The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #441  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:11 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moran View Post
Yeah, corrected this. I need to learn to count on my fingers better!


Still escapes me why the rules need to be changed for Harry, specifically. What makes "the son of a future king" so much more special than "the daughter of a recent king"? In retrospect, I think the BP decision to present "the boys" as basically equal was a mistake. The only answer I can see to the question I asked is... Harry and Meghan were the only ones who kicked a fuss about it. Why did he consider it proper is the one-million dollar question and my answer isn't a favourable one for him or the BP.
They never presented them as equal...in terms of Kingdom.

It is hard for the siblings I think because they are hughly important growing up and then as adults they become less.and less constitutionally.

But the thing is he is still Prince Harry it is just his children who.really wouldn't be treated like their cousins. And they shouldnt be really.

And apparently Harry was always fine with this. Relieved even. Until now and all Meghan's protestations.

So really who has the issue about not being as high profile. They had a huge platform in the royals. Whole thing is just so sad.
__________________

  #442  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:14 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: N/A, Bulgaria
Posts: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Maybe because Harry didn't have to go to King school. William used to go across the river from Eton to Windsor castle for tea with the Queen on Sundays specifically for "king lessons" if I'm remembering rightly here.
I'd think it was another reason to see the difference in their stations but that's me. I just don't get many of his decisions, from acting under the illusion that he was entitled to security to taking part in this sad interview.
__________________

  #443  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:21 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,554
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moran View Post
I'd think it was another reason to see the difference in their stations but that's me. I just don't get many of his decisions, from acting under the illusion that he was entitled to security to taking part in this sad interview.
Therein lies the difference in the world that saw the interview and us that frequent TRF threads. People that watched the interview saw only what was being said and took that at face value and didn't really raise any questions. Neither did Oprah btw. It was what is was.

Here, questions are being asked and it reminds me a lot of when I first came here. I found out that I could check off my "learn something new everyday box" just by listening and asking questions no matter how simple and perhaps even unintelligent those questions I asked would seem to be to me today. The discussions here are serving a purpose.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #444  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:27 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: N/A, Bulgaria
Posts: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Therein lies the difference in the world that saw the interview and us that frequent TRF threads. People that watched the interview saw only what was being said and took that at face value and didn't really raise any questions. Neither did Oprah btw. It was what is was.

Here, questions are being asked and it reminds me a lot of when I first came here. I found out that I could check off my "learn something new everyday box" just by listening and asking questions no matter how simple and perhaps even unintelligent those questions I asked would seem to be to me today. The discussions here are serving a purpose.
Indeed. I think many people still see William and Harry just as "Diana's boys" who would somehow stay equal even if they aren't. I recommend a crash course here, on the TRF threads, to get cured of this notion. You guys are great.
  #445  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:28 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,257
I cant' help feeling that actually Harry knows litlte more than Meghan..about the rules of royal life. Either that or he DOES know better but he can't persuade HER that the various things she's said in this interview are incorrect - so he just agrees with her...
  #446  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:28 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,345
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post

So really who has the issue about not being as high profile. They had a huge platform in the royals. Whole thing is just so sad.
They were the 4th couple in the land. OK, 4th is not 1st, 2nd or 3rd, but, out of 67 million people in the UK, and I think nearly 2.5 billion across the Commonwealth, it's really not bad!
  #447  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:31 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Grottoes, United States
Posts: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moran View Post


Still escapes me why the rules need to be changed for Harry, specifically.
Okay this is my first real 'opinion' rather than just playing devil's advocate. Putting on my CJ Cregg hat, if I was an advisor, the minute I heard The Sussex's were expecting I'd sit down with the Queen and this would be the scene...

"Ma'am, I strongly urge you to re-write the LP's to say that starting from this birth all Great-grandchildren on the Monarch are automatically granted HRH unless specifically refused by their parents,"

"Why?" Her Majesty would reasonably ask.

"Ma'am, if you don't, someone, somewhere could and likely would say that this child isn't given it because of his ethnic makeup."

Possibly Her Majesty would say "But that's untrue, and ridiculous. The rules were made in 1917."

"That's correct ma'am. However, in 1917 people of color were lynched in the US and couldn't even use the same lavatory until the late 60's. Someone will bring it up, and the only way not to have a horse in that race, is to cancel the race. This is the world we live in now."
  #448  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:44 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by KrissyM View Post
Okay this is my first real 'opinion' rather than just playing devil's advocate. Putting on my CJ Cregg hat, if I was an advisor, the minute I heard The Sussex's were expecting I'd sit down with the Queen and this would be the scene...

"Ma'am, I strongly urge you to re-write the LP's to say that starting from this birth all grandchildren on the Monarch are automatically granted HRH unless specifically refused by their parents,"

"Why?" Her Majesty would reasonably ask.

"Ma'am, if you don't, someone, somewhere could and likely would say that this child isn't given it because of his ethnic makeup."

Possibly Her Majesty would say "But that's untrue, and ridiculous. The rules were made in 1917."

"That's correct ma'am. However, in 1917 people of color were lynched in the US and couldn't even use the same lavatory until the late 60's. Someone will bring it up, and the only way not to have a horse in that race, is to cancel the race. This is the world we live in now."
That is absolutely ridiculous. No one said that. No one even cared the day he was born. Meghan said that because she obviously desperately wants her children to be titled. As bad as Andrew.
  #449  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:45 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
They were the 4th couple in the land. OK, 4th is not 1st, 2nd or 3rd, but, out of 67 million people in the UK, and I think nearly 2.5 billion across the Commonwealth, it's really not bad!
Shrugs shoulders. Wasnt good enough for them.
  #450  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:46 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Grottoes, United States
Posts: 73
Like I said that's my opinion. If The Duchess hadn't said it, it still would have come up eventually. I'm not saying it's right the world is like this, only that it is.
  #451  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:47 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,074
Quote:
Originally Posted by KrissyM View Post
Okay this is my first real 'opinion' rather than just playing devil's advocate. Putting on my CJ Cregg hat, if I was an advisor, the minute I heard The Sussex's were expecting I'd sit down with the Queen and this would be the scene...

"Ma'am, I strongly urge you to re-write the LP's to say that starting from this birth all grandchildren on the Monarch are automatically granted HRH unless specifically refused by their parents,"


All grandchildren in paternal line of a British Sovereign are already automatically granted HRH under the LPs of 1917, so I don't see why any change would be necessary or why anyone would have that kind of discussion with the Queen.


I suppose someone could argue with the Queen that the rules should be changed though to give equal treatment to grandchildren in paternal and maternal line in consonance with the new succession rules in the Succession to the Crown Act 2013, but I guess that is not what you had in mind.



Quote:


"Why?" Her Majesty would reasonably ask.

"Ma'am, if you don't, someone, somewhere could and likely would say that this child isn't given it because of his ethnic makeup."

Possibly Her Majesty would say "But that's untrue, and ridiculous. The rules were made in 1917."

"That's correct ma'am. However, in 1917 people of color were lynched in the US and couldn't even use the same lavatory until the late 60's. Someone will bring it up, and the only way not to have a horse in that race, is to cancel the race. This is the world we live in now."
Luckily, there was no legalized segregation of people of color in the United Kingdom in 1917 or in the 1960s and, of course, slavery was abolished in the British Empire over 30 years before emancipation in the United States. I don't see why the history of racial relations in the United States (a country that legally severed its ties to the British Crown in 1783) should be taken into consideration in the rules that govern royal titles and styles in the UK, which BTW never included any race-based criteria.
  #452  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:48 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by KrissyM View Post
Like I said that's my opinion. If The Duchess hadn't said it, it still would have come up eventually. I'm not saying it's right the world is like this, only that it is.
It absolutely never would have come up. Because it made absolute sense for him not to be titled.
  #453  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:48 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,554
Quote:
Originally Posted by KrissyM View Post
Okay this is my first real 'opinion' rather than just playing devil's advocate. Putting on my CJ Cregg hat, if I was an advisor, the minute I heard The Sussex's were expecting I'd sit down with the Queen and this would be the scene...

"Ma'am, I strongly urge you to re-write the LP's to say that starting from this birth all grandchildren on the Monarch are automatically granted HRH unless specifically refused by their parents,"

"Why?" Her Majesty would reasonably ask.

"Ma'am, if you don't, someone, somewhere could and likely would say that this child isn't given it because of his ethnic makeup."

Possibly Her Majesty would say "But that's untrue, and ridiculous. The rules were made in 1917."

"That's correct ma'am. However, in 1917 people of color were lynched in the US and couldn't even use the same lavatory until the late 60's. Someone will bring it up, and the only way not to have a horse in that race, is to cancel the race. This is the world we live in now."
First correction in your scenario. The subjects were *great* grandchildren and not grandchildren of the monarch. Secondly, it would never even have been though of being done at all if the Act of Succession to the Crown 2013 hadn't happened. There'd be no need for the Queen to do anything. If the Cambridges had a girl first, she'd be Lady Charlotte and her younger brother would be HRH Prince George of Cambridge, the heir apparent to the heir apparent to the heir apparent to the throne. Imagine the uproar and the hue and the cry from women about Charlotte not being treated as "equal" to her own brother! Quelle horreur!!

No matter the possible scenarios in the 21st century, something wasn't going to be looked at favorably. With the Queen being on the throne since 1952, not many people really have any other recollection of anyone being the Queen except for QEII. I was born in George VI's reign but as he died when I was a month old, I don't remember him being king at all. In 1952, the civil rights movement hadn't started yet. No one really remembered that Albert, the Prince Consort to Queen Victoria was an avid abolitionist in his time and the sexual revolution and women's lib and the equal rights fight weren't even thought of yet.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #454  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:50 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,257
Its nonsense. If Meghan felt he was being deprived of a title becuase of his racail origins why did she and Harry deprive him of his courtesy title....
  #455  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:50 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Grottoes, United States
Posts: 73
Because like it or not the BRF are an international brand with a high profile bi-racial American member! I don't care personally about the feelings. It's pragmatism.
  #456  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:52 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
All grandchildren in paternal line of a British Sovereign are already automatically granted HRH under the LPs of 1917, so I don't see why any change would be necessary or why anyone would have that kind of discussion with the Queen.


I suppose someone could argue with the Queen that the rules should be changed though to give equal treatment to grandchildren in paternal and maternal line in consonance with the new succession rules in the Succession to the Crown Act 2013, but I guess that is not what you had in mind.






Luckily, there was no legalized segregation of people of color in the United Kingdom in 1917 or in the 1960s and, of course, slavery was abolished in the British Empire over 30 years before emancipation in the United States. I don't see why the history of racial relations in the United States (a country that legally severed its ties to British Crown in 1783) should be taken into consideration in the rules that govern royal titles and styles in the UK, which BTW never included any race-based criteria.
Yes one could say that really sexism is alive and well in that rule. So either maternal and paternal line or neither. And I think that is the way it should be in the future. Do Meghan and Harry were after HRH for nothing but status it seems.

The reason it was changed in 2012 was because they couldn't have the potential future Queen being born Charlotte Mountbatten Windsor.
  #457  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:55 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,257
Quote:
Originally Posted by KrissyM View Post
Because like it or not the BRF are an international brand with a high profile bi-racial American member! I don't care personally about the feelings. It's pragmatism.
Then why didn't Meghan use her son's title that she could have used, if titles are so important to her?
  #458  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:55 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Grottoes, United States
Posts: 73
Well it's not a good look for the Inter-ethnic babies of the reigning monarch's line not to be HRH's in today's world. Is it stupid? Yes. But hey that's the way the world works.
  #459  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:56 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,257
Quote:
Originally Posted by KrissyM View Post
Well it's not a good look for the Inter-ethnic babies of the reigning monarch's line not to be HRH's in today's world. Is it stupid? Yes. But hey that's the way the world works.
So it would be OK if Harry had married one of his other girlfriends, and they had a son, for that child not to be HRH?
  #460  
Old 03-14-2021, 05:58 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Grottoes, United States
Posts: 73
In my opinion. No. However, my point is if the Sussex's children were automatically granted HRH's nobody could have used a race card.
__________________

Closed Thread


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
The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 2: December 2020-March 2021 JessRulz Current Events Archive 874 03-07-2021 08:05 PM




Popular Tags
abu dhabi america archie mountbatten-windsor background story baptism biography birth britannia british british royal family brownbitcoinqueen buckingham palace camilla camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing commonwealth countries countess of snowdon customs daisy doge of venice doll duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family life family tree fashion and style george vi gustaf vi adolf harry and meghan hereditary grand duke guillaume highgrove jack brooksbank jewellery king willem-alexander książ castle line of succession list of rulers luxembourg meghan markle nepal nepalese royal jewels plantinum jubilee prince charles of luxembourg prince constantijn prince harry princess ariane princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn walailak princess ribha queen consort queen louise queen maxima queen victoria royal ancestry spain speech sussex suthida swedish queen taiwan thailand tradition unfinished portrait united states of america welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:54 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×