What would happen if the heir to the British Throne was gay?

[CurlewKate]

I wonder if there are contingency plans. Would he or she appoint an heir? Would there be a King/Queen and a King/Queen Consort? How would the GBP receive the idea? I’m sure that in the past he or she would have been pressured. Into a lavender marriage, but pretty sure that wouldn’t happen these days…. Is there any precedent in the House of Lords?

I agree that the line of succession is already set in stone as it may come into play for a number of reasons. Queen Elizabeth II wasn't directly in line until the King married Mrs Simpson and abdicating moving her across.

I think the subject of titles is much more interesting. Presumably King Consort/Queen Consort or would it be Prince/Princess in the same way Prince Philip was Prince.

Initially it would be a bit of a novelty but we have adapted well to a divorced, catholic (or was it just her first husband who was catholic) mistress as Queen Consort so I don't imagine it will be earth shattering.

Not just that but they need their kid to be perfect. Most children up for adoption understandably have behavioural issues and are older. Child services try badly to keep babies with their parents now. I can’t imagine child services would think a royal upbringing a good thing. The royal parents don’t really get involved with their kids that much due to Nannie’s etc.

The Mall would be painted in a giant rainbow. Soho would slowly take over the rest of London. The national anthem would be replaced with God Save the Queens. Grindr would become nationally subsidised. Royal decrees would henceforth be delivered via interpretive dance and confetti cannon. The Prime Minister would be required by law to lip-sync for their life during weekly PMQs.

What a glorious time it would be.

Yes and it would be very unfair to inflict a royal upbringing in the public eye on any child with difficulties relating to adoption or the reasons for such. Even a baby given up voluntarily would likely have problems as an adult in that environment.

I think even children born into that environment have had problems as adults.

That's true, so it would definitely be unwise to inflict it on an adopted child.

Nor can the eldest girl get a gender recognition certificate and be classed as a male for inheritance of wealth/titles.

True, although for the throne they did change it so now the eldest child does get the title if a girl. It's not retrospective though, so Princess Anne hasn't moved up the line of succession.

Currently, the crown passes to the next in line. So, for example, if Charles were gay and had no legitimate children, the crown would pass to Andrew, and so on.

Historically, gay monarchs like James I married women to produce heirs, then quietly carried on with affairs behind the scenes (often with beautiful young male favourites at court). The line of succession had to be preserved, regardless of their actual preferences.

My hope is that we reach a point where children born through surrogacy and adoption, or even illegitimate children, are recognised equally in matters of inheritance. For that to happen, there would need to be major reforms in inheritance law to reflect the realities of modern families.

Such a change would affect the aristocracy quite significantly. Currently, even when the monarchy allows equal primogeniture (eldest child inherits regardless of gender), this doesn’t extend to titles like Duchies, Earldoms, etc. Many of those still follow strict male-preference inheritance.

It’s time we started thinking seriously about how the law can evolve to recognise all children — not just those “born of the body.

We don't know that he is not. Nothing about William suggests he is gay to me but the Royals are actors playing a role. We don't know anything about their personal lives really.

It has happened in the past but back when the monarch was expected to marry for political reasons more than love so they would just marry anyway. If no children the monarchy would pass to next in line - brother or nephew usually.

If it happened today it would be nice to think there would be a same sex royal wedding and most people would accept it. Good point from PP about getting legally married in the CoE - but I guess it works for the current King and Queen who were married in a registry office!
The heir would be as per laws of succession, probably a nephew/niece.

i don't really get the question? he/she would be forced to marry someone of the opposite sex for the sake of the lineage.
once a suitable number of offspring were produced, he/she would be at liberty to to spend time with another in a discrete fashion.

somehow i doubt this has not been done before.

The “ lineage” already exists, no one can be forced to marry for the sake of it! If, for whatever reason, sexual preference or not, there were no direct heirs to the then monarch, we simply move onto the next in line. Just Google “Line of Succession” there are dozens on there to work through before we need to worry!

^^ This.

If any member of the royal family was gay we really wouldn't know. Everything is hidden as they just play a role of all normal and perfect.. At one point QE2 needed to be in a wheelchair and refused to. It's said she thought her sister Margaret in a wheelchair was undignified. Gotta paint the right picture 😲

@FruityCider ”God save the Queens” made me laugh.

Might make the Head of the Church of England thing a bit difficult….

Could they just change the rules? I mean they would be king/ queen? Isn’t it there rules go?
Like Henry eighth did with the church to allow divorce.

So instead of addressing your not very well hidden homophobic comment on the other thread, where you gleefully stated you hope to live to see a gay heir to the throne creating a problem for the succession, you've started a whole thread with the sub-context: how can a person's sexuality be used against the royal family.

Don’t be silly. You know perfectly well that’s bullshit. And I would have said so on the other thread if it hadn’t reached capacity. Not going to engage with you.

It’s already happened.

many times.

Engage or don't engage. You have form, regular posters know it.

Its a complicated narrative with Curlew. 🙄

I made a similar comment on another thread (about a different subject) but it's so obvious that a huge number of people paid zero attention to the BRF, to a Constitutional Monarchy (or any Monarchy in fact) before 2018.

The Line of Succession is clear and obvious.

Complicated indeed @MrsFinkelstein ! The issue of infertility is one thing, and whether heirs to the throne should include adopted children or children born from poverty stricken women with no other choice but to partake in baby trafficking surrogates. But it is very clear that the purpose of this thread and the remark on the other one was the glee over a gay heir somehow creating a crisis within the monarchy. The workings of a constitutional monarchy and the line of succession is as it ever was, unless a future monarch and the government decide to change it though letters patent and/or legislation. Someone's sexuality and life choices are private matters: whether to be open about it or not is a matter of personal choice, whether to marry or not is a matter of personal choice, coming to an arrangement with one's spouse is a matter of personal choice. This thread is using homosexuality as a weapon, and salivating over how the potential distress/difficulty/choices of a future heir might stick it to the RF.

Can you say some more? Post Edward II?