Skip to content or view screen version

‘The management reserves the right to refuse any Gypsies or Travellers’

Ya Basta Media | 26.09.2010 18:12 | Anti-racism


Although a lengthy discussion of semantics isn’t exactly necessary, I think it is very important to clear up the terminology used to refer to travellers. It is by no means consistent and what people say can very often be very different to the meaning they intended. The blurring of definitions is also evident within Romany Gypsy and Irish Traveller communities themselves, as people may prefer to label themselves differently depending on their heritage, their current lifestyle and the way they wish to be interpreted. (Discussion on this topic from Gypsy Message Boards)

To try and make it as clear as possible, using the term ‘traveller’ can often be used as an umbrella for groups practising a travelling lifestyle. There are essentially two main groups which form this travelling population in this country (which is estimated at about 300,000), Irish Travellers and Romany Gypsies. Irish Travellers often referred to as Pavee, are descendents of nomadic people who roamed Ireland for hundreds of years. Romany Gypsies (‘Gypsy’ being a corruption of ‘Egyptian’, the land the Romany were falsely assumed to have hailed from) are descended from Northern Indian tribesman who left that region and migrated steadily westwards in medieval times. The Romany people have many different sub groups which are divided along lines of different territorial, cultural and linguistic lines.

It is also important to note that many Irish Travellers and Romany Gypsies no longer practice a travelling lifestyle, however still attach importance to their heritage.

Despite the different practices and heritage of the different groups of travellers, they are often referred to as a homogenous group because of their shared travelling lifestyle. This often happens in the media, where derogatory stories about Gypsies and travellers is commonplace and does nothing for improving the knowledge of consumers of such stories.

When in conversation discussing the racism which appears to be so acceptable when directed at Romany people and Irish Travellers a response which is common runs along the lines of ‘its not racist because they are not a different race’ which is not only ignorant of the facts that Pavee and Romany people are ethinically different from the other ‘English’, (Anglo-Saxons, Celts etc) but is also reflex to excuse the fear and mistreatment of a minority group.

Whether you call it racism or not, anti-Gypsy bigotry exists in a big way in this country and all over Europe, particularly fiercely in countries such as Romania, Hungary and Italy but what is most worrying about it is that it is more than acceptable. Although banning words from being heard is hardly any solution to racism, you will casually hear words like ‘gippo’ and ‘pikey’ on television and on the radio where you would never hear the words ‘paki’ and ‘nigger’. Although it is hard to fathom today, it is shocking to find that there are places in the UK where you will find signs beside the entrance to establishments to the effect of ‘We Do Not Serve Gypsies’ . Imagine the outrage if establishments refused to serve black people or Jews!

Although it would still be a battle for rights and equality, if the racism that faces travellers today were limited to words and the right-wing media, it would be a much easier task. However, this is not the case and across Europe travellers are quite literally in some cases, enemies of the state. The Italian government declared its Roma population a national security threat. Right-wing groups, notably in Italy and Hungary have used violently mobilised against local Roma populations, forcing them from their homes, burning down camps and even murdering Roma people.

In France, President Sarkozy is under fire from the EU after ordering the deportation of hundreds of its Roma population to Romania and Bulgaria, as officials have cracked down on the group holding them responsible for criminal activity. Closer to home, the new coalition government has reversed the decision to create ‘pitches’ within the jurisdiction of each local authority which aimed to reduce the problems associated with travellers forced to camp on private land. They are also carrying through new waves of evictions of established camps including Dale Farm, home to around 1000 people.

The right-wing media across Europe is constantly on a tirade against Gypsies, The Sun’s launching of a war on the Gypsy community, ‘STAMP ON THE CAMPS’ is just one example. Let us not forget that during the Holocaust, around 500,000 European Roma were executed by the Nazis, a huge percentage of their total population. Much of the rampant anti-Semitism which existed in Europe has since been eradicated after the terrible persecution of the Jews but today it seems as acceptable as ever to treat Romany Gypsies and Irish Travellers as second class citizens. Why?

 http://yabastamedia.wordpress.com/2010/09/26/%E2%80%98the-management-reserves-the-right-to-refuse-any-gypsies-or-travellers%E2%80%99/

Ya Basta Media
- e-mail: yabastamedia@gmail.com
- Homepage: http://yabastamedia.wordpress.com

Comments

Hide the following 13 comments

heard the term 'pikied' instead of 'stole' the other day...

26.09.2010 19:12

its disgusting and i 100% agree, but be careful not to become too eager a participant in the oppression olympics. its true that people are more aware of the effects and meanings of conventional racism, but it can sound like downplaying it to a less common/serious issue. cheers x

anchoredwunderlust


Agreed

26.09.2010 19:59

Bigotry toward Travellers is, for some reason, one area of race related bigotry that stubbornly refuses to go. While the majority of people accept that bigotry toward the black community, Asian community or Jewish community is no longer acceptable bigotry toward Travellers is still acceptable in the mainstream.
Never really understand why this is but as the OP states, if the attitudes displayed to travellers were ot be aimed at black people or Jews the offenders would be in severe trouble yet we still see signs refusing to serve travellers in pubs and pother conveniences.

As pointed out this is owrse on the continenet where Roma peoples are enfrcably moved, booted ouit of countries and face other unfair legislation and attacks.

It has to stop

IHTF


possibly slightly discriminatory, exclusionary and reductionist?

26.09.2010 20:52

Re. this comment:- 'To try and make it as clear as possible, using the term ‘traveller’ can often be used as an umbrella for groups practising a travelling lifestyle. There are essentially two main groups which form this travelling population in this country (which is estimated at about 300,000), Irish Travellers and Romany Gypsies.'

Is this comment not a little reductionist?

I agree with what you are saying, but what about the large contingent of people who are derogitarily referred to as 'new age travellers'? A term which is just as discriminatory in its own way. I know of many people who would be labelled as such by the mass media (esp Daily Mail etc) who's families have lived this way for generations and are themselves the grandchildren of families have lived on site/with a travelling lifestyle for generations. They can also find themselves victims of discrimination from 'normal'society as well as from the more traditional irish/Roma travellers, yet their choice to follow this way of life is equally/just as valid.
Also, what about those of us who sometimes live on site and sometimes live in squats yet still maintain or follow a travelling/ itinerant lifestyle. It seems to me that to exclude us from your definition of what it is that constitutes a 'traveller' by restricting your definition to your "essentially two groups' of 'Irish Travellers and Romany Gypsies'" is just as discriminatory and essentially excludes all those of us who have chosen an itinerant lifestyle (either in squats or on sites) outside of the societal norms of the orthodox capitalist liberal hegemony.

What are your thoughts on this matter?

anarcho squatter


@ anarcho squatter

26.09.2010 23:13

Cheers for you comments.

I hope you see that I did not aim to homogenise or to be reductionist in my description of traveller communites. I began from the starting point that a lot of people who will read the article will know very little about the distinctions between travellers and that to make some differentiations would be helpful.

In reference to the "essentially two groups' of 'Irish Travellers and Romany Gypsies", these are the two main groups of travellers in Britain, which comprise the vast majority of the travelling population. By using the term 'essentially', I hoped to indicate that this is not comprehensive and as you have correctly pointed out there are other groups and individuals which do not fit into these 'categories'.

It is very hard to make definitions between groups of travellers, something which is evident even within traveller communities and here I have aimed at making some rudimentry differentiations assuming that most people who read the article will be less informed than yourself.

Here is an interesting post with travellers debating how they prefer to be referred to from the Gypsy message Boards, which I used as a source, ( http://z10.invisionfree.com/GypsyMessageBoard1/index.php?showtopic=418&st=0). All other sources are listed on the main article ( http://yabastamedia.wordpress.com/2010/09/26/%E2%80%98the-management-reserves-the-right-to-refuse-any-gypsies-or-travellers%E2%80%99/)

Dan (Ya Basta)
mail e-mail: yabastamedia@gmail.com


@ anarcho squatter

26.09.2010 23:17

Cheers for you comments.

I hope you see that I did not aim to homogenise or to be reductionist in my description of traveller communites. I began from the starting point that a lot of people who will read the article will know very little about the distinctions between travellers and that to make some differentiations would be helpful.

In reference to the "essentially two groups' of 'Irish Travellers and Romany Gypsies", these are the two main groups of travellers in Britain, which comprise the vast majority of the travelling population. By using the term 'essentially', I hoped to indicate that this is not comprehensive and as you have correctly pointed out there are other groups and individuals which do not fit into these 'categories'.

It is very hard to make definitions between groups of travellers, something which is evident even within traveller communities and here I have aimed at making some rudimentry differentiations assuming that most people who read the article will be less informed than yourself.

Here is an interesting post with travellers debating how they prefer to be referred to from the Gypsy message Boards, which I used as a source, ( http://z10.invisionfree.com/GypsyMessageBoard1/index.php?showtopic=418&st=0). All other sources are listed on the main article ( http://yabastamedia.wordpress.com/2010/09/26/%E2%80%98the-management-reserves-the-right-to-refuse-any-gypsies-or-travellers%E2%80%99/)

Dan (Ya Basta)
mail e-mail: yabastamedia@gmail.com


Don't be so reductionist

26.09.2010 23:18

Yeah and like some of us pale-skinned dudes have chosen to grow locks, and even some of the kids have them. So that like makes us just the same as black people cos we is oppressed too by Babylon. An we might have not been doing it so long but it is like racist not to view us as the same. An some of us choose to go to festivals so we is travellers too an we even have to live in tents an ting. We is well oppressed man.

Nigel Jah Rasta Clutterbuck-Smythe


Nigel

27.09.2010 11:26

You're an idiot

Northern A


Northern A

27.09.2010 14:31

You is just being racist an exclusionary against me n me bredrin! Surely living in a squat for 6 months puts me on a par with an ethnic group that was persecuted by the Nazis and are perhaps the last victims of 'accepteptable' racism? Non?

Nigel Jah Rasta Clutterbuck-Smythe


PS

27.09.2010 14:39

Yeah n like its those of us who live outside of the societal norms of the orthdox capitalist liberal hegemony an ting that is the REAL oppressed.

Nigel Jah Rasta Clutterbuck-Smythe


no nigel you are a genius

27.09.2010 16:48

or at least certainly not an idiot anyway. you made me laugh, you made your point clearly and succintly, and the point is an extremely good one. wish more posters were like you.

a woman


use of the word "pikey"

27.09.2010 16:53

I have quite often heard people who are quite right-on in other respects use the term "pikey" to mean more like scammers or lower-class petty thieves (both travellers and non-travellers) rather than travellers in general. (aka "chavs" or "neds") Although it does seem the origins of the word is from "turnpike" implying people who travel.

According to Wikipedia:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pikey, apart from the main/original meaning as a traveller:

Among English Romani Gypsies the term pikey refers to a Traveller that is not Romani. It may also refer to a member who has been cast out of the family. If a member of the family is hot headed or a thief or a trouble maker or brings misfortune on the family, then a family council will be held and that member will be cast out of the family and will have to stay out of the way for ever more. They are regarded as never having even been a part of the family.[16]

In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, the definition became even looser and is sometimes used to refer to a wide section of the (generally urban) underclass of the country, or merely a person of any social class who "lives on the cheap" such as a bohemian.

Young people who use charver or pikey to identify a contemporary style of dress or general demeanour suggest an aimless "street" lifestyle, unaware of the Romany origin of the first or of connotation with "gypsy" of the second.

anon


racism

28.09.2010 10:11

"Among English Romani Gypsies the term pikey refers to a Traveller that is not Romani"

Look forward to the campaign on that issue!!

baart


Unjustified Scapegoats?

18.10.2010 18:04

In Post 2 IHTF says that;

““Bigotry toward Travellers is, for some reason, one area of race related bigotry that stubbornly refuses to go……
Never really understand why this is…””

My question is. Have you ever come into contact with Roma Gypsies? Obviously not.
Well, I have. I lived in Barcelona for several years and there were many of the Rumanian Gypsies there and unfortunately I fear they are a godsend for fascists and ambitious racist politicians. Where they go they provoke rejection by their anti social modus vivendi. They really are in a terrible state. They have virtually lost their culture and resort to desperate methods to survive.

I saw on a daily basis women begging with drugged babies. I saw gangs of under16’s rampaging through shops and openly robbing tourists. I witnessed a Roma girl spit over all the customers when a waiter asked her not to beg in a bar. I saw another youth urinate at a road crossing and splash passers by openly in broad daylight. I saw groups at the traffic lights get violent and abusive with people who didn’t want their windscreens of their cars cleaned.
The metro is still full of thieves today. I was there a few weeks ago and counted 16 in half an hour. In fact I have seen so much shit I had to question whether how I felt was making me a racist. It is only my rev left education that puts the brakes on that but most other people wouldn’t be able to exercise that self control after seeing what I have seen. I find it pathetic that people come forward to defend Roma rights without even knowing what they are like. It’s abstract politics taken to the extreme.

Neighbours in the Barcelona suburb of Badalona who protested about Rumanian Gypsies throwing used nappies out of windows, blocking toilets with rubbish and banging scrap metal at 4 in the morning were unceremoniously tagged as Nazis by anti racist organizations staffed by middle class people who don’t live anywhere near that neighbourhood.

Who will those neighbours turn to in future? Will it be the left or the right?

Romatic Gypsy