The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #81  
Old 08-20-2018, 05:40 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: US, United States
Posts: 5
I think gender equality for titles is a good idea. But I don't know if it's better for male spouses to be made kings consort or female spouses to be made princesses consort.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 08-20-2018, 07:47 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 11,562
It is pretty simple:

The Sovereign is The King or The Queen
The Consort is The Prince or The Princess

HM The Queen (Victoria)
HRH The Prince (Daniel)

HM The King (Christian)
HRH The Princess (spouse)

HM The Queen (Catharina-Amalia)
HRH The Prince (spouse)

HM The King (Charles)
HRH The Princess (Camilla)

Etc.

Perfectly gender neutral and a solution honouring the difference in Sovereigns and consorts.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 08-20-2018, 08:00 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
It is pretty simple:

The Sovereign is The King or The Queen
The Consort is The Prince or The Princess

HM The Queen (Victoria)
HRH The Prince (Daniel)

HM The King (Christian)
HRH The Princess (spouse)

HM The Queen (Catharina-Amalia)
HRH The Prince (spouse)

HM The King (Charles)
HRH The Princess (Camilla)

Etc.

Perfectly gender neutral and a solution honouring the difference in Sovereigns and consorts.
The problem is that, while there is only one king or queen ( barring a widow or an emeritus), there are many princes. If you call the husband of a Queen the prince consort, his rank/ precedence is confused with that of his children for example, which is undesirable.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 08-20-2018, 08:06 PM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
So we go crazy and title the Queen's husband Queen's Consort and the Kings's wife King's Consort. No confusion. Or make up a gender neutral title for either.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 08-20-2018, 08:16 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile View Post
So we go crazy and title the Queen's husband Queen's Consort and the Kings's wife King's Consort. No confusion. Or make up a gender neutral title for either.
I have no objection to a new gender-neutral title as long as both male and female consorts have the style of Majesty as their spouses. What I object to is a male consort having the same style as his children ( Royal Highness) and a lower style than his wife.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 08-20-2018, 08:23 PM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I have no objection to a new gender-neutral title as long as both male and female consorts have the style of Majesty as their spouses. What I object to is a male consort having the same style as his children ( Royal Highness) and a lower style than his wife.
I think as long as it is clear they are not the Monarch, (as is seems the biggest issue is with a Queen's husband being titled King) the Monarch's spouse should be given more rank and courtesy than all others but the Monarch.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 08-21-2018, 01:14 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: New Delhi, India
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by semisquare View Post
reina i'm sorry to say but this world is obessed with how beautiful you are no matter how much plastic work you've had done, your body-the thinner you are the better and how you dress.
its sad to say that if you are smart no one cares but how u look..now thats a horse of a different color
Exactly, and they'll always compare you to your sister in-laws and mother in laws (In case of Kate). Overlooking your own work
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 08-21-2018, 03:57 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 11,562
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
The problem is that, while there is only one king or queen ( barring a widow or an emeritus), there are many princes. If you call the husband of a Queen the prince consort, his rank/ precedence is confused with that of his children for example, which is undesirable.

There is no problem. It is the same was with The King (Philippe, Felipe) versus King Albert II, King Juan Carlos. In Denmark, for decades it was Hendes Majestæt Dronningen / Hans Kongelige Højhed Prinsen (HM The Queen / HRH The Prince).

In the Netherlands it was always "de Koningin en de Prins" (The Queen and the Prince). In 1980 Prince Claus refused to be know as De Prins, out of respect for Prince Bernhard, who was The Prince from 6 januari 1937 tot 30 april 1980. Instead he requested to be referred as Prince Claus. In the end Prince Bernhard would outlive his son-in-law, so the title The Prince of the Netherlands was never used by Claus.

Máxima would have been H.K.H. de Prinses der Nederlanden, was it not for the last moment that the Cabinet tought it was "undesirable" that Máxima was "lower" than other female spouses. (Apparently it was not "undesirable" for male spouses...). The Cabinet came with the solution to refer Máxima by her titre de coutoisie as spouse of the King, rather than by her rightful and very own title.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 09-01-2018, 10:06 PM
CyrilVladisla's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 8,023
The title of The Prince Consort was finally declared for Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha on June 26, 1857. He was actually awarded the title by Letters Patent four days later.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 08-10-2021, 10:19 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 4,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR76 View Post
Norwegian royal journalist and writer Trond Norén Isaksen has written an article in Aftenposten about the title of a potential future husband of Princess Ingrid Alexandra stating that "if the Princess marries a man he should have the title of king". He goes on writing that it was the custom in European monarchies until Queen Anne ascended the throne of England etc in 1702 and that there are nothing in the Norwegian Constitution stopping it from happening.
The article was written as a commentary on a piece by "language reporter" (?) Kristin Storrusten that I unfortunately haven't been able to read because of a paywall.

https://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/...r-kalles-konge
Trond Norén Isaksen is a reliable historian, and his article is worth the read.

It is very questionable that commenters usually plead tradition regarding gender-discriminatory titles of European consorts, but willfully exclude the hundreds of years of tradition which were set by kings consort prior to the recent trend begun by the UK.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
In terms of titles, Kings traditionally are the highest title. Including higher then queen. If a husband was given the title king it was believed he would out rank his wife.
The perception that King is a "higher title" than Queen only seems to emerge in discussions of titles of consorts, and never elsewhere.

Nowhere in the many discussions I have read on royal websites and social media have I ever heard admirers of Queen Elizabeth II of the UK or Queen Margrethe II of Denmark bemoan that they were given "lower titles" than their fathers and other male monarchs.

Royal watchers to my knowledge have never argued that monarchies whose constitutions strictly regulate the powers and duties of a King will provoke a constitutional crisis if and when Princess Elisabeth of Belgium, for example, accedes to the throne as a Queen. On this issue, royal watchers easily accept that a Queen is precisely the same thing as a King, and therefore the constitution's regulations for reigning Kings will extend to a reigning Queen.

As for consorts, it is frequently brought up in conversations about the British royal family that under British common law, a wife has the right to take the rank and title of her husband and morganatic marriages are impossible for female consorts. But no one has claimed that if the future King Charles's wife Camilla is styled Queen, it would introduce morganatic marriages for female consorts as Queen is a "lower title" than King.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Spheno View Post
Many husbands became Kings jure uxoris. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jure_uxoris

Pure king-consorts were rare cases.
If you are inferring that historically most kings consort had a role in government, I believe that is correct, but it was likewise correct for princes consort. It was assumed for most of European history that regardless of his title, a male consort would actively participate in affairs of government, or "co-rule", if you prefer. Indeed, even recent historians have castigated the husband of Queen Anne of Great Britain for choosing to be politically inactive.

I also disagree with the claim in the article that the term "jure uxoris" is not equivalent to the term "consort". "Jure uxoris" translates to in right of a wife, and that is I understand the term "consort" to imply.
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 08-10-2021, 10:40 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post

I also disagree with the claim in the article that the term "jure uxoris" is not equivalent to the term "consort". "Jure uxoris" translates to in right of a wife, and that is I understand the term "consort" to imply.

I think "jure uxoris" is technically different from "consort". Philip II of Spain as king of England is normally referred to as "jure uxoris" as is Philip I of Castile as Queen Juana's husband. Lord Darnley in Scotland or Francisco, Duke of Cádiz, on the other hand, are normally considered "kings consort", rather than "jure uxoris".

In theory, "jure uxoris" implies being a co-ruler to a certain degree as long as the wife is alive (even though Philip of Spain in particular was largely removed from ruling in England in practice under the terms of his marriage contract). A consort, on the other hand, as many modern constitutions explicitly say, has no role in government except the possibility perhaps of becoming a regent in certain circumstances.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 08-10-2021, 10:43 AM
Blog Real's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 7,473
The problem is that they are complicating an issue that is simpler than you think.

Currently, the husband of a Queen is a Prince Consort.
A King's wife is the Queen Consort.

As for same-sex couples, I think the husband of a King should have the title of Prince Consort.
A Queen's wife would be Princess Consort so as not to be confused with the Queen.

This issue is simple to resolve. The most difficult thing is the children that homosexual couples will have, that is. Because they need a third person....
I don't believe that a couple of homosexual monarchs can have children...

Do you think these issues have already been discussed between the various royal houses to be prepared for the future?
__________________
My blogs about monarchies
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 08-10-2021, 11:00 AM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 3,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blog Real View Post
Currently, the husband of a Queen is a Prince Consort.
A King's wife is the Queen Consort.
Not really. All husbands of a reigning queen holds the position of prince consort (if not king consort), but few hold the style of prince consort. The husbands of the Dutch queens were all styled prince while the two latest men that were styled as prince consorts (Albert & Henrik) were created so by their wives. Henrik even relinquished that title when he retired. Interestingly enough at the same time that Albert was prince consort there were two king consorts in Portugal and Spain.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 08-10-2021, 11:01 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blog Real View Post

This issue is simple to resolve. The most difficult thing is the children that homosexual couples will have, that is. Because they need a third person....
I don't believe that a couple of homosexual monarchs can have children...

They can't have children that share genetic material from both parents (unless some kind of "hybrid cloning" or whatever is used, but that is SciFi).

It is obviously possible, however, for a reigning king to be the biological parent of a child using a surrogate mother and an egg from a woman to whom he is not married. Or, similarly, for a reigning queen to have a biological child using sperm donated by a man who is not her husband.

The question here is whether children conceived like that would be considered "legitimate" for succession purposes and entitled to inherit the throne or not. As I discussed in another thread, in the British peerage for example, children born of surrogate mothers do not have succession rights, even when a peer and his wife (in this case, a heterosexual couple) are both the biological parents. That is because English law defines a woman who gives birth to a child as his/her legal mother and, if she is married, her husband is the legal father. The legal parents, in the latter sense, may under the law transfer their parental rights to the biological parents (as long as that is done altruistically, rather than in exchange for a financial settlement), but, for succession purposes, the child has the same status in this case as an adopted one.


As I also mentioned in another thread, there was an interesting teen / young adult series recently on Netflix about a 16-year-old fictional prince in Sweden who is gay and unexpectedly becomes the Crown Prince (and only person left in the line of succession) after his older brother dies in a car accident. At the time, he was dating another boy in his school, who was the son of a poor immigrant mother from Latin America, but they eventually break up, after their relationship is exposed by a leaked video, and the Crown Prince denies it.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 08-10-2021, 11:18 AM
Blog Real's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 7,473
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
They can't have children that share genetic material from both parents (unless some kind of "hybrid cloning" or whatever is used, but that is SciFi).

It is obviously possible, however, for a reigning king to be the biological parent of a child using a surrogate mother and an egg from a woman to whom he is not married. Or, similarly, for a reigning queen to have a biological child using sperm donated by a man who is not her husband.

The question here is whether children conceived like that would be considered "legitimate" for succession purposes and entitled to inherit the throne or not. As I discussed in another thread, in the British peerage for example, children born of surrogate mothers do not have succession rights, even when a peer and his wife (in this case, a heterosexual couple) are both the biological parents. That is because English law defines a woman who gives birth to a child as his/her legal mother and, if she is married, her husband is the legal father. The legal parents, in the latter sense, may under the law transfer their parental rights to the biological parents (as long as that is done altruistically, rather than in exchange for a financial settlement), but, for succession purposes, the child has the same status in this case as an adopted one.


As I also mentioned in another thread, there was an interesting teen / young adult series recently on Netflix about a 16-year-old fictional prince in Sweden who is gay and unexpectedly becomes the Crown Prince (and only person left in the line of succession) after his older brother dies in a car accident. At the time, he was dating another boy in his school, who was the son of a poor immigrant mother from Latin America, but they eventually break up, after their relationship is exposed by a leaked video, and the Crown Prince denies it.
It is a complex issue but one that must have already been discussed among the various royal houses.
I think that, despite everything, and to avoid succession problems, it was preferable for a homosexual monarch not to have children.
But what will happen, in time it will be known...
__________________
My blogs about monarchies
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 08-10-2021, 12:19 PM
SLV's Avatar
SLV SLV is offline
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 1,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
Trond Norén Isaksen is a reliable historian, and his article is worth the read.



It is very questionable that commenters usually plead tradition regarding gender-discriminatory titles of European consorts, but willfully exclude the hundreds of years of tradition which were set by kings consort prior to the recent trend begun by the UK.









The perception that King is a "higher title" than Queen only seems to emerge in discussions of titles of consorts, and never elsewhere.



Nowhere in the many discussions I have read on royal websites and social media have I ever heard admirers of Queen Elizabeth II of the UK or Queen Margrethe II of Denmark bemoan that they were given "lower titles" than their fathers and other male monarchs.



Royal watchers to my knowledge have never argued that monarchies whose constitutions strictly regulate the powers and duties of a King will provoke a constitutional crisis if and when Princess Elisabeth of Belgium, for example, accedes to the throne as a Queen. On this issue, royal watchers easily accept that a Queen is precisely the same thing as a King, and therefore the constitution's regulations for reigning Kings will extend to a reigning Queen.



As for consorts, it is frequently brought up in conversations about the British royal family that under British common law, a wife has the right to take the rank and title of her husband and morganatic marriages are impossible for female consorts. But no one has claimed that if the future King Charles's wife Camilla is styled Queen, it would introduce morganatic marriages for female consorts as Queen is a "lower title" than King.

..
But Queens Elizabeth and Margrethe are both King and Queen. The function of head of State is a King, their title is Queen. At least that is the situation in the Netherlands when Queen Beatrix was still monarch. From what I understand, princes Claus (and Bernard before him) could not be named King, as their wives already had that function.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 08-10-2021, 12:45 PM
muriel's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,900
Perhaps for this discussion to be meaningful, a consort should really be invited to join this discussion. Might M-T of Luxembourg be the right person to provide some perspective?
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 08-10-2021, 01:19 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
Perhaps for this discussion to be meaningful, a consort should really be invited to join this discussion. Might M-T of Luxembourg be the right person to provide some perspective?
Wouldn't M-T be tainted by the Waringo report? She would certainly have an interesting perspective to add to the discussion but there's an official report that concludes she was a huge bully that among other things completely overstepped the role of consort and helped bring the Cour into disrepute.

Prince Henrik had some things to say about not being King but at the time a lot of people thought this was part of the temper tantrum about being considered "less" than his son, which is another matter entirely.

I'm personally not in favour of a male consort being named King in the interests of "fairness" simply because "here come the King and Queen" is so ingrained into the English language as the King being the most important one, although I don't know about other languages.

And to be honest nothing about royalty is actually based on fairness.

Quote:

The perception that King is a "higher title" than Queen only seems to emerge in discussions of titles of consorts, and never elsewhere.

Nowhere in the many discussions I have read on royal websites and social media have I ever heard admirers of Queen Elizabeth II of the UK or Queen Margrethe II of Denmark bemoan that they were given "lower titles" than their fathers and other male monarchs.
Because it really only matters when discussing matters of status between Queen's regnant and their husbands. At all other times its taken for granted that a female monarch will be a Queen Regnant and there's no real appetite among royal watchers (many of whom do value tradition in titles and other things to do with royalty) that PC Victoria for instance becomes King Victoria.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 08-10-2021, 01:55 PM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: An Iarmhí, Ireland
Posts: 32,711
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR76 View Post
Not really. All husbands of a reigning queen holds the position of prince consort (if not king consort), but few hold the style of prince consort. The husbands of the Dutch queens were all styled prince while the two latest men that were styled as prince consorts (Albert & Henrik) were created so by their wives. Henrik even relinquished that title when he retired. Interestingly enough at the same time that Albert was prince consort there were two king consorts in Portugal and Spain.
As far as I know the spouse of Charlotte, Grand Duchess of Luxembourg was also styled Prince Consort and was never made a Grand Duke of Luxembourg?

His Royal Highness The Prince Consort of Luxembourg, Prince of Bourbon-Parma.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 08-10-2021, 03:25 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 264
If anyone reads 'Royalty Digest, Quarterly', Trond Noren Isaksen has written a very interesting article on Prince Henrik of Denmark and the Kings Consort of Navarre.
As we all know, Prince Henrik often complained that he had not been styled King Consort. Interestingly, he has a significant Navarrese heritage - and the ancient Kingdom of Navarre had many female monarchs, with their husbands styled as King.
He notes that the style of 'Prince Consort' was a Victorian invention, starting with Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, and carried on by their descendants ever since.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Albert, Prince Consort (1819-1861) Elise,LadyofLancaster British Royal History 106 11-23-2021 07:51 PM
Queen Mary, consort of George V (1867-1953) gaoshan1021 British Royal History 425 11-02-2021 08:44 AM
Daniel's Future: Discussion (his role, title, orders, pressure etc.) Yennie Crown Princess Victoria, Prince Daniel and Family 442 05-18-2021 06:32 PM
Queen Olga (1851-1926), consort of King George I juliamontague Greek Royal History 69 12-30-2019 08:58 PM
Role and Title for Princess Madeleine, Chris O'Neill and Family Marengo Princess Madeleine, Chris O'Neill and Family 46 03-28-2017 08:52 PM




Popular Tags
#uae #abudhabirullingfamily 18th birthday america american archie mountbatten-windsor asian birth britain britannia british british royal family camilla camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles charles china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese colorblindness coronation crown jewels dresses duchess of sussex duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family tree fashion and style gemstones genetics george vi harry and meghan henry viii highgrove ingrid-alexandra japan japanese imperial family japan history jewellery kensington palace king edward vii king juan carlos liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchist movements monarchists monarchy mongolia nara period noble families norway crown princely couple politics prince harry prince of wales prince of wales in jordan queen victoria samurai state visit st edward sussex thai royal family tokugawa unfinished portrait united states wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:40 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×