For those interested in learning more about the Romani, this is an excellent site by the way. I haven't read it in a year or so but found it to be interesting when I did.

The Patrin Web Journal

You cant say 'i hate travellers because they leave rubbish and break into peoples houses'

Hello, walk down your street and see the amount of dumped rubbish and litter there is, and hell, there are thousands of white brittish people that break into peoples houses everyday.

I think its disgusting how people generalise so much.

And Lizzie, how do you know that gypsies/travelers dont work? I know my gypsies relatives all do, they give back something in the community they live in. And im sorry, but i think you should be ashamed about what you said about asylum seekers.

---

by Funky Monkey

(quotes)

*winces* Is that all they're good for? That's already the case in America where Hispanics primarily do the menial jobs other Americans don't want to do.

---

I want no part of this argument, although I'm fascinated by what you've all been writing. Just de-lurking momentarily to say, Latinos in the US do a lot more than menial jobs. Many recently-arrived Latinos (often illegal immigrants) do work at a large percentage of low-paid jobs, primarily because they will work for lower wages that many Americans will accept. The key is primarily the pay, not the nature of the job.

OK, leaving and returning you to the main topic...

---

by KaTiEStar
You cant say 'i hate travellers because they leave rubbish and break into peoples houses'

Hello, walk down your street and see the amount of dumped rubbish and litter there is, and hell, there are thousands of white brittish people that break into peoples houses everyday.

I think its disgusting how people generalise so much.

---

Not trying to get into a fight here but you're generalising the state of the environment across the country. Where I leave is surprisingly clean compared to a lot of places I've seen and been to, and so when the travellers basically turned their little corner into a dump it really stood out.

Not touching the burglary thing, not really the crux of the issue.

---

by KaTiEStar
You cant say 'i hate travellers because they leave rubbish and break into peoples houses'

---

Sorry if I've misunderstood your meaning here (please say so if that's the case which it probably is), but oh yes I can!

I don't drop litter and I sure as hell don't break into other people's houses (or mine - this key sure is handy! ) and I've never gone round thumping people and swearing at them in car parks, or whatever.

I like to think I am respectful of other people's land and property, etc. (and I've never had someone complain to suggest otherwise) so I think I should entitled, like other people here, to be angry at other people who treat us and others with such disrespect - why should we respect the rights of those who don't disrespect ours?

And before someone bitches at me, I'm only angry at the people who're specifically known to be pains in the community's collective arse - not travellers in general!

Thats my point, you cant say you hate them as a collective, because everyone is different.

There does seem to be a little bit of government switch and bait here.. first you stop making provision for travellers to live anywhere, and then you complain that they're staying in places they don't have permission to stay in.

It's a lovely spin trick, you ask "why should travellers get to use the human rights act to ignore the laws that apply to everyone else" and sidestep the obvious question why are that apply to everyone else consistently judged by courts to be infringing on travellers human rights?.

The Independent today had an interesting opinion piece comparing Michael Howard's previous support of Section 28 (banning local councils from "promoting" homosexuality) to his attacks on travellers and immigration. At the moment he's willing to give up their votes to take advantage of a wider prejudice that exists against them, but I wouldn't be suprised if in 10 years we start to realise how ridiculous that prejudice looks.

That's not to say that there aren't issues with some travellers (much as any minority population, tbh). There are examples on this thread about people being burgled and litter being left. Those are arguments that used to be used about black people. They're thieves, they don't integrate with society etc. etc. The way to discourage all of these things is with friendliness, not by pushing travellers further away from the rest of the population. Sometimes, though, that takes a while to sink into a nation's consciousness, and in the meantime; just like with homophobia, with racism and with sexism in the past, political parties will in trying to reflect the views of the people seek to capitalize.

Unfortunately, traveller communities tend to be very closed in my experience. Attempts by outsiders to be friendly are often snubbed, if not greeted with open hostility. Many people find travellers intimidating, as well. I've known several occasions where groups of travellers have come into local bowling alleys and snooker halls in gangs of up to 15 at a time. They were very often rude, loud and disruptive, muscling other customers out just by being louder than everyone else.

Along with most other people in this thread, I have no problem with "genuine" gypsies or the many perfectly decent, honest travellers that I'm sure are around. Unfortunately, the noisy few have put most people off because they're just plain anti-social.

This has nothing to do with racism.
Firstly, I'm not entirely sure that travellers of that sort are a different race anyway. If 3 generations ago, your forebear chose to leave his birthplace and live in a van, does that create an entire race? Or just a different social group?
Secondly, I don't dislike travellers per se. I dislike people who muscle their way into a community, take everything they can from it without contributing a damn thing, then whine if someone asks them to please not dig a midden 3 feet from your back garden.

If you want a travelling lifestyle, that's fine. But true travellers have always accepted that they can only stay anywhere for a short time. "Proper" gypsies have spent a good century camping somewhere for a bit, then moving on. So how can modern "travellers" complain? Why not move? Isn't that the point? If they want to stay somewhere long-term, why not rent a house? You have the same option to move on after a while if you want to, and you don't have to use a chemical toilet.

---

by Kate
Firstly, I'm not entirely sure that travellers of that sort are a different race anyway. If 3 generations ago, your forebear chose to leave his birthplace and live in a van, does that create an entire race?

---

That would just be a different social group. However as I mentioned earlier Romani people are a race whose origin goes back a few thousand years - there are believed to be between 5 and 10 million Romani living in the world today, most concentrated in Europe. Not all travellers are Romani. There are also Irish Travellers for instance. There are far fewer Irish travellers though (around 15,000 estimated in Britain).

---

Secondly, I don't dislike travellers per se. I dislike people who muscle their way into a community, take everything they can from it without contributing a damn thing, then whine if someone asks them to please not dig a midden 3 feet from your back garden.

---

Well call them Chavs then...but don't have a go at an entire race. Nobody on here seems to like chavs (who are generally white), for the same reasons. That's not to say that people on here dislike working class people. It's making the distinction that's important. I haven't got a problem with calling people Chav's because you're calling them names for their *actions* not the race or social class they belong to.

---

by Funky Monkey
(quotes)

For one, by "gypsies" you're referring to a race of people, and it can be considered in the pejorative at that. I'm sure you can see that if you reworded your phrase as:

"I used to be sympathetic to paki's, until they broke into my house and stole heap loads of stuff.", that it doesn't sound so good? I'm not having a go - i reckon you just weren't aware of that.

(quotes)

*winces* Is that all they're good for? That's already the case in America where Hispanics primarily do the menial jobs other Americans don't want to do.

---

Well it's better than saying they don't belong at all. They however work hard and are unfortunatley paid badly but the little money they do get, it is more money than most had ever received before. Also they have a sense of belonging and some can afford to send money home. We had a workshop at school about it and that's how I know this. Also it's a point of view I'm taught at school so maybe we should have a whole topic on education...?

And also thanks for pointing that out, I have no idea what's PC

Katie - I didn't say they don't work at all and see above re comments on what I said. But I'm not ashamed at all. It's true, it doesn't mean I agree with it.

Oh let me just add I think travellers are fine unless they dump their rubbish on land. I think it's disgusting and although it's an sight for sore eyes I'm more concerned with the fact that it's dangerous, especially to animals. I don't hold a grudge however the fact that they stole items from my house. And before anyone says, the guy was caught running away with one of our bikes and he was part of the travellers 1/2 mile up the road...


(Edited by lizzieslayer 23/03/2005 18:45)

If you dont agree with it, dont use it as part of your justification.

It's easier to use it as part of my justification, even if I don't wholly agree. I am lazy

---

by Funky Monkey
Ah a classic "chambler the rambler" reply

---

Suitable discription I guess I didn't pick the nick for nothing

---

Doesn't mean that governments shouldn't be trying to solve a problem that isn't about to go away.

---

Well they are "travelers" so from a local viewpoint (which building permissions etc are) it is a problem that will go away

---

It's not that tricky really, if the government spent money on facilities they would have less of the problems caused by unauthorised sites and probably save money in the long run.

---

Totally true however that is if you consider this problem a "national" problem if the scope of the problem is local getting them to shift their vans to another town saves you loads of money as a council
Also this still leaves the issue of funding facilities for people that are breaking the law which is every tricky to "sell" politically. Same problem occures with druggies.... if you supply them with free & safe shots they will not have to break into your car anymore therefore effectivly saving the community shitloads of money. As the damages that they cause don't weight up against the cost of dispensing free drugs...... however except from in NL I haven't seen many countries where this idea really took off for some reason

Lets just say there are more votes to win aggressivly fighting these things than there are to show a solution which will "directly" cost the tax payer money

---

Oh come on! People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Our nations native populations have plenty of problem people, take chavs as an example.

---

Aslong as you make your house of security glass no issue there But don't you find it strange that if a group in general has an image problem because of crime etc but also has the social ties to solve this image problem doesn't use it? In the Netherlands we had loads of trouble with groups of Turkish and Marocan kids causing problems in cinemas etc. The Turkish and Marocan society as a whole decided okay this rubs off badly on us as a group so they solved the issue. The (respected) elders / fathers in those groups took turn in accompanying these groups to cinemas etc and confronting them with their actions. Effectivly stopping the problems.

Sure this is more than can be expected by a group / society but it does show that a group / society isn't powerless in solving at least some of the problems they are faced with due to these different factors which play a role in these groups.

---

by Kate
Firstly, I'm not entirely sure that travellers of that sort are a different race anyway. If 3 generations ago, your forebear chose to leave his birthplace and live in a van, does that create an entire race?

---

Well this is how it started in the early days for the Romani

---

by Kate
Many people find travellers intimidating, as well. I've known several occasions where groups of travellers have come into local bowling alleys and snooker halls in gangs of up to 15 at a time. They were very often rude, loud and disruptive, muscling other customers out just by being louder than everyone else.

---

Sounds like a T21 meet...

---

by PictureOfFlowers
(quotes)

Sounds like a T21 meet...

---

*REALLY* FOFL

I personally think that there should be land specifically for gypsies. I don't think its right for them to camp on peoples land without permission, for example if they were all in your back garden one morning you would be a bit annoyed. Whenever they have been here in he past I have only really nkown them to cause trouble. I'm not saying they all cause trouble or anything, but whenever they have been camping in car parks, fields or whatever then what i've personally seen and heard hasn't been all that nice at all. The children would poo in peoples gardens (peopel complained to the council about this) Lots of council generators and such were apparently stolen from one of the yards, the lsit goes on. However thats not to say that local people don't cause trouble as well when there are gypsies around as they will often smash up their caravan windows and call them abuse and what not, which then leads to the gypsies behavior to worsen and also the local peoples behavior. I don't think its neccesarily a kind of racism people feel against gypsies, I think its more that they live by very different rules to which we do and people tend to think they can get away with murder. Without sounding nasty here, I do hate it when the gypsies come to town cuz of the mess and noise and trouble we tend to have, but i'd agree its also the locals fault with what tends to happen here. If the gypsies were given their own land to camp on then, which has been done in the past, I think it certainly makes things less chaotic, although seeing a programme on it recently, people still complaned then about the noise and huge fires being made and such. But yes I think they should be allowed their own land

I've been thinking of a solution which may or may not work, i'm not very up on these things, but i thought i'd share anyway

Why not have designated areas throughout the country, pieces of land i mean, that travellers/gypsies can either rent or buy if they plan to stay for any length of time. they will also have to pay council tax on this as well as being expected to work with paying taxes (rather than cash in hand) or claim benefits in the proper way if they don't earn enough like many people do. Having designated areas of land that would be legal for them to park and live in their caravans would hopefully prevent them from setiing up camp in parks and carparks and the like, and as they would have the option to rent for a short period of time, the option would still be there if they wanted to move on in the future.

Someone was saying earlier something about the land needing planning permission or something, what i'm proposing is that this land would be specified for the travellers caravans.

I understand that there would be issues in the short term finding this designated land as many people would have problems no matter where the land was, but in the long term knowing where it is would be better as you're not going to suddenly open your curtains one morning to a load of caravans

Am i making any sort of sense

This is really interesting. Because I often talk about it with my guitar teacher, who has very strong gypsy roots. The thing is, he lives in Crays Hill, and has all his life, which is also site of one of the biggest 'gypsy' sites in the UK. The thing is, the term gypsy is used so loosely nowadays, because from it's original meaning to the type of people who have lived pretty much in peace for hundreds of years as my guitar teachers family has, and i'm guessing Katie's too, it has evolved into a broad term for pikey disgusting people who as my mum says "are called Lee, live in a caravan and claim income support."

I am not strongly opposed to people who live harmoniously in society. I have just as much of a problem with 'pikeys' as I do with people who steal stuff and cause crime and don't contribute to society that live in houses and pay tax. If someone doesn't want to wash - fine. If someone wants to park on someone elses land with the permission of the owner - fine. But I don't approve of anyone in society doing crime, wether they're 'gypsy' black, white, tall, short, gay, whatever.

Also in Crays Hill, when a group of these "fake gypsies" (so says my guitar teacher) came to town, and all the children started going to the school, there was so much problems within the school, that the majority of the children left, grades went down, the headtacher resigned, and now it's just appalling. So yeah, if the moving on of these people will make society better, why not?

I also live near a really big gypsy site, and I've come face to face with them stealing from my local shop, been shouted at by some of them, was in the shop when they started a fight last year, if anyone remembers. The woman who lived in my house before me was burgled relentlessly. You don't go out at night because you get your jaw broken. I think this is why people feel so angry at gypsies, wether it's right or wrong, there's still a big problem with it at the moment, and doing nothing is not good enough for me. I'm not saying people should be treated as lower class citizens, I think everyone should be equal, and everyone deserves a place to live and live the lifestyle they want.. AS LONG AS THEY'RE NOT HURTING ANYONE.

So then the problem comes - who are the real gypsies and who aren't? My mum works for the benefits agency, and when she worked in one department, she had to go out to alot of gypsy sites, and people had guns, and no one would give their real names, so it is so hard to prosecute the people who are just living off the council and doing crime.

Asylum seekers, gypsies, whoever. I don't believe in a social divide, I welcome people as long as they contribute to society. Simple as that really.

---

by lil_miss

Why not have designated areas throughout the country, pieces of land i mean, that travellers/gypsies can either rent or buy if they plan to stay for any length of time.

---

I beleive they ahve done this, I was watching a programme about it the other night. However it still seemed to cause a lot of trouble with the people surrounding it and eventually the gypsies were arrested and told to move on and the things they had build were all torn down.

---

by Miss Corrupt
Asylum seekers, gypsies, whoever. I don't believe in a social divide, I welcome people as long as they contribute to society. Simple as that really.

---

I would agree with this. I personaly have never lived anywhere that has been near Romani or other travellers settlements, so my interest is so far purely academic, and I can't talk from experience. The thing I was trying to get across in my posts was that you have a right to complain about specific people causing trouble, but that it's all to easy to pin the blame on an entire ethnic group. I still hear a lot of racist views from taxi drivers and most of what they say is utter crap. Anywhere you've got groups of people who are not well off, and maybe don't have access to good education, you're gonna get problems with crime etc. Yes this is a problem, yes it needs tackling, but simply writing of entire ethnic groups as scum or whatever, isn't gonna make the problem better it's gonna make it worse.

That's my problem with the hardliners. The hardline approach always appeals to people who dont wanna think too hard, because the hardline approach is always the "simple" approach.

I don't pretend to know the answers but I believe that simply "moving them on" is a short term, short sighted approach, that shifts a problem elsewhere.

My defense of the Romani people is because one day last year I suddenly thought to myself (out of nowhere really) "I don't have a clue who Gypsies actually are..." so I went looking on the web and read. What I found was that these people have suffered a great deal of predudice and persecution and I don't like to see more of it because of ignorance.

You may find it interesting that the word "Gypsies" comes from the misconception a few hundred years back that these people were from Egypt. They were known as "'gyptians", then "Gypsies".