The status of the Romany woman in the family and in society

Alena Kajanová, David Urban, Pavlína Adamcová
University of South Bohemia, Faculty of Health and Social Studies, Department of Social Work, České Budějovice, Czech Republic

Korespondenční autor: Alena Kajanová (ali.kajanova@email.cz)

ISSN 1804-7181 (On-line)

Full verze:

Submitted:15. 7. 2013
Accepted: 2. 12. 2013
Published online: 30. 12. 2013

Summary

The aim of this survey study is to highlight the changes in the status of the Romany woman in the family and in society. The status of the Romany woman had always been one of subordination to the Romany man. The woman was responsible for the household and care of the children and family, and even for its livelihood if necessary. The woman’s position was determined by her age, fertility, and number of children, and, to a certain extent, did not allow access to education or the official job market. Currently, we are seeing efforts of emancipation of Romany women in the family, where the younger generation is already making their decisions about the number of children they will have and when they will have them, just as they are have “more independence” regarding the question of marriage and independence from men. The status of the Romany woman in society seems to be changing at a somewhat slower pace than her status in the family, and is influenced by such elements as the lack of opportunities to participate in the job market, which is often resolved by early and frequent motherhood. This reality completes the cycle that prevents a more progressive emancipation of the Romany woman in both of the situations described, which, of course, overlap in real world situations Organisations dedicated to the status of Romany women that have begun to emerge over the past decade have also played a significant role in this area.

Literatura

1. Anderson CD (1996). Understanding the inequality problematic: From Scholary rhetoric to theoretical reconstruction. Gender and Society. 10/6: 729–746. ISSN 1552–3977.

2. Brenner J (2000). Conclusion-Intersections, locations, and capitalist vlase relations. In: Brenner J (ed). Women and the Politics of Class (293–324). New York: Monthly Review Press. 320 p. ISBN 1–58367–010–6.

3. Budilová L, Jakoubek M (2005). Rural impurity and kinship in a Gypsy settlement in eastern Slovakia. Romany Studies. 15/1: 1–29. ISSN 1757–2274.

4. Davidová E (2004). Romano drom – Cesty Romů 1945–1990 [Romano drom – The Journeys of the Romany 1945–1990]. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého. 273 p. ISBN 80–244–0524–5 (Czech).

5. Davidová E et al. (2010). Kvalita života a sociální determinanty zdraví u Romů v České a Slovenské republice [The quality of like and social detriments to the health of Romany in the Czech and Slovak Republics]. Prague: Triton. 256 p. ISBN 978–80–7387–428–5 (Czech).

6. Dudová R (2012). Interrupce v České republice: zápas o ženská těla [Abortion in the Czech Republic the struggle over the female body]. Prague: Sociologický ústav AV ČR, v. v. i. 177 p. ISBN 978–80–7330– 214–6 (Czech).

7. Durst J (2002). Fertility and childbearing practices among poor Gypsy women in Hungary: The Intersections of class, race and gender. Communist and Post-communist Studies. 35/4: 457–474. ISSN 0967–067X.

8. Durst J (2007). “Több a kára, mint a haszna: születésszabályozás a gettóban” Demografia (Hungarian journal), 50. évf. 1. szám, pp. 74–103.74–103.

9. Hasdeu J (2008). Imagining the Gypsy Woman. Third Text. 22/3: 347–357.

10. Hofman NG (2008). Life at the crossroads of social change: Invigorating Romany women’s empowerment in post- socialist Croatia. Human Organization. 67/4: 417–429.

11. Hrvatić N (2000). Upbringing and education of the Roma in Croatia. Social Studies. 9/2: 46–47.

12. Hübschmannová M (2007). Romové v České republice (1945–1998) [Romany in the Czech Republic (1945–1998)]. Prague: Socioklub. 560 p. ISBN 80–902260–7–8 (Czech).

13. Izsák R (2009). The European Romany women’s movement: The Struggle for human rights. Development. 52/2: 200–207. ISSN 1011–6370.

14. Jakoubek M (2004). Romové – konec (ne)jednoho mýtu [Romany – the end of many myths]. Prague: Ermat. 317 p. ISBN 80–86140–21–0 (Czech).

15. Kajanová A, Urban D, Kubelová V, Davidová E (2009). Změna tradičního postavení romské ženy v romské rodině a české společnosti [The change in the traditional stuts of the Romany woman in the Romany family and Czech society]. Zdravotnictví a Soc. Práce. 3–4, 70–74. ISSN 1336–9326 (Czech).

16. Kalibová K (1993). Gypsies in the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic: Geographic and demographic characteristics. GeoJournal. 30/3: 255–258. ISSN 0343–2521.

17. Kendall D (1997). Race, class, and gender in a diverse society. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. ISBN 0205198287.

18. Kóczé A (2003). Romany women face double discrimination in Europe. (Presentation to European Parliament Committee of Women’s Right and Equal Opportunities.) Available at: http://www.socialniprava.info/article300.html

19. Kóczé A (2011). Gender, Ethnicity and Class: Romany Women’s political Activism and Social Struggles (dizertační práce). Central Europen University: Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology. Budapest. Supervizor: Judit Bodnár, Don Kalb.

20. Kolářová M (2008). Na křižovatkách nerovností: gender, třída a rasa/etnicita [At the crossroads of inequality: gender, class, and race/ethnicity]. Gender, Rovné Příležitosti, Výzkum. 8/2: 1–10. ISSN 1213–0028 (Czech).

21. Koldinská K (2010). Gender a sociální právo. Rovnost mezi muži a ženami v sociálněprávních souvislostech [Gender and social law. Equality between men and women in the context of social law]. Prague: C. H. Beck. 240 p. ISBN 978–80–7400–343–1 (Czech).

22. Králíková A (2006). Porušování lidských práv [Human rights violations]. Prague: Gender studies (Czech).

23. Mirković D (1996). Ethnic conflict and genocide: Reflexion on ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 548: 191–199. ISSN 1552–3349.

24. Newman DM (2007). Identities and inequalities: Exploring the intersections of race, class, gender and sexuality. New York: McGraw Hill. ISBN 0073380105.

25. Pulkrábková K (2009). Rámování reprezentace romských žen v české společnosti [Framing the representation of Romany women in Czech society]. In: Sociologický Webzin. [online], 11 [cit. 2013–02–23]. Available at: http://www.socioweb.cz/…eb_11_09.pdf (Czech).

26. Pulkrábková K (2009a). Formování reprezentace romských žen v české společnosti [Forming the representation of Romany women in Czech society]. Socioweb 11/2009 (Czech).

27. Pulkrábková K (2009b). Romský ženský aktivismus v českém veřejném prostoru – Re/prezentace romského ženství v pojetí romských ženských aktivistek. 11. pracovní konference BIOgrafu, 2009–06–19–21, Hoješín u Seče [Romany women’s activism in the Czech public sphere – (Re)presentation of Romany womanhood in the testimony of Romany female activists. The 11th professional congress of BIOgraf, 2009–06–19–21, Hoješín u Seče] (Czech).

28. Říčan P (1998). S Romy žít budeme – jde o to jak: dějiny, současná situace, kořeny problémů, naděje společné budoucnosti [We shall live with the Romany—but how: history, current situation, roots of the issues, and hope for a common future]. 1st ed. Prague: Portál, 143 p. ISBN 80–7178–250–5 (Czech).

29. Stewart M (2005). Čas cikánů [The time of the Gypsies]. Brno: Barrister & Principal. 280 p. ISBN 80–7364–017–1 (Czech).

30. Tritt R, Laber R, Whitman L (1992). Struggling for Ethnic Identity: Czechoslovaki­a’s endangered gypsies: a Helsinki Watch report. New York: Human Rights Watch. 152 p. ISBN 1564320782.

31. Turková K (2008). Čas cikánů [A Gitano woman between tradition and the present. The status of the woman in select communities of Catalan Gitanos in French Perpignan and the surrounding area]. Romano Džaniben. 1: 65–90. ISSN 1210–8545 (Czech).

32. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP/ILO regionally survey) (2002). The Roma in Central and Eastern Europe: Avoiding the Dependency Trap. Prague: Gabal Analysis & Consulting. 12. 9. 2008. Available at: <http://undp.sk>

33. Weinbaum B (2010). What the Gypsy woman probably didn’t tell the female anthropologist: A Critical response to Judith Okely’s own or other culture. Femspec. 11/1: 44–55. ISSN 1523–4002.

34. Žigová A (1996). Nejstarší sestra a její postavení v tradiční romské rodině [The eldest sister and her status in the traditional Romany family]. Romano Džaniben. 3/1–2: 65–70. ISSN 1210–8545 (Czech).