Camilla snubs Brigitte Macron at D-Day Anniversary, rejecting her gesture of warmth

[TallerSally]

Well, isn't this a funny one.

Foreign heads of state are under no obligation to respect protocols of foreign royalty, particularly in their own country.

Seems Camilla didn't get the memo:

"Queen Camilla, 76, and Brigitte, 71, had an awkward moment on June 6 during a service marking the 80th anniversary of the D-Day Landings in Normandy, France. As seen in a video shared to X by the Daily Mail, French President Emmanuel Macron's wife tried to hold the royal's hand after they laid wreaths at the British Normandy Memorial at Ver-sur-Mer. However, Queen Camilla didn't reciprocate, keeping her arm at her side. After briefly grasping the royal's hand, Brigitte stepped to the side and folded her arms in front of her.
Proper etiquette around interacting with the British royals has long been a highly discussed subject. The royal family's website, which has yet to be updated in full following the death of Queen Elizabeth in September 2022, states, "There are no obligatory codes of behavior when meeting The Queen or a member of the royal family, but many people wish to observe the traditional forms."

Funnily enough, Charles himself didn't follow royal protocol:

"Proving that there are no hard and fast rules around how to say hello, King Charles, 75, greeted President Macron with a hug at the British Normandy Memorial and kissed his wife's hand."

I guess Camilla's more royal than the royals themselves?

https://people.com/queen-camilla-brigitte-macron-awkward-moment-royal-avoids-holding-hands-d-day-anniversary-event-france-8659266

@Wickedlywearynamechanged this whole thread was created to vilify Camilla.
At a very important and significant event, the final commemorations of DDay at which many veterans could attend. The liberation of Europe. There's a tiny bit of awkwardness and so Camilla gets slated.
Read the thread. Most people don't think it's an issue at all, and question why this is the focus for someone, rather than DDay?
She gets compared to Diana? It's such nonsense, of course it's going to be challenged by those of us to think that the premise of this thread is unpleasant and nasty.

@Wickedlywearynamechanged I never said anything about "wet dreams". That was another poster.

@Wickedlywearynamechanged · Today 03:56

And I find that one of the most tiresome things about responses on these threads is that critics of H & M (who are usually pretty well-informed) are always being scolded for criticising them. Or 'hating'.

It's rare for H & M fans to actually engage with points and arguments though. They usually just attack the critical posters instead, or pick out one the predictable re-railing phrases we all know off by heart.

I suspect this is because you can't defend the indefensible, and the only form of defence in these circumstances is to attack, however ridiculous and off-topic. The only other conclusion is that they're not capable of reasoned argument.

Quite.

@Wickedlywearynamechanged
“I don’t claim to love Diana. I feel she was a complex imperfect woman, BUT I also see she was treated very unfairly from the start when she was only a teenager and this continued for years. When she wouldn’t/couldn’t tolerate it she was made out to be ‘mad’. The victim was made out to be the perpetrator. (Gaslighting 101)”

Do you not think her family should have done more to protect this young woman instead of pushing her into what was essentially an arranged marriage ?
Not sure if the wives of the men Diana had affairs with saw her as the victim.

Do you not think her family should have done more to protect this young woman instead of pushing her into what was essentially an arranged marriage ?

A point I have made a few times now.

They could have stopped the bus when she rang the bell.

They didn’t.

I’ve had an arranged marriage as did my parents, siblings and my husband’s family. It’s for each individual family to protect their child. Diana’s family should have prepared and protected her. It wouldn’t have been for the RF to protect her when negotiating the marriage arrangements.

Indeed it wasn't, that was my phrase, and I stand by it. It sums up the constant, idiotic, feverish comments by Sussex supporters that Diana would have done it better. They always forget that she would never have been Queen because she ended her marriage with Charles by mutual agreement. So their imaginings aren't even grounded in any reality that could have happened had she lived. And meanwhile, they use this as a stick to beat a living, breathing 70-something woman who is carrying out a huge amount of public service at an age when the rest of us would like to be putting our feet up, and pretty much being the person holding it all together during a major health crisis for the RF. If my phrase is "nasty", @Wickedlywearynamechanged , what does that make you?

@BlueParrotRedParrot 👏👏👏The original post was spot on, too.

Also, another example, a poster who pasted and copied from a Meghan hating twitter post, changed a few words here and there; and presented it as her own opinion.

Like the one who copied something from celebitchy the other day?

I should imagine it goes on all the time. From all quarters.

As for ‘wet dreams’? Harry wrote worse in Spare.

Also ‘dogmatic’. I’m afraid it would be hard to change my opinion on those who have lied, alluded to some pretty hateful goings on, backtracked on them and have sought to hurt and damage the reputations of those they profess to love.

I don’t hate them. I should imagine the majority on here don’t hate them.

But I don’t see how folk are supposed to ignore all that and speak kindly of them or their actions either.

I don’t hate Charles or Camilla. I just don’t respect them. There is a difference.

And I don’t hate Meghan or Harry. I just don’t respect them. There is a difference.

geese and sauce and that.

Absolutely this. But apparently when people don’t think that the sun shines out of the Sussexes arses they are haters and it’s not allowed. Work that one out 🙄😆

I’m not sure I can smilesy

If you mean this latest wedding I thought he got straight out of a car and slipped into a side entrance?

I liked the "side entrance" thing though - presumably done to make absolutely sure it couldn't be made about him (and by extension Harry) rather than the couple

Edited to add I'm wrong about the car - seems it was indeed a minibus, but he did enter through a side door:

@mathanxiety equal? The UK and France? How dare you 😂

That's very true and apt. Hindsight too is a wonderful thing with all of this.

William knows when an event is not all about him.

The papers do not then. Articles whose only focus is that William is a serious statesman and diplomat after D Day event.

Maybe the press is just relieved that William spoke French, didn't spend time with known wanted conmen, and dressed appropriately around the veterans.

That doesn't negate what I said.

William knowing the event is not about him and the papers making it about him are two completely separate issues. Others choose to make engagements about themselves and the papers also make it about them. The papers always have a clear agenda of focussing on fashion/gossip. The key is not to play to the media and to be mindful of the people in attendance, so that their memories of the event are that they were respected and centred. The working royals do this very well, I think.

Depends how the media is being briefed.

Oh sorry of course. Mainstream media can't attend the DDay ceremonies and write its own reports on what happened and the people who attended, it has to wait to be 'briefed.' 🙄

'And make sure you're nice about William, 'kay? that's a nice newspaper you have there, be a shame if anything happened to it.'

I suspect some posters have no real idea of what the D Day ceremony was about and what happened there 😆

I suspect some posters have got no real idea about the British media, either.