Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will never like her just because her cruelty towards Diana (Charles is even worse but he’s a separate issue) happened in the 1980s and 1990s. Watch old Diana interviews on YouTube where she describes Camilla leaving passive aggressive little notes on Diana’s BED when Diana was still only engaged to Charles.

She was a 19 year old, mentally ill, naive girl. Camilla and Charles psychologically tormented her. As an adult woman in my early 30s, I find Camilla Parker Bowles so much more repulsive now than I did when I was a little kid, or even when I was a teenager.

Diana is hardly a paragon of truth telling so maybe you should treat it with a grain of salt. This is the woman who had to be threatened with lawsuits to stop spreading rumors that their nanny was pregnant with Charles’ baby.

Anonymous wrote:I will never like her just because her cruelty towards Diana (Charles is even worse but he’s a separate issue) happened in the 1980s and 1990s. Watch old Diana interviews on YouTube where she describes Camilla leaving passive aggressive little notes on Diana’s BED when Diana was still only engaged to Charles.

She was a 19 year old, mentally ill, naive girl. Camilla and Charles psychologically tormented her. As an adult woman in my early 30s, I find Camilla Parker Bowles so much more repulsive now than I did when I was a little kid, or even when I was a teenager.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will never like her just because her cruelty towards Diana (Charles is even worse but he’s a separate issue) happened in the 1980s and 1990s. Watch old Diana interviews on YouTube where she describes Camilla leaving passive aggressive little notes on Diana’s BED when Diana was still only engaged to Charles.

She was a 19 year old, mentally ill, naive girl. Camilla and Charles psychologically tormented her. As an adult woman in my early 30s, I find Camilla Parker Bowles so much more repulsive now than I did when I was a little kid, or even when I was a teenager.

+1

Another +1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will never like her just because her cruelty towards Diana (Charles is even worse but he’s a separate issue) happened in the 1980s and 1990s. Watch old Diana interviews on YouTube where she describes Camilla leaving passive aggressive little notes on Diana’s BED when Diana was still only engaged to Charles.

She was a 19 year old, mentally ill, naive girl. Camilla and Charles psychologically tormented her. As an adult woman in my early 30s, I find Camilla Parker Bowles so much more repulsive now than I did when I was a little kid, or even when I was a teenager.

+1

Anonymous wrote:Diana was young so that would be her excuse. Prince Charles is hard on the eyes along with Camilla. It's a love story between a squirrel and a woodchuck.

Anonymous wrote:I will never like her just because her cruelty towards Diana (Charles is even worse but he’s a separate issue) happened in the 1980s and 1990s. Watch old Diana interviews on YouTube where she describes Camilla leaving passive aggressive little notes on Diana’s BED when Diana was still only engaged to Charles.

She was a 19 year old, mentally ill, naive girl. Camilla and Charles psychologically tormented her. As an adult woman in my early 30s, I find Camilla Parker Bowles so much more repulsive now than I did when I was a little kid, or even when I was a teenager.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They seem happy together. Doubt Charles will ever become king.

How and why?

NP

-1. Half of twitter already thinks the Queen is secretly dead because she's had to cancel so many functions lately for health reasons. Charles is already doing a lot of the work. We're as likely to see a coronation as a 75th jubilee.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They seem happy together. Doubt Charles will ever become king.

How and why?

NP

-1. Half of twitter already thinks the Queen is secretly dead because she's had to cancel so many functions lately for health reasons. Charles is already doing a lot of the work. We're as likely to see a coronation as a 75th jubilee.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They seem happy together. Doubt Charles will ever become king.

How and why?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know I'm in the minority but my ex cheated on me and I deeply understand the pain it causes. Independent of all other circumstances, she deeply hurt Diana, William and Harry who are innocent parties. I could never do that. I'm sure most of you couldn't, either. It's truly scumbag behavior.

Same.
Same.
Same.

If your stance toward adultery is that strong, then presumably you must feel the same about Diana, who slept with and pursued multiple married men. Do you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always think how incredibly lucky these two were that Diana died so early. Otherwise they’d have had to sneak around much longer.

Not really. Charles and Diana were already divorced when she died. I actually think if she had lived people would have been much more sympathetic to Camilla because Diana would have been off dating other men too. Diana’s death adds a layer of tragedy and betrayal that wouldn’t be there if she was just a divorcée.

This, plus so much of the Diana worship is about how young and pure she was at the wedding, and how selfless she was with her charity. All it would have taken was another year of her in relationships, which the media was clearly invested in capturing, for people to turn on her as not a good mother or not a good role model for having seks and wearing tight clothes. It's not lucky for anyone that she died early, but if you have any understanding of celebrity culture Diana you have to see that the public was primed to turn on Diana when she died. It was just that point in the cycle.

But the whole reason her charity work got so much focus is that there was a young and beautiful woman doing that work. Certainly, other people in the BRF have invested energy and time in charity works (ex. Anne) but Diana got more notice because of her looks. I think there was quite a bit of resentment in the family that other people's efforts aren't getting much spotlight.

Regarding Camilla, I think that she and Charles are clearly a love match, and I have grudging sympathy for them. Charles had all kinds of options (younger and prettier women OR remaining a bachelor) but he was clearly devoted to Camilla. I think she is also one of the last of her generation of women who were not formally educated and expected to follow a predetermined life path. Certainly, it would have been better for all involved if Charles proposed to Camila and insisted on marrying her despite the opposition of the family but oh well.

Diana was the young mother of the future King. Sorry, but she was more important than Anne. It's the same reason why Catherine is more important than the rest of the extended family (eg, Anne, Beatrice, Eugenie, etc).

I get it but that's not what the narrative was. If she was admired for her good works, OK, but she wasn't the only person in the family doing good works. You can admire the young mother of the future king without saying she's the most charitably minded in the institution.

I also think that Diana's own infidelities didn't get any spotlight at all, and if they did, she would have been a less sympathetic figure with careful framing from Charles. He had one mistress. She had multiple liaisons, with married people too, during and after the marriage.

It's quite sad that her only genuine and good love relationship (with Hasnat Khan) stayed 100% under the radar.