Have a question?
Looking for answers?
Gagging for advice?

Fuck Dear Abby - Ask A Brit!

Got a question for the Brit? You can e-mail them here or you can submit them via the Updates Page (for added anonymity)

Britland?
Boyfriend wants my Hershey Highway
British Bad Guys
Tony Blair
Pronunciation
Royal Pervert
Anti-American British Guy?
Which Country has the oldest surviving Democracy?
Did the US Save England's ass in WW2?
English Sports Fans
Cyber-Rape Whiner (See the article and Einstein's response)
How long, in your estimation, could the UK last without the USA's support?
More conceited than Bruce Willis
How long can the UK exist without USA permission?
How's that work?
Shagadelic, Baby!
Looking for Refuge
Concern from a Fellow Brit
Americans Welcome?
Overemotional Americans
Jealous much?
Lord of the Highland Fling
Another Welcome American
EU: Love it or Hate it?
Should I pay for it?
Bog Blast
Election Recourse?
Kilroy's Outfit et al
Gun Law Query
The British Guy Gets Fan Mail (New!)
Homophobic British Guy? (New!)
Up North (New!)

Dear British Guy,
You live in England, so why are you called British? Shouldn't the name of your country be called Britland?

It's basic geography questions from Americans such as this that makes me wonder how Uncle Sam ever manages to bomb the right country. The answer of course is simple - like the person who asked it.

Britain, or Great Britain as it also known, is a collective of four small countries: England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. It follows then, that if you are 'British' you can hail from any one of
these four countries whilst also being English, Welsh, Scottish or Irish respectively.

If that is too hard to get your head around then think of an example closer to home such as South America. You can be South American AND Chilean or Brazilian or Argentinean.

For those Americans that actually possess a passport and aren't scared to use it: Panic not if your plane ticket states your destination as being the 'United Kingdom' when you really wanted to visit Britain - it is the same place. Britain is a monarchy and therefore also a kingdom. Before anybody asks why it is called a 'kingdom' when we currently have a queen I would draw your attention to the fact that some things just are.

Top

Dear British Guy,
My boyfriend wants me to let him fuck me up the ass. What should I do?

Well that's an interesting question. Don't let your head swell - you haven't posed anything akin to Fermat's Last Theorem for me to ponder. No, what interests me is the fact that instead of relying on your own judgment and your own feelings regarding this most intimate act you've chosen to ask me, a complete stranger, what you should do with your own body. How do you know my answer won't be 180 degrees from what I really believe just so I can laugh at the daft bitch I maliciously persuaded
to spin on a guy's dick from well over 4,000 miles away?

Okay. Here's the British low-down on buggery. If you're a male and as bent as an eleven pound note then obviously you're limited to either playing the pink oboe or accepting lifts from strange men. Nature, it would seem, hates homosexuals and has made penetration an unpleasant business by obliging them to have at their poop shoots in order to put them off.

If, on the other hand, you're male and stridently heterosexual then the choice is clear - tickle her tonsils with your old fella or impale her on your flagpole. Because heterosexuality is nature's preferred way of doing things a regular chap is not confronted with the harrowing task of packing fudge by choice. It follows then one might question what kind of bloke would actively wish to engage in the stinky practice of inserting himself into an area designed to expel unpleasant waste matter.

Possible reasons for this unsavoury request are:

- Your boyfriend is a closet gay who is doing his best to avoid his natural urges and is compromising himself by engaging in sex with a woman whilst wishing he were with a man. Confront him and tell him to stop living in denial - your relationship is going to fail eventually anyway so it's best do it now and get on with your lives.

- You are slack in the skirt department and making love to you is like throwing a sausage down the Lincoln Tunnel - hence he is prepared to come through the back door, so to speak. At least this shows he loves you - otherwise he'd have dumped you for tighter meat. Try pelvic floor exercises, have surgery or find a bigger man.

- He is small. See above - You may need to exercise even harder - is he worth it?

- You are ugly and he wishes to see as little of you as he can get away with in order to achieve climax. At least he still loves you - try turning off the lights.

- He wants sex with you now but wishes to marry a virgin. He wants to have his cake and eat it - he's selfish AND unreasonable, dump him.

- He is weird. See above.

As with any sexual activity you ought to consider the reality that you are frequently exposed to all manner of unpleasant disease - some of which are life threatening and exceptionally painful.

By the way - lesions caused by anal sex can become infected by faecal matter and in extreme cases can lead to a particularly unpleasant form of gangrene called Fournier's gangrene. Untreated, victims can observe their flesh literally being eaten away as it rapidly progresses from the anal and bowel area towards the genitals.

As ever the safest and often the best, not to say also the cheapest, sex is to be had by masturbating.

Tip here for men - masturbating frequently has been scientifically proven to ward off prostate cancer.

Top

Dear British Guy
Why are bad guys in movies always British? Cowards, usually, too.

It's remarkably simple, really. Due to suffering an acute inferiority complex coupled with a need to be loved, Americans continually strive to be seen in a positive light. Not unnaturally this psychological obsession spreads into the world of celluloid where producers are faced with the daunting prospect that none of their American cast wish to portray anything less than a clean cut man's man. In essence everybody wishes to be play the cowboy and nobody wants to be the Indian.

Refreshingly for Hollywood producers the problem is solved by the ready availability of the jobbing British actor. The plucky Brit, unburdened by the need to be loved and content to follow his profession as an actor is happy to play any part required of him. The British actor finds playing the bad guy a more challenging role more worthy of his talent. Anybody can play the hero - it only requires a stiff drink and a loud mouth. It's much harder to play the bad guy convincingly in order to compensate for the 'hero's' inability to string a coherent sentence together much less act.

A point worth pondering: Shortly after the events of the eleventh of September 2001 Bruce Willis, for reasons best known to him, cancelled an intended flight abroad. A few weeks later I was more than happy to fly to the States. Does this mean that despite having no formal acting training I could play a hero more convincingly than Bruce Willis? You be the judge.

Top

Dear British Guy,
I was wondering what the Brit Guy thought about the wonderful work Tony Blair has done in helping us make the world a safer place. The Queen is lucky to have such an upstanding Prime Minister working for her don't you think? From - Alice

Well, Alice, clearly you are either very gullible or, at best, delusional.

Tony Blair, and this is only my opinion (unless you also count the collective views of some 70% of the UK electorate), is probably the biggest threat to democracy that Great Britain has experienced since Adolf Hitler. Aside from abusing the democratic checks and balances set in place to protect its citizens from an over-powerful Government, Blair is also incompetent and dishonest in equal measure. Having roundly failed at every issue he has attempted to address he sought to distract the electorate with an illegal war based on knowingly unfounded information. Far from helping to make the world a safer place he (and Bush) has managed to make terrorist threats more likely by attacking Iraq and uniting Muslim ill-feeling.

As for being tough on terrorism: Tony Blair caved in to Irish terrorism long ago, demonstrating to the world at large that if you mount a determined and consistent campaign against Britain she will concede to terrorist demands.

As for the Queen being lucky to have Tony Blair as her Prime Minister:

Somehow I doubt it. Currently Blair is doing his best to sign away the last vestiges of British sovereignty to the corruption-riddled EU. Her Majesty trusts her Prime Minister so little that she has been obliged to seek outside advice to see whether her position is to be sold down the river.

The man is an inanely grinning twat obsessed with style over function and has only a passing acquaintance with honesty. He has ruined my country and I fear we may never recover from his moronic meddling and incompetence.

Top

Dear British Guy,
The real question i want to ask a brit is do they realize how silly it sounds when they say 'shhhedule 'instead of schedule? I assume they don't say shhhoo linstead of school, right? what up with that? From - SarahSue

What up with that, as you put, is simply this - the English language is OUR language and we do with it as we will. The British have carefully cultivated the language to be the most versatile and consequently most widely spoken universal language in the world. The rules of its use are very flexible; therefore it is an evolving language which we see no point in constraining simply to pander to the Americans because they cannot grasp a few occasional anomalies.

Top

Dear British Guy,
look, I can see you don't like tony blair, but then why doesn't your queen just pop in and tell him to fuck off? or is she like, just for show? and what's the deal with prince charles? first he kills his wife and now he's raping servants????

Were that it were that simple. It's the whole democracy thing getting in the way. Thanks to our civil war way back in the seventeenth century Royalty doesn't have the same sort of clout that it once enjoyed. Theoretically she chooses a Prime Minister when a party is elected but in reality that's been decided by the party that wins the election it is taken as read that the leader will hold the position. The Queen is almost (but not quite) a figurehead with a few important powers that allow her some control over the laws made in Parliament. She can refuse to give Royal Assent to a law (stopping it in its tracks) in the making but rarely does so; preferring not to interfere in the workings of Parliament.

That's not a complete answer my any means but should suffice in the space available to me.

As for Prince Charles - you know as much as I've read in the gutter press. He's doing himself no favours by allowing speculation to run rife though - he ought to make a full and frank statement that will settle the issue once and for all. I don't know what the facts are but the rumours going around are pretty unsavoury reading. Depending on which rumour you've heard he's been guilty of watching, assisting, joining, wanking, tea-bagging, inserting, diddling, forcing etc. etc.

Who knows what the truth is. I'll tell you this though - this is what happens when you surround yourself with a menagerie of jealous, preening, fawning gay men - rumours. Prince Charles would never have got into this mess if he'd found himself a proper job, stayed faithful to Diana and stopped talking bollocks to plants.

Top


I think your site is okay but I find it really anti-american. I know the 9/11 snow globe is just a joke, but it's not very funny. even your resident birtish man seems to be anti-american judging from his answer to the very first question posted. perhaps he's forgotten that we are allied and brothers in arms? Don't try to get some laughs at the expense of america ... and if you continue to do so, I suggest you change your name from Einstein to Stupid

Well, thanks for your input. Einstein will change her name to stupid when you learn how to spell 'British'. Try some uppercase letters at the beginning of your sentences whilst you're at it.

The snow globe - if we'd made it funnier would that have been more palatable?

Don't mention the war. Actually we're not terribly keen on the brothers in arms arrangement. Our Prime Minister tricked us into this bloody farce by lying to the electorate, Parliament and to our allies in order to force us to take part. Something like 65% of the population did not want this war.

By the way - as we are joint partners in this absurd adventure why is it that Britain is getting exactly zero of the rebuilding contracts compared to America's 100% contract rights?

Don't you think Britain deserves something to offset her huge costs? We've even let trigger-happy American pilots shoot at our soldiers on the ground without raising so much as a 'look here, old chap, how about a bit of consideration for our lads on terra firma?'

Top

Dear British Guy,
I recently got into an argument with someone on line who says that since Americans were British until they announced their independence they were thus a part of England and so America stands as one of the oldest surviving democracies because their time line extends back into English history. I say America is only the third oldest because by the time it declared independence England and France already had established democratic traditions.

Who's right?

You're both wrong.

The oldest rudimentary democracy dates back to the Icelandic Althing circa 930. England's Magna Carta was signed in 1215 (although it was many hundreds of years later that Britain enjoyed democracy as we now know it). Britain enjoys the oldest successful democracy (Althing surrendered its sovereignty to Norway in around 1260 when a poor harvest and other related problems required they be bailed out).

France established its democracy in 1787 - the same year as America established its own constitution. However, America enjoyed a more successful start than the French. I'll leave your nations to argue the toss on that one. Technically speaking then America is the fourth oldest democracy.

America was one of our colonies but in the brief period between being under British rule and establishing its own constitution it cannot 'borrow' democracy from our heritage to fill in the missing timeline (in my humble opinion).

In terms of age then

Iceland
England
France
USA

In terms of success:
England
USA / France

An interesting link:
http://www.newamerica.net/index.cfm?pg=article&pubID=1248

Top

WorldWar2 Controversy
Regarding your comment: "It's basic geography questions from Americans such as this that makes me wonder how Uncle Sam ever manages to bomb the right country"

Maybe you forget, you limey bastard, we saved your ass in WW2! (From: AngryPatriot)

Actually, old chap, America did not save "our ass" (I presume you mean bottom?) in W.W.II. America sat on its hands whilst Britain mounted a lone struggle to combat the spread of Nazism throughout Europe and the free world. It wasn't until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor (we did warn you) that America realized that it could no longer close its eyes to the threat from the Axis countries.

Up until America entered the war it was doing very nicely from the lease / loan agreement whereby the USA rented us the military equipment necessary for us to fight our desperate struggle against the Nazi scourge. In other words America profited from our battle against the fascist hordes. The United Kingdom only just paid off this massive debt a few years ago.

Whilst we are grateful that America entered the war (eventually) it has to be said that far from saving our 'ass' as you put it, you were really saving your own as well. What do you think would have become of America once Adolf Hitler and his allies had seized the whole of Europe, Africa and the Middle East and all of their resources? America as you know it now would have ceased to exist.

After the war America did very nicely. She managed to install US military bases all over Europe as a first line of defence against its imagined communist enemies. She secured very profitable rebuilding contracts and financial agreements. She even managed to spirit away Nazi scientists and scientific documentation for her own use. Your magnificent NASA space program is founded on German rocket science (originally developed to launch missiles on London) and the suffering of Jewish victims of inhuman Nazi experimentation.

It's about time that certain Americans realized that W.W.II was a joint venture to preserve democracy and human decency throughout the free world against a common enemy. We acted as a team - it was not all about America and her saving the world like some bloated Seventh Cavalry charge. Millions of British, Canadian, Australian, New Zealanders and other allied souls fought and died in that war too. Try reading history instead of rewriting it.

By the way - Not only have I never eaten a lime but I was also conceived on the right side of wedlock. I'm pretty sure I'm correct in saying you're a wanker though.

Top

Dear British Guy,
I hope you really are British, otherwise you won't understand this. It's Tuesday and I'm STILL hearing about the rugby match this past weekend. I'm proud England won the cup, but I just can't believe that THIS is what passes for news these days. My mates all say that if I feel like this there must be something seriously wrong with me but surely I can't be the ONLY sane man in all of England? Is it so wrong that I don't watch or follow sports and the only reason I even know who David Beckham is is because I used to have crush on his bony little wife. So does that make me a weirdo? Since when do you have to be some sort of football / rugby / bullshit sport lager-head just to be considered normal? HELP! (From: OnlySaneBlokeInLondon)

Hello chap.

Rest assured you are not alone - I too can scarcely contain my indifference to sport. Indeed most of the professional types I know have little interest in kicking or throwing plastic bags of air around either. I believe the whole blokey sports thing is a myth put about and sustained by big business interests and politicians. Those of a thick disposition go along with it because they're homophobic and don't have the strength of character to come out of the closet and proudly declare their complete and utter disinterest in watching sweaty, overpaid, petulant men run up and down a field with the equivalent of go-faster stripes emblazoned on their clothing.

The furore will soon die down, you'll see - being British one doesn't like to brag about one's successes too much. It's unseemly.

I think the fuss really stems from finally beating the boastful and frequently obnoxious Australians at something that really mattered to them. After suffering torrents of abuse in their newspapers there's something deeply satisfying in rubbing their faces in it.

It'll all blow over soon enough - we'll get back to politely losing again and everything will be just as it should be.

I must say though that we do deserve a few days in the sun - our lads beat both the Australian team and the obviously biased referee. More importantly they did it in a dignified sportsmanlike manner the like of which we have not seen since a pair of shorts barely concealed a gentleman's knees. The rugby lot are so much more likeable than footballers (who should all be forced to work for a living or be shot).

If I were you I'd be more concerned about having once had a crush on 'Posh'. How Mr B manages to have relations with this skeletal woman without stabbing her to death with his love truncheon is beyond my ken.

Top


This e-mail actually came in response to Boo Fucking Hoo: The Fallacy of Cyber Rape but when The British Guy saw it, he felt compelled to put in his two pence:
Yeah, this is about your article on cyber rape. Clearly you don't know shit. Men (and people pretending to be men) on the net can really fuck with you. And you say it's so easy to just shut off a computer, but for some of us it isn't. We have what you'd call an addiction and it makes turning off the net like turning off our lives - so what would you suggest WE do? Not everyone is the same you know and it's people like you - people who try and trivilaize the emotions and upsets of others who make this world really fucked up and hard to live in. DIE YOU BITCH!

Clearly you're determined to be a victim otherwise you'd have the strength to get a life and switch off your computer - or at the very least block offending perps. That you choose not to take the simplest preventative measures suggests to me you're giving tacit consent. Ergo you cannot be said to have suffered cyber rape. Weaklings like you who surf the net deliberately putting yourself in stupid situations and then cruising for sympathy make me puke. My sympathies lie with people who are raped in the real world. The irony of you remaining anonymous whilst posting this self-serving crap is not wasted on me. You actually disgust me to the core - and that takes a lot of doing believe you me. If you can't handle life perhaps you ought to try suicide?

Top

Dear British Guy,
How long, in your estimation, could the UK last without the USA's support?

A small request for future reference: Please try and be specific with your questions. The above appears to be, at first blush, another vague question on the Britain exists thanks to the largesse of the good ol' USA - what would you do without us? theme.

I could spend the rest of my life answering such unfocussed questions. This one is so wide scoped that I’m just going to direct my attention to it until I get bored.

As the world’s fourth-largest economy I’m sure we’d do pretty nicely thank you … also:

As part of a large pan-European club we’d be safely snug.

As a nation no-longer suckered into stupid Middle-Eastern conflicts we’d cease to be a likely target for terrorism.

We would be free from intrusive US military bases on British soil.

We would no longer have our phone-calls and e-mail scanned by the US intelligence services based at Menwith, Yorkshire, England.

We would no longer have to smooth over anti-American feelings in Europe.

We wouldn’t have to legitimize American military action thanks to the so-called ‘Special Relationship’ by lending our support.

I could go on but I’ve lost interest.

Top

Dear British Guy,
Jesus Christ-- you certainly could play a conceited little fuck better than Bruce Willis.

No doubt! I also have the luxuriant head of hair that he so desperately craves. Unfortunately, standing at six foot tall as I do, I'm not sure I could play a conceited little fuck.

But if there's ever a role for a conceited big fuck do drop me a line. Distance is no object; unlike the vast majority of Americans I not only have a passport but I'm not scared to fly during this War On Terror that's been keeping you all hiding under the beds at home.

Top

Dear British Guy,
How long can the UK exist without USA permission?

I suspect you meant to ask: How long could the UK exist without the permission of the USA?

I'm going to do you a favour and pretend that this is an honest question rather than the rambling impotent rage of a redneck moron. It's a courtesy I rarely extend to people I suspect of being an imbecile.

Given that Britain existed for many centuries before the Americas were even discovered I'd say a considerable time yet.

As the UK is part of the ever-growing European Union, creating a vast multinational army many times larger than the US military, perhaps the real question you ought to be asking is:

'What would happen to America if it dared to threaten a member of such a large club which has so many anti-American members within it?'

Top

How's that work?
My friend and I had a rousing ten minute viewing of your Parliment on CSPAN 2 and would like to know: Once a person is no longer Prime Minister, do they just step down or take another position in the house? Also, how are Ireland and the rest of the U.K. governed? Being from Texas we spent so much time learning how it works here that we barely know how the U.S. government works, let alone the U.K.'s. Thanks! Crystal

Briefly. The Houses of Commons comprise Members of Parliament who are elected by their constituents to represent them in local elections. Each has a 'Seat' in Parliament. It follows then that Tony Blair is himself both a Member of Parliament (for the constituency of Sedgefield) and the current Prime Minister. When he is eventually obliged to step down he will still serve as a representative of his constituency, unless that is, he loses his Seat in the next local election.

Southern Ireland is independent of the UK. Northern Ireland and Wales are subject to the ruling of Parliament but have certain exemptions allowing them to regulate themselves. Scotland has its own Parliament although Scottish MPs also enjoy the right to vote in the House of Commons too. This right is not reciprocated. This disparity, oft referred to as as 'the West Lothian question', has caused something of a furore in recent times as it allows Scottish MPs to vote for unpopular legislation that either has no affect on Scotland or confers upon her disproportionate rights and amenities funded by (but unavailable to) English taxpayers

Top

Shagadelic Baby!
Hey! I just watched Austin Powers and I was wondering if he's, like, your national hero? Does everyone go around doing Austin impressions like they do here? And do people dress like him and shit?

Austin Powers provided brief amusement and enjoyed the same level of popularity as Crocodile Dundee once did in the US. That is all.

Do people dress like him and shit? No, it's a very informal process here with no dress code. We drop our trolleys around our ankles; plonk our arses on the toilet and crap just like regular folk.

Top

Looking for Refuge
Do you have white trash trailer parks in England? because I live in one now thanks to my fucking alcoholic whore of a mother and I want to move somewhere that doesn't have any. england sounds pretty dammn straight laced and so I figure maybe there's no pieces of fucking white trash over there. Could you let me know?

We do have trailer parks in the UK but they tend to be quite nice affairs, as people usually own them rather than rent. They can be relatively pricey to buy too; consequently residents tend to pride themselves on their environment. The sort of people that give parks a bad name in the States have a tendency to live in tenement blocks over here. Be assured though that Britain has more than its share of white trash scattered around our inner cities and small towns just like any other country. Sorry for having to deliver the hard word.

Top

Dear Brit,
How do you put up with being asked all these incredibly stupid questions by overly patriotic Americans? Yours sincerely, A fellow Brit concerned for your mental stablity

It's not so bad. Thanks for asking.
For every ranting American I usually get two sensible letters Stateside. Chemical doesn't put up the everyday questions insufficiently interesting for general consumption. Those that don't get posted I try to answer personally via e-mail. The raving loonies tend to get the higher proportion of real estate because I feel it my duty to expose ignorance wherever it crosses my path.

Top


Hello Mr. Brit,
After reading your rather scathing comments about Americans, I am wondering - Is there any chance for an American who is unabashedly 'unpatriotic' (that is, against the whole Iraq fiasco) to move to your lovely country? Or am I screwed by sheer dint of being American? Thanks! Crystal Weaver

(Many apologies if you are in fact Ms. Brit, but in the context of your responses, Mr. seemed more appropriate.)

Crystal,
I don't think there's anything unpatriotic in being against a war that was ill conceived and based on disinformation. Democracy is about believing in what you consider right and voting accordingly. Going along with the crowd simply because to do otherwise is considered un-American is unpatriotic in itself because it flies in the face of the concept of democracy. Go down that road and you do your country a disservice.

Moving to our country is not as easy for Americans as it once was. Sadly, refugees and sundry European economic migrants have a far easier time of it than regular immigrants. That's not to say it's impossible though. If you have key skills that are considered lacking in the UK then there's every chance you could gain a work permit. If you're married or engaged to a UK citizen then that is also a foot in the door. An American spouse can obtain two years leave to remain and work within the UK. After that, assuming you've broken no laws and can support yourself, permanent leave to remain is usually granted.

On the upside visitors can visit the UK for six months. Students can also obtain leave to remain for the duration of their studies and can work in part time employment during this period.

The short answer is I don't know. I'm a law graduate myself and that, hampered with the fact that I
earn my living as a geek means that I have absolutely no literary soul!

Having said that you could do worse than to check out the two main universities, Cambridge and Oxford.

I've looked out their addresses for you.

University of Oxford
University Offices, Wellington Square, Oxford. OX1 2JD. UK
Telephone:
+44 (0)1865 270000
http://www.ox.ac.uk/

University of Cambridge
University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1TN, UK
Telephone +44 1223 337733
http://www.cam.ac.uk/

Other sites that may prove useful are given below, jobs.ac.uk, by the way, is the site used by academics looking for work within the UK

http://www.jobs.ac.uk/

http://www3.open.ac.uk/employment/

http://www.prospects.ac.uk/cms/ShowPage/Home_
page/job_search__prospects_net_integration_/p!edcaefX

Hope that little lot helps and good luck.

"As the UK is part of the ever-growing European Union, creating a vast multinational army many times larger than the US military, perhaps the real question you ought to be asking is: 'What would happen to America if it dared to threaten a member of such a large club which has so many anti-American members within it?'"

So which is it? Do you like the EU or hate it? Or does your opinion of it change depending on your mood?

Not at all - but anything that gets up the nose of the Yanks as they assume the role of the World's
Police has to be healthy

I like Europe but hate Super-states that seek to rob nations of their national identity and sovereignty

Obviously I despise the French - that's a given.

Top

Dear British Guy,
I'm tired of trying to find a girl to have sex with me. Do you think I should start paying? I hear the hookers in SoHo are rather nice. I'd be willing to fly over and check them out if you gave them some sort of British Stamp of Approval.

Having never had to pay for sex myself I hardly think I'm in a position to advise you. However, given that prostitution is legal in Holland with properly registered health checks in place I'd opt to park my schlong in some Dutch pastries. Afterwards you can enjoy a fine range of post-coital cannabis products.

In the UK 'bog' is slang for a toilet - I need not go into the obvious here but suggest, Ozzy Osbourne being Ozzy Osbourne, that the 'blast' is probably a reference to some sort of unsavoury activity / experience / practice in this receptacle.

Top

Dear British Guy,
I have a question about the how the Prime Minister is appointed. Here's my scenario: I am from Kent and am a Labour Party supporter. In addition, the person who represents our corner of the world is able and well liked but the Prime Minister, from the same party is not. My question is this: in this given situation, does John Q. Public have any recourse?

You mean can we get rid of Tony Blair?

Not now, no. There was a window of opportunity. It is now closed. Had Reg Keys ousted Blair from his constituency in the election he would no longer be an elected Member of Parliament and therefore could not have remained as prime minister. Sadly lemming-like Labour voters ('my father, his father, and his grandfather voted Labour so I will too - even if they're crap') and selfish no-hoper opposition candidates saw to it that we're stuck with the inanely grinning, self-satisfied, lying, oily and incompetent champagne socialist.

Reg Keys stood on the single issue of Iraq and the way Blair lied and misled his way into war. Lib-Dem, Conservative and lesser party candidates could have stood aside to give Reg a clear run at Blair. Labour voters could have voted tactically to get rid of Blair. They didn't!

Now we'll have to wait until things get really bad so that Blair jumps ship and dumps everything into Gordon Brown's hands. Alternatively hope politicians do what they always do and stab the bugger in the back and dump him - sooner rather than later.

If it were up to me I'd round up every politician in the land and impale them every half a mile down the length of the M4 from London to Wales. Suspended between Heaven and Earth and fit for neither.

Unless you were thinking along the lines of assassination? In which case disregard all of the above.

Top


greetings brit guy ( im one two ).what do you reckon on kilroys new outfit ? they get my vote !!!!! dave

Greetings Brit guy ( I'm one too ). What do you reckon on Kilroy's new outfit? They get my vote !!!!!
Dave

There, that's better, isn't it?

I think a vote for Kilroy is a wasted vote. Here's something controversial - I'd vote for the BNP if they didn't have that whole racial discrimination vibe going on. Amongst all the ridiculous anti-race guff they have the right idea of putting Britain first, second and third. We definitely ought to pull out of the EC before they suck us any further into their corrupt federal master plan.

Given all the options I think every Brit ought to abstain from voting thus removing any legitimacy from the current one horse race. Tories? They don't deserve my vote simply because they're not led by Tony Blair.

Labour? Biggest threat to British democracy and liberty since Adolf Hilter's fascists.

LibDem? Who they?

The Green Party? Joke.

I could go on but it's too depressing.

Top


Hi British Man! My bf lives in England and I am in America. He is moving here next year (red tape takes foreva here!) but I live in a state with a conceal and carry law which means that everyone can carry a gun as long as you have a permit. HE says our gun laws are dumb and dangerous and we should have a gun ban like you do over there. What can I say to change his mind? Thanks! Amy

Amy,

Your boyfriend is both arrogant and ignorant. Are you sure you want to marry someone like that?

I say when in Rome do as the Romans do. Where does he get the effrontery to comment upon a country's constitutional rights when he's not even a citizen of that country? S'truth it's not like the United Kingdom is a Utopian dream come true. We have terrible gun crime here - and it's increasing rapidly. As is all manner of other distasteful violent crime. The only reason that it isn't plastered all over the media these days is because it has become so commonplace that it is no longer considered newsworthy. That, and it is upsetting to read over breakfast.

At least in America decent folk have an opportunity to protect themselves from armed would-be assailants. On the UK mainland the only right we have is to be a helpless victim at best or a tragic statistic at worst. Although carrying a pistol for protection in the UK hasn't been permitted since around the 1930s one could use one within the home should someone break in and threaten you or your family with lethal force. Providing you used 'reasonable force' - i.e. in proportion to the threat presented you could slot the bugger. That right has substantially been reduced as Britain (represented by liberal hand-wringing elitist politicians) has become more and more sympathetic to the plight of scumbags.

Despite popular belief amongst the general (ignorant) public we do not have a total gun ban in the United Kingdom. Private ownership of handguns is (with a few exceptions) forbidden. However, whilst you may not generally own modern pistols you can still own and shoot guns of historical interest - providing they are kept at a club. So whilst you cannot own, for example, a Smith and Wesson mod 586 .357, you can own pistols such as Lugers, Walther P38s, Berretta Mod 1934s, Colt 45s, Webley service revolvers and similar weapons of W.W.II and earlier. Furthermore it is possible to own and shoot black powder reproductions of western pistols AND keep them at home (safely locked up).
You may also own modern revolving pistols providing they have a barrel length of 24 inches or more - because they are then considered rifles (our Government makes for some ridiculous and incoherent firearm legislation that has little basis upon common sense). Buntline style handguns are coming into fashion here in a BIG way.

You can legally own shotguns and full bore rifles - providing they are not semi-automatic. Bolt and lever action rifles are still permitted and we continue to have a thriving interest in their sporting use for hunting and target shooting purposes. In .22 calibre (for some obscure reason) you can still own semi-automatic action rifles. And yes, all of these can be kept (safely locked up) in ones own home.

The handgun ban did not extend to Northern Ireland (somewhat odd, one might think, given the level of sectarian violence at that time).

The misconception follows the general ban of handguns for private use after a raving Scottish nonce (Brit slang for pederast) shot up a school in Dunblane and then shot himself. Following the slaying the media whipped up a frenzied anti-gun bandwagon which opportunist politicians eagerly leapt upon. In the ensuing investigation it became clear that Thomas Hamilton had previously shown himself to be unfit to own a firearm certificate, was known to the police as being unfit, and had illegally owned firearms he was not entitled to possess. Despite all of this he had been permitted to retain his certificate. Indeed, the Scottish police had obligingly retrospectively given permission to own these firearms when it should properly have been revoked. Had the police followed the tried and tested procedure in place the Dunblane massacre need not have occurred. It has been suggested, with good reason, that Hamilton was being protected by senior police officers. There was and is speculation that he was part of a pederast ring which included some very influential members. It has also been proffered that he was a freemason of a lodge comprising senior policemen and other members of 'the great and the good.' We may never find out the exact truth as a 100-year secrecy order was placed on all the documentation of the investigation. That in itself is regarded as highly suspicious.

Regardless, someone had to be punished for the outrage and as Hamilton was already dead the ordinary sporting shooter was made the scapegoat for the 'something must be done' and 'there should be a law against it' brigades. Consequently the media portrayed ordinary, responsible, and law-abiding shooters as being part of a sick and depraved 'gun culture'. They were labelled fantasist Rambos, sickos, perverts, inadequate loners and ... well ... I'm sure you've seen the same attitude in your American papers.

Despite the fact that the amount of legally held firearms used in armed crime (over a ten year period) could literally be counted on the fingers of one hand the politicians relished the opportunity to be seen as being tough on gun crime.

So modern handguns were banned and firearm law, already the strictest in the Western world, was made even more pointlessly stringent with regards to ownership of rifles and shotguns. Owners had their handguns confiscated in 1997, the politicians patted themselves on the back, and then buggered off back to filling their boots off the back of the taxpayer with fraudulent expenses claims.

Did banning legally held handguns cut crime thereafter? Of course not! Firearm crime has steadily been on the increase year after year. As legally held guns never genuinely figured in firearm crime in the first place it logically follows that their banning would have zero impact later on. It was all a con played out between the media (who wanted to sell news coverage) and the politicians (who wanted to sell themselves) on a largely hysterical public.

The use of handguns in crime rose by 40% in the two years after the weapons were banned. By 2003 gun crime figures had risen by more than double the 4,903 firearms incidents recorded in 1997 when Labour first took power. That represents an average of 27 offences involving firearms every day in England and Wales, with guns fired in nearly a quarter of cases. There were 9,974 incidents involving firearms in the 12 months to April 2002 - a rise from 7,362 over the previous year. In the year ending June 2005, there were 10,979 firearm offences recorded in England and Wales (excluding offences involving air guns). That's a 6% increase from 2003/04

The Daily Telegraph recently reported (16/02/2007):

"... We have, post Dunblane, what are said to be the toughest gun control laws in the world. They have actually proved strikingly ineffectual. ... Gun crime has doubled since they were introduced. Young hoodlums are able to acquire handguns - either replica weapons that have been converted, or imports from Eastern Europe - with ease. With no dedicated frontier police, our borders remain hopelessly porous. The only people currently incommoded by the firearms laws are legitimate holders of shotgun licences, who are subjected to the most onerous police checks. ..."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/02/16/dl1601.xml

So, Amy, next time your boyfriend espouses the UK's handgun ban over your own constitutional right to bear arms you can tell him from me that he's talking out of his arse. Furthermore, if he doesn't like the way Americans handle their own affairs tell him to sod off back to his own country.

There's nothing worse than guests coming to your home and then expecting you to change your customs to embrace their own. It's simply bad manners and any decent Englishman would rather die (discretely and without causing a fuss) than offend his host.

Top

I love this Ask A Brit

I also love how when I listened to the BBC world service or News 24 on my satellite radio, they kept trying to interview Americans after VT shootings, and to a t every American was like, why should we ban guns. This guy who killed hisself was the shooter, and banning guns wouldn't change anything.

It's like blaming a car for a drunk driver.

Frow Dubya, to the Liberal Senator of Note Jim Webb, to Democratic and republican presidental contenders. The UK media i.e. the BBC was shocked that Almost all Americans were fine with the gun laws, and were advocating for less gun laws so students could have brought weapons on campus and helped shoot him before he shot more

Also, correct me If I'm wrong, but in addition to the ban not affecting handguns in the 6 counties of Northern Ireland, under Scottish law, this whole weapons ban don't affect Scotland at all cause Scotland is on an older, and their own legal system, and with the new SNP, they can pick and choose whatever laws they want provided they don't change immigration or reduce taxes.

Aaron Duff

Aaron, thanks for your input.

It is true that Scotland can largely pass its own laws through Scottish Parliament. At the same time Scottish MPs, outrageously, can vote in England's Parliament for unpopular legislation that will not affect their own constituents. However, the current handgun ban DOES apply to Scotland. After all, it was a Scottish pervert who committed the Dunblane massacre (in Scotland) so were it otherwise it would be wholly unreasonable and illogical - inasmuch as either reason or logic played a part in the nonsensical ban.

Top

Dear Homophobic British Guy, I've been reading your previous answers and, for the most part, you seem like a pretty nice guy. So what's up with shit like this: "Nature, it would seem, hates homosexuals and has made penetration an unpleasant business by obliging them to have at their poop shoots in order to put them off." Nature doesn't "hate homosexuals" - homosexuality can be found all over the animal kingdom and, besides, being gay is a bit like having green eyes or brown hair - it just IS. So why all the hate, mate? I've been gay all my life and can't imagine living or having sex with anyone except my wife. Nature doesn't hate us, PEOPLE DO. Stop spreading intolerance. Other than that, great answers.

Hmmm. Where to start?

"Dear Homophobic British guy" is as good a place to start as any.

I reread my earlier reply to see where I might have ranted and raved about my supposed contempt for homosexuality thereby earning my laurels as a bona fide homophobe and I just couldn't see it. If you're really reaching one might, as you have done, infer that point of view from the quote: "Nature, it would seem, hates homosexuals and has made penetration an unpleasant business by obliging them to have at their poop shoots in order to put them off."
So basically your whole stance is based on my looking at what nature's done to promote homosexuality (in the context of the original question regarding male anal sex), concluding nothing tremendously accommodating, and calling me a homophobe because I believe nature's done them no favours. Is that about right?

Let's spin the question around then and see what you think.

If nature loves homosexuals so much why don't men have a clitoris just inside their anus - just in case they want to bat for the other side later on in life?

Why is it that after two guys have got their sweaty love on the room stinks of arse? It's not a terribly attractive scent, is it?

Why doesn't the rectum / anus have natural 'friendly' bacteria to combat infection from the more prominent lesions (anal tissue being more fragile than that of vaginal tissue)?

Why can't men become pregnant from anal sex - thereby promoting a family unit in their own right - thereby avoiding having to dip into the heterosexual pool for a hand?

Nature hasn't exactly rolled out the evolutionary pink carpet out for homosexuality has it? Am I a homophobe for stating that? I don't think so.

I will allow that I find the mechanics of anal sex unattractive regardless if it be between homosexual or heterosexual couples. It's just, well, just so bloody awful to contemplate and is right up there with faecal play on my old fella's list of wilt-inducing no nos. Does that make me a homophobe? No. It's just my personal opinion and I should be able to express it just as freely as some chap proclaiming his love of the cock. How about showing me some of that 'tolerance' you espouse - or is it, like my poop shoot, strictly a one-way street?

No mention of lesbians I hear you say? Well, will it offset my homophobic credentials any if I mention here that my porn collection is AMPLY represented by lesbian pornography? More so, in fact, than any single other fetish material I have collected over the years.
Moreover, a lot of my friends are lesbians and they're great mates. And yes, I do harbour the appallingly bloke-ish hope that they'll get it on right in front of me as I sit back and watch.

So, the Brit Guy, appalling anti-gay hate-monger or just some bloke giving his two pence within the context posed? You be the judge.

Top


British Guy, I've been reading your page on this site for about a year now. I've just moved to Manchester from the States for work and I have to ask = what the FUCK is wrong with these people???? Mike

Mike,
You'd need to give a few examples for me to pin this question down.

However, why on Earth would you leave a relatively good country such as the USA for the monstrous wreckage that is Tony Blair's legacy to the poor British overly taxed-payer? Have you the brain worms?

Top

Got a question for the Brit? You can e-mail them here or you can submit them via the Updates Page (for added anonymity)