Queen Camilla taking part in a documentary to highlight abuse of women

I didn't know Di was abused? I thought the news said she was aware and did nothing about the harrods guy as she wanted to date the son?

Queen Elizabeth II mother was also the wife of the King and hence was technically Queen Consort, ditto Mary, Alexandra etc etc. Have any of these ladies ever been referred to as Queen Consort? How on earth is it offensive to the late Queen to continue to refer to the King's wife as Queen?

I watched it last night. It was very good. Camilla came across really well, I thought.

I meant to add @WestwardHo1 , your point is valid re the rest of us of course. That is obvious - of course we are a mix of bad and good . But we are not heading a billion pound PR machine focused on keeping us ensconced in our luxury and above the law as the Windsors are .
Camilla’s rehabilitation also involved the smearing of Diana .

People have every right to be cynical about the royals and their ‘charity’

As recent revelations ( Dispatches the times/ channel 4 ) have reinforced . The truth about the rapacious greed of the Windsors bubbles up every so often and if you are talking about ‘frightening ‘ binary attitudes I’d point to dwindling band of royalists who will even play down Andrew and Epstein in their rush to defend the Windsors at all costs

Let the Windsors pay their taxes and donate even a fraction of their stolen wealth to charity - then I’ll listen to their ‘charity’

How can you know, unless you were a personal friend of course!

@Sylviacrystal

Could I also remind you that Diana had an affair with Oliver Hoare but he refused to leave his wife so Diana bombarded his wife with silent phone calls . More than 300 ! Calls were traced to Kensington Palace .
Do you call that abusive ?

@Sylviacrystal

“Diana was also wrong to have the affair with Will carling.”

Your words . We agree she was wrong but my question was , did she abuse Julia Carling and the other wives of the men she had affairs with ?

It's not deleted. It's still there on page 14 of this thread.

I have read the whole thread . Maybe your reply was deleted so please humour me and say whether you agree that Diana was abusive towards the wives of then men she had affairs with ?

You are incorrect.

If you read back, you will find that I did indeed answer this.

Ill even go back and find the page for you. It's on page 14 of this thread.

You have repeatedly said that Camilla abused Diana by having an affair with Charles so do you agree that Diana abused the wives of the married men she had affairs with ?
Have already asked you this but you seem strange reluctant to answer !

I don't think the view that a cheating man's affair partner is his wife's abuser has much traction in the mainstream. Its an extreme and controversial view that many disagree with even when the rationale is explained. Certainly I doubt it will occur to many watching the documentary, who will (hopefully) be too focused on the issues highlighted to be thinking too deeply about the transgressions of the Queen. And even if they do vaguely dislike her for being the OW I can't imagine many jumping to her being a hypocrite because she too is an abuser, and this somehow undermining the integrity of the documentary. So, all things considered, while I agree she is a divisive figure, i don't believe this causes a problem for the documentary and royal patronage of a cause is typically helpful.

I don’t see evidence of it being deeply divisive, except a few posters as is their right/perspective. And then there is the other one.

What I have seen is posters who’ve actually watched the programme, some of whom may have been victims, completely unbothered about her involvement. Seems it’s only an issue for people who dislike Camilla and the RF generally. Pages of this thread are about tittle tattle. I don’t care what people read in the daily mail and who is alleged to have done what and who is ‘manky. All unsubstantiated.

What are the government doing to highlight this issue? Any other groups with as large a reach picking up the baton? Those are the questions, not is she a smoker.

I just don't see evidence in the posts of undermining the seriousness of DV by pointing out that cheating is part of a spectrum of emotional abuse. although it is qualitatively different from actual physical violence. And there are plenty of voices out there stating that cheating is emotional abuse in itself.

For evidence we have primarily Diana's statements.....although a few posters on here seem to be trying to undermine these by portraying her as a slut. No there is no definitive evidence of what Camilla did or didn't do, and I am not disputing her sincerity. But the fact is that she is a deeply divisive figure like it or not, which is a problem if you are trying to keep the focus on this cause.

Just to say again.

Yes, I agree with you OP

Do you even realise what this thread is about.
Do you know what thread you're on?

This thread was started by the OP to point out how hypocritical it is for Camilla to do this documentary. It says that clearly in her opening post.

The OP wrote how hypocritical it is for Camilla to be doing this documentary on abuse, considering Camilla's own past of being an emotional abuser herself

I then greed with what the OP said

To say that me AGREEING with the OP is me "derailing the thread", doesn't make any sense in the slightest.

If your only counter to actual events is "Well I expect she didn't mean it", it's not a very convincing point, is it?

And if we're talking about "respect", you're calling her "Liz".

That’s not the point. Liz said Camilla would be Queen. It wasn’t a matter of liking her, it was a matter of fact.

Liz was a professional and toed the line. I doubt she cared much for the likes of Camilla.

Except the poster who has derailed the thread (in my view), is undermining the seriousness of DV by likening the emotional turmoil of an affair in the same category of emotional abuse such as coercive control and gaslighting. Not a single person on this thread can have evidence Camilla did that, and its that which is being used to judge her suitability.

The statements from that poster are clearly available on page 1 or 2.

Is every Queen (Consort) who followed a Queen (Regnant) an insult to the memory of the dead one?

Apparently QEII liked her. On their marriage she said her son was "home and dry with the woman he loved". She didn't sound particularly insulted.

Queen Elizabeth said a year before her death that Camilla would be Queen.

Your offence has no basis in reality.

OK to unpick this:

I am not sure it is true that the poster has derailed the thread. It is not about domestic violence per se; rather it is specifically about the suitability (or otherwise) of Camilla to host a documentary on this subject.

It was a provocative post from the OP who described herself as 'apoplectic'. In that context I don't see any derailment going on.

I don't see any correlation between disagreeing with Camilla hosting the doc, and that being proof that the poster doesn't give a shit about DV victims.

I didn't know there was a rule about how many times a poster may post.

It is past 8pm so the poster may well have a 'real job', I personally manage to fit posting around my day job.

They're definitely not a good example in any way.