Wordsworth

Watching the BAFTAS just now and Brad Pitt’s acceptance speech (delivered by Margot Robbie as he’s not there) finished on a joke about calling the award “Harry” as he’s “looking forward to bringing it back to the States.” It got an audible “Oooh” and god bless the BBC for cutting to a shot of William and Kate, who are in attendance. She looked more amused than he did, let’s just say. It was hilarious.

Honestly I despair at the absolute state of modern Britain that this is casting a light on; I was particularly grumpy yesterday because it was Brexit day. That’s also the outcome of racism and I’m pissed off.

I just typed a really long response to this which I lost and can’t be bothered retyping, ? so to summarise in still lengthy but slightly shorter form: I fully agree aides will be encouraging the tabs to go after certain royals, but i disagree that it’s solely down to racism alone, although I do believe and agree that is in play with H&M, because since the 1980s i have watched the tabloids various rip royals to shreds then later turn them into saints like it never happened (I had typed numerous examples but Sophie is a prime example, she was even set up by the tabloids in a “fake sheik” sting at one point, and now she’s their darling because the queen favours her. And pre marriage both Kate and her family were often ridiculed (did you know her mum used to be an air hostess? Because that was in every daily hate story about Kate for years!). Our tabloids are AWFUL but they also know the royals won’t try to fight everything. So certainly i think it’s also about class, position and snobbery, (both Kate and Sophie, and indeed fergie, are perceived as “lower” class), and I do think it’s ultimately about proximity to the crown - you become fairer game the further down the line if succession you go, or the further from the queens affections you fall, because you’re seen as less of a threat to the institution. The classism, the racism and all the other isms are the tools used to try to put people “in their place”. and I think it’s that threat point that is most interesting to me - the politics of the palace are being seen worldwide for possibly the first time, because the internet has made it easy to access news from elsewhere, and perhaps people outside the U.K. are more interested because there’s an American celeb (using this as a shortcut term, not to be disrespectful) involved. So someone who is now sixth in line to the succession is no longer the minor royal, and throwing them under a bus to protect others isn’t as easy to do. Meanwhile Andrew, who is his mums favourite so would ordinarily be protected, can’t get away with it so easily because people know what’s happening through non-UK means.

I hope she washed it before wearing it.

There have always been rules around what the press will Publish re the royals, although I think a lot are in the form of “gentlemen’s agreements”. Like not taking pap pictures to the same degree, after Diana died. And I remember reading that when Edward VIII fell for Wallis, the UK press wasn’t publishing anything on it at all - not until he abdicated, basically. Whereas the overseas press were going for it. i think a lot of the media is conservative and doesn’t really want to be seen to destabilise the royal institution, even now. They’re worker bees protecting their Queen. ?

It was the top story on the main evening news last night. colour me not surprised by his refusal to cooperate! Spineless man.

I imagine that Camilla makes that face a lot when Charles is off on one of his tangents. “Of course, dear. Whatever you say!” in other news: got milk? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51188894

I reckon they might end up in the US now, given the full step back.

Interestingly enough The Daily Hate, sorry Mail, had a story weekend that supporting both his kids is “draining Charles financially”. My heart bleeds. I did think this was a good opinion column from the former editor of The Guardian, a paper not exactly known for a love of the royals. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/19/there-is-a-reason-why-royals-demonised-but-wont-read-all-about-it-prince-harry-meghan-markle

Apologies for the double post but i forgot to I also think the statement “they understand that they are required to step back from royal duties, including official military appointments.” is hinting that this wasn’t necessarily what H&M wanted if given the choice - the specific mention of military appointments is particularly interesting in that regard given it’s well documented that Harry’s time in the army might have been the best of his life (before meeting Meghan at least). Supporting current and ex members of the armed forces was his thing - I assume the invictus games will continue at least.

I think H&M were perhaps a bit naive as to how people were going to react to their first proposal, to be honest. I think they may have expected the people who are huge fans of the royals (and of Harry) to be ok with it, even applaud it “in the name of diana” but a lot of the staunch royalists seemed to take it as a slap in the face, almost a betrayal. The Queen is such a figurehead, she’s aging and already having a hard time, and I think a lot of people are upset that she’s been put through this, by her beloved grandson no less. (Because god forbid we mention her beloved son.) For some reason (and I am fully prepared to be wrong LOL) I feel like the palace really played hardball on this re taking away the titles, paying back the money, etc, whether that’s due to anger at how it unfolded or not. The image of the royals is getting away from them, with Andrew then this, so they may want to make a stand that the institution will endure, and if you’re not helping on that front, you’re out.

Thanks all. The Rose affair story picked up little bit of speed in the UK papers after I’d read about it on NA sites, but it has definitely not been overtly and widely covered - it’s oblique references if anything (like that DM story about church - they know exactly why they’re pointing out Rose was there but not really saying it). Which is weird given that it’s been a long, long time since U.K. papers refrained from big negative stories about the royals (I think probably Edwards abdication was a turning point there). so I understand why there might be a hmmmm around why the press are going after one couple and not the other. But this is also the first I’d heard about Meghan possibly being behind the leak, and that could be innocent but could also well be not (surely tipping off the tabs or paps is from the minor Hollywood celeb playbook?). again I’m back in the middle ground that neither side is squeaky clean. I’m starting to feel sorry for Kate - husbands affair exposed, birthday ruined...and she is one party in all this I believe would not want to put a foot wrong!

Oh that reminds me of something I saw today on Twitter - which was the suggestion that there’s a widespread story in the US that Harry and William fell out not over Meghan but over William having an affair. Is this really a big story that the UK press aren’t reporting? I’d heard the Rose rumour, originally on NA sites as it hasn’t been big news here (which could fit with the idea the press are being fed stuff about M&H in return for protecting the Cambridges) - but the idea the brothers fell out over this was news to me.

Good day to be Zara and have this pass without notice. Already having 9 points before this offence suggests she is indeed a speed demon! I am generally also there with you and - absent the creepy sex trafficking stuff obviously - I actually think this is very similar to the space where Andrew wants to sit, except he is there with successful businesspeople rather than Hollywood celebrities. there are racism issues in Britain that M has brought to the fore, and it’s awful to see and I do feel for her on that front. The pressure must be immense. That doesn’t mean she is not trying to use it to her advantage, for her own ends. equally the tabloids did go after Kate a lot in her early years with William because we also have class issues, yay! Her family were seen as social climbers, now they’re saints. i think my advice would be - just don’t marry royal. ? I believe the main argument goes that the money from the crown state is intended to be used for the administration of the country as a whole (so the plebs don’t get upset about the fact one family basically owns the island by virtue of being borne, you know? ). Anything that is then given “back” to the Queen could technically otherwise have been used by the government to fund other public services like the NHS, education, police etc instead - so by giving an amount to the Queen it then requires the taxpayers to make up the gap in funding for those services (through higher taxation than would theoretically otherwise be required). I don’t think it’s direct taxpayer funding as such, it’s almost more an opportunity cost? the reality is way more complicated obviously - you can argue the royal family results in the country collecting more money by way of tourism than it otherwise would. But then the counter to that is how much does the family itself actually add, if people would still come to see the palaces even without active royals? Edinburgh castle hasn’t been used in centuries but is still a major visitor attraction, for example. so the taxpayers money argument is potentially because a lot of people would like to pay less tax but still maintain or improve public services, and this is a clearly visible outflow of money that doesn’t necessarily create value for those people, so it’s an easy target. Reality is again that the civil service as a whole is hugely inefficient (in my experience, as I work a lot with a government department) and likely ‘wastes’ far more money than the Queen gets. or it’s just that we like a moan when it’s cold and raining, which is most of the time this is long, and just my take on it - I grumble but reality is I don’t care that much day to day ?

Hadn’t realised that they chose to announce this news the night before Kate’s birthday. Seems a bit petty!

I also saw reference to trust funds like you mentioned before, apparently both Diana and the Queen Mother may have paid into trusts for Harry. I presume it can only be that statement was written by them and not sense checked by anyone else, because no one else knew! This overriding theme of “we can do it all on our own” is perhaps not the best idea, but it is what it is now.

Haha! I think, with the benefit of hindsight, the Windsors are not so sad to have gotten rid of the Nazi-adjacent Edward (whatever number) v quickly! I was reading that they’ve published something on their website about what they mean by “financially independent” and it appears it may basically be “we’ll not take a grant from the Queen and will mostly live on the money we get from Harry’s dad’s private income from the duchy” - which Charles really only gets by virtue of being royal! They’ll also get security paid for and use a royal residence when living here. I’m strongly reminded of Kylie Jenner being declared “self made” tbh. But I’m mostly just amazed by the emotive language being used to describe the palace’s feelings: “The BBC understands no other royal - including the Queen or Prince William - was consulted before the statement and Buckingham Palace is "disappointed". Senior royals are understood to be "hurt" by the announcement.”

Well, the Queen wanted a distraction from Andrew....if this was a UK tv soap opera she’d pop her clogs now and there’d be a family fight at the funeral ending with Meghan or Kate getting pushed in the grave!

Ooft. Doesn’t look like the rest of the royals knew much about this statement going out, according to the new chat. A Buckingham Palace spokeswoman said discussions with the couple on their decision to step back from the royal family were “at an early stage”, adding: “We understand their desire to take a different approach, but these are complicated issues that will take time to work through.” This is not a great look. “https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/08/prince-harry-and-meghan-say-they-are-stepping-back-from-royal-family”

“Not you, Andrew. Sit down.”

Exactly - I couldn't decide if they meant “we will be financially independent from now on by working” or “we’ll need funding from you for a bit until we are able to find work and fund ourselves”. I imagine their bills will be hefty - surely security costs alone will be enormous!

I remember being surprised when she married the previous guy because I thought she was engaged to someone else, so that fits!

How fortunate to be in a position to have the time to “work to become financially independent” when you decide you don’t like your current role in life! That part strikes me as tone deaf, to be honest. I’m not a royalist so don’t care much beyond my usual grumps about use of taxpayers money, but I suspect Harry may have just pissed off a lot of people!

To be fair, unlike most parents she’s probably the one still paying for the party. Hope she can get the deposit for the trampoline centre back!

For some reason I can’t imagine Biel will ever leave him.