Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Trooping the colour booing

458 replies

theresalighttofindyou · 15/06/2026 10:54

AIBU to think this was well deserved?

Kate can glower at people as much as she wants but the monarchy is a rotten institution and people are getting more and more annoyed by it

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
ikeepforgetting · 15/06/2026 18:23

The DM was all over it this morning, but just held my nose and checked and looks like the royal PR team have been whipping things back into shape. Huge beaming pic of Kate now, no scowling to be seen. As you were.

38thparallel · 15/06/2026 18:21

Op do you hate all rich people, or just the royal family?
If you do hate all rich people, which I suspect you do, at what income level or value of assets do you start to hate them?

FancyBiscuitsLevel · 15/06/2026 18:19

The “no more Kings” protesters have got larger and louder. They must have expected them to be at the trooping, it was a choice to bring the children anyway.

It will be a very interesting choice if they bring the children to future formal events after this, and it’ll be interesting seeing the Wales fans justify it if the children are booed a second time,

BrownTroutBluesAgain · 15/06/2026 18:16

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 15/06/2026 18:09

But the children haven't put themselves in that position

No, their parents did, which makes all the "poor Kate, if those were my children..." stuff even more risible.

If she doesn't want her kids subjected to hearing the boos of people who are perfectly entitled to protest and voice their displeasure at an utterly outdated, anachronistic disgrace that she and her kids are very much the living embodiment of, then she can opt out and go live like a normal, albeit extremely privileged, person anyway.

Rather than the endless squabbling about Monarchy vs Presidency etc, how about we simply stick them on an island for 12 months and ignore them completely, give people in the UK a look at what life would be like without them, and then hold a vote on what the institution of HoS should look like going forward?

If the public actually votes for a system whereby we decide to continue to pick a random upper class family, plonk a magic hat on their head, and then inform the citizenry that they are inferior beings to the newly coronated Monarch, and that due to Divine Providence we must then also consider all of their offspring superior and grovel to them and fund their obscene wealth in perpetuity, so be it, bring them back, but lets at least have a full and frank discussion of this being the current status quo, and how utterly ridiculous it is, before we decide to continue on with it.

I'm even willing to leave the Guillotine out of it if the public votes against.

Should we be putting people on an island for a year
Im assuming you mean forcing them onto this island as you haven’t mentioned asking them

Isn’t this a rather a Rwanda style policy
when in fact we live in a democracy.

Of note currently the majority want the monarchy. So 🤷‍♀️
and as yet no one’s proved that it wouldn’t lose the country money
So
Another loss maker

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 15/06/2026 18:09

But the children haven't put themselves in that position

No, their parents did, which makes all the "poor Kate, if those were my children..." stuff even more risible.

If she doesn't want her kids subjected to hearing the boos of people who are perfectly entitled to protest and voice their displeasure at an utterly outdated, anachronistic disgrace that she and her kids are very much the living embodiment of, then she can opt out and go live like a normal, albeit extremely privileged, person anyway.

Rather than the endless squabbling about Monarchy vs Presidency etc, how about we simply stick them on an island for 12 months and ignore them completely, give people in the UK a look at what life would be like without them, and then hold a vote on what the institution of HoS should look like going forward?

If the public actually votes for a system whereby we decide to continue to pick a random upper class family, plonk a magic hat on their head, and then inform the citizenry that they are inferior beings to the newly coronated Monarch, and that due to Divine Providence we must then also consider all of their offspring superior and grovel to them and fund their obscene wealth in perpetuity, so be it, bring them back, but lets at least have a full and frank discussion of this being the current status quo, and how utterly ridiculous it is, before we decide to continue on with it.

I'm even willing to leave the Guillotine out of it if the public votes against.

Overthehillmum63 · 15/06/2026 18:06

AmyDudley · 15/06/2026 11:14

I'm anti monarchy, but booing children is a dick move. Not surprised Kate looked annoyed, I'd be very pissed off and protective if someone was verbally abusive to my children, especially if those children had no say in what they have been born into. Good for her for not pretending to just accept it.

But she did just accept it, she has no choice but to accept it as an occupational hazard. She has no real voice in the royal family.

Dizzydrizzy · 15/06/2026 17:54

My youngest would have given them the finger at that age. He was rather spirited. I’d love if one of those kids had done the same

wordler · 15/06/2026 17:53

IsawwhatIsaw · 15/06/2026 17:30

The monarch and royals wield soft power.
The Queen successfully lobbying for a completely unsuitable man- her son - to be trade envoy? There were already serious concerns about his behaviour and suitability.
Then she and Charles lobbying government ministers to secure tax advantages on their vast estates?
the lack of transparency over their vast wealth?
the Royals are a business and their aim is to protect themselves and the wealth.

But that's totally on the politicians who are prepared to let them wield soft power!

The monarch isn't a magical being who hypnotises people into acting against their will.

The monarch can request, suggest, lobby, even demand. However they cannot make the government do anything they don't want to do.

Put the responsibility where it is due.

The politicians and at source the people who choose to elect these politicians.

MrsShawnHatosy · 15/06/2026 17:48

Lifeomars · 15/06/2026 17:15

Exactly, other countries seem to function pefectly well without all this pomp and circumstance.

I find it really embarrassing when there’s a big state occasion and people go on about “how good we are” at this pomp and circumstance stuff, when our schools, hospitals and infrastructure are really shit.

NDerbys32 · 15/06/2026 17:41

whoopsnomore · 15/06/2026 17:24

It was the institution being booed, not the "young kids". They were there because they are a cog in the royal machine, helping to perpetuate the idea that some humans are superior to others by virtue of the family they are born into.

So 'fair game" then?

That's poor mitigation, if indeed any at all

MulberryBrandy · 15/06/2026 17:33

The Not My King movement has highlighted questions concerning Andrew's relationship with Epstein and how much the royals knew for so long. Andrew was loaned £12 million to settle the civil action against him,

Another question is concerning the fact that, all though now 8th, he is still in the line of succession. The King needs to address this. Canada, Australia and NZ have all called this out.

ThisIsMyUsername0 · 15/06/2026 17:33

ilovesooty · 15/06/2026 13:30

If their parents want to put them in the public eye in full awareness that there's a growing republican movement in the country they'll have to accept that people are going to express an opinion in front of them.

And expressing that opinion doesn't make them spiteful cunts.

But the children haven't put themselves in that position. Yet they're being shouted at by a crowd of adults. How bloody scary that must've been for them.

Shameful behaviour and shame on anyone who is of the mindset that thinks it's ok.

Persephonia1966 · 15/06/2026 17:31

InterIgnis · 15/06/2026 15:29

Many other countries manage quite well without monarchy, constitutional or otherwise.

I’m not sure how a democratically elected Trump or Farage, that can also be democratically voted out of power, isn’t preferable to an unelected head of state that cannot be.

I think that countries fhG combine the head of state with the elected guy who does the stuff is problematic because it seems more likely to wind up with a cult of personality around the elected person. We have far less reverence towards the PM than Americans have traditionally had towards their president and I think that's a good thing. Countries like Ireland which have a ceremonial president and a taisoch to do things seem to get it more right.

Personally I would far rather have the trooping of the colour than a cage fight on the white house lawn complete with allegations against the wife of a former head of state being a man. The Trooping of the Colour has horsies.

IsawwhatIsaw · 15/06/2026 17:30

wordler · 15/06/2026 17:13

If he'd been first born and had been doing all the things we now know he was doing - the politicians who knew all about those activities at the time would have found a way to manage him out to prevent a disaster of a monarch. Or would have found a way to restrict his activities, possibly.

And actually the government - the representatives of the people have the power to get rid of the monarchy any time they want to - the monarch has no real power. If the political will was there, they would do it.

I've no doubt that if Andrew was next in line instead of William, the republican movement would be gaining great ground.

The monarch and royals wield soft power.
The Queen successfully lobbying for a completely unsuitable man- her son - to be trade envoy? There were already serious concerns about his behaviour and suitability.
Then she and Charles lobbying government ministers to secure tax advantages on their vast estates?
the lack of transparency over their vast wealth?
the Royals are a business and their aim is to protect themselves and the wealth.

BrownTroutBluesAgain · 15/06/2026 17:28

whoopsnomore · 15/06/2026 17:21

You do know how popular a tourist site Versailles is , don't you?

Yes of course
but people always throw that one out as justification

Clearly it’s irrelevant cost wise and in fact struggling hence the price increase

‘The Palace of Versailles generates an annual consolidated budget of roughly €100 million. With approximately 8 million visitors per year, roughly 60% of its revenue comes directly from ticket sales, while the rest is generated through commercial activities, partnerships, and state grants.
The revenue directly sustains the enormous cost of keeping the royal estate running:
Operating & Maintenance Costs: Routine upkeep of the massive site (gardening, watering, roofing, heating) costs about €15 million annually. 1]
Ticket Revenue Boost: To further support national heritage and offset rising operating costs, the Palace increased admission fees for non-European visitors. Full-access tickets during peak periods are priced at €35, a strategy expected to generate an additional €9.3 million in annual revenue’

Its not anywhere in the same league

Of note
the pp hasn't yet provided a non biased source to prove there would be no financial downturn.

whoopsnomore · 15/06/2026 17:24

NDerbys32 · 15/06/2026 15:52

Booing and disrespecting young kids is pathetic and tantamount to emotional abuse

What their upbringing is, IMO, irrelevant. An easy target for someone to take their own life frustrations out on.

Shouting abuse at anyone else's kids in public is likely to lead to a confrontation, but cowards do it from behind crowd safety barriers.

Grown adults behaving like that? Please, get a grip.

It was the institution being booed, not the "young kids". They were there because they are a cog in the royal machine, helping to perpetuate the idea that some humans are superior to others by virtue of the family they are born into.

whoopsnomore · 15/06/2026 17:21

BrownTroutBluesAgain · 15/06/2026 13:23

Well that’s not true

Shall we get rid of them and shoot ourselves in the foot again like the 20% on private schools

Its all very short sighted

‘ Recent attempts to measure the size of the impact of the royal family on UK tourism have estimated the capital value of UK monarchy as a business to be £67.5 billion (up from £44 billion in 2012) and the annual contribution to the UK economy to be £1.766 billion.

https://www.regionalstudies.org
Impact of the UK Royal Family on tourism - RSA Main

Edited

You do know how popular a tourist site Versailles is , don't you?

Lifeomars · 15/06/2026 17:15

ikeepforgetting · 15/06/2026 14:08

It isn't a binary choice between a King or a Trump-like all powerful president. Other Republics have presidents who perform the same ceremonial duties as the royal family might, but without the ridiculousness. You already have a system of government.

Exactly, other countries seem to function pefectly well without all this pomp and circumstance.

wordler · 15/06/2026 17:13

IsawwhatIsaw · 15/06/2026 17:05

Not always managed out of the way - Prince Albert Victor died young.
if Andrew had been first born ,we’d have no choice about the matter. These people are unelected and unaccountable .
at least politicians can be voted out.

If he'd been first born and had been doing all the things we now know he was doing - the politicians who knew all about those activities at the time would have found a way to manage him out to prevent a disaster of a monarch. Or would have found a way to restrict his activities, possibly.

And actually the government - the representatives of the people have the power to get rid of the monarchy any time they want to - the monarch has no real power. If the political will was there, they would do it.

I've no doubt that if Andrew was next in line instead of William, the republican movement would be gaining great ground.

IsawwhatIsaw · 15/06/2026 17:05

wordler · 15/06/2026 15:08

In the past when the government behind the scenes knew that the next in line was very unsuitable to the job they were ‘managed’ out of the way.

And it’s very clear now that a lot of people in the government across both main parties cabinets knew what Andrew was up to.

So he would / will never make it to the throne.

Not always managed out of the way - Prince Albert Victor died young.
if Andrew had been first born ,we’d have no choice about the matter. These people are unelected and unaccountable .
at least politicians can be voted out.

perlana · 15/06/2026 16:21

I think for the future, they could get AI to put them all in carriage or an open top car, dress them up (differently for each year), age them appropriately and show the video on big screens on the day.

The RF can then sit at home drinking gin, in their PJs while counting their loot, and they won't hear boos or see Republic protesters.

It's the future innit. Even if the RF is firmly living in the past.

JHound · 15/06/2026 16:20

AmyDudley · 15/06/2026 11:14

I'm anti monarchy, but booing children is a dick move. Not surprised Kate looked annoyed, I'd be very pissed off and protective if someone was verbally abusive to my children, especially if those children had no say in what they have been born into. Good for her for not pretending to just accept it.

They shouldn’t have the children out then.

DryTerryandJUNE · 15/06/2026 16:00

nomas · 15/06/2026 14:00

There is something queasy about them being trotted out for the great unwashed to bow and scrape to.

I was in the stands watching them going round in the carriages. I said to my friend, "they are quite literally being wheeled around on display". She thought they quite liked it, but we also both thought that they know they have to do it and look happy about it (whether they are or not) as a significant part of their job. Let's be honest, the military display is not much of a birthday for KC3, who would rather be reading a gardening magazine in his garden. It's for all of us, it's to keep us happy.
ETA. The King waved and a few people waved back. The PoW waved and the whole stand waved back. She is very popular!

NDerbys32 · 15/06/2026 15:52

Booing and disrespecting young kids is pathetic and tantamount to emotional abuse

What their upbringing is, IMO, irrelevant. An easy target for someone to take their own life frustrations out on.

Shouting abuse at anyone else's kids in public is likely to lead to a confrontation, but cowards do it from behind crowd safety barriers.

Grown adults behaving like that? Please, get a grip.

Swipe left for the next trending thread