Indifference to PoW?

[FaiIureToLunch]

I find it strange that there’s no real interest or concern from the public about POW being in hospital. Nobody seems to be that bothered. If you compare it to the circus if Diana had been in the same situation….. I just find it odd. I always thought she was relatively popular because we’re constantly told she is but actually…. Tumbleweed.

I know it’s her own business etc but it just feels quite odd that somebody can disappear and there is no interest in why. I don’t really know or care what’s happened or why, but the silence is really intriguing. It reminds me of when the brexit referendum happened and I had no idea that there was such strong feeling about the EU…. I had no idea that there was such apathy about the PoW until now. It’s been a real eye opener for me.

I reckon the next generation or two, the monarchy will be gone.

I can't even think who he is? 🤔

Anyway I only came on here because I thought it was about prisoners of war.

Same!

I loved all of the above but they were all very broken and flawed self destructive people.

In fact it has been speculated that both Marilyn and Diana had BPD.

I think it was a different time with media, and people felt protective especially if those two. They clearly had mental health struggles and were loved. Very very loved. They were also involved in many scandals.

If they were around today I don't think either would have survived social media scrutiny.

I have a similar background as well as infertility as MM and adore her. She was not very respected however. I'm not sure Diana was either until her tragic death.

Kate is very stable and steady and while loved for sure I think there is a level of respect from media and the public alike. I don't find her boring, I think she reliable. I think the public responds to her differently as she is in face quite different from the above.

People often feel more emotional about celebrities who reveal their vulnerabilities. Diana especially was adored by many divorced women who had been cheated on by their husbands.
Everyone has flaws and vulnerabilities. We are all human.

Children loved Diana and she was loved by the public long before she started to talk about how the ‘royals’ treated her .
She had charisma and warmth

None of the current ‘royals’ have an iota of her personality and vivacity and that is a huge problem for them.

Good.

Let me guess- two of the magazines were Hello and OK! They will publish every type of Royal sycophantic nonsense on their front page. Even people who are vaguely related to someone who married a Royal, people who used to be European Royalty, anything. They don't know any more than anyone else. They have dug up some Royal mouthpiece like Ingrid Seward to pull something out of her arse. I thinknthe worrying thing for the Royals is that I'm not ypung- I'm in my 50's. I don't know anyone under about 70 who falls for thst anymore, ir even bothers to buy the magazines. Once you are past about 40 it is unlikely you will suddenly change your opinion on Royalty or suddenly become a plastic flag waver. I dont know any of my peers who have brought their children up with a culture of deference to them either. Another issue for them is that people grew up with The Queen. Now we have a string of old men to look forward to.

Wikipedia is not a reliable and accurate source.

Yes it is if you pay attention to Reliable Sources and External links at the bottom of the relevant page. There are often verifiable sources but you have to look carefully.
You can't dismiss all of Wiki just like that

I can because most people don't check the source at the bottom!

The notion that those who are young at the moment are suddenly going to morph into ardent monarchists in the autumn of their life is fanciful. Social media and its consequence - the fact that the royals can't actually conceal their true nature (despite best efforts) - will do for the monarchy.

jeff you're welcome to check out Camilla's woeful lack of qualifications by another route but a warning that you'll be wasting your time if you want to prove me wrong. Wiki wasn't my original source, it was just a quick way of triangulating info.

A pupil at a private London day school even in those days had to really be seriously motivated to only get a single O Level. They really were not that hard.

Tbh one only has to listen to the royals talk to identify a comprehensive lack of wit or spark. There's just no light on anywhere, except possibly with Harry.

Harry who had to be "helped" with his A levels? Now I am convinced that you are playing a character. 😁

This is true . The old trope that young reactionaries turn into old tories no longer holds - if it ever did

It was based on people having a stake in society ( home ownership, pension, continued economic growth ) plus a one note media machine that was not questioned
Both of those factors are gone
A majority of those under 50 do NOT support the monarchy . And that majority is growing
If the Windsors had any style they would have bowed out after Elizabeth

I think it’s pretty common knowledge that Harry is pretty dim and thick.

I think it’s pretty common knowledge that Harry is pretty dim and thick

Harry clearly wasn't ever going to be taken in at All Souls but he has at least a modicum of natural wit which is absolutely missing with William and Kate and indeed every single other one of the royals. They're all super dull, so perhaps dull is a better way of framing it.

I do!

And that doesn't stand up as you said Wiki is not reliable or accurate which isn't true is it.... If someone quotes Wiki, you can always check it out yourself at the bottom of the page.

If the Windsors had any style they would have bowed out after Elizabeth

Definitely. Excessively dull and no style whatever.

And grubby.

then what would you post excessively on MN about?

ElevenSeven I tend to post overwhelmingly on the Oxbridge threads, although less so recently as my seventh and eight DC to go there are due to leave this year

No idea if he's either "dim" or "thick" but he's clearly not academic. Which he may get from his mother, who failed all her O levels (or maybe she also got just the one?)

Exam success just wasn't so important back then, when it was expected that naice upper class gels would get a little job (probably through connections) which they would give up when they married.

Why would I spend my time trying to prove something, I neither care about or find relevant to this thread wrong?

I'm simply pointing out that wiki isn't a source that can be solely relied on , it can and has been edited by anyone who wants to .

jeff I took you to be quibbling over the accuracy of what I wrote. Obviously you're not going to waste your time if you were simply making a global point about Wiki.

👍

Novella4 · Today 07:57

Children loved Diana and she was loved by the public long before she started to talk about how the ‘royals’ treated her .
She had charisma and warmth

None of the current ‘royals’ have an iota of her personality and vivacity and that is a huge problem for them.

Good.

I don't agree, Novella. Not everyone liked Diana! The tragedy of her early death has made her into a kind of secular saint, but that wasn't necessarily the story when she was alive.

I didn't particularly warm to her but I agree that she used her position to do good and that she was genuinely a kind person who sought to help people. All good - but on a personal level I bet she was a handful! She had appalling taste in men which didn't help: Dodi was a sleaze-bag and that awful James Hewitt. She seemed very self-destructive.

I'm an introvert and I'm always wary of so-called 'charismatic' people. They can be all show and no substance (not saying this of Diana, btw). But I do think that about H & M. M is primarily an actor - she's been brought up around actors and film studios from an early age, and I always get the feeling she has got into the habit of projecting a fake, smiley, warm persona. She does not come over as warm to me at all - but we're all different. I only know that I'd run a mile from her in real life.

Harry is just a twit.

I've always liked the quieter, non-attention seeking personalities such as Charles, Anne and now possibly W & K better. I think (counter-intuitively) that being 'royal' means having no ego - you're not there to spout your own views - you're there to rubber-stamp other people's achievements and let them take the credit and the spotlight. I don't think M ever understood that - it's the difference between royalty and celebrity. I don't agree these people have no personality, as you claim. I think they appeal to quieter, less showy and more thoughtful people, that's all.

I've met PA (among others) when she came to open a centre my charity had built and she was absolutely brilliant. Turned up in very ordinary clothes, quietly did her stuff and spent absolutely ages talking to us all in great detail. Give me that over 'personality and charisma' any day of the week. There was no sense of ' where's the camera? Look at me and listen to my wonderful speech' and hey - how about my designer gown?

Lol - you are hilarious