If you get annoyed at political correctness don't look

Former Member

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7101942.stm

lol

choice quotes:

"criticised for being too male" (what defines more maleness or less, I thought it was either you are or aren't)

"The Met will spend £15,000 in making three new characters."

The original mascot was based on a real guy and got on well with kids. Maybe cos he was based on a real guy rather than the fantasy-land-childrens-tv PC world kids could relate a bit better.

I think they'd be much better off just saving the cash and buying a Barney outfit, that's much more appropriate, then you're not being equally discriminatory to everyone . (Except purple dinosaurs)

P.s. my spell check didn't like barney, it prefers Barney! lol madness

Former Member

£15,000 of cash is almost a years wages for a police officer, or 2 newish cars. What a waste.

Former Member

Nice money wasting.

The last one cost £1k, which was paid for by sponsorsip. This time the Met is paying and 3 cost £15.

Now, I know I've only got A level maths, but to my mind 3 x £1k = much much much less than £15k.

Former Member

Why isn't there a mascot of a one-legged Albanian lesbian WPC as well? :mad:

Former Member

OMMMMMMMMMGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG IT MAKES ME SOOOOOOO MADDDD!!!!!!!!

(you did warn me not to look but its like a horror film, you just can't help it)

Former Member

Aladdin wrote: »

Why isn't there a mascot of a one-legged Albanian lesbian WPC as well? :mad:

That's for the next week...

Former Member

No sarcasm, I'm genuinly confused as to what you lot are upset about?

Former Member

katralla wrote: »

No sarcasm, I'm genuinly confused as to what you lot are upset about?

It's a bit of a waste of money isn't it?

How is a white male PC not representative of the met police force when most of the people in the police are probably white males. It's designed to be for kids to get them to build relationships with the police etc. and it was doing it's job. It's only critics who say 'that's racist cos it's white' or sexist, for being 'too male', that mean the met are having to pay £15K to have now three models to satisfy the critics.

I think basing the first model on a real PC was a brilliant idea, instead of now just making them up to cover themselves.

Former Member

As a brown-haired member of the public i'm offended that this blonde abomination doesn't accurately reflect the follicular make-up of the nation.

Former Member

There are good reasons for having non-white police mascots though, given that very high numbers of non-white citizens distrust the police and believe the old bill is prejudiced against them. A white cop mascot is going to have little effect amongst the black community, I should think...

Former Member

Aladdin wrote: »

There are good reasons for having non-white police mascots though, given that very high numbers of non-white citizens distrust the police and believe the old bill is prejudiced against them. A white cop mascot is going to have little effect amongst the black community, I should think...

Former Member

CptCoatHanger wrote: »

As a brown-haired member of the public i'm offended that this blonde abomination doesn't accurately reflect the follicular make-up of the nation.

POTW awesome

Former Member

Aladdin wrote: »

There are good reasons for having non-white police mascots though, given that very high numbers of non-white citizens distrust the police and believe the old bill is prejudiced against them. A white cop mascot is going to have little effect amongst the black community, I should think...

But is it representative, given that only 3.7% of the police are non-white?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6570545.stm

I don't really have an opinion on the matter, I can see the intention and it is perhaps a noble one but does anyone really give a fuck what the police mascot looks like?

Former Member

That article mentions 'critics' but suspiciously gives no sources; if you Google it and look at other versions of the story you get this sort of thing:

Met Police chiefs will spend £15,000 creating "ethnically diverse" mascots after one of their officers criticised an existing model for being too male and white.

[...] one of the force's sergeants slammed the character for failing to represent the capital's communities. He said the figure, which is white with blue eyes and blond hair, risks leaving Asian and women officers "isolated".

So far from this being something brought about by the invisible 'PC brigade' it seems it was a police sergeant.

EDIT: But do they really have that kind of pull?! Do you reckon the media got hold of this non-story of a complaint and thereby made sure the changes would happen?

Former Member

Do the new ones not run the risk of leaving white male officers feeling isolated?

Former Member

I think the issue of any childhood mascot is surely one of who you are trying to appeal to? Is the aim to have something that represents everyone based on population perspectives or something that might me less dead people from ethnic minorities. I know which I'd see as more important and I think something that appeals to excluded communities would be more useful than a blonde white mascot.

Former Member

dead people?

I don't see how a mascot is going to appeal to black or asian people or whatever. Maybe an actual black policeman or woman would!

Former Member

Yerascrote wrote: »

But is it representative, given that only 3.7% of the police are non-white?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6570545.stm

I don't really have an opinion on the matter, I can see the intention and it is perhaps a noble one but does anyone really give a fuck what the police mascot looks like?

I don't care much at all myself. Like Jim V says it all depends what the mascot is intended to be for. If it is just to represent the force then white and male would be the most accurate format. If however it is to intereact with children and try to improve the image of the Met amongst the general population, then it makes sense to have mascots of different genders and/or races.

At the end of the day I fail to be moved or bothered much by any (non)story that has the "PC gone mad" tag attached to it.

Former Member

Jim V wrote: »

I think the issue of any childhood mascot is surely one of who you are trying to appeal to? Is the aim to have something that represents everyone based on population perspectives or something that might me less dead people from ethnic minorities. I know which I'd see as more important and I think something that appeals to excluded communities would be more useful than a blonde white mascot.

Hang on a second Jim. When did this mascot become a mascot for one-legged orphans with diseases? It's a mascot to be sent in to junior schools to talk to kids.

Former Member

CptCoatHanger wrote: »

Hang on a second Jim. When did this mascot become a mascot for one-legged orphans with diseases?

Former Member

How can I put this?

IT'S JUST A FUCKING LOGO!

End of story.

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote: »

We all know the real reason why this mascot was declined. It looks exactly like Sir Ian Blair, who at the time of writing is still the Metropolitan Police Commisioner. Let's face it - if the incompetent boob does finally get sacked today, that mascot won't be relevant anymore.

Sadly that won't be the case :mad: :mad:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7107631.stm

But that's a good point, actually. Do we want to send a mascot to schools that is a lookalike of the police chief who oversaw the execution of an innocent man by the police and then lied about the events and tried to stain the character of the victim? I shouldn't think that is the best ambassador the police could employ...

Former Member

As if little kids would know anything about that tbh.

Former Member

Depends on the age group. I should think most kids from the age of 8 onwards, specially those from black, Latin or Asian backgrounds, are aware of the De Menezes case. Indeed, I would bet money some adults in their communities who might be intent on prejudicing children against the police (them and us and all of that) will have use the De Menezes case to support their case.

Former Member

Aladdin wrote: »

The article says that the mascot was used in schools and at public events. I can't see anywhere where it mentions it's to be used as part of minority interaction, but suddenly that notion is introduced to the thread and the inference is made that if you're criticising the money being spent on this thing then you're not concerned about dead minorities.

Former Member

Well it's being used in London schools - the percentages of people from ethnic minorities in London schools and especially Inner city London schools is vastly higher than the mentioned national average.

Former Member

I'm wondering how it costs that much? I'm not against the idea of it, but frankly, I could have drawn a picture of an Asian woman in a police uniform for them for nothing.

Former Member

Jim V wrote: »

Well it's being used in London schools - the percentages of people from ethnic minorities in London schools and especially Inner city London schools is vastly higher than the mentioned national average.

Yes, but London's a completely different world to the rest of the country. I notice that much every time I visit. The "PC brigade", as the media defines it, would probably think that the British countryside is "too white", for instance. We're always being told that the UK is now a multi-cultural and multi-racial country - nonsense. In my opinion, that only really applies in larger cities, such as London, Manchester, Birmingham etc. It's affecting more areas now, but the UK is far from being this melting pot.

Aladdin wrote: »

But that's a good point, actually. Do we want to send a mascot to schools that is a lookalike of the police chief who oversaw the execution of an innocent man by the police and then lied about the events and tried to stain the character of the victim? I shouldn't think that is the best ambassador the police could employ...

I retracted the first set of comments I made. After thinking about it, I realised the mascot couldn't possibly be like Sir Ian Blair. He'd most likely be wearing a T-shirt saying "vote Labour", the useless little toad.

Former Member

And just to stress, the idea of a lack of co-operation between ethnic minorities and the police has been seen as a huge problem for decades. As a mascot something is intended to represent how an organisation presents itself to those it works with. Given there is a major problem in the relationship between ethnic minorities and the police, and huge issues of trust especially when it comes to breaking down barriers within often closed off communities - I really dont' think it's impossible to see this as a worthwhile use of money.

Things change with small measures in the end, given a more welcoming face to young children from ethnic minorities for a police officer, as opposed to other more negative views they will hear seems to be valuable.

However I think actual police officers would obviously be a better option.

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote: »

Yes, but London's a completely different world to the rest of the country. I notice that much every time I visit. The "PC brigade", as the media defines it, would probably think that the British countryside is "too white", for instance. We're always being told that the UK is now a multi-cultural and multi-racial country - nonsense. In my opinion, that only really applies in larger cities, such as London, Manchester, Birmingham etc. It's affecting more areas now, but the UK is far from being this melting pot.

Mate, please, read the link again. This is the Met mascot, not the police. This debate is only about London, not anywhere else. That's why I'm talking about London

PSCO Steve was created by the Metropolitan Police to visit primary schools but drew criticism for failing to represent London's communities.

Former Member

Jim V wrote: »

Well it's being used in London schools - the percentages of people from ethnic minorities in London schools and especially Inner city London schools is vastly higher than the mentioned national average.

I'm fully aware that London has a higher proportion of ethnic students in it's schools - though by no means across the board - and even so, this doesn't address my point. Perhaps what we actually need is a small force of culturally-sensitive plastic police-people?