Bomzhi and their subculture: An anthropological study of the street children subculture in Makeevka, eastern Ukraine

Abstract

The aim of the article is to outline key elements of the street children subculture in Makeevka, Ukraine, with an emphasis on the functions of a subculture and its manifestations of collectivity. The research was based on qualitative and quantitative data and was conducted from 2000 to 2009. Data analysis suggests that collectivity functions on three different levels: inner-group, group and supra-group levels and that the subculture of street children combines elements of a classical subculture with those of a neo-tribe.

Assessment of Health Issues that Encountered by Street Children in Kirkuk City

“…Almost about two-thirds of the children were living with both parents. The determination of street children status is not just related to time on the streets, it also has a very vital family and collegial component as suggested by Naterer and Godina (2011). Moreover, the findings of their study that conducted in Makeevka, indicate that the majority of street children had two living parents, but that their parents did not have lot of authority over them.…”

Street Children in Ukraine

“…Some street children might be led to the street in order to avoid family conflict or even to assert their own independence. In an eastern Ukrainian sample, children tended to enter street life for individual reasons (i.e., difficult family circumstance) and seemed to stay for collectivist reasons, as they became part of that particular subculture of street youth (Naterer & Godina, 2011). Certain family structures are particularly at risk, such as mother-headed single-parent families and parents who are separated or divorced (Le Roux & Smith, 1998;Zapata, et al, 2011).…”

“…Some of these include malnutrition, violence, police harassment and abuse, drug abuse, risky sexual activity, sexual abuse, forced sex, and HIV infection (Arrington & Yorgin, 2001;Busza, et al, 2011). Opportunities to make money are few so children sometimes resort to begging, stealing, or prostitution (Naterer & Godina, 2011;UNICEF, 2010, p. 178). Many are not enrolled in school and thus fall behind in their educational attainment (Busza, et al;Kerfoot, et al, 2007;UNICEF, p. 177).…”

Contradictory and Intersecting Patterns of Inclusion and Exclusion of Street Youth in Salvador, Brazil

“…Street youth appropriate public (as well as private) space opportunistically, using marginal spaces at marginal times (Ruddick, 1998), including spaces normally perceived as impossible, impractical, or impure by mainstream society (Young, 2003). However, studies also reveal their ambiguous position as socially marginalized yet partly accepted and incorporated in particular socio-spatial settings involving leisure or livelihood activities (Moyer, 2004;Naterer & Godina, 2011;Ursin, 2011Ursin, , 2012Ursin & Abebe, 2016;Young, 2003).…”

“…The street allows youth to contest social conventions and assert independence (Matthews, Limb, & Taylor, 2000), and for many poor boys and young men from the deprived favelas in Brazil, the street is a site of agency and empowerment (Gough & Franch, 2005). A growing body of research shows how young homeless populations often use 'tactics' of spatial resistance (De Certeau, 1984), encroaching upon the space of the dominating power in a language of protest, defiance, and refusal (Naterer & Godina, 2011;Ruddick, 1998;Scheper-Hughes & Hoffman, 1998;Young, 2003). Street youth appropriate public (as well as private) space opportunistically, using marginal spaces at marginal times (Ruddick, 1998), including spaces normally perceived as impossible, impractical, or impure by mainstream society (Young, 2003).…”