Peter Casey's beliefs of Travellers' ethnicity Part II

PlaneSpeeking

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Used to be Stringer Bell, now he annoys us with stupid Sky ads. Talk about going downhill.

Was thinking last night, not a habit I intend to proceed with, what percentage of people on Boards are travellers? There must be some. How are they feeling about these threads and why keep quiet on them? Or at least not say they are travellers.

That's a good point - I know my College has a Traveller Access Programme and one student actually graduated and did very well, he wanted the negative issues talked about and addressed, good on him.

Later on we had a female applicant who was doing really well initially but ultimately flunked out, after emptying the meagre Hardship Fund (I think we were paying for the family tbh) and last I heard was married with 5 kids. What a complete waste.

Plumbthedepths

PlaneSpeeking wrote:

It's backfiring spectacularly at the minute though because when stupid things like pasta recipes are used as "racist incidents" the agenda is seen for what it is.

You should have a look at the feedback thread. It's unbelievable what someone is hoping the admin team in boards will concede to .

Plumbthedepths

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

You should have a look at the feedback thread. It's unbelievable what someone is hoping the admin team in boards will concede to .

He's bitter that his view in isolation is not representative of AH as a whole, pay little credence.

givyjoe

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There is a definition under the UN that makes what Casey did 'racially discriminatory' if not the bolted down definition of racism.

Any group or community can use that card if someone like Casey makes generalisations about them or spreads mis-information in order to incite hate.

Again, if you want to see the hate he incited, just review this thread alone.

I'll remind you again, the Travellers in Tipp did NOT get what they asked for.
If you want to open a discussion on groups in Irish society from the public service through every workforce and social groups who 'look' for entitlements, fire away.

Absolute guff again, it's almost as if you are trying to prompt some kind of reaction.

Plumbthedepths

Deleted User wrote:

He's bitter that his view in isolation is not representative of AH as a whole, pay little credence.

To be fair there is a few others who try the same but in more subtle ways.

PlaneSpeeking

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

You should have a look at the feedback thread. It's unbelievable what someone is hoping the admin team in boards will concede to .

So if you voted for Casey you're a Putin bot ????

Madness! I'm fairly sure Vlad couldn't give two f***s for our elections, let alone the Presidency one!

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There is a definition under the UN that makes what Casey did 'racially discriminatory' if not the bolted down definition of racism.

Any group or community can use that card if someone like Casey makes generalisations about them or spreads mis-information in order to incite hate.

Rubbish. Casey was not "inciting hate."

He stated that Travellers should not be recognized as an ethnic minority. Scientific studies confirm indisputably that Travellers are of Irish ancestral origin. The genetic difference between settled people and Travellers emerged because of repeated intermarriage within that sub-group. But the basis for their recognition as a separate ethnicity is highly dubious and Casey was right to question it, IMO.

He also said that Travellers in Tipperary should not be demanding acres of land and stables at a time when the country is experiencing a housing crisis. Again, hardly controversial. Are public funds best used to build stables and provide land for Travellers' horses, or to provide homes for families in need?

He additionally stated that Travellers do not pay their fair share of taxes. Again, hardly a controversial opinion. Even the Irish Times article quoted earlier notes the lavish mortgage-free houses that some Travellers possess -- despite the fact that the vast majority of Travellers leave school before 15 and 80 percent of them are unemployed. Where does the wealth come from to buy these houses? What about all the other displays of wealth, such as flashy new vehicles and lavish weddings? Where does this money come from, and has tax been paid on it?

NOTHING that Casey said could be construed as racist. Trying to characterize him as a racist is just an attempt to avoid addressing the legitimate issues he raised.

Hattie Puny Litterbug

Hattie Puny Litterbug wrote: »

Rubbish. Casey was not "inciting hate."

He stated that Travellers should not be recognized as an ethnic minority. Scientific studies confirm indisputably that Travellers are of Irish ancestral origin. The genetic difference between settled people and Travellers emerged because of repeated intermarriage within that sub-group. But the basis for their recognition as a separate ethnicity is highly dubious and Casey was right to question it, IMO.

He also said that Travellers in Tipperary should not be demanding acres of land and stables at a time when the country is experiencing a housing crisis and there are many families in need. Again, hardly controversial. Are public funds best used to build stables and provide land for Travellers' horses, or to provided homes for families in need?

He additionally stated that Travellers do not pay their fair share of taxes. Again, hardly a controversial opinion. Even the Irish Times article quoted earlier notes the lavish mortgage-free houses that some Travellers possess -- despite the fact that the vast majority of Travellers leave school before 15 and 80 percent of them are unemployed. Where does the wealth come from to buy these houses and all the other displays of wealth, such as flashy new vehicles and lavish weddings?

NOTHING that Casey said could be construed as racist. Trying to characterize him as a racist is just an attempt to avoid addressing the legitimate issues he raised.

Alarming in its simplicity, what Francie and other bleeding hearts refuse to accept.

Omackeral

Hattie Puny Litterbug wrote: »

Rubbish. Casey was not "inciting hate."

He knows. It won't stop him repeating it though, along with 23% of 46% and SEMS. Chap is like a broken record.

I'd like to know what precisely makes one ethnically a Traveller, still no clear answer on that really.

FrancieBrady

Hattie Puny Litterbug wrote: »

Rubbish. Casey was not "inciting hate."

He stated that Travellers should not be recognized as an ethnic minority. Scientific studies confirm indisputably that Travellers are of Irish ancestral origin. The genetic difference between settled people and Travellers emerged because of repeated intermarriage within that sub-group. But the basis for their recognition as a separate ethnicity is highly dubious and Casey was right to question it, IMO.

He also said that Travellers in Tipperary should not be demanding acres of land and stables at a time when the country is experiencing a housing crisis and there are many families in need. Again, hardly controversial. Are public funds best used to build stables and provide land for Travellers' horses, or to provided homes for families in need?

He additionally stated that Travellers do not pay their fair share of taxes. Again, hardly a controversial opinion. Even the Irish Times article quoted earlier notes the lavish mortgage-free houses that some Travellers possess -- despite the fact that the vast majority of Travellers leave school before 15 and 80 percent of them are unemployed. Where does the wealth come from to buy these houses and all the other displays of wealth, such as flashy new vehicles and lavish weddings?

NOTHING that Casey said could be construed as racist. Trying to characterize him as a racist is just an attempt to avoid addressing the legitimate issues he raised.

Under that UN definition of racial discrimination he most certainly did cross the line.

He generalised and made untruthful remarks about travellers which were insulting to travellers.

It's very simple. Had he talked about 'issues within the community' and had not used broad brushstrokes, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Regarding 'inciting hate', I think any reasonable person can see the hate unleashed by this. It is why 90% of the electorate did not come out to endorse him and why only 10% of the electorate responded to it.

MrMusician18

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Under that UN definition of racial discrimination he most certainly did cross the line.

He generalised and made untruthful remarks about travellers which were insulting to travellers.

It's very simple. Had he talked about 'issues within the community' and had not used broad brushstrokes, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Regarding 'inciting hate', I think any reasonable person can see the hate unleashed by this. It is why 90% of the electorate did not come out to endorse him and why only 10% of the electorate responded to it.

Maybe Francie you can enlighten us as to the issues within the community as you see it?

Because all I'm seeing from apologists are that any ills that Travellers face is entirely down to the rest of us.

Plumbthedepths

givyjoe wrote:

Absolute guff again, it's almost as if you are trying to prompt some kind of reaction.

It's the same reason he uses the 10 per cent claim repeatedly . He's hoping to provoke an actionable report. Best to put him on ignore.

Brendan Bendar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Under that UN definition of racial discrimination he most certainly did cross the line.

He generalised and made untruthful remarks about travellers which were insulting to travellers.

It's very simple. Had he talked about 'issues within the community' and had not used broad brushstrokes, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Regarding 'inciting hate', I think any reasonable person can see the hate unleashed by this. It is why 90% of the electorate did not come out to endorse him and why only 10% of the electorate responded to it.

You are losing this one Francie just like you lost the BREADMAN debate.

Fair play for trying to stick your finger in the dyke and hold back the flow, but you really need to dial down the hyperbole and understand that the lad was telling the truth, and it’s time the cobwebs of cant and rhetoric were brushed aside and the truth was allowed to be published.

Sticking your head in the sand and ignoring what is going on will do nobody any good.

MrMusician18

Omackeral wrote: »

He knows. It won't stop him repeating it though, along with 23% of 46% and SEMS. Chap is like a broken record.

I'd like to know what precisely makes one ethnically a Traveller, still no clear answer on that really.

I don't think they fit the scientific definition of an ethnic group, but they do for the sociological one: distinct culture and language.

PlaneSpeeking

Omackeral wrote: »

He knows. It won't stop him repeating it though, along with 23% of 46% and SEMS. Chap is like a broken record.

I'd like to know what precisely makes one ethnically a Traveller, still no clear answer on that really.

My College did the research - I'm still none the wiser tbh.

Omackeral

MrMusician18 wrote: »

I don't think they fit the scientific definition of an ethnic group, but they do for the sociological one: distinct culture and language.

So not ethnically different then. Whole Special ETHNIC Minority Status thing is pretty much a farce so?

As far as distinct culture and language go... Maybe a 100 years ago that was true but in 2017 when it was passed? By that reasoning anyone in an area speaking Irish as their first tongue should qualify. Dubs and Rural people are arguably culturally different from each other too if you wanna push the boat out, among other sections of society.

dav3

Omackeral wrote: »

I'd like to know what precisely makes one ethnically a Traveller, still no clear answer on that really.

It's not up for debate. People far more educated on the subject than you or I gave their reasons.

http://www.rcsi.ie/index.jsp?n=145&p=107&a=10373

Irish Travellers account for approximately 0.6% of the Irish population, consisting of between 29,000-40,000 individuals. They are a population with a history of nomadism, where cousin marriages (consanguineous marriages) are commonplace and they are socially isolated from ‘settled' Irish people. This landmark research, using DNA from a sample Irish Travellers, European Roma and settled people*, has:

• Found that at a genetic level, Travellers are very close to settled Irish people, but show significant differences;
• Found no evidence for a recent shared ancestry between Irish Travellers and European Roma;
• Estimated the time when Travellers diverged from the settled population: approximately 12 generations (360 years) ago
• Shown subtle genetic differences between speakers of the Cant and Gammon dialects of the Traveller language.
• Found that the proportion of Traveller genomes where the maternal and paternal copies are identical was on a par with similar consanguineous populations in other countries.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/travellers-as-genetically-different-from-settled-irish-as-spanish-1.2969515

Ethnic status
The findings provide strong evidence that Travellers should receive some form of ethnic status, according to Prof Cavalleri.

“We think this is a nice piece of evidence for that complex debate,” he said. The research group “would be supportive of some form of ethnic status”.

The DNA analysis also revealed that there are four “genetic clusters” or subdivisions within the Traveller community. These in turn tend to match up with their social grouping and use of language.

One cluster is associated with the “Rathkeale group” of Travellers. Two other clusters are linked to whether the Traveller speaks the Cant or Gammon dialects of the Traveller language Shelta.

The study clearly showed there was no significant genetic contribution made by Roma Gypsies to Traveller DNA. This disproves a view held by some that the two groups were genetically related.

Traveller origins have long been a “source of considerable debate” the authors write. There is also a lack of documentary evidence that reveals the history of the Irish Traveller population.

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep42187

Author information
Author notes
James F. Wilson & Gianpiero L. Cavalleri
These authors contributed equally to this work.

Affiliations
Molecular and Cellular Therapeutics, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, St Stephen’s Green, Dublin 2, Ireland
Edmund Gilbert & Gianpiero L. Cavalleri

Braun School of Public Health and Community Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
Shai Carmi

School of Medicine and Medical Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
Sean Ennis

Centre for Global Health Research, Usher Institute for Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, Scotland
James F. Wilson

MRC Human Genetics Unit, Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Crewe Road, Edinburgh, Scotland
James F. Wilson

Contributions
E.G., S.C., J.F.W., and G.L.C., wrote the main manuscript, E.G. ran the analysis, with exception of TIBD, which was run by S.C. S.E. contributed to supervision of E.G. J.F.W. and G.L.C. designed the study. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author
Correspondence to Gianpiero L. Cavalleri.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/q-a-what-does-ethnic-recognition-mean-for-irish-travellers-1.2993526

An ESRI report published last month highlighted the “extreme disadvantage” suffered by Travellers across a range of indicators, including health, housing, education, employment and mortality.

Recognition of Traveller ethnicity “could be of considerable benefit in ensuring respect for the cultural identity of Travellers in the context of targeted services,” it said.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/why-minority-ethnic-status-matters-a-traveller-view-1.2994178

Ubiquitous racism and the subsequent shaming came to define who we are as Travellers. Ethnicity was often misunderstood. We, the Traveller community have a distinctive culture, tradition, shared language and customs that differ somewhat from the settled Irish population. These characteristics constitute the accepted definition of an ‘ethnic group’. The prevailing view was that we as Travellers needed to be rehabilitated, then forcibly assimilated into the settled Irish population.

Omackeral

The last paragraph you put up is literally an opinion piece and the first two words are ''ubiquitous racism''. So that's bollox on two counts. The main body of the text lists consanguineous marriage as one of the main factors of them being distinct. Basically, that means they're riding their cousins. Cry about that if you want, that's a crude but factual definition of it. So being inbred is essentially one the main reasons why we're all supposed to say they're a different ''race''. Fantastic.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

So you've provided scientific evidence that Travellers are of Irish origin, have no genetic connection to Roma gypsies, and are "very close" genetically to the settled population. Any genetic divergence has come about because Travellers for the past 12-odd generations have intermarried with their cousins.

And you think that's enough for them to be recognized as an entirely separate ethnic minority?

Brendan Bendar

Omackeral wrote: »

The last paragraph you put up is literally an opinion piece and the first two words are ''ubiquitous racism''. So that's bollox on two counts. The main body of the text lists consanguineous marriage as one of the main factors of them being distinct. Basically, that means they're riding their cousins. Cry about that if you want, that's a crude but factual definition of it. So being inbred is essentially one the main reasons why we're all supposed to say they're a different ''race''. Fantastic.

Fair play O, you blew that crock clean out of the water.

Well done lad.

RandomName2

dav3 wrote: »

It's not up for debate. People far more educated on the subject than you or I gave their reasons.

Ah, I thought you wouldn't try debating it yourself, despite your strident position.

So you quote a single peer reviewed paper (twice) and the opinion of Enda Kenny. I'm going to ignore Kenny, as I doubt your statement that he's more educated on the subject than you or I, or that his opinion was entirely objective.

The paper you quote analysed between 45 and 50 Travelers (it is not quite clear which number). That's quite a small cohort. They compared these 50 odd Travelers to over 6000 Europeans of mixed backgrounds.

The findings were that Travelers were most closely related to Irish people and had no clear link with European Roma. You could knock me down with a feather. It was also found that the 45 individuals were slightly more closely related to each other than to the general Irish population. It isn't stated if these 45 people are from the same family. If a sizeable proportion of these 45 were from the same family - even 10 of them, that would skew the statistics such that they would be more closely related to each other than the general population. Even then, there's no significance between them and the general population.

There's the last tattered remnants of your argument, dav3.

Edward M

dav3 wrote: »

It's not up for debate. People far more educated on the subject than you or I gave their reasons.

I wonder what do you mean by, more educated than you or I on the subject?
Would that include being robbed by, assaulted or liveing in fear of either happening by the unwanted presence of a group of travellers in your yard or driveway?

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

RandomName2 wrote: »

It was also found that the 45 individuals were slightly more closely related to each other than to the general Irish population.

I'm sure if you took 45 people from Tory Island or the Hebrides or any other isolated community, you would probably get the same result. That doesn't mean they're of a different ethnicity.

As for the claims about a separate language ... how many Travellers actually speak Shelta? I've never heard a Traveller speaking anything but English.

And the separate customs? What would these be?

givyjoe

MrMusician18 wrote: »

I don't think they fit the scientific definition of an ethnic group, but they do for the sociological one: distinct culture and language.

Not sure putting 'boss' at the end of every sentence = distinct language.

tretorn

Hattie Puny Litterbug wrote: »

I'm sure if you took 45 people from Tory Island or the Hebrides or any other isolated community, you would probably get the same result. That doesn't mean they're of a different ethnicity.

As for the claims about a separate language ... how many Travellers actually speak Shelta? I've never heard a Traveller speaking anything but English.

And the separate customs? What would these be?

Well one of the separate customs is marrying your first cousin and this would lead to a lot of health problems with children in this community.

Being religious as in wearing crosses and installing huge monuments to your dead seems to be part of the customs too. Religion doesnt extend to not coveting your neighbours goods or not trespassing on their land so the travellers religion is an a la carte one .

I cant think of much else apart from the horses but I doubt if these animals are kept legally, ie chipped etc so I have no interest in hearing about horses. People cant keep horses in rural areas unless they have access to land and this applies no matter how much travellers feel entitled to their horses and ponies.

Mr. CooL ICE

Mod: FrancieBrady, don't post in this thread again. Reason: borderline soapboxing for days

Roger Hassenforder

Can we get some aloe vera for dav3 please...

Ipso

Hattie Puny Litterbug wrote: »

So you've provided scientific evidence that Travellers are of Irish origin, have no genetic connection to Roma gypsies, and are "very close" genetically to the settled population. Any genetic divergence has come about because Travellers for the past 12-odd generations have intermarried with their cousins.

And you think that's enough for them to be recognized as an entirely separate ethnic minority?

Ethnicity is really stretching it, subculture might be more appropriate.

Assetbacked

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/garda-object-to-firm-run-by-traveller-patriarch-getting-licence-for-pub-37505029.html

Clear bias from the authorities amounting to prejudice - shocking that the gardai could so blatantly object to a traveller family trying to run a business just because they are travellers.

Oh wait, it's evidence based.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

Assetbacked wrote: »

Clear bias from the authorities amounting to prejudice - shocking that the gardai could so blatantly object to a traveller family trying to run a business just because they are travellers.

If you read closely, it's not because the applicant for the license is a Traveller. It's because he and his family have been involved in long-running feuds with other Traveller families. The Gardai are justifiably concerned about the impact on law and order should the license be granted.