The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1161  
Old 07-27-2008, 01:39 PM
Monika_'s Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
There are no winners, two young men were robbed of their mother and a woman was killed in the prime of her life. Charles and Camilla should thank their lucky stars that they are together, healthy, alive and happy.
Well said. I fail to see any levity here.
__________________

__________________
"If I had said some things about her before 1997, she could have responded to them but, since she is not here, it would be very unfair to make a comment about her." Dr Hasnat Khan
  #1162  
Old 07-27-2008, 01:50 PM
Monika_'s Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
Yes, you're right, but Diana decided that this was enough for her. Even at her age of 19 she must have realised that Charles was complicated. She must have realised that he brought a lot of emotional baggage with him, while not being free to purchase a lifestyle that could have helped him to overcome the baggage. So in a way she brought it up on herself - because she believed in dreams instead of evaluate realities. I agree her family should have helped her and I bet the Windsors counted on that because noone wanted that disaster.
So all the blame belongs on Diana's doorstep, I suppose. Hmmm... It's one thing to understand that a man is complicated, and quite another to realize that your husband may seek emotional support outside the marriage. Most sane people expect good times and bad in a marriage, but they expect to go through them side by side. But yes, shame on her for believing in dreams as it was never going to happen.
__________________

__________________
"If I had said some things about her before 1997, she could have responded to them but, since she is not here, it would be very unfair to make a comment about her." Dr Hasnat Khan
  #1163  
Old 07-27-2008, 02:11 PM
CasiraghiTrio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burbank, United States
Posts: 6,398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monika_ View Post
So all the blame belongs on Diana's doorstep, I suppose. Hmmm... It's one thing to understand that a man is complicated, and quite another to realize that your husband may seek emotional support outside the marriage. Most sane people expect good times and bad in a marriage, but they expect to go through them side by side. But yes, shame on her for believing in dreams as it was never going to happen.
I think Diana just kept pushing until Charles couldn't deal with her crap anymore. He seems to have given it a good try but a person can only take so much, you know? Dealing with people with emotional and psychological problems, over time, over and over again, day in day out, is exhausting.
And I think the family did a lot to try to help Diana! They got her doctors and meds, but in the end, the only person who could save Diana was Diana!!
  #1164  
Old 07-27-2008, 02:13 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,377
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monika_ View Post
So all the blame belongs on Diana's doorstep, I suppose.
Again you exaggerate. Why must you insist on seeing just good guys and bad guys? Good people can make bad decisions; people can go into a marriage fully expecting to stay in love with the person they marry and then find out that the person they married is nothing like they thought. Or the marriage is nothing like they thought.

So the dreams they had of sharing a life with this person can't come true even if they tried to share a life with this person because the person they thought they were sharing a life with doesn't exist.

And then they find someone who really is like the person that they thought they were sharing their life with; only its another person. This happened for both parties.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
  #1165  
Old 07-27-2008, 02:16 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monika_ View Post
So all the blame belongs on Diana's doorstep, I suppose. Hmmm... It's one thing to understand that a man is complicated, and quite another to realize that your husband may seek emotional support outside the marriage. Most sane people expect good times and bad in a marriage, but they expect to go through them side by side. But yes, shame on her for believing in dreams as it was never going to happen.
Well, we know that Charles hoped he could love her in time. She claimed to love him but when it came to bad times, she was more focussed on her own problems than on searching a way together with him. She could for example simply believed in him. She could have believed in him being at least gentleman enough to break it off with Camilla. She could have trusted him. But she didn't from the start. While he was really proud of her at first and believed in the possibility to make their marriage work. She was convinced it was doomed right from the start, I think. And acted accordingly.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #1166  
Old 07-27-2008, 02:44 PM
Monika_'s Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio View Post
I think Diana just kept pushing until Charles couldn't deal with her crap anymore. He seems to have given it a good try but a person can only take so much, you know? Dealing with people with emotional and psychological problems, over time, over and over again, day in day out, is exhausting.
And I think the family did a lot to try to help Diana! They got her doctors and meds, but in the end, the only person who could save Diana was Diana!!
Is this first-hand information?
__________________
"If I had said some things about her before 1997, she could have responded to them but, since she is not here, it would be very unfair to make a comment about her." Dr Hasnat Khan
  #1167  
Old 07-27-2008, 02:58 PM
Monika_'s Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel View Post
Again you exaggerate. Why must you insist on seeing just good guys and bad guys? Good people can make bad decisions; people can go into a marriage fully expecting to stay in love with the person they marry and then find out that the person they married is nothing like they thought. Or the marriage is nothing like they thought.

So the dreams they had of sharing a life with this person can't come true even if they tried to share a life with this person because the person they thought they were sharing a life with doesn't exist.

And then they find someone who really is like the person that they thought they were sharing their life with; only its another person. This happened for both parties.
I did not exaggerate; it was your statement that she brought it upon herself.
__________________
"If I had said some things about her before 1997, she could have responded to them but, since she is not here, it would be very unfair to make a comment about her." Dr Hasnat Khan
  #1168  
Old 07-27-2008, 03:09 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monika_ View Post
It's one thing to understand that a man is complicated, and quite another to realize that your husband may seek emotional support outside the marriage..
Do you have any evidence that Diana wasn't the first to seek emotional support outside the marriage, if by emotional support you mean sex, (the two don't necessarily go hand in hand). Were you perhaps in Diana's bedroom, the barracks?
  #1169  
Old 11-10-2008, 10:12 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 13,928
posted by milla Ca in the birthday thread:

Public support falls for Queen Camilla - Telegraph

not sure what kind of survey this is but I believe the majority of people in the uk would prefer "princess consort" to "queen", i am one of them.

not because i don't like camilla but because i find this whole title thing discriminating and unequal. for me, the monarch and the monarch only should be "king" or "queen", in any monarchy. i prefer the "prince consort" or "princess consort" title for the spouse, no matter if male or female. i like the fact that males are usually called "prince consort" and not "king" - a strong association to a monarch what in fact male consorts are not. as a consequence, i don't like female consorts to be called "queen", imo this should be the privilege of a female monarch only, like elizabeth II, and not the privilege of a female consort.

the "queen" title gets more and more commonerized in monarchies, it's almost like any woman from the street can get it these days. there should be distiction between the monarch and the consort, equally for men and women. if the male consorts can't be "king" the female consorts shouldn't be able to become "queen".
  #1170  
Old 11-10-2008, 03:31 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,219
I understand your argument but can't agree for the following reason:

A woman always takes the rank and titles of her husband. What you are suggesting is that a Queen Consort isn't able to share the rank and titles of her husband unlike everyother woman.

To make it equitable then we need to not only say this about Queens' Consort but about ALL women - no woman takes the title/s and rank of her husband so no more Princesses, Duchesses etc through marriage.

To limit is to the wife of one person is totally discriminatory and unfair.
  #1171  
Old 11-10-2008, 07:25 PM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,869
I am in complete agreement with you on this one Iluvbertie. I never cease to be amazed at the continuing flow of "reasons" and "reasoning" that have only one agenda.

I respect the honest views of those who do not wish to see Camilla crowned as Charles Queen. I loath convoluted bafflegab used by those less open in their opinion in an attempt to obfuscate the point.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
  #1172  
Old 11-10-2008, 09:27 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I understand your argument but can't agree for the following reason:

A woman always takes the rank and titles of her husband. What you are suggesting is that a Queen Consort isn't able to share the rank and titles of her husband unlike everyother woman.

To make it equitable then we need to not only say this about Queens' Consort but about ALL women - no woman takes the title/s and rank of her husband so no more Princesses, Duchesses etc through marriage.

To limit is to the wife of one person is totally discriminatory and unfair.
Really? Then how do you reconcile the BRF denying Wallis, Duchess of WIndsor, HRH?
  #1173  
Old 11-10-2008, 10:11 PM
banda_windsor's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter View Post
Really? Then how do you reconcile the BRF denying Wallis, Duchess of WIndsor, HRH?

I think it's a very different case with the DOW. She is the reason of King Edward to abdicate. The Royal Family never accept her as a member of the Royal Family. But the DOC, she's well accepted. QEII even bestowed upon her the Royal Family Order.

I agree to those who said that if Camilla can't be queen, it's unfair. She's already agree to not use her right to become the Princess of Wales in honor of Princess Diana memory. But Princess Diana was never use a title as a Queen of England. So I guess, it doesn't matter if Camilla use the title of Queen if Charles ascended the throne.
__________________
"The Hardest Thing to Govern, is the Heart"
  #1174  
Old 11-10-2008, 10:20 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter View Post
Really? Then how do you reconcile the BRF denying Wallis, Duchess of WIndsor, HRH?
I don't.

They were wrong, in my opinion.

Just because they were wrong is no reason to allow another discrimination to occur.
  #1175  
Old 11-10-2008, 10:37 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by banda_windsor View Post
I think it's a very different case with the DOW. She is the reason of King Edward to abdicate. The Royal Family never accept her as a member of the Royal Family. But the DOC, she's well accepted. QEII even bestowed upon her the Royal Family Order.

I agree to those who said that if Camilla can't be queen, it's unfair. She's already agree to not use her right to become the Princess of Wales in honor of Princess Diana memory. But Princess Diana was never use a title as a Queen of England. So I guess, it doesn't matter if Camilla use the title of Queen if Charles ascended the throne.

As for well accepted I refer you to http://www.telegraph.co.uk/newstopic...n-camilla.html

Dated today:' A daily telegraph/Yougov poll commissioned to mark the 60th birthday of the Prince this Friday showed that only 18% wanted the Duchess to become Queen. When the same question was asked on her 60th birthday in July 2007, the number was 28%. '

Scarily enough, George Bush has far better approval numbers.
  #1176  
Old 11-10-2008, 10:45 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,873
banda_windsor was talking about being accepted by the royal family. Which Camilla obviously has been. I wouldn't get too excited about these polls. People were demanding that Charles be shunted aside in favour of William after a previous poll found that more people wanted William to follow the Queen - but this poll shows that more people want Charles to be King now. I assume that if the same question is asked again at the time of William's engagement or some other popular event, the numbers will change again. It's a good thing nobody took fright at the "William must be the next monarch" polls and persuaded Charles to step out of the succession. Obviously a poll at the time of Camilla's birthday is going to give higher positive ratings than one coming just after all the publicity about her not accompanying Charles to Indonesia.
  #1177  
Old 11-10-2008, 11:26 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 2,382
I doubt Charles will settle for anything less than Camilla being Queen.
  #1178  
Old 11-10-2008, 11:31 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,873
Well, if they're going to have her be anything but Queen, they need to get moving as far as whatever laws need to be changed. It's not going to look good if she has to be demoted after the accession.
  #1179  
Old 11-11-2008, 03:36 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,587
I think QEII has a few more miles left in her. No need to hurry!
  #1180  
Old 11-11-2008, 04:08 PM
Menarue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cascais, Portugal
Posts: 2,155
There is only one title for Camilla when Prince Charles becomes King and that is Queen.
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
camilla, camilla parker bowles, duchess of cornwall, princess consort, queen consort, styles and titles


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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Victoria's Future Title? rop81 Crown Princess Victoria, Prince Daniel and Family 80 09-12-2021 08:00 PM
Will and should Camilla use the title of Queen when Charles becomes King? muriel The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 17 11-10-2011 10:20 AM
Crown Prince Hamzah relieved of his title: November 28, 2004 Amoula Current Events Archive 338 04-22-2005 09:28 AM




Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor asian birth britannia british british royal family buckingham palace camilla camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house commonwealth countries coronation crown jewels customs dresses duchess of sussex duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family tree fashion and style gemstones genetics george vi gradenigo harry and meghan henry viii highgrove history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs japan japanese imperial family japan history kensington palace king edward vii king juan carlos książ castle liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchy mongolia names pless politics portugal prince harry queen elizabeth ii queen victoria st edward sussex suthida thai royal family tradition unfinished portrait united states wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:01 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×