Royalist: The York princesses are ‘innocent victims’ in their father’s horrible scandals

In recent weeks, there have been dozens of horrible stories about Prince Andrew, all coming out of Andrew Lownie’s book about the House of York. I’ve skipped many of the most lurid stories, partly because I find the whole thing disgusting and partly because most of the terrible stories are decades-old and they’ve already been reported on and discussed ad nauseum. If there’s one optimistic note for the Yorks, it’s that people have thought that Andrew is a buffoon and a nonce for years, so few people are newly scandalized by these stories. Still, we’re going through another round of “poor Princess Beatrice and Eugenie” for some reason. Like, I don’t believe Bea and Eugenie should have to “pay” for their parents’ crimes, but they’re also grown women with families of their own, and it’s past time for B&E to distance themselves from their horrible father, not to mention the entire monarchy. Some highlights from Tom Sykes’ Royalist Substack:

Innocent victims: Friends of Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie have described them as “innocent victims” and “collateral damage” after Lownie’s book came out. One contemporary of the sisters exclusively told The Royalist: “All they have ever done is stand by their parents in the most horrifically public circumstances. I don’t think it’s fair to criticize them for that. They’re sweet girls who understand that they are immensely privileged, and have always been grateful for the privilege they’ve had, and have tried to use it to do the right thing. They were told to get jobs by the firm and they did that, so it seems unfair to attack them for making money.”

More from B&E’s contemporary: “It would be totally inaccurate to say they are devastated or heartbroken by the book, or any of this c**p that is going around, because there are absolutely no new revelations in it at all. It’s just a massive rehash of a load of things that have already been said by different people, brought together in one place. The family used to wonder when this would ever end; now they know it never will. It’s just, the tide comes in and the tide goes out. They deserve to be allowed to get on with their own lives. Beatrice has set up an AI business and Eugenie is a director at [art gallery] Hauser and Wirth, and she is extremely good at her job.”

A friend of Fergie: “Sarah has only ever tried to make a living for herself through her writing, something she is now doing, and they are all incredibly proud of her for it. The family have been pilloried and bullied by the British press for a generation, so they are well used to it by now. Sarah has seen it all before. She’s a tough old bird and I don’t think this latest series of revelations, which actually aren’t revelations at all, just a rehash of information that is already out there, will do very much at all. It’s interesting that so many of the people quoted are either anonymous or dead.”

Fergie & Andrew will not remarry: There have long been suspicions that Fergie and Andrew were happy enough with an open marriage, and that it was only the publication of those photographs that forced a divorce. These rumors have been fueled by the fact that the couple have continued to live together, apparently very happily, at Royal Lodge, Andrew’s home, ever since, appearing in many ways to be a married couple. I have been told they live in separate wings of the house. Rumors of remarriage have persisted, though friends regard them as tabloid fantasy, given they no longer have a romantic relationship and the attention it would attract.

York associates believe the whole thing will blow over: Speaking to several of Andrew and Sarah’s friends this week, I have been struck by how many of them think the controversy will quickly “blow over.”

[From The Royalist Substack]

I kind of agree with the “sources” that it will likely blow over. I’m not saying that’s what should happen or that we should breeze over the constant stream of depravity, arrogance and abuse from Andrew. I’m just saying that Andrew has always been lucky – his mother spent decades covering for him, and just when Andrew’s years of degeneracy were coming back into the public sphere in a big way, the entire British media and British establishment decided that the bigger story was “Meghan and Harry.” As for Sarah… she’s a survivor, she’ll find a way to survive in some form no matter what. Eugenie and Beatrice need to understand that there’s never going to be a moment when a current or future king will welcome them with open arms and want them to be “working royals.”

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Avalon Red, Cover Images.

return home

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

43 Responses to “Royalist: The York princesses are ‘innocent victims’ in their father’s horrible scandals”

  1. somebody says:

    “It’s interesting that so many of the people quoted are either anonymous or dead.” Sounds like all their sources for Meghan. Many of the people saying things about Andrew and making accusations said it up-front without being anonymous. I guess, in Virginia’s case dead now, but not when she stood up and said what happened.

  2. Scorp-n says:

    At least Bea has been doing dodgy shit in the middle east so no, they’re not innocent. I could dig back in the archives but I’d rather not, too tired. They’re a family based on grifting. There’s no way out of that for anyone. Only Harry broke the grift.

    • Tessa says:

      I think Edo is an opportunist and would want to do royal work. He’s a married in which would not make it possible.

    • Hypocrisy says:

      They both stood by him so no none of that leftovers family is innocent they are all tried to cover up his crimes.

    • PPP says:

      Wasn’t one of them directly involved in that sweaty interview?

    • BeanieBean says:

      And Sarah’s ‘only ever tried to make a living as a writer’–what is this nonsense? And what’s with the Beatrice & Eugenie were told to get jobs & they did, so stop whining about it? Wow! Eugenie seems to have normal jobs but Beatrice? She seems to run from grift to grift. This is the first I heard she was running an AI company. Last I knew she was doing something in finance.

  3. Dee(2) says:

    I wonder why they’re doing the press thing so much about this particular book? Nothing that I’ve seen reported is all that shocking, or dramatically worse than anything else that was already in the public sphere, including that disastrous first person interview which Beatrice was part of setting up. I wonder what’s going on in the background to make them feel like they needed that Daily Mail story last week, and now this this week for
    “distance”. Plus:

    “It’s just a massive rehash of a load of things that have already been said by different people, brought together in one place. The family used to wonder when this would ever end; now they know it never will. It’s just, the tide comes in and the tide goes out. They deserve to be allowed to get on with their own lives. ”

    This entire section was just mind boggling to me, because yeah. That’s what their cousin and his wife have been saying for almost a decade!

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      They may be trying to preempt anymore revelations from the Epstein files and Maxwell who, thanks to Trump, is getting ready for her close up.

  4. Julia says:

    I have sympathy for Andrew’s daughters but none for Fergie. She cozied back up to Andrew after she had spent all her money then borrowed money from Epstein. She is not innocent. It will definitely blow over most British people don’t care about Andrew and while they think he is a bad guy with dodgy associates and a serious allegation levelled against him they don’t believe many of the more outrageous stories. A lot of this book seems slightly ridiculous. People will have forgotten about it in a few weeks time.

  5. Tessa says:

    They are not now a married couple or like one. Imo She lost lots of her money and tried to recoup by being spokesperson for various products. They divorced nearly 30 years ago. It is a relationship of convenience for her. And nothing romantic. If she remarrie s she will lose the duchess title from her divorce settlement.

  6. Alex Can says:

    I kinda think Bea and Eugenie know that they’ll never be made working royals. I think they’re probably being pushed by Sarah to stick around and beg for crumbs because it helps protect Andrew. The whole “poor innocent victims” narrative makes the house of York look more sympathetic.

  7. Tessa says:

    After philip died Sarah got to make some inroads to the queen.

    • Nikki (Toronto) says:

      This. Also, before the Queen died, Fergie bought that rental property that’s owned by a trust for Beatrice and Eugenie. The Queen did what she could before her death, but Andrew and Sarah will need William’s financial support. Consequently, the sisters will be trotted out to support the crown when William and Kate don’t feel like working.

      • Unblinkered says:

        Get why you say that, but remember QEII and her advisers were only too well aware of W’s likely financial treatment of Andrew when/if W eventually ascends. I’d imagine a significant capital sum was put into a trust for Andrew to draw on to maintain his lifestyle, in the event of future exclusion from the Sovereign Grant.
        Possibly similar arrangements for Anne and Edward.

  8. Amy Bee says:

    When people were saying that Andrew should talk to the FBI, Sarah was doing interviews saying that he was a wonderful man so she shouldn’t be given grace. If we to believe the stories, Beatrice was one of people negotiating with the BBC for Andrew to do the interview instead of encouraging to talk to the authorities and it’s clear that both women benefit from Andrew’s connections in the Middle East so they’re not so innocent either. They’re never going to separate themselves from the Royal Family because they get to the best of both worlds.

  9. Monika says:

    I watched one of Andrew Lownie’s interviews on the Sky news the other day. He did not have anything good to say about any of the Yorks. He was accusing one of the York sister doing shady business deals in the Middle East as well. He did not mention a name and I do not know about them who has the Middle East connection. He also accused the Palace under the late Queen blocking an investigation into Andrew’s dealings and abuse of his position as a special trade envoy.

    This might not be new news but to see it all contained in one book is different. Andrew might not see any major consequences at this stage but there are some forces out there who want to make sure that there is no way for Andrew to sneak back into the public eye.

    • CatGotMyTongue says:

      Beatrice is the one doing shady middle eastern deals. Eugenie has distanced herself from that stuff. She seems to be the best of the York bunch.

      • Monika says:

        Thanks @CatGotMyTongue. I do not follow Beatrice or Eugenie so I did not know who he was referring to.

  10. Inge says:

    My ‘symphathy’ ebbed away when I saw how friendly they were with Piers Morgan

  11. Amy G says:

    When Charles dies, I suspect B&E will be made working royals so there is someone to do some “work” and W&K can say they’re bringing the family together. Though if they (at least B) don’t lay off the Ozembic they’ll become as skinny as K and we know how she feels about competition.

    • Jais says:

      I’m not sure that William will have them doing royal work. Maybe but idk?

      • Lianne says:

        He probably hates the idea of giving them their own titles in exchange for doing the work but I’m sure he’s eager to have SOMEONE ELSE doing that work, so who knows-he could do it.

      • Bqm says:

        They have titles, Princess, so he doesn’t need to give them anything. They wouldn’t get made Duchesses in their own right (which has always been sexist in royalty and most of the aristocracy ). He just needs to officially make them working royals. I could see him doing it, at least with Bea, when Charles dies. Cam is out of there and that’s two working royals (including one of the hardest, Charles) down.

    • HeatherC says:

      I don’t know about “working” royals because I doubt William wants to pay them. But they’ll be doing more royal things for sure, esp Beatrice.

  12. aquarius64 says:

    The Epstein scandal is still going strong in the US. Democratic lawmakers are demanding names to be released and GOP lawmarkers are catching heat from their constituents crying White House cover up. When Trump visits the UK next month some reporter is going to bring up Andrew, and the £12 million payoff to Virginia Guiffre. raising questions are BP and the UK government leaning on Trump to make the Epstein go away. A British prince abused underage American girls? That will bring fresh outrage. I hope the Windsors are enjoying the karma that’s coming their way.

  13. Gemini says:

    Beatrice and Eugenie have never been made constant tabloid fodder, they have never been smeared by the usual commentators. Other than an odd story that goes way quickly, they remain mostly untouched and oddly protected from the tabloids. I always wondered why. Because if the tabloid editors wanted to, there are many areas of their lives to be picked apart, from their shady business dealings to B’s husband having a kid out of wedlock. What did the dead queen think about that?

    • MaisiesMom says:

      I’m not going to judge either of them based on their Andrew’s actions. That would be unfair and honestly, it has to be pretty awful for a daughter to find out her father abused underaged girls. I actually feel for them but it’s not like they need me to protect them? No one is blaming them for what Andrew did or who he is. They are free to live their lives and enjoy their families. I’m not sure what the point of the article is since no one is coming for Beatrice or Eugenie.

      • HeatherC says:

        Yet. No one is coming for them yet. As the attacks on Harry and Meghan continue to fall flat, they’ll need new targets, esp if more attention is paid to the York girls as Kate continues to recover from her fake cancer and not do what’s expected of her.

    • samipup says:

      FYI: having a child”out of wedlock” is not a scandalous thing to do. Hasn’t since like the 50’s-60’s.

      • Nic919 says:

        Meghan was painted as a Jezebel for being a divorced woman. The fact they said nothing about the messy baby mama situation with Edo but harped on Meghan having been divorced years before is the double standard here.

        They tried so hard to say Meghan was just like Wallis Simpson, which was scandalous back in the 1930s

      • Gemini says:

        Of course it isn’t. I think my snark got lost here. As @Nic919 wrote, I was trying to point out the double standards in social morality employed by the tabloids.

      • Tessa says:

        Wallis’ second husband took the blame for their divorce. Her first husband was abusive to her physically and emotionally. Some writers claim he caused her to have a miscarriage and not be able to have children.

    • BeanieBean says:

      They actually have been smeared rather consistently, especially Beatrice. For some reason, she got under somebody’s nose & they went after her for her looks–specifically her weight (which is why she got so thin & then ran the London Marathon), they went after her for her seeming near-constant vacationing (oh, the irony), her various jobs, her dating life. I haven’t seen too much criticism of Eugenie, particularly as she spent a lot of time in the US at one of her earlier art gallery jobs. Oh, and they have definitely BOTH been picked on for their sartorial choices. I rather like what they wear, as they’re never boring & not afraid of color & wacky accessories. Y’all remember Bea’s hat for W&Ks wedding?

  14. Becks1 says:

    So no, the misdeeds/crimes/scandals of their parents should not be visited on the daughters and they are not to blame for their father’s crimes.

    But it doesn’t mean that either one is absolved from doing anything sketchy – but I’m not sure what they do is any sketchier than what other royal-adjacents like Zara and Peter do.

    If they really wanted to cut ties with their father and the royal family, they could. But neither has (and I do realize that’s easier said than done.)

    • Nic919 says:

      Beatrice and Edo grift along the same lines as the Middletons as well as William and Kate.

      But only the American duchess will be criticized and for having legitimate businesses not grift.

  15. Cosmo says:

    Their current careers sound way more interesting and fulfilling than that of a working royal.

  16. Lady Digby says:

    I have always wondered about the York sisters and how they coped with two publicly awful parents with repeated scandals hitting the headlines. I remember one of them crying during an Oprah Winfrey special on Fergie after the cash for access scandal. Must be difficult growing up with two parents who are complete embarrassments, Fergie always needs bailing out financially and then Andrew is another level entirely?! Is it like Saffy from Absolutely Fabulous where the child has to grow up before their time and parent the adult?

  17. Lianne says:

    I love Bea and Eug but you can not tell me that Bea isn’t doing SOMETHING in the Middle East.

  18. Beverley says:

    The sins/crimes of the parent(s) should NEVER reflect on the offspring. However, we all suspect Bea of doing some creative fundraising in the Middle East. Adults are responsible for their own actions, but I do believe Beatrice has her own scandals to answer for.

  19. Blujfly says:

    This particular book is getting a ton of publicity because Lownie is considered a historian, not a full fluff royal reporter and because the Mail excerpted it. It’s also not true that the book contains no new revelations – the book confirms Andrew swapping sex workers at a hotel in Asia with another diplomat while on official British government business, all day long, for days on end. A story Tom Sykes said was well known among the press but nobody dared print until now.

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment