CuriousByNature

Definitely not something you would find being demonstrated/sampled in the appliance aisle at Costco.

It sounds like you could write some great posts for the True Travel Stories thread, or whatever it is called. The most exciting thing to happen to me on a cruise has been ziplining... lol.

Were these guys fellow travellers on the cruise?

I once saw her when I was on a midnight train to Georgia.

You deserve a special award on this site for always posting links - it's very kind of you!

But 'died' is such a passive word. 'Kicked it' is much more dynamic. LOL

I've never heard that term before. Is spanikopita and ouzo involved? Do you smash dishes afterwards and dance in a circle?

I realized I was old when Titanic was re-released in 2012 and I heard that some of the younger people who saw it didn't realize the sinking was an historical event. Or maybe that's when I realized some people are pretty stupid.

I'm very impressed that 1500+ species were able to organize themselves and come together for such an orgy. 😉

Same here. I was curious about this thread, so clicked the link. Now I'm blocked too... LOL. I wonder if the 'hot' part in his name refers to his temper?

I think this is a most unusual situation, and I believe you are wise to have concerns. My two cents: if your gut is questioning whether or not this is a good course of action then perhaps it is best not to jump in. While it may not be 'predatory' per se (since they are adults and approached you) you may still end up taking advantage of them if this is not really something they wish to do. Money can make people do things they otherwise never would, and the fallout for them could be significant. Many will criticize me for raising these points - it is easy to encourage someone to follow pleasure despite the possible effect on others. I share your concern that this could be damaging to them in the long run.

I think 'prodigious' might be the word meaning generous or extensive, whereas a prodigal son or daughter is one who goes their own way, loses badly, and returns to their family empty, but is showered with grace upon their return to the 'fold'. I imagine his grandma, as misinformed as she may be, is hoping he will one day change his ways and return to the 'fold'. In the Bible story it is the other brother, who always did everything right, who is criticised and rebuked. He resents that his father welcomes the wayward brother back with such generous and open arms. It is a story about grace and receiving something good when we might not deserve it.

Que?

I'm not sure that he will be able to maintain the same level of outward impartiality that the Queen has managed. We need to remember that one of the guiding forces in her own queenly development was the early influence of her grandmother, Queen Mary. Charles may make some significant changes given the greater multicultural character of the UK - he expressed in the past that the monarch should no longer be considered 'Defender of the Faith', for instance. Sorry, I don't mean to bring in politics or religion to this forum - just noting that there are various aspects of monarchy that may be up for reconsideration when the next reign begins

I would disagree with that, but I do understand what you are getting at. I believe she is more than a feel-good symbol. While her position is largely symbolic and ceremonial, she does represent historic continuity and has offered a source of stability in difficult times. Perhaps there has not been the same degree of threat recently as there was in WWII, but she was there and lived through the turmoil and the post-war recovery. No other head of state has the degree of experience that she does, nor I image, the amount of political wisdom that can only be acquired over decades in a position like her own.

It's a valid point for sure, and likely even a higher percentage feel that way in various Commonwealth countries. But I think the percentage in the UK who wanted to get rid of the monarchy was even higher 20 years ago. Since her Golden Jubilee I think many Britons have grown to appreciate the Queen and the monarchy more. But there will always be those who believe that the monarchy is not worth the cost. The value the monarchy brings isn't easy to quantify, so I think the argument will always exist about whether or not it should be continued.

The link doesn't take me to any profile, just the London listings. So perhaps they were TGTBT?

I thought this post was going to be about a rubber hose, like a nasal-gastric tube.

I wonder if there has been too much societal change throughout her reign for it to be considered a new Elizabethan Era. The Victorian period - whether in 1837 or 1901 - was pretty consistent in its conservative societal norms, from clothing to architecture, design to family life. But I don't think that can be said for the current monarch's reign. Changes have accelerated so much that it would be very difficult to define what a new Elizabethan Era represents. Is it the post-war boom? The greater secularization of society? The Cold War and the fight against communism? The women's liberation movement? The race to the Moon? The rise of social media? The threat of terrorism? None of these things are closely linked to the monarchy, and the present Queen has not had the same level of influence over society's path as monarchs of earlier times once had. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, and I am pretty sure history will remember her reign fondly and with admiration even if it is not the basis for defining an era.

My best experience so far left me relaxed and limber, and reached places I didn't even realize needed any attention. I was on a business trip to Halifax, and staying in a hotel much posher than I was used to. But it quickly became worth the splurge. My legs were spread slightly, and I could feel this firm, lengthy hardness against the small of my back. I braced my arms and rocked myself against the hardness as it slowly moved from just above my butt to the middle of my back, and up to between my shoulder blades. Drips of sweat ran down my chest as my breathing deepened, and as I ground against that blessed hardness until I was utterly spent. Again, and again, and again until my quads were quivering and my entire body released. Never before and never since have I found such a perfect door frame to massage myself against.

With all due respect, I think you may be exaggerating her health difficulties. She can speak, she can stand, and she can sit. But she is evidently experiencing enough discomfort at this time to limit her engagements. As a figurehead I think she is likely aware that the way she presents herself is important. If she were to be seen wincing in pain as she walked, or struggling to get in and out of a carriage, it would be upsetting to many people. I don't think she would want that - not because of pride, but because she has never sought the nation's pity.

Yes, you are correct that no previous British monarch has made it to their 90s. But the Queen Mother, who was consort to George VI, was almost 102 when she died. In her late 90s she curtailed a lot of her activities due to her age, She had both hips replaced, and by most accounts continued to live a fulfilling life for a number of years. Her daughter, the present Queen, is at least as robust as her mother was at 96, so I would not be surprised if she could easily pull through hip replacements if that happens to be her mobility issue. I understand though that at such an advanced age things can decline very quickly, as they did for her husband last year.

I think we'll need to wait and see whether or not things improve - let's not give her the boot quite yet. She has faced significant challenges during the past year, but I am hopeful that she will get whatever treatment is necessary to deal with the mobility issues and go on reigning for a number of years - with increasing support from members of the family, of course. I don't think her like will be seen again.

I agree - I think she very much sees it as a religious calling and an obligation to the people of the Commonwealth.

Thank you for this. And regarding the Netherlands, I believe the last several monarchs chose to abdicate so that their successor could reign. I think Juliana abdicated for Beatrix, and Wilhelmina for Juliana some decades earlier. But the last abdication in the UK was Edward VIII, and the fallout from that may also be part of the reason why the Queen intends to continue her reign.