The 'Cambridge Set' and Friends


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm on Twitter but I haven't seen the tweets ...the only thing I've seen (a few tweets) of whatever woman who did like a dozen tweets in a row describing what supposedly happened ...I just rolled my eyes (it read like a romance novel) and moved on. I can't believe anyone was thinking she was accurate.


LaRae
 
JR76 said:
No, I got that. I was just checking if I had interpreted the forum rules correctly.
Click to expand...

But the controversy is social media generated. It's all rumours and gossip. Russell Myers says there's no foundation to the gossip

TRF rules state that comments and posts must be backed up by facts, not rumours or gossip but at the least a media source.
 
Pranter said:
I'm on Twitter but I haven't seen the tweets ...the only thing I've seen (a few tweets) of whatever woman who did like a dozen tweets in a row describing what supposedly happened ...I just rolled my eyes (it read like a romance novel) and moved on. I can't believe anyone was thinking she was accurate.


LaRae
Click to expand...
To see how many and who have chosen to believe what that person obviously made up have been very surprising *inserting Joey from Friends with open mouth gif*
 
Rudolph said:
But the controversy is social media generated. It's all rumours and gossip. Russell Myers says there's no foundation to the gossip

TRF rules state that comments and posts must be backed up by facts, not rumours or gossip but at the least a media source.
Click to expand...

What is a “media source” these days though? Just because it is online doesn’t mean it is not media. I had an article about this come up on my Yahoo feed. The “media” in question seems like a scandal sheet, but it is identified as media/news company.
 
Last edited:
O-H Anglophile said:
What is a “media source” these days though?
Click to expand...
My Labour Law professor once said that the most important lesson a higher education will give us is the ability to know what is a serious source and what isn't. I've made good use of that ability on social media in the last year or so.
 
O-H Anglophile said:
What is a “media source” these days though? I had an article about this come up on my Yahoo feed.
Click to expand...

I would say at the least a source has an editor to answer to. Or a reporter.

I'm just pointing out that if we use social media as the 'source' of gossip than things can go sideways pretty fast.
 
Social media is a cess pool, a viper's nest. While it can be used for good, it seems people use it more often to hurt each other more than anything else. How about we all agree to stop discussing this particular topic about the Cambridges. It's all gossip, rumour and innuendos at this point.
 
Richard Kay never should have wrote his weird little article. This rumor was fascinating to watch unfold. Just goes to remind how easy a so called rumor can be twisted and turn into something else entirely.

I have seen some of the same individuals reject this one but are very quick to believe other rumors of other royals. And to be fair the reverse has happened. How about we remember we don't know these people and majority of the crap we read is likely not true.... or some twisted version of a piece of the truth.

KP is wise to ignore it like they ignore everything else. But honestly I don't see most reporters touching something like this unless they have pretty solid evidence. Why risk it over some hearsay?

At the end of the day people will believe what they want anyways.
 
Rumors are rumors. Ignore them and move on.
 
Anything and everything these days can be used for good or for bad and even for ugly. We've seen tremendous response to a social media incentive that has astounded the charities getting donations because people "follow" a couple having a baby. We see the rumors, the gossip and the outright nasty things that people spread on social media and we see purely destructive vitriol worthy of any "shock jock" you'll find anywhere.

Its our job to be discriminating. Its our job to be aware enough to make an intelligent decision as to what we pay attention to and what we don't allow rent free space in our heads. One cannot dismiss and discard something they know absolutely nothing about or stick their head in the sand like an ostrich.

Here, we're informed of what's going on out there but the good part is that we can see this wolf in sheep's clothing exactly for what it is and call it as we see it. If we're discriminating enough, we discuss it and dismiss it because we know better than to aid and abet spreading this germ further.
 
^^]

It goes when you decide to put it behind. When you try to dig for reasons to bring it up then it appears to be bigger or should I say worst. It goes when you leave the story alone. We probably wouldn’t be discussing this now if people chose to leave it alone. That’s what makes it strong, constantly reading about won’t help it fading my
 
Let's move on from the speculation and gossip about the Cambridge marriage, please.
 
16a1f410eb725549d517c2d79e6fd94ce51a2b48.jpg


Source: The Telegraph. Another two besties off the Market
 
Let's hope this marriage will last longer than his first - for both of them and baby Mary (very traditional name BTW). Getting married within two years because (?) they are expecting a baby, doesn't seem to be the best possible start.
 
Somebody said:
Let's hope this marriage will last longer than his first - for both of them and baby Mary (very traditional name BTW). Getting married within two years because (?) they are expecting a baby, doesn't seem to be the best possible start.
Click to expand...

Despite Lucy being six months pregnant when they married, they didn't have a shot gun wedding (didn't marry because of it). They announced their engagement in June 2019. They were meant to marry in April but like Beatrice their plans got pushed due to the pandemic. They would have been engaged more then 6 months when Lucy became pregnant.

Its been four years since his divorce from his first wife.

Her full name is reportedly Mary Anna.
 
Congratulations to the couple! Not a lot of young girls named Mary about nowadays. I remember it was the first name I really liked when I was around 7/8 - and I still am partial to Mary now!
 
Congratulations to the couple on the happy news.

Yes Mary is a very traditional name ,I quite like the different variations of it Miriam, Maria, Marie ,Máire and son on.
The 2 most popular female names in Ireland for many years were Mary and Anne ( the mother and grandmother of Jesus).
 
Rose Hanbury, Marchioness of Cholmondeley did an interview with Tatler on the Anish Kapoor exhibition in Houghton Hall. The (inside) exhibition unfortunately ended on 1st November, but visitors can still "admire the impressive collection of permanent works that punctuate it’s sweeping grounds and gardens".

https://www.tatler.com/article/houghton-hall-bids-adieu-to-anish-kapoor

There are more pictures for the Anish Kapoor exhibition on the Houghton Hall website: https://www.houghtonhall.com/art-and-exhibitions/anish-kapoor-at-houghton-hall/

As Tatler mentioned in its article, the Anish Kapoor exhibition reminds me of Cecily Brown's artwork collection at Blenheim Palace.
 
HereditaryPrincess said:
Congratulations to the couple! Not a lot of young girls named Mary about nowadays. I remember it was the first name I really liked when I was around 7/8 - and I still am partial to Mary now!
Click to expand...

That may be because the name Mary was so widely used at one time. Its popularity made it unpopular! :lol:

But now it is quite unusual again, so it's coming back in style.
 
Mary used to be a very popular name. I often get these three "Teck Princesses" or "Cambridge Ladies" mixed up:
  • Lady May Abel Smith (1906-1994) (Formerly HSH Princess May of Teck, then Miss May Cambridge then The Lady May Cambridge)
  • Lady Mary Whitley (1924-1999) (Formerly Lady Mary Cambridge)
  • Mary Somerset, Duchess of Beaufort (1897-1987) (Formerly HSH Princess Mary of Teck, then Lady Mary Cambridge)
Of course there was Queen Mary (wife of George V) or Mary of Teck, who was Princess Victoria Mary of Teck when she was born.

Other "blood born aristocrat" that I could think of
  • Lady Mary Charteris (b. 1987) (now Lady Mary Furze), daughter of James Charteris, 13th Earl of Wemyss and 9th Earl of March
  • Lady Mary Colman (b. 1929) (formerly Lady Mary Bowes-Lyon), daughter of Captain Hon. Michael Bowes-Lyon (son of Claude Bowes-Lyon, 14th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
Laws of the House of Grimaldi
Replies
3
Views
443
Tatiana Maria
T
Queen Claude
Duke and Duchess of Cambridge: Platinum Jubilee Tour of The Caribbean 19-26 Mar 2022
6 7 8
Replies
227
Views
31K
shaggydog
S
Iluvbertie
British Royal Family Engagements - 2021
2 3 4
Replies
110
Views
13K
Iluvbertie
Iluvbertie
Iluvbertie
British Royal Family Engagements 2020
2 3
Replies
85
Views
15K
Iluvbertie
Iluvbertie
E
Duke of Cambridge: Official Visit to Israel, Jordan and the OPT - Summer 2018
3 4 5
Replies
136
Views
20K
Rudolph
R

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom