Have you ever experienced hibernophobia?

fryup

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Meh. I'd say that kind of thing is becoming less prevalent. Look at UK TV ffs - loads of Irish people and they're very popular.

Off the top of my head:

Dara Ó Briain
Graham Norton
Eamon Holmes
Ed Byrne
Terry Wogan
Patrick Keilty
Laura Whitmore
Liz Boninn
Brian Dowling
Chris O' Dowd
Zig & Zag

well to be fair, even back in the bad ol'days during the troubles you had plenty of irish personalties on british TV

terry wogan
eamon andrews
henry kelly
val doonican
and dave allen had a prime time slot on bbc

woodoo

Humans eh! wrote: »

Coarse and implied it was dirty.

Exactly like modern day India and Pakistan

Humans eh!

woodoo wrote: »

Exactly like modern day India and Pakistan

I can only liken it to them getting their viewpoint from 19th century 'Punch' cartoons of the Irish.
I could never understand why black Afro-Carribean youths jumped on that particular bandwagon though

Lyra Fangs

One experience that comes to mind is overhearing two English fellas having a heated conversation about their hatred of the Irish while I was sitting next to them and yes they were well aware that I was Irish (I worked with them). Highlights of the conversation included one of them wishing there had been a 2nd famine so it might have 'finished the rest of them off'

Arpa

You shouldn't take offense at Irishman jokes. Irish people know how to take a joke. Ifyou're offended then you're a gobsh*te. If it's really offensive...then laugh all the more. Ireland is a fantastic country that has a wealth of intelligence and beauty over its neighbours comparitively. We have nothing to be ashamed about. If the main joke is that we died from famine...then you have to look more at the person who is making the joke.

Wibbs

Bertie Woot wrote: »

It's true that there is less genetic variation in the Pretanic isles than elsewhere in Europe. A study conducted by Trinity College showed that there has been little genetic variation in Ireland since its first inhabitants arrived. An ancient genetic marker, known as "haplogroup 1" is shown to be present in 98.3% of men in Western Ireland. Although Ireland has been subjected to successive invasions by Celts, Gaels, Norse Vikings and Anglo-Normans, this marker has remained relatively undiluted.

As has the "English" genotype, even though there is a clear historical influx of Romans and Saxons to name but two. Which haplogroup 1 are you specifically referring to? It's a wide field. The hap 1 that is strongest in Scandinavia is about equal between these islands.

The first known settlers in Ireland came form Scotland,

They're not exactly sure about that.

Saint Patrick himself was Scottish

Unlikely. Scotland was left alone by the Romans. Mainly cos they got well fcuked over anytime they tried to bring them under the Roman yoke. Hadrians wall being a more than obvious border. So how could Patrick be Scotish? He was a Romano Britain, a Christian from a line of same. His da a deacon and his granda a bishop, versed in Latin(vulgate though it was) and the new religion. He was within the falling light of Rome's influence. Vanishingly few Scots would have been similar at the time. So Paddy was a northern English lad in todays geography and terms. I find his origins interesting when it comes to the Irish psyche over the years. Growing up I heard he was Welsh, Scots at a push and even some eejits said he was of French descent.(he did serve some of his ecclesiastical time in France though) Anything but "Brit!". Who gives an actual fcuk? I mean the English today think Augustine brought Christianity to Britain. Yea lads, pity he was a bit tardy as the Micks had been there a couple of centuries before him and clearly the religion was in Britain as otherwise how could Paddy and his da and his granda been died in the wool Roman Christians? The bullshít piles high in invented culture.

Fair enough, but it is historical fact that the Anglo-Norman invitation to Ireland by one King Dermot MacMurrough, and the subsequent English invasion has had much more impact on Ireland than any Irish excursions to Britain.

True but that's the nature of the beast. Perfidious Albion being bigger an all.

The English attempted to wipe out the Gaelic language and supplant it with English.

Also the nature of the beast. Languages get supplanted. It's a historical given.

It's only been in recent years that we've witnessed a revival of the Gaelic language,

And even thats hardly been the greatest of successes.

and it's important to note that Gaelic is as much a language of a foreign invader as is English.

True enough BW. Rare you see people saying that. Still, like I say that's a given. People migrate to the most useful form of communication, whether that be from trade or colony or even fashion.

If all else fails, blame it on the cheese-eating surrender monkeys!

Yep but true. It was the Scandinavian French. Though surrender monkeys they were not. Thats some good old Yankee hype. The French army are about teh most successful military force in Europe since Rome fell. The English may shout "remember Agincourt!!", but tend to forget every other battle of that war where the French handed them their arse on a plate.

It's true the Irish, Ulster-Scots Irish in particular, played a huge role in the American war of independence, providing the US with no less than 20 of its presidents. Even Obama can trace his lineage back to Ireland.

I wasn't talking of the Uster Scots, the "hillbillies"(interesting and obvious background to that term), Im talking of the Catholic Irish in arms like the 7th cavalry.

I've discovered that the English are generally clueless on Irish history. You have a mixture of ignorance, apathy, and a classic shying away from anything remotely related to empire. They're particularly not comfortable in talking about that act of genocide known as "the great famine", and for obvious reasons.

For a start I'd really take issue with the "genocide" tag. It's far too lazy and fashionable a term when looking for external and internal support/horror/justification. Plus I've had zero issue with English folks when on rare occasions the subject came up. Well I wouldn't think it would be much of an issue after all those folks I was talking with weren't responsible, nor where the vast majority of their ancestors. It's like the shíte you sometimes get from people in the US over the slavery issue. The "oh you're white your ancestors enslaved my people". GTFO. 99% of whites at the time were poor, many were indentured glorified slaves themselves. the vast majority didn't own other people.

The southern Irish accent has been described as "music to the ears". The Northern Irish accent (Belfast in particular) can be likened to taking a hammer drill to one ear, and a distorted loudspeaker turned up to 11 to the other. Most people who want to get anywhere in life outside of Belfast know that they have to ameliorate, lose or soften their Belfast accent, and many have and succeeded. In some parts of working class East Belfast the accent can only be described as HARSH.

I'd tend to agree there. I remember a chat with a voice coach for movies and the like and he reckoned the Belfast accent was easy enough if you could do say a Donegal accent, only clench your teeth and stick out your lower jaw and it came naturally. An accent born of siege and saying "never!!". On both sides.

The English view us all as Irish, and regardless of whether you are Northern Irish, Unionist and Protestant, or Southern Irish, Nationalist and Catholic; but they probably do have more dislike of Unionists, and for being a bit too loud at times.

I have found they differ in attitude quite a bit and can discern the difference in background. Indeed have seen this up close A situation where I was the "southerner" among "northerners" and I was viewed much more favourably even though they were Unionists "loyal to the crown".

fryup

Bertie Woot wrote: »

It's true that there is less genetic
Saint Patrick himself was Scottish and captured by Irish raiders and brought to Ireland as a slave, escaping and returning to Britain before coming back to Ireland as a missionary.

i was led to believe he came from wales

crockholm

From 1400 AD onwards I would imagine that the French would have been seen as the most feared soldiers from 1650-1815.

The Pheasant

Last Summer in Portugal my friend and I were at a bar, having a few beers and don't why but we started speaking in Irish. Anyway there are these birds from Manchester who we'd been talking to earlier and they start asking us what we're on about - we explain that we were speaking in Irish. And yer one refuses to believe there's an actual Irish language. She's all "there's a Celtic language called welsh but there's no such thing as Irish..." we explain that there is, it's called Gaeilge etc and she just says we're lying! So we continue trying to explain to her and then she just says "Yeah well England owns Ireland anyway." at this point I politely told her to go fcuk herself and stormed off, leaving my friend in a fairly awkward position!

fryup

The Pheasant wrote: »

and then she just says "Yeah well England owns Ireland anyway." at this point I politely told her to go fcuk herself and stormed off, leaving my friend in a fairly awkward position!

how diplomatic of you:cool:

she was probably just pullin your leg

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

GRMA wrote: »

look at the date on the piece. The book is very good btw

It's today's date, what's the significance?

Quote the author (allegedly)
"Many people assume that current English hostility or discrimination towards the Irish is the result of events in Northern Ireland so they see it as regrettable but understandable."

This is, of course, based on the rather niave assumption exists: I've spent a lot of time over there and never once witnessed it. I have difficulty beleiveing some of the extracts mentioned above in the same way that I have difficuty beleive the Creationist theory, and the newspaper inself fails to list an example in the last 50 years.

So can someone please identify what is meant by "current English hostility" - with emphasis on the word 'current' - that goes beyond the mere anecdotal, please?

The Pheasant

fryup wrote: »

how diplomatic of you:cool:

she was probably just pullin your leg

Nah unfortunately not in this case, she was being serious...said in such a matter of fact tone and at that point it was like yanno when someone is just so astoundingly ignorant that there is no point in even attempting to have a reasonable discussion with them? Hahaha she brought me straight to that point so I left :L

razorgil

sister had a pub in hammersmith thru the 80's-90's. lot of the locals used to slag her and her also irish husband. but if any strange, (ie non -local) english punter started givin them grief, they would circle the wagons and back her to the hilt. saw this first-hand a few nights, was impressed with their loyalty to the "irish", all relative really

Bertie Woot

Huckster wrote: »

The first time I went to the UK was when I won a competition with a media agency. There were a few other people there who won other categories, but they were all British. In the Q&A session with the head of the media agency, he spent pretty much the whole time berating the Irish as being corrupt, lazy, useless bastards basically. Keeping in mind I was 16 at the time and this was a middle aged man. Not only was it very awkward, it was just so incredibly inappropriate. I was a bit wary of the British since then, but went to London a few weeks ago and they couldn't have been nicer. I guess there will always be ignorant people out there.

Yeah, it would be wrong to tar all of them with the same brush. There are nice and not so nice in every nationality/race/religion etc., and those people who play the superiority card usually have self esteem issues. Some Brits are better at concealing their hibernophobia than others too, and they're the ones I can appreciate.

Wibbs

The Pheasant wrote: »

Nah unfortunately not in this case, she was being serious...said in such a matter of fact tone and at that point it was like yanno when someone is just so astoundingly ignorant that there is no point in even attempting to have a reasonable discussion with them?

I'm not surprised at all TP. A few years ago I was in one of the home counties, real genteel middle class educated southern English, very Miss Marple, very Midsomer Murders kinda vibe. Indeed I was avoiding woodland paths in case I found the lovely Mr Carruthers(he drinks you know...) the vicar face down in the mud with a knife in his back. They were a nice bunch overall.

The pub was like a sketchbook of English stereotypes, including the permanently ossified Major(Captain in this case) propping up the bar eager to tell his stories of some far flung posting or other. Late one evening of a session on the local cider they were eager for me to try, lots of questions came up about Ireland. I was quite surprised how little they knew of the place and it's history and this went for older and younger people. EG many were surprised we had our own money(this was before the euro) and were surprised their queens head wasn't on it. I handed out a few Irish punts that night for them to keep. One went up behind the bar. Well I had been getting free pints of headmelter cider all night so fairs fair. Like your example almost none knew of the Irish language, though they knew about Welsh and some knew of Scots Gaelic. Many thought we were part of the commonwealth. Of our history they were mostly at a loss, IIRC only one woman knew about the famine(though like I said they were equally blank about stuff like the highland clearances). They were shocked how late divorce and contraception came to us. They did know of our rep as writers and poets mind you.

They were surprised I knew way more about them and their history and geography than the other way around. I wasn't. Growing up in Dublin with the "pipe television" we were exposed to their media from an early age. From Blue Peter to the News at Ten, while they got none of ours.

Like I say these were well educated middle class types, the Tracy and Sharon types with less educational opportunities are going to be even more adrift on average.

the purple tin

crockholm wrote: »

From 1400 AD onwards I would imagine that the French would have been seen as the most feared soldiers from 1650-1815.

Funny how countries rise and fall. France and Rome, once two of the greatest military forces, became something of a laughing stock in modern times.

crockholm

the purple tin wrote: »

Funny how countries rise and fall. France and Rome, once two of the greatest military forces, became something of a laughing stock in modern times.

Crazy,isn't it.

In the 17th century Swedish and Finnish soldiers rampaged through modern day Germany and Poland, and was said that they reduced bavaria,s population by a third. So much so that for a long time the German bogeyman that would scare the kids straight was a Swede!!!!

And nowadays we associate Sweden with pacifisism,neutrality and metrosexuals:D

the purple tin

crockholm wrote: »

Crazy,isn't it.

In the 17th century Swedish and Finnish soldiers rampaged through modern day Germany and Poland, and was said that they reduced bavaria,s population by a third. So much so that for a long time the German bogeyman that would scare the kids straight was a Swede!!!!

And nowadays we associate Sweden with pacifisism,neutrality and metrosexuals:D

What I find interesting as well is that Britain was planning to invade the USA until WW1 broke out. Wonder how things would be different nowadays if Britain had gone ahead with it and lost/won?

Vojera

No, never. Just the opposite, in fact. In a few places abroad (but especially France, for some reason), I've had locals be a bit stand-offish and rude, and then ask if I was English. As soon as I told them I was Irish their attitudes completely changed; they were friendly, gave me happy winks every morning in the boulangerie, couldn't be nicer.

The most uninformed attitude I ever experienced was in the Netherlands, but I think that was due to the family we were staying with. We were travelling around the country with our Dutch friends and staying with their families. One family was lovely, went out and bought tea specially for us (and tolerated our bizarre habit of putting milk in it), while the other was quite conservative and religious. The conservative family kept asking if we were drunk because we laughed all the time. They were pretty dour so it was easier to believe that the Irish girls were drunk 24/7 than just genuinely happy. I never heard any laughter in that house that wasn't our own.

looksee

Bertie Woot wrote: »

Yeah, it would be wrong to tar all of them with the same brush. There are nice and not so nice in every nationality/race/religion etc., and those people who play the superiority card usually have self esteem issues. Some Brits are better at concealing their hibernophobia than others too, and they're the ones I can appreciate.

Lol, not that you have made your mind up or anything!

brummytom

Bertie Woot wrote: »

Yeah, it would be wrong to tar all of them with the same brush.

Some Brits are better at concealing their hibernophobia than others too, and they're the ones I can appreciate.

Sweet Jesus.

ManMade

Generally people who negatively stereotype large groups of people are insecure or stupid or most likely both.

Bertie Woot

Humans eh! wrote: »

I lived in England in the eighties in the midst of the IRA 'activities'.
I went out with an indian girl and we were known as 'The Paddy & The Paki' by our English friends.It was all good natured and never nasty.

The only racism I encountered was from blacks and asians for going out with an asian girl.
It was really bad, our house was attacked with stoneswe got physical and verbal abuse and our dog was badly attacked. The police were involved countless times, my girlfriend used to get spat upon on the street. Not just because I was white, apparrently it was worse being Irish.
Among asians, to describe something as being Irish denoted it as being coarse and implied it was dirty.

I will point out that in all my years living there, not once did I experience racism from a white English person and with the IRA waging their campaign of violence at the time there were many occasions that I was ashamed to be Irish.

Isn't it ironic that in England you didn't experience anti-Irishness from white English, but Indians? I know I'll probably get lampooned for saying this, but it comes from personal life experience; I have found most Indians I've come into contact with to have a superior demeanour. You can sense it, they really do consider themselves above you. I used to wonder if it was a racial thing or a nationality thing. Probably a bit of both. Sad really.

Lyra Fangs wrote: »

One experience that comes to mind is overhearing two English fellas having a heated conversation about their hatred of the Irish while I was sitting next to them and yes they were well aware that I was Irish (I worked with them). Highlights of the conversation included one of them wishing there had been a 2nd famine so it might have 'finished the rest of them off'

Classic example of hibernophobia (which means hatred towards as well as fear of the Irish). God knows where it comes from, but that level of hatred defies all comprehension.

Arpa wrote: »

You shouldn't take offense at Irishman jokes. Irish people know how to take a joke. Ifyou're offended then you're a gobsh*te. If it's really offensive...then laugh all the more. Ireland is a fantastic country that has a wealth of intelligence and beauty over its neighbours comparitively. We have nothing to be ashamed about. If the main joke is that we died from famine...then you have to look more at the person who is making the joke.

Absolutely. There is something wrong and very twisted with anyone who takes delight in the suffering of others, be they Irish or some other nationality. Ignorance, poor taste and blind bigotry have compelled a lot of people to poke fun at the famine. Be it on their shoulders.

fryup wrote: »

i was led to believe he came from wales

"St. Patrick is the patron saint of Ireland, although he was born in Britain, around 385AD. His parents Calpurnius and Conchessa were Roman citizens living in either Scotland or Wales, according to different versions of his story."

He was either Scottish or Welsh. Some even have him down as English. One things for sure; he wasn't Irish.

GRMA

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

It's today's date, what's the significance?

Quote the author (allegedly)
"Many people assume that current English hostility or discrimination towards the Irish is the result of events in Northern Ireland so they see it as regrettable but understandable."

This is, of course, based on the rather niave assumption exists: I've spent a lot of time over there and never once witnessed it. I have difficulty beleiveing some of the extracts mentioned above in the same way that I have difficuty beleive the Creationist theory, and the newspaper inself fails to list an example in the last 50 years.

So can someone please identify what is meant by "current English hostility" - with emphasis on the word 'current' - that goes beyond the mere anecdotal, please?

Look again, it's from 1996.

She is right though anti Irish racism has nothing to do with the IRA

looksee

Bertie Woot wrote: »

Isn't it ironic that in England you didn't experience anti-Irishness from white English, but Indians? I know I'll probably get lampooned for saying this, but it comes from personal life experience; I have found most Indians I've come into contact with to have a superior demeanour. You can sense it, they really do consider themselves above you. I used to wonder if it was a racial thing or a nationality thing. Probably a bit of both. Sad really.

I think maybe you had better stay at home and keep the curtains closed.

Bertie Woot

Wibbs wrote: »

As has the "English" genotype, even though there is a clear historical influx of Romans and Saxons to name but two. Which haplogroup 1 are you specifically referring to? It's a wide field. The hap 1 that is strongest in Scandinavia is about equal between these islands.

They're not exactly sure about that.

Haplogroup R1b, with subclades R-P312-4b (R-M222), R-P312-4f (R-L159.2) and R-P312-4h (R-L226) being found most frequent in Ireland. I traced my ancestry back to the Scandinavians (Norse Vikings), who invaded Scotland, England, then came across to Ireland during the plantations, and as British colonial settlers. Yeah, I'm descended from Vikings and Brits, this would explain this perpetual urge to rape, pillage and plunder.

Unlikely. Scotland was left alone by the Romans. Mainly cos they got well fcuked over anytime they tried to bring them under the Roman yoke. Hadrians wall being a more than obvious border. So how could Patrick be Scotish? He was a Romano Britain, a Christian from a line of same. His da a deacon and his granda a bishop, versed in Latin(vulgate though it was) and the new religion. He was within the falling light of Rome's influence. Vanishingly few Scots would have been similar at the time. So Paddy was a northern English lad in todays geography and terms. I find his origins interesting when it comes to the Irish psyche over the years. Growing up I heard he was Welsh, Scots at a push and even some eejits said he was of French descent.(he did serve some of his ecclesiastical time in France though) Anything but "Brit!". Who gives an actual fcuk? I mean the English today think Augustine brought Christianity to Britain. Yea lads, pity he was a bit tardy as the Micks had been there a couple of centuries before him and clearly the religion was in Britain as otherwise how could Paddy and his da and his granda been died in the wool Roman Christians? The bullshít piles high in invented culture.

St. Patrick's exact birthplace and date is not known for sure. However it is believed he was born around 375AD in Scotland. His parents were Calpurnius and Conchessa, and were Romans living in Britain in charge of the colonies. Others of course have him down as either Welsh or English, but like I've already stated, he definitely wasn't Irish, and came from Britain. Yeah, Saint Patrick was a Brit.

For a start I'd really take issue with the "genocide" tag. It's far too lazy and fashionable a term when looking for external and internal support/horror/justification. Plus I've had zero issue with English folks when on rare occasions the subject came up. Well I wouldn't think it would be much of an issue after all those folks I was talking with weren't responsible, nor where the vast majority of their ancestors. It's like the shíte you sometimes get from people in the US over the slavery issue. The "oh you're white your ancestors enslaved my people". GTFO. 99% of whites at the time were poor, many were indentured glorified slaves themselves. the vast majority didn't own other people.

In 1996, Francis A. Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign wrote a report commissioned by the New York-based Irish Famine/Genocide Committee, which concluded that "the British government deliberately pursued a race and ethnicity-based policy aimed at destroying the group commonly known as the Irish people, and that the policy of mass starvation amounted to genocide per the Hague convention of 1948". On the strength of Boyle's report, the U.S. state of New Jersey included the Irish famine in the "Holocaust and Genocide Curriculum" at the secondary tier.

The famine was not caused by the English, it was caused by Phytophthora infestans. But the English did very little to tackle the famine and prevent it from claiming the lives of approximately one million Irish people. Many sections of the English colonial establishment were of the view that the famine was "God’s intention" guided much of Britain’s Irish policy. They viewed the crop failures as "a Visitation of Providence, an expression of divine displeasure" with Ireland and its mostly Catholic peasant population.

Tim Pat Coogan, an Irish historian and journalist, is to many, the unofficial voice of modern Irish history. In the introduction to his polemical history of the disaster, he labels the famine as "genocide"; plain and simple. His most compelling argument for English genocide is the xenophobic images and words commonly used to caricature the Irish in Victorian England.

Charles Trevelyan administered relief for the Irish famine and is believed to have exacerbated the fatalities by his lack of effective action. He and other architects of the famine response had a direct hand in filling the newspapers with the often repeated theme that the famine was the result of a "flaw in the Irish character". And Punch, a satirical magazine, regularly portrayed "Paddy" as a simian in a tailcoat and a derby, engaged in plotting murder, battening on the labour of the English working man, and generally living a life of "indolent treason". The result of such dehumanising propaganda was to make unreasonable famine policy seem more reasonable and just.

Without doubt, the English committed genocide on the Irish people by viewing them as "inferior", "subhuman", and by intentionally not doing enough to tackle the famine. Despite this, hibenophobia (Irish fear and hatred) still exists among the English to this day, and that my friend, is totally unacceptable.

I have found they differ in attitude quite a bit and can discern the difference in background. Indeed have seen this up close A situation where I was the "southerner" among "northerners" and I was viewed much more favourably even though they were Unionists "loyal to the crown".

Most of the English view us all as Irish regardless of ancestral origin or national allegiance, with Northern unionists being the most unpalatable due to constantly harking on about 1690, the Somme, and all of the other sacrifices that they've made for Britain and empire. The English don't want six county Ulster's loyalty, and would like nothing more than to see Northern Ireland exit the UK and leave the English tax-payer with more money in the kitty for that tawdry summer break in Blackpool.

Bertie Woot

The Pheasant wrote: »

Last Summer in Portugal my friend and I were at a bar, having a few beers and don't why but we started speaking in Irish. Anyway there are these birds from Manchester who we'd been talking to earlier and they start asking us what we're on about - we explain that we were speaking in Irish. And yer one refuses to believe there's an actual Irish language. She's all "there's a Celtic language called welsh but there's no such thing as Irish..." we explain that there is, it's called Gaeilge etc and she just says we're lying! So we continue trying to explain to her and then she just says "Yeah well England owns Ireland anyway." at this point I politely told her to go fcuk herself and stormed off, leaving my friend in a fairly awkward position!

If you had told her that Ireland was in the Isle of Man, and that all Manx people were typically alcoholic Gaelic speakers who no-one could understand because of their slurred speech, she would have believed you. It's bin-lids like that that ...no I'd better not.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

It's today's date, what's the significance?

Quote the author (allegedly)
"Many people assume that current English hostility or discrimination towards the Irish is the result of events in Northern Ireland so they see it as regrettable but understandable."

This is, of course, based on the rather niave assumption exists: I've spent a lot of time over there and never once witnessed it. I have difficulty beleiveing some of the extracts mentioned above in the same way that I have difficuty beleive the Creationist theory, and the newspaper inself fails to list an example in the last 50 years.

So can someone please identify what is meant by "current English hostility" - with emphasis on the word 'current' - that goes beyond the mere anecdotal, please?

It's not so much open hostility as it is snide remarks and insinuations. If you've ever been one of a tiny minority of Irish on a British forum you might have experienced the "Paddy" jibe, and thought noting of it, as it may have come across as a bit of benign banter. But when an English poster refers to two Irish posters as "thick Paddies with walnut sized brains" you begin to detect a hint of malice. When other posters periodically and opportunistically weigh in with other similar remarks, you begin to question if this is a bit of craic or genuine Irish hatred you are experiencing.

Allow me to elaborate from real life experience. When I was recently on a guided tour of the Lake District (Cumbria) I was introduced by the tour guide to the group as "Irish". Instead of correcting her by saying "Well, to be accurate, I'm Northern Irish", I instead kept silent and didn't respond. To cut a long one short; during the tour I experienced what can only be described as a barely concealed contemptuous attitude from a guy from London, and that puzzled me. When I entered a Hotel in Leeds, the receptionist knew I was from Northern Ireland, and I was viewed with suspicion and distrust the whole time whilst staying there. Sitting on the bank of the canal in Godalming, Surrey, I was approached by a young woman who asked me if I had "a light" for her cigarette. I said "Sorry, I don't smoke". Having heard my accent she then asked me where I was from. I told her "Belfast". She couldn't wait to get away quick enough. When I was going through the check-in terminal at Manchester airport, I was pulled off to one side and asked if I was in possession of "a mobile phone". I told them "yes", and produced my mobile. They then proceeded to use a special cloth to check my mobile for signs of explosive. My own English family in Leicester have put me at a distance. I haven't done anything wrong or to them.

I could illustrate with many more examples. Am I being overly sensitive and paranoid, or am I experiencing anti-Irish prejudice?

looksee wrote: »

I think maybe you had better stay at home and keep the curtains closed.

Ah no. Again?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

GRMA wrote: »

Look again, it's from 1996.

She is right though anti Irish racism has nothing to do with the IRA

Balls, was reading the date at the top .

Lived in England back in 95 and most of 96 and enver expereinced anything, IRA realted or not. A little banter, yeah, but they took as good as they got and laughed it off.

Bertie Woot wrote: »

It's not so much open hostility as it is snide remarks and insinuations. If you've ever been one of a tiny minority of Irish on a British forum you might have experienced the "Paddy" jibe, and thought noting of it, as it may have come across as a bit of benign banter. But when an English poster refers to two Irish posters as "thick Paddies with walnut sized brains" you begin to detect a hint of malice. When other posters periodically and opportunistically weigh in with other similar remarks, you begin to question if this is a bit of craic or genuine Irish hatred you are experiencing.

Possibly, I have a thick skin, but they were equally positive as well as negative.

I haven't read the entire thread, can you redirect me to the poster who posted the "walnut-brain" jibe. Have you ever thought you may be tarring everyone with the same brush?

Allow me to elaborate from real life experience. When I was recently on a guided tour of the Lake District (Cumbria) I was introduced by the tour guide to the group as "Irish". Instead of correcting her by saying "Well, to be accurate, I'm Northern Irish", I instead kept silent and didn't respond. To cut a long one short; during the tour I experienced what can only be described as a barely concealed contemptuous attitude from a guy from London, and that puzzled me. When I entered a Hotel in Leeds, the receptionist knew I was from Northern Ireland, and I was viewed with suspicion and distrust the whole time whilst staying there. Sitting on the bank of the canal in Godalming, Surrey, I was approached by a young woman who asked me if I had "a light" for her cigarette. I said "Sorry, I don't smoke". Having heard my accent she then asked me where I was from. I told her "Belfast". She couldn't wait to get away quick enough. When I was going through the check-in terminal at Manchester airport, I was pulled off to one side and asked if I was in possession of "a mobile phone". I told them "yes", and produced my mobile. They then proceeded to use a special cloth to check my mobile for signs of explosive. My own English family in Leicester have put me at a distance. I haven't done anything wrong or to them.

I could illustrate with many more examples. Am I being overly sensitive and paranoid, or am I experiencing anti-Irish prejudice?

I think you've been very unlucky, but let me ask you a question: do you think your experiences are representative of the English population?

Ah no. Again?

Yes, again. I'm surprised you ever opened them in the first place.

Bertie Woot

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Possibly, I have a thick skin, but they were equally positive as well as negative.

I haven't read the entire thread, can you redirect me to the poster who posted the "walnut-brain" jibe. Have you ever thought you may be tarring everyone with the same brush?

The "Thick paddies with walnut sized brains" remark was flagged and removed by the moderators. I'm not tarring all with the same brush, as if they were all hibernophobic then the moderators wouldn't have removed the comment.

I think you've been very unlucky, but let me ask you a question: do you think your experiences are representative of the English population?

I haven't the faintest notion, as I have not experienced, and have no way of experiencing all of that attitudes of all of the English people. Perhaps you'd like to recollect all of your rosy experiences.

Yes, again. I'm surprised you ever opened them in the first place.

Enlightening.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Bertie Woot wrote: »

The "Thick paddies with walnut sized brains" remark was flagged and removed by the moderators. I'm not tarring all with the same brush, as if they were all hibernophobic then the moderators wouldn't have removed the comment.

This doesn't make sense: if you even bring up the point you are tarring everyone. What does its removal have to do with anything?

I haven't the faintest notion, as I have not experienced, and have no way of experiencing all of that attitudes of all of the English people. Perhaps you'd like to recollect all of your rosy experiences.

You see, it does't have to be "all of the attitudes, it just ha to be be a bir more represntative.

I never said they "rosy" - I said I had no experience of hibernophobia. No more or less hibernophobicthan my experiences of living in France, Denmark or Germany.

These points, plus the comment about the Indians () makes me think that you are more xenophbic than they are hibernophobic. You seem to want to hate.