How offensive to brand the Queen the most hard working woman in Britain

I was very disappointed to receive your magazine this month to discover that the Queen is considred by you the most hard working woman in Britain?

How did this come about?

  • Keith

    | 8989 Posts

    Chartered Fellow

    27 Mar, 2014 09:54


    Debateable maybe, unprovable probably, but certainly is busy for far more hours than many 85 year olds

  • David Bareham

    | 189 Posts

    Chartered Member

    27 Mar, 2014 10:00

    I haven't read the article but did see the cover.  As such I may be totally off the mark here.

    At her age and given her working commitments I don't think it is offensive.  If you feel it is offensive because she is royalty or indeed has more money than the rest of us is that a valid reason?  Do those who have money automatically become work shy?  If any periodical ran a piece citing 'the most hard working woman in Britain' and it wasn't the Queen, would everyone assume it was a scientific poll?  No, they would assume the article was simply lauding what this individual does and whether you agree with the concept of royalty or not , this shouldn't detract from an individual's commitment. I don't think this belittles every other hard working person out there and therefore I am certainly not offended (whether I believe it or not!).

  • Hi Giovanna, it may be worth asking what offended you and to share some of your thoughts.  For my part I'm with Keith and in the grand scheme of things I would rather have a monarchy given the amount of income it generates for the UK.  If you can shed some light on your perspective that would be useful.   :-)
  • I briefly scanned the article this morning, although am yet to really get into it.  My understanding was that it was promoting an article on productivity and encouraging people to re-think what constitutes productivity and how to measure it.

    Headlines are invariably intended to attract the attention and should not be taken as bald statements of fact, especially not in our field of business! If it's got us talking about it, then it's achieved its objective. So, seeing as we've started the conversation, I look forward to seeing why Giovanna is offended and who else she might propose as an alternative nominee...

  • I must say that I kind of understand where Giovanna may be coming from. Perhaps also people who come from countries with no royals, look at this a bit differently?

    She certainly seems to work hard for her age when she could take it easier if she liked, I give her that. Maybe it's the job satisfaction and she is enjoying it? It cannot be that bad to visit interesting places, travel to exotic countries, attend posh dinners etc, can it?

    But what I struggle to accept is that as the richest woman in this country, she is paid a huge annual allowance by the state, and since the recession, requested the allowance to be increased as it was not big enough! Not exactly the perfect timing.

    Sure, the royals do generate income for this country but they are also a huge financial burden on the taxpayers. If it were just the Queen, but the number of royals who receive state funding is rather big, and when Prince Charles apparently cannot squeeze his own toothpaste, it is rather amusing...

    But the hardest working woman in the country? I can understand why someone may find that disappointing.  There are people who are really struggling working several jobs to put food on the table so these kind of statements kind of undermind their efforts and harsh realities of life.

  • Keith

    | 8989 Posts

    Chartered Fellow

    27 Mar, 2014 14:52

    Just to be clear I made no judgement one way or the other on the status of the Royals.

    I don't think you need to. Indeed I think its a mistake to have a pro/anti royalty debate on these Boards.

    Taja - disappointing in your last paragraph is a long way from offensive.

  • David Perry

    | 4652 Posts

    Chartered Member

    27 Mar, 2014 15:04

    Its all subjective anyway.  


    In terms of hours I personally would agree.  She probably spends more time 'on-the-road' than any other person in the UK, She can't exactly go places and let her hair down.  She can't have a day off, she can't nip round the corner for a drink, She does what she's told and if she's having an 'off' day, she can't stick the slippers on, feet up infront of the fire and read the paper as she's got one of those "Posh" dinners to attend. Again!!!  

    I escorted the Royal Yacht to south america when the queen was onboard.  I got to see, swim and walk on Ipenima & Copacabana  beach, wander around Rio and then walked up to the statue of Christ the Redeemer.  The queen didn't!! and couldn't even if she wanted to.  I didn't see her in her bikini (it was a long time ago) and do a bit of sunbathing like I did as we crossed the equator either.  She went off to attend business functions and, lunches and a few dinners where she had to listen to various dignitaries talk.  She couldn't take the corgis for a walk for a break.

    Do I think its offensive?  Utter rhubarb.  No more offensive than calling David Beckham a 'hero' or some  so called celebrity I've never heard of, as 'Awesome' and so on. 

    And some people even think prince Charlie can't squeeze his own toothpaste?  lol lol 

  • Keith, Giovanna used the terms disappointing and offensive, hence the use of the word.

    David, it's been in the papers that Charlie's male servant has to squeeze his toothpaste. Should one believe everything one reads in the papers? No, but I personally would not put it past him but have no way of knowing for sure... not that I really care either way.

  • David

    | 19223 Posts

    Chartered Member

    27 Mar, 2014 15:27

    Hi Giovanna

    The Monarchy (and the traditional peerage etc system it upholds) has its good points as well as anachronistic / objectionable ones, but I do think ad hominem disparagement of the Queen in person is offensive too.

    If I were you, I'd steer well clear of any gentlemen in red tunics carrying big battleaxes......


  • I think I should clarify my position regarding my posting. If the Queen is considered the hardest working woman in Britain, where is the data to confirm that? Who was the runner up? Was is just famous/ successful or royal people that could be nominated if this research was done?  Or could normal women who are “merely” working, looking after their family, volunteering and/or looking after their sick relative be entered in the contest? 
    To Robey Jenkins I can think of a number of women, Cherie Blair and Theresa May come to mind but also some of my acquaintances who have to juggle their job, their career and their lives in general and the stresses that come with it without any help from others but their friends or family members.

  • David Perry

    | 4652 Posts

    Chartered Member

    27 Mar, 2014 19:46

    Tarja, I haven't the faintest idea of which papers have contained these newsworthy items about Charlie's inability to squeeze a toothpaste tub, but I guess they just turn out the same old  make believe stuff because there are people who read them who are dumb enough to believe it.


    Did you know that Charlie is the patron of the National  Hedge Laying Association?  Not only that but I've seen him actually lay hedges.  And I've talked to a couple of hedgelayers who've done work for him on his estate.  Not only have they commented on how good he is at practical work, especially hedgelaying!! but you can also see him doing it on good old U-tube.  His manservant may squeeze his toothpaste but its not because Charlie hasn't a clue.


    If I had his dosh I wouldn't wash up, clean up, do the dishes, run my bath, wash my clothes - or iron them. And I certainly wouldn't be bothered to put things away either.  I'd have someone else do that too.  Oh, and I certainly wouldn't form fill either.

    This you understand isn't at all because I can't do these things - its simply because I'd rather someone else do them. 

  • Well, David, when I said he can't, I did rather mean won't.

    Chill out, what Charles gets up to does not really rock this world.

    And also very undiplomatically you decided to call me dumb, which I don't think was really necessary.

  • Steve Bridger

    | 6540 Posts

    Community Manager

    27 Mar, 2014 23:30

    Hi Tarja,

    I think David was referring to those who believe *everything* they read in the tabloids, etc.... and not directed at you personally.

    'Silly', 'gullible'?

    Moving on.

  • Harvey Bennett

    | 1563 Posts

    Chartered Fellow

    28 Mar, 2014 08:37

    Giovanna, you would best address your question to the editor of PM.
  • David Perry

    | 4652 Posts

    Chartered Member

    28 Mar, 2014 11:23

    In reply to Tarja Eraharju:

    Tarja. I did not intend to imply you were dumb. But as Steve clarified, I was referring to those who believe everything they read in the tabloids.
More Content