Human angle
“Freedom of dress” - or an affront to science?
The “turban” question has been presented as an issue of freedom of dress at Turkish universities and in public places in Turkey, and also at educational institutions in Western European societies. In this context, it has been put before the European Court of Human Rights (EHCR). But the decision of the EHCR has not satisfied the expectations of the protagonists, and the matter remains on the agenda.
I will take up the issue mainly from the standpoint of the Turkish society. I am of the opinion that the core of the issue is not a “will for freedom”. On the contrary, I believe this is a guise used by various trends and movements which are in fact the enemies of thought, research and questioning, of science and freedom, and of democracy - especially the human rights of women.
The issue has not been sufficiently discussed from the standpoint of the attributes which ought to characterise the educational and scientific institutions and public areas of a democratic order. All anti-democratic movements declare that there is only one truth, and that the truth is whatever they say themselves. In the case of the so-called turban, they view women as incomplete beings. Yet these attitudes are ignored by public opinion, and they are able to present captivity as freedom, darkness as clarity and obscurantism as knowledge.
Legitimising inequality
If a single foreign word is capable of creating so much noise in our society and at the higher educational institutions, the main reason is that the majority of the political parties and organs of mass communications have failed to explain to society the decisions of the Turkish Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights approving the prohibition of this form and dress. Instead, they openly or implicitly support a manner of dress which is symbolic of a repressive and dark world view. This in itself should gives us all food for thought.
There is a view that women are not equal citizens and human beings, but sexual objects, unequal with men, incapable of protecting their own honour or selecting their own husband, unfit to carry out certain professions or to take part in sports. This is the message carried by a form of covering the head. And what is being demanded is the “freedom” to display this in higher education institutions and public areas.
This is not a question of freedom of dress, but it part of an anti-democratic trend which seeks to destroy the environment of free education and training in scientific and educational institutions, and to legalise inequality of men and women – a trend which is happy to take advantage of democracy only to destroy it.
Democratic education
Educational institutions should be established and function on the basis of scientific criteria. Within this spirit, it is out of the question for instructors or students to think and act out of a concept of “unchangeable truth” or “prohibited questions”. In science, there is no knowledge that has reached its final point. Accordingly, no one has the right to tell the educational institutions: “I already have the full and unchangeable knowledge of the truth. There is no other truth”. On the contrary, every instructor and student should always remember:
a) to act objectively - in other words, even though findings may not be in line with their beliefs or views, they should recognize and abide by them completely and promptly.
b) to remember that the truth never repeats itself exactly - in other words, life does not follow beliefs and views, but beliefs and views should follow life.
c) To be open-minded and be of a spiritual disposition which is ready to learn the justifications of those who have different thoughts and beliefs.
No place in which these criteria, which constitute the basics of science, are not respected, can be qualified as a scientific or educational institution. Rather, such a place can only be described as a repressive institution based on unilateral conditioning. History shows that repressive organisations based on silencing the free mind, so indispensable for the independent existence and prosperity of the society, have frequently caused divisions and conflicts in the lives of nations.
Learning or prejudice?
While instructors and students of educational and scientific institutions are required to have open minds, the “turban” campaign seeks to introduce prejudice to the universities – prejudice against the equality of men and women, and prejudice against scientific thought. The campaign seeks to do this quite blatantly. Democracy necessitates not that efforts to destroy the atmosphere of scientific research and discussion atmosphere should be presented as a requirement for democracy, but that those hostels, cells or camps where these prejudices are injected into young people should be done away with!
In an atmosphere where symbols are used to thrust prejudices into the eyes of young people, students and instructors who hold differing views are deprived of the opportunity to communicate peacefully, and come under pressure to divide into camps. Those who make clear their beliefs and ideologies are effectively saying, “I came here not to learn something from other people, but to declare and spread the unchangeable truth that I know.”
If the obsession with covering heads is tolerated and rewarded, then every kind of obsession may start to appear at our educational and scientific institutions in the form of clothing, colours, emblems and badges denoting different faiths, sects or orders. Equally, if, during their school years, children and young people are not trained as members of the same nation, but continuously display their differences and fail to communicate, they will be unable to achieve social co-operation and solidarity as adults, and will not contribute to national peace, freedom, independence or international peace.
Public places
The same drawbacks are valid for other public areas. It is evident that a citizen who do not share the same belief or ideology with a security official, a judge, a public prosecutor or lawyer, a health official or a lecturer – and who announces his or her belief or ideology through clothing or other symbols - will not have confidence in them, and the field of public service will be a place of disagreement rather than solidarity. Symbols opposed to the secular state order and women’s rights should also be excluded from the public appearances and politicians of politicians, who represent the nation, and whose behaviour, moreover, sends messages to their own communities and others, at home and abroad. After all, the Republic gave Turkish women equal status as citizens before a number of European countries.
The most efficient way to divide young people into camps or shut them up in ghettos is to destroy their opportunities to talk and communicate. Those who qualify people who do not think and act exactly like themselves as harmful and violators of their sacred values, and who make this clear with the symbols they carry, obstruct these communications. “An intolerant person feels under pressure unless he pressurizes those who do not think and believe the way he does! Therefore, tolerance towards intolerance should not reach the level of consenting to be a sheep to the slaughter.” (Atatürk, Yurttaþ Ýçin Medeni Bilgiler – Civil Information for Citizens)
Islam and freedom
Terrorism is regarded as a major threat by the Western world, which regards it as “Islamic”. The way to defeat this phenomenon is not to pursue strategies based on contradictory concepts such as “moderate Islam”. This approach only makes it possible to support anti-democratic and medieval political structures, and facilitates the use of religion for selfish benefits. What is called for instead is a strategy which demonstrates that Islam is not a religion incompatible with the order of freedom and the scientific way of thinking. With respect to the “turban”, this means that:
a) Islam does not describe woman as an incomplete being, who cannot protect her own innocence, or sexual object.
b) Islam does not espouse irrational ideas about the magical effects of strands of hair or pieces of cloth.
c) Islam views woman and man as equal, and sees woman as a human being possessing every right and capability, and able to carry out any profession and participate in every activity, whether in administration, sports or the arts.
Such a strategy will give Muslim people self-confidence in an era marked by science and freedom, and will remove the obstacles on the path towards a real development and modernization process. The recent riots in Western Europe show how important this dimension of the issue is.
The best solution
Properly considered, the principles of the scientific method also constitute the standards of legitimacy of the democratic order. It is therefore absolutely necessary that all kinds of behaviour which obstruct the scientific way of thinking and democratic public order, clothing included, should be kept outside the whole public domain, including educational and scientific institutions, without any discrimination.
(DIPLOMAT - December 2005 - Ankara)