To find the royal family fascinating part 2

[MagicKingdomDizzy]

Hello everyone, here's thread 2.

I'd be very grateful if someone could do a clicky link to the last one. Still can't figure it out.

Thanks!

@MagicDizzyKingdom

Do the Dutch and Luxembourg monarchs retire at a certain age? I'm not familiar on how they work.

The tend to abdicate. There doesn't seem to be a set age for it, just when they've had enough they hand it on.

Then the new monarch or Grand Duke has the previous one around for support and advice in their new role, which must be good.

I like the (probably apocryphal) quotation from Edward VII when he was Prince of Wales "I don't mind praying to the Eternal Father, but I must be the only man in the country afflicted with an eternal mother.”

I should think Prince Charles could sympathise!

“Ha ha an exhausted vagina. I was an HR Manager for some years but no one ever produced that on a Drs note”

@pannalash in case you haven’t seen it, there’s a thread on MN that started today about someone’s workplace sent out a health information email about the menopause, and how her friend thought the phrase “vaginal dryness” as part of the description of symptoms was inappropriate in a work context.

He’ll be 78 and then if he lives to 98 that’s 20 years

By which time William will be 62?

All rather tiresome.

And that is what i think sill knacker the monarchy. Extended life expectancy.

A doddery w old chap way past retirement ages ahuffles onto the throne and carks it 15 or so years later to be replaced by another doddery old man also drawing his pension whilst the children, grandchildren and great grandchildren line up in the queue.

There's no great excitement, mystique or romance in that. They're essentially pointless, but the Queen coming to the throne as a young woman and growing into the role and doing a competent but unimaginative job, at least has some interest in it.

I think once the current queen dies there'll be a significant drop off in support for the monarchy.

The Japanese Emperor has handed over the reins to the new 59 year old one, first abdication in 200 years. He's going to be the Emperor Emeritus, apparently. Heir is the second son, followed by his primary-sex son. Daughters don't get to inherit and stop being royal if they marry royalty. Japan is worried they're running out of emperors; a bit daft as there's been females on the Chrysanthemum Throne before the relatively recent legislation.

King Juan Carlos of Spain also abdicated in favour of the now King Felipe. Maybe it's becoming a trend, like the Pope?

Mind you, none of them seem to have all the pomp and circumstance of the BRF about the handover, or the religious overtones of a calling for life. Even the Shinto bits of the Japanese abdication and ascendancy were private and short.

I actually think what could turn people against the monarchy is the Queen’s death then Charles having a short reign.

Two expensive state funerals and two expensive coronations in quick succession won’t be popular.

Agree totally with Funky

I don’t think Prince Charles will have a short reign. He seems in good health and going by his parents and grandmother his life expectancy should be long.

I think him coming to the throne will be a turning point though. His black spider diaries show that he was lobbying ministers on lots of issues and they weren’t very happy about it. He was directly trying to interfere and wasn’t staying neutral as he was supposed to.

“In 2012 the then attorney general, Dominic Grieve, warned they “would be seriously damaging to his role as future monarch because, if he forfeits his position of political neutrality as heir to the throne, he cannot easily recover it when he is king”.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/may/13/prince-charles-black-spider-memos-lobbying-ministers-tony-blair

I find the thought of him being King worrying and rather distatesful.

Typo: distasteful

I'm actually quite pleased Charles has written his letters & got involved & questioned things. If a government is perfect or should we say almost perfect apart from being annoyed then said government can lay their facts down & prove they are correct. Any decent organisation should be as transparent & honest as possible.
But then I've woken up & realised we live in a world of smoke & mirrors, truth & lies. Nothing is black or white just various shades of grey.
I'll get off my soapbox & go back to watching Line of Duty

Like your posts @byeclaire and agree about Charlie boy

If this isn’t the next best thing to avoid actual proof of a baby having arrived then I don’t know what is. The press must have a deal as they didn’t publish this photo.

www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/news-photo/peter-phillips-and-prince-harry-duke-of-sussex-attend-the-news-photo/1145667247

~To actual proof~

It’s a photo of Peter Phillips giving Harry a huge hug but not one that was published.

Peter Phillips is a dish! Lucky Autumn.

I only just realised that recently, that he was quite lovely looking @tracybeakersoyeah and those photos of Anne with that hair - before the days of hair extensions, balayage etc and she still had this magnificent mane. I think Zara gorgeous too, not in a stereotypical way but lovely fit curvaceous figure that is refreshing amongst all the waif aristos. Always looks so adorable when pregnant, very cute.

Yes Humpy84 Anne has gorgeous hair. What I like about Anne & her children most is that they all have gorgeous smiles.
Anne is a beautiful woman but she doesn't really seem that interested in make up & all that frippery. Though I suspect Anne & I do share something in common: Mane & Tail Shampoo. However I suspect Anne uses it on horses rather than her hair like me. Though you never know

@Humpy84

Oh that hug between Harry and his cousin. It’s the look they’re exchanging which could well be the give away....

Sorry but back to the LeChabanais love chair.
On this link, post 22

The chair was bought back by the great great grandson of the original manufacturer, and has been reupholstered as apparently; it was very dirty! ( you don’t say!)

Thanks @Humpy84

I think the look between Peter and Harry could equally be about the excitement of impending fatherhood?

Today is Princess Charlotte’s birthday. As I’ve said before, it would amuse me if Baby Sussex was born today. One of those annoying coincidences that happen from time to time and test the patience of familial relations

I’m also thinking they may go for Mary as a name because, as a piece I saw pointed out, it’s kind of a combo of Meghan + Harry, as well as having royal associations. I’m still betting on Botswana being in there too.

Does anyone else think that Charles really doesn’t want to be our monarch and that’s one of the reasons the Queen has held onto the role for so long? He wants to potter about with his flowers, his hunting and his charities. I bet taking on the title of King fills him with dread.

No I think he really wants to do it

But there’s been continual questions about the wisdom of letting him due to some poor judgment on his part.

tracybeaker Yes of course the government should be called to account. That is what Parliament is for. The problem is that our Parliament is made up of one elected part and two unelected parts. This makes their scrutiny less valid as the HoC can say they are the only representative institution. The answer to more transparency is to have an elected upper house and an elected head of state. Not to give unelected figureheads more influence.

I suspect Anne uses it on horses rather than her hair

Quite hard to find a previous king of England (I don't know much about Scotland sorry) who was 100% faithful to his wife

I can't remember which King it was but someone a couple of hundred years ago was apparently very in love with his wife the queen and didn't want to have a mistress. The court was completely bemused and told him that there was an official title, wage and house sitting there for his mistress and he needed to find one ASAP because it would be unacceptable not to. He was made to nominate someone (I don't know if he actually ended up sleeping with her or just put her in the official position to shut them up) Such a weird concept.

I'm actually quite pleased Charles has written his letters & got involved & questioned things. If a government is perfect or should we say almost perfect apart from being annoyed then said government can lay their facts down & prove they are correct. Any decent organisation should be as transparent & honest as possible.

I disagree. Charles's letters were given undue attention because of who he was. Why should his special pleading and self interest bd put above say, Bob Smith a taxi driver from Garstang? To my mind it is an abuse of power and creates the impression he has undue influence on government.

It’s absolutely an abuse of power - (1) the monarch and RF are supposed to be politically neutral and (2) he was putting pressure on ministers to do as he individually wished.