sempozyum_bildiri_kitabi

Oya Baydar (1940) and Melek Ulagay (1946) were born during the Republican Period into
‘westernized’ educated families who were ‘appreciative of Republican values’. Oya Baydar is the
daughter of a member of the armed forces who was not promoted to be a ‘pasha’ because of his
uncompromising attitude and strong principles 2 ; Melek Ulagay, on the other hand, is the daughter of
a family that established the pharmaceutical industry in Turkey. 3 Both women benefit from an
education that is the privilege of the few. Ulagay starts her education in Notre Dame de Sion and
completes it in American Robert College and Oya Baydar is a graduate of Notre Dame de Sion.
This is followed by the years at the university. They both attend Istanbul University the Faculty of
Arts and Sciences. Baydar graduates from the sociology department and becomes a faculty member
in the department. Ulagay studies English literature. University years are pivotal for both women;
their political involvement, which will determine their respective futures, starts during these years.
As activists of socialist movement after 1968, the stories of Baydar and Ulagay ‐one more
theorising and the other militant‐ are both similar and different in certain aspects. While telling each
other what they experience they let the reader grab those similarities and differences. However,
their stories also represent the experience of women in the socialist movement which is, so far,
mentioned very little in written literature and thus live yet mostly in our collective memories.
In the narratives of Ulagay and Baydar, it is claimed that men can also find their own selves and
share it with women. Accordingly at the beginning of the book the authors state that this history of
the left is a collective history which has been narrated from the perspective of women. In their own
words; “those who belong to our generation will not be surprised at what we relate. They have all
encountered similar events and commotions. Actually, our narrative is the narrative of a
generation.” 4 Yet, they do not have any claim of objectivity or comprehensiveness. What makes this
narrative different from other male narratives is that it is written from a female perspective, which
gives credit for subjective accounts of experience.
The feminist movement and concepts such as female identity and female outlook had not found
their way into the Turkish discourse before 1980. In the 1980s and 1990s women’s issues began to be
discussed at a scope going beyond the immediate horizon of the modernization project. After the
coup d’état of 1980 and the subsequent depoliticization of Turkey, feminism appeared as the first
democratic movement. In those years books on modern feminist theories were translated into
Turkish leading to more intensive debates on women’s problems.
Not very different from Republican ideology the socialist politics of the time did also not
distinguish between men and women and according to the ideology of the time when socialism was
established the problems of women would be solved along with the other social problems. It is on
these grounds that the writers’ account of the past in the light of today’s consciousness is crucially
important. Looking retrospectively back at the period and the widespread arguments of the left then,
the writers imply that the women’ issue of liberation is simply postponed to an unknown future.
Another important point related to women is that in the socialist movement, as it was in the
nationalist movement, women often played a secondary role. In Melek Ulagay’s words “women were
relegated to secondary roles. Although there were a few women who contributed significantly to the
socialist movement, yet the majority was relegated to the background. Women were used in menial
jobs as it was believed that they could not be successful in intellectual activities. This aroused a
strong reaction in me.” As for Oya Baydar it can be said that she is rather realistic, she says: “being an
academic, the situation was different for me. However on second thoughts men were still dominant.”
And she continues: