The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #2781  
Old 11-23-2015, 01:07 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
No not absurd just realistic.

You are saying that Edward should receive something because it was promised to him before they changed the rules.

You are suggesting they continue the sexist policy but change it for Charlotte.

I am saying that Edward should not receive the title because Anne would not be given a title.

Going forward males and females should be treated equally.

If Edward did not receive the dukedom in 1999, he cannot receive it after 2011/2012/2015.

The same for Harry. He does not have it now so he should not be given a dukedom. (Or are you suggesting the sexist policy should continue for Harry?)

If going forward Beatrice or Eugenie will not receive a dukedom nor inherit a dukedom, neither should Harry nor Charlotte.

I originally thought Charlotte should receive a dukedom but changed my mind.
Why should Charlotte be handed a dukedom if Beatrice cannot inherit a dukedom?

IMO, dukedoms should cease to be passed out, except to the monarch & heir.

Their purpose has been reduced. They also suggest sexism.

Going forward the title of Duke Cambridge should not pass to George.

If Harry nor Edward receives a dukedom then no one except the usual
anti-Charles brigade would complain.

I was going to explain why Anne shouldn't be given a dukedom but then I remembered I already did, and you couldn't be bothered to read it the first time.

Edward should be created DoE when the time comes because that is what his parents and brother have promised him and there's really no logical reason to deny it to him.

Charlotte should one day be created a Duchess in her own right because to not would be sexist.

Neither Beatrice nor Eugenie should be created Duchesses in their own right because they're the children of the second son of the monarch, not the first.

But then, if you weren't trying to start an argument here you'd have figured that out on your own. And in the interest in not continuing an argument, this will be the last I have to say on this part of the issue.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #2782  
Old 11-23-2015, 01:10 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
The Queen could issue new LPs to recreate the titles so that if there is no male heir then heirs female could inherit but she can't unilaterally change the succession to titles or allow for first born to titles already existing.

The fact that she didn't issue the Cambridge title with any other than the standard 'heirs male' suggests that she really doesn't approve of the changes but, as a constitutional monarch, accepts the will of her various parliaments.

I knew she could do that for a title that didn't have an heir - didn't she do it for Lord Mountbatten? - but I didn't think she could do it for just any (or every) title. If a title isn't on the verge of extinction is she able to recreate the LPs still? Will the male heirs not have grounds to protest their displacement (or would they still inherit the original title?)

I do agree with you on what is likely to be her stance regarding female succession. If I remember, Charles wasn't a big fan of the changes either, or perhaps it was just the speed with which they seemed to have been implemented (or were being implemented at the time).
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #2783  
Old 11-23-2015, 09:32 AM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,331
I believe when Mountbatten was made an Earl. He only had 2 daughters and his wife was in mid 40s so unlikely to have a son. The only women that can inherit the title are the daughters of Louis Mountbatten. His eldest has it now and it passes down through males descendants if they died out, it goes to her younger sister and then her male descendants. So the woman inheriting is only for one generation not future ones.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #2784  
Old 11-23-2015, 07:48 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,194
Edward VII recreated the Fife Dukedom - again only for one generation - so it could pass through his granddaughters rather than die out as his daughter didn't have a son.

My suggestion though is that if there was no male heir and therefore the title would become extinct why not allow a female heir to inherit? A number of titles have become extinct simply because there was no male heir - however distant - even though there were female heirs and, in the case of my family's title (very distant cousins) the two daughters both had sons but the title became extinct.
Reply With Quote
  #2785  
Old 11-24-2015, 02:17 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gonzales, Louisiana, United States
Posts: 623
Before so many too many people cry "sexism," I would hope one would really think about how so very complicated styles/titles in the BRF (and other royal families) would become. The Swedish royal family is somewhat the start of how complicated royal titles will become in the future. In most of the western world, with Spanish-speaking countries the exception, children (born in wedlock) get their surname from their father. I believe royal titles should also only be passed from father to their children, just as last names do. I know many countries have amended laws concerning this particular situation, but things are just much simpler if titles/surnames are solely "inherited" from the father. All I see is serious convolutions abound - TOO MANY HRH Prince/ss - for a moment, really think about it
Reply With Quote
  #2786  
Old 11-24-2015, 03:29 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,194
In the UK only the children of the monarch, male line grandchildren and the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales and spouses of the men can pass on HRH. Realistically that means only William, Harry and Andrew can do so.


HRH isn't a title that can go for more than two generations e.g. Harry's children will be HRH when Charles is King but not his grandchildren. If, though he only has daughters then he can't pass on anything to his grandchildren e.g. Andrew's grandchildren can't get a title or style or even a surname from him as he only had daughters.


Under my suggestion Beatrice could inherit York so Andrew's grandchildren etc could have a style or title.
Reply With Quote
  #2787  
Old 11-24-2015, 11:59 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,938
NotHRH, I disagree that allowing all the grandchildren of a monarch - through male or female lines - would make British styles and titles more complicated. British styles and titles are already fairly complicated, female inheritance won't make it worse. It will make more HRHs - at this time, if all the grandchildren of a British monarch, regardless of gender, had an HRH there would be six new HRHs; Viscount Linley and his wife, Lady Sarah Chatto, Peter Phillips and his wife, and Zara Tindall. 9 if the spouses of daughters were also made HRHs. That would take the BRF from being 22 people to 31 (33 if you include the Wessexes).

To bring that into what Bertie's said, I don't think that things should be changed now - the youngest female-line grandchild of a monarch is 34 year old Zara. It seems kind of silly to give a group of fully grown adults royal titles when we know they're not going to become working royals, and when it's very likely that their lives would be impeded by them. But when Charlotte has children? It should be changed to allow her children to have royal titles from birth.

I do agree that titles should be recreated to allow for absolute primogeniture as they begin to face extinction. I also think that future hereditary titles should be created with absolute primogeniture as well. We're not going to see this happen under the Queen's reign - the Queen has shown that while she's willing to accept the changes her parliaments wish to enact on the issue, she's not willing to implement change herself - but it would be nice to see things change under Charles and William. That could create some problems though - if the DoE title were to be recreated with absolute primogeniture, then Louise would inherit it while James inherits the Earl of Wessex title, and I think even if the DoY title was recreated to allow Beatrice to inherit, if both of Edward's children were to inherit peerages, Andrew likely wouldn't be happy with only one of his children getting one.
Reply With Quote
  #2788  
Old 11-24-2015, 12:20 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,331
The Royal dukedoms go extinct but are then recreated in the future. You had Dukes of York, Clarence, Gloucester in the Plantagenet era. Victoria's second of son was the Duke of Edinburgh. The previous last dukes of Cambridge were the son and grandson of George III.

If you had absolute primogeniture, the titles would rarely go extinct and would not be able to use for future royals.

Also if you change the titles inheritance for royal titles, what about the rest of the non Royal aristocratic titles. What about men taking a title from his wife? A man becomes a knight, he becomes Sir, his wife a Lady, but a woman becomes a Dame, her husband is just Mr.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #2789  
Old 11-24-2015, 01:00 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,784
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippyboo View Post
The Royal dukedoms go extinct but are then recreated in the future. You had Dukes of York, Clarence, Gloucester in the Plantagenet era. Victoria's second of son was the Duke of Edinburgh. The previous last dukes of Cambridge were the son and grandson of George III.

If you had absolute primogeniture, the titles would rarely go extinct and would not be able to use for future royals.

Also if you change the titles inheritance for royal titles, what about the rest of the non Royal aristocratic titles. What about men taking a title from his wife? A man becomes a knight, he becomes Sir, his wife a Lady, but a woman becomes a Dame, her husband is just Mr.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
There is currently a bill before the House of Lords which, if passed, will introduce male-preference primogeniture (as opposed to equal primogeniture) in the succession to hereditary peerages. It is unclear if the bill will ever become law though.

On the royal dukedoms, my personal preference is that they should become personal, non-hereditary titles associated with a particular territorial designation within the UK, like the royal duchies in Sweden for example. That way, the title could be reused over several royal generations.
Reply With Quote
  #2790  
Old 11-24-2015, 06:33 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gonzales, Louisiana, United States
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
NotHRH, I disagree that allowing all the grandchildren of a monarch - through male or female lines - would make British styles and titles more complicated. British styles and titles are already fairly complicated, female inheritance won't make it worse. It will make more HRHs - at this time, if all the grandchildren of a British monarch, regardless of gender, had an HRH there would be six new HRHs; Viscount Linley and his wife, Lady Sarah Chatto, Peter Phillips and his wife, and Zara Tindall. 9 if the spouses of daughters were also made HRHs. That would take the BRF from being 22 people to 31 (33 if you include the Wessexes).

To bring that into what Bertie's said, I don't think that things should be changed now - the youngest female-line grandchild of a monarch is 34 year old Zara. It seems kind of silly to give a group of fully grown adults royal titles when we know they're not going to become working royals, and when it's very likely that their lives would be impeded by them. But when Charlotte has children? It should be changed to allow her children to have royal titles from birth.

I do agree that titles should be recreated to allow for absolute primogeniture as they begin to face extinction. I also think that future hereditary titles should be created with absolute primogeniture as well. We're not going to see this happen under the Queen's reign - the Queen has shown that while she's willing to accept the changes her parliaments wish to enact on the issue, she's not willing to implement change herself - but it would be nice to see things change under Charles and William. That could create some problems though - if the DoE title were to be recreated with absolute primogeniture, then Louise would inherit it while James inherits the Earl of Wessex title, and I think even if the DoY title was recreated to allow Beatrice to inherit, if both of Edward's children were to inherit peerages, Andrew likely wouldn't be happy with only one of his children getting one.
Wow! This is exactly my point - an exponentially convoluted sticky mess. Everything in life cannot be politically correct. Although this is a lighthearted subject, political correctness is beginning to degrade society into utter chaos. :/
Reply With Quote
  #2791  
Old 11-24-2015, 07:18 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotHRH View Post
Wow! This is exactly my point - an exponentially convoluted sticky mess. Everything in life cannot be politically correct. Although this is a lighthearted subject, political correctness is beginning to degrade society into utter chaos. :/
The fact a situation may be, as you describe it, "an exponentially convoluted sticky mess", is not sufficent reason to not try to remedy it.

The present system is based on blatant sex discrimination, and in my opinion an effort should be made to correct that imbalance, and I do not consider it to be a lighthearted subject. In my opinion this is a serious and important issue that should not be belittled by assigning to discussions on how it may be rectified the disparaging term "political correctness".
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #2792  
Old 11-24-2015, 08:16 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: ***, Sweden
Posts: 1,784
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post
The fact a situation may be, as you describe it, "an exponentially convoluted sticky mess", is not sufficent reason to not try to remedy it.

The present system is based on blatant sex discrimination, and in my opinion an effort should be made to correct that imbalance, and I do not consider it to be a lighthearted subject. In my opinion this is a serious and important issue that should not be belittled by assigning to discussions on how it may be rectified the disparaging term "political correctness".
I agree. That stuff will be a bit uncomfortable for a while is no reason not to do it. It always is when change is implemented. After a while it just becomes the new normal. It's not like the titles are simple now anyways.
Reply With Quote
  #2793  
Old 11-24-2015, 08:44 PM
padams2359's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 524
What about adopted children of peers? This has also been an issue of titles moving on to others even though the first child was a male.
Reply With Quote
  #2794  
Old 11-24-2015, 08:55 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,331
Or children born out of wedlock?


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #2795  
Old 11-24-2015, 10:24 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Illegitimate children and adopted children still cannot inherit substantive titles, although, in a Royal Warrant dated 30 April 2004, HM was graciously pleased to ordain and declare that adopted children could thenceforth use "such styles and courtesy titles as are proper to the younger children of Peers of the Realm". So, yes, the system is rife with discrimination: as to gender, legitimacy, and status.

Even the Succession to Peerages Bill does not seek to give inheritance rights to illegitimate or adopted children, only to women and those who claim through women, and only permits women to take if there are no available men.

That Bill had its second reading on 15 September. I commend it to anyone with an interest in the subject. Lords Hansard text for*11 Sep 2015 (pt 0001), commencing 12.21pm. Lots of interesting submissions. For example, Human Rights lawyer Lord Pannick said:

"The only area of public life that I am aware of that retains institutional discrimination against women is the hereditary peerage. I can think of only one argument in favour of such prejudice: that the hereditary peerage is so absurd and anachronistic an institution—why on earth should a person’s status depend on that of his or her father—that we cannot expect to apply basic principles of fairness in that context. But that will not do. The peerage is not a private club. Indeed, 92 hereditary Peers, of whom the noble Lord, Lord Trefgarne, is a distinguished example, sit in this House helping to make the laws of the land. The peerage cannot claim to be exempt from the basic principles of fairness that govern the rest of our society."

No mention of adopted children, so it seems blood is still more important than fairness, and only if it is contained within a person born in wedlock, not even one who is legitimised by their parents' subsequent marriage!

Lord Fellowes of West Stafford (Julian Fellowes) spoke about his wife's particular interest in the subject.

The Earl of Clancarty observed: "There are those who say, “But what about the expectations of young men?”—to which the reply is, “What about the expectations of women?”. In contemporary times this cuts both ways. The hopes of young women are as valid as the hopes of young men. The previous Government said that this change would be,

“far more complicated to implement fairly".

"The answer to that is clear. If the Government can sort this out for the Royal Family, with all the international complications involved, a simple, effective Bill can do the same for the other titles which the Crown owns and has responsibility for."
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #2796  
Old 11-24-2015, 10:52 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,194
Charlotte though will be eligible to hold a title that is totally unique to her in her generation - Princess Royal (assuming William is King). No other woman can hold it and there will be no one in the next generation as Charles only has daughters.


She could still be given an hereditary title in her own right of course but only if other woman are able to inherit their father's titles - in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #2797  
Old 11-24-2015, 11:22 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Charlotte could certainly be given a hereditary title in her own right. It depends on the words of limitation used in the Letters Patent. Perhaps if she were given one, that would provide impetus for a move towards legislation to enabling all women who are the first born and who, if they were male, would have taken the title that currently would go to a younger son, or more remote male relative.

Though I wouldn't be surprised if, by the time Charlotte is an adult, there have already been changes along those lines.

Or, preferably (IMO), removing hereditary peerages completely.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #2798  
Old 11-25-2015, 04:28 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post

Or, preferably (IMO), removing hereditary peerages completely.

This I agree with.

I have no problem with anyone who performs outstanding service to their country being honoured in some way. The problem with hereditary peerages is that those who are currently having the privileges and benefits of the title have done nothing to earn them. They are living on the deeds of their ancestors.

My preference would be for an elected second chamber but if we have to have peerages then make it life peerages (with no honorary title for the spouse) so that the person who is honoured has earned the honour rather than through accident of birth.
Reply With Quote
  #2799  
Old 11-25-2015, 05:16 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
This is the reason I think they should be abolished. And the hereditary element of baronetcies can go, too, for the same reason.

Here's one of those peers who is living on the deeds of his ancestors: G'bye Pommies - Telegraph He has all the qualities that we expect in the upper echelons of society. Isn't he just the sort of outstanding fellow who should be an earl? (Though part of me thinks it's absolutely delicious that he is. )
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #2800  
Old 11-25-2015, 08:26 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gonzales, Louisiana, United States
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post
The fact a situation may be, as you describe it, "an exponentially convoluted sticky mess", is not sufficent reason to not try to remedy it.

The present system is based on blatant sex discrimination, and in my opinion an effort should be made to correct that imbalance, and I do not consider it to be a lighthearted subject. In my opinion this is a serious and important issue that should not be belittled by assigning to discussions on how it may be rectified the disparaging term "political correctness".
I respect your opinion but I do not agree with it. HM King Philippe of Belgium has rectified the "exponentially convoluted sticky mess" that had some serious long-term consequences - there would have been way too many HRH Prince/ss of Belgium according to the wishes of his father HM King Albert II. I guess laws were made, according to the wishes of KAI I, that all of his descendants would be HRH Prince/Princess of Belgium. Wow - he must have a serious inflated ego. People say Philippe is goofy - but he made a very intelligent decision concerning this matter. Kudos to him for being wise enough to look into the near future and see the convoluted mess that would eventually present itself.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, consort, spouse, styles and titles


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 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
Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children Aussie Princess Prince Harry and Prince William 1353 11-17-2016 02:00 PM
Styles and Titles Nahla10 Ruling Family of Dubai 38 09-17-2016 06:06 AM
Diana's Styles and Titles florawindsor Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 749 06-29-2016 07:02 PM
Non-British Styles and Titles Lord Sosnowitz Royal Ceremony and Protocol 729 10-09-2014 05:24 PM
Abdication Beatrix and Inauguration WA: Titles, Names, Succession, Precedence Princess Robijn King Willem-Alexander, Queen Máxima and family 67 05-24-2013 04:14 PM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll grahamm grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdulah ii king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament photo picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess eugenie eveningwear princess ingrid alexandra princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania revolution royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:47 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises