Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

I think it's perfectly acceptable for Charles and Harry to call brown-skinned people 'Sooty' and 'Paki'...

109 replies

MrsGrouchoMarxMerryHenry · 13/01/2009 20:14

...so long as we can all refer to them by the endearing little nickname I've thought up for them: 'moronic fuckwit'!

See here

Apparently the two Asian men in question were quite happy to have the Princes refer to them by the above names. Yeah, right. I bet they were delighted. I can just picture the scene:

Charles: I say, old boy, you're looking rather sooty these days. Mind if I call you that as my fond little nickname?
Kolin Dhillon: Of course, my clever little arsehole. You know, you're just like your adorable father. Actually, it's been a lifetime ambition of mine to have the future King use a racist term of abuse as my hilariously chummy nickname. Nothing would give me greater pleasure. More tea?

OP posts:
Original poster
MrsGrouchoMarxMerryHenry · 13/01/2009 22:37

You are noble, Sponge. True nobility. You ought to be Queen (hang on a minute, what am I saying?!)

I think 'The Nation's Weirdest Hamsters' is the best title for our programme.

OP posts:
frogs · 13/01/2009 22:41

By Desi:

"Yes, but Sooty and Paki probably call him Cunt, so it all balances out in the end."

That is genius. Dh is v. sniffy about MN, but snorted coffee all over his laptop when I read that out to him. He's still intermittently chortling about it.

Scummy · 13/01/2009 22:46

lololol desi.

Sponge- your son is gorgeous

ilovemyghds · 13/01/2009 22:54

That Imogen something or other who writes for a royalist magazine was on Breakfast yesterday morning defending Harry (pre the sooty comments becoming public). She said something like "I don't think anyone would be offended by this...apart from Muslims maybe". DH and I were . She is so stupid and clueless - living in a bubble. (As are they).

spongebrainbigpants · 13/01/2009 22:58

MrsGroucho, I do try .

Scummy, while thank you - allow me to introduce you to President Mini Sponge. I'm sure you'll agree that with his beautiful blue eyes and gorgeous smile he'll make a wonderful figurehead for our country. And I can promise he won't have a racist bone in his body!

Now, we all have about twenty years to get rid of this hideous bunch and he can step into his new role as soon as he leaves university!

spongebrainbigpants · 13/01/2009 23:09

I, of course, meant why thank you!

ukrainianmum · 14/01/2009 08:39

I am very sorry, but can you please tell me what sooty means, I figured out paki but the fisrt one is hard.
You know, royal or not royal. I rmemeber whe we had an election campaing and there was a guy wanting to be(he is now) a mayor of one of the biggest cities in my country and how they were filming his electoral speech and how many times did it take for him and how awful he addressed his voters thinking camera is off and look, he is the mayor..

bagsforlife · 14/01/2009 08:43

I got a right telling off on the Prince Harry thread yesterday (pre Sootygate) for daring to suggest he suffered from inbred ignorance amongst other things.

Glad to see there's a few other people out there who agree with me

Nighbynight · 14/01/2009 08:48

ukranianmum - "sooty" = covered with soot = dark skinned.

Just the sort of thing we want our future head of state to say

Nighbynight · 14/01/2009 08:49

In case I didnt make it clear enough, I find these names utterly revolting.
To the guillotine NOW!!

ErnestTheBavarian · 14/01/2009 08:51

ukranianmum, see By MrsGrouchoMarxMerryHenry on Tue 13-Jan-09 20:22:30

Nighbynight · 14/01/2009 08:52

oh I may as well get all my annoyance at this out...was pissed off that PH referred to his colleague as "little" as well. Patronising twat.

As for Charles, well one can only hope the Queen lives to age of 150.

mm22bys · 14/01/2009 09:02

I thought the use of "little" was patronising as well, and almost as bad as the other word!

From what I've read, it's only Charles and W&H who use the nickname, and he's hardly going to complain is he, which might explain why he's defending the use of the term. I know you can be offensive without intending to be, but if someone is not offended by something (and talking generally here not specifically about this case) it's not up to anybody else to determine that that person "should" be offended and effectively speak for them.

Of course none of these terms should be used by anybody, especially not the next three in line for the throne.

Can't believe about the Christmas card and first name! One rule for him, one rule for everybody else.

Nighbynight · 14/01/2009 09:08

Some people are so blinded by the golden light that emanates from the "royal" family, that they will excuse anything.

The first name/christmas card thing is just a joke. At least, it would be a joke if they weren't paid by taxpayers.

troutpout · 14/01/2009 09:24

I am offended by it though mmtttbys. They has offended me.

mm22bys · 14/01/2009 09:26

Oh, should add, too, that DH's boss calls him "convict" (where from Australia)....

DH did wonder this morning if he should sue for the hurt feelings and offence caused...

mm22bys · 14/01/2009 09:27

we're not where!

Nighbynight · 14/01/2009 09:31
Shock
cory · 14/01/2009 09:32

We are talking about the son of a man who needs somebody else to put toothpaste on his toothbrush for him. So what level of maturity can we reasonably expect?

cory · 14/01/2009 09:34

The thing is I have always been vaguely in favour of the idea of a royal family for representational duties, to take some of the limelight off the prime minister and ensure that this country is not exclusively associated with its current PM (thinking of some of the ones we've had....)

But not this royal family. Never this royal family.

Can we have one with brain cells next time.

Nighbynight · 14/01/2009 09:36

well, these ones got the job because they didn't argue with the establishment, but just did as they were told.

If you remember, the aristocracy got rid of the previous lot, for insubordination.

spongebrainbigpants · 14/01/2009 09:40

cory, that's what a president does - look at Ireland!

Then if they're awful you just vote them out - nobody should get a job based on the hereditary principle anymore, it's so ridiculous in a 21st century 'democracy'.

cory · 14/01/2009 09:41

The Swedes did well for themselves when their old royals had grown unbearably dim: they sent off for a bright French revolutionary who did wonders for the royal genetics. So who can we have...

MrsMattie · 14/01/2009 09:42

They're ignoramouses devoid of all class. The Duke of Edinburgh is my personal fave - what a ghastly man.

cory · 14/01/2009 09:46

spongebrainbigpants on Wed 14-Jan-09 09:40:45
"cory, that's what a president does - look at Ireland!"

Look at the US.

I am not wildly enthused about the idea of royalty, but I do think there may be times when they, like civil servants, can do a useful job in just keeping diplomacy ticking over until the bonkers elected get kicked out. But this of course can only work if they do not reveal that they too are bonkers...

Which is why I think the Queen has filled a useful role, particularly in the dismantling of the empire.