Big Fat Gypsy Wedding

Utter...

My other half is a dress maker and said the material and sawarski crystals on the one last week prob cost about 3-5 grand! Also the rest of the wedding party get the full treatment as well - Some idea of prices here.... http://tackyweddings.com/2008/10/


Bet the tax man is taking a good look at Nico's dressmakers books lol...If I was making that cash, I wouldnt mind the danger money for turning up on the day with fire extinguishers.:)

Theres a guy in Cork that used to do it, prob still does. I have to convince herself to get down to the nearest halting site and pass her business card around.... she's not that keen though for now.....

I'm handy with a glue gun!! We could set up a line:P:P

Where were all the men when they were being evicted? It was (by the looks of it) left to all of the women to defend the site.
To be fair to the guys who were buldozing the site, they are probably only doing their job under instruction from the council or the "powers that be".

Yeah but she was funny when she was saying 'I think 6 is old enough...I'm 6...2 or 1 is too small.':D

I don't understand when they're banging on about traveller traditions when the screen is showing them dancing/dressing like..eh sluts. How is that a traveller tradition? Also yes the high emphasis on morality while wearing those clothes..is so weird. I feel sorry for traveller women, they seem to have no choice at all in anythign except the size of their dress. I really want to know how much those dresses cost! That pink one that lit up and weighed about 20 stone...that had to have cost about £10k. The demolition of the sites is awful, really they need to strike a balance where the sites are legally built and not near enough to eh non-traveller housing that massive amounts of complaints are going to happen.

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

What's shocking about it. They built there illegally. If they didn't want the stuff knocked down they should get proper planning permission.

The programme did state that planning permission was applied for on different sites with the majority of them being turned down - probably due to the fact that the surrounding communities had their own prejudices without knowing the group involved. This group appeared to have fitted in well into the community over the 6/7 years they had been living there...with members of the community coming out to try and stop the demolition of the site.

I think if travellers are prepared to buy their own site and properties and keep these in the immaculate condition they appeared, this should be actively encouraged instead of knocked. It is time that they were allowed to take responsibility for themselves and this would encourage them to take care of themselves and the environment around them. In Ireland, the opposite is encouraged. Facilities such as pre-schools etc are usually built on the halting sites themselves which does not encourage the children to integrate into the communities. If travellers choose to live in family groupings that should be fine so long as local authorities can accommodate this or encourage them to create their own environment (i.e. buy land/planning permission) etc. However, other areas such as education and social should not be provided separate from the general population. Programmes put in place by well meaning groups only tend to segregate the travellers further within their communities creating an "us" versus "them" society.

KeanSeenan wrote: »

I don't think the seperation is entirely down to that though, the travelling society, as far as I saw from the show, is quite insular. They look down on people not from their society(it's common in all societies, but it seems to be more of a natural incilnation with them), they are quite secretive about customs(found it hilarious that the dress maker made this point by saying 'They have their own language!') and some don't want their 'race' diluted by people outside of it. Perhaps some of these opinions have come about through decades of attrition between 'them' and 'us', But I think that integration is down to them just as much as it is down to us.

Yes, totally agree with you there - it works both ways. But the well meaning government partnership initiatives think they do well by keeping traveller's education and socialisation within their own boundaries, therefore creating walls. This does not work. With finances being so tight for all sectors of society in these times, we cannot continue to pay for individualised programmes for travellers in the areas of childcare, healthcare, community development workers and tutors for youth who decide to leave school early so that they can get entitlements that other sectors of our society would not be entitled to. Allow them to be independent if that is what they want.

http://uk.tv.yahoo.com/news-extra/article/109547/big-fat-gypsy-ratings-smashbut-critics-up-in-arms.html

Channel 4’s fly-on-the-wall documentary series ‘Big Fat Gypsy Weddings’ was a ratings smash for the channel last night, with 7 million tuning in.

Early overnight ratings said the controversial show drew 6million viewers in the vital 9pm timeslot – with a whopping 1million tuning in an hour later on Channel 4+1.

However, many critics and viewers felt that the show had some inappropriate scenes, particularly involving children getting ready for their first communion.

The views of Shelagh Fogarty, BBC presenter on the Nicky Campbell Radio Five show, were typical:

“I was astonished to see six-year-old girls in boob tubes, miniskirts, high heels and more make-up than you could shake a stick at, receiving communion for the first time in their lives. It seemed so bizarre.”

Siobhan Freegard, of parenting website Netmums said: “In this case it is not about making the children sexy.

“They are just dressed up like dolls. But the outcome in some cases can be sexualisation.”

Rachel Varley, writing in Metro, said: “This week, we had little girls with the carefully honed hip movements of thirty-year-old prostitutes.”

The debate continues as to whether the series is a point-and-giggle exploitation, or a revealing, sympathetic look at a fascinating subculture.

Either way, people are watching.

bubbaloo wrote: »

Where were all the men when they were being evicted? It was (by the looks of it) left to all of the women to defend the site.

I'd say it was more to do with not being shown on TV, there was a few pixilated faces at the wedding, either that or it was the side effects of inbreeding.