Being a man in Turkey

Sunday, December 11, 2005

For reasons unknown to me, literary journals in Turkey are particularly fond of asking writers a run-of-the-mill question: How well do male writers understand women? Let’s for a moment turn that question the other way round: How well do female writers understand men? Is being a man in Turkey as easy as we take for granted?

  For reasons unknown to me, literary journals in Turkey are particularly fond of asking writers a run-of-the-mill question: “How well do male writers understand women?” Let s for a moment turn that question the other way round: “How well do female writers understand men?” Is being a man in Turkey as easy as we take for granted?

  Let s assume for a minute that you were born into this world as a man. The face of God s green earth is, no doubt, vast. But we all need to start from somewhere, and let s assume your starting point was Turkey. In other words, let s imagine that you were born a baby boy in some little place in this country as a citizen of Turkey. Let s then assume that you grew up learning the ways taught by the dominant gender and national ideologies. Yet, there came a time when it dawned on you that you do not belong here -- that is, you do not belong to the “manly” world surrounding you: a world where boys don t cry, effeminate men are mocked and masculinity is associated with being “tough.”

  Let s say you have no interest whatsoever in being tough or heavy-handed. It might even be said that you are “emotional,” even capable of crying from time to time. Should someone s, even a stranger s, finger get hurt, you are capable of feeling the pain on your own fingertips. Let s say you do not like militarism and that becoming a soldier is not among your objectives. What you really care and yearn for is peace. You d like to see peace everywhere, boundless equality and unfettered imagination.

  You cannot see yourself carrying a gun or giving orders to others. It is no easy task to be a “girly Ali” in our culture, though it is perfectly fine to be a “macho Fatma.” As much as society dislikes effeminate boys, it praises Amazonian girls. You know perfectly well that if and when you voice these thoughts, chances are you will be ridiculed and belittled for your softness. In a culture where men are expected to be manly, your emotionality and gentleness will be put down. You know this all too well. Nevertheless, you do not hide your thoughts or feelings. Instead, you choose to reveal the most basic fact about yourself: that you are an anti-militarist, gay Turkish man.

  Can this system, this world, accept you the way you are? Do you have any right to live in these lands? Mehmet Tarhan is a conscientious objector -- refusing to perform military service due to moral stance, political opinion or religious belief. Consciously refusing to serve in the army, he has since been taken into custody, imprisoned and segregated. The concept of being a conscientious objector is an individual act, in other words, it is a personal choice. It is recognized by international public opinion as a “right.” In accordance with his stance, Tarhan refuses to wear a military uniform and carry a gun, mainly because it is against his conscience.

  The Turkish military will definitely not be affected by Tarhan s absence. But, I don t know why, his resistance is seen as a threat to the system. That must be the case because since he declared himself a conscientious objector in 2001, he was made to pay a high price for his choice. Not only did Tarhan refuse to serve in the army he also refused to obtain a doctor s report that could have disqualified him from military service. The word we employ in Turkish in such situations is “dysfunctional.” Tarhan declined to accept this definition, arguing that being gay is not being dysfunctional. He preferred to resist.

  He ended his 35-day hunger strike in early November. Dec. 9 was solidarity-with-Mehmet Tarhan day. Numerous international civil society organizations of all sizes, especially in Europe, staged rallies. In Turkey, the activities were less vocal. That a gay activist conscientious objector is going through a series of arrests is “tiny news” in the world of macro politics, and it went mostly unnoticed.

  This is a mirror test of democracy. Those who are obsessed with being surrounded with their own mirror image, that is to say with their like-minded, whichever side of the ideological spectrum they might be on, are simply narcissistic. They are obsessed with their own image. Do you want to live with people who are exactly like you, talk exactly like you, think exactly like you? Is there any space for the “other” in your universe? In my columns many a time I have criticized those “progressives” in Turkey who are ashamed of headscarved women, thinking that they taint Turkey s image in the eyes of the West. By the same token, I condemn those “conservatives” who are ashamed of Tarhan s existence. Just like the former mindset, so does the latter mindset do poorly in the test of democracy.

  You personally may disagree with Tarhan s opinion regarding the military. But here is a point to ponder: You are given a place in the peaceful, unarmed world he envisions. Do you allot a place for him, or people like him, in the system you envision?