I am not from Sweden but I would like to say that I don't see why women can't rule even if there is a male in her immediate family. Women are the ones that do all the hard work as it is in the first place concerning the birthing and caring for children. The woman goes through the hours of labor necessary that would produce heirs to the throne. It the woman who has to has to keep a level headed when dealing with a husband, children, home and all in between. To use the woman's womb as a birthing chamber and then tell her that she can't or none of her females can ascend to the throne (if they are eldest of the bunch) just because she has some boys in the mix is horrifying to me and it scares me that people still think this way.
If the woman is of sound mind, intelligent, charming, elegant, gracious, generous, firm when she needs to be and soft when she needs to be, what is wrong with her becoming ruler as first born? What makes the male so entitled to something more than a female? There were plenty of not so good Kings of all ERFs who trashed their country and perhaps if their older sister had been allowed to rule, things could have gone differently. The male may drop his seed off and go about his business, but it is the woman who toils and suffers, but the male has the right to just automatically become king because why? Men have been ruling this world for years and we are no closer to: world peace, ending poverty, hunger, pollution, war, racism, classicm, sexism, under their ruling thumb. Many of the great changes in societies have been institued by us lowly women in the first place.
As the new Chileans President Michelle Bachelet said in the May article of Vogue, "There are studies about how women solve problems. They have a different kind of ethics than men. Usually the woman tries to find a win-win solution. They are more interested in the process than men, who are interested mainly in the results...Woman can be firm, but they can also be caring, nurturing-you can do both things, depending on what's needed." Sounds the like the kind of person who I would want as my ruler if it were me. But to each it's own.
Hippy indeed. Equality doesn't mean disregarding the differences between men and women, it means that despite those difference everyone should automatically have right to be on the same level in the situation they are born in. Being a male doesn't make you more prone to being a better leader nor does it make you entitled just because you are male. C-P did not come from anywhere differen than CPV. They came from the same parents, the same way. The only difference is that CPV came first, in which that should be the only thing that matters. And even then, if for some reason CPV was not mentally capable of handling the job, then I would why people would want to skip her and go to the next person. But I would feel that way even if CP had been the first born. As it stands, if you're healthy and able there is no reason why first born be they male or female should not be second in line for crown.
there are four types of succession:
