 |
|
|
||||||
|
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Gender Inequalities and Social Policy
Valentina Zlatanova[1]
The roles of men and women are historically determined, just as the reproduction of behavior models is determined by gender. Under the conditions of socialism the model of the Woman as mother, spouse, worker, and public activist was ostensibly an attempt to emancipate her from the wardship of the Man, to give her freedom of realization. Yet the actual social policy offered services and privileges oriented mainly to childbirth and raising children: n Paid leave for childbirth and raising children was strictly regulated according to the consecutive number of the child; n Allowance for children was added to the monthly salary; n Mothers were used the services of crèches and child-care centers at comparatively reasonable prices, as well as other privileges, in proportion to their monthly income, etc. (Stoyanova, K. 1997; 156-168). These services were very popular in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, including Bulgaria. But a woman could not choose to raise and educate her children herself, nor how long a period she would devote to these duties. For the man in the family could not provide a full livelihood for the family, which compelled the woman to work; and by law everyone was obliged to “exercise” socially useful labor”. This was part of the communist ideology. Seemingly the right to labor was guaranteed. Woman was emancipated from economic dependence on Man. In fact Society had assumed the obligations/rights of the concrete man/husband in assuring Woman the opportunity of guaranteed work. At the same time the jobs that provided full employment of women were actually adding to the concealed unemployment. The incomes received were insufficient both for the Man and the Woman to provide for the family. The family proved to be a “cell” in the literal sense, a trap in which necessity consolidated both sides and often forced them to go on cohabiting for financial and or housing reasons even when there were deep contradictions between the partners. Women were told they could reach the top positions of society and of their professions if they wished. In fact, the double burden, holding a job and fulfilling household and maternal duties, which, being considered entirely “woman’s work”, were mostly assigned to her, made these possibilities unrealistic. Her duties kept women enclosed in the family by invisible barriers. The ambitions born of these unfeasible opportunities were often the basis and cause of tension between spouses. (Kirova, K. 1997: 128-133). Men were also in a disadvantaged position. They were deprived of the traditional role of providers of livelihood. They could only affirm their manhood by the use of force. The male model included the notions of aggressiveness and violence.
Gender dimensions of economic inequality: Women on the labor market
The question of gender-based inequalities of income concerns the participation of women in the labor market, where changes in recent years have put women in disadvantageous positions compared with men. What do are the facts and figures? Currently 87% of the women in Bulgaria work. They are 47% of the work force in this country (Women in Transition 1999:27). Data on women’s unemployment reveal that it is higher than men’s are (especially in the youth category and in respect to prolonged unemployment).[2] Analysis of data of the sociological survey “Bulgarian Women in Transition: Risks, Inequalities, Social Cost” show there are significant statistical differences in the opinions of respondents according to gender and the nature of their work. These are basic characteristics related to qualification, opportunities for prosperity, good remuneration, social prestige, and subsidiary work. Data of the survey show that, according to respondents, men predominate in the category of persons performing specially qualified labor (58%). Only 39,3% of the respondents who have stated that their work gives them opportunities for professional growth are women (as compared with 60,7% of the men); 46% of the women say they are well paid (as compared with 54% of the men). According to the men and women of the sample, women enjoy greater respect and prestige for their work (53,9% of respondents) although they admit that their work is rather of a subsidiary kind (56,3% of the cases) (Table 1).
Table 1Distribution of respondents’ assessments according to the characteristics of the paid work and gender (in %)
In fact the changes in the gender dimensions of economic inequalities are based on the actual inequality in the participation of women on the labor market. Often employers prefer to hire men, consequently women are compelled to accept any work, even under unfavorable conditions and for less pay (Bulgaria: Women in Poverty 1998: 9). Data show that the educational level of women resembles that of men in broad outline. Yet the distribution of respondents according to social groups reveals that there is a feminization of subsidiary jobs. Women predominate among the unemployed and those performing low-skilled and unskilled labor. Men more often perform managing functions and have a higher probability of being in the categories of large-scale, middle and small proprietors and farmers. The proportion of men in skilled labor is twice as high as that of women performing the same work. Analysis of labor biographies of the respondents according to gender reveals that 75,5% of the people who have completed their education and hold part-time jobs are women; among those registered as unemployed 82% are women; 67,0% of the respondents without permanent work are also women, while of the self-employed in the sample only 39% are women. The general picture of women’s employment during the transition shows they are more likely to perform labor that does not require high qualification, that does not give opportunities for a career, does not provide good pay, and is mostly subsidiary. They more frequently accept to work without a labor contract, without social security (1/4 of the women as compared with 1/5 of the men). Analysis of attitudes of women with regard to their labor opportunities reveals a certain element of paternalism and inertia, especially under the new conditions. According to the data in approximately half of the respondents’ families the husband provides the greater part of the income. In 1/5 of the families the contribution is equal and only in one out of 10 families does the woman provide a greater share of the family income. This is probably why women are less inclined than men to make considerable changes in their place of residence, to change their job, to start their own business, etc. Less than 1/3 of the women are prepared to seek work in another town, whereas approximately half the male respondents are willing to do so (46,4%); one out of every four women would borrow credit in order to begin a business of her own (as against 1/3 of the men). Statistical data on self-employment show a lower relative share of women than men (11% as against 15%) (Women in Transition 1999:31). These ratios have a negative effect on the economic status of women. The opportunities for part-time employment of women are practically not being used. Facts show a much lower relative share of such employment: 1% (for comparison, it is 30% in the EC countries) (Women in Transition 1999: 32). Moreover, the ratio of the average monthly salary of women and men is the lowest in Bulgaria of all Central and Eastern European countries and the states of the former Soviet Union: the average salary of women amounts to 69% of the average monthly salary of men. And there has been a 4% decrease in the ratio during the transition period (1993 - 1997), which additionally worsens the material status of women; Bulgaria is the country with the greatest inequality in remuneration of women compared to men among all countries of Europe and the former Soviet Union (see Graph 1)
Graph 1Average monthly salary of women as a % of men’s salaries in different countries, 1997
Source: Women in Transition, UNICEF, 1999, p. 33 The survey data confirm the tendency to feminization of poverty (CF Graph 2)
Graph 2
Monthly income according to gender
Source: Survey “Bulgarian Women in Transition: Risks, Inequalities, Social Cost”, 1999
It is evident from the data that women predominate in the lower income groups and men predominate in the higher. The income of ¼ of the women falls in the section of the minimal salary, while among men this category is twice smaller compared with women. Moreover, about half (45,2%) of the women respondents have incomes ranging between the minimal work salary and the average salary for the country. In other words 83% of all women in the sample receive a monthly income lower than the average for the country. For comparison, the percentage of men is 66,3%, which is 25% less than that of women. Less than 1/5 of the women (17%) have income above the average salary (as against 33,7% of the men. The situation of single mother, widows, invalids and ethnic minorities is particularly difficult (Bulgaria: Women in Poverty 1998:17-25).
Factors of economic inequality according to gender
Analysis of positions on the labor market delineates inequality of women compared with men in regard to the content of labor and qualification, career opportunities, and pay. A measure of this inequality is the segmentation of the labor market; this is a result of the smaller access of women to employment, including additional employment, due to their smaller professional experience. On the other hand the higher relative share of women in the low-skilled labor market can only offer non-institutionalized employment of an occasional kind: work in agriculture, commerce, tourism, and services. Participants in this market are usually long-term unemployed women of low qualification. The presence of students, pensioners and specialists with a higher education on the market is due rather to the struggle for survival in the transition period than to some kind of regular correlation. According to data of the survey, when asked “In what case would you accept a job without a labor agreement and social security?” 71% of people with a secondary education or lower answered that the lack of a contract did not make any difference to them; 22,1% of people with a secondary education, and only 6,9% of those with a higher education gave such a response (Kramer coefficient 0.208). 70,9% of people with college and higher education work in 2 or more places of employment. The survey shows that there is a correlation between the level of education and the demand for additional employment (Kramer coefficient 0,261). The survey did not establish any statistical correlation between the education of respondents and the degree of labor mobility. Gender inequality in respect to employment shows regional differences, especially between large city, small town, and village. There is a clear correlation between residence and the characteristics of respondents’ jobs. This correlation is more significant for qualification (Kramer coefficient 0,177) and remuneration (0,117). There is an evident correlation between the respondents’ place of residence and his/her labor mobility, measured by the number of places of employment held by a respondent (Kramer coefficient 0,174). Due to the smaller possibility of finding a job in small settlements, the majority of people there 53.3% have never changed their work, as against 42,6% of the employed in large cities. For the same reasons there is a correlation between place of residence of respondents and their willingness to work without labor agreement, retirement security, social security (Kramer coefficient 0,180). Nearly twice as many people in small towns and villages than in large cities have answered that these benefits would not influence their choice of job. Place of residence is a factor for increasing social opportunities by the conditions towns provide for improving one’s education, thereby increasing competitive ability on the labor market (Kramer coefficient 0,193) and improving one’s chances for starting a personal business. Age is another dimension of social inequality which is related to raising educational level and skills in order to better the chances of employment (Kramer coefficient 0,370), which includes migration to a different place of residence (Kramer coefficient 0,299) and the use of business credit (Kramer coefficient 0,270). On the other hand younger people are more often willing to accept work without labor agreement and social security (Kramer coefficient 0,194). The age factor should be considered in relation to social and family status, which are important factors for social, including gender, inequalities on the labor market. Family situation is a factor that adds an overtone in gender inequalities in the sphere of labor. Divorce is considered to be another factor of feminization of poverty, while the presence of family and children on the whole combines with lower ambitions, with assuring survival in a time of crisis. People with families are more likely to work at several jobs in order to provide for their families (Kramer coefficient 0,215) as well as to accept work without social security (Kramer coefficient 0,200). If left without an alternative they are prepared to look for work in another town (Kramer coefficient 0,197), and to raise their educational level (Kramer coefficient 0,270), to seek their own market niche by using business credit (Kramer coefficient 0,152). The inequalities registered in respect to the social status of respondents are mostly related to qualification of the labor performed (Kramer 0,379), remuneration (Kramer 0,325), prestige (Kramer 0,303) and possibilities for a career (Kramer 0,282). The higher the social status, the greater the opportunities for employment and for receiving income from more than one workplace (Kramer 0,384). Respondents show greater flexibility in the search for alternative employment, including migration (Kramer 0,229), better possibilities for receiving business credit (Kramer 0,210) and for raising their education level (Kramer 0,156). In order to overcome gender-related economic inequalities it is necessary to take the following measures: 1. Planning and conducting macroeconomic policy and strategies for development which take into account the situation and needs of women in poverty; 2. Reexamining the relevant laws and administrative practice in order to provide equal rights for women and access to economic resources; 3. Devise methodologies and carry out surveys that take into account gender differences and are aimed at solving problems related to the feminization of poverty; 4. In the sphere of enterprise and private business: facilitating and promoting women’s participation, their learning management skills, promoting the development of “women’s networks”, etc.; 5. Assuring gender-neutral criteria in the choice of people for positions of leadership. 6. Providing subsidies and credit programs focused on women-entrepreneurs.
Gender dimensions of inequalities in government and decision-making
The inclusion of women extends the democratic basis of local self-government, improves its effectiveness and quality. Since its purpose is to respond to the needs of men and women, it should profit by the experience of both genders through their equal participation at all levels and in all decision-making. Statistical data show that women in Bulgaria are not equitably represented at various levels of power. The 30% minimum participation level set by the Economic and Social Council of the UN has not been achieved. Women with rank of ministers and deputy ministers amount to about 14% of all persons occupying such positions. The participation of women in the National Assembly is gradually decreasing and in 1999 it was less than 11% of all deputies.[3] Women practically have no voice in the structural reforms and their specific needs are not taken into consideration. The present participation of women in government is nominal and has tended to decrease in recent years, especially at high levels of government (table 2)
Table. 2Women in the National Assembly[4]
The proportion of women in the government is 24%[5]. Unfortunately their presence seems to have no effect on government policy in respect to women. Public opinion demands checking the competence of women in politics while being less strict concerning men. Men, it would appear, do not need to prove themselves. The policy for overcoming inequality in government and spheres of decision-making involves: 1. Providing equal access to government and decision-making at the level of government and public administration, including the judiciary, in international and non-governmental organizations, political parties, and syndicates. 2. Promoting equal participation of women in decision-making and positions of leadership. Party procedures for nominating electoral candidates are not transparent and valid for all. Women are at best marginal figures and usually abandon political activities. Despite the formal gender equality, the participation of women in power is mediated by a number of causes, factors, and traditional paternalistic attitudes which strongly limit it. For these and other reasons opinions are voiced that women are not interested in working as politicians. Those who do choose such a career are said not to be “real” women, i.e. bad spouses and mothers. The traditional opinion persists that the place of a woman is at home, that their proper roles are in the sphere of the family as housewives, wives, and mothers. It is thought natural for a husband’s will to have greater weight than the wife’s is. In defining the distribution of duties between genders, mass opinion assigns household work and raising children mostly to the woman of the house, and management mostly to the husband (Kotseva, Todorova, 1994:24-25). Thus, according to the survey data, although about half of the sample (46,8%) consider that gender has no influence in their choice of manager, the other 53,2% are positive that it is important, and the ratio in favor of men as managers is 4:1, and there is no significant differences in this opinion between the responding men and women. Public attitudes are even more categorically in favor men as candidates for parliament. Although the majority of respondents (53,8%) claims that “gender is not important”, preference inclines to men as deputies in a ratio of 7:1. In this respect there are statistically significant gender differences: women express this preference 5:1, whereas for the male respondents the ratio is 9:1 in favor of male deputies. There is a correlation between traditional attitudes about gender roles and residence (Kramer 0,178). For instance, a majority of the surveyed persons living in large cities declare that “gender does not matter” (63,2%) as against 45,4% of respondents in small towns and villages who are of that opinion. Villages is where male deputies are most strongly preferred (47,1%) (cf. Table 3)
Тable.3 Distribution of responses to the question: “Who would you elect to be your deputy?” according to residence /in %/
It is interesting to what respondents believe to be the causes of women’s low participation in government /Cf Graph 3/.
Graph 3Causes of women’s low participation in government (in %)
Source: Survey “Bulgarian Women in Transition: Risks, Inequalities, Social Cost”, 1999
Data from our survey show that we are confronted with traditional notions about women. The opinion is that a successful woman is one who has raised healthy and well-behaved children and has a good marriage. Her success in these roles makes her respected. That is why the prevalent opinion is that women should devote more time to their families. There is no gender-based difference in this opinion, probably due to the traditionally high value set on the family. Secondly, according to the responses in the sample the low rate of participation in government is due to the traditional prejudices in regard to women and their role in government: about 1/5 of respondents are of this opinion. There are no significant differences according to gender. Thirdly, 1/6 of the respondents believes the cause of low rates of women’s participation is the unwillingness of men to share power with women. Significant gender differences are observed here. The ratio of women and men who share this opinion is 2:1 and approximately ¼ of the women put this cause in second place among the various causes for low participation. Fourthly: 7,4% of the respondents point out the lack of professional ability and experience as an obstacle to women’s participation in government. There are statistically significant differences in the way genders answer this question: the ratio of men and women is 2:1. One out of ten men express this opinion as against one out of twenty women. About 1/6 of the respondents consider that the participation of women in government is sufficient. The proportion of men expressing this opinion is higher than that of women: approximately 1/5, compared to 1/8 of the women. The highest correlation of responses to this question is with the place of residence (Kramer coefficient 0,192). There is also a correlation between respondents’ family status and their opinions on the causes of women’s low participation in government (Kramer 0,192). Married people point to women’s need to give more time to their families as the main reason, 1/5 of respondents point to traditional ideas and prejudices and only 1/6 of the respondents believe the cause is that ”men are unwilling to share power with women. Among unmarried people “traditional prejudices” is the first choice and “the resistance of men to share power”, the second. Family duties is in third place among this category. (Table 4). Table.4. Distribution of responses on causes for low participation of women in government, according to family status /in %/
On the other hand the existing attitudes about women in government can probably be accounted for by the prevalent view that women do not have great chances of success in life. The majority of respondents (62,2%) are of that opinion. Notably, about 2/3 of the women shares this idea (compared to ½ of the men). Only 1 out of 10 respondents considers that women have a greater potential than men do to succeed in life, and there are no significant gender differences on this view. On the other hand, the mass opinion is that men have a greater potential to succeed: half the respondents share this view. Women have “overestimated” the capabilities of men, while men are more skeptical about their own prospects. One out of four women in the aggregate (compared to one out of three men) are of the opinion that men have greater potential to succeed in life. The study shows a correlation between the respondents’ evaluation of their potential to succeed and the gender of the respondent, as well as his ethnic origin (Kramer 0,147). The widely prevailing notions, attitudes, frame of mind, concerning “men’s” and “women’s” opportunities for success are probably the cause of the corresponding degrees of self-confidence as to competence and the ability to achieve one’s life goals. The survey registered a relatively large share of people who are confused, who find it hard to assess their own power and capacity in the new situation (37,8%). Against the background of the low self-confidence of the persons surveyed (only 40% have stated they feel strong and competent enough to achieve their objectives), a lower portion of women than men have given such responses (36,9% as against 43,6%). Thus also, ¼ of the women and only 1/5 of the men are not quite confident in their own capacities.
Expectations and attitudes with regard to the changes in social policy in the post-totalitarian period
A very widespread view in the early 1990s, the beginning of transition, was that political changes would automatically lead to a higher living standard and to the solution of all the pressing social problems. With time it became clear that many people would have to pay a high price for this transition. Currently less than 1% describe their households as “wealthy”, whereas at the other end of the scale about 15,6% consider themselves poor, including 16,5% of the female respondents and 14,7% of the males (according to the data of our survey[6]). In all approximately 1/3 assess the material situation of their household as rather well off, while about 2/3 are faced with daily economic problems. Between the two extremes of the “rich-poor” scale there are people who manage to make ends meet but also feel poor inasmuch as they cannot maintain the living standard they once had or that corresponds to their social position in society. Their new condition compels them to make changes in their way of life and consumption models, to decrease or restrict their spending, to change their work, and to look for additional resources, including to sell or rent their property, to work more, often at several workplaces, to use alternative sources of food as a strategy for compensating the lack of money, etc. In connection with the respondents’ attitudes to social policy, they were asked about the distribution of responsibilities between state, municipalities, non-governmental organizations, and social networks of exchange between relatives and friends. The data show that the attitudes of the majority of the population as to the responsibilities of social policy under the new conditions have changed radically. A small proportion of the surveyed persons relies on the state, while the majority of the respondents intend to fend for themselves or manage with the help of relatives and friends. Understandably, the most significant correlation is between the family status of respondents and their opinions on the distribution of responsibilities of social policy in respect to child-care (Kramer 0,211). There is a correlation between the educational level of the respondents and their opinions on the distribution of responsibilities of social policy between the state, municipalities, non-governmental organizations, the respondents themselves, and their friends and relatives. The circle of close relatives and friends assumes a typically important role for the Bulgarian woman, who has traditionally relied on them in caring for her children (Kramer 0,146); for the elderly people in the family (Kramer 0,108), for finding housing, employment (Kramer 0,140) as well as the possibility of combining professional and family obligations (Kramer 0,150). The higher the educational level of respondents, the stronger their conviction that they need an active personal strategy for solving their problems, and that personal initiative and responsibility are important. The survey data have clearly shown that a considerable part of the respondents have relatives and friends who are actually part of rather extensive social networks for help and mutual aid, networks that share the responsibilities of solving various social problems. 35,5% of the respondents say they rely on relatives and friends for the care of their children; about 35%, for the care of elderly relatives; 37,5%, for finding a job. Approximately 1/5 of the persons surveyed rely on them for providing housing and combining family and professional responsibilities, about 1/6 rely on them for qualified health care. Under the present conditions of transition the latter is considered to be a state and municipal responsibility by about half the respondents, 44,2%. More important gender-related differences in judgments on distribution of responsibilities are observed in respect to problems of finding work and providing housing; on this topic, men are greater optimists than women about the capacity of social networks are. Obviously, regardless of the urbanization processes and the geographic and social mobility of the population, kinship ties have not lost their importance for the personality, although they are difficult to maintain from a distance. They help in giving emotional support for surmounting problems in times of difficulty.
Collaboration between institutions
Collaboration between institutions for promoting participation of women involves creating state mechanisms and stable structures at the government and regional level, as well as national programs and laws on gender equality. The activity of institutions working for this cause are based on systematic monitoring of women’s situation by means of surveys that register gender inequalities, risks, and social cost. Non-governmental organizations dealing with gender equality should be asked for their expert aid. According to the Platform for Action of the 4th World women’s Conference, the state is a key factor for the successful promotion of gender equality: it should develop state mechanisms that provide for the advancement of women. The state plays an important role in building and maintaining an equality culture. The need for a government organism for coordinating the development of social policy so that opportunities for women will be opened in all spheres of social life. The need of women are provided for when their interests are protected through laws adopted by the government and through programs that work for partnership with other levels of social management, including civil society, and that aid the activity of non-governmental women’s groups and organizations promoting gender equality. In order for the work to be effective, both political will and resources are needed. The collaboration between government, business, syndicates, political parties, women’s non-governmental organizations would create the proper environment for partnership. There are programs for aiding women-entrepreneurs in 3 countries: Russia, Rumania and Estonia. In the other seven countries - Czech Republic, Bulgaria, former Yugoslavia, the Ukraine, Georgia, Tadjikistan, and Uzbekistan, there are no government programs for aiding women to start a private business. In the last ten years micro-crediting programs have been an important source for helping. The basic principle is that it is better to give a poor person a chance to help himself rather than rely on aid. A good example is ‘Mama Cash”, an independent women’s non-governmental financial institution, founded in the Netherlands in 1983. It offers services in the field of preparing business plans and providing credit financing. It also acts as guarantor for half the loan given to the woman-entrepreneur by the bank; it “partially sponsors” the control program jointly with the association of women-entrepreneurs. Bulgaria is one of the last countries in Europe that has no state mechanisms providing real gender equality. Up to this moment the Bulgarian government has not fulfilled any of the responsibilities it assumed in signing the UN Convention for abolishing all forms of discrimination toward women. These responsibilities include: setting up a state organ with regional and local structures, drafting a law on equal rights, etc. taking measures for promoting equality and providing protection from direct and indirect gender-based discrimination. The constitutional principle of formal equality and non-discrimination does not protect women against violation of their human rights and does not provide them with equal access to economic resources. The absence of legal proceedings and verdicts on cases of gender-based discrimination proves that there are no legal instruments (similar to those in the E. U. countries) for protecting women against discrimination of employers, against sexual harassment at the workplace, against physical and sexual violence in the family, etc. In connection with discrimination of women in Bulgaria, the UN Committee for Abolishing Discrimination reports that: 1. The Bulgarian Constitution includes the principle of equality between men and women, but does not include the definition of discrimination contained in art. 1 of the Convention; 2. The previous ideological tenet, including the declared formal equality, is now an obstacle to the correct understanding of the complex set of questions related to discrimination, defined as a structural and indirect discrimination which is later combined with the situation of practical inequality of women. 3. The Committee assesses that the constant highlighting of women’s role of mother and the protection of motherhood has led to consolidating stereotype gender roles, decreasing the role and responsibility of the father in raising children. This has created difficulties for the government in formulating a new concept of gender roles, which, however, should not lead to infringement on individual desires and decisions of men and women. 4. The Committee notes with concern that the Bulgarian government obviously does not properly understand the meaning of art. 4 of the Convention. According to this article, the special temporary measures or positive actions entail the elaboration of programs for providing advantages to women. Such programs would change the implicit formal equality in a way that would de facto achieve equality in a long-term perspective (Regional Report 1999:27-30). Finally, what conclusions can we draw? 1. Women’s problems are not a priority; they are thought to be connected with those of the family, youth and children; 2. Government responsibilities for providing equal opportunities for women are practically not being fulfilled; 3. There is no consistency in the way gender issues are being considered and regarded; 4. Awareness of gender differences is lacking at all levels of society; 5. There are no stable working relations between the government and the non-governmental organizations that deal with women’s problems; 6. National (state) mechanisms, such as the national action plan, do exist in Bulgaria, but there is no state-coordinating organ for promoting the advancement of women. The institution now operating (National Council on Social and Demographic Problems) was declared in January 1998 to be a working organ on women’s problems as well, without having a mandate for the latter function; 7. There is no state financing for studies and programs on women (Regional Report 1999:10-12). 8. The question of subordination and rights involves the possibility for effective action of the national institutions for advancement of women. It is observed that the existing national institutions do not have a clear structure, which results in bad functioning, in lack of stability, hence in lack of rights; the possibilities for collaboration on problems of gender inequality are limited. The human resources are insufficient; the staff has no prospects for training, is insensitive to the problems, and is subject to political changes.
The sociological study “Bulgarian Women in Transition: Risks, Inequalities, Social Cost” raises many and various questions related to the question: is the “second sex” really in a position of equality? The slow restructuring of the Bulgarian economy has led to permanent impoverishment of a considerable part of the population. Women, especially certain risk groups, proved to be the most negatively affected. Data show that poverty mostly pertains to women. 2/3 of the impoverished people in Bulgaria is women and children. Factors of poverty are lower income as a result of the increasing segregation of the labor market, divorce, non-participation of fathers in raising children, etc. Facts show that women bear the greater burden than men and this is due to traditional roles and expectations. The care for children and the family prove to be their responsibility and they work an average of 4 additional hours a day to fulfill it, without getting paid. Women perform 2/3 of the unpaid labor in the country, thanks to which many families are able to survive. Women are formally but not actually equal in the economy, in government and in decision-making at all levels. What is needed are state (national) mechanisms, national programs, and new laws for real equality of the two genders, as well as constant monitoring of the situation of women, and introduction of gender specifics in the policy and strategy of social management.
L I T E R A T U R E
Bulgaria: Women in Poverty, An Assessment of the Policies and Strategies for Decreasing Poverty in Bulgaria, International Labor Organization, Geneva, UN Development Program, 1998. Institutional mechanisms for the advancement of women in countries of Central and Eastern Europe (regional report of non-governmental organizations, prepared at the 43d session of the Commission on Women’s Situation, Coalition for Regional Action CARAT, Regional Network of Women’s Non-governmental Organizations in Central and Eastern Europe), Warsaw, February 1999. K i r o v a, K. 1997 “Social Policy for Combining Labor and Family Functions of the Woman”, in: Family Social Policy (Problem, Priorities, Implementation) Stoyanova, K. (ed.) Goreks Press, Sofia. K o t s e v a, T. T o d o r o v a, I. 1994, The Bulgarian Woman: Traditional Views and Changing Realities, Krakra, Pernik. S t o y a n o v a, K. 1997 “Social Protection of Mothers and Children: a Basic Priority of Family Social Policy”, in: Family Social Policy (Problems, Priorities, Implementation) Stoyanova, K. (ed.) Goreks Press, Sofia. Platform for Action and the Beijing Declaration, 1995, United Nations Women in the Riksdag, 1998, The Swedish Riksdag Factsheets No. 8. Women in Transition, The MONEE Project CEE/ CIS/ Baltics, Regional Monitoring Report - N0. 6 -1999, UNICEF
[1] Valentina Zlatanova is senior research associate and Deputy Director of the Institute of Sociology of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Head of Department “Sociology of Deviance Behavior”, Ph.D. E-mail: vzlat@internet-bg.net [2] Prolonged unemployment among women amounts to 62% of all unemployment. Cf. “Women in Transition”, UNICEF 1999, p. 29 [3] In Sweden the percentage of women deputies is 43% (Women in the Riksdag 1998). [4] Data of the National Statistical Institute [5] For comparison, the proportion is 50% in Sweden (Women in the Riksdag 1998). [6] Empirical sociological survey “Bulgarian Women in Transition: Risks, Inequalities, Social Cost”, Institute of Sociology, 1999 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
