The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Join The Royal Forums Today
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 09-18-2016, 04:54 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 13,527
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Correct it is a Marquess. Not thinking straight today. Have just received the news of a death of a dear friend - 15 months after being diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. She fought the good fight but past away yesterday so I am not thinking straight.
Lost my mother to lung cancer and I miss her but I've never been able to say goodbye. For me, its only until we meet again. A dear friend is never totally gone but always with us in our hearts.

No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 08:37 PM
WreathOfLaurels's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 475
Regarding the two older examples cited on this page Edward II and James VI & I: what you need to keep in mind is that the view of sexuality in the Middle Ages and the early modern period was very different to our own and indeed to each over. It's fine to talk about the modern royals metioned on this thread (modern being the nineteenth century onwards) as being gay/straight/bi etc... but that's a product of the enlightenment and anything prior to that time period was very different to our own, and even then that's to ignore situational sexuality (that's what the boarding school and army/navy jibes are about - although with the rise of co-ed education and women serving in the military....)

The first thing is that regarding sexual activity in history the only concrete way of knowing that somone engaged in sexual activity is if she becomes pregnant.# Everything else is open to conjecture and interpretion and this unsurprisingly makes determining homosexual activity all the more tricky as there is also the issue of social taboos, both contempary and of later historians, as well as notions of what actually constuites sexual intercourse. It's a much tricker topic than what it looks like on the surface.

For example in the Middle Ages the main sexual divide was between the celibate and the non-celibate - all other sexual acts, which were phallocentric due to the fact that what constituted "sex" was based on what a mostly male clergy thought, were equally sinful and those for having children was seen as a necessary evil - in other words one of the side effects was that there was no conception of female homosexuality in this time period and the oddity of somthing like feliatio being regarded as a form of sodomy* but cunnilingus was not due to it not involving penile penetration. However this was also the great age of courtly love and chivalrous botherhood as well so make of that what you will. Regarding Edward, the sodomy allegations (its not accurate to talk about him as being 'gay' in this time period) were really more about the fact that his favorites hogged his patronage and blocked out other great magnates of the realm who Edward depended on to help him run the country, from offering him their council and guidance. It also alienated Isabella as these men, Hugh Despencer in particular, were a threat to her status and wealth - that's what angered her more not the sex.

Kathryn Warner has a blog about Edward and has written biographies of him and Isabella which goes into this in more detail: Edward II. There are also a number of lectures on YouTube about sexuality in the Middle Ages in Europe - they're actually about sexuality in Game of Thrones but they go into detail about the RL Middle Ages and are well worth listening to for more information.

By James's time period attitudes were beginning to shift more toward what we might recognize in our own time period due to a shift away from the emphasis on celibacy - a byproduct of the population decrease caused by the Black Death, the questions raised by the reformation, and the development of an alternative discourse on sexuality based on classical learning - to what we would now recognize as the homo/heterosexual divide, it's no coincidence that this was the time period when men finally began to figure out how women could have sex with one another as well. In James's case there was also the fact that his sexuality was seen as linked to his foreign policy choices, James was somthing rare for the time period in that he was a pacifist in principle and fact, when warfare was seen as the correct occupation of kings and gentlemen, and was pursuing what a large number viewed as a policy of appeasement against the catholic powers. The fact that James seems to have prefers these pretty-boys to his wife and natural children was also a problem to many of his contemporaries as it looked like he was mocking marriage and the family unit - when you consider that James's political thinking was based on this kind of familial metaphor, it just looked like the worst kind of hypocracy imgainable. However that said James wasn't as "out" as he's often made out being and did try and keep things on the sly as much as was possible.

The literature on the subject of LGBT in the early modern period and James's importance to it is vast and there are too many books and articles to mention here but Michael B Young's James I and the History of Homosexuality has a comprehensive look at James's sexuality and it's impact on both the politics of the time and posterity. It does go into detail and can be quite explicit so its not a easy or comfortable read as it discusses child sex abuse allegations with James as both victim and perpetrator - in short Trigger Warning: Sexual Abuse and Pederasty. David Bergeron and Roger Lockyer (a biographer of one of the more important favorites and James himself) are also good as well.

What's intersting is the interplay not only of biology and society, but also how its been viewed and reinterpreted over time.

* Sodomy has meant a variety of things over time and wasn't always a derogatory synonym for male homosexual behavior. It actually had a meaning closer to perverted rather than queer.

# The exception to this rule being the conception of Our Lord and Saviour obviously .

Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2017, 10:06 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Texas, United States
Posts: 3,618
^^^2 Long Didn't read

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
The problem with children from same-gender couples is that a third person is needed for the conception. In a country as the Netherlands an Act of Parliament is needed (Act of Consent). This Act says that Parliament approves the royal marriage of X with Y and that possible fruit of the union between X and Y are legitimate successors to the throne.

When Prince X marries a Mr Y but ask a Ms Z to bear his child, then both Ms Z and their child are outside this legal bond and per definition the child is no "fruit of the marriage between Prince X and Mr Y".

When Princess A marries a Ms B but ask a Mr C to create their child, then Mr C and their child are outside this legal bond and per definition the child is no "fruit of the marriage between Princess A and Ms B".

So the equal gender marriage on itself will not be the biggest problem. Possible offspring from that marriage, which will always require a ménage-à-trois, no matter it is done in a laboratory, always will be a problem.
You bring up a good point, one most people don't want to acknowledge because it brings up legitimate questions.

Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Queen Silvia's Family and Siblings - The Sommerlaths NJRedDevils King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia 62 04-24-2019 11:39 AM
Precedence - Who Outranks Who? Huddo Royal Ceremony and Protocol 138 03-20-2018 04:45 AM

Popular Tags
aristocracy armenia belgian birthday celebration bracelets british royal family charles of wales clothes corruption crown crown prince hussein's future wife current events cyprus daughter denmark discussão duchessofcambridge duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex duke of york earl of wessex extramarital affairs felipe vi french revolution future wife of prince hussein genealogy general news germany hamdan bin mohammed headship her children introduction juan carlos lady louise mountbatten-windsor letter lineage meghan markle modernization mohammed vi monaco christening monogram naples nelson mandela bay official visit patron potential areas prince harry princenapoleon prince nicholas prince of wales prince peter princess benedikte princesses princess eugenie princess louise princess royal qe2 sarah duchess of york savoy siblings south korea spain state visit the crown titles uk styles united kingdom windsor castle windy city wivies

Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:48 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019
Jelsoft Enterprises