jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (23 posts)

Taking Bets

  1. Writer Fox profile image80
    Writer Foxposted 4 years ago

    Prince William and Catherine Duchess of Cambridge are expecting the birth of their first child momentarily.  Do you think it will be a boy or a girl?

  2. WriteAngled profile image93
    WriteAngledposted 4 years ago

    Yawn.

    Whatever it is, it will be overprivileged, overpaid and underworked and a further drain on my taxes.

  3. MPG Narratives profile image60
    MPG Narrativesposted 4 years ago

    Who cares? Whatever they have there will be constant photos splashed all over and the kid will never be left alone. It will be Princess Diana all over again.

  4. Writer Fox profile image80
    Writer Foxposted 4 years ago

    WOW!  I thought Brits were really excited about this.

    1. HollieT profile image88
      HollieTposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Many of us have royalty fatigue. Sick of contributing to their scandalously luxurious lifestyle and sick of seeing Catherine in the *season's latest frock*

      1. Writer Fox profile image80
        Writer Foxposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I don't understand why so many people turned out for the Queen's big anniversary celebration.  From a distance, it looks like people in the UK love the monarchy (except for Prince Charles).

        1. HollieT profile image88
          HollieTposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Some people in the Uk do love monarchy, some are indifferent to them and some opposed. I just find some of the news distasteful. For example, in this rotten age of austerity, there are disabled people, people with mental health problems and learning difficulties who are struggling to survive because they've been deemed fit for work by ATOS- they're having to go to food banks and some are living on the streets, and then the news is full of Catherine's baby and how they're having a two million (I think this is the correct sum) revamp of *one of the palaces* to ensure that it's fit for them. So many people are struggling to make ends meet that this just seems way too extravagant.

          1. Writer Fox profile image80
            Writer Foxposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I hear you.  But I still hope the best for the baby and it will be a more historic event if it's a girl.

  5. psycheskinner profile image80
    psycheskinnerposted 4 years ago

    Girl.

    And I think the monarchy beats a president as a way to separate state and military.

  6. Mark Ewbie profile image83
    Mark Ewbieposted 4 years ago

    The monarchy symbolise privilege.  No little boy or girl can hope to be a Prince or Princess - except in Disney World.  They stand for the worst in life - a few gilded people who have 'achieved' something by being born.

    I absolutely and uncategorically loathe the Royal Family and all they stand for - and the rest of the hangers on.  We go to war over our fake democracy, dropping bombs on innocent families who happen to be brown, Muslim or just different, and yet we celebrate a family that has not been voted for.

    In a small moment of honesty on TV a while back - the Queen was visiting Ireland.  They asked a sweet old Irish lady what she thought of the Royal visit.  She told them what for.  In a clear and brief statement she explained exactly why she had no time for them.

    There are people starving on the streets of Britain while the media and politicians pretend that the people are celebrating.  Not everyone does.

    1. WriteAngled profile image93
      WriteAngledposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      The royal parasites are loathed by many in Wales, where I live.

      1. Writer Fox profile image80
        Writer Foxposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Why is Charles called 'the Prince of Wales' but his wife is called 'the Duchess of Cornwall?'

        1. HollieT profile image88
          HollieTposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Due to the Royal family's rather antiquated and narcissistic sense of entitlement and superiority.

          1. Writer Fox profile image80
            Writer Foxposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            If any of you writes a Hub about the perception of the monarchy, I want to read it!

            1. HollieT profile image88
              HollieTposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I try to write balanced hubs, I really don't think I could in this scenario.

              She'll give birth to a boy. IMHO. smile

        2. WriteAngled profile image93
          WriteAngledposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Well, Charles owns and exploits a large part of Cornwall and is therefore also called duke thereof. Camilla was not given the P-ess.oW title because it was felt by those who worry about such things to be an affront to the sainthood of Charlie's previous wife, who had little brain but immense abilities to flutter eyelashes and manipulate the media.

          Actually, Wales is currently not a principality, so the PoW title is incorrect anyway. Some in Wales consider Llywelyn ap Gruffudd, who was slaughtered in 1282 by the English (Saeson) to be the last Prince of Wales. The great hero Owain Glyndwr, who disappeared during the revolt he led against the Saeson in 1412, was also voted into the title by his supporters, so is considered by others to be the last Prince of Wales. Either way, many here in Wales consider Charlie a usurper to this title.

          1. HollieT profile image88
            HollieTposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I just have a problem with the Prince title. Which man has the right to be a prince? The title would indicate that he is in someway superior to other men, purely by birthright.

            1. Writer Fox profile image80
              Writer Foxposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Why is there a monarchy at all if Parliament runs the government?  Why did it allow for a 'constitutional  monarchy?'

              1. HollieT profile image88
                HollieTposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Superficially, the Queen is the head of parliament. However, arguably she has no political power, and arguably she does, she just chooses not to use it.

                You decide.

                1. Writer Fox profile image80
                  Writer Foxposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  It's curiouser and curiouser.  The baby is due today!

              2. WriteAngled profile image93
                WriteAngledposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                It was a compromise, which both sides felt allowed them to retain the maximum advantage.

                As for a hub about the subject, I fear it is not a topic of major interest. In particular, it will not be a topic of interest to the US denizens who work for a pittance at MTurk and decide the fate of all hubs. I am no longer willing to spend hours writing a hub only to have it idled by ignorant people.

          2. Writer Fox profile image80
            Writer Foxposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Well I want to read about all of this.  Please write a Hub!

  7. psycheskinner profile image80
    psycheskinnerposted 4 years ago

    The presidency is essentially the same, but with added corruption and even more expensive. The reality can be a little different from the optics.

    Consider: since 1789 we have had two female queens (despite this not really being allowed) and zero female presidents (despite this being totally allowed.) 

    Both Bush and Elizabeth have a net worth in double-figure millions. Neither of these leaders represents me.

    It is a matter of what kind of unfair privilege annoys you more.  At least the monarchy is pretty transparent.

 
working