ChatterBank0 min ago
Gawd Help Us, You Can't Even Call Someone By Their Correct Name And Title!
111 Answers
http://
So must we now know not only someones name but their preferred appellation?
So must we now know not only someones name but their preferred appellation?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
It is rude. I don't like any titles... especially Ms. A friend and I were literally just saying an hour ago that we don't know anyone who has got married in the last few years that have changed their surname. Maybe we are joining the 21st Century at last. Or possibly- it's just easier for Facebook....
-- answer removed --
The lady in question is I assume legally married & in this country it is customary when married to take ones husband's name. I therefore submit that Mr Boris Johnson far from committing an offence is in fact being extremely well behaved & correct & should receive an apology from the Commons Speaker.
In one respect Lady Nugee is quite correct:
“I have never been a Lady and it will be a great deal more than being married to a Knight of the Realm in order to make me one.”
It’s a shame that she does not like being addressed by the title she gained courtesy of her husband’s elevation. She may well have added that it would take more than membership of the Privy Council to make her remotely “Right Honourable”.
A few years back I had a less than civilised exchange of correspondence with her. Lady Nugee was bemoaning that because of where she lived she had to send her children a considerable distance to ensure they went to a good school. I pointed out to her that had Labour’s Anthony Crosland not near enough succeeded in his pledge to "….to destroy every fecking grammar school in England. And Wales and Northern Ireland.” there would have been a perfectly decent school just half a mile from her home (my own alma mater). I expected no reply but her response was not that of a lady and certainly not that of a Right Honourable one.
As it was she had to send her children to the school at its new location some fifteen miles from her home, where it taken to exile. It had decamped from Islington to avoid the rabidity of the Inner London Education Authority which was among the first major authorities to embrace Mr Crosland’s pledge. Ostensibly it then became a “comprehensive” school (it is now an Academy) but in fact was (and still is) highly selective.
Of course under her party’s mantra, where comprehensive education is allegedly equal education for all, Lady Nugee could have sent her children to any one of a number of local State schools (e.g. Holloway Comprehensive or Dr Rhodes Boyson's old haunt - Highbury Grove School). It is a mystery (!) why she chose to subject her children to a thirty mile round trip each day and she came in for a fair bit of stick for her hypocrisy. However, being “Right Honourable” (but not, apparently a “Lady”) she simply brushed them aside.
I wish Lady Nugee well in her quest to be addressed in the manner she considers to be most appropriate. My own view of what is appropriate is not for publication on AB!
“I have never been a Lady and it will be a great deal more than being married to a Knight of the Realm in order to make me one.”
It’s a shame that she does not like being addressed by the title she gained courtesy of her husband’s elevation. She may well have added that it would take more than membership of the Privy Council to make her remotely “Right Honourable”.
A few years back I had a less than civilised exchange of correspondence with her. Lady Nugee was bemoaning that because of where she lived she had to send her children a considerable distance to ensure they went to a good school. I pointed out to her that had Labour’s Anthony Crosland not near enough succeeded in his pledge to "….to destroy every fecking grammar school in England. And Wales and Northern Ireland.” there would have been a perfectly decent school just half a mile from her home (my own alma mater). I expected no reply but her response was not that of a lady and certainly not that of a Right Honourable one.
As it was she had to send her children to the school at its new location some fifteen miles from her home, where it taken to exile. It had decamped from Islington to avoid the rabidity of the Inner London Education Authority which was among the first major authorities to embrace Mr Crosland’s pledge. Ostensibly it then became a “comprehensive” school (it is now an Academy) but in fact was (and still is) highly selective.
Of course under her party’s mantra, where comprehensive education is allegedly equal education for all, Lady Nugee could have sent her children to any one of a number of local State schools (e.g. Holloway Comprehensive or Dr Rhodes Boyson's old haunt - Highbury Grove School). It is a mystery (!) why she chose to subject her children to a thirty mile round trip each day and she came in for a fair bit of stick for her hypocrisy. However, being “Right Honourable” (but not, apparently a “Lady”) she simply brushed them aside.
I wish Lady Nugee well in her quest to be addressed in the manner she considers to be most appropriate. My own view of what is appropriate is not for publication on AB!
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.