Rewatching Supergirl from season one and being reminded just how much I disliked James Olsen and his emotional manipulation of Kara! Flirting with Kara while still being in a relationship with poor Lucy and then after spending an episode telling Kara she's wrong he then tries to have his cake and eat it by manipulating Kara and telling her he NEEDS to tell Lucy the truth!! Lucy, the daughter of General Lane! Then Winn acting like he was entitled to a relationship with Kara and giving her the cold shoulder because she wasn't into him 😤.

Guys! I'm looking for a fic on A03, it was an AU with Beatrice and Ava (along with the gang) working in a coffee shop with Vincent owning a pizza place across the road. Ava was living in a crappy apartment in a dangerous neighbourhood but moves in with Beatrice. Can anyone help?

Remember that time Lex Luthor was Cat Grants father? 😅 plot twist! Imagine Lena being Cat Grants aunt? 😂

Just been on Twitter and MY GOD that Mushroom and Peggy whatever are STILL arguing about Lena being evil for all the things other people have done. It's been 5 YEARS since Lena was introduced and they are STILL on this?

It's been FIVE years and they still haven't actually watched this show all the way through ?

Get some help!!!

🤦🤦

Soooo, a little (a lot) late to the party, but I just finished watching The L Word: Generation Q season 2: My takeaways:

• Finnley is a mess and ruining someone's wedding is cliche and a really selfish move. Its not romantic, its not cute and she deserved the punch in the face.

• Sophie gives both Dani and Finn the run around and it's not cool. Especially when she goes and sleeps with Dani again. Then she sings that song for Fin right IN FRONT of Dani!

. Shane is shane, she and Tess are perfect and I hope season 3 (if there is one has them together).

. Angie's storyline is done really well and the actress is really good to. Spoiler! It was so sad she didn't get to meet Marcus, but also very obvious that's what was going to happen. She and her girlfriend are really cute and that Prom Proposal was adorable.

. Alice! YES!! Finally they remembered that Alice is bisexual! They even snuck in a Easter egg with Bette's (past) opinions on bisexuality.

. I really liked Sophie's idea for unsung LGBT+ heroes, but why did we only see one couple?

. Tom is adorable and Perfect, a precious bean who must be protected and I hope he and Alice get more time together and they don't just ruin it by having a rejected proposal and we never see him again.

. Gigi, yeah.... I'm not to invested in her character, but she was good to Dani. I do however feel really bad for how she was treated by Bette!

. Alice's chapter on Dana 😭😭 right in the feels!

. Micah is a great guy, I'm not too sure about his love interests this season though. Mirabel is great and they have a cute friendship, the horse riding scene was cute but I think it went to "I'm in love with you" way to fast and she seemed reluctant and then didn't even tell her family they were dating (while perfectly happy to spill Sophie's drama). We got snippets of her struggles, her mum thinking she won't have to worry about dating, but that's something that could have been explored a bit more. Honestly, I found myself rooting for Micah and his co-worker.

. Tina, oh Tina, was she even there? She just pops up for a few minutes and is gone. She's defined by her relationship with Bette, that it, that's all Tina has. Even when she's being there for Angie, Bette is there. When's she's talking to her fiancé, it's all about Bette. The original series at least tried to give her storylines that weren't completely about Bette.

. Which brings us to Carrie, oh poor, loveable Carrie. Carrie is defined almost entirely by Bette as well. Every scene she's in its either with Bette or its a conversation about Bette. Seriously Tina, marry this woman who quite clearly loves you and can see your conniving ex for who she truly is.

. Which bring us to Bette f**king Porter! My God I hate this woman!! I hated her when I was a teenager and I hate her now! Bette (other than Jenny) is the worst character and I can't understand why people love her so much. She's not changed, she still a self centered, selfish, stuck up arsehole and I can't take to her. From the get go she's just a bully to Carrie who's just being nice. She uses women (Gigi) for sex and then can't be arsed with them later on. The moment something doesn't go her way she turns on Dani, she didn't even give her a chance to speak before she got all on her high horse and was nasty. She practically stalked that artist to get what she wanted, even though she had been told no. That's the thing about Bette, if she wants it, sex or even someone to be in an art show, she feels she has the right to keep going. Also, what is with Bette Porter and sleeping with people she works with?!!! I knew exactly how the therapy session would go and how she would flip out at Angie and I was right. But mostly what I can't stand about Bette is her constant need to have Tina but also other women. She has always been like this, she likes to have control of Tina or at least have Tina as a back up while she goes out and sleeps with other women. She was damn right Evil with what she did in the last episode, playing nice with Carrie on to basically tell her fiancé she's still in love with her. Then to top it off, they had door mat Tina turn up at Bette's door. TIBETTE SUCKS!! I've never quite gotten over Bette trying to force Tina to have sex with her and I never will. Come at me, I don't care.

.oh and Shane?! Telling home wrecker Bette that a VERY drunk woman was having pre wedding doubts (caused by said homewrecker) is a shitty thing to do! Bette took that bait and just thought "I can get what I want now".

. Fin went to rehab! Good stuff!

. Dani? You knew you would be in contempt of court and yet you went drinking and look surprised when you're arrested? Gigi you didn't help here.

. The Nat and Alice polyamory storyline (minus Gigi) felt rushed to me. Nat doesn't even think too much about Alice and jumps straight in. Honestly it felt like the season 2 writers just wanted Nat gone.

. The singing was great, I'll even applaud Bette for her part in Love Shack.

. Finally, Dani's dad is awful!!!

Superman and Lois Vs Supergirl

And Kryptonite

So, I've finally got round to watching S+L season 1. I have to admit I've kind of found it pretty dull and boring, but I promised my friends I would finish watching it.

The whole Edge being Clarks brother thing was unexpected but I didn't find it all that exciting. I couldn't stop laughing at the accent of teenage Edge though 🤣🤣 worst British accent ever!!

I thought it would focus more on the twins to be honest, especially Jordan but so far it's been again quite boring.

Lois is the best character, I wouldn't want to pick a fight with her!

Clark is OK, he's a good dad but as a super hero it's again pretty boring.

Edge and his father are just ridiculous, I felt a bit bad for Edge but did cheer when he basically unplugged his arse of a dad.

One thing I do like is Clark acknowledged that the military DO need kryptonite! He went off the rails and knew that it could happen again. This is a stark contrast to Supergirl who was so self righteous that she didn't think anyone should have kryptonite.

Clark recognised that after a Kryptonian attack that it could happen again. Kara and the DEO by contrast destroyed their kryptonite right after a Kryptonian attack. This left them with absolutely nothing to fight Reign with until Lena "genius" Luthor made synthetic kryptonite.

Rather than recognise that she needed kryptonite to deal with Reign Kara took it personally and had a go at Lena. It was hilarious though when Kara needed the Kryptonite, Lena gave it to her and Kara had a tantrum but took the Kryptonite anyway 🤣.

I think the major difference between Clark and Kara is that this Clark isn't self righteous and doesn't think he should be in control and in charge of everything. Unlike Kara who became more and more self righteous and intolerable as the show went on.

I don't know if I will continue with this show as I do find it pretty yawn worthy, but they have done a good job with Clark.

"there is nothing heterosexual about Lena Luthor"

Re-watching Once Upon a time Season 3 again and I still find Emma so annoying! It's not all the time, it's just the parts where she decides constantly that Henry not remembering who anyone is what's best. She also goes in and on about how they need to go back to New York because they had a life there, even after they defeat Zelena.

The sad part is, during this season we see Emma and Regina bonding so much and understanding eachother much better. But not once does Emma stop to think that taking Henry away from his MOTHER would be a bad thing. She is constantly thinking about herself and Henry. But mostly it's really just herself and Henry is more of an excuse. She is the one who isn't happy, that is worried about everything and uses the excuse it's what's best for Henry when she knows what he would really think.

But the worst part is that just like in the earlier seasons, she seems to think she now has sole parental rights over Henry. She treats Regina like the baby sitter or the long distance aunt. She only had Henry in New York because he couldn't go back to the enchanted forest with them having been born in our world. But Emma just ignores the fact Henry has another mother. She doesn't want him to remember anything on the beginning, and wants to take him back to New York once Zelena is defeated, not once considering or consulting Regina, the woman that has been his mother since he was born.

But even when he does have his memories back, even after Henry and Regina have their mother/son true loves kiss and Regina is defeated, Emma still tells Hook that she will take Henry back to New York. This is even after Regina just used light magic and became a bloody hero. If Regina had snapped and gone dark all over again due to Emma's selfishness I wouldn't even blame her.

Ok, so yes I am fully aware it all works out in the end. But God re-watching this really does make me see how awful and selfish Emma could really be at times. (not unlike the Charmings). At least we know Regina is meant to be selfish at times, that's the point. But the writers didn't send to think ahead when they wrote some of Emma's lines. We're supposed to route for the woman who gave her baby up (which is fine of course) but then decides that even after a closed adoption she can waltz in and just be Henry's sole parent and Regina doesn't exist? Yeah helped along by the Charmings at times.

Ugh rant over.

Who gets to be Princess of Wales?

So, today's’ rant is who gets to hold the title of ‘Princess of Wales’. This title is held by the wife of the Prince of Wales, but she does not hold this title in her own right.

The current Princess of Wales is believe it or not is Prince Charles’ wife Camillia. Out of respect for her predecessor and no doubt to avoid a lynch mob Camilla chose to be known by her subsidiary title of Duchess of Cornwall, another title she holds in right of her husband who is the Duke of Cornwall. Camilla may not use the title HRH The Princess of Wales but it is still hers to use if she chose to.

There have been Princesses of Wales who have been known by their first names, Princess Alexandra (wife of Edward VII when Prince of Wales) and Princess Mary of Teck (wife of George V when Prince of Wales) but this is because they were already princesses in their own right and not by virtue of their marriage.

So, that’s who gets to be Princess of Wales through right of their husbands. But can someone be Princess of Wales in their own right?

The title of Prince of Wales was granted to Welsh princes until the 12th Century when Edward I defeated Llwelyn ap Gruffudd and presented his own son as the first English Prince of Wales in 1301, this prince would become the unfortunate Edward II. From that point the title has been traditionally held by the male heir apparent, but this hasn’t always been the eldest son of the king. It can be held by the kings grandson if his father is deceased, and Richard duke of York even managed to get this title himself during the Wars of the Roses when Henry VI son Edward of Lancaster (the then Prince of Wales) was disinherited and Richard was acknowledged as his cousin Henry’s heir.

The title Prince of Wales is not hereditary, and if the current holder dies the title reverts back to the crown. So, if Prince Charles was to pre-decease The Queen, Prince William would not automatically become The Prince of Wales. The title is a gift from the monarch, and it's up to them whether they grant it or not.

Historically the title could only be granted to the heir apparent and only if they were male. The difference between the ’heir apparent’ and ‘heir presumptive’ is that the heir apparent cant be displaced by a brother or sister. Charles is the heir apparent, but his mother when a princess was the heir presumptive.

It was suggested by Welsh politicians that the current Queen be created Princess of Wales when she was 18. But King George VI rejected the idea because the title was the traditional one for the wife of The Prince of Wales. It would beg the question what Prince Philip’s title would have been if that had happened.

The 2013 Act of Succession removed the male bias in the line of succession. This means that males can no longer over take an elder sister. Today, or rather in a few generations the title of Princess of Wales could theoretically be granted to the heir apparent even if they are female. The next 3 heirs are all male and one is already Prince of Wales, its likely William will be granted the title and then in turn Prince George.

But, Should Prince George’s first born be a daughter she will be the heir apparent regardless if she has any younger brothers, so we could end up with our first Princess of Wales in her own right.

This one got away from me:

Erm.. ..I'm not even sure where to begin with this. Piers gets upset when people call him a racist, but apparently Xenophobia is completely OK? Is he actually suggesting we go back to dictating who royals can marry and who they can't? If Prince George marries a German and she doesn't "quite fit in" shall we add Germans to the list of the banned? (Which would be ironic considering our royals ancestry). If Prince Louis marries someone from Spain and she doesn't quite " fit in" shall we ban the Spanish to?

Has Piers forgotten that the royals marrying the English has ended badly a hell of a lot more than marrying Americans? Has he already forgotten the disastrous marriage of Charles and Diana? Unlikely since she's talked about second only to Megan right now. Has he forgotten the marriage of Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson? Or Princess Anne and Captain Mark Phillips? Or Princess Margaret and Anthony Armstrong Jones? None of those spouses were/are Americans.

He seems to have forgotten that royal princes and princess marrying English men and women (until recently) was a very uncommon thing.

Does he still think that princes and princess' should be betrothed only to other royals? Shall we betroth Prince George to the Infanta Sofia of Spain? We don't give them a choice of course, royals shouldn't get a choice in who they marry after all. As long as they are from good breeding stock, are virgins (Oh and shall we have the royal doctors perfrom an inspection to make sure royal brides are intact?)

Oh so that's not what he's saying? Does he mean that they should marry only English nobility then? Maybe a cousin? Shall Prince George be betrothed to Isla Phillips? Would that make Piers happy?

Oh he's saying that. He's not Xenophobic? Then I can only conclude he has a certain hatred for women who are b.....actresses'! That must be it! Actresses should be banned from marrying into the royal family! According to Piers ALL the times this has happened it's never ended well. 🤔

Well, Wallis Simpson probably did us all a favour anyway, having Edward VIII as king wouldn't have been the best since he quite liked Hitler.

I also like how those that slam Megan for being an actress (the so called royal experts) seem to believe that actress' don't belong in the royal family. But some how these "experts" either forget or don't know of the existence of one Sophie Winkleman. Oh, you've never heard of Sophie? Well Sophie Winkleman is married to Lord Frederick Windsor, the son of the Queens first cousin Prince Michael of Kent. So Sophie is entitled to be known as Lady Frederick Windsor. Due to the 1772 Royal Marriages Act The Queen had to give her permission for the two to be married. Also, interesting fact, Sophie and Frederick live in LA!! Sophie is an actress, who married a member of the House of Windsor, continues to be an actress and lives in LA. You might recognise her from playing older Susan in the first Narnia film, she's been in Poirot, 2 and half men, peep show, I could go on. But here's the best part, Sophie was a main character in the short lived series The Palace that was on ITV. Here Sophie plays Princess Eleanor, the scheming elder sister of the new King. The plot is about a play boy Prince of Wales who's father dies suddenly and he has to be king. Eleanor believes she should be Queen and schemes to try and take his place. They also have a younger brother who is just as bad as the play boy prince. But no one has attacked Sophie for bringing shame upon the royal family she married into by displaying this character.

I don't think Megan and Harry have gone about this in the right way. I would have waited Charles is king. But, I also think they would have been shat on no matter when or how they did this. If they had waited they would be questioned on why they waited so long. They would be accused of wanting to destroy Charles' reign. They would be accused of trying to overshadow William who will be Prince of Wales. Then more dumb fuckery would follow and they would be accused of wanting to be the Prince and Princess of Wales.

The best thing to have done was for Harry to step back earlier, then get married. But, Megan would be destroyed and torn apart no matter what, she would be accused of stealing him, forcing him to give up royal life. Only this way round people wouldn't have the option to ignore all the good thing Megan did or just how happy she makes Harry. Its the age old story of blaming a woman for the actions of a man, it's always the woman, men are incapable of being wrong. She must be a witch! That's the only logical answer. She's a witch and Harry has "evil counsellors".

Lady Louise Windsor turning 18 years old.

So, Lady Louise Windsor has turned 18 years old and as a male line grandchild of The Queen , Lady Louise had the right to be HRH Princess Louise of Wessex when she was born. Her parents however, decided that she would be styled as the child of an Earl. Lady Louise’s mother Sophie , Countess of Wessex said that her children could decide to take the HRH status when they turned 18. Now some people are speculating on what Louise is going to do?

I doubt Lady Louise will choose to become an HRH, but for speculation purposes let’s assume she does and The Crown allows for this to happen with no complaint. This male line grandchild who is the daughter of two White, British people is allowed to have her rights. But, Archie and Lilibet the male line grandchildren of the future king who’s father is a White British man and who’s mother is a mixed race American are denied their rights? Even though they come under the same Letters Patent? The first mixed race members of the royal family? Does this not scream of discrimination and racism? Keep in mind that the discussion about Archies future status being denied and the questions about his skin colour happened before he was born. So the “well they’re in America!” excuse that would inevitably be used has no relevance.

This would just look like a game of royal roulette and just picking who you want, but based on what exactly? If this were to happen the Royal Family would look even more like a circus than it already does.

Chuckling at the amount of people who try to insult Prince Harry by referring to him as only the “spare” or #6.

These same people pretend to be doing this to defend The Queens honour, but they are forgetting one very crucial, and ever so important detail……

The Queen herself is the daughter of “The Spare”.

When The Queen was born she was at that point only 3rd in line to the throne and not at all expected to be Queen.

The Queens father George VI at the time of his birth was 4th in line and not at all expected to be King.

George VI was the spare heir of yet another spare heir. His father King George V was the second born son of King Edward VII.

King Edward VII mother Queen Victoria was herself the daughter of the 4th son of King George III.

So this notion that being a “spare” makes you inferior makes absolutely no sense.

Princess Anne is hailed as one of the best royals, yet she is currently 17th in line to the throne.

Princes Edward has been big upped a lot more lately since Prince Harry left, yet Edward is only 14th in line.

That’s way beyond the concept of “spare”.

Is this the treatment that awaits Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis? Why are the not being called useless spares?

Who is the Duke of Edinburgh now?

So, since the passing of Prince Philip I've seen a lot of confusion about who has inherited the title Duke of Edinburgh.

Many people seem to believe that Prince Edward is now the duke, but this is incorrect.

The new duke of Edinburgh is actually Prince Charles.

In 1947 Prince Philip renounced all of his Greek and Danish titles and his claim to the Greek throne. The day before his wedding to The Queen (then Princess Elizabeth) George VI issued Letters Patent that granted Philip the Dukedom of Edinburgh, along with the titles Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich, along with the style "Royal Highness". These titles are hereditary and inherited by Prince Philip's first born son.

In 1957 The Queen created Philip a Prince of the United Kingdom.

The Dukedom of Edinburgh has been created 3 times. The first was for Prince Frederick, the granson of George I. When Frederick died while still Prince of Wales his eldest son Prince George became the duke of Edinburgh. When Prince George eventually became King George III the title merged with the crown.

The second creation was for Queen Victoria's second born son Prince Alfred. This was unusual because traditionally the second born son of the monarch is created Duke of York. When Prince Alfred died in 1900 he left no surviving sons so once again the title merged with the crown.

Upon his marriage to Sophie Rhys -Jones in 1999 Prince Edward (The Queen and Prince Philip's 3rd son) was created Earl of Wessex. This was unusual because princes are usually created dukes when married. It was discussed and agreed by The Queen, Prince Philip and Prince Charles that Edward would eventually become Duke of Edinburgh when the title reverts back to the crown.

So, when The Queen passes and Charles becomes king the Dukedom of Edinburgh will revert to the crown and Charles will be free to recreate it for the 4th time for his younger brother Prince Edward.

Should Charles pass before The Queen then Prince William will become the duke of Edinburgh and once again when he is King it will revert to the crown. Should William pass before he is King then Prince George will inherit the Dukedom.

Hypothetically if Charles is passed over in favour of William he will remain the duke of Edinburgh along with the lesser titles that come with it.

As for the Duchess of Edinburgh, that style was held by The Queen until the 09.04.2021. Before she became Queen, Elizabeth was known as HRH The Duchess of Edinburgh. She is now the Dowager Duchess of Edinburgh.

The current Duchess of Edinburgh is Camilla, duchess of Cornwall. But just as she doesn't use the title Princess of Wales (which she is fully entitled to do) she will unlikely use the title Duchess of Edinburgh. The next Duchess of Edinburgh should be the Sophie, the Countess of Wessex.

Since the Dukedom is going to be granted to Prince Edward it will then be inherited by his son James, Vicount Severen and his heirs. When there are no more sons to inherit the title it will revert to the crown again and can be recreated at the monarchs discretion.

Who is the Duke of Edinburgh now?

So, since the passing of Prince Philip I've seen a lot of confusion about who has inherited the title Duke of Edinburgh.

Many people seem to believe that Prince Edward is now the duke, but this is incorrect.

The new duke of Edinburgh is actually Prince Charles.

In 1947 Prince Philip renounced all of his Greek and Danish titles and his claim to the Greek throne. The day before his wedding to The Queen (then Princess Elizabeth) George VI issued Letters Patent that granted Philip the Dukedom of Edinburgh, along with the titles Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich, along with the style "Royal Highness". These titles are hereditary and inherited by Prince Philip's first born son.

In 1957 The Queen created Philip a Prince of the United Kingdom.

The Dukedom of Edinburgh has been created 3 times. The first was for Prince Frederick, the granson of George I. When Frederick died while still Prince of Wales his eldest son Prince George became the duke of Edinburgh. When Prince George eventually became King George III the title merged with the crown.

The second creation was for Queen Victoria's second born son Prince Alfred. This was unusual because traditionally the second born son of the monarch is created Duke of York. When Prince Alfred died in 1900 he left no surviving sons so once again the title merged with the crown.

Upon his marriage to Sophie Rhys -Jones in 1999 Prince Edward (The Queen and Prince Philip's 3rd son) was created Earl of Wessex. This was unusual because princes are usually created dukes when married. It was discussed and agreed by The Queen, Prince Philip and Prince Charles that Edward would eventually become Duke of Edinburgh when the title reverts back to the crown.

So, when The Queen passes and Charles becomes king the Dukedom of Edinburgh will revert to the crown and Charles will be free to recreate it for the 4th time for his younger brother Prince Edward.

Should Charles pass before The Queen then Prince William will become the duke of Edinburgh and once again when he is King it will revert to the crown. Should William pass before he is King then Prince George will inherit the Dukedom.

Hypothetically if Charles is passed over in favour of William he will remain the duke of Edinburgh along with the lesser titles that come with it.

As for the Duchess of Edinburgh, that style was held by The Queen until the 09.04.2021. Before she became Queen, Elizabeth was known as HRH The Duchess of Edinburgh. She is now the Dowager Duchess of Edinburgh.

The current Duchess of Edinburgh is Camilla, duchess of Cornwall. But just as she doesn't use the title Princess of Wales (which she is fully entitled to do) she will unlikely use the title Duchess of Edinburgh. The next Duchess of Edinburgh should be the Sophie, the Countess of Wessex.

Since the Dukedom is going to be granted to Prince Edward it will then be inherited by his son James, Vicount Severen and his heirs. When there are no more sons to inherit the title it will revert to the crown again and can be recreated at the monarchs discretion.

Chuckling at the amount of people who try to insult Prince Harry by referring to him as only the “spare” or #6.

These same people pretend to be doing this to defend The Queens honour, but they are forgetting one very crucial, and ever so important detail……

The Queen herself is the daughter of “The Spare”.

When The Queen was born she was at that point only 3rd in line to the throne and not at all expected to be Queen.

The Queens father George VI at the time of his birth was 4th in line and not at all expected to be King.

George VI was the spare heir of yet another spare heir. His father King George V was the second born son of King Edward VII.

King Edward VII mother Queen Victoria was herself the daughter of the 4th son of King George III.

So this notion that being a “spare” makes you inferior makes absolutely no sense.

Princess Anne is hailed as one of the best royals, yet she is currently 17th in line to the throne.

Princes Edward has been big upped a lot more lately since Prince Harry left, yet Edward is only 14th in line.

That’s way beyond the concept of “spare”.

Is this the treatment that awaits Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis? Why are the not being called useless spares?

Lady Louise Windsor turning 18 years old.

So, Lady Louise Windsor has turned 18 years old and as a male line grandchild of The Queen , Lady Louise had the right to be HRH Princess Louise of Wessex when she was born. Her parents however, decided that she would be styled as the child of an Earl. Lady Louise’s mother Sophie , Countess of Wessex said that her children could decide to take the HRH status when they turned 18. Now some people are speculating on what Louise is going to do?

I doubt Lady Louise will choose to become an HRH, but for speculation purposes let’s assume she does and The Crown allows for this to happen with no complaint. This male line grandchild who is the daughter of two White, British people is allowed to have her rights. But, Archie and Lilibet the male line grandchildren of the future king who’s father is a White British man and who’s mother is a mixed race American are denied their rights? Even though they come under the same Letters Patent? The first mixed race members of the royal family? Does this not scream of discrimination and racism? Keep in mind that the discussion about Archies future status being denied and the questions about his skin colour happened before he was born. So the “well they’re in America!” excuse that would inevitably be used has no relevance.

This would just look like a game of royal roulette and just picking who you want, but based on what exactly? If this were to happen the Royal Family would look even more like a circus than it already does.

Lilibet Diana’s place in the line of succession and historical accusations of ‘illegitimacy’.

So, on the 25th July The Daily Mail published an article highlighting the fact that The Duke and Duchess of Sussex daughter Lilibet Diana had not been added to the line of succession. To clarify, that meant the official royal website hadn't been updated. Claims were made that the House of Windsor was ‘making a point’ and that they were being petty because other royal babies, Prince Louis, Archie and Lucas Tindall were added much sooner after their births.

The official Royal website has now updated the line of succession and Lilibet is listed as 8th in line after her brother Archie and just before Prince Andrew.

This little episode of course prompted all the idiots and trolls to come out of their caves and to first express their approval that Lilibet had been excluded and then to express their disgust when she was officially added, because ‘how dare she?!’

‘We don’t want Harry or his ‘offspring’ to be anywhere near the British crown!’

‘Remove Harry and his children from the line of succession!’

‘Their daughter was born in America! She has no place being in the line of succession! How can an American be the Queen of England?!’

These are just a few of the ridiculous and hateful comments aimed at a seven-week year old baby and a two-year-old.

But these aren't the worst of the comments, the predicable racist remarks can be found, because of course they can. But the most common ‘argument’ against Lilibet (and Archie) not being allowed to be in the line of succession is that they aren't actually Prince Harry or Meghan’s children at all. The craziest thing is this argument or rather accusation wouldn’t have been out of place at all up until the 17th century.

Meghan has been accused of wearing a ‘moon bump’, using a surrogate and Archie has been referred to as a doll since the day he was born. It doesn't help that 'Royal Commentators' masquerading as 'Royal Experts' have been using their platforms to share conspiracy theories on Twitter, yet are still invited on to give their 'expertise' in someone else thoughts and feelings. People they have usually only ever met the once or not at all.

The most recent ‘proof’ these insane idiots have that Archie and Lilibet are illegitimate or ‘not real’ is that no one was there to witness their births. Well, what they really mean to say is that no one from the palace was in the birthing room watching Meghan give birth.

As insane as these accusations are they can be paralleled throughout the history of the monarchy. The easiest way to try and claim the throne from the current occupant or the heir was to question their legitimacy.

Edward of Lancaster (b.1453) - Edward was the son of ‘Mad’ King Henry VI and his Queen Margaret of Anjou. Edward was born when is father was having one of his episodes, Margaret presented the kings son to him but Henry didn’t respond. Finally, when Henry snapped out of it he acknowledged Edward as his own. Edward’s legitimacy however, was questioned and he was accused of being the son of his mother's advisers. Edward would later be cut out of the line of succession; he would go into exile and would eventually be killed at the Battle of Tewksbury during the Wars of the Roses.

Edward IV (b.1442) - Edward was the son of Richard Duke of York and Cecily Neville. His father is the one who replaced Edward of Lancaster as the heir to the English throne but he was killed at the Battle of Wakefield. Richard had been fighting to claim the English throne and Edward continued and won this fight. After Edward’s death his throne passed to his 12-year-old son Edward V (one of the Princes in the Tower) but Edwards' brother Richard, Duke of Gloucester questioned not only his nephew's legitimacy, but also the legitimacy of Edward IV. Tony Robinson presented a documentary following this claim in ‘Britain’s Real Monarch’. It was even claimed that Edward’s mother Cecily was the one to make the accusation. She was apparently so enraged that her son had married a commoner she threatened to expose him as illegitimate and deprive him of the throne.

Edward V (b.1470) As mentioned above Edward was for a very short time King Edward V. But he was quickly deposed on the grounds that his father had been pre-contracted to another woman when he married Elizabeth Woodville. A pre-contract was as good as marriage in the 15th century, so that rendered all of Edward and Elizabeth’s children illegitimate. Edward was deposed and his uncle Richard become King Richard III.

Mary I (b.1516) Mary Tudor was declared illegitimate by her own father King Henry VIII. Henry was desperate for a son and had his marriage to his first wife Catherine of Aragon annulled. According to Henry he had gone against God by marrying his brother’s widow and that made his children with her as illegitimate. Mary remained illegitimate until she became Queen and rectified this.

Elizabeth I (b.1533) Elizabeth was declared illegitimate after her father Henry VIII had his marriage to his second wife Anne Boleyn annulled. Elizabeth, like her sister Mary did eventually succeed to the throne, but unlike Mary she didn’t declare herself legitimate. The accusation of illegitimacy was used against Elizabeth throughout her reign and there have even been accusations that she was really a man!

Prince James Frances Edward (b.1688) James was the son of the Catholic James II and his Queen Mary of Modena. James being a Catholic had already created a problem, but the prospect of a Catholic male heir unnerved people. Rumors began to spread almost immediately that James was a changeling, that the Queens baby had died and a substitute had been snuck into the place in a warming pan! James II even had testimonies published from people who had witnessed the birth. James II was eventually deposed in the Glorious Revolution and his daughter and nephew were offered the crown. The story about Prince James (known as the Old Pretender) didn’t go away, they were spread and encouraged by his own half sisters Mary and Anne.

Prince Harry (b.1984) rumors that Prince Harry is actually the son of James Hewitt have been around since the day he was born and are thrown out every time he is mentioned. People have claimed he isn't the son of Prince Charles based on ‘evidence’ consisting of Harry’s red hair and by putting pictures of him and James Hewitt next to each other. Couple those with Charles’ disappointment that Harry wasn’t a girl and his displeasure at the red hair and apparently this is full proof evidence Harry isn’t a Windsor.

Archie Harrison (b.2019) Archie has been accused of being a surrogate, an actor, the son of Meghan’s friend and a doll.

Lilibet Diana (b.2021) Lilibet has had the same accusations as her brother thrown at her, that she's a doll, she’s a surrogate etc. This baby hasn't even been seen by the public for them to have an opinion on her.

Notice how illegitimacy throughout the centuries has been used as a political weapon and only used when someone had something to gain or had to discredit someone. You would think that illegitimacy accusations would be have ended in the 17th and 18th centuries, yet here we are in 2021 and those same accusations are being thrown out. You would think that the idea a woman has to have witnesses watching her give birth would be a ridiculous concept today, but it's still a weapon being used to discredit and to try and deprive children of their place in the succession. We like to think that we have evolved but the truth is the same arguments, accusations and political weapons used from the medieval period to the early modern period are just as rampant today. No one was asking who was in the birthing room witnessing Prince George, Princess Charlotte or Prince Louis’ births. But they demand to know who witnessed the births of Archie and Lilibet? What could the difference be I wonder?

There have been and still are petitions for The Queen to deprive Prince Harry and Meghan of their titles. There are also calls for The Queen to boot Harry and his children out of the line of succession, as though The Queen can just decide she doesn’t like her grandson and great grand children and can boot them as she chooses. Yeah....that isn't how that works. She can’t deprive Harry, Archie or Lilibet of their places in the line of succession any more than she can boot Charles out and make William her heir.

Lastly, Lilibet hasn’t ‘finally’ been added to the line of succession. She was 8th in line to throne from the moment she was born. The line of succession being updated on the official royal website has done nothing other than let people know what the line looks like now. The idea that people are losing their minds over the 8th in line having her place when the likely hood of her ever-becoming Queen is next to none is just petty and is simply based on racism, xenophobia and bullying.