925844

research-article2020
MWC0010.1177/1750635220925844Media, War & ConflictTutkal

Article
Media, War & Conflict

Dehumanization on Twitter in
1­–18
© The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
the Turkish–Kurdish conflict sagepub.com/journals-permissions
https://doi.org/10.1177/1750635220925844
DOI: 10.1177/1750635220925844
journals.sagepub.com/home/mwc

Serhat Tutkal

Abstract
This article examines the dissemination of images of mutilated and humiliated dead bodies of
‘others’ and reactions of Twitter users to these images as dehumanizing practices. When the peace
negotiations between the Turkish state and Kurdish PKK failed, numerous images of mutilated
and humiliated dead bodies of PKK militants were disseminated by Twitter accounts apparently
used by members of the Turkish security forces. The author focuses on two controversial cases
from 2015 and immediate social media reactions to those images in order to demonstrate how
dehumanization of Kurdish militants played out in the case of Turkey.

Keywords
animalization, dead bodies, dehumanization, sexism, social media, Turkish–Kurdish conflict

Introduction
The ongoing ceasefire between Kurdish PKK (Partiya Karkerên Kurdistanê or Kurdistan
Workers’ Party) and Turkish security forces had come to an end after the Turkish general
elections of 7 June 2015. As an immediate result, Turkish military forces launched a
series of attacks on the Kurdish region of Turkey, which resulted in the destruction of
Kurdish-populated cities such as Cizre, Sur, Silvan, Silopi, Varto, Nusaybin and
Yüksekova, the deportation of Kurdish people, prolonged curfews and the death of hun-
dreds of civilians. Since then, numerous violent images and videos have been dissemi-
nated via unofficial social media accounts related to Turkish security forces. Two of
these cases, especially, sparked a heated debate in Turkey: the case of Ekin Wan and the
case of Hacı Lokman Birlik.
The photograph of the naked and bloodied dead body of a woman was circulated on
social media on 15 August 2015. The photograph depicts standing men whose faces are
not visible and the dead woman lying before their feet. The woman was identified as

Corresponding author:
Serhat Tutkal, Center for Social Studies, National University of Colombia, Unidad Camilo Torres, Block
A5-A6, Office No:622, Bogotá 111321, Colombia.
Email: stutkal@unal.edu.co
2 Media, War & Conflict 00(0)

Kevser Eltürk, alias Ekin Wan, a PKK militant. On 3 October 2015, the video of a dead
PKK militant called Hacı Lokman Birlik became viral. In the video, the dead body of
Birlik is tied to a military vehicle by a rope and dragged along the streets of the city of
Şırnak. Images of Ekin Wan and Birlik sparked protests and discussions all around the
world and resulted in various reactions on social media.
Dehumanization is painting the other as ‘less-than human’ and in many cases trivial-
izing their lives compared to the ones whose ‘human’ status is not in dispute. Mutilating,
torturing and humiliating dead bodies of ‘others’ is an important way of depriving the
living members of the same community from their humanness. Social media channels,
such as Twitter, play an important role in this process for two main reasons. Firstly, they
are highly efficient platforms for disseminating the images of mutilated and humiliated
dead bodies so that the optimum number of people can see them; secondly, these plat-
forms allow user interaction which permits them to actively participate in the dehumani-
zation process, something that was not possible with traditional media channels such as
television or print newspapers.
This article examines the dehumanization process of PKK militants in Turkey. To this
end, it examines dehumanizing Twitter posts in relation to the previously mentioned
cases. It starts out by briefly introducing the literature on dehumanization, the place of
mutilating, torturing and humiliating dead bodies in dehumanizing practices, and media
performances in relation to the dehumanization. It subsequently presents the background
against which this case unfolded. After that, it delves into the case and examines the
images, their media representations, and social media reactions from different audience(s).
It classifies the immediate dehumanizing posts on Twitter into six distinct categories and
analyzes the ways in which dehumanizing practices manifest themselves in this specific
context. Finally, it highlights a series of elements that may open up new avenues for
future research.

Dehumanizing the ‘other’

It has been suggested that ‘an important way in which others may be denied full human-
ness is in an animalistic sense in which they are seen as not having risen above their
animal origins; that is, they are seen as less than human’ (Esses et al., 2013: 522). Haslam
et al. (2009: 63) call this practice ‘animalistic dehumanization’ and state that it has, at its
core, an implicit ‘likening of people to animals and the ascription of relatively bestial or
barbaric characteristics to them’. The authors describe another type of dehumanizing
practice which they call ‘mechanistic dehumanization’ in which humans are objectified
or seen as machine-like (p. 64). Both animalistic and mechanistic forms of dehumaniza-
tion involve ‘perceiving others as less than human, likening them to beasts or unfeeling
objects, and treating them with inhumanity’ and these practices are especially common
‘in times of war, genocide, and ethnic conflict’ (p. 56). Butler (2004: 78) focuses on the
reduction of human beings to animal status as a dehumanizing practice and claims that
the human is defined against the figure of an ‘animal’. Here, we can infer that the bina-
rism of ‘us’ and ‘others’ is linked to the binarism of ‘human’ and ‘non-human’. The
‘other’ is usually considered ‘less human’ and in many cases ‘more animal-like’. When
Adelman and Ruggi (2016: 911) state that ‘both women and people marked as “racial
Tutkal 3

others” have been associated with the body’, rather than with the culture, it can be
inferred that this association with ‘body’ denotes being ‘less human’ than those who are
being associated with ‘culture’. After all, as Peggs (2014: 17) identifies, ‘an essential
difference between humans and other animals is established in the perception that
humans, unlike other animals, have transcended their biology; it is precisely this tran-
scendence that is said to define the human as human.’
Likening certain groups of humans to animals as a way of dehumanization was noted
by various scholars. Steuter and Wills (2009: 9) underline the place of ‘orientalism’ in
those media practices. In their view, this rhetorical framing ‘draws upon long-standing
binaries by which the West defines the East as alien to its norm; the barbaric East is
seen, through its essential nature, as fundamentally opposed to the civilized West’. They
show the systematic dehumanization of Muslims in Canadian media by showing how
media reports about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq regularly use animal-related meta-
phors such as hunt, trap, snare, net and corral (p. 13). In another work, Dalsklev and
Kunst (2015) demonstrate how the Roma were likened to animals in Norway. The
authors show that the Roma were depicted as ‘disgusting’ in Norwegian media and
established a relation between feelings of disgust and dehumanization. Vaughan-
Williams (2015) examines the animalization of ‘irregular’ migrants in Europe. Here, it
is shown that the migrants in formal detention centers felt that they were treated like
animals. Vaughan-Williams finds ‘animalised imagery and metaphors’ both in irregular
migrants’ testimonies and in European official discourses (p. 9). Barrett (2017: 240)
analyzes the animalization of Africans in Britain and shows that the dehumanization of
Africans was done in two ways: by likening them to animals, and by likening them to
children. Kovacevic (2017) explores the animalization practices in Chile during the
military dictatorship and shows how the Chilean media repeatedly used verbs such as
‘exterminate’ for killing members of the opposition and also called them by animal
names, such as dogs or rats. Romero Morales (2018) investigates the animalization of
Moroccan people in the Spanish colonial narrative. Some examples of dehumanization
of Moroccan people are when they were called ‘cornered animals’, ‘savage creatures’
and ‘monkeys’ (p. 150). Chu and Huang (2019) examine the animalization of Paiwan
people by Japanese NHK and the way in which they were depicted as savages and
uncivilized.
The process of dehumanization during wars and conflicts may be explained in differ-
ent ways. Steuter and Wills (2009: 9) claim that ‘images emphasizing the Otherness of
the enemy are fundamental to wartime discourses because they create the preconditions
necessary to military action.’ According to Hall (1996: 5), ‘identities can function as
points of identification and attachment only because of their capacity to exclude, to leave
out, to render “outside”, abjected.’ Adams (2018: 53) suggests that ‘the concept of the
beast functions to justify perceiving some people as other and disempowering them.’
Laclau (1990: 32) considers that ‘an identity’s constitution is always based on excluding
something and establishing a violent hierarchy between the two resultant poles’, such as
black–white or man–woman. This hierarchy manifests itself as a difference between
‘civil–uncivil’. Here, we can recall the quote from Durkheim (1995: 214): ‘It is these
things that give man his distinctiveness among all creatures, for man is man only because
he is civilized.’
4 Media, War & Conflict 00(0)

Alexander (2006: 50) states that ‘the civility of the self always articulates itself in
language about the incivility of the other.’ He talks about a ‘we-ness’ that transcends
particular commitments, narrow loyalties, and sectional interests (p. 43). The ques-
tion here is to decide on who is included in this ‘we’, and subsequently, who is not.
Winkler et al. (2018) refer to a similar phenomenon when they claim that ISIS uses
images of dead bodies in order to construct in- and out-group members. Butler (2009:
74) takes it further when she claims that ‘there are norms, explicit or tacit, governing
which human lives count as human and as living, and which do not.’ According to
Butler (2004: 78), the language with which Afghan militants were described suggests
that these individuals ‘may not be individuals at all’, ‘they are effectively reducible to
a desire to kill’, and ‘regular criminal and international codes cannot apply to beings
such as these.’
Mutilating, torturing and humiliating dead bodies have been a crucial part of dehu-
manizing practices. Gregory (2016: 946) presents various examples from Afghanistan
perpetrated by US soldiers. In his view, the violence towards dead bodies in Afghanistan
‘did not simply kill the victims, but was complicit in a dehumanizing logic that left them
unrecognizable as human beings and erased any trace of their individuality’. What
Gregory says is closely related to the statement made in court by Steven Green, a US
soldier who raped a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and murdered her along with her family: ‘I
wasn’t thinking these people were humans’ (Daily Mail, 2010).
Yalçınkaya (2016: 60) states that these practices on dead bodies contain a message for
the survivors. This message indicates that the living bodies that are similar to the dead
ones cannot be killed since they were never human in the first place. Etöz (2016: 97)
seems to agree with this statement when she says that if dead bodies lay on the street for
days, being attacked by dogs, or could not be buried properly, as was the case in Kurdistan,
this meant that the community to which those dead bodies belong is also dying. Mutilating
and humiliating dead bodies serve to trivialize and dehumanize not just the dead, but also
the living bodies of the ‘others’.
Graphic evidence of dehumanizing practices towards dead bodies is disseminated in
the form of photographs and videos on both traditional and social media. Butler (2004:
146) considers that ‘the media’s evacuation of the human through the image’ must be
understood ‘in terms of the broader problem that normative schemes of intelligibility
establish what will and will not be human, what will be a livable life, what will be a
grievable death’. For Butler (2009), ‘grievability is a presupposition for the life that mat-
ters’ (p. 14) and war can be considered as ‘dividing populations into those who are griev-
able and those who are not’ (p. 38). She acknowledges the role of images in making this
division, noting that ‘the photograph is not merely a visual image awaiting interpreta-
tion’, but itself is ‘actively interpreting’ and ‘sometimes forcibly so’. Thus, according to
Butler, the question for war photography ‘concerns not only what it shows, but also how
it shows what it shows’ (p. 71). Butler (2004: 20) criticizes Sontag’s (2004) idea that ‘a
photograph has only one language and is destined potentially for all.’ Butler (2009: 84)
considers the photograph as a ‘promise that the event will continue’.
Kuntsman (2012: 1) mentions the day-to-day online interactions ‘in which the vio-
lence of racism and nationalism was normalized into the mundane, sprinkled with
Tutkal 5

“smileys”’. She develops the term ‘cybertouch of war’ which refers to ‘the emotional and
informational intersections between on- and offline military violence, the mediation of
wars and conflicts, and the affective regimes that emerge in cyberspace’ (p. 3). According
to her, online communication is ‘saturated with passion, that virtual conflicts move us,
and that our use of digital media is about affective investment, as much as it is about
information, storage of data or form of communication’, and violence can touch us
‘through the monitors of our computers and mobile phones, whether by creating an
immediate emotional response (sadness, rage, pain, compassion, indifference, etc.) or by
leading to long-lasting changes in the ways we remember and experience war and con-
flicts’ (Kuntsman, 2010: 9–10). It is important to consider the emotional aspect of online
communication and social media interaction when thinking about hundreds of photo-
graphs taken by Turkish security forces in war-torn Kurdish towns. Indeed, numerous
photographs from the region depicting mutilation and humiliation of both living and
dead bodies were published in the following months on social media accounts apparently
owned by individuals from Turkish military and police forces (Protner, 2018a).
Scholars have shown that the social media, especially Twitter and Facebook, allow
the political participation of citizens (Blevins et al., 2019; Castelao and Viveros, 2014;
Ghobadi and Clegg, 2015; Haciyakupoglu and Zhang, 2015; Harlow et al., 2017). This
participation results in the ‘contact’ of many citizens with their ‘others’. Practices of
dehumanization through social media are especially impactful considering that, unlike
traditional media, social media are a constant part of the daily lives of many users. As
this study shows, social media may also allow the users to actively participate in dehu-
manizing practices.
Both animalizing and mechanizing forms of dehumanization categorize the ‘other’ as
‘less-than human’, and legitimize discrimination by trivializing their lives. Agamben
(1998: 8) was referring to the figure of ‘homo sacer’ from Roman law in order to explain
the sovereign sphere as ‘the sphere in which it is permitted to kill without committing
homicide and without celebrating a sacrifice’. This figure is included in the juridical
order by a double exclusion which meant that ‘homo sacer’ can be killed but not sacri-
ficed. The specific characteristics of ‘homo sacer’ were the unpunishability of his or her
killing and the ban of his or her sacrifice (p. 73); in this way, he or she was excluded from
both the profane and the sacred world. Agamben argues that the life that may be killed is
‘politicized through its very capacity to be killed’ (p. 89). Mutilation and humiliation of
dead bodies may be considered in relation to this power over life and death. It is plausible
to think that, by committing these acts, the dead bodies (and living bodies that are in the
same category) are excluded as ‘bodies of others’. Mutilation and humiliation of dead
bodies underline the ‘unpunishability’ of the murderer and the ‘unsacrificeable’ character
of the victim. They go even further and trivialize the lives of ‘others’ by allowing disre-
spect to their dead bodies; disseminating graphic images that depict those dead bodies
via social media may be considered as a way of ensuring that the images will ‘touch’ as
many people as possible. These acts may result not only in exclusion from the juridical
system or from the society, but also from the category of human. By investigating audi-
ence reactions on social media to these images, it is possible to deduce the impact and
effects of dehumanizing practices on civilian populations.
6 Media, War & Conflict 00(0)

The Turkish–Kurdish conflict

The Kurds are often referred to as the largest stateless people in the world (Ozsoy, 2013:
103). Kurdistan is divided between Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran. In all of these countries,
Kurdish people faced systematic assimilation, torture, massacres and state persecution.
In Turkey’s case, the Kurdish Question has existed since the first years of the Republic.
The Sheikh Said Rebellion occurred in 1925, approximately 15 months after the founda-
tion of the Republic and it was followed by another Kurdish rebellion in Ağrı (1930) and
then the Dersim Rebellion (1937). Turkey is currently in an armed conflict with the
Kurdish rebel group, PKK, which was founded in 1978 by Abdullah Öcalan.
Many of the founders of the PKK were former members of Turkish socialist parties,
and PKK identified itself as a Marxist–Leninist national liberation movement (Yarkın,
2015: 31). Even though its main objective was ‘ending Turkish colonialism’, it did not
target the state apparatus in its earlier years and instead targeted ‘the agents and inform-
ants, those security force members who captured and tortured PKK members, landlords
and tribal chieftains, and the members of those rival organizations which attacked the
PKK’ (Yegen, 2016: 8). On 15 August 1984, PKK declared guerrilla warfare and launched
its first major attack against the Turkish military (Yarkın, 2015: 31). Even though the
PKK abandoned the target of an independent Kurdistan (Yegen, 2016: 11), the armed
conflict is still ongoing.
The Turkish state and PKK agreed on a ceasefire in 2012. The main actors in this
peace process were ‘then-Prime Minister and now-President Erdogan, PKK leader
Öcalan, the Intelligence Service of Turkey, and the PKK cadre’ (Baser and Ozerdem,
2019: 11). On 22 March 2013, Öcalan’s letter calling on the PKK to declare a ceasefire
and withdraw from within Turkey’s borders was read out at the Newroz celebration in
Diyarbakır, the biggest Kurdish city. The following day, PKK declared a ceasefire
(Hakikat Adalet Hafıza Merkezi, 2015). Following the call of Öcalan, the PKK began to
withdraw its units from Turkey in May 2013 (Aktoprak, 2018: 149). However, as Bakiner
(2019: 481) states, ‘despite calls from PKK leaders for legal guarantees, the first one-
and-a-half years of Turkey’s peace negotiations were not covered by any legislation.’
Also, as Rumelili and Çelik (2017: 280) state, ‘the process remained exclusively focused
on the talks between the PKK and the Turkish state, but failed to include measures to
promote the construction of new narratives and routines around which an altered sense
of ontological security could develop.’ It has been argued that ‘Turkey’s peace negotia-
tions were marked by the remarkable absence of civil society representation’ (Bakiner,
2019: 483).
Before the 2015 elections, pro-Kurdish HDP (Halkların Demokratik Partisi or
People’s Democratic Party), which is a democratic alliance of Kurdish political actors in
Turkey with other minority political actors and a large part of the Turkish left, increased
its popularity throughout the country. As a result, HDP members and offices have been
attacked in various parts of Turkey. From 23 March to 5 June 2015, ‘the number of
ambushes, attacks, threats and police raids carried out on HDP election bureaus/vehicles,
candidates, rallies and workers has reached 176’ – 5 people died in these attacks, while
522 people were injured. ‘Instead of preventing these attacks, the exact opposite course
of action was adopted’, and 185 HDP members were detained while 33 of them declared
Tutkal 7

that they were tortured in detention (Hakikat Adalet Hafıza Merkezi, 2015). HDP was the
first pro-Kurdish political party to overcome the 10 percent national electoral threshold
on 7 June 2015. It is one of the most influential political parties of Turkey (Kaya and
Whiting, 2019) and, as of 2019, the third biggest political party in the Grand National
Assembly of Turkey, holding 67 of the 600 seats.
After the June 2015 elections in which HDP obtained 13.1 percent of the votes (which
means an increase of approximately 7.5%) and AKP (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi or
Justice and Development Party) obtained 40.8 percent (which entailed a loss of approxi-
mately 9%), the peace process was terminated and President Erdoğan called for snap
elections for 1 November 2015. On that occasion, AKP obtained 49.5 percent of the
votes and HDP 10.76 percent. When the peace process failed, ‘the violence and destruc-
tion of Kurdish-majority cities . . . returned with unexpected intensity’ (Protner, 2018b).
Turkey announced a military operation against PKK on 24 July 2015 and, as the opera-
tions continued, the images from the war began circulating on social media
(İbrahimhakkıoğlu, 2018). Both the photograph of Ekin Wan from August 2015 and the
video of Hacı Lokman Birlik from October 2015 were part of this circulation.
On 15 August 2015, the image of the dead body of a woman surrounded by Turkish
soldiers circulated on social media. Later, the woman was identified as Kevser Eltürk,
alias Ekin Wan, a PKK militant. The photograph depicts her naked and bloodied dead
body lying face down. The body is completely naked and, even though she is lying face
down, her face is still somewhat visible. There are three men in the photo whose faces
are not seen. Another controversial case of torture and humiliation of a dead body
occurred in October 2015, when the dead body of Hacı Lokman Birlik was dragged on
the streets of Şırnak while tied to a military vehicle. Later, it was revealed that his body
was shot 28 times (telesur English, 2015). Birlik was 24 years old and he was the brother-
in-law of HDP MP, Leyla Birlik. Following the military operations of the Turkish gov-
ernment, local Kurdish leaders in Şırnak had declared autonomy which resulted in the
destruction of various parts of the city. The military confrontation in Şırnak between the
Turkish security forces and Kurdish self-defence units came to be known as the Şırnak
Clashes, and resulted in numerous human rights violations committed by Turkish
officials.
Agamben (2005) defines the ‘state of exception’ as ‘an anomic space in which what
is at stake is a force of law without law’ (p. 39). In his view, in the ‘state of exception’,
the normative aspect of the law is abolished while a governmental violence claims to
replace it (p. 87). For Agamben (1998: 168–169), ‘the space that is opened when the
state of exception begins to become the rule’ is the concentration camp, which shows
the relation between the ‘state of exception’ and dehumanization considering the dehu-
manizing features of the concentration camps of the 20th century. A state of emergency
declared in the Kurdish cities also served to worsen the situation and created grave
practices of dehumanization in the said cities. Agamben (2005: 80) mentions the figure
of ‘hostis iudicatus’ who was a ‘public enemy’ but differed from ‘hostis alienigena’ who
was a foreign enemy and protected by the ‘ius gentium’ (law of the people). This situa-
tion allows the sovereign to strip these ‘enemies’ of any kind of protection by suspend-
ing the law and therefore make way for their ‘legal murder’. It is possible to suggest that
the constant suspension of law in Kurdish cities contributed to dehumanizing practices
8 Media, War & Conflict 00(0)

by marking the Kurdish bodies as ‘others’ that are protected by neither the national nor
the international law.
Both of the cases should be read in relation to the hate speech on Turkish media in
framing the Turkish–Kurdish conflict and hate speech towards ethnic and religious
minorities in the Turkish public discourse. As Aktoprak (2018: 148) states, ‘the media
has played an important role as one of the main instruments of authoritarianism under the
AKP government, accompanied by the near-monopolization of the media by the govern-
ment.’ Popular TV series, such as Şefkat Tepe, Tek Türkiye and Kurtlar Vadisi, have
produced constant hate speech towards the Kurdish people and other ethnic minorities.
Misvak, an islamist ‘humor’ magazine, has produced constant examples of hate speech
in recent years. An example is a cartoon published on 6 October 2017, which depicts four
men ‘lying on the ground wearing female underwear, made from the national flags of the
USA, Israel and Germany’ (Nas, 2018: 82–83). The men are supposed to be PKK mili-
tants and one of them speaks with a ‘Kurdish accent’. Numerous pages of Misvak con-
tain xenophobic, homophobic, misogynist, racist and speciesist content (p. 82). It has
also been shown that various advertisements from Turkey depict the Kurdish people
from an orientalist gaze, representing them as immature, childish and backward cultural
others (p. 74). Hate speech in AKP’s later years in Turkey has been produced by social
media channels (Saka, 2018), different websites (Gençoğlu Onbaşi, 2015), print newspa-
pers (Deveci and Binbuğa Kınık, 2019), among others, and there are many cases in
which opposition figures have been targeted by national, local, and social media (Tören
and Kutun, 2018). This resulted in a promotion of the polarization in the country by
painting the ‘other’ as the ‘enemy’ (Adaklı, 2015: 16), which was exempt from legal
protection and can be killed or tortured without the fear of legal sanction.

Images of dead bodies on Twitter

Both cases have sparked furious reactions in Turkey, especially among the Kurdish pop-
ulation. The treatment of dead bodies caused indignation and anger. However, as images
went viral on social media, numerous insulting and celebrating comments were also
made by social media users. Since this was especially common on Twitter, this article
presents certain trends of these commentaries in order to paint a clear picture of the situ-
ation. It examines Twitter entries about both Ekin Wan and Hacı Lokman Birlik.
This article aims to unravel the ways in which dehumanization of PKK militants in
Turkey plays out and the place of disseminating graphic images of mutilated and humili-
ated dead bodies in dehumanizing the ‘other’. It should be emphasized that this article is
not interested in determining the frequency of dehumanizing practices but it focuses on
how dehumanizing practices occur. The dataset is relatively small and similar to other
works based on relatively small datasets, therefore the aim of this article is ‘not to pro-
duce generalizable results, but rather to understand complex human issues’ (Latzko-Toth
et al., 2017: 212).
In the case of Ekin Wan, the author looked at all Twitter posts with the hashtag ‘#geril-
laekinvanonurumuzdur’, which was the only hashtag about the case that was trending.
Since the aim was to examine immediate reactions, this article chooses to work on entries
from the first week, hence limiting the search between 15 and 22 August. The author also
Tutkal 9

searched for the names ‘Ekin Van’ (since the Turkish alphabet does not contain ‘w’ this is
how the name usually appears in Turkish posts), ‘Kevser Eltürk’ and ‘Kevser Ertürk’ (this
typo was common among Twitter users). Later, some repetitive entries from frequently
posting users were discarded. In this way, the author located 1091 insulting, celebrating
and threatening Twitter posts in Turkish about the case of Ekin Wan. In the case of
Hacı Lokman Birlik, the author examined all Twitter posts with the hashtag
‘#KürtlerUnutmayacak’ which was created after a Twitter post of HDP co-leader Selahattin
Demirtaş and was globally trending on Twitter. Demirtaş shared the photograph of Birlik
on 4 October 2015 on Twitter with a note that read ‘Look closely at this photo. It was
taken in Şırnak the day before. Let no one ever forget this as we will not’ (Turan, 2019:
213). Later, Twitter users created this hashtag which means ‘Kurds will not forget’. Other
than this hashtag, the author have also collected Twitter entries which contain the name
‘Hacı Lokman Birlik’ or the hashtags ‘#LokmanBirlik’ and ‘#HacıLokmanBirlik’. The
author searched for insulting, celebrating and threatening Twitter entries from 3 to 10
October, discarded some repetitive entries from frequent users and located 452 posts in
total. Later, these posts were processed in a RQDA qualitative data analysis program and
coded according to six different categories: animalization, dehumanization (other), dis-
criminating religious references, racism, sexism and wishing and/or celebrating death.
The posts in which PKK militants and/or Twitter users that criticize the images were
likened to animals were coded in the category of animalization. A category of ‘dehu-
manization (other)’ was created for posts in which words such as ‘dirt, garbage, creature
etc.’ were used to denominate bodies or the use of words such as ‘gebermek’ which
replaces the verb ‘die’ in a very rude manner. ‘Discriminating religious references’ refer
to when PKK militants, Kurdish people, or certain Twitter users were called ‘non-Mus-
lims’ in order to ‘insult’ them or when users stated that the dead militants now must be in
hell, or that Allah will damn them. The category of racism was created for explicitly
racist posts. Considering the trends, the author created four codes under this category:
racism against Armenians, racism against Jewish people, racism against Kurdish people
in general, and racism (other). This last one contains racist posts against other ethnic or
racial groups (Germans, Europeans, foreign people in general), posts that contain racist
insults such as ‘soysuz’, ‘kansız’, or ‘kanı bozuk’ (a literal attempt to translate these
insults may be ‘raceless’, ‘bloodless’ and ‘foul blooded’), or posts that contain Turkish
supremacist remarks. The category of sexism consists of five different codes: celebrating
rape, feminization (of male militants and male users), insulting physical traits (a com-
mon example is saying that Ekin Wan is so ugly that she was not worth raping), sexual
insults and threatening with rape. Finally, the category of ‘wishing and/or celebrating
death’ contains posts that celebrate the death of militants, wishing death for other people
(Twitter users, Kurdish politicians etc.), or threatening with death.
The ‘mainstream’ media chose to ‘ignore’ both cases. The image of the dead body of
Ekin Wan was disseminated on 15 August, but none of the 25 largest newspapers in cir-
culation in Turkey mentioned the case on their front page on 16 or 17 August. Images of
Hacı Lokman Birlik were disseminated on 3 October 2015. On 4 October, only 1 of the
25 largest newspapers in circulation in Turkey mentioned the case of Birlik on the front
page (Cumhuriyet) but it did not use any images. However, on 5 October, after the Twitter
message of Demirtaş, 4 of the 25 largest newspapers in circulation in Turkey mentioned
10 Media, War & Conflict 00(0)

the case on their front pages (Cumhuriyet, Zaman, Bugün and Taraf) and all of them used
the image, but the other 21 newspapers did not mention the case on their front page. If
one of the reasons for working on Twitter posts is the possibility of user participation in
dehumanizing practices which permits agency that does not exist in the relationship
between the reader and mainstream print newspapers, another reason is the ignorance of
war images depicting the military crimes of the Turkish army in the mainstream media.

Dehumanization of the ‘enemy’

In the case of Ekin Wan, a total of 1091 Twitter posts were examined. The number of
Twitter posts that contain elements from the categories can be seen in Table 1. In the case
of Birlik, the total number of posts was 452, breakdown of the posts according to catego-
ries can be seen in Table 2.

Table 1.  Categories and number of posts in Case 1.

Categories Animalization Dehumanization Discriminating Racism Sexism Wishing and/or

(other) religious celebrating death
references
Number of 341 166 114 184 608 242
posts

Table 2.  Categories and number of posts in Case 2.

Categories Animalization Dehumanization Discriminating Racism Sexism Wishing and/

(other) religious or celebrating
references death
Number of 123 51 52 292 118 72
posts

Animalization
A common example of animalization was calling the dead bodies ‘leş’ which is explicitly
used for dead bodies of animals in Turkish. In the case of Ekin Wan, among the 341
Twitter posts that were coded as ‘animalization’, in 106 posts users use the word ‘leş’ for
dead bodies of humans while in the case of Birlik, the word ‘leş’ was used in 28 of the
123 posts. In the case of Ekin Wan, dogs (150 times), pigs (29 times), donkeys (12
times), and monkeys/gorillas (11 times) were the animals that were referred to most fre-
quently while, in the case of Birlik, dogs (59 times), donkeys (11 times), pigs (5 times),
jackals (5 times), reptiles (3 times) and ticks (3 times) were the animals that were referred
to the most. These references contain likening references to these animals, stating that
certain humans (PKK militants, Kurdish people, sympathizing Twitter users, etc.) are
inferior to these animals, or explicitly wishing for the dead bodies (or the living members
of the groups) to be raped by these animals or accusing Kurdish people of bestiality with
Tutkal 11

these animals. In the case of Ekin Wan, in 29 posts, people were referred as ‘sürü’
(Turkish word for flock, herd and pack) while, in the case of Birlik, the number was 12.

Dehumanization (other)
An example of this category is likening dead bodies to ‘garbage’. In the case of Ekin
Wan, there are 13 posts that refer to her as ‘garbage’ or refer to her murder as ‘cleaning’.
In 82 posts, the verb ‘gebermek’ which is an extremely rude word replacing ‘to die’ is
used. In many posts it is stated that the dead bodies do not belong to humans, PKK mili-
tants are not humans, and they are disgusting. PKK militants are likened to excrement
and dirt. In the case of Birlik, 9 posts used the verb ‘gebermek’ and 8 posts referred to
human bodies as dirty and killing them as ‘cleaning’. In different posts, PKK militants
and/or Kurds are likened to objects that are used by the ‘enemy’ such as the USA, Israel,
Armenian people, European countries, etc.

Discriminating religious references

In this category, there are various posts which state that PKK militants, or users that criti-
cize torture and murder of them, are heathens, atheists, heretics, uncircumcised (distinc-
tive feature of Muslim men), etc. Religious insults also belong to this category. In the
case of Ekin Wan, 16 posts denominate people as atheists while among the common
insults towards non-Muslim people, ‘gavur’ only appears once while ‘kafir’ appears
three times. In the case of Birlik, people are denominated as atheists (15 times), Yezidis
(3 times) and Alevis (3 times). Here, both ‘gavur’ and ‘kafir’ only appear once.

Racism
As previously stated, four different codes were used in this category: racism against
Armenians, racism against Jewish people, racism against Kurdish people in general, and
racism (other). In the case of Ekin Wan, a striking finding is that the most common
among these posts were racism against Armenians even though the case does not involve
any Armenians. The number of posts that were coded in each sub-category can be seen
in Table 3 (case of Ekin Wan) and in Table 4 (case of Birlik).

Table 3.  Sub-categories of racism in Case 1.

Sub-categories Armenians Jewish people Kurdish people Racism (other)

Number of posts 76 14 69 45

Table 4.  Sub-categories of racism in Case 2.

Sub-categories Armenians Jewish people Kurdish people Racism (other)

Number of posts 95 14 175 38
12 Media, War & Conflict 00(0)

Using ‘Armenian’ to ‘insult’ people is a common trend among the posts. In the
case of Ekin Wan, in 68 posts people (users or militants) are called Armenians in
order to ‘insult’ them. There are posts that criticize people for ‘serving to Armenians’,
using the ‘Armenian genocide’ as an example to threaten Kurdish people, and
insulting Armenians for no apparent reason. This number was 95 in the case of
Birlik. Racist posts about Jewish people are also similar in which ‘Jewish’ is used
to ‘insult’ people or people are criticized for supposedly ‘serving to Jewish people’.
There is one case in which a user states that ‘even Jewish people are human com-
pared to you’ in regard to Kurds. Almost all Twitter posts were racist against Kurdish
people at some level, but the sub-category of racism against Kurdish people is
coded when there are specific insults that apply to the whole ethnic group. These
include insulting Kurdish people in general, mocking their language and their
accent when they speak Turkish, suggesting genocide against Kurdish people, or
advocating for a population exchange in order to ‘clean the country’ from Kurds.
These posts are more common in the case of Birlik, since the hashtag was named
‘Kurds will not forget’ therefore it received more responses against the Kurdish
people as a whole.
The sub-category of ‘racism (other)’ includes insults such as ‘soysuz’, ‘kansız’, or
‘kanı bozuk’, all of which underline racial inferiority. In the case of Ekin Wan,
‘soysuz’ (raceless) appears 26 times, ‘kansız’ (bloodless) 4 times, and ‘kanı bozuk’
(foul-blooded) 3 times. One user mentions the name ‘Adolf Hitler’ in order to
threaten Kurds while there are many xenophobic posts in which different countries
such as the US (6 times), England (3 times), Germany (once), and Europe in general
(2 times) are used as an insult. In the case of Birlik, there are 26 posts in which a
common racist stereotype appeared when people mocked Kurds for supposedly not
paying their bills. Here ‘soysuz’ was used 9 times, ‘kansız’ 5 times, and ‘kanı bozuk’
twice. Xenophobic posts here are about the US (11 times), England (3 times), France
(3 times), Germany (once), Russia (once), and Europe in general (4 times). There are
also two racist posts about Greeks and one racist post about the Roma.

Sexism
The category of sexism consists of five different codes: celebrating rape, feminization,
insulting physical traits, sexual insults, and threatening with rape. The number of posts
that were coded in each sub-category in the case of Ekin Wan can be seen in Table 5, and
in the case of Birlik in Table 6.

Table 5.  Sub-categories of sexism in Case 1.

Categories Celebrating Feminization Insulting Sexual Threatening

rape physical traits insults with rape
Number of 80 60 73 449 32
posts
Tutkal 13

Table 6.  Sub-categories of sexism in Case 2.

Categories Celebrating Feminization Insulting Sexual Threatening

rape physical traits insults with rape
Number of Does not apply 16 0 100 8
posts

The posts that celebrated that Ekin Wan was raped and were mocking about the possible
rape were coded in the sub-category of ‘celebrating rape’. These 80 posts contain various
entries that celebrate Turkish soldiers for the alleged rape of Ekin Wan. Feminization of
male PKK militants was especially common, an example was ‘joking’ about the nakedness
of Ekin Wan’s dead body by stating that it might be to determine her sex since all members
of PKK wear skirts, or saying that her skirt might be robbed by male militants. In 50 differ-
ent posts it is mentioned that male PKK militants wear skirts or fistan (traditional Kurdish
woman’s clothing). In the case of Birlik, feminization appears in 16 different posts, and 15
of them are references to wearing ‘skirts’ or ‘fistan’. Insulting physical traits included posts
saying that Ekin Wan was ugly, hairy, or looked like ‘a man’. A common example was say-
ing that she is ‘too ugly to rape’, which occurs in 15 different posts. There were other ‘jokes’
among the posts that included saying that the bullet that killed her must have been drunk. It
is striking that there is not a single post in the case of Birlik which falls under this category.
In the case of Ekin Wan, 449 different posts were coded as ‘sexual insults’. This is also
due to the fact that these kinds of insults are highly common in the Turkish language but the
difference between the cases (41.15% of total posts vs 22.12% of total posts) show that this
was not the sole reason. Finally, threatening with rape occurred both towards female PKK
militants, Kurdish women in general, and specific Twitter users. No legal action was taken
against those who were making threats to people on Twitter that they would ‘rape them’.

Wishing/celebrating death
This category contains posts that were celebrating deaths of PKK militants and wishing
death on other people. In the case of Ekin Wan, 132 posts were coded as ‘celebrating
death’ while 140 posts were coded as ‘wishing death’. There are many posts in this cat-
egory which contain photographs of other dead PKK militants. Among the users, there is
a person who uses his real name on Twitter and boasts of killing some of ‘those’ during
his military service and cutting off the ears of his victims. In the case of Birlik, 41 posts
were coded as ‘celebrating death’ while 42 posts were coded as ‘wishing someone dead’.
Again, no legal action was taken towards these people.

Discussion
Animalization was common in both cases since 31.25 percent of the posts in the case of
Ekin Wan and 27.21 percent of the posts in the case of Birlik contained it. Indeed, ani-
malization of Kurdish people was common throughout the history. An example from
Turkish literature is the novel Dersimli Kız (The Girl from Dersim) written by Niyazi
14 Media, War & Conflict 00(0)

Ahmet during the military operations in the Kurdish-populated city of Dersim in 1938.
Throughout the novel, people of Dersim are likened to animals, such as dogs or livestock
(Başaran İnce, 2016). Seyit Rıza, alleged leader of the Dersim Rebellion, also makes an
appearance and, when he enters the scene, the people of Dersim start throwing them-
selves to the ground and kissing his feet (p. 58). The objective of this scene is to highlight
the contrast between animal-like Kurds and the rational Turks.
The numbers of racist posts about Armenian people were common in both cases.
Especially in the case of Ekin Wan, there are more racist posts about Armenian people
(76) than about the Kurds. There are also various posts that liken PKK militants to Jewish
people. This was done to ‘dehumanize’ PKK militants since Armenian and Jewish people
are considered ‘less human’ by many in Turkey. The same can be seen in religious refer-
ences because most Sunni Muslims do not consider an ‘atheist’ equally human to a
‘Muslim’.
Sexist posts about Ekin Wan include both insults for her physical appearance, and
threats to rape her or women ‘like her’. As Morris et al. (2018: 1) claim, women are
objectified through their physical appearance. This may result in a more mechanistic
dehumanization when women are considered more ‘physically attractive’, or it may
result in a more animalistic dehumanization when women do not comply to the socie-
ty’s so-called ‘beauty standards’, especially if the said women are in a position to be
discriminated against for their class, race, or ethnicity. It is important to note that 55.72
percent of the posts in the case of Ekin Wan were coded under the category of sexism
while, in the case of Birlik, the percentage is 26.1 percent. Feminization of male mili-
tants occurred frequently as a way of ‘humiliating’ them, from which it can be inferred
that ‘man’ is considered more ‘human’ than the woman by many of the commenting
Twitter users.
Numerous users stated that Kurds have a high birth rate and used this information to
trivialize the lives of Kurdish people. The posts also included threats of genocide, gang-
rape, and the like. These threats were not really necessary, after all as Butler (2009: 76)
says, ‘some humans take their humanness for granted, while others struggle to gain
access to it.’ The ‘others’ are usually aware of their precariousness even when they are
not reminded of it. But these images were not made solely to remind the ‘others’ of their
otherness. These dehumanizing practices serve to group people as ‘us’ and ‘others’ which
is why they can be considered as practices of exclusion.
One of the most famous government-supporting journalists in Turkey, Fatih Tezcan,
published a Twitter post on 6 September 2015 in which he called PKK militants ‘moun-
tain whores’, and said that there will be at least 300 ‘leş’ from them. Islamist ‘humor’
magazine Misvak published a comic strip during military operations which depicts dead
bodies of Kurdish militants being swept towards the sewers by Turkish soldiers. Among
the Twitter posts about Ekin Wan and Birlik there were posts from public figures and
local politicians from various political parties. These examples are important since they
hint that the animalization of Kurdish militants and sexist insults against them are accept-
able and public figures can make these comments without fear of any backlash. As of
2019, such Twitter posts are still visible which means that the users did not face any criti-
cism that would force them to delete the posts. Ünlü claims that what legitimized the
Tutkal 15

physical violence in Dersim was the symbolic violence which painted the people of
Dersim as savages and less than human. As a result, the military operations were pre-
sented by the media as ‘civilizing operations’ (Ünlü, 2018: 201–202). In this sense, the
role of media performances did not change drastically since 1938 when it came to the
Kurdish question and it seems that dehumanizing practices about the Kurdish people
(and also about women, LGBTI communities, Armenians, Jewish people, Alevis, etc.)
are acceptable and they play an important role in the politics of the ruling class in Turkey.
While depicting the mutilated dead bodies of the ‘others’, the images in both cases also
mark the living bodies of ‘others’ as vulnerable and worthless.

Concluding remarks
This article argued that the dissemination of graphic images of dead bodies during wars
and ethnic conflicts is a practice of dehumanization of the ‘other’, which also serves to
unite those who are considered part of ‘us’. By mutilating, humiliating and torturing
dead bodies, the living bodies that are in the same category are also being deemed worth-
less. In the case of dead bodies of women, mechanisms of racism and sexism work
together. Ekin Wan was insulted for her physical appearance but at the same time she also
became the target of sexualized slurs. Feminization of male militants occurred frequently
as a way of ‘humiliating’ them. It is obvious that all forms of discrimination are closely
linked and racism, sexism, religious and ethnic discrimination, and speciesism are mostly
intertwined. Transcending binarisms such as ‘human–nonhuman’, and ‘us–other’ seems
fundamental in order to eradicate racism and sexism.
Dehumanizing practices in times of war make it extremely difficult to achieve
successful reconciliation and peace. When people think in the binary mode of ‘us–
others’, they are not able to see the ‘other’ as a being worthy of negotiation since the
‘other’ is considered ‘less than human’. This aspect of dehumanization has not been
studied thoroughly in the last failed peace process of the Turkish–Kurdish conflict.
It would be an intriguing area for further research. Examining the effects of dehu-
manizing practices of exclusion on polarized societies may allow us to establish
strategies for reversing these processes and achieving lasting peace in regions scarred
by wars and conflicts.

Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank the editor Dr. Katy Parry and anonymous reviewers for their helpful
comments. He also wants to thank Isaura Castelao-Huerta for her comments and her support.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.

ORCID iD
Serhat Tutkal https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2882-4186
16 Media, War & Conflict 00(0)

References
Adaklı G (2015) Kürt Sorununun ‘Çözüm Süreci’ Biterken AKP Medyası ve Psikolojik Savaş.
Mülkiye Dergisi 39(4): 5–41.
Adams CJ (2018) Neither Man nor Beast: Feminism and the Defense of Animals. London:
Bloomsbury Publishing.
Adelman M and Ruggi L (2016) The sociology of the body. Current Sociology 64(6): 907–930.
DOI: 10.1177/0011392115596561.
Agamben G (1998) Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Agamben G (2005) State of Exception. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Aktoprak E (2018) Between authoritarianism and peace: The Kurdish opening in Turkey (2013–
2015). In: Nimni E and Aktoprak E (eds) Democratic Representation in Plurinational States.
Chichester: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-01108-6_7.
Alexander JC (2006) The Civil Sphere. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acpro
f:oso/9780195162509.001.0001.
Bakiner O (2019) Why do peace negotiations succeed or fail? Legal commitment, transparency,
and inclusion during peace negotiations in Colombia (2012–2016) and Turkey (2012–2015).
Negotiation Journal 35(4): 471–513. DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12301.
Barrett M (2017) Dehumanization and the war in East Africa. Journal of War and Culture Studies
10(3): 1–15. DOI: 10.1080/17526272.2017.1315702.
Başaran İnce G (2016) Ulusal Kimlik, Kolektif Bellek ve Edebiyat: Dersimli Kız Romanında
Resmi Bellek Temaları. monograf 5: 36–68.
Baser B and Ozerdem A (2019) Conflict transformation and asymmetric conflicts: A cri-
tique of the failed Turkish–Kurdish peace process. Terrorism and Political Violence 5.
DOI: 10.1080/09546553.2019.1657844.
Blevins JL et al. (2019) Tweeting for social justice in #Ferguson: Affective discourse in Twitter
hashtags. New Media and Society 21(7): 1636–1653. DOI: 10.1177/1461444819827030.
Butler J (2004) Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence. New York: Verso.
DOI: 10.1177/107780040100700405.
Butler J (2009) Frames of War: When Is Life Grievable? London: Verso.
Castelao I and Viveros E (2014) El uso de las redes sociales como instrumento de organización
en movilizaciones sociales: el caso de #YoSoy132 en México. In: Valencia Rincón JC and
García Corredor CP (eds) Movimientos Sociales e Internet. Bogotá: Editorial Pontificia
Universidad Javeriana, 183–201.
Chu RX and Huang CT (2019) Indigenous peoples in public media: A critical discourse analysis
of the human zoo case. Discourse & Society 30: 395–411. DOI: 10.1177/0957926519837392.
Daily Mail (2010) ‘I didn’t think of Iraqis as humans,’ says U.S. soldier who raped 14-year-old girl
before killing her and her family, 21 December. Available at: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/
news/article-1340207/I-didnt-think-Iraqis-humans-says-U-S-soldier-raped-14-year-old-girl-
killing-her-family.html?ito=feeds-newsxml (accessed 27 April 2020).
Dalsklev M and Kunst JR (2015) The effect of disgust-eliciting media portrayals on outgroup
dehumanization and support of deportation in a Norwegian sample. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations 47: 28–40. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2015.03.028.
Deveci C and Binbuğa Kınık BN (2019) Nationalist bias in Turkish official discourse on hate speech:
A Rawlsian criticism. Turkish Studies 20: 26–28. DOI: 10.1080/14683849.2018.1479961.
Durkheim E (1995) The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. New York: The Free Press.
Esses VM, Medianu S and Lawson AS (2013) Uncertainty, threat, and the role of the media in
promoting the dehumanization of immigrants and refugees. Journal of Social Issues 69(3):
518–536. DOI: 10.1111/josi.12027.
Tutkal 17

Etöz Z (2016) Vasiyetimdir: ‘Yürekleri Ağırlaşsın Diye, Tabutumun İçinde Tepineceğim’. In:
İflazoğlu EC and Demir AA (eds) Öteki Olarak Ölmek. Ankara: Dipnot Yayınları, 79–99.
Gençoğlu Onbaşi F (2015) Social media and the Kurdish issue in Turkey: Hate speech, free speech
and human security. Turkish Studies 16(1): 115–130. DOI: 10.1080/14683849.2015.1021248.
Ghobadi S and Clegg S (2015) ‘These days will never be forgotten . . .’: A critical mass approach
to online activism. Information and Organization 25: 52–71. DOI: 10.1016/j.infoan-
dorg.2014.12.002.
Gregory T (2016) Dismembering the dead: Violence, vulnerability and the body in war. European
Journal of International Relations 22(4): 944–965. DOI: 10.1177/1354066115618244.
Haciyakupoglu G and Zhang W (2015) Social media and trust during the Gezi protests in Turkey.
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 20(4): 450–466. DOI: 10.1111/jcc4.12121.
Hakikat Adalet Hafıza Merkezi (2015) Chronology of peace process in Turkey. Available at:
http://hakikatadalethafiza.org/en/chronology-of-peace-process-in-turkey/ (accessed 27 April
2020).
Hall S (1996) Introduction: Who needs ‘identity’? In: Hall S and Du Gay P (eds) Questions of
Cultural Identity. London: Sage, 1–17. DOI: 10.4135/9781446221907.n1
Harlow S et al. (2017) Protest paradigm in multimedia: Social media sharing of coverage about
the crime of Ayotzinapa, Mexico. Journal of Communication 67(3): 328–349. DOI: 10.1111/
jcom.12296.
Haslam N et al. (2009) Attributing and denying humanness to others. European Review of Social
Psychology 19(1): 55–85. DOI: 10.1080/10463280801981645.
İbrahimhakkıoğlu F (2018) ‘The most naked phase of our struggle’: Gendered shaming and
masculinist desiring-production in Turkey’s War on Terror. Hypatia 33(3). DOI: 10.1111/
hypa.12429.
Kaya ZN and Whiting M (2019) The HDP, the AKP and the battle for Turkish democracy.
Ethnopolitics 18(1). DOI: 10.1080/17449057.2018.1525168.
Kovacevic DAA (2017) La animalización como mecanismo de deshumanización en la dictadura
militar chilena (1973–1990). Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Críticos Animales 1:
151–179.
Kuntsman A (2010) Online memories, digital conflicts and the cybertouch of war. Digital Icons:
Studies in Russian, Eurasian and Central European New Media 4: 1–12.
Kuntsman A (2012) Introduction: Affective fabrics of digital cultures. In: Karatzogianni A and
Kuntsman A, Digital Cultures and the Politics of Emotion: Feelings, Affect and Technological
Change. Chichester: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1057/9780230391345.
Laclau E (1990) New Reflections on the Revolutions of Our Time. London: Verso.
Latzko-Toth G, Bonneau C and Millette M (2017) Small data, thick data: Thickening strategies for
trace-based social media research. In: Sloan L and Quan-Haase A (eds) The SAGE Handbook
of Social Media Research Methods. London: Sage. DOI: 10.4135/9781473983847.n13.
Morris KL, Goldenberg J and Boyd P (2018) Women as animals, women as objects: Evidence for two
forms of objectification. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 10: 252–264. DOI: 10.1177
/0146167218765739.
Nas A (2018) New cultural others? Unveiling the limitations and paradoxes. In: Media
Representations of the Cultural Other in Turkey. Chichester: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1007
/978-3-319-78346-8_4.
Ozsoy H (2013) Introduction: The Kurds’ ordeal with Turkey in a transforming Middle East.
Dialectical Anthropology 37: 171–182. DOI: 10.1007/s10624-013-9297-y.
Peggs K (2014) Animals and Sociology. Chichester: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1057
/9780230377271.0005.
Protner B (2018a) Reading and feeling gender in perpetrator graffiti and photography in Turkey.
Kurdish Studies 1. DOI: 10.33182/ks.v6i1.434.
18 Media, War & Conflict 00(0)

Protner B (2018b) The limits of an ‘open mind’: state violence, Turkification, and complicity in the
Turkish–Kurdish conflict. Turkish Studies. DOI: 10.1080/14683849.2018.1514494.
Romero Morales Y (2018) La narrativa colonial española sobre Marruecos como fuente para el
estudio de la mora-bestia: deshumanización y monstruosidad. Feminismo/s, June: 143–166.
DOI: 10.14198/fem.2018.31.07.
Rumelili B and Çelik AB (2017) Ontological insecurity in asymmetric conflicts: Reflections on
agonistic peace in Turkey’s Kurdish issue. Security Dialogue 48(4): 279–296. DOI: 10.1177
/0967010617695715.
Saka E (2018) Social media in Turkey as a space for political battles: AKTrolls and other
politically motivated trolling. Middle East Critique 27(2): 161–177. DOI: 10.1080
/19436149.2018.1439271.
Sontag S (2004) Regarding the Pain of Others. New York: Picador.
Steuter E and Wills D (2009) Discourses of dehumanization : Enemy construction and Canadian
media complicity in the framing of the War on Terror. Global Media Journal 2(2): 7–24.
telesur English (2015) Turkish Prime Minister says dragging of Kurdish man’s corpse ‘unacceptable’,
5 October. Available at: https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Turkish-PM-Says-Dragging-of-
Kurdish-Mans-Corpse-Unacceptable--20151005-0032.html (accessed 31 August 2019).
Tören T and Kutun M (2018) ‘Peace academics’ from Turkey: Solidarity until the peace comes.
Global Labour Journal 9(1): 103–112. DOI: 10.15173/glj.v9i1.3424.
Turan Ö (2019) Return to the status quo ante: Reloading militarism before and after 15 July coup
attempt. In: Çiçekoğlu F and Turan Ö (eds) The Dubious Case of a Failed Coup: Militarism,
Masculinities, and 15 July in Turkey. Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan, 189–241.
Ünlü B (2018) Türklük Sözleşmesi: Oluşumu, İşleyişi ve Krizi. Ankara: Dipnot Yayınları.
Vaughan-Williams N (2015) ‘We are not animals!’ Humanitarian border security and zoopolitical
spaces in EUrope. Political Geography 45: 1–10. DOI: 10.1016/j.polgeo.2014.09.009.
Winkler C et al. (2018) Images of death and dying in ISIS media: A comparison of English and Arabic
print publications. Media, War & Conflict 12(3): 248–262. DOI: 10.1177/1750635217746200.
Yalçınkaya A (2016) Gözleri Faltaşı Gibi Kapalı: Lades. In: İflazoğlu EC and Demir AA (eds)
Öteki Olarak Ölmek. Ankara: Dipnot Yayınları, 43–77.
Yarkın G (2015) The ideological transformation of the PKK regarding the political economy of the
Kurdish region in Turkey. Kurdish Studies 3(1): 26–46. DOI: 10.33182/ks.v3i1.390.
Yegen M (2016) Armed struggle to peace negotiations: Independent Kurdistan to democratic
autonomy, or the PKK in context. Middle East Critique 25(4): 365–383. DOI: 10.1080
/19436149.2016.1218162.

Author biography
Serhat Tutkal is a PhD candidate in Human and Social Sciences at the National University of
Colombia and he is part of the research group titled as ‘Colombian group of media discourse analy-
sis’ (Grupo Colombiano de Análisis del Discurso Mediático). He holds a Master’s Degree in
Political Science from Ankara University. His research is concerned with political violence and the
ways in which it is legitimized or delegitimized. He is especially interested in the Turkish-Kurdish
conflict and the Colombian conflict.