Diana/Charles/Camilla's Relationships Part 2


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Skydragon said:
Then why do you support a woman, who betrayed her husband many times. Who gave no thought to the partners and wives she put through hell by pursuing their men. Who caused her sons such humiliation by publishing a spite based book about their father, grandparents and other relations.

Margaret answered for nothing, she was ill, she had the best possible treatments and died in comfort with her family around her. Where is the punishment in that?

Sinning is merely a concept dreamt up by the church to control the masses.

Take the church out of the concept then. There is right and there is wrong, plain and simple. Diana did wrong, but she should not be bashed more than others who are Royal by birth. Being Royal doesn't erase your wrongdoing. Seems only Her Majesty really seems to grasp that concept.
 
Lady Marmalade said:
The same works in the U.S. Don't assume to always understand our culture based on the constant attention we get in the news. ;)

It is not represent by Sex and the City, Friends, CSI, Law and Order, ER, Lost, Desperate Housewives etc....just examples of American shows shown around the world which may cloud the picture of who we are...

But we are not talking about your royalty, so what would it have to do with the protocols within our upper class?

I can't say I have ever watched any of the programmes you mention.
 
Skydragon said:
But we are not talking about your royalty, so what would it have to do with the protocols within our upper class?

I can't say I have ever watched any of the programmes you mention.

We do not have royalty in our country. Check your facts before you post. ;)
 
tiaraprin said:
Take the church out of the concept then. There is right and there is wrong, plain and simple. Diana did wrong, but she should not be bashed more than others who are Royal by birth. Being Royal doesn't erase your wrongdoing. Seems only Her Majesty really seems to grasp that concept.

I see it as wrong that Diana wanted to hang on to a man who didn't love her and whom she didn't love, for whatever reason. That if she was being caused so much pain by Charles and Camilla, why she would knowingly cause that pain to a number of other women and their children.
Princess Margaret and Prince Philip have been discrete, they havn't set out to cause pain or encourage people to take sides.
 
Skydragon said:
Princess Margaret and Prince Philip have been discrete, they havn't set out to cause pain or encourage people to take sides.

Discretion still does not excuse what is right and what is wrong. If you are married, you are married. You do not commit adultery.
 
Oh my, this conversation has gotten all heated very quickly. I'd like to respond to some things but I've got to run to class. Maybe its better to take a breather? I'd hate to see the thread closed.
 
Lady Marmalade said:
First of all, I was talking respectfully to Sam, and he understood that. Don't get all defensive on here with me and don't start with me either.

I am 32 by the way...just to let you know, so yes I remember very clearly..

Memories of a 13 year old are not likely to be accurate. Threats of 'don't start with me' are hardly friendly overtures are they. You made a point about Sams age, I merely made a point about your youth.
 
Skydragon said:
Precisely what I mean

There is no point. You were wrong, we do not have royalty in the U.S., but we do have a very established upper class of aristocratic and old-money families.
 
Skydragon said:
Memories of a 13 year old are not likely to be accurate. Threats of 'don't start with me' are hardly friendly overtures are they. You made a point about Sams age, I merely made a point about your youth.

I was older than that...much as I hate to admit it.. ;)

Sam and I were respecting each other on here and there was not need for you to jump in...
 
Lady Marmalade said:
There is no point. You were wrong, we do not have royalty in the U.S., but we do have a very established upper class of aristocratic and old-money families.

The point is we are talking about our royal family, our aristocracy, our upper class protocols, therefore the American system is irrelevant.
Everyone knows that the Americans do NOT have a monarchy.
 
Skydragon said:
It seems that it is only the remaining Diana fans, that give her any thought. I don't sit here thinking about Diana every moment of my day. I, like very many people don't see Camilla and think Diana.
She was IMO a very flawed individual best consigned to the history books.

I'm by no means a fan of Diana, but I certainly think about her when thinking about recent British royal events. It's rather hard not to, if you want to see the whole picture.

Clearly she's destined for a place in the history books, along with Charles, Camilla, and all the rest of them in due course. Being in the history books is a much better place for an ex-royal to be than being written out of them, after all!
 
Skydragon said:
The point is we are talking about our royal family, our aristocracy, our upper class protocols, therefore the American system is irrelevant.
Everyone knows that the Americans do NOT have a monarchy.

Actually, you brought up the American system, I was just responding back to it.

Then why did you type that we did have one? ;)
 
Lady Marmalade said:
Sam and I were respecting each other on here and there was not need for you to jump in...

I must have misunderstood that this was a forum, that the whole point is that anyone can put their point across.
I read your post as 'putting down' Sam because he is younger than you. I just pointed out your relative youth to some of the others on here.
 
Skydragon said:
I must have misunderstood that this was a forum, that the whole point is that anyone can put their point across.
I read your post as 'putting down' Sam because he is younger than you. I just pointed out your relative youth to some of the others on here.

Not at all...go back and read Sam's response to me.

I enjoy the posts on here, agreeing or disagreeing with mine. That is what makes it interesting and fun and educational.

But if you think I am going to let anyone bash my country in anyway, shape or form, subtle or direct, then guess again.

There is a fine line of disagreeing without insulting another person's country.. ;)

I respect Great Britain. I may not agree with everything they do, say, believe in, etc. but I will not show my personal feelings on here so openly towards my disagreements.
 
Lady Marmalade said:
Actually, you brought up the American system, I was just responding back to it.

Then why did you type that we did have one? ;)

Perhaps I should have put, America does not have a monarchy, we are talking about the British monarchy and Upper classes, therefore, the American class system is not relevent to the discussion IMO.
The class system in this country is unique to this country, as is the caste system in India, what would be acceptable to one, would not be acceptable in the other.
 
Well, I see this thread has turned into a transatlatic war zone.

Everybody please take a few deep breaths and calm down; this sniping really isn't helpful to the thread or its participants.

Now, if you all have nothing worth saying other than how much you hate either Diana or Camilla and how much you don't think other people's opinions are worth listening to, is there any reason for me not to close this thread immediately? We seem to have exhausted all of the productive things that could be said on this matter, and I see no particular reason to keep it open just so that people can indulge their prejudices.

Elspeth

Royal Forums administrator
 
Lady Marmalade said:
But if you think I am going to let anyone bash my country in anyway, shape or form, subtle or direct, then guess again.

There is a fine line of disagreeing without insulting another person's country.. ;)quote]

I really don't think you can accuse me of bashing your country but, every time you critisize Prince Charles, you are 'bashing' the UK.
 
I really don't think you can accuse me of bashing your country but, every time you critisize Prince Charles, you are 'bashing' the UK.

That is absolutely not true. If a person criticises Prince Charles, she's criticising Prince Charles, not the whole of the UK. If a person criticises President Bush, she's criticising President Bush, not the whole of the USA.
 
Last edited:
I agree with you Elspeth, close this thread. It is not productive in any way, shape or form. It has become a hotbed for expressing prejudice and hatred beyond the names on this thread.
 
Why should the thread be closed? I think there were a few over-reactions to comments. Otherwise people have posted decent opinions and I've enjoyed reading it.
 
Well, for one thing, people don't seem to be saying much that's different from what was said twenty pages ago. And for another, the last three pages or so have made thoroughly depressing reading. "You hate Diana!" "Well, you hate Camilla!" "Charles is a pointy-eared idiot!" "Bush is a pointy-headed moron!" "Anyway, you're American so your opinion doesn't count!" "You weren't there so your opinion doesn't count either!" "Americans don't understand what's going on!" "Well, we're better than you Brits any day!" Three bloody pages of it! I bow to your greater optimism and all that, but I must say I've been hard put to find very many opinions in the last couple of pages that I'd want to label "decent."
 
You're right Elspeth. Looking at it in that light - ditch the b*tch.
 
Well I just got back and wish Elspeth would not close the thread. I think its unfair when the many people who do respect each other have to pay for the sins of the few. I'd like to get the chance to respond to some interesting things here and I have no plans to bash anybody.
 
In that case, I'll duly appoint ysbel "saviour of the thread" and we'll see if she can perform a miracle.:)

Just so long as this everlasting sniping stops, that's all. This stuff gives me headaches.
 
una said:
But don't you think this would have happened anyway?

To a certain extent, yes, but we know far less about C&C's affair than we know of Diana's doings. IMHO its because C&C didn't really say anything past one comment in the BBC interview and their friends for the most part followed their lead. Diana's friends followed her lead and released everything.

una said:
IMO she wouldn't mind all this coming out, she wasn't a private person, and may even have been pleased to know people were still paying her attention- that she was still "a star".

I don't know about that. Some of the attention she didn't mind, but she definitely minded James Hewitt's first book release. I also think-and this is just speculation based on their personalities-that if she had lived, she would have had problems with William regarding her fame once he became an adult. William definitely doesn't like attention, yet anytime he was around her he was subjected to intense observation and speculation by the press. Her fame already caused a rift between her and her brother whom she was once very close to because he refused to let her come to his house to escape the press.

I don't think very highly of Charles Spencer but for once I cannot fault him for this. He had his own wife and children to think of and he had to take into account how the inevitable press presence at Althorp would have affected his own family. I'm sure it hurt Diana terribly as she would definitely be hurt if William distanced himself in any way from her to escape the scrutiny. But with her fame and the notoriety about her private life, my belief is that it would have been inevitable.

That's why I think she would have regretted releasing her private details.
 
I agree. I know...I have sounded like a b***h as well.. :)

So, getting back on topic again.

What are people's thoughts if Charles and Camilla had a child together?

It could happen. They are not too old in that respect.

I know to some it may seem far-fetched, but I have thought about it from time to time.
 
ysbel said:
To a certain extent, yes, but we know far less about C&C's affair than we know of Diana's doings. IMHO its because C&C didn't really say anything past one comment in the BBC interview and their friends for the most part followed their lead. Diana's friends followed her lead and released everything.

Very well put Ysbel.
 
Lady Marmalade said:
Maybe when Diana was younger her parents could have gotten her help for the emotional toll she went through regarding her parents' nasty divorce and custody battle.

But then, Charles could have also realized his bride WAS only 19 and did need support directly from him early on.

It sounds like a nice idea, Lady Marmalade, but it hardly ever happens like that. Diana's parents were involved in their own battles with each other, they probably had enough scars of their own to heal. Diana had the same problem with some of the things she did with her sons as her marriage fell apart.

I don't think Charles was able to give her the emotional support she needed. Men are not raised to give that all-encompassing support like women are; they don't have the emotional reserves themselves to give that much away and its an unfamiliar role for men to assume. The guys that appeared to give Diana the emotional support she needed at the time ended up using her (Hewitt, Burrell)

A few guys can give that kind of emotional support without taking advantage of people but they are very rare. When she was going through the bulimia and the post-partum depression, she needed an experienced professional and a peer group of women that had faced the same illness.
 
Elspeth said:
In that case, I'll duly appoint ysbel "saviour of the thread" and we'll see if she can perform a miracle.:)

Just so long as this everlasting sniping stops, that's all. This stuff gives me headaches.

Sorry Elspeth, next time I'll just have a G & T and calm down.:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom