Not so crabbit now!

Tinuviel wrote:I've never seen the word Queen used so often without my name behind it!
I always thought Hawaii had a good government, before it was annexed and the Queen was stripped if her title. They had a monarch, but they got to choose who the next one would be. To me, that seems like the best of both worlds.

There's my 2 cents! You may continue on with your long, informed posts!

c'mon more than 2 cents qtin

''The reason I asked about race was that I've heard the question raised by members of some of the ethnic communities in the UK. At least some of them seem to see the Queen and her heirs as symbols of the dominance of the white race, much as many of the ethnic communities in the United States have felt about our past presidents here''.

thing is Dave until the weather changes and we all produce more melanin and become Black the British will be born White unless they are immigrants from ex-colonial countries. so I think we are at this moment in time allowed to have White monarchs without people getting Bees in their bonnets.

Mrs Figg wrote:
thing is Dave until the weather changes and we all produce more melanin and become Black the British will be born White unless they are immigrants from ex-colonial countries. so I think we are at this moment in time allowed to have White monarchs without people getting Bees in their bonnets.

Of course you're allowed, Mrs Figg. Just as we're allowed to elect more white protestant presidents (though I wouldn't be at all surprised to see us slip a woman in there soon.) But I guess my question is, do you think some people would get Bees in their Bonnets if for example Prince Harry were to fall in love and marry a woman who was from such an immigrant family?

(By the way, just how many generations do you have to live in the UK before you're no longer considered an immigrant? )

I dont think it would be a big deal at all David.
She would not be Queen anyway, he would be King.
But obviously their children would be heirs and of mixed race.
But I dont see the British really bothering at all except a small minority perhaps. Mixed race families are common enough among the ruled so they are unlikely to see anything wrong with it.

In my neck of the woods you are technically Scottish as soon as the law says you are a citizen.
If you just live here you are a Scotish-Indian, or a Scottish-Pole, or whatever it might be.
In practice for most folks if you were born here you are Scottish.
Colour of skin isnt an issue in it for the majority.

Old Celtic traditions maybe- the land shapes the people and the people the land. If you are born here regardless of how that came about you are part of the land and therefore Scottish and that cant be taken away from you and doesnt come from outward appearences. Its in the bones somehow.

Again, I want to make it clear that a lot of my questions are coming from what I see through the windo of the British press (and I know how warped that window is!)
Most recently it was the lengthy discussions of the suitability of Kate Middleton to marry a prince. It made me thank my lucky stars I was born to a simple farming family and not royalty .

The British public love two things there- class and Royalty- its a sure fire seller- so newspapers hype it up.
Ask joe bloggs on the street what they think and they will tell you they should marry who they like.
All that commoner/Royal stuff is really mostly newspaper fiction.
I dont know a single person who thinks that way.

It is true that some people think they should marry to a simlar class to there own. One of the lessons perhaps from Diana was that if you havent grown up with the contant media intrusion and scrutiny and the grinding Royal Duties and libing up to the ideal then it can break you.
So there is some sense in marrying those who understand what it means already to some degree.

the reason for asking is that there are 20 million american women who are wondering what their chances with Prince Harry are.....

I can use all those words in one sentence.

I bet you do!

Wow, hilarious! No, seriously, if that's how you think, that's okay. Go ahead and make your little jokes or whatever. It's fine, there's nothing about it that bothers me.

I guess the effect was lost because I'm a man...?

Spoiler:

And how do you expect me to notice that at 5.30am at the wrong end of a buckie binge!

Wow so you think Moffat is better than RTD, if that's how you think, that's okay, go ahead and make my day, say hello to my little friend, there's nothing can save you now, its the FINE whatever.

[martyr] That's OK. I'll be fine. You just go ahead as if nothing whatever were the matter.

HAHAHHA OMG SO FUNY BT I'M SO MAD I AM NEVER GOING TO FIND A BANQUET DRESS ~

I can't wait for my daughter to be old enough for school lunches!

• http://www.pleated-jeans.com/2013/04/23/awesome-dad-treats-kids-to-daily-sandwich-bag-drawings-28-pics/

Eldorion wrote:I guess the effect was lost because I'm a man...?

Spoiler:

actually I think the effect was lost because you used it on a man. We are genetically programmed to blithely accept all of it at face value, with little more than lingering, nagging confusion that something may be a tad amiss.

halfwise wrote:

Eldorion wrote:I guess the effect was lost because I'm a man...?

Spoiler:

actually I think the effect was lost because you used it on a man. We are genetically programmed to blithely accept all of it at face value, with little more than lingering, nagging confusion that something may be a tad amiss.

Emotions so cryptic but to you they seem to make sense.

I think I got too much enjoyment from this.



And with that, I'm going to bed.

meanwhile in Hong Kong...

Naaaawwwww... it thinks the boat is it's mommy.