|
|
Post by tonynatuzzi on Nov 15, 2005 22:55:31 GMT -5
Speaking of Gypsies has anybody here ever seen Stephen King's Thinner.The Gypsies in that movie looked White and looked nothing like the darkskin people of India where Gypsies originally came from suposedly.Did that movie inacuratley portray what real Gypsies look like were they Hollywood trying to Whitewash Gypsies maybe.Even Italian actor Joe Mantegna in that movie was darker than many of the Gypsies portrayed.
|
|
|
|
Post by zemelmete on Nov 16, 2005 3:53:53 GMT -5
Are the Nomads from Central asia, like people from Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, etc. considered gypsies? No. But as I know, at least in Russia many russians look down at them. The term "Gypsies," I think, only refers to the people "Roma." Gypsies call themselves "roma", while european nations call them with their own words - english "gypsies", latvian "èigâni", russian "cygane" etc. Speaking of Gypsies has anybody here ever seen Stephen King's Thinner.The Gypsies in that movie looked White and looked nothing like the darkskin people of India where Gypsies originally came from suposedly.Did that movie inacuratley portray what real Gypsies look like were they Hollywood trying to Whitewash Gypsies maybe.Even Italian actor Joe Mantegna in that movie was darker than many of the Gypsies portrayed. Maybe in America gypsies could be considered as "white", but not here - in Europe. Gypsies look considerable darker than average european, even they usually aren't as darkskinned as indians or arabs. gypsies are regarded in europe and anywhere they live, much worse than african americans I dont think most white americans would have a problem hiring a black nanny, but who would hire a gipsy to look after your children if you go to the movies? Yeah, nobody trust gypsies. They usually are regarded as thievish, lazy, unthuthful etc. The truth is, that gypsies are the least educated people. Here, in Baltic states almost all illiterate people are gypsies. Gypsies are also the least employed of all ethnic groups. There are numbers that only 10% of gypsies in Baltic states work legal job. Many of them "earn" by doing illegal jobs, such as drug selling, fortune telling, selling clothes, watches, mobile phones etc. in markets. In summers and early autumns some gypsy groups are going to forests to pick up there berries etc. which they sell to passing car drivers. |
|
Gamed
New Member
Posts: 47
|
Post by Gamed on Nov 16, 2005 4:39:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Hairless on Nov 16, 2005 5:03:01 GMT -5
I'm not qualified at all to answer this question, because I don't much about gypsies or European ethnic conflicts, but I can say this... All the American racial tension I hear about and see on the 'Net, I don't see in real life. Maybe it's different in other parts of the country, but where I live, I haven't seen a lot of issues. In my classes, I'm usually the only AA person (although, more recently, I have been seeing West Africans).I'm surrounded by white and Asian people on a daily basis, and they don't treat me differently than they treat each other. I've been invited to their house, met their parents, and so on...In my highschool, where there was more of a mix, there was no real tension at all, except between the AA's and the recent rich African immigrants (who tend to look down on AA's, btw). Just curious where you live. I've spent a lot of time in California and Hawaii and always feel the same (although I am not black and could certainly be missing some things). My friends in other cities feel the same way. Even my "ultra-conservative, semi-Southern" in-laws happily embraced a black son-in-law. So I wonder if people are not just focusing on events in small towns or the Deep South. On the other hand I have heard Europeans say quite offensive things about black people, both when they are living here and when I have travelled (France is supposed to be harmonious... but I saw several rude displays and overt comments made towards black people in restaurants there that would simply not happen where I live without a lot of angry people intervening). |
|
|
|
Post by alaina on Nov 16, 2005 23:50:56 GMT -5
khangard,
I live in NYC... ;D
<<<<<<<
|
|
|
|
Post by Hairless on Nov 17, 2005 1:52:41 GMT -5
khangard, I live in NYC... ;D <<<<<<< opps, I am getting old and blind  |
|
|
|
|
|
Post by Lada on Nov 17, 2005 17:04:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by vgambler33 on Nov 22, 2005 21:58:39 GMT -5
[quote author=alaina board There is a sizable Mexican population in the city. Six or more of them live in two-bedroom apartments. You will see the women in the obstetrician clinics with three kids already in tow. I visited Harlem Hospital two weeks back with a friend and saw more Mexican patients than black or PR patients (blacks and puerto ricans are the majority in Harlem, blacks on the west side, PRs on the east). gambler>Well. In NYCITY. Puerto ricans have a higher poverty rate than Recent Mexican immigrants. Believe the Mexicans in NYCITY are recent arrivals. The poorest Mexicans in the USA live in NYCITY. Most Mexicans in NYCITY are from the Mexican state of Puebla. For example, in New York City, less than one-third of Mexican and Cuban children are poor, compared to one-half of Puerto Rican children. www.pop.psu.edu/searchable/press/aug1696.htm |
|
|
|
Post by alaina on Nov 23, 2005 18:11:38 GMT -5
They are recent immigrants so it's understandable. 3rd generation descendants of MExican immigrants are much better off than those types. Man, i have to modify the post of mine you quoted. That's so inarticulate! I don't think it has much to do with how 'recent' immigrants are. It's about how much money and education they have when they come. All of the recent Nigerian immigrants I know have big houses, cars, and one or two children. They either have a degree or are working toward one. |
|
|
|
Post by vgambler33 on Nov 23, 2005 20:26:24 GMT -5
They are recent immigrants so it's understandable. 3rd generation descendants of MExican immigrants are much better off than those types. Man, i have to modify the post of mine you quoted. That's so inarticulate! I don't think it has much to do with how 'recent' immigrants are. It's about how much money and education they have when they come. All of the recent Nigerian immigrants I know have big houses, cars, and one or two children. They either have a degree or are working toward one. It's obvious that only the educated Nigerian immigrants come to the USA. You are not going to see Nigerians who live in huts coming to the USA. |
|
|
|
Post by murphee on Nov 24, 2005 4:05:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by alaina on Nov 24, 2005 20:57:53 GMT -5
I don't think it has much to do with how 'recent' immigrants are. It's about how much money and education they have when they come. All of the recent Nigerian immigrants I know have big houses, cars, and one or two children. They either have a degree or are working toward one. It's obvious that only the educated Nigerian immigrants come to the USA. You are not going to see Nigerians who live in huts coming to the USA. Duh, so? You obviously missed the point of my post. Carry on. |
|
|
|
Post by osservatore on Nov 25, 2005 7:13:35 GMT -5
Maybe in America gypsies could be considered as "white", but not here - in Europe. Gypsies look considerable darker than average european, even they usually aren't as darkskinned as indians or arabs. Gypsies are commonly referred as whites in Italy. I mean, speaking about them nobody ends up saying they aren't white or stuff. The Roms are usually dark, while another community, speaking another dialectal variety of their language, the Sintis, are usually fairer and undistinguishable from average italians. |
|
|
|
Post by aroundtheworld on Nov 25, 2005 18:12:31 GMT -5
In the pics they appear to be inbred or lack proper nutrition or prenatal care. Something about them looks like they are "lacking" but of course those are the worst pics of them.
|
|
