If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ABC)   It's stories like these that make you realize that the British Monarchy is really just a Cosplay LARP that people have taken way too seriously for way too long   (abcnews.go.com) divider line 174
    More: Silly, Kate Middleton, Duchess of Cornwall, Duke of Edinburgh, Duchess of York, Prince Edward  
•       •       •

14920 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Jun 2012 at 11:51 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



174 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-26 12:22:39 PM

FarkinHostile: "Royalty" is absolutely ridiculous and should be abolished in an enlightened time. What amazes me is that we here in the USA are just as big on Royalty Worship as they are in England, and we are supposed to be a nation of people who believe that all are equal.

Just the concept of royalty should be insulting to anyone who has any amount of critical thinking and self esteem.


But, but, but, Tradition! And Disney-esque romantic tales of royal white weddings with fair maiden and prince charmings!
 
2012-06-26 12:22:58 PM
Well I didn't vote for them.
 
2012-06-26 12:24:48 PM
FarkinHostile: Just the concept of royalty should be insulting to anyone who has any amount of critical thinking and self esteem.

Inquisitive Inquisitor: The monarchy has no true power or authority. I have no qualms with a society who maintains these traditions as a link to their history. The American fascination with the Royal family is no different than our penchant for celebrity gossip.


Do you have any qualms about the royals owning huge tracts of tax-free land and possessions? Or how about that the UK people pay to keep these folks in high style, with round-the-clock protection, without receiving any tangible benefit from them in return?

I'm with FarkinHostile on this one. The royals (benign or not, powerless or not) represent the opposite of everything I believe in as a free man.
 
2012-06-26 12:26:27 PM
The continued existence of royalty is an affront to human dignity, and the ridiculous excuses addlebrained Brits come up with to justify the maintenance of an absurd medieval office are, uh, ridiculous. First of all, no one goes to Britain to see the royal family, okay; some may attempt to see them while they're there, but catching a glimpse of the queen is not the actual reason tourists come to Britain, even the stupid ones who actually regard royalty as somehow better or more interesting than Shaniqua the welfare queen with 12 kids down the street. To be fair, at least when Brits defend their stupid antiquated traditions they're defending their traditions; when an American does it I just want to slap them.
 
2012-06-26 12:26:46 PM
Am I the only one asking WTF is cosplay LARP???


ALSO:
False monarchies are about as useful as tits ob a bull. They harken back to a time when people thought they were "Ordained by God" to rule. Why does this stupid shiat still exist? Are brits really that bored? They all look down on the US because of our stupid obsession with actors, isn't this the same thing? I enjoy entertainment, however I think we need to reevaluate our process of who we value in life.

\Sometimes I hate this planet.
 
2012-06-26 12:27:04 PM
www.ihatethemedia.com

"Bloody Princesses, hmm? Why I've got just the thing, what what?"
 
2012-06-26 12:27:22 PM

Loadmaster: FarkinHostile: Just the concept of royalty should be insulting to anyone who has any amount of critical thinking and self esteem.

Inquisitive Inquisitor: The monarchy has no true power or authority. I have no qualms with a society who maintains these traditions as a link to their history. The American fascination with the Royal family is no different than our penchant for celebrity gossip.

Do you have any qualms about the royals owning huge tracts of tax-free land and possessions? Or how about that the UK people pay to keep these folks in high style, with round-the-clock protection, without receiving any tangible benefit from them in return?


The usual response to your argument from most in support of the royals that I hear is something along the lines of:

a) They provide a reason for tourists to visit, and while they're here, they spend money.
b) They bring awareness to good causes.

Not saying I agree with the argument, just putting it out there.
 
2012-06-26 12:27:43 PM
Great headline subby...made me laugh out loud.
 
2012-06-26 12:28:07 PM

PsyLord: can't believe that those blokes over there still tolerate this reminder of their subjugation. Granted the royal family is more of a figure-head than anything these days, but they still get money from the state and they are still influential. Oh well, to each their own.


Actually they generate an incredible amount of money for the country.
 
2012-06-26 12:29:10 PM
Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
 
2012-06-26 12:29:10 PM
SIGH. Couldn't I just lop off a few heads and usurp the throne?
 
2012-06-26 12:30:08 PM

Loadmaster: FarkinHostile: Just the concept of royalty should be insulting to anyone who has any amount of critical thinking and self esteem.

Inquisitive Inquisitor: The monarchy has no true power or authority. I have no qualms with a society who maintains these traditions as a link to their history. The American fascination with the Royal family is no different than our penchant for celebrity gossip.

Do you have any qualms about the royals owning huge tracts of tax-free land and possessions? Or how about that the UK people pay to keep these folks in high style, with round-the-clock protection, without receiving any tangible benefit from them in return?

I'm with FarkinHostile on this one. The royals (benign or not, powerless or not) represent the opposite of everything I believe in as a free man.


Except the Royals turn over the vast majority of the income from their huge tracts of land and possession, to the government, receiving in return millions of dollars much of which goes to maintaining buildings of historic significance.

Besides, they're a major tourism driver. Literal job creators, simply by existing. Like a living grand canyon
 
2012-06-26 12:30:08 PM

Krieghund: White people's problems.


Perhaps the most accurate use of that phrase ever employed.
 
2012-06-26 12:30:53 PM

Loadmaster: Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.


no, but it has great potential for porn.
 
2012-06-26 12:31:24 PM

buzzgoat: Am I the only one asking WTF is cosplay LARP???


I'm quite sure the internet has sources, in particular Wikipedia, where you could find this information.
 
2012-06-26 12:31:26 PM

DjangoStonereaver: xanadian: Weaver95: The Queen recently circulated around the royal household an updated copy of the Order of Precedence, which is an official paper listing, in descending order, the rankings of the different members in the Royal family.

we should have our own 'Order of Precedence' for various farkers.

Well, I am the "queen"...

I'm a joker, I'm a smoker.


i'm a 1130am toker?
 
2012-06-26 12:31:27 PM
I was completely confused by the headline until I clicked the link. That was the most accurate statement I have ever seen. Good job.
 
2012-06-26 12:33:31 PM
Gotta hand it to the Brits, they sure do dress fancy...

2.bp.blogspot.com
janeaustensworld.files.wordpress.com
i.telegraph.co.uk
static6.businessinsider.com
www4.pictures.zimbio.com

On and on and on it goes. They got them fancy outfits for just about everything 'cept taking a crap. The whole country is a vast costume drama...

/full disclosure - I was seen by millions of Brits in my foxhunting clothes when I was interviewed by the BBC
 
2012-06-26 12:33:31 PM

amishkarl: Literal job creators, simply by existing. Like a living grand canyon


I think I dated her...
 
2012-06-26 12:34:01 PM

Inquisitive Inquisitor: The monarchy has no true power or authority. I have no qualms with a society who maintains these traditions as a link to their history. The American fascination with the Royal family is no different than our penchant for celebrity gossip.



Please. If you don't think that the monarchy has very powerful influence and authority I have a bridge to sell you. Besides the "Right to Rule", The Queen has "royal prerogative" which is a "I can do what I want" card, even if it is rarely used (The last time was in 1982 to go to war in the Falklands without Parliament having a say.) Nevermind the MILLIONS it costs for "head of state expenditure"...The state also gives the queen about £30 million a year (through two 'gifts in aid') to pay for the maintenance of her palaces and to cover her travel expenses, just to make sure that she doesn't have to dip into her own pockets for such things.

Furthermore the state spends an estimated £100 million a year on policing and security for the Queen and the royal family.

On top of all these payments, the state also pays for the expenses of Prince Charles, Prince Andrew and other royals in their various official capacities. Prince Andrew also holds a separate position as a trade envoy for the UK. In 2011 he spent £620,000 of taxpayer's money in this capacity.

Princes William (28) and Harry (26) already have personal fortunes of £43 million each. They will in future inherit the incomes of the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, etc.


Adding all of the above payments together, one reaches a sum of approximately £176 million per year (comprised of money both spent by the state, and of lost income that would otherwise belong to the state), dedicated to maintaining the Queen and her immediate family.


It's farking stupid.

How much money does the queen cost England?


Britain's monarchy
 
2012-06-26 12:34:20 PM
And if she refuses?...seriously...what happens if she refuses?

getasword.com
 
2012-06-26 12:35:03 PM
We can't say anything. We're commoners. We didn't come out of a royal vagina.
 
2012-06-26 12:35:22 PM

buzzgoat: Am I the only one asking WTF is cosplay LARP???
.


No you are not. Either you are involved in cosplay OR LARP . Never heard of cosplay LARP
 
2012-06-26 12:35:46 PM

Perducci: All these rules are just bureaucratic red tape getting in the way of the monarchy's vital roles as, um, people who open shopping malls and wave a lot.


"Just imagine what that would do to the monarchy!"
"What would that do to the monarchy?"
"Probably nothing. The royal family is pretty much just a tourist trap at this point."

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-november-10-2003/prince-charle s- scandal

/One of the best Daily Show clips out there if you watch the show or Colbert Report
//That quote's not why
 
2012-06-26 12:35:52 PM

Cythraul:

a) They provide a reason for tourists to visit, and while they're here, they spend money.
b) They bring awareness to good causes.

Not saying I agree with the argument, just putting it out there.



I already addressed argument a, which is quite simply absurd; as for b, are you talking about "good causes" like shiatty alternative medicine that soesn't work? Link Because yeah, they have been known to support stuff like that.
 
2012-06-26 12:37:56 PM
The kicker is, if she is in the presence of William the two princesses have to curtsy to her....What do you bet she will always have him around if she is anywhere near those two.
 
2012-06-26 12:38:51 PM

Loadmaster: Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.


www.ncsx.com
/anime was interesting
 
2012-06-26 12:38:55 PM
My thoughts on royalty can be summed up by:
i120.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-26 12:39:17 PM

buzzgoat: Am I the only one asking WTF is cosplay LARP???


ALSO:
False monarchies are about as useful as tits ob a bull. They harken back to a time when people thought they were "Ordained by God" to rule. Why does this stupid shiat still exist? Are brits really that bored? They all look down on the US because of our stupid obsession with actors, isn't this the same thing? I enjoy entertainment, however I think we need to reevaluate our process of who we value in life.

\Sometimes I hate this planet.


Cool down, friend. I love this planet, it is fine. It's the people on this planet that are the problem.
 
2012-06-26 12:39:57 PM

catmandu: buzzgoat: Am I the only one asking WTF is cosplay LARP???
.

No you are not. Either you are involved in cosplay OR LARP . Never heard of cosplay LARP


You could role play a comicon.
 
2012-06-26 12:40:04 PM
meh, I bet the government could save a ton of money on security and support by replacing them with animatronics.
Or just attractive people dressed all fancy like.
I figure most people are only there for the spiffy buildings and the men in feathers and stuff anyway, thrown in the fact that they could get a picture with the pretty girl dressed in ruffles, and I suspect that no revenue would be lost.
 
2012-06-26 12:41:11 PM

swahnhennessy: We can't say anything. We're commoners. We didn't come out of a royal vagina.


Can we say things if we manage to come in one?

inquiring minds want to know.
 
2012-06-26 12:42:43 PM
For a lot of people who either don't care or don't like the idea of royalty.....there sure is a lot of caring going on in this thread. I'm interested in the royals the same way I'm interested in reading celebrity gossip blogs. It's a life I'll never lead, and I like looking at the expensive gowns and jewels that I'll never in any way be able to own or wear.

BTW, you shouldn't feel bad for the Duchess of Cambridge. Feel bad for her husband's aunt, the Countess of Wessex. SHE has to curtsy to Kate, even though she's married to one of the Queen's sons. The Duchess outranks her through her marriage to the future King, even though they were both not of the manor born.
 
2012-06-26 12:43:09 PM
unrealitymag.com
 
2012-06-26 12:44:29 PM

malaktaus: Cythraul:

a) They provide a reason for tourists to visit, and while they're here, they spend money.
b) They bring awareness to good causes.

Not saying I agree with the argument, just putting it out there.


I already addressed argument a, which is quite simply absurd; as for b, are you talking about "good causes" like shiatty alternative medicine that soesn't work? Link Because yeah, they have been known to support stuff like that.


I'm not really sure how to continue this argument, since I'm not good at playing 'devil's advocate.'

I do know that Princess Diana supported awareness to remove land mines from war stricken countries.
 
2012-06-26 12:45:43 PM
beachboy
And if she refuses?...seriously...what happens if she refuses?


Someone might pout?
 
2012-06-26 12:46:04 PM
Id be more intrested by it all if it was more like games of thornes with head choppings and such
 
2012-06-26 12:47:01 PM

Cythraul: FTA: As a former commoner, she must show reverence by curtseying to royal-borns in public and private when her husband, Prince William, is not present.

What exactly would the consequences be if she just laughed and refused to 'curtsey?' And so if she wasn't a former 'commoner,' would that mean she wouldn't have to curtsey?

Heh, I'd just tell these people to go fark themselves. Moot point I guess, since the chances of me ever hooking with a noble are an absolute zero.


1.bp.blogspot.com

Curtsey. CURTSEY BEFORE ZOD!!
 
2012-06-26 12:47:19 PM

Perducci: All these rules are just bureaucratic red tape getting in the way of the monarchy's vital roles as, um, people who open shopping malls and wave a lot.


There is some argument for separating all those ceremonial duties, leaving the Prime Minister free to govern and such.
 
2012-06-26 12:47:46 PM

groppet: Id be more intrested by it all if it was more like games of thornes with head choppings and such


You sound like you'd prefer to live during Henry VIII's reign.
 
2012-06-26 12:48:48 PM

Biv: The PPA approves.

/obscure?


Nope. Nice reference!
 
2012-06-26 12:49:24 PM

Cythraul: groppet: Id be more intrested by it all if it was more like games of thornes with head choppings and such

You sound like you'd prefer to live during Henry VIII's reign.


Groppet seems more like a Willie or son of Sam.
 
2012-06-26 12:53:27 PM

Weaver95: The Queen recently circulated around the royal household an updated copy of the Order of Precedence, which is an official paper listing, in descending order, the rankings of the different members in the Royal family.

we should have our own 'Order of Precedence' for various farkers.


Can't. Too many Jesters.
 
2012-06-26 12:55:04 PM
This thread needs more pix of chix.

files.myopera.com

Larcosplaypy goodness
 
2012-06-26 12:55:38 PM
Cythraul: The usual response to your argument from most in support of the royals that I hear is something along the lines of:

a) They provide a reason for tourists to visit, and while they're here, they spend money.
b) They bring awareness to good causes.


You missed one, the most important one to my mind.

c) They keep us away from a presidency. If abolished there would, of course, be a constitutional need to have someone in the same position, i.e. a president.
The last thing the UK needs is another damned ex lawyer turned ex politico looking to justify their position and carve out a niche in history as a "statesman" and impose yet more ill thought out legislation on a country that's already drowning in it. In my opinion.

The great thing about the monarchy is they DON'T do anything. Never has the monarchy imposed crap laws on me inspired by the latest tabloid scare story, they are powerless a result of a hard won process going back many centuries. I like it that way.

It might have been a crappy constitutional machine to start with but so many parts have been replaced with better components over the years that it's now a custom built ride that works well even if it does still have that same old radiator grill. Why replace it with some untested POS?

Germany and the USA are fine countries but I'd rather be like Norway, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands thanks.
 
2012-06-26 12:57:49 PM

Cythraul: malaktaus: Cythraul:

a) They provide a reason for tourists to visit, and while they're here, they spend money.
b) They bring awareness to good causes.

Not saying I agree with the argument, just putting it out there.


I already addressed argument a, which is quite simply absurd; as for b, are you talking about "good causes" like shiatty alternative medicine that soesn't work? Link Because yeah, they have been known to support stuff like that.

I'm not really sure how to continue this argument, since I'm not good at playing 'devil's advocate.'

I do know that Princess Diana supported awareness to remove land mines from war stricken countries.


There's no reason to assume royals will only support good causes; given their family history of inbreeding, there is probably a greater than average chance that a member of the royal family will be a complete moron, and will support stupid and harmful causes out of pure idiocy. You don't need royals to have awareness campaigns anyway, and the fact that they are experts in nothing means that any such awareness campaigns are quite possibly based on ignorance and a belief in pseudoscience. There is no reason why a member of the royal family might not be an antivaccine person, for instance, and although the present queen is not Charles arguably is, in that a company he endorses sells homeopathic polio "vaccines" that do nothing.
 
2012-06-26 12:58:24 PM
FarkinHostile
"Royalty" is absolutely ridiculous and should be abolished in an enlightened time. What amazes me is that we here in the USA are just as big on Royalty Worship as they are in England, and we are supposed to be a nation of people who believe that all are equal.

Just the concept of royalty should be insulting to anyone who has any amount of critical thinking and self esteem.


Obviously, but the UK's powerful tabloid newspaper lobby will never allow them to get rid of the royals!
 
2012-06-26 12:59:43 PM

ethics-gradient: Germany and the USA are fine countries but I'd rather be like Norway, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands thanks.


Don't forget France.
 
2012-06-26 01:01:07 PM

Weaver95: The Queen recently circulated around the royal household an updated copy of the Order of Precedence, which is an official paper listing, in descending order, the rankings of the different members in the Royal family.

we should have our own 'Order of Precedence' for various farkers.


Off with their heads!

Funny thing. One of my great aunts on the Anglo side of the family looked exactly like Sir John Tenniel's portrait of the Duchess in Alice in Wonderland. A little kinder and gentler, perhaps, but she even had the hair bun. Drawn from the life, perhaps.
 
2012-06-26 01:04:14 PM

LeroyBourne: When she's the queen can she make changes to the dumb rules?


I doubt it. She'll never be The Queen, the way The Queen is The Queen. Her husband will be The King and will be the one who makes the rules. Pippa will only be the Queen Consort.
 
Displayed 50 of 174 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report