What does the wig symbolize?

In fact, his articles, what he says, or what he does are not really within my area of interest. There are people who are interested enough in him, who deal with him very well, and who say whatever he deserves in the best way every time. There is no point in me intervening and taking the matter more seriously. But this time I cannot help but join the conversation.

I am saying that if media ethics had any sense of justice, the editor-in-chief of the flagship newspaper should have somehow stopped writing. The news that he persistently ran on the front page for several days in a row and continued to defend in his own column blew up from every angle. It became blatantly obvious that the story was not just a misunderstanding, but on the contrary, worked on with a specific target in mind to reveal bad intentions—that is, deliberately fabricated.

Unfortunately, abusing all the opportunities of the journalism profession in the worst possible way, violating its ethics, and exploiting the trust of the reader carry no sanctions for some people. A mysterious armor of immunity, antinomianism in ethical rules, and exemption from sanctions operate here as well.

At best, this person, who should have failed journalism for failing to understand what was going on, continues to "enlighten" the public as if nothing had happened on the very day his story was refuted by both the Prime Minister and many newspapers. While he was expected to immediately issue a grand apology to the female sonographers whom he did not hesitate to sacrifice for his scandalous news story, he found a way to accuse them of hypocrisy and forgery. Özkök juxtaposed two photos: from one (the photo of the female sonographer wearing a wig over a headscarf) he suddenly saw hypocrisy and forgery flow, and from the other (the photo of Tarık Akan at his mother's funeral) he saw authenticity, sadness, and beauty flow. He does not deprive his reader of what he sees. He shares it. And his reader is enlightened by it. Oh, what a wonderful Turkey!

Juxtaposing the sad photo taken during Tarık Akan's mother's funeral with the picture of the "wig over headscarf" female doctor requires a very special type of intelligence and, of course, a state of mind. I won't name it. But this is not normal. Journalists who survive such accidents, even if they do not withdraw completely, should at least go on vacation for a while to pull themselves together and stop talking nonsense. If the reader's mental and psychological health is not considered, this is also important for their own health. I am not saying "Is it my concern?"; I am seriously recommending it. Because after all, someone needs to be thoroughly busy correcting every wrong in the press. A bunch of unnecessary work, hassle around.

You would think a wig over a headscarf is a new Islamist fashion, a new political symbol.

It is clear that there is hypocrisy in this. But to think that this hypocrisy lies in those who wear it, one must be utterly devoid of fairness. Hypocrisy stems from the attitude of those who stubbornly want to maintain the irrational ban on attire. A practice that leads at best to "separating their inside from their outside" even if women uncover their heads has no right to complain about hypocrisy.

A wig over a headscarf really looks awkward. But surely no woman wears it to look prettier. Surely no woman in Turkey lacks that much of an aesthetic sense. Of course, no one chooses this lovingly, appreciatively, or just to make it a fashion. If someone willingly risks entering such an awkward situation, it means there are very harsh storms brewing deep inside. Those are the storms of sincerity, faith, and authenticity. There is an expression of a desire for a final resistance against the power of the ignorant who targeted these feelings.

A wig over a headscarf is not a political symbol, but an indicator of the level to which a secularism at war with beliefs and Islam has stooped. There could be no better expression of the absurdity into which a narrow-minded prohibitionism has fallen. It is the helplessness of a rude power claiming to dictate people's clothing. But in no way does it show the hypocrisy of those who are forced to wear it.

Those who are forced to prefer this know very well how sincere they need to be and towards whom. We have passed ethics and justice; others should be ashamed of this. Let them be ashamed...