NationStates Jolt Archive

And here I thought that the British were progressive.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-fg-class18apr18,1,1542103.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage&ctrack=1&cset=true

Chewing gum is bad? Oh, and it's one thing for the royals to be this inane, but it makes me wonder what people in the UK are thinking when the newspapers go along with this sort of snobbery.

page requires login. Can't read the story.

You have to register to see the article.. how about quoting it.

page requires login. Can't read the story.

http://www.bugmenot.com/ *nods*

page requires login. Can't read the story.

I hate to have to do this, but just for you:

London — NOW that it's all over but the kerchief-wringing, now that Prince William's latter-day fairy tale romance with commoner Kate Middleton is royally kaput, it's time for the sages to weigh in. And weigh in they have, squarely in the place the English have always drawn their lines. Middleton was, sorry to say, way too middle class.

It wasn't supposed to happen like this. A decade of Tony Blair's New Labor policies were meant to have opened the floodgates of upward mobility; newsreaders on the BBC who sounded like they came from Glasgow or Cardiff were agreeably multicultural. Yet there it is, the class thing, back with a vengeance.

It wasn't Middleton, per se. It was her mother, a former airline flight attendant who was caught on video chewing gum next to her elegantly hatted and serenely smiling daughter at William's graduation from the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst.

There was more. Carole Middleton, who runs a party supply business with her husband and made enough to buy a $2-million house in Berkshire and send her daughter to prestigious Marlborough College, said "toilet" instead of "lavatory." She said "pardon" when she couldn't hear what someone had just said. ("What?" is more posh.)

When she met Queen Elizabeth II, William's grandmother, she said, "Pleased to meet you." Well, columnists wanted to know, who wasn't happy to meet the queen? "Hello, ma'am," was what was called for.

Within days, the tabloids, which by and large sympathized with the deposed princess-to-be, had rendered their anguished verdicts: "Kate was too middle class," the Mail on Sunday pronounced sadly. "Not posh enough for royals," fumed the Mirror. By Tuesday, the papers were publishing "cut-and-keep" guides on "how to be posh," and the Telegraph had a take-at-home quiz on "what class are you?"

Clue: Does your house have a number, rather than a name? Do you propose toasts like "Cheers" over drinks? Do your children have a PlayStation 3, rather than a dressing-up box? Get a better life.

The Middleton affair has reminded Britain, though the rest of the world may not have needed reminding, that it has not achieved its aspirations of a classless society.

MIDDLETON and the prince met as classmates at the University of St. Andrews, where they both began studies in 2001. Soon they were seen everywhere together, prompting intense speculation by February that an engagement was in the making.

Then, over the weekend, came news of the couple's breakup. Officially, William was said to be focusing on his military career. Unofficially, there was talk of other women, of needing to sow some royal oats before settling down to marriage. But behind it all, there has been a persistent bass note: The Middletons weren't royal in-law material.

One-third of inner-city Londoners may live in low-income households, while the average house in tony Kensington or Chelsea sells for $1.6 million. But such everyday disparities seem to inspire far less collective angst than the anonymous quotes from courtiers who revealed that mates of William would make snickering references to her mother's flight attendant background whenever Middleton entered the room. "Doors to manual," they would say, the line used in Britain to signal the opening of the cabin doors at the end of a flight.

"The English have developed snobbery to an art form," style commentator Stephen Bayley said in an interview. "Personally, I think the video of Mrs. Middleton at [William's] ceremony at Sandhurst showing her chewing gum was probably instrumental. I cannot imagine myself trying to explain to [the queen] what chewing gum is, or why one should do it, but I am confident that she would not be impressed or persuaded by any arguments in its favor."

Yet once you get outside the rarefied grounds of Windsor Castle, England's class divide these days is a shifting fault line. The ranks of the posh and the chavs — the British equivalent of white trash, cool but just a little cheap — are as likely to be defined by money and style as breeding.

"Previously, people talked about, 'He's got a good background, therefore he knows people through the old boy network, and he got on because of that' — that's not the case anymore. People now get on because they've got dynamism or talent. There's not the same sort of aristocracy. There's lots of marriages between people of mixed ranks," said Mary Killen, considered the "Miss Manners" of Britain with her lively etiquette column in the Spectator magazine.

These days, she said, "money is the kind of thing that brings people together. Spending power. People now socialize with people with the same amount of money as they have to spend."

Still, the vocabulary clues that linguist Alan C. Ross distinguished in 1954 (don't say "mirror" when you could say "looking glass," and don't call someone "mental" when they are, more genteelly, "mad") still apply. They've just been updated.

Snobby acronyms like NSIT ("Not Safe In Taxis") and OTT (Over The Top) date back to Peter York and Ann Barr's famous 1982 guide to Sloane Square preppies, "The Official Sloane Ranger Handbook." Now, they have snittier contemporary counterparts, the Telegraph noted last year, such as NFI — Not [expletive] Invited.

Then too, class consciousness these days cuts both ways. Thanks no doubt to the populist residue of 10 years of New Labor, it's almost hipper to be chav (think: Victoria Beckham; think: Burberry scarf) than posh (think: Barbour jacket), though it may not get you a royal proposal of marriage.

"There's a kind of reverse snobbery, which England is in the grip of," Killen said.

Not only do the newsreaders of the BBC, which once was the bastion of the queen's English, often sound regional — Huw Edwards, the presenter of the "Ten O'Clock News," tells of growing up as a small, studious "swot" in Wales in his official biography — but upper-class "twits" are also more often the butt of jokes in London's frighteningly wealthy financial district than are former airline hostesses.

David Cameron, leader of the once solidly aristocratic Conservative Party, failed to include a single classical composition on his list of records he'd take with him to a desert isle — a calculated nod to the zeitgeist, commentators said.

"We even had Cameron having to apologize for having been to Eton, when it's the best school in the country," Killen said. "Why would you not want someone who'd been to the best school in the country to be in charge?"

And here I thought that the British were progressive.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-fg-class18apr18,1,1542103.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage&ctrack=1&cset=true

Chewing gum is bad? Oh, and it's one thing for the royals to be this inane, but it makes me wonder what people in the UK are thinking when the newspapers go along with this sort of snobbery.
you haven't read the Mail.

you haven't read the Mail.

That newspaper has one of the highest number of working class readers that isn't a tabloid. Right wing =/= snob.

So far this article just looks like sensationalism. No-one expects the royals to be progressive in this way.

From the article, it just looks like the newspapers were cashing in.

I see they've also included the fallacy that chavs are a class. It's more of a subculture.

Not only do the newsreaders of the BBC, which once was the bastion of the queen's English, often sound regional
Heavan forbid the diversity of British accents is celebrated.

A bunch of rubbish speculation. Two people split up, neither claiming it was for any ulterior reason and suddenly it's because of her class. FFS.

A bunch of rubbish speculation. Two people split up, neither claiming it was for any ulterior reason and suddenly it's because of her class. FFS.

Agreed. This is uber sensationalist.

Chewing gum is a disgusting habit. I agree with the Queen about that.

Here's my calculated nod to the zeitgeist:

The British aristocracy are the ugliest specimens on the planet, and they don't help their cause one bit by speaking publicly. It's time for the tinted windows on the limo, you lot. Or move to Saudi Arabia.

*hits power button*

Agreed. This is uber sensationalist.

And press intrusion had nothing to do with it.

et once you get outside the rarefied grounds of Windsor Castle, England's class divide these days is a shifting fault line. The ranks of the posh and the chavs — the British equivalent of white trash, cool but just a little cheap — are as likely to be defined by money and style as breeding.

......

Then too, class consciousness these days cuts both ways. Thanks no doubt to the populist residue of 10 years of New Labor, it's almost hipper to be chav (think: Victoria Beckham; think: Burberry scarf) than posh (think: Barbour jacket), though it may not get you a royal proposal of marriage.

Chavs are not considered cool nor hip. Classifying someone as a chav is insulting.

Chavistic Burberry Article (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2005/01/13/cnburb13.xml)

That newspaper has one of the highest number of working class readers that isn't a tabloid. Right wing =/= snob.

The Daily Mail is a tabloid.

The Daily Mail is a tabloid.

It's only called a tabloid as an insult.

It's only called a tabloid as an insult.

And nothing to do with its size? ie tabloid shaped?

And nothing to do with its size? ie tabloid shaped?

Quite. Tabloid refers to its size - half that of a broadsheet.

And nothing to do with its size? ie tabloid shaped?

Yeah but i'm pretty sure that the Daily Mail isn't tabloid shaped.

Yeah but i'm pretty sure that the Daily Mail isn't tabloid shaped.

Doesn't matter what you are or aren't pretty sure of - it is.

Add: Put daily mail tabloid into Google. See?

Doesn't matter what you are or aren't pretty sure of - it is.

Add: Put daily mail tabloid into Google. See?

Ok fine. But it's not a tabloid in the sense as most people use it - similar to papers like the mirror or the sun etc...

Ok fine. But it's not a tabloid in the sense as most people use it - similar to papers like the mirror or the sun etc...

What's the difference? They all rely on lame celebrity gossip and unbalanced reporting. In fact I'd say the Mail is the one most likely to be caught out telling outright lies (as opposed to distorted truths, that is).

Add: Plus lurid speculation and supposition dressed up as fact. They all engage in that.

What's the difference? They all rely on lame celebrity gossip and unbalanced reporting. In fact I'd say the Mail is the one most likely to be caught out telling outright lies (as opposed to distorted truths, that is).

Since when did the daily mail rely on celeb gossip?

Since when did the daily mail rely on celeb gossip?

Since I was old enough to throw it aside in disgust.

(Unless my memory has gone totally crooked. You've got me doubting myself now - I shall check a copy tomorrow, if I remember.)

Doh! The joy of the internet means I don't have to wait until tomorrow at all:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=449314&in_page_id=1773

David Beckham takes Victoria to Paris. Who with a life cares?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/galleries/galleries.html?in_page_id=711&in_gallery_type_id=5

Ooh - Victoria Beckham goes birthday shopping.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=449370&in_page_id=1773

Geri Halliwell does some housework. Wow.

Since when did the daily mail rely on celeb gossip?

Just glanced at their website and down on the right there's a section devoted to David Beckham, Pixie Geldof, and Anna Nicole Smith.

But the Mail does generally rely more on vocal hatred of certain groups to attract readers.

But the Mail does generally rely more on vocal hatred of certain groups to attract readers.

Yeah, it is particularly scummy like that.

Anyway, is the discussion over or do I have to produce an example of a Daily Mail article which I know for a fact is totally untrue?

Doh! The joy of the internet means I don't have to wait until tomorrow at all:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=449314&in_page_id=1773

David Beckham takes Victoria to Paris. Who with a life cares?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/galleries/galleries.html?in_page_id=711&in_gallery_type_id=5

Ooh - Victoria Beckham goes birthday shopping.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=449370&in_page_id=1773

Geri Halliwell does some housework. Wow.

Yeah but thats not relying on celebrity gossib. Most papers have a showbiz section on their websites.

Yeah but thats not relying on celebrity gossib. Most papers have a showbiz section on their websites.

Are you suggesting that they have that section on their website, but don't print an equivalent? Seems like a pretty odd way for a newspaper to do business.

By 'relying' I meant 'rely on to fill up space', not that their whole operation runs on that and nothing else.

The mail is excellent, for the sole reason that they pay Peter Hitchens, who is undoubtedly the greatest performance artist of the early twenty first century.

Case in point, his mockumentary: "Toff at the Top." One of the funniest things I have watched for a good long time.

It's just a shame that people don't get the humor.

And on that note, I ought to be going to the pub.

I'll leave you with this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=428598&in_page_id=1770
...a totally untrue news story.
Greg Rusedski does indeed have a wife called Lucy and a home in Kirdford, West Sussex. That's it - that's the only true information in this article. No such explosion happened, anywhere in West Sussex, on that night or any other night over the Christmas season.

What a ridiculous article.

Who cares if the highest class exhibits classist opinions? There are only a few dozen people who can reasonably said to be 'Upper Class' in the first place!

If you want to talk about classism and snobbery in the UK, look at how the Middle Class treats those beneath it, the so-called "Chav"-class.

Who cares if the highest class exhibits classist opinions? There are only a few dozen people who can reasonably said to be 'Upper Class' in the first place!

If you want to talk about classism and snobbery in the UK, look at how the Middle Class treats those beneath it, the so-called "Chav"-class.

Chavs are not a class.

Chavs are not a class.

what about a class of parasite/vermin?

the queen is a snob?

i expect next you'll be telling me the pope is a catholic...

If you want to talk about classism and snobbery in the UK, look at how the Middle Class treats those beneath it, the so-called "Chav"-class.
Bit of a sweeping statement - I'm pretty well off and certainly middle class, and I don't villify 'chavs' like a lot of people do.

That said, the prejudice against the working class from a fair proportion of the middle class is indeed a problem. See The Blessed Chris for a fine example.

Honestly, as if any country doesn't have class snobbery.

Bit of a sweeping statement - I'm pretty well off and certainly middle class, and I don't villify 'chavs' like a lot of people do.
I'm guessing that you've not met that many chavs, then. The ones I've met are probably the most obnoxious people on the face of the earth. They stare at you just for walking past, and I've been jumped on the way home from town for no reason, whatsoever.

Bit of a sweeping statement - I'm pretty well off and certainly middle class, and I don't villify 'chavs' like a lot of people do.

That said, the prejudice against the working class from a fair proportion of the middle class is indeed a problem. See The Blessed Chris for a fine example.
I'm guessing that you've not met that many chavs, then. The ones I've met are probably the most obnoxious people on the face of the earth. They stare at you just for walking past, and I've been jumped on the way home from town for no reason, whatsoever.
Well I grew up in Newcastle - charva central - and would probably consider myself middle class. There are asshole charvas, but there are also ones who are just normal people. Played football with a lot of them, avoided English with them, you get the idea. There are a assholes in every group, its just that charvas are noisier.

There are asshole charvas, but there are also ones who are just normal people. Played football with a lot of them, avoided English with them, you get the idea. There are a assholes in every group, its just that charvas are noisier.
Admittedly so. I've just had the misforutune to run into more arsehole chavs than non-arsehole chavs. I suppose it's just luck of the draw of who run into about the place.

So far this article just looks like sensationalism. No-one expects the royals to be progressive in this way.

From the article, it just looks like the newspapers were cashing in.

I see they've also included the fallacy that chavs are a class. It's more of a subculture.

The fact is that we still do have a class system in this country, and I guess we always will.

Chavs, hehheh it makes me laugh whenever I hear that. Chav is a word originaly used by our umm travelr community to refer to little kids. How many chave have you got? When I was a chav? etc..

Nowadays I guess it is taken to mean much the same thing, specificaly kids of a certian ilke, would you say that chavs and hoodies are interchangeable terms?

after reading most of this thread i can say two things:

1. who the fuck cares?

and 2. the daily mail is a tabloid in every sense of the word, but it tries to pass itself off as a real newspaper. and its readers believe it...

after reading most of this thread i can say two things:

1. who the fuck cares?

and 2. the daily mail is a tabloid in every sense of the word, but it tries to pass itself off as a real newspaper. and its readers believe it...

Well said Pure Metal.

Being scottish I have more fondness for the Ned than the Chav.

Learn more here.....

http://www.nedumentary.co.uk/

after reading most of this thread i can say two things:

1. who the fuck cares?

and 2. the daily mail is a tabloid in every sense of the word, but it tries to pass itself off as a real newspaper. and its readers believe it...

Well said Pure Metal.

Being scottish I have more fondness for the Ned than the Chav.

Learn more here.....

http://www.nedumentary.co.uk/

after reading most of this thread i can say two things:

1. who the fuck cares?

and 2. the daily mail is a tabloid in every sense of the word, but it tries to pass itself off as a real newspaper. and its readers believe it...

Well said Pure Metal.

Being scottish I have more fondness for the Ned than the Chav.

Learn more here.....

http://www.nedumentary.co.uk/