![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
long does it wave
The UK Parliament is considering, and indeed has been considering for a period of time, a change in the law regarding the succession to the monarchy. From males-first primogeniture it would go to primogeniture regardless of sex.
This is an obvious blow for gender egalitarianism, but I'd just like to point out that if such a law had been in effect at the time of Queen Victoria (or at any previous time back to George III; if it had been in effect before then, there never would have been a George III, which may be a feature, not a bug), then Kaiser Wilhelm would have become King of Great Britain. I'm not sure that would have been a good idea.
Also, if the idea of males taking automatic precedence over females is so inherently ludicrous in our modern time, why isn't the idea of automatic precedence of the eldest also considered ludicrous? Instead, this law change would reinforce it.
In other monarchial news, this brief history of ladies in waiting looks good until the end, when it refers to Wills' cousin Lady Sarah Chatto. Then there's a terminological error. She should be on later reference called Lady Sarah, not Lady Chatto, because she is the daughter of an earl, not a peer or the wife of one herself. (If she were "Lady Chatto", it'd have been incorrect to also call her "Lady Sarah Chatto." Just remember, you can't be Lord (or Lady) Firstname and Lord (or Lady) Lastname at the same time, and 90% of the terminological errors people make over British nobility would disappear.)
This is an obvious blow for gender egalitarianism, but I'd just like to point out that if such a law had been in effect at the time of Queen Victoria (or at any previous time back to George III; if it had been in effect before then, there never would have been a George III, which may be a feature, not a bug), then Kaiser Wilhelm would have become King of Great Britain. I'm not sure that would have been a good idea.
Also, if the idea of males taking automatic precedence over females is so inherently ludicrous in our modern time, why isn't the idea of automatic precedence of the eldest also considered ludicrous? Instead, this law change would reinforce it.
In other monarchial news, this brief history of ladies in waiting looks good until the end, when it refers to Wills' cousin Lady Sarah Chatto. Then there's a terminological error. She should be on later reference called Lady Sarah, not Lady Chatto, because she is the daughter of an earl, not a peer or the wife of one herself. (If she were "Lady Chatto", it'd have been incorrect to also call her "Lady Sarah Chatto." Just remember, you can't be Lord (or Lady) Firstname and Lord (or Lady) Lastname at the same time, and 90% of the terminological errors people make over British nobility would disappear.)