Sack Cressida by all means, if it makes you feel better, but I doubt that it will improve matters. I don’t think that I am being overly dramatic when I admit that I have lost confidence in all the institutions that I once presumed to trust. I feel at times that I am a member of the last reasonably civilised generation to walk the streets of England. And that should worry you, because I am not a saint. Hitting a girl with a truncheon, telling a, presumably, distressed girl that she was hot, are things that I wouldn’t do whether wearing a uniform or not. Those were displays of moral incontinence that ordinary parental socialisation would stop me from inflicting upon the world. As for the Carl Beech fiasco, I wonder how much of this was caused by officers’ determination to show that they were on message. “No one had ever suggested that complaints should not be investigated thoroughly”. Are you sure? To claim that you are a victim seems to be commonly accepted as proof that you a victim. Cressida can’t be expected to turn back these waves. But sack her if you want, Sack Boris as well, but it won’t pay your gas bill if you do.
PS: Don’t use Cressida’s surname or you will be moderated. Perhaps that is the best reason for sacking her.
I agree up to a point but leadership does matter. There are other police forces in the UK not beset by these issues. Well led organisations, of whatever stripe, perform better than organisations led by opportunists seeking only personal advancement.
What her tenure clearly highlights is the failure of affirmative action. Recruitment prioritising gender, race or sexuality is always going to lead to inferior organisational performance against recruitment based only on competence as measured by skills, experience and track record.
Agreed, but focusing on the failings of one individual risks ignoring the numerous elephants in the room.
Come back Doxon of D*ck Green, we need you now.
There is one reason and one reason only that she go the job.
You don’t need much imagination to envisage our politicians salivating over the ‘optics’
Another box ticking exercise! She ticked two! We’ve got to stop this nonsense and promote on meritocracy!
“The appointment of the first woman Commissioner has been a failed experiment”
And there I was thinking she’d got the job on merit! Poor old London, what did they do to deserve being experimented upon?
There was this fairly accurate saying that how well a society treats its women is an indicator of that society overall, with the implication being (rightly) that even men would benefit greatly relative to other cultures that don’t trat women well.
The corollary is that a if you produce a culture that venerates women’s rights and look down upon the needs of men, especially working class men who most need support – treating higher male suicide rates or father’s rights with contempt, or (as this article shows) assuming male domestic violence victims don’t even exist…..
The outcome isn’t great, even for those exalted upper class women who drove that culture. Bad for men, of course, but turns out we are both in the same sinking ship. The underlying gynocentric principles are not going to change. So for instance, you will have a police that focuses more on “diversity”, promoting women and making the right noises about “women’s rights” than actually putting strong, rough men in uniform and on the streets. And hence, predictable results for safety of common citizens and prevention of crime. Which, incidentally, affects men even more so, which hopefully makes you feel a bit better.
This is why Men’s Rights are treated with contempt. Men love to brag about how much bigger and stronger they are than women except when it comes to domestic violence: then they are suddenly all simpering little children cowering before a woman who is half their size and strength.
Yes, of course there are male victims of domestic violence, but men are bigger and stronger than women, so when a man is violent he is much more dangerous and deadly. That’s why it is much worse for a man to strike a woman than for a woman to strike a man (just as it is much worse for a young person to strike an elderly person than it is for an elderly person to strike a young person).
Men are harmed by sexism, but not in the ways that you claim.
Men should be valued based on their character, not on how much money they make or on how athletic they are.
Men should be allowed to express fear and pain without being ridiculed or accused of “weakness”; this by itself would probably reduce the male suicide rate.
Men should be socialized to develop warm interpersonal relationships with women and with other men, so that they aren’t driven mad with loneliness (a loneliness they are forbidden to express).
Men are oppressed in this culture, but they are not oppressed by so-called “feminists”. They are oppressed by men like you, who ignore real suffering and make a straw man out of women who just want to be treated fairly in society.
Worse for a man to strike a woman:
It really depends on what you mean by worse. The consequences are generally worse (depending, of course on the strength of the blow), but is it morally worse?
Put another way, is it more acceptable for a woman to hit a man, just because it won’t hurt so much? And if we expect men to control their tempers and not commit acts of violence, should women not be expected to show similar self control? And what about other forms of verbal and emotional abuse?
Do women get a free pass, because men are big and strong and can take it. Or are we to treat them like children who lash out – but it’s ok, because they are not strong enough to really hurt anyone?
Penny – appreciate your concern for men, but it’s not really your role to dictate to men what they are oppressed by. Perhaps you should listen to mens voices instead.
You are just interpreting mens suffering and oppression through a feminist lens – a lens which was in no way designed for such a task.
I’m from a traditional working class background and I grew up in the 50s and early 60s. I was taught to treat all people, irrespective of their race, colour, creed or sex, with respect. Indeed I was taught to treat women with reverence albeit with expectations about their behaviour which are unfashionable today. During my later teens and early 20s I had a lot of fun with girlfriends but I would not have laid a finger on them without them wanting me to. I found the casual misogyny of some of my male acquaintances repellent although they were never a majority.
I taught my son the same values and he is now a police officer in one of the other large metropolitan forces. I’ve met some of his team. They like him are horrified and disgusted with what has been happening in the Met. Peel rightly knew that successful policing can only happen with the cooperation and trust of the public. It is about leadership but also resourcing. The politicians who have assiduously cut resources to the bone have a lot to answer for.
I think the idea that Sexism is a bad thing is false. Men and women are different for all the reasons most people know about – physical, mental and emotional. If you treat everyone the same, ie, equal, then gender becomes fundamentally meaningless, something to be bought and sold in the market place, put on or taken off like a coat.
Men and Women “should be socialised to develop warm interpersonal relationships “, that is most likely going to happen in a traditional family with a father and mother committed to, and supportive of each other. But boys need a different approach to girls in their upbringing, parents, doctors, teachers, psychologists, have always known this, until a few sociologists and feminists in the 1950s and 60s decided otherwise.
If women want men to protect them from predatory men then they must be honest about their limitations, and have some respect for the decent men who would put themselves in danger on women’s behalf.
Trying to feminise men you end up with someone like poor Prince Harry, or the trans situation. You cannot have it all ways.
“Should… should… should.”
Do you not think feminism has done enough damage to boys, men (and girls, women) already by constantly peddling anti-reality like this?
You really, really do not understand boys and men, please stay away.
Undermine chivalry and one produces crude men. Solution. Teach boys to box and dance the Salsa. Salsa dancing improves footwork and produces better boxers which is why the Cubans are so good. Salsa dancing teaches boys to be decorous with girls.
I don’t know why you have been so downvoted. I think you make some valid points. There is a problem in our society that in the crucial years between about 2 and 8, some young boys are not receiving the parental love which allows them to grow into emotionally stable adults. This is not about feminisation: it is humanisation.
Perhaps because you express it with genuine, rather than ideological, sympathy.
Whether you are right or not is another question. It’s a generalisation, and perhaps your words were ill chosen, but I would say that women tend to be more lacking in emotional stability, and need to be constantly propped up with social media approval.
Feeling free to express one’s emotions is perhaps a different story.
And why do you think it is that boys are not receiving parental love, while their sisters presumably are. Is this sons of single mothers, or two parent families?
Any solid evidence?
As to the relative emotional stability of men and women, that is deep water. I agree that young women appear to be fixated on the opinions of their peers via social media, but then boys are joining gangs not just for protection, but for friendship, loyalty, respect: these are all emotional needs.
Yes it is about single parents, parents ill-equipped to look after themselves let alone others, the familiar litany I’m afraid.
The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, was said to be “furious” and reported to have put the Commissioner “on notice”. What took him so long?
Perhaps the fact that she’s a woman.
What this shows, above all, is that simply appointing a woman to such a role will not necessarily make things better for women. It’s competence that gets things done, not gender. Giving women a free pass, or promoting them above their level of competence, just because they are women, doesn’t help anyone.
People join the police for different reasons. Family tradition was one major driver. After a job in the military was another. Then there are those who join because they need the authority the uniform gives them in order that they can be the bullies they never had the courage to be. The fact is the job attracts a good number of weirdos. Add to that all the Diversity hiring and you have the above.
A few years ago I watched a cop trying to manoeuvre himself out of a police car. He was morbidly obese. The sort that looks like they are waddling rather than walking. But that’s is ok, hopefully he doesn’t have to actually arrest anyone, because he ticked a diversity box based on his ethnicity.
Summer 2020 I ran into a protest on Haymarket. Walking down Jermyn Street were two lines of cops in their riot clothing but not carrying riot equipment. I’ve never seen a less threatening group of people in my life. They looked like they had walked out of the staff room at a kindergarten. At the head of each line was a female with a red cap that denoted leadership of some sort. Neither of them would have been able to bruise a grape if they had to fight a grape. One officer looked the same age as my mother. Mother is 84. I assume the officer was not 84, she just looked it. The men were no better. Slouching along with their wispy, bum fluff beards they looked like not one of them had ever been punched in the face. That is an experience that is quite handy to have behind you if you need to deal with violence.
Anyone who complains about the ineffectiveness of the police force needs to grow up. What do you think is going to happen when you kick out all the thugs and replace them with middle class criminology graduates with degrees from the University of Buttf*ck Nowhere? I will tell you what. You will get videos on Youtube of police officers at a BLM protest running as if for their lives from a group of school kids that is “chasing” them.
For those of you who remember the England rugby teams of the 1980s you can run a thought experiment and ask yourself “would Wade Dooley or Paul Ackford have felt the need to flee in terror from a group of school kids even if there be 100 times more school kids present than there are Dooley’s and Akford’s?”
Only if among them was Federico Mendez who as a 19 year old playing for Argentina knocked Ackford out cold. His punch was a little bit unsporting but admirable for its timing and power.
Lol, so true. Locally, I heard of one naive young recruit who had no idea that violence might be involved in the job until he attended his first lessons in how to restrain violent criminals (and preferably not get punched in the face while doing so). He was so horrified that he quit on the spot. Still, better then than later, on the street, when someone was getting a kicking and he was too scared to intervene.
As long as this young man was sufficiently empathetic that he could feel the lived experience of the person getting the kicking that is all we can ask of the youth of today.
“The appointment of the first woman Commissioner has been a failed experiment”
If true, then forcing Londoners into being guinea pigs was a terribly risky and stupid thing to do.
But I hope her appointment was based on factual merit: that she was as good as anyone one else in the frame for the job. For if not – that it was because she was valued as a “double minority” with respect to leading the force – then that, as a political act, is exceptional damaging in so many ways.
‘Factual merit?’ I doubt it. Any police officer will tell you that ticking a diversity box will make it easier to get promotion and much harder to get sacked, even if you do something stupid.
One needs to determine what are the threats facing Britain today. I suggest the following:- Islamic Terrorism, East European organised crime gangs employing ex special forces and security people; international criminal money laundering using lawyers and accountants; local London gangs, international drug dealers, especially South American; rapists, muggers, high level armed criminals- bank jobs; serial killers, rioters.
What are the qualities needed from The Police to prevent crime from above: – honesty, moral rectitide, industriousness, high level of fitness and unarmed combat skills, good knowledge of the law; ability to out think criminals; language skills; good knowledge of foreign cultures relevant to crime detection and prevention; patience and self – control in the face of provocation, emotional maturity, sagacity
Where likely to find these skills? Those who have reached the rank of corporal and above in Commando/Airborne/ Elite Infantry Units; people with A Levels or degrees in languages, law engineering or applied science who have played contact sports, preferably rugby, boxing and martial arts.
We need to increase duration of training. The most difficult aspect of fitness to increase is upper body strength, the pull up( needed for grappling ). I suggest entry to the Police should require the following ;- 3 pull ups, 40 press ups, 40 sit ups and run 5 miles in 40 mins which is achievable in 6 months. If people cannot achieve this level of fitness before joining the Police they lack the emotional maturity and self- discipline to an Officer of the Law.
The vetting will take months. During this period they should join Aikido/Judo or Ju Jitsu clubs. W E Fairbarin Asst Commissioner of Shanghai Police developed modern un- armed combat from Ju Jitsu in the 1920s and 1930s. At Police College every morning there will be two hours of un-armed combat training. I expect total training period to be increased to about 9 months. We do not need graduates but modern Policing probably needs someone who has the competence of a Corporal or higher from an elite military unit or tough people with A Levels in rigorous academic subjects ( Langages, Maths and Science).
Historically many Chief Constables were ex military officers. Also many sergeants used to join the Police. After WW2, many sergeants had special Forces/Commando/Airborne experience which meant they were tougher and more astute than any criminal.
One cannot put a wise head on young shoulders.The level of stress and risk which can be faced by Police can be extreme so we need people with the sufficient experience to to make the correct decision but also have the fitness and skill to arrest the most violent fit criminals .
But isn’t she doing her actual job really well?
Her real job is to be a massive distraction from all the problems / scandals of citizen Khan or the current prime minister. The bigger the scandal the more eyes she draws away from the rest of the them. Its not how i’d run a police force but i dont think shes there to run a police force either.
*Troilus P3nis has failed women
That deserves a quadruple uptick, bravo!
Reading that calamity of a Performance Review tells me that Cressida D*ck is very good at “managing up”. In any PLC she would have been fired or been prepared to resign, i.e. “managed out”.
Perhaps, even if it is a given that D*ck wholly deserves to be demoted asap, she is simply emblematic of the political appointment system.
(Edit: So Unherd has an automated method of transposing unsavoury words in saved comments like “D i c k” into “d**k”. Pity if one’s surname is a swear word! Further edit: even though I’ve edited out the surname my comment is for the first time ever ‘Awaiting for approval”. I’m not hopeful….)
Her surname is also a very recognised abbreviation of the boys forename Richard, not so much used now but extremely common until a few years ago. Middle aged and elderly Richards must get very, very, annoyed at their name being asterisked all the time.
The Macpherson Report which, unlike many, I have read (twice), was a very unbalanced assessment of the murder of Stephen Lawrence, and the handling of the aftermath by the Met, attributing unconscious racism to a number of officers where the evidence cited seemed to show no such thing. It destroyed the confidence of the leadership of the Met to make decisions and be accountable for them, and spawned the current cohort who now occupy senior roles by virtue of having seen how to tick the new boxes on the way up. I don’t think a similar report on misogyny would help matters.
She has failed women?
So BJ has failed men?
Harry has failed the ginger haired?
Patel has failed Muslims?
Cummings has failed psychopaths?
The Met is too big : between the policy makers at the top and the feral thugs at the bottom (not all of them, but a good number) there are too many layers of bureaucracy and adninistrative procedures which delay and dilute the effect of any ‘initiatives’.
If a commissioner wants to implement a change in organisational culture, who are they going to get to implement it? People who have come up through the organisation and who are products of it (and probably rather approve of the culture ‘on the ground’. It’s like bullying in the army : there are many at NCO level who think that a ‘robust’ culture is a good thing.)
Trouble is, if you cull all the bad apples, who is left to do the work?
One can be tough but not crude, coarse or vulgar. Robert Graves, infantry officer in WW1, boxer, climber, classical scholar and poet. The Commando /Special Forces Officers were tough and refined, Col Bill Hudson SOE, P Leigh Fermour SOE, Lewis SAS, Stirling SAS and Mayne SAS.
I completely agree with you, though can I point out that the people you mention were all, as far as I know, ‘officer class’ and (normally) came into the forces as such – they didn’t rise through the ranks. I don’t know whether they would thrive in the present day (I mean, you only need to look at what louts rugby players are in their cups to see that civilisation is a very thin veneer.)
I just wonder how you reverse the rot in an organisation once it gets past a certain level. The ‘canteen culture’ is very difficult to counter once it becomes the norm.
In WW2 many Commando/SF/RAF officers were educated and remained sergeants or were commissioned, J Cooper of the SAS and Field Marshall Lord Bramhall are examples.
What I think is ignored is that much of the quality of the British Police rested on them being former members of the armed forces. My theory is that as the proportion of Police who former members of the armed forces and overseas police forces, especially those who who had been sergeants and officers of elite units declined, so did overall standards, such as moral rectitude, politeness, fitness and self defence skills. Elite units require more self discipline and years of selective training. There are also jumps in standards required from going from private to corporal and corporal to sergeant.
When it comes to rugby players, when ladies are present vulgar behaviour is not accepted.
I suggest all police personnel are Officers of the Law and therefore need the sense of responsibility, politeness and moral rectitude of officers and gentlefolk. Coarse, crude and vulgar behaviour is not acceptable. If they are unable to comply, then they should leave. This statement could be made by all Chief Constables and the New Commissioner.
She was one of main culprits for the murder of Mr Menezes. Had she not “failed women” would the murder of mr Menezes be okay? This compartmentalization of sexes and races is contemptuous.
Did she do a good job for men then?
Her role in the murder of Jean-Charles de Menezes should have precluded her from any future role in public life. That it didn’t tells us everything we needed to know about her cheerleaders – the ridiculous Khan’t being only the worst.
”Last summer, another dark cloud brooded over d**k’s head.” I cannot help thinking of Austin Powers when reading this article. A lot of tongue in cheek.