On 5/20/2018 9:42 AM, Cheri wrote:
> "Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
> ...
> On Saturday, May 19, 2018 at 2:54:18 PM UTC-4, Dave Smith wrote:
>> On 2018-05-19 2:17 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> > On 5/19/2018 2:04 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
>> >> On 5/19/2018 1:22 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> It has been an interesting experience. Women have made a lot of
>> >>> advances in the work force and government over the last 50 years.
>> >>> Over the last week they have been fixated on a royal wedding, which
>> >>> usually involves a young woman becoming a princess or queen.
>> >>
>> >> Oh, yes, you caught us, we want to be princesses. Oik.
>> >>
>> >> No amount of money could entice me to take on that job.
>> >>
>> >> nancy
>> >
>> >
>> > Being a celebrity may be fun for a day, but then I'd want to go back to
>> > being a normal, happy, working stiff. I'm very happy with my life,
>> as > is.
>>
>> That is the older and wiser voice. The thing is that when I was a kid,
>> every little girl wanted to be a princess and marry a handsome prince.
>
> I must have been a little weird (ya think?) or I'm a little younger.
> My future plans vacillated between nuclear physicist and jet-setting
> spy working alongside Ilya Kuryakin.
>
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>
> =====
>
> I never was much interested in the princess thing myself when young.

I never was either. ;-D

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>
>> Bruce wrote:
>> > Just when you think he can't get any worse...
>>
>> Wait for it. He does get worse.
>
> Sheldon really does have a knack for making anything sexual sound
> so damn filthy. I suspect he might really be Larry Flint in
> disguise.


Or the main writer for Game of Thrones. ;-)

Cheri

"Gary" > wrote in message
news
> On 5/20/2018 9:42 AM, Cheri wrote:
>> "Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> On Saturday, May 19, 2018 at 2:54:18 PM UTC-4, Dave Smith wrote:
>>> On 2018-05-19 2:17 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> > On 5/19/2018 2:04 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
>>> >> On 5/19/2018 1:22 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> It has been an interesting experience. Women have made a lot of
>>> >>> advances in the work force and government over the last 50 years.
>>> >>> Over the last week they have been fixated on a royal wedding, which
>>> >>> usually involves a young woman becoming a princess or queen.
>>> >>
>>> >> Oh, yes, you caught us, we want to be princesses. Oik.
>>> >>
>>> >> No amount of money could entice me to take on that job.
>>> >>
>>> >> nancy
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Being a celebrity may be fun for a day, but then I'd want to go back
>>> > to
>>> > being a normal, happy, working stiff. I'm very happy with my life,
>>> as > is.
>>>
>>> That is the older and wiser voice. The thing is that when I was a kid,
>>> every little girl wanted to be a princess and marry a handsome prince.
>>
>> I must have been a little weird (ya think?) or I'm a little younger.
>> My future plans vacillated between nuclear physicist and jet-setting
>> spy working alongside Ilya Kuryakin.
>>
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton
>>
>> =====
>>
>> I never was much interested in the princess thing myself when young.
>
> I never was either. ;-D

You might have married one. ;-)

Cheri

On 5/20/2018 8:55 AM, wrote:
>>>
>
> Diana was a stupid woman, there was no excuse for her behaviour, she
> had mixed in those circles all her life and knew exactly what she was
> in for, best of all, the two grandmothers should not have arranged it.
>
I agree with that assessment. Charles was being pressured; the
grandmothers felt Diana would be the perfect wife. Anything to keep
Charles away from "that divorcee" and avoid another abdication. Heh.

Diana's death was tragic but I think it could have been avoided. She
and Dodie Al Fayed were at The Ritz. By all accounts they were
uncomfortable in the dining room so they had their food delivered to the
Imperial Suite. But there were still photographers outside the hotel.

If they were so concerned about the paparazzi why didn't they just stay
there for a while? No need to sneak out the back and rush off at
breakneck speed in the middle of the night. If they'd stuck around for
a few days and enjoyed the amenities they might both still be alive.

Jill

On Sun, 20 May 2018 10:00:16 -0400, jmcquown >
wrote:

>On 5/20/2018 8:55 AM, wrote:
>>>>
>>
>> Diana was a stupid woman, there was no excuse for her behaviour, she
>> had mixed in those circles all her life and knew exactly what she was
>> in for, best of all, the two grandmothers should not have arranged it.
>>
>I agree with that assessment. Charles was being pressured; the
>grandmothers felt Diana would be the perfect wife. Anything to keep
>Charles away from "that divorcee" and avoid another abdication. Heh.
>
>Diana's death was tragic but I think it could have been avoided. She
>and Dodie Al Fayed were at The Ritz. By all accounts they were
>uncomfortable in the dining room so they had their food delivered to the
>Imperial Suite. But there were still photographers outside the hotel.
>
>If they were so concerned about the paparazzi why didn't they just stay
>there for a while? No need to sneak out the back and rush off at
>breakneck speed in the middle of the night. If they'd stuck around for
>a few days and enjoyed the amenities they might both still be alive.
>
>Jill

She had rejected security from BP and who better to know how to handle
everything. Instead she allowed Dodi to organise it, and they were
all drunk, driver, Dodi and Diana when they got in the car. The only
one who lived was the guard sitting in the "death seat" next to the
driver - because he did up his seat belt, none of the others did. A
responsible mother would have done it up. It's ironic, I have to hear
two of my grandchildren proclaim their father as wonderful because
they can't remember what a shithead he was, died young. We don't
enlighten them but it is sometimes very difficult not to.

On 5/20/2018 9:38 AM, Gary wrote:
> wrote:
>>
>> Well said, they are young and clearly happy, that's likely what he is
>> jealous about.
>
> I watched it all and what a Royal storybook wedding they had.
> Even the weather was warm and sunny which I've heard is somewhat
> rare in England.
>
I thought it was very entertaining. And yes, the weather held
beautifully for the whole week leading up to and including their big
day. I doubt a little rain would have put much of a damper (heh) on
the event. If it had rained they'd have left in a closed carriage
rather than an open landau. The crowds would have been soaked but I
doubt they'd have cared.

Like Nancy, I was a tad worried about that one horse in the procession
as they were leaving. It looked ready to bolt. That actually happened
during the procession of Prince William and his bride Catherine, Duchess
of Cambridge. One of the horses in the advance guard ahead of the
carriage dumped its' rider on his ass and took off running. Oops!

Jill

On 2018-05-20 8:58 AM, wrote:
> On Sun, 20 May 2018 08:53:55 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> On 2018-05-20 8:38 AM, U.S. Janet B. wrote:
>>> On Sun, 20 May 2018 03:46:07 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>>
>>>>> That is the older and wiser voice. The thing is that when I was a kid,
>>>>> every little girl wanted to be a princess and marry a handsome prince.
>>>>
>>>> I must have been a little weird (ya think?) or I'm a little younger.
>>>> My future plans vacillated between nuclear physicist and jet-setting
>>>> spy working alongside Ilya Kuryakin.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>
>>> Nah, I wanted to be with Napoleon Solo, so you're not weird.
>>> I thought Grace Kelly was neat but never longed for her situation.
>>> Dave was just being patronizing about women again.
>>
>> Really? You little fantasy about being with Napoleon Solo ranks up there
>> with being a princess. For some reason, it is only patronizing when I
>> point out the reality.
>>
> I thought exactly the same as Janet, you should look inwards, you
> rarely miss a chance to patronize women. All kids imagine themselves
> as people from books, movies, tv whatever, it's a normal thing to do.



I don't need to look inward. I grew up with a generation of women who
dreamed of becoming a princess and then fought to be taken seriously in
business, industry and government, but then when there is a royal
wedding they are fascinated by it. That is not patronizing. It is just
reality.

On 5/20/2018 10:10 AM, wrote:
> On Sun, 20 May 2018 10:00:16 -0400, jmcquown >
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/20/2018 8:55 AM, wrote:
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Diana was a stupid woman, there was no excuse for her behaviour, she
>>> had mixed in those circles all her life and knew exactly what she was
>>> in for, best of all, the two grandmothers should not have arranged it.
>>>
>> I agree with that assessment. Charles was being pressured; the
>> grandmothers felt Diana would be the perfect wife. Anything to keep
>> Charles away from "that divorcee" and avoid another abdication. Heh.
>>
>> Diana's death was tragic but I think it could have been avoided. She
>> and Dodie Al Fayed were at The Ritz. By all accounts they were
>> uncomfortable in the dining room so they had their food delivered to the
>> Imperial Suite. But there were still photographers outside the hotel.
>>
>> If they were so concerned about the paparazzi why didn't they just stay
>> there for a while? No need to sneak out the back and rush off at
>> breakneck speed in the middle of the night. If they'd stuck around for
>> a few days and enjoyed the amenities they might both still be alive.
>>
>> Jill
>
> She had rejected security from BP and who better to know how to handle
> everything. Instead she allowed Dodi to organise it, and they were
> all drunk, driver, Dodi and Diana when they got in the car. The only
> one who lived was the guard sitting in the "death seat" next to the
> driver - because he did up his seat belt, none of the others did. A
> responsible mother would have done it up.

Yep, even after the divorce they offered her the same protection she'd
had all along and she said no. Just plain stubborn. And then not to
put on your seat belt, how stupid! The crash was ultimately blamed on
the driver being drunk but I can well believe they all were.

> It's ironic, I have to hear
> two of my grandchildren proclaim their father as wonderful because
> they can't remember what a shithead he was, died young. We don't
> enlighten them but it is sometimes very difficult not to.
>
I'm sorry to hear that. But yes, there's not much point in
disillusioning them now. I can imagine how difficult it must be to have
to bite your tongue sometimes.

Jill

On 5/20/2018 6:46 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Saturday, May 19, 2018 at 2:54:18 PM UTC-4, Dave Smith wrote:
>> On 2018-05-19 2:17 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On 5/19/2018 2:04 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
>>>> On 5/19/2018 1:22 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> It has been an interesting experience. Women have made a lot of
>>>>> advances in the work force and government over the last 50 years.
>>>>> Over the last week they have been fixated on a royal wedding, which
>>>>> usually involves a young woman becoming a princess or queen.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, yes, you caught us, we want to be princesses.Â* Oik.
>>>>
>>>> No amount of money could entice me to take on that job.
>>>>
>>>> nancy
>>>
>>>
>>> Being a celebrity may be fun for a day, but then I'd want to go back to
>>> being a normal, happy, working stiff. I'm very happy with my life, as is.
>>
>> That is the older and wiser voice. The thing is that when I was a kid,
>> every little girl wanted to be a princess and marry a handsome prince.
>
> I must have been a little weird (ya think?) or I'm a little younger.
> My future plans vacillated between nuclear physicist and jet-setting
> spy working alongside Ilya Kuryakin.
>
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>
The Man From U.N.C.L.E.! I caught an [old] episode of NCIS where
Ducky (David McCallum) showed up at a crime scene and someone standing
outside the crime scene tape said, "You look familiar." Ducky looks up
and the person says, "You look like Ilya Kuryakin!" It made me laugh.

Jill

On 5/20/2018 9:42 AM, Cheri wrote:
> "Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
> ...
> On Saturday, May 19, 2018 at 2:54:18 PM UTC-4, Dave Smith wrote:
>> On 2018-05-19 2:17 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> > On 5/19/2018 2:04 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
>> >> On 5/19/2018 1:22 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> It has been an interesting experience. Women have made a lot of
>> >>> advances in the work force and government over the last 50 years.
>> >>> Over the last week they have been fixated on a royal wedding, which
>> >>> usually involves a young woman becoming a princess or queen.
>> >>
>> >> Oh, yes, you caught us, we want to be princesses. Oik.
>> >>
>> >> No amount of money could entice me to take on that job.
>> >>
>> >> nancy
>> >
>> >
>> > Being a celebrity may be fun for a day, but then I'd want to go back to
>> > being a normal, happy, working stiff. I'm very happy with my life,
>> as > is.
>>
>> That is the older and wiser voice. The thing is* that when I was a kid,
>> every little girl wanted to be a princess and marry a handsome prince.
>
> I must have been a little weird (ya think?) or I'm a little younger.
> My future plans vacillated between nuclear physicist and jet-setting
> spy working alongside Ilya Kuryakin.
>
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>
> =====
>
> I never was much interested in the princess thing myself when young.
>
> Cheri

When I was about six I wanted to be a ballerina. Problem is, I am not
at all graceful and have no sense of balance. Toe shoes? Forget about it!

Jill

On 5/20/2018 9:40 AM, Cheri wrote:
> "Gary" > wrote in message
> ...
>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>
>>> *Cheri wrote:
>>> Yes, lots of good historical info.* And the gowns.* (Was not a fan of
>>> Diana's "froofy" gown with huge poofy... well, everything. Oh good lord.
>>> * The 1980's.)
>>>
>>> I love the show you're talking about on PBS.* Interesting to me was
>>> Queen Elizabeth II had to have the tiara she chose to wear repaired on
>>> her wedding day.
>>
>> Maybe a different PBS show but I watched most of a 2-hour
>> biography of Queen Elizabeth II about a week ago. It was
>> interesting as I knew little about her. Good show.
>
>
> I think I saw that as well, the one I'm talking about was on for four or
> so nights on PBS leading up to the wedding. There was a lot of
> interesting facts, traditiions, etc.
>
> Cheri

Was it 'Royal Wedding Watch' hosted by Meredith Viera?

Jill

jmcquown wrote:
>
> When I was about six I wanted to be a ballerina. Problem is, I am not
> at all graceful and have no sense of balance. Toe shoes? Forget about it!

Your friend, Julie was. heheheh

On 5/20/2018 9:17 AM, Gary wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
>>
>> U.S. Janet B. wrote:
>>> Gary is trying to subtly introduce the fact that Harry is introducing
>>> black blood into the royal family. That's the scandal for Gary.
>>>
>> I think that's what Gary is *hinting* at, too. He really should look up
>> the second wife of King George III, Princess Charlotte.
>
> Both of you are now the official Neighborhood Nosey Old Biddies,
> second guessing about people and spreading erroneous rumors.
> Every neighborhood has one but The RFC neighborhood evidently has
> two. Shame on both of you.
>
> My comments were not about race at all. Never even entered my
> mind so I was stunned to read your interpretation of what I said.
>
> Both of you now owe me an apology. I won't hold my breath for one
> though.
> I suspect both of you are too arrogant to admit error.
>
> >;-[]
>
I'll apologize if you'll explain what you meant by "scandal". What,
that she's American? Divorced? What scandal did you intend us to infer
from your comments?

Jill

On 2018-05-20 10:00 AM, jmcquown wrote:

> I agree with that assessment.Â* Charles was being pressured; the
> grandmothers felt Diana would be the perfect wife.Â* Anything to keep
> Charles away from "that divorcee" and avoid another abdication.Â* Heh.
>
> Diana's death was tragic but I think it could have been avoided.Â* She
> and Dodie Al Fayed were at The Ritz.Â* By all accounts they were
> uncomfortable in the dining room so they had their food delivered to the
> Imperial Suite.Â* But there were still photographers outside the hotel.
>
> If they were so concerned about the paparazzi why didn't they just stay
> there for a while?Â* No need to sneak out the back and rush off at
> breakneck speed in the middle of the night.Â* If they'd stuck around for
> a few days and enjoyed the amenities they might both still be alive.


I was talking to a woman the other day who blamed Charles for Diana's
death. That was ridiculous. He had nothing to do with it. It was the
result of a combination of high speed and a variety of drugs in the
driver's body. There could also be an element of entitlement to the
driver and his passengers who thought they were important enough to be
driving at such high speed on city streets.

Perhaps if celebrities were a little more open about their lives the
paparazzi would leave them alone. Their pictures are only valuable when
they are hard to get. Some celebrities have gone after the tabloids in
the courts.

FWIW on a trip to Paris in 1999 I stayed at a hotel on rue Jean de
Gouchon. I went for a walk around the block recognized the tunnel from
all the photos that had been in the media for the last year and a half
since Diana's death. Very close to it was the Flame of Liberty, which
had been co-opted as a memorial to Diana.

It was interesting to see Fayed's father accusing the royal family of
having the couple killed. He claimed that MI6 carried it out with the
help of the French. Neat trick to orchestrate a high speed chase
through the streets of Paris in order to cause a fatal high speed crash
in a tunnel.

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 5/20/2018 9:42 AM, Cheri wrote:
>> "Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> On Saturday, May 19, 2018 at 2:54:18 PM UTC-4, Dave Smith wrote:
>>> On 2018-05-19 2:17 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> > On 5/19/2018 2:04 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
>>> >> On 5/19/2018 1:22 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> It has been an interesting experience. Women have made a lot of
>>> >>> advances in the work force and government over the last 50 years.
>>> >>> Over the last week they have been fixated on a royal wedding, which
>>> >>> usually involves a young woman becoming a princess or queen.
>>> >>
>>> >> Oh, yes, you caught us, we want to be princesses. Oik.
>>> >>
>>> >> No amount of money could entice me to take on that job.
>>> >>
>>> >> nancy
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Being a celebrity may be fun for a day, but then I'd want to go back
>>> > to
>>> > being a normal, happy, working stiff. I'm very happy with my life,
>>> as > is.
>>>
>>> That is the older and wiser voice. The thing is that when I was a kid,
>>> every little girl wanted to be a princess and marry a handsome prince.
>>
>> I must have been a little weird (ya think?) or I'm a little younger.
>> My future plans vacillated between nuclear physicist and jet-setting
>> spy working alongside Ilya Kuryakin.
>>
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton
>>
>> =====
>>
>> I never was much interested in the princess thing myself when young.
>>
>> Cheri
>
> When I was about six I wanted to be a ballerina. Problem is, I am not at
> all graceful and have no sense of balance. Toe shoes? Forget about it!
>
> Jill


I always wanted to be a doctor until I realized how long you had to go to
school, thank God for the internet. ;-)

Cheri

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 5/20/2018 9:40 AM, Cheri wrote:
>> "Gary" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Cheri wrote:
>>>> Yes, lots of good historical info. And the gowns. (Was not a fan of
>>>> Diana's "froofy" gown with huge poofy... well, everything. Oh good
>>>> lord.
>>>> The 1980's.)
>>>>
>>>> I love the show you're talking about on PBS. Interesting to me was
>>>> Queen Elizabeth II had to have the tiara she chose to wear repaired on
>>>> her wedding day.
>>>
>>> Maybe a different PBS show but I watched most of a 2-hour
>>> biography of Queen Elizabeth II about a week ago. It was
>>> interesting as I knew little about her. Good show.
>>
>>
>> I think I saw that as well, the one I'm talking about was on for four or
>> so nights on PBS leading up to the wedding. There was a lot of
>> interesting facts, traditiions, etc.
>>
>> Cheri
>
> Was it 'Royal Wedding Watch' hosted by Meredith Viera?
>
> Jill


Yes, she was hosting with a man, I can't recall his name.

Cheri

On 5/20/2018 10:41 AM, Gary wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
>>
>> When I was about six I wanted to be a ballerina. Problem is, I am not
>> at all graceful and have no sense of balance. Toe shoes? Forget about it!
>
> Your friend, Julie was. heheheh
>
Heh. I knew better. Sure, my mom took me to ballet and tap lessons.
It's what mom's did with little girls back then. I was smart enough to
know I wasn't ever going to be a ballerina. I really just liked the
costumes.

Jill

On 5/19/2018 6:32 PM, jmcquown wrote:

> I didn't know until this past week many traditional royal wedding cakes
> have been fruit cakes.
>
> Jill

As have many of the Royals themselves.

jmcquown wrote:
>
> On 5/20/2018 9:17 AM, Gary wrote:
> > jmcquown wrote:
> >>
> >> U.S. Janet B. wrote:
> >>> Gary is trying to subtly introduce the fact that Harry is introducing
> >>> black blood into the royal family. That's the scandal for Gary.
> >>>
> >> I think that's what Gary is *hinting* at, too. He really should look up
> >> the second wife of King George III, Princess Charlotte.
> >
> > Both of you are now the official Neighborhood Nosey Old Biddies,
> > second guessing about people and spreading erroneous rumors.
> > Every neighborhood has one but The RFC neighborhood evidently has
> > two. Shame on both of you.
> >
> > My comments were not about race at all. Never even entered my
> > mind so I was stunned to read your interpretation of what I said.
> >
> > Both of you now owe me an apology. I won't hold my breath for one
> > though.
> > I suspect both of you are too arrogant to admit error.
> >
> > >;-[]
> >
> I'll apologize if you'll explain what you meant by "scandal". What,
> that she's American? Divorced? What scandal did you intend us to infer
> from your comments?
>
> Jill

Scandal in my mind came from the news portraying her family as
trailer trash. Not fit for the Royal and proper family. The rich
in my area really frown on their kids marrying into poor and
questionable families rather than all the country club kids from
rich and "proper families. It's real here, believe me.

This is what I assumed but Janet UK nicely explained it all with
no assumption that my comment was about race.

On 5/20/2018 8:58 AM, wrote:
> On Sun, 20 May 2018 08:53:55 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> On 2018-05-20 8:38 AM, U.S. Janet B. wrote:
>>> On Sun, 20 May 2018 03:46:07 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>>
>>>>> That is the older and wiser voice. The thing is that when I was a kid,
>>>>> every little girl wanted to be a princess and marry a handsome prince.
>>>>
>>>> I must have been a little weird (ya think?) or I'm a little younger.
>>>> My future plans vacillated between nuclear physicist and jet-setting
>>>> spy working alongside Ilya Kuryakin.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>
>>> Nah, I wanted to be with Napoleon Solo, so you're not weird.
>>> I thought Grace Kelly was neat but never longed for her situation.
>>> Dave was just being patronizing about women again.
>>
>> Really? You little fantasy about being with Napoleon Solo ranks up there
>> with being a princess. For some reason, it is only patronizing when I
>> point out the reality.
>>
> I thought exactly the same as Janet, you should look inwards, you
> rarely miss a chance to patronize women. All kids imagine themselves
> as people from books, movies, tv whatever, it's a normal thing to do.
>
Yes, it's perfectly normal. My brothers used to read 'Tom Swift' books
and imagine themselves as genius boy scientist/inventors. Dad gave them
a chemical set - probably not a great idea. My oldest brother took
apart one of Dad's radios, good thing he figured out how to put it back
together. Neither one of them wound up being inventors. Or geniuses.
LOL Some little girls wanted to be Nancy Drew. It's what kids do.
It's called imagination.

What's the big deal, Dave? Weren't you ever a kid?

Jill <---did not dream of being a princess

On 5/20/2018 10:46 AM, Cheri wrote:
> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 5/20/2018 9:40 AM, Cheri wrote:
>>> "Gary" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheri wrote:
>>>>> Yes, lots of good historical info. And the gowns. (Was not a fan of
>>>>> Diana's "froofy" gown with huge poofy... well, everything. Oh good
>>>>> lord.
>>>>> The 1980's.)
>>>>>
>>>>> I love the show you're talking about on PBS. Interesting to me was
>>>>> Queen Elizabeth II had to have the tiara she chose to wear repaired on
>>>>> her wedding day.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe a different PBS show but I watched most of a 2-hour
>>>> biography of Queen Elizabeth II about a week ago. It was
>>>> interesting as I knew little about her. Good show.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think I saw that as well, the one I'm talking about was on for four
>>> or so nights on PBS leading up to the wedding. There was a lot of
>>> interesting facts, traditiions, etc.
>>>
>>> Cheri
>>
>> Was it 'Royal Wedding Watch' hosted by Meredith Viera?
>>
>> Jill
>
>
> Yes, she was hosting with a man, I can't recall his name.
>
> Cheri

I can't remember his name either. I looked him up. his name is Matt
Baker. He's a BBC television presenter. I guess that means host? Very
cute!

They had a guest on the panel a couple of times, Dickie Arbiter (had to
look that up, too) former press secretary to the Queen. He had an
inside view to past Royal weddings and protocol, having been through a few.

I couldn't get past the glaring tie he was wearing! I saw him in other
interviews about the [then] upcoming wedding on other programs, he was
always wearing that same tie. I think he was wearing it in the older
program about Queen Elizabeth II, too. I kept thinking, dude, don't you
own another tie? It was so distracting! LOL

But overall the 'Royal Wedding Watch' series contained a lot of fun
historical information. It was fascinating to me to see the care that
goes into making the Queens gloves. Hats, gowns, wedding cakes.

Jill

On Sun, 20 May 2018 11:35:19 -0400, jmcquown >
wrote:

>On 5/20/2018 10:46 AM, Cheri wrote:
>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 5/20/2018 9:40 AM, Cheri wrote:
>>>> "Gary" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheri wrote:
>>>>>> Yes, lots of good historical info. And the gowns. (Was not a fan of
>>>>>> Diana's "froofy" gown with huge poofy... well, everything. Oh good
>>>>>> lord.
>>>>>> The 1980's.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I love the show you're talking about on PBS. Interesting to me was
>>>>>> Queen Elizabeth II had to have the tiara she chose to wear repaired on
>>>>>> her wedding day.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe a different PBS show but I watched most of a 2-hour
>>>>> biography of Queen Elizabeth II about a week ago. It was
>>>>> interesting as I knew little about her. Good show.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think I saw that as well, the one I'm talking about was on for four
>>>> or so nights on PBS leading up to the wedding. There was a lot of
>>>> interesting facts, traditiions, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Cheri
>>>
>>> Was it 'Royal Wedding Watch' hosted by Meredith Viera?
>>>
>>> Jill
>>
>>
>> Yes, she was hosting with a man, I can't recall his name.
>>
>> Cheri
>
>I can't remember his name either. I looked him up. his name is Matt
>Baker. He's a BBC television presenter. I guess that means host? Very
>cute!
>
>They had a guest on the panel a couple of times, Dickie Arbiter (had to
>look that up, too) former press secretary to the Queen. He had an
>inside view to past Royal weddings and protocol, having been through a few.
>
>I couldn't get past the glaring tie he was wearing! I saw him in other
>interviews about the [then] upcoming wedding on other programs, he was
>always wearing that same tie. I think he was wearing it in the older
>program about Queen Elizabeth II, too. I kept thinking, dude, don't you
>own another tie? It was so distracting! LOL
>
>But overall the 'Royal Wedding Watch' series contained a lot of fun
>historical information. It was fascinating to me to see the care that
>goes into making the Queens gloves. Hats, gowns, wedding cakes.
>
>Jill

Likely he was wearing his old school tie -

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 5/20/2018 10:41 AM, Gary wrote:
>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>
>>> When I was about six I wanted to be a ballerina. Problem is, I am not
>>> at all graceful and have no sense of balance. Toe shoes? Forget about
>>> it!
>>
>> Your friend, Julie was. heheheh
>>
> Heh. I knew better. Sure, my mom took me to ballet and tap lessons. It's
> what mom's did with little girls back then. I was smart enough to know I
> wasn't ever going to be a ballerina. I really just liked the costumes.
>
> Jill


My mom took my bro and me to tap dancing lessons. We both hated that.

Cheri

"jmcquown" > wrote in message news:YAgMC.68523

> But overall the 'Royal Wedding Watch' series contained a lot of fun
> historical information. It was fascinating to me to see the care that
> goes into making the Queens gloves. Hats, gowns, wedding cakes.
>
> Jill


For sure.

Cheri

On 5/20/2018 10:57 AM, Gary wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
>>
>> On 5/20/2018 9:17 AM, Gary wrote:
>>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>>
>>>> U.S. Janet B. wrote:
>>>>> Gary is trying to subtly introduce the fact that Harry is introducing
>>>>> black blood into the royal family. That's the scandal for Gary.
>>>>>
>>>> I think that's what Gary is *hinting* at, too. He really should look up
>>>> the second wife of King George III, Princess Charlotte.
>>>
>>> Both of you are now the official Neighborhood Nosey Old Biddies,
>>> second guessing about people and spreading erroneous rumors.
>>> Every neighborhood has one but The RFC neighborhood evidently has
>>> two. Shame on both of you.
>>>
>>> My comments were not about race at all. Never even entered my
>>> mind so I was stunned to read your interpretation of what I said.
>>>
>>> Both of you now owe me an apology. I won't hold my breath for one
>>> though.
>>> I suspect both of you are too arrogant to admit error.
>>>
>>> >;-[]
>>>
>> I'll apologize if you'll explain what you meant by "scandal". What,
>> that she's American? Divorced? What scandal did you intend us to infer
>> from your comments?
>>
>> Jill
>
> Scandal in my mind came from the news portraying her family as
> trailer trash. Not fit for the Royal and proper family. The rich
> in my area really frown on their kids marrying into poor and
> questionable families rather than all the country club kids from
> rich and "proper families. It's real here, believe me.
>
> This is what I assumed but Janet UK nicely explained it all with
> no assumption that my comment was about race.
>
Okay, then I apologize if I misunderstood you.

For the record, I did not pay much attention to how the media portrayed
her family. She's an adult, she's been standing on her own two feet for
years.

And also for the record, you *did* say "Meghan Markle sounds like a
stripper name". You didn't know a thing about her but you posted that.
So apparently you bought into the hype.

As for her name, Rachel Meghan Markle - her father is of Irish descent.
She didn't name herself.

Her half brother and half sister may well be "white trash". I don't
know and I don't care. They will never be welcome at Kensington or
wherever else Meghan and Harry settle, that's for sure.

Jill

On 2018-05-20 10:52 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 5/19/2018 6:32 PM, jmcquown wrote:
>
>> I didn't know until this past week many traditional royal wedding
>> cakes have been fruit cakes.
>>
>> Jill
>
> As have many of the Royals themselves.

LOL good one.

On Sun, 20 May 2018 08:53:55 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2018-05-20 8:38 AM, U.S. Janet B. wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 May 2018 03:46:07 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>
>>>> That is the older and wiser voice. The thing is that when I was a kid,
>>>> every little girl wanted to be a princess and marry a handsome prince.
>>>
>>> I must have been a little weird (ya think?) or I'm a little younger.
>>> My future plans vacillated between nuclear physicist and jet-setting
>>> spy working alongside Ilya Kuryakin.
>>>
>>>
>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>
>> Nah, I wanted to be with Napoleon Solo, so you're not weird.
>> I thought Grace Kelly was neat but never longed for her situation.
>> Dave was just being patronizing about women again.
>
>Really? You little fantasy about being with Napoleon Solo ranks up there
>with being a princess. For some reason, it is only patronizing when I
>point out the reality.
>
There you go again. I didn't want to "be with' Napoleon Solo. I
wanted to be catching spies with the likes of him. What little boy
wishes did you have that don't fall under the same umbrella?
Janet US

On Sun, 20 May 2018 10:15:48 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2018-05-20 8:58 AM, wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 May 2018 08:53:55 -0400, Dave Smith
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 2018-05-20 8:38 AM, U.S. Janet B. wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 20 May 2018 03:46:07 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
>>>
>>>>>> That is the older and wiser voice. The thing is that when I was a kid,
>>>>>> every little girl wanted to be a princess and marry a handsome prince.
>>>>>
>>>>> I must have been a little weird (ya think?) or I'm a little younger.
>>>>> My future plans vacillated between nuclear physicist and jet-setting
>>>>> spy working alongside Ilya Kuryakin.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>>
>>>> Nah, I wanted to be with Napoleon Solo, so you're not weird.
>>>> I thought Grace Kelly was neat but never longed for her situation.
>>>> Dave was just being patronizing about women again.
>>>
>>> Really? You little fantasy about being with Napoleon Solo ranks up there
>>> with being a princess. For some reason, it is only patronizing when I
>>> point out the reality.
>>>
>> I thought exactly the same as Janet, you should look inwards, you
>> rarely miss a chance to patronize women. All kids imagine themselves
>> as people from books, movies, tv whatever, it's a normal thing to do.
>
>
>
>I don't need to look inward. I grew up with a generation of women who
>dreamed of becoming a princess and then fought to be taken seriously in
>business, industry and government, but then when there is a royal
>wedding they are fascinated by it. That is not patronizing. It is just
>reality.

So, then, you are telling us that you have nothing outside yourself
that interests you or catches your attention? Sports teams, the
stock market, etc? What a dull fellow. That explains why you are
able to sit home, look around and judge everyone so critically. You
don't engage yourself so you are always perfect.

On Sun, 20 May 2018 10:50:35 -0400, jmcquown >
wrote:

>On 5/20/2018 10:41 AM, Gary wrote:
>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>
>>> When I was about six I wanted to be a ballerina. Problem is, I am not
>>> at all graceful and have no sense of balance. Toe shoes? Forget about it!
>>
>> Your friend, Julie was. heheheh
>>
>Heh. I knew better. Sure, my mom took me to ballet and tap lessons.
>It's what mom's did with little girls back then. I was smart enough to
>know I wasn't ever going to be a ballerina. I really just liked the
>costumes.
>
>Jill
as you say, it was what moms did back then.

On Sun, 20 May 2018 10:34:07 -0400, jmcquown >
wrote:

>On 5/20/2018 6:46 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> On Saturday, May 19, 2018 at 2:54:18 PM UTC-4, Dave Smith wrote:
>>> On 2018-05-19 2:17 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>> On 5/19/2018 2:04 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
>>>>> On 5/19/2018 1:22 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It has been an interesting experience. Women have made a lot of
>>>>>> advances in the work force and government over the last 50 years.
>>>>>> Over the last week they have been fixated on a royal wedding, which
>>>>>> usually involves a young woman becoming a princess or queen.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, yes, you caught us, we want to be princesses.* Oik.
>>>>>
>>>>> No amount of money could entice me to take on that job.
>>>>>
>>>>> nancy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Being a celebrity may be fun for a day, but then I'd want to go back to
>>>> being a normal, happy, working stiff. I'm very happy with my life, as is.
>>>
>>> That is the older and wiser voice. The thing is that when I was a kid,
>>> every little girl wanted to be a princess and marry a handsome prince.
>>
>> I must have been a little weird (ya think?) or I'm a little younger.
>> My future plans vacillated between nuclear physicist and jet-setting
>> spy working alongside Ilya Kuryakin.
>>
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton
>>
>The Man From U.N.C.L.E.! I caught an [old] episode of NCIS where
>Ducky (David McCallum) showed up at a crime scene and someone standing
>outside the crime scene tape said, "You look familiar." Ducky looks up
>and the person says, "You look like Ilya Kuryakin!" It made me laugh.
>
>Jill

I missed that one.

On Sun, 20 May 2018 09:16:36 -0400, Gary > wrote:

snip
>
>I know you don't seem to like me but please don't spread rumors
>about what I say. It's unbecoming of you.

Oh, please. I haven't played the violin in years and am not going to
play your tune. What is it? Cry me a River?

Just going on your past performance regarding race, women, poor people
etc, etc. . The fact that you posted such a negative leaning post
tainted the impression you made.
Janet US

On 5/20/2018 11:35 AM, jmcquown wrote:
> On 5/20/2018 10:46 AM, Cheri wrote:
>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 5/20/2018 9:40 AM, Cheri wrote:
>>>> "Gary" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheri wrote:
>>>>>> Yes, lots of good historical info. And the gowns. (Was not a fan of
>>>>>> Diana's "froofy" gown with huge poofy... well, everything. Oh good
>>>>>> lord.
>>>>>> The 1980's.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I love the show you're talking about on PBS. Interesting to me was
>>>>>> Queen Elizabeth II had to have the tiara she chose to wear
>>>>>> repaired on
>>>>>> her wedding day.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe a different PBS show but I watched most of a 2-hour
>>>>> biography of Queen Elizabeth II about a week ago. It was
>>>>> interesting as I knew little about her. Good show.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think I saw that as well, the one I'm talking about was on for
>>>> four or so nights on PBS leading up to the wedding. There was a lot
>>>> of interesting facts, traditiions, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Cheri
>>>
>>> Was it 'Royal Wedding Watch' hosted by Meredith Viera?
>>>
>>> Jill
>>
>>
>> Yes, she was hosting with a man, I can't recall his name.
>>
>> Cheri
>
> I can't remember his name either.* I looked him up.* his name is Matt
> Baker.* He's a BBC television presenter.* I guess that means host?* Very
> cute!
>

Yes, new people are called presenters or news readers. They don't make
them out to be powerful news anchormen like we have here.

On 5/20/2018 12:05 PM, U.S. Janet B. wrote:
> On Sun, 20 May 2018 10:15:48 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>> I don't need to look inward. I grew up with a generation of women who
>> dreamed of becoming a princess and then fought to be taken seriously in
>> business, industry and government, but then when there is a royal
>> wedding they are fascinated by it. That is not patronizing. It is just
>> reality.
>
> So, then, you are telling us that you have nothing outside yourself
> that interests you or catches your attention? Sports teams, the
> stock market, etc? What a dull fellow. That explains why you are
> able to sit home, look around and judge everyone so critically. You
> don't engage yourself so you are always perfect.

Any little thing to support shaky feelings of superiority. Oh, they
like weddings, especially princess weddings, I'm better.

nancy

On 5/20/2018 11:42 AM, wrote:
> On Sun, 20 May 2018 11:35:19 -0400, jmcquown >
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/20/2018 10:46 AM, Cheri wrote:
>>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On 5/20/2018 9:40 AM, Cheri wrote:
>>>>> "Gary" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheri wrote:
>>>>>>> Yes, lots of good historical info. And the gowns. (Was not a fan of
>>>>>>> Diana's "froofy" gown with huge poofy... well, everything. Oh good
>>>>>>> lord.
>>>>>>> The 1980's.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I love the show you're talking about on PBS. Interesting to me was
>>>>>>> Queen Elizabeth II had to have the tiara she chose to wear repaired on
>>>>>>> her wedding day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe a different PBS show but I watched most of a 2-hour
>>>>>> biography of Queen Elizabeth II about a week ago. It was
>>>>>> interesting as I knew little about her. Good show.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I saw that as well, the one I'm talking about was on for four
>>>>> or so nights on PBS leading up to the wedding. There was a lot of
>>>>> interesting facts, traditiions, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheri
>>>>
>>>> Was it 'Royal Wedding Watch' hosted by Meredith Viera?
>>>>
>>>> Jill
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, she was hosting with a man, I can't recall his name.
>>>
>>> Cheri
>>
>> I can't remember his name either. I looked him up. his name is Matt
>> Baker. He's a BBC television presenter. I guess that means host? Very
>> cute!
>>
>> They had a guest on the panel a couple of times, Dickie Arbiter (had to
>> look that up, too) former press secretary to the Queen. He had an
>> inside view to past Royal weddings and protocol, having been through a few.
>>
>> I couldn't get past the glaring tie he was wearing! I saw him in other
>> interviews about the [then] upcoming wedding on other programs, he was
>> always wearing that same tie. I think he was wearing it in the older
>> program about Queen Elizabeth II, too. I kept thinking, dude, don't you
>> own another tie? It was so distracting! LOL
>>
>> But overall the 'Royal Wedding Watch' series contained a lot of fun
>> historical information. It was fascinating to me to see the care that
>> goes into making the Queens gloves. Hats, gowns, wedding cakes.
>>
>> Jill
>
> Likely he was wearing his old school tie -
>
Was his old school tie bright, almost psychedelic?

It's this one he keeps wearing:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/galler...rbiter-4292104

Jill

On 5/20/2018 12:23 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 5/20/2018 11:35 AM, jmcquown wrote:
>> On 5/20/2018 10:46 AM, Cheri wrote:
>>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On 5/20/2018 9:40 AM, Cheri wrote:
>>>>> "Gary" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheri wrote:
>>>>>>> Yes, lots of good historical info. And the gowns. (Was not a fan of
>>>>>>> Diana's "froofy" gown with huge poofy... well, everything. Oh
>>>>>>> good lord.
>>>>>>> The 1980's.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I love the show you're talking about on PBS. Interesting to me was
>>>>>>> Queen Elizabeth II had to have the tiara she chose to wear
>>>>>>> repaired on
>>>>>>> her wedding day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe a different PBS show but I watched most of a 2-hour
>>>>>> biography of Queen Elizabeth II about a week ago. It was
>>>>>> interesting as I knew little about her. Good show.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I saw that as well, the one I'm talking about was on for
>>>>> four or so nights on PBS leading up to the wedding. There was a lot
>>>>> of interesting facts, traditiions, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheri
>>>>
>>>> Was it 'Royal Wedding Watch' hosted by Meredith Viera?
>>>>
>>>> Jill
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, she was hosting with a man, I can't recall his name.
>>>
>>> Cheri
>>
>> I can't remember his name either.* I looked him up.* his name is Matt
>> Baker.* He's a BBC television presenter.* I guess that means host?
>> Very cute!
>>
>
> Yes, new people are called presenters or news readers.* They don't make
> them out to be powerful news anchormen like we have here.

I don't pay much attention to news achors no matter where they're from.
The show did present some fun wonderful historical information. And I
hated Dickie's tie. LOL

Jill

On 2018-05-20 11:11 AM, jmcquown wrote:
> On 5/20/2018 8:58 AM, wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 May 2018 08:53:55 -0400, Dave Smith

>> I thought exactly the same as Janet, you should look inwards, you
>> rarely miss a chance to patronize women.Â* All kids imagine themselves
>> as people from books, movies, tv whatever, it's a normal thing to do.
>>
> Yes, it's perfectly normal.Â* My brothers used to read 'Tom Swift' books
> and imagine themselves as genius boy scientist/inventors.Â* Dad gave them
> a chemical set - probably not a great idea.Â* My oldest brother took
> apart one of Dad's radios, good thing he figured out how to put it back
> together.Â* Neither one of them wound up being inventors.Â* Or geniuses.
> LOLÂ* Some little girls wanted to be Nancy Drew.Â* It's what kids do. It's
> called imagination.
>
> What's the big deal, Dave?Â* Weren't you ever a kid?

Yes. Of course I was a kid. We played boy games and dreamed of male
jobs. The girls played with dolls and had tea parties. They fascinated
by princesses. A princess marries well and runs the household.... with
lots of help. I saw enough coverage of this royal wedding to see that
the turnout was overwhelmingly female, young and old. My point remains
that I expected that all the advances of the women's movement would have
eliminated the fascination with marrying a prince.

On 2018-05-20 11:43 AM, Cheri wrote:
> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>
>> Heh.Â* I knew better.Â* Sure, my mom took me to ballet and tap lessons.
>> It's what mom's did with little girls back then.Â* I was smart enough
>> to know I wasn't ever going to be a ballerina.Â* I really just liked
>> the costumes.
>>
>> Jill
>
>
> My mom took my bro and me to tap dancing lessons. We both hated that.

I can imagine. There are lots of people who love to watch it, but few
you actually do it. There are a lot of people in show business who have
invested a lot of time and energy into learning singing, musical
instruments and dance in search of a well rounded background for a
career in the performing arts. It should not be a total surprise to
learn that some major stars get leading roles in musicals where they
have to sing and dance.

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 2018-05-20 11:43 AM, Cheri wrote:
>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>>> Heh. I knew better. Sure, my mom took me to ballet and tap lessons.
>>> It's what mom's did with little girls back then. I was smart enough to
>>> know I wasn't ever going to be a ballerina. I really just liked the
>>> costumes.
>>>
>>> Jill
>>
>>
>> My mom took my bro and me to tap dancing lessons. We both hated that.
>
> I can imagine. There are lots of people who love to watch it, but few you
> actually do it. There are a lot of people in show business who have
> invested a lot of time and energy into learning singing, musical
> instruments and dance in search of a well rounded background for a career
> in the performing arts. It should not be a total surprise to learn that
> some major stars get leading roles in musicals where they have to sing and
> dance.
>


We didn't last long, money wasted on tap shoes and plywood for practice. LOL

Cheri

On 5/20/2018 11:43 AM, Cheri wrote:
> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 5/20/2018 10:41 AM, Gary wrote:
>>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>>
>>>> When I was about six I wanted to be a ballerina.* Problem is, I am not
>>>> at all graceful and have no sense of balance.* Toe shoes?* Forget
>>>> about it!
>>>
>>> Your friend, Julie was.* heheheh
>>>
>> Heh.* I knew better.* Sure, my mom took me to ballet and tap lessons.
>> It's what mom's did with little girls back then.* I was smart enough
>> to know I wasn't ever going to be a ballerina.* I really just liked
>> the costumes.
>>
>> Jill
>
>
> My mom took my bro and me to tap dancing lessons. We both hated that.
>
> Cheri

I liked the sound the taps made, but never got much past past
shuffle/ball/change. Wasn't good at that, either. Why did they expect
us to learn to dance? What a strange thing.

I took classes on both coasts. Started out with lessons in Toms River,
New Jersey (Dad was stationed at Lakehurst) in 1965 and ended up in
classes in Riverside, CA in 1967.

I finally told my mother, I really don't like this. I'm sure she was
relieved. This was the early version of "soccer moms". Mothers whose
kids had scheduled activities.

At that age I'd much have rather been at home playing with my friends
after school. Or reading a book. I loved reading from a very early age.

Jill

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 5/20/2018 11:43 AM, Cheri wrote:
>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 5/20/2018 10:41 AM, Gary wrote:
>>>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> When I was about six I wanted to be a ballerina. Problem is, I am not
>>>>> at all graceful and have no sense of balance. Toe shoes? Forget about
>>>>> it!
>>>>
>>>> Your friend, Julie was. heheheh
>>>>
>>> Heh. I knew better. Sure, my mom took me to ballet and tap lessons. It's
>>> what mom's did with little girls back then. I was smart enough to know I
>>> wasn't ever going to be a ballerina. I really just liked the costumes.
>>>
>>>
>>> Jill
>>
>>
>> My mom took my bro and me to tap dancing lessons. We both hated that.
>>
>> Cheri
>
> I liked the sound the taps made, but never got much past past
> shuffle/ball/change. Wasn't good at that, either. Why did they expect us
> to learn to dance? What a strange thing.
>
> I took classes on both coasts. Started out with lessons in Toms River,
> New Jersey (Dad was stationed at Lakehurst) in 1965 and ended up in
> classes in Riverside, CA in 1967.
>
> I finally told my mother, I really don't like this. I'm sure she was
> relieved. This was the early version of "soccer moms". Mothers whose
> kids had scheduled activities.
>
> At that age I'd much have rather been at home playing with my friends
> after school. Or reading a book. I loved reading from a very early age.
>
> Jill


I think you're right about the early version, my mom did the same thing with
piano lessons. Ack, I hated that as a kid, but sure wish I would have stayed
with it as an adult, she also had us taking accordion lessons for what
reason I don't know.

Cheri