Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family
Original poster

Will Sophie take the title Princess

241 replies

Viviennemary · 16/10/2021 12:50

Sophie will be 18 next month and will have the choice of whether to be styled HRH Princess Sophie or not. It was her parents decision not to have her styled thus even though she could be as the grandchild of the monarch. Not sure but I thought probably not. But if she was to become a working royal opening town halls and so on the title Princess would look better on the plaques.

OP posts:
SallyLockheart · 21/10/2021 13:58

@julieca

Paid maternity leave of course should be introduced.

@Viviennemary it is as political as William and Charles talking about climate change.

Rubbish. Writing directly to political leaders AND publically releasing that letter to the media is vastly different to campaigning and running initiatives such as Eartshot.

If she wrote as Meghan Mountbatten, that would be fine but she isn’t. She’s a private Individual in the USA and should be writing in that representation NOT as a member of the British Royal family.

Roussette · 21/10/2021 14:08

She's a citizen of the US, she's quite entitled to write to who she wants. You talk like we own her because we fund her. We don't.
And even if she wrote as Meghan Mountbatten (that's a new one!) the criticism would be exactly the same.

i.e. How dare she be championing womens rights, who does she think she is.
I have to say... I think detractors of her better start getting used to her having a voice because otherwise you are going to go demented!

smilesy · 21/10/2021 14:27

You are correct Rousette, she is entitled to do that as US citizen, but if she were not married to who she is married to, it would not be making the news. I agree that we don’t fund her, but she is still using the title that she was provided with when she joined our Royal family and she is using it as a way to getting her “voice heard”. Not everyone in the US will understand that she does not speak for the Royal family.

julieca · 21/10/2021 14:30

@SallyLockheart what did she write as then? She is not a Princess. So how did she write as a member of the RF?

SallyLockheart · 21/10/2021 14:33

I have no problem with her championing maternity pay in the USA but not using the RF moniker when she is not representing the RF in the USA at all, especially as Smilesy points out, not everyone in the USA will appreciate that point.

Meant Meghan Mountbatten Windsor which is of course Harry's non royal surname. As an independent feminist, I'm surprised she isn't going under Meghan Markle

smilesy · 21/10/2021 14:36

@SallyLockheart what did she write as then? She is not a Princess. So how did she write as a member of the RF?

Erm, as The Duchess of Sussex. You do know that it’s not only “Princess” that is a royal title?

julieca · 21/10/2021 14:37

Duchess is not a Royal title. Lots of women are Duchesses without being a member of the RF.

SallyLockheart · 21/10/2021 14:48

julieca. Posters on here are very insistent that Harry, her husband, will always be part of the royal family because that is his birthright (which it is) so she is undeniably part of the RF. If Harry is part of the royal family, then Meghan (by marriage) is also part of the royal family. If she wishes to disown that relationship, then she should relinquish the titles that go with being part of the the RF

WinnieTheW0rm · 21/10/2021 14:49

@julieca

Duchess is not a Royal title. Lots of women are Duchesses without being a member of the RF.
It is however in her case a Royal one

Gloucester, Kent, York, Cambridge and Sussex are all currently Royal dukedoms.

smilesy · 21/10/2021 14:49

But she is “HRH” even though she doesn’t use it. And the title was conferred by the Queen. So she is a Royal Duchess. You are splitting hairs anyway.

Roussette · 21/10/2021 15:06

Not everyone in the US will understand that she does not speak for the Royal family

They've been living under a rock if they don't know that.

but not using the RF moniker when she is not representing the RF in the USA at all

What is a RF moniker?
Do you mean like Prince Andrew is Duke of York?

she should relinquish the titles that go with being part of the the RF

Not happening. Because then Andrew would have to give up his.

But my point as I said above... even if she styled herself as Meghan Mountbatten Windsor or whatever... there would still be posts criticising her. So she may as well carry on as Duchess of Sussex. The areas ripe for criticism are getting narrowly small, and I would love to think that giving up titles would mean no criticism but I know that will not be the case. Just living and breathing is enough to inflame some people

julieca · 21/10/2021 15:06

Using HRH means a member of the RF, but Duchess does not automatically mean that.
Although I doubt most people know that certain Duke and Duchess titles are only for RF.
But this level of protocol I think is not an issue for most people.
And I see maternity leave as a totally uncontroversial demand. I mean it is really a basic human right.

Roussette · 21/10/2021 15:08

Posters on here are very insistent that Harry, her husband, will always be part of the royal family because that is his birthright (which it is) so she is undeniably part of the RF. If Harry is part of the royal family, then Meghan (by marriage) is also part of the royal family. If she wishes to disown that relationship, then she should relinquish the titles that go with being part of the the RF

From that post I assume you mean she should also relinquish her husband too... him being royal and all that.
Look.... they are forever going to be connected to the RF. Harry will be grandson, son or brother of the UK monarch. It's best to accept and let this go

julieca · 21/10/2021 15:09

I also wonder where the calls are for Andrew to give up his RF titles? I suspect most of the public would support that.

Roussette · 21/10/2021 15:15

No julieca it's far far more important for a woman who lives in the US and is married to a member of the RF and who's championing womens' rights to lose it. Than a son of the current Monarch who has a civil case hanging over him regarding sex with a young coerced woman who was procured by a sex trafficker who happened to be a very good friend of his.
Shock

SallyLockheart · 21/10/2021 15:22

@Roussette

Posters on here are very insistent that Harry, her husband, will always be part of the royal family because that is his birthright (which it is) so she is undeniably part of the RF. If Harry is part of the royal family, then Meghan (by marriage) is also part of the royal family. If she wishes to disown that relationship, then she should relinquish the titles that go with being part of the the RF

From that post I assume you mean she should also relinquish her husband too... him being royal and all that.
Look.... they are forever going to be connected to the RF. Harry will be grandson, son or brother of the UK monarch. It's best to accept and let this go

Rousette. disown the relationship with the RF not Harry of course. nobody here is saying otherwise.

you are always banging on about Harry being grandson of the monarch, and therefore she is by default by marriage representing herself as part of the RF. Let it go - she IS trading on the RF by signing letter from the Office of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

julieca · 21/10/2021 15:25

@Roussette

No julieca it's far far more important for a woman who lives in the US and is married to a member of the RF and who's championing womens' rights to lose it. Than a son of the current Monarch who has a civil case hanging over him regarding sex with a young coerced woman who was procured by a sex trafficker who happened to be a very good friend of his. Shock
Yes exactly. If Andrew loses his titles, at that point I will support calls for Harry and Meghan to lose theirs. But until then, I cant stomach the sheer hypocrisy.
Roussette · 21/10/2021 15:38

you are always banging on about Harry being grandson of the monarch, and therefore she is by default by marriage representing herself as part of the RF. Let it go - she IS trading on the RF by signing letter from the Office of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex

She will always be connected to the RF by marriage. You need to let it go. To accept it. She isn't trading on anything that isn't legitimate and correct and why should they give up Duke and Duchess? They don't use HRH. Maybe come back and make a point when PA gives up his... perhaps I'll listen then.

I just find it ironic that I've never seen you call for PA to lose his titles? Or military patronages?
Have you?
But yet a wife of the grandson of our current Monarch championing womens' rights is just so awful for you.

SallyLockheart · 21/10/2021 15:48

so are you lumping Harry and Andrew together? Really - you consider their behaviour on par?

Roussette · 21/10/2021 16:01

so are you lumping Harry and Andrew together? Really - you consider their behaviour on par?

Very clever Sally but obviously not so given my posts on PA. And my posts on H&M.

But if you find it difficult to understand I will explain. PA is abhorrent and has behaved appallingly and is still called HRH, Prince and Duke of York.

Harry isn't appalling IMO and does not deserve to have his Duke title removed, especially given sleaze and freeloader Andrew keeps his.

As I said (why do I have to keep repeating it?) if ever PA's titles are remoed then come back and argue the toss with me about Harry's if you must.

SallyLockheart · 21/10/2021 16:12

It’s a given that whenever Harry and Meghan not using their titles ones up - and there’s no reason why that can’t include them not using them, putting them in abeyance like their HRHs- then the response is always, what about Andrew. Ie the two are irretrievably linked by many posters - ie you can’t do one without the other. So they are lumped them together in one big titles or no titles argument. The discussion is whether it is appropriate they hang onto the use of those titles on America and use them for political means which is a no-go in the UK for many reasons

Original poster
Viviennemary · 21/10/2021 16:17

If she was writing as a third rate soap star on a cable TV channel nobody woukd take much notice. But no. She is writing as the oh so royal Duchess even if she hasn't a good word to say about royalty.

OP posts:
julieca · 21/10/2021 16:21

@SallyLockheart

It’s a given that whenever Harry and Meghan not using their titles ones up - and there’s no reason why that can’t include them not using them, putting them in abeyance like their HRHs- then the response is always, what about Andrew. Ie the two are irretrievably linked by many posters - ie you can’t do one without the other. So they are lumped them together in one big titles or no titles argument. The discussion is whether it is appropriate they hang onto the use of those titles on America and use them for political means which is a no-go in the UK for many reasons
Because it is hypocrisy. Meghan talking about maternity leave is worse than Andrew being accused in court of sexual abuse? I know which has brought more disrepute on the RF.
Roussette · 21/10/2021 16:30

If she was writing as a third rate soap star on a cable TV channel nobody woukd take much notice

Nice Hmm
And isn't it interesting that you post this on your thread about Lady Louise??
Funny that....
Don't you feel your thread has been derailed somewhat?

Original poster
Viviennemary · 21/10/2021 16:32

Yes it has been derailed.

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread