women’s dress and the politics of access to political representation in contemporary turkey

Anthropology of the Middle East, Vol. 9, No. 2, Winter 2014: 72–90 © Berghahn Journals

Women’s Dress and the Politics of Access to Political Representation in Contemporary Turkey

Mona Tajali

Abstract: Male leaders have often used women’s bodies and dress as a means to regulate their access to formal politics, including to national parliaments. Through an analysis of women’s activism surrounding the expansion of headscarved women’s

that pious women’s public protests against discriminatory actions of male leaders towards headscarved women’s candidacy challenged the hegemonic symbolism surrounding the headscarf as articulated by both secularist and conservative religious forces. The consequent discourse shift offered a new perspective on women’s sexuality in the public arena and brought secular and pious women’s rights groups, who rarely saw eye to eye with one another, closer as they realised that imposed dress codes are vehicles for their exclusion from formal politics.

Keywords: dress code, framing processes, headscarf ban, pious women’s activism, Turkey

Introduction

Women’s bodies in many Middle Eastern countries, including Turkey, have often served as a battleground over which opposing tendencies of secularism

over women’s bodies and sexualities, and by extension women’s access to the public sphere, including formal politics. Through the use and abuse of women’s dress codes, particularly the Muslim headscarf, male leaders across the political and ideological spectrum have sought to regulate diverse women’s groups’ access to positions of political authority, including the national parliament:

Women’s Dress and the Politics of Access to Political Representation in Contemporary Turkey • 73

its religiously oriented political leaders generally opposed women’s access to political leadership, or at best advocated headscarved women’s activism in

while women’s bodies become markers of identities, women themselves are robbed of their agency.

Until recently, little research has analysed how women have actively challenged the dominant discourses as articulated by their male leaders, and have at times sought to reach across the ideological and political divisions to assert their demands more forcefully.

This article presents an instance in which women actively protested against the hegemonic symbolism surrounding their dress in an effort to reformulate their core identity claims and demand access to formal politics. Through an analysis of women’s activism regarding the expansion of headscarved women’s

argue that pious women’s groups’ outspokenness against the discriminatory actions of political elites towards headscarved women’s candidacy for the parliament was a major move to challenge the hegemonic symbolism surrounding the headscarf as articulated by both secularist and conservative religious forces.1

women as oppressed, backward or as mere subjects of male control, while it also challenged the conservative religious view of Muslim women, which denies women their active presence in the public sphere, particularly in leadership positions.

This discourse shift was an important step for the Turkish women’s rights movements. Through their strategic organising and framing efforts, pious women’s groups emphasised that their male party leaders discriminate against

protest against gender discrimination in nomination of parliamentary

that women’s groups across the ideological spectrum share: that all women are

discriminatory actions of all party leaders. This inclusive approach resulted in the overall strengthening of the Turkish women’s rights movement as it helped bring together key women’s rights activists from secular and religious circles

in the public discourse from the headscarf itself to the concern of gender discrimination, as both women’s groups realised that imposed dress codes of male leaders are vehicles for their exclusion from formal politics.

74 ← Mona Tajali

More than a Piece of Clothing: The Politics of the Headscarf in Turkey

Throughout history, women’s bodies and dress have often served as markers for ideological and political tendencies around the world, including within the

that the nationalist movements which rose in response to colonialism particularly politicised women’s bodies to signify the nation and its identity

delineate the colonised nations as less civilised, and in particular emphasised the Muslim veil and covering of women’s bodies as a barbaric treatment of women as sexual objects. Women’s bodies became the battleground over

bodies, in which women’s dress, behaviour and ‘proper roles’ became the concern of state politics, rarely concerned women’s own interests and demands

Turkey, although never formally colonised, has been nonetheless subject

and secularists who advocate secularisation and modernisation according to the Western model. Women’s roles and bodies became a central part of this struggle, as each side sought to use women as a marker of their identity claims.

the veil to vest themselves with political agency at the expense of women,

becomes a matter of male regulation, women are deemed merely as sexualised

agents to regulate women’s sexuality, behaviour and roles.The Muslim headscarf, rather than a piece of clothing, has therefore

transformed into a powerful political symbol that serves as a proxy for

divisions among Turkish women, with male elites often acting as the main instigators of such divisions. These divisions have had lasting effects in Turkish society and women’s activism, as each group of women views one another as


This article seeks to shed further light onto the voices that have risen to challenge the seemingly enduring binary opposition between secularism and

elections to observe and record the campaigns as well as the discussions and reactions surrounding the demand for headscarved women’s candidacy for the parliament. To demonstrate women’s organising and campaigning efforts,

and active regarding headscarved women’s right to political representation, ranging from those who were active within a particular party to independent

and gender equality has resulted in important collaborations with their more secular counterparts, whose voices are also reflected here.2

This article concludes with an analysis of the use and abuse of dress codes in regulating women’s access to the public sphere and positions of authority.

formal politics on two fronts: against the secular state that discriminated against their headscarf, and against their male party leaders, who discriminated

that women have to fight exclusion from formal politics on many levels, including dress, ideology and gender. This realisation led pious and secular women’s rights groups in Turkey to fight their exclusion from politics together.

The Headscarf as a Major Obstacle to Women’s Political Representation

of secularisation and Westernisation in an effort to move away from Turkey’s

traditionalism and backwardness. Women’s bodies, similar to men’s, became an

3

secular form of women’s dress essentially disenfranchised headscarved women for decades to come.4

76 ← Mona Tajali

for extreme secularism, assumed that headscarved women are apolitical and

which, outside of agriculture, was the largest employer of women.

politicised and mobilised them to expand their constituency, without intending

increased visibility of headscarved women in the Turkish public sphere as a result of mass urbanisation of the previous decades, and women’s own upward mobility in higher education and professional development, resulted in the secular establishment in combination with various secular feminists to

and assumed that they constituted a disempowered section of the society. The

and its official rhetoric of gender equality led to even stricter exclusion of headscarved women from various public institutions, including universities

women’s access to public universities and schools, no such regulation was specifically in place for the parliament. There was an assumed ‘ban’ on headscarved women parliamentarians as a result of broad interpretations of rulings which addressed headscarved women’s access to state facilities. The only dress code requirement which had been in place for the parliament stated that women have to wear ‘skirt suits’, hence outlawing pants for women, but

The headscarf was deemed by the secularists to have no place in the Turkish parliament, similar to other public buildings, as it signified an ideological

tendency, but similar regulations were rarely extended to men since women’s

‘acceptable’ tendencies is not a new phenomenon, nor is it unique to Turkey.5

of the newly established parliament to encourage Westernisation and to

the parliament’s regulations regarding deputies’ dress was quite explicit: ladies shall wear tailleur

6 By banning


The extent of Turkish secular establishment’s sensitivity to a headscarved

religious Fazilet Virtue Party, was prevented from being able to take her oath Demokratik Sol Parti

a headscarved representative signified a ‘deep fundamentalist threat’, in the

Fazilet Partyattempting to take the oath a second time.

secularist tendencies in Turkey, which played itself off on women’s bodies and

state secular ideology, nationalism, public unity and manifestations of progress

parliamentary dress code, she was nonetheless prevented from serving her

7

than a headscarved woman in the eyes of the regime, and hence was entitled

Fazilet Party,

and even publicly criticised her for exposing the party to condemnation and

parliamentarians, all major political parties in Turkey, including those aligned

candidates, particularly those who refused to remove their headscarves if

← Mona Tajali

including the Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi –

their political will and experience into gains in leadership positions, including candidacy for the parliament. Many headscarved women who were central to

when their parties did not nominate them but rather nominated ‘outside’ women with little party experience to stand as token female representatives

while at first many such women tried to conceal the discriminatory actions of their party leaders, gradually they became vocal as they realised that their right to stand for elections is blocked both by their party leaders as well as the secular establishment. Various secular feminist groups played a key role in instigating

publicised the discriminatory actions of male party leaders by highlighting the fact that many viewed women merely as ‘foot soldiers’ to bring the party to

egalitarian, while simultaneously pursuing gender discriminatory policies,8 further encouraged pious women’s rights groups to formulate their protest against patriarchy and gender discrimination.

The 2011 Parliamentary Elections and Pious Women’s Activism

fought for control over the state and its institutions. This is apparent by the

remove the headscarf ban, and the secular elites’ responses of pursuing party closures and implementing even stricter bans on headscarved women’s access

two state institutions that were notorious for closing parties which were deemed in conflict with Turkey’s secular establishment – before addressing

institutional and structural reforms using the rhetoric of democratisation, justice and making Turkey compatible for EU membership. With the backing


consolidation of power over the state institutions, pious women, who had

inclusion and fairness.

groups demanding headscarved women’s nomination as parliamentary

many headscarved women’s rights activists also pointed to the question of the female body, by protesting the male leaders’ discrimination against women in general, and not just against headscarved women. Most of these efforts

parties in Turkey, had the most headscarved members and supporters among the major Turkish parties. However, when women’s rights activists did not

headscarved women’s marginalisation from political leadership, they took matters into their own hands.

rather than remaining patient for male elites to acknowledge her ‘right’ to

gone public about the need for the party to nominate headscarved candidates. Her outspokenness against her own party led her to become a controversial figure as the Turkish media either considered her as a ‘brave or outspoken

Despite Bostan’s long history of involvement with the party, including her

positions. While her husband, who had a shorter history of party involvement,

even considered as a potential parliamentary candidate by party leaders.

individual right to access the political sphere, a right which is also supported

of piety, Bostan’s insistence on individual rights and freedom of expression as emphasised by international human rights framework was intriguing.

with a threatening statement that if the party leaders were not ready or willing to nominate her, she would run as an independent, signaling her resignation

← Mona Tajali

nominate headscarved women for the 2011 elections:

During last year’s Istisare Toplantisi

and hopes that headscarved women have access to the parliament in 2011

registering for candidacy was mostly to put pressure on the party rather than

headscarf wearing candidate, then no vote’, threatening to boycott the major parties that do not nominate headscarved women, a move which was directed

the campaign’s objective was to highlight the discriminatory and unjust nature of denying headscarved women the right to political representation only based

in terms of rights and justice, and particularly sought to legitimise their

would not only win headscarved women the support of more secular women’s

who are eager to impress the EU and the international community through egalitarian gender policies in the midst of the negotiations for Turkey’s EU membership. Hence, pious women’s rights activists framed their demands for

Women’s Dress and the Politics of Access to Political Representation in Contemporary Turkey •

headscarved women candidates strategically to appeal to the secularists, while

To many pious women activists’ surprise the groups which came out the most strongly against the efforts to increase headscarved women’s access to the

stripped the headscarf of its religious significance, reducing it to a symbol

The campaigners however did not leave such attacks unanswered. While religiously conservative men were offended by the headscarved women’s refusal to remain patient and continue to devote themselves to the party, the campaigners made it clear that they wished to take matters into their

in her column at the conservative daily Yeni Safak

womenfolk is dependent on them [women] deferring to their husbands and

duty to protect women] then, inevitably, they are going to end up being told

‘Where did this demand emerge from?’ by stating that, ‘There was always such

Sunday’s Zaman

be within the domestic sphere as subjects of male control still dominate within

headscarved women as being obedient and stereotypically weak, but when

was prompted due to the unwillingness of male party leaders to take action

← Mona Tajali

women’s issues facilitates coalition building among groups with previously

the Turkish women’s movement secured a major victory by bringing together diverse groups of women, namely the previously opposing secular and pious women. This was because, for the first time in Turkish history, secular women’s rights activists were witnessing pious and headscarved women’s level of agency as they were contesting patriarchal and discriminatory attitudes of male lead

ness, finally to imagining headscarved women as independent individuals who can articulate and fight for their rights. These recent developments have made many secular feminists realise that they have a lot in common with headscarved women when it comes to tackling misogynous and discriminatory party politics that undermine women’s political rights and influence.

A Strategic Convergence on Headscarved Women’s Right to Political Representation

rights groups in Turkey in support of headscarved women’s access to the

parliamentary elections, which for the first time addressed headscarved

mostly of secular women’s rights activists since its foundation in 1997,

time, in 2011 this organisation included the image of a headscarved woman in their ‘50/50 campaign’ poster demanding that at least half of the 550 Turkish parliamentarians should be women, resulting in 275 female parliamentarians,

illustrated that their demands are finally finding resonance with the country’s

arguments as us by pointing out that the majority of women in Turkey are headscarved. They even raised this issue at their meetings with women from across various parties, and in a way pressured parties to nominate headscarved


Figure 1:

source

Figure 2:

headscarved women appeared. However the 2011 posters demanded women’s equal representation in parliament. The posters illustrated different types of women, including women who were handicapped, headscarved and ethnic minorities – all of whom were famous and advocates of women’s rights. The

to campaign for headscarved women’s right to political representation was as a result of a number of factors, among them pious women’s rights activists’

← Mona Tajali

outspokenness and strategic framing of their demands according to a rights discourse. Through their public protests against the discriminatory and patriarchal attitudes of male party leaders, pious women’s rights activists strategically emphasised their similarities with their secular counterparts rather than their differences: that they are also denied access to political

in many feminists from the secular camp being responsive to pious women’s

member, as an organisation that claims in its mandates to be of ‘equal distance

to ignore headscarved women, and hence a decision was made to change their

political representation of all the headscarved women who have been active

group we had to defend all

larger objective of increasing all women’s access to the parliament’ many pious women’s rights activists, including Bostan, strategically refrained from emphasising the headscarf as the main barrier to headscarved women’s

‘considering that the majority of Turkish women are underrepresented, it is

all Turkish women are discriminated against when it comes to politics, so we 9

When her efforts and outspokenness during the 2011 elections turned her into a representative of headscarved women within the larger feminist camps, Bostan chose to build alliances and win over secular feminist group’s support

gathering regarding increasing women’s presence in the parliament organised by Hurriyet

the discrimination that all women face rather than just headscarved women.

sentence which had analogised the term ‘glass ceiling’ that women usually face

is nonetheless a major step in the right direction when a headscarved women’s rights activist can represent the interests of those who were until recently considered by many secularists as ‘oppressed’ or ‘fundamentalist’. Bostan’s

and women’s organisations, but also depoliticised the headscarf in Turkey’s


mobilise women on the issue of discrimination, rather than the religious act of covering one’s head.

in Turkey in recent years has strengthened Turkey’s women’s movement, as many women’s rights activists realised that they have to fight discrimination on many levels, including dress regulations. Towards this end, they have been active in opposing the divisive extreme secularist rhetoric which demonises

unity among diverse women’s groups in Turkey was a signature campaign that

first to normalise their access to the public sphere, including universities. This coalition brought together women of different ideological and political aspirations, including feminists, gay rights activists and headscarved women’s

arm in arm is not our public sphere,’ read the headline of the petition, signaling many secular feminists’ recognition of the struggles of headscarved women for their basic rights to freedom of expression, education and employment, and as they contest state authority over their bodies. Hidayat Tuksal, a pious women’s rights activist and theologian, welcomed this act of solidarity among women from across the ideological spectrum by stating that while many secular feminist organisations opposed religion and veiling practices, their signature meant that they supported the fight of religious women against discrimination

to the moderates who compose the majority of women in Turkey, thus depoliticising the headscarf as a major point of contestation between the

activists who in collaboration with many others helped launch the ‘We support

for years on headscarved and ethnic minority women’s rights, and was a recent

issue rather than a political issue, and hence, it is women who should gather

← Mona Tajali

Conclusion

With the advent of modernity, women’s bodies and dress have frequently served as markers for national ideological and political tendencies in many

sought to publicise its secularist tendencies through unveiling the female body,

their agency and autonomous choice of dress, as well as control over their

women from higher party echelons and parliamentary candidacy by claiming that they could not take up their post should they be elected.

the secularists who equate religious expression in the Turkish parliament to the

making posts, many pious women’s rights activists shifted their organising and lobbying tactics. They publicly criticised the discriminatory behaviours of their male party leaders, while at the same time strived to build alliances with influential secular women’s rights groups. The pious women demanded an end to exclusionary practices, using a human rights discourse, rather than a religious one. This shift in framing their demand and public criticism of the

relegates women to the domestic sphere. This discourse shift was an important step for the Turkish women’s rights

movements as it offered a new perspective on women’s sexuality in the public arena. The shift brought secular and pious women’s rights groups, who rarely saw eye to eye with one another, closer as they realised that the imposed dress codes are vehicles for their exclusion from formal politics. The coalition of diverse women’s groups against gender discrimination and in support of freedom of expression, including freedom to dress one’s body, ultimately

reform, the parliament also reversed the ban on women parliamentarians


Mona Tajali

a book, Electoral Politics: Making Quotas Work for Women

the Journal of Women, Politics and Policy, Middle East Journal and Religions.

Notes

political parties in Turkey that often manage to secure seats in the parliament, with the most emphasis placed on the leaders of the ruling Justice and Development Party Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi – women’s campaigns were directed.

campaigners in the media who consented to forego anonymity.fez

başörtüsü hijab, or türban, as this is the preferred term used by pious women who choose to cover themselves. While türban is used by many

religious connotations and attach it to a more modernised and political meaning, many pious women reject this term and prefer merely headscarf to emphasise

chador

to major elections, such as the parliament. Women who wear the less observant manteaux, complemented with a

6. The ban on women parliamentarians to wear pants was removed with a swift parliamentary vote in November 2013 following the announcement that

headscarf, the Turkish courts were forced to find other justifications to remove her

← Mona Tajali

his public encouragement for women to bear more children, as well as his fierce opposition to the adoption of gender quotas to ensure women’s political presence

more than 70 per cent of Turkish women cover their hair.

References

Women and Gender in Islam: Historical Roots of a Modern Debate

Rethinking Islam and Liberal Democracy: Islamist Women in Turkish Politics

The Greek Review of Social Research

Parliamentary Affairs 61, no. 3: 461–475.

The U.S. Women’s Movement in Global Perspective

Looms’, EurasiaNet

Modernity, Islam, and Secularism in Turkey: Bodies, Places and Time

Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 33, no. 4:

Headscarf Ban and Discrimination: Professional Headscarved Women in the Labor Market

Middle Eastern StudiesToday’s Zaman, 1 November, http://www.


Lancaster University LEAL (Linguistics and English Language), https://www.soas.ac.uk/lmei/events/

The Washington Post, 21 January,

Thinking Gender Papers, UCLA Center for the Study of Women, http://escholarship.

The Forbidden Modern: Civilization and Veiling

Middle Eastern Studies 41, no. 3: 351–372.

Resources for Feminist Research 22, no. 3/4:

A Brief Overview of Women’s Movement(s) in Turkey

Woman, Nation, State

Women, Islam, and the State

Headscarf Politics in Turkey: A Postcolonial Reading

Middle East Journal of Culture and Communication

Turkey: Challenges of Continuity and Change

Discourses’, Feminist Review Women in Iran: Emerging Voices in the Women’s Movement

Journal of Middle East Women’s Studies 1, no. 3: 46–72.Women Living Under Muslim

Laws Dossier 5–6.

Women in Modern Turkish Society: A Reader

Quaderns de La Mediterrània 7: 193–197.

90 ← Mona Tajali

Harvard Journal of Law and Gender

Islamist Mobilization in Turkey: A Study in Vernacular Politics

Kamilpasha.com, http://

Today’s Zaman,

women’s dress and the politics of access to political representation in contemporary turkey

Documents