Anonymous wrote:I don’t like Charles. They seem to be a good couple I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m neutral to slightly positive. I strongly disliked her during the Diana days but have realized she and Charles were the victims of time and circumstances beyond their control. I admire her for taking a backseat, not seeking the limelight and paying her dues with her charity work, unlike the Meghan Markles of the world. She’s never complained publicly and has always been supportive of the BRF, even though they treated her like a second-class citizen for years and didn’t consider her good enough to be a marriage prospect for Charles. She held her head high despite being one of the most despised woman in the world. You’ve got to admire her for that, if nothing else.

This, minus the dig at Megan Markle. It seems so strange to me to say in one breath that the BRF treated a person like a second class citizen for years and in the same breath condemn another person for standing up to the BRF. Stockholm Syndrome meets Disney Princess indoctrination, I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the royal family is a difficult place to exist, and it turns them all into fairly ugly people, eventually. I think Charles is a complex person who has a mean streak. I think they truly love each other and that she has gotten through an extremely public scrutiny of her lovelife with relative class and poise.

I dunno, I think they are people, products of their lives. I don't have much admiration for her or Charles, but I don't have loathing either.

This. I don't think any of us know or can relate to what they live or go through. Diana was an arranged marriage and whether her family failed her, the monarchy or her own youth, she seemed not to be in on the arrangement. However, we only know what we have seen in the few interviews. Charles should have been allowed to marry who he wanted. It would have caused so much less pain for so many.

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).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the royal family is a difficult place to exist, and it turns them all into fairly ugly people, eventually. I think Charles is a complex person who has a mean streak. I think they truly love each other and that she has gotten through an extremely public scrutiny of her lovelife with relative class and poise.

I dunno, I think they are people, products of their lives. I don't have much admiration for her or Charles, but I don't have loathing either.

This. I don't think any of us know or can relate to what they live or go through. Diana was an arranged marriage and whether her family failed her, the monarchy or her own youth, she seemed not to be in on the arrangement. However, we only know what we have seen in the few interviews. Charles should have been allowed to marry who he wanted. It would have caused so much less pain for so many.

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.

Anonymous wrote:I think the royal family is a difficult place to exist, and it turns them all into fairly ugly people, eventually. I think Charles is a complex person who has a mean streak. I think they truly love each other and that she has gotten through an extremely public scrutiny of her lovelife with relative class and poise.

I dunno, I think they are people, products of their lives. I don't have much admiration for her or Charles, but I don't have loathing either.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeh, they seem made for each other. I would not want to hang out with either. She seems like she does her job which is to wear a hat and dress and go to boring functions without stirring up controversy? I guess that’s good. My kid just asked me who will be queen whh E dies and I was like “ummmm….very good question.” Queen Camilla?

There’s just so much wrong with that family. Elizabeth is probably the best they could hope for. It’s going downhill from here, I thimk.

When Charles and Camilla got married, it was mentioned that when Charles became king, she wouldn’t have the title of Queen but instead Princess Consort. But that was 15+ years ago, and the public opinion seems to have shifted in her favor, so who knows, maybe Queen Camilla after all?

When he becomes King, he can give her any title he wants.

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.

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.