The Characteristics of Domestic Violence against Women on Gendered Spaces in Turkey

Authors

  • İlknur Yüksel Kaptanoğlu
  • M. Murat Yüceşahin

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33831/jws.v17i2.211

Keywords:

Domestic violence against women, feminist geography, private space, public space

Abstract

Violence against women has been continue to be one of the important social problems of Turkey. Even the number of studies has increase in recent years on this issue, the relationship between violence against women and gendered spaces, as well as empirical studies focus on feminist geography are still limited. We, in this study, aimed to reveal how the relations between different types of violence that ever-married women exposed to during their lifetime, women’s strategies coping with violence and gendered space. This study is based on quantitative methods which provides some advantages to compare similar and different social groups suggested by the feminist geography literature. We used the micro data sets of the research on Domestic Violence Against Women Survey in Turkey, which was conducted with 12,795 women aged 15-59 in 2008. We constructed gendered space variable using the information about work outside of housework. Women who work whether earn money or not and women who do not work because of different reasons are labelled as ‘more interaction with public spaces’ and ‘restricted to private space’ respectively. By doing this, we tried to analyze, using the chi-square test, whether there is a difference or not between gendered space and women’s socio-demographic characteristics, physical and sexual violence, controlling behaviors by partners. The results of this study indicate that prevalence of violence clearly differs by gendered space. While, current physical violence is more common for women who are more interaction with private space, sexual violence is more exposed by women who are more interaction with public space. Controlling behaviors by partner’s changes by interaction with private and public spaces. While, women, who are more interaction with public spaces, are more prevalent to apply to institutions which helps to struggle with violence against women, this relation shows key factor for strengthening women. 

References

Alkan A. (2009). Giriş: Cinsiyet Dinamiklerinin Peşinden Mekânın İzini Sürmek. İçinde Alkan A. (Der.), Cins Cins Mekân. İstanbul: Varlık Yayınları: 7-35.

Altınay A. G. & Arat Y. (2008). Türkiye’de Kadına Yönelik Şiddet Araştırması. İstanbul: Punto Yayıncılık.

Bilton T., Bonnett K., Jones P., Lawson T., Skinner D., Stanworth M. & Webster A. (2009). Sosyoloji (Çev. İnal K., Kartal Y., Özkale, N., Toraman, K., Özkan Y. & Güngen A.R.). Siyasal Kitabevi: Ankara.

Bora A. (1998). Kamusal Alan/Özel Alan: Mahrumiyet-Özgürleşme İkileminin Ötesi. İçinde Çitçi O.(Ed), 20. Yüzyılın Sonunda Kadınlar ve Gelecek. Ankara: Türkiye Orta Doğu ve Amme İdaresi Enstitüsü Yayın No:285: 63-69.

Cope M. (2002). Feminist Epistemology in Geography. İçinde Moss P. (Ed.), Feminist Geography in Pratctice: Research and Methods. Oxford: Blackwell: 43-55.

Fenster T. (2005). Gender and the City: The Different Formations of Belonging. İçinde Nelson L. & Seager Malden J. (Eds.), A Companion to Feminist Geography. Blackwell: 242-256.

Forsyth C. (2014). Gendered Spaces: An Exploration of Violence Against Women in Delhi’s Public Spaces Australia: The University of Queensland, (İnternet adresi: http://www.gpem.uq.edu.au/docs/2014plan4008/Chloe Forsyth-PLAN4003-thesis.pdf. Erişim tarihi: 10.3.2015.

İlkkaracan P., Gülçür L. & Arın C. (1996). Sıcak Yuva Masalı: Aile İçi Şiddet ve Cinsel Taciz. İstanbul: Metis Yayınları.

Kadın Dayanışma Vakfı. (1995). Ankara’da Düşük Sosyo-ekonomik Düzeydeki Ailelerde Aile İçi Şiddet. Ankara: Kadın Dayanışma Vakfı Yay.

Kadın Dayanışma Vakfı. (1996). Ankara’da Orta ve Yüksek Sosyo-ekonomik Düzeydeki Ailelerde Aileiçi Şiddet Araştırması. Ankara: Kadın Dayanışma Vakfı Yay.

Kadın Eserleri Kütüphanesi ve Bilgi Merkezi Vakfı. (2000). Kadın Hareketinin Yüzyılı Kadın Eserleri Kütüphanesi ve Bilgi Merkezi Vakfı 2000 Ajandası. İstanbul: Kadın Eserleri Kütüphanesi ve Bilgi Merkezi Vakfı .

Kadının Statüsü Genel Müdürlüğü (KSGM). (2009). Türkiye'de Kadına Yönelik Aile İçi Şiddet. Ankara: Elma Teknik Basım.

Kandiyoti, D. (1987). “Emancipated but Unliberated”, Feminist Studies, 13(2): 317-338.

Kandiyoti D. (1988). Bargaining with Patriarchy. Gender and Society, 2(3): 274-290.

Kwan M-P. (2002). Quantitative Methods and Feminist Geographic Research. İçinde Moss P. (Ed.), Feminist Geography in Practice: Research and Methods. Oxford: Blackwell: 160-172.

Massey D.B. (2001). Space, Place and Gender. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

Massey D.B. (1994). Space, Place and Gender. Cambridge: Polity.

McDowel L. (2007). Gender, Identity and Place: Understanding Feminist Geographies (3rd ed.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

McLaffery S.L. (1995). Counting for Women. Professional Geographer, 47: 436-442.

Monqid S. (2012). Violence Against Women in Public Spaces: The Case of Morocco. Internet adresi: http://ema.revues.org/3011. Erişim tarihi: 14.04.2015.

Özgüç, N. (2008). Kadınların Coğrafyası. İstanbul: Çantay Kitabevi.

T.C. Başbakanlık Aile Araştırma Kurumu. (1994). Aile İçi Şiddetin Sebep ve Sonuçları. Ankara: Bizim Büro.

Tuncer, S. (2012). Beşeri Coğrafyaya Feminist İtirazlar. Fe-Dergi: Feminist Eleştiri, 4(1): 76-90.

World Health Organization (WHO). (2001). Putting Women First: Ethical and Safety Recommendations for Research on Domestic Violence Against Women. WHO/FCH/GWH/01.1. Geneva.

Published

2016-12-12

How to Cite

Yüksel Kaptanoğlu, İlknur, & Yüceşahin, M. M. (2016). The Characteristics of Domestic Violence against Women on Gendered Spaces in Turkey. Kadın/Woman 2000, Journal for Women’s Studies, 17(2), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.33831/jws.v17i2.211