Skip to main content

Questions, Questions and more Questions

 It feels like things have been quiet.  

Sure we hear of this bit of news that they are doing this.  Or have done that (not always with pictures which then begs the question: did it really happen?).  Or read that one of them is about to do something.

So many questions swirl around them.

Why are the exposures and interests appear to be more scattershot than a few general areas to be grouped under?  Consistently meaning the same groups or group types.

Why does the clothing still not seem to match the season they are in?  Are they still able to find people willing to offer stuff or are they running out of designers?  Or are they just not checking the weather?

What is happening with Spotify?  

Or Netflix?  

Or what do you think will happen as The Crown edges closer to current events?

Where are all the power hires who were to lead or guide them in some of the proposed projects?  

What if they left the Montecito house?  Where in California be a better or more visible place for their interests?  Or would New York beckon?  The City is always a flashy albeit expensive draw but many power people live in Westchester, Katonah (HRC), Greenwich, Westport (Martha although is now more in Bedford I think but could be wrong) and commute.  Sometimes there is even a pied-a-terre in the City. Old money.  Company head movers and shakers.  Brokerage money.  Serious money.

What about politics?  Is that realistic meaning there could be some support for it to start?  If politics was in the future, wouldn't that bring additional security risks? Would that be safe for any of them?  

Which brings the kids to mind.  Will there be any more kid sightings any time soon?  Valentine crayon glued on candy heart?  Easter looking for hidden eggs?  

Or expand the past influencer blogger life?  Where might that go now?  The field is way more crowded than it used to be five years ago.  New people are always flocking in daily.  Will there be enough interest to sustain past the initial flurry because it is revived?

It feels like things have been quiet.  Is it because energy is running down?  Or the money stream?  Or is it a conservation of energy because they are about to announce big things - something/bring things on line/meet all their contract obligations?  

What are your thoughts?


Comments

Mel said…
It was unfortunate to have the beginning of the Queen's Jubilee be marred by anything. I was expecting happy celebrating instead of what we got.

The fact that it was marred I put firmly at H's feet.

If H hadn't been publicly threatening to bash Camilla in his upcoming book, the Queen wouldn't have felt obligated to say anything right now about Camilla. Maybe she would have said something later on, or maybe not at all.

I do think she's tying up loose ends so maybe would have done this at some point soon, but maybe not in connection with her accession date.

I wonder if she felt the need to pull it as a surprise like that in order to stun the Harkles a bit. Let them know who's Queen, and it ain't them.

Mel said…
I kinda think that the latest H video was a slam at Catherine's Rugby patronage more than a slam at Camilla.

I don't think he cares about Camilla one way or the other. But he's p*ssed about that Rugby patronage being taken away from him.

The AIDS thing was just whatever excuse he could find to have a conversation with the Rugby guy.

The point was that he is trying to show that the Rugby people love *him*, not their new patron. It's so important to him that he be seen as being beloved by groups of people.

Kinda like he always tried to portray that the military people adored him. He was beloved.

The same way he forces little kids to huddle around Mm to hug her.

See....they love ME! Me. Way more loved than you. I'm Mr. Popularity. Not you.
Maneki Neko said…
Re Diana's funeral, I remember being angry at Charles Spencer's eulogy. He said 'we, your blood family' but weren't Charles, the Queen and the rest of the BRF their blood family? How insensitive. And he didn't really do much for his nephew's.
Miggy said…
@Maneki,

Charles Spencer's words.

"She would want us today to pledge ourselves to protecting her beloved boys William and Harry from a similar fate and I do this here Diana on your behalf. We will not allow them to suffer the anguish that used regularly to drive you to tearful despair.

And beyond that, on behalf of your mother and sisters, I pledge that we, your blood family, will do all we can to continue the imaginative way in which you were steering these two exceptional young men so that their souls are not simply immersed by duty and tradition but can sing openly as you planned."
OCGal said…
@Mel, a few minutes ago you wrote Harry was “…p*ssed about that Rugby patronage being taken away from him.

The AIDS thing was just whatever excuse he could find to have a conversation with the Rugby guy.”

Thank you! I couldn’t figure out what Harry was up to, it made no sense to me, but now due to your conjecture and your entire interesting blog post it now makes perfect sense.

I agree wholeheartedly with everything you’ve said, and am shaking my head. Harry is transparent in his self-serving greed and self-obsession. Harry is utterly contemptible.
Maneki Neko said…
@Miggy

Spencer pledged to and guide his nephews through life but did precious little as far as I remember.
CatEyes said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Miggy said…
@Maneki,

Yes, claimed the family would.

"We fully respect the heritage into which they have both been born and will always respect and encourage them in their royal role but we, like you, recognise the need for them to experience as many different aspects of life as possible to arm them spiritually and emotionally for the years ahead. I know you would have expected nothing less from us."

As far as I'm aware, nothing has ever been publicised in regard to Charles or his sisters guiding W & H... but who really knows what goes on privately?
CatEyes said…
Since there is much celebration for the jolly old sport of having royal affairs I thought I would bring some good news that "Queen Elizabeth granted permission for Roderic "Roddy" Llewellyn to visit her sister's burial site on Wednesday, which marked two decades since Princess Margaret died at age 71, according to Richard Eden of the Daily Mail."

In the documentary Elizabeth: Our Queen, Lady Anne Glenconner, who was one of the Queen's maids during her coronation, revealed that the monarch was in favor of Margaret's extramarital relationship with Llewellyn.

"It was difficult for the Queen, and I felt rather guilty always — having introduced Roddy to Princess Margaret," Lady Anne said in the documentary. "But after Princess Margaret's funeral, the Queen, she said, 'I'd just like to say, Anne, it was rather difficult at moments, but I thank you so much introducing Princess Margaret to Roddy 'cause he made her really happy.' "

For our history-loving Nutties would already know that Margaret took up with Roddy while she was still married (can't be bitter when it's jolly more fun to have a roll in the hay, er garden.)

snarkyatherbest said…
Mel - good point the Aids thing seemed so random and couldnt figure it out. Oh cant wait until other patronages get redistributed so we can see the Montecito response.

the days of arguing how many angels can dance on a pinhead are long over, so I'm taking a break.
Maneki Neko said…
I'm not so sure H's involvement with HIV work is so random - after all, he's vowed to 'continue his mother's 'unfinished' HIV work' and 'feels an 'obligation' to continue Diana's work 'to remove stigma surrounding the virus'. A laudable initiative but again one that needs to be connected to Diana. And why now? As for 'every one of us having a duty to get tested', no, it's not 'every one of us'. Either he knows it and is being disingenuous or else he is ignorant.
LavenderLady said…
@Maneki,
I completely agree. My first thought when reading about Haz taking up the HIV work was if he keeps hijacking Diana's causes, pretty soon there won't be any more to steal.

What a joke he is. I think it's TBW coming up with all the pitiful ideas. He goes along with them because his head is up her back side.
LavenderLady said…
@WBBM,
My question was rhetorical but yes, a break is always good for the soul. Don't stay away too long. Your input is essential and always missed.
Fifi LaRue said…
'airy's the first one who should get tested for HIV, and STDs, considering his past, and the wife. God knows where the wife has been
Enbrethiliel said…
@Hikari
As ever, Her Majesty was exquisitely on point as to the finer tenets of Royal protocols. In principle, she was correct. But such correctness showed a fairly shocking want of human feeling, at least to the onlookers.

I agree that the Queen's initial decision was correct.

But in the sense that a monarchy is always playing the long game, that move was wrong. Not just because it horrified her grieving subjects, but primarily because it seemed to prove that everything Diana had said about the BRF was true.

HM was bullied into relenting by PM Blair and also Charles, who insisted on going personally to Paris to retrieve the body of his children's mother in a Royal plane.

There's also a sense in which the Queen opened her family to Charles Spencer's attack. He was only the third man to defy her openly when it came to her handling of Diana's funeral. After Prince Charles blatantly broke protocol and Tony Blair successfully bullied the Queen, receiving public support as they did so, Spencer knew that it was now or never.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Maneki
Spencer pledged to and guide his nephews through life but did precious little as far as I remember.

That's the part that disillusioned me, too. Reflecting upon it now, however, I think even he knew that the speech was the only chance he would ever have. Even with something more diplomatic, would he have been allowed to have such a direct hand in raising his nephews?
Enbrethiliel said…
@Mel
If H hadn't been publicly threatening to bash Camilla in his upcoming book, the Queen wouldn't have felt obligated to say anything right now about Camilla. Maybe she would have said something later on, or maybe not at all.

I wish the Queen had gone through with whatever her original plans were. It's a little bit like negotiating with terrorists. What she knew about the upcoming book must have been really bad for her to have let her Ascension Day be so overshadowed. But I also think it was a deeply authentic step. She herself knows that she doesn't have long on earth and she has probably been doing a lot behind the scenes to ensure a smooth transition to her eldest son.

We've joked that Harry became a Markle rather than * becoming a Mountbatten-Windsor, but given the latest digression, I can't help wondering whether we're also seeing a strong Spencer streak now. Is the drama of the Spencers vs. the current dynasty merely being continued in Princes William and Harry's lives? Will Harry have his own "now or never" moment, as arguably the only Briton with a real right to be a "Diana diehard"?
Magatha Mistie said…

@Enbreth

The mood where I’m from is
very much ‘live and let live’
My faith to the Queen,
and her church, still stands.
I love coronation chicken,
plenty of curry powder 😉
Magatha Mistie said…

Harry Who?

Harry’s always had a plot
Since finding out whilst
still a tot
That his brother would be King
His life’s now focused on ka-ching


Hikari said…
To this day I still get an upset stomach when I recall Charles Spencer’s performance at the funeral of his sister. Though given the title eulogy, it was barely about her. The force of the vitriol spewing from the podium in God’s house was ear-curdling. In the context of what was already the worst day in the lives of many listening—Diana’s children principally, and, regardless of Charles’s role in how things ended up there, I believe he genuinely grieved her loss. Being relieved that you’re not married to someone anymore isn’t the same as hating them—Spencer’s words were tantamount to throwing kerosene on a bonfire to watch it burn the entire place to the ground. It was a shocking display and violated every tenet of aristocratic conduct on such an occasion.

One had to grudgingly admire Earl Spencer’s absolute *balls* to stand up in front of *his Queen* and say those incendiary words. The anger he expressed was certainly very human, righteous even…Save for the active role his own family played in putting Diana into the lion’s mouth in the first place. He conveniently left the Spencer part of this tragedy out of his tirade. Coupled with the subsequent two decades of doing sod all to support his nephews as he promised, that speech made him ultimately just a grandstanding hypocrite. If he’d offered Diana sanctuary at Alrhorp as she had asked, she might not have wound up in the arms of Dodi Fayed. In that light his excoriating of the Royal family was even more hypocritical. Was he feeling guilty? Did his sisters know the content of his speech beforehand? Lady Jane’s husband was an equerry to the Queen, so it’s hard to imagine her baby brother’s choice words not negatively impacting his job or their reception at court as a couple. At least William seems to have kept the channel open with his aunts. I don’t think he’s got much use for his uncle. If he and Harry and the York girls applauded, it’s because they were all *children* caught up in the emotion of the moment—there were some nice bits about Diana slipped in. They could not in the moment dissect that they too were part of this rank institution of vultures the Earl was railing against. The whole moment was staged for maximum spectacle, capped off by Elton John’s concert number, which in his defense, he really did not want to do.

I will say this of Chas Spencer’s speech—he certainly chose his moment, and it was well-delivered. It will be the defining moment of his entire life really, and he made the most of it. But hate and revenge are shoddy pillars to build a life upon. Wonder if Harry is ever going to learn this.
Hikari said…
WBBM,

In reading the article you posted about the eulogy, one paragraph leapt out at me—the bit where it describes Diana’s volatile relationship with her staff and how it was a bit of a revolving door in her office because she was constantly replacing staff she couldn’t get on with.

Doesn’t this sound like someone else we know?

Turns out that Hazzer may have married a girl more like Mummy than even he knows. * cosplays Diana by copying her clothes and ostentatiously squatting down to take flowers from kids but her resemblance to Diana is not in superficial details of appearance. It’s the emotional landscape she creates that must feel so familiar to Harry.

It doesn’t give me any joy to pick over the bones of St. Diana. But what if her much-vaunted dedication to motherhood has been burnished with the same careful gloss which was applied to Hero Hazza’s military career? It is far easier to pose with pictures of your cute babies or to do fun outings to amusement parks and McDonald’s than the other less photogenic stuff that comprises the day to day acts of parenting. I rather wonder if Diana didn’t regard her boys as toys to amuse herself with, or as sources of affirmation for her own ego rather than actually being equipped to give them what they needed from her. William was completely disgusted by her conduct that last summer of her life; being the eldest, he had reached a stage of being able to be more discerning about his Mum’s limitations in a way Harry had not. As the future of the Windsors he had to develop the ability to consider both sides. And thank God for that. He has a perspective on his mother which has allowed him to cope. Which is not to say that he loved his mother less; I do believe he knew her better. And so far, only one son of Diana is trying to make bank for himself by milking her memory, and it’s not William. For anyone to claim that Harry loved his mother more, his behavior makes that a complete farce.
Elsbeth1847 said…

Hikari, re: that funeral speech and someone's something in front of his Queen

She is also his godmother. And, after the service, they (as in all of the assorted family on all sides who had been at the service) took a special train to then go bury the body.
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
@Hikari - yes that bit about D's treatment of her staff hit me too.

@Magatha:

Moi aussi - which, for non-French speakers doesn't mean `I'm an Australian'!
Maneki Neko said…
@Hikari

I share your loathing of Spencer's 'eulofy'.
I agree that William knew his !other warts and all - unlike H whom has an idealised memory of her. Remember how she shared her problems with him and he used to pass her tissues under the bathroom door. Makes you wonder who was the parents.
Fifi LaRue said…
With William having to be his mother's emotional caretaker, it's surprising William turned out basically okay, being able to form a healthy relationship and family. William must have received all kinds of nurturing, therapy, and training to the end that he would eventually take his place in the line of succession. Putting one child in the position of emotionally supplanting the spouse is one of the characteristics of BPD. The brother would have witnessed the dynamics, but not been part of it. The BPD parent affects all children in a family. Unfortunately, without therapy for the children, the borderline pattern continues. That's the reason Ball-less is with *, she matches what he knows as a family dynamic. Diana was maybe the Waif, threatening suicide, and engaging in self harm. * is the Queen subtype. The Queen type needs all kinds of attention, all the time. They demand it. The other types are the Hermit, and the Witch.
CatEyes said…
It seems that Charles never showed the love to his children while they were young to think enough of their needs above his own. It was too easy to let Diana be the parental figure in raising them while he sootheshis ego in the arms of his mistress. Children require time and more importantly love. Charles loved himself more and he had his expectations that even a baby Harry in all his lovability as a newborn could not rouse in his father the least inkling of pride. Nop Charles was disgusted his second son, was not only a son but a red headed one (claiming that he looked “like a Spencer”.)
Charles spent his precious time with not his wife but his mistress. If he did not love his wife then he should have showered hos attention on his children.

Just as many men are, when they feel insecure about the love connection with their children, they pretend to be their friend and will indulge the children to compete with the easy love they naturally have for their mother. Charles did that and more, allowing the boys freedom to drink in their own in-house bar and use a female caretaker to attempt to replace their devoted mother. He was more interested in his royal work and his personal interests than his own flesh and blood. It would not be so shocking to know that he could probably name the 10 rarest plant's botanical names that reside at Highgrove than his own son's favorite interests. Charles made more effort of arranging not-so-secret trysts with Camillia than play dates with his sons.

It was pure love and time that cemented the relationship William and Harry had with Diana, but it didn't help that Charles was pretty much a failure of a father in those formative years that almost rose to the level of failure he was as a husband to Diana. When Charles finally divorced he wasted no time in foisting Camillia on the boys. According to historians Charles had a significant event and did not want to exclude Camillia so the sons had to meet her on Charles terms/timetable. It's not any wonder that things were frosty for quite some time, and it seems like it's only been the last decade or less things have improved with William while Harry only recently expressed very unflattering comments about his father. Yes, we can all say Harry is the problem but that would be too pat, and it would ignore Charles very direct role in how he did or did not bring up his children.

It seems people here want to easily blame Diana for the shortcomings and faults of Harry and tout Charles the reason why William has positive traits. No one can say this with accuracy because there is an individual aspect of personality versus whatever element may eventually be determined to be inheritable along with the influence of environmental factors or pressure varying over both short and long-term timeframes. This field of study has more questions than answers at present and I dare say it will be quite some time that even broad conclusions could be ascertained in the population as a whole much less singled out for two royals.
Enbrethiliel said…
I'm happy for Prince William, because he seems to have found peace in life despite injustices from both his parents that they may never apologize for (since one is dead and other has been allowed, like Prince Andrew, to have whatever he wants). This took a lot of strength of character and it couldn't have been easy.

I think that if Harry identifies with his Spencer side and goes through with his plan to reveal his own personal experience of Camilla, he will be finished with his family forever. It won't matter if he is actually 100% honest this time and that every family therapist in the world will agree that Charles was wrong to do what he did after 1997. Remember that the family black sheep is the scapegoat for everyone's dysfunction, not just his own. The black sheep is cast out so that the sins of the rest may be forgiven and the community (not just the BRF but the whole UK) be renewed. He looks bad so that others may look good. We're witnessing that now.

This is not to say that Harry was justified in everything that he has done as an adult man. He does need to mature and to take responsibility for his life. But we seem to be defining maturity as pretending that everything is fine when it is not, forgiving people who have never apologized, and concealing your true feelings. I think the Queen made the drastic move of saying that Camilla will be Queen because she knew Harry wanted to tell the truth about his childhood at last. Charles's wants over Harry's needs, all over again.
LavenderLady said…
https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/4676397/prince-harrys-book-true-feelings-camilla/

Well, some of us called it that this is what was coming after HMs announcement about Camilla. I'm wondering how accurate this story is.

I'm a bit surprised how Harry seems to not have any fear of alienating his father, who will be King in the near future. Rather, he seems determined to take his family down at all costs. And for pay.

Is anyone keeping up with Lady C on this? I'm out of the loop. I've been busy mitigating my own family dramas and haven't checked her channel in months. Her vids are so long.

The part that says the deal included dishing dirt on the RF.

I can't even... Ugh!
Maneki Neko said…
@Fifi

Yes, it's lucky that William turned out okay. I think that he benefited immensely from being with Kate's family, i.e. a 'normal' family for want of a better word. Apparently he even called/calls Mike Middleton 'dad'. Who knows how H would have turned out with the right wife and in-laws. * has brought out the worst in him, even if he was rather flawed to begin with.
Miggy said…
New HARRYMARKLE

A Tale Of Two Monarchs Named Elizabeth

https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2022/02/13/a-tale-of-two-monarchs-named-elizabeth/
Enbrethiliel said…
@Miggy

I disagree with Harry Markle's thesis. I think our current Queen Elizabeth is still hugely popular and will remain so for the rest of her reign. If any monarch stands to reap the whirlwind, however, it will be her successor.
Fifi LaRue said…
IMO anyone and everyone in the UK are maintaining their respect for Her Majesty, The Queen. There are people who know a lot, from the petty incidents, to the most awful human vile, loathsome, despicable behaviors committed by members of the BRF, past and present. And, that includes * and Twit. When the Queen is gone, information is going to come out, in dribbles progressing to lava flows of incidents and stories. Twit may write awful things in his coming book, but he should be aware that whatever he claims to be abuse against him will gain him only momentary sympathy. Eventually everything will come back to haunt him 10 times over, and that includes the harpy to whom he's married. When her true history is revealed, the harpy will need to find a hole in which to hide.
snarkyatherbest said…
LL. saw that article. they are preparing in advance for some book trashing especially about making it the mrs versus camilla. given the mrs unpopularity, it’s interesting they are lifting up camilla on it. then again makes charles look bad that camilla had her pegged early on and he didn’t. interesting strategy though. make harry’s book more about his puppet master settling scores. then him settling scores. then again we knew camillas feeling with the patting her own stomach while talking to Kate and Sophie at the commonwealth event. she couldn’t even hide it. and i for one loved it!!
Mel said…
"Unlike Charles, the Duchess of Cornwall could see through the actress’s coquettish smiles and tactile performance."

Tactile performance.
Hmmm....I bet she did notice that. Women are highly tuned in to that kind of sh*t.

We all spotted it first thing. She's always draping herself over men, especially older white men.
Enbrethiliel said…
@snarkyatherbest
hey are preparing in advance for some book trashing especially about making it the mrs versus camilla.

This is the worst possible angle! I have great sympathy for Harry if he just wants to tell the truth about what the 1990s were like for him and about his relationship with Camilla since then. But * wasn't there when any of those things happened. She doesn't even merit a footnote in a chronicle of this era.

She can't even let him have a therapeutic moment without inserting herself into it.
LavenderLady said…
@snarky @Enbre,

I so agree on both of your thoughts.

What kind of crap human being writes that type of expose vs. a genuine memoir? Someone who has ships to sink. Trashy and uncouth which is everything he was not raised to be. But then, look at PA and the details coming out about him; eyewitnesses making sex pest accusations. Charles supposedly telling him to quit grinning around the estate looking like the entitled ass he is.

And yes I also think she has her mark on this as well to settle scores with Camilla. What an evil pair those two are. I am appalled at the audacity of that spawn of Satan pair. Ok I'm being dramatic but I do believe in Karma and I think that book will bite them BIG TIME. I can't see anything good for them coming from it. The masses always seem to turn on vindictive celebrities and their victim status stories...
God willing, their guns will be well and truly spiked.
Girl with a Hat said…
haha

I read this comment at a subscription only online magazine that talks about political issues. They were talking about the Canadian Forces Base where Harry was once stationed:


We can’t blame Medicine Hat. It’s one of the few places in the Commonwealth where you can watch an Irishman and an Englishman vomit fraternally together between rounds.

Also, numerous local gingers claim to be Royal spawn

abbyh said…
Eh, I don't think of Charles as totally frozen/clueless towards the kids. Tactless? chip off the old block maybe? And, we all can say the wrong thing(s) on occasion. Most of us don't have spouses/onlookers mentally recording those moments and blasting them to the tabloids for spite though.

When I look at this, I notice that her car arrived first and what's described as dancing toward the kids. But notice how right behind her was Charles very quickly too - past all that protocol. And he doesn't shake hands with the kids either. Grab and hug.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9cW9ntrtoI

Anonymous said…
A new poll in the Express:

POLL: Would you support Meghan and Harry rejoining as working royals under King Charles?

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1565385/royal-poll-meghan-markle-prince-harry-king-charles-favourite-royal-memoir-spt
Elsbeth1847 said…

Re: the DM article about how the book will damage and so on.

What's fascinating is how the sources are supposed to be Harry's friends (and are, as usual not named but helpfully talking about how damaging this will all be when it's out). What? I didn't think he had any left?

It sounds like he has acquaintances - people who weren't part of his upbringing or have knowledge of royal life. Sad but this so called friends come off as more may be good at encouraging him to continue this path (to watch the fireworks) rather than get off it.

As for the poll, so far the comments seem to be running against them (or at least the ones I read).
@Elsbeth,

I think that article is a lot of nonsense. 😟

Take this part for example…..

And in further comments that are likely to concern the Palace, Harry's friends added: 'He has got lots to say. People think he's keeping a low profile to respect the family but it's not that.

'He's writing a book. He's got a multi-million-pound book deal and he's keeping a lot of his opinions for that. The memoir deal states that it should include personal details of personal and family arrangements.

'And it will be a really intimate take on his feelings about his family and what has gone in the breakdown of the relationship.'


I’m guessing this is feed direct from SS courtesy of Mole! As if Mole is keeping a low profile out of respect for the family! 🥺That’s absolute codswallop! He has zero respect for his family. Under normal circumstances I’d expect a person to harbour a certain amount of resentment over a step mother (Camilla), but this book is nothing more than the continuous muck slinging he’s been doing since he left the royal family. All for monetary value and headlines. 😒😖 I hope he chokes on his diatribe, what a truly nasty piece of work he is. 😔
Maneki Neko said…
@Fifi

When the Queen is gone, information is going to come out,
------
I'm not so sure, some information stays restricted for a number of years (I think) and then goes into the Royal Archives. Do correct me if I'm wrong. That said, we would all like to see info released about the harpy... Perhaps not in our lifetime.
Girl with a Hat said…
a DM comment:

I wonder if Harry*s book will contain his excerpts from his bo*otca*mp days in Cal*gary Al*berta like the ro*mp with Cdn bus*ty ba*rtend*er *C*H*E R 1 E C *Y*M B *A L 1 S T Y it was all over the news here when he was in bo*ot cam*p - here is an excerpt: *He was obsessed about my outfit and br*a top* Miss C*Y* M B A *L 1 S T Y said. "He was very forward." The Prin*ce then reportedly asked whether she was wearing und*erwe*ar and ogl*ed a poster of her removing her G*S*t*r*i*n*g with a stiletto.* And this was not just with her - either - The randy royal rebel CAVORTED in front of curvy Katherine Smith dressed in a blue and orange sarong before removing his boxer shorts and SPAN*KING her bottom. And he let the 20-year-old beauty wear a necklace which was a gift from loyal girlfriend Chelsy Davy as he pawed her beneath the sheets and be*g*ged her to stay the night with him.
Fifi LaRue said…
Eugenie is at the Super Bowl with Twit.
Fifi LaRue said…
@Maneki: I was thinking of all the juicy tidbits that unnamed staff, and people close to the situation, will no longer feel compelled to keep to themselves.
Museumstop said…
@Fifi LaRue: He looks botoxed to every inch of his face!! Whatever is happening?
I feel like Serena said what she did about Harry is her picking a side and it's Harry not the wife's. Something is afoot.
snarkyatherbest said…
i am surprised the wife wasn’t there looking for hubby number 4 or something. something is afoot. and isn’t it eugenie’s son’s birthday? this is so very odd
Fifi LaRue said…
@museumstop: Ah, maybe so about Serena choosing with whom she's siding. I can't tell if he's botoxed, but he sure doesn't look like he's having a good time.

@snarky: There were so many hot women at the Super Bowl, that Maggot would have faded into the background. When someone persistently presents as a whiner, they lose whatever was attractive in the first place. That also goes for Mole. Interesting about the son's birthday. Hmmm...
SwampWoman said…
Again, world events aren't waiting for two unimportant but self-aggrandizing RF members to get their plots in a row.
Enbrethiliel said…
I wonder if Eugenie is supportive of Harry's memoir or not.

After Prince Andrew's disastrous last interview, it was initially reported that his daughters had warned him not to do it. A little later, it was leaked that his daughters had wanted him to do it, foolishly believing it would make him seem more sympathetic. Saying later that they were actually against it was just damage control. I'm not sure which story I believe yet.

We tend to feel positively about the York princesses here, but they (or at least Eugenie) have sent almost as many mixed signals as the Dollars have.
Maneki Neko said…
I'm not sure what Eugenie is doing in LA, apart from being at the Super Bowl. Is she staying at Mudslide Manor? (doubtful). Has she met the invisible children?

In other news, the Sun states that 'Meghan Markle was branded ‘that MINX’ by Camilla who thought she was ‘ungrateful’, expert [Tom Bower] claims’ 😁. Actually, minx is very polite. I can think of other words. I bet Camilla saw * at work fluttering her eyelashes etc to butter up Charles.
@Maneki Neko

I agree it’s a bit odd that Eugenie is there..😟I suppose she has nothing to lose seeing her Father is now persona non grata in the royal family; they are both in a similar but different situation. This public scene of loyalty however, won’t do her any favours with the British public. 🥴
Enbrethiliel said…
Re: "that minx"

While * probably was acting like a total minx around Prince Charles (and all other white men unfortunate enough to get within eyelash batting distance), I'm currently skeptical of anything that makes Camilla look catty.

There's a far better chance that it's a leak from Montecito than a leak from Clarence House. It casts Camilla in the role of an insecure aging woman and * in the role of sexy younger woman who can't help it if all the men around her fall at her feet.

Nice try, * -- but the only insecure aging woman in this drama is you.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Raspberry Ruffle
This public scene of loyalty however, won’t do her any favours with the British public.

I hate that I'm feeling so ambivalent these days, but I find that I can't fault Princess Eugenie for sticking by Harry, if they have always truly been close. Loyalty is one of my favorite qualities in a person, even if I don't really understand why people choose to be loyal to certain others. Saying that Eugenie should simply forget a bond that may go much deeper than any of us know, because we find Harry's behavior unacceptable, is tantamount to cancel culture.

We all have a breaking point after which we must go LC (low contact) or NC (no contact) with problematic family members or friends. It doesn't look as if Eugenie is anywhere close to this point with Harry. If we support Prince William's personal feelings in his decision to go NC with his brother, then we can't really condemn Eugenie's personal feelings in her own decision to remain in contact with him.

It's just unfortunate that loyalty to Harry would be also perceived as disloyalty to the Queen. I don't think she means anything against her grandmother and would really like for Harry to get his act together, that the family might have peace again.
TheGrangle said…
Someone on Quora has just referred to Archie and Lili as ‘Aldi and Lidl’ 😂
TheGrangle said…
The context being that supposedly reliable sources are saying that parliament is requesting medical conformation from the doctors who attended both births and if it’s not forthcoming they are to be removed from the list of succession.
Please, God, let that rumour about seeking medical confirmation of the births be true!

It occurred to me within the last hour that although there is no evidence of Aldi & Lidl (!) actually existing, so far there's no evidence that they don't. That may be what has hindered any action against them about their alleged children. The say-so of the Portman nurses wouldn't stand up in court.
Teasmade said…
@TheGrangle: "Aldi and Lidl" is PERFECT. Well, except that they actually exist and are legitimately European-born. I will say that they are a go-to source for bargains, though, as, along with the race and Diana cards, they have paved the way for a nice scam for this pair of grifters.

@Maneki: If Camilla (or anyone) called * "ungrateful," well, that is one of the nicest, most subtle things I think you could call her. Hilarious. And a dry wit worthy of Camilla. Love it.
Aldi and Lidl are both German-owned and strangely enough were set up by 2 brothers who, it s said, hated each other. Mind you, the same is said of Puma & Addidas.
Where is the article or news confirmation about Parliament’s request regarding Maggot and Mole’s issues ? I can’t find anything. 🥴
Hikari said…
If it’s true that Parliament is finally demanding proof of the legitimacy of the Sussex spawn, I’d say the day of the Kraken is nigh.

Gee, it seems nearly quaint to think back to the days when the Kraken seemed at its worst to be whether * sailed for cash.

As for Eugenie’s head-scratching appearance with Hazmat at the Super Bowl…I am confused. What the hell is she doing there? Since when did either of them start giving attacks about American football? This feels like a stunt move strictly to be seen. Euge has a baby at home, 6000 miles away. Why leave him to come all the way to CA for such a frivolous purpose that to the world watching is going to look like consorting with her traitorous cousin as her supposedly beloved grandmother is in fragile health and has just kicked off her Jubilee? Either Eugenie has chosen this moment to announce her true side, or if we hold with the theory that she is the designated go-between of the two camps with the blessing of the RF… Maybe they actually sent her, as a public declaration to * that the Crown always wins—H is with his blood family symbolically, not her. There are plenty of ways for Eugénie to support her cousin that aren’t so glaringly public, risking blowback on her. The whole thing has the whiff of espionage—but everything hinges on who sent her and why. I don’t believe that she just got it into her head to lark off to America to enjoy the game with H, leaving the baby home with Jack. The venue could not have been more public…only one papp photo?

I’ve always had a bit of a soft spot for E., who struggled for a time in her adolescence and early 20s as the chubby less pretty York girl, before blossoming it seemed into a confident young woman with a heart for service. She couldn’t have looked more beautiful at her wedding, and seems genuinely happy in her family life. Conspiring with the Sussexes does not fit this image, as much as she may still be concerned about Harry personally. Given Harry’s conduct since his marriage, the choice seems pretty stark: to support the Sussexes is to diss the Queen.

Is E. throwing in with H after her father’s final disgrace…or is this all part of a Harry extraction mission? Has she been tasked with cooling his jets on the forthcoming book…or at least finding out how bad it’s going to be?

I don’t know what to think. E has to know that she is gambling with her own reputation. Anti Sussex sentiment at an all time high, and she leaves her family behind to be seen with the Ginger Tw*t at an event where tickets go for thousands of dollars? Not a good look for her at all—Unless there is a greater purpose behind this move. If there isn’t, then I’m afraid she is as tone deaf and entitled as H is. I don’t want to think that of her, So I hope there is another explanation.
snarkyatherbest said…
hikari. i agree it’s an odd display for PE to be at the super bowl. then again her husband is still associated with the tequila brand a few seats nearby were empty maybe he was with the party in the skyboxes. maybe the wife was there too but busy hobnobbing. if that were the case and she didn’t get her pic out there wow someone is going to be angry.

or maybe pe is delivering a personal message on the queen’s health. too much of this jubilee pr has centered on charles and his ascension. don’t like that focus one bit. charles is as bad as the montecito crew.
@Embre

As far as I’m aware, Eugenie is a lovely person. I’m big on loyalty myself, but if I had a family member who continuously, publicly and repeatedly throw our family under a bus, then my loyalty would cease. As I said previously she’s on the outskirts of royalty now, her Father has been privately and publicly ostracised, she has little to lose. However, she could also be trying to ensure and prevent Mole from mentioning anything on the York’s in his upcoming poo-flying piece. 😳😟
Maneki Neko said…
Like @Raspberry Ruffle, I can't find anything re Parliament requesting medical confirmation of the invisible children's births. Could anyone provide a link? Thanks.
Natalier said…
IMO, that is a Prince Harry double. Noone except Eugenie and the man supposed to be Harry were wearing masks. The mask serves a purpose - to hide most parts of the face. Those are certainly not his eyes or eyebrows. Also, impossible the hair grew that much from last week. We know that Harry will always wear a cap on occasions like this - a cap pulled down low and prob with sunglasses. Finally, Harry doesn't own any white white tshirt. Everything is grey.

So the mystery is why did Eugenie pretend that she was with Harry and they wanted to be seen by the public? Why the diversion tactic. Are the two grifters secretly in UK?
Maneki Neko said…
Now in the DM:

Duchess of Cornwall feared 'that minx' Meghan Markle was 'a self-seeking troublemaker' who would not 'sacrifice career to silently serve' the monarchy, royal biographer claims

• Meghan Markle, 40, was branded 'that minx' by the Duchess of Cornwall
• Camilla 'found it hard to believe' the Duchess of Sussex would 'silently serve'
• Royal biographer Tom Bower has claimed the two women never saw eye-to-eye
• Added Camilla thought the former actress was 'a self-seeking troublemaker'
😉

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10510899/Meghan-Markle-branded-MINX-Camilla-expert-claims.html
That should’ve been threw not throw. 😕
Enbrethiliel said…
Last month, the Body Language Guy had a video analyzing the body language around the Cambridges at the Christmas carols event.

First, he showed the warm greetings when Mike and Zara Tindall arrived. The hugs were genuine.

In contrast, the "hug" Princess Eugenie gave to Prince William was barely deserving of the term. She reached out as if to bring the two of them closer to each other, but then just lightly rubbed his side. (Her arm didn't even go far enough for her to pat him on the back.) They didn't seem comfortable next to each other.

Princess Beatrice and Edo didn't come close enough to hug or to shake hands, but they had very respectful, if reserved body language compared to Eugenie.

We like to think of the BRF as a united entity that will circle the wagons around the Queen just because of who she is, but Harry has proven that that's not always the case. Perhaps Eugenie is the second contradiction. And maybe one angle we haven't considered is that even among the smiling faces on the balcony, Camilla is not universally beloved.

Again, I hate suddenly being the contrarian Nutty, but I think the cousins sticking together is a fairly healthy thing on its own. Lockstep thinking, with the ostracizing of anyone who exhibits "badthink," isn't a sign of a truly happy family. There's obviously an extra political dimension when the family is also a Royal Family, but to make that the main consideration is a little dehumanizing.

@Hikari
Given Harry’s conduct since his marriage, the choice seems pretty stark: to support the Sussexes is to diss the Queen.

I know what you mean. I don't like the optics of it, either (American football? Really?), but this is on the level of saying that the bonds of the heart come second to politics. And that you shouldn't attend to your sister's wedding if she has been "racist." Or go back home for Christmas if your parents are "homophobic." Are Harry and Eugenie simply never to see each other again because of how it all looks?

As for whether she should have kept things private -- I suspect that is exactly what she has been doing since *-xit, with only a few public "appearances" (like the 40x40 farce) to show occasional support. Her finally coming out in a big way may be our first sign that not everyone in the BRF has a happy hive mind where Camilla is concerned.
TheGrangle said…
I’m normally a fan of both Aldi and Lidl, Aldi does a great range of reasonably priced pet products ( I have two dogs and eight cats) and I buy fish, meat and veg from Lidl when I have the time to wait in line at the single checkout open....!

With regards to Eugenie, I remember there being someone who would leave numerous comments on any article about Harry and his brass from the moment that they were revealed to be an item and always saying the same thing, « All roads lead to Soho House ». I think that this is likely and involves more than just a simple introduction. The head of SH has been linked with Epstein and It was mooted somewhere that * owed money to SH and it was they that paid Sunshine Sucks. Whether it’s true or not, who knows, but the suggestion from Virginia Guiffres’ lawyer that * could be called to testify and could be relied upon to be truthful as to what she knew about Andrew, sounded like a shot across her bows to me. I reckon it’s possible that it’s all intertwined and that Harry was low hanging fruit, ripe for the picking with his known weaknesses which have been exploited to the full. I may be wrong ( I hope not) but I also wonder if Harrys’ forthcoming memoir will ever see the light of day.
The RF seem to be getting their ducks in a row in readiness for Charles and with * so unusually quiet, I can well believe that a few of their chickens are on their way home to roost, Aldi and Lidl just for starters.
TheGrangle said…
For those seeking ‘confirmation’ re Aldi and Lidl, It’s hardly likely to be news headlines right now and I did say that it was from quora. Official confirmation on anything these two have said or done is in very short supply, however the sources are ‘supposed’ to be reliable. It’s quoted as a retweete on this twitter account Luca31404488 (2nd tweet down from SoultOucher) Comments worth a read too.
If, and it's a big `if', that report is true, it's worth remembering the rule about questions in a court of law - only ask a question if you already know the answer...
TheGrangle said…
@Natalia, A few commentators have said the same and he does look to have much more hair than in other recent photos and videos. Who knows, but I doubt that they would both be in the UK. It’s entirely possible though that he is here alone.
Teasmade said…
@TheGrangle, I only have three cats, so they get store-brand and human food, but I get Aldi cat food, wet and dry, for assorted visiting outdoor cats, raccoons, and possums. It's gone every morning, so there must be nothing wrong with it!
TheGrangle said…
@Teasmade I feed, trap and neuter a colony of strays and up until last April I only had 1 cat! Caught a heavily pregnant queen who presented me with 4 kittens as well as 2 others, one of which I fell head over heels for when he was tiny and the latest who was getting badly beaten up. Boss cat is an angel to put up with it, although he has his personal space (my bed!) where only he is allowed. I’ll feed the colony with whatever I can and they do seem to like Aldis’ canned food very much. Best of all though are their accessories and cat ‘´furnituré which are innovative and ridiculously cheap. I’ve bought scratching posts, cat beds and hides holes as well as a cooling pad for my old dog ( can be 40 degrees here in summer) all for under 10 euros and they are standing up to the daily punishment well. It’s saved me a fortune!
SwampWoman said…
Hikari said: I don’t know what to think. E has to know that she is gambling with her own reputation. Anti Sussex sentiment at an all time high, and she leaves her family behind to be seen with the Ginger Tw*t at an event where tickets go for thousands of dollars? Not a good look for her at all—Unless there is a greater purpose behind this move. If there isn’t, then I’m afraid she is as tone deaf and entitled as H is. I don’t want to think that of her, So I hope there is another explanation.

Snarkyatherbest said: or maybe pe is delivering a personal message on the queen’s health. too much of this jubilee pr has centered on charles and his ascension. don’t like that focus one bit. charles is as bad as the montecito crew.


When I saw that PE was seen publicly with Twit at the Thug Bowl, I assumed a family message was being passed. There are *no* secure comms. If you want to send a private message, it has to be via a trusted private messenger, F2F, with lots of background noise and the mask obscuring lips is a nice touch. (You will note from pics that other people around them are *not* wearing masks.)

That being said, I do not think that the RF would send Eugenie to Harry with a message about the Queen's health because it would immediately be in the gossip columns. My speculation is that any message would be about something specifically to do with Twit and Twat. The parliamentary gossip about requiring medical people to testify about live birth along with possible DNA testing or the child(ren) would be removed from succession would definitely qualify. Maybe Harry sent an SOS to the family re divorce and they are replying so that Twat can't access the message. Maybe they have intelligence re war in Europe and wanted to pass it on to Harry(?), who knows.
snarkyatherbest said…
natalier. interesting post. ever changing harry could be a double. good speculation that maybe he is in the UK but the alibi to the mrs is he was with his cousin. then again i think she reads this and other blogs and so is probably guessing that too. now let’s see if we can make her come out of hiding she would have loved to have been there with everyone and have been papped.

another theory. may SS intern was responsible for making sure pics made it to people magazine and deliberately kept back the ones with the mrs who was prob in the bathroom at the time or knocking on skybox doors trying to get in to see her besties. intern says that mrs is such a pain in the arse. i’m gonna lose those pics and just do one of her hubby.

just an odd pic and to have PE out there. so much going on behind the scenes.
Fifi LaRue said…
I'm with SwampWoman about the mask wearing, so no one could read their lips. Same with the coaches at the Super Bowl, covering their faces so no none could lip read them. Eugenie was there on serious business, because those two were obviously not having fun.
SwampWoman said…
I like the idea of Harry's double being seen at Thug Bowl with PE. Maybe the RF kidnapped The Real Prince Harry as certified by Twitter and he is being detoxed at this very moment. Maybe he took the kid(s?) and fled for his life in a liquor jet provided by his cousins with Twat trying to chase him down at the plane, barking and growling, as Anglican vicars threw holy water and rebuked Satan. (Sadly, I'm not sure whether Anglican vicars are into the drama of casting out demons. Casting out seems rather rude. They'd probably have to find alternate accommodations for the demons. Are there Demon Rehoming Associations in the UK, or is that limited to California?)
Fifi LaRue said, Eugenie was there on serious business, because those two were obviously not having fun.

If she’s there on serious business, why the public spectacle? It’s all for a show of some kind. Solidarity? Photo op?! Who knows. 😳 I like a lot of SwampWoman’s comment! 😃
Fifi LaRue said…
Eugenie's husband was most likely there, on business. I'm guessing they told Twit they had ONE extra $5,000 ticket for the game. Maggot is extremely controlling, and that's the only way PE and Twit could have a private conversation, away from Maggot.
@Hikari,

Great comment and pretty much what I think too! 😃
Hikari said…
It had not occurred to me that this trip could be business related for Jack too…that makes me feel better about E’s involvement.

But—if the purpose was for PE to meet H for private communications…this is a very public display of a private conversation. They could have watched the game and had their family matters discussion hidden from view in a VIP box. No one need never know any of the Royals were there.

So I can only conclude that that photo was for one person only. This is the equivalent of * displaying her ringless finger in a photo leaving the National. Imagine the rage if she didn’t know where H was or with whom until she saw that photo. By some increasingly credible sources Tw*t and her handbag lead separate lives. Things that make you go..hmmmm!!!!
lizzie said…
Didn't see this here. Camilla has tested positive.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/14/europe/camilla-covid-intl-scli/index.html
Mel said…
Supposedly photo of H with country singer who sang the national anthem.

I can't make out the logo on his lanyard.


------------
I met Prince Harry. He was just lovely. I even curtsied in my track suit. https://t.co/eC73vzVWCH
Mel said…
Whether that's PH or a double....that hair is utterly ridiculous.
Duncan said…
Word is chimpo Harry scored his Superbowl tickets via BetterUp. The connection is Salesforce who were big advertisers at the game.
snarkyatherbest said…
jesse. maybe the mrs was out of picture range because she was busy love bombing Mark Benoif for $, job, matrimony? so then she wouldn’t care she wasn’t photographed.

although i still think she cares and we will se a pap walk. unless of course her new face is eugenies. stranger crap has happened !

SwampWoman the woke part of the anglican church wouldn’t cast off satan but instead would sit down to better understand his anger. we need to be inclusive. (i say that as a Catholic who once heard a priest omit the part of the baptismal renewal vows about denouncing satan. he explained later that satan was a construct. kumbaya et al!)
Hikari said…
@Embre

We like to think of the BRF as a united entity that will circle the wagons around the Queen just because of who she is, but Harry has proven that that's not always the case. Perhaps Eugenie is the second contradiction. And maybe one angle we haven't considered is that even among the smiling faces on the balcony, Camilla is not universally beloved.

The timing of Her Majesty announcing her support of Camilla taking the title Queen Consort on the very anniversary day of her accession instead of on a non-occasion day is a bit weird, as it hardly seems pressing RIGHT NOW compared to other matters. If we chose to go down the darkest rabbit hole, we could speculate that Her Majesty is indeed very ill and knows she does not have much time left to get that sorted. At her great age, that could be true regardless of whether or not she's got some other health issue. It seems to have been deemed prudent to not have the matter of Camilla's title hanging over One for any longer.

I expressed earlier that I think it's kind of a tempest in a teapot. I know feelings are still running high in some quarters over this now 30+ year old scandal--Charles and Diana separated 30 years ago this year . . .largely over the woman he is now married to. But isn't this 'a rose by any other name' territory? I suppose as 'Princess Consort' she would not be entitled to a coronation, but in all other matters, she would and will perform the duties and offices which the wife of a King normally does do. What she is *called* does not change in one iota what she *is*--Charles's only present and living wife, the one he chose to be the Queen of his heart long ago. She's in the spot; she's doing the job. She could be referred to as a banana split but it wouldn't fundamentally change her position.

I suppose it might rankle both of Diana's sons to see their father's second wife and the cause of so much of their mother's unhappiness take the title that was supposed to be their mother's . . though if Diana had been able to accept that Camilla was always going to be a part of her husband's life, she most likely would have lived to be Queen. She couldn't accept it, so here we are. But I wonder if this sudden flurry of weird activity and 'press leaks', etc. is all completely due to the Queen's announcement about Camilla. I feel like there has to be other stuff going on.

And now, Camilla's got the virus. I was afraid of something like this since my own recent experience--I tested negative too, the day before suddenly I wasn't. So she went on engagements when all the while she was actually infected. That press isn't going to be too kind, I fear. I hope she will be OK. As it happens, I was boosted, and caught the virus nearly 4 months to the day of my booster shot in November. So if it's been 4+ months for you, too, you might want to think about topping yourself up with another dose.



Here's a piece about the `deliverance ministry' of the C of E, as it is now known:

https://drfrancisyoung.com/2017/10/23/contract-signed-a-history-of-anglican-exorcism/


Thinking of other entities which may or may not exist, I am still of the opinion that the `birth certificate' we were shown for the infant Aldi was not what many took it to be.

For those new to this saga, the lack of the authenticating stamp, present on all genuine replacement/copy certificates, even for those born more than 100 years ago, shows up in photocopies. This suggests to me that this is, at best, an `interim certificate for an adopted child', as issued by the Registrar. (Adopted children have to wait until they are 21 to get the true certificate with details of the real birth parents.)

I had to apply for Letters of Administration for a cousin who had died intestate, after she'd destroyed all her ID documents. This entailed getting copy certificates to prove that I and two other cousins were indeed the children of the deceased's mother's sisters. I have a sheaf of copy birth and marriage certificates covering the relevant family links - each photocopy has the authenticating stamp with the Royal Arms in the bottom RH corner).
Breaking news?

A number of news sources are reporting that Twit has the filed papers at court about this claim for police protection in the UK. Who is afraid of? Loyal subjects of HM or the RF itself?
I think The Queen choosing to make the announcement that Camilla would get become Queen Consort was a preemptive move before Mole released his poo throwing book and unleashing more nasty nuggets of info. I’m certain he’s looking to include details about Camilla, and none of it nice. If The Queen had made the announcement later, it would have been seen in a rather different light, more of a a defensive etc., move. 🥴
Hikari said…
@Embre, con't

Re. York vs. Cambridge

It's tempting to view people's loyalties as binary . . either For or Against one thing or the other, but people are a whole lot more complex. I have come to admire both Eugenie and Beatrice over the years as they have grown into young women who publicly at least seem to embody a commitment to giving back out of their privileged positions, and seem also to be warmly regarded by their grandmother, and she likewise by them. They have never done anything to publicly disrespect her or demean the Royal house in the manner of their parents or their ginger tw*t of a cousin. I'd hate to think that 'one may smile and smile and be a villian' where they are concerned . . for public consumption playing the roles of devoted and respectful granddaughters while behind the scenes colluding with the likes of Haitch and the Tw*t. Beatrice seems more at a remove from Harkle business than her sister but recent events in which E's name is linked with the Sussexes, and the body language analysis of JRR stirs up remembrances of oh, a decade-plus ago when the Princesses of York were alleged to be absolute little beasts to Cousin William's girlfriend who, along with her sister had earned the nickname "Wisteria"--fragrant and climbing--in aristo circles. I'd like to credit the York girls with being better people than their parents, but why should they be, really? With those role models and springing out of the same soil . .? Perhaps I've been thinking too highly of E. and B.'s moral fiber.

Again, I hate suddenly being the contrarian Nutty, but I think the cousins sticking together is a fairly healthy thing on its own. Lockstep thinking, with the ostracizing of anyone who exhibits "badthink," isn't a sign of a truly happy family. There's obviously an extra political dimension when the family is also a Royal Family, but to make that the main consideration is a little dehumanizing.

It is loving to be there for a family member who is struggling, even if it goes against the party line, but this particular situation is far and above the normal types of problems that might require a family intervention style approach. It's not just that Harry, E.'s cousin and childhood playmate despite being 6 years the elder struggles with substance issues . . or has made an unfortunate marriage . . or needs some propping up by a familiar face being so far from home. It is all of those things and yet--this isn't a family disagreement over one bone of contention. Harry's not engaging in 'Badthink' in one issue. Who knows to what degree he's got active agency in any of this but he's got all the appeareances of systematically and cruelly hounding, attacking and lying about his 95-year-old grandmother, which would constitute elder abuse, frankly, were she not also his Queen. Think about the impact his and *'s behavior would be having if she were just an ordinary middle-class grandmother without her wealth, position and all the layers of protection around her. This would destroy her. Harry's arrows may be blunt or at least blunt(ish) but he's still letting them loose. At what stage does he pass from simply 'badthinking' into 'bad-doing' that has irreparable consequences? Didn't he pass that mark some time ago?

Mel said…
Hikari...I thought it odd also that Camilla was out in public unmasked after PC tested positive.

Doesn't seem like a prudent move. Seems to me that if you've been exposed to someone who tested positive it might be smart not to go out for 4-5 days. Or if you must, at least mask up and stay the 6' away from others.

Hikari said…
I said earlier that if Euge wanted to privately support her cousin, she could do it without turning it into a public spectacle. I'd say being photographed with him at the Super Bowl constitutes a public spectacle, along with the fairly incessant dribble of articles claiming that Harry 'Gave' her Frogmore Cottage/she's paying him money as her landlord and other drivel like that. She might not be responsible for any of those articles but if there is zero truth to them, why do they keep getting published, given the UK's stringent anti-libel laws?

Being seen to be too chummy with the Sussexes doesn't make her seem more relatable or more kind, sadly . . it just makes her look like a tool of H and his demented partner in crime, really. Beatrice has taken the wiser course, seems to me and is never linked to the Soho ho at all. It does make one begin to wonder what kind of mud E. might have on her hands. Her choice of friends has been questionable, at the least, if she got embroiled in that crowd. * never comes for Beatrice, notice? But whenever Harry needs a Royal friend, Eugenie is right there. Considering how rude Harry's wife has always been to the York girls and E. in particular who was supposed to be a friend, you'd think E. would have her own reasons for keeping her distance regardless of what she feels about Harry. It's just curious.

Are Harry and Eugenie simply never to see each other again because of how it all looks?

Maybe being so ostentiously SEEN to be seeing each other in highly public venues isn't the best way to handle their ongoing relationship *just now*, with things so sensitive? She could visit Harry more discreetly, if she were inclined to do so. Being papped with him at the sporting event of the year seems kind of like she's . . flaunting that she's still on Team Harry? If she feels okay about continuing to be his friend under the circumstances, fine . . but what a place to turn up. People are sure to be talking about it--et voila--and that is overshadowing the Queen and raising a lot of questions at an already tumultuous time. If that's what both E. and Harry *want* at this stage . . well, it does make you wonder . . why? There's got to be an angle or else their private party could have stayed entirely private out of our view.

Hikari said…
Blogger Mel said...
Hikari...I thought it odd also that Camilla was out in public unmasked after PC tested positive.

Doesn't seem like a prudent move. Seems to me that if you've been exposed to someone who tested positive it might be smart not to go out for 4-5 days. Or if you must, at least mask up and stay the 6' away from others.


I don't know what the current recommendations are in the UK, but that does seem quite lax, yes, particularly since she has such a high degree of public contact. A Royal engagement and the numbers of people she meets isn't the same as risking nipping off to the corner shop for a pint of milk and some bikkies.

Now that everyone is weary of Covid protocols, the mandatory quarantine periods seem almost to be moot, unless you're an Olympic competitor. When I took a home test and reported the result to my director, he said I was to stay home 'as long as I was experiencing symptoms'. Well, one thing we have all learned from monitoring our health obsessively over the last two years is that on any given day, most of us feel 'something'. A slight headache. A sniffly nose. A twinge. I mean, I am pasty and kind of tired as my default setting--it's Ohio in February, and I have to get up at the a**crack of dawn for work. When I tested positive again 5 days in, I let him know. "You'll probably test positive for a while," he says, "But you can come in, you just have to wear a mask for a week afterwards." To what degree a positive person can still infect other people 5-10 days on . . nobody seems to know. Common practice used to be to quarantine everyone in the household for 10 days, irregardless of test results or symptoms. The people that weren't sick had to quarantine twice as long as those who were, quizzically, on the grounds that it took 10 days for symptoms to show up in some people. I think it's more like 1-3 days. But this is too far the other way if someone living with someone with active Covid doesn't even have to cover her face.

I'm not blaming her, but perhaps she could have been given better advice. Three shots don't make one invincible, sadly.

Maybe Cam is secretly tired of this fight over her future title and tired of being hated so much. Maybe she hoped she'd get it so she would have an excuse to lie low for a couple of weeks. Best wishes to her.
Fifi LaRue said…
It's just curious, that with all the glitterati of LA in attendance, that Maggot was not present at the Super Bowl.
Girl with a Hat said…
@Hikari,

people in England (because things are different in Scotland and Wales) don't have to self-isolate or even wear a mask if they test positive.
There are no more covid regulations there. None at all.
From the DM and it quotes…

The hospitality area was sponsored by Salesforce Ventures, one of the official partners of BetterUp, which is the San Francisco-based corporate and personal coaching company that Harry works for as 'chief impact officer'. .

Mole was there to promote….the seats were of course freebies. 🙄

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10510671/Super-Bowl-Princess-Eugenie-visits-Prince-Harry-Los-Angeles.html
Hikari said…
@GWaH

Wow, thanks for the update.

Well, then . . Camilla went by the book (or non-book) in attending her engagements maskless. She had a negative test, after all.

I guess it's the same where I live in Ohio. The governor has left it to the municipalities to set policies and I'd guess that all Covid regulations have been officially abandoned. The buck has been passed to the individual businesses and venues to enforce any measures on their own premises.
SirStinxAlot said…
Yall give E too much credit. She has her own history as a scandalous party girl. Not only that, shes the baby of the family. I know what my youngest sister is like-very much a double agent. She could despise someone a still carry on as best friends. Family is family, no matter how dysfunctional or manipulating they are. The palace knows E personality better than we do. Whether E is trying or not the grey men may be using her to do recon on the Sussex train wreck. She has always struck me as a bit dumb tbh.
LavenderLady said…
@abbyh,
Im late to the party. First of all just want to say a post refering to the NFL superbowl as Thugbowl @5:28 pm is way past a microagression, it's a racist comment. Could you please address this offensive comment? Thank you.

Something to ponder: The NFL has only 2 black coaches out of the thirty something teams. And why are there no black quarterbacks??? I believe the NFL to be a racist institution; a holdover from the good ol boys club days. JMHO.

___
Re: Spare and Eugenie at the Superbowl

I'm beginning to think Spare and TBW are not actually together anymore. They join up for PR moments but he seems to be inching his way back to the RF.

As someone stated upthread somewhere, we really don't know with certainly what is going on in their lives. It could be anything especially with how she likes to play everyone and keep people guessing.

Maybe Eugenie is there to lead him back to the fold before that damn book comes out. He is looking like a zombie lately- more than usual.
DesignDoctor said…
Did anyone else see the pic that Eugenie posted on Instagram "Happy Valentine's Day" of herself and a man who I am assuming is Harry--his face is not visible at all--
Sorry, I do not know how to copy the link to share.
Mel said…
I thought it was H at first, too. But now that I'm on a larger screen I think it's Jack without his glasses.

They are all just too weird.
LavenderLady said…
If it is Harry at the SB, he's had a hair transplant and some eye work done.
If that isn’t Mole and Eugenie at the game then it’s their doppelgängers! 😂He’s got Mole’s close together eyes, and sticking out ears. Just because his hair appears to be thicker (and has done for a while in my opinion), he could be wearing a hair piece or had implants (which I think he has), they are also sitting in shade which changes depth and colour. There’s a lot of redheads in my family, including myself and different lighting changes the shade etc a lot.
snarkyatherbest said…
my opinion. it’s both of them. do deep fakes. i’m more curious what is going on with the Mrs. where is she and why did she miss the celebrity love fest. something is up. even scoobie do didn’t offer up an explanation.
Mel said…
Raspberry....do you think they did the Rugby video a while back and held onto it until they needed it to usurp something the Cambridges were doing?

So in the video the hair transplant was fresh?
And now it's grown out a bit?

Whether it's a toupee or a transplant, they didn't match the color very well. It seems to be quite a bit lighter than the side hair.

The side hair looked more grown out yesterday, and quite a bit thicker. Which, imo, makes it appear darker.

He'd do better to keep it all fairly short so the color discrepancy isn't so obvious.
Anonymous said…
I don’t believe the Royal Family would use Eugenie as an intermediary. As others here have noted, Prince Charles and William are clearly determined to downsize the monarchy, and the York girls and their families will surely be among the casualties. I doubt very much that either Eugenie or Beatrice harbor much good will toward PC in particular, especially considering his role in banishing their father. The Yorks and Sussexes are in essentially the same sinking boat, though E and B would seem to have more stability on the domestic front. I think Eugenie is loyal to Harry because of their lifelong friendship. And I wouldn’t be surprised if he even used her as a source for his book.

I know this may be unfair, but Andrew and Sarah both strike me as being amoral, unscrupulous people. It’s hard to understand how their daughters could not be “bent” to some degree too.
Mel said…
Raspberry...I was confusing the Rugby video with the BetterUp video. Sorry.

But still...maybe they lied and said BetterUp was live when it wasn't?
I don't know, that hair sure did grow fast if it was live. Especially the sides.
Cindy Lou Who said…
Lavender Lady... I agree calling the Superbowl a Thugbowl is not appropriate, but I think the nine current black quarterbacks might have an issue with you calling them white. Back to lurking.
@Mel

I’m guessing they have pre recorded videos etc, I wouldn’t never assume everything they post is recently done, I think that’s naive thinking. 🥴 I think Mole had the the hair transplant done a fair while back, nothing recent to my eyes. Mole and Eugenie are also sitting in shade, this would affect his hair colour. Overall, it looks darker to me, not lighter at all.

As a redhead myself and I already stated it varies a lot in different light. Most redheads have lots of varying shades of strands it isn’t one colour or shades of red/gold. My hair is lighter at the front and sides than the back. When I was very younger it was more red and vibrant, as I’ve grown older it’s got lighter more auburn overall. I have cousins whose red hair has changed with age.

Mole has give away ears and eyes regardless of his hair colour and thickness. It’s very much him from the forehead down. 😃

It’s gone midnight here, bedtime!! 🤗
DesignDoctor said…
After enlarging Eug's Valentine's photo on my phone, I agree with the Nutty who said she's with Jack.
Hikari said…
@Rebecca

Yes, sadly an impeccable curtsy in front of the Queen does not translate to quality moral character. Regardless of E’s reasons for hanging out with her stupid cousin, if the book he’s planning is as scandalous as predicted, E’s chumminess with the persona non grata might hurt her if she’s perceived to have participated in it or egged H on, even by association. Loyalty to her cousin might be commendable usually but Harry has been so awful to his whole family…how tight could he really be with a girl cousin 51/2 years his junior? Given the legendary frostiness between the Wales and York clans, how deep could this relationship be? What has Harry got in terms of internal qualities to even make him a friend to E? Did they just bond over shared partying? As long as he’s been with * Harry has treated everyone like garbage including E, so either she’s a far more forgiving sort than I am, or she has very weak boundaries…or there is some tie to Soho House as yet unknown.

* has indeed been uncustomarily quiet….has she been seen or heard from since the Happy Family photoshop project? Maybe her latest plastic surgery foray was botched. What a shame that would be.
LavenderLady said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
LavenderLady said…
Edited

@Cindy Lou Who said,
"Lavender Lady... I agree calling the Superbowl a Thugbowl is not appropriate, but I think the nine current black quarterbacks might have an issue with you calling them white. Back to lurking."

Lol. Gotta love Wikipedia. Pretty sneaky of me but the Wiki page highlights the disparities and segregation of the NFL and the issue about QB's. It really spells it out doesn't? I knew if I posted the link, it would go unread. The internet sleuthing that goes on here...

Glad to know someone agrees with me about the offensive, inappropriate comment.
Girl with a Hat said…
I think Thugbowl is quite appropriate considering the high criminality rate with current and previous players. No racial connotations need to be added. You don't see that high criminality rate in baseball or any other sport.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Hikari
I expressed earlier that I think it's kind of a tempest in a teapot.

I agree with this, in the sense that everyone knows the Queen makes the final decision. Protesters (whether within the BRF of outside it) are just officially registering their displeasure before finally gritting their teeth about things they can't change, like the rest of us have to. They might as well not make any noise, as it won't amount to anything anyway . . . But one could also argue that as it won't amount to anything anyway, why not just let them vent a bit?

But isn't this 'a rose by any other name' territory?

Is it indeed, as is Camilla's current style. I've been happily reminding people for years that she is Princess of Wales, just not styled that way.

Even the disgruntled bloggers on Royal Tumblr say they were expecting it. They just hadn't expected to be so blatantly lied to. About two years ago, a statement was made saying of the plan to style Camilla as Princess Consort: "Nothing has changed." Now we're being told that the plan to have her known as Queen was in the works as early as five years ago. Again, pointing this out and having receipts really amounts to nothing. But then again, neither does pointing out the lies of Dollars. Nutties and other bloggers are not decision makers in this area, though we may be able to sway the opinions of a few fence-sitters . . . who are also not decision makers in this area.

I myself view the change more positively than negatively. What is making me more sympathetic to Harry, in the light of the current goings on, is the possibility that his feelings about Camilla were run roughshod over, to the point of great damage. We know that Prince William met Camilla first; perhaps Harry did not and then had to be pushed. What if he genuinely never made his peace with it? In a sense, it certainly isn't the Queen's problem, and it won't be the future King's problem either. But that's just convenient for them.

Once more, Harry is an adult and needs to stop blaming other people. But it seems to me that dismissing his feelings about Camilla is like saying that all parents who make arguably selfish decisions get a free pass as soon as their children turn 21. If we're going to pass the buck to the child anyway, what's the difference between a parent to a child and a therapist to an adult? Did Charles, Diana and Camilla (three of them in that marriage!) magically stop being accountable on 15 September 2005?
Natalier said…
@ snarkyatherbest

Interesting scenario you raised there that the * was knocking down doors trying to see her "besties", lol.

After viewing the pic of Harry with the singer, I guess that is really H in the pic. It's really weird - he never had big eyes and I am not sure how plastic surgery could do that.

My take on why the * wasn't there - part of the Butter Cup deal is most prob that H promised he has access to famous and influential people. They asked him to fulfil that part of the deal, hence he dragged in Serena Williams and now Eugenie. We can be certain whom the company would prefer: a real-life Princess who would reaffirm his links to royalty or a failed cable tv actress notorious for lying on tv and in court.
Ian's Girl said…
Well, if Eugenie was at the game because of Jack's tequila business, and Harry got a free ticket, surely there isn't odd about them sitting next to each other?

Masks WERE required, and the mayor of L.A. is catching hell for not wearing his... but one of my cousins and her husband went, and said very few people were wearing them. (Her youngest is the security manager...or maybe it's the parking manager...at the stadium and got them tickets)

I do agree that the cousins were wearing them to avoid lip reading, but I doubt there was anything going on per se, and it's possible they just wore them so as not to get accused of breaking the rules. (I doubt that)

I think it's funny that * didn't get to go, assuming it actually is Harry in the pics. It looks like him to me, but I can't say I've spent much time studying his face.


Magatha Mistie said…

Crock ‘n’ Vole

The rat in the mask
Had only one task
Make us ask
where’s meggy the vole
Losing possession
Through offensive obsession
Secret Squirrel defense
from Super Mole

Anonymous said…
Parts of this article make me nauseous but it might be of interest here. The writer states that * was with Jack Brooksbank, Aldi and Lidl 😂 during the Super Bowl:

Harry and Eugenie: The rise of the royal outliers
The cousins have always been close, but their surprise appearance at the Super Bowl sent an unmistakable message back home

By
Hannah Furness,
ROYAL CORRESPONDENT


It was not the most obvious place for a game-changing royal reunion. The all-American Super Bowl, with its celebrity spectators, eye-popping cheerleaders and half-time show of hip-hop anthems, is a world away from their usual family outings to church or to their grandmother’s castle for tea.

But there, in the VIP section, were Prince Harry and Princess Eugenie.

In face masks, lanyards and a baseball cap, they could at first glance have been anyone; picked up by the cameras as they stared straight ahead to speak casually and comfortably, as only cousins who have grown up together in their most unusual of circumstances can. What they were talking about is anyone’s guess. But the message their surprise appearance sent to those back home was unmistakable.

Princess Eugenie is the first member of the Royal Family to have visited California since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex moved their young family from Windsor to Montecito in search of freedom from royal duty. Hosted by the Duke, whose nine-bedroom, 16-bathroom home has plenty of room for guests, she is also the first to be given the chance to meet baby Lilibet.

Until now, Lili – eight months old – has never been introduced to her father’s side of the family, with her older brother Archie faring only a little better, having left the UK when he was one year old. While Prince Harry has returned to the fold only briefly since – once for his grandfather, the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral, and once for the unveiling of a statue for Diana, Princess of Wales – Meghan has not set foot back in Britain since their “farewell” tour in March 2020.

The couple is not expected to return any time soon, with the Duke condemning the UK as far too dangerous for his family without the Met Police protection he is now seeking through the courts.

With the 95-year-old Queen unable to travel, royal-watchers fear she will never see her half-American great-grandchildren again.

So the sight of Princess Eugenie by Prince Harry’s side on Sunday night came as something of a shock. US celebrity websites gloried in Harry “living his best American life”; viewers wondered which team the pair were supporting. (According to NBC, Prince Harry visited the Rams’ locker room after the match.)

Could she act as an intermediary in the royal rift and tone down Harry’s forthcoming memoir?” one royal commentator in the UK asked.

For Eugenie, whose husband Jack and one-year-old son August spent the game with Meghan and the Sussex children, the visit may tie in nicely with a work trip to Los Angeles Frieze later this week. The Princess is a director at the Hauser+Wirth gallery, and a stalwart at the annual contemporary art fair.

At the Super Bowl, the royal pair’s seats were reported to have been hosted by one of the game’s sponsors, offered through BetterUp, the mental fitness coaching platform where Harry works as chief impact officer. Without their spouses in attendance, the Prince and Princess had hours to chat unencumbered on the common ground of new parenthood, Harry’s entry into the world of paid work, and – one imagines – his somewhat estranged family back at home.

The pair – who have been close since growing up as the youngest children of Diana, Princess of Wales and Sarah, Duchess of York – now have more in common than at any point of their lives.
Anonymous said…
Once seen giggling and whispering as members of the cohort of mischievous royal children, they later bonded over a shared love of the London party scene, but were always on unmistakably different paths.

As the daughter of the scandal-hit Duke and Duchess of York, “blood princess” Eugenie was expected to find a proper job in the era of a streamlined Royal Family. Prince Harry, on the other hand, was the son of a future king, expected to take his place as a working royal as generations had done before him.

The situation has changed beyond their wildest dreams.

If just a few short years ago, Prince William and Prince Harry were inseparable brothers at the centre of the public’s love for the Royal Family, they are now – in the words of Harry himself – the ones on “different paths”.

William, a father-of-three, is tasked with continuing the Queen’s legacy, with a lifetime of duty ahead of him. Harry, off to pursue financial freedom in America, has switched lanes to join a crew of cousins on the “outside”.

Voluntarily and deliberately, the Duke has planned for a new life in which The Firm does not feature, casting his net wide for paid work and sharpening the pencil of his ghostwritten autobiography to cause as much further chaos for his relatives as he chooses.

In their interviews to date, the Sussex brand has not shied away from their struggle. Eternal victims of the press, the palace “men in grey suits” and the “institution”, they have been candid in sharing their thoughts on family members: Charles and William are “trapped”; the Duchess of Cambridge made her sister-in-law cry; one anonymous relative asked about Archie’s skin colour.

“It’s really sad that it’s got to this point,” Harry told Oprah in 2021. “But I’ve got to do something for my own mental health, my wife’s, and for Archie’s as well.”

That “something” has so far included fighting interview “misinformation”, setting up a philanthropic foundation and a host of business ventures, and a daily regime of meditation and mindfulness in the Californian sunshine.

It has not included any significant signs of rapprochement with his family. So it is no coincidence that Princess Eugenie is the one to finally come calling.

Not only did the Sussexes offer her the use of their Frogmore Cottage at Windsor after they moved out, she has taken part in Meghan’s “40x40” mentoring project, and sent sweet messages of support via social media.

The Duchess has spoken about her in her now-infamous television interviews, telling Oprah Winfrey they were “friends” and noting: “Eugenie and I had known each other before I had known Harry, so that was comfortable.”

Anonymous said…
The two couples socialised together while Prince Harry and Meghan were dating, with Eugenie and Jack partying with them for a fancy-dress Halloween event just before their relationship was leaked to the press.

In October 2018, the Duke and Duchess told family and friends they were expecting their first baby at Eugenie’s Windsor Castle wedding.

“Out of all the Queen’s grandchildren, Harry and Eugenie have one of the most natural connections,” say Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, authors of the Sussexes’ biography Finding Freedom.

“Like Harry, Eugenie is loyal, honest and great fun. Not only did he trust her implicitly, but friends said that she gives great advice and has always been ‘beyond wise’ for her years.”

Having introduced him to one of his previous serious girlfriends, Cressida Bonas, Eugenie’s support was again invaluable in welcoming Meghan into Harry’s life. In return, he ensured Eugenie’s mother Fergie, so long left in the cold for official royal engagements, was at St George’s Chapel for his wedding.

“They’ve always got on very well and been very close,” says royal author Phil Dampier. “If there is going to be an emissary, or an intermediary, between Harry and the Royal Family back home, she could well fit the bill.

“I’m sure when they met in LA, they would have talked about the situation – and I’m sure she’ll be trying to smooth things over. She could be one of the ways whereby tentative steps could be taken to try and heal the rift,” he adds.

If there are sides to be taken, Eugenie is treading the line carefully: she also stepped out in support of the Duchess of Cambridge’s carol concert at Westminster Abbey in December, with her sister Beatrice, the Wessexes and the Tindalls.

Certainly, the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee has brought the royal faultlines into focus like never before. Her written request that the nation one day welcomes the Duchess of Cornwall as Queen Consort was met with brief words of support from Prince William’s camp – and nothing from Prince Harry’s.

The question of what Archie and Lili will one day be called has not been settled: they are entitled to be known as “HRH” once they are grandchildren of a monarch, but no similar statement has yet confirmed it.

The milestone celebrations in June – the roster of street parties, pageants, concerts and that all-important balcony moment – mean the questions aren’t going away for Prince Harry. What kind of royal outlier will he be?

In a speech just after he announced his departure from the Royal Family, he told friends he would “step my family back from all I have ever known to take a step forward into what I hope can be a more peaceful life”.

At least, with the arrival of his cheery, plain-speaking, tactful cousin, that prospect of peace suddenly seems a step closer.
Girl with a Hat said…
@Rebecca,

thanks for taking the time to post that article. It's much appreciated.
Ian's Girl said…
Yes, thank you very much for posting the article!

Nauseating indeed, and since I've come to believe Harry has probably been a horse's ass since childhood, it gives me no great impression of Eugenie's character if they are indeed so much alike. Perhaps she sees her father in him.

Does anyone else find it crazy that Harry would take on Camilla in his book? Attacking her, and in such a way, seems to me to be the only thing that Charles would absolutely go scorched Earth over. But then he's acted so horrifically to his grandparents I guess I shouldn't be surprised.



Magatha Mistie said…

@Rebecca

Thanks, a treacly read.
Harry loyal, honest and good fun hahaha!!

Isn’t the art world notorious for
laundering money?
Asking for a friend 😉

Ian's Girl said…
@Maga5tha, if you're still around...I never get a chance to thank you properly for all your wonderful, witty posts! I have nearly choked myself laughing so many times...
Enbrethiliel said…
@Hikari (continued)

Re: "badthink"

This was actually referring more to Eugenie than to Harry. And in general, to any member of any family who doesn't conform to groupthink for his or her own reasons and is labeled as "bad" for it. Eugenie has far more information than we do about the goings on within the BRF. Why can't we give her the benefit of the doubt?

Among other things, she must be wondering why her uncle gets a pass over Jimmy Saville, while her father takes the fall over Jeffrey Epstein. Is it just because Charles is the heir? And if so, does this mean that if Charles had been photographed with Virginia and or let Jimmy sit laughing on his mother's throne, we'd be forgiving him for that, too? A decision isn't automatically good and moral because the one who happens to be the monarch made it.

And if she weren't the monarch? You asked how we would think of the situation if the Queen were an ordinary elderly lady. To be honest, I'd feel less sorry for her. (When I originally took the BRF's side in this conflict, it was because of the principle that the monarch deserves extra respect.) My domineering grandmother might as well have been the monarch of our home; she didn't understand, at the end of her life, why two of her children were estranged from her. She had given them everything. How could they be so ungrateful? Along those lines, there are daily posts on Reddit that tell of older family members who have no idea how much they're actually hurting or alienating the younger ones, until years later, when the latter refuse to see them. This kind of behavior from a grandson doesn't come out of nowhere, which is why I brought up that idiom earlier about chickens coming home to roost.
Fifi LaRue said…
@Rebecca: Thanks for posting the article. However, I don't believe for one second that Eugenie's baby was with Jack because he was simply be too busy hosting and pouring drinks in the VIP bar at the game. Brooksbank reps high-end liquor. No place for a baby. And Maggot was not there, and certainly not with any supposed children. Maggot must have squeaked out some $$ to have that info placed by her PR firm to explain not seeing Maggot at the game. She wasn't there.
Enbrethiliel said…
The Body Language Guy analyzes Harry's appearance at the Superbowl:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0EdCattTBA

Why Megan REFUSED To Join Harry At The Super Bowl
LavenderLady said…
@Fifi,
I agree she wasn't there. Pics, if she was.
LavenderLady said…
@Enbre,
Thanks for the link for BLG. I have a weird little feeling Spare and the wife have drifted apart. If they are seen together, it's for PR. I can't imagine how that toxic mess of a situation would generate happiness in anyone.
LavenderLady said…
@GWAH,
Anyone who keeps up with current issues knows the word thug= a far right code word for black person. It's inappropriate.
Fifi LaRue said…
A further thought: When buying a ticket for a game at a stadium, the seat is specified. Gong to a baseball game, and it's the cheapest seat in the last seat at the top of the risers? It's specified on the ticket. No switching seats unless you notice that 15 rows below you the people haven't shown up by half-time, then make a switch. So, to that end, Jack Brooksbank's liquor company allowed him two tickets to the Super Bowl, one for Eugenie, and the other for a guest. Twit was their guest. Those seats are coveted. Season ticket holders get first choice for the Super Bowl, and the remainder seats are sold. There is no seat switching. BetterUp did not buy Twit a seat at the Super Bowl. They may have taken him to the Rams' locker room afterwards, but that's about it.

One cannot go to a sports game like the Super Bowl with a General Admission ticket, no seat, and then hang in the bar. It isn't allowed, and it doesn't happen. Maggot was not there.
OCGal said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Magatha Mistie said…

*Gusano de Megcal

Where was meh
she wasn’t there
If she was we’d be aware
No shady pics of wheeler dealer
She was resting her face
and swigging tequila…

*Worm in Mezcal/Tequila


Magatha Mistie said…

Cheers @Ian’s Girl 😘

Mel said…

One cannot go to a sports game like the Super Bowl with a General Admission ticket, no seat, and then hang in the bar. It isn't allowed, and it doesn't happen. Maggot was not there.
------

Maybe she was out in the parking lot?
Magatha Mistie said…

@Mel

90210 revisited…
Hip-hop & her dashboard drop!!

Magatha Mistie said…

Heir Looms

Summat’s brewing in megadud
Hazzer just realised
his wife is no good?
Noticed he’s wearing his
wedding ring
Damn, that means
he’s still stuck with that thing
Hazzers stint at the NFL
Merely a stunt
from the ne’er do well
Nothing good will come
from this pair
Eugenie should remember
who’s heir to the heir

Maneki Neko said…
@Hikari

Regardless of E’s reasons for hanging out with her stupid cousin, if the book he’s planning is as scandalous as predicted, E’s chumminess with the persona non grata might hurt her if she’s perceived to have participated in it or egged H on, even by association.
-----------------
Perhaps Eugenie was trying to soften him up so that he wouldn't be too harsh about her father or other family members when writing his book, perhaps painting people in a good light or making sure H gets some positive info. I do realise the book must be well under way by if not finished but perhaps it's not too late for a few corrections.
Fifi LaRue said, BetterUp did not buy Twit a seat at the Super Bowl. They may have taken him to the Rams' locker room afterwards, but that's about it.

I posted an article last night and it quoted The hospitality area was sponsored by Salesforce Ventures, one of the official partners of BetterUp, which is the San Francisco-based corporate and personal coaching company that Harry works for as 'chief impact officer'. .

So according to this Mole’s seat was bought via a parter of BetterUp. It’s not a sport Mole would ever follow or know anything about. He was there as a photo op and more publicly for him and erm BetterUp 🥴According to the DM Eugenie was in America because her hubby was there on business. Again, she’d have no obvious reason to be there other than showing a sign of solidarity IMHO.

I’m waiting for Lady C to release the video where she might spare us a nugget of info as to what info Mole will include in his book which will garner him and Maggot some short term sympathy. 😕

Here’s the link again containing the above piece…

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10510671/Super-Bowl-Princess-Eugenie-visits-Prince-Harry-Los-Angeles.html
@Lavender Lady

The only people we can censor is ourselves, it’s down to Abby and Nutty as to what’s allowed. 🥴

As for code words I for one wouldn’t have clue what code words are used in America, perhaps be mindful that not every Nutty is American so would have no clue as to what language some might deem offensive or upsetting. 🥴
Magatha Mistie said…

Panandrewed

Who to keep on the royal scene
To be honest
not Beatrice, nor Eugenie
Neither seemed to work
long holidays
Not much has changed
They’re set in their ways…

LavenderLady said…
@Raspberry,
No one is trying to censor anyone. Those who use such charged phrases, regardless of where they are located (this is the information age after all; certain groups know these words and use them among themselves. I know, I have family who use them) do so to send a message. It's code for the N word and there is no place for it in a community such as this.

I did appeal to the moderator and she has not responded yet. I am following **her guidelines.

What kind of person of color would I be if I didn't ask about it? My thinking on this is if someone uses that word to refer to black folks what do they call me?

We are better than this here on this blog, no?

I don't need a answer. Just saying. I don't care to discuss it further. Thanks.
Magatha Mistie said…

@Raspberry

Thank you, I don’t understand
code words either?
I speak as I see it.
LavenderLady said…
Well now the blog knows the word thug here in America means the N word...
Please stop trying to control English English. `Thug' refers to a tough of any colour who'd beat you up or kill you without a second thought.

For it's origin, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thuggee
LavenderLady said…
Not trying to control English English. This is not about semantics over a language but what people do to it. Why would anyone want their precious language weaponized???

This is turning political which is no surprise. Where is our moderator?

BTW,
I'm not going anywhere. Ever. Let that sink in.
Magatha Mistie said…

I know@WildBoar
Bloody unbelievable!!!


LavenderLady said…
@abbyh,
Please address the current situation on the blog. The right wing is dogpiling again
Thanks!

Wow. So when did this blog become "English" only? There are many representations here not just Blighty.

Magatha Mistie said…

@LL
Thanks, Why so nasty?

@Magatha - quite!

It creases me up when, in films, what I'd call `thugs' (you know, like Sgt Calhoun in a recently-repeated `Foyle's War') talk about going to the `toilet' - so very dainty and twee!
LavenderLady said…
@Magatha,

I will ask you the same...

Why??? I am nothing but supportive of you and your contributions. You and @WBBM treat me like shit. She has convinced herself I'm a scary narc... And I overlook it time and again. I do not need your validation but just saying.

Don't blame me for the one you hate- TBW -because I happened to be born in yankland.
@LL

I don't understand why you think you know what I think?

I just hope to see more forgiveness of people saying what in their usage is perfectly innocent. Please point it out gently so we may learn from it.
Girl with a Hat said…
As someone who spent a lot of time living in the USA and reading and watching American cultural products, I have never heard the word "thug" to mean people of colour exclusively, just people who could be dangerous physically to others.

I think that this is just an effort to control other people's thoughts and make them worry that what they write may offend others even though there is no such intent.
Girl with a Hat said…
I thought that Harry was at the Super Bowl because a company associated with Better Up has a box in the stadium.
LavenderLady said…
@WBBM,
We are both church goers and Christian people. I appreciate your response.

It's an intuition. Something I pick up from you regularly.

I don't think it's wise to discuss more right now. Sharks are smelling blood.

Let's just both do better in how we communicate with each other going forward. We love and worship the same Lord. Let's strive for peace.
CatEyes said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
>@GWAH

Yes, Mole was at the stadium because BetterUp is a partner with Salesforce Ventures, who sponsored the hospitality area where he and Eugenie were sitting. I posted the link to the article twice which stated that. Eugenie was in America because her hubby is on business there according to the same article. It’s likely her seat was paid for by the sponsor (via Mole). 🥴
OKay said…
Late to the party but weighing in on "thug." I've met plenty of white thugs in my lifetime. It only specifically means black people if you decide it does. I personally will give no such weight to the word. It means a violent person/criminal and is fairly appropriate for many football players, no matter their skin tone.
abbyh said…
I am now awake.

I have not read most of this yet - just a few to get an idea of what went down.

I wanted to think about the concept of Thug as it has to be black and there is not other way to define or associate the word other than with skin color - do I believe this? Can I therefore tell others (here and everywhere) that they, too, have to now change their definition because I now say so? Is this new definition so wide spread that I must, must be the only person the planet who was so clueless that they did not know this?

So I wanted to sleep on it and think on it. Maybe something would come to me in a dream. The prior night I had dreams of polar bears trying to break into the house and I was hiding in the attic hoping they would not reach through and well you know. Maybe dreams are not the answer after all.

What is interesting is the music genre played in the half time show. Misogynist? Not tolerant to the alternative lifestyle? Women? Drug lifestyle venerated?

Thug came from Indian gangs who worshiped Kali and would kill in ritualized murders (ending in British control in the 1830's or so). It went from an Asian slur to a general description of loutish behaviors. Slowly no doubt.

It may have switched to associated with AA with this video 2014:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PH35C7Fhq0
This was in some response (where I got some of the above).

https://www.aaldef.org/blog/seahawks-richard-sherman-offended-by-word-thug-but-justin-bieber-probably-digs-it/

COMMENTS ARE ON FULL MODERATION FOR THE TIME BEING

I WILL LET YOU KNOW WHEN IT IS LIFTED so if you want to send me a private message, it is safe to do so
Fifi LaRue said…
IMO the seat was courtesy of whatever liquor brand Mr. Brooksbank was representing. If BetterUp had a a whole section of seats reserved, why wasn't Maggot there? ButterUp didn't provide a seat amid their vast swath of $5,000 each seats? Financially it doesn't make sense. A counseling firm isn't a money maker, no matter how many billions they claim to take in. ButterUp is not Amazon. A liquor company makes money, as well as investment firms, and gambling operations. Investment portfolios do not contain any kind of counseling services, because that sort of business does not result in significant financial gain. More likely, the ButterUp people are running a scam on clients and investors if they are reserving entire sections to attend the Super Bowl.
Fifi

Salesforce Ventures were the ones that paid for the seating area not BetterUp, they are partners to the former. The article doesn’t say how many seats Salesforce Ventures paid for. It’s not entirely unfeasible that Jack paid for Eugenie’s seat either. Truly and really it doesn’t matter who paid, they were still sitting there as a public spectacle for all to see. 🤔

The BLG has a video as to why Maggot wasn’t there (I’ve not had a chance to view it yet), but I think he says she didn’t want to be there. 😳
Mel said…
BLG has some very valid points as to why she wasn't there.

But I don't think either of them is smart enough to have thought of any of that.
And based on their PR history, neither is their PR.

Some other reason, we just haven't figured it out yet.

OTH, that guy cracks me up. Love the grimaces.
Girl with a Hat said…
did * go to the polo thing that Hairy had last year? Just wondering if * doesn't like sports events or just sports events that aren't considered posh
Hikari said…

Mole was at the stadium because BetterUp is a partner with Salesforce Ventures, who sponsored the hospitality area where he and Eugenie were sitting. I posted the link to the article twice which stated that. Eugenie was in America because her hubby is on business there according to the same article. It’s likely her seat was paid for by the sponsor (via Mole).

And the droll article which was kindly posted above says that Mole's very young children were at the event and happily at play elsewhere. OMG, pull the other one. Lili (real or fictional) is still an infant. An infant and a three-year-old having a bonzer time at an adults only alcohol fueled sporting event with lots of shouting?

But Mole's alleged children are allegedly far more chilled than the average tots, according to their alleged father. (I'm taking a page out of Neil Sean's book who reminds us that "As ever, we must say "allegedly".)

Either * was at the stadium and absolutely failed to get captured by a single camera lens despite her scary talent of honing in on zoom lenses no matter how distant . . or she was nowhere near it. My money is on the latter. Not giving a toss about football wouldn't have stopped her from clawing her way in for a photo op . . after all, her hometown team was playing and Hazmat allegedly works for one of the sponsors. So she would have grounds for attending. She inflicted herself on the baseball players that time . . so her absence today is significant, particularly if her alleged children were allegedly there. (I don't believe a word of that whale tale if you can't tell, but I have been a proponent of Aldi and Lidl from way back.

The picture of H full face looking straight ahead and slightly up, possibly at the scoreboard looks very weird. His eyes are enormously and their color is very visible even from that distance. Retouched? Haz has got tiny pale eyes, not these limpid pools. The other hazier shots taken from the side definitely look like him. The hair is decidedly less robust-looking from the side.

That is definitely Eugenie in the photo, and while I wouldn't rule out * using doubles for herself and the hubs in the past to suit some of her nefarious agendas, I do not suspect E. of cheerfully posing with a hired doppelganger of her cousin just for the optics. But it's true to say that Haz certainly does not look like himself, either, in at least one of these pictures. He also looked bored out of his tiny mind.

***************

WBBM,

It creases me up when, in films, what I'd call `thugs' (you know, like Sgt Calhoun in a recently-repeated `Foyle's War') talk about going to the `toilet' - so very dainty and twee!

I am American, and a student of language, so stuff like this fascinates me. 'Toilet' is the preferred common usage for the WC, correct? Should a military man have better referred to it as 'the head' or 'the latrine' (that's what American GIs would generally say).

It's funny that 'toilet' sounds delicate and twee to you in that situation because Stateside, 'toilet' feels a bit too crass for general use. It gets the point across, but if one is looking for the facilities in a place of business, we generally say 'restroom'. Bathroom, too, though, as has been pointed out by non-Americans, that's odd since a public facility most definitely wouldn't contain a bath. It might have an adjacent lounge for nursing moms. It would be weird to ask for a 'restroom' in a private home; that's when we say bathroom. "Toilet" is very utilitarian and conjures up visions of a gas (petrol) station or truck stop facility . . never very salubrious.

Girl with a Hat said…
@Hikari,

wouldn't it be hilarious if the paps started completely ignoring * in their photos but only taking pictures of Harry even if they are together? completely cropping her out of the pictures? as a narc, she would got ballistic for lack of attention.
Mel said…
He also looked bored out of his tiny mind.
------
Yes, he does.

But he sure lit up when taking the photo with that very pretty singer.
All smiles there. And quite, uh...cosy.

Poor little orphan Annie ain't gonna like that. Not one little bit.
She owns that prince, doncha know.

If that new young mother had been there, $10 says that the singer would not have been within 50 feet of the prince.
abbyh said…
I am trying not to post anything which could further inflame the word at issue at the moment (so moderation will be on for a long while - please remember we cross all the time zones and people sleep/work/have other things going on which may mean they aren't on).

Thank you for the private comments so far. Some really good and thought provoking.

Thank you.

Mel said…
Hikari....semantics is a fun topic. Love talking about it.
Like the difference in connotation between miserly and frugal. And which words would be between the two. Or be outside of either.

Saying restroom in a private home would be pretentious. I can see Mm doing that.
I wonder if she ever admits to needing to use the facilities?
Svetlana said…
@mel.

* WAS out in parking lot. Going through Haz’s trunk.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Girl with a Hat
wouldn't it be hilarious if the paps started completely ignoring * in their photos but only taking pictures of Harry even if they are together?

It would be even more hilarious if they've already started and * had been at the Superbowl, too, but just got completely ignored!
@Hikari

I never read the full article, Maggot definitely wasn’t there nor their erm children, agree she’d never miss a photo op. It sounds like a dodgy PR piece now. 😳

My Mum who has the printed version of the DM said Mole looked bored and weird! American football is not a game the majority of Brits are interested in or therefore understand, so he was probably trying to work it out! 😂

I think loo is probably the most common word use for toilet etc in the UK. I hardly ever hear the latter used. 😃
Girl with a Hat said…
@Mel,

I think * just goes in the bushes, like in Kenya.
Girl with a Hat said…
breaking news: Prince Andrew and Virginia Giuffre have reached a settlement in their trial
Mel said…
It would be even more hilarious if they've already started and * had been at the Superbowl, too, but just got completely ignored!
-------

What if Mm had just stepped away to visit the facilities and E just sat down in Mm's seat for a quick visit with her cousin?
E wasn't really there there with H at all? Just saw the empty seat and thought she'd visit until Mm came back from visiting the restroom?

The camera person recognized E and H and not Mm and H?
Miggy said…
New Lady C

MEGHAN&HARRYuseEUGENIE/silence/behindSCENESruses/HARRY'smemoir/COSTofMONARCHY/Edinburgh;PALACE photo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUMTkv46E70
Hikari said…
Took this from the MSN page today. Granted, it's most definitely a PR piece from the Suxxit camp but there are definite hints of what's coming. Camilla is definitely in the sights.

My heart is heavy for William. All his life he's had to carry the dead weight of his sociopathic little gobsh*te of a brother, pretend that they were best pals and crying shoulders for one another when in actuality, he's always been the emotional caretaker/babysitter, never in a relationship remotely of fraternal support and camaraderie, except for cameras . . and now he's got to brace himself for what's coming from the traitor. It's like he's an only child now only with none of the benefits.

**************

Prince Harry's tell-all book will "shake the monarchy to its core", his friends have said.

The Duke of Sussex is set to publicly reveal details about his relationship with the royal family in a new memoir due to be published later this year, and friends of Harry have hinted that the world can expect some explosive revelations.

They told the Daily Mirror newspaper: "If they think he's gone soft, they are mistaken. Just wait for the book to come out because that will shake the monarchy to the core."

Harry - who stepped down as a senior member of the royal family and relocated to the US alongside his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex in 2020 - will collaborate with JR Moehringer in what has been described as "the definitive account of the experiences, adventures, losses, and life lessons that have helped shape him".

Friends of the 37-year-old royal have suggested that the memoir will touch on Harry and his brother Prince William's relationship with their stepmother Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall - who is set to become Queen Consort when Prince Charles accedes to the throne.

They said: "Although tensions have eased between two of them over the years, it was more for a show of unity than a close relationship.

"There were big problems at the start but as Harry and his brother William aged and matured, things got better and they can now co-exist as adults."


Friends of Harry - who shares children Archie, two, and Lilibet, eight months, with Meghan - added: "He has got lots to say. People think he's keeping a low profile to respect the family but it's not that.

"He's writing a book. He's got a multi-million-pound book deal and he's keeping a lot of his opinions for that. The memoir deal states that it should include personal details of personal and family arrangements.

"And it will be a really intimate take on his feelings about his family and what has gone in the breakdown of the relationship."
Hikari said…
@Mel


Like the difference in connotation between miserly and frugal. And which words would be between the two. Or be outside of either.

The way I look at it, "frugal" can be a positive trait if one applies it to oneself. Frugality becomes 'miserly' when one forces others to suffer from one's frugality.

Eg. Eating simple meals at home to save money is frugal. Bringing one can of beans to a potluck dinner on the grounds that you yourself don't plan to eat much is miserly. Or substitute 'cheap'.

Saying restroom in a private home would be pretentious. I can see Mm doing that.
I wonder if she ever admits to needing to use the facilities?


* is pretentious but she's also gutter-mouthed, which is an interesting combination. I could see her demanding to know where 'the can' is in a beautifully appointed home just for the shock value. Though she'd also like us to think that she only poops out bluebell scented rainbows like a unicorn.

What if Mm had just stepped away to visit the facilities and E just sat down in Mm's seat for a quick visit with her cousin?
E wasn't really there there with H at all? Just saw the empty seat and thought she'd visit until Mm came back from visiting the restroom?

The camera person recognized E and H and not Mm and H?


This is possible but I don't think plausible because if word had gotten around that * was there--which she would have made sure to do, one would suppose the photogs would linger to try and snap her. Very unlikely that she she left for just a few minutes and that was the only photo op. There were probably dozens taken of Harry and Euge and we only saw a curated few.

@ Hikari said ` sociopathic little gobsh*te of a brother'

Perfect terminology, thank you. Some of the online definitions reduce the full power of this Irish term - but I'd go for it with full force:

He's a thoroughly contemptible person whose mouth spews nothing but excrement. Bad cess to him.

William has my full sympathy for being saddled with him in their youth - and still lumbared with him..

google translate
Mel said…
Very unlikely that she she left for just a few minutes and that was the only photo op. There were probably dozens taken of Harry and Euge and we only saw a curated few.
----

No, I was kidding around. But it would have been a funny scenario.

People just don't care about it being him? Seems like hardly any comments or pics by others?

You'd think there might be at least a few omg! I just saw PH! comments by random people. Not seeing any of that.
`Toilet' is seen as pretentious - it's a euphemism and comes from the French `toilette' which really applies to activities such as doing one's hair and is regarded as frightfully lower middle class- just like `serviette' for `table napkin'. Shockin' giveaways about one's humble origin, dontcha know?

We have ladies `powdering their noses' and even `adjusting their veils' from the early 20th century - the early days of motoring, perhaps.
lizzie said…
I'm sure Harry's book will be nasty. But "shaking the Monarchy to its core?" Honestly, it's hard for me to get worked up over the prospect of hearing "My 56-year old father remarried about 6 months before I turned 21. I didn't like my stepmother and she was mean to me. Boo-boo. And now my father won't give me lots of money after I quit my job. Wah wah"

We've already been forced to hear years of boo-hooing about Diana with no acknowledgment drunk driving and lack of a seatbelt played a role in her death.
snarkyatherbest said…
Snorting cocaine and blowing well you know tend to be other uses of the bathroom/loo/restroom/toilet so yes Mrs Dollar probably has had to ask where it is (now where it is versus asking permission to use it are two different things)

If she were at the SB, scobie do would have made sure it was known and why she wasnt in the pic. I like the theory he got invited at the end and snuck out the miserable look was because the minute he was photographed he knew there would be trouble.

As for frugal - one could argue not to use it. I remember the frugal gourmet including the cover he had with the boy scout on it. ewwwww Then again i no longer use OJ to talk about orange juice

snarkyatherbest said…
Looks like Andrew settled. Did Charles approve/make the payoff so they could get this off the front page and focus on his coronation i mean the Queen's platinum jubilee. What will the dollars do? they know money is being thrown around but now here prob wont be daily prince andrew stories all eyes (all negative eyes) will be on them



Hikari said…
`Toilet' is seen as pretentious - it's a euphemism and comes from the French `toilette' which really applies to activities such as doing one's hair and is regarded as frightfully lower middle class- just like `serviette' for `table napkin'. Shockin' giveaways about one's humble origin, dontcha know?

This is so interesting about our two cultures separated by a common language. For an American, 'toilet' is about the least pretentious word going. Lots of other even rougher words, generally used by men--"bog", "head"--one 'hits the head', which is indicative that it maybe came from the part of the body? (RIP, Bob Saget), "john" . . as in "I've gotta go visit John"; "can", etc. Toilet is at best neutral, but a bit blunt to American ears, particularly if one is in a restaurant eating when one feels the call of nature. "Restroom" is more delicate.

"Loo" sounds cute to our ears, like something rather exclusive to a small child or a young girl. Do men really ask for the 'Loo' in the UK? There's a scene in Bridget Jones's Diary where Bridge and her boss Daniel Cleaver, both over their intellectual depths at a book party and terrified of chit-chat with esteemed authors both ask Salmon Rusdie within minutes of each other "I don't suppose you know where the toilets are?" Mr. Rushdie did indeed know where the toilets were. But seeing as the event was taking place at a very swanky hotel, with what must be beautifully appointed facilities for attending to that business, to refer to them as 'toilets' conjures up, to an American ear, a prison latrine or a bowling alley or a petrol station where you have to get a key and go around back to pee in a concrete bunker.

So we Puritan-derived Americans have too much delicacy around the topic of bodily functions perhaps. Of course one needs a toilet at intervals but we like to dress it up, like and use a softer word, especially if we are having an evening out at a nice place. 'Toilet' doesn't sound fancy. We have toilets at home and 'restrooms' when we go out.

When I was in Canada, 'Washroom' was ubiquitous. To an American ear, a 'washroom' is inhabited strictly by men, possibly garage mechanics or farmhands or schoolboys. Like Toilet, it's a very no-frills description of the purpose, though it makes it sound like the person's dirty hands are the main reason they need a washroom.

We have ladies `powdering their noses' and even `adjusting their veils' from the early 20th century - the early days of motoring, perhaps.

Ladies of a certain vintage will ask for 'the powder room' sometimes, whether out or as a guest in someone's home. Generally the powder room will be the small guest bathroom that is on a main floor and doesn't include the shower/bathtub.

Americans tend to hear French and automatically think 'fancy'/superior. A 'serviette' is superior to a plain old paper napkin. It'd be pretentious AF to ask for a serviette at home when you might be lucky to get a strip of paper towel, but when in a nice French restaurant or having a private soiree somewhere fancy, 'serviette' might get used--particularly for the fancy doily-style dessert napkins.
Hikari said…
@WBBM

One final word on 'toilet' . . I remember reading that the York princesses and others of William's circle used to mock Catherine for using 'toilet' and for, heavens forfend, bringing *new* items to school. How gauche. (said they.) In the United States, the Middletons could not really be properly called 'middle class'--with several successful businesses generating millions of pounds per year and significant personal wealth . . let's just say that the Middletons would garner more respect in America, where cash is king and new money spends just as well as old. *My* family is middle class--my father sold life insurance on commission in a steel town and was the sole support of six dependents on a very sporadic income. We had a relatively nice house for the neighborhood but at times we felt on the 'lower' end of the middle than the 'upper' end.
Anonymous said…
I don’t believe Hannah Furness implied that Jack Brooksbank, * and their respective kids were atthe Super Bowl. I inferred that they were elsewhere—a local hotel? Eugenie and Jack are in Los Angeles for the Frieze Art Fair (because of E’s association with the Hauser+Wirth Gallery in London).
abbyh said…

For contacting Abby directly,

Currently, the blog is on moderation and not post which would flame the problem are being allowed through.

Thank you.

abbyh said…
no posts

not not post

JennS said…
Weighing in on the "thug" debate.

I'm American and I have never heard of the word thug being used as a derogatory term for black people.
I know it only for the normal definition.

When I read the term "Thug Bowl" used by a Nutty here, I assumed it was a reference to how violent football is.

Football as a contact sport can certainly be a violent and dangerous game.
Football players of all races have been known to carry on-the-field violence into everyday life.
Forceful behavior is used to succeed in the game - it's not surprising that some might be aggressive outside the game as well.

In addition, some football players develop CTE - chronic traumatic encephalopathy caused by repeated head injuries. A symptom of this brain damage can be aggressive violent behavior.

The term "Thug Bowl" did not strike me as racist at all - it never even occurred to me. It just made me think of the violence in the sport.
in public places, we have the `Ladies' and `Gents'- in socialist venues, it's more likely to ne `Women' & `Men' - but perhaps for not much longer, thanks to current gender critical views.

Heaven help us.
WBBM

Toilet is seen as pretentious in the UK? Well that’s news to me! 😂 You just don’t hear anyone use the word now, it seems outdated. I do remember reading Carol Middleton being mocked for using the word. How dare she show her working class roots! 😳

Changing the subject, I’m glad the Andrew thing is over…what will Maggot and Mole do now? Maggot won’t have her day in court! 😂😳
lizzie said…
@Hikari wrote:

"One final word on 'toilet' . . I remember reading that the York princesses and others of William's circle used to mock Catherine for using 'toilet' and for, heavens forfend, bringing *new* items to school."

People may have written that but I think Carole Middleton is the one widely ridiculed for saying "toilet" instead of "loo" not Kate. (And chewing gum among other iffy things.) I don't know how the York girls would know anything about what Kate took to school. They are 7 & 9 years younger-- that's a huge age difference during the school years. But maybe that was reported when they were young.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kate-middleton-felt-isolated-after-24641334

Popular posts from this blog

A Quiet Interlude

 Not much appears to be going on. Living Legends came and went without fanfare ... what's the next event?   Super Bowl - Sunday February 11th?  Oscar's - March 10th?   In the mean time, some things are still rolling along in various starts and stops like Samantha's law suit. Or tax season is about to begin in the US.  The IRS just never goes away.  Nor do bills (utility, cable, mortgage, food, cars, security, landscape people, cleaning people, koi person and so on).  There's always another one.  Elsewhere others just continue to glide forward without a real hint of being disrupted by some news out of California.   That would be the new King and Queen or the Prince/Princess of Wales.   Yes there are health risks which seemed to come out of nowhere.  But.  The difference is that these people are calmly living their lives with minimal drama.  

As Time Passes and We Get Older

 I started thinking about how time passes when reading some of the articles about the birthday.  It was interesting to think about it from the different points of view.  Besides, it kind of fits as a follow up the last post (the whole saga of can the two brothers reunite). So there is the requisite article about how he will be getting all kinds of money willed to him from his great-grandmother.  There were stories about Princess Anne as trustee (and not allowing earliest access to it all).  Whether or not any or all of this is true (there was money for him and/or other kids) has been debated with claims she actually died owing money with the Queen paying the debts to avoid scandal.  Don't know but I seem to remember that royal estates are shrouded from the public so we may not (ever) know. However, strange things like assisting in a book after repeated denials have popped up in legal papers so nothing is ever really predicable.   We are also seein...

The Opening Act of New Adventures in Retail

 I keep thinking things will settle down to the lazy days of spring where the weather is gorgeous and there is a certain sense of peacefulness.  New flowers are coming out. increasing daylight so people can be outside/play and thinking gardening thoughts.  And life is quiet.  Calm. And then something happens like a comet shooting across the sky.  (Out of nowhere it arrives and then leaves almost as quickly.)   An update to a law suit.  Video of the website is released (but doesn't actually promote any specific product which can be purchased from the website).  A delay and then jam is given out (but to whom and possible more importantly - who did not make the list?).  Trophies almost fall (oops).  Information slips out like when the official date of beginning USA residency.  (now, isn't that interesting?) With them, it's always something in play or simmering just below the surface.  The diversity of the endeavors is really ...