Can't help thinking King Charles is selfish

[Eieiom]

Standing back, looking at the Harry situation, I can't help thinking that Charles is the root of all the family toxicity.

He had an affair while married to Diana, which led to their divorce and much unhappiness on her side. After her early death, his children were obviously in a lot of pain. The remote parenting style of the RF probably did little to soften this.
He's managed to marry his affair partner and now he's cutting off one of his sons.
Harry just looks like a really hurt person acting out to me. In most families, they would just be tolerated and forgiven.
I think the RF look very cold.

Palace Confidential are suggesting that Charles couldn’t meet with Harry because it would have given Harry and Meghan’s faux royal tour to Nigeria the look of a seal of approval of the trip. The Royal family cannot afford to give that impression when they have no control over what happens, or is said, on that trip so best not to have the two events so close together.

Very respectfully, I think the point is a broader one than that.

I think the late Queen’s funeral was appropriate given her long reign.

I favour a republic but even putting that aside, the Coronation felt too much; too opulent, too old fashioned, too hide-bound in ancient tradition that no longer resonates with the population today. Particularly given the grandeur of the Queen’s funeral not long before.

For example, it may be extremely interesting historically speaking but the glove of Antioch or whatever it was in 2023? Along with six other relics? Really?

And I just don’t think it was appropriate for the King and Queen to be riding around in a gold “Disney” carriage, wearing Crowns with jewels, some of which have been looted from other countries , given that 280,000 people are homeless in the UK today, 2.99 million people use a food bank and according to the H of L library, “4.3 million children (30% of all UK children) live in poverty” in 2022/23, “up from 3.6 million in 2010/11”. And guess what, 69% of those children are from working families!

At some points you have to look up and look around and read the room!

Other European countries manage to pass on the Crown at a church service, with a handshake, with the participants wearing suits.

To me the tone of Charles’s Coronation simply struck the wrong note.

When you look back at the recording of the investiture of Charles as Prince of Wales back in 1969, it took place on a modern dais within the ruins of Caernarfon Castle and it was a simple ceremony choreographed by Anthony Armstrong Jones if I recall correctly. It involved just two people and was far from opulent but still visually arresting. They could have designed the Coronation that way and given the money they saved to construct a children’s park l, an arboretum, or hospital or similar?

Actually, two things are interesting about that ceremony. One being that it was totally made up proving it is possible to go
outside of tradition, and two that they skipped it for Prince William, probably to avoid stoking Welsh nationalist fervour.

All of which means the Royals basically do what they like and so called “tradition” is eminently adaptable and the Coronation could therefore have been more attuned to suit modern sensibilities if that is what they wanted.

Maybe they got away with it this time, but I think we are fast approaching an era when a little more humility and sensitivity will become appropriate if the momarchy wishes to survive. If you insist on having a monarch, what else is a King or Queen there for, if not to serve the people, and that involves understanding and acknowledging their current struggles and behaving appropriately in response to them?

The thing is I liked the link to previous times, the glove of Antioch and the 5th C Bible.
It's about our history as a nation and not the individual.

Absolutely, I am in awe of the historical continuity related to those objects. But I think they should be confined to a museum and not form part of our modern day “liturgy”.

Our country is constantly looking backwards and imho is hidebound by privilege and favour embedded at the heart of the establishment.

What do these opulent symbols represent? Shouldn’t we as a nation be striving for more equality and making it easier for young people to succeed on merit alone?

And I just don’t think it was appropriate for the King and Queen to be riding around in a gold “Disney” carriage, wearing Crowns with jewels, some of which have been looted from other countries

Those things cost nothing, we already have them. It’s not as if someone went out and bought them specially for the occasion. The biggest cost of the coronation was the security. As a monarchist I love the tradition and pomp of state occasions and would be really pissed off if we lost them.

It doesn’t matter whether we already had them. It’s what they represent that matters.

There have been countless posts on MN over the years advising people to go NC with various family members, including toxic offspring. I know if Harry was a family member, behaving as he does, I would feel very stressed being around him.

They represent our history and our heritage. And if it’s what they represent rather than their monetary value, why throw homelessness and poverty into the equation?

Tell me, is it not cold to go on TV and tell the world lies about your father and trash his wife? A millionaire of nearly 40 moaning that daddy cut him off (a lie)?

I think he let them wake up naturally before he told them and took the TV and radios out their rooms while they slept.
Poor Charles and poor young H&W what a terrible thing to have to tell your children

👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

I think Camilla is the fly in the ointment. Charles always made it clear she was 'non negotiable'. Why would Harry get along with the women who made his mums life a misery.

Lovely to see him back in Uk he's such a breath of fresh air compared to the other stuffy lot.

But Perdita wasn't a second mate for Pongo. Mrs Dearly found her collapsed on the road in rain, got out to put her in the car and saw she was in milk, so brought her back to help feed Missis' fifteen puppies. When they washed her they found she was a liver-spotted Dalmatian. At the end of the story it turned out her pups were the ones who pulled Cadpig along in the toy cart, and she was reunited with them and with Prince, who was the "hundred and oneth dalmatian" of the last chapter.

This. I you watch them get married, it's obvious he has zero interest in Diana as a person. As soon as they were engaged he buggered off abroad and didn't contact her. It was a business contract as far as he was concerned.

He accuses his parents of being cold and I'm sure he is right but he is the same. he treated Diana as a commodity and when he broke her, he didn't care.

Diana had faults too, massive ones but had she married a man that loved her, I suspect they would have faded away to a large degree. When, on her honeymoon, she realised he was still warm from Camilla's bed and overheard him telling her no matter what happened, he would always love her (C), I think she did well under those circumstances. I think she should have called for a 'taxi' to get her off the boat, flown home and called time on it then and there. It would have caused a worldwide scandal but it would have been better than what then opened up for her.

There are rumours the main one being Barbra Streisand. I should have put affair rather than affairs as it's only Camilla he has confirmed.

But the nonsensical and expensive charade would be over.

Also, remember Diana was so young - just 19 years old, I beleive while Charles was in his 30s. What a creep.

He used to cycle between married women, so when Camilla was pregnant by Andrew PB he'd shag someone else. I can't remember the name of the woman. I think this was before he was married though.

But he didn't want to marry her. Why not call the the Queen a creep for pushing him into that marriage?

I love British History too. It's amazing but it shouldn't hinder how we behave in the future. We should learn from it. Having a royal family in this day and age is ridiculous. Especially one with so much power. If the Queen can manage to change the law to exempt her estate from inheritance tax then what else are they up to.

As @Hairychops77892 said
At some points you have to look up and look around and read the room!

I didn't get why they aren't embarrassed to stand around with crowns on. I always wonder what they tell their kids.

I actually hate the pomp and pageantry. I think it actually makes us a laughing stock when everything else about our country is so shit and when Brits bang on about how good we are at it. I’d much rather we had great hospitals, schools and public transport infrastructure and fewer people having to use food banks.

I’d rather we had all those things. We don’t need to get rid of the former to have the latter.

And I’ll one hundred percent guarantee that if we got rid of the RF none of those things would improve, absolutely none of them. We are a country whose politicians don’t care about us, that is the real problem.

@DramaLlamaBangBang You mean literally, he was on a bike cycling round married women's houses? I am just picturing Charlie in his cycling gear

Agree. Chas was 32. It could never have worked and it is creepy. I think if D had a 'full spectrum' upbringing instead of the dysfunctional shitshow she had no choice but to navigate, she would have laughed in his face when he proposed.

Having said that, I suspect she thought she could change him but as you say, she was only nineteen and functionally, probably only about 15 psychologically, so not worldly wise enough to realise that he was already set in his ways. I suspect he changed absolutely nothing about himself when he married Diana. It certainly looked that way to me.