Lesbian Chief Constable Forces Bearded British Cops To Wear Beard Nets

The openly lesbian Chief Constable of Gloucestershire Constabulary, a British police force, has foisted draconian new rules on male officers with beards. The force’s new uniform rules will force officers to either wear a “beard net,” or shave their beards entirely.

Suzette Davenport, a open lesbian with links to subversive charity “Common Purpose,” has defended the uniform rules as necessary to ensure an acceptable appearance and “health and safety.” Police representatives have criticised the policy.

Are “beard nets” for male officers a genuine requirement of modern policing or is Suzette Davenport another Cultural Marxist infiltrator doing Gramsci’s work?

Health and safety gone mad


Suzette Davenport, Chief Constable of Gloucestershire Constabulary

In addition to beard nets, Chief Constable Davenport has also introduced other measures in an attempt to clothe the beard-ban in an apparently legitimate pursuit. The Times reports that police staff will have to hide visible tattoos with a plaster, while women “have been urged” to wear less makeup.

It is unclear whether any sanctions will attach to women who persist in caking it on a la Josie Cunningham. An inside source told the The Times: “Some of the female PCs have been wearing so much bronzer that they look like the Tango man. But the blokes will just look silly walking around with a big net on their face.”

The Police Federation, which has lately been at odds with Conservative Home Secretary Theresa May over deep cuts to the policing budget, also criticised the policy. Their spokesman Steve White said: “Police officers have got to look professional and smart when they are on duty, but for goodness sake. There is a big difference between a trimmed goatee beard and a full length Father Christmas Z.Z. Top beard. People just need to be sensible.”

Mr. White conceded that there was some legitimate concern about officers sporting “wild beards” on duty: “They can be used as a weapon,. For someone to grab. That’s why it’s important to keep long hair tied back on patrol. But a beard net? Chief Constables shouldn’t be looking at such draconian measures. There are many much more important things that need to be discussed.”

Across the UK, police forces have discretion to implement their own policies relating to facial hair. In London, for instance, the Metropolitan Police has no qualms about allowing beards. In May, a Met officer, Peter Swinger, became an internet sensation when pictures of his neatly trimmed beard and sculpted moustache went viral on Twitter. He was christened “Hipster Cop,” although he later revealed he only listens to Meat Loaf.

Hipster Cop

Common Purpose: dodgy political charity

Common Purpose purports to be an “independent, international leadership development organisation” and claims to give people from the private and non-profit sectors “the inspiration, skills and connections to become better leaders at work and in society.”

They do this by running courses for “leaders,” useful idiots in some position of influence in councils or police forces. Common Purpose’s creepy agenda is, in part, revealed in their own website copy, where they claim they help leaders to:

Become better – and significantly faster – at breaking down silos and crossing cultures.

Operate effectively outside their comfort zone.

Deliver complex change.

Common Purpose claims its “experiential work” takes place in “in prisons, trading floors, schools, hospitals, production plants and more.” Nowhere on their website is there any indication what mandate this organisation has to “deliver complex change” and order employees to “Operate effectively outside their comfort zone” in institutions which are funded by the British taxpayer.

Documenting the entire gamut of Common Purpose shenanigans is beyond the scope of this article. Former Royal Navy Lietenant Brian Gerrish has exposed the involvement of Common Purpose at the heart of many a British political scandal, including the fact that numerous prominent figures in the Rotherham child abuse scandal, where 1,600 girls were raped by local “Asian” men while police and council officials did nothing for fear of appearing “racist,” were graduates of Common Purpose leadership courses.

A leader of men?


Suzette Davenport underwent such a Common Purpose “leadership” course while Assistant Chief Constable of Staffordshire in 2006. Davenport had been placed under investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission for her handling of a gangland murder investigation in Staffordshire in 2011. Although she was cleared in 2014, Davenport was appointed as Chief Constable of Gloucestershire with the charges against her still outstanding.

It’s difficult to say whether whether the educational charity Common Purpose has exerted undue influence to shoehorn the careerist Davenport into the top job at Gloucestershire Constabulary. A look at Davenport’s profile begs the question, what right-minded system of governance appoints a woman who has spent more of her time in desk-jobs like the “national lead for roads policing in England and Wales” and the vice president of the British Association for Women in Policing, and who cavorts with phony political charities, in charge of the men tasked with keeping law and order on Britain’s streets?

By introducing beard nets for male officers, Suzette Davenport is leading by the example set by Julia Middleton, the creepy, mind-bending NLP nut who was formerly CEO of Common Purpose and was intimately involved in Sir Brian Leveson’s inquiry into press standards, a naked attempt by the British Left to destroy our freedom of the press.

Middleton, in her business book Beyond Authority: Leadership in a Changing World, counselled her adepts to “led beyond authority.” What better way to “lead beyond authority” in public service than by imposing loony policies that alienate front line staff?

The long march through the institutions


Not an Equality and Diversity co-ordinator in sight.

Common Purpose, who have hoovered up close to £500,000 from British police forces alone in fees for training “future leaders,” has been described as a “left wing Freemasonry.” Behind the NLP and management jargon, and the bland business attire, Common Purpose are radically Left-wing.

A radically left-wing gesture like Davenport’s imposition of beard nets is just one more salvo in the agenda to emasculate men in public service, men who are already required to tread on eggshells as they defer the manifold layers of oppressed, wailing minorities above them.

A gesture so emasculating also serves to devalue an old institution like the police, with all its connotations of the preservation of a certain order. Can you imagine Sir Robert Peel’s original bobbies being told to wear nets over their beard for “health and safety” purposes?

Men who are expected to be ready at all hours of the day to mete out violence in order to keep criminals in check cannot be expected to submit to rules dreamed up in a conference room by a jumped-up jobsworth who happens to carry the title of Chief Constable.

If indeed Common Purpose are a malign foreign-influenced cult which seeks, as the conspiracy theorists say, to usurp British state for amalgamation into a federal, social-democratic European state, pursuing the aggressive demoralisation of the police would be an ideal strategy.

It’s a classic case of Gramsci’s edict that progressives should take a “Long march through the institutions.” Let us hope that the undoing of Common Purpose graduate Suzette Davenport and her zany policy of beard nets will come from a minority which has thus far been muscular in demanding religious accommodation: bearded, Muslim police officers.

Read Next: Modern Social Justice Warriors Use The Same Subversion Strategies As The USSR

171 thoughts on “Lesbian Chief Constable Forces Bearded British Cops To Wear Beard Nets”

  1. What the world needs now…..someone who knows what to do when they “can’t leave it alone”

  2. Hmmmm….I wonder if her tune would change if any of the affected constables converted to islam….

      1. I think the constables forced to wear these beard covers will wind up offending the civilian islamist men because it shames them by proxy.

        1. If that is the case, then I think they would require all male constables to be clean shaven as to appear gender neutral…except for their hats.

      1. To quote her “I love the pole and the hole, and right now, I’m as moist as a snack cake down there”. Gerri was also known for looking at fine women and saying “That’s gotta be tiiight!”. Amy Sedaris is actually funny, unlike most female comedians that we are forced to watch.

        1. She was good looking for a bit too sans fake teeth.
          No way in hell a show like that gets made today- even if a woman created it.

        2. Well, Girls is made by a “woman” and it depicts women acting like pigs….but that show celebrates it while Strangers was satire.

        3. yeah, thats a good point- is satire dead? Is a show like Girls nothing more than a “humorous” documentary?

  3. Women don’t lead men effectively. End of story. Lesbian women are even bigger fucktards. What fantasy world are these idiots living in?

    1. I’m assuming the UK would also have many Sikh officers, who are known for majestically large beards. I wonder how they feel about it…? I’m guessing this beard net thing won’t last, since it wouldn’t only apply to native white British officers.

      1. Sikh officers will be exempted, you can be sure of it ! The dyke wouldn’t like to be accused of racism !

      1. Not true, excellent women are great leaders of children. They are created specifically for this biological purpose. If women educate themselves correctly (Music, Poetry, Manners, etc….) and comport themselves with dignity and understand their role in the family unit, women will not only lead children wonderfully, but will, in this way, actually be performing a task that their male counterparts cannot.

        1. “performing a task that their male counterparts cannot”
          I wouldn’t go this far, at least when concerning kids above the age of 3 years old.
          But certainly your point stands strong when talking about babies. They have something we lack when taking care of little babies and of course there is immense value in what they do in the family.

        2. Babies without saying. But, I think, even with young children 3-10. I am not saying they can be teachers of male children at this age…in terms of teaching them the tools to be young men…they need a father for this. However, when it comes time to make sure they are dressed for school, going to their after circular activities, brush their teeth every day, sit down to the table to eat…I think that (good) mothers are made for this.

        3. I think youre right- once they get to that more defiant smart mouth tween age range, a no nonsense male teacher would be better for both boys and girls….

        4. “Not true, excellent women are great leaders of children”
          you know I was going to say this…but i realize it aint true. even for women to be great leaders of children, they require a man to lead her. without the man in place, they will fail to lead even children.
          in reality it is more like the man delegates that job to the woman rather than the woman being capable of it on her own. women then be natural followers tap into their children leading skills.

        5. I agree with you. This is why I said “excellent women” who by definition, amongst other things, would have put herself in the care of a high valued man and not just accepted but craved firmly established tacit roles prior to having the children.

        6. Yep. Feminists ruin everything. Their whole fantasy of ‘women and men are the same’ or ‘women are better’ B.S. is delusional.

        7. I agree with you. But, can we substitute the word ‘leaders’ with ‘nurturer’? I think it would be more appropriate honor for that particular women’s role, in my opinion.

        8. Would love to. would even run for office on that ticket if I could, but SJW’s would throw anyone out in a jiffy with mindless outcries of “injustice”

    2. Oh my God! Here in the U.S. women get management jobs because of Affirmative Action. And they do nothing but cause issues and fire people to make look like their doing something. People have to work around them to get the job done. And lesbians hate men and can’t control their emotions, and constantly sexually harrass the other women. Companies can’t do anything about them because of lawsuits, so when a department loses too much money they get transferred and become someone else’s problem.
      When you consider the amount of money society spends, college grants/loans, HR processing, etc. to get women into these positions, and only to cause constant losses, it has to be considered that women go back to menial jobs. Their behavior of chasing men for their wallets doesn’t change when they become managers anyway. Just boost up secretarial pools the way they used to be. Or like the Japanese. . .Have “departments” where unwanted employees are warehoused untill they get married, move on, or die.
      The days when America had so much money to burn that this kind of nonsense could be economically absorbed are gone. Just because a woman wants to be a boss and run things, even when everyone knows they can’t, shouldn’t mean that they should just get it. A retarded person unable to write their name might want to be a CEO someday, but that’s not going to happen. Same thing here.

    1. Check out the icon of Marshal Law down below- it was a comic back in the lates 80s/early 90s.
      I dont think you are far off…

  4. I sometimes wonder if I’m reading a satire article from The Onion. The absurdity of some of these topics just defies belief.

  5. Sorry, we would have caught your rapist but we forgot our beard nets and had to await approval to leave the station with our dangerous facial hair exposed.

  6. And how would this effect a shit-colored immigrant who’s dumb ass religion has asinine ascetic requirements?
    Whitey should play that game too. “I’m a Neo-Pagan Viking and Odon Zeus requires that I wear a blood red Mohawk, full beard and and have my cock out at all times. Muh believevves”

  7. Now feminists are telling men how they have to look.
    It is well known that a lot of women have always demanded men to wear skirts.
    Perhaps these policemen should wear hijab,it would really suit them
    since they are well trained in the arts of misandry.

  8. Why are men taking orders from a female whose neck they could snap with their bare hands?

  9. “this is outrageous , a betrayal of our members, many of whom are proud of their beards, moustaches and verdant facial hair!”
    said a spokesperson for the federation of lesbian police officers

  10. This is a good website that explains it well (CP anyway) http://stopcp.com/
    We are witnessing a coup by the banksters who are trying to set up a
    globalist, corporatist, technocratic, communitarian dictatorship
    commonly known as the ‘New World Order’. National sovereignty is being
    destroyed. The EU has put its satraps into Greece and Italy so that
    these countries are now effectively provinces of the EU. Spain and
    Portugal are the next targets.
    How do they do it? Manipulating systems.”

  11. Although womyn officers are fully capable of growing a beard, their beards are inadequate in comparison to the male’s. Therefore, to ensure that there are no performance differences whatsoever between the sexes, male officers must hide the shame of their excessive performance in the hirsute skill category.

  12. There should be a muff net for all those feminists who refuse to wax their gashes.

  13. So, if a beard, as a symbol of masculine oppression need be shorn or covered so as not to offend the delicate uber-sensitives, then what of our “weapon of force” so assuredly the catalyst for all us men to be rapists?
    Are we to be literally castrated preemptively (supposing figurative eunuch man-bitches aren’t sufficient) next, where will it end?
    Sorry lady, guess those rubber dongs haven’t relieved your penis-envy after all, you should’ve accepted no substitute.

  14. Craggy, bitter, domineering, but with a very latent but indelible paranoid inferiority streak a la Stalin. I see it all over her face. I recognize it because i just suffered through a decade of tyranny under a female boss who shared all the same traits as her photograph betrays here.

  15. Why don’t they all just wear ski masks full time to compliment their assault weapons and body armor? That’s the militaristic police state mindless citizens seem to want anyway.

  16. Honestly, these absurd situations are starting to scare me- the inevitable backlash is gonna be very very bad, and very very violent…

    1. That’s probably what they want. Provoke until they get a reaction, then label any groups that react as ‘ extremists’. Wesley Clark wants to put extremists into camps

      1. That’s a typical female behavior. To provoke and get a reaction, good or bad. Unfortunately, getting a bad reaction is easier to obtain.

        1. yes, it is typical female behaviour. But in a way it is also how the government works. From passive aggressives to agent provacteurs, its all about setting traps

      2. They throw rocks at hornets nests all day long and then try and build a case for doing away with hornets by showing everyone the welts.

        1. that’s exactly how it works. Look at the middle east. Bomb them until they’re sufficiently pissed off that they pose a bigger enough threat to justify the military industrial complex that started it in the first place and to impose massive surveillance on domestic populations

  17. I used to wear a mustache just because I’m too lazy to shave all the time, but now it’s a source of masculine pride because women want to be like men in every way but can’t. It’s strange how women always take pictures with their finger above their lip like its a mustache, not sure if they’re pretending to be men or what.

    1. It’s strange how women always take pictures with their finger above their lip like its a mustache, not sure if they’re pretending to be men or what.
      Some women have mustaches tattooed on their index fingers. They then place their tattooed finger between their nose and lips to simulate a moustache.

  18. It may be somewhat offensive to say so, but a warning was given in 1933 about what would happen, so within 70 years, it all came true. They went through it. Wrecked economy, culture destroyed, rampant prostituition, worthless money, debt that could not be repaid and borders eroded.
    The bankers and their frontline sock puppet politicians created a worldwide criminal syndicate that has demonized the very essence of western culture and empowered a small minority of clinically insane magina’s and blue haired feminists. The armed forces are used to subjugate nations that don’t play under the banner of “free-trade.”
    Britain fought the wrong war. London isn’t British, Sweden isn’t Swedish and America is fighting proxy wars and criminalizing it’s citizens at the behest of a small middle eastern country.
    Everything we claimed Germany was, we became in less than 70 years. We utterly destroyed a nation that simply tried to extricate itself from the mess of cultural destruction. England was a global power that claimed Germany wanted to “Rule the World” as it actually ruled the world through colonialism.
    Christianity became religion of weakness and passivity that appears to have been a trojan horse. So worried about being “good” you lay before the feet of insane madman as they laughingly stop your face into the ground. The correct solution is forcibly removing the filth from our midst unapologetically and stop turning a blind eye to the destructive ideology of the left.
    You give those fucking idiots enough rope and they’ll hang you with it!
    We have to contend with the bullshit death cults looking forward to Armageddon and new agers that think we are “spiritually evolving” by being passive fools as the world burns. Growing takes a sack with two well placed balls. The idea “All things happen for a reason” is a cop-out from taking action.
    Are the SJW’s self-destructing? No. They are purging the fringes of the ones that aren’t true believers and simple minded opportunists.

      1. Richard Sharpe of the books by Bernard Cornwell?? Richard Sharpe of the Greenjackets??
        Love those books…

        1. I think he is awesome, but just poking fun (with my disappointment) about how he always plays second banana (006 anyone?) and gets killed off whereas in Sharpe, which first brought him to my attention as well as a lot of casting agents and such I think, he is like a Napoleonic James Bond.

    1. You are 100% correct, of course.
      It’s a mindfuck… that moment when you realize your grandparents’ generation was misguided into sacking and burning the last Western nation to defend ALL OF US.
      The whole episode in Germany was merely a beta test of the modern Jewish war machine. They underestimated just how effective it would be, however, and it promptly blew up in their faces. Luckily for them, they already had their hooks planted in the other Western nations. A little politicking, a little fear-mongering, and they had a million goy fuckwits ready to go destroy their own civilization.
      The war tribe threw that “greatest generation” some extra table scraps for their service, which they used to buy houses and new cars, then spent twenty years installing the Germany model framework in the US.
      As soon as the Boomer generation stopped suckling the teat, the Jews pushed the big red button again.

    2. Germany in the Thirties was essentially what the United States and UK are today. Many of the policies are the same. I would not hold them up as an example of how a country should be.

    3. USA was worse than Germany for a very long time and still was, Hitler learned how to be racist and kill from Americans and Britons. Slaving minorities, stole from America, concentration camps, stolen from Britain.

        1. O so because the confederate army had black folks there was no racism against blacks in the confederacy?

      1. Hitler learned how to be racist and kill from Americans? Um, because the Jews were well liked in Europe prior to Hitler. Right….?

        1. Maybe it was the Rich and corporations that owned everything, and sent thugs to machine gun camps full of workers and poor people. You don’t hear about that. And Hitler was financed by American and Jewish Industrialists. You don’t hear about that either. Jews helped Hitler get into power with the same idea they had in overthrowing the Russian Monarchy. To take control of a state and use the goyim as peasents. It fell through with Stalin, and then the Holocaust only started in Germany towards the end of the war when there was an uprising in the Nazi Party to get rid of the Jews, who started the death camps in the first place. Poetic Justice at work: The Jews started the death camps for German “undesirables,” and then became the enemy when the people realized the disaster they brought with Hitler.

    1. The sooner the better, past time to get on with the raping and pillaging. We know it’s inevitable, why drag it out?

  19. How could that sickly, sour skank become head of a constabulary? English cops must truly be a bunch of poofters to put up with that.

  20. Facial hair is one of the only remaining overtly masculine displays that hasn’t been completely disallowed or stolen by feminists. It sounds like Constable Lesbian is trying to embarrass her male officers into giving that up, probably for the sake of her own radical socialist belief that gender is a construct, blah blah blabbity-blah. “Deliver complex change” is code for some variety of socialist revolution, sure as hell.

    1. you havent visited the west lately have you? the modern businessman is clean shaven with short hair. a lot of companies have a no facial hair policy.
      hell not shaving for a year has been one of the most ballsy things I’ve done in ages….I know if I lived at home I’d hear no end to “YOU NEED TO SHAVE”
      yeah fuck those assholes. sure I dont have a full thick beard(great mustache though)….but fuck those assholes. men have facial hair, boys and girls and women dont.

  21. But what about Sikhs who’s religion says not to ever cut your beard?? Is their a religious exemption??
    This Chief Dyke doesn’t like beards cause they are manly. MEN wear beards and that this carpet-muncher-in-chief can’t abide. This is about shaming men. Shave your beard? You first bitch….

    1. If she wants to be like a man, why is she wearing a female constable hat? She should just make it uni-sex hat.

  22. The deviousness of liberals, being mostly idiotic, never fails to astound me. This is obviously meant to emasculate the men and defeminize the women; what is scary about it is that it can be justified if someone tries to attack the measure.
    Makeup can run in the eyes during pursuit.
    Beards can be grasped by criminals when they attack.
    What a cunning dyke.

    1. Well, women shouldn’t be in law enforcement in the first place so criticising their defeminizing is rather pointless (the whole occupation itself is unfeminine).
      I agree with the men’s part though.

    2. Beards cut to a minimum would make it far harder to grab and would actually be a good way to psych out the culprit

  23. Most professions you shouldn’t have a beard , long hair or tattoos. Long hair in the work place has been a personal risk since the advent of machinery. Tattoos are a symbol of degenerate conformists. When I see police with neck and full sleeve tattoos I really feel for the miniority of society who does not vote for a militarised police state with aspiring thugs you can use necessary force and are the only people armed on masse at the reigns.these groups are salivating at the mouths for when it will martial law.

      1. You mean highly trained killers that are told to obey rank and file orders should be standard for model for how society should base their attire.

        1. ” Long hair in the work place has been a personal risk since the advent of machinery. Tattoos are a symbol of degenerate conformists”

        2. SEALS most definitely don’t fit that description. But if you’re anti-military and don’t really understand the nuance of various operating units I could see why one might think what you’ve typed.

  24. Someone could grab his beard? Yeah, well, someone could kill this tiny lesbo with a single punch. Beard or no beard these big guys have a lot better chance of surviving an attack then this little lesbo bitch.
    Do these cops have any balls or did she make them cut those off too?

  25. She’s just mad she can’t have a beard. But oh how she wants one.

    1. This is how Leftists work, their jobs are on the line if they don’t accept it. Once they infiltrate the government , they use the government to do their bidding. They got laws made so the government couldn’t be used against them for a reason.

    1. “Why is everyone so angry?”
      Warning everyone:
      Sock puppeting female detected.
      Likely also a dyke herself judging by the slightly masculine philosophical slant to ‘his’ other comments..

      1. Yeah, that’s a fishy one. I think it is too, but can’t confirm. It’s hard to believe that this is a normal, red blooded male. This character seems really out of place on a forum such as this no matter what. I would have though that someone like this would be more at home in the comments section of that beacon of liberal “tolerance” The Guardian and I bet they have a user account there too. I would guess they are here to try and prosleytise and troll beneath the radar.

        1. I don’t waste my time trying to fit in to a stereotype of a red blooded man like you do.
          Being tolerant of peoples differences is not weak.
          What I am most intolerant of is that people don’t think for themselves, and the general mob mentality of the small minded who make mass generalisations.
          The assumption you make that just because I disagree with the level of anger in this thread, that I must therefore be in a category of people you personally are against is a prime example of the most basic level of sub human brain processes.
          Do you even know why you are so angry?

        2. You are doubling down I see, probably to try and the avoid embarrassment of being caught out impersonating a man. Listen sister, this is a “red blooded man” website. Either you are here because you like that or because you wish to subvert it (the first part of that sentence was entirely rhetorical). You don’t know me, but I know oestrogen and sneaky SJW tactics when I see them. I see you are at your “angry” routine again. Men scare you, you don’t like them and you want to change them. That might work on the type of “men” that you would interact with at Guardian online, but it has no currency here.

        3. Oh wow, very funny. You are a real humorist. Not as funny as being caught out impersonating a man on a red pill website though. You go girl!

        4. “Being tolerant of peoples differences is not weak.”
          SJW confirmed.
          “What I am most intolerant of is that people don’t think for themselves”
          She means people not thinking for themselves what it is that she want them to think.
          “Do you even know why you are so angry?”
          Females always call men angry when they disagree with them.
          It’s clearly an attempt to silence dissent (especially when the opposition is making good points) while simultaneously reframing the situation so that he’s the aggressor.
          But I suspect that such manipulation isn’t engineered.
          If it was there would be no shortage of females in STEM for them to complain about.
          Instead I think that there manipulation is assisted by evolution.
          That there are perhaps a set of basic ‘subroutines’ genetically wired into the female brain that assist them in manipulation.
          If so then this is good news.
          We already have a shaming language compilation and categorization.
          A compilation of these manipulative ‘subroutines’ would give men everywhere a serious edge when dealing with females because the females aren’t going to evolve a shit load of new ones overnight!

        5. Good analysis mate – what is extraordinary is how even though she has been caught with her fembot pants down, she refuses to slink away to avoid further embarrassment as most rational people would do. She instead uses the” big lie” tactic in the bizarre hope that she will wear people down with dishonest denials and derail the subject from that of her being outed.

        6. It doesnt become true just because you keep saying it. But thanks for proving the point that this article is nothing more than an excuse to rage against people who disagree with you.

        7. The whole point is that while I agree that forcing men to wear hair nets its fucking rediculous, at the time of my comment no one was actually dicussing this.
          Instead you are being even more fucking rediculous as you launch in to extreme aggression and overanalysis that lesbians are ruining your life.
          The absence of rational comment may be because the smart guys are not wasting their time here, and are aware that this unnewsworthy overeaction will blow over and nothing will come of it.
          Accusing anyone who diagrees with you as being a woman or gay proves this thread to be populated by unintelligent fluffy moustached idiots like yourself.

        8. “It doesnt become true just because you keep saying it.” — You words sweetheart and I couldn’t have put it any better. Just because you keep on pretending to be a man that doesn’t change the fact that you are a SJW female embarrassing the shit out of herself here after having been exposed.
          Wow, you love this “anger” stuff (now cunningly re-branded as “rage.”). As previously pointed out to you, the “angry” line is standards SJW fare. You want to discredit anyone who dares utter a view that your “liberal” and feminists overlords have not approved, by patronising them and claiming that they are “angry.” The only one “angry here is you for being caught out – look at your meltdown in your sweary, rant below which in true SJW style is full of ad hominem remarks. Must be that time of the month. Have a glass or two of red wine love and see if that helps.
          You go girl!

        9. Sounds very like hormonal to me. Young lads are off the wall these days. Im sure I dont remember being this much of an asshole when I was younger.

        10. No you are right; you would have been an assholeette. The only hormones affecting you are estrogen (or maybe you are a masculine dyke trying to raise her T levels). You go girl!

      2. Just someone noticing that even a pointless click bait news item inspires an excessive amount of rage.
        And paranoia.

    2. You’ve been outed sister. If we want your re-hash of whatever the Guardian’s latest editorial standpoint is this week, we will give you a shout.
      You go girl!

  26. “If you’re one of the ones who’s paid to care about truth or justice or health and don’t give a damn except for the fee, we’re sick of you.
    If you’re one of the one’s who’s the person in charge and your only interest is keeping the list, and not getting blamed for whats wrong or undone, we’re sick of you.”
    US 14:1-4-15:1-4

  27. Great article. Something I was completely unaware of. Just one thing, who described Common Purpose as a ‘left wing Free Masonry’?

  28. The only legislation that needs to be passed is to force her to wear a bag over her head…or wear a fake beard. Seriously, she would look better with one.

  29. I agree completely that health and safety is paramount. The next step they must take is to require all women to wear Bio Hazard/Waste stickers on their crotch every month. Can’t be too safe!!

  30. British cops look bad enough they look like Mary Popo (Poppins). How is a beard net going to make them any harder to grab if anything it makes it easier to grab

    1. Yup, just like Mary Poppins!
      Of course, in one picture, he will have to start wearing a beard net from now on.

  31. Be hell for her if a rumor ever got started that she wants the British Muslim population to wear those nets in public too.

  32. OHHH fuck. I got it. Each officer should print the policy out and hand it out to the shit-skin population.
    Something like “Hello Achmood, the police are hiring of course our faggot boss would require you to violate your primitive culture to apply. I hope to see you at the academy”.

  33. One day, women like this one are going to be crying ‘help, help me’ for some perceived problem or another.
    And when they are really in trouble, there is NO way I am stepping in.
    I’ll give her the talk, and demand she walk the walk. Served cold.

    1. That’s the REAL problem. Why are Western men still helping their women. Dude, they aren’t worth it anymore. Go to Russia and stop whining on a website.

  34. I have never heard of Common Purpose, but they sound like a standard feminist organization. Their empty dialogue turns the use of weasel words into a second language and this absurd beard-net policy is another victory for their gender bigotry.
    To me, the best way to fight back is to know that feminists (gender bigots) are wrong and will eventually fall on the wrong side of history the way the KKK (racial bigots) and the Nazis (religious bigots) have.
    Then treat them the same way: Instead of debating them, just react to them like they make you sick and that the only way to feel better is to put distance between you and them. Fire them from their jobs. Shine a light on them and trash them (like this article – nice job).
    Just my thoughts.

  35. “Although she was cleared in 2014, Davenport was appointed as Chief
    Constable of Gloucestershire with the charges against her still
    Appointed by who?

  36. This is hard one to comment on because the Victoria Police Force in Australia has introduced a no beards policy with the Chief Commissioner being male – I think the reason is beards make police officers look unprofessional. But in this articles case a beard net makes the police look even more unprofessional.

  37. Fuck the police and Ren said it with authority…

    – MC Ren
    The police in Britain can go fuck themselves.
    They have made it clear that they are no longer interested in investigating crime, or at least the crime you care about. Instead, they will continue to focus on “made-up” crime, like speeding. After all, they don’t make money from helping you out, they make money from robbing you.
    And to add to this, they will also focus on “crimes against the state” such as the terrorism that the State causes itself. They laughably claim they will also be focusing child abuse… Yeah right, where were you when Jimmy Saville and his mates were molesting children for decades!
    Fuck the police and I hope they wear full body nets.

    1. “Made up” crime is a huge problem. The state should NEVER be able to press charges absent a victim except in the case of murder. That would solve 95% of the problems with the police today. If there’s no victim (speeding, drugs, prostitution), there’s no crime.
      When we start to think about “crimes against the state” we slip into 1984.

      1. while i get what you two are saying….crimes against the state is a legit thing. Treason is a very real thing and should be dealt with as such.
        just pointing that out that not all crimes against the state are bullshit, though most these days are as you pointed out.

        1. Agreed. However, the level we’ve taken “crimes against the state” is so far from treason that I hesitate to even compare the two. It would not surprise me at all to find that 90% of “crime” committed in this country has no victim. I know, for a fact, that it’s at least 50% (because that’s about how many drug cases there are). But whatever the number.. I’d be equally shocked to find that more than .1% of all those cases involve anything approaching a “real” crime against the state (like treason/terrorism, etc).
          So, for all intents, it’s safe to say that “the state should never be the victim”. It’s more correct to add “except in extraordinary cases like treason and terrorism”. However, you give the state an inch, they take a 1000 miles, so it feels safer to let the treason go unpunished than to try to differentiate “real” crimes against the state from the “make believe crimes” that we have today.

        2. well I wouldnt call all drug crimes victimless but i get your point and I do agree with your general message.
          yes while crimes against the state have become insane….I dont think the solution is a blanket destruction of the concept and I don’t think letting treason go unpunished is a good answer either. I just dont think we are looking for treason in the right places….we are all high on blaming extreme Islam and whatnot….but the reality is most of the treasonous assholes are in washington DC and as governors of each state and so on. we all chase our tails looking for domestic terrorism or the enemy of the state committing tax fraud or even how Muslims are building churches over here out to kill us….none of us look for the reason treason and terrorism…the real definition of the word. America has no bigger enemies than its own elected leaders.
          of course….how does one put a senator on trial for treason when the judge is on it and the jury is made up of idiots?
          and no one is talking about a violent revolution so….I ask what do we do with people committing treason?

        3. I said drug POSSESSION, not supply, or trafficking. There is NO victim in drug possession. It is no different to someone underage holding a bottle of beer. NO victim.
          You are confusing consequences, and limited ones at that, as being victims.
          Using your logic I shouldn’t drive my car, because some cars have crashed, hurting people, maybe not EVERY car…. but it is some.

        4. my apologies I was thinking general drug use. Yes just holding it is indeed victimless. though my general philosophy is legalize it all(Hell it isnt any worse than legal doctor medicine), and make it crime when it harms someone else….such as gang wars or a pregnant women or something and to be clear the crime would be the harming of someone else not the drug use…..similar to how I think murder should be murder not assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill. keep shit simple.

    2. Don’t forget “hate crime”, where ANYTHING that a minority perceives as offensive will be treated as important as an armed robbery or murder.

  38. The lesbian covets the men’s masculinity manifested and enhanced by their beards. She can’t sport a manly beard? OK, then beards should be banned. Or demeaned and made to look ridiculous. Lots of bitches covet your manhood. Don’t hand it over.

    1. I’m mixed. They are pretentious – on the other hand, they are actually acknowledging that they are men and capable of growing facial hair.

    2. I hate people relentlessly trying to connect beards with the damn crappy Liberal Leftist Hipsters. Beards rock no matter who is sporting them and I would say the vast majority of men who wear them aren’t bloody Hipsters.

      1. It’s that hipster beards are notoriously ungroomed. I sport some designer stubble myself, but I take regular care of it.

  39. Beards are the one acceptable non-gay compliment other men can give each other…..there isn’t a man on the planet that isn’t impressed by a full grown beard.
    Men have facial hair, boys and girls and women don’t. Even the mighty King of the jungle the Male Lion sports some beard looking thing as he looks all majestic.
    in other news….criminals in Britain will now be dying of laughter instead of needing to be caught and fought with on the streets.

  40. They can keep their beard net right next to their pistol at night………..Oh wait…………they’re not allowed to carry a gun.
    I’m sure the criminals in GB will be entertained by some uniformed unarmed guy with a beard net demanding they stop what they are doing.

  41. Lesbians have no place to lead men, period. Fantastically useless, power abuse and thing with their genitals and try to punish men.

  42. Women are simply not evolved for leadership. That’s why there have been virtually no females leaders, except for a few monarchs in Europe and East Asia, in world history. Jean d’Arc is an exception because there is a rule.
    My personal experience with females in management is horrific. Every single thing about them renders them not only incapable of leading, but incapable of understanding what men are doing when they lead. Women attempt to mimic male leadership behavior, but simply get it wrong.
    Like the woman on Twitter who posted for days about the stunning revelation that “men don’t hold grudges forever over tiny matters.” Women are simply built differently, and that build precludes leadership.

  43. Way to give everyone a woman to point at when discussing how women focus on trivial shit and are horrid leaders. If this is on purpose then bravo! If not (it probably isn’t) then what a tard

  44. Check this out fellas. Below is a link to a woman’s groups that say’s, “If you’re a woman, you’re a leader.” Such a hubris statement is beyond reproach. Email bomb the hell out of this site and let the ladies know that we think.

  45. This cant last long, some muslim will complain about having to cover their beard up and it will be dropped.

  46. Part of policing and public control is the image the officer presents. Wearing these things makes the officers look like jokes, and they probably feel that way too. There are people out there who’ll walk up to one of these guys and make fun of them and mouth off. What kind of problems is that going to cause?
    This is just enabled-female idiocy at it’s worst.

  47. deep breath…. Lesbians are fucking pathetic losers. This woman is a fucking lesbian.
    ergo: this this fucking pathetic lezbeen is a faggot. a shitstain.
    When I was at uni in the early eighties, there were only two institutions in the world that offered an MBA , and leadership if “taught” at all was only a pedagogic thing for the military.
    Now there is a worldwide industry churning out “managers” and “leaders” and 99.9 percent of ’em you would say should be shot as enemies of humanity.
    And where I used to work, there were a lot of Aspergers and a shitload of lesbians. Couldn’t stand either classsof vegetable, but I really WANTED to bash a fuckin lesbian.

  48. Beard is what makes men, men. To differentiate between men and women. To avoid man from attracted to another man. Also, leadership was never women’s role in a society. It is NOT their nature. When you disturb nature’s balance this will happen like so many other imbalance issues in our world today. As kings we need to put an end to this and restore the balance. Unleash your conqueror’s auras to those wicked people and bring justice and righteousness upon them.

  49. What about all the pakis and Moo-slimes and other towel-headed camel jockeys and also the Jews with their long nappy gross beards??
    But that would be rayciss, yo.

  50. This happens only as long as men put up with it. They do have the power to just walk away and leave her stranded without a single male on their police force.
    Of course it is the Brits, so not having police really won’t make much difference. Just a few less officers running away from criminals and seizing any stray spoons that may have fallen out of the weapon bin.

  51. Hold up. Who the FUCK promoted this sex-starved, munchkin elfling creature into this position of authority??
    I demand she wear a fucking niqab, to protect my eyes from her hideous face and scowl. Funny thing is, she might actually go for it – as long as it was demanded by a Muslim.
    Why don’t we pit Muslims against Feminist Marxists? Let’s announce an anti-Muslim ROK march in every major city, with specific times and meeting places, and just not show up.
    The Feminists and radical Muslims will both show up expecting us. What they will get is each other. One can only hope for an entertaining and socially beneficial outcome to ensue.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *