Princess Madeleine, Chris O'Neill and Family, General News 2: June 2015 - Sept 2017


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
So I take it that all children are in full time childcare then.

Yes, usually from the time they are around 1,5-2 years old. There is a generous parental leave here that allows parents 480 days paid time off work when a child is born. That would include Madeleine, since she's swedish.
 
And so it begins. This is taken from a major paper in southern Sweden. It's ironic, but it's triggered by Chris' remarks in the interview, as I suspected...

Rough translation:

"A princess of Sweden must be able to live and work in our nation without starving between banquets".

Karl Oskar left Sweden to find a living for his wife and children overseas. (Refers to the US-emigrants in the late 1800's, my remark). Now history repeats itself. Chris O'Neill moves his family to London, where financial soil is more profitable than the poor and unfriendly moors in Sweden. O'Neill has in an interview with Expressen explained that he sees no other way out. The family needs to be supported. As a father and husband he is forced to shoulder the heavy responsibility. "I'm the one who puts the food on the family. I have to primarily think about our little family" (Expressen 21.7).

So it's that bad. It's was all about the basics. The food! In the royal house, someone risks going hungry away from the dinner table. You can imagine the Oliver Twist-like scenes at the castle: "Please, sir, I want some more!"

It simply can't go on like this. The king, the head of the royal house, get an apanage of somewhere between125 and 130 million SKE every year. And the word apanage is derived from the ancient latins "apanare", which means "provide with bread". But apparently the isn't much left over for princess Madeleine, who's private fortune apparently doesn't give them money enough to cover the essentials.

I therefore suggest a national campaign in favor of the distressed family O'Neill-Bernadotte. A princess of Sweden must be able to live and work in the kingdom without starving between banquets.

”En prinsessa av Sverige måste kunna leva och verka i riket utan att behöva svälta mellan banketterna” - Sydsvenskan
 
I actually find that article very funny ;-)



Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app
 
Thanks for the translation, Xenobia :flowers:

I see from the comments though that few thought this piece of satire was funny.
 
Glad I could translate so that the irony didn't get lost in translation :)

Yes, a funny article, and it also shows that the "breadwinning" part of the article is what people catch on to, since it's a strange way to express yourself/live your life in Sweden.
 
Pardon my ignorance on the subject but does Madeleine have a personal fortune? Does she have money in her own right or is she only rich on handouts from her father?

I took the article to mean that Chris is the only one in the couple working and so the family moves with him to wherever he works.
 
Pardon my ignorance on the subject but does Madeleine have a personal fortune? Does she have money in her own right or is she only rich on handouts from her father?

I took the article to mean that Chris is the only one in the couple working and so the family moves with him to wherever he works.

I have today earlier posted to this thread that princess Madeleine has inherited totally 15 million SEK from prince Bertil and princess Lilian. And xenobia has told at her posts about Madeleine's fortune.
 
What difference does it make if Maddie inherited a fortune? It's not Chris's money. I would imagine it's being invested/saved for their children.




LaRae
 
i

My opinion is that the King insisted that the babies be HRH, and that Madde really wanted out. Chris is the fall guy. He loves her and is trying to make it all work, imo.
Leonore will probably teach him Swedish!

As far as I can recall, Madeleine never said or hinted that she "wanted out". On the contrary, my impression is that she was more than happy to be back to her "normal life" in Sweden after her "exile" in New York.

On Chris "trying to make it all work", I guess he could have said in his interview that leaving New York and moving to London was a compromise on his part so that he could carry on with his work and, at the same time, Madeleine could be closer to Sweden and her occasional royal duties. Readers would probably have bought that version of the story, as it makes sense. The problem is, however, that Chris actually didn't say that. On the contrary, he said in the interview that New York wasn't working for him either as he frequently had to travel to London, and that is why he decided to move.

As I see it, Chris' point of view is very clear. He sees himself as the "breadwinner" and the head of the family, and the entire family has to adapt to suit his needs with no room for compromise, even when his wife is a princess of Sweden, who is not only wealthy in her own right (and hence is not starving for bread ), but also has obligations of her own to the Swedish Crown and the Swedish people.


Being pregnant gave Madeleine a perfect excuse to stay in Sweden over the spring and summer, but now that is over and Chris made it clear that the family won't even wait for Nicolas' christening to move out. The problem remains, however, that Swedish law requires that Leonore and Nicolas live permanently in Sweden by the time they are of school age (or, at least, that is the Court's interpretation of the text of the law). Based on what we know and have heard from Chris over the past years, he is unlikely to compromise and, at that point, Madeleine will have to go with "out" (i.e. her children losing membership of the Royal House and succession rights), or else she and Chris will have to split. Sorry if I may sound too blunt, but that is realistically how I see it.
 
Wow what a lot of red ink over an "emotionally loaded" loaded term like breadwinner. He is trying hard to support his family and I took it to underline he is not sponging off the taxpayers. If the extent of madde fortune is fifteen million sek, which is about one and 3/4 million US dollars, that is a nice nest egg but does not make her fabulously wealthy if she had to live off that alone with the very low rates of return.
As marg asked, what do the other women in her rarified circle do? The aristocratic women of Sweden? By any definition, she is not a typical swedish woman, she is a royal princess
 
Wow what a lot of red ink over an "emotionally loaded" loaded term like breadwinner. He is trying hard to support his family and I took it to underline he is not sponging off the taxpayers. If the extent of madde fortune is fifteen million sek, which is about one and 3/4 million US dollars, that is a nice nest egg but does not make her fabulously wealthy if she had to live off that alone with the very low rates of return.
As marg asked, what do the other women in her rarified circle do? The aristocratic women of Sweden? By any definition, she is not a typical swedish woman, she is a royal princess

As Xenobia said, her prenup agreement put her net worth at about 3.5 million dollars and, as I mentioned, CelebrityNetworth.com puts it at 10 million. The truth is that we don't really know her true income or net worth, but, in any case, as that ironic article on the Swedish press put it clearly, it is ludicrous to assume that a princess of Sweden needs a husband to put bread on the table.

I admit that Chris meant it well and probably didn't anticipate the negative reaction that his poor choice of words would attract. The fact remains, however, that his words reveal his own view of marriage as an unequal partnership where the husband provides for the family and the family conforms to the husband's will and needs.

Chris is not the first person to marry into a royal family and not take up a title or official duties. That in itself would be perfectly fine. He is, however, the first person I can recall who married a king's daughter expecting her to give up her royal life or her future children's succession rights. To be fair, judging from the interview, Chris seems to have realized that was an unrealistic expectation on his part and that he will have to live with Madeleine's retaining some kind of residual official status, even if he would simply prefer her to be at home in the evening when he comes back from work.
 
As marg asked, what do the other women in her rarified circle do? The aristocratic women of Sweden? By any definition, she is not a typical swedish woman, she is a royal princess


This is my question. Does Sweden have 'Sloane Rangers'?
 
This is my question. Does Sweden have 'Sloane Rangers'?

I had to google that. If I understand the phrase, it refers to upper class women who spend their time taking care of their kids and doing charity work. My answer would be that there might be one or two, but most upper class women work. Some in high paid lines of work (like lawyers or researchers), others with more upper class culture jobs (like art galleries or opera/theater). But yes, almost all women work even after they marry and have kids. Even upper class women.
 
"Open Letter to Chris O'Neill"

With all due respect, Mr. O'Neill, I and my girlfriends, present women in Sweden 12-84 years thank for the frank interview in which you convey your dedication and your love as father and husband of Princess Madeleine. But that is something that chafes. "I am providing for my family, it's me that puts food on the table!" Are the words that I and my friends wish had never been said...
The whole letter
Öppet brev till Chris O'Neill - News55
Translation

At the article is a poll. At the moment 84 % of the readers think Chris's words are out of date.
 
Last edited:
Why am I not surprised....see this is the problem. Chris is not allowed to have his views, someone feels the need to publically chastise him for daring to not appear to be on board with their views.

Further does the woman even think how she must appear to women who happen to agree with Chris's views? How her words may hurt them? Physician heal thyself.




LaRae
 
Last edited:
Well, there aren't many of those in Sweden (almost none), so heaven won't be too busy helping them :)

I suspect that this won't go away as easily as the court would like. I don't know if the PR-department is doing a lousy job again, or if Chris is totally unaware of how the swedish society works.

In any case, several of us saw this coming as soon as we read the interview, so you can't say you haven't been warned.
My mother was home for a while with me (until 4 maybe) and met no problem. And there are a few bloggers as well that are "housewifes" and as any blogger recives critique for their choices but no more than other bloggers about their choices. We are not saying it's forbidden or very much frowned upond (sometimes curously questioned such as "are you not afraid of having a lower pension when old" "What happens if you divorce") just that it's just more "normal" to work. It's nothing you think about because that's how your mother did and she was amazing. We also have much longer maternity+paternity leave than many countries so it's not like mothers leave them when they're 2 months old.
 
Thanks, LadyFinn. :flowers:

And here the good Chris is being compared to a caveman by a PR expert. :lol:
PR-experten: O'Neill framstår som en grottman - News55

I'll spare you the translation but talk about a cultural clash here!
Interesting actually.

Yes, very interesting. Paul Ronge says that Chris's answer is very American and not at all in line with how many Swedes look at gender equality. Ronge also thinks that it would have been a great help to Chris if someone from the court would have told about that to Chris.
Ronge thinks that the statement to support Madeleine and put food on the table had sounded strange and backward even if it were so that the princess had no own money. Ronge says that most serious to the court is that the interview puts light on an issue the royal family is not keen to talk about.
- Unconsciously he puts the apanage in focus. It is precisely the question many will think of when they read his answer. Unlike her siblings, Madeleine has not shown any great interest to fulfill her duties at home. If she then will be staying in London and is provided by Chris, probably many ask why she ever should have some apanage from Swedish people. The court should have prepared him with a better answer to that question, says Paul Ronge.

Of course the court has told that Madeleine gets apanage only when she does royal duties. But not all the people have read that or understand that. And when/if Madeleine is flying a few times in a month to Sweden to do royal duties, the people start to wonder if her flying tickets are paid from the apanage and if that is right...
 
Also a thing to remember about general Swedish media is that they are very much dominated by left-wings so the articles will always be harsher and more left than the general view.
 
Those articles are obviously the more activly vocal people about it. No doubt you people have vocal stupid people in papers as well.

And honestly. I get very, very sad about how easily YOU guys dismiss and say OUR views are wierd... Aren't you doing exactly the same that you are accusing us of? Can't we just agree that different countries and groups have different cultures and there are pro's and con's in all of them?

And we commenters here have only predicted that this would be the reaction. We have not begrudged them their choice at all!

I'm saying it should be a matter of choice. In every country. If Chris and Madeleine are happy with him being the breadwinner, that should be the end of it.

This seems to be more about ideology than equality. If both parents want to work then fine if one chooses to be the 'breadwinner' that should be fine too.

But to label a man who isn't singing from the same hymn sheet as other Swedes a 'caveman' or a throwback to the 1950s doesn't seem very equal to me.

Anywayyy, that's enough for me because I'm bowing out of Swedish threads.
 
Last edited:
My mother was home for a while with me (until 4 maybe) and met no problem. And there are a few bloggers as well that are "housewifes" and as any blogger recives critique for their choices but no more than other bloggers about their choices. We are not saying it's forbidden or very much frowned upond (sometimes curously questioned such as "are you not afraid of having a lower pension when old" "What happens if you divorce") just that it's just more "normal" to work. It's nothing you think about because that's how your mother did and she was amazing. We also have much longer maternity+paternity leave than many countries so it's not like mothers leave them when they're 2 months old.

I agree. People are free to chose to live their lives however they want, as long as they aren't hurting others. Admittedly, I'm one of those women who are worried about the financial limitations that can hit a woman who isn't working if there is a divorce. I've seen it happen more than once. (I lived in Canada for a while, and have friends there and a lot of other places all over the world). So yes, I worry about their situation, but that doesn't mean that they can't chose what fits them best. And in Madeleines case, it's not exactly like she's going to starve or become homeless if worst case scenario happens.
 
It has nothing to do with political correctness. Don't you guys want similar rights and pay for women? If all women stay home 10 years for rearing kids, how on earth can you expect to be treated the same?

I believe a woman must have the choice to decide what to do with her life.

If she wants to work, fine. If she wants to stay at home taking care of the children, fine as well.

And I'm a 36 years old woman who decided not to marry and have children in order to focus on my career.
 
I agree. People are free to chose to live their lives however they want, as long as they aren't hurting others. Admittedly, I'm one of those women who are worried about the financial limitations that can hit a woman who isn't working if there is a divorce. I've seen it happen more than once. (I lived in Canada for a while, and have friends there and a lot of other places all over the world). So yes, I worry about their situation, but that doesn't mean that they can't chose what fits them best. And in Madeleines case, it's not exactly like she's going to starve or become homeless if worst case scenario happens.
I agree. The people who stay at home in Sweden are 2 groups. The romantics (that stay home because they want without thinking about what could happen) and the practics (that are well aware of what can happen and have made plans for it -man saving a extra pension for her, a good prenup etc or have well-knowingly taken the chance). The first group I can feel a little worried about, but the second I have a huge respect for because they are doing what is right for them.
 
I believe a woman must have the choice to decide what to do with her life.

If she wants to work, fine. If she wants to stay at home taking care of the children, fine as well.

And I'm a 36 years old woman who decided not to marry and have children in order to focus on my career.
I agree. And we havn't said anything else.And they are very welcome to make that choice. We are just saying that most aren't
 
The issue is clearly one of culture, Chris didn't mean it to sound anti-feminest or big headed, he pointed out the reality of the situation he and Madeleine are in using words that in America or the UK would be acceptable by all but the most liberal of media. The only thing it shows is that he perhaps doesn't understand that in Sweden such phrases might not been seen as acceptable but equally IMO the Swedish media need to be realistic when talking about a man who has not long married into the Royal Family having hardly ever lived there.
Personally I don't think Chris is of the mind set that he earns all the money so what he says goes, I suspect he and Madeleine have quite an equal relationship however what he said is true, please correct me if I'm wrong but I thought Madeleine didn't get paid for her work for World Childhood Foundation therefore he is technically true, he is the one who works and brings in the most money so it makes perfect sense for his family to be where he needs to be for work.

The media are making a big deal about the exact words he used but not putting them in context, he is not Swedish (rightly or wrongly) and such phrases are acceptable in his culture and he is technically the one working to bring in the money (Madeleine might be wealthy but doesn't have to work in a job for it as such)
 
No, they aren't hearing, for some reason. Trying to explain the swedish society obviously isn't appreciated here, so I think I'm out. Why waste my time?

It's appreciated, but without actually living in the society i'm convinced it's not possible to 100% understand it, maybe 80 or 90% if you're from a similar environment..

In the NL i think the "breadwinner" phrase would have been considered somewhat old-fashioned, but nothing more :flowers:
 
The issue is clearly one of culture, Chris didn't mean it to sound anti-feminest or big headed, he pointed out the reality of the situation he and Madeleine are in using words that in America or the UK would be acceptable by all but the most liberal of media. The only thing it shows is that he perhaps doesn't understand that in Sweden such phrases might not been seen as acceptable but equally IMO the Swedish media need to be realistic when talking about a man who has not long married into the Royal Family having hardly ever lived there.
Personally I don't think Chris is of the mind set that he earns all the money so what he says goes, I suspect he and Madeleine have quite an equal relationship however what he said is true, please correct me if I'm wrong but I thought Madeleine didn't get paid for her work for World Childhood Foundation therefore he is technically true, he is the one who works and brings in the most money so it makes perfect sense for his family to be where he needs to be for work.

The media are making a big deal about the exact words he used but not putting them in context, he is not Swedish (rightly or wrongly) and such phrases are acceptable in his culture and he is technically the one working to bring in the money (Madeleine might be wealthy but doesn't have to work in a job for it as such)
Thank you :) I think this is exactly it (although I think he has a more "traditional" view than most swedes). And had they had a better image before it would have been just a little flub. But since they already are seen as "far away" from general swedishness and a little more "socialite" than prefered in the royal family, this is just one more thing piled on to make the picture of them even more "irrelevant". I honestly really understand their choice and are very for it. As you may have seen in other threads I have defended Kate's right to be home with her kids and I defend Madeleines right as well. I just predicted why it wouldn't be very well recived in the general public (and turns out I was right).
 
It's appreciated, but without actually living in the society i'm convinced it's not possible to 100% understand it, maybe 80 or 90% if you're from a similar environment..

In the NL i think the "breadwinner" phrase would have been considered somewhat old-fashioned, but nothing more :flowers:
Thank you for appreciating this. Some of the (majorly US people it seems?) take it as we are saying that EVERYONE is living the same way which is obviously not the case. Just the most usual.
 
Sweden has a 'custom' that everyone must work and or be labelled a throwback to the 1950s?

Maybe Chris knew exactly what he was saying and was sticking it to his new country's customs.

Doesn't seem very 'egalitarian' to me to label anyone who has a different opinion as a caveman.

Little wonder he turned down a Swedish title.

It looks like there was another issue in the interview, which I hadn't intially noticed myself, but apparently was picked up by the Swedish press judging from the article Xenobia posted here. I'm referring specifically to Chris' implicit insinuation that moving to London was something that he, as the breadwinner, had to do in order to get a job that would enable him to provide for his family. Apparently, some people in Sweden took that as an insult to the country, as if Chris was saying that Sweden is an unsuitable country to live for someone who wants to find a decent job.

Of course, last time I checked, Sweden is one of the wealthiest countries in the world (e.g. in per capita GDP) and there aren't many starving Swedes lurking around. Therefore, even if Chris didn't actually mean it that way, he might have sounded over the top on that specific point.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom