In the previously posted quote, I don’t believe the terms and phrases “harem”, “groom them”, “lover”, “he could use them as he chose”, and “wife and children became in effect one” give a vague impression of his relationships with his daughters. I find these hard to interpret as anything but describing an abusive sexual relationship.

It’s also written by an aristocrat in the 1960s whose tendency towards florid prose is apparent throughout. “Groom” as in “child grooming” was not in common usage until the 1980s or 90s, I feel obligated to note. Kinross often describes Ataturk in terms of power and how he used people, often with asymmetrically emotional relationships; in that context, and that of a man emerged from the literal Ottoman Empire, ‘harem’ is much less suggestive. It’s noted by Kinross at multiple points that Ataturk lacked a real family or emotional support for most of his adult life, and was a deeply lonely man, not on a romantic level, but on the level of human connection.

On top of that, Kinross’s biography is one of the English language sources on Ataturk, and if it was meant (or interpreted at the time of release) as an accusation of molesting his daughters, considering how the Turkish government tends to react to such things, I suspect there would be much more controversy around the book itself. I also suspect that it would be an accusation passed around much more often by Islamists who despise Ataturk if it had any substance, as his widely-speculated bisexuality so often is.

“Lover” is the most suggestive term used, and sparked me to spend some two hours searching through sources, English and (translated, as I don’t speak it) Turkish for any other accusations of a similar sort. Only his eldest adoptive daughter comes up as a potential lover in any serious treatments, and even then as fairly fringe speculation largely predicated on the fact that they lived in the same house and she acted as his ‘first lady’ at affairs of state, itself not unusual. The British embassy at the time notes the rumor in internal correspondence, but dismisses it - and the Brits were hardly Ataturk’s biggest friends.

I’m biased, and like I said, it certainly can be legitimately read that way. But it’s also not as cut-and-dry as you suggest here.

I’m by no means an expert on this subject, but I found a few other segments from the biography that I believe contribute to the bigger picture of how he viewed young girls and women in general:

That Ataturk had a reputation as a womanizer, especially earlier in life, is not in question; only whether he had sexual relationships with his daughters. Also, that first quote, I believe, is presented in the book to contrast his reputation with the reality, isn’t it?

Ataturk: The Rebirth of a Nation by Patrick Kinross.

One small problem - I own and have read that book, and have it on my Amazon account as an ebook no less, and to my recollection it says nothing of the sort and in fact speculates on Ataturk’s possible impotency during the 20s and 30s from venereal disease contracted during his younger years.

Do you have a rough idea of what page this accusation is on?

EDIT: Another user pointed out the paragraph. It’s an aside, but it arguably makes the accusation. I apologize for my hostility.