web analytics

Please! I beg you. Make it STOP!

Say, in case you haven’t heard, there’s a royal wedding tomorrow. Because, you know, WE HAVEN’T HEARD ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE FOR WEEKS. Seriously, I can’t even tune into Classic FM. This keeps up, I’m’a punch a princess, I swear.

We went to the supermarket this afternoon to pick up a few bits and pieces and, stupidly, we got there just as the local elementary school let out. Suddenly, the store was FLOODED with princesses. Yeah, they let the little girls all dress up today. For some stupid reason, it took me a minute to realize why we kept getting stuck behind sparkly logjams of gauzy little girls.

This brings up several interesting points. Like, they’re still gendering kids (none of the boys were dressed up as anything, and certainly not as princesses). Also, most of the little girls obviously already owned princess outfits.

Also, they haven’t tried to make the little ones cynical about the monarchy yet. This is interesting because all of the adults I’ve encountered are cynical as shit about most of the royals in general and this wedding particular (even people who usually aren’t, like my mother-in-law).

Anyway, we’re keeping well away from the TV tomorrow. One of our neighbors is having an all-day party, which she is rigorously not billing as a royal wedding party. So I’m thinking of bringing along something royal wedding themed, just to piss her off.

Have an awesome and princess-free weekend, y’all.


Comment from Ric Fan
Time: May 19, 2018, 12:05 am

Cynical — why? Because the bride is American and, gasp, not 100% white? I wd think the brits would know that Markle will never be made a princess. It’s against the rulzzzz.

Let’s see: Diana had some royal blood (illegitimate) so cd be a princess. Fergie – no. Camilla? Dont know. Maybe she can only be a duchess bc she is divorced??

Comment from AliceH
Time: May 19, 2018, 12:38 am

There I was, reading away when I got to “… my mother-in-law” and I was completely derailed. I just don’t recall any mention of Weasel in-laws existing, though it seems obvious enough they would.

And what sort of mustelidae is the mother of a badger and MIL of a weasel? Is she a polecat? Wolverine? Ferret? If a nom de Web for her is still unassigned, allow me to submit “Mutter Otter” for your consideration.

Comment from gebrauchshund
Time: May 19, 2018, 4:58 am

Maybe you should lock up them surgical tools till its all done and over.

Just to avoid any…temptation.

Comment from Rich Rostrom
Time: May 19, 2018, 5:50 am

There’s no rule against a non-white (mulatto, in this case) or American becoming a “Princess”. In fact, as I understand the rule, upon the marriage, she will become “the Princess Henry”.

Sarah Ferguson was “the Princess Andrew” while married.

Also, Queen Mother Elizabeth (E II’s mother) was a Princess, though if she had any royal ancestry it was extremely remote.

Comment from Ric Fan
Time: May 19, 2018, 9:31 am

So, stoaty is the Princess Uncle B?

Comment from S. Weasel
Time: May 19, 2018, 11:38 am

Cynical because every one of them, from Charlie on down, is a moron, Ric Fan. The old lady and her consort are the only ones any of them has any respect for. Marrying an American divorcee actress of color is at least nailing your tabloid colors to the mast.

Uncle B’s family is very long lived, Alice H. His grandfather was still alive and over 100 when we got married. His mom has a shopping list of illnesses, but still lives on her own and is compos mentis.

Comment from Ric Fan
Time: May 19, 2018, 2:06 pm

Princess B: I’ve seen *alot* of online attacks on her race. I’d love to hear what Prince Phillips says. As long as the bride is pretty, he doesnt care.

Comment from S. Weasel
Time: May 19, 2018, 8:27 pm

It’s a cosmic wash, Ric Fan. If you were here, you’d see the (normally anti-royal) media, especially the BBC, raving and drooling over this event strictly because of her race. It’s been pretty sick making, to be honest.

Comment from Mrs Compton
Time: May 20, 2018, 12:09 am

Seems any description of the bride has to involve her being bi-racial. That SHE made the ceremony so diversive and brought her culture to the royals! It’s all so gag inducing. Even Meredith Viera was joking how they would all be clapping along with the gospel music.

Comment from Anonymous
Time: May 20, 2018, 1:15 am

What is most interesting to me is that I believe the Royal House is the symbol of the history and tradition of the United Kingdom. In this marriage, Prince Harry has rejected the notion that he has any duty or responsibility to act in the interests of the Royal Family; to preserve the idea or at least the pretense that they are somehow different or better than the average Yob. Diana was, of course, a crack in the facade but she was at least plausible cracker. Although I understand the appeal of the Cinderella story where any scullery maid or stage girl has a shot at becoming a princess if the shoe fits, I’ve always thought that it was a thing for minor principalities that made their income by gambling or selling stamps – not for empires. I’ll certainly acknowledge that a little fresh blood is needed in the House Of Windsor, but the tradition has always been that it’s introduced via the Bar Sinister rather than marrying the Bar Maid.

Too long, didn’t read: if anybody can be a princess then there are no princesses.

Comment from S. Weasel
Time: May 20, 2018, 9:31 am

I never bought into the ‘he’s a bastard’ thing, until I saw this image.

Hmmmm. Surely somebody’s done a DNA test on that boy.

Comment from Uncle Badger
Time: May 20, 2018, 10:31 am

Ackshly, he looks even more like Beavis (of Beavis and Butthead fame). The resemblance is shocking!

What haven’t we been told?

Comment from Mrs. Peel
Time: May 20, 2018, 12:12 pm

Ric – iirc, part of the conditions for Charles being allowed to marry Camilla was that she can never be called queen.

I’m guessing that with William having three and the succession therefore not being in danger, whom Harry marries is of less concern.

Comment from OldFert
Time: May 20, 2018, 3:58 pm

Uncle B: Beavis, perhaps, but I see a bit of a resemblance to Mark Steyn.

Comment from Deborah HH
Time: May 20, 2018, 6:11 pm

re: Princesses. The Princess theme is making Disney so much money—we can’t even imagine. The whole Princess line probably underwrites the majority of what Disney does. When Disney ran out of traditional princesses from literature, the studio began creating new ones. Of course they are not all called princesses, but they are all heroines. This will continue forever. Disney knows, despite anything the studio may say or do publicly, that the majority little girls are hard-wired with a love for dolls—and that is an endless stream of revenue.

As for myself, I didn’t care 2 cents for dolls, but real babies—oh my word. I loved them. I honestly thought when I was little that I would marry a rancher/farmer, and have lots of children. That didn’t happen, but I still adore babies.

Comment from Ric Fan
Time: May 20, 2018, 10:29 pm

I’m still enjoying the lavacam. Had it on all night. He changes views from the lava fountains to one lava fountain that has created a large cone. There are also the lava pools, the gas vents (which sound like 747s when they arent exploding) and the lava bombs. And the piece de resistance is Mr Rooster crowing up a storm. If they have to evaucate in a hurry, they better damn well take him with them.

Comment from DurnedYankee
Time: May 21, 2018, 12:56 am

we’ve proved three times now in the last 12 years that it really is true that any idiot can be President (which gives me hope for my 2020 campaign, I’m going to legally change my name to Pat Paulsen)

I see no reason why England shouldn’t step up for their round of ‘anybody can be…whatever’.

Really, can’t we all just wish them the best of luck, cripes the world is tough enough on these clowns as it is.

As for Goddess Pele – I’m surprised the Hawaiian clown judge hasn’t smacked an injunction on her eruption.

Comment from Simon Oliver Lockwood
Time: May 21, 2018, 1:12 am

I’m still holding out hope for a Jacobite Restoration.

Comment from Wolfus Aurelius
Time: May 21, 2018, 2:08 pm

Comment from Rich Rostrom
Time: May 19, 2018, 5:50 am
There’s no rule against a non-white (mulatto, in this case) or American becoming a “Princess”. In fact, as I understand the rule, upon the marriage, she will become “the Princess Henry”.

Sarah Ferguson was “the Princess Andrew” while married.
I don’t recall hearing that at the time, Rich; it would have brought me up short. Wasn’t Fergie called “Lady Sarah,” and wouldn’t Markle be “Lady Meghan”?

Which brings me to my pettiest peeve about calling Diana “Princess Diana.” Once she divorced Charles, it seems to me, she’d have lost the right to that title. “Lady Diana Spencer,” sure; she was born to that. But she married into the “Princess” title, was not born into it, and (I’d think) after the divorce Diana would lose it.

Comment from BJM
Time: May 23, 2018, 3:18 am

WTF was that? The only thing missing was a buck & wing. I was rather embarrassed for Doria Ragland, she carried herself with quiet dignity while Charles flounced around like Franck Egglehoffer.

BTW-Wouldn’t one love to had been a fly on the wall when the Mustaches were informed of the plans.

The display of cultural confusion/pandering leads one to believe that the monarchy will not long survive the passing of QEII.

To paraphrase Geoff Whitlam; God save the Queen, because nothing will save The Prince of Wales.

Comment from BJM
Time: May 23, 2018, 3:25 am


A tip ‘o the trilby to Gerard.

Write a comment

(as if I cared)

(yeah. I'm going to write)

(oooo! you have a website?)

Beware: more than one link in a comment is apt to earn you a trip to the spam filter, where you will remain -- cold, frightened and alone -- until I remember to clean the trap. But, hey, without Akismet, we'd be up to our asses in...well, ass porn, mostly.

<< carry me back to ol' virginny