Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
So...Ok then...How do we talk about it? (Irish Presidential Election Result)
Comments
-
Tell me how wrote: »I've no interest in trying to change peoples opinions on travellers on an online forum.
What I have an interest in and why I started the thread is to try to understand is it possible to get to a place where we can say we have considered all facts and therefore have reached objective opinions openly. In this instance (given the presidential election) the topic is travellers but it could just as easily be climate change or the housing crisis or whatever.
We see it time and again where advocates want to have a discussion from a fixed position. At least as far as they are concerned, they are willing to discuss as long as it takes until the other side changes their mind.
If I accused you of having a baseless position, you would disagree with me. But if I asked you to present the evidence you used to form your opinion you call it arseaboutery. That to me indicates that you are not open to presenting and defending your position with evidence. Which leads me to wonder is there any point of a debate. And it is not just you, I think this approach exists amongst some with a different opinion to you on the matter.
So, on that basis, maybe the answer to my question "How do we talk about it?" is that we can't.
Lets just allow the populist pendulum to swing first one way, then the other.
No, that's not the case. You infer meaning and derive your questioning from that and on that basis you judge if I'm willing to discuss 'my' position, when it's one you've inserted for your own end.
All criminality should be judged on a case by case basis be they a Traveler, Solicitor, Politician or Junkie.
We can talk about it. We are in fact. We will not change ingrained opinions. Therefore instead of a series of alternating what ifs regarding the 'are they all criminals or are they not', lets discuss Travelers and their place in society. It's a given they exist. It's a given they won't be put in concentration camps. They will not be legally treated negatively en masse because they are Travelers. So we can start from there.0 -
oscarBravo wrote: »I keep hearing the phrase "free pass" bandied about, but I've never, ever seen anyone advocate for it, or even explain what it means.
Here is a clear example of them being given a free pass.We can all agree that coverage of Travellers in the media is massively negative.
Lets look at it a different way.
Ireland has a very very bad record on discriminating against minorities and those outside the pale and covering it up.
Unborn mothers, children/babies born out of wedlock, vulnerable children targetted for abuse.
Poor people in these danger categories were particularly vulnerable.
You would assume that people in these categories who were also travellers would be especially vulnerable: travellers being despised by Church and State.
We rarely hear these stories however.
That every traveller child was vulnerable to being taken by a priest flanked by a guard to industrial schools etc. Infact there was a policy for this I believe. These would be Grandparents now I guess. How do you think they fared?
What about their kids in schools completely vunerable to predatory men. Who would believe a traveller against a priest?
Lets look at social welfare. Travellers were nomadic rural folk. They were part of Irish culture for many centuries. When social welfare came in there was no consideration if you were a traveller or settled. That meant relocating to towns and cities wherever they could find and the wiping out of much of their way of life.
What other discrimination have we meted against this ancient minority?
When will we say, Sod it! you know they have a right to live as they have lived for the last 500 years. Lets just make peace with them, extend the hand of friendship and sort this out?
But no. A particularly poor excuse for a presidential candidate mouths off to get his 12.5% rebate and we nod in 20% agreement. It's weak and shameful.0 -
Tell me how wrote: »There is a perception that they are heavily involved in criminal activity.
There is a perception that they are receiving payments from social welfare while they have alternative income streams which should exclude them from doing so.
There is a perception that they receive allowances such as halting sites or houses provided for them which the general public do not.
To people who believe in these perceptions, what evidence have you that they are accurate?
To people who feel they are unfairly being targetted, are you saying that there is no merit in any of these perceptions?
Evidence has been produced on this thread of a deeply misogynistic traveller culture. Some posters have no issue with it. The evidence has included reference to CSO statistics as well as media examination. This evidence has not been refuted.
Similarly, evidence has been produced of a criminal culture extant within the travelling community. Again, this has not been refuted.
The evidence of homophobic culture is less clear-cut, but again there has been little refuting of this, other than some suggesting the traveller community is twenty years behind the rest of Ireland. Would India be given a pass on LGBT rights by the same posters who blindly defend the travelling community seeing they are only 30 years behind Ireland in decriminalising homosexuality? I doubt it.
The social welfare issue is harder to prove. Then again, that hasn't been one of my main arguments. The three arguments I have put forward - misogynism, homophobia and criminality - around deep flaws in traveller culture are largely backed by independent statistics and evidence. Yet some posters persist in pretending there isn't an issue. Others seem to suggest that only outside agency through education can address the cultural issue and thereby absolve the individuals and the leaders of the travelling community from those problems.0 -
Others seem to suggest that only outside agency through education can address the cultural issue and thereby absolve the individuals and the leaders of the travelling community from those problems.
Who is saying this?
Travellers representative groups are already working on VAW (Violence Against Women) initiatives. Are already on the National Steering Committee on Violence against Women, also on the Women's Council Of Ireland committee.
I see no evidence they are looking for 'absolution' on that issue.0 -
FrancieBrady wrote: »Who is saying this?
Travellers representative groups are already working on VAW (Violence Against Women) initiatives. Are already on the National Steering Committee on Violence against Women, also on the Women's Council Of Ireland committee.
I see no evidence they are looking for 'absolution' on that issue.
Sitting on a committee or sitting having discussions is not evidence of doing anything.
Regular public statements on their own community would be a start of actually doing something.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
FrancieBrady wrote: »You think them making statements on what we know is going to help?
I think it's evidence of them engaging with committees designed to tackle these issues I would have thought.
I think some want them to walk around carrying placards or something. I can't see it. Should we be working towards punishing an entire group based on prejudice or looking at ways to live in tandem without infringing on their culture? It's unlikely those disgruntled settled people will be getting their pound of flesh and rightly so.0 -
oscarBravo wrote: »Who has claimed there isn't a problem?
I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you over the chorus of elected officials and media proclaiming there is a problem with criminality within the traveling community..... not.0 -
I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you over the chorus of elected officials and media proclaiming there is a problem with criminality within the traveling community..... not.
So... your proposed solution to the problem of criminality in the travelling community is more complaining about it?
It's not exactly an original suggestion.0 -
Matt Barrett wrote: »No, that's not the case. You infer meaning and derive your questioning from that and on that basis you judge if I'm willing to discuss 'my' position, when it's one you've inserted for your own end.
All criminality should be judged on a case by case basis be they a Traveler, Solicitor, Politician or Junkie.
We can talk about it. We are in fact. We will not change ingrained opinions. Therefore instead of a series of alternating what ifs regarding the 'are they all criminals or are they not', lets discuss Travelers and their place in society. It's a given they exist. It's a given they won't be put in concentration camps. They will not be legally treated negatively en masse because they are Travelers. So we can start from there.
First the part in bold. No reasonable person is disputing any of this. Please show a link of someone in a position of high standing or authority who claims otherwise.
Secondly, the line before it. Absolutely lets discuss their place in society but can we also discuss their responsibility to society or is that off limits?
Finally, you suggest that I am trying to effectively tailor my question in an unreasonable way. I think if you look at my posts on this I have queried claims from both arguments in an equal manner. I challenged one posters 5 points on issues within the travelling community as they saw it. If you noticed any of my posts on other threads on boards I think you have to see I'm largely supportive of the culture deserving to receive support in existing.
If the status quo continues, then the travelling community will likely become further marginalised leading to greater issues within their community. I think that would be unfair but I think they cannot absolve themselves entirely of the view some seem to have of them if they are not open to being asked if that view is valid or not.0 -
Advertisement
-
Tell me how wrote: »How about the evidence from the Irish Prison Service that says that travellers are marginalised from their early life and particularly in education which has an impact on the number of them who end up being incarcerated?
I agree with that, however, Travellers themselves are primarily responsible for this. It is they that take their kids out of school and it is they who want to live on the margins outside mainstream society. The term settled people originated from them.In terms of Margaret Cash. What about white collar criminals who cost the state greater amounts and don't necessarily end up being reprimaned appropriately?
There is a difference though. Everyone and their dog knows the officialdom and white collar criminals get away with it and they hate the establishment for it. You will hear plenty of stories in the media this week about how the state ****ed over its citizens by paying for Martin Callinan's defense for being sued by McCabe. Stuff like this drives everyone mad.
You will not hear anything remotely the same about the welfare culture at the heart of Ireland's underclass. The fact that Cash, who has 30 odd convictions under her name, gets over €50,000+ net a year is not discussed by our betters.0 -
oscarBravo wrote: »So... your proposed solution to the problem of criminality in the travelling community is more complaining about it?
It's not exactly an original suggestion.
No, you are putting words in peoples mouths again, to repeat my other post.
The first step to fix a problem is to recognise that there is a problem. Official Ireland, in my opinion, would rather stick its head in the sand.
As to a solution, I mentioned one already. Education where the state enforces the law in regards Traveller kids going to school. If they don't. Take the kids off them. It might upset some of the sensitive sensibilities but id rather put a kids future over the vanity of some official.0 -
No, you are putting words in peoples mouths again, to repeat my other post.
The first step to fix a problem is to recognise that there is a problem. Official Ireland, in my opinion, would rather stick its head in the sand.
As to a solution, I mentioned one already. Education where the state enforces the law in regards Traveller kids going to school. If they don't. Take the kids off them. It might upset some of the sensitive sensibilities but id rather put a kids future over the vanity of some official.
What about settled people whose children don't attend school?
Think you might want to find a different way of saying hold the parents responsible.0 -
Tell me how wrote: »What about settled people whose children don't attend school?
Think you might want to find a different way of saying hold the parents responsible.
Home schooling is a legitimate option. However, there are significant hoops to go through to get approved for home schooling. Parents' level of education is a significant factor in whether it gets approved.
Keeping girls out of school from the age of 12 so they can be primed to be married at 15 or 16 is not likely to win the approval of the Department of Education and Skills.
Parents should be responsible for ensuring their children get an education.0 -
Matt Barrett wrote: »I think it's evidence of them engaging with committees designed to tackle these issues I would have thought.
I think some want them to walk around carrying placards or something. I can't see it. Should we be working towards punishing an entire group based on prejudice or looking at ways to live in tandem without infringing on their culture? It's unlikely those disgruntled settled people will be getting their pound of flesh and rightly so.
You are another poster who is ignoring the evidence. I am not suggesting punishing an entire group based on prejudice. There is plenty of evidence on the culture of criminality and the ingrained misogyny and that has been presented in the thread. Criticising Muslims for treating women badly or unionists for preventing the enactment of SSM is fair game for many posters such as yourself and Francie. However, when a minority you favour is criticised the defences are wheeled out.
Quite simply, change needs to come from the traveller community. There is no sign of it. That isn't prejudice, that is fact.
I certainly think that it is a naive suggestion that we should be looking at ways to live in tandem without infringing on their culture. That just gives a free pass to criminality, homophobia and misogyny.0 -
Tell me how wrote: »What about settled people whose children don't attend school?
Think you might want to find a different way of saying hold the parents responsible.
I would hold the same opinion, settled or non-settled. Sorry to disappoint.0 -
Parents should be responsible for ensuring their children get an education.
A big thing at the moment is discipline in the classroom. It is very very difficult nowadays to expel unruly children because the parents can appeal to the board of management of the school and proclaim that their rights to an education are being denied. They usually win the case.
It is astonishing that there is a section of Irish society wilfully denying their kids an education and handicapping them for the remainder of their lives. Would love to see some proper statistics on school attendance of the traveling community.0 -
-
I would hold the same opinion, settled or non-settled. Sorry to disappoint.
It doesn't disappoint. It does give a strong indication what your broader position in understanding societal needs is.
Thankfully, very few would agree that removing children from their parents because they are not attending school (as important as education is) is an appropriate response or would ultimately benefit the children.0 -
Tell me how wrote: »It doesn't disappoint. It does give a strong indication what your broader position in understanding societal needs is.
Thankfully, very few would agree that removing children from their parents because they are not attending school (as important as education is) is an appropriate response or would ultimately benefit the children.
It does seem to be a very self serving solution.0 -
Advertisement
-
Home schooling is a legitimate option. However, there are significant hoops to go through to get approved for home schooling. Parents' level of education is a significant factor in whether it gets approved.
Keeping girls out of school from the age of 12 so they can be primed to be married at 15 or 16 is not likely to win the approval of the Department of Education and Skills.
Parents should be responsible for ensuring their children get an education.
I feel you are using an extreme case in an attempt to present it as common practice within the community.
There are other reasons why children don't attend school. Not limited to but including their experience when at school where there is evidence that both students and teachers act in a prejudiced manner towards them.0 -
Tell me how wrote: »It doesn't disappoint. It does give a strong indication what your broader position in understanding societal needs is.
Thankfully, very few would agree that removing children from their parents because they are not attending school (as important as education is) is an appropriate response or would ultimately benefit the children.
The state holds the power to remove children from parents who they deem a danger. It happens all the time. Taking kids out of school before they are a teenager would be in my opinion be classified as such.
The alternative is, of course, do nothing and talk around the issue.0 -
Tell me how wrote: »What would you say that to those that have been the victims of traveller criminal activity?
What would you say to the travellers who committed such criminal activity? Here is a free pass?
The law applies equally to all people in the land. Black white, traveller settled, Protestant Catholic.
Your phrasing it this way is bigotted and dispicable:
What would you say that to those that have been the victims of Black criminal activity?
What would you say to the Blacks who committed such criminal activity? Here is a free pass?
What would you say that to those that have been the victims of Catholic criminal activity?
What would you say to the Catholics who committed such criminal activity? Here is a free pass?
0 -
Here is a clear example of them being given a free pass.
My statement was in the context of the Government effectively forcing the travelling community from changing from a rural people to an urban people by offering social services as if they were settled people. This was clear in my post.
Don't misrepresent me again.0 -
Evidence has been produced on this thread of a deeply misogynistic traveller culture. Some posters have no issue with it. The evidence has included reference to CSO statistics as well as media examination. This evidence has not been refuted.
Similarly, evidence has been produced of a criminal culture extant within the travelling community. Again, this has not been refuted.
The evidence of homophobic culture is less clear-cut, but again there has been little refuting of this, other than some suggesting the traveller community is twenty years behind the rest of Ireland. Would India be given a pass on LGBT rights by the same posters who blindly defend the travelling community seeing they are only 30 years behind Ireland in decriminalising homosexuality? I doubt it.
The social welfare issue is harder to prove. Then again, that hasn't been one of my main arguments. The three arguments I have put forward - misogynism, homophobia and criminality - around deep flaws in traveller culture are largely backed by independent statistics and evidence. Yet some posters persist in pretending there isn't an issue. Others seem to suggest that only outside agency through education can address the cultural issue and thereby absolve the individuals and the leaders of the travelling community from those problems.
Misogyny exists in more traditional cultures but it also exists in modern cultures. The president of the US and most of the males around him in power have nearly all been associated with misoginyst issues including sexual assault, rape and many cases of domestic violence. Thier policy includes a return to deeply misogynistic Christian values.
In Ireland last year a man murdered his entire family brutally and yet was immediately heralded by society as being misunderstood, kind of a tragic hero.
Incidents of Domestic Violence and child sexual abuse in Ireland is extremely high. I have a feeling that these issues only matter when you can try and use them to batter a disliked minority.
Statistics might show a criminal culture in the Summerhill, Ballybough area of Dublin city. But only a tiny proportion of criminals exist in that population. To evidence a criminal culture you need more than you are supplying.0 -
Tell me how wrote: »I feel you are using an extreme case in an attempt to present it as common practice within the community.
There are other reasons why children don't attend school. Not limited to but including their experience when at school where there is evidence that both students and teachers act in a prejudiced manner towards them.
I am sorry but that is ridiculous in the face of the evidence already posted.At least one traveller seems to think laws against teen marriage are an attack on their culture:
https://www.thesun.ie/archives/irish-news/117271/kelly-law-to-stop-young-people-getting-married-is-anti-travellers/
Here is one priest's experience, obviously denied by a traveller group.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/traveller-group-rejects-priest-s-claim-on-young-or-arranged-marriage-1.2101955
But less of the anecdotes, what does the CSO say?
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp8iter/p8iter/p8itd/
"Among the general population 5.8 per cent of 15-29 year olds were married, compared with 3 in 10 (31.9%) of the Irish Traveller population."
And women don't find it easy to escape from their men either:
"The divorce rate among Irish travellers was 2.2 per cent, compared with 4.7 per cent for the general population."
Women are expected to produce heirs:
"Among Traveller women aged 40-49 (the age by which women have typically completed their fertility) 13.3 per cent had not given birth to a child - compared with 18.3 per cent of women generally. Nearly half had given birth to 5 or more children, in stark contrast to just under 1 in 20 (4.2%) of women overall in this age group."
The Irish Times thinks their women are abused:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/traveller-women-30-times-more-likely-to-suffer-domestic-violence-report-1.707916
"TRAVELLER WOMEN are proportionately 30 times as likely as settled women to suffer domestic violence"
IF there is a single person on these boards who is prepared to ignore the reality of a deeply misogynistic Traveller culture, then they are ignoring the evidence. There is no doubt that what I have said about their misogynist culture is completely true. Absolute rubbish to suggest it is only extreme practices.
As for homophobia, have a read of this:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/gay-travellers-entering-arranged-marriages-to-avoid-shame-1.3248791
"Young gay Travellers are entering arranged marriages because they do not want to shame their families, according to a 22-year-old Traveller who spent years covering up his own sexual orientation."
I am really disappointed with a number of posters who would have been strong supporters of the SSM referendum, but have been on here aggressively defending travellers. Not all minorities are oppressed, not all minorities are the good guys, not all minorities have a pleasant culture.
Read this again:
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp8iter/p8iter/p8itd/
"Among the general population 5.8 per cent of 15-29 year olds were married, compared with 3 in 10 (31.9%) of the Irish Traveller population."
What does that mean? Women are being married off at significantly younger ages than the settled community. Five times the rate. That isn't some extreme case, that is an ingrained culture. And what happens these women when they are married off?
"Among Traveller women aged 40-49 (the age by which women have typically completed their fertility) 13.3 per cent had not given birth to a child - compared with 18.3 per cent of women generally. Nearly half had given birth to 5 or more children, in stark contrast to just under 1 in 20 (4.2%) of women overall in this age group."
Yeah, quite simply they are turned into baby factories. There is no more important feminist issue in Ireland today than the treatment of traveller women by their own culture. It is an absolute disgrace.
It is also deeply disappointing to see posters who were strong supporters of SSM and of abortion rights ignore the clear evidence of a misogynist culture among the travelling community, just because they fit their world view of an oppressed minority.0 -
Misogyny exists in more traditional cultures but it also exists in modern cultures. The president of the US and most of the males around him in power have nearly all been associated with misoginyst issues including sexual assault, rape and many cases of domestic violence. Thier policy includes a return to deeply misogynistic Christian values.
In Ireland last year a man murdered his entire family brutally and yet was immediately heralded by society as being misunderstood, kind of a tragic hero.
Incidents of Domestic Violence and child sexual abuse in Ireland is extremely high. I have a feeling that these issues only matter when you can try and use them to batter a disliked minority.
Statistics might show a criminal culture in the Summerhill, Ballybough area of Dublin city. But only a tiny proportion of criminals exist in that population. To evidence a criminal culture you need more than you are supplying.
Nice anecdotes, but the statistics that demonstrate the misogynistic nature of the Traveller culture are clearly evident in the CSO Statistical Report.
If you have figures on the differences in domestic violence between the traveller community and the settled community, I would be interested in seeing them.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/traveller-women-30-times-more-likely-to-suffer-domestic-violence-report-1.707916
"TRAVELLER WOMEN are proportionately 30 times as likely as settled women to suffer domestic violence, while migrant women are more than twice as likely to suffer domestic violence than Irish women, according to a report published yesterday."
https://health.gov.ie/blog/publications/translating-pain-into-action-a-study-of-gender-based-violence-and-minority-ethnic-women-in-ireland/
Here is the full report. It shows up the lie that some have tried to promulgate that somehow the traveller community is a matriarchal society. Nothing could be further from the truth.
"‘You see, you can’t go back to your family. Because you get them into trouble, as well as yourself into trouble. And you don’t want to see that happening. So therefore, when he comes to collect you…promising you that he won’t do it no more, just in order for your family not to get into trouble, you’ll just go back. And then you go back and it starts all over again’ (Frances)."
It is a horrific report.0 -
Tell me how wrote: »First the part in bold. No reasonable person is disputing any of this. Please show a link of someone in a position of high standing or authority who claims otherwise.
Secondly, the line before it. Absolutely lets discuss their place in society but can we also discuss their responsibility to society or is that off limits?
Finally, you suggest that I am trying to effectively tailor my question in an unreasonable way. I think if you look at my posts on this I have queried claims from both arguments in an equal manner. I challenged one posters 5 points on issues within the travelling community as they saw it. If you noticed any of my posts on other threads on boards I think you have to see I'm largely supportive of the culture deserving to receive support in existing.
If the status quo continues, then the travelling community will likely become further marginalised leading to greater issues within their community. I think that would be unfair but I think they cannot absolve themselves entirely of the view some seem to have of them if they are not open to being asked if that view is valid or not.
What part of 'it's a given' is confusing you. It means it's generally agreed. You keep trying to pull this nonsense and when I don't bite I get accused of avoiding.
Again, you keep trying to stifle debate and put it in reverse while claiming to be seeking means to discuss Travelers. If you just want to discuss criminality, okay, but getting sensational by inferring it might be taboo or 'off limits' to discuss it is false. It's what's mostly been discussed thus far. The point is peoples opinions will not change here. So why not accept people have differing views and discuss where we go from there? You can cite various criminal acts till the cows come home, it won't progress the debate.
Your claims are your dillusion, willing or accidental. Case in point, the first part of your comments here. Asking me to post proof/quotes of people saying the opposite of what I said was a given not a claim that anyone disagreed. I was stating accepted elements so we could move on. And by moving on it's more to do with the futility of trading anecdotes regarding criminality, not making it 'off limits'.Given
noun
1.
a known or established fact or situation.
"at a couture house, attentive service is a given"
synonyms: established fact, reality, certainty
"his aggression is taken as a given"
The Judiciary really need to find some consistency. I think all too often some Judge will make a decision based on his or her whims. That's their right, but I feel if they all stayed within some set parameters there would be less public disbelief and ire. Maybe set minimal sentencing or fines for any and every transgression. If it's found you did something, you must in the least pay a minimal price. I know it's supposed to work like that but it often doesn't. Suspended sentences resulting in what amounts to nothing isn't cutting it, be it Traveler, Landlord or politician.0 -
Matt Barrett wrote: »What part of 'it's a given' is confusing you. It means it's generally agreed. You keep trying to pull this nonsense and when I don't bite I get accused of avoiding.
Again, you keep trying to stifle debate and put it in reverse while claiming to be seeking means to discuss Travelers. If you just want to discuss criminality, okay, but getting sensational by inferring it might be taboo or 'off limits' to discuss it is false. It's what's mostly been discussed thus far. The point is peoples opinions will not change here. So why not accept people have differing views and discuss where we go from there? You can cite various criminal acts till the cows come home, it won't progress the debate.
Your claims are your dillusion, willing or accidental. Case in point, the first part of your comments here. Asking me to post proof/quotes of people saying the opposite of what I said was a given not a claim that anyone disagreed. I was stating accepted elements so we could move on. And by moving on it's more to do with the futility of trading anecdotes regarding criminality, not making it 'off limits'.
The Judiciary really need to find some consistency. I think all too often some Judge will make a decision based on his or her whims. That's their right, but I feel if they all stayed within some set parameters there would be less public disbelief and ire. Maybe set minimal sentencing or fines for any and every transgression. If it's found you did something, you must in the least pay a minimal price. I know it's supposed to work like that but it often doesn't. Suspended sentences resulting in what amounts to nothing isn't cutting it, be it Traveler, Landlord or politician.
Nobody is suggesting that opinions have to change in a discussion. What is being said though is that if one side present evidence to back up their opinion, particularly independent statistical evidence, the other side, if they stick to their opinion, run the risk of being seen as equivalent to flat-earthers.
I can have an opinion that Leeds will win the Premiership this season, but if I keep maintaining that opinion in face of the fact that they are only in the Championship, I do look a little foolish, don't I?
Well, it is similar with discussions like these where statistical evidence of a culture of criminality and of deeply misogynistic practices is clearly presented and then posters appear to blithely ignore the evidence and maintain an opinion not supported by the facts.0 -
Advertisement
-
https://www.womensaid.ie/about/policy/natintstats.html#X-2012091712434612
Nice anecdotes, but the statistics that demonstrate the misogynistic nature of the Traveller culture are clearly evident in the CSO Statistical Report.
If you have figures on the differences in domestic violence between the traveller community and the settled community, I would be interested in seeing them.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/traveller-women-30-times-more-likely-to-suffer-domestic-violence-report-1.707916
"TRAVELLER WOMEN are proportionately 30 times as likely as settled women to suffer domestic violence, while migrant women are more than twice as likely to suffer domestic violence than Irish women, according to a report published yesterday."
https://health.gov.ie/blog/publications/translating-pain-into-action-a-study-of-gender-based-violence-and-minority-ethnic-women-in-ireland/
Here is the full report. It shows up the lie that some have tried to promulgate that somehow the traveller community is a matriarchal society. Nothing could be further from the truth.
"‘You see, you can’t go back to your family. Because you get them into trouble, as well as yourself into trouble. And you don’t want to see that happening. So therefore, when he comes to collect you…promising you that he won’t do it no more, just in order for your family not to get into trouble, you’ll just go back. And then you go back and it starts all over again’ (Frances)."
It is a horrific report.Domestic Violence and minority women:
In 2017, 26% of new women using the Women's Aid One to One Support Services were migrant women who face additional barriers when affected by domestic violence (Women's Aid Impact Report 2017).
37% of women accessing refuge identified themselves as Travellers, 6% as Black, and 2% as Asian. It is important not to draw conclusions about levels or severity of domestic violence amongst particular minority ethnic communities given some appear 'over-represented' in refuge provision. Instead it shows that minority women face additional barriers to obtaining long-term safety and lack other possible options than emergency accommodation. [SAFE Ireland (2009)
Non-indigenous minority ethnic women only comprise approximately 5% of Ireland's population, but represented 13% of those seeking services from gender-based violence organisations. Traveller women make up 0.5% of population but represent 15% of service users. [The Women's Health Council (2009) Translating Pain Into Action: A study of Gender-based Violence and Minority Ethnic Women in Ireland.]
Barriers to fulfilling minority ethnic women's needs identified by gender-based violence services and minority ethnic organisations were: inadequate resources, absence of staff training, and the Habitual Residence Condition. Most GBV organisations identified language and the absence of interpretation services as barriers. [The Women's Health Council (2009)Translating Pain Into Action: A study of Gender-based Violence and Minority Ethnic Women in Ireland.]
Some reasons for the high representation for minorities and why not to draw the wrong conclusions (as you did) bolded above.
You'll note that at no point is 'using domestic violence statistics as an excuse to fire racial slurs at minorities' mentioned.
The truth is you don't care about traveller womens issues, you dont care about womens issues. When it comes to domestic violence youre probably a "But why didn't she just leave" guy.0
Advertisement