5. "If the Kardashan family can find fame from doing nothing really" In response to Reply # 0 Tue Dec-09-14 09:48 AM by dafriquan
Why is it a surprise that people are star struck by actual "royalty"? After all, they are the prototype of people-worship. For a long time, monarchs were the only celebrities of the land. Deep inside, royalty is what people like Bey and Jay for instance aspire to.
12. "RE: i just love the fact that they sat next to Mutombo for the game" In response to Reply # 6
"The duke and duchess attended the game to mark a newly forged partnership between their royal foundation and the NBA. The NBA will support the charitable foundation’s work with United For Wildlife and the Coach Core programme, which aims to encourage a new generation of sports coaches.
During the first half of the game the couple dined with NBA executives and basketball elite in a private boardroom at the arena to celebrate the partnership.
The NBA legend Dikembe Mutombo, Serge Ibaka of the Oklahoma City Thunder and two-time All-Star Al Horford of the Atlanta Hawks were named ambassadors to the duke’s United for Wildlife organization.
After a hectic day spent shuttling between DC and NYC William chatted breezily with the newly appointed ambassadors and his wife.
Standing next to Mutombo, who towers at 7ft 2in, for a photograph, William quipped: “At last I’m standing next to someone who’s taller than me.”"
8. "they seem like nice rich white people. i dont understand the anger" In response to Reply # 0
ppl seem to detest this kid because of shit his great great great grandparents did
that aint his damn problem
all he does is cruise around the world, smile & take pictures, his wife is beautiful and also seems very level headed and they got a baby too. perfect. people hate them cuz they aint them
i fucks w/ the british royals. i'd never call him your highness or no shit like that because this is America but he seems like a very nice upstanding young man & i like their young family
10. "theyre living history." In response to Reply # 0
We all studied the history of the British royals in school. We see movies about them. It all seems like fantasy - William and Kate make it real. It's interesting to many for that reason, I think.
>We all studied the history of the British royals in school. >We see movies about them. It all seems like fantasy - William >and Kate make it real. It's interesting to many for that >reason, I think. Plus Kate is a good looking,"likable", relatively scandal-free character for those who have a preference for more "wholesome" celebrities. The Rihannas and Mileys are not for everybody.
18. "Lol. I rolled my eyes at that too" In response to Reply # 17
Interest in the British Royal Family almost single handedly kept their entire tabloid industry afloat for 20 years. Plus I was in London for the royal wedding, the city was shut down and virtually every news and TV station was streaming it.
One million people who'd been given a free day off work and a free outdoor party to attend in the middle of summer. At the time I lived 10 mins walk from that park and I went along for the sunshine and to smoke dope and get drunk with my friends. It had very little to do with what was on the big screen.
>how many ppl live in London, total?
~10 million. So roughly 90% couldnt even be bothered when they got given the day off.
> >how many in the UK?
56 million.
> >and one million ppl attended a wedding no one cared about.
One million attended a free street party in the height of summer. Bands played and shit. I'm the most bored-of-the-royals Brit around, but wedding or not, it was brilliant day in the sunshine.
If I got given the day off again I'd think about doing the same, but if it wasn't a free day off work that park would've only held pensioners and tourists.
TheAlbionist Member since Jul 04th 2011 3306 posts
Tue Dec-09-14 12:58 PM
64. "I'd point you to the previous reply..." In response to Reply # 59
...but you obviously didn't read it then, so I doubt you'd read it now.
Yes, give British people a day off and we will go ALL IN for the party; whatever it's about. Tell us to celebrate AIDS and we'll fucking get pissed and celebrate AIDS. Hell, even out of my generally apathetic circle I'm one of the most staunch republicans I know, but when a public holiday came up in the middle of summer and there was the prospect of getting drunk with 1 million people 10 minutes walk from my apartment I was THERE. I even waved a flag and let my girlfriend paint Royalist shit on my face. It was a great day, but I didn't watch anything about it on TV or read anything in the papers... I just went and had a party with my friends and a bunch of drunk strangers in a public park.
It was far more about sunshine and cider than it ever was about Wills and Kate; but you carry on believing whatever you like... it's pretty clear that however much I write, you're not going to consider a single word.
I was living in the West End within walking distance of Buckingham Palace during the wedding and the city saw more disruption during the Olympics. The wedding consisted of *one day* of disruption where everyone had the day off work anyway.
It was about the same amount of disruption as an Easter Sunday.
London doesn't do "shut down", it's not in our vernacular.
82. "Lol . I don't know why you are denying verifiable facts" In response to Reply # 48
We live in the internet age now. So while your opinion matters, facts are facts. I was in London too and my experience was this article. "London Roads shut down for three days"
You are twisting yourself out of shave to prove something that is literally and verifiably on true. There is no way that Americans care more about the Royal family then the British do. you don't care obviously but you alone cannot speak for the whole country.
>Genuine laugh out loud. You're talking utter gas. > >I was living in the West End within walking distance of >Buckingham Palace during the wedding and the city saw more >disruption during the Olympics. The wedding consisted of *one >day* of disruption where everyone had the day off work >anyway. > >It was about the same amount of disruption as an Easter >Sunday. > >London doesn't do "shut down", it's not in our vernacular.
TheAlbionist Member since Jul 04th 2011 3306 posts
Tue Dec-09-14 11:13 AM
23. "I honestly disagree." In response to Reply # 17 Tue Dec-09-14 11:16 AM by TheAlbionist
Most people in the UK never mention the royal family. The royal wedding got coverage, but the last one that got similar coverage was in 1982... we very rarely allow the royals that sort of stage these days. Hell, I used to walk past Buckingham Palace every day on my walk to work... the only people you ever see stood outside are American or Japanese.
Honestly? I visited the US in the build up to the Kate/William wedding and it was on your TV *far* more than it was on TV over here. Visiting the US is the *only* place I've ever been asked for opinion on the royal family. People still ask what I think about Diana. It's fucking hilarious.
You can believe or not, but yeah... OKP is the only place I *ever* discuss the Royal family. They don't even get discussed on UK based forums.
26. "most ppl in the USA never mention the royal family." In response to Reply # 23 Tue Dec-09-14 11:23 AM by SoWhat
>Most people in the UK never mention the royal family. The >royal wedding got coverage, but the last one that got similar >coverage was in 1982... we very rarely allow the royals that >sort of stage these days.
ditto here, holmes.
>But honestly? I visited the US in the build up to the wedding >and it was on your TV *far* more than it was on TV over here.
no. no it wasn't.
>You can believe or not, but yeah... OKP is the only place I >*ever* discuss the Royal family. They don't even get discussed >on UK based forums.
i did a quick search for "royal family UK news" and one for "royal family US news". the UK news search turned more recent articles about the family and several websites devoted to coverage of the family. the US news search returned a UK site first and then an article from 2013 and then news about random royal families around the world and ppl named "Royal".
based on that quick search i'd say the UK Internet has more info about the royal family than the US Internet.
i didn't look at discussion forums but i'd convinced i'll find more Brit royal family discussion forums in the UK than in the US.
TheAlbionist Member since Jul 04th 2011 3306 posts
Tue Dec-09-14 11:20 AM
27. "Ok, you believe that all you like." In response to Reply # 26 Tue Dec-09-14 11:20 AM by TheAlbionist
I've still only ever had conversations about Royals on US based forums; mainly this one. I've still only *ever* been asked for an opinion on the Royals by Americans. Not a single British person has ever asked me what I think about them.
I don't know how much time you spend in the UK, but I spend a few weeks every year over there and I'm always surprised how often you guys bring them up.
It's not an insult. It's just interesting to me. I'm sorry if you've caught feelings.
31. "i have literally not talked to a person about the Brit royals since" In response to Reply # 27
...umm....
i can't remember.
i think it was back when William and Kate got married. since then not a single person i have met in real life has uttered a single word about the British royal family.
>I've still only ever had conversations about Royals on US >based forums; mainly this one. I've still only *ever* been >asked for an opinion on the Royals by Americans. Not a single >British person has ever asked me what I think about them. > >I don't know how much time you spend in the UK, but I spend a >few weeks every year over there and I'm always surprised how >often you guys bring them up. > >It's not an insult. It's just interesting to me. I'm sorry if >you've caught feelings.
oh it's all good. i know you're lying or i know my experience doesn't match what you claim to be true about the USA and the royals so no feelings have been caught here. if anything i'm puzzled as to why you're lying about such an obvious truth. but that's on you, holmes.
TheAlbionist Member since Jul 04th 2011 3306 posts
Tue Dec-09-14 11:44 AM
44. "Perhaps it's just attempted politeness?" In response to Reply # 40
Maybe it's just that you guys assume Brits are interested and are trying to make us feel comfortable or something, but honestly, speak to any Brit who's visited the US and they will have been bemused by questions about the Royals. It's a very standard experience.
TheAlbionist Member since Jul 04th 2011 3306 posts
Tue Dec-09-14 01:18 PM
74. "No, as I've said all along, I'm telling you how I feel." In response to Reply # 68
This may not be the objective truth, but it is my experience and it is also the experience of every Brit I've asked sitting near me over the last 60 minutes - so far they've all been bemused at least once or twice by questions about the Royal family when talking to Americans.
You can take it, leave it or disagree with it all you like, that's *your* experience... you might only think of a 40 year old rock band and a powerless Royal Family when you think of this ancient nation of nearly 60 million people... many Brits and Europeans have equally lazy stereotypes of Americans which, no doubt, you'd find equally insulting and frustrating... I'm not sure why anyone would pride themselves on such ignorance though.
I apologise for sharing my experiences. I'll try to agree with everyone next time.
77. "your myopicness combined with your sense of superiority" In response to Reply # 74
you might only think of a 40 year >old rock band and a powerless Royal Family when you think of >this ancient nation of nearly 60 million people... many Brits >and Europeans have equally lazy stereotypes of Americans >which, no doubt, you'd find equally insulting and >frustrating... I'm not sure why anyone would pride themselves >on such ignorance though.
is just a little to close to my stereotype of a typical Brit.
79. "I think it's just a way of making conversation" In response to Reply # 44
The times I've spent in the USA I've been somewhat bemused by questions about the royal family, but it's a conversation piece even though I'm not really interested in them. Most people I know aren't interested in them either.
83. "my whole life I thought people from outside of Indiana" In response to Reply # 81
were completely obsessed with the Indy 500, the Pacers, and the Indiana Hoosiers.
But now that I've been eating Situational Awareness brand cereal for breakfast, I realize that people have a tendency to talk about things they know about a place when meeting people from that place, no matter how base that topic might be.
87. "are you saying ppl aren't completely obsessed w/snow and shootings?" In response to Reply # 83
b/c when i leave Chicago i get lots of questions about snow and shootings. i figure that's all ppl think about everywhere else, meanwhile we here in Chicago just go about life talking about many other subjects.
TheAlbionist Member since Jul 04th 2011 3306 posts
Tue Dec-09-14 11:26 AM
32. "Honestly?" In response to Reply # 28 Tue Dec-09-14 11:28 AM by TheAlbionist
The wedding, sure - but as I said, the last Royal wedding with that sort of attention was in 1982 (Diana and Charles). It wouldn't have been nearly as acknowledged as it was if we hadn't been given a day off work, either. If/when Harry gets married, he won't get the same treatment in the slightest just as Charles' siblings didn't.
In my entire lifetime (32 years), I remember a grand total of THREE Royal events and 2 of them came within 18 months of each other - Wills/Kate getting married (2011) and Elizabeth's Golden (2002) and Diamond (2012) Jubilees. I went outdoors for one of them (the wedding - it was sunny, we had a public holiday and everyone got drunk in the park).
The Queen Mother's funeral was high profile, but didn't result in many people actually doing anything... Margaret Thatcher's funeral was a bigger deal.
3 events that got British people out of their houses in 32 years. Yeah, we're properly obsessed with it!
34. "LOL...NO ONE IN THE US got a day off work for that wedding, fool." In response to Reply # 32
>It wouldn't have been nearly as acknowledged as it was if we >hadn't been given a day off work, either.
^ that right there kills your entire position on this topic.
we didn't get a day off for the wedding. LOL.
>In my entire lifetime (32 years), I remember a grand total of >THREE Royal events and 2 of them came within 18 months of each >other - Wills/Kate getting married (2011) and Elizabeth's >Golden (2002) and Diamond (2012) Jubilees. > >3 events that got British people out of their houses in 32 >years.
and now i know you're lying b/c Princess Diana's funeral definitely got Brits up and out of their houses during those 32 yrs.
TheAlbionist Member since Jul 04th 2011 3306 posts
Tue Dec-09-14 11:59 AM
51. "I didn't say they did." In response to Reply # 34
I said if British people hadn't been given a day off work we wouldn't have had any celebrations. The government over here know that the public aren't interested in the royals... they have to bribe us with a day off to keep up appearances for the rest of the world.
Conversation is so much more constructive when both sides read what the other is writing. Try it.
TheAlbionist Member since Jul 04th 2011 3306 posts
Tue Dec-09-14 12:30 PM
61. "Then I'm sorry my experience is too tough to believe." In response to Reply # 54 Tue Dec-09-14 12:32 PM by TheAlbionist
That's all this ever was. I haven't got points to score by saying the US cares more, I was just indulging in a spot of conversation and sharing my experience.
I don't even know if you've ever visited the UK to make the same comparison, but I assume you have visited here more than I have there as you're so certain in your analysis.
Either way, this wasn't supposed to rustle jimmies or hurt butts, which it appears to have done... it was just a personal opinion... would you be happier for me to write "Due to myriad factors both personal, societal and relating to the experience of tourists in foreign climes I've been left with the impression that many Americans care more about the royal family than they need to, maybe even more than many Britons."
Frankly, OBJECTIVELY, America DOES care about the UK royals too much. It cares about them. They have no power, no influence and no formal deference in the US... why does ANYONE even mention them? You think we gossip about the Danish royals? No. They're fucking Danish. That's their problem.
The British royals are Britain's problem. Most of us ignore them, but if the rest of the world could as well, it'd be a great help.
"Due to myriad >factors both personal, societal and relating to the experience >of tourists in foreign climes I've been left with the >impression that many Americans care more about the royal >family than they need to, maybe even more than many Britons."
^ that's accurate.
>Frankly, OBJECTIVELY, America DOES care about the UK royals >too much. It cares about them. They have no power, no >influence and no formal deference in the US... why does ANYONE >even mention them? You think we gossip about the Danish >royals? No. They're fucking Danish. That's their problem. > >The British royals are Britain's problem. Most of us ignore >them, but if the rest of the world could as well, it'd be a >great help.
TheAlbionist Member since Jul 04th 2011 3306 posts
Tue Dec-09-14 11:40 AM
43. "You get that you're not American News Coverage, right?" In response to Reply # 38
You're an individual person that clearly will not be representative of the whole.
My experience is that whenever I've visited America (once a year for a couple of weeks for at least the last 10 years) is that I'm more likely to hear someone discuss the royal family on TV over there than I am over here.
I'm really sorry if that experience offends you. If you personally aren't interested then we're pretty much in agreement with each other... and as such, I'm not sure what this argument is achieving.
>You're an individual person that clearly will not be >representative of the whole.
just like you.
>My experience is that whenever I've visited America (once a >year for a couple of weeks for at least the last 10 years)
...i've lived here almost everyday for 38 yrs.
is >that I'm more likely to hear someone discuss the royal family >on TV over there than I am over here.
i have watched TV in the USA pretty regularly for more than 30 yrs. i very rarely hear anyone discuss the British royal family unless there's some reason to discuss them - like they're visiting over here or there's a major event happening over there like a wedding or a funeral.
>I'm really sorry if that experience offends you. If you >personally aren't interested then we're pretty much in >agreement with each other... and as such, I'm not sure what >this argument is achieving.
>The wedding, sure - but as I said, the last Royal wedding >with that sort of attention was in 1982 (Diana and Charles). >It wouldn't have been nearly as acknowledged as it was if we >hadn't been given a day off work, either. If/when Harry gets >married, he won't get the same treatment in the slightest just >as Charles' siblings didn't.
Harry's not in line for the throne either, but in another 30 years when Prince George gets married it will be a big deal.
More Brits watched Charles and Diana get married than did Wiliam and Kate.
More Americans watched William and Kate than did Charles and Diana.
At the very simplest level these facts show that America has got *more* interested in the Royals over the last 30 years and Britain has got less interested.
When Charles and Camilla got married and we *didn't* get given a day off work, more people watched an annual horse race than the wedding of the heir to the throne.
i definitely know a bunch of english people who are pretty partial to the royals. yes, even among young hipsters. shit, one girl i went to uni with who is almost a decade younger than me is a huge fan of the queen, in a non-ironic way.
the only thing that rings sort of true is that when you're travelling, perhaps people see that as a point of reference when they discover you're British. Although i've travelled a fair amount around the US and that's never happened to me. Now Canada on the other hand...jesus. A friend actually called me asking for crumpet recipes & got up early (time difference) to watch the royal wedding. Plus Victoria Day. smh
36. "what i'm saying is they only had aproblem with them" In response to Reply # 30
being ruled by a King not the idea of Kings in general. well I should say some of them didn't. ideas were floated as to having a King here, some even wanted George Washington to be president for life.
sixteenstone Member since Sep 22nd 2002 27996 posts
Tue Dec-09-14 01:24 PM
76. "I think it's the magazines and blog who care" In response to Reply # 24
if the pictures and videos of them were not there it wouldn't change anyone's life. I doubt any of us are actually looking up pictures of them. They are just there in front of us.
84. "you'd be surprised how many ppl seek this information out" In response to Reply # 76
for the most part information just finds us (especially now a days with people reposting and retweeting on social media) but there is a huge audience of people who live for celebrity gossip
people are buying/watching/subscribing to this culture....i swear channels like E!, Bravo!, Vh1, and MTV are almost totally about making people celebrities and following them around...
"yes, sometimes my rhymes are sexist, but you lovely bitches and hos should know i'm tryin to correct it"- hiphopopotamus
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
General Discussion
fficial&client=firefox-a&channel=sb
