The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > Royal House of Denmark

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #41  
Old 01-22-2009, 02:01 PM
Kotroman's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: -, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 463
Monarchy is based on tradition. It is also based on gender inequality, whether we like it or not. For example, wives of princes become princesses, while husbands of princesses do not become princes. Wives of kings become queens, while husbands of queens do not become kings. Children of the sovereign's sons automatically become princesses and princes, while children of the sovereign's daughters never become princes and princesses automatically.

Besides, having a female monarch is so special exactly because of male-preferance primogeniture.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 01-22-2009, 02:24 PM
Al_bina's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 5,604
Smile In my very subjective opinion ...


You have made valid observations. It is short-sighted to totally abolish the male primogeniture. It would be fair to say that some European Royal houses have replaced their bloodline (e.g., the UK, Denmark, the Netherlands). Although the aforementioned Queens do a wonderful job serving their respective countries, the their bloodlines have been replaced by those of their husbands ... technically speaking. I am actually surprised to see willingness of the European houses to do so. What is wrong with having the male/equal primogeniture? It does not matter whether or not newly-enlightened Europeans like it, European countries as well as Asian ones are of a patriarchal nature. Thus, the lineage is preserved and tracked via males. This means that the preference must be given to a son of a particular Crown Princely couple, even if this son is not the first child. If a particular Crown Princely couple (e.g., Spain or the Netherlands) has not got a son, the equal primogeniture must come to the forefront.
As for Danish referendum, the current Danish Royal family has not got a single reason to speed the process of introducing the equal primogeniture. Her Majesty has got two sons, who, in their turn, have got sons too. At the same time ... If Danes think that it is the right time to change the rules of the succession to the throne, it should be done.
__________________

__________________
"I never did mind about the little things" Amanda, "Point of No Return"
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 01-22-2009, 02:47 PM
Kotroman's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: -, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 463
Thank you for taking a deeeper look at this subject. Most people just say: "Oh, that's not fair, women should have equal rights." It's not so simple. European and Asian monarchies are patriarchal institutions and it would be hard to remove all the characteristics that make them patriarchal. If the basic rules of monarchy are removed, monarchies will become pointless.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 01-22-2009, 03:09 PM
Drottning's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: La La Land, United States
Posts: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al_bina View Post

You have made valid observations. It is short-sighted to totally abolish the male primogeniture. It would be fair to say that some European Royal houses have replaced their bloodline (e.g., the UK, Denmark, the Netherlands). Although the aforementioned Queens do a wonderful job serving their respective countries, the their bloodlines have been replaced by those of their husbands ... technically speaking. I am actually surprised to see willingness of the European houses to do so. What is wrong with having the male/equal primogeniture? It does not matter whether or not newly-enlightened Europeans like it, European countries as well as Asian ones are of a patriarchal nature. Thus, the lineage is preserved and tracked via males. This means that the preference must be given to a son of a particular Crown Princely couple, even if this son is not the first child. If a particular Crown Princely couple (e.g., Spain or the Netherlands) has not got a son, the equal primogeniture must come to the forefront.
As for Danish referendum, the current Danish Royal family has not got a single reason to speed the process of introducing the equal primogeniture. Her Majesty has got two sons, who, in their turn, have got sons too. At the same time ... If Danes think that it is the right time to change the rules of the succession to the throne, it should be done.
Excellently said and you made some very valid points.
__________________
"Free at last, free at last, free at last. Thank God the Almighty we are free at last"-Martin Luther King
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 01-22-2009, 03:20 PM
Lilla's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al_bina View Post
If Danes think that it is the right time to change the rules of the succession to the throne, it should be done.
You are so right on that point.

Anyway using tradition as an argument to maintaine the male-preferance system is IMO using a rather unsolid way of argumentation. Monarchys evolve just like everything else. The Danish monarchy has been evolving ever since Gorm the Old was King in 900 ad.

If the Danish monarchy had not evolved but stuck to tradition - then Denmark would have been an absolute monarchy today just like it was in the period from 1660 until 1848. Not the constitutional monarchy as it is today. Or to go even further back in time - then the reigning King would only become King by elections held among the nobility and not by inheritance as is the case today. I could mention hundreds of different changes to tradition in the Danish monarchy but settle for the above mentioned, as I don't want to spend the rest of the week writing on this post .

Now the time has come for change once more. This time it is about implementing equal gender preferance - and it is the right time and it is about time. After all the greatest sovereign Denmark ever had was female - Margrethe I. She was for Denmark what Elisabeth I was to Britain.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 01-22-2009, 03:27 PM
Jacknch's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Grundisburgh, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,759
This whole subject has for me personally become a very interesting one and I agree that people must looker into it more carefully. I have always thought that equality is the best way forward and in most circumstances, such as equality in the workplace for men and women and racial equality etc, should in this day and age be thought of as sacrosanct. However, I reminded of the fact that indeed a man marrying a blood royal princess does not automatically (if at all) take the title prince and for reasons I cannot quite fathom at the moment, I have always felt uncomfortable of the idea that he would! So there is some inconsistency in my views on equality. I think people do indeed need to think about the proposals before making a final judgement.

More importantly, I think, is the fact that calling into question the mechanisms of royalty could possibly be a dangerous thing. Changing rules and traditions should not be entered in to lightly or quickly (changes to the House of Lords in recent years seemed to have been done at the drop of a hat) and there would have to be very certain and valid reasons for doing so, such as the Danish situation back in the 1950's when no suitable male heir seemed likely to be produced and seemingly valid reasons prevented King Frederik's younger brother being a suitable candidate.

Monarchy is of course very much based on tradition and the fact that it has remained unchanged for may hundreds of years is indeed its strength.
__________________
J
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 01-22-2009, 03:37 PM
Al_bina's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 5,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacknch View Post
... [snipped] Monarchy is of course very much based on tradition and the fact that it has remained unchanged for may hundreds of years is indeed its strength. ... [snipped]
You are absolutely right. Many people are inclined to view their Royal Houses as an embodiment of culture, norms, values, and etc., that is everything that defines and helps to preserve uniqueness of a particular country in the globalised world.
__________________
"I never did mind about the little things" Amanda, "Point of No Return"
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 01-22-2009, 03:54 PM
Kotroman's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: -, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilla View Post
Anyway using tradition as an argument to maintaine the male-preferance system is IMO using a rather unsolid way of argumentation. Monarchys evolve just like everything else. The Danish monarchy has been evolving ever since Gorm the Old was King in 900 ad. .
That's true, but according to your principle, monarchies would one day evolve into de facto republics. So much would change that nobody could find any similarity between the original Kingdom of Denmark and the new Kingdom of Denmark. Once they say that "no tradition should be used as an argument to maintaine gender inequality", it's only a matter of time when someone will say: "Hey, why should royalty enjoy higher status than ordinary people? Nobody should have rights based only on birth. Who cares about tradition?" and voila - here we have another republic

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilla View Post
Now the time has come for change once more. This time it is about implementing equal gender preferance - and it is the right time and it is about time. After all the greatest sovereign Denmark ever had was female - Margrethe I. She was for Denmark what Elisabeth I was to Britain.
I was thinking the same way you think now until a certain member of this forum made me realize that monarchs who lived many centuries ago cannot be compared with modern monarchs. "The differences on every level from status over power to the role of women in general are too vital to even make productive comparisons." Today, monarchs have so little power that their political abilities are of small importance. Today, they represent continuity and stability. Each major change interrupts the continuity and shakes the stability.

Adoption of equal primogeniture certainly wouldn't not mean absolute gender equality. It would only trigger giving males right to enjoy their wife's title, which is unthinkable today. It would also trigger giving children of the sovereign's daughters right to enjoy the princely titles and that's also against tradition.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 01-22-2009, 04:52 PM
Lilla's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kotroman View Post
That's true, but according to your principle, monarchies would one day evolve into de facto republics.
.

I don't agree. They will evolve into something. But nobody knows what that something will be - as it is something that has still not come into existance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kotroman View Post
So much would change that nobody could find any similarity between the original Kingdom of Denmark and the new Kingdom of Denmark..
And so what? There is no similarity between the Kingdom of Denmark as it was in 1650 and the Kingdom of Denmark as it is today. Actually I find it very hard to figure out what you mean by "the original Kingdom of Denmark". There never was an original Kingdom of Denmark unless you mean the time of "Gorm the Old" who was our King in 900 ad. (and QMII, CPF's ancester). He was King in the beginning of the age of the Vikings. The only remaining similarity between the Kingdom of Denmark then and today is the genes and DNA in the bodies of TRF.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kotroman View Post
Once they say that "no tradition should be used as an argument to maintaine gender inequality", it's only a matter of time when someone will say: "Hey, why should royalty enjoy higher status than ordinary people? Nobody should have rights based only on birth. Who cares about tradition?" and voila - here we have another republic .
Well that is your prediction - not mine. I am quit convinced that the Danish monarchy will continue for as many years as Denmark exist as long as the royal family doesn't betray the trust of the people. Actually if TRF incisted on maintaining the male-preference they would be close to betraying that trust and they would without doubt get into big trouble.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kotroman View Post
I was thinking the same way you think now until a certain member of this forum made me realize that monarchs who lived many centuries ago cannot be compared with modern monarchs.
.

I was not comparing monarchs. I was making a point about how the Danish monarchy has been evolving over the years. {Deleted comments/Mandy}

You are the one talking about "the original Kingdom of Denmark" (whatever that is) and making some kind of comparison to the present and future Kingdom of Denmark.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kotroman View Post
It would also trigger giving children of the sovereign's daughters right to enjoy the princely titles and that's also against tradition.
This is not something that is nither pro nor against tradition. The right to enjoy the princely titles depends on whom the children marry - nomatter if they are male or female. If they marry a commonor it is the Queen, who decides whether the couple can have a title and what that title will be. Throughout Danish history there has been no tradition on this matter - non at all. Some Kings have done one thing others have done differently.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 01-23-2009, 07:10 AM
Kotroman's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: -, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 463
Quote:
Well that is your prediction - not mine. I am quit convinced that the Danish monarchy will continue for as many years as Denmark exist as long as the royal family doesn't betray the trust of the people. Actually if TRF incisted on maintaining the male-preference they would be close to betraying that trust and they would without doubt get into big trouble.
That is a reasonable prediction. Next thing that will come up will be: "Why should the eldest child inherit, when the monarch is equally parent to all of her/his children?" As I said, the monarchy is based on inequality among the people - some are royal and live in palaces, while others are commoners and live in sleepy subburbs. If they continue going towards absolute equality among the people, it's only a matter of time when the monarchy will collapse. ("because all people, regardless of age, gender, or descent, should have equal right to rule their country, etc").

Quote:
This is not something that is nither pro nor against tradition. The right to enjoy the princely titles depends on whom the children marry - nomatter if they are male or female. If they marry a commonor it is the Queen, who decides whether the couple can have a title and what that title will be. Throughout Danish history there has been no tradition on this matter - non at all. Some Kings have done one thing others have done differently.
Please tell me which princess of Denmark passed her titles to her own children?

Let's continue this discussion in Boy or Girl First Born Rules thread.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 01-23-2009, 12:01 PM
Lilla's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kotroman View Post
Please tell me which princess of Denmark passed her titles to her own children?.
I fail to se why I upon writing - -:

"The right to enjoy the princely titles depends on whom the children marry - nomatter if they are male or female. If they marry a commonor it is the Queen, who decides whether the couple can have a title and what that title will be. Throughout Danish history there has been no tradition on this matter - non at all. Some Kings have done one thing others have done differently"

:- - am asked to provide a name of a Danish princess who passed her title to her own children. There is no connection between my statement and your demand.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 02-01-2009, 02:23 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,105
I believe that the line of succession should change to allow Denamrk to have equal primogenture. This would allow the present Princess Isabelle to keep her place in line for the Danish Throne and ont be over taken by any further brother she has.

Also if Christian was to have a baby girl when he is amrried, it would be completely unfair for her to be bi passed what is rightfully hers, the crown of Denamrk because of some old tradtion, that is out dated.

It needs to be changed.

xx
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 02-04-2009, 04:56 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Victoria, Canada
Posts: 32
Is there a sir name involved?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 02-04-2009, 05:46 PM
Lilla's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 918
Hamlet I don't quit understand your question. Can you please elaborate?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 05-09-2009, 09:51 AM
sgl's Avatar
sgl sgl is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: ~, United States
Posts: 4,826
Berlingske Tidende has an article about a group called Conservative Youth who are against the referendum on succession. They don't think that the genders should be treated equally when it comes to the monarchy and rules of succession:

KU afviser ligestilling i Kongehuset - Danmark

Kind of disappointing that they feel this way, IMO.

Here's another article from Jyllandsposten about the referendum. According to this article, 87.9% of Danes support the referendum, and the change would add Denmark to the list of monarchies that already have equal primogeniture, such as Belgium, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Norway.

jp.dk - Ja til ændring af tronfølgeloven

And one more (it's the hot topic today, apparently):

KU afviser ligestilling i Kongehuset - Politiken.dk
__________________
Be sure to visit the blog!
"I look just like the girls next door...if you happen to live next door to an amusement park"-Dolly Parton
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 05-09-2009, 02:55 PM
Maura724's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: St. Louis, United States
Posts: 772
I personally agree with them (although I don't think I have that great of a right to an opinion in the first place since I'm not Danish and it's their monarchy, so whatever the Danes decide in June is fine by me). I don't think women should be kept from the throne - that's unnecessary and impractical and we've seen great woman monarchs, like Margrethe herself or Elizabeth II and Beatrix, as well as women in history (Victoria, Elizabeth I, etc.) However, I think the law should place males ahead of females in the line because I think there are reasons it's better, in general, to have a King:

First, I think there's a role for both a King and a Queen. Yes, there's usually a Prince Consort, and yes, Phillip, Henrik, and Claus have all done good jobs in their role, but I think you get "more for your money," so to speak, when you have two monarchs rather than one monarch plus a prince.

I also think Prince Consort is a difficult role for a man - it's hard to spend your life walking three steps behind your wife. I think it's difficult for a man personally and difficult for the marriage. (Maybe one could argue it shouldn't be this way, but it generally is in our society.)

If a woman comes to the throne as Queen Regnant once her children are grown, then this next issue doesn't matter. However, if she has small children at the time - like Margrethe and Elizabeth II - then it's difficult for her to fulfill her duties and spend enough time with them, as was the case for both these women. A King who is also a young father doesn't have quite the same problem because his wife has more time for them as Queen Consort and because fathers aren't expected to see quite as much of thier kids as mothers are. (Once again, maybe one could argue it shouldn't be this way, but it generally is in our society.)

I don't know what the arguments of the young conservative group are since I don't speak any Danish, but those are mine for why it's better to use a succession system that provides a King when possible. One argument a lot of people seem to be making is that it isn't fair to deny a girl the right to the throne because she has a younger brother. This seems to presuppose that the throne is a wonderful thing everyone is just clamoring to have. On the contrary, you tend to see royals reacting the opposite way. For instance, the two younger Swedish siblings say they're glad Victoria's the heir and not them, Margriet of the Netherlands says she can't imagine anything worse than being Queen like Beatrix, and I've read that when Elizabeth was a young girl after it became apparent her father would have to take the throne she used to pray for God to send her a brother. The throne is a lot of work, a lot of responsibility, and generally pretty restricting for your life, your spouse's life, and your children's lives, which is why most royals would prefer to avoid it. I think the fact that the Danish system currently keeps women from being in this situation unless they have no brothers is a show of great preference to females, and I think making the succession laws gender-blind would be a loss to a royal woman's rights rather than a gain.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 05-28-2009, 06:45 AM
Tricota's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 160
Yes the vote is in just a few weeks. Personally I am voting a firm No, for a number of reasons.

No doubt a majority will vote yes, but the vote may still fall, simply because not enough people are voting.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 05-28-2009, 07:33 AM
UserDane's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,966
One might almost suspect that there was a hidden agenda by linking the question of the equality to the throne with an EU selection with the notoriously low voter turnout

I will be SO disappointed if we do not manage to update our royal institution and get the equality which is only natural and just in this day and age. I will certainly vote a huge YES.
__________________
Some people say that cats are sneaky, evil, and cruel. True, and they have many other fine qualities as well.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 05-28-2009, 08:37 AM
Tricota's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by UserDane View Post
One might almost suspect that there was a hidden agenda by linking the question of the equality to the throne with an EU selection with the notoriously low voter turnout

I will be SO disappointed if we do not manage to update our royal institution and get the equality which is only natural and just in this day and age. I will certainly vote a huge YES.
There was a hidden agenda. That 2 votes, none of which are very likely to attract huge crowd, could maybe lend a hand to each other.

I dont see why people are so hell bend on "updating" the institution. Even with this vote it wont bring equality.

Besides, the legal mess of the vote, is anough for me to vote no, even if I did agree that it was nessesary to update. Which I dont.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 05-28-2009, 08:49 AM
UserDane's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,966
It is only good that people are 'hell bent' on rectifying an obvious inequality - thank God for that. It may be that when males and females hopefully have equal rights, there are still inequality in the royal institution. Perhaps so, but that is in my book no reason for not adjusting what can be adjusted. And this can and hopefully will be.
__________________

__________________
Some people say that cats are sneaky, evil, and cruel. True, and they have many other fine qualities as well.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
referendums, succession


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
UN calls for referendum on Royal Family Skydragon British Royals 40 07-09-2008 05:15 PM
Danish Royal Family, Current Events 1: April 2003 - March 2008 Julia Current Events Archive 506 03-23-2008 05:56 PM
Danish Royal Family's Official Visit to the Faroe Islands; June 20-23, 2005 pdas1201 Royal House of Denmark 75 07-20-2005 03:07 AM
Danish Royal Family's Official Visit to Greenland; June 19-July 5, 2004 hrhcp Royal House of Denmark 97 07-06-2004 03:57 AM
The King's Opinion on the Succession Laws Binny King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia 13 01-09-2004 03:06 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events duchess of cambridge fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg ottoman poland pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit visit wedding william winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:10 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]