Limerick Traveller Family story in Irish Times

bigpink

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/features/2011/1128/1224308217459.html

Well Travellers wanted to be treated equal but then they want to be an seperate ethic race:rolleyes:

Imo let them rot there,christ if they can't at least clean up after themselves

krudler

The boy who says he’s Tommy declares “We don’t want to live on an estate. We want to keep away from everyone. We want somewhere a bit out the country. And we want half an acre for our dogs and horses.”

cheeky fcukers, pay taxes if you want to live where you want like the rest of us do. lol at the "we live in a dump" comment, like it was like that when they moved in?

The Snipe

krudler wrote: »

The boy who says he’s Tommy declares “We don’t want to live on an estate. We want to keep away from everyone. We want somewhere a bit out the country. And we want half an acre for our dogs and horses.”

cheeky fcukers, pay taxes if you want to live where you want like the rest of us do. lol at the "we live in a dump" comment, like it was like that when they moved in?

Jaysus! I always knew something was off about IO :P

bigpink

Don't think the Casey Family would be wanted in any bars or hotels in Limerick

bobbysands81

'Travellers' have as much a claim to ethnic minority status as 'Mayo Hurlers' have.

blatantrereg

wow some of the comments here. Talk about tarring everyone with the same brush.

Why would being considered a different ethnicity be contradictory with being treated as equals?

Go join stormfront or something tbh.

Kristopherus

bobbysands81 wrote: »

'Travellers' have as much a claim to ethnic minority status as 'Mayo Hurlers' have.

Wtf do you mean by that coimparision?

Berty

If they want houses let them buy some houses. They wouldn't be the first or last travellers to either own homes or want to buy homes or want the council to buy them homes.

Frankly the welfare system of this country is not designed to help people who do not want to contribute, it was designed for people who cannot contribute and/or afford their own home.

To be all politically correct about it. If you want a house then let them be "means tested" for it. If they pass then join the back of the queue and if they don't qualify then it is not beause they are a traveller. It is because they simply don't qualify.

gaf1983

Kids can often tell the truth, and the truth can often hurt:

...Or you can buy a house and pay a mortgage like everyone else,” interjects one of the children, after their father has finished explaining what he hopes the council will provide them with. Nobody makes any response to this.

While I have no doubt that they don't live in the nicest conditions, the fact that they were constantly changing their stories or not speaking to the journalist doesn't help their cause, I think.

Second good article on Limerick this month from Rosita Boland, here's one she wrote about a night spent in the A&E waiting room in the Regional:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/weekend/2011/1112/1224307440996.html

bobbysands81

Kristopherus wrote: »

Wtf do you mean by that coimparision?

Somebody called Travellers an ethnic minority, they're not.* I'm pointing out that Mayo Hurlers have as much right to call themselves an ethnic minority as Travellers do.

*This is not a slur on Travellers, many travellers themselves don't consider themselves an ethnic minority.

For the record (and clarity) I'm using the Collins English Dictionary definition of ethnic minority:

ethnic minority

an immigrant or racial group regarded by those claiming to speak for the cultural majority as distinct and unassimilated

Kristopherus

The Mayo Hurlers will be chuffed:D:D:D

bigpink

Stormfront a bit extreme i say lol.I dont abuse or attack travellers on the street however my opinion is i dont like them based on bad experiences of them

If they have bad conditions there why dont they try improve them a bit for themselves its not very hard to clean up after themselves

Sid_Justice

Travellers are genetically distinct with their own culture and language. I don't see any reason why they shouldn't get ethnically distinct status.

bigpink

Sid_Justice wrote: »

Travellers are genetically distinct with their own culture and language. I don't see any reason why they shouldn't get ethnically distinct status.

Let them have there culture and language but we should not be paying for there lifestyle,and they are playing the ethic race card

Same in schools there is traveller education why cant they just go to school like everyone else

I know of one school in Limerick that a taxi was paid for to bring the travellers kids to school

jonski

Sid_Justice wrote: »

Travellers are genetically distinct with their own culture and language. I don't see any reason why they shouldn't get ethnically distinct status.

That may be so , but some of them wouldn't agree with you .

“There’s no such thing as a Traveller,” Billy declares. “We all came out of houses before the Famine".

kinseydub

Sid_Justice wrote: »

Travellers are genetically distinct with their own culture and language. I don't see any reason why they shouldn't get ethnically distinct status.

Could you elaborate how travellers are genetically distinct ?

Sid_Justice

Travellers' rarely breed with people outside the travelling community. They have a high prevalence of deleterious, recessive genetic traits, e.g. CF, haemochromatosis, Galactosemia.

Brennans Row

Images from article

bigpink wrote: »

. . . . . . Imo let them rot there, . . . . .

krudler wrote: »

cheeky fcukers, . . . . .

I think that was a pretty cheap shot to degrade these people like that with such derogatory remarks.

You certainly don’t display an appreciation for good journalism.

The Casey women folk should be commended for accepting the Irish Times reporter into their homes, especially as they left themselves very vulnerable to all sorts of verbal abuse (see above).

These Irish Times articles on travellers are really helpful and hopefully they might help change some peoples’ mind-sets into seeing travellers as fellow human beings too.

Last Saturday’s article “Travellers on Travellers” was an amazing read too.

Kess73

Sid_Justice wrote: »

Travellers' rarely breed with people outside the travelling community. They have a high prevalence of deleterious, recessive genetic traits, e.g. CF, haemochromatosis, Galactosemia.

A lot of the recessive traits you mention can be caused by breeding within one community, or mild inbreeding to put another term onto it.

It does not make them genetically distinct in the true meaning of that phrase.

A large amount of them are Irish born to Irish born parents and so on and so on for many many generations. They have in some cases genetic anomolies caused by staying within a small breeding population, but that is by choice and not a true genetic difference.


If any travellers avail of the same social services available to any other Irish person, then they should be seen in the same manner as any other Irish citizen and afforded the same rights and be expected to live by the same laws.

What is wrong in my eyes is that some travellers (and some non travellers) seem to be under the impression that they can pick and choose what they want to be able to get for free, and also to be able to decide to be exempt from what they want.

Kess73

Brennans Row wrote: »

Images from article






I think that was a pretty cheap shot to degrade these people like that with such derogatory remarks.

You certainly don’t display an appreciation for good journalism.

The Casey women folk should be commended for accepting the Irish Times reporter into their homes, especially as they left themselves very vulnerable to all sorts of verbal abuse (see above).

These Irish Times articles on travellers are really helpful and hopefully they might help change some peoples’ mind-sets into seeing travellers as fellow human beings too.

Last Saturday’s article “Travellers on Travellers” was an amazing read too.

I find myself both agreeing with you and strongly disagreeing with you.

Mainly because I see Travellers simply as people, and as people they are made up of the same types as any other group in society. There are good ones, bad ones, happy one, contrary ones and so on.

When it comes to Travellers in Limerick with the Casey surname, I can think of examples that I personally know that I would regard as top notch people, and I can think of a few whose actions have me regarding them as vile excuses for people.

As with a lot of topics that attract heated debate, I think the subject of travellers too often attracts extremes of opinion, and the middle ground (where the truth often lies) tends to be ignored and not explored.

gaf1983

bobbysands81 wrote: »

'Travellers' have as much a claim to ethnic minority status as 'Mayo Hurlers' have.

A cousin of mine plays for the Mayo hurling team, and he pays rent for his house.

I thought one of the most depressing lines in the piece was this:

Bridget (39) has lived here for 17 years, and “is still waiting for a house”.

What does that mean? In 2006, she would have been 34, and the national rate of unemployment was between 4 and 5 per cent. So was she waiting for a house all through the Celtic Tiger too, or did she try to get a job during this period of unprecedented high employment, in order to shorten her wait for a house?

I don't know the answer to that question, the article doesn't address those points, and I also appreciate that some travellers do suffer discrimination in the labour market. However, it does seem to be a rather defeatist attitude, to be waiting for that long for a house.

I don't know whether it's important or not whether travellers get an ethnically distinct status or not. Personally I think it serves to widen the divide between them and the rest of society. While I do think they have a distinct culture, I agree with Kess73 here:

If any travellers avail of the same social services available to any other Irish person, then they should be seen in the same manner as any other Irish citizen and afforded the same rights and be expected to live by the same laws.

Cathal McCarthy, a Limerick-based sometimes Irish Independent columnist made the same point in an article written in 2008:

The good people of Pavee Point must see the fairly crippling paradox at the heart of their world view. They insist that Travellers be seen as a distinct collective, an identifiable and self-validating ethnic minority. They insist that we all proceed on that basis -- whether we find the version credible or not. But the insistence on treatment as a seamless, ethnic whole comes apart the very instant that Travellers engage in the kind of behaviour that we all saw last Tuesday -- and some of us saw from very much closer than I would fancy. At that stage, we start hearing about a tiny minority, certain individual families, and the dangers of tarring everyone with the same brush.

And they're right: it is stupid and illogical to tar everyone with the same brush. That's why Pavee Point should stop doing it for, and on behalf of, an arbitrarily chosen subset of my fellow citizens of Ireland, who look the same as me, practise the same religion (generally more devoutly than me) and bear the same surname, but who espouse a quirky scepticism to new-fangled stuff like literacy and formal education and seem to favour living in houses with wheels on the corners.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/its-a-choice-to-bypass-the-law-and-reach-for-the-slash-hook-instead-1445623.html

jmch81

There was a show on RTE earlier in the year about the dna of travellers. Not on rte player any more, but link below to the page giving info and the boards thread about it
http://www.rte.ie/tv/programmes/blood_of_the_travellers.html

And the boards thread:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056275415

Sid_Justice

Kess73 wrote: »

A lot of the recessive traits you mention can be caused by breeding within one community, or mild inbreeding to put another term onto it.

Their high prevalence is caused by inbreeding.

It does not make them genetically distinct in the true meaning of that phrase

.

Yes it does.

A large amount of them are Irish born to Irish born parents and so on and so on for many many generations.

irish parents who didn't mix with other irish people

They have in some cases genetic anomolies caused by staying within a small breeding population, but that is by choice and not a true genetic difference.

yes it is

If any travellers avail of the same social services available to any other Irish person, then they should be seen in the same manner as any other Irish citizen and afforded the same rights and be expected to live by the same laws.

Perhaps you don't understand the difference between ethnicity, nationality and citizenship. Perhaps you might look them up in a dictionary.

What is wrong in my eyes is that some travellers (and some non travellers) seem to be under the impression that they can pick and choose what they want to be able to get for free, and also to be able to decide to be exempt from what they want.

so nothing to do with ethnicity at all

PseudoFamous

gaf1983 wrote: »

Bridget (39) has lived here for 17 years, and “is still waiting for a house”.

What does that mean? In 2006, she would have been 34, and the national rate of unemployment was between 4 and 5 per cent. So was she waiting for a house all through the Celtic Tiger too, or did she try to get a job during this period of unprecedented high employment, in order to shorten her wait for a house?

I don't know the answer to that question, the article doesn't address those points, and I also appreciate that some travellers do suffer discrimination in the labour market. However, it does seem to be a rather defeatist attitude, to be waiting for that long for a house.

IIRC, traveller women aren't allowed to have a job other than housekeeping, according to their culture, so I assume she did not have a job in 2006.

Insect Overlord

Sid_Justice wrote: »

Perhaps you don't understand the difference between ethnicity, nationality and citizenship. Perhaps you might look them up in a dictionary.

*mod hat on*

No need for the attitude, Sid. 'Tis an emotive enough topic already without making it personal too.

Kess73

Sid_Justice wrote: »

Their high prevalence is caused by inbreeding.

.

Yes it does.



irish parents who didn't mix with other irish people



yes it is



Perhaps you don't understand the difference between ethnicity, nationality and citizenship. Perhaps you might look them up in a dictionary.



so nothing to do with ethnicity at all

You say I should pick up a dictionary. Maybe you can do something similar and read up on the differences between true genetic distinctions, and genetic disorders involving recessive genes. There is a difference between the two that is recognised scientifically, as recessive genes is a term that actually does not mean the genes are recessive but that the phenotype.

So if you are claiming that Travellers are genetically distinct thanks to inbreeding, then you are saying they are different due to recessive phenotypes and not recessive genes. Technically there is a difference despite it being causually thrown about that they are genetically distinct due to inbreeding.


You also made a comment about me not undertanding the difference between ethnicity, nationality and citizenship. I understand the difference quite well thank you. Having lived in a number of countries and getting citizenship in four of them, I would hope that I know the difference by now.:) The comment I made which provoked that response from you I still stand over though, and if you disagree with it I would be interested in hearing you break it down into reasons why you disagree.

The comment I made was

If any travellers avail of the same social services available to any other Irish person, then they should be seen in the same manner as any other Irish citizen and afforded the same rights and be expected to live by the same laws.

Granted I could have made it more detail specific, but the general point that I was making was, to my mind, a pretty obvious one, and certainly a fairly neutral point in that it was not anti or pro traveller in content.

If you do think I am saying something that you deem to be anti traveller, please point it out and debate it with me, but I looked back through my posts in this thread and I see nothing that could suggest that my posts are anti traveller in any way.

flutered

a line from the story the irish traveller movement was founded in 1990 it has a network of more than 80 different organisations and individuals ?????. in other words a quango, has any one a rough estimate on how much the country is spending on these people.

bigpink

Let them rot yes if they want to live in a dump thats there own fault,basic hygiene is not hard to do
Im pretty sure they have running water and electricty in the site

Yet they can seem to afford little toy dogs

bigpink

Ok can i claim traveller status?

source

The main issue here is that they're saying that they shouldn't have to live in a dump.....None of these halting sites have been handed over to the travellers in the state they're currently in.

The halting sites are the way they are through neglect on the part of the tenants.

Sid_Justice

Kess73 wrote: »

You say I should pick up a dictionary. Maybe you can do something similar and read up on the differences between true genetic distinctions, and genetic disorders involving recessive genes. There is a difference between the two that is recognised scientifically, as recessive genes is a term that actually does not mean the genes are recessive but that the phenotype.

So if you are claiming that Travellers are genetically distinct thanks to inbreeding, then you are saying they are different due to recessive phenotypes and not recessive genes. Technically there is a difference despite it being causually thrown about that they are genetically distinct due to inbreeding.

There are social barriers to interbreeding between Travellers and non-Travellers. Travellers almost exclusively reproduce within their own numbers. Within a number of generations, this activity will make you genetically distinguishable from non-Travellers by testing for specific genetic markers. One method of demonstrating Travellers' genetic distinction is there increased prevalence of recessive traits such as Galactosemia. All Irish travellers with Galactosemia have the Q188R allele on the 9p13. Irish travellers who don't have Galactosemia, who aren't homozygous for this gene, may be heterozygous. The phenotype doesn't matter, I don't know why you made that erroneous assumption or incorrectly inferred this is what I believe. The important criteria for genetic distinction is increased prevalence of rare genes.

Are am I right in assuming you consider Irish people a separate ethnic group. Separate culture, language, shared genetic and geographical ancestry. Irish people aren't just British people who live on an island and inbred, they're not just white European. It's a separate ethnicity in my definition.

Following on from this line of reasoning, Irish Travellers have their own culture, language, shared ancestry and originally come from the same geographical region, despite, their spread across UK and America.

If any travellers avail of the same social services available to any other Irish person, then they should be seen in the same manner as any other Irish citizen and afforded the same rights and be expected to live by the same laws.

Granted I could have made it more detail specific, but the general point that I was making was, to my mind, a pretty obvious one, and certainly a fairly neutral point in that it was not anti or pro traveller in content.

I don't see any point here. We were discussing ethnicity, specifically, genetic arguments for ethnicity and then you start pontificating about social services and taxation. People born here to Nigerian parents 'can avail of the same social services, treated in the same manner as an Irish citizen and afforded the same rights to live by'. This doesn't make any difference to their ethnicity, which I wouldn't describe as Irish or White Irish as they're ethnically Nigerian (West-African) but are Irish in terms of nationality/citizenry*.

My argument is Travellers are a separate ethnic group, you questioned my reasoning, I explained my reasoning, and then you brought in this topic. That lead to me thinking you actually don't understand the argument.