To think Prince George is never going to find a life partner?

[HitMeWithAHotNoteAndWatchMeBounce]

Who on earth would marry into the Royal Family, at this point?

What sort of parent would send their child to the slaughter-house?

The monarchy could well end up crumbling because no-one will be willing to marry into it - due not only to unacceptable levels of press intrusion, but also social media (and God even knows what that’s going to look like by the time George (and his siblings) come of age).

Because speculation on his sexuality is LITERALLY speculation on who he will take to bed. It’s creepy. He’s NINE.

Don’t give me that crap about lineage - he may or may not marry. It won’t be a global disaster if he doesn’t and it doesn’t need to be discussed in further detail than that

So why bother have Charles date all the women he did if, when he was born, someone went “ooh there’s a girl being born in 11 years he can marry her”

What happens the monarchy if the eldest can’t have children?

Is the eldest bypassed in favour of a younger sibling who has kids?

@Adeckofcards yes

Interesting that some posters think that discussing sexual orientation is disgusting when it's gay.

And yet most would happily sit their toddlers down in front of hetero romances like Disney. Even ones where the straight prince sexually assaults a princess and she marries him.

Yes, there's a clear line of succession. As long as William had no kids, Harry was next in line after him.

It’s nothing to do with sexual orientation. This vile thread is discussing a 9 year old sex life quite grim.

I reported this morning & got the mass email that this thread was being looked at.

Shame on @MNHQ letting this remain.

🙄🙄

Your are speculating on an actual 9yo child and who they may take to bed later in life. If you can’t see why that’s disgusting I can’t help you.

And give over with the ‘sexually assaults’ nonsense. It’s a fucking fairytale featuring a kiss not a hard hitting documentary

Interesting that some posters think that discussing sexual orientation is disgusting when it's gay.

It doesn’t matter what the sexual orientation is.

It is the fact that people are discussing the possible sexual orientation of a child of 9.

A child. Of 9.

I’m sad that people don’t see why that is a problem.

I agree, absolutely vile thread.

Did people do this with William from a young age?

So William wouldn't be bypassed, but that's how it would go after him. If Harry also had no kids, next in line would have been Andrew (the new rules abolishing male primogeniture aren't retroactive, so Princess Anne stays where she is).

Fully agree @MNHQ is there a reason this threadhad not been moderated yet?

A line has been crossed here. Some posters are just unpleasant agitators and I can’t imagine their being too pleased if people were discussing their child in this way. Actually I don’t think some posters are parents or even human beings, just angry little islands sitting hunched over their devices all day and deriving some twisted pleasure from posting cruel muck.

Interesting how some posters can read people speculating about the sexuality of a child and be anything other than horrified isn't it?

Agreed.

Just let him be

I’ve posted twice on here already to express how awful this thread is. I see the OP has disappeared, hopefully ashamed to have started it…
Just wondering if threads discussing other ‘famous’ children would be allowed to run on this long. How about the children of some instagram parents or podcasters, the answer would be no, and the thread- where adults are discussing a specific child’s future relationship- would be rightly taken down. Why is the 9yo child in this thread title fair game? Why is this thread still up?

Just coming back to this thread. It’s a perfect example of people seeing what they want to see, and vociferously asserting their personal interpretation as the only acceptable interpretation (their ‘truth’, if you will 🙄), everyone else’s being so obscene as to warrant the conversation being shut down entirely. The sheer chutzpah! Such a waste of time.

I don’t interpret anyone on this thread - except for those posters who are saying the opposite - as discussing the sexuality of Prince George. There are no peadophiles on this thread as far as I can see. I interpret this thread as discussing what would happen if a future monarch of the British Royal Family, in the 21st century where gay marriage is not at all remarkable for many people but still frowned upon by others, turned out to be gay. Or, the original question, a bachelor for life. It’s a hypothetical. Yes, that future monarch already exists and his name is George. But it could have been anyone. It’s a hypothetical. It’s like wondering what would happen, if anything, if a member of the British Royal Family married a black shaman (we can see what Denmark might do about that), or abdicated (we could turn to the Duke of Windsor), or - I don’t know - were wheelchair bound or mute or anything. Monarchs are figureheads. There’s only ever one of them at a time. A figurehead sets standards, which some of their subjects use as benchmarks. It’s an interesting barometer of where certain parts of British society see themselves. What used to be traditional is now unfathomable. What’s now unfathomable could become totally normal for being ‘endorsed’ by a monarch. It’s a totally
innocuous question, and one of many many similar and possibly more daring than is being/ has been asked and answered many times over by those vested in the continuing existence of the RF.

Nobody is discussing the sex life of a child fgs. To suggest as much only reveals the agenda of those posters looking to make a specific point. It’s deliberately and unintelligently obtuse, so much so that one can’t help but wonder what their real motivations are for even going there.

This thread is called: To think Prince George is never going to find a life partner?

It is not called: What would happen if a future Monarch is gay?

See the difference?

A conversation about the RF's acceptance of homosexuality is one thing. A thread talking about a potential future 'life partner' (note it doesn't say wife) of a named child is not an appropriate place to start that conversation imo.

This place had become so full of bots recently it is almost unusable at the moment, this thread in particular is full of them and should be deleted.

How can you tell what's a bot? Why are bots just having a chat?

This thread is about why anyone sane would want to marry into the Royal Family.

It’s not about anyone’s sex life or sexuality.

If people think the thread is so vile - then stop furiously refreshing it and posting on it, and let a die a death.

Isn’t that obvious?

Then why have you singled out Prince George?

Because his father’s already married and he’s next in line to the throne (after his father). I thought that was obviously, but apparently not.

No one is looking at George and saying "He must be gay"

No one is trying to match him up with anyone.

He is an heir to the throne. The Royal sycophants on here are the people who have his life mapped out.

Poor sod. Trapped by duty. No doubt having it drummed into him about what is expected. He'll soon be aware of it as he becomes a teenager.

Personally, I hope he rebels as a teenager.

In fairness to the OP she isn’t the one who started speculating about George’s future partner, just the prospect of someone reasonable and normal joining the RF. the OP was fine - it’s just gone off in a weird tangent

@MNHQ- thanks for moving the thread to a more appropriate forum, but please do feel free to delete it altogether.

I thought it was going to be an interesting discussion about why anyone with an ounce of self-preservation would marry into the firm.

Clearly and naively, I could not have been more wrong and this reminds me why I never start threads of my own. 😳