When the Queen dies, will you be sad?

I wouldn't say sad per se. She has lived a very long life, it would be her time.

Not sad, but I think England will be lost and the BRF's days will be numbered.

When I read of old people passing it's sad but nowhere near as sad as when a younger person dies.

My sister died at age 29, and it was the saddest thing in my life. She fought to stay alive - she wanted to have children, a life. My dad is 85 and is terminally ill and he is at peace with this and calm about dying. We spend more time talking about my sister than his situation (loving memories).

I imagine that QEII has long made her peace with herself and dying. However, I think she will fight death so that she can continue to protect her favorite son Andrew from repercussions of his illegal behaviors. I think this will keep her alive for many years.

No not at all.

Ask this question... if you died, would the queen be sad. Then you should get your answer.

What r3 said. (Sorry for your losses, r3)

When I die, the queen will cry for days! She just will!!

Meh.

Yes, of course. She's been the queen my entire life and I'm an eldergay. It will have a profound effect on me as I review her history on the throne along with my own life's trials and travails.

And I'm not even British.

What's sad is she's still on the throne and can't trust anyone to take over properly. Really, she should already be in retirement and can let herself fade around from the public eye so death can come whenever.

Don' be silly.

For a multitude of reasons lost on many of you, I will fully observe the mourning period and likely weep softly as I watch her funeral.

Of course I'll be sad. She is--or was--THE QUEEN.

Why are we even discussing this?

Of course, she's been bloody terrific.

HM also seems like one of the most honest and kindly people we've had as Monarch, plus her hard work should be an inspiration.

R3 sorry about your losses X

Yes, very much so. I usually don't react much to the deaths of famous people. I never cried over Diana, although I did recognize that the circumstances were especially sad. But I've already lost my Mom, my Grandmas, all my aunts and great-aunts, and HM sort of takes their place when I look for an example of thoughtful, dignified behavior. And Yes, I may actually shed a tear, since she's always been in my life.

Yes, I'll be kind of sad. Not from a personal feeling of loss, but just from nostalgia and the feeling that yet another familiar, stable element in Western culture is gone. As queen, she's been much nicer-seeming than Charles promises to be as king. We've grown accustomed to her face, at any rate.

Some of you dizzy queens are too much and are overly emotional.

[quote] Why are we even discussing this?

Because many people are disagreeing with you?

Just a guess.

What ever she does, she still makes world news and it has been so for the last 70 years.

No other person in the world today can make that claim.

🙄

I'm a Canadian. She's been on our money and our stamps for my entire life. If I don't have a strong emotional response to her death I should be diagnosed as a cataleptic. I only hope that when she dies the Covid-19 restrictions will be over and there will be a magnificent state funeral. God bless Her Majesty !

Of course I'll be sad. Not regretful or sobbing sad. She's a public figure after all and no kin to me. But yes, it will mark the end of an era, and the beginning of massive changes in great Britain. And it is Historic. I will also feel sad when Jimmy Carter dies. Hail & Farewell! She's had a great run.

What I want to see is Charles, Camilla, and Anne and Andrew, Edward & Sophie sobbing like mad things. I want Zara, Beatrice, and Eugenie to collapse throwing themselves on her casket. I want to See Her Royal Highness the new Princess of Wales, Katherine, Standing tall and ramrod straight like a soldier, with one lone tear trickling down her cheek.

I want William to sob a time or two then watch her kick him in the shins , "Buck up old lad!" I want Harry to sob uncontrollably and for Meghan to stand beside him rubbing circles in his back while she dabs a glycerine tear from her cheek. I want George to fart loudly, for Louis to complain that "George is stinking, Mama!" I want pageantry and fantastic music, and hymns and it will be WONDERFUL!

[quote] I want to See Her Royal Highness the new Princess of Wales, Katherine, Standing tall and ramrod straight like a soldier, with one lone tear trickling down her cheek.

She wouldn't be Princess of Wales yet. The title of Prince of Wales (and thus her married title as Princess of Wales) has to be formally conferred by the sitting monarch; it is not automatic. And the new king would confer no titles until his mother was buried and the period of official mourning was over.

She would, however, immediately become Duchess of Cornwall and Rothesay the second the Queen dies.

When you manage to live to be 80 something or even 90 something, your passing is not sad, it just isn't. You have managed to live a very long life and all of our lives will end at some point. Something that will happen to all of us isn't sad, it is just as it should be, inevitable.

I'm not British. So probably no.

It would be better if they had professional wailers and Philip threw himself on the casket. She's not that meaningful to me---it will be the end of era, but given how dysfunctional the family obviously has become, a lot of things won't change.

[quote] It would be better if they had professional wailers and Philip threw himself on the casket.

He will scream, "Take me with you, Lillibet!" and jump on top of the casket as it is lowered into the hole in St. George's Chapel.

No. Not at all.

R10 The queen was never going to retire. She will be Queen until she dies.

There has been only one abdication in 954 years. There won’t be another one in our lifetime.

I’ve said it before on other threads and I’ll say it again; Charles will die before Elizabeth.

The family has longevity genes. The Queen will probably check out at around 105. Charles has longevity on both sides, he’ll also be around forever.

O mighty prophetess Cassandra at r29, why are you cursed by Apollo so that no one will believe your infallible prognostications of doom?

Will Prince George inherit her purse collection?

Oh, god no. The fusty old bitch has run her time out.

Byeeeeeeeeee!

She’s really just a glorified hostess, greeting dignitaries with her tits hanging out, etc.

No great loss.

Who is going to knight has been rockers and actors?

It will be the end of an era. If COVID-19 has been resolved, the funeral will be bigger than Diana’s. There will be multiple crowned and other heads of state in attendance.

Six months ago, I would've said it wouldn't matter to me. I'm American, and I've never really understood why countries keep their royal families.

After her recent coronavirus address, however, I'll say I appreciate her more than I'd ever imagined I might.

And now, I will miss her.

R31 you get a WW because that was the funniest post I’ve read tonight.

This makes for extremely cringeworthy reading. I’m not sure which of “she’s on our stamps” or the repeated versions of “it’s the end of an era” as being supposedly legitimate reasons for sorrow is more pitiful. If the principles behind her being head of state are less (less!) democratic than Donald Trump’s being in the same position then you know you don’t really deserve it. But of course a crown and a few monochrome outfits can really distract the masses as illustrated here!

So when she dies, I guess it will be just a week or two before they announce the date of the coronation?

In the video clip it R37 @ 2m 46s she says “many people of all faiths and of none”

If that phrase had been uttered by a politician in this country the MAGAs would riot.

Márgarét, áre you gríeving Over Goldengrove unleaving? Leáves like the things of man, you With your fresh thoughts care for, can you? Ah! ás the heart grows older It will come to such sights colder By and by, nor spare a sigh Though worlds of wanwood leafmeal lie; And yet you wíll weep and know why. Now no matter, child, the name: Sórrow’s spríngs áre the same. Nor mouth had, no nor mind, expressed What heart heard of, ghost guessed: It ís the blight man was born for, It is Margaret you mourn for.

No, because I'm American and I'm not emotionally invested in the British monarchy.

Of course not OP. Royalty is just entertainment and we have plenty of the latter in the world.

R9 - MARY!

I don't understand how Americans can be so upset by this. She's not our queen.

She's a symbol of a fucked up class system that keeps people down in her country. The Brits would have been better off without the monarchy but never got the revolution due to the British colony outlets for poor people.

The idea of monarchy is pretty grotesque.

Only slightly as I have no particular attachment to the royals. She will have had a really long life, but its one I'm glad I dont have, always in the public eye and bound by protocol. Neither her nor other royals have ever been able to enjoy simple pleasures in life like monster truck pulls or tailgate parties, thats a little sad

Nope. But I do look forward to seeing who Philip marries next and especially what their children will look like.

No but I would rather Trump die.

She's the Queen of my country (Australia). I have met her in person in Sydney. I'm not sure many will be exactly sad but she is deeply respected and has earned her place in history as the longest-reigning British monarch and figurehead.

I think her funeral will be massive. Bigger than Diana's funeral with attendance by leaders and dignitaries from all over the planet. Thankfully, no member of the Trump family will be invited much less tolerated.

I am by no means a royalist. But when the Queen of England and Queen Margrethe of Denmark dies I will be sad. Mostly because they have been in the media for all of my life and are a part of my cultural upbringing.

I was sad when Vera Lynn died.

QEII's passing will be more than a death it will be a significant change. It will end an era that contained the Second World War and move us into modern times in totality. Money will be changed but it will take decades to get it all out of circulation so her presence will be known.

She had a great arse but she can't live forever.

I don’t like our king and the rest of his family, they mean shit to our culture. I don’t like any other royal family either. Aren’t they all Germans anyway. The world would be better off without royalty, god knows it would save some tax money. Instead we could find some good diplomats to represent our countries, not people who happened to be born in a certain family.

Not really, though I would be sad for the cultural change it would bring about. She's been the queen (and old) my entire life, and I'm 48. She's an institution. The idea of King Charles (or whatever name he chooses) is just dreary and dull.

People like me get a lot of guff for having been shocked at Diana's death, but it was a similar thing: not so much sad about the death of the person, but the death of someone who had been such a huge, pervasive part of our culture.

Nope

Not sad, but moved. She's been Queen since before my parents were born. She's like a monument in my eyes.

A monument? Who teaches people stuff like that? Does it start during primary school? What does that old lady represent? A dying Britain? I truly don’t get it at all.

Not one bit. She’s lived a century in nothing but the pinnacle of luxury. She got more than she ever deserved. And she raised pretty shitty kids. And that ginger grandson of hers is a turd, too.

No OP. She's neither family nor friend.

I will see it as the closing of the postwar era in the UK.

And potentially as the beginning of the end of the Royals as an institution, which may or may not be a good thing.

I think she did her job to the best of her abilities for the sort of job it was. She was a national figurehead, which is not nothing.

I have never envied her.

Not at all.

Can't happen soon enough!

When she dies of what?

[QUOTE] There has been only one abdication in 954 years. There won’t be another one in our lifetime.

It doesn't count as an abdication if the monarch retires at 94, you spazmodic fool.

She won't die.

I'll be sad initially, but the rapid transition to witnessing the destruction of the British monarchy will sustain me. I don't see how such an archaic institution will survive her absence.

She’s the glue that’s holding the whole shitshow together.

Nope. Fuck those krauts!

[quote]When the Queen dies, will you be sad?

Doubt that I'd notice.

If it wasn't for you obsessive queens beating it into my head.

I’ll be sad, but only because I know that the media coverage will dominate our lives to the point of over saturation.

r67 By updating. Same as the other European ones have done. Don't know how well it'll work in practice though. We or at least the press like the spectacle of Gold coaches WAY too much to know what to do with bicycling monarchs.

The Queen has years left. She is so young.

That's what she wants you to think.

Will Elton John write a song for her?

R75 he can use candle in the wind again. The third time is a charm.

I personally will be sad, I am not any kind of fierce royalist by any stretch but having been exposed to the Queen since birth, through TV, on money and stamps etc, and living near two of her main residences, I definitely feel some sort of bond with her. She's the longest reigning British monarch of ALL TIME so she is literally the Queen of Queens and it will be very strange when she's no longer around.

I’m British and while not a monarchist in any way, The Queen’s death will be huge. Even among those who oppose the monarchy, she’s respected. She’s of a different era and has done her job brilliantly. She’ll be missed, and the whole deal around her death and funeral will be like nothing we’ve ever seen in our lifetimes.

"I declare before you all that my whole life whether it be long or short shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong."

Pledged by HM The Queen on her 21st birthday in 1947. And carried out by her magnificently for the past 68 years, 5 months.

I’ll take to mourning in black attire for years, my face covered by black lace to shield the world from my never ending tears.

Yes. She may not have been a perfect parent, but she was a magnificent Head of State, evidencing self-discipline, discretion, an unquestionable dedication to her job, belief in shared social values, and a profound love of country. She evidenced none of the whingeing narcissism and self-absorbtion that characterises rather too many of her descendants (and her younger sister).

The values she served are departing with her, and not for the better where Britain is concerned.

Some of her underlying steel is likely due to having lived through WWII at an age (13-17) when she was able to appreciate her parents carrying out their duties at a critical time.

I could wish she had been as good a parent as a Head of State, but I suppose that's asking a great deal.

An era will pass with her.

I am not too sanguine about Charles doing as good a job. He might be in different position today if he hadn't made the disastrous match with Diana.

If the monarchy has a future, it lies with William and Kate, who appear to realise that their models should be the Queen and her parents.

Yes, I will be sad.

R65 I meant she will be queen until she dies.

There is no retirement.

Charles may become her Regent and carry on the duties if she were to become bed ridden but even then he would not be King.

She’ll be the Queen of England until she stops breathing.

R67 - "I'll be sad initially, but the rapid transition to witnessing the destruction of the British monarchy will sustain me. I don't see how such an archaic institution will survive her absence."

You could go broke betting against the British monarchy, which has been counted down and out twice in my lifetime: the Abdication crisis and the Death of Diana.

You also need to remember that the monarchy only gets abolished through an Act of Parliament, and Parliament makes very good use of the monarchy and its more effective members.

Parliament has no particular appetite for abolishing the monarchy - the are enough social upheavals going on, and Parliament also isn't interested in the headaches of constantly electing new Heads of State periodically along with holding elections for actual government.

Parliament quite well knows the value of having the cachet that the monarchy casts over the job of Head of State

It like being able to send, for example, an attractive young couple like William and Kate to Pakistan for a week to patch up the threads of the last not terribly successful visit more than a decade earlier.

No one will fill magazines with shots of old men in suits shaking hands before disappearing into conference rooms.

The Danes have one of the most progressive countries on earth. They adore their monarchy, which by the way is the oldest in Europe.

Do you also think the monarchy in Denmark is doomed just by, ipso facto, being a monarchy?

Crown Princess Mary is Denmark's Duchess of Cambridge. Pity that Meghan Markle didn't turn out to be Denmark's quietly successful Princess Marie (married to the Danish Spare).

Keep yer money in yer pocket, mate.

Parliament likes things just the way they are.

R65 - She cannot "retire". She can "reduce her workload" and hand over increasing numbers of duties to Charles and William, but one of those duties will NOT be going through sensitive state papers on a daily basis - only the Sovereign is privy to those.

If the day comes when HM can no longer do THAT, then she will have either to abdicate or establish a Regency to ensure that the review of matters of state continues so that the monarchy is kept informed. In either case, she will remain an anointed Queen till she dies. I suspect that in the event she really cannot continue reviewing those papers, a Regency would be occur rather than an Abdication. Charles would remain Prince of Wales throughout any Regency.

The Sovereign has three constitutional rights: to be consulted, to advise, and to warn. People constantly forget that she is a Head of State, that every day of her life she sits down to review the most sensitive matters concerning the government, and holds weekly meetings with the Prime Minister in which those matters are discussed. She is privy to everything. Not one PM has had anything but praise for her common sense, insight, and courtesy.

If you don't think that's a loss for Britain, you're a naive fool.

There is no global figure that I have more respect for. I’m not a royalist but I do find room in my heart for QEII. She is a Mother figure for the entire world. She commands that I sit up straight and be on my best behavior. I will miss her. Her son is a tub of entitled goo.

R83 the Danish adoration of their queen is sickening. She should get her teeth fixed and stop making her own clothes. The woman looks horrible and I can’t blame her husband for having been depressed being part of that family.

R85 a mother to the world??? LMAO, god you’re old fashioned. Where you born in the 19th century? Newsflash Brittannia doesn’t rule the waves.

Speak for yourself R85

R86 - Dear me, aren't you triggered this afternoon.

Why should the Danes measure their liking for the way Queen Margrethe has carried out her duties by her teeth and her clothes?

Their monarchy is 1,000 years old and is part of their tradition and culture. I suppose it never occurred to you that her odd, Mother Goose appearance is part of why the Danes like her? That they aren't concerned with her beauty or fashion sense or her teeth, but her dedication, her endearing eccentricity combined with her ability to pull off royal grandeur when necessary? And, like QEII, her evident love for her country and its culture?

Margrethe has much in common with QEII, including an Heir not quite of the same calibre. Fortunately, her eldest son got himself a wife who made up for the vacuity of the Crown Prince and his well-known laziness and disinterest in anything but sailing and tennis. Mary works far harder than Frederik, leant some more au courant feminine glamour including much better clothes and teeth, added four very attractive children, and learnt fluent Danish.

Jesus - Margrethe was the eldest child of the last Sovereign. That's how a hereditary monarchy works - not by shade of teeth.

And her husband, once handsome, turned into a fat drunk who whinged constantly about not being made King Consort. Margrethe put up with his petulant bullshit with a great deal of grace and fortitude.

The British monarchy should copy the Danish approach, and ensure by law that ONLY the Sovereign, the Heir, and his Heir can expect an "appenage" from the taxpayers (annual support to sustain the monarchy and core royal family, whose seniors obviously cannot earn money any other way). Even the Heir's younger children will have to fend for themselves. The Danish monarchy didn't utter a peep in protest.

No wonder the Danes appreciate their monarchy. They also loved King Christian IX, Margrethe's father, and his consort, Queen Ingrid, born a princess of Sweden and a very elegant woman.

How sickeningly uninformed and superficial you are.

Cecil Beaton describing then-Princess Elizabeth in her teens:

". . .the dazzlingly fresh complexion, the clear regard from the glass-blue eyes, and the gentle, all pervading sweetness of her smile."

R86, Prince Henrik was depressed because he was a closeted royal. Margrethe learned to look the other way, but accepted the fact that he liked boys. Near the end, his love for rich food and drink was a substitute for the male flesh and it eventually killed him.

[quote]When the Queen dies, will you be sad?

AS IF there is only one Queen in the world. If you mean QEII, just say so, OP. Otherwise, I try not to think of that family at all.

At the moment, Europe has no fewer than SEVEN reigning queens; Queen Mathilde of Belgium, Queen Letizia of Spain, Queen Margrethe II of Denmark, Queen Silvia of Sweden, Queen Sonja of Norway, Her Majesty Queen Máxima, Princess of the Netherlands, and QEII.

So, get your queens straight, OP. And what was your question?

[quote]I am by no means a royalist. But when the Queen of England and Queen Margrethe of Denmark dies I will be sad. Mostly because they have been in the media for all of my life and are a part of my cultural upbringing.

Are you Danish? You must be, because that Danish queen hasn't been in any media I've ever noticed, I've never heard of her.

I have PTO days reserved every year in the event HM The Queen passes, for I will be too distraught to do anything. (MARY!!! I know...)

She is everything and the living goddess on earth.!

r91 when people say "The Queen" it is automatically known that they are referring to Elizabeth.

Ridiculous, R94. Ridiculous and absolutely untrue.

No r95. In most of the world "The Queen" refers to Elizabeth.

R96, I'd have to agree but I think that's because there is the combination of her longevity, a western or at least an American lack of knowledge about other monarchies besides the UK, and of course the movie, "The Queen." If Camilla does not become -- or more accurately, not use the style and title, the Queen -- then it might be a while until we think of the UK monarch as The Queen. By that time, we'll be so used to calling her Kate that it's doubtful she will be The Queen especially since he will be The King. Perhaps it will only be when another woman becomes the regnant monarch.

I will be sad because it may well signal a deep decline in their fortunes for a while. An elderly Charles & Camilla succeeding a beloved monarch would be tough but the Queen has been elderly for a long time, though God bless her stamina! William will probably be past 50 when he succeeds so the UK is in for a long period of older monarchs. I think this is where Charles has got it wrong: slimming down the monarchy may rob it of its youth and newest members.

Yes, I'll be sad.

I am not much of a monarchist, and she and her family certainly reaped a multitude of benefits from the system. But she served in a role that she never had any choice or part in deciding to play, and in that, she has done admirably.

I also think she is the last of her kind. The institution is unlikely to last long after her passing. If it does, its public influence will be significantly diminished.

Who cares what "most of the world" thinks? There are presently 13 reigning queens throughout the world. In 12 of those countries, "the Queen" most certainly is not Elizabeth.

Your view on this matter is pinched, parochial, and without substance or merit.

[quote] Your view on this matter is pinched, parochial, and without substance or merit.

MARY!!!!!

HISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

R99 Don't be absurd. Even in countries with a reigning Queen, "The Queen" means only QEII. She's the most famous woman on the planet.

To people in America there is only one Queen.

QEII

Betty Windsor is the QUEEN.

All other hatin ass bitches to the left

No one cares about that old leather bag. She’s a murderer.

Yes, of course her funeral will be massive - Covid permitting - it will be the funeral of the British head of state, which we have not had since 1952. Given that she's been Queen for longer than most of the UK population and world population has been alive even if you don't care for her it will still be a great psychological change.

R2 is absolutely wrong that her passing will mean the BRF's days are numbered, but it will, I believe, transform the UK. So much of our misplaced assuredness, and our inability to comprehend that we are no longer that great imperial power anymore are due, I feel to the fact that we have had such continuity with the Queen from the final days of the empire. Her longevity has also made her internationally popular and even though Charles will be a decent king and William a much better one, they still won't have the same aura she has had. So, while I feel that the Queen's passing will be sad, I also feel that it will provide the big jolt that the UK needs to come to its senses and understand just what its position and status in the world is today (not as significant as many imagine).

I don't think I'll be sad. She's had a long life. The antiquated monarchy should die with her, though it won't. The world doesn't need entitled rich people who carry jumped-up, ultimately meaningless titles. All these royals are coasting on the privileges conferred on long-dead ancestors for dubious achievements (murdering rival relatives for a throne).

That said, she did an admirable job as a fancy sort of diplomat and as a symbol of stability for her country. Her work ethic and the qualities that made her effective in her role weren't "inherited" by most of her children and grandchildren. That is what is truly sad.

Charles doesn't seem like he's all that interested in taking care of a bunch folks. He'll do his duty and let William handle a lot of stuff and probably bring Harry back into the fold since Harry seems to have inherited his passion for progressive causes. He'll discard the hangers on like those ghastly sisters and the racists like Michael of Kent.

Devastated.

^oops

Never underestimate the power of true moral authority, and the observance of rituals and traditions. Done well, they can bind a nation together and set a standard that imbues cultural identity with the kind of stature, and legitimacy that extend into generations yet unborn.....

NO , LONG TIME COMING .

I'm British. I don't give a monkey's bollocks about the queen. I feel embarrassed over some of the fawning in this thread.

SILENCE PEASANTS!

Be quiet twos, a TEN is speaking!

Quite frankly, I find the Continental royals much more interesting and accomplished than the British Royal Family. And definitely more attractive. Even the Princely Family of Lichtenstein is better educated and more sophisticated than the BRF. For some reason, Americans go apeshit over anything that has to do with the Windsors.So sick of it.

I would happily dissolve the monarchy tomorrow but I don’t hate The Queen. I admire that she until very recently has carried on with her duties into very old age. So yes, I will be sad to see her go - not as sad as when Sir David Attenborough dies - but in that way when any respected public figure dies. I even quite like Prince Charles from what I have seen of him but don’t think we need a monarchy. An elected head of state Would be far better.

"I saw THE QUEEN on CNN today."

"Pardon, but which QUEEN are you talking about? There are 13 REIGNING QUEENS, you know."

"Oh I am so sorry, I forgot that everybody in the world doesn't think "THE QUEEN" automatically means the QUEEN OF FUCKING ENGLAND because she's, you know, the most famous woman in the world and has been in the media nearly every day for 70 years."

[quote]For some reason, Americans go apeshit over anything that has to do with the Windsors.So sick of it.

Gee, I wonder why that is. **rolls eyes**

R114 I blame Lucy and that episode where she went “apeshit” over wanting to see Lilibet in person.

[quote] —Couldn't you beat something meatier?

We'd happily beat you like a going if you were in front of us. And you sound pretty meaty.

[quote] Who cares what "most of the world" thinks? There are presently 13 reigning queens throughout the world. In 12 of those countries, "the Queen" most certainly is not Elizabeth. Your view on this matter is pinched, parochial, and without substance or merit.

Mary! You sure gave everyone here a good piece of your mind!

I don’t feel any great affection for the royal family. They are just a sideshow to distract us from the politicians. They have no impact on ordinary people’s lives. I don’t understand why so many Americans are so interested in them.

r99 is bitter no one means [italic]his[/italic] queen in Lower Slobbovia when anyone outside of his august nation says "the Queen."

I would have before we learned her son is a pedophile.

“ I declare before you all that your whole lives whether they be long or short shall be devoted to my service and the service of my shitty imperial family to which none of you belong”

R79 isn’t this what she really meant? Sovereign grant was over $100m in 2019?

[quote] I don’t understand why so many Americans are so interested in them.

Because our own queen isn't quite as dignified.

Politicians come and go. But the Monarch is above all that. The Queen, Philip, Charles, Anne, Andrew, Edward , etc.etc. have all been part of the scene the cultural history of the world for decades. All my life really. She's like the Pope. Because, you know, the ceremony that occurs when a monarch is crowned happens in church. She's anointed with holy oils. There is a religious ceremony to it. So She has this unique standing. And she sees it as her duty. I remember watching The Crown when Elizabeth had lunch with her Uncle David, Duke of Windsor and she asked him if he ever thought he ought to apologize to her because here she was in a role she had never asked for, etc.? As I thought of it, she was always going to end up Queen. Because David had no heirs. It would have eventually passed to her once her father died.

Why are there literally hundreds of threads about the royals on Datalounge? Are they all posted by the same person?

R126 ‘holy oils’? You can’t be serious. And are we really living in a world where you (presumably a gay man) post “she’s like the pope” with an implicit positive meaning? And you feel comfortable enough to post that, like the community response to that would be in agreement with that sentiment? And the most insane thing of all is that it does seem to be the community sentiment.

He's just making a comparison r128. The Queen is an international figure, the same as the Pope.

[quote]R127 Why are there literally hundreds of threads about the royals on Datalounge? Are they all posted by the same person?

It’s a pair of members who are obsessed with them. The rest of us just chime in once in a while to tell them that they, and their grifter idols, are stupid.

R128 The figure of the Queen is often compared to the Pope.

R131 ok if we take that as a given, shouldn’t any gay man with a shred of critical thinking therefore be totally certain that the monarchy is totally unworthy of any praise or regard and be certain of the threat they hold to society? Also just to comment of the comparison, the pope at least has had to rise through the ranks and win some kind of vote, even if it is clandestine at least there’s a nod to a democratic process.

HISSSSSS!

No I read back in the late 90s she made an anti-gay move about same sex couples.

I never cared for her after that.

She needs to lay off the cake and drinkiepoos, r131.

The Queen Mother made it to 101 and she was shitfaced drunk every day of her life. QEII should be around for awhile longer.

If she does live as long as her mother did, Charles won't become king until he's 79 years old!

And always the fucking BRF...tiresome.

Thanks R129 & R131. I wasn't suggesting anything more than that. And yes, the coronation ceremony is a religious ceremony and she is anointed with "holy oils" . She's crowned by the Archbishop of Canterbury, I think. So the whole thing goes back historically to the "Divine Right of Kings". That's how she was raised. It's what her grandmother and her father and her grandfather taught and what they believed. So it's ingrained in her. I have no idea how strongly Charles buys into all that. I think he might to a certain extent, but he is also 100% in favor of changing and modernizing it. Although I expect he will show more respect for certain traditions that William will. And Queen Charlotte will then restore the monarchy to the days of queen Victoria, bitches!

Prince George is the heir, not Charlotte.

But R138 I think you are suggesting something. You’re not just casually listing items tangentially related to the queen that would serve no purpose, we can all read a Wikipedia article if we please. You clearly are listing things like “holy oils” and the even weirder “divine right of kings” to somehow infer a scale of importance and legitimacy to the role of a monarch and to how a monarch obtains their position. And lol that you think the Archbishop of Canterbury has some kind of moral position.

Someone upthread mentioned that it suits parliament to not have to hold elections for a head of state on a rotational basis and I think this is the key. Parliament allocates a $100m / yr grant to the royal family. The royal family therefore has a vested interest in keeping parliament happy. Thus one of the arms of government (head of state) is less responsible to the people than it should be. It’s so undemocratic and cynical.

Yes I will be sad. She has played a big part in her world history.

Who is the total idiot on this thread bleating on about 13 "reigning" queens? There are only TWO: QEII in the UK and Margrethe in Denmark. All the others are Consorts, in that they are spousal Queens by marriage only. Not constitutional Heads of State.

There might be three reigning Queens, if Carl Gustaf in Sweden kicks off before QEII and his cousin Daisy, making his daughter Victoria Queen in her own right. Many of the young heirs in the other countries are also female.

No, I'm telling you what they believe and how they think. I certainly do not buy into some divine right bullshit and holy oils vs. olive oils. Sugresting Queen Charlotte was my attempt at humor but I see it was not appreciated. Do not tell me what I'm thinking or "inferring." You are projecting.

“ No, I'm telling you what they believe and how they think.”“ Do not tell me what I'm thinking or "inferring."”

Both in the same breath.

You’re something else. Also all your little factoids are couched in such fawning language that it’s obvious you’re a little BRF fangirl.

I am intrigued by royals, but I still don’t know what they DO!

LOLOL Why are you on this thread if you're not. I enjoy gossiping about them. But I'm not a fan. Begone you little troll. YOur shit stinks.

no the concept of royals is archaic and the old cunt can go already

No, man faced Lilibet has had a long life of privilege, time for the shit show of Charles III. She probably will outlive him though.

I will be very sad. She is due all the respect in the world.

If Charles dies first, the shock will probably send her to the grave. The Queen Mum died weeks after Margaret. However complicated their relationship, no parent should outlive their child.

lmao fuck no!

why the fuck would anyone be sad?

She's OLD and has lived a very cushy life.

It's shocking in 2020 we still have monarchists

Sure, I'll weep and cry a fucking river for a hag leech who never worked a day in her life and lived off people's earned money, of course I will, because I'm an imbecile imperialist, how about you?

[quote] I will be very sad. She is due all the respect in the world.

For what exactly? Being rich and privileged?

[quote] There are only TWO: QEII in the UK and Margrethe in Denmark. All the others are Consorts, in that they are spousal Queens by marriage only. Not constitutional Heads of State.

What difference does it make? it's all made up shit anyway, who cares if they've married into it or were born into it? What matters is that its fucking 2020 and self-proclaimed enlightened Europeans are still supporting this hereditary privilege as if it were the middle ages.

Yes very sad because all the TV coverage will be the Queen dying for days on end, there will be hundreds of threads about it on DL, no one will be talking about anything else, you simply won't be able to get away from the subject, unless something even bigger happens.

The only thing that will make me care about this hag is if she shape shifts into a reptilian when she dies, then I'll give a fuck. 🤣

R153 The difference is the others are just breeders nothing more or less.

She did work!!! She did. She worked very hard. Very very hard. Every day she went through the boxes. The Red Boxes. Or was it just the one. And then, she would have to change her clothes. Yes. And she had to go to Fortnum & Masons to pose with Anne and the Ladies by the cakes. Or maybe it was by the Teas and the cakes.

And then she would come home, and she would have to change her clothes again. So then she would greet the representatives from the Commonwealth charities? or was it the foundation for the preservation of the authentic grout to do the tuck pointing at Windsor? And then she would have to change clothes again. So she could go out and exercise th corgis. The corgis can't get fat. Their hearts would give out!

And then she would come back and she would have to get dressed so she could host tea for all the living members of the Royal Order of the Garter. After Tea she would go to her apartment to relax and change into something comfortable to watch her soaps. But only for an hour or so. Because one G&T was more than enough. The she would get dressed so she could host a reception for the Ambassador from Sweden. She liked him. For some reason he always had delicious gossip about the Garbaldis. After the reception they would all go in for the dinner. Toasts would be given. She had to give a speech. Now that's work.

Afterwards, she had to return phone calls to Andrew and Beatrice and an urgent message from Charles had just come in telling her NOT to talk to Andrew, he wanted money. Charles lacks compassion and Andrew is just not strong! He needs to be protected. As she changes into her nightclothes she has to decide whether to sleep with Philip who farts a lot during the night and sometimes they aren't just farts, or sleep in her own suite. She opts for her own suite. She reads a Maeve Binchy novel, because Maeve always writes Ireland the way she wants to imagine it.

The lights don't go out until 11 PM. Tomorrow there will be more boxes and ribbons to cut and the flower show to walk around in and listen to the gardeners chatter about their flowers. Sometimes she likes to cut a sneaky smelly fart to see if people will react. it's quite fun. She and Philip used to fart in code to signal one another, but that was years ago, when they were in their 60's. Sometimes she had headaches just thinking about all there was to do.

FUCK that nazi-sympathizer marrying, pedophile spawning cunt.

Respect is due because year after year without fail The Queen needed to endure The Royal Variety Show. Covid will at least spare her that this year.

Whilst I don't wish her dead, I look forward to the shitshow which will unfold as sure as night follows day. Once Wills become Prince of Wales, the Sussexes will be on Death Row and their antics will be a sight to behold.

Harry and Meghan better hope and pray that Charles lives to be 100, because once William is king he's not going to tolerate any of their bullshit, and they can forget about having their hands out for more $$$. William will put the smack down on them HARD, and they know it.

To the Margrethe lovers, blind adoration is sickening imo. I’ve lived in Denmark and it was disgusting to see the people worship their queen like their own personal Jesus that and she made her poor husband so unhappy he turned into a depressed alcoholic.

R161 why do you think Will hates his brother so much? Years from now they might make up

[quote]R149 She is due all the respect in the world.

Whatever FOR?? She’s been a lifelong leach on the public coffers.

Harry exited the royal family precisely because he didn't want to rely on King Bald's handouts all his life. He was sick of the hierarchy and the endless launches and dinners and sitting around. William sounds like a callous bully from the way you Klan witches talk about him. Who would want to be beholden to such a man? He's like Macbeth.

Harry and Meghan did the honorable thing - which was to desert that sinking, racist ship called the BRF.

(Rhymes with BARF)

[QUOTE] And are we really living in a world where you (presumably a gay man) post “she’s like the pope” with an implicit positive...

There are very few gay men on the brf threads. It's mainly racist fraus over 60, who flock here to bitch about Markle. This is why they're known as Klan Grannies on DL.

Once William becomes king, Harry will be irrelevant. William doesn't even need to do anything to make Harry obscure, although Harry is already making himself obscure.

George is seven. In just over a decade, he'll be 18 and can be king in his own right. In the meantime, as he and his siblings grow up they are going to be of far more public interest than Harry and his family.

Henrik was a nutcase, r162.

I cannot wait for her favourite granddaughter-in-law Meghan's touching video tribute to the late queen, detailing their close, intimate r'ship. Copious tears will be shed...when the will is read and it turns out Meghan has been inexplicably excluded.

I see our Klan Grannie Troll is out and about spewing her hatred of all things Windsor.

For those new to DL, it isn't DL who calls people who dislike Meghan Markle and don't think the Windsors the spawns of Satan "Klan Grannies" - it's only the Klan Grannie Troll herself. She haunts all royal threads beating her ragged drum for the "progressive" Sussexes (cavorting around in private jets, gas guzzling Cadillacs, and 18 room homes with swimmin' pools) and the horrible British, Windsors, and anyone else who rejected Meghan's and Harry's hectoring, lecturing, hypocritical Looker Me! Dog and Pony Show.

She's also a pain in the arse on Lipstick Alley, and has been threatening all sites and posters who criticise the Harkles with "legal action" by calling any criticism of Meghan Markle "racist hate speech".

Of course, when she criticises how Kate looks, and jeers at a five year old for having "eye bags" and stating that in her later years Charlotte's "legs will be open to all comers", that's not hate speech.

Ignore her, put her on block Her prose is unmistakable. She's mentally unhinged and/or in the pay of Sunshine Sachs or a Russian bot.

R171 they pay people to write that stuff?? Sign me up!

R162 - What the fuck is your problem?! The Danes are entitled to like their culture and their ancient monarchy is part of their history, tradition, and culture. Margrethe, like every other symbolic entity of her type, is temporary. They managed to shape one of the most successful, peaceful, prosperous countries in the world - it ranks far ahead of both American and Britain in contentment, education, health care . . . and you're fixated on their approval of their monarchy?!

Monarchies aren't Denmark's and Britain's problem, or other countries in the West without monarchies wouldn't be coping with the same social problems.

Meanwhile, some of us of European background actually do know something about other monarchies and governments. We follow elections in France, Germany, the Czech Republic, Poland (where the right-wing Duda just pulled out a re-election victory by the way), Hungary . . .

Presumably you don't live in Denmark any longer. That's good. They don't need you.

And as for the other moron upthread using the term "13 reigning Queens" when in fact 11 of those are Queen Consorts - I hope you finally learned the difference.

Prince William one day will be a "reigning" Sovereign. His wife will be a Queen Consort.

However, in the next generation, the situation will be reversed: Norway (two generations: when King Harald dies, Crown Prince Haakon will reign before his daughter, Ingrid Alexandra), Sweden, Belgium, Lichtenstein, Spain, and The Netherlands all have Crown Princesses, not Crown Princes.

Only Britain, Denmark, Norway (until Crown Prince Haakon is done) and Luxembourg will have reigning Kings (in Luxembourg's case, a reigning Hereditary Grand Duke).

R173 you’re hilarious suggesting I’m not European. Sorry to disappoint darling. I’m very down to earth and I’m not ok with blind worship. People ass kissing a person they don’t even know. I am entitled to have this opinion and I don’t consider it to be a problem. Monarchy is an outdated system and no country needs it in any way. It doesn’t make a monarchy different or better because it’s older. Everyone is allowed to cling to the past as much as they like of course. Following politics is different from following the royals of any given country. Since they are usually separated in our current age.

I'll certainly be glued to my television for her funeral.

I adore that old war horse. By far, she is my favorite famous person. For decades, she's been this singular, global presence; as recognizable as anything , animate or inanimate.

And laugh away, but I think she's among the best dressed human beings on Earth. There is a particular genius to her uniform, and it's just what you want, and you don't want it not not even one iota different. It's like craving the taste of McDonald's. You can go into one anywhere and know that you'll experience just the taste you want. And yes, I write that as a compliment.

She's wealthy and privileged. I've noticed human kind hasn't figured out how to distribute those two things equally although I wish we could.

And labor can be counted in more ways than conventional work. When she promised that her whole life will be devoted to her people, she's done it, and when I contemplate the mental and emotional labor of that, especially when she didn't ask for the job, but had no choice but to take it on, you're damn right I think she works.

I'll play the Obama card and say he nailed it when he remarked about Q E II that she is a "remarkable" person. When one contemplates her longevity, what she's seen, experienced, who she knows, and, I assume, her kindness to him and Michelle Obama, that's the right word, in the least, to describe her.

So, while I won't be "sad", and assuming I survive Q E II, I'll certainly expend more than a few moments of my life acknowledging her extraordinary life and death.

Sue me.

No need to sue you, Della. The pope and his cardinals have all taken a vow of poverty, yet they manage to live in digs every bit as grand as Elizabeth's. It's not really about the money. It's about power.

Here, here Della. I agree! Now, as for the Pope and the cardinals, I learned, when I was in Catholic school, that only certain orders of priests take the vow of poverty. (They all take the vow of chastity...but that hasn't worked out for them too well...) Priests in our parish were diocesan priests. They weren't in any order like the Jesuits or the Dominicans or the Franciscans. They were just diocesan priests and accepted gifts all the time, like new cars, and fancy robes and jewelry, golf clubs, etc. In fact I think the way they get around the vow of poverty in general is, that they own nothing but the clothes on their backs, and all the other stuff is "gifts". So Some rich guy donates his house to the parish and it houses the priests. And the church pays a landscaper and a housekeeper and a cook for them.....but personally they're....poor. Homeless in fact...LOLOL!

R175 I’d definitely watch if her funeral is in the next few weeks, my schedule is open.

Please don't encourage Della, r177.

I want us to get through this pandemic. Because I don't want this to be a virtual funeral. As for Wills & HArry, I have a feeling HArry will be back. This pandemic derailed PoorMeghan's plans and at some point she will see into the future as she has done in the past, and they will be quits. Harry will go home to England. He is very much attached to his country, his family and The Queen. Harry and Meghan won't get beyond 3-5 years at best. Meghan doesn't waste time.

I think the fans and followers of the royal family are more annoying than than the family itself. They are a prime example of a dysfunctional family, yet their fans hold them to some standard of behavior and protocol that died centuries ago.

Rolls eyes at R152.

Fuck you, R179. Thought police idiot.

You're just as whacko as Della, r183.

I've had Della the American telling me the British citizen to shut up for saying correct and accurate things about the royal family, which she doesn't comprehend because even to this day she still thinks they're celebrities. So I'd say she's the little dictator around here. Of course, everyone is allowed their own opinion but that doesn't mean their opinion isn't nonsense.

Lol at all the American outrage at monarchies, when they have TRUMP as their president.

r184 is full of bangers and mash. I've never posted, nor would I, a word that would attempt to dictate to, or correct how, a Brit should see the BRF.

And yes, one time I made the mistake of referring to Q E II as a "celebrity". I know better and shouldn't have. I'll own it.

r184 sounds like he or she resents that don't jump on the Meghan Markle was spotted on the Grassy Knoll!, Meghan Markle Demoted Pluto to Dwarf Status!, Meghan Markle's Behavior Equals Prince Andrew's! bandwagon.

Yes, among her haters is someone who argues that her effect on the BRF equals Andrew's.

And then they wonder why they're viewed with a side-eye.

[quote] To the Margrethe lovers, blind adoration is sickening imo. I’ve lived in Denmark and it was disgusting to see the people worship their queen like their own personal Jesus that and she made her poor husband so unhappy he turned into a depressed alcoholic.

I've lived in the Netherlands for a year as a foreign exchange student and was very bummed by how subservient they are to monarchy, for a supposedly enlightened bunch, they're terribly provincial. Even scientists are 'proud' of the royal family, it's ridiculous.

Even if you don't count HM's royal duties as work, she still worked as a mechanic during WWII, so she has worked some days in her life.

It’s dreadful to even think of it. I imagine a pall falling over the month it occurs, as there was on the Isles when Bowie died; seeming cold and grey, lacklustre, an empty-feeling, no-one speaking much or looking one another in the eye. British people do not handle grief well at all, and it takes us long time to accept and process the sorrow of mourning (hence the papers going on about high-profile deaths for donkeys’ years).

HM has been our watchful sovereign protector for as long as most of us can remember (she was coronated when my 85-year old grandmother was a little girl) - the feeling of bereavement will go on for decades, I imagine. As others have already said, she is a transcendent figure in countless ways, one of the most famous and celebrated monarchs to ever stand as a cipher to this kingdom. HM will live as long as Britain in memory, alongside the restorative dauntless rulers before her in Alfred the Great, Edward the Confessor, Elizabeth Tudor, Henry V, and George V.

For context I’m not at all a general monarchist nor am I a Christian, and I don’t entirely buy that a shady inbred family of greedy throne-stealing Normans ought to reign over us as a forthright Pagan people of mixed Celtic/Viking/Saxon heritage. We used to have an elective tribal monarchy, you know. I will find it difficult to support the next King, and I feel uncomfortable with acknowledging a male monarch (that’s the lesbian in me, I suppose) of such a largely awful lineage (leaving out the exceptions above). That said, I am a woman who looks up to powerful women with ethic and elegance and inner strength, and therefore HM has my respect. HM is a stunningly dutiful self-sacrificing woman of incredible grace, and forbearance, who gave up the basic universal human right of freedom of choice and freedom from scrutiny to carry out her daily service all of us without a waver in composure, even as bombs fell on London Town. As citizens of this Isle. we must pay our greatest respects.

Bear in mind too that for any ill HM has reputed to have done, the long line of predecessors have done worse by orders of magnitude, and have flouted it besides.

[quote] she still worked as a mechanic during WWII

Of course she did. 🙄

Assuming humanity and the monarchy survive, would any future Queen Regnant dare to be Elizabeth III? Lot to live up to.

She did, R190, as did many women of her class (or rather, the class below!) and age. She wasn’t hanging out at the local gas station smoking fags and checking fanbelts with titty posters on the wall, obviously, but she was working on trucks of the armed forces while living in Windsor Castle once she turned 18. Plenty of photographic evidence. Of course it was all great propaganda but nevertheless she did it.

In [italic]the Queen[/italic], while driving a Range Rover? over a brook, she has mechanical trouble. When she calls for assistance, she mentions having broken the transaxle. This was a reference to her having been a mechanic during the war and being familiar with automobile terminology.

R187 I’ll let you in on a secret, I’m Dutch. You quoted my post. I dislike the monarchy and I know many like minded fellow country men. In Denmark it was worse than here. I don’t know where you stayed but there are definitely villages where people adore the royals Especially if it’s place near one of their palaces. 🤮 Maxima also never acknowledged her father’s crimes during the Videla regime 🤮

It’s not a big deal, I mean there’s more than one queen to go around. You got Chaka the Queen of Soul, Patti the Queen of Hearts, Janet the Queen of the Damned, and of course Queen Bey....

May the Queen Live Forever !!!

'She's mentally unhinged and/or in the pay of Sunshine Sachs or a Russian bot.'

Oh the paranoia of the Chief Klan Granny! You know your libellous posts could easily be traced and the police come knocking on your door.

I really don't get why people approach the royal family with an attitude of semi-worship. It is bad enough amongst the British, but super-cringy and incomprehensible amongst Europeans or Americans. Giving King George the heave is one of the few things you guys got right.

The Queen is an admirable person in some ways and I admire some of her carefully-chosen political gestures (such as during her visit to Ireland). She clearly is devoted to her idea of public service. Many people - including well-educated people generally sceptical of institutions - will get very, very upset when she dies.

That said, the coverage of the Royal Family in the UK borders on North Korean. The Queen is a font of wisdom, goodness, duty and selflessness. Philip is a rogue and a rascal and a man's man. Charles is an intellectual and a future philosopher-king. Kate is a style paragon. etc. In reality for a family that has lived a life of endless privilege their accomplishments are fairly middling and they seem pretty overwhelmingly unimaginative - and in some cases woefully mediocre (hello Edward). Yet the craven state media adopts a posture of unrelenting cringing deference, best exemplified by the dreadful bootlicker Nicholas Witchell.

Partial exceptions are Anne - who was an Olympian in her own right - and Harry, who, love or hate him and his wife, at least has radically remade his life in a way not done by any royal since Edward VIII. Whether it ends in tears or not he at least has had the courage and independence to give it a go..

As for the Queen, I will be mildly sorry for her as an individual, but as a republican I will be delighted that Charles taking the reigns will move the whole sorry enterprise closer to its end, with, hopefully, declarations of republics in Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, and perhaps Canada soon after. The only fear with Charles is that, just like Edward VII, another long-serving Prince of Wales, he will manage to outperform very, very low expectations and somehow make himself look like a winner.

hat tip to the genius who came up with this. This is what I mean.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Thank you for this R200. She really is mentally as sharp as ever. And yes, clearly she enjoys talking to them. She was bubbly and warm.

Cold eyes

R190 Yes, she did serve as a mechanic - and truck driver! during WWII

So she did actually work for 2 years of her life. All honour to her!

R203 Very dyke-ish.

"[R184] is full of bangers and mash." - OMG Della, please stop, it's not working.

"Giving King George the heave is one of the few things you guys got right." - What does this mean?

[quote]Lol at all the American outrage at monarchies, when they have TRUMP as their president.

Huh? Trump will be eventually gone. The public can't vote out the monarchy.

People forget that for those European countries with monarchies, those monarchies are deeply entwined with those nations' history. This is particularly true for Britain: the Tudor's swung England (as it was then) from a Catholic to a Protestant country. Henry II transformed England from a medieval packet of warring tribal thugs into a European power.

Most of those countries with monarchies left see them as defanged but nevertheless valuable bridges to that history and to their traditions and cultures. The monarchies represent a sort of national soul, but can no longer start wars or levy taxes to build palaces.

The sovereigns are seen as stewards, not rulers.

There are rumblings in Spain and Sweden - hence, Juan Carlos stepping down in favour of his son. In Sweden, King Carl Gustav has responded to rumblngs about cost by taking his younger children out off the royal payroll, leaving them their titles, but not counting them as members of the royal household. But his heir, Crown Princess Victoria is very much liked by the Swedes.

So far, Willem and Maxima of The Netherlands also seem well liked, and Maxima started out behind the 8-ball as the daughter of a businessman suspected of collaborating with the repressive Argentinian regime. She ended by endearing herself to the public by learning Dutch swiftly, carrying out her duties with charm and dignity (but awful clothes), and the marriage seems very happy.

There are always detractors no matter what the royals do or don't do. There is always a case to be made for their archaic character - what the detractors forget is that it is that very archaic quality that many find appealing. Not everyone wants to do away with every last shred of past history.

As for the whinger about the Danish monarchy: I repeat: somehow having a monarchy didn't stop the Danes from creating one of the most progressive, happiest, and successful small nations in history. So obviously, having a monarchy isn't an infection killing off all happiness.

You whinge today about Margrethe's teeth and terrible clothes - the Danes like her for not caring about her looks.

When Mary is Queen Consort, you'll whinge about how much she spends on clothes and keeping her teeth white.

And Denmark will go on being happy.

This will be weird since she has been the Queen my whole life. But I remember when the pope died 2005 I couldn't image anyone else being pope since I never experienced a papal election. I moved on quickly and do not care anymore. I dont think people will really care about the monarchy that much when she's gone. The monarchy will probably die with her.

"The monarchy will probably die with her." - Why do people say things like this? It's totally implausible.

"People forget that for those European countries with monarchies, those monarchies are deeply entwined with those nations' history." R209 I don't know which history websites or books you read if any at all but many monarchies were (re)instated in the 19th century. So much for the history. Sure the Danes can love their careless queen. She sure looks like it's 1890.

We don't all live in the past and no the monarchy doesn't add anything to our culture. It's entertainment and tax money could be better spent.

"We don't all live in the past and no the monarchy doesn't add anything to our culture. It's entertainment and tax money could be better spent." - what's your proposal for replacing the head of state in those countries that have constitutional monarchies?

[Quote]"The monarchy will probably die with her." - Why do people say things like this? It's totally implausible.

Well did you read that Charles plans to limit "working royals" and slim down the Royal family among other things? Most of them have to get normal jobs and find other housing when Charles becomes King. These will be the first steps towards monarchy slowly fading into obscurity. It's a process and it has already started. I'm pretty sure the public will eventually get rid of this "institution". And rather sooner than later with everything happening in the world right now.

R213 the prime minister. At least that's more democratic choice. Which would be the same like every other country with a royal family.

*without a royal family (aplogies chaos in the house)

Nope!

I don't know why people wouldn't want someone like Charles to be King. He's everything modern liberals would want. He's green and he doesn't want the Church involved in the monarchy.

r206, Yeah I get a kick out of that corny, harmless sentence, too.

What gives me more of a kick, however is what's missing from your post- you haven't contradicted anything I wrote at r186.

Because you can't.

R207 'to give King George the heave' = 'to get rid of King George' (that is, the Third)

And R218, Charles is actually interesting. Just like Harry is interesting. William just walks around like a sad sack. Look at the guy, there is no fun in him. What is he passionate about?

R221 William showed some degree of fight after his mother's death, when he blamed the press. That was pretty much comprehensively stamped out of him by 'The Firm' who knew how he would have to be as an heir to the throne. He is more or less a blancmange now, and not just because he has lost his looks, but because anything sharp or controversial has been rounded out of him and he has been made safe.

Harry on the other hand has gotten more interesting with age and marriage. Publicly criticising the Commonwealth is a big, big thing to do for him.

R214, slimming down the royal family will do nothing in terms of getting rid of the royal family. The monarch is the head of state, their eldest child is their successor, that is part of the British constitution and has been for centuries if not millennia. That is not going to change, certainly not for several generations, George's grandchildren's grandchildren and several more generations after them for several more centuries.

R215, you're kinda ridiculous. The UK has a prime minister who is the head of government, he is currently (unfortunately) Boris Johnson. As in the other European constitutional monarchies you refer to, the prime minister, i.e. the head of government, is separate from the head of state and that is a good thing. You may not be aware of this, but in the UK we have general elections which produce governments that appoint the prime minister, who is invariably the leader of the party with the most seats in parliament.

This is indeed the same situation in every other European country with a monarchy - the monarch is the head of state and the leader of the elected government, i.e. the prime minister, is the head of government.

I'd love to live in the same world as you where I'd never heard of Boris Johnson and didn't know that he was the prime minister of the United Kingdom!

[quote]When the Queen dies, will you be sad?

No, we'll just make another one

R219 Della, just so you know, we don't say "trash" in the UK, we say rubbish. Good attempt at cockney rhyming slang using the name of a "traditional" British dish though!

I'm not sure how I'm meant to begin contradicting "R184 sounds like he or she resents that don't jump on the Meghan Markle was spotted on the Grassy Knoll!, Meghan Markle Demoted Pluto to Dwarf Status!, Meghan Markle's Behavior Equals Prince Andrew's! bandwagon."

R224 I don’t see how an elected person is worse as the head of state than someone who isn’t. Yes we have to deal with the idiot majority anyway but that’s democracy. I’m European too and I can’t wait for our royals to go. The truly add nothing at all.

Homosexual Obama might be sad. Since she was born in Kenya when it was a British colony her allegiance is to the City of London, aka Bank of England, not to the American people. Obvious to anyone with functioning brain cells. One of the fist things she did as President was to report to her sovereign, Queen Elizabeth, as the new Royal Governor of the Columbia Corporation.

Whut?

Look. IMO there will always be a British Monarchy. We will see a coronation. The spectacle is wondrous! Like a Cecil B DeMille movie. And Royals will always show up to cut ribbons and to make appearances to support their charities. That's a given. So ribbon cuttings, and visits to various localities to sample the cheeses, etc. and promote Trade is still going to happen. But it will be, as someone state, much scaled down.

I doubt anyone will actually live at Buckingham Palace anymore. It will be a place for administrative offices, state dinners, and a museum open to the public most of the time. Same with Kensington Palace. And Windsor. There will be living quarters on the Windsor estate, but Windsor Castle itself will not be a residence. Clarence House and St. James will still be residences, and Balmoral too, but I think Sandringham is up in the air.

As far as living, Sophie & Edward, and Andrew, and Anne will keep what they have, personally, but all the freeloading cousins and friends of The Queen will be finding their own places, as will Beatrice and Eugenie. If Anne or Edward want something for their kids etc. they will have to give it to them out of their own personal accounts. I'm also predicting that Harry will come home. High Grove will still be part of Charles' and WIlliams's brief. It's organic farming and a place to innovate. It makes money too.

That's great r227, but most of the people in the UK want to keep the royal family.

r229, what are all these very specific predictions based on? A gut feeling?

The queen's cousins are all very old people. I don't think Charles III is going to turn them all out on the street. That would be terrible PR, and these are also people he has grown up with and learned to respect. If they get rid of Kensington Palace and Thatched Cottage ultimately, I would think it more likely he allows the queen's cousins to finish out their lives there.

I don't know that William will be all that interested in organic farming. Highgrove is Charles's own house personally (he bought it with the money that is his as part of the Duchy of Cornwall); it does not belong to the crown. Its upkeep is Charles 's own responsibility. When he dies, Camilla will probably finish out her days there, but then William and Harry may well sell it.

R230 you Brits can keep your royals. I’m not a British citizen. I was talking about Willem Alexander and the rest of the fam.

I willl be beyond sad

I will condole her.

R231 - Re Highgrove House - au contraire:

"Highgrove House is the family residence of the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall, situated southwest of Tetbury in Gloucestershire, England. Built in the late 18th century, Highgrove and its estate were owned by various families until it was purchased in 1980 by the Duchy of Cornwall from Maurice Macmillan.

The Prince of Wales remodelled the Georgian house with neo-classical additions in 1987. The Duchy manages the estate and the nearby Duchy Home Farm. The house is noted for its extensive gardens which receive more than 30,000 visitors a year. The house and gardens are run according to The Prince of Wales's environmental principles, and have been the subject of several books and television programmes. The Prince of Wales frequently hosts various charitable events at the house."

Charles' remodelling, it must be said, was gorgeous.

I suppose Americans find it equally strange that we have numerous Sirs & Dames, Lords & Ladies, Barons & Baronesses? We’ve even got a dedicated House of Lords.

Most Americans are completely confused by all the aristocratic titles, i.e. what they mean and what the pecking order is. We don't learn that in school.

Everyone will indeed line up when she dies ... to piss on her fucking grave.

Welfare grifting cunt. Why doesn't she live of her OWN money??

[italic]r236 I suppose Americans find it equally strange that we have numerous Sirs & Dames, Lords & Ladies, Barons & Baronesses? We’ve even got a dedicated House of Lords.

Move it along, toots.

Oh, please. She is an historical figure, a public figure with a largely very positive image. There will be a kind of sadness attached to her death. Because we are watching a a part of our own history go as well. For example, here's what I mean. I had an aunt who was a vile cruel person and she hated me. Even my mother, her sister said of her, "She's mean as a rattlesnake." We'd be civil to one another at family gatherings, but no love lost.

I Remember as a child growing up she had bad days and good days. On her good days she'd organize all the cousins to go to the movies. On her bad days I was a "rotten little bastard." Whatever. She got cancer, and my mother insisted I take her over to the house to sit with her sister until the end. I sat outside with my other cousins. Couldn't be in that house.

She died. At the funeral, I surprised myself by shedding a tear. Nothing extravagant but I did. I was puzzled. I asked another cousin why I felt sad, and she said, because we are losing a part of our family history every time one of them dies. And that's true.

[quote]r240 I asked another cousin why I felt sad, and she said, because you are retarded.

FTFY

R236 it only makes sense to the British it is terribly old fashioned and the House of Lords is simply undemocratic. You seem to have a hard time letting go off the past

[quote]r242 You seem to have a hard time letting go of the past

What?? The British?? You're crazy!!

She’s going to hang on RBGishly until Charles dies, because she thinks he’s too much like the dreadful Edward VIII.

Who ABDICATED.

It’s simply not done! William will have none of that nonsense, nor will the serving girl he married.

I'd challenge the idea that the House of Lords is undemocratic. It is overwhelmingly made up of people who have been appointed by the political parties as a result of having had an elected political career or been distinguished in some area of public life, the arts, business, charities, etc. Its purpose is to scrutinise the bills of the House of Commons, which it does very effectively. Its members are very independent of the political parties, even if they are part of one, and mostly objective and learned people. It often challenges controversial elements of bills that the government has tried to push through, giving the House of Commons the opportunity to revise them.

Laws are still passed by the elected House of Commons but in a country as large as the UK it's imperative to have a second chamber that scrutinises, challenges and improves the bills produced by the government and parliament. If it were to be elected then it would lose a lot of its impartiality, be more bound by the agendas of the political parties and its members would be more belligerent and prone to grandstanding in order to appeal to voters.

R245 so your have to have a title to be able to challenge the bills of the House of Commons? Look at the Dutch systemwide example, it works fine there are two houses too. It just has nothing to do with aristocracy. As much as I love Britain from an outsider’s perspective you seem to be so old fashioned in some ways. It’s like to some of you the Victorian age never ended. Also Commons sounds degrading it’s 2020 ffs

*you *system for example

Yes, I'll be kind of sad. Not from a personal feeling of loss, but just from nostalgia and the feeling that yet another familiar, stable element in Western culture is gone. As queen, she's been much nicer-seeming than Charles promises to be as king. We've grown accustomed to her face, at any rate.

Well put R16; her speech from Windsor during the pandemic brought tears to my eyes & I'm not even a brit. For as much as they love to bash royalty, the brits really do love her & are going to lose their shit when she dies. It's truly the end of an era.

I also think - and I'm not trying to turn this into a H&M thread - that the brits will never forgive them for the way they treated QEII

R246, you don't understand the House of Lords. It's not made up of people with hereditary titles (a few), it's mainly comprised of people who have distinguished themselves in their particular sector who are then given a title so that they can participate in the House of Lords. It's far from a perfect system but I think far from being undemocratic it strengthens democracy in the UK by having a mostly disinterested, non-party political group of people with expertise and experience scrutinising legislation and producing valuable reports on current issues.

R232, Queen Beatrix abdicating yet still knocking around while her son is king broke the mystery and the magic spell and tarnished the sense of lifelong duty and dedication. If the Dutch monarchs are going to treat their role as simply another public post and not as something special, then the Dutch people have no reason to treat them as anything more than public officials.

The weather is the Commonwealth is built on the rape and pillaging of Africa, America and Asia at various times. I have no love for the BRF or the British aristocracy that still benefit from these atrocities.

R250 Beatrix wasn’t the first a Dutch monarch to abdicate - it’s a bit of a tradition for the House of Orange.

My team already has interviews and appearances lined up, thank you. We have our wardrobe available on short notice.

R250 R252 I wish they would all step down and end the circus the monarchy is. Look at Maxima for example who never distanced herself from her father’s crimes like her own sister did. It’s shameful and doesn’t paint a pretty picture.

R249 I understand I just don’t agree with that outdated system. I don’t see why anyone would need a title to be in that house. Thank you for the info though(I mean that).

Of course they queen is anointed with holy oils. She is probably the remaining anointed sovereign. The emperor of Ethiopia was anointed but that's gone. And she is like the Pope. She's then head of a church.

I think Charles will be a good king. He will be the bridge to modernity. I believe he will have a coronation, but scale it back. There will be the religious ceremony at Westminster, but the real pageantry is reserved for the Queen's funeral. They are going to set it out.

I think I want to go back and watch Season 1 of The Crown.

[quote]Yes, I'll be kind of sad. Not from a personal feeling of loss, but just from nostalgia and the feeling that yet another familiar, stable element in Western culture is gone.

Well said. This mirrors my sentiments exactly. Plus, I'm sad to see anyone die. I've been re-watching True Blood and as one of the characters is dying he says, "There ain't no Heaven and Hell's a dog fight. I'm gonna disappear like I never was." Personally, I think we all will and there's a terrifying element to that, whether it's you or someone else.

It isn't so terrifying. I mean, I believe when we die that's it. We just ...stop. And we live on because of the memories of our families and friends. Now I did get a sense, when my Mother died, that her spirit hung around for a while because it wasn't used to being dead. But then that sort of stopped.

No.

Charles is so homely. No wonder he married Diana. Had he had children with Trollmilla, can you imagine how unfortunate they would look?

[quote]It isn't so terrifying. I mean, I believe when we die that's it. We just ...stop.

But that's the thing, R259. I'm not so keen on just [italic]stopping[/italic]. I guess I'm one of those lucky guys who absolutely loves his life. I have a job I love, a partner I love, friends and family I love . . . I'm selfish and want all that to go on. Perhaps when I get older and have the aches and pains and other challenges of old age I'll feel different.

There's just something about, I don't know, "ceasing to be" that I find unsettling and, yeah, terrifying, if I'm honest. I'm glad you don't have those fears though.

No. I don't know her personally.

Will Sparkle do the casket dance?

[quote]r249 It's not made up of people with hereditary titles (a few), it's mainly comprised of people who have distinguished themselves in their particular sector who are then given a title so that they can participate in the House of Lords.

If there's 206 female peers (out of 781) (or 26%) in the House of Lords, I guess that means men are valued 300% over women?

R231 - As mentioned after you put up your totally erroneous post, Highgrove is NOT "Charles's own house personally" the Duchy owns it - so Harry will have no right to a single hectare of it to sell, live in, or piss in the garden.

Camilla has her own place just across the border in Wiltshire.

Only the Duchy can sell Highgrove. William as the new Prince of Wales may move the family in summer to Highgrove for appearances sake, but remember, he's also got Anmer Hall in Norfolk for other country living, and when Charles dies, William also gets Balmoral and Sandringham - and possibly Clarence House.

Speak of spoiled for choice!

R256 - Yes, the anointing and Head of Church aspects make QEII different from the other European monarchs. They don't have coronations and it is not viewed, as it is here, as a religious obligation as well as one of State.

That said, I believe Queen Margrethe of Denmark is Head of the Evangelical Lutheran Church there. A white rose is the symbol of Lutheranism, and the Queen years ago designed and stitched herself an altar cloth in red with the white rose. and donated it to the Wittenberg Church where five centuries earlier the Protestant Reformation and Lutheranism began.

According to the official site of the Duchy of Cornwall, when Charles dies the title of Duke will pass to his son/heir. While the Duke of Cornwall doesn't own the entire Duchy, he DOES own a significant amount of it -including Highrove. So it is owned by Charles the Duke, rather than Charles the man. It is entitled, meaning it passes to his heir -he cannot will it away, outside the family. If he were to die without an heir, the title and land would go to the Crown.

So when Elizabeth is gone and Charles becomes king, William will become Duke of Cornwall, and Highgrove will become his. On Charles' death, William becomes king, and his son George becomes Duke and inherits the house.

[R268] So when Elizabeth is gone and Charles becomes king...

Big Liz will quite probably realize she made a colossal mistake letting Harry and Meghan get away, and try to leapfrog them up onto the throne.

Not that they'd accept. The BRF missed the boat, in that regard.

[quote] I'll play the Obama card and say he nailed it when he remarked about Q E II that she is a "remarkable" person.

I was wrong in my post at r175. Obama referred to Q E II as "astonishing", and even better, more accurate description.

As I look at that photo of Obama watching the Queen, I think it must be really hard for any gentleman, like Obama, or even women to resist the impulse to help the Queen or assist as she is getting out of a car or going up a step.

It's harder to resist not pushing her down it, more likely.

Never knew Obama was a gerontophile.

R268 - " . .In August 1980 the Highgrove estate was purchased by the Duchy of Cornwall for a figure believed to be between £800,000 and £1,000,000 with funds raised for its purchase by the sale of three properties from the duchy's holdings, including part of the village of Daglingworth.

The Duke of Cornwall, Charles, Prince of Wales, was subsequently appointed a tenant for life of Highgrove by the duchy."

What part of the difference between "owned by Prince Charles" and "appointed tenant for life -owned by the Duchy" don't you understand?

He was raised by his grandparents. Obama is a gentleman. He is the gold standard of how a United States President should behave.

She was expected to be a perfect Princess, then a Perfect Wife and Mother, and then a Perfect Queen.

Arguments for an against the institution are valid and usually entertaining. But those still existing inside the institution are expected to live in some sort of Happy Families paradise - and that includes the other European monarchies. Naturally, they don't, they're quite fallible humans living in a very strange environment that requires them to cultivate both the mystique of "apartness" with warmth and approachability. Every royal family in Europe has had to cope with scandals, divorce, adultery, lazy heirs, etc. Some have come out better than others.

The Queen did splendidly in my view in all the areas mentioned but motherhood, where she failed miserably. Her notorious aversion to personal confrontation (a trait, by the way, she shared with her mother) led her to spoil Andrew shamelessly, not take a stronger line with Charles about her doubts about Diana, and then later with Harry re Meghan, and instead of smoothing things along, guaranteed that the family would end up paying the piper more extensively down the road.

The expectation of being all things to all people was bound to fail somewhere along the line. It's too bad it was her parenting. She was a dutiful daughter, a loving and dutiful wife, an exceptional Sovereign . . . and a terrible parent.

Queen Margrethe of Denmark has a fractured relationship with her children as well. They didn’t eat with their parents until they were teenagers. They had to make appointments with their parents.

The Grand Old Duke of York

He fucked ten thousand teens

If the Queen or Prince Philip get sick after attending Bea's private wedding, we'll never forgive her.

Hey, it was her choice. I suspect everyone who was there had to quarantine for two weeks in order to be with the Queen. I'm glad Phil was there. I wish they would have had it outdoors. That would have been my only suggestion.

R80, is that you Miss Lindsey?

Are the royalist posters here the same as the #TrannyPanic ones?

Both cabals are similarly long winded.

It must have been difficult getting through life unable to read, R275!

As I correctly stated in my post, the Highgrove estate is owned by the Duchy of Cornwall, in the person of the Duke of Cornwall, not by Charles Windsor, the man. Charles became Duke of Cornwall in 1952. Highgrove was purchased by the Duchy on his orders, redone to his specifications, and is managed and lived in by him. It will cease to be his when he stops being the Duke of Cornwall -at his or his mother's death. At that point Prince William becomes Duke of Cornwall and master of Highgrove. Pettifog all you like, R275. Your argument has no meaning whatsoever in the real world.

They were all tested the day before the ceremony.

R283 - Look, you fucking moron: NEITHER Charles the Man nor Charles the Duke "owns" Highgrove House, nor will William "inherit" it.

That's the difference between the word "tenant" and "owner". t

It is part of the Duchy and naturally Charles would be given a sweetheart deal to make use of it.

But Charles does not in any way shape form entity or by use of any title "own" it. Nor will William "inherit" IT.

William will naturally be offered the use of it in his time, ditto Prince George.

But none of them will "own" it.

And just by the by: Charles the Duke does not "own" the Duchy of Cornwall, either. He has the right to claim its revenues, that's what it was set up for: to provide the Heir with an independent source of income and forestall corruption and treason for the sake of wealth.

The Duchy of Cornwall is legally a corporation. Like all corporations, decisions are made by Boards and Councils with the Duke's participation. Charles cannot sell off for private gain any part of it.

The Duke of Cornwall is the Duchy's steward, not its "owner". Appearances to the contrary, this is not 1385 and the people of the Duchy are not serfs.

Girls! Girls! You're both Anglophiles!!

YOu can't mean R275. Apologize.

We may both be Anglophiles, but only one of us is a pedant. : )

When the Queen dies, I will be sad. When R285 dies, the world will not notice.

Not really, she's a very old lady and has had a good life.

My Mother who's 85 has lived during the reigns of George V, Edward VIII, George VI and Elizabeth II. My Grandmother born in !896 could add Queen Victoria and Edward VII to that as she died in 1974.

'The Duchy of Cornwall is legally a corporation. Like all corporations, decisions are made by Boards and Councils with the Duke's participation'

And these people will stop the Bald One from disinheriting Harry, something which has probably never crossed his mind, but which Klanners here bring up as it's really going to happen.

Wiliam has no say in Harry's financial shit. Charles and the Queen will give to both boys what ever t hey're entitled to. Once that happens William can't reverse it. All WIlliam can do is secure the future financial welfare for his own little family. Period.

Neither William nor Harry have been “boys” for a couple of decades now.

It's more precise to discuss ownership of property in terms of different, sometimes concurrent, sometimes successive, rights or interests. The Duchy bought Highgrove outright ("in fee simple," in property law parlance) from a private owner in 1980, at which time it conveyed a life interest, or "life tenancy" in Highgrove to Prince Charles. That means that Charles "owns" or can essentially do what he wants with the property, subject to certain upkeep requirements, as long as he lives.

But because he does not own Highgrove outright (i.e., in fee simple), he has no say in its disposition upon his death. Presumably, the Duchy maintains a "reversion interest" in Highgrove (i.e., it reverts to the Duchy upon Charles's death). But theoretically, the Duchy could have also conveyed a "remainder interest" to a third party. In other words, the Duchy, as owner in fee simple, could have conveyed Highgrove to Charles for the remainder of his life and thereafter to Person X in fee simple or for the remainder of Person X's life (though the ability of the original conveyor to control the extent of future interests is limited by the Rule Against Perpetuities).

Other parties could have property interests in Highgrove (for example, anyone who might have an easement to cross the property).

As an interesting side note, another type of future property interest (long abolished in the US) was that of male heirs (no matter how distant in the relationship) of the "owner" of an "entailed" property or a property that had a "tail on it". This was the substance of the plot of Pride and Prejudice - a family of six daughters desperate to marry rich because they would all be out on the street upon their father's death and the nearest male relative was an odious clergyman.

The Queen and Prince Philip will be moving to Balmoral for the rest of the summer after isolating for 4 months at Windsor.

Do you think the Queen and Philip ever shared the bedroom? Or do they have adjoining suites or something like that?

Also, who are the Queen's ladies in waiting? Do we have names?

R294 - The Pedant (that's me, the Party First) and the Sloppy Interpreter of Terms (that's the Party Second), thank you for clarifying matters and bridging the divide.

R296 I do know that like many of the people that surround royalty (more so than royalty themselves) they are utter cunts. The BRF members have their behaviour tempered by a certain vague notion that they're meant to be doing public service, but the people around them have no such restraining mechanism (hence William's friends shouting 'doors to lock' at Kate and calling her 'Kate MiddleClass'.

A friend tells the story of his friend who is a fashion designer was once called to meet the Queen in connection with making some clothes for her. HMQ broke off the conversation to run (/waddle) after a naughty corgi who was biting its friend or chewing the cushions or whatever. Then immediately these lady-in-waiting bitches start in on him: "I don't like your air of informality with the Queen" one remarked haughtily. "OK, please just tell me what I am doing wrong" he protests.

"No, it was just your manner".

I won’t be sad but I will enjoy the momentous occasion that her funeral will be if we’re post Covid.

I’m a republican and she is head of state of my country, and while I have massive respect for her for a job well done, I’m looking forward to the fact that her death will usher in a new assessment of my country’s head of state, because King Charles is just not going to work for me or (hopefully) the majority of my fellow citizens.

[quote]R295 The Queen and Prince Philip will be moving to Balmoral for the rest of the summer after isolating for 4 months at Windsor.

So they can do even less work?

Jesus Christ.

They are 94 and 99 years old respectively, R300 - what work are you expecting from them? Amway? 7/11 cashiers? Something more rewarding? Do tell.

R299 - I wouldn't hold my breath on that. As noted above, the monarchy works out well for Parliament, which makes very good use of its cachet and u insing it for PR and "friendly relations" measures with other countries. No elected bland President could create the same interest and press attention abroad, or hosting foreign dignitaries.

For the majority of your fellow citizens, their support is rather for the institution of monarchy, not on the temporary holders of the position. King Charles III may not "work" for you, but it is retaining the institution that is at the heart of the matter, and so far Parliament shows no appetite for such a social upheaval.

The monarchy will only come closer to being abolished when the hereditary peerage system is, and the House of Lords, and I see no chance of that any time soon.

Lastly, however unsatisfactory Charles may prove as a successor to the much-loved QEII, he will have the advantage of the attractive Cambridges close behind him. They have done exceedingly well in placing themselves as "the future" and are growing in popularity every year - especially given their contrast to the faithless, traitorous, whingeing Sussexes - the best thing to happen to the Cambridges since their wedding and the birth of Prince George.

So Charles will be viewed as a much shorter bridge, and attention will focus on the rapidly maturing Cambridge children.

As I said, don't hold your breath.

Betty wants to ride her horses and chase the corgis, and Phil loves riding in his buggy with the whip in his hand!!! He slashes at the horses and hollers at the one named Fergie, , Run you blood idjit! I'm going to ride you hard and put you away wet!!!Fuckers!!!!

I'm not sure what you mean by the Cambridges R302. I don't think I've ever seen two unhappier looking people. William looks miserable all the fucking time. And that fake smile, gurl please. And don't get me started on Kate. As for the Sussex family, the gossip rags have created this mythology about them, but at the end of the day Harry is now like 6th and 7th in line. He was never going to be a factor in anything.

R304 - yes dearie. Will looks miserable all the fucking time.

R304 - yes, Will & Kate are just two unhappy people.

What drug are you taking?

Look how fake that smile looks R305 and look how old he looks. That man is miserable.

I don't think William's smile is fake or that he's miserable. He has a very good life, public and private. And so he should.

William is 38 years old. He looks at least ten years older than that. For a man with his life too look like that at 38 tells you all you need to know about him.

R305. I guess it was only a matter of time before Wills adopted Kate's fake braying laugh.

A very unpleasant look for both.

That's the new The Cambridges Are Miserable meme that keeps getting circulated in hopes that it's true. Their work, their three adorable children, their wealth, their beautiful homes - utterly meaningless. Not to mention the increasing status and wealth that will open up before them in the fullness of time - gosh, who'd want to live like that?!

William is supposed to be turning cartwheels every day, and Kate has to stop smiling at the cameras and at the people she meets when out on official duties, except for Remembrance Day and funerals.

Otherwise, they're miserable.

R304 - You don't know what I mean by "the Cambridges"?

Perhaps you should check recent polls, at whose top they now sit with the UK public, which is the only public that counts in their game.

Don't try the simples on us. Actually, you do know what it meant. You just don't like admitting it.

I'm more interested in how she's at the top of the list for longest reigns in World History. I'm rooting for her to get to #1, and she still has three years to go to get there !!

Yes, the Queen will be the longest-reigning European monarch if she makes it to the autumn of 2024, beating the record of King Louis XIV of France, who reigned for 72 years.

No way she's making it to 2024. Not happening.

Ever since it came out that Williams has been fucking around on Kate, you guys have gone into overdrive trying to push this "Happy Cambridge" meme. Fine, go for it. But I know plenty of 38 year old men and none of them look like that.

My bet is the Queen checks out at 105.

Betty Windsor is definitely going to get to 2024. No worries, peasants.

The Queen appears to be in amazing shape for a woman her age, she could very well make it to 2024 and beyond. Remember, her mother lived to 101 and got shitfaced drunk every day of her life, right to the very end.

William does not look 48, r309. He is very bald, though, and perhaps, given that most guys who go bald shave their heads these days, that makes him look older. But he looks like a fit, healthy, happy guy approaching 40. Which is what he is.

It never came out that William has been fucking around on Kate, r316.

I wonder if Queen Elizabeth will read this thread and giggle?

R320, how rich...and how hypocritical. You people speculate on Harry’s and Meghan’s every move, but think that Wills didn’t have an affair? Puh-lease. He fucked around on Kate. I’d be shocked if he didn’t. She’s allowed herself to be a doormat in exchange for a title and a tiara...she’s hardly above not tolerating when he strays...

From every report I've read, the Queen is abstemious. She seems not to be a foodie at all. She has a glass of wine and she has her cocktail every day. She eats sparingly, and she doesn't have much of a sweet tooth aside from her favorite cake, which she has as a special treat.. Add to that the fact that she walks. A lot. Just by virtue of where she lives. You and I live, for the most part, in modest houses or apartments. She lives in a palace. So there were stairs to climb and very long hallways to walk every day. All of life she's lived in palatial surroundings where getting from the bedroom to the living room or the dining room was a hike. She's probably been walking 2-3 miles a day for decades. And she loves the outdoors. Rain or shine she is out there mucking about, horse riding, etc. I've never seen any 90 year old hop out of a car and into a car without holding on to anything for balance, the way she does. So diet and exercise are important. And look at Prince Phillip. He is ramrod straight. His posture is that of someone 30 yrs younger.

R322, it's not evidence that William allegedly had an affair because some people think he should have had one.

If the queen lives to 101 like her mother, then she would have reigned for an unbelievable 76 years.

"It" didn't come out that William was fucking around on Kate.

A rumour, begun by Nicole Cliffe of Slate and Giles Coren (who removed his swiftly), well known "fans" of Meghan Markle, came out.

We'll see how quickly you accept Trouble In Paradise rumours about the Sussexes as fact when, inevitably, they arise.

I'll bet you didn't believe that Melissa Tabouti resigned in six months after abusive treatment by Meghan, despite BP rushing out that press release praising her service to shut her up about what she saw on that tour.

Because when it's about the Cambridges, despite lack of a shred of proof, it's true; when it's about Meghan, even if there's plenty of smoke to be seen and the Palace press office admits that it was futile trying to "protect" Meghan from stories that were, in fact, true (although Meghan expected them to regardless), it's a "smear".

Wills fucked around on Kate because he can, would and will again. He will fuck women and the palace, in their condos, in nightclubs and hotels in the royal limousine, in Hyundais. Because future king of England. Kate will put up with it because her uterus is dipped in gold and there’s always retail therapy. His PR works overtime to keep his indiscretions out of the press. This last time, someone stuffed up. Wills...fucks...around...on Kate. Kate can shop. She’ll live. She’s just like that alien queen, just dropping eggs from her royal minge. Lol. It all she’s good for anyway. A royal sow that breeds.

R327 is a highly disturbed inividual.

Not as disturbed as the racist MM haters. Your double standards are completely transparent.

R319 is either drunk, headless, or Rose Hanbury

R329 is a moron as well as highly disturbed.

Sadly, the Queen's reign is most notable for the sad decline of the UK: increased poverty coupled with austerity; increase in hunger; increase in unemployment and people on benefits; increase in the importation of impoverished migrant workers as the British have decided they no longer want to work hard; increase in obesity; and increase in violence.

This is the true legacy of her reign.

R314, actually if you do the math, it would be MAY of 2024, not Autumn, that QEII would be the longest ruling monarch in all of recorded World history, not just Europe.

I wonder what Harry & Meghan are thinking about the fact that Amazon and other sellers have already cut the price of their book? COVID really derailed their plans. I mention it because I think they will return to Great Britain. It's really the only move that will generate the kind of publicity they need to return to the A-List. Will they divorce? Yes. But only after they return. Because Meghan will want that Duchess of Sussex thing to last a bit longer. So HArry will definitely be home in time for Granny's funeral.

r322 clearly was not around in the 1970's

I meant r332 above

R332 - It's the legacy of the follies of successive British governments, not the Queen.

Britain has always had miserable levels of poverty. Just look at the Victorian era. Why do you think so many Brits got on boats and sailed for the colonies? Life was wretched in Britain back then.

R323 The Queens homes all have elevators installed. The last one to get done was at Sandringham House. As much as she like to walk she doesn't have to do stairs if she chooses not to.

Of course William fucks around. Kate probably does, too. I wouldn't be surprised if they have an "understanding".

So fucking what.

Kate should insist, however, that William get a vasectomy, if he hasn't already.

Best to prevent babies born on the wrong side of the blanket.

I don't have any reason to believe the Cambridges are unfaithful, other than it's simple human nature. I've never read any convincing evidence of it, and I happen to be one of those people who has always been faithful, so i know it's possible.

Della and her bullshit again. "Of course William fucks around, because I say so, and I've also decided how Kate reacts and what they've agreed in private together and I've also decided what William should do with his body ."

Della and her bullshit again. "Of course William fucks around, because I say so, and I've also decided how Kate reacts and what they've agreed in private together and I've also decided what William should do with his body ."

Della speaks the truth.

Of course, r342 and r343.

Go ahead and call my posts "bullshit".

Like I give a fuck.

I notice you don't resist reading them, though.

R344, Della speaks her own opinions based on her fantasy dolls house version of the royal family, where she dresses them up and decides on their furniture and bends the dolls around to make them do the things she thinks it would be fun for them, in her imagination, to do.

R339 - "If she chooses not to"??!!

She's 94. She can barely walk - in film footage you can see she's shuffling as inconspicuously as she can and moving very slowly.

"Choice" has nothing to do with it.

Nobody asked me if I was sad!

See I guess I'm taking an opposite view. I think at this point in their relationships neither William nor Harry would be inclined to fuck around and cheat. I think their parents' problems traumatized them sufficiently so as to not be inclined. I Also think both young men are looking for "mothering" from their wives. They want stability. I think that Kate & Meghan are Alphas in the relationships. If anyone were to fuck around I would bet on their wives not the two brothers.

R333 Some historians of ancient Egypt believe that Pharaoh Pepi I of the 6th Dynasty ruled for 94 years 2278 - 2184 B.C.

What’s your excuse, r331? Inbreeding, probably.

Meanwhile, quite astonishingly, Prince Philip was out today, waving, impeccably dressed, appearing at his first official event in three years, to hand over his role as Commander in Chief of the Rifles to Camilla.

Ninety-nine (99). He looks spry and, amazingly, mentally intact.

Stop lying, R350. Pharaoh Pepi is the name of a Salsa Rap group from the 90's.

Phillip looks like a zombie.

[quote]to hand over his role as Commander in Chief of the Rifles to Camilla.

Liz, you in danger, gurl.

I do get a feeling either she or Philip will die around the 23rd anniversary of Diana’s death next month.

How many days will we get off from work?

You know, if any of them die right now there will be no royal funeral. And I would hate that. Half the fun of watching the Royals is seeing the pomp and ceremony and the Cinderella coaches,and the cavalry and the extravagant ceremonies. So I say, with all my heart, hang in there Betty! Hang in there Phil!! YOu too Charlie. I've been thinking. If anything were to happen right now, to Camilla, and there was no virus, if they had to give Camilla a funeral as Duchess of Cornwall, she'd probably get the same kind of funeral Diana got. How ironic. I mean she's not the queen...yet.

The sad part is that we will have Charles as King and that hideous and disgusting Camilla will probably still be around. Nothing will ever equal the sadness of losing our beloved Diana!

[quote] If anything were to happen right now, to Camilla, and there was no virus, if they had to give Camilla a funeral as Duchess of Cornwall, she'd probably get the same kind of funeral Diana got. How ironic. I mean she's not the queen...yet.

Actually, probably not. I am certain Camilla has requested a private funeral if she goes before the Queen does--and maybe even after, if she becomes queen consort. (Philip has supposedly asked for a private funeral.)

Camilla has a huge phobia of being seen as competing in any way with Diana. This is why she refuses to style herself Princess of Wales (even though she holds it in actuality). she knows how much the British people loved Diana, and does not want to be seen as taking anything more away from her.

r360 I think Charles qualifies as a major taking. If that doesn't fit, let's say she never relinquished him.

Charles is not respected by anyone but crawlers and toadies. He is a self indulgent crybaby who was deliberately cruel to his wife, and expected her to put up with it. She was a bag of tricks to start with, but he and his horse faced mistress pushed her over the edge.

Do Harry and William actually get along with Camilla or is it all for show? I’d find it difficult to get along with her.

R362 - She displayed the same insanity as soon as the ring was on that she did later.

She pushed Charles over the edge, and he returned to his mistress.

There, fixed it for you.

Yea R360, Camilla doesn't want to compete with Diana because she can't! It would be like comparing an outhouse to a penthouse. She also is at least smart enough to realize what a joke it would be to be referred to as "Princess of Wales"

Of all the Queen's family, I believe Anne will truly be inconsolable. She's VERY close to her mummy.

R366– Anne is a true Windsor. She’ll have a stiff upper lip and carry on

Camilla is the Princess of Wales - they chose not to use it. Princesses of Wales are not "chosen" based on their looks.

She was interested in tact, not comparisons.

And the true comparison is that between a comfy farmhouse and a snotty boutique.

Good r363 because if looks were a requirement, Camilla would be banned to the dungeon.

I mean r368.