Why wasn't the Queen a good mother?
I'm not surprised that Philip was not a particularly good parent, since his parents were always absent and his father didn't care for him. But I am surprised the Queen was not better since her own parents were so warm and loving to her. Unless the stories of her family holed up together at Windsor during the war were just propaganda, she had the example of what it was like to have parents who spent time with their children and were kind and supportive to their children.
It cannot be just because she was so busy as queen--Diana was a great parent to her boys (except for forgetting to buckle up that one crucial time), and William and Kate have seemed attentive and loving towards their own kids.
by Anonymous | reply 79 | November 30, 2020 10:20 PM
|
It seems as if she loved her mother and her sister.....her children, not so much.
by Anonymous | reply 2 | November 22, 2020 7:15 PM
|
Just so you know OP, the TV show "The Crown" is a fictional drama series that is not an accurate portrayal of events.
by Anonymous | reply 3 | November 22, 2020 7:16 PM
|
She was the queen. Good mothering comprised having quality nannies and healthcare and enough contact with the children to remain recognizably familiar.
So she was a good mother.
The insistence on seeing lower-class values and habits of miserable domesticity as a norm for a monarch is a sign of - guess what? - being lower class.
by Anonymous | reply 4 | November 22, 2020 7:16 PM
|
"It cannot be just because she was so busy as queen--Diana was a great parent to her boys" - Diana wasn't queen.
by Anonymous | reply 5 | November 22, 2020 7:16 PM
|
Yeah I don't get what OP was trying to say about Diana. The crown sits on one head, and that is Elizabeth's.
by Anonymous | reply 6 | November 22, 2020 7:18 PM
|
I have always wondered this myself. Perhaps the burden of being a monarch so young? But it went beyond being cold to a point of disregard and selfishness I believe, only to awaken decades later to what her callousness and neglect had wrought in her children.
by Anonymous | reply 7 | November 22, 2020 7:19 PM
|
As as young woman, she was subjected to aerial bombardment and then got on with it driving and repairing trucks in a war-torn city, listening to the screams of dying and wounded people.
She has had no fucks to give about your whingeing about cold showers in boarding schools and anorexic unfulfillment in marriage.
by Anonymous | reply 8 | November 22, 2020 7:21 PM
|
OP is yet another person who binge watched The Crown and isn’t aware that the screenwriter - Peter Morgan - invented much of the plot content.
I’ve no doubt that HM wasn’t a particularly hands-on mother, but she was Head of State and, because of her class, probably quite comfortable about falling out much of the child-rearing to nannies.
I really doubt that she had to ask for crib notes on each of her offspring to get up to speed before meeting them.
by Anonymous | reply 9 | November 22, 2020 7:31 PM
|
I didn't realize people thought The Crown was a documentary.
Also, except for Anne, she had shitty kids.
by Anonymous | reply 11 | November 22, 2020 7:46 PM
|
Not a few upper class parents of The Queen's generation, plus before and after, sent their children to boarding prep then public schools as soon as possible. They may or may not have had 'family fun' during the holidays.
Then it would be the army or university, by which time the die was cast. Offspring could be amusing to have around and send into the marriage market, or not. Plenty of such parents simply didn't like children very much and were happy to farm out the rearing to Others. If they got on as adults, well and good, but if not, whatever.
Emotional dysfunction given this culture might reasonably be expected. Maybe The Royal Family epitomised this approach, with results fully documented. They knew no better, because they were seen as and thought themselves The Best.
by Anonymous | reply 12 | November 22, 2020 7:49 PM
|
Anne said her nanny was a horror.
by Anonymous | reply 13 | November 22, 2020 9:51 PM
|
POPPYCOCK! The Queen absolutely loves babies.....with several dashes of Siracha!
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 14 | November 22, 2020 10:19 PM
|
She was better than my mother. A little.
by Anonymous | reply 15 | November 22, 2020 10:23 PM
|
I think it was a couple of years ago that I watched old footage of the Queen returning from a world tour on the royal yacht. A very young Charles was there to greet her. After an absence of several months, one would expect that a hug was in order, but she patted Charles on the shoulder a couple of times, in a desultory manner, and that was that.
by Anonymous | reply 16 | November 23, 2020 2:02 PM
|
I know that footage, R16. What's not generally known, however, is that there WAS accompanying audio to the footage which the Royal Family had squashed long ago. I was one of the very fortunate ones to have heard it before it was destroyed. Remember that The Queen Mother and THE Princess Margaret were there as well. The Queen patted Charles on the shoulder and said to him "Nice to see you again, Chris." Charles, quick flash replied "CHARLES! Mummy, it's CHARLES!" The Queen then responded "Of course it's Charles! That's what I said, isn't it? AH! MARGO!!" She advances to THE Princess Margaret and kisses her.
At the 02:45 mark in this video.
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 17 | November 23, 2020 3:35 PM
|
R17 That's a good one, but I'm sure that the one I saw was different. Charles was a bit older, and the shoulder patting took place on the yacht when Charles went aboard. I can't seem to find it
by Anonymous | reply 18 | November 23, 2020 3:58 PM
|
R17, I doubt very much there was any audio to that footage and the idea that the Queen would have thought for a second that Charles' name is Chris is ridiculous. The Queen is being very affectionate with Charles and her mother and sister in this footage.
by Anonymous | reply 19 | November 23, 2020 4:10 PM
|
Sometimes your children as just unlovable. The Queen's are very unlovable.
by Anonymous | reply 20 | November 23, 2020 4:12 PM
|
R19 is a riot at parties!
by Anonymous | reply 21 | November 23, 2020 4:17 PM
|
R16, the only several months long tour the Queen did when Charles was still a kid was the November 1953 - May 1954 Commonwealth tour. Here's footage of the Queen returning on her yacht, but far from just patting Charles on the shoulder as she disembarks, he and Anne are actually on the yacht with her as she sails in, having a lot of fun.
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 22 | November 23, 2020 4:33 PM
|
When I was much younger, I had a friend whose parents were close friends with the Queen. He attended Christmas parties at Buckingham Palace as a child. When I asked him what the Queen was like, he replied simply: brusque.
Obviously, there is a great deal of fiction in the Crown, but I don’t think that includes the way the Queen’s demeanor is portrayed.
by Anonymous | reply 23 | November 23, 2020 4:55 PM
|
Lizbeth and Margot were sent to Windsor during the war, but their parents remained in London. Their Majesties went to Windsor for the weekends, but mostly the princesses were in the company of their nanny who was later exiled for cashing in.
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 24 | November 23, 2020 4:58 PM
|
When Elizabeth and Margaret were very young, they didn't have the pressure on their family unit to ascend, because it was assumed that Edward would be King, but then when he abdicated that changed everything. From then on, Elizabeth could never relax.
by Anonymous | reply 26 | November 23, 2020 5:10 PM
|
She had to straddle that line between parenting and career but her career was “running” a country on a world stage and raising the future monarch. Couldn’t have been easy in the 50s.
by Anonymous | reply 27 | November 23, 2020 5:13 PM
|
I’m so ashamed. Lizbeth=Lilibet
by Anonymous | reply 28 | November 23, 2020 5:31 PM
|
It's funny how suddenly it's the fashion here to accuse people who criticize the queen of being dummies who take "The Crown" as a documentary. These things have been obvious all along to those of us who don't watch "The Crown."
She seems like a decent mother, but queen first, mother second, and none too affectionate, at least not openly. I know that her immediate family (growing up) was very cozy and loving, but that things had to change somewhat when her father became king, which was not originally expected. I'm sure things suddenly became more serious and a level of formality was added. Maybe it was a shock to her, and, becoming queen at such a young age, she was afraid of making missteps and letting down the dynasty. After all, it was pretty disastrous in the generation preceding her. She had a lot of responsibility riding on her to preserve the monarchy.
In the circumstances, it would be natural for her to be very wary of letting her personal feelings have influence over her official duties. Probably easiest to just make sure the children were raised in the formal traditions of the upper class and, especially, with full awareness of the gravity of being a royal prince or princess. Showing them that they're loved, supported, etc., was likely not a priority. It's a different era now. Royal duties just aren't as important, and the royals are free to behave more like other parents.
by Anonymous | reply 29 | November 23, 2020 5:48 PM
|
[quote] [R19] is a riot at parties!—R17
By which you mean he contradicted you, and so now you're childishly sulking.
by Anonymous | reply 30 | November 23, 2020 5:49 PM
|
OP, one mustn’t try to impose 2020 mores on someone raised by parents born into the culture of the early 1900s. Her father was born in 1895 and her mother in 1900.
Children were meant to be seen and not heard. Society had not yet shifted the focus of the nuclear family from the parents to the children.
In the period when the Queen was raising her children the needs of the parents (or adults) took priority over all the needs of the children. The needs of the adults truly took precedence over those of the children. In other words, little Johnny’s soccer practice and Mary’s travel softball are ideas that would have horrified people of that time. A child whining? Not something to be tolerated. Public displays of affection? Not the done thing. Temper tantrums because there was only an orange and three pieces of chocolate in your Christmas stocking? To bed with no supper.
Queen Elizabeth also had a lot on her plate. When her children were little she had to contend with the fate of the British Empire (when her father died some asked if it should continue), her royal travel duties, dealing with the needs of Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother, managing her wayward sister, Margaret and, oh, her millions of royal subjects.
Frankly, given all of the challenges facing that family I am surprised the children all made it to adulthood.
Yes, the Queen had the advice and counsel of the men in the gray suits to rely on, but she was functioning very much in the role of a powerless CEO leading a troubled company run by a revolving door of cantkerous prime ministers.
Elizabeth and Phillip are not alone in their lack of employing the 2020-parenting style in an earlier age. One only has to read “Too Close to the Sun: Growing Up in the Shadow of my Grandparents, Franklin and Eleanor“, the insightful book by Curtis Roosevelt, to learn how contemporaries of Elizabeth & Phillip related to their children and grandchildren in much the same way.
by Anonymous | reply 31 | November 23, 2020 6:21 PM
|
Diana was not a good mother to her boys. She had a lot less to do with them than she did with her hairdresser.
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 32 | November 23, 2020 7:12 PM
|
R17's clip isn't that bad. It is a little strange that she would greet her mother before greeting her own child, but she does seem warm towards Charles, bending down to his level. It looks like she kissed him on the head. Then a few seconds later, after greeting Margaret, she returns to Charles and bends down to him again, perhaps kissing him again.
The only thing that seems off to me is that Charles doesn't seem excited at all. Most kids would be very excited to see their mother come back from a trip.
by Anonymous | reply 33 | November 23, 2020 7:57 PM
|
Where would Elizabeth have learned to be a good mother? From Cookie?
No. Just no. Elizabeth arrived on adulthood with no idea whatsoever of what a parent should do. None.
by Anonymous | reply 34 | November 23, 2020 8:02 PM
|
Well, people of her generation and her status expected their children to be well-behaved and sensible, and nannies made sure of that. As for "the nurturing mother".....I don't think so.
by Anonymous | reply 35 | November 23, 2020 8:24 PM
|
Elizabeth's dad has been described as a warm, hands-on father. When London was being bombed in World War II, Elizabeth's mom said that the girls remained in London because they didn't want to leave their mother behind. And their mom was apparently OK letting them stay in the palace with the family as opposed to shipping them somewhere more safe.
Elizabeth seems to have done a complete 180 from her parents. Maybe she has some type of social anxiety that even impacted her relationships with her kids.
by Anonymous | reply 36 | November 23, 2020 8:29 PM
|
She seems warm and loving to me.
by Anonymous | reply 37 | November 23, 2020 8:36 PM
|
I thought it was very nice of the queen to bring Mags some souvenirs in the form of a matched set of nice, strapping Mounties.
The "Mountie" part intrigued Her Royal Highness The Princess Margaret.
Thank you, R17. How well I remember that wonderful day of homecoming.
by Anonymous | reply 38 | November 23, 2020 9:14 PM
|
Elizabeth was close to her parents, but they left her for months at a time for royal tours, and she followed suit with her brood. This was especially true in the early days of her reign; I’d imagine that Edward and Andrew received more attention and love from their mother than did Charles and Anne.
She also agreed to let Philip take leadership of the family unit and making decisions for their children. Charles was sensitive and not particularly masculine as a boy and he struggled with Philip’s cold shower, brutalist ways. He never should have been sent to Gordonstoun.
There has also historically been a struggle /jealousy between the heir to the throne and the King or Queen. Most of those relationships were difficult. George VI and Elizabeth are a notable exception.
by Anonymous | reply 39 | November 23, 2020 9:23 PM
|
[quote] I’d imagine that Edward and Andrew received more attention and love from their mother than did Charles and Anne.
And Edward and Andrew seem to appreciate her personally more than Charles and Anne. I’ve read that Edward and Andrew are also her favorites.
by Anonymous | reply 40 | November 23, 2020 9:49 PM
|
It's possible that, like so many people, she didn't have any real desire to have children. But she didn't have a choice; she had to have them, it was part of the job.
by Anonymous | reply 41 | November 24, 2020 1:09 AM
|
OP her family weren't holed up in Windsor during the war. Her mother and father were in London at Buckingham Palace. Elizabeth and her sister were at Windsor Castle during the Blitz.
by Anonymous | reply 42 | November 24, 2020 1:17 AM
|
Newsflash: Not everyone who has kids likes kids or wants to look after them.
by Anonymous | reply 43 | November 24, 2020 6:38 AM
|
Royalty are rarely brought up by their parents. They are emotionally and physically closer to their nurses. Many consider their wetnurses their mothers.
by Anonymous | reply 45 | November 27, 2020 1:15 PM
|
R33, what struck me in that clip is that Charles wasn’t very excited to see that massive train engine pulling into the station. When my nephew was that age, he would’ve been ecstatic, jumping up and down. Heck, he was excited to see a school bus.
by Anonymous | reply 46 | November 27, 2020 2:13 PM
|
Princess Elizabeth of York ascended to the throne at the age of 27. Britain was still an Empire on which the sun never set. Unimaginable responsibility for one so young, She thought she'd have many years to ease into the "top job". And then her father, King George VI, died suddenly at the age of 56. She was far too busy in her duties to country and empire to pay attention to her children.
by Anonymous | reply 47 | November 27, 2020 2:27 PM
|
[quote] Just so you know OP, the TV show "The Crown" is a fictional drama series that is not an accurate portrayal of events.
Not true.
by Anonymous | reply 48 | November 27, 2020 2:30 PM
|
They’re a bunch of socially retarded, inbred drunks, OP. Do the math.
by Anonymous | reply 49 | November 27, 2020 2:31 PM
|
The Queen is autistic. Autistic people have fetishes or obsessions. A lot of birdwatchers are autistic, eg. Some are trainwatchers, or go to airports to watch & take photos of planes taking off and landing. Her fetish is royalty’s rules & regulations. She had an autistic uncle & two mentally retarded cousins. The gene pool in that family is thin.
She thinks of her family in terms of their place in BRF & treats them accordingly. She wouldn’t let her sister marry a divorced man. In the end, her sister was an unhappy, jaded divorced woman. She wouldn’t let her son marry Camilla. In the end, her son married Camilla, but only after lives were destroyed. She has banished her grandson, his wife and her great grandson because she refused to counter tabloid stories that characterized her grandson’s wife as an evil troublemaker hated by the entire palace and her grandson a bumbling oaf. Even after proof was shown that tabloids deliberately painted her 2nd grandson’s wife negatively while portraying her 1st grandson’s wife as a saint, the queen would not issue a statement saying tabloids were reporting false stories about the Sussexes. She did the same with her son’s 1st wife. She could’ve negotiated with tabloids, but she didn’t.
The Queen will not be remembered fondly by family members who survive her. She’s caused a rift between the younger princes. She’s a nasty old autistic twat who only broke protocol when members of her staff forced her to after Diana died. They feared her refusal to address the country would sway people towards republicanism. It took Diana’s young death for the queen to acknowledge her as a person.
by Anonymous | reply 50 | November 27, 2020 2:46 PM
|
[quote]Even after proof was shown that tabloids deliberately painted her 2nd grandson’s wife negatively
The second son's narcissistic grifter wife did it all herself. The tabs played no part in any "negativity".
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 51 | November 27, 2020 2:53 PM
|
Well, he’s living off his “grifter” wife’s million$
by Anonymous | reply 52 | November 27, 2020 3:19 PM
|
Diana was a good mother? With all her narcissistic and mental health issues, I doubt that very much. Being a good mother is a lot more than being cuddly for the photos. I would hope we would be beyond the blind Diana worship by now.
by Anonymous | reply 53 | November 27, 2020 3:50 PM
|
[quote] Even after proof was shown that tabloids deliberately painted her 2nd grandson’s wife negatively while portraying her 1st grandson’s wife as a saint
Are you referring to Kate Middleton and Autumn Philips respectively?
by Anonymous | reply 54 | November 27, 2020 6:18 PM
|
[quote] She wouldn’t let her sister marry a divorced man [/quote]
Untrue. The only stipulation for Margaret was to give up her place in the line of succession, and the Queen already had two children. Nope, Margaret had second thoughts.
by Anonymous | reply 55 | November 29, 2020 2:23 PM
|
The Queen moved the time of her weekly audience with the Prime Minister so that she could bath the children.
That doesn't sound the trait of a bad mother to me.
I actually think that's one of the reasons she likes the Obamas, because they were raising their family whilst he was undertaking his duties, just like she had.
by Anonymous | reply 56 | November 29, 2020 2:31 PM
|
She is an old alcoholic parasite sucking up tax dollars. Off with her head.
by Anonymous | reply 57 | November 29, 2020 2:40 PM
|
tax pounds/dollars/Takas/Pulas/francs/euros/lilangeni....*delete as appropriate
by Anonymous | reply 58 | November 29, 2020 2:44 PM
|
From the clip, I am guessing the Queen Mother is the mother substitute for Charles. Charles also looks highly anxious. That may be one of his problems. Anxious people can be off-putting and maybe that's why the Queen rejected him.
by Anonymous | reply 59 | November 29, 2020 2:54 PM
|
It still seems she was a better mother than her husband was a father.
by Anonymous | reply 60 | November 29, 2020 2:56 PM
|
r52 According to published reports, Prince Harry is worth 40 mil while his grifter wife is worth only about 5 mil.
by Anonymous | reply 61 | November 29, 2020 2:59 PM
|
What kind of mother was Margaret? Her children are both completely off the radar. They probably got the best deal of all the royals, actually. All that wealth but much less press intrusion than the others.
by Anonymous | reply 62 | November 29, 2020 4:05 PM
|
I’ve heard Margaret was a good mother, but I’ve also heard that the Queen had to help raise them in the 70s when she was getting a divorce and fooling around with the gardener.
What always comes through , loud and clear, to me whenever I read something about the Royal Family or when I watch something like The Crown, is that The Queen Mother was a manipulative monster , pulling everyone’s strings while presenting herself as a sweet grannie.
by Anonymous | reply 63 | November 29, 2020 4:26 PM
|
Charles has always been an entitled spoilt brat.
He needs taking down a peg or two.
by Anonymous | reply 64 | November 29, 2020 5:14 PM
|
[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 65 | November 29, 2020 7:34 PM
|
[quote] I’ve heard Margaret was a good mother, but I’ve also heard that the Queen had to help raise them in the 70s when she was getting a divorce and fooling around with the gardener.
Margaret's daughter, Sarah, has always been very close to the Queen. I saw that documentary mentioned upthread and the family videos show a real connection between Margaret's children and the Queen's life. They spent holidays together - there are vids of them all on the royal yacht playing and the Queen commenting - and are very much a part of each others' lives.
People think parenting today is the same as it was 60 years ago. It's not. Not for almost everyone - royal or regular folk.
by Anonymous | reply 66 | November 29, 2020 8:37 PM
|
Some people just aren’t good with children; they’re too self centered.
Sociopaths are like this.
by Anonymous | reply 67 | November 29, 2020 8:51 PM
|
R66 Have you see Sarah Chatto's son at all?
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 68 | November 29, 2020 9:36 PM
|
Someone lifted it off of him, R70.
by Anonymous | reply 72 | November 29, 2020 9:57 PM
|
[quote] Diana was a good mother?
Her sons think so. Who should I believe ? Her children, to whom she was a mother, or some anonymous royalty obsessed gossip monger?
Tough choice.
by Anonymous | reply 73 | November 29, 2020 9:59 PM
|
I had foreign Heads of State to welcome! World tours to undertake on behalf of the fucking Foreign Office! Those fucking red dispatch boxes following me every day of my life everywhere I went! I had to meet with the bloody PM every week! I had to reign Margaret in constantly and pay my spendthrift Mum's debts constantly, and oversee the management of Windsor, Buck House, Sandringham, Balmoral, and Clarence House. I had to organise Christmas lunches for the family and staff, Easter dinner ditto, ride that damned horse every June for the Trooping the Colour, give a huge speech at the Opening of Parliament, in the moments between give birth to four children (although only two were born after I ascended the Throne), be Philip's wife, the Nation's Mother, Mum's daughter, Meg's sister . . . I had to smile constantly, never give the slightest hint of my real feelings, uphold the teachings of the Established Religion, watch helplessly as two of my sons married impossible if charming women, and my daughter married on the rebound because the man she wanted to marry wouldn't have her on a plate, even AFTER Philip spoke to him man to man . . . THEN it was that bloody Diana and that fucking accident that set us back half a century, and THEN it was the bloody grandchildren - well, William seemed to make a sensible choice and for awhile things seemed stable and then that bellend Harry brought that bitch Meghan Markle in and here I am again trying to hold it all together behind the scenes whilst smiling serenely for the People.
Why don't you stick a broom up my arse and I'll sweep the floor as I walk. too?!
by Anonymous | reply 74 | November 29, 2020 10:48 PM
|
^*dear me, unconsciously funny typo above: "rein (not reign) Margaret in".
And with all that you wanted great parenting, too.
by Anonymous | reply 75 | November 30, 2020 12:33 PM
|
George V and Queen Mary spent exactly one hour with their children in the later part of the day. If they were home, that is. The children would be scrubbed and dressed and scuttled into the drawing room by their nurses, the children stood at attention until they were spoken to. Queen Mary sat rigidly in a chair doing needlework and King George usually stood by the window or the fire, forever checking his watch for the whole thing to be over. The children dutifully bowed and curtsied to their parents, Mary would languidly extend several fingers of her hand for the children to kiss. She mostly focused her eyes on her needlework while she made small talk about any academic or behavior issues that were brought to her, and she might keep them apprised of any interesting events in The Empire. The Queen would rise and crisply wish them a good evening, which signaled the audience was over. The children bowed again and the nurses then skuttled the children out. That was the extent of George V and Queen Mary’s relationship with their children.
by Anonymous | reply 77 | November 30, 2020 12:42 PM
|
George VI famously complained that his nanny would pinch him during these sessions and make him cry.
by Anonymous | reply 78 | November 30, 2020 12:50 PM
|
R76 - Well, you know, there is only so much room in the day!
by Anonymous | reply 79 | November 30, 2020 10:20 PM
|