ZİNANIN HUKUK-İÇİ VE HUKUK-DIŞI SOYKÜTÜĞÜ

Adultery, which means “illegitimate sexual intercourse”, is a regulative gender norm in the patriarchal symbolic order. In this article, I will discuss the concept of patriarchal symbolic order through a reference to Butler’s thesis. Butler argues that Lévi-Strauss’ and Lacan’s structuralist discourse, bases on the incest law, are formulated as a universal and ideal form of social/symbolic norms. The common point of this universal structure is that there is no room for an equal and autonomous female subject. In other words, the female subject has a subsidiary position in the patriarchal symbolic order. I will explain that the patriarchal symbolic order norms and the social/symbolic meaning of adultery internally and externally affect the legal norms and interpretations through acts of violence. I will critically debate on legal norms and interpretations of adultery by analyzing Cover's concepts of “legal violence” and Fricker’s “epistemic injustice” by briefly mentioning the history of adultery in common-law. In Turkey, adultery is regulated as a specific reason for divorce in the Civil Code. Thus, it is necessary to argue on the ways of interaction between the legal violence and the jurisprudence on adultery in Turkey. I will try to put forward the ways of interpretation of judicial decisions in the fault-based divorce process and subjection of women to legal violence by examining Turkish Family Court’s and Supreme Court’s precedents on adultery. While determining the amount of the compensation and the share of intra-marital acquisitions in divorce cases, the Supreme Court firmly considers adultery of the wife as a gross fault, even more than domestic violence of the husband.