The Queen/Prince Philip

[tabitha2]

If I could have a daughter her name would be Windsor Rose. 

[just_ordinary]

I see I have some catching up to do

On 4/21/2021 at 6:59 PM, anjulibai said:

I haven't seen those leaks, but I have seen leaks about Kate being the peacemaker and the rock and anchor of the monarchy. 

I think we might define leaks differently. Most tabloids that cite anonymous sources in royal circles do that to give credibility to bogus stories. Real leaks carry a higher weight than what perfume XY wears. If some of their PR people sprinkles rumours of her being the saviour of the BRF it’s not a leak - it’s PR work. I think no one sees her as peacemaker and rock and anchor of the monarchy. She might execute that role with Wiliam (who will be the embodiment of the monarchy at one point- so it’s maybe technically true?). That’s not a leak- tabloids need something to write and blow the smallest thing out is proportion. I would say a leak is when things get out that shouldn’t. 

On 5/12/2021 at 6:19 PM, Xanariel said:

The Queen famously said that Princess Michael sounded "a bit too grand for us". She can trace her lineage back to pre-1300s, and she is very snobbish about that - she definitely thinks she ought to be higher-ranked within the BRF itself. I wouldn't be surprised if she resents Kate and Sophie, who are higher-ranked despite being from middle-class (if wealthy) families. 

Other fun fact about her bloodline - her father was a literal Nazi. And while I would not judge a child by the sins of their parents, she responded to the backlash over Harry's Nazi costume by telling a journalist that she thought the public had been actually excited to see it and there wouldn't be any fuss if he'd worn a hammer and sickle instead. 

She wasn’t raised by her father though, but lived with her mother in Australia. Fact is, almost everyone back then was a member of the Nazi Party and most of the peerage held at least honorary military titles with them. Everyone (like 90%) was literally Nazi. That’s true for some of the resistance as well. The whole Staufenberg clique was exactly like this, except they had real military ranks. Her father and his actions were pretty unremarkable compared to the rest. That’s not to say he didn’t share the Nazi mindset or ideals, but from the records he doesn’t look to have been be a full force fanatic.
I really hate when people use the Nazi parents as explanation for such behaviour. It completely ignores that there was a MASSIVE pushback from the children’s generation asking very uncomfortable and hard questions. It led to a massive historical revision process (because afterwards many things were just shut down - “after 1945 there were no Nazis in Germany” is a sarcastic quote to describe it. Ghosting the past to be able to go forward). This was possible because the younger generation has been taught more critical in schools and the occupying powers really doubled down on how bad it was in the curriculum. I am immensely grateful they did that and not just bombed us into oblivion and then ignored and shut us out (and yes, they also had their own motives and some are pretty questionable but looking bad it definitely turned out pretty well). This whole uproar in society was strenuous on private relationships as people really went against their parents sometimes. It was painful but necessary. So- her father being a Nazi is no satisfying explanation for her racist behaviour. Sadly, Racism is very much a thing for older generations. Most have accepted and realised that obvious and public racist thinking and behaviour is wrong but you still can find many micro aggressions or thought patterns that show very clearly they are no where near what we strive to achieve. Even though I am sure they would all be appalled to be called racist and believe they are not.

On 5/13/2021 at 5:43 PM, HerNameIsBuffy said:

I had no idea she saw it as a religious calling in this day and age, makes the monarchy extra creepy to me if this is true.

I just thought she was like one of those business owners that have the means to step down and live a perfectly fabulous life but insist on coming into the office everyday because life is work.  I've worked with those kind of people and they are an odd bunch.

I even worked with a guy who had retired from an executive spot in one of the countries biggest companies who came into work in the SMB manufacturing business owned by his wife's cousin because he had no idea what to do with himself.  His wife wanted him out of the house because he kept ironing the sheets and criticizing how she organized the cabinets....Idk about you guys but if I didn't have to work I could find plenty of things to do with my time.  

I am sure HMTQ is very devoted and her faith gives her strength to fulfil her role. A higher calling is a powerful motivator. But I highly doubt she still believes her power comes from god as they did in the old days or a few decades ago. The whole “anointed not appointed” phrase is from The Crown and while I think there is some merit to it, I think it comes more down on the idea that you as an Individuum step back to take on the role and fulfil it. Not to be led by Zeitgeist and the urge to win an election. I am pretty sure they have evolved the idea to a more “enlightened” concept. The fact that under her reign the monarchy became to be known as The Firm and the way they go on about things show very clearly that they don’t wish to prominently hold up the religious aspect of it all. I think it’s great and the UK has no disadvantage by keeping them - even though the heir to the throne fantasises to be a tampon. Still better than “grabbing them by the pussy”.

[SweetJuly]

1 hour ago, just_ordinary said:

I think it’s great and the UK has no disadvantage by keeping them - even though the heir to the throne fantasises to be a tampon. Still better than “grabbing them by the pussy”.

I agree with everything you wrote, and I am aware this is a minor and slightly unrelated throwaway remark, but it does bother me that Charles is always reported as having "fantasised to be a tampon". (Not that anything would be wrong with that as such, we all have our kinks and cringey private phone conversations that should never be made public. ?)

Camilla and Charles were discussing how they both need to be with eachother several times a week, and Charles said he'd just have to "live inside Camilla's trousers" to which Camilla jokingly asked ""what are you going to turn into, a pair of knickers?" They both laughed and Charles responded it would be just his luck to turn into a tampax, "to be chucked down the lavatory and go on and on forever swirling round on the top, never going down."

[Ozlsn]

On 5/14/2021 at 1:43 AM, HerNameIsBuffy said:

I had no idea she saw it as a religious calling in this day and age, makes the monarchy extra creepy to me if this is true.

I don't think it's seen by her so much as a "calling" but as a "duty". A calling to me indicates something that you pursue, and this was more a religious and personal duty to take up the burden of the crown, no matter her actual feelings about it (again, from her perspective). QE2's generation and class were raised to have a strong sense of duty - the Girl Guides (founded 1909) Promise mentions it twice (Duty to Deity/beliefs; Duty to Country), the Scouts' (1908) original Oath/Promise had "Duty to King and Country" included. WW2 would have probably reinforced this in her peer group - she served her country (as expected) in the ATS (probably less expected by her family - although obviously if she'd been male she would have enlisted somewhere safeish). 

My family are about as far from the BRF as you can get (although my Scottish grandfather had a schoolteacher who was allegedly an illegitimate descendant of one of them, forget which - close, right!) but my relatives who were in her peer group certainly were taught,  influenced by, and understood duty in that way.

[just_ordinary]

@SweetJuly true. Just to clarify- I think the conversation should have remained private and they must have been horrified when it was slashed all over the magazines (so much for Meghan being treated so much worse). The point I was trying to make, even though by not quoting correctly, is that this topic is a bit quirky but in no way as bad as many Heads of State have proudly shown themselves in the last years.

[EmCatlyn]

On 5/13/2021 at 4:35 PM, Xanariel said:

[snipped]

And I always kind of thought America invoked the whole 'country specifically favoured by God thing' in a particularly weird way, whether Democrat or Republican. 

Sorry to join in so late, but I wanted to say that in my experience, many countries consider themselves especially blessed by God — not just the USA.    The US is actually unusual these days to have so many people ready to criticize their country publicly. (Note: I am neither applauding nor condemning.)

It is also common for people to think their country and their people are somehow “better” than others— even when they recognize and critique where their country has weaknesses (failures) they tend to balance these against virtues associated with their country.  This can be the bravest men, the most beautiful women, the best food, the most devout people, the wisest people, the people with the best sense of humor, the most beautiful hills or beaches, the clearest skies, the most loyal dogs or whatever.  

(Yeah, I made it up about the dogs. But the others are all things I have heard from people about their countries.)

To summarize: Americans are not exceptional in their belief in their country’s exceptionalism. ?

[anjulibai]

Obama pointed that out once, and got criticized by the right for it. Many Americans assume other countries think we are the best, too.

[WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?]

14 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

This can be the bravest men, the most beautiful women, the best food, the most devout people, the wisest people, the people with the best sense of humor, the most beautiful hills or beaches, the clearest skies, the most loyal dogs or whatever.  

Like Lake Wobegon.

Quote

Well, that's the news from Lake Wobegon, where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average.

 

[EmCatlyn]

2 hours ago, WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo? said:

Like Lake Wobegon.

 

Yeah, Prairie Home Companion made fun of the tendency all communities have to think themselves perfect.  I always liked the reversal of gender stereotypes too.?

 

[QuiverFullofBooks]

I’m watching a documentary about the Diamond Jubilee year (2012), and there was a brief shot of Harry greeting Andrew by kissing him on both cheeks. I know social kissing between men is more common in Europe, but I’m American and it surprises me a little.

[just_ordinary]

On 6/10/2021 at 10:14 PM, EmCatlyn said:

Sorry to join in so late, but I wanted to say that in my experience, many countries consider themselves especially blessed by God — not just the USA.    The US is actually unusual these days to have so many people ready to criticize their country publicly. (Note: I am neither applauding nor condemning.)

It is also common for people to think their country and their people are somehow “better” than others— even when they recognize and critique where their country has weaknesses (failures) they tend to balance these against virtues associated with their country.  This can be the bravest men, the most beautiful women, the best food, the most devout people, the wisest people, the people with the best sense of humor, the most beautiful hills or beaches, the clearest skies, the most loyal dogs or whatever.  

(Yeah, I made it up about the dogs. But the others are all things I have heard from people about their countries.)

To summarize: Americans are not exceptional in their belief in their country’s exceptionalism. ?

It would be interesting to know which ones you are referring to. In my experience many people love and prefer the way of life in their country. Many a quick to point out where they are doing something “better”. But at the same time most aren’t blind to things that are not going great/could be improved and have no problem to admit it. I think it’s less “my country is best” but more a “this country suits me best”. And the idea of a country being chosen by God (talking about a Christian God) is most definitely something no European country is still claiming (left that in the Ancien Regime if even). I think it might be part of a constitution preamble in some countries but it’s definitely nothing that is still publicly emphasised. 
Regarding the BIB: ????? I don’t know how your newspapers work, but we definitely get insides about the political arguments in different countries. And if you read up a bit a good idea of the different ideas and the voices of normal people. Criticising politics and critically questioning your way of life and culture traditions and customs is a quite normal thing to do and a very lively debate in most countries I know (not talking about countries with oppressive governments obviously).
So, I have never experienced something like that outside the USA- but this doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. So, if you have examples I am happy to listen.

Edited June 13, 2021 by just_ordinary

[EmCatlyn]

12 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

It would be interesting to know which ones you are referring to. In my experience many people love and prefer the way of life in their country. Many a quick to point out where they are doing something “better”. But at the same time most aren’t blind to things that are not going great/could be improved and have no problem to admit it. I think it’s less “my country is best” but more a “this country suits me best”. And the idea of a country being chosen by God (talking about a Christian God) is most definitely something no European country is still claiming (left that in the Ancien Regime if even). I think it might be part of a constitution preamble in some countries but it’s definitely nothing that is still publicly emphasised. 
Regarding the BIB: ????? I don’t know how your newspapers work, but we definitely get insides about the political arguments in different countries. And if you read up a bit a good idea of the different ideas and the voices of normal people. Criticising politics and critically questioning your way of life and culture traditions and customs is a quite normal thing to do and a very lively debate in most countries I know (not talking about countries with oppressive governments obviously).
So, I have never experienced something like that outside the USA- but this doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. So, if you have examples I am happy to listen.

I am a little confused by your post.  Specifically I don’t get “Regarding the BIB: ????? I don’t know how your newspapers work, but we definitely get insides about the political arguments in different countries.”  What does BIB mean?  Why are you talking about newspapers?

My comment was more based on personal experience and what I see on social media than anything in the press.  I was not referring to specific articles or authors.

There is a stereotype out there that Americans are arrogant about their country’s superiority.  I have come across such Americans, but my experience has been that this is rare.   In fact many Americans are very critical of their own country and (in my experience) they are more willing to engage in criticism of the US while talking to people of other countries than the reverse.

In my experience, the US is not unique in having people who think (and will say) that their country is superior and/or that the way they do things is normal/right while other countries are wrong.  

Furthermore, even though I live in the Bible Belt, I know relatively few people who believe that the USA is literally blessed by God and meant to be better than other places, etc.  Politicians may make speeches about this kind of stuff, and there are definitely people who link their patriotism to religious fervor, but the average American is pretty secular.  

My comments about other countries come from many years as a teacher of ESL to adults, my travels, and the work I have done with the international students at the university where I taught.  In addition, I grew up in Puerto Rico (a nation with a complex relationship with the US to say the least) and have family in different Latin American countries and in Spain. (I was born in Cuba to second generation Spanish immigrants.) As a Hispanic, naturalized US citizen I am just as likely to roll my eyes and exclaim, “Americans!” In frustration as I am likely to defend the country. ?)

In short, I wasn’t referring to newspapers but to what ordinary people that I come across have to say.  Sorry if that wasn’t clear.

 

[JanasTattooParlor]

On 6/13/2021 at 2:00 PM, EmCatlyn said:

I am a little confused by your post.  Specifically I don’t get “Regarding the BIB: ????? I don’t know how your newspapers work, but we definitely get insides about the political arguments in different countries.”  What does BIB mean?  Why are you talking about newspapers?

My comment was more based on personal experience and what I see on social media than anything in the press.  I was not referring to specific articles or authors.

There is a stereotype out there that Americans are arrogant about their country’s superiority.  I have come across such Americans, but my experience has been that this is rare.   In fact many Americans are very critical of their own country and (in my experience) they are more willing to engage in criticism of the US while talking to people of other countries than the reverse.

In my experience, the US is not unique in having people who think (and will say) that their country is superior and/or that the way they do things is normal/right while other countries are wrong.  

Furthermore, even though I live in the Bible Belt, I know relatively few people who believe that the USA is literally blessed by God and meant to be better than other places, etc.  Politicians may make speeches about this kind of stuff, and there are definitely people who link their patriotism to religious fervor, but the average American is pretty secular.  

My comments about other countries come from many years as a teacher of ESL to adults, my travels, and the work I have done with the international students at the university where I taught.  In addition, I grew up in Puerto Rico (a nation with a complex relationship with the US to say the least) and have family in different Latin American countries and in Spain. (I was born in Cuba to second generation Spanish immigrants.) As a Hispanic, naturalized US citizen I am just as likely to roll my eyes and exclaim, “Americans!” In frustration as I am likely to defend the country. ?)

In short, I wasn’t referring to newspapers but to what ordinary people that I come across have to say.  Sorry if that wasn’t clear.

 

I also live in the Bible Belt and so many people I know, including lots of people in my family, will swear up and down that the US is the best country in the world. Anytime I’ve tried to talk to them about our flaws, they get angry because to them, if I don’t like our country, then I should just leave just like every other person who has the audacity to question our country. However, these are the same people that are now heavily criticizing the government for its “liberal” agenda and “oppression of religion,” so I guess they do criticize, but only when it goes against their views.  

[EmCatlyn]

23 minutes ago, JanasTattooParlor said:

I also live in the Bible Belt and so many people I know, including lots of people in my family, will swear up and down that the US is the best country in the world. Anytime I’ve tried to talk to them about our flaws, they get angry because to them, if I don’t like our country, then I should just leave just like every other person who has the audacity to question our country. However, these are the same people that are now heavily criticizing the government for its “liberal” agenda and “oppression of religion,” so I guess they do criticize, but only when it goes against their views.  

I don’t disagree that there are a lot of people in the US (and not just in the Bible Belt) who believe the US is the best country in the world and get upset at perceived criticism.  My original point was that the US is not unique in this. 

I have run into such claims for their own countries from many people in Latin America (where I have visited/lived the most other than the US) even while they will criticize some aspect(s) of their country.  I have had students from Middle Eastern countries where I believe women are oppressed and where I understand there is no freedom of religion sing the praises of their country and minimize the absence of freedom of religion and the disenfranchisement of women. “National pride” is a much more common characteristic than national shame. 

You raise a good point about how people will criticize what they don’t like in their country as something that “the government” does while when it is something that they are comfortable with they see it as “my country” and get angry at those who criticize or challenge it.  The same person may tell you that we are the greatest country in the world and complain that we are being beaten by the Chinese in trade and that allowing abortion and gay marriage shows how corrupt our country (led by evil liberal politicians) has become.

There are also people (and I’d say they are all over the world) who will criticize their own country when talking to others from that country but will defend the country with great energy when talking to “foreigners.”  For example, I know people who complain about the medical system in their country but will praise it and defend it when talking to someone from a different country.

 

[FrumperedCat]

So, I'm a bit behind on the news but seems Her Majesty has been having a bit of fun cake cutting. It's good to see her seemingly in such good spirits, with her trademark sense of humour. It does remind me a little though of Prince Philip who also had a humorous twist with engagements.  https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/birthday-queen-elizabeth-royal-sword-b1864603.html

[EmCatlyn]

Just saw that the complete plans for announcing Queen Elizabeth’s death and her funeral, Operation London Bridge, have been leaked to Politico.

Buckingham Palace reportedly furious about the leak but apparently have said nothing publicly.

All I can say that among the many reasons I am glad not to be Q of E is all this brou-ha-ha about what will happen when she dies. 😉

The most interesting detail is that there is concern that London will be overrun by grieving citizens, and the way they are trying to plan ahead for this.

[tabitha2]

 The government surely has been preparing for years for the crowds and massive disruption to city life that will occur with  both the funeral and the subsequent coronation.  Because it’s going to make the Olympics look the Kansas state fair.  

[EmCatlyn]

3 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

 The government surely has been preparing for years for the crowds and massive disruption to city life that will occur with  both the funeral and the subsequent coronation.  Because it’s going to make the Olympics look the Kansas state fair.  

Agreed.  But if you read the article, it appears that they are worried they won’t be able to handle the crowds/crowding.  As you say, it will be bigger than the Olympics.  Let us hope it won’t be during the pandemic, which has made the concerns greater.

I believe the coronation of Charles will be less of a problem.  People will want to attend, just as they want to be there for the Queen’s jubilee, but it won’t be the “last chance to pay our respects” to a very well-loved monarch as well as the end of an era.

[viii]

Similar plans leaked in 2017. I used to hate to think about a time where the queen died but man she’s proven to be a disappointment lately with Andrew. 

[EmCatlyn]

5 hours ago, viii said:

Similar plans leaked in 2017. I used to hate to think about a time where the queen died but man she’s proven to be a disappointment lately with Andrew. 

Andrew is her son.   If, God forbid, my son were accused of what Andrew is accused of, I would grieve and tell him I was disappointed and horrified, but I would not disown him.

The queen has made Andrew step back.  He cannot represent the crown, do public appearances, etc.  She has made it clear that his legal problems are his legal problems, and she has neither defended nor excused.

Given that she took away Harry’s honorary military rank and she has so far not taken Andrew’s, there is a suggestion that she is not being “hard enough” on Andrew.  But the other way to read this is that Harry chose to leave (quite literally leaving the country). Taking away his military rank did not make Harry look bad.  

In contrast, taking away Andrew’s military rank would be like publicly announcing that the Queen did not believe Andrew was innocent.  It would hurt his position (which is already bad enough).  Again, this is a son that she loves.  I think she is only human, and until/unless Andrew is legally proven guilty of something substantial, the Queen may be reluctant to make his position worse.

Please note that I am not defending Andrew.  I am, however, defending the Queen for not being harder on him.  

[tabitha2]

Right? Some people act like she should somehow strip him of all titles, evict him  from his home, kick him out of the family and never see him again. Not gonna happen.

[nokidsmom]

38 minutes ago, tabitha2 said:

Right? Some people act like she should somehow strip him of all titles, evict him  from his home, kick him out of the family and never see him again. Not gonna happen.

2 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

The queen has made Andrew step back.  He cannot represent the crown, do public appearances, etc.  She has made it clear that his legal problems are his legal problems, and she has neither defended nor excused.

We can't know what is really going on behind the scenes but it is very possible that privately the Queen raised serious hell with Andrew with his "stepping back" as a result.  It may not have been voluntary on his end but her insistence that he do so.  I am inclined to think that this was her decision to keep "Airmiles Andy" from doing any more damage or causing any more embarrassment.   She wasn't born yesterday, as much as she loves her son, and he is considered the favorite, on the other hand she also has to know what he is like.

It has to be a tough situation for her.   As a mother, she is not going to toss him out, make his situation worse but at the same time, she isn't going to be defending him nor shield him from consequences if/when authorities finally catch up to him. 

[tabitha2]

She would not be the first mother in history to not want to believe her sweet cheeky baby boy turned into a person so perverted and seedy and stupid. Esp as he was the much wanted baby after so many years and got much more of her time than his elder siblings.  

[viii]

Nah, when everything broke and he stepped back, he accompanied her to church, a 1000000% sign of favour. She doubled down. I get that he is her son but it’s clear her favouritism of him could impede her legacy. 

[EmCatlyn]

47 minutes ago, viii said:

Nah, when everything broke and he stepped back, he accompanied her to church, a 1000000% sign of favour. She doubled down. I get that he is her son but it’s clear her favouritism of him could impede her legacy. 

I just don’t see this.  Maybe it’s because I didn’t follow Andrews case closely, but how is she “doubling down”?

Having a son who is in trouble accompany you to church isn’t saying the accusations against him should be disregarded. It is saying that you still love him.  It is not like having him escort you to official functions. She seems to have firmly excluded him from any activities where he might be seen to represent the crown.

Whatever favoritism she may feel for Andrew, I don’t see it affecting her role as monarch.