Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

King Charles and Queen Camilla

381 replies

LoveInTokyo · 16/05/2018 07:36

AIBU to wonder why so many people seem to think this will not happen?

I can understand why a lot of people abroad seem to think it’s likely that Prince Charles will just hand over the crown straight to William because he’s younger and more popular. Most countries don’t have royal families, and in some European monarchies routine abdication is something that actually happens.

But I was reading some of the completely mental royal wedding threads on here and was surprised by the number of similar comments. I particularly enjoyed one Daily Express reader’s person’s comment about how the public would never accept Camilla as queen.

I don’t think most people give a shiny shit whether Camilla is Queen or not, but those that do have an issue with it will have to get used to the idea. Prince Charles didn’t have to give up his place in the line of succession when he married her, therefore unless the Queen outlives Charles, he will be king and Camilla will be queen!

OP posts:
ILikeMyChickenFried · 17/05/2018 15:17

A woman who he could have married if he had been prepared to stand up to any objections from the RF. His behaviour was normal for previous generations of royals-but this was in the 1970s.

At the time would such a marriage (had Camilla been up for it, which she apparently wasn't) not have meant Charles would have had to step out of the order of succession?

I'm sure that would've been more scandalous than him marrying Diana.

Battleax · 17/05/2018 15:36

Technically he COULD have married Camilla in the 70s. In the same way he could have joined the circus, abdicated his place in the succession or shacked up with a stripper.

Battleax · 17/05/2018 15:37

He’d have needed her to agree too, of course. He couldn’t compel her.

BertrandRussell · 17/05/2018 15:39

"It's. It a matter of forgiving Camilla or sanctifying Diana"
That was a typo-should have been "it's not a matter"....

BertrandRussell · 17/05/2018 15:42

Well, if he couldn't stand up to his family for the sake of the women he supposedly loved, he should have ended the relationship when he married. It really was unforgivable behaviour.

BertrandRussell · 17/05/2018 15:44

"At the time would such a marriage (had Camilla been up for it, which she apparently wasn't) not have meant Charles would have had to step out of the order of succession?"

Why? She wasn't a catholic or divorced.

raisedbyguineapigs · 17/05/2018 15:44

Why couldn't he marry Camilla? I thought he just faffed about so much she married someone else.

derxa · 17/05/2018 15:45

It really was unforgivable behaviour. Yes it was appalling. And Camilla remained in the background pulling the strings.

Battleax · 17/05/2018 15:45

He did end it when he married. Then they all slid into a mire of adultery within a few years, Diana included.

It really would have taken a bit more than “standing up to his family” as well. It was received wisdom then that high born Protestant virgin was de rigeur for the heir to the throne.

I didn’t have you down as a folksy Diana fanatic Bertrand.

Battleax · 17/05/2018 15:46

Why? She wasn't a catholic or divorced.

She had - horrors - “a past!”

BertrandRussell · 17/05/2018 15:48

"didn’t have you down as a folksy Diana fanatic Bertrand."

I'm not. I just find the Charles worship rather distasteful.

Battleax · 17/05/2018 15:49

It’s quite easy to take a middling position.

BertrandRussell · 17/05/2018 15:50

I don't think anyone really believes that he ended it when he married. I was an adult at the time and remember the speculation well.

Ontopofthesunset · 17/05/2018 15:57

Does anyone worship Charles or indeed any of them?

What I think is strange is that some people seem to expect them to be able to be respected or in any way admirable when in fact, given they've been born into a massively dysfunctional family (as it would have to be, given its status), lavished on the one side with money and adulation and on the other side constantly scrutinised and criticised, looked at through an enormously magnifying lense, it would be astonishing if any of them were at all normal.

I'm not an apologist for them at all, but I don't think the myth of kingship or monarchy stands up to the forensic interrogation of the 21st century.

Get rid of the lot of them, I say. I'm all for having no inherited monarchy at all.

BertrandRussell · 17/05/2018 16:04

Worship's the wrong word. But he seems to have a pretty active fan club on this thread!

derxa · 17/05/2018 16:08

I don't think anyone really believes that he ended it when he married. I was an adult at the time and remember the speculation well.
Good luck to them but don't let anyone pretend that they're angels. There's a coterie of ladies who are determined to drive the rehabilitation of Camilla and Charles. Penny Junor, Joanna Lumley, Jilly Cooper and Kathy Lette. Fawning doesn't begin to describe it.

Battleax · 17/05/2018 16:10

The thing is I can believe that Charles thought it was honourable conduct to stop the affair the day he got married, having continued it throughout the engagement. Similarly, I can believe that Diana somehow believed it was a love story despite it clearly being a highly chaperoned courtship of very few meetings culminating in an arranged marriage. There aren’t many people I’d believe either of those things of. It truly was a Greek tragedy.

Battleax · 17/05/2018 16:12

There's a coterie of ladies who are determined to drive the rehabilitation of Camilla and Charles. Penny Junor, Joanna Lumley, Jilly Cooper and Kathy Lette. Fawning doesn't begin to describe it.

Yes, that’s a strange collective of obsequious lady toffs, but he’s always attracted those, hasn’t he?

The truth truly does fall in the middle with this one, I think, and all the people determined to lionise one side or the other look a bit odd, or heavily invested.

WilyMinx · 17/05/2018 16:18

I don't have anything against Charles and Camilla really, but they're so boring. IMO, they just don't have the charisma of the the Queen, William and Kate or even George. I think sales of royal memorabilia will hit an all time low when they take the crown. Probably less tourists will visit London during any royal events and in general.

ILikeMyChickenFried · 17/05/2018 16:20

It's interesting that you think Kate and William have Charisma. I find them very bland, Kate is certainly attractive but so obedient to the Royal Family that she presents very little of herself to us commoners!

Saltcrust · 17/05/2018 16:31

Penny Junor [shudders]

Puzzledandpissedoff · 17/05/2018 16:31

I've sometimes wondered what would happen about foreign visits when/if Charles comes to the throne

I'd imagine another lengthy tour of the commonwealth nations is more or less expected, especially as he's been so keen to be taken on as their head. But considering Camilla bailed out after just a few days in Australia, how's that going to work with someone he expects to be called Queen?

BertrandRussell · 17/05/2018 16:48

I'm trying to imagine Will and Kate and Charisma in the same sentence. Tricky.

Downtheroadfirstonleft · 17/05/2018 16:53

I'm a republican and don't think the monarch should be head of the church.

This has been a fun thread though!

SenecaFalls · 17/05/2018 16:53

Yes, I am sure William and Kate are perfectly nice people but I don't think of them as having charisma. My idea of a royal who might have a bit of charisma would be Queen Maxima of the Netherlands.

Swipe left for the next trending thread