Skip to main content

World hopes Kate and William will have a girl

By Arianne Chernock, Special to CNN
July 18, 2013 -- Updated 1157 GMT (1957 HKT)
The first child of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, Prince William and Catherine, was born on Monday, July 22. Speculation is rife as to what name they will choose for the new heir to the British throne. The first child of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, Prince William and Catherine, was born on Monday, July 22. Speculation is rife as to what name they will choose for the new heir to the British throne.
HIDE CAPTION
What will royal baby's name be?
What will royal baby's name be?
What will royal baby's name be?
What will royal baby's name be?
What will royal baby's name be?
What will royal baby's name be?
What will royal baby's name be?
What will royal baby's name be?
What will royal baby's name be?
<<
<
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
>
>>
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Arianne Chernock: Popular opinion prefers that Prince William and Kate have a girl
  • Chernock: The fervor has to do with a new succession law that gives girls equal rights
  • She says another reason is women have worn the crown in Britain in recent history

Editor's note: Arianne Chernock is an associate professor of modern British history at Boston University. She's at work on a book titled "The Right to Reign and the Rights of Women in Victorian Britain."

(CNN) -- "I hope you have a boy." These were the words of a well-wisher to Queen Elizabeth II (then Princess Elizabeth) and Prince Philip on the eve of the birth of their first child in 1948.

Prospects look considerably brighter for royal girls in 2013. Over the past few weeks, as the craze surrounding the birth of the Duke and Duchess's first-born has reached fever pitch, there's been very little fantasizing of princes per se. If anything, the pendulum now seems to have swung the other way.

Perusing the web, I've been struck by how many comments indicate a popular preference for a girl. To quote one particularly enthusiastic respondent to a recent article on the royal birth, "I'm personally wishing it to be a girl for the good of the entire human race and the sustainability of the planet."

Why the shift in sentiment?

Arianne Chernock
Arianne Chernock

In part, the enthusiasm for royal daughters can be attributed to the passage of the Succession to the Crown Act, which became law in late April 2013. The act, greenlighted to save the British government from the embarrassment of denying the throne to William and Kate's first-born -- should that first-born be a girl -- erases the male preference in royal succession.

The change in law means that the new royal baby, regardless of its sex, will be third in line to the throne. Thus, the refreshing banality of Kate's recent statement that, "I'd like to have a boy -- and William would like a girl!" From a constitutional perspective, the sex of the child no longer makes a difference.

There's another reason for the eagerness, at least in some quarters, for a female heir. The very uncontroversial nature of the passage of the Succession to the Crown Act reflects a particular historical reality in Britain. Male preference aside, women have worn the crown there for most of the past two centuries.

"Will and Kate Plus One" sneak peek
From the altar ... to parenthood

Queen Victoria reigned for almost 64 years; Queen Elizabeth II has already clocked in 61. That's a lot of time to get accustomed to female sovereigns. And not just accustomed to them, but extremely fond of them in the process.

While Victoria's reign (1837-1901) was regarded as an "accident" until the very end, it was an "accident" that most Britons came to consider a very happy one. As the muckraking journalist William Thomas Stead proclaimed in 1897, the year of Victoria's Diamond Jubilee, "England indeed has been fortunate in her Queens." So confident was Stead in queens' abilities to lead the British nation that he would go on to note that, "Many a time and oft has the idea recurred in these later years whether by some inversion of the Salic law our dynastic line could be made to pass only through female sovereigns. This being past praying for, we shall do well to make the most of our good Queens when we have them."

Surely there was something overly compensatory about Stead's remarks. Queen's reigns, under the terms of the old succession laws, were always understood to some extent as aberrational. As Victoria herself once confided to her prime minister, William Gladstone, "The queen is a woman herself and knows what an anomaly her own position is."

Yet the "anomalousness" of female sovereigns was far more of a problem in the early modern period than in the modern time. After the Glorious Revolution of 1688, Britain emerged as a constitutional monarchy, with the king -- or queen -- taking on an increasingly ceremonial or "dignified" function. Women have shone in this role (both on and off the throne), helping to transform the monarchy into an institution intimately connected with cultural diplomacy, middle-class morality, family life and charity work. (Queen Elizabeth is currently involved with more than 600 different charities.)

Historians often describe this as a "feminization" process. Whatever it is, it's a role to which women, for a wide range of reasons, are more habituated to playing.

The real question we should be asking, then, in the days leading up to the royal birth, is not 'boy or girl?' It's whether we would have the same levels of enthusiasm, or at least complacency, regarding a female heir, if that heir were to inherit a position that had significant executive, legislative or judicial powers.

Follow us @CNNOpinion on Twitter.

Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion.

The opinions in this commentary are solely those of Arianne Chernock.

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
October 30, 2014 -- Updated 1539 GMT (2339 HKT)
Mike Downey says the Giants and the Royals both lived through long title droughts. What teams are waiting for a win?
October 30, 2014 -- Updated 1832 GMT (0232 HKT)
Mel Robbins says if a man wants to talk to a woman on the street, he should follow 3 basic rules.
October 29, 2014 -- Updated 2103 GMT (0503 HKT)
Peter Bergen and David Sterman say more terrorism plots are disrupted by families than by NSA surveillance.
October 29, 2014 -- Updated 2125 GMT (0525 HKT)
Time magazine has clearly kicked up a hornet's nest with its downright insulting cover headlined "Rotten Apples," says Donna Brazile.
October 29, 2014 -- Updated 2055 GMT (0455 HKT)
Leroy Chiao says the failure of the launch is painful but won't stop the trend toward commercializing space.
October 29, 2014 -- Updated 1145 GMT (1945 HKT)
Timothy Stanley: Though Jeb Bush has something to offer, another Bush-Clinton race would be a step backward.
October 28, 2014 -- Updated 1237 GMT (2037 HKT)
Errol Louis says forced to choose between narrow political advantage and the public good, the governors showed they are willing to take the easy way out over Ebola.
October 27, 2014 -- Updated 1803 GMT (0203 HKT)
Eric Liu says with our family and friends and neighbors, each one of us must decide what kind of civilization we expect in the United States. It's our responsibility to set tone and standards, with our laws and norms
October 27, 2014 -- Updated 1145 GMT (1945 HKT)
Sally Kohn says the UNC report highlights how some colleges exploit student athletes while offering little in return
October 26, 2014 -- Updated 1904 GMT (0304 HKT)
Terrorists don't represent Islam, but Muslims must step up efforts to counter some of the bigotry within the world of Islam, says Fareed Zakaria
October 24, 2014 -- Updated 1302 GMT (2102 HKT)
Scott Yates says extending Daylight Saving Time could save energy, reduce heart attacks and get you more sleep
October 27, 2014 -- Updated 0032 GMT (0832 HKT)
Reza Aslan says the interplay between beliefs and actions is a lot more complicated than critics of Islam portray
October 27, 2014 -- Updated 1119 GMT (1919 HKT)
Julian Zelizer says control of the Senate will be decided by a few close contests
October 24, 2014 -- Updated 1212 GMT (2012 HKT)
The response of some U.S. institutions that should know better to Ebola has been anything but inspiring, writes Idris Ayodeji Bello.
October 21, 2014 -- Updated 1312 GMT (2112 HKT)
Sigrid Fry-Revere says the National Organ Transplant Act has caused more Americans to die waiting for an organ than died in both World Wars, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq
ADVERTISEMENT