I wonder how that happened since unis dont look too kindly to expulsions
he just joined a second uni with no gap
i understand he was asked to leave cos he didnt turn up to a single class
he is also a uk citizen
Do you also feel NT women frustrate u?
On my life all my friends are men or ND women
Idk if im being thick but i acc dont get why normal ppl are so emotionally attached to the monarchy.
Like babe the royals are not paying ur rent. They are not getting u a better job. They are not sorting the NHS. They are not lowering ur tax. They are not making ur life more glam. They live in palaces and u live in a semi detached in kent or a flatshare in zone 4. So what are u actually getting??
I think its borrowed status.
Ppl look at the royals and they dont think “this is a family above me funded by public legitimacy”. They think “this is OUR history, OUR country, OUR tradition, OUR prestige”.
So even tho the status is not theirs, they feel like they get a bit of it by association.
Its like:
“we have a king” = britain is special
“we have palaces” = our country is grand
“the world watches the royals” = we still matter
“the monarchy is old” = it must be meaningful
“the crown is respected” = somehow I am part of something respected too
But are u actually respected more? No. Are u richer? No. Do aristocrats invite u to dinner? No. Would the royals know u if u passed them in the street? Also no.
So its like emotional trickle down status. The prestige stays at the top but normal ppl get a little fantasy of being near it.
And this is what baffles me. Bc I dont get that emotional payoff. When I see the monarchy I dont feel proud. I dont think “omg my country is so grand”. I think “why is one family symbolically above everyone else bc of birth”. I think “why are we paying for this”. I think “why is inherited privilege dressed up as national identity”.
And yes ppl say “theyre good for tourism” or “they represent britain” or “its tradition”. But lots of things are tradition. Doesnt mean they are fair or rational. Like old doesnt mean good. A hierarchy being old doesnt magically make it morally ok.
Also the cost thing annoys me. The Sovereign Grant went up to £132.1m in 2025/26 and is expected to go to £137.9m in 2026/27. People can argue about crown estate this crown estate that, but the point is still public money/public legitimacy is involved, so why are we not allowed to ask why tf this is justified??
And the weirdest bit is that loads of ordinary working class ppl defend it like the royals personally improved their status. They didnt. The monarchy does not make them upper class. It doesnt make them elite. It just lets them feel attached to elite symbols from below.
I think thats why some ppl get so defensive when u criticise the monarchy. They dont hear “this institution is unfair”. They hear “your idea of Britain is being attacked”. Bc for them monarchy = britain = identity = pride.
For me its the opposite.
And im sorry but the politics of it also makes me suspicious. Monarchy support is way stronger with conservatives and reform types. So I dont think its just harmless old lady likes the queen vibes.
For some ppl it clearly overlaps with wanting an older, whiter, more deferential, more “know ur place” britain.
Not saying every monarchist is racist before someone cries. But I do think some monarchy support is tied to racialised nostalgia. Crown, flag, empire, borders, military, christianity, all that “real britain” stuff. Its not neutral.
I dont feel borrowed grandeur from the royals bc I dont want to borrow status from a hierarchy that makes me worse off
If someone is rich bc they were born into the right family, that doesnt make me feel elevated. It makes the whole system look fake.
Many celebs in the UK and western world are famous for their wealthy lifestyles e.g. Kim Kardashian, Paris Hilton rather than their skills like a pro athlete or musician
Yet if I just mention my FIRE goal to my peers or my salary or saving rate they get angry at me.
Why get angry at me yet worship Kim K
I am trying to FIRE atm as a 26f consultant living at home with parents in London. When I tell people of my desires... I am saving over 1k a month, 1k spent on lifestyle, nobody feels happy for me. They just say things like
why don't i move out and stop saying with my generous parents?
why am i so obsessed with money?
who do i think i am?
I know this is divisive, but I genuinely struggle to understand how the monarchy fits with the version of Britain we are usually told to believe in: democracy, fairness, rule of law, equal citizenship, individual liberty, rational debate, etc.
To me, the monarchy feels like a contradiction.
On one hand, Britain says everyone should be equal under the law and that institutions should be accountable.
On the other hand, we still symbolically place one family above everyone else because of birth.
They get titles, palaces, public funding, ceremony and national reverence, while ordinary people are expected to justify every benefit claim, student loan, tax rise or public service cost.
I understand why some people like it. For them, it probably represents continuity, tradition, the late Queen, national pride, stability, tourism, and a sense that Britain is still “special”. But I don’t experience it that way. I see inherited privilege being dressed up as national identity.
I also think monarchy support often overlaps with a certain nostalgic version of Britain: older, more deferential, more imperial, more Christian, more class-based, and sometimes more racially coded. I’m not saying every monarchist is racist — that would be stupid and unfair. But I do think the monarchy is not a neutral symbol. For some people, it seems tied to a particular idea of Britishness based on ancestry, tradition, hierarchy and national nostalgia rather than civic values.
For me, Britishness should be civic, not hereditary. It should be about fairness, law, democracy, pluralism and accountability — not crowns, bloodlines and inherited status.
So I’m curious: do other people feel this contradiction too? Or do you think the monarchy can still fit with modern democratic British values?
Not trying to sound rude but the people who support them tend to be overwhelmingly:
women
white
old
What gives?
Assuming most of you here are employees and not business owners/asset owners, why vote reform?
Reform has opposed Labour’s Employment Rights Act 2025, which became law on 18 December 2025 and is being phased in during 2026–2027. ACAS says the Act introduces changes to employment law over that period.
That Act includes things like stronger statutory sick pay, day-one paternity/unpaid parental leave, stronger whistleblowing protections, collective redundancy protections, stronger trade union access, and protections around sexual harassment.
Reform’s direction is therefore roughly:
| Area | Likely Reform direction |
|---|---|
| Zero-hours contracts | Less likely to support strong new restrictions |
| Sick pay rights | Less supportive of Labour’s expanded SSP rules |
| Fire and rehire | Less likely to support strong legal limits |
| Trade unions | Less supportive of expanded union power/access |
| Business regulation | Strongly in favour of cutting “red tape” |
| Migration and wages | Argues wages improve by reducing migrant labour |
| Equality/discrimination rights | Reform figures have backed repealing the Equality Act, which would be a major risk for workplace discrimination protections |
The voting record also matters. At the Employment Rights Bill Third Reading on 12 March 2025, the bill passed by 333 Ayes to 100 Noes, and Nigel Farage was listed under Reform UK among the MPs voting No.
So ELI5: Reform says it is pro-worker because it wants fewer migrant workers competing for jobs and lower costs for businesses. But when it comes to legal protections at work — sick pay, zero-hours, unions, fire-and-rehire, anti-harassment — Reform is much more employer-friendly than worker-protection-focused.
The realistic conclusion: if you are an employee who relies on formal workplace rights, union protection, anti-discrimination law, sick pay, flexible-hours protections, or protection from insecure contracts, Reform is not obviously on your side.
I’m trying to understand why some benefit claimants seem drawn to Reform UK, because on paper it looks like a Reform govt would probably make life harder for them, not easier?
Their messaging is very focused on “making work pay”, reducing dependency, stopping people being “better off on benefits”, and tightening who qualifies for support.
Reform’s own current policy page says welfare should support only British citizens who “cannot get by without government help”, and that people should always be better off in work than on benefits: https://www.reformparty.uk/policies
Their 2024 welfare pledges also included face-to-face PIP and Work Capability Assessments, independent medical assessments, and withdrawing benefits from jobseekers deemed fit for work if they don’t accept work after a set period: https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/reform-uk-election-manifesto-welfare-benefits-promises
Disability News Service also reported Farage saying Reform would pursue “significant welfare cuts”, though to be fair that’s reporting/interpretation rather than a fully costed manifesto line: https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/farage-finally-confirms-a-reform-uk-government-would-slash-spending-on-disability-benefits/
I get the appeal of lower taxes, tougher borders, and being angry at the current system.
But if someone relies on Universal Credit, PIP, LCWRA, housing support, or disability benefits, surely the practical risk is just more assessments, more conditionality, more suspicion, and maybe less support?
I’m not saying the current welfare system works well.
But there’s a difference between reforming welfare so people are properly supported into work, and creating a harsher system where disabled, ill, unemployed or low-income people have to constantly prove they are “deserving”.
Am I missing something? Why would a benefit claimant vote for a party whose welfare rhetoric seems likely to make their own life harder?
EDIT: What do you have to say about this lady begging for more handouts
After growing up in poverty, I know the anger 4.5 million children must feel - Big Issue
Life is hard for most. Most people don't like working hard and find their jobs shit and boring.
Why on earth do people on benefits feel they are entitled to more? If they want a better lifestyle, obtain their own cash via jobs, businesses etc.
if they have a work-limiting disability they should just accept the fact that they would never live as well as their peers who can work?
Spurred by this article:
After growing up in poverty, I know the anger 4.5 million children must feel - Big Issue
Her grievances seem to be focused on not having as much as her peers:
They stripped the joy and innocence of the small moments – a 13th birthday party, school disco, or summer holiday – that others recall with warmth. Instead, mine carry the weight of loneliness, guilt, shame and jealousy.
Since her main caregivers don't seem to be very wealthy or have high paid jobs, she should just accept that her bdays and holidays won't be as great as the kids whose parents do have material means
Throwing leftovers away without hesitation, taking a clean, warm bath, alone, with bubbles that smelled like strawberries.
Many people don't throw away their leftovers or take bubble baths ffs.
Also she mentions poverty but in the UK there is no absolute poverty only relative poverty, which would always exist as it's defined as it is often defined as having a household income below 60% of the national median.
TLDR: just accept that inequality exists
EDIT: But if you disagree with me and think ppl like her deserve better lifestyles from the taxpayers, why vote reform
I’m trying to understand why some benefit claimants seem drawn to Reform UK, because on paper it looks like a Reform govt would probably make life harder for them, not easier?
Their messaging is very focused on “making work pay”, reducing dependency, stopping people being “better off on benefits”, and tightening who qualifies for support.
Reform’s own current policy page says welfare should support only British citizens who “cannot get by without government help”, and that people should always be better off in work than on benefits: https://www.reformparty.uk/policies
Their 2024 welfare pledges also included face-to-face PIP and Work Capability Assessments, independent medical assessments, and withdrawing benefits from jobseekers deemed fit for work if they don’t accept work after a set period: https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/reform-uk-election-manifesto-welfare-benefits-promises
Disability News Service also reported Farage saying Reform would pursue “significant welfare cuts”, though to be fair that’s reporting/interpretation rather than a fully costed manifesto line: https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/farage-finally-confirms-a-reform-uk-government-would-slash-spending-on-disability-benefits/
I get the appeal of lower taxes, tougher borders, and being angry at the current system.
But if someone relies on Universal Credit, PIP, LCWRA, housing support, or disability benefits, surely the practical risk is just more assessments, more conditionality, more suspicion, and maybe less support?
I’m not saying the current welfare system works well.
But there’s a difference between reforming welfare so people are properly supported into work, and creating a harsher system where disabled, ill, unemployed or low-income people have to constantly prove they are “deserving”.
Am I missing something? Why would a benefit claimant vote for a party whose welfare rhetoric seems likely to make their own life harder?
It has become v. popular with the Far right like Britain First.
I am a highly educated daughter of immigrants. My parents have PhDs and have never claimed benefits or committed crimes.
I myself have not committed crimes, volunteered for the community and work in a demanding highly paid corporate job.
So why do some of you here still want me to leave the country?
e.g. one reform voter told me he resents me cos I am more competition for his kids, e.g. they could have taken my job, had my salary, brought the house I had etc.
I understand that in low paid sectors like care work they may employ immigrants as companies feel they are less likely to complain about conditions/more willing to work hard than the natives. Also its low paid so its less competitive, making it available to immigrants
But for high-paid jobs like banking, why? Surely the companies will employ the people with more skills/talent?
EDIT: For ppl correclty pointing out that those immigrants are more talented if they are employed in banking over a native person, why do u think some reform voters still think those jobs should go towards natives
As an immigrant myself, I paid taxes and have a high paid corporate job.
I also volunteer in my spare time. I work in an international firm with people across the world.
My criminal record is clean and I got a First in English Lit at Oxbridge.
I try to make friends with everyone regardless of race.
I understand the hatred against refugees who come here with no skills and are more predisposed to commit crimes.
But why resent immigrants like me?
EDIT: negatively affected?
Hi all — looking for some honest advice.
I’m an analyst in consulting with about a month left before my probation review. My technical work is generally strong, but I’ve had some feedback around “people behaviours” — specifically around judgement in context (e.g. when to ask questions publicly vs privately, checking ownership before acting, etc.).
My manager has been clear this is fixable and has been coaching me, and I’ve reflected on it and started adjusting how I work. I’ve also sent a follow-up message outlining what I’m focusing on improving.
At this stage, I’m trying to be realistic and maximise my chances of passing.
What I want to know:
For context, I’m aiming to:
Would really appreciate candid input, especially from people who’ve been on the manager side of probation decisions.
Thanks.
Hi all — looking for some honest advice.
I’m an analyst in consulting with about a month left before my probation review. My technical work is generally strong, but I’ve had some feedback around “people behaviours” — specifically around judgement in context (e.g. when to ask questions publicly vs privately, checking ownership before acting, etc.).
My manager has been clear this is fixable and has been coaching me, and I’ve reflected on it and started adjusting how I work. I’ve also sent a follow-up message outlining what I’m focusing on improving.
At this stage, I’m trying to be realistic and maximise my chances of passing.
What I want to know:
For context, I’m aiming to:
Would really appreciate candid input, especially from people who’ve been on the manager side of probation decisions.
Thanks.
Reform want to remove the Equality Act of 2010.
Would this not worsen the lives of any British person:
Unless you yourself are a white man, why would you support this policy?
If it were scrapped, anyone with protected characteristics can be told to leave their workplaces, barred from entering establishments, not given equal treatment when house searching etc.
Amnesty responds to Reform UK proposals to repeal the Equality Act | Amnesty International UK
I am only here because on of my acquaintances, an autistic woman unable to work, has had a son and apparently he is also autistic. She is married and has never had a job.
This is the UK. They rely on benefits. I have no idea if the husband has a job. Why did she do this to herself, her son and society?
She can't even sustain herself without intervention from the taxpayer.
Now she is bringing a new life to the world and she can't provide for him. Won't the son be upset he hasn't got the same lifestyle and opportunities as his peers?
EDIT: her son is ever more disabled than her -- he has epilepsy-- and the woman in question has never a job or gone to uni. she only has 5 gcses
I am not talking about internationals who come from millionaire backgrounds. I am talking about people from middle class backgrounds like myself who can afford weekend trips to france, makeup, designer clothes etc.
Are they drug dealers? What kind of part time job do they have where they earn this sort of money?
I say this as a Chinese girl. I used to deny racism existed in the UK bc I thought it needed to be overt and obvious. But in reality it's less obvious.
e.g. on spareroom.com I was looking for flatmates in London. The only people who replied to me were Asian/Black women/
Even on dating sites most matches I get are not white. At work ,I notice cliques dominated by a certain race