Under the title above and the byline of Caroline Davies, the following appeared in the leftish British highbrow paper "The Guardian" on, I think, Thursday:
Visible panty line, or VPL as it is usually shorthanded, is a fashion faux pas to be avoided. That is especially the case, it seems, if you are already a member of the thin blue line.
A dictat issued to West Midlands Police has cautioned officers that their underwear is required to be "in appropriate colour" and "inconspicuous" beneath their uniform.
Thongs or boxer shorts creeping over waistbands, or colourful bras peeping through regulation white shirts, are outlawed under the sartorial guidance , issued as part of a revised uniform policy.
The warning is apparently needed to ensure officers present a "professional and corporate appearance" to the public.
But recipients are less than happy, accusing their superiors of "nannying" and criticising the warning as "outrageous".
In a lively response in the pages of "Police Review", officers question the force's entitlement to dictate their underwear, or the need for such a directive, with some asking if there would be "spot checks".
"Any chance they could run a piece on tying shoelaces, or how to use toilet paper?" enquired one constable.
Another claimed: "Rather than spending time on sending pointless mesages out concerning the way we look when doing the job, the force should concentrate more on letting us do the job of a police officer trying to catch criminals." A third stressed: "We are not a security organisation made up of young children who need nannying".
Assistant Chief Constable Sharon Rowe defended the policy, saying "All supervisors, at whatever level they are in the organisation, have a clear mandate to challenge inappropriate dress."
Now apart from the dreadful management-speak affected by dear Sharon, several things stand out from this article. One is that Caroline Davies is definitely titillated (bottomillated? quim elated?) by the subject.
Another is this idea of spot checks (for banned polka-dot panties?). It would be in keeping with our new government's move to empower citizens and persuade them to carry out public services themselves, for the spot checks to be carried out by all citizens. I imagine a robber, caught, overpowered and about to be handcuffed by a policewoman, intoning:
"Under Section 17 of the Police Regulations, I inform you that I intend to carry out a spot check of your underwear. Any resistance or unco-operative behaviour will be subjec to penalties. Down with your trousers!" Since no clear definition has been set out of inappropriate underwear, the judgement would of course be up to the citizen and punishment would be summary and on the offending area.
Actually, I can't see the problem with the VPL. Surely a plump young official posterior with an interesting VPL would ensure that everybody got behind the police?
