The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #261  
Old 05-26-2010, 07:35 AM
Jacknch's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Grundisburgh, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by queenofthelight View Post
I really do not think there is any reason for Sarah to "flee" the country and make a fresh start in the US! Firstly, she already spends much time over there and I fail to see how moving there "permanently" could be constituted as a "fresh start". Secondly, if she ran her life properly as a private citizen or carried out her life in a quiet, peaceful, simple and un-ostentatious way, living in a quiet place like she used to before marriage, then there would be no reason or excuse for the media to "hound" her. But it seems she enjoys an aristocratic lifestyle, at the centre of attention, lots of money to spend and functions to attend, holidays to have - i.e. a jet-set life - and so it's hardly going to be a fresh start if she carries on regardless!
__________________

__________________
J
Reply With Quote
  #262  
Old 05-26-2010, 07:40 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: london, United Kingdom
Posts: 277
From the daily mail article

Mr Shuter, a former publicist, told CBS the The Duchess’s financial problems were to blame for her behaviour.

‘Sarah's had financial trouble for a long, long time,' he said


'And she can't win. When she got the job for Weight Watchers the press was awfully cruel to her.

'They said a royal should not be working.

'But it's awful expensive being the Duchess of York.

'But if Sarah lands in JFK, she can't get into a yellow cab, she has to have a security guard. It's terribly expensive.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1281505/Sarah-Ferguson-wants-leave-Britain-permanently-friends-say.html#ixzz0p2D7TqHe


Why does she need a security guard? She isn't royal anymore, she just thinks she is. If she stopped making awful mistakes like this one she wouldn't be in the papers so much and then there would be even less need for 'security'. Its only expensive being the Duchess of York becuase she wants it to be. Looking at the footage of her arriving at the airport in NY fronm the other day you can see that she still thinks she is royal, look at how she goes off shaking everyones hands like she is still a member of the RF. Sarah's trouble is she thinks she is Royal still.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #263  
Old 05-26-2010, 07:43 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
Starting a "fresh" in the US? Impossible! It's just not a realistic move, if at all being considered as a serious alternative.

Quote:
and look about for a book deal
All else fails, write a book? Something I think the establishment would like to see avoided if possible.

Sarah, imo, wants the social recognition, ie: acceptance. And America, being the celebrity based culture that it is, is willing to embrace her ONLY because she is a former member of the Royal Family. In the US, members of the Royal Family are not generally considered as being part of an historic, though very modern, institution of significance first and foremost, but as celebrities (I talk of course of the wider public at large). Having a little (or near enough) "blue blood" floating around the polished marble floors of New York makes the locals cosy up and where she isn't appreciated in the UK, she finds that acceptance in the States. Even if it is likely to be all smoke and mirrors, at least she feels accepted.

It's a shame, really.

Still, I do not believe the States is a place to be 'reborn', in any such case as this.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #264  
Old 05-26-2010, 07:50 AM
MandysRoyalty's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 44
The people I feel sorry for in this spectacle are their daughters, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie. Sarah has been touted as being a good mother for staying on amicable terms with Prince Andrew, but was it really for the girls’ sake, or to stay within Andrew’s financial good graces? Beatrice and Eugenie are always on hand looking mildly miserable when their mother walks a red carpet or needs a photo opportunity, so it’s probably all about the cache they can lend her as true British princesses. They are nothing more than Fergie’s tickets to staying within the royal orbit.

Those two girls have probably never seen themselves reflected in their mother’s eyes, only the dollar signs dancing within. So forget Fergie, just say a prayer for Bea and Eugenie.
__________________
M.L. Littlefield
Visit me at Facebook
The Royal Representative - Royal news and reviews
Reply With Quote
  #265  
Old 05-26-2010, 08:06 AM
MandysRoyalty's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idriel View Post
^from the Times article:

Excatly what I have been saying.
What she was offering to do was akin to lobbying.

Yes, that is true. She is behaving like a special interest group/politician. If that's what she wants to do, she should at least be clear about it.

I'm disappointed. I've criticized Fergie in the past, but then decided she was pulling her weight after all and I gave her another chance. Now this happens.

And as far as other royals go, if the world didn't want to give, royals wouldn't have anything. Same goes for the Duchess. With that title, she knows she's set for life (if she's responsible with the money, that is). A title and prestige impresses people, full stop. If the public really saw them as worthless, they'd abolish the system. In Fergie's case, she would've been ignored and never accepted by Weight Watchers or any of the other companies. Title lends cache, and that's just the way it is.

Besides, it isn't just the royals; in their place would be the (relatively speaking) commoner family of a politician expecting to fly first-class, get taxpayer funded taxis, shopping trips, et al.
__________________
M.L. Littlefield
Visit me at Facebook
The Royal Representative - Royal news and reviews
Reply With Quote
  #266  
Old 05-26-2010, 08:30 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,033
At the end of the day the DOY's idea of being "penniless" and that of the rest of us are two different things. She is wealthy by most peoples standards but she just seems to want more and more and more. It is pure greed. I don't have a fraction of what she has but I wouldn't sell out my family for all the money in the world so she really needs to take a long hard look at herself. My God, this woman has seen little children suffer through extreme poverty, among other things, in the charity work she has done so one would think she would be more than satisfied in having a very comfortable lifestyle along with two healthy children without resorting to making sleazy deals in hotel rooms. It just shows that some people are never happy.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #267  
Old 05-26-2010, 08:46 AM
MandysRoyalty's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 44
It also just goes to show that some people are never embarrassed, either. See the link below from the New York Times - the Duchess has been running around collecting awards and hitting up bookstores in the midst of the scandal:

Scandal or No, the Duchess of York is fully booked

I would be hiding in a dark room full of shame - not that I would do something like this in the first place! I get the feeling that all that Botox has gone to her brain. There is no shame or a noble sentiment in her entire body!
__________________
M.L. Littlefield
Visit me at Facebook
The Royal Representative - Royal news and reviews
Reply With Quote
  #268  
Old 05-26-2010, 10:45 AM
NotAPretender's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: WPB FL/Muttontown NY, United States
Posts: 853
Thank you

Quote:
Originally Posted by Idriel View Post
I completely agree with you. I do not doubt for a second that Sarah never means to hurt anyone.
But the question is: I am supposed to care what her intentions were? Were Andrew or the Royal family supposed to?
'I'm sorry I cheated on you/humiliated you/hurt your reputation/dragged your name through the mud/etc.. My intentions were spotless'.Being a Royal comes with huge privileges and also some concessions, especially when it comes to privacy.

When you are HRH The Duchess of York, wife of the Queen's second son and you are having your toes sucked by your lover, in front of your daughters, on the open deck of a yacht, you simply cannot have any expectation of privacy.
I find incredible that you would blame the press or the public (who is entitled to know what kind of person their taxes fund) for such contemptuous and brazen indiscretions. Diana, for all her faults, was never that reckless with her lover(s). Neither was Charles for that matter.

Behind closed doors? If only!
Diana was not rewarded for anything, she was reasonably entitled to a large settlement. Comparisons between these two are absurd because their situation were very different.

Firstly, Charles was as bad a husband as Diana was a bad wife, whereas Fergie was clearly more at fault in the break down of her own marriage. In term of settlement, it makes a difference.

Secondly, Diana, as the mother of the future King, was never to have the freedom of enterprise Fergie would enjoy. Simply put, she could never work, make an income as a private citizen or market herself the way Fergie did. And this is the critical difference.
The Royal family had a financial responsibility towards Diana because by marrying the heir to the throne she gave up a large chunk of autonomy and the ability to make money on her own in case of divorce. Fergie did not. If anything, she financially benefited from marrying in the Royal family, because her image was worth millions after she divorced, and she was free to cash in on it (and cash in she did). As a divorcee, the only work Diana would have ever been able to do was unpaid charity work.
Of course I agree that Diana used public sympathy to plump the numbers, but she would have had a pretty penny anyway.

And of course, as has been already pointed out, divorce settlement are calculated based on the husband's worth.

So trying to bring up Diana to somehow convinced people Sarah was entitled to more than she got simply doesn't cut it.
I quoted your entire post because it's brilliant. There simply is no comparison between the two women's proceedings.
__________________
"Me, your Highness? On the whole, I wish I'd stayed in Tunbridge Wells"
Reply With Quote
  #269  
Old 05-26-2010, 11:23 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Lilburn, United States
Posts: 62
Maybe she should get together with the resigned and disgraced former governor of the American state of Illinois. They could, perhaps, do a reality TV show together:)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #270  
Old 05-26-2010, 12:13 PM
Vasillisos Markos's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Crete, United States
Posts: 1,158
Sarah would be a producer's dream for a reality show. Can you imagine the ratings that would pull from the public?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #271  
Old 05-26-2010, 01:55 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada, Canada
Posts: 978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Royale View Post
Starting a "fresh" in the US? Impossible! It's just not a realistic move, if at all being considered as a serious alternative.
I totally agree with you, Sarah likes the U.S. because it's very important for her to be liked, and she gets acceptance there, or appearance of acceptance anyway. (Sarah thinks the United States loves her for herself; I think they just like her because they love any celebrity, plus they see her as a hard-done-by member of an outdated institution (thanks especially to Princess Diana).) Ten years ago Sarah tried to market herself as someone who had been "reborn" in the U.S., and what does she have to show for it now? No money, and still making the same mistakes over and over again. And Americans might still sympathize with her, but I don't think Sarah is going to have the same opportunities to make money in the U.S. anymore either.

Sarah needs to grow up and take responsibility for her actions. Repeating "I hate grownups and love children" is childish, and so is running away (if that's what she's thinking of doing) to the United States, where everyone seems to accept her. I'm not too impressed with Sarah's behaviour at the moment. It seems like she just sees herself as a victim of people who don't like her (the UK press). Yes, the British press doesn't like her and sometimes I also think they have it in for her, but that doesn't excuse her latest actions. This latest scandal was all her own fault, and not just for being "caught" or falling for the trap of a set-up.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #272  
Old 05-26-2010, 03:34 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy1716 View Post
I really can not beleive people are so outraged that the Queen won't give Sarah any more money...
Early on Sarah ran up an overdraft of 250,000 pounds. The Queen bailed her out by writing a check for the full amount. Once Sarah made the same mistakes the Queen may have just lost her patience with her and said no more.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #273  
Old 05-26-2010, 03:45 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renata4711 View Post
Regardless of any smear campaigns, I have a soft spot for Fergie!

She is so refreshingly un-royal, and that's what made her not just a royal, but a celeb, at the time of her marriage, and beyond.

The Royal Family and the gutter press have made her what she is now.
No one made her what she is except herself. The gutter press and the royal family could not have done her any harm if she had behaved herself in the first place. She had a 2 million dollar a year contract from Weight Watchers. She was with them for three years. She receives $90,000 a time for a lecture. She wrote a book and made money. She has been given all kinds of perks and monies. I also have always had a soft spot for Fergie, but please! She has made such a disgrace of herself this time I don't know what she will do with herself. Nothing and no one would make me sell out my husband and embarrass the royal family. I agree that her divorce settlement was ridiculous, but she did a ridiculous thing and shamed herself and her husband by her behavior. I don't want any harm to come to her and I think Prince Andrew will be kind about it, but something must be done to police her spending and keep her in check. There has been talk that she may leave England altogether and live in America. It will be interesting to see if she keeps getting into the same trouble if she does live here. Can you imagine what is going on at the palace? I wonder if smoke has stopped coming out of Prince Philip's ears and I would love to be a fly on the wall at Gatcombe Park. Princess Anne must be in fine form over this matter. It is Sarah's daughters and Prince Andrew I feel sorry for. Those two girls are sitting their examinations, they don't need this.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #274  
Old 05-26-2010, 04:12 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Posts: 177
I am disappointed in the duchess, but I am also disappointed at the memebership here. The woman has done her best; she isn't some media savvy Eurotrash celebrity and what morality lies behind a newspaper mogul deciding to destroy someone whom he disapproves of.

And as for those Christians here who advocate the Duke of York cutting her adrift and evicting her from her home, please do remember she is the mother of his children, and if he worked harder and provided for her then perhaps she would be as compliant in public as many of the other royal spouses are. Three cheers for someone near the royals who lives in the real world.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 05-26-2010, 04:22 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hereditary Thane View Post
I am disappointed in the duchess, but I am also disappointed at the memebership here. The woman has done her best; she isn't some media savvy Eurotrash celebrity and what morality lies behind a newspaper mogul deciding to destroy someone whom he disapproves of.

And as for those Christians here who advocate the Duke of York cutting her adrift and evicting her from her home, please do remember she is the mother of his children, and if he worked harder and provided for her then perhaps she would be as compliant in public as many of the other royal spouses are. Three cheers for someone near the royals who lives in the real world.
Actually what you are witnessing is disappointment.

A lot of people, myself included, have defended Sarah to the ENDS of time. We have over looked a lot of things (the affairs, the using the DoY title to earn a living because really she couldn't get another type of job, the Turkish debacle, etc.) but really this is it. Its ridiculous and quite sad.

She tied Prince Andrew to the idea that he a member of the British Royal Famiy was for sale. And that is unforgiveable.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 05-26-2010, 04:23 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,500
Has anyone considered that the undercover press pack might not even care whether Fergie did "it" ?? The role of newspapers has undergone a massive change - they hide their own misbegotten actions under the "public interest" banner, but really they only do it for .......money, of course.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 05-26-2010, 05:06 PM
Vasillisos Markos's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Crete, United States
Posts: 1,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
Actually what you are witnessing is disappointment.
Nicely put, Zonk. I agree that most commentators are disappointed in Sarah's behavior; notwithstanding the newspaper's motivation, whether it was to sell papers or publicly embarrass Sarah, at the end of the day she is responsible for her actions, even if she was tempted by the undercover reporter's actions and offer of money.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #278  
Old 05-26-2010, 05:17 PM
October's Avatar
Newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: City, United States
Posts: 8
I'm personally far more disgusted with the NOTW than I am Fergie. They secretly recorded, what to me appears to be an emotionally unstable drunk person, with-out said person’s knowledge or consent in a deliberate attempt to create a scandal for their own use. Yes, she's an adult and what she did was unethical, but I still put what they've done as worse. This newspaper is also owned by Rupert Murdoch who I suspect has had it in for the RF for years; I think it was this paper that recorded Sophie with-out her consent and it was the Sun (another Murdoch rag) that bugged William's phone. I also don't see how what she did was illegal, unethical and stupid yes, but illegal, I'm not sure?...However if it's not illegal for a tabloid to secretly record someone for financial gain than it ought to be. It is also absolute bull that a concerned friend of Andrew’s asked the NOTW to set this up because they were concerned for Andrew. I don’t know what is more unbelievable: that the NOTW expects anyone to buy that or that perhaps their regular readers are actually that gullible.

Considering her measly divorce settlement and that she has no real work skills or income to fall back on I don't see how she could possibly support herself; I think this is a common element with many divorced women in her age group because they were part of the last generation where it was a semi-acceptable idea that a girl could go through life and never worry about money if she married well.

She will continue to cause scandal in her attempts to make money and in by doing so bring shame on the royal family. This of course isn't fair to the RF because she isn't a royal anymore, it's not right that they should be tainted by the antics of the ex-wife of the man fourth in line to the throne, but I think some people salivate over royal scandals to such an extent that they'll latch onto any dubious actions committed by anyone connected to the royal family regardless of whether they’re royalty or not. Once someone loses that HRH or if they never had it in the first place than in my opinion the royal family shouldn’t be tainted by association. Diana may have been charismatic, beautiful, caring, etc. but I shudder to think what she might be getting up to now if she were alive….this is why William & Harry need to be certain who they marry will put the monarchy first every time and themselves second, even after a divorce.

The only way for the RF to stop this would be to pay off her debts and give her a stipend, but afterwards if she still insisted on living above her means she will again find herself in the same situation. I think not only her, but several members of the RF feel for some reason that they need to project an image of wealth in order to save face so they may perhaps spend more than they can afford. I don’t understand this philosophy because I think most people recognize (at least in the UK, perhaps not in America) that there is a difference between class and wealth. Fergie could live a more simple life (all of them could) with only the most petty of people sneering at them for it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #279  
Old 05-26-2010, 06:06 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,466
Sarah's problems have been made by Sarah, mostly. That being said, the idea the the RF is above all this is silly. They are "celebrities". Most of them serve no other function. Other than the queen, the rest are paid for ceremonial jobs and a good bit of pay at that. They inherited land that a strong sworded ancestor stole from someone else. They amassed a fortune by not paying taxes, when others did. Even now, the queen inherited her mother's treasure trove, as it is not taxed, and can then quietly pass on what she wants to others. Sarah, has been thrown in a world where she thinks she has to make a full spash and that's gotten her into trouble. Yes, she was acting like a lobbyist. She was trying to make a buck. And, while Andrew isn't "ricj", I don't think he need lose sleep over his worth. He will always have a good roof over his head. Let him decide how he will deal with this situation. Who knows, he might have been part of it to help Sarah, and now this mess is here.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #280  
Old 05-26-2010, 06:07 PM
Vasillisos Markos's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Crete, United States
Posts: 1,158
This is in response to October's post:

I don't know what the laws are in England, but it is not always illegal to secretly record a conversation or videotape a person in the States. It depends on the individual state's law but essentially, the litmus test is whether the recording accurately sets forth the conversation between the two people and here it appears that Sarah engaged in a conversation where she "sold" access to her ex-husband to someone she believed was a businessman. If you are implying that Sarah is emotionally unstable and should not be held accountable for her actions, then perhaps her family should institute guardianship proceedings.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Marie Pavlovna "The Elder" (Grand Duchess Vladimir) (1854-1920) Jackswife The Imperial Family of Russia 118 11-05-2013 09:56 PM
Do your kids play "Queen", "Princess", "King" or "Prince"? FarahJoy Royal Chit Chat 39 12-22-2011 04:40 AM
"The Duchess" (2008) a film about Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire susan alicia The Electronic Domain 25 07-03-2011 03:25 AM
"Diana" by Sarah Bradford love_cc Royal Library 15 06-29-2011 11:10 PM
Royals on CNN program "Quest": York, Swaziland, Serbia and Greece, 2006 RhapsodyBrat The Electronic Domain 10 07-31-2006 02:22 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince felipe crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta elena infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan kate middleton king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games ottoman picture of the month pom president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit wedding william



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:59 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]