If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Yet more PC crap.
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
I was amused by an advert in the Big Issue in the North for "Associate Trainers in Diversity" for the Merseyside police. The job requires someone to deliver training on "Young people, older people, people who are lesbian or gay, people with disabilities, travellers and gypsies, Asylum seekers, people from diverse racial & cultural communities, people from diverse religious communities, mental health issues, gender issues, any other areas of diversity or socially excluded groups."
I think that covers everyone who isn't a white male aged 30-50!
The "headline" of the advert said "The last thing we need is a uniform approach to policing Merseyside". Why should one group from the above list be treated differently to another? I always thought equality should mean people being treated the same. Evidently not.
I think that covers everyone who isn't a white male aged 30-50!
The "headline" of the advert said "The last thing we need is a uniform approach to policing Merseyside". Why should one group from the above list be treated differently to another? I always thought equality should mean people being treated the same. Evidently not.
0
Comments
With this kind of krap we all need a good healthy war to get back to basics.
Diesel
88888888 <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
So who WOULD know about all these 'groups'?
Are you suggesting that anyone who doesn't fit your stereotype of a police officer would be any better informed?
The police aren't there to be nice, to act in deference to someones gender or race. They are there to prevent crime, and where it happens to arrest the offenders. Sometimes I think that even they forget that...
And the ploce are, of course, gonna arrest crminals...not their fault if those criminals happen to be from 'socially excluded' groups.
Look at judges-mostly male, middle aged, white and middle class, yet most people up in court are young working class (of all races).
I agree that this advert seems to be PC crazy. Last year I was applying for jobs and so many for Birmingham city council are "only for a person with a disability" or ony for a Bangladeshi person. That really p'd me off. I don't have anything against these people working, but surely a job should be given on merit and not race?
Thanatos, posting as Teufelhund:
Careful... you might get confused as to being of a CONSERVATIVE mindset!!! <IMG alt="image" SRC="eek.gif" border="0">
MoK~ you keep talking like that, and I might have to re-evaluate and accord you some REAL respect! <IMG alt="image" SRC="wink.gif" border="0"> ... or, PERHAPS, you didn't realize that I was in the audience? <IMG alt="image" SRC="biggrin.gif" border="0">
No, not at all. I'm saying the the average police officer has no handle on such groups, and the force as a whole is composed in such a way that there is little chance of the relevant knowledge being generated and spread internally.
It would be perfectly possible for a heterosexual white middle-aged middle-class protestant man to take the job, and he would probably be better received by the trainees. he would also, however, probably have greater difficulty keeping current with this particular subject area. I didn't see anything in the quoted advert asking that the applicants be "age, class, racialy, religiously, sexualy or sexuality challenged"
I object to my statement of the modal officer being referred to as a stereotype. For that you need to add in "slightly thick", "conservative", "free mason", "with domestic problems/wife beater" and "corrupt" and to do this effectively they have to create and maintain good relationships with the communities they serve.
When the police have alienated a population they will have great difficulty carrying out the most basic detection.
They also need to be reminded of their preconceptions - just because an asian man and white woman marrying and trying to run a shop on an all white northern council estate are "asking for it" doesn't mean they aren't entitled to proper protection and investigation of attacks.
Our police were set up to police by consent, and had very few special powers. This situation has been weakend over the years, with rights and powers being added to the arsenal - by stealth the "jolly bobby", defender of the public and public good has been replaced by the "bent copper", the servant of the state and the powerful..
On the other hand, if you do nothing about it, people you've discriminated against in the past remain disadvantaged
And my argument is that the best way to avoid alienating the population at large is to stop cosying up to minorities, going on 'awareness' jollies and actually arrest some criminals.
What we really need to wake up to is the fact that most of us want to live in an area free of crime - not filled with policemen who know 'what it means to be gay/black/disabled' or any thing else. What we want is a police force who knows the law and is willing and able to investigate and prosecute crime.
What we've got at the moment is a force paralysed by the Lawrence case and political correctness...
Grow up, jump off the band-wagon, and learn something about policing.
And which particular police force decides that? If more blacks commit crime in an area than whites, then more blacks will be arrested. But despite what the PC lobby- those who feel noone should be responsible for their actions- try to claim, the pollice are not out to get minority groups.
what needs to be done is to find out why these minority groups commit more crime than other groups, not to ostracise and criticise the police for merely doing their job. The police catch criminals, not stop criminals offending.
Diesel
88888888 <IMG alt="image" SRC="biggrin.gif" border="0">
Yes, quite possibly. That sounds very Founding Fathers-ish? A quote, or simply something you thought of in that style.
However, 'necessity' is also the driving force behind far more admirable things. Did the USA enter WWII for reasons of 'necessity'? Was the atomic bomb dropped for reasons of necessity? Is America not founded on the principle that certain things are 'necessary' for freedom?
Yes, many horrors have been committed under the excuse that 'it was necessary at the time,' I agree. However, not all actions brought under such claims are wrong.
The quote was from our very own William Pitt, Earl of Chatham in a speech on 19 Nov 1783...Its one of my favs <IMG alt="image" SRC="biggrin.gif" border="0">
Things that are done for necessity are rarely well thought out and usually end in disaster...Blair is using necessity as an excuse to get his awful anti terror laws in...Thats not one of the more admirable things <IMG alt="image" SRC="frown.gif" border="0">
And we have it. Just because (per capita) more blacks are in prison, doesn't mean that this is because the police are racist. It might be that they had comitted more crime.
Everytime you cry "racism", you lessen its impact. Ever heard the story of Peter and the Wolf?