Turkish women are arrested for bikini photos, while fornication, forbidden in Islam, is permitted. As with the issues of headscarf bans, Sweden’s NATO membership, Mosque demolitions, and especially the call to prayer, the question arises: Does the AKP government serve God?

Five months of house arrest because social media influencer Merve Taskin offered herself for a romantic dinner on a Valentine’s Day. Images: X/Merve Taskin

Istanbul – The recent arrest of at least 16 women in connection with online erotic platforms such as OnlyFans has drawn international attention. Turkish authorities are investigating on charges of obscenity and alleged money laundering. Arrest warrants have been issued for a total of 25 individuals, and assets worth millions have been seized. The measures are taking place in the context of a court-ordered ban on the platform in Turkey that has been in force since 2023.

Officially, prosecutors and the government justify the crackdown as a means of protecting public morality, the family and social values. Critics, however, point out that the investigations are directed almost exclusively at women who earn their living through digital content, while structural issues such as financial flows, platform regulation or consumption patterns are largely ignored.

Human rights organizations and secular legal experts view the arrests as a continuation of the moral and order policies through which the Turkish leadership has exercised social control for years —often using religious rhetoric, yet with a clearly political agenda.

Pseudo-Islamization Instead of Religious Coherence

Politically, many observers speak of a pseudo-Islamization. Although the government regularly invokes religious values, a consistent islamic legal or ethical framework is scarcely discernible.

The Holy Quran does not contain a blanket prohibition on female visibility or gainful employment. With regard to clothing, it admonishes concerning modesty and restraint for women —as well as for men— specifically advising against ostentatiously displaying one’s “adornment.” This is a Warning, not a coercive commandment —unlike “lewdness,” which is indeed punishable by detention under Surah An-Nisa (The Women) 4:15. Even when read together with Surah An-Nur (The Light) 24:32 on bodily display, it is difficult to derive a basis for state bans or criminal sanctions. The red line is generally drawn at nudism, pornography and fornication, the latter of which is legal in Turkey, while pornography, nudism and partial nudity are deliberately conflated under the vague concept of “obscenity.” In several well-documented earlier OnlyFans-related cases, women in Turkey were taken into police custody for bikini photos, lingerie images. Enforcement is selective and predominantly targets women. In its official statements, the Turkish prosecution does not specify what type of content each individual suspect is alleged to have produced, once again referring only vaguely to “obscene content.”

A similar inconsistency characterizes the now uninterrupted 23-year rule of the AKP with respect to other Quranic passages, such as those warning against political alliances that contradict one’s faith. These, too, are Warnings rather than day-to-day prohibitions —especially given that the Turkish government itself desires close strategic, economic and military ties with Western states.

Another contradiction appears in the handling of alcohol and drugs. While alcohol consumption is explicitly prohibited in the Holy Quran, the Turkish state earns substantial revenue from the taxation and state-regulated sale of alcoholic beverages. At the same time, the government repeatedly stages public arrests of artists, musicians or influencers for drug use. This double standard reinforces the impression of political instrumentalization rather than religious consistency.

The contradiction is particularly evident in religious practice itself. According to the Quran, Mosques are meant solely for the Remembrance of God. Yet to this day, the name of the Prophet is called from minarets five times a day for prayer, thus to be worshiped. This historically established practice stands in tension with Quranic Verses explicitly warning against invoking names other than God in places of worship. A genuinely consistent “Islamization” would have to address these issues as well —yet deliberately does not.

As with the headscarf bans affecting schoolgirls, students and civil servants, the OnlyFans arrests raise the fundamental question of whom these measures actually serve: God, Islam —or primarily the mobilization of conservative voters. The selective invocation of religious arguments appears all the more contradictory given that President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan simultaneously relativized key religious sensitivities for political gain: the Turkish leadership ultimately rewarded the Quran burnings, which were allowed by Sweden, by approving Sweden’s accession to NATO and initially linked this to the prospect of reviving talks with the European Union. When that goal proved unrealistic, arms deals —particularly the acquisition of new fighter jets— moved to the forefront, despite Turkey’s advanced drone capabilities making such purchases militarily unnecessary. Added to this are repeated instances in which Erdoğan’s party approved the demolition of Mosques to make way for shopping malls, roads or infrastructure projects. Taken together, these elements reinforce the impression that the issue is less about Islam or religious principles than about power politics, strategic bargaining and electoral calculations.

Conclusion

It is precisely the same government that bears responsibility for inflation, impoverishment and the erosion of purchasing power through years of economic mismanagement that now punishes women for trying to survive. In Turkey, the official inflation rate stands at around 30 percent, while opposition figures and independent economists estimate real inflation at 70 to over 80 percent —often even higher for food, rent and energy. Millions struggle daily to make ends meet, and regular employment is no longer sufficient for many. Instead of acknowledging this failure, the government targets those who attempt to secure an income outside a collapsing labor market. Women are criminalized, publicly shamed and morally condemned —not because they harm others, yet because they seek to escape poverty produced by the state itself. The message of this policy is both cynical and brutal: starvation is deemed more acceptable than self-determined survival. Morality is not used to protect society, yet as a weapon to deflect from failure and punish social hardship.

>>-> Afghanistan Legalizes Beating of Women

By Okay Altinisik | 14-2-2026, 12:43:26