George going to Marlborough? Article linked.

[Greatballzoffire]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12872215/William-kate-snub-eton-george-marlborough-college-second-visit.html

Funny you thought she was referring to you! , I assumed someone else .

Not that I seek resentment, far from it.

Perhaps I'm being self-absorbed jeff but I feel that I'm not paying sufficient obeisance to the rf and so....

Cross post!

No, a pre-emptive strike, just in case.

Your opinions ( to which you are entitled) would carry more credibility if you gave some examples of the late Queen’s mistakes

Or give us examples that can be laid at the monarchy for its (alleged) falling popularity that can't be laid equally at the door of massive upheavals in society in the last 70 years? Was there even a poll done 70 years ago by which to measure it? Only a fool would say the monarchy as a whole didn't made mistakes but everyone makes mistakes and hindsight is a wonderful thing.

My thinking is based purely on my own perceptions from reading the press etc but my view is that Kate would divorce William before she sent George there.* *

Whyeould she have gone eith him to visit and not secretly either. She will never divorce William. Certainly not over a school for George.

Wonderfully confident that even though they couldn't tell the time ( at presumably 13+) they wouldn't have to worry too much about getting a job?

Wow , what’s with all the deleted posts ?? Have I missed something?

Hi all,
Once again we have made several deletions on a Royal Family thread because posters go from discussing the subject at hand to personal back-biting.
Could we please ask that you all take a moment to consider whether you can keep to our talk guidelines, and if not, might you consider not posting on these threads?
We feel certain that it should be possible for adults to discuss the Royal Family without this perpetual descent into in-fighting, policing, sniping and goading.
Anyone who feels this is impossible, do as ever feel free to get in touch and express your concerns.

Apologies @HopeMumsnet if my post broke guidelines, I thought @goodbyestranger and I were just joshing each other !
Apologies to @goodbyestranger if I offended you .

why? because of security reasons?

Apparently pointing out it's not nice to make unsubstantiated posts about a 10yo isn't allowed.

I'm sorry Mumsnet - but I don't think those kind of comments should be allowed.

jeff I wasn't offended at all - just logged on and saw all the deletions. Certainly not at my request; all good.

Cheers @goodbyestranger , didn't think you were but posters are odd on here ! 🤣

rosyglowcondition the critical social change (as opposed to 'upheavals') is that the rf are less and less able to pull the wool over the eyes of the public and are increasingly exposed to being seen for what they actually are (overwhelmingly thanks to the internet/ social media).

Attempts at briefing seem a bit limp these days. Especially as the PR teams don't appear to be that sharp.

I suspect by George's turn, the Royal family will largely be impossible to justify. I suspect, as a survival mechanism they will turn the Monarchy into a Presidential like system, with just the Monarch providing duties, and us just maintaining one State residence and one country residence ( hopefullly, rather than what we have now, which is a smaller RF that costs us more) There is no need for a Ceremonial Head of State to have their whole family on the payroll, as much as they would want to. William and Kates engagements, if made into a working week would last a month a year each. Especially when all their kids will be boarding school in in a few years. They coukd step up and stop making excuses. They could invite the family to big occasions if they want to maintain the touristy bits like Trooping of the Colour and family weddings, but none of them need to be full time Royals apart from.the Head of State.

I have a wry smile when I read about the end of the Monarchy , the irrelevance of the Monarchy etc . Such things have been said for years ; I remember my grandparents talking about the Duke of Windsor scandal , my parents discussing Princess Margaret and her antics and I am old enough to remember the furore over Roddy Llewelyn . Then Diana died so tragically and people said it was the end of the Monarchy . And let’s not forget Andrew and Sarah .
Somehow they keep going and despite what Republicans insist , there is still huge interest and an affection for some of them . I was in the huge crowd at 2 fairly recent Royal events in Edinburgh surrounded by fellow Scots and not just foreign tourists as some insist .
My teenage granddaughter was fascinated by the Coronation and loves seeing the clothes so it’s not just us oldies who are interested.

That they will get smaller is inevitable but then we have to accept they do less work. Do we want to? I mean the Queens cousins do a bit but really it is King, Queen, brother, sister, sister in law, son, daughter. After that William, Kate and kids. The titles, Prince and Princess, should just be for children and siblings of the monarch, which they were doing nicely at having until Harry decided he wanted Russian emigre titles for his kids.

😂Yes that was an unhelpful development. Just silly

@AuroraCake "That they will get smaller is inevitable but then we have to accept they do less work. Do we want to?"

You know, I think I could cope. Just about. If I tried very hard. I'd carry scissors in case I need to enter a building with a ribbon across the door and with a bit of practice I think I could manage.

Overall do we really need people turning up to a school for 10 minutes, causing weeks of disruption just so they can be presented to a minor Royal? The Wales' could easily do far, far more than they do now to take up some of the slack. Non working Royals like the York kids do their private charity work, patronage etc. Heck, even celebs manage to be patrons of charities alongside full time jobs! Agree about Harry's kids having titles, but that is the fault of the last 2 Monarchs. The Queen knew Charles wanted to slim down the Monarchy ( which was where the "They didn't want him to be a Prince' stuff came from). She could have restricted titles to children of the Monarch and heir at any time before the children were born. Charles could have stuck to his guns and done it.

I think he was afraid of ostracising his son even more. Took his house though. It’s a fine line.

Is it Denmark or similar where the Queen has withdrawn titles from some of her grandchildren, leaving only the people likely to become monarch with titles? I think down the line there may be a more streamlined monarchy. Though in the short term that will happen naturally. The Queen had 4 children and loads of grandkids. As far as the monarchy is concerned Charles in effect only has one child and 3 grandchildren.