Is Prince Andrew's protestation too little too late?

I'm sure most of us Grans agree with that GG13

When one thinks how she has had criticism of her children over so many years , Queen yes , mother yes

Varian Prince Andrew has let himself, his family, the monarchy and of course his Mum down..........but she is his mum, she is probably fuming, but our love for our children is unconditional.

They infuriate us, we can see from the estrangement threads how much heartache and abuse mums experience, but the overwhelming love for our children overrides the majority of things.

I do feel sorry for the Queen. She may at one time have been proud of Andrew who served in the Falklands war, the only one of her children to have seen action in the course of their military service, but what has he done since then?

By all accounts has let her and the rest of his family down. There are other threads on GN where posters say they feel let down by ACs. HM is not alone in that feeling.

janipat. phew! relief! Thanks!

Tillybelle it hadn't occurred to me to take it any other way than you were despairing with me (agreeing) I can see now you've pointed it out it could have been taken the other way, but no harm done, I didn't.

I don't think a girl of 17 can be classed as a child. They will have known very well what they were doing, and were probably well-paid for their services. Image living the high life, having sex with an English prince...I bet the girls were fighting to be first in line

My jaw dropped at this....how on earth does HQ allow this?

Alexa

Thanks so much Alexa.

I feel so upset for the Queen.

I agree Alexa

It's not the Windsor celebs that matter to us, it's the institution of monarchy that matters and is good.

I'm sure you know, Maw.
When are you going to discuss the topic raised and not just make personal digs at me?

MawB. No. Saw it.

But fiction can be strange too

Gonegirl
OK maybe not. Life can be strange. They say fact is stranger than fiction. I've certainly learned this to be true.

Tilleybelle I know that sounds utterly crazy

Surely not.

You seem to have missed the in my post Tillybelle

I certainly wasn’t, not even allowed to have a lift home after choir practice with the headmaster.

Perhaps Bill Clinton will say "I did not have suicide relations with that man."

I agree with you about young women Tillybelle and Janipat What makes things even worse for young women who find themselves being groomed is when other women blame them instead of blaming the sleazy men.

I wonder, have so many of us women been brought up to believe that if a man is well spoken and has superficially good manners then he cannot possibly be an abuser? Especially if he is a man in the public eye.

gillybob. Yes. And people will go on and on and on trying to find out what happened and who did it and why then and so on and on... What is most compelling today, is how difficult it is to find anyone who believes it was an accident.

janipat. Heck I'm stupid!! I've only just seen that what I said is ambiguous!!
When I said "I despair with you!" it meant I join you in your despair! I too despair about what people like RosieLeah are saying!!
Sorry if you thought otherwise!!

sunseeker. well said!

I hope this won't be an everlasting "How did Epstein die?" scenario, like the terrible torment we have over the death of Diana

and like Diana we might never know the real truth Tillybelle. We will just get a version of the truth that they would like us all to believe .

janipat. I despair with you!

This is an issue in which I agree that the US has it right. Their age of consent and age at which a teenager is still a minor or under-age is 18.

I can remember how naive I was at 17. I was not a follower of pop idols but I trusted what older people said and did and it didn't cross my mind if a friendly and polite man started to talk to me that I should not trust him. Very often the children who are groomed are naive unworldly girls who trust people too easily.

For many years I would have imagined that a member of the Royal family would behave in a decent and caring way towards me.

My children thought that people at the BBC were respectable until one of their friends won a visit to the BBC and on being shown round was asked would she like a Blue Peter Badge? To earn it she was invited to go into a dark cupboard with a famous children's program presenter. I really have forgotten his name. My children were so upset that I was focused on them at the time.

I believe people need protection at any age really. The smooth talking con man can always cause terrible trouble to anyone no matter what their age. Paying for sex, luring women into places, keeping them there, bribing them with large sums of money, making it clear that if they talk they will be in trouble of a serious kind... this is revolting whatever the age of the women who are treated as objects. For a girl under even 20, I would say, she would be too naive to understand the implications of what might happens to her. She would be far too easily talked into meeting a famous man, far too easily willing to believe she would be treated well and all would be fine.

A person with rank, title, money, status, position, power and superiority in any way, can misuse this to get whatever he or she wants and often can get away with their crimes. It's nothing new.

Fortunately, today, the internet, immediacy of news, more records having been kept, means people who indulge in malevolent deeds are being trapped by this modern net. The surveillance around every public place, for one thing, makes it harder for them to get away with their crimes.

I am waiting for the enquiry into Epstein's death. Apparently there were no security cameras, unless I have not read correctly. However, already we are being told there are circumstances which need explaining.

I hope this won't be an everlasting "How did Epstein die?" scenario, like the terrible torment we have over the death of Diana.

gillybob. you are on form today

he had to be got rid of just in case he spoke up in court,

Bull's eye!

Callistemon. Not too sure about Richard III.