Relationships between the members of the British royal family

[royalanthropologist]

I don't believe in stifling children too much so I think that Savannah should be taught a little self-discipline rather than turning her into a robot. I have to say that push seemed malicious and the boy that sent that paper flying was even worse.
Double post auto-merged: June 15, 2018, 12:51:05 PM

Michael was and is a faithful husband. Grampa Charles wasn't I sure would want George to take after Michael in character. And looks.

How shallow can a person get? Looks indeed. And then talking about a child cheating as if it is some kind of genetic defect. Pathetic :wacko:

[TLLK]

I believe George gets his shyness from George VI and Queen Mary.

Quite possibly the shyness also comes from the Queen, Diana, and his mother Catherine seems to be a rather reserved person at times too.

[Blue Clover]

Is Prince Charles responsible for the unity we see today between the members of his own family? Can we give him credit bringing his sons and wives together in what is a difficult situation? A situation that could have caused many problems in the royal family?

Prince William and Prince Harry are all smiles. Kate and Meghan are all smiles. Is this because of Prince Charles?

The Queen and members of The Royal Family attend Christmas Day Church Service at Sandringham ? Royal Central

[Blue Clover]

I must say that I am impressed by the show of unity between these two ladies after weeks of a rumored rift in the tabloids. They are following the Queen's message and showing unity.  :xmas17:

The Duchess of Cambridge and Duchess of Sussex arrive at Christmas Church Service together ? Royal Central

[Curryong]

Well, Charles may be a peacemaker. Who knows. Or the whole 'feud' thing may have been a big bunch of hooey in the middle of a Meghan-bashing exercise by the British press. And on the whole, as disputes sell more clicks than peaceful relations, that might well be the explanation. Even if Kate and Meghan are very different and not bosom buddies.

I really think that the Queen was pointing to a divided country post-Brexit vote, and various clashes throughout the world in her speech, not giving coded messages to her two grandsons and their wives. She's never referred EVER to any difficulties within her family circle in her Xmas Day messages since 1953, and I can't see her doing so now.

A nice, not too long clip, showing the royals leaving church today at Sandringham.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Cimx9kpTibQ

[sandy]

I think the DM made up the feud. Charles is all about his image and spin. I think the Queen is the family peacemaker Charles IMO is more out for himself.

[sandy]

The rift was imo fake news and manufactured by the DM.

[Blue Clover]

@Curryong  :goodpost:
@sandy  :goodpost:

[Blue Clover]

@sandy Perhaps, the rift was a fabrication but I do think today's Happy Families display did sent a positive message to the public/tabloids about the brothers and their wives. I really do hope all is well!

Kate and Meghan are all smiles as they join the Queen at church in Sandringham | Daily Mail Online

[Trudie]

I agree with Sandy I don't believe there is a rift this story was manufactured by the media when it was announced The Queen gifted Frogmore cottage to Harry and Meghan and not a home in Norfolk near William and Kate. Ok they aren't seen together in a lot of joint engagements well Kate was on maternity leave until October and each couple have there own separate duties due to their positions. Kate is no actress and if there was a rift you would have seen it on her face despite a smile.

[Blue Clover]

@Trudie I agree! I think they get along just fine.

[sara8150]

Kate and Meghan 'were ordered to call Christmas Day truce by the Queen' | Daily Mail Online
Order by HM Queen not since Prince Charles and Diana but not good relationship in marriage years when Prince Charles been see Camilla for decades they now Duchess of Cornwall but wont happened in royal history

Meghan Markle and Kate dispel rumour of ongoing RIFT with simple gesture | Royal | News | Express.co.uk

Royal FEUD: Meghan and Kate's Christmas was 'AWKWARD' after Queen told them to end row | Royal | News | Express.co.uk

Kate puts Meghan Markle rift claims behind her for Christmas church service with William | Royal | News | Express.co.uk

[Blue Clover]

This body language expert concluded that the Duchesses tried too hard to appear united.  :hehe:

Body language expert reveals Kate and Meghan used tricks politicians employ to show festive unity | Daily Mail Online

[TLLK]

Both were born commoners.

With the exceptions of Prince Phillip and Princess Marina of Greece and Denmark, all of the post WWI 20th century and 21st century royal in-laws have been commoners including  Lady Elisabeth Bowes-Lyon, Lady Alice Montagu Douglass Scott, and Lady Diana Spencer. :) Technically there are members of the BRF who are commoners ie: Prince Michael of Kent and until their wedding days: Princes Andrew, Edward, William and Harry.

Who is a ?commoner? in Britain? Is everyone who is not a peer a commoner, even if that person is a member of the royal family? Can you be royal and

I must say that I am impressed by the show of unity between these two ladies after weeks of a rumored rift in the tabloids. They are following the Queen's message and showing unity.  :xmas17:

:goodpost: I agree @Blue Clover. The tabloids "need" a storyline to continue earning clicks and to sell papers/magazines. Of course most human relationships will have their moments of disagreement, but as far as I can tell there is nothing substantial to suggest that there is a "rift."

[Blue Clover]

With the exceptions of Prince Phillip and Princess Marina of Greece and Denmark, all of the post WWI 20th century and 21st century royal in-laws have been commoners including  Lady Elisabeth Bowes-Lyon, Lady Alice Montagu Douglass Scott, and Lady Diana Spencer. :) Technically there are members of the BRF who are commoners ie: Prince Michael of Kent and until their wedding days: Princes Andrew, Edward, William and Harry.

Who is a ?commoner? in Britain? Is everyone who is not a peer a commoner, even if that person is a member of the royal family? Can you be royal and
:goodpost: I agree @Blue Clover. The tabloids "need" a storyline to continue earning clicks and to sell papers/magazines. Of course most human relationships will have their moments of disagreement, but as far as I can tell there is nothing substantial to suggest that there is a "rift."

@TLLK Yes, tabloids need a storyline and a narrative that they can build on for years and years.  :goodpost:  The storylines actually make the royals and royal life more relevent to regular people. Not all regular people, of course but some who would not be interested otherwise. Sadly, the storylines resemble those of TV soap operas at time.

[Curryong]

Given the longevity of the Windsors it could well be twenty five years before William sits on the throne as King and Kate becomes Queen Consort. A great many things can happen in the next twenty or so years. We don't really know whether the monarchy will survive that long, for instance.

[TLLK]

Yes, tabloids need a storyline and a narrative that they can build on for years and years.  :goodpost:  The storylines actually make the royals and royal life more relevent to regular people. Not all regular people, of course but some who would not be interested otherwise. Sadly, the storylines resemble those of TV soap operas at time.

Yes they do. IMO most families have similar "storylines" from time to time, so the various royal families are made  a bit more "relatable" when there are happy events or even more story worthy a suggested "tiff."

Consider at the mileage that the Spanish tabloids had with this year's "Easter scandal" between Queens Letizia and Sofiia. :wacko:

[Blue Clover]

@TLLK Yes, regular families have their storylines that are shared and retold over the years. The royal storylines have their happy and sad moments. I'm sure there are people who buy more papers in order to read about the royal tiffs. All of this makes them seem more normal and just like regular people.  :nod:

Focusing on a so-called tiff between members of the Spanish royal family last year was a highlight for the tabloids on Easter and probably pulled in many readers who like seeing that they are royal but just like us.  :P

[Blue Clover]

Given the longevity of the Windsors it could well be twenty five years before William sits on the throne as King and Kate becomes Queen Consort. A great many things can happen in the next twenty or so years. We don't really know whether the monarchy will survive that long, for instance.

:goodpost:  The truest statement!  :friends:

[TLLK]

Given the longevity of the Windsors it could well be twenty five years before William sits on the throne as King and Kate becomes Queen Consort.

Which will have the British tabloids gushing over "How young" the new monarch/consort (William/Catherine -61) would be when compared to the previous ones (Charles/Camilla-70+) :lol:.

[royalanthropologist]

Good old DM. Manufacture a rift using "sources" then manufacturer a reconciliation using the same "sources" then write an article questioning the reality of both the rift and reconciliation. Three stories out of nothing and 8000 plus DM comments. Poor Meghan...an intelligent and accomplished woman having to put up with royal watcher vitriol without ever being given any chance to respond.

[Curryong]

Yes, and negative article after negative article since Novermber, daily with scarcely a break. Who knows how long it will go on for, probably years. Why the other members involved, ie Kate and William, haven't issued firm denials of a rift before now, God knows.

[Trudie]

It was only a matter of time Curryong. Lets see upon marriage the Queen has gifted many properties to her children not in close proximty to each other no manufactured rifts mentioned at the time. So she gifted William Amner in Norfolk and Harry Frogmore in Windsor and suddenly there's a rift. Are people that gullible or have such empty lives to see the timing exactly at the same time as the announcement of the gift there is a rift? Another hate on Meghan clickbait exercise.

[wannable]

Sandringham in time will be William's, its a private property and giving ALL the private properties to a King (or Queen) the death taxes of the prior is literally wiped out.

Frogmore is only a 'lease'.  HM cannot 'gift' a property of the Crown Estate.

[Curryong]

Yes, we know William performed a miracle of his own accord by being born first. The leases of some of the Queen's children's property are the result of not being the first born. (Anne's property was purchased for her so she is an exception.)

And guess what, the same will happen to Charlotte and to Louis. If the monarchy lasts by the time it's William's turn. Might be another twenty five years or more, so good luck waiting Willie!

Meghan is only a few months older than Kate who is 37 next month and, according to you, is an old woman then?

And Meghan has friends from her college days and early days in show business. Those college friends may well be godmothers to her coming child.

George, Charlotte and Louis won't be taking up royal duties for another twenty years or more. Harry and Meghan will still be in the public eye. Plus, most of the Royal family aren't direct heirs to the throne. They still manage to lead very enjoyable, happy and fulfilling public lives, without the constraints of being monarch and heir like Charles.

I wouldn't say Anne, the York princesses and the Wessexes are crying into their soup every day because they aren't directly inheriting the throne. And that throne may well be a poisoned chalice for the next monarchs, considering how British views of the monarchy have changed in the last couple of decades.