Police officers have been told not to say “man up”, “OAP”, “policeman” and “middle-aged”, along with a host of other common words and phrases when dealing with the public as they could be “unlawful discrimination”. The Telegraph has the story.
The 12-page guidance document, published by Staffordshire Police, warns that “discrimination through language causes offence, patronises and may be unlawful”.
The guide, issued to officers in June, also warned police not to use the phrase “high poverty rates” and instead call deprived areas “communities with access to fewer opportunities”.
A spokesman for Staffordshire Police said the language advice had been issued after a consultation with “external consultants” to ensure everyone was treated with the “utmost courtesy and respect”.
The guidance states that the examples included are “by no means exhaustive or definitive” as language is always changing.
The recommendations also advise against using gender-biased expressions or expressions that reinforce gender stereotypes, such as “man up” or “grow a pair”.
The guide makes further suggestions for the way officers identify individuals by their jobs.
The term “cleaning lady” should be swapped for “cleaner” while “spokesman” should be switched to “spokesperson” and “statesman” should be replaced with “official”, “diplomat”, “political figure” or “leader”.
The word “policeman” has also been banned with officers told to use the “police officer” instead.
On the list of banned phrases for older people are the terms “elderly, middle-aged, pensioner and senior”.
Officers were also told that they could not use the phrase “confined to a wheelchair” “suffering from” or “diabetic person” when referring to people with disabilities.
People who describe themselves as Christians or Muslims should not be referred to as such – instead, officers should call them “Christian people” or “Muslim people”.
Language around mental health was also referenced, with the phrases “suffers with anxiety” and “struggles with depression” also on the banned list.
Police were instead encouraged to say, “the person has anxiety and depression”.
Worth reading in full.
Image: This is very likely an AI-generated image, but one with more than a ring of truth to it.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Jeez!
Are these now our policemen?
Unbelievable.
Looks like it should have come direct from a Mel Brooks movie..
Except they are funny
Plodpeops
Unfortunately, it’s all too believable.
Yes they are and often they appear like a troupe of sequence dancers doing their set routine with shields. Two steps forward, and one back, two steps to the side and one back. I often wonder if the idea is to disperse the baying crowd or entertain them.
so if your can’t say “confined to a wheelchair”, is ‘ambulatorily impaired’ OK?
Wheel endowed?
Would someone who had just “grown a pair” be wheel endowed?
An ex colleague who was a former police officer in close protection duties was the victim of an attempted mugging on her way home from work. She brought a lump to the mugger’s throat (or maybe two) if you see what I mean. Grow a pair? No need, she could take anyone’s.
My son suffers with anxiety.
Yes, he suffers. It’s horrible.
NHS mental health support is overstretched these days. Yeah, I know – so is the rest of the NHS.
They can’t ban words. Who the hell do they think they are?
F Da Police as NWA once said.
NWA could be seen as a means to divide society on racial lines, contributing to some of the problems we see today. Jerry Heller wasn’t particularly black though.
I guess it ‘could’ be seen that way, but people are willing to find anything offensive nowadays so I’m going to stick with my view that Straight Outta Compton was a brilliant album and FDP a response to overtly racist police treatment.
Why all this semantic drivel? I think I’ll carry on using the word ‘constable’ because that is what they are whereas ‘officer’ suggests a higher level of authority. I expect they don’t want to call someone a ‘senior citizen’ because it confers some authority over them.
They must be anti-semantic.
My thoughts exactly Aethelred.
“Constable” for plod is more than sufficient. It’s not as if I know their stripes is it? I wouldn’t want to over promote one of these jokers
Control the language, control the narrative. Communist/Marxist playbook used effectively by tyrants. That is where we are.
No doubt called someone “coloured” is banned but “person of color” is fine.
The term “police” should be banned and replaces with “holders of white flags of surrender”
Correct, police means upholders of law and order, so that’s a completely incorrect term nowadays!
Benedict Cumberbatch was “devastated to have caused offence” in 2015 when he used the term coloured. Usually people are devastated due to some life changing event.
The documentary “The Injustice System in America” has blacks using the term People of Colour but also “retarded”. Why is that then acceptable?
Kneelers rather than Peelers perhaps?
Compelled speech and compelled offence again. A great disappointed in that nothing in the real world gets fixed just because somebody changes a few words or bans others. Also nobody can fix anything because nobody knows what you are talking about any more. It’s like that scientific paper that talked about the dry tinder effect. It was resubmitted with a different ‘less offensive’ term. The only problem is that I have no idea what the new term is as it is simply hard to remember.
Alice strikes again
Since the covid drivel started, it is amazing how many quotes from Alice in Wonderland seem to come up as being apt and relevant;
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things, “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master——that’s all.”
This business of hurtful and offensive words descends into a mad cycle where words and phrases eventually lose their meaning, possibly that is the real target in all this? To destroy sense, sensibility and rational reason.
The destruction of language is perhaps less for us and more for the upcoming generations who won’t know any better and will only be able to express themselves in these nonsensical terms.
Meanwhile, the legal profession seems to maintain their language? This would certainly give dominance over the masses.
“words and phrases eventually lose their meaning, possibly that is the real target in all this? To destroy sense, sensibility and rational reason.”
Without a shadow of any doubt. Orwellian in the extreme.
‘1984’ is literally the manual.
None of this is new. It’s just a rehash of the 70s/80s.
Senior citizens (not OAP, or elderly), unwaged (not unemployed), differently abled (not handicapped), chairperson (not chairman/chairwomen) which morphed into just chair, firefighter (not fireman), single mother (not whore), person of restricted growth (not dwarf) hence PORG… femhole cover instead of manhole cover – no, just made that up.
When the loonies are recycling old stuff, they are finished. Don’t encourage them, they are mentally ill.
If you have ever seen the film Clockwork Orange, you will see a distinct resemblance to the police depicted therein to the police of today.
They are just thugs who protect ‘mostly peaceful’ rioters, and weed out thought criminals.
I regularly meet a lady who walks many dogs partly to earn a supplement for her pension and mostly because she just likes dogs.
She describes her former job as a ‘manageress’ – a word which I found more than a little jarring. As far as I’m concerned I’ve worked for managers and directors (female or male), I’ve served on committees and governing bodies under a chairman (female or male) and enjoyed the performances of (and despised some) actors on stage and screen (female and male).
Most jobs don’t need a separate term to describe men or women – even if the word includes ‘man’ or ‘men’ as one of the syllables. Could you imagine creating the word ‘surgeoness’ or ‘pilotess’? No more do we need the term ‘chairwoman’ or ‘spokeswoman’ or even less ‘chairperson’ or ‘spokesperson’.
‘Chairman’ is a function which says nothing about the sex or imagined gender of the person in that role.
I once showed an American friend the video of the naval ratings ‘manning the mast’, a tradition now sadly gone. The one who got to stand on the top of the mast, considered a great honour, was called the ‘Button Boy’, except this was the first female rating to have the honour. ‘So, shes a Button Girl.?’ asked my colleague.?’ No’, said I ‘she’s a female Button Boy’. They couldn’t get the head around it and insisted on Button Girl.
When I was involved with the Boy Scout movement we had cubmasters for the 8 to 11 year old boys. Some were ladies and were referred to as lady cubmasters rather than cubmistresses to avoid any implication that young boys had mistresses.
Let’s not lose our s*** over this; it’s just in- house rules for the fuzz, not anyone else.
If they want to give themselves stupid rules to follow then it doesn’t hamstring me in any way, and I don’t have to do it too.
I just never want to see a copper wearing rainbow shorts ever again. Is this the Village People?
Leaving aside the complex issue of discriminatory attitudes and resultant language (there certainly are still problematic areas in terms of sexism, ageism etc) can I make an appeal to refuse to use or pay any attention to imagery of the type appearing at the head of this article.
Whilst I realise that it is intended in a satirical / cartoonish sense the evident use of AI to create a photo-realistic impression is a form of propagandist deception.
One central foundation of professional fact checking (re journalism, academic history etc) is ‘don’t believe anything until you have seen the verifiable primary source, with photographic and film imagery being especially persuasive’.
Written texts and documents have always been relatively easy to forge. If that significant element of doubt extends into hitherto generally reliable / unforgeable visual material we really are into an entire evidential world resting on quicksand.
Control the Language = Control the argument. When you control the words you control the narrative. The solution is to inform the wokerati that you have an education and own a dictionary and that you will be choosing your own words. ———————–The trouble is with the offence taking industry is that even if you remain silent you will be offending some faction or other, like what happens with Critical Race Theory. So it is better not to pander to them in the first place. Say it like it is and if it is the dictionary —-USE IT
In this “cost of living” crisis , its the midgets I feel sorry for. They’re the ones struggling to put food on the table.
Maybe the left can provide them all with free step ladders.
After they’ve taken the knee and spoken to them face to face.
Have you seen Snow White and the 7 diverse and inclusive characters yet?
Never mind the assault on language! Is that Photo Real ??? In a way I hope it is because it would confirm that Lunatics are in fact running The Asylum !!
Surely none of the everyday words & phrases that Staffordshire plod are targeting can be deemed unlawful unless there is a specific law banning their use !
I bet a lot of transgender people would like to man up and grow a pair or just grow a pair (of breasts). Maybe they’d be manning down
It’s amazing all the things that they can find unlawful, yet hate-marches, glorification of terrorism, desecration of war memorials and such are totally fine…
The Police ‘Service’ has now clearly merged with the Village People.
Don’t they realise that they are being made to look like absolute clowns and become a laughing stock?
Discrimination? Fucking IDIOTS. They are descriptions.
God help us. We’re gone. End days.
“Police officers have been told not to say “man up”, “OAP”, “policeman” and “middle-aged”, along with a host of other common words and phrases when dealing with the public as they could be “unlawful discrimination”.”
The police now feel they can INTERPRET the law. We pay them to enforce it. FUBAR
Bingo, I see the magic word “consultant” is in the middle of the article. that of course explains everything, and presumably another waste of taxpayers money.