DS Forums

 
 

Prince Andrew Demands New Titles...


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-12-2016, 12:48
jjwales
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,439
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.
jjwales is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 10-12-2016, 13:06
Moany Liza
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,749
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.
Moany Liza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 13:07
SaturnV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,623
Except he has issued an official denial that he asked for any such thing.
That'll teach me to take notice of gossip.
SaturnV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 13:25
anne_666
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 30,190
"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

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.
anne_666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 13:46
zx50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: County Durham
Posts: 78,619
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.
zx50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 13:51
anne_666
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 30,190
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

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.
anne_666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 14:11
LakieLady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 9,177
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 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 14:33
LakieLady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 9,177
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.
LakieLady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 14:45
Moany Liza
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,749
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.
Moany Liza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 15:13
LakieLady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 9,177
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".
LakieLady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 16:53
Gloria Fandango
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Fandango Mansion
Posts: 3,218
Beatrice and Eugenie at yet another royal wedding...

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/C4jSWrJBuDU/maxresdefault.jpg
Gloria Fandango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 17:00
Aneechik
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Mount Olympus
Posts: 18,234
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.
Aneechik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 17:23
Skaface
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Pepper Army Essex Regiment
Posts: 2,366
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.
Skaface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 17:28
Pitman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London
Posts: 16,527
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
Pitman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 17:38
GusGus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 626
Perhaps Andrew should undergo a DNA test before he makes any more assertions about his daughters "special position"
GusGus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 17:41
Richard46
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: London
Posts: 41,696
deleted
Richard46 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 17:57
Ovalteenie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: a whimsical world
Posts: 20,959
Why is ageism and sexism still allowed when it comes to the royals?
Ovalteenie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 18:20
Richard46
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: London
Posts: 41,696
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.
Richard46 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 19:41
jjwales
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,439
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.
jjwales is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 19:50
anne_666
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 30,190
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.
anne_666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2016, 21:30
spookyLX
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,872
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
spookyLX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2016, 00:16
Moany Liza
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,749
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?
Moany Liza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2016, 00:26
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,693
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
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2016, 01:43
TheEricPollard
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 'Dales
Posts: 9,628
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.
TheEricPollard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2016, 01:53
jabegy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: North Hampshire
Posts: 5,362
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
jabegy is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:49.