I can't get over how Charles arranged for them to get together, without telling Diana anything about his history with Camilla. Holding Camilla out as some kind of example to Diana. And later, Charles and Camilla must have talked about Diana behind her back.

That's just so hurtful. Almost inhuman. I don't understand how a person could do that to someone they're married to. It's such a betrayal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was watching footage of Diana the other day and sort of went down the IG rabbit hole on her. She really was stunning. Just absolutely gorgeous and her warmth shone through in everything she did. I can't for the life of me tell what Charles sees or saw in Camilla in terms of both beauty and personality. It just goes to show what little depth he has to not appreciate someone like Diana. She truly glowed.

Ah, so True Depth is picking someone based on their iridescence.

What a bunch of nonsense.

Why do you think there are so many second marriages?

The man goes for pretty and sex the first time and soon realizes it is totally boring. Like many men, Charles wanted a woman who could be his life's companion rather than a sulky child he had to jolly along.

If you don’t want to be married to a child then don’t get engaged to a 19 year old. Is the bar really that low for men?

Blame it on the girl

That is unfortunately the mantra of the times we live in

Unfortunately there are very very few real men

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was watching footage of Diana the other day and sort of went down the IG rabbit hole on her. She really was stunning. Just absolutely gorgeous and her warmth shone through in everything she did. I can't for the life of me tell what Charles sees or saw in Camilla in terms of both beauty and personality. It just goes to show what little depth he has to not appreciate someone like Diana. She truly glowed.

Ah, so True Depth is picking someone based on their iridescence.

What a bunch of nonsense.

Why do you think there are so many second marriages?

The man goes for pretty and sex the first time and soon realizes it is totally boring. Like many men, Charles wanted a woman who could be his life's companion rather than a sulky child he had to jolly along.

If you don’t want to be married to a child then don’t get engaged to a 19 year old. Is the bar really that low for men?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well Diana’s mother left her kids when she left her husband rather than stay in an unhappy marriage, so she wasn’t exactly mother of the year either.

+1 terrible the way she ran off and left her kids

I don't think you understand that in that time, a woman who left her husband would have never been given custody. She tried to see her children afterwards but wasn't allowed. I'm not saying she was a mother of the year or anything, but I don't think you have a full appreciation of her circumstances. It's not like an automatic 50/50.

+1 also IIRC she was a commoner and he was aristocracy.

But she could have just stayed married.

Sure, if she wanted to keep being abused.

Did you just make that up? They were both unhappy and both cheated, but that is quite and unproven accusation you are tossing around.

FFS, PP is referring DIANA’s mom and dad’s situation, not Diana and Charles. Can’t anyone keep track of a simple conversation anymore.

That's who I WAS referring to. Diana's MOM was not abused. She was a cheater. This is common knowledge.

"Unhappy in her marriage to John Spencer, Frances demanded a divorce in order to officially register a relationship with a man named Peter Shand Kidd, an American billionaire. Peter at that time was married and raised three children. For the sake of his beloved, Peter left his family and children, he and Francis soon got married."

https://woman.forumdaily.com/en/kem-byla-mama-princessy-diany-i-pochemu-ona-brosila-svoix-detej/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well Diana’s mother left her kids when she left her husband rather than stay in an unhappy marriage, so she wasn’t exactly mother of the year either.

+1 terrible the way she ran off and left her kids

I don't think you understand that in that time, a woman who left her husband would have never been given custody. She tried to see her children afterwards but wasn't allowed. I'm not saying she was a mother of the year or anything, but I don't think you have a full appreciation of her circumstances. It's not like an automatic 50/50.

+1 also IIRC she was a commoner and he was aristocracy.

But she could have just stayed married.

Sure, if she wanted to keep being abused.

Did you just make that up? They were both unhappy and both cheated, but that is quite and unproven accusation you are tossing around.

FFS, PP is referring DIANA’s mom and dad’s situation, not Diana and Charles. Can’t anyone keep track of a simple conversation anymore.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well Diana’s mother left her kids when she left her husband rather than stay in an unhappy marriage, so she wasn’t exactly mother of the year either.

+1 terrible the way she ran off and left her kids

I don't think you understand that in that time, a woman who left her husband would have never been given custody. She tried to see her children afterwards but wasn't allowed. I'm not saying she was a mother of the year or anything, but I don't think you have a full appreciation of her circumstances. It's not like an automatic 50/50.

+1 also IIRC she was a commoner and he was aristocracy.

But she could have just stayed married.

Sure, if she wanted to keep being abused.

Did you just make that up? They were both unhappy and both cheated, but that is quite and unproven accusation you are tossing around.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I was watching footage of Diana the other day and sort of went down the IG rabbit hole on her. She really was stunning. Just absolutely gorgeous and her warmth shone through in everything she did. I can't for the life of me tell what Charles sees or saw in Camilla in terms of both beauty and personality. It just goes to show what little depth he has to not appreciate someone like Diana. She truly glowed.

You have this backwards - he wouldn't have depth if he stayed with Diana only because of how beautiful she was. He has MORE depth because he chose someone who he has a connection with - despite her not being as beautiful as Di

This. What turned me around on the whole Charles/Camilla pairing was seeing the way they are together. You can clearly tell that they love each other and are completely comfortable together. Was the way it came about ideal, absolutely not, but at the end of the day you want people to be with the person they love unconditionally for who they are, not the glamour or clout they bring to the relationship.

They had total disregard for their spouses, children, queen, country, etc. Two selfish people. Charles should have had to give up the crown like his uncle. If he really loved her, he would have. Instead they changed the constitution so he could be king. Many in England will never give him respect or Camilla. They don’t deserve it.

You do know that Charles could not abdicate until he became king.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well Diana’s mother left her kids when she left her husband rather than stay in an unhappy marriage, so she wasn’t exactly mother of the year either.

+1 terrible the way she ran off and left her kids

I don't think you understand that in that time, a woman who left her husband would have never been given custody. She tried to see her children afterwards but wasn't allowed. I'm not saying she was a mother of the year or anything, but I don't think you have a full appreciation of her circumstances. It's not like an automatic 50/50.

+1 also IIRC she was a commoner and he was aristocracy.

But she could have just stayed married.

Sure, if she wanted to keep being abused.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was watching footage of Diana the other day and sort of went down the IG rabbit hole on her. She really was stunning. Just absolutely gorgeous and her warmth shone through in everything she did. I can't for the life of me tell what Charles sees or saw in Camilla in terms of both beauty and personality. It just goes to show what little depth he has to not appreciate someone like Diana. She truly glowed.

Ah, so True Depth is picking someone based on their iridescence.

What a bunch of nonsense.

Why do you think there are so many second marriages?

The man goes for pretty and sex the first time and soon realizes it is totally boring. Like many men, Charles wanted a woman who could be his life's companion rather than a sulky child he had to jolly along.

The real world, which is full of second wives who are chosen for sex and prettiness, disagrees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hate her.

Diana should be queen

Ditto!

Diana was not suitable Queen material.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was watching footage of Diana the other day and sort of went down the IG rabbit hole on her. She really was stunning. Just absolutely gorgeous and her warmth shone through in everything she did. I can't for the life of me tell what Charles sees or saw in Camilla in terms of both beauty and personality. It just goes to show what little depth he has to not appreciate someone like Diana. She truly glowed.

Ah, so True Depth is picking someone based on their iridescence.

What a bunch of nonsense.

Why do you think there are so many second marriages?

The man goes for pretty and sex the first time and soon realizes it is totally boring. Like many men, Charles wanted a woman who could be his life's companion rather than a sulky child he had to jolly along.

Anonymous wrote:I was watching footage of Diana the other day and sort of went down the IG rabbit hole on her. She really was stunning. Just absolutely gorgeous and her warmth shone through in everything she did. I can't for the life of me tell what Charles sees or saw in Camilla in terms of both beauty and personality. It just goes to show what little depth he has to not appreciate someone like Diana. She truly glowed.

Ah, so True Depth is picking someone based on their iridescence.

What a bunch of nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well Diana’s mother left her kids when she left her husband rather than stay in an unhappy marriage, so she wasn’t exactly mother of the year either.

+1 terrible the way she ran off and left her kids

I don't think you understand that in that time, a woman who left her husband would have never been given custody. She tried to see her children afterwards but wasn't allowed. I'm not saying she was a mother of the year or anything, but I don't think you have a full appreciation of her circumstances. It's not like an automatic 50/50.

+1 also IIRC she was a commoner and he was aristocracy.

But she could have just stayed married.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well Diana’s mother left her kids when she left her husband rather than stay in an unhappy marriage, so she wasn’t exactly mother of the year either.

+1 terrible the way she ran off and left her kids

I don't think you understand that in that time, a woman who left her husband would have never been given custody. She tried to see her children afterwards but wasn't allowed. I'm not saying she was a mother of the year or anything, but I don't think you have a full appreciation of her circumstances. It's not like an automatic 50/50.

+1 also IIRC she was a commoner and he was aristocracy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was watching footage of Diana the other day and sort of went down the IG rabbit hole on her. She really was stunning. Just absolutely gorgeous and her warmth shone through in everything she did. I can't for the life of me tell what Charles sees or saw in Camilla in terms of both beauty and personality. It just goes to show what little depth he has to not appreciate someone like Diana. She truly glowed.

Diana was not gorgeous unless standing next to other royals specially mid that time. It is funny you think Charles has no depth because he should pick Diana based on her looks and looks alone. You and I do not know the personality of Camilla or Diana. Though Diana always came off as naive and doe-eyed. She was very young, much younger vs Charles.

Agree. She was pleasant looking, especially standing next to Charles, but really nothing remarkable.