Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Why is Traveller disadvantage not a mainstream concern?

Options
24567…10

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    rodento
    Registered Users Posts: 1,728 ✭✭✭rodento


    How about they respect our laws and cultures for a change

    For example, we want a safe place to bring up and educate our childern

    http://www.independent.ie/national-news/three-charged-in-connection-with-school-machete-incident-3056312.html

    Or grant us a safe place to respect our relegion and culture

    http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/group-with-slash-hooks-chased-man-through-confirmation-service-185457.html

    These happenned in the last few weeks


  • Options
    #33
    woodoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,219 ✭✭✭woodoo


    I think they should be made move into houses like the rest of us. Its a lifestyle that lends itself to social welfare dependence.


  • Options
    #34
    later12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,299 ✭✭✭✭later12


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Two initial points
    (i) Nobody said that the settled community have a "responsibility to rescue" travellers. I have clarified that I think travellers need to be firmly pushed into adapting to minimum educational and labour force activation standards for example. Having said that, we should expect to have to pay to support (and indeed monitor) their transition
    (ii) It's more than lifestyle. I would suggest lifestyle choices sound like choosing between holidaying at home or on the continent, vegetarianism, leisure expenditure and so on. The problems we are talking about in relation to travellers are apparently very deeply ingrained, tenaciously observed social traditions which younger members of the travelling community are conditioned to adhere to. And given the abuse that travellers are often subjected to, I don't easily question their loyalty to their own people. But it needs to change, and it isn't just 'lifestyle choices'.
    Godge wrote: »
    The bit in bold sounds familiar. Didn't I often hear that if any of us had grown up in Derry in the late 1960s and 1970s that we would have ended up in the IRA?
    I think a good lot of us would have actually. Personally I've had to change my opinion on a lot of things since I joined this site: most relevantly my own heretofore sheltered, southern opinions on Northern Irish nationalist activism. I think the Derry comment you refer to is actually quite valid.

    I think we have to recognize that there is nothing inherently lazy, belligerent, ignorant or disorderly about travellers as a group of people. Where these characteristics are expressed within the traveller population is obviously a manifestation of their social upbringing as individuals, perhaps a sense of being remote outsiders, and perhaps a sense of having been let down by the social structures of a Republic that ideally aims to allocate equal opportunities amongst all children.

    I would suggest that anyone putting forward a notion that traveller children being born today are allocated the same level of opportunity as other Irish children is kidding themselves.

    This isn't all the state's fault, but if the state fails to intervene and correct the opportunities afforded to these children, it must take some of the blame for that.


  • Options
    #35
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    rodento wrote: »
    How about they respect our laws and cultures for a change

    For example, we want a safe place to bring up and educate our childern

    http://www.independent.ie/national-news/three-charged-in-connection-with-school-machete-incident-3056312.html

    Or grant us a safe place to respect our relegion and culture

    http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/group-with-slash-hooks-chased-man-through-confirmation-service-185457.html

    These happenned in the last few weeks

    Yeah, we know this stuff happens, we have the Dundons in Limerick and generations of ingrained behaviours in inner city Dublin etc. as well.

    So do we take the social Darwin approach and just give up, or is there anything that can be done by Government to help?

    If society generally expects them to act like the above, well some will. Are there any examples of getting out of this culture or behaviour? Society likes concentrating on negatives and phoning into Joe Duffy.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #36
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    SupaNova
    Closed Accounts Posts: 788 ✭✭✭SupaNova


    K-9 wrote: »
    If society generally expects them to act like the above, well some will.

    I really hate this excuse for an anti social behavior. Do people actually buy this when it comes to travellers?


  • Options
    #38
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    later12 wrote: »
    Two initial points
    (i) Nobody said that the settled community have a "responsibility to rescue" travellers. I have clarified that I think travellers need to be firmly pushed into adapting to minimum educational and labour force activation standards for example. Having said that, we should expect to have to pay to support (and indeed monitor) their transition

    Isn't that what Job Seekers allowence is for?


    later12 wrote: »
    This isn't all the state's fault, but if the state fails to intervene and correct the opportunities afforded to these children, it must take some of the blame for that.

    They would do well to stop it by giving the travellers the slip. By all means cotinue your nomadic culture but the state should not foot the tab, if they want to be a part of modern Irish society then by all means help.

    I wonder what the purpose was of all those millions spent on travellers was for then?


  • Options
    #39
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    A fantastic point there about the Amish.


  • Options
    #40
    RichardAnd
    Registered Users Posts: 3,629 ✭✭✭RichardAnd


    I think any study trying to draw attention to hardship suffered by travelers is going to have an uphill struggle if it wants to appeal to a large audience. Travelers are not held in a good light in this country and to be fair, when one considered the trouble that has cropped up in recent years from feuds, it's not hard to see why.

    Personally, I think alot of travelers get a bad time in the press. I've known a few bad ones but I've also known a few decent and honest sorts as well. They keep to themselves mostly thus, we know very little about them so when one ventures onto youtube and finds things such as this (warning: vulgar language) . . .

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eaLsvusF7s

    . . . it's not hard to see why some consider all travelers to be boisterous thugs.


  • Options
    #41
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    zoobizoo
    Registered Users Posts: 2,712 ✭✭✭zoobizoo


    There are obviously many good travellers but there seems to be a complete lack of condemnation by the decent ones who think it acceptable to organise feuding fights in school yards.

    There are only 26,000 travellers in the country.

    I would have always felt that they had a right to their type of lifestyle yet my recent encounters have been negative ones. (a father laughing as his young soon asked me if I licked my mother's fanny - this was after I had nodded a hello to the dad..... a settled traveller broke into my house..... another threatened to kill me after I politely asked him to put his rubbish in a nearby bin).

    Traveller culture seems to be the following: Leave school early with limited education, Grabbing aka mild abduction, Treating women like cleaners, Carrying weapons, Feuding at schools, homophobia, Fighting and Dressing children as strippers.

    What is of concern to me is the welfare of those kids whose opportunities are so limited due to their parents behaviours.

    And with such limited education, is it any wonder that their lives are limited and that they exclude themselves from so much.

    As I said, there are only 26,000 travellers in the country - is it any wonder that we don't really care about a very small minority who have a self destructive lifestyle.


  • Options
    #43
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    To answer the OP, the seemingly low mainstream concern is likely borne out of the only obvious solution to this disadvantage - i.e no longer permitting a subgroup to live a parallel lifestyle outside many institutions of the state - has been rebranded as a racial attack on an ethnic minority.

    By the by, the stats in the OP (irresponsible to no family planning, subjugation of women, unhealthy lifestyle, no focus on education of personal development, lack of contributions through employment) could easily support the thread title 'why is productive contribution to society not a general traveller concern'.

    So you either advocate a more heavy handed state with regards travellers (something consistent with a social capitalist society) which is opposed by travellers, rights groups and liberals (as social engineering) or you let them live as they choose and trundle along with a disadvantaged unproductive subgroup existing in parallel to society.


  • Options
    #44
    later12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,299 ✭✭✭✭later12


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    What if they don't want to adapt to your standards?[/QUOTE]My standards? No, I don't want them to conform to my standards. I said that travellers need to be pushed to attain "minimum educational and labour force activation standards". I think that's a reasonable suggestion, and I think that the cutbacks in services for travellers' education are particularly worrying.

    I have no interest in pushing my beliefs on others beyond these basic points. You, after all,are the one who suggests "The state should strive to replace a culture of idleness and dysfunction with one of work, education, and responsibility" (and you call me statist). I could just as easily ask you the same question as I have just answered.
    History suggests that travelers don't like state bureaucrats dictating how they should live, and that they react forcefully and negatively when pushed.
    That's neither here nor there, frankly. The cordoning off of educational resources (for example) for traveller children (whether by mainstream discrimination or by traveller elders) is not something I think most reasonable people would find acceptable. All children should be expected to participate in education in a way that empowers them to choose to participate in and contribute towards society should they desire to do so.

    I don't particularly mind if someone wants to live in a caravan and deal in horses for a living. In fact I think it all sounds rather fun, really. However, it ought to be more of a mainstream concern if that way of life is disproportionately detrimental to young children subsequent ability (or desire) to participate in society.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Social traditions which they choose to perpetuate, rather.[/QUOTE]
    Eh, no. I'm talking about traveller children in the above. You cannot blame traveller children for being conditioned to adhere to the traditional way of life of their forbears. Yes, their parents deserve part of the blame (of course, their outlook was informed by their environment as well), but so does the state by failing to act decisively on young travellers' conditions.
    In portraying travelers as products of their environment [...] you strategically refuse to regard them as human beings
    Absolute rubbish. Of course we are all, in large part, products of our environments. The norms and traditions and outlooks to which we are exposed frame our respective behaviours and outlooks in turn.

    That is not a "get out of jail free" card for failing to take personal responsibility when things go wrong. It's just a recognition that there is nothing inherently wrong with travellers. If you or I had been adopted by travellers in infancy, we'd be far more likely to be grow up practically illiterate, with no qualifications whatsoever, and a life expectancy of 61, the same as the general population in the 1940's.

    If anyone is suggesting that the systematic waste of traveller children, whose human potential walks off a social cliff with every advancing generation, is not largely a function of their environment, then I am afraid they are likely to be fooling themselves.
    one could point to the Amish in Dutch Pennsylvania Country as another instance of a self-segregating minority group — but traveler culture attracts more negative attention due to persistent patterns of antisocial behavior.
    I don't really disagree with this. We all know why travellers receive a lot of negative attention. I wish I retained an idealistic, utopian view of life but I readily acknowledge the problems that are evident amongst the traveller community. I didn't start this thread to get Blackie Connors beatified.

    The question is about tackling disadvantages experienced (and indeed often perpetuated) by travellers, and the settled community's general apathy to this matter.


  • Options
    #45
    lividduck
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,250 ✭✭✭lividduck


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    I would refer the poster ansd all others concerned that The Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act 1989, proscribes words or behaviours which are "threatening, abusive or insulting and are intended or, having regard to all the circumstances, are likely to stir up hatred" against "a group of persons in the State or elsewhere on account of their race, colour, nationality, religion, ethnic or national origins, membership of the travelling community or sexual orientation.


  • Options
    #46
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    later12 wrote: »
    travellers need to be pushed to attain "minimum educational and labour force activation standards".

    cordoning off of educational resources (for example) for traveller children (whether by....by traveller elders) is not something I think most reasonable people would find acceptable.

    it ought to be more of a mainstream concern if that way of life is disproportionately detrimental to young children subsequent ability (or desire) to participate in society.

    You seem to be attacking traveller lifestyle/culture here. It's a dangerous road to walk and why I think most people are silent on traveller disadvantage (because to open ones mouth in criticism is 'racist')
    Eh, no. I'm talking about traveller children in the above. You cannot blame traveller children for being conditioned to adhere to the traditional way of life of their forbears. Yes, their parents deserve part of the blame (of course, their outlook was informed by their environment as well), but so does the state by failing to act decisively on young travellers' conditions.

    This is an even more dangerous line of thinking and I'd tend to agree with Permabear. Describing children as conditioned automatons reduces them as human beings. Of course behaviour is determined by genes and environment (leading to far more inequality than libertarians care to recognise) but if you want to say someone is a product of their environment and that product doesn't know right from wrong ( whether it's the right of educating yourself and your children vs the wrong of wallowing in ignorance and illiteracy or the right of being law abiding vs the wrong of criminality) - if you don't know right from wrong, it doesn't matter what made you that way, you are then a danger to yourself and society. Travellers aren't totally isolated. They (the children) have mainstream society and behaviour as a comparison or benchmark.


  • Options
    #47
    later12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,299 ✭✭✭✭later12


    Mr. Presentable wrote: »
    So, this is census data. Who filled out the forms? How were they delivered and collected from "nomads"?
    Not all travellers are nomads. It is perfectly possible that those living in caravans are under-represented in Census 2006, which would partially explain the disparity between this estimate and previous estimates of the traveller population in Ireland.

    However, if this data is disproportionately more representative of housed travellers, that's probably an even bigger cause for concern.


  • Options
    #48
    spank_inferno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    lividduck wrote: »
    I would refer the poster ansd all others concerned that The Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act 1989, proscribes words or behaviours which are "threatening, abusive or insulting and are intended or, having regard to all the circumstances, are likely to stir up hatred" against "a group of persons in the State or elsewhere on account of their race, colour, nationality, religion, ethnic or national origins, membership of the travelling community or sexual orientation.

    No point in scaremongering or stifling free opinion Lividuck
    Permabear's posts are fine and would not fall under the above

    He's drawing attention to and criticising chosen behaviours by the travelling community, he has not diminished or insulted anyone’s race, gender... etc.

    I choose to be a Liverpool supporter.... I take abuse for it!
    I don’t wave some incitement of hatred act in their face.


  • Options
    #49
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    later12 wrote: »
    However, if this data is disproportionately more representative of housed travellers, that's probably an even bigger cause for concern.

    I am definitely concerned, especially when it is framed as a child welfare issue. Now how are you proposing this disadvantage is dealth with? You mentioned traveller education resources being cut - when these were in place what was the engagement rate from travellers? Any idea of the effectiveness? I agree with additional supports like this but only if they are 'enforced' or 'mandatory' (scary words for some) and not left to the whim of the parents.


  • Options
    #50
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    lividduck wrote: »
    I would refer the poster ansd all others concerned that The Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act 1989, proscribes words or behaviours which are "threatening, abusive or insulting and are intended or, having regard to all the circumstances, are likely to stir up hatred" against "a group of persons in the State or elsewhere on account of their race, colour, nationality, religion, ethnic or national origins, membership of the travelling community or sexual orientation.

    And hence, under threat of being labelled racist, the mainstream disengages with the issue - which comes across as lack of concern


  • Options
    #51
    Fluorescence
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 8,490 Mod ✭✭✭✭Fluorescence


    This may be something of a glib point, but bear with me for a moment. Irish travellers often appear on the show Big Fat Gypsy Wedding - a big part of the show tends to be asking travellers how they feel about certain events etc. One thing they always, always say is, "They hate us travellers." It doesn't matter what the event is. An illegal caravan site being shut down? "It's because they hate us." Fiancé having a court case the day of his wedding? "It's because they hate us." Given a free house by the state because their nomadic lifestyle is unsustainable? "It's because they hate us!"

    So why would settled society be concerned about poor traveller statistics, when they, on the whole, refuse to engage in reasoned discourse? Any offer of aid or any retribution for crime is seen as undermining their culture or just an excuse for hatred. So leave them to it. If or when they want to engage with Irish society, they'll find that Irish society is more than happy to help them. They just have to want it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Eggy Baby!
    Registered Users Posts: 1,142 ✭✭✭Eggy Baby!


    Does anybody else find these statistics frighteningly damning of Irish society and our ability to address travellers' disadvantage?

    Clearly you don't live in Navan!

    In fairness, travellers have been given enough chances, and its just a result of our affluent guilt that we believe that their problems are due to society or us. The problem with the travellers are the travellers themselves. They have been given opportunities to live in houses rather than in the squalor which destroys their life expectancy, and they have failed to seize this opportunity.

    And although I'm not a man who adheres to stereotypes, travellers do not exactly help their image. Most I have met, and most others have met are just aggressive and foul to be around. And that's pretty evident.

    They have chosen to live in situations which give them the life expectancies and demographics of Lesotho.


  • Options
    #53
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #54
    lividduck
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,250 ✭✭✭lividduck


    spank_inferno wrote: »
    No point in scaremongering or stifling free opinion Lividuck
    Permabear's posts are fine and would not fall under the above

    He's drawing attention to and criticising chosen behaviours by the travelling community, he has not diminished or insulted anyone’s race, gender... etc.

    I choose to be a Liverpool supporter.... I take abuse for it!
    I don’t wave some incitement of hatred act in their face.
    Actually I would consider that describing Traveller Culture as a "Culture of Idleness and Dysfunction" as both abusive and insulting and as such likely to give rise to incitment to hatred. Many members of the Traveller Community would contest that they have a culture of "idleness and Dysfunction".


  • Options
    #55
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    lividduck wrote: »
    I would refer the poster ansd all others concerned that The Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act 1989, proscribes words or behaviours which are "threatening, abusive or insulting and are intended or, having regard to all the circumstances, are likely to stir up hatred" against "a group of persons in the State or elsewhere on account of their race, colour, nationality, religion, ethnic or national origins, membership of the travelling community or sexual orientation.

    I'm going to second lividduck's point here from a mod perspective. People often apparently don't think such legislation applies to Travellers, or doesn't apply to their comments, but it does, and this:
    I choose to be a Liverpool supporter.... I take abuse for it!
    I don’t wave some incitement of hatred act in their face.

    is not a legal defence, or even an analogy. People are Liverpool supporters by choice, not by birth.

    I obviously don't want to shut down discussion of the topic, but I'd ask people to be aware of the legislation in question, and to refrain from offering either blanket condemnations of "Traveller culture" or silly "justifications" for such blanket condemnations.

    moderately,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #56
    RichieC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,334 ✭✭✭RichieC


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    In a perfect world.
    We'd end up paying more from the crime if they didn't get any state support. As for social traditions, they weren't always as they are now, their caravans are modern, they have assimilated/ picked and chose what they like from our culture and discarded what they didn't want.

    It's the same reason I support a strong social safety net. the resulting crime from it's absence would end up making a worse society. More police, more prisons. more money spent. It's one of the major holes I see in your ideology, one you don't seem to factor in. It's funny you speak of "social engineering" too.


  • Options
    #57
    antoobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    I'm going to second lividduck's point here from a mod perspective. People often apparently don't think such legislation applies to Travellers, or doesn't apply to their comments, but it does

    My family and I have had a few run ins with travellers, so I find many of the comments to be a fair reflection of the people involved. This will naturally colour my opinion of the wider community, in much the same way as getting mugged by a junkie on abbey st would give a tourist a bad opinion of Dublin & Ireland.

    Saying that, there is a traveller couple who are friends of the family and you couldn't meet nicer people.

    So before I start talking about the experiences (none of which are reported in the press or anything) I'm going to ask the question:
    Can we discuss our personal experiences without fear of libel or being called racist?


  • Options
    #58
    RichieC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,334 ✭✭✭RichieC


    antoobrien wrote: »
    My family and I have had a few run ins with travellers, so I find many of the comments to be a fair reflection of the people involved. This will naturally colour my opinion of the wider community, in much the same way as getting mugged by a junkie on abbey st would give a tourist a bad opinion of Dublin & Ireland.

    Saying that, there is a traveller couple who are friends of the family and you couldn't meet nicer people.

    So before I start talking about the experiences (none of which are reported in the press or anything) I'm going to ask the question:
    Can we discuss our personal experiences without fear of libel or being called racist?

    Personal experience is anecdotal and as you said, shouldn't be applied to their wider community. As hard as that may be. I've had negative experiences myself, though, I've had many many more, orders of magnitude in fact, with settled Irish people.


  • Options
    #59
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    RichieC wrote: »
    It's the same reason I support a strong social safety net.

    There is a difference between a social safety net to help create opportunities, to provide assistance, to support people in times of hardship and an entitlements trap that makes people dependent, that requires no responsibility from them, that is perpetual without encouraging progression.

    I am with you in that I disagree with libertarian positions of removing the state crutch and waiting for people to buck up their ideas - there would be an immediate switch to crime and civil disobedience. But the current welfare system clearly isn't fit for purpose and needs to be reshaped into a carrot and stick approach.

    I think the behavioural findings of reward > punishment for behaviour modification have been misinterpreted and led some to a policy approach that is all kid gloves and throwing money/facilities/regeneration at sections of society. In a social capitalist model there is a tiered approach where the government is more hands on with the social engineering at one end and less so with the GDP producing at the other end.


  • Options
    #60
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    RichieC wrote: »
    Personal experience is anecdotal and as you said, shouldn't be applied to their wider community. As hard as that may be. I've had negative experiences myself, though, I've had many many more, orders of magnitude in fact, with settled Irish people.

    If such a thing exists as traveller culture, that entitles them to minority protection, then that culture must be definable in some ways? there must be reasonable generalities that can be drawn. If the OP can present statistics in support of a general disadvantage amongst travellers, why cannot some one else use these same statistics to show there is a lack of engagement on the part of travellers with state supports, education and the work force?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement