[VEILED TALES-1]
Headscarf is discussed, but veiled are forgotten
The headscarf is once more on the agenda. Actually this is nothing new, there have long been discussions over the issue.


Students who wear headscarves demonstrate in front of a university, in protest of their not being allowed into classes.
Yet all were made as directed by the prevalent political and media language, erasing the fact that such bans bring pain and suffering. Talking about the headscarf takes precedent over the suffering of the victims. Headscarf and victimization became two words that were not to be used together. The only movie addressing the issue is still the one shot by Mesut Uçakan in 1990. However, a lot has happened in the 17 years since then -- from rooms designated to persuade the veiled to remove their headscarves to specific sites allocated to those who want to remove their scarves.

For the defenders of the ban, there is really nothing to discuss. The veiled are the women who do not comply with the norms of the neighborhood; it is implied that they should go away. Those who stress that the headscarf should not be allowed on the grounds that it would cause further problems hold that it is something apart from the human being. Therefore, since there is nothing human about it, there should be no story to tell. The turban is the choice of those who do not want the headscarf in urban areas. Calling the headscarf a “turban” would facilitate its detachment from society and normality. Therefore banning the turban would be possible. There is no room for pain where bans are considered normal.

In short, the headscarf is a story we think we know, but really we do not. The headscarf is an issue whose human dimension we remain indifferent to. Are you aware that there is no other image out there than the stereotypical one of a young girl banned from entrance into the university building? We are here to raise awareness. Let us open our eyes and recall that the situation has affected so many other areas in women’s lives. Amid the discussions over the civilian constitution and the lifting of the headscarf ban, the dreams of the victims subject to the ban have never been mentioned. Besides the despair of the students who have been expelled from school because of their attire, the difficulties of those who had to continue their studies abroad are also overlooked. The victims of the ban remember those days with sadness.

Denied healthcare
Medine Bircan was a 71-year-old woman who was receiving cancer treatment. She was also suffering from kidney failure. She had to use a dialysis machine, however when she went for treatment, İstanbul University Hospital did not accept her health care ID bearing a veiled photo, issued by the Pension Fund. On May 10, 2002, the İstanbul University Personnel Department ordered that the relatives of university personnel had to have unveiled photos on their health care IDs. Bircan was asked to take unveiled photos for her health records and other transactions. However, Bircan was hairless because of chemotherapy. Besides, such an ill and elderly woman was unable to walk to a photographer. Her son took the veiled photo, deemed inadmissible by the university, to the photographer and asked him to turn it into an unveiled photo using Photoshop. Bircan was then entitled to receive a health care ID thanks to the doctored photo -- but she died the very same day. Following media coverage about the case, the university lifted the ban. However this was too late for many.

I received my diploma, but my father was not there to see it
Betül Üzer stood out for her exemplary grades while studying medicine at Selçuk University, however her good grades soon became meanin-gless. She was expelled from the school because she wore a headscarf. She could not bear to break the news to her father because he was undergoing cancer treatment at the time. She stayed in Konya for another year trying to figure out a way around the problem. Like many others, she decided to continue her studies in Vienna at the Vienna University School of Medicine. During her third year at the university, she received news that her father had died. She spent every remaining day at university dwelling on the fact that she was unable to be with her father in his final moments. Finally she earned her diploma, but the joyful event was tempered her father’s absence. Üzer is now trying to get the diploma recognized in Turkey. The vivid memories of her father are still with her. “His wish was to see this diploma,” she said. Meanwhile she also wonders how those who implemented this ban can sleep with a clear conscience.

Optimism carried her through
Hatice Orhan, a young medical student, was welcomed to university in 1998 by a series of police tanks there to enforce the headscarf ban. However she is endlessly optimistic and exudes a sense of serenity. Her optimism even crosses over into her dreams. “In my dream, [then-rector Kemal] Alemdaroğlu was praying; because he was distracted when he saw me, he changed rooms. I interpreted the dream as Alemdaroğlu would realize he made a mistake and the issue would be resolved in a short time. My friends laughed at me,” Orhan said.

The issue remained unresolved, but Orhan did not lose faith. She never criticized her friends who took off their headscarves, but she did not waver in her position. She would not give up on something indispensable to her for worldly benefits. Orhan sees her diploma as a bestowment by Allah. Her only sadness is for her sisters’ hopelessness, but she has faith in her creator and believes the day will come when she can realize her ambitions.

Orhan transformed her difficult experience into a process that strengthened her belief. In this respect, her story is invaluable, but not everybody is as lucky. Their outrage is understandable, their reaction entirely human.

Divorce as penalty to the veiled
Yıldız T. was an orphan girl raised by a woman who made her living as a house cleaner. Her mother had her dream fulfilled when Yıldız became a teacher. She was appointed to a school in Malatya, at which she wore a headscarf. She loved teaching and children and even helped the mothers of her students by teaching them to read and write. Meanwhile, she got married and 15 years passed. One day Yıldız was denied entrance to her school, under the new directives. Her son was insulted there on account of his mother. Yıldız was banned from practicing her profession and an investigation was opened against her husband, who was sent to Hakkari. Her husband became depressed and blamed Yıldız for all their troubles; the couple ended up divorcing.

Yıldız has been left unemployed without any benefits after 15 years of public service. She has a son in college which gives her reason to go on. To support herself and her son she opened a mobile stationery store near the school. However, the reactions from the school principal and the teachers (we may simply call this “neighborhood pressure”) she had to close it down.

She now tries to survive in a rental house and is angry with those who put her through this ordeal. She has nothing left except her rebellion. “We were taught that the state and its laws exist to provide people with peace and happiness. But it left us alone without help,” she lamented.

Not only college students are affected by the bans on the headscarf. The dreams of thousands raised in poor families and keen to work in their profession in peace were shattered by the bans. The stories are endless. Let us not look the other way.


[VEILED TALES-2]
Same prohibition aggrieves mother first, then daughter
Women who wear headscarves in the face of the headscarf ban continue to live their lives hoping for some good to happen despite the barriers set before them.


Ayşe Akbal is reliving today, through her daughter’s problems, the memories of her past. In 1983 she was not allowed to enter the faculty of dentistry at İstanbul University after coming back from her mid-year break. “A lot has changed in Turkey over the last quarter of a century; however, this regulation, which deeply affects our lives, has not,” she says.
However, life must go on, with financial problems, the depression of isolation and the regret of having been forced to miss the most vibrant period of one’s life. I read case records and stories I get from my colleagues who are lawyers. Some overt forms of discrimination can bring injustices in income distribution and social hierarchy in the face of public scrutiny. But class discrimination can be covered with the headscarf issue. I have also seen that the perception -- widely accepted by society -- that women who wear the headscarf are obeying traditional protocols for housewives does not serve to help women since it is used to deprive them of the right to study and work. Returning to the home after a difficult and painful ordeal in education or after having already experienced a successful professional life, women affected by the headscarf ban feel useless and fight with feelings of worthlessness.

From despair to hope and back again

Dürdane Ö. is a woman who has worn the headscarf since she was 12. She was once a teacher. She taught from 1991 to 2000, the year she was fired. Her headscarf significantly altered the course of her life. Growing up in a small town under harsh conditions, Dürdane had to walk for hours to get to school. She even lacked two separate outfits for winter and summer. She clearly remembers the day she was left barefoot when the sole of her shoe broke off in the mud as she walked home in knee-high snow with her summer-weather shoes. Having stitched and dried the shoe by the stove, Dürdane knew it was going to be exposed to the insistent looks of her art history teacher. At 17 years of age, Dürdane was aware that she would only be able to escape such conditions through education.

She was able to further her studies thanks to scholarships provided by the Koç Group’s Turkish Education Fund. She graduated to become a biology teacher. She felt the joy not only of earning a living but also of helping students who were unable to afford education just like she had been. She even received a master’s degree with a thesis in world literature. At that time, she was unaware that her life would turn upside down in 2000, when she was fired due to the headscarf ban introduced by the 57th government. Having fought so many obstacles with honor and dignity, Dürdane saw all her struggles come to naught because of the headscarf ban. It is now as though she is back in high school and once again unable to afford lunch. Moreover, she now has children, who she cannot fully afford to feed. She keeps wondering how she can be faced with such an obstacle because of a simple requirement of her religion and how all of her efforts and relationships over the years can be washed away by a decision from a state that claims to represent the people.

While she has tried to forget all the injustice done to her, her daughter has been faced with the same problem. From now on, such girls will not be able to pursue the dream of leading better lives than those of their mothers.

Having been barred from returning to the dental faculty at İstanbul University following a semester holiday in 1983, Ayşe Akbal experiences déjà vu through her daughter’s experiences 24 years later. Many things have changed over the past quarter century except for this ban deeply influencing their lives, she says. “Twenty-four years,” sighs her daughter, 19-year-old Nuseybe, for whom 24 years is quite a long time.

Ayşe Akbal comforts herself with one particular experience from the past. It makes her feel proud, even today. She explains: “In the early days of the prohibition the administration drew up a petition to support the ban. They asked us to sign it. The refusal of my classmates made me look to the future with hope. I am still hopeful.”

A modern paradox

Like Ayşe Akbal, some of the victims of the ban had the support of friends, which is always better than nothing. Others, however, found themselves all alone. For some, the result of this loneliness and isolation from the state and from society has been a feeling of isolation and an exaggerated promotion of the concept of “liberty” in comparison to other values. Among women wearing headscarves in the new generation these prohibitions have led to a rapid increase in the number who have turned their faces to the West, the cradle of freedom. This new generation is slowly taking its place amongst the rest of the Turkish women who wear the scarf. These young women point to the US, Austria, Britain, Holland and other countries that allow the headscarf as an extension of human rights and the principle of liberty. They now look at the “backwardness” of Muslim countries from the perspective of Westerners.

Having gone abroad because of the dilemma posed by the ban, E.G., who prefers that her full name not be printed, is a young girl who still feels lost since she returned home to find so many doors in Turkey still closed to her. She spends her time reading books, watching movies and occasionally doing translation. She is 25 and quite persistent in ignoring the fact she has not been able to find a place in her own country. She strongly disagrees with the critics of Western liberal democracies. She says: “The West shares and is able to adapt. The West works; it is broadminded. Where we are is set, whereas the West tries on what fits.” E.G. embraces many of the social manifestations of Western modernization except for issues like obscenity and family values. I find that her explanations come from an experienced and tolerant perspective even about paranoid attitudes in the West after Sept. 11. She disagrees with her fellow Turkish women who regard men with beards and women with black chadors as unwilling to adapt to the countries they now live in. But she is even understanding of this tendency. She reminds me of how the Young Turks returned home as unexpected fans of the West. Expecting these young girls, who have been prevented from exercising their basic rights, to not be influenced by a climate that does not judge them -- at least not as much as in Turkey -- would be quite simple minded. To me, understanding this post-liberal Westerner generation with a headscarf is quiet crucial. They represent an incredible paradox.

They took the exam via my class notes; I was left outside
The story of H. A., who would also prefer that her full name not be printed, reveals how headscarf discrimination is exercised arbitrarily and what kind of psychological hostility it creates. Having entered the Cerrahpaşa Medical Faculty in 1995, H.A and her friends who wore headscarves started encountering problems in their third year. Around that time, the university president, Bülent Berkarda, passed on his duty to Kemal Alemdaroğlu. She was unable to take her third year examinations because the secretary of surgery obtained the names of students who wore headscarves from the registration office and had them omitted from the examination list. Thus, H.A. and her companions were blocked from the exam despite the fact that a prior verdict was not given regarding whether they could take it with a headscarf or not. Their attempt to appeal these actions yielded no result. H.A. says: “I was left on the other side of the door of an exam I had studied hard for. My classmates, who were supposed to be good friends of mine, entered the room with my class notes in their hands. Not even one of them turned her head to look at me, which bothered me for a long time.” It was as if not only her name, but also her existence, had been erased. The young girl was exposed to many bitter events and much humiliation. She faced vengeful words from leftist professors like “once ‘you’ did not let ‘us’ in.” She was never able to make out who “you” and “us” were. Finally, she was kicked out of school due to supposed “disciplinary problems” and a poor attendance record caused by not being allowed into her classes.

On the other hand, H.A. has been able to find a new world at the Medical Faculty of the University of Vienna in Austria. She is touched most by smiling people making eye contact with her, and it sometimes makes her sit and cry in disbelief that she feels such joy in a foreign country despite her religion but cannot have such an experience in her own country.

H. A. has long been endeavoring to obtain equivalency recognition in Turkey for her degree, just like many others educated abroad. Other women who have not been so lucky are still dreaming of the day when they will be treated equally in a country that declares everyone equal in its laws.

‘New generation of headscarved women’ on the rise
The number of young, headscarved women -- who hold avant-garde views on many subjects and face the cradle of freedom, the West -- is on the rise. These are the headscarved women of the new era, whose reference points on human rights and freedoms are based on those of Western countries such as the US, England and Holland, which “allow” the headscarf. These women, like their Western counterparts, see the approach of Muslim countries on the matter as “backward.”


[VEILED TALES-3]
‘You can’t lecture here, if your mother wears a headscarf ’
Undoubtedly, the headscarf ban shows its most dramatic dimension at universities. The right to education is one of the rights guaranteed and secured by law.


Fighting against bans is a measure of how sincerely freedom of belief is valued. Turkey will either pass this examination or fail at the gates of history’s “doors of conscience,” alongside the women it debilitates.
On the one side, they complain about low levels of schooling among women, and on the other side they deprive women wearing headscarves of their right to education, such a situation cannot even be found in a third world country.

But opposing the headscarf ban should not be limited to the scope of universities. Consenting to a differentiation between the concepts of “public sphere” and “those receiving and taking public service” as claimed by supporters of the headscarf ban means approving an understanding that regards headscarves as being opposed to secularism; such reflection affords the opportunity to block the path to the removal of the headscarf ban with alternative prohibitive means. Certain debates featuring on the agenda seem to prove that the arguments inflamed by the question of “public sphere” over the headscarf ban are brought forward with the intention of confusing people. When the scope of this ban is identified by an ambiguous term such as the public sphere, it inevitably turns into a general criterion and the ban’s scope is extended to one’s family life and even to the private sector.

The headscarf ban should be annulled completely without differentiating between the public sphere and those giving or receiving public service. Otherwise such bans will one day begin to be practiced in different places such as driving courses, private language courses and even conferences on asthma, and taking off the headscarf will constitute a reason to be abused in the public sphere. The experiences of Gülender Karabıyık and Emine D. are significant examples proving this and so are the experiences of some men who were expelled from their jobs for being the husband or son of a woman wearing a headscarf.

‘Don’t become a lecturer if your mother is wearing a headscarf!’

Özcan K. was an esteemed professor who lectured at universities for more than 17 years and who did not have any ideological leanings. His sole goal was to advance in his career; to this end, Özcan was giving lectures both in the United States and Germany, as well as at the business administration department of İstanbul University. On July 3, 2007, he arrived at the garden of his department by car, accompanied his mother and sister who were wearing headscarves. On the very same day he was dismissed from the school within three hours. His action of coming to the faculty garden with his sister and mother was not included in any legislation as a crime. In the notice regarding the grounds for his removal from office, it stated “...for entering the faculty garden with two headscarf wearing women.” The department of business administration where Özcan was lecturing was in need of lecturers and his wife did not wear a headscarf. Nevertheless, one-third of his final wage was cut and he was removed from his university. He had to find another job at a private university.

Compulsory appointment because of wife

Let’s say Özcan K. committed a serious error by taking his headscarf-wearing mother and sister to the garden of his faculty. What is the guilt of the civil servant who received a compulsory appointment for not attending the national ceremonies and republican balls with his wife who was wearing a headscarf? This time the reason of the compulsory appointment is “family life” and the headscarf-wearing spouse did not even step into the areas where she thought her headscarf would pose a problem. According to the statement of the Council of State, the civil servant we are talking about is a successful person who had never failed in his duty. A report was drafted on his account for “making his wife wear a headscarf,” the “symbol of devout circles in a secular country.” The administrative court called the demand for compulsory appointment off for not being based on any concrete reason. The Council of State stated that the civil servant did not commit anything other than a “fault in his family life” and pronounced a compulsory appointment on behalf of the civil servant because he was not qualified to represent the institution since he “had a headscarf wearing wife.”

The discrimination applied toward one individual over others preferring to wear a headscarf is against the “principle of equality” which is guaranteed by law. A headscarf is also not the symbol of “protection of women’s honor through a masculine jealousy.” To the contrary, it is the most significant actor in the demand for freedom of belief and a big struggle for democracy. Those who claim that the “headscarf issue is the problem of a sector representing only 1.5 percent of the population” should re-examine their position to see if they are in contradiction with the freedom of belief. Turkey will either pass this difficult examination or be left with nothing to say before the gates of conscience.

It is not enough to be qualified, if you wear the headscarf

When Gülender Karabıyık went to Marmara University in 1993 to enroll in the radio and television department, she was requested to bring “a photo taken with an uncovered head.” The justification for the request was quite funny; “maybe she was another person, how could they know?” The tension was broken with a joke. “Would you like to see our teeth as well just to know we are the same person?” Some tensions arising over headscarf-wearing students could be settled in such a way in 1993. Gülender did not experience any serious problems because of her headscarf during her time at university. Only one of her professors, Ãœnsal Oskay, used to say, “My dear, you are a qualified student, but you cannot find a good job in this sector if you insist on covering your head.” Now, looking at the current debates on the headscarf issue, Gülender sighs. “How polite were the comments about my headscarf during my university years,” she says. Following her graduation, she found a job at a television station targeting the conservative circles in the population, and three-and-a-half years later she became the producer and director of her own program.

However, her salary was quite low. When she asked for an increase in her salary, she received a heart-breaking reply from the editor-in-chief of the station. “Do you think you will be able to find a job at other TV channels with your headscarf? I do not think you have another alternative than working here,” he told her. The boss of the station turned down her demand for a salary increase but offered her shopping checks instead. Gülender resigned from her job at the station along with 11 friends who suffered the same problem, even though her program was very popular at the time. Afterwards, her program was sold to TRT2 -- a TV station owned by the state.

Not surprisingly, Gülender cannot even enter the building of TRT2 with her headscarf. She applied for a position at various stations, but the interviews conducted over the phone resulted in disappointment after she met the station officials with her headscarf. This was the case for various job applications, and Gülender ended up in a depression and spent almost a year and a half in her room. She started consulting a psychiatrist and decided to go abroad. She had difficulty in persuading her family but finally managed to get permission to continue her career overseas. First she attended English classes at the University of Cambridge for one academic year and then obtained a master’s degree at City University London in international journalism. “I was allowed to enter even the House of Lords for interviews when I was in London. My friends at university were competing with each other to prepare a fast-breaking evening meal for me while I was fasting during Ramadan,” says Gülender, remembering her peaceful days abroad.

Gülender witnessed that the condition of headscarf-wearing women had worsened when she returned to Turkey to prepare her thesis after doing an internship at the BBC. She says she was obliged to return to Turkey because her family had her allowed to go abroad only to continue her education. When she came back to Turkey, she was an expert with a master’s degree in international journalism. She became a qualified journalist despite the pressure on her due to her headscarf. She hoped to be employed at NTV, where she had received vocational training during the second gulf war. But she received the same excuse. “We are content with your work. You are really successful. But we wish you were not wearing a headscarf...” After being ousted from her position, Gülender tried all avenues to pursue her career in journalism, but her applications were turned down with the same reason. Gülender is still in search of a job.

A telegram worth one month in prison

Seher Yusuf Bengisu was not a university student; she graduated from the faculty of theology and was working as a teacher in a Quran study course. She was married and had two children. One day when the bans imposed upon students with headscarves reached their peak in 1987, she could not bear the pressure imposed on her sister who was trying to continue her education in the faculty of law at İstanbul University. Many were sending telegrams to the president with the hope that he would take a step to remove the bans, and Seher decided to do the same thing. She said in her telegram, “Mr. [Kenan] Evren, you cannot do this to us.” She was taken into custody and sent to prison as a result. She was sentenced to four years in prison and removed from her position for a specified period. Seher grieved deeply. Her children were still very small. The “Islamic circles” of the time became disturbed when she said she did not have the intention of objecting to the secular order with her telegram. Luckily, she was among those who were released with the amnesty law. She spent one month in prison. But her time in prison affected her state of health, and one year after her release a doctor diagnosed her with cancer. A rational relation may not seem to exist between the disease and the conditions in prison, but everyone knows that extreme stress and grief lie at the root of many diseases. The diagnosis shocked her relatives. Seher survived just long enough to raise her children and lost her life in 2001 at an early age.

‘Don’t get us wrong, we support the AK Party too’

Emine D. was disturbed several times by comments of a waiter at a luxurious restaurant where she went to have dinner with her friends. There were other headscarf-wearing ladies among Emine’s group of friends. “More esteemed guests will come to our restaurant, you should finish your dinner quickly and leave the place,” said the waiter to the group. There were several empty tables in the restaurant; the statement directed at them could not be due to lack of space in the restaurant. H.Y., one of Emine’s friends, became anxious and lodged a complaint against the waiter with the owner of the restaurant. The owner of the restaurant rebuked the waiter but said he had to protect the prestige of his establishment. What he said as an excuse was funny though. “Don’t get us wrong, we support the AK Party too.”

Nihal Bengisu Karaca

Source: http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=124769

This turban story is a very weird story...notice it is as long as the scarf itself too. )))))))))

As far as I am aware, the party in political power today is the one who won the last elections by a very large margin. Their major promise to voters was that they would abolish the turban ban in universities, if they were elected (5 years ago).

Add to that the other right wing parties, who had similar songs, the National Assembly is now full of reps who got their seats by playing "I love turban" song.

What they claim they want to see about the turban ban however, requires some legal changes to be made in the Assembly.

These singers, when put together, have the number not only enough to lift the turban ban - they can in fact make it obligatory, if they so desire.

I have no idea why they dont pull their fingers off, and do whatever they have to do...

Do you guys think it may be possible that these singers are waiting for AlphaF to abolish the turban ban, himself/singlehanded, just for the heck of it ?

Turkey headscarf reform opposed
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/A67C6D7F-DD2F-4780-91BD-BA14FBA87963.htm

turks willing to share the fate of the eastern neighbour (iran)?

Roswitha, why do you leave so much blank space underneath your message?

Catwoman,how do you get rid of it?

Another discussion on the headscarf? I wish I had my 'yawn' smiley handy but I guess this will have to do....

What is the real meaning of secularism?

Here is your chance to teach me the meaning of "real secularism".
Be sincere...come on !, say your piece !

PS: I will read you tomorrow...

Origins of Secularism as a Non-Religious, Humanistic, Atheistic Philosophy
Despite its importance, there isn't always a great deal of agreement on just what secularism really is. Part of the problem lies in the fact that the concept of "secular" can be used in a couple of ways which, while closely related, are nevertheless different enough to make it difficult to know for sure what people might mean. The word secular means "of this world" in Latin and is the opposite of religious. As a doctrine, secularism is usually used to describe any philosophy which forms its ethics without reference to religious dogmas and which promotes the development of human art and science.



http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2007/07/21/world/20070721_TURKEY2_1.html

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=132656

One person's personal experience and view

People wear headscarves. So what? Exc.article, Peace Train.
Headscarves: A sin?

Even if I having an american vision and don't like the idea of having to wear a headscarf I wonder why this topic is in discussion as I see in my opinion people should wear whatever they like in every place and every situation

Absolutely true MrX67. Lets allow them into universities first and worry about the rest later

Headscarf cannot be a liberty, it's like making slavery seem as a kind of liberty. Choosing to wear headscarf is up to someone although a woman most of the time does not choose to wear it with a 100% free will,but they already have the freedom of wearing headscarf or whatever they want in Turkey. Which freedom do they want more? They want the freedom of wearing it in universities as students as professors, in banks,in hospitals, in the parliament. They want the freedom of having a headscarved president. Now, in this condition imagine a headscarved president can we talk about a seculiar republic anymore, when someones headscarf is shouting out that she's a muslim? Noone has the right to ask someone's religion, and in a seculiar republic noone has the right to show his/her religion where he/she is supposed to make her/his decisions without any influence of any personal beliefs.
Just letting this happen, think just about it, you let the headscarf enter the universities, than where will you stop? Forinstance a radical islamic association called Özgür-der (Freedom association) is not pleased with this headscarf decisiion because they want liberty to all head to toe covered islamic dresses and male islamic dresses like (male turbans, salvars etc).



Then, if liberty is wearing whatever you want wherever you want, then what will be against allowing these as well into universities, working places, parliament? And you already have the freedom to wear these in streets, shops, everywhere you want.

Lastly I want you to have a look at this video about the women before and after the Islamic revolution in Iran. It might tell something.

click to watch

the muslim lady looks gorgeous!

many girls in turkey want to look like that lady after choosing islamists to rule over them!

Wow, what a picture, Meltem!

I wore a scarf "a la Queen Elizabeth" while visiting Orthodox neighborhoods near the Halic.

Hehe maybe it's unpleasent but I can't help thinking about it. If all girls were wearing such garments, then big surprises would wait for the turkish man in the wedding night when the girl uncovers herself for the first time to her new husband thinking that turkish men appreciate physical beauty so much.

have a look at my pictures: Lovely headscarf

Here is a song in the honor of all beautiful women...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKDZDj-OHyw

What the man says in the song, is roughly,

Do not even eat honey with the ugly ones,
Go, carry stones with the pretty ones...

If I cant even eat honey.........No deal !

Came here by random curiosity.

I still can´t understand how come a country´s government with about 95% Muslims doesn´t allow headscarves. Like, why not? It´s not that bad. What´s the problem if they wear headscarves? If women are free to show their body, then they must be free to cover their body too.

I don´t know, just a random thought.