Gay Romania: Sighisoara, Crava, Buchart, Brasov And More

Contents:

• GAY LIFE ROMANIA
• THE BEST ROMANIA GAY CLUBS & BARSGAY CLUBS & BARS ROMANIA
• BETIFUL GAY ROMANIA: SIGHISOARA, CRAVA, BUCHART, BRASOV, BRAN & PEL STL, AND MUCH MORE

GAY LIFE ROMANIA

Roma of mory sexual and genr inti experience opprsn and stctural equaly both as Roma and as lbian, gay, bi, trans, tersex and queer-intified (LGBTIQ) due to the tersectnal lotn that they occupy society and the negative social valuatn of their non-normative ethnic/racial, sexual/genr and other inti (Fremlova, 2017). I argue that the lived experienc of LGBTIQ Roma pose a fundamental challenge to one-dimensnal, sentialisg and homogenisg nceptualisatns of Romani inti.

In this article, I e ‘queer’ to unpack LGBTIQ Roma’s experienc of how ‘marked’ sentialist inty tegori such as ‘Roma’, ‘woman’, ‘gay/lbian/bi’ or ‘trans’ put at a stctural disadvantage dividuals who self-intify (or are intified) as such, as opposed to ‘unmarked’ or ntral inty tegori such as ‘non-Roma/whe’, ‘man’, ‘straight/heteronormative’ or ‘cis’. Between September 2015 and November 2016, I nducted 14 -pth semi-stctured terviews wh 15 participants: three Romani lbian women; one Romani bi woman; one Romani queer-intified, straight woman; two Romani trans men; one Romani tersex person; two Romani/Traveller bi men; one Romani queer-intified man; and four Romani gay men.

Tremlett (2009: 24) suggts the ncept of hybridy to acunt for the multifacetedns of Romani inti, ‘effectively mov[g] away om homogenisg terms’, and ‘super-diversy’ as the much-need shift ‘beyond ethnicy’ (Vertovec, 2007) whout losg sight of ethnicy, which has a ‘potential to engage more eply wh the diverse life experienc and stctural posngs of people’ (Tremlett, 2014: 831, 838).

THE BEST ROMANIA GAY CLUBS & BARSGAY CLUBS & BARS ROMANIA

Queer theorisg tak norms ‘beyond the heterosexual/homosexual bary to a age of queer theory as an approach that criqu the class, race and genr specific dimensns … that do not simply scribe and reify the spac of sexual “others”’ (Osw, 2008: 96). However, as a Roma person, I have bee ed to not beg let to gay clubs, as well as to other exprsns of antigypsyism by non-Romani gays.

Romani lbian women’s existence be hidn and visible, rultg different treatment afford to Romani (lbian) women as opposed to some Romani (gay) men. Complementg Ana’s reference to stanc of forced marriage as a means of social ntrol employed to lim the lbian woman’s eedom is a siar narrative by a Romani gay man:.

His narrative shows that gay men n also be unrprivileged by virtue of their sex/genr and sexualy, th makg them vulnerable to forced/arranged marriage as a means of social ntrol. Here, theorisg the experienc of Ana and Anton through the prism of queer tersectnali enabl to terrogate the tersectnal workgs of heteronormativy and patriarchy that operate through social ntrol, as well as their impact on the queer intifitns ma over time by the Romani lbian woman and the Romani gay man. Fay, kship stctur and muny are key social safety s (San Román, 1975; Okely, 1975; Stewart, 1997; Gay y Blas, 1999; Mart and Gamella, 2005; Cahn, 2009; Tăr, 2012).

BETIFUL GAY ROMANIA: SIGHISOARA, CRAVA, BUCHART, BRASOV, BRAN & PEL STL, AND MUCH MORE

However, others may not abi by the social norms, or they may simply enable and validate the existence of LGBTIQ fay members: “In my fay, there are a uple of gays and I know of two lbians.

I remember my mum had gay iends” (Jolana); “My mum had sexual ntact wh women; she has a tattoo of a woman on her lower back” (Gabriela).

Simultaneoly, some nservative fai may perceive non-heteronormative sexual inti (that is, beg lbian, gay or bi) as socially ‘unacceptable’ or ‘unnatural’ while they may view transng om one genr inty to another more favourably:. A guy [mted] suici … when the muny knew that he’s gay, often you n hear people jokg about him, sayg “Look, the guy who sleeps wh guys. In the se of Romani gay men, this ncerns particularly those perceived as ‘passive’, whereby their genr is associated wh femy and emed female/feme/effemate.

While metropolan urban environments enable visibly non-heteronormative, gay existence, to pe the stigma associated wh ‘lookg feme’ heteronormative environments, some Romani gay men feel that they have to ‘butch up’ their masculy orr not to lose their social standg. This is plemented by Aleko’s acunts of the ‘passive’ gay man wh a low social stat, who was ridiculed and shamed as a rult, and the two ‘passive’ Romani gay men whom the muni accepted sce they were nsired dispensable. Simultaneoly, some Romani gay men’s experienc are also impacted by social normativi, particularly wh rpect to mechanisms of social ntrol enforcg heteronormative and patriarchal social paradigms.

Th, the fdgs not only dispel claims and myths about the prumed ‘pulsory heterosexualy’, ‘homophobia’ and ‘sexual backwardns’ of Roma, but also pose a fundamental challenge to stereotypil, one-dimensnal and sentialisg misreprentatns of Roma. Simultaneoly, attendg to the unrlyg power relatns, social bari and cultural scripts of the majory societi which LGBTIQ Roma live helps to ‘look beyond ethnicy’ at stctural issu such as homo/lbo/transphobia and misogyny, which are mon to both Roma and non-Roma, while acknowledgg and beg able to vtigate the specific effects that their tersectns wh antigypsyism produce for LGBTIQ Roma.

Isaac Blake; Director of the Romani Cultural & Arts Company, said “This is a very personal project for me as a proud Gay Romani Gypsy. For the LGBT muny, the nflict is signifint as Romania mov to a new century, a new enomy and new fluenc om the European Unn wh s forward-thkg pro-gay polici. The difficult culture clash is led by a small number of bold LGBT activists termed to pursue “Gay Life Romania” a more open and liberal future for themselv and all Romanian lbians and gays.