Thanks! I appreciate it.
To answer some of your earlier comments and questions about my comments specifically:
If you read through my previous post, you will see I quoted the specific comments which I was addressing, and I suggest bearing them in mind.
For example, when I mentioned Chris O'Neill, it had nothing to do with William Isvy or Belgian titles, as I was addressing the argument that King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden would not have elevated a male commoner (Daniel) to Prince rank if he (Daniel) had not married the Crown Princess. The fact that King Carl XVI Gustaf offered a princely title to Chris O'Neill, a male commoner who was
not marrying the Crown Princess, weighs against that argument. (The offer being conditional on Chris O'Neill becoming a working royal and Swedish citizen did not matter for this particular point.)
I must also admit I am unclear on why you felt it was necessary to repeat that Elisabetta's title is a courtesy title. It seems you believe I or others are unaware of that fact, but as I mentioned, it is a point I have raised many times over (long-term readers of this forum are probably tired of the number of times I have repeated it
), and I also included it in my very latest post, so that new readers would also be made aware of it.
You say you do not understand what I meant by "the progress made in the previous [Astrid's] generation". As you yourself said: "Did previous generations of Belgian princesses share their titles with their spouses? No." But Astrid (since 1995) did, so naturally, that is the progress I was referring to, as that was the topic of my post. (Obviously, those who prefer discriminating between princes and princesses would not view it as progress, but equally obviously, I do not speak for them.)
If any of my points remain unclear, please do not hesitate to ask me for clarification.
I will respond later to comments on Belgian royal titles.