"The Family, Feminism, and the State during the
Transkript
"The Family, Feminism, and the State during the
Zafer Toprak, "The Family, Feminism, and the State during the Young Turk Period, 1908-1918," in Première Rencontre Internationale sur l'Empire Ottoman et la Turquie Moderne, İstanbul-Paris, Éditions ISIS, 1991, s. 441-452. The Family, Feminism, and the State during the Young Turk Period, 1908-1918 Zafer Toprak In considering the family in an historical context, one has to take into consideration the interaction between families and the social structures in which they are imbedded. The family as part of the diversity of social milieus, affects the latter while these, in turn contribute to mutations in domestic organization. It may be argued that the dynamics of this interrelation originate in large part within social 1 structures. The processes of social change induce modifications in the constitution of the family more often than the latter stimulates the former. Fundamental changes in the organization of society may bring about, in the long run, basic changes in the structure of domestic units, as in the cases of the French Revolution or of the Soviet one. In both instances, family life shifted from the private into the purview of the public realm. Although the idea of the family as the germ-cell of the state has only limited justification from an actual historical point of view, one observes that the "bourgeois family" and its accompanying way of life emerge in the politico-social discourse of the nineteenth century as the main pillar of "bourgeois society". In fact, a host of sociologists in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries even tended to see the state as the sum total of families in an organicist way. In the solidarist milieus of France of that period, from which Ottoman-Turkish learned men deduced their social models, domestic organization and domestic ethics occupied paramount importance. The family has always been described as one of the basic values to which the "bourgeoisie" pays great homage. This has been especially true in years of crisis. State-family interplay gathered particular momentum in the inter-war years of the twenties and thirties. The authoritarian regimes of the continent led the way in this context. The prosperity of the nation in these countries required the well-being of the family. The emphasis on state and statism in the first half of the twentieth century did in fact enlarge the realms of the government in most countries. State policies very often encompassed domestic units of the society, and the private milieu of family life was brought into the fold of the state through numerous governmental measures. The interaction between family and state was one of the main concerns of governments during the Young Turk period (1908-1918) and again in the Singleparty era (1923-1946) of Republican Turkey. Sociology as a newcomer to Ottoman intellectual life influenced the making of the Turkish nation-state and provided for its ideologues clues about the social prerequisites of a new society. "New Life" (Yeni Hayat), as formulated by ideologues of the Committee on Union and Progress, the Unionists, as we shall call them, required radical changes in the cultural norms and social structures of Ottoman society. Women and family in particular were brought onto the agenda of the new regime as main items of concern during this period. At the same time political and social changes in late Ottoman society brought about alterations in the structure of the family, especially in Istanbul and the major metropolitan centers of the Empire. The rising constitutionalism of the pre2 World War I years challenged to some degree the old Ottoman family structure, as the libertarian atmosphere of the period led to a metamorphosis in the concept of family in Turkish society. In the early years of the Young Turk period, a new ideological framework was developed in line with the emerging nationalism of the time. According to this new outlook, patriarchalism had to be replaced by partnership within the family because the tenets of the 1908 revolution required "liberty, equality and fraternity". The nuclear family based on partnership was seen as the model family, one that would emerge from and also lead to the emancipation of women. Indeed, feminism and the "New Family" (Yeni Aile) or the "National Family" (Milli Aile), as the Unionists put it, went hand in hand during the Young Turk period.[1] Sociology, or sociologism became a basic tool for the Unionists to understand the milieu within which societies evolved. They assigned to it the paramount task of discovering the hierarchy of social groups. This was indispensable for their nonconflictual, consensual model of society, one in which the various collectivities and their norms had to be in harmony.[2] The family as a solidarity group in a sociological sense was one of the main concerns of the Unionist solidarists. The history of the Turkish family, made its debut during that time in the writings of Ziya Gökalp, the founder of Turkish sociology. He devoted more than a dozen scholarly articles, mainly in Yeni Mecmua and Milli Tetebbu'lar Mecmuası, to the historical evolution of the Turkish family.[3] Halim Sabit was another social historian who dealt with the same topic in his "History of the Family".[4] Gökalp highlights three kinds of social groups: family groups, occupational groups, and political groups. As independent and self-sufficient collectivities, political groups occupy the most important place in this classification. Family groups and occupational groups are integrated within political groups. Political groups are seen as social organisms, having a life of their own. Family groups are the cells and occupational groups are the organs of this organism. Therefore, family groups and occupational groups are called secondary groups. Social solidarity, for Gökalp, is the cement of a non-conflictual, consensual society. The collective conscience, the basis of solidarity in a Durkheimian sense requires common norms, including national-patriotic, occupational, familial, civil-individual, and international moralities. National-patriotic morality means for Gökalp among other things a commitment to human rights and to feminism. As for family morality, or the morality of the "cell", which is a part of his "Moral Turkism" (Ahlâki Türkçülük), equality and liberty should be the main criteria. Family morality, based on old Turkish cultural values, concerns such norms such as those 3 relating to communal property in land, to democracy in the "conjugal family" as opposed to the autocracy of the "patriarchal family", to the inviolability of residence, to the equality of men and women, and to monogamy. As was true with most of the other latecomers to nationalism, the Turks also had to rely on their ancient past as an ideological underpinning to the future. Young Turk ideologues argued that Turks used to enjoy higher standards in the pre-Islamic period and that the ancient family structure and sexual morality of the Turks had disappeared over the centuries. They believed that the status of Turkish women had declined as a result of the encounter with Iranian and Byzantine civilizations. And they argued that under those circumstances Turks had been unable to live up to their ancient endogenous egalitarian principles. The condition of Turkish women in particular worsened rapidly under alien influence. They were made to wear the veil and were kept in seclusion. Their education was neglected and their legal status within marriage deteriorated. According to Gökalp, with the coming of Turkish nationalism, the revival of and return to old Turkish precepts would be inevitable. Gökalp promoted the idea of the nuclear family based on egalitarian principles, one upholding the components of national morality as he saw it, as the most appropriate for modern Turkish society. The cell of the social organism and the building-block of the nationstate that needed to be reconstructed was, he argued, the nuclear family. In Gökalp's teaching feminism has an especially important place: it is the motor force lying behind the nuclear family. In his emphasis on Turkish national culture rather than on Islamic sources of social morality, he retrospectively by-passes the Islamic period in order to acquaint himself with and build upon the mythological sagas of Central Asian Turks. Feminism, in his view, originates with the Central Asian Turks. The status of women in the Turkish Central Asian past was equal to that of men. The Khan and the Hatun had equal rights in executive authority and a decree of the Khan alone would not be obeyed without the consent of the Hatun. Only a decree issued in the names of both had legitimacy. An ambassador could be given an audience only when the Khan was seated with the Hatun on his left. Laws and customs required the Hatun's presence at political councils, religious ceremonies, and assemblies for war and peace. In Gökalp's account, monogamy also was the rule among the ancient Turks. Although women called "kuma", a type of concubine, could be part of the old Turkish household, they did not enjoy the rights and privileges of actual wives. Houses belonged equally to husbands and wives, and the custody of children could be assigned to the mother as well as to the father. After embracing Islam, the Turks kept their old customs for a considerable time. In fact Ibn Batuta, who 4 travelled widely in the Turkish world, described in his writing the equality of men and women among Turks unfettered by outside influences. This view was supported by late nineteenth and early twentieth century ethnographic research read by Gökalp and his colleagues. Although the ancient Turkish family is his ideal model, Gökalp does in fact also appreciate early Islamic advances in family life. He writes that in the ancient preIslamic Arab family the birth of a girl was regarded as a dishonor for the father and that female infanticide was common. Arabs could then marry any number of women and divorce them at their will. With the coming of Islam, female infanticide was outlawed. The number of wives was limited to four and even this upper limit was legitimate only if the husband could ensure equal treatment for all. Islamic law considered marriage as a contract for which the consent of parties was needed. Women were protected in case of divorce through the payment of dowry and an indemnity. Unless there was a major cause such as misconduct or dishonesty, divorce was not approved by Islamic family law. Although Islam required the obedience of wives to their husbands, it was at the same time an obligation of the husband to treat his wife or wives decently. In fact, according to Gökalp, when compared to the pre-Islamic period in Arabia, Islam brought about considerable reforms in family life. According to Gökalp feminism originated with the Turks. He considers democracy and feminism to be the foundation-stones of ancient Turkish life. He argues that modern Turkish nationalists must adopt feminism and restore the dignity of womanhood and the family. In this endeavor, Gökalp directs Turkish nationalists to turn to the tolerance of their ancient past for inspiration. Feminism in nineteenth and twentieth century Turkey developed with the rise of nationalism. Turkish nationalists considered themselves to be both populists and feminists. Turkish nationalist ideology regarded the emancipation of women as one of the most important prerequisites of the larger social revolution (ictimaî inkılâb) which was brought to the agenda of the Unionists following the 19O8 (Young Turk) political revolution. The Young Turk period was a time of rising aspirations for women. Seclusion and veiling were challenged. Ottoman women became increasingly more integrated into public life. Fashionable women began to substitute a thin veil for the traditional covering.[5] A few years later the veil no longer covered the face but was thrown off to one side and the fabric was no longer always black. During World War I, many women simply wore a scarf and no veil. Discrimination in education was lifted with the coming to power of a number of enlightened 5 ministers of the time.[6] And women were allowed to attend schools of higher education. In 1914 a university for women (İnas Darülfununu) was founded.[7] It provided a three-year course in literature, mathematics, and natural sciences. In January 1918, segregation between the sexes at the university ended as women attended the same lectures as men.[8] This change was confirmed by a decree issued in September 1921 by the Board of Administration of university. Coeducation was first initiated in the science and literature departments; later, during 1921-1922, the Faculty of Law began to admit female students; and in 1922-1923, the Medical School followed suit. In 1917 a commercial college was opened exclusively for women [9] as well as a fine arts school and a school of music. In 1918 several Muslim women joined the Istanbul theater school for the first time. [10] The Young Turk period also witnessed the burgeoning of a host of women's associations.[11] Most of them had philanthropic aims.[12] As wars followed one upon the other, women's associations provided social services for the needy, raised funds for the Red Crescent, nursed the wounded, and collected garments for soldiers. The Women's Section of the Red Crescent Society (Osmanlı Hilal-i Ahmer Cemiyeti Kadınlar Heyet-i Merkezisi)[13], the Society for Aid to Needy Soldiers' Families (Muhtac Asker Ailelerine Muavenet Cemiyeti) and the Ottoman Women's Committee for the National Defense (Mudafaa-i Milliyye Osmanlı Hanımlar Heyeti)[14] were the leading philanthropic societies. Apart from these philanthropic associations, there were others with feminist goals. Their motto was the betterment of the conditions of women. They aimed at educating women, creating business opportunities for them, modernizing their way of living and their dress, teaching them the arts, etc. There was even an attempt to establish a teachers' union. The Women's Section of the Union and Progress (Ittihat ve Terakki Kadınlar Şubesi), the Society for the Protection of Women (Kadınları Esirgeme Derneği), the Society for the Elevation of Women (Teali-i Nisvan Cemiyeti), [15] the Society for Defense of Women's Rights (Müdafaa-i Hukuk-ı Nisvan Cemiyeti), and The Ottoman Islamic Association for the Employment of Women (Osmanlı Kadınlari Çalıştırma Cemiyet-i İslamiyesi)[16] were among the major feminist organizations of the time. The Society for the Elevation of Women was founded in 19O8 by Halide Edip, the most eminent female writer of the period. This society was in close contact with the British suffragette movement [17] and provided educational facilities for its members [18]. The Society for the Defense of Women's Rights was the most radical of the women's associations of the time. Its main concern was the economic emancipation of women by finding them decent jobs in the public sector as well as in factories[19] The first Ottoman woman to work in 6 an office was Bedra Osman Hanim, a member of the Society for the Defense of Women's Rights. Her first attempt at getting employment at the Telephone Company of Istanbul was a failure. But thanks to a campaign carried out by the Society, and to public opinion created by the Kadınlar Dünyasi (Women's World ) - a publication of the same society - the company felt itself obliged to employ female telephone operators. This was the beginning. Others followed suit. But the most radical change came with World War I. The war and the human losses at the fronts created a labor vacuum. [20] Due to a shortage in manpower, women were invited to enter professions hitherto regarded as the exclusive domain of men. They were employed as national governmental and municipal clerks, as factory workers, as street cleaners, and even as barbers in many districts of Istanbul.[21] Women from the outskirts of Istanbul brought their products to the city to market them. There was even a bazaar in Galata, earmarked exclusively for women merchants.[22] The First Army in Istanbul initiated Women Workers' Brigades and trained them for support services.[23] The Fourth Army in Syria under the command of Cemal Paşa organized a Women's Battalion to provide farmhands for agricultural production in the Çukurova Region.[24] By the end of World War I, large numbers of women had been integrated into the social and economic life of the country. The poverty-stricken, isolated Ottoman women had no choice but to seek employment to survive as their men, who had hitherto provided for the household, were called to arms.[25] Parallel to the changes in the status of women, economic and social disorder inflicted by the Balkan Wars and World War I brought about a moral crisis and the loosening of old family ties.[26] The number of Muslim prostitutes increased rapidly during this period.[27] Syphilis was quite widespread. The Unionist government had to adopt a liberal code providing medical care to prostitutes. Medical surveillance became obligatory. The maintenance of the brothels was put under the control of the municipal government and the general directorate of police.[28] A by-law legalized prostitution for the first time in Ottoman history.[29] It was such circumstances that the family became a political issue for the Unionist government. In fact, the idea of a "National Family", immune to all the malaises of the epoch, occupied the forefront of the social concerns of the period. The "New Family" or the "National Family", as it was known, sponsored by the Unionists, was in essence the companionate nuclear family. The Unionists welcomed the replacement of large patriarchal families by small monogamic ones. During this period, marriage ceased being purely a religious affair. The new family law 7 enacted in 1917, encouraging monogamy, paved the way for a secular family code.[30] At the same time, the Unionists put into effect a pro-natalist policy following the rapid decline in population due to the successive wars. Stateengineered marriages were introduced. The Ottoman Islamic Association for the Employment of Women established by Enver Paşa, published matchmaking advertisements in the newspapers. The candidates whose names were listed in the ads with detailed personal information about them were also introduced to one another in the offices of the Association.[31] Theatrical wedding ceremonies were staged in order to encourage would-be candidates.[32] Brides were provided with a trousseau. A lump sum financial assistance, of up to fifty Ottoman liras, was distributed to newly-wed couples. Bride and groom had their salaries increased by 20 per cent. In addition each new birth was awarded with another 20 per cent salary increase. Indeed, quasi-mandatory marriage became part of the official policy at the time.[33] The Association fixed upper age limits in order to pressure people to marry early. Women and men were expected to marry by 21 and 25 respectively. Those who either could not find an eligible spouse or who refused the candidates provided through the Association by that age had their salaries reduced by fifteen per cent and lost their membership. The last sanction could result in unemployment, as jobs were provided through the Association. The "National Family" as the Unionists saw it, however, did not imply a bona fide reproduction of the "European family" or the "modern family" of the West. In this context, the Unionists made a distinction between culture which was indigenous and civilization which could be international in scope. In their view, family structure was part of the culture of a people and had to remain indigenous. Hence, the Turkish "National Family" could not imitate the types of family in other nations. Gökalp, the architect of the idea of the "National Family", cautioned the Unionists on this point. According to Gökalp, the Ottoman family as an institution had been undergoing severe crises since the beginning of the Tanzimat period. Many Ottoman intellectuals failed, he believed, to see the fundamental differences between the progress of civilization and the growth of cultures. The westernizers, on the one hand emphasizing the importance of progress, by-passed the existence of a national culture. They blindly imitated Europeans in matters of the "National Family" as they strove to acquire "modern", that is European family patterns. Traditionalists, on the other hand, feared the disintegration of the traditional family and the ensuing chaos in the relationship of the sexes that might result. Hence, they 8 opposed the modern family and the modern conception of womanhood. Traditionalist writers, such as Mustafa Sabri, Mehmet Akif and Said Halim, praised polygamy as well as seclusion and veiling of women. In their view, classical patterns of sex differences provided for social unity and cohesion. Proponents of the "National Family" rejected both of these "extremist" views. The new Turkish family would be modernized by the introduction of new concepts from European civilization. But this did not mean that the Turkish family would imitate family patterns in various European countries. As with all social organisms, Gökalp and his colleagues believed that the Turkish family too, would have to pursue its own the path of evolution. Certain components of public society might be borrowed from Europeans since Ottoman progress would inevitably follow the lines of European civilization. But the same route could never be adopted for the cultural course that the Turkish family would take. Turkish culture could grow only from within by an inner logic and in accordance with changes taking place in social structure and in civic and political organization. Hence, the "National Family" idea put forward by the Unionists was conceived of as a panacea for the salvation of Ottoman society. Unionist intellectuals in search of national identity relied upon the family as the germ-cell of the nation-state and family morality as the source of national solidarity. The Unionist intervention into the private realm of the family was partly due to the concerns of the new regime for the future of the state. The political revolution of 1908 could only succeed, they believed if accompanied by a "social revolution" (ictimai inkılâb), the foundation of which was the "New Life." The revolutionary discourse of the Young Turks emphasizing egalitarian principles, paved the way for Ottoman feminism. The Unionists attempted to hasten this transformation through the adoption of a new family model. It is within such a context that the "National Family", highlighting the status of women became the slogan of the Young Turk ideologues. The Young Turk ideologues believed that it was necessary for the state to intervene on behalf of the revolution in order to clear the ground for a new type of social organization. This necessitated a new family morality that would be in harmony with the public morality of the nation-state. The sociological discourse of Ziya Gökalp and his colleagues was oriented toward laying the conceptual framework for that social organization. The interconnections drawn between the "New Life," the "National Family," and feminism during the Young Turk decade were manifestations of the social organizational component of Unionist ideology. 9 In sum, during the Young Turk Period a new conception of womanhood and familial living was introduced in the Ottoman Empire. Ottoman society did, in this respect, undergo a radical transformation, a change occasioned both by the intellectual environment of Young Turk family ideology and Ottoman feminism, as well as by the social and demographic changes of the war era. REFERENCES 1. Among the many books and booklets on Ottoman feminism and the family, are the following: Halil Hamid, İslamiyette Feminizm yahud Alem-i Nisvanda Musavat-ı Tamme, Dersaadet: Keteon Matbaası, 1328; Baha Tevfik (from Odette Lacquerre), Feminizm - Alem-i Nisvan (Teceddüd-i İlmi ve Felsefi Kütüphanesi), Dersaadet: n.d. (with a chapter on Islam and Feminism "İslamiyet ve Feminizm"); Ahmed Rıza, Vazife ve Mes'uliyet 3. cüz: Kadın, (published by the Union and Progress Party in Paris), 1324; Halil Hamid, Dünkü, Bügünkü, Yarınkı Kadın,İstanbul: Necm-i İstikbal Matbaasi, 1334; Kasım Emin'den Zeki Magamez, Hürriyet-i Nisvan, Istanbul: Matbaa-i Hayriye ve Şürekasi, 1329/1331; Ahmed Mümtaz, Mevki-i Nisvan Hakkında Nazariyyat ve Hakâyik, Istanbul: Mürettibin-i Osmaniye Matbaası, 1325; Celal Nuri, Kadınlarımız, İstanbul: Matbaa-i İctihad, 1331; Salahaddin Asım, Türk Kadınlığının Tereddisi yahud Karılaşmak, İstanbul: Resimli Kitap Matbaası, n.d; Kadınlarımızın İctimaları, İstanbul:Tanin Matbaası, 1329; Ahmed Cevad, Bizde Kadın, Dersaadet: Kader Matbaası, 1328; Erkeklerle Kadın Arasında Musavat Olabilir mi? İstanbul: 1333: Fatma Aliye, Nisvan-i İslam., İstanbul, 1309; Nazım, İslamHanımlari ve Alem-i İslamiyette Hayat-i Aile, Istanbul: 1318. 2. Taha Parla, The Social and Political Thought of Ziya Gökalp1876-1924, Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1985, pp. 59-62. 3. Basically "Aile Ahlâkı -1- Semiye," Yeni Mecmua, vol. 1, no. 10, 13 Eylül 1333, pp. 181-186; "-2- Ocak", Ibid., no. 11, 20 Eylül 1333, pp. 201-206; "-3- Konak," Ibid., no. 12, 27 Eylül 1333, pp. 221-223; Ibid., no 13, 4 Teşrin-i evvel 1333, pp. 241-245; Ibid., no 14, 11 Teşrin-i evvel 1333, pp. 261-265; Ibid, no 15, 18 Teşrin-i evvel 1333, pp. 301-304; "-4- Konaktan Yuvaya," Ibid., no. 17, 1 Teşrin-i sani 1333, pp. 321-324; "Gevşek Yuva," Ibid., 8 Teşrin-i sani 1333, pp. 341343; "Şövalye Aşkı ve Feminizm," Ibid., no. 19, 15 Teşrin-i sani 1333, pp. 361364; "Asri Aile ve Milli Aile," Ibid., no. 21, 29 Teşrin-i sani 1333, pp. 381-383; "Düğün Adetleri," Ibid., no. 21, 29 Teşrin-i sani 1333, pp. 421-424; "Türk Ailesinin Temelleri," Ibid., no. 23, 13 Kanun-ı evvel 1333, pp. 441-444; "Eski 10 Türklerde Ictimai Teşkilat", Milli Tetebbu'lar Mecmuası, no. 3, 7 Ağustos 1331, pp. 388-456. 4. Halim Sabit, "Aile Tarihi - Islamiyetten Evvel ve Sonra -1-", Yeni Mecmua, no 23, 13 Kanun-ı evvel 1917, pp. 453-456; "-2-", Ibid, no. 24, 20 Kanun-i evvel 1917, pp. 461-464; -3-", 27, 10 Kanun-ı sani 1918, pp. 13-15; "-4-", Ibid, no. 29, 24 Kanun-ı sani 1918, pp. 48-54. 5. Osman Ergin, "Kadın Hayatında İnkılab: Kadının örtüyü atması ve tedrisi, idari ve teşrii hayata atılması," Türkiye Maarif Tarihi, vol. 5, Istanbul, 1977, pp. 187919O6. 6. Hasan Ali Koçer, "Turkiye'de Kadın Eğitimi," Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 5, no. 1-2 (1972): also in Eğitim Sorunlarımız Üzerine İncelemeler ve Düşünceler, Ankara: 1974, pp. 1-64. 7. The idea of a university for women was put forward in 19O8 by Seniha Nezahet, "Hanımlara Mahsus bir Darülfunun," Aşiyan, vol. 1, no.13, 27 Teşrin-i sani 1324, pp. 419-426. 8. M. "Şu'un: Darülfünun ve Kadın Meselesi." Türk Yurdu, 7,no. 2, 16 Kanun-i sani 1334, p. 66. 9. "Hanımlara Ticaret Dersleri," Iktisadiyyat Mecmuası, no. 65, 27 Eylül 1333, p. 8. 10. For the activities of women in Anatolia, see: "Kastamonu Osmanlı Hanımlar İş Yurdu," Türk Yurdu, vol. 11, no.9, 22 Kanun-ı evvel 1332, p. 152; "Anadolu Türk Kadınlarının Faaliyeti," Türk Yurdu, vol.9. no.4, 22 Tesrini evvel 1331, p.63; "Niğde Hanımlarının Cemiyeti," Türk Yurdu, vol. 9. no.9, 31 Kanun-ı evvel 1331, p. 142. 11. For Ottoman women's associations in general, see: Ruşen Zeki, "Bizde Hareket-i Nisvan," Nevsal-i Milli. Dersaadet: 1330, pp. 343-352 and T.Y "Türk Alemi: Türk Kadınlarınlarında Iktisadi Terakkiyat," Türk Yurdu, vol. 6, no.10, 10 Temmuz 1330, pp. 2392-2393. The World War I era is covered in, Lebib Selim, "Türk Kadınının Harb-i Umumideki Faaliyeti," Türk Yurdu, 5, vol 9, no. 3, 8 Teşrin-i evvel 331, pp. 40-42; Ibid., no.4, 22 Teşrin-i evvel 1331, pp. 55-57; Ibid., no.5, 5 Teşrin-i sani 1331, pp. 70-74. 11 12. Şişli Cemiyet-i Hayriye-i Nisvaniyye'nin Nutuk Sureti, Dersaadet: Hanri Zelic ve Şurekâsı Matbaası, 1332, pp. 1-10. 13. Osmanlı Hilal-i Ahmer Cemiyeti Hanımlar Heyet-iMerkeziyesi, İstanbul: Ahmed İhsan ve Şurekâsı Matbaası, 1330; Doktor Besim Omer, Hanimefendilere Hilal-i Ahmere dair Konferans, Istanbul: Ahmed İhsan ve Şurekâsı Matbaası, 1330. 14. For the conferences organized by the Ottoman Women's Committee for the National Defence, see: Kadınlarımızın Ictimaları (Darülfünun Konferans Salonunda) Müdafaa-i Milliye Kitaplari, lstanbul: Tanin Matbaasi, 1329. The female orators at the conferences were Fatma Aliye, Gülsüm Kemalova, Fehime Nuzhet, Nakiye, Zühre, Firdevs, Naciye, and Halide Edib. 15. On the activities of the Society for the Elevation of Women see, "Haftalık Havadis: Kadınlarımız için," Halka Doğru, no. 29-30, 23 Teşrin-i evvel 1329, p. 235. 16. For the regulations of the association see, Kadınları Çalıştırma Cemiyet-i İslamiyesi - Nizammname, Dersaadet: Matbaa-ı Askeriyye, 1332. For the activities see, "Kadınları Çalıştırma Cemiyet-i İslamiyesi", Iktisadiyyat Mecmuası, no. 23, 28 Temmuz 1332, p.7; "Kadınları Çalıştırma Cemiyet-i İslamiyesi Hakkında," Ibid., no. 27, 1 Eylül 1332, p.7; and; Ibid., no. 55 10 Mayıs 1333, s. 7.17. "Kadınlar Kongresi ve Osmanli Kadınlari," Yeni Gazete, 22 Haziran 1909, p.4; "Beynelmilel Kadınlar Kongresi ve Hakem Usulu," Ibid., 24 Haziran 1909, p.3. 18. "Beyanname: Teali-i Nisvan'dan Sevgili Milletlerine," Tanin, 11 Teşrin-i evvel 1911. 19. For Ottoman women in industry see, İbrahim Pertev. "Memleketimizde İşçilik ve Kadın," Sanayi, no. 34, 15 Haziran 1334, p. 91. 20. The demographic problem is treated in "Nüfus Meselesi," Dersaadet Ticaret Odası Gazetesi, no. 1237, 7 Mayıs 1332, p. 105-106. 21. See, "Kadınların Muharebeden İstifadeleri," Sabah, 13 Teşrin-i evvel 1917, p.3; "Kadınlarımızdan da Amele," Sanayi, no. 11, 31 Mart 1333, p. 32; "Izmir'de Kadın Tanzifat Amelesi," İktisadiyyat Mecmuasi, no. 55, 10 Mayıs 1333, p. 7; "İktisadi Haberler: Şehremaneti'nde Kadın Memurlar," Ibid., no. 53, 26 Nisan 1333, p. 7. 22. "Kadın Tüccarlar Pazarında," Vakit, 11 Kanun-ı sani 1918,p. 2. 12 23. On the Women Workers Brigades see, "Birinci Kadın İşçi Taburu," Vakit, 11 Şubat 1918, p. 1. For the call to the Brigades, see: "Kadınları Çalıştırma Cemiyeti'nden," Vakit, 8 Şubat 1918, p. 2. 24. For the Women's Battalion in Syria see, "L'agriculture et les femmes," Iktisadiyyat Mecmuasi, no. 54, 3 Mayıs 1333, s. 4. "....S.E. Djemal pacha, commandant en chef de la 4me armée, a décidé la création de bataillons de femmes pour le service agricole. Ces bataillons seront envoyés à Adana, Bekaa et Bissan. On donnera à ces femmes tout ce qui leur faut pour assurer la subsistance de leurs familles. Voila un nouveau pas dans la voie du progrès féminin du encore a S.E. Djemal pacha." 25. This situation is best described in a pessimistic way in a poem of Yaşar Nezihe, entitled "The Need for Bread and Coal" "Ekmek ve Kömür Ihtiyaci," Nazikter, no. 20. 15 Şubat 1919. 26. See, for example, "25 Kişilik Hırsız Kadınlar Şebekesi," Vakit, 7 Eylül 1918, s. 2. 27. For the situation with regard to prostitution see, Mustafa Galib, Fahişeler Hayatı ve Redaet-i Ahlâkiyye, Dersaadet: Mahmud Bey Matbaasi, 1338. The number of registered Muslim prostitutes during the Armistice was 774. The Ottoman Greeks were second with 691. The number of Armenian, Jewish and Russian prostitutes were 194, 124 and 171 respectively. 28. For the by-laws and the regulations on venereal diseases and brothels see: Takvim-i Vakayi (no. 2328) and Polis Mecmuası (no. 66). The main points are summarized in Halim Tevfik Alyot, Türkiye'de Zabıta (Tarihi Gelişim ve Bugünkü Durum), Ankara: Kanaat Basımevi, 1947, pp. 570-587. 29. The social problems of the Second Constitutional Period are best described in the novels and stories of the time. Huseyin Rahmi Gurpinar's novels can be consulted for the moral decadence and disintigration of Ottoman society. See, for example, Hakka Sığındik; Billur Kalp; Tebessüm-i Elem; Gönül bir Yeldeğirmenidir, Toraman, Cehennemlik, Muhabbet Tılsımı, Ben Deli miyim?, Kokotlar Mektebi, Utanmaz Adam, etc. 30. Ziyaeddin Fahri, Essai sur la transformation du code familial en Turquie. Paris: Editions Berger-Levrault, 1936, pp. 49-54. 13 31. For the comments on the ads, see: Kazım Şinasi, "Izdivac İlanlari," Yeni Mecmua, vol. 2, no. 38, 4 Nisan 1918, pp. 237-238; "İlk Izdivac Talepleri," Vakit, 21 Mart 1918, p. 1. 32. For wedding ceremonies see, "Kadınları Çalıstırma Cemiyeti Vasitasiyla Akdedilen ilk Izdivac," Vakit, 16 Mart 1918, p. 1. 33. For the procedures see, "Türklük Şu'unu: Kadınları Çalıştırma Cemiyet-i İslamiyesi'nin Muhim bir Kararı," Türk Yurdu, vol. 13, no.9, 20 Kanun-ı evvel 1333, p. 142. 14