|
Post by Mouse on Oct 10, 2006 14:19:27 GMT -4
She's not like her daughter, the Queen, who will put everything aside for the job or who will give up everything for the position, even at the cost of her children's emotional wellbeing. Yup, you can say whatever you want about dear ol' Lizzie, but she sure knows what her job entails and it is indeed her top priority, despite the effects on her, her private life or her family. I've heard stories how she looked down on Juliana when she abdicated to make way for her daughter Beatrix. For Elizabeth it is a lifelong job and abdication? Never! She is the Queen till the day she dies. Actually, I can respect them both for their respective decisions. For one thing, Beatrix seems smarter and more responsible than Chuckles, so Juliana probably felt comfortable turning the crown over to her. I kind of prefer Juliana to QEII, in terms of personality.
|
|
|
Post by Brookie on Oct 10, 2006 14:27:53 GMT -4
The thought of Charles running a country - any country - is somehow disturbing and unappealing.
|
|
|
Post by Augustus on Oct 10, 2006 14:42:58 GMT -4
Actually, I can respect them both for their respective decisions. For one thing, Beatrix seems smarter and more responsible than Chuckles, so Juliana probably felt comfortable turning the crown over to her. I kind of prefer Juliana to QEII, in terms of personality. Oh yes, Juliana basically stayed on long enough for Beatrix to enjoy her family and for her grandchildren to live an as normal possible life. She wanted to offer them that at least. I think that was also a big difference, Juliana truly did care for her children and tried to do the best she could and was quite involved with their upbringing. And well, I think my entire nation, especially the older generations, absolutely adored Juliana. She was far more approachable as a person and as a monarch.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 6:22:49 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2006 16:04:06 GMT -4
The thought of Charles running a country - any country - is somehow disturbing and unappealing. Which is why I hope "Lillibet" lives a long, prosperous life just like her mother. The idea of Chucky and Dutchess Seabiscuit ascending to the throne seems vomit inducing.
|
|
kafka
Guest
May 3, 2024 6:22:49 GMT -4
|
Post by kafka on Oct 10, 2006 19:52:48 GMT -4
The late father of my friend Sarah was a British Ambassador, and he had quite a few meetings with QEII over the years. He had a few tales to tell about her... first of all, QEII hated Margaret Thatcher. Hated her, which, of course, endears QEII to me. Second, even though the Amb. was meeting with the monarch, he said that she had a wonderful sense of humor, and is more intelligent than she's able to express in most situations. He had a very high opinion of her as a monarch, and liked her very much as a person. Oh, and Kafka dear, Sarah totally concurs with your opinion of The Vicious Cow. Actually, Sarah calls her "the gin-soaked old N@zi". Heh. See, anyone who knows the stories can't help but hate the vicious harridan. Zivvie, next time you email your friend, show her what I think is the best photo of the Old Bat...... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Peggy Lane on Oct 10, 2006 20:16:21 GMT -4
Kafka, that's hysterical. Mean, but hysterical.
I'm going to take part in the Great Queen Mum Hate Letting and say that I think a LOT of Elizabeth and Philip's maritial problems were based in QEQM. She made such a fuss over the dispatch boxes that she got one instead of Philip!
Plus, her family locked up the misshapen child and hid away the brain damaged twins.
|
|
kafka
Guest
May 3, 2024 6:22:49 GMT -4
|
Post by kafka on Oct 10, 2006 20:42:09 GMT -4
Kafka, that's hysterical. Mean, but hysterical. Why is it "mean"? Because I'm insulting Yoda? ;D Honey, IMO, almost EVERYONE's problems can be attributed straight to the Old Bat. It's so typical that her best friend was another legendary, notorious harridan and interfering, vicious harpy: Lady Fermoy, Diana's grandmother. Lady Fermoy basically turned against her own child (Diana's mother) and testified against her, despite the spousal abuse her daughter went through. Two peas in a pod, that woman and the Queen Mum. It was the Old Bat (& Lady Fermoy) who settled upon Diana for Charles. I thought it was only the one girl who was locked away in the insane asylum? Were there more whom her family hid away? It's amazing to me how the QM's whole family is either degenerate, emotionally deficient or some other ghastly trait. The Spencers aren't exactly a model of kindness or familial bliss, but the Bowes-Lyon people are lacking in even the most basic moral gene or milk of human kindness. The current earl is or was going through the nastiest divorce ever, stemming from his sexual addictions and from bringing prostitutes and escorts to the castle, essentially having orgies there. There was also massive gambling issues too, IIRC. Then there is the alcoholic gene which seems to infect all of them. And, lastly, as you mentioned, there is the genetic predisposition to .... erm..... mental vacuity...... <koff>Margaret was very much a Bowes-Lyon in her attitude, behavior and approach. Thank God the Queen is more her father's daughter.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 6:22:49 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2006 21:02:28 GMT -4
If for nothing else, these people are prime research objects for geneticists. The traits that have manifested through generations of inbreeding is truly fascinating. Actually, quite a bit scary. Makes me glad I'm not one of them.
|
|
|
Post by Peggy Lane on Oct 10, 2006 22:14:48 GMT -4
I'm fairly certain that both twins were locked away. Perhaps something went wrong with the birth, because even in that jacked up family I think the odds of both twins having genetic issues would be low. The twins were born after Elizabeth the multiple queen was married; the misshapen boy locked in the attic would've been there during her childhood (I think. I'm going off of old memories of historian journal gossip. And Kitty Kelley). BTW, the rest of the story went that the twins were in the Royal Register but Q2 had them knocked off of it and recorded as dead way before they actually, you know, died.
As far as her family, weren't they utterly fucked up from the very first one who won the peerage? As in, sadistic orgies aren't exactly a new thing in that castle? And there's something truly odd about the way Elizabeth Q2's birth was recorded. Like, after recording six kids births perfectly her father didn't register her birth for a year and then registered two different birth places, and Q2 always gave yet another story of her birth.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 6:22:49 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2006 22:24:12 GMT -4
Wait, for those of us not familiar with the story, what's up with locking away children in asylums and attics? Thanks
|
|