Esmerelda
Serene Highness
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2010
- Messages
- 1,199
- City
- London
- Country
- United Kingdom
I feel for Victoria as well. I hope it won't come to an abdication. I guess we'll see when it all comes out.
My 2 cents worth:
What are the facts here as far as we can tell?
The King had an affair a long time ago. Not smart, but not illegal, it is also a private "couple" matter and he did not deny it. "Turn the page" as he said, move on.
He probably attended some "clubs" or parties- In fact he acknowledged in his interview that he went to places like Folies Bergeres. Are there scantily clad women in these clubs? Yes! feathers, pompoms, topless what have you. Striptease, Lap dancing? In some clubs yes. Are such clubs illegal in Sweden? Doubt it. Why is it OK for any person in Sweden to attend such clubs except the king? He was young once, he had a healthy appetite for fun, had a healthy libido- he went to parties, parties may have gotten out of hand. Everyone or almost everyone did something silly in their youth. It seems these former "associates" [and the media] are creating a scandal by bringing up behaviour from the past, - edgy, silly behaviour, probably something the now older king is not too proud of but hardly illegal behaviour.
Did he lie? Well he "waffled" a lot. He is not a good speaker, bungled up an interview , gave a bunch of non answers. That was probably his biggest mistake. -
Let us compare that with another famous royal interview: when Prince Charles acknowledged his adultery many years ago! So he [Charles] did not lie, but was that better PR? no , they dragged him in the mud, crucified him in the media, it took many years to recover if in fact he recovered; [there were and are still many calls for him to be cut from eh succession]. So which is the better strategy about embarrassing moments: to lie or not to lie ? For public figures it seems a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Personally for king Carl Gustav I think the very first answer from a year ago when he said "this was in the past, I turned the page, let's look forward" was the best line.
It's not so much the King attended sex parties and had affairs. He may or may not have links to the Mafia. A head of state - monarch or not - cannot have such ties.
If the King abdicates, I really feel for Victoria. A new baby and she's suddenly Queen? Not right.
If the monarchy is banned because of this, I also feel for Victoria. She would make a great Queen and should be given a chance.
It's not so much the King attended sex parties and had affairs. He may or may not have links to the Mafia. A head of state - monarch or not - cannot have such ties.
If the King abdicates, I really feel for Victoria. A new baby and she's suddenly Queen? Not right.
If the monarchy is banned because of this, I also feel for Victoria. She would make a great Queen and should be given a chance.
Why Mr? He is Prince by birth.If the king abdicates, would that make Silvia HM Queen Silvia, The Queen Mother, wife of Mr. Bernadotte?
Actually, based on historical precedent, he would continue to be King and she would continue to be Queen, they just would not be the reigning couple...King Constantine & Queen Anne-Marie are still referred to as such by the royal community. King Simeon and Queen Margarita and King Mihai and Queen Anne are all referred to as such even though they married well after the boy kings had left their respective countries which had also become republics by that time. Queen Juliana of the Netherlands herself decided to become Princess Juliana after her abdication, but that was the exception. Her mother and grandmother did not. Grand Duke Jean, Grand Duchess Josephine-Charlotte, and Grand Duchess Charlotte did not become "Mr." or "Mrs." after their abdications. Why would there be any difference in Sweden?
I cannot say that I'm shocked by this. Many other people who are public figures/in the limelight have done a lot worse (not that it should excuse the King's actions). I think that perhaps the best course to take would be to do an investigation, as has been suggested earlier in the thread. If the King is leading the said investigation, then perhaps he can be seen in a little better light.
My sympathy at this point is with Victoria and Queen Silvia. It can't be easy watching your parents' marriage fall apart, and go out with a smile on your face (and carry a child too). Nor is it easy to know that the man whom you married and trusted has been involved in some (possibly) shady business, and has been unfaithful to boot.
Actually Queen Julioan followed the esample of her mother who also choose to be known as Princess Wilhelmina after her abdication. And now it's even in the Law about the membership of the Royal House which means if Queen Beatrix abdicates she will also become Princess Beatrix again.
Well reading about all those scandals not only in Sweden, but also in Spain or Belgium makes me think what are monarchies for?
Of course lying about your "dark side" of life or cover it up is the biggest fault a royal can ever make but also the way of life those royals spent is highly unrecommendable when you are a royal paid by other people's tax-money. What kind of example do you give then?
Sweden can not have a Head of State who is not transparent about the things he does. Sweden can not have a Head of State or a royal prince visiting sex-clubs.
In a republic you can at least easily send those people away
Thanks for the info, Stefan. I was not aware of Wilhelmina "downgrading" to Princess when she abdicated, nor that it is now a law. Still under current practices and current Swedish law, wouldn't CG & Silvia would still be referred to as King and Queen? That is unless they also chose to voluntary change their titles?
Oh, dear. Things aren't looking good are they?
I'd just like to add that this business with the clubs and "coffee girls", which has now become a Swedish expression, did not only take place when the king was young, but allegedly when he was a middle aged man.
Although I personally think it is morally disgusting that a married man and father goes to sex parties, it is not illegal (it could be, though, if some of the girls were prostitutes). The problem in this case is that the king is Head of state and by doing things like these (if he did, that is) he put himself in a position where he can be blackmailed and manipulated by gangsters. Not the kind of good judgment people expect from their king.
Since this stuff came out over a year ago, you would think that the allegations or if any picture or pictures existed regarding this matter would be either proven or disproven one way or another.
It's also problematic because the King should be an example for people to look up to, and how could anyone look up to someone like that?
I think the dtuch Queens and also King Edward VIII. where the exceptions. For example King Léopold III. of the Belgians keept his title as King and also did the luxemburgian monarchs who abdicated.I would be surprised if they kept their titles. Constantine and Anne-Marie are a different matter entirely - their country abolished its monarchy, and there was no new King and Queen to take their place. I think a closer parallel than the Dutch Queens who retired and became Princesses would be the other modern monarch who abdicated in disgrace, King Edward VIII, who became merely the Duke of Windsor.