Royalty Thread #5 - Kate Now Officially A MILF

Discussion in 'Off The Beaten Track' started by floskate, Jul 23, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. floskate

    floskate Vacant

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2003
    Messages:
    8,783
    Any title suggestions to celebrate Will and Kate's baby?
  2. Lanie

    Lanie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    4,647
    Nappy and Glorious! I saw that somewhere.

    I have no idea. I am not clever.
  3. zaphyre14

    zaphyre14 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2002
    Messages:
    4,637
    Well, given the various changes in different countries, as well as The Royal Birth Heard Round The World, how about "The New Regimes"?
  4. missing

    missing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,580
    Now that I've gotten over my disappointment that there will be no Princess Charlotte, I've taken it upon myself to name the little prince.

    John Michael Francis Hawking.

    John is for John of Gaunt, ancestor of them all, and a clever tribute to Charles and Camilla.

    Michael is because I hear there's a Michael on Kate's side of the family.

    Francis is for Diana, and a nice way of saying "hello" to the British Roman Catholics.

    Hawking is for Stephen Hawking, a UK citizen who exemplifies intellectual curiosity and physical courage.

    I know they'll end up with something dull and yucky like George, but it won't be because I didn't try.
  5. cygnus

    cygnus Liberal Furry

    Joined:
    May 4, 2002
    Messages:
    2,319
    I'm still liking HRH J'ayden-Bradyn-Haydon-Kaiden-Zayyden of Cambridge (in line with the current trends)! ;)
  6. DarrellH

    DarrellH New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    4,763
    Elton James Wilberforce Freddie
    antmanb and (deleted member) like this.
  7. falling_dance

    falling_dance The Scarlet Unlettered

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    23,214
    Yes.
  8. DarrellH

    DarrellH New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    4,763
  9. taf2002

    taf2002 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    13,845
    From the last thread:

    The queen will hand over to Charles when they pry the baton out of her cold dead hands. If abdicating was her plan she would have done it years ago. I think she's trying to beat the record.

    BTW I don't consider her frigid, I consider her stately & regal.
  10. Holley Calmes

    Holley Calmes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Messages:
    3,859
    A bunch of people on Facebook last night said that the boy should be named Spencer...and I thought-how awful! Try saying Prince Spencer a few times. It does not come trippingly off the tongue. Maybe stick Spencer into a longer name, but please don't call him that!

    And for the record, I'm an American and I don't find the Queen frigid at all! I think she's wonderful and a great role model for women! You go, Liz.
  11. DarrellH

    DarrellH New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    4,763
    How about Thomas Ulysses Taylor

    When his turn comes, he can be King Tut!
  12. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2001
    Messages:
    17,469
    I like it!

    As for Spencer - as IF. The closest they will get to honouring Diana is Francis - and it's also Kate's father's middle name, so a good family name all round. This is a future king - his name must be stately and suitable to take its place in history, whether it's a traditional historic name or one that's more modern but still solid. I doubt Michael - I can see that as a middle name, but when your father, grandfather and myriad ancestors have been or will be heads of state and hold hundreds of royal titles, you do not name him after a commoner. MAYBE a second child, more likely a third.

    I don't see Richard at all - too much controversy associated with the last Richard to saddle this guy with Richard IV. I'm doubting George either - not exactly the most illustrious of monarchs in recent history, especially compared to the Queen.

    I expect to see Charles in there - the father and future king - and wouldn't be surprised to see Philip in there somewhere too, to honour him. I agree with those who think Arthur is a possibility though - William and Kate's ancestry crosses in Tudor times, so naming a child after the Tudor who didn't get to be king isn't a bad choice, plus it's very English and of course captures the imagination too.

    My bet is on James, and I think Henry is not a bad choice either. It's a historic name, and since his uncle goes by Harry, there's no confusion. Remember that William is VERY close to Harry, who is already a prominent member of the royal family and will only become more important once his father then brother are kings, and Kate is close to him too. My personal choice would be John, but I think there's some superstition or something about a King John?
  13. skatesindreams

    skatesindreams Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Messages:
    13,759
    As do I!
  14. rfisher

    rfisher Satisfied skating fan

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2005
    Messages:
    40,365
    oops double post
  15. rfisher

    rfisher Satisfied skating fan

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2005
    Messages:
    40,365
    Do people seriously think Wills and Kate get to just pick a name for the heir to the throne? :lol: There will be no King Spenser I.

    I guess my FB friends couldn't care less what the kid is named. But then it's mostly science new feeds and I know they couldn't care less.
  16. Lanie

    Lanie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    4,647
    I can't see them using James because of Edward's son James, or else I'd be rooting for that. I'm thinking they might think outside the box a little and go with something not used often like Alexander (name of a few kings of Scotland, for example)... George is just so blah.
  17. cruisin

    cruisin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    17,391
    Very happy that Kate and Will had a healthy baby boy. Not sure why we are all so enthralled with the birth of a British monarch. It's nice, but people have babies every day, this is not Nobel Prize worthy.
  18. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2001
    Messages:
    17,469
    Speaking for myself, I know the reason I'm happy about this and interested in it is because I find most of the news to be so negative and sad and tiring - whether it's wars and natural disasters or nasty people doing nasty things, or yet another celebrity divorce or celebrity trainwreck. To me, a happy couple and bright future are a breath of fresh air, and that's why I follow them. I also enjoy history, and this is history unfolding in an unashamedly romantic way, and throw in some fashion frivolity, and it's all good to me :)
    nubka and (deleted member) like this.
  19. ballettmaus

    ballettmaus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,680
    Some historian or royal reporter or whatever on CNN said so yesterday, that the parents are going to choose. But she also added that they're traditional people anyway. I somehow doubt they have free rein, but they do seem to divert a little bit from protocol (announcement of the birth via press release, for example) so they may choose a name they like within reason.
  20. skipaway

    skipaway Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    7,542
  21. dardar1126

    dardar1126 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    3,250
    A really British name for the baby like...

    Benedict Cumberbatch Sherlock Rumpole Grantham! :p
  22. skipaway

    skipaway Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    7,542
    Michael was an Archangel, hardly a commoner.
  23. dardar1126

    dardar1126 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    3,250
    And Michael is the name of Kate's dad. :)

    Her brother is James.
  24. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2001
    Messages:
    17,469
    But not a king, or other prominent European royal who it makes sense to name him after.

    Exactly - a commoner. I think it's a great name for a second or more likely third son, or a middle name for either, but for the first child and future king? No.

    The fun part of all this of course is that soon we all might be proven very, very wrong :lol:
  25. Zemgirl

    Zemgirl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,890
    Wasn't Michael a primarily Catholic name in the UK in past? I can see how historically that would have been an unpopular choice among Britain's royal family, and of course they are so into tradition that now there is no precedent for a Michael.

    I vote for Henry or Alexander ;)
  26. antmanb

    antmanb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Messages:
    3,271
    Kanye KCambridge?
  27. JasperBoy

    JasperBoy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Messages:
    3,013
    As of yesterday I thought Richard would be the name. There is a Richard in the family, the Queen's cousin, Richard of Gloucester, so it has been used recently. Also, Richard III of York has had a bit of a revival recently since his bones were discovered in the parking lot.
    Richard Francis Charles Philip. They will save Henry/Harry for the spare
  28. Zemgirl

    Zemgirl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,890
    Along those lines, a friend suggested Prince South of Cambridge, who will one day become South of Wales.

    Probably not :p
  29. antmanb

    antmanb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Messages:
    3,271
    :rofl:

    I think that's a great suggestion.

    The funniest entertainment yesterday was watching the news channels trying to string "it's a boy!" out into hours and hours of endless coverage. My favourite was news reports speculating on what might be in Kate's hospital room, and then wondering if there might be air conditioning :rofl:
  30. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2001
    Messages:
    17,469
    I don't know - Richard III is still controversial from the point of view of whether or not he was a good king, whether or not he murdered the princes in the tower, and the whole mess that was succession at that time. Not to mention that he allegedly died on the battlefield at the hands of Henry VII, so maybe they don't want to put those two names close together?

    I definitely see Charles there though, and have said for years now that Frances/Francis is a great way to honour both Diana and Kate's father.
  31. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2001
    Messages:
    17,469
    :lol:

    I do love that they managed to do it exactly their way, and even keep it all a secret for a full 4 hours, which nowadays is near impossible. Love that there were no leaks and their families heard it the way they should - with a phone call directly from William. I don't even bother watching the "coverage" of what this so-called expert and that says will happen next (or the matter of AC!), but this is not a bad source of ongoing actual facts - What Kate Wore that many of us already follow for the fashions is doing a live blog right now.
  32. Vagabond

    Vagabond Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Messages:
    3,547
    She's a queen, not a frigging bandleader! If they have to pry anything out of her cold, dead hands, it will be a scepter, not a baton!

    :drama: :glamor: :p
  33. skipaway

    skipaway Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    7,542
    The most eye rolling to me was a British twit (one of the "experts" on Royalty, no less) on CNN saying that Kate must be relieved it's a boy. She's done her duty to the throne. What is this, the middle ages? Has she taken a Biology class or a Current events class? Hello, new succession law in place.
  34. PDilemma

    PDilemma Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    4,765
    I don't think she is trying to beat a record. She is merely living. It isn't like she is being sustained on life support by royal decree until the day she out-reigns Victoria. Abdication due to age or infirmity has never been the tradition in Britain. And the abdication of her uncle was a traumatic event for her family. She sees her vows as the monarch as a lifelong duty and is not going to walk away from that.
  35. Zemgirl

    Zemgirl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,890
    :rolleyes: Perhaps the so-called expert confused the UK with Japan, where only males can inherit the throne?

    We were hoping for a girl who would be named after various awesome European royals: Princess Maxima Victoria Mette-Marit Mary of Cambridge ;)
  36. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2001
    Messages:
    17,469
    Exactly - it is her duty to her country and her people. As she gets older we are seeing her not only prepare for the future of the monarchy with Charles and William, but also for her own increasing age and inability to do as much as she once did. Look at the way she sent the family out on a worldwide tour for her Jubilee, and the way she is so clearly putting Camilla, Kate and Harry forward, ahead of Andrew, Edward and Anne. I think she will never abdicate, but rather as she can no longer perform all her duties, give Charles, Camilla, William, Kate and Harry increasing responsibilities. Same thing a smart corporation would do as its founder ages - put the next generation of leaders in place now, give them the experience, make sure they are well established within the company and with key stakeholders (in this case, the people of Britain) well in advance.
  37. Spareoom

    Spareoom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,737
    And just as a thought in response to a post above, I think people are fascinated about Kate and Will and their marriage and children not just because they're royals, but because it's history. Some day William will be King and later on, so will his son. These things go down in the history books and people like to be able to say, "I remember when that happened".
  38. centerstage01

    centerstage01 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,014
    I vote for HRH Prince Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore of Cambridge.
    rfisher and (deleted member) like this.
  39. LilJen

    LilJen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    9,274
    QE II rocks. So, how close is she to Victoria's record? Victoria was 1837-1901, correct, for 65 years if my math is right? Elizabeth became queen in 1952, so it's been 61 years, roughly, so far. I admire her sense of humor and the fact that she stubbornly just keeps on going.

    (BTW: Can anyone PM me an answer: Why did Vicky go to the throne and not her uncles when their dad died? With all the :argue: over the newest Windsor possibly being a girl and the change in law, well??? Confused.)
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2013
  40. danceronice

    danceronice Corgi Wrangler

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    6,463
    I can see very specifically NOT using the names of the pre-Hanoverian kings of Scotland, unless they're deliberately trying to pander to the Scottish separatists. James VIII/II was the "King Across the Water" opposed to George I and that got ugly. Remember the Scottish kings are only related through a daughter of James VI/I and the current monarchs are technically German imports. OTOH, George was the reigning name of HMQ's father and I doubt they'd want to use his family name as "Albert" isn't very popular these days...

    I can see unless they scream the Diana/Middleton connections up street and down alley using "Francis" being called pandering to Catholics what with the sitting Pope being Francis, though it might be a nice nod given the changes in the laws about that....
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.