Camilla Parker-Bowles' 60 birthday presents for Prince Charles

[kasippu]

Wow she must really love him. If my husband would give me that..

[Laurent]

Originally Posted by yanna

I like Camilla. She looks fun.

I like Camilla, too, and I agree that I think she and Charles were the real love story in the debacle. Regardless, there were no clean hands in the whole mess . . . including St. Diana's.

Originally Posted by aabbcc

I think that's a pretty cool thing to do. She's obviously put a lot of thought into the gifts. I bet he loves it.

Yep, I think it's a very thoughtful thing to do. I would be blown away if the man I loved went to this much trouble and effort for me.

[GaPeach]

what happened to the days when she would give Charles her underwear to carry around in his pocket?

Camilla is a ho and I think she must have something on old Charles, like catching him with the male hired help.

When your as ugly as Camilla you have to be funny or have a very good personality

[Ravenna]

Originally Posted by kingcap72

Once upon a time, there was a goofy prince who married a horse...

To be fair, they both look like horses.

Originally Posted by yanna

I've always felt that Charles and Camilla were the real love story.

I do feel bad for Diana but never liked her much.

Same here. Yes, Charles and Camilla behaved abominably while he was married to Diana, but it was so long ago; time to get over it, I would think. I like them as a couple now. I root for them. I was happy for them when they finally got married.

[scooter]

Originally Posted by A*O

I said Camilla has never PUBLICLY discussed her relationship with Prince Charles. Of course they had a shag before his wedding day. Diana knew all about Camilla from the get-go and how Charles felt about her and yet still went ahead and married him.

By "monogamous" I mean that Charles and Camilla haven't had other lovers apart from each other. Diana had several that we know about and probably more that we don't. Andrew Parker Bowles isn't a slouch when it comes to shagging his way around other men's wives too. He was Princess Anne's boyfriend for a while (both were single). This kind of stuff is perfectly "normal" in those upper class circles. Wives and husbands turn a blind eye to it provided everyone remains discrete and since everyone is at it in the first place nobody starts casting the first stone. Prince Philip has had mistresses for years, his current favourite is Lady Penny Romsey but there have been LOTS of others including his cousin Princess Alexandra and actress Anna Massey. Even the Queen is widely rumoured to have had an affair with Lord Porchester (later Earl Carnarvon) to whom her second son, Prince Andrew, bears a striking resemblance. We don't know HALF of what goes on.

I must disagree about her 'not speaking publicly'. Talking to a newspaper editor every week as the mistress of the PoW to put her spin on it is not being silent. Also, I dont know a woman in the world who would be ok with her about to be husband f*cking his piece on the side the night before her wedding. Not ok on any planet. Would you put up with that shit? I sure wouldn't.

[Laxmobster]

Originally Posted by Ravenna

Yes, Charles and Camilla behaved abominably while he was married to Diana, but it was so long ago; time to get over it, I would think.

So what is the statute of limitations for gossiping about home-wreckers? 20+ years...

To my Chin Lovers/Haters,

We have no limits, keep the jokes coming!!!




Back to topic: Affairs are a time-honored tradition amongst the royals. You aren't anyone special until you're shagging someone else's spouse...or cousin

[A*O]

Originally Posted by scooter

Also, I dont know a woman in the world who would be ok with her about to be husband f*cking his piece on the side the night before her wedding. Not ok on any planet. Would you put up with that shit? I sure wouldn't.

Me neither and therefore I wouldn't have married the asshole in the first place. Diana knew all about Charles and Camilla long before the wedding yet still went ahead with the whole charade.

[scooter]

That maybe, however the only prescedent for the heir to the throne being allowed to marry his divorced mistress, was when Edward VII wanted to marry Wallis. For that to happen, Edward had to give up the throne. Let's also remember that Wallis was not allowed to be HRH and that she did not break up the PoW's marriage. Dont forget that the only reason Queen ElizabethII and Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother ascended the throne was because the divorced mistress was absolutely unacceptable. Pretty ironic that Prince Tampax gets to marry the divorced mistress and keep the throne, in light of the fact that the only reason he's heir is Uncle was not allowed to marry his girlfriend in the same situation.

[scooter]

Originally Posted by A*O

Me neither and therefore I wouldn't have married the asshole in the first place. Diana knew all about Charles and Camilla long before the wedding yet still went ahead with the whole charade.

She said in the Morton Book that she had only gotten together with Charles on 'dates' 5 times before the engagement (only 3 of them alone). I dont think she had much of an idea exactly what she was up against.

[Karistiona]

I have no sympathy for Diana (other than the fact that it's sad that a mother died), because she went into that marriage wanting all the power and status it would bring and then bitched and moaned about it for ages afterwards. Camilla and Charles aren't much better, but at least they're happy. I would LOVE to see DNA testing on the royals, it's all so convoluted and disgusting haha. A*O I love all your Royal knowledge!

[aabbcc]

Originally Posted by scooter

That maybe, however the only prescedent for the heir to the throne being allowed to marry his divorced mistress, was when Edward VII wanted to marry Wallis. For that to happen, Edward had to give up the throne. Let's also remember that Wallis was not allowed to be HRH and that she did not break up the PoW's marriage. Dont forget that the only reason Queen ElizabethII and Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother ascended the throne was because the divorced mistress was absolutely unacceptable. Pretty ironic that Prince Tampax gets to marry the divorced mistress and keep the throne, in light of the fact that the only reason he's heir is Uncle was not allowed to marry his girlfriend in the same situation.

Note: It was Edward VIII who abdicated for Wallis, not Edward VII.

I tend to agree with you regarding Charles and the throne, but I thought you might be interested in this tidbit from Wikipedia:

Unlike the situation in 1936, however, the marriage did not lead to a constitutional crisis. In contrast to Mrs Simpson's first divorce, the Parker Bowles divorce is recognised by most members of the Church, on the grounds of her husband's adultery,[85] and is valid under English law.[86] The Church of England has moderated its stance on divorce, and now accepts that civil marriages after a divorce may be blessed in a religious service in a church.[87] Divorce is now both more common and more acceptable in the public mind than it was in 1936.[88] Polls taken shortly before the marriage of the Prince of Wales and Mrs Parker Bowles showed widespread support.[89] Mrs Simpson had a reputation as an adventuress and was less socially acceptable as a bride than Mrs Parker Bowles.[90]

Edward VIII abdication crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[witchcurlgirl]

Originally Posted by scooter

That maybe, however the only prescedent for the heir to the throne being allowed to marry his divorced mistress, was when Edward VII wanted to marry Wallis. For that to happen, Edward had to give up the throne. Let's also remember that Wallis was not allowed to be HRH and that she did not break up the PoW's marriage. Dont forget that the only reason Queen ElizabethII and Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother ascended the throne was because the divorced mistress was absolutely unacceptable. Pretty ironic that Prince Tampax gets to marry the divorced mistress and keep the throne, in light of the fact that the only reason he's heir is Uncle was not allowed to marry his girlfriend in the same situation.

The Brits should erect a statue to Wallis in every town in the country....Edward was a Nazi sympathizer, and if he had been on the throne the world would look quite a bit different now.

[A*O]

Edward VIII abdicated in 1936 when ANY kind of divorce was considered shocking and shameful. As King and therefore Head of the Church of England he also had a lot of religious pressure not to marry a divorcee. But times have changed - 3 of the Queen's 4 children have divorced and 2 of those have remarried (Charles and Anne). The stigma and scandal surrounding divorce just doesn't apply any more, thank God.

I'm quite sure that if Edward VIII was the current king and wanted to marry a divorcee (and an AMERICAN at that!) he would not have been forced to abdicate although no doubt there would have been some old farts who disapprove.

Apart from being a Nazi sympathiser he was also a weak, lazy and selfish man who would have made a crap king so handing the throne to his dutiful if somewhat dull brother (George VI) and thence to the current Queen was actually a the very best thing that could have happened. Wallis Simpson. Duchess of Windsor was denied the title HRH (to which she was fully entitled) out of sheer petty spite from the royal family (mainly the steel magnolia Queen Mother) and the Duke of Windsor never forgave them for it.