Royal row between King Charles and Earl Spencer 2

[Viviennemary]

Buckingham Palace have said they won't be commenting further on the book. But I expect plenty of others will be and it's not even published yet so I started this second thread. I really liked Diana and thought she got treated shabbily by Charles. But really writing a book of gripes 30 years later is not on imho. I noticed on the news Harry declined to comment on it. Sensible decision for once.

I see you didn't answer my question 😂

I have explained it all, several times.

If you think it's crazy that Diana may have had a virginity test.

Do you also think it's crazy, as alleged from various accounts, that the Royal Family apparently insisted on Charles marrying a virgin.

It's hard to believe that was still going on in 1981

No. He did it for money, media attention, and to keep the fires of his victimhood burning.

No you haven't.

Can you clarify. Are you saying that virginity tests don't happen in the UK?

No one is saying that these tests are medically accurate. they check for a hymen which can be broken by other things. They do happen to people though

Well recollections and assumptions can vary....

Was that poster talking about the U.K.? ( i wasn’t discussing it at all !)
well let’s think a moment 🤔 …..it was in reference to Diana , yes?
was Diana in the U.K. during the supposed timeline?
or are you suggesting that due to the fact that these examinations are no longer carried out in the U.K. , the rf had Diana shipped of to Afghanistan for the procedure?

Indeed. I've read Spare - Harry's recollections are certainly interesting! 🤣🤣

That's quite a crazy jump!

Why would I suggest that Diana was shipped off to Afghanistan, seeing as I've said that virginity tests also have happened in the U.K

I can only use personal experience. My sister and I, decades later, had very different views about family history and family members. She was surprised when I revealed some things which she was unaware of due to being younger - and not as aware emotionally because she was a child when I was an adolescent. She keeps to her narrative despite my telling her things and I’d guess (notice I don’t claim to actually know) that may be what happened with the princes.

If I were a psychologist I’d expect H to have a more idealistic view of his mum and W to see her more realistically.

And the media at the time reported that Diana underwent a virginity test. The palace did not deny it.

Back up your assertion that we “all keep bringing up Meghan “.

This is a stupid comment.

Who is bringing up Meghan?

Who indeed? I haven’t seen any posts mentioning her.

This poster has little regard for truth!

So Diana had a virginity test!?

I’m not really into the whole visiting graves idea. Both my parents are cremated and don’t have graves. It doesn’t mean there weren’t loved or that we remember them any less.

I agree.

Grieving is a personal thing. I was pushed into viewing my father’s body before his funeral and it was incredibley upsetting. He looked nothing like he did in life.

I was told I’d regret not doing it - despite telling people I wanted to remember him as he was.

Grief is interesting.

When my father died, I didn't feel any sadness.

Then I had to get into long discussions about my fathers funeral, will and inheritance and I began to feel, sadder and sadder. It's like people were telling me he was dead and it was really sad, when I actually felt like he still existed somehwhere.

I work with teenagers now and one of the teenagers dads died by suicide. I went to talk to her on the day. She said that she was fine, he was in a better place and she had a lot to still do in her own life which would make him proud

The staff were asked to check in on her every day, and I noticed after a week of people constantly talking to her about her fathers death, she was much sadder and in a worse place

You are joking aren't you?

Who's that to?

Well, if commemorating the dead through statues or memorials isn’t needed - and I accept that some people simply don’t feel they require memorialisation as such then let’s have the QEII memorial, with a provisional construction budget of £23–46 million, paid for by the Windsors, or at least through public subscription, rather than by the taxpayer. If they want royal vanity projects, they should pay for them themselves, and let’s keep public money where it belongs: on public services.

Meghan mentioned on this very thread. There are various other posters mentioning her. And yet some claim nobody has mentioned Meghan. The sheer audacity!

@foxylady2 quite 12.11 post

I think the royals should pay for this. The Spencers rightly paid for the Diana memorial on the althorp estate. The other Diana memorial, the water feature, was paid for by public subscription.

They won’t, of course that’s a given. The Windsors and others before them have a history of tightness going back centuries, and we, the taxpayers, are paying rent to William on an abandoned prison on Dartmoor while he goes litter-picking on the beach for a few minutes.
And let’s not forget Queen Mary, who had a rather unfortunate habit of simply helping herself to things she fancied when visiting stately homes. Apparently, if something caught her eye, the concept of “not belonging to you” could become remarkably flexible.
Some things really do seem to run in the family.Kings weren’t given their power they took it at the point of a sword.