• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Gypsy Toilet Culture

A

Anonymous

Guest
I first heard about this recently and it's just been mentioned again on the Kilroy and the Gypsies programme. Apparently, Romany Gypsies (which these particular people claimed to be) will not share a toilet with non-Romanies on the grounds that subsequently the Gypsies will be made unclean - although, contrarily, they claimed that the non-Romany wouldn't actually be unclean themselves.

Anyway, I can't find any other reference to this anywhere. I know some cultures have specific toilet-related practices such as Muslim faith, but have never heard anything related to Gypsies before. I know, as Romanies have travelled across the world, they have adopted/adapted parts of the beliefs of the country they are in and it could possibly be related to Muslim beliefs but somehow it doesn't ring true for me.

Does anyone have any information at all about any of this? Or even other 'peculiar' Gypsy beliefs?
 
Not a Muslim tradition - it does sound alot like a Hindu caste taboo, however, which is interesting given the Roma's supposed Indian origins.
 
Alexius said:
Not a Muslim tradition - it does sound alot like a Hindu caste taboo, however, which is interesting given the Roma's supposed Indian origins.
Click to expand...
I meant to put "etc., etc." after the last "Muslim" in my post. :oops: I meant to refer to Muslims, Hindus, Zoroastrians and so on. I thought of the Hindu caste system myself, but again, what didn't ring true was the way the man on the documentary implied that although he and his family would be made unclean if a non-Romany used their toilet, the non-Romany themselves wouldn't be considered unclean themselves. So, it's not as if it's a genuine caste issue as then the non-Romany would definitely be considered unclean.

I'm seriously wondering as to whether this was a load of tosh not a Romany culture issue at all.
 
When does a particular quirk or behavioural oddity become a point of culture?

While not necessarily this particular "toilet behaviour", I can't help feeling that some silly bias or minor habits - when commented upon by a non-member of the practitioners - are defended as being "part of our culture" even though the origins of said habit has no clear basis in that culture.

Now, if all Gypsies/Roma/Travellers (delete labels not applicable) just refused to use the same toilets as non-members and declared "We don't like you lot using our bogs!" it wouldn't sound as socially acceptable as "It's part of our culture!" since that activates the "You're A Racist!" Shield against anyone who dares to question behaviour.
 
Stormkhan said:
When does a particular quirk or behavioural oddity become a point of culture?

While not necessarily this particular "toilet behaviour", I can't help feeling that some silly bias or minor habits - when commented upon by a non-member of the practitioners - are defended as being "part of our culture" even though the origins of said habit has no clear basis in that culture.

Now, if all Gypsies/Roma/Travellers (delete labels not applicable) just refused to use the same toilets as non-members and declared "We don't like you lot using our bogs!" it wouldn't sound as socially acceptable as "It's part of our culture!" since that activates the "You're A Racist!" Shield against anyone who dares to question behaviour.
Click to expand...

Often cultural quirks either have some symbollic value or follow at least some kind of rationale - even if it doesn't necessarily make sense to someone outside the culture. In this case however, it didn't seem to at all.

Actually, quite a lot of that documentary didn't make sense to me - their attitude to (semi)permanent dwellings was odd too. The family wanted a permanent base/site to live on like some of the other members of their extended family had. These particular homes, although mobile in the sense that were moved to the site and assembled, were actually anything but by the time they had finished with them due to building brick walls, the use of a permanent site etc. That combined with plumbing, electricity, gas, and the actual size of some of these homes (which are actually bigger than a flats I've lived in!) seem very at odds with the the declaration that it's 'against their culture' to live in houses.

Seriously, I can't see a real difference between what they actually want and a bungalow! Who doesn't want a nice, (not so) little bungalow in a leafy environment surrounded by only the people you choose to live near (friends and family)? Can I say that's my "culture" too?

Don't get me wrong, I've nothing against the romantic idea of a real travelling lifestyle per se or the conservation of a real tradition and culture, but the reality of it seems very different from what the Gypsies/Travellers themselves want to promote.

One thing that struck me odd too, and more than a little unfair, was they way they expected to Kilroy to live for a week in far less favourable circumstances than they lived themselves. The caravan that Kilroy was given to stay in was hardly the same standard as their own (holes in the walls letting the wind in, windows that didn't close, damp, no running water, toilet wasn't nearby etc., etc..) and yet they claimed he wasn't cut out to be a "Gypsy man" because of it.
 
I once read an article a woman wrote about how it was being a non-romani friend of romani, and she mentioned her romani friend once told her she had hired a cleaner to clean the toilet in their new apartment beacuse "a romani woman can't clean a toilet used by non-romani". Apparently, romani has very strong cultural norms surronding cleanlisess in general, praobably beacuse if you live close together in tents and caravans you either keep it clean or you soon die of some disease.
 
Just as an aside, I saw the Kilroy program last night.

The hotel where Kilroy stayed was just along the road from me (a short walk away), so they must have been staying at a site near Moggerhanger in Beds. I hadn't realised until now that there was a traveller's site nearby.

I have very little sympathy with them.
 
Chigrima said:
Apparently, romani has very strong cultural norms surronding cleanlisess in general, praobably beacuse if you live close together in tents and caravans you either keep it clean or you soon die of some disease.
Click to expand...

Pity the travellers* down my way don't subscribe to the same ethic. I've lost count of the number of human turds I've trodden on whilst walking my dog over the last year or two. I've even caught the odd traveller in mid strain amongst the bushes, only to return later to a scene of shite-paper-festooned squallor.

* that's Travellers, not Gypsys, who I'm SURe would never crap on their own doorsteps.
 
Stormkhan said:
When does a particular quirk or behavioural oddity become a point of culture?
Click to expand...

When an outsider observes it as such in print or another medium.
 
Chigrima said:
I once read an article a woman wrote about how it was being a non-romani friend of romani, and she mentioned her romani friend once told her she had hired a cleaner to clean the toilet in their new apartment beacuse "a romani woman can't clean a toilet used by non-romani". Apparently, romani has very strong cultural norms surronding cleanlisess in general, praobably beacuse if you live close together in tents and caravans you either keep it clean or you soon die of some disease.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this, can you remember any other details about the article or the magazine? It's the first reference I've heard of that supports what was said on the documentary, I googled for quite a while last night and didn't come up with any thing.
 
Womaniac said:
Thanks for this, can you remember any other details about the article or the magazine? It's the first reference I've heard of that supports what was said on the documentary, I googled for quite a while last night and didn't come up with any thing.
Click to expand...

Sorry, it was in some magazine I picked up on a bus or some such long ago, and it would have been in swedish too.

But if you want to learn more about romani habits, try findning the books of Katarina Taikon. She's a swedish romani who wrote books about her own life thinly veiled as ficition about a little romani girl named Katitzi. Quite a smash hit, staple in all libraries. They've been translated into german and french.
 
Something was mentioned also about the women not being alowed in the kitchen at certain times of the month. Who makes the dinner then?

I couldn't understand the whole deal with the chalets. Here we still have a large number of post war prefabs, these are no different to the house that that woman on the programme was living in. I just don't understand where the line is drawn.
 
the late Kenneth Williams wouldn't let any visitors use his bog. They had to go down the road and use the one in the pub.

:?
 
Just did a quick google and you are right, there is tons of stuff out there. But I did stumble across this on a Romany language and culture site

Prikaza (pree-KOZ-ah) -- "Bad Luck." Prikaza is the result of coming into contact with mahrime things, creatures or people -- it follows any who are tainted (there are, of course, ways to undo it). Actions that cause prikaza include bringing a dog into a vardo, touching or even coming into contact with a cat, becoming too close to the Gaje and most of all mentioning any and all bodily fluids and functions -- a strict taboo. The color red in its primary, basic shade is also very prikaza -- this shade of red dye almost never appears in Gypsy clothing, and you will never see a vardo painted that color.
Click to expand...

So if the fluids and functions of the Rom themselves are viewed as taboo, then it would make sense that those of an outsider would be even moreso
 
Thanks to everyone for all the information on this, its appreciated.

Perhaps this highlights a problem concerning integration with communities with different backgrounds and cultures, that very often we don't actually know a lot about even the basics of other cultures!
 
Can't be bothered to dig up the reference, but I do recall reading in a book about gypsies that they need to have two kitchen sinks - one used for food, one for everything else. Non-food items cannot share a sink with food ones, so when they acquire houses they always try to have the plumbing changed.

A quick google found this:
http://www.wintersteel.com/files/ShanaA ... eliefs.htm


"Many of the traditional laws of hygiene deal with water. For example, Roma must wash only in running water. A shower would be acceptable, but a bath would not be, for the person would be sitting or lying in dirty, stagnant water. Dishes cannot be rinsed in the same sink or basin that is used for washing personal clothing. The kitchen sink is used only for washing dishes, and therefore it cannot ever be used for washing one's hands. In addition, women's clothes and men's clothes cannot be washed together, because of the impurities of the women's bodies.

Certain Roma tribes have set specific and very rigid rules for the drawing of water from a river or stream. The water from the farthest point upstream, therefore the purest, is used for drinking and cooking. Working their way downstream, the water is used for washing dishes and bathing. Further down the stream water is used for washing or nourishing horses. Further down washing clothes is appropriate, and at the farthest point downstream, washing the clothes of pregnant or menstruating women. In order to make certain that there will be no impurities, separate pails are always used for the different uses of water. "

I do wonder whether the toilet taboo might apply specifically to women, who might be 'unclean' in Roma eyes.
 
Alot of that makes sense. Only wash in running water. If you have to wash in a stream or pond then the running water is going to be the one less likley to carry disease. The same for washing clothes and people in different places.
 
zygmunt said:
the late Kenneth Williams wouldn't let any visitors use his bog. They had to go down the road and use the one in the pub.

:?
Click to expand...

That's probably down to OCD, especially considering that he also wrapped his cooker in clingfilm...
 
Wembley said:
Can't be bothered to dig up the reference, but I do recall reading in a book about gypsies that they need to have two kitchen sinks - one used for food, one for everything else. Non-food items cannot share a sink with food ones, so when they acquire houses they always try to have the plumbing changed.

A quick google found this:
http://www.wintersteel.com/files/ShanaA ... eliefs.htm

"Many of the traditional laws of hygiene deal with water. For example, Roma must wash only in running water. A shower would be acceptable, but a bath would not be, for the person would be sitting or lying in dirty, stagnant water. "
Click to expand...

The odd thing is, the Gypsies in the documentary actually had a bathroom/trailer which was kitted out like a house bathroom complete with bath. Obviously it wasn't for the use of visitors (i.e. non-Gypsies), so I wonder why they had it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top