1. The survey of 5,000 teenagers with an average age of 15, published by “Bliss” magazine, is not very surprising to me. I am, myself, a 16-year-old soon to be 17-year-old girl, and I actually agree with the majority of the teenagers’ answers in this survey.
The fact that nine in 10 of teenagers around my age believe in marriage and hope to marry one day, is not surprising. It’s just a matter of teenagers trying to rebel against their parents. Since their parents belong to a generation where marriage isn’t the only option, teenagers of today want to go in the opposite direction. Today’s parents are untraditional and liberal, so today’s teenagers have to be traditional and conservative in order to rebel against their parents.
Norway 25th April 2006
The Daily Telegraph
98 Fleet Street
London NW 12 PJ
The United Kingdom
RE: the idea of giving 16-year-olds the vote.
In this article “Who’d have thought Tony could be so out of touch with our teenagers?” Tom Kemp re-introduces the idea of giving 16-year-olds the vote. Is this also how the newspaper feels about this subject?
I am myself barely 17 years of age, but I find this idea simply ludicrous. Teenagers need those extra two years to “grow up”, and even then many may not be mature enough to get that kind of responsibility. But I find it a little amusing that people in the UK get the right to drink alcohol two years before they get the right to vote, don’t you?
I’m looking forward to reading your response.
3a) The Classical Brit
What are the characteristics of the classical Brit? Well, that is what I am trying to find out through this article or essay.
The British have a lot of history to be proud of, but the funny thing is that if you ask a Brit if he’s British, you’ll probably get the answer:” No, I’m English/Irish/Scottish/Welsh! They are all part of Great Britain, but they are indeed divided in separate countries, even after all these years.
England and Scotland formed Britain in 1603, when James 6th of Scotland inherited the English throne and became James 1st (Stuart) of England after the death of Elizabeth 1st (Tudor) of England. So Britain as a nation has existed for more than 400 years. I would have thought that amount of time would have brought the countries together, but it hasn’t.
This might come from the fact that the British people seem to have difficulties with accepting change. A few examples of this are:
1. The Beefeaters at the Tower of London still wear uniforms.
2. You’ll find that the judges and advocates of the Old Bailey in London still wear wigs and cloaks as if they were in an 18th or 19th century court of justice, and not in one from the 21st century.
The Laws of the Kingdom haven’t changed that much over the last centuries either. London Taxis had to travel with a bale of hay on top of their cars as late as the 1950s or 60s. And the taxis still have height enough to fit a gentleman with a tophat while seated. I might add that the latter of the two laws is still in function.
But the characteristic black cabs don’t have to be black anymore, not by law anyway. The citizens of London weren’t happy for the change and many prefers the black cabs to the multicoloured ones even today. And we must not forget that the English people were in an uproar when they learnt that the old double-decker buses were to go to the nearest scrap heap. Well, they were actually sold, not made into scrap metal, but that didn’t make people feel any better. This is of course the fear of change reappearing.
Another thing that the British have been clinging on to is their class-system. It seems like class- or clan-consciousness is very much apart of the British way of life, even though they pretend to be different. It has become more and more difficult to separate social classes because many of the old telltale signs like their way of speech have vanished. Many young people think of themselves as part of a classless society, but they almost always end up with someone from the same social class when they’re wandering off looking for a boy-/girlfriend.