I will say, more widely, I think there are dangers to giving police harassment and prejudice as an excuse for DV and family violence.
Jews in Tsarist Russia and Poland and African Americans in Jim Crow South are only two of many groups who have suffered violent & state sanctioned abuse. I do not think that in recent decades Travellers in England faced this kind of violence, and even if they had, many Jews and African Americans did not respond by turning their violence on their families.
OP, would you say your family follow an 'honour culture'? With the good and the bad elements of that?
More info on what honour culture is :
Skip to main
Culture of Honor
Edited by:Roy F. Baumeister & Kathleen D. Vohs
In:Encyclopedia of Social Psychology
Chapter DOI:doi.org/10.4135/9781412956253.n128
A culture of honor is a culture in which a person (usually a man) feels obliged to protect his or her reputation by answering insults, affronts, and threats, oftentimes through the use of violence. Cultures of honor have been independently invented many times across the world. Three well-known examples of cultures of honor include cultures of honor in parts of the Middle East, the southern United States, and innercity neighborhoods (of the United States and elsewhere) that are controlled by gangs.
Cultures of honor can vary in many ways. Some stress female chastity to an extreme degree, whereas others do not. Some have strong norms for hospitality and politeness toward strangers, whereas others actively encourage aggression against outsiders. What all cultures of honor share, however, is the central importance placed on insult and threat and the necessity of responding to them with violence or the threat of violence.
Insults and threats take on great meaning in cultures of honor, because of the environments in which cultures of honor develop. Such cultures develop in environments where there is no central authority (such as the state) that can offer effective protection to its citizens. In such a situation, a person has to let it be known that he will protect himself, his family, and his property. Insults and affronts are important because they act as probes, establishing who can do what to whom. A person who responds with violence over “small” matters (e.g., an insult or an argument over a small amount of money) can effectively establish himself as one who is not to be messed with on larger matters. Thus, an effective response to an insult can deter future attacks, when the stakes may be much higher.
Many violent incidents in cultures of honor center on what might be considered a trivial incident to outsiders. Such matters are not trivial to the people in the argument, however, because people are defending (or establishing) their reputations. What is really at stake is something of far greater importance than a one-dollar debt owed or a record on the jukebox.
In cultures of honor, reputation is highly tied up with masculinity. A telling anecdote from Hodding Carter's book Southern Legacy (1950) concerned a 1930s Louisiana court case, in which Carter served as a juror. The facts of the matter were clear. The defendant lived near a gas station and had been pestered for some time by workers there. One day, the man had had enough and opened fire on the workers, killing one person and wounding two others. As Carter tells it, the case seemed open and shut, and so Carter began discussions in the jury room by offering up the obvious (to him) verdict of guilty. The other 11 jurors had very different ideas about the obvious verdict, however, and they strongly and unanimously favored acquittal. Fellow jurors explained to Carter that the man couldn't be guilty—what kind of man wouldn't have shot the others? An elder juror later told Carter that a man can't be jailed for standing up for his rights. In cultures of honor everywhere, traditional masculinity is a virtue that has to be defended.