Royal Weddings.

hinault

As a man, I can remember a lot of scoffing by women in the runup to Charles and Diana's wedding.

But come the day, most of the world was glued to the TV screens.

Here in Ireland they went on and on and on about the wedding, the dress.

Probably a more innocent time back then though.

Neyite

Regina Phalange wrote: »

I don't know what she studied at University..

she studied history, along with William, but he switched to geography, or so Sky News informed me.

Neyite

Fishie wrote: »

"From student lover to princess, Kate’s nine-year wait is over" - yes, because all she's been doing for the last nine years is hoping he'll propose. Since that is the only objective in a woman's life.

evidently we are all just hanging around for our prince. however there is an element of truth in this statement in one way, i dont mean by waiting for him to propose, but for instance, they have lived together for 7 years now. she has been his partner, yet its only due to a bit of new jewellery that she is now being given royal protection. now she has the benefit of pr & media management to keep tabloids in a bit of line, whereas yesterday if a story of say, a wild night at university surfaced, she would have been at the mercy of the press.
i would hope that she enjoys the sweet revenge on the dumbass posh sloaney set that took the piss out of her mother being 'only' an air hostess. and slagged her off about being middle class and no family title - she'll now have a far better title than Lord wotsit and Lady yerwan.

Novella

Saw on Sky earlier that she'd gotten engaged... did not have a clue who she is. So yeah, I don't care at all, no interest.

Giselle

Fishie wrote: »

In fairness, it is pretty difficult to escape this news, it is absolutely everywhere today.

Thats my only problem. Its just going to be impossible to escape.

While I dont have many particularly clear memories of Princess Diana, I think this woman is going to be shoved into a Diana shaped void and tormented in a very similar way. Poor thing, its a high price.

panda100

Giselle wrote: »

Thats my only problem. Its just going to be impossible to escape.

While I dont have many particularly clear memories of Princess Diana, I think this woman is going to be shoved into a Diana shaped void and tormented in a very similar way. Poor thing, its a high price.

Yep,I can't help but fear for them. They seem to be a lovely couple,very much in love, Im sure the media will help screw up both their lives in some sort of way.
The tabloids have got a perfect princess in Kate Middelton and she will be stalked by them until she dies, i guess.

Orla K

monroebaby wrote: »

Queen Victoria's husband Prince (consort) Albert didn't become King because he did not inherit the throne and therefore couldn't claim a title deemed higher than that of the lady in charge. When Kate marries William she should become a Queen (consort) and share her husbands rank but not hold his military or political powers. Historically and politically its important. A lot of people will be interested in it, the problem really is the way todays media drowns us in mundane detail, too much information. That's the way it is and as long as people keep making money at it, that's the way it'll stay. By the time this comes around we will surely know what even the corgi's have had for breakfast on the day. :eek:

The main thing I think about in that case is that she (queen victoria) wanted him to to king consort, the government at the time wouldn't allow it. Also I have a feeling that Mary I her husband was king consort (but then he was king of Spain). Thinking about it, it's probably going to be different for a woman(well used to queen consort and queen dowager by now)

Also I have watched far too many history documenties, I'm not going to reply because to be honest I don't even know her name and I don't care what it is either.

Pretty_Pistol

I'm interested. I've never seen a Royal wedding besides the Prince Charles and Camilla ceremony which was pretty boring. Also, I like history and this will be a part of history. And I'm interested in seeing her dress.

monroebaby

Orla K wrote: »

I'm not going to reply because to be honest I don't even know her name and I don't care what it is either.

I'm sure you'll know it by the end of the ceremony!!! Its sure to be on every TV and radio station, newspaper and magazine!

Personally I think its nice that they're getting married, it's not an endogamous marriage. They've been together years, its clearly a marriage of love. A previous poster stated that its a sign that the Royal family have moved with the times because of this. That in itself is historic I guess. While I really don't want to see it on the news, I'm definitely interested in the dress! I wasn't around for Diana and Charles' wedding, but her dress was maaaaaasssive!!! I reckon Kate's will be a lot simpler, more modern, less fairytale Or maybe a big pouffy Vera Wang

iguana

Orla K wrote: »

Also I have a feeling that Mary I her husband was king consort (but then he was king of Spain). Thinking about it, it's probably going to be different for a woman(well used to queen consort and queen dowager by now)

England or the whole of Britain has never had a King Consort. The earliest Queen Regnants, Matilda and Jane, never held power in a way that allowed for their husband's positions to be confirmed. (Though Jane did not wish to make Guildford Dudley anything more than a Duke.)

Phillip II of Spain was co-monarch for the duration of his marriage to Mary I. They could only call parliament jointly for example. In return his father ceded a number of his titles, King of Naples and King of Jerusalem (which was titular only at this point), early so Phillip could be Mary's equal in rank. He didn't become King of Spain until 1556 when his father abdicated.

Mary II and William of Orange were also co-monarchs and their marriage treaty allowed for William to continue to rule after Mary's death. Anne's husband, George, third son of the Danish monarch, was Prince only in his Danish title. Duke of Cumberland was the greatest title he gained as the Queen's consort. But he was styled by his greatest title which was his Danish one, Prince.

Victoria did wish for Prince Albert, a prince in his own right as a member of the royal house of Saxony, to become King consort but the parliament did not want a German king. She chose to title him as Prince Consort instead. The current Prince Phillip is not actually a Prince Consort at all but instead a Prince of the United Kingdom.

A number of the wives of various male monarchs were never crowned, and so never officially Queen Consort, but all were styled as Queen.

LadyMayBelle

Well, i plan on having a bit of a cheesy bash on the day, oogling the the dress and all. Who's in?

getz

Fishie wrote: »

As for my opinions about the actual engagement, I think that it shows that the Royal family are starting to move with the times a bit more. William is engaged to his girlfriend of several years, who is from a rich but not a titled family. She has had previous boyfriends, has an education, and most importantly they chose each other. They have also been together for years, so she has a good idea of what she is getting herself into. They've even lived together before marriage - there is no way this would have been allowed a few decades ago!

Compare this to his parents, Charles and Diana - Charles had obviously fallen for Camilla, but was not allowed to marry her because she was divorced. Diana was pretty much chosen for him - she was young (I think she may have been 18 or 19?) compared to Charles who was in his early 30s, her father was an Earl, and she was a virgin. A lot of importance was placed on the virgin thing - I've heard before that some press at the time were determined to get evidence of the couple having sex before marriage, but actually recorded phone calls between Charles and Camilla, which were quickly hushed up. Anyway, my point is that they should have just let Charles marry Camilla in the first place, it would have saved so much heartache, and it was a big deal when they finally got married a few years ago.

So, I think it is a good thing that he is being allowed to marry the person he is actually in love with, not some titled virgin who has been chosen to bear sons for him and not much else. Also, Diana was so determined that her kids would grow up to be grounded, I think that she would have approved.

sorry to let you down, diana was not a virgin when she married charles,it was well known she was bedding a soldier ,

efb

I thought they had her 'checked'?

getz

efb wrote: »

I thought they had her 'checked'?

no that just one of those things people like to believe,on the king consort [prince philip]gave up his greek royal titles when marrying elizabeth,his dad was prince andrew of greece,his mother princess alice of battenburg, and his grandmother queen olga of greece,he has stated that he considers himself danish,

getz

diana first boyfriend was called george plumptre,they were so close she would do all his washing for him,

Corsendonk

Royal Wedding in 2011
London Olympics in 2012
Queens Diamond Jubilee 2012

I think ladies you will have plenty of opportunities for royal watching.

Giselle

A good 15 minutes of breakfast news time this morning was devoted to discussing whether or not Kate would have a British or foreign designer work on her dress.

Don't get me wrong, I'll check out her dress like everyone else on the wedding day, but its at least six months away and speculating about the nationality of the designer isn't news.

Its only going to get worse too.:(

spinandscribble

Its only been a day but i'm so sick of it all over the news. I can't get over she hasn't even had a career in her life, just follows Will around the bases.

Scarinae

Giselle wrote: »

A good 15 minutes of breakfast news time this morning was devoted to discussing whether or not Kate would have a British or foreign designer work on her dress.

Don't get me wrong, I'll check out her dress like everyone else on the wedding day, but its at least six months away and speculating about the nationality of the designer isn't news.

Its only going to get worse too.:(

Apparently some of the news channels have been interviewing everyone who has ever met her - her old hairdresser, teachers from school, barmen from pubs she would frequent... It's a bit creepy. Imagine if you suddenly became famous and absolutely anyone you'd had contact with was on the news talking about you?

getz wrote: »

sorry to let you down, diana was not a virgin when she married charles,it was well known she was bedding a soldier ,

Sorry to let me down? :rolleyes: It doesn't matter to me if she was a virgin or not, but either way the press made a big deal of it, and like efb pointed out that it's widely said that they had her checked... There has been no mention of it this time as far as I've seen anyway. Considering that they've lived together for years, and she's had previous boyfriends, it is unlikely - but nobody really cares these days. I think that this is a good thing

Giselle

Fishie wrote: »

Imagine if you suddenly became famous and absolutely anyone you'd had contact with was on the news talking about you?

Can you imagine the kiss and tell potential for unscrupulous ex's? :eek:

Maybe thats why they went for girls 'without a past' before now.

sinequanon

Im loving it, its a bit of good news amidst the doom and gloom and a really happy story for a change. I think Kate is perfect for Wills and him her...best of luck to them, and hears to being glued to the telly at a date to be confirmed in '11!

Scarinae

Giselle wrote: »

Can you imagine the kiss and tell potential for unscrupulous ex's? :eek:

Maybe thats why they went for girls 'without a past' before now.

Ugh, imagine the headlines. "I had sex with future queen!"

metaoblivia

It's all over the media here in the States. They've been together so long, it's not much of a surprise. I'm happy for the as they seem very much in love, but I know all of the media coverage and build up to the wedding is going to get old.

Now, I love a good wedding and formal gowns of any kind, but I'm preparing myself for a let down here. Kate Middleton's fashion sense is a bit too safe for me. I think she's a very attractive girl, but I wouldn't go so far as to describe her as glamourous. That said, I hope she has a wonderful wedding and life with Prince William. I don't think it will be easy, but hopefully the British royal family and the media will have learned some lessons from what happened with Diana.

Giselle

Fishie wrote: »

Ugh, imagine the headlines. "I had sex with future queen!"

If I was him I'd wait until the headline would be ''I had sex WITH the Queen''! Much more interesting than ''I had sex with A queen'':p

I'd definitely buy that paper.:)

Piste

I actually couldn't care less. Maybe it's an English thing that's just part of their mentality?

SeekUp

You know, I usually don't pay attention at all to celebrity anything. In fact, I get annoyed at the money people spend on gossip magazines, and more often than not, I don't know who's the hottest this or the latest that.

This, however, I dunno. It's not just a random movie star nobody. The prince of a major world power is getting married, it's a big deal. I won't be stalking the news coverage, but I'll take a passing interest, sure. Good luck to them!

LordSutch

Westminster Abbey - Friday 29th April - 2011.

mackwan

i personaly belive in Love and i want to do Love marriage with my love so i have no Traditional idea for Marriage .Traditional marriage take few day's but in Love marriage it's take few minutes .

Regina Phalange

Wahoo, 4 day weekend for me!!
Suddenly I'm VERY interested

Scarinae

Regina Phalange wrote: »

Wahoo, 4 day weekend for me!!
Suddenly I'm VERY interested

25th April is Easter Monday
29th April is the wedding + bank holiday
2nd May is May bank holiday

SWEET!