Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 ··· 5 6 7 ··· 10 11

Original poster

Prince Andrew's Birthday

268 replies

Nippybutsweet · 19/02/2020 14:06

AIBU to feel that it's insensitive for Westminster Abby to ring it's bells to celebrate Andrew's 60th?

OP posts:

Nanny0gg · 19/02/2020 16:49

@Nippybutsweet

ilovesooty - Your being a borderline bully now, please stop

Eh?

And I think you misread @Serendipity's post too.

ilovesooty · 19/02/2020 16:49

I think he's unfit to be lauded in a royal capacity regardless of any alleged personal criminal behaviour. Association with convicted criminals is enough.

LeMaFe · 19/02/2020 16:51

JustForTheTasteOfIt yes that is exactly what SerendipityJane means. That all this bell ringing and stuff shows that the royals don’t give a fuck about what their lowly ‘subjects’ think and that by extension they can do as they like and get away with it. She was saying maybe we could all do what we like when we fancy. But actually we can’t because we don’t have the royals privilege and we would be held to account.

LaurieMarlow · 19/02/2020 16:53

i think he's unfit to be lauded in a royal capacity regardless of any alleged personal criminal behaviour. Association with convicted criminals is enough.

Very well put. Exactly.

And surely being stripped of his royal duties was a tacit acknowledgement of his unfitness?

So why the bells?

LeMaFe · 19/02/2020 16:53

And YANBU OP. I think the queen either isn’t able to read the public mood or doesn’t give a shiny shit when it comes to clanging bells and tooting whistles for her darling boy.

ilovesooty · 19/02/2020 16:59

Thank you @LaurieMarlow . I absolutely agree.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 19/02/2020 16:59

Is Andrew still getting money from the Civil List or whatever it’s called now?

It's now known as the Sovereign Grant, and I believe the claim is that Andrew no longer gets public money but is funded from his mother's private resouces instead

And anyone who'd swallow that would probably believe anything ...

SerendipityJane · 19/02/2020 17:01

have we forgotten the furore over flying flags and Diana ? How the Queens first instinct was to just continue "as per" ?

It was only the fact that Tony Blair - whatever you may have though of him subsequently (and there is a lot) - was not only able to gauge the public mood, but gently guide Her Madge into acting as a "Peoples Queen". Something it seems in hindsight she absolutely detested and has made a solemn pledge to never ever repeat.

Obviously there is no way that Boris "man of the people" (judging by his offspring) Johnson could have the same sort of feeling for the mood of the public, and therefore can't be arsed to help Lizzie out.

Alternatively, he might completely understand the mood of the people, and is leaving the Monarchy out to dry, as the are no longer part of the plan for the UK ?

Last "peoples monarch" was Richard II. And look how that ended.

JustForTheTasteOfIt · 19/02/2020 17:01

OP...

Who hurt you and why have you come online to be a mean girl.

She wasn’t mean to you or about you.

Be Kind and have a good day

Agreed.

She was, insinuating I'm incapable of controlling my own emotions or thoughts regarding what I give a "flying fuck" about.

She wasn’t and hopefully that’s clear now.

I'm in no doubt you can't percieve it from your comment but I can and that is what matters to me.

You essentially called her less clever than you here, albeit in way dripping with sarcasm.

Makes me feel so much better that you pointed that out to me in such a convoluted, patronising manner.

You said this of her when you had in fact already essentially called a poster stupid for pointing out you had misinterpreted the original post which was actually agreeing with you.

I get that you’re probably a bit embarrassed now but in the spirit of being kind it’s disappointing a grown adult can’t hold their hands up, say a simply sorry and... be kind.

halcyondays · 19/02/2020 17:02

I suppose there wasn’t much choice but for them to get him to step down from duties, because most of his charities and things he was patron of had already said they didn’t want him.

LaurieMarlow · 19/02/2020 17:07

I suppose there wasn’t much choice but for them to get him to step down from duties, because most of his charities and things he was patron of had already said they didn’t want him

Right. So the people supposedly benefiting from his royal patronage don't want him. What would make anyone think the wider public want bells to celebrate his big 60?

ilovesooty · 19/02/2020 17:07

Those charities obviously had a better perception of the public's opinion of him than the Queen does.

Forgetfebuary · 19/02/2020 17:12

Just I agree.

One poster admonishing another wrongly and stating me kind, should absolutely lead the way and well... Be kind

Puzzledandpissedoff · 19/02/2020 17:12

surely being stripped of his royal duties was a tacit acknowledgement of his unfitness?

I'm not so sure, Laurie; personally I've always thought the palace saw his minimal support draining away and did it as a sop to public opinion, to stop the situation getting any worse and to protect the overall brand

I'm not sure either that HM could even begin to think of a "blood royal" as being unfit ... it's we oiks that assumption seems to be reserved for, whatever the pretence to the contrary

LaurieMarlow · 19/02/2020 17:17

I'm not sure either that HM could even begin to think of a "blood royal" as being unfit ... it's we oiks that assumption seems to be reserved for, whatever the pretence to the contrary

Given ‘bell gate’ there’s a good chance that you’re right there.

Her Maj should be careful. She’d do better to draw no attention to him whatsoever. He’s unredeemable after that interview.

ilovesooty · 19/02/2020 17:19

I suspect that the Queen would never have stripped him of his royal duties . I think Prince Charles drove that decision. He flew back especially to ensure it happened.

Jaichangecentfoisdenom · 19/02/2020 17:24

She was, insinuating I'm incapable of controlling my own emotions or thoughts regarding what I give a "flying fuck" about.

I didn't read it that way.

No, nor did I, that's a really strange reading of Serendipity's post, I think

TheQueef · 19/02/2020 17:24

Maybe she knows Charlie is going to swap the monarchy for some magic beans and is just running it into the ground.
No one would blame her she's put a full shift in and is due her pension.

LaurieMarlow · 19/02/2020 17:24

Yeah there clearly isn’t much love lost between him and Charles. Charles has also been very resistant to the girls having bigger roles in the Firm.

If Andrew has two brain cells to rub together he’ll be apprehensive about what happens to him after his mother goes. I’m not sure he has though.

Aderyn19 · 19/02/2020 17:26

Okay, it's not illegal to associate with the likes of Epstein, but if you are that person, you don't deserve to be publicly celebrated.
This is not the first time the queen has read the public mood incorrectly. This just further hammers home how out of touch the monarchy is.

Jaichangecentfoisdenom · 19/02/2020 17:30

I agree, @LaurieMarlow. I would add that it has often been said that Andrew is Her Madge's pet and Charles has resented this most of his life. The difference in her treatment of Charles's younger son and his wife, and her treatment of her own dear Andrew, is quite noticeable, it seems to me.

restawhile77 · 19/02/2020 17:37

Thanks for nothing, God.

I'd want a word with you about this if you existed, which luckily you don't.

In your opinion.

SerendipityJane · 19/02/2020 17:40

I would add that it has often been said that Andrew is Her Madge's pet and Charles has resented this most of his life

I think Charles life was far more mapped out from before birth than Andrews, leaving him very little say in anything. Famously Prince Philip insisted he attend Gordonstoun, which he didn't like, and made sure William and Harry never had to endure.

I imagine quote a few patrician families would recognise that attitude. The first born being simultaneously a golden boy and straitjacketed into compliance. Subsequent offspring .... well who cares, really ?

Of course if we do want to psychoanalyse Charles (rather than each other ) it must have been an additional source of irritation that his own mother and grandfather did not have to endure the same level of upbringing, as originally they weren't meant to rule.

Still, given ol' Chuck does get to lord it (literally) over Cornwall and most of Devon, it's hard to start a crowdfunder just yet.

Disfordarkchocolate · 19/02/2020 17:45

No matter what the Queen thinks we have a monarchy by consensus now. If there was sufficient public opposition we wouldn't have a monarchy. Such public support of Andrew 'too honourable to stop being friends with a paedophile, ' is sickening to a lot of people. Being associated with Andrew massively legitimated the actions of Epstein.

SerendipityJane · 19/02/2020 17:48

No matter what the Queen thinks we have a monarchy by consensus now. If there was sufficient public opposition we wouldn't have a monarchy.

It would have to be more opposition than the Iraq war had though.

Interesting thought experiment. What opposition would unseat the monarchy ?

Flip

1 2 ··· 5 6 7 ··· 10 11