Sometimes I'm disappointed with the British royals these days. It's not just the possibility that Prince Charles might take over some of the duties of the Queen, it's the complete and utter lack of sex appeal in the present royal family. I'm not talking about Diana and Fergie, or anyone else who has married into the royal family. The gene pool was in dire need of boosting, so they did their part. No people, I'm talking about the blood royals.
If anyone at one point did have some appeal, it has definately gone by the wayside. Prince Charles did, as I wrote about in my posting Prince Charles: Royal Sex Symbol. But he's really the only one, with royal blood, who had any appeal. And this is only because of his position. The potential to become a princess would make Prince Charles attractive to anyone.
Sure there's some evidence of sex appeal within the family. A couple of photos of Prince William without his shirt on should tide us over. Some thought that the 21st birthday photo of Prince Harry on his motorcycle, channeling Marlon Brando, was sexy. Zara Philips is a good clotheshorse, and Princess Beatrice looked great on the cover of Tatler. But really, who are we kidding here?
Who was the last sexy royal? Well, Princess Margaret did have a sex appeal going for her, the Duke of Windsor, when he was Prince of Wales, had the women swooning. Prince George, Duke of Kent (husband of Marina, Duchess of Kent), rumoured to be bi-sexual and a drug addict, was also supposed to be sexy. Prince Andrew, or 'Randy Andy' was attractive in his day. Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, can be counted because he does have royal blood. But, that seems to be about it. Can you believe that in 100 years, we've only had five genuinely sexy royals? This doesn't include Prince Charles, because if he didn't have that aura of symbolic power about him, we probably wouldn't give him a second glance.
Because the well seems to have run dry, we have to look at other royal families to find attractiveness. Isn't it sad? Some people who have nothing better to do, would argue that I'm being completely shallow and that they've been genetically blessed with good health and longevity, and that should override physical features. However, the fact that they've lived as long as they have, simply reminds me more and more that there isn't a beautiful royal amongst them.
*Sigh* At least they have nice personalities
© Marilyn Braun 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Contact Form
Featured Post
If being royal is so extraordinary, why do the royals want to be ordinary?
Being royal is clearly not all it is cracked up to be. Gilt here and there. Liveried footmen abound. Church bells ring on your birthday. Red...
Search This Blog
Popular Posts
-
Best known as the mother of Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York, she was part of a family that can trace their ancestry back to 1557. Born on ...
-
There has been a lot of discussion lately about removing Andrew Mountbatten‑Windsor from the line of succession. Outrage, opinion columns, ...
-
Y'know, I don't have a problem with artwork. As a matter of fact, I go to the museum at least a couple of times a year to make mysel...
-
Definition: A queen regnant is a female ruler who reigns in her own right. Unlike a queen consort who is the spouse of the reigning king, wi...
-
"Diamonds are a girl's best friend", and so the song goes. But royal engagement rings are somewhat different. Despite some fab...
-
Based on the title it would be easy to dismiss this book as yet another attempt to reincarnate Diana. Other books have tried and, in my opin...
-
Today I had the opportunity to be interviewed by Andrew Nichols on CBC Newsworld about Princes William and Harry and the Concert for Diana. ...
-
Royalty have their image on stamps and commemorative items. Some more notable royals have buildings, docks, and streets that bear their name...
No comments:
Post a Comment