# Gentlemen or snobs



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Some new members are soon identified after arrival as trolls...yea,so what? what's new?

Well, I've noticed that said trolls always, or nearly always, put themselves across as one or all of the following: a) nobility, b) upper class and/or c) a gentleman....and soon lose track of their own false facades.

Again, that might not be anything new.
BUT they have made the assumption based on some stereotype about a) gentlemen b) this forum and c) men interested in fine clothes that WE here, members, are all either a) snobs b) upper class or c) nobility...simply because we like fine clothing.

Now, the part of that stereotype, which exists in many quarters, that I want to focus on is regarding ther term "gentleman"

There is this automatic assumption among said trolls and in fact many people, especially outside the UK, that a gentleman can only be a member of the upper classes and from a certain background.

HOGWASH! Maybe 200 years ago but not today.

Back then (this is a very involved socio-cultural subject in history,so lets not get bogged down in it and lets stick to the basics)...where was I? oh yea, back then in the 18th and 19th centuries a gentlemen was titled as such and was usually of the upper classes. The title gentleman being nothing more than just that, a title, not a description of the person. So behaviour was not a priority and the evidence shows that indeed it was not!

Today however to be a gentleman, behaviour is important, class and background are totally irrelevant, fine clothing a bonus, dated attitudes and stereotypes should be left at the door!

To me the following, just to use a short list as an example, working class lads are true gentlemen both in behaviour, manners and style.

Ian Dury - R.I.P
Robert Elms - BBC Radio London
Bobby Charlton 
Dickie Bird
Suggs -from Madness 

Being a gentleman is about character, not titles, money, class or background.

Oh yea..by the way..a snob in its true definition is a member of the middle class that looks down on the working classes, while trying to aspire to the upper classes....and a snob by definition is the antithesis of a gentleman.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I agree that being a gentleman is more about character, behavior and some sense of social grace than about who you were born to.


----------



## Grayson (Feb 29, 2008)

Carrying over the discussion began with The Earl in another thread, my belief is that these "sockpuppets" may be journalists, coming in here with prejudices as well as fake identities. We are being baited with their primed opinions, most likely so we can be referenced in an article.

Either that, or it's some 15 year old kid who thinks he's being cool. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Mad Hatter (Jul 13, 2008)

I'm with y'all-I've been here long enough to know who I find credible, who's putting on airs, and who is just putting us on.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Grayson said:


> Carrying over the discussion began with The Earl in another thread, my belief is that these "sockpuppets" may be journalists, coming in here with prejudices as well as fake identities. We are being baited with their primed opinions, most likely so we can be referenced in an article.
> 
> Either that, or it's some 15 year old kid who thinks he's being cool. Just my 2 cents.


I think they probably come in all shapes and sizes with all sorts of various agendas.

However, one common feature I would imagine, is that they all, prior to joining and posting for the first time, create for themselves a persona based on one or more of the following: A) how they want to be viewed by their peers in the real world and by AAAC members B)what they think we are and how they think we communicate C) generalisations and stereotypes about the members here and about people interested in men's clothing in general and D) what they think they need to say/write to impress.

False personas are so easy to spot, because no matter how good a cyber-actor a person is, ****** in the armour will eventually appear, and sooner rather than later, usually due to savvy members pressing the right buttons to cause a slip in the sockpuppets' feeble defences....I'm on a roll baby :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> I agree that being a gentleman is more about character, behavior and some sense of social grace than about who you were born to.


Abso-flippin-lutely :icon_smile:


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Mad Hatter said:


> I'm with y'all-I've been here long enough to know who I find credible, who's putting on airs, and who is just putting us on.


I agree, and you know what, I've never believed for one moment that you're an insane milliner. :icon_smile:


----------



## Grayson (Feb 29, 2008)

Apologies for the double-post, but I would like to add a positive spin with a short list of who I consider present best living generally-known examples of the American Gentleman...

- President Jimmy Carter
- Golfer Arnold Palmer
- Baseball great Hank Aaron
- Actor/director Clint Eastwood
- Cisco CEO John Chambers

Interesting... I didn't set out to name them as such, but all of them are considered "self-made men".


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Grayson said:


> Interesting... I didn't set out to name them as such, but all of them are considered "self-made men".


You see..Hey? From humble beginnings....with humility...comes greatness...and gentility....walk tall, walk straight and look the world right in the eye.

Great list by the way


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

Perhaps because this forum is American, and America is the embodiment of the ideals of the French Revolution, there lurk many who dislike those of good breeding.


----------



## DougNZ (Aug 31, 2005)

There are two definitions of "gentleman".

The first describes a UK social position and is akin to "noble" in European terms. It is not a definition of caste as one can be made a gentleman, particularly by being granted arms, but in most other cases it is a hereditary position for descendants of an armiger or peer. This could be determined a "gentleman of fact".

The second describes a mode of behaviour which was originally modelled on the ideal charactoristics of a gentleman of the first definition. This could be determined a "gentleman of manner".

The first definition held sway until the late 1800s. The importance of the term was such that instances of court action can be found in the UK initiated by gentlemen whose status had been called into question. It was usual for a gentleman to call himself as such; where another man would be noted as: _John Smith, grocer, _a gentleman would be _Charles Edgebrook, gentleman_. This was not snobbery but a description of their station in life.

It is worth noting that the greatest class mobility happened during the reigns of Elizabeth and Victoria. During the Victoria era, as the merchant class became stronger, there was much striving for elevation to the gentry. Arms were bought by those who had the means, assumed by those who could get away with it, and things such as initial signet rings were worn by those trying to look the part. In this romantic era chivalry came to the fore and men assumed the term "gentleman" if they could look and act as they thought one should. Eventually "gentleman" as a description of manners became so common that it overran the much older definition. Herein lies the real snobbery; men assuming a position they were not entitled to to gain a perceived advantage over their fellows. The College of Arms, as a 'judge' of gentle status, did much to try to enforce the original term as well as expose false armigers. The trend of the time, however, won out and today most people would associate the term with a "gentleman of manners". However, for as long as arms are granted in England and pedigrees maintained by the College to show legitimate claim to the term, "gentlemen of fact" will remain.


----------



## chatsworth osborne jr. (Feb 2, 2008)

*Peasants!*

My dear Earl, I am shocked, shocked to learn that there are impostors to the aristocracy here. Please do extend sympathy to the genuine blue bloods who have a difficult time adapting to the egalitarianism of the interwebs.

Seriously, I agree that actual decency is more rarified and desirable than any haughty gentility. But I reserve the right to exhibit disdain for those of higher means striving to look and act crude and impoverished.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

DougNZ said:


> There are two definitions of "gentleman".
> 
> The first describes a UK social position and is akin to "noble" in European terms. It is not a definition of caste as one can be made a gentleman, particularly by being granted arms, but in most other cases it is a hereditary position for descendants of an armiger or peer. This could be determined a "gentleman of fact".
> 
> ...


Doug, Doug, Doug what did I say mate? "This is a very involved socio-cultural subject in history,so lets not get bogged down in it and lets stick to the basics" :icon_smile_wink:

In other words,let's stick please to what a gentleman is and isn't and should and shouldn't be today.And focus on today's stereotypes and their accuracies and inaccuracies :icon_smile:

And as much as I usually find heraldry of interest, I generally find the whole esquire, gentleman and granting of arms for same an extremely tedious subject.


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

Why would Lord Ormonde worry about Gentlemen? If there were a sudden profusion of Earls joining the forum, one would be worried.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Bog said:


> Why would Lord Ormonde worry about Gentlemen? If there were a sudden profusion of Earls joining the forum, one would be worried.


:icon_smile: Heaven forbid! I might then be outranked... you haven't seen any lurking Dukes have you?:icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

As Shakespeare wrote in _King Lear_, "The prince of darkness is a gentleman."

I fear neither gentleman nor snobs, but I do fear those who think they must shew pretense and be the former to disguise the fact of their being the latter.

Inscribed this Final Day of February by

Quay, Duke of California, Defender of the Fools, Unvanquished, Etc.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Quay said:


> As Shakespeare wrote in _King Lear_, "The prince of darkness is a gentleman."
> 
> I fear neither gentleman nor snobs, but I do fear those who think they must shew pretense and be the former to disguise the fact of their being the latter.
> 
> ...


:icon_smile_big:

And may I bid you a good morrow sir, a good March, and beware the ides!.....hic...dash of water please....! Get me kippers ready Edwards it's nearly morning! And I'll take some Kedgeree as well....dash of water! What? No, send them away man !!! I don't own a television set!


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> ...I don't own a television set!


Now _that_ may be a sign of someone of superior faculties, manners and a pronounced ability to carry on a conversation without reference to sports, fashion or politics.

This "Sweden" place sounds interesting.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Quay said:


> This "Sweden" place sounds interesting.


Oh, it is old son, it is! You should visit.


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

Whatever it is, the best thing to do is just not respond.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Orsini said:


> Whatever it is, the best thing to do is just not respond.


Quite right too old chap..as it says in that troll thread..do not feed the trolls....dash of water please!


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> Oh, it is old son, it is! You should visit.


If Carl XVI Gustaf sends an invitation I should be disposed to consider it.

Are you really able to get English kippers in Sweden or are you suffered with whole herring?


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

*Actually, this post is "trolling"...*



Earl of Ormonde said:


> Quite right too old chap..as it says in that troll thread..do not feed the trolls....dash of water please!


I'm not sure what's-his-name is a troll. If he is, he's pretty mild -- at least for me.

Actually, a lot of us have been called "troll" one time or another...


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Quay said:


> If Carl XVI Gustaf sends an invitation I should be disposed to consider it.
> 
> Are you really able to get English kippers in Sweden or are you suffered with whole herring?


Oh God yes, kippers is easy to come by. Sweden is much more of a fish eatin' nation than is ol' blighty...so no problems on the piscine front....
And I eat all sorts of fish, loves it all I does!


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Orsini said:


> I'm not sure what's-his-name is a troll. If he is, he's pretty mild -- at least for me.
> 
> Actually, a lot of us have been called "troll" one time or another...


You're right of course, you're right, he's not a troll...just a poseur and an irritant.


----------



## Mad Hatter (Jul 13, 2008)

I don't _think_ I've been nominated as troll, but I suspect some think I live up to my name..EoO, excepted. :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> Oh God yes, kippers is easy to come by. Sweden is much more of a fish eatin' nation than is ol' blighty...so no problems on the piscine front....
> And I eat all sorts of fish, loves it all I does!


Good to know.

And apropos of a "test" for the subject of this thread: which will not eat fish without a fish fork, a gentleman or a snob?


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> You're right of course, you're right, he's not a troll...just a poseur and an irritant.


Yes, I gather for some he presses some class struggle hot buttons...


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Quay said:


> Good to know.
> 
> And apropos of a "test" for the subject of this thread: which will not eat fish without a fish fork, a gentleman or a snob?


A snob!

A gentleman in Sweden for example will eat freshly caught, beach grilled fish with his fingers!

Met a working class snob at a very middle class private party in Stockholm a few years ago, who refused to drink red wine from a white wine glass and made quite scene about it...explaining of course in his half-cut state that perhaps he wasn't good enough for the level of the party, then explained baout all the different glasses and with som any on the table he didn't know what to do..but still refused to drink red wine from a white wine glass...confued and confusing! Of course this made the rest of us think, "what an arsehole!" It was clear though that he was over compensating for what he thought he was himself.


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

Mad Hatter said:


> I don't _think_ I've been nominated as troll, but I suspect some think I live up to my name..EoO, excepted. :icon_smile_big:


Yes, some of us could stand to try a little harder...


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> A snob!
> 
> A gentleman in Sweden for example will eat freshly caught, beach grilled fish with his fingers!


:icon_smile: Sweden is a most civilized place!


----------



## Dhaller (Jan 20, 2008)

While lacking in pedigree myself (or rather, having too much of it, being an American salad of national origins), I do have a dog with a very nice pedigree. Does that count? 

Funny thing, though: I know a fair number of aristocrats (none British, though, they're all French, Austrian and Italian) - mainly princes and counts and one duke - and they uniformly *avoid* going on about it, or even mentioning it, especially outside those few places it "matters". Moreover, they (and maybe I'm lucky) all are "gentlemen of manner", very considerate and polite.

If a so-called "aristocrat" crows about it publicly, going on about signet rings and the like, it's quite clear that the one thing that person absolutely is *not* is an aristocrat.

More like a young, male, Mrs. Bucket.

DH


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

I'm off to Uncle Ned now. Edwards, my man, reminds me that I'm required on govt service tomorrow and that in my present condition I need some sleep.

So I bid ye all Good night sweet prince. In the arms of morpheus I must reside a while.

laters!


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Dhaller said:


> If a so-called "aristocrat" crows about it publicly, going on about signet rings and the like, it's quite clear that the one thing that person absolutely is *not* is an aristocrat.
> 
> More like a young, male, Mrs. Bucket.
> 
> DH


Exactly...empty vessels make the most noise!

And I'll remind you sir that it's pronounced Bouquet! :icon_smile_big:


----------



## DougNZ (Aug 31, 2005)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> Doug, Doug, Doug what did I say mate? "This is a very involved socio-cultural subject in history,so lets not get bogged down in it and lets stick to the basics" :icon_smile_wink:
> 
> In other words,let's stick please to what a gentleman is and isn't and should and shouldn't be today.And focus on today's stereotypes and their accuracies and inaccuracies :icon_smile:.


The basics is that calling oneself something that one is not technically entitled to be called, by whoever's reckoning, is seen by some as wrong. I am certain that if I called myself Capt. DougNZ you would be the first to be upset, Ormonde. I might say, "Who cares? I conduct myself like a army captain." You would rightly say, "But you are not a captain in any army and have no right to be addressed as captain." The same goes for false dukes, lawyers or car salesmen.

For some people in this world, nice blokes with good manners calling themselves a gentleman is equally as offensive, particularly to "qualified" gentlemen. They say it isn't correct and shouldn't be allowed, even today. (Side note: I'm not one who thinks so).



Earl of Ormonde said:


> And as much as I usually find heraldry of interest, I generally find the whole esquire, gentleman and granting of arms for same an extremely tedious subject.


For those that care, this is at the heart of the technical qualifications we are talking about.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

May The Earl_ never_ leave this forum.​


----------



## DougNZ (Aug 31, 2005)

Peak & Pine, I have just noticed that you have eclipsed the 1,000 post mark. If you have not been congratulated elsewhere, I congratulate you here. Well done; may we see another 1,000 more.


----------



## TheWGP (Jan 15, 2010)

Most entertaining reading... but a caveat: what if said sockpuppets decide to read THIS thread first? The horror! Then perhaps they would endeavour to imitate 13-year-old apple-pickers instead.

:icon_smile_big:


----------



## lovemeparis (May 20, 2006)

*Who's the real TROLL?*



Orsini said:


> Actually, a lot of us have been called "troll" one time or another...


I was labeled a TROLL when I first came to this forum... thanks to Chuck Frank (the so-called Carlo Franco) , one of the moderators at that time. :devil::devil::devil:

But unfortunately... I'm not a gentleman ;-) ;-) ;-)


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

lovemeparis said:


> I was labeled a TROLL when I first came to this forum...


Gee, I thought I knew all the trolls...


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

I was called a troll also. I think that some of the guys doing this have little understanding of what troll means. They just like to throw it out there if they don't like you.

Anyway, this thread reminds me of the incident in _Huckleberry Finn _when Huck and Jim join up with two grifters and one promptly declares himself to be a Duke. Not to be outdone the other grifter then declares that he is actually the rightful King of France; thereby trumping his partner's status as a Duke. Huck and Jim buy into their stories; however, Huck is somewhat suspicious. Their adventures with the Duke and King have to rank among the funniest passages in that book.

Cruiser


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

DougNZ said:


> Peak & Pine, I have just noticed that you have eclipsed the 1,000 post mark. Well done; may we see another 1,000 more.


Thank you. That number would be about equal to the number of times I've thought about trying to get Nancy back over the past 47 years.
​


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

Dhaller said:


> If a so-called "aristocrat" crows about it publicly, going on about signet rings and the like, it's quite clear that the one thing that person absolutely is *not* is an aristocrat.


Not necessarily true.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

I've always hated snobs,they always thought they were better than you,gentlemen always had proper behavior.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

TheWGP said:


> Most entertaining reading... but a caveat: what if said sockpuppets decide to read THIS thread first? The horror! Then perhaps they would endeavour to imitate 13-year-old apple-pickers instead.
> 
> :icon_smile_big:


Oh Will, the humanity Will, the humanity!!!!! :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Peak and Pine said:


> May The Earl_ never_ leave this forum.​


Thank you P.P. very kind of you to say so sir. And congrats on the millenium!

J. B.


----------



## beherethen (Jun 6, 2009)

*A True Gentleman*

I knew a Chinese cook (not a chef) who was a gentleman. He brought over his wife from China about 50 years ago. She went to work the same week she arrived. The work was double shifts for 6 days and her day off consisted of a single shift. She had a hard life, but she brought over her entire family and bought 3 buildings, 5 minks and more diamonds than most rich people.

One day a few months after his death, she got this look on her face and told me that in all their years of marriage, he'd never allowed her to wash his under wear. In 40 + years of marriage, he would not let his delicate bride confront his skid marks. If this isn't a gentleman, I'm not interested in being one.


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> I've met quite a few royals, peers and nobles in my day both in England and Sweden and all but one


So you're yet another one of the bunch, going on and on about your noble and royal connections, are you?


----------



## DougNZ (Aug 31, 2005)

So he had her work over 100 hours a week but spared her his undies? Not my idea of how to treat a woman.


----------



## Dhaller (Jan 20, 2008)

DougNZ said:


> So he had her work over 100 hours a week but spared her his undies? Not my idea of how to treat a woman.


Many of the happiest couples I've known were those who worked hard together to reach a common dream.

DH


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> Still having trouble with English I see, not surprising for an Icelander!


I beg your pardon? Or is it the mark of a snob to mock people's Location field?


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

DougNZ said:


> For some people in this world, nice blokes with good manners calling themselves a gentleman is equally as offensive, particularly to "qualified" gentlemen. They say it isn't correct and shouldn't be allowed, even today. (Side note: I'm not one who thinks so).


Sorry Doug, but I disagree. I defy you to find me one single "officially granted" gentleman who takes offence at the everyday usage of the word gentleman to describe good blokes that haven't been granted the title. I find the possibility highly unlikely.


----------



## DougNZ (Aug 31, 2005)

Dhaller said:


> Many of the happiest couples I've known were those who worked hard together to reach a common dream.
> 
> DH


Granted. This man, however, was held up as an example of a gentleman not one of a happy couple.


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

Earl of Ormonde said:


> If you can't stand the heat stay out of the kitchen!


At least have the decency to keep your drivel and name calling in the relevant interchange thread. This one is about snobs.


----------



## beherethen (Jun 6, 2009)

DougNZ said:


> So he had her work over 100 hours a week but spared her his undies? Not my idea of how to treat a woman.


They were very poor and assumed a large responsibility. If they each hadn't worked like ******* and lived like refugees, their family's would still be on the mainland. I find a certain nobility in the way they conducted their lives. When he first got here the only job he could get was working in a Chinese hand laundry. At the end of the day he would sleep under the counter. 
I'm sure you would have handled the situation in a very different manner.


----------



## DougNZ (Aug 31, 2005)

beherethen said:


> I find a certain nobility in the way they conducted their lives.


There are so many stories of immigrants who work three times harder than the local population and who, in the space of a generation, set themselves up better than many around them. Their stories of hard work are inspirational.

I should point out, beherethen, that I live in a country that is only 170 years old (in terms of its founding document). Most of the population is descended from working class Englishmen (particularly from the Home Counties), Scots and some Irish. They carved an existence out of the forest and made their own futures. As a country we value hard work and modesty.


----------



## lovemeparis (May 20, 2006)

*This hard work thing is interesting*

:icon_smile_big:


DougNZ said:


> So he had her work over 100 hours a week but *spared her his undies*? Not my idea of how to treat a woman.


Well... he might have something to hide there


----------



## beherethen (Jun 6, 2009)

lovemeparis said:


> :icon_smile_big:
> 
> Well... he might have something to hide there


He probably had skid marks. Many men do. So what?

https://www.medhelp.org/posts/Mens-Health/How-do-you-not-get-skid-marks/show/183192

The fact remains that he would not subject his wife to this problem. In spite of everything else that was going on in their lives, he would protect her from this .


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

I like Gentlemen before snobs,gentlemen always act cool and calm,snobs sometimes want to start arguements.


----------



## Busterdog (Jan 1, 2010)

Didn't someone describe King Edward VII when still the Prince of Wales as "Not quite a King not quite a Gentleman?"
One could almost say the same about the current PoW!

Surely manners maketh the man - and integrity!

I would add to the list of American Gentlemen General Colin Powell. (or Sir Colin Powell as he is in the UK).
I rather think Morgan Freeman fits the bill too.


----------



## DougNZ (Aug 31, 2005)

I would say that Prince Charles is every bit the gentleman.


----------



## R0ME0 (Feb 10, 2010)

Cruiser said:


> I was called a troll also. I think that some of the guys doing this have little understanding of what troll means. They just like to throw it out there if they don't like you.


I also been called a troll.

Anyway, folks on this forum are very formal in their speech. I visit a sports forum quite frequently and the folks over there are very informal but I assume that their also younger (judging from what are you wearing today thread).

I would assume that that's why some would think that this forum is filled with snobs. Plus, the words gents and gentlemen are used on here quite often.

Among my family and friends, coworkers and acquaintances, I hardly ever hear those words.


----------



## Mad Hatter (Jul 13, 2008)

R0ME0 said:


> I also been called a troll.
> 
> Anyway, folks on this forum are very formal in their speech. I visit a sports forum quite frequently and the folks over there are very informal but I assume that their also younger (judging from what are you wearing today thread).
> 
> ...


Maybe, but I don't believe the internet gives license to abandon grammar, vocabulary and a modicum of civility.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

R0ME0 said:


> I also been called a troll.
> 
> Anyway, folks on this forum are very formal in their speech. I visit a sports forum quite frequently and the folks over there are very informal but I assume that their also younger (judging from what are you wearing today thread).
> 
> ...


Romeo, I am not the type to correct a person's English, so I won't. :icon_smile_wink:

Now, what makes you think that your "sports forum" is any more representative of the average man than this one? And what makes you think that THEY'RE even presenting themselves and THEIR opinions as they truly are? And not just adopting the language and attitudes associated with jocks and sports fans? :icon_smile:

As much as there is a large interest in sports in many countries. It is still a minority interest in many of those countires, with the majority, however slim, of any given nation not having any interest in sport at all, either to watch it or to play.

Unless of course it's India where almost 500,000,000 (just under half the population) regularly watch the India Cricket Team when it plays international cricket matches. Strange but true! :icon_smile:


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

> Surely manners maketh the man - and integrity!


That's true.


----------



## El_Abogado (Apr 21, 2009)

beherethen said:


> He probably had skid marks. Many men do. So what?
> 
> https://www.medhelp.org/posts/Mens-Health/How-do-you-not-get-skid-marks/show/183192
> 
> The fact remains that he would not subject his wife to this problem. In spite of everything else that was going on in their lives, he would protect her from this .


I'm just curious to hear how this came up in conversation with him (or her). Just curious, not trolling. . . . :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Busterdog (Jan 1, 2010)

DougNZ said:


> I would say that Prince Charles is every bit the gentleman.


Hmmmm...HRH The PoW a Gentleman? Some would say, me included, not.
The term gentleman implies absolute integrity.

Now Camilla's FORMER husband? There's a gentleman.


----------



## DougNZ (Aug 31, 2005)

Busterdog said:


> The term gentleman implies absolute integrity.


Well that rules out a lot of people commonly held up as such.


----------



## DCLawyer68 (Jun 1, 2009)

DougNZ said:


> Well that rules out a lot of people commonly held up as such.


I recall Prof Arthur Schlesinger telling a Congressional Committee that President Clinton was _entitled_, perhaps even obligated, to lie about his affair with Ms. Lewinsky precisely because that was how a "gentleman" would handle such a question about his love life.

One of the most interesting invocations of the term I've ever heard.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

beherethen said:


> One day a few months after his death, she got this look on her face and told me that in all their years of marriage, he'd never allowed her to wash his under wear. In 40 + years of marriage, he would not let his delicate bride confront his skid marks. If this isn't a gentleman, I'm not interested in being one.


That's a nice story, but my wife doesn't touch ANY of my laudry.

I get a ic12337: just asking her to drop it off at the cleaners!!


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

DCLawyer68 said:


> I recall Prof Arthur Schlesinger telling a Congressional Committee that President Clinton was _entitled_, perhaps even obligated, to lie about his affair with Ms. Lewinsky precisely because that was how a "gentleman" would handle such a question about his love life.
> 
> One of the most interesting invocations of the term I've ever heard.


"Gentleman," "love" life, or both?? 

White lies are permisable for a gentleman.

Damn lies are not!!


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

Busterdog said:


> Hmmmm...HRH The PoW a Gentleman? Some would say, me included, not.
> The term gentleman implies absolute integrity.
> 
> Now Camilla's FORMER husband? There's a gentleman.


:icon_smile_big: ha ha...you beat me to it.


----------



## jamgood (Feb 8, 2006)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentry


----------

