Artemisia - that article was like watching a tennis match - a slam, than a defensive volley, then another slam.
I don't think the public thinks the York girls are complete moochers; I do think a lot of people noticed that the girls have lobbied for royal jobs and have been cut off in that pursuit. But I also think they are seen as good girls, generally.
Just from actions, it seems the girls mum and dad are pushing for more. And they seem to be meeting resistance. And I think a lot of people believe the Queen has learned (through her own generous actions that came back to bite her) to make sure the "firm" is not too large or filled with people that find appearing before a crowd of 45 in a small town to place a plaque as a fate worse than death. .
I also think most people perceive that Charles does not support Bea and Eugenie for a role in the firm. The public also has not seen a collegial image or read of a collegial interaction between Andrew and Charles in a long time.
It appears from the outside to be a mess. I'm just sorry that Bea and Eugenie are caught up in it.
I agree with both you and Artermesia that this is the DM damning the girls with faint praise. But I find what you have written interesting.
1. "lobbying" - this is pure speculation by the press - there is no evidence. If I've missed the evidence (other than heresay) then please point me that way. But also no evidence that they didn't - I accept that. But Beatrice is working full time and Eugenie is also working so I have opted towards speculation
2. "Pushing" - again speculation, heresay, let's make up a story ....... no evidence. If Andrew really wanted this he could have brought them with him on visits for the past 10 years - its how Anne learnt the ropes. But he didn't so I'm thinking speculation.
3. "unveiling a plaque" - I'm sorry but what is this referring to? I've not been a member on this site for a very long time so might have missed something.
4. "Charles not supporting" Speculation and heresay by the press. No evidence, as there is no evidence anywhere that Charles wants a smaller BRF.
5.
Very true but don't just concentrate on Charles and Andrew. It applies across all of the siblings. I think I've worked out why. Charles away at boarding school, then military including a longish stint in the navy, captaining a ship so limited interaction while younger boys growing up; Anne got married and did 3 day eventing which consumed all the available time outside of royal duties. The 2 younger boys are a lot younger, so different interests. Then Andrew away in the Navy. What chance did they have??
Because of all of this history its easy for the media to talk about falling out, disagreeing etc. They could do something about it if there was something critically important to the royal family to resolve or if it was true. I just think that it is athe natural outcome that they have little in common and have led separate lives.
I also agree with what has been said that these 2 girls do not deserve the bad press they get. And Andrew and Sarah deserve credit for bringing them up so well.