Royals

Page 1 of 19 1, 2, 3 ... 10 ... 19  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Royals

Post  naughty zoot on Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:51 pm

So Prince Harry has wasted no time and has hooked up, allegedly, with a cocktail waitress from San Diego.
avatar
naughty zoot

Posts : 1099
Join date : 2011-10-21
Location : Western Mass

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  maxell131313 on Mon Oct 24, 2011 12:10 am

That worked out well for Prince Albert of Monaco. Oh wait....
avatar
maxell131313

Posts : 597
Join date : 2011-10-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  dionneshea on Mon Oct 24, 2011 3:28 am

I know it's mentioned in the article, but she really does resemble Kate. It's kind of funny.
avatar
dionneshea

Posts : 499
Join date : 2011-10-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  19uses on Mon Oct 24, 2011 6:12 pm

She's the first brunette he's been publically linked with, and, yes, she does resemble Kate, so hmmmm....

19uses

Posts : 15
Join date : 2011-10-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  bluebird on Mon Oct 24, 2011 8:56 pm

She looks more like Pippa to me! Maybe a bit of unrequited love for Harry? ;)

bluebird

Posts : 74
Join date : 2011-10-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  naughty zoot on Fri Oct 28, 2011 8:35 am

No more male primogeniture for the British.
avatar
naughty zoot

Posts : 1099
Join date : 2011-10-21
Location : Western Mass

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  jcpdiesel21 on Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:14 pm

It's about damn time the rules of succession caught up with the 21st century.
avatar
jcpdiesel21

Posts : 377
Join date : 2011-10-23
Age : 38
Location : Springfield, MO

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  MLIS on Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:57 pm

Yeah, it only makes sense in this day and age, especially as we're approaching the Queen's diamond jubilee -- who could argue that she hasn't ruled as well as any man???

I'm not surprised by the timing, either. It hasn't been an issue for generations (there hasn't been a younger son inherit over his older sister in recent memory, I don't think) but with William having married and the prospect of the next generation on the horizon, it was time.

MLIS

Posts : 159
Join date : 2011-10-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  Instant Monkeys on Fri Oct 28, 2011 2:46 pm

I don't mean this to come off overly flip, because I know there's been untold amounts of bloodshed over this issue in Britain and elsewhere. But it cracks me up that, until this change, a British monarch wasn't allowed to marry a Catholic. Any other religion, fine; just not a Catholic. (I don't imagine the original rules SAID "any other religion's fine" -- I suspect the only prohibition they found it necessary to write in was Catholic.)

So I'm glad they changed that one too while they were at it. It's been 500 years or so; I think it's OK.
avatar
Instant Monkeys

Posts : 1783
Join date : 2011-10-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  The Glen on Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:14 pm

Instant Monkeys wrote:So I'm glad they changed that one too while they were at it. It's been 500 years or so; I think it's OK.

It's hard to believe that that rule was still in place, but fair play to them for changing it at last.

The Glen
Mod Squad

Posts : 725
Join date : 2011-10-21
Location : Unemployed in Greenland

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  Binky on Fri Oct 28, 2011 5:27 pm

But if it's twins, they still get to break out the ol' iron mask/dungeon deal, right?
avatar
Binky

Posts : 1041
Join date : 2011-10-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  MLIS on Fri Oct 28, 2011 5:29 pm

I wonder if it will apply to those already in succession, or if it will just be going forward. Not that it makes any difference, really, as the heirs and those in close succession haven't, but there are those further down the line (like the children of some of the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester and that) who have married Catholics and been struck from the succession. Not that they're ever likely to inherit the throne, but I wonder if they'll be put back on the list. Or if it matters to them.

MLIS

Posts : 159
Join date : 2011-10-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  curryalley on Sat Oct 29, 2011 7:38 pm

Binky wrote:But if it's twins, they still get to break out the ol' iron mask/dungeon deal, right?

Twins are so easy. I'm rooting for identical strangers.

curryalley

Posts : 218
Join date : 2011-10-22

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  maxell131313 on Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:29 pm

MLIS wrote:I wonder if it will apply to those already in succession, or if it will just be going forward. Not that it makes any difference, really, as the heirs and those in close succession haven't, but there are those further down the line (like the children of some of the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester and that) who have married Catholics and been struck from the succession. Not that they're ever likely to inherit the throne, but I wonder if they'll be put back on the list. Or if it matters to them.

I don't know if it will matter to Prince Michael of Kent, but you better believe it matters to his wife. I never noticed before, but on another board someone made mention of the fact that any time there's a group royal gathering like Trooping the Color (or Colour) she is *always* either near the Queen or whoever's gotten the most press of late. This year, she was stuck like glue to Will and/or Kate so she would always be in the pictures and the paper/magazine couldn't crop her out. It was kinda hilarious.
avatar
maxell131313

Posts : 597
Join date : 2011-10-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  joey potter's it on Mon Oct 31, 2011 9:58 am

I don't know if it will matter to Prince Michael of Kent, but you better believe it matters to his wife. I never noticed before, but on another board someone made mention of the fact that any time there's a group royal gathering like Trooping the Color (or Colour) she is *always* either near the Queen or whoever's gotten the most press of late. This year, she was stuck like glue to Will and/or Kate so she would always be in the pictures and the paper/magazine couldn't crop her out.

Ah, Princess Pushy. Even by royal standards, she's quite a...um, character.

joey potter's it

Posts : 11
Join date : 2011-10-21
Age : 34

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  The Lady of Shalott on Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:49 pm

Christmas is coming, guys! Who's getting the Royal Doulton Catherine Royal Wedding china lady? $497 marked down to $297.50, what a steal!
avatar
The Lady of Shalott

Posts : 172
Join date : 2011-10-21
Age : 29
Location : New Brunswick, Canada

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  Unlucky Bear on Fri Dec 02, 2011 2:34 am

Not gonna lie, if that were marked down to, say, $20 or so, I would totally buy it.
avatar
Unlucky Bear
Official Succubus

Posts : 1036
Join date : 2011-10-21
Age : 33
Location : Suburban Chicago

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  Tabby on Fri Dec 02, 2011 11:05 am

Yeah, my price limit for wedding kitsch is $25.

I don't know if you guys remember it, but at the height of the Beanie Baby craze, they came out with a "Princess" beanie in honor of Diana after her death. It was royal purple with a rose embroidered on it. The Beanie Baby collectors went crazy, and there were stories of people buying them for hundreds of dollars. The first editions sold out immediately, and the Beanie Baby people had a bunch more made until the bottom fell out of the market.

I went to an antiques show/flea market a couple of months ago, and found one of the Princess bears on one vendor's dollar table. Snapped up that puppy right quick, since I don't have any Diana kitsch and felt I needed something. A quick bout of internet research indicates that I may have found a first edition of the bear.

A couple of lessons can be learned from this. One, I will buy royalty-related idiocies when they're cheap enough. (Also the bear is small, and it's kind of cute. And it's purple.) Two, my former co-worker who collected Beanies shouldn't have counted on her collection to "fund her retirement." (Yes, she actually believed this. Oops.)
avatar
Tabby

Posts : 729
Join date : 2011-10-25
Age : 57
Location : Minneapolis, Minnesota

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  Unlucky Bear on Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:24 pm

I was in junior high during the Beanie craze and was only mildly interested in them (my friends' moms were the INSANE collectors who would hang out in McDonalds' parking lots working out trades for the little ones that came in Happy Meals, though). My dad knew I liked them and won some raffle at work where one of the prizes you could choose was the Princess Di Beanie and he got it for me and was SO EXCITED that he could give me a super-popular, hard-to-find bear. I love him so much.
avatar
Unlucky Bear
Official Succubus

Posts : 1036
Join date : 2011-10-21
Age : 33
Location : Suburban Chicago

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  boutros boutros kitty on Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:48 am

I worked for a company that owned Hallmark stores during the BB craze, and we could buy them with first dibs choice AND get our discount. I bought those Princess bears and sold them to the crazies. I made over a thousand bucks on the purple bears alone. It was a great time, I tell you!

boutros boutros kitty

Posts : 68
Join date : 2011-10-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  The Lady of Shalott on Wed Dec 21, 2011 1:55 am

Kate looks outstanding at a holiday party. Charlene looks uncomfortable in front of cameras.

Kate wins, again.
avatar
The Lady of Shalott

Posts : 172
Join date : 2011-10-21
Age : 29
Location : New Brunswick, Canada

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  sagitare on Wed Dec 21, 2011 2:49 am

I'm totally going to think of her as "Cathy Cambridge" from now on. That makes her sound like a spunky sleuth in a murder/mystery novel!
avatar
sagitare

Posts : 477
Join date : 2011-10-22
Location : Canada's Wet Coast

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  maxell131313 on Wed Dec 21, 2011 4:52 am

I think this may be my new favorite blog. So if you want to see close-ups of Catherine's jewels she was wearing the other evening, go here. Also, LOTS AND LOTS OF DIAMONDS. *drool*
avatar
maxell131313

Posts : 597
Join date : 2011-10-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  Tabby on Wed Dec 21, 2011 10:58 am

I LOVE that jewelry. It's important enough for the stunning gown, but still fits Kate's pared-down style.
avatar
Tabby

Posts : 729
Join date : 2011-10-25
Age : 57
Location : Minneapolis, Minnesota

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  MLIS on Wed Dec 21, 2011 11:25 am

I love Royal Order of Sartorial Splendor ... she posts such interesting, well researched entries, along with gentle snark when required, but an obvious genuine affection for the people she's writing about at the same time. It's a great blog. I love Mad Hattery, too, but she doesn't update as often as she used to.

MLIS

Posts : 159
Join date : 2011-10-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Royals

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 19 1, 2, 3 ... 10 ... 19  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum