Ohhhhhhhhh trust me everton, I know plenty of Scots who wouldn’t be…
Aye, and I can think of a few blue-clad Glaswegians who probably wouldn’t like the things you do call them …
Well they’re certainly no worse than the things they’d call me…
Reminds me of childhood holidays in Glasgow (where my mum comes from). My brother wore his blue and white scarf bold as brass, which took some explaining, but naming the Lions of Lisbon got us off the hook in spite of our English accents.
Anyway, doesn’t Dirk Abrogoot manage Rangers these days?
I’m not sure “manage” is the word, everton - not that I’m criticising Dickie, you understand, I think he’s doing a fine job
Are we in MPSIMS yet?
Finally, after clenching my teeth tightly and wringing my hands in fear of offending somebody, I used the word Brit in a post. Agghhh!
Are we Americans reduced to sounding like the BBC: “Are any Britons…”? 
Or is the consensus that “Brit” is (mostly) OK? (OK enough, anyway.) (But still**:** Never use “Britisher”, I take it.)
Are there any other choices?
I just got back from the pub, Sea Sorbust, so factor that in as necessary, but it seems that ruadh and I (a foreigner in my own land perhaps) have been over-egging the pudding here. It’s surprising to find an American who could care less what we call ourselves, but as long as you stay away from Celtic Park and its environs in Glasgow, Kilburn in London or Bootle in Liverpool you won’t get a frosty reply if you say “hello Brits” or similar.
If you’re planning on calling us Britishers though, we’ll have a mental picture of someone wearing a pikelhaube and monacle, smoking a cigarette from a long holder and about to follow it up with something along the lines of “Zoh Tommy, vee haff zee advahntage nau no? Fur yoo ze wahr iz ohfer”.
Und ve haff vays ov makink you tok.
Erm, I wasn’t just talking about the Scots who hang about Celtic Park when I said not all Scots like to be called Brits (actually a lot of the Celtic Park denizens don’t even like to be called Scots, but that’s another thread). Go up to the highlands - or hell, even Aberdeen - and you’ll find plenty of Scottish National Party types who aren’t thrilled with the “Brit” appellation, either.
Don’t worry too much about it though, andros, with a Yank accent you can (usually) get away with this sort of faux pas. You might find yourself being lectured to like a four-year-old, but they won’t slug you for it. Usually
[sub] (everton - a foreigner in your own land? Tell me about it…) [/sub]
I happened to be eating breakfast in my favorite English-Irish restaurant this morning, listening to Irish jigs and looking at the architectural detail in a picture of the Parliament Building that sits 5" from my head.
I had gotten into a very “British Isles mood”.
As I turned to leave, I came face-to-face with the formal pic of the Queen’s Silver Jubilee and, Ye gooods!, I might as well have been looking at a picture of my own (older) sister when she was in her early 20’s. (A compliment to either the Queen or her photographer–it was her 1977 SILVER jubilee.)
All of this brought this, one of my “freshman” posts, to mind and when I dug it out of the archives, I noticed ruadh’s link to SNP.org.
“Scottish National Party?”, I thought. With the war in N. Ireland, with the breakaway of Ireland, with Scotland sporting a nationalist political party, and with Wales beginning to sniff the “airs of independence”, why is no one interested in discussing the U.S. constitutional method of governance as a means to unite the British Isles (–maybe even to RE-include Ireland )? If this question sounds a little “pushy” and arrogant, then—
I suppose that I should add that after our (successful) Revolution in the late 1770’s, we formed a UNITED government under something called the “Articles of Confederation”. They didn’t work. In fact, they worked so badly that after barely a decade, some of the States were planning war (some “by land”; others, “by sea” ;)–a wee historical pun) and others were talking about withdrawing and forming their own (smaller) union. We drafted, then adopted, the present Constitution and it has pretty well kept us united and intact for over 200 years.
Just curious. Why, in these times of growing dissatisfaction with the United Kingdom’s governmental status quo, is no one interested in investigating (or debating) alternatives?
Erm, I think the creation of the Scottish Parliament and Welsh and Northern Ireland Assemblies a couple years ago could legitimately be called “alternatives”.