Interesting article about Travellers by a Traveller

Wibbs · 22-06-2017 08:13AM

end of the road wrote: »

i actually have been effected by members of the traveling community in the past. however, that does not give me the right to discriminate against travelers.

It would however make it prudent to do so and beyond naive not to. Well unless one is aiming for right on martyrdom.

Deleted User wrote: »

I think the author of the piece in the OP pointed to just about the exact opposite. From when she was a 4 year old child, when she could not have done anything, she was ostracised solely on the basis of who she was. It's textbook discrimination, singling someone apart for less preferential treatment on the basis of their identity and ethnicity, not on what he or she may have done.

Again with this naivete, why don't we live in a perfect world that the bleeding heart mindset tends to display. The plain fact is the sins of the father are often visited upon the children.

the_syco wrote: »

So, your solution is to take the kids from the non-law abiding travelers?

Yeah like that wouldn't set things off. Unreal.

Black people will turn other black people into the law.

Exactly! Never mind that the one doing the arresting could be Black, as could the lawyers involved and the judge. African Americans still face all sorts of prejudice, but even with that they're main thrust has been a desire to integrate. Travellers on the other hand have a stated aim to not integrate, to stay apart in their "culture", while "settled people" should just accept this, foot the bill and suffer the fallout of this choice. The difference between the two groups is vast and to compare them is beyond moronic.

Wibbs · 22-06-2017 08:22AM

Shenshen wrote: »

I have an honest question to all those who point to bad experiences as informing the way they view travellers:

In my life, nearly all violence I've experienced, all the threats I've faced and all the abuse I got (and I got a fair share, I'd say), came from men. It was men who would beat me and punch me, men who would shout abuse at me in the street, men who treated me as a doormat.

Would you say there's something wrong with me for not being immediately suspicious of all men I meet? That I actually will open the door to the postman? That I work with men every day and don't feel fearful or distrustful? That I actually even went an married one?

Or does it make me sexist to notice that no woman ever treated me with as much violence?

Not really. The facts are that as far as violence goes men are far more likely to be a threat than women(including violence towards other men, where men themselves are more likely to be victims of such violence).

It also comes down to the percentages of actual risk when dealing with a group. You have no issue with the postman or colleagues because they have shown no hint of the violence some men have shown you. However, if the vast majority of your interactions with men were aggressive and threatening then you would be imprudent to not be fearful and distrustful.

If you lived in an area where 8 out of 10 mushrooms were toxic, or an area where 1 out of 10 were, which area would you be likely to leave mushrooms off the menu?

VinLieger · 22-06-2017 08:24AM

Shenshen wrote: »

I have an honest question to all those who point to bad experiences as informing the way they view travellers:

In my life, nearly all violence I've experienced, all the threats I've faced and all the abuse I got (and I got a fair share, I'd say), came from men. It was men who would beat me and punch me, men who would shout abuse at me in the street, men who treated me as a doormat.

Would you say there's something wrong with me for not being immediately suspicious of all men I meet? That I actually will open the door to the postman? That I work with men every day and don't feel fearful or distrustful? That I actually even went an married one?

Or does it make me sexist to notice that no woman ever treated me with as much violence?

Has every man youve ever met been a bad experience and been violent towards you?

Annasopra · 22-06-2017 08:27AM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

That is discrimination. She wasn't ostracised because of anything she did. Just like say for example if you were ostracised for being Irish because of the IRA.

Shenshen · 22-06-2017 08:36AM

VinLieger wrote: »

Has every man youve ever met been a bad experience and been violent towards you?

No, but on the other hand I've never had any violent encounters with travelers.

I actually do wonder if Irish people will notice that someone is a traveler if they don't behave in the stereotypical ways? How would you recognise that they are?

sbsquarepants · 22-06-2017 08:36AM

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

No I'm being completely serious, friend.

I'm basing my experiences of black people on two lads I knew in school, who would beat the heads off one another. One was likeable, but the other was a lot rougher.

I haven't really associated with black lads since, but I did once see a few of them hanging around with a RAPIST.

What's the problem, lad? Just relating our similar experiences here

At a certain point judging people isn't prejudice. It's knowing what to expect based on things you've seen happening all your life.

All this bullshít I'm sure sounded a lot more clever in your head, than when you actually commit it to a page.

Personally speaking I think I would probably find it hard to find a person I know who hasn't had some sort of trouble with "travellers".

I used to work in a place that dealt with a lot of them (90% of it was replacing glass in caravans that had been smashed up during the weekends revelries) By jaysus you'd want your wits about you, between trying to rob tools, trying to harass you to do things for free, refusing to pay agreed rates and getting threatening when you point that out - it was a fúcking ordeal to do anything for them in at least 80 - 90% of cases. There were a few who were perfectly nice and fine, but they were very much in the minority.

Very few people have experience of gangs of black people robbing their shops blind, or having to deal with the piles of rubbish that wandering hoards of black people left on the side of the road. You'll struggle to find a pub or hotel that was wrecked after they hosted a black wedding or funeral.

In short - your "point" is total fúcking nonsense.

Wibbs wrote: »

Exactly! Never mind that the one doing the arresting could be Black, as could the lawyers involved and the judge. African Americans still face all sorts of prejudice, but even with that they're main thrust has been a desire to integrate. Travellers on the other hand have a stated aim to not integrate, to stay apart in their "culture", while "settled people" should just accept this, foot the bill and suffer the fallout of this choice. The difference between the two groups is vast and to compare them is beyond moronic.

Couldn't agree more!

The Bishop Basher · 22-06-2017 08:50AM

Shenshen wrote: »

No, but on the other hand I've never had any violent encounters with travelers.

So you have no reason to fear them..

No one is asking you to change your view of travelers because of the experiences of others. But those of us who have had nothing but bad experiences are more then entitled to be wary and avoid them at all costs.

Shenshen wrote: »

I actually do wonder if Irish people will notice that someone is a traveler if they don't behave in the stereotypical ways? How would you recognise that they are?

I know and work with people who I suspect are from a traveling backgroud. To be honest I couldn't give a fiddlers and have zero issue with them as they've never given me cause to have one. They behave in a civilised manner and go about their business earning an honest living just like the rest of us..

As has been said many many times on this thread, it's not travelers that any of us have an issue with.. it's their anti social and criminal behaviour.

s3rtvdbwfj81ch · 22-06-2017 08:56AM

Shenshen wrote: »

I actually do wonder if Irish people will notice that someone is a traveler if they don't behave in the stereotypical ways? How would you recognise that they are?

Probably with 75-80% accuracy you can tell by the way a person dresses, or just generally comports themself. Once they open their mouth to speak though, there is a definite "traveller accent" that is quite distinct from any other Irish accent.

....... · 22-06-2017 08:59AM

This post has been deleted.

22-06-2017 09:04AM

Wibbs wrote: »

The plain fact is the sins of the father are often visited upon the children.

You omitted to say whether you approve of this or not?

The plain fact is, as you say, that the world is full of people who dislike others based on "the sins of their fathers", hate the British because of 800 years, hate the Germans for WWII and so on. But you can I can say "that's simply wrong"...can't we? Isn't it?

The Bishop Basher · 22-06-2017 09:05AM

@ A Tyrant Named Miltiades!

end of the road has already said that he would keep opening his pub regardless of the consequences and personal cost to him so as not to discriminate against travelers which is obviously nonsense as his business couldn't survive.

But i'm asking you the same question..

Say you're a publican in a rural town... A notorious traveler family funeral is on and every other pub in the town is closing..

Would you stay open regardless of the consequences or would you choose to discriminate ?

tomofson · 22-06-2017 09:06AM

Deleted User wrote: »

You omitted to say whether you approve of this or not?

The plain fact is, as you say, that the world is full of people who dislike others based on "the sins of their fathers", hate the British because of 800 years, hate the Germans for WWII and so on. But you can I can say "that's simply wrong"...can't we? Isn't it?

WWII is not an ongoing issue, traveller violence,intimidation ect is.

Maguined · 22-06-2017 09:44AM

My first experience with a traveller I was probably 7 or 8 and messing about with friends and we came across another group of boys our age so we said hello and we were threatened to get off their land and had rocks thrown at us so we ran away.

When I was 10 a halting site was setup in our area and that summer we had a wave of burlaries. One of our neighbhours had their dog stolen and a ransom note left. They reported it to the guards who went out to the halting site to ask questions but couldn't do anything as they were only met with denials. They left shortly after and when the site had to be cleaned up from all the waste and rubbish they left the dead dog was found with his throat slit amongst the rubbish. It is one of my earliest memories of trying to understand maliciousness in real life rather than some comcial villain on TV cartoons.

When I was 14 a caravan was left outside our school walls and burned down which the settled community once again having to clean up the mess that travellers had left. There was no threat to the school as this was an outer wall but it was just the lack of caring about others having to clean up after them and not even bothering to try and find a different spot away from a school.

When I was in my early 20's and full of progessive ideals I was out with friends in a club and a gorgeous girl was trying to dance with one of my friends but he kept avoiding her despite her following him constantly and being very direct with her attentions. Eventually she left and I asked him what his problem was as she was very attractive. He told me she was a traveller and he didn't want any trouble. I laughed at him, I could not get over how much of a coward and a bigot he was being to discriminate against her because she was a traveller and I only wished I was lucky enough to be getting her attention. Twenty minutes later her brother showed up and glassed some guy who was not as discriminating for dancing with his sister.

When I was again in my early 20's and living in Smithfield every month I got to see the racist abuse thrown at the local shop employees when they routinely caught traveller children stealing from their shop.

When I went to the UK and one drunken lout gave me abuse for being Irish I did not become wary of all english people because that one negative encounter was outweight by a thousand positive encounters with english people. I cannot say the same for my experiences with travellers.

I am wary of travellers because my only experience has been negative, I wish I had a positive experience with travellers to balance my views but unfortunately I do not. I do not doubt that there are decent travellers out there but I have not encountered them or maybe I have and I just did not notice but I can only go with the experience I have had in my life and that experience has only taught me one thing and that is travellers end up in negative and potentially dangerous encounters so it is wise to avoid them if possible to just reduce risk in your life.

jackofalltrades · 22-06-2017 09:51AM

Shenshen wrote: »

And where does that "sense of self-policing" come from?

Empathy and an understanding that we need to for society to function.

Remove the police from any society., even just for a short space of time, and you will pretty much immediately notice that sense evaporating almost entirely.
Google "Montreal's Night of Terror", a result of a 16h police strike back in 1969.

The Gards unofficially striked on May 1st 1998. The "blue flu day".
AFAIR people carried as normal, just like it was any other day.
Sure if it had gone on longer you probably would have started to see problems.
But the numbers involved would probably have been fairly low.

s3rtvdbwfj81ch · 22-06-2017 09:53AM

The most recent run-in that I've had with them, well my wife, was when a woman crashed into the side of my wife's car, immediately jumped out and started ranting "Your fault, your fault" - then she copped my then 2 yr old son in the car, bawling and frightened after the crash and some fat imbecile shouting and ranting at my wife. The fat c?nt couldn't get back into her car quick enough, and scarpered into the local halting site.

The Guards called into my wife and asked if she could ID the woman, and my wife said she could.

The Guards actually went up into the site and, of course, were met with denials until one of the young kids on the site piped up "Yeah, Mary* was out in the car this morning".

Of course, nobody is going to take a kid's word for anything, but the guards, in fairness to them, gave a statement to the insurance company absolving my wife of all fault, but there was little they could do to prosecute this halfwit who they knew was driving with no licence or insurance.

Law onto themselves, and when challenged call it "culture".

I shudder to think what happened to that kid after the guards left the site tbh.

*name changed, because I can't remember the actual name, but Mary is a good guess

rustynutz · 22-06-2017 09:57AM

Travellers use their " ethnicity" to stay one step ahead of the law, and use the system to their advantage. Why would they integrate into society and become settled? As is stands the vast majority claim the dole, if they do commit a crime and are suspected they just move campsites, there could be several people in the same extended family with the same name so how do the guards even go about tracking down their suspect? Johny ward from no fixed abode could be literally anyone from hundreds of people.

I think the onus here is on travellers to try and help themselves, if they stopped tolerating criminality within their community and engaged with the guards, I think peoples attitudes towards them would change, albeit slowly. I don't think its up to the general population to try and become more tolerant of them, and their current behaviour, and make all the concessions when most of us have fallen victim to travellers at some stage.

I think on top of all the antisocial behaviour, criminality etc. what really annoys people is, we are all paying for them through income tax, most have large families (Myself and my partner both work fulltime and I cant afford any more than 2 kids) so they are a massive drain on the social welfare system, I would love to see what our unemployment rate and social welfare bill would be if travellers were taken out of the equation. Then you hear the anecdotes like a traveller family I know where a taxi picks the kids up every morning to bring the kids to school and drops them off, paid for by the state, this is after the family were housed in a bungalow out the country on an acre site etc.

I don't see a solution to this at all, I would consider myself tolerant and reasonable but will admit I really dislike travellers, this comes from any experience I've had with them, I'm sure there are good ones, but experience tells me the bad outweigh the good.

sbsquarepants · 22-06-2017 10:01AM

Shenshen wrote: »

I have an honest question to all those who point to bad experiences as informing the way they view travellers:

In my life, nearly all violence I've experienced, all the threats I've faced and all the abuse I got (and I got a fair share, I'd say), came from men. It was men who would beat me and punch me, men who would shout abuse at me in the street, men who treated me as a doormat.

Would you say there's something wrong with me for not being immediately suspicious of all men I meet? That I actually will open the door to the postman? That I work with men every day and don't feel fearful or distrustful? That I actually even went an married one?

Or does it make me sexist to notice that no woman ever treated me with as much violence?

What percentage of men you've met have treated you this way? I'd say an extremely small one .1%? .01%?

99.99% of all men you've met have at least been civil to you - why exactly would you fear them or feel the need to avoid them?

If out of all my encounters with travellers .1% or .01% had ended in trouble of some sort, I'd likely see them as a harmless bunch. But that hasn't been my experience, in my experience 8 or 9 out of every 10 interactions with our travelling brethren has been worrying to a greater or lesser extent.

If 8 out of every 10 men you've dealt with either punched you, shouted abuse at you or treated you as a doormat - postie wouldn't be getting the warm welcome he does, I can absolutely guarantee that!

Shenshen · 22-06-2017 10:02AM

Swanner wrote: »

So you have no reason to fear them..

No one is asking you to change your view of travelers because of the experiences of others. But those of us who have had nothing but bad experiences are more then entitled to be wary and avoid them at all costs.

I'm not entirely sure if you realise, but the bolded bit above and the bolded bit below seem to show a massive cognitive dissonance.

On the one hand you claim that it's prudent to be wary and avoid all travelers, on the other you state that as long as you can't be 100% sure they're travelers you've no issues with them?

I know and work with people who I suspect are from a traveling backgroud. To be honest I couldn't give a fiddlers and have zero issue with them as they've never given me cause to have one. They behave in a civilised manner and go about their business earning an honest living just like the rest of us..

As has been said many many times on this thread, it's not travelers that any of us have an issue with.. it's their anti social and criminal behaviour.

I generally have no issues with people stating that they will avoid people who do not behave in a civilised manner, and who are violent and aggressive. Perfectly sensible.
And I also accept that there apparently is a larger-than-average sub-section of travelers who are uncivilised, violent and aggressive.

I just object to taking the leap from there to "all travelers are violent and aggressive and need to change".

Wibbs · 22-06-2017 10:14AM

Deleted User wrote: »

You omitted to say whether you approve of this or not?

NOt earlier in the thread I didn't. Of course I don't approve of it, but I do acknowledge why it happens.

22-06-2017 10:15AM

As I've said before, I'm as much a "traveller" as most of the ones who go on the TV shows about them. As such I've had experience with a lot of them and that's what's formed my opinions on them.
Funny enough there was one in my primary school, he got on with everyone, only "heard" he was a traveller when he left around 2nd or 3rd class and went on the road. No ostracisation there.

VinLieger · 22-06-2017 10:18AM

Shenshen wrote: »

I just object to taking the leap from there to "all travelers are violent and aggressive and need to change".

Nobody said all travelers are violent and aggressive and need to change.

However all travelers do need to acknowledge the issues in their culture and work toward changing that.

The Bishop Basher · 22-06-2017 10:29AM

Shenshen wrote: »

On the one hand you claim that it's prudent to be wary and avoid all travelers, on the other you state that as long as you can't be 100% sure they're travelers you've no issues with them?

That's not what I stated though..

I said i believe a couple of people in work are from that background but as I witness them behave in a normal decent and civilised manner day after day, I have no problem with them and see them as colleagues and peers, no different to anyone else..

It just goes to highlight the fact that once you remove the criminality and anti social behaviour, you will sort the discrimination..

Shenshen wrote: »

I generally have no issues with people stating that they will avoid people who do not behave in a civilised manner, and who are violent and aggressive. Perfectly sensible.
And I also accept that there apparently is a larger-than-average sub-section of travelers who are uncivilised, violent and aggressive.

I just object to taking the leap from there to "all travelers are violent and aggressive and need to change".

Agreed on all counts. I never said ALL travelers are violent, agressive and need to change.

My experience however tells me that the majority of them are bad news..

22-06-2017 11:03AM

end of the road wrote: »

i completely agree and you would be in the right here.

I'm happy we agree on that. I wish more people would. I try to give everyone the benefit of a clean slate upon meeting them.[/QUOTE]

end of the road wrote: »

no posters are giving free rides to scummy behaviour.

See I disagree, you literally do it in your next line. I call for personal responsibility, without the need for babysitting from the Gardai, and straight away you absolve it.

end of the road wrote: »

yes, because it's fact. if someone is racing on the roads, arrest them. if someone is organising or involved in organised fights, arrest them. it's as simple as that.

Why don't they take it upon themselves too, though? And how come other people witnessing this from inside the community don't inform the authorities as it's destroying their wider rep? Why amn't I out boxing the mush off people or flying down the motorway way on a horse? It's not because I'm scared the police will stop and arrest me, it's because I have the self control and cop on not to, for the greater good. Same reason I don't rob sh*t from outside displays in shops. Same reason I pay onto the Luas. Personal responsibility.

end of the road wrote: »

because doing so would just be a ranting sound bite. the reality is people break the law and we need to insure that is dealt with and punished accordingly.

It's not just a soundbite and it's certainly not ranting, it's clearly a valid point. Why stop at a red traffic light if you can probably get through it and there's hardly any others around? Because it's the right thing to do and it just takes a bit of self-policing, personal responsibility. There's hardly gonna be a traffic corp member at every junction, so people need to take it upon themselves to obey the law, otherwise, it all goes to sh*te. And this example is just at a very basic level.

ancapailldorcha · 22-06-2017 12:19PM

AnGaelach wrote: »

Of course, it's our fault that most of them are crooked fúckers.:rolleyes:

This sort of post is against the charter:

dr.bollocko wrote: »

Zero tolerance will be shown to posts containing racism or discrimination. This includes the travelling community. Please do not use this forum to incite hatred.

Do not post in this manner here again.

whisky_galore · 22-06-2017 12:55PM

VinLieger wrote: »

However all travelers do need to acknowledge the issues in their culture and work toward changing that.

Like that's ever going to happen.

seamus · 22-06-2017 01:28PM

whisky_galore wrote: »

Like that's ever going to happen.

One of the most telling examples of this refusal to self-examine came in the Carrickmines fire, when not a single advocacy group pointed to Traveller culture as a contributory factor in those ten deaths.

It was all about trying to blame a council for the conditions, blaming local communities for being "unfriendly". Never once did we hear Pavee Point or another traveller say, "Hey, maybe if these people didn't refuse the housing that had made available to them because it's not part of their culture, they wouldn't have died all crammed together in a little flammable box?".

When it comes to talking about Traveller issues, culture is for some reason, never the problem. Apparently it's the sacred cow that must never be touched, and the onus is on the rest of us to make concessions (financial, legal and social) for that culture, no matter how archaic or ridiculous that culture may be.

We're never going to get past this impasse until traveller groups are willing to step up and work to change the most toxic and anti-social parts of traveller culture. The rest of society has done everything they can.

benjamin d · 22-06-2017 01:48PM

A lot of people genuinely think that if something is referred to as "culture" it's irrefutably sacred. It's a linguistic mindblock that refuses to acknowledge that a "culture" can be, and often is, a bad thing, one that is to be consigned to history rather than celebrated.

It's bizarre that if I were to talk about traveller culture referring to the colourful old style caravans, the "make do and mend" craft abilities of the old "tinkers" that some travellers still practice, the shelta or cant language, etc. I would get wholehearted agreement that this is traveller culture.

If I refer to the family feuds, violence, mistreatment of women, disdain for education, criminality etc. as traveller culture certain people jump up and down indignantly about it.

Statistics show that the latter set of cultural activities are MUCH more broadly practised than the former, yet we can't call it what it is, traveller culture, because it's not a nice friendly thing that our nation's version of white guilt can live with.

Wibbs · 22-06-2017 01:49PM

seamus wrote: »

When it comes to talking about Traveller issues, culture is for some reason, never the problem. Apparently it's the sacred cow that must never be touched,

Culture and cultural equivalence are subjects that are indeed scared cows politically and socially to some degree. The 1970's idea that all cultures are equally valid is a very strong one when discussing topics like this. The very idea that someone might suggest than a particular culture is harmful and/or lesser tends to attract horrified responses. And that's why a) it's off the table and b) why some self interested pressure groups wheel it out as an attempt to close down that debate.

Let's be real here though. Some cultures are overall clearly lesser than others. Modern western European culture is clearly superior in most metrics compared to western European culture of the early Middle Ages. Few would dispute that, but have blinkers on when it comes to extant cultures that are similarly lacking. Traveller culture is most certainly one of them and their horrendous life and lifestyle statistics reflect this most obviously.

end of the road · 22-06-2017 02:08PM

benjamin d wrote: »

I find many aspects of many and varied races and ethnicities toxic. Marrying child brides, stoning women to death, honour killings, homophobia... I could go on and on about things in many cultures that are abhorrent. Irish culture itself has plenty of aspects to criticise. This discussion is about travellers, whose culture has essentially deliberately developed as antagonistic to that of settled people.

And yes, you're a racist. Your determination to absolve the travelling community from any blame for their social problems is racism on your part. You're treating one group of people differently and demanding the same from others here simply because of their ethnicity. Treating someone differently because of your sense of superiority to them is racism - you're a racist.

Your superior attitude to black people is also obvious. You're pulling up the negative aspects of black people in America in an attempt to compare to travellers - that's racist. You, up there on your high horse, can't see that you are one of the only racists in this thread.

refusing to put all the blame for everything on travelers isn't racism.
suggesting that other minority groups which have some members who are badly behaved wouldn't have discrimination against them tolerated, and people wouldn't dare discriminate against them yet would against travelers, is valid. it's not racism.
you need to look up the definition of racism.

Wibbs wrote: »

It would however make it prudent to do so and beyond naive not to. Well unless one is aiming for right on martyrdom.

nope. It would not make it prudent to do so. the only naive ones here are those finding any excuses to discriminate against travelers because for now at least, they can get away with it without re-percussions. yet the same people wouldn't dare discriminate against anyone else because correctly, it wouldn't be tolerated.

Wibbs wrote: »

Again with this naivete, why don't we live in a perfect world that the bleeding heart mindset tends to display. The plain fact is the sins of the father are often visited upon the children.

there is no such thing as a bleeding heart mindset, apart from being one of the old "terms" thrown around by certain types either engaged in. racism, bigotry, bullying, trying and failing to shut down anyone who's argument they can't argue against, and the rest. the fact is only a certain type usually blame the children for the acts of the parents, and they will find any excuse to do it where travelers are concerned.

Wibbs wrote: »

Exactly! Never mind that the one doing the arresting could be Black, as could the lawyers involved and the judge. African Americans still face all sorts of prejudice, but even with that they're main thrust has been a desire to integrate. Travellers on the other hand have a stated aim to not integrate, to stay apart in their "culture", while "settled people" should just accept this, foot the bill and suffer the fallout of this choice. The difference between the two groups is vast and to compare them is beyond moronic.

it's not moronic to make certain comparisons in terms of certain aspects. the reason some don't like comparisons being made is it shuts down their non-reasons for discriminating against travelers.

Captain Obvious · 22-06-2017 02:15PM

end of the road wrote: »

the reason some don't like comparisons being made is it shuts down their non-reasons for discriminating against travelers.

No it's because people can see the difference between a culture, which consists of customs and traditions that can change, and skin colour, which is simply a biological difference which effects how you appear.

Interesting article about Travellers by a Traveller

Comments