Please read here on how to use images on RoyalDish. - Please read the RoyalDish message on board purpose and rules.
Images containing full nudity or sexual activities are strongly forbidden on RoyalDish.


Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: British Royal News 2020.  (Read 16586 times)
1 Member and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.
perdie

Large Member
******

Reputation: 853

Offline Offline

Posts: 1551





Ignore
« Reply #120 on: January 14, 2020, 08:31:30 PM »

What’s the point of this being a royal dishing website when the major royal event being dished on at the moment, the Sussexes, isn’t even mentioned?

If you don't like it, do better.  Set up your own website where we can dish on the Sussexes and you can see what a headache it is to moderate.  This is Thomas and Maria's corner of the internet and we follow their rules.

Besides, it may be the major dishing royal event, but there is also:
the Yorks, including Andrew and the engagement/future wedding of Bea;
the upcoming state visit from Japan to the UK;
whatever is going on with Mary and Fred taking the kids to Verbier for a term;
ML and her Shaman (and a very sad thread on Ari's suicide);
the bonkers Russians and their pretenses;
the fallout from CG cutting the working royal family down and how CP and Sofia are reacting;
Albert of Belgium and his attempts to dodge his un-royal offspring.

And that's off the top of my head.  There has always been more to royal dishing than the British royal family...
Logged
boneofcontention

Small Member
****

Reputation: 227

Offline Offline

Posts: 508





Ignore
« Reply #121 on: January 14, 2020, 08:42:59 PM »

Thank you for the two polite replies. As for yours Perdie -you have quite an aggressive tone. It usually works just as well to answer in a less strident manner. As well as being polite, the calmness has the advantage of looking more level headed too. Thanks.
Logged
Konradin

Small Member
****

Reputation: 100

Offline Offline

Argentina Argentina

Posts: 406


“Après moi le déluge”




Ignore
« Reply #122 on: January 14, 2020, 08:54:38 PM »

They seem to have a good time together, based on the pictures.

They are near the same age, like horses, country life, and are close to their kids. Then of course they have Andrew Parker Bowles in common, too.

 Laughing Laughing Laughing

 Star Star Star Well deserved it, I promised.

What’s the point of this being a royal dishing website when the major royal event being dished on at the moment, the Sussexes, isn’t even mentioned?
I am in other sites where you can, as others have well explained, it didn't work out here. You are always welcome to try elsewhere.  Smiley
Logged
Chandrasekhi

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 282

Offline Offline

Posts: 1051





Ignore
« Reply #123 on: January 14, 2020, 09:09:36 PM »

They seem to have a good time together, based on the pictures.

They are near the same age, like horses, country life, and are close to their kids. Then of course they have Andrew Parker Bowles in common, too.
I wasn't going to say it, but that's exactly what I was thinking LL. Star
Jinx! Laughing Laughing Laughing
Logged
Chandrasekhi

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 282

Offline Offline

Posts: 1051





Ignore
« Reply #124 on: January 14, 2020, 09:15:02 PM »

Congrats on 3000 posts Caroline!
Champagne Congrats OC Star
Logged
Pomme

Huge Member
********

Reputation: 1018

Offline Offline

Netherlands Netherlands

Posts: 2603


Mary who?




Ignore
« Reply #125 on: January 14, 2020, 09:16:02 PM »

Thank you for the two polite replies. As for yours Perdie -you have quite an aggressive tone. It usually works just as well to answer in a less strident manner. As well as being polite, the calmness has the advantage of looking more level headed too. Thanks.

Dear boneofcontention,
You've been around for quite a few years on this board. In fact, some 7 years longer than Perdie. During those years, you will have probably noticed that it's called Royal Dish: we dish on royals, not other posters. For many, English is not the first language. What qualifies as politeness, differs from country to country and we tend to accept this.

There are plenty of forums, tumblrs and instagrams that discuss these events in depth, pictures and memes included.

So, tune in with Elsa and....let's smurf!
Logged

Talk to the hair, you slitherin' Skank
http://i.imgur.com/2mUIe.jpg
Chandrasekhi

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 282

Offline Offline

Posts: 1051





Ignore
« Reply #126 on: January 14, 2020, 09:23:28 PM »

Resident royal historians, can a royal title be retired/de-listed/de-royaled? Thinking
« Last Edit: January 14, 2020, 09:41:10 PM by Chandrasekhi » Logged
Pomme

Huge Member
********

Reputation: 1018

Offline Offline

Netherlands Netherlands

Posts: 2603


Mary who?




Ignore
« Reply #127 on: January 14, 2020, 09:30:02 PM »

If you're born a HRH (like Charles'sons, but not Anne's children) I believe it is possible but not easy. *
A peerage can only be revoked by an Act of Parliament. Last time that really happened was in 1917.



* eta it's what OC says; the optics of course are not easy  Wink
The grandchildren in the male line of the monarch are entitled to HRH, so Edward's kids are in fact HRHs, but he politely declined the titles and they are styled Lord and Lady (James has the subsidiary title Viscount Severn). Edward is only an Earl. Perhaps QEII was running out of titles, perhaps she found it unnecessary because his issue would be way down the succession anyway.
Anne is a HRH by birth and Princess Royal, but she has no other title. So basically a commoner, just like Charles sons until they got their title upon marriage. She could've become a duchess/etc if she'd married a duke/etc.

Anne's children are not in the male line, hence Peter and Zara Phillips are not HRH and commoners until the monarch bestows titles on them. The rules were changed a bit before  George was born.Discussed elsewhere on RD :-)
« Last Edit: January 14, 2020, 10:43:44 PM by Pomme » Logged

Talk to the hair, you slitherin' Skank
http://i.imgur.com/2mUIe.jpg
Oh_Caroline

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 738

Offline Offline

Posts: 3054





Ignore
« Reply #128 on: January 14, 2020, 09:32:57 PM »

Yes someone's HRH Prince(ss) is the sole will of the sovereign via letters patent...see George V's 1917 retooling, Princess Patricia of Connaught, and the 1996 ex-wife LP as the best examples of removal.  It's super easy.

Removing someone's peerage...regardless of their royalness...is up to Parliament and only Parliament.  See 1917 Titles Deprivation Act as reference.



Sorry Pomme I was typing at the same time as you.   Hug
Logged
Chandrasekhi

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 282

Offline Offline

Posts: 1051





Ignore
« Reply #129 on: January 14, 2020, 09:44:48 PM »

 Hug  OC, Pomme - can the title itself be retired to never be available to another royal again?
Logged
fruela

Small Member
****

Reputation: 163

Offline Offline

Spain Spain

Posts: 541





Ignore
« Reply #130 on: January 14, 2020, 10:12:37 PM »

Infanta Cristina of Spain was deprived of her dukedom title but she will be an infanta as long as she wants. I don't know about other royal houses.
Logged
Oh_Caroline

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 738

Offline Offline

Posts: 3054





Ignore
« Reply #131 on: January 14, 2020, 10:20:17 PM »

Hug  OC, Pomme - can the title itself be retired to never be available to another royal again?

I guess.  If you look at the peerages affected by the 1917 Act a heir to that peerage could petition parliament to have it reinstated.  The probability the Parliament will pass an act dealing with the peerages of both current troublemakers is unlikely but if they did we’d have to see the wording.  If the wording was similar to 1917 then those peerages wouldn’t be available as long as potential heirs were alive.  If the language was different then the peerages in question would be available and it would be up to the judgement of future monarchs whether or not to recreated those peerages for someone else down the road.

AFAIK there’s no formal retired list. 

IMVHO it’s unlikely that any of the current troublemaker will lose their peerages as Parliament has better things to do. 
Logged
Pomme

Huge Member
********

Reputation: 1018

Offline Offline

Netherlands Netherlands

Posts: 2603


Mary who?




Ignore
« Reply #132 on: January 14, 2020, 10:21:33 PM »

Hug  OC, Pomme - can the title itself be retired to never be available to another royal again?


If the title is revoked/deprived/givn for life it can be retired forever and never used again. If there is no male issue a dukedom will become extinct, unless the monarch decides it can be inherited by a woman (Fife comes to mind)

https://en.wikipedia.org/...es_of_Britain_and_Ireland
is a very useful page about dukedoms (there are more on the other ranks), how they were created etc.
Some titles revert to the Crown, there are quite a few 'royal' dukedoms and before Harry got his there was speculation which of the 'dormant' royal ones he was going to get. Some were not ok because something was the matter with the last holder, or some bad luck befell him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/...oms_in_the_United_Kingdom

everything on the royal dukedoms.
Logged

Talk to the hair, you slitherin' Skank
http://i.imgur.com/2mUIe.jpg
Chandrasekhi

Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 282

Offline Offline

Posts: 1051





Ignore
« Reply #133 on: January 14, 2020, 11:03:26 PM »

Hug  OC, Pomme - can the title itself be retired to never be available to another royal again?

I guess.  If you look at the peerages affected by the 1917 Act a heir to that peerage could petition parliament to have it reinstated.  The probability the Parliament will pass an act dealing with the peerages of both current troublemakers is unlikely but if they did we’d have to see the wording.  If the wording was similar to 1917 then those peerages wouldn’t be available as long as potential heirs were alive.  If the language was different then the peerages in question would be available and it would be up to the judgement of future monarchs whether or not to recreated those peerages for someone else down the road.

AFAIK there’s no formal retired list.  

IMVHO it’s unlikely that any of the current troublemaker will lose their peerages as Parliament has better things to do.  
OC, Pomme:  Star Star Star. Andy is now infamous for his "those are not my hands", "Me , sweat? Never". Hypothetically, if he decided to package his extraordinary ability (depite armple evidence to the contrary) into a device/medication, he could convince the gullible to purchase it, with many of his revenue streams terminated. He would certainly want to market it as "No Sweat" by the House of York: Better than Botox . Could he petition Parliament to have the Duke of York title rendered obsolete/non-existent so he can make his gazillions from his "No Sweat device" under the House of York banner without trading on the York title because technically it would no longer exist, royally?  Halo Halo Halo
Logged
Pomme

Huge Member
********

Reputation: 1018

Offline Offline

Netherlands Netherlands

Posts: 2603


Mary who?




Ignore
« Reply #134 on: January 14, 2020, 11:11:57 PM »

 Thinking   Methinks Parliament has better things to do. The York dukedom will revert to the monarch anyway (no male issue-rule) and if he succeeds in handing it back, mother will make sure it will be with strings attached.
Logged

Talk to the hair, you slitherin' Skank
http://i.imgur.com/2mUIe.jpg
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: