Does my Baton look big in this?
The Fascism of Political Correctness strikes again!
Dave Thompson, chief constable of West Midlands police, has decided that there are ‘no barriers’ to a woman police officer deciding to wear the niqab – the full face covering beloved of some Muslim women. He has already hired some Muslim female police officers who have asked to wear the hijab – the full length body covering garment sometimes called a burka.
The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) questioned whether the face veil was appropriate in policing and said that the percentage of women who wore it was “very, very small”. A spokesman added: “The women who do would probably not want to be in the police.”
A spokesman for Mr Thompson confirmed that he was referring to the garment which covered the face.
The ‘usual suspects’ are going berserk over this story, and I expect the Mail to pick up on it any minute (it’s a Times exclusive at the moment and so behind a paywall) this comment is pretty representative of the opinions that are flooding in.
Facial expression is a fundamental aspect of communication in our culture. I do not see that the wearing the niqab could possibly be appropriate to face to face communication’ around education, policing, medical care or legal processes.
How is the niqab any different to the garb currently worn by the gentlemen (loose term) in the picture above? I can’t see their facial expression either.
Is this a slow waltz to the tune of Islamic dhimmitude, or does Dave Thompson have a point? – after all, if every woman in a burka could be a police officer concealing a baton then he has just recruited thousands of pseudo-cops to the streets…
Debate at your leisure; I’m going to paint today.
- John Galt
September 10, 2016 at 10:14 am -
Lets face it, by the time the riot squad, SPG or the latest bunch of paramilitary armoured thugs turns up the time for talking is well over and the time for draconian approaches such as kettling or even “being bashed over the head with a baton” has arrived.
Having culturally appropriate clothing for police offices such as Sikh turbans hasn’t led to the decline and fall of the Metropolitan Police, so I suspect that head coverings for female women police officers (but not full face coverings for obvious reasons) are reasonable.
Having community police officers that actually understand the culture and speak the language of the community being policed seems to me appropriate, certainly for Tower Hamlets, Bolton and Luton, if not necessarily Stow on the Wold.
- Wigner’s Friend
September 10, 2016 at 10:26 am -
“But not full face covering for obvious reasons”
Unfortunately, if you read the post again you will see that this does refer to full face covering as confirmed by the police spokesman.
- Wigner’s Friend
- Major Bonkers
September 10, 2016 at 10:17 am -
The thing is, we have already been here; see: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/beyond-the-veil-what-happened-after-rebekah-dawson-refused-to-take-her-niqab-off-in-court-9244409.html
“Rebekah Dawson, 22, was charged with intimidating a witness and was on trial jointly with her brother. In preliminary hearings, Judge Peter Murphy had ruled that she could keep her face covered while in the dock, but that, if she testified, the veil would have to come off. Judge and jury needed not just to hear her words with their own ears, but to see her demeanour with their own eyes.
This compromise, itself not without controversy, necessitated a strange little ceremony. At the start of the day’s proceedings, and after each break, a court official would have to enter the witness box and declare under oath that she had personally checked the defendant’s identity and could confirm that it was, indeed, Rebekah Dawson. Meanwhile Dawson herself sat, still as a black pillar, on one of many rows behind the plate glass of the dock. Her brother, Mathias, was there, too.”
Leaving aside the point that weirdoes who choose to dress up as a great black letterbox are more likely to view the police as agents as Satan, who deserve nothing more than having their heads chopped off for their apostasy and oppression, how on Earth are they expected to give evidence in Court?
- macheath
September 10, 2016 at 10:43 am -
If a woman chooses to cover her entire face for religious reasons, I should have thought it likely that she subscribes to the belief that she may not, even in the course of duty, touch a man who is not a relative.
This is an issue which appears to cause much heart-searching, if the online Q&A sites are anything to go by, with queries eliciting such responses as:
a woman is allowed to offer medical treatment to a non-mahram man [one to whom she is not related], so long as this takes the form of bringing medicine to him or other forms of indirect treatment (i.e. with no touching or direct contact involved) – except in cases where it is necessary and there is no fear of temptation (such as in an emergency situation or in the event of a disaster).”Were I in the police force and dealing with potentially violent criminals or crowds, I might well feel uneasy at the prospect of a colleague operating a strictly hands-off approach to policing except in dire emergency. Such police officers could surely have no place on the front line, but imagine the reaction to any attempt to confine burka-clad police officers to desk jobs. Still, as the spokesman said, it’s probably an academic question anyway.
Somehow, I can’t shake off the image of Eric Idle dressed in ancient Judean drag…
- binao
September 10, 2016 at 1:31 pm -
I agree macheath.
I instinctively feel there’s a need for uniformity in these front line law & order representatives, both in appearance & working practices; plain clothes & those in riot gear are not part of this issue.
But then I also feel there should be no distractions from prominent tattoos or rainbow hair. As with a number of jobs, a big part of it is the generation of confidence and respect in the role, sometimes in difficult circumstances. Appearance counts. Considerably more important than the opportunity for personal freedom of expression on the job, whether it be culture, style preference, or religion.
Just a view, and yes I do know shaven heads can be intimidating to some.
- binao
- Retired
September 10, 2016 at 11:22 am -
As the CC said-
*As it stands we have not had any approaches from potential recruits asking to wear the burka, but if such an approach was made it is something we would have to consider.’ He didn’t say yes, he didn’t say no. Quite rightly, given the various acts in force relating to race equality such a question would have to be considered and a reasoning would have to be shown otherwise an employment tribunal would inevitably follow. Bear in mind that whatever he said the usual moon howlers and frothers would have emerged from the undergrowth and he would have been damned whatever answer he gave. The CC was asked a question that was the equivalent of ‘have you stopped beating your wife yet?” Whatever his answer someone would have whipped up a twitter storm. It’s a bit of a non-story and proof that standards of journalism are declining.
BTW I don’t like the full face burkha and I have always subscribed to ‘when in Rome, do as the Romans do’ approach to life. You may be interested to learn that in the late 90’s under the Blair government the ‘when in Rome’ approach was declared to be anathema and it was the local population who were expected to change. - Jim McLean
September 10, 2016 at 11:38 am -
Not your best post or analysis, Anna. Maybe you’re just looking forward to painting and wrote this hurriedly.
Police in Riot gear is not about facial communication. In fact the Riot gear is a form of communication in itself.
Secondly, those helmets are to protect the face and head against injury.
Normal coppers don’t wear head gear apart from a hat
No comparison to a religiously inspired face covering designed to avoid contact with males and to prevent devout Muslim men from getting bad thoughts!!- theyfearthehare
September 14, 2016 at 5:43 pm -
In fact the Riot gear is a form of communication in itself…..
I’m sure you are right. Thankfully I no longer live in the UK, but during a recent visit, I had cause to visit a police station in a relatively sleepy Oxfordshire town (I was giving a statement regarding a scoundral who lived in the locality who had been involved in a relatively high profile fraud case).
My immediate response on being confronted by two officers was “oh my god, is there a riot”. Fortunately (or unfortunately depending on your point of view) the stab vests and batons were standard issue these days. The last time I saw police tooled up like that in the UK was in the toxteth riots, and I am being completely serious
I’m not quite sure exactly what the police want to communicate to the general public by routinely dressing in this way, I wont even begin to speculate, I sincerely hope its made their job easier, but I doubt is has, and if thats the case, they only have themselves to blame.
- theyfearthehare
- Fat Steve
September 10, 2016 at 11:50 am -
What a strange place ‘multicultural’ Britain is or has become …..our political masters treat the population like an unruly kindergarten class with a ticking off if we question the rules ….and rules are there to support dogmas rather than directed to achieving outcomes that people want or for that matter sensible outcomes
Its little wonder that the wealthy choose to live in their own bubble insulated from the world ……well away from as John Galt (who I thought was an Aussie) says above ‘Tower Hamlets, Bolton and Luton’ - tdf
September 10, 2016 at 12:50 pm -
I know the expression ‘political correctness gone mad!’ has become a right wing cliche but honestly, at times it’s appropriate.
- Sean Coleman
September 10, 2016 at 4:58 pm -
The claim “The expression ‘political correctness gone mad!’ has become a right-wing cliché” has become a left-wing cliché.
- Sean Coleman
- Trevor
September 10, 2016 at 12:59 pm -
“He has already hired some Muslim female police officers who have asked to wear the hijab – the full length body covering garment sometimes called a burka.”
This is nonsense. The hijab and the burka are completely different things.
- macheath
September 10, 2016 at 2:55 pm -
Perhaps I am being too cynical (the result of hanging around at the Raccoon Arms?), but, given the media circus surrounding this story, even though it concerns a currently hypothetical situation, could the Chief Constable’s statement possibly be intended to draw attention away from something else?
- Alexander Baron
September 10, 2016 at 3:16 pm -
Perhaps they should join the anti-terrorist groups; that would save the need to issue masks.
- Ljh
September 10, 2016 at 3:43 pm -
Islam as a system of thought is an alternative theocratic system to liberal democracy: codes of dress are an outward manifestation. Do you really want an adherent of shariah acting as an agent of UK law?
- tdf
September 10, 2016 at 4:06 pm -
^ In its current form, it’s hard to disagree with you.
Apparently the original reason for the invention of the hijab (and similar) was perfectly rational – it’s useful to keep sand out of the face/hair important in deserts. But slowly and by turns it’s been turned into an instrument of oppression.
- tdf
- Sean Coleman
September 10, 2016 at 5:31 pm -
I happened to be listening to this man this morning:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqGR8AdA13g
I only heard the first half hour and I don’t know if I can summon the will to hear the rest, but it turns out his big discovery is that the veil was adopted in Europe, in Roman times, when it was as yet unknown in the Islamic countries (I suppose he means later on, after Mahommed’s birth). This was because women were known to be the ‘gateway of the Devil’ and you had to cover their heads to stop the Devil getting into them, often in the shape of birds getting tangled up in their hair. (Just to be clear, it is what he says, not me.) So he scores pc points on two counts. He begins with a story about the British teaching the natives in some East African colony how to play cricket, to demonstrate the virtues of the free market, but when the locals finally won a match the British stopped playing (this got a laugh from his Italian audience). Europe was evil, the Americans massacred 95m in their ‘holocaust’ and lots of other things that don’t get mentioned in school books. In the remaining hour I expect him to focus on the Crusades (and the Crusaders’ sacking of Constantinople), the Vatican’s close links with the Nazis and a short history lesson about how civilized the Arabs were compared to backward Europeans – none of which are ever mentioned in school books. Corretezza politicale divenuta pazza!
- Mrs Grimble
September 10, 2016 at 7:03 pm -
“he veil was adopted in Europe, in Roman times”
Interesting. The other week, I came across mention of an offshoot of the fundamentalist Haredi Jewish sect. This cult makes its women – and even its children, no matter how small – wear the all-enveloping niqab in public. It seems the sect’s founder (awoman!) discovered that the niqab was originally a Jewish garment. People are indeed strange….I read the ‘Met allows burquas’ story wondering 1) if there was the usual media confusion between burquas and hijabs (headscarves) and 2) if the accouncement had been inspired by this Police Scotland anouncement: http://www.scotland.police.uk/whats-happening/news/2016/august/hijab-ratified-as-option-for-police-scotland-uniform.
- Mrs Grimble
- cascadian
September 10, 2016 at 5:58 pm -
Perhaps the chief constable needs to consult a dictionary as to what “uniform” means, then think why uniformity might be desirable to the public (not the PC crowd that seem to have overtaken plod).
- tdf
September 10, 2016 at 5:58 pm -
Max P.C. points in this link (the person who wrote this is an academic historian. I’m not joking):
http://goingmedieval.tumblr.com/post/149419583307/islam-was-the-party-religion-or-why-it-is-lazy
- Fat Steve
September 10, 2016 at 6:37 pm -
A brief further thought . Personally i have no objection whatsoever to a woman wearing a Hijab Burkini or full Burka in public. For some people life becomes meaningless without practice of their religion and it is something for which I have nothing but respect. There are of course limits in respect of forcing religion (or political views for that matter) on others but the wearing of certain clothes or following dietary or worship laws cannot be said to affect anyone but those who wear the clothes, eat the food or worship as to their religious tradition. I leave aside hallal and kosher slaughter as a rather different issue.
The point in issue might I think be that a judge , a soldier, or a policeman is an impersonal representative of the State. Personal identity must be given up hence the uniform or the robes since personal identity cannot be interjected between the State and its citizen by an Agent acting on behalf of the State. To dress as one wishes must be given up if one wishes to be a functionary of the state in certain capacities.- Ho Hum
September 10, 2016 at 7:23 pm -
Great Cue for playing ‘Design a Uniform for Politicians’
I’ll start with ‘Completely Naked’, a sort of metaphor for being on a Strictly and Unashamed meme
- Fat Steve
September 10, 2016 at 8:04 pm -
Judging by our Boris on a zip wire the forthcoming uniform for our elders and betters is likely to be that of a clown …..oddly appropriate since beneath the buffoonery and greasepaint one often senses the sinister
- Ho Hum
September 10, 2016 at 8:15 pm -
Oh dear! Cue the sick John Wayne Gacy conspiraturds (sic). Often sons of Jesse
- Fat Steve
September 11, 2016 at 7:54 am -
Naaaah not Gracy sinister (I had to find who he was from the web) which was calculating and deliberate,, more dangerous than that, reckless sinister in that one doesn’t really know quite where one might end up if one gets a little too drawn in by Boris’ act ……Gosh one might even find oneself jollied along into all manner of things, even the foolishness of laying the blame for all of the UK’s woes on European Politicians.
- Fat Steve
September 11, 2016 at 8:53 am -
To further define my reference to sinister and clown costume for Politicians and my example of Boris Johnson, I was thinking more Pied Piper of Hamlin sinister …..A jolly figure piping the rats out of town but no doubt rather less so when when the Town’s children followed him
As one observer remarked about Johnson
‘he can pull off serious political coups when the greater good happens to coincide with his personal advantage’
An observation that might apply to many politicians and a glossy show business/entertainer persona seems to be attractive to the punters at the moment.
Witness not just Boris but Trump …..in the past Berlusconi or Sarkosy …..or even our own ‘regular sort of guy’ Blair.
Personas are all the rage , Policies rather less so.
Just how far a constructed persona can get one might be illustrated by Camilla Bat(whatever) of Kid’s Co (remember her and her nightly television appearances in clown garb?)……remember the seriousness with which she was taken? …..wonder where she is now? …..and what those who relied on her are doing now?- Mudplugger
September 11, 2016 at 9:17 am -
As with most of the ‘clowns’, those who relied on Camilla Batshit were merely collateral damage in the deliberate process of her personal aggrandisement.
Wherever she is skulking now, it will be somewhere rather more confortable than most of her ‘victims’ will ever enjoy – and we are all some of her victims.- Fat Steve
September 11, 2016 at 12:43 pm -
It appears she is lying low given the few recent reports on the web …..but when spotted (by chance I suspect) in her uniform still capable of enjoying the finer things in life
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1342323/disgraced-charity-boss-camila-batmanghelidjh-enjoys-lavish-lifestyle-full-of-posh-dinners/
Mind you without the uniform ….or in the substitute uniform of say a fat chavvy who might be able to pick her out in a crowd?
- Fat Steve
- Fat Steve
September 11, 2016 at 9:21 am -
Here you go ….a picture of the two heavyweights together
http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/event/the-london-evening-standards-1000-londons-most-influential-people-inside-518861911#mayor-of-london-boris-johnson-and-camila-batmanghelidjh-attend-the-picture-id457316504
- Mudplugger
- Fat Steve
- Fat Steve
- Ho Hum
- Fat Steve
- Ho Hum
- The Blocked Dwarf
September 10, 2016 at 9:31 pm -
PC Dwarf of the Ruralshire Constabulary (that later became ‘Thames Valley’) straightened his tunic, tapped the ‘holly’ in his pocket , pulled himself up to his full 3ft (ok 6ft…he was a very tall dwarf) , stepped up to the gang of ‘didicoys’ and ‘ruffians’ who were industriously kicking one of their own to death with their hob nails for some slight involving, no doubt, unlawful knowledge of a pony. With all the AUTHORITY of his Majesty’s law he instructed them to desist from their criminal endeavours and accompany him to the nearest police station where they would await His Worship’s displeasure in the morn.
PC Dwarf got worked over so badly that after all the bones had healed he had to retire from the force on health grounds. No surprise there but my point is PC Dwarf embodied The Law. His authority came from his whole bearing, his uniform, his cadence …and his rather naive belief that one only had to tell ‘tearaways’ and ‘teddy boys’ to behave and they would instantly drop their flick knives and make their sheepish ways home.I know from my own experience i have trouble taking a policeman in combat trousers and stab vest seriously…I know why he wears a batman utility belt and kevlar, and it is more than sensible….but …you look like some wannabe soldier.
A Peeleress in , whatever, muslim garb doesn’t embody the law, she embodies the teachings of Mo’. Her authority comes from the Koran….and I’m sorry Luv but you look a right twat in that black KEVLAR bin bag.
That said, surely it is not beyond the wit of the Home Office and Chief Constables to come up with an approved Muslim uniform- maybe half face balaclava type thing head covering (a head scarf might be dangerous-easier to rip it down and garotte her with it) and long skirt ? I would have thought a 2 year mutli millon £ committee might be called into being to report on this? That nice Kiwi Judge is free at the moment I think…
- Penseivat
September 10, 2016 at 9:39 pm -
I reckon Dave is playing a blinder, manoeuvring into a win-win situation. By suggesting recruits be allowed to dress up as a binbag with a warrant card (not his description), he is garnering support from those trapped in the 6th century. When it comes out that such an idea is ridiculous, he can justly say that it wasn’t’t his fault it wasn’t followed through. A knighthood for services to diversity and then a peerage, plus a huge Police pension and obscene expenses, will make up for the majority of the officers in his force thinking that he’s a tw#t. If he is serious, I wonder how many of these recruits will apply for the dog section?
- Ho Hum
September 10, 2016 at 9:47 pm -
More seriously, trying to do a little background work on this, why is this being treated as if something new?
Is the following not true?
And if it is, are the present group stirring the pot of hot effluent just ignorant, or SIerra Hotel contenders to win The Great British Denigration Game?
- wiggia
September 11, 2016 at 9:22 am -
Difficult to take any of this seriously, if we really go this route then expect this………….
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-RBko2zl0DKg/UDiRDvZnVKI/AAAAAAAAAvk/yAN4KaMSQWs/s1600/1.JPG
Good morning officer, can you……………………..
- Flaxen Saxon
September 11, 2016 at 10:35 am -
When in riot mode I like to see the white of the opponent’s eyes. And black all over ‘suits’ detracts from my stone throwing and pepper spray squirting. Sorry, but a black pillar is too easy to hit. Frankly, I like a challenge. The burqa mob are not easy to appease but easy to hit. Perhaps we should ‘hit’ them more often. But then again silly liberals will worry about their heads falling off. Silly liberals, and there was me a thinking that the enlightened West had discarded this sort of primitive nonsense a few centuries ago. Ain’t dat the sad truth. And another thing, not only is Islam inimical to life, at least as we know it, tis also a load of total bollocks. Oops missus where’s me head gone.
- JuliaM
September 11, 2016 at 11:31 am -
*hands Anna keys to the blog labels* Here, you might as well have all the future ‘Blog title of the month’ awards…
- James Higham
September 11, 2016 at 11:55 am -
Please, someone, give us the answer how to exterminate PCism for once and for all.
- Keith Walters
September 12, 2016 at 6:19 am -
Vote for Donald Trump
- Fat Steve
September 12, 2016 at 10:39 am -
Vote for Donald Trump
The task is the extermination of PCism not the most obvious option to exterminate humanity at the same time
- Fat Steve
- Keith Walters
- Ho Hum
September 12, 2016 at 10:47 am -
@ Fat Steve
September 12, 2016‘The task is the extermination of PCism not the most obvious option to exterminate humanity at the same time’
Contender for comment of the month….
- Peter Raite
September 14, 2016 at 1:38 pm -
A hijab isn’t a “full length body covering garment,” it’s just a headscarf that doesn’t cover the face. There are various headscarfs, but the only garments that cover the whole body are the burka and the niqab – both of which include the face being covered – and the chador, which doesn’t.
- I sneeze in threes
September 20, 2016 at 7:58 pm -
I thought the old bill only wore clip on ties so to prevent them from being strangled by them should a ruckus ensue. Would a garment worn over the head, such as a niqab, not also be problematic for such reasons?
{ 42 comments… read them below or add one }