Prince Philip, 96, attended his final royal engagement this week and is now retired. People have warmed to him in recent years, because he’s so old, but Prince Philip has his share of controversy. He’s said some racist sh-t. He’s offended people all over the place. He has never, however, bitched about not being made king – at least not openly. Not the way Prince Henrik, of Denmark, is going about it now.
Prince Henrik is married to Margrethe, the Queen of Denmark. In Denmark, a princess becomes Queen when her husband ascends the throne. However, if the monarch is a woman, it is not tradition for her husband to become King. So Henrik’s title has always been Prince Consort to Queen Margrethe. This, in Henrik’s opinion, is sexist. He’s been pissy about it the whole time they’ve been married. So pissy that he’s decided that when he dies, he does not want to be buried with her.
“It is no secret that the prince for many years has been unhappy with his role and the title he has been awarded in the Danish monarchy. This discontent has grown more and more in recent years,” the palace’s communications chief, Lene Balleby, told the tabloid BT.
“For the prince, the decision not to buried beside the queen is the natural consequence of not having been treated equally to his spouse – by not having the title and role he has desired.”
Crusty bastard. But is this simply a petty temper tantrum, a major suck attack? Prince Henrik insists that this isn’t about ego, it’s about equality. That Denmark is supposedly a world leader in gender equality and Henrik is not being treated equally if the “Queen” rule isn’t being applied equally to “King”. The implication here is that the term “King”, a title reserved for a man, is so special that it can only be acquired through birthright and not marriage, unlike “Queen”, which, seemingly, is not as exclusive. The subtext behind that then is that “King” ranks higher than “Queen”. It’s more special.
If that was the argument that Prince Henrik was making, we’d have a proper debate. Why IS “King” more absolute than “Queen”? This is the discussion we should be having. This, however, is not the discussion that Prince Henrik is having. Or, at least, that’s not how he’s presenting it. He’s not objecting to the less-than status of the word and title “Queen” in comparison to the absoluteness of the “King”, and therefore the less-than status of women, he’s objecting to what he calls discrimination… against MEN:
“It makes me angry that I am subjected to discrimination,” he said told the French newspaper Le Figaro. “Denmark, which is otherwise known as an avid defender of gender equality, is apparently willing to consider husbands as worth less than their wives.”
And there he’s revealed himself, ironically I guess, as a sexist. Because the rule that restricts the use of King isn’t about valuing husbands less than wives, it’s about valuing royal MALES more than royal FEMALES, dumbass. It’s about the fact that a King can only be born, not made – and consequently more rare and more prized. And that’s not the cause Prince Henrik is behind. The cause he’s behind is his own. Which automatically disqualifies him as a crusader for equality.
You know why Prince Philip, of England, never objected to being Prince Consort and never getting to be called King? Because he too likely believes that a King cannot be made by marriage. A King rises only in blood. A King is supreme. So he’s a sexist too. But you already knew that.
Have a great weekend!
Yours in gossip,