private and public use of the living room - Bilkent University
private and public use of the living room - Bilkent University
private and public use of the living room - Bilkent University
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
The ho<strong>use</strong>wife who continually rearranges her furniture has become a well-<br />
worn stereotype. Even among liberated, young, working couples decorating<br />
remains primarily a female activity. In our culture a nice home reflects a<br />
good home-maker, a good wife, a good mo<strong>the</strong>r <strong>and</strong> so, a good woman<br />
(Loyd, 1975, p. 12).<br />
Ano<strong>the</strong>r study that reveals <strong>the</strong> male <strong>and</strong> female differences in housing experiences<br />
shows that <strong>the</strong> personalization <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ho<strong>use</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> symbolization <strong>of</strong> self in <strong>the</strong><br />
ho<strong>use</strong> are female actions <strong>and</strong> men avoid <strong>the</strong>m (Cooper, 1974). Men especially avoid<br />
personalization <strong>of</strong> spaces <strong>use</strong>d commonly in <strong>the</strong> ho<strong>use</strong> like <strong>the</strong> <strong>living</strong> <strong>room</strong>. Hall<br />
(1987) also states <strong>the</strong> division <strong>of</strong> space in <strong>the</strong> ho<strong>use</strong> as “ladies <strong>and</strong> gentlemen” (p.<br />
91) <strong>and</strong> defines <strong>public</strong> life as men, <strong>and</strong> <strong>private</strong> life, <strong>the</strong> home as women. Hunt<br />
(1989) claims that <strong>the</strong> home worker (ho<strong>use</strong> wife) creates an artistic expression<br />
through <strong>the</strong> arrangement <strong>of</strong> domestic furnishing <strong>and</strong> style <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> home.<br />
Cross (1997) states that in <strong>the</strong> suburbs, men oscillate between <strong>the</strong> <strong>of</strong>fice, <strong>the</strong> city<br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> feminine, domestic world <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ho<strong>use</strong>. According to Cross (1997), <strong>the</strong><br />
dominance <strong>of</strong> women in <strong>the</strong> personalization <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ho<strong>use</strong> becomes stronger in <strong>the</strong><br />
suburbs where; “… it was primarily <strong>the</strong> woman who orchestrated domestic<br />
consumption. She worked with purchased goods <strong>and</strong> transformed <strong>the</strong>m into<br />
displays <strong>of</strong> status <strong>and</strong> into individual expressions <strong>of</strong> familial privacy <strong>and</strong> comfort<br />
throughout <strong>the</strong> ho<strong>use</strong>” (p. 118). Increased hours <strong>of</strong> shopping even compete with<br />
recreation activities (Cross, 1997). This situation is quite <strong>the</strong> same in Turkey as<br />
Ayata (2002) reveales that <strong>the</strong> suburban life is gendered; women display <strong>the</strong> status<br />
<strong>of</strong> family through consumption <strong>and</strong> homemaking. Men are pleased to display <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
28