WI: Prince Harry Is Gay And Does Not Hide It?

Just as a general social what if, but let's say that in his early 20's finds that he attracted to men and decides that he will not try to hid it from the public (i.e, won't date a woman just to cover it, will answer the question honestly as he can if asked by the public, etc.)

Now gay rights and acceptance in the nineties forward meant that in theory a gay royal would not create a huge contorivery for being gay itself. However how would a Harry being publicly known as gay be affected by his royal status, place in line for a throne, and influence Britain LBGT development in general?
 

Deleted member 94680

However how would a Harry being publicly known as gay be affected by his royal status, place in line for a throne, and influence Britain LBGT development in general?

He will be publicly popular, given less official duties to perform and it won't affect his place in line for the throne one jot. It might be beneficial for "British LGBT development" as you put it, but I'm not sure. I imagine there'll be several lurid headlines from the tabloid press and stuffy indifference from the broadsheets. All depends who he's romantically linked with, I suppose.
 
What exactly would happen if the heir apparent/his child (like for example Prince William) was homosexual?

I suspect Nothing would happen. The UK is not medieval and has already had several homosexual monarchs over the years.

Oh wait a few odd sections of the Anglican church in Africa might schism.

Question what would you call the king's male consort? Presumably a prince.
 
I Wikipediaed It, it doesn't even look like they were Princesses
No, they were Queens. The only times when a monarch's spouse hasn't been a King or Queen is when the monarch is female - the husbands of Queens Anne, Victoria and Elizabeth II are/were Princes, with Albert being Prince Consort and the other two being Princes with a Dukedom. Also, I don't think Anne's husband was made a Prince in Britain because he was already a Danish Prince. Philip was also a Danish and Greek Prince but resigned these titles before he married Elizabeth, and was made a British Prince shortly beforehand. The husbands of Mary I and Mary II were Kings, though.

There is an idea going round that Charles' second wife, Camilla, will be 'Princess Consort' or something like that so as not to offend the ghost of Diana or something. And after that it might just become The Done Thing to call the monarch's spouse a Prince or Princess as opposed to King or Queen.
 
with regard to the Duchess of Cornwall - there is also the fact that should Charles pre-decease her would she be a dowager Queen as she is not William/ Harry / George /Charlotte bio- mother. grandmother...
 

shiftygiant

Gone Fishin'
No one would care (although it would be beneficial to LGBT Rights).

Actually, the only people who would care if Harry was gay would be the faith, family and flag crowd, but even they would come around to stomach it in public when the Queen and/or Charles comes out and confirms they still loves him and doesn't really care about his sexuality. And given how Harry is only going to become King if William dies/has no kids, there is no reason for them to actually care after the initial shock.
I suspect Nothing would happen. The UK is not medieval and has already had several homosexual monarchs over the years.
Pretty much. Even though a fair few of the claims certain monarchs were gay can be divided into 'greek relationships' and 'rumors', it'd be an odd line of thought to assume the Royal Family would turn away from one of their own simply because he liked men. A lot of awkward moments and maybe a slightly frigid atmosphere at dinner, but really as long as Charles accepts Harry for who he is, there really isn't much of an issue.
Oh wait a few odd sections of the Anglican church in Africa might schism.

Question what would you call the king's male consort? Presumably a prince.
Both these assume Harry would become King, and thus head of the Church, which only works if the premise includes William getting killed at some point before 2012.
 
You would see a huge generation-gap in public responses.

Young people would respond "whatever" and get on with thier lives.
Meanwhile, some grumpy old bastards (hint: I am 59 years old) would be horrified and out-raged and scandalized about the morale decline of the monarchy. They would protest about the House of Windsor losing its "God-given right" to rule and demand a restoration of the House of Stewart ..... or some other pretender to the throne as long as it is not "those perverted Windsor/Montbatten/Battenburgs!"

IOW some older folks are too old to change thier opinions about some subjects (e.g. homosexuality).
 
Top