Should Beatrice and Eugenie voluntarily give up their titles if they want any public respect ever again?

[Sweetiedarling7]

Just that really.
I think the only possible way forward for them is to choose to give up the princess thing, make a brief public statement in support of victims and to end their middle east business jaunts.

yes, eugenie and Beatrice did. William pays tax in the duchy of Cornwall. The king pays tax on his interest and income etc.

Yes because they only have their titles because of their father. Now that he has lost his, they should lose theirs.

Do you know anything about Mike Tindall?

I'm not really sure what I think about all of these calls to strip people of their hereditary titles.

I mean, I do understand why they removed the "prince" title from Andrew's name because the whole thing was so high profile and they really needed to be seen to be doing something, but are we really going to start morally evaluating the behaviour of every member of the aristocracy to determine whether or not they are upstanding enough to "deserve" their hereditary titles?

Surely the whole point of a hereditary system is that it is based on heredity and not on merit? It's arbitrary, and there will be decent royals and not so decent ones. Shouldn't we just be acknowledging that system for what it is, rather than pretending that any of them have somehow done anything to earn their honorifics?

I've no doubt you're about to tell me! All I know is he is married to Zara daughter of P. Anne, and he was a rugby player who was fined for "bad behaviour" on tour in NZ. Has two drink driving convictions. Has two daughters and a son, they live in Gatscombe estate and travel down under every UK Winter for a few months. He is involved with sports charities. But since I'm not a sports fan I don't know or care about that aspect. Or any other either I might add, they are not in my friendship circle, and they probably don't want to be in mine!

Prince Richard used to be an architect until his older brother died. He was the spare in his family.

That's the most sensible way, acknowledge the heir has to learn the job and let the others follow their own careers until they retire.

This

Right, I think there's a pretty colossal difference between a very grown man who'd been a member of government passing on state secrets and an 18 year old going along with her groomer parents tbh.

And as another pp pointed out, he's quite unusual in actually being held accountable at all.

Surely not everyone whose ever had contact with him is being held accountable for it. Having lunch with someone who has been to prison isn't some sort of crime.

I'm not going to disagree but if they (& Andrew) are striped of titles and whatever royal assets they are entitled to how will they live? (not that I care that much) Will they have to live on benefits? Sell all their fancy frocks and their dreadful headgear??

Have you been sucking on lemons?

Ok, so what about Richard Branson, Naomi Campbell, Annabelle Neilson, Richard Dawkins, Mick Jagger etc?

PP suggested lots of other people were being held to account for their links with Epstein, that patently isn’t true. So instead we are focussing on two women who have not been shown to have a direct link to him, outwith that of their father?

They both inherited from the old queen and queen mother, so there's going to be money whatever happens. Unless it's all been spunked already.

Are you a big fan of Mike Tindall or something? @damselly was quite fair in her knowledge of him. It was just facts

Very selective facts. Failed to mention winning the rugby World Cup and other achievements. Anyway I don’t think Zara and Mike are connected in any way with Epstein.

Why can't we focus on those you mentioned AND B&E?

The point was that we demonstrably aren't. Important not to mix up is and should here.

Having lunch with someone who's been in prison certainly isn't and something I've done lots of times with a family member (they went to many prison years ago for a non violent or sexual crime).

Deliberately popping off to go and celebrate a convicted sex offenders release from prison? Still not illegal, but certainly questionable morally.

This thread is about Beatrice and Eugenie. Start a thread about Naomi Campbell if you want and I'll post about why I think she should be subject of a police investigation. Start one about Jagger or Branson and I'll tell you what creeps I think they are and would personally never endorse them by buying/using their stuff.

This is not where we need to focus our outrage. This is exactly what patriarchal predators would like you to do. Never mind the hundreds of powerful men who tortured and raped children focus on two 20 year old women who were clueless. Think!

Oh there's no need. The fact that the OP is advocating for a different approach to those two than to people who were considerably older, more independent and clearly very much embroiled is hugely relevant to the topic of this one.

And you didn't feel the need to start a new thread when you said there were other adults taking accountability, nor when you mentioned Peter Mandelson. So you clearly get that.

Hmmmm their lack of statement well may be ‘legal’.

Remember any fraternisation with Epstein while in public office (and it’s not just AMW who was ‘in office’ - all the Royals are) will result in suspicion.

I'm just dealing with the thread I have in front of me. That's all.

I only mentioned Mandleson because so many people had said they were too young to appreciate what they'd done wrong by going to visit Jeffery. But this is also MN where anyone over eighteen is a fully functional adult. So I was trying to point out that either all the adults can take accountability, or they can't.

Is there a point to anything you've said recently?

In fact MN takes a pretty varied approach to such things. So for example there was a thread just yesterday about people being independent much later now than they used to be, the very widespread cultural change. There's no hive mind on here, not surprising on a board with thousands of posters.

But ultimately, there aren't any people who were very young adults with clearly predatory, highly Epstein involved parents who've been expected to take accountability here. And even if you want to attach some blame to them, which I'm not comfortable doing without more information about how their revolting parents were treating them, on current information it's undoubtedly at a different end of the spectrum to the likes of Mandelson. He's not a comparable example.