The change of the Act of Succession - 1979 Constitution change

[RoyalKnottie]

I'm not a big fan of hypothetical questions, because what is done is done, however this got me thinking. I wonder if Victoria would have had an eating disorder if she wasn't CP? From what I have read her disorder developed after she was officially invested as heir and 1995 and started to gain more media attention.

[ZandraRae]

RoyalKnottie, I do not think her status as an heir caused Victoria to have an eating disorder. Plus, she has been the heir since she was very young and she didn't have the eating disorder then. More than likely, she would still have had a eating disorder.

[Zonk]

Let's stay on topic..this thread is NOT about Victoria's eating disorder.

[Lox]

Originally Posted by Stefan

True. And that's the problem Spain will face if Felipe and Letizia will have a son as third or even fourth child.

It amazes me that they are just as stupid about this in Spain. Exactly the same situation will occur in Spain, a boy will be born and then robbed of his birthright.

Changes in the succession should be done at a time when no potential heirs are being born. They could have changed the succession in Sweden a lot earlier, but they didn't. The same holds true for Spain. Great Britain will have the same problem when William gets married, so why not change the succession right now?

[Gita]

Just as bad Lox! If it affects her happiness then I think it is unfair but you know you are entitled to your opinion like anyone else.

[The O.C. Fanatic]

Why don't people move on?! The choice been made get over it!

[maidmarion]

Originally Posted by The O.C. Fanatic

Why don't people move on?! The choice been made get over it!

Thank You!! Everyone has a right to state their opinion surely, buy this is now the 21 st century. Let's get on with it. Women have been proven to do the job with much distinction regardless of succession order. Sorry Lox! Ruling by birthorder is not a bad thing whatsoever. I believe that their own subjects and citizens should decide this in their respective countries. The monarchial society is trying to manage it's own place in todays world. Truly you have to see this. Shall we face the fact that we are presently in 2006. Please read the last posts in the last two pages and hopefully you will see that we, the world in general have moved on. With all due respect of course. Let's hope that the same can done for Prince William and Ms. Kate, the wonderful Windsors of England prior to their nuptials and potential succession issues and for Felipe and Letizia. I truly hope they end this old way of governance. Either male or female in birthright order would be welcome no matter what under this change in succession.

MM

[Lox]

maidmarion: Have you read my previous posts? I do support a gender neutral succession!

Such a succession should not, however, rob a person born as a crown prince of his birthright. Can't we all agree on that?

[maidmarion]

[quote=Lox]maidmarion: Have you read my previous posts? I do support a gender neutral succession!

Such a succession should not, however, rob a person born as a crown prince of his birthright. Can't we all agree on that? [/


Yes.
To everyone on this forum, have yourselves a fabulous holiday season no matter what you celebrate. We shall see you all in the new year and I look forward to seeing and hearing about our world monarchs.

MM

[ZandraRae]

Originally Posted by Lox

It amazes me that they are just as stupid about this in Spain. Exactly the same situation will occur in Spain, a boy will be born and then robbed of his birthright.

Changes in the succession should be done at a time when no potential heirs are being born. They could have changed the succession in Sweden a lot earlier, but they didn't. The same holds true for Spain. Great Britain will have the same problem when William gets married, so why not change the succession right now?

In Great Britain, there can only be a boy heir?? I didn't know that. All countries must change this in the coming year. Spain, and GB too.

[Gita]

Hi ZandraRae, no in the UK women are allowed to inherit the throne but only in the absence of a male heir or if the male heir abdicates then a female can inherit the throne.

For example our current Queen Elizabeth II was the eldest of two girls, her youger sister being Margaret Rose but they did not have a brother so that is why she became Queen.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by Lox

It amazes me that they are just as stupid about this in Spain. Exactly the same situation will occur in Spain, a boy will be born and then robbed of his birthright.

Changes in the succession should be done at a time when no potential heirs are being born. They could have changed the succession in Sweden a lot earlier, but they didn't. The same holds true for Spain. Great Britain will have the same problem when William gets married, so why not change the succession right now?

Especialla when it is so complicated to change the law. The could vote before the next elections which will be i believe in Spring 2008 then the next Vote after the election and then the referendum. But the problem is that the political Parties only agree about the change of the succession law and not of other changes of the succession who have also be done. And there is the fear that when a referedum is held only about the change of the succession law it will turn in a referedmum about the Monarchy.

[Furienna]

Well, I still don't see the point of having a female heir, if there would be a male avaible. When it comes to royal houses, tradition is much more important than equality.

[Yennie]

Originally Posted by Furienna

Well, I still don't see the point of having a female heir, if there would be a male avaible. When it comes to royal houses, tradition is much more important than equality.

what do you mean by "tradititon"? Why cant a female heir pass on the royal house/name just like a male one?
I dont see why the royal houses shouldnt be modernized just like other parts of our society

[ZandraRae]

Originally Posted by Furienna

Well, I still don't see the point of having a female heir, if there would be a male avaible. When it comes to royal houses, tradition is much more important than equality.

So you are saying that you wish Carl Phillip would take the throne one day, Furienna. Victoria is the oldest, therefore the rightful heir IMO. Victoria will make an excellent queen one day I'm sure of it. I hope you will be proud to call her your queen when the time comes. If I lived in Sweden I know I would.

[Lena]

Well, I get Furienna´s point (I think)

I don´t know, what Furienna´s general attitude towards feminism is, but I think, one indeed can see "ordinary" women working in top jobs (like men) and female princesses (with brothers) becoming heirs as two very different things.
You always come up with "modern society" etc. pp. but if you draw really logical conclusions nothing about a person becoming first man or woman of the state just through birth is MODERN. It is a statement against equality as well. And it´s up to a certain point quite undemocratic. In fact the only thing, that keeps these ppl in this office is tradition. Humans don´t like to throw all old things over board (even though it sometimes seems so in the light of globalism, world of consumption etc. pp.) and so actually anachronistic things like Monarchies are kept. I´m truly believing, that a good working accepted monarchy needs to keep "old traditions"...of course one can´t expect them to go always by carriage (Carl Gustaf would cry out loud ) and to get dressed in the morning by their court ladies, but a few things surely should be kept. I don´t say, that one of these things should be the males-first law, but I wouldn´t mind, if this would be a thing, that would be kept in some monarchies. And I´ve understanding and respect for ppl, who feel, that such a change could contribute (together with other changes) to the end of Monarchy.

BTW I think reigning Queens in office are more grand and exciting...and I think Victoria is doing a better job, than CP could ever do (I think he is lacking of the outgoing personality, one needs for the job. And when I watched some old videos of late, I noted that Carl Philip seemed to have this more shy personality up from an young age)
But as I wrote earlier in this thread...the ones, who criticise ppl, who are against equal succession should explain, how they see the role of the prince consort...and should tell how often they wrote things on the style of princesses and how often on the work of the guys...and esp. the work of the 2 remaining prince consorts

[maidmarion]

All points are well taken. Thanks to all for the insights. This is what creates great discussions.
Cheers,
MM

[Lillia]

Originally Posted by Furienna

Well, I still don't see the point of having a female heir, if there would be a male avaible. When it comes to royal houses, tradition is much more important than equality.

I just don't know sometimes.

In the name if tradition, we have seen the troubles of a current CPrince and his wife.

Sometimes it's easy to talk from the outside of tradition, when one is not living it every single solitary day and having these rules and regimines determine almost every aspect of your life. I would bet that it's not always so wonderful to have to live in what some might term 'a guilded cage' but then again, that's just me.

The grandeur and spectacle of it can be fine and good, but when it destroys someone (I'm not talking about everyone who's royal, but certain very high profile examples), I have to wonder just what is more important.

How about this: there used to be a tradition that women were not allowed to own property or go to school or learn to read. I wonder what some people think if that were the standard that they themselves had to live today?

In the end, tradition is fine, as long as it's not hurting people or depriving them of their right to live life like everyone else. but that's just my opinion.

[Penny Lane]

Quote: