I think Queen Silvia's position is also very clear. In the interview below to Brazilian TV, she basically says the same thing she said in that most recent 2015 Gernan interview, including the reference to the women's movement of the 1970s. Her attitude, like the King's, is one of resignation, i.e. they both accepted "the will of the people", even though it is clear that she feels that applying the law retroactively was wrong.
I believe it would be
unfair though to say that CP Victoria doesn't have her parents' full support now. In fact, in the interview below, the Queen praises Victoria for her preparation and commitment to her role as heiress to the throne. Clearly, Victoria was raised as the heir whereas Carl Philip was not. Victoria's position in the royal house is pretty clear and unambiguous as she is the only child of Carl Gustaf with a household (i.e staff) of her own and takes a full range of state and diplomatic duties that are not shared with her siblings. The family came to terms with the reality imposed by the new law and, as the Queen said again below, Carl Philip also
"accepted it" and "everything is fine" now.
His parents should not have been "puzzled" by it, and CP wasn't stripped of anything. He was born into a Sweden in which the process of changing the male primogeniture system was already underway. It was only a matter of time before the parliamentary process was completed.
As others have carefully and accurately stated already, but ignored by some, the changes to the law were already underway long before CP was conceived, and, apparently, before Victoria was born. It's not as though it was something that was suddenly foisted on an unsuspecting CG and Silvia.
They chose to welcome and baptize him as Crown Prince because, when he was born and until he was 7 months old,
he was legally the Crown Prince of Sweden. A bill doesn't come into force until it is finally passed according to the proper procedure laid out in the constitution. The fact that the succession bill had already cleared its first reading in the Swedish parliament didn't mean the bill was already in force as it could still be voted down at second reading. Especially considering that Carl Philip was born in May] 1979 and the general election was held in September 1979. The new parliament could obviously overturn decisions from the previous one. That is BTW precisely why the Swedish Instrument of Government requires that a general election be held between two votes on a basic law like the Act of Succession.
They probably hoped everything would work out the way they wished once they presented a
fait accompli.
It's too bad they still sound so bitter about it, I'd have thought they would have adapted by now. But I guess not.
All political parties except one in the Swedish parliament agreed on this so there was/is no chance in the world that the new constitution would have been dismissed by the parliament before or after elections unless both the government and the opposition would have agreed to do so.
The royal family and the courtiers knew that so they putted themselves in their own situation !
Yet they welcomed Prince Carl Philip as Crown Prince with a 42 gun salute and christened him with the Crown Princely Crown placed beside the baptismal font despite knowing all this very well. Still they choosed to. I don't feel sad at all for them !
I agree with Mirabel-I think they intended a fait accompli but it didn’t happen & I don’t think they can let go of that. I’d argue it’s not even about Carl Phillip anymore. It’s about them being irked that their wishes got usurped by a Parliamentary action. And if so it’s troubling that they wanted to subvert the legislative process. But in hindsight what they did in 79 is just them being willful and sexist. “Sweden with the times” clearly meant something different to the King than it did to the legislature. But again everyone has different perspectives.
I’d argue it’s their behavior and actions since that has been pretty awful. Thirty plus years later they still comment on the decision and it serves zero purpose other than making them look stubbornly fixated on something that was long ago decided.
And the worst part is every time they make a comment like this Victoria has to address it and say some variation on how she doesn’t take it personally.
