Why is the Queen commenting on the Roald Dahl controversy?

[OutofEverything]

I thought the Royal Family were supposed to be uncontroversial and unpolitical, so why is the Queen getting involved in this? It is nothing to do with her, she did not have to say anything?

Or have the rules changed and they are now going to be more controversial and political?

So much of the crap posted about Camilla is based on the hysteria around the cult of Diana. She died over 25 years ago. If she were alive today it wouldn't make a jot of difference to Camilla being Queen.

I think that Harry and William were right on this point. Charles didn't have to marry her after the difficult backstory involving their mother. He could have simply lived with her as her partner (as some European monarchs probably do). They didn't even have to go official or do joint engagements. Nobody was expecting it or looking forward to seeing them together (apart from the tabloids).

Did Charles not initially want to marry Camilla but was stopped by his parents?

No - it never got that far because Camilla didn't want to marry him. She was in love with Andrew Parker-Bowles.

Was a bizarre take on things. They're entitled to personal relationships. It's none of your business.

Nobody was expecting it or looking forward to seeing them together (apart from the tabloids).
I don't think most people care at all. I don't have much of an opinion but I certainly don't object to then being married. It's nice that two people who have been in love for decades married. And it's no big deal at all that Camilla is Queen.

The queen was produced to make a statement that she wanted Camilla accepted as queen consort

It happened and must have been deemed necessary to get the queen to weigh in on something that people are now claiming was simply routine .
It wasn't .

Even the 'royals' know the Charles Camilla situation needs careful management.
The question is why was it necessary for the queen to do this - if as you say, there is no issue with Camilla

Clearly there is a huge issue .

They all lie. And the fools who don't want to see praise the emperor's clothes

'Camilla will be known as princess - a lie
Camilla will never be crowned - a lie
It will be a scaled down con- a - nation- a lie '

@PlaitBilledDuckyPuss
Yep

The 'star crossed lovers' angle was a PR wheeze . Another re writing of history

Charles could have married her if he'd wanted . He had several others on the go at the time .
Camilla wanted PB.

Are you a toddler? Never been to school?

😂😂 I love this.

Why on earth shouldn’t the King have married the woman he loved? He didn’t want her to be a dirty little secret tucked away out of view. He’s proud of her and wants her to share every aspect of his life. What a horrible Victorian misogynist view @Plitvice.

Clearly there is a huge issue
Yep, a huge issue with weirdos obsessed with Diana who think her Blessedness means Camilla should never be Queen. So yes it was all PR managed as a sop to a militant minority. I find that funny more than sinister.

And lots and lots of people, probably including QEII herself, have changed their minds over the years. Which is all very normal as well.

Every time the term con-a-nation is used, the opinions of the user appear less credible.

Which European monarchs live with a partner to whom they are not legally married?

I find it best to skim that poster’s posts. It must be absolutely exhausting being such a rabid republican.

No it's fun and interesting

That is hardly fair. He wasn't prioritizing the feelings and wishes of his sons whose lives he had actively fucked up in collaboration with Camilla. He owed it to them. He wanted to marry his mistress but he could easily not have done it if it hurt them.
How does misogyny come into it? She chose to sleep with him on her own terms in those circumstances. Isn't that a proper feminist statement or must it always come with the expectation of a traditional prize of marriage at the end?

Why should he prioritise his adult sons over the woman he loved? He owed them being a loving parent which he seems to have been. Misogyny comes into it because you think she should have been hidden away and not been legally recognised as his life partner. Every nasty thing you post about Camilla reeks of misogyny.

The King of Spain was living full time with his mistress for years as an established couple instead of living with Queen Sofia. I'm sure he is not the only one.

I mean, that's rather the ERI"I's fault isn't it? The timing I mean. Unless you're claiming KC of QCC were implicated in the timing of her death

I never said anything about her being "hidden away". Those are your words. They should have carried on as they were, not got married. It is almost as though they got married so that Camilla would not go down in the history books as the longest serving Royal mistress. She could have been cool and owned her behaviour.

So that's what you recommend? Instead of making the woman he loves his wife and queen, Charles should hide her away, as though she were an illicit 'mistress' rather than his partner?

@OutofEverything It's only been dropped by some in the media. You don't have to mindlessly follow. She is NOT the Queen and she never will be! She is Queen-Consort.
I will never, ever, ever use the stand alone term 'Queen' for her. Never. And I wish people would stop indulging it.

In fact, really, it should be King-Consort. Because Camilla is the Consort of the King. She isn't a Consort to the Queen. So the term makes no sense to me, but I'd rather Camilla Consort or even Queen-Consort. But never will I ever in a million years in 10 life times ever use the stand alone 'Queen' for her. I find it deeply offensive considering who it is, but worse is they went back on promising she wouldn't even be called Queen Consort. Now some are using Queen. Nope, sorry, to f with that.

Because she’s as entitled to an opinion as anyone else.

I never used the words "hiding away", Blossom did so you need to ask her what she means by it. What she was existed in fact, putting a ring on it wasn't going to erase the past hurt the caused together.

Unbelievable, isn’t it? There’s no valid comparison with the King of Spain who had a living wife. The King had been a widower for eight years by the time he married again.