İstanbul Sözleşmesi’nden çekilme kararı ışığında Türkiye’de patriyarkal devlet

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 47 Sayı: 1, 42 - 70, 08.07.2023

Ece Kocabıçak

Öz

Patriyarkal devlet karakterinin belirleyenlerini ele alan bu çalışma, cinsiyetsiz devlet kuramlarının eleştirel bir tahlilini sunarken, cinsiyet rejimini konu alan feminist çalışmalara da katkı sunmaktadır. Türkiye örneğinden yola çıkarak hem nitel hem de nicel araştırma yöntemlerini kullanan bu araştırma, patriyarkal devlet karakterindeki değişimi kuramsallaştırarak, devletin çoklu ajandalarının, demokratikleşme sürecindeki sorunların ve natrans heteroseksüel aile yapısının devlet yapısını nasıl şekillendirdiğini incelemektedir. Türkiye’nin 2021 yılında İstanbul Sözleşmesi’nden çekilme sürecine odaklanarak, şu bulgulara varılmıştır. Demokratikleşme sürecinin tıkandığı koşullarda, kadınlar kamusal karar mekanizmalarından dışlanmışken, patriyarkal politik aktörler hem ırkçı devlet ajandasını kullanarak hem de küçük ama etkili bir grup seçkin erkeğin desteği ile devletin erkek egemen karakterini şekillendirmektedir. Buna karşılık, cinsiyet ve toplumsal cinsiyet kavramlarına yönelik biyolojik özcü anlayışlar, kadınların mücadelesini bölmüş, gücünü zayıflatmış, böylelikle devlet üzerinde kurulan etkinin zayıflamasına yol açmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Devlet, Toplumsal Cinsiyet, İstanbul Sözleşmesi, Patriyarka, Kadın Mücadelesi

Teşekkür

Yayım sürecinde yazılacaktır

The patriarchal state in Turkey in light of the country’s withdrawal from the Istanbul Convention

Öz

By investigating the determinants of the patriarchal state, this paper critically engages with ungendered accounts of the state and contributes to gender regime scholarship. Drawing on the case of Turkey and using the mixed methods of qualitative and quantitative analyses, the paper (1) theorises varieties of the patriarchal state, and (2) investigates the significance of the multiple state agendas, (3) de-democratisation process, and (4) cis-gender heterosexual family in shaping the patriarchal character of the global Southern states. Focusing on the withdrawal of Turkey in 2021 from the İstanbul Convention, I find that the patriarchal political actors maintain the patriarchal state character by adopting the racist state agenda. Under the conditions in which the de-democratisation process has excluded women from public decision making, a particular group of elite men have provided significant support to the men’s rights-based mobilisations thereby increasing their influence over the state. Meanwhile, the biological essentialist accounts of sex and gender have divided women’s struggle, and as such, weakened women’s capacity to challenge the patriarchal state character.

Anahtar Kelimeler

The state, Gender, Istanbul Convention, patriarchy, Feminist movement

Kaynakça

• Akdoğan, A. A., M. Yıldız, ve C. U. Çiner (2017). An Analysis of Policy Transfer the Policy on Protecting Women Against Domestic Violence in Turkey. İçinde: R J Lewis (der), Public Policy Making in a Globalized World, London, New York: Routledge, 402-417.
• Akuduman, D (2020). İstanbul Sözleşmesi: Disiplinler Arası bir Soruşturma. Tire kitap.
• Aksoy, H. A (2018). Gendered Strategies between Democratization and Democratic Reversal: The Curious Case of Turkey. Politics and Governance, 6 (3), 101-111
• Alavi, H (1972). The State in Post-Colonial Societies: Pakistan and Bangladesh. New Left Review 74, 59- 81.
• Amin, S (1976). Unequal Development: an Essay on the Social Formation of Peripheral Capitalism. New York: Monthly Review.
• De Beauvoir, S (1969). The Second Sex: New England: Library press.
• Bianet (2020). Women from AKP file a complaint against columnist over İstanbul Convention remarks. Bia News Agency. 11 Ağustos. Son erişim tarihi: 24.08.2021. https://m.bianet.org/english/print/228820-women-from-akp-file-a-complaintagainst- columnist-over-istanbul-convention-remarks.
• Bodur Ün, M (2019). Contesting Global Gender Equality Norms: The case of Turkey. Review of International Studies, 45(5), 828-847.
• Bodur Ün, M, ve H Arıkan (2021). Europeanization and De-Europeanization of Turkey’s Gender Equality Policy: The Case of the Istanbul Convention. Journal of Common Market Studies, 60 (4), 945-962.
• Boratav, K (2011). Türkiye İktisat Tarihi (1908- 2009). Ankara: İmge Kitabevi.
• Cerami, C (2021). Turkey, Europe and Women’s Rights: The Controversial Debate on the Istanbul Convention. NAD – Nuovi autoritarismi e Democrazie: Diritto, Istituzioni e Società, 3 (1), 1- 42
• Coşar, S (2021). Turkish Nationalism and Patriarchy. İçinde: J Jongerden (der), The Routledge Handbook on Contemporary Turkey, London, New York: Routledge, 213-233
• Çağatay, S, M Liinason, ve O Sasunkevich (2022). Feminist and LGBTI+ Activism across Russia, Scandinavia and Turkey: Transnationalizing Spaces of Resistance, Springer Nature.
• DKV (2020). İstanbul Sözleşmesi Bir Aldatmacadır. Davet ve Kardeşlik Vakfı. 5 Ağustos. Son erişim tarihi: 24.08.2021 https://dkv.org.tr/blog/istanbul-sozlesmesi-biraldatmacadir/
• DuvaR.English (2020). Istanbul Convention back on Erdoğan’s agenda with emphasis on ‘family unity. Gazete DuvaR. 30 Aralık. Son erişim tarihi: 23.08.2021. https:// www.duvarenglish.com/istanbul-convention-back-on-turkish-president-recep-tayyiperdogans- agenda-with-emphasis-on-family-unity-news-55319
• Düzgün, E (2022). Debating ‘uneven and combined development’: Beyond Ottoman Patrimonialism. Journal of International Relations and Development, 25, 297–323.
• Elmas, T, R Overdorf, ve K Aberer (2021). Tactical Reframing of Online Disinformation Campaigns Against The Istanbul Convention. ICWSM 2021 Workshop on Data for the Wellbeing of Most Vulnerable: Promises and Challenges.
• Erdoğan Bayraktar, S (2021). Sümeyye Erdoğan’dan İstanbul Sözleşmesi açıklaması. ABC gazetesi. 5 Nisan. Son erişim tarihi: 25.08.2021 https://abcgazetesi.com/sumeyyeerdogandan- istanbul-sozlesmesi-aciklamasi-387441
• Eslen-Ziya, H (2020). Right-wing Populism in New Turkey: Leading to All New Grounds for Troll Science in Gender Theory. HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies, 76 (3), 1-9.
• Guillaumin, C (1995). Racism, Sexism, Power and Ideology. London, New York: Routledge.
• Güneş, A (2021). Legal Implications of Turkey’s Accessions to the Istanbul Convention by Enacting and Refining Its Laws on Violence Against Women. Women & Criminal Justice, 31 (3), 210-224.
• Gümrükçüoğlu, S (2021). Söyleşi. G Sonakalan (der). KADEM Kadın Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(1), 7-12.
• Gülel, D (2021). Feminist Movement and Law-making in Turkey: a Critical Appraisal from 1998 to 2018. Women’s History Review, 30 (1), 2-27.
• Hearn, J, S Strid, A L Humbert, D Balkmar, ve M Delaunay (2022). From Gender Regimes to Violence Regimes: Re-thinking the Position of Violence. Social Politics, 29 (2), 682- 705.
• Heper, M (1985). The State Tradition in Turkey. Walkington: Eothen Yayınevi.
• HUIPS (2008). Population and Health Survey. Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies. Ankara: Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies.
• HUIPS (2013). Population and Health Survey. Ankara: Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies.
• ILGA World (2020). State-Sponsored Homophobia: Global Legislation Overview Update, Geneva: ILGA.
• ILOSTAT (2020). Employment by sex and age — ILO modelled estimates. The International Labour Organisation. Son erişim tarihi: 02.11.2022 https:// i l o stat . i l o . o rg / ? _ af r L o o p = 1 7 9 3 9 1 1 9 9 6 8 5 5 7 1 & _ af r W i n d o w M o d e = 0 & _ a f r W i n d o w I d = n u l l # ! % 4 0 % 4 0 % 3 F _ a f r W i n d o w I d % 3 D n u l l % 2 6 _ afrLoop%3D179391199685571%26_afrWindowMode%3D0%26_adf.ctrlstate% 3Dhwim9684w_3574
• ILOSTAT (2022). Employment by sex, status in employment and economic activity (thousands, annual). The International Labour Organisation. Geneva. Son erişim tarihi: 02.11.2022 https://ilostat.ilo.org/?_afrLoop=179391199685571&_ afrWindowMode=0&_afrWindowId=null#!%40%40%3F_afrWindowId%3Dnull%26_afrLoop%3D179391199685571%26_afrWindowMode%3D0%26_adf.ctrlstate%3Dhwim9684w_3574
• Jessop, B (1990). State Theory : Putting the Capitalist State In Its Place. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Yayınevi.
• Jessop, B (2002). The Future of The Capitalist State. Oxford: Polity.
• Kabasakal-Arat, Z (2020). Women’s Struggle in Turkey and a New Transnational Declaration. 31 Aralık. Son erişim tarihi: 02.02.2021 https://www.wilsoncenter.org/ blog-post/womens-struggle-turkey-and-new-transnational-declaration
• KADEM (2020). İstanbul Sözleşmesi Hakkında. 20 Ocak. Son erişim tarihi: 26.08.2021 https://kadem.org.tr/istanbul-sozlesmesi-hakkinda/
• Kandiyoti, D (2016). Locating the Politics of Gender: Patriarchy, Neoliberal Governance and Violence in Turkey. Research and Policy on Turkey, 1 (2), 103-118.
• Karakuş, B (2018). Türkiye’de Yaşlılara Yönelik Hizmetler, Kurumsal Yaşlı Bakımı ve Kurumsal Yaşlı Bakımında İllerin Durumu. Ankara: Aile ve Sosyal Politikalar Bakanlığı.
• Kaos GL (2021). İstanbul Sözleşmesi’nen, eşit ve özgür yaşama hakkımızdan vazgeçmiyoruz. Kaos GL. 1 Temmuz. Son erişim tarihi: 01.09.2021 https://kaosgl. org/haber/istanbul-sozlesmesi-nin-feshi-kadinlarin-ve-lgbti-larin-yasam-haklari-yoksaymak- demek
• Keyder, Ç (1987). State and Class in Turkey: a Study in Capitalist Development. London: Verso.
• Kocabıçak, E (2018). What Excludes Women From Landownership in Turkey? Implications for Feminist Strategies. Women’s Studies International Forum, 69 (July– August), 115–125.
• Kocabıçak, E (2020). Why Property Matters? New Varieties of Domestic Patriarchy in Turkey. Social Politics, 28 (4), 812–830.
• Kocabıçak, E (2022a). Gendered Property and Labour Relations in Agriculture: Implications for Social Change in Turkey. Oxford Development Studies, 50 (2), 91-113.
• Kocabıçak, E (2022b). The Political Economy of Patriarchy in the Global South, Routledge Series of Gender and Economy. London, NY: Routledge.
• Konda (2020). Only 7 Percent Say Turkey Should Withdraw from İstanbul Convention. Konda Research. BIA News Desk. 2 Eylül. Son erişim tarihi: https://m.bianet.org/english/women/230104-only-7-percent-say-turkey-should-withdrawfrom-istanbul-convention
• Koyuncu, B, ve A Özman (2019). Women’s Rights Organizations and Turkish State in the Post-2011 Era: Ideological Disengagement versus Conservative Alignment. Turkish Studies, 20 (5), 728-753.
• KİH-YÇ (2021). Kadınların Üreme Sağlığı Hizmetleri ve Kürtaj Deneyimleri Araştırma Raporu, İstanbul: Kadının İnsan Hakları ve Yeni Çözümler derneği
• Lombardo, E ve A Alonso (2020). Gender Regime Change in Decentralized States: The Case of Spain. Social Politics, 27 (3), 449-466.
• Lombardo, E, A Alonso ve R Ciccia (2023). A Southern European model? Gender regime change in Italy and Spain and the Interplay of Polity, Civil Society and Gender-based Violence. Women’s Studies International Forum, March- April 97, baskıda.
• Mardin, Ş (2006 [1967]. Historical Thresholds and Stratification: Social Class and Class Consciousness. İçinde: S. Mardin (der), Religion, Society and Modernity in Turkey, New York: Syracuse University Yayınevi: 102- 135
• Moghadam, V (2023). Gender Regimes, Polities and the World-System: Comparing Iran and Tunisia. Women’s Studies International Forum, March- April 97, baskıda.
• Moghadam, V (2003). Modernising Women: Gender and Social Change in the Middle East. London: Lynne Reinner.
• Moghadam, V (2020). Gender Regimes in the Middle East and North Africa: The Power of Feminist Movements. Social Politics, 27 (3), 467-485.
• Moore, B (1966). Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World. Boston: Beacon Yayınevi.
• OECD.Stat. (2020). Family veritabanı. OECD. Son erişim tarihi: 28.10.2022 https://stats. oecd.org/Index.aspx?datasetcode=TIME_USE#
• Offe, C ve J Keane (1984). Contradictions of the Welfare State. London: Hutchinson.
• Oğuz, Ş (2015). Rethinking Globalization as Internationalization of Capital: Implications for Understanding State Restructuring. Science & Society, 79 (3), 336-362.
• Özgür Keysan, A ve Z Özdemir (2020). Civil Society and State Relations in Turkey: Opposing Trajectories of Two Islamist Women’s Civil Society Organizations. Asian Journal of Women’s Studies, 26 (3), 301-325.
• Paternotte, D, ve M Verloo (2021). De-democratization and the Politics of Knowledge: Unpacking the Cultural Marxism Narrative. Social Politics, 28 (3), 556-578. Poulantzas, N (1969). The Problem of the Capitalist State. New Left Review 58, 32-53.
• Shire, K, ve K Nemoto (2020). The Origins and Transformations of Conservative Gender Regimes in Germany and Japan. Social Politics, 27 (3), 432-448.
• Türkiye Cumhuriyeti (2019). Turkey’s 2nd Voluntary National Review (VNR) Sustainable Development Goals. New York.
• Tilly, C (1990). Coercion, Capital, and European States, AD 990-1990. Cambridge, Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.
• TÜİK (2016). Aile Yapısı araştırması. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. Son erişim tarihi: 20.10.2022. https://data.tuik.gov.tr
• TÜİK (2020). Adrese dayalı nüfus araştırması, Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. Son erişim tarihi: 20.10.2022. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/
• UN Women (2021). Women in Politics. The United Nations. Son erişim tarihi: 20.10.2022. https://gender-data-hub-2-undesa.hub.arcgis.com/
• Verloo, M (2022). Gender Regimes and Cathexis. Varieties of Gender Regimes Workshop. 24-27 April. Berlin: Humboldt University
• Walby, S (2009). Globalisation and Inequalities: Complexity and Contested Modernities. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
• Walby, S (2011). The Future of Feminism. Cambridge: Polity Yayınevi.
• Walby, S (2020a). Developing the Concept of Society: Institutional Domains, Regimes of Inequalities and Complex Systems in a Global Era. Current Sociology, 69 (3), 315–332.
• Walby, S (2020b). Varieties of Gender Regimes. Social Politics, 27 (3), 414-431.
• Wallerstein, I M (1974). The Modern World-System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Yayınevi.
• Wallerstein, I M (2004). World-Systems Analysis. Durham N.C.: Duke University Yayınevi.
• WDI (2022). World Development Indicators. The World Bank. Son erişim tarihi: 01.11.2022. https://databank.worldbank.org/reports.aspx?source=worlddevelopment- indicators
• Weber, M (1947). The Theory of Social and Economic Organisation. New York: Free press.
• Wittig, M (1992). The Straight Mind, and Other Essays. London; New York : Harvester.
• Wood, E M (1981). The Separation of the Economic and the Political in Capitalism. New Left Review I (127), 32- 63.
• Yeniden Refah Partisi (2019). Yeniden Refah Partisi Toplumda Üçüncü bir Cins Yaratma Amacı Taşımaya Rest Çekti. AHA news. 13 Temmuz. Son erişim tarihi: 28.02.2021 https://www.akbabahaber.com.tr/yeniden-refah-partisi-toplumda-ucuncu-bir-cinsyaratma- amaci-tasimaya-rest-cekti/32027/
• Yücel, Ö (2017). Efficiency and Expediency of Preventive and Protective Measures against Domestic Violence Taken by the Family Courts in Ankara. International journal of law, policy, and the family, 31 (3), 311-327.