Nepotism for the Un-American

I'm not precisely sure how to admit that for several weeks I believed "dovout" was the non-American spelling of "devote." Or, more accurately, I was using "devouted" in place of "devoted," and it wasn't until I actually wrote "devoute" that I remembered what the difference between the God damned words was. I actually put "devouted" in an English essay, and the Professor marked it with a 'sp' (Spelling) correction and I actually smacked the paper and griped, "What? He can't mark off for using British spellings!"
I try to reserve my fuck-ups for the spoken language—seriously, I suck at talking—but I guess I have my moments with the written language, too. Le sigh, c'est la vie, and other such Frenchy expressions.
Aside: in case it's not blaringly obvious, I use the British spellings most of the time—not because I'm a pretentious elitist, but due to the fact that it adds a sense of consistency to the language for which I have a particular favour. English is such a bastard child of a language, anyways, so unless we went full-force forward with Noah Webster's revisions of the spelling system, I don't see how any of it has any point, otherwise.
Note: Noah Webster suggests, amongst his ideas for eliminating 'u's and changing 's's to 'z's in places, that we get rid of 'th' and 'ph,' replacing them with, respectively, 'd' and 'f.' Right, "fone" instead of "phone" and "feder" in lieu of "feather." The 'ea' combination was another spelling he strove to eliminate, as well. He was pretty radical in his suggestions, and was aiming at making the written language look at a pronounciation key, really.

Conclusion: I'm dumb.