royals: boys, girls - but why eldest?

[vinteuil]

Am I the only person to be a leetle bit baffled by the current consensus that the move by the Royal Family to give first-born girls equal precedence to first-born boys when it comes to inheriting the throne is an obviously good idea? By which, I don't - of course - mean that girls shdn't have equal chances at everything. It's more - what seems to me glaring, but seems missed by most commentators - why on earth do we think that - if we are keen on equality - there shd be an absolute prejudice in favour of primogeniture? Why does equality matter when it comes to boy/girl (quite right; I agree) - but not when it comes to whether the accident of being born first / second / third arises?

I must check up on the old legal meaning of Borough English - where the youngest son inherited...

(I write, obviously, as a youngest son... )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimogeniture

[Mahlerei]

I reckon the corgis should get a look in too.

Arf, arf.

[Serial_Apologist]

I reckon the corgis should get a look in too.

Arf, arf.

Dogma would not be advisable in the issue...

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Yes: on the clog-popping of a monarch, put the offspring in a boxing ring and televise the proceedings. (Call it It's a Royal Knockout!)

[Serial_Apologist]

I'd prefer "The Royal Box"

[Anna]

Surely it's just a question of keeping things tidy, first-born gets the lot. Saves squabbling over who might be best suited to inherit. Personally I think Anne would make a better monarch than Charles but if you didn't have that first-born son rule - imagine if Andrew seized the crown!

[ahinton]

I can see that - and why - the age factor remains an issue now that the other two - that of boy/girl and non-RC/RC - are out of the way (at last!) but, when there is more than one sibling, on what grounds, if not age, might a decision be made? There would have to be some guiding parameter if age were no longer to be an issue. Less than ideal though the seniority qualification is, the only instances in which it would not be and has not been an issue is in cases where there is only one sibling and therefore no choice factors at stake so, whilst I accept that these two revisions to the succession rules are improvements to the system, I do believe that the seniority factor should remain intact at least until someone can come up with an alternative that would provably be better - so it's open to anyone who feels sufficiently strongly that the seniority issue is a no-no to suggest something else that might represent an improvement in the way that these two new revisions do.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

As one who believes in the individual's responsibility in keeping down the population, I don't think there should ever be a third child anyway. So in a perverse sort of way, the first child idea is probably the best, and it prevents any arguments.

In case you are wondering, I wrote "way," only once and can't edit it out.

[Curalach]

It rather begs the question of why the position of Head of State should be hereditary in the first place. Come the revolution these changes might seem like re-arranging the deck-chairs on the Titanic

[vinteuil]

I believe that all the Kings of Sa'udi Arabia, since its foundation by King Abdul-Aziz ibn Abdul-Rahman Al Sa'ud ("Ibn Sa'ud"), have been his sons - ie, the throne has passed from brother to brother to brother ( Sa'ud, Faisal, Khalid, Fahd, Abdullah), rather than from father to son.

I'm not saying that is a better system.

Rather, I wd wish to indicate that all these systems are ultimately absurd. Perhaps a Borgesian lottery system might be instructive...

[vinteuil]

Anna - a new avatar!!! tell us more!!!

[PatrickOD]

I believe that all the Kings of Sa'udi Arabia, since its foundation by King Abdul-Aziz ibn Abdul-Rahman Al Sa'ud ("Ibn Sa'ud"), have been his sons - ie, the throne has passed from brother to brother to brother ( Sa'ud, Faisal, Khalid, Fahd, Abdullah), rather than from father to son.

I'm not saying that is a better system.

Rather, I wd wish to indicate that all these systems are ultimately absurd. Perhaps a Borgesian lottery system might be instructive...

I don't know what a Borgesian lottery system might be, vinteuil, but they have a qaint PR system in Ireland, and it looks like over there they are going to choose the first born for their head of state. And they are not against women either!

[Anna]

Anna - a new avatar!!! tell us more!!!

Well, I got a bit fed up with Lauren Bacall and everytime I looked I was reminded of "You know how to whistle, don't you, Steve?" So I merely switched to Fay Wray. Simples. Actually I have an original b&w photo of her on set, not signed unfortunately, which is on the bathroom wall in which she is looking very wistful.

Oh, and EineA not believing there should be a third child - I am the fourth child!

[Serial_Apologist]

It would have to be the Firth of Forth for a Scottish monarch

[vinteuil]

I don't know what a Borgesian lottery system might be, vinteuil, but they have a qaint PR system in Ireland, and it looks like over there they are going to choose the first born for their head of state. And they are not against women either!

... Patrick - what's going on over in Ireland is much more interesting!

For Borges and the lottery -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lottery_in_Babylon