But it seems like they only talk about it when a reporter asks them about it. So I don't see any problem.
Well, they have certainly resisted any attempts to pry information out of them regarding some of the quite lurid past scandals, and there were several. From the distance of 35 years hindsight, this should have been a no-brainer. So no, it was their choice to give what amounts to in-depth exposés.
This wedding may have seen the marriage of a Prince who was once Crown Prince for seven months, but the die was cast when parliament decided to change the Act of Succession and followed through when, in 1977 the first reading of the Act passed with an easy majority. That it would pass its second reading after the next General Election was a given. King Carl Gustaf and Queen Silvia would have done well to accept the will of the people rather than lamenting the past and enjoy the upcoming the wedding instead of indulging themselves publicly in bitterness.
Both the King and the Queen were well aware that the Succession was to be vested in the
first issue of Carl Gustaf, regardless of gender. That this should happen made sense since the King has four sisters who were never in line for the throne. He also had an uncle who delayed a marriage that would exclude him from both the Succession itself but, more importantly, the right to act as Regent should his brother die before his heir was of age or, worst case scenario, that he would survive both his brother and nephew.
That Queen Silvia blamed it all on the feminist movement was a canard, after all, Carl Gustaf had to the change the condition that prevented both his Uncle and himself from marrying the women they loved. Silvia's "revisionist" history enables her to vent on her on what she feels her son lost, totally glossing over the self-interest that enabled her own marriage.
But I can't help wondering if their lack of diplomacy, or common sense may have caused hurt and pain to her. It has almost certainly humiliated her. Who wouldn't be with your parents publicly lamenting that their son isn't, who you are?
A while before Victoria's engagement was announced, I joked that the King wouldn't give permission for Victoria and Daniel to marry until Victoria was past child-bearing age. I forgot that she could have just married Daniel without the king's blessing, and in so doing, remove herself from the Succession. Just a little food for thought.
Immediately prior to the announcement of their engagement the King was mired in scandal and there's nothing like a humongous Royal Wedding to take our minds off things. Whatever the reason, their behavior was badly done and brings no credit on the House of Bernadotte.