This is why people are losing respect for the police...

Status
Not open for further replies.
The misogyny issue is different, and is likely the result of the mostly male historic working environment so it should naturally improve over time.

24 years since the last damning report and nothing has changed. I don't think sitting back and passively waiting for things to improve is working, do you?
 
There are more women in the police now, so wouldn't you expect the issue to naturally improve as the male/female balance equalises towards 50/50?

Right, but just working on the dilution due to there being less men doesnt tackle the culture that seems to be prevalent within the men who are there.

The point is to stop it occurring as much as possible in the first place. There's obviously a culture of turning a blind eye and not holding officers to account for their behaviour, that's what has to change.

You can't stop individuals being racist, or misogynistic but you can stop them acting openly like that within the workforce.
 
Last edited:
Right, but just working on the dilution due to there being less men doesnt tackle the culture that seems to be prevalent within the men who are there.

The point is to stop it occurring as much as possible in the first place. There's obviously a culture of turning a blind eye and not holding officers to account for their behaviour, that's what has to change.

You can't stop individuals being racist, or misogynistic but you can stop them acting openly like that within the workforce.

I agree there is work to do in the police, the report is pretty damming.

But some of the stuff mentioned is common in male dominated professions. I knew a couple in the military and some of their stories are similar. I don't know if it's better now there are more women in the military, but I imagine still common in places.

T
 
I don’t really know how they manage to avoid employing wronguns. It’s a job which will always appeal to these types because of the power it gives them.
Well, there are wronguns everywhere, they just aren't tolerated ....the problem is that the wronguns in the Met join and see that it's a boy's club where open bigotry is tolerated so they get to act it out.
 
Well, 24 years on from the Macpherson report and nothing seems to have changed. So there's something institutional and systemic in their makeup and governance that isn't tackling the culture of racism, misogyny and homophobia that is being highlighted as endemic and not just 'a few bad apples' as it tries to be handwaved away by the usual suspects.
Problem has always been that the system protects the "few bad apples".

But it is not really as "few" as people try to make out. Why wouldn't cops be as representative as the general population? Why can't 52% of them be ignorant, stupid or bigoted?
 
the actual report V

Our survey of officers and staff in the Met found that:155  a third (33%) of women in the Met who responded to the survey report personally experiencing sexism at work  12% report directly experiencing sexual harassment or assault. Two in five (41%) women in the Met who responded to the survey think the Met treats everyone who works there fairly regardless of gender, compared with 60% of male respondents.

SIGNA, the project set up to record and raise awareness of everyday sexism in the Met, developed from conversations in the wake of Sarah Everard’s murder when women in the organisation began sharing their own lived experiences of sexism and misogyny. The volunteer team who run the SIGNA project provided analysis of 315 entries showing:  35% were classified as ‘unwanted sexual behaviour’ or ‘criminal offence’ relating to sexual behaviour  24% involved insulting or exclusionary language  10% involved comments on appearance  10% involved comments on an assumed level of ability.

the data still doesn't show that sexism in Met is significantly different to other workplaces - Casey is myopic, & doesn't discuss that


Overall, 29% of those in employment reported having experienced some form of sexual harassment in their workplace or work-related environment in the last 12 months, equating to a fifth (20%) of the population. • Women were only slightly more likely than men to experience sexual harassment in the workplace (30% compared with 27%) in the last 12 months. However the type of sexual harassment experienced varied by gender. • Mirroring the pattern for the population overall, there was a higher incidence of workplace sexual harassment among those aged 16-24 and 25-34, people from an ethnic minority (excluding White minorities), those identifying as LGB and those with a highly limiting disability. • One in five (20%) of those in employment experienced sexual harassment at their physical workplace. Sexual harassment when socialising with colleagues outside the workplace was the second most likely setting for sexual harassment in a work-related environment (13%), followed by visits to clients or customers (9%).
per normal r4today have sadiq on for his normal partisan party broadcast of indignation .
r4 accused

the discussion on Met rape cases in the casey report looks like underfunding - we get what we pay for.

-----------

If you heard Sadiq squirming around on r4 today as he was accused of being part of the problem where he had not ensured reform,
all he could put up in his defence was that Casey said he should now contribute in managing reform -
 
Last edited:
I'm seeing a lot of nerdy looking men on twitter complaining about the met being racist and all that. Why don't these types apply to be policemen then, that would solve the issues right?

The problem is, the people that want to be policeman are probably going to be a bit rough round the edges generally speaking. I do not see that changing, its embedded in human nature.
 
Thoroughly believe that enforcers of law should be given maximum sentences for any crime they commit simply due to the damage to public trust and likely increase in crime they cause among their criminal comrades far outweighing their individual act. If we continue down this road then people will just handle stuff on their own, ragtag militias will pop up and the police will fully develop into a wealthy protection force with infinite powers.
 
What the actual?!
from case examples from 14 interviews , with no dates attached , salaciously distributed on twitter


..........

also in report
When giving reasons for why they think the Met’s reputation has worsened:  Met employee survey respondents are most likely to cite negative media coverage (93%); high profile incidents and scandals (86%); poor behaviour
and actions of individual officers in the Met (85%); lack of funding for the Met (64%); poor training (63%) and failures of leadership and management structures within the Met (63%)  Londoners are most likely to cite poor behaviours and actions of individual officers in the Met (77%); high profile incidents and scandals (68%); institutional bias within the Met (55%); failures of leadership and management structures within the Met (54%) and negative media coverage (53%). Whilst negative media coverage is cited by the large majority of Met staff survey respondents as a reason for the Met’s reputation worsening (93%), it is only similarly cited by just over half (53%) of Londoners

casey conclusions are very subjective, it's become like the Crucible, they're instituionalwitches
 
There are more women in the police now, so wouldn't you expect the issue to naturally improve as the male/female balance equalises towards 50/50?
I don’t really believe in that as a concept.

The idea that you can make an organisation less sexiest by employing less men. Or less racist by employing less white people.

The way you improve things is to ensure people are treated equally on the basis of individual ability and merit. Not employed because of their gender/ethnicity/etc to meet an equity quota.

To actively discriminate against groups of people in order to “make them equal” and expect that alone to make things somehow better is nonsense.

What makes an organisation systemically and institutionally racist, sexiest and homophobic?

By the criteria that the police have been judged by would any company not be considered racist, sexiest and homophobic?
 
Last edited:

Its amazing how many people take this sort of nonsense at face value.

The Met employs around 43,000 people

Over 30 % of the police officers are female and the proportion for police staff will be much higher. So somewhere around 15,000+ plus female staff

Anyone with an ounce of knowledge about these sort of polls know that there will be a self selecting bias in those that respond to them and that the average staff member will be more likely to respond if they will be saying they do think there is an issue than if there isn't.

Also what this nonsense....


What sort of idiot thinks its a good idea to try and have 50% of police officer being female?

Around 85% of people arrested in the UK are male

Regardless of what some people think there are significant strength and agility differences between men and women. Que the usual nonsense about some mem being faster and stronger than some men.....

Which is true but guess what they should not be employing weak slow men either!

And nothing I have typed should be read to mean that women should not be allowed to join the police, enter some roles or that there should be a lower than 50% 'quota' for them to join the police or be in roles.

Only that its nonsense to have a target for 50% women when the violent stuff the police have to deal with overwhelmingly involves males and that this means that a police force artifically carrying more female officers will more often lack suitable officers to respond to one of their core problems. The police as a whole and individual units should set a physical standard (which should be the same for any applicant) for entry and any candidate that can meet that criteria should be eligible to apply.
 
Last edited:

Whilst it is quite amazing that the officers wasn't sacked it's not all apparent that this can be attributed to a 'boys club sort of sexism' in the police



An LBC investigation can reveal that a male police officer, who was caught publicly masturbating twice on a train, is still serving in the Metropolitan Police. 

The discipline board which decided on a final written warning as opposed to dismissal – was not chaired by an external candidate, rather by Helen Ball – who was the Met’s assistant commissioner at the time – and until last September was second in charge at the Met as Deputy Commissioner.



What is rarely mentioned in the recent stories about police officers especially the bad ones and recruitment problems is the role the central government has played in causing issues with perverse incentives.

Basically after years of cutting funding it became politically expedient to boost the number of police officers serving. So police forces were given some extra funding but crucially this was tied to them having to recruit and retain 'X' amount of police officers.

So if a force can't hit its recruitment and retention targets it loses money. Which has turned UK policing into a game of police forces trying to poach from one another and transferees like Wayne Couzens being rushed from not really public facing roles in places like the CNC into the Met with little vetting because he was particularly valuable as an officer already trained to use firearms.

So I would suspect a considerable part of the reason the masturbating PC wasn't sacked had nothing to do 'institutional' biases but rather a more prosaic practical approach that went along the lines of whether it was in the best interests of a police force to lose yet another officer (and the money the force would have received for him) at a time when policing in general has become a profession people are leaving from in droves.

 
Last edited:
Yeh, now I disagree with this being a fundamental part of their job

The threat of and use of organised violence is very much a core part of policing.

Maybe we would not be in such a mess if people understood this? The UK police are internationally quite unusual in as much as they don't carry firearms routinely.

None the less they do carry batons, incapacitant sprays and often tasers.... all weapons that would see any other member of the public arrested not only for possession in the street but also in at least two cases for possession within a home.

The Police a Criminal Evidence Act of 1984 gives police sweeping powers to use force (violence) in a whole host of circumstances not applicable to other professions

117Power of constable to use reasonable force.​

Where any provision of this Act—

(a)confers a power on a constable; and

(b)does not provide that the power may only be exercised with the consent of some person, other than a police officer,

the officer may use reasonable force, if necessary, in the exercise of the power.
 
Whilst it is quite amazing that the officers wasn't sacked it's not all apparent that this can be attributed to a 'boys club sort of sexism' in the police
Ironic that the press didn't follow it to the police tribunal hearing at the time, but, social media hadn't wound up temporal public interest, with associated advertising revenue then
change of language used in original report is hmmh interesting - wasn't turned up to 11 - maybe daily mail moved to the right since then
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...cer-faces-sack-caught-pleasuring-himself.html


What sort of idiot thinks its a good idea to try and have 50% of police officer being female?
agree - those are further items about the report that discredit it - but no one can call it out publically - excepting - well Rowley, who rejected the Institutional crown of thorns.
 

Off-duty captain pleas 'turn the camera off' during arrest
Oklahoma City police captain James Matthew French was pulled over when police noticed him swerving his vehicle. When the arresting officer started to question if he had been drinking, Mr French asked the officer to turn off his body camera. The investigation continues.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom