Posts
I took little or no interest in the birth of the Duke of Sussex's son, because he is only seventh in line to the throne, but the Guardian and Independent, which 25 years ago said they would not cover stories about the royal family (until the scandals about Diana forced them to change their policy), did so avidly. I wonder why.
Why is the boy to be christened Archie, not Archibald? And why Harrison? And why not four Christian names at least, one of which should be Louis or Arthur? And, most of all, why no courtesy title?
I smell the influence of Woke America.
Someone in the Spectator said the name Boris would have made people sit up. Yes, indeed.
The upper classes in 1936 didn't mind Mrs. Simpson being divorced. They minded her being American. I do rather see their point.
Still, good health and a long life to Master Archie.
Apparently he is named after the Duchess's dog.
Why is the boy to be christened Archie, not Archibald? And why Harrison? And why not four Christian names at least, one of which should be Louis or Arthur? And, most of all, why no courtesy title?
I smell the influence of Woke America.
Someone in the Spectator said the name Boris would have made people sit up. Yes, indeed.
The upper classes in 1936 didn't mind Mrs. Simpson being divorced. They minded her being American. I do rather see their point.
Still, good health and a long life to Master Archie.
Apparently he is named after the Duchess's dog.
The upper classes in 1936 didn't mind Mrs. Simpson being divorced. They minded her being American. I do rather see their point.
ReplyDeleteLOL. I quite agree.
Archie is not a particularly woke (I think you mean black) name. An unexpected and eccentric choice, but not a social justice sobriquet.
ReplyDeleteI did not mean black. I meant egalitarian. Untraditional. I was thinking of deleting that sentence because of course on reflection the Duchess chose the names.
DeleteI did not mean black. I meant egalitarian. Untraditional.
DeleteIt's a signal that the Royal Family despises tradition.
If they want to prove that they're egalitarian a good way would be for them to give up their wealth and privileges. Let Harry go and get a job. Lord knows what he'd be capable of doing. Maybe he could drive cabs. Or wait tables. Or dig ditches.
But they want to keep there wealth and privileges whilst simultaneously virtue-signalling. They really are a worthless family.
Royal baby leaves hospital
ReplyDeletehttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7021267/Danny-Baker-tells-live-BBC-sacked-hes-refusing-retire.html