I wouldn't describe myself as a RF sugar but I do support them. I don't however support Andrew in the slightest. Guilty or not he put TRF in such a dreadful position he needs to just disappear. He also should not have been anywhere near young girls of any age. He knew what Epstein was up to and should have dropped him like a stone. He's an arrogant, disgusting twit.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Even Charles and Michael Fawcett have been taking backhanders for a while.
Andrew and Harry remind me of one another, because they are both just crappy people.
Andrew benefitted more because he was Mummy's favorite who would sweep anything under the rug, not just his Epstein associations but his behavior as 'trade envoy' which was just more than a wee bit corrupt.
Andrew benefitted more because he was Mummy's favorite who would sweep anything under the rug, not just his Epstein associations but his behavior as 'trade envoy' which was just more than a wee bit corrupt.
I think there are several layers to the situation. The Sussex or RF hardcore fans are going all crazy in their respective direction though.
Andrew is well known for his sleazy, embarrassing, entitled and shady ways. There is no way to excuse what he did- and that is BEFORE we take the whole Eppstein story into account. He should have been put on the royal naughty step ages ago. His actions were problematic and did harm the monarchy! His only pro argument is that he never undermined the institution openly by saying something bad about it. The Eppstein topic is a big problem. Even with thinking the best of him (
innocent till proven guilty I guess) there is no excuse. Being oblivious and utterly stupid is no excuse. Sadly it’s hard to draw a line that regulates it. Because being a sleazeball is not something that will can be applied objectively. And having contact with a CONVICTED weirdo is definitely too late to draw this line.
On the other hand, this would very probably not hold up in a court if an employee would go against wrongful termination. What you do in your private life is nobody’s business. You could argue though that his actions brought enough bad publicity to make it a company problem. His earlier shady business actions are actually easier to judge under that focus. It’s complicated because law doesn’t necessarily equal morally right.
H&M are easier to judge in terms of employee vs employee. Even though their actions have harmed themselves more than anyone else. You can’t expect your employer to just give you the jobs you want, you can’t just work less to open a side business, you can’t expect to use company resources or their business cards after you quit. And publicly talking bad about your employer is definitely a red flag.
On a general level it’s easier to jump on H&M because whatever they do it’s still pretty inconsequential. They are more laughed about than detested (talking about sane people not hardcore crazies). Andrew on the other hand should have seen a court room and then maybe even a cell (depending on ruling). Most would agree that his parents and the Queen as his boss failed to take appropriate actions. It’s just not as entertaining to witch about his horrible actions instead of the comic relief that H&M have made out of themselves (especially H, I still have a soft spot for M).
If I were in charge of the Firm, I would have gotten rid of Andrew long ago. And with him Sarah. And then H (and by Proxy M). The cousins can age out for all I care but Princess Pushy should have been benched a long time ago as well. And K&W would have been met with an increase in work they wouldn’t know what slapped them……
Andrew is well known for his sleazy, embarrassing, entitled and shady ways. There is no way to excuse what he did- and that is BEFORE we take the whole Eppstein story into account. He should have been put on the royal naughty step ages ago. His actions were problematic and did harm the monarchy! His only pro argument is that he never undermined the institution openly by saying something bad about it. The Eppstein topic is a big problem. Even with thinking the best of him (
innocent till proven guilty I guess) there is no excuse. Being oblivious and utterly stupid is no excuse. Sadly it’s hard to draw a line that regulates it. Because being a sleazeball is not something that will can be applied objectively. And having contact with a CONVICTED weirdo is definitely too late to draw this line.On the other hand, this would very probably not hold up in a court if an employee would go against wrongful termination. What you do in your private life is nobody’s business. You could argue though that his actions brought enough bad publicity to make it a company problem. His earlier shady business actions are actually easier to judge under that focus. It’s complicated because law doesn’t necessarily equal morally right.
H&M are easier to judge in terms of employee vs employee. Even though their actions have harmed themselves more than anyone else. You can’t expect your employer to just give you the jobs you want, you can’t just work less to open a side business, you can’t expect to use company resources or their business cards after you quit. And publicly talking bad about your employer is definitely a red flag.
On a general level it’s easier to jump on H&M because whatever they do it’s still pretty inconsequential. They are more laughed about than detested (talking about sane people not hardcore crazies). Andrew on the other hand should have seen a court room and then maybe even a cell (depending on ruling). Most would agree that his parents and the Queen as his boss failed to take appropriate actions. It’s just not as entertaining to witch about his horrible actions instead of the comic relief that H&M have made out of themselves (especially H, I still have a soft spot for M).
If I were in charge of the Firm, I would have gotten rid of Andrew long ago. And with him Sarah. And then H (and by Proxy M). The cousins can age out for all I care but Princess Pushy should have been benched a long time ago as well. And K&W would have been met with an increase in work they wouldn’t know what slapped them……
I actually think it shows that historically, the RF have absolutely no idea how to handle the whole ‘spare’ issue. They are simultaneously cosseted, ignored and woefully under prepared should they ever need to take on the role of heir.
George V was the spare who stepped up into his brother’s shoes so much he even married his fiancée. Edward VIII - according to my Gran
- was obviously never going to produce an heir even without the Wallis Simpson situation and George VI has to be the most underprepared person ever to become monarch (which given his father’s situation seemed a bit happy go lucky) … but then, the Queen Mother saw William to instruct him on statescraft without Harry, even after Seeing how being an under prepared monarch affected her husband. They want the spare, but they don’t want to make eye contact with the idea they might actually be needed so they are kept in a kind of ‘break glass in case of emergency’ limbo. What you actually end up with is someone who has reached early 20’s or even 30’s with no defined role who then finds that even taken away and then having to reset. I actually wonder if the Queen was so sympathetic to Andrew (and even Harry to some extent) because she saw how the whole situation had affected her own sister and she was still trying to make amends?I hope if nothing else at all comes out of the sorry mess that is Andrew and Harry, it leads to a change in how the heirs siblings are treated and Charlotte and Louis given the freedom to follow their own star rather than just hang about waiting to become an auntie and uncle.
Last edited:
I don’t think they thought they had the best people. I’m sure I read they would have ideas and want it executed straight away, so when advisors would say it’s going to take time or pick holes in the idea they’d get annoyed.
I think Meghan was used to an American style of working of living to work and not working to live, so it was even more frustrating for her. People said she can send emails at 5am and no one has to reply at that time so it’s shouldn’t be a problem, but as someone with a manager who sends 7am emails they’re usually the most chaotic ideas that have come to them when they’ve just woke up. There’s never any foresight to how that idea will work, how disruptive it will be to the worker and you’re just expected to come up with the solution.
They’re the kind of people I imagine saying “don’t bring me a problem, bring me an answer”
I guess historically a good prepared spare was a massive problem. You know, most wouldn’t put their sword down to support an idiotic, ill prepared, pompous usurper. Spares, if you didn’t actually need them, have always been a problem. On a pure rational level it would be the best to have at least three spares and then look who would be the best candidate and train them further. You have to get rid of male and primogeniture for spares though. Anne or Edward would be a great spares. Hard working, loyal and supportive. They would be a good choice to step up if needed and a good adviser/regent in case the heir would be under age.I actually think it shows that historically, the RF have absolutely no idea how to handle the whole ‘spare’ issue. They are simultaneously cosseted, ignored and woefully under prepared should they ever need to take on the role of heir.
George V was the spare who stepped up into his brother’s shoes so much he even married his fiancée. Edward VIII - according to my Gran
I hope if nothing else at all comes out of the sorry mess that is Andrew and Harry, it leads to a change in how the heirs siblings are treated and Charlotte and Louis given the freedom to follow their own star rather than just hang about waiting to become an auntie and uncle.
I can imagine Charles and Wiliam, in a boozy moment, regret that you can’t just put your spare in a convent nowadays. Or on a ship to Australia for that matter.
But are Anne and Edward hard working, loyal and supportive because they aren’t the spare? It’s so difficult to prepare someone to be the more important person in the country just in case but then discard them nine times out of ten because they aren’t needed after all and I don’t think the royal family so far have shown they know how to balance it
To be fair, I think Anne and Edward look like good spares purely because they haven’t been spares … or in the case of Anne was only 10 when she was demoted so I don’t think it had really registered (and being a girl added another <shrug> level to it). I think it really kicks in around mid-teens … and has probably been made worse because both Charles and William were 30+ when they had their heir, which meant their own spare was pretty well established and used to it.
I mean, I know the RF is a next of vipers and some of them probably wouldn’t be adverse to a spot of Into The Tower-ing with some of their least favourite relatives but things have been fairly quiet since The Great Heir Race of 1817. Although ironically its the more recent times that have seen consecutive spares become King.
Spot on @Boring Monday Monday
Nothing stopping the Spares from taking on big projects or even working. They aren’t really needed from their 20’s onwards as the Heir in Charles, William and the Queens case were born. Harry and Andrew were in school and then the Armed Forces, so they had plenty of direction until their 20’s. My opinion is they were just spoiled and coddled.
Nothing stopping the Spares from taking on big projects or even working. They aren’t really needed from their 20’s onwards as the Heir in Charles, William and the Queens case were born. Harry and Andrew were in school and then the Armed Forces, so they had plenty of direction until their 20’s. My opinion is they were just spoiled and coddled.
Mohamed Al Fayed has died.
Private Eye court circular
Yes I have felt this for some time. They probably feel they are dedicated but people judge them by what they are seen to be doing. They aren’t being seen to be doing a lot. Expectations are low because Queen Elizabeth did less in her later years but I do think if the press decide to go after them, they will have plenty of material.
Bloody ridiculous that they hardly do any work.
Brian
Mail Online are very excited that it was 'nearly' 26 years to the day Diana and Dodi died
They would be. Never liked the man but always felt some sympathy for him losing his son in such a public way but always so overshadowed. He could never let go of the conspiracy theories.
Agreed I always felt for him for that.
Looking back now the reaction to Diana's death was hysterical and now there is proof that Martin Bashir used 'deceitful methods' to get 'that interview' which included forging bank statements to fuel Diana's paranoia that The Crown was working against her I would expect some of this had filtered through to him which makes me judge him less harshly for the conspiracy theories.
Their last official duty being the Wimbledon final and the US open is already into the third round is embarrassing. No adult needs that much time off.
And Charles used to be so very active, I do think he and Camilla are active (she not as much as him but she's got a plethora of health problems so whatever, I do love her push for reading and her work with domestic violence charities and orgs) - but they just don't garner that kind of media attention. He does a lot more boring king stuff rather than his public engagements and charitable purposes understandably but it's a meteoric shift for him. I have always been impressed by what he's done, and his and anne's work ethic in particular. Wish Camilla's work with women's issues got the attention it deserves. Same as Sophie or Anne when they're out and about.
Sadly William has zero work ethic and they can just disappear thinking they're fine because they aren't Harry and Meghan. William and Kate are beige and boring but they do get press the off-chance they do work.
It's a really bad way to look at things isn't it? 'I'm not AS bad as them so I can do what I want!'
Charles knows he's a 'caretaker monarchy' but what happens when William inherits, could be a few years, could be a decade or more...
- Status