Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
GHScorpiosRule

The Royals: All the People Who Unironically Wear Robes and Crowns

Recommended Posts

I also like his acknowledgment of the shop workers trying to keep the shelves full.  Well done, Charles, happy to see you looking so well!

  • Like 18

Share this post


Link to post

3 hours ago, BlackberryJam said:

That was a lovely message. I hope the Queen puts out one soon too.

Am I alone in thinking that the Queen definitely has COVID and that the royals and the government are keeping her out of sight because they don't want people to know how sick she is?  Because other than that photo of her talking on the phone with Boris Johnson, it seems like she's basically gone dark, which is kind of an unusual thing for a monarch to do during a time of crisis.

  • Surprise 1
  • Sad 7

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, Steph J said:

Am I alone in thinking that the Queen definitely has COVID and that the royals and the government are keeping her out of sight because they don't want people to know how sick she is?  Because other than that photo of her talking on the phone with Boris Johnson, it seems like she's basically gone dark, which is kind of an unusual thing for a monarch to do during a time of crisis.

I don't think they would keep that a secret.  Most likely, WIndsor Castle is running on a skeleton staff and they are practicing social distancing as much as possible.  This is not the time for her to have a photographer on hand to snap "candid" pictures.  If she was more adept at using technology, then maybe she could record a short video, but even then how would she  this while maintaining dignity?  Elizabeth has always been a person who someone else photographs or videos, for her to start doing this herself it would feel odd.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Steph J said:

Am I alone in thinking that the Queen definitely has COVID and that the royals and the government are keeping her out of sight because they don't want people to know how sick she is?  Because other than that photo of her talking on the phone with Boris Johnson, it seems like she's basically gone dark, which is kind of an unusual thing for a monarch to do during a time of crisis.

It wouldn’t surprise me that they would hide her being sick but she is probably just in isolation until they are sure she didn’t catch it before is left London. 

Camilla is still in isolation through the end of the week even though she tested negative as a precaution. 

Edited by Dani
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I don't think they would keep that a secret.

I think your explanation for why she's been out of sight is believable, but I disagree that they wouldn't keep it a secret if the Queen was ill.  I think they would absolutely keep that under wraps, based on how they've historically dealt with senior members of the royal family having potentially serious illnesses.  The public wasn't told that George VI had lung cancer (although his lung surgery was public knowledge, the explanation for it was "structural changes," whatever that was supposed to mean) and the Queen Mother had two different cancer operations, one in the 60s and the other in the 80s, that were kept secret until after her death.  Even last Christmas when Philip was hospitalized, the official explanation was simply that it was a result of a "pre-existing condition."

  • Like 6
  • Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post

45 minutes ago, Steph J said:

I think your explanation for why she's been out of sight is believable, but I disagree that they wouldn't keep it a secret if the Queen was ill.  I think they would absolutely keep that under wraps, based on how they've historically dealt with senior members of the royal family having potentially serious illnesses.  The public wasn't told that George VI had lung cancer (although his lung surgery was public knowledge, the explanation for it was "structural changes," whatever that was supposed to mean) and the Queen Mother had two different cancer operations, one in the 60s and the other in the 80s, that were kept secret until after her death.  Even last Christmas when Philip was hospitalized, the official explanation was simply that it was a result of a "pre-existing condition."

I agree, when the Queen develops a life threatening condition, as is bound to happen, the public won't be told.  If she cannot make appearances, they will announce she has a cold or some such and any hospital visits will be given vague explanations like was given for Philip.  There will be no deathwatch,

King George VI himself was never told he had lung cancer, although that was not unusual at the time.  There was a sentiment that, since cancer tended to be a death sentence in those days, the person would give up hope. Also, there was a social stigma associated with cancer and there would've been concern about public outcry over that.  In George's time, cancer was not discussed in polite company.  Even after his surgery, which carried a grim prognosis, Elizabeth and Philip were sent on the tour of Africa anyway, she never suspected that her father was terminal.

  • Like 1
  • Useful 1
  • Sad 7

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, doodlebug said:

I agree, when the Queen develops a life threatening condition, as is bound to happen, the public won't be told.  If she cannot make appearances, they will announce she has a cold or some such and any hospital visits will be given vague explanations like was given for Philip.  There will be no deathwatch,

King George VI himself was never told he had lung cancer, although that was not unusual at the time.  There was a sentiment that, since cancer tended to be a death sentence in those days, the person would give up hope. Also, there was a social stigma associated with cancer and there would've been concern about public outcry over that.  In George's time, cancer was not discussed in polite company.  Even after his surgery, which carried a grim prognosis, Elizabeth and Philip were sent on the tour of Africa anyway, she never suspected that her father was terminal.

I am kind of surprised that she never suspected. When you see clips of George VI going to see them off. He looks really sick. But also his eyes. It just looks like he knew he was never going to see her again. Then again she might not have had anything to compare it too. She was young when her grandfather died and/or they might have kept her away. In the last few weeks with my mom I was noticing more and more how she looked more liked my grandmother (her mother) in the weeks before she died. My dad told me after she died how she kept rearranging the table beside her bed in the days before she died like he saw his mother do in the days before she died. 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 5

Share this post


Link to post
On 3/31/2020 at 9:45 AM, Camille said:

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/prince-william-seriously-considering-returning-112800967.html

It's wonderful that he wants to pitch in like this, but it's ultimately a very bad idea when you consider the number of medical personnel who have been infected thanks to their contact with I'll patients.

The original source of the Yahoo story is an article from The Sun. William may end up returning to duty, but if he doesn't, it wouldn't be surprising.

10 hours ago, Steph J said:

Am I alone in thinking that the Queen definitely has COVID and that the royals and the government are keeping her out of sight because they don't want people to know how sick she is?  Because other than that photo of her talking on the phone with Boris Johnson, it seems like she's basically gone dark, which is kind of an unusual thing for a monarch to do during a time of crisis.

I've found some of the official statements to be a bit...careful about the Queen ("she remains in good health, we will not be commenting further"), compared to how Charles had tested positive but "otherwise remains in good health" despite mild symptoms and it was made clear that Camilla had tested negative. Obviously, Camilla had more exposure to the virus from Charles than the Queen would have, but she'd last seen her son within two weeks of him falling ill. I can see several scenarios being likely: the Queen feels fine and hasn't been tested but is self-isolating as a precaution; she has tested positive but is asymptomatic/mildly ill; or she has tested negative but out of deference to her age/position/sensibilities/etc. the courtiers don't want to release that info publicly. Or, she's under the weather with it but not at death's door, yet...

Edited by Dejana
  • Like 10
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Just wanted to pop in and say that I thought Charles’ message was quite lovely. Well done.

  • Like 15

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, doodlebug said:

 

King George VI himself was never told he had lung cancer, although that was not unusual at the time.  There was a sentiment that, since cancer tended to be a death sentence in those days, the person would give up hope. Also, there was a social stigma associated with cancer and there would've been concern about public outcry over that.  In George's time, cancer was not discussed in polite company.  Even after his surgery, which carried a grim prognosis, Elizabeth and Philip were sent on the tour of Africa anyway, she never suspected that her father was terminal.

I'm not entirely sure she was entirely clueless. I mean, she DID take with her mourning attire on that trip (which has been standard travelling geer for the Windsors ever since) but I'm not sure Princess Elizabeth had always done so or whether she (and/or George VI himself) DID consider it a probability rather than a hypothetical possibility she might actually have need for it on that trip!  Also, George VI had at least one operation on his lungs so I'm not sure he didn't have some clue that it wasn't done merely to clear up coughing and shortness of breath! 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Blergh said:

he DID take with her mourning attire on that trip

Actually she did not.    Her plane flying her back from Kenya had to make a stop in Egypt where it was met by a plane from the UK carrying her mourning clothes.   She was not prepared.    Which is why they now carrying such things to avoid the complexities of getting the right clothes to the person.

  • Like 6
  • Useful 3
  • Sad 3

Share this post


Link to post

54 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

Actually she did not.    Her plane flying her back from Kenya had to make a stop in Egypt where it was met by a plane from the UK carrying her mourning clothes.   She was not prepared.    Which is why they now carrying such things to avoid the complexities of getting the right clothes to the person.

I stand corrected!  Forgive my previous post. I guess because I saw the newsreel footage of her getting on the plane in Kenya in regular clothes then deplaning in London in mourning attire, that that had meant she'd already had it onboard with him. I never considered that a refueling stop in Cairo could the clothes' source. 

 

Well, I still think George VI had some inkling about his impending mortality due to having undergone that operation and his appearance at the London tarmac to see off his heiress sure had the expression of not being sure he'd ever see her again in this world as opposed to just happy for her to go on a trip.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, merylinkid said:

Actually she did not.    Her plane flying her back from Kenya had to make a stop in Egypt where it was met by a plane from the UK carrying her mourning clothes.   She was not prepared.    Which is why they now carrying such things to avoid the complexities of getting the right clothes to the person.

Interesting. The version I’ve heard in documentaries was that she had to sit and wait on the tarmac for the clothes before she could deplane but this makes more sense. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, merylinkid said:

Actually she did not.    Her plane flying her back from Kenya had to make a stop in Egypt where it was met by a plane from the UK carrying her mourning clothes.   She was not prepared.    Which is why they now carrying such things to avoid the complexities of getting the right clothes to the person.

It was more common for them to travel with mourning clothes even before then. When she and Philip went on the Canadian tour for her father in the fall of 1951 they had packed a mourning dress for her along with a draft accession declaration paper just in case. But on the next trip someone forgot to pack the black dress. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

No, that wasn't it.  There were mourning clothes packed.  They were in the luggage that had already been sent to the ship that was going to take them to Australia.  The trips to the lodge they'd been given in Kenya, and the excursion to Treetops, were supposed to be brief and private visits, so a minimal amount of luggage was taken (especially to Treetops, where they walked in and literally climbed a tree).  Still, not having one black dress in the luggage that stayed with her was an oversight, and apparently hasn't been repeated.

An early bio of E the II (published in 1964), detailed the mounds of luggage that went with them on the eventual round-the-world tour, including one terrifying leg (for the staff), when the jewelry case wound up with the ordinary cargo instead of being hand-carried by a senior member of the household.

  • Like 5
  • Useful 4

Share this post


Link to post

Love the new title. Just a reminder that it’s not just the British Royals, although they are always gossip fodder.

Here is Carl Philip of Sweden.

They are not doing a full lock down, but a different sort of social distancing.

And here is CPV and Daniel, looking very intently at a computer monitor. My money is on them reading a Tiger King recap.

 

  • Laugh 8

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, BlackberryJam said:

Love the new title. Just a reminder that it’s not just the British Royals, although they are always gossip fodder.

Here is Carl Philip of Sweden.

They are not doing a full lock down, but a different sort of social distancing.

And here is CPV and Daniel, looking very intently at a computer monitor. My money is on them reading a Tiger King recap.

 

Or perusing Tiger King memes! One of my friends and I pretty much communicate exclusively in Tiger King memes now, and I haven't even watched it yet. LOL

  • Laugh 3

Share this post


Link to post

1 hour ago, Zella said:

Or perusing Tiger King memes! One of my friends and I pretty much communicate exclusively in Tiger King memes now, and I haven't even watched it yet. LOL

No lie, I know nothing about Tiger King, but it seemed funny and topical. 😉

 

  • Like 2
  • Laugh 3

Share this post


Link to post

The QE2 is going to make a statement on Sunday.

I hope she's well. She's certainly made some missteps, but I want more cranky battleaxes out there refusing to step down to let men take their places. Also, hats.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, BlackberryJam said:

The QE2 is going to make a statement on Sunday.

I hope she's well. She's certainly made some missteps, but I want more cranky battleaxes out there refusing to step down to let men take their places. Also, hats.

I suspect it's a general morale-booster deal. While I'm not the biggest fan and don't take things to heart, I'm sure there are people who are and do. For their sakes, they don't need to be further dumped upon. Unless it's of critical importance, now really isn't the time for more bad news.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Anduin said:

I suspect it's a general morale-booster deal. While I'm not the biggest fan and don't take things to heart, I'm sure there are people who are and do. For their sakes, they don't need to be further dumped upon. Unless it's of critical importance, now really isn't the time for more bad news.

Even here there was some speculation that the Queen had COVID-19. I suspect this will be a "I'm fine, Phils is fine, be vigilant, stay the course, Corgis and horses are immune and they don't transmit the virus, we can all celebrate my birthday next year." I do think it's important for her to make an appearance. 

  • Like 15

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, BlackberryJam said:

Even here there was some speculation that the Queen had COVID-19. I suspect this will be a "I'm fine, Phils is fine, be vigilant, stay the course, Corgis and horses are immune and they don't transmit the virus, we can all celebrate my birthday next year." I do think it's important for her to make an appearance. 

I get the feeling that this address has been planned for some time probably since it was announced that Charles was sick.  It just took some time getting a crew and equipment together that will not accidentally infect her majesty.  Or, and this makes me chuckle, someone had to teach her majesty how to film using either an ipad or laptop like in Charles's video.  

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, BlackberryJam said:

The QE2 is going to make a statement on Sunday.

I hope she's well. She's certainly made some missteps, but I want more cranky battleaxes out there refusing to step down to let men take their places. Also, hats.

 

Time may prove me entirely wrong, but the fact that she's given her nation and Commonwealth two days' notice for the proposed broadcast rather than just DOING it and pinning the news to spread to the world via social media leads me to think it's possible Her Majesty could have a BIG announcement in the offing and wants her subjects to learn it simultaneously rather than chancing any misinterpretations via social media. Yes, it could be simply a 'our nations have made it through serious challenges before and they can do so this time if we all keep stay as pragmatic as possible while keeping cool heads' but this seems as though it could be bigger than that.  One way or another, time will tell for all of us on Sunday!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Prince vs. prince.  Queen vs. queen.  I would credit the artist, but no signature.  

Screenshot (274).png

Love that QE is getting the best of Freddie.

Edited by SuprSuprElevated
  • Like 5
  • Laugh 18

Share this post


Link to post
57 minutes ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

Prince vs. prince.  Queen vs. queen.  I would credit the artist, but no signature.  

Screenshot (274).png

Love that QE is getting the best of Freddie.

And her hat is perfectly in place.

  • Like 1
  • Laugh 11

Share this post


Link to post

I’m having flashbacks to  7 Days in Hell to when Queen Elizabeth beats up Kit Harrington in the elevator, lol.

  • Like 4
  • Laugh 4

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

Prince vs. prince.  Queen vs. queen.  I would credit the artist, but no signature.  

Screenshot (274).png

Love that QE is getting the best of Freddie.

I'm sorry, but that's obviously not the Queen, there is no handbag in sight.

  • Laugh 20

Share this post


Link to post

Wasn't there a lot of discussion at the time of the wedding whether the officiant would use Rachel Meghan or just Meghan?  (Also whether it would be Henry or Harry?  I cannot remember what was said during the ceremony for either of them.)   I"m not sure why this publication is treating the fact that her name is Rachel Meghan as breaking news.  Oh wait, I forgot, it's Meghan.   She must be criticized!  What else is she hiding???

If you look at the birth certificates of George, Charlotte, and Louis, it will say the same thing for their mother - "Princess of the United Kingdom" - because she is Princess William of Wales as well as the Duchess of Cambridge.  Meghan is Princess Henry of Wales as well as Duchess of Sussex.  Given that all three of the Cambridge children have this on their birthday certificates, I don't know why this publication is surprised by the same thing being on Archie's birth certificate.  Oh I forgot, it involves Meghan.  She must be criticized!  At the time of Archie's birth she was a full-time royal, so why shouldn't it say that?  

  • Like 21

Share this post


Link to post

I always found it a bit cringey that Diana was apparently listed as “Spinster of Althorp” on her marriage certificate.

  • Surprise 8
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, MadyGirl1987 said:

I always found it a bit cringey that Diana was apparently listed as “Spinster of Althorp” on her marriage certificate.

I feel bad for chuckling at this. It makes her sound like some sort of ghost from an old English legend.

  • Like 5
  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, MadyGirl1987 said:

I always found it a bit cringey that Diana was apparently listed as “Spinster of Althorp” on her marriage certificate.

Wait, what? I googled but could find any reference. Could it have been a misreading of Spencer of Althorp or the tabloids being cruel?

Share this post


Link to post

48 minutes ago, Dani said:

Wait, what? I googled but could find any reference. Could it have been a misreading of Spencer of Althorp or the tabloids being cruel?

I forgot where I heard of it. A documentary or a biography somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post

I saw it on the marriage certificate. "Spinster" is still the term for an unmarried/never married woman, no matter how old she is, so yes, even at only 20, Diana was considered a spinster, even though the word conjures up the image of an old hag.

  • Useful 1
  • Sad 7

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, Camille said:

I saw it on the marriage certificate. "Spinster" is still the term for an unmarried/never married woman, no matter how old she is, so yes, even at only 20, Diana was considered a spinster, even though the word conjures up the image of an old hag.

Oh, that makes more sense. I thought it said “Spinster of Althrop” like a title. Sometimes the UK seems so backwards in areas like this it surprises me. 
 

ETA: looks like it was changed in the UK in 2005. Now they just use single. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4141996.stm

Edited by Dani
  • Like 2
  • Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Dani said:

ETA: looks like it was changed in the UK in 2005. Now they just use single. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4141996.stm

I'm glad for that. It's such a sexist and offensive term. "Bachelor" sounds good no matter how old a guy is, but spinster sounds unflattering no matter what a woman's age is. Women consistently get stuck with these unpleasant terms regarding their marital status--spinster, old maid, maiden aunt, Christmas Cake. 

Edited by Camille
  • Like 5
  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Calvada said:

Wasn't there a lot of discussion at the time of the wedding whether the officiant would use Rachel Meghan or just Meghan?  (Also whether it would be Henry or Harry?  I cannot remember what was said during the ceremony for either of them.)  I"m not sure why this publication is treating the fact that her name is Rachel Meghan as breaking news.  Oh wait, I forgot, it's Meghan.   She must be criticized!  What else is she hiding???

If you look at the birth certificates of George, Charlotte, and Louis, it will say the same thing for their mother - "Princess of the United Kingdom" - because she is Princess William of Wales as well as the Duchess of Cambridge.  Meghan is Princess Henry of Wales as well as Duchess of Sussex.  Given that all three of the Cambridge children have this on their birthday certificates, I don't know why this publication is surprised by the same thing being on Archie's birth certificate.  Oh I forgot, it involves Meghan.  She must be criticized!  At the time of Archie's birth she was a full-time royal, so why shouldn't it say that?  

Yes, there was a discussion about which names would be used, like, by the officiant, etc., during the wedding (&, I think, by extension, if Meghan was given a title other than “Princess Henry of Wales”, would she use “Rachel” or “Meghan” with it?). I was a pretty good part of it. It had to do with if you had to use the couple’s legal names (Rachel Meghan & Henry + his 3 middle names) or you could use what they went by in everyday life, if it was different (Meghan & Harry). They ended up using Meghan & Harry, which was perfectly acceptable.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

I"m not sure why this publication is treating the fact that her name is Rachel Meghan as breaking news.  Oh wait, I forgot, it's Meghan.   She must be criticized!  What else is she hiding???

I didn't see it as criticism, just a article by someone who had nothing better to write about and thought it might be interesting to some.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

10 hours ago, Calvada said:

If you look at the birth certificates of George, Charlotte, and Louis, it will say the same thing for their mother - "Princess of the United Kingdom" - because she is Princess William of Wales as well as the Duchess of Cambridge.  Meghan is Princess Henry of Wales as well as Duchess of Sussex.  Given that all three of the Cambridge children have this on their birthday certificates, I don't know why this publication is surprised by the same thing being on Archie's birth certificate.  Oh I forgot, it involves Meghan.  She must be criticized!  At the time of Archie's birth she was a full-time royal, so why shouldn't it say that?  

Pretty sure if the Sussexes had a second child, the birth certificate would still say 'princess' despite them no longer being full-time royals, because the title remains theirs whether they work or not.

2 hours ago, Camille said:

I'm glad for that. It's such a sexist and offensive term. "Bachelor" sounds good no matter how old a guy is, but spinster sounds unflattering no matter what a woman's age is. Women consistently get stuck with these unpleasant terms regarding their marital status--spinster, old maid, maiden aunt, Christmas Cake. 

What is really infuriating is that the negative connotation behind 'spinster' is sexist propaganda. Because originally, the term 'spinster' simply meant someone who spun yarn or thread - could be either male or female, but usually female. Spinning was a respectable occupation by which a single woman could support herself without having to rely on a husband, and thus the word became primarily associated with unmarried women. But the patriarchy didn't want female independence to be seen as a good or desirable thing, so over the time the word became more loaded, a way of denigrating women for remaining unmarried beyond the usual age for marriage - the name of an entire profession became the legal term for an unmarried woman, forever associated with marital status (negative marital status at that, failure to secure a man), therefore something vaguely shameful, rather than a respectable source of independence.

 

 

  • Like 8
  • Useful 12

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

Prince vs. prince.  Queen vs. queen.  I would credit the artist, but no signature.  

Screenshot (274).png

Love that QE is getting the best of Freddie.

 

  • Like 5
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

Prince vs. prince.  Queen vs. queen.  I would credit the artist, but no signature.  

Screenshot (274).png

Love that QE is getting the best of Freddie.

But the Duke of Sussex not only is a foot taller than the late artist Prince was but also likely has been in scrapping shape so I doubt that His Royal Badness would have gotten the better of him even using his androgynous symbol as a weapon! 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I think when the Queen speaks today, rather than an initial shot of the Royal Standard or whatever they would use, they should start with a close-up shot of her handbag next to her chair and then widen out to a full shot of her.  What could symbolize resolve & steadfastness more than that?!  

  • Like 9
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Blergh said:

But the Duke of Sussex not only is a foot taller than the late artist Prince was but also likely has been in scrapping shape so I doubt that His Royal Badness would have gotten the better of him even using his androgynous symbol as a weapon! 

Never underestimate the fight in little guys.  Too many larger guys have done that, to their dismay and dismantlement. 😉

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

Prince has the speed and would dance circles around Harry before KOing him.

  • Like 5
  • Laugh 6

Share this post


Link to post

The Queen appears to be in good health, and I love the bright emerald of her outfit.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Giant Misfit

Don't get snippy in your responses with other members' opinions with which you do not agree.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size