The Place of Honour Code in Middle-class Women’s Leisure in High-security Estates in Turkey
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33831/jws.v22i1.108Keywords:
gender, class, high-security estates, Turkey, honour-code, civility-codeAbstract
This paper investigates the role of gender in women’s everyday leisure practices in a high-security estate in Bursa Turkey. Defined as a new type of sub-urbanisation, such residential areas have emerged in Turkey towards the end of 1990s and, to date, social class has been the central area of inquiry in relation to high-security estates in Turkey. Drawing on the findings from a qualitative research, the current paper argues that gender plays a central role in middle-class women’s access to and use of neighbourhood leisure spaces. Even though the community values and the middle-class rhetoric of gender equality advocate the equal use of public leisure spaces, family-level male control shaped by honour code is still dominant in preventing women from practising the leisure activities they choose.
References
Akyol Altun D. (2010). Kapalı Konut Siteleri ve “Mahalle” Kavramı, [Gated Communities and the Concept of “Mahalle”], İdealkent, 2:216-244.
Ataca B. and Sunar D. (1999). Continuity and Change in Turkish Urban Family Life, Psychology and Developing Societies, 11: 77-90.
Ayata S. (2002). The New Middle Class and the Joys of Suburbia. In: D. Kandiyoti and A. Saktanber, ed., Fragments in Culture: The Everyday of Modern Turkey, London: I.B. Tauris, 25-43.
Aydın S. (2012). İstanbul’da “Orta Sınıf” ve Kapalı Siteler, [The Middle-class in Istanbul and Gated Communities], İdealkent, 6:96-123.
Bektaş Ata L. (2016). Bir Güvenlikli Site Hikâyesi: Gündelik Hayatın Dönüşümüne Otoetnografik Yaklaşım, [A Story of High-security Estate: Auto-ethnographic Approach to the Transformation of Everyday Life], Fe Dergi, 8(2):46-61.
Beşpınar F. U. (2010). Questioning Agency and Empowerment: Women's Work-related Strategies and Social Class in Urban Turkey, Women’s Studies International Forum, 33: 523-532.
Blakely E.J. and Snyder M.G. (1997). Fortress America: Gated Communities in the United States. Washington D.C: Brookings Institution Press.
Bolak H. C. (1997). When Wives are Major Providers: Culture, Gender, and Family Work, Gender and Society, 11(4):409-433.
Breitung, W. (2012). Enclave urbanism in China: attitudes towards gated communities in Guangzhou. Urban Geography 33(2): 278–94.
Coşar, S. (2007). Women in Turkish Political Thought: Between Tradition and Modernity, Feminist Review. 86: 113-131.
Datta A. (2014). Gendered nature and urban culture: the dialectics of gated developments in Izmir, Turkey. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 38(4):1363–83.
Davis M. (1992). City of Quartz: Excavating the Future in Los Angeles. New York: Vintage.
Evan J., Jones P. (2011). The Walking Interview: Methodology, Mobility and Place. Applied Geography, 31: 849-858.
Geniş Ş. (2007). Producing elite localities: The rise of gated communities in Istanbul, Urban Studies, 44:771-798.
Ilkkaracan I. (2012). Why so Few Women in the Labor Market in Turkey, Feminist Economics, 18(1):1-37.
Kandiyoti D. (2002). Introduction. In: D. Kandiyoti and A. Saktanber, ed., Fragments of Culture: The Everyday of Modern Turkey. London: I.B. Tauris, 1-25.
Karaarslan F. and Karaarslan Ö. N. (2013). Modern Kent Mekanlarında Mahallenin Konumu: Modern Kent Mekanları Olarak Güvenlikli Siteler ile Mahallenin İşlevsel Kıyası. [The Place of Mahalle in Modern Urban Spaces: The Functional Comparison of High-security Estates and Mahalle as Urban Spaces]. II.Türkiye Lisansüstü Çalışmaları Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı. Bursa: Bursa Kültür. 1185-1205
Keyder Ç. (2005). Globalization and Social Exclusion in Istanbul. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 29(1):124-134.
Kitzinger J. (1995). Introducing Focus Groups. British Medical Journal, 311: 299-302.
Kurtuluş, H. (2005). İstanbul’da Kentsel Ayrışma: Mekânsal Dönüşümde Farklı Boyutlar, İstanbul: Bağlam Yayıncılık.
Küçükşahin S., Demir B. and Ayder T. (1997). Bursa’ya ‘Yeşil’ İlçe (‘Greencity’ District to Bursa). [Online] Hürriyet. Available at: http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/bursaya-yesil-ilce-39263331 Access date: 17/07/2015.
Low S. (2003). Behind the Gates: Life, Security and the Pursuit of Happiness in Fortress America, London: Routledge.
Meeker M. (1976a). Meaning and Society in the near East: Examples from Black Sea Turks and the Levantine Arabs (I). International Journal of Middle East Studies. 7(2): 243-270.
Öncü, A. (1999). Istanbulites and Others: The Cultural Cosmology of ‘Middleness’ in the Era of Neo-Liberalism”. In: C. Keyder, ed., Istanbul Between the Global and The Local, New York: St. Martins
Özyegin G. (2009). Virginal Facades: Sexual Freedom and Guilt Among Young Turkish Women. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 16(2):103-123.
Perouse J.F. and Danış A.D. (2005). Zenginligin Mekanda Yeni Yansimalari: Istanbul’da Guvenlikli Siteler. [New Reflections of Wealth on Space: High-Security Estates in Istanbul], Toplum ve Bilim, 104:92-123.
Reinharz S. (1992). Feminist Methods in Social Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rossman G. B., Rallis S. F. (2012). Learning in the Field: An Introduction to Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications.
Shirley I., Neill C. (eds.) (2013). Asian and Pacific Cities: Development Patterns. New York: Routledge.
Sirman, N. (2014). Contextualizing Honour. European Journal of Turkish Studies, 18:1-6
Skeggs B. (1997). Formations of Class and Gender: Becoming Respectable, London: Sage Publications.
Sunar D. and Fisek G.O. (2005). Contemporary Turkish Families. In: J. L. Roopnarine and U. P. Gielen, ed., Families in Global Perspective. Boston: Pearson Education, 169-184.
Sümer S. (1998). Incongruent Modernities: A Comparative Study of Higher Educated Women from Urban Turkey and Norway, Acta Sociologica, 41:115-129.
Wheeldon J. (2011). Is A Picture Worth A Thousand Words? Using Mind Maps to Facilitate Participant Recall in Qualitative Research, The Qualitative Report, 16(2):509-522.
Zahle J. (2012). Practical Knowledge and Participant Observation, Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy, 55(1):50-65.
Ataca B. and Sunar D. (1999). Continuity and Change in Turkish Urban Family Life, Psychology and Developing Societies, 11: 77-90.
Ayata S. (2002). The New Middle Class and the Joys of Suburbia. In: D. Kandiyoti and A. Saktanber, ed., Fragments in Culture: The Everyday of Modern Turkey, London: I.B. Tauris, 25-43.
Aydın S. (2012). İstanbul’da “Orta Sınıf” ve Kapalı Siteler, [The Middle-class in Istanbul and Gated Communities], İdealkent, 6:96-123.
Bektaş Ata L. (2016). Bir Güvenlikli Site Hikâyesi: Gündelik Hayatın Dönüşümüne Otoetnografik Yaklaşım, [A Story of High-security Estate: Auto-ethnographic Approach to the Transformation of Everyday Life], Fe Dergi, 8(2):46-61.
Beşpınar F. U. (2010). Questioning Agency and Empowerment: Women's Work-related Strategies and Social Class in Urban Turkey, Women’s Studies International Forum, 33: 523-532.
Blakely E.J. and Snyder M.G. (1997). Fortress America: Gated Communities in the United States. Washington D.C: Brookings Institution Press.
Bolak H. C. (1997). When Wives are Major Providers: Culture, Gender, and Family Work, Gender and Society, 11(4):409-433.
Breitung, W. (2012). Enclave urbanism in China: attitudes towards gated communities in Guangzhou. Urban Geography 33(2): 278–94.
Coşar, S. (2007). Women in Turkish Political Thought: Between Tradition and Modernity, Feminist Review. 86: 113-131.
Datta A. (2014). Gendered nature and urban culture: the dialectics of gated developments in Izmir, Turkey. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 38(4):1363–83.
Davis M. (1992). City of Quartz: Excavating the Future in Los Angeles. New York: Vintage.
Evan J., Jones P. (2011). The Walking Interview: Methodology, Mobility and Place. Applied Geography, 31: 849-858.
Geniş Ş. (2007). Producing elite localities: The rise of gated communities in Istanbul, Urban Studies, 44:771-798.
Ilkkaracan I. (2012). Why so Few Women in the Labor Market in Turkey, Feminist Economics, 18(1):1-37.
Kandiyoti D. (2002). Introduction. In: D. Kandiyoti and A. Saktanber, ed., Fragments of Culture: The Everyday of Modern Turkey. London: I.B. Tauris, 1-25.
Karaarslan F. and Karaarslan Ö. N. (2013). Modern Kent Mekanlarında Mahallenin Konumu: Modern Kent Mekanları Olarak Güvenlikli Siteler ile Mahallenin İşlevsel Kıyası. [The Place of Mahalle in Modern Urban Spaces: The Functional Comparison of High-security Estates and Mahalle as Urban Spaces]. II.Türkiye Lisansüstü Çalışmaları Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı. Bursa: Bursa Kültür. 1185-1205
Keyder Ç. (2005). Globalization and Social Exclusion in Istanbul. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 29(1):124-134.
Kitzinger J. (1995). Introducing Focus Groups. British Medical Journal, 311: 299-302.
Kurtuluş, H. (2005). İstanbul’da Kentsel Ayrışma: Mekânsal Dönüşümde Farklı Boyutlar, İstanbul: Bağlam Yayıncılık.
Küçükşahin S., Demir B. and Ayder T. (1997). Bursa’ya ‘Yeşil’ İlçe (‘Greencity’ District to Bursa). [Online] Hürriyet. Available at: http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/bursaya-yesil-ilce-39263331 Access date: 17/07/2015.
Low S. (2003). Behind the Gates: Life, Security and the Pursuit of Happiness in Fortress America, London: Routledge.
Meeker M. (1976a). Meaning and Society in the near East: Examples from Black Sea Turks and the Levantine Arabs (I). International Journal of Middle East Studies. 7(2): 243-270.
Öncü, A. (1999). Istanbulites and Others: The Cultural Cosmology of ‘Middleness’ in the Era of Neo-Liberalism”. In: C. Keyder, ed., Istanbul Between the Global and The Local, New York: St. Martins
Özyegin G. (2009). Virginal Facades: Sexual Freedom and Guilt Among Young Turkish Women. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 16(2):103-123.
Perouse J.F. and Danış A.D. (2005). Zenginligin Mekanda Yeni Yansimalari: Istanbul’da Guvenlikli Siteler. [New Reflections of Wealth on Space: High-Security Estates in Istanbul], Toplum ve Bilim, 104:92-123.
Reinharz S. (1992). Feminist Methods in Social Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rossman G. B., Rallis S. F. (2012). Learning in the Field: An Introduction to Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications.
Shirley I., Neill C. (eds.) (2013). Asian and Pacific Cities: Development Patterns. New York: Routledge.
Sirman, N. (2014). Contextualizing Honour. European Journal of Turkish Studies, 18:1-6
Skeggs B. (1997). Formations of Class and Gender: Becoming Respectable, London: Sage Publications.
Sunar D. and Fisek G.O. (2005). Contemporary Turkish Families. In: J. L. Roopnarine and U. P. Gielen, ed., Families in Global Perspective. Boston: Pearson Education, 169-184.
Sümer S. (1998). Incongruent Modernities: A Comparative Study of Higher Educated Women from Urban Turkey and Norway, Acta Sociologica, 41:115-129.
Wheeldon J. (2011). Is A Picture Worth A Thousand Words? Using Mind Maps to Facilitate Participant Recall in Qualitative Research, The Qualitative Report, 16(2):509-522.
Zahle J. (2012). Practical Knowledge and Participant Observation, Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy, 55(1):50-65.
Downloads
Published
2020-12-20
How to Cite
Demirbaş, G. (2020). The Place of Honour Code in Middle-class Women’s Leisure in High-security Estates in Turkey. Kadın/Woman 2000, Journal for Women’s Studies, 22(1), 25–40. https://doi.org/10.33831/jws.v22i1.108
Issue
Section
Articles
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, with the work [6 months] after publication simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access)
