Discussion about Sofia Hellqvist's Past & Future Role in the Royal Family

[French Toast]

I don't think the family have any problems with Sofia. I think the problems are with the folks on the internet. Obviously, she will get to know many royals over time and they will get to know her.

A wise comment.

 

[amaryllus]

Most current royals are pretty practical and pragmatic... As long as you don't talk to the press or do something totally outlandish or boorish to embarrass people I'd think they live and let live. If she can be discreet and toe the line from now on it will work and I bet she had been told and understands one screw up by her will be blown up and worth 10 of everyone else's because many many people are just looking for a reason to see her as unsuitable or a fail!princess.

 

[Skippy]

Wow, ok. I didn't know there was a special rule that dictates that you must have a specially pious past to be "a sweet and well-mannered girl". Good to know.

That is because some people still have a hang towards the old days of royal glory. When being royal and entering a royal family actually "still meant something" and had an elevated status.

Of course they know. I don't think they have seen all of them, but they have a rough idea. Sofia has also talked openly about her background, saying (in short) that she doesn't regret anything, but she would have chosen differently today.

The court is trying to give us the impression that Sofias way into the family was an easy ride. I'm sure that's not true. But I'm also sure that they have gotten to know her over the years (they've been together for five years now) and that she is fully accepted.

You can't know that for sure and neither can anyone else here - we weren't there.

I don't think the family have any problems with Sofia. I think the problems are with the folks on the internet. Obviously, she will get to know many royals over time and they will get to know her.

A wise comment.

Agreed.

Most current royals are pretty practical and pragmatic... As long as you don't talk to the press or do something totally outlandish or boorish to embarrass people I'd think they live and let live. If she can be discreet and toe the line from now on it will work and I bet she had been told and understands one screw up by her will be blown up and worth 10 of everyone else's because many many people are just looking for a reason to see her as unsuitable or a fail!princess.

For example many people who post in this thread but disguise it by using careful phrases as "time will tell", "let's wait and see", "I hope she'll prove me wrong" etc.. It's really the same feeling expressed through another tone. Because one may hope that no one wants to read the same comments that were made on June 27th and the ensuing days last year - some of them were really mean and spiteful (even hinting towards broken engagements not being uncommon in Sweden, how petty to wish someone something like that).

 

[amaryllus]

I don't think expressing some reservations- this is an unusual marriage for a senior Royal and she is an unusual type of Royal bride after all-makes one petty mean or spiteful just cautious and realistic. To expect everyone to treat this as some awe inducing fairy tale we must wholeheartedly gush over and celebrate or we are big meanies is unrealistic and very unfair.

 

[Skippy]

I don't think expressing some reservations- this is an unusual marriage for a senior Royal and she is an unusual type of Royal bride after all-makes one petty mean or spiteful just cautious and realistic. To expect everyone to treat this as some awe inducing fairy tale we must wholeheartedly gush over and celebrate or we are big meanies is unrealistic and very unfair.

I don't see why we, anonymous people on a forum, need to express reservations. It equals doubting Carl Philip's judgement and perhaps even more King Carl Gustaf's and that of the government. As in "how dare they approve of *her* and cloud my view of how royalty should be"?
We don't have to deal with her and we won't be marrying into the family. Yes, she may be "unusual" in terms of that we haven't seen "a girl like her" marrying into royalty before, but it doesn't mean she is less qualified or ill-suited to start with. For some she is ill-suited and less qualified exactly because of her being "unusual" and even more, should not even be allowed near a royal family.

I do think some people expressed themselves in a petty way and made some nasty comments - I hope you don't think wishing him a broken engagement (or hinting at it, which did happen) is a very nice thing to do simply because his intended is "not traditional princess material".

And I did not say anything about gushing over and treating it like a fairytale, but I did say something about the general attitude towards her - which has not been of the kindest. Would you like to endure the cr*p that she has, simply because some outsiders disagree with what you did?
That is not unrealistic or unfair, it is exactly what happened here. It's considering what's worth it and what's best to let go, and some people can't let go.

In the end I guess it all depends on how you look at it. Either from the royal point of view, or from the human point of view. I look at it from the latter point. The biggest success can come from the most unexpected person/place/corner.

 

[COUNTESS]

Royal is just a made up word from times ago. She is just as suitable as anyone. They are no more special nor have anything special flowing through their veins. Just a bunch of people whose forebears had a big sword. She is just as suitable as Queen Sylvia, whose father was a Nazi. Sylvia is lovely and wonderful. And just as suitable as the King who has had some tawdry affairs. No films included. Or Daniel who is a personal trainer, now a prince. She will do just fine. Made better than some.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

I don't see why we, anonymous people on a forum, need to express reservations. It equals doubting Carl Philip's judgement and perhaps even more King Carl Gustaf's and that of the government. As in "how dare they approve of *her* and cloud my view of how royalty should be"?
We don't have to deal with her and we won't be marrying into the family. Yes, she may be "unusual" in terms of that we haven't seen "a girl like her" marrying into royalty before, but it doesn't mean she is less qualified or ill-suited to start with. For some she is ill-suited and less qualified exactly because of her being "unusual" and even more, should not even be allowed near a royal family.

I do think some people expressed themselves in a petty way and made some nasty comments - I hope you don't think wishing him a broken engagement (or hinting at it, which did happen) is a very nice thing to do simply because his intended is "not traditional princess material".

And I did not say anything about gushing over and treating it like a fairytale, but I did say something about the general attitude towards her - which has not been of the kindest. Would you like to endure the cr*p that she has, simply because some outsiders disagree with what you did?
That is not unrealistic or unfair, it is exactly what happened here. It's considering what's worth it and what's best to let go, and some people can't let go.

In the end I guess it all depends on how you look at it. Either from the royal point of view, or from the human point of view. I look at it from the latter point. The biggest success can come from the most unexpected person/place/corner.

Skippy, your post is right on point and I agree with everything you've written.

 

[Frelinghighness]

What if she was a recovered alcoholic or drug addict? Would she then be barred for life from marrying, afraid she would relapse?

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I don't see why we, anonymous people on a forum, need to express reservations. It equals doubting Carl Philip's judgement and perhaps even more King Carl Gustaf's and that of the government. As in "how dare they approve of *her* and cloud my view of how royalty should be"?
We don't have to deal with her and we won't be marrying into the family. Yes, she may be "unusual" in terms of that we haven't seen "a girl like her" marrying into royalty before, but it doesn't mean she is less qualified or ill-suited to start with. For some she is ill-suited and less qualified exactly because of her being "unusual" and even more, should not even be allowed near a royal family.

I do think some people expressed themselves in a petty way and made some nasty comments - I hope you don't think wishing him a broken engagement (or hinting at it, which did happen) is a very nice thing to do simply because his intended is "not traditional princess material".

And I did not say anything about gushing over and treating it like a fairytale, but I did say something about the general attitude towards her - which has not been of the kindest. Would you like to endure the cr*p that she has, simply because some outsiders disagree with what you did?
That is not unrealistic or unfair, it is exactly what happened here. It's considering what's worth it and what's best to let go, and some people can't let go.

In the end I guess it all depends on how you look at it. Either from the royal point of view, or from the human point of view. I look at it from the latter point. The biggest success can come from the most unexpected person/place/corner.

Doesn't the title of this thread seem to indicate that the sole purpose for being here is to discuss the young woman's past? I understand why her fans are not enthusiastic about that, but it is what it is.

Sofia's own soon-to-be sister in law Princess Victoria uttered a rather terse "no comment" when she was asked about her brother's upcoming wedding during the Korean State visit. How simple would it have been to say "She is lovely, I am happy for both of them" or something equally mild and generic? Do you REALLY believe that if the Royal fiancée was someone without SH's background Victoria would have answered as she did?

Or was Victoria being petty and unfair as well?

 

[Kellydofc]

Sofia's own soon-to-be sister in law Princess Victoria uttered a rather terse "no comment" when she was asked about her brother's upcoming wedding during the Korean State visit. How simple would it have been to say "She is lovely, I am happy for both of them" or something equally mild and generic?

I'm going to guess, given some of the truly horrible statement's that were made on Madeleine's Facebook page when she congratulated her brother on his engagement, that Victoria has chosen to avoid speaking about the topic in general. It has to be very hurtful to see a brother you love torn down constantly over his choice of a wife. Better to say nothing and not have to deal with any potential fall out or hateful remarks that might be directed towards yourself and/or your family. If I was Victoria I'd do the exact same thing even if I adored the woman in question.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I'm going to guess, given some of the truly horrible statement's that were made on Madeleine's Facebook page when she congratulated her brother on his engagement, that Victoria has chosen to avoid speaking about the topic in general. It has to be very hurtful to see a brother you love torn down constantly over his choice of a wife. Better to say nothing and not have to deal with any potential fall out or hateful remarks that might be directed towards yourself and/or your family. If I was Victoria I'd do the exact same thing even if I adored the woman in question.

Good points, except that by saying nothing you simply add fuel to the already rampant speculation that the SRF are not all exactly thrilled with SH's imminent accession to their ranks. Victoria is not an idiot, she must have realized this.


She could have come up with something more noncommittal yet diplomatic than a terse " I don't want to talk about it"...my goodness! It's a family wedding, not an embezzlement controversy like in Spain or a sordid sex scandal like in England!


Speaking of the nastiness on Madeleine's FB page, she not only didn't object to them she let the derogatory comments about SH stay up.

And no, the negativity is not solely confined to the Internet.

 

[MARG]

Doesn't the title of this thread seem to indicate that the sole purpose for being here is to discuss the young woman's past? I understand why her fans are not enthusiastic about that, but it is what it is.

Well no! This thread is actually titled:

Discussion about Sofia Hellqvist's Past & Future Role in the Royal Family

However, thinking that the "sole purpose" of the thread was to discuss Sofia's past does seem to explain the number of negative posts and people firmly grounded in the past. Not to mention people endlessly trawling the net for unsavoury information which can only be alluded to obliquely as the forum rules prevent a full out assault.

Sofia's own soon-to-be sister in law Princess Victoria uttered a rather terse "no comment" when she was asked about her brother's upcoming wedding during the Korean State visit. How simple would it have been to say "She is lovely, I am happy for both of them" or something equally mild and generic? Do you REALLY believe that if the Royal fiancée was someone without SH's background Victoria would have answered as she did?

Or was Victoria being petty and unfair as well?

Isn't it amazing that two people can read the same thing and come up with two opposite views about it.

Firstly, the words "no comment" cannot be construed as meaning anything other than what they say. Or in this case, what you want them to say.

Victoria, indicated she liked Sofia way back around the time of the engagement announcement. That statement merely engendered a lot of people printing in the rags and posting all over the net that, "she doesn't really but she has to say she does because that's the SRF line". So, saying anything is counterproductive. Your own take on her comment proves the point.

So, when some sleazy journalist tries to blindside her with a question about her personal family life when they are supposed to be following the Korean tour, what else was she ever going to say except, "No Comment". She is a consumate professional and would never allow such "loaded questions" to possibly derail her work for her country. That is, after all, why she was there in Korea and not sunning herself on some tropical beach,

Now me, I thought "No Comment" was pretty unambiguous but, as your post illustrates, that is obviously not the case.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Yes, MARG. It is indeed fascinating how two people can sometimes read the same thing and come up with different interpretations.

And why exactly was the journalist "sleazy" for asking Victoria her brother's upcoming wedding? If you read the interview it was during the course of a relaxed question and answer period when lots of personal questions were being asked....i.e. about Princess Estelle's response to her mother's absence. It was perfectly legit for the reporter to ask about the upcoming wedding...ANY Royal with a family member having a wedding coming up would have been asked that question.

And the question was about the wedding in general...not about Sofia.


The question might be considered "loaded" by some SH fans but that is hardly the fault of the journalist is it?


Finally...what other recent Royal fiancée has had a thread put up to discuss her "PAST, and her future role" within her new family? Catherine Middleton? Stephanie de Lannoy?

 

[Winnie]

What if she was a recovered alcoholic or drug addict? Would she then be barred for life from marrying, afraid she would relapse?

I wouldn't think so, but her past will always follow in media and certain circles will always talk behind her back. Look at Mette-Marit and what she has gone through over the years. Not fair, but then most people are not fair, even when a person make a 160 degree change in their life style. Most people seem to enjoy reading and talking about the negative rather than the positive. Sells more papers.

 

[Cris M]

I wouldn't think so, but her past will always follow in media and certain circles will always talk behind her back. Look at Mette-Marit and what she has gone through over the years. Not fair, but then most people are not fair, even when a person make a 160 degree change in their life style. Most people seem to enjoy reading and talking about the negative rather than the positive. Sells more papers.

Sad but true. I'll never understand people who feel happy degrading other people. For me, that's an indicative of a very sad and frustrated life.

 

[Marengo]

Well no! This thread is actually titled:

Discussion about Sofia Hellqvist's Past & Future Role in the Royal Family

However, thinking that the "sole purpose" of the thread was to discuss Sofia's past does seem to explain the number of negative posts and people firmly grounded in the past. Not to mention people endlessly trawling the net for unsavoury information which can only be alluded to obliquely as the forum rules prevent a full out assault.

Indeed, as the thread's opening post says: 'This thread has been created to discuss the Sofia Hellqvist's past, her suitability to be a member of the Swedish Royal Family, and her potential future role within the SRF.'

The reason why we started this thread was that it was obvious that people want to discuss her past life style. We did not want each and every thread about her to be cluttered with the same endless discussion. That is why we created this one thread where such a discussion could take place. A place thread that can be ignored by those who do not find the discussion interesting. At this point a rather large group I would say. It seemed a logical choice to add the 'future' too, so we can look ahead.

Not in reply to you MARG, but a general remark: the atmosphere in this thread & the remarks of some posters to others are at times rather nasty and rude -as we can see these last pages. We do our best to moderate this debate but it feels like the walk to Canossa. The nasty remarks by some posters towards others and the general intolerance of the opinions of others is something we find particulary disappointing. It would be a start to accept that people have different opinions. Not everybody will find her Lucifers daughter, not everbody will find her a saint. Cyberbullying other posters will never convince anybody to alter their views. Neither will rudeness or insults.

 

[amaryllus]

Well in the end some posters are going to crow they were right that she turned out to be a lovely addition to the family and a model Royal princess or other posters are going to sadly(or not) tsk tsk about how they were right and pronounce she was a bad choice who brought embarrassment and scandal down on their heads...either way it will be interesting to see.

 

[French Toast]

Sad but true. I'll never understand people who feel happy degrading other people. For me, that's an indicative of a very sad and frustrated life.

Indeed. Such behavior shows their true character.

 

[Dman]

Sad but true. I'll never understand people who feel happy degrading other people. For me, that's an indicative of a very sad and frustrated life.

It's a blood sport that I've never liked. We've been through this with the DoC before her marriage to William.

 

[Baron Brockdorf]

I would like to just say that those who have a negative opinion about Sofia have just as much right to express it as those who have a positive view of her as long as every thing is done in a respectable manner, I think its sad that some posters imply that other posters have ill characters or that it reflects what kind of a person they are or souls etc just because opinions differ

 

[Cris M]

It's a blood sport that I've never liked. We've been through this with the DoC before her marriage to William.

No, Dman. I remember the Duchess of Cambridge received a lot of attacks, but not even the Duchess of Cornwall was as degraded as Sofia.

With Sofia Hellqvist, some people (in general, I'm not talking specifically about this forums) managed to reach a new level of nastiness and spitefulness.

 

[Dman]

No, Dman. I remember the Duchess of Cambridge received a lot of attacks, but not even the Duchess of Cornwall was as degraded as Sofia.

With Sofia Hellqvist, some people (in general, I'm not talking specifically about this forums) managed to reach a new level of nastiness and spitefulness.

I don't know about that. Things got pretty interesting towards the DoC before her marriage to Will.

Things will calm down over Sofia (on the internet) once she is fully established in her royal role and people see where her interests are. Although, some will never give her a break, attitudes will shift after a while.

 

[Cris M]

Things will calm down over Sofia (on the internet) once she is fully established in her royal role and people see where her interests are. Although, some will never give her a break, attitudes will shift after a while.

I think - and hope - you're right.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

I would like to just say that those who have a negative opinion about Sofia have just as much right to express it as those who have a positive view of her as long as every thing is done in a respectable manner, I think its sad that some posters imply that other posters have ill characters or that it reflects what kind of a person they are or souls etc just because opinions differ

Of course everyone has the right to criticise her. And no one has ever said that they don't. However, one can have a negative opinion of a person without being downright vicious. Sofia has been called so many nasty things throughout this thread – whether directly or indirectly. I don't know about you but I had thought that adults would refrain from such behaviour. Disliking Sofia (or any other royal) is perfectly alright but there's no need to take criticism to the lowest common denominator. Slut-shaming should never be condoned – regardless of how many euphemisms people use in their sharp remarks – and doesn't belong on a respectable forum like TRF.

With Sofia Hellqvist, some people (in general, I'm not talking specifically about this forums) managed to reach a new level of nastiness and spitefulness.

I completely agree with you. And to me, it seems as though much more of this irrelevant hatred has been tolerated than it would have been for other royals on this forum – that might just be me though.

 

[Cris M]

I completely agree with you. And to me, it seems as though much more of this irrelevant hatred has been tolerated than it would have been for other royals on this forum – that might just be me though.

I've been thinking the same for a long time. I'm glad I'm not the only one.

 

[Baron Brockdorf]

Of course everyone has the right to criticise her. And no one has ever said that they don't. However, one can have a negative opinion of a person without being downright vicious. Sofia has been called so many nasty things throughout this thread – whether directly or indirectly. I don't know about you but I had thought that adults would refrain from such behaviour. Disliking Sofia (or any other royal) is perfectly alright but there's no need to take criticism to the lowest common denominator. Slut-shaming should never be condoned – regardless of how many euphemisms people use in their sharp remarks – and doesn't belong on a respectable forum like TRF.


.

First Id like to say that my previous post was not aimed at anyone, I noticed that the tone of some posts (both directly and indirectly stated) addressed to other posters was also becoming rather nasty.....all I wanted to say was we may disagree on many things discussed on these forums but let's not forget to be nice, or at the least civil, to each other.

 

[Dman]

I think - and hope - you're right.

Yeah, things will calm down after a while. Like I said before, we've been down this road already. It was a long road, but there's always light at the end of the tunnel.

I'm looking forward to seeing Sofia establish herself as Prince Carl Philip's wife and a member of the Swedish royal family.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Of course everyone has the right to criticise her. And no one has ever said that they don't. However, one can have a negative opinion of a person without being downright vicious. Sofia has been called so many nasty things throughout this thread – whether directly or indirectly. I don't know about you but I had thought that adults would refrain from such behaviour. Disliking Sofia (or any other royal) is perfectly alright but there's no need to take criticism to the lowest common denominator. Slut-shaming should never be condoned – regardless of how many euphemisms people use in their sharp remarks – and doesn't belong on a respectable forum like TRF.



I completely agree with you. And to me, it seems as though much more of this irrelevant hatred has been tolerated than it would have been for other royals on this forum – that might just be me though.

It's all well and good to assure us that "everyone has a right to criticize her". Yet every almost time a poster does so here-even in a mild way-their integrity and character are called into question both directly and indirectly. I don't think the opinions of posters who are not thrilled about Sofia are any less "relevant" than the ones who speculate breathlessly about what tiara she will wear on her wedding day.

"Slut shaming"?

I see that phrase so often these days. It strikes me as confusing as it is vulgar. What on earth does it even mean?

Anyone who believes Carl-Philip's fiancée is treated unfairly on TRF is leading a very, very sheltered online existence. Have a look around at some other sites...if you dare.

 

[GracieGiraffe]

I've never been a Sofia non-fan, I've just kind of watched neutrally. I don't dislike her, I don't think their marriage is the end of the royal world.

I don't and never did have an issue with her, but I do want to point some things out:

I do think some of the actions of CP's sisters, pointed out by Moonmaiden have been rather interesting. Victoria's "no comment" comment, Madeleine leaving negative posts up on Facebook (not sure what these people said). This suggests to me that perhaps the sisters are non-fans. Now this could be for many a reason other than they don't care for their future sister-in-law - I don't know. They could also perhaps just not care for her on a personal level that really has nothing to do with her past. I don't take this as a signal to dislike Sofia - maybe if I met the three of them at a party, I'd like Sofia but not like the other two, who can say?

People are suggesting that Sofia is well-liked and accepted into the royal family, and it's only people on the internet who have an issue. Not necessarily. Once royals make a decision, in the public eye they tend to support it in lock-step. And not everyone within a family may think the same way. Maybe Silvia adores her, CG just doesn't care and Madde can't stand her - or so many other combinations. As with most royal families, we won't hear of it, and we won't see anything but a united front.

 

[amaryllus]

How are people saying "let's wait and see" and "time will tell" mean and nasty? Time will tell if any new Royal bride, much less one with this baggage, will represent her monarchy well. So we do indeed have to wait and see if she will do a good job.