Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To have lost interest in the royal wedding because...

448 replies

malificent7 · 12/04/2018 03:59

If the council in Windsor wanting to clear homeless out ?

I mean why don't the royal couple open a shelter instead given they are 'humanitarian' ?

OP posts:
Awwlookatmybabyspider · 12/04/2018 07:19

I can't argue with you. I never had any interest from start to be honest. How much is this wedding costing muggings aka the tax payer, millions I suppose. Yet when ordinary folk claim a pittance in benefits they're hauled over the coals. Angry.
I don't like that Megan. She makes out she's doing you a favor by allowing you to breath the same air as her

Nikephorus · 12/04/2018 08:01

Given that they're not inviting any official representatives of this country (i.e. the PM etc.) why the hell are we, the taxpayers, paying for the mega-huge security bill?! How many shelters could we build with that money?!

KC225 · 12/04/2018 08:13

Loved her in suits. Considered him a 'Tim Nice but Dim' type. But their together we are going to heal the world and make a difference navel gazing is nauseating and worst and naïve at best for a couple in their 30s. Especially, when their joint influence is so great they were blocked from inviting Sarah Ferguson to their wedding.

DarklyDreamingDexter · 12/04/2018 08:16

I wasn't interested in the first place. Nothing against either of them, and Harry seems to be one of the most down to earth Royals, but I have no more interest in their wedding than in any other complete strangers' wedding.

Doesn't surprise me that the 'powers that be' are clearing out homeless people and will probably do more to clear the place up generally for this one day than they ever do for locals.

Years ago my Dad told me the council in Manchester at the time painted windows and curtains on a derelict, boarded-up block of flats because the Queen was visiting the area and due to drive past. Heaven forbid if she happened to glance out of the window of her limo for a split second and saw a derelict building!!

keepingbees · 12/04/2018 08:28

I do find it a bit hypocritical that they are asking for charity donations and make out they are all about charity and giving, whilst blowing a hideous amount of money on excess and extravagance for themselves.
Ok they were never going to have a registry office do but they could have had something more modest and made a significant charity donation if that's what is important to them.

GreatDuckCookery6211 · 12/04/2018 08:35

I don't like that Megan. She makes out she's doing you a favor by allowing you to breath the same air as her

I take it you know her then?

LifeBeginsAtGin · 12/04/2018 08:40

They are paying for the wedding themselves.

The homeless are an eyesore, if our local highstreet is anythingto go by, so I hope they can get them into shelters for their own sake.

Cantusethatname · 12/04/2018 08:42

That 50000 engagement dress put me off.

Teddy1970 · 12/04/2018 08:51

They might be paying for the wedding, but not the security...the taxpayer is footing that bill.

cariadlet · 12/04/2018 08:52

YABU because to have lost interest you must have been interested in the first place.

It's hard enough having to feign interest in other people's weddings when it's sombebody I know. I couldn't care less about the wedding of a pair of strangers.

WeirdCatLady · 12/04/2018 08:52

I reckon she will pop out a child and then within ten years they will be ‘consciously uncoupling’ or whatever the current twatty buzzphrase is.

Isadora2007 · 12/04/2018 08:53

Yes YABU. In “losing interest” you just have had interest in the first place... so that’s unreasonable.

I couldn’t tell you which month this wedding is, nor the due date of the next royal baby etc. And I’m happy with that.

LifeBeginsAtGin · 12/04/2018 08:54

The council will rake in £££ from the event, so will local businesses.

BitOutOfPractice · 12/04/2018 08:54

I'm going on holiday specifically to avoid the wedding.

I'll have a look at the papers to look at the outfits / her dress because I'm interested in fashion.

Viviennemary · 12/04/2018 08:55

I agree. It won't last very long IMHO. As they are totally unsuited. He should have waited a bit longer. I give it around two to three years and she'll be off. No money for this and no money for that. But £30m spare for two people. You couldn't make it up.

MinisterforCheekyFuckery · 12/04/2018 08:56

Never had any interest to begin with.
I only just about manage to feign interest in the weddings of people I know and like to be honest.

MinisterforCheekyFuckery · 12/04/2018 08:57

cross post with cariadlet, glad I'm not the only one! Grin

EenaMinaMoe · 12/04/2018 08:58

We're not paying for the wedding. They are paying for it themselves. The tax payer is paying for security which seems reasonable if you take into account the risk of terrorist attack etc.

EdithWeston · 12/04/2018 08:58

Presumably you lost interest when that councillor spoke - back in January

There was a big thread at the time (if it was in 'chat' it will have gone pfft by now, I doubt it was in the actual topic, which is a pity simply for avoiding autodelete for things that last more than 90 days)

I don't think it was ever council policy. Just something expressed by one councillor who urged the police to 'do something'. They haven't

Nikephorus · 12/04/2018 09:02

We're not paying for the wedding. They are paying for it themselves. The tax payer is paying for security which seems reasonable if you take into account the risk of terrorist attack etc.
They're only paying for the cheaper stuff! They could have a small, private wedding where there was no need for extra security and therefore NO burden on the taxpayer but they want the adoring public fawning over them (when it suits them). Amazes me how mugs fall for it.

MiniTheMinx · 12/04/2018 09:03

I never had any interest in it to start with.

Homeless is an embarrassment, quite rightly, the establishment do not want to publicise that we are tripping over people in sleeping bags whilst huge sums of money are spent on royal weddings. It should be a bloody embarrassment, it's unacceptable that a home is not a basic right given to everyone. There is a direct relationship causal relationship between money and power, and poverty and powerlessness. Royalty and the establishment have vested interests that ensure that homelessness continues to rise. They are quite literally leeches.

EdithWeston · 12/04/2018 09:04

It's pretty low for security costs for scale of events. Not so many VVIPS and much of it happening within a secure perimeter. So yes, quite a lot of journeys in and out of the Castle to deal with, plus crowd management outside, including on the drive-about route. Those who get CP would probably get it wherever they were that weekend, so it is crowd management as the main cost. And noone can stop the public turning up, and it would be imprudent to plan as if they wouldn't

I don't think cancelling the drive-about on the grounds of reducing cost to public purse to the essential minimum wouid go down terribly well.

MiniTheMinx · 12/04/2018 09:05

They are parasites. If they lived on your pet you would kill them.

Joanna57 · 12/04/2018 09:05

I lost any 'interest' the day it was announced he was marrying a foreign actress.

You couldn't make it up.

It won't last, that's for sure.

abigailsnan · 12/04/2018 09:06

I am interested in "The Wedding" but have no interest in Megan,he ha always been my favourite royal as he comes across as more normal than most,they are certainly not suited imo I always thought he and Chelsey would have been a good match but not meant to be .
I'll give it 5yrs max.

Swipe left for the next trending thread