Why The Royal Family Keeps Snubbing Princess Eugenie

When Princess Eugenie, the second child of Prince Andrew (Prince Charles' younger brother) and his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, got married on October 12, 2018, all eyes were on her. The Queen's granddaughter said "I do" to Jack Brooksbank in a star-studded ceremony, which marked the second royal wedding of the year after Prince Harry's nuptials with Meghan Markle. It was a day of pure joy and the bride wowed in a dazzling gown, but there was a lot of drama hiding behind the scenes. In fact, it's been there her whole life.

Born Princess Eugenie Victoria Helena of York in 1990, Princess Eugenie is ninth in the line to the throne, but she's not a full-time royal. Since graduating with a Bachelor's in English Literature, History of Art and Politics from Newcastle University in 2009, she's been working in the art world and, in 2015, became the associate director of London art gallery Hauser & Wirth.

Not only does she keep a full-time job and have no official royal duties, but the royal family keeps snubbing her. Here are all of the reason why Princess Eugenie simply can't catch a break.

Unfortunately for Princess Eugenie, her family has been embroiled in scandal practically her entire life. While Sarah Ferguson, the Duchess of York, and Prince Andrew were married, the pair reportedly spent just 42 days a year together, as the prince focused on his naval career. During their time apart, Eugenie's mother was often snapped partying and vacationing with various men.

The final straw, however, came in September 1992 when Eugenie was just two years old. While vacationing with the royal family at the Queen's Balmoral Castle, scandalous paparazzi photos were published showing Fergie and "financial adviser" John Bryan, as People dubbed him, kissing and being intimate while Eugenie and her older sister Princesses Beatrice looked on. In one shot, the mag describes her as being "bare-breasted" and "frolicking on the French Riviera" with Bryan.

Not only was Fergie shunned by the royals, but as the outlet noted, the racy photos "unleashed the fiercest public outcry yet against the wayward younger royals and the costly monarchy itself."

Sarah Ferguson and Prince Andrew parted ways in 1992 and eventually divorced in 1996, but it wasn't just her indiscretions that caused the royal family to snub her. In addition to being unfaithful, Fergie was also amassing a growing debt and giving the royals plenty of reasons to shun her. So much so that Queen Elizabeth's sister Princess Margaret (Fergie's aunt-in-law), actually sent her a letter condemning her actions, which the Telegraph quoted as reading, "You have done more to bring shame on the family than could ever have been imagined."

It seems time has not healed all wounds. When Eugenie tied the knot in 2018, the palace, even all these years later, reportedly warned Fergie to be on her best behavior, but, as she told Good Morning Britain (via Express), she paid no attention to their wishes. "The most extraordinary thing is when I got out of the car and everybody said 'Oh no, go into the church, be demure, don't go over the top,' but you can't, I went nuts," she confessed, describing her excited waving and interaction with the crowd.

Princess Eugenie's father, Prince Andrew, has also spent quite a lot of time in the tabloids. According to Vanity Fair, before he and Sarah Ferguson tied the knot, he actually brandished the nickname "Randy Andy" and infamously dated Koo Stark, an actress who appeared in a raunchy scene in a 1976 R-rated film dubbed Emily. 

Fast forward to 2011 when Prince Andrew made headlines again, this time for being involved in a sex scandal with his billionaire friend, Jeffrey Epstein, who is "a convicted sex offender." Epstein was sued by a woman named Virginia Roberts, who claimed that he had her working "as an under-age prostitute" and that she was "forced" into "sexual relations" with the Prince on three occasions. What's more, while investigating the case, Vanity Fair was told by a former Epstein employee the prince actually "attended naked pool parties and was treated to massages by a harem of adolescent girls."

But his scandals range far beyond the bedroom. According to the outlet, Prince Andrew has also dined with Kazakhstan's corrupt president, Nursultan Nazarbayev, sold Nazarbayev's son-in-law his mansion for nearly $5 million more than the asking price, and allegedly accepted a $30,000 gold necklace as a gift for Beatrice "from a convicted Libyan gun smuggler."

It was a situation no bride would ever want to go through — being forced to postpone an entire wedding against their will — but that's exactly what Princess Eugenie had to deal with when the palace made her move the date of her nuptials to accommodate another royal couple — Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. Talk about sending a loud and clear message about who was more important, right? 

As The Daily Mail reported in January 2018, the wedding was initially scheduled to take place in September, but because there was "talk of a number of foreign tours for Prince Harry and Miss Markle this year, September is a date that has been mooted. There is nothing concrete yet, but it looks as if Eugenie and Jack will go for October instead." The pair eventually settled on October 12 to accommodate the princess' cousin and Markle. 

When Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank wed on October 12, 2018, the royal bride broke from tradition in several ways, as noted by Town & Country, snubbing the royal family's protocols the way they snub her. Most notably, her sister was her maid of honor. Royals are usually not allowed to hold that role, but Princess Eugenie threw tradition out the window and asked Princess Beatrice to do the honors.

What's more, while all royal brides in recent history have donned a veil (expect Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, and Princess Anne, both of whom were previously married), the princess chose to wear a tiara without a veil. The bold move helped ensure that her low-cut dress, which was specially designed to show off the scar on her back was on full display. Explaining an operation to correct scoliosis that she had on her back when she was 12 years old, Princess Eugenie told ITV's This Morning (via Hello!), "It's a lovely way to honor the people who looked after me and a way of standing up for young people who also go through this." 

The break from tradition continued following the ceremony, as onlookers were asked by local police to not throw confetti at the royal couple (Prince William and Kate Middleton were showered with flower petal confetti in 2011) and, at the after party, guests indulged in a bold red velvet and chocolate cake instead of the classic layered fruit cake with white icing.

The day Princess Eugenie tied the knot should have been the happiest, most drama-free day of her life and yet, she was snubbed once again, this time in a tweet. When the royal family's official Twitter account sent out a message celebrating the joyous day, they actually managed to get the groom's name wrong. Rather than congratulating Her Royal Highness and Jack Brooksbank, the now deleted tweet, which was captured by Page Six, sent well wishes to a "Mr. Jacksbrook," getting more than just a few letters wrong and completely messing up Brooksbank's name.

"Princess Eugenie and Mr. Jacksbrook have invited people from the charities they support onto the grounds of Windsor Castle tomorrow — to help them celebrate their wedding day," the tweet read. Adding insult to injury, the message was live for a whole 40 minutes before someone realized the mix-up and updated the tweet with the proper name.

When @buckinghamroyal, an account operated by devoted royal fans, took to social media to promote souvenirs created specifically for Princess Eugenie's big day, namely a mug celebrating the upcoming nuptials, they made a major mistake in the caption: Rather than featuring the bride's name, they included her older sister's. Yikes. As News.co.au reported, the since-deleted post read: "This exclusive mug issued in commemoration of the wedding of HRH Princess Beatrice of York and Mr Jack Brooksbank is now available for purchase by following the link in the description."

Granted, mistakes happen, but there's no denying the fact that royals fans left Princess Eugenie hanging when it came to the televised broadcast of her big day. The princess' wedding was not carried by the BBC (rival network ITV took over instead) because she simply doesn't have enough fans. According to an insider source who spoke to the Daily Mail, the BBC actually "turned [Eugenie's wedding] down because they don't think enough people will tune in and that there isn't enough support for the Yorks." Ouch! 

Although Eugenie is not a working royal and holds no official engagements in support of the monarchy, it was revealed in September 2018 that the security at her wedding, costing an estimated £2 million, would be paid for, at least in part, by taxpayers. Something that one member of Parliament, Chris Williamson, adamantly spoke up against.

In an interview with Sky News [via Express], Williamson asked, "Who's heard of Princess Eugenie anyway? She carries out no royal functions, no useful purpose to the public sphere and yet we're having to spend this kind of money." He concluded, "There is no need to have such glamorous events."

What's more, over 49,800 people signed a petition hosted by anti-monarchy group Republic, which was addressed to the House of Commons and called for the princess' family to cover all security costs. "If the royals want to turn Eugenie and Jack's big day into a public event, they need to pick up the bill — all of it," it read. "We petition the House of Commons to urge the Government to commit no public money to the wedding of Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank, and to publish a report of all costs to taxpayers."

As reported in October 2016 by The Daily Mail, the fact that Eugenie and her sister, Beatrice, are not full-time royals really upsets their father, Prince Andrew. So much so that Prince Charles' younger brother has petitioned the Queen directly, arguing that the only "blood princesses" in their generation should be tasked with official royal duties. According to an insider, however, Prince Charles has been adamant in his campaign to stop this from happening, citing that while the two young ladies "should, of course, be treated properly, as befits their royal status, they cannot have a public role and cannot be taxpayer-funded."

As if to prove his point, in 2011, the princesses lost their 24/7 official police bodyguards (which cost about £500,000 a year) in a move to save money. Prince Andrew "took great umbrage at the decision, mainly because he saw it as diminishing his own status," an unnamed source told the outlet. Unfortunately, given Prince Charles' seniority, as well as his role "as de facto 'chief executive' of the Royal Family," Prince Andrew's wishes are unlikely to ever come true.