Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Royal succession - look at the language being used!

50 replies

SardineQueen · 16/04/2011 19:55

bbc here

Thinking of changing it so that if a female child is born before a male child, the male child no longer gets to jump the queue.

Whether you give a monkeys about the royals or not - the language used by Nick Clegg is astounding!

I would have thought that it would be very obvious that it should be changed - apparently not Hmm

OP posts:
WideWebWitch · 17/04/2011 11:45

Agree, this does show where is really at

NorfolkNChance · 17/04/2011 13:24

Completely agree Sardine (about the succession not my bumping of all the royals in my way!)

vesuvia · 17/04/2011 13:26

SardineQueen, I agree with your concerns regarding the "inadequate" language that the Deputy Prime Minister has used on this issue. Sex discrimination is definitely much more than his opinion that it is "a little old-fashioned".

A female (or male) cleaner of a royal palace is never going to have as much privilege as a princess. Any change to equalise the rights of females to males in the royal succession is obviously not going to correct that situation but surely it is not even claiming to address that wider issue. It's only a start but we have to start somewhere. Until the monarchy is abolished, someone is still going to end up as monarch, whether the rest of the population are rich or poor, happy or unhappy etc.

Royal women are among the most privileged people in the world but they are still people who deserve equal treatment on the basis of sex, in whatever situation they find themselves.

I think removal of the current sex discrimination in the royal succession would be a positive step. Women's rights should be absolute not relative. I don't want my rights as an ordinary British woman to be reduced or not improved just because there are men and women in other countries who have fewer rights or less money or less privilege.

Removing the current sex bias would send a signal, however limited, that no institution, however high or remote or "traditional", should be allowed to discriminate against a female on the basis of her sex. That is the key feminist point in this issue.

Whoever is sitting on the throne probably does not really have a huge impact on the everyday lives of ordinary people, but I think it is important to ensure that the unfairness of royal succession due to the sex of the royal children is removed. Obviously, that still leaves age discrimination but that's another can of worms that affects both sexes.

femtastic · 17/04/2011 14:10

Personally speaking, I am a hardcore republican who thinks the entire monarchical system should be scrapped as opposed to just primogeniture.

SardineQueen · 17/04/2011 14:53

I am "meh" about the royals TBH.

However you feel about them though, this language being used by the people who run the country says a lot I think.

OP posts:
SuchProspects · 17/04/2011 16:45

I'd prefer a republic, though I think we would likely have had less female representation under such a system.

I can't see how anyone who claims that feminism is important or "no longer needed" can support primogeniture. But I can also appreciate that Clegg's language (and I really quite hate Nick Clegg) is more likely to get the right legislation through the right places than language that is more just and accurate. So I can't get too worked up about that - seems like political pragmatism to me.

I would be idly curious to know what monarchs we would have had if women had been equal to men in the royal line. Who would be monarch now and what is that person currently doing?

It's also the case I believe that most of the hereditary titles in Britain not only put sons first but put most male relatives over any direct daughters. Money and land is often tied to the title as well meaning women routinely inherit less in the aristocracy. And while they are a lot less important than they used to be, a title is still a valuable thing to hold and, once again, women are systematically cut of leadership and power.

SardineQueen · 17/04/2011 16:49

If we had a republic, mind you, we'd probably never get a woman....

OP posts:
hocuspontas · 17/04/2011 16:51

Queen Victoria's eldest child, Victoria, was the mother of Kaiser Wilhelm so in the 1st WW we would have declared war on ourselves Grin

Unrulysun · 17/04/2011 19:33

Pointless parasitic heads on spikes outside the Tower. Job done.

Want2bSupermum · 17/04/2011 19:54

As to why no Catholics, the Queen or King of England is the Head of the Anglican Church. How can you be Head of the Anglican Church and be married to a Catholic? The children and heir to the throne would be raised as Catholics resulting in a Catholic monarchy.

Overall the Royal family are moving with the times. Prince William has been able to marry the girl who he loves and has lived with for the past 10 years. She clearly isn't a virgin and no one seems to have a problem with this.

In addition, I wish Clegg would concentrate on more pressing matters such as figuring out a way to scrap tuition fees, sort the economy out and improve education. Once all of that is done he can by all means start working on changing the hereditary order of the British monarchy. No system is perfect but this system has given us a few Queens who on the whole have done a much better job than the majority of Kings.

SardineQueen · 17/04/2011 20:14

But it would be OK for them to marry a Hindu, Jew or Zoroastran?

OP posts:
senua · 17/04/2011 20:15

"A Buckingham Palace spokeswoman said it was a matter for the government and would not comment."

Isn't politics bizarre. The people who this affects most directly know that they are not 'allowed' to express a comment.Confused

I think that the OP is being naive if she thinks that the need for change would be "very obvious". Try telling the Archbishop of Canterbury that it is "very obvious" that there should women Bishops. The rest of the Commonwealth / Anglican community cannot be instructed by us because 'we know better'. They need to be persuaded, not patronised by us. It took us long enough to get this far with equality, you can't expect them to adopt it overnight.

meditrina · 17/04/2011 20:37

senua: the Queen never comments on proposed legislation. And I don't think she'd want to start on this one, where she could so easily be accused of unduly influencing the legislatatuve process here or in the realms and dominions. That said, the Palace has "let it be known" that HMQ would have no difficulty with such a change should it be wanted.

confuddledDOTcom · 17/04/2011 21:18

I wonder if this would change the fact that a princess doesn't pass the title down too as her children would be higher in line for the throne.

SardineQueen · 18/04/2011 09:03

Being naive to think that women should be equal to men?

OP posts:
senua · 18/04/2011 10:37

No, not naive to think that women should be equal to men. Naive to think that a politician here can wave a magic wand and make it happen overseas.
I presume you are not in the Diplomatic service.Grin

SardineQueen · 18/04/2011 10:42

I understand that they need accord from all the Commonwealth countries.

What I am amazed about is the language used by Nick Clegg. Given the year we are in and where we're supposed to be at regarding equality, you would have thought he could have afforded to be less wishy washy than that.

OP posts:
oohlaalaa · 18/04/2011 10:43

I am a farmers daughter, and although I'm older than my brother, I knew from a very young age that the farm was his to inherit and run (if he wanted to), rather than mine. I only got the farmif he didnt want it.

As I'd grown up with this, it has never bothered me. I understood that the farm had gone down the generations with the son taking over, and my parents grandparents wanted to continue this.

I know it's different to royal family, but I suspect it is a sensitive issue.

caramelwaffle · 18/04/2011 10:51

Add message | Report | Message poster MigratingCoconuts Sat 16-Apr-11 20:54:58
Most of the best monarchs this country has had have been women...discuss!

Surely it should just be a statement

Most of the best Monarchs this country has had have been women...fact!

MigratingCoconuts · 18/04/2011 11:01

Grin...yes, I've been thinking about that and I am struggling to think of a king who was all that.

George 6th was good (but look at the wife backing him up)

Henry 8th showed promised but turned into a complete tyrant

the best monach we've had has to be Elizabeth the first...none can touch her!!

wonderstuff · 18/04/2011 11:08

Great post vesuvia
I am a socialist, republican, feminist, and while I don't agree with the monachy and take great issue with inherited wealth, that is the system we have and so it seems only right that if we can improve it to make it 'fair' then we should do that.
What shocked me watching daybreak this morning was the number of people emailing saying the system of male succession should be kept because of 'tradition'! Take that to it's logical conclusion and traditionally women had no vote or property rights - tradition should be no excuse to hold onto inequality.

Cattleprod · 18/04/2011 11:18

Seeing as we have had a female monarch for the entirity of most people's lives, it should be obvious that a female is perfectly capable of the job.

Out of interest, when was the last time that the primogeniture rule was actually used?

MigratingCoconuts · 18/04/2011 11:21

Queen Victoria's eldest daughter was passed over in favour of Edward 7th, I believe

Cattleprod · 18/04/2011 11:29

So over 100 years ago for the Royal family then.

What about other aristocratic families? Is it the norm for titles/land etc to be passed to boys rather than girls? It was mentioned on 'Country House Rescue' last night and caused a lot of bitterness with the daughters who didn't inherit.

vesuvia · 18/04/2011 19:44

wonderstuff wrote - "Great post vesuvia ... tradition should be no excuse to hold onto inequality."

Thanks.

Just because something is traditional doesn't make it good or right. Feminists have had to fight tradition depressingly often over the years. Too often, "tradition" has been a euphemism for patriarchal status quo.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread