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.

Using the OPs logic, the King should also give up his title. After all he is Andrew’s brother. How ridiculous.

Whatever you think about him and the idea of a constitutional monarchy KC does actually do stuff for the nation. And he has done for most of his life.

The two princesses have done nothing. They are using their titles to accumulate wealth and status for themselves.

What does he actually do for the nation?

Mostly the stuff any head of state would do just in fancier clothes and with stage coaches instead of limousines. Also without the need for elections every so often.

I don’t want to be responsible for showing any respect to anyone caused suffering by my father. This is such problematic thinking. We are not responsible for our father’s sins. Such parents are usually damaging to their kids too, you won’t understand unless you have had such parents.

Well he's only been the monarch for a few years
And heads of state are at least elected for
They are not just in the job because they happened to born into the royal family in the right order.

Not contradicting myself at all.
It has long been shown that the figures supposedly showing that the RF are good for tourism were not reliable- supporters of the RF cobbled together visitor figures from anything that had Royal in the title, or was connected with the state and adding these up and saying look how many tourists visited x and y attractions= monarchy rasing money. It's like saying I can't be a republican as I very, very occasionally may buy an overpriced Duchy food product from Waitrose!
If it were up to me, I'd kick all the hangers on out of Buckingham Palace or Kensington Palace or wherever they live - tell me what does Princess Micheal of Kent do to deserve such a home- and house asylum seekers and nurses and care workers there.

They knew their parents had kept in contact with epstien after the dates their parents publicly said they'd cut off contact with him. This shows they are just as bad as their parents for lying.

The daughters knew their parents were lying about the dates and contact the parents had with epstien after they said they cut off contact. They cant be trusted as they are also liars.

In these days of supposed equality, I do not understand this whole royalty thing anyway . I will never bow or curtsey to another human being for as long as I live . Just because u are born into a wealthy family ??? That being said it’s not their fault that their cretin of a father can’t keep it in his pants or keep his mouth shut . They are not responsible for his lack of morals or questionable behaviour . Fergie on the other hand …

Yeah, no, they really have had it easy. Dyslexia or no dyslexia.

There are a lot of questions to be answered (but which probably won't be) about Charles's involvement in the pay-off to Virginia Guiffre. He was involved in every aspect of his mother's life at that point, including financial. No one knows where most of the money came from (or even how large the sum was). Charles's private fortune is estimated at £1.8 billion - that's his private wealth, not the stuff that is theoretically owned by the state.

So, yes, actually - Charles should certainly face some accountability over the cover-up. Is he fit to be king? Probably not. Are any of them? Ditto.

I'd agree with almost every word here in this well-written post, except that to disagree with the idea of 'private wealth' for Charles. His family have ruled Britain for a thousand years; all their finances stem from being the ruling family. 'Their' money is really our money, to the last penny.

Ha, fair point!

For him and William, the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall are massive money spinners (and of course they have multiple other sources of wealth). One of the most staggering things is that hospitals and military bases on Duchy land have to pay them money. Utterly incredible.

Just leaving this celebrity blind here. They aren’t always right, but aren’t always wrong either.

@ThePoshUns Never rains but it pours...

No - if every descendant of guilty parents was ostracised and criticised there would be very few people left to be self righteous! (especially in Australia as most people are descended from people who were deported - mainly for ridiculous crimes like stealing a loaf when they were poverty stricken, but it was a crime at the time!)

The question isn’t whether they should criticised or ostracised. It is whether they should give up their titles.

They don’t do anything and they have not done anything to deserve titles of state. They can be private people living whatever life they want but the opportunity to trade off these titles should be removed. They should never have been given them.

They shouldn’t be shamed because of who they are related to but they shouldn’t be elevated for who they are related to.

If we are to have a constitutional monarch then only people actually doing the job should hold royal titles as adults. There are other changes that should be made, like replacing the various household staff with a professional civil service accountable to government but that is another story.

They don’t do anything and they have not done anything to deserve titles of state.

The problem is that this is true of anyone with an inherited title.

Once you start pulling at that thread it all unravels.

That’s why I said titles of state. The BRF aren’t fulling the role of Lord Poshy of Poshshire. They are part of our constitution. The King is the head of state and COE. The working royals support that role. If we keep that model then working royals need to be defined. They need a job description and any title should only be given if they do the job.

Being the Queens grandchild didn’t mean automatic title of prince or princess. Which is why Anne and Edward’s children don’t have those titles. Andrew insisted they have them.

The King hasn't done anything to deserve his title either.

B and E did receive their titles automatically because they are the son and daughter of the son of a monarch. Edward's children are also entitled to use Prince and Princess, but the family choose not to. This is also why Harry's children are automatically entitled to use Prince and Princess.

https://debretts.com/royal-family/letters-patent-and-the-law/the-edinburgh-children/

Anne's children didn't automatically have the right to use Princess and Princess because Anne is not a son.

I don't know if the rules have changed since then.

Unsurprising if true. The husband was probably interested in the royal connection and now that’s worthless.

So, should all victims - young women and teens like Beatrice and Eugenie - also be responsible for associating with Epstein and not seeing his evil and getting themselves clear of him?

Some people go to prison.every week who other's believe are not guilty. They don't believe in the crimes due to personally never seeing them do wrong. Charismatic sleezy men creating a respectable, fun, supportive outward appearance with the use of people from the highest offices in the land. Many believe that Virginia was a liar.

Beatrice and Eugenie have done nothing to warrant their titles being taken off them.

Exactly they have done nothing and continue to say and do nothing. It’s not good enough.

Charles may not be qualified to be head of state. But he does the job. He is and always has been a working royal.

the 2 princesses have done nothing. Their entire adult life has been spent in pursuit of their own interests. Not the nations. Funnily enough they have made millions out of it.