![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Although conflict remains a major obstacle to development in many areas of the world, its impact on education has been rarely studied. This article investigates the relationship between conflict and gender equality, focusing on the schooling of the girls in the conflict-ridden regions of Turkey. Patriarchy is the most important determinant of low educational levels among girls in Southeastern Turkey. However, ethnic conflict exacerbates male-dominant traditions and blocks economic development, reinforcing patriarchal norms and limiting girls’ school attendance. Yet, by provoking political mobilization around a Kurdish identity, ethnic conflict may undermine patriarchy and unintentionally promote girls’ education.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Amorette Nelson and Bethany Vailliant for research assistance.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes on contributors
Ramazan Kılınç is an associate professor of political science at University of Nebraska at Omaha.
Jody Neathery-Castro is an associate professor of political science at University of Nebraska at Omaha.
Selin Akyüz is a research fellow at Bilkent University International Advanced Studies Centre.
Notes
1 UNESCO Institute for Statistics, Global Education Digest; Kaya, Forgotten or Assimilated?; McClure, “Turkey’s Eastern Question.”
2 UNESCO Institute for Statistics, Global Education Digest.
3 Chernichovski, “Socio-Economic and Demographic”; Moghadam, Democratic Reform; Acar et al, Cinsiyete Dayalı Ayrımcılık.
4 Gross, “The Politics of Unofficial Language,” 177–208.
5 Gündüz-Hoşgör and Smits, “Linguistic Capital”; Smits and Gündüz-Hoşgör, “Linguistic Capital.”
6 The emergence of the Kurdish movement in civil society started in the 1990s due to Turgut Özal’s liberal reforms; however, the decriminalization of the Kurdish language came only in the 2000s.
7 Chernichovski, “Socio-Economic and Demographic”; Moghadam, Democratic Reform; Acar et al., Cinsiyete Dayalı Ayrımcılık.
8 Bourdieu, “The Economics”; Bourdieu, Language; Gross, “The Politics of Unofficial Language.”
9 Shemyakina, “Ordinary Language”; Rankin and Aytaç, “Gender Inequality”; Smits and Gündüz-Hoşgör, “Effects of Family Background.”
10 Filmer, “The Structure”; Acar et al., Cinsiyete Dayalı Ayrımcılık; Adaman and Keyder, “Poverty and Social Exclusion”; Alat and Alat, “A Qualitative Study”; Bahar, “Education Is Important”; Chernichovski, “Socio-Economic and Demographic”; Erigil, “Results of a Survey”; Smits and Gündüz-Hoşgör, “Effects of Family Background”; Moghadam, Democratic Reform; Herz et al., What Works in Girls’ Education; Tansel, “Determinants of School.”
11 Kosmol, “Turkey’s East-West Economic Divide.”
12 Kırdar, “Explaining Ethnic Disparities,” 297–333.
13 Ibid.
14 Adaman and Keyder, “Poverty and Social Exclusion”; Brizic and Yagmur “Mapping Linguistic Diversity”; Uçarlar, “Between Majority Power and Minority Resistance”; Candas et al., Turkiye’de Esitsizlikler”; Kaya, “Forgotten or Assimilated?”; Kırdar, “Explaining Ethnic Disparities.”
15 Gross, “The Politics of Unofficial Language,” 177–208.
16 May, Language and Minority Rights.
17 Polat and Makalingappa, “Gender Differences in Identity”.
18 Gündüz-Hoşgör and Smits, “Linguistic Capital”; Smits and Gündüz-Hoşgör, “Linguistic Captital”; Alat and Alat, “A Qualitative Study,” 1369–73.
19 Göle, “Authoritarian Secularism and Islamist Politics.”
20 Tekeli, “Emergence of the Feminist Movement in Turkey,” 193; White, “State Feminism.”
21 Zihnioğlu, Kadınsız Inkılap.
22 Kandiyoti, “Bargaining with Patriarchy.” See also, Sirman, “The Making,” 163.
23 Arat, The Patriarchal Paradox.
24 Diner and Toktaş, “Waves of Feminism in Turkey.”
25 Coşar, Yeğenoğlu, “New Grounds for Patriarchy in Turkey?”
26 Al-Rebholz, “Gendered Subjectivity.”
27 Özkaleli, “State of the State in Their Minds.”
28 Smits and Gündüz-Hoşgör, “Effects of Family Background.”
29 Rankin and Aytaç “Gender Inequality in Schooling,” 25–43.
30 Ibid.
31 Erman, “Rural Migrants,” 130.
32 Ibid.
33 Smits and Gündüz-Hoşgör, “Effects of Family Background,” 545–60.
34 Cin, and Walker, “Reconsidering Girls’ Education.”
35 Ertem and Koçtürk, “Opinions on Early-Age Marriage,” 147–52.
36 Ibid.
37 Davies, Education and Conflict.
38 Alwy and Schech, “Ethnic Inequalities in Education in Kenya.”
39 Kao and Thompson, “Racial and Ethnic Stratification.”
40 Stromquist, “Gender Inequality in Education.”
41 Bush and Saltarelli, The Two Faces of Education in Ethnic Conflict.
42 Caprioli, “Gender Equality and State Aggression.”
43 Sirkeci, “Exploring the Kurdish Population,” 149–75.
44 Taşpınar, Kurdish Nationalism; Romano, The Kurdish Nationalist Movement; Yeğen, “‘Prospective-Turks’ or ‘Pseudo-Citizens’.”
45 Olson, The Kurdish Nationalist Movement, 1–208.
46 Tezcür, “When Democratization Radicalizes”; Efegil, “Analysis of the AKP.”
47 Tezcür, “Prospects for Resolution”; Gürses, “Is Islam a Cure for Ethnic Conflict.”
48 AltInay, The Myth of the Military-Nation.
49 For more information about the project, see, http://www.gapcatom.org/en (last accessed on September 25, 2017).
50 Ilkkaracan, “Exploring the Context,” 67.
51 Ibid.
52 Sen, “Gender and Cooperative Conflicts,” 123.
53 Çeliker, Kurdish Life, 95.
54 The Syrian refugees in the later period diversified the population but at the time of our research, there were no Syrian refugee impact in the neighborhoods that we conducted our fieldwork.
55 Brady et al., “Toward a Pluralistic Vision”; Brady, “Causation and Explanation.”
56 Leech, “Asking Questions”; Schaffer, “Ordinary Language Interviewing.” For other examples of research that included interviews in Southeastern Turkey, see Sahin-Mencutek, Zeynep, “Strong in the Movement” and Gürbüz, Rival Kurdish Movements in Turkey.
57 Ilkkaracan, “Exploring the Context,” 66–75.
58 Ahmetbeyzade, “Kurdish Nationalism in Turkey,” 187–210.
59 Smits and Gündüz-Hoşgör, “Linguistic Captial,” 829–53.
60 Cindoğlu and Unal, “Gender and Sexuality,” 50.
61 Day, “The Politics of Poverty,” 24–6.
62 Gümüş and Gümüş, “Achieving Gender Parity”; Ilker, “The Capitalist Function”; O’Dwyer et al., “Expanding Educational Access”; Somuncu, “Achieving Universal.”
63 In 2014, the state support for the boys was 20 Turkish liras (about 10 US dollars at the time).
64 Mojab, “Vengeance and Violence”; Hassanpour, “The (Re)production of Patriarchy.”
65 Yüksel-Kaptanoğlu and Ergöçmen, “Early Marriage,” 1719–20.