[quote todaysdilemma]@MeSanniesareBrannies
What reams of data though? Data just reviewing the police in isolation?
Do you have any data that links occupations to domestic violence/sexism etc?
If we use common sense, why would anyone invest time and money into investigating the personal lives of people in an occupation UNLESS the occupation was to uphold law and order and in the public interest. It is a profession that will always be held more accountable and under more scrutiny because it is at the front line and serving the public directly.
So WHY would research organisations and the media go around trying to investigate how many accountants are wife beaters or tradies are cheats - it doesn't matter to the general public, and so no one is going to fund it or do anything with it. Policing does matter, hence it is important to flush this behaviour out. And why it is publicised.
As an example of how meaningless data can be. These are professions most likely to cheat on you.
www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/cheating-relationship-partner-job-profession-adultery-affairs-a8374616.html
This one is for Oz www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6229505/This-profession-likely-cheat-making-20-cent-users-cheating-website.html
Also, surgeons have a higher prevalance of alcoholism according to this report
www.reuters.com/article/us-alcoholism-surgeons-idUSTRE81L1VO20120222
jamanetwork.com/journals/jamasurgery/fullarticle/1107783#:~:text=The%20point%20prevalence%20for%20alcohol,ratio%2C%201.25%3B%20P%20%3D%20.
And here, apparently the unemployed are most prone to domestic violence (so anyone who's partner loses their job needs to LTB by your logic)
warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/centres/cage/news/05-10-21-unemployment_substantially_increases_domestic_violence_new_study_finds/[/quote]
I’ll repeat myself: The review of the high occurrence of DA amongst police officers is taking place because there are so many reported cases, not because a decision was made to review them due to their position in the community.
So, of reported DA cases, a disturbingly high percentage (globally and in the U.K.) of the abusers are police officers. So, there is a review of DA amongst police officers. That’s how research works. That is why. It’s not complicated.
It’s not about researching occupations and seeing which of them are the worst offenders. It’s about researching DA and its perpetrators, a disturbing number of whom are policemen.
A similarly high incidence of any other profession in reported DA cases would also be cause for concern, review and research, but there isn’t a similarly high incidence. I’m genuinely not seeing what part of this you’re not getting.
Ditto institutional racism and sexism.
Your links aren’t relevant to anything that I’ve said. And I’ve already addressed the fact that nobody is claiming perfection amongst other professions. I’m not sure there’s much point to this, to be honest. I’ve expressed myself clearly, but you can choose to believe what you want, I suppose.
OP, I advise you to run.