Jump to content
All visa questions and fresh Immigration updates here ×

British support for the monarchy is apparently at an all time low

Social Media
 Share

Recommended Posts

Toolong Silver Member

Toolong

Posted
Posted

A verse will do as I'm in the mood for one.....and I'm on the beer Sing, too....so...y'know....cut me some slack. 

 

Heavy is the head that wears the crown it's said,

But lighter than air are kingly thoughts,

A penny for your thoughts Charles is the most I'd pay, but still think I got no bargain,

The crown will weigh you down, fathoms deep,

End it, can't mend it, but the House of Windsor bends it,

To gasp and thrash to the last, like a fat mullet laid on the riverbank mud. 

 

(Just sayin')

 

 

 

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 149
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Timbob
Timbob

France chopped the heads off their Royals over 200 years ago. To this day, the Palaces of Versailles gets more tourists than Buckingham Palace. 

transam
transam

I was going to have a pop at the anti-UK Royalty brigade posters above, but thought better to point out my thoughts on the possible lower Royalty support, if there indeed is one.   In our ti

youreavinalaff
youreavinalaff

Benefits? Please explain.

Posted Images

MrJ2U Ruby Member

MrJ2U

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Well said, and respect to you for saying so.

 

It should be possible to have an healthy educated debate about monarchy without bickering posts.

 

Not to forget the benefits is huge for the country as face of British culture and history, but as constitution is another matter which do not belong in modern society.

 

 

Definitely.

 

 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hummin Diamond Member

Hummin

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, transam said:

Tell us why, and how the UK Royalty affects you personally....?  ????

Mostly peoples ability to create and cultivate something that is not real or true,and willing to spend time and resources on fake images.

 

Weakness of humanity I would say

  • Confused 2
  • Sad 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
transam Star Member

transam

Posted
Posted
Just now, Hummin said:

Mostly peoples ability to create and cultivate something that is not real or true,and willing to spend time and resources on fake images.

 

Weakness of humanity I would say

I don't believe I was asking you, plus, I haven't a clue what you are talking about.

A bit early for wacky-baccy........:wacko:

  • Like 1
  • Love It 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
VocalNeal Star Member

VocalNeal

Posted
Posted

NB. April 23rd was the anniversary of the coronation of Charles II when Great Britain decided they didn't like being a republic and went back to being a monarchy. So they've been there, done that and had they have been invented would have got a T shirt.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
billd766 Star Member

billd766

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

Nope. Only 53.

perhaps he means me as I am 78, served in the RAF for 25 years and proud of it.

 

I swore allegiance to QE ii back in 1960 and if it is possible (due to timing) I will do so again on Saturday. It is NOT compulsory.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-65435426

 

People watching the Coronation will be invited to join a "chorus of millions" to swear allegiance to the King and his heirs, organisers say.

The public pledge is one of several striking changes to the ancient ceremony revealed on Saturday.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hummin Diamond Member

Hummin

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, transam said:

I don't believe I was asking you, plus, I haven't a clue what you are talking about.

A bit early for wacky-baccy........:wacko:

The psychology behind cultivating royals and other famous people is quite interesting, and one reason why royals hit all time low, might be the viarity of people on many platforms people now rather choose to identifie themselves with. 

 

We’re social animals,” says Dr. Frank Farley, a professor and psychologist at Temple University and a former American Psychological Association president. “With famous media figures, people we learn about, celebrities, et cetera, we often live some of our lives through them.”

Farley says this falls under the label of “parasocial behavior,” which can create a one-sided relationship in which someone becomes attached to a person without actually interacting with them in any meaningful way. Parasocial behavior could include becoming emotionally invested in your favorite television show or sports team — or, say, in the lives and dramas of the royal family.

 

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/why-people-are-obsessed-with-the-royals-according-to-psychologists.html

  • Confused 2
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hummin Diamond Member

Hummin

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, bignok said:

How could you love that? 

That question is valid for all of us, and should never be asked based on apperance only. 

 

To be true, my personal opinion, I do not think it was a good choice thinking of popularity and the position he have. 

Edited by Hummin
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
xylophone Ruby Member

xylophone

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Hummin said:

You want to deny him his love of his life?

Well, just after he married Diana, he told her that he was going to have a mistress, because many of his predecessors had, and Camilla was that mistress – this despite a recent newspaper article from a palace "insider" that suggested Diana was the first one to stray.

 

So I lost respect for Charles way back then, and also for the royal family, apart from Queen Elizabeth II, and including Prince Philip who was a racist bigot.

 

And look at the latest round of cr@p going on with the royal family. Perhaps Charles can find himself a magician who could turn him into a tampon, which was his main aim in life according to intercepted telephone calls with Camilla!

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hummin Diamond Member

Hummin

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, xylophone said:

Well, just after he married Diana, he told her that he was going to have a mistress, because many of his predecessors had, and Camilla was that mistress – this despite a recent newspaper article from a palace "insider" that suggested Diana was the first one to stray.

 

So I lost respect for Charles way back then, and also for the royal family, apart from Queen Elizabeth II, and including Prince Philip who was a racist bigot.

 

And look at the latest round of cr@p going on with the royal family. Perhaps Charles can find himself a magician who could turn him into a tampon, which was his main aim in life according to intercepted telephone calls with Camilla!

Of course, and totally agree, he have lost respect because of his actions even he might feel he was forced to find a Diana to marry, to cover over his love for a married woman. 

 

Thats why my first post suggested for popularity reasons, William should have jumped the line if they wanted a popular choice and also to preserve the support for the Royal house and institution. 

 

Anyway, Charles and Camilla is persons who people can identify theselves with, so maybe their fans is insulted by our critic of them. Only through crises such institutions like Royal houses rise in poplularity and often plays an important role to give hope. Economic crises is not a crises thow who help them in popularity if they continue living recklelsy and create new scandals. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
3NUMBAS Platinum Member

3NUMBAS

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

charlie  has 300 staff to wait on him costing millions ,theyre all living beyond their means on handouts,,andrew is the biggest scrounger of public money and charlies money and his wife is also a scrounger , A JOB IS alien to their ways, they never had one

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bignok Star Member

bignok

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, transam said:

Just as I expected, you cannot see the point.....You are enjoying trashing the UK King and getting away with it here...????

What is your point? Wife love and mum love is different in my books. Perhaps you are into that.

  • Sad 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ozimoron Star Member

ozimoron

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, transam said:

Just as I expected, you cannot see the point.....You are enjoying trashing the UK King and getting away with it here...????

I'll have to learn to tug the forelock some more. I didn't realize there was a problem with trashing the royal family.

  • Sad 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
youreavinalaff Platinum Member

youreavinalaff

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, Hummin said:

The psychology behind cultivating royals and other famous people is quite interesting, and one reason why royals hit all time low, might be the viarity of people on many platforms people now rather choose to identifie themselves with. 

 

We’re social animals,” says Dr. Frank Farley, a professor and psychologist at Temple University and a former American Psychological Association president. “With famous media figures, people we learn about, celebrities, et cetera, we often live some of our lives through them.”

Farley says this falls under the label of “parasocial behavior,” which can create a one-sided relationship in which someone becomes attached to a person without actually interacting with them in any meaningful way. Parasocial behavior could include becoming emotionally invested in your favorite television show or sports team — or, say, in the lives and dramas of the royal family.

 

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/why-people-are-obsessed-with-the-royals-according-to-psychologists.html

All of that only applies if you let it happen.

 

For me, we'll, I have a mind of my own.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
youreavinalaff Platinum Member

youreavinalaff

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, xylophone said:

Well, just after he married Diana, he told her that he was going to have a mistress, because many of his predecessors had, and Camilla was that mistress – this despite a recent newspaper article from a palace "insider" that suggested Diana was the first one to stray.

 

So I lost respect for Charles way back then, and also for the royal family, apart from Queen Elizabeth II, and including Prince Philip who was a racist bigot.

 

And look at the latest round of cr@p going on with the royal family. Perhaps Charles can find himself a magician who could turn him into a tampon, which was his main aim in life according to intercepted telephone calls with Camilla!

Only true if you believe everything you read in the media.

 

Do you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
transam Star Member

transam

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
1 minute ago, bignok said:

What is your point? Wife love and mum love is different in my books. Perhaps you are into that.

So your grandfather doesn't love your grandmother because she no longer looks 20.......?

Though, I doubt, you will see my point on your daft post about Camilla.

Your shed awaits...

  • Like 3
  • Love It 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.







×
×
  • Create New...