Press Reports about Carl Philip and Sofia Hellqvist, Part 1: Jan. 2010 - April 2012

[KitKat2006]

People are bringing up the childless matter when Sofia entered the picture because that would mean Carl would be a potential king and that's a scary thing right now considering he's not setting the best example. Right now Carl Philip possibly being king is a scary thing to behold!

Why is he setting a bad example? I said it numerous times before: what's past is past. It's not his fault what Sofia did years ago, when she never ever expected to be in this position today. But today Carl Philip is just a guy with a navy background who's studying on a second degree so he can manage his farm someday in the future, has time to pursue his race car hobby and enjoying life with a woman he loves and who's behaving perfectly these days. And every now and then he also does work in the 'family business'. Sorry, but don't see anything wrong with that and I don't think the 1% chance of him becoming king and Sofia becoming queen of Sweden is scary at all.

All democracies have a head of government, Prime Minister, also Sweden. But he is not the head of state. The King is our head of state and not likely to change by Carl Philip's relations with Sofia. Would it not be needed more than that monarchy had long since been dead in Denmark, Britain and Norway among others.
1st As long as there is a majority of Swedes who prefer monarchy over republic dare none of the parliamentary parties raise the issue seriously.
2nd So long as no relation published by the court, there is not. It can be difficult to understand for many people living in other countries, but is formally the case in Sweden.
3rd Would Carl Philip and Sophia marry we do not know if Carl Philip to retain his title. He could, perhaps as it was with the king's sister, taken from the title of "royal highness" but keep the title Prince. And no one knows about Sofia even get a title? Possibly maybe Duchess of Värmland, because it is Prince's duchy.

Everything is just speculation and I think they are unnecessary until something more is published by the Royal Court Administration.

To 2nd: I understand perfectly what you mean by this. So in this case we're talking about crossing bridges before we come to them. Like I said before: No need to panic for anyone. Officially there is no relationship and when maybe is one in the future it's okay too, because it's an accepted relationship.

To 3rd: It would be the 'Märtha Louise case' from Norway. A perfect way to end all speculations of a unsuitable hypotetical king.

 

[nascarlucy]

Those who are heirs to the throne even if their upbringing is the same as their siblings know that they are different from their siblings. The fact that he/she is the heir to the throne is what is different about them. Most of them take this very seriously and act accordingly. You generally don't see heirs to thrones acting really outrageous or out of control or acting out in front of the camera for all eyes to see. Behavior like this, nowadays would be difficult to conceal. Maybe if it was a one time thing, it might not get out but if the behavior was repeated over and over again, someone would get wind of it. They would be strongly rebuked by their family or someone for doing so.

If it wasn't the controversary with Prince Carl Phillip, those who support Republicanism would find someone else or another member of the Swedish Royal Family to attack. They would find something.

In the United States you see this with the President and other political leaders where they find something and it's really nothing. Case and point would be a couple of years ago when some people made an issue of Michelle Obama wearing walking shorts when the family was visiting national parks. The outfit looked nice and there was nothing wrong with it.

 

[Winnie]

The horror scenario still remains in case V&D are unable to produce an heir(ess).

Good Lord, you are correct on this one! Can give one the shivers.

 

[Cinderella5x]

I'm pretty sure it wasn't in your mind to blame Madeleine for her broken engagement, because it very well sounded like it. And that Victoria had a more disciplined upbringing than Carl Philip and Madeleine makes sense. SHE will be the future queen whereas her siblings will only be her sidekicks. They will be pushed further from the spotlight the older they get. You can see it with Joachim in Denmark, Märtha Louise in Norway, Johan Friso and Constantin in the Netherlands and it will happen in Sweden as soon as Victoria and Daniel produce little royals. And they will, believe me. I don't know why anyone is always bringing up a childless CPcouple when Sofia enters the picture. There is absolutely no evidence that Victoria and Daniel will remain childless and Sofia ever gets to be queen of Sweden. So why all the panik? Just leave them be and wait patiently for the baby-news.

How do you know?

And well, what's one more hypotetically princess who's body is well known. Because honestly, almost every princess nowadays has been photograped in a bikini by papparazi when they're on holidays.

In a bikini, yes, but not without it, "wearing" a snake on the breasts only (Ruotsin prinssin rakas rohkeissa kuvissa - katso kuva! | Viihde | Iltalehti.fi). I guess there is a slight difference here...

 

[KitKat2006]

How do you know?

Because in vitro fertilisation can do almost everything nowadays to those who have the money and the best doctors at hand in case a natural conceiving is not possible. And you have to admit that Victoria and Daniel will have the best treatment possible if they would need in vitro. So the chance of them remaining childless is very, very low I'd say.

In a bikini, yes, but not without it, "wearing" a snake on the breasts only (Ruotsin prinssin rakas rohkeissa kuvissa - katso kuva! | Viihde | Iltalehti.fi). I guess there is a slight difference here...

I know this photo. It's old news. And again I repeat myself. That's her past and has nothing to do with who she is today.

I also remember a photo ten years ago with a blond girl in it who had a joint in her hand. The same girl apologies sincerly for her past as partygirl in the drug-scene and is loved and accepted today by her country because she does a good job in her new profession and no-one is bothered by her past anymore.

Tell me, do you know who I'm talking about? And don't you (and everyone else) think the same wouldn't work today? If not why not? Because drugs and parties are not as scandalizing as snakes and nude skin? Personally I think drugs are worse than nude skin and a snake. But that's just me and maybe there are countries where drugs are considered a small misdemeanour and nude skin is considered a serious crime. For Sofias and Carl Philips sake I hope Sweden is not one of those (smallminded) countries.

 

[CrownPrincess5]

Why is he setting a bad example? I said it numerous times before: what's past is past. It's not his fault what Sofia did years ago, when she never ever expected to be in this position today. But today Carl Philip is just a guy with a navy background who's studying on a second degree so he can manage his farm someday in the future, has time to pursue his race car hobby and enjoying life with a woman he loves and who's behaving perfectly these days. And every now and then he also does work in the 'family business'. Sorry, but don't see anything wrong with that and I don't think the 1% chance of him becoming king and Sofia becoming queen of Sweden is scary at all.

I like CP a lot and I think he's a good guy but I'm calling it like I see it. He's not "just a guy" as you put it. He is a prince who is obligated to set good examples for his country. He represents Sweden and he should represent the country in the best possible light and no I don't think he's doing that. I disagree about what's past is past. That's true for the average Joe but not for someone in CPs position.

The worlds morals are slipping but the royal families should at least try to hold up good standards, even when it's fading.

Also, who said anything about love?

Tell me, do you know who I'm talking about? And don't you (and everyone else) think the same wouldn't work today? If not why not? Because drugs and parties are not as scandalizing as snakes and nude skin? Personally I think drugs are worse than nude skin and a snake. But that's just me and maybe there are countries where drugs are considered a small misdemeanour and nude skin is considered a serious crime. For Sofias and Carl Philips sake I hope Sweden is not one of those (smallminded) countries.

Wow.
I'm trying to get over the shock from reading this paragraph.

 

[princess gertrude]

I would have to agree with you CrownPrincess5. CP is not just "joe schmo" off the street. To be quite honest, the only child of the King & Queen that I have any real respect for right now is CP Victoria. She and Daniel are doing a fine job together, unlike her brother & sister who are causing quite the controversy with their choices lately.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

The world's royals, taken as a group, over time have not exactly been consistent in "upholding morals." Maybe since Victorian times, but before that, there were some outstanding examples of debauchery, excess, liking of nude skin (don't know about snakes but certainly mistreatment of animals as I would see it), endorsing or at least not raising an eyebrow about slavery or the capture/enslavement of indigenous people, child brides, etc., etc.

The Royals are what they are: reflections of the period in which they live (often lagging behind the world's avant-garde, but still always a part of the world in which they live - by definition). Henry VIII might have been a bit "ahead of his time" while still keeping a foot in the medieval.

Louis XII invading Italy three times was not the nicest way to set a moral example, but he thought he was doing the right thing.

Personally, I think the ascertaining of Princess Diana's virginity was whacky, but that's just my opinion. Prince Charles has moved up in my estimation through his ecological viewpoints and practices, it's so nice to see - so moral.

As a group, the international roles make up for the deficits of each other, each nation's royals dealing with different problems and perceptions. I like royals that actually stand for something besides evening gowns and tiaras though (as much as I love gowns and tiaras). I'd love a Queen or King who wrote good music or poetry or did something else that makes us want to see them esteemed entirely for their own personal efforts. Prince Charles's participation in search and rescue comes to mind.

In Hawaii, monarchs could adopt (and in the Roman world, nobles could adopt heirs, certainly in pre-national Italy, rulers of principalities (including one Queen of Naples, IIRC, certainly some Dukes and Duchesses) did adopt.

The last Viking King apparently was a changeling (adopted) or had a foster mother of some sort:

Dienekes' Anthropology Blog: mtDNA of the last Viking King

 

[Cinderella5x]

Because in vitro fertilisation can do almost everything nowadays to those who have the money and the best doctors at hand in case a natural conceiving is not possible. And you have to admit that Victoria and Daniel will have the best treatment possible if they would need in vitro. So the chance of them remaining childless is very, very low I'd say.



I know this photo. It's old news. And again I repeat myself. That's her past and has nothing to do with who she is today.

I also remember a photo ten years ago with a blond girl in it who had a joint in her hand. The same girl apologies sincerly for her past as partygirl in the drug-scene and is loved and accepted today by her country because she does a good job in her new profession and no-one is bothered by her past anymore.

Tell me, do you know who I'm talking about? And don't you (and everyone else) think the same wouldn't work today? If not why not? Because drugs and parties are not as scandalizing as snakes and nude skin? Personally I think drugs are worse than nude skin and a snake. But that's just me and maybe there are countries where drugs are considered a small misdemeanour and nude skin is considered a serious crime. For Sofias and Carl Philips sake I hope Sweden is not one of those (smallminded) countries.

That doesn't change the fact you cannot say for sure they will have kids. So no, you don't know if they will or won't. (I shortened your post, as it would be a bit long and what I am referring to is exactly the part below)

... and it will happen in Sweden as soon as Victoria and Daniel produce little royals. And they will, believe me...

I know it's an old photo, I was not talking about her present or her past. I was simply referring to your post below stating:

And well, what's one more hypotetically princess who's body is well known. Because honestly, almost every princess nowadays has been photograped in a bikini by papparazi when they're on holidays.

Hence my response where I evidenced Sofia showed a bit more than what you mentioned.

 

[HRHofNothing]

Sophia did all of the things she did to feed her need for attention. I think what bothers most people wo don't agree with this relationship is that she is still the same person and will remain the same person even if she were to became a Princess.....And a Princess willing to do ANYTHING to get attention on herself is not a good thing

 

[Esmerelda]

Sophia did all of the things she did to feed her need for attention. I think what bothers most people wo don't agree with this relationship is that she is still the same person and will remain the same person even if she were to became a Princess.....And a Princess willing to do ANYTHING to get attention on herself is not a good thing

To be fair, she hasn't been drawing attention to herself lately. I'm not disposed to approve of her (nude photos, announcing her date through twitter) but if they marry and she proves she can do a good job as a Royal like Mette-Marit, I would change my mind.

 

[KitKat2006]

Wow.
I'm trying to get over the shock from reading this paragraph.

Then I did a got job with this paragraph. I hope more people are shocked right now and maybe start thinking a bit more about commensurabilities.

I would have to agree with you CrownPrincess5. CP is not just "joe schmo" off the street. To be quite honest, the only child of the King & Queen that I have any real respect for right now is CP Victoria. She and Daniel are doing a fine job together, unlike her brother & sister who are causing quite the controversy with their choices lately.

Time changes everything. Go 5 years back and you have Madeleine and Carl Philip with perfect partners and Victoria with a non-suitable one. And how did all turn out with Daniel (the horror scenario hypotetical husband) and Jonas (the perfect future prince)?

That doesn't change the fact you cannot say for sure they will have kids. So no, you don't know if they will or won't. (I shortened your post, as it would be a bit long and what I am referring to is exactly the part below)


I know it's an old photo, I was not talking about her present or her past. I was simply referring to your post below stating:

Hence my response where I evidenced Sofia showed a bit more than what you mentioned.

1st: You may be right. But at the same time no-one can say that they remain childless also. So why always bringing it up?

2nd: Sofia wasn't showing anything more than every other royal in a papparazzi bikini picture. The only difference is that she had a snake hiding her upper parts and others have little triangle pieces. So what's the point? The snake? At a time in her live where a royal boyfriend was completely out of the picture? You all can yell bloody murder at me but I think those snake picture where nicely and professionally done.

I think what bothers most people wo don't agree with this relationship is that she is still the same person and will remain the same person even if she were to became a Princess ...

And you know this because you know her and talk to her every day? Is that why you can say she hasn't changed one bit when at the same time she's doing charity, holding back on bikini / animal shots and didn't take part in some emberassing realitiy show? And also do you really think peoples personalities are made in stone and absolutely not changeable the older and more experienced in life they get?

Personally I can say for sure that I'm not the same person that I was in my teenage years or my early twenties. I've changed, all the people I know have changed over the years. And I'm glad we all have the chance to change and see things differently later in life.

To be fair, she hasn't been drawing attention to herself lately. I'm not disposed to approve of her (nude photos, announcing her date through twitter) but if they marry and she proves she can do a good job as a Royal like Mette-Marit, I would change my mind.

Your first sentence is exactly what I mean. She did all the "bad" things when CP wasn't in the picture. These days she isn't doing anything that can be used against her. So why not giving her the same chance that Mette Marit got? If she doesn't use this chance and is making another photoshot like the one with the snake or appears in swedish "big brother" tomorrow I'm completely on the "No Sofia" side. In that case she is not the right girlfriend for a prince. But until now she didn't do anything to not have the right to be the girlfriend of a prince. Quite the contrary, to be honest. She is doing princess-like things with her charity project. On Purpose or not. What's important is that she's not emberassing CP and the SRF since she's involved with CP.

 

[Monna]

2nd: Sofia wasn't showing anything more than every other royal in a papparazzi bikini picture. The only difference is that she had a snake hiding her upper parts and others have little triangle pieces. So what's the point? The snake? At a time in her live where a royal boyfriend was completely out of the picture? You all can yell bloody murder at me but I think those snake picture where nicely and professionally done.

KitKat, you`re wrong. Sofia showed much more, in fact she showed everything from the waist up! And most of her photos were not "nicely" done at all. But I was much more shocked when I read that she had boasted about a meeting with a porn star. What kind of woman meets porn stars and is happy about that?

I don`t care much about this relationship. If CP wants to marry Sofia some time in the future, he can do that IMO - BUT he should give up his rights and royal duties. Just like Martha Louise did. Then Sofia would not become a princess. The only problem is that Victoria doesn`t have an heir yet.

 

[Lenora]

KitKat, you`re wrong. Sofia showed much more, in fact she showed everything from the waist up! And most of her photos were not "nicely" done at all. But I was much more shocked when I read that she had boasted about a meeting with a porn star. What kind of woman meets porn stars and is happy about that?

I don`t care much about this relationship. If CP wants to marry Sofia some time in the future, he can do that IMO - BUT he should give up his rights and royal duties. Just like Martha Louise did. Then Sofia would not become a princess. The only problem is that Victoria doesn`t have an heir yet.

Totally agree and I really believe Victoria will give birth to a heir(even if they have problems,with today's level of medicine hopefully they will overcome it).I do say many judge Carl-Philip's choice,but if we consider his level of education(in the matter of studies) I suppose he feels boring with intellectual women.The another problem is that Sofia seems to be overproud of herself and tends to be always in the centre of attention.If she was a model,but more or less professional,with the sense of duty and modesty,like Natalya Vodyanova for example,I think their relationship would not have encountered so many controversial and negative points of view.Of course ,if this is his choice,let it be

 

[Karisma]

What about nude pictures of male royals?

I am very surprised that no one respond to the way young men and women, who were born into the monarchy, behave! Maybe I am as a male more amazed that women seem to be so tough on other women. It flourishes nude pictures of male royalty, young and old. Several of them are really not flattering and it's hard to believe that the pictures only taken when the royals have been unaware. There are pictures of those who are already married and those who will marry. Images are not only secretly filmed but also proof of how bad even male royal youth can behave. As a man I do not think it's nice, but I do not go so far as to allocate them long before they even come close to the throne ...

 

[Monna]

Totally agree and I really believe Victoria will give birth to a heir(even if they have problems,with today's level of medicine hopefully they will overcome it).

Yes, I think the same. Victoria and Daniel are both healthy and capable of having a child (otherwise they wouldn`t have said after the wedding that they were looking forward to start a family) and if there are some problems, modern medicine can help.

I do say many judge Carl-Philip's choice,but if we consider his level of education(in the matter of studies) I suppose he feels boring with intellectual women.The another problem is that Sofia seems to be overproud of herself and tends to be always in the centre of attention.If she was a model,but more or less professional,with the sense of duty and modesty,like Natalya Vodyanova for example,I think their relationship would not have encountered so many controversial and negative points of view.Of course ,if this is his choice,let it be

I agree, beeing a model doesn`t disqualify anyone from becoming a princess. I`m sure many models are clever and decent women. But Sofia is not just a model. Everything she did - reality show, controversial model career, charity activities with African children (yes, charity IS admirable, but naivity aside, some people do charity work - especially connected to children - only for publicity), dating a prince - suggests that she likes attention and her goal in life is to become a celebrity. But there`s something Sofia should realize and CP should know: royal doesn`t mean celebrity. Once royals become celebrities, monarchies will be in BIG troubles.

Really when I see royals like CP or Martha Louise, I don`t understand them. They are so lucky, born into priviliges. With the power which comes with their position, they could do so much for their countries, help people, try to improve things that need to be improved. And what are doing instead? Car racing, dating a nude model, speaking with the dead, singing... Ridiculous

 

[KitKat2006]

Really when I see royals like CP or Martha Louise, I don`t understand them. They are so lucky, born into priviliges. With the power which comes with their position, they could do so much for their countries, help people, try to improve things that need to be improved. And what are doing instead? Car racing, dating a nude model, speaking with the dead, singing... Ridiculous

So I think this: Prince Carl Philip is the patron for Mustaschkampen - Sveriges Kungahus [NS4 version] doesn't count? Just because he's driving race cars and dating a girl? Isn't he not allowed to have a hobby and a privat life. Does he have to make the world a better place 24/7? What are you, what are all the others here, doing to make the world better? Because it's not just the duty of the royals and celebrities but the duty of each and everyone of us. And no-one can blame us for having a private live and a hobby at the same time. So tell me, what are you doing? Help children? Old people? Sick people? Poor people? Animals? What?

Honestly, I don't understand you all. Sofia has not been a bad girl at all since she started dating Carl Philip. So why do you always have to mob her? I really don't get it.

Oh, and another question because this came up a few posts before mine: Is a porn star a bad person just because of her job? Is one not allowed to meet one? Honestly, I would rather brag about meeting Gina Wild than Tom Cruise. Or Madonna (a woman who doesn't know she's not 25 anymore and get's more and more embaressing by pretending to appear so).

 

[Nadine]

My final word on this matter:

I hope this is a case of Carl Phillip sowing his royal seeds, not literally mind you, figuratively speaking only in the sense that I would not like to see an unwed pregnancy result. Rather, I see this on par with Prince Andrew, whom sowed his royal seeds with soft porn star Koo Stark back in the 80's.

Remember this: Prince Andrew's former flame Koo Stark looks relaxed at 52 | Mail Online

Yes, there was even talk of marriage at one point. But alas Prince Andrew came to his senses and married his childhood sweetheart, Sarah Ferguson.

Tata!

 

[CrownPrincess5]

Then I did a got job with this paragraph. I hope more people are shocked right now and maybe start thinking a bit more about commensurabilities.

2nd: Sofia wasn't showing anything more than every other royal in a papparazzi bikini picture. The only difference is that she had a snake hiding her upper parts and others have little triangle pieces. So what's the point? The snake? At a time in her live where a royal boyfriend was completely out of the picture? You all can yell bloody murder at me but I think those snake picture where nicely and professionally done.

Wow!
If that makes you sleep at night.

Um did you not see the nude pics? It seems to me you're glossing over the facts. She's done way more than show a bit of skin and pose with a snake. As far as I know, MM, Marie, Mary, Victoria, Madde, Maxima, Letizia never posed nude so I think it's pretty silly to say she wasn't showing more than any other royal. And on top of that she's bi-sexual and has been known to be in the company of Jenna Jameson! I'm sorry but old habits die hard and yes personalities are very much set in stone. We all change to a certain extent...when we get older we become wiser but our individual personalities remain the same.

If Sofia is changing for herself and to be a better person then I give her two thumbs up but to me I see her changing because of who she's dating. That sort of change is fake and it never lasts.

I'm all for people getting involved in charities and I think it's never too late to do good. But it seems fishy to me that all of a sudden she makes a trip to Africa while dating the prince. Something's not adding up.

 

[Jonquil]

Wow!
If that makes you sleep at night.

Um did you not see the nude pics? It seems to me you're glossing over the facts. She's done way more than show a bit of skin and pose with a snake. As far as I know, MM, Marie, Mary, Victoria, Madde, Maxima, Letizia never posed nude so I think it's pretty silly to say she wasn't showing more than any other royal. And on top of that she's bi-sexual and has been known to be in the company of Jenna Jameson! I'm sorry but old habits die hard and yes personalities are very much set in stone. We all change to a certain extent...when we get older we become wiser but our individual personalities remain the same.

I agree with you for the most part but I do have to butt in here: there is absolutely nothing wrong with her sexuality. It's her actions that are the problem. They show a great lack of foresight.

 

[CrownPrincess5]

I agree with you for the most part but I do have to butt in here: there is absolutely nothing wrong with her sexuality. It's her actions that are the problem. They show a great lack of foresight.

Don't get me wrong...I could care less about her sexuality. And I'm not saying it's wrong for her to be bisexual...but you said it better than I could. It's her actions (like the situation with Jameson) that's the problem. Hope I cleared it up.

 

[Iva]

So I think this: Prince Carl Philip is the patron for Mustaschkampen - Sveriges Kungahus [NS4 version] doesn't count? Just because he's driving race cars and dating a girl? Isn't he not allowed to have a hobby and a privat life. Does he have to make the world a better place 24/7? What are you, what are all the others here, doing to make the world better? Because it's not just the duty of the royals and celebrities but the duty of each and everyone of us. And no-one can blame us for having a private live and a hobby at the same time. So tell me, what are you doing? Help children? Old people? Sick people? Poor people? Animals? What?

I'd ask something else, what is he doing to deserve time for his hobbies and private life? It's April, he had 5 working days in January, 3 in February, 0 in March and 3 in April, that's a total of 11 working days. If you look at his calendar, there are 5 working days comming, 3 of them being Monaco wedding and 2 days of birthday celebrations (King + Victoria). That hardly looks like making the world better place 24/7. I'm rather not going to compare it to a regular working citizen of this world, who contributes to the society and is earning for his living, or he may look even worser as he does right now. They are always blaming it on his studies, but when one only slightly believes what the press writes about his results there, I don't think that he spends that much time studying. So what does he do with the rest of his time? I'd LOVE to have so much time for private life and hobby's as he does.

Honestly, I don't understand you all. Sofia has not been a bad girl at all since she started dating Carl Philip. So why do you always have to mob her? I really don't get it.

Maybe she isn't such a bad girl, who knows, I don't know her personally after all. At first I was not so anti-Sofia as I'm now, I thought that everyone makes mistakes and deserves second chance. But the "scandals" just kept comming and comming, and suddenly there were so many that it hardly looked like a stupid mistake. I see Sofia now as an attention seeker, reality show, several photo series including soft porn pictures and now the Prince comes. What's better for attention then dating a prince? Too bad for her that at the point where she got to Prince she already had so much negative baggage attached to her. Right now they are trying to play it low key and she tries to present herself as a good girl, doing charity work for poor African children, if we can call a few pictures where she is posing with little children charity work, cheering for her boyfriend etc.
Only time will tell if what they are trying to present now is the real Sofia or if it's fake. For CP's sake I hope that she really does love him and not his title and place in society. For now you can call me snobish or whatever, but I'm not in favor of this relationship. One can't decide when he/she falls in love with someone, but I do think that this relationship came in an absolutely wrong time. First CP's split with Emma, who would be more then welcomed into the SRF, then Madeleine's broken engagement, King's book, documentary about Queen's father, CP & M's working habits. Way too much negative coverage in a short time.

Because in vitro fertilisation can do almost everything nowadays to those who have the money and the best doctors at hand in case a natural conceiving is not possible. And you have to admit that Victoria and Daniel will have the best treatment possible if they would need in vitro. So the chance of them remaining childless is very, very low I'd say.

This is off topic in here, but it's one thing to get pregnant, even with the help of IVF and another thing to carry a baby to full term or to a point where it's safe to deliver a healthy baby without any future complications. Even the best doctors and all the money of world can't guarantee that mothers body will cooperate to this point. Not wishing anything like this to Victoria & Daniel, just my 2 cents.

 

[KitKat2006]

I'd ask something else, what is he doing to deserve time for his hobbies and private life? It's April, he had 5 working days in January, 3 in February, 0 in March and 3 in April, that's a total of 11 working days.

You're only allowed to have a hobby when you work fulltime in Sweden (and on second thought, you're just allowed to have a privat life when you work)? I'm shocked. What does the average Joe do when he loses his job? Quitting his membership at the local soccer club? Selling his horse? Burning all his books? Turning in his annual ticket at the local baths? Oh, and while we're at it, does your answer mean, that a manager in an important business is allowed to have more hobbies than the little employer at a little supermarket? And how does it work with parttime employers? Are they only allowed to have a half of a hobby? They can play the first half of a soccer game but not the second? Just clean the horse but not riding it? Just looking at a book cover but not reading the book?

I hope you hear the sarcasm in my response, but I just had to say that. Your answer was just to ridiculous. You don't deserve to have a hobby. You just have one (or more) or not. That has nothing to do with your working hours.

And - because I think you just summoned up the days where CP was officially mentioned in the royal diary - do you honestly believe the royal family is just working when they're mentioned in said diary? If so, Victoria and Daniel have just 1(!!!) working day during the first 8 days in may. That's not much on the working front either, right? So, do they have to slow down on their hobbies to in that week?

Honestly, I can't even believe I really replied to such a silly posting. It's not worth even one little letter.

 

[Monna]

Honestly, I can't even believe I really replied to such a silly posting. It's not worth even one little letter.

You must be kidding. Iva`s post was not silly at all. She just said what many of us think - from all we know CP performes only a few duties a year and the monarchy (= the taxpayers) is sponsoring him. We know much more abour his free time than about his work

 

[Iva]

You're only allowed to have a hobby when you work fulltime in Sweden (and on second thought, you're just allowed to have a privat life when you work)? I'm shocked. What does the average Joe do when he loses his job? Quitting his membership at the local soccer club? Selling his horse? Burning all his books? Turning in his annual ticket at the local baths? Oh, and while we're at it, does your answer mean, that a manager in an important business is allowed to have more hobbies than the little employer at a little supermarket? And how does it work with parttime employers? Are they only allowed to have a half of a hobby? They can play the first half of a soccer game but not the second? Just clean the horse but not riding it? Just looking at a book cover but not reading the book?

I hope you hear the sarcasm in my response, but I just had to say that. Your answer was just to ridiculous. You don't deserve to have a hobby. You just have one (or more) or not. That has nothing to do with your working hours.

You either do not get the point or, and I'm thinking the later, do not want to get the point. We all have our "liebling" and do not want to admit that what they do is wrong, don't we? Nothing wrong with that though. When the avarage Joe, loses his job, he has to cancel the membership, you know avarage Joe has to provide for himself, if he is married also for his wife and children and this avarage Joe has to look for a new job, because he has to live from something, he can not just sit on his butt, ride on his horse in the morning and go play soccer with his friends in the afternoon, he has to pay rent, taxes etc. The same goes for manager or whoever, obviously just not for CP, who gets lots of free time funded by the Swedish taxpayers, woohoo life's easy, isn't it .

And - because I think you just summoned up the days where CP was officially mentioned in the royal diary - do you honestly believe the royal family is just working when they're mentioned in said diary? If so, Victoria and Daniel have just 1(!!!) working day during the first 8 days in may. That's not much on the working front either, right? So, do they have to slow down on their hobbies to in that week?

Yes, they are working also outside the diary. If I'm not mistaken the King & Queen used to work Mo-Fri, it was mentioned in some documentary and I don't think it has changed, I'd say the same goes for Victoria and maybe already also for Daniel. They are preparing for their assignments, official visits and working with their charities & patronages, none or majority of these things not mentioned in their official calender. But when one has so little assingments, one also does not need to prepare himself for them so much.
Oh, and Victoria has 2 working days in the first 8 days of May + a 3 day visit to Gavle & Ockelbo and a 4 day visit to Germany at the end of the month. I hope you hear the sarcasm.

 

[KitKat2006]

You must be kidding. Iva`s post was not silly at all. She just said what many of us think - from all we know CP performes only a few duties a year and the monarchy (= the taxpayers) is sponsoring him. We know much more abour his free time than about his work

And that's where you're wrong. CP doesn't get sponsored by the tax payers but by his dad. Because only Carl Gustav and Victoria are paid by the tax payers. Every other member of the family lives of their income. And if they want to support their partners (Silvia and Daniel) and his children (Carl Philip, Madeleine and Victoria back when she didn't get paid her own income) it's entirely their decision. Just like the average joe has the right to sponsor is own wife and children with the money he make in their job. It's his decision how he wants to spend it and no-one elses. Looking at the situation from this angle, CP doesn't have to do anything and works without getting paid when he does royal duties. Has anyone of you ever thought of it like this? I think not.

And anyway, most of you aren't even swedish citizens and therefore don't pay tax money for the SRF. So do you have any real reason at all to always grumble or is it just you wanting to grumble and not granting CP to be in love?

And yes, I still think Iva's posting was completely silly and not worth a reply even if I did reply.

 

[KitKat2006]

Oh, and Victoria has 2 working days in the first 8 days of May + a 3 day visit to Gavle & Ockelbo and a 4 day visit to Germany at the end of the month. I hope you hear the sarcasm.

That makes 9 working days out of 20 if you talk about 4 weeks a month with a 5 working days each week if you count Mo - Fr. If it's Mo - So it's only 9 days out of 28. That isn't that much either. Only a halftime job. And if you want to counter this little math example and telling me they work more than what's on their official diary how would you know that it isn't the same woth CP? He has patronages too. Maybe he doesn't need as much preparation as Victoria and Daniel who have more patronages, but he also needs tp prepare for that too. And just take a look at my "tax payers reply" above. CP is doing all this for free if you see at it closely whereas Victoria is getting paid. So can you really honestly blame him for not doing more? I can't. And this has nothing to do with not wanting to see your point or having a favourite in the royal circus. It's common sense. He and Madeleine are not paid the same as Voctoria is for what they do. They don't have to do anything. Just Victoria and Carl Gustav who get payed and therefore are employed by the tax payers do. But that's just those two and no-one else in the royal family.

 

[nascarlucy]

Royals are a reflection of the times.Years ago stuff they did was well hidden from the public. You can't tell me that every single royal even those who dont have scandals have not done something in their youth that they either aren't proud of or regret doing. If you expect all royals to be perfect all the time or to have the lifestyle of a monk, then you are in for major disappointment. Whenever you look to someone for a role model, you are usually disappointed.

 

[CrownPrincess5]

That makes 9 working days out of 20 if you talk about 4 weeks a month with a 5 working days each week if you count Mo - Fr. If it's Mo - So it's only 9 days out of 28. That isn't that much either. Only a halftime job. And if you want to counter this little math example and telling me they work more than what's on their official diary how would you know that it isn't the same woth CP? He has patronages too. Maybe he doesn't need as much preparation as Victoria and Daniel who have more patronages, but he also needs tp prepare for that too. And just take a look at my "tax payers reply" above. CP is doing all this for free if you see at it closely whereas Victoria is getting paid. So can you really honestly blame him for not doing more? I can't. And this has nothing to do with not wanting to see your point or having a favourite in the royal circus. It's common sense. He and Madeleine are not paid the same as Voctoria is for what they do. They don't have to do anything. Just Victoria and Carl Gustav who get payed and therefore are employed by the tax payers do. But that's just those two and no-one else in the royal family.

No offense to you, I respect your opinion and all but you should really read over your posts and perhaps you'll see how you sound...because you're not making sense.

A lot of work that the king, queen, V&D does are not listed on the calendar. Silvia says she sometimes attends many audiences and meeting throughout the day...most of which she says the public never knows about.

Yes I can blame him for not doing more. CP is not doing more because CP doesn't want to do more. Plain and simple. There are thousands of invitations that come to the royal family in hopes of their being apart of charities and organizations. There's more than enough to do.

CP is a nice guy but unfortunately he's what I call a rich bum.

 

[KitKat2006]

I'm making perfect sense. But maybe it doesn't reach you all what I mean. Don't forget that english isn't my native language and sometimes it's difficult to put things into foreign words that make perfect sense in german.