Mary Donaldson, Current Events 1: September 2002 - May 2004

[kate14]

Thanks Anna,

The picture of Mary with the Danish Flag, Beautiful :flower:

[Alexandria]

I don't think (according to my understanding and interpretation of the original post) that the intent of this thread was to be a criticism of Mary but a question about others' perception of Mary (and other Crown Princesses&#39 situations when they marry into the royal family.

I think that signing maternal rights to your children over to the royal family (or the Crown Prince) is part and parcel of marrying the crown prince and into a royal family. It's not fair but it's part of the "royal system," so I don't have much comment on that.

But as for Mary not sticking up for herself or knowing when to say no or to back off, etc., I think Mary is in a difficult position. How Mary feels about Queen Margrethe, Prince Henrik, and the rest of the royal family is one thing as is how they treat her. But how she feels about the royal court is something else altogether. I think that the royal court with all its protocol and formalities can be very intimidating if you have not grown up surrounded by it and know what to do or what is expected of you. Mary has a huge learning curve ahead of her.

I remember Princess Diana and Sarah Ferguson referred to some members of the royal court as the "grey men" who herded you and told you what to do or how to act in response to certain occasions, events, individuals, etc. I am not certain, but to some extent, the Danish royal family must have similar individuals who are responsible for these things and for establishing a right or proper image for the monarchy, and Mary might feel a level of intimidation by them. I know I would in her position as Diana and Sarah always made these individuals seem so imposing. Mary seems earnest in wanting to do the right thing and not to embarass Frederik or the royal family, so I think that she would for the most part accept their expertise in the area of "handling" the royal family and directing her and guiding her to do the right thing. (Part of Diana's argument against the "grey men" was that they didn't like her and were directed by senior levels of the royal family to lead her astray, making it easier for her and Charles to divorce. Hopefully, this will not be the case for Mary.)

[sunlesstanning]

Marriage into royalty is a sacrifice

I agree with this. Mary has to give up certain part of her character. She has to conform with whatever protocol the royal family/court designed. She can't do things in a spurr of the moment like "normal" people do.

Signing the rights to give your children in case of divorce is just a sad thing. I think the DRF should change that. But I think in some ways if there is a divorce she will still keep in touch and see her children.

Fred needs to help her out with the royal protocol and trying to make her feel at ease. I think having him besides her in any royal events is a good idea until she's comfortable to be by herself. I know i would be intimidated if i was to go to a royal event with just QM.

[Jasl]

I apologise if I misinterpreted the question being asked. But I believe that the original question was "is Mary being used as a doormat", not that "will mary be used as a doormat". The former question necessitates that there must have been something that Mary did that would promt the question in the first place, so I wanted to know, what prompted it? Why is the question "is Mary being used as a doormat" being asked? I suppose the second part of the question, "doesn't she know hot to stick up fo herself when the pressure is on and say no and back off to everyone" clinched it. So I suppose I wanted to know when she had to stick up for herself but failed to.

Do you think mary is being used as a door mat by the royal family and the press or doesn't she know how to stick up for her self when the pressure is on her and say no and back off to everyone.

The original post went on to talk about Mary giving up her rights to her children, which made me think that this was what promopted the question about Mary being a doormat. But I don't understand because all of the princesses, I would imagine, have to do this. I can't imagine any royal house allowing the consort to take away the heir to the throne.

The post also ended with this line:

"And it looks like mary doesn't know how to set bountries when needed with certain people like the media. "

I believe that is a criticism. But again I don't undestand because it is almost impossible to set boundaries for the media - even the strongest celebs like Madonna etc are unable to do that. It has nothing to do with being a doormat.

[kate14]

All the Crown Princess and CP to be will have to give up Custody of the children if a divorce occurs, not only Mary.
IMO--that is one of the "Down Side" of marrying a Crown Prince.

I am curious to know like Jasl what prompted the question/comment "Is Mary being used as a doormat by the Royal Family"

On the several Official/Unofficial Engagements that I have seen, I would say NO.

Unless I missed something.

[tigerlilly23]

it just seems to me that she just lets people do what they like with her that all and she has no say in it.

Lets just say they do divorce one day and she just stand there infront of fred and says fine darling we have been married for the past 3 years and know after all this time you want a divorce. I might as well give up my children who aren't mine to begin with becouse they belong to the royal family and you becouse i signed away my rights to my children. Also i might as well give up on staying in denmark as well becouse you wont be needing me anymore.

What would mary have nothing she caming into denmark with nothing and she will leave denmark with nothing so she loses . If your married and have children you have a right to see your children or have them in your care and the courts usely dicide this not the royal family.
I think the the royal family is playing there own little game and that way they have all these mary has to give up australia , she must forfet her children if there is a divorce etc. Do you think a smart good looking women like her will just say fine and walk away from this empty handed in don't think so. If samething that bad should happen like a divorce hope it doesn't she won't go down with out a fight belive me this girl maybe years from know will think what did i do by signing my children away i must have been crazy to do that and she will fight to have her children with her one way or another and what would mary's family think if they couldn't see there grandchildren just becouse they were under royal rule.

if you were in mary's porstion would you or wouldn't you sign away your rights to have your children near you becouse of a divorce ?

And who do you think should decide the outcame who gets to keeps the children the courts or the royal family and who is the better parents to look after the welfare of the children in the long run.

This is what happens with addoptions as well just becouse a mother gives away her children she still has the right within law to ask for her child back from the adoted parents and if they don't the courts decide who is the better legal gaurdine.

[Jasl]

Thanks for explaining the reason for the question.

No, I don't think all of that necessarily means she is being used as a doormat by the royal family. I believe all the CPss had to sign similar things - not only Mary. For example, no-one can deny that Diana loved her kids and I think she would have done anything for them. But I think Diana knew that she was oliged to let go of her kids, and allow them to be raised apart from her. I think it applies to all the CPss - perhaps the question ought to be, are these CPss weak women because they so easily give up the right to the childre? IMO focusing solely on Mary and saying Mary is weak based on something that all of them are required to do is unfair to Mary. It's like saying, she's weak because she had to give up her citizenship - it's not only Mary that had to do that, so I don't think the ciriticism should be against Mary, but about what all CPss are required to do.

I also do not believe that in the event of a divorce, Mary will not have access to the children.

But thanks for explaining the reasoning behind your opinion on Mary being a doormat - it makes it easier to understand and to disagree.

[sheeba]

I'd like to agree with jasl - I believe the question is more directed at all CP's. But you do raise an interesting point in the past duty came first you were expected to turn a blind eye to your husbands infidelities, do as you were told and you knew the consequences of divorce. In a modern world, women have gained enormous independence, divorce is no longer a stigma and if I understand you what your worried about is how can such age old traditions fit with modern independent women marrying into Royal Family's. The institution of monarchy is incredibly resilient and won't change overnight even if any of the CP's decided to get divorced and take on the institution they would be incredibly foolish as they would lose. So your comment about Mary not going down without a fight - I think it would be foolish of her. Besides these girls are smart they know what they're marrying into atleast God I hope they do. I hope they have not just been dazzled by the Palaces and the clothes and the celebrity lifestyle and missed the point on sacrifice and duty. And if they have I'm sure there's some hideous person in the palace with a big stick to the whack them over the head to remind them (figuratively speaking).

[Fireweaver]

Any Crown Prince that doesn't at least warn the girl deserves to get dumped for not being honest!

[sheeba]

Too right!!!

But comeon Fireweaver - dashing, handsome Prince, nice clothes, the lifestyle etc - you never have to worry about the mortgage or bills at the end of the month, your husband or you keeping your job, having to get your kids into the right schools etc like the rest of as mortals. Would you say no? I'm guessing you're a girl and you know what we women are like we forgive ANYTHING.

[tricia]

Any potential bride or groom marrying into a royal family should be told about the pros and cons BEFORE there is even an engagement. :flower:

[Anastacia]

Switzerland 5.2.2004: Mary Donaldson and Crown Prince Frederik. The 32th birthday of Mary Donaldson was celebrated in Switzerland. They went skiing.

[kate14]

Hello Anastacia,

Where did you get that information from?

Thanks

[sheeba]

We all like to think they do, but they did not in the case of Diana and Fergie - you are both aristocrats learn the trade as you go along. I hope the Continental European royal families are better at explaining the remit of the job than the British ever were. I know Mary had a couple of years to get acquainted with what she was letting herself in for as did Princesses Maxima but didn't Felipe spring Letizia 3 weeks before the national announcement? Now how do you explain the remit of the job in such a circumstance or is the presumption like the English - you're Spanish you know whats expected of you.

[Alexandria]

Originally posted by sheeba@Feb 7th, 2004 - 7:59 pm
but didn't Felipe spring Letizia 3 weeks before the national announcement? Now how do you explain the remit of the job in such a circumstance or is the presumption like the English - you're Spanish you know whats expected of you.

No, Felipe did not "spring" Letizia into the role. The only people Letizia might've been sprung upon was the general public. The couple had been dating since earlier that year, so Letizia had several months to get used to the idea that she was dating a prince and what her potential duties or roles might be as Felipe's wife. And in Phillippe of Belgium's case, no one had any idea that Mathilde existed until the day of the engagement announcement.

[Alisa]

And in Phillippe of Belgium's case, no one had any idea that Mathilde existed until the day of the engagement announcement.

Not exactly.

[Dennism]

"Australia's royal bride-to-be Mary Donaldson celebrated her birthday
last week, but instead of cake the former Sydney real estate agent
got her first taste of controversy over the public salary she is to
be awarded after her May wedding to Denmark's Crown Prince.

Details of how she marked her 32nd birthday on February 5 remained a
secret yesterday, but a public debate over the annual allowance she
is to be granted when she weds Crown Prince Frederik on May 16
dominated the front pages of Denmark's newspapers and magazines.

The drama draws into conflict the reigning queen, Margrethe II, who
is said to have put a limit on Donaldson's share of Frederik's
official annual salary, which is set to increase from his present
taxpayer-funded pay packet of 3.7 million kroner ($819,605) to 12.7
million kroner. Donaldson is set to claim a 1.27 million kroner
share of her husband's wage, but progressive royal watchers and
feminists have demanded that the royal bride be given equal rights
to the money.

A Danish press insider said Donaldson's increased royal
responsibilities justified a fair split of the public purse her
husband-to-be would be allocated.

"Most Danes think the Queen, who is usually quite modern, is being
really old-fashioned about Mary's allowance. The royal couple will
share responsibilities and we think they should get an equal share
of the money," the source in Copenhagen said.

In other wedding news, Frederik is said to be keen for ordinary
Danes to join in the celebrations of his marriage, driving plans for
a gala concert to be staged the week before the nuptials."

[Alexandria]

What is the source of the above story? I always like to know where stories are come from to know if they are credible or not, or whether they are more of the tabloid variety.

[Dennism]

Good point. Well, I got it from a Yahoo Group. They posted it as well as the story about Prince Bernhard which I also saw on the Front page of Netscape.com But that was an AP report. This might be too.

[Alexandria]

Originally posted by Alisa@Feb 7th, 2004 - 9:04 pm

Not exactly.

What do you mean? Can you explain this further?