Why It Sucks to Be the Royal Baby
Well, it doesn't suck compared to your life, but...
By Evann Gastaldo, Newser Staff
Posted Jul 23, 2013 10:23 AM CDT
Updated Jul 23, 2013 10:57 AM CDT
In this April 5, 2013, file photo, Britain's Prince William and Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, smile during a visit to Dumfries House in Dumfries, Scotland.   (AP Photo/Danny Lawson, Pool)

(Newser) – OK, sure, the royal baby is instantly rich and famous and will almost certainly have a better time on this planet than you. But, as the world awaits his first appearance, his name, and any other detail, a lot of reports are focusing on why it kind of sucks—relatively speaking, of course—to be the newest member of the British royal family:

  • In the Washington Post, Dylan Matthews points out that the British Empire is vast...ly diminished. Nowadays, "you basically have ... the Falkland Islands." Even the Commonwealth is missing a few key former colonies like, you know, the United States. " They’re your most successful former colony, and they won’t even join your stupid club."
  • Oh, and you have no actual power over any of your territory. "You host dinners, give soldiers medals, eat the raw hearts of Canadian seals," and other standard ceremonial stuff.

  • Even so, more and more of your subjects want the monarchy gone, including 20% of your own countrymen.
  • And oh, by the way, the royal family isn't doing so well financially these days, and soon it may be on track with Spain, where the royal family has to live on less than $10 million per year. Say it with us now: the horror!
  • In terms of family life, Hanna Rosin points out on Slate that the duke and duchess of Cambridge may be a bit too busy to "play hide the kangaroo every night." And, oh, you're definitely getting sent off to boarding school.
  • But at least you're a celebrity? True, but Rosin notes that means every paparazzo is "salivating for ... a lifetime of pot-smoking and Nazi-costume parties—for that moment you say something as memorable to your paramour as, 'I want to be reincarnated as a tampon and live inside your trousers forever.'"
Click for Matthews' full piece, or Rosin's. Or the Washington Post runs down a list of the best British tabloid covers from the blessed event, including the headline, "Woman Has Baby."

More From Newser
My Take on This Story
To report an error on this story,
notify our editors.
Why It Sucks to Be the Royal Baby is...
46%
1%
3%
4%
0%
47%
Show results without voting
You Might Like
Comments
Showing 3 of 9 comments
StevieGee
Jul 23, 2013 10:58 PM CDT
It doesn't suck as much as being one of the over 600 babies born into poverty in the UK yesterday.
scott-houghton
Jul 23, 2013 12:49 PM CDT
Apart from the fact you'll be one of the most privileged people on the planet? Oh yeah sounds awful! Also, the British Empire was greatly diminished even by Elizabeth II's birth, does that mean she's had no power at all? Of course not! Thirdly they'll also have a career built for them, so no need to get down the job center! Fourthly, the baby will have power if he becomes king, as the ruling monarch has the power to approve laws and disband Parliament. Fifthly, 20% isn't ~really~ very much is it? I'd expect more people in the US will want rid of most American Presidents than that, is that an excuse for a President to step down? Nope. What a load of hastily cobbled together shit, Newser.
B007
Jul 23, 2013 11:54 AM CDT
Sorry, 'inane drivel" '