So what if the hair of the wife of Turkey's president is visible
Fatih Cekirge, editor-in-chief of hurriyet.com.tr, called me yesterday and asked "Have you seen the photo of Mrs. Hayrunnisa Gul*? The cap under her headscarf has slipped and some of her hair can be seen."
I looked at the photo and noticed that some hair was clearly exposed.
Of course, we cannot know if this is a new style or something that was the result of carelessness, and from my point of view, it is not very important.
We might have run this as headline news at Hurriyet daily if it had happened four or five years ago.
But now, we don’t even consider publishing the photo.
Either way, I am certain that this picture will be widely debated.
Everyone will have their own personal opinion and assessment of this image.
* * *
I will look at the situation from a slightly different perspective: "So what if some of her hair is exposed?"
What will happen if we see some of her hair?
Compared to the day before it happened, will Mrs. Gul now be considered a sinner after this incident?
No, Mrs. Gul is exactly the same as she was the other day.
Let me say, "if".
"Even if she did this on purpose, Mrs. Gul is no more a sinner today than she was before. Nothing will happen."
I am assuming the Presidential Office will issue a message today and say that "nothing has changed".
This is where the real problem lies.
The exposing of even a wisp of hair means absolutely nothing to me, but it is very meaningful for others.
This situation is likely not to matter to the president and his wife, but it is probably going to be muttered among the "reference circles" that are influential upon them.
This is the real problem that
For this reason I will understand if the presidential office issues an explanation today over this photograph.
Of course, I will still be asking myself. Is there any way to show that the headscarf is not a symbol of fanaticism?
Unfortunately, the “taking of sides” has been established.
I am not "on that side”, and I still respect "that side", but despite all my effort to empathize, I am unable to fathom their way of thinking.
* * *
At this point, I want to move on to an editorial discussion we had at Hurriyet daily.
We discussed a photograph of Arabic leaders and their wives.
Ayse Karasu, the foreign news editor-in-chief, said that similar photographs have been published by the newspaper on several occasions and therefore it is not very interesting.
Most of our other colleagues held opinions contrary to this. I was also one of them.
The photo was interesting because it showed that in regard to the headscarf issue, there was no unity in the Arab world.
Moreover, highly evident differences exist.
The heads of some leader's wives are fully covered, just like in our country.
Not even one wisp of hair is visible.
Some also wear headscarves but their hair can still be seen clearly.
While others, who are not few in number, wear no headscarves.
The question: "Is the headscarf truly a rule of Islam?" automatically springs to mind when first glancing at this photograph.
I am not a religious expert.
I'm not a fanatic forcing either the "with a headscarf" or "without a headscarf" lines of thought.
But I think it is possible to calm society over this issue and end this argument, when I see this photograph of Arab leaders.
It is would be admirable to be able to reach this point.
This is why I wrote such a column even though I knew that the president would release a disclaimer over the incident.
* The wife of
