Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Fucking ilkley. fucking. fucking ilkley. seriously. how can people be so racist.
it is public property. they are Roma. they stayed for two nights. i saw not a dog and heard not a generator (though admittedly it was daytime). i saw no rubbish afterwards. there are no houses within several hundred meters of the field. they have only started staying on this field nearer the town centre because the council put fences up around one which was outside of the town (and visible to NO houses) because Ilkley residents complained that people were camping on it for about FOUR NIGHTS a year.
have you ever even met any? fucking scumbags, one and all
language? customs? i didnt slang words counted as a language. i wasnt even aware travelling the country in a caravan counted as a custom.
lots of things have been around for ages, doesnt legitimise it.
yes vikram, thanks for insulting me, because there's absolutely no ammunition that can be thrown back at you.
they dont have a language, god damnit, awful accents and slang, yes. and give me some examples of their customs.
as someone who had to put up with the fuckers before the police finally moved them on, and then leaving a cleaning bill of 5 grand for the local council to remove their fucking rubbish. then pavee point (the travellers rights thing) claiming that our town was being racist.
assumed it was the irish ones.
NO DOGS, NO BLACKS, NO IRISH.
Presumptuous, racist (since I agree that the Irish travellers constitute an ethnic group), pandering to stereotypes based purely on ethnicity, denying that people have a culture because you don't like them.
you make me do a little sick in my mouth.
Presumptuous - based on past experience, news reports, and hear say
racist - hahahahahah
denying that people have a culture because you don't like them. - both you and vikram keep talking about this culture. tell me more about it.
you make me do a little sick in my mouth. - hahahaha
if a group is recognised under UK law as a particular ethnic group, and you have a prejudice against them, based purely on the fact they are a member of this particular ethnic group (which is pretty much what you seem to be doing by denying they have any sort of culture, denying that they ARE an ethnic group, denying they have a language etc etc) then you are essentially a racist. sorry to break it to you. Irish travellers are recognised under the Race Relations Act...
Also, there are plenty of news reports about violence involving young, black people, you might have even been mugged yourself by a black person. would you then immediately presume that black communities have no culture, that black people are uniformly bad etc etc, because that's what you're doing with travellers/gypsies/pavees/whatever
bit of an overreaction?
i don't think most people would let someone get away with saying "Jews/blacks/asians are scumbags based on one bad, isolated experience I've had and some hearsay", this is no different.
before you can justifiably have a prejudice and not be considered a massive racist generally?
and people will have different answers.
A racist is one who would maybe only need one annecdotal experiance other people might need lots and then they will see only likelyhood of bad behaviour, others will see lots of examples and just assume all as being bad.
It varies and this is the crux of the problem of generalising and stereotyping, there can be some truth in some assumptions of probability of bejhaviour, yet unless you use statistical analysis of all casaes then it is flawed, it would also be flawed IF you used statistical analysis because even if 99% of all cars stolen are stolen by someone called Barry and if 90% of people called barry steal cars, then it would still be wrong to lock up all Barrys, however I would understand if people didnt let me near their keys, or wanted to keep an eye on me around cars
my friend was threatened with slash hooks, our equivalent of the RSPCA seized their horses off them (they had to be put down), etc., etc.
if your friend's anything like you, they probably deserved it.
how dear he, trying to feed a horse some grass
why are you bringing up the discrimination of black people? not much similarities. travellers choose to travel around. the government offers houses to them, they dont want them. they literally dont work, they live off government money and whatever "business" they conduct. they wont get employment, because of their reputation. they could avoid this reputation by settling.
and i rly wish you'd give me some examples of their culture and language, this is the third time ive asked.
and just because some things a law, doesnt mean that its right. i assume your next point will be comparing me to hitler and another reference to genociding the roma.
I was bringing it up because I was trying to demonstrate that being prejudiced towards an ethnic group is being racist and you don't seem to realise this.
Why shouldn't travellers travel? It's an important part of their culture, it's a tradition, a custom (there is an example). And don't say it's an irrelevant one or doesn't constitute an ethnic characteristic, it's integral to the existence of their culture. Why should they settle? What gives you the cultural superiority to think that your settled way of life is better than travelling?
Why did you put "business" in inverted commas? Maybe these people could get more employment if people like you weren't so racist.
As for culture & language:
I've never looked at any case studies, but I imagine constant travel doesn't provide a very stable upbringing for any of the kids involved. Foremost because it prevents any supra-group relationships developing and leads to an incredibly inward-looking group developing, arguably to an unhealthy extent. There's one reason that has nothing to do with 'cultural superiority'.
cant be arsed labouring this any further.
never heard about the arranged marriage, and im not sure the difference in family is that much different from a large unstable settled family
im not sure does being more superstitious than average count towards a relgion vikram.
at least you can bloody argue a point
after centuries of persecution really both you that much?
Also, according to the OED: Pertaining to race; peculiar to a race or nation; ethnological. Also, pertaining to or having common racial, cultural, religious, or linguistic characteristics, esp. designating a racial or other group within a larger system
That sounds like Roma, and indeed Irish travellers.
i despute that. racial - nope. cultural - eh? culture? whats their culture? religious - what? linguistic characteristics - on this one, you could argue that any area with a strong accent is an ethnicity.
that sounds like bullshit
Dude, you're talking about a group of people who were subjected to organised genocide and denying that their culture or sense of community has any worth, and frankly, that's tantamount to racism in my book.
but obviously i didn't ask them!
ilkley is making me suicidal
i manage to read about 100 pages of book a day and still have about 10million hours free. might organise a gig though yeh!
If your neighbours let their animals roam free and generally be a nuisance/let their children throw stones at your property/were noisy and inconsiderate/defecated in public, you'd complain, wouldn't you? The writer of that piece largely seems to stick to the events concerned, and doesn't appear to roam into generalisation at any point. Whether or not it's accurate or influenced by prejudice is difficult to prove or disprove, so I won't go into that.
I've had two personal experiences of travellers. The village where I live in Suffolk has an Irish gypsy camp nearby. I don't really think you can term them 'travellers', as they actually bought the land (which was poor and unusable) off of the farmer and have built street lights and shit. They don't cause much of a fuss... Some of the kids are a bit rowdy, but it's hard to tell them apart from the rowdy kids who live in ordinary houses most of the time, that's just how it goes. Though a few of them were convicted for shaving the serial numbers off of stolen BMWs and selling them for export about two years ago, so good hustle guys.
The other was when I did work experience for the local council, I went on a field thingy to a Irish traveller park in a wood near Needham Market in Suffolk. Like with the lot near where I live, it seemed they mainly kept themselves to themselves; the most trouble was caused by them beating up and setting dogs on each other over land 'claims' and domestic stuff - just bad neighbour stuff, really.
As for the 'race' thing... I've never seen anything that suggests they're such. It seems to me that if you took away the caravan they'd just be Irish Catholic folk with a working class mentality, on the whole. However, there is all kinds of ethnicity stuff going on though, created from both outside and within, with the two bouncing off of each other (as always). I imagine there's all sorts of inferiority-complex and siege mentality shit present, mostly in the kids. It's all a bit dolls experiment-ey.
I'm wondering whether to post this or not now... it's a bit vague. Ah whatever.
fucking hell, why don't you read the article at a base level instead of twisting it to fit your own conclusions you inverted Daily Mail tugjob
regardless of the fact that what people are complaining about aren't traditions (what does having a generator and loud dogs and shitting in public have to do with tradition?), just because something is traditional doesn't make it acceptable. western society has a 'tradition' of anti-semitism. does that make it acceptable for people to be anti-semitic? no. it doesn't.
or maybe the combination of the two. i felt angry anyway. and it was very typical of ilkley. mayeb you have to live there.
Complaining about a group of annoying people who happen to be of a certain culture.
Opening fire on a Holocaust Memorial Museum because you're a white supremacist.
These things are not in any way similar, or linked. Stop being a total moron.
was that Tristan's understanding of "racism" is a misnomer. I thought people would just 'get' that I was posting an example of a news story where his reaction would certainly be justified, y'know for contrast, without me having to explicitly say so. Morons.
The letter's basically saying "my holiday was interrupted by a bunch of irritating dickheads." I can't smell any hints of racism.
Theres a complete failure to understand any of the social, cultural, and political reasons why travellers might behave that way.
To all those who say like wrightylew, "The letter's basically saying "my holiday was interrupted by a bunch of irritating dickheads." I can't smell any hints of racism.". Fair enough, on face value.
But the sad fact remains that even if travellers were the most polite, delightful, well spoken and tidy people in the world, most 'normal' people would still treat them like shit.
Stereotypes do, unfortunately, in the majority of cases have grains of truth within them. Fact is, if for years the travelling community had been tidy, polite, friendly and engaging instead of insular, violent, rude and disruptive then their reputation would have changed as such.
In my experiences with travellers (of which I have had several) only once have I had positive memories of my interaction with them. Dickheads are dickheads whether they're black, white, yellow, striped, whatever. But it's also true that certain situations (mainly sociologically based) can lead to a more significant proportion of a group behaving in certain ways. It appears this was the case from the letter. I don't see how it's racist in any way. If it had been a family from say, Scunthorpe, camping there and the story was reported in the same way, would you have been so damning in your accusations RNRM?
what made me angry was that I saw absolutely no evidence of this reported behaviour and it seemed to me that conclusions were drawn from who these people were rather than what they were doing.
also, it works both ways, perhaps the (in my experience) definite majority of travellers who are unpleasant would be more inclined to get on with people if they hadn't been subject to centuries of abuse and mistrust, which stems from a time when towns and villages were pretty squalid, rough places anyway, simply because they were Irish/Roma/had different habits and customs.
It was also horribly white when I lived in south Manchester and east London.
sure, ilkley's white but you say i'm some sort of rural Elizabethan. Anyway, of course I'm keen to not look like a racist. I'd be mortified if someone thought I was.
Bradford, Leeds, Keighley, East London and South Manchester are all definitely NOT WHITE.
Basically my point is, you shouldn't feel so much sympathy for people when the majority of them would fleece you without a second thought.
1. as nauseatingly and hippy-ish as it sounds, i tend to approach everybody positively until they do something unpleasant.
2. i'm into second (and third) chances.
3. the very few people of various travelling communities i've met have been lovely people.
4. this is an overwhelmingly white town with lots and lots of nasty but respectable-faced middleclass racism bubbling under the surface and I'm very very vigilant of it.
not middle class. AHA!
What fucking part were you living in?!
it is in the metropolitan district of Bradford
Leeds is very close by.
i'm just offended that you think the only reason i might be interested in how people treat other people is to save face or something, and I was just demonstrating that you were wrong and I'd have absolutely no need to save face, especially based on your ridiculous comments.
you're hardly innocent of every bringing up current events discussions about your political opinions, and it's not like you spare everyone your views that women are for having tits for you to stare at or to lie there for you to copulate with before bringing meat and two veg, a can of lager and sucking you off underneath the table before spitting the cum into your dole cheque.
i don't know that many people who don't like me, i'm plenty different in real life, and all the people i wanna be friends with on here i am friends with
and besides, it's true. and besides, it's not like i'm more or less permanently victimised on here by people like you and zapsta by constantly questioning the intention or validity or anything i try to discuss. if you're not interested, why not refrain from posting? if you disagree with me, why not explain why rather than constantly trying to belittle me?
i thought i was disliked because i was effusively enthusiastic, idealistic and apparently self-conciously arty. that post was none of those things.
your ridiculously naive opinions(dont you dare call me a racist again, or turn this around and claim its because you "care", boy), and cringe worthy friendliness to women. oh, and posts like "i thought i was disliked because i was effusively enthusiastic, idealistic and apparently self-conciously arty".
youre what i imagine bamnan was like, before the breakdown
also, it's a music forum. of course people are going to be discussing other aspects of culture on the social board. i don't get all on my high-horse when people discuss sport that i don't know much about because i think they are trying to show off about it.
If I was given some gifts by travellers, I wouldn't slag them off.