PATRIARCHAL STRUCTURES AND PRACTICES IN TURKEY: THE CASE OF SOCIAL REALIST AND NATIONAL FILMS OF 1960s A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES OF THE MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY HAT İCE YE Şİ LDAL ŞEN IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY OCTOBER 2005 Approval of the Graduate School of Social Sciences Prof. Dr. Sencer Ayata Director I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sibel Kalaycıo ğlu Head of Department This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Prof. Dr. Mehmet C. Ecevit Supervisor Examining Committee Members Prof. Dr. Kurtulu ş Kayalı (DTCF, Hist) Prof. Dr. Mehmet C. Ecevit (METU, Soc.) Prof. Dr. Yıldız Ecevit (METU, Soc.) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Filiz Kardam (Çankaya U. ADM) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mesut Ye ğen (METU, Soc.) I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name : Hatice Ye şildal Şen Signature : iii ABSTRACT PATRIARCHAL STRUCTURES AND PRACTICES IN TURKEY: THE CASE OF SOCIAL REALIST AND NATIONAL FILMS OF 1960s Ye şildal Şen, Hatice Ph. D., Department of Sociology Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Mehmet C. Ecevit October 2005, 249 pages This thesis highlights the significance of patriarchal structures and their reproduction in women’s social position through the feminist perspective. Patriarchy is a dominant structure both on production and reproduction sphere. Patriarchy, which is a dominant structure in every sphere of social life has material basis and controls both women’s labour and sexuality. With this framework some concepts such as the types of women’s labour, paid and domestic labour, family, honour, violence and masculinity are used in order to understand patriarchy. Patriarchy is not a fixed structure; on the contrary it has been changed according to the different mode of production and different social and cultural structures in which it takes place. In the scope of this thesis, the examples of ‘social realist’ and ‘national cinema’ are analysed sociologically. The social, economic and political structure of Turkey in between 1960-70 has some special importance. In addition to that, the institution of cinema had some important changes at the same period. Meantime, it is important that not many studies were done in woman’s subordination for this period in Turkey. Not only woman’s subordination in the scope of patriarchy, but also mutual relations of men and the role of men in reproduction of patriarchy were analysed in the film analysis. Keywords: Patriarchy, Turkish Cinema, Socialist Realist and National Films. iv ÖZ TÜRK İYE’DE 1960-70 ARASI ATAERK İL YAPILAR VE PRAT İKLER: 1960’LARIN TOPLUMSAL GERÇEKÇ İ VE ULUSAL F İLMLER ÖRNE Ğİ Ye şildal Şen, Hatice Doktora, Sosyoloji Bölümü Tez Yöneticisi: Prof. Dr. Mehmet C. Ecevit Ekim 2005, 249 pages Bu tez, feminist perspektife ba ğlı olarak ataerkil yapılar ve bunların yeniden üretiminin kadının toplumsal konumun analizindeki önemine dikkat çekmektedir. Ataerkillik hem üretim hem de yeniden üretim alanında hâkim olan bir yapıdır. Ataerkillik, toplumsal ya şantının her alanında hâkim olan ve maddi temelleri dolayısıyla tarihsel boyutu olan; kadının hem eme ğini hem de cinselli ğini denetleyen bir yapı olarak ele alınmı ştır. Bu çerçevede ataerkilli ği anlamak için kadının emek kullanma biçimleri –ücretli ve eviçi emek-, aile, namus, şiddet ve erkeklik vb kavramlar kullanılmı ştır. Ataerkillik sabit dura ğan bir yapı olmayıp tersine farklı üretim biçimlerine, farklı toplumsal ve kültürel yapılara göre de ğişik biçimler gösterebilen bir yapı olarak ele alınmı ştır. Bu tez kapsamında 1960–70 döneminde ‘toplumsal gerçekçi’ ve ‘ulusal sinema’ anlayı şıyla geli ştirilen filmlerden örnekler seçilerek bu filmlerin sosyolojik analizi yapılmı ştır. 1960–70 dönemi genel olarak Türkiye’nin toplumsal, ekonomik ve politik yapısı anlamında belirli özelliklere sahiptir buna paralel olarak Türk Sineması bir kurum olarak bu dönemde önemli de ğişiklikler ya şamı ştır. Bu dönem aynı zamanda Türkiye’de kadın tarihi anlamında da daha az çalı şılan bir dönem oldu ğu için önemlidir. Filmlerin analizinde ataerkillik kapsamında yalnızca kadının ikincil konumuna de ğil erkekler arası ili şkilere ve bu ili şkilerin ataerkilli ğin yeniden üretilmesindeki rolüne de bakılmı ştır. Anahtar Kelimeler: Ataerkillik, Türk Sineması, Toplumsal Gerçekçi ve Ulusal Filmler. v To My Little Brother Erdal vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank all who have contributed towards this thesis. Firstly, I would to give my utmost thanks to my supervisor Mehmet Ecevit who not only helped me in all stages of this thesis but supported me throughout. He was the one contributed the most from start to finish. His support was not only on an individual basis, but in believing that academic life should require collective collaboration. He also managed to form a sociology dissertation group. I also would thank to my friends in this dissertation group for their contribution by listening and commenting in my presentations. I owe the deepest gratitude to Yıldız Ecevit and Kurtulu ş Kayalı who joined our dissertation group’s meeting from time to time. Yıldız Ecevit read this thesis and made some valuable suggestions. Kurtulu ş Kayalı always shared his knowledge with me. Both Yıldız Ecevit and Kurtulu ş Kayalı hold a special place for me, not only academically, but also personally. This study was funded by a grant from The Turkish Academy of Sciences (TÜBA) to carry out my research in the University of West of England in the UK. A special thanks to Harindranath Ramaswami for his academic support. I would also like to thank both the examining committee members, who provided me with further feedback. The films I have analyzed in this thesis were from Anadolu University Department of Cinema and TV, Ankara University Faculty of Communication vii Department of Cinema, Tümay Arslan and U ğur Ün. I thank all those who in some ways helped me to find these films. I would like to thank Charles Sant for giving comments and proof reading the text. Special thanks to my colleagues Ay şin Koçak, Yasemin Özgün, Nadide Karkıner, and Oya Beklan Çetin for their help during my thesis. They always support me ambitiously. Thanks to my dear friend Elif U ğurlu for her emotional support and delicious meals. I am very lucky to have friends like Güray Topaç and Göksel Turan and would like to thank them for their support and help. I also thank to Emrah and Burcu for helping me out in cassette transcriptions. This thesis would not have been completed without Aynur Özu ğurlu’s tireless efforts, help, and her detailed and incisive comments. I would like to thank to my dear family for their support over the years. Without them I would not reached this stage. Finally, I am indebted to my friend Tamer Şen. He, always, in all circumstances has stood besides me and gave me all his support. He not only shared the whole thesis process, but still plays a big part in my life. viii This thesis was supported by Turkish Academy of Sciences as part of Fellowship Program for Integrated Doctoral Studies in Turkey and Abroad in Social Sciences and Humanities. ix TABLE OF CONTENTS PLAGIARISM ......................................................................................................... iii ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................... iv ÖZ .......................................................................................................................... v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................................................................... vii TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................... x CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1 2. RESTORING WOMEN TO HISTORY BY QUESTIONING THE LEGITIMATION OF PATRIARCHY .................................................... 6 2.1. Introduction ............................................................................................ 6 2.2. Questioning Patriarchy as Criticism of Social Order ................................ 7 2.3. Explaining Patriarchy on Production Sphere ............................................. 9 2.4. Analysing Patriarchy with the Togetherness of Gender and Class.................................................................................................... 13 2.5. Invisibility of Women’s Labour in Turkey ............................................. 24 2.5.1. Changes of Women's Employment from Rural to Urban ........................................................................................... 25 2.5.2. Marriage and Fertility.................................................................... 30 2.5.3. Studies on the Situation of Women's Employment......................... 32 2.5.4. Educational Level of Women and Working Issues......................... 35 2.6. Conclusion ............................................................................................. 36 3. RESEARCHING PATRIARCHY VIA CINEMA: A SOCIOLOGICAL