk, T. A. (1983). Discourse analysis: Its development and application to the structure of news. Journal of Communication, 33(2), 20–43.
29. van Dijk, T. A. (1988). News as discourse. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
30. van Dijk, T.A. (1993). Analyzing racism through discourse analysis: some methodological reflections. In J. H. Stanfield II, R. M. Dennis (Eds.), Sage focus editions, Vol. 157. Race and ethnicity in research methods (pp. 92–134). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications.
31. van Dijk, T. A. (Ed.). (1997). Discourse as social interaction: Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction, Vol. 2. Sage Publications, Inc.
32. van Dijk, T. (2001). Critical discourse analysis. In D. Schriffin, D. Tannen, H. E. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 352–371). Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers.
33. Williams, C. L. (Ed.). (1993). Doing “women’s work”: Men in nontraditional occupations. Sage Publications, Inc.
34. Zhang, Y., Akhtar, N., Farooq, Q., Yuan, Y., & Khan, I. U. (2021). Comparative study of Chinese and American media reports on the COVID-19 and expressions of social responsibility: a critical discourse analysis. J. Psycholinguist. Res.1–18.