Discussion:
Prince Andrew Is A Prick
(too old to reply)
IslandZeus
2004-02-25 16:15:44 UTC
Permalink
Over the weekend, my country (St. Lucia) celebrated it's 25th
anniversary of Independence and so Prince Andrew was invited as a
member of the Royal Family to celebrate with the country this special
occasion.

Well it was apparent from his arrival that he wasn't as enthused with
this occasion as the rest of the country! From visiting various
various functions which was televised on national television various
snapshots to the prince's countenounce showed him less than impressed
and less than fervent in experiencing any of the functions.

Finally, in attending a special function where only an invited few
were to dine in the presence of His Royal Highness, the PRICK simply
came in the room, ate his dinner, and quickly exited....not a word nor
any sign of emotion or delight, at least, for the many St. Lucians
enjoying 25 years of Independence from the Throne. He left a alsting
impression on all of us of snobbery, unimpressed disdain...and total
moronic disrespect!

A british friend of mine who was also at this dinner when asked about
the Prince said to me "He could at least have said 'Mum says
Hi!!'"....I couldn't agree any more....the Prick!!
poetman
2004-02-25 17:31:46 UTC
Permalink
. . . only an invited few were to dine in the presence of His Royal
Highness, the PRICK . . . He left a lasting impression on all of us of
snobbery, unimpressed disdain...and total moronic disrespect! ....the
Prick!!

Prince Andrew may intuitively have understood that amongst the guests with
whom he was to dine lurked an attitude that you display here most
effectively. What sort of a person are you, to call someone a crude name
derived from male genitalia simply because he did not say how wonderful you
are? You are a fine one to accuse someone of showing disrespect, I must say.
I suggest you go and wash your mouth out with soap and water. Next time you
dine in company try to adopt a more positive and courteous outlook, as this
will make people like you a whole lot more. Then, perhaps, they will have
something nice to say about you.
mhlife
2004-02-25 21:00:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by poetman
. . . only an invited few were to dine in the presence of His Royal
Highness, the PRICK . . . He left a lasting impression on all of us of
snobbery, unimpressed disdain...and total moronic disrespect! ....the
Prick!!
Prince Andrew may intuitively have understood that amongst the guests with
whom he was to dine lurked an attitude that you display here most
effectively. What sort of a person are you, to call someone a crude name
derived from male genitalia simply because he did not say how wonderful you
are? You are a fine one to accuse someone of showing disrespect, I must say.
I suggest you go and wash your mouth out with soap and water. Next time you
dine in company try to adopt a more positive and courteous outlook, as this
will make people like you a whole lot more. Then, perhaps, they will have
something nice to say about you.
---

This is *the* 'prince' Andrew we're talking about? - the foul mouthed yob
who shouts obscenities at his servants when they wake him up in the
morning - yes?

What a filthy pack those Windsor's are.




---



Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.594 / Virus Database: 377 - Release Date: 24/02/2004
poetman
2004-02-25 21:32:05 UTC
Permalink
This is *the* 'prince' Andrew we're talking about? - the foul mouthed yob
who shouts obscenities at his servants when they wake him up in the
morning - yes? What a filthy pack those Windsors are.

I beg your parden? Is this why people on St Lucia had a negative reaction to
Prince Andrew'a visit? Could it be that this sort of tittle-tattle
concerning his private household agenda is the cause of his bad reception at
St Lucia? For goodness sake, are we now to pay mind to malicious rumours
spread by disloyal and loose-mouthed servants who's condition for employment
was that they sign a code of silence beforehand? Has it occurred to you that
there's nothing some of these lazy blabbermouth servants need more than a
damned good telling off every now and again? You can work out for yourself
how they yap their heads off to all and sundry about strictly domestic
affairs - otherwise how in the world could you have written such details as
those above? It is the servants who are filthy, not the Windsors. Those
servants that Prince Andrew has are bastards!
Sacha
2004-02-25 21:50:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by mhlife
This is *the* 'prince' Andrew we're talking about? - the foul mouthed yob
who shouts obscenities at his servants when they wake him up in the
morning - yes? What a filthy pack those Windsors are.
I beg your parden? Is this why people on St Lucia had a negative reaction to
Prince Andrew'a visit? Could it be that this sort of tittle-tattle
concerning his private household agenda is the cause of his bad reception at
St Lucia? For goodness sake, are we now to pay mind to malicious rumours
spread by disloyal and loose-mouthed servants who's condition for employment
was that they sign a code of silence beforehand? Has it occurred to you that
there's nothing some of these lazy blabbermouth servants need more than a
damned good telling off every now and again? You can work out for yourself
how they yap their heads off to all and sundry about strictly domestic
affairs - otherwise how in the world could you have written such details as
those above? It is the servants who are filthy, not the Windsors. Those
servants that Prince Andrew has are bastards!
Actually, I'd always wondered why nobody queried whether this morning
salutation was meant to be funny - though not everyone's idea of humour, I
do agree. Andrew was in the services where tea isn't always taken from bone
china and with a crooked little finger, either by mess servants or officers.
Just occasionally I've known friends of mine in the services let slip with
the odd "go forth and multiply" without anyone thinking this was the end of
the world as we know it. Sensitive little plants the royal staff seem to
be, don't they?
--
Sacha
(remove the weeds to email me)
mhlife
2004-02-25 22:06:33 UTC
Permalink
"Sacha" <***@gardenweeds506.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message news:BC62C90E.164CF%***@gardenweeds506.fsnet.co.uk...
Sensitive little plants the royal staff seem to
Post by Sacha
be, don't they?
______

Well, of *course* they are, silly woman! - anyone with half an ounce of self
respect would just tell them to piss off, and walk out with their heads held
high! (hopefully, after rubbing Andrew's nose in the Marmalade...)

You *have* to be a bit of a Back Passage Billy to put up with dancing
attendance on the Windsor's!




---



Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.594 / Virus Database: 377 - Release Date: 24/02/2004






---



Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.594 / Virus Database: 377 - Release Date: 24/02/2004
Susan Cohen
2004-02-26 04:17:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sacha
Just occasionally I've known friends of mine in the services let slip with
the odd "go forth and multiply"
ROTFLOL!!
That's priceless!!

SusanC
mhlife
2004-02-25 21:52:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by mhlife
This is *the* 'prince' Andrew we're talking about? - the foul mouthed yob
who shouts obscenities at his servants when they wake him up in the
morning - yes? What a filthy pack those Windsors are.
I beg your parden? Is this why people on St Lucia had a negative reaction to
Prince Andrew'a visit? Could it be that this sort of tittle-tattle
concerning his private household agenda is the cause of his bad reception at
St Lucia? For goodness sake, are we now to pay mind to malicious rumours
spread by disloyal and loose-mouthed servants who's condition for employment
was that they sign a code of silence beforehand? Has it occurred to you that
there's nothing some of these lazy blabbermouth servants need more than a
damned good telling off every now and again? You can work out for yourself
how they yap their heads off to all and sundry about strictly domestic
affairs - otherwise how in the world could you have written such details as
those above? It is the servants who are filthy, not the Windsors. Those
servants that Prince Andrew has are bastards!
______

Then, perhaps, he should dismiss them all and stir his own teacup - No?,
well pay them a decent wage then? - No?, well at least treat them with some
respect (I mean, they *are* crawling effeminate low-life's, but there's no
need to let 'em know that's his opinion of 'em) No? - well then. he's
stuffed! , and he'll just have to put up with their reminiscences of life
below stairs.

Won't he?





---



Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.594 / Virus Database: 377 - Release Date: 24/02/2004
Liquidate1
2004-02-25 22:16:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by mhlife
Then, perhaps, he should dismiss them all and stir his own teacup - No?,
well pay them a decent wage then? - No?, well at least treat them with some
respect (I mean, they *are* crawling effeminate low-life's, but there's no
need to let 'em know that's his opinion of 'em) No? - well then. he's
stuffed! , and he'll just have to put up with their reminiscences of life
below stairs.
Won't he?
He could easily have been in the servant's position if he had not been born
into this dysfunctional family, and he is also homosexual, which is why Sarah
Ferguson divorced him. Most people are aware of this fact.
Ross Howard
2004-02-25 22:32:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Liquidate1
Post by mhlife
Then, perhaps, he should dismiss them all and stir his own teacup - No?,
well pay them a decent wage then? - No?, well at least treat them with some
respect (I mean, they *are* crawling effeminate low-life's, but there's no
need to let 'em know that's his opinion of 'em) No? - well then. he's
stuffed! , and he'll just have to put up with their reminiscences of life
below stairs.
Won't he?
He could easily have been in the servant's position if he had not been born
into this dysfunctional family, and he is also homosexual, which is why Sarah
Ferguson divorced him. Most people are aware of this fact.
"The gentlemen assembled at Bilibin`s were young, wealthy, gay society
men, who [...] received Prince Andrew as one of themselves"

-- Leo Tolstoy, *War and Peace*, Book Two, Chapter 9

(Yep, that's what the man wrote. Feel free to check it.)

--
Ross Howard
poetman
2004-02-25 22:58:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Liquidate1
He could easily have been in the servant's position if he had not been born
into this dysfunctional family, and he is also homosexual, which is why
Sarah Ferguson divorced him. Most people are aware of this fact.

I am sure one could find skeletons in the cupboards of most families if one
took the trouble to scrutinise them enough. And if the royal family has a
scandal or two in its midst then that merely emphasises how human they are.
I challenge your 'fact' about Prince Andrew being homosexual until you
provide supporting evidence. But even if he were homosexual - well, so what?
Do you have a complex about that?
Liquidate1
2004-02-25 23:34:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by poetman
I am sure one could find skeletons in the cupboards of most families if one
took the trouble to scrutinise them enough. And if the royal family has a
scandal or two in its midst then that merely emphasises how human they are.
I challenge your 'fact' about Prince Andrew being homosexual until you
provide supporting evidence. But even if he were homosexual - well, so what?
Do you have a complex about that?
Not at all. I have nothing against homosexuals, except when they marry naive
young women under false pretenses, and coverup serious crimes like rape. There
are very few, who deal in reality, who have not heard the gossip and formed an
educated opinion that Charlie and Andy are homosexual, and rightly so. In
fact, there is rumors of all 3 brothers being homosexual.
mhlife
2004-02-26 00:03:47 UTC
Permalink
"Liquidate1" <***@aol.com> wrote in message news:***@mb-m27.aol.com...

. In
Post by Liquidate1
fact, there is rumors of all 3 brothers being homosexual.
______

Oh dear! - that reminds me of a post by the Usenet evangelist, Reverend
Stapleton S Love!
Begin Quote:


".......The crowd - many of whom had apparently emerged from the nearby
'Three
Ravens' public house (known to every local as 'The Three Queers' - in
memory of a former Landlord, William Gruffe, who collapsed and died of
a massive heart attack in 1957, shortly after all three of his sons had
openly declared themselves to be homosexuals......"......


(A Country Parsons Diary - 10/02/2001 - Source: Google)


---



Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.594 / Virus Database: 377 - Release Date: 25/02/2004
Sid
2004-02-27 13:58:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Liquidate1
Post by poetman
I am sure one could find skeletons in the cupboards of most families if one
took the trouble to scrutinise them enough. And if the royal family has a
scandal or two in its midst then that merely emphasises how human they are.
I challenge your 'fact' about Prince Andrew being homosexual until you
provide supporting evidence. But even if he were homosexual - well, so what?
Do you have a complex about that?
Not at all. I have nothing against homosexuals, except when they marry naive
young women under false pretenses, and coverup serious crimes like rape.
There
Post by Liquidate1
are very few, who deal in reality, who have not heard the gossip and formed an
educated opinion that Charlie and Andy are homosexual, and rightly so. In
fact, there is rumors of all 3 brothers being homosexual.
There you go, twaddling again!
Do go away, comrade, and find something really purposeful to say for a
change.
Being an unoriginal, plagiarising laughing stock is of no help at all and
you are becoming an embarrassment to the republican movement.

s
Liquidate1
2004-02-27 19:35:51 UTC
Permalink
From: "Sid"
There you go, twaddling again!
Do go away, comrade, and find something really purposeful to say for a
change.
Being an unoriginal, plagiarising laughing stock is of no help at all and
you are becoming an embarrassment to the republican movement.
Go fuck yourself. You're an embarrassment to homosexuals.
Sid
2004-02-28 07:29:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Liquidate1
From: "Sid"
There you go, twaddling again!
Do go away, comrade, and find something really purposeful to say for a
change.
Being an unoriginal, plagiarising laughing stock is of no help at all and
you are becoming an embarrassment to the republican movement.
Go fuck yourself. You're an embarrassment to homosexuals.
And that, I guess, is the sum of your originality and wit!
Sid
2004-02-27 13:50:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Liquidate1
he is also homosexual, which is why Sarah
Ferguson divorced him. Most people are aware of this fact.
More like factual twaddle on your part!

s
poetman
2004-02-25 22:36:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by mhlife
Then, perhaps, he should dismiss them all and stir his own teacup - No?,
well pay them a decent wage then? - No?, well at least treat them with some
respect (I mean, they *are* crawling effeminate low-life's, but there's no
need to let 'em know that's his opinion of 'em) No? - well then, he's
stuffed! and he'll just have to put up with their reminiscences of life
below stairs. Won't he?


Prince Andrew is providing work positions for people who may otherwise be on
the dole. He should be applauded for assisting this riff-raff to achieve
gainful employment - all credit to him! I believe it is the Crown Treasurer
who pays wages to royal staff in general, and therefore prince Andrew has no
influence upon how little or how much a servant may earn. Not only that, but
should an employee be truly unsatisfied with the wage he/she receives then
they would be better served by taking the matter up with their union -
rather than just going around belly-aching about it. Will you please stop
this dragging Prince Andrew's name through the mud? Nobody stirs his tea for
him; you are unfairly slanting rhetoric in order to enhance a twisted point
of view. I am utterly appalled at the way people can so readily participate
in the character assassination of The Queen's son. You do not deserve a
royal family!
mhlife
2004-02-26 00:08:05 UTC
Permalink
"poetman" <***@online.no> wrote in message news:er9%b.6555$***@news4.e.nsc.no...


am utterly appalled at the way people can so readily participate
Post by poetman
in the character assassination of The Queen's son. You do not deserve a
royal family!<
_____________


I am in complete agreement with you, Mr Troll .....(a *genuine Troll, I
might add, given your country of residence)



---



Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.594 / Virus Database: 377 - Release Date: 24/02/2004
Morgana
2004-02-27 19:47:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by poetman
am utterly appalled at the way people can so readily participate
Post by poetman
in the character assassination of The Queen's son. You do not deserve a
royal family!<
_____________
I am in complete agreement with you, Mr Troll .....(a *genuine Troll, I
might add, given your country of residence)
---
But is he a troll as in "foll de rol" or just a boring old troll in
whatever meaning it has in newsgroups? He's lost it anyway. Forelock
tugging (or foreskin tugging or whatever it with with some people)
tends to do that I've noticed. It's greasy, and it's nasty.
Post by poetman
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.594 / Virus Database: 377 - Release Date: 24/02/2004
IslandZeus
2004-02-26 02:45:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by poetman
Prince Andrew may intuitively have understood that amongst the guests with
whom he was to dine lurked an attitude that you display here most
effectively. What sort of a person are you, to call someone a crude name
derived from male genitalia simply because he did not say how wonderful you
are? You are a fine one to accuse someone of showing disrespect, I must say.
I suggest you go and wash your mouth out with soap and water. Next time you
dine in company try to adopt a more positive and courteous outlook, as this
will make people like you a whole lot more. Then, perhaps, they will have
something nice to say about you.
Mr. "poetman"..if you had any literary skills, you would find through
thorough reading that I in particular wasn't expecting the Prince to
act anyway impressed towards ME ....but to the whole island out of
which he was a distinguished guest....I never gave him any look at
dinner nor did I approach the dinner with any mood or attitude that
the Prince might have had an intuition to. He simply came form day one
with an air of nonchalance and that Royal stick up his ar*sse - which
you , a probable wannabe aristocrat seem to want to have up yours as
well -which never turned out to be that of interest in the island's
celebration at the least.
It's because of twats like you who think that the Royals are so
demigod in nature that they may treat something like a nation's pride
as if it weren't worth the excrement of the amoeba infecting the
parasitic worm infecting their dog's bowels...well not me and not he
nation, all I wanted was at least a smile from the Duke, not for me
but for my nation and it's impressive achievement of self rule sans
coups d'etats and"great depressions" and anarchy; but a thriving
economy and respect from it's other sister countries in the
region..thank you

and P.S.....you seem like a Prick too
Susan Cohen
2004-02-26 04:17:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by IslandZeus
Post by poetman
Prince Andrew may intuitively have understood that amongst the guests with
whom he was to dine lurked an attitude that you display here most
effectively. What sort of a person are you, to call someone a crude name
derived from male genitalia simply because he did not say how wonderful you
are? You are a fine one to accuse someone of showing disrespect, I must say.
I suggest you go and wash your mouth out with soap and water. Next time you
dine in company try to adopt a more positive and courteous outlook, as this
will make people like you a whole lot more. Then, perhaps, they will have
something nice to say about you.
Mr. "poetman"..if you had any literary skills,
Ha!!! Physician, heal thyself.


you would find through
Post by IslandZeus
thorough reading that I in particular wasn't expecting the Prince to
act anyway impressed towards ME ....but to the whole island out of
which he was a distinguished guest....I never gave him any look at
dinner nor did I approach the dinner with any mood or attitude that
the Prince might have had an intuition to. He simply came form day one
with an air of nonchalance and that Royal stick up his ar*sse - which
you , a probable wannabe aristocrat seem to want to have up yours as
well -which never turned out to be that of interest in the island's
celebration at the least.
It's because of twats like you who think that the Royals are so
demigod in nature that they may treat something like a nation's pride
as if it weren't worth the excrement of the amoeba infecting the
parasitic worm infecting their dog's bowels...well not me and not he
nation, all I wanted was at least a smile from the Duke, not for me
but for my nation and it's impressive achievement of self rule sans
coups d'etats and"great depressions" and anarchy; but a thriving
economy and respect from it's other sister countries in the
region..thank you
and P.S.....you seem like a Prick too
& here too - heal thyself.

SusanC
poetman
2004-02-26 12:29:18 UTC
Permalink
. . . stick up his ar*sse . . . up yours as well . . . twats like you . . .
excrement of the amoeba . . . dog's bowels . . . like a Prick . . .

You are an awful person - absolutely obnoxious. And if you are
representative of the other inhabitants on St Lucia then it's little wonder
indeed that Prince Andrew declined to socialise. You have a mind like a
cess-pool - and to me you have as much significance as a tiny piece of
stinking maggot's dropping rotting on a dead rat's backside as it floats in
a sewer filled with the diarrhea of a syphilis-infected skunk. Go away,
filthy, crude person that you are!
Nerofort
2004-02-26 17:32:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by poetman
You are an awful person - absolutely obnoxious. And if you are
representative of the other inhabitants on St Lucia then it's little wonder
indeed that Prince Andrew declined to socialise. You have a mind like a
cess-pool - and to me you have as much significance as a tiny piece of
stinking maggot's dropping rotting on a dead rat's backside as it floats in
a sewer filled with the diarrhea of a syphilis-infected skunk. Go away,
filthy, crude person that you are!
You sound pretty charming too
grumblebug
2004-02-27 07:11:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by poetman
. . . stick up his ar*sse . . . up yours as well . . . twats like you . . .
excrement of the amoeba . . . dog's bowels . . . like a Prick . . .
You are an awful person - absolutely obnoxious. And if you are
representative of the other inhabitants on St Lucia then it's little wonder
indeed that Prince Andrew declined to socialise. You have a mind like a
cess-pool - and to me you have as much significance as a tiny piece of
stinking maggot's dropping rotting on a dead rat's backside as it floats in
a sewer filled with the diarrhea of a syphilis-infected skunk. Go away,
filthy, crude person that you are!
Oh really, Geoffrey, you're beginning to sound like Phil. What's
happened to your sense of humour? All the (new!) poster did was offer
some criticism of Prince Andrew's behaviour which if true or (as I
said) is perceived to be true, caused offence. You didn't offer any
answer except to suggest that the boot might have been on the other
foot (unlikely - Caribbeans are very hospitable) and to express
outrage at his use of a very mild swearword. You insulted him in your
return posts, so he got annoyed and posted a few more which you've
extracted selectively. You don't know the levels of acceptability of
different words in St Lucia.

Or even in the UK, I suspect. "Prick" is a very mild expletive these
days, something that friends might call each other in light badinage.
The other words aren't swearwords at all, except possibly "twat".
These things change over time:

Once aboard the lugger
Straight down the quarterdeck the fiat falls
You may say bloody but not say bugger
You may say bottom but not say balls.

(Gerald Gould)

The point is that in the 40s or whenever two of those were OK and two
were out. Earlier, all four were out. Nowadays, the lot and much worse
are polite after-dinner conversation. Even the F word, to spare your
blushes, is commonplace. I myself refrain from the C word because I
feel it's insulting to women but the younger generation have no such
qualms.

Oliver
Morgana
2004-02-28 11:39:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by grumblebug
Post by poetman
. . . stick up his ar*sse . . . up yours as well . . . twats like you . . .
excrement of the amoeba . . . dog's bowels . . . like a Prick . . .
You are an awful person - absolutely obnoxious. And if you are
representative of the other inhabitants on St Lucia then it's little wonder
indeed that Prince Andrew declined to socialise. You have a mind like a
cess-pool - and to me you have as much significance as a tiny piece of
stinking maggot's dropping rotting on a dead rat's backside as it floats in
a sewer filled with the diarrhea of a syphilis-infected skunk. Go away,
filthy, crude person that you are!
Oh really, Geoffrey, you're beginning to sound like Phil. What's
happened to your sense of humour? All the (new!) poster did was offer
some criticism of Prince Andrew's behaviour which if true or (as I
said) is perceived to be true, caused offence. You didn't offer any
answer except to suggest that the boot might have been on the other
foot (unlikely - Caribbeans are very hospitable) and to express
outrage at his use of a very mild swearword. You insulted him in your
return posts, so he got annoyed and posted a few more which you've
extracted selectively. You don't know the levels of acceptability of
different words in St Lucia.
Or even in the UK, I suspect. "Prick" is a very mild expletive these
days, something that friends might call each other in light badinage.
The other words aren't swearwords at all, except possibly "twat".
Once aboard the lugger
Straight down the quarterdeck the fiat falls
You may say bloody but not say bugger
You may say bottom but not say balls.
(Gerald Gould)
The point is that in the 40s or whenever two of those were OK and two
were out. Earlier, all four were out. Nowadays, the lot and much worse
are polite after-dinner conversation. Even the F word, to spare your
blushes, is commonplace. I myself refrain from the C word because I
feel it's insulting to women but the younger generation have no such
qualms.
Oliver
Grumblebug - I hate to sound fawning, but I have to congratulate you
on being one of the most intelligent, well balanced and just downright
decent people in this newsgroup. I think you admitted to being a
Guardian reader (as I am myself but usually only on Saturdays, despite
the loss of Julie Birchill), so that says it all. This group is lucky
to have you.
grumblebug
2004-02-28 18:59:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Morgana
Post by grumblebug
Post by poetman
. . . stick up his ar*sse . . . up yours as well . . . twats like you . . .
excrement of the amoeba . . . dog's bowels . . . like a Prick . . .
You are an awful person - absolutely obnoxious. And if you are
representative of the other inhabitants on St Lucia then it's little wonder
indeed that Prince Andrew declined to socialise. You have a mind like a
cess-pool - and to me you have as much significance as a tiny piece of
stinking maggot's dropping rotting on a dead rat's backside as it floats in
a sewer filled with the diarrhea of a syphilis-infected skunk. Go away,
filthy, crude person that you are!
Oh really, Geoffrey, you're beginning to sound like Phil. What's
happened to your sense of humour? All the (new!) poster did was offer
some criticism of Prince Andrew's behaviour which if true or (as I
said) is perceived to be true, caused offence. You didn't offer any
answer except to suggest that the boot might have been on the other
foot (unlikely - Caribbeans are very hospitable) and to express
outrage at his use of a very mild swearword. You insulted him in your
return posts, so he got annoyed and posted a few more which you've
extracted selectively. You don't know the levels of acceptability of
different words in St Lucia.
Or even in the UK, I suspect. "Prick" is a very mild expletive these
days, something that friends might call each other in light badinage.
The other words aren't swearwords at all, except possibly "twat".
Once aboard the lugger
Straight down the quarterdeck the fiat falls
You may say bloody but not say bugger
You may say bottom but not say balls.
(Gerald Gould)
The point is that in the 40s or whenever two of those were OK and two
were out. Earlier, all four were out. Nowadays, the lot and much worse
are polite after-dinner conversation. Even the F word, to spare your
blushes, is commonplace. I myself refrain from the C word because I
feel it's insulting to women but the younger generation have no such
qualms.
Oliver
Grumblebug - I hate to sound fawning, but I have to congratulate you
on being one of the most intelligent, well balanced and just downright
decent people in this newsgroup. I think you admitted to being a
Guardian reader (as I am myself but usually only on Saturdays, despite
the loss of Julie Birchill), so that says it all. This group is lucky
to have you.
OMG - (blush bright red)

Olly

(PS where do you live?)
grumblebug
2004-02-28 20:13:21 UTC
Permalink
[snip]
Post by Morgana
Post by grumblebug
Once aboard the lugger
Straight down the quarterdeck the fiat falls
You may say bloody but not say bugger
You may say bottom but not say balls.
(Gerald Gould)
(I should have added that this comes from George Orwell's "Down and
Out in Paris and London" and is actually in a footnote by Victor
Gollancz.)
Post by Morgana
Post by grumblebug
The point is that in the 40s or whenever two of those were OK and two
were out. Earlier, all four were out. Nowadays, the lot and much worse
are polite after-dinner conversation. Even the F word, to spare your
blushes, is commonplace. I myself refrain from the C word because I
feel it's insulting to women but the younger generation have no such
qualms.
Oliver
Grumblebug - I hate to sound fawning, but I have to congratulate you
on being one of the most intelligent, well balanced and just downright
decent people in this newsgroup. I think you admitted to being a
Guardian reader (as I am myself but usually only on Saturdays, despite
the loss of Julie Birchill), so that says it all. This group is lucky
to have you.
(More considered response than my last posting follows:)

Thank you. You're not taking the piss by any chance, are you? OK,
let's assume not. Yes, I read the Guardian and I see the Telegraph
when I'm down at my mother's (it does you good to get a different
viewpoint.) I see the Indy at work but I find it a bit po-faced
sometimes. So that's it, because the FT has no sport and I refuse to
read the Murdoch press on some worn-out point of principle (I won't
get Sky either).

Personally I'm glad to see the back of Julie Birchill. IMHO she's a
clapped-out Stalinist hack who's wrong about almost everything (race,
capital punishment, the Iraq war, the Spanish Civil war, need I go
on?) & bangs on about being working-class when she's been a
highly-paid journo for decades. Yes, I know a lot of what she wrote
was to get the G's readership's backs up - and it worked!

I admit they haven't found a successful permanent replacement yet
tho'.

Oliver
Sacha
2004-02-28 22:40:08 UTC
Permalink
grumblebug28/2/04 8:13
Post by grumblebug
[snip]
Post by Morgana
Post by grumblebug
Once aboard the lugger
Straight down the quarterdeck the fiat falls
You may say bloody but not say bugger
You may say bottom but not say balls.
(Gerald Gould)
(I should have added that this comes from George Orwell's "Down and
Out in Paris and London" and is actually in a footnote by Victor
Gollancz.)
Post by Morgana
Post by grumblebug
The point is that in the 40s or whenever two of those were OK and two
were out. Earlier, all four were out. Nowadays, the lot and much worse
are polite after-dinner conversation. Even the F word, to spare your
blushes, is commonplace. I myself refrain from the C word because I
feel it's insulting to women but the younger generation have no such
qualms.
Oliver
Grumblebug - I hate to sound fawning, but I have to congratulate you
on being one of the most intelligent, well balanced and just downright
decent people in this newsgroup. I think you admitted to being a
Guardian reader (as I am myself but usually only on Saturdays, despite
the loss of Julie Birchill), so that says it all. This group is lucky
to have you.
(More considered response than my last posting follows:)
Thank you. You're not taking the piss by any chance, are you? OK,
let's assume not. Yes, I read the Guardian and I see the Telegraph
when I'm down at my mother's (it does you good to get a different
viewpoint.) I see the Indy at work but I find it a bit po-faced
sometimes. So that's it, because the FT has no sport and I refuse to
read the Murdoch press on some worn-out point of principle (I won't
get Sky either).
Personally I'm glad to see the back of Julie Birchill. IMHO she's a
clapped-out Stalinist hack who's wrong about almost everything (race,
capital punishment, the Iraq war, the Spanish Civil war, need I go
on?) & bangs on about being working-class when she's been a
was to get the G's readership's backs up - and it worked!
I admit they haven't found a successful permanent replacement yet
tho'.
Oliver
What could possibly be more 'successful' than Julie Burchill? Hate-filled,
venomous, full of loathing for all mankind or so it would appear, unsure of
her own wants and wishes and with children who must wonder where or what
their mother is. This Julie Burchill:
"Ms Burchill, who has famously abandoned two husbands, two children and one
girlfriend in her time"
http://website.lineone.net/~jon.simmons/julie/ip270600.htm

Well worth reading a newspaper for if you have only one, remaining,
functioning brain cell. Not.
--
Sacha
(remove the weeds to email me)
Susan Cohen
2004-02-29 01:14:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sacha
grumblebug28/2/04 8:13
Post by grumblebug
Personally I'm glad to see the back of Julie Birchill. IMHO she's a
clapped-out Stalinist hack who's wrong about almost everything (race,
capital punishment, the Iraq war, the Spanish Civil war, need I go
on?) & bangs on about being working-class when she's been a
was to get the G's readership's backs up - and it worked!
I admit they haven't found a successful permanent replacement yet
tho'.
What could possibly be more 'successful' than Julie Burchill?
Hate-filled,
Post by Sacha
venomous, full of loathing for all mankind or so it would appear, unsure of
her own wants and wishes and with children who must wonder where or what
"Ms Burchill, who has famously abandoned two husbands, two children and one
girlfriend in her time"
http://website.lineone.net/~jon.simmons/julie/ip270600.htm
Well worth reading a newspaper for if you have only one, remaining,
functioning brain cell. Not.
It's amazing that out of everything I've ever seen or heard of her, there is
only one article she ever wrote that I thought was dead-on, & I noted that
she did it as sort of a "farewell" to her newspaper.

SusanC
grumblebug
2004-02-29 05:21:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sacha
grumblebug28/2/04 8:13
Post by grumblebug
[snip]
Post by Morgana
Post by grumblebug
Once aboard the lugger
Straight down the quarterdeck the fiat falls
You may say bloody but not say bugger
You may say bottom but not say balls.
(Gerald Gould)
(I should have added that this comes from George Orwell's "Down and
Out in Paris and London" and is actually in a footnote by Victor
Gollancz.)
Post by Morgana
Post by grumblebug
The point is that in the 40s or whenever two of those were OK and two
were out. Earlier, all four were out. Nowadays, the lot and much worse
are polite after-dinner conversation. Even the F word, to spare your
blushes, is commonplace. I myself refrain from the C word because I
feel it's insulting to women but the younger generation have no such
qualms.
Oliver
Grumblebug - I hate to sound fawning, but I have to congratulate you
on being one of the most intelligent, well balanced and just downright
decent people in this newsgroup. I think you admitted to being a
Guardian reader (as I am myself but usually only on Saturdays, despite
the loss of Julie Birchill), so that says it all. This group is lucky
to have you.
(More considered response than my last posting follows:)
Thank you. You're not taking the piss by any chance, are you? OK,
let's assume not. Yes, I read the Guardian and I see the Telegraph
when I'm down at my mother's (it does you good to get a different
viewpoint.) I see the Indy at work but I find it a bit po-faced
sometimes. So that's it, because the FT has no sport and I refuse to
read the Murdoch press on some worn-out point of principle (I won't
get Sky either).
Personally I'm glad to see the back of Julie Birchill. IMHO she's a
clapped-out Stalinist hack who's wrong about almost everything (race,
capital punishment, the Iraq war, the Spanish Civil war, need I go
on?) & bangs on about being working-class when she's been a
was to get the G's readership's backs up - and it worked!
I admit they haven't found a successful permanent replacement yet
tho'.
Oliver
What could possibly be more 'successful' than Julie Burchill? Hate-filled,
venomous, full of loathing for all mankind or so it would appear, unsure of
her own wants and wishes and with children who must wonder where or what
"Ms Burchill, who has famously abandoned two husbands, two children and one
girlfriend in her time"
http://website.lineone.net/~jon.simmons/julie/ip270600.htm
Interesting. What I meant by "successful" is that the Guardian haven't
yet found a replacement for JB in that particular slot - the Saturday
one to annoy the hell out of the readership by mouthing opinions
opposite to theirs and guaranteed to annoy them. Now suddenly we have
a plethora of possibilities - the author of this piece, or Yvonne
Roberts, or this ex-waitress woman, or any number of posters to this
ng.....

Incidentally David Hare has performed a similar service (albeit a lot
less stridently!) by writing a leftish column in the Telegraph.
Post by Sacha
Well worth reading a newspaper for if you have only one, remaining,
functioning brain cell. Not.
Well actually you need a few brain cells in order to bash her
arguments. That's what her column's for, for me. Helps ward off the
coming senile degeneration.
Sacha
2004-02-29 09:17:30 UTC
Permalink
grumblebug29/2/04 5:21
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
grumblebug28/2/04 8:13
Post by grumblebug
[snip]
Post by Morgana
Post by grumblebug
Once aboard the lugger
Straight down the quarterdeck the fiat falls
You may say bloody but not say bugger
You may say bottom but not say balls.
(Gerald Gould)
(I should have added that this comes from George Orwell's "Down and
Out in Paris and London" and is actually in a footnote by Victor
Gollancz.)
Post by Morgana
Post by grumblebug
The point is that in the 40s or whenever two of those were OK and two
were out. Earlier, all four were out. Nowadays, the lot and much worse
are polite after-dinner conversation. Even the F word, to spare your
blushes, is commonplace. I myself refrain from the C word because I
feel it's insulting to women but the younger generation have no such
qualms.
Oliver
Grumblebug - I hate to sound fawning, but I have to congratulate you
on being one of the most intelligent, well balanced and just downright
decent people in this newsgroup. I think you admitted to being a
Guardian reader (as I am myself but usually only on Saturdays, despite
the loss of Julie Birchill), so that says it all. This group is lucky
to have you.
(More considered response than my last posting follows:)
Thank you. You're not taking the piss by any chance, are you? OK,
let's assume not. Yes, I read the Guardian and I see the Telegraph
when I'm down at my mother's (it does you good to get a different
viewpoint.) I see the Indy at work but I find it a bit po-faced
sometimes. So that's it, because the FT has no sport and I refuse to
read the Murdoch press on some worn-out point of principle (I won't
get Sky either).
Personally I'm glad to see the back of Julie Birchill. IMHO she's a
clapped-out Stalinist hack who's wrong about almost everything (race,
capital punishment, the Iraq war, the Spanish Civil war, need I go
on?) & bangs on about being working-class when she's been a
was to get the G's readership's backs up - and it worked!
I admit they haven't found a successful permanent replacement yet
tho'.
Oliver
What could possibly be more 'successful' than Julie Burchill? Hate-filled,
venomous, full of loathing for all mankind or so it would appear, unsure of
her own wants and wishes and with children who must wonder where or what
"Ms Burchill, who has famously abandoned two husbands, two children and one
girlfriend in her time"
http://website.lineone.net/~jon.simmons/julie/ip270600.htm
Interesting. What I meant by "successful" is that the Guardian haven't
yet found a replacement for JB in that particular slot - the Saturday
one to annoy the hell out of the readership by mouthing opinions
opposite to theirs and guaranteed to annoy them. Now suddenly we have
a plethora of possibilities - the author of this piece, or Yvonne
Roberts, or this ex-waitress woman, or any number of posters to this
ng.....
Sounds like the service Suzanne ??? does for The Mail on Sunday. One
imagines all those managing directors' wives fulminating and seething over
their Sunday sausage.
Post by grumblebug
Incidentally David Hare has performed a similar service (albeit a lot
less stridently!) by writing a leftish column in the Telegraph.
It's time I looked at the Telegraph again. We only see the gardening pages
which a neighbour kindly passes on to us - they're very good.
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
Well worth reading a newspaper for if you have only one, remaining,
functioning brain cell. Not.
Well actually you need a few brain cells in order to bash her
arguments. That's what her column's for, for me. Helps ward off the
coming senile degeneration.
Well - there's always agr. ;-)) I have always found Burchill loathsome -
not because of her views but because of the smug, patronising
look-at-me-being-clever way she expresses them, IMO.
--
Sacha
(remove the weeds to email me)
grumblebug
2004-02-29 17:00:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sacha
grumblebug29/2/04 5:21
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
grumblebug28/2/04 8:13
[snip some more]
Interesting. What I meant by "successful" is that the Guardian haven't
yet found a replacement for JB in that particular slot - the Saturday
one to annoy the hell out of the readership by mouthing opinions
opposite to theirs and guaranteed to annoy them. Now suddenly we have
a plethora of possibilities - the author of this piece, or Yvonne
Roberts, or this ex-waitress woman, or any number of posters to this
ng.....
Sounds like the service Suzanne ??? does for The Mail on Sunday. One
imagines all those managing directors' wives fulminating and seething over
their Sunday sausage.
Suzanne Moore? She used to write for the Guardian until she had a
famous argument with Germaine Greer who wrote without naming her of
"certain feminists with such low self-esteem that they walk around
with bird's-nest hair and f*ck-me shoes" OWTTE. (obscenity bowdlerised
for Poetman's benefit). Moore took it to mean her and flounced off to
some other paper (Indy?) before beaching up at the Mail group.
Meanwhile, Greer has landed up at the Telegraph, although I preferred
her as Private Eye's gardening correspondent "Rose Blight".

This is what they were on about on "Have I got news for you" when
Greer guested.

Ian Hislop: "What kind of shoes are you wearing, Germaine?"
Greer: "Don't-f*ck-me shoes.
Mess-around-with-me-and-I'll-kick-you-in-the-face shoes."
Post by Sacha
Post by grumblebug
Incidentally David Hare has performed a similar service (albeit a lot
less stridently!) by writing a leftish column in the Telegraph.
It's time I looked at the Telegraph again. We only see the gardening pages
which a neighbour kindly passes on to us - they're very good.
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
Well worth reading a newspaper for if you have only one, remaining,
functioning brain cell. Not.
Well actually you need a few brain cells in order to bash her
arguments. That's what her column's for, for me. Helps ward off the
coming senile degeneration.
Well - there's always agr. ;-)) I have always found Burchill loathsome -
not because of her views but because of the smug, patronising
look-at-me-being-clever way she expresses them, IMO.
Oddly, she can only do that in print. She has this high-pitched
little-girl voice which would be OK in a teenager but sounds odd
coming from a great big middle-aged woman. That's why she rarely does
TV or even radio.
Sacha
2004-02-29 17:32:45 UTC
Permalink
grumblebug29/2/04 5:00
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
grumblebug29/2/04 5:21
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
grumblebug28/2/04 8:13
[snip some more]
Interesting. What I meant by "successful" is that the Guardian haven't
yet found a replacement for JB in that particular slot - the Saturday
one to annoy the hell out of the readership by mouthing opinions
opposite to theirs and guaranteed to annoy them. Now suddenly we have
a plethora of possibilities - the author of this piece, or Yvonne
Roberts, or this ex-waitress woman, or any number of posters to this
ng.....
Sounds like the service Suzanne ??? does for The Mail on Sunday. One
imagines all those managing directors' wives fulminating and seething over
their Sunday sausage.
Suzanne Moore? She used to write for the Guardian until she had a
famous argument with Germaine Greer who wrote without naming her of
"certain feminists with such low self-esteem that they walk around
with bird's-nest hair and f*ck-me shoes" OWTTE. (obscenity bowdlerised
for Poetman's benefit). Moore took it to mean her and flounced off to
some other paper (Indy?) before beaching up at the Mail group.
!!!!! What a sheltered life I lead! I had no idea of any of this. I think
Ms Greer is a bit wonky there, though - being a feminist doesn't seem to
mean Doc Marten's and dungarees, AFAIK. And was this before or after Ms
Greer did her semi-nude pose for whatever-it-was? ;-)
Actually, both women make me think of the days when feminism was quite new
in UK and a famous but un-named actress espoused the cause, triumphantly
burning her bra and refusing to wear one ever after. She was in a play and
two stage-hands - male, naturally - were discussing this and one said he
thought her not wearing a bra was disgraceful, the other said "oh I dunno,
it don' arf take the wrinkles out of her face."
Post by grumblebug
Meanwhile, Greer has landed up at the Telegraph, although I preferred
her as Private Eye's gardening correspondent "Rose Blight".
This is what they were on about on "Have I got news for you" when
Greer guested.
Ian Hislop: "What kind of shoes are you wearing, Germaine?"
Greer: "Don't-f*ck-me shoes.
Mess-around-with-me-and-I'll-kick-you-in-the-face shoes."
Time I started watching that again. I went off it a bit when Angus Deayton
left, even though I know he was very contrived. I think they had a few
guest presenters who I found dull, so I rather gave up on it. I gather
Boris Johnson was very good?
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
Post by grumblebug
Incidentally David Hare has performed a similar service (albeit a lot
less stridently!) by writing a leftish column in the Telegraph.
It's time I looked at the Telegraph again. We only see the gardening pages
which a neighbour kindly passes on to us - they're very good.
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
Well worth reading a newspaper for if you have only one, remaining,
functioning brain cell. Not.
Well actually you need a few brain cells in order to bash her
arguments. That's what her column's for, for me. Helps ward off the
coming senile degeneration.
Well - there's always agr. ;-)) I have always found Burchill loathsome -
not because of her views but because of the smug, patronising
look-at-me-being-clever way she expresses them, IMO.
Oddly, she can only do that in print. She has this high-pitched
little-girl voice which would be OK in a teenager but sounds odd
coming from a great big middle-aged woman. That's why she rarely does
TV or even radio.
Thank god we're spared that. Personally, I'd always assumed she gargles
with gravel and sharp sand every morning.
--
Sacha
(remove the weeds to email me)
Jean Sue Libkind
2004-02-29 18:43:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sacha
Actually, both women make me think of the days when feminism was quite new
in UK and a famous but un-named actress espoused the cause, triumphantly
burning her bra and refusing to wear one ever after. She was in a play and
two stage-hands - male, naturally - were discussing this and one said he
thought her not wearing a bra was disgraceful, the other said "oh I dunno,
it don' arf take the wrinkles out of her face."
LOL!

Is that the secret????

js
Sacha
2004-02-29 21:42:19 UTC
Permalink
Jean Sue Libkind29/2/04 6:43
Post by Jean Sue Libkind
Post by Sacha
Actually, both women make me think of the days when feminism was quite new
in UK and a famous but un-named actress espoused the cause, triumphantly
burning her bra and refusing to wear one ever after. She was in a play and
two stage-hands - male, naturally - were discussing this and one said he
thought her not wearing a bra was disgraceful, the other said "oh I dunno,
it don' arf take the wrinkles out of her face."
LOL!
Is that the secret????
js
Cheaper than the surgeon. ;-)
--
Sacha
(remove the weeds to email me)
grumblebug
2004-03-01 06:24:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sacha
grumblebug29/2/04 5:00
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
grumblebug29/2/04 5:21
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
grumblebug28/2/04 8:13
[snip some more]
Interesting. What I meant by "successful" is that the Guardian haven't
yet found a replacement for JB in that particular slot - the Saturday
one to annoy the hell out of the readership by mouthing opinions
opposite to theirs and guaranteed to annoy them. Now suddenly we have
a plethora of possibilities - the author of this piece, or Yvonne
Roberts, or this ex-waitress woman, or any number of posters to this
ng.....
Sounds like the service Suzanne ??? does for The Mail on Sunday. One
imagines all those managing directors' wives fulminating and seething over
their Sunday sausage.
Suzanne Moore? She used to write for the Guardian until she had a
famous argument with Germaine Greer who wrote without naming her of
"certain feminists with such low self-esteem that they walk around
with bird's-nest hair and f*ck-me shoes" OWTTE. (obscenity bowdlerised
for Poetman's benefit). Moore took it to mean her and flounced off to
some other paper (Indy?) before beaching up at the Mail group.
!!!!! What a sheltered life I lead! I had no idea of any of this. I think
Ms Greer is a bit wonky there, though - being a feminist doesn't seem to
mean Doc Marten's and dungarees, AFAIK. And was this before or after Ms
Greer did her semi-nude pose for whatever-it-was? ;-)
After. But since then she's taken some flak by writing an Art book
about young nude boys in paintings.
Post by Sacha
Actually, both women make me think of the days when feminism was quite new
in UK and a famous but un-named actress espoused the cause, triumphantly
burning her bra and refusing to wear one ever after. She was in a play and
two stage-hands - male, naturally - were discussing this and one said he
thought her not wearing a bra was disgraceful, the other said "oh I dunno,
it don' arf take the wrinkles out of her face."
Post by grumblebug
Meanwhile, Greer has landed up at the Telegraph, although I preferred
her as Private Eye's gardening correspondent "Rose Blight".
This is what they were on about on "Have I got news for you" when
Greer guested.
Ian Hislop: "What kind of shoes are you wearing, Germaine?"
Greer: "Don't-f*ck-me shoes.
Mess-around-with-me-and-I'll-kick-you-in-the-face shoes."
Time I started watching that again. I went off it a bit when Angus Deayton
left, even though I know he was very contrived. I think they had a few
guest presenters who I found dull, so I rather gave up on it. I gather
Boris Johnson was very good?
He was unintentionally hilarious, they were far too quick for him - he
realised this and took it in good sport. He would be my best bet for
permanent chair except that Michael Howard probably doesn't want
another Tory MP looking foolish every week.
Post by Sacha
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
Post by grumblebug
Incidentally David Hare has performed a similar service (albeit a lot
less stridently!) by writing a leftish column in the Telegraph.
It's time I looked at the Telegraph again. We only see the gardening pages
which a neighbour kindly passes on to us - they're very good.
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
Well worth reading a newspaper for if you have only one, remaining,
functioning brain cell. Not.
Well actually you need a few brain cells in order to bash her
arguments. That's what her column's for, for me. Helps ward off the
coming senile degeneration.
Well - there's always agr. ;-)) I have always found Burchill loathsome -
not because of her views but because of the smug, patronising
look-at-me-being-clever way she expresses them, IMO.
Oddly, she can only do that in print. She has this high-pitched
little-girl voice which would be OK in a teenager but sounds odd
coming from a great big middle-aged woman. That's why she rarely does
TV or even radio.
Thank god we're spared that. Personally, I'd always assumed she gargles
with gravel and sharp sand every morning.
Sacha
2004-03-01 07:49:37 UTC
Permalink
grumblebug1/3/04 6:24
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
grumblebug29/2/04 5:00
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
grumblebug29/2/04 5:21
Post by grumblebug
Post by Sacha
grumblebug28/2/04 8:13
[snip some more]
Interesting. What I meant by "successful" is that the Guardian haven't
yet found a replacement for JB in that particular slot - the Saturday
one to annoy the hell out of the readership by mouthing opinions
opposite to theirs and guaranteed to annoy them. Now suddenly we have
a plethora of possibilities - the author of this piece, or Yvonne
Roberts, or this ex-waitress woman, or any number of posters to this
ng.....
Sounds like the service Suzanne ??? does for The Mail on Sunday. One
imagines all those managing directors' wives fulminating and seething over
their Sunday sausage.
Suzanne Moore? She used to write for the Guardian until she had a
famous argument with Germaine Greer who wrote without naming her of
"certain feminists with such low self-esteem that they walk around
with bird's-nest hair and f*ck-me shoes" OWTTE. (obscenity bowdlerised
for Poetman's benefit). Moore took it to mean her and flounced off to
some other paper (Indy?) before beaching up at the Mail group.
!!!!! What a sheltered life I lead! I had no idea of any of this. I think
Ms Greer is a bit wonky there, though - being a feminist doesn't seem to
mean Doc Marten's and dungarees, AFAIK. And was this before or after Ms
Greer did her semi-nude pose for whatever-it-was? ;-)
After. But since then she's taken some flak by writing an Art book
about young nude boys in paintings.
Post by Sacha
Actually, both women make me think of the days when feminism was quite new
in UK and a famous but un-named actress espoused the cause, triumphantly
burning her bra and refusing to wear one ever after. She was in a play and
two stage-hands - male, naturally - were discussing this and one said he
thought her not wearing a bra was disgraceful, the other said "oh I dunno,
it don' arf take the wrinkles out of her face."
Post by grumblebug
Meanwhile, Greer has landed up at the Telegraph, although I preferred
her as Private Eye's gardening correspondent "Rose Blight".
This is what they were on about on "Have I got news for you" when
Greer guested.
Ian Hislop: "What kind of shoes are you wearing, Germaine?"
Greer: "Don't-f*ck-me shoes.
Mess-around-with-me-and-I'll-kick-you-in-the-face shoes."
Time I started watching that again. I went off it a bit when Angus Deayton
left, even though I know he was very contrived. I think they had a few
guest presenters who I found dull, so I rather gave up on it. I gather
Boris Johnson was very good?
He was unintentionally hilarious, they were far too quick for him - he
realised this and took it in good sport. He would be my best bet for
permanent chair except that Michael Howard probably doesn't want
another Tory MP looking foolish every week.
Well, not on purpose anyway. ;-)
<snip>
--
Sacha
(remove the weeds to email me)
DeadeyeDev
2004-02-29 04:50:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by grumblebug
Thank you. You're not taking the piss by any chance, are you? OK,
let's assume not.
---
Care to translate?
(bearing in mind that I'd prefer a truthful answer)
grumblebug
2004-02-29 11:04:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by DeadeyeDev
Post by grumblebug
Thank you. You're not taking the piss by any chance, are you? OK,
let's assume not.
---
Care to translate?
(bearing in mind that I'd prefer a truthful answer)
What don't you understand? I thought it was clear enough.

Unless you're Morgana by any chance (yes I know that's impossible but
I know you hated being taken for Salome!) I see no need for further
explanation.

BTW Morgana has been suspiciously quiet since her last post in this
thread!

O
poetman
2004-02-29 11:35:16 UTC
Permalink
"You're not taking the p**s by any chance, are you?"
"Care to translate?"
"What don't you understand?"
Please, gentlemen, allow me to intervene. The expression 'Are you taking the
p**s' is a somewhat coarse colloquialism meaning, for example: 'You are
joking, surely!' or 'Are you pulling my leg?' I don't really see the
necessity of using filthy versions of a 'saying' when clean and wholesome
versions function quite adequately, do you?
grumblebug
2004-02-29 17:07:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by poetman
"You're not taking the p**s by any chance, are you?"
I regret this. It was a spur of the moment thing, much like you
choosing Poetman while meaning Postman. It refers to my occasional
unintentional impersonation of Walter Matthau in "Grumpy Old Men",
according to the younger generation.

I wish I'd chosen Oliver but there are a lot of them. Anyway, you can
call me that instead.
Post by poetman
"Care to translate?"
"What don't you understand?"
Please, gentlemen, allow me to intervene. The expression 'Are you taking the
p**s' is a somewhat coarse colloquialism meaning, for example: 'You are
joking, surely!' or 'Are you pulling my leg?' I don't really see the
necessity of using filthy versions of a 'saying' when clean and wholesome
versions function quite adequately, do you?
My, my, Geoffrey, you are a sensitive soul! Is it a long time since
you visited the UK, or do you only fly, hence avoiding having to enter
via the docks?

Oliver, STILL waiting for Morgana's next intervention.
Sacha
2004-02-29 17:36:49 UTC
Permalink
grumblebug29/2/04 5:07
Post by grumblebug
"You're not taking the p**s by any chance, are you?"
I regret this. It was a spur of the moment thing, much like you
choosing Poetman while meaning Postman. It refers to my occasional
unintentional impersonation of Walter Matthau in "Grumpy Old Men",
according to the younger generation.
<snip>

Just got the DVD of that. ;-) I loved the story of Matthau and Lemmon on
set when Matthau suffered a heart attack. Lemmon rushed to his side, folded
his jacket and placed it under M's head and said "Walter, are you
comfortable?"
Matthau, eyes shut and white as a sheet said "I make a living."
*That's* style! ;-)
--
Sacha
(remove the weeds to email me)
DeadeyeDev
2004-02-29 17:52:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by poetman
"You're not taking the p**s by any chance, are you?"
"Care to translate?"
"What don't you understand?"
Please, gentlemen, allow me to intervene. The expression 'Are you taking the
p**s' is a somewhat coarse colloquialism meaning, for example: 'You are
joking, surely!' or 'Are you pulling my leg?' I don't really see the
necessity of using filthy versions of a 'saying' when clean and wholesome
versions function quite adequately, do you?
I appreciate your taking the time to clarify that for me.

I was aware that in the UK "being pissed" often means being drunk, and I was
somehow trying to relate Oliver's expression to that (akin to our "taking the
cure" a tongue in cheek reference to many old-timey Baptists' keeping whiskey
in the house "for medicinal purposes only".) But that interpretation didn't
make sense in context.
DeadeyeDev
2004-02-29 18:13:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by DeadeyeDev
Post by poetman
"You're not taking the p**s by any chance, are you?"
"Care to translate?"
"What don't you understand?"
Please, gentlemen, allow me to intervene. The expression 'Are you taking the
p**s' is a somewhat coarse colloquialism meaning, for example: 'You are
joking, surely!' or 'Are you pulling my leg?' I don't really see the
necessity of using filthy versions of a 'saying' when clean and wholesome
versions function quite adequately, do you?
I appreciate your taking the time to clarify that for me.
I was aware that in the UK "being pissed" often means being drunk, and I was
somehow trying to relate Oliver's expression to that (akin to our "taking the
cure" a tongue in cheek reference to many old-timey Baptists' keeping whiskey
in the house "for medicinal purposes only".) But that interpretation didn't
make sense in context.
---
Poetman, now you wouldn't be takin' the piss here, would you?

It's not that you seem particularly untrustworthy; still, I'm aware of the
great temptation of making up definitions for the sake of a joke and for the
benefit of gullible foreigners. I've done it myself while in England.

Perhaps Oliver will concur. I'd feel a bit more confident if I had two
sources.
grumblebug
2004-03-01 06:51:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by DeadeyeDev
Post by DeadeyeDev
Post by poetman
"You're not taking the p**s by any chance, are you?"
"Care to translate?"
"What don't you understand?"
Please, gentlemen, allow me to intervene. The expression 'Are you taking the
p**s' is a somewhat coarse colloquialism meaning, for example: 'You are
joking, surely!' or 'Are you pulling my leg?' I don't really see the
necessity of using filthy versions of a 'saying' when clean and wholesome
versions function quite adequately, do you?
I appreciate your taking the time to clarify that for me.
I was aware that in the UK "being pissed" often means being drunk, and I was
somehow trying to relate Oliver's expression to that (akin to our "taking the
cure" a tongue in cheek reference to many old-timey Baptists' keeping whiskey
in the house "for medicinal purposes only".) But that interpretation didn't
make sense in context.
---
Poetman, now you wouldn't be takin' the piss here, would you?
It's not that you seem particularly untrustworthy; still, I'm aware of the
great temptation of making up definitions for the sake of a joke and for the
benefit of gullible foreigners. I've done it myself while in England.
Perhaps Oliver will concur. I'd feel a bit more confident if I had two
sources.
No he's not. I was puzzled that you didn't get this as you otherwise
have the full range of meanings of this useful verb. What would you
say instead?

I've been an intended victim of an American trying to teach us the
"wrong" US slang. Unfortunately for him we have too many sources of
your culture (TV, film, music, internet) for it to work that way
round.
Morgana
2004-02-29 18:28:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by grumblebug
Post by DeadeyeDev
Post by grumblebug
Thank you. You're not taking the piss by any chance, are you? OK,
let's assume not.
---
Care to translate?
(bearing in mind that I'd prefer a truthful answer)
What don't you understand? I thought it was clear enough.
Unless you're Morgana by any chance (yes I know that's impossible but
I know you hated being taken for Salome!) I see no need for further
explanation.
BTW Morgana has been suspiciously quiet since her last post in this
thread!
O
I just posted a reply (Sunday 18 15) and the whole thing has just
disappeared so if it has gone for good I will re-post tomorrow, and
Ol, I was not taking the piss!
CT Guy 102
2004-02-29 18:32:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Morgana
I just posted a reply (Sunday 18 15) and the whole thing has just
disappeared so if it has gone for good I will re-post tomorrow, and
Ol, I was not taking the piss!
I thought taking the piss meant drinking.
Morgana
2004-02-29 22:47:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by CT Guy 102
Post by Morgana
I just posted a reply (Sunday 18 15) and the whole thing has just
disappeared so if it has gone for good I will re-post tomorrow, and
Ol, I was not taking the piss!
I thought taking the piss meant drinking.
Getting "pissed" is drinking. Taking the piss (out of someone) is
like "taking the mick". A "piss artist" is a person, like Princess
Margaret or the Queen Ma for instance, who likes bevvying (i.e.
partaking of alcoholic beverages in great abundance). English eh?
What a lingo.
olaf
2004-02-29 23:20:46 UTC
Permalink
A "p**s artist" is a person . . . who likes . . . alcoholic beverages in
great abundance

All right. But why are they called 'artists'? My Westminster dictionary
defines an artist as 'a person who practises a fine art'. I have heard of a
rude French artist called 'Le Petomane' who could play the opening bars of
Beethoven's Fifth by making noises caused by flatulence, but I am at a loss
to imagine how anyone can become an artist by simply emptying their bladder.
Morgana
2004-02-29 23:02:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by grumblebug
Thank you. You're not taking the piss by any chance, are you? OK,
let's assume not. Yes, I read the Guardian and I see the Telegraph
when I'm down at my mother's (it does you good to get a different
viewpoint.) I see the Indy at work but I find it a bit po-faced
sometimes. So that's it, because the FT has no sport and I refuse to
read the Murdoch press on some worn-out point of principle (I won't
get Sky either).
Personally I'm glad to see the back of Julie Birchill. IMHO she's a
clapped-out Stalinist hack who's wrong about almost everything (race,
capital punishment, the Iraq war, the Spanish Civil war, need I go
on?) & bangs on about being working-class when she's been a
was to get the G's readership's backs up - and it worked!
I admit they haven't found a successful permanent replacement yet
tho'.
Oliver
It was interesting to read JB just to see what outrageous topic she
would choose and I have to say I agreed with her on some things....
hunting, royalty and John Lennon (i.e. "imagine no possessions" and
him with two chilled rooms just to house his and Y's collection of
furs) to name but three. What was her stance on the Spanish Civil
War? I have tried to look it up but can't find anything.

I certainly would not read the Murdoch press either, or have Sky TV.
Nothing clapped out about those principles. The man is a jerk. I
will never forgive him for acquiring a decent newspaper (the Sun as it
was) and reducing it to being good for nothing but cutting into
squares, threading onto string and putting in an outside carsey (for
you folks overseas a carsey is a toilet. Not sure if I spelled it
right though).
grumblebug
2004-03-01 06:41:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Morgana
Post by grumblebug
Thank you. You're not taking the piss by any chance, are you? OK,
let's assume not. Yes, I read the Guardian and I see the Telegraph
when I'm down at my mother's (it does you good to get a different
viewpoint.) I see the Indy at work but I find it a bit po-faced
sometimes. So that's it, because the FT has no sport and I refuse to
read the Murdoch press on some worn-out point of principle (I won't
get Sky either).
Personally I'm glad to see the back of Julie Birchill. IMHO she's a
clapped-out Stalinist hack who's wrong about almost everything (race,
capital punishment, the Iraq war, the Spanish Civil war, need I go
on?) & bangs on about being working-class when she's been a
was to get the G's readership's backs up - and it worked!
I admit they haven't found a successful permanent replacement yet
tho'.
Oliver
It was interesting to read JB just to see what outrageous topic she
would choose and I have to say I agreed with her on some things....
hunting, royalty and John Lennon (i.e. "imagine no possessions" and
him with two chilled rooms just to house his and Y's collection of
furs) to name but three. What was her stance on the Spanish Civil
War? I have tried to look it up but can't find anything.
IIRC She was pro the Communists and therefore against anyone else on
the Republican side - anarchists, POUM etc. Stalin gave the orders
that his men should crush the opposition on their own side rather than
unite to take on the Falangists. IMO this cost them the war.
Post by Morgana
I certainly would not read the Murdoch press either, or have Sky TV.
Nothing clapped out about those principles. The man is a jerk. I
will never forgive him for acquiring a decent newspaper (the Sun as it
was) and reducing it to being good for nothing but cutting into
squares, threading onto string and putting in an outside carsey (for
you folks overseas a carsey is a toilet. Not sure if I spelled it
right though).
"Khazi" I think but not sure of derivation.
Lowell
2004-02-25 17:32:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by IslandZeus
Over the weekend, my country (St. Lucia) celebrated it's 25th
anniversary of Independence and so Prince Andrew was invited as a
member of the Royal Family to celebrate with the country this special
occasion.
Why would St Lucia invite him in the first place??

Lowell

FEBRUARY 2004: The Denny Report
- http://hometown.aol.com/thedennyreport/frontpage.html
The Household Crisis * Gay Marriage * Johnny Pacheco * The Fabians turn 120 *
Iowa * Dinner w/ Fidel * Weed & Memory * Debtors Prison * Evolution in Georgia
Ross Howard
2004-02-25 17:54:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lowell
Post by IslandZeus
Over the weekend, my country (St. Lucia) celebrated it's 25th
anniversary of Independence and so Prince Andrew was invited as a
member of the Royal Family to celebrate with the country this special
occasion.
Why would St Lucia invite him in the first place??
I very much doubt that they did. HRH Prince Andrew, The Flake of York,
is the principal Plan B Royal -- the one you are most likely to get
sent, like it or not, when you invite the Queen and Charles but they
are unavailable (or can't be bothered).

What I don't understand is why the he was in such a file myood --
didn't they tell him about this jewel of the island's cultural
heritage?
http://www.stluciagolf.com/




--
Ross Howard
poetman
2004-02-25 18:46:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ross Howard
What I don't understand is why the he was in such a file myood --
And what I don't understand is what on earth you are talking about. Isn't it
at all possible to try to concentrate just a little bit more, make at least
a tiny effort to be comprehensible? It's not much to ask, surely. After all,
this is a text medium - and if you can't do better than this I would throw
the towel in, if I were you. I've never seen such atrocious writing in all
my born natural. Disgraceful!
Morgana
2004-02-27 19:55:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by poetman
Post by Ross Howard
What I don't understand is why the he was in such a file myood --
And what I don't understand is what on earth you are talking about. Isn't it
at all possible to try to concentrate just a little bit more, make at least
a tiny effort to be comprehensible? It's not much to ask, surely. After all,
this is a text medium - and if you can't do better than this I would throw
the towel in, if I were you. I've never seen such atrocious writing in all
my born natural. Disgraceful!
Snobbery does not become you and does not impress anyone.
Victor Meldrew
2004-02-25 19:29:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by IslandZeus
Over the weekend, my country (St. Lucia) celebrated it's 25th
anniversary of Independence and so Prince Andrew was invited as a
member of the Royal Family to celebrate with the country this special
occasion.
Well it was apparent from his arrival that he wasn't as enthused with
this occasion as the rest of the country! From visiting various
various functions which was televised on national television various
snapshots to the prince's countenounce showed him less than impressed
and less than fervent in experiencing any of the functions.
Finally, in attending a special function where only an invited few
were to dine in the presence of His Royal Highness, the PRICK simply
came in the room, ate his dinner, and quickly exited....not a word nor
any sign of emotion or delight, at least, for the many St. Lucians
enjoying 25 years of Independence from the Throne. He left a alsting
impression on all of us of snobbery, unimpressed disdain...and total
moronic disrespect!
A british friend of mine who was also at this dinner when asked about
the Prince said to me "He could at least have said 'Mum says
Hi!!'"....I couldn't agree any more....the Prick!!
Please don't call him a 'Prick' they can be useful .

Call him a layabout, sponger, waste of space or whatever, but not
that.
grumblebug
2004-02-26 09:07:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by IslandZeus
Over the weekend, my country (St. Lucia) celebrated it's 25th
anniversary of Independence and so Prince Andrew was invited as a
member of the Royal Family to celebrate with the country this special
occasion.
Well it was apparent from his arrival that he wasn't as enthused with
this occasion as the rest of the country! From visiting various
various functions which was televised on national television various
snapshots to the prince's countenounce showed him less than impressed
and less than fervent in experiencing any of the functions.
Finally, in attending a special function where only an invited few
were to dine in the presence of His Royal Highness, the PRICK simply
came in the room, ate his dinner, and quickly exited....not a word nor
any sign of emotion or delight, at least, for the many St. Lucians
enjoying 25 years of Independence from the Throne. He left a alsting
impression on all of us of snobbery, unimpressed disdain...and total
moronic disrespect!
A british friend of mine who was also at this dinner when asked about
the Prince said to me "He could at least have said 'Mum says
Hi!!'"....I couldn't agree any more....the Prick!!
Once again, I wake up to find a thread so debased by insult and
counter-insult that the original point is lost and I'm undecided where
to post. So I'll post to the original article which hasn't been
properly answered.

If it is true, or more importantly if it is believed that is true,
that Prince Andrew has insulted an entire Commonwealth nation, then we
have a problem. There are a lot of Caribbean 25th-independence
anniversaries coming up, and after that the African 50th anniversaries
too, and they would be within their rights to ask that some other
royal comes to their celebrations.

If the DoY was so bored at being in an island tropical paradise, he
could have found a way not to show it. He could have asked his mother
for advice - she has been feigning interest in much more boring
situations for decades.

There might be some internal RF politics going on here - he might have
gone here under protest, on sufferance, and be showing it in order to
get out of the next one. Fair enough, but being in the "Firm" requires
duties as well as perks and one has to take the rough with the smooth.
If he doesn't want to do these jobs he could always remove himself
from the Civil List and try to live on his naval officer's salary -
plenty do. I'm sure that many of the minor Royals would be delighted
to be offered trips to the Caribbean in exchange for being half way
gracious.

Another thought occurs - perhaps Andrew is as awkward and prone to
gaffes around non-white people as his father is. Again, some lessons
are required - (again perhaps from his mother who was once esconced
privately with the late President Julius Nyerere of Tanzania for so
long that "Private Eye" jokingly rumoured a romance!)

Most of the other stuff posted here is irrelevant - I neither know nor
care whether the DoY is straight bi or gay, is beastly to his servants
or kindly, is a toilet-mouth or never swears. If he has knowingly or
unknowingly insulted a fellow Commonwealth nation, that is bad. I've a
feeling this is only the start of this story.

Oliver (remove _ as ever)
IslandZeus
2004-02-26 19:15:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by grumblebug
Post by IslandZeus
Over the weekend, my country (St. Lucia) celebrated it's 25th
anniversary of Independence and so Prince Andrew was invited as a
member of the Royal Family to celebrate with the country this special
occasion.
Well it was apparent from his arrival that he wasn't as enthused with
this occasion as the rest of the country! From visiting various
various functions which was televised on national television various
snapshots to the prince's countenounce showed him less than impressed
and less than fervent in experiencing any of the functions.
Finally, in attending a special function where only an invited few
were to dine in the presence of His Royal Highness, the PRICK simply
came in the room, ate his dinner, and quickly exited....not a word nor
any sign of emotion or delight, at least, for the many St. Lucians
enjoying 25 years of Independence from the Throne. He left a alsting
impression on all of us of snobbery, unimpressed disdain...and total
moronic disrespect!
A british friend of mine who was also at this dinner when asked about
the Prince said to me "He could at least have said 'Mum says
Hi!!'"....I couldn't agree any more....the Prick!!
Once again, I wake up to find a thread so debased by insult and
counter-insult that the original point is lost and I'm undecided where
to post. So I'll post to the original article which hasn't been
properly answered.
If it is true, or more importantly if it is believed that is true,
that Prince Andrew has insulted an entire Commonwealth nation, then we
have a problem. There are a lot of Caribbean 25th-independence
anniversaries coming up, and after that the African 50th anniversaries
too, and they would be within their rights to ask that some other
royal comes to their celebrations.
If the DoY was so bored at being in an island tropical paradise, he
could have found a way not to show it. He could have asked his mother
for advice - she has been feigning interest in much more boring
situations for decades.
There might be some internal RF politics going on here - he might have
gone here under protest, on sufferance, and be showing it in order to
get out of the next one. Fair enough, but being in the "Firm" requires
duties as well as perks and one has to take the rough with the smooth.
If he doesn't want to do these jobs he could always remove himself
from the Civil List and try to live on his naval officer's salary -
plenty do. I'm sure that many of the minor Royals would be delighted
to be offered trips to the Caribbean in exchange for being half way
gracious.
Another thought occurs - perhaps Andrew is as awkward and prone to
gaffes around non-white people as his father is. Again, some lessons
are required - (again perhaps from his mother who was once esconced
privately with the late President Julius Nyerere of Tanzania for so
long that "Private Eye" jokingly rumoured a romance!)
Most of the other stuff posted here is irrelevant - I neither know nor
care whether the DoY is straight bi or gay, is beastly to his servants
or kindly, is a toilet-mouth or never swears. If he has knowingly or
unknowingly insulted a fellow Commonwealth nation, that is bad. I've a
feeling this is only the start of this story.
Oliver (remove _ as ever)
Although I wouldn't go as far as saying that he insulted my country,
as did his father with his nasty remarks on the African Nation's
ceremony...his total disinterest and what seemed to me to be total
disinterest proved very disheartening nonetheless. A fake smile would
indeed suffice, at least when the cameras came upon his face.

I have no knowledge of his attitude towards non Whites in general, nor
would I say that his opinion of them seem to be that of racial
superiority as it is well known along that family line there is
Negroid somewhere, just have to review the family tree. However, his
attitude at the occassion proved to methat the Royals in general are a
bunch of sobbering narcissistic aristocrats whose attitude have no
welcome in the modernised, especially an island like St. Lucia...true
we are island folk with our various taboos and folklore with regard to
Voodoo and Obeah and other narrowminded cultic storylines; and are not
as developed technologically as the metropolitan superpowerful
countries in Europe and North America, but we are none the less very
educated qualification-wise(we do boast two Nobel Laureates in
Economics and Literature, very impressive IMO for a country that can
hardly been seen on the map of the world), have access to computers
and Internet and, yes, DVDs, and yes, speak Proper English and,
therefore, will not in this day and age think that anyone who is born
into a family with lots of regality has any more value than us; nor do
we think that our services, though merely mortal and therefore
sub-worthy, are there to profoundly impress these 'Gods of British Mt.
Olympus'.

We invited this chap to our country to take part in our festivities -
we had put on the show and exposed our culture through artistic
performances, Gala Dinners, and various other programs...all he had to
do was meet us half way, smile, intermingle, have a freaking good
time!! But is opposing reaction to me left a very sour taste in the
mouths of myself and other people I'm acquainted with, who invariably
noticed his actions.

He did not insult the country..but he isn't our favorite Royal.
grumblebug
2004-02-27 07:24:12 UTC
Permalink
[snip both our original posts for brevity]
Post by IslandZeus
Although I wouldn't go as far as saying that he insulted my country,
as did his father with his nasty remarks on the African Nation's
ceremony...his total disinterest and what seemed to me to be total
disinterest proved very disheartening nonetheless. A fake smile would
indeed suffice, at least when the cameras came upon his face.
I have no knowledge of his attitude towards non Whites in general, nor
would I say that his opinion of them seem to be that of racial
superiority as it is well known along that family line there is
Negroid somewhere, just have to review the family tree. However, his
attitude at the occassion proved to methat the Royals in general are a
bunch of sobbering narcissistic aristocrats whose attitude have no
welcome in the modernised, especially an island like St. Lucia...true
we are island folk with our various taboos and folklore with regard to
Voodoo and Obeah and other narrowminded cultic storylines; and are not
as developed technologically as the metropolitan superpowerful
countries in Europe and North America, but we are none the less very
educated qualification-wise(we do boast two Nobel Laureates in
Economics and Literature, very impressive IMO for a country that can
hardly been seen on the map of the world), have access to computers
and Internet and, yes, DVDs, and yes, speak Proper English and,
therefore, will not in this day and age think that anyone who is born
into a family with lots of regality has any more value than us; nor do
we think that our services, though merely mortal and therefore
sub-worthy, are there to profoundly impress these 'Gods of British Mt.
Olympus'.
Not to doubt you, but have you any coverage of this? Newspaper
articles (on line if possible)? Or is the island press still too
deferential?
Post by IslandZeus
We invited this chap to our country to take part in our festivities -
we had put on the show and exposed our culture through artistic
performances, Gala Dinners, and various other programs...all he had to
do was meet us half way, smile, intermingle, have a freaking good
time!! But is opposing reaction to me left a very sour taste in the
mouths of myself and other people I'm acquainted with, who invariably
noticed his actions.
Yes, even if not reported, the damage may still be done if people in
your country are talking about it. It may go all aver the island and,
if it gets further, other nations with upcoming 25th anniversary
independence celebrations (St Vincent? St Kitt's?) might be lobbying
not to have this particular guest. Yaffadina is probably right that it
won't cause many ripples in the UK - except possibly in the Caribbean
community here.
Post by IslandZeus
He did not insult the country..but he isn't our favorite Royal.
obviously!

Oliver
Jean Sue Libkind
2004-02-28 00:52:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by IslandZeus
But is opposing reaction to me left a very sour taste in the
mouths of myself and other people I'm acquainted with, who invariably
noticed his actions.
Don't you have mouthwash in the Caribbean?

Seems to me like an enormous fuss is being made about someone who, in your
apparent estimation, is not very important in the first place.

js
G.Roberts
2004-03-01 22:58:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by IslandZeus
We invited this chap to our country to take part in our festivities -
we had put on the show and exposed our culture through artistic
performances, Gala Dinners, and various other programs...all he had to
do was meet us half way, smile, intermingle, have a freaking good
time!! But is opposing reaction to me left a very sour taste in the
mouths of myself and other people I'm acquainted with, who invariably
noticed his actions.
----------

.........On the other hand, Jeanine Toussaint's article 'Toast to
Independence 2004' in the weekend's 'St.Lucia Star' is introduced by a
photograph of a positively beaming Prince Andrew.
Nor are there any criticisms voiced anywhere in the article about the Duke
of York's attitude and 'opposing reaction' to participating in the
festivities or of his visit leaving 'a very sour taste'.
AGR participants may like to refer to:
www.stluciastar.com/weekend/FriFeb27-04/feature

G.Roberts
Jean Sue Libkind
2004-03-02 20:09:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by G.Roberts
Post by IslandZeus
We invited this chap to our country to take part in our festivities -
we had put on the show and exposed our culture through artistic
performances, Gala Dinners, and various other programs...all he had to
do was meet us half way, smile, intermingle, have a freaking good
time!! But is opposing reaction to me left a very sour taste in the
mouths of myself and other people I'm acquainted with, who invariably
noticed his actions.
----------
.........On the other hand, Jeanine Toussaint's article 'Toast to
Independence 2004' in the weekend's 'St.Lucia Star' is introduced by a
photograph of a positively beaming Prince Andrew.
Nor are there any criticisms voiced anywhere in the article about the Duke
of York's attitude and 'opposing reaction' to participating in the
festivities or of his visit leaving 'a very sour taste'.
www.stluciastar.com/weekend/FriFeb27-04/feature
G.Roberts
I suspected AGR was being given a pile of codwollop.

js
G.Roberts
2004-03-02 23:21:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jean Sue Libkind
Post by G.Roberts
Post by IslandZeus
We invited this chap to our country to take part in our festivities -
we had put on the show and exposed our culture through artistic
performances, Gala Dinners, and various other programs...all he had to
do was meet us half way, smile, intermingle, have a freaking good
time!! But is opposing reaction to me left a very sour taste in the
mouths of myself and other people I'm acquainted with, who invariably
noticed his actions.
----------
.........On the other hand, Jeanine Toussaint's article 'Toast to
Independence 2004' in the weekend's 'St.Lucia Star' is introduced by a
photograph of a positively beaming Prince Andrew.
Nor are there any criticisms voiced anywhere in the article about the Duke
of York's attitude and 'opposing reaction' to participating in the
festivities or of his visit leaving 'a very sour taste'.
www.stluciastar.com/weekend/FriFeb27-04/feature
G.Roberts
I suspected AGR was being given a pile of codwollop.
Postscript.
I've found that the above ref. which I gave does not work when clicked -
even if one types in the missing .htm! However, the newspaper page should
come up if the address is typed in independently:
www.stluciastar.com/weekend/FriFeb27-04/feature.htm.

G. Roberts
Post by Jean Sue Libkind
js
yaffaDina1
2004-02-26 22:16:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by grumblebug
Post by IslandZeus
Over the weekend, my country (St. Lucia) celebrated it's 25th
anniversary of Independence and so Prince Andrew was invited as a
member of the Royal Family to celebrate with the country this special
occasion.
Well it was apparent from his arrival that he wasn't as enthused with
this occasion as the rest of the country! From visiting various
various functions which was televised on national television various
snapshots to the prince's countenounce showed him less than impressed
and less than fervent in experiencing any of the functions.
Finally, in attending a special function where only an invited few
were to dine in the presence of His Royal Highness, the PRICK simply
came in the room, ate his dinner, and quickly exited....not a word nor
any sign of emotion or delight, at least, for the many St. Lucians
enjoying 25 years of Independence from the Throne. He left a alsting
impression on all of us of snobbery, unimpressed disdain...and total
moronic disrespect!
A british friend of mine who was also at this dinner when asked about
the Prince said to me "He could at least have said 'Mum says
Hi!!'"....I couldn't agree any more....the Prick!!
Once again, I wake up to find a thread so debased by insult and
counter-insult that the original point is lost and I'm undecided where
to post. So I'll post to the original article which hasn't been
properly answered.
If it is true, or more importantly if it is believed that is true,
that Prince Andrew has insulted an entire Commonwealth nation, then we
have a problem. There are a lot of Caribbean 25th-independence
anniversaries coming up, and after that the African 50th anniversaries
too, and they would be within their rights to ask that some other
royal comes to their celebrations.
If the DoY was so bored at being in an island tropical paradise, he
could have found a way not to show it. He could have asked his mother
for advice - she has been feigning interest in much more boring
situations for decades.
There might be some internal RF politics going on here - he might have
gone here under protest, on sufferance, and be showing it in order to
get out of the next one. Fair enough, but being in the "Firm" requires
duties as well as perks and one has to take the rough with the smooth.
If he doesn't want to do these jobs he could always remove himself
from the Civil List and try to live on his naval officer's salary -
plenty do. I'm sure that many of the minor Royals would be delighted
to be offered trips to the Caribbean in exchange for being half way
gracious.
Not only that, but when a 'firm' deals with the public this kind of
behavior would lead to a firing when so many complaints are made
against, say, a shop assistant -- who would continue to patronise such
a store? Alas, this logic does not apply when there is only one
store, does it, and when the personnel *cannot* be fired. Bah! And,
as you say, there are plenty to give advice on how to do one's job
properly. Is he getting the advice and ignoring it? Or does anyone
bother since there are no repercussions on the offender? Of course,
this firm is meant to be a representation of the country, so it may be
that Andrew is, in fact, doing a good job. Yes? No?
Post by grumblebug
Another thought occurs - perhaps Andrew is as awkward and prone to
gaffes around non-white people as his father is.
Doesn't matter. Andrew is closer to the throne than Philip ever was
or will be and it is, most surely, his duty to do his duty with all
the respect to the crown (if not his mother) and the country he
represents.


Again, some lessons
Post by grumblebug
are required - (again perhaps from his mother who was once esconced
privately with the late President Julius Nyerere of Tanzania for so
long that "Private Eye" jokingly rumoured a romance!)
Most of the other stuff posted here is irrelevant - I neither know nor
care whether the DoY is straight bi or gay, is beastly to his servants
or kindly, is a toilet-mouth or never swears. If he has knowingly or
unknowingly insulted a fellow Commonwealth nation, that is bad. I've a
feeling this is only the start of this story.
A little snort escaped me, I'm afraid at your last sentence, this
story, like so many others of a similar nature will die and be
resurrected only now and again. It *is* you who are as well as who
you know.
yD
Post by grumblebug
Oliver (remove _ as ever)
Breton
2004-02-26 15:41:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by IslandZeus
Over the weekend, my country (St. Lucia) celebrated it's 25th
anniversary of Independence and so Prince Andrew was invited as a
member of the Royal Family to celebrate with the country this special
occasion.
Well it was apparent from his arrival that he wasn't as enthused with
this occasion as the rest of the country! From visiting various
various functions which was televised on national television various
snapshots to the prince's countenounce showed him less than impressed
and less than fervent in experiencing any of the functions.
Unlike most 3rd world nations, the UK is not accustomed to reheased
and artificial expressions of glee. People who criticize the RF tend
to complain how artificial they are; yet, when one of them fails to
use a script that the St. Lucia government probably wrote, they
complain. Can't have it both ways.

BTW St. Lucia is still a monarchy I believe, so it isn't independent
of the monarchy.

Breton
DeadeyeDev
2004-02-27 05:37:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Breton
Post by IslandZeus
Over the weekend, my country (St. Lucia) celebrated it's 25th
anniversary of Independence and so Prince Andrew was invited as a
member of the Royal Family to celebrate with the country this special
occasion.
Well it was apparent from his arrival that he wasn't as enthused with
this occasion as the rest of the country! From visiting various
various functions which was televised on national television various
snapshots to the prince's countenounce showed him less than impressed
and less than fervent in experiencing any of the functions.
Unlike most 3rd world nations, the UK is not accustomed to reheased
and artificial expressions of glee. People who criticize the RF tend
to complain how artificial they are; yet, when one of them fails to
use a script that the St. Lucia government probably wrote, they
complain. Can't have it both ways.
Breton
In the rest of the world such 'rehearsed and artificial expressions' as smiling
are referred to as common courtesy, which -- sorry to disappoint you, Nick -- I
have experienced in your country.

Perhaps it's the "common" portion of common courtesy that Andrew can't abide.
grumblebug
2004-02-27 07:31:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Breton
Post by IslandZeus
Over the weekend, my country (St. Lucia) celebrated it's 25th
anniversary of Independence and so Prince Andrew was invited as a
member of the Royal Family to celebrate with the country this special
occasion.
Well it was apparent from his arrival that he wasn't as enthused with
this occasion as the rest of the country! From visiting various
various functions which was televised on national television various
snapshots to the prince's countenounce showed him less than impressed
and less than fervent in experiencing any of the functions.
Unlike most 3rd world nations, the UK is not accustomed to reheased
and artificial expressions of glee. People who criticize the RF tend
to complain how artificial they are; yet, when one of them fails to
use a script that the St. Lucia government probably wrote, they
complain. Can't have it both ways.
It's pretty insulting to call St Lucia a 3rd world nation! That aside,
the Queen always manages to appear interested wherever she is, and
even the Duke manages to ask a few questions, even if they're the
wrong ones sometimes. (asking British-born black people where they're
from, reportedly, but at least he has a go.) Andrew needs some advice,
it seems.
Post by Breton
BTW St. Lucia is still a monarchy I believe, so it isn't independent
of the monarchy.
Still a constitutional monarchy within the Commonwealth, but became
independent of the UK 25 years ago.

Oliver
Post by Breton
Breton
Jean Sue Libkind
2004-02-28 00:49:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by grumblebug
It's pretty insulting to call St Lucia a 3rd world nation! That aside,
the Queen always manages to appear interested wherever she is, and
even the Duke manages to ask a few questions, even if they're the
wrong ones sometimes. (asking British-born black people where they're
from, reportedly, but at least he has a go.) Andrew needs some advice,
it seems.
What's wrong with the DoE asking where someone is from? It's a standard
royal question.

Even if the person is black, he or she might be from Birmingham on holiday
to Manchester.

Geeez,

js
grumblebug
2004-02-28 07:29:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jean Sue Libkind
Post by grumblebug
It's pretty insulting to call St Lucia a 3rd world nation! That aside,
the Queen always manages to appear interested wherever she is, and
even the Duke manages to ask a few questions, even if they're the
wrong ones sometimes. (asking British-born black people where they're
from, reportedly, but at least he has a go.) Andrew needs some advice,
it seems.
What's wrong with the DoE asking where someone is from? It's a standard
royal question.
Even if the person is black, he or she might be from Birmingham on holiday
to Manchester.
Geeez,
js
Sorry, I thought you or someone else might remember these incidents. I
don't very well, but the Duke asked somebody where they were from, and
on being given the answer, say, Birmingham, seemed unable to accept
that and asked again, implying he wanted to know where their parents
are from, or grandparents before that.

It is insensitive because many people who are born here have parents
from different places so they can't assist the Duke with his
prejudices. One friend has one parent from Mauritius and another from
Guyana. Most people then have to ask where those places are! No wonder
she insists on being called British.

Another friend whose father is a black African and mother is white
prefers to let people think of her as Caribbean as that's what she
looks like and it's simpler than going through explanations.

To be fair to the Duke his attitude is widespread in the older
generation. The Conservative party here is trying to shed its previous
racist image (at least among black Britons) and any talented non-white
younger person who joins the Tories can expect to be fast-tracked. But
that liberalism hasn't reached the membership. One made it as far as
the constituency selection board in Southend or some other retirement
resort and when asked where he was born, replied (say) Luton.

"But where were you born before that?"

Oliver
Sacha
2004-02-28 09:49:10 UTC
Permalink
grumblebug28/2/04 7:29
Post by grumblebug
Post by Jean Sue Libkind
Post by grumblebug
It's pretty insulting to call St Lucia a 3rd world nation! That aside,
the Queen always manages to appear interested wherever she is, and
even the Duke manages to ask a few questions, even if they're the
wrong ones sometimes. (asking British-born black people where they're
from, reportedly, but at least he has a go.) Andrew needs some advice,
it seems.
What's wrong with the DoE asking where someone is from? It's a standard
royal question.
Even if the person is black, he or she might be from Birmingham on holiday
to Manchester.
Geeez,
js
Sorry, I thought you or someone else might remember these incidents. I
don't very well, but the Duke asked somebody where they were from, and
on being given the answer, say, Birmingham, seemed unable to accept
that and asked again, implying he wanted to know where their parents
are from, or grandparents before that.
It is insensitive because many people who are born here have parents
from different places so they can't assist the Duke with his
prejudices. One friend has one parent from Mauritius and another from
Guyana. Most people then have to ask where those places are! No wonder
she insists on being called British.
Another friend whose father is a black African and mother is white
prefers to let people think of her as Caribbean as that's what she
looks like and it's simpler than going through explanations.
To be fair to the Duke his attitude is widespread in the older
generation. The Conservative party here is trying to shed its previous
racist image (at least among black Britons) and any talented non-white
younger person who joins the Tories can expect to be fast-tracked. But
that liberalism hasn't reached the membership. One made it as far as
the constituency selection board in Southend or some other retirement
resort and when asked where he was born, replied (say) Luton.
"But where were you born before that?"
Oliver
I don't think it's racist as such to be interested in someone's origins -
unless it confirms or exhibits a prejudice, of course. If I meet someone
with a Scottish accent, I might ask them what part of Scotland they're from
originally, only to be told they were born in e.g. Devon but grew up with
parents who had strong accents. And something very similar has happened to
me. AND I don't have a problem with Scottish (or any other) people. ;-) I
think it's natural curiosity.
--
Sacha
(remove the weeds to email me)
Jean Sue Libkind
2004-02-28 18:12:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by grumblebug
It is insensitive because many people who are born here have parents
from different places so they can't assist the Duke with his
prejudices. One friend has one parent from Mauritius and another from
Guyana. Most people then have to ask where those places are! No wonder
she insists on being called British.
Another friend whose father is a black African and mother is white
prefers to let people think of her as Caribbean as that's what she
looks like and it's simpler than going through explanations.
To be fair to the Duke his attitude is widespread in the older
generation. The Conservative party here is trying to shed its previous
racist image (at least among black Britons) and any talented non-white
younger person who joins the Tories can expect to be fast-tracked. But
that liberalism hasn't reached the membership. One made it as far as
the constituency selection board in Southend or some other retirement
resort and when asked where he was born, replied (say) Luton.
"But where were you born before that?"
LOL.

I guess, as an American, I am less troubled by these questions since we're
always asking similar ones, even of each other. There are so many American
accents (nine is some states alone) that no one can know them all. And then
you have our mobility here; no one can tell where I am from since I speak
midwestern with four years of southern and twenty years of Philadelphia.

"Yo, Bobbi Jo, got milk?"

You are right in that the interest is to some degree generational. In my
father's generation, there were still a lot of neighborhoods that were
ethnically segregated for whatever reason; there was the Italian
neighborhood and the Greek and the Danish, for example.

I tend to phrase the question a bit differently: "what are the origins of
your name?" comes to mind. I ask because I'm always fascinated by these
links.

Most Americans are such mongrels now, it is not a big issue and I am sure
the questions will become fewer.

Still, as an ice-breaker, Where is your family from? beats "What's your
sign?"

js
Susan Cohen
2004-02-29 01:14:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jean Sue Libkind
I tend to phrase the question a bit differently: "what are the origins of
your name?" comes to mind. I ask because I'm always fascinated by these
links.
I always try to let people now that I am *interested* rather than sneering;
I start with a compliment: "Your accent is so lovely - what part of
(wherever) are you from?"
Post by Jean Sue Libkind
Most Americans are such mongrels now, it is not a big issue and I am sure
the questions will become fewer.
Still, as an ice-breaker, Where is your family from? beats "What's your
sign?"
The coolest interaction I've ever had with something like this was working
alongside an African American woman (more of a girl!) with a derivative of
the same clan name of which my grandmother's maiden name was also a
derivative! She was very polite about it, saying, "One of my ancestors must
have worked for one of yours," & I replied that she was being awfully nice
about it, but it was probably one of my cousins, because the name wasn't
exact. But the looks on people's faces when I referred to her as my probable
cousin was priceless!!

SusanC
Post by Jean Sue Libkind
js
Sacha
2004-02-28 09:22:03 UTC
Permalink
Jean Sue Libkind28/2/04 12:49
Post by Jean Sue Libkind
Post by grumblebug
It's pretty insulting to call St Lucia a 3rd world nation! That aside,
the Queen always manages to appear interested wherever she is, and
even the Duke manages to ask a few questions, even if they're the
wrong ones sometimes. (asking British-born black people where they're
from, reportedly, but at least he has a go.) Andrew needs some advice,
it seems.
What's wrong with the DoE asking where someone is from? It's a standard
royal question.
Even if the person is black, he or she might be from Birmingham on holiday
to Manchester.
Geeez,
js
Or from Bolsover on holiday in St Lucia. ;-))
--
Sacha
(remove the weeds to email me)
G.Roberts
2004-02-28 11:58:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jean Sue Libkind
Post by grumblebug
It's pretty insulting to call St Lucia a 3rd world nation! That aside,
the Queen always manages to appear interested wherever she is, and
even the Duke manages to ask a few questions, even if they're the
wrong ones sometimes. (asking British-born black people where they're
from, reportedly, but at least he has a go.) Andrew needs some advice,
it seems.
What's wrong with the DoE asking where someone is from? It's a standard
royal question.
Even if the person is black, he or she might be from Birmingham on holiday
to Manchester.
Geeez,
js
And there's not much point in, say, Liverpool of asking any Black or Chinese
where they are from; their families may have been living there 250 years
longer than yours!

Gordon
Morgana
2004-02-26 21:28:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by IslandZeus
Over the weekend, my country (St. Lucia) celebrated it's 25th
anniversary of Independence and so Prince Andrew was invited as a
member of the Royal Family to celebrate with the country this special
occasion.
Well it was apparent from his arrival that he wasn't as enthused with
this occasion as the rest of the country! From visiting various
various functions which was televised on national television various
snapshots to the prince's countenounce showed him less than impressed
and less than fervent in experiencing any of the functions.
Finally, in attending a special function where only an invited few
were to dine in the presence of His Royal Highness, the PRICK simply
came in the room, ate his dinner, and quickly exited....not a word nor
any sign of emotion or delight, at least, for the many St. Lucians
enjoying 25 years of Independence from the Throne. He left a alsting
impression on all of us of snobbery, unimpressed disdain...and total
moronic disrespect!
A british friend of mine who was also at this dinner when asked about
the Prince said to me "He could at least have said 'Mum says
Hi!!'"....I couldn't agree any more....the Prick!!
All the more reason to "celebrate" your independence. If that HRH
Boor visits again show him to the cafeteria and let him get his own
food. Better still, don't invite the rude bugger again.
Mrs.H
2004-02-26 21:40:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Morgana
Post by IslandZeus
Over the weekend, my country (St. Lucia) celebrated it's 25th
anniversary of Independence and so Prince Andrew was invited as a
member of the Royal Family to celebrate with the country this special
occasion.
Well it was apparent from his arrival that he wasn't as enthused with
this occasion as the rest of the country! From visiting various
various functions which was televised on national television various
snapshots to the prince's countenounce showed him less than impressed
and less than fervent in experiencing any of the functions.
Finally, in attending a special function where only an invited few
were to dine in the presence of His Royal Highness, the PRICK simply
came in the room, ate his dinner, and quickly exited....not a word nor
any sign of emotion or delight, at least, for the many St. Lucians
enjoying 25 years of Independence from the Throne. He left a alsting
impression on all of us of snobbery, unimpressed disdain...and total
moronic disrespect!
A british friend of mine who was also at this dinner when asked about
the Prince said to me "He could at least have said 'Mum says
Hi!!'"....I couldn't agree any more....the Prick!!
All the more reason to "celebrate" your independence. If that HRH
Boor visits again show him to the cafeteria and let him get his own
food. Better still, don't invite the rude bugger again.
============
Look on the bright side, they could have had Pss Anne.
Mrs.H
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...