Relying On Ritual: Why Coffee, Beer & Martinis are Better in America

It's a common perception that Americans aren't big on ritual. After all, this is the country that abandoned family dinnertime in favor of the TV dinner, then abandoned even that it favor of the drive-thru (and a plethora of meal options you could eat while walking down the street - hot pockets, anybody?)

But when it comes to things that count, Americans don't compromise. That's why there are certain things in this country that are generally infinitely superior to their equivalents in England.

Martini Cocktails

Considering the Martini Cocktail was invented in the Savoy Hotel, you'd think this would be something we Brits would have nailed; but we haven't.

In all my years in England, I only managed to get a decent Martini cocktail in three places - the Dorchester Hotel, the Hotel du Vin and some place on Park End Road, Oxford (my brother will have to help me out here.) Anywhere else, I was generally greeted with a blank look or a glass of lukewarm vermouth.

In America, however, you can go to the ropiest dive bar in the worst part of town and still be served a sublime Martini Cocktail.

American bartenders are just fluent in Martinis - and any of them can fix you a world class one in a few seconds. And what's so special about Martinis? The ritual.

A British Martini is an aberration. In America, they're elegant in their simplicity:

• Get an ice-cold cocktail glass from the freezer.
• Swill vermouth around the glass, then pour it out.
• Shake gin or vodka over ice and pour it in.
• Garnish with olives or lemon.

Job done.

Coffee

The reason American coffee is so good follows the same pattern. There's a ritual to making coffee that Americans embrace, but the Brits spurn.

That's why most Brits at home use that disgusting instant coffee stuff; saving making 'real' coffee for breakfast or after dinner.

In America, serving instant coffee is as alien a concept as gun control and atheism. Fresh ground beans, coffee filters and a peculator are household essentials.

There's more effort involved, but it's that same thing as with the Martini Cocktail - a ritual. One no American will compromise on.

Beer

And this ritualistic approach is why I firmly believe American beer is superior to British beer.

Even if the beer is inferior - which it increasingly commonly isn't - there's a standard ritual to serving it that makes the pourmasters of Guiness look like amateurs.

For a start, beer in America is served practically ice-cold; barely above freezing. Secondly, it's normally poured into a frosty, chilled pint glass or tankard pulled straight from the freezer.

Those two details are that subtle nod towards ritual that makes every pint in America an occasion; whereas the closest we come in the UK is the cynical marketing ploy of having a shamrock poured into the head of your stout.

(The French and Belgians are also very good at ritual- next time you have a beer in France, watch them 'cleanse the chalice' with a squirt of water from a specially-designed spray tap behind the bar.)

Ritual

We Brits often think we're so evolved; but like with the English language itself, there are facets of English culture and character that the Americans took, ran with and made their own; and now do far better than we do - despite being a nation that prides ourselves on that sort of thing.

What do you think? Do I have a point?

Tolerant Britain? Fraser Nelson's Insipid Editorial

I’ve read a lot of shitty editorial over the years (and penned a fair whack of it myself) but it’s difficult to top the insipid, self-contratulatory tripe that Fraser Nelson posted on The Spectator this Sunday.

“What it is to be British” was ostensibly a celebration of The Proms; but rapidly deteriorated into something else entirely – a kind of disjointed tribute to a utopian Britain that bears very little resemblance to what the UK’s actually like.

“[The] British are, and always have been, more at ease with foreigners [than Americans],” he writes, which is utterly laughable to anybody who’s ever lived here, or to my American pals who've watched the adorably xenophobic banter on Top Gear.

“There is something inherently understated about being British,” he adds; which immediately makes me think back to the 2010 FIFA World Cup, when England fans burned a German flag in Leicester Square and trashed a Haagen Daz restaurant. Hardly very understated ways to support your national team.

But the statement that really got my goat was this one:

“Brits are, I firmly believe, the most tolerant people on earth.”

At this point, you have to start wondering which Britain this so-called journalist actually lives in, because it sure as hell doesn’t sound much like the Britain I know.

Here’s the land in which people get stabbed or driven out of town for having ginger hair, and in which British religious extremists blow themselves up in the Underground.

He writes “we're the only country in Europe to manage mass immigration without a far-right party in parliament or with any sizeable share of the vote” while blithely ignoring the fact that we’re also one of the only Western countries that has mainstream white supremacist party on the polls (or did he miss the British Nationalist Party’s delightful party political broadcasts this May?)

We British are masterful at being politically correct – and at vilifying anybody who refuses to be similarly so – but Fraser Nelson seems to have mistaken that rather repressive form of social fascism for ‘tolerance’, when it is actually very far from.

Tolerance is an open minded, inclusive attitude towards those who are different from the norm. Political correctness, on the other hand, is merely social conditioning and behavioral policing, enforced by the threat of polite society ostracizing you.

If you want a demonstration of Britain’s true character, just take away that expectation of political correctness and you’ll see quite how mean-spirited and vicious we can be.

A case in point? The fact that I spent four years living in the UK and was guaranteed at least one cat-call of “Ginger” from across the street every single day, and was accosted and confronted in pubs, restaurants, cinemas and shops for having red hair on a regular basis.

That’s only my experience, and I’ll admit I’ve got a big ol’ chip on my shoulder as a result of it. However, there’s ample proof to support the theory that Brits just aren’t in the running for a ‘most tolerant people on Earth’ award any time soon.

For all our politically-correct pretentions, most Brits will admit that there’s a judgmental streak in our character that simply doesn’t exist in other places.

For instance, it’s only in Britain that George Bernard Shaw’s famous quote rings true: “It is impossible for an Englishman to open his mouth without making some other Englishman hate or despise him.”

As soon as a Brit reveals his accent, he’s immediately pigeonholed by his audience (For instance, I’ve always lived with the mantle of ‘posh public school boy’ despite attending a comprehensive in Devonshire.)

Here in America – a land so many Brits are keen to dismiss as intolerant – there are far fewer social barriers than you might imagine. For example, there isn’t the insipid obsession with class that there is in the UK. Joe the Plumber can mingle with a Kennedy without either feeling insecure; as the measure of pride is a hard day’s work; not necessarily how much you get paid for it.

In Britain, you’re expected to know your place in the social hierarchy (a concept Prince Charles himself inopportunely admitted supporting) and never rise above it. Brits cling to some deluded sense of class identity even though such concepts have lost all relevance in British society.

(Working in radio, I never had to look far to find some presenter with a northern accent celebrating his ‘working class’ roots despite the fact he read the traffic and travel on a regional FM station - which is not exactly a working class occupation.)

No, Britain is not the most tolerant nation on earth.

In fact, scratch the surface and a large proportion of the country is revealed to be stunningly intolerant.

We don’t like anything different and are quick to hammer down any nail that stands taller than the others. In Britain, we’re only oh-so-fucking tolerant as long as you abide by our expectations.

This probably explains a number of things in my life – why the majority of my British friends tend to be the types who fall outside popular, polite society – gays, eccentrics, expatriates and entrepreneurs. Like me, with my ginger hair, they’ve tended to be the butt of British intolerance and are considerably more open-minded to other’s oddities as a result.

It’s also probably the reason why I’m so happy here in America.

For all of America’s faults – and open intolerance towards gays and immigrants are two of the biggest – the average American judges somebody by what they do and say, and not what accent they have or what color their hair is.

I can be deliciously, deliriously eccentric here in the states and the worst I get is an amused, accepting smile. I’m able to be myself in the ‘land of the free’ to an extent I never could back in Britain.

To my mind, that’s powerful evidence that Fraser Nelson didn’t know what he was talking about when he wrote “Brits are, I firmly believe, the most tolerant people on earth.”

But then again, if his impression of what British society is like matches what he wrote, perhaps there's an awful lot Mr. Nelson doesn't know about.

Britain at its worst: The William Hague scandal

Sometimes, I despair of Britain.

The source of my most recent ire is the so-called scandal that erupted when Foreign Secretary William Hague was revealed to have shared a hotel room with his special adviser during the election campaign.

Tabloids and the Internet were suddenly ablaze with stories of Hague’s ‘inappropriate’ relationship with his special adviser, and thinly-veiled references to the former Conservative leader’s homosexuality.

William Hague and special adviser Christopher Myers - who has floppy hair, so he must totally be gay.

These were backed by the scantest circumstantial evidence – such as how 49-year-old Hague hadn’t fathered a child yet with wife Ffion (so he must be a queer, right?).

The special adviser, Christopher Myers, even stepped down from his position over the fallout, and Hague made a public statement dismissing the ‘malicious allegations’ yet apologizing for making a decision that “in hindsight I should have given greater consideration to.”

All this - over the fact that they’d shared a hotel room together!

That's right: There were no incriminating photographs. No kiss-and-tell confessions. No inappropriate text messages or emails. Just the fact that they’d shared a twin room (i.e. two beds) when they were traveling the country stumping for the election.

The fact that this gave birth to a scandal is truly mind-boggling stuff – a disgusting example of Britain’s smutty and hypocritical obsession with other people’s personal lives.

The fact that Myers and Hague rose to take the bait was equally disappointing – Myers had no reason to resign and Hague hadn’t a bloody thing to apologize for.

What has Britain come to if two men can’t even share a hotel room without being accused of homosexual hijinks? Thank God I’m not a celebrity – I’d have been strung up for sharing hotel rooms with male members of staff during my four tenures teaching in Paris, or sharing a twin room (i.e. two beds) with my best friend when we traveled up for a university reunion.

[Don't you know not being able to afford your own room makes you gay? Editorial Bear]

I know it’s frightfully hip to accuse celebrities, historical figures and fictional characters of homosexuality without the slightest bit of evidence (I recently wrote an article about whether Sherlock Holmes and Watson were a gay couple or not – my conclusion was ‘not’) but it’s come too far when a hotel receipt is all that’s needed to spark a scandal.

What makes it worse is that Britain is supposed to be progressive about this sort of thing.

Don’t we pride ourselves on being tolerant and open-minded about people’s sexuality? If William Hague was gay – which he’s not – why the hell would it matter?

On a daily basis, we Brits preen and croon to ourselves about how much more ‘evolved’ we are than our cousins in the United States; but when given the opportunity we reveal ourselves to be considerably more petty and malicious.

We might not wear our homophobia on our sleeves like the Christian Fundamentalists in America, but if this is how we behave at the barest whiff of a scandal, I don’t think we can claim to be any better than they are.

In fact, just look at the Republican Party. With anti-homosexual rhetoric increasingly at the core of their identity, the average Republican is still secure enough not to leap to wild conclusions about the relationships two men have.

It’s worth remembering that Abraham Lincoln – one of the icons of the Republican Party – shared not just a room, but a bed with his ‘best friend’ for several years and even today, most Republicans dismiss suggestions that Lincoln was gay as a baseless conspiracy theory.

To be honest, this whole ‘scandal’ is something the British public should be thoroughly ashamed of. Given the recent scandal over MP’s expenses, perhaps the British tabloids should be congratulating William Hague on saving the taxpayer a few quid by sharing a hotel room, instead of leveling all sorts of baseless accusation at him.

For real: When the British press launches into reactionary rhetoric that make the likes of America’s Fox News look ‘fair and balanced,’ than perhaps we should be wondering if that’s the real scandal – not that two colleagues shared a hotel room together on a business trip.

Britain - Proudly Celebrating Mediocrity

Last night saw the culmination of a historic election in Great Britain - resulting in the first hung parliament since 1974.

The residents of this building couldn't organize a piss up in a brewery; yet they're responsible for running the country. Yikes!

The results saw the Conservatives with the largest single party in Parliament; but not large enough to form a majority government. The incumbent Labour party were thrashed in the polls - a clear message from voters that they were sick of 'New Labour' and their insipid policies. Most shocking of all were the results for the Liberal Democrats - who'd been predicted to scoop up a windfall of votes, but ultimately landed short of where they were even after the previous election.

This leaves Gordon Brown with a constitutional right to remain Prime Minister and try to form a coalition government with the Liberal Democrats and a number of MPs from other parties (including Britain's first Green MP.) If he fails to have his version of the Queen's speech ratified by Parliament, he must then give David Cameron, leader of the Conservatives, his opportunity to form a coalition government.

What I find most remarkable about the election isn't the result - a hung parliament had been predicted for some time. It's how each party's unmitigated failure has been turned - in classic British style - into a purported victory. We Brits worship mediocrity.

The Conservatives are crowing that they 'won' the election by winning the majority of seats. However, the fact that they didn't win enough to secure a majority means that the victory is absolutely hollow. It's possible that David Cameron will have to lick a lot of peanut butter to win a partnership with the Liberal Democrats - like conceding to the introduction of Proportional Representation and destroying the Tories' chances of ever truly being in power again.

The Labour party is equally claiming 'victory' - in that Gordon Brown remains Prime Minister and even has a chance of forming a coalition government. This victory is truly a failure in two regards. First off, the results were a clear and unequivocal message by the voting public that they wanted Labour OUT.

Secondly, the failure of the political system to oust the losing prime minister from 10 Downing Street is indicative of everything wrong with British politics. The people said they want Brown evicted; but like with everything else politicians do in the UK, the voter's wishes remain secondary to what the MPs think will serve their own best interests.

But the most unmitigated failure belongs to the Liberal Democrats; who are also the most smug party of the bunch. Despite having simply horrible results - turning what was to be their 'best election ever' into a thoroughly disappointing one - they've ended up securing the balance of power. Nick Clegg will become 'king maker' and it's likely his number one priority will be forcing either the Labour Party or the Conservatives to introduce proportional representation; securing his party more seats during each election, but condemning Britain to a homogeneous electoral system that guarantees hung parliaments in practically every election.

In the most important respects, each political party has performed diabolically - yet each considers themselves the victors and the rightful bearer of Britain's political power. It's the most flagrant example yet of how the voting public has been entirely disenfranchised by a self-serving political elite.

Perhaps the scenes at the voting stations, in which hundreds were turned away and unable to vote at all, best represents what's happened all across the country. Last night, the people unequivocally spoke out, but within the hallowed halls of Westminster, it appears nobody was listening.

Ask Militant Ginger

It's that time again! Where we sift through the search-terms that people have entered into Google and answer the questions that brought readers to Militant Ginger.

Is Stephanie Meyer an anti-gay supporter?

Stephanie Meyer, the author of the best-selling vampire melodrama ‘Twilight’, has been at the center of much discussion recently. Did she contribute towards the passing of ‘Proposition 8’, the controversial bill that banned same-sex marriage in California?

The issue seems to revolve around her affiliation to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The LDS, of course, are strongly opposed to same-sex marriage and equal rights for homosexuals. In fact, they were one of the strongest supporters of ‘Prop Hate.’

If Mormonism plays such an important part in Meyer’s life (which, by all accounts, it does) surely it’s logical to assume that she shares their attitude towards gay-marriage.

Well, I have a friend who’s a Mormon and if she’s taught me anything, it’s that Mormons defy expectations. They’re individuals and capable of making their own minds up on these issues. Generalizations are both stupid and inaccurate.

So while it’s a fair suspicion that Meyer might be 'for' Prop 8 – that’s a conclusion only reached by making several assumptions.

We assume that Meyer gives 10% of her income to her local church. Then we assume that this church supports Proposition 8 and other anti-gay legislation. That’s why most people assume she supports anti-gay legislation.

However, assumptions aren’t proof – and in her defense, it’s worth nothing that there’s no record of Meyer making a direct financial contribution towards supporting Proposition 8. Likewise, her church didn’t directly fund the campaign either (although over $190,000 was paid ‘in kind’ by the Church’s members.)

That’s proof that Stephanie Meyer’s didn’t directly support Proposition 8 - and even if she does support the measure, she’s remaining conspicuously quiet on the matter. Probably a wise move, as the Twilight franchise is very popular with some members of the LGBT community

What sort of car is a Furillac?

A Furillac? Well, it’s the monstrously powerful sports coupe driven by Simon Templar, in the first of Leslie Charteris’ ‘Saint’ novels.

Although The Saint is best remembered for driving a Volvo (or the fictional Hirondel) he actually started his career in crime behind the wheel of the equally fictional Furillac.

Charteris didn’t give much of a description of this car, but from the name (suspiciously like Cadillac) and the few words he did write, it’s safe to assume that it might have been a powerful American coupe much like the Cords of the 1930s.

In the novel ‘The Last Hero,’ later renamed ‘The Saint Closes the Case,’ Templar’s Furillac falls into the hands of the police and he hits the road in his friend Norman Kent’s Hirondel (a car loosely based on Charteris’ own Bugatti roadster.)

When Kent nobly sacrifices his life in the final pages of the novel (leaving Simon a note – ‘Nothing is Won without Sacrifice’) Simon seems to adopt the car as his own – and drives it for more or less the rest of his literary career.

(Cord picture courtesy of the Kilted Travel Agent)

Can you get a New Jersey driver’s license on a Tourist Visa?

No. In order to get a driver’s license in New Jersey, you have to have a valid VISA that is good for at least six months or more. Even the B-class Tourist Visa is only good for six months. Some states, however, do offer State driving licenses with less stringent regulations (and depending on the state, these can be exchanged for a New Jersey license after proving residency.)

What’s the British ‘English’ Mindset?

This is a question that could take an entire blog post to answer. Perhaps several of them!

From my point of view, the typical ‘British’ mindset isn’t always a positive one. Brits can be snobby – in both directions. ‘Reverse’ snobbery is rife and most people in Britain are instantly judged (and condemned) based on things like their accent.

Brits also have a tendency to hammer down any nails that ‘stand too tall’ and entrepreneurialism, ambition and success seem to be somewhat frowned upon. Brits should, to paraphrase Prince Charles, ‘know their place’ and be satisfied with it.

But moving to America, I have identified some typically ‘British’ traits that I do like. For example, Brits have a wonderful knack for keeping their mouths shut, whereas Americans (especially from New York) have an opinion about everything. Mummy Militant, for example, often frustrates me by claiming knowledge on things she really doesn’t know anything about.

But what this does mean is that Americans don’t take ‘no’ for an answer – and will give anything a try. While I find Mummy Militant’s self-confident ‘expertise’ somewhat frustrating, whenever she tries her hand at something I tell her she doesn’t know how to do – she more often than not manages to pull it off!

Redheaded men are ugly.

That sort of statement is exactly what I think of when I’m asked about the ‘typical British mindset.’

“Red-headed men are surely the most unattractive male specimens on the planet at the best of times,” wrote one British blogger I picked a fight with. “But they look even worse with their horribly pale, freckled skin..”

To be honest, I think somebody who makes an assumption that ‘all redheaded men are ugly’ is probably saying more about themselves than about redheads. What if they said the same about blacks?

Surely we’re all individuals – and should be judged as ‘attractive’ or not on a case-by-case basis, not lumped into one generalization.

Eric Stolz and David Caruso are two redheaded Americans who are generally regarded as fairly handsome. I know more than a few women who go weak at the knees when Caruso yanks off his shades in the opening moments of C.S.I. Miami (and I know a few more who laugh at the conceit.)

Rupert Grint, who plays Ron Weasely in the Harry Potter movies, is fast becoming a redheaded sex-symbol and plenty of girls I know have gone gaga over all the shots of his muscular arms (to be enjoyed in the latest movie, Half Blood Prince.)

Other redheads, like Simply Red front man Mick Hucknall, are often mocked as being unattractive – but it’s a universally acknowledged truth that Mick has more moist panties being hurled at him than any olive-skinned underwear model. In the case of this so-called ‘Ginger Stallion,’ sexiness is definitely subjective.

So I’ll say that redheaded men aren’t ugly – unless they are. Some are really strange looking goons (like Carrot Top) and some are matinee idols (like Charles Dance.) They might buck the trend for ‘tall, dark strangers’ but I’m pretty sure there are more than enough women out there who find a few freckles and a curl of ginger to be just what the doctor ordered.

(By the way, the redheaded model in the picture is from Model Mayhem. His name's Corey Tenold, and you can find his website here. Way to represent for us gingers, mate!)

How do you knock out power to a block of houses?

Oh my God! Why would anybody visiting my blog want to know this?

It sounds like the sort of thing a serial killer might find useful – although now my imagination’s working, I like to think it was some erstwhile adventurer googling goodies for a Simon Templar-inspired act of justice.

In any event, Militant Ginger IN NO WAY advocates attempting to knock out the power to a block of houses. DON’T DO IT. It’s illegal, highly dangerous, totally irresponsible and here’s how to do it:

As readers will know, America’s power system is a wondrous example of the free-market system at it's worst. Several companies compete for the right to supply your domicile with juice – but in the interests of profit, completely fail to maintain the grid in the meantime. This results in regular power-outages, ugly cables strung along the roadside and the ability to paralyze the entire eastern seaboard whenever a tree falls down.

It also means it’s ridiculously easy to knock out power to a block of houses. Absurdly so.

The trick is to find the local electric company’s ‘power box.’ This is a large, locally-situated generator/booster which boosts the power, or amps up the juice (or something) to make it strong enough to light up a row of houses. Knock that out (driving a car into it should work – as America’s drunk drivers regularly demonstrate) and you’ll send the block into darkness quicker than you can blink.

It’s not very scientific – and does carry the risk of electrocuting you – but it should work.

As I said earlier, though, DON’T DO IT. Don’t even THINK about doing it. The last thing I want to learn is that some stupid sod burnt themselves to a crisp driving their Honda Civic into an electricity pylon – especially if they did so after reading this post!

Will there be a sequel to Devil May Care?

Sebastian Faulks picked up Ian Fleming’s pen to write an anniversary James Bond novel on the occasion of Fleming’s 100th birthday. Devil May Care was the result – and was very highly received.

However, Faulks has already said he’s ‘unlikely’ to write a follow up. Initially reluctant to take the project in the first place, he feels that the next Bond novel (and Ian Fleming publications has promised there will be more) would be better suited to another author.

He suggested picking a ‘celebrity’ author for each progressive book – much like IFP had envisioned when Kingsley Amis first wrote ‘Colonel Sun’ under the nom de plume ‘Robert Markham.’

But Bond fans needn't despair. Charlie Higson is continuing to churn out the ‘Young Bond’ books. You haven't read the last of Britain's favorite secret agent!

On Stephen Fowler

I don't watch reality television, so I missed the shameful performance of Stephen Fowler, a British man featured on the LIFE television show 'Wife Swap.'

'Wife Swap' features two families who 'swap mums' for a fortnight. In this case, it was Stephen Fowler and his American wife, who both live in a wealthy district of San Francisco, who 'swapped' with a blue collar family from Missouri.

Fowler's wife, Renee, went off to Missouri - where she banned the family from playing paintball and organized compulsory French lessons.

Gayla, the Missouri 'mom', visited San Francisco, where she was subject to a tirade of insults from the snobbish, arrogant Fowler.

It apparently made for great television. Fowler was as snide and bitter as Basil Fawlty and cut Gayla down to size at every opportunity - lambasting her for her weight, her perceived lack of education, her patriotism and her 'redneck' ways. In the space of a forty-minute television show, Fowler managed to insult or alienate a broad range of middle Americans, from military families to NASCAR fans.

When the television show hit the air, the backlash was inflammatory. "You rude disgusting little limey prick" was probably the most polite of the comments made against him.

What annoyed me about the backlash, however, was that it manifested itself in a form just as offensive as Stephen Fowler's rants. I guess the old law is true - for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

The first thing Stephen Fowler was attacked for was being British - the perrenial cry of 'go back to your own country, you limey prick.'

Then he was attacked for his lauded 'education.' The fact that he sent his kids to a bilingual French school was labelled 'useless' and people scoffed, wondering why anybody would 'bother learning French.'

Just like Fowler had labelled Gayla a 'redneck' and attacked her for traits like her weight or her patriotism, many of the people reacting to Fowler attacked him for his nationality and for other facets of who he was that had nothing to do with the despicable things he'd said.

Why is this a problem? Because I took many of them personally.

I share more than a few similarities with Stephen Fowler. I'm a British man married to an American. I have a son who I intend to raise learning French. I'm perceived as 'educated' because of my accent and my job. When outraged mid-westerners attack him for merely being all those things, they're simultaneously attacking me.

Which entirely defeats the purpose. They're ignoring what Stephen Fowler actually did wrong - berated and belittled somebody, wallowed in his own sense of superiority and insulted millions of hardworking blue collar Americans and military families.

Their reaction to his disgusting behavior is along the same lines as his. Stereotypes, jingoism and reverse snobbery are the order of the day.

It's the same old rubbish we witnessed during the election; the perrenial conflict between 'elitist' liberals on the East and West coast and the 'real' Americans who live between them.

Fowler is perceived as 'bad' NOT because he's an arrogant, rude prick, or because of his disgusting behavior. No, he's 'bad' because he's a West coast, liberal foreigner who wants to send his kids to learn the language of those 'cheese eating surrender monkeys' over in France.

When it comes down to it, is that any better than him attacking Gayla and her brood for being 'uneducated rednecks'? Merely because she didn't have a college degree and they live in the Midwest?

When you start attacking people for what they are instead of what they do, the whole point of the argument loses cohesiveness. Thanks to these middle Americans and their scatter gun attacks, the Stephen Fowler debate has descended into a bunch of 'redneck hicks' insulting an 'elitist snob.' Nobody's talking about what he actually did wrong.

As for me?l I was personally disappointed that Stephen Fowler was British. Perhaps I'm being guilty of the same judgementalism as the people I'm complaining about, but I was always under the impression that certain Brits from a certain class were raised not to behave the way he did.

I certainly wasn't - I have never considered myself 'better' than anybody else. I have friends from all sorts of backgrounds and I respect all of them equally. Growing up in Hampshire or the West Country, mixing with the friends of royalty or penniless Cornish farmers, my parents always taught me that people are defined by their actions, not their class.

So, I'm not going to be ashamed to be a liberal, East Coast, 'intellectual' foreigner with 'funny ideas' about my son learning French. If the people attacking Stephen Fowler have a problem with me because of who I am, that says more about them than it does about me.

In Defence of the Beckhams

Victoria and David Beckham caused consternation on Tuesday when they enjoyed a 'complimentary' meal at a posh Los Angeles restaurant - and then neglected to tip their waiting staff.

While Channel 2 relabelled Victoria 'Cheap Spice,' I actually sympathised.

Remember, Posh and Becks are not the brightest expatriate Brits to come to these shores - and the etiquette regarding tipping in America is Byzantine.

I'm going to give the Beckhams the benefit of the doubt and assume they made an honest (and common) mistake - they thought their 'free' meal would be exactly that - free.

In reality, American dining involves doing business with two contractors - the ones who prepare your food and the ones who deliver it. Unless you get your noggin around this principle, the tipping system in America makes no sense at all.

How Tipping Works

Typically, in the states, a restaurant pays it's waiters and waitresses below minimum wage and their pay-packet is made up of tips - generally 15% of a meal's cost.

Therefore, the price on the bottom of your 'check' only covers the food and beverages. The payment for getting them delivered is on top of that.

This is why Brits abroad should never make the mistake of 'only tipping for good service.'

If the service was great, by all means tip more. But if you food arrived at your table at all, you are still obliged to leave 15% of the bill to your waiter or waitress. The tip is the price of their service, not a reward.

If service is genuinely bad - and I mean rude, untimely or just plain wrong (and they didn't try to make it up to you) it's acceptable to leave a reduced tip. If you're skimping on a tip merely because the waitress forgot to top up your coffee on her last visit to your table, you're being cheap.

The myth of a 'free meal.'

My father always warned me that 'there's no such thing as a free lunch.'

When it comes to American restaurants, he's absolutely right.

If you, like the Beckhams, ever find yourself receiving a complimentary meal, remember the golden rule of American dining.

Only the food and beverages are free. You still need to pay the price of having it served to you!

This is where David and Victoria got it wrong. They thought (entirely understandably, from a British perspective) that the 'free' meal meant they could keep their wallets in their pockets. 'Free' involves 'no cost.'

In fact, only the chef's side of the bargin was 'free.' The waiting staff still expected to get their payment for serving the celebrity couple.

Once you've got your head around it, the concept is fairly straightforward. It's no different to getting a free item by mail order - you still need to pay the Post Office to deliver it.

I got caught by this myself, when I got a 'free' drink from a bartender, who was then very pissed off that I didn't tip him for pouring it (well, it's not 'free' then, is it?)

It doesn't need to make sense [That's good, since it doesn't - Editorial Bear] - it's just how it is here in America. Learning to tip gracefully is just part of adapting to the American way of life.

After a year in the States, I'm surprised Posh and Becks hadn't realised that.

Inside the British Mindset...

I recently picked a fight with a blogger* (although I think we might have reached a detente now.)

I don't often do this. Normally, I make friends with other bloggers, since blogging interaction is an important part of this self-expression we call blogging - sometimes the friends we meet on the 'blogosphere' are the only people who actually read our blogs!

But this blogger pushed my buttons!

The blogger in question is actually a very fluent and compelling writer and her blog is written in a great 'stream of consciousness' style. I just hated it because her blog clearly illustrates the mindset of some Brits I've met. She is the sort of person I moved away from Britain to escape!

Her writing represents every judgemental, negative character trait traditionally associated with a miserable minority of British people. For example, when it comes to 'my kind':

"Red-headed men are surely the most unattractive male specimens on the planet at the best of times, but they look even worse with their horribly pale, freckled skin... "

Thanks, lady. Us gingers can't hear that enough.

Of course, I find this comment offensive - but I don't sweat it. Yes, I know that British men are considered unattractive in the UK. That's the basis behind the Militant Ginger blog!

Fortunately, in more civilised places like France or America, red hair can be seen as attractive, so I don't take her stupid comment to heart. I think this blogger says more about herself with that nasty opinion than anything about redheads.

Still, I guess it could be worse. Since our blogger's rants are blissfully anonymous, she could just of easily have really rocked the boat and written: 'Black men are surely the most unattractive male specimens on the planet,' or 'Asian men look even worse with their horrible yellow, hairless skin...'

She probably just doesn't want to be labelled as a judgemental, vacuous racist. So she winds up just being labeled judgemental and vacuous instead.

Still, I guess everybody's entitled to their own opinion - and as far as opinions go, she's got lots more of them. One of the others that got up my nose was:

"It's strange the way that I still get a shiver of repulsion down my spine when I hear a certain kind of English accent, normally a Southern one. I immediately think to myself "Wanker!" When I hear a southern accent, I immediately assume the person is culturally arrogant and more privileged than me, without knowing anything about them."

Since I've got a received-pronunciation English accent (what a Scottish bird might easily identify as 'southern') I took this comment personally too (just like I did with her opinion of redheaded men.)

But it's just as vacuous and judgemental as the previous rant, so I shouldn't lose any sleep over it. It just makes me sad - another typically negative 'Brit' stereotype from our opinionated blogging pal.

I think it was George Bernard Shaw who famously said: "It is impossible for an Englishman to open his mouth without making some other Englishman hate or despise him." Our blogger's clearly a proponent of that theory. Somebody speaks - so she judges them based on how their voice sounds.

One of the most refreshing things about moving to America is the absence of this 'accent assumption.' I think it's a curiously British obsession with class that immediately makes Brits judge somebody by their accent (and assume this new person is either socially inferior, 'one of them' or 'stuck up.')

This blogger's judgemental attitude illustrates one of the major difference between Brits and Americans.

For the most part, Americans are more or less confident about who they are and what their place is in the world, no matter how humble their upbringing.

A dirt poor, gun-owning, truck-driving Pennsylvania resident might feel out of place at a multi-million dollar Hampton's yacht party, but certainly wouldn't feel 'inferior' to the WASP'y guests (the Van Der Beeks and the Chuffington-Herberts.)

Instead, in Britain, we get taught to have an unhealthy obsession with how other people perceive us. There's no such thing as the 'working class' any more, but some people still have a 'working class' chip on their shoulder.

Likewise, the middle-class scramble desperately to keep up with the Jones, while their children descend the other way. Public schoolboy Charles Smythe goes to University, adopts an estuary accent and becomes 'Charlie Smith' - at least, until his parents pick him up in the Volvo at the end of term.

Whatever class niche we're born into, far too many Brits spend their lives making an upward or downward scramble out of it. It all rather sad, really.

Reading this blogger's rants and opinions, it just reinforced how pleased I was to be shot of the dark and dreary mindset of Brits like her. In the vast majority of blogs I've read, one invariably comes to like and sympathise with the author, even if you don't agree with them.

She manages to achieve the almost impossible - becoming more and more unlikeable with every blog post she writes. I find it quite astonishing really. Almost compelling. Part of me wonders, if we met face to face, whether she'd be just as unlikeable in person or whether we'd actually get on (as bizarrely sometimes happens in this sort of situation.)

In any event, I'd just like to let North American readers know that our friendly blogger is NOT typical of my countrymen (although not nearly rare enough, either.) For some much better British blogs, check out the list of links I have on the right hand side!

* her blog is here, but be warned that it is targeted towards adults and somewhat explicit in nature.

What Brits can Learn from Americans

Just Do It: When faced with an opportunity, just grasp it - instead of working out infinite possible scenarios to talk yourself out of it. Brits Think. Americans Do.

Judge Not: The President wears cowboy boots and jeans. The head of Microsoft shops at The Gap. The average American realises that you can't sum a person up based on a five second meeting - whereas Brits will still make judgements about your place on the totem pole as soon as you've opened your mouth and let them hear your accent.

Don't Pass the Buck: In the office, people screw up from time to time. In Britain, the 'team' will scurry around to try and find the responsible party. Americans are far less interested in assigning blame than they are solving the problem - so the problem gets solved far more quickly.

Drink Real Coffee: Many a Brit has declared 'if a job's worth doing...' while spooning Nescafe into a mug. They should take their own advice - and take a leaf out of the American book - by spending a little more time making real coffee. It improves Monday morning 200%.

Ask and Ye Shall Receive: It's not 'couth' and it's not 'polite' but it gets you one hell of a response. If you want something, ask for it. Politely. Respectfully. Be willing to accept no for an answer. But if you don't ask, you don't get. Most British people will be too worried about 'being polite' to open their mouths in the first place. Americans are far more willing to ask for what they want - and that way, they sometimes get it.

Britain's Hottest Gingers

In response to The Independent's list of the 101 most important British gay people, I've come up with a list of the hottest British gingers. There aren't 101 of them. Not by a LONG shot.

But if you're interested, check it out over on Editorial Bear. http://editorialbear.blogspot.com/2007/05/britains-hottest-gingers.html