• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • General Discussion Forums
  • General Discussion
Prince Andrew Demands New Titles...
<<
<
4 of 5
>>
>
jjwales
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by Moany Liza:
“I don't particularly feel the need for abolition of the Monarchy - and quite frankly I don't think that would even solve the problem.

If the Monarchy were abolished upon the death of the Queen, does anyone imagine that the rest of the Royal Family would be able to simply become private citizens and not still be subjected to endless scrutiny - but with an additional and liberal dollop of "Oh how the mighty have fallen" being bandied around in the tabloids and elsewhere? It would never happen. They would still all be plagued by endless bitching and carping.”

You're probably right, but I'm taking the long term view. Eventually none of the current Royals will be around, and there would only be mild curiosity about their descendants, given that they would always have been private citizens with no royal duties or titles.
Moany Liza
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by jjwales:
“You're probably right, but I'm taking the long term view. Eventually none of the current Royals will be around, and there would only be mild curiosity about their descendants, given that they would always have been private citizens with no royal duties or titles.”

Well, given that Andrew's daughters are likely to marry untitled men, that means that their children (assuming they have any) will be untitled too and that will mean that they will be in the same situation as Zara and Peter Phillips's children. They are able to lead normal lives under very little public scrutiny.

I see the slimming down of the Royal Family as an inevitable but gradual transition as the older generation, who have known nothing different in their lives, all die off. William, Harry and all their cousins have led more normal lives, and have friends who are ordinary people, leading ordinary lives. With the exception of William who cannot change his destiny, they probably all want to just carry on leading normal lives as their contemporaries do and that is probably what will happen.

Very little is heard about most of the younger members of the extended Royal Family. They all just go about their everyday business and activities and it's only if one of the grubby tabloids chooses to print some piece of tittle-tattle that they are ever mentioned. None of them are doing any one any harm and they should really just be left to get on with their lives in peace.
SaturnV
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by Moany Liza:
“Except he has issued an official denial that he asked for any such thing. ”

That'll teach me to take notice of gossip.
anne_666
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by GusGus:
“"Prince Andrew denies rift with Prince Charles over Royal titles "

http://news.sky.com/story/prince-and...arles-10689698
I guess Mummy and Phillip have stamped their feet”

Yes of course, it couldn't possibly be the Daily Mail lying again.........

Buckingham Palace statement yesterday.

http://static.ow.ly/docs/AY_5F3g.pdf


Duchess of York in plea to 'stop bullying Beatrice and Eugenie' during Teenage Cancer Trust visit

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/du...-a3416866.html

Quote:
“On Friday, Sarah said: "Both the Duke and myself, we could not be more proud of this moment because these are two girls that work so hard in their own careers, have taken time off today to spread the word of teen cancer, which is so important, and then go back to work.”

zx50
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by anne_666:
“Yes of course, it couldn't possibly be the Daily Mail lying again.........

Buckingham Palace statement yesterday.

http://static.ow.ly/docs/AY_5F3g.pdf”

Which website was that on?

Edit: Doesn't matter. I found it on The Mirror's website.
anne_666
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by zx50:
“Which website was that on?”

It's linked in yesterday's Guardian article.

Prince Andrew denounces 'made up' newspaper stories about daughters
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...rk-urges-media

Quote:
“Prince Andrew has denied claims of a rift between him and his brother, Prince Charles, over his daughters’ roles in the royal family.

In a rare public statement, he moved to end speculation that he wanted princesses Beatrice and Eugenie to become more central figures, and bear greater responsibilities at public engagements. He also insisted he has not asked that his daughters’ future husbands be given titles.

“As a father, my wish for my daughters is for them is to be modern working young women, who happen to be members of the royal family, and I am delighted to see them building their careers,” Prince Andrew said, in a statement released on Friday.”

LakieLady
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by TheEricPollard:
“Maybe they want to be Princess Michael of Kent. I understand.”

They could use that protocol for the spouses of Beatrice and Eugenie. No-one would want to be known as Prince Beatrice or Prince Eugenie, surely?
LakieLady
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by Ber:
“Margaret's children weren't prince/princess and their spouses weren't given titles. Her son inherited his father's title but beyond that they have no official royal titles afaik?”

Margaret's husband was given the title Lord Snowdon. I think their son is still Viscount Linley and that Snowdon wasn't a hereditary title.
Moany Liza
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by LakieLady:
“Margaret's husband was given the title Lord Snowdon. I think their son is still Viscount Linley and that Snowdon wasn't a hereditary title.”

Earl Snowdon is still alive, which is why his son is still Viscount Linley.

He is heir apparent to the title though because it is hereditary and will inherit it upon the death of his father, at which time his own son will become heir apparent.
LakieLady
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by Moany Liza:
“Earl Snowdon is still alive, which is why his son is still Viscount Linley. ”

Bloody hell, another one of those people about whom, on hearing of their death, my first thought is "I had no idea he/she was still alive".
Gloria Fandango
10-12-2016
Beatrice and Eugenie at yet another royal wedding...

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/C4jSWrJBuDU/maxresdefault.jpg
Aneechik
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by Moany Liza:
“Earl Snowdon is still alive, which is why his son is still Viscount Linley.

He is heir apparent to the title though because it is hereditary and will inherit it upon the death of his father, at which time his own son will become heir apparent.”

To add to this, the custom is that the eldest son of an Earl gets to use one of his father's lesser titles as a courtesy title while the father is still alive, which is why he's Viscount Linley even though Snowden is actually the holder of the title. Presumably that's why Snowden was given two titles.
Skaface
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by confuddled:
“when the Queen kicks the bucket we should dispense of the whole lot of them, then they can call themselves what they want and squabble about who lives where.
they must piss themselves laughing every morning when they wake up and remember that his country is still buying into that outdated family of freaks.”

I agree. I despise the whole bloody lot of them, including that old hatchet-faced baked bean. London has an abundance of historical sites to still pull in the tourists and Buck House could be converted into something useful for many to benefit from, rather than luxury for a privileged few. I think now's as good a time as any, seeing as us taxpayers will be footing the bill of millions of pounds for the recently-announced ten year refurb anyway.
Pitman
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by Skaface:
“I agree. I despise the whole bloody lot of them, including that old hatchet-faced baked bean. London has an abundance of historical sites to still pull in the tourists and Buck House could be converted into something useful for many to benefit from, rather than luxury for a privileged few. I think now's as good a time as any, seeing as us taxpayers will be footing the bill of millions of pounds for the recently-announced ten year refurb anyway.”


while we are it, boot the politicians out of Westminster as well, send them to an industrial estate in the suburbs, the Palace of Westminster could host exhibitions and raves for the kids
GusGus
10-12-2016
Perhaps Andrew should undergo a DNA test before he makes any more assertions about his daughters "special position"
Richard46
10-12-2016
deleted
Ovalteenie
10-12-2016
Why is ageism and sexism still allowed when it comes to the royals?
Richard46
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by Ovalteenie:
“Why is ageism and sexism still allowed when it comes to the royals? ”

And why are they not allowed to choose their own livelyhoods? Free the Royals from this bondage.
Serious point actually. It seems to me to be indefensible that a child should have its future ordained for it in this way.
jjwales
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by Richard46:
“And why are they not allowed to choose their own livelyhoods? Free the Royals from this bondage.
Serious point actually. It seems to me to be indefensible that a child should have its future ordained for it in this way.”

I think so too.
anne_666
10-12-2016
Originally Posted by GusGus:
“Perhaps Andrew should undergo a DNA test before he makes any more assertions about his daughters "special position"”

I'm far from being a Royalist but that's a foul comment.
I see you're still running with the Mail's lies.
spookyLX
10-12-2016
Prince Andrew is everything that is wrong with the Royal family , horrible self indulgent lazy snob with some very dodgy friends . it looks like his daughters are very much the same
Moany Liza
11-12-2016
Originally Posted by spookyLX:
“Prince Andrew is everything that is wrong with the Royal family , horrible self indulgent lazy snob with some very dodgy friends . it looks like his daughters are very much the same”

On what basis so you say that? They both have jobs and I'm not aware of any major issues with any of their friends. Can you be more specific?
skp20040
11-12-2016
Originally Posted by Skaface:
“I agree. I despise the whole bloody lot of them, including that old hatchet-faced baked bean. London has an abundance of historical sites to still pull in the tourists and Buck House could be converted into something useful for many to benefit from, rather than luxury for a privileged few. I think now's as good a time as any, seeing as us taxpayers will be footing the bill of millions of pounds for the recently-announced ten year refurb anyway.”


BP is state owned so like the PoW the refurb ( well update ) will be carried out, a refurb that means it will bring it into line with the modern day world in health and safety terms as some of it is dangerous

But whilst the media shout taxpayers money and the government is happy for that to be said as it took them off the front pages for a short while exactly what taxes that we have paid in ( PAYE, NI, VAT, CGT etc etc ) is being used ? none the money will come from Crown Estate profits
TheEricPollard
11-12-2016
Originally Posted by LakieLady:
“They could use that protocol for the spouses of Beatrice and Eugenie. No-one would want to be known as Prince Beatrice or Prince Eugenie, surely? ”

I hope they do. I would buy the Daily Mail special pull out.
jabegy
11-12-2016
I can remember it being said that Andrew was always the Queens favourite, so I expect he's grown up with an air of entitlement, but Charles being the heir to the throne wants to trim down the Royal family, to just the Queen, Prince Phillip, himself and his heirs. I think Andrew has hit a brick wall in this respect, and I quite agree with Charles's decision. After all Princess Anne didn't want, or have, titles for her children.

He is a total knob
<<
<
4 of 5
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map