“…Ellis and McWhirter, 2008). Next, the writer uses the strategy identified in the previous post, in suggesting that racist talk about Gypsies is more acceptable than racist talk aimed at other groups; indeed, he/she suggests that had these comments been aimed at any other group then their authors would be in breach of anti-racism laws.…”
Section: Direct Accusations Of Racismmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…It is difficult for Gypsies to gain permission to settle on land to live, meaning that many live on unauthorised sites (Ellis and McWhirter, 2008), a situation that has shown to be damaging to their mental health and social integration (Cemlyn and Clark, 2005). When unauthorised sites are cleared, as was the case with the 'Dale Farm' camp, 1 it has been shown that extreme force is used to remove residents (Kabachnik, 2010).…”
This article addresses the ways in which opposition towards Gypsies is debated, with particular regard to whether or not this opposition constitutes racism or prejudice towards a group shown to be vulnerable and subject to discrimination. A discursive analysis of a corpus of internet discussion forums about Gypsies in the UK is undertaken. The analysis demonstrates that opposition towards Gypsies can be presented as racist; however, such accusations are met with criticism so that writers become accountable for making them. While writers do go to rhetorical lengths to dissociate themselves from being presented as racist, there is nevertheless an acceptance that opposition to Gypsies may constitute prejudice. This prejudice is presented as an inevitable result of Gypsies' behaviour and, of particular note, appears to be deemed acceptable. The implications of this finding for the discursive literature on taboos against, and denials of, racism are discussed.
“…Ellis and McWhirter, 2008). Next, the writer uses the strategy identified in the previous post, in suggesting that racist talk about Gypsies is more acceptable than racist talk aimed at other groups; indeed, he/she suggests that had these comments been aimed at any other group then their authors would be in breach of anti-racism laws.…”
Section: Direct Accusations Of Racismmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…It is difficult for Gypsies to gain permission to settle on land to live, meaning that many live on unauthorised sites (Ellis and McWhirter, 2008), a situation that has shown to be damaging to their mental health and social integration (Cemlyn and Clark, 2005). When unauthorised sites are cleared, as was the case with the 'Dale Farm' camp, 1 it has been shown that extreme force is used to remove residents (Kabachnik, 2010).…”
This article addresses the ways in which opposition towards Gypsies is debated, with particular regard to whether or not this opposition constitutes racism or prejudice towards a group shown to be vulnerable and subject to discrimination. A discursive analysis of a corpus of internet discussion forums about Gypsies in the UK is undertaken. The analysis demonstrates that opposition towards Gypsies can be presented as racist; however, such accusations are met with criticism so that writers become accountable for making them. While writers do go to rhetorical lengths to dissociate themselves from being presented as racist, there is nevertheless an acceptance that opposition to Gypsies may constitute prejudice. This prejudice is presented as an inevitable result of Gypsies' behaviour and, of particular note, appears to be deemed acceptable. The implications of this finding for the discursive literature on taboos against, and denials of, racism are discussed.
“…Both of these limited the ability to travel and stop freely, prescribed legitimate stopping places and created no‐go areas in some cases (see Sibley, ). Control and dispersion are also enacted through informal policies of enforcement by local authorities and their officials, often in conjunction with the local police force (James, ), and often as a response to nimbyism and racial prejudice among wider society (Ellis and McWhirter, ).As you pull on, nine times out of ten before you get your caravan hooked off they're [the police] there, and sometimes they will escort you out the boundary. Like you pull on in Bradford and they will escort you to the borders of Leeds (interview 18, male Gypsy, aged 51).…”
Section: Gypsy‐travellers and The Ethnic Cluster/ghetto Continuummentioning
This article utilizes Loïc Wacquant's concept of the ghetto as an analytical tool in understanding the marginal and ambivalent position of Gypsy-Traveller populations resident on sites (or camps) in Britain. The article argues that the fruitful work of quantitative urban scholars on ethnic segregation in the UK has neglected Gypsy-Travellers. It suggests that the theoretical concept of the ghetto can elucidate the ways in which the spatial marginality of sites serves as a weapon of 'confinement and control' for the dominant, and an 'integrative and protective device' for the stigmatized Gypsy-Traveller population. Drawing on qualitative empirical data, key characteristics in Wacquant's definition of the ghetto are shown to hold true for Gypsy-Traveller sites; these include ethnic homogeneity, spatial confinement, shared cultural identity, mutual distancing and a retreat into the private sphere of the family. This comparison also reveals key differences in terms of economic function, parallel institutionalism and the relationship with the state. The article points to the potential offered by Wacquant's theory and suggests that the dismissal of the ghetto concept within the UK ignores its power as a tool of comparison. The article suggests that qualitative and theoretical approaches should seek to complement the work of quantitative social scientists through focusing on everyday social relations and encounters between ethnic minority groups and 'host' populations -both within and outwith residential boundaries. It also questions the urban-centred focus of debates on ethnic segregation.
“…Research has also identified the ways in which Gypsies and Travellers have been criminalized as a consequence of planning policy and practice. Indeed, Ellis and McWhirter (2008: 82) refer to the planning process as the ‘critical interface’ between Gypsies and Travellers and the state. The failure to accommodate Gypsies and Travellers has often resulted in them stopping and staying in places that are deemed illegitimate and public order legislation used to move them on via formal eviction or the threat of such eviction.…”
Section: The ‘Problem’ Of Gypsies and Travellersmentioning
This article sets out how a critical hate studies perspective can explain and illuminate the hate harms experienced by Gypsies and Travellers in the UK. In doing so, it directly responds to the question of how criminological theory can move beyond existing debates in studies of race and ethnicity and engage more effectively with the wider social sciences. The critical hate studies perspective provides a comprehensive theoretical approach to appreciating the harms of hate in late modernity. This framework challenges existing explanations for bias-motivated violence in society and proposes an approach that acknowledges the overarching role of neoliberal capitalism on individual subjectivity and subsequently the lived experience. By utilising this perspective, it is possible here to discuss the range and depth of hate experienced by Gypsies and Travellers and thus consider its genesis and the potential for positive praxis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
