Brits like Camilla but what about the rest of the Commonwealth?

Queen Elizabeth made Camilla a Dame Grand Cross as the Duchess celebrates her anniversary to Prince Charles.

Apparently Brits have really taken to her, even though she was once scorned as “the other woman” in Charles’ life.

I’m not sure what her reputation is outside of Britain.

I suspect many people really don’t care much.

The CBC, in an indepth look at the Royal Family, reported she is very charismatic and also athletic.

Is it hard to get past the fact she was once a mistress though?

Camilla seems to have gotten all she’s ever wanted as she cleverly played the game of love. Good for her.

Advertisements

15 thoughts on “Brits like Camilla but what about the rest of the Commonwealth?

  1. Now now, Camilla has been wife-of the Heir to the Throne for
    seven years. and if her husband does not die before his mother
    she will be wife-of the King – and we assume he would also be King
    of Canada..Had things gone otherwise, she might have been Wife 1,
    and virginal girl bride Diana Spencer never entered royal history.
    Royals had mistresses galore – few if any being regularized, so
    that puts her one up historically.
    Royal inheritance is not a popularity contest, it is a fact. No point
    in shooting the Next-in-Lines’ wife down because she cuckolded
    her first husband with a married old flame. (Is one a Mistress if
    the Master is a bachelor or a single at the time ?)
    It’s obvious that Charles image needs refreshing in view of his
    mother’s advanced age and Mother-in-Law endorsement as
    Dame just announced is a good start.
    Kathy, if you blackball all females with Mistress histories,
    you’ll eliminate a lot of high profile women…
    Give the lady a chance. Things will become very complicated for
    her if Charles succeeds to throne (ensuring that WIlliam will be
    eligible too).

  2. Being a mistress is not necessarily “promiscuous” – meaning sleeping
    around, a Loose Woman is it.
    – Subject to Kathy defining her terms, a Mistress is the Other Woman
    kept by the Master’s in addition to the one who is currently his legal Wife.
    Didn’t Diana cover a lot of strange bedroom territory before she became
    an Ex-, whereas Charles was loyal to one woman, with the intention of
    making her an Honest Woman, a Wife, when he was free to re-marry ?
    Again a single, Diana didn’t even marry Dodi, the Harrod’s man’s son she
    died with..
    It is said that Diana was tested for virginity back in the dark days of the
    1980s, where as “Kate” was shacked up with William before they decided
    to legalize things. If she has a sexual past, no one is holding it against her
    in the early 21st century.

  3. How quaint, and adorable, and yet at the same time how sick, sordid, and pathetic is this “Royal watching” drivel.

    What foolish preoccupation it is to be concerned with such tripe and inconsequence.

    Maybe more Canadians would care about these Royals and give precious thought to imagining the ‘love-scapades’ of these pervs with all their anachronistic, unearned priviledges, if only they played in the ‘Stanley Cup’ or were contestants in ‘Dancing with the Stars’.

    The Royal institution in the modern age—like the aforementioned entertainment products, is similarly a publum, diversion, perhaps even a revenue stream, but altogether irrelevant.

  4. Calling the person who pays for this venue ‘sick sordid and pathetic’
    is abusive of the freeloading she enables. Anyone seems just too
    cheap to create his own site. This Anyoneism reads as badly-spelled
    hate mail, a real topic killer. Wonder why the host posts it. It even insults
    those who do contribute to her blog keeping it viable… but for how long?

  5. Clearly M, you don’t really understand what a blog is…do you.

    Perhaps the topic I was ggetting aaround to ddiscussing, ccontributing, and sharing my perspective was precisely ‘badly-spelled, hate mail topic killers’…of which I think your above post is a fine example. Thanks.

  6. A Blog is what the person who creates it – in effect privately publishes
    on the internet – chooses to make of it. It’s Ms. Rumleski’s name and
    reputation on the line, and her time and money and liability.
    Today she has chosen to discuss the private life of public people, and
    a couple of regulars spoke to the issue, which is Constitutionally of relevance
    to this country too.
    One responder says the input should be hisr perspective only, and on an
    unrelated subject. That’s not blogging, that’s hijacking, if the site proprietor
    permits.
    How many of her postings have now been killed this way, an unknown person
    attacking our Host’s supporters in this new endeavour?

  7. I believe this is a relevant topic. I am interested in the honours granted by the Queen. Many Canadians have been honoured through jubilee awards.
    I am open to all comments but I do not want people who participate to be attacked.
    Please state your opinions without disparaging others.

  8. This honour to her daughter-in-law is of special interest.
    Not a ‘Jubilee commemorative’ handout, but something
    in the Queen’s personal control. (Snipers are of course
    saying she waited a long time, but a nice 7th wedding
    anniversary for the woman , and not doubt something
    that pleases the Queen’s eldest child).
    “Awards under the Royal Victorian Order are in the
    Queen’s personal gift and unlike others are bestowed
    independently of Downing Street.
    “They are given by the head of state to those who have
    served her or the monarchy in a personal way.
    “The order was founded in April 1896 by Queen Victoria
    as a way of rewarding individual service to her.”
    -Not young, this relatively new royal has been working
    very hard to restore the image of the family, which must
    be pretty tired of having Charles attacked by media and
    by extension his second wife.
    This is fascinating…watching the first family try to counteract
    decades of media abuse of one of their children. Will it work?
    Let’s wait and see how things unfold when the pair come here
    shortly. Will Camilla again wear Canada’s diamond Maple Leaf
    brooch presented to wife-of George Vi re the 1939 visit and
    inherited by Elizabeth on the Queen Mum’s death?
    Only Diana seems not to have been granted this favour
    when sent out to Canada.. a Royal putdown !
    A timely topic indeed.

  9. M,
    Thank you for the information about the diamond Maple Leaf brooch. I do hope Camilla wears it and I will be watching to see.
    I enjoy Royal history and am still interested in learning more of Edward who abdicated.
    I don’t think mistress is pejorative any more. And what is the male equivalent?
    I see Camilla as a woman in control of her destiny and I admire that.

  10. Dear “M”…may I call you that? I take it that you are also as you call it, an “unknown person” after all.
    You may be quick with the accusations and quicker with cribbing unattributed sources but why not spend some time correcting your own mistaken notions of what a blog is before you become the self-appointed guardian of this one. I may one day even invite you to visit my website and blog and you may see that I am not just, in your words: “Anyone…too cheap tp create his own site.”

    In the meantime may we All share and parlay our interests for the benefit of All blog readers and All participants since the interenet is a wide open place for All discourse and Anyone’s ideas have a very good reason to be…so, if anyone needs more info on Royalty…a source more valid than what has so far been seen…here is:
    http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Honours/RoyalVictorianOrder.aspx

  11. Kathy – that doesn’t work, my disdain for Diana is clouding my arithmetic.
    If the Canada brooch was inherited by the Queen when her mother died,
    Diana was irrelevant as Wife-of and also dead. That piece of jewellery
    was huge in its time, Wife-of George VI shown wearing it on Canada-
    oriented occasions in newsreels during the war, and soldier husbands
    wanting to buy one for wives back home. It is the book on royal jewels
    and will dig out the information if it reappears this visit. I’m not particularly
    interested in Camilla, but her place in history is interesting. What will
    be done if/when her husband ascends the throne, and will other
    Commonwealth monarchy countries have a say if public opinion is
    strong.
    Meanwhile it is fascinating from a public relations point of view, and one
    wonders about professional help.

  12. Your original question about Commonwealth reaction to Wife 2 of Charles –
    not all of its members recognize the monarch as their Head of State so
    are only bystanders to any complications.
    “The Queen is Head of State of 15 Commonwealth realms in addition to the UK.
    She is also Head of the Commonwealth itself, a voluntary association of 54
    independent countries.”
    Strange beast the Commonwealth, but that’s a lot of countries bound in friendship.
    As for Edward the Abdicator, he’s fun to read up on in online-archived newspapers
    Globe, free with LPL card. Quite the glamour boy – but we are lucky he was gone
    when it was time to keep the Britain and its supporting Empire countries going
    through the long years of war. See what the library has.
    Can anyone think of a married female who kept another man, in the sense of
    financing him, as I tend to think is part of the Mistress setup?
    You do know Camilla’s connection with a royal mistress of an earlier generation??

  13. This is worth a look, Beaverbrook being born a Canadian…
    The abdication of King Edward VIII Non Fiction
    Beaverbrook, Lord, 1879-1964.
    London : Hamilton, 1966.
    Central 3rd Floor History 942.084 Ed92B IN LIBRARY
    122 p.

  14. My expressed words: ‘sick sordid and pathetic’ was not for the topic but for the sexist and stereotypical chauvinistic, snickering paternalistic comments that emerged…and stand unchallenged. Shame.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s