The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #141  
Old 09-12-2018, 08:35 AM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
There were some in the Swedish press that bent over backward to promote this young woman....one in particular was so rabidly pro Sofia I occasionally wondered if he was on the payroll.

As for social media...well yeah. What did she expect?

She still got fields of roses compared to poor Daniel.
I think there was more going on with the years Victoria had to wait for permission to marry a sweet, loving, educated and self-made man. And, I also believe that if he wasn't a CP in his own right he would have been as unacceptable as Daniel.
__________________

__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 09-12-2018, 08:35 AM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 6,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMD View Post
I wonder how many were relieved to lose their place in succession, and have more privacy and personal freedom? Or do they also lose much more than a title such as privilege, allowances, residence etc? I heard that Princess Margaret of GB
was not prepared to relinquish her title and lifestyle for Peter Townsend, although there were other considerations.
I think Margaret thought things would go on as they had for years - very old school life of a royal without a lot of hard work required of the non-monarch. Just hang out and look cute. She lacked the imagination to see that things always do change and not usually in one's favor, unless one strives for things that matter to the public. I've always thought her interpersonally crafty, but not the brightest bulb in the bunch.
__________________

__________________
"And the tabloid press will be a pain in the ass, as usual." - Royal Norway
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 09-12-2018, 09:26 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdmirerUS View Post
I think Margaret thought things would go on as they had for years - very old school life of a royal without a lot of hard work required of the non-monarch. Just hang out and look cute. She lacked the imagination to see that things always do change and not usually in one's favor, unless one strives for things that matter to the public. I've always thought her interpersonally crafty, but not the brightest bulb in the bunch.
The Queen was front and center and felt the profound change in the way people viewed monarchy. Her hand was forced a bit on some of the changes she's had to make as society changed. Margaret was far more out of touch, which isn't surprising. Margaret has always seemed to me quite spoiled and sheltered from real life and consequences. As for the Peter Townsend situation, I don't know how much of it was duty versus she realized the reality of her life if she marries him, and decided that wasn't for her. Hurting the monarchy did not stop her from doing a number of things after that.
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 09-12-2018, 10:33 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: -, Netherlands
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
There were some in the Swedish press that bent over backward to promote this young woman....one in particular was so rabidly pro Sofia I occasionally wondered if he was on the payroll.

As for social media...well yeah. What did she expect?

She still got fields of roses compared to poor Daniel.
Well, what would you expect?

It really goes beyond normal or even polite what some have accused her of or slung at her. Even some people here.

And I don't think Daniel was that "poor" at all, Victoria's position is starkly different from Carl Philip's, so her spouse had much more boxes to tick and prove that he was suitable material in the long run.
On paper he looks like a dream guy, but he had to prove that the paperwork also translated into practical work. That is what a lot of people seem to forget here. He proved that his paperwork was practical as well, so he and Victoria were allowed to marry.

Vice versa for Sofia - her paperwork was, depending how you look at it, less than stellar and apparently she proved that her practical work was better. Or at least had gotten better over the years. I suppose she's always been a free spirit.
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 09-12-2018, 12:45 PM
PrincessElena's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: -, Hungary
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muhler View Post
Don't worry.
It was only an outrageous example I made up to illustrate a point.
That's why I ended it with this:

I doubt Mary has ever cut off the heads of budgies - with scissors.

Oh thank heavens! My bad I took your words literally!
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 09-12-2018, 01:49 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 10,472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippy View Post
Well, what would you expect?

It really goes beyond normal or even polite what some have accused her of or slung at her. Even some people here.

And I don't think Daniel was that "poor" at all, Victoria's position is starkly different from Carl Philip's, so her spouse had much more boxes to tick and prove that he was suitable material in the long run.
On paper he looks like a dream guy, but he had to prove that the paperwork also translated into practical work. That is what a lot of people seem to forget here. He proved that his paperwork was practical as well, so he and Victoria were allowed to marry.

Vice versa for Sofia - her paperwork was, depending how you look at it, less than stellar and apparently she proved that her practical work was better. Or at least had gotten better over the years. I suppose she's always been a free spirit.
Well, for starters Skippy I would probably not have ever shared the dicey details of my personal life on social media, including but not limited to, rhapsodizing about what it's like to have carnal relations on ice and what it feels like to make out with a porn star. And after realizing that there were photographs of myself online that could be construed as immodest enough to be banned from certain message boards and that the Swedish Court felt compelled to "scrub clean" I would not have expected the Audrey Hepburn treatment just because I had gone and bagged myself a Royal Prince.

I would have just kept my mouth shut and proven myself with what you refer to as "practical work"...letting the results speak for itself.

Minus the whinging and complaining about unfair treatment.

But that's just me.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice". Martin Luther King Jr. 1929-1968
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 09-12-2018, 01:52 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,977
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMD View Post
I wonder how many were relieved to lose their place in succession, and have more privacy and personal freedom?

I don't thnk they would give up their place in the line of succession if they had the option to keep it. On the contrary, some actually tried to get their title and rank back as Sigvard Bernadotte, who even went to the European Court of Human Rights to have hs princely status recognized by the Swedish government. There is a great deal of myth IMHO about royals resenting a lack of privacy and personal freedom. Especially when it comes to cadet children of monarchs, it seems to me that their perks tend to outnumber their obligations or the intrusion in their private lives.


There is indeed an issue, however, with royal marriages requiring official consent, which may be seen as a restriction of personal freedom (in this case, the freedom to marry whoever you choose). The consent requirement itself is understandable in my opinion, considering that the issue of those marriages will be in the line of succession to the throne. Nevertheless, maybe the current British model of limiting the consent requirement only to the first six persons in line makes more sense as it is very unlikely that someone lower than sxth place will ever ascend the throne anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 09-12-2018, 03:38 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: -, Netherlands
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
Well, for starters Skippy I would probably not have never shared the dicey details of my personal life on social media, including but not limited to, rhapsodizing about what it's like to have carnal relations on ice and what if feels like to make out with a porn star. And after realizing that there were photographs of myself online that could be construed as immodest enough to be banned from certain message boards and that the Swedish Court felt compelled to "scrub clean" I would not have expected the Audrey Hepburn treatment just because I had gone and bagged myself a Royal Prince.

I would have just kept my mouth shut and proven myself with what you refer to as "practical work"...letting the results speak for themselves.

Minus the whinging and complaining about unfair treatment.

But that's just me.
I would not do all those things either, I am with you about that, but I won't sling anonymous mud at someone (a then-future royal in this case) online because of them having done it and talking about it. Calling them names and stuff - it's happened.
Not here perse but some folks online have been really mean about her. Only because they disagree with her past and there the differing viewpoints come along.

It was not the smartest thing to do but she has - elsewhere - only just escaped crucification. I guess that she hoped that online life had also moved with the times and not dredge up something from years ago.

She's learnt a hard lesson with that, is my take. And it was naive, Internet never erases.
She could have acknowledged that she understood the concerns about her past but that she moved on from it a long time ago and all the rest she said.
That would couple both sides (public view and her own viewpoint) - with the approach that she took I can imagine that it stung for some people.

And now I believe I have said all I wanted to say about it
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 09-12-2018, 09:44 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 10,472
You make excellent points and yes, that would have been a great way for Sofia to have handled herself.

Thank you Skippy.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice". Martin Luther King Jr. 1929-1968
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 09-12-2018, 10:17 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 2,822
With few exceptions, everyone makes mistakes in life; sometimes they are horrible, cruel mistakes which hurt others terribly. Sometimes they are foolish, naive, and selfish mistakes made in the blithe ignorance of youth, and which are hurting only yourself.

When you are 20 years old, you unthinkingly do things that you can’t imagine will affect your future. But if you are just an ordinary “sinner”, at some point you mend your foolish ways and begin being the kind of person you were intended to be: self-aware, kind, wholesomely ambitious, and anxious to live a good life.

This is the transition Sofia has gone through. By a wonderful stroke of luck, she fell in love with a special man, and he fell in love with her. I can’t imagine anyone still obsessing over her party girl past.
__________________
"If you look for the bad in people expecting to find it, you surely will.”

Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 11-14-2020, 06:40 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
Has any recent married in got near the engagement stage (that we know of) and been refused permission when it is needed? I know there was a situation with Friso and Mabel and stories about Eva Sanum ruining her chances with her dress at Haakon and Mette-Marit's wedding - although we don't know why it actually ended and Letizia is/was a controversial choice in herself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
N.B. I still wonder why other countries don't adopt the Dutch requirement for parliamentary permission as that ensures that family dynamics cannot one-sidedly decide on these issues (and wouldn't lessen the blow; it is easier to accept that parliament doesn't approve than that your parent doesn't - even if for dynastic reasons).
I concur with this.

And I would add that for the European monarchies, it would be a wise move to officially rebrand "permission to marry" as "approval to be in line to be King/Queen and Consort" or something of that nature.

In the first place, it would be truer to the reality. Currently, all European royals are allowed to marry without anyone's permission, and such a marriage would be legally recognized and equal to any other marriage in the eyes of the law. The only legal consequences would be changes to their position in line to the throne.

Second, the current language has led to it becoming practically impossible to deny permission if a couple asks for it (replying to Heavs, I cannot think of an instance when that has happened in European monarchies other than the Netherlands over the recent decades). The phrasing "denying X and Y permission to marry" invites outraged accusations from the public of "How dare they deny two people the right to marry who they love?" Hopefully, the reactions to "denying X and Y the potential to become monarchs" would be more muted.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 11-14-2020, 08:31 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,977
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
I concur with this.

And I would add that for the European monarchies, it would be a wise move to officially rebrand "permission to marry" as "approval to be in line to be King/Queen and Consort" or something of that nature.

In the first place, it would be truer to the reality. Currently, all European royals are allowed to marry without anyone's permission, and such a marriage would be legally recognized and equal to any other marriage in the eyes of the law. The only legal consequences would be changes to their position in line to the throne.

Second, the current language has led to it becoming practically impossible to deny permission if a couple asks for it (replying to Heavs, I cannot think of an instance when that has happened in European monarchies other than the Netherlands over the recent decades). The phrasing "denying X and Y permission to marry" invites outraged accusations from the public of "How dare they deny two people the right to marry who they love?" Hopefully, the reactions to "denying X and Y the potential to become monarchs" would be more muted.

As you said, no royal is denied the right to marry, which would be actually in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights. What might happen, however, is that a royal may be presented with a choice, as Prince Friso was, between getting married without consent or remaining in the line of succession to the throne.

I suppose that most people understand and accept that the government or parliament has a legitimate interest in vetting marriages of individuals who might become the head of state. There doesn't seem to be any major controversy about that. I don't think it makes a lot of sense, however, when consent is also required of people who are way down in the line of succession and extremely unlikely ever to succeed.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 11-14-2020, 09:09 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I suppose that most people understand and accept that the government or parliament has a legitimate interest in vetting marriages of individuals who might become the head of state. There doesn't seem to be any major controversy about that. I don't think it makes a lot of sense, however, when consent is also required of people who are way down in the line of succession and extremely unlikely ever to succeed.
I can see your points but I respectfully disagree.

Regarding public controversy over vetting or withholding approval from marriages of potential heads of state: As I see it, the rarity of a couple publicly being refused consent after having sought it out (unless I have overlooked someone, no European royal couple in recent times other than Friso and Mabel of Orange-Nassau has had this happen to them) suggests refusal is viewed as controversial at best. One can also take note of this forum. Generally, posters on TRF are more accepting of royal systems than the general public, but even here, many posters are affronted by even the notion of a third party denying consent to the marriage of a royal.

Regarding requiring consent for people who are higher in the line of succession but not for people lower down: With respect, I don't think that makes sense. But I think I will move my thoughts on this to the British forum, as the UK is the only monarchy I am familiar with which has put that system into effect.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 11-14-2020, 09:27 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,977
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
I can see your points but I respectfully disagree.

Regarding public controversy over vetting or withholding approval from marriages of potential heads of state: As I see it, the rarity of a couple publicly being refused consent after having sought it out (unless I have overlooked someone, no European royal couple in recent times other than Friso and Mabel of Orange-Nassau has had this happen to them) suggests refusal is viewed as controversial at best. One can also take note of this forum. Generally, posters on TRF are more accepting of royal systems than the general public, but even here, many posters are affronted by even the notion of a third party denying consent to the marriage of a royal.

Regarding requiring consent for people who are higher in the line of succession but not for people lower down: With respect, I don't think that makes sense. But I think I will move my thoughts on this to the British forum, as the UK is the only monarchy I am familiar with which has put that system into effect.

I suppose Sweden has de facto moved to a similar system now as people who have been stripped of the rank of "prince or princess of the Royal House" can marry without consent and still retain their succession rights in the interpretation of the Royal Court.

In the Netherlands, on the other hand, the line of succession itself is limited, so there is no need to also limit the number of persons who require consent to marry.
__________________

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
Shortest Royal Marriages HMTLove23 Royal Weddings General Discussion 37 01-21-2021 05:22 AM
Royal-Royal Marriages Today Hereditary Mapmaker Royalty Past, Present, and Future 124 11-25-2019 01:09 AM
Royal Marriages: Biggest Age Difference HMTLove23 Royalty Past, Present, and Future 29 01-09-2015 07:12 PM
European/Japan royal marriages Australian Imperial Family of Japan 37 03-19-2013 07:32 PM
The Royal Marriages Act of 1772 and Royal Marriages branchg British Royals 99 12-31-2012 09:24 PM




Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes abu dhabi american american history ancestry archie mountbatten-windsor baby names baptism british british royal family british royals brownbitcoinqueen carolin china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing clarence house cpr customs dresses duke of sussex earl of snowdon edward vii family tree general news thread george vi gradenigo gustaf vi adolf hereditary grand duchess stéphanie history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs imperial household jacobite japan jewellery jewelry kensington palace king edward vii list of rulers luxembourg maxima meghan markle monarchy nepal nepalese royal family pless princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn princess chulabhorn walailak princess eugenie princess laurentien princess of orange princess ribha queen consort queen elizabeth ii queen victoria resusci anne royal jewels royalty of taiwan russian court dress spain sussex swedish queen thai royal family tradition unfinished portrait united states united states of america welsh wittelsbach


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:07 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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