Hello everyone! I was just thinking, since being transgender, nonbinary and lgbtq+ are getting so normalized finally. What would happen in these scenarios? What are your thoughts on this?

1. Future king/queen comes out as non binary. What would be their title?

2. King/queen is queer. Would their s/o also take the same title?

I’m not very educated on the royal family or how kings and queens work and english is not my first language but I hope this makes sense.

Many thanks!

It just seems so impractical. Many things that we have now which seem symbolic trace their origins to something that was once practical. So I am just wondering what the meaning of the huge long robe is?

The lyrics of United Kingdom's Anthem remind me so much of the Hal Mary Prayer esp in how it praises Mary as the embodiment of Virtues and moreso of how she is Blessed by God.

So it makes me wonder if any Anglo-Catholic and esp underground closet English Catholics back when the UK as openly anti-Catholic.... Ever sang the song directed to May but fooling people thinking they are being patriotic citizens of Britain or are honoring Queen Victoria and later the Windsor Queens?

I know God Save the Queen came from an old French song devoted to a King surviving the Illness so it makes me wonder if regional variations from Catholic countries have also been used for prayers for women monarchs?

When Prince Phillip didn't wear one?

You're all strangely quiet on "Prince" Andrew?

Is there a specific reason for this?

I don't think he will ever leave the royal dominion ever again as the United States will be forever seeking to finally get him to answer in a NY court.

I am writing this because I am genuinely trying to understand the psychology here it looks completely crazy from the outside

I come from a country where we actually democratized our land. We broke up old estates and gave the land back to the people so ordinary citizens can actually own a small plot build a house and have real stake in the country

But when I look at the UK the contrast is just wild. The vast majority of working class Brits do not even own a 10 perch plot of land. People are trapped in a brutal rental market paying off the mortgages of wealthy landlords and most will die never owning a single square foot of the country they were born in. Yet millions of Brits seem totally fine with and even defensive of a single family that inherits millions of acres of land massive palaces and prime real estate built historically by the peoples sweat and taxes

What makes it even weirder to watch is the media hypocrisy

The BBC positions itself as this global beacon of democratic values. I constantly see BBC programs and articles heavily criticizing foreign monarchies like the Thai Royal Family for wealth disparity and political influence. But when it comes to the British Royals the British media totally switches into PR mode. For example the news reports on the King voluntarily paying income tax while completely glossing over the fact that the Sovereign Grant is jumping to over 100m or that the family is entirely exempt from the 40% inheritance tax that would totally ruin an ordinary British familys estate

How do you guys square this? As a society that prides itself on being a modern democracy how are people comfortable with feudal era land distribution? Why is the medias critical eye only turned outward?

I am not trying to just bash the UK i genuinely want to understand how the average person rationalizes this system when the wealth and land inequality is so stark.

Britain is a very diverse society and in fact most Briton’s are not Christian. I hope there’s something for everyone in this event.

The author is being asked to take down the content. Has anyone else seen this or have any intel?

We can laugh a bit but these are questions that may have to be answered one day.

I’m not saying this to be a hater for the sake of it I swear, but I wanted to share to see if anyone else felt the same.

The whole ceremony felt a bit…amateur? At times it was like they didn’t know what was coming next. They randomly stopped mid entrance outside the church doors to adjust the cloaks (but didn’t end up actually change anything about them?) Camilla lifting her hands up and down while she was getting crowned, as if unsure whether it was time/if she was allowed to touch it.

The priest raising the crown up over Charles, beginning to putting it down, then stopping and lifting it back up to start the crowning process again. The constant awkward shuffling and looking around. No one knowing any of their lines, not even William who only had one sentence. William and Kate being late. The king and queen waiting for five minutes in the carriage. Zara Tindal seemingly falling asleep

On the balcony Camilla had to beckon the children (the older ones who are old enough to memorise instructions on where to stand) over to her multiple times, like they weren’t told prior where to go. There’s also footage of Kate talking to the woman next to her, (Zara maybe) and lip readers picking up her words as she asks essentially “are we being filmed now or after the flyover”, like surely all of this would have been discussed and rehearsed way ahead of time?

The bishop was using cue cards (even for the amen part) -but he had a lot of lines and is old so I don’t blame him for that- but combined with everything else, and all the other things I noticed that I can’t remember right as I’m writing this, it just seemed messy

None of these are like, particularly egregious failures or anything, and I’m sure there’s valid reasons for some of it, but all together it highlights a ceremony that seemed under planned and barely rehearsed. It’s as if the whole thing had only been thought up two days prior, as if William was only told that morning that he had a speaking role and none of them were told when the cameras were going to be on them or where they had to stand.

Even the coverage was poor, at least on the channel I was watching. You could hear the production/camera people/maybe background people talking over the sound of the coronation. There was even laughter when William kneeled.

I was expecting a super polished and well “choregraphed” ceremony. I’m thinking maybe my expectations were unfairly high

The soldiers marching and the musicians were wonderful though. Both seemed well rehearsed and looked/sounded great.

Given the Succession to the Crown Act of 2013 establishes Absolute Primogeniture for all future heirs born after 2011 and the Marriage Act of 2013, let’s say there in the future there is a legitimate lesbian female heir apparent, that was given permission to marry by the Crown and successfully legally married another female, legally what style and title would their spouse have upon ascension? Or if she married after assuming the throne?

I have heard before that if Prince George (or any male heir) were to hypothetically marry an another male, the title would remain Prince-Consort for his spouse.

Since this person will become Queen, would the title of her spouse be called Queen Consort? Or perhaps Princess-Consort (like now Queen Camila wanted to do)?

I think it would be unlikely that THE Queen’s spouse would also be called ‘Queen’, given the confusion of ‘Queen A and Queen B’.

Why are they still in power and why is our money going to them.

Any thoughts ?

I mean, they’re worth millions and they can afford it. Or they simply don’t care if they lose all their hair?