About The Woman
In the first episode of a series depicting the life of Lydia Poet, her brother’s wife tells her the following: “If God wanted you to be a lawyer, it wouldn’t have created you as a woman.”
Can it be said that women have mostly been placed as the “other” in a time frame that can be described as ‘always’ on the stage of history? Perhaps, most of the time, men who are physically stronger have put themselves forward because they wanted to protect women in every sense they deemed necessary. This situation will vary personally, of course, but the issue we are addressing here is based on what is experienced due to the general attitude in society. For example, in the patriarchal social structure, can women who compose the lives of male individuals in the background (“It is the female bird who builds nests” in Turkish.”) be the main protagonists? Can we talk about the effort of silently assigned tasks behind the compliments to the sanctification of women and their elegance, in order for them to be responsible for things they never wanted to take responsibility for? How wrong can it be to say that in many cultures, they are used as a spiritual shield against external difficulties, as a material for stress relief? Could it be that the women who provide support to their men, who are given the leading role in the front stage of history by dealing with more complex problems, are the ones who mask themselves with their identities as knitters in the foreground, those who are taught art (but cannot discuss art), and those who take care of children (but do not raise children alone)? Maybe those who were described as neurotic in history, those who got sick in the villages, those who could not fit under that mask?
If you want to take a look at how Aristotle classified acquired knowledge, you will see that among the higher domains of knowledge, as the level of sophistication climbs from the lowest to the highest, the following are observed in sequence: the domain of knowledge that relies on memory, artistic knowledge, science, and finally the domain of wisdom. Here, art is evaluated only from a practical perspective, and it is pursued for the purpose of knowing with science. When it comes to wisdom, questioning emerges. This is the critical point in question! So, what about women!? In the Levant region around 1300 BC, in India around 500 BC, or in Arabia around 600 AD, as we approach the present day, whether it’s the 6th century or the 17th century in Europe, if history were a bag and a random time and geographical location with historical significance were chosen from that bag, could it be said that “Women of that time had equal rights to those held by men within society”? When all these historical periods are examined, were women allowed to reach the highest level, the level of wisdom? If a woman can now proclaim her existence more loudly, could she owe this to her counterparts who fought against all odds in the dusty pages of history, rejected all forms of oppression, and, if necessary, managed to establish authority even while concealing themselves? Of course, there are also the people struggling to survive within the exploited population. Despite not being given time to question under the overwhelming pressure of an unjust working system, those who put forth their minds in the midst of the struggle, regardless of gender, those who tried to illuminate themselves and those around them with what they read, even as they were being crushed under the gears of the system, I am indebted to that enlightened group on my own behalf. Their struggle is the story of heroes who have managed to create their identities within the unequal order, regardless of gender.
If we return to talking about the story of being a woman in parts, when the time bar is taken back to before Christ and the mythological stories of the Miletians, who hosted the birth of philosophy, are evaluated, it can be seen that many inferences can be made about the role of women of the period in life. Ultimately, mythology provides information about the social order and perspective on life of the community it addresses. Here, when there was nothing in the universe, Chaos and Eros (desire) that existed at the beginning, accompanied by Gaia (earth) can be mentioned. Gaia has a birthing quality like a female, and is also referred to as the earth mother. Under the influence of Eros, Gaia took Uranus (the sky) as a spouse for herself (and also her child, an initial formation that contradicts the conclusion, such as the incestuous relationship of siblings, which is related to those who claim that everything in Islam is produced from Adam and Eve) gave birth.
Than, Uranus, not liking the children he gave birth to aesthetically, imprisoned them in Gaia, causing the earth to become angry and suffer. However, Uranus remained indifferent to the pain Gaia suffered and left her to suffer because he thought it was right. Gaia sought help from her children, and Kronos (time) came to her aid. With the help of Kronos, Gaia punished Uranus by depriving him of his masculinity. This story is a mythological quote about the beginning of the universe from the times when humanity had not yet begun to discover itself in the field of science and was trying to establish social order. When evaluated, it can be clearly seen that even at the beginning, masculine representation, which has the potential to suppress what could take it out of its comfort zone (this situation is more in line with Kronos eating his children), or what it does not like and cannot give meaning to, chooses to suppress what it does not like when it can exert power over it. As a representation of a woman who gives birth, although she is under pressure from a physical point of view, when she can use her potential through struggle (unfortunately, we see support for this potential from Kronos, who is again a male representation), the power she has is much more powerful. So, can such power be seen as a danger? When stories are written about this power, is including helping of masculine representations a result of the intolerability of being able to survive on its own? When it comes to Greek Mythology, I would like to talk about Zeus, but I think it would be unfair to generalize men on a mythical god who is considered selfish in many aspects [1].
Maybe at this point, we can briefly talk about Pandora. I say Pandora because Pandora is a female figure who was brought to humanity as a punishment. Yes, a punishment and a female. As a result of the community’s rebellion against the divine power superior to themselves, Pandora was created as a particularly attractive and skillful creature as punishment. A decoration of men’s desires but a cunning creature that does not give them what they have. So, what is in Pandora’s box? If you thought there was only hope in that box, you were wrong, everything about diseases, poverty, and suffering is in that box. The reason is only Prometheus stealing fire and bringing it to humanity. Whether it is Pandora’s curiosity that led her to open the box and spread all the suffering on earth because of her, or whether the first woman was created for all these sufferings to spread on earth, it is probably not a story that is well received by women. Fortunately, it is told that she regretted opening the lid and unknowingly prevented hope from coming out after all that suffering. This is a situation that, while some consider it the greatest punishment, others consider it a disappointment to Zeus by mitigating the severity of the punishment. Here, I would like to add Nietzsche’s quote “In reality, hope is the worst of all evils, because it prolongs man’s torments” as a side note. I believe that even from this example, pages of interpretations can be made about women [1].
Now I would like to talk about the approach of the Christian theologian St. Augustine (354–430), mentioned in the book “The Forbidden Apple”. According to him, you can see Eve as the source of perversion that led Adam astray by tempting him with the forbidden fruit. Once again, the first woman leads the man astray, and once again, humanity is punished because of her. In my opinion, there is also an insult to the man here because he is underestimated compared to the intelligence of the woman. Furthermore, due to her perversion, we are faced with the idea that the female sexual organ is the opposite of the divine. The statement of the subsequent Sicilian Arnobius goes as follows: “The female body smells foul and is rotten. It is a disgusting sack filled with urine and feces.” Maybe Arnobius, who smells amazing, has a problem with us because he does not have the ability to explore our bodies! In the Puritan Christian tradition, it is believed that all women inherit the immorality and will of Eve, and thus “we, who are daughters of Eve,” are seen as more inclined to desire and lust than men. So, how could the lust of those who attack women like greedy hyenas due to their duty to bring forth offspring, disregarding the male ego that considers itself tasked with bringing seed into the world, be overlooked [2]?
When talking about the Puritan Christian tradition, I would like to address another issue that I cannot comprehend. In the Quran, the holy book of Islam, it is written in the 282nd verse of the Surah Al-Baqara that it is recommended to have two male witnesses to testify about the debts given, and if there are not two men, one man and two women can be kept as witnesses. Why is it that when one man is excluded, only two women are considered equivalent to him? Were men created in a way that they will never make mistakes in any sense? Are we more flawed compared to them? Ali Ünal explained this by stating that men are the ones who engage in commercial transactions, and he said, “Moreover, women are much more emotional than men and are more prone to forgetfulness and error than men.” [3]. Do men not have emotions? Can correct decisions only be made when there is an increase in emotional deprivation? Was Truman, who dropped the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a sentimental woman? Furthermore, the need for a second woman in the continuation of the verse is explained as a means for one to warn the other in case of confusion [4,5]. Besides, I would not want to ignore Imam Ghazali’s writing. What a gift he saw us as, to those who enjoin good and forbid evil in the way of Allah; He wrote that he would marry three hundred thousand houris with big eyes, who would only look into their husbands’ eyes, in their mansions in heaven. I am sure I did not misread, three hundred thousand maidens [6, p. 99]. Also, if there is a female prophet mentioned in monotheistic religions, it would make me very happy if you could mention it in the comments.
Before finishing my writing, I would also like to briefly touch upon Buddhism. Initially, we can read that unfortunately, Buddha’s thoughts also adapted to the patriarchal society of the time. We are talking about the existence of a lower class that does not place women in practical knowledge area and devalues them. So, can beings belonging to the lower class be accepted into the religion? Unfortunately, we see that women were marginalized in Buddhism at the beginning. The one who resisted this idea is Mahaprajapati, who is also Buddha’s aunt and foster mother. Women who joined Mahaprajapati’s resistance created their own revolutions and were able to accept women into the religion and bring about changes in the place of women in the existing cultural structure through their work [7].
In conclusion, the prevailing idea among those who hold an anti-feminist approach today is that feminism triggers male hostility. The cruelty committed by men who acted with the mistaken belief that women should obey men for years should not be attributed to all men. Likewise, it is inappropriate to attribute to feminism the ideas of individuals who advocate bullying a particular gender to protect women.Today, when we look at those who argue that women should suppress the freedoms they want to achieve and their desire to make their own choices, unfortunately, they can say whatever they want from any platform they want, acting with actions covered by the concept of freedom they criticize. Who can argue against the opposite of women being unable to choose the professions they desired about 300 years ago, or about not having a say in voting rights until about 100 years ago? Who can deny the disproportionate number of those who look down on women in the name of humanity, instead of condemning actions that are flawed for all of humanity, such as cheating or violence? Who can cover up the abundance of those who cover up the fault of cheating men, while the responsibility for harmony within the home is pushed onto women through sanctified values? While this list could go on and on, who can equate feminism with the idea that if men cheat, women should cheat as well? NO! Perhaps there is a distinction here that not everyone’s capacity for understanding can grasp. Feminism does not say that if men cheat, women should cheat in the world where men cheat. It says that if men can commit the fault of cheating, then women can do the same, and when they do, both genders should be subject to the same treatment. It does not say that women should be non-conformist; it says that both women and men can adapt to each other, but they can still be non-conformist to each other in points where they think differently. Feminism says that women and men are equal before the law. It does not say that women have a penis. In fact, it is quite strange that a group that favors men by taking advantage of the structural differences between women and men, in history, evaluated women’s biological differences as a flawed form of men, and characterized women’s sexual organ specific to their biology as a void that men need to fill or as a small male organ they possess.
As I conclude here, I would like to thank my ancestor, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, who set an example to the whole world with the right to vote that he brought to women. Afterwards, I would like to thank all the fathers who do not treat women as an extension that has to adapt to men, but set an example for their children with good behavior. I would also like to thank all the women who have struggled to fulfill their professions in law, academia, management and many other fields, which in the past centuries were despised in society but still considered men’s work, and my family who raised me as a strong woman.
“That nothing comes from violence and nothing ever could. For all those born beneath an angry star. Lest we forget how fragile we are. On and on the rain will fall. Like tears from a star like tears from a star. “
[Sting-Fragile]
References
[1] Durusken C. Ancient philosophy. Istanbul University Open Education Lecture Notes.
[2] Stromquist L. Forbidden Fruit. Baobab Publication; 2014.
[3] Unal A. The Holy Quran and Its Explanatory Translation. Irfan Publication; 2021.
[4] Yazır EMH. The Holy Quran and Its Supreme Translation. Ravza Publication; 2017.
[5] Ozturk YN. Translation of the Holy Quran. Ege Advertising Printing Arts; 2013(141. Edition).
[6] Gazali M. Discovery of Hearts. Ilkharf Publication; 2019.
[7] Arslan H. The position of women in Buddhism. Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Theology Journal. 2014;39:179–147.
