Opinion: Why isn't there a Victor day?

As the long weekend approaches, we should reflect on what it means for us to be celebrating Queen Victoria's legacy. As we consider why we're expected to acknowledge the life of a career monarch, an important question arises:

What about the men?

Why don't we also award attention to those historic gentlemen who have born the crown? These men actually used their power to accomplish terrible things, rather than just acting as a symbolic head of state.

If it weren't for the foresight of Charlemagne, we wouldn't have the education system as we know it today. The philandering ways of King Henry VIII brought about the institution of divorce. Were it not for the curiosity of Phalaris, the tyrant of Akragas, we would never have learned that you could burn a man alive inside a bull-shaped device that could be engineered to convert his screams into a lovely little melody.

After all, why bother hoarding wealth and Corgis if you do not use that influence to impose your whims upon society? A ruler whose primary function is to wave at passersby is an insult to the legacy of subjugation that was blazed by so many great men.

All I'm asking for is for equal representation. Why is it that all our female remnants of an archaic system are honoured with songs and national holidays, while the men have been subjected to revolutions and guillotines? This is a deeply unfair treatment of some of the most powerful figures in history.

It's empowering when Daenerys executes someone with her dragons, but when Ivan Vasilyevich creates a task force to murder anyone who could be perceived as a threat to his reign, he's forever branded as "The Terrible." It's plain to see there's a double standard at play here where fictional women are portrayed as heroes, and the real men who actually existed are now monsters.

I'm not saying I agree with a monarchical system. I'm just asking the question no one is allowed to ask anymore: Why is it okay to demonize the regency, when all King George ever asked for was to expand his ever-growing empire and ensure that his incestuous bloodline remained pure?

If we don't do what we can to honour the legacies of kings, all these regal men could have left to their names is nothing more than a place in the history books, plus the enormous structures they built to forever honour their time on earth.

Furthermore, what was the point of forcing labourers to dedicate themselves and their lives to erecting those imposing or lavish buildings if the common folk aren't compelled to look upon them in despair and envy? Anyone can visit the Tower of London for $40, and two entire rooms of Buckingham palace are open for the rabble off the street to gawk at.

As you enjoy your time off to commemorate Queen Victoria's birthday, take a moment to consider the poor demonized monarch: men who wanted nothing more than to wear fancy clothes, throw elaborate feasts, and brutalize their enemies.

As today's Royal Family expands, we can hope that one of those infants might take interest in what it means to be a king. Perhaps one day he will use the authority and power ordained to him by his genetic line to declare a day in his own honour. If not, well then royals may as well be regular celebrities, and that would be the most tragic of all fates.

The King is dead. Long live The King.  

Don't miss anything from CBC Comedy - like us on Facebook and Instagram.