What is your opinion about Sarah, Duchess of York?

[Roslyn]

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

Oh now come on dear, you don't actually think Miss Ferguson actually does any work? She makes her money from the chat show circuit. She's not hurting anyone in the USA because she knows if she does there what she did here they'd kick her out as well. Now, Princess Michael doesn't work - but my God that woman has style. Sarah has nothing. She's tried the botox, she's attempted to look glam at the premieres, she's done Letterman - but she is what she is. A reject. We like Princess Michael because she's an opportunist and she's open about it. She doesn't claim to be a victim - she does what she does and does it with style and she is a true Princess. Sarah is an opportunist but she tries to present herself as this caring saviour when in actual fact, she's just a barnacle on her daughter's, trying to eek the last drops of fame before they grow up and realise that we aint laughing with Fergie - we're laughing at her. Let us never forget the prayer for Royal animals;

"We pray for Her Majesty's Corgis, Princess Anne's horses and for anything that get's sat on by the Duchess of York".

Sarah is now a nothing. A nobody. Let's just hope she'll complete the rounds, find a Liza-style hubby and then disappear for good.

My goodness! You really don't like her, do you?

Whatever else she may be, and may have done, and whatever faults she may have, she is the loving mother of Princesses Beatrice & Eugenie, and she and her ex-husband have done a splendid job raising those girls, who both seem charming and well-adjusted, and who both seem to adore their mother. She has an excellent relationship with her former husband, and with their daughters. That's something of an achievement, I think.

[Furienna]

Originally Posted by Zonk

Yes, I do mean Princess Michael of Kent. Sorry for the confusion.

But hasn't she been in a scandal about what she might have said about some black people on a restaurant in New York? At least for a while, she wasn't liked either.

[Zonk]

Originally Posted by Furienna

But hasn't she been in a scandal about what she might have said about some black people on a restaurant in New York? At least for a while, she wasn't liked either.

Honestly...when I mentioned Princess Michael of Kent, I was actually referring to the charges that she to uses her royal connections for business opportunities as well. That's the only comparison that I am making.

Both Sarah and Princess Michael have done and said things that one wouldn't expect from a royal. But in this instance, I was just using her as a point of reference since so many people criticize Sarah for using her royal connections. More of...okay..you criticize Sarah but she isn't the only one.

And yes, I recognize that this thread isn't about Princess Michael of Kent.

[BeatrixFan]

Thats right Roslyn - I aint a fan!

Zonk, I disagree with you. Princess Michael has acted like a Royal. Everything she does, we expect of a Princess. Maybe not a modern Princess but of a 1920s style Princess, totally. Sarah has never acted like a Royal. She never could carry herself or make herself presentable and I know that alot of people in Britain saw her as a true embarassment. They still do.

[Zonk]

Well BeatrixFan..we must agree to disagree

As this thread is not about Princess Michael of Kent, I won't go into great detail about some of the events or episodes that she has done that might have cause embarassment to some. I will, however, reiterate what I said in the beginning of the thread.

While everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion, and you can either like or dislike Sarah just because you do. Because she was loud, had no class and totally unsuitable for royal life. I understand that. I just find it hypocritical to use examples of things she has done, when other people have done the same thing and yet they are forgiven because they are human. Yes, she cheated on Andrew (but so has Margaret, Camilla, Charles, Diana, and Anne. Not cheated on Andrew mind you but you get the point). Yes, she acquired a large debt (Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother). Yes, she has used her royal connections to make money but so has the Prince and Princess Michael of Kent. It just seems like forgiveness (or the past is the past mantra that so many like to say) is only available for a select few.

[Princess BellyFlop]

Margaret, Camilla, The Queen Mother, Diana, etc... everyone mentioned in the previous post has done one bad action they cannot or should not be proud of.... the problem qith Sarah is that she has done ALL of them and that is too much.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Zonk

It just seems like forgiveness (or the past is the past mantra that so many like to say) is only available for a select few.

I think it's only me that uses that 'mantra' (although I don't repeat it to aid my concentration).

Sarahs 'crime', IMO, is that she can't or won't let go of the past. She is like one of these sad old women you hear about, who 30 years after the divorce, turn up uninvited at a function and introduce themselves as 'mrs ??', an absolute laughing stock, that people who know her get sick and tired of.

Originally Posted by Princess BellyFlop

Margaret, Camilla, The Queen Mother, Diana, etc... everyone mentioned in the previous post has done one bad action they cannot or should not be proud of.... the problem with Sarah is that she has done ALL of them and that is too much.

Exactly

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Trudie

MY ex husband served in the navy in the US and not it is not a cruise they work very hard but, We lived together as husband and wife the Palace said no to Andrew and Sarah living on a base so it is no wonder she turned to someone for comfort.

As with anyone married or living with a member of the armed forces, you know what life is going to be like.

You also know that as a member of the navy, your husband/partner is going to be away, for long periods at a time. I wouldn't have thought Andrew or Sarah would have been happy living on the base in a little 4 bed, semi detached house, provided by the MOD.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

As with anyone married or living with a member of the armed forces, you know what life is going to be like.

You also know that as a member of the navy, your husband/partner is going to be away, for long periods at a time. I wouldn't have thought Andrew or Sarah would have been happy living on the base in a little 4 bed, semi detached house, provided by the MOD.

I don't think Sarah really realized how life would be. It was far easier for Diana and even she, with her aristocratic background and her marriage to the heir (and not his much poorer spare) did not manage.

IMHO Sarah thought seh would marry money and leisure at the top of the social pyramid, with an amusing and, yes, lovable husband when she only got status, herself a workload and a husband who had a tough job.

But - that's only an explanation for her antics, her debts and her mistakes, it's not an excuse. If you read how carefully Crown Princess Mary examined the pro and cons of her and Frederick's situation and how they planned and prepared for this final step out in the open, then you can blame Sarah for not having been as logical and sensible as these two. I mean if I had the unfortune to fall in love with a representative of such an impressive but strict institution and he asked me to become his wife, then I would be very, very careful in my decision as I'd know that it's not only the guy but the whole system you have to embrace.

So that's a point against Sarah having said "yes" when she was not willing to buy the whole package. IMHO she still keeps part of the package after having damaged so many things for the Royals who had to stay behind and that's not fair and not correct, IMHO. Maybe I have this reaction to her because she is always so loud, as Skydragon remarks. She radiates bad taste and an absolute lack of decorum. After all she cheated on her husband, damaging the whole monarchy in the resulting divorce and thus should lead a little more dignified life without dragging her kids to parties of the likes of Puff Daddy.

But even this point is a minor point. I'm really conservative at heart. While I find the mess Sarah created on being herself sad, embarrassing and distressing for the Brits, I find the mess she created on cheating on her husband unjustifieable and utterly appalling. Especially as her husband's kids were in the vincinity of this "private" pool. I wouldn't wonder if the paparazzi were tipped off by a member of Sarah's own household who did not condone her behaviour.

[Zonk]

I am so sure a member of her household alerted the press to what was going on the pool. She was certainly foolish to be so careless. Mind you...that definitely does not excuse her behavior.

And IMO its unfair to make a comparison between Sarah and Crown Princess Mary because after the breakdown of Sarah's marriage..I am sure most royal household compiled a video of WHAT NOT DO when you marry a Royal and she was the prime star Remember unti Sarah and Diana, when most people married into the Royal Families...you didn't get the reaction from the public and the press that these two received. Now whether they courted it and brought a lot of it on themselves is debatable.

In regards to the cheating done by the other people I mentioned..it wasn't one time..in fact many of them carried on long standing relationships. So cheating with your spouse once or twice is better than carrying on another relationship at the same time. I don't think so. Cheating is Cheating.

And Skydragon..even though I referenced your "past is past" quote..you are not the only one who says that...just maybe the only one who has it at the bottom of their signature

And while I agree that Sarah shouldn't party and hang out with her kids...it should be noted that after the divorce and prior to them reaching the "teenage years" Sarah did in fact attend parties such as this. Which makes me wonder...who is asking who to go to the party

[ysbel]

Well this has been an enlightening thread - its seems that Sarah's worst sin is being LOUD AND TACKY-she doesn't think about what shes says, wears, or does before she does it. This is what draws the most heated reaction from people - not her affairs, not the fact that she doesn't work much. I'd hazard to guess its also because she draws attention to herself and one sees an insecurity - a need to please.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by ysbel

Well this has been an enlightening thread - its seems that Sarah's worst sin is being LOUD AND TACKY-she doesn't think about what shes says, wears, or does before she does it. This is what draws the most heated reaction from people - not her affairs, not the fact that she doesn't work much. I'd hazard to guess its also because she draws attention to herself and one sees an insecurity - a need to please.

Hm, Ysbel, I don't think that's her worst sin. But maybe that's why a lot of people react with animosity against her, here you're certainly right. She was a Royal but not a lady, and that's something especially well-mannered ladies simply don't like.

That doesn't mean these ladies are conservative or old-fashioned, it's just that they strive to be "good" and put effort into reacting according to rules which are there to make life in human society more pleasant for all concerned. Well, not only pleasant but calculable, reliable and thus safe. I certainly see the need for each generation to change these rules, but normally this change is slight and/or if there is a radical change, polite people still try to behave the former way when around their elders.

A person like Sarah shows in her way to behave that these rules are not important for her. That is okay for a commoner but not for a Royal who takes her right to precedence from exactly these rules. And most people think or feel or both that you can't have one without the other.

And really: it's not so hard to learn these rules if you want to. To to behave according to them. I agree that CP Mary probably was warned by Diana's and Sarah's example but still I think that there are enough women around who do not need that kind of warning at all, who realize by themselves that there are rules, that they make sense and life easier for all if you follow them.

It's interesting to read the excerpt of the Paxton-book printed by the Guardian where he describes a weekend invitation ot Sandringham. He writes that even he as a "staunch republican" felt he had to say "Sir" to the Prince of Wales all the time. I take that as an example for the fact that if you don't follow the rules by choice, it's one thing. But you will always realize that you miss the security these rules give you. I've read that the POW is quite a nice host, not formal at all. But still it's a lot easier for you if you know the rules and thus the borderlines between being informal with a host who wants you to and being rude out of lack of knowledge.

That's why I try to install the rules of good manners in my son - he may decide with other kids not to use them or use a different set of rules but when I take him out into a top restaurant or hotel where people know me because of my profession he acts accordingly, thus encouraging me to take him again the next time.

As for Sarah - my very personal guess is that while she was in contact with the Royal set, she met them through the "stable door". While "stable manners" are surely a way to interact in even the most noble circles when it comes to horses, riding and sports, I guess a real lady like The Princess Royal or The Princess of Wales (I've decided to drop the "Duchess of Cornwall" as I've decided that I'm so formal as to perceives Camilla as Princess of Wales... ) or our very own Skydragon knows how to behave in the stable and at the table. Different behaviour, I'm sure but you have to have learned both kinds of manners to be a "proper lady". Mind, I have no idea how to behave around horses....

[BeatrixFan]

I just find it hypocritical to use examples of things she has done, when other people have done the same thing and yet they are forgiven because they are human.

It isn't an issue of forgiveness Zonk. It's an issue of simple dislike. And Ysbel is right - alot of dislike came from her being loud and tacky. I mean, have you ever seen "It's a Royal Knockout"? The others kept composure whilst making fools of themselves but Sarah was there, doing pratfalls, shouting and hollering, bouncing around, yellling - and she always seem to be loud. She never knew how to behave like a member of the Royal Family so she was never accorded the graces the others were. For example, we know that Princess Michael has had a few colourful incidents - but because she behaves like a Princess, we expect it from her. With Sarah, she never said "Royal" she always said, "trying too hard" and so yes, one of her biggest let downs was being loud and tacky.

But also, it was the fact that she just didn't do very much and now, Britain just sees her as another tired old D-Lister but it's taken on a slightly creepy Mommie Dearest flavour because she's using her daughters to keep her hand in. I mean, when I heard Beatrice say, "I want to be a mini-mummy" I almost had a coronary. Sarah is not a role-model for a glittering career. I do think that the media were fairly cruel to Sarah because she wasn't exactly a beauty, "Duchess of Pork" springs to mind. I don't think she was given a fair deal but there was no other reason for her to be a bad member of the Royal Family. She could have learned the Windsor ways but she didn't attempt to. She just tended to roll in and make people cringe. She still makes me cringe - it's very sad that she can't just retire from the cameras and be this good mother she's supposed to be behind closed doors.

[servingsophie]

I wonder if we were having the same forum discussion but about Princess Diana, the same people condemning the Duchess would still be sitting on their high moral horses?

Would we all condemn the Princess for her sordid little affairs with England Rugby captains or disgraced army Majors?

Would we condemn her for embarrassing the royal family in an interview on national television?

Or will the Diana apologists claim like some of us have trying to defend the Duchess, that she found life as a royal difficult?

Or is it ok for Diana to embarrass the Royals because we could argue she was more elegant?

Or do we just ignore all her faults because of the tragic circumstances of her death?

Leave the Duchess alone!

[Elspeth]

Thank you for that intervention, servingsophie, but the whole point of this thread is an exchange of opinions, which is a bit hard if one side is prohibited from saying anything.

[Furienna]

Yes, I think Diana behaved much more like a princess should, and that's why she's more liked than Sarah. Her tragical death also added to it, of course.

[servingsophie]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

Thank you for that intervention, servingsophie, but the whole point of this thread is an exchange of opinions, which is a bit hard if one side is prohibited from saying anything.

I'm all in favour of free speech but it seems that the attacks on the Duchess are very personal and I find some of them offensive.

I remember the royal lives of Sarah and Diana with great fondness and I love them both equally. I simply don't understand the vitriol and spiteful nature of the comments criticising the Duchess.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by servingsophie

I wonder if we were having the same forum discussion but about Princess Diana, the same people condemning the Duchess would still be sitting on their high moral horses? lone!

You'll find that quite some people who critizise the duchess for her lack of propriety are well-know Diana-critics as well.

[Princess BellyFlop]

Diana would be getting the same treatment (at least from me) but she is dead and it is kind of unfair to present a negative opinion of a dead body. Sarah on the other hand offers me day after day new reasons not to appreciate her and for that am I thankful to her? no of course.

[Skydragon]

I don't see most of the comments as being anything other than various people giving their opinions on Sarah, which is what the thread is about. I'm sorry if it upsets you that not everyone remembers the days of Sarah and Andrew as you do, but, I for one don't. As anyone will tell you I have also been a fierce critic of Diana.

Sarah may have found life as a royal difficult, so why does she try to trade on it now? Wouldn't the sensible thing have been to withdrawn from such a public life?