Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

"The Magnificent Seven", "What amazing clothes", "What adorable children" - AIBU to think that the Royal Family is just the Truman show for a lot of people

273 replies

cakeorwine · 26/12/2022 09:56

Except the people actually know they are in it.

Such sycophancy. There is the role of the Head of State that the King fulfills but this is an obsession with them.

Their role just seems to sell newspapers now. To generate clicks in the media. And headlines.

They are just a family. I am sure there are plenty of other families with 'adorable' children, where the mum wears 'amazing clothes' (that people seem to want to to go out and buy)

AIBU to think that some of the headlines and the stories is just pure obsession and is almost putting them on this pedestal?

The Magnificent Seven indeed.

OP posts:
Mamamia7962 · 26/12/2022 15:56

Maximininalist - People queuing all night is imposed on you? Don't look at the pictures then. The royals cost each taxypayer roughly £1.29 a year. I don't mind paying that. I'd rather pay for the royal family than see my taxes go towards the police having to attend these stupid demonstrations by the climate protestors who think they're clever glueing themselves to the M25.

antelopevalley · 26/12/2022 15:57

That amount of money is a lie.

Blossomtoes · 26/12/2022 16:03

antelopevalley · 26/12/2022 15:57

That amount of money is a lie.

The total Sovereign Grant of £86.3million is equivalent to a cost of £1.29 per person in the UK. Last year, the total Sovereign Grant stood at £85.9million.

Without the additional renovation funding, the Sovereign Grant costs each person in the UK 77p.

Maximinimalist · 26/12/2022 16:03

Mamamia7962 · 26/12/2022 15:56

Maximininalist - People queuing all night is imposed on you? Don't look at the pictures then. The royals cost each taxypayer roughly £1.29 a year. I don't mind paying that. I'd rather pay for the royal family than see my taxes go towards the police having to attend these stupid demonstrations by the climate protestors who think they're clever glueing themselves to the M25.

I mind paying regardless of how much it is. I’d rather my money go towards a worthier cause like homelessness or nurses.

It is imposed upon me because I have no choice but to pay and to be told I must pay because it makes some people who are happy to think they are lesser, happy.

It is my business to know what the tax I pay is used for. So yes, it is imposed on me .

cakeorwine · 26/12/2022 16:05

Blossomtoes · 26/12/2022 16:03

The total Sovereign Grant of £86.3million is equivalent to a cost of £1.29 per person in the UK. Last year, the total Sovereign Grant stood at £85.9million.

Without the additional renovation funding, the Sovereign Grant costs each person in the UK 77p.

Security costs?

Or do we not pay for those?

OP posts:
Blossomtoes · 26/12/2022 16:07

Security costs are dwarfed by the amount of money we’re paying for those of no fewer than seven former PMs. Seven.

cakeorwine · 26/12/2022 16:09

Blossomtoes · 26/12/2022 16:07

Security costs are dwarfed by the amount of money we’re paying for those of no fewer than seven former PMs. Seven.

Democratically elected representatives.

versus unelected people imposed on us and kept in their role by them giving the press stories, photographs of the family etc and headlines etc

OP posts:
DrunkOnHim · 26/12/2022 16:14

Blossomtoes · 26/12/2022 16:07

Security costs are dwarfed by the amount of money we’re paying for those of no fewer than seven former PMs. Seven.

They did actually lead the country though (even if badly). That’s a job that does need doing and if security risks remain from doing that job, it’s fair that it’s paid for. What jobs do the Royals do that needs doing. None. We do not need them. They don’t fulfil a necessary role.

DrunkOnHim · 26/12/2022 16:16

cakeorwine · 26/12/2022 16:09

Democratically elected representatives.

versus unelected people imposed on us and kept in their role by them giving the press stories, photographs of the family etc and headlines etc

Exactly. They create their own hype to keep themselves relevant.

Blossomtoes · 26/12/2022 16:19

Democratically elected representatives.

Four of them were PM without a democratic mandate. Cameron didn’t achieve a majority in 2010, May was PM by coronation in 2016 and failed to achieve a majority in 2017, same with Johnson before the 2019 election and Truss was “democratically” elected by 50,000 Tory party members. Sunak hasn’t been democratically elected either. It’s a pretty poor show of democracy in my view.

cakeorwine · 26/12/2022 16:20

Blossomtoes · 26/12/2022 16:19

Democratically elected representatives.

Four of them were PM without a democratic mandate. Cameron didn’t achieve a majority in 2010, May was PM by coronation in 2016 and failed to achieve a majority in 2017, same with Johnson before the 2019 election and Truss was “democratically” elected by 50,000 Tory party members. Sunak hasn’t been democratically elected either. It’s a pretty poor show of democracy in my view.

Off topic - but they were elected and have run our country as Prime Minister.

There are costs to having a Royal Family - and there is security around them.
Who knows what that costs?

OP posts:
Blossomtoes · 26/12/2022 16:27

Off topic - but they were elected and have run our country as Prime Minister.

They weren’t. I’ve just explained it in detail. Maybe you don’t understand what democracy actually means.

cakeorwine · 26/12/2022 16:29

Blossomtoes · 26/12/2022 16:27

Off topic - but they were elected and have run our country as Prime Minister.

They weren’t. I’ve just explained it in detail. Maybe you don’t understand what democracy actually means.

It is off topic.

The Royal Family cost us money. We pay for their security. Can you tell me if that's included in the figure you gave for the annual cost?

OP posts:
Fairyliz · 26/12/2022 16:32

minipie · 26/12/2022 11:17

It’s always been like this, right back to Regency times if not earlier. Their main function is to provide “a show” and gossip for people who like to live vicariously. They’re doing an excellent job of providing juicy gossip I must say 🤷‍♀️

I agree with this. They are like a more popular soap than Coronation Street or Eastenders; a family we all ‘know’ and can chat about.
We are just waiting for the next exciting instalment of the H and M storyline.

Maximinimalist · 26/12/2022 16:40

Blossomtoes · 26/12/2022 16:07

Security costs are dwarfed by the amount of money we’re paying for those of no fewer than seven former PMs. Seven.

They do a job and they answer to the people. They are there to serve us.

The Royal Family are not answerable to us, we serve them, and they are better than us, apparently.

I rather pay for the former than the latter.

cakeorwine · 26/12/2022 16:46

Still - I am sure there won't be too many photo opportunities for a while. I guess we have the balcony gathering at the Coronation.

And then the release of official photos for Mother's day and the children's birthdays. The RF need to generate clicks as much as the newspapers need to generate clicks. And if releasing official photos for their children's birthdays helps, then that's what they will do.

OP posts:
Blossomtoes · 26/12/2022 16:53

They do a job and they answer to the people. They are there to serve us.

Major hasn’t had a job, answered to the people or served anyone for 35 years, Blair for 14 years, Brown for 12, Cameron for six. We still pay for their security.

Sloth66 · 26/12/2022 17:09

Charles isn’t a particularly popular King so this is all relentless PR, both to try and show how relevant they are, and to keep actual news- poverty , food banks and debt- firmly off the front page. They are a bunch of dull , mediocre people who through accident of birth have huge wealth and extravagant lifestyles.

DrunkOnHim · 26/12/2022 17:14

Maximinimalist · 26/12/2022 16:40

They do a job and they answer to the people. They are there to serve us.

The Royal Family are not answerable to us, we serve them, and they are better than us, apparently.

I rather pay for the former than the latter.

Me too. The job of running the country is a necessary one. Again, what necessary job do the royal family do?

Blossomtoes · 26/12/2022 17:17

DrunkOnHim · 26/12/2022 17:14

Me too. The job of running the country is a necessary one. Again, what necessary job do the royal family do?

None of the seven former PMs are running the country. Truss only ran it for six weeks, ffs.

Justasec321 · 26/12/2022 17:24

Truth is we do not know how much they cost us as their finances are so opac.

We do not really know how much money they actually have.

All the wills are kept secret.

They do not pay inheritance tax.

They do not pay proper tax period.

I am sure that, like most of the rich, and the huge landowners they work rules to their advantage and our disadvantage.

But again - we do not know.

But one thing I think we can be sure of is that their true cost is way above 80 something million.

But hey - tourists.....

DrunkOnHim · 26/12/2022 17:27

Blossomtoes · 26/12/2022 17:17

None of the seven former PMs are running the country. Truss only ran it for six weeks, ffs.

But as I’ve already said, they did run the country which is a NECESSARY job, and if that leads to security risks after they’ve done the job, I think its fair that the costs are covered.

Again, what necessary job do the royals do?

Justasec321 · 26/12/2022 17:29

Sloth66 · 26/12/2022 17:09

Charles isn’t a particularly popular King so this is all relentless PR, both to try and show how relevant they are, and to keep actual news- poverty , food banks and debt- firmly off the front page. They are a bunch of dull , mediocre people who through accident of birth have huge wealth and extravagant lifestyles.

My BIG disgust with the actual royals, and by that I mean the holders/owners of the bloodline, is that they are sending the women and children out as human shields.

Look at the coverage of them since the queen died.

It is wall to wall the PoW, Queen Camilla, and the children but very little on William and Charles.

That is deliberate.

It strikes me as so utterly cynical and entitled. They own it all - put them out front.

Grr!!

Miss03852 · 26/12/2022 17:31

cakeorwine · 26/12/2022 15:35

I do wonder what the Royal Family think to see themselves described as 'adorable, the Magnificent Seven' and to have themselves fawned over by people.

They probably ignore it like they ignore the trolling. They used to mock Kate constantly for being desperate, not working, waiting for Will to propose, I remember how catty they used to be towards Kate I’m surprised she stuck it out, they were only nice to her after her and Will were married.

antelopevalley · 26/12/2022 17:33

@Justasec321 It is misogny