Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To find the royal family fascinating part 2

999 replies

MagicKingdomDizzy · 29/04/2019 20:43

Hello everyone, here's thread 2.

I'd be very grateful if someone could do a clicky link to the last one. Still can't figure it out.

Thanks!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
24
lyralalala · 30/04/2019 19:42

I believe the Queen offered a title for Mark Philips again when Anne was pregnant with Peter, but it was turned down again.

Myimaginarycathasfleas · 30/04/2019 19:42

You're right, @lyralalala, forgot that was how it came about.

Original poster
MagicKingdomDizzy · 30/04/2019 19:42

lyralalala

Thank you for your detailed explanation! It's all very sexiest isn't it.

You would have thought with a Queen now ruling in her own right, we could dispense with the different rules between sexes and just treat everyone equally.

If any of the royal family ever identify as a different gender, they will be very stuck on what to do! Grin

OP posts:
Original poster
MagicKingdomDizzy · 30/04/2019 19:43

Lol at sexiest.

Of course I meant sexist Grin

OP posts:
desertgirl · 30/04/2019 19:44

Certainly offered to Mark when he married Anne - like Princess Margaret’s husband being made Earl Snowden on marriage, which in turn made his children Lord and Lady.

lyralalala · 30/04/2019 19:45

Thank you for your detailed explanation! It's all very sexiest isn't it.

It is massively sexist.

That's why (imo) when Kate was pregnant the first time the announcement was made that all of the children would be HRH Prince/Princess.

The ruling had been made that a girl would no longer be superceeded by a younger brother in the line of succession, but in titles form for the children of the eldest son of the POW only his eldest son would be HRH Prince. Even if his older sister was the heir.

Change the LP's to save a sexism row!

Puzzledandpissedoff · 30/04/2019 19:46

Of course Andy and Fergie accepted (titles for their daughters) Hmm

Well yes; after all, for the parents "Princess" is so much more marketable than "Lady" or - god forbid - nothing at all, and nobody would ever accuse Andrew and Sarah of being uninterested in money

lyralalala · 30/04/2019 19:49

I don't like defending Andy and Fergie, but their daughters titles were an automatic thing. Until Edward made his announcement about his children the whole 'not using the title' thing hadn't even been thought of.

Before that the only real title swapping was the Queen allowing her Aunts Marina and Alice to use Princess Marina and Princess Alice rather than be known as Doweger Duchesses when they were widowed

The Queen's grandchildren from her sons were assumed to be Prince or Princess. It's just the way it was.

A lot of people thought it was a real snub to Edward and Sophie for him to be an Earl rather than Duke (even taking the Edinburgh thing into account) and for their children to be titled as such.

BettyBooJustDoinTheDoo · 30/04/2019 19:49

I think they are missing a trick not letting Beatrice and Eugenie have full time roles, I know they get a lot of stick for bad fashion sense and too many holidays, which in unfair as that can be said to be said of most of the royals, but I think Eugenie’s wedding showed them in a new light, Beatrice spoke beautifully at the ceremony, Eugenie was an exquisite bride and really apart from the odd hat disaster (which was dealt with good humour) they have done nothing to embarrass the royal family at all and seem pleasant young women. I think Charles has blocked them purely to spite Andrew and the Queen felt compelled to support Charles in his decision as he will be the next monarch and she did not want to undermine him.

ByeClaire · 30/04/2019 19:51

I thought the change in the law on succession in 2015 would have addressed the titles but of course that’s not what he says on the tin.

Magic you know who is THE SEXIEST royal, don’t you? Wink

Original poster
MagicKingdomDizzy · 30/04/2019 19:52

lyralalala

A lot of people thought it was a real snub to Edward and Sophie for him to be an Earl rather than Duke (even taking the Edinburgh thing into account) and for their children to be titled as such.

Was there a reason he wasn't made a Duke? I did find this strange.

OP posts:
lyralalala · 30/04/2019 19:54

I just don't think the girls are needed. When the decison was made there was HM, Philip, Charles, Andrew, Edward, Sophie, Anne, Duke of Gloucester, Duchess of Gloucester, Duke of Kent, Duchess of Kent, Princess Alexandra and occasionally Prince Michael of Kent.

Waiting in the wings were William, Harry and their eventual wives. Plus Camilla. They just weren't needed.

Original poster
MagicKingdomDizzy · 30/04/2019 19:54

BettyBooJustDoinTheDoo

Princess Eugenie’s wedding certainly showed that she and Beatrice are more popular than first thought.

I thought Eugenie was stunning, and looked far nicer than Kate or Meghan.

Sorry Kate and Meghan! But it's true.

OP posts:
BettyBooJustDoinTheDoo · 30/04/2019 19:55

Good post Lyra yes it was their automatic birthright to have titles and also it’s less marketable to have the title Princess, Zara makes far more money than B&E, she can be used in marketing campaigns such as Rolex and Landrover, because B&E are titled that can’t do what Zara can. Its more of a hindrance for them, Princesses with no royal duties but can’t cash in either!

lyralalala · 30/04/2019 19:56

Was there a reason he wasn't made a Duke? I did find this strange.

Apparently there's an agreement that he will be Duke of Edinburgh eventually.

There's a bit of a hoo-ha around it as it seemed to say that he would be DOE on the death of his father. However, Philip's titles will go automatically to Charles so he'd only be able to become DOE once Charles is King and the title went to the Crown and was recreated for Edward.

Original poster
MagicKingdomDizzy · 30/04/2019 19:56

ByeClaire

Magic you know who is THE SEXIEST royal, don’t you?

Are you talking about our beloved Meghan by any chance? Grin

OP posts:
ByeClaire · 30/04/2019 19:57

I didn’t think it showed that they were more popular than first thought.

I love the anecdote about how Prince Andrew was annoyed that the BBC didn’t want to buy the rights to televise the wedding.

lyralalala · 30/04/2019 19:58

I also laugh when people say B&E trade on who their Granny is whereas Zara and Peter never do.

Peter Philips sold his wedding photos to Hello magazine!

Plus his company was involved heavily in the jubilee celebrations (organising the Mall street party and the likes).

Original poster
MagicKingdomDizzy · 30/04/2019 20:00

lyralalala

It's odd that they didn't just create a new Dukedom for him like they did for William and Harry.

OP posts:
DialDownTheIanPaisley · 30/04/2019 20:04

If anyone changed gender, I think whoever is biologically male would still come out on top. The law change that people talk about on MN - in the case of primogeniture, even if say the eldest daughter of a family identified as male they would not inherit over any sons. It’s a minor issue obviously but still Hmm Don’t want to derail onto that topic though.

I hope they go for a gender neutral and Gwyneth/Hollywood inspired name, like Field or something.

lyralalala · 30/04/2019 20:05

MagicKingdomDizzy

It is a weird one. There's not a huge amount of available traditional dukedoms, but one could have been found.

Also if she wanted the Queen could just have created the Duke of Wessex as a title.

It's a nice touch that he wants his fathers dukedom, but it's an odd long wait.

TracyBeakerSoYeah · 30/04/2019 20:06

Edward is very involved in The Duke of Edinburgh scheme & I suppose it would make sense for him to be created the Duke of Edinburgh when Philip is no longer on this mortal coil.

SaveKevin · 30/04/2019 20:07

I am a big fan of Zara's she has a mischievous sparkle in her eye at the events, like she loves how all the drama plays out, just dipping her toes into the chaos and then disappearing to normalish life.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 30/04/2019 20:07

I don't like defending Andy and Fergie, but their daughters titles were an automatic thing. Until Edward made his announcement about his children the whole 'not using the title' thing hadn't even been thought of

That's perfectly true Lyra, but it doesn't mean it couldn't have been thought of if the will was there - or maybe if they wished to live in a manner more fitted to the current century

Personally I've always found too many of their attitudes to belong to the 17th than the 21st ... ditto the scheming, jostling for position and backstabbing. They might not despatch each other to the Tower any more, but despite pretences has all that much really changed?

lyralalala · 30/04/2019 20:09

It must be kinda weird for the royals in the current bunch, like Andrew and Edward, that their children are so different to the older generation of royals.

When Princess Alexandra got married in 1963 apparently 200 million people round the world watched the wedding at Westminster Abbey.