Isn't it time Travellers get embraced by Irish society?

john_reilly74

DNA study: Travellers a distinct ethnicity
By Jennifer Hough
TUESDAY, MAY 31, 2011
THE first DNA analysis of the Travelling community has proven that it is a distinct ethnic minority who separated from the settled community between 1,000 and 2,000 years ago, experts have claimed.

According to genetics expert Jim Wilson from the University of Edinburgh, though it is clear Travellers diverged from the settled community, it is not clear why.

He said Travellers are a distinct genetic group as different from the settled Irish as Icelanders are from Norwegians.

The revelation was made on RTÉ’s documentary, Blood of the Travellers, and will put further pressure on the Government to recognise Travellers as a distinct group of people.

In March, the UN Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination expressed concern at the state’s "persistent refusal" to recognise Travellers as an ethnic minority, and pointed out that they satisfied the internationally recognised criteria for such a group.

Morag

I think it's more of an issue of Travellers not embracing Irish society and it's standards and ways of conducting themselves.

We have people with other cultures living here who are Irish as well but you don't see them running afoul of the law as much or marginalising themselves.

MRPRO03

So, that study justifies the fact, they leave school early, they choose to live in caravans, they do not want to work whatever they say about employers turning them down. At the end of the day, they are citizens of Ireland and should be treated as citizens, they themselves want to be separate, they are not a help to society. There is a reason why people do not like them, for the reasons I gave and people also feel threatened whenever they walk by, fearful of been robbed or attacked, you ask anyone who has lived with them and they will mostly say that they cause trouble. They fight among themselves, steal from your house and you can disagree with them but as a result, they will ask for a fight to solve the issue. These are all personal experiences, you can have your study, but the attitudes must change for them to be accepted.

john_reilly74

Sharrow wrote:

I think it's more of an issue of Travellers not embracing Irish society and it's standards and ways of conducting themselves.

We have people with other cultures living here who are Irish as well but you don't see them running afoul of the law as much or marginalising themselves.

This society shamefully marginalises them. Provides squalid conditions for them to camp in and systematically introduced legislation to harrass them by moving them on. All the settled community is an accessory to this to our shame and to our blindedness.

Orion

john_reilly74 wrote: »

This society shamefully marginalises them. Provides squalid conditions for them to camp in and systematically introduced legislation to harrass them by moving them on. All the settled community is an accessory to this to our shame and to our blindedness.

With all due respect that's bollox. They marginalise themselves for the most part. There's an ingrained belief that the world owes them a living.

If you're talking about illegal encampments that legislation applies to everyone. But a lot of travellers play the traveller card thinking that if they call discrimination they can get away with showing contempt for the law.

It's not for no reason that publicans close their pubs if there's a traveller wedding nearby. You think publicans don't need the business?

If travellers were more inclined to abide by the law and become part of the wider community then they would be accepted more readily. But if they show contempt for their locale, for their neighbours and for the law of the land then they earn equal contempt for their actions.

I am speaking in general terms obviously. This does not apply to all members of the community. There are some who are quite happy to conform to societal norms. Unfortunately they are out-shouted by those who won't.

MyKeyG

john_reilly74 wrote: »

This society shamefully marginalises them. Provides squalid conditions for them to camp in and systematically introduced legislation to harrass them by moving them on. All the settled community is an accessory to this to our shame and to our blindedness.

I'm sorry but you're spouting nonsense of the highest order. That you fell for that tripe on Rte tonight is pathetic.

The travelling community treat society like an a la carte buffet. They elect to live outside it coming back only to pick and choose the best bits when it suits their purpose. All you ever hear is that they have a culture and way of life that they want to maintain but they have no problems keeping up to date with modern innovations in Social Welfare payments.

The settled community are supposed to feel responsible for how they choose to live?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

john_reilly74

MyKeyG wrote:

john_reilly74 wrote: »

This society shamefully marginalises them. Provides squalid conditions for them to camp in and systematically introduced legislation to harrass them by moving them on. All the settled community is an accessory to this to our shame and to our blindedness.

I'm sorry but you're spouting nonsense of the highest order. That you fell for that tripe on Rte tonight is pathetic.

The travelling community treat society like an a la carte buffet. They elect to live outside it coming back only to pick and choose the best bits when it suits their purpose. All you ever hear is that they have a culture and way of life that they want to maintain but they have no problems keeping up to date with modern innovations in Social Welfare payments.

The settled community are supposed to feel responsible for the fact that they choose to live in their own filth??? Give me a break!!!

This documentary showed the human side of the TC who never get represented as they are in mainstream media 'cause we know shag all about them. Really felt for the emotional old man relating how his mum had to beg to feed them... like who'd choose to live like that? To have survived and retained their ancient language and traditions while we lost ours demonstrates tremendous resilience and ability to keep the head down. All of that comes with an emotional cost, hence the acting out of a few by fighting and rebelling against the society that shames them by engaging in disorderly conduct (they probably don't see the point in trying, as they'll always get judged harshly). Some of the stuff I've heard people say and still continue to say is maddening... a tolerance deficit bigtime!

oldyouth

It's not going to happen in my lifetime. For it to ever happen, travellers need to address the concerns of the majority of the population. That's as non-confrontational as I can put it

MyKeyG

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I apologise for the harsh way I expressed my point. I merely wanted to point out that however people choose to live on themselves be it.

With all due respect that the travelling community are a distinct ethnic group is not the OP's sole point. He is clearly also trying to claim that the travelling community are being ostracised by the settled community. The OP mentioned the squalled conditions with which travellers are 'forced' to live with. I think people are entitled to refute that supposition.

This society shamefully marginalises them. Provides squalid conditions for them to camp in and systematically introduced legislation to harrass them by moving them on. All the settled community is an accessory to this to our shame and to our blindedness.

Surely we're entitled to defend ourselves albeit I accept without harsh terminology?

HovaBaby

I do not feel they should be recognized as a distinct ethnic minority. They have been born in Ireland, have been raised here. That the high majority of them live a nomad lifestyle shouldn't allow them to be called a distinct ethic minority IMO.

BTW I don't know what advantages being classified as that would bring them, I mean they are already recognized by the general populace as being distinct from the stationary populace. Their accents are different, their method of living (as in their accomodation and housing, not in a general way) is different. I don't know however all the ways in which they are recognized by the government, but there are travellers groups and organizations. There are halting sites provided.

I don't know how that would affect state policy, as I am not sure what the advantages or disadvantages of being recognized as a distinct ethnic minority would bring. Or whether they would get more benefits or be treatly differently from the government, ie different legislation towards them, or what disadvanges that might arise from that classification.

Cavehill Red

Travellers are already considered an especial case in Irish law, cited under Equality legislation, and given additional support and resources, often refused by them, in relation to health and education provision.

What more is being sought here?

To suggest they are a separate ethnicity (highly disputable I'd argue) and that that alone is a basis for special treatment suggests that anyone with a different ethnicity from the norm ought also to be so treated.

I personally have been DNA tested and found to be, almost uniquely according to the lab, entirely of Celtic haplotypes. In other words, unlike most people who have a melange of heritages, all of my ancestors for the past many thousands of years emanate from this island or from similar heritage next door at most. This is a very unusual ethnicity these days. So what special treatment can I now expect to receive?

Here's my suggestion to the OP - I'd suggest it's actually time Irish Travellers embraced Irish society (as many others from diverse ethnicities have done with no problem in much shorter periods of time). And that means - send your kids to school, live in houses, stop marrying your cousins at very young ages, cease your engagement in criminality, and go out to work for a living like the rest of us.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Cavehill Red

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I'm curious - why do you think that is?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Antomus Prime

To answer the question in the thread title..... No it isnt time for society to Emabrace the travelling community........... They chose to live the way they live, if they dont want to be embraced then why should society extend the olive branch??

Cavehill Red

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It's relevant because I asked. I asked because you stated that in your experience this occurs a lot. I wondered why that is. If you don't care to answer further, fair enough, I suppose. :rolleyes:

The Corinthian

Tolerance is a two-way street and unfortunately we seldom hear anything from the travelling community other than how they should be tolerated, yet seemingly they have little interest in reciprocating. This is hardly going to win hearts and minds.

Society is berated for providing "squalid conditions for them to camp in", yet their own contribution to that society is close to zero. Tax payments are non-existent and instead society is asked to fund "their ancient language and traditions" when they in return do nothing in return to that same society.

The whole question of they're being a 'separate ethnic group' (and 1,000 years of divergence is a pretty tenuous definition of this) appears to simply be another political device to gain special status, to seek 'tolerance' without giving any in return. As cynical and self-serving strategies, I'll have to say it takes the biscuit, TBH.

So john_reilly74; if you really think that society should show more tolerance towards traveller culture and community, do you not think that the reverse should be shown also, because there is little emphasis on this in what you've written?

The Corinthian

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You'll probably have to be more specific in what defines to "attack or disparage", as while I would naturally presume that knee-jerk rants would be unwelcome, this could also be taken to mean any criticism - in which latter case it may simply be better to close down all discussions involving such groups rather than only tolerate a one-sided discussion.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

seamus

The first reply here from Sharrow pretty much nails the problem on the head.

I agree that Travellers are subject to much marginalisation and discrimination in Irish society, but they largely marginalise themselves.

Most distinct communities either make an effort to integrate with society at large, or at least isolate themselves and manage their resources so that their interaction with society is minimised.

Travellers seem to be somewhat unique in that they refuse outright to integrate with society, while simultaneously demanding access to its resources and frequently displaying complete disregard and discrimination against the people of that society.

john_reilly74 wrote: »

Provides squalid conditions for them to camp in and systematically introduced legislation to harrass them by moving them on.

There are two issues in this:

1. Why should we provide any place for them to camp? There are methods of applying for state assistance in relation to putting a roof over your head. You can either avail of this, or look after yourself. Travellers by-and-large have chosen to look after their own needs in relation to housing, therefore I see no obligation on the state to provide them with suitable places to camp. If they want to camp, they can pay for it.

2. By "moving them on", I presume you mean, "Requiring them to leave private or public land on which they have camped without any regard to the rights of the landowner or the needs of the local population and environment". Travellers who camp on land where they have been provided with permission to do so and show due regard for the local population and environment, will not be moved on.

The next move needs to be made by the travellers. We've gone about as far as we can govermentally to open the doors for them and provide the opportunities. Now they need to step up, take those opportunities and tackle their attitudes in relation to settled people. Until that happens, they will continue to be shunned and marginalised by settled people, no matter how much legislation is put in place.

Cavehill Red

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

My experience of boards is that there are almost no racist threads, almost no homophobic threads, very few threads that could be described as anti-Muslim, and a very small proportion of anti-immigration threads, which only occasionally spill over into overt xenophobia.

Is it your contention that there is a proportion of overt 'Traveller bashing' as you put it on boards which exceeds the miniscule level of hostile threads directed at the above listed minorities? And if so, why do you think that is?

tenchi-fan

john_reilly74 wrote: »

This society shamefully marginalises them. Provides squalid conditions for them to camp in and systematically introduced legislation to harrass them by moving them on. All the settled community is an accessory to this to our shame and to our blindedness.

They get so much in benefits, thieving and occasionally genuine employment they should have no problems maintaining their camp sites. Instead they decide to move on and leave a mess behind them.

I'll trust them when they act more trustworthy.

OwaynOTT

A lot of them are trying to integrate themselves into 'normal' society. There is a large population of them in my area and a good few of them have jobs, finished the leaving cert, are living in and maintaining there houses and a genuinely nice people and I've worked with some of them.
Unfortunately a larger proportion of them are the complete opposite of this. Driving uninsured, untaxed cars, leaving the site of a crash, beating the crap out of each other at 3am on Christmas Eve, aggressive, arrogant, and basically contributing nothing to society.
This group is nearly all male but there are females in there as well.

I think people are willing to 'accept' travellers if they are willing to conform in some way to society.

The other nasty side of some travellers isn't acceptable and they should be treated in the same way as other citizens when they fail to obey the law. Having double standards only widens the gap between us.

On the whole my experience with travellers has been negative and not just towards me but also looking in at the treatment that travellers who are trying to become a part of society.

Both sides need to accept each other. Its a two way street

MyKeyG

Cavehill Red wrote: »

My experience of boards is that there are almost no racist threads, almost no homophobic threads, very few threads that could be described as anti-Muslim, and a very small proportion of anti-immigration threads, which only occasionally spill over into overt xenophobia.

Is it your contention that there is a proportion of overt 'Traveller bashing' as you put it on boards which exceeds the miniscule level of hostile threads directed at the above listed minorities? And if so, why do you think that is?

I would think the main problem is the expectation of bashing and therefore the interpretation that any comment made is intended to be disparaging even if it is made with the best intention to reflect the reality of a situation.

Personally I believe it has quite a lot to do with an apparent attitude in society whereby we're so busy falling over each other trying to observe political correctness that any point of view expressed with negative inference, even though it may have basis in truth, is claimed to be discriminating.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Problem is is becomes a vicious circle.

Society thinks travellers are mostly chancers/violent/thieves etc.

Most people's personal experience tends to back this up. Used to work in retail where I'd come in contact with travellers and yeah, there certainly was a much higher ratio of troublesome to reasonable customers from that background

So now that this attitude is established among settled people, there's little motivation for travellers to "clean up their act" - when individuals decide to better themselves they will likely be overlooked by general society due to so many other travellers continuing to embrace in the separatist, thieving, licence to tax dodge lifestyle. What likely happens is many travellers quietly drift into the settled community and effectively cease to become travellers.

I think the "lifestyle" is overly respected. Its like Roma gypsies cultures who think it acceptable to do nothing but beg to pay for their lifestyle. I don't think the state should provide anything for their lifestyle. I mean I'd love if the state provided me the means to travel around the world visiting other cultures on the grounds that I am from the "backpacker" community. I do however accept its not exactly feasible for a state to do so.

john_reilly74

Cavehill Red wrote:

Travellers are already considered an especial case in Irish law, cited under Equality legislation, and given additional support and resources, often refused by them, in relation to health and education provision.

What more is being sought here?

To suggest they are a separate ethnicity (highly disputable I'd argue) and that that alone is a basis for special treatment suggests that anyone with a different ethnicity from the norm ought also to be so treated.

I personally have been DNA tested and found to be, almost uniquely according to the lab, entirely of Celtic haplotypes. In other words, unlike most people who have a melange of heritages, all of my ancestors for the past many thousands of years emanate from this island or from similar heritage next door at most. This is a very unusual ethnicity these days. So what special treatment can I now expect to receive?

Here's my suggestion to the OP - I'd suggest it's actually time Irish Travellers embraced Irish society (as many others from diverse ethnicities have done with no problem in much shorter periods of time). And that means - send your kids to school, live in houses, stop marrying your cousins at very young ages, cease your engagement in criminality, and go out to work for a living like the rest of us.

They are not some blow-ins on whom there's an onus to assimilate. As anyone who watched the documentary, or were aware before this, will know there wasn't the same stigma against them prior to the 50s... it would appear more public spaces existed back then but in the interim more land got rezoned or fell into private ownership culminating in restricted access that all this came to a head. Without any official study conducted it got circulated as fact that Travellers were descendants of those whose land had been disposessed by Cromwell and it was time for them to catch up and move on. Even though we pride ourselves on being more civilised than generations past we are in ways more harsh and less connected to society... it's all about fitting in to this thing we call the economic system and allowing ourselves get packaged like a commodity. Maybe they don't want that? Maybe they have a right to retain their nomadic lifestyle which is older than ours and until now are only finding their voice to challenge the glaring deficit which currently exists? Their social deprivation is caused by limited access compared with what we get and not self isolation... nobody ever wants that even the junkie or alcoholic... if it's one or two society rehabilitates them but shrug when a whole community exhibits symptoms... WRONG!

john_reilly74

nothing to do with lifestyle but cultural traditions, norms and heritage. Shopping by contrast is a lifestyle choice.

Morag

john_reilly74 wrote: »

nothing to do with lifestyle but cultural traditions, norms and heritage.

And yet Ireland has Jewish, Muslim and Hindu communities who manage to preserve their own traditions, norms, language and heritage with in the bounds of Irish society at large and with out centres like Pavee point and the many other funded programs aimed at educating Travellers and bringing up their standard of living.

There's traditions, norms and heritage and then there's not caring enough that your children do their home work and are treated for head lice when needed like all kid in primary schools.

Cavehill Red

john_reilly74 wrote: »

They are not some blow-ins on whom there's an onus to assimilate. As anyone who watched the documentary, or were aware before this, will know there wasn't the same stigma against them prior to the 50s... it would appear more public spaces existed back then but in the interim more land got rezoned or fell into private ownership culminating in restricted access that all this came to a head. Without any official study conducted it got circulated as fact that Travellers were descendants of those whose land had been disposessed by Cromwell and it was time for them to catch up and move on. Even though we pride ourselves on being more civilised than generations past we are in ways more harsh and less connected to society... it's all about fitting in to this thing we call the economic system and allowing ourselves get packaged like a commodity. Maybe they don't want that? Maybe they have a right to retain their nomadic lifestyle which is older than ours and until now are only finding their voice to challenge the glaring deficit which currently exists? Their social deprivation is caused by limited access compared with what we get and not self isolation... nobody ever wants that even the junkie or alcoholic... if it's one or two society rehabilitates them but shrug when a whole community exhibits symptoms... WRONG!

The story never stays the same, does it? One minute they've been a separate ethnicity for a thousand years, the next only since Cromwell. I've also heard since the famine and since the early 20th century too. It's patently obvious by the moving goalposts that these people aren't a definably separate ethnicity at all. They are a self-choosing cultural separatist group, with an identifiable series of practices which set them apart, at their choice, from everyone else.
Fair enough if, as you say, they don't want to assimilate into the very broad boundaries of society laid out by the state for the rest of us. They can live in another state, or they can forego their claims on privilege within this one.
Their limited access to society does not seem to extend to social welfare benefits, which they are well able to obtain, often fraudulently. Their access to education and healthcare is much less limited than it is to those who, having recently come to Ireland, do not speak the language.
It is not society's job to 'rehabilitate' any group. The 'symptoms' you identify are what Travellers themselves call their culture. While they cling to cultural practices which, to 21st century western standards appear to be backward, self-defeating and criminal, then there is no method of assisting them. They have to want to help themselves first, and some do, generally with very positive outcomes for themselves.

john_reilly74

Sharrow wrote:

john_reilly74 wrote: »

nothing to do with lifestyle but cultural traditions, norms and heritage.

And yet Ireland has Jewish, Muslim and Hindu communities who manage to preserve their own traditions, norms, language and heritage with in the bounds of Irish society at large and with out centres like Pavee point and the many other funded programs aimed at educating Travellers and bringing up their standard of living.

There's traditions, norms and heritage and then there's not caring enough that your children do their home work and are treated for head lice when needed like all kid in primary schools.

Don't wish to go on repeating myself. As far as i see there is a huge gulf between what I'd term 21st century access rights for all settled residents of the state and the TC. Anyone that's been put through a decent education system here or in another jurisdiction starts from a higher base than someone reared in a cold damp caravan with substandard living conditions. It appears you don't see that or what to see it

john_reilly74

Cavehill Red wrote:

john_reilly74 wrote: »

They are not some blow-ins on whom there's an onus to assimilate. As anyone who watched the documentary, or were aware before this, will know there wasn't the same stigma against them prior to the 50s... it would appear more public spaces existed back then but in the interim more land got rezoned or fell into private ownership culminating in restricted access that all this came to a head. Without any official study conducted it got circulated as fact that Travellers were descendants of those whose land had been disposessed by Cromwell and it was time for them to catch up and move on. Even though we pride ourselves on being more civilised than generations past we are in ways more harsh and less connected to society... it's all about fitting in to this thing we call the economic system and allowing ourselves get packaged like a commodity. Maybe they don't want that? Maybe they have a right to retain their nomadic lifestyle which is older than ours and until now are only finding their voice to challenge the glaring deficit which currently exists? Their social deprivation is caused by limited access compared with what we get and not self isolation... nobody ever wants that even the junkie or alcoholic... if it's one or two society rehabilitates them but shrug when a whole community exhibits symptoms... WRONG!

The story never stays the same, does it? One minute they've been a separate ethnicity for a thousand years, the next only since Cromwell. I've also heard since the famine and since the early 20th century too. It's patently obvious by the moving goalposts that these people aren't a definably separate ethnicity at all. They are a self-choosing cultural separatist group, with an identifiable series of practices which set them apart, at their choice, from everyone else.
Fair enough if, as you say, they don't want to assimilate into the very broad boundaries of society laid out by the state for the rest of us. They can live in another state, or they can forego their claims on privilege within this one.
Their limited access to society does not seem to extend to social welfare benefits, which they are well able to obtain, often fraudulently. Their access to education and healthcare is much less limited than it is to those who, having recently come to Ireland, do not speak the language.
It is not society's job to 'rehabilitate' any group. The 'symptoms' you identify are what Travellers themselves call their culture. While they cling to cultural practices which, to 21st century western standards appear to be backward, self-defeating and criminal, then there is no method of assisting them. They have to want to help themselves first, and some do, generally with very positive outcomes for themselves.

You give lie to the colonial ideology of shipping away the dregs to put them to better use. A fair & equitable society can't do that no longer as enshrined in the charter on human rights that we signed up to. One size doesn't fit all. I believe they'd start to tow the line if halting site conditions were up to housing estate standards, and they had their own unique education system to meet their needs.

MyKeyG

john_reilly74 wrote: »

Don't wish to go on repeating myself. As far as i see there is a huge gulf between what I'd term 21st century access rights for all settled residents of the state and the TC. Anyone that's been put through a decent education system here or in another jurisdiction starts from a higher base than someone reared in a cold damp caravan with substandard living conditions. It appears you don't see that or what to see it

I'm sorry but it appears it is you who are being obtuse. Travellers weren't forced to live in caravans, surrounded by squalor. A number of years ago Francie Barratt gave an interview on the Late Late Show. Pat Kenny asked him a question along the lines of if he were to go on and be a successful professional boxer would he buy a big house. His reply was he grew up in a trailer and would live out his life in one. This is the choice they make. It's a social choice NOT an economic one and certainly not a discriminatory one.

Last nights program was a Trojan horse in my opinion. What could have been an interesting scientific piece was merely a façade for another 'settled person' bashing episode holding the TC up as victims of an intolerant society. The gulf between the two communities seems to be, in your opinion, crossed by a bridge that only the settled have an obligation to cross.

The Corinthian

john_reilly74 wrote: »

I believe they'd start to tow the line if halting site conditions were up to housing estate standards, and they had their own unique education system to meet their needs.

Why don't they pay for such services?

Cavehill Red

john_reilly74 wrote: »

You give lie to the colonial ideology of shipping away the dregs to put them to better use.

Don't use big phrases if you don't know what they mean. Effectively, what you said above translates as: I have demonstrated that the colonial ideology you refer to is untrue. I suspect you meant to say that I endorsed this ideology. In fact, I reject its relevance entirely. Travellers are Irish born and bred. The only colonising act they were ever subjected to was the same British one that affected all Irish.

john_reilly74 wrote: »

A fair & equitable society can't do that no longer as enshrined in the charter on human rights that we signed up to. One size doesn't fit all.

However, we only have one state which accommodates a vast disparity of people within it relatively without problems, from rich to poor, from black to white, gay to straight, and many other diversities besides. It is only nomadic cultures, such as the indigenous travellers or the Roma, who generally fail to accommodate themselves successfully within the state, simply because they choose to opt out of those elements which do not suit their chosen cultural habits, such as education, proper healthcare or respect for the law of the land.

john_reilly74 wrote: »

I believe they'd start to tow the line if halting site conditions were up to housing estate standards, and they had their own unique education system to meet their needs.

Where Protestants, Muslims or other special interest groups seek a specific cultural education, they pay for the privilege. There is a highly regarded state education system in Ireland provided for anyone else, with a specific unit dedicated to the needs of Traveller children. Your proposal is further ghettoisation, paid for by the taxpayer, not by travellers.
If I want better housing than I have, I must pay for it, either via a mortgage or rent. What entitles travellers to a superlative right to housing, again paid for by the state and not by them, especially when better housing is already available to them by way of council housing, and they refuse it?

john_reilly74

MyKeyG wrote:

john_reilly74 wrote: »

Don't wish to go on repeating myself. As far as i see there is a huge gulf between what I'd term 21st century access rights for all settled residents of the state and the TC. Anyone that's been put through a decent education system here or in another jurisdiction starts from a higher base than someone reared in a cold damp caravan with substandard living conditions. It appears you don't see that or what to see it

I'm sorry but it appears it is you who are being obtuse. Travellers weren't forced to live in caravans, surrounded by squalor. A number of years ago Francie Barratt gave an interview on the Late Late Show. Pat Kenny asked him a question along the lines of if he were to go on and be a successful professional boxer would he buy a big house. His reply was he grew up in a trailer and would live out his life in one. This is the choice they make. It's a social choice NOT an economic one and certainly not a discriminatory one.

Last nights program was a Trojan horse in my opinion. What could have been an interesting scientific piece was merely a façade for another 'settled person' bashing episode holding the TC up as victims of an intolerant society. The gulf between the two communities seems to be, in your opinion, crossed by a bridge that only the settled have an obligation to cross.

So you wanted a TV programme censored in order to give you and your ilk a warm fuzzy feeling? Along the lines of: oh look how ethnically diverse Ireland is, and isn't it marvellous the Traveller stock count as one of our own and see their DNA origins here. But now the show was a "Trojan Horse" because those malnourished piebalds are analogous to an Orwellian animal farm and that is just too uncomfortable to bear. Living in a caravan should not equate to living in squalor... i thought we put that to rest in the 50s when tenements got demolished but the TC seem to have been bypassed. Anyone forced to live in squalor because the local council refuses to provide adequate living amenities for them is being discriminated against because of who they are.

MyKeyG

john_reilly74 wrote: »

So you wanted a TV programme censored in order to give you and your ilk a warm fuzzy feeling? Along the lines of: oh look how ethnically diverse Ireland is, and isn't it marvellous the Traveller stock count as one of our own and see their DNA origins here. But now the show was a "Trojan Horse" because those malnourished piebalds are analogous to an Orwellian animal farm and that is just too uncomfortable to bear. Living in a caravan should not equate to living in squalor... i thought we put that to rest in the 50s when tenements got demolished but the TC seem to have been bypassed. Anyone forced to live in squalor because the local council refuses to provide adequate living amenities for them is being discriminated against because of who they are.

Why aren't you listening to people? I mean seriously what is your problem? Are you so blinded by hate for the settled community that you refuse to listen to their point of view instead twisting their words to suit your delusion?

As citizens of this country the TC are entitled to the same provisions as any settled person. They're entitled to dole, rent allowance, fuel allowance, carers allowance and such. They can put their names on the housing list. They can avail of the same grants for education as me. They're protected by equality legislation. The same legislation that doesn't protect me from you 'and your ilk'.

But no. According to you that's not nearly good enough. They should be afforded the luxury of throwing all these tax payer funded initiatives back in the governments face and demand some sort of traveller legislation that means they can remain outside mainstream society in comfort. For a community that desires integration they don't half fight hard against it.

john_reilly74

Cavehill Red wrote:

john_reilly74 wrote: »

You give lie to the colonial ideology of shipping away the dregs to put them to better use.

Don't use big phrases if you don't know what they mean. Effectively, what you said above translates as: I have demonstrated that the colonial ideology you refer to is untrue. I suspect you meant to say that I endorsed this ideology. In fact, I reject its relevance entirely. Travellers are Irish born and bred. The only colonising act they were ever subjected to was the same British one that affected all Irish.

john_reilly74 wrote: »

A fair & equitable society can't do that no longer as enshrined in the charter on human rights that we signed up to. One size doesn't fit all.

However, we only have one state which accommodates a vast disparity of people within it relatively without problems, from rich to poor, from black to white, gay to straight, and many other diversities besides. It is only nomadic cultures, such as the indigenous travellers or the Roma, who generally fail to accommodate themselves successfully within the state, simply because they choose to opt out of those elements which do not suit their chosen cultural habits, such as education, proper healthcare or respect for the law of the land.

john_reilly74 wrote: »

I believe they'd start to tow the line if halting site conditions were up to housing estate standards, and they had their own unique education system to meet their needs.

Where Protestants, Muslims or other special interest groups seek a specific cultural education, they pay for the privilege. There is a highly regarded state education system in Ireland provided for anyone else, with a specific unit dedicated to the needs of Traveller children. Your proposal is further ghettoisation, paid for by the taxpayer, not by travellers.
If I want better housing than I have, I must pay for it, either via a mortgage or rent. What entitles travellers to a superlative right to housing, again paid for by the state and not by them, especially when better housing is already available to them by way of council housing, and they refuse it?

Disagree with your basic premise that the taxpayer would pay disproportionately. If the TC were given a choice between setting up camp in the field at the end of town or paying to take up residence at the state of the art caravan park with showers, shop, and pub - no brainer which option they'd go for. Depending on how many of these their community could sustain, an education system would be based around this i.e. if family x spent 6 months in Portlaoise and then move on to Sligo their sons' education wouldn't get interrupted because a school would exist in the camp site in Sligo to accommodate him... with proper register in place to check every child gets an education. Not the haphazard way it's done now which is failing them.

Cavehill Red

john_reilly74 wrote: »

Disagree with your basic premise that the taxpayer would pay disproportionately. If the TC were given a choice between setting up camp in the field at the end of town or paying to take up residence at the state of the art caravan park with showers, shop, and pub - no brainer which option they'd go for. Depending on how many of these their community could sustain, an education system would be based around this i.e. if family x spent 6 months in Portlaoise and then move on to Sligo their sons' education wouldn't get interrupted because a school would exist in the camp site in Sligo to accommodate him... with proper register in place to check every child gets an education. Not the haphazard way it's done now which is failing them.

Nothing is failing them but their own behaviour. You're calling for a network of schools attached to state of the art caravan parks all over the country? Let me introduce you to a little concept called reality here. It's biting right now. This nation is in billions of euro of debt. The existing education system, and social housing system, both of which are freely available to travellers to access if they choose, are already being cut. There is no bubble budget money available to fund facilities such as you suggest, which based on my experience of how travellers look after provided facilities, would be trashed within a year.
There is no onus on the rest of us to fund a lifestyle which is actively self-destructive. We don't give alcoholics free drink, or smokers free ciggies. Where we give junkies methadone, it is to stabilise their lives so that they can change their behaviours. I see no reason, financial or otherwise, for the state to facilitate a self-defeating culture. Rather, the onus is on the travelling community to learn to respect their neighbours and surroundings, and ultimately themselves - ie time to put the slashhooks and whiskey bottles down, find somewhere permanent to live, and send their kids to school.

john_reilly74

MyKeyG wrote:

john_reilly74 wrote: »

So you wanted a TV programme censored in order to give you and your ilk a warm fuzzy feeling? Along the lines of: oh look how ethnically diverse Ireland is, and isn't it marvellous the Traveller stock count as one of our own and see their DNA origins here. But now the show was a "Trojan Horse" because those malnourished piebalds are analogous to an Orwellian animal farm and that is just too uncomfortable to bear. Living in a caravan should not equate to living in squalor... i thought we put that to rest in the 50s when tenements got demolished but the TC seem to have been bypassed. Anyone forced to live in squalor because the local council refuses to provide adequate living amenities for them is being discriminated against because of who they are.

Why aren't you listening to people? I mean seriously what is your problem? Are you so blinded by hate for the settled community that you refuse to listen to their point of view instead twisting their words to suit your delusion?

As citizens of this country the TC are entitled to the same provisions as any settled person. They're entitled to dole, rent allowance, fuel allowance, carers allowance and such. They can put their names on the housing list. They can avail of the same grants for education as me. They're protected by equality legislation. The same legislation that doesn't protect me from you 'and your ilk'.

But no. According to you that's not nearly good enough. They should be afforded the luxury of throwing all these tax payer funded initiatives back in the governments face and demand some sort of traveller legislation that means they can remain outside mainstream society in comfort. For a community that desires integration they don't half fight hard against it.

Your tone doesn't inspire me to want to listen to you or anyone else who's delusional enough to think this issue so black and white. As someone whose been afforded more opportunities than the TC i'd don't deem it economically viable or intelligent to make a group totally dependent on handouts. Do you? We need people who are skilled up to contribute to the economy so how are they meant to without equal educational opportunities? And don't come back with nonsense like they get it already. They don't. They move around in the middle of term. Schools turn them away leading to arrested development and all the problems that go with that: illiteracy, higher mortality rates, unemployment etc

john_reilly74

Cavehill Red wrote:

john_reilly74 wrote: »

Disagree with your basic premise that the taxpayer would pay disproportionately. If the TC were given a choice between setting up camp in the field at the end of town or paying to take up residence at the state of the art caravan park with showers, shop, and pub - no brainer which option they'd go for. Depending on how many of these their community could sustain, an education system would be based around this i.e. if family x spent 6 months in Portlaoise and then move on to Sligo their sons' education wouldn't get interrupted because a school would exist in the camp site in Sligo to accommodate him... with proper register in place to check every child gets an education. Not the haphazard way it's done now which is failing them.

Nothing is failing them but their own behaviour. You're calling for a network of schools attached to state of the art caravan parks all over the country? Let me introduce you to a little concept called reality here. It's biting right now. This nation is in billions of euro of debt. The existing education system, and social housing system, both of which are freely available to travellers to access if they choose, are already being cut. There is no bubble budget money available to fund facilities such as you suggest, which based on my experience of how travellers look after provided facilities, would be trashed within a year.
There is no onus on the rest of us to fund a lifestyle which is actively self-destructive. We don't give alcoholics free drink, or smokers free ciggies. Where we give junkies methadone, it is to stabilise their lives so that they can change their behaviours. I see no reason, financial or otherwise, for the state to facilitate a self-defeating culture. Rather, the onus is on the travelling community to learn to respect their neighbours and surroundings, and ultimately themselves - ie time to put the slashhooks and whiskey bottles down, find somewhere permanent to live, and send their kids to school.

Having the political will is always going to be the deciding factor. The TC do not have the political clout to set the agenda, therefore their rights continue to get trampled on regardless of the economy, because your reality maintains the status quo not their reality. A "self-defeating culture"...says it all really.

markesmith

I agree with many of john_reilly74's points, and he's making them in a calm and measured tone.

My interactions with the travelling community have been few and limited.

When moderators and respected posters, with 3,000+ posts in their pocket, can generalise on an entire group of people, that's not a good thing. You could substitute "traveller" for "Jew" and "Irish" for "German" in some of these threads and...well, you know what I mean.

Debates on Travellers, whether in the bowels of After Hours or the relative sanity of Humanities, rarely end in concord.

The Corinthian

john_reilly74 wrote: »

They move around in the middle of term. Schools turn them away leading to arrested development and all the problems that go with that: illiteracy, higher mortality rates, unemployment etc

Why do they need to move specifically in the middle of term?

john_reilly74

The Corinthian wrote:

john_reilly74 wrote: »

They move around in the middle of term. Schools turn them away leading to arrested development and all the problems that go with that: illiteracy, higher mortality rates, unemployment etc

Why do they need to move specifically in the middle of term?

i should think it's a pattern of behaviour unique to them whose relevance would be best explained by either the anthropological & sociological communities or Pavee Point, as it continues to be a sticking point.

Cavehill Red

The Corinthian wrote: »

Why do they need to move specifically in the middle of term?

Obviously, they don't need to. They choose to. This is one of the reasons I described Travellers as a self-defeating culture.

They refuse to send their children to school, or else uproot them from school, despite provision having been put in place to specifically assist them, and then claim the system is skewed against them. It isn't. They are wilfully exempting their children from the education system.

MyKeyG

john_reilly74 wrote: »

Your tone doesn't inspire me to want to listen to you or anyone else who's delusional enough to think this issue so black and white. As someone whose been afforded more opportunities than the TC i'd don't deem it economically viable or intelligent to make a group totally dependent on handouts. Do you? We need people who are skilled up to contribute to the economy so how are they meant to without equal educational opportunities? And don't come back with nonsense like they get it already. They don't. They move around in the middle of term. Schools turn them away leading to arrested development and all the problems that go with that: illiteracy, higher mortality rates, unemployment etc

Oh my goodness:rolleyes: You want everything to change overnight! To be honest I don't think you know what you're talking about yourself because you keep changing your approach.

Who said anything about total dependence? Or are you just putting words in my mouth again? If the TC do exist in a state of basic existence then it's only by availing of these opportunities that they can begin the building process, nobody says they have to remain dependent, but it's not going to change on the snap of a finger. This country has seen people drag themselves literally off the streets and avail of granted education to give themselves a platform on which to build a better life.

You can't get it into your head. Most travellers see integrating with settled society as a challenge to their 'way of life'. That this way of life has to do in any way with tradition and culture is debatable but either way the fact of the matter is that they simply want the best of both worlds and I for one, and I don't care what you think of my tone, don't believe anyone is entitled to dictate under what regulation and law they reside.

The TC do not have the political clout to set the agenda, therefore their rights continue to get trampled on regardless of the economy, because your reality maintains the status quo not their reality.

Fifteen years ago saw an influx of foreign nationals into this country. They maintained their own culture but they got on with society as well. Empty pockets all, no political clout but no winging for handouts, no accusation of being shunned. In most towns you can see Czech, Polish food markets and African salons.

I have a Polish friend who came to Ireland eight years ago. No rights or social entitlements so he picked up a mop and started pushing it up and down the floors of Dunnes after closing seven nights a week. Now he has his own cleaning contract company with six lads working under him and he drives around in an Audi. You know why? Because he knew that nobody gives you anything in this life, it's there for the taking, you have to get up off your behind and seize it. Surely with so much more opportunities available there should be no excuse as to why the TC do not flourish.

celticcrash

IF you want to truly know what the TC is like, dont watch a tv programme
instead invite them into your home. Become friends with some of them.
Sit with them for hours and listen to them. Talk with them. Has the OP being
friends with anyone within the TC. Why dont the OP embrace them and invite them into your home. I have and I know their thinking back to frount.

Some of the TC went to school because society wanted them to have an education. Most of the TC dont want a proper education, they want to educate their children their way. They claim to be 100% Irish, yet they want
seprate laws for them selves.

Their ideas about being free are flawed. Free from responsibility.
Time and time again I have seen members destroy their material possessions
and if you ask them why they do this, they say to prove that their are free
and not attached to their possessions.
I say to the Travellers who I know for years if your truly not attached to them than why destroy them. The answer I get is to show that were not attached to them.
To show. Yet they dont see the attachment of peer pressure in their own community. The TC suffer attachment like anyone in the settled community.
Just to prove to others members of their community that they are free, they destroy.
Its built into their idealism of being free.

Some travellers I know can see through this flaw and could teach the settled community on what reponsiblity is all about. They are the wise ones who know what being free is all about. Debts are things that they avoid not only in monetery but in all aspects of life. They try not to be in debt to any man. They dont want things for nothing, they will work for
what they want, they enjoy nature and dont destroy things around them.
We in the settled community could learn alot from these people, but sadly they are few.

As for to embrace all of the travelling community.
Sorry OP but they would look on you as a buffer.

The Corinthian

john_reilly74 wrote: »

i should think it's a pattern of behaviour unique to them whose relevance would be best explained by either the anthropological & sociological communities or Pavee Point, as it continues to be a sticking point.

So, let me get this straight; as they refuse to in any way compromise on their "pattern of behaviour unique to them", this and other "sticking points" are what the rest of us should be accommodating.

What are they accommodating exactly? Do you not see how such an approach by Travellers is ultimately not only doomed to failure, but fundamentally intolerant (by them)?

Fuinseog

john_reilly74 wrote: »

DNA study: Travellers a distinct ethnicity
By Jennifer Hough
TUESDAY, MAY 31, 2011
THE first DNA analysis of the Travelling community has proven that it is a distinct ethnic minority who separated from the settled community between 1,000 and 2,000 years ago, experts have claimed.

According to genetics expert Jim Wilson from the University of Edinburgh, though it is clear Travellers diverged from the settled community, it is not clear why.

He said Travellers are a distinct genetic group as different from the settled Irish as Icelanders are from Norwegians.

The revelation was made on RTÉ’s documentary, Blood of the Travellers, and will put further pressure on the Government to recognise Travellers as a distinct group of people.

In March, the UN Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination expressed concern at the state’s "persistent refusal" to recognise Travellers as an ethnic minority, and pointed out that they satisfied the internationally recognised criteria for such a group.

travellers are intolerant of settled people. they forbid their people to marry about the group.
they hate gays. should we really embrace a culture that is gay intolerant?

slowburner

john_reilly74 wrote: »

DNA study: Travellers a distinct ethnicity
By Jennifer Hough
TUESDAY, MAY 31, 2011
THE first DNA analysis of the Travelling community has proven that it is a distinct ethnic minority who separated from the settled community between 1,000 and 2,000 years ago, experts have claimed.

According to genetics expert Jim Wilson from the University of Edinburgh, though it is clear Travellers diverged from the settled community, it is not clear why.

He said Travellers are a distinct genetic group as different from the settled Irish as Icelanders are from Norwegians.

The revelation was made on RTÉ’s documentary, Blood of the Travellers, and will put further pressure on the Government to recognise Travellers as a distinct group of people.

In March, the UN Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination expressed concern at the state’s "persistent refusal" to recognise Travellers as an ethnic minority, and pointed out that they satisfied the internationally recognised criteria for such a group.

It would be good to hear the views of those with a sound knowledge of genetics on this.
Are the conclusions of this analysis unquestioned?