AIBU to find it disgusting that gypsies have taken over a school playground

[Adizzylass2014]

whilst attending my best friends wedding today in a little village I was horrified to see that gypsies had taken over the school playground. There was rubbish all over the floor, children and dogs running all over the place and scantily clad women puffing away.
why a school playground, these people have no morals. The poor caretaker is going to have his work cut out for him as there was at least 15 caravans!

I know in our work liaising with the traveller community and with the LA, they have tried a few different approaches to the poo issue. One was to provide one site with a toilet block. But that didn't actually solve the problem as those travellers who don't have toilets in their caravans also don't want to share toilets with other travellers. So the first family to use the site could use the toilet block but the families who came later, wouldn't use it.

Depending on where an encampment is, then generally our LA doesn't send out staff to pick up poo. Regardless of whether or not it's placed in a refuse sack, you can still get cross-contamination. Hence our LA tends to use a large lorry with a vacuum attachment that sucks up all the rubbish and waste left behind.

And not to harp on but it is only one section of the travelling community who create this issue. The others do have toilets in their caravans and contrary to the experience of a PP upthread, chemical toilets are perfectly sanitary. The travellers who use chemical toilets empty them into appropriate drains/toilets.

Fifi on settled sites - assuming you mean local authority run sites - there are no complaints from the general public. They live on these sites like any other person who lives in a house - they have a trailer for general living and a brick wash house / toilet facilities.

The site in my town and a few towns over are both council ran, well kept with facilities, there's a bit of info online and it said there were no objections to plans to extend it. The site is quite large, and you pay to live there from the info i have found online. It is tucked in right next to an industrial estate about 1/2 a mile from the closest housing estate but with schools nearby. From looking online people are opposing sites like this not just the ones next to houses which is a shame as it seems like this would be the solution, more legal sites i would assume would mean more places ot use as temporary stopping places as well whilst traveling meaning they would have access to the facilities on the site as well.

The only way to solve the problem is to create more council run sites with adequate facilities and stopping places, idk how you do this when no one will let the council do it and continuously oppose them because they don't want one in their town. I can't see the problem being solved any time soon.

Such interesting insights from twosides.

I know it's complicated but there is something extremely concerning about 11 year girls being trained only for domesticity and being forced to leave school AND virginity checks. In the UK. In 2015.

Is this genuinely defensible under some notion of cultural relativity? As I said before, I think the anti-social behavior is the least of it. It's interesting how people claiming this thread was racist kept saying "imagine if they were Muslim/black/gay etc". This seems sort of like the opposite. I think if a Muslim family, or even white working class non-Traveller family - just your average so called "chavs" - were removing their kids from school at 11, I think there would be uproar and mass intervention by the authorities. The parents would be jailed. No question. But it seems like no one is intervening here?

Probably another good idea for legal sites, maybe that way the authorities can try and help get the kids into school or keep and eye on what is going on which must be pretty hard when the kids are moving about

*reason

I cannot believe that there are people here defending people who are defecating in the open.

If you want a traveling lifestyle, you need to find ways of doing that which do not involve leaving excrement lying around in public spaces that others desire to use as well at some point.

Therefore, you either need to make a decision to install toilets in your caravans, or you need to camp only at spots that have toilets available for you to use. As there are not enough of these spots, then travelers need to start funding the provision of such sites by paying fees to the councils that they will be stopping it, to have such sites created.

It is not okay to defecate in a hedge or park or parking area. Never, ever, ever.

Dare I even inquire what happens regarding dog feces?

Re the poo questions: Travellers would not bag up their poo like humans do with dog poo. Firstly they are not dogs but people so to liken them to animals would be seen as very offensive and b. Where would they put the poo? It's not as if a large encampment would all put human faeces in overflowing dog bins even if you got over the factor of likening them to dogs plus this would be very hazardous for waste collectors to dispose of because of human to human transmissible germs.

This beggars belief, I'm sorry. It in no way likens travelers to dogs to insist that sanitary waste is disposed of safely. Any sort of rudimentary bin (can be bought for about £10) to put bagged waste in, would be easier to dispose of than the scattered faeces, sanitary towels, nappies and toilet paper. Disposing of waste in a fashion that makes it less hazardous for the general public has to be a consideration if there is to be any sort of negotiating for legal stopping sites.

Likewise it's not really practicable to carry round a spade and dig a hole when you have many children running around and little time because you don't want to be caught by anyone pants down having a poo. Speed is of the essence.

Sorry, but I have seen kids running around sites without adults, and digging a hole to crap in doesn't have to done with your pants round your ankles, i have done it myself - it doesn't take long!

If there were toilets, Travellers would use them. It is unfortunate that there are so few legal places to stop with facilities which mean when Travellers stop illegally there are no flushing loos.

When a group of travellers, parked up in a sports facility that my dh used to work in, dh and the manager decided the best way to deal with any potential problems was to open the facility toilets - the turnstiles were still used (at least they could be hosed down!) as was the goal (I don't think they were fans of the local team).

It is unpleasant but the most sanitary and cheapest way for councils to deal with human waste is to simply leave it if it is spread thinly and not in large concentrations to degrade naturally over a week or so. If there is a larger toilet area with higher concentrations it is sprayed with disinfectant and left.

The school that my dh works in had to pay themselves to have it cleared (it is a private school), it cost about £5000, and meant the sports fields were unusable for weeks, nearly a whole term. My dh was still coming across waste in verges after the clear up. Honestly, strimming through a pile of crap is grim, they had to wear full protective clothing and masks, because it sprays up in the face.

Yes, legal stopping sites would be great, with facilities, and I am sure that these would be used by the majority. I do think that there would still be groups that would refuse to park up in the legal sites (as was the case when we had to move). If, as Twosides says, there is such fear of settled society, surely there would also be fear that moving into council run sites would involve their children having to attend school etc? I guess in the past farmers would let their land be used, for temporary encampments, but I can't see that happening now.

When travellers pitch up somewhere, why the heck can't they hire Portaloos. That's what other people would do. There is absolutely no excuse for leaving somewhere like an open air toilet, it's absolutely disgusting. There seems to be a complacency that it's OK, and it's travellers so it's only to be expected - it's one rule for them and one for others - look how the Council kicks up over fly tipping and that isn't human faeces.

There is no defence, because as a pp said, dog owners have to pick up after their dogs.

I do think that there would still be groups that would refuse to park up in the legal sites ... If, as Twosides says, there is such fear of settled society, surely there would also be fear that moving into council run sites would involve their children having to attend school etc?

The same though occurred to me; there's also the point that they'd be expected to pay for "settled" sites, and I wonder if this is a factor too?

TheNewStatesman the majority of sites for travelling people are privately funded by them. The Council does not provide them. A traveller will buy the land, submit planning, then build the site.

The problem with provision does not lie in travellers not wanting to purchase sites. It lies with Councils refusing planning permission. And let's be clear the only places they have a chance of getting planning permission are usually industrial areas, where no-one else would live. However lately, as anti-traveller discrimination has grown, even applications for sites in industrial areas are being refused.

Part of the problem is what has happened on this thread, that 'travellers' are being referred to as though they are one group. They aren't. Only one sub-section of 'travellers' behaves in the way twosides has discussed. The other 'travellers' have a different culture and would be no more likely to poo in a bush than you would. Their DCs do attend school and they work closely with the authorities to support them to access education, even when they are travelling.

If I think of one of the sites, we worked with, in the last five years, five teenagers have lived onsite. Two have gone on to university (one has since graduated with a profession). One went to college. One has entered the forces (after completing a sixth year at school). The remaining one has went into employment on a self-employed basis, working for other businesses within the travelling community. And yes, he pays tax. I know because one of our services is to help them complete the relevant paperwork.

Likewise, if I think about the next site in that same area,in the last five years, two teenagers have gone on to a RG university.

Only one sub-section of 'travellers' behaves in the way twosides has discussed. The other 'travellers' have a different culture and would be no more likely to poo in a bush than you would

Forgive me if I've misunderstood you, but it seems you're talking about an actual group with a culture which accepts antisocial behaviour, rather than a few bad apples. If so, is there any way you can identify that group for us?

I am aware that the groups that we have had near us are not gypsies of the sort that Twosides talks of. The larger group which we had awful problems with were Irish travelers, as were the group that camped out in the school fields. The other group I am not sure about. I know there are good and bad in every section of society, but surely you can understand, given some of the experiences that people on here had, that it might put people off having stopping sites built nearby? I think it would be a good idea if there could be stopping sites as it seems from experience and this thread that most problems arise from people setting up temporarily whilst on the move.

I guess, as well as planning, there would also be the problem of who would fund stopping sites, as they would be used by many different groups of travellers.

I wish that when we had our trouble that someone had come to talk to us about the situation, I don't know if this was just bad luck on our part and normally someone would.

twosides, I had a conversation a while back on Another Forum (no, not that one) with a young Romani woman, who was doing an AMA. There used to be a kid from a settled traveller site at DS's school, and I was wondering if there might be any reason other than personal preference that this kid's mum completely rebuffed any attempt from any other mum there to chat or make friends - she would not even say hello. The young Romani woman said that the fear of "spiritual pollution" might have been one explanation (though of course the mum may simply not have liked any of us). She talked about the idea that if a Romani person spends any quality time with non-Romani, then they become unclean in some way, and risk their own Romani-ness. (She used specific words, but I can't remember what they were.)

If this is a common belief amongst Roma, then might this be both an explanation of a lot of the clashes with non-Romani, and a huge barrier to any meaningful communication which might help sort it out?

On the poo thing - I agree that the custom and practice of one group (in this case travellling communities) should absolutely not be allowed to interfere with the health and reasonable enjoyment of the communities in which they visit (in this case by leaving poo and paper, sanpro etc, on communally-used areas and paths). If travellers, as someone said, will use a facility that is only for them, but won't share a communal one, I don't know what the answer is, except insisting that they do, or find another way of managing that doesn't leave poo around a site. I thought it was interesting what twosides said about the completely, utterly different cultural norms about cleanliness that exist between some travellers and non-travellers - that some travelling communities think non-travellers are the dirty ones, for having toilets indoors where you live. I am reminded that there are settled communities in other cultures where there aren't designated places to poo, no loos at all, and you just walk away from your house for a little bit and go in the bushes. The fundamental difficulty here is that while this might be sustainable in a small village in, I dunno, Ghor, it won't fly in Woking.

I think you are right Coconutty, as the number plates are always Irish ones.

It's possible, *Coconutty"! Seriously, she just blanked us! And we were a pretty mixed bunch - I found it difficult to conceive she couldn't find someone she liked amongst us, and wasn't willing to ever try, which is why I wondered if there was something else going on. Have you ever come across the "spiritual pollution" thing? Because for the young woman I talked to, it was a thing that was important in her family. (Unless she was pulling all our legs, but I don't think so.)

It's often true that there isn't a one-culture-fits-all thing going on in any broad group of people. For example, a lot of my family are British Indian, and what is the norm in my family won't be the norm for other British Indian families, due to region of origin, class (I think class is a huge signifier of difference), personality, current circumstances, etc etc.

That's interesting ArcheryAnnie although like Cocunutty I've not experienced it myself. I'm married to a non-Romany so I don't think it makes me unclean.
I'm guessing maybe she practised very strict cleanliness rules (I think it's called Romanipen?) I've heard that some in the old days would have strict rules on food e.g. different washing up bowls and utensils for meat, veg, fish etc and various other cleanliness rules that might make it difficult to eat at a non-Romany household for example. I've never heard of talking / making friends being a problem though. She might just have been not very nice though!

The group within the community that shit in bushes are usually the Irish travellers

Okay, so if that's right does anyone know why? We seem to have established that they could dig holes, quickly use them and fill them in ... or bag everything and take it to a tip ... or buy bins themselves and at least leave waste in those ... or hire portaloos ... or any number of other things. From the accounts on here it's not even as if this happens once in a blue moon; if everyone's right it happens time and again

So I'll ask once more: WHY endanger others by simply leaving waste to endanger others??

I'm not sure that the trowel-and-small-hole option would be much of a solution. You'd need a lot of small holes over a comparatively short time, and the poo wouldn't be buried very deep. And of course the field/park/verge/wherever would look like a thousand moles had been at it, which probably wouldn't be popular, either.

"The fundamental difficulty here is that while this might be sustainable in a small village in, I dunno, Ghor, it won't fly in Woking." It's not sustainable in Ghor, either, sadly. Open defecation is a major problem in rural areas over much of the Indian subcontinent and Central Asia, and is a major health hazard.

I am relieved to hear that many/most Travellers are not engaging in this behavior. We need to find ways to stop the remaining groups that are doing it. Because it is disgusting and there is no excuse.

No, thinking about the digging a hole thing - this was a daft suggestion of mine! It would actually be a bloody nightmare!!

By the way, I don't think there's any particular disconnect/contradiction between the fact that Travellers engage in intensive cleaning practices in their own spaces and the fact that some groups of Travellers do not see any problem with defecating in a park or hedge. It is to do with the idea of clean vs dirty spaces and the idea that you shift all the dirt as far away from your turf as possible.

I remember a friend of mine who lived in rural Sicily for years, who commented on the fact that so many of the people around her would throw litter on the ground and seemed to take poor care of their ancient ruins and monuments.... and yet the insides of their houses were always spotless and people would keep their gardens tidy and sweep the garden path right up to the gate.... Same sort of idea.

Oh, that's interesting (and depressing), TheNewStatesman. I'd read a book about life in the interior of Afghanistan, and the no loos thing rather caught my eye.

i seen something on facebook last night, 2 pekanise (sp) dogs have been stolen from a garden and there is CCTV images of the man carrying the dogs away. There are people posting stills from my big fat gypsy wedding saying a traveler off there is the man on the CCTV, doesn't look like him to me, some people are saying it's the travelers who are stealing the dogs. I have no idea who it is but i am watching it to see if the man turns out to be a traveler or just a random dog thief. i know there was something similar a few weeks ago near me, people saying travelers in a white van were marking houses to steak dogs but it turns out they were just the men who sell fish from a van