Marie Antoinette And Louis XVI - Problems In The Royal Bedroom 

And yet, that is what happened, but remember that Louis was a very shy and introvert man..

I feel that they were just children when they were forced to marry. Antoinette was only 14, Louis-Auguste was barely older, just 15. They were 21 and 22 respectively when they finally consummated their marriage, after some awkward attempts. In their early 20s, they were both older now, more mature and had grown fond of one another. It makes much more sense for them to be ready for intercourse as young adults, than as children! With Joseph's help, they were able to figure it out (he called them both 'blunderers'). It is clear that no one had bothered to explain to either of them anything about intimacy until Joseph set them both straight.

Well, it was unthinkable to think the king could've been the issue... Or to say it outloud, so it HAD to be Marie Antoinette.... Thank you for watching Christine ! 🌻❤

I can't imagine living in a dark stone castle. Looks brilliant but u know it was full of black mold, bugs and spiders, not to mention rats and mice, snakes, no shower everyday. They didn't take any exercise or sunshine or vitamins. Not even the balance diet we take for granted. It's a miracle any children were born. Not to mention the incest part . So grateful to live in a small Definitely not a castle, but clean, and running water, all fresh food, exercise and sunshine.

Glad you liked it Lucas

Marie Antoinette definitely wasn't as horrid as she was said to be by the revolutionists. I sympathize with them both as well.

@TheKingsofFrance they were both far to young and removed from the plight of the people. It wasn't necessarily their choice. But it was ridiculous to think a couple 19 year old kids could properly rule. At age 19, I couldn't imagine if I were made a queen. I like to think I'm kind, and empathetic. But I can't imagine how I would have acted if I were a teenage queen. Seems like a beautiful life, but I will keep mine 😘

Indeed. There are some details about the situation, but I couldn't be too 'graphic' in explaining in the video, as youtube tends to listen in and boycot movies with certain words or content... but trust me when I tell you the situation was ridiculous.

Well, his father did try to protect him from La Pompadour. He did too good of a job.

Very glad you enjoyed the video !

You will find a 3 part series of Louis XVI. on this channel. The surgery is mentioned in part 1.

Correct. And indeed the 3 part series makes mention of it. But,... aside from that problem, they literally didn't know how to perform the act...

Thanks very much for watching and commenting !

everyday life is easy because Maria Theresa can afford an army of wet nurses to feed, clothe and entertain her kids. the hardest part for her is giving birth.

Thanks so much for watching and commenting !

Thank you for sharing the quote !

Rani definitely isn't a big cat... She's rather on the small side... but I don't pick her up often because she dislikes it. So only if it's necessary. The weather here is extremely warm for the time of year, still 30°. Luckily, this week, it'll become a bit cooler (around 22°)... Give our hugs to Benjamin !!!

I'd have to look into it... Thanks for watching !

Thanks for watching.

Maybe some watching material for those cold fall days that are about to come !

I am great, thank you for asking. I hope you're well too !

❤

In a patriarchal society, it's not a good idea to have a reigning queen. Because of laws that allowed women to inherit and transmit the crown in societies where only peternal inheritance mattered, the consequences are not great. England was ruled by French, Scottish and German rulers because of that rule, and Spain by Austrian and French. Meanwhile all of French kings were previously to their coronation French nobles. In modern societies, where we atleast try to get rid of patriarchy, it makes sense that women can inherit the crown. So I'd say no, women shouldn't have been reigning queen of France throughout history, but if France was a monarchy today, then yes there should be reigning queen. Also, Edward III had no legitimacy whatsoever. If women were allowed to rule, then in 1316 it's Joan II of Navarre who would have inherited the throne, then her son Charles II of Navarre (the Bad). If women can't inherit the throne but can transmit it to their sons, then Philip of Burgundy, son of the eldest daughter of Philip V would have had a better claim that Edward III. Sure Edward III was "the closest male relative of Philip IV", but Philip of Burgundy was the closest male relative of Philip V, and Philip VI was the closest male relative of Philip III. No matter how you spin it, there are always more legitimate heirs than Edward III.

@@roidrannoc1691 It would have save french A lot of trouble. As for Edward, I'm on his side, I think the french should have recognize him as King of french.

@@DarthDread-oh2ne What troubles would have been avoided? Having French kings ruling France is not troubles! And Edward had no legitimacy, he's nothing but a greedy imposter. Why would the French have recognized a foreign imposter as their legitimate king? It's like saying that the British today should accept Macron as their new king!

I don't really have an opinion on the matter. It is not what happened due to Salic law... Whether or not it is fair is beside the point...

​@@roidrannoc1691So let's say that if France had the system of male primogeniture, that is, without male heirs, women could reign. The Valois and Bourbon dynasties would have ended sooner? because the children of reigning Queens are named after their father's royal house, right? France had a monarchy with the strictest succession rules in Europe in relation to the Salic Law and even more patriarchal than Japan itself today, as Japan in the past had reigning Empresses, while France never had a Queen Regnant