Baby Cambridge: Musings and Suggestions


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
They'd be better off with a boy. A little girl might end up in a subconscious recreation of the William-Diana parent child relationship which by all accounts was not the healthiest of relationships.
 
I would believe him for 4 reasons:

1. He was in a line with other soldiers either side who could hear what was going on, as could the officer accompanying Catherine. He wouldn't dare lie about something the wife of his Colonel has said. This is the army, not the general public.

2. He'd be on a charge if he lied

3. It is the sort of question that she is now more prepared to be asked and would answer in an open and honest way but which did not compromise the situation.

4. He's a bloke
 
They'd be better off with a boy. A little girl might end up in a subconscious recreation of the William-Diana parent child relationship which by all accounts was not the healthiest of relationships.

I highly doubt William's gender contributed to that relationship. The William/Diana relationship developed as the result of Diana's need to be loved and her emotional insecurity, with William (and Harry) being someone who loved her unconditionally. You could argue that the relationship would have taken form regardless of gender or that William would have been hates by his mother had he been a girl owing to the fact that a female Wales would have gotten the love from Charles that Diana believed was owed to her.

Regardless of the Cambridge baby's gender, we have no reason to believe that William or Catherine are as emotionally unstable as Diana was, or that their relationship is anything like the Diana/Charles one. Furthermore, William seems to have a good relationship with his father, stepmother, extended family, and in-laws, as does Catherine, so we have no reason to believe (at this point) that Baby Cambridge will have a relationship with either of its parents, regardless of gender, that is comparable to the William/Diana one.

Although, on that note, it is just as possible for William and his daughter to have a Diana/William type relationship as it is for Catherine and her son I have one - arguably the later is even more likely.
 
I would believe him for 4 reasons:

1. He was in a line with other soldiers either side who could hear what was going on, as could the officer accompanying Catherine. He wouldn't dare lie about something the wife of his Colonel has said. This is the army, not the general public.

2. He'd be on a charge if he lied

3. It is the sort of question that she is now more prepared to be asked and would answer in an open and honest way but which did not compromise the situation.

4. He's a bloke

I love #4. I would also toss in a 5. Saying such a thing definitely counter the "daughter" rumours.
 
They'd be better off with a boy. A little girl might end up in a subconscious recreation of the William-Diana parent child relationship which by all accounts was not the healthiest of relationships.

*facepalm*

The situations are completely dissimilar and I doubt the gender of the child will matter in the slightest when it comes to how that child is parented.
 
They'd be better off with a boy. A little girl might end up in a subconscious recreation of the William-Diana parent child relationship which by all accounts was not the healthiest of relationships.

This is phyco babble at its worst. Projecting one individuals problems on a child to be and a relationship that is in its formulative stage. This is not helpful, positive or accurate.

Just deal with the happy future event between a couple who obviously care for each other very much, and will love their child.
 
Boy - James

Girl - Diane

Godparents
Queen Elizabeth
Prince Charles

James is the given name of Viscount Severn, William's first cousin who is really close in age to Baby Cambridge.

Is it normal for grandparents/great-grandparents to be godparents?
 
Actually The House of Lords Constitution Committee denied the governments plan to fast track to bill citing that the bill was of constitutional significance and could have unintended consequence. So everything indicates the baby will be born before new laws are put into place.

that's ok. It will happen before long. Her Majesty set things up to allow this baby girl to be a HRH and a Princess at birth and despite nay sayers i see in her future the title Duchess of Cornwall and then Princess of Wales. Lastly, the title Her Majesty, the Queen. I know what will be said by me stating this but thats ok we have years to rewrite the laws that will allow this to happen. ;-) .
 
The bill on its 3rd reading in the Lords. So once it gets passed that it will go through parliamentary ping pong.

Succession to the Crown Bill 2012-13 — UK Parliament

:flowers:[/QUOTE

It still has to work its way through the Commonwealth realms. Even parts of the UK have also to pass it on their own. Sark for instance, like the other Channel Islands, is not covered by the laws of Westminster so has also to approve the legislation. It will take some time before everyone has passed the legislation into law.
 
That is for them but once it's law in the UK it's the law. No ifs and buts.
 
Skippyboo, your last point is the one which has worried any, me included, since this proposal was put forward. As the deputy PMis married to a Catholic you would think he'd understand this but no, he says it's not a problem.

I don't see it as a problem, since a super strict Catholic is not likely to marry the future head of the Anglican Church if they know that they can't raise any children as Catholic.
 
Although, on that note, it is just as possible for William and his daughter to have a Diana/William type relationship as it is for Catherine and her son I have one - arguably the later is even more likely.

Really? Why do you consider that to be so? William is the one with Diana's genes. I haven't seen any evidence that Catherine has any of the instability that Diana demonstrated. Catherine seems to have a perfectly sound family background with close and loving relationships with her parents and siblings.
 
Really? Why do you consider that to be so? William is the one with Diana's genes. I haven't seen any evidence that Catherine has any of the instability that Diana demonstrated. Catherine seems to have a perfectly sound family background with close and loving relationships with her parents and siblings.

I in no way meant to imply that Catherine has any of Diana's instability, although I can see how what I said could be construed in such a way.

My understanding of Diana is such: she was an unstable woman prone to depression and jealousy, from a broken family. She longed for love and failed to find it in her marriage - either because it wasn't there or because she failed to recognize it in the form that it took. She really seems to have construed her relationship with Charles as one of emotional abuse and neglect (although, once again, this can be seen as her interpretation of it, not what it actually was) and sought the love and protection that she was failing to receive in her marriage elsewhere - from her son. Because of Diana's understanding of her relationship and the way she felt that she was abused/neglected she forced her son into a position where he had to act as her protector. This is more typical of relationships between mothers and sons than fathers and daughters (or even fathers/sons or mothers/daughters), thus if it's likely to happen again it's more likely to happen between Catherine and a son than William and a daughter - not because of genetics but because of gender relations.

What's more is that while William has the genetics of Diana (although he has not, to the best of my knowledge displayed the instability) and the troublesome childhood, neither of which his wife has displayed, there are still a lot of similarities between Diana and Catherine simply owing to their position in life. William may be from a broken home, but he belongs to a family that is tight-knit and in which he is heavily supported - and belongs to a world that isn't exactly well known for letting people in. Diana had the problem of being an interloper within the BRF who struggled for acceptance, Catherine is likewise an interloper - although all appearances show that the BRF has learned from the folly that was the Charles/Diana relationship and is working more to accept newcomers (Catherine, Sophie, etc) than they had previously. Regardless, though, Catherine faces more public scrutiny as the wife of the heir than the heir himself and in a way is in a position that is more challenging than William's. As such, were this marriage to crumble like Diana/Charles, or if relations between them and their children were to take similar dynamics as the overall Wales' family dynamic, I would more expect William to fill the role of Charles and Catherine to fill the role of Diana than the other way around. It's in no way meant to be a comment on either of them and their own instability, so much as one on their roles and positions.

All that aside, Catherine's own background and the history of the relationship to date (plus the lesson that the BRF surely learnt from Diana), there is every indication that this relationship is not going to end up like that. The sins of the father do not have to be the sins of the son, so to speak.
 
I hope it's a boy.

As for Diana's instability, the situation she put William in was horrible no child should be put in such a situation. I don't think a man is very likely to put a daughter in that kind of situation. Someone correct me if u have a different opinion. William also does not appear to be emotionally unstable like his mother was.
 
I would believe him for 4 reasons:

1. He was in a line with other soldiers either side who could hear what was going on, as could the officer accompanying Catherine. He wouldn't dare lie about something the wife of his Colonel has said. This is the army, not the general public.

2. He'd be on a charge if he lied

3. It is the sort of question that she is now more prepared to be asked and would answer in an open and honest way but which did not compromise the situation.

4. He's a bloke

There's no proof at all she said that. People like to make things up and it sounds like one to me.

Again I dont think she would be that silly to reveal that sort of info to a man she doenst know, right after all the speculation she started last week.
 
She didn't started any speculation last week
 
My husband and I had also different opinions which gender our child would have. We joked a lot about it.

I am definitely sure they don't matter what gender it would have and they are happy when the baby is here on earth.
 
2 weeks ago during her engagement on th 5th march

And she didn't, we saw video evidence where she never said "d..." That was just the media starting a frenzy base on one unreliable witness
 
And she didn't, we saw video evidence where she never said "d..." That was just the media starting a frenzy base on one unreliable witness

Ok but she did start speculation and then it stopped. Some believe some not.

I also think she wouldn't confide that sort of info to a man she doenst know after what happened with the 'D' thing IMO.
I can't picture her revealing that.
 
How did she started something when she never said what the media and a woman claim she said?
 
Ish, the Duchess of Kent and was already married to the Duke when she converted to the Catholic faith, which allows him to retain his line in succession. Prince Michael married his wife when she was already Catholic, which removes him from the line of succession.
I believe this is the gist of the difference in status between these people.
 
How did she started something when she never said what the media and a woman claim she said?
The same way media did with what she reportedly 'said' on Sunday about their gender preferences about the baby.

I don't believe at all.
 
Baby Cambridge's reign

I came across this articles, about about Baby Cambridge and the Monarchy's future:

Kate Middleton pregnant: Baby could be on the throne in the 22nd century - Phil Dampier - Mirror Online

Kate Middleton pregnant: 'silver monarchy' of elderly kings and queens predicted as Kate spends night in hospital - Telegraph

What kind of Britain will Prince William and Catherine Middleton rule? | Mail Online

So, I would like to ask your opinions about the articles, and about the future, not only of the Monarchy, but also about Baby Cambridge.

How much do you think the Monarchy will have changed by the time this Baby ascends to Throne? How many Commonwealth Realms he/she'll find to reign?

I would like to hear your predictions, let's exercise our futurology.

(moderators, feel free to move this for another or to a new post, if you think that's necessary).:flowers:
 
:previous: Are we metaphorically moving from Cinderella's Castle to Tomorrowland in our Disney-fied view of the BRF? I predict that the Cambridge baby, as Rex or Regina will spend its time in People Movers, and the public will find it unfair that his/her grandson and wife get Fast Passes for everything.
 
Last edited:
:previous: Are we metaphorically moving from Cinderella's Castle to Tomorrowland in our Disney-fied view of the TRF? I predict that the Cambridge baby, as Rex or Regina will spend its time in People Movers, and the public will find it unfair that his/her grandson and wife get Fast Passes for everything.

Gracie, your comments always make me laugh really loud. :ROFLMAO:

Any serious prediction about the future of Monarchy and of this Baby? :ROFLMAO:
 
Gracie, your comments always make me laugh really loud. :ROFLMAO:

Any serious prediction about the future of Monarchy and of this Baby? :ROFLMAO:

Um, no, no not really....:ermm:

By the time this baby is on the throne, separation of church and state will be gone, gays will have full and equal rights, and the monarch will have been on the London Tube... oh wait, she did that today......
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom