People: The Queen ‘has no intention’ of abdicating, she’s ‘in good fettle’

State Opening of Parliament

As we discussed, I find this week’s People Magazine cover story very suspicious. The first excerpts were all about how the Queen loves to laugh, and how she enjoyed having some “down time” during the pandemic. Sources tried to claim that this was the first time in the Queen’s life that she’s ever had any kind of break. I guess that’s true if we aren’t counting her annual vacation to Balmoral, where she stays for two-to-three months every year, or all of those weeks and months where she’s doing nothing but reading briefing papers and walking her dogs. Or all of those other vacations she’s taken over the course of her life. I’m not saying that the Queen is lazy – she’s not. But it’s a f–king joke to suggest that this past year was her first real “time off.”

Anyway, as additional excerpts from People’s cover story are released, I’m starting to get a clearer idea of why this cover story exists. It’s not just sugary PR out of “nowhere.” The PR has a purpose beyond “normalizing a Queen and make her sound like someone who is NOT icy, petty, emotionally stunted, tone deaf, racist, neo-colonialist and reprehensible.” The other purpose is to once again shut down talk of the Queen abdicating on her 95th birthday this year.

Queen Elizabeth will celebrate her 95th birthday in April, but she has no intention of giving up her role as monarch. Any speculation that the Queen will abdicate the throne and allow her son and heir, Prince Charles, to become monarch has practically vanished — and an insider tells PEOPLE in one of this week’s cover stories that the Queen remains fit to serve.

“Neither her physical nor her mental health are waning,” says the insider. A close source to the monarch adds that she is “well” and “in good fettle.”

In fact, Queen Elizabeth continues horseback riding (although she has switched from horses to Fell ponies, as they are “a little closer to the ground,” her head groom Terry Pendry previously shared).

While Queen Elizabeth has continued to work amid the coronavirus pandemic through video meetings and small-scale engagements from Windsor Castle, the insider says, “In her twilight years, I’m sure it is quite lovely not to have the pressure” of a full calendar of public events. The close source adds, “It is possible this is the only slight rest she’s ever had in her whole life.”

[From People]

‘Tis interesting that someone in the palace communications office is *this* concerned about the abdication stories. I’ve never really believed that the Queen will abdicate, but I also think there’s a de facto Charles Regency anyway. Every year that passes, Charles takes up more of his mother’s work and makes more appearances on behalf of the crown. This People Mag story reads as an overreaction to what is probably more of what is already happening – Charles preparing to take even more work off his mother’s plate, and the Queen spending more time with her horses and her nasty BFF Angela Kelly. And no, I don’t think the Queen’s mental acuity is all that sharp these days. I think that’s also one of the reasons for this sugary PR.

Hope Hicks meets with members of Congress

Royal Portrait

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid. Cover courtesy of People.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

56 Responses to “People: The Queen ‘has no intention’ of abdicating, she’s ‘in good fettle’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Kiera says:

    The lady doth protest too much

    • Elizabeth Regina says:

      There you have it. Charles will have to prise the throne from her cold dead hands. At 95, these headlines make her look cold, selfish and out of touch. The Windsors are single handedly destroying whatever is left of their legacy.

      • Kalana says:

        She’ll make Charles do the work but she’ll keep the title.

        If she wants to be Queen, then do all of it. If she’s not up to it, then abdicate.

      • notasugarhere says:

        UK and Danish monarchs do not abdicate, that’s not how they do business. For now, with Charles handling things behind the scenes? At least it keeps William from getting his mitts on the Duchy money and causing chaos right now.

      • Seraphina says:

        ER, I agree. At 75 it was “cute” to have her want to keep going; at 95 it’s like: give it a rest.

      • BnLurkN4eva says:

        She loves the power and has enough mental mettle left to ensure she continues to hold on to it. Also, it’s the only thing standing between Andrew finally facing some well deserved consequences and she’s going to hold on for as long as she’s able. Not that Charles is going to give him up to authorities, but I do believe he will be stripped of whatever royal perks he still enjoys. Finally, I think she’s held in a certain reverence, (don’t ask me why) by many including those in the CW and there’s the fear (rightly) that the monarchy will be in danger of losing whatever relevance is left once she’s no longer the monarch.

  2. Amy Bee says:

    “Neither her physical nor her mental health are waning,” At 95 years old? This is a blatant lie and she should step down and let Charles act as regent.

  3. Chill says:

    They put Charles on a step to make him look taller. My uncle was 5’6″ tall. His wife was 5’9″. They made him stand on a box for his wedding photo too.

    • SarahCS says:

      I used to think he was tall then a former colleague whose sister did something at BP (not staff, maybe to do with events?) told me that actually he’s quite short. That was the first time I noticed!

      Not that I used to pay nearly as much attention to them.

  4. Muffintop says:

    I don’t understand why she won’t let Charles act as Regent — doesn’t she want a break? Doesn’t she want to see out her final years mucking around with her dogs, sitting in gardens, playing with her great grandchildren, and pottering around? I don’t want to be working at 95, that’s for sure. But then, I’m not into power or monarchies, so what would I know?!

    • Ana Maria says:

      because she does not like sharing the spotlight; they’ll wheel her out of the castle, feet first

    • notasugarhere says:

      He is already unofficially acting as Regent, taking over many of her duties.

    • Shannon says:

      No I don’t think she does want the break that would come with abdication because: 1) “Controlling” is an evident personality trait for her. 2) She wouldn’t know what to do with herself, she has been a queen-in-training or reigning queen for her entire life.

      • notasugarhere says:

        She wasn’t queen in training until she was at least 10, after the abdication of her uncle. For years after, there was still the idea her parents might have a son who would be the heir.

  5. Sofia says:

    Yeah she’s not abdicating. The only way she leaves that throne is in a coffin. Hence why I never took the whole “she’s abdicating at 95” anything other than Charles’ wishful thinking and trying to get the public to support him in it.

    But Charles doing the “leg-work” or at least some of it, might be true. HM still does the constitutional stuff but he might deal with the household and engagements more.

  6. BABSORIG says:

    This People mag and their focus and fixation People mag has on the British royals would have one believe this is People mag UK, my goodness..Its all pukeworthy actually.🤮🤮🤮

  7. Becks1 says:

    This IS starting to feel like an overreaction. I feel like most royal watchers – i.e. most people who would be interested enough to buy this particular issue or to buy the new quarterly supplement – know that the queen will never abdicate, so why bring it up so pointedly? My guess is that what’s actually going on is what we have discussed here and what Kaiser touches on – there is a bit of a de facto Charles regency and this is to cover up for that.

    • notasugarhere says:

      It might be a slap to William, against all of his embiggening articles against QEII and Charles in the last year. Get your house in order William and figure yourself out NOW. QEII isn’t leaving any time soon. If you want Kate sidelined, do it now before you are Prince of Wales.

      • Becks1 says:

        I’m coming around to that theory Nota. I think someone mentioned it below as well. The Queen isnt abdicating, Charles isnt going to abdicate – William may have a solid 20, 25 years before he’s king – so maybe this is a warning shot to get the delusions of grandeur out of his head.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        I think it’s also to stop the incessant stories about how keen they are in the roles as future King and Queen Consort, that all conveniently leave out Chuck and Cams.

        She is passively aggressively asserting her position.

  8. Digital Unicorn says:

    Fettle – now theres a word I haven’t heard in a long time LOL.

    I agree with everyone else, she is not going anywhere anytime soon. Chuck will have to wait some more.

  9. Maliksmama says:

    Proof that Elizabeth is a horrible person. She should’ve abdicated at least 15 years ago. I’m convinced she’s hanging on to spite Charles. She really doesn’t want him on the throne. And unfortunately, she doesn’t seem to understand how damaging this is to that family and the monarchy.

    • SarahCS says:

      I agree she should be long gone but I’m less sure on her reasoning. I wonder if she’s so sold on the martyrdom to her ‘duty’ that in her head she ‘can’t’ abdicate, she’s queen until death.

      Having said that, Charles is totally the regent in all but name already, that’s been building gradually for years.

    • Ana Maria says:

      that’s exactly it! from following the gossip over the years, it is my impression that she has always made him believe he will be king, one day, maybe, perhaps…but she has no intention of vacating the spot

    • Ariel says:

      I concur. If it was really, as we are told to believe, all about service to the country, then she would abdicate. But it is really a personal thing, about not wanting to ever be former queen, or whatever her grandiose title would be. It is clearly all about her and only her. And a little bit about her favorite child, the duke of gross, of course.

      • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

        She would be known as Queen Mother (as her mother was, when Ol’ Petty Brenda took the throne). Then Cam becomes Queen Consort. I don’t think Brenda’s ego can take the name, or the back seat. She KNOWS she doesn’t have the same overbearing personality as her mother did, making a lot of the decisions for Liz, and Liz not wanting to go against steely mummy. And honestly, not sure she wants to actually SEE Charles on the throne, knowing how he feels about Pedo, and what he might (will!) do to sideline him further.

        Wouldn’t surprise me if Petty Betty leaves a bigger part of her private fortune to Pedo than the others.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Whatever she leaves Andrew is taxed at minimum 40 percent. Unlikely she’d leave him enough to endanger the future of either Balmoral or Sandringham.

    • notasugarhere says:

      UK and Danish monarchs do not abdicate.

      That said, I don’t see this as against Charles but against William. Billy is nowhere near ready to be Duke of Cornwall or Prince of Wales. He needs to figure out his rage issues, finally decide whether or not he’s going to dump Kate, and get himself under control. Until then, the Queen and Charles are holding the line against William getting more power/money as Duke of Cornwall.

    • Couch potato says:

      As Nota already said UK and Danish monarchs don’t abdicate, neither does the Norwegian. It’s part of the tradition that the heir gradually take over more of the duties, but don’t become monarchs before the monarchs are dead. That’s where the saying “The king is dead. Long live the king!” comes from. The monarchs don’t run the countries anymore, they have a ceremonial role. I think it’s a lot more concerning to have aging presidents and other elected officials who actually do govern the countries. Look at the US, both DT and Biden are in their 70ties, Biden will be 82 when his first term ends. I worked with people in different age groups, and although the eldest held a lot of visdom and knew a lot, their ability to keep up on new things were gradually shrinking as they grew older. People age differently, so I’m not saying elderly people are unable to govern. It’s just a bit odd to hear someone claming the queen should have abdicated at 80, while the newly elected president of the US, who holds a lot of real power, will be in office after turning 80.

    • Jegede says:



      Shes doing more harm to the legacy of the Crown by hanging on.

      The world is changing fast.
      She could have let Charles the opportunity to redefine the Windsors for the 21st century and beyond.

      Brenda’s like a comfortable shoe at this point and when she dies, a pack of cards will fall on the Windsors of how to operate in a very different world, esp vis Commonwealth and other countries slipping away.

      And that’s IF there’s even still a United Kingdom to reign over at that point.😶😶😶

    • February-Pisces says:

      She’s queen until she dies. I think in a post Covid world she will quietly step back from the bread and butter engagements and just show her face a ceremonial events like trooping the colour. I think she’ll still do other queen stuff like her red boxes and weekly pm meetings, but Charles will probably just do the rest. I think the word “abdication” is too strong and is too associated with Edward III which is why she would never say that she’s ‘abdicating’. But she will slowly step back which she should. I will give Charles some credit, if he is taking on more of the leg work, he’s doing it quietly without a huge fanfare. We all know if it was Willie, he would ensure is press minions would tell the world on a daily basis, just like when he tried to pretend he was in charge at the beginning of the pandemic. All apart of his regency campaign.

  10. Harper says:

    It’s amazing that she and Philip, and the Queen Mum, lived so long. However, the reality is at 95 she could die very quickly from anything. So yes, she’s not abdicating but to say she’ll be around for a while, nope. She seems to be in remarkable shape so that is something to celebrate. As for People magazine pushing her for public relations, at this point, it won’t make a dent. The Queen isn’t a compelling figure to most of the American population. I doubt this issue is a big seller for People.

    • Sarah says:

      Exactly. My grandfather was in remarkable shape at 93. He and my grandmother still lived in their home and did everything themselves. He got dehydrated one summer day, turned to a bladder infection and then he was gone, just like that.

      These abdication stories have been the same for nearly 20 years. It reeks of Charles stamping his foot that it’s his turn. Lizzie will never step down – it’s a job for life.

      • notasugarhere says:

        To me it reek more of QEII and Charles slapping down William. 2020 was full of William-led pro-William PR stories, stories that attacked both Queen and Charles.

  11. Catherine says:

    I actually think that the abdication rumors came from William and William’s handlers not Charles. Charles appears to be resigned to his fate as a short lived King. Look at all the effort he puts into the Duchy and to his charities. He has known that his best chance at having any sort of significant legacy will be from what he accomplishes as the Prince of Wales. Also, at this point he in many ways is acting as a regent. William, his handlers, and his co-conspirators in the media are desperate for him to have more power. I think the original story about the queen abdicating at 95 started in late 2019 with a story in the Sun written by Emily Andrews. She was a KP mouthpiece 100%. She was one of the primary players in the smear campaign against Meghan and helped drive several negative narratives about both Harry and Meghan. Until KP chose Dan Wooten as their favorite SUN reporter. The constant references to William being the future King as of he is first in line instead of second are an attempt to increase the perception of his power. So suggesting that he was in the near future actually going to be first in line were of benefit to him more than Charles because let’s be honest people aren’t exactly excited about the prospect of Charles being king.

    • JT says:

      I agree with this assessment. I hadn’t quite thought of it like this before. Charles has built his legacy as POW and although I’m sure he’d love to be king now, he knows he’ll have a short reign. All of his work will be tough to follow and unlike the queen, he’s has tangible projects that helped real people. It’s William who benefits from “the queen is too old to reign” stories, because it will directly effect Charles’ reign. There have been dozens of king William articles and pieces crying to skip Charles. Hell, at the beginning of the pandemic a source said William was in charge. It’s the same with the queen Kate articles as well. The pat have created a monster in William by coddling him; H&M aren’t the only ones he’s trying to undermine.

    • notasugarhere says:

      wrong place

    • Couch potato says:

      That makes sense in more ways than just Willnot becoming PoW. If the queen set precedence by abdicating, it’d give Will a lot more leverage to pressure his father into abdicating as well.

    • February-Pisces says:

      William and Kate seem determined to over throw the entire family. I think the press want Willie in charge so bad so they can finally get those honours and knighthoods he promised them in exchange for all the harry and Meghan smearing, lol. Also I think key figures in the press see Willie as ‘one of them’ and with him in charge, they would have so much more power.

      I remember the ‘skip a generation’ campaign after Willie and Kate got married. This is more than Willie and Kate embiggening themselves, there seems to be an actual coup to fast track them to the throne. Charles needs to stop being a weak little bitch and actually grow some balls, cos of Willie and Kate can chase harry away, the most beloved member of that family, then imaging what they could do to him.

      • JT says:

        Yep. Willieleaks is getting too big for his britches at this point and it’s time for the queen and Charles to work together for once and slap down the Tweedlekeens. He’s been allowed to go unchecked for too long and I imagine the H&M business has probably made him hungry for more power. W&K are unfit at this point and it’s time Charles starts reminding the people of that to get him in line. I think someone needs to be reminded that the PPOW titles aren’t automatic and the keens should work for them.

        And the press only like him because he’s easily controlled and manipulated which does not bode well for him. If he learned anything from his own mother is should be that the press can and will turn on him if need be. Harry learned that lesson, too bad Cannot didn’t.

      • February-Pisces says:

        I think Willie and Kate probably feel empowered that their smear campaign actually chased harry away. I think they have probably thought if they did something similar with Charles then, they are only a heartbeat away from the throne. But Charles has survived worse and he’s still there. He would super glue his ass to the throne of he has to.

  12. Case says:

    Do you think Charles is pissed that his mom got the crown at such a young age and he’s now four grandchildren deep without the title in sight?

    • notasugarhere says:

      No. Even Diana admitted Charles wasn’t looking forward to being king, because it would limit the amount/type of work he could accomplish. He is the most accomplished Prince of Wales in history, and he knows William will mess everything up. That’s why he’s created a separate umbrella charity, run by his nephew David Linley/Snowdon, to make sure his most important charities continue without William’s interference.

      • Julia K says:

        Charles and David are first cousins I believe but maybe I have generation mix up

      • notasugarhere says:

        Or lord, you’re right, I was typing too quickly. David is Princess Margaret’s son, Charles’s cousin.

  13. Kate says:

    It’s my new goal to use the word “fettle” in a sentence in the next week.

  14. Over it says:

    Well if she is happy to rest without a full calendar then she needs to take her racist petty rape protector ass off the tax payers dime . She can rest on her own stolen loot . The more back stories I read on this site the more I despise petty Betty baldy egg head and buttonhole 10 year wait mattress.How much must she hate Charles that she will keep him waiting to reign

    • Mads says:

      “I despise petty Betty baldy egg head and buttonhole 10 year wait mattress.”

      Over it

      I adore this sentence. “Buttonhole 10 year wait mattress” is my favorite part. Let’s call her this regularly. Also, that bibliography of offensive pet names for the Lamebridges really needs to happen.

    • Mads says:

      “I despise petty Betty baldy egg head and buttonhole 10 year wait mattress.”

      Over it

      I adore this sentence. “Buttonhole 10 year wait mattress” is my favorite part. Let’s call her this regularly. Also, that bibliography of offensive pet names for the Lamebridges really needs to happen.

  15. line says:

    She will not abdicate, and I see her live as long as her mother, that is to say until 104 years. So in less 10 years Charles will probably be king at the age of 82 and he too will not abdicate but I don’t see him living as long as his mother.William won’t be king anytime soon, but more in his late 50s older and early 60s older, but he and Kate need to step up their work as Charles will be an elderly monarch and therefore his heir will have a lot more work to do.

  16. Coco says:

    She wants to outlive all of them. She’s going to be a brain in a jar with a crown on top, overseeing the flooded wasteland of London from the top of Big Ben, and still her great-great-great-great-great-great grandchild will have to defer to Her Cerebral Majesty.

  17. Jumpingthesnark says:

    Charles has the sads…….

  18. Merricat says:

    Kate ha demonstrated repeatedly that she is next to useless at anything beyond tennis and child-bearing. William has repeatedly demonstrated that he hasn’t the right stuff to be king. After brexit, what remains of the UK will lose standing and even recognition by the global community. I think we’re witnessing the sun going down on the British empire.