To be shocked at some RF members turning their back?

[fiheka]

It has been reported that some Royal Family members literally turned their back on Prince Harry at Prince Philip's funeral and refused to even acknowledge him.
I have had extended family members behave badly and are in no hurry to be friendly. But I think this is appalling behaviour. I would never do that and especially not at a funeral.
It reminds me of that video being shared where William and Kate totally snub and ignore Harry and Meghan.
It is just so rude and awful.

If she was going to be a force for real change she would be calling on the government to reinvigorate sure start or a version of it. And calling on the government to invest in early years across a whole range of services. Instead poverty for children is increasing and services have been cut. I actually wouldn't care if she was not an expert if she was using her position to make real changes. But the focus of the RF on Kate and William is don't frighten the horses

You really don’t understand the role of the monarchy, do you?

Maybe they turned their backs because they were pissed off that because Harry couldn't wear his military outfit, then no-one could. Maybe it had nothing to do with the public trashing he'd been dishing out repeatedly over the previous months?

@Marmaladeagain

yes, I remember thinking it was odd - William would be presenting the Cup at the Cup Final as President of the FA since 2006 - and then the date of the wedding was announced, clashing so he didn't go.

Would be disappointing for lots of people as there are lots of other days to get married, but only one FA cup final - Man U and Chelsea would be a draw and says about 8.2 households watched it on BBC that day

Their wedding seemed bit rushed anyhow, I thought maybe she's pregnant - everything was rushed with them. They'd only known one another 5 mins in a relationship over thousands of miles and no friends in common to speak of.... you invite Oprah and I'll invite James Blunt etc..oh, and William's President of the FA - let's do it cup final day...

Yes the FA cup final and William couldn't go. I actually think that was deliberately spiteful.

What I thought was particularly thoughtless was planning the wedding for three weeks after Kate gave birth. No wonder she was tearful about the whole bridesmaid business.

TBF re the wedding date - I suspect it was the only weekend that didn't interfere with all royal engagements. And to be blunt MM was 36 when they got married, I can't imagine they'd want to put off baby making for a few years. Dont MN always say plan your wedding around what's convenient for the B&G? Kate could've brought Louie!

@Marmaladeagain why shouldn't Meghan have asked for macrobiotic food? I do not see the big deal.

@mermaidsariel the date of the wedding will not have been chosen by MM and Harry, just as William and Kate will not have chosen their wedding date. They both need permission from the queen to marry for a start.

And I do understand the role of the RF. Take taxpayers money, don't frighten the horses and do a few public engagements to keep the plebs happy.

fiheka you really don't want to acknowledge that the RF has any worth do you. You won't even admit they have a constitutional role. The only ones you support are the ones who've tried their best to trash the institution because that suits your agenda.
I was so pleased for Harry to find a beautiful woman who loved him but together they bring out the worst rather than the best of each other. The blatant fib about the wedding was the final straw.
When they insult our head of state even indirectly they do insult the British people. I wish them well and hope they have a happy life but nobody gets that by throwing shit far and wide on Oprah. What did they hope to gain? No matter how badly they feel they've been treated.

That is hilarious!

@mateysmum I know their constitutional role in theory. In practice the queen still had to sign an illegal notice proroguing parliament.
I do not support Meghan, I am just not anti Meghan and recognise racism.

The upshot of the ‘racism’ argument is that anyone non white cannot be criticised because the motivation must automatically be racism. Batshit.

@fiheka

And I do understand the role of the RF. Take taxpayers money, don't frighten the horses and do a few public engagements to keep the plebs happy.

You obviously don’t or you wouldn’t be suggesting the Duchess of Cambridge should embroil herself in politics.

You misunderstand me. I am saying her contribution is a waste of time. If she could be political she could make a real difference.
Look at someone like Marcus Rushford.

@fiheka do you understand exactly why the RF don't involve themselves in politics?

The press were really horrible about MM. Just as they have been about KM, Sarah Ferguson, Diana, Beatrice and Eugenie. We all ought to be outraged by the misogyny constantly exercised by the British press.

But somehow I think press behaviour has become mistakenly conflated with public attitude, with M and H behaving as if the British people were against them, which wasn't true imo. There was a lot of goodwill towards MM and to Harry, particularly because of the loss of his mother and that awful funeral procession. But neither of them seemed to 'get' the immense level of privilege they enjoyed or feel that there is a cost. They made the public feel like they were not worth the bother, which is a big mistake for a member of the RF. Complaining on Oprah hasn't helped. They do seem to think that being royal is something you can treat as just another subset of celebrity and this is biting them on the arse. Coming across as rude and disrespectful is harming them.

@FrangipaniDeLaSqueegeeMop can you be any more patronising?
Yes I totally understand why they do not involve themselves in party politics.
But the truth is some of them do involve themselves in controversial views such as Charles with architecture, organic farming and homoeopathy.

@fiheka it was a genuine question, I didn't mean it to come across as patronising.

Having views and involving themselves in politics is not the same. They are allowed to have personal views, they aren't allowed to push their views on the world

Unless it's proven to be good for the world of course and isn't controversial - environmental issues, mental health support etc

You say you understand but every single post demonstrates you don’t understand role of head of state. You remind me of someone saying they have a really witty response, but they won’t say it (ie don’t have a funny comment) acting outraged that everyone is saying you don’t understand and every post you show you don’t

The Queen is head of state. William will be one day.
If you think Charles did not push his controversial views then I suspect you are young. The newspapers used to be full of his latest speech.

Isn’t it just you’re anti monarchy altogether, rather than concerned about each individual accusation re. hours worked - ie nothing they do would be good enough as you don’t want monarchy?

[quote fiheka]@HypocriteHunter my objection to all the royals apart from Andrew who is a sex offender, is that they are a vast waste of public money.[/quote]
Unproven sex offender you cannot slander someone

I did point that out to OP theunamedcat

Not at all wise.