Omid Scobie's new book

[boxedandribboned]

Heads up, Omid is back on the PR trail...

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/harry-meghan-author-omid-scobie-31362434

BTW, can anyone explain why he's Harper's Royal reporter when he only seems to have access to or report on Harry and Meghan? It's a bit strange.

Novella4 · Today 14:45

@BadgerB

They are ?…..

At least 6 have started the ball rolling

There is plenty of news coverage of it.

Are they leaving the Commonwealth, or just wishing to choose their own Head of State?
Never mind - I can look it up

Also, Roussette, I did not say Harry should surrender his title, just that if he wants to trade on it then distancing himself from the monarchy will diminish his value over time.

King of England.

I don't carrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrre.

I didn’t actually, I agreed with another poster who did. Maybe it’s you who is confused? It’s true the quote facility can be a little difficult to follow at times.

And anyway your multiple sneery posts at anyone who has no issue with royals are a clear indicator of who is denigrating who. You’re right in a way though, you are denigrating anyone who doesn’t agree with you not just the over 65s. Time will tell if you’re correct about waining support for the royals. Let’s see if they still here in a decade or two, I’m going to risk it and say they will be because whether you like it or not, they have majority support and probably always will. You making stuff up and using snarky language around them being “packed off” from places isn’t going to change a thing 👑 😉

He is king of white women 65+ living in the south east of England . That’s where his comfortable majority support is

If this is a true fact, I'm curious as to why posters believe this is considered denigrating this specific demographic.

Links please.

queentim · Today 14:58

He is king of white women 65+ living in the south east of England . That’s where his comfortable majority support is

If this is a true fact, I'm curious as to why posters believe this is considered denigrating this specific demographic.

Let's take it to imply that "white women over 65 living in the south east" are thereby shown to be the most intelligent section of the population.......

(sez a white woman over 65 - who doesn't live in the S.E.)

Being mentioned by you is denigration. Please don't pretend otherwise.

"He is king of <race> <Sex> <age> people living <region>" is intended to be denigrating. Especially coming from someone who has made their feelings known about people who support anyone he does not.

How is he trading on it? He goes to an ice hockey match to throw the puck in, and they introduce him as Prince Harrryyyyyy. He gives a speech at a function and he's introduced as Prince Harry.

What's he supposed to do about that? I have no idea what he is doing at this minute in time to trade on it. Spare, the book?
Come back to me on that one when SF has stopped using her title as she has done for her 72 books, 31 years after divorcing a member of the RF!!

How should he distance himself? He is the son of King Charles, there is no escaping that. And it will always be so.

“He is king of white women 65+ living in the south east of England . That’s where his comfortable majority support is”

Wow, was it necessary to use the adjective white in there?

And where are the statistics to prove that or is that what you think?

I think most people probably know who “Prince Harry” is. So I don’t think he needed to use his Duke of Sussex title and royal monogram with the gold coronet on the big screen at the arena.

So you think it is acceptable to be disrespectful to millions of people ?
Nice !

Good on him! Whilst the divorced for 32 years ex wife of a disgraced hidden from view member of the RF does... so should he!

I didn't read it as such as particularly denigrating, in the same way I wouldn't necessarily read a statistic, if true. Example, if someone said "white men above 30 in the London area are Labour's biggest supporters". If it's true, it's true.

But I think personal feelings between posters may be involved here for some

So if one finds Sarah Ferguson’s perennial trading off her position worthy of criticism, (and posters here clearly do), I don’t see why they object so strongly to posters who have the same views, not just about Sarah, but others also…

Believe me, I do not care.

If people are insulted or disrespected by others non-maliciously saying Charles "King of England", instead of King of XYZ, they need to get a grip.

I'm sure if Charles met someone who called him King of England by mistake, he'd politely smile or chuckle and move on. I don't think he'd moan and stamp his feet about it in your honour.

Yes, 'one' finds her trading off of her royal name abhorrent when she actually isn't married to a member of the RF. But 'one' will complain about Harry more when he has been a presenter on This Morning and written 72 books with his title. And moves back into a Royal Estate bankrolled by the public. Until then 'one' thinks it only fair that he carries on using the title Prince as to be fair to him, he is the son of the King, whereas Sarah is very far removed from that position.

(Serenster, please take the 'one' p**s taking in the spirit in which it is meant, it just sounded extremely regal. I can do regal too!)

No respectable aggregator of statistics injects the loaded language of "He is King of..." into their work.

Novella typed that out and has not disguised their views about people who support the monarchy. But usually the sexism, ageism and race stuff is kept under wraps.

I think we just had higher expectations of Harry for a number of reasons. He isn't broke. He wasn't cast out. He wasn't a mother.

I felt kind of ... something for Sarah when she got involved with weight-watchers. But she seemed to embrace it.

I also think the number of books Sarah has authored. It's not just one or two vanity projects. She doesn't seem lazy and I am not embarrassed for her as long as she is happy to be doing these things.

So it IS a different rule for a Father. And the number of books she wrote using her title is just making money, and that's OK.
I know she was badly treated by the RF when she divorced ... financially. You'd think she would want nothing to do with them, but no. I wonder why ?! as if I didn't know
But she has made up for it in other ways, taking money here and there with dodgy deals. I don't want to be accused of derailing, but there are a few posts on this today on the thread 'Prince Andrew back in the fold'. It's pretty shocking!

I can't quite get my head round your reasoning I'll be honest!

Sarah Ferguson is a bit of a national joke. She kind of plays on that and I suppose uses it to her advantage.

Somehow I don’t think Harry, Meghan or even Omid Scobie would be happy to be viewed as figures of fun.

They are treated as figures of fun though! But not fun in a 'oh, it's just Sarah being Sarah' way. In a more disparaging way.

Yes, I think there are different expectations of a woman who married in the 80s and had every reason to believe she would be financially stable the rest of her life prior to being cast out.

Than of a man who has millions and chose to walk away then make $ he didn’t really need by talking about his family.

Harry has and will always have more options than Sarah.

Be mad at the patriarchy if you like.