 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
MeMe
United Kingdom
541 Posts |
 Posted - 03 Oct 2007 : 13:44:14
|
The heading "Women condemn Turkey constitution " took my interest after reading Turk's postings raving about the new Turkish government. What do you think of this, Turk? Please see link ...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7025294.stm
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 03 Oct 2007 : 22:21:52
|
I have read that. As Turkey is the only democracy in the muslim world while is not perfect. These times are the final state.
The justice and development party has 47 % support. It is the allience of Conservatives (muslims) and liberals. Next Conservatives Nationalist with 15 %. Kurdish seperatists 4 %. And the Kemalist Repuplican People Party with 20 %.
It is not only religion. It is social issue too. Now there is a new business class who are muslims want a space in the society. The ladies with hijab are driving BMW, taking positions in private sector, TVs. The secular, elite does not like it. It is like modernization of rural area and elite is afraid that their dominance in society will end. There are more conservatives at universities as proffessors. Muslims are no longer bunch of ignorant people who are associated with religion. Now they are in business, muslim feminists, news papers, arts everywhere and elite does not like it at all.
Abdullah Gul, a conservative, is elected despite Kemalist party, army and deep government opposition. Now JDP is creating a new constitution based on European constitutional standards. These women condeming constitution is really does not make any sense. New constitution does not do any discrimination against women, contrary, it recognizes women as marginalized group that needs to be focused. The issue is these women organizations have hidden agenda. Their problem is not women rights, their agenda to stop liberalization and democraticazation of turkish constitution, and most important, supporting hijab ban. Currently, hijab is forbidden at universities. The government wants to change that. Deep government and kemalist ideology opposes. That is all the noise about. Personally, I am against hijab ban for the students at universities. And hope this will change.
It is true revolution by muslims and true democratization. |
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
 |
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2007 : 10:01:39
|
| I have no problem with the headscarf, they should allow it in government offices if the women who wear it do so out of their own choice. However,to draft a constitution based on the under-riding idea that "women are a vulnerable group that need special protection" is ridiculous. It is setting the ground for subjugating the womenfolk. Those two words VULNERABLE and PROTECTION are the two chains that husbands , fathers, and the government will likely use to tie down the women from any meaningful societal function such as certain level and type of work , education , travel , etc. A serious cause for concern here... |
Edited by - kayjatta on 04 Oct 2007 10:02:14 |
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2007 : 11:10:20
|
Kay. I would agree with you for western countries. But third world countries If women are third class citizen, they need protection. And that has nothing to do with Islam. Do you know why I know that. Because many conservative women who have money are not vulnerable, not have much problem. Women do have economic problem, education problems, barriers in the society, they do need to be treated differently.
Gambia would be excellent example for that. Most women, even generation of 15- 25 years old generation do not know how to read and write. How are they going to know about rights? How are they going to exercise their political rights. I give you one example. When you look at the parliement only 10 % of them are women. For example government can do something like this. From now on, political parties must have 40 % of the candidates women. That would automatically increase the women participation in the parliement.
Of course this is not a issue in sweden. But it is a issue in Turkey or Gambia. So our women INDEED NEED SPECIAL PROTECTION.
|
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
Edited by - turk on 04 Oct 2007 11:14:20 |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2007 : 11:25:51
|
| Turk,what Turkey is trying to do has a historical context and Feminist Movement in Turkey is cognisant of that. In previous constitutions in Turkey women cannot even work without the permission of their husbands. This is based on a false believe that women are vulnerable and need protection . But women have consistently demanded nothing other than equality. In the Gambia too all that the women need is equality of treatment:they want to be educated as much as men are, allowed to pursue a career instead of early marriage, etc. They are not asking for SPECIAL PROTECTION, only equality. Talking about SPECIAL PROTECTION connotes male cheuvenism. Right? |
Edited by - kayjatta on 04 Oct 2007 11:59:36 |
|
|
|
MeMe
United Kingdom
541 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2007 : 11:31:44
|
My sentiments exactly, Kay, thanks for wording it so profusely!
Turk, I have to take exception to the following quote "New constitution does not do any discrimination against women, contrary, it recognizes women as marginalized group that needs to be focused."
Hello!!!! Women make up half (if not more) of the population of the world how does that make us a "marginalised group"??? What sort of arguement is that for the new Turkish constitution?????? It's 2007 not 1807!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2007 : 21:32:25
|
quote:
In previous constitutions in Turkey women cannot even work without the permission of their husbands.
Kayjatta. Can you provide reference?
quote:
This is based on a false believe that women are vulnerable and need protection
False believe? It is reality. Do you think women not vulnerbale and need protection. If women do not have as equal education and work rights as men they are indeed vulnerable. Why do you think in west women can divorce their abusing husband easily but in third world they can't. Because they are vulnerable when it comes to economics. If they do not have their economic indepence, they are vulnerable to their husbands. Come on guys, come to the real world.
Let us example of gambian women. No education, no profession, no money. And british women. They have education, they can work. They have welfare etc. Of course, gambian women is vulnerable and needs protection. They can't divorce their abusing husband because it is very difficult to survive.
You guys are not considering the realities then you make comparison western society to the society that did not as advance in terms of social justice.
quote:
Hello!!!! Women make up half (if not more) of the population of the world how does that make us a "marginalised group"??? What sort of arguement is that for the new Turkish constitution?????? It's 2007 not 1807!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Meme
I assume you are not aware of Quantitative and qualitative approaches. Women may make up half of the population, quantitative approaches mean nothing here, when you look at the situation with the qualitive approaches, for example the percentage of women in work force, or percentage of women as CEO, universities, politics, you might clearly see there are men dominance clearly.
Meme, Than please tell me why there are several 'special treatment laws' to women in western countries where women have the more advance rights?
This is even happening in western world. If not, please explain why western family law have the disriminatory law against men favoring women in family law. Isn't it unfair protection of women when there is a domestic violance women has power to put their husband to jail without needing any evidence? Or during divorce, women having advantage over men when it comes to financial arrangements. Affirmative action does exist in yankeestan favoring groups like afro-american to overcome social barriers and provide advantage in job market to mostly blacks.
In Canada. The Canadian Employment Equity Act requires employers in federally-regulated industries to give preferential treatment to four designated groups: Women, people with disabilities, Aboriginal people, and visible minorities.
Finland, women may get preferential treatment in recruitment for certain public sector jobs if there is a gender imbalance in the field.
In Norway. All public company with more than five members, must have at least 40 % women (can not be made up of more than 60%).
in yankeestan,Affirmative action in the United States occurs in school admissions, job hiring, and government and corporate contracts. Its intended beneficiaries are disadvantaged ethnic minorities, women, people with disabilities.
So your claim that protection of women is nothing new, most western nations despite they have very good track of women equal rights, still having 'protection law'. No?
it is 2007 not 1807? May I remind you in UK, Women were given the vote on the same conditions as men in 1928. Turkish women got this right in 1924.
So ultimate objective is equal rights of women and men. If it is not. Women needs to be favored. I support women special treatment by law so they can advance in the society. |
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
Edited by - turk on 04 Oct 2007 22:00:52 |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2007 : 23:41:12
|
Turk here is the reference:
"Pressure from women's groups helped force major reforms of Turkey's civil code in 2002.
A clause was removed then that identified the man as the head of the household, and obliged a wife to seek permission to go out to work",S .Rainsford (BBC News Istanbul, October 2nd 2007).
It looks like you didn't read the link Meme provided above.
The condition of the women whether in the Gambia or elsewhere is deplorable because they live in a society that classify tham VULNERABLE and NEEDING PROTECTION by men. That classification is what denies them independent living through education, work , or the pursuit of other careers. Did you hear the saying in the Gambia that "when a woman is well educated she does not respect her husband".This statement is not always true but does this tell you something? Here is what it means, it means that women do not need your protection because as long as they remain in your protection they will remain marginalized. What they need according to themselves is equality, 50/50. Western women, particularly in the U.S. are very powerful, maybe too powerful. They are considered partners to their husbands , not vulnerable needing protection. They do everything you can think of. They can even kick the husband out of the house anyday they want to. They can divorce him whenever they want to, work anywhere they want,and above all take part in all the financial and other decisions about the family. Real men let their women be free and make independent decisions. Some cultures in Africa and elsewhere are totally against this , instead they want to lock their women inside the room or wrapped in a hijab to protect them because they are vulnerable...
|
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2007 : 00:10:06
|
kayjatta
You said previous constitution. There is not constitutional ruling about that. It is not constitution. Kayjatta, we discussed that before. Constitution and in this case penal code is two different things. It looks like you read the article but you did not understand.
quote:
VULNERABLE and NEEDING PROTECTION by men. That classification is what denies them independent living through education, work , or the pursuit of other careers
Your judgement would be murder of law. What you are doing is you are expanding what rule meant to be. WHere the law say needing protection by men. That is your own ruling. Protection is done by constitution. Where does it refer to men? NO law classfied that. That is your own subjective classification. Again, answer my question, where does it say 'protection by men'?
The rest of the your post just confirm and agree what I have been saying.
|
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2007 : 03:05:22
|
| Turk , are you denying that the previous constitution denied Turkish women the right to equality "until they fought hard to include that clause", S. Rainsford (2007)? Do you want to listen to the voice of the Turkish women? They have spoken loud and clear that they do not want the present draft constitution unless they are guaranteed equality and their rights expanded instead of contracted. Did that get into your head? |
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2007 : 04:30:51
|
Yes Kayjatta. I am denying that the previous constitution denied Turkish women thr right to equality in constitution. It was part of civil code. You are insisting not to accept my correction. Not constitution. Civil code. What I do not deny is that the Code, targeting the most intimate level where gender discrimination is continually reproduced, abolishes the supremacy of men in marriage and thus establishes the full equality of men and women within the family.
quote:
Pressure from women's groups helped force major reforms of Turkey's civil code in 2002.
A clause was removed then that identified the man as the head of the household, and obliged a wife to seek permission to go out to work.
Draft constitution. What draft constitution. It does not even exist. And this is not even draft constitution. There is not even draft constitution. Draft constitution must be drafted and must come to parliement's constituion committe to became offical draft. Non of these things happen. It is still being discussed within non-governmental organizations and public.
You are debating the subjects you are not familiar. Than you make silly mistakes. |
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2007 : 04:36:24
|
See that below......
quote:
As regards women's right to economic independence, until 1990 a married woman could work outside the home only with the permission of her husband. With a decision that became operative in 1992, the related legislature was annulled by the Turkish Constitutional Court on the grounds that it violated the Constitution. Until January 2002, women's right to work was governed only by the Constitution, which stated: "Everyone has the right and duty to work." The New Civil Code, however, explicitly states in its Article 192 that "neither of the spouses is obliged to seek permission from the other regarding the choice of work or profession".
So constitution states that --Everyone has the right and duty to work.---. So if there is a law, which is not constitution, let us say civil code, --men is the head of the family-- than constitution court would say, this law violates the constituion because constitution say everyone has the right to work, but lower law say differently. So court annulled this and 2002 new penal code clearly states women does not need permission from husband.
Do you need further information? I mean Especially, you are refering the some journalist words. I am providing you facts from the real source. |
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
Edited by - turk on 05 Oct 2007 04:48:54 |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2007 : 07:10:30
|
Turk, I have to thank you for painstakingly sharing your views about Turkey with us. I particularly learned quite a lot from your participation. You are perhaps a more credible authority on Turkey than I am, but look at this headline below and you said there is no draft constitution, is that right?
"Women's groups in Turkey have condemned a new draft constitution, saying it sets the country back years in terms of gender equality." |
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2007 : 08:07:39
|
Lesson to learn.
What you read is not what actually happens. Things may mislead us.
1. Extremism: Feminist groups might come and tell you that there is a discrimination against women. And you ask why. They say 'because there is no public room facilities we can peee while we are standing. So sometime extreme groups would put forward their extreme agenda.
2. Bias: There is no official draft constitution yet. Only islamic rooted party has the power, and they assume their constitution will be conservative. However, same government also mentioned to abolish mandatory religious courses too. Or they have done more democratic reforms than previous so called social democrats, seculars, central right, central left. So it is just bias.
3. Stereotypes: Normally, there is a stereotype that turks are islamic anything happenning there could be islamic. Which is not true. Considerable majority have the secular social view and life style. Turkey already get the green light in terms of democratic establishment with the maastricht criteria which is the political criteria of EU membership. But still public and large number of intellectuals, journalists still have the nostalgic view of turks from ottoman times. So they see women groups making sounds, so that means sheria coming. Do we have same when women groups make noise in ireland that inquisition is coming. no.
When draft come out we will see what government intends to do in turkey.
|
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
|
|
|
MeMe
United Kingdom
541 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2007 : 10:55:46
|
| So are you saying that the whole BBC article is false???? |
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 05 Oct 2007 : 11:12:17
|
Partly. There is not even drafted constitution.
- There are several constitution by Businessman Community, Professionals Associatians, Turkish Universities and many other groups. And the most recent one is being drafted by a comitte by our most senior constitution scholar with representatives from different universities.
- Than all the brainstorming and public debate.
- The reporter of parliement will draft the constitution based and the constitution comitte will discuss, debate and by comitte will vote draft the constitution and it will be voted by parliementer committes. Than that will became draft to be vote by parliement.
- Also, parliment will be looking that constitution comply with the European norms. That is an obligation.
- Than referandum. If people like it, it will became the first constitution prepared and voted freely by people.
So article is not reflecting the reality of the situation. But why is it so surprising? Can't bbc be biased? No? Check this out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_BBC
But most important the existing constitution was made by 5 generals who did the military coup in 1982. Suddenly people became the defender of constitution has no human rights, no democracy. Now the civilian are doing constitution, if you don't trust the choice of the people maybe turks should not have democracy at all.
Even author is women (Sarah Rainsford  
|
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
Edited by - turk on 05 Oct 2007 11:38:30 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
