Why Charles is so much more in tune and relaxed with Camilla

this may sound sexist, but I don't give a fuck.

Simple. She lets him be "the man" or rather, "da man".

She is content to be in the shadows, behind him.

His ego and his station in life demands that he be out in front. His upbringing instilled this in him -- after all, he is the future king.

Diana dwarfed him, and relegated him to the rear.

She made him look small and insignificant.

I was going to say that Diana was so popular cause she finally broke the ugly streak.

unless you know something I don't.

Charles is so weak and pathetic.

He's way uglier than she is.

and I willl admit I laughed out loud :D

God! What a Middle School type comment.

I seem to be in the distinct minority in my preference for persons with intelligence over gorgeous air-heads. I despised Diana for using her sons as her self-pity audience. The story of her oldest slipping tissues under the door of the bathroom was pathetic. She was not only stupid, she was a child-abuser.

Camilla is a well-mannered, happy-in-her-own-skin lady. I am glad the Prince can finally live a decent life with the woman he should have married in the first place.

It is mean-spirited for so many of you to harp on the physical appearance of the Duchess and rhapsodize about the surface beauty of the spiritually hideous late Princess.

She is a very handsome lady in her 50's., and doesn't feel the need to try to look or act like she's 27. Good for her!

Very bad of DUers to be saying this.... tsk tsk tsk.

It's just not fair to physically compare a woman who died in her 30's at the height of beauty to a mature woman nearly 60 years old.

Let's see some pics of the posters who call other people ugly.

...and also, Charles is good friends with Al Gore.

Double dare you... I thought not...

I don't think so. Either the Queen will outlive him (look how long her mother lasted for) He'll step aside for William, or we'll finally get rid of the monarchy

however, he is next in the line of succession.

Charles was bred and taught to be king.

"in-tune" with his current wife because he loves her. His first marriage was surely some sort of arrangement, wasn't it?

Why do people have such hostility towards that guy and his new wife?

and have you ever thought that that quality (in my orignial post) is what made him fall in love with her?

We fall in love for so many reasons -- one any one in particular.

Can't it be the same for Charles?

perfectly honest. Doesn't concern me in the least.

I agree that people fall in love for many reasons, but I expect that most are far too subtle and personal to be read through a television screen.

he didn't let Di in on the "arrangement." She believed he loved her and fell in love with him. He broke Di's heart and I wish he and the dog no happiness.

Forgive me for being blunt, but that sounds like a tabloid narrative born of a need to sell newspapers. I just don't see how people can ever expect to have a real insight into some strangers' love lives, or why they should wish to in the first place.

I'm just sayin........

It simply doesn't concern me. The thing that does interest me is why people feel a need to follow this sort of thing, and why it's considered acceptable to berate this man and his wife about everything from their physical appearance to their perceived lack of grace.

I just don't get it, that's all.

Honestly, did this guy not have the decency to divorce Diana first? I don't give a flip who he sleeps with, but from a PR perspective --- and isn't the real job of the royal family PR? --- he screwed up big time. When your position in life is owed to the the public, the public has a right to scrutinize you and love or hate you. This is the same for celebrities.

Celebrities subsist on the public's affection --- with no fans, you make no money. That means you open yourself up to public scrutiny. You cheat on your wife, who is adored by the public, and you WILL pay. You WILL be mocked. You WILL elicit hate. Period. End of story.

She was quite willing to look elsewhere while married as well. Charles did not have the monopoly on adultery during that marriage in any way, shape, or form.

If she hadn't looked elsewhere, she would have been a foolish idiot.

what's good for the goose, you know?

Why should she sit back and rely on "devices" while her husband is openly fucking someone else?

Diana did alot of good with her charity work, and I will be the first to say that Charles handled the whole situation horribly.... but Diana wasn't some celibate princess. She had lovers, and the poor woman definitely had some emotional issues that a good therapist could have helped. The whole thing was screwed up, but everyone had a hand in exacerbating it.

was being subjected to Virginity Tests, & Camilla & Charles thought the menage-a-trois was fine so long as Diana stayed out of sight.

that's why.

They both seem so happy together and I think they're cute. :)

Princess Diana was his duty.

her name is Camilla (Diana called her the Rottwieller which fits as well!). And all of your reasons are spot on. She wants to be his little lamb following behind him.

:hi:

There is nothing that stands out about Camilla. Her appearance has certainly improved (along with her station in life).

However, I don't exactly see Camilla starting a campaign on the dangers of landmines or traveling through Africa to draw attention (and $$$) to help fight the AIDS epidemic and world hunger.

to think about others, whose station in life is beneath her.

...the whole monarchy thing on which her fame rested was tired. She would have done better to have left things alone and not to have gone into the marriage in the first place.

It's true she was a little girl when she went into it, but she could have and should have resisted the whole deal from the get go.

As for Chuckie, I'm glad he's happy, but this boy-man is a less than stirling example of humanity. He was, to steal a phrase from Kurt Vonnegut, "born into this cockamamie proprietorship." There is no earthly reason that anyone should be provided with such resources as a condition of birth. It is immoral.

she loved and trusted?

Maybe her crystal ball was malfunctioning during that period.

I'm not saying that she was a bad person, but on the other hand she couldn't have been the brightest bulb on the block getting into that situation in the first place.

Many nineteen year olds, however, have far more sense. There were a zillion red flags in the whole deal.

But look, Diana, like her husband, was born into privilege and wealth and one supposes she could have - and perhaps should have - been a worse person. She certainly had more character than her husband, who has long been a pathetic twit with no real accomplishments. Diana certainly has more to recommend herself than say, Brittany Spears. It is probably mean spirited of me to have said what I said, but I have problems with the deification of people for no other reason than their birth and glamor.

Diana did a lot of good things, but she also lived high and did so in spite of having been in the direct personal presence of poverty and suffering. It's not like she ever showed any signs of walking away from privilege she did not really earn. That may be a lot to ask of anyone, but somehow the truly great spirits manage to do it. Diana may have been good, but she was not great.

It is unclear whether Diana would have been as active in charity if she hadn't married into the royal family.

Camilla has adopted osteoporosis, the disease that causes older women to slump, as her cause. It isn't glamorous, but many, many older women suffer from it, including my mom. It could happen to you or your mom, too. Camilla gave a speech on osteo at NIH.

quite shocked.

"Camilla starting a campaign on the dangers of landmines or traveling through Africa to draw attention (and $$$) to help fight the AIDS epidemic and world hunger."

Camilla would if she were as fixated on her personal popularity as was the Airhead. I'll bet you think Laura the Unloved gives a damn about inner city gang violence too.

1. Drugs. 2. If he doesn't behave she kicks his frickin ass.

Sorry, but that is it. Brains may have come without beauty this time,and it is probably just as well. I think Diana was a great unifiying figure, and used her celebrity to promote worthy causes,but this is what is best for Charles now. People need to get over the appearance thing, it isn't going to change. His sons are handsome enough for both of them anyway........(meow!!)

Royal MALE PENIS...TO FALL OVER IN SUBJGATION...to our Wordrobe and Human Rights Activism!


To say nothing about Charles' Weird SEX LIFE...that Diana had to find "other folks" to talk to.

Hey...I don't dislike Camilla. She seems very shy and unassuming. But, she does always turn in "humility" for the photo op.
:eyes:

Diana was a brood mare, albeit a pretty, shiney one.

yes, she was "shiny and pretty", but she carried a lot stronger light than he did.

And you know what? I'll be if Diana wasn't such a "personality" they would never have divorced.

the memo that her role was that of a brood mare. I think she naively thought she was going to have a real marriage. The estates and diamond tiaras were only a side benefit in her mind, I believe.

Hell, I certainly didn't have the knowledge at 18 or 19 that I have now. It was a dream to her - a fairytale. Any 18 year-old, thinking themselves in love with a real Prince and believing that he loved her back wouldn't jump at the opportunity for marriage.

talk about "not getting it"

Nineteen year olds are all incompetants lead around by the nose by their elders, like http://www.jlrweb.com/whiterose/sophie.html">Sophie Scholl or, if we must worship royalty, http://www.elizabethi.org/uk/earlyyears/teens.html">Elizabeth I who managed to save her own life (and those of her supporters) in high court intrigue at the age of 15, acceded to throne in great danger (at the same age as Diana became engaged, 19) and who in spite of incredible sexism, in spite of her maternity through a woman beheaded for treason, disarmed powerful men with decades of experience in high government treachery, many of whom were determined to kill her, and set herself on a course to preside, in a time of violent religous divisions, over the transformation of her country from a peasant backwater on the lower half of a divided island to one of the most powerful nations on earth.

A very ditzy 19 year old, no, that Elizabeth?

I suppose it IS clueless of me to assume that 19 year olds bear some responsibility for their actions or that they are in any way competant. After all, most 19 year old women get engaged to powerful men at the first opportunity. The point of being a 19 year old woman is to behave like a piece of stupid candy.

be marrying him? Gee, they both did what they thought they wanted at the time, and it didn't work out, just like many other marriages don't work out. What did they even have in common?

was much older, not so good looking. If he wasn't a Prince, does anybody really think Diana would run to the alter with him? Get a clue!

her sister did. I think sis dated Charles before Diana did. So yes if he were a garbage collector I don't think she would have had a chance because her family would have had the guy shipped way north to Scotland. So to speculate that she could marry anyone out of her class isn't true.

I think her altruism and sympathy for those of less fortunate circumstances made her a romantic who would hope for real love. At nineteen let's face it you think you are hot and that anybody who wants to be with you loves you. How many of us have dated a guy in college and then found out he was using you? At that age you don't think anyone wouldn't love you and had alterior motives.

His great uncle had to renounce the throne to marry the woman he loved, a divorcee.

At least Camilla has a chance of being queen if the present queen falls off a horse and cracks her skull open, a thing Wally Simpson (not sure of name) could never hope for.

Maybe by William's time, they might not even raise an eyebrow, if he marries a stripper divorcee, with children, whose much older than him.

:shrug:

:hi:

:D

I couldn't remember!

:hi:

Someone else can catch my back on that. I think it's because of her past divorce or something.

Example: Charles' dad is NOT king. He's Prince Philip.

maybe that's how they will refer to her if he becomes King. I personally don't get the difference. She still is the person he will do pillow talk with and who will fulfill the duties of his consort. My point was that the king (I can't remember his king name), Queen Elizabeth's uncle couldn't even do that. He had to abdicate the throne to marry Wallis Simpson, an American and horrors a divorcee.

She knows it's a very sensitive issue and may not refer to herself as such, but she will, as Charles' consort, be Queen. She will not be Queen in her own right, the way Elizabeth is by birth, but she'll be Queen Consort until Charles' death (assuming he ascends the throne), as has every other woman who married a man destined to be King.

Wallis Simpson was denied the use of the title "H.R.H." by the Royals, but she had every right to the title as the wife of H.R.H. Duke of Windsor. She declined to press the issue, however.

besides they are so much quirkier than the Bushie/Cheney Royals we have. Ours are so secretive that we don't get good tabloid on them. :D

It's only when they're taken seriously that they bug me. :)

Personally, I always liked Di and Fergie. The fact that the royals couldn't deal with their strength and independence spoke volumes.

she mothers him.

he always loved her, he never really loved Diana. Who can say what the chemistry is between them, it just is.

She made herself the bride at every wedding and the corpse at every funeral. I have no idea why he married the trashy little thing; then again, I don't really give much a shit about English royality, though Charles is marginally less repellent than most of them.

:silly:

The memory doesn't grow old, only the body does.
And he's a Scorpio, and Camilla knows how to please him---and actually wants to.

Camilla has always been her own woman and never sought the spotlight, and doesn't seek it now. My impression of Prince Charles is that he's rather submissive; he was certainly dominated by his parents, particularly his father (who has a reputation as a cold man). Camilla is a strong woman, and I believe that's what Charles loves.

To the people who say that by marrying Prince Charles, Camilla moved up in the world, well, the same is true of Diana. Camilla was born into a family equally as well off (if not more so) than Diana Spencer's. Camilla inherited a large sum of money as a young woman, and her background assured her a place in "high society", prince or no prince.

To the people obsessed by Camilla's looks, how shallow it is to make a judgement of a person's value on that basis. She didn't always look like she does now, as this early picture (from about 1970/71 or thereabouts) of Charles and Camilla shows:



Maybe when he looks at her, that's what he still sees, an athletic, confident, spirited young woman. What anyone else sees is not important.

Certainly he never should have married Diana in the first place, but she did all right out of it. Diana was not the helpless waif Americans like to believe she was. Karl Rove could have learned a thing or two from her about manipulating the world's press.

I'm not a royalist myself and have never really understood the interest people have in their lives (America fought a war to become independent of these people, so I don't get why they care so much about them now). They're just people, and they make the same kinds of stupid life decisions the rest of us make. They're no better and no worse than the rest of us, nor are they more important - they just have the misfortune to live in a goldfish bowl. I wish the world would ignore them and let them get on with their lives. I know I'd be happy never to hear of any of them again.

Edited for typo.

:)

I find Diana's story compelling and pitiable, but I don't think that she was some naive victim. And Camilla isn't some bloodthirsty harpy crossed with a Stepford wife.

From what I've seen, I believe that Camilla is so comfortable in her own skin that she doesn't care to be in the spotlight. I agree that Charles seems rather submissive, but I also think that Camilla has proven for thirty years that he can trust her. They have similar interests and like each other. Of all the couples in the world, why pick on them?

Camilla is certainly not a 19 year old virgin. But, again, why should she pretend to be? Why should she not be with the person that she's loved for so many years? Why should he not be with her?

Diana is dead. She grew into a strong person with an international following. In many senses, she did grow beyond the monarchy. That's what divorce and moving on with your life is for. It's fairly clear that she would never have been an international star (if that's the point) if Charles hadn't plucked her out of the daycare she worked at.

The tragedy of Charles and Diana is the archaic system that prevented Charles from marrying Camilla in the first place.

Diana was the daughter of the 7th Earl Spencer. Camilla was the daughter of a humble Major (who served the royal household) and his wife who was the daughter of a Baron.

I don't give a fig of who is an Earl and who is not.

Like or not, theirs is different than ours.

in this instance? That's coming really close to sounding insulting to people who live in Britain.

The reason Charles didn't marry Camilla when they were both young was that she had "a past". If not for that, she would have been considered as equally "marriageable" for Prince Charles as Diana was. A "good" family is a "good" family, and to call Camilla's father "a humble major" is dismissive and unwarranted on your part.

or better than you or me, for that matter. Why is there such an interest in royalty? As Americans, shouldn't we be beyond that?

Which said this:

"To the people who say that by marrying Prince Charles, Camilla moved up in the world, well, the same is true of Diana. Camilla was born into a family equally as well off (if not more so) than Diana Spencer's. Camilla inherited a large sum of money as a young woman, and her background assured her a place in "high society", prince or no prince."

They weren't equals socially. Diana was certainly higher on the totem pole as far as the aristocracy goes.

Charles and Di were so far apart in age and they didn't have anything in common. Camilla is an outdoorsy lady just like Charles and they are contemporaries. I'd say that's why they get along so well.

She is definitely her own person, and that's why they didn't get married years ago. She kept on waiting while he futzed around, and finally said the hell with it and got on with stuff.

I think he likes her because she is an independent woman.

I also liked how they did stuff in New Orleans. He learned something from his GRandmother and Mother. Did you watch that George? Pickles? Actually mingling with REAL PEOPLE, and acting trul;y concerned, not just posing for a photo op???

so why the fuck didn't he marry Camilla in the first place?

Why drag Diana into it if he didn't love her? The selfish bastard.

The sorry selfish fuck.

I remember him saying his "daddy made him marry Diana".

Plus, she had already been linked to him romantically in the press along with Lady Caroline Jane Wellesley (Duke of Wellington's daughter), Lady Sarah Spencer (Di's sister), and a whole bunch of others. The government and his mama had to agree to whoever he chooses to marry or he is removed from the line of succession. Think back to history and all the hell that was raised in government and with the public over who royalty married. Perhaps his family objected to it. I don't know if we'll ever know for sure.

I think, even though Di was a bit naive, that she had a basic idea of what she was getting into. The problem between Di and Charles is that she chose to be his equal after they married. She was so deferential to him before marriage, you know. He wasn't prepared for the change. He thought he could have everything he wanted and a prim and proper wife. After all, the Princes of Wales typically had mistresses throughout history. Diana wasn't the first Princess of Wales to object.

Prince Charles lacked a backbone when faced by his formidable parents. He did what "the firm" (as they're known over here) wanted him to do and married Diana instead of the woman he loved. It was a mistake, and everyone paid for it.

This is why I believe he needs Camilla. She has the strength that he lacks. Diana, as a young bride, looked to her husband for something he simply doesn't possess.

I only hope his sons learn from all this.

I think these are reasons why Charles is more at ease with Camilla;

1. He's known her forever. She's familiar, like a comfortable pair of shoes.

2. Diana was much younger than Charles and relatively inexperienced, and not just in a sexual sense. She was also likely insecure in her relationship to him from the first. Also different interests in almosts every way, so not a lot of neutral ground to be comfortable in together. Big barriers.

3. Because Charles was strongly sexually and emotionally attracted to Camilla for so many years, there never really was much of a chance that he would start all over again and lay his heart at the feet of the very young, virginal, romantic Diana. Nor did he appear to want to.

4. He was (and is) no maiden's dream, but Camilla liked him and he knew it. He didn't have to be dashing and attentive to impress and placate her.

5. Camilla has her own interests - horses - and they don't require him to show much interest that he doesn't feel

6. Sexual attraction can't be forced and is unpredictable. Camilla had "it" for Charles, Diana did not.

7. (This one is related to yours) Diana was photogenic and idolized and relentlessly pursued by the British public. Whether she enjoyed it or not, she rose to the occasion and was pretty for photo-ops. Charles is not an outgoing or physically attractive person and must have disliked the constant cameras.

8. Diana would have found out about Camilla rather early and would have resented Charles' attraction to the "other woman." Someone who is feeling betrayed and insecure is not comfortable company, especially if the other person feels guilty about it.

And you know, I don't think Camilla is so bad-looking. She looks like a regular person, not a movie star and not some kind of monster.

EDIT: and, no, before anyone flames me, I do not know any of the history of Charles/Diana, how they met, why they married, what their life was like together. Nor do I really care.

So if I'm way off on this, fine. Its just a speculation based on the little I know about these people.

Any contender had to have an aristocratic background, not previously married, preferably a Protestant and a virgin. Diana met the qualifications.

He sure have followed his uncle's example, if that's the case.

Perhaps several lives would not have been ruined.

As an American woman I can't imagine marrying personally for any reason other than love. But, the notion of marrying for love was a rarity among the aristocracy until the past century. They married to gain alliances, pedigrees, properties, etc. They still marry for these reasons, though not so much now that royalty and aristocracy itself is dwindling and wanting to avoid consanguinity.

Look at Prince Phillip. He's about as insignificant as you can get among the royals. He's not King, he doesn't have access to the government documents and papers that the Queen has. In the scheme of things...Phillip is rather...insignifcant. And Charles, I think, is scared of being seen like his father.

And there's where Camilla comes in. I think you're right...she purposefully stays in the shadow, letting Charles be his own man. I don't think, for instance, Camilla had any desire to be interviewed for that "60 Minutes" story about Charles that was aired last week. She very much wants to stay out of the limelight.

are irrelevant in today's world. They're a soap opera, and about as important as one.

Be careful about thinking of Prince Philip as insignificant, though. He's very vocal when he chooses to be (and has paid the price for some of his over-the-top controversial statements), and as husband to the Queen, his words carry more weight than you might think. He may have married into the royal family in Britain, but he himself was born into the royal families of both Greece and Denmark, and he is also a distant cousin to the Queen. His uncle was Lord Louis Mountbatten. Prince Philip definitely isn't a just a non-entity who married well. He may not set policy in the UK, but then neither does the Queen. The royal family stays out of politics.

Maybe it's payback for his womanizing all those years.

Compatablity is everything. It's a mystery.

being analyzed? How many relationships are for real and have true love in them? Fantasies get you in a lot of trouble, but they say real love can make fantasies seem quite pale.

I think it is good if there is real love between the Prince and Camilla. Why Diana married him? - well whatever the reasons, it sure got her into deep trouble. Why didn't the Prince just marry Camilla in the first place? Heck if I know.

Why do you care? We don't and we have to live with these inbred halfwits.

:rofl:

I never really cared about the Royals. Even when Diana died, I was barely interested. But there has been so many tabloid stories, tv shows, news reports on and on, it finally got into my head. I try to stay away from celebrity news, they just live off of people's attention.

lots of newspapers, tabloids, books and TV. It is colorful drama. The interest in the royal family will continue to sell long after the present Hollywood royalty loses its enhanced sexed-up edge. we can look forward to the antics of Harry and his heartthrob brother for a long time to come.

before I found someone who didn't care.


I sure as hell don't.

Famous people with marital difficulties??? You don't say.

I see their simple fucking faces.

Keep them off my screen and on yours. Think you can do that?

I've learned way too much about the royals over the years, and wish they would become invisible (and I felt that way about Diana too, the less I saw of her the more I liked it). Even better, I wish that a portion of our taxes didn't go towards perpetuating their lifestyle at the expense of the rest of us (for example, to those of you who remember when Windsor Castle caught on fire several years ago - well, it wasn't insured and we, the taxpayers, had to foot the bill for the reconstruction).

What on earth possible good did Prince Charles visiting dispossessed people in New Orleans do? He's a man who has his valet put his toothpaste on his toothbrush for him - what use would he be in post-Katrina territory?

for the fact that I believed Diana was so hurt because of her. But I see pictures of Charles and Camilla together and I get a sense of real genuine love there. They are both happy and it is good.

I certainly have made wrong choices in my life. I hope that life would allow me a second chance at happiness.
That being said, I have no right to judge other people's lives. Just wish them the happiness they are looking for.

I always felt as sorry for HIM as Diana. I know I know, he "could" have bolted fromt he royal family like his uncle did, but I think he was warned that if he DID , it could be the undoing of the monarchy. he would not want that on his shoulders forever. Families are complicated. I think he thought he would be the "good son", and would be rewarded later. His mother's longevity means that he may NEVER rule, and may abdicate in favor of William.

Camilla was not deemed "suitable" for him when they were 20-somethings, and of course she married someone else. the fact that Charles stayed single so many years pretty much says that he was not interested in "just being married".

It's sad that Diana was "picked" for him.. She deserved to have a love-match, and to live a happy life, but being young and impressionable, she probably thought she would grow to love him,but I don;t think she ever did..and he certainly did not love her.

Had charles married camilla when he wanted to, they would probably have had 4 or 5 kids, and been bored to tears with each other by now, and Diana?..Well we would have never known about her, and she would probably have had a happy life married to someone SHE chose.


Too bad Shakespeare is not still around.. it would make an interesting play :)

:D

Again, my point is completely lost.

Fuck it.

and woman striving to please them. O boy!!

:rofl: