Baby Cambridge: Musings and Suggestions

[Dman]

Kate's expectations of motherhood:
Kate's expectations of motherhood | Royal | News | Daily Express

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

If baldness is inherited from the mother why is William bald? I believe Diana's brother still has all his hair. Also Williams's bald spot is in the same place as his fathers.

 

[kathia_sophia]

^None of the men from my family are bald, both my maternal and faternal grandfathers are not bald and my uncle is not bald, yet my father is bald. He is obssessed with taking shower, excessive amount of water can saturate the root of the hair, because we need to create a certain oil in the head that keeps the root of the hair strong. Of course it not applies to everyone, but my father is bald because of that (I am talking about a lot of years, my father obssession started as a teen, by 29 years old he was almost bald). Not all men are bald because of genetics.

So that means Prince William is a second cousin once removed of Lord Frederick Windsor?
And that the future child of Lord Frederik's unborn child will be fourth cousin of the Cambridge's baby?

If I'm correct on both of my questions, then I understood the matter of "once removed", because I didn't quite understand as well.

 

[cepe]

No post #505 explains it very well. Charles and Frederick are 2nd cousins - its generations that count, not relative age.

Have another look at that post by Ish

 

[Ish]

If baldness is inherited from the mother why is William bald? I believe Diana's brother still has all his hair. Also Williams's bald spot is in the same place as his fathers.

Baldness is connected to a recessive gene linked to the X chromosome. Typically speaking, women are XX and men are XY; therefore in order for a woman to show a recessive trait linked to the X chromosome she has to have it linked to both her X chromosomes, but for a man to show it he only has to have it linked to his 1 X chromosome.

Diana received 1 of her mother's X chromosomes (out of a possible 2) and her father's only X chromosome. Charles Spencer received 1 of his mother's X chromosomes (also out of a possible 2) and his father's only Y chromosome. Likewise, William and Harry each received 1 X chromosome (still out of a possible 2) from Diana and the only Y from their father.

Assuming that William's baldness is genetic there are still a few things were don't know:
1. Which X chromosome Frances Spencer gave to Charles and which one she gave to Diana (was it the same one or two different ones?)
2. Which X chromosome Diana gave to William and Harry (once again, were they the same or different, and did they come from her father or her mother)
3. Which of Diana's X chromosomes (the one from her mother or the one from her father) contained the bald gene

The indication is that the X chromosome Charles Spencer received did not contain the bald gene, so if he and Diana received the same one from their mother then the bald gene comes from the late John Spencer. I don't think the late John Spencer was bald, which would indicate that Diana received a different X chromosome from her mother than her brother received.

Looking at the different hairlines of William and Harry, we can then say that they each received a different X chromosome from their mother.

So that means Prince William is a second cousin once removed of Lord Frederick Windsor?
And that the future child of Lord Frederik's unborn child will be fourth cousin of the Cambridge's baby?

If I'm correct on both of my questions, then I understood the matter of "once removed", because I didn't quite understand as well.

Yes, you're right.

 

[Lumutqueen]

So that means Prince William is a second cousin once removed of Lord Frederick Windsor?
And that the future child of Lord Frederik's unborn child will be fourth cousin of the Cambridge's baby?

If I'm correct on both of my questions, then I understood the matter of "once removed", because I didn't quite understand as well.

Lord Frederick's child and William's child will be third cousins once removed. William and Frederick are second cousins once removed, possibly.

 

[Ish]

No post #505 explains it very well. Charles and Frederick are 2nd cousins - its generations that count, not relative age.

Have another look at that post by Ish

Actually, she is right - although I did read what she wrote wrong the first time too.

Lord Frederick and Prince Charles are second cousins, therefore Lord Frederick and Prince William are second cousins once removed (William's a level bellow Frederick).

William and Baby Windsor are third cousins, therefore Baby Cambridge and Baby Windsor are third cousins once removed. When Baby Windsor has a child, he/she will be fourth cousins to Baby Cambridge.

 

[kathia_sophia]

Thank you, now I understand it fully, that's because in portuguese we have other terms, so that made me a bit confused about the "once removed" thing.

What I wrote wrong was about baldness? I'm not an expert about genetics (though I find it fascinating), but what I was saying is that not all people who are bald came through genetics, some baldness can happen with other natural causes (disease, stress, and has I stated above, some excessive abuse of the root of the hair which leads to baldness...)

 

[miche]

Earl John Spencer was bald and had a receding hairline. Just look around the 2 minute mark (from Charles and Diana wedding) Royal Wedding of Charles & Diana [ july 29 1981] part 1 - YouTube

 

[Ish]

Earl John Spencer was bold and had a receding hairline. Just look around the 2 minute mark (from Charles and Diana wedding) Royal Wedding of Charles & Diana [ july 29 1981] part 1 - YouTube

Thanks! I did know he had a receding hair line. He did have more hair though, than William.

 

[EllieCat]

it MUST be true (kate having a 'daughter') as all three main New Zealand women's weeklies say it is – blaring it out in super large type on their front covers, with suitably happy pic of Kate. And of course, those women's weeklies are NEVER wrong...

 

[GracieGiraffe]

Actually, she is right - although I did read what she wrote wrong the first time too.

Lord Frederick and Prince Charles are second cousins, therefore Lord Frederick and Prince William are second cousins once removed (William's a level bellow Frederick).

William and Baby Windsor are third cousins, therefore Baby Cambridge and Baby Windsor are third cousins once removed. When Baby Windsor has a child, he/she will be fourth cousins to Baby Cambridge.

Down here that means they all can marry when they're about 15 or so.

 

[SLV]

The degree of cousins' relationship is determines by the number of generations to their closest common ancestor. If the cousins do not belong to the same generation (descended from the same ancestor), then they are "removed".

For instance, let's take the ancestries of William and Lord Frederick:
George V -> George VI -> Elizabeth II -> Prince Charles -> Prince William
George V -> Prince George, Duke of Kent -> Prince Michael of Kent -> Lord Frederick Windsor

We can see that:
- Elizabeth II and Prince Michael of Kent are first cousins (since their parents were brothers).
- Prince Charles and Lord Frederick Windsor are second cousins (since they are two-generation descendants of George V).
- Prince William and Lord Frederick's future child will be third cousins (since they are three-generation descendants of George V).
- Prince William's child and Lord Frederick's child will not, however, be in the same generation (William's child will be four-generation descendant of George V, while Frederick's child will be three-generation descendant), so they will be "removed" once, that is to say third cousins once removed.

Hope that answers your question.

Thank you! I've always been confused by this. Now it makes sense to me.

 

[COESpiral]

Down here that means they all can marry when they're about 15 or so.

I beg your pardon?

 

[GracieGiraffe]

I beg your pardon?

My apologies. The age of consent in Georgia is in fact 16. Sorry for the discrepancy.

 

[Ish]

I beg your pardon?

It's a "southerners marry cousins" joke.

Kind of tasteless if you think about it; HM married her first cousin when she was 21....

 

[cepe]

It's a "southerners marry cousins" joke.

Kind of tasteless if you think about it; HM married her first cousin when she was 21....

First cousin? I thought he was her 3rd cousin

 

[Ish]

First cousin?

Ah, typo. Something-cousin.

It was Victoria who married her first cousin. And George V, I believe.

Thanks for the correction, muchly appreciated.

 

[GracieGiraffe]

It's a "southerners marry cousins" joke.

Kind of tasteless if you think about it; HM married her first cousin when she was 21....

Why is it tasteless? It's legal here in Georgia, and in many states, both Southern and Northern

The Queen did indeed marry her cousin What is their degree of consanguinity?

 

[cepe]

Why is it tasteless? It's legal here in Georgia, and in many states, both Southern and Northern

The Queen did indeed marry her cousin What is their degree of consanguinity?

3rd cousins

 

[Ish]

Why is it tasteless? It's legal here in Georgia, and in many states, both Southern and Northern

The Queen did indeed marry her cousin What is their degree of consanguinity?

I meant the joke, not the act.

Marrying cousins is also legal here, actually.

 

[GracieGiraffe]

I meant the joke, not the act.

Marrying cousins is also legal here, actually.

I still don't understand why you would consider it tasteless to joke around that these two children might fall in love one day and marry - much like HM and the D of E, and when most jurisdictions recognize its legality.

If the act is not tasteless, why would the joke be tasteless?

When it was first suggested that Phillip marry Elizabeth, whenever that was, was that in poor taste?

 

[Ish]

I still don't understand why you would consider it tasteless to joke around that these two children might fall in love one day and marry - much like HM and the D of E, and when most jurisdictions recognize its legality.

If the act is not tasteless, why would the joke be tasteless?

When it was first suggested that Phillip marry Elizabeth, whenever that was, was that in poor taste?

I said nothing about the taste of cousins marrying cousins.

I said that a joke about how southerners marry their cousins is a tasteless joke, because despite the fact that you're so quick to defend the taste of cousins marrying, the joke in itself implies that the act is tasteless and that southerners are tasteless for doing so.

My point was that HM has married her (3rd) cousin, and is not typically considered tasteless for having done so, nor is she from the American South. Therefore the joke that is based on the idea that southerners are beneath others because they marry their cousins (and at a young age) is, in my opinion, rather tasteless, especially when you consider that it's being made at the expense of a family that is not southern or tasteless, but does have a rather long history of marrying cousins.

 

[cepe]

Ah, typo. Something-cousin.

It was Victoria who married her first cousin. And George V, I believe.

Thanks for the correction, muchly appreciated.

George V started out wanting to marry his 1t cousin but didn't. Princess MAy of Teck was his 2nd cousin, once removed.

 

[Ish]

There's too many cousins, however removed, when it comes to royals....

 

[COESpiral]

I said nothing about the taste of cousins marrying cousins.

I said that a joke about how southerners marry their cousins is a tasteless joke, because despite the fact that you're so quick to defend the taste of cousins marrying, the joke in itself implies that the act is tasteless and that southerners are tasteless for doing so.

My point was that HM has married her (3rd) cousin, and is not typically considered tasteless for having done so, nor is she from the American South. Therefore the joke that is based on the idea that southerners are beneath others because they marry their cousins (and at a young age) is, in my opinion, rather tasteless, especially when you consider that it's being made at the expense of a family that is not southern or tasteless, but does have a rather long history of marrying cousins.

Precisely. I'm from the American South so I knew what was being inferred. It's insulting and just perpetuates the stereotype that Southerners are stupid, backwoods, inbred idiots. I've had it, quite frankly. There are so many wonderful things about where I'm from but no one ever hears them because of the continued belief we're a living representation of "Deliverance".

 

[Grandma828]

Actually everbody has cousins, 2nd cousins, 3rd cousins and the one removed ones. If you study genealogy it becomes crystal clear. I got into it when I tried to sort out my husbands family. His Mother's Dad was married 3 times and there were a total of 23 children. His Mothers Grandmother was married twice. His Mother was married twice. When you put it all down on paper, it all makes sense, but I found it confusing. If you are interested, I recommend Ancestry.com as a good place to start.

 

[NGalitzine]

Precisely. I'm from the American South so I knew at was being inferred. It's insulting and just perpetuates the stereotype that Southerners are stupid, backwoods, inbred idiots. I've had it, quite frankly. There are so many wonderful things about where I'm from but no one ever hears them because of the continued belief we're a living representation of "Deliverance".

Perhaps but some of the funniest jokes I have ever heard on the subject, and that definitely perpetuate the stereotype, are told by southerners themselves. Some southern comedians have made pretty successful careers out of it.

 

[GracieGiraffe]

I said nothing about the taste of cousins marrying cousins.

I said that a joke about how southerners marry their cousins is a tasteless joke, because despite the fact that you're so quick to defend the taste of cousins marrying, the joke in itself implies that the act is tasteless and that southerners are tasteless for doing so.

My point was that HM has married her (3rd) cousin, and is not typically considered tasteless for having done so, nor is she from the American South. Therefore the joke that is based on the idea that southerners are beneath others because they marry their cousins (and at a young age) is, in my opinion, rather tasteless, especially when you consider that it's being made at the expense of a family that is not southern or tasteless, but does have a rather long history of marrying cousins.

Oh, good Lord. When you're next in Georgia, look me up. I'll show you around!

 

[Penny Royalty]

I chuckled at some of the suggestions referred to the lineage discussions including our chosen Will the wombat and his trusty traits that he shares with generations ago where the height and color of pigmentation of green or blue eyes, blond or red hair marveled the people and the expectation in one's head of notoriety upon us time and again until now. I enjoyed partaking in the threads and inscribes of you lately and find it easy to spend entertained moments here where otherwise I would be left clueless about many inclusions that I can't come up with. So thanks for so much. As the song goes, it's good to be a king. Will definitely understands this I believe. I enjoy reading. So cheers to him and all of us.