Royal Watchers- "Royal Fam. Tidbits "

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
There's one thing you can guarantee: if you are the girlfriend of the heir to the throne, and you either live together or have sex, you can bet that you will not be marrying him.

There still is a virginity requirement, despite its silliness.
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,363
61
48
This whole "royal " issue is quite outdated.......but for some reason, people seem to cling to the "traditions" and symbolism it continues to represent.




( started this for any and all updates (gossip included ;-) re: Royals, and discussion of pros and cons of maintaining such an institution. Royals can be such "fun"... :wink: "they" have such --um--- weird ideas about things.

the fascinating part about them is their geneology and history..
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,363
61
48
Re: RE: Royal Watchers- "Royal Fam. Tidbits "

TenPenny said:
There's one thing you can guarantee: if you are the girlfriend of the heir to the throne, and you either live together or have sex, you can bet that you will not be marrying him.

There still is a virginity requirement, despite its silliness.


that whole "virginity" thing is beyond stupid. It is just sooo pre-historic. Kinda too bad , it does not apply to the "heir " as well. :roll:

Irrational symbolism at best.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: Royal Watchers- "Roya

I like the way Iceland handles Royals. They keep the king around for ribbon cutting ceremonies etc, but they don't pay him, so he needs a regular job too.
 

Hard-Luck Henry

Council Member
Feb 19, 2005
2,194
0
36
Re: RE: Royal Watchers- "Royal Fam. Tidbits "

Ocean Breeze said:
TenPenny said:
There's one thing you can guarantee: if you are the girlfriend of the heir to the throne, and you either live together or have sex, you can bet that you will not be marrying him.

There still is a virginity requirement, despite its silliness.


that whole "virginity" thing is beyond stupid. It is just sooo pre-historic. Kinda too bad , it does not apply to the "heir " as well. :roll:

Irrational symbolism at best.

8O I have to say, I have some serious doubts about that particular 'requirement' being a fact, guys. :lol:
 

Hard-Luck Henry

Council Member
Feb 19, 2005
2,194
0
36
I found the following quote at Macleans.ca:
The Spectator even went so far as to speculate she has retained her virginity, an archaic requirement still expected of those who aspire to provide heirs to the throne. "William is Kate's first serious boyfriend," it said, "and if her reputation is as squeaky clean as it seems, this suggests she may still have her V-plates intact and thus satisfy the age-old requisite for future queen consorts."

I'm still not totally convinced, but I wouldn't put it past the oddballs.

Incidently, on the genealogy thing - with all the in house shenanigans that have gone on over the centuries, the whole royal lineage thing is highly doubtful. In fact, there is a very popular theory that the brother of Richard the Third -himself a usurper, of course - was not in fact descended from the king at all, but from a swarthy archer who had his wicked way with the Queen while the king was away on kingly business, thus making the royal line since the C15th nothing more than a sham. They're all descended from a common scumbag (as opposed to a royal scumbag, that is). Apparently the real King of England is some old guy who lives in a portakabin in Australia. When a TV crew gave him the news a while ago, he gave the impression he'd much rather stay where he was, thank you very much. 8)
 

bevvyd

Electoral Member
Jul 29, 2004
848
0
16
Mission, BC
I seem to recall before Diana married Chucky that there was news that she passed the virginity test and as such was permitted to carry the title of Princess, whereas Camel only gets the title of Duchess.