this post was submitted on
1,954 points (71% like it)
3,285 up votes 1,331 down votes
shortlink:

unitedkingdom

unsubscribe34,775 readers

104 users here now

  1. IRC moving to SnoonetAssign your own flair!

For the United Kingdom of Great Britain (England, Scotland, Wales) and Northern Ireland; News, Politics, Economics, Society, Business, Culture and anything else UK related.

Do not editorialise titles.
Please report posts that contain disruptive or misleading titles; try to keep your titles as if they are being reported by proper news organisations if it is linking to a news site. Do not make it seem like a Daily Mail or Sun headline please, these will be removed. Let commentators make their own decisions on an article.

Try to keep a positive attitude.
This is the UK subreddit; posts that seem to come from people coming here only to attack the country in some sort of downvote brigade from another subreddit will be banned.

Anyone cross-posting to other subreddits to gain support and upvotes for a certain point of view will be banned. Reddit is not your personal army.

Images

Images of text, image macros, and so on will be removed.

Images are allowed, but it is encouraged that they are posted in /r/britpics.

UK immigration information

Related Subreddits:

Set your own location flair

If you think your post has been banned, please contact a mod.

The moderators of r/unitedkingdom reserve the right to moderate posts and comments at their discretion, with regard to their perception of the suitability of said posts and comments for this subreddit. Thank you for your understanding.

a community for
to anything interesting: news article, blog entry, video, picture...
message the moderators

MODERATORS

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

1953
1954

[/r/all]The Queen having a giggle at Prince Philip's ceremonial uniform (imgur.com)

submitted ago by surrenderdorothy

top 200 commentsshow all 368
sorted by:
best
best
top
new
hot
controversial
old

[–]LeChToEast Midlands 242 points243 points ago

She's probably remembering last time she made him wear it. If you know what I mean

[–]Toomz808Luton 165 points166 points ago

"I'm standing to attention now Liz"

[–]UshankaclockDerby 65 points66 points ago

"And what is it that you do"

[–]generalscruffNot'num 72 points73 points ago

"Have you come far?"

Philip says something racist about the South Koreans

"Oh Philip!"

[–]UshankaclockDerby 51 points52 points ago

He's a treasure

[–]generalscruffNot'num 60 points61 points ago

He's like the nation's racist granddad. Instead of being appalled it's "Oh Philip!" and "Come on, Philip, it's time for your nap"

[–]HammymanEast Yorkshire 29 points30 points ago

Indeed. No matter what he says, I think there isn't anyone on the planet who is surprised anymore.

[–]AdamBombTVGeneral Manc -3 points-2 points ago

I think he knows what he's saying is offensive, and he can't believe no one has pulled him up on it.
One of these days he's going to snap, put on "black face", call everyone he meets a Nigger regardless of their race and then dance the charleston in front of the palace, just to get the reaction he sorely needs.

[–]LolworthLondon, so do as you're told. 23 points24 points ago

I find him offensive in a cheeky, knowingly provocative, Jeremy Clarkson type way rather than a card-carrying, racist, Nick Griffin type way. I think that's the crucial difference here.

[–]TrolleyPower 10 points11 points ago

I find Jeremy Clarkson offensive just by his being.

[–]cssafcLondon 29 points30 points ago

ruined it

[–]RufflesYourFeathers 5 points6 points ago

American here. I have absolutely no clue what conversation just took place.

[–]LePyGuy 2 points3 points ago

trying so incredibly hard, and failing even harder

[–]vyleside 3 points4 points ago

Nope everyone will just shrug and laugh at his crazy ways.

load more comments (1 reply)

    [–]OneCruelBagel 12 points13 points ago

    "Oh, you're a plumber! What on earth is that?"

    [–]Smell-my-greatnessEngland 0 points1 point ago

    Something to do with plums surely...

    load more comments (1 reply)

      [–]Prof_G 69 points70 points ago

      Look at his posture. The man is over 200 years old (or something like that)and still standing straight. Good for him.

      [–]S-BROWirral 2 points3 points ago

      Thats what 200 years of stiff-upper-lipedness does for you

      [–]dawnichu 133 points134 points ago

      isnt that a beautiful picture?

      [–]greenyellowbird 39 points40 points ago

      She always looks so rigid in her photos...its nice to see her as a cute little ol' lady.

      [–]AdamBombTVGeneral Manc 54 points55 points ago

      I bet she has a bag of Worthers Originals in her handbag.

      [–]greenyellowbird 8 points9 points ago

      Next to her bottle of Franks RedHot.

      [–]Smell-my-greatnessEngland 1 point2 points ago

      I'm sure Werthers was mentioned in the list of contents of the queen's handbag. That and Tena Lady...

      [–]dawnichu 6 points7 points ago

      i like it, i think it looks like they are still in love

      [–]dudewithpants 0 points1 point ago

      Except when she goes to Scotland.

      [–]MrBushido2318England 100 points101 points ago

      Aye, as much as they try (and have) to hide it, its things like this that remind you that they are human.

      [–]Frankeh 184 points185 points ago

      Ha, trying to tell me they're not actually lizards.

      [–]MrBushido2318England 26 points27 points ago

      Hehe. Just on the offchance that theres a tinfoil hatter reading that comment, I'd like to remind them that the opinions of David Icke are not in touch with reality.

      [–]kael13Buckinghamshire 18 points19 points ago

      I think... David Icke is a lizard. He's pulling a Jimmy Saville.

      [–]db1692 7 points8 points ago

      I'm not sure whether 'pulling a Jimmy Saville' should become a thing or not

      [–]Mondoshawan 10 points11 points ago

      I've been using "he has a touch of the Jimmy Savile about him", seems popular. My dream is that it will become commonplace and contract to "a touch of the Jimmies".

      [–]AudiowormSwansea/Nottingham 4 points5 points ago

      And in this case, it was the Jimmy who was doing the rustling

      [–]Shaper_pmp 3 points4 points ago

      Alternatively/in addition, I want to see the phrase "fixing it for" becoming an euphemism for child abuse. As in "Saville? I heard he fixed it for over 400 kids...".

      [–]westyfieldBath / Southampton Uni 1 point2 points ago

      "He said he wanted to heal the world but really he wanted to feel the world."

      • Chris (Simpsons artist)

      [–]GreenK 0 points1 point ago

      This is what comes to mind every time I hear about Jimmy Saville

      [–]MrBushido2318England 2 points3 points ago

      He definitely has a lizard-like face. I mean just look at this from his wikipedia page. Are flies safe around that man?

      load more comments (1 reply)

        [–]Aluxh 2 points3 points ago

        I posted this the other day in another sub but my fave quote by David Icke ever is when he said the queen mother was "seriously reptilian". It made me laugh.

        But yes, on a more somber note, promising young man with a good career who went nuts. Some people think it's an act and his books are satire but imo you can feel the conviction in what he says.

        [–]MrBushido2318England 1 point2 points ago

        We'll never really know, satire and extreme beliefs are hard to seperate. I do believe his original escapade was the result of a mental breakdown. Perhaps his original books were also written while he was still unstable. That said I do feel he is motivated by money these days, like he said after the Wogan incident, his public humiliation freed him.

        [–]Aluxh 0 points1 point ago

        Yeah I agree, especially when he talks of his... religious? experiences on his trips. Not so much the visions of the earthquake but the way he convulsed and freaked out while seeing these things - who really knows, it could have been some sort of seizure. He is certainly an interesting man though and I respect his integrity and how he wants to share what he sees is the truth no matter the consequences.

        On the flip side of that though, I think the fact he has followers has deeply worsened his condition, not to the point of complete insanity where he can not look after himself but his paranoia and therefore paranoid thoughts get conviction from his fanbase.

        load more comments (2 replies)

          [–]Reginald_KillingtonSouthern twit 8 points9 points ago

          I think you mean werewolves...

          [–]quintessadragon 0 points1 point ago

          Try telling my father that!

          [–]Celliers 15 points16 points ago

          That's very true. I'm pretty sure a lot of people don't know that she's a qualified mechanic too...

          [–]alive41stime 4 points5 points ago

          Its almost as if these kind of photos are made public by some form of royal public-relations entity. Nahhhh....

          [–]Pillagerguy 1 point2 points ago

          I don't know... you tell me.

          [–]HammymanEast Yorkshire 27 points28 points ago

          Not enough photos of her in situations like this. She has one wicked smile.

          [–]sprashooCanadian lost in Oxfordshire 68 points69 points ago

          Admittedly it is a pretty ridiculous uniform when you think about it...

          He has a bear sitting on his head.

          [–]AL85 115 points116 points ago

          its not ridiculous. every element of it served a purpose on the battlefield at one point. the hat, for example, was tall to make it harder for cavalry to slash an infantryman in the head from horseback, and the chain over the face was to deflect the glance of a sabre. life saving bit of kit. the tunic was bright so that men could be seen through the smoke caused by cannon and rifle fire. which other parts of the uniform do you think ridiculous?

          [–]tachyon534 55 points56 points ago

          Also the red makes it hard to distinguish individuals in a group, so it made number estimates harder.

          [–]josephanthony 36 points37 points ago

          But who said "We need some kind of protective headgear - I've got it! Giant furry hats!"

          [–]BeatlesForSaleSuffolk 29 points30 points ago

          They come from the French. When the guards beat Napoleons Old Guard at Waterloo they took the French hats as a reward. Keep in mind that the Old Guard had basically never been beaten before.

          [–]sigma914 9 points10 points ago

          "They came on in the same old way and we defeated them in the same old way."

          [–]AL85 7 points8 points ago

          well the shako performed a similar role.

          load more comments (1 reply)

            [–]G_Morgan 20 points21 points ago

            Same as people think all the fur attached to medieval armour was decorative. Turns out Vikings were so good because the combination of their furs, chainmail and padding together would actually stop weapons much better.

            They did tests firing arrow shafts at suits of armour constructed along similar lines to those used by Saxons, Vikings and Roman Britons. The Viking armour was stopping arrows because they commonly had furs, leather and other shit over and under their armour.

            [–]AL85 4 points5 points ago

            wow i had no idea, thats fascinating.

            [–]G_Morgan 5 points6 points ago

            It actually turned out that the Vikings were boss engineers as well. I can't remember the specifics but the Vikings had a technique that roughly halved the number of joins in a ring. Increasing its strength dramatically.

            [–]AL85 6 points7 points ago

            incredible. i saw a documentary about their swords not that long ago. apparently they made some of the best at the time and even had quality brands that they favoured, so many of the swords found by historians over huge geographical distances share the same makers logo. it really is fascinating how little glimpses of modern culture and progression can be seen in ancient and comparatively primitive cultures.

            [–]G_Morgan 4 points5 points ago

            Especially a culture often looked down upon as barbarians. Vikings made incredible weapons and armour. They didn't conquer so much territory on such a wide basis because they were nutters (or at least not solely because of it).

            [–]ohgeronimo 5 points6 points ago

            Hell, weaponry and armor were only part of it. They had a great idea of strategy too. When you want to bring back riches, but all the castles are heavily defended, what do you do? You attack a religious site, because everyone else is too scared of offending their deity, and the monks/what have you aren't really armed or trained for that sort of thing.

            Then the genius part. You take your riches, you leave some people alive to tell others about you, and you threaten to come back and do it again if they don't pay you not to. You can't reason with barbarians, but you can at least convince the vikings not to come back for a bit if you pay them enough.

            [–]JazzspasmNorf London, innit 1 point2 points ago

            Who are these barbarians of which you speak? Genuine question - i've always wondered if people referred to the Jutes, Mongols, Vandals, Visigoths, whoever - just wondering...

            [–]ohgeronimo 0 points1 point ago

            I think that people refer to barbarians in the Roman sense, so it would be Vandals and Visigoths.

            That's probably entirely false, but I have the feeling that most people refer to Rome and their barbarians when speaking about barbarians in general. When people refer to the Mongols, they seem to know them by name at least, likely due to Genghis Khan. Germanic people are who I picture when saying barbarians, which is confusing because my mental image is incredibly similar to that of vikings.

            I need to finish reading my ebook on Viking war tactics.

            [–]OccamsAxeWound 0 points1 point ago

            Any ideas on the name of the documentary?

            [–]AL85 0 points1 point ago

            i wish i could remember man. i cant even recall which channel it was on. ill have a look for it and if i can find it ill send you a link.

            [–]Viremia 1 point2 points ago

            I don't know if this is the same one, but I saw one on Nova (PBS show in the States) called Secrets of the Viking Swords: Preview

            [–]dnicholsonbNewcastle 0 points1 point ago

            There are also claims that they used to recycle broken/enemy weapons and armour during battle, making and repairing armour and weaponry on the battlefield.

            [–]sprashooCanadian lost in Oxfordshire 5 points6 points ago

            What is your source on that? I know Wikipedia is not a great source, but according to the article there (link) the hats were decorative, to make soldiers look taller and more imposing.

            No mention of practical battlefield use.

            [–]AL85 5 points6 points ago

            my source? the british army. it was the purpose of tall headwear for battle use. also why you often saw decorative metal plates and chains on them to afford further protection. maybe the article on the shako style hat will explain it further.

            [–]sprashooCanadian lost in Oxfordshire 2 points3 points ago

            The chain I do get, but the tall hat (which is really the silly part of the uniform) is, from what I can find, just there because it's tall and furry.

            [–]AL85 3 points4 points ago

            it makes it hard to judge where to hit when charging on horseback with a sword. its also a tough leather, with a hardy weather resistant fur. it was also to make troops look intimidating, and our forces wealthy. it was very common all across europe.

            [–]AL85 2 points3 points ago

            heres a pretty rubbish source with a brief explanation:

            http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_history_behind_the_bear_skin_hats

            i like the fact that someone asked if they grow.

            [–]God_is_dead 13 points14 points ago

            As a Canadian I apologize, but don't be too hard on AL85 as most civilans assume that the uniforms are just attention getters and serve no purpose. I've come to learn to not take those comments the wrong way as most people are just not aware of the reason for military accoutrements.

            [–]AL85 6 points7 points ago

            no need to apologise. funny thing is ive quite a lot of canadian family and have spent a fair amount of time over there, but the only time ive ever seen a mountie in full regalia was in trafalgar square on canada day a few years ago complete with a cup of tim hortons coffee.

            [–]fane123God damn imigrant! 11 points12 points ago

            no need to apologize.

            He did say he's Canadian, let him be!

            [–]pikeybastard 4 points5 points ago

            I love when Canada day comes round. Yummy doughnuts and fit Canadian girls who want to get everybody within a 30 yard radius pissed, all over central London. It's like polite Christmas.

            [–]SteveMcQwarkOntario 0 points1 point ago

            Yeah, they usually only wear Red Serge at ceremonial occasions of great national significance, like state visits, state funerals, and hockey games. Otherwise, just your typical blue police uniform. However, if you're in Ottawa during the summer, you're basically guaranteed to see Canadian Grenadier Guards at some point.

            [–]feureau 3 points4 points ago

            I wonder if the red makes them more easier to pick out from a distance? I mean, modern uniforms tries to blend in with their environment. Red shirt would just stick out like a sore thumb.

            My hypothesis is supported by the high rate of red shirt death in the star trek series.

            [–]listepik 0 points1 point ago

            This was actually one of the reasons they picked it. Red is the hardest colour to differentiate numbers on a battlefield from a difference, and in the Napoleonic Wars, each army would have a "spotter" to roughly count the numbers the opposing side had. Red tunics made it all blend into one and made the spotter's job harder.

            [–]Mguy123456789Canada 4 points5 points ago

            Also if you're hit with a musket in a red uniform the enemy can't tell if you're bleeding or not.

            [–]GeeJo 46 points47 points ago

            The falling over and screaming might provide something of a clue, though.

            [–]Amateur_SuperheroCanada 16 points17 points ago

            That's actually just a very common myth. England chose red for its uniforms because it was one of the cheapest dyes they could get at that time. When you shoot someone wearing red, the coat ends up being stained a very dark brown, and it's just as obvious as it would be on any other colour.

            [–]ashd91 2 points3 points ago

            True. Doesn't blood on red clothing even look sort of black when it's fresh?

            [–]JazzspasmNorf London, innit -1 points0 points ago

            Its more about the men next to you not knowing - the gun decks of Royal Navy warships were painted red for the same reason

            [–]ratchet1106 2 points3 points ago

            I wish there was still cavalry around.

            [–]AL85 9 points10 points ago

            there are. blues and royals are cavalry. my grandfather used to call them donkey wallopers.

            [–]Jim_dog 1 point2 points ago

            Aren't tanks considered cavalry?

            [–]G_Morgan 2 points3 points ago

            They won't be around much longer. Tanks are about as effective as cavalry today.

            [–]AkasaPeak District 2 points3 points ago

            If you can maintain air superiority, tanks are useful.

            It's true that the battles in the air are more important, but in no way have tanks been reduced to irrelevancy the same way cavalry were.

            [–]G_Morgan 0 points1 point ago

            Even without air superiority our hand held options for busting tanks are massively improved today.

            [–]AkasaPeak District 3 points4 points ago

            I don't think it's correct to look at this as a rock paper scissors scenario.

            Tanks play a valuable roll in modern militarys because of the way we use various different tools to "get the job done". It's combined arms.

            The various military's of the world are not maintaining a fleet of tanks for prestige despite the advice of armchair generals. They have various roles to fill and work within a combined arms strategy.

            We will never see a battle like Kursk again, combat has moved on. But the tank isn't dead in the water just yet.

            [–]G_Morgan 0 points1 point ago

            The point is the tank has moved into a niche role rather than being a plain generally useful platform. Also yes military politics plays a large part in the maintained prominence of the tank. I'm not saying they'd be gone entirely but without politics we'd have fewer tanks by far.

            [–]AkasaPeak District 0 points1 point ago

            The point is the tank has moved into a niche role rather than being a plain generally useful platform

            Not really, you can mount a turret with a gun, bridge laying equipment , mine sweepers, recovery vehicles they can be used for direct or indirect fire, they're incredibly fast.

            Yes they require air support and in some cases they might require infantry support that does not make them obsolete or useless.

            Also yes military politics plays a large part in the maintained prominence of the tank

            As long as we're fighting on land, there's going to be a roll for tanks to play, generals are not sat around like WW2 allied generals expecting to fight like they did in the last war.

            The tank can evolve in both design and tactics, horse breeders couldn't breed an armoured horse in response to the development and usage of automatic weapons and trench warfare

            [–]ratchet1106 0 points1 point ago

            I doubt those hats are going to protect them very well then.

            [–]Jim_dog 1 point2 points ago

            Unless someone rides a tank and still uses a sabre then no, I don't think it would.

            [–]combustible 4 points5 points ago

            The part where it's the 21st century and thus its previously pragmatic features now don't really serve any purpose.

            Looks impressive though, for sure.

            [–]ReasonRules 6 points7 points ago

            It IS ridiculous. You are not understanding that he is only saying that the uniform LOOKS ridiculous, which it does. There is no doubt that the uniform serves a purpose and served it well, but that does not mean it doesn't look crazy.

            [–]AL85 0 points1 point ago

            rather than it being me not understanding, i think its your ignorance to the history and meaning behind military uniforms. considering its one of the most famous and historically significant uniforms in the world i do not think any part of it is ridiculous. the guards regiments earned the right to wear those uniforms with the lives of our ancestors and they continue the tradition with pride and respect. our uniforms have existed for longer than the some people countries.

            [–]vercian 9 points10 points ago

            Mate, it's still a bit ridiculous. I'm sure it was all very useful back in the day but tell me, other than attracting tourists, what function a bear skin has today? We don't still send soldiers with swords to war, just because it used to be practical. Tradition is a little bit silly sometimes.

            [–]AL85 4 points5 points ago

            we you could argue the same of virtually all cultures in every country. every national dress, ceremonial parade or tradition. christmas trees are ridiculous. classic cars are ridiculous. etc.

            [–]vercian 4 points5 points ago

            yes...

            [–]ReasonRules 3 points4 points ago

            You are still misunderstanding. I will be the first to admit I do not know much about the uniform, so call me ignorant to the issue all you want, I will not dispute it. We are merely saying it LOOKS ridiculous to US. No one is questioning their right to wear it or its usability/functionality. It is our opinion that it looks ridiculous, and that is not something you can not take away from us.

            [–]Chambowsquared 1 point2 points ago

            It must look a bit silly but the purpose it actually serves today is about the UK's regimental system. Soldiers and officers take immense prides in their regiments and the individual quirks in the uniforms make them feel as part of a family, so they stand on parade with pride as a Guardsman, Light Dragoon, Life Guard, KRH, QDG, Gurkha, Engineer, Artillery, Signals etc etc.

            [–]faderprime 0 points1 point ago

            Isn't that a hussar uniform and not an infantry one?

            [–]AL85 0 points1 point ago

            its the uniform of the grenadier guards.

            [–]faderprime 0 points1 point ago

            Got it, thanks. Whenever I see the big fury helms I think Hussar.

            [–]Chambowsquared 0 points1 point ago

            Hussar's are cavalrymen and have another jacket called a pelisse slung over one shoulder. The bearskins are shorter and square at the top

            [–]PAY_IN_TIGERS 1 point2 points ago

            Not related to battlefield practicality but I read somewhere that an incredible amount of those who made British Army uniforms had sight problems due to constantly working with the bright red fabric. Sounds crazy but true apparently. Can't remember source, it was some kind of history of the British Army.

            [–]yaqueeah 0 points1 point ago

            i mean, just because they serve a purpose doesn't mean they don't look silly.

            [–]jik_chung_choi 0 points1 point ago

            Good post, you do sound a bit overly defensive though, it's easy to assume that it's a ridiculous outfit as it certainly looks that way.

            Surely the bright red colour proved to be a disadvantage for the same reason it was an advantage though? By the time it was abandoned and camouflage was adopted more readily, what had changed?

            [–]gruntybreath -1 points0 points ago

            And fanny packs are useful for keeping things in while you're on the move and fedoras keep your hair dry in the rain.

            That hat is silly.

            [–]AL85 1 point2 points ago

            well if an age old item thats origin was founded in practicality and life saving protection is silly, so too would be basically every other now obsolete item, like steam engines, old cars, religion etc. i really dont see how people consider a ceremonial historical item is silly when we still wear ties.

            [–]gruntybreath 0 points1 point ago

            I bet it looked silly to people then, too, though. Look at it! It looks like he's got a massive sort of caveman afro. It is innately comical given its resemblance to hair. The red coat and gold trim looks silly to me now, but I accept it would have seemed quite martial and masculine at some point.

            [–]AL85 3 points4 points ago

            yes well considering at the time the british army was mostly very intimidating thugs, hooligans and criminals going through hell, poorly paid, deprived of women and being kept in line by brutality, and then given the appearance of being 7 foot tall covered in metal, leather, fur and dirt they would have been terrifying.

            load more comments (21 replies)

              [–]cssafcLondon 2 points3 points ago

              BearSKIN.

              EDIT. For some reason I feel like a Neo-Nazi, mus be the capitals in the word "skin", anyway. Bye.

              [–]sprashooCanadian lost in Oxfordshire 8 points9 points ago

              No, I'm pretty sure it's an actual, complete bear.

              [–]QuaytsarCanada 1 point2 points ago

              Maybe you've been in Oxfordshire too long, but bears are nowhere near that small.

              [–]sprashooCanadian lost in Oxfordshire 6 points7 points ago

              You're talking about bears right? Black, furry, roughly cylindrical things about about 50cm high?

              [–]MiserubleCant 2 points3 points ago

              Nope, in this country, bears have lighter coloured fur and wear either blue duffel coats or yellow checked trousers.

              [–]QuaytsarCanada 0 points1 point ago

              You got the black and furry part right, but they are not cylindrical and stand closer to 250cm high.

              [–]sprashooCanadian lost in Oxfordshire 3 points4 points ago

              Oh! I thought those were beavers.

              [–]cssafcLondon 0 points1 point ago

              My mistake. I'd like to wear a bear some day...

              load more comments (1 reply)

                [–]Ko0lHaNDLuKe 9 points10 points ago

                Makes you proud to be British...

                [–]geekchic 33 points34 points ago

                What's the source of the photo?

                [–]HiddenText 158 points159 points ago

                http://i.imgur.com/raTCD.jpg

                [–]rooftoptile 23 points24 points ago

                Now I KNOW I'm in the UK subreddit

                [–][deleted] ago

                [deleted]

                [–][deleted] ago

                [deleted]

                [–]Chazwatti 18 points19 points ago

                My respect and admiration for this woman knows no bounds.

                [–]Undescended_testicleHampshire 24 points25 points ago

                This is so cute

                [–]cssafcLondon 24 points25 points ago

                Bless. She's been the best Queen she could possibly have been. Dignified, likable, understated, elegant and authoritative.

                [–]hellolizzieLondon 29 points30 points ago

                I love this. The Queen is cool.

                [–]CitehManchester 8 points9 points ago

                Post reaches /r/all and the retards come out and comment.

                [–]staythepath 8 points9 points ago

                "having a giggle" YES. I want to be not American.

                [–]DarcyHartHampshire 12 points13 points ago

                I still haven't gotten over how miserable she was over the Olympics.

                [–]TheAbsurdist 48 points49 points ago

                Come on, the woman is 86. My grandad is 10 years younger and would be absolutely miserable if he had to sit there that late into the night.

                [–]DarcyHartHampshire 3 points4 points ago

                From the start she was like it. I'd understand if she even went home half way. But to turn up like it, whole world is bloody watching!

                [–]loldudesterUnited Kingdom 23 points24 points ago

                She'd had a very long day of entertaining foreign visitors though.

                [–]DarcyHartHampshire 2 points3 points ago

                She's only representing our entire nation though.

                [–]BeatlesForSaleSuffolk 51 points52 points ago

                What better way to represent Britain than to have a grumpy old woman sitting in the rain. That's basically Britain personified.

                [–]DAsSNipez 11 points12 points ago

                No she isn't, our entire nation was representing our entire nations, that's the point of holding an event here.

                When she's packed off abroad, then she is representing the entire nation.

                [–]AdamBombTVGeneral Manc 22 points23 points ago

                You'd be miserable too if you just parachuted in with James Bond and then had to sit still for another 3 hours.
                She had plans to go bungee jumping with Harry Potter next.

                [–]Smell-my-greatnessEngland 0 points1 point ago

                Apparently Daniel Craig wasn't too happy that night, wonder if it rubbed off on HRH? She isn't usually grumpy...

                [–]intangible-tangerineBrizzlefoshizzle 0 points1 point ago

                Prince Phillip was seriously ill in hospital at the time, it's not surprising she was glum.

                [–]Girlwithnousername 3 points4 points ago

                Ah, I do love to see our Brenda smiling.

                [–]iamtheowlman 3 points4 points ago

                "Look, dear - the old uniform still fits!"

                [–]smelly_discharge 2 points3 points ago

                Go your Maj!!!

                [–]OhYeahThat 2 points3 points ago

                I don't know how one can be so dignified and adorable at the same time!

                [–]TyploEuropean Union 1 point2 points ago

                Oh you!

                [–]smokinghorse 1 point2 points ago

                This needs to be combined with that picture of prince Charles that went around a month or two ago

                [–]Irrelevant_muffins 1 point2 points ago

                The queen reminds me of my grandma, they even dress similarly

                [–]jumpingbananarama 0 points1 point ago

                I have always wondered what the Queen carries in her purse. ID and home keys, maybe?

                [–]DueyDerp[!] 0 points1 point ago

                She loves a man in uniform...making her all giddy.

                [–]notactuallyauser 2 points3 points ago

                Is the hat supposed to come down that low, or did they not have his size?

                [–]KainotomiuDevon 10 points11 points ago

                That's how it is meant to work.

                [–]Girlwithnousername 1 point2 points ago

                It's a good point though: why? It's not especially logical.

                [–]KainotomiuDevon 10 points11 points ago

                The reason the bearskin is the shape that it is is to make the wearer seem tall and impressive in parade and on the battlefield. I've no idea why it comes down over the eyes though.

                [–]Girlwithnousername 10 points11 points ago

                I've found a semi-plausible answer: 'The bearskin cap was also a functional piece of headgear. Since the fur came down past the eyes, it broke the silhouette of the soldier head and lancers who were trained to hit the head, would hit the bearskin cap instead.' http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_history_behind_the_bear_skin_hats

                [–]KainotomiuDevon 3 points4 points ago

                That makes sense, I suppose - although you'd think it'd be possible to train people to aim low or something.

                The other thing that stands out about the bearskin is the chinstrap; why is it under the soldier's nose and not his chin? It seems like it'd make it much harder to keep it on his head, while bumping him in the teeth every time he moved.

                [–]Chambowsquared 2 points3 points ago

                As per the above. It sits securely on the head, like any cap or hat, the chinstrap rests under the bottom lip so the head seems higher, in battle, on horseback at high speeds, it made it more likely they would aim high.

                [–]Girlwithnousername 1 point2 points ago

                The same article provides an answer, which I'm afraid I don't believe: 'The curb chain, or 'chin strap', which some may wonder why is worn on the chin instead of under it, is so that it can protect face against Sabre slashes.'

                If you look at the strap, it's quite hefty. Look at the height of the hat and how much grip that would give a person. I'd hazard a guess that it's worn on the chin to minimise the risk of being throttled by it in battle (or even by falling over/being trapped by debris).

                load more comments (1 reply)

                  load more comments (35 replies)

                    Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. © 2012 reddit inc. All rights reserved.

                    REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.

                    π Rendered by PID 23515 on app-15 running 3a7e0ef.