to be appalled when 'intelligent' people speak of 'pikeys' and ' gypos'

[debs40]

I live in a small provincial cathedral city. It is a white, Daily Mail/Torygraph reading kind of place.

OK, I can sort of live with that even if it is all church schools and 11+. I've lately been taken aback by the easy resort to using terms such as 'chav', 'pokey' or 'gypo' on relation to anyone who seems less well off or intelligent. These people are police officers, teachers or immigration officers too!

AIBU to think this is dated and offensive? No wonder. Jimmy Carr always has a tour date here!

I am often appalled when beautiful people speak.

And you can hear the wind playing pinball with there brain cells.

I think I know what you mean OP. Although intelligent is a relative term.

It is interesting. Back to the Jimmy Carr thing .... when he jokes of 'gypsys smelling of piss' or some such vile comment... is he laughing at the idea of such an awful joke or is he providing cheap laughs at easy targets for people who believe what he says has some element of truth, i.e. that gypsys are smelly, vile etc? I think the latter.

Equally, even though people may not mean to be racist or offensive when these things are said or terms used, because they are, in common parlance, generally to be considered as racist/offensive, people are generally more circumspect about avoiding this type of language.

After all, if you don't like someone or a group of people, it is easier and fairer to judge them and explain your dislike based on what they have done to offend rather than resort to the use of such sullied terms.

That is what I find unintelligent .... no matter what paper you read!

That's like the Warren Mitchell thing, isn't it? He really thought, in performing "Til Death Do Us Part" etc, that he was mocking racists and bigots. Suddenly, a certain section of the audience are saying Alf Garnett should be in Parliament!

but travellers (be they romany or Irish) have been one of the most persecuted groups of people in history.

It can be argued that they are a race as they are have a common heritage and lifestyle that gives them an identity off their own.

You do not need to have a nation to be a race. Or necessarily have different physical traints. (though some argue that you do)

But I think it is commonly accepted that if someone is anti -french or german or welsh they are being racist, though the majority population have similar 'traints'.

debs is Salisbury all shut tomorrow or are shops open?

Right wing and racist are not synonymous terms. Neither are tory and bigot.

As a non racist, feminist Conservative I though that was a point worth making. I dislike the Daily Mail too

I like Jimmy Carr a lot.
I also like Frankie Boyle.
I am intelligent enough to know when a joke is just that and not veiled racism. I am sure neither of them would describe themselves as racist. I would suggest they find humour in people and circumstance- I am construed as disabled and I tell jokes about the disabled. I just prefer to laugh about things rather than be p.c.
And on the gypsy thing I teach a family of gypsy's. The only time I ever heard the oldest boy being refered to as a pikey they were still cleaning up an hour later.......

It can't be argued that they are a race.

Because they are not a race.

Not only do they not have "similar traits" or share a nationality, they are not all from the same country, do not share a common culture (hence sub-categories like "new age traveller), do not share common beliefs, do not all speak the same language and do not identify themselves as a race!

What exactly DO they have in their favour for being identified as a race?

They have a common chosen lifestyle (if you exclude the "travellers" who don't actually travel and live on fixed sites) but criticising a lifestyle is not racist.

Well, Jim Davidson doesn't describe himself as a racist either.

FWIW I don't think that travellers have ever been persecuted.

Gypsies have.

And so have the Irish.

And those are races.

But travellers per se? Example, please!

Sorry, made a mistake there.

I meant that I don't feel travellers per se have everbeen persecuted in the sustained, systematic way that Gypsies and the Irish have.

It would be idiotic to suggest that no traveller has ever been treated differently for being a traveller and I retract that statement fully and apologise if I have offended anyone.

But nooki are there not travellers who are not Romany or Irish? I think that pikey describes travellers whose behaviour is offensive rather than travellers in general, just as chav describes working class people who are thoughtless, stupid and offensive rather than working class people in general. I agree that travellers are a much persecuted group and it is perfectly possible to be racist against such a group, but surely travellers despair of twats who cause trouble and create filth wherever they go as much as the rest of us?

debs40 I really think JC is laughing at the idea of awful jokes, that is certainly what I find funny, Jim Davidson on the other hand?? I know because I have seen interviews with him that Al Murray is laughing at the idea of nationalism, I do wonder whether all of his audience are?

Wonderstuff - but most travellers understand the word to be a derogatory term specifically about travellers. I know a number of travellers and they hate it when people use this word, whoever they are refering to.

If you use the term to talk about non-travellers you are suggesting that they are a bad thing.

If you use it about travellers who behave badly, you are still using a term that is derogatory about travellers.

Surely if you realise a term could be offensive you shouldn't use it.

manIfeellikeawoman -

I have re-read you post and it sounds as if you mean travellers to be 'new age travellers' but they have choosen their lifestyle and I think are a different kettle of fish.

Pikey generally refers to Irish travellers around here. Who have undenaiably been persecuted throughout history.

The term is offensive and is intended to be so, I wouldn't use is to describe travellers in general but there are travellers who are rude and disgusting, this is not prejudice but observed opinion. It is not in my everyday vocabulary, but I have encountered travellers who were offensive, dirty and very unpleasant and I feel describing them as 'pikey' was appropriate.

I didn't say it wasn't derogatory. When I use it - which is not that often, incidentally - I certainly mean it to be derogatory and offensive.

What I said is it is not a racist word. I am not judging any race of people. I am judging a group of people who choose a certain lifestyle - travelling - and who choose to carry out that lifestyle in what I see as a thoughtless, unattractive, unclean, backward way.

If other people use it to mean all and only Irish travellers I have no control over that - I know I don't, and that's what matters to me.

On the other hand, nor do I mean only new age travellers. And I would say ALL travellers have chosen that lifestyle. Presumably, if they didn't like it, they would stop travelling. None of us are condemned to follow the same lifestyle as our parents.

did anmyone see Riven's post?

What's your point 2shoes? I did see Riven's post and she is right he does make jokes about disabled people, I find them (the jokes) funny, not because making jokes about disabled people is funny, I work with SN kids, but JC jokes are offensive and the joke is that the jokes are so shockingly awful, and that there is often an assumption made in the first line that is destroyed in the punch line. That is the joke!

sorry I don't think jokes about disabled people/children are funny,

Then we have a different sense of humour. I am not a bad person, I don't laugh AT disabled people/children etc. I have laughed at JOKES about disabled people.

manifeel -

irish travellers in this day and age haven't choosen to be travellers - they are born into it.

They find the term offensive and racist. And therefore you should not use it. It does not matter how you perceive it.

Would you use the term 'spastic' or 'coloured'; words that in some contexts were/are not offensive but they now hold such negative connotations few people would use them.