Women’s Studies Int. Forum, Vol. 17, Nos. Z/3, pp.

241-248, 1994
Copyright 0 1994 Elsevier Science Ltd
Pergamon Printed in the USA. All rights reserved
0277-5395/94 $6.00 + .OO

TOWARD A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY

The Women’s Movement in Turkey in the 1980s

YESIM ARAT
Department of Political Science and International Relations, Bogazici University,
Bebek, Istanbul, 80815. Turkey

Synopsis-This article explores how the women’s movement in Turkey contributed to the process
of democratization in the 1980s. The movement did not merely give more women the opportunity to
participate in politics through grass roots organizations, but also helped create the political milieu
conducive to the establishment of a political democracy. The movement extended the political space
allotted to civil society. In the context of a statist polity, feminist women organized independent of
and in opposition to the state. They generated power through civil society as they established femi-
nist institutions. Their movement was a secular front against Islamic revivalism, one that mostly
tolerated and even influenced the Islamists. Consequently, by the end of the 1980 decade, political
parties which worked to consolidate political democracy in Turkey had heard women’s voices, even
though their response was far from satisfactory.

In September, 1980, a military coup took
place in Turkey. After a 3-year rule during
which the military aimed to restructure the
parameters of politics and depoliticize the
polity, power was turned over to the civilians.
The 1987 and 1991 elections helped to consol-
idate democratic rule in the country.
During the same decade, a women’s move-
ment emerged in Turkey. In the context of an
international order where feminist move-
ments had already made their spectacular im-
pact and where women in the West were de-
bating whether or not their movements were
in decline, Turkish women began to organize
to protest women’s predicament (Arat, 1991;
Sirman, 1989; Tekeli, 1986, 1990, 1992). Ed-
ucated, mostly professional, middle-class
women organized consciousness raising
groups, petition campaigns, protest walks to
highlight women’s problems, wrote in papers
and published two feminist journals, insti-
tuted a Women’s Library and a foundation
against the Beating of Women. About one
hundred women who called themselves femi-
For an explanation of Kemalism, see Tekeli (1992,
p. 142).
The author thanks the Middle East Research Compe-
tition of Ford Foundation for supporting this research.
241
nist were involved in organizing these activi-
ties. The number of participants ranged from
10 to 20 in consciousness raising groups, to
16 thousand who signed the most recent peti-
tion against violence toward women. While
Turkish society struggled to democratize,
Turkish women discovered the implications
of their gender identity. As these women pro-
moted their gender interests, they partook in
the democratization of their polity.
This article aims to explore how the wom-
en’s movement in Turkey contributed to the
process of democratization in the 1980s.
“Women’s movement” refers to the collective
activities led by women calling themselves
feminist. Women who sought to expand the
opportunities they had as women, at times
consciously, at times inadvertently, at times
with serious setbacks, helped establish a
more democratic polity. Before I explore this
process, I define the concept of democracy
and democratization as used in this article.
Then I sketch the context of women’s rights
and democracy to move on to the 1980s.
DEMOCRACY AND
DEMOCRATIZATION
The concept of democracy as self-rule is elab-
orated by social scientists who use the term
242 YE$IM
in reference to democratic polities. Juan Linz
distinguishes between a “political democ-
racy” and a “democratic society.” A demo-
cratic society is “a society with considerable
equality of opportunity in all spheres, includ-
ing social equality as well as opportunity to
formulate political alternatives and mobilize
the electorate for them” (Linz, 1978, p. 97).
A political democracy, on the other hand, re-
fers to those polities in which there is the
“freedom to create political parties and to
conduct free and honest elections at regular
intervals without excluding any effective po-
litical office from direct or indirect electoral
accountability” (Linz, 1978, p. 5). A demo-
cratic society is difficult to conceive without
a political democracy; however, a political
democracy does not suffice to ensure a demo-
cratic society. Political democracy is a neces-
sary but insufficient condition of a demo-
cratic society.
When our concern is to analyze women’s
role in the democratization process of a pol-
ity, the concept of a democratic society seems
to be self-evidently appropriate. Women par-
take in politics to create a democratic society,
in search of equality or opportunity and par-
ticipate, traditionally, through grass roots
organizations rather than through orthodox
channels of politics. Although women have
been notably absent from parliaments and
parties in most modern states, till recent
years, they nevertheless partook in politics
through their unique modes of participation
in search of a more democratic society with
better opportunities for women. Similarly, in
the Turkish case, women who were politi-
cized in the 1980s did not seek opportunity
and power through parties and regular elec-
tions, but rather organized in small groups
and joined together through collective cam-
paigns to create a more democratic society.
Yet, in their search of a democratic soci-
ety, women can also contribute to the estab-
lishment of a political democracy. As argued
here, democratic societies are closely linked
to political democracies. If a democratic soci-
ety recognizes liberal rights, such as freedom
of speech, writing, association, religion or
the right to a fair trial, to its members, a
political democracy guarantees them. A po-
litical democracy that does not recognize lib-
eral rights loses its purpose. O’Donnell and
Schmitter, in their analysis of a transition
ARAT
from authoritarian rule to a political democ-
racy, underline the significance of the rela-
tion between liberalization and democratiza-
tion. They argue, “without the guarantees of
individual and group freedoms inherent in
liberalization, democratization risks degen-
erating into mere formalism. On the other
hand, without accountability to mass publics
and constituent minorities institutionalized
under the latter (political democracy), liber-
alization may prove to be easily manipulated
and retracted at the convenience of those in
government” (O’Donnell & Schmitter, 1986,
p. 9). Women’s politics in its grass roots char-
acter is particularly relevant to ensure liberal-
ization of the regime. Women who seek to
extend their opportunities, whether it be the
right to abortion or the right to protection
from domestic violence help liberalize the
regime.
In transition from authoritarian rule to
political democracy, liberalization of the
system is particularly important, because
liberalization helps “resurrect civil society”
(O’Donnell & Schmitter, 1986, pp. 48-56),
after a period of repression, depolitization,
and atomization of society. Groups that be-
gin to associate and express their grievances
to promote their limited interests, even when
their claims are narrow and specific, help vi-
talize civil society and provide the opportu-
nity for democratic citizenship. Resurrecting
civil society helps nurture a political culture
which is conducive to the establishment of a
political democracy with its parties and elec-
tions that are accountable to the electorate.
This article analyzes the various levels at
which the women’s movement that emerged
in the 1980s contributed to the creation of a
political democracy as well as a democratic
society. In search of their gender interests
and liberal rights, women helped resurrect
civil society and thus contributed to a transi-
tion to a political democracy as well as a dem-
ocratic society. Before I focus on the 198Os, I
sketch the historical relationship between
women and democracy in Turkey.
THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF
WOMEN’S RIGHTS AND
DEMOCRACY IN TURKEY
To appreciate the history of women and de-
mocracy, the political legacy of the Turkish
 Democracy and the Women’s Movement in Turkey
state, as well as the immediate political milieu
of the 1980s need to be considered. The pre-
dominant role the state played in Turkish
politics and society has been elaborated, ana-
lyzed, and criticized for some time (i.e.,
Heper, 1985; Keyder, 1987; Mardin, 1973).
The strong, mostly authoritarian state has
helped explain many aspects of Turkish life,
from periodic military interventions to reli-
gious revival. Unlike in the West, there has
not been a strong tradition of civil disobedi-
ence or peaceful association against the state.
If democracy is self-rule, women have par-
ticipated in political life since the nineteenth
century by writing about their destiny and ad-
vocating their interests; thereby, they helped
democratize their society which had this
strong state tradition. Yet, the nature of their
contribution has been different at different
stages of Turkish political life.
After the Republic was founded in 1923,
radical attempts were undertaken to improve
the status of women because the new regime
had democratic aspirations. After the disso-
lution of the Ottoman Empire where Islamic
law was an important source of legislation,
the founders of the Republic aimed to estab-
lish a liberal Western society, secular as well
as democratic, in Turkey. Rights granted to
women were a significant tool in this process
(Arat, 1989; Tekeli, 1982). The 1926 Civil
Code abolished polygamy, endorsed compul-
sory civil marriage, recognized the right to di-
vorce to both partners, and accepted equal
rights to inheritance. By 1934, suffrage was
granted. Women could vote and run for po-
litical office at local as well as at national
levels.
Even though Republican Turkey created a
space in which women could promote their
status within the constraints of class, region,
and tradition, the polity was neither a politi-
cal democracy nor a democratic society in the
193Os/194Os. The regime assumed a demo-
cratic outlook by recognizing rights to
women during the single party era which las-
ted until 1946. However, women were dis-
couraged from activism independent of the
state. When women attempted to establish
their Women’s People’s Party in 1923, they
were not allowed (Toprak, 1988). Instead,
they were encouraged by the leaders of the
Republican People’s Party (RPP), which es-
tablished and, at the time, singlehandedly
243
ruled the Republic, to found the Turkish
Women’s Federation under state tutelage.
When the Federation seemed to be moving
away from state control in 1935, the RPP
leaders asked the Federation to dissolve itself
(Toprak, 1986).
When the political system opened up after
World War II, women’s political activism re-
mained limited. Until 1980, women’s associa-
tions were mostly philanthropic or profes-
sional associations. The Turkish Women’s
Union, Turkish Women’s Council, Mothers’
Association, Association for the Promotion
of Women’s Rights existed without any voice,
let alone any clout. During the 197Os, when
Turkish politics became increasingly frag-
mented and polarized, women were politi-
cized along with men, but their political activ-
ism was restricted to some involvement in
leftist groups. Women began to organize to
confront their problems and question the ade-
quacy of Kemalist reforms (such as the Civil
Code of 1926 and the suffrage recognized in
1934) only in the 198Os, under special circum-
stances, in a unique period in Turkish history.
In the Turkish context, 1980 was a critical
turning point for change. The army inter-
vened in politics on September 12, 1980. The
1982 Constitution aimed to curb demands
from civil society. Activities of labour
unions, the press, universities, and voluntary
institutions were duly restricted with the ex-
plicit_.aim of depoliticising the polity (Parla
and Oncii, 1990). The process of depolitiza-
tion undermined the traditional left and
right. Politics had to be articulated within a
new paradigm and with a new discourse after
the army gradually turned power over to ci-
vilians in 1983.
Even though the constitutional frame-
work remained mainly intact during the de-
cade, civil society expanded its boundaries.
At one level, a conservative, nationalist, reli-
gious ideology filled the artificially created
ideological vacuum in the polity; at another
level, a consciousness of liberalism and indi-
vidualism emerged. An awareness of the en-
vironment and nuclear proliferation and gay
rights arose. In this context, where the tradi-
tional left which had preempted any autono-
mous feminist inclinations was itself under-
mined, feminist rhetoric could find fertile
ground (Tekeli, 1986). Furthermore, the po-
tential threat of the feminists, their radical
244 YE$IM ARAT
antistate, deeply political nature could be dis-
missed by the state not merely because their
numbers were small, but also because they
were understood (or rather misunderstood)
to be fighting for something that the Republi-
can founding fathers had legitimized through
the recognition of suffrage and the Civil
Code in the early 193Os, namely women’s
rights. They could thus survive in the political
context of the decade.
THE WOMEN’S MOVEMENT AND
DEMOCRATIZATION
At a most obvious level, the women’s move-
ment gave a few more women the opportu-
nity to participate in politics. The groups and
organizations which constituted the move-
ment aspired for and, to a significant extent,
practised internal democracy more than
larger scale associations ever could. At a
macro level, these small groups and organiza-
tions through their campaigns and petitions
were engaging in grass roots politics; thus
these women were participating in the way
they were governed.
Yet, because the movement came into be-
ing during the process of redemocratization
in Turkey, it assumed a unique role. Above
and beyond the democratic ideology or prac-
tice it promoted, the women’s movement
helped to open up the authoritarian regime of
the time to usher in democracy. It encour-
aged liberalism and strengthened civil so-
ciety.
Feminist women of different persuasions,
socialist and radical feminists included, all
upheld a woman’s right to exercise her will,
choose her destiny. Defying tradition and
male authority, they encouraged women to
claim their sexuality. An important goal of
the feminist movement was to enhance wom-
en’s respectability as individuals, rather than
as mothers or sisters. Various activities and
the colourful discourse of the women’s move-
ment underlined the significance of women’s
claim to their emotions and problems as
women. The journalfeminist brought out by
radical feminists was a testimony to the femi-
nists’ insistence on individual rights. The
journal invited women to write as individu-
als. Consequently, personal issues that had
not been publicly disclosed and thus politi-
cized until the 198Os, such as abortion, lesbi-
anism, and alternative lifestyles, were voiced
in a polity with communitarian values and a
statist as opposed to a liberal pluralist politi-
cal tradition.
If individualism is the core of liberalism,
antistatism is its natural extension. The wom-
en’s movement challenged the state tradition
in Turkey, both because feminists supported
women’s individual rights in defiance of the
patriarchal norms protected by the state, and
also because the movement took shape in re-
action to specific state policies and could thus
display a clear instance of civil society rising
against the state.
Feminists within the women’s movement
were against the state because the state per-
petuated the patriarchal division of labour in
society which, according to their analysis,
was the cause of women’s problems (Kadm-
larm Kurtulusu Bildirgesi, 1989). The state
had traditionally protected, legitimized, and
helped perpetuate patriarchal organizations
in society, including the family, the econ-
omy, the educational system, and the media.
The Kemalist legal structure still had biases
against women. The Civil Code still accepted
the husband as the head of the family. The
Criminal Code treated men and women dif-
ferently, for example, in cases of adultery.
Underlying these criticisms, and along with
Western feminists, the claim was made that
the personal was political; the state had to re-
spect women’s private life and choices at the
same time as it guaranteed protection to
women in the private realm where they were
most exploited. Above and beyond formal
equality with men, which could not be at-
tained fully either in law or in daily practice,
certain groups within the women’s movement
argued that women’s values and women’s
work had to be publicly recognized. In Deniz
Kandiyoti’s words, the women in Turkey
were “emancipated but unliberated” (Kandi-
yoti, 1987), and now, as had been the case in
the West, they sought both emancipation and
liberation independent of the state.
Major public demonstrations and political
activities of the women’s movement were ac-
tually reactions to state policies. Women un-
dertook a petition campaign in 1986 in An-
kara and Istanbul because the state did not
implement the 1985 UN Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
against Women, even though the convention
 Democracy and the Women’s Movement in Turkey
was signed by Turkey in 1985. In 1987, femi-
nist women protested the battering of women
with a major campaign including a march
and a festival, publications and a temporary
museum. The campaign was initiated be-
cause a state judge refused to grant divorce to
a woman, mother of three children and preg-
nant with a fourth, who was regularly beaten
by her husband and was seeking divorce. The
judge’s ground was that according to tradi-
tion, “you could not leave the wife’s back
without a stick, her belly without a baby.”
The campaign against the Criminal Code ar-
ticle 438 (which decreased by two-thirds the
punishment of a man when the woman he as-
saulted was a prostitute) began because the
Constitutional Court decided that 438 was
not unconstitutional, in response to an ap-
peal from a local judge in Antalya who con-
fronted a case involving this article.
In addition to these campaigns, individual
feminists contested state policies with their
writing (i.e., Tekeli, 1988). They responded
to and presented their feminist viewpoint
against laws, proposals, and state actions.
Deficiencies of the abortion law which had
been passed by the military government were
thus evaluated. Civil law amendments, cen-
sorship, and torture were publicly criticized.
These antistate feminist activities were or-
ganized around specifically women’s con-
cerns. One prominent exception was the
“black protest” when, in the summer of 1989,
a group of women demonstrated in support
of prisoners who went into a hunger strike to
protest the conditions in state prisons. The
women were duly placed under police super-
vision. Even though feminists were primarily
interested in articulating women’s interests,
their attempt to link their activism with hu-
man rights issues was not tolerated. Speaking
in defence of human rights rather than wom-
en’s rights was seen to be more threatening by
the state. This singular event testified to the
limits of women’s challenge to state authori-
tarianism. Women’s issues had to be con-
fined and kept apart from human rights
problems perhaps because, from the perspec-
tive of the state, the latter implicated men as
well as women and hence represented a more
serious opposition to the state.
Despite its limits, feminist activism was
fruitfully channelled to become institutional-
ized, independent of the state. The campaign
245
for battered women successfully resulted in
the establishment of a foundation which
aimed to set up shelter homes for battered
women. In 1989, a Women’s Library and In-
formation Center was founded in Istanbul,
which is also a testimony to the concrete
goals feminists could meet within the move-
ment and outside state tutelage. With colour-
ful campaigns and festivals, feminist women
expanded the political space allotted to civil
society. In the Turkish context where the tra-
dition of peaceful association against the
strong state was weak, the achievements of
the women’s movement were quite signifi-
cant.
RELIGIOUS REVIVAL, FEMINISTS,
AND DEMOCRACY
The women’s movement played a unique
democratic role in the context of religious re-
vival in Turkey. As mentioned before, in the
198Os, the state with its constitution, mili-
tary, government, and bureaucracy pro-
moted a conservative nationalist religious
ideology. The promotion and spread of reli-
gious ideology implied the promotion of Is-
lamic dictates and morals concerning
women. Different religious groups interpret
women’s status in Islam differently. Never-
theless, the orthodoxy upholds at the mini-
mum, a gendered division of labor and strict
control over women’s sexuality. It is difficult
to reconcile Islamic ideology where men are
privileged with a feminist perspective which
upholds gender equality (Arat, 1990). In con-
trast to feminists’ insistence on women’s
right to choose, Islamic ideology regulates all
aspects of socioeconomic and political life as
well as the rights and responsibilities of
women. Under these conditions, the women’s
movement was a secular front, defending the
secular interests of women and arguing for
the primacy of a democratic context for the
promotion of women’s rights.
Yet, the women’s movement was a unique
secular front, because it was not built by the
state against civil society. Unlike in the Kem-
alist era, the issue of women’s rights was not
used by the state against Islamic groups. To
the contrary, many feminists as well as Islam-
ists were against the state. Consequently,
contrary to tradition, feminists were inclined
to believe that women’s liberation did not ne-
246 YESIMARAT
cessitate a suppression of Islamic opposition.
Unlike in other Muslim contexts, feminists
were ready to tolerate Islamists (Tekeli, 1992,
p. 141). Perhaps because they were a younger
generation of women who had taken Kema-
list secularism in a Muslim society for
granted, they had more confidence in the
rootedness of secular institutions in their pol-
ity. For the feminists, political liberalization
of the authoritarian state and the flourishing
of civil society was a higher priority than the
suppression of the Islamists.
Paradoxically, feminist ideology pro-
moted by the women’s movement was a chal-
lenge that had democratic repercussions
within the Islamic movement. The women’s
movement affected Islamic groups, espe-
cially women who played and are still playing
an increasingly active role in the Islamic
movement. A small group of “feminist”
women emerged within the Islamic move-
ment. They pointed out that their being reli-
gious did not guarantee that they would not
be discriminated against as women.
In turn, Islamist women challenged secu-
lar feminists for being elitist (Kurter et al.,
1988). The Islamist claim was that the secular
feminists were assuming that they, and not
others, knew where women’s liberation was.
The polemic that took place between these
groups added variety and richness to the re-
spective platforms of these groups (see Gz-
tiirk, 1988a, 1988b).
Besides this feminist response to and inter-
action with the Islamists, an older group of
women who called themselves Kemalist femi-
nists considered the Islamists to be an immi-
nent threat. Kemalist feminists were politi-
cized in response to increasing Muslim
activism. A foundation to defend a secular,
modern polity (Cagdas Yasami Destekleme
Dernegi -Association to Promote Contem-
porary Life) was established. Women’s asso-
ciations that had not been particularly active
before the 198Os, such as the Turkish Woman
Lawyers Association, became more visible as
they defended secularism and women’s rights
(Zktisut Dergisi, 1991, p. 5).
THE 1991 ELECTIONS: DEMOCRATIC
GAINS AND LOSSES FOR WOMEN
Although the women’s movement of the
1980s remained a feature of civil society, a
movement organized in opposition to and in-
dependent of the state, women’s voices that
were raised during the decade had repercus-
sions in the orthodox channels of politics. At-
tempts to consolidate political democracy
through open competitive elections where
political parties were held accountable to the
public reflected women’s increasing presence,
at least as electors, in the polity.
In the 1991 General Election, women’s is-
sues became a visible item in the campaigns
and party programs of all the major parties.
This development was unprecedented in
Turkish politics. The Motherland Party that
took power from the army in 1983 and held
on to power with the 1987 elections made
women’s issues one of the seven items which
would structure the party campaign. Mesut
Yilmaz, who led the party, announced that
the party would implement the United Na-
tions Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Discrimination Against Women.
The announcement was striking especially
because the women’s movement in Turkey
had made its first collective, public appear-
ance to protest against the government’s neg-
lect of the Convention, which had been
signed by Turkey in 1985 under international
pressure (Berik, 1990). The Social Demo-
cratic People’s Party, which had installed a
25% quota for women in the party organs in
1989 and the True Path Party on the center
right followed suit, the former addressing
more urban women, while the latter priori-
tized the concerns of women from towns and
villages.
More unexpectedly, the religious Welfare
Party also recognized the need to address the
secular, female electorate to increase its elec-
toral strength. Hence religious rhetoric was
underplayed to respond to the secular, mun-
dane concerns of women from different stra-
tas, including women working outside the
home, housewives, and students. Concepts
like women’s exploitation, inequality, do-
mestic violence against women, and the mar-
ket economy that treats women’s sexuality as
a commodity were introduced in the 1991
electoral campaign by the Welfare Party.
After a decade of women’s activism, polit-
ical parties had recognized women as voters
that could practise their democratic rights of
suffrage independent of men. There is also
some evidence that women did support politi-
 Democracy and the Women’s Movement in Turkey
cal parties which promoted women’s issues
(Kalayctojjlu, in press). In other words, the as-
sumption made by political parties in the 1991
elections that women had unique interests and
would pursue them was not unfounded.
Emerging public consciousness about wom-
en’s issues and women’s problems would be a
step toward solving these problems.
After the elections, the Social Democratic
People’s Party and the True Path Party that
formed a coalition government with prom-
ises of liberalizing the regime appointed a
woman Minister of State responsible for
women’s affairs. Although both the Ministry
and the Minister were criticized by many fem-
inists (Cizgen, 1991), there were promising
developments. The Ministry was criticized
because it would be a token response to wom-
en’s problems, and the Minister was criticized
because of her apparent ignorance regarding
feminist activism. Yet, by the 199Os, femi-
nists had established a network in the polity.
With the right advice from feminists and aca-
demicians, the Minister of State responsible
for women’s problems had a radical amend-
ment to the Civil Law prepared. Accord-
ingly, the article which stated that the hus-
band was the head of the family would be
abolished; articles which declared that
women were caretakers of the home and
helpers to the husband would be abolished;
the article which made women’s employment
outside the home contingent on the permis-
sion of the husband would be abolished;
women would be allowed to use their maiden
name along with their husband’s.
Despite these developments, women’s
gains were limited in the formal political
arena. In the 1991 elections, contrary to the
rhetoric of the political parties, women can-
didates were shunned in the electoral race.
Only eight women were elected to the parlia-
ment, thus keeping women’s representation
in the parliament as low as it had always
been. The radical amendments to the Civil
Code were not realized. The Minister of State
who had them prepared was forced to resign
because she was implicated with fraud con-
cerning misuse of public funds.
CONCLUSION
The women’s movement played a unique role
in the process of redemocratization of Tur-
241
key in the 1980s. The movement did not
merely give more women the opportunity to
participate in politics through grass roots or-
ganizations, but also helped extend the politi-
cal space allotted to civil society. In the con-
text of a statist polity, feminist women
upheld individualism. Organized indepen-
dent of and in opposition to the state, these
women generated power through civil society
as they established feminist institutions.
Their movement was a secular front against
Islamic revivalism, one that mostly tolerated
and even influenced the Islamists. Conse-
quently, the movement helped create the po-
litical milieu conducive to the establishment
of a political democracy. By the end of the
198Os, political parties which worked to con-
solidate political democracy in Turkey had
heard women’s voices even though their re-
sponse was far from satisfactory. Much re-
mains to be done both to democratize the re-
gime and liberate women. Yet, the women’s
movement is a testimony to the capacity of
women as political actors to contribute to the
breakdown of authoritarian regimes.
REFERENCES
Arat, Yesim. (1989). The patriarchal paradox: Women
politicians in Turkey. NJ: Associated University
Presses.
Arat, Yesim. (1990). Feminizm ve Islam: Kadtin ve aile
dergisinin diigtlndtirdilkleri. In Sirin Tekeli (Ed.):
Kadm bakes agsmdan 19&3’IerTiirkiyesinde kadmlar
(pp. 89-102). Instanbul: Iletisim.
Arat, Yesim. (1991). 1980’ler Tilrkiyesi’nde kadm hare-
keti: Liberal Kemaiizmin radikal uzanttst. Toplum ve
Bilim, 53,7-20.
Berik, Gilnseli. (1990). State policy in the 1980s and the
future of women’s rights. New Perspectives on Tur-
key, 4, 81-96.
Cizgen, Newai. (1991, December 12). Birazclk kadm ba-
kanh&. Cumhuriyet.
Heper, Metin. (1985). The state tradition in Turkey.
North Humberside: The Eothen Press.
iktisat Dergisi. (1991). no. 313.
Kadmlarm Kurtulusu Bildirgesi. (1989). In 1. Feminist
Hqfta Sonu II-12 Subat.
Kalayctoglu, Ersin. (in press). Elections and party pref-
erences in Turkey: Changes and continuities in the
1990s. Comparative Political Studies.
Kandiyoti, Deniz. (1987). Emancipated but unliberated?
Reflections on the Turkish case. Feminist Studies,
13, 317-338.
Keyder, Caglar. (1987). State and class in Turkey: A
study in capitalist development. London: Verso
Press.
Kurter, Aysel et ai. (1988). ‘Kadmlara Ragmen KadmIar
Icin‘ Tavrma Bir Elestiri. KakttZs, 4, 25-27.
Linz, Juan. (1978). CrG. breakdown and reequilibra-
248 YESIM
tion. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University
Press.
Mardin, Serif. (1973). Center-periphery relations: A key
to Turkish politics. Daedalus. 102, 169-190.
O’Donnell, Guillermo, & Schmitter, Philippe C. (1986).
Transitions from authoritarian rule: Tentative con-
clusions about uncertain democracies. Baltimore:
The Johns Hopkins University Press.
oztilrk, Sedef. (1988a). Kadm Sorunu Blamcrlarm
Gundeminde Nereye Kadar? . Kaktiis, 2, 38-43.
&turk, Sedef. (1988b). Elegtiriye bir yamt. KaktCs, 4,
28-30.
Parla, Taha, & C&ii, Ayse. (1990). Militarismus und
korporatismus in der Turkischen politik. In Jahr-
buch fur Vergleichende Sozialforschung 1987/88
(pp. 9-40). Berlin: Edition Parabolis.
Sirman, Niikhet. (1989). Feminism in Turkey: A short
history. New Perspectives on Turkey, 3, l-34.
Tekeli, Sirin. (1986). Emergence of the feminist move-
ARAT
ment in Turkey. In Drude Dahlerup (Ed.), The new
women’s movement: Feminism and political power
in Europe and the USA (pp. 179-199). London: Sage
Publications.
Tekeli, Sirin. (1988). Kadmlar icin. Istanbul: Alan
Yaymcrhk.
Tekeli, Sirin. (1990). Women in the changing political
associations of the 1980s. In Andrew Findel & Nuk-
het Sirman (Eds.), Turkish state, Turkish society
(pp. 259-288). London: Routledge.
Tekeli, Sirin. (1992). Europe, European feminism, and
women in Turkey. Women’s Studies International
Forum, IS, 139-143.
Toprak, Zafer. (1986, March). 1935 Istanbul ulus-
lararasr feminizm kongresi ve bans. Di&tin, pp.
24-29.
Toprak, Zafer. (1988). Halk fukasmdan once kurulan
parti kadmlar halk fukasr. Tarih ve Toplum, 51,
30-31.