General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSome thoughts on King William... sooner than one might think.
Yeah it's a UK gossip mag but interesting.
Goes along with my thinking.
Charles deserves his time in the Sun, wear the crown that he's spent a lifetime waiting for...
But... a young King and Queen would bring a fresh burst of energy and 21st Century reality to the monarchy.
https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/celebrity-news/why-experts-believe-prince-charles-may-hand-crown-prince-william-709625
With regards to the possibility of Charles passing the crown straight to William, the website reads: Having waited over 60 years as heir apparent, it would be perfectly natural for Prince Charles to want to assume the throne and perform the royal duties for which he has spent so long preparing in waiting.
But it would be equally natural if, after reigning for a few years as an increasingly elderly monarch, he chose to invite Parliament to hand on the throne to Prince William.
Camillas presence instead of Diana is a sad reminder that Charlie is no better than any man who cheats
catbyte
(34,376 posts)was Camilla's tampon thing outta my head.
Ew.
jrthin
(4,835 posts)far from my mind.
Jilly_in_VA
(9,966 posts)and I suppose I could be more charitable towards her than I am, considering that Charles has been in love with her his whole life. The damn stuffy "courtiers" should have let him marry her in the first place, instead of complaining that she "had a past" or whatever their silly-assed problem with her was, since she probably deflowered the prince anyway. That said, once he was married, she should have backed off, even if he wanted to continue.
Pathwalker
(6,598 posts)That's why Diana was chosen, she was examined and declared to be one on the morning of the wedding. The law was later changed so William could marry Kate. This was the law in olden times to make certain any child was in fact the king's, an no man could go before the king. Ugh.
Jilly_in_VA
(9,966 posts)I presume that's been changed, since there's no way on this earth that Kate was a virgin. Or likely that any future female that a future king wants to marry will be a virgin. Those will be a rare commodity unless they've been kept under lock and key since they were toddlers.
Pathwalker
(6,598 posts)It was a disgusting and sexist thing.
Celerity
(43,344 posts)Celerity
(43,344 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)and it was accepted and expected. It is funny how as sexual mores loosen generally, they get stricter for the rich and famous and royal
claudette
(3,550 posts)Camilla was not just Charlie's "mistress." He did not love Diana. He loved the other one that he is married to now. He was immoral to marry Diana and put her through the emotional turmoil that he did. No wonder Harry dislikes her and moved away. I would have, too.
treestar
(82,383 posts)the marriages were arranged to make alliances. So nobody thought they'd love their queens. But some did, after all - they were satisfied with the result. Thus Henry III had no illegitimate children/mistresses.
A few of them could pick their wife/husband, but that was usually because they were already the monarch and then got married, so Edward IV married a woman he loved (but then later had mistresses anyway).
By the time of the Queen's father, it seemed they could pick their spouse. Still, there was pressure. Charles had to pick a bride with certain characteristics. He couldn't marry the woman he loved. He could have given up / abdicated to marry the divorced Camilla, perhaps. Still, if Diana were still alive, he would not have been able to marry her at all.
RobinA
(9,888 posts)I never get all this handwringing about Charles and Camilla. They are angels in the behavior department compared to most of their predecessors. If this were a couple centuries ago, Meghan would be in the Tower, Harry would be plotting from some relative's castle in Germany, Louie would have had George beheaded already, and Kate would be weighing potential French husbands for Charlotte. The gang is a tame bunch.
treestar
(82,383 posts)The Plantagenets and the Tudors must be laughing in their graves at that handwringing!
Blue_playwright
(1,568 posts)I hope he uses his position to push his agenda - perhaps a bit more political than he ought but I thought it was a bit prophetic that she passed him the crown as the country debated their energy future.
mopinko
(70,092 posts)i know he has been rewilding some of the estates. he knows the science.
purr-rat beauty
(543 posts)or the world for that matter?
Granted, it's a cash cow so it won't end...but it's history is filthy and selfish and rather than holding them up on gilded wings, let's not forget out how faulty they truly were/are.
my condolences to those who will grieve her but she is not without blame.
TxGuitar
(4,190 posts)Their castles do. Charles isn't gonna go gladhand the tourists at Buckhouse's gate.
When they say that, you wonder, who goes to the UK as a tourist because of today's royals? It is the past royals who created the history.
delisen
(6,043 posts)People who are weak depend upon status to confer the appearance of strength upon themselves, the inherently strong never rely upon status but make their own place in the sun
Jilly_in_VA
(9,966 posts)and hauteur are duly noted.
delisen
(6,043 posts)Response to delisen (Reply #16)
Post removed
delisen
(6,043 posts)Nor have I insulted any other individual personally. I have voiced an opinion in a thread that presumably is open to all.
Were it marked as private and not open to all members of DU I would not comment.
BlackSkimmer
(51,308 posts)But that wont happen any more than all the conjecture about The Queen giving the crown to Charles. Lost count how many times I saw that here.
Freddie
(9,265 posts)There was always speculation that the Queen would step down to give Charles time on the throne. Didnt happen. The Royals will stick to the way things have always been done.
Irish_Dem
(47,026 posts)Americans don't seem to understand the British mindset.
WarGamer
(12,440 posts)Irish_Dem
(47,026 posts)One disgruntled Brit does not drive the nation.
WarGamer
(12,440 posts)I can see him passing the torch after a few years.
Irish_Dem
(47,026 posts)The Brits pride themselves on not being like other royalty.
Who "retire" and let the younger generation do the work.
RobinA
(9,888 posts)work that way. That would be something Americans would do.
Emile
(22,714 posts)DenaliDemocrat
(1,476 posts)I hope the monarchy fizzles into obscurity
liberal_mama
(1,495 posts)serious damage to his organs and immune system. Hopefully, he is taking precautions to avoid getting it a 3rd time. Someone in my town died after their 3rd Covid infection.
FakeNoose
(32,634 posts)... and he didn't have any gray hair yet. I'm pretty sure Charles and Diana were still married then. All kinds of rumors that Elizabeth wanted her son to rule, and she'd retire and go on vacation. But that never happened. Oh well.
He's not the brightest bulb in the pack, that's for sure. And there's the matter of Meghan Markle and the way the Royal Family (ahem ... Charles) treated her. Personally I hope his reign is short.