New Royal Question - What Will Happen to Camilla?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Yeah right. Diana would have been front and center at Wills wedding. There is absolutely no way she would have been tossed to the side. Keep dreaming Camilla lover |
Anonymous
The fact that Camilla has stans is the weirdest thing to me. I remember when she had tomatoes thrown at her in the grocery store. She's a hard worker though and had to turn around public sentiment when everyone knew she was a homewrecker. That's something. |
Anonymous
| I actually have warmed up to Camilla- she makes Charles seem less weird. Remember that story about Charles having someone squeeze his toothpaste for him every night? I just can’t see Camilla participating in that kind of nonsense |
Anonymous
| Why is Camilla solely branded a home wrecker when Charles played an equal role in the demise of his marriage with Diana? |
Anonymous
They are both disgusting. But unfortunately he gets to be king. She shouldn’t get anything |
Anonymous
Diana clearly cared and didn't want to leave her marriage. As far as I can tell, Camilla's husband was just coasting. They divorced before the Wales did. But yes, Charles is equally culpable and just as much of a homewrecker. |
Anonymous
That is true. He also was said to carry his own mattress on trips abroad. Camilla may be a lot of things but I never got the special, snowflake vibe from her. She's down to earth. And even though she apparently can't tolerate flying and sunburns easily you never see her complaining on their 3+ international tours a year. Even at her age! |
Anonymous
Literal LOL. And can you please explain the term “stans” to me? Obviously I know it means fans but where did it come from and why is it necessary/everywhere? Thanks, Old person |
Anonymous
Had Diana not died it's also not clear how her life would shape up. She was going through a messy period, hanging out with wholly unsuitable men and playboys with drug habits and people forget that in the last year or two she seemed to be going through a downward trajectory, there was a lot of disapproval of her dating Fayed. Had she continued in that direction who knows what would have happened to her. She was not made of strong stuff, unlike her sisters who would have been much better wives for Charles, ironically. And she clearly had emotional issues, unlike Sarah Ferguson. Her behaviour before she died was not suitable for the mother of a future king. In a way it's a good thing she died when she did. |
Anonymous
I can't comment on her sisters, except to say Diana was an exemplary Princess of Wales. She represented Britain in a way never before seen and made changes on a global scale in less than two decades. It's not her fault Charles was such a sh*t husband. As for the men she was dating at the end, yes she had a thing for Muslim upper class men. I can't say I ever expected a future Queen of England to date men of the background she did, but Diana also was said to have been thinking that her marriage with someone of that background would help ease tensions between the Muslim and Christian community. Which was sorely needed then and is sorely needed now. |
Anonymous
|
I think Diana's life was both complicated at the time of her death, but also going in very affirming directions in some ways. She had just redoubled her commitment to high-profile charities, including land-mine removal. She had the sale of her dresses as a way to raise money for those charities. She was finding her voice, having met with a number of foundations in New York and Europe to reshape her agenda.
Her personal life - she had gone through a breakup with the doctor, Hasnat Khan, who refused to marry her. She had gone to lengths to get involved in Pakistani charities, visited his family, etc. But he refused - not just because she wasn't Muslim but also because of her high profile. Dodi Fayed was convenient, rich, and indulgent rebound. He was a known playboy, and I don't believe Diana thought of him as anything other than a whirlwind romance. Also, unlike Dr. Khan, Dodi's father was someone with difficult relations with the BRF, and questionable background. Hasnat Khan's family was not super rich but upper class in Pakistan. Diana was still a snob in some ways. She was incensed by Charles' hosting Camilla's 50th birthday even though it was after the divorce. It was just days after that when Diana and Dodi started their holiday in the Mediterranean in front of paps. As for Camilla, despite being despised by the British public for so long after Diana's death, she's put in a lot of years and hard work in her role. She has some huge initiatives, like the washbags for rape survivors, that have real impact. She and Charles are a team. That's why I'm positive he's planning on her taking up Queen Consort when he ascends. |
Anonymous
|
Diana’s trajectory almost reminds me of Wendy Deng.
But with Diana on a bigger scale, much more visible, and with charity at the center. Although the latter two were partially choices that she didn’t have to make. So maybe Diana would have continued on a Wendy deng path—in circles of mega billionaires, connected to various powers, and slipping in an out of using them for her needs and helping them with what they need. |
Anonymous
Yes, poor, poor Charles. Forced to marry a beautiful woman, by all accounts a kind woman and later a good mother, to appease the queen so he can properly ascend to be a KING. Yes, poor man. This post is so utterly stupid. Diana may have been naive in some ways. And she certainly had her own instability, though one could argue that developed after being in the public eye and subject to the demands of the Court. And her dick husband who threw his mistress in her face and his luke warm feelings for her to the media. And expecting too much?? Yes, it is quite a lot to expect your husband to love and respect you. She may have "manipulated" the media after the divorce and went on to live her life after the divorce. That was her right. Just as it was Charles to take up with Camilla - the MISTRESS. But, there is a reason the public favors her (and favors her still). Charles was a spoiled, entitled, whiny, little asshole. Jesus. The sexism in your post is astounding. I generally don't post on "royal" threads but, man, this really ticked me off. |
Anonymous
Ooh - I know this! "Stan" comes from an Eminem song with the same name - Stan. The song/video is about an obsessive fan of Eminem's. https://www.bustle.com/articles/94986-what-does-stan-mean-everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-slang-term |
Anonymous
That’s because you’re very judgemental. Charles was not allowed to marry Camilla. Because she wasn’t a virgin. Those rules were not in place for William and Harry. No one even assumes Kate or Meghan were virgins at the time of marriage. Charles was trapped by the royal standards of his time which was still rooted in previous generations and pushed to marry a woman he did not love when he already had his great love. Previous kings had their mistresses and their wives. That was accepted as the price for being royal because they rarely married for love. You can bitch about Diana being a victim but so was Charles. Diana was weak because she expected something that was not going to happen despite plenty of evidence it wasn’t going to happen. And when it didn’t happen she threw temper tantrums. Previous queens would have just smiled politely and got on with life. It doesn’t mean it was the right thing to do but that was royal standards backed by centuries of precedence. |