Princess Diana VS Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall

[mama21212]

The fight between these two ladies have been going on for a long time.
for me, I support for the person who still alive, so I support Camilla.
Who do you support? and why?

Interesting

Having read the backstory I don't feel I could support Camilla she was with Charles and her soon to be husband off and on then she was with Charles he went to do a tour? and she got married the same year to someone else

Diana was used quite frankly to provide an heir and a spare she did her thing Harry wasn't a girl and she said that devastated her marriage too! Can you imagine being Harry in that situation his mom explained to the world his fathers disappointment about his sex

I'm not sure I could support either tbh

Camilla's past actions during the affair with Prince Charles demonstrate a lack of honesty, integrity and respect.

Many in life have probably acted worse than Camilla and she does seem to be a good partner to Charles.

We are supposed to look up to our monarch and I don't think it is possible for me to have respect for Camilla as Queen Camilla or indeed Charles as King Charles. The more so as Charles will also be head of the Church of England.

I think the time for monarchy is past and that it should die with ER2.

I think I agree with your last sentence Snot (although I don't mind W&K), but then we'd have the likes of Boris or Corbyn as was, representing us as head of everything!🙈
I think it just shows how dysfunctional the concept of a RF can be and I don't feel it's appropriate that someone by accident of birth or marriage should have multiple residences, great wealth and privilege - and then lecture others without qualification on what they should do or not do!
Diana was a young, naive, mentally fragile girl, who was a completely unsuitable match for Charles. Charles should have been able to marry for love.
Camilla I rather like, as she was the only one not to air dirty laundry, but there was bad behaviour from all of them.
So I'm not team anyone-they were all deeply flawed humans.
I do very much respect HMQ for her lifelong commitment to her role and Anne for just getting on with it, but most of the rest of them are parodies of an outdated notion in my eyes.

@Snog

Camilla's past actions during the affair with Prince Charles demonstrate a lack of honesty, integrity and respect.

Many in life have probably acted worse than Camilla and she does seem to be a good partner to Charles.

We are supposed to look up to our monarch and I don't think it is possible for me to have respect for Camilla as Queen Camilla or indeed Charles as King Charles. The more so as Charles will also be head of the Church of England.

I think the time for monarchy is past and that it should die with ER2.

Given that we know Diana was also unfaithful would you have the same view had she not died and gone on to be Queen?

I think the whole sorry story shows that people should be allowed to marry who they like from the start, Charles & Camilla should’ve been allowed to marry and leave Diana out of it.

Diana was naïve, which wasn’t her fault, her and Charles was never going to be a happy ending.

Just sad that the monarchy continued controlling people’s marriages and hopefully a wake up all to them all to leave people to live their lives.

I think you may be in the wrong decade.

Given that we know Diana was also unfaithful would you have the same view had she not died and gone on to be Queen?

I think had they not split and Diana had gone on to be queen all infidelities would’ve been hushed up.

Camilla won’t be queen will she, she’ll be Consort or something similar.

@Skysblue

I think you may be in the wrong decade.

My time machine works! It’s 1992 and Charles and Eddie are back in the charts!

@Eaumyword

I think I agree with your last sentence Snot (although I don't mind W&K), but then we'd have the likes of Boris or Corbyn as was, representing us as head of everything!🙈 I think it just shows how dysfunctional the concept of a RF can be and I don't feel it's appropriate that someone by accident of birth or marriage should have multiple residences, great wealth and privilege - and then lecture others without qualification on what they should do or not do! Diana was a young, naive, mentally fragile girl, who was a completely unsuitable match for Charles. Charles should have been able to marry for love. Camilla I rather like, as she was the only one not to air dirty laundry, but there was bad behaviour from all of them. So I'm not team anyone-they were all deeply flawed humans. I do very much respect HMQ for her lifelong commitment to her role and Anne for just getting on with it, but most of the rest of them are parodies of an outdated notion in my eyes.

I agree with all this.

Also I think there's such a cultural gap between normal people and the Royal family that it's difficult to judge the relationships of one by the morals of the other. It is historically very normal for royals to have not-so-secret mistresses and whilst I am hugely sympathetic to Diana who was very young and very vulnerable, I would find it surprising if she really expected fidelity and romance.

Also I think it's fascinating to be interested in 'team Diana' vs 'team Camilla' when Diana died more than 20 years ago! I suppose the sense that Charles will be king soonish provokes a bit of 'what if', though.

The cliche 'dysfunctional family' has been brought out to describe the Royal Family for decades. I don't know how many generations people are thinking of, when they use the words, but several I think. True, there have been umpteen divorces, but then I think about my family and people I know and if I look at four generations of their and my families there are/were quite a few un-perfect things going on. How many families, through four generations, for instance, are wholly 'functional', (whatever that means)?

What was the question? Diana v Camilla? Haven't got time to write an answer to that at the moment.

Is there evidence that Charles wanted to marry Camilla and asked to, and was told no, or is that a story that people, maybe newspapers, have made up? He was a young man, busy with going to university and doing stints in the Navy and the Air Force.

What about the other mistresses? And Diana's belief (Mishcon letter) that Camilla was only a blind for his real intentions?

Plus the timelines of her lovers.

Thinking that it was one-v-one and that it was only on his side would be a significant level of support for the narrative of the revenge interview. Which was not untrue but also not the whole truth.

Also, the pitting of one woman against another is very much tabloid tactic, isn't it?

@WinnieTheW0rm

Also, the pitting of one woman against another is very much tabloid tactic, isn't it?

Oh God exactly.

Why blame the (cheating) husband or the archaic (patriarchal) establishment when you have two women who can be shouldered with all the vitriol?

Charles wanted to marry Camilla in the first place, but as I understand it he was told that she wasn't suitable (by Prince Philip I think), because she'd had previous boyfriends and Charles' bride should be a virgin. Charles was then sent off somewhere (Navy maybe or on a royal tour) and by the time he returned Camilla had married Andrew Parker-Bowles.

Due to the virgin thing Charles then needed to find someone who fit the bill and was also a member of the aristocracy - enter stage left Diana Spencer. She fit the bill, Charles was pressured to make a snap decision and the pressure was also on for him to marry and produce heirs and so he married Diana. Yes, she was used. She was young and aristocratic and was in the right place at the right time.

The relationship was doomed from the start, of course. Diana was ill-prepared and ill-suited for the role she was thrust into. She and Charles had nothing in common. And he had already met the woman he wanted to marry and although I think he tried to make a go of things with Diana, they were just too different and so he drifted back to Camilla, while Diana looked for someone more her own age and with whom she had stuff in common.

As for who I support - Diana has been dead for 24 years, which is an utter tragedy - but IMO Charles and Camilla should've been allowed to marry in the first place. Their relationship has stood the test of time and they clearly are the love of each other's lives. Camilla has had a huge amount of criticism, but she has never spoken out in her own defence, always maintaining a dignified silence, a good quality in a future queen consort.

can we just like both of them or does it have to be the childish twilight stuff. I like both Kate and Meghan too.

Camilla appears to be a good support to the younger royals, and from what I've read spends a lot of time with her own children and grandchildren.

She doesnt appear to court fame, she chooses good causes etc etc.

Not saying any of this as comparison into Diana as I dont like that. Just as a stand alone opinion.

Personally I think there were faults on all sides. And much of the truth really unknown. I also think that The royal approach to marriage and divorce in those days was part of the problem.

Diana was only 19 when she married it was so so very young. Had she been a decade older, I suspect much of this would never have occurrred.

This was basically an arranged marriage, Charles and her had met about three times before the wedding was decided. This was never a love match.

Diana is Dead. Why is it a competition between the two of them?

The whole thing was a mess.
Unsuited people being " matched" by their elders. Charles giving in to pressure.
Diana was so young and naive. Her home life was unhappy. She wanted a happy ever after.
Camilla had made a choice.A-PB.
Her first husband was supposedly unfaithful. Which would make most people unhappy in a marriage.
Though the English upper classes appear to have a different take on this. It doesn't appear to be a big deal.
It was most unkind to Diana to resume the relationship with Charles. The marriage didn't stand a chance.

So much for the vow of "....forsaking all others." 🙄

I’ve actually met Camilla a few times and she is really really lovely. I felt she was actually taking interest in what we were saying rather than just nodding and smiling along.

Did you live through it? I did. There was so much pressure on Charles, from the press, as well as from everywhere else. I mean before Diana - any girl he looked at.

People say that the RF doesn't learn, but I think it does, at least in some respects. I don't think anyone insisted that W or H married virgins, or Edward or Andrew.

Now Prince Philip is dead he can be blamed for even more things than he was in his lifetime. Somewhere I have heard/read that he didn't so much push Charles into marrying Diana, but told him to make up his mind either to give her up or to get engaged, as she was getting so much press pursuit, but I wasn't there so I don't KNOW.

........and I don't think the English lower classes are all that good at the 'forsaking all others' bit, nor the English middle classes, except that loads of them don't get married anyway so they haven't made any vows that can be broken.

What about the other mistresses? And Diana's belief (Mishcon letter) that Camilla was only a blind for his real intentions?

This.

Also, I had no idea Clarence House were mumsnetters. Welcome, Clarence House.

Charles wanted to marry Camilla in the first place, but as I understand it he was told that she wasn't suitable (by Prince Philip I think), because she'd had previous boyfriends and Charles' bride should be a virgin. Charles was then sent off somewhere (Navy maybe or on a royal tour) and by the time he returned Camilla had married Andrew Parker-Bowles.

That was the problem wasn't it really — most of Charles's circle and age group had had relationships by the time he was in his late 20s/early 30s. So they ended up with the age gap (not that age gaps can't work, but I think he'd have been better with somebody from his own group).