According to many people who knew her, the late Queen was a woman who didn't like conflict , she always had a bit of ostrich in the sand attitude. Yet, she is being lauded as the greatest Queen that ever queened. How can someone be a great leader while avoiding difficult situations?
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
This if someone has experienced dv colour shouldn’t matter. I donate clothes / makeup etc to a local safe house who took anybody in who needed help. You are not privileged in any way if you are experiencing dv and it is just encouraging acceptance of division/resentment in society based on colour.
I mean, being Queen is just basically turning up to things, being diplomatic and charming people, maybe asking the right questions and making people feel comfortable. Its not difficult, and she did it well. ( her LIW should have learnt a thing or two) but I don't think she wanted to handle her children or deal with anything difficult. Being a good Queen and being a competent parent and head of the family are different things, although the main part of her job as Monarch should be to make sure she isn't inflicting a bunch of fuckwits on the nation as First Family, and they do want to endure the continuation of the Royal Family for as long as they possibly can. That does mean ensuring her family and the people who surround them are decent people.
Maybe because she didnt actually avoid difficult situations, or have a head in the sand attitude!
The Queen you describe above is the way she is being portrayed in ''The Crown'' as very quiet and insignificant, prefering to play with her dogs than to engage in matters of state.
Where does the woman who visited Northern Ireland at the end of the troubles to try and promote the Peace agreements, fit into this image of a woman who avoided difficult situations?
What about the woman who met Nelson Mandela.
She read all her red boxes, and kept up to date with all the current political events so that she could play the subtle diplomat at palace functions, introducting people and smoothing things over. -even way past retirement age!
I dont particularly like the monarchy itself, but you cant deny Queen Elizabeth worked hard, and had a keen sense of duty towards the British people, and towards keeping the peace in a troubled world!
Past monarchs...did do very little, but I dont think modern monarchy can ever get away with this!
Being waited on hand and foot 24/7, never knowing money troubles with a 'job' that is just turning up, shaking a few hands, making small talk and waving is not my definition of 'working hard'!
And that's before you get into the love of blood sports, vast wealth and fabulous Art collection, most of which the public are never allowed to see.
If you want to see it that way, then fine. As I’ve already explained, their focus is on a marginalised community who suffer from being left behind. This isn’t an opinion, it’s a statistical fact. Your ‘privilege’ is showing
Focusing on these people isn’t a bad thing. As also mentioned by a previous poster, a person outside of this community is likely to have been given resources on where to find help better serve them. Nobody is left behind this way, it means people are given the opportunity to receive care that best suits their needs.
Life isn’t black and white. Nuance is key. The world isn’t colourblind, nor should it be. Different people have different experiences and needs and care reflects that.
You wouldn’t be turned away though, they would lead you to somewhere that can help you as they are focusing efforts on black women. Nobody is saying that white women are privileged if they are experiencing DV, but are more likely to be understood in a variety of charity settings as they’ll share the same culture as the people running it. Black women don’t have this. There are often a lot of cultural issues at play that a lot of non black people don’t understand, so SS focuses on this, and due to this wouldn’t necessarily have all the resources to deal with everyone. It’s like wanting to go to black therapist because a white one would be able to sympathise but not necessarily empathise with specific cultural issues you have. It’s not divisive, it’s just being acutely aware of a specific issue. Much like the fact you wouldn’t go to an OBGYN to deal with male issues.
Last edited:
That was the differentiation in the previous post though, wasn’t it?
Constitutionally, as a Head of State, she did what was expected and did it well.
As a private person, dealing with issues within the family, she did not like conflict and was content to let things ride or step back for others to deal with.
This isn’t based on anything seen in the The Crown, it’s based on what has been said by the people involved (Charles and his schooling, Margaret and Peter Townsend, all the issues with her children and marriage/divorce/remarriage)
I don't think she avoided difficult situations:
She "sacked" Prince Andrew eventually, she (eventually) asked Charles and Diana to divorce and took away Diana's HRH, she faced difficult leaders, she made a few political statements (climate change, Ireland), she didn't allow Harry to be half-in/half-out.
She acted slowly, not in a rush, and not always. But I don't see her as shying away from difficult situations /decisions.
I think ’eventually’ is the keyword there. Those things happened when it was blatantly obvious things had gone on too long and something had to be done.
This article is well written! "if she is racist, then I am an ornamental fountain"
It might backfire that the palace acted so swiftly and without considering the matter properly. Quite a few people feel this was unfair towards a loyal elderly aide.
Yes, but she didn't act in haste, and in the latest situation this might have been helpful.
It also shows that she is not acting based on what the public thinks, but when she is certain of the right decision.
This might be late, after things have gone on for a long time, but her approach was considered and she wasn't unfair towards people.
I’m sure it would’ve been a lot worse if they’d have kept her . Charles doesn’t seem the type to appreciate dedication he’s a “taken for granted “ kinda guy ! the queen wasn’t even cold and he’d handed half her staff their notice.This article is well written! "if she is racist, then I am an ornamental fountain"
It might backfire that the palace acted so swiftly and without considering the matter properly. Quite a few people feel this was unfair towards a loyal elderly aide.
Yes, but she didn't act in haste, and in the latest situation this might have been helpful.
It also shows that she is not acting based on what the public thinks, but when she is certain of the right decision.
This might be late, after things have gone on for a long time, but her approach was considered and she wasn't unfair towards people.
I am interested in this. Most people I know are quite shocked by what was said and see that she couldn’t stay in post (even if she might be an excuse and I am not sure that it really can be), it could also be a good reason for LSH to step back. If she is so out of touch with the world as it now is, is she suitable to be in a role for the royal family where she interacts with the public?This article is well written! "if she is racist, then I am an ornamental fountain"
It might backfire that the palace acted so swiftly and without considering the matter properly. Quite a few people feel this was unfair towards a loyal elderly aide.
Yes, but she didn't act in haste, and in the latest situation this might have been helpful.
It also shows that she is not acting based on what the public thinks, but when she is certain of the right decision.
This might be late, after things have gone on for a long time, but her approach was considered and she wasn't unfair towards people.
That has to be a joke doesn’t it?
im not sure that being married to the Chairman of the BBC is proof of anything, however many legs are involved.
This whole issue raises a lot of predicaments. I speak 4 languages, I have a keen interest in linguistics and the origin of names, and I've lived in 4 countries on 3 different continents. When I come across someone with a non-English name, if the circumstances are appropriate, I will ask them about it. It's because I am genuinely interested. I'm not trying to get them on the next deportation flight. I have always enjoyed learning from them, as I can now more easily recognise and pronounce names from certain countries, and they have always seemed to welcome my interest.
I'm probably quite tactful in my approach to it, as opposed to Lady Hussey, but where does this end? With nobody being able to ask anyone about their heritage, unless you've asked them in the universally approved manner and registered yourself as a definite non-racist with the government database?
I'm probably quite tactful in my approach to it, as opposed to Lady Hussey, but where does this end? With nobody being able to ask anyone about their heritage, unless you've asked them in the universally approved manner and registered yourself as a definite non-racist with the government database?
I think this is what Harry's problem was - she didn't act quick enough to his concerns so he just took things into his own hands with disastrous results
But that’s the thing - you’re likely very tactful, and probably read social cues as to when the other person isn’t feeling the conversation. It’s really a matter of being polite vs being rude, isn’t it?
Of course, but isn't it also a matter of someone having the best of intentions and the other person getting offended for offended's sake, as people love to do these days, and reporting it to your boss? Even if you do have the best of intentions, it's a constant case of walking on eggshells. Not everyone has the means to go on discrimination awareness courses. It doesn't help that the rules on which terms are acceptable keep changing too.
Not in this day and age she is way out of her depth and can only treat non royals/ lower classes as minions.
I would assume you also wouldn’t keep pushing for answers if the person you were talking to was unwilling to answer?
That seems to be what is actually at the heart of it all … the persistence in the face of reluctance in what was … or should have been … nothing more than a bit of putting at ease social chit chat.
- Status