The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Current Events Archive (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f166/)
-   -   Princess Eugenie of York Current Events 5: October 2008-April 2010 (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f166/princess-eugenie-of-york-current-events-5-october-2008-april-2010-a-18793.html)

iowabelle 04-14-2009 09:18 PM

Well, it wasn't so much the hurricane that caused the problem in New Orleans as the poor levee system (although that didn't help my friends in Mississippi whose houses did wash out to sea). Storms like Katrina are pretty rare. When I was growing up there, all my classmates could remember Camille as being the worst ever. Given that it had been 40+ years since that event, cataclysmic hurricanes are pretty rare. Severe typhoons seem to be a more common event, although maybe their effects are more localized. (Maybe I'm wrong, I'm not a meteorologist! :flowers:)

But still, somebody from the Foreign Office and/or BP should be talking with Eugenie... I wish she'd find herself something interesting and worthwhile to do, like a conservation trip to the Galapagos or even the Barrier Reef, rather than spending her gap year drinking ketchup and beer. (Shades of Prince Harry.)

christinacg 04-14-2009 10:23 PM

I'm not seeing anything inappropriate about any of those pictures. Looks like she's having a good time on her gap year; isn't that the point of a gap year?

rmay286 04-14-2009 10:30 PM

I don't see anything inappropriate in the pictures either, except for Eugenie's bikini. As a princess of the UK, whether she wants to or not, she's inevitably representing Britain wherever she goes, so the stars and stripes bikini was not a good idea and someone should remind her of that.

Other than that, I think Eugenie's just having some harmless fun with her friends, and nothing she's done seems like bad behaviour to me. Inappropriate for an adult, maybe, but not for a nineteen year-old on her gap year. The "topless" story is much ado about nothing...if even the paparazzi couldn't get a picture of Eugenie bare-chested, it's because she wasn't: she just dropped the straps on her bikini for a minute. And really, as much as she is a public figure, she's on a private holiday, she doesn't carry out royal engagements so the UK press has no vested national interest in what she does, and she isn't a celebrity who has sought out media attention. The paparazzi have no excuse for following Eugenie around on what is supposed to be a private vacation.

iowabelle 04-14-2009 10:52 PM

I don't think it's as much a scandal these days to go without your top... I mean, even Sophie the paragon had an embarassing moment years ago and she's done a pretty good job. (And I'm not appalled by the American design... I remember a thousand years ago wearing a pair of hiphuggers with Union Jacks. So old. Sigh.)

Roderick 04-15-2009 02:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rmay286 (Post 921906)
The paparazzi have no excuse for following Eugenie around on what is supposed to be a private vacation.

I am afraid they do. If Princess Eugenie took care to behave with a little more decorum as befits a member of the royal family the paparazzi would retain little interest in following her around during this private vacation. They are doing so for one reason only: royals behaving badly earn them big money and the princess is giving them exactly what they want.

Iluvbertie 04-15-2009 04:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roderick (Post 921933)
I am afraid they do. If Princess Eugenie took care to behave with a little more decorum as befits a member of the royal family the paparazzi would retain little interest in following her around during this private vacation. They are doing so for one reason only: royals behaving badly earn them big money and the princess is giving them exactly what they want.


Not only royals behaving badly but ones costing the taxpayers money through the cost of the bodyguards is even more newsworthy.

QUEENECE29 04-15-2009 05:31 AM

Where Princesses have been
Taxpayers hit over minor royals protection | The Sun |Features

Lady Ann 04-15-2009 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rmay286 (Post 921906)
I don't see anything inappropriate in the pictures either, except for Eugenie's bikini. As a princess of the UK, whether she wants to or not, she's inevitably representing Britain wherever she goes, so the stars and stripes bikini was not a good idea and someone should remind her of that.

Well, I see nothing wrong with her wearing an American Flag bikini. It not as if she was wearing the flag of Iraq. Fashion was never something of an issue for the York girls.:ermm: They don't seem to care who reminds them of what not to wear...at least there were no feathers involved .. I think it is more inapporopriate that she has a women cupping her breast in the middle of a open place private vacation or not. IMHO of couse. May you keep your own...

rmay286 04-15-2009 01:06 PM

I really don't condone bad behaviour on the part of royals (or anyone) but I just don't see where Eugenie is "behaving like a lunatic." I don't think she should be smoking, I think the bikini was a bad choice, but other than that, what has she done that is going to ruin the monarchy? She and her friend were just being silly teenagers in the "breast-groping" picture, and she wasn't really topless. I do understand concerns that Eugenie's bodyguards are a waste of taxpayer money, but I don't think this is Eugenie's fault. If anything, the problem there lies with Andrew: he is the one who apparently refuses to give up his daughters' protection. I doubt Eugenie really wants the bodyguards hanging around 24/7 during her gap year travels. Sarah's behaviour way back when, that's one thing, but Eugenie? She's just acting like a normal 19 year-old to me. I haven't yet seen her falling out of nightclubs drunk (though some will claim she does this regularly!), having loud arguments in the middle of the street, vandalizing homes, knifing people...okay, I exaggerate, but a quick perusal of The Daily Mail (tabloid though it may be) suggests to me that all of these things aren't completely uncommon with British youth nowadays (sadly).

I think that Eugenie should represent her country well, but I also think that she's on a private trip, and she's nineteen (barely).

And some of the comments about her figure in the bikini are just rude and have nothing to do with any serious problems with her behaviour.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Ann (Post 922043)

Well, I see nothing wrong with her wearing an American Flag bikini. It not as if she was wearing the flag of Iraq. Fashion was never something of an issue for the York girls. They don't seem to care who reminds them of what not to wear...at least there were no feathers involved .. I think it is more inapporopriate that she has a women cupping her breast in the middle of a open place private vacation or not. IMHO of couse. May you keep your own...

I don't think she should have worn the bikini because it appears as though she's making a political statement. There's nothing wrong with citizens of one country wearing clothing that represents another country, unless you happen to be a princess of the UK...then I think it becomes questionable. But I don't think it's a huge deal. As for her friend cupping her breast, I think it would be inappropriate in a 25 year-old, but not a 19 year-old, an age at which people are still forming their identity. I think for Eugenie and her friends, it was just a joking way of experimenting with their sexuality. And a much better way of doing so than confusedly switching from male to female partners (like some celebrities I can think of).

HighGoalHighDreams 04-15-2009 01:14 PM

Quote:

I think for Eugenie and her friends, it was just a joking way of experimenting with their sexuality.
I think that's reading a bit too much into it, reading into something that's not there. To suggest they were "experimenting with their sexuality" suggests that there was something sexual about the touch. I highly doubt it- much like when a teammate slaps her friend after a goal in soccer.

rmay286 04-15-2009 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HighGoalHighDreams (Post 922107)
I think that's reading a bit too much into it, reading into something that's not there. To suggest they were "experimenting with their sexuality" suggests that there was something sexual about the touch. I highly doubt it- much like when a teammate slaps her friend after a goal in soccer.

I don't think there was really anything sexual about it, but people have interpreted the touch as lesbian-like...I can't remember if that was here or in the comments on the articles posted. What I meant was that, if the touch was sexual to any extent, it was just a young girl admiring her friend's figure.

babyd0ll 04-15-2009 01:36 PM

To be fair, Eugenie's aerolas were popping out of her bikini, and her friend appeared to be helping Eugenie adjust her swim suit so nothing showed. It's just odd that Eugenie didn't adjust her bathing suit herself and had her friend do it in full view of the public.

Zonk 04-15-2009 01:38 PM

Perhaps there does need to be a question of security while in the UK but honestly, do we really need anything to happen to have of the British royals while abroad (especially those so close to the throne). Then its a little too late to have second thoughts about security, isn't it.

And why should Andrew's daughters lose their title, they are grand daughters of the monarch..and has the older royals get older and slow down...they will (at least one hopes) pick up some of the slack of additional royal duties.

rmay286 04-15-2009 01:44 PM

I think that's what Andrew thinks about the security--they are his daughters and while the chance of a kidnapping or attack might be very slim (and the likelihood that bodyguards could protect the girls from such an attack even slimmer) how awful would you feel as a parent if you removed your daughters' police protection and shortly thereafter, something really did happen? Some parents are pragmatic and say, "well, there are dangers in the world and something might happen to my children but I can't protect them from everything," and people with this mindset would be rational enough not to feel guilty if something did happen to their children. On the other hand, overprotective parents feel that they (and society, hence the taxpayer in this case) should be responsible for their children's wellbeing and will be quick to lay blame if anything should happen.

Menarue 04-15-2009 01:55 PM

If Prince Andrew is so concerned he should pay for the security himself. As to why they should lose their titles, well their cousins havenīt got HRH and it seems they donīt have the security that these two globe trotting girls have perhaps that is not a coincidence.
As to the other members of the royal family getting older, yes they are and they still carry out their royal duties while most of the time we see these two princesses on holiday and coming out of night clubs.

Zonk 04-15-2009 02:49 PM

Why should Andrew pay for their security...they are grand children of the Queen. And yes, Peter and Zara do not have titles...but that was the personal decision of the Princess Royal. And in order for them to get titles, it would have been necessary for the Queen to grant them titles. Beatrice and Eugenie were given their titles by the nature of their birth.

And why are people writing off Eugenie at the age of 19?! Thank goodness no one ever wrote me off at 19!

She doesn't have time to grow and evolve? I admit, the clubbing can be calmed down...but IMO she doesn't do any more or any less than any other teenager. She just needs to be a bit more mindful of who SHE is and what SHE does.

ETA: Not to get too far off topic BUT

Furthermore, Charles really needs to give deep thought to his desire to decrease the size of the royal family. Which I agree with to a point. But is he saying that Beatrice and Eugenie don't need HRH because they are the children of the 2nd son/daughter? So, if and when Harry has children...that should be applicable for his kids as well. I mean the situations are the same. The grandchildren of a monarch from the 2nd child. And I don't think he wants that to happen.

Rebafan81 04-15-2009 08:58 PM

I might be a little behind but I just saw the picture of Princess Eugenie in a bikini while in her gap year. I don't know why I was so bothered by those pictures but I was. She was hugging another girl in the water with her leg around her and then she was shown smoking. I guess I found the whole bunch very distrubing and not Princess like at all. I understand she is young but she is still a Princess and she act like one. IMHO

rosana 04-15-2009 11:50 PM

Who are you people to tell anybody not to smoke?


I donīt come very often to these boards. Can anydoby tell me what these girls do with their lives, other than travel and shopping, do they study for example?

Russophile 04-16-2009 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rosana (Post 922291)
Who are you people to tell anybody not to smoke?

Well, I would strongly suggest that NOBODY smoke as I know too many people have gotten cancer from smoking.

Iluvbertie 04-16-2009 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rosana (Post 922291)
Who are you people to tell anybody not to smoke?


I donīt come very often to these boards. Can anydoby tell me what these girls do with their lives, other than travel and shopping, do they study for example?


Beatrice is currently studying at uni and will be doing so for the next few years (I think she is in her first year so two to three more years for her).

Eugenie is on a 'gap' year between finishing school and starting uni. She will be starting uni in September/October when English unis start their next year.

'Gap' years are fairly common amongst wealthy British kids (among others). William and Harry also both had gap years - although Harry's went for 18 months and William had two - one after leaving school and one after finishing uni before entering Sandhurst.

I am fairly sure that both Peter and Zara also had them after they left school.

As for telling people not to smoke - having had a mother die from emphacyma (sp), having a father with that disease now, and having had a number of friends who have died or currently suffer from breast cancer caused by smoking I will strongly tell anyone and everyone not to smoke. My friends who still smoke understand why I ask them to give up the habit - it is because I care about them and don't won't them to suffer the way my mother did and my father does. The impact on their quality of life has been tremendous.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:50 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises