Prince Andrew gives up royal titles

This is 100 percent the right call. This was certainly going to happen when William became king, so he probably decided to get it over with now.

So is he just Prince Andrew now? Or Andrew Windsor? Windsor-Mountbatten? Andy from the block?

These things are so confusing,

He must have received a nice settlement and promised to cease whatever business activities he's engaged in.

Has he given up the titles or just agreed not to use them?

Poor Fergie.

does he get to keep all the 🧸 teddy bears?

[QUOTE]He will remain a prince - but will cease to be the Duke of York, a title received from his mother, the late Queen Elizabeth

I guess this means he's still an HRH.

[quote]Poor Fergie.

I never got over the way she sang the national anthem at this NBA game.

Ah yes, a nation in which sex offenders are hounded out of public life, as opposed to another in which they are elected President.

R6 He lost the HRH in 2019.

How long until Fergie starts eating her feelings?

He’s a potentially dangerous asset, given that he could write a scathing tell-all about the royal family.

I would imagine he was given more than enough money to live comfortably somewhere far, far away from the palace.

he brought it all upon himself.

Only an act of Parliament can strip Prince Andrew of his HRH. He was born with it& he will die an HRH. He's not going to use it, just like Prince Harry (born an HRH).

I'm sad for Sarah. I have always liked her.

She will always be Duchess of York.

I wondered what happened behind the scenes. Andrew's notoriously arrogant; he won't have agreed to this without a fight. Charles doesn't seem like someone who'd want to rock the boat, although he and Andrew have reportedly never been close. Maybe William was the driving force. He seems more PR-savvy than Charles.

[quote] She will always be Duchess of York.

She is the people’s porkus.

[quote]She will always be Duchess of York.

In her mind, maybe. To the rest of us she's now plain Sarah Ferguson.

I bet that William had a big say in this.

Harry and Meghan must be quaking in their boots, they are next on his list.

I'm betting a big payout from Charles prompted this decision on Andrew's part.

Is there a new Duke of YorK?

[quote]To the rest of us she's now plain Sarah Ferguson.

Sarah, Plain and Tall.

Does that mean fergie can no longer go by the Duchess of York?

Sarah's days may be numbered, wasn't she diagnosed with melanoma a year or so ago?

[quote]Only an act of Parliament can strip Prince Andrew of his HRH. He was born with it& he will die an HRH. He's not going to use it, just like Prince Harry (born an HRH).

No, no, no. The monarch has FULL power over the use of the HRH honorific. Parliament has no say - it lies solely with the sitting monarch. They can give it, or take it away at will. It's called being the Fount of all Honour - look it up.

This day was a long time coming and frankly, necessary. Andrew can still remain as Royal Lodge, as long as he can continue to afford it. He can live out his life as a privileged private royal family member, as can Sarah. Just without titles, or public appearances.

He will still be present at family events, such as funerals and weddings, and at Christmas at Sandringham.

Fuck Fergie and her egg-cocked supreme friend Jeffrey.

She will now be known as...Her Grace, Sarah

[quote]Maybe William was the driving force.

He had to have a major say after: Andrew Lownie's biography, Andrew and Sarah openly revealed as lying about their last contacts with Epstein, and Andrew's pseudo-matey conduct with William at the recent Royal funeral. Plus strong hints about more to come about Epstein. Well might William have said to Charles, how much more of this can be tolerated?

To add to my post at r26, I wonder if part of the trade off here was to allow Beatrice and Eugenie to keep their HRHs, and continue their own semi-public roles as they have the past few years. Both princesses have made appearances at Royal Ascot, for example, and worked at the Buck Palace tea parties to meet/greet the public.

BBC is reporting that the York dukedom is not being stripped away from him, but is voluntarily being put "in abeyance" so won't be used again by him.

The upcoming book by the late Virginia Giuffre also allegedly played into this decision. It's being published next week - the pile-on of bad press was just too much. The damage would have extended to the King and broader Royal Family.

[quote]He will still be present at family events, such as...Christmas at Sandringham.

Not this year, when a precedence is likely to be set.

William might have played a role in getting Charles to agree to this as Charles is weak and ineffectual.

I think Harry will face some humiliation/deprivation as well after Charles kicks the bucket.

Sarah was kissing Epstein’s ass hard (figuratively) in the email in case she needed more money or favors in the future.

I'll wager you r32 that even if he and Sarah aren't present this year, they will be in future years. He's still a member of the Family and Christmas is a private family holiday, not an official event.

Agreed r33.

And yes, HRH Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie should rightfully retain their titles.

They are the daughters of a prince and they were grandchildren of the sovereign at the time of their birth and as a birthright, they are entitled to HRH princesses.

Lady Sarah Ferguson.

She will never be plain ol' Sarah

It is now time to remove Harry and Markle's titles as Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

He should be know only as Prince Harry, and she can be plain, mundane Meghan Markle.

I read the Lownie book on the Yorks. I was, at first, sympathetic to Sarah but as the book goes on, you realize she is really quite a monster: a behind-the scenes, full-of-herself diva, and a shameless, repeat-offender griftress. She stiffed many charitable organizations and kept donations for herself, including those intended to help the sick, orphaned children, whom she pretended to champion. Just despicable. Andrew, too, is utterly awful: stupid, arrogant, pervy, and 100% shady.

Will people still buy her books without the Duchess Of York on the cover? Does this mean that nobody has to curtsy to her anymore?

So many questions?

[quote]It is now time to remove Harry and Markle's titles as Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

Agreed, but I'd wager it will be William who will do that, and not Charles. The latter won't stomach doing that to his son, who he seems keen to forgive for nearly anything.

No and no, r40. No one has curtsied to her since her divorce anyway.

Fergie is a common grifter who lied when she said she cut ties with Epstein, she emailed him soon after begging to be lept in his good graces. She's a vile enabler of her ex-husband, always on the prowl for a payout.

I swear some of you would swoon like idiots over Adolf Hitler if he had a royal title.

No one has "had" to curtsy to Sarah Ferguson since she lost her HRH with the divorce almost 30 years ago.

[quote]Agreed, but I'd wager it will be William who will do that, and not Charles. The latter won't stomach doing that to his son, who he seems keen to forgive for nearly anything.

R41. Agree, but it would be perfect if Charles would do it now in one feel swoop. End these titles for Harry and Markle--and those of the invisible children. Rip off the band aid now.

R42 we all know what Fergie is like, we are taking the piss. Try getting a sense of humour.

Sarah, Duchess of York will remain in my heart and head.

I like her, always have.

[quote] Does that mean Fergie can no longer go by the Duchess of York?

You didn't even bother to read the original post, which wasn't even long.

Fasten your seatbelts Harry and Meghan, changes are coming!

Just heard Lownie interviewed on the BBC: he said he himself knows more about Andrew than he's yet to reveal, which might go into the paperback of his biography; and that it's very likely others know plenty more which is likely to emerge. This at the moment could just be pariah-lite for Andrew.

Prince Andrew STRIPPED

[quote]He’s a potentially dangerous asset, given that he could write a scathing tell-all about the royal family.

I assume he wants to lie low, r11.

They had to strip Andrew's titles first to prevent Harry and Meghan shrieking any 'whataboutism' when their titles are sent to the guillotine as well. Stay tuned!

Royal Family drama is the best!

They are also doing this in advance of the (eventually) to be released Epstein files. Congressman Thomas Massey read out loud the names and er titles of several me of the clients identities that had been disclosed closed to members of congress (though greatly redacted) Among the identities listed were a couple of billionaires (named), a particular individual of highest U.S. political office, and one “Royal”. As soon as that New Democrat representative is sworn in they will move to get the complete unredacted Epstein client list.

I don't think so, R23.

This has nothing to do with Harry and Meghan. It has to do with Prince Andrew's ties to Jeffeey Epstein and the very credible evidence that he raped a minor employed by Epstein. Andrew has done more damage to the modern monarchy than the two of them, Diana, Charles, Camilla, Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson combined. NONE of those people were ever accused of any crime at all, let alone one so vile, deviant and disgusting.

He'll always be Randy Andy to me!

That was my thought, too, r54.

Charles is trying to get out front of the Epstein drop

Fergie and Meghan Markle strike me the same way — as opportunists with a nose for money. Fergie with Epstein and Meghan with the sexual molester Tyler Perry. Money wins every time.

[QUOTE]even if he and Sarah aren't present this year, they will be in future years. He's still a member of the Family and Christmas is a private family holiday, not an official event.

Christmas at Sandringham involves the family walk to church, so it's semi-official. Given how he and Sarah behaved for the cameras at the Duchess of Kent's funeral, chatting up other members of the family who clearly looked uncomfortable, and then cheerfully laughing and smiling? They are not up to the task, not this year or any future year. They lack the self awareness or humility.

And, honestly, who in the family now would be comfortable having Andrew around at Christmas lunch for a few hours? If I were him or Fergie, I'd expect polite ostracism and decline. Would YOU want Andrew at your Christmas festivities?

Sarah has had.more challenges in her life than a person should ever have to bear. She’s the victim in this story.

I bet William and Kate don’t want him anywhere near their children.

As the well-born say, and as the well-born inevitably consider themselves when they fuck ip royally, right r61?

I hear Andy is now selling cars at Carmax of the Jersey Turnpike. Go see him

That was how I felt about her, too, R61. However, Lownie's book documents scam after scam committed by Sarah for her own benefit. Her childhood sounded pretty terrible but that just doesn't excuse SO MUCH selfish and unethical behavior.

[quote] I bet William and Kate don’t want him anywhere near their children.

In an excerpt from Giuffre's book she says Andrew and some other sleezebags were guessing how old she was. Andrew was the only one who got it right (17).

He said, "you're just a little older than my daughters." Then they had sex.

He's a spoiled, obnoxious and rotten cunt. He should be dragged by the balls before the courts.

[quote] How can you sex traffic someone who was already slinging pussy ?

Here we go again:

“Trafficking in persons” and “human trafficking” are umbrella terms—often used interchangeably—to refer to a crime whereby traffickers exploit and profit at the expense of adults or children by compelling them to perform labor or engage in commercial sex. When a person younger than 18 is used to perform a commercial sex act, it is a crime regardless of whether there is any force, fraud, or coercion involved.

Seems like a dumb overly explicit thing. They were better just letting him quietly disappear, officially whatever but in reality a disgraced prince playing no real role in public life, hopefully forgotten as much as possible.

But I guess people can't resist the big stupid gesture.

He raped a 17yo prostitute. Which means he had sex with her so it's rape because she was underage in USA. Thems the rules.

That said, statutory rape of a 17 yo prostitute is hardly an earth-changing event. Also I doubt Prince Andrew has any idea about the actions and people he is not entitled to abuse. That's not an apology for him.

R71, from what I understand, in all three of the jurisdictions which Virginia Giuffre alleged she had sex with Andrew, she was above the age of consent.

Actually, not everywhere in the U.S. r71. A lot of states have 16 and 17 age of consent. Which doesn't mean it's all fine, but it does indicate how arbitrary a lot of this is, and how there is no absolute OMG nobody must ever ... is largely a big, dumb, myth that most people don't really abide by or care about until it becomes an issue for other reasons. It's like the whole "transported across state lines" thing. Largely arbitrary and meaningless until somebody decides to give a fuck for whatever reason. It's mostly a legal game, until it isn't.

Which isn't to say that Prince Andrew is some great guy who didn't purposely do something wrong. It's just that being a "criminal" is a different standard and doesn't often make sense in some abstract sense.

Andrew hasn't given up any titles. He's still the Duke of York but he has agreed not to use the title.

A small part of me kind of feels sorry for Fergie. She’s a fucking grifter of the highest order, and losing the title “Duchess of York” makes her never ending pursuit of benefactors so much harder. Now she’s just another broke bitch reliant on her children for handouts.

York now joins Windsor as a damaged Royal Duchy.

I hope William holds it to bestow on CHARLOTTE, as a Duchess in her own right.

Make Louis Duke of Windsor, now. Both restore dignity. Charlotte needs to be elevated, before marriage, and before the current Princess royal dies.

This is the right step, and it had to happen since the revelations about Andrew and Fergie kept coming. Andrew up until now refused to live in a more modest style, and now he's got to do so. All these steps would never have happened under his mother's reign, though, but she wasn't going to live forever.

I agree that some sort of buyout was involved in all of this. Charles has tried to pressure Andrew to move out of Royal Lodge for a long time because the costs of keeping up Royal Lodge are insane, and since Andrew is no longer a working royal, they're not getting any bang for their buck whatsoever (believe it or not, the BRF probably IS getting their money's worth keeping Bagshot open for Edward and Sophie and Gatcombe for Anne, given how much work they do for the family). I assume Andrew will live in a much more modest house but will have enough money to be able to retain servants.

I feel little sympathy at this point for Fergie, since she's been consistently complicit in all this. She's lived her entire life off her failed marriage, and she still has diamonds a-plenty to sell from that if she hasn't sold them already (QE2 and Prince Philip gave her a diamond tiara for her wedding, and she got it in the dirvorce arrangement). Plus her daughters married rich men and they can help her.

As for Harry and Meghan: I agree that it is phenomenally unlikely Charles would ever ask them to relinquish their titles as Duke and Duchess of Sussex, but William likely will when he's the king if given half a reason to do so. The line will now be that if you want the titles and big houses, you've got play ball with the monarchy and not try to make money in other ways that take advantage of your title.

[quote]not try to make money in other ways that take advantage of your title.

Like the Prince of Wales fund?

And they thought WE were awful. I never in all my life...

Yes R74/ He has placed his titles in abeyance. Basically, he is still the legal holder of the titles of Prince and Duke of York but no longer has access to them.

It probably won't happen until William becomes King but the BRF should take this opportunity and follow Denmark and Sweden's example and strip all non-working royals of titles (this would include Beatrice and Eugenie) to minimize potential scandals.

Interestingly, when Harry and Meghan decided to leave, it's well documented that both Philip and William wanted Harry to be forced to put his titles into abeyance but the Queen and Charles didn't want to seem harsh. At the time they didn't believe Harry would stab them in the back. Honestly think it's one of the late Queen's few misjudgments.

[quote] in all three of the jurisdictions which Virginia Giuffre alleged she had sex with Andrew, she was above the age of consent.

This is a FEDERAL statute, not the same thing as a state's age of consent.

*sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such an act has not attained 18 years of age;

[quote] That said, statutory rape of a 17 yo prostitute is hardly an earth-changing event. Also I doubt Prince Andrew has any idea about the actions and people he is not entitled to abuse. That's not an apology for him.

Sure sounds like it.

He is still officially the Prince Andrew. The Palace announced back in 2022 he agreed to give up public use of the HRH honorific, although he still retains it for private use--I doubt that will change.

What's he given up this time are the titles of Duke of York, Earl of Inverness (his Scottish title), and Baron Killyeagh (his Northern Irish title), plus his honors, including his knighthoods as a Royal Knight Companion of the Order of the Grater, and a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order.

There's more to life than a little underage island pussy, ya know. Don't cha know that? And here ya are. And it's a beautiful day.

Well. I just don't understand it.

R83, he hasn't given those titles up, he has simply stated that he will be longer use them. They are still his titles.

[quote] Plus her daughters married rich men

Beatrice’s Edo.

Charles has been stealing money and acting horribly for years but has been extremely protected by the palace for decades because he was the future king. This is not a nice person and I have no idea why people consider him so. (an environmentalist who is as concerned about the environment as when he is in his private planes. The DiCaprio sort) He can't be ruthless with Andrew and Harry though he has every right to be because he is in a very delicate situation. I'm sure Andrew and Harry have plenty to say about his foibles so he treats them with kid gloves while people claim the king is an old softie. Not true. Just scared.

[quote] Royal Knight Companion of the Order of the Grater

Well he is grating certainly.

[quote]That said, statutory rape of a 17 yo prostitute is hardly an earth-changing event. Also I doubt Prince Andrew has any idea about the actions and people he is not entitled to abuse. That's not an apology for him.

Then what is it, r71? At the very least you're giving him the benefit of the doubt.

When I scanned the subject title I thought it said he gave up “royal titties.” I guess it means the same thing.

So Virginia is given11 million pounds. What is that in dollars? Then writes an autobio then kills herself That makes as much sense as Epstein alone in a prison cell, the video cameras not working and the two guards happen to be taking 40 winks at the same time. Then the warden of the prison is given a promotion and is moved. The funniest things happen.

I'm sure Sarah has a home and a fortune for life.

It was a way to keep the York Princesses Yorkies, It would take an act of the king and parliament to remove a birthright prince.

Does he have to return the corgies?

I bet the deal is he agreed to this (and who knows what else) and in exchange he gets to keep the house he won't vacate. Royal Lodge?

I’ve long maintained Epstein is a (horrible) smokescreen but the real story is the millions he received from shady regimes as a roving trade ambassador.

Releasing news late on a Friday evening used to be an attempt to get ahead of a big story / scandal in one of the Sunday tabloids..

Fergie is the ultimate example of someone who got everything she ever wanted and proceeded to fuck it up. Growing up, she was fascinated with royalty, particularly Queen Victoria. She found her way into Diana's circle and managed to bag not just any member of the royal family, but the Queen's second son (who was, at the time, considered a real catch). She became a princess, was initially pretty popular with the public, grew pally with the Queen herself (who was reportedly very fond of her at first) and gave birth to the descendants of Victoria.

When it all went sour, she clung on for dear life. I honestly think the reason she and Andrew continued to live together for so long after their divorce is that she point-blank refused to move out, and he couldn't force her because she had a lot of dirt on him. The Queen became disillusioned with her (to say the least), yet she kept accompanying Beatrice and Eugenie when they visited their granny, even when they were grown women. The Queen was too polite to tell her to leave, but Philip would actively make himself scarce when he knew Fergie was coming round. She still talked to the press as though nothing had changed since the 80s, telling them Andrew was still "my handsome prince". She just carried on with the fantasy that she was still married to a prince, still a beloved daughter-in-law of the Queen, still popular with the public. She even kept acting as though she and Diana had remained BFFs until her death (in truth, they hadn't spoken for two years before Paris). She said it wasn't right that she wasn't invited to William's wedding because "Diana couldn't be there either".

She admitted she contacted the writers of The Crown to "advise" them on how to portray her. In the end, her character never even spoke onscreen. And now she's lost the title of duchess after nearly forty years.

[quote]Charles has been stealing money and acting horribly for years but has been extremely protected by the palace for decades because he was the future king.

None of those children with the possible exception of Anne are good human beings. But the Queen and Phillip never seemed like overly loving or caring parents to begin with. Liz makes Beth Jarrett seem like Marie Osmond.

William and Harry clearly take after Diana. She always presented herself with the utmost grace and dignity and was a shining example of how to conduct yourself in public with good morals.

Glad William if rectifying the mistakes of the past and putting good morals ahead of tired traditions. Maybe the Monarchy will finally be classy again.

[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.]

R14 Sarah Ferguson ceased being known as the Duchess of York when she divorced Prince Andrew in 1996. Since then she's been known as Sarah, Duchess of York, as his ex-wife. Now she's back to being Sarah Ferguson again.

R75 Sarah hasn't been "The Duchess of York" since her divorce in 1996. As the ex-wife of the Duke of York she was known as "Sarah, Duchess of York", no matter what she chose to call herself.

[quote]That said, statutory rape of a 17 yo prostitute is hardly an earth-changing event

Tell that to Virginia Giuffre you callous fucking ghoul.

Oh wait, she killed herself over this "hardly an earth-shattering event." Maybe you could pass it on to her three children.

[quote] I guess this means he's still an HRH.

That’s right, he’s still an HRH, but he will no longer use it, nor the title the Duke Of York.

But he can still love off the gubbermint teet.

Shame The Windsors is probably over for good. You just know they would have been savage about Andrew and Fergie becoming commoners again. But Haydn Gwynne was perfect as Camilla. I can't see them recasting her. Plus, they might be skittish about mocking the royals after all the health problems they've had over the last few years.

R106, it appears the portrayal of Fergie in The Windsors was not too far off the mark.

By having the title but not 'using' it does this mean Andy's business cards and letterheads must read only 'Prince' Andrew, like some pathetic Eurotrash who buys Prince titles like they're baubles from Bimini?

r104, he's not an HRH if his brother has said he no longer is. It's the monarch's right to add/remove the HRH honorific at will. This was posted upthread. Charles doesn't even need a Letters Patent to accomplish this, he just needs to tell Andrew he's no longer an HRH, and that's it.

Andrew has some kind of airtight lease on Royal Lodge, which is why Charles has been unable to dislodge him from there, so far. There are enormous upkeep costs involved, but somehow Andrew has managed to do the bare minimum to stay put (probably help from his daughters and in-laws). As long as Andrew can barely afford to live there, the lease has to be honored.

[quote]So is he just Prince Andrew now? Or Andrew Windsor? Windsor-Mountbatten? Andy from the block?

Just Andrew. The one and only.

[quote] Andrew has some kind of airtight lease on Royal Lodge, which is why Charles has been unable to dislodge him from there

Royal Dis-lodge!

[quote] I have decided, as I always have, to put my duty to my family and country first.

Sure, Jan.

NYT has the tea:

“After the two brothers consulted, Andrew acted preemptively.”

Not “decided.” “Forced”.

They’re coming for you Meghan Markle. And I shall wear my brooch on the day they do.

R109, in Andrew’s statement, he said he will no longer use his honours on, not that Charles has officially taken them away. It was a very carefully worded statement.

[quote] l"With His Majesty's agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me.

But has he given up the royal tittays?

I don’t think Harry is next. His betrayal was personal. Exile and loss of the use of HRH is punishment enough.

Andrew betrayed the public as well as the family.

I suspect he was given an ultimatum—give up Royal Lodge or lose the title. He chose wisely.

Agree r117. Tell me the crime that Harry and Meghan have committed. I get why people don't like them, and I can really see the resentment. But talking shit about the BRF on Oprah is not in fact a crime, as much as some DLers would like it to be.

I want to know if Charles is going to allow him and Sarah to stay in Royal Lodge. From what I've read they're not taking care of the place and I've seen a few recent photos that show lots of big areas of paint in the outside that have just fallen off.

He apparently has an ironclad lease. His use of the Lodge is not at the King’s pleasure. If it were, he’d be long gone.

[quote] Prince Andrew made major royal news on Friday, October 17, when he finally decided to give up his Duke of York title following the growing accusations and his involvement with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. However, the disgraced prince reportedly doesn't have any plans to move out of his Windsor home, Royal Lodge.

[quote]Despite receiving pressure from his brother King Charles for over a year to leave the residence, BBC royal correspondent Sean Coughlan reports that Andrew is expected to stay in the Royal Lodge.

[quote] "The royals are being decisive after months of scandal," Coughlan said. "Prince Andrew's loss of the use of his titles is taking immediate effect. But he is still expected to stay in his Windsor home, Royal Lodge, on which he has his own private lease which runs until 2078."

[quote] Last year, the tensions over the residence reached a boiling point when Charles attempted to evict Andrew from the 31-room estate by cutting off his private security and allowance. Andrew, however, reportedly found the funds to remain living on the property, per Keeper of the Privy Purse Sir Michael Stevens.

What good is a title if you're forbidden from using it?

He lost his titles. Arguing otherwise is ridiculous hairsplitting for dick-riding Royalists. The rest of the world knows he lost his titles, and rightly so.

Andrew's ironclad lease on Royal Lodge is his 75-year lease as long as he maintains the upkeep of the place, which is no small expense.

Andrew does not still have the full 75 years since he's been living at Royal Lodge for many years. But the lease has enough years still on it to last him until his death. But does he have enough money to pay for the upkeep for many years to come?

And no, they cannot nor will they just toss Sarah out. Whatever the arrangement, Andrew and Sarah are a couple, friends, lovers, companions, whatever, etc. Call the relationship what you will, but they are not going to leave Sarah, mother of two royal princesses, four grandchildren, without a home. Andrew and Sarah may eventually give up Royal Lodge, but another more modest royal home will be bestowed upon them.

[quote]Shame The Windsors is probably over for good.

When one women's quest to hold onto her title at all costs takes precedence over everything else.....

This is not William's fault. Or throwing Harry and Meghan into the mix as usual.

The Queen should have stepped down a good twenty years prior and allowed Charles the throne while working behind the scenes to patch her fractured family up. Harry could have gotten the help he so clearly needed for starters. Andrew's mess could have been dealt with before it reached a public breaking point. It's embarrassing that she let things get so out of control, but pride and ego go before the fall.

William is left with a mess.

I think we would all envy that "mess." There is actually no good reason for Britain to abandon one of the few things that makes them internationally interesting as a country. It's fine. Prince William will become King William and there is no reason to panic about what Elizabeth should or should not have done a hundred years ago. Nobody gives a fuck except a few aging obsessives, and the monarchy is not in any real danger.

R125, I think affection for the Queen is a large part of what kept the British monarchy going through the twenty-first century. I don't think her abdicating in favour of Charles would have been a popular decision in the 2000s.

Didn’t Sarah just sell a big pile in Central London?

I hope Sarah's eventual grave stone acknowledges her as Duchess of York. Queen Elizabeth supposedly promised Sarah a gravesite at Royal Burial Ground, Frogmore, near the very grand Frogmore House (not to be confused with the more modest Frogmore Cottage) .

The Duke and Duchess of Windsor, formerly Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, are also interred at Royal Burial Grounds, Frogmore.

R125, The Windsors is a parody show of the British royal family.

The big problem is when you start fucking around with the underlying concept of "titles for life" you start to fuck with the whole damn system. I think Fergie could keep using the damn title and she'd be more in the spirit of the whole thing than some goober at Buckingham Palace blathering about some chart or some letters patent or any other nonsense.

He only did this now because he's victim's book is about to be posthumously released.

The 16 MILLION pounds only bought her silence temporarily. She was always going to put out a book 18 to 24 months after he paid her that giant settlement.

She had EXCELLENT attorneys

Andrew did this now so that the press will go easy on him and the royal family.

Dershowitz must be plotzing

[quote]Releasing news late on a Friday evening used to be an attempt to get ahead of a big story / scandal in one of the Sunday tabloids..

It still is. Here's the real story

Dershowitz joined the cult. He'll be fine.

Good riddance to him.

As for etiquette, Fergie is The Princess Andrew.

[quote] I think Fergie could keep using the damn title

R131. I agree. Andrew fucked up her life. So big deal, she wrote an email to Epstein in 2011.

PRINCE ANDREW BANISHED! Andrew gives up ALL royal titles before Virginia Giuffre’s book is released next week.

A statement was released from Buckingham Palace.

Prince Andrew has announced he has given up all his royal titles, including those of Prince, and Duke of York.

“In discussion with The King, and my immediate and wider family, we have concluded the continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family,” Andrew said in an official statement by Buckingham Palace. The shocking move comes a few days before Virginia Giuffre‘s posthumous memoir is released next week, which includes claims alleging Andrew viewed sleeping with her as his “birthright” when she was just 17 years old.

Andrew’s statement continued: “I have decided, as I always have, to put my duty to my family and country first. I stand by my decision five years ago to stand back from public life. “With His Majesty’s agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me. “As I have said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”

It’s believed the decision was made alongside both Charles, Prince William and other members of the royal family. The decision means his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson will also lose her title as Duchess of York, although Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie will keep theirs.

Andrew first stepped back from royal duties in 2019, He has always denied Virginia’s accusations that she had sex with Andrew on three separate occasions. She sued him but they settled out of court with an admission of no guilt.

Virginia, 41, took her own life in April. Her book Nobody’s Girl: A Memoir Of Surviving Abuse And Fighting For Justice is due to be released next week. Before she died earlier this year, she sent an email to her co-author, journalist Amy Wallace, saying that she wanted the book to be released “even in the event of my passing.”

They covered for him - or looked away - for far too long. NOW we learn about what a pompous and demanding asshole he was on tours. How he just loved to party - which we now know with Epstein went too far.

He was Elizabeth's favorite - and he typified the 80s young rich preppie with charm and no care for anyone else.

Fuck him. And that ginger ex-wife is just as bad.

[quote] As for etiquette, Fergie is The Princess Andrew.

She is no longer married to him, so she cannot use that title.

She is just Sarah Ferguson now.

Can’t Sarah make up a title like the Queen Mother did?

[quote] She is no longer married to him, so she cannot use that title.

Prince Andrew gives up royal titties

reading between the lines., this is less about pushy and more about the money PA received from Epstein for access to the royal family

Just to clarify...

The titles are in abeyance, meaning they are still Andrew's and Sarah's titles, but Andrew has agreed not to use them, which means Sarah cannot use her title because British royal titles go through the male line. They were not "stripped" of their titles, but in essence, the titles go quietly into "storage." "Stripping" Andrew of his titles would be reserved as an act of Parliament. However, on the other hand, agreeing to "abeyance" means that Charles can avoid making a formal request of Parliament in which the UK governing body would have to vote on the matter, a longer and more public damaging process.

No, R126, Sarah Ferguson hasn't been "Duchess of York" since 1996 - i.e. almost 30 years ago. As her ex-husband is no longer the Duke of York, why would she be buried as anything other than "Sarah Ferguson"? She's a crook. A grifter who has been trying to monetise her former royal title and style since her divorce.

Apologies R126 - that was meant for R129, not you.

When women who have previously been married to men with titles are either widowed or divorced, they are newly styled as FirstName, TitleOfFormerHusband.

Hence "Sarah, Duchess of York", or "Diana, Princess of Wales". It keeps things simple as so many of the British aristocracy divorce so regularly.

How old is he? 70-something?

Who gives a fuck, at this point?

He’s lived the majority of his life in absolute & complete privilege, due to popping out of the birth canal of a woman who was the Queen of England, & therein lies the irony of it all.

No big loss to any of us, however, MOST certainly, no big loss to him, either.

He placed his bets, & because he’s now an old man, he won every single bet he took, & that’s the truth of the matter, isn’t it?

Sarah will have to remarry Andrew, and then she will be Princess Andrew, since Andrew's princely title is still active. Maybe even be HRH Princess Andrew...just like HRH Princess Michael of Kent.

It’s humorous that you actually “dime” out Sarah Ferguson’s future, R150.

She should establish residency in the U.S., become a staunch MAGA, & let the cash flow into her bank accounts.

It’s the easiest grift available for those who haven’t scruples or dignity.

It's a funny situation. There are two ways to go with royal titles: either they are nothing and silly and nobody cares or should care. Or they are these things that people have through birth or marriage and nobody can really change that. This attempt to make them some legalistic thing that people can give and withdraw just doesn't work. In other words, Fergie is still the Duchess of York if you ever cared about it at all. Or it was all false from start to finish. But you really can't do both.

For a moment put aside that Andrew treated Sarah poorly and was neve home due to his naval duties when they first married. Much of this situation stemmed from when Andrew and Sarah got divorced. Sarah and her lawyers did not fight for a big settlement. Sarah was never going to get as much as Diana, but she could have gotten more than the paltry sum she got.

Royal and semi-royal women are frowned upon if they work, but Sarah had to work once she got divorced, and all she could do was go from one public job to another, none of which paid enough. She spent her formative years when she should have been gaining work experience being royal unable to work and being a mother. Perhaps Sarah would not have lived wisely or spent a possible large divorce settlement money prudently, but maybe it would have allowed her to hire a financial manger and keep her on a short leash. As it turned out, she was just making enough money (or not) to barely get by even though she was royal and then royal adjacent. Yes, her lifestyle is expensive. No one in her place is simply going to get a flat in London and to to pay rent.

As a result, she spent her life just getting by, beating herself up and scraping by to get back into the royal family. Fortunately and ironically, in recent years, Sarah has been the breadwinner in the York household making some good hard cash as a romance novel author--and as a result, she is no longer in desperate financial trouble. But early after the divorce, Sarah only appeared independent, but she was still quite dependent on the bum Andrew. And it all started with a shitty divorce settlement. It can wear a girl down.

This is all so unfortunate. In the past several years, Sarah had really made great strides in getting back into the good graces of the royal fold. It's really all she ever wanted.

Her life today seems to be so much more balanced and calm. All the bullshit she gets criticized for happened many years ago. Oh yes, she made some bad mistakes and poor choices, but that was a lifetime ago. Her life now and for the past several years has been fine. It' simpler, she's not out looking for money, her daughters are grown with families of their own. And now she's losing her status once again for yes, mistakes she made long ago and for the behavior of her awful former husband. You can't absolve Sarah totally, but Andrew has made Sarah's life fucking hell.

And yet she has persevered. But this is a blow at this stage in life.

^^^^She sucked up to a human trafficker and rapist after claiming she cut ties with him. Your fawning sympathy is disgusting.

R131 is a perfect example of someone who knows nothing about a topic, talking out of their arse.

Sarah Ferguson was styled as "HRH The Duchess of York" from her wedding day until she and her ex-husband were divorced in 1996. From that day - 29 years ago - she was styled as "Sarah, Duchess of York" as the ex-wife of a royal duke, no matter what she chose to call herself.

As of yesterday she is plain old Sarah Ferguson. Emphasis on the "plain".

You don't get it at all r156. These things are about blood and marriage, or they aren't about anything at all. You are trapped in a bureaucratic mindset. That is what is happening here. You can decide the whole thing is nonsense, but you can't decide it matters but it's also a bureaucratic category. Both can't be true.

To R150-You're correct on that too-Sarah could do that& be known as Princess Andrew or HRH Princess Andrew. like the Princess Michael woman.

To R26-Google is your friend, stop the Lying-Act of Parliament not fount of honor

You mean stripped of Royal titles. Meanwhile Dump is POTUS.

R157 yes, I don't get it. I've read your post three times now and I still have no fucking idea what it is that you are tempting to communicate.

I'm saying that Prince Andrew is a prince by birth, and also Duke of York, which really was a thing that happened because he was the second son. And Fergie is his duchess because she married him, and really that's kind of it. Even with the divorce, she has this title cause that's how royalty and marriage works. Really. She got this thing when she married him, and since there is no other Duchess of York now, she gets to keep it.

[quote] You're correct on that too-Sarah could do that& be known as Princess Andrew or HRH Princess Andrew. like the Princess Michael woman.

No, she could not do that. S

She negotiated to still be known as "the Duchess of the York," which was not hers automatically to retain, in the divorce settlement--she had to be specially granted that right by the Queen; otherwise she would then have been known simply as Sarah Ferguson (or at most, "Sarah Mountbatten-Windsor") after the divorce.

Since she is no longer married to Prince Andrew, and she did not negotiate for the title of "The Princess Andrew" in her divorce, she absolutely cannot call herself The Princess Andrew now, She would have had to have asked for that right in the divorce settlement.

No R161, you couldn't be more wrong. But you do you, bless your heart.

r161:

[quote] His ex-wife will be known as Sarah Ferguson and no longer Duchess of York, but their daughters will continue to have the title of princess.

Historically, it is how it works. Divorce of course being a minor, and really impossible blip in the scheme of things. We're just all going to have to assume this is a "separation" or blow up the whole thing.

And really, these two belong together, so let's all just stop the nonsense and get them reunited, as Duke and Duchess of York.

Maybe he can do Ozempic commercials with Fergie…

Andrew will always be Prince Andrew. I don't think Parliament can strip that away. He is no longer a duke, but he is a Prince of the Blood, as the son of the Queen, so he will always be a Prince . At least that's what I was told. I am sure I will be ridiculed for being an ignorant American, but I'm just making an observation. I am sure I will be corrected if I am wrong.

Yet another reason to stop giving titles, or literally any credence, to people just because of who their family is. The entire idea of “royalty” or “nobility” is blatantly elitist and people who take it at all seriously are mentally damaged.

[quote] Andrew will always be Prince Andrew.

He will always have the title Prince Andrew as long as the idiot UK indulges this "royal" family.

The UK is as gullible as the US.

[quote] The entire idea of “royalty” or “nobility” is blatantly elitist

Gee, do you think?

The sympathy shown here for Sarah Ferguson is utterly mystifying. The woman is a disaster. Anyone who reads the Andrew Lownie book must know that her only talent is for burning through cash (preferably other people’s cash). She borrowed £100K from a “friend” to pay for a holiday, and paid back only £5000, claiming that it was a gift. The friend had to threaten litigation to get his cash.

At every opportunity, she indulged to excess, to the extent that The Queen was forced to pay off £500K of debt to Fergie’s bankers to avoid yet more bad publicity. She treats spending as a delightful, totally mindless hobby, taking the kind of careless approach to spending which you can only take if you are sure that more cash will always turn up and if you don't really care too much who provides it.

Both she and Andrew are the authors of their own demise. Their entitlement and greed have led them to seek cash wherever they could find it, because they think that they are too special to live like mere minor royals, with only a comfortable home, an unearned place in high society, and the lifelong cushion of a well-stocked trust fund. Their own hubris and stupidity made them easy meat for any number of dodgy businessmen like Epstein, and they deserve their downfall.