So what the fuck are Kate and Willy doing?

[RogueV]

Isn’t there a princess in Europe that’s now working as a HCA?

A queen somewhere in Asia cooking for the poor?

Harry and Meghan delivering meals?

Bet if Diana was here she’d be out doing everything in her power to help the ordinary folk 💪

it makes sense for them to not leave the house.

Loads of things they could be doing from the house.

But ... no.

As a non-Brit, the relationship some of you have with the monarchy amuses and fascinates me. I cannot understand the adoration, adulation and unquestioning sycophancy towards an unelected bunch of people, most of whom are not role models in any shape or form, who are part of an archaic institution which grants unearned privilege. And not only that, ordinary folk pay for them, are subservient to them, are happy to be called ‘subjects’ rather than citizens... it genuinely baffles me.

And as for those who cite that the British monarchy is respected the world over, let me tell you, it really really isn’t. Most people I know find it and its supporters a topic of ridicule.

And no, tourists don’t flock to the UK because of the current ‘royals’, they flock because of the buildings and history, among other things, not the people in them. Much like France still has a thriving tourist industry despite not Hannigan current royals.

^not having..

@Wannabangbang

William will one day be king and his children heir to the throne, I'm sure the queen doesn't want him and his wife galavanting about dicing with death.

But they are happy for the people that subsidise their lifestyle to gallavant around dicing with death? And you find that admirable?

Lets be honest they are the Royals, they are special and i can't see why people can't cut them some slack.

All they do is slack. And can you explain to me why they are more special than nurses, doctors and supermarket workers? And dont just say 'because they're royal', that's a meaningless line and you know it.

They've given up other parts of their lifes such as privacy for example because they were born into monarchy. The royals do a lot for charity. Why the hatred for them. Jealousy isn't a good look

I'm going to add to my index of excuses 'you're just jealous'. Another meaningless deflection. They dont do enough for charity to make them worth having - let's cut the middle man and give the money we spend on then straight to charity ourselves.

@sammylady37 👏👏👏

Wolfgirrl - "Please repeat?"

You're having a bloody laugh now!

So, new additions to the royalist excuses index:

1. 'But they're royal' (meaningless)

10 'You're just jealous' (meaningless)

@Mamamia456 see? Still no answer. Copy and paste if you have to, I want to know why the Queen cant pass up next years Sovereign Grant in solidarity and why Charles cant donate food from the Duchy.

Others take note - PP will not give an answer, just put 'I'm done' or some such

I was waiting for the pearls of wisdom by mamamia in the defence of the royals... 😂

Now do we know they haven’t donated? Or does it only count if you get publicity for giving cash?

They are a f-king wast of space. During the blitz, the Queen Mother put her life at risk by staying in London when others fled. She did this to show solidarity. The Queen drove for the military. The RF have a RESPONSIBILITY TO BE ON THE FRONT LINE. It comes with the privilege. This pair want all the goodies and none of the tough stuff. Gurning and simpering at the camera whilst honest, good people are actually working. They have ZERO excuse for not delivering goods to the vulnerable or doing other low contact work. They SHOULD be working like key workers - very VERY well paid key workers. But instead they hole themselves up in their ivory tower wittering on about mental health and how challenging homeschooling is. The are absolutely shockingly appalling and the public will not forget this.

@Abraid2 of course not. But I find the royalist notion that they must be giving cash because we dont know about it, illogical and absurd.

It’s essentially a very big and expensive soap opera @sammylady37 .

I strongly suspect that it’s same people who knit bootees for fictional babies and send them to the soaps, who also paint their faces in Union Jack patterns and sleep on the pavement outside Windsor Castle or private maternity hospitals waiting for the royals to marry or produce a baby.

I often think the fanatics must be quite frightening to the royals. There are some downsides to huge inherited wealth and privilege, I suppose. Not many, but some.

I agree, after all it is very difficult to do something 'wrong' when you do nothing at all!

Which appears to constitute about 98% of the argument in favour of the moral worth of the Queen. She has trundled about with a handbag, waving, for decades, without ever betraying an opinion or changing or hairstyle, and therefore a monarchy is a dignified and excellent thing, and otherwise we might get President Blair/Corbyn/Johnson/Cameron/Trump, as is invariably suggested by people with an imperfect grasp of the likely ceremonial role of a post-monarchy elected head of state.

During the blitz, the Queen Mother put her life at risk by staying in London when others fled. She did this to show solidarity. The Queen drove for the military.

This.

Say what you like about the Queen mother, but she grasped the PR requirements.

Getting stuck in during wartime helped establish the narrative of Elizabeth’s lifetime of duty. It built the strong foundations that she has been working off all her reign.

Wills has never really understood any of this, so it’s not much of a surprise that he’s squandered this opportunity and pissed away good will by holing himself up in his gorgeous estate for a family time by the pool.

The best the royalists have come up with on this thread is ‘well, we don’t know they’re not donating money’.

Wow. Strong.

They've given up other parts of their lifes such as privacy for example because they were born into monarchy

The option to live a private life is open to every last one of them. None of them take it. Why do you think that is?

And please don't point to Just Harry because he's still very firmly clamped to the royal tit.

Which appears to constitute about 98% of the argument in favour of the moral worth of the Queen. She has trundled about with a handbag, waving, for decades, without ever betraying an opinion or changing or hairstyle, and therefore a monarchy is a dignified and excellent thing, and otherwise we might get President Blair/Corbyn/Johnson/Cameron/Trump, as is invariably suggested by people with an imperfect grasp of the likely ceremonial role of a post-monarchy elected head of state.*

This is the best summary of the pointlessness of the monarchy I've seen so far, well done.

I'm a dual citizen, families on both sides originate from countries that had royalty in the past, but are currently republics. Believe it or not, some, if not all of us on here are half intelligent and thetefore able to distinguish between the ceremonial and a political role.

The point being made is that ceremonial roles are pointless and unnecessary. They do not bring anything to the table in modern world. And your summary proves the point perfectly well.

@sammylady37

👏🏼

Couldn’t have put it better myself. The sycophancy towards the rf makes me cringe. It’s all so outdated and inappropriate.

Kate and wills seem like nice people but they are just that, nice people like you (probably!) and I 🤷🏻‍♀️

LaurieMarlow

LOL.
I’m not a royalist. Just seems strange to say that because we don’t know if they’ve given money or not, they can’t have done?

Just seems strange to say that because we don’t know if they’ve given money or not, they can’t have done?

And yet both HM and Charles are quick enough to broadcast the charitable donations they make from other people's money.

But we aren’t talking about them, we were talking about the Cambridges.

There’s no evidence they’ve given any money.

So, no we don’t know this 100% for sure, but based on the fact they have publicised it in the past, we can draw our own conclusions.

It also seems weird that in answer to the question, ‘what have they done’? the best that they’ve come up with is ‘we don’t know for sure they haven’t done this.’ When there’s absolutely no evidence.

my response was to the question about whether they’d given money rather than what generally they might have done.

Because really who cares?