Perhaps it’s because I’m a left leaning, republican, snowflake, remoaner but I genuinely don’t know how you would make an institution like the monarchy relevant in this day and age. No individuals in a modern and fair society should be awarded senior state positions by birth or marriage. If we must have them, I really wouldn’t be comfortable with their role expanding beyond ceremonial.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Ahh ok thanks, I misread
I agree with you. They are extremely difficult to justify. I think they will stay because people cant be bothered to think of an alternative when there are more important things to worry about. Apathy will save them, but I certainly wont be affording them any respect over and above any other human or teaching my children to look up to them in any way.
The problem is Harry seems to be placing himself in the chief mourner role for his mum. Everyone goes on about poor Harry, but what about William? Also, William is the oldest and I think anyone who is the oldest child will know that a certain level of responsibility comes with that in a family, never mind about becoming king. At a time when Harry needs to earn money he is suddenly talking about his mother more and more. Its one hell of a coincidence, especially as only a few years ago they both said the documentary they did was a one off to celebrate theif mother.
Maybe as he's married and become a father he's started to think about all the things both of them missed out on, as a child and as a mother/grandmother.
I always feel for William when it comes to Diana, since finding out about her spilling her problems to him and him often giving her tissues and things when she'd be upset. Life seems hard enough when you're a teen, I can't imagine a public separation, and a massively ugly one at that, being easy on him.
I am concerned about them behaving more like celebrities than royals. Whilst the DoE planned for a pared down RF to make it more palatable for the public, l wonder if those that have distanced themselves or been distanced are actually relieved. They more than likely get some financial benefit from the name, social standing as a matter of course, but get a large amount of privacy and ability to build their own lives.
I find it hard to believe BP did not pre empt the Harry- Meghan union going wrong. Perhaps not as quickly as it did. But a woman with a past, her own life, celebrity status, own causes etc was never going to just fit in.
Edit l realise reading that it sounds like a cry of 'blame the woman!' That is not my thoughts at all. PH fell in love and it was only natural to want to build a life. To be fair he has also said before on record he isn't happy with his lot in the RF.
Edit l realise reading that it sounds like a cry of 'blame the woman!' That is not my thoughts at all. PH fell in love and it was only natural to want to build a life. To be fair he has also said before on record he isn't happy with his lot in the RF.
I doubt it’ll be that interesting, it’ll have all substance and sickly sweetness of candy floss.
This is what l was thinking of
www.theguardian.com
Prince Harry says no one in royal family wants to be king or queen
In revealing interview, Harry says despite reluctance to sit on the throne, the family will ‘carry out our duties at right time’
www.theguardian.com
Then he should have retired from his HRH position before adding anyone else to the mix. He could have had a private wedding and gone away and built a life for himself. The problem with the Windsor’s is that they like to moan about being royal but they do like to hold on to the royal titles, status and privilege.
I always think the privacy question is one that can be misinterpreted or misunderstood. I see it that H&M want the privacy from the journalists who send drones over their house to get unauthorised pictures or those who trick their way into getting information from others or suchlike.
Privacy can be defined as ‘freedom from unauthorized intrusion’ and you can want that whilst also choosing to share some things. It’s always presented as being one or the other and it’s just not that simple. I have private social media so unknown people can’t access it but it doesn’t mean I don’t use it to share what I want - with those I choose.
It is also odd double standard here - people would be up in arms if someone tried to take secret photos of the Cambridge’s when they’re out on family days but yet there seems to be a feeling the Sussex’s are an open target. I agree H&M have made mistakes - as have W&K - but the response is very different and one I’d want to protect my family from as it seems Harry does.
Privacy can be defined as ‘freedom from unauthorized intrusion’ and you can want that whilst also choosing to share some things. It’s always presented as being one or the other and it’s just not that simple. I have private social media so unknown people can’t access it but it doesn’t mean I don’t use it to share what I want - with those I choose.
It is also odd double standard here - people would be up in arms if someone tried to take secret photos of the Cambridge’s when they’re out on family days but yet there seems to be a feeling the Sussex’s are an open target. I agree H&M have made mistakes - as have W&K - but the response is very different and one I’d want to protect my family from as it seems Harry does.
Again let’s stop acting like a prince marrying a celeb and living that lifestyle is so awful.. I don’t want to sound like a broken record but Randy Andy is getting away with way too much. He must love H&M
Yes!!! I realise I am sounding like H&Ms biggest fan but I think there is a massive difference between not wanting a private letter to your father printed and announcing wonderful pregnancy news. They can't do right for doing wrong... It's no wonder they legged it to America (or wherever they are... Canada? Cali? I don't actually know lol)
Yes, I understand your point. And I think you have a fair point.
I just think that this is not how the media works - if you give them clicks, make them money then they want to exploit you. This means they will "haunt" you, try to get more stories and photos as you make them money.
H and M make money for the media. Now they announced the pregnancy.
I suspect the media would ideally want more information, more photos surrounding that. They might be hesitant to pursue that now, but naturally they would want it.
You cannot impose your rules on the media. They have their own rules.
And I recall some celebs that want privacy for their children and get it. Blake Lively for example didn't announce her second pregnancy. The just informed the press that she had another child. And she is not the only one.
You're right... They approached this all wrong. There are many celebs that get privacy for their children... I'm sure the Beckhams did and Cheryl Cole. As someone said earlier, Harry probably thought he was the man to change it and its backfired on them as it just wound the press up. There has to be a middle ground with people getting the privacy they want/need and the media doing it's job.
Exactly. The ' union' hasnt gone wrong. They seem happy and are expecting their second child. The relationship with the Royals has gone wrong. Other European Royals have married actresses. They arent prostitutes, they are women with careers. Look what happened when Charles married a woman 'without a past'. Or maybe the Royals should have gone the Grace Kelly route and broken her spirit a bit more before?
Both sides should have handled it better and Harry was fed up with being a 3rd wheel for a long time before Meghan.
Yeah as if no one wants to sit on the Throne! The entire purpose of the Windsors is the survival of the Monarchy! If ' no one's wanted to sit on the Throne it would be as easy as pie to say that Charles will be the last King and for an orderly transition to an elected ceremonial Head of State, like they have in Ireland. (and the silver lining of a decent National anthem that encompasses all citizens of this country, not just one) They have little power, and what they do have is unjustifiable in a modern democracy. They would be rich anyway. But even Aristos have to eventually think of a way of making money to keep their stately homes afloat. They know they arent bright enough to keep their wealth for generations. They need to be the monarchy, for their own sake more than anyone else's.This is what l was thinking of
Prince Harry says no one in royal family wants to be king or queen
In revealing interview, Harry says despite reluctance to sit on the throne, the family will ‘carry out our duties at right time’
Last edited:
Why have they agreed to do an interview with Oprah?
I would think that this is likely to only increase the interest in them, as Oprah has such a big platform
I would think that this is likely to only increase the interest in them, as Oprah has such a big platform
Yes. They always protected the Cambridges far more than they protected Meghan or Archie, and they have been allowing negative press about Harry to run to protect William for years before that. Any gaffes the Cambs make are met with a flurry of positive press releases. A newborn child of a Prince gets called a monkey and they sit back and do nothing. No wonder they left!
- Status