The Royals

Shandashey · 24-04-2015 11:07PM #1

Any interest? Have to say, I do love following the British Royal Family. Andy and his under ages, Fergie and her toe sucking, Charles and his cheating ass, William and his large face. All in all, very interesting. And a sprog due soon, how EXCITING :P

893bet · 24-04-2015 11:07PM

Nope! No!

falan · 24-04-2015 11:08PM

How original:rolleyes:

alchemist33 · 24-04-2015 11:08PM

Shandashey wrote: »

Any interest? Have to say, I do love following the British Royal Family. Andy and his under ages, Fergie and her toe sucking, Charles and his cheating ass, William and his large face. All in all, very interesting. And a sprog due soon, how EXCITING :P

Jesus! Some of us are eating, y'know

dxhound2005 · 24-04-2015 11:08PM

What member of the Royle family scored in a FA Cup Final?

Joe Royle.

That only works in speech.

Shandashey · 24-04-2015 11:10PM

falan wrote: »

How original:rolleyes:

Love the rolly eyes! You are so CUTTING!

kneemos · 24-04-2015 11:10PM

What was Charles ass up to?

Junkyard Tom · 24-04-2015 11:11PM

I have zero interest in celebrities, royals or anything like that. I've always found the stories of regular Joe/Jane Soaps far more interesting than those of celebs, royals, former presidents etc.

Harry Palmr · 24-04-2015 11:12PM

They cannot hold a candle to the Grimaldi family

Canis Lupus · 24-04-2015 11:14PM

It's all a bit weird... Saw on the news a mother and teenage daughter who travelled 5 hours a day when Kate went into hospital in order to be there when the baby arrived. They apparently cried when the baby was announced and they were already doing the same thing as of a week ago for the latest addition...

What the **** is wrong with people....

Kristopherus · 24-04-2015 11:17PM

The Royal Family = the most dysfunctional family in the U.K.:mad:

brummytom · 24-04-2015 11:19PM

Bunch of unelected, benefit-scrounging, inbred fúckwits.

People who fawn over them, or give a shit about them at all just baffle me.

Junkyard Tom · 24-04-2015 11:20PM

Canis Lupus wrote: »

What the **** is wrong with people....

There's nowt so queer as folk.

Cold War Kid · 24-04-2015 11:21PM

Canis Lupus wrote: »

It's all a bit weird... Saw on the news a mother and teenage daughter who travelled 5 hours a day when Kate went into hospital in order to be there when the baby arrived. They apparently cried when the baby was announced and they were already doing the same thing as of a week ago for the latest addition...

What the **** is wrong with people....

Yeah I heard about them, if it's the same people - they're staying near the hospital a while now, to be there for the birth. They travelled from the north-east.

A modern-day Three Wise Men.

kneemos · 24-04-2015 11:23PM

Probably shouldn't be critical but does anybody else think kates kid looks about forty?

anncoates · 24-04-2015 11:25PM

I do like the way a lot of the male kids start out looking quite handsome and normal before the merciless time bomb of the Windsor genes turns them into rubicund, balding, horse-human hybrids by their late 20s.

johnny osbourne · 24-04-2015 11:26PM

good *** LUCJ TO CHEATS

24-04-2015 11:26PM

Some people are bonkers about the Royals, it's bizarre. As a Brit, I think there's far too much money spent in perpetuating that privilege, but I have some vague fondness for the pomp and ceremony and ritual of the institution, in the abstract. It's a nice focal point for tourists in London if nothing else.

24-04-2015 11:27PM

anncoates wrote: »

I do like the way a lot of the male kids start out looking quite handsome and normal before the merciless time bomb of the Windsor genes turns them into rubicund, balding, horse-human hybrids by their late 20s.

Not just the male kids, Anne is the most equine looking of the lot.

anncoates · 24-04-2015 11:31PM

Candie wrote: »

Not just the male kids, Anne is the most equine looking of the lot.

Exhibit A:

http://static.indianexpress.com/pic/uploadedImages/bigImages/B_Id_402516_Prince_William.jpg

http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/106/590x/prince_william-444684.jpg

The Diabolical Monocle · 24-04-2015 11:31PM

Oh they're interesting alright.

Interesting from the point of view of a great lesson on how to pull up the metaphorical drawbridge once you've got the goods.

Not that I dislike them individually, on a personal level.

They've got a 24 hour 7 days a week job in one sense. And they should be rewarded for carrying that heavy responsibility.

That said, they seem more than just a wee bit overpaid, by all means, have a castle or two, but what they have in terms of land alone is unreal.

They know how to play it, and with that much cash, marketing experts and influence you know they're going to come off as saints.

This year a marriage, that year a kid, this year a visit, that year a ceremony, next year another kid, year after that a marriage. Photo ops in between. Target the female demographic with princes and horses and babies they love that sht.

Heir and a spare, keep out of politics directly. All the while keep your ass sat on the mountain of wealth. If you don't screw up the masses won't realize you're just another human getting away with it.

24-04-2015 11:36PM

anncoates wrote: »

Exhibit A:

http://static.indianexpress.com/pic/uploadedImages/bigImages/B_Id_402516_Prince_William.jpg

http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/106/590x/prince_william-444684.jpg

He actually became Tim-Nice-But-Dim.

To be fair he seems like a nice enough chap, but Philip is where it's at for comedy value.

Harry has the potential to be the entertaining one of the current crop, if the PR folks don't ruin him first.

folamh · 24-04-2015 11:43PM

Monarchy might have been a good system to maintain valuable social mores and functions in the past, but that no longer applies to our modern globalized world. The Royal family generate a lot of revenue for the British economy in tourism and other sectors, though, so I guess the institution isn't completely purposeless.

Junkyard Tom · 24-04-2015 11:48PM

folamh wrote: »

The Royal family generate a lot of revenue for the British economy

There's no proof of this whatsoever.

24-04-2015 11:51PM

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

There's no proof of this whatsoever.

I'm surprised at that, London is chocablock with tourists who come to see BP, the changing of the guard etc.

Junkyard Tom · 24-04-2015 11:58PM

Candie wrote: »

I'm surprised at that, London is chocablock with tourists who come to see BP, the changing of the guard etc.

Yep, but it's impossible to prove or disprove whether, or not, the royals 'bring a lot of revenue' yet it is regularly spoken about as if it were a fact.

Newton's flaming laser sword.

K4t · 25-04-2015 12:01AM

They're an embarrassment.

The only logical reason given for their continued existence is the tourism revenue they generate but that has been shown to be greatly exaggerated too. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/28/royal-family-value-for-money-not-worth-tuppence

25-04-2015 12:01AM

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

Yep, but it's impossible to prove or disprove whether the royals 'bring a lot of revenue' yet it is regularly spoken about as if it were a fact.

Newton's flaming laser sword.

I can't imagine them not being a factor in bringing in the tourists, but whether they earn the money they've commanded is another issue. I suppose it's like the Pope - Vatican City might have plenty of tourists without him, but it's very likely he pulls in the numbers.

dxhound2005 · 25-04-2015 12:02AM

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

Yep, but it's impossible to prove or disprove whether, or not, the royals 'bring a lot of revenue' yet it is regularly spoken about as if it were a fact.

Newton's flaming laser sword.

If it is impossible to disprove it, it could be a fact.

The Diabolical Monocle · 25-04-2015 12:03AM

The tourists visit the buildings not the royals themselves.

Like in Paris the tourists visit the royal palaces/champs-elysses.

No majestic ones necessary for that cash.

25-04-2015 12:07AM

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

The tourists visit the buildings not the royals themselves.

Like in Paris the tourists visit the royal palaces/champs-elysses.

No majestic ones necessary for that cash.

They show up in vast numbers for the Queens birthday, changing of the guard and ceremonies like that. They like to witness the pomp and ceremony and the Royals are at the centre of it.

I'm not defending the institution, but there's no denying they draw in tourists. Americans in particular seem to love the concept of royalty, never having been under their thumb has rendered the thought romantic, I imagine.

The Royals

Comments