Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation
Skip to talk navigation

Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

MNHQ have commented on this thread

1 2 3 4

MNHQ have commented on this thread

News

Breaking News : Do you agree with a woman succeeding the throne?

89 replies

Manathome · 28/10/2011 11:55

Commonwealth countries agree constitutional changes to remove gender discrimination in the order of succession to the British throne. Is this the start of an even slippery slope to mayhem in this country, or is it a positive thing?

I am confused with all the changes I face today, I now seem to be living in an alien country to the one I was born in, and I have had no choice in the matter.

OP posts:

Report

JaneBirkin · 28/10/2011 11:56

You what?

Haka · 28/10/2011 11:56

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MissIngaFewmarbles · 28/10/2011 11:56

which century were you born in?

HettyAmaretti · 28/10/2011 11:56

FFS

TheRealMrsHannigan · 28/10/2011 11:57

What would be so disastrous about a woman succeeding the throne?

I think it's a brilliant leap forward for equality. Long overdue!

JosieRosie · 28/10/2011 11:58

Manathome, I'm choosing to read your OP as a witty attempt at satirising DM readers and such-like. Well done

EvilElizabethPonsonby · 28/10/2011 11:58

Gosh no, imagine having a queen, that would be just awful wouldn't it

tooearlymustdache · 28/10/2011 11:58

arf at slippery slope

you're right of course, OP.

just imagine the fresh hell that would be unleashed if they let a girl do man's stuff

motherinferior · 28/10/2011 11:59

I don't believe in anyone succeeding the throne. I'd get rid of the whole boiling of them, personally. Am an equal opportunities republican.

SarahBumBarer · 28/10/2011 11:59

Quite. I think it's a shame the Queen did not have a younger brother so that we could have a proper monarch

Cheeptrickortreat · 28/10/2011 11:59

I think its a good thing but i'm confused as we have had a Queen for the past 60+ years so whats the difference?

duvetdayplease · 28/10/2011 11:59

yes, but we only have a woman cos she had no brother. if she'd had a younger bro then he would have leapfrogged liz.

Time for a republic anyway, however much we like the inbred lot of idiots, its a stupid outdated crap system.

aquafunf · 28/10/2011 11:59

ahem. we have a queen.

she became queen because she did not have brothers.

now, the first born will succeed regardless of sex.

no brainer, and a way of keeping the monarchy up to date (as is getting rid of the ridiculous rule about not being able to marry a catholic).

if it was going to be done, it needed to be done before william etc produce offspring.

fails totally to see the issue.

ScaredBear · 28/10/2011 11:59

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MrBloomsNursery · 28/10/2011 11:59

NO WAY!!! MEN should take control of everything...how dare they suggest that a woman takes over the throne...We're living in an evil world.

TheVermiciousKnid · 28/10/2011 11:59

Shocking, isn't it. Whatever next: women getting the vote? Women allowed to work? Where will it stop?

worraliberty · 28/10/2011 12:00

PMSL at 'slippery slope to mayhem'

Calm down and put the kettle on love.....

HecateGoddessOfTheNight · 28/10/2011 12:00

No, I don't.

I don't agre with a man succeeding it either.

I think we should get rid of the monarchy because it is a horrible thing.

Open up all their houses to the public and make lots of money from the tourism.

Take back all the treasures they have aquired that by rights, belong to the nation.

Save the money we currently give to people who are rich beyond the wildest dreams of most of us and spend it on people who need it.

aquafunf · 28/10/2011 12:00

soz if it was ironic ( not had sleep for 3 days)

EvilElizabethPonsonby · 28/10/2011 12:01

Manathome · 28/10/2011 12:01

I am just asking a question, years ago what would people have said if a woman had said that her husband would stay at home and look after the children housework and meals? She would have been deemed!! Well that is ME NOW, so things DO change but it is doing my head in, I am not a woman and I am not Gay so what am I doing in this role? I have to get my head around it, but I am slowly seeing the benefits, not having to put my suit on on the morning and get the train to work, but it doesn't seem normal....yet!

OP posts:

tooearlymustdache · 28/10/2011 12:02

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Email address

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

AFuckingKnackeredWoman · 28/10/2011 12:02

What next a woman voting? pah!!!

broken Britain!

SarahBumBarer · 28/10/2011 12:02

Perhaps this is a topic for another thread but can someone explain to me the concept of "personal wealth" as in when it is said "the Queen's personal wealth is estimated at..." How can the Queen have any "personal wealth" and is this what she would get as a golden handshake if we did become a republic?

JosieRosie · 28/10/2011 12:02

'I am not a woman and I am not Gay so what am I doing in this role? '

You're a parent, aren't you? Why do you feel it's not your job to be at home taking care of your family etc?

Flip

1 2 3 4

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.