Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

What do you think about Prince Andrew?

198 replies

theilltemperedclavecinist · 05/01/2024 12:04

Sexual exploitation of women and girls used to be saucy (think Carry On movies, the Playboy Mansion or seaside postcards) and no-one wanted to think about the power imbalance apart from hairy feminists.

Now we know that Epstein was a sex trafficker, the media and the public think that every man who met him must have known about it and is therefore equally vile.

It's not as though misogyny has gone away though. Daily Mail articles about teen pregnancy for example attract highly rated comments about those slutty girls.

Why the discrepancy? Everyone seems to suffer the same kind of magical thinking - that every individual has perfect knowledge and perfect autonomy. The hard-of-thinking celebrity who gropes a pretty girl (or worse) and thinks its all good clean consensual fun? Definitely a p@#£do.The devious fourteen year-old, plotting her way to a cushy life on benefits? Definitely couldn't be a victim. Always think the worst of everyone.

Not sorry for Andrew, except insofar as he's a careless wielder of unconscious privilege who probably still doesn't get what he did wrong. But frustrated by the portrayal of misogyny as a parade of pantomime villains rather than the everyday menace that women all know about.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
AnnaMagnani · 06/01/2024 11:37

Prince Philip was absolutely a sleaze. Or depending how you see it, normal for aristos of his generation.

He got away with it as reporting was very different in his time - no TV news, much more respect for the royals, and he was so close to the Queen.

Have a look at the Thursday Club he used to hang out in. Everyone else there was shagging showgirls, are we supposed to believe he was the only one who wasn't?

Plus there is his supposed affair with Princess Alexandra, the Queen's own cousin. They used to go sailing together knowing the Queen hated it.

Grammarnut · 06/01/2024 11:39

LenaLamont · 05/01/2024 12:08

He’s a venal, self-delusional, arrogant serial sex offender who will never think he’s done anything wrong because to his mind, he’s great and infallible.

Why waste time on such insignificant man?

He is sleazy, arrogant, and probably self-deluded but not a sex offender. He was c. 40 when he had sex with Guiffre and she was 17. Perfectly normal behaviour afaik, though some think it sleazy and 'cradle-snatching' has always been frowned on.

WarriorN · 06/01/2024 11:43

AnnaMagnani · 06/01/2024 09:37

@WarriorN I always assumed that 95% of the Harry and Meghan stuff was put out to deflect from shit Andrew/William/Charles were up to.

It's worked brilliantly.

Yes it has.

Never took a great deal of notice but I found the whole anti Megan thing extremely puzzling.

I started a new twitter account a couple of years ago and the algorithm from the basic detail of "uk" was all pro Kate and William and anti Megan. <adjusts tin hat>

WarriorN · 06/01/2024 11:47

Laurens Van der Post and Jimmy Saville also extremely close to Thatcher.

SOxon · 06/01/2024 12:01

Needmoresleep · 06/01/2024 00:05

He is a knob.

I have met several people who have worked with him and other members of the Royal Family and have yet to hear anyone say anything positive about him.

In contract Princess Anne commands real respect for her professionalism.

It happens. Within the same family you can get all sorts, and knobs exist in all social classes. The difference with Andrew was that he had more opportunity. People, including Epstein and Maxwell, sought him out and put up with him because of his title. And he was more protected and for longer.

Andrew is not like his siblings : he doesn’t resemble them in any way whatsoever.
He is loud, uncouth, oafish, yes entitled, this is the man who drove through a gate rather than get out and open it, brays like a donkey, has poor comprehension skills
conversationally (Matlis interview) harangued his nanny as a child, played cruel tricks on parents, guardsmen alike, a disliked child youth man who liked to throw his weight about.

I’m old enough to remember him being interviewed at Lockerbie. The shock, the shamefulness of his ineptitude.

I also remember news footage of him in a car factory? being shown how the cars are spray painted,
asked if he could have a go, turning the pipe onto the phalanx of press photographers, and the BBC? news camera of course, collective audible groan.
He soaked people, clothes, cameras in industrial paint at a comsiderable velocity.

It was the maniacal look on his face which was so disturbing, nasty, spiteful, vengeful.
Buckingham Palace paid out for ruined cameras and suits, there was no accountability then, at least publically, as there was no accountability over

Virginia Roberts, £12m to a woman he had ‘never met’ which didn’t silence her.

He is a wrong ‘un and no mistake. Southfork anyone? a wedding gift from HM
left to rot, sold above its value?

I remembered something else - years ago obviously, he was chasing a young, actress, Katie something, who said he grabbed and kissed her on the mouth.
Some reports say they had a whirlwind romance, maybe, but I recall thinking
how dare he? well he dared.

No guiding hand ever came near his royal bot bot.

of course ‘he is a knob’ describes this more succinctly !

The lady like American Koo Stark might have had a transformative effect
but alas that was not to be and instead he wed his female doppelganger,
two wrongs not making a right.

Whatevershallidowithmylife · 06/01/2024 12:02

@ZenNudist you do realise Scotland is in Britain don't you?

SOxon · 06/01/2024 12:04
  • I looked up the paint spraying episode, all traces seem to have been removed
  • Katie Rabett
SerafinasGoose · 06/01/2024 12:15

He'll never be held legally accountable. His family has made sure of that.

But I'm perplexed by the constant protestations to the tune of 'innocent until proven guilty', or 'there's no PROOF that he's done anything wrong'. Yes, there is. Ample. He was an unelected diplomat of his country. There are all shades of wrong with that in the first place, but hanging around with a man he knew to be a convicted sex offender alone is enough to determine his complete unfitness for post. The mere photograph with Epstein in Central Park taken after his conviction is evidence enough on its own. Most of us would be fired for bringing our profession into disrepute: this wouldn't require a criminal conviction.

The post upthread talking about the alleged shenanigans of so-called 'royal' men, who have been brought up to believe they're above others and can take whatever they want from them when they want it, is only a variation on that theme. Is it any great surprise that this is the way they turn out?

In view of the above, is it right that he should be ostracised? Yes. Lose his state-funded privileges and grace and favour home? Again, yes. Has Charles brought this family into (yet more) ill-repute with his sickening little show of unity over Christmas? Yes. Is anyone in this entire family fit to hold a position of unelected state and his bloated family of hangers-on? Hopefully not for too much longer.

I hope Virginia Giuffre is laughing all the way to the bank.

SOxon · 06/01/2024 12:16

Whatevershallidowithmylife · 06/01/2024 12:02

@ZenNudist you do realise Scotland is in Britain don't you?

Andrew, Scottish name, Scottish on his maternal side,
Ferguson is also a Scottish name,
Balmoral is vacant, its an excellent plan !

SOxon · 06/01/2024 12:17

SOxon · 06/01/2024 12:04

  • I looked up the paint spraying episode, all traces seem to have been removed
  • Katie Rabett

of the incident that is, not the paint

SerafinasGoose · 06/01/2024 12:20

That Daily Mail article @theilltemperedclavecinist has posted above. Good grief.

So the Mail has decided - rather than pursuing all the privileged men who used young girls' bodies as wank socks to satisfy their own urges - to go after female staff associated with Epstein and to query why Maxwell is the only woman who has so far been held culpable.

Fucking hell. Words fail me.

SaffronSpice · 06/01/2024 13:04

But I'm perplexed by the constant protestations to the tune of 'innocent until proven guilty', or 'there's no PROOF that he's done anything wrong'. Yes, there is. Ample.

Then he should stand trial in the UK. But I am not sure why you think throwing out the principle of innocent until proven guilty in court is a good thing. It is one thing for the people to judge an individual’s behaviour and react (within law) to that eg by avoiding an individual, not employing him, warning others to stay away. It is quite another for the state to punish an individual who has not been found guilty in a fair trial.

unelected diplomat

diplomats are never elected.

SOxon · 06/01/2024 13:16

Saschka · 05/01/2024 19:27

Scotland! What have Scotland ever done to deserve him? Unless you mean an uninhabited island off the Hebrides, in which case ok.

like Rockall ? he could be Prince of all he surveys! (guillemot and shag)

pickledandpuzzled · 06/01/2024 13:22

Re the list of people Charles was pally with- he knows many many people. He will have been courted by many many people.

It could be argued that the nastiest of them would be the ones who worked hardest at getting an in with him. Alan Ball and Jimmy Saville being perfect examples. Superficially they would have seemed interesting and worthwhile friendships to pursue.

Charles is also close to the Dean of Windsor, if I remember correctly, so his friendship with Alan Ball is not unlikely- he was considered a great man until the truth was revealed.

SerafinasGoose · 06/01/2024 13:45

SaffronSpice · 06/01/2024 13:04

But I'm perplexed by the constant protestations to the tune of 'innocent until proven guilty', or 'there's no PROOF that he's done anything wrong'. Yes, there is. Ample.

Then he should stand trial in the UK. But I am not sure why you think throwing out the principle of innocent until proven guilty in court is a good thing. It is one thing for the people to judge an individual’s behaviour and react (within law) to that eg by avoiding an individual, not employing him, warning others to stay away. It is quite another for the state to punish an individual who has not been found guilty in a fair trial.

unelected diplomat

diplomats are never elected.

Re-read my post. You've only responded to a selected quote without considering the context.

This isn't a matter of criminal conviction or no criminal conviction. He's a friend of two convicted sex offenders. I do not want a person with his track record representing my country on the global stage. Imagine the message this would send?

If many other people felt differently then he would likely still be in this role. That he isn't suggests a great deal.

fedupandstuck · 06/01/2024 15:03

@SOxon there is mention of a paint spraying episode on the wiki page for Andrew which has references to articles that mention it. It was white paint and from a building project not a factory. The same general story though, that he did it deliberately and said he enjoyed doing it whilst wiping his hands on newspaper.

SOxon · 06/01/2024 17:56

fedupandstuck · 06/01/2024 15:03

@SOxon there is mention of a paint spraying episode on the wiki page for Andrew which has references to articles that mention it. It was white paint and from a building project not a factory. The same general story though, that he did it deliberately and said he enjoyed doing it whilst wiping his hands on newspaper.

thank you for this ! my half a memory - it was the gleeful look of a complete
sigh Ko and the groans of the beleagured reporters - good sleuthing Holmes !

Tinysoxxx · 06/01/2024 18:25

WarriorN · 06/01/2024 11:43

Yes it has.

Never took a great deal of notice but I found the whole anti Megan thing extremely puzzling.

I started a new twitter account a couple of years ago and the algorithm from the basic detail of "uk" was all pro Kate and William and anti Megan. <adjusts tin hat>

I can confirm this deflection happens (from a journalist).

WarriorN · 06/01/2024 18:34

Bloody hell.

Anyone else feel we are due another big round of "national inquiry into how everyone enabled and covered up for crimes of the rich and famous?"

RedToothBrush · 06/01/2024 18:37

What do I think of Prince Andrew?

Not a lot apart from a spoil brat with an ego the size of a planet who thinks all people are beneath his royal self and there to be exploited. And thank fuck he had an older brother.

Otherwise meh. I don't think he's particularly sexist as such. I just think his god complex is so big that everyone is for him to use and exploit and he's none discriminatory in that - as in everyone is fair game to him if they are lower social status.

IHaveAskedYouThriceNow · 06/01/2024 21:05

WarriorN · 06/01/2024 18:34

Bloody hell.

Anyone else feel we are due another big round of "national inquiry into how everyone enabled and covered up for crimes of the rich and famous?"

“Lessons will be learned“ etc etc

LuluBlakey1 · 06/01/2024 22:56

I'm sick of hearing about Epstein. It has been turned, like everything in the US into a long series of court cases, appeals, judicial decisions about evidence, the suing of people who have been named but not actually been tried and found guilty- by a woman who has changed her story several times about who these people actually are and what they did eg Alan Dershowitz. TV and rumour appear to be the vehicle of judgement.
I would be interested in the truth of what happened and who was involved but am not interested in the US judicial system doings. The focus should be an investigation of the truth. No one seems to be pulling it all together and investigating to produce an overall view of it. No one seems interested in finding the truth.

Beefcurtains79 · 07/01/2024 07:27

Grammarnut · 06/01/2024 11:39

He is sleazy, arrogant, and probably self-deluded but not a sex offender. He was c. 40 when he had sex with Guiffre and she was 17. Perfectly normal behaviour afaik, though some think it sleazy and 'cradle-snatching' has always been frowned on.

40 year olds sleeping with 17 year olds is perfectly normal behaviour?
What circles do you mix in? 🤢

sep135 · 07/01/2024 07:59

40 year olds sleeping with 17 year olds is perfectly normal behaviour? What circles do you mix in?

Not the same as mine. I have a 17 year old and I'd be concerned if they were seeing a 25 year old, let alone a 40 year old. Add in the power imbalance and Royal angle and it's disgusting.

He hasn't helped himself by being unbelievably arrogant. On all these threads, no one who's met him has a good word to say about him. That's in public so I imagine he's even more unbearable in private.

The Newsnight interview showed he lacked any penitence whatsoever. Total scumbag and it rankles that tax-payers are funding his lifestyle. And while we're at it, Fergie can stop banging on about him as the most honourable man. There's no honour in screwing 17 year olds when you're old enough to be their dad, particularly trafficked ones.

stealtheatingtunnocks · 07/01/2024 08:26

Beefcurtains79 · 07/01/2024 07:27

40 year olds sleeping with 17 year olds is perfectly normal behaviour?
What circles do you mix in? 🤢

Charles was 29 when he first dated the 16 year old Diana.

Swipe left for the next trending thread