Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Queens speech

796 replies

Imfinallyhappy1 · 04/04/2020 23:05

Am I the only one who actually couldn’t give a shiny shit what she has to say at this time.

People are dying , everyone is affected so the last thing we need is a rich old woman sitting in her ivory castle asking us to stay calm.

It’s really wound me up, it’s constantly being mentioned on the news!

OP posts:
BubblesBuddy · 06/04/2020 16:36

We have reached older age, have retired and have money! What DH doesn’t seem to have is free golf! Where should he go for this perk? Never seen a golfer on benefits yet!

BubblesBuddy · 06/04/2020 16:39

Walking every day for free is what lots of older people could do. Golf has always been fairly exclusive. A bit like tennis. Of course the Queen has every benefit of being wealthy but I do think many people do want to hear her and she’s definitely mentally astute.

Alsohuman · 06/04/2020 16:41

He could try my dad’s old club @Bubblesbuddy, but presumably he’s not 90 yet so he wouldn’t qualify. There’s a huge gap between benefits and fabulous wealth as you very well know. It’s astonishing how stupid people are prepared to make themselves look to be goady.

OnlyTheLangoftheTitBerg · 06/04/2020 17:48

I have no strong feelings about the RF one way or t'other and didn't watch the speech, but I'd be genuinely intrigued to know how many of those criticising the queen for not giving away her wealth to the homeless and the NHS voted for the very government responsible for ten years of austerity, an increase in poverty and homelessness and the systematic defunding of the NHS. Obviously some people will be consistent in having socialist principles but equally, some won't be.

BurneyFanny · 06/04/2020 17:52

I very much doubt the anti-royalists on here are Tory voters.

Brefugee · 06/04/2020 17:58

I watched a bit of the speech this morning. Load of ol' flannel.

But bloody hell those strangulated vowels!

pigsDOfly · 06/04/2020 20:16

@Mamamia456 Well, I certainly don't have a clue what your post means.

What exactly do you think I don't have a clue about?

Wolfgirrl · 06/04/2020 20:23

@Mamamia456 found you! Would you be able to answer the question I posed to you the other day please? I'm genuinely interested in the answer. It was:

What would the royals have to do, for you to no longer support them? If anything?

Please dont read that in a sarcastic tone, I'm genuinely asking!

audreysview · 06/04/2020 21:03

Mamamia might change her mind if she read this book I linked to upthread.
This is one review from the book by Nornan Baker.

This should be a must read for British citizens. Nothing I even suspected about our Royal family is as bad what I found out about them. Page after page of shameless, immoral, greedy behaviour from an undeserving family of no known talent or ability who protect their immense privileges like .. well, like the Crown Jewels. Read about their huge tax dodges, the free flights, the millions spent on refurbishments, many more millions on valets, drivers, security staff, kennel keepers and thousands of other go-fetch-its - at the tax payers expense. Baker keeps the revelations coming, two or more to the page until you think there can’t be more to come, but there is. He concludes the book with an extensive bibliography should you want to dig in further though the nearly incredible fact is that all these things are previously known about and have been published.
So, the first begged question is, why do so many British subjects still support them and what they represent. The second question is obviously how long have they got left. (less)

FunkyKingston · 07/04/2020 01:45

This is what the Queen did in WW2

Except it was done for publicity. Her training with the ATS was a sham. They picked the ' right sort' of girl who had already completed the six week course and they had to repeat it solely for Elizabeth's benefit. She also are seperately for the faux training and was driven to and from Windsor ever morning and night. This all happened in the spring of 1945 and as VE day was early May, her military service only amounted to playing at soldiers for a few weeks.

GoFiguire · 07/04/2020 07:31

When nearly half the country watches, it seems there are plenty of people who do value it.

It’s cos there wasn’t anything else to do.

audreysview · 07/04/2020 08:05

The fact that so many watched it is irrelevant. We’re on lockdown, people are dying. If Kermit the frog came on to give an inspirational speech people would watch it. People were desperately looking for comfort and reassurance, empty words from a greedy uncaring “queen” wasn’t going to give it them. Where was the offer of aid?

BurneyFanny · 07/04/2020 08:09

they had to repeat it solely for Elizabeth's benefit

They laid on a special accelerated flying course for Prince William too, for thé job he went on to do for under two years part time. He did it in months instead of two years.

BurneyFanny · 07/04/2020 08:10

*four months

ravenmum · 07/04/2020 08:23

This all happened in the spring of 1945 and as VE day was early May, her military service only amounted to playing at soldiers for a few weeks.
Right, as you can see from the article in the link. She could hardly know when the war was going to end, and could only join after 18. But no, no-one expected a princess to be on the front.

newbie111 · 07/04/2020 08:33

@audreysview you’re mistaken in thinking that people support the royal family for some logical reason. They don’t. It’s based on pure emotion (a fascination for celebrity, nostalgia, feelings of inferiority etc.) and that means, like Brexit, there’s no amount of logic that can make them see any other way.

As to how long they have got left, I think, we will see a change in our lifetimes. Attitudes are quickly changing, the younger the demographic the less likely they are to have deference towards the monarchy. The Royals recognise this and are therefore desperately trying to mould themselves appropriately to make sure they champion the same values this demographic cares about (environment, mental health etc) and come across as celebrities rather then rulers.

BurneyFanny · 07/04/2020 08:50

She could hardly know when the war was going to end

Au contraire, I think it was pretty clear to the powers that be that they were in the end game.

derxa · 07/04/2020 09:07

The fact that so many watched it is irrelevant. We’re on lockdown, people are dying. If Kermit the frog came on to give an inspirational speech people would watch it. People were desperately looking for comfort and reassurance, empty words from a greedy uncaring “queen” wasn’t going to give it them. Where was the offer of aid? What a cheery wee soul you are. Grin

ravenmum · 07/04/2020 09:16

I don't support the royal family and would not have anything against them no longer existing. I'm not sure how that would work in a way that would make people truly happy - obviously the taxpayer would stop paying for them, but they'd still be privileged, which seems to be a major point of contention!

What I do appreciate, living abroad, is the continuity that a non-elected head of state brings. The Queen and her family have been around all my life. The same familiar faces, homes, traditions. I can talk to my children about things that my mother talked to with me, when I was a child. I live in East Germany. Parents my age lived in a totally different society to their own children today; everything has gone from that time. When you read A. A. Milne's "Changing the Guard at Buckingham Palace", you're drawing on a tradition that people in many countries can't begin to imagine. So yes, even though I don't support the royal family, I'd find it moving if they no longer existed.

ravenmum · 07/04/2020 09:25

I think it was pretty clear to the powers that be that they were in the end game.
My point was more that Elizabeth herself wasn't the one who engineered the end of the war to fall shortly after her military service Grin. She couldn't have joined up before. No, if they'd thought it was going to last another ten years and that she might have been killed in action, she wouldn't have been in uniform. It was symbolic. Quite a powerful symbol at the time, less so today.

Brefugee · 07/04/2020 10:21

Well, East Germany just before the fall of the wall looked a lot like the industrial northern town i grew up in back in the 60s. The Queen had nothing to do with how it looks now.

I am deeply appreciative, however, of Liz's wearing that green dress again for the internet to do its thing with. Brilliant some of them.

ravenmum · 07/04/2020 10:26

The Queen had nothing to do with how it looks now.
I'm not sure I understand the connection?

Alsohuman · 07/04/2020 10:50

It’s cos there wasn’t anything else to do.

Nope. No Netflix, no Amazon Prime, no YouTube, no 100+ freeview channels, nothing else to do at all.

CathyorClaire · 07/04/2020 10:52

Another vote for Norman Baker's book. I'd defy any ardent royalist to read it and still try to defend the indefensible. Although I realise someone will almost inevitably be along soon to do just that Grin

Mamamia456 · 07/04/2020 10:56

Wolfgirrl - Are you stalking me!

Swipe left for the next trending thread