Analysis of Máxima

[DMR412]

WELL SAID, Marengo! I couldn't agree with you more.

What makes Maxima a complete success, in my opinion, is that she has connected with people.

It seems to me that the basis for this neverending argument is that some of us on this forum are advocates for tradition, and some for modernity. If you listen to all the posts here, that is what it comes down to.

I prefer the modernity of the European Houses- modernity defined by Crown Princesses marrying non-royal women but women that they truly love. Modernity defined by these new Crown Princesses exerting influence over the causes they support and their public image. Modernity defined by the endless images we see of these Crown Princesses making real connections with people, young and old, and gaining the love of their nations.


On this basis, I think that Maxima, Mary, Mette Marit, Mathilde, Camilla and to some measure, Letizia, are all great successes.

We have also seen the tragedy that results when need for tradition clashes repeatedly over the desire for moderninty. We now have a Japanese Crown Princess who has so much talent, intelligence and warmth that has been extinguished and she has been seemingly, forced into mental health problems as a result.

Clearly, some on this forum prefer tradition over modernity. That's OK- it might be interesting to hear more about WHY rather than just what is not liked about Maxima. I, for one, would like to understand your perspective better.

Excellent post, I totally agree.

 

[Henri M.]

Royal standards

Just shut up, show a cool smile, never show any emotion, be pretty, wear gloves and never laugh or show a bit of humanity (though I remember that some here critisized another crownprincess not to long ago for these very reasons).

That is their 'job', Marengo: shut up and be pretty.

Is there any other woman in the world who gets an annual own budget of € 819.000,-- (appr. $ 1,100,000.--) for just 'being the wife of'? There are no any requirements. No education is asked. No experience is needed. No blue blood is needed. The religion is unimportant. The only requirement is that a guy, who happens to be The Prince of Orange gets a crush on you, and marries you.

And then you suddenly gets an annual income or $ 1,100,000.--. For just being 'the wife of'. That's all. Thanks to the friendly Dutch taxpayers. Please, may I measure her with the highest standards, royal standards, and not need to compare her with my sister or the caissière in my local supermarket?

 

[azile]

I disagree with you, Henri.

The job of a princess is not to shut up and be pretty. It might have been 100 years ago, but that is not the case in our modern world.

Princesses now have a diverse job description that includes the following:

- choosing a portfolio of charities to support and becoming directly involved with these charities
- choosing specific social causes to support and bringing visibility, understanding and attention to these causes (through direct involvement)
- supporting local fashion industry by wearing local fashion
- becoming a voice for members of society who are underpriviledged, disinfranchised, isolated and vulnerable
- becoming a domestic AND international ambassador (international travel, state visits,wide variety of special events)where she officially represents her country
- raising well-adjusted children who are ready for roles of imposed public service- parenting challenged by these youngsters growing up under intense media spotlight.
- completely giving up ALL of her personal/career aspirations and going to work for the state- full time (7 days a week, 24 hours a day).

If you want to dispute salaries that royals are paid, that is a separate matter. If you want to dispute that the Crown Princesses do not have any official role, expectations or responsibilities beyond being state puppets, I think you are completely out of touch with current reality.

Maybe you would prefer things they way they were years ago, under a more traditional model of royal life and roles?

 

[*SofiaM*]

I can't believe some of the things that are said about a number of the crown princesses-especially Maxima! She is, IMO, a very hardworking woman, she takes interest in what she is doing, she is in touch with the people, she is always smiling and presents a good image. What I like about Maxima is that she isn't skinny, she is a normal woman, her clothes may not always be to everybodys liking, but that doesn't matter. The fact is she does what she is expected and she does it well!

I hope I don't offend anybody with what I said, but I don't understand what she has done wrong

Sofia

Edit: I'm not Dutch, so obviously I can't speak for the Dutch people. But this is just the impression of Maxima that I get from pictures and news

 

[Oppie]

Azile

I agree with your post, and I think to some extent Princesses a hundred years ago were suppose to do more than stand around pretty. I know the British Royal Family a little better than the Dutch, but a majority of those women 100 200 years a go were invovled with chairty, they travelled, they repersented there countries, many of them trained in jobs such as nurses and well most had nannies to raise there children in some cases they were actively invovled. The were patrons of the arts, spoke for the disinfranchised (especially in that case former soilders) I think the job has just evovled, but there was always more to it than standing around a looking pretty.

 

[azile]

Thanks, Oppie. You make a very good point- I don't think there has ever been a time when princesses did nothing at all. As I think about this more, it seems that there have always been social responsibilities for princesses. Thanks so much for pointing this out!

I also agree with you, Sofia- I don't understand what Maxima has done to receive such criticism. When I look at the "job description" I listed above, she does all of these things really well. I think she's done a fantastic job of becoming royal, maintaining her personality and personal passions and balancing private and public life.

Azile

 

[ysbel]

WELL SAID, Marengo! I couldn't agree with you more.

What makes Maxima a complete success, in my opinion, is that she has connected with people.

It seems to me that the basis for this neverending argument is that some of us on this forum are advocates for tradition, and some for modernity. If you listen to all the posts here, that is what it comes down to.

I prefer the modernity of the European Houses- modernity defined by Crown Princes marrying non-royal women but women that they truly love. Modernity defined by these new Crown Princesses exerting influence over the causes they support and their public image. Modernity defined by the endless images we see of these Crown Princesses making real connections with people, young and old, and gaining the love of their nations.

On this basis, I think that Maxima, Mary, Mette Marit, Mathilde, Camilla and to some measure, Letizia, are all great successes.

We have also seen the tragedy that results when need for tradition clashes repeatedly over the desire for moderninty. We now have a Japanese Crown Princess who has so much talent, intelligence and warmth that has been extinguished and she has been seemingly, forced into mental health problems as a result.

Clearly, some on this forum prefer tradition over modernity. That's OK- it might be interesting to hear more about WHY rather than just what is not liked about Maxima. I, for one, would like to understand your perspective better.

You make a good point azile. Someone who is interested in the modernity of royalty may have a very different opinion of a particular royal than someone who is interested in the tradition of royalty.

Speaking as someone who prefers the tradition of royalty, I live in New York, the one city that is totally dedicated to modernity, progress, and change. Honestly I love it. There is always something to do here and something new to see because the city keeps changing all the time.

But as invigorating as it is, so much change and modernity can wear on the nerves. Although New York is one of the oldest cities in the U.S. it is infamous for tearing down old landmarks and institutions to build the next new novelty. The city has much less of architecture from the last century much less from the 1600s when the city was founded. Even my own block looks vastly different from when I moved here 15 years ago.

Change and modernity is all around us and will always be here because civilization is bound to always evolve and change. Yet tradition is much more fragile and and a connection to the past doesn't survive unless someone actively makes it their objective. I follow royalty because I'm surrounded by modernity every day and its hard to find an institution outside of royalty that does honor tradition.

In addition to your excellent point, I also think there is a difference between people who are impressed by royals who appear intimate and approachable in public and people like myself who aren't necessarily impressed. I work with marketing and sales people and many people I met who were friendly and seemingly open when they were in front of a group of people for a short amount of time turned out to be extremely distant and noncommunicative when they were in a one on one situation or when they were with people over a long period of time. That doesn't mean that they're necessarily bad people or fake but it does mean I don't assume that if I knew one of these princesses privately, that they would appear as warm and friendly as they do on camera.

I don't consider it a negative that a princess appears warm but I don't give the princess extra kudos for appearing friendly in front of the cameras. I'd have to see them act that way when no camera is around to give them the kudos and its not possible.

I know I don't speak for everyone that follows royalty for the tradition but I hope that explains a little.

Thanks for bringing up the question. You made me think of things I haven't thought before.

 

[Maxie]

There are a few things I would like to add:

-Máxima came into this country and she's here to stay, so we'd better get used to it, don't you all think?

-The Netherlands have evolved since the 1900's: women have voting rights nowadays and the 'shutting up and being pretty' nonsense is already way behind us and I suppose this goes also for a princess with an academic background.

-I agree that Maxima sometimes could look better (buy a comb for instance) but to compare her with a cassiere is a bit ridiculous, isn't it? Or there have to be a few really good looking cassieres in some parts of the country I'm not aware of.

 

[HRH Mims]

Shut up and be pretty?!

That is their 'job', Marengo: shut up and be pretty.

Is there any other woman in the world who gets an annual own budget of € 819.000,-- (appr. $ 1,100,000.--) for just 'being the wife of'? There are no any requirements. No education is asked. No experience is needed. No blue blood is needed. The religion is unimportant. The only requirement is that a guy, who happens to be The Prince of Orange gets a crush on you, and marries you.

And then you suddenly gets an annual income or $ 1,100,000.--. For just being 'the wife of'. That's all. Thanks to the friendly Dutch taxpayers. Please, may I measure her with the highest standards, royal standards, and not need to compare her with my sister or the caissière in my local supermarket?

Well Henri, may I ask you why do you think this?
Why do you think she should "shut up and be pretty" ?

Because of she gets her own budget of $ 1,100,000, she has to do something. Because then tabloids would call her "lazy."

She makes big work for Netherlands- The Royal Forums is international forum because princes and princesses are making their job and they are making monarchies in 21.st century useful. They are not just stupid figureheads, which can smile on official state visits.

I don't know why you are so disgusted by "unblueblooded" Maxima. She married Prince of Orange and she got wonderful chance to make something good for all.
God, some people just wants to have that chance!

So, please think about her work- she is pregnant, but she is making her duties. She is making them, when she is ill, when she is unhappy. She has to be mother for her two lovely girls- princesses. Also she gave to Netherlands crown princess.

You can think everything what you want, but buget of $ 1,100,000 is so awkward sum, when you know, she gives her life to Netherlands and she will always princess which belongs to Dutch people.

 

[Maxie]

Mims, very well said!

There's always this moment when discussions about royalty get to the point where one side starts talking about the poor tax payer. I wish people would get over it. The royal family only costs me a few euro every year and look what I get for it: an intelligent woman who does a great job for several good causes. What would be the alternative? An Audrey Hepburn look-a-like? A clothes horse? Someone who uses more hair spray than Queen B. herself to get her hair to stay perfect, even in a storm? A woman who doesn't have any opinion or personality at all, but thank god, she wears gloves and her father is some German prince? Come on. There's nothing wrong with not liking how Maxima looks, but one can make such a big thing out of it that it looks like it's a mere personal crusade than an opinion at all.

 

[azile]

Ysbel- Thanks for such a great response. You know- you and I follow royal for exactly the same reasons! I am also really drawn to the traditional structure and institution that IS the Royal Houses. Culture these days is a little too disposable for my liking, eventhough the energy of change can be wonderful.

You also really helped me think about what I define as "modern"- and sincerity is a major factor. When I think about "Traditional " princesses, I think of individuals who are removed from the people. Someone who is what Henri M. seems to favour- a silent woman who is there for appearances only and acts only as an image or figurehead. I think that's why I prefer our current Crown Princesses- these are all women who seem to connect with people, have passion for specific social causes and who get involved with real people.

I agree with you totally- Sincerity is not always what it seems. We will never know for certain, although there certainly are royals who are known to be less than kind and warm in private! Maybe sincerity is something that is truly only known over time. Because we all have individual opinions about who is sincere, maybe we never all fully agree! Maxima is one of the people who appears, to me, to be quite sincere. She is quite extroverted and wears her heart on her sleeve- it's maybe a little easier, because of her personality, to see her emotions and to evalute if she is sincere in a particular situation. In contrast, Mary (who I believe is much more introverted) is more difficult to read but, I think, just as sincere!

Oppie makes sucha great point and I toss out two questions for discussion-

1. Was there ever a time when princesses were expected to "Just shut up and be pretty" and there were not any expectations (social involvement, for example)?

2. Is sincerity something we all evaluate in a princess? How do we determine this? How does it change how we evaluate Maxima?

Thanks again, Ysbel. As a "modernist" (!) I realize we're in much closer agreement than I intially thought!

....I also think there is a difference between people who are impressed by royals who appear intimate and approachable in public and people like myself who aren't necessarily impressed. I work with marketing and sales people and many people I met who were friendly and seemingly open when they were in front of a group of people for a short amount of time turned out to be extremely distant and noncommunicative when they were in a one on one situation or when they were with people over a long period of time. That doesn't mean that they're necessarily bad people or fake but it does mean I don't assume that if I knew one of these princesses privately, that they would appear as warm and friendly as they do on camera. ....

Thanks for bringing up the question. You made me think of things I haven't thought before.

 

[HRH Mims]

Thank you Maxie, you read my mind!
I disbelieve there are people which think that role of crown princess is something like you said. People, which thinks that moral code and etiquette from 14.th century is much more important than monarchy.

Everything chages. Oppinions too. So sorry if I should say this so, but I think someone overslept the century and still thinks that the most important thing in Monarchy is: "have blue blood and look like barbie doll. And man (prince) should do the work and be that most important."
Sorry but it makes me laugh

 

[Henri M.]

Job description: shut up and be pretty

It is nice that so many posters do attach so many wonderful qualifications to Máxima.

But as I stated, there is no job description for a spouse to the Heir. There is nothing which states that she should be lovely, full of empathy, interested, have a heart for good causes and whatever more.

She is just 'the wife of'. No more, no less. The job description on the application form for becoming a caissière in a supermarket is more demanding! Diana Spencer, Camilla Shand and Mette-Marit Tjessem Hoiby are the proofs that you need nothing to become a Princess. Let us not forget the 19-years old Princess Emma zu Waldeck und Pyrmont who married the 62-years old King Willem III and became a Regentess for her daughter Queen Wilhelmina. Without any qualification, without any education and in a strange country.

Máxima Zorreguieta Cerruti was lucky that the eye of The Prince of Orange felt on her, during the Feria de Abril in Sevilla, in 1999. This has made her one of the world's most privileged persons. So is the situation. No more, no less.

And now I happen to be one of those citizens in the Kingdom of the Netherlands who is watching how his future head of state is performing. Sometimes with his wife next to him. And I form my own opinion on them. Sometimes positive. Sometimes not positive.

 

[Oppie]

1. Was there ever a time when princesses were expected to "Just shut up and be pretty" and there were not any expectations (social involvement, for example)?

There once was a female royal. She was the daughter of a King and she married a ruler of a smaller area within that kingdom. Not one for standing around and looking pretty she survived a murder attempt at the age of 15, she signed treaties on her husbands behalf (thus suggesting that she was more in control then her husband) and after her husbands death she countinued to rule for eight more years and is recorded in history as one of the best military leaders of the time.

Her name was Aethelfleda and she was born in 872 or 879, I don't think there was ever a time to stand around and look pretty.

 

[Henri M.]

There are only two persons named in the Constitution and these are The King and the Heir Apparent.

Only these two do matter. The first one is the head of state, by birthright. The other is the future head of state, by birthright.

The spouses of a minister, of a governor, of a mayor (in the Netherlands we do not elect ministers, governors and mayors, by the way) may happen to accompany their spouses so now and then. They have no any other role than shut up and be pretty. That is no difference with Maria Shriver, the wife of Governor Schwarzenegger.

That many of these ladies do have their own careers or do a lot for charity. Wonderful. Applause to them. But if they have chosen to remain completely out of the limelight. Also okay. Also applause.

Now there happens to be a country in Northwest Europe, at the North Sea. When you marries their head of state, or their future head of state, you receive your very own independent budget. Believe it or not. Why? Just because you are 'the wife of'.

Do you need to buy dozens of couture? Eeerh... no.... Prince Claus or Prince Bernhard also did receive the same lavish sums. Year in, year out. They did it with the same costumes, shoes and ties. Even in the last 15 years, when Prince Claus was more in hospital than out and about. Or in the last 24 years, when Prince Bernhard was the spouse of an abdicated Queen. They received millions.

Why? Just because they happen to be 'the spouse of'.

 

[rosana]

The point is not what they receive but what they do for recieving that money. Here in America ( the continent i mean) we pay governors to make their job. If i lived in a monarchical country, i would be very upset if royals would just shut up and show a smile in public acts, as if they were puppets.So they are not paid to spend their money in fashion, but as a means to work for their country,and that´s what Maxima does,pregnant, dishevelled, tired,exhausted or whatever she may look

 

[Maxie]

It's all very pretty that the only two people who are named in the constitution are the King and the Heir Apparent, but to get a Heir Apparent you need a certain (in this case) woman to function as -well, let's call it- womb. If that's not a qualification I don't know what it is! Receiving millions for doing nothing and just being the wife of? Ehm... It all seems so natural and logical: prince marries girl, girl gets pregnant, a whole country starts cheering etc. But what it's really like you get to see in cases like Masako's or Fabiola's when the woman isn't able to produce the wanted heir. Hopefully these ladies have a happy life with the money they got for doing nothing and being the wife of.

I think we can at least say we agree about one thing, albeit from a different point of view: this isn't a pretty system, is it?

 

[azile]

Good point. I know that if I were expected to be working 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and every single move I made was reported by media and open to free public criticism, I would expect fair compensation. I would expect a few perks for what would be, essentially, giving up my freedom.

Henri- if only the the monarch and the heir apparent matter, why do you make such a big deal and go to such great lengths to criticise Maxima?

 

[carlota]

The spouses of a minister, of a governor, of a mayor (in the Netherlands we do not elect ministers, governors and mayors, by the way) may happen to accompany their spouses so now and then. They have no any other role than shut up and be pretty. That is no difference with Maria Shriver, the wife of Governor Schwarzenegger.

is that the image you want maxima to have? just someone who shuts up and look pretty? that's a rather chauvinistic and "old" way of thinking. i really support that maxima, mathide, rania or all the other female royals who stand up for their countries in conferences around the world to support not just charity but ambitious projects. it really shows how clever they are.

i'd definetely wouldn't like maxima to stand next to willem and be pretty. that's just not modern and not productive at all. as you said, if you pay someone lavish quantities of money, i'd at least ask for someone who speaks for helself...

 

[ysbel]

You also really helped me think about what I define as "modern"- and sincerity is a major factor. When I think about "Traditional " princesses, I think of individuals who are removed from the people. Someone who is what Henri M. seems to favour- a silent woman who is there for appearances only and acts only as an image or figurehead. I think that's why I prefer our current Crown Princesses- these are all women who seem to connect with people, have passion for specific social causes and who get involved with real people.

I agree with you totally- Sincerity is not always what it seems. We will never know for certain, although there certainly are royals who are known to be less than kind and warm in private! Maybe sincerity is something that is truly only known over time. Because we all have individual opinions about who is sincere, maybe we never all fully agree! Maxima is one of the people who appears, to me, to be quite sincere. She is quite extroverted and wears her heart on her sleeve- it's maybe a little easier, because of her personality, to see her emotions and to evalute if she is sincere in a particular situation. In contrast, Mary (who I believe is much more introverted) is more difficult to read but, I think, just as sincere!

Oppie makes sucha great point and I toss out two questions for discussion-

1. Was there ever a time when princesses were expected to "Just shut up and be pretty" and there were not any expectations (social involvement, for example)?

2. Is sincerity something we all evaluate in a princess? How do we determine this? How does it change how we evaluate Maxima?

Thanks again, Ysbel. As a "modernist" (!) I realize we're in much closer agreement than I intially thought!

azile, another great point and two great questions!

Well to pose my humble answers:

To number 1, were princesses ever expected to be pretty? Well when princes were expected to marry royal princesses, they didn't have any guarantee that the royal princess would be pretty, just that she would be royal. Some princes got lucky, like Edward VII (husband of the beautiful Queen Alexandra) or the Emperor of Austria, (husband of the enchanting Empress Sisi) but more often they were like Henry VIII when he married Anne of Cleves sight unseen. I'm sure she was a lovely person but Anne of Cleves was a bit dowdy.

Actually it can be said that royal consorts had more influence and power in previous days because they often stood in the place of their husbands who were absolute rulers. When the husband was away or incapitated, he often left his wife in charge as regent. That meant she ruled the kingdom. Henry VIII appointed his Queen, Catherine of Aragon as regent when he went to compete in the Field of the Cloth of Gold, and he later appointed his sixth Queen, Katharine Parr, as regent when he went off to war in Europe. Charles V le Sage of France named his Queen as regent in case he died before his heir came of age although she died before him. These men did not see their wives as just window dressing IMO.

Marie of Guise, dowager Queen of Scotland and Anne of Austria, dowager Queen of France both ruled their prospective countries after their husbands died leaving a child as heir.

and to your question number 2, how do we define sincerity.

Sincerity, to me, means that a person gives off the same impression as they really are. That doesn't necessarily mean that I like them; somebody could look like a nasty person and really be nasty (that's sincerity but not nice) but still I wouldn't like them.

Actually I think Queen Beatrix gives off incredible sincerity. She is the inheritor of the House of Orange and she is aware of the importance of the institution and her role in preserving it. At the same time, she cares greatly about people. She cares about her family, she was sincerely devastated when her beloved husband died and she seems to care about other people. Her care for both the institution and for individual people is what makes me believe in her sincerity. The needs of the institution and the needs of the individual are often at odds and I can see her going back and forth between the two; honoring the institution and caring for the individual and trying to figure out how to make it all work; much the same as does a mother does between two children who are very different but she adores equally.

Does she always make the right decision? That would be impossible but I believe she is sincere in her choices and sincere in her dedication to both her heritage and her family and the people around her.

 

[Henri M.]

The point is not what they receive but what they do for recieving that money. Here in America ( the continent i mean) we pay governors to make their job. If i lived in a monarchical country, i would be very upset if royals would just shut up and show a smile in public acts, as if they were puppets.So they are not paid to spend their money in fashion, but as a means to work for their country,and that´s what Maxima does,pregnant, dishevelled, tired,exhausted or whatever she may look

Yes you pay governors. Do you pay for their wives too?

 

[Henri M.]

Receiving millions for doing nothing and just being the wife of? Ehm... It all seems so natural and logical: prince marries girl, girl gets pregnant, a whole country starts cheering etc.

I think we can at least say we agree about one thing, albeit from a different point of view: this isn't a pretty system, is it?

No it isn't a pretty system. It is an expensive studfarm for royals. The whole point was that the Government thinks it is "undesirable" that the spouse of the King or the Heir Apparent does depend on others for his/her income. He/she should not even rely on the The King or the Heir-Apparent.

Anyway, I only ask Máxima to be a grand Princess of Orange. And she can do it. There is no other royal lady in Europe, except for Camilla, who has the chance to glitz, glam and ooh and aah so much as the Princess of Orange.

 

[Henri M.]

Henri- if only the the monarch and the heir apparent matter, why do you make such a big deal and go to such great lengths to criticise Maxima?

Because, apart from her undoubtedly grand days, she has declined in her royal class act and appearance. And there is no any need for that.
A sort of sleaze has crawled in the way Máxima performs now. I wished she would look to her mother-in-law or her aunt Princess Margriet who manages it to remain perfectionistic and take everything with exceptional seriousness.

 

[azile]

Henri, you are entitled to your opinion but it is not appropriate to use the word "sleaze" in association with any royal on this forum.

According to the Miriam-Webster dictionary, the definition of sleazy is :

1 a : lacking firmness of texture : [SIZE=-1]FLIMSY[/SIZE] b : carelessly made of inferior materials : [SIZE=-1]SHODDY[/SIZE]
2 a : marked by low character or quality <sleazy tabloids> b : [SIZE=-1]SQUALID[/SIZE], [SIZE=-1]DILAPIDATED[/SIZE] <sleazy bars>

Using this word may thus be taken as an attack on Maxima's character and this is not OK.
Since your opinions seem to be rooted in your commentary on Maxima's appearance and not her character, I suggest you find a different word.

 

[Henri M.]

Henri, you are entitled to your opinion but it is not appropriate to use the word "sleaze" in association with any royal on this forum.

According to the Miriam-Webster dictionary, the definition of sleazy is :

1 a : lacking firmness of texture : [SIZE=-1]FLIMSY[/SIZE] b : carelessly made of inferior materials : [SIZE=-1]SHODDY[/SIZE]
2 a : marked by low character or quality <sleazy tabloids> b : [SIZE=-1]SQUALID[/SIZE], [SIZE=-1]DILAPIDATED[/SIZE] <sleazy bars>

Using this word may thus be taken as an attack on Maxima's character and this is not OK.
Since your opinions seem to be rooted in your commentary on Maxima's appearance and not her character, I suggest you find a different word.

I would go for meaning 1a and 1b. And of course on her royal appearance. There is no way I find Máxima inferior or sleazy of character. I'm sure she has a much better character than I have.

 

[Oppie]

Now there happens to be a country in Northwest Europe, at the North Sea. When you marries their head of state, or their future head of state, you receive your very own independent budget. Believe it or not. Why? Just because you are 'the wife of'.

So does the First Lady of the United States.

 

[juliana]

I believe Henri M's points are valid though it is also easy to see why some might disagree. It all depends on whether we want our monarchies to continue and with such spouses is this going to result in promoting celebrity status or maintaining the political systems that are in place. Will the downgrading of monarchies to apparently go with the modern flow not result in the population ultimately asking why we have to pay for "celebs" when in actual fact celebrities usually work for their money themselves. In the past, money came into the royal houses with the marriages - now it seems to go out.
Maxima was vibrant though with a calmer appeal to begin with, but things have changed- perhaps she feels confident; she has done her job and is now prepared to laugh all the way to the bank.

 

[popy]

Yes you pay governors. Do you pay for their wives too?

We do, here in Mexico they also work!!

 

[rosana]

Yes you pay governors. Do you pay for their wives too?

No, because they are citizens like anyone else and are allowed to work. It´s not the case with Maxima; it´s understandable that she receives a sum of money to fulfill her duties, although i find it exaggerated.But the same happens with other monarchies; in Spain e.x. this is a common argument among republicans: the excessive cost to maintain the Royal House.

 

[HRH Mims]

Here, when we are paying taxes, they are going on our gouvernment. And we can't wait that First Lady, or wife of prime minister would buy their dress in their own, from their own money. So taxes go for wifes too.

That's the charm of fairytale, which makes monarchy. When you live in republic, no one cares for homeless, no one higlights important things. In monarchies, you are paying for royal family, which makes your country better. It's simple- isn't it.

As I'm reading your posts Henri, I'm getting feel, that you just dislike wife of someone, because she doesn't match to your ideal of royal wife. Times when woman could only smile are in the past. Princess Diana started this waterfall of working european princess. Also not only european, but also some womans in Asia (especially q. Rania) are working for charities, they are higlithing people in need, they are making on conferences about finacies.

Because (if you like it or not) woman is always catching eye more. And they are using the public interest for good thing. W-A is maybe royal by blood, but Máxima isn't. She became a princess from day to day and now she has to work for everyone. She can do nothing. But then people will hate her.