I'm a proud gay gypsy – I was shunned for breaking traveller ‘rules' but here's why I'll never turn my back on community
Except for Jessie Jeff, 33, who has totally bucked the trend and is the exact opposite of what you'd expect of a man born and raised within the Romany Gypsy community.
He's openly gay, marrying electrician husband Andy Wilson, 30, in 2022, and the couple even adopted four children under the age of ten two years ago.
Being gay is still deemed unacceptable among some in the traveller community and when Jessie first 'came out' he was estranged from his mum for three months - one relative even refused to share a cup with him in case he 'caught being gay'.
Jessie, who lives with his family in a detached four-bedroom house in Bournemouth, says: 'Nobody believes me when I say I'm a traveller. I've turned it all upside down. It hasn't been easy, when I came out as gay, my mother couldn't cope, and we stopped seeing each other for a while.
'In some traveller communities, gay men are still forced into marrying a woman. Thankfully, she's come round now and even lives with us, but it took time.
'I haven't turned my back on the gypsy community. You can't. I always compare it to being born into the Royal Family. It's your heritage."
Jessie's life now is a far cry from what those around him expected it to be.
Men like him usually follow a set path when it comes to work and relationships.
"It was ingrained in me that I'd leave school and start working in a physical job, such as roofing or being a tree surgeon," he says. "Instead, I'm university educated and work as a paramedic.
"I should have married young to a woman from the gypsy community. My wife would stay at home, while I provided for her.
'I don't know a single other professional, gay traveller who's adopted children – it's vanishingly rare.'
Fighting the truth
Jessie's mum lived in the Piddlehinton traveller community near Dorchester in Dorset when he was born and he spent his early years there until she got a house – though he still spent most of his time on the site at his grandfather's caravan.
'I loved it in many ways,' he remembers. 'I was the youngest of three brothers and there were loads of other children, so we always had people to play with – running around, climbing trees, fixing cars and eating our meals by the campfire.
'The site back then was spick and span, there were 12 pitches, and we all knew each other – there was a very community atmosphere. The kids could play out until all hours and I remember the grown-ups sitting outside drinking beer, with my grandfather whittling flowers out of old pieces of wood.
'We learnt life skills early on – I could drive by the age of 12.
'But in other ways it was hard. I was bullied once I left primary school and called 'gypo'. I realised then that I was different, that other families didn't live on caravan sites, and they ate their meals at a table, not round the fire. And I was dismissed by teachers, who thought it was barely worth teaching me as I'd leave and work in manual labour.'
And Jessie tried to fight the truth that he was gay.
He says: 'In the traveller world it's all about being macho and finding a girlfriend within the community at an early age. It's almost arranged, when I was 12 I was set up with a girl from our community and even then I had to talk to her father before I was allowed to date her.
'When they ended up leaving the site a year later I was so relieved as I didn't want to marry her – though I pretended to be devastated as that was expected of me.'
5
5
Jessie left school at 16 with no qualifications, but he was determined to become a paramedic, after helping to care for his grandfather.
He did a public service course at a local college and then did an access course to get into university and complete a paramedic degree.
He says: 'It was almost unheard of to go to university – a lot of the community struggle to read or write – let alone get a degree.'
It was when he was 21 and met Andy through their hospital work that he finally came out to his family – telling his aunt who told his mum for him.
He says: 'It was a really difficult time, I felt rejected by so many people, the public hated gypsies and my own community was homophobic, they saw being gay as a mental illness.
'My mum started talking to me again after three months, but it was two years before she fully accepted Andy. She now lives with us and is so proud. When I graduated she bought a cake the size of a table in the shape of an ambulance!'
Jessie has worked his way up as a paramedic, he works for the NHS but also for private companies, both as a flight paramedic – where you supervise ill or injured people flying home from abroad – and at private events, he goes to the Chelsea Flower Show and Wimbledon for his job.
'I still find it amazing that I'd be the one that helped royalty if they got ill at one of those events,' says Jessie.
A closer look at gypsy traditions
HERE we take a look at some of the traditions many gypsies follow...
Family-Centric Living: The family is the cornerstone of Romani life, with extended families often living close to one another. Elders are highly respected and play a crucial role in decision-making and maintaining cultural traditions.
Nomadic Heritage: Many Gypsy communities maintain a semi-nomadic lifestyle, moving seasonally to find work or attend cultural gatherings. This tradition is deeply rooted in their history and identity.
Distinctive Décor: Romani homes, whether they are caravans or fixed abodes, are often brightly decorated with vibrant colours and intricate patterns. These decorations reflect their rich cultural heritage and love for beauty.
Communal Gatherings: Social gatherings are a significant part of Gypsy life. Celebrations, such as weddings and religious festivals, are grand affairs involving music, dance, and feasting, often stretching over several days.
Spiritual Practices: Many Gypsy families incorporate a blend of Christian beliefs and traditional spiritual practices. Homes may feature religious icons and amulets believed to offer protection and bring good fortune.
Craftsmanship and Artistry: Romani people are renowned for their craftsmanship, particularly in metalwork, woodwork, and textiles. These skills are often passed down through generations and are a source of both pride and livelihood.
Hospitality: Hospitality is a valued tradition. Guests are treated with great respect and generosity, often being offered the best food and drink available as a sign of honour and goodwill.
Sharing Stories: Storytelling is a vital part of Romani culture, preserving history, morals, and lessons through generations. Elders often share tales that are both entertaining and educational.
And he and Andy are settled in their marriage – they got married in a registry office, once more bucking the gypsy trend of having an enormous wedding with hundreds of guests – and then had a further celebration in Cyprus in September 2022 with only 60 guests.
Andy says: 'I've been to big weddings and funerals. My grandfather's funeral was huge, there were three or four lorry loads of flowers, including a huge flower arrangement of his dog and the gates to heaven.
"His coffin went in a horse and cart around the whole of Dorchester and hundreds of people came. It was wonderful but not the sort of occasion we wanted for our wedding.'
The icing on the cake of his new life was adopting his four children after a lengthy process.
5
Jessie explains: 'We were desperate for a family and started the process when I was 29. It's a lengthy process and very intrusive but it was worth it.
'I adore my children and despite struggling with some aspects of the traveller life, I'm keen that they know all about their heritage. Traveller communities have a terrible reputation; people accuse them of all sorts from theft to fly tipping.
'But in my experience genuine traditional travellers have good family values and an amazing sense of community.
"I've bought a caravan and we go on trips every holiday and half term and I'll be taking them to the Appleby Fair – the highlight of the gypsy social calendar, where thousands of gypsies converge to trade horses and socialise.
'I'm a proud gypsy boy with a difference.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
Solving the asylum question is suddenly even more urgent
What next? As ministers digest the High Court ruling on the use of a hotel in Epping to house asylum seekers, they have very limited options in front of them, none of them good ones. The High Court should not be attacked for making a ruling that takes no account of politics or even practicalities, for that is not its job. It has, though, made a bad situation very much worse. It is hardly helpful to anyone, in such circumstances, for Nigel Farage to exploit a delicate and sometimes combustible situation by calling for more peaceful protests. From bitter experience, we know how such demonstrations can degenerate into minor disorder, or worse. In fact, given the force of the High Court judgment, there is even less need for such protests now. Instead, Mr Farage and his deputy, Richard Tice, as usual, are playing on the fears of people and behaving in a way that is irresponsible at best and dangerous at worst. Mr Farage's interventions in the riots last year only added to the campaign of disinformation underway, and most recently was made to apologise for claiming that the Essex police had 'bussed in' counter-demonstrators in Epping. The Conservatives, mesmerised by the rise of Reform UK, are in a constant losing battle to out-Farage Farage, and they should know better than to propagate myths about asylum seekers living in 'offensively luxurious' conditions, which was today's unhelpful sideswipe from former Tory MP Damian Green. The shadow home secretary Chris Philp and the shadow communities secretary James Cleverly should bear their share of the blame for the mess the asylum system is in, and offer some constructive alternatives and call for calm. They will not recover as a serious alternative party of government until they too come up with a plan for the asylum system. The leader of the opposition, Kemi Badenoch, often talks of such a thing, but it is yet to be seen. Meanwhile, her undeclared rival, Robert Jenrick, appears to be constantly dialling up tensions. The position is serious. Were the Bell Hotel the only place to be affected by the ruling, then it would not be such a challenge to relocate its 140 residents by the date set by the court of 12 September. However, the judgment also sets a clear precedent, albeit largely based in planning law, for the end of the use of hotels to provide emergency housing. It does so with near-immediate effect. That means some 32,000 individuals will need to be rehoused, at absurdly short notice. Already, local authorities controlled by Reform UK and the Conservatives are expected to bring their own cases, which, as the Home Office lawyers warned the High Court, will make the dilemma of finding shelter for them even more acute. In practice, too, it will encourage many more local protests and increase the pressure on police forces to maintain order. One other immediate effect will be to increase the pressure in areas where Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green councils may still try to stick to a 'refugees welcome' policy. This only creates a sense of unfairness that the task of finding shelter for the immigrants is not being properly shared across the country. And, in any case, all, including the refugees and other migrants affected, agree that using hotels is a far from ideal solution in any case. Contrary to some of the anti-refugee propaganda, these hotels, whatever their nominal star ratings, are unsuitable for long-term residence, and are not the lap of luxury. Concierge is not available. Asylum seekers are not allowed to work, they are given shelter and a minimal allowance to stave off destitution, some medical attention and, courtesy of some councils, access to some recreational activities. They are not cosseted in the way some seem to imagine. There is talk of the migrants being placed in flats, which would be relatively expensive, student accommodation, and houses of multiple occupation (HMOs). These create their own problems, particularly because the tendency will be for the irregular immigrants to be moved in disproportionate numbers to parts of the country where rentals are relatively low. The effect there will be to push rents up for the locals, and create more friction in host communities. It may also prompt more action by some local councils to frustrate the strategy, such as using their powers to block the conversion of houses across large areas into HMOs under Article 4 of the town and country planning acts. Even where HMO accommodation is found for families or smaller groups of asylum seekers, they will be more vulnerable to any aggressive demonstrations organised by neighbours alarmed by extremist misinformation about them. Such incidents will be much harder for the police to control. It may be that some form of emergency legislation will be required to delay the implementation of such High Court orders, although that in itself may not be constitutional. The only course then open to government is to redouble its efforts to process the backlog bequeathed to them by the previous administration, speeding up the grant of leave to remain for genuine refugees, or issuing deportation orders in expedited fashion for rejected claimants. It will take too long to build vast detention centres, while the old army barracks that have been commandeered in the past have been found to be completely unsuitable. The High Court has listened to the representatives of the people of Epping Forest and made its decision, and it is right that the judges should do so. Citizens have a right to have their cases heard impartially and have their grievances aired. The courts will no doubt soon be issuing many similar orders. Yet there are other people with a stake in these cases. Perhaps the most lamentable aspect of this latest episode in the migration crisis is that the voices of the immigrants themselves have been so rarely heard, and their plight disregarded. They have their human rights, too, enforceable by law – though many would cheerfully seek to deny them that. Indeed, the tendency in the media has been to demonise these fellow human beings as malevolent monsters determined to wreak crime and havoc in whatever neighbourhood they find themselves bussed to. Whether refugee or economic migrant, they are entitled to be treated properly in a civilised society, and not portrayed, as cynical politicians pretend, as an 'invasion' of 'fighting-age' men. They are not an alien army, but individuals who want a better life. Many would have preferred to stay put, were it not for war, persecution, famine and poverty. In a land such as Britain, with severe labour shortages, they have much to contribute, as have previous waves of immigrants. They could help to fix the 'Broken Britain' we hear so much about, and do the jobs that need doing. Yet they are all too often regarded as terrorists, rapists and murderers. The police at the hotel demos fare hardly any better, berated as 'paedo-defenders' and verbally and physically abused for doing their duty and preserving the King's Peace. The wider challenge for ministers now is to persuade the public that they are doing all they can to restore order to the asylum system – and to rebuild confidence in it. That task just got a lot more urgent.
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
BBC ‘not institutionally antisemitic', editor says after row over Gaza coverage
The BBC is 'not institutionally antisemitic', a newspaper editor has said following a row over the broadcaster's coverage of the conflict in Gaza. James Harding, The Observer 's editor-in-chief said the perception of a 'political presence looming over the BBC' is a problem and the broadcaster needs to be 'beyond the reach of politicians'. The BBC has been criticised for a number of incidents in recent months which include breaching its own accuracy editorial guidelines and livestreaming the Bob Vylan Glastonbury set, where there were chants of 'Death, death to the IDF (Israel Defence Forces)'. Following the incident, UK Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said ministers expect 'accountability at the highest levels' for the BBC's decision to screen the performance. Mr Harding discussed the difficulties of covering the Gaza conflict when he delivered this year's James MacTaggart Memorial Lecture at the Edinburgh TV Festival on Wednesday. He described how 'newsrooms are in a furious argument with ourselves over the coverage of Israel and Gaza', with the situation 'very hard to view dispassionately'. The Observer chief said this is true for all media organisations, particularly the BBC, and it is 'about as difficult as it gets in news'. Mr Harding said: 'This summer, Lisa Nandy has weighed in.' He said the Culture Secretary's office insists she did not explicitly ask Samir Shah, the BBC chairman, to 'deliver up' director-general Tim Davie 's resignation following the Bob Vylan incident, but 'people inside the BBC were left in no doubt that was the message'. Mr Harding said: 'The place became paranoid about how the BBC itself would cover the story; people around him thought the political pressure would be too much. 'Whatever your view of the hate speech vs freedom of speech issues, an overbearing government minister doesn't help anyone. 'The hiring and firing of the editor-in-chief of the country's leading newsroom and cultural organisation should not be the job of a politician. It's chilling. 'Political interference – and the perception of a political presence looming over the BBC – is a problem, one that we've got too accustomed to. 'It looks likely to get worse. We need to get on with putting the country's most important editorial and creative organisation beyond the reach of politicians now.' The broadcaster is also facing an Ofcom investigation into its documentary Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone after a review found it had breached the corporation's editorial guidelines on accuracy. The programme was removed from BBC iPlayer in February after it emerged the child narrator, Abdullah, is the son of Ayman Alyazouri, who has worked as Hamas's deputy minister of agriculture. Mr Harding said the BBC is not antisemitic. 'I am Jewish, proudly so,' he said. 'I'm proud, too, to have worked for the most important news organisation in the world. 'The BBC is not institutionally antisemitic. It's untrue to say it is. 'It's also unhelpful – much better to correct the mistakes and address the judgment calls that have been wrong, than smear the institution, impugn the character of all the people who work there and, potentially, undermine journalists in the field working in the most difficult and dangerous of conditions.' The UK Government and the BBC have been asked for comment. Mr Harding is co-founder of Tortoise Media, which acquired broadsheet newspaper The Observer in April. Before he co-founded Tortoise Media, Mr Harding was editor of The Times from 2007 to 2012 and was in charge of the BBC's news and current affairs programming from 2013 up until the beginning of 2018. He also co-presented On Background on the BBC World Service and wrote the book Alpha Dogs: How Political Spin Became A Global Business. A spokesperson for the Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport said: 'The Culture Secretary has been repeatedly clear that the role of the director-general is a matter for the BBC board. Any suggestion to the contrary is untrue. 'The BBC has itself acknowledged a number of serious failings in recent months, including the broadcasting of the Bob Vylan set at Glastonbury. 'It is entirely right that the Culture Secretary raised these issues with the BBC leadership on behalf of licence fee payers.'
Telegraph
22 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Starmer's own guidelines ‘should have spared Lucy Connolly from jail'
Sir Keir Starmer has become embroiled in a hypocrisy row over the prosecution of Lucy Connolly on the eve of her release from prison. The Prime Minister supported the conviction of Mrs Connolly for inciting racial hatred over an expletive-ridden post on X after the Southport attacks, but it has emerged that he had previously suggested that people who swiftly deleted offensive social media statements should not necessarily face criminal action. On Thursday, Mrs Connolly will be released after being sentenced to 31 months in prison for posting the comments, which she deleted hours later. The mother-of-one's supporters claim she has been subjected to an unfairly long jail term and made a scapegoat for the rioting last summer. Sir Keir has defended Mrs Connolly's conviction, saying that while he was strongly in favour of free speech he was 'equally against incitement to violence' against other people. He added: 'I will always support the action taken by our police and courts to keep our streets and people safe.' However, in 2013, when director of public prosecutions, he introduced guidance for prosecutors to consider a more lenient approach towards suspects who 'swiftly' deleted social media posts and expressed 'genuine remorse'. The guidance urged prosecutors to consider four factors where 'a prosecution is unlikely to be both necessary and proportionate'. These included if 'swift and effective action has been taken by the suspect and/or others for example, service providers, to remove the communication in question or otherwise block access to it'. Mrs Connolly was jailed for a post on the day three children were killed at a dance class in Southport, on Merseyside, urging followers to 'set fire' to hotels that housed asylum seekers 'for all I care.' At the time, the childminder had about 9,000 followers on X. Her message was reposted 940 times and viewed 310,000 times before she deleted it three and a half hours later, saying she regretted it. Sir Keir's 2013 advice was caveated with a warning to prosecutors that it was 'not an exhaustive list' of mitigating circumstances and that 'each case must be considered on its own factors and its own individual merits.' Legal experts who have followed Mrs Connolly's case noted that the guidance suggested public order offences, such as inciting racial hatred, should be treated separately and suspects would not therefore necessarily benefit from the same protections. Sir Keir followed up publication of the guidance with interviews in which he said: 'There's a lot of stuff out there that is highly offensive that is put out on a spontaneous basis that is quite often taken down pretty quickly, and the view is that those sort of remarks don't necessarily need to be prosecuted. 'This is not a get out of jail card, but it is highly relevant. Stuff does go up on a Friday and Saturday night and come down the next morning. 'Now if that is the case a lot of people will say that shouldn't have happened, the person has accepted it, but really you don't need a criminal prosecution. It is a relevant factor.' The 2013 guidance is repeated nearly word for word in the latest version for prosecutors. However, the initial advice that the factors could make a prosecution 'unlikely' has been tempered to state that prosecutors should take 'particular care' to ensure prosecution is 'necessary and proportionate'. Critics who have claimed Mrs Connolly was a victim of two-tier justice said it raised further questions over her treatment. Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said: 'Keir Starmer's enthusiasm for prosecuting Lucy Connolly appears to contradict his own guidelines. She rapidly deleted the message and showed remorse. This suggests Keir Starmer is guilty of hypocrisy and double standards by supporting a breach of his own prosecution guidelines. 'Lord Hermer personally authorised this prosecution, in what looks like another example of two-tier justice bearing in mind the very long sentence given when compared to others who committed actual acts of violence.' Lord Toby Young, the director of the Free Speech Union, said: 'Sir Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, should have listened to the advice of Sir Keir Starmer, the director of public prosecutions, and urged the CPS not to bring charges against Lucy Connolly. 'Sentencing her to more than two and a half years for a single tweet which she quickly deleted and apologised for has undermined public confidence in the criminal justice system, particularly when Labour councillors, MPs and anti-racism campaigners who have said and done much worse have avoided jail altogether. 'The public have concluded – rightly – that it's one rule for people on the Right and another for people on the Left. 'The Free Speech Union urged Lucy to plead not guilty, and offered to pay for her defence. Had she done so, I'm confident she would have been acquitted. But she decided against that precisely because she wasn't granted bail and was worried that her case would take so long to come to trial that she would end up spending more time in jail than she would if she pleaded guilty.' Richard Tice, the deputy Reform UK leader who visited Mrs Connolly in prison, said she should have pleaded not guilty. 'There was pressure in the legal system to get her to plead guilty. That was the establishment working in its mystical ways,' he claimed. 'The proof of my point is that Ricky Jones, the Labour councillor, can urge for people's throats to be slit live on TV in front of a big crowd and be found not guilty by a jury. It proves the whole point about two-tier justice and two-tier Keir. He is the biggest hypocrite that has been in Downing Street.' Frank Ferguson, the head of the Crown Prosecution Service's special crime and counter-terrorism division, said: 'It is not an offence to have strong or differing political views, but it is an offence to incite racial hatred – and that is what Connolly admitted to doing. 'The prosecution case included evidence which showed that racist tweets were sent out from Lucy Connolly's X account both in the weeks and months before the Southport attacks – as well as in the days after. The CPS takes racial hatred extremely seriously, and will never hesitate to prosecute these cases where there is enough evidence to do so.' The CPS also noted messages raised during her appeal on her remorse, in which she suggested she might claim that it was not her who had posted but that she was a victim of 'doxing', and that she had published the apology at the suggestion of a third party and her husband. A Government spokesman said: 'Sentencing is a matter for independent courts, and we support the action taken by the courts, as well as the police, to keep our streets safe. 'In all cases where Law Officers' consent is required, the Law Officers carefully consider whether to grant consent, including all relevant factors to the public interest in the prosecution.'
