Royalty/Nobility and Gender


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Continued from a discussion in the Danish forum:


If Princess Isabella of Denmark marries at a young age and she marries a foreign prince or foreign aristocrat who would continue to live in his native country, how much would she be helping out with royal duties in Denmark?

-And if she does like her other great-aunt (Muhler, what is the Danish word for great-aunt?) and marries an aristocrat, why would it not be that that aristocrat would not come and live in Denmark?

Isn't it because the European royal families continue to conform to the old patrilineal rule that the wife settles in her husband's country and not the other way around, unless the wife is the heiress to the throne?

Prince Joachim and Marie Cavallier, Princess Madeleine of Sweden and Chris O'Neill, Prince Amedeo of Belgium and Lili Rosboch, Prince Harry of Wales and Meghan Markle: Even in relatively recent marriages, the old rule has still been complied with, whether the husband or the wife was the blood royal. I expect Princess Maria Laura of Belgium will also remain in the UK, where her future husband is from, instead of returning to Belgium as her brother did.

I don't believe any of those did so out of conformity to a rule. It is apparent that Joachim and Marie wanted to remain in Denmark.

Rather, job opportunities (and strong personal preferences) appear to be the driving forces for the couples mentioned. Not conformity with arcane rules.

I agree. It is just about choices in life. The brothers of the Dutch King have lived in the Netherlands, the USA, Belgium, France, the UK, just corrresponding with their stage of life (study, work) and opportunities at that moment. Likewise Mabel and Laurentien have lived in the Netherlands, in Japan, in Belgium, in the UK.

But job opportunities, personal preferences and choices in life are sensitive to and affected by gender structures. When the given couples made their choice as to which country they would live in, they prioritized the husband's job or royal service over those of the wife.

Princes Joachim and Harry continued to represent the monarchy after marriage, whereas their wives renounced their premarital careers and relocated to their husbands' countries in order to work for their husbands' royal families.

Princess Madeleine and Chris O'Neill's moves to his native countries were explicitly announced as being motivated by his professional needs, whereas Princess Madeleine severely reduced her official program and her private work with her mother's foundation as a consequence.

The situation of the brothers of the Dutch king is quite different as they moved abroad before and not in connection with their marriages: Their wives were also Dutchwomen.
 
Continued from a discussion in the Danish forum:












But job opportunities, personal preferences and choices in life are sensitive to and affected by gender structures. When the given couples made their choice as to which country they would live in, they prioritized the husband's job or royal service over those of the wife.

Princes Joachim and Harry continued to represent the monarchy after marriage, whereas their wives renounced their premarital careers and relocated to their husbands' countries in order to work for their husbands' royal families.

Princess Madeleine and Chris O'Neill's moves to his native countries were explicitly announced as being motivated by his professional needs, whereas Princess Madeleine severely reduced her official program and her private work with her mother's foundation as a consequence.

The situation of the brothers of the Dutch king is quite different as they moved abroad before and not in connection with their marriages: Their wives were also Dutchwomen.




Actually Prince Amedeo and his Family are living in Switzerland now.
 
Continued from a discussion in the Danish forum:












But job opportunities, personal preferences and choices in life are sensitive to and affected by gender structures. When the given couples made their choice as to which country they would live in, they prioritized the husband's job or royal service over those of the wife.

Princes Joachim and Harry continued to represent the monarchy after marriage, whereas their wives renounced their premarital careers and relocated to their husbands' countries in order to work for their husbands' royal families.

Princess Madeleine and Chris O'Neill's moves to his native countries were explicitly announced as being motivated by his professional needs, whereas Princess Madeleine severely reduced her official program and her private work with her mother's foundation as a consequence.

The situation of the brothers of the Dutch king is quite different as they moved abroad before and not in connection with their marriages: Their wives were also Dutchwomen.
Well with Harry and Meghan, Meghan wasn’t actively involved in acting around the time she was dating Harry. Princess Madeline could have easily left Sweden because she wasn’t the heir and Chris’s business affairs had something of a conflict of interest in Sweden.
 
Actually Prince Amedeo and his Family are living in Switzerland now.

Yes, and that is also a choice corresponding more to the husband's interests than the wife's. Basel is the location of Prince Amedeo's paternal investment firm, where he himself is now employed, and it is where he was raised until the age of seven. Princess Elisabetta, on the other hand, has no special connection to Switzerland.


Princess Madeline could have easily left Sweden because she wasn’t the heir and Chris’s business affairs had something of a conflict of interest in Sweden.

All the same, if the genders had been reversed, the conflict of interest would most likely have been settled by the non-heir prince's Anglo-American businesswoman wife giving up her career upon marriage. Her brother Prince Carl Philip's girlfriend Sofia Hellqvist, who had established herself and worked in the United States for many years, immediately renounced her career and returned to Sweden once she began a relationship with the prince.
 
Yes, and that is also a choice corresponding more to the husband's interests than the wife's. Basel is the location of Prince Amedeo's paternal investment firm, where he himself is now employed, and it is where he was raised until the age of seven. Princess Elisabetta, on the other hand, has no special connection to Switzerland.




All the same, if the genders had been reversed, the conflict of interest would most likely have been settled by the non-heir prince's Anglo-American businesswoman wife giving up her career upon marriage. Her brother Prince Carl Philip's girlfriend Sofia Hellqvist, who had established herself and worked in the United States for many years, immediately renounced her career and returned to Sweden once she began a relationship with the prince.
it would make sense because some of the royals would be working and being high profile more would be expected. But for Chris, it was because the company that he never took on citizenship or permanently living in Sweden.
 
:previous: Sorry, I'm not clear on whom the first sentence refers to. Your second point is the one I was addressing in my previous post.
 
Yes, and that is also a choice corresponding more to the husband's interests than the wife's. Basel is the location of Prince Amedeo's paternal investment firm, where he himself is now employed, and it is where he was raised until the age of seven. Princess Elisabetta, on the other hand, has no special connection to Switzerland.




All the same, if the genders had been reversed, the conflict of interest would most likely have been settled by the non-heir prince's Anglo-American businesswoman wife giving up her career upon marriage. Her brother Prince Carl Philip's girlfriend Sofia Hellqvist, who had established herself and worked in the United States for many years, immediately renounced her career and returned to Sweden once she began a relationship with the prince.

When did she leave New York and when did they start their relationship? I wasn't aware of any link between those two events.

Her royal biography is very vague and lacks this kind of detail - it just mentions that she studied "accounting with computer application, specialising in business development, at the Institute of English and Business in New York." (without any mention of graduation) and that she "also studied at YTTP, Yoga To The People, to become a certified yoga instructor. She was also involved in setting up a yoga centre." Again, rather vague and not necessarily indicative that she 'established herself' and worked their for many years and had a real career. Instead it mentions that she took various courses at Stockholm university (which according to some Swedish courses happened after she returned from New York - and while working as a waitress and model) and did voluntary work in Ghana (her voluntary work indeed seemed related to working on her profile as potential future wife of CP).
 
When did she leave New York and when did they start their relationship? I wasn't aware of any link between those two events.

I reviewed the links to news reports posted in the couple's first thread on TRF to double-check. It seems that subsequent to the first reports of the romance in January 2010, the couple were regularly photographed with one another from April 2010 onwards, always in Sweden and sometimes at Prince Carl Philip's home. By September 2010 there were headlines expressly stating that the couple were living together (at the prince's residence).
 
So, the question is: when did she move back from New York? That could easily have been for a completely different reason than meeting CP. As far as I can tell we don't even know whether she had moved back to Sweden before meeting him or after meeting him. I cannot recall anyone else linking those two things to each other, so I am trying to find (indications of) the evidence that her relationship was the reason for her move.
 
Last edited:
So, the question is: when did she move back from New York? That could easily have been for a completely different reason than meeting CP. As far as I can tell we don't even know whether she had moved back to Sweden before meeting him or after meeting him. I cannot recall anyone else linking those two things to each other, so I am trying to find (indications of) the evidence that her relationship was the reason for her move.

Interesting. I recall my overall impression from reading news reports as being that Sofia Hellqvist returned from New York to Sweden around the beginning of her relationship with Prince Carl Philip and cannot recall anyone else reporting an alternative timeframe. But your recollection is as good as mine.

Scanning through the aforementioned TRF thread, the Realtid article from June 2010 implies that she only recently returned from New York after two years in order to begin studying social entrepreneurship at Stockholm University. TRF member Boris (who was typically very reliable) also mentioned in 2011 that

One of the less appealing stories which were in the press about her in fall last year [2010] was that she had intended to apply for a spot at a Swedish university upon returning from New York, but missed the deadline to hand in her paperwork, while at the same time trying to collect student's state benefits regardless."
 
Last edited:
Yes, and that is also a choice corresponding more to the husband's interests than the wife's. Basel is the location of Prince Amedeo's paternal investment firm, where he himself is now employed, and it is where he was raised until the age of seven. Princess Elisabetta, on the other hand, has no special connection to Switzerland.




All the same, if the genders had been reversed, the conflict of interest would most likely have been settled by the non-heir prince's Anglo-American businesswoman wife giving up her career upon marriage. Her brother Prince Carl Philip's girlfriend Sofia Hellqvist, who had established herself and worked in the United States for many years, immediately renounced her career and returned to Sweden once she began a relationship with the prince.
Amedeo and his wife aren’t working royals in Belgium and they are very well off, especially Lili’s family so that’s no issue or conflict of interest plus she’s a relatively young mother. Lili has relatives who live in Switzerland. As for Chris, he didn’t want Swedish citizenship or to be a working royal and Madeline is a junior royal so her leaving is not an issue. If the genders were reversed and the “female Anglo-American businesswoman” came in, I’m not necessarily sure because it depends on how highly ranked that person would be.
 
Amedeo and his wife aren’t working royals in Belgium and they are very well off, especially Lili’s family so that’s no issue or conflict of interest plus she’s a relatively young mother. Lili has relatives who live in Switzerland. As for Chris, he didn’t want Swedish citizenship or to be a working royal and Madeline is a junior royal so her leaving is not an issue. If the genders were reversed and the “female Anglo-American businesswoman” came in, I’m not necessarily sure because it depends on how highly ranked that person would be.

I wasn't saying there were issues with the working royals or conflicts of interests with Lili moving to Switzerland or Madeleine moving to America. I stated that most royal couples still conform to the old "rule" that the wife follows the residence of her husband and not the other way around, giving them and other couples as examples.
 
Last edited:
In October 1993,Viscount Linley now the second Earl of Snowdon married the Ango-Irish noble,Serena Alleyne Stanhope (daughter of the then Viscount Petersham)
 
I stated that most royal couples still conform to the old "rule" that the wife follows the residence of her husband and not the other way around, giving them and other couples as examples.

Might have something to do with the fact, that until recently all was in the most cases inherited by the oldest son... And it will stay that way for the most families, albeit in Sweden and so on the course has been changing - a female yoga instructor for the Prince, ok, but a male fitness trainer for the Princess...
 
I wasn't saying there were issues with the working royals or conflicts of interests with Lili moving to Switzerland or Madeleine moving to America. I stated that most royal couples still conform to the old "rule" that the wife follows the residence of her husband and not the other way around, giving them and other couples as examples.
Well it depends on the couples, the financial situation of the respective individuals, among other things.
 
Interesting. I recall my overall impression from reading news reports as being that Sofia Hellqvist returned from New York to Sweden around the beginning of her relationship with Prince Carl Philip and cannot recall anyone else reporting an alternative timeframe. But your recollection is as good as mine.

Scanning through the aforementioned TRF thread, the Realtid article from June 2010 implies that she only recently returned from New York after two years in order to begin studying social entrepreneurship at Stockholm University. TRF member Boris (who was typically very reliable) also mentioned in 2011 that

Thanks. So, it seems she had not been back in Sweden for a long time (probably in summer 2009 if she intended to start studying at Stockholm University in September - or earlier if she lived in New York for only 2 years; not exactly sure when she moved there). Nonetheless, my question was primarily about the reason for the move: so, the question remains whether she moved back because of CP as you claimed or moved back to Sweden for another reason (study for example), met CP and (not long after that) became his girlfriend.
 
Last edited:
Might have something to do with the fact, that until recently all was in the most cases inherited by the oldest son... And it will stay that way for the most families, albeit in Sweden and so on the course has been changing - a female yoga instructor for the Prince, ok, but a male fitness trainer for the Princess...

Indeed, and not only for oldest sons. Prince Carl Philip has received more in the way of inherited property than Princess Madeleine or the Crown Princess.


Well it depends on the couples, the financial situation of the respective individuals, among other things.

Financial considerations also tilt the scale towards the wife being the partner to move. In the majority of couples the husband is higher-paid than the wife, and, as victor1319 pointed out, the men are more likely than the women to benefit from family inheritances.


Thanks. So, it seems she had not been back in Sweden for a long time (probably in summer 2009 if she intended to start studying at Stockholm University in September - or earlier if she lived in New York for only 2 years; not exactly sure when she moved there). Nonetheless, my question was primarily about the reason for the move: so, the question remains whether she moved back because of CP as you claimed or moved back to Sweden for another reason (study for example), met CP and (not long after that) became his girlfriend.

I agree that the reason for the move cannot be proven one way or the other. However, the fact that, in the four years between her return to Sweden and her formal engagement to the prince, she did not engage in any professional work or training but devoted her time to courses, charity work and public activities similar to those of the queen and princesses, does in my view strongly indicate that she intended to give up her former life and career and take on her husband's status, which was the eventual outcome.
 
Last edited:
I don’t know whether this is an acceptable source for anything, but it does mention that CP and Sofia met in Sweden in 2009 and it ‘was love at first sight’. It also mentions Sofia’s stint in NY and what she did there.

https://www.independent.ie/style/ce...nd-prince-carl-philip-of-sweden-34115266.html

[FONT=&quot]5. The loved-up couple met on holiday in Bastad, Sweden in 2009 and described their meeting as “love at first sight.”[/FONT]
 
I agree that the reason for the move cannot be proven one way or the other. However, the fact that, in the four years between her return to Sweden and her formal engagement to the prince, she did not engage in any professional work or training but devoted her time to courses, charity work and public activities similar to those of the queen and princesses, does in my view strongly indicate that she intended to give up her former life and career and take on her husband's status, which was the eventual outcome.

To the latter I fully agree - as I indicated from the start. Once she was in a (somewhat steady) relationship with Carl Philip she indeed dedicated her life to becoming an acceptable future wife by doing charity work. She didn't have a promising career or education to fall back on but did have a concerning past with her 'modeling' work. So, she needed to do something... She could have chosen to pursue a (different) career (but I'm not sure that she had the qualifications as she started her modeling career quite early on which probably was detrimental to her education) and show what's she was capable of outside of her looks but instead went the 'royal' way of doing charitable work to pass her time and become acceptable as royal bride.
 
Moved from the thread "Christian, Isabella, Vincent and Josephine, News Part 4: June 2023-".

I remember clearly the treatment Madeleine of Sweden got! She was vilified to no end. Couldn't do anything right and was basically a mindless bimbo. - My guess is that she was (is) too pretty. No wonder she left for USA.
And Alexia of the Netherlands also get some regular bashing. And IMO again it's down to her being too pretty.

I'm going to claim that it's not the guys who are bashing these three women...

I will merely point to the posters who have been and are detractors of Madeleine, MC and Alexia here on TRF. Even though women constitute the vast majority of members I dare maintain that those who were/are most critical are almost exclusively women.

I'm not sure that would be of much significance. If it is true that women constitute the vast majority of members, then it is only to be expected that the vast majority of any given royal's detractors will be women - and the vast majority of their detractors' detractors. ;)

And as you raised the examples of Madeleine, Maria Chiara and Alexia, I will offer as a counterpoint that the majority of people on the internet who enforce sentiments such as "Madeleine's children aren't real Bernadottes and should be plain Miss/Mr. O'Neill (because she is a woman)" or "Maria Chiara and her sister Maria Carolina aren't rightful heirs to the headship of the Bourbon-Two Sicilies family (because they are women)" appear to be male.

Indeed, however I do seem to notice a very distinct absence of male members actually bashing these three women.

As for your second point: Isn't that more a defense of the current rule about female royals (and female nobles) losing personal titles and status upon marriage? A rule that has been around forever? Rather than de-valuating women?

Both my and your examples of women being devalued compared to men (your example being "party girls" receiving more bashing than "party boys") have been around forever. The rule that women must be more restrained than men in their personal behavior is as ancient as the rule that women when marrying must give up their position in their family of origin and take up the position of consort to their husband and member of his family.


I do believe women should not automatically lose their titles and status upon marriage. That's outdated and as most royal families champion women's rights, pretty hypocritical as well.

I fully agree with you on that.
 
Indeed, and not only for oldest sons. Prince Carl Philip has received more in the way of inherited property than Princess Madeleine or the Crown Princess.




Financial considerations also tilt the scale towards the wife being the partner to move. In the majority of couples the husband is higher-paid than the wife, and, as victor1319 pointed out, the men are more likely than the women to benefit from family inheritances.




I agree that the reason for the move cannot be proven one way or the other. However, the fact that, in the four years between her return to Sweden and her formal engagement to the prince, she did not engage in any professional work or training but devoted her time to courses, charity work and public activities similar to those of the queen and princesses, does in my view strongly indicate that she intended to give up her former life and career and take on her husband's status, which was the eventual outcome.
But didn’t Carl-Philip sign over assets of the Galliera foundation to the CP? It would make some sense for Carl to receive more of the inheritance than Madeline because Madeleine’s husband is independently wealthy and his father was wealthy, but Sofia doesn’t come from wealth. Unless you’re talking about some other inheritance?
 
Moved from the thread "Christian, Isabella, Vincent and Josephine, News Part 4: June 2023-".

Both my and your examples of women being devalued compared to men (your example being "party girls" receiving more bashing than "party boys") have been around forever. The rule that women must be more restrained than men in their personal behavior is as ancient as the rule that women when marrying must give up their position in their family of origin and take up the position of consort to their husband and member of his family.

I fully agree with you on that.

I'd say we are pretty much in agreement.

Though, as for "party princes" they too have been whacked on the heads in the past, perhaps more by the pres than the public.
Harry in UK. Frederik in DK. King WA in NL.
 
But didn’t Carl-Philip sign over assets of the Galliera foundation to the CP? It would make some sense for Carl to receive more of the inheritance than Madeline because Madeleine’s husband is independently wealthy and his father was wealthy, but Sofia doesn’t come from wealth. Unless you’re talking about some other inheritance?

Yes, I was talking about other properties. His uncle Prince Bertil and a royalist named Bertil Jonsén both bequeathed their estates to Prince Carl Philip. Prince Bertil died in 1997 and Bertil Jonsén died in 2007, so they couldn't have known that Princess Madeleine would eventually marry a wealthier spouse than Prince Carl Philip.

In addition, Prince Carl Philip was gifted a vacation home as a christening present from his duchy, and the King has indicated that he wants his son to succeed him in the lease to Stenhammar estate.

There were no similar bequests and gifts to Crown Princess Victoria or Princess Madeleine, as far as we know.
 
Yes, I was talking about other properties. His uncle Prince Bertil and a royalist named Bertil Jonsén both bequeathed their estates to Prince Carl Philip. Prince Bertil died in 1997 and Bertil Jonsén died in 2007, so they couldn't have known that Princess Madeleine would eventually marry a wealthier spouse than Prince Carl Philip.

In addition, Prince Carl Philip was gifted a vacation home as a christening present from his duchy, and the King has indicated that he wants his son to succeed him in the lease to Stenhammar estate.

There were no similar bequests and gifts to Crown Princess Victoria or Princess Madeleine, as far as we know.
I thought you implied that the King gave Carl some seriously important royal properties that should have gone to Victoria as CP. The ownership of the Galliera foundation is far more important than these secondary gifts. I get that you’re making the obvious distinctions and “obvious preference” but I’m looking at the bigger picture here which is Victoria will be Queen and will enjoy the use of the important royal assets and properties, Madeline doesn’t live in Sweden full time and is married to the wealthiest spouse of the three siblings whereas Carl-Philip lives in Sweden full time and isn’t married to a wealthy spouse as in the case of Madeline as stated above. Wasn’t the christening present prior to him no longer being CP? Regarding the assets of Prince Bertil and the royalist family friend, it was up to them to give up their assets to whoever they wished be it a bus driver, a charity or anyone else.
 
I get that you’re making the obvious distinctions and “obvious preference” but I’m looking at the bigger picture here which is Victoria will be Queen and will enjoy the use of the important royal assets and properties, Madeline doesn’t live in Sweden full time and is married to the wealthiest spouse of the three siblings

But again, at the time that Prince Carl Philip was gifted the aforementioned properties, Princess Madeleine was living in Sweden, and Princess Madeleine and Prince Carl Philip had not even met their current spouses. So the siblings' current marriages and living situations was clearly not a factor in those decisions.

Regarding the assets of Prince Bertil and the royalist family friend, it was up to them to give up their assets to whoever they wished be it a bus driver, a charity or anyone else.

Of course, that was the point. It was up to them to give their assets to whoever they wished - and they did not wish their assets to belong to a female future monarch, or to charities or bus drivers, but to a male royal.
 
But again, at the time that Prince Carl Philip was gifted the aforementioned properties, Princess Madeleine was living in Sweden, and Princess Madeleine and Prince Carl Philip had not even met their current spouses. So the siblings' current marriages and living situations was clearly not a factor in those decisions.



Of course, that was the point. It was up to them to give their assets to whoever they wished - and they did not wish their assets to belong to a female future monarch, or to charities or bus drivers, but to a male royal.
I know that they weren’t married at the time of the gifting, but my point was that currently the gifts don’t really matter in the greater scheme of things. I wasn’t saying that their marriages impacted the inheritances but that after both siblings got married marking the obvious financial situations of the spouses of Madeleine and Carl’s spouses, does it really matter? No.

As I stated already, it was the personal assets of the two men. Were Bertil’s assets ones that were of serious significance to the Galliera foundation? If they weren’t why should it matter they he gave the assets to Carl? If he was alive when changes to the succession were made for Victoria to be heiress that probably impacted his choice as Victoria was to own the assets of Galliera at some point, whether he knew it or didn’t know. Bertil Jonsen definitely lived long enough to be aware of the changes to the succession and that probably impacted his gifting to Carl under those circumstances. If Bertil Jonsen wasn’t a royal relative, which I assume he wasn’t, then I don’t see why it should it matter why he gifted to Carl over anyone else. If these weren’t assets that once belonged to the Galliera foundation, it’s not significant.
 
We'll agree to disagree on significance, as I think it was a suitable example of the phenomenon victor1319 was discussing.

If [Prince Bertil] was alive when changes to the succession were made for Victoria to be heiress that probably impacted his choice as Victoria was to own the assets of Galliera at some point, whether he knew it or didn’t know. Bertil Jonsen definitely lived long enough to be aware of the changes to the succession and that probably impacted his gifting to Carl under those circumstances.

The Swedish royal succession was changed in 1980 (though the Galliera collection's succession wasn't legally changed until 2012-13). As mentioned, Prince Bertil died in 1997 and Bertil Jonsén died in 2007.

It does not seem likely that their reason for bypassing Crown Princess Victoria was because she would (as queen) already own assets tied to the throne or headship of the house. Both Bertils lived long enough to be aware that Prince Carl Philip already received a home as a christening gift. Bertil Jonsén, at least, lived long enough to be aware that Prince Carl Philip had already been appointed as the heir to Prince Bertil's home and the Stenhammar estate. If their goal had been to leave their assets to a royal who was not already heir to an inheritance, they would logically have left them to Princess Madeleine or one of the King's sisters. So I do not think that was their goal.
 
We'll agree to disagree on significance, as I think it was a suitable example of the phenomenon victor1319 was discussing.



The Swedish royal succession was changed in 1980 (though the Galliera collection's succession wasn't legally changed until 2012-13). As mentioned, Prince Bertil died in 1997 and Bertil Jonsén died in 2007.

It does not seem likely that their reason for bypassing Crown Princess Victoria was because she would (as queen) already own assets tied to the throne or headship of the house. Both Bertils lived long enough to be aware that Prince Carl Philip already received a home as a christening gift. Bertil Jonsén, at least, lived long enough to be aware that Prince Carl Philip had already been appointed as the heir to Prince Bertil's home and the Stenhammar estate. If their goal had been to leave their assets to a royal who was not already heir to an inheritance, they would logically have left them to Princess Madeleine or one of the King's sisters. So I do not think that was their goal.
But why the King’s sisters? They weren’t even heirs under old rules. To me it doesn’t matter, the assets gifted by the Bertils were not of importance to the Swedish royal family so there’s no reason for it to be taken as some slight to Victoria’s succession or some gender injustice. None of the King’s sisters are poor, Princess Birgitta lives in Mallorca and her husband inherited goods from his family, the other Princess married to a British businessman certainly wasn’t poor either nor was the one who married a Swedish Baron. The Bertil’s gifted the assets to whoever they wanted to and that’s that.
 
Back
Top Bottom