Every culture has its own stories or narratives which are shared as a means of entertainment, education, cultural preparation or experienced as instilling moral values. But Britain’s royal declaration seems opposite to what is basically meant by the cultural characteristics. Prince Andrew retreated from his royal public duties for the foreseeable future amid a raging controversy surrounding his relationship with the disgraced American financier who died in an apparent suicide in a New York federal city jail in August.
In his one interview with the BBC, the royal Prince Andrew had said that “he did not regret his relationship with Jeffery Epstein, instead noting that the people he met and opportunities he got because of Epstein were actually useful.”
It is hard to be sure enough to find a solution to a problem and try hard to impel things superfluously. That’s why the British Royal family had issued an open statement criticising the media’s unwelcome onslaughts on their traditional practice of sexual insult, that reflects strain or tension in the earthly life to a considerable extent.
“This is one of our most dearly held traditional practices, which can be traced through our family tree for thousands of years, ” said Queen Elizabeth II, who noted that if not for their long-standing tolerance of mass sexual perversion, the royal family would have broken a long time ago.
Sexual misconduct is a cornerstone of the British monarchy. A complete disregard for consent courses through our regal veins and defines what it means to be a British royal. We invite the media to think twice before intervening in our time-honoured history of abusing women and children.” The Queen further added that Prince Andrew would continue to perform these ancient duties in private during this difficult time.
It is putting to have some people to engage in points contrary to the exact topic but what if an attempt is made to erase the sensibility from our normal feeling. Can sexual abuse be accepted only because of its royal mark?