For Your Society

Whiskey & Immigrants is our new podcast which introduces listeners to regular, everyday people who have immigrated to the U.S. from elsewhere.

We’ll learn about their country of origin, how and why they came to here, find out how their expectations of the U.S. square with the reality they’ve encountered, politics, food, history and and so much more.

Join us.

Episodes now available:

  • S01E01 – Mexico – Santiago Sanchez
  • S01E02 – Slovenia – Gregor Strakl

Subscribe now on iTunes!

Whiskey & Immigrants is our new podcast which introduces listeners to regular, everyday immigrants. We hear their stories, how and why they came to America, their expectations vs. reality and much more. We hope you’ll join us.

Subscribe now on iTunes

you'd share this if you knew what was good for you

Meghan Markle and How the British Monarchy Became a Matriarchy

The Duchess of Cambridge has helped to steady the ship: she’s as photogenic as her mother-in-law was, but appears genuinely content in both her marriage and her public role. And Ms. Markle — also strikingly beautiful and who, as a divorced, biracial woman with a successful career as an actor, would have been a controversial choice of bride for a British prince until shamefully recently — promises to bring a breath of 21st-century air into the deeply conservative royal establishment. By comparison, the men of the family — even the approachable Harry and William — can seem a little dull; they are consorts to the main attraction, rather than standing center stage themselves.

What are we to make of this shift in the prominence of royal women when the fundamentals of their roles — to be decorative, nurturing and virtuous — have remained consistent? In Western culture, female forms have always embodied abstract ideals, from Liberty to Justice to Victory — not, as the cultural historian Marina Warner points out, because women have been free, or sat as judges, or won battles, but precisely because they haven’t. We therefore instinctively understand female figureheads — whether mounted on ships or as the embodiment of the ship of state — as static and symbolic, rather than active and individual.

Modern monarchs reign, rather than rule. They are required to be, not to do; to represent values, not instigate policy. This is the context in which a reigning queen, and the royal women around her, now find a natural place in our consciousness. Famously, Elizabeth II’s political opinions are completely unknown to her subjects. She, and her granddaughters-in-law the Duchess of Cambridge and, soon, Ms. Markle, are understood to represent the nation by doing and saying nothing other than embodying conventionally “feminine” virtues: family, beauty, charity, duty. The political restrictions we have imposed on the functions of monarchy now exactly match the cultural restrictions so long placed on women.

For royal men, on the other hand, a life defined by wearing nice suits, attending charitable events and being a husband and father is a much less comfortable proposition. Traditionally “masculine” virtues require action; with the shift of power into democratic institutions, royal men appear thwarted and reduced by the limitations on what they can do. The heir to the throne, Prince Charles, has notoriously struggled against the constitutional constraints on his ability to influence public policy:



Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Close Menu