Sometimes it’s the monarch who is the embarrassing one.
At least there’s no longer head-chopping’ for the more exuberant ones.
Who cares if Chuck and Will get along? Will’s still going to be king eventually, and there’s nothing Chuck can do to stop it.
Hmmm…tell that to Robert Curthose 
.
Clearly, enough people willing to buy a magazine that “allegedly” inventscovers such stories - anything to pass an idle moment. I assume Cosmopolitan sees itself as a bit more upmarket than most gossip magazines, but this is only one step above the sort of cover screamer I saw the other day: My boyfriend attacked me with a roast dinner while Dad lay DYING!*
*NOT a story about the royals.
Getting harder to tell, these days.
I am far from an expert on the royal personalities. Or even on the unsubstantiated gossip about the royal personalities.
But I had always viewed Charles as weird, Harry as difficult, and Will as the calm maturity of the crowd.
If it turns out Will is really the raging jerkwad of the crew, that pretty well overturns my chessboard.
Reading between the lines, I think Will sees (rightly, in my opinion) that Andrew is a threat to the monarchy and wants to have nothing to do with him. Will (and probably Kate) has the modern sensibility to matters of sexual abuse, and is extremely strict in his response.
That conflicts with Charles, who has taken extremely public and strict measures to exclude Andrew from the public function of the Family, but still views Andrew as his brother, and part of the family.
It’s hard to completely dump a sibling; dumping an uncle, not so much.
……if true
Thank you.
When a family has a true bad actor, there is almost no way the rest of the family can come to a unanimous decision on how to treat the problem child. Which almost always leads to second and third order angst and conflict and all the rest.
Sucks to have to do all this in a fishbowl. OTOH, there are offsetting rewards.
Yes, but there’s lots of (equally unreliable?) press reporting that Andrew isn’t going to be invited to Sandringham for Christmas. Which, if true, would mean that there wouldn’t be any issue of the Wales having to hang out with him.
But one suspects that this is actually just a case of them facing the very common problem of having to chose between different sides of the family with whom to spend Christmas. It’s probably quite good for the kids to get the sense that their Middleton grandparents don’t automatically get side-lined by their royal granddad.
Might as well put this here: I read Harry’s book. Just finished a few weeks ago. And allowing for the fact that his father and brother, and maybe sister-in-law as well, probably see things differently, he makes a good case for himself.
He never got over how his mother died. Not the crash itself, but the paparazzi chasing her, as they had every day for almost twenty years, and look what happened. So he can’t deal with pap intrusions on his married life, and he doesn’t want Meghan, or Archie and Lilibet, to have to deal with them either. Yes, I know the media has given Charles/Camilla a hard time, likewise William/Kate. Yes, they’ve been dealing with it. Harry can’t deal, and that’s how it is.
But it’s not just a matter of who he married when he was almost forty. From an early age, it was clear that he didn’t have much to offer The Firm, nor they him, so he joined the army, and that turned out to be his calling (for as long as he was allowed to do it). He was already disengaging from his family when he met an American actress. And he’s not asking to have it both ways. Just two things he wants: private security, which has been denied, and to place a wreath at a war memorial on Decoration Day (also denied).
No joke: I can see a parallel between Harry and Meghan, and John Lennon and Yoko Ono. Yoko did not pull John away from the Beatles; John got involved with Yoko as part of his pulling away from the Beatles. Likewise, Meghan is not leading Harry anywhere he doesn’t want to go; when they met, he’d already been speculating about a future away from The Firm. And in both cases, the woman being non-white and not CofE also seems to have soured people’s opinions.
Silver lining, though: since Harry’s already been dismissed, he won’t have to take a side on the issue of Andrew.
Fuck me, the man was in the military. That is stone cold.
Not every ex-serviceman gets to lay a wreath at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Day. There’s a well-established protocol about who does this, starting with the sovereign and other senior royals and then working through the Prime Minister, leaders of other political parties represented in Parliament, senior officers of the services, religious leaders, representative of civilian and uniformed organisations, diplomatic representatives accredited to the UK, etc.
Now that Harry is no longer a senior royal, he has no place on this list. He could do, if the British Legion or a similar body nominated him as their representative for the occasion, but that doesn’t seem to have happened.
And there are other royals who don’t lay wreaths in the official ceremonial, but watch from surrounding balconies (among them the Duke of Kent who had a lifetime’s career in the Army, but he’s in his 90s so “excused boots”, as it were).
I suppose Harry could, if he wished, join the British Legion parade of regimental associations who march past and lay their own wreaths. But it comes down to the basic issue in his choices - you’re in or you’re out, you can’t have it both ways.
The Royal Navy demotes the Andrew formerly known as Prince:
What’s key to this is that he lost he honorary title (Vice Admiral) and the awards that went with it. He is still a retired Commander which is a rank he legitimately earned for his regular service including combat in the Falklands and all of those medals. It’s not really a demotion. They just stripped the bullshit title.
Very nice indeed:
Don’t mess with a future Queen:
You’re burying the lead, @Elendil_s_Heir !