The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #3721  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:02 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by wyevale View Post
I'm afraid l differ from you on this : Sussex failed a] to adequately convey to his Girlfriend/Fiance quite the restrictive nature of the life she was considering, and how vicious the Press could be here and b] failed to allow enough time for her to acclimatise to the UK, the role she CHOSE to undertake c] IF he saw her as an 'escape route' he led his family, this Nation, indeed the World 'up the garden path', when he could [at the outset] chosen another way

- refuse the Dukedom, the vast panoply of Wedding/Frogmore/Commonwealth role etc. etc..and 'retired' to live a secluded life using his large inheritances, and whatever monies his wife could generate.
#1
Please do not quote me out of context. This the statement I made with the part you left out highlighted: "I don't agree with what Harry's done but I sympathize with the reason for his unhappiness."

#2
Please go back and read the article I was responding to: https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-meghan-markle

#3
I suggest you read this one as well: https://bylinetimes.com/2019/11/19/y...are-in-denial/

#4
I agree with the Queen. I do NOT approve of what Harry and Meghan have done and (as I have stated before) I think they should have found a way to deal with the media but... "I recognise the challenges they have experienced as a result of intense scrutiny over the last two years."

Yes, Harry and Meghan deserve the blame for this sorry mess. But that does NOT mean the tabloids and the irresponsible part they play - not only in this affair but in British public life as a whole - should be excused or ignored.
__________________

  #3722  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:03 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
A couple of people have bought up the money Charles has outside of the Duchy of Cornwall. A few points about that: it forms a small portion of his wealth and he cannot pay 4-5 million a year for Harry in perpetuity on it.
I don't think this arrangement is going to be in perpetuity, he certainly cannot do it when he is King.

What I believe is going to happen, Charles will support them until they're earning enough money to support themselves and then they'll release that shackle from themselves as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ladongas View Post
Why should he live it to the specifications and expectations of others?
I have no issues with Henry and Meghan living their life as they want. Absolutely none whatsoever. My issues with this whole situation have been the way it has been handled, and announced to the world.

From my point of view, their initial announcement (pre-empted by a leak or not) very clearly showed that they wanted the best of both worlds. Which for me begs the question, if they both hated the royal way of life so much, why ask to remain in it for part of the year? If the response to that is that they wanted to give something in return for remaining out for part the year, why bother? I don't want someone representing my country, who doesn't want to be there.

I've said since the initial announcement, I would have had no issues with Henry and Meghan bowing out, if they'd done it properly and renounced their titles to begin with.
__________________

__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #3723  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:14 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,238
It has probably already been mentioned previously (I haven't read the entire thread. it is rather long) but if a member of the royal family wants to be a private individual they can renounce their style in the manner of Patricia of Connaught.

If they also have a peerage they don't have to use it.
  #3724  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:16 PM
Elenath's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawin View Post
Yes, Harry and Meghan deserve the blame for this sorry mess. But that does NOT mean the tabloids and the irresponsible part they play - not only in this affair but in British public life as a whole - should be excused or ignored.
I don't think I'd say they are to blame, I might say they are partly responsible. They could have made different choices, but there are other players in this circus who are equally involved. If you say the Sussexes are to blame, then you do ignore or excuses the media.
  #3725  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:17 PM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Tthe long suffering public do not want to pay any more for a bunch of younger royals. And Charles does not want to undertake expenses for younger royals if he can avoid it because then He will be stuck with paying them for the rest of his life.
He wanted the 2 sons to work, WIlliam as future King, Harry to take on a commonwealth role and any other stuff that cropped up. Bbut in the next generation I think the public will be saying " we don't want ot pay for Charlotte to cut ribbons for the rest of her life.. or do some made up job to keep her on the payroll... " They will remember how Andrew messed up and used his job to make dubious money, and they will remember how Harry walked out on the job of second royal supporter. So the public will be very hostile IMO to the idea of more than the heir working..
And you could also end up like Norway with one healthy adult working.
  #3726  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:18 PM
Ista's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 3,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post

I have no issues with Henry and Meghan living their life as they want. Absolutely none whatsoever. My issues with this whole situation have been the way it has been handled, and announced to the world.

(...)
I've said since the initial announcement, I would have had no issues with Henry and Meghan bowing out, if they'd done it properly and renounced their titles to begin with.
Agreed.

I have said numerous times that if they are so unhappy with royal life, that they should be allowed to draw back from it. I have read almost no commentary, either here or in print media that indicates the vast majority of people have a problem with Meghan and Harry moving away from royal life and making their own way. Virtually all the criticism here and elsewhere has come from how they chose to handle it, and the perception, based on their own website, that they were willing to do the fun stuff--tours and the occasional cherry picked engagements--but wanted to control press access, and also that their desired financial independence really means that Prince Charles will pick up the tab until they can monetize their brand. Those are the things that are being criticized or questioned, not their desire to bow out of the royal rigamarole.
  #3727  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:31 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
There has to be a lot of truth to this... His military appointments were not in even in public discussion and the statement basically bought about a discussion of it. I don't believe the BRF would have seemingly gone out of their way to bring this into the public limelight unless they were forced to.

For me taking him out of any active relationship with the military means he is less likely to stay a target that he has been as a working Royal and former soldier now representative of the British armed forces. Maybe that was the try to bring the necessary security down. Because the taxpayer seem to be okay with the sovereign grant (though it's the Crown who earned the money and only 25% is spend by the Crown, the rest goes into the state's budget, the public considers (or is repeatedly told by the media) the whole income by the Crown Estate to be "taxpayer's money" which it isn't.



I read an interesting article about the Royal family from William the Conqueror (England)/Macbeth (Scotland) as kings (yes, those two were living in the same time) down to the current queen and her family. Especially interesting the titles and why they were given and the financial aspects behind it! A lot of kings, but especially the "early" Georges were trying to impregnant their wifes in the hope for healthy boys but got many girls instead and knew they had to marry them off or let them stay with their own court once they were adults and that cost enormous amounts of money! And when they had boys, they had heirs, but those who survived besides the eldest were bound to marry, have children and these cost money as well because you had to outfit them in the most luxurious style according to their elevated rank in the kingdom with soo many rich nobles. Or give the princesses dowries to make them attractive for other Royals to marry.


Oh, those problems! (Still think it was about the cost of security/security at all for Harry & Maghan that he was stripped of his military positions.
  #3728  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:35 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
Harry seems to never forgotten all this in his haste to label everything about the monarchy and BRF as toxic. Meghan never cared to know.
This is the aspect that troubles me, for many reasons. First, when young people get into this phase (and stay in it) through their 30's, it's an issue. In this case, I think it means that Harry probably should have sought psychotherapy in his teens and twenties. Sure, the situation feels toxic to him but not to others in the family or outside of it, so it deserves objective exploration with a neutral party.

Because the labeling of all uncomfortable situations as "toxic" and therefore to be legitimately avoided (by everyone, like the plague) is not a good adult defense strategy. If he really intends to live and work in North America, he will find situations of hierarchy that trigger him (to use the local phrase).

It's interesting that if your analysis is correct, that now the newlywed couple has declared both of their families "toxic." I hope they realize that as children of two "toxic" family systems, their own system is likely to reflect that - they should be concerned about actually getting away from the toxicity (which is going to take inner courage and personal change, if they believe it's really true).
  #3729  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:42 PM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
Harry seems to never forgotten all this in his haste to label everything about the monarchy and BRF as toxic. Meghan never cared to know.
I missed this earlier. When did Harry do this?
  #3730  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:42 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 1,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helen.CH View Post
I agree with thinking why on earth did HM choose them for such an important thing( I suppose it to be compared to other wirk) like the CW? Did nobody realize what was going on, their immaturity......


I think she expected that when 2 adults in their mid to late 30s made a commitment to something, they’d keep it. Not unreasonable imo. This seems to be something they really wanted- then and now: This was one of the royal jobs they still wanted when they were cherry picking which parts of being royal they wanted to keep.

For all the flack William and Kate got for the length of time they spent dating, there was a reason for it. I get why Harry and Meghan rushed into it, but they did rush into it, made commitments they couldn’t keep, threw a public temper tantrum and left- and left a mess in their wake.

It’s too bad they didn’t take the time to figure out what they wanted before committing, and much worse, making a public mess out of their desire for a different life.
  #3731  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:45 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
For me taking him out of any active relationship with the military means he is less likely to stay a target that he has been as a working Royal and former soldier now representative of the British armed forces. Maybe that was the try to bring the necessary security down. Because the taxpayer seem to be okay with the sovereign grant (though it's the Crown who earned the money and only 25% is spend by the Crown, the rest goes into the state's budget, the public considers (or is repeatedly told by the media) the whole income by the Crown Estate to be "taxpayer's money" which it isn't.



I read an interesting article about the Royal family from William the Conqueror (England)/Macbeth (Scotland) as kings (yes, those two were living in the same time) down to the current queen and her family. Especially interesting the titles and why they were given and the financial aspects behind it! A lot of kings, but especially the "early" Georges were trying to impregnant their wifes in the hope for healthy boys but got many girls instead and knew they had to marry them off or let them stay with their own court once they were adults and that cost enormous amounts of money! And when they had boys, they had heirs, but those who survived besides the eldest were bound to marry, have children and these cost money as well because you had to outfit them in the most luxurious style according to their elevated rank in the kingdom with soo many rich nobles. Or give the princesses dowries to make them attractive for other Royals to marry.


Oh, those problems! (Still think it was about the cost of security/security at all for Harry & Meghan that he was stripped of his military positions.
I would love to know the name of that article!
  #3732  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:52 PM
Eskimo's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 423
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile View Post
And you could also end up like Norway with one healthy adult working.
I think that this is where it is somewhat headed....The same formula as most countries that have a ceremonial head of state (President) and a backup (Vice-President) if the head of state cannot do their job.

So, by the time William comes to the throne, I expect royal duties will be limited to him, Kate and George and the others will have to go fend for themselves off the public purse.
  #3733  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:52 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilyflo View Post
I missed this earlier. When did Harry do this?
He didn't use those words, to my knowledge, but what he has said points in that direction (and his desire to move as far away as possible is a clear signal).

His situation is complicated because his family is also his occupation, but he is rejecting both publicly. Meghan has done the same. The emphasis on wanting to raise Archie without involvement in the "family system" is (at least in many parts of North America) code for "my family is a mess/is toxic."

Toxic really translates as "avoid! do not go near unless necessary!" and that's how both Meghan and Harry seem to be regarding their families. The problem is that good research shows that, barring some sort of psychological miracle, these two are still the children of their families and will always need to be aware of it. One cannot run from "toxicity" due to paparazzi and family position without recognizing one's need to change not just the role but one's self.

Perhaps Meghan feels that her relationship to her friends and "the public" is more healthy; Harry has yet to experience working in the real world. All kinds of systems resemble family systems, he may well be triggered again, but will not have the system to blame/escape from.
  #3734  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:56 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
But what are they going to do? If they went away and lived quietly as private people, complaints would fade away. If they are still in the public eye and tyring to make money they will still get noticed. That's inevitable.

Yes, that is the question. I understand that Harry wants a more quiet life for his wife, his son and himself. But Meghan?? Will she be comfortable with that? She had it partly in the UK with Frogmore being secluded, the use of the beautiful gardens without any visitors for most days, the possibilities for long walks etc. Then turn up at charitable events and other Royal engagements, then back home. With enough money to spend and no sorrows on thinking of the future.



That was not what Meghan wanted. Obviously not what Harry wanted, too. I read their home page and , well, they didn't get what they dreamt off and will now have to do something to earn the big bucks if they want to stay on millionaires' row within their agreed upon restrictions. I'm not sure their "Royal" restrictions were that bad, honestly. As longa s they didn't care about the media. But they did and Harry probably did for his whole life, being raised by Diana.



I honestly don't see how they can achieve what they set out to do. But we'll see.
  #3735  
Old 01-19-2020, 02:57 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 1,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKaimi View Post
This is the aspect that troubles me, for many reasons. First, when young people get into this phase (and stay in it) through their 30's, it's an issue. In this case, I think it means that Harry probably should have sought psychotherapy in his teens and twenties. Sure, the situation feels toxic to him but not to others in the family or outside of it, so it deserves objective exploration with a neutral party.

Because the labeling of all uncomfortable situations as "toxic" and therefore to be legitimately avoided (by everyone, like the plague) is not a good adult defense strategy. If he really intends to live and work in North America, he will find situations of hierarchy that trigger him (to use the local phrase).

It's interesting that if your analysis is correct, that now the newlywed couple has declared both of their families "toxic." I hope they realize that as children of two "toxic" family systems, their own system is likely to reflect that - they should be concerned about actually getting away from the toxicity (which is going to take inner courage and personal change, if they believe it's really true).
I think they feel like they did escape it, and now they’ll be fine...except in escaping, Harry has rejected his entire family. I have a hard time understanding that. Now, if his relationship with his father is a good one, I’m sure he’ll visit from time to time, and of course there’s Skype, etc. If, however, their relationship is iffy, then how will it - or his with William- ever be repaired?


Interesting article...They’ve got the freedom,, but they also have no family - or at least they’ve rejected it. Hopefully I’m wrong and relationships will be mended

Quote:
They hoped for solutions within "days," and, somewhat miraculously, they found some. The outcome? Harry and Meghan did not get exactly what they wanted, but it is very clear where their priorities lie. In a new model which will take effect this spring, the couple are giving up the use of their HRH titles and their roles as working royals. Harry will lose his official military appointments and his recently-announced role as Commonwealth Youth Ambassador. They will not receive Sovereign Grant funds and will pay back £2.4 million of public money already spent renovating Frogmore Cottage, their home in Windsor. They will retain their private patronages. But they have got the one thing that clearly matters most to them: their freedom.

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/amp30580468/meghan-markle-prince-harry-royal-arrangement-freedom/?__twitter_impression=true
  #3736  
Old 01-19-2020, 03:02 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,633
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKaimi View Post
I would love to know the name of that article!

Here's the one about the titles and styles of Prince/Royal Highness


https://www.heraldica.org/topics/bri...e_highness.htm


About the history of England and Scotland up to today:
https://www.heraldica.org/topics/bri...alstyle_uk.htm



More reading: https://www.heraldica.org/topics/royalty/uk.htm
Plus the whole site offers titbitds here and there, so just look around. It is a very factual sire with lots of sources.
  #3737  
Old 01-19-2020, 03:04 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 820
They went into the military and stayed there - the Grand Old Duke of York! - or were found paid jobs.


George III had 15 children, but that was very unusual. The Tudors and the Stuarts struggled to produce any children at all ... although the Plantagenets and the Hanoverians had a lot! Queen Victoria's father was the Governor of Gibraltar for a while. The future William IV was the Ranger of one of the London parks. They didn't rush to get married and have legitimate children - most of the Hanoverian princes had mistresses instead. George III's sons only rushed to get married when Princess Charlotte died and there was no direct heir.


Back in the days of the Plantagenets, princes were often married off to rich heiresses or to foreign princess with dowries, to provide for them that way.


George I only had two legitimate children. He fell out with his wife and locked her up! It's only really been George II, George III, Edward III and Henry II who've had very long families.
  #3738  
Old 01-19-2020, 03:06 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 1,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilyflo View Post
I missed this earlier. When did Harry do this?
From various media outlets, but first from People

https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-and-prince-harry-felt-their-hand-was-forced-to-leave-royal-family-amid-bad-blood/

On another note, good...I’m glad the Queen is angry...though I’m so sorry for her.

Quote:
The Queen’s brief but surprisingly warm statement disguised her true sadness and anger at being forced to dissolve her beloved grandson’s royal status.

Duty in the way Her Majesty understands it clearly means little to her grandson.

She gave up everything for duty, to be Queen.

....

Freedom at the price of giving up everything he has known for the last 35 years will not be easy, but it is what he wants or thinks he wants.

The Queen has put her supportive arm around both him and Meghan. I hope he does not live to regret it.
  #3739  
Old 01-19-2020, 03:09 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 1,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKaimi View Post
He didn't use those words, to my knowledge, but what he has said points in that direction (and his desire to move as far away as possible is a clear signal).

His situation is complicated because his family is also his occupation, but he is rejecting both publicly. Meghan has done the same. The emphasis on wanting to raise Archie without involvement in the "family system" is (at least in many parts of North America) code for "my family is a mess/is toxic."

Toxic really translates as "avoid! do not go near unless necessary!" and that's how both Meghan and Harry seem to be regarding their families. The problem is that good research shows that, barring some sort of psychological miracle, these two are still the children of their families and will always need to be aware of it. One cannot run from "toxicity" due to paparazzi and family position without recognizing one's need to change not just the role but one's self.

Perhaps Meghan feels that her relationship to her friends and "the public" is more healthy; Harry has yet to experience working in the real world. All kinds of systems resemble family systems, he may well be triggered again, but will not have the system to blame/escape from.
Maybe the system isn’t workable for him, but I’m sickened by the implication that people who love him, who have done their best for him, are toxic and to be avoided. His father? His brother? If we’re wrong, then he needs to show it, because right now it looks like an utter rejection of everyone and everything he knows.
  #3740  
Old 01-19-2020, 03:09 PM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I read somewhere recently that Charles found botht sons rather volatile.. taking after Diana in that respect. But WIliam seems to have calmed and become stable and postivlely dull. Harry has gone more volatile IMO. I never thought he would walk out on royal life.. I thought maybe Meghan might htough it wasn't all that likely. never thought the 2 of them would go.
Charles himself is volatile, there are stories of him flying into rages, I remember a story where he threw a small object at one of his staffers. IIRC the distinction made was that Charles would have a fit of temper and then get over it but Diana held grudges.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
As a Canadian here is my opinion, which is shared by a lot of other Canadians as evidenced by the comments on Canadian new sites:

Even if I had the compassion for them (and I don't*) I do not want my tax monies used to pay for their security as private citizens. I do not mind paying for them when they come for a short visit representing my head of state but not if they want to live as a VISITOR in Canada in a private capacity.

*- I lost all compassion for them when they had the audacity to complain about "existing not living" and no one had asked "how they were doing" in a documentary that was meant to highlight the plight of some of the most disadvantaged people on the face of the planet.
Yes it's been made abundantly clear that the Canadians do not want to pay for the Sussexes security, and I don't think that it is even on the table that taxpayers in Canada, the UK or any other country will pick up the full cost of the Sussexes security.

I think that direct security for the Sussexes should be privately paid if only to preempt media and individuals from complaining about taxpayers paying absorbing the cost of their security. By direct security I mean personal bodyguards, security that patrol their residence and the like. However there are other levels of security like intelligence gathering, threat assessment and planning that I think should be headed by the Metropolitan Police, the body that is tasked with protecting the royal family with cooperation from the national and local authorities of wherever the Sussexes are based or visiting. I don't think that security at that level should be privately funded and if Canada or any other country wants to be bill for / be reimbursed for being part of that aspect of the Sussexes security then IMO they should just refuse them entry.
__________________

Closed Thread


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
The Duke of Sussex and The Invictus Games: 2014 and 2016-2018, 2020 Dman The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family 1150 09-06-2020 08:30 PM




Popular Tags
abdication anastasia anastasia once upon a time archie mountbatten-windsor background story baptism bridal gown british royal family british royals chittagong commonwealth countries countess of snowdon customs daisy doge of venice doll dubai duke of sussex facts gustaf vi adolf hill historical drama history house of windsor imperial household intro italian royal family jack brooksbank jacobite japan jewellery king willem-alexander książ castle line of succession list of rulers luxembourg mailing mary: crown princess of denmark meghan markle nepalese royal jewels northern ireland norway prince constantijn prince dimitri princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn walailak princess ribha queen consort queen mathilde queen maxima random facts royal dress-ups royal jewels royal marriage royal re-enactments. royal wedding royal wedding gown serbian royal family snowdon speech sussex suthida swedish queen taiwan tracts tradition uae customs united states of america unsubscribe wittelsbach


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:05 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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