to not care about the royal baby?

[carlajean]

Apologies if there's already a thread on this (I can't find one) but why do people care about this? My facebook page is full of people thinking it's great news and I just don't get it. Just another royal parasite in my view.

amazing is such an over used word.

I don't give 2 hoots tbh. It doesn't affect my life at all. Can't believe the people who have camped in London for weeks. Where do they get the money? Do they not work? Get a life you sad bastards!!
Btw I haven't seen any coverage at all! Don't think lev missed out at all.

Kate did look amazing. That's true. Why is that sycophantic?

I do find the superfans hard to understand.

Why camp out for days outside a hospital to see fuck all really, why stand out on a freezing cold Christmas Day to watch them walk to church?

Now that's daft.

It's not their fault, it is the general public who maintain the craziness that is the 'royal' family. I believe we are all equal and the notion of royalty just laughable in this day and age but I genuinely don't wish them any malice. New babies are always cute, so I am interested in any for a minute or so, but just avoid the press until it calms down.

I have coped by posting Republic's 'Born Equal' campaign posters etc all over my FB page. Babies - yay! Lovely for them :) I'm sure they're perfectly nice people. But why their child should become head of state because of their parentage, over mine or yours or anyone elses, completely eludes and offends me...

You have every right to not be interested.

To call an innocent baby a parasite though, that's vile.

I'm delighted they've had a healthy baby, as I always am when people have a baby. I said 'ahhh' when I saw the picture. That's about it really.

Not really worth getting worked up about either way is it?

Why are people so against the monarchy? Are they jealous? Queen still hasn't properly retired and she's in her eighties!

There hasn't been one post on my FB about it.

I was not interested, then interested yesterday, now back to not interested.

Objecting to the monarchy isn't about our personal views as to the individuals who make up the family.

It is objecting to the institution and all that the institution represents, which is that you can be born superior, better, wealthier.

I disagree with all that.

YANBU. Can't stand the royals, and I mean those particular people as well as the institution.

Or to put it another way, Owlina, she's in her 80s and she's yet to do a day's honest work...

It's nice when babies are born healthy and loved, and to that extent it's a nice story. But I find it really bizarre that the people who get exercised about what a hard hard life this little princess will have due to fate and family seem to be the least likely to think that when babies are born into poor families, their fate is up to them and their welfare shouldn't be anyone else's concern!

carla its fine not to be interested, but calling a baby a parasite is really nasty. If you don't care so much, why post this, it scream, hey look at me kind of thing.

I mean the most likely!

Because... the monarchy is dated, undemocratic, erratic and generally offensive? I'm definitely not jealous. That's the great thing about being a republican - I believe that anybody who wishes to, and has the intellectual ability, can set their sites on becoming head of state. This is not the case in a monarchy, even one as castrated as the British one.

The monarchy here is offensive in its existence, but so politically neutralised (although we'll see very soon what Charles plans to do about that, I imagine), that its SOLE FUNCTION is ceremonial. So it's pointless as well as offensive.

That all having been said, babies are great, and it's mean spirited to call any baby a parasite, whether she is a princess or not.

At what age are we allowed to refer to her as a royal parasite? 18?

Also the Queen of England is not an especially great role model as a person, if how her children turned out is anything to go by. They could have whole "But We Took You To Stately Homes" threads to themselves (or rather "But We Brought You Up In Stately Homes"). She's no more a cuddly little old lady than Margaret Thatcher was.

Hummm think poor queenie works hard enough.

Don't we as a society accept that children born into poorer families need more external support hence all manner of extra support for them? I think you can think both of these things, indeed how could you not? I wouldn't want to be a royal spending all day making small talk and listening to that flipping national anthem everywhere you go. Equally I support all movements to equalise society eg pupil premium, tax credits etc.

That was directed at nit I'm a slow typer!

I am anti royalist but to be honest what an absolute relief from all the bloody election coverage this is. first time I have ever been relieved to hear of a royal baby being born. perhaps we can have another one in 5 years time as it is proving to be a great distraction from the procession of liars that I have had to endure for the last what feels like months. You cant help who you are born to but perhaps she will grow up to have a proper job and earn a living and be a future role model. who knows?

Ltk I stand by what I said, its a nasty thing to say about a baby, says a lot about the op. Yes fine not to like or support the Royals, but to call a baby a parasite is really low.

No ynbu. Women are having babies every single minute of the day. You don't care and you don't have to but if you really don't care why have you started this thread to talk about it.

(set their SIGHTS, not sites. There should be a special word for the embarrassment of writing a snarky post with a typo.)

notyour I think I see that ambition to head of state as being the prime minster really, and I totally agree with you on that front.

Having a head of state that is purely there to shake hands, ask inane questions and look nice surely frees up the prime minster to actually get on with running the country?