From an American perspective, I agree with Niamh that: "The monarchy is not seen here as the beguiler of the masses as the preceding two views might indicate, but as a deliberate invocation of continuities with the past, combined with new forms of adjustment to Britain’s current interests and relationships with other states."

It might be that the type of oppression British are concerned with today has little or nothing to do with what the Monarchy represents. In a time of accelerating change, traditions like this one have probably increased in value for the contrast they provide.

On a related topic, I think a similar thing might be happening to 'sexual politics' in the US. As far as the feminist movement it was defined in opposition to an institution, it has become less so.