Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Featured
2024 Guinness Six Nations
[2016 RBS Six Nations] Round 4: England vs. Wales (12/03/2016)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Leonormous Boozer" data-source="post: 793261" data-attributes="member: 45598"><p>Quite clearly not, that statement is nothing more than a red herring and you know it. A glorified boys club is incomparable to a group of people living and breeding with each other for 1000+ years.</p><p></p><p></p><p>No, Irish travellers are a "distinct genetic group from settled Irish as Icelanders are from Norwegians". </p><p><a href="http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/health/dna-study-travellers-a-distinct-ethnicity-156324.html" target="_blank">http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/health/dna-study-travellers-a-distinct-ethnicity-156324.html</a></p><p></p><p>That's a 1250 year old nation that was under Norwegian rule for 118 years, it had been settled on by Norsemen and Vikings and hasn't been ruled by Norway for 700 years. That's the same period of time that Irish travellers, unlike settled Irish, would not have been fraternising and breeding with Norman settlers who provided many common Irish surnames, such as anything starting with Fitz or De/D' and many more. These are names that very few, if any, Irish traveller families have, I couldn't find any after skimming through this. <a href="http://www.travellerheritage.ie/parish_records_of_surnames.asp" target="_blank">http://www.travellerheritage.ie/parish_records_of_surnames.asp</a> This is really where the most significant scientific distinction of ethnicity lies between settled Irish and Irish travellers because the Norman influence on this country was absolutely huge.</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>Again that statement is made to be misleading. Gay and deaf communities have their own culture but they don't have unique marital, working and religious traditions like Irish travellers nor their own language, sign language is incomparable here as it's used out of necessity and they don't all live in a way as distinct from the wider communities they live in as Irish travellers do to the settled Irish.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If it wasn't a comparison it was certainly malicious considering that you used the Amish as an example in this post which would have been a far better example, alb<span style="font-family: 'tahoma'">eit still wro</span>ng, to the point you were trying to make.</p><p></p><p>An ethnic group is described as <span style="font-family: 'tahoma'">"a community or population made up of people who share a common cultural background or descent." I don't understand how a group with their own language and all their other cultural distinctions who have separated themselves from and been separated from the settled community which they likely came from for 1000+ years to the point where they do have scientifically distinguishable DNA aren't an ethnic group. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'tahoma'"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'tahoma'">Another point which backs up them being their own ethnic group is that if a settled person were to marry a traveller and live like a traveller it wouldn't make them one, their kids would be travellers, well half traveller, but they wouldn't. Quite like if a white Norwegian were to marry a white Icelandic and move to Iceland their ethnicity doesn't change.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'tahoma'"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'tahoma'">They are considered ethnic minorities by both the governments of the UK and Ireland and it wasn't given to them just because they asked for it, they fought hard for the distinction and it was a decision made and influenced by experts in fields relevant to the issue, people who have a far greater understanding of the topic than either of us do.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'tahoma'"></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Leonormous Boozer, post: 793261, member: 45598"] Quite clearly not, that statement is nothing more than a red herring and you know it. A glorified boys club is incomparable to a group of people living and breeding with each other for 1000+ years. No, Irish travellers are a "distinct genetic group from settled Irish as Icelanders are from Norwegians". [URL]http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/health/dna-study-travellers-a-distinct-ethnicity-156324.html[/URL] That's a 1250 year old nation that was under Norwegian rule for 118 years, it had been settled on by Norsemen and Vikings and hasn't been ruled by Norway for 700 years. That's the same period of time that Irish travellers, unlike settled Irish, would not have been fraternising and breeding with Norman settlers who provided many common Irish surnames, such as anything starting with Fitz or De/D' and many more. These are names that very few, if any, Irish traveller families have, I couldn't find any after skimming through this. [URL]http://www.travellerheritage.ie/parish_records_of_surnames.asp[/URL] This is really where the most significant scientific distinction of ethnicity lies between settled Irish and Irish travellers because the Norman influence on this country was absolutely huge. Again that statement is made to be misleading. Gay and deaf communities have their own culture but they don't have unique marital, working and religious traditions like Irish travellers nor their own language, sign language is incomparable here as it's used out of necessity and they don't all live in a way as distinct from the wider communities they live in as Irish travellers do to the settled Irish. If it wasn't a comparison it was certainly malicious considering that you used the Amish as an example in this post which would have been a far better example, alb[FONT=tahoma]eit still wro[/FONT]ng, to the point you were trying to make. An ethnic group is described as [FONT=tahoma]"a community or population made up of people who share a common cultural background or descent." I don't understand how a group with their own language and all their other cultural distinctions who have separated themselves from and been separated from the settled community which they likely came from for 1000+ years to the point where they do have scientifically distinguishable DNA aren't an ethnic group. Another point which backs up them being their own ethnic group is that if a settled person were to marry a traveller and live like a traveller it wouldn't make them one, their kids would be travellers, well half traveller, but they wouldn't. Quite like if a white Norwegian were to marry a white Icelandic and move to Iceland their ethnicity doesn't change. They are considered ethnic minorities by both the governments of the UK and Ireland and it wasn't given to them just because they asked for it, they fought hard for the distinction and it was a decision made and influenced by experts in fields relevant to the issue, people who have a far greater understanding of the topic than either of us do. [/FONT] [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Featured
2024 Guinness Six Nations
[2016 RBS Six Nations] Round 4: England vs. Wales (12/03/2016)
Top