Royal Baby

[Borachio]

Yeah. But, you see, being cute isn't something you do. Earning something means you do something to earn it. Not just be something.

Or is that not how the language works?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

"To be" is a verb.

 

[Borachio]

It is. You're absolutely right. And "to be" is an infinitive, moreover.

I think I understand what you getting at, though. But let me point out that "enjoy" is also a verb.

(If we keep on like this, I've a feeling we could start a social revolution in a matter of minutes.)

 

[warpus]

I wouldn't even have known about this baby if you guys weren't talking about it.

Is it really such a big deal? I mean, yay, a baby, sure, but making babies is easy. Let's wait until the baby is old enough to compose a haiku - then we can decide if it's worthwhile to talk about it - assuming that the poetry is top notch and/or amusing.

 

[Evie]

A royal baby, according to people who buy into dynastic monarchy. That's basically what dynastic monarchy is about.

Pretty much every baby I've ever seen received the adulation of the vast majority of people around them (except the occasional curmudgeon whining about the noise or the breastfeeding). The only difference here is that the medias have made this particular baby have a MUCH larger entourage.

Pretty much none of the babies I've ever seen ever did anything to deserve it.

I figure it comes down to an instinctive response - babies are small and need protection, so a very large number of us are wired socially and/or naturally to look on them as the MOST IMPORTANT THINGS ever and put them ahead of even our own needs. Which comes off as adulation these days.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

@warpus: I take it you don't read CBC.ca, then, since this has been one of their top international stories for several days now.

Some monarchists are pleased about this for sentiment's sake - Diana's first granddaughter. And since the first duty of any wife of an heir to the throne is to produce "an heir and a spare," Kate has fulfilled that duty now. So there should be much less speculation about any future pregnancies when - or even if - they occur.

As for me, I'm just having an uncharacteristic bout of sentimentality. It'll pass. But I will still think that it's irrational to hate little kids just because of who their parents are. It's not like they asked for it.

 

[Traitorfish]

We live in a society that routinely punishes children for being born into poor families. Being the object of some vague and unrealised plebeian resentment hardly registers in comparison.

 

[warpus]

@warpus: I take it you don't read CBC.ca, then, since this has been one of their top international stories for several days now.

Yeah, I get most of my news via other sources. Seems to be working - useless "news" like this doesn't make it to my brain, and normal news, such as information about the Nepal earthquake, does.

That's pretty depressing though that they're spending so much energy reporting on this baby. How much could there be to report? "Here's the baby. Look at it. Okay, that's it, that's all we got."

 

[Traitorfish]

Doubly ridiculous, in the UK, with a general election in four days. Would the Americans stop to coo over some sprog the week before a presidential election? They barely stop to eat for the entire preceding month!

It might just be a convenient distraction form an election which revolves around too unlikeable public schoolboys competing to see which of them loses least-badly, but it's a sad comment on the state of British journalism none the less.

 

[Leoreth]

And I don't think that the people who buy into dynastic monarchy could maintain that the baby has "earned" it's position of wealth and privilege either. It's inherited them. Not earned them. And that IS the whole point of dynasties, isn't it?

Okay from that point of view it is an incorrect choice of words. They definitely think it's okay for the baby to get the attention though, earned or inherited.

If I want to look at a cute human baby, in-person is not the way to do it (I have zero patience when said baby starts crying, which is yet another thing I should remember to mention to a certain poster here the next time babies come up in the conversation). Over a computer screen works just fine.

Image boards for baby pictures then?

Wait is that a thing? Sounds rather creepy now that I think about it.

Pretty much every baby I've ever seen received the adulation of the vast majority of people around them (except the occasional curmudgeon whining about the noise or the breastfeeding). The only difference here is that the medias have made this particular baby have a MUCH larger entourage.

So it's not the same. Unless it was meant as a personal insult that my birth didn't make the evening news.

 

[Tahuti]

Congrats are in order! Better late than never, though it's perhaps more than timely considering the thread has become an arguing fest for no good reason.

 

[Lohrenswald]

I don't get the whole argument about whether Diana I guess her name is, has "earned" to be in the news.

Like, the royal family of Britain are notable people in notable positions. And these positions pass through the family, so Diana is notable.

Like, I don't think say the minister of education here has "earned" his position, but he has it, and that makes him important, and there should be reported news about him.

 

[Evie]

So it's not the same. Unless it was meant as a personal insult that my birth didn't make the evening news.

If the medias weren't covering that baby they'd be covering some other famous couple's babies.

It's human nature. We look up to and live vicariously through the persons we elevate to a notoriety above our own. This include being interested in their families.

I'm not really into it, but complaining because it happens is pretty much a case of denying human nature.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

useless "news" like this doesn't make it to my brain, and normal news, such as information about the Nepal earthquake, does.

Interesting that you should say the Nepal earthquake, as I tend to even block out such disaster news. There is nothing news-worthy to me about that earthquakes happen and ruin lives and the coverage of such disasters pretty much always ends there. Though I appreciate the service this does to the victims by boosting donation and other support. Yet I admit, I have found myself internally sighing when another disaster goes the news cyle similarly to how I sigh when the sports segment starts.

Recently my parents returned from London with a subway chip card which had a celebratory picture of Kate and William on it and I thought to myself "Lol God I would hate to be British and get such a fracking card. What a spit in the face"

 

[Arakhor]

Recently my parents returned from London with a subway chip card which had a celebratory picture of Kate and William on it and I thought to myself "Lol God I would hate to be British and get such a fracking card. What a spit in the face"

I think that's dreadfully tacky personally.

 

[warpus]

Hey, I just saw something about the baby on the news while I was cooking! So this baby looks like it was pretty much just born. That's why I don't know anything about it yet.

I thought it happened a couple weeks or months ago for some reason. I hope I didn't come across as a "down with babies" kind of guy. If this just happened, then it should be celebrated adequately, babies make the world go round.

Interesting that you should say the Nepal earthquake, as I tend to even block out such disaster news. There is nothing news-worthy to me about that earthquakes happen and ruin lives and the coverage of such disasters pretty much always ends there.

I like to travel, so happenings around the world can affect me directly. I'm planning a group hike to Mt. Everest Basecamp in Nepal next year.. or was planning? Now I'm not sure. I told the group that I'm playing it by ear and that we'll decide if we're going to go or not next year, when the situation is more clear. We might have to go elsewhere and/or postpone the trip.

That's one of the reasons why I try to stay informed about general consequential stuff around the planet - even if most of the time the media will tend to report on the negative ones.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Yeah, I get most of my news via other sources. Seems to be working - useless "news" like this doesn't make it to my brain, and normal news, such as information about the Nepal earthquake, does.

That's pretty depressing though that they're spending so much energy reporting on this baby. How much could there be to report? "Here's the baby. Look at it. Okay, that's it, that's all we got."

Everyone's got a different opinion about what kind of news is "useless," though. Right now the CBC.ca political articles are mostly talking about the Alberta provincial election that's happening today (I voted last week, by special ballot) and the possibility that for the first time in 44 years, we might not be governed by a Conservative majority. Other articles are talking about Mike Duffy and the other senate expense scandals. Oh, and there's a Flames game tonight. I have a passing interest in the Senate stuff because I loathe Mike Duffy, and normally I don't pay attention to hockey news... unless it means some people might opt to go to the game instead of to the polling station.

But the new baby is a harmless bit of "nice news" amidst so much death, politics, and natural disasters.

There's also a lot of information about Nepal there, and apparently a friend of our local Liberal candidate was there when it happened (went for a business meeting, later went on a hike and thankfully made it out alive and unhurt).

Doubly ridiculous, in the UK, with a general election in four days. Would the Americans stop to coo over some sprog the week before a presidential election? They barely stop to eat for the entire preceding month!

It might just be a convenient distraction form an election which revolves around too unlikeable public schoolboys competing to see which of them loses least-badly, but it's a sad comment on the state of British journalism none the less.

Is there some social convention in your country that says people can only be interested in one news issue at a time?

Image boards for baby pictures then?

Wait is that a thing? Sounds rather creepy now that I think about it.

There probably are image boards for human baby pictures. I don't frequent any, however, and frankly, it's a bit insulting that you would jump to that conclusion.

Sites for cat pictures are a different matter. I've got several thousand cat-themed pictures on my Cheezburger site, many of which are of kittens. So yeah, I enjoy looking at babies. As long as they're of the feline DSH/DMH variety.

I don't get the whole argument about whether Diana I guess her name is, has "earned" to be in the news.

Like, the royal family of Britain are notable people in notable positions. And these positions pass through the family, so Diana is notable.

Like, I don't think say the minister of education here has "earned" his position, but he has it, and that makes him important, and there should be reported news about him.

Diana has been dead for many years. This is about her granddaughter, Charlotte, who was just born.

Hey, I just saw something about the baby on the news while I was cooking! So this baby looks like it was pretty much just born. That's why I don't know anything about it yet.

I thought it happened a couple weeks or months ago for some reason. I hope I didn't come across as a "down with babies" kind of guy. If this just happened, then it should be celebrated adequately, babies make the world go round.

Yep, she's less than a week old. There's been coverage for quite awhile longer, though, mostly speculating on what names would be chosen and reminding people of the family tree and tossing in a little historical tidbits about famous "spares" (ie. Henry VIII was a "spare" until his older brother, Arthur, died young).

 

[Leoreth]

If the medias weren't covering that baby they'd be covering some other famous couple's babies.

I don't mind it being covered in the rainbow press. That's where the Windsors belong, right next to the Kardashians.

There probably are image boards for human baby pictures. I don't frequent any, however, and frankly, it's a bit insulting that you would jump to that conclusion.

Oh, I didn't mean to imply you frequent these sites. And the creepiness reaction was mostly against the idea of people circulating baby photos on the internet.

Sorry, I basically was sidetracked by something I wanted to bring up as an example. I never meant to insinuate anything about you personally.

 

[Traitorfish]

Is there some social convention in your country that says people can only be interested in one news issue at a time?

There's a difference between interest and headlines, surely? If they put this on page forty-three or the "in other news" section, that would be one thing, but it's not like they should be facing a slow enough news day that "baby exists, probably won't become monarch" should be front page material.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Oh, I didn't mean to imply you frequent these sites. And the creepiness reaction was mostly against the idea of people circulating baby photos on the internet.

Sorry, I basically was sidetracked by something I wanted to bring up as an example. I never meant to insinuate anything about you personally.

Apology accepted, thanks.

There's a difference between interest and headlines, surely? If they put this on page forty-three or the "in other news" section, that would be one thing, but it's not like they should be facing a slow enough news day that "baby exists, probably won't become monarch" should be front page material.

I get that the Royals must seem very ordinary to you and you probably think we're crazy to be this interested in something so common. But a lot of Canadians do have lingering sentimentality for them, dating back decades.

Sometimes, though, surprising things can happen. I remember reading about a time when the Queen happened to be doing a walkabout of some sort and Kurt Browning (one of Canada's best-loved male figure skaters) passed nearby. The younger people promptly forgot all about fussing over the Queen and swarmed around Kurt, wanting an autograph. So the Royal party got curious about this young man who was more popular than the Queen, and they invited him to come over and meet her. According to Browning, the conversation wasn't very stimulating, but he still felt honored.