Blimey, what a thread. Hope WIWALB gets some resolution.
On the "white people can't be victims of racism" stuff, I'd go along with the idea that prejudice is what most white people face in those sort of uncomfortable situations in the UK because racism implies a degree of power. But Jews and Travellers are also white, and I think it's wrong to say that what they experience isn't racism. In particular, Travellers experience of policing is similar to other ethnic minorities. Nor does the other side of the coin hold true - that people from a minority heritage can't be racist when given the power - because no one's going to convince me that Priti Patel isn't a racist.
Travellers experience of policing is similar to other ethnic minorities???
Could be true. In terms of skin colour it doesn’t matter if travellers have white skin, they are sometimes victims of similar ‘othering’ than non white people. There are some who categorise travellers into ‘true Romanys’ (sp?)=good, and Irish ‘pikey’ travellers =bad. It does not go unnoticed that the Irish angle is mentioned, it taps in to centuries old anti Irish racism. However for the majority of Irish or Irish heritage people their skin colour can help them keep their identity on the down low, and therefore avoid the hatred that is based on the way they look.
My understanding is that the general consensus that they are not treated fairly by the police and local authorities - that they are treated far too leniently and not dealt with as they should be
That may well be the general consensus but it just indicates the amount of racism in our society. I can remember seeing "No travellers" signs in pubs in Lewisham less than 25 years ago, which would never have happened with any other ethnic group. One of my Traveller mates has described how when the police came to his home they were slagging off his mum and being totally disrespectful just to get him to respond so they could nick him or kick him in or both. He gets stopped all the time and regularly attacked by either cops or racists.
I suspect the general consensus 30-40 years ago was that black people were inherently criminal. Assuming that one ethnic group is all going to behave in one way is kind of the textbook definition of racism - you're not seeing the people only the stereotype.
I know for a fact that Pykies were causing considerable problems in some Lewisham pubs and a couple were closed down/went out of business as a result.
I won’t write any more because I am supposed to avoid topics like this. However you might reflect on your use of the words ‘they’, and ‘leniently’ and the term ‘dealt with’, and consider whether that language would go without challenge if it were applied to a black, or Asian, or Oriental person. I shall say no more.
Why are you supposed to avoid topics like this?
What is wrong with using the word 'they' when referring to any group, be it a minority (or the players in a team for example), 'dealt with' is a common phrase regarding interactions with the police and 'leniently' is a word that could be applied the treatment of anyone, whatever their ethnicity, gender
A dangerous precedent.
It strikes me that 'Woken, LGBT, etc etc are just driving our society apart . We all live in the same world but somehow it is turning hateful.
Social media gives a voice to any old fool who then seizes the chance to offend or be offend they never met.
I don't care about sexual bias, gender or racism. Why is it important to keep discussing such things.
Any survey now asks my religion, security bias and gender preference.
Blimey, what a thread. Hope WIWALB gets some resolution.
On the "white people can't be victims of racism" stuff, I'd go along with the idea that prejudice is what most white people face in those sort of uncomfortable situations in the UK because racism implies a degree of power. But Jews and Travellers are also white, and I think it's wrong to say that what they experience isn't racism. In particular, Travellers experience of policing is similar to other ethnic minorities. Nor does the other side of the coin hold true - that people from a minority heritage can't be racist when given the power - because no one's going to convince me that Priti Patel isn't a racist.
Travellers experience of policing is similar to other ethnic minorities???
Could be true. In terms of skin colour it doesn’t matter if travellers have white skin, they are sometimes victims of similar ‘othering’ than non white people. There are some who categorise travellers into ‘true Romanys’ (sp?)=good, and Irish ‘pikey’ travellers =bad. It does not go unnoticed that the Irish angle is mentioned, it taps in to centuries old anti Irish racism. However for the majority of Irish or Irish heritage people their skin colour can help them keep their identity on the down low, and therefore avoid the hatred that is based on the way they look.
I think trying to put the Gypsy community into just two groups is over simplifying it. There are many different groups of gypsies and nowadays only a small proportion are of Irish decent compared to yesteryear.
Blimey, what a thread. Hope WIWALB gets some resolution.
On the "white people can't be victims of racism" stuff, I'd go along with the idea that prejudice is what most white people face in those sort of uncomfortable situations in the UK because racism implies a degree of power. But Jews and Travellers are also white, and I think it's wrong to say that what they experience isn't racism. In particular, Travellers experience of policing is similar to other ethnic minorities. Nor does the other side of the coin hold true - that people from a minority heritage can't be racist when given the power - because no one's going to convince me that Priti Patel isn't a racist.
Travellers experience of policing is similar to other ethnic minorities???
Could be true. In terms of skin colour it doesn’t matter if travellers have white skin, they are sometimes victims of similar ‘othering’ than non white people. There are some who categorise travellers into ‘true Romanys’ (sp?)=good, and Irish ‘pikey’ travellers =bad. It does not go unnoticed that the Irish angle is mentioned, it taps in to centuries old anti Irish racism. However for the majority of Irish or Irish heritage people their skin colour can help them keep their identity on the down low, and therefore avoid the hatred that is based on the way they look.
I think trying to put the Gypsy community into just two groups is over simplifying it. There are many different groups of gypsies and nowadays only a small proportion are of Irish decent compared to yesteryear.
Every single minority is always tarred with this brush.
I'm sure I could find a quote like this for every single minority that people have a negative view on:
"Criminologist Professor Liz Yardley said: "The findings suggest that there is an association between the presence of a traveller site and a crime rate increase or a higher crime rate.
"But it’s not just the presence of a traveller site that will affect the crime rate, there are other factors as well. So there are things like population stability, population composition, poverty, deprivation.""
These are quotes that have always been parroted when immigrants settle in an area. First the Black Communities, then the Irish and now you see it increasingly about Muslim and middle-east settlers.
Blimey, what a thread. Hope WIWALB gets some resolution.
On the "white people can't be victims of racism" stuff, I'd go along with the idea that prejudice is what most white people face in those sort of uncomfortable situations in the UK because racism implies a degree of power. But Jews and Travellers are also white, and I think it's wrong to say that what they experience isn't racism. In particular, Travellers experience of policing is similar to other ethnic minorities. Nor does the other side of the coin hold true - that people from a minority heritage can't be racist when given the power - because no one's going to convince me that Priti Patel isn't a racist.
Travellers experience of policing is similar to other ethnic minorities???
Could be true. In terms of skin colour it doesn’t matter if travellers have white skin, they are sometimes victims of similar ‘othering’ than non white people. There are some who categorise travellers into ‘true Romanys’ (sp?)=good, and Irish ‘pikey’ travellers =bad. It does not go unnoticed that the Irish angle is mentioned, it taps in to centuries old anti Irish racism. However for the majority of Irish or Irish heritage people their skin colour can help them keep their identity on the down low, and therefore avoid the hatred that is based on the way they look.
I think trying to put the Gypsy community into just two groups is over simplifying it. There are many different groups of gypsies and nowadays only a small proportion are of Irish decent compared to yesteryear.
Every single minority is always tarred with this brush.
I'm sure I could find a quote like this for every single minority that people have a negative view on:
"Criminologist Professor Liz Yardley said: "The findings suggest that there is an association between the presence of a traveller site and a crime rate increase or a higher crime rate.
"But it’s not just the presence of a traveller site that will affect the crime rate, there are other factors as well. So there are things like population stability, population composition, poverty, deprivation.""
These are quotes that have always been parroted when immigrants settle in an area. First the Black Communities, then the Irish and now you see it increasingly about Muslim and middle-east settlers.
And if you see the reported crimes and complaints and speak to people who live in or work in those communities that can be relied upon to give a fair and objective view, then you are able to form a reasonable picture of what has/is going on.
You could for example to look in detail at those rates before, during and after any significant change (such as temporary 'residents', school holidays, when local amenities closed etc - all of which are examples of things that could affect those rates )
Every single minority is always tarred with this brush.
I'm sure I could find a quote like this for every single minority that people have a negative view on:
"Criminologist Professor Liz Yardley said: "The findings suggest that there is an association between the presence of a traveller site and a crime rate increase or a higher crime rate.
"But it’s not just the presence of a traveller site that will affect the crime rate, there are other factors as well. So there are things like population stability, population composition, poverty, deprivation.""
These are quotes that have always been parroted when immigrants settle in an area. First the Black Communities, then the Irish and now you see it increasingly about Muslim and middle-east settlers.
And if you see the reported crimes and complaints and speak to people who live in or work in those communities that can be relied upon to give a fair and objective view, then you are able to form a reasonable picture of what has/is going on.
You could for example to look in detail at those rates before, during and after any significant change (such as temporary 'residents', school holidays, when local amenities closed etc - all of which are examples of things that could affect those rates )
Here is where you argument falls down.
Maybe look into economic factors the same as you would with poor white people that commit crimes. Rather than tarnishing all travellers under the same brush. What percentage of travellers are in poverty or in a low socio-economic household? I'd wager most.
'Travellers' that have accessed an education is very low and therefore the percentage that have a GCSE level C or above in English and Maths. There is a lack of a way to access the mainstream job market and they are discriminated against due to the lack of grades or schooling. Stuck making a living with their families and close friends.
Every single minority is always tarred with this brush.
I'm sure I could find a quote like this for every single minority that people have a negative view on:
"Criminologist Professor Liz Yardley said: "The findings suggest that there is an association between the presence of a traveller site and a crime rate increase or a higher crime rate.
"But it’s not just the presence of a traveller site that will affect the crime rate, there are other factors as well. So there are things like population stability, population composition, poverty, deprivation.""
These are quotes that have always been parroted when immigrants settle in an area. First the Black Communities, then the Irish and now you see it increasingly about Muslim and middle-east settlers.
And if you see the reported crimes and complaints and speak to people who live in or work in those communities that can be relied upon to give a fair and objective view, then you are able to form a reasonable picture of what has/is going on.
You could for example to look in detail at those rates before, during and after any significant change (such as temporary 'residents', school holidays, when local amenities closed etc - all of which are examples of things that could affect those rates )
Here is where you argument falls down.
Maybe look into economic factors the same as you would with poor white people that commit crimes. Rather than tarnishing all travellers under the same brush. What percentage of travellers are in poverty or in a low socio-economic household? I'd wager most.
Nothing has fallen down. Nowhere have I (ever) tarnished all travellers with the same brush, and never would do. Of course economic factors in AN example, as are the ones I quoted as 'examples' - I never said they were the only factors, just 'examples'.
This is where your argument breaks down - YOU are making incorrect assumptions about what others have (clearly) said and also mis-quoting others.
The economic factor would, for example, likely have an effect over a longer period than say, temporary visitors. And before you take an other leap to another incorrect conclusion, 'temporary visitors' who could cause a spike, could be one (or a combination) of many demographics, including a festival or other event (including football and other sport), students or a traveller site - caveat: these are examples and not an exhaustive list.
We can discuss crime pattern analysis if that would help, but I suspect not.
And 'income' and declared income are not necessarily the same thing.
Every single minority is always tarred with this brush.
I'm sure I could find a quote like this for every single minority that people have a negative view on:
"Criminologist Professor Liz Yardley said: "The findings suggest that there is an association between the presence of a traveller site and a crime rate increase or a higher crime rate.
"But it’s not just the presence of a traveller site that will affect the crime rate, there are other factors as well. So there are things like population stability, population composition, poverty, deprivation.""
These are quotes that have always been parroted when immigrants settle in an area. First the Black Communities, then the Irish and now you see it increasingly about Muslim and middle-east settlers.
And if you see the reported crimes and complaints and speak to people who live in or work in those communities that can be relied upon to give a fair and objective view, then you are able to form a reasonable picture of what has/is going on.
You could for example to look in detail at those rates before, during and after any significant change (such as temporary 'residents', school holidays, when local amenities closed etc - all of which are examples of things that could affect those rates )
Here is where you argument falls down.
Maybe look into economic factors the same as you would with poor white people that commit crimes. Rather than tarnishing all travellers under the same brush. What percentage of travellers are in poverty or in a low socio-economic household? I'd wager most.
'Travellers' that have accessed an education is very low and therefore the percentage that have a GCSE level C or above in English and Maths. There is a lack of a way to access the mainstream job market and they are discriminated against due to the lack of grades or schooling. Stuck making a living with their families and close friends.
Just one point on that - Going by those that I know, and being reasonably confident they don't have credit (possibly wouldn't qualify for it, even if they wanted it) they must be doing reasonably well to finance the caravans, vehicles, machines and plant they own.
Nothing has fallen down. Nowhere have I (ever) tarnished all travellers with the same brush, and never would do. Of course economic factors in AN example, as are the ones I quoted as 'examples' - I never said they were the only factors, just 'examples'.
This is where your argument breaks down - YOU are making incorrect assumptions about what others have (clearly) said and also mis-quoting others.
The economic factor would, for example, likely have an effect over a longer period than say, temporary visitors. And before you take an other leap to another incorrect conclusion, 'temporary visitors' who could cause a spike, could be one (or a combination of) of many demographics, including a festival or other event (including football and other sport), students or a traveller site - caveat: these are examples and not an exhaustive list.
We can discuss crime pattern analysis if that would help, but I suspect not.
That’s definitely not for this thread, it’s already been dragged down enough
Lol, not expecting it for one minute - just putting professional knowledge into the mix!
Every single minority is always tarred with this brush.
I'm sure I could find a quote like this for every single minority that people have a negative view on:
"Criminologist Professor Liz Yardley said: "The findings suggest that there is an association between the presence of a traveller site and a crime rate increase or a higher crime rate.
"But it’s not just the presence of a traveller site that will affect the crime rate, there are other factors as well. So there are things like population stability, population composition, poverty, deprivation.""
These are quotes that have always been parroted when immigrants settle in an area. First the Black Communities, then the Irish and now you see it increasingly about Muslim and middle-east settlers.
And if you see the reported crimes and complaints and speak to people who live in or work in those communities that can be relied upon to give a fair and objective view, then you are able to form a reasonable picture of what has/is going on.
You could for example to look in detail at those rates before, during and after any significant change (such as temporary 'residents', school holidays, when local amenities closed etc - all of which are examples of things that could affect those rates )
Here is where you argument falls down.
Maybe look into economic factors the same as you would with poor white people that commit crimes. Rather than tarnishing all travellers under the same brush. What percentage of travellers are in poverty or in a low socio-economic household? I'd wager most.
Nothing has fallen down. Nowhere have I (ever) tarnished all travellers with the same brush, and never would do. Of course economic factors in AN example, as are the ones I quoted as 'examples' - I never said they were the only factors, just 'examples'.
This is where your argument breaks down - YOU are making incorrect assumptions about what others have (clearly) said and also mis-quoting others.
The economic factor would, for example, likely have an effect over a longer period than say, temporary visitors. And before you take an other leap to another incorrect conclusion, 'temporary visitors' who could cause a spike, could be one (or a combination) of many demographics, including a festival or other event (including football and other sport), students or a traveller site - caveat: these are examples and not an exhaustive list.
We can discuss crime pattern analysis if that would help, but I suspect not.
And 'income' and declared income are not necessarily the same thing.
I believe in their view why should they declare to a country that they feel actively despises them?
Even if the 'cash in hand' jobs were totaled up, I've seen enough traveler sites to know that their standard of living isn't as high as people would assume it was.
Every single minority is always tarred with this brush.
I'm sure I could find a quote like this for every single minority that people have a negative view on:
"Criminologist Professor Liz Yardley said: "The findings suggest that there is an association between the presence of a traveller site and a crime rate increase or a higher crime rate.
"But it’s not just the presence of a traveller site that will affect the crime rate, there are other factors as well. So there are things like population stability, population composition, poverty, deprivation.""
These are quotes that have always been parroted when immigrants settle in an area. First the Black Communities, then the Irish and now you see it increasingly about Muslim and middle-east settlers.
And if you see the reported crimes and complaints and speak to people who live in or work in those communities that can be relied upon to give a fair and objective view, then you are able to form a reasonable picture of what has/is going on.
You could for example to look in detail at those rates before, during and after any significant change (such as temporary 'residents', school holidays, when local amenities closed etc - all of which are examples of things that could affect those rates )
Here is where you argument falls down.
Maybe look into economic factors the same as you would with poor white people that commit crimes. Rather than tarnishing all travellers under the same brush. What percentage of travellers are in poverty or in a low socio-economic household? I'd wager most.
Nothing has fallen down. Nowhere have I (ever) tarnished all travellers with the same brush, and never would do. Of course economic factors in AN example, as are the ones I quoted as 'examples' - I never said they were the only factors, just 'examples'.
This is where your argument breaks down - YOU are making incorrect assumptions about what others have (clearly) said and also mis-quoting others.
The economic factor would, for example, likely have an effect over a longer period than say, temporary visitors. And before you take an other leap to another incorrect conclusion, 'temporary visitors' who could cause a spike, could be one (or a combination) of many demographics, including a festival or other event (including football and other sport), students or a traveller site - caveat: these are examples and not an exhaustive list.
We can discuss crime pattern analysis if that would help, but I suspect not.
And 'income' and declared income are not necessarily the same thing.
I believe in their view why should they declare to a country that they feel actively despises them?
Even if the 'cash in hand' jobs were totaled up, I've seen enough traveler sites to know that their standard of living isn't as high as people would assume it was.
No who is using 'their' and stereotyping? There is a strong correlation between compliance and acceptance.
Every single minority is always tarred with this brush.
I'm sure I could find a quote like this for every single minority that people have a negative view on:
"Criminologist Professor Liz Yardley said: "The findings suggest that there is an association between the presence of a traveller site and a crime rate increase or a higher crime rate.
"But it’s not just the presence of a traveller site that will affect the crime rate, there are other factors as well. So there are things like population stability, population composition, poverty, deprivation.""
These are quotes that have always been parroted when immigrants settle in an area. First the Black Communities, then the Irish and now you see it increasingly about Muslim and middle-east settlers.
And if you see the reported crimes and complaints and speak to people who live in or work in those communities that can be relied upon to give a fair and objective view, then you are able to form a reasonable picture of what has/is going on.
You could for example to look in detail at those rates before, during and after any significant change (such as temporary 'residents', school holidays, when local amenities closed etc - all of which are examples of things that could affect those rates )
Here is where you argument falls down.
Maybe look into economic factors the same as you would with poor white people that commit crimes. Rather than tarnishing all travellers under the same brush. What percentage of travellers are in poverty or in a low socio-economic household? I'd wager most.
Nothing has fallen down. Nowhere have I (ever) tarnished all travellers with the same brush, and never would do. Of course economic factors in AN example, as are the ones I quoted as 'examples' - I never said they were the only factors, just 'examples'.
This is where your argument breaks down - YOU are making incorrect assumptions about what others have (clearly) said and also mis-quoting others.
The economic factor would, for example, likely have an effect over a longer period than say, temporary visitors. And before you take an other leap to another incorrect conclusion, 'temporary visitors' who could cause a spike, could be one (or a combination) of many demographics, including a festival or other event (including football and other sport), students or a traveller site - caveat: these are examples and not an exhaustive list.
We can discuss crime pattern analysis if that would help, but I suspect not.
And 'income' and declared income are not necessarily the same thing.
I believe in their view why should they declare to a country that they feel actively despises them?
Even if the 'cash in hand' jobs were totaled up, I've seen enough traveler sites to know that their standard of living isn't as high as people would assume it was.
No who is using 'their' and stereotyping? There is a strong correlation between compliance and acceptance.
Exactly. Society doesn't tolerate alternate ways of living and then blames the minority for not fitting in with them.
Nothing has fallen down. Nowhere have I (ever) tarnished all travellers with the same brush, and never would do. Of course economic factors in AN example, as are the ones I quoted as 'examples' - I never said they were the only factors, just 'examples'.
This is where your argument breaks down - YOU are making incorrect assumptions about what others have (clearly) said and also mis-quoting others.
The economic factor would, for example, likely have an effect over a longer period than say, temporary visitors. And before you take an other leap to another incorrect conclusion, 'temporary visitors' who could cause a spike, could be one (or a combination) of many demographics, including a festival or other event (including football and other sport), students or a traveller site - caveat: these are examples and not an exhaustive list.
We can discuss crime pattern analysis if that would help, but I suspect not.
And 'income' and declared income are not necessarily the same thing.
I believe in their view why should they declare to a country that they feel actively despises them?
Even if the 'cash in hand' jobs were totaled up, I've seen enough traveler sites to know that their standard of living isn't as high as people would assume it was.
No who is using 'their' and stereotyping? There is a strong correlation between compliance and acceptance.
Exactly. Society doesn't tolerate alternate ways of living and then blames the minority for not fitting in with them.
No, not exactly. But you either aren't seeing the wider picture or don't to. So no point continuing the discussion. I have explained why my argument hasn't fallen down but yours has. You are entitled to your opinion.
I I always found that at the fairground while riding on the walzers, that shouting ‘come on you gypos, is that the best you’ve got’ was guaranteed to get a rose out of the people twirling the waltzers around no matter whether the colour of their skin, whether their roots were Romany or Irish or both. I saw it as a unifying force in the end 😂😂😱 the one think everyone other than me can agree on is that I’m a prick 😁
Blimey, what a thread. Hope WIWALB gets some resolution.
On the "white people can't be victims of racism" stuff, I'd go along with the idea that prejudice is what most white people face in those sort of uncomfortable situations in the UK because racism implies a degree of power. But Jews and Travellers are also white, and I think it's wrong to say that what they experience isn't racism. In particular, Travellers experience of policing is similar to other ethnic minorities. Nor does the other side of the coin hold true - that people from a minority heritage can't be racist when given the power - because no one's going to convince me that Priti Patel isn't a racist.
Travellers experience of policing is similar to other ethnic minorities???
Could be true. In terms of skin colour it doesn’t matter if travellers have white skin, they are sometimes victims of similar ‘othering’ than non white people. There are some who categorise travellers into ‘true Romanys’ (sp?)=good, and Irish ‘pikey’ travellers =bad. It does not go unnoticed that the Irish angle is mentioned, it taps in to centuries old anti Irish racism. However for the majority of Irish or Irish heritage people their skin colour can help them keep their identity on the down low, and therefore avoid the hatred that is based on the way they look.
My understanding is that the general consensus that they are not treated fairly by the police and local authorities - that they are treated far too leniently and not dealt with as they should be
That may well be the general consensus but it just indicates the amount of racism in our society. I can remember seeing "No travellers" signs in pubs in Lewisham less than 25 years ago, which would never have happened with any other ethnic group. One of my Traveller mates has described how when the police came to his home they were slagging off his mum and being totally disrespectful just to get him to respond so they could nick him or kick him in or both. He gets stopped all the time and regularly attacked by either cops or racists.
I suspect the general consensus 30-40 years ago was that black people were inherently criminal. Assuming that one ethnic group is all going to behave in one way is kind of the textbook definition of racism - you're not seeing the people only the stereotype.
I know for a fact that Pykies were causing considerable problems in some Lewisham pubs and a couple were closed down/went out of business as a result.
Every single minority is always tarred with this brush.
I'm sure I could find a quote like this for every single minority that people have a negative view on:
"Criminologist Professor Liz Yardley said: "The findings suggest that there is an association between the presence of a traveller site and a crime rate increase or a higher crime rate.
"But it’s not just the presence of a traveller site that will affect the crime rate, there are other factors as well. So there are things like population stability, population composition, poverty, deprivation.""
These are quotes that have always been parroted when immigrants settle in an area. First the Black Communities, then the Irish and now you see it increasingly about Muslim and middle-east settlers.
And if you see the reported crimes and complaints and speak to people who live in or work in those communities that can be relied upon to give a fair and objective view, then you are able to form a reasonable picture of what has/is going on.
You could for example to look in detail at those rates before, during and after any significant change (such as temporary 'residents', school holidays, when local amenities closed etc - all of which are examples of things that could affect those rates )
Here is where you argument falls down.
Maybe look into economic factors the same as you would with poor white people that commit crimes. Rather than tarnishing all travellers under the same brush. What percentage of travellers are in poverty or in a low socio-economic household? I'd wager most.
Nothing has fallen down. Nowhere have I (ever) tarnished all travellers with the same brush, and never would do. Of course economic factors in AN example, as are the ones I quoted as 'examples' - I never said they were the only factors, just 'examples'.
This is where your argument breaks down - YOU are making incorrect assumptions about what others have (clearly) said and also mis-quoting others.
The economic factor would, for example, likely have an effect over a longer period than say, temporary visitors. And before you take an other leap to another incorrect conclusion, 'temporary visitors' who could cause a spike, could be one (or a combination) of many demographics, including a festival or other event (including football and other sport), students or a traveller site - caveat: these are examples and not an exhaustive list.
We can discuss crime pattern analysis if that would help, but I suspect not.
And 'income' and declared income are not necessarily the same thing.
I believe in their view why should they declare to a country that they feel actively despises them?
Even if the 'cash in hand' jobs were totaled up, I've seen enough traveler sites to know that their standard of living isn't as high as people would assume it was.
Wtf. They soon get themselves to the dentist or doctor or hospital etc. Are you saying that they shouldn't contribute
Blimey, what a thread. Hope WIWALB gets some resolution.
On the "white people can't be victims of racism" stuff, I'd go along with the idea that prejudice is what most white people face in those sort of uncomfortable situations in the UK because racism implies a degree of power. But Jews and Travellers are also white, and I think it's wrong to say that what they experience isn't racism. In particular, Travellers experience of policing is similar to other ethnic minorities. Nor does the other side of the coin hold true - that people from a minority heritage can't be racist when given the power - because no one's going to convince me that Priti Patel isn't a racist.
Travellers experience of policing is similar to other ethnic minorities???
Could be true. In terms of skin colour it doesn’t matter if travellers have white skin, they are sometimes victims of similar ‘othering’ than non white people. There are some who categorise travellers into ‘true Romanys’ (sp?)=good, and Irish ‘pikey’ travellers =bad. It does not go unnoticed that the Irish angle is mentioned, it taps in to centuries old anti Irish racism. However for the majority of Irish or Irish heritage people their skin colour can help them keep their identity on the down low, and therefore avoid the hatred that is based on the way they look.
I think trying to put the Gypsy community into just two groups is over simplifying it. There are many different groups of gypsies and nowadays only a small proportion are of Irish decent compared to yesteryear.
If you read my post timed at 12.27 you will see I mentioned other travelling people too.
Guys, we're veering off into general racial politics, which as someone has already mentioned should really go over in the House of Commoners if you want to carry on discussing it. We don't want to end up having to close the thread in case @WhenIwasLittleBoy needs to update further.
Every single minority is always tarred with this brush.
I'm sure I could find a quote like this for every single minority that people have a negative view on:
"Criminologist Professor Liz Yardley said: "The findings suggest that there is an association between the presence of a traveller site and a crime rate increase or a higher crime rate.
"But it’s not just the presence of a traveller site that will affect the crime rate, there are other factors as well. So there are things like population stability, population composition, poverty, deprivation.""
These are quotes that have always been parroted when immigrants settle in an area. First the Black Communities, then the Irish and now you see it increasingly about Muslim and middle-east settlers.
And if you see the reported crimes and complaints and speak to people who live in or work in those communities that can be relied upon to give a fair and objective view, then you are able to form a reasonable picture of what has/is going on.
You could for example to look in detail at those rates before, during and after any significant change (such as temporary 'residents', school holidays, when local amenities closed etc - all of which are examples of things that could affect those rates )
Here is where you argument falls down.
Maybe look into economic factors the same as you would with poor white people that commit crimes. Rather than tarnishing all travellers under the same brush. What percentage of travellers are in poverty or in a low socio-economic household? I'd wager most.
Nothing has fallen down. Nowhere have I (ever) tarnished all travellers with the same brush, and never would do. Of course economic factors in AN example, as are the ones I quoted as 'examples' - I never said they were the only factors, just 'examples'.
This is where your argument breaks down - YOU are making incorrect assumptions about what others have (clearly) said and also mis-quoting others.
The economic factor would, for example, likely have an effect over a longer period than say, temporary visitors. And before you take an other leap to another incorrect conclusion, 'temporary visitors' who could cause a spike, could be one (or a combination) of many demographics, including a festival or other event (including football and other sport), students or a traveller site - caveat: these are examples and not an exhaustive list.
We can discuss crime pattern analysis if that would help, but I suspect not.
And 'income' and declared income are not necessarily the same thing.
I believe in their view why should they declare to a country that they feel actively despises them?
Even if the 'cash in hand' jobs were totaled up, I've seen enough traveler sites to know that their standard of living isn't as high as people would assume it was.
Wtf. They soon get themselves to the dentist or doctor or hospital etc. Are you saying that they shouldn't contribute
I would obviously prefer them to be a part of society.
Feel like there should be more reach out programmes than telling them that they should be 'dealt with'.
Apropos of nothing really regarding actual subject matter of this thread, where did the term pikey originate ( from an offensive point of view ) does it mean something ?
Mick Everitt has been a top man in all of this. The steward in question has been permanently banned from the club, as well as other proposals to the security company. He is not that happy with the security company as they have failed to come back to the club with a full report as requested
I was sat in the Covered End Upper today, I booed the taking of the knee. At the end of the game a black lady in the front row and said I was a racist because I booed. I replied with how did she come to that conclusion and what does taking the knee achieve. She then repeated her earlier comment, then added I was a c***. Charming. My wife is Brasilian, my best mates are Swedes and Sri Lankan.
I was sat in the Covered End Upper today, I booed the taking of the knee. At the end of the game a black lady in the front row and said I was a racist because I booed. I replied with how did she come to that conclusion and what does taking the knee achieve. She then repeated her earlier comment, then added I was a c***. Charming. My wife is Brasilian, my best mates are Swedes and Sri Lankan.
Maybe not a racist , but right about you being a cnut
I was sat in the Covered End Upper today, I booed the taking of the knee. At the end of the game a black lady in the front row and said I was a racist because I booed. I replied with how did she come to that conclusion and what does taking the knee achieve. She then repeated her earlier comment, then added I was a c***. Charming. My wife is Brasilian, my best mates are Swedes and Sri Lankan.
I had a feeling she was going to say something to you - not sure why she left it until the end of the game though.
As CLB says. She was right about the Cnut bit though.
Are you saying booing of taking the knee is justified of being called a racist, and a c***?
Comments
There are many different groups of gypsies and nowadays only a small proportion are of Irish decent compared to yesteryear.
I'm sure I could find a quote like this for every single minority that people have a negative view on:
"Criminologist Professor Liz Yardley said: "The findings suggest that there is an association between the presence of a traveller site and a crime rate increase or a higher crime rate.
"But it’s not just the presence of a traveller site that will affect the crime rate, there are other factors as well. So there are things like population stability, population composition, poverty, deprivation.""
These are quotes that have always been parroted when immigrants settle in an area. First the Black Communities, then the Irish and now you see it increasingly about Muslim and middle-east settlers.
You could for example to look in detail at those rates before, during and after any significant change (such as temporary 'residents', school holidays, when local amenities closed etc - all of which are examples of things that could affect those rates )
Maybe look into economic factors the same as you would with poor white people that commit crimes. Rather than tarnishing all travellers under the same brush. What percentage of travellers are in poverty or in a low socio-economic household? I'd wager most.
'Travellers' that have accessed an education is very low and therefore the percentage that have a GCSE level C or above in English and Maths. There is a lack of a way to access the mainstream job market and they are discriminated against due to the lack of grades or schooling. Stuck making a living with their families and close friends.
This is where your argument breaks down - YOU are making incorrect assumptions about what others have (clearly) said and also mis-quoting others.
The economic factor would, for example, likely have an effect over a longer period than say, temporary visitors. And before you take an other leap to another incorrect conclusion, 'temporary visitors' who could cause a spike, could be one (or a combination) of many demographics, including a festival or other event (including football and other sport), students or a traveller site - caveat: these are examples and not an exhaustive list.
We can discuss crime pattern analysis if that would help, but I suspect not.
And 'income' and declared income are not necessarily the same thing.
Even if the 'cash in hand' jobs were totaled up, I've seen enough traveler sites to know that their standard of living isn't as high as people would assume it was.
No need for everyone to jump in and agree btw
They soon get themselves to the dentist or doctor or hospital etc.
Are you saying that they shouldn't contribute
Feel like there should be more reach out programmes than telling them that they should be 'dealt with'.
does it mean something ?
At the end of the game a black lady in the front row and said I was a racist because I booed. I replied with how did she come to that conclusion and what does taking the knee achieve. She then repeated her earlier comment, then added I was a c***. Charming.
My wife is Brasilian, my best mates are Swedes and Sri Lankan.