Kadın Refahı Alanında Kullanılan Kuramlar
Özet
Bu bölüm, sosyal hizmet disiplininde kadın refahını açıklamak için kullanılan temel kuramsal yaklaşımları incelemektedir. Kadın refahı, toplumsal cinsiyet eşitsizlikleri, ataerkil yapılar, ekonomik sistemler ve sosyal politikalar arasındaki etkileşimle şekillenen çok boyutlu bir olgu olarak ele alınmaktadır. Öncelikle feminist kuram, kadınların bireysel sorunlarını toplumsal eşitsizliklerin bir sonucu olarak değerlendirir. Liberal, radikal, sosyalist ve postmodern feminist yaklaşımlar; kadınların güçlenmesi, ataerkilliğin eleştirisi ve toplumsal dönüşüm hedefi etrafında birleşir. Ayrıca toplumsal cinsiyet, ataerkillik ve kamusal/özel alan ayrımı gibi kavramlar ele alınmaktadır. Yapısalcı ve eleştirel kuramlar, kadın yoksulluğunu ve güvencesizliğini bireysel eksikliklerle değil, kapitalist üretim ilişkileri ve patriyarkal düzenin etkileşimiyle açıklar. Bu yaklaşımlar, sosyal hizmetin yalnızca bireysel değil, toplumsal dönüşüm için de etik bir sorumluluk taşıdığını vurgular. Toplumsal cinsiyet kuramı, cinsiyetin biyolojik değil, toplumsal olarak inşa edilen bir kimlik olduğunu savunur. Kadınların ekonomik ve politik yaşamda ikincil konuma itilmesini, patriyarka ve kapitalizmin kesişimindeki güç ilişkileriyle açıklar. Yaşam seyri kuramı, kadınların yaşam döngüsü boyunca biriken yapısal dezavantajların (örneğin eğitim, istihdam, bakım emeği) refah kayıplarına yol açtığını gösterir. Bu yaklaşım, sosyal politikaların önleyici ve bütüncül olması gerektiğini vurgular. Son olarak kesişimsellik kuramı, kadınların deneyimlerini yalnızca cinsiyet temelli değil; sınıf, etnisite, yaş, engellilik ve göçmenlik gibi kesişen eşitsizlikler çerçevesinde analiz eder. Sonuç olarak, bu kuramlar sosyal hizmete kadın refahını bireysel değil, yapısal ve çok boyutlu bir perspektiften ele alma olanağı sunar; güçlendirme, eşitlik ve sosyal adalet ilkelerini merkeze alır.
This section examines the fundamental theoretical approaches used to explain women’s welfare within the discipline of social work. Women’s welfare is regarded as a multidimensional phenomenon shaped by the interaction between gender inequalities, patriarchal structures, economic systems, and social policies. First, feminist theory interprets women’s individual problems as a result of social inequalities. Liberal, radical, socialist, and postmodern feminist approaches converge around the goals of women’s empowerment, the critique of patriarchy, and social transformation. In addition, concepts such as gender, patriarchy, and the public/private sphere dichotomy are discussed. Structuralist and critical theories explain women’s poverty and insecurity not as individual deficiencies but through the interaction between capitalist production relations and the patriarchal order. These approaches emphasize that social work carries an ethical responsibility not only for individual change but also for social transformation. Gender theory argues that gender is not a biological but a socially constructed identity. It explains women’s relegation to a secondary position in economic and political life through the power relations at the intersection of patriarchy and capitalism. Life course theory shows that the structural disadvantages accumulated throughout women’s life cycles (such as education, employment, and care work) lead to welfare losses. This approach emphasizes that social policies should be preventive and holistic. Finally, intersectionality theory analyzes women’s experiences not only on the basis of gender but also within the framework of intersecting inequalities such as class, ethnicity, age, disability, and migration. In conclusion, these theories provide social work with the opportunity to address women’s welfare from a structural and multidimensional rather than an individual perspective; they center on the principles of empowerment, equality, and social justice.
Referanslar
Abbas, S., Zainab, F., Mehtab, H., Fatima, A., & Nasir, M. (2025). Defying patriarchy: A radical feminist view of resilience in Garcia’s We are not born submissive. Contemporary Journal of Social Science Review, 3(3), 2100–2111.
Afyonoğlu, M. F. (2020). Sosyal Çalışmada Kesişimsellik. Toplum ve Sosyal Hizmet, 31(2), 699–725. https://doi.org/10.33417/tsh.689618
Aile ve Sosyal Hizmetler Bakanlığı. (2025). Kadına yönelik şiddetle mücadele V. ulusal eylem planı (2026–2030). Kadının Statüsü Genel Müdürlüğü.
Akış, A. G., & Korkmaz Yaylagül, N. (2021). Yaşam seyri perspektifi ve yaşlılık. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (38), 276–309. https://doi.org/10.14520/adyusbd.867560
Akkan, B. (2023). Toplumsal yeniden üretim kuramı ve kız çocuklarının ev içi bakım emeği. Mülkiye Dergisi, 47(1), 118–139.
Aktaş, G. (2013). Feminist söylemler bağlamında kadın kimliği: Erkek egemen bir toplumda kadın olmak. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(1), 53–72.
Ashari, A. (2025). Dimensions of gender construction and its implications in promoting women’s empowerment policies. Jurnal Ad’ministrare, 12(1), 65–70. https://doi.org/10.71309/administrare.v12i1.8489
Avcil, C. (2020). Kadın bedeni üzerinde denetim aracı olarak namus cinayetleri: Türkiye örneği. International Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences, 4(3), 137–150.
Aydoğmuş Ördem, Ö. (2020). Kadın bedeni ve biyo-iktidar/biyo-politika söylem düzeni. Fe Dergi: Feminist Eleştiri, 12(2), 32–44. https://doi.org/10.46655/federgi.842845
Bhandari, M. P. (2024). Feminisms in social sciences. In Women and society (pp. 1–25). IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.111652
Bhasin, K. (1993). What is patriarchy? Kali for Women.
Bracke, P., Delaruelle, K., Dereuddre, R., & Van de Velde, S. (2020). Depression in women and men, cumulative disadvantage and gender inequality in 29 European countries. Social Science & Medicine, 267, 113354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113354
Bricker-Jenkins, M., & Hooyman, N. (1986). Feminist social work practice in clinical settings. Social Work, 31(1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/31.1.29
Blackstone, A. M. (2003). Gender roles and society. In J. R. Miller, R. M. Lerner, & L. B. Schiamberg (Eds.), Human ecology: An encyclopedia of children, families, communities, and environments (pp. 335–338). Springer.
Buğra, A., & Keyder, Ç. (2006). The Turkish welfare regime in transformation. Journal of European Social Policy, 16(3), 211–228. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928706065593
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge.
Büyükyörük, N. (2021). An overlook to older women’s poverty. Current Perspectives on Health Sciences, 2(1), 1–6.
Cho, S., Crenshaw, K. W., & McCall, L. (2013). Toward a field of intersectionality studies: Theory, applications, and praxis. Signs, 38(4), 785–810. https://doi.org/10.1086/669608
Collins, P. H. (2000). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Connell, R. (2022). Toplumsal cinsiyet ve iktidar. Ayrıntı.
Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139–167.
Değirmencioğlu, N. (2024). Destruction of female body by femininity: An analysis on De Beauvoir, Foucault, Bordo and Atwood. Trakya Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(27), 315–330. https://doi.org/10.33207/trkede.1344900
Doğancı, H. K., & Tuncay, T. (2020). Tarihsel süreçte kadının aile içindeki konumunun feminist sosyal hizmet yaklaşımı temelinde değerlendirilmesi. Toplum ve Sosyal Hizmet, 31(3), 1324–1351. https://doi.org/10.33417/tsh.687922
Dominelli, L. (2002a). Anti-oppressive social work theory and practice. Red Globe Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4039-1400-2
Dominelli, L. (2002b). Feminist social work theory and practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
Erol, A. (2021). Toplumsal cinsiyet kavramı bağlamında feminist yaklaşımların bir analizi. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 53, 31–54. https://doi.org/10.53568/yyusbed.1003401
Foucault, M. (1978). The history of sexuality: Volume 1, an introduction. Pantheon Books.
Gasior, K., Avram, S., & Popova, D. (2025). Invisible gaps: Women’s individual poverty risks and the gendered failings of the adult worker model. Economic Systems. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosys.2025.101363
Hankivsky, O. (Ed.). (2012). An intersectionality-based policy analysis framework. Institute for Intersectionality Research and Policy, Simon Fraser University.
Hankivsky, O., Grace, D., Hunting, G., Giesbrecht, M., Fridkin, A., Rudrum, S., Ferlatte, O., & Clark, N. (2014). An intersectionality-based policy analysis framework: Critical reflections on a methodology for advancing equity. International Journal for Equity in Health, 13, Article 119. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-014-0119-x
Herbst-Debby, A., & Achouche, N. (2023). Double jeopardy: Gendered social policy for two risky life periods in six welfare state contexts. Women’s Studies International Forum, 100, 102814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2023.102814
Herbst-Debby, A., Endeweld, M., & Kaplan, A. (2021). Differentiated routes to vulnerability: Marital status, children, gender and poverty. Advances in Life Course Research, 49, Article 100418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2021.100418
International Federation of Social Workers. (2014). Global definition of social work. https://www.ifsw.org/what-is-social-work/global-definition-of-social-work/
Joseph, J., Jauhola, M., Shanbhogue Arvind, L., & Gadhavi, S. (2021). Wounded attachments to disaster recovery: Gendered structural violence and everyday life, Indian experiences explored. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 59, 102242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102242
Karim, M. H. A., & Azlan, A. A. (2019). Modernism and postmodernism in feminism: A conceptual study on the developments of its definition, waves and school of thought. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 4(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v4i1.154
Kerber, L. K. (1988). Separate spheres, female worlds, woman’s place: The rhetoric of women’s history. The Journal of American History, 75(1), 9–39. https://doi.org/10.2307/1889653
Leopold, L., van Valkengoed, I. G. M., & Engelhardt, H. (2023). Education and age trajectories of chronic conditions: Are tests of the cumulative advantage and disadvantage hypothesis biased by underreporting? Social Science & Medicine, 334, 116134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116134
Lundy, C. (2004). Social work and social justice: A structural approach to practice. Broadview Press.
McClain, L. C., & Hacker, B. (2022). Liberal feminist jurisprudence: Foundational, enduring, adaptive. In D. L. Brake, M. Chamallas, & V. Williams (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of feminism and law in the United States (pp. 1–28). Oxford University Press. https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/1153
Mullaly, B. (2010). Challenging oppression and confronting privilege: A critical social work approach (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Mullaly, B., & Dupré, M. (2019). The new structural social work: Ideology, theory, and practice (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Orloff, A. S. (1993). Gender and the social rights of citizenship: The comparative analysis of gender relations and welfare states. American Sociological Review, 58(3), 303–328. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095903
Ökten, Ş. (2009). Toplumsal cinsiyet ve iktidar: Güneydoğu Anadolu Bölgesi'nin toplumsal cinsiyet düzeni. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2(8), 302–312.
Pachinger, M. (2005). Sozialistischer und marxistischer Feminismus. Arbeitsgruppe Marxismus.
Payne, M. (2021). Modern social work theory (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Phillips, R. (2015). Feminist research and social work. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (2nd ed., Vol. 8, pp. 935–941). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.28033-1
Rajapandi, M., Hariharasudan, A., Gurusamy, K., & Pandeeswari, D. (2022). The analytical reading discourse of liberal feminism in Bernardine Evaristo’s Girl, Woman, Other through black women in different generations. World Journal of English Language, 12(2), 47–54. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v12n2p47
Ridgeway, C., & Smith-Lovin, L. (1999). The gender system and interaction. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 191–216.
Rotman, D. L. (2006). Separate spheres? Beyond the dichotomies of domesticity. Current Anthropology, 47(4), 666–674.
Rutagumirwa, S. K., & Bailey, A. (2022). “It’s all about being a woman”: Intersections of multiple (dis)advantages experienced by older women in Tanzania. Journal of Aging Studies, 61, 101021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2022.101021
Sancar, S. (2012). Türk modernleşmesinin cinsiyeti: Erkekler devlet, kadınlar aile kurar. İletişim Yayınları.
Sarıgöl, P. (2020). Kesişimsellik teorisi ve farklılıkların feminizmi. Uluslararası İnsan Çalışmaları Dergisi, 3(6), 331–352. https://doi.org/10.35235/uicd.715735
Stewart, P. J. (2014). Socialist feminism. In M. T. Gibbons (Ed.), The encyclopedia of political thought (pp. 3503–3507). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118474396.wbept0956
Vukoičić, J. (2013). Radical feminism as a discourse in the theory of conflict. Sociološki Diskurs, 3(5), 33–49.
Weinberg, M. (2008). Structural social work: A moral compass for ethics in practice. Critical Social Work, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.22329/csw.v9i1.5761
Walby, S. (1990). Theorizing patriarchy. Blackwell.
Winter, B. (2018). Patriarchy. In J. M. Ryan (Ed.), Core concepts in sociology. Wiley.
Xue, B., Tinkler, P., Zaninotto, P., & McMunn, A. (2020). Girls’ transition to adulthood and their later life socioeconomic attainment. Advances in Life Course Research, 46, 100352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2020.100352
Zalewski, M. (2000). Feminism after postmodernism: Theorising through practice. Routledge.
