Women’s Rights: Europeanization in Greece and Turkey
EMPOWERING THE ROLE OF WOMEN
IN CYPRUS & GREECE
Women’s Rights: Europeanization
in Greece and Turkey
Nicosia, March 19, 2018
Anna Karamanou
Warm Thanks…
I would like to briefly present some findings and conclusions from a comparative study I conducted in Greece and Turkey, aiming to investigate and compare the driving forces behind the peaceful women’s revolution that began in the 19th century and continues to this day. The research examines feminist struggles in the context of both countries’ early European orientation and their pursuit of a European identity.
The originality of this study lies in the fact that it examines two neighboring countries in the European periphery, which did not participate in the Renaissance and the European Enlightenment, and moreover, have different historical paths, as well as relationships of conqueror and conquered. The differences are significant. However, there are similarities in many areas: delayed economic and social structures, a clientelist political system, discrimination and violence against women, strong religiosity, and the inability to establish a modern, mature democracy and the rule of law. The study maintains a dynamic relationship between theory, empirical research, and comparative political analysis.
By researching and searching, I experienced an exciting journey through the history of feminist struggles, which begins in Greece with the revolution of 1821, inspired by European Enlightenment, and in Turkey with the decline of the Ottoman Empire and the beginning of Western-style reforms (tanzimat). The steady orientation of both countries towards the West and their interaction with European developments paved the way for the women’s demands.
Europeanization, as the adoption of the values of the European Enlightenment and the liberal political tradition of equality, rule of law, equal citizenship, and individual rights, formed the foundation for the emergence of the feminist movement. Simply and aptly, feminists integrated women and gender equality into the values of modernity, which men had neglected to include. From this perspective, Europeanization served as a reference system and a source of knowledge and inspiration. The research has been published in a 700-page book titled… The Europe & Women’s Rights. Europeanization in Greece and Turkey – A Comparative Analysis , εκδόσεων Παπαζήση.
My aim is to contribute to a deeper understanding of the conditions and common elements that shaped the political, social, cultural, and economic realities of the two countries, beyond and outside the usual nationalist analyses and stereotypes. The study showed that, beyond geographical proximity, there is a cultural affinity between Greece and Turkey, as both countries strongly exhibit characteristics of patriarchal/Mediterranean/Balkan culture.
The historical European orientation of the two countries provoked various and strong resistances within them, as it threatened to bring about dramatic changes to the stable traditional structures of society and cracks in the dominant cultural model, as well as in the patriarchal and sultanic-type authority. European modernization faced opposition from social backwardness, Balkan and Mediterranean traditions, irrational objections, and the persistent ambivalence between tradition and the European dream, between the East and the West.
The women’s revolution in both countries initially expressed itself through emancipation, a concept historically linked to women’s movements and the main demand of the time: the right to education and dignified work. Educated women were those who led the way. In the 19th century Ottoman Empire, Fatma Aliye Hanim, the first female writer, in her books and articles did not depict women as victims, but as dynamic personalities with values and strong will, ready to change their fate.
In Greece, the most important publication, *Efimeris ton Kyrion* (The Ladies’ Journal), was founded in 1887 and continued for 30 years under the leadership of Kallirhoe Parren, the first and most prominent Greek feminist, journalist, and writer. Through this magazine, women were present in the shaping of Greek society, advocating for their rights, and contributing to the forging of national consciousness. Similarly, in Ottoman Turkey, through political magazines like *Yerakki* (Progress) and *Terakki-I Muhadderat* (Progress of Muslim Women), they vehemently criticized imams and those who supported discrimination against women.
In both Greece and Turkey, pioneering women faced ridicule not only from the uneducated but also from the intellectuals of the time, such as Souris and Roidis in Greece and Ahmet Mithat Efendi in Turkey, who rejected even the idea of women as writers. Their own books were often filled with educated heroines who fell into great misery upon marriage. In other words, they portrayed education as the cause of women’s unhappiness.
For Ottoman women, a major issue of that time was polygamy and the right of men to unilaterally decide on divorce. In this matter, Greek women had an advantage, as (official) polygamy was prohibited. The same could not be said for adultery, which was treated as a criminal offense and an act of moral corruption in both countries, primarily for women. In Greece, it was abolished in 1983, and in Turkey, it was abolished in 2004. So late! We do not know whether this would have happened without the obligations towards the EU, but also without the grassroots pressure from feminist organizations.
At the beginning of the 20th century, the struggles for the right to vote and equal access to education, paid employment, and politics reached their peak. In Turkey, the progress was impressive. In 1914, universities admitted women, in 1915 the Women’s University was founded, and in 1917 polygamy was limited by law, although this was never effectively implemented in everyday life; nevertheless, it was an important step for the Muslim world. In 1919, the right to vote became dominant, and women organized an information campaign. Ottoman women, therefore, were not behind European feminists, with whom they, like Greek women, were in constant contact.
It is evident that the revolutionary changes brought about by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk were preceded by the long-standing actions of Ottoman women. In Greece, a similar movement emerged. In 1908, the National Council of Greek Women was founded, followed by the Lyceum of Greek Women in 1911, founded by Kallirhoe Parren, and the Women’s Rights Association in 1920. The constitutional revision of 1911 and the legislative work of Eleftherios Venizelos created a favorable institutional framework for the claim of rights. Venizelos’ goal was clear: modernization/europeanization, just as, shortly thereafter, it was for Mustafa Kemal. Both leaders were passionate Europeanists and reformists.
In Turkey, the pursuit of European identity was achieved through the overthrow of all traditional elements of the Ottoman system, with women at the center of the reform agenda. The abolition of the caliphate and the sacred Sharia law, the change from the Arabic script to the Latin alphabet, the secularization of the state, the new civil code, the recognition of political rights for women, coeducation, the banning of the veil and religious marriages, and the inclusion of women in the country’s reconstruction efforts were changes that sent a very strong message of Europeanization both domestically and to the international community.
As was natural, feminism during this period became closely associated with Kemalism, which elevated Atatürk as the only political leader who linked the modernization of his country with the improvement of the social status of women. In Greece, Venizelos faced much more challenging political circumstances. Despite his Europeanism, lacking the revolutionary powers of Atatürk, he hesitated to confront the conservative circles and the press of the time, which published venomous articles against women, and perhaps even with the majority of women who did not question patriarchy or the gender status quo. Moreover, between 1920 and 1928, he was not the prime minister.
In Turkey, women were granted full political rights in 1934, while in Greece, this recognition came in 1952. In 1935, 18 women were elected to the Turkish Grand National Assembly. However, progress was hindered following the death of Atatürk in 1938.
The comparison of the empirical data from the two cases, historically, geographically, and culturally, highlights the modernizing and democratic impact of integrating the gender dimension into all areas of politics, democratic institutions and mechanisms, culture, norms, bilateral negotiations, and international relations. It also underscores the demand for the elimination of patriarchal symbols that remain unchallenged.
Strong symbols of patriarchy, with significant influence on popular culture, are promoted by religious institutions: double standards of morality for the genders, offensive and degrading references in sacred texts, direct gender-based discrimination and exclusion. In Greece, this is particularly evident in the prohibition of women’s access to Mount Athos (the Athos prohibition), and their exclusion from the priesthood and ecclesiastical offices.
In Turkey, with political Islam attempting a return to the past, the most prominent symbols are reintroduced: dress codes and the hijab, double-standard family values, the prohibition of alcohol and public displays of emotion, the expansion of Islamic schools, the construction of mosques on university campuses, the control of women’s sexuality, and the attempted ban on abortions. Therefore, we demand the reinterpretation of sacred texts and the change of all outdated practices that clash with social progress and the principle of gender equality.
The comparative analysis showed that the suppression of feminist action is at the core of authoritarian regimes. All dictatorships in Turkey and Greece shared the same characteristic: paternalistic control over women, violence, so-called protective laws, and the suppression of any feminist activity. Violence against women remains at the forefront as an expression of aggressive hegemonic masculinity, the abusive exercise of power, the unequal distribution of responsibilities and obligations between the sexes, and the identification of masculinity with aggression, the suppression of emotions, and the ability to use violence.
These views and the nationalist-populist discourse today find fertile ground and followers in Greece, amid the painful economic crisis, and in Turkey, with the attempt to fully reintroduce Islam. Nationalist and racist rhetoric tends to replace the lack of prestige, credibility, and effectiveness of the political system, and gender equality has no place in the public discourse.
Thus, the political challenge today is the reclamation of democracy, credibility, and prestige in the political world, with women at the forefront. One of the conclusions of my study is that the international actions of feminists contain elements that can weaken militarism, nationalism, and the use of violence—key components of the orthodoxy of classical Realist Theory in international relations and the theory of war.
The archetypal model of Lysistrata—opposing war—leads to a reduction of competition and violence in international politics, promoting a fairer settlement of international affairs. The Greek-Turkish organization WinPeace, founded immediately after the crisis at Imia (Kardak), and “women’s diplomacy” provide an excellent example of soft power, which deserves deeper theoretical exploration and study, just as the political actions of the Cypriot Greek-Turkish organizations do.
Today in Greece, the economic crisis is often used as a pretext for further downgrading the position of women. In Turkey, the position of women is becoming increasingly difficult under Erdogan, who, using Islam as a vehicle, repeatedly declares that he does not believe in gender equality. At the same time, he promotes the “three-child policy,” with the primary aim of returning women to the home and traditional roles. However, a strong pro-European feminist movement has developed, exerting pressure with the support of the EU, particularly the European Parliament’s Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, which has declared in a resolution that “Without gender equality, Turkey will not enter the EU.”
The current gender imbalance in political life represents a wasted potential of skills and knowledge from more than half of the population. In the latest ranking by the World Economic Forum, out of 144 countries, Greece ranks 78th, Turkey ranks 131st, and Cyprus ranks 92nd. However, some countries in our region have made greater progress in gender policies: Albania ranks 38th, North Macedonia 67th, Bulgaria 18th, Serbia 40th, Bosnia and Herzegovina 66th, and Slovenia 7th.
The elimination of everyday practices rooted in the established culture requires regimes that do not currently exist: strong political will and leadership, possessing knowledge, deep education, and vision. In Turkey, it was only through the revolutionary changes and political voluntarism of Atatürk that political rights for women were recognized, at a time when they had not even been recognized in France, the birthplace of the French Revolution. Similarly, in Greece, Europeanization and the modernization of society were advanced by powerful political figures (Kapodistrias, Trikoupis, Venizelos, Karamanlis, Papandreou, Simitis).
Despite the undeniable progress made since the early 20th century, when suffragettes were arrested and imprisoned, discrimination—both indirect and direct—remains and persists. There is no balanced distribution of power and responsibilities between men and women, neither in the public nor in the private sphere, that would translate into practice the principles of democracy and gender justice.
So what needs to be done when today the political system denies the obvious? The answer provided by the study is that the only guarantee for the promotion of substantial gender equality can be given by the women themselves, by 50% of the electorate, and by utilizing the political power they possess.
On the occasion of this year’s International Women’s Day, I would like to address primarily the young women of Cyprus, Turkey, and Greece and call on them, based on their outstanding achievements in education and all merit-based systems, to further utilize the legislation and the ideal framework provided by European policy, so that the ideal of gender equality and justice becomes a reality and an experience. The constitutions and laws exist. Let them be fully implemented. This is the new great challenge for the feminist movement of the 21st century.
At the same time, they should shift the focus from the weaknesses and problems of women to the strength they possess, in order to lead the political struggle for the creation of a better, more peaceful, and just globalized world. As the pioneering feminist Kallirroi Parren said 100 years ago, ‘Let us succeed where men have failed!’