Photograph by JFPhotoon 201.
‘Every culture has either a matrilineal or pratilineal structure; there are a few cultures that have both systems. The matrilineal and patrilineal history is part of the humanity and identity of all human beings; these concepts empower women and men and transmit the ancestral cultures, since we learn standards of behavior from father and mother.’
By John Freeman.
The monarchy is a multi-dynastic institution with genealogies from male and female lines. Any changes to the succession law must never exclude the concept of royal lineages, since all cultures include patrilineal and/or matrilineal organizations. My ideas for the succession law do not discriminate for order of birth or gender.
The concepts have four components:
1) If succession rights come from a mother, daughters have preference over sons. If succession rights come from a father, sons have preference over daughters. The gender of the parent (with dynastic rights) is the first precedent in succession rights.
2) Succession rights alternate from youngest to oldest in one generation and from oldest to youngest in the next, to avoid unequal treatment of any kind.
3) Rights of succession come from Proximity of Blood and Lineages. Proximity of Blood means that daughters/sons of a monarch come first in succession, followed by granddaughters and grandsons, or more distance blood descendants. Succession rights only go as far as the great great-granddaughters/grandsons
4) Lineages: Descendants of queens in direct female line have succession rights in perpetuity. Descendants of kings in direct male line have succession rights in perpetuity.
Why the preference for females, when succession rights comes from a mother? Why the preference for males, when succession rights comes from a father?
At the present time the monarchy and society are patrilineal; the monarchy only recognizes paternal lines. This is justification for male-primogeniture, and gender-blind primogeniture fails to correct discrimination. A patrilineal/matrilineal system of succession is a good example of gender equality for society.
A dual system of succession would eventually produce a Netherlands type monarchy, where matrilineal Queens succeed one another, since in every monarchy there are kings that only have daughters. My suggestions promote the maternal/paternal lines of both sexes, and in the long run there is no gender discrimination.
Why alternate succession from youngest to oldest in one generation and from oldest to youngest in the next generation?
This is equality, since primogeniture is a hierarchical concept that favors the firs-born.
My concepts permit succession of oldest, youngest, and middle daughters/sons. Please, see hypothetical genealogical tree on next page.
What can the monarchy do to be more inclusive of women?
The name of a dynasty only comes from a man, and women do not have this right/tradition. If the Queen names the dynasty, the house of Bowes-Lyon Windsor after her mother and father, this is recognition of the dual maternal and paternal lineages of the monarchy; it would grant women and their maternal lines equal social status.
Why is gender-blind primogeniture not equality?
Equality is a concept of universal application. Gender-blind primogeniture is a selective application of laws, and it discriminates against people who are not the first-born.
The following are examples of selective application of laws, and these examples are not equality: Women and men have the right to vote, but women do not have equal pay. We are all citizens, but people of African ancestry are 3/5 of a person and do not have the right to vote.
Gender-blind primogeniture goes against the civil rights and laws of the United Kingdom and Commonwealth, since these nations do not apply laws and civil rights selectively. This is a law for the 1% of 1% of the population, and it is not a good example for men, women, and children who are not the first-born.
Monarchies and cultures have lineage traditions (maternal and paternal lines). Gender-blind primogeniture is comparable to re-inventing the wheel, because gender-blind primogeniture destroys the cultural concept of maternal and paternal lines.
Primogeniture of any kind is all about who comes first, and it implies that the justification for the monarchy is primogeniture. The monarchy is an institution of service and a cultural system of paternal and maternal lines.
Any changes to the succession law must include changes to the patrilineal cultural system. English-speaking countries have a patriarchal cultural organization, where the identity of the family comes from paternal line.
My suggestions satisfy the ideals of equality better than gender-blind primogeniture, because it recognizes the contributions of both genders and their paternal/maternal lines. This is of practical application for the non-royal 99% of population, since it provides working class families and women the identity of the maternal line; this would required a dual system of maternal/paternal surnames, since everyone has matrilineal and patrilineal histories.