Selfhood in the mirror of the city: social and spatial positionings of Turkey-origin immigrants in Milan

Öz

This study examines the psycho-social and spatial transformations that migration generates in identity, belonging, and self-concept, analysing the experiences of Turkey-origin immigrants living in Milan, Italy, from a multidimensional perspective. Increasing global mobility reshapes immigrants’ quests for social acceptance and recognition within new urban settings, bringing the tensions between identity formation and belonging into sharper focus. However, the spatial dimension of these tensions is often overlooked in current migration studies. This research aims to explore how immigrants negotiate their selfhood through everyday interactions in diverse urban spaces. Based on qualitative fieldwork, semi-structured and unstructured interviews were conducted with Turkey-origin immigrants of different ages, genders, ethnic backgrounds, and legal statuses, complemented by observations in interactive public spaces. The findings indicate that immigrants redefine their identities by developing positioning strategies shaped by both negotiation and resistance in their relations with Italian society, other immigrant groups, and their own communities. The research demonstrates that migration is a dynamic process of self-transformation, influenced by intertwining spatial and social contexts, and makes a conceptual contribution to the literature on migration and urban studies.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Immigration
• Turkey-origin immigrants
• Immigrant identity
• Self-concept
• Positioning
• Milan

Kentin aynasında kendilik: Milano’daki Türkiyeli göçmenlerin toplumsal ve mekânsal konumlanmaları

Öz

Bu çalışma, göçün bireylerin kimlik, aidiyet ve kendilik algılarında yarattığı psiko-sosyal ve mekânsal dönüşümleri incelemekte ve İtalya’nın Milano kentinde yaşayan Türkiyeli göçmenlerin deneyimlerini çok yönlü bir bakışla analiz etmektedir. Küresel ölçekte artan göç hareketleri, bireylerin toplumsal kabul ve tanınma arayışlarını yeni kentsel bağlamlarda şekillendirmekte, bu süreçte kimlik inşası ile aidiyet üretimi arasındaki gerilim daha görünür hâle gelmektedir. Güncel göç araştırmalarında, bu gerilimin mekânsal boyutu çoğu zaman arka planda kalmaktadır. Bu araştırma, göçmenlerin farklı kentsel mekânlarda kurdukları gündelik ilişkiler aracılığıyla kendiliklerini nasıl müzakere ettiklerini anlamayı amaçlamaktadır. Nitel saha çalışması kapsamında, farklı yaş, cinsiyet, etnisite ve yasal statüden Türkiyeli göçmenlerle yarı yapılandırılmış ve yapılandırılmamış görüşmeler yapılmış, ayrıca etkileşimli kamusal mekânlarda gözlemler gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bulgular, göçmenlerin İtalyan toplumu, diğer göçmen grupları ve kendi topluluklarıyla ilişkilerinde müzakere ve direnç üzerinden farklılaşan konumlanma stratejileri geliştirdiklerini ve kimliklerini yeniden tanımladıklarını göstermektedir. Araştırma, göçmenliğin mekânsal ve toplumsal bağlamlarda biçimlenen dinamik bir kendilik dönüşümü olduğunu ortaya koyarak göç ve kent çalışmaları literatürüne kavramsal bir katkı sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Göç
• Türkiyeli göçmenler
• Göçmen kimliği
• Kendilik algısı
• Konumlanma
• Milano

Kaynakça

1. Ahmed, S. (1999). Home and away: Narratives of migration and estrangement. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 2(3), 329–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/136.787.799900200303
2. Akhtar, S. (1999). Immigration and identity: Turmoil, treatment, and transformation. Jason Aronson, Inc.
3. Ambrosini, M. (2013). Immigration in Italy: between economic acceptance and political rejection. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 14(1), 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134.011.0231-3
4. Anthias, F. (2001). New hybridities, old concepts: The limits of “culture.” Ethnic and Racial Studies, 24(4), 619– 641. https://doi. org/10.1080/014.198.70120049815
5. Artero, M., & Chiodelli, F. (2019). Migration, religion, and residential segregation at the urban level: The case of Muslim migrants in Rome and Milan. Sociological Inquiry, 90, 867–890. https://doi.org/10.1111/soin.12322
6. Barua, H., & Maheshwari, N. (2025). The interplay between migration and self-identity: a structured review using TCCM and bibliometric analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1563508. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.156.3508
7. Beech, N. (2010). Liminality and the practices of identity reconstruction. Human Relations, 64(2), 285–302. https://doi. org/10.1177/001.872.6710371235
8. Berman, S. L., & Weems, C. F. (2016). Identity distress. R. J. R. Levesque (Ed.), Encyclopedia of adolescence içinde (ss. 1–8). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32132-5_143-2

9. Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology, 46(1), 5–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.1997. tb01087.x
10. Bhugra, D. (2004). Migration and mental health. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 109(4), 243–258. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0001- 690X.2003.00246.x
11. Bilecen, T., & Araz, M. S. (2015). Londra’da yaşayan Türkiyeli göçmenlerin etnik ve mezhepsel aidiyetlerinin siyasal tutum ve davranışlarına etkisi. Göç Dergisi, 2(2), 189–207. https://doi.org/10.33182/gd.v2i2.562
12. Brettell, C. B., & Hollifield, J. F. (Ed.) (2023). Migration theory: Talking across disciplines (4. basım). Routledge.
13. Bourdieu, P. (1993). The field of cultural production: Essays on art and literature. Columbia University Press.
14. Carlà, A., Nicolson, M. (2023). Negotiated belonging in sub-state nationalist contexts: Young adult migrant narratives in Scotland and South Tyrol. Comparative Migration Studies, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878.023.00325-4
15. Carling, J., & Collins, F. (2017). Aspiration, desire and drivers of migration. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(6), 909–926. https:// doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2017.138.4134
16. Castles, S., & Miller, M. J. (2009). The age of migration: International population movements in the modern world. Palgrave Macmillan.
17. Cummings, C., Pacitto, J., Lauro, D., & Foresti, M. (2015). Why people move: Understanding the drivers and trends of migration to Europe. London: Oversea Development Institute.
18. Çakırer, Y. (2009). Göç trafiğinde araftakiler: İtalya’daki Türkler. M. M. Erdoğan (Ed.), Yurtdışındaki Türkler: 50. yılında göç ve uyum içinde (ss. 763–768). Orion.
19. Demo, D. H. (1992). The self-concept over time: Research issues and directions. Annual Review of Sociology, 18, 303–326. https://www.jstor. org/stable/2083456
20. Dinc, P. (2022). The semantics and substance of contesting Turkishness in the diaspora. D. Abdelhady, & R. Aly (Ed.), Routledge handbook on Middle Eastern diasporas içinde (Bölüm 12). Routledge. http://doi.org/10.4324/978.042.9266102-15
21. Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity, youth, and crisis. W. W. Norton Company.
22. Ertorer, S. E. (2014). Managing identity in the face of resettlement. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 14, 268–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/15283.488.2014.944695
23. Faist, T. (2000). The volume and dynamics of international migration and transnational social spaces. Oxford University Press.
24. Gayırnal, A., & Gündoğmuş, B. (2021). Almanya’da yaşayan Türkiyeli göçmen kadınların kimlik değişimlerine yönelik bir alan araştırması. Düşünce ve Toplum Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 4, 189–222. https://doi.org/10.33182/gd.v2i2.562
25. Gecas, V. (1982). The self-concept. Annual Review of Sociology, 8, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.08.080.182.000245
26. Glick Schiller, N., Basch, L., & Blanc Szanton, C. (1995). From immigrant to transmigrant: Theorizing transnational migration. Anthropological Quarterly, 68(1), 48–63. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3317464
27. Glick Schiller, N., & Çağlar, A. (2011). Locating migration: Rescaling cities and migrants. Cornell University Press.
28. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Anchor Books.
29. Goldin, I., Cameron, G., & Balarajan, M. (2011). Exceptional people: How migration shaped our world and will define our future. Princeton University Press.
30. Grigoriadis, I. N. (2007). Türk or Türkiyeli? The reform of Turkey’s minority legislation and the rediscovery of Ottomanism. Middle Eastern Studies, 43(3), 423–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/002.632.00701246116
31. Grzymala-Kazlowska, A., & Phillimore, J. (2018). Introduction: Rethinking integration. New perspectives on adaptation and settlement in the era of super-diversity. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(2), 179– 196. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2017.134.1706
32. Güler, H. (2019). İşçilikten “girişimciliğe” Türkiyeli göçmenler: Paris örneği. Sosyoloji Dergisi, 39, 81–102. https://izlik.org/JA57TZ82HE
33. Hall, S. (1996). Introduction: Who needs ‘identity’? S. Hall ve P. du Gay (Ed.), Questions of cultural identity içinde (ss. 1–17). SAGE Publications.
34. Hatoss, A. (2012). Where are you from? Identity construction and experiences of ‘othering’ in the narratives of Sudanese refugee-background Australians. Discourse & Society, 23, 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/095.792.6511419925
35. Hitlin, S. (2003). Values as the core of personal identity: Drawing links between two theories of self. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66(2), 118– 137. https://doi.org/10.2307/1519843
36. ISTAT (Istituto Nazionale di Statistica). (2024). Immigrants.stat: Data and indicators on immigrant and new citizens. http://stra-dati.istat.it
37. James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. Henry Holt and Company.
38. Jung, E., & Hecht, M. L. (2008). Identity gaps and level of depression among Korean immigrants. Health Communication, 23, 313–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/104.102.30802229688
39. Kanık, C. (2017). Türkiyeli göçmenler, çokkültürlülük ve kültürlerarasılık (Almanya örneği). Siirt Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 4(2), 141–154.
40. Kaya, A., & Kentel, F. (2005). Euro-Turks: A Bridge or a breach between Turkey and the European Union? A comparative study of German- Turks and French-Turks. Centre for European Policy Studies.
41. Kim, Y. Y. (2001). Becoming intercultural: An integrative theory of communication and cross-cultural adaptation. SAGE Publications.
42. King, R. (2018). A geographer’s perspective on migration, identity and space. T. Linhard, & T. H. Parsons (Ed.), Mapping migration, identity, and space içinde (ss. 331–356). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 3-319-77956-0_14
43. King, R., & Raghuram, P. (2013). International student migration: Mapping the field and new research agendas. Population, Space and Place, 19(2), 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.1746
44. Koser, K. (2016). International migration: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
45. Lefebvre, H. (1974/1991). The production of space (D. Nicholson-Smith, Çev.). Blackwell. (Orijinal eserin yayım tarihi 1974)
46. Lefebvre, H. (1996). Writings on cities (E. Kofman ve E. Lebas, Ed.). Blackwell.
47. Levitt, P., & Glick Schiller, N. (2004). Conceptualizing simultaneity: A transnational social field perspective on society. International Migration Review, 38(3), 1002–1039. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2004.tb00227.x
48. Madison, G. (2006). Existential migration. Existential Analysis, 17(2), 238–260.
49. Markus, H., & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social psychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 299– 337. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.38.020.187.001503
50. Massey, D. (1994). Space, place and gender. University of Minnesota Press.
51. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society. University of Chicago Press.
52. Mollica, M. (2020). The twenty-five Turkish Alawi from Tokat and the creation of the Alawite Bektashi Italia in Lecco. Türk Kültürü ve Hacı Bektaş Velî Araştırma Dergisi, 96, 145–162. https://doi.org/.34189/hbv.96.006
53. Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitive approaches (7. basım). Pearson.
54. Nuhoğlu Soysal, Y. (1994). Limits of citizenship: Migrants and postnational membership in Europe. University of Chicago Press.
55. Ogan, C., Giglou, R. I., & d’Haenens, L. (2017). Challenges of conducting survey research related to a social protest movement: Lessons learned from a study of Gezi protests involving the Turkish diaspora in three European countries. The Information Society, 33(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972.243.2016.1248615
56. Park, S., & Gerrits, L. (2021). How migrants manifest their transnational identity through online social networks:
57. comparative findings from a case of Koreans in Germany. Comparative Migration Studies, 9(10). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878.020.00218-w
58. Phinney, J. S., Horenczyk, G., Liebkind, K., & Vedder, P. (2001). Ethnic identity, immigration, and well-being: An
59. interactional perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 57(3), 493–510. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00225
60. Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. G. (2001). Legacies: The story of the immigrant second generation. University of California Press.
61. Pugh, J. D. (2017). Negotiating identity and belonging through the invisibility bargain: Colombian forced migrants in Ecuador. International Migration Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/imre.12344
62. Purkis, S., & Güngör, F. (2015). İtalya, Milano’da yaşayan Türkiyelilerin göçmenlik deneyimleri. İ.Ü. Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, 53, 1–29. https://izlik.org/JA68TN93PK
63. Quassoli, F., & Dimitriadis, I. (2019). “Here, there, in between, beyond...”: Identity negotiation and sense of belonging among Southern Europeans in the UK and Germany. Social Inclusion, 7(4), 60–70. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v7i4.238
64. Quiroz Bacerra, M. V. (2014). Performing belonging in public space: Mexican migrants in New York City. Politics & Society, 42(3), 331–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/003.232.9214543257
65. Reitz, J. G. (2002). Host societies and the reception of immigrants: Research themes, emerging theories, and methodological issues. International Migration Review, 36(4), 1005–1019. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4149489
66. Reyneri, E. (2004). Immigrants in a segmented often undeclared labour market. Journal of Modern Italian Studies, 9(1), 71–93. https://doi. org/10.1080/135.457.1042000179191
67. Riva, E., & Zanfrini, L. (2013). The labor market condition of immigrants in Italy: the case of Lombardy. Interventions Économiques/Papers in Political Economy, 47, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.4000/interventionseconomiques.1987
68. Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. Basic Books.
69. Ryan, D., Dooley, B., & Benson, C. (2008). Theoretical perspectives on post-migration adaptation and psychological well-being among refugees: Towards a resource-based model. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fem047
70. Salomoni, F. (2012). Göç veren ülkeden göç alan ülkeye geçiş: Akdeniz modeli ve İtalya örneği. I. G. Öner ve S. A. Öner (Ed.), Küreselleşme çağında göç: Kavramlar, tartışmalar (ss. 417–438). İletişim.
71. Sayad, A. (2004). The suffering of the immigrant (D. Macey, Çev.). Polity Press.
72. Schuster, L. (2005). The continuing mobility of migrants in Italy: Shifting between places and statuses. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 31(4), 757–774. https://doi.org/10.1080/136.918.30500109993
73. Sili Kalem, A. (2015). Türk çayına süt katmak: Londra’da yaşayan Türkiyeli göçmenlerin gündelik hayatları. İnsan ve Toplum, 5(10), 43–72. https://izlik.org/JA64LD54GZ
74. Smith, L. R. (2013). Female refugee networks: Rebuilding post-conflict identity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 37, 11–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2012.04.011
75. Sussman, N. M. (2000). The dynamic nature of cultural identity throughout cultural transitions: Why home is not so sweet. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(4), 355–373. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0404_5
76. Stryker, S. (1980). Symbolic interactionism: A social structural version. Benjamin/Cummings.
77. Taukeer, M. (2024). Ethnographic analysis of “safe zone” concept in migration in global perspective. Migration and Diversity, 3(1), 71–87. https://doi.org/10.33182/md.v3i1.3220
78. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. S. Worchel ve W. G. Austin (Ed)., Psychology of intergroup relation (ss. 277–293). Hall Publishers.
79. Urban, E. L., & Orbe, M. P. (2010). Identity gaps of contemporary U.S. immigrants: Acknowledging divergent communicative experiences. Communication Studies, 61, 304–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/105.109.71003757147
80. Üstel, F. (2004). “Makbul vatandaş”ın peşinde: II. Meşruiyet’ten bugüne vatandaşlık eğitimi. İletişim Yayınları.
81. Vertovec, S. (2001). Transnationalism and identity. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 27(4), 573–582. https://doi. org/10.1080/136.918.30120090386
82. Wessendorf, S. (2013). Commonplace diversity and the “ethos of mixing”: Perceptions of difference in a London Neighbourhood. Identities, 20(4), 407–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/1070289X.2013.822374
83. Zapata-Barrero, R., & Hellgren, Z. (2023). Intercultural citizenship in the making: Public space and belonging in discriminatory environments. R. Barbulescu vd. (Ed.), Revising the integration-citizenship nexus içinde (ss. 111– 128). IMISCOE Research Series. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25726-1_7