Royalty Thread #5 - Kate Now Officially A MILF

Discussion in 'Off The Beaten Track' started by floskate, Jul 23, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. heckles

    heckles Well-Known Member

    3,121
    634
    113
    It appears that William and Kate have what you consider winning, so, as Charlie Sheen would say, they're bi-winning. I have a "feeling" that many people living in China have seen their own loved ones snuffed out by their oppressive government, live with no privacy, and live in poverty.
     
  2. ballettmaus

    ballettmaus Well-Known Member

    1,842
    263
    83
    I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say here, really, but, I suppose, if you use the people in China as an example, we're all winners and we all live in some sort of mansion compared to what the people you are referring to live in.

    On a side note, yes, William and Kate seem to have love and happiness and they also seem to know about values and in addition they do have the housing. But do we know if they really care for them? Maybe they prefer the cottage they live in wherever it is where William works.
    My reply was going more into the general direction of things because I honestly don't understand why you assumed just because they have the housing, the material possessions, they're winning. Do they make life more comfortable? Absolutely. But just because someone has the material possessions doesn't mean they lead a great life. It's not the grounds for leading a happy and fulfilled life. Those lie elsewhere, for everyone, not just Kate and William. That was the point I was trying to make.
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2013
  3. heckles

    heckles Well-Known Member

    3,121
    634
    113
    Nah, everyone has the right to complain about their mundane lives; it keeps Secret Sources populated. What is ironic is that the same people lamenting that the royals have no privacy are the same people fueling the interest in the royals. "Look at these family photos of Kate and William! Oh, I just can't stand how the media gives them no privacy!" The "media" won't sell what you don't buy.
     
  4. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    17,560
    2,130
    113
    I think you are simplifying the issue. The Royals and William especially has done a great job of giving the media many, many opportunities to photograph them, interview them, and report on their activities. Where it crosses the line is when they stalk to the point of danger, use telephoto lenses to capture their private moments, or when people who shouldn't do so provide personal details to media.

    Similarly the Royals are very open with the public - many, many public appearances and now a very wide and deep presence of social media. Again, where it might cross the line is when members of the public decide they want more - stalking, trying to get into places they shouldn't, etc.

    One can be a happy consumer of the photos that Kate and William issue publicly on their own terms and still have a distaste for media that cross the line that has been very clearly drawn by the Royal Family.
     
  5. heckles

    heckles Well-Known Member

    3,121
    634
    113
    True, but the same people who whine about those allegedly intrusive photos are also looking at those photos and commenting on them. I'm sure there are some people who only look at the official photos, but they're living on some Maharishi commune.
     
  6. skatesindreams

    skatesindreams Well-Known Member

    14,582
    2,461
    113
    The "usual" photographers are upset because they don't have something they can sell for big $$$$$.
    The time will come for more "formal" portraits; such as at the Christening.

    eta: I believe that Prince William has done a fine job, thus far, in balancing his official duties with his desire to lead as "normal" a family life as possible.
    This is a challenge that may be much more difficult in the years ahead.
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2013
  7. taf2002

    taf2002 flower lady

    14,633
    3,359
    113
    You are absolutely wrong. When a story breaks that some photographer has gotten photos by spying & that the subject(s) is trying to suppress them, I never go looking for them to see for myself. I have never seen the nude pictures of Jackie O or the pictures of Kate in France or the sex videos of Paris Hilton or Kim K because I have no interest withsoever in intruding in this way. I think people who take them are absolute scum & the people who view them are not better, because they support scum. And I am not living on some Maharishi commute & I don't think I am unique in how I feel.
     
    mag and (deleted member) like this.
  8. Skittl1321

    Skittl1321 Well-Known Member

    12,024
    1,375
    113
    You're not. I've never seen any of the things you mentioned.
     
  9. heckles

    heckles Well-Known Member

    3,121
    634
    113
    I didn't even know about the first two you mentioned. The latter two I haven't watched yet. Krishna, Krishna.
     
  10. Alixana

    Alixana Definitely NOT a sonogram

    1,273
    176
    63
    People in a Maharishi commune have internet access? Funny, always pictured them meditating or weeding their veg plot, not surfing FSU. ;)
     
  11. heckles

    heckles Well-Known Member

    3,121
    634
    113
    If you can tune into the proper transcendental plane, sure.
     
    Alixana and (deleted member) like this.
  12. dardar1126

    dardar1126 Well-Known Member

    3,338
    242
    63
    :HA!:

    http://www.digitalspy.com/celebrity...andrew-back-together-planning-to-remarry.html

    Sarah Ferguson and Prince Andrew 'back together, planning to remarry'
    Published Sunday, Aug 25 2013, 10:31am EDT | By Colin Daniels

    Excerpt:

     
  13. Catherine M

    Catherine M Well-Known Member

    8,090
    737
    113
    I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Andrew and Sarah were never really apart all these years. Good luck to them if they do decide to remarry.
     
  14. skatesindreams

    skatesindreams Well-Known Member

    14,582
    2,461
    113
    I'll believe that when I see it confirmed by other than tabloid sources; such as official Royal channels.
     
  15. heckles

    heckles Well-Known Member

    3,121
    634
    113
    Partners in crime.
     
  16. centerstage01

    centerstage01 Well-Known Member

    2,063
    492
    83
    Has Prince Philip given his blessing for this? I've always heard he couldn't stand Sarah and the fact that she had to leave Balmoral before Philip arrived a few weeks ago still kind of confirms that theory. They might remarry after he dies, but I question it happening before then.
     
  17. taf2002

    taf2002 flower lady

    14,633
    3,359
    113
    Why would it take Philip's blessing? Those two have already proved that they go their own way without regard to what anyone thinks. And Philip really doesn't have any power that the Queen doesn't give him.
     
  18. Vagabond

    Vagabond Well-Known Member

    3,802
    950
    113
    Neither does Andrew. :shuffle:
     
  19. taf2002

    taf2002 flower lady

    14,633
    3,359
    113
    That's not the point. centerstage implied that the marriage might not go forward if Philip disapproved. My point was that Philip couldn't stop it if Andrew was stupid enough to take Fergie back.
     
  20. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    17,560
    2,130
    113
    I haven't followed them, but the article says she lives with him, and if she really was invited to Balmoral -from what I understand the Queen's most private residence, family only, then that's a pretty big deal, no?
     
  21. heckles

    heckles Well-Known Member

    3,121
    634
    113
    Fergie's pretty delusional if she cloaks her schism with the royal family as a symptom of her commercialism. Not that this would be the first time that she doesn't take responsibility for her foul-ups. She's lucky that she didn't end up in jail for the influence peddling stunt(s).
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2013
  22. Vagabond

    Vagabond Well-Known Member

    3,802
    950
    113
    Actually, it very much is the point.

    1. If he wants to marry anyone, he either needs the Queen's consent or has to give the Privy Council a year's notice (and hope that both houses of Parliament refrain from expressly disapproving the marriage). Otherwise, the marriage would be void. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Marriages_Act_1772

    2. His housing and much of his income is either directly dependent on his mother or, at the very least, dependent on being in her good graces.

    I suspect, however, that if Andrew and Sarah really want to get married again, the Queen will consent, regardless of how her husband feels about it.

    eign's consent may marry one year after giving notice to the Privy Council of their intention to so marry, unless both houses of Parliament expressly declare their disapproval.
     
  23. *Jen*

    *Jen* Well-Known Member

    11,609
    1,368
    113
    Not quite.

    If he wanted to remain a royal, yes. Given he's unlikely to ever be king, there's nothing to stop him renouncing his right to the throne and then marrying whoever the hell he wants! Think Edward VIII...
     
  24. heckles

    heckles Well-Known Member

    3,121
    634
    113
    Eh, I think Andy and his old bird are shrewd enough to realize that they can keep the posh digs if they also keep their currish coupling on the DL.
     
  25. my little pony

    my little pony snarking for AZE

    31,337
    8,508
    113
    it has only been 3 yrs since fergie tried to sell access to andrew, i think their remarriage would be unpopular with more than just he DoE

    and andrew has the best of both worlds, he bangs fergie for old times sake and trades underaged girls with jeffrey epstein. i think fergie was in balmoral because bea is close to engagement.
     
  26. Coco

    Coco Well-Known Member

    10,968
    1,588
    113
    Andrew is trying to get his daughters to have full time careers as Royals. He. Will. Never. Leave, lol
     
  27. *Jen*

    *Jen* Well-Known Member

    11,609
    1,368
    113
    His daughters are royals in their own right, although that said, risk becoming rather obscure. The more kids Wills and Harry have, the further down the line they're bumped...
     
  28. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    17,560
    2,130
    113
    Is that so bad? If all you want to do is have a secure home and income, enjoy the parties and pageants, and do a little charity work, then maybe it's a good thing that you are further from the throne and don't need to take on as much responsibility.
     
  29. *Jen*

    *Jen* Well-Known Member

    11,609
    1,368
    113
    True :)

    I read an article about a year ago about why things were tough for them. They are both well educated, but couldn't find work after uni. It's difficult to find a job suitable for a royal in the first place since the men go into the military and the women have never had to work, but with this economy....

    The article was stating the further they get from the throne, the more pressing it is for them to find work or marry.

    And as for parties...didn't they both give up drinking after one too many embarrassing incidents? I think one had a stolen car...Eugenie maybe?
     
  30. skatesindreams

    skatesindreams Well-Known Member

    14,582
    2,461
    113
    Everyone, royal or not, deserves the opportunity to find the career/job meant for them.
    I hope the younger generation - particularly the women royals - are able to do so.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.