Contestation of the global norm against violence against women in Turkey

ABSTRACT

This article contributes to recent research on norms by highlighting the normative agency of non-Western, local recipients of global norms and the plurality of local responses to global norm diffusion. Bringing together insights from norm research and feminist scholarship, this study explores the reception of the global norm on violence against women (the anti-VAW norm) in Turkey, a Muslim majority country, over the past three decades. The study uncovers three different approaches to the global anti-VAW norm adopted by civil societal actors: adoption/compliance, contestation, and rejection. The analysis reveals that the global anti-VAW norm that seeks to unsettle established patriarchal gender hierarchies faces significant resistance in local contexts. The study thus emphasizes the importance of domestic normative frameworks that condition local responses to global norm diffusion.

KEYWORDS:

• Anti-VAW norm
• norm contestation
• norm rejection
• sustainable patriarchy
• civil society actors

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1 World Bank Group, Women, Business, 19–20.

2 WHO, Violence Against Women, xvi.

3 Paternotte and Kuhar, “Disentangling,”; Korolczuk and Graff, “Gender.”

4 Enloe, The Big Push.

5 Kandiyoti, “Locating.”

6 IPS, Domestic Violence, 7.

7 We Will End Femicide Platform, Report of 2020.

8 We Will End Femicide Platform, Report of 2021.

9 See Bodur Ün, “Contesting”; Koyuncu and Özman, “Women’s Rights Organizations”; Tabak, Erdogan and Bodur Ün, “Intra-conservative Bloc”.

10 Enloe, The Big Push.

11 Kandiyoti, “Locating.”

12 Krook and True, “Rethinking,”103–04.

13 Finnemore and Sikkink, “International Norm,” 896–900.

14 Ibid.; Keck and Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders.

15 Finnemore and Sikkink, “International Norm.”

16 Ibid., 895, 904.

17 Krook and True,“Rethinking”, 104, 108.

18 Zwingel, “How Do Norms Travel?”; Bettizza and Dionigi, “How do Religious Norms”; Acharya, “How Ideas Spread”; Bodur Ün, “Contesting”; Bloomfield, “Norm Antipreneurs.”

19 See Wiener, “Contested Compliance”; Acharya, “How Ideas Spread”; Deitelhoff and Zimmermann, “Things We Lost”; Zwingel, “How Do Norms Travel?”; Bettizza and Dionigi, “How Do Religious Norms”; Levitt and Merry, “Vernacularization”; Bodur Ün, “Contesting”; Bloomfield, “Norm Antipreneurs.”

20 Wiener, “Contested Compliance,” 219.

21 Bettizza and Dionigi, “How Do Religious Norms”, 624; Wiener, “Contested Compliance”; Tabak, Erdogan and Bodur Ün, “Intra-conservative Bloc.”

22 Deitelhoff and Zimmermann, “Things We Lost,” 1, 5.

23 Bloomfield, “Norm Antipreneurs,” 319.

24 Deitelhoff and Zimmermann, “Things We Lost”; Sanders, “Norm Spoiling.”

25 Lombardo, Meier and Verloo, The Discursive Politics; Levitt and Merry,“Vernacularization”; Bodur Ün,“Contesting.”

26 Sanders, “Norm Spoiling”; Paternotte and Kuhar, “Disentangling”; Korolczuk and Graff, “Gender.”

27 Keck and Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders, 165–98.

28 Enloe, The Big Push.

29 Coşar and Yeğenoğlu, “New Grounds.”

30 Kandiyoti, “Locating,” 109–10.

31 Ibid., 110.

32 Keck and Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders, 165–98.

33 Simonovic, “Global and Regional Standards,” 599, 601.

34 UN Women, www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/protocol/.

35 See Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, https://www.ohchr.org/en/hrbodies/cedaw/pages/gr35.aspx#:~:text=On%2014%20July%202017%2C%20the,19.

36 For SDGs see https://sdgs.un.org/goals.

37 Bonewit and De Santis, The Issue of Violence, 30–40.

38 Htun and Weldon, “The Civic Origins.”

39 Ibid.

40 Sirman, “Feminism”; Arat,“Feminists.”

41 Coşar and Yeğenoğlu, “New Grounds.”

42 Bağır! Herkes Duysun (Shout! Be Heard).

43 Different women’s groups, including Islamist women’s groups and Kurdish feminists, challenged the Republican mode of patriarchy, advocating competing visions of gender equality throughout the 1990s and 2000s. See Diner and Toktaş, “Waves of Feminism.”

44 Sirman, “Feminism,” 16.

45 Bodur Ün, “Contesting,” 836.

46 Ibid.

47 Akkoç, “Diyarbakır.”

48 Bilge, “Havada Kalan Ceza.”

49 Güneş and Ezikoğlu, “Legal,” 4.

50 Bodur Ün, “Contesting,” 835–7.

51 Ibid., 837–8.

52 GREVIO, Baseline Evaluation, 29–30.

53 Official Gazette, Law No. 6284.

54 Coşar and Yeğenoğlu, “New Grounds.”

55 Ibid.

56 Kandiyoti, “Locating,” 109–10.

57 See, for example, Coşar and Yeğenoğlu, “New Grounds”; Acar and Altunok, “The ‘Politics of Intimate’”; Kandiyoti,“Locating”; Cindoğlu and Unal,“Gender and Sexuality.”

58 Bodur Ün, “Contesting,” 839–40.

59 Aydın-Düzgit, “De-europeanisation,” 55; Bodur Ün and Arıkan,“Europeanization,” 955.

60 Yılmaz, “Strengthening the Family.”

61 Acar and Altunok, “The ‘Politics of Intimate’”; Yılmaz,“‘Strengthening the Family.’”

62 Bodur Ün, “Contesting.”

63 Koyuncu and Özman, “Women’s Rights Organizations”; Bodur Ün, “Contesting.”

64 For a detailed discussion see Bodur Ün, “Contesting,” 841–5.

65 Ibid., 843–4.

66 Aydın Yılmaz, “A New Momentum,” 108–9.

67 Bodur Ün, “Contesting,” 841.

68 Aydın Yılmaz, “‘Erkeksen öfkeni yen!’”; Akyüz and Sayan-Cengiz, “‘Overcome Your Anger’,” 2.

69 Akyüz and Sayan-Cengiz, “‘Overcome Your Anger’,” 2, 7-8. Also see Gülbahar, “Türkiye’de Kadın Cinayetleri.”

70 Tabak, Erdogan and Bodur Ün, “Intra-conservative Bloc.”

71 Ibid., 7.

72 Maraşlı, “Erkeğe Şiddete Dur De!”. Also see Akit, “İşte KADEM’in yaranmaya çalıştığı zihniyet.”

73 Dilipak, “Önce Aile!”; Maraşlı, “İstanbul Sözleşmesi”; “Erkeğe Şiddete Dur De!”.

74 See Dilipak, “Önce Aile!”.

75 Ibid.; Asiltürk, “İstanbul Sözleşmesi.”

76 Yetkin, “The İstanbul Convention.”

77 Ibid.; Hürriyet Daily News, “Turkey may Consider.”

78 See Dilipak, “Önce Aile!”; “Teşekkürler”; Maraşlı,“İstanbul Sözleşmesi.”

79 Maraşlı, “İstanbul Sözleşmesi”; “Kadınları İstanbul Sözleşmesi Öldürüyor!”.

80 KADEM, “Küresel LGBT Dayatmasına Hayır.”

81 KADEM, “İstanbul Sözleşmesi Hakkında.”

82 The We Will Stop Femicides Platform prepares monthly reports of femicide data and follows court cases involving femicide and VAW.

83 İstanbul Convention Monitoring Platform on Turkey, “Shadow NGO Report,” 9–11.

84 Executive Committee on NGO Forum for CEDAW, “Updated Shadow Report,” 4; Purple Roof, “Information Note”; WWHR, “Brief Note.”

85 Gülbahar, “Türkiye’de Kadın Cinayetleri.”

86 Maraşlı, “Kadınları İstanbul Sözleşmesi Öldürüyor!”.

87 Ibid.

88 Özkazanç, “The New Episode.”

89 Maraşlı, “Erkeğe Şiddete Dur De!”; “Kadınları İstanbul Sözleşmesi Öldürüyor!”.

90 Sabah, “Şiddet Aile.”

91 Ibid.

92 Bianet, “Women Take to Streets.”

93 EŞİK, “İstanbul Sözleşmesi.”

94 Bianet, “Council of State Prosecutor.”

95 Bianet, “Women Take to Streets.”

96 KADEM Press Release, “İstanbul Sözleşmesi’nin Feshi.”

97 For a detailed discussion on the debates around the İstanbul Convention see Bodur Ün and Arıkan, “Europeanization,” and Güneş and Ezikoğlu, “Legal.”

98 Bodur Ün and Arıkan,“Europeanization.”

99 Ibid., 950–6.

100 Cindoğlu and Unal, “Gender and Sexuality,” 43.

101 Htun and Weldon,“The Civic Origins.”

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Marella Bodur Ün

Marella Bodur Ün is Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science and International Relations at Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey. Her research interests include gender and politics, social movements, norm contestation, and migration. Her recent work has been published in international journals such as JCMS – Journal of Common Market Studies, Review of International Studies, and Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space.