BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 04:23 PM

Sharon - I didn't mean to suggest that we should ignore the media, just realize what it is all about. In fact, I think you might be echoing what I was trying to say. As I said earlier, we need to draw our own conclusions from a variey of sources.

I DON'T think that the media intentionally lies or changes the focus - they merely reflect what the public is asking for. The sensationalism that the media creates is merely a reflection of our curiosity. If people weren't feeding off it, the media wouldn't cover it. Frankly we are "to blame" for it's existence - we create it.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: GUEST,McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 04:18 PM

"turn public sympathy away from the child "

Yes, the interests of the child clearly have to be the first and most important thing, as in any case involving children. And as I read it, the central worry of people like InOBU is that the interests of the child are very likely indeed to be severely damaged if it isn't handled a great deal more sensitively than it seems to have been.

Taking a child away from its community and family isn't a neutral thing to do. It's happened to children of Native Americans, and Native Australians and to Travellers of one sort or another, and it's often been seen as a kind of rescue from a lifestyle that is assumed to be damaging - and it's worked out very badly indeed in many many cases.

Yes, of course there are circumstances when particular parents can't be relied on to care for their children, and alternatives have to be found, temporarily or even lon term. But it's a delicate matter, and there's a real danger of doing real damage. Wherever possible it is far better to use relatives rather than strangers, especially strangers from a completely different culture.

Violence towards children is not an accepted and normal part of the Traveller way of life. It happens sometimes, as it happens in all kinds of families, and when it is seen to happen it needs to be effectively responded to, in a way that protects the child. But in a way that protects the child in all kinds of ways.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: GUEST,Ireland
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 04:14 PM

So I'm from Ireland fly to America, get drunk on Irish whiskey, beat up some people trash a bar,rely on the stereotypical views of the Irish about drunks and fighters and claim I'm Irish thats what we do, nature of the beast.

Accountability, law was broke people were in danger irrespective of my origins and I have to like all other citizens be accountable for my actions it is what separates us from the animals.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: SharonA
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 04:11 PM

Oops. I intended to turn off the italics after my second paragraph, where I posted the quote from Kat. Second time today! What am I doing wrong??

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: SharonA
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 04:03 PM

Ron: On the other hand, I don't think it's wise to refuse to use the media as a source of information, nor do I think there's anything wrong with exchanging views in a forum such as this one. Ignoring the problem of sensationalism in the media won't make it go away, but observing the sensationalism doesn't necessarily mean that one is caught up in it or that one is "to blame" for its existence. Better to be informed about misdeeds of the media in order to effectively speak out against them, eh?

-------------------------------

A while ago, Kat said, " 'Charles Smith, director of the St. Joseph County Office of Family and Children, said the fact the family is part of the Irish Travelers will play a role in whether other family members get temporary custody of the girl – and whether the Toogoods regain custody.' And, that's not discrimination?"

I have to say that I don't think it is. Here's why: the county authorities are aware of the migratory habits of the clan to which Toogood belongs, and I'm sure their concern is that the little girl be living in a situation that can be monitored to assure that she will not be abused or assaulted again. I'm sure there are laws in Indiana to the effect that the child's living situation must be monitored pending investigation of charges against her parent or guardian. This, of course, is difficult to do when the clan moves from state to state. If Martha were released into the custody of family members, I'm sure those family members would have to agree to remain in the county for the duration of the term of custody, which would go against their custom.

There's also the fact that at least some family members have already proven to be uncooperative with authorities with regard to releasing information about the child's whereabouts and condition, supposedly because of the clan's protectiveness of its private affairs. I think the authorities are concerned that the same uncooperative spirit might present itself if they tried to legally monitor the child's safety in the home of a member of the clan.

Then there's the fact that Toogood had already proven herself to be a flight risk when she left Texas, using her migration with her clan to avoid two outstanding warrants for her arrest there. Quite obviously, no one in the clan who knew of these warrants was willing to report Toogood to authorities for extradition to Texas. The child-protective services in Indiana are understandably concerned about Martha being in a family situation where disregard of warrants for arrest is the norm. If Martha were to be released into the custody of one of the families in the clan, the authorities would want to be sure that it was a family of law-abiding clan members who would not be influenced by those without regard for the law, so some investigation would have to be done beforehand.

Whether the Toogoods themselves regain permanent custody would depend on Madelyn's willingness to stop using the clan to hide from the law and her husband's willingness to stop using the clan to hide his wife from the law. The husband himself admits having some unspecified run-ins with the law when he was younger but claims to have mended his ways, yet he was still willing to take his wife with him from Texas to travel with the clan and let warrants be issued for her arrest, rather than stay in Texas with her and have her face the charges against her. The authorities are understandably concerned that the little girl, if she continued to live with them, would be influenced by similar clan pressure to travel out of state rather than stay with family members in-state while they have their day in court.

None of this has to do with prejudice but with the behavior of this family and clan in their previous dealings with the law, just as any family's history is examined in a custody placement. I don't see anything prejudicial about concern by legal authorities that the law be respected and followed. Note that Mr. Smith was quoted as saying that the family's association with the Irish Travelers would play a role in the county office's decisions about custody of Martha, not that it would be the overriding factor in those decisions.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 03:53 PM

I guess the lesson is simple. If the mother didn't treat her child in the manner that she did, none of this would have happened. The child would still be in her custody and they could continue their lifestyle.

Sure, you can't change the past. The rest of us can learn from it however - people are responsible for their own actions - you can't blame society.

We have our issues in society and prejudice is still a huge problem. Toogood and her lawyers are making a HUGE mistake if they think they can turn public sympathy away from the child and the alleged abuse and make it a battle for Irish Traveler rights. They are trying to turn this into a battle against prejudice and it looks like they have a poor battle plan.

Frankly, prejudice USUALLY is based on appearance - the color of skin, the way a person looks or dresses, or gender. The Irish Travelers that we've seen on the news lately appear to blend into white middle class America. The prejudice only arises when incidents such as scams or thefts occur. (Didn't Dateline a few years ago do a story on underage marriage as well?) Unless the Traveler participates in some sort of ILLEGAL activity, I am curious as to how they are identified. A woman in a department store that looks like half of the customers will not stand out to a security guard unless something occurs. If a security guard started watching a shopper JUST because they are black, Indian, or a woman - then you have a strong case of profiling. I am very curious as to how they can PROVE profiling in this case. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, I just can't figure out HOW they are doing it.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 03:15 PM

Thanks, Nerd: I must admit that I don't buy USA Today every day. I miss once every couple of weeks for one reason or another. It's part of my morning ritual to drive down the hill to get a paper, and stop in at Walmarts to shoot the breeze with some friends. Last week, the vending machine in front of Walmart that sells USA Today wasn't in operation, so I picked up the paper where I could, and read the New Haven Register the day I couldn't get a copy. If I thought about it, I could probably figure out which day you and your wife saw the article.

Yeah, I don't like the way they phrased their commentary. It made it sound like dishonesty is the norm, but there are exceptions. And, I would never present USA today as the paragon of newspaper reporting, although its leagues ahead of papers like The New York Post and Daily News out this way. One of the things I really like about it, though, is that they do print editorials from a variety of newspapers around the country, and I find them determinedly balanced in presenting opposing views... usually the exact number on each side of the issue.

I also don't doubt that newspapers in the Midwest may be reporting it differently, just as newspapers around here will report a local story with their own "angle" for area viewers. I also don't doubt that there is prejudice against Irish Travellers.

Just for a little lightness, I'll share a true story with you. I knew someone in Graduate School at USC many years ago, who told me this story. A Jewish student at USC was using his "jewishness" to blackmail professors into giving him higher grades than he had earned by threatening to charge them with discrimination if they didn't. He apparently succeeded a couple of times, and tried it on another professor. When he told the professor that he was going to charge him with discrimination and report him to the Dean if he didn't raise his grade, the professor told him to go ahead. The student filed a formal complaint about being discrimated against by the Professor, and then discovered that the Professor was Jewish. As was the person who told me the story. :-)

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Grab
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 03:14 PM

Kat, you said:

I've also found that, according to an AP article, the fact that she is an Irish Traveller will have a bearing on who gets custody of her child:

Charles Smith, director of the St. Joseph County Office of Family and Children, said the fact the family is part of the Irish Travelers will play a role in whether other family members get temporary custody of the girl – and whether the Toogoods regain custody.

And, that's not discrimination?

No it isn't, it's making sure no further child abuse happens.

For instance, consider the cases of children abused by priests. What happened to them? They were put into the care of other priests and pressurised into saying nothing. Years later the truth comes out, and the childcare system is changed as a result to ensure the same kind of horrible events can't happen again. But just because of the ethnic origin of these people, you think it's a good idea to go back to this system?

You want a child who has been abused by her mother to be put into the care of people who have a close relationship with her mother, and who have in the past weeks concealed the mother from the police to cover up for her? I don't know about you, but I think that's the last thing that should happen! Do you seriously think that's it's better to risk putting her back in a situation where she can be abused, than to remove her temporarily from the Traveller community?

If they can find a Traveller family who are unconnected with the mother, then all well and good. That's the best option for everyone. But if all the Traveller families are close friends of the mother, what choice is there for ensuring the child is safe?

Ron Olesko's point is absolutely correct - the first priority in cases of child abuse is to remove the child from the abuse, and ensure that no connections remain between the child and the abuser which can be used to pressure the child into silence. This isn't some "bureaucratic" ruling, it's plain common sense.

Larry, you said in the earlier thread that separating the child from the Traveller community would harm the child. I've never yet heard the accusation that it's harming a black child to foster them temporarily with a white couple, nor vice versa. Why should it be different for fostering this girl with a non-Traveller family? Please explain how this is damaging the girl, bcos I simply don't understand how this can be the case.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 02:17 PM

Nerd - you are right. Attention is being paid ONLY when new information breaks, or when it is a slow newsday.

Also, it should be pointed out that the news of the Irish Travelers and this specific case are not being covered in what I would call the "mainstream" press. It has become the fodder for tabloid talk shows and Fox News Channel. If you pick up your local paper and see if the story is still in the headlines. That is hardly the NY Times or CBS Evening News (or NBC, ABC). Unless a major development occurs, this is now "old news" It is the cable newschannels are littered with tabloid journalists who talk about subjects they know audiences will listen to. If you are reading this note (or writing it!) then you are part of the situation.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Nerd
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 02:03 PM

Also, Ron, OJ was a "first-tier" celebrity. When Roots was being made, he just had to call and say "I want to be in Roots" and they wrote him a role. Imagine Robert Blake doing that! His career high point was Baretta! I am SO not surprised that nobody's paying attention to him now...they never paid attention to him when he was supposedly famous!

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 02:02 PM

Kat, you are 100% correct about the media doing whatever it can to get ratings. I spent 12 years working as a Production Manager for a cable news network and saw first hand what the priorities are - it is getting viewers to watch the program. I saw a once respected journalist revive his career by focusing on the O.J. scandal. As soon as O.J. ended, the ratings dropped. The decision on what subject to follow was driven by what people wanted to watch. If viewers weren't tuning in to watch O.J. news then the focus would shift to find something that would attract viewers. If the powers that be couldn't find news that would attract viewers, new powers that be would be brought in to try to "fix" the problem.

The days of Edward R. Murrow are unfortunately long gone. We have to rely on a number of sources to get the news and form our own opinions.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:52 PM

Ron, true, absolutely. Thanks for pointing that out. Again, it goes back to the media will use whatever will get them more viewers, i.e. more ratings, thus advert money.

Mudcatter Stephen L. Rich just posted a thread about hsi new CD. I noticed one of the lines in one of the songs mentions his "consciousness sitting on the shelf." (That may not be exactly, I've only heard it once.) Anyway, I wonder how many people who watch tv, esp. the news, have set aside their consciousness and haven't a clue as to what kind of influence their watching exerts.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:42 PM

If I went by the newspapers I generally read, I'd think that the media in England treated refugees and immigrants and Travellers and all kinds of people with respect, and always made sure that the problems they face were accurately explained.

Unfortunately there are a lot of newspapers I never read, and they aren't like that at all. But a lot of people read them, far more than read the papers I choose to read.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:36 PM

Kat - your story about the woman in Wyoming just points out a fault in the system, not a case of prejudice. That woman you speak of SHOULD have had her children taken away and perhaps the end of your story would not have had a tragic ending.

In the Toogood case there is too many eyes watching the case. IF the child was given back to her parents and something went wrong the arguements would be made at how bad our system is at protecting children.

Yes, the media has focused on the case of Robert Blake. Unlike O.J., Blake has not been flaunting his innocence in the same manner as O.J. did at the time. The evidence against Blake is not as substantial as the evidence against O.J. APPEARED to be at the time. On top of that, this is similar to the "second child syndrome". We've had it with O.J. and people are tired of such cases. Also, the Blake case has not gone to trial yet.

Everyone is quick to point out that the media is at fault. Do you think they would broadcast the news if people didn't WANT it? Look how many people are posting notes here. We are all to blame.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:32 PM

The fact remains that, at least in the area where this took place, according to what Aine posted and has told me (she lives near there, too), it has been an issue with the media.

I've also found that, according to an AP article, the fact that she is an Irish Traveller will have a bearing on who gets custody of her child:

Charles Smith, director of the St. Joseph County Office of Family and Children, said the fact the family is part of the Irish Travelers will play a role in whether other family members get temporary custody of the girl – and whether the Toogoods regain custody.

And, that's not discrimination?

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Nerd
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:31 PM

Uh, Jerry, I hate to say this but last week my wife saved a copy of USA Today for me because it had a whole article on the Toogood case that explained how she was an Irish Traveller, along with a sidebar about who the Travellers are. So that particular newspaper has definitely been using the Traveller angle at least a bit. I still think there's truth to what you say, though.

BTW, I'm ambivalent about the USA Today Travellers article, because it used the tactic of saying "Travellers have been known to commit fraud, but many are law-abiding." So you can't fault it for the facts, but if we said "blacks have been known to commit robbery, but many are law-abiding" or "Jews have been known to be stingy, but many are generous" I think we'd feel uncomfortable despite the fact that the sentences are obviously accurate in a strict sense. Still, the paper had no choice but to mention the common perception that Travellers commit fraud, because otherwise there's no real reason to be talking about Travellers at all!

I'll see if we've saved the paper at home, and I'll let you know the date if so.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:20 PM

As a point of information: In USA Today, the one truly national newspaper, they included editorials from five or six (don't feel like going down stairs to count which) newspapers across the country on this case. Not one of them mentioned that she was an Irish Traveller. Those claiming descrimination act as if that is the primary focus of news coverage. So far, in newspaper coverage I have yet to see that connection mentioned once. I think it's fairly obvious that not everyone is judging her as part of the Irish Traveler community if I have seen seven or eight articles so far, none of which mention the Irish Travelers.

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Nerd
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:08 PM

Larry,

sorry I assumed there was money involved, etc. In any case, I know from your posts that you're too honorable for that to have been your main motive.

I still think people who are close to an issue, and considered experts on it (as I am on other issues) often face the problem of being so close to a community that they cannot avoid taking on a cause espoused by that community without endangering the relationship that allows them to be considered an expert. In other words, if an expert on the Masai pisses off the Masai tribal authorities so that he is shunned by the tribe, the Kenyan government will eventually cease to consider him an expert. Being an expert, which is where some of us get some of our sense of pride and self-worth, becomes contingent on taking sides. Usually this is not problematic for those of us interested in oppressed communities, because taking their side is usually what we'd do anyway. But sometimes our judgment can get clouded and we end up defending wrongdoing. An observation--do with it what you will.

Anyway, Larry, fight the good fight. Because whether or not THIS is an example of anti-Traveller discrimination (and I still think it's probably not), that discrimination DOES exist, and this case may bring it out in the open. In the meantime, let's all hope the mother can productively work through her issues and be reuinited with her child!

On another note, I think I may be the originator of some of the posts NicoleC is referring to as "it's just their culture." What I had said in part one was that many European ethnic communities practice corporal punishment, including my own, and that what I saw on that tape was not much worse than much of what I endured myself, and certainly no worse than what my parents endured. This is not saying "it's just their culture" so much as saying "it's our culture"; in other words, there is a disconnect between American official law and common practice in a wide range of families, and she was definitely in the realm of common practice for many communities. But having been properly chastened by some fellow Mudcatters, I realized that this should not excuse her from scrutiny. The fact is, in most cases like this, children are not permanently separated from their parents unless the abuse is ongoing, so the legal system can run its course. Unless there's evidence of worse abuse, I don't think drastic consequences will result. If they do result, without evidence of worse abuse, I think we need to take another look at the possibility of discrimination. But so far, she has been treated by the authorities just as any mother would have been treated in the circumstances.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 12:48 PM

That is complete nonsense. In Wyoming there was a woman who was a known abuser, who was allowed to keep her several young children with nothing but ocassional checks by DFS. Only thing is, DFS didn't have enough people to check consistently and as a result she beat one daughter to death and stored her in a plastic bag in the garage for over a year before it was discovered. Even then, they had no idea how many children she had at one time. She was white.

Conversly, there were black parents who had their children removed under much less extreme circumstances. Racism and its assumptions are alive and well among some of the law enforcement and social agencies. I see the same types of things regarding Hispanics, too.

Where's the OJ-like media hype in the case of that white actor who was recently charged with killing his wife?

The media is always looking for an angle on which to "hook" viewers, so they can get more advertising dollars. If they can do so using ethnicity, they will. If they can do so using the fact that a woman is a single parent, they will (I am thinking of the case several years ago, the mother who drowned her kids.) Nobody gets treated equally in the media, no matter how much you might want to believe that.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: GUEST,Samuel Tischler
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 12:26 PM

Are Irish Travellers discriminated against in the USA? Probably, most ethnic groups in the USA face discrimination.

Larry contends that the Toogood case has been sensationalized in the media because she is an Irish Traveller. That is nonsense.

The Toogood case has been sensationalized in the media becuase she was caught brutalizing her child on videotape.

As a television news director, and former television news reporter, I can assure you that any mother caught brutalizing her child in this manner on videotape, be she WASP, Jewish, African American, Asian American, Hispanic, Arab, whatever, will receive exactly the same treatment.

Samuel Tischler

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 11:57 AM

I am sorry to say that a lot of what I am reading seems to be self-righteous and judgemental. How can any of us really judge this case without being in a jury box and hearing both sides? The media has made a case against Ms. Toogood, irregardless of how the authorities may have acted, which most definitely uses the prejudice card.

From the beginning of these threads I have never read an intention on Larry's part to deny what seems to have happened or to say Ms. Toogood should not be held accountable.

What I have read, through his postings, Aine's, and my own research, is that whether this woman did this or not (I am NOT saying she didn't!) there is no way in hell she would get a fair trial with all of the media BS about her bring a Traveller and the well-documented discrimination which does exist against that community.

The world is not black and white when it comes to parenting. One known incident does not mean that parent makes a habit of hitting their child. Most parents who find themselves doing that or even thinking about it are horrified and usually will seek some way to cope. I've been there, I know.

Aine, thank you for links and the well-written explanation.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 11:42 AM

That was loose use of language on my part, Sharon, and thanks for pointing it out - what I meant was that the child was the first clear victim, because of the way the mother had behaved on that day. That was so clearly in my mind that it didn't occur to me that what I'd written didn't exactly say that.

And the second victim is the Traveller community, and thus potentially the child once again, and also the mother.

The central point I was making was about it being a distortion to present the community from which the child was removed as being abusive towards children. And even if the actions of the authorities did turn out in fact to have been appropriate and proportional and so forth, the impression conveyed by a lot of media coverage seems to have involved that distortion.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 11:40 AM

I'm anxious to hear what those exculpatory excuses are, and what the video really shows. In police beating cases it is sometimes claimed that the suspect was threatening, or resisting arrest, or was dangerous, or did something prior to when the tape started. But this was a 4-year-old child!

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 11:38 AM

Have people stopped to think what the child wants, she has go over the physical abuse, keeping her from her mum will add to the emotional abuse. Think of it if the child reasons if she had not been naughty then she would have not been punished. Children can turn situations with a little imagination to it being their fault.

Rather than leaving the child with her mother and letting the humiliation of the event be enough punishiment is taking the child away from her loved ones really helping anyone.

I see this as an over zealous reaction which is more to do with soothing Americans own conscience and making people feel better than it has to do with the reasons behind the mothers actions.

The loser in it all is the little girl all those who post pro removing her from her family should step back and think of the child.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: M.Ted
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 11:29 AM

I understand that abuse is an issue for you, Sharon, and I respect that. Abuse is an issue for a lot of us. But, from my own experience, I know that there can be exculpatory facts in situations like this--furthermore, I know, also from my own experience, that the camera image, no matter how vivid, does not really show what is happening--

When the word "exculpatory" comes up, though, it means that there is different explanation for what has happened than the first one that pops into people's minds, not that what we have seen is necessarily reasonable or acceptable--only that the issue is much more complex, in both cause and solution, than we first realize--

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: SharonA
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 11:05 AM

P.S. – McGrath says ,"...there can be more than one victim. In this case there are two. There's a mother who has snapped and done something stupid and wrong, and nobody is denying that. And there's a community of people who have been discriminated and persecuted in various ways over the centuries, and the mother belongs to that community..."

If you consider the mother to be one victim, and the community to be another, then there are three victims. Remember the child? If the community is a victim of discrimination, then the child as a member of that community is a victim twice over – of discrimination and of abuse by her mother. If the mother is a victim because she "snapped", then the child is a victim three times over – of discrimination, of abuse by her mother, and of the psychological trauma of living with a mother who is capable of "snapping" and may well have "snapped" again and again had she not been brought up short by the justice system. Whether Toogood is convicted of felony battery or not, IMO she shouldn't get any of her kids back until she can manage her anger.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 11:00 AM

You can love your enemies, do good to them that hate you...but don't help them do harm. And to legally "get one off" is to enable (to use drug/psychological terminology) their behavior. We become a part of the process when we are enablers.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Jeri
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 10:54 AM

Ron Olesko wrote:

Please tell me where this stereotyping has influenced the case. Standard procedures in SUSPECTED abuse cases are to put the children in foster homes - no exceptions.

ALL the talk about what Traveler culture is and isn't is coming from the media and public opinion. No one has shown ANY evidence that the authorities have used ANY prejudicial treatment in this case.

(I'm responsible for making the text bold.)
I think that's one of Larry's main points, which is another reason I can't understand what he's doing or why he's doing it. I think he believes there should have been special treatment in this case, because it involves an ethnic group to which he's sympathetic, and a burocratic one-size-fits-all procedure should have been waved in this case.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: SharonA
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 10:40 AM

Larry says, "When was the last time a woman slapped a child leaving no injury definable by any forensic methods and it was national news for a week... please folks open your eyes!"

Larry, with all due respect, I think you need to open your own eyes.

First of all, the story was "national news for a week" because there was a warrant out for Toogood's arrest for a week while she fled halfway across the nation, hiding a child whom the authorities feared had been seriously physically injured, and trying to disguise the child by dyeing and cutting her hair. "The fact that she returned to Indiana quickly when she could have been away until the intial furror passed" could also mean that she realized that it was pointless to keep running away when the entire country was on the lookout for her.

Secondly, as was evident on the videotape and as I and others on this thread have pointed out repeatedly, this was far more than a woman slapping a child. Yes, indeed, it was a "bad slapping" and there was shoving, but there was also hair-pulling, shaking and – using Toogood's own term – repeatedly "knocking" on her daughter's forehead. Now, knocking involves a closed fist, just as punching does, so whether Toogood actually meant that she was knocking as if on a door or using the term as a euphemism for punching (as in the term "knocking someone's block off" by punching them), she still is admitting laying a fist on her child and not just an open hand. I am as distressed as Jerry at your apparent downplaying of the abuse that child received that day.

Thirdly, that child was not examined by the doctor in new Jersey for nearly a week (if not exactly a week) after the incident of abuse, NOT the next day as you'd claimed in part 1 of this thread. I'm disturbed to see that you haven't got that fact straight, and I'm afraid you're blinding yourself to the fact that any bruises the child might have sustained could have healed before she was examined. Furthermore, as I stated before, there is psychological injury inflicted by abuse even if physical injury is not evident, and I don't see you even acknowledging that fact.

I can't imagine what you could possibly have to bring to the case that would be exculpatory, when there is simply no excuse for treating one's own child the way Toogood treated her daughter on September 13th when she struck the child, and afterward when she removed the child from her home and community and tried to hide her from the world. How can you tolerate that sort of isolation of the child from her siblings, her father and her culture while objecting to a temporary, supervised foster-care placement???

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 10:31 AM

McGrath - Your points about inaccurate and prejudiced stereotyping are well taken, but again no one has shown how that is relevant in this case. Everyone is trying to put a spin on how what has transpired should be "excused" (for lack of a better word) simply because the individuals were stereotyped.

Please tell me where this stereotyping has influenced the case. Standard procedures in SUSPECTED abuse cases are to put the children in foster homes - no exceptions.

ALL the talk about what Traveler culture is and isn't is coming from the media and public opinion. No one has shown ANY evidence that the authorities have used ANY prejudicial treatment in this case.

Having worked in a department store, I know that security cameras will follow a person suspected of shoplifting or other security infringement. If they can prove something on tape they have a case. Based on what Toogood has said transpired when she tried to return items, there was REASONABLE suspicion for the store to follow her on camera - no matter what her ethnic background is. The FACT that they caught her hitting her child was coincidence.

Until facts prove otherwise, it really looks like the only spin doctoring going on is by those who are trying to make a case for the Travelers. It is a noble endeavour to fight prejudice that PROBABLY exists, but to pin it on this particular case is NOT helping the cause - it merely shows the public that misguided lawyers will do anything to prove their point. We learned nothing from the O.J. Simpson case.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 09:42 AM

How can you try to help someone you disagree with? That's like saying "how can you love your enemies?" If you only help people you agree with you'd end up only helping yourself.

Quite rightly good people will want to protect people who are abused by people who are stronger than themselves. But sometimes it gets more complicated, because there can be more than one victim.

In this case there are two. There's a mother who has snapped and done something stupid and wrong, and nobody is denying that. And there's a community of people who have been discriminated and persecuted in various ways over the centuries, and the mother belongs to that community, and if InOBU is right, the way this thing has been dealt with has been coloured and distorted by that.

There's a suggestion that violence towards children is more prevalent among Travellers than it is among the rest of society. This is a suggestion that can comes from two directions - it can come from people who are demonising them, and it can come from people who might seek to excuse the behaviour as culturally conditioned or something.

But the truth, as I understand it, is that, if anything, violence towards children is less prevalent among Travellers than it is among what you can call the mainstream. That would definitely have been true a couple of generations ago - but there has been a move away from that way of treating children among mainstream people, and maybe we've caught up a good way.

Slapping a small child around the head is deviant behaviour among Travellers - and yet the authorities chose to remove the child from her whole family and community. That suggests inaccurate and prejudiced stereotyping to me. And reading what some of those "experts" have been saying reinforces that suspicion.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Jeri
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 09:39 AM

Larry, you say you're not defending the slapping but that's what virtually your entire post does. That's how you started the first thread, with this

"Most anyone who can look me in the eye and say their mom did not once loose it and swat you as Madlyne Toogood did her daughter (leaving no mark by the way...) well a lot of you would be not telling the truth. Fact is, that she is being prociscuted for the crime of being an Irish Traveller in the United States..."

Bullshit
You would have had to show me why that was true, and you haven't been able to do that.

This is NOT normal behavior, and no desperate attempts at justification will make it so. You are trying to justify what she did, although you ARE going about it as a lawyer, a politican, a spin doctor. You're trying to manipulate facts so they tell the story you'd rather be telling. Discrimination exists and is evil. I just can't see that this case is an example of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 08:22 AM

Larry, I understand what you're saying about it not being a pattern of behavior. But I'm still repulsed by the fact that her instinct was to punch or slap around the head. To me that is not natural. Even if anger momentarily took over, it was a most harmful, hideous form of outlet. All it takes is one incident to do permanent damage, why should one be told to wait until that happens? And as far as the carseat...totally irrelevant...just a habit. I've seen and studied teenaged boys who have uncontrollable anger, often with impulses to harm themselves or to act out physically. I've seen police react to a persom resisting arrest. I once felt the rage in myself when physically threatened. But this was a tiny child probably strapped in a seat!

On another note, I ask this because I've given it a lot of thought for a lot of years...how can you defend (and thereby help) someone whom you vehemently disagree with? In my mind (and I realize I'm in the minority here) any explanation is just a rationalization using false logic. It just wouldn't work for me. You don't have to answer this if it would be "talking out of court" but it really is a question I've thought about all my life.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: InOBU
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 07:41 AM

Hi RIck, Mary, Amos, etc... Rick DON'T REACH FOR A CIGGY MAN!!!! Reach for a guitar!

In one respect I have to speak as a lawyer because I have restraints on my speach in this case, as part of what I know is still confidential. But, Mary that which I know explains why this is not a pattern of behavior. Now, Rick, as to looking one way and the other. One thing to understand about ALL people and people's racialized as "Gypsies" one thing to understand is that they live in the state of being out of place. As your Black friends will tell you, that in certain places and situations, they know that they are looked at suspiously by folks around them, no matter how mainstream they are, it is a fact of Race in the US, if not in America. For Travellers and Roma it is a matter of being permanently "out of place" as the "other".

Looking right and left is a constant in the life of these communities racialized as Roma. Before Roma go anywhere, they say to each other, Arrack sa jas, "watch as you go..." Some one asked a group of Roma with me, what they would say in the old days before the wagons started, and one Rom said, laughing, Arrack o Gyzhen, whatch out for the non-Roma. Roma and Travellers are subject to pretextual arrest, constant harassment, and as a result in public, they can appear to be "acting guilty" when they are worried and cautious, and in fact, the exculpatary evidence in this case will explain this further.

We who know and love these folks have a huge burden, as the nation has been told something, and shown a video that shows part of what we have been told, and the comentary has filled in the rest. Perspective in video is everything. What the video does not show is a punching, a beating, what it does show is a slapping, a bad slapping that should not have happened and under the normal cercumstances of Madelyne's life, this would not have happened and has not in the past. Her confusion at her own loss of temper is clear in her abondoning the caution of her culture to speak to the nation and say she did what she is accused of, her confusion at her loss of temper is seen in the fact that she returned to Indiana quickly when she could have been away until the intial furror passed, as would have been normal in her culture and in fact in many people's culture... I am not defending the slapping and shoving. It was ugly and wrong, but that is not to say I agree with the presentation as fact that she beat her child. You should note that even in the throes of unusual rage for her, she is placing the child in a car seat. Well, all I have to say is let one of you who has not experienced a moment of unusual rage in your life cast the first stone, everyone else present your kids to Child Protective Services to be placed with strangers.

all the best, Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Amos
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 02:01 AM

Rick:

I don't believe anyone was defending wrong-doing here, in what I have read.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:02 AM

This appears to be a grey area to some folks here, but I'm afraid the time that I spent working for the Ontario Children's Aid society (I've chatted some about this on MC) has made me very inflexible in the area of child abuse. I have no doubt the fact that Travellers are unduly hassled, will be used in this woman's defense, but on the video tape I watched a woman look to the right, then to the left, and then start whaling on a little kid. I don't care if her family get turned into Saints, that's very wrong Larry, and on some level you know it. Darn, I wish you weren't talking so much like a lawyer in this thread.

Guess this is why I stay WAY clear of most political or controversial threads, even though I have a lot of opinions. When folks on "my side," ie: the Left, use what seem to me to be the same tactics used by "The Right" to defend wrong-doing, I gotta say something.

On the other hand....it hasn't driven me to want a cigarette!!! So Whoopie!

Cheers

Rick

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Amos
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 12:48 AM

Aine:

Thanks for your highly clarifying guidance and commentary.

I think you separate the issues very handsomely. Well done!

As I recall there were furors about the evil Gypsies in another Western country that stood on the edge of war about sixty years ago or so.

Those who ignore their history are doomed to repeat it -- whether in individual violence or in mob reactions. They are both mindless dramatizations.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Coyote Breath
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 12:47 AM

InOBU! Thank you for the response. I don't do much news service scanning or TV watching so some of what you say I will take especial note of. I despise discrimination of any kind. Perhaps my romantic view of the world shields me from some of it's nastiness when I should face that nastiness and do something. In that regard I am tired. I now recall a 60 minutes bit of almost ten years ago which did an "expose" of a group of people, who, while they were not called travellers, probably were. It was all about a siding scam of some sort, I can't recall any details. There was SOME sort of story in a recent film with Brad Pitt playing a traveller (a boxer I think) can't remember the title. (Yikes, I can't seem to remember much at all these days!)

With what you posted and what Aine posted I might be able to get a handle on this whole thing. I'll visit some of the sites. Aine.

My girlfriend said this upon seeing the tape: "Boy, she'll never be able to get a job now!" referring to the publicity and that terrible image of her slapping her kid like that. We both agreed that she needs to get help and that was the extent of the reaction on our part. I felt sorry for the child and I felt sorry for her as well. I can't help but feel that she has too many little ones to worry about and that can be a problem. Heck, just ONE can be a problem!

I am fascinated about your covering the "war" in the North. I would like to see your photos sometime. I also would like to hear your opinion of past and present events.

CB

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: mg
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 12:05 AM

I would be very very surprised if this was a one-time incident. I really really doubt it. People get into patterns of behavior. And this was fairly cold-blooded it seemed. I'm not interested in the mother being punished or doing time, but I am interested in seeing that the child is protected from that sort of monster behavior. I'll call her a monster. And there are lots more like her out there. And I believe that she is married, but to me one of the strongest arguments against single parenthood is that so often there are no witnesses, and no one to stay a hand if someone gets out of control. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Sep 02 - 10:25 PM

One thing Larry - you just said "When was the last time a woman slapped a child leaving no injury definable by any forensic methods and it was national news for a week"

Well, when was the last time such a beating was caught on tape?

I still find it offensive to say that because there are no injuries there is no crime. I go back to my early comment about using a gun - if I pull the trigger and miss you, does that mean that it was okay? There was no intent to harm? If you could prove that it was an accident perhaps, but I am curious how they will defend what was viewed on tape AND what she admitted to.

Perhaps it wouldn't have been national news for a week if the Traveler angle hadn't been used and if everyone stopped talking about it. The news is there because people want it and people are willing to talk about it.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Sep 02 - 10:20 PM

I understand Larry and I hope that the truth will out. While the evidence SEEMS strong against this woman, I do know that you can't tell everything from a videotape.

I hope whatever evidence you are hinting at does not fall in the category of "loophole". If she was caught in a crime against her child then she should take her punishment - even if the FBI, CIA and any other clandestine organization were following her waiting for such a moment.

Still, I respect and admire your conviction Larry and I await what happens. Like most of us, this story has opened up a lot of thought. I must say that things I've been reading here and in other venues in the last 24 hours have opened up some doubts. While I say she should take her punishment, I do feel that she deserves compassion and treatment if she has a problem. No mother and child should be permanently separated unless the damage and risk is too great for either's safety. Just as no evidence has been yet presented that the authorities were persecuting her because of her cultural identity, I have heard no evidence that the behavior she exhibited that day is her regular behavior. However she has admitted to hitting the child in a violent manner. That is going to be hard to deny.

I also hope we won't see the justice system corrupted once again.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: InOBU
Date: 26 Sep 02 - 10:09 PM

Oh as to playing the race card, I have read sixty or seventy articals on this, and have some insider knowlege of the case, I have been involved in a number of family law cases, and have never ever seen policing like this other than in the pretextual arrests of Roma and Travellers which are often used on minor incidents to get information on a community racially profiled as a criminal subculture against the evidence of the experts, that is the long and short of it. When was the last time a woman slapped a child leaving no injury definable by any forensic methods and it was national news for a week... please folks open your eyes! Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 26 Sep 02 - 10:06 PM

McGrath, I really must step in and comment here. From personal experience shopping in lots of WalMarts and shopping centers over many years, I have NEVER seen a child punched in the head repeatedly. It breaks my heart to hear frustrated parents snap and say very ugly things to crying children...and I've seen a swat on the butt...but absolutely never hit above the waist, and certainly not repeatedly. Lets all remember the little girl...this was an emergency.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: InOBU
Date: 26 Sep 02 - 10:04 PM

Ron: From the start of these posts I have had a wee problem that next week I may not have. I know something exculpatory which is not yet public and cannot share it, so I have been more strong in speaking on the aspect of anti-traveller discrimination while not going into the core of the case. Hang in there folks, the truth will out VERY soon, I hope. Cheers to all, Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 26 Sep 02 - 10:00 PM

Kevin: An interesting little ancedote. Many years ago when my sons were little, one of them had bronchitis so seriously that we had to take him to the hospital and put him in an oxygen tent. While my wife of that time and I stood there, deeply concerned about our son, a young hispanic couple came in with their two or three year old son, who was in far worse shape than our son. The boy was terrified, and because of the congestion in his throat was barking like a wounded animal, unable to form words. The Nurse was Nurse Ratchet from One Flew Over Thew Cuckoos nest, and dragged the boy out of his Mother's arms and threw him down in the crib. This terrified the boy even more. and the parents were horrified. They didn't speak English, but they expressed their fear in their eyes. Finally, the nurse got the little boy strapped down so he couldn't try to climb out, and put the oxygen tent over him. I realize that she had to do something to contain him, but she did it in such a brutal way, with no thought for letting the parents calm there son down. And then she turned to me and made a fatal mistake. She said to me "I don't even know why they let them in the hospital." I was in a state of shock, and momentarily thought only of the terrified young boy. Our son seemed to be the picture of health, in comparison. Before we left, I got the name of the nurse. As it turned out, she was the head of the department.

When I got home, I wrote a letter on the letterhead of the Museum where I worked, using my title as Executive Director, and signing my name Gerald E. Rasmussen. It didn't hurt that the names of all the members of the Board of Directors were on the stationary. Of course, the Museum had nothing to do with my letter, but I wanted to use whatever influence I could. I described the experience in great detail, expressed my disgust at the way the child and parents were treated, and offered to appear in person to confront the nurse. A couple of weeks later, the hospital held a hearing in response to my letter, and the Head Nurse was fired. Someone I knew who worked at the hospital said that they'd been trying to fire her for years, but couldn't get solid enough evidence against her. My position and the Museum's in the community was strong enough that they fired her, without my ever appearing in front of them.

The perspective that I'd add to this would be to just as strongly go up against anyone who said, "The staff at that hospital are so prejudiced against Spanish-speaking people that they don't give them the same care as everyone else." I don't know what the percentage of good people is, Kevin. I'm an optomist, so I'd set it higher than a lot of people. What I do believe is that generalities are unjust. Fight discrimination and dishonesty. One person at a time. If there are three people out of ten who are prejudcied, fight them. Those who are not will appreciate you and do everything they can to back you up. Blanket them all as, "those people" or "That organization" and they will respond in the same way that Irish Travellers, or Puerto Ricans respond. Don't make generalities that judge groups of people. No matter who the group is. Go after the Bastards. The good people will be your strongest allies.

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Sep 02 - 09:57 PM

There are two stories here... Toogood versus the authorities and the media/public perception versus the Irish Travelers. Unfortunately they aren't being separated in this discussion.

As for the media/public perception versus the Irish Travelers, yes Larry is right. Over the past week there has been a bandwagon approach to this story and the media and the public are drawing sterotyped opinions of the Irish Travelers.

However the initial story is still Toogood versus the authorities for her actions against her child. Aside fromm innuendo and opinions I haven't seen any EVIDENCE in these discussions or in the media that would lead me to believe the authorities are treating this case any differently than other cases of child abuse. I am waiting for someone to prove me wrong.

If there is a stereotype being drawn, it is probably one against the system of justice in this country. It sounds like a defense is trying to be formed that Toogood was unjustly singled out and persecuted. Her lawyers will play this trump card in the same fashion that OJ Simpson's lawyers played the race card. Lawyers are committed to giving their client the best defense they can, even if that client is guilty.

The result is always the same, the victim is ignored and the press has something to talk about for months on end.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: InOBU
Date: 26 Sep 02 - 09:43 PM

Ps it goes without saying, I even feel kin to the oft cantakerous Gargoyle! Here's to ya, garg! Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: InOBU
Date: 26 Sep 02 - 09:42 PM

Hey Jerry, I just want to add, I consider you a stand up guy and a friend as well, in fact, most fellows I dissagree with on EVERYTHING! jsut about on mudcat, like oh say Leprichan, I consider a stand up guy and a pal, and I'd be happy and proud to share something we have in common, like hunting Carabou! (See now all my liberal friends are pissed at me Lep!) But, the exposure of prejudise takes putting your head on the block sometimes. "And tell me Thomas, will you not come along with us for comradery..." "And when you go to heaven for following your faith and I go to hell for denying mine, will you come along with me for comradery" as Thomas Moore said. I cannot come along with you all, when, as O'Rielly states, that he would take the children away from travellers as they aren't an ethnic community, that they are a cult of criminals. Someone must put their head on the block and say, no, No to the journalist who states he never heard of travellers until last week, but now knows better than I, who is a friend to them for decades, better than social scientists who have done field work. Yes, some friends may see this as an attack on comradery to say take note of a prejudice common in this nation. But some of us must accept the blows of friends for justice and forsake praise of the crowd. Jerry, you and Rick Fielding, and all are special friends to me, as dear to me as Kev, who agrees with me more times perhaps, but I see us as a family united by our love of people's music and people's culture. Some of us vote one way, love one way, hate another, but we are family here.
Catch me on CNN tomorrow... boing goes the plugomatic, Spaw!
Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Sep 02 - 08:40 PM

I wish I was sure about 95% of people anywhere being decent, unprejudiced and tolerant. I think if that was true the world wouldn't be in the state it is.

Or maybe it's the world being in the state it is that gets in the way of us being decent and unprejudiced and tolerant.

Anyway, people who preach hatred seem to have no difficulty in gathering a lot more than 5% of support in most places.

I think it's more a matter of most of us (al of us really) having a nasty side to our nature which is always liable to break out. So maybe 95% (or I'd guess rathr less) of each of us is decent - but that 5% of each of us (or I'd guess rather more) is there ready to be fanned into flame. Original Sin is one name for it.

But that's thread drift. As I read what InOBU has said, and it's reinforced by what Áine just said, the key thing is the way that a particular incident (not that different from what, I suspect, many of us have seen in the course of shopping - slapping kids is still part of mainstream culture in both our countries), has been projected into a media feeding frenzy in the States (which we have been spared here), and has brought into the light a lot of really nasty prejudice.

I don't think anyone has been suggesting that Americans are especially intolerant or anything like that. Just that when it comes down to it, the same intolerance that distorts the places your ancestors came from crossed over with them, and is still there, changed in some ways, unchanged in others.

"'Monster Mom' is Irish Traveller" - that's a headline from an Irish American online news site that I came across.

If there were news stories saying "Monster Mom is a Jew" I think most people would be a bit perturbed, and rightly so - even if it were actually true, and the label "Monster Mom" was actually a justifiable thing to call anyone in this kind of context. As Áine just said, it's right that there should be an effective response to an incident like this - but there seem to be some aspects of the way this whole thing has been handled which raise serious questions.

And thanks for that last bit Jerry - and of course I see you as a friend, and I know that you can be depended on to fight anything in the way of prejudice and discrimination that you came into contact with.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 26 Sep 02 - 07:51 PM

Perhaps what Nicole was suggesting, Kevin, is that it seemed almost impossible to get Larry to respond to the accusations of the slapping/punching/hair pulling, what ever exact form the abuse of the child was. I think that we all would have been a little easier on Larry if he had just accepted that the whole cause of all this was that the Mother had done something that was seemingly seriously abusive. His responses sounded earily like the cover-ups I've seen in reporting war actions... kind of like, "of course, we regret that several civilian children were killed in the cross fire." I feel that Larry is so intent upon proving that this individual case is clearly one of social injustice that he either minimized or downplayed the abuse that was poured on the little girl.

I think that the folks on Mudcat are liberal to the extreme... far more than the general public. And yet everyone was saying that the initial action taken against this woman had nothing to do with her being an Irish Traveller (or even any awareness that she is.) It seems like even mentioning that this woman has lied, shop-lifted and used illegal drivers licenses is looked upon as being prejudicial. I think that Mudcat members (including me) have tried to focus on what the woman did, not whether there is prejudice against Irish Travellers. Most people I've talked to didn't even realize that they existed... never even heard the term. It's hard to claim broad prejudice against a group that almost no one has ever even heard of. "I hate those... who are they?"

I guess that I also personally get tired of how damning the image of Americans is on Mudcat. It's like we're all a bunch a Damn Biggots, ready to shoot anyone who takes out a wallet, or steals a pair of blue jeans. Maybe I should write an open letter to the people of the United States, as someone has to the people of Iraq. Truth is, Kevin, most Americans are open-hearted and not prejudiced. Just as I believe most Iraqis, Brits and Afghans are. Of course there is prejudice here (and in England, Afghanistan and everywhere where there are people. There are some people in positions of authority that are prejudiced, too. But, it seems like everyone in authority is being tarred and feathered on some of these threads. I for one would like to STAND UP for the decency of 95% of all Americans, Brits and Afghans. By tarring and feathering everyone in generalities that run rampant on Mudcat, it just breeds mistrust and suspicion.

So this one's for you, Kevin. I don't agree with some of the things that you're saying on this thread, but I think you're a fine man, and I consider you a friend.

Brother Jerry