HRH Elizabeth said:
I'm afraid I have to disagree...Charles' sons are not normal, they are second and third in line to the throne, respectively, and can never have normal lives.
I didn't say they were normal.
I said that both Diana and Charles wanted them to be raised to be 'as normal as possible'.
The fact that both of them are trying to live as normal a life as possible reflects on the upbringing they were given, particularly by their mother with their father's agreement - i.e. as normal as possible.
It's true that Harry will be in the military and I count that along with royal duties - he will still be working for the British people, as it were. However, I don't see how anyone can argue that 24 and 22, the boys are too young to take on royal duties in full (including army service, etc).
My point about their ages is that they are doing full-time military duties and therefore don't have time to do the sorts of full-time royal duties that their father is doing. Maybe you didn't read my entire post as I said that the first time.
They have too much on their plates at the moment serving in the army to be doing any extra duties. I expect Harry to be in the army for the next two decades at least and William for most of the next decade (his father served for 7 years and he was the heir - William is only second in line and will be able to serve for longer if the Queen lives that long).
As to Chelsy, I'm hardly suggesting punishing her...but I do think that there is a difference between punishing her for her father's sins and believing she is suitable to date or heaven forbid marry a royal. At this point, I'm certain someone will bring up Princess Maxima of the Netherlands - as I said about Mette Marit, if it works for the Dutch, I'm delighted for them (and I do love Maxima) but I cannot say I would have been so enthusiastic about it occurring on British soil. Chelsy's father makes her, in my opinion, completely unsuitable, even if she dressed as a nun. Particularly given Britain's history with Zimbabwe, and Mugabe's brutality, the daughter of a man who has collaborated and made rather a lot of money off such a horrid regime should never be a princess of the United Kingdom, in my opinion. And as I said, my objections to her go far beyond attire, but I have to say that I do not believe, when it comes to being or dating royals, that the excuse of "that's precisely what other girls her age do" cuts it. The whole point of royals, as I understand it, is to not be like the other kids their age - HM surely was not!
If the reason that you say she is unsuitable to be a princess is because of her father then you are punishing her for the sins of her father.
If Harry and Chelsy do truly love each other then they should be allowed to marry in my opinion. I will never support the idea of denying her and Harry their happiness because of her father's actions.
I think you demands that the future wives of Harry and William don't dress and behave as other young women their own age smacks of Diana keeping herself 'tidy' at a time when most young ladies were sleeping around. We know how disastrous that turned out to be - let them date and marry girls who have had real life experiences.
Finally, Beatrice...as nearly as I can tell, she has not shown any serious indication of attending university, and as she is now legally an adult, I fail to see why she cannot take on royal duties.
She has been an adult for less than ONE WEEK. Give her a chance to find what interests her and where she can work.
I have read that she would like to go to college in the USA. If so that will be another four years before she finishes her education. Even if she doesn't go to university I am sure their is other training she could be doing before deciding on her future life.
Also, I have to disagree about her dating a man with a criminal record...even if she doesn't marry him (I was certain that there would be no way in hell that HM would agree to such a thing), by dating him, she embarrassingly connects him to the British Royal Family. I don't believe 18 is too young to recognize that, like it or not, she is a princess of the United Kingdom, and she has to moderate her behaviour and her dates accordingly.
Again the insistance of the parents to allow their children to have as normal an upbringing 'as possible' has meant that the behaviour standards of earlier generations aren't there any more.
Maybe, to satisfy your standards, rather than mine, we need to return to educating royal children behind palace walls - in the way that the Queen was educated. She certainly had very few 'normal experiences' whereas she and Philip tried a bit and then Diana and Sarah even more at giving their children more 'norma' upbringings. The results include meeting and dating people that in earlier times would not have come into their circle of acquaintances.
Personally I like Chelsy. She has spunk and reminds me a lot of Sarah - fun and different.