Is it okay to put family first? (Response to royal family stuff)

[FlightlessDuck]

Family comes first. Not to the point of being a martyr (everybody needs down time) but it's more important than work and other outside obligations.

I find this especially true of something like the royal family. WIlliam and Harry didn't choose to be born from Charles and Diana. They should get to live their lives. Personally, I'd just abdicate and hide somewhere. Too much drama. Who needs paparazi hounding you and busybodies online talking about you and your spouse 24/7?

Ohhhh, British Prince Carson Wentz married some half-black American actress! The scandal! The outrage! Quick, let's put them in the super market rags every week and complain about them on RoyalWatchingBittys.com!

 

[ford family]

I agree that Princess Anne has conducted her duties quite well. I disagree that she's analogous in relationship to Charles' position as Harry is to William's in that her entire adult life she has been no higher than 4th in line to the throne and therefore never personally wrestled with the constraints of being the "spare".

In the interests of accuracy, Princess Anne was second in line to the throne, behind Charles, from when her mother became Queen in 1952 until Andrew arrived in 1960.
On the other hand, Harry was never higher than third after his father and his brother William.

To say that "Princess Anne has conducted her duties quite well" displays a poor understanding of the workings of the Royal Family. The Princess Royal, a title richly deserved, is one of the hardest working and well loved members of that family.

ford family

 

[FlightlessDuck]

Personally, I'd just abdicate and hide somewhere.

Oh, or the other option: A coup. You want to harass me all the time because I'm royalty?

Fine, now I'm King. An actual King. Goodbye parliament, I'm in charge. That would be entertaining.

 

[robinb]

Why then, did I read the Royal family news and immediately feel myself rolling my eyes and judging? I'm such a hypocrite! (My second response was "good for them" but I'm surprised it was my second response.)

I rolled my eyes too, but at their comment about "financial freedom". If a freaking prince and a TV star don't already have "financial freedom" then what chance do we mere mortals have? Who pays for little Archie's silver spoons?

 

[mousefan73]

I find it hilarious that some Brits ***** about the monorachy and how much it supposedly costs them in taxes (which is next to nil, btw), but now that Harry wants to become financially independent and make his own money, it's somehow a problem. Can't have it both ways, tootsies.

People are not being critical or hypocritical by having it both ways. The criticism lies in that their definition of financial independence is not the norm and it’s just outside of this world. If they would’ve relinquished all titles, and not live off granny and papa handouts then there would more respect for them and less critismn. that is not the case as least as much as we know now with limited information we have. They trademarked their titles a few weeks ago I believe. So their future financial independence is 100% based on being royal.

 

[fla4fun]

Sorry if this has been mentioned, but William and Kate seem to handle their family and royal responsibilities well. And they have three kids and likely more responsibility, being directly in line for the throne. Ever since Harry and Meghan got married, I have heard news stories periodically that Meghan wasn't taking the notoriety and criticism well. Its certainly not for everyone. It sounds like she may be missing her old lifestyle, with her wanting to get back into acting. I'm wondering if the differences are that Kate knew exactly what she was getting into, being from England and understanding what the royal family was about. Meghan probably thought she knew, but likely had no idea. And her criticism in the press was likely heightened with her being American. I feel for her because its a tough road to walk down, but by the same token, it also comes with the territory.

It seems like when William and Catherine first married, they were allowed to live away from the royal spotlight, so to speak. William had a career apart from being a royal, and although they occasionally made appearances or tours, it wasn’t their primary job. They were allowed to have that time together to grow as a family and to grow into their royal roles gradually. I feel like that contributed greatly to their ability to step up in the past year or so and take on more royal duties.

I think it would have been good for Harry and Meghan to have that same time away from strictly royal duties, and perhaps that is what they are trying to do. I don’t know much about Meghan, but I know if it were me, I would have welcomed a more gradual approach to my new life. Moving to a new country is difficult in the best of circumstances, and when your every move and even your very existence is being torn apart by the media, it has to affect your self esteem. I also feel that their ages have worked against them, because people have different expectations based on William marrying in his twenties and Harry marrying in his thirties. Regardless of how old you are when you marry, it’s still a big adjustment that takes time to work through.

If they could take a few years to get their bearings, with Harry taking on some kind of employment that is meaningful to him, with just the occasional royal outing, I think it’s a good idea. I do think it should have been discussed with the Queen, out of respect, but I don’t fault them for wanting to do it. I also think it’s fair that they not receive financial support unless they are specifically performing a royal duty. Give them five years to get their family grounded, and they may be ready to work full time as royals again.

 

[Praying Colonel]

Uh oh--stuff's getting real:

 

[BlueStarryHat]

Actually, a drunk driver is what got Diana. And Megan isnt some sheltered naive girl like Diana was, she was an adult, previous married, who had also sought out fame and fortune in acting before seeking more fame and fortune in marrying Harry. If anyone is to be felt sorry for over lack of privacy and the press, it is Harry who had no choice of the family into which he was born

They were being hounded and chased by paparazzi as well. Would the accident still have happened had they been driving at a more reasonable speed? Who knows? I am not advocating for drunk driving here, my own father was killed by one.

Yes, Meghan is more worldly than Diana was when she got married, but the Royal family is famous for chewing people up and spitting them out, so you either conform or you suffer. The level of fame and fortune Meghan was seeking in her acting career is *nothing* compared to the absolute minute scrutiny of *everything* you do as a Royal by the UK tabloid press-they are poisonous and horrible. They latched on to Meghan Markle as Public Enemy Number One, and nothing she did or said would have changed that. I saw Meghan throw herself into charity and good works right away, but it still wasn't good enough. The public's perception of her has been molded by what the rags say.

What I will say is that Harrry should have taken his brother's approach with his relationship with Kate-introduce her to royal life a bit at a time until she knew what she was letting herself in for. Adding into that though, Kate had the advantage of being British and white.

 

[Ariel484]

They were being hounded and chased by paparazzi as well. Would the accident still have happened had they been driving at a more reasonable speed? Who knows? I am not advocating for drunk driving here, my own father was killed by one.

Yes, Meghan is more worldly than Diana was when she got married, but the Royal family is famous for chewing people up and spitting them out, so you either conform or you suffer. The level of fame and fortune Meghan was seeking in her acting career is *nothing* compared to the absolute minute scrutiny of *everything* you do as a Royal by the UK tabloid press-they are poisonous and horrible. They latched on to Meghan Markle as Public Enemy Number One, and nothing she did or said would have changed that. I saw Meghan throw herself into charity and good works right away, but it still wasn't good enough. The public's perception of her has been molded by what the rags say.

What I will say is that Harrry should have taken his brother's approach with his relationship with Kate-introduce her to royal life a bit at a time until she knew what she was letting herself in for. Adding into that though, Kate had the advantage of being British and white.

100%. And don't forget that Meghan is "old" and divorced, too!

 

[kaytieeldr]

While I had barely heard of her show on a bottom tier cable channel

Interesting. USA Network is ranked 8 out of 115 cable channels last year https://www.thewrap.com/115-cable-c...-viewership-yes-comedy-tv-is-still-dead-last/

Does "bottom" have a new definition I'm not aware of?

 

[cabanafrau]

In the interests of accuracy, Princess Anne was second in line to the throne, behind Charles, from when her mother became Queen in 1952 until Andrew arrived in 1960.
On the other hand, Harry was never higher than third after his father and his brother William.

To say that "Princess Anne has conducted her duties quite well" displays a poor understanding of the workings of the Royal Family. The Princess Royal, a title richly deserved, is one of the hardest working and well loved members of that family.

ford family

In the interest of accuracy you may want to take note of the fact that I said her entire adult life. Google represents her birth as having taken place in 1950. Accepting your word Andrew was born in 1960, my ill informed cyphering keeping socks and shoes upon my feet indicates the Princess was ten years old, which is not considered an adult -- unless perhaps her family was booking a trip to WDW?

Are you upset I did not address her as the Princess Royal? Most references do not refer to her this way, despite it being her correct title. Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle are not correct modes of address either.

Do you want to quibble with the fact I merely stated she has conducted her duties quite well, instead of stating it precisely as your wishes command? Have at it. IMO that's on par with the rudeness of pointing out someone spelled a word wrong, used the incorrect word or incorrect grammar on a discussion board.

Are you trying to suggest that I claimed Harry was second in line to the throne? The reference to being "spare" in relation to Harry is merely the reflection of what he was often referred to within his generation when he was born and the fact that his mother had concern he not become trapped in that concept.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Prince Harry to step up, his call to arms and he should do his duty and serve his country.

.
What is his duty, and serve his country how?

Actually, a drunk driver is what got Diana.

W
Actually, paparazzi chasing the limo being driven by a drink driver is what got Diana.

before seeking more fame and fortune in marrying Harry.

Why do you think they didn't marry because love?

 

[ford family]

In the interest of accuracy you may want to take note of the fact that I said her entire adult life. Google represents her birth as having taken place in 1950. Accepting your word Andrew was born in 1960, my ill informed cyphering keeping socks and shoes upon my feet indicates the Princess was ten years old, which is not considered an adult -- unless perhaps her family was booking a trip to WDW?

Are you upset I did not address her as the Princess Royal? Most references do not refer to her this way, despite it being her correct title. Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle are not correct modes of address either.

Do you want to quibble with the fact I merely stated she has conducted her duties quite well, instead of stating it precisely as your wishes command? Have at it. IMO that's on par with the rudeness of pointing out someone spelled a word wrong, used the incorrect word or incorrect grammar on a discussion board.

Are you trying to suggest that I claimed Harry was second in line to the throne? The reference to being "spare" in relation to Harry is merely the reflection of what he was often referred to within his generation when he was born and the fact that his mother had concern he not become trapped in that concept.

Wow! Having a bad day, are we?
"When you are in a hole, stop digging" is quite good advice.

ford family

 

[cabanafrau]

Wow! Having a bad day, are we?
"When you are in a hole, stop digging" is quite good advice.

ford family

In a hole? Because you suggest people have to conform to the descriptions as you wish them presented?

 

[tvguy]

Uh oh--stuff's getting real:

View attachment 463961

Yup. Don't mess with the Queen.

 

[Hikergirl]

I just saw an article that estimates Harry's net worth at $40 million and Meghan's at $5 million.
Something tells me they will be just fine.

 

[luvsJack]

You know, it doesn't matter how much money, prestige or power the royals have; the fact that some here are basically saying that "suck it up buttercup, you have NO choice in your life. You were just (un)lucky to be born into the royal family, so through no fault or choice of your own, you owe the British people your life and have no choices for you, your spouse or your children", is really sad. Sorry, that's not being bratty or entitled or any of that. Its just maybe wanting to be half way normal.

Most of us look at the Royals and see this fabulous life. Full of riches and extremes and lots of money and "oh how wonderful it must be". But is it? Look at Diana. She didn't find it so wonderful. Neither did Fergie. And just maybe Harry has enough of his Mother in him that neither does he.

But not wanting to be one of the main royals doesn't mean he suddenly isn't a part of that family. He is still grandson of the queen and son of Charles and Diana and that does make him entitled to certain things.

 

[NYCgrrl]

Why do you have to include the term "Martyrdom" in your phrase? How about the more correct word "Responsibility"? Otherwise, it just makes a person sound like an immature selfish brat who probably shouldn't have had kids in the first place, KWIM? People who choose to have kids (or have unprotected sex and get pregnant) aren't being martyrs for giving up things to raise a child correctly. they re being responsible, mature adults.



Just because he was born into the royal family doesn't mean he has to stay there. That would be a form of slavery, wouldn't it? Even indentured servants could get out of their contract eventually.

No as we seem to define the term differently. For you it seems to be an absolute negative. Not so much for me.

 

[Praying Colonel]

You know, it doesn't matter how much money, prestige or power the royals have; the fact that some here are basically saying that "suck it up buttercup, you have NO choice in your life. You were just (un)lucky to be born into the royal family, so through no fault or choice of your own, you owe the British people your life and have no choices for you, your spouse or your children", is really sad. Sorry, that's not being bratty or entitled or any of that. Its just maybe wanting to be half way normal.

Most of us look at the Royals and see this fabulous life. Full of riches and extremes and lots of money and "oh how wonderful it must be". But is it? Look at Diana. She didn't find it so wonderful. Neither did Fergie. And just maybe Harry has enough of his Mother in him that neither does he.

But not wanting to be one of the main royals doesn't mean he suddenly isn't a part of that family. He is still grandson of the queen and son of Charles and Diana and that does make him entitled to certain things.

My WAG is if you put this in the form of a poll you'd have the following groups here substantially, if not fairly equally, represented:

--"Suck It Up, Buttercup";
--"You Can't Have Your Cake And Eat It, Too";
--"Good For Them--Live Their Own Lives";
--"Meh--It's An Outdated Institution, Anyway"

 

[TipsyTraveler]

Really though, whom among us hasn’t been in their shoes? You go on vacation, get away from the stresses of daily life, and start feeling relaxed. At some point you turn to your spouse and say, “What if we just didn’t go back?” Your spouse laughs at first, but the idea grows as the two of you start to talk about how you could get a little cabin on the Canadian frozen tundra and lead a simpler, happier life away from all the pressures back home. And sure, you know your relatives will be disappointed but you have to do what’s best for your little family and they’ll come around eventually. Next thing you know, you’re making a global announcement and stepping down from your royal duties.

The answer here is obvious: