If you are watching the coronation, are you team Camellia

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

I don't think the thread will be shut down for merely making a factual observation and comparison. If we call the King and Queen adulterers, I think it's fair game to also point out the flaws and shortcomings of other nation's leaders. Both statements are based in fact based on their own words or court proceedings.

I think it was perfectly legal to begin with. But given the objection, I reworded mine anyway to make it even more to the good side of the line.

 

[Jangles]

I think it was perfectly legal to begin with. But given the objection, I reworded mine anyway to make it even more to the good side of the line.

Some people just failed to read the room yesterday. I wish I had failed to read my newspaper this morning!

Many people don’t understand the monarchy’s role and the reverence and respect with which the monarch is generally held by the people of the U.K. and Commonwealth.

Being a republican (note small ‘r’) and an anti monarchist, is clearly a political stance! And yet …… the late Queen and King Charles III are somehow fair game.

 

[CdnCarrie]

Some people just failed to read the room yesterday. I wish I had failed to read my newspaper this morning!

Many people don’t understand the monarchy’s role and the reverence and respect with which the monarch is generally held by the people of the U.K. and Commonwealth.

Being a republican (note small ‘r’) and an anti monarchist, is clearly a political stance! And yet …… the late Queen and King Charles III are somehow fair game.

100% agree with you as a member of the Commonwealth

 

[BlueStarryHat]

They are both Head of States.

Yes, but for some reason the Mods here don't allow American polititians to be criticized or talked about. Anyway, it looks like I was wrong about the thread going under, *and* an old fuddy-duddy, so I apologize. I'm not usually a party pooper.

 

[Karin1984]

Yes, but for some reason the Mods here don't allow American polititians to be criticized or talked about. Anyway, it looks like I was wrong about the thread going under, *and* an old fuddy-duddy, so I apologize. I'm not usually a party pooper.

Kingdoms aren't considered politics. The other royal threads got closed because of bickering.

But we usually can go on for a long time before the bickering gets out of hand.

 

[Kennywood]

Ooooooooo....bickering!

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I don't think the thread will be shut down for merely making a factual observation and comparison. If we call the King and Queen adulterers, I think it's fair game to also point out the flaws and shortcomings of other nation's leaders. Both statements are based in fact based on their own words or court proceedings.

Court proceedings, hehe. It’s all about who’s in power and control as to which cases they choose to prosecute. Cause yes, you’re right - plenty of flaws and shortcomings to go around.

 

[ttintagel]

One thing which I haven't seen discussed here is that Charles and Camilla are more closely related than Charles and Diana were. Given that Charles's parents were both second and third cousins, which makes Charles's coefficient of consanguinity higher than if they had been first cousins, there may have been some fear over their marrying when young and producing more inbred heirs.

 

[TLSnell1981]

One thing which I haven't seen discussed here is that Charles and Camilla are more closely related than Charles and Diana were. Given that Charles's parents were both second and third cousins, which makes Charles's coefficient of consanguinity higher than if they had been first cousins, there may have been some fear over their marrying when young and producing more inbred heirs.

And? I am born and bred in the South. If you aren't first cousins....

 

[TLSnell1981]

Yes, but for some reason the Mods here don't allow American polititians to be criticized or talked about. Anyway, it looks like I was wrong about the thread going under, *and* an old fuddy-duddy, so I apologize. I'm not usually a party pooper.

Well... at least for some who are able to change posts... after the fact. Just sayin'

 

[Living42Day]

Never mind. Not going to engage in the bait.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

What? The case was held in an actual court, but was not prosecuted. It was a civil matter that was decided by jurors based on a preponderance of evidence.

Are you confusing this with another case? Also plenty of those to go around, in different jurisdictions. Rhetorical question, I don't plan on responding after this one because this is pretty off topic from the intent of the thread.

I was speaking generally.

 

[TLSnell1981]

I was speaking generally.

Sometimes it’s better to ignore….

 

[Living42Day]

Sometimes it’s better to ignore….

I was thinking the same thing. Probably shouldn't have taken the bait!

 

[MrsPete]

... I find it interesting people are so quick to pick up the mantle and say how awful it was they divorced but then say she was living her best life after she divorced. You can't have it both ways ...

Nah, I don't think Diana ever really "lived her best life":
- She was too young and naive to realize what she was getting into with Charles.
- When they divorced, she had to live with the difficulties she and Charles created for their sons, who were innocent in all of this. Sure, she lived a glamorous life, but I'm not sure she wouldn't have traded it to go back in time and marry someone else with whom she could've built a stable marriage /a stable foundation for her children.

... I think Charles just said yes at a certain time when the parents decided that Diana would be the best choice ...

Agree. He'd had numerous other girls suggested to him, and I think it was finally just time that he felt he had to say yes to one of them.

Why was is so necessary for Charles to marry and produce heirs? The Queen already had three spares available.

Good question.

... In the US we also consider 18 yr olds to be adults. It doesn’t mean much, necessarily, depending on their emotional growth, maturity and lots of other factors ...

Yeah, but -- in all honesty -- few 18 year olds are actually adults.

 

[Karin1984]

I was thinking about the Netflix show Alias Grace (based on the Margaret Atwood book). If you haven't seen it, and enjoy historical dramas, this is a good one.

Without spoiling the plot, at a certain point the main character discusses 2 women who had an abortion. It's set in the 1840s-1860s. One of the women died, the other survived and had some good things in her life happen to her. The main character claims how that is unfair, why should one die for her sin and the other be rewarded? That can't be right.

All three in the Diana/Charles/Camilla saga committed adultery, one died, the other two got rewarded.
I think some people have similar feelings as the main character in Alias Grace.

 

[tinkerbellandpeterpan]

Nah, I don't think Diana ever really "lived her best life":
- She was too young and naive to realize what she was getting into with Charles.
- When they divorced, she had to live with the difficulties she and Charles created for their sons, who were innocent in all of this. Sure, she lived a glamorous life, but I'm not sure she wouldn't have traded it to go back in time and marry someone else with whom she could've built a stable marriage /a stable foundation for her children.

Agree. He'd had numerous other girls suggested to him, and I think it was finally just time that he felt he had to say yes to one of them.

Good question.

Yeah, but -- in all honesty -- few 18 year olds are actually adults.

I wouldn’t want her life for anything. But a lot of people who say how awful life was with Charles sing the praises of her life post Charles. That was my only point.

She seemed quite pleased to live a life in the spotlight. I think she loved her sons and was well intentioned. But I take issue with sanctifying her while vilifying Charles. You (general) can’t cast her as the perennial victim and at the same time say she was so strong and independent. I think there were many casualties of that arranged marriage and it’s easy to pick one villain and one perfect “princess”. Life is rarely that black and white.

 

[Suger Mag]

I wouldn’t want her life for anything. But a lot of people who say how awful life was with Charles sing the praises of her life post Charles. That was my only point.

She seemed quite pleased to live a life in the spotlight. I think she loved her sons and was well intentioned. But I take issue with sanctifying her while vilifying Charles. You (general) can’t cast her as the perennial victim and at the same time say she was so strong and independent. I think there were many casualties of that arranged marriage and it’s easy to pick one villain and one perfect “princess”. Life is rarely that black and white.

Diana dying so young made her a tragic heroine, I wonder if she had lived a full life and was still alive today.... would she be regarded with the same fondness. Diana gets to have the same idolization that we reserve for other tragic troubled people who also died way too young like for example Marylin Monroe.

Full disclosure... I loved the Diana fairytale.... watched the wedding, bought into the hype. But I agree with another poster who also mentioned that looking at it all in hindsight now with 'adult' eyes.... it is different, def. not a fairytale I would want.

 

[Karin1984]

Wow that is drama! Keeping the monarch current and modern. Are most of the public being supportive?

Oh we have some drama today. Our 6th in line is participating in a tv show (part time royal, part time influencer). It's a show about photography and competiting against other celebrities to take 'the perfect picture'.

For one assignment she had to be photographed herself in a bathing suit. Which she did. She had a black one piece suit on (a little bit low cut, but nothing shocking), and now some people say 'oh my goodness, can she do that? She is a member of the royal family!'

So, that was the drama of the week in the Kingdom of the Netherlands

Back over to you, UK!

 

[Jangles]

Oh we have some drama today. Our 6th in line is participating in a tv show (part time royal, part time influencer). It's a show about photography and competiting against other celebrities to take 'the perfect picture'.

For one assignment she had to be photographed herself in a bathing suit. Which she did. She had a black one piece suit on (a little bit low cut, but nothing shocking), and now some people say 'oh my goodness, can she do that? She is a member of the royal family!'

So, that was the drama of the week in the Kingdom of the Netherlands

Back over to you, UK!

Have you been watching Queen Charlotte, the Bridgerton sequel?