Duties and Roles of Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie 1: Discussion Until 2022


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Charles didn't, according to the article, speak directly to any member of the press, much less "members of the press," plural. Instead, he said it within the hearing of a well-place source, who then talked to one reporter at the Chicago newspaper.
 
Still, it's not a nice thing to say about one's nieces. The princesses get enough knocking in the media without it coming from inside the family as well.:ermm:


Does it really? Not that we can verify the veracity of the purported statement, but even if Charles did make the comment, he probably has a lo tmore to base his opinion on than either the Press or any of us who do not really know the York girls intimately.
 
The Chicago Sun-Times is reporting that Prince Charles dislikes the York girls' taste and has mocked them, according to the reporter's "usually reliable" source. In fact, the headline says Charles called them 'twits.'

Many apologies if this story has already been discussed (I got bogged down in reading about the presidential children and didn't see any mention of it right away):

prince-Charles-mocks-eugenie-and-Beatrice-as-twits.html
What a lot of old cobblers! I keep asking for someone, anyone, to reference any legitimate article relating to Charles "slimming down" the firm with a view to cutting the York girls out of the picture.

So far, zip, zilch, zero! No one, it seems, can supply any concrete evidence that any of this is anything more that tabloid ramblings. The "source" in the subject article could have been the cleaner who heard half a conversation"!

For the record, I adore my nieces but have been known to refer them as twits and nitwits! It's a generational thing I think!
 
Still, it's not a nice thing to say about one's nieces. The princesses get enough knocking in the media without it coming from inside the family as well.:ermm:


Are the girls close to any other members of the RF?

The article in Variety said that Andrew has always made a point of seeing to it that they spend time with the Queen, so they'll feel close.

But what about the rest of the family?
 
Why not join up?

Would there be anything to prevent one of these young women from going into the military?
 
Would there be anything to prevent one of these young women from going into the military?

No, nothing that I am aware of would prevent them from joining HMs armed forces.
 
Would there be anything to prevent one of these young women from going into the military?


Not sure Beatrice would pass the eye test having dyslexia and Eugenie has had that surgery for her back, which could also point to a 'problem' that would see her not pass a physical but other than that no reason at all - their grandmother served during WWII.

Note - I am not saying they wouldn't pass the physicals etc only stating known reasons which may see them fail.

I know that eyesight isn't always a problem but it does depend on the problem itself (I served with myopia - no problems at all but dyslexia is another problem and I don't know about that one). I know Eugenie's back is fine now but is it fine for the sort of things that have to be done in the military.
 
Last edited:
The article in Variety said that Andrew has always made a point of seeing to it that they spend time with the Queen, so they'll feel close.

But what about the rest of the family?

Judging by the body language at family gatherings like Christmas, the York princesses appear close to the COuntess of Wessex.
 
:previous: That's the problem! We really don't know anything about how anyone in the BRF feels about each other. We just have tabloids telling us, and if anyone else has been listening to the Leveson Inquiry, they would be seeing and hearing how, with each new testimony, things just gets worse and worse, their meanness, mendacity and malice seems to know no bounds!

We can say, without fear of denial, that most of what we read about royalty and celebrities is "manufactured". A figment of some journalist's fertile imagination. Why do we give credence to the reports from unnamed sources? Why are we going "tut tut, that's not very nice Uncle Charles"? Hell, we don't even know what, if anything, he has said.

Yes, we can draw a conclusion from photo's that Sophie get on well with the girls. We can also say, from previous photo's, that William and Harry get on well with them, after all, they went clubbing with them often enough, and I fully expect they will be seen in Harry's company again once he returns from the USA.

Bottom line: We have no reputable reports about what Charles has said about the girls, but I am betting that he knows them both pretty well as the BRF are known to socialise together outside the public arena. After all, we keep getting little surprises, like readings by them at family weddings, family things that we should not be surprised at. The fact is that we would not be surprised at all if we had not brought the media party line about the York girls being ostracised, demoted, etc, ad nauseum, from "unknown sources"!
 
I don't doubt that Charles does think that the girls are twits sometimes. He probably also thinks that William and Harry are twits sometimes as well. It's called the generation gap. But I do not believe that he made any type of comment where he could be overheard.

Tabloids, both US and UK, can make for interesting reading...but I would put their accuracy at best, at about 25%.
 
:previous: That's the problem! We really don't know anything about how anyone in the BRF feels about each other. We just have tabloids telling us, and if anyone else has been listening to the Leveson Inquiry, they would be seeing and hearing how, with each new testimony, things just gets worse and worse, their meanness, mendacity and malice seems to know no bounds!

We can say, without fear of denial, that most of what we read about royalty and celebrities is "manufactured". A figment of some journalist's fertile imagination. Why do we give credence to the reports from unnamed sources? Why are we going "tut tut, that's not very nice Uncle Charles"? Hell, we don't even know what, if anything, he has said.

Yes, we can draw a conclusion from photo's that Sophie get on well with the girls. We can also say, from previous photo's, that William and Harry get on well with them, after all, they went clubbing with them often enough, and I fully expect they will be seen in Harry's company again once he returns from the USA.

Bottom line: We have no reputable reports about what Charles has said about the girls, but I am betting that he knows them both pretty well as the BRF are known to socialise together outside the public arena. After all, we keep getting little surprises, like readings by them at family weddings, family things that we should not be surprised at. The fact is that we would not be surprised at all if we had not brought the media party line about the York girls being ostracised, demoted, etc, ad nauseum, from "unknown sources"!

EXACTLY! The press has to keep it's readership up. And what better way than to hint at a royal 'scandal' on the cover to get the public to buy a copy to read what's inside. Let's say for example; The BRF is on the balcony. Edward leans to Sophie and we see him say something. She looks at him, turns and walks to the other side of the balcony. Scandal! Next day's headline "Sophie leaves Edward!!" Inside the rag "Yesterday, the Countess of Wessex left her husband to stand on the other side of the balcony. Is their marriage in trouble?" Thus begins the scandal. Now, pretend we're a fly on the wall & what he said was "Sophie Darling, remember, you're supposed to be standing next to Anne today". To quote Ben Franklin "Believe none of what you hear (or read) and only half of what you see". While it may be interesting to speculate on the relationships within 'The Firm', it is just that...speculation and not to be taken as gospel (IMHO).
 
Last edited:
On the contrary, I think we do know a great deal about the disaffection the BRF and most of those in the know feel with the Yorks. The princesses certainly do not deserve to be painted with the same brush as their parents, but, unfortunately, they themselves are not always wise about their friendships, their clothing, their activities and other choices, often engaging in behaviour that brings criticism down upon themselves. While I agree about the distasteful tactics of the Daily Mail, it doesn't take an official statement from Buckingham Palace or Clarence House to understand all of this. The Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and the Prince of Wales are undoubtedly EXTREMELY concerned about public opinion and public regard for the monarchy. Why would they not be chagrined, and often embarrassed, by the Yorks' antics?
 
On the contrary, I think we do know a great deal about the disaffection the BRF and most of those in the know feel with the Yorks. The princesses certainly do not deserve to be painted with the same brush as their parents, but, unfortunately, they themselves are not always wise about their friendships, their clothing, their activities and other choices, often engaging in behaviour that brings criticism down upon themselves. While I agree about the distasteful tactics of the Daily Mail, it doesn't take an official statement from Buckingham Palace or Clarence House to understand all of this. The Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and the Prince of Wales are undoubtedly EXTREMELY concerned about public opinion and public regard for the monarchy. Why would they not be chagrined, and often embarrassed, by the Yorks' antics?

What bad decisions have the York princesses made?
 
Well, this is all well traveled territory and Zonk prefers we not rehash old news, but briefly, just start with the Oprah show, the dreadful hat which was very poor taste at a royal wedding, other not so well chosen clothing, falling out of clubs late at night, attending weddings and other events of rich declasse euros who no one else in the BRF would dare to be seen with... etc., etc., etc.
 
What bad decisions have the York princesses made?

Before she began dating Dave Clark, Beatrice was involved with an extremely shady type; I think the man had a prison record.

Just a few months ago, Eugenie was stumbling out of a club in a stained dress, apparently intoxicated.

Both girls allowed Fergie to include them in questionable activities like the Oprah show and the Ecclestone wedding.
 
So doing normal things that young people do - and that Harry, William and Zara all did at their ages - such as going clubbing, going to friends' weddings, making poor fashion decisions, like most young ladies, including Zara and Anne and supporting and loving their mother are bad choices.

How sad that people see two normal young ladies, making the same poor decisions as their older cousins (at least neither of them have had the stupidity to wear the uniform of a Nazi to a costume party - but then Harry can be forgiven - he was young - about the same age that Eugenie is now but she isn't allowed to make mistakes).

Double standards - sorry but this is so unfair and if the RF are judging them accordingly then they aren't much of a family who understand that young people have to make mistakes as they grow.
 
It does seem unfair, but perception is everything.

If the York princesses are perceived as following in their parents' footsteps, then they will be judged harshly.
 
Iluvbertie, it is not just about the RF. If the perception of the people is against the Yorks, then it reflects poorly on the BRF. So, the point is, if the girls want to be taken seriously, they must (fairly or unfairly) be seen to be above reproach. No mistakes for a good long while.
 
As young ladies in their early 20s 'no mistakes' is a bit much to expect.

In fact 'no mistakes' is too hard a requirement to ask of any human being.
 
As young ladies in their early 20s 'no mistakes' is a bit much to expect.

In fact 'no mistakes' is too hard a requirement to ask of any human being.

A rhetorical statement, Iluvbertie, just a rhetorical statement...

As a matter of fact, the princesses would be well advised to follow the example set by Catherine before her marriage. She has hardly put a foot wrong, then or now...
 
The Chicago Sun-Times is not a tabloid. Funny how it became one in the course of this thread. The person who wrote the article is not usually considered a tabloid journalist, by any means. One can investigate his earlier journalism rather easily. I doubt he'd risk his journalistic career by going totally rogue at this point.
 
So doing normal things that young people do - and that Harry, William and Zara all did at their ages - such as going clubbing, going to friends' weddings, making poor fashion decisions, like most young ladies, including Zara and Anne and supporting and loving their mother are bad choices.

How sad that people see two normal young ladies, making the same poor decisions as their older cousins (at least neither of them have had the stupidity to wear the uniform of a Nazi to a costume party - but then Harry can be forgiven - he was young - about the same age that Eugenie is now but she isn't allowed to make mistakes).

Double standards - sorry but this is so unfair and if the RF are judging them accordingly then they aren't much of a family who understand that young people have to make mistakes as they grow.

Indeed. All of the examples given of these young women's poor behavior seem pretty harmless, even in comparison to that of their own cousins.

I suspect that Beatrice and Eugenie could cure cancer and broker world peace and they'd still be pilloried, simply because how people feel about their parents. I think they've been turned into permanent scapegoats, and that's unfortunate, IMO.
 
The Newspaper may not be. But if it is not, the "Society" editor needs a rocket. Please refer to my earlier post. No reputable sources, none named, nasty inferences . . . . . all smell of no research, no intention to check information and, in short, no journalistic integrity!

Instead of writing a well reseached story about the York girls he has taken a really nasty cheap shot, courtesy of someone's gossip. If he is a good journalist then let him have the guts to write a well researched article about the Yorks that has reputable and reliable sources. Anything else is is risible.
 
A rhetorical statement, Iluvbertie, just a rhetorical statement...

As a matter of fact, the princesses would be well advised to follow the example set by Catherine before her marriage. She has hardly put a foot wrong, then or now...


When I was being educated there was no such thing as a 'rhetorical statement' only rhetorical questions' - ones that didn't need an answer. Your statement way an exaggeration - and beyond the possibilities of any person - but unfortunately sums up the views of a lot of people about the York girls.

Kate certainly isn't a role model for any women as she didn't work and just waited for a proposal - hardly a ringing endorsement. Yes I know that she supposedely worked for her family but any outside job had to be on the condition she was available for William when William called.

I would like to see the girls actually do something with their lives rather than revert to 19th C ideas of waiting for a man. Kate has put back the women's fight for equality a century with the message she sent young girls - don't do anything with your lives but wait for marriage and then sit around and take care of your husband - hardly a ringing example of a role model for any young woman, in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Kate is hardly setting women's rights back. :ermm: And I wouldn't call earning a University degree as doing nothing with her life.

Indeed. All of the examples given of these young women's poor behavior seem pretty harmless, even in comparison to that of their own cousins.

I suspect that Beatrice and Eugenie could cure cancer and broker world peace and they'd still be pilloried, simply because how people feel about their parents. I think they've been turned into permanent scapegoats, and that's unfortunate, IMO.

I too think it's unfortunate that they are being judged by the acts of their parents.
 
Last edited:
How is working for your family consider not real work? And were didn't this supposed condition that she could only work on a job where she would be available for when William call? The Daily Mail?

And I thought one of the reason that women fought was so that they could have a choice in what they choose to do? If a women wanted to b/c a housewife, stay at home mother, work part time, work for the family business or do nothing so what. As long as she can afford.
 
How is working for your family consider not real work? And were didn't this supposed condition that she could only work on a job where she would be available for when William call? The Daily Mail?

And I thought one of the reason that women fought was so that they could have a choice in what they choose to do? If a women wanted to b/c a housewife, stay at home mother, work part time, work for the family business or do nothing so what. As long as she can afford.


The story about her being available for William was from Jigsaw - the company that offered her a job.

Yes woman fought for the right to choose but that right doesn't extend to members or aspiring members of the royals families as they have to work and work until they drop - they have no rights - but one who hasn't done any work at all since leaving university (and if you believe that she worked for her family business full-time rather than be on call for William I have a Bridge for sale over Sydney Harbour) isn't a role model for young people - and to be held up as one is wrong. Princess Mary did actual work - even after meeting Fred, even though it meant leaving her home and family and yes Fred helped her find work in Europe but she did work - unlike Kate who simply waited.

Beatrice and Eugenie - the topic of this thread - would be better off taking Zara as a role model - a girl who got a good degree, found something she enjoyed, was good at and works hard to succeed and has reached the top of her profession - that is the sort of role model I would set up for young people to follow - one who works hard and succeeds on her own merits.
 
Why wouldn't I believe she work full time for her parents company, she is the one that started First Birthday for the family. She also organized many charity events before marrying William.And I remember reading all those article about her trying to start her own mail and order company after she graduated college. The only place I ever heard that story about Jigsaw was the Daily Mail and they have made up many stories and quote about many celebrities.

Anyway you are not going to believe Kate did anything other than wait, just like many people many people believe Mary did not work after she move to Europe b/c of some so called article and interview that co-worker did after Frederik got her the job.
 
Beatrice left college six months ago and so far besides go to parties and follow her boyfriend around she really hasn't done all that much. So she does seem to be following some peoples version of Kate. Except Kate did work for her family and didn't go and hang out with the Euro trash. I thought she had several very hard to get internships lined up but so far she hasn't done anything. Even if she did some charity work not just attend a party it would make her have a better image. But for someone who is supposed to have a passion for it she seems not too really care that much. Maybe that is why the stories of Prince Charles and the RF not wanting them to be working royals keeps being bought up? If Beatrice did something positive then it would give the tabloids etc something other to talk about. But so far going to fashion shows, looking pretty and being with her boyfriend are her priority. It's nearly Christmas there must be a lot of charities that would love some help. Beatrice knows what the press are like and doesn't help herself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom