The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #841  
Old 03-07-2021, 05:04 AM
Nico's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 2,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
Emails are not text messages. Its not like they are going to wake you up.

I could send my boss an email at 4am in the morning or 11 at night. It wouldn't matter. They wouldnt get the email until they opened their computer to start the day. Does anyone actually read the time stamp on an email?


Sorry it speaks worse of the employee. OMG I had an email waiting for me when I started work this morning. Seriously you are getting paid to handle that. Its not like Meghan called them at 4 am and woke them up.


It screams an employee 'I didn't get enough gold stars for showing up to work today'.
What a condescending thing to say.

In some jobs, especially PA, communication, press etc a response to an Email from the boss is expected in the 20mins ors so, days or nighs. It's an implicit rule, or even explicit as this requirement is sometimes detailed in the employement contract.

A boss is deemed a good manager if he/she will abuse or not of this clause.

In France a " right to deconnect" was created in 2017 especially to fight many abuses on this front.
__________________

  #842  
Old 03-07-2021, 05:07 AM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 3,317
According to journalist Richard Palmer the GMA interview were taken down because it didn't include Valentine Low's name but will be reposted later

https://twitter.com/RoyalReporter/st...395965440?s=19
__________________

  #843  
Old 03-07-2021, 05:10 AM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by duchessrachel View Post
Whoa!!! Meghan and Harry's behavior has even put a republican (anti-monarchist) on the side of the Queen:
https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/0...-royal-family/
In this article, he compares Meghan to the Queen, which sounds reasonable until you wonder whether this isn't holding Meghan to a higher standard than others are held? I'm imagining the same comparison being made with other royal family members, several of whom would also fare badly in comparison to HMQ.
  #844  
Old 03-07-2021, 05:12 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
I don’t think Harry’s HRH is in danger but I can see Letters Patent being issued saying that only the immediate heir and their immediate heir etc. (so Charles, William and George) are entitled to the HRH
I agree, unless something absolutely awful and earth shattering should come out I cannot see the Queen or Charles taking away the titles. They received a backlash when Diana's was removed, and she was divorced.
They have been asked not to use the HRH in relation to their business dealings and from what I have seen or heard they have honoured their agreement. He will always be the Queens grandson, 6th in line to the throne that can never be removed, in fact he will move closer one day.
  #845  
Old 03-07-2021, 05:17 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 8,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilyflo View Post
In this article, he compares Meghan to the Queen, which sounds reasonable until you wonder whether this isn't holding Meghan to a higher standard than others are held? I'm imagining the same comparison being made with other royal family members, several of whom would also fare badly in comparison to HMQ.
However, none of these other royals (whoever tehy re) walked out on their royal life and set up home abroad, said that they did't want to return to royal duties, and seem to be planning to do an interview criticising the royal family and its life....
  #846  
Old 03-07-2021, 05:18 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marengo View Post
The communication style from the British court never fails to amaze me.

Do they even have an official spokesperson? Does the press actually have somebody to turn to when they have questions? Or can they only rely on a steady stream of leaks?

In the Benelux a situation like this would be simply impossible. The prime Minister would be forced to put him/herself in front of the RF and explain and defend their actions in parlament. In the UK it seems nobody is making an effort to do this in an official capacity but they spoil us with a never ending stream of leaks.
There are time when "an official spokesman" or simply "Buckingham Palace" who is almost always never named says something but it often goes mostly disregarded by everyone when there's a big flap on. We know that they have begun an official enquiry into how accusations against a member of the family towards staff are handled but that isn't the Big News part of the story. That's the part the government might get involved in if it turns out there is a Maria Teresa sized problem and it's not something that can simply be handled internally.

I don't think Boris Johnson getting in front of the cameras and giving his opinion about the only part of the story people seem to care about (Harry and Meghan and what bombshells they're going to produce) would help matters at all right now. It would just make things worse and be seen as yet more proof that that The Establishment is terrified of what they're going to say and trying to silence them. And the Government has more than enough to deal with right now.

I can't speak for how Benelux handles it but it seems that our Swedish posters are often complaining about how Press officer Margareta Thorgren handles things so even when there is an official spokesperson cock ups can happen.
  #847  
Old 03-07-2021, 05:23 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 8,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sionevar View Post
Harry's dukedom is a title in the peerage of the United Kingdom, which the Queen does not have the power to rescind. This would require an Act of Parliament, which is almost certainly not going to happen.

I believe the Queen *could* remove the style of HRH and the title of Prince, through the issuance of Letters Patent to that effect, but I think this is also highly unlikely.
She could but she hasn't done it for Andrew so it is unlikely, unless H and Meghan asked her to remove it so that they could be "normal Americans"... i suppose she'd do it then...
  #848  
Old 03-07-2021, 05:29 AM
moby's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilyflo View Post
In this article, he compares Meghan to the Queen, which sounds reasonable until you wonder whether this isn't holding Meghan to a higher standard than others are held? I'm imagining the same comparison being made with other royal family members, several of whom would also fare badly in comparison to HMQ.
Sure but the focus is on Meghan because others didn't say silly things like "collaborate" with the Queen, "service is universal", propose a half-in, half-out system, strike multimillion deals with Spotify and Netflix but that isn't enough so is now crying to Oprah about how d I F f i C u L t it was being part of "The Firm"?
  #849  
Old 03-07-2021, 06:34 AM
rominet09's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: LIEGE, Belgium
Posts: 4,770
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR76 View Post
According to journalist Richard Palmer the GMA interview were taken down because it didn't include Valentine Low's name but will be reposted later

https://twitter.com/RoyalReporter/st...395965440?s=19
Very interesting article....
  #850  
Old 03-07-2021, 06:51 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by rominet09 View Post
Very interesting article....
I think he makes very fair points. I do t think they will sue because whether they agree with the allegations or not the Sussexes know its true.

As for whether they crave rejection. I would question that as perspective. If Meghan and or Harry felt they were being rejected the whole thing would have descended into looking like that because all they would have heard is the negatives

So I would question whether that instinct was conscious or unconscious. It sounds like a horrific situation for all involved. And History has repeated itself but the question is what history.
  #851  
Old 03-07-2021, 06:53 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
There are time when "an official spokesman" or simply "Buckingham Palace" who is almost always never named says something but it often goes mostly disregarded by everyone when there's a big flap on. We know that they have begun an official enquiry into how accusations against a member of the family towards staff are handled but that isn't the Big News part of the story. That's the part the government might get involved in if it turns out there is a Maria Teresa sized problem and it's not something that can simply be handled internally.

I don't think Boris Johnson getting in front of the cameras and giving his opinion about the only part of the story people seem to care about (Harry and Meghan and what bombshells they're going to produce) would help matters at all right now. It would just make things worse and be seen as yet more proof that that The Establishment is terrified of what they're going to say and trying to silence them. And the Government has more than enough to deal with right now.

I can't speak for how Benelux handles it but it seems that our Swedish posters are often complaining about how Press officer Margareta Thorgren handles things so even when there is an official spokesperson cock ups can happen.

As far as I can tell, the involvement of the government with the court and how it's run differs greatly from country to country. The decision of PM Bettel to get involved in the case of Maria Theresa seems to have been
a) a personal one, because Jean-Claude Juncker before him seems to have not done anything of the sort.
And b) That he felt nothing was being done by the Lux Family themselves to properly address the bullying situation and fast staff-turnover. Which was also objectively true.

Since the BRF has already announced an investigation, I don't think there's a necessity for the government to get involved, unless there's evidence that the investigation is not properly done. But I rather think the Queen and William know that they cannot afford for this investigation to be a cover-up or only lip-service.

I agree that for the PM to comment on Meghan & Harry would only stoke the fire and help them push their narrative of "the establishment is trying to destroy us." Unless the Queen is insulted in a way that absolutely cannot go unchallenged - I do think they are insulting her constantly, but there is still a line that, if they crossed it, the government might actually have to comment.
  #852  
Old 03-07-2021, 06:55 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallo girl View Post
I agree, unless something absolutely awful and earth shattering should come out I cannot see the Queen or Charles taking away the titles. They received a backlash when Diana's was removed, and she was divorced.
They have been asked not to use the HRH in relation to their business dealings and from what I have seen or heard they have honoured their agreement. He will always be the Queens grandson, 6th in line to the throne that can never be removed, in fact he will move closer one day.
Yea but I think really the direct line should always have the titles which is what is happening now. Children and siblings of the monarch or expected monarch.

So presuming that The Cambridges have no more children that the next new HRH will be potentially George's children. Siblings of the heir should be HRH though as tragically you never know and you don't know of the heir won't have kids for example.
  #853  
Old 03-07-2021, 07:08 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 8,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
Yea but I think really the direct line should always have the titles which is what is happening now. Children and siblings of the monarch or expected monarch.

So presuming that The Cambridges have no more children that the next new HRH will be potentially George's children. Siblings of the heir should be HRH though as tragically you never know and you don't know of the heir won't have kids for example.
That would take away the HRH from Charlotte and Louis..
  #854  
Old 03-07-2021, 07:52 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
taht wuodl take away teh HRH from Charlotte and Louis..
No it wouldn't. Read what I wrote. But their kids shouldnt have it.
  #855  
Old 03-07-2021, 08:34 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marengo View Post
In the Benelux a situation like this would be simply impossible. The prime Minister would be forced to put him/herself in front of the RF and explain and defend their actions in parlament. In the UK it seems nobody is making an effort to do this in an official capacity but they spoil us with a never ending stream of leaks.

My impression is that, in the UK, the RF stays away from politics and, likewise, politicians try to stay away as far as possible from internal RF matters, so the PM is not expected to put himself in front of the RF to explain or defend their actions in parliament or to the press. That separation between the RF and the government is clearer in the UK than in some continental European monarchies. What do you think?


Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
Yea but I think really the direct line should always have the titles which is what is happening now. Children and siblings of the monarch or expected monarch.

So presuming that The Cambridges have no more children that the next new HRH will be potentially George's children. Siblings of the heir should be HRH though as tragically you never know and you don't know of the heir won't have kids for example.

That changes a lot from country to country, but the "least common denominator" to which many European monarchies seem to be converging (the Netherlands, Spain, most recently Sweden) is to keep the HRH for the heir, children of the monarch (other than the heir when he/she is also a child of the monarch), and children of the heir. Some countries like Belgium, however, still extend the HRH to all grandchildren of the monarch and even to all grandchildren of the heir.



Personally I don't expect any change to royal title rules in the current reign in the UK. Keep in mind that, if anything, Queen Elizabeth II has actually broadened the class of people who are entitled to the HRH by extending it to all children of the eldest living son of the Prince of Wales (i.e. Charlotte and Louis in addition to George only as before). There may be some slimming down under Charles, but I don't expect anything radical or dramatic.
  #856  
Old 03-07-2021, 09:09 AM
Marengo's Avatar
Administrator
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 22,500


You are right Mbruno, the Dutch and Belgian monarchies are far more political due to the fact that the PM is politically responsible for what members of the RF do. It ensures more debates in parlament about various aspects of the monarchy and at the same time it means that in times of crisis it is the prime minister who will be forced to explain what happened and by doing so is responsible for defending the monarchy. This encourages some form of transparency and accountability but at the same time can make the monarchy a tool to hit the prime minister with, as we saw with the latest of Wilelm-Alexander's many Greek travels of 2020.

In a case like this I can imagine a Dutch or Belgian PM would have received questions from MP's about the interview and he or she would be able to explain or refute claims that are going to be made by the Duke and Duchess against the palace.

Both systems have negatives and positives but to me it seems far from ideal that the monarchy is just left out to dry without being able to defend itself, other than through anonymous leaks. Leaks that, some would argue, may do more damage to them than good
__________________
TRF Rules and FAQ
  #857  
Old 03-07-2021, 09:30 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,918
[...]We have not yet seen any specific reference to individuals or to staff in making specific allegations. That may come during the full interview, but meanwhile it's all speculation until we actually hear what Meghan has to say in full.

Therefore the feeling that "others have the right to defend themselves," presupposes that there's an expectation or a worry by certain individuals that Meghan is planning to single out particular instances of conflict or worse that she has experienced, and also name names. Again, that hasn't happened yet, and we don't know that it will. So once again, the desire to get ahead of anything Meghan might have to say without knowing what she's planning to say, presupposes that Meghan has 'a side of the story to tell' about something unpleasant.

Anyone worried and full of trauma hopefully could have received assistance as well as apologies and any necessary counseling or restitution by pushing for the matter to be looked into asap when these alleged events occurred.


It appears that many people in Britain and America, etc., are skeptical of the accusations against Meghan. I'm not certain if Dave McCladd is a writer or a humorist, but apparently he's British, and he randomly made a satirical comment that started several parody threads which slyly reference Meghan and the latest accusations against her. Too funny and very apt, as the best parody/ sarcasm can be:

He started out several days ago making random comments like:
"Look, I was supportive of Meghan at first, but I just can't condone someone who started World War I"

"gah I've just knocked over a cup of tea bloody hell Meghan Markle this is your fault AGAIN"

Then yesterday this thread:
https://twitter.com/davemacladd/stat...25780703109120

"can't believe that Meghan also invented nuclear weapons"


Some of my favorite reply comments in this thread:
"I believe it was Meghan who scratched my car in the supermarket parking lot with her trolley."

"Meghan's the one who shot J.R."

"At least she gave Gaga her dogs back..."

  #858  
Old 03-07-2021, 11:39 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,918
[...]


Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
[...]Is it possible that he glossed over things because he didn't want to risk Meghan making the same decision?

I find it hard to believe that she didn't know what she was letting herself in for, even if Harry didn't spell it out, but it's possible. If so, that wasn't very fair either on the Royal Family or on her.
[...]

Meghan fell in love with Harry for who he is as a person, not for his princely titles and royal heritage. When you are in love, you tend to focus on the positives. Plus, Meghan is a happy, positive person in general. I know that because when it was first revealed that Meghan and Prince Harry were dating, and a lot of negative things were being said about her, I decided to find out who she is for myself. I did my homework before jumping to conclusions. I'd never heard of Meghan before, and I'd only casually heard of Suits in a limited way, but I'd never seen it since I didn't watch much television at the time. I made sure I boned up on all the information that was available, and there was a lot available on YouTube (very unusual for someone dating a British prince). But Meghan was an actor who was in the public eye, even if she to that point wasn't widely known. She was known within the industry, and she was becoming increasingly visible because of the opportunities her successful tv series was providing.

The available information on Meghan in late 2016 included a variety of interviews, fashion shoots and hair modeling features. There was none of the absolute negative crap that now clogs YouTube about Meghan and requires wading through to get to something substantive, factual, and/or truthful. Plus, I checked out Meghan's former Instagram and her former Tig blog, the U.N. speech from 2015, and the Larry King Live interview in early 2016 with Meghan in which she said: "I think it's possible to be a feminist, and to be feminine, to embrace both..."

I was intrigued, and the more I researched and read about Meghan, some of it her own writing about her personal experiences, plus her well-curated, funny and upbeat Instagram account, it began to dawn on me that Meghan seemed interesting and someone well worth getting to know more about. The more I read and saw of her, the more impressed I became. And I thought, "Boy, Harry is lucky to have met her." I think Meghan felt and still feels the same way about having met Harry, simply because they are kindred spirits. Not anything more than that truthfully. As Meghan said sincerely in the engagement interview, when the opportunity to meet Prince Harry was first suggested to her by a friend: "I asked her whether he was kind, because if he wasn't kind, it didn't seem to make sense..."
  #859  
Old 03-07-2021, 12:12 PM
HighGoalHighDreams's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Unspecified, United States
Posts: 469
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
[...]We have not yet seen any specific reference to individuals or to staff in making specific allegations. That may come during the full interview, but meanwhile it's all speculation until we actually hear what Meghan has to say in full.

Therefore the feeling that "others have the right to defend themselves," presupposes that there's an expectation or a worry by certain individuals that Meghan is planning to single out particular instances of conflict or worse that she has experienced, and also name names. Again, that hasn't happened yet, and we don't know that it will. So once again, the desire to get ahead of anything Meghan might have to say without knowing what she's planning to say, presupposes that Meghan has 'a side of the story to tell' about something unpleasant.

Anyone worried and full of trauma hopefully could have received assistance as well as apologies and any necessary counseling or restitution by pushing for the matter to be looked into asap when these alleged events occurred.


It appears that many people in Britain and America, etc., are skeptical of the accusations against Meghan. I'm not certain if Dave McCladd is a writer or a humorist, but apparently he's British, and he randomly made a satirical comment that started several parody threads which slyly reference Meghan and the latest accusations against her. Too funny and very apt, as the best parody/ sarcasm can be:

He started out several days ago making random comments like:
"Look, I was supportive of Meghan at first, but I just can't condone someone who started World War I"

"gah I've just knocked over a cup of tea bloody hell Meghan Markle this is your fault AGAIN"

Then yesterday this thread:
https://twitter.com/davemacladd/stat...25780703109120

"can't believe that Meghan also invented nuclear weapons"


Some of my favorite reply comments in this thread:
"I believe it was Meghan who scratched my car in the supermarket parking lot with her trolley."

"Meghan's the one who shot J.R."

"At least she gave Gaga her dogs back..."

I get that this is meant to be funny and appreciate both the humor behind the posts (I take it they are a silly knock-off on the #thanksObama style posts) and your inserting the levity into this thread, but....

I hope you, and others, realize that the knocking over a cup of tea is almost certainly a knock on an employee who supposedly had scalding tea thrown over her by her employer, Meghan. It's not funny, it's not a joke, and it's (yet more) victim-shaming after several glorious days of it here and elsewhere.

You can be "skeptical of the claims against Meghan" without making a "parody" of serious claims of bullying and, in this case, something quite a bit more serious. But I guess that should leave me "rolling on the floor laughing."
  #860  
Old 03-07-2021, 12:14 PM
Fem's Avatar
Fem Fem is online now
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: UK, Poland
Posts: 680
[...]
Maybe with more time and more caution Meghan would have more time to get to know people in the UK and understand the way BRF works and if she can live with the boundaries of becoming a member of a royal family.
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
archie mountbatten-windsor, duchess of sussex, duke of sussex, meghan markle, prince harry, sussex


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 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
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 1: September-December 2020 Jacknch Current Events Archive 2223 12-19-2020 01:13 AM




Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes american anastasia 2020 baby names biography bridal gown britain britannia british royal family buckingham palace canada china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing cpr dna duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex earl of snowdon edward vii elizabeth ii emperor family life fantasy movie fashion and style george vi hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume history hochberg hypothetical monarchs interesting introduction jewellery jewelry king willem-alexander list of rulers mary: crown princess of denmark mountbatten names nepal nepalese royal family plantinum jubilee pless prince charles of luxembourg prince harry princess ariane princess chulabhorn princess dita princess eugenie princess laurentien princess of orange queen louise resusci anne royal balls royal court royal events royal family royal jewels royal spouse royalty royalty of taiwan royal wedding russian court dress spain stuart thailand thai royal family united states united states of america wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:45 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×