The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1141  
Old 08-15-2012, 05:42 PM
maryr0249's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Franklin, NC, United States
Posts: 66
I appreciate the reminder to get back on track. However, respectfully, I, for one, have not lost track of Charles and Camilla's marriage. There might be other places to learn about primogeniture, the declaration of war by various countries in the Commonwealth and the history of other royals' marriages, but here they relate directly to what we began talking about: the question of how and when Prince Charles and his wife and his Kingdom will decide what to call the legal Queen (settled) once he is King. It is sobering to think that knowing all these things about Parliamentary procedure, and knowing how many other people know the same things, the PoW website continues the farce. Or maybe they really don't know WTF they're doing. I just feel silly. But I have learned a lot.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1142  
Old 08-15-2012, 11:27 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,127
The fact that times have changed seems to have been missed by some people - in the 1930s a divorced person wasn't accepted at court and to get a divorce involved one party being proved to be 'at fault'.

These days it is recognised that marriages 'irretrievably break down' - that is what happened in the case of Charles and Diana - there was no way to repair the marriage but neither was one party more at fault than the other.

Camilla, since 2005 (which is the basis of this thread), has supported her husband and the family into which she married with grace and charm and has clearly been accepted by that family.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1143  
Old 08-16-2012, 12:26 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post

Camilla, since 2005 (which is the basis of this thread), has supported her husband and the family into which she married with grace and charm and has clearly been accepted by that family.
I agree 100% and it's on that basis that she should be Queen, not denied because of things that may or may not have occurred before her marriage into the Royal Family.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1144  
Old 08-16-2012, 03:52 AM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,161
I believe Wallis has been scapegoated by the British as well.....
Anyway back to post 2005, how many times has Camilla worn a tiara? Just trying to bring up something else to talk about. Also I wonder why Charles chose to give Camilla was of his grandmother's rings as an engagement ring?
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Reply With Quote
  #1145  
Old 08-16-2012, 08:10 AM
muriel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
The fact that times have changed seems to have been missed by some people - in the 1930s a divorced person wasn't accepted at court and to get a divorce involved one party being proved to be 'at fault'.

These days it is recognised that marriages 'irretrievably break down' - that is what happened in the case of Charles and Diana - there was no way to repair the marriage but neither was one party more at fault than the other.

Camilla, since 2005 (which is the basis of this thread), has supported her husband and the family into which she married with grace and charm and has clearly been accepted by that family.
I completely agree with IluvBertie. Britian has changed considerably since the 1930s, and social norms reflect the current state of play. Whilst divorce was rare at the time, we now live in a society where c25% of children are born out of wedlock. Like it or not, this is the reality of Britain (and most Western societies) today.

Charles and Camilla are not alone in Britain to have had affairs whist married, got divorced and subsequently remarried. This is largely acceptable across Britain today (and to the CoE), so I query why some find it unacceptable for the next King and Queen.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1146  
Old 08-16-2012, 08:22 AM
MARG's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 3,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
. . . . . Anyway back to post 2005, how many times has Camilla worn a tiara?
Not often enough! And oh how I would love to see the Delhi Durbar get another outing

Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
. . . . . Just trying to bring up something else to talk about. Also I wonder why Charles chose to give Camilla was of his grandmother's rings as an engagement ring?
Well, that ring is certainly a beauty and full of good memories but perhaps for no other reason than he thought it would suit her and that she would like it. And let's be honest . . . what's not to like?

The Royal Order of Sartorial Splendor: Flashback Friday: A Few of Camilla's Sparkliest Things

Like most engagement rings, I think it is a gift of love.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #1147  
Old 08-16-2012, 09:29 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 2,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post

Like most engagement rings, I think it is a gift of love.
I agree!
Regardless of what some may think of them, Charles and Camilla have loved one another for a long time, and he deeply loved his grandmother as well.

It doesn't surprise me that he wanted to give her a family ring that meant something to him, rather than having Garrard's call around with a tray and let her choose something for herself.
(I'm not faulting that; there's much to be said for picking out a ring you'd like to wear rather than having one wished on you).

But I do think it reflects Charles' attitude to his two marriages.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1148  
Old 08-16-2012, 10:20 AM
Nico's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 1,218
Just amazing, and kind of sad, that more than 7 years later after the marriage some people are still stuck with a so called C&C original sin and spend a lot of time and energy to persuade us that Camilla has to live with the word "whore" tattooed across her forehead. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion but the arguments seem now a little bit tired (and some comparisons with some events 76 years ago more than far-fetched). Forgiveness people, forgiveness ! Strong word i know, but taught by the Church as well ...
And if you can't stand the woman, which is your own right, you just can't deny that she has done a pretty good job since 2005 and that her increasing popularity, apparently still hard to swallow , is well deserved.
The marriage was not really a PC decision at that time but 7 years later it has proved to be a really wise one...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1149  
Old 08-16-2012, 10:27 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 848
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel
Charles and Camilla are not alone in Britain to have had affairs whist married, got divorced and subsequently remarried. This is largely acceptable across Britain today (and to the CoE), so I query why some find it unacceptable for the next King and Queen.
Agreed about adultery and infidelity becoming more acceptable worldwide, not just in Uk.

Why is anyone looking at any of these people as moral role models? It's the same for a lot of royals from years past-Napoleon was a narcissist; Edward (Victoria's son) was also a philanderer; the list goes on and on...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1150  
Old 08-16-2012, 10:30 AM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,097
Seriously folks...how much clearer must one be?

I've deleted a slew of posts from folks that are stuck in pre 2005 and will continue to do so.

Or do we need to close a thread so we can all take a breather?
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #1151  
Old 08-16-2012, 10:46 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Duisburg, Germany
Posts: 146
Maybe I just missed it, but I was pretty disapointed in the lack of C&C at the Olympics. This two always seem so happy around each other. It is heartwarming to see a couple their age actually wanting to be together instead of staying together for convinence.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1152  
Old 08-16-2012, 11:16 AM
maryr0249's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Franklin, NC, United States
Posts: 66
Otherwise, I love you folks who love Camilla, but I don't like the way she looks with a tiara, so have fun. I'll be thinking of the Marriage after 2005, hiking in Scotland.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1153  
Old 08-16-2012, 11:22 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by maryr0249 View Post
but I don't like the way she looks with a tiara.
It's the hair. There's just too much of it to suit a tiara. It's volume takes over and doesn't support a tiara as much as it does overshadow one when worn. Theres little equilibrium. Shorter hair would make a world of difference imo.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #1154  
Old 08-16-2012, 01:12 PM
SLV's Avatar
SLV SLV is offline
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 599
On the other hand, it also makes sure that those huge tiaras she has worn don't overwhealm everything else.
When seeing the pictures in the Sartorial-website, I was thinking that she had the perfect hair for them.
They would not suit Catherine or Sophie.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1155  
Old 08-16-2012, 01:16 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Duisburg, Germany
Posts: 146
I saw that too and I agreee. It certainly helps that with her hair, you don't see the base of any tiara.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1156  
Old 08-16-2012, 01:39 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 848
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLV
On the other hand, it also makes sure that those huge tiaras she has worn don't overwhealm everything else.
When seeing the pictures in the Sartorial-website, I was thinking that she had the perfect hair for them.
They would not suit Catherine or Sophie.
I think she looks okay with tiaras, but I wish her hair was a bit more 'tamed' and sleek. That's why I think Catherine and Sophie would look wonderful in them. Let's face it-anyone would look amazing with beautiful diamonds on top of their head :)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1157  
Old 08-16-2012, 03:25 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,161
The reason I asked about the engagement ring was because I have read that Charles' grandmother was against them ever getting married. Just seemed kind of strange to pick a ring belonging to someone who was against your marriage.
Oh wow I didn't know Camilla's family had a tiara.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Reply With Quote
  #1158  
Old 08-16-2012, 04:22 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
I don't think we'll ever know the Queen Mother's true feelings. Bear in mind that she allowed Charles and Camilla to use her Scottish residence and she was pretty indulgent of Charles' passions, whatever they might be. Maybe her opinions were in the stash Princess Margaret took care of? But a dead woman doesn't care where her jewellery ends up so once the rocks went from mother to daughter, I suppose it was the Queen's decision which bling the Duchess ended up with.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1159  
Old 08-16-2012, 05:44 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissJanet View Post
Maybe I just missed it, but I was pretty disapointed in the lack of C&C at the Olympics. This two always seem so happy around each other. It is heartwarming to see a couple their age actually wanting to be together instead of staying together for convinence.

I actually liked the fact that Charles went to the Mey Games instead - something he has done as a tribute to his grandmother since 2002 and that she did as well.

Rather than get caught up with the hype over the Olympics, and Charles did attend on the first day of competition as well as visited the military doing the security, he went to the traditional games - the organisers even expressed surprise that Charles did go to those games but appreciated the fact that he continued to value their games and traditions.

Camilla did attend quite a bit in the first week - as Patron of the British Equestrian Federation. She then joined her husband in Scotland (I assume) as neither of them did any engagements during the second week - only the second full week this year for Charles with nothing official to do.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1160  
Old 08-16-2012, 08:46 PM
Lindy's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico View Post
And if you can't stand the woman, which is your own right, you just can't deny that she has done a pretty good job since 2005 and that her increasing popularity, apparently still hard to swallow , is well deserved....
I am someone who can't stand Camilla. I think she is unattractive, rough around the edges, and lazy. I don't think she has done much with her role and she seems to keep her royal engagements to a minimum. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and that is mine.... lol
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
camilla, duchess of cornwall, marriage, prince charles, prince of wales


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth birthday bourbon-parma camilla charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events danish royals engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hohenzollern infanta elena king abdullah king abdullah ii king albert ii king carl xvi gustav king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander picture thread pom pregnancy prince albert prince albert ii prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince frederik prince henrik prince joachim prince laurent princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess haya princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess maxima queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia state visit wedding willem-alexander william


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:59 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]