Equal Rights For Royals?

By 1953 the King of Denmark, Frederik IX, had fathered three daughters and it was becoming increasingly obvious that he would not be able to produce a son to inherit the throne. This was a problem because under the constitution of the time, no woman could accede to the throne, so without a change in the law, which required a national referendum, the royal line would pass to the King’s younger brother, Prince Knud.

A referendum was held in 1953 which the enabled an amendment to the constitution, allowing daughters of the reigning monarch to accede to the throne provided there was no male heir. Thus a younger brother would have precedence over any female. In the event there was none, the King’s eldest daughter, Margrethe, became Queen upon his death in 1972 and has been an immensely popular and successful monarch ever since.

Finally someone has decided that now is the time to vote on the constitution again, on the revolutionary proposal that there should be equality between men and women in the succession to the throne as there is in every other layer of Danish society, so that the monarch’s first born child is automatically the heir to the throne, regardless of gender.

In a way this is none of my business. I don’t get a vote as I am not a Danish citizen, but wake up people! This is the 21st century, in one of the most enlightened lands in the world when it comes to equality of opportunity. Where every woman is entitled to 50 weeks maternity leave paid for by the state, and fathers are also entitled to paid paternity leave, where there is state childcare available to all who want it and where there is a government ministry whose sole responsibility is to safeguard equality of opportunity.

This ought to be a no-brainer. Why is the subject even up for debate?