British Royals

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have never seen the same level of vitriol for Andrew/Sarah as has been displayed against Harry/Meghan.

One literally cavorts with pedophiles and the other is outspoken & biracial. It's crazy to see the dissonance.

Fergie is just lucky DCUM didn't exist during her toe-sucking days.

For me, her getting her toe sucked is the best thing she ever did. Sulking in an e-mail to Jeffrey Epstein of all people about why he doesn't love her anymore just seemed sad.

Of course he was using you to get to Andrew. That's who he was: a narcissistic user.

Good point. The toe-sucking was just your garden variety national enquirer cover stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's ironic that it always seemed Charles and Di were the most dysfunctional, but this Fergie/Andrew stuff will obviously end up much worse. I think we only know the tip of the iceberg.

Why do they still live together?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's ironic that it always seemed Charles and Di were the most dysfunctional, but this Fergie/Andrew stuff will obviously end up much worse. I think we only know the tip of the iceberg.

Why do they still live together?

They're still fond of each other, perhaps?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's ironic that it always seemed Charles and Di were the most dysfunctional, but this Fergie/Andrew stuff will obviously end up much worse. I think we only know the tip of the iceberg.

Why do they still live together?

Seems like they have limited funds and options. But I also think they are bound by terrible secrets that are darker than any of us can imagine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's ironic that it always seemed Charles and Di were the most dysfunctional, but this Fergie/Andrew stuff will obviously end up much worse. I think we only know the tip of the iceberg.

Why do they still live together?

Seems like they have limited funds and options. But I also think they are bound by terrible secrets that are darker than any of us can imagine.

I think it’s this too.

I cannot imagine interacting with Andrew as an ex or as an adult daughter with children after the photo came out with Andrew leering over an apparently unconscious woman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone here knows which direction this thread will go and why it will eventually be locked.

Why even try at this point.

I haven't seen any posts that are worthy of reporting?

If you've hung out on this board for any time at all, you'll know that all threads about the royals eventually get locked because of the way posters talk about Meghan.

No, because of the way a scant few women flip out against any critique of Meghan Markle, whereas any other public figure is fair game.

My favorite is when the rabid anti-Meghan crowd starts posting like they're posh Brits.

Your dimwit vocab is your issue, among all of your other problems.

Regarding Fergie - she has enjoyed the benefit of the doubt because she crybabied about Duchess of Pork and her divorcee in-law issues, never having the charm to accept that her own rank choices were her fault. Andrew Lownie’s expose Entitled (about the Yorks) is getting some fresh material included in the paperback release. The “shagging weekend” email she wrote to Epstein has decimated the fantasy Sarah had tried to sell, that she took pride in her excellent mothering to her daughters. She is a disgusting, greedy monster all on her own. She and Andrew were definitely meant to be and the Queen’s failure to corral her son permanently damages the limited good she managed to accomplish.

DP. You'll get no Fergie-love from me. But as a few others here have said, it's the women (Fergie and Meghan), and not the actual pedo and trafficker (Andrew), who are the target of your ire. This poster devoted a full para to bashing Fergie as a "disgusting, greedy monster." And this poster, or someone else, is trying to spin this thread into yet another anti-Meghan hate train. While the actual pedo, Andrew is being painted here as some sad-sack old fogey who's too vulnerable to be sent out to a flat of his own. Can you see the problem?

As for calling pp a dimwit, Kate's fangirls are very Klassy

You're so cute! Throwing a tantrum because you can't control the dialogue.

Nope. I'm commenting on your dialogue. Specifically, on your misogynistic take on women vs. men.

It's a fact: you're ignoring the actual pedo so you can hate on two women. Prove me wrong.

Is anyone ignoring the Andrew thing? I think he's universally despised. The thread was about royals and their spouses- it's the very first post. I don't think we are required to discuss any one of them in particular.

There hasn't been a peep about Camilla, my how far she has come from the so-called third woman in Princess Diana's marriage.

PP was idioting at me. I posted earlier about Entitled, Andrew, Sarah, and the revelations. PP has limited brain activity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone here knows which direction this thread will go and why it will eventually be locked.

Why even try at this point.

I haven't seen any posts that are worthy of reporting?

If you've hung out on this board for any time at all, you'll know that all threads about the royals eventually get locked because of the way posters talk about Meghan.

No, because of the way a scant few women flip out against any critique of Meghan Markle, whereas any other public figure is fair game.

My favorite is when the rabid anti-Meghan crowd starts posting like they're posh Brits.

Your dimwit vocab is your issue, among all of your other problems.

Regarding Fergie - she has enjoyed the benefit of the doubt because she crybabied about Duchess of Pork and her divorcee in-law issues, never having the charm to accept that her own rank choices were her fault. Andrew Lownie’s expose Entitled (about the Yorks) is getting some fresh material included in the paperback release. The “shagging weekend” email she wrote to Epstein has decimated the fantasy Sarah had tried to sell, that she took pride in her excellent mothering to her daughters. She is a disgusting, greedy monster all on her own. She and Andrew were definitely meant to be and the Queen’s failure to corral her son permanently damages the limited good she managed to accomplish.

DP. You'll get no Fergie-love from me. But as a few others here have said, it's the women (Fergie and Meghan), and not the actual pedo and trafficker (Andrew), who are the target of your ire. This poster devoted a full para to bashing Fergie as a "disgusting, greedy monster." And this poster, or someone else, is trying to spin this thread into yet another anti-Meghan hate train. While the actual pedo, Andrew is being painted here as some sad-sack old fogey who's too vulnerable to be sent out to a flat of his own. Can you see the problem?

As for calling pp a dimwit, Kate's fangirls are very Klassy

The bolded is a lie. Please cite the post here suggesting that Andrew is just a doddering man who needs to have an easy retirement from trafficking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I always thought it was weird that Andrew and Fergie lived together after the divorce. Maybe they just knew too much about each other and both wanted the other under their thumb.

They were both cheaters, lovers of the good life, spendthrifts, and they share 2 kids.

I think he took in Fergie because she was kinda broke and the house was big enough to give her her own wing.

This is not particularly surprising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone here knows which direction this thread will go and why it will eventually be locked.

Why even try at this point.

I haven't seen any posts that are worthy of reporting?

If you've hung out on this board for any time at all, you'll know that all threads about the royals eventually get locked because of the way posters talk about Meghan.

No, because of the way a scant few women flip out against any critique of Meghan Markle, whereas any other public figure is fair game.

My favorite is when the rabid anti-Meghan crowd starts posting like they're posh Brits.

Your dimwit vocab is your issue, among all of your other problems.

Regarding Fergie - she has enjoyed the benefit of the doubt because she crybabied about Duchess of Pork and her divorcee in-law issues, never having the charm to accept that her own rank choices were her fault. Andrew Lownie’s expose Entitled (about the Yorks) is getting some fresh material included in the paperback release. The “shagging weekend” email she wrote to Epstein has decimated the fantasy Sarah had tried to sell, that she took pride in her excellent mothering to her daughters. She is a disgusting, greedy monster all on her own. She and Andrew were definitely meant to be and the Queen’s failure to corral her son permanently damages the limited good she managed to accomplish.

DP. You'll get no Fergie-love from me. But as a few others here have said, it's the women (Fergie and Meghan), and not the actual pedo and trafficker (Andrew), who are the target of your ire. This poster devoted a full para to bashing Fergie as a "disgusting, greedy monster." And this poster, or someone else, is trying to spin this thread into yet another anti-Meghan hate train. While the actual pedo, Andrew is being painted here as some sad-sack old fogey who's too vulnerable to be sent out to a flat of his own. Can you see the problem?

As for calling pp a dimwit, Kate's fangirls are very Klassy

The bolded is a lie. Please cite the post here suggesting that Andrew is just a doddering man who needs to have an easy retirement from trafficking.

Who’s the liar?

Page 7 @14:23

“ Andrew/Sarah are old and British and people don't relate to them or care about them. We'd rather talk about an American contemporary. Why is that so hard to figure out?”

@14:31

“ Because they are all just hoping that Andrew will fade slowly into the background again. I mean, he's old. He's not very adaptable. Yes, they could make him start paying his own bills and such, but it's hard when you're old already. I tried to get my mom to learn to do all of that at 78 and she was terrible at it. Setting him loose in the UK to find a flat to rent and pay his own light bill isn't going to end well. If he gives him some measure of help, he can use it as a way to get him to behave. I don't blame him. Let's just be glad he's not the King. That would be very messy.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's ironic that it always seemed Charles and Di were the most dysfunctional, but this Fergie/Andrew stuff will obviously end up much worse. I think we only know the tip of the iceberg.

Why do they still live together?

Seems like they have limited funds and options. But I also think they are bound by terrible secrets that are darker than any of us can imagine.

I think it’s this too.

I cannot imagine interacting with Andrew as an ex or as an adult daughter with children after the photo came out with Andrew leering over an apparently unconscious woman.

His kids are gonna have a lot to unpack in therapy. Not nearly as much as his victims, of course, but I would guess they didn't know about this stuff growing up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone here knows which direction this thread will go and why it will eventually be locked.

Why even try at this point.

I haven't seen any posts that are worthy of reporting?

If you've hung out on this board for any time at all, you'll know that all threads about the royals eventually get locked because of the way posters talk about Meghan.

No, because of the way a scant few women flip out against any critique of Meghan Markle, whereas any other public figure is fair game.

My favorite is when the rabid anti-Meghan crowd starts posting like they're posh Brits.

Your dimwit vocab is your issue, among all of your other problems.

Regarding Fergie - she has enjoyed the benefit of the doubt because she crybabied about Duchess of Pork and her divorcee in-law issues, never having the charm to accept that her own rank choices were her fault. Andrew Lownie’s expose Entitled (about the Yorks) is getting some fresh material included in the paperback release. The “shagging weekend” email she wrote to Epstein has decimated the fantasy Sarah had tried to sell, that she took pride in her excellent mothering to her daughters. She is a disgusting, greedy monster all on her own. She and Andrew were definitely meant to be and the Queen’s failure to corral her son permanently damages the limited good she managed to accomplish.

DP. You'll get no Fergie-love from me. But as a few others here have said, it's the women (Fergie and Meghan), and not the actual pedo and trafficker (Andrew), who are the target of your ire. This poster devoted a full para to bashing Fergie as a "disgusting, greedy monster." And this poster, or someone else, is trying to spin this thread into yet another anti-Meghan hate train. While the actual pedo, Andrew is being painted here as some sad-sack old fogey who's too vulnerable to be sent out to a flat of his own. Can you see the problem?

As for calling pp a dimwit, Kate's fangirls are very Klassy

The bolded is a lie. Please cite the post here suggesting that Andrew is just a doddering man who needs to have an easy retirement from trafficking.

Who’s the liar?

Page 7 @14:23

“ Andrew/Sarah are old and British and people don't relate to them or care about them. We'd rather talk about an American contemporary. Why is that so hard to figure out?”

@14:31

“ Because they are all just hoping that Andrew will fade slowly into the background again. I mean, he's old. He's not very adaptable. Yes, they could make him start paying his own bills and such, but it's hard when you're old already. I tried to get my mom to learn to do all of that at 78 and she was terrible at it. Setting him loose in the UK to find a flat to rent and pay his own light bill isn't going to end well. If he gives him some measure of help, he can use it as a way to get him to behave. I don't blame him. Let's just be glad he's not the King. That would be very messy.”

Still you regarding 14:23. Come the fk on.

[Anonymous]

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and King Charles have both put out public statements about their concern over the latest Epstein revelations. I agree with the PP way upthread who said William will never be photographed with Andrew again. I don't think Charles will either. I think he will live out his days in Charles' smallest personal home, getting the scrappiest of allowances, until he goes to jail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone here knows which direction this thread will go and why it will eventually be locked.

Why even try at this point.

I haven't seen any posts that are worthy of reporting?

If you've hung out on this board for any time at all, you'll know that all threads about the royals eventually get locked because of the way posters talk about Meghan.

No, because of the way a scant few women flip out against any critique of Meghan Markle, whereas any other public figure is fair game.

My favorite is when the rabid anti-Meghan crowd starts posting like they're posh Brits.

Your dimwit vocab is your issue, among all of your other problems.

Regarding Fergie - she has enjoyed the benefit of the doubt because she crybabied about Duchess of Pork and her divorcee in-law issues, never having the charm to accept that her own rank choices were her fault. Andrew Lownie’s expose Entitled (about the Yorks) is getting some fresh material included in the paperback release. The “shagging weekend” email she wrote to Epstein has decimated the fantasy Sarah had tried to sell, that she took pride in her excellent mothering to her daughters. She is a disgusting, greedy monster all on her own. She and Andrew were definitely meant to be and the Queen’s failure to corral her son permanently damages the limited good she managed to accomplish.

DP. You'll get no Fergie-love from me. But as a few others here have said, it's the women (Fergie and Meghan), and not the actual pedo and trafficker (Andrew), who are the target of your ire. This poster devoted a full para to bashing Fergie as a "disgusting, greedy monster." And this poster, or someone else, is trying to spin this thread into yet another anti-Meghan hate train. While the actual pedo, Andrew is being painted here as some sad-sack old fogey who's too vulnerable to be sent out to a flat of his own. Can you see the problem?

As for calling pp a dimwit, Kate's fangirls are very Klassy

The bolded is a lie. Please cite the post here suggesting that Andrew is just a doddering man who needs to have an easy retirement from trafficking.

Who’s the liar?

Page 7 @14:23

“ Andrew/Sarah are old and British and people don't relate to them or care about them. We'd rather talk about an American contemporary. Why is that so hard to figure out?”

@14:31

“ Because they are all just hoping that Andrew will fade slowly into the background again. I mean, he's old. He's not very adaptable. Yes, they could make him start paying his own bills and such, but it's hard when you're old already. I tried to get my mom to learn to do all of that at 78 and she was terrible at it. Setting him loose in the UK to find a flat to rent and pay his own light bill isn't going to end well. If he gives him some measure of help, he can use it as a way to get him to behave. I don't blame him. Let's just be glad he's not the King. That would be very messy.”

Still you regarding 14:23. Come the fk on.

Not sure who you’re talking to, but insults are an admission soon of defeat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and King Charles have both put out public statements about their concern over the latest Epstein revelations. I agree with the PP way upthread who said William will never be photographed with Andrew again. I don't think Charles will either. I think he will live out his days in Charles' smallest personal home, getting the scrappiest of allowances, until he goes to jail.

I'm glad Kate and William are finally concerned given the fact that they like hanging out with him.



This pic is from AFTER Andrew stepped down as a working royal in 2023.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kate has a very carefully curated public image so it's hard to find fault with her. She's milquetoast. I think people forget how she was raked through the press as Waity Katie and for her "common" roots, before she was married. I'm old enough to remember the stories of William's school friends saying "doors to manual" when Kate entered a room bc her mom used to be a flight attendant. Who knows if that's true, but that's what Kate got picked on for.

Now you don't really see anything but a thin, polished, restrained middle aged woman. There's just not that much material there people!

Ah yes, we've entered the phase where we pretend that the way that Kate was treated is in any way equivalent to the irrational hatred that Meghan gets. Next up: "But I didn't even realize that Meghan is black!!!"

That's my favorite. There's some idiot on this board who once posted in earnest they thought MM was just a really tan white woman, "maybe Latina or Italian-American."

I know when I think of a typical Italian-American mother I think of a dark-skinned Black woman with dreadlocks!