Queen Camilla

Her collapse is NOT complete, she will be queen 👑.

She's suppose to be Princess Consort when Charles becomes King but I've never believed that statement.

Technically, she's Princess of Wales but they gave her the secondary title of Duchess of Cornwall because Diana as Princess of Wales was still fresh in everyone's mind. It's been over twenty years since Diana's death so Camilla will be Queen Consort.

She will never be Queen, dears.

[quote]Will she be loved by the people?

What do you think?

I think she'll be the People's Queen.

R2, not technically at all. She IS Princess of Wales and chooses to use an existing secondary title. Duchess of Cornwall is not a title given to her as a replacement. It's a secondary title she already had as Princess of Wales.

In a word, no.

At 72, I doubt Cam gives much of a flying fuck what she's called at this point. She got the King, the houses, the tiaras, the jewels, the status and is self-assured enough not to sweat the petty stuff (petting the sweaty stuff is quite another matter). Calling her Princess of Wales or Duchess of Cornwall or Queen Cam is irrelevant. Because when Charles becomes King, EVERYFUCKINGBODY will have to bow, scrape and curtsy to her as wife of the sovereign.

EVERYFUCKINGBODY in the UK, that is.

We don't go for that shit in the States.

Charles is already ancient, so Cam best enjoy it while she can. When William becomes king she'll be sent quietly off to pasture.

R9 EVERYFUCKINGBODY in the UK and Commonwealth.

When the got married, Charles and Camilla said she would be titled and called Princess Consort. They should follow their word and abide by their statement.

Besides, home wreckers and Rottweilers don’t become queen.

I like her just fine.

D'ya think she'll make it that far? Looks knackered here and that was a year and half ago

I think she'd be a hoot to hang out with. She looks like my Aunt Caroline who smoked 3 packs of cigs a day until she died gasping for air.

And when Charles dies, she'll become King Camilla and rule all of the land!

She will be queen. Forget that "princess consort" crap Charles said. He only said it at the time hoping to settle troubled waters at the time of their marriage.

She won't be popular and she won't be unpopular. Camilla will just sort of, be there.

r15, most people say that in fact she is. She's funny and does not take herself seriously at all.

The Buckinhgham palace website dropped the whole 'And one day, she will become princess Consort" jazz. that was mostly done so everyone would get used to her and not think her too pushy. if Charles takes the crown (which is looking less likely these days given his age), she will likely be crowned Queen Consort. Diana's death was more than 20 years ago--no one except the most diehard Di fans think she's being pushy anymore.

Liz is still going strong. She has a very good chance of outliving that awful hag Camilla. She might even outlive Charles. They are all of an age where no bet is certain.

My preferred scenario is for Charles to fall over dead, even as early as this afternoon. Then we will get to watch the Windsor machine grind up Camilla and throw the pieces to the wolves. When Charles is dead, no one will be able to stop William and Andrew from having their revenge.

She's good with children.

Who wants to be "loved by the people?" The Royals think "the people" are disgusting, and the average Brit could care less about the Royals.

With this skank, it's more like Duchess of Cornhole.

So Charles and Camilla we’re lying when they said she would be called Princess Consort. Never mind, “Oh they just said it to suit the time.” They said it. Abide by it. She should not be styled as queen.

She was good friends with Joan Rivers. Barbara Walters too. Wonder if the three ever had tea together, that would be an interesting conversation.

Will never be her name as the people LOATHE her like Madge and Hydrangea

Diana forever. Camilla should be nothing more than consort—and even that’s too much for a Rottweiler.

Camilla has to babysit the Harkles over Remembrance Day. The comments on the DM are eye-opening. There is a #freecamilla hashtag going around. Let's think about this. The BRF are sending out Camilla to prop up Diana's once immensely popular son. This would have been unimaginable even five years ago. If Charles does ever make it to the throne, people will accept Camilla as queen consort just fine. Only the craziest Diana fans still hate her. The rest of the public has moved on, and she seems to have the public persona of a solid, fun-loving broad who would be a hoot to have a drink with.

What happens when Prince Charles becomes king? The official line from Clarence House is that Camilla would adopt the title of princess consort when her husband assumes the throne.

However, according to Oxford University law professor Pavlos Eleftheriadis, the Duchess of Cornwall should be queen under the Treason Act 1351 and also as the sovereign’s wife under section two of the Regency Act 1937.

The wives of male royal family members typically obtain the equivalent title to their spouse when they marry. When Charles became a Duke, Camilla received the title Duchess - so when Charles becomes king, convention suggests she will become queen consort.

“The wife of a head of state is not a joint head of state, however. The sovereign reigns on his or her own. In that sense Camilla will be a ‘Queen’ in the limited legal sense of being the wife of the sovereign,” he told the Daily Star.

- The Week

.....

The tolerated queen.

If everything goes to plan, Britain will have three MALE sovereigns in a row. For me, the pomp and circumstance of the monarchy always seemed more suited for a FEMALE (gowns, jewels etc...).

R15, you'll be proven wrong. She'll be Queen Consort. I wish I could bet you on it as I like getting returns.

Imagine a Moldavian massacre where only George and Camilla are left. The boy Queen and his fag-hag granny as regent.

From Kenneth Rose's diary. Imagine if Diana had her personality or Charles hadn't dithered and asked her to marry before Parker-Bowles did.

December 23, 2005

Prince Eddie [the Duke of Kent] tells me about the Royal Family Christmas lunch. ‘I was lucky enough to sit next to Camilla. She is one of the best things to have happened for years. I like her down-to-earth good sense, total lack of airs, warmth, friendliness and sense of humour.’

Even if she is publicly known as Princess Consort, she will of course be by right the queen consort as the wife of the king regnant. Just like she’s Princess of Wales now but doesn’t use the title. My problem with the Princess Consort thing is that it comes with an HRH, where Camilla should at least have the HM. I have a solution, she could be Her Majesty Camilla. There is a precedent for this in Romania, when Crown Princess Helen’s husband King Carol II wanted to avoid having her be his consort. She was to be Her Majesty Helen.

I assume she will be buried like a Queen, next to Charles. I would guess the Winsdor Chapel?

Always so amusing to read about how mixed up Americans are about the Monarchy and succession. It's understandable of course, but highly amusing nonetheless.

Of course they'll be buried together, and probably at Windsor. WTF not! IMO if the BRF wants to soften public opinion for Camilla's ascent, they ought to have her accompanying ER 2 as she makes the rounds. Especially at horse shows and other horsey events. Right now the Queen hangs out with Zara and Sophie Wessex at those things, and it would help ease things for Camilla if she were perceived to be close to the Queen. Even if it's fiction.

The problem is that the idea of Camilla being Princess Consort wasn't only to placate the Queen and Diana's fans, but also the leaders of the various realms and the Church, some of whom weren't keen on her. I think she will prefer the Princess Consort title so as not the rock the boat, unless there is strong public outrage demanding she is named Queen. She would, of course, actually be Queen, with all the rights and privileges associated with it, just without the public use of the title.

She has rehabilitated herself in the eyes of the public and by most accounts the family. For instance, it has been reported that she was very involved helping and advising Catherine when she entered the family, which made William warm to her. As time goes by, I think even most Diana fans place the majority of the blame not on Camilla but on Charles. He was the one who caused this whole mess by his dithering and indecisiveness. Even, Diana before she died, it has been reported, said that Charles should marry Camilla. Really Diana and Camilla were both victimized by his messed up immature personality. And, if the gossip is to be believed she has determined that being his wife isn't that great of a prize. In any case any reign by Charles will probably be brief, if he even makes it to his Coronation.

The Queen is ever thankful for Camilla. She is a fine wife to her son will be a steadfast partner to the future king. Not like the other mistake.

Why is it that Philip is a prince, but Camilla could become queen consort.

I wonder if Diana was dug up, would she look the same? Was she elbamed and buried in a lead coffin?

[quote] When Charles is dead, no one will be able to stop William and Andrew from having their revenge.

I think you meant William and Harry (unless you somehow think Andrew really has it in for his sister-in-law).

But by all accounts William and Harry are very close to her. They do not see her as responsible for their mother's death or her problems while alive.

R41 - This American's understanding is that Philip cannot be styled as a "King" or "King Consort" because no one can have a title higher than the reigning monarch's. He came to England with his title from Greece. I guess he renounced the citizenship but retained the royal title as a courtesy?

[quote]If everything goes to plan, Britain will have three MALE sovereigns in a row.

Prince George will abdicate so he can marry his boyfriend. Queen Charlotte, long may she reign.

R36 - I think royals are now buried at a mausoleum at Frogmore.

R47 Maybe the two kings followed by one queen sequence will run as follows: Charles, William, George.

Camilla really loved the guy she married. She wanted him more than Charles - at that time. Apparently, he was quite the lady's man and he had an abundance of women after him. He was a real catch for Camilla.

Watch George will be the real modernizing force in the BRF-the first openly out gay king. I found it interesting that William made a point of saying that he and Kate would be fine with whatever he is.

QEII has decreed she can be queen but she can't use her tampon tierra.

Andrew Parker-Bowles, her first husband, was a legendary ladies' man among the British horsey set in the early 70s. Every woman wanted him in that world, including Princess Anne, who slept with him before her marriage (and his), and remains close to him to this day.

All those Jilly Cooper novels about superstud horseman Rupert Campbell-Black that are so popular among British women are supposedly really about Andrew Parker-Bowles.

[quote]Especially at horse shows and other horsey events.

Tee hee!

R41 :

If Kate is eligible to be Queen, then why is Prince Philip not King?

The answer, according to the official website of the British royal family, is found in British Parliamentary law, which determines who’s up next for the throne, and also what title his or her spouse will have. In terms of succession, the law looks only to blood, and not to gender. In terms of the spouses of royalty, however, that law treats men and women differently. Here’s an easy guide to the current line of succession.

When a male in the royal bloodline marries: His wife takes whatever is the female form of his title. Thus, when Prince William married Kate Middleton and became Duke of Cambridge, Kate became Duchess of Cambridge, and when Prince William becomes King, Kate’s title will change to match William’s. And delving back a couple of generations, when Queen Elizabeth II’s father, George VI, became King, his wife’s title became “Queen Consort,” although she was usually referred to as “Queen Elizabeth” (having been born Elizabeth Angela Marguerite Bowes-Lyon, not to be confused with Queen Elizabeth I of England, daughter of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn). Queen Elizabeth held her title until George died, at which point Elizabeth II ascended to the throne, and her mum became “Queen Mother.” When a female in the royal bloodline marries: Her husband is not eligible to take the male form of his wife’s title, as Marlene Koenig, a royal historian and writer of the Royal Musings blog, told Town and Country. That’s why Princess Eugenie’s fiancé, Jack Brooksbank, is expected to remain “Mr. Jack Brooksbank” upon their upcoming marriage in October.

-RD

I'm learning a lot from this thread.

What will happen to her if Charles dies before her (after becoming King)? Would she be considered the “Queen Mother” even though she’s a stepmother?

Horsefeathers. I'll throw in a few dogs' teeth for good measure.

Queen Victoria wanted Prince Albert made "King Consort:" when they married, but Parliament refused--they thought it would be confusing, and imply that he was King Regnant jointly with her as Queen regnant. So she lobbied hard instead for him to be given the title "Prince Consort,": which is something Queen Anne's husband,. Prince George of Denmark, did not receive. Philip did not want to be made Prince Consort (and parliament probably would have fesued it to him), bnut he had to abdicate his title as Prince of Greece and Denmark when he married Elizabeth, and became first (before the wedding) just plain lieutenant Philip Mountbatten, and then for ten years after his marriage HRH the Duke of Edinburgh. He was not technically a prince in his own right, but the press still referred to him as "Prince Philip" as well as "The Duke of Edinburgh." The queen decided in 1957 decided to make him Prince of the United Kingdom in his own right, and Parliament allowed it: he became HRH The Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh. That made no difference probably to anyone except to him and her, and the tiny world of the court.

Kate will certainly become "Her Majesty the Queen" (no first name necessary officially) when William ascends the throne, and the press will start referring to her as "Queen Catherine." (Actually, since her name is so long, they will probably continue to call her "Kate" as they do now, although no one calls her that--everyone within her families addresses her as "Catherine"). If she outlives William, she will assume the title "HM Queen Catherine," and whoever George has married will become known as "HM the Queen" officially.

What happens with Camilla is something no-one knows except for Charles and Camilla themselves. The current Queen will have no say whatsoever in it since whatever happens after her death is not her official concern. Since she will by law automatically become "HM The Queen" it is likely this point she will just go by that, and the press will refer to her as "Queen Camilla." if she outlives Charles after he becomes King, she will then be known as "HM Queen Camilla," and if he dies before his mother she will just be known as "HRH Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall" for the rest of her life. Even if the future King William tried after his father died (which he wouldn't), it would take an act of Parliament to do so, and they would likely not consent.

On a good day.

R54 But is it of any value?

Let them call each other what they want, but it has zero impact on the lives of the rest of us.

R59 - Hey Debbie Downer, why are constantly bitching about the royals? Are you trying to ruin other's enjoyment of the subject? No one says they give our lives meaning. If you don't like the Royals, then DON'T post on threads about them. You see how simple it is.

Camilla is as royal as a Sloan Royal Flush urinal.

A 72-year old frau trying to pull off the Farrah Fawcett feathered hair look. I give you your next Queen!

She's beautiful.

[quote] A 72-year old frau trying to pull off the Farrah Fawcett feathered hair look. I give you your next Queen!

I would have been their queen at a much younger age if a certain someone [bold]didn't live so bloody long!!![/bold]

She may not be "loved" like Diana, but Camilla is liked by a great swath of the public. She does her job for The Firm without complaint, can chat with all sorts of people at events and appearances, and makes people feel at ease -- especially when they get all stiff and wooden when meeting Charles. She's a social lubricant that helps Charles seem nicer. Queen? So what of it?

R51, but Rupert Campbell-Black was supposed to be gorgeous. That guy is hideous.

The people will not accept Camilla because she’s a drunken slut with sagging breasts and horrendous hair and teeth. I hope QE2 outlives Charles because he would be an unbearable King.

[quote] a drunken slut with sagging breasts and horrendous hair and teeth.

You're describing almost any one in the nobility, r66.

If you were married to Charles, you would drink too!

R65 At Camilla's ripe age, I highly doubt she's got any lubricant left at all. The Gin is the social lubricant, and I haven't a clue what Camilla puts in her cooz, but I'm sure it's something similar to high viscosity engine oil at this point.

[quote] a drunken slut with sagging breasts and horrendous hair and teeth.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

[quote] But by all accounts William and Harry are very close to her.

Actually, from most things I have read, William has grown quite fond of her but not Harry. I suspect that the rift is even wider, since his marriage. Catherine listened and welcomed Camilla's advice about acclimating to the Royal Family, and Camilla really earned William's respect and gratefulness for helping his wife. However, it was reported that Meghan and Harry dismissed both Camilla and Catherine's attempts to help her and that they viewed such attempts as interference not helpfulness. Even though, I was and remain a huge fan of Diana, I acknowledge that she had emotional problems and it sadly appears Harry has inherited them.

[quote]The people will not accept Camilla because she’s a drunken slut with sagging breasts and horrendous hair and teeth.

Please, don't hold back, tell us how you really feel about Camilla.

[quote] [R51], but Rupert Campbell-Black was supposed to be gorgeous. That guy is hideous.

You sound completely looks-obsessed, so it may be hard for you to understand this fact of life: male sex appeal sometimes does not correlate with handsomeness. Otherwise Mickey Rooney and Frank Sinatra would both not have been able to marry so many gorgeous women.

[quote] Actually, from most things I have read, William has grown quite fond of her but not Harry.

It doesn't matter.

Harry has zero power anymore with regards to the Crown and its policies since he is now so far away from succeeding to the throne. He will have almost no say in what happens to Camilla when Charles dies: it will all be up to King William V, and the only person he is likely to take advice from on this matter (other than his ministers) is his own wife.

“When the got married, Charles and Camilla said she would be titled and called Princess Consort“

Because my knickers and I formed a consortium with Charles.

They will love it when she dies.

Who is "they," r76? Diana worshippers?

The Queen Mother title was made up and never existed before.

Elizabeth, despite her loving image, was a high riding bitch.

The title was to placate her and shut her up.

R39. The Charles and Diana debacle was caused by Camilla just as much as Charles. Camilla wouldn't leave even though Charles was married to Diana. Camilla continued to undermine the marriage of Charles and Diana. Camilla initiated and perpetuated the cheating to cause harm to Diana, before the marriage, during Charles and Diana's honeymoon and throughout the marriage until Camilla had successfully broke it down. Charles was a piece of shit as well. Camilla earned her name, "the Rottweiler."

[quote] I think royals are now buried at a mausoleum at Frogmore

Oh, hell no.

I'm not having some dead people buried in my back yard.

I'm tearing that shit down, starting tomorrow!

[quote] The Queen Mother title was made up and never existed before.

Uh, no.

"A queen mother is a dowager queen who is the mother of the reigning monarch (or an empress mother in the case of an empire). [bold] The term has been used in English since at least 1560. /bold] It arises in hereditary monarchies in Europe and is also used to describe a number of similar yet distinct monarchical concepts in non-European cultures around the world. "

[quote]and whoever George has married will become known as "HM the Queen" officially.

When George ascends to the throne, he'll be a Queeney King and his spouse will be Confusing Consort

Actually R82, they'll be Xing and Xueen.

Camilla will be known as HRH Princess Consort, which is more than the homewrecking trollop deserves.

I am no fan of Camilla but if she hadn't hooked up with Charles he would have been sleeping with someone else or multiple other women. He was never in love with Diana, he found a virgin who gave him an heir and a spare as his mother ordered him to do and that was all he wanted from her.

[quote] The Queen Mother title was made up and never existed before.

Yes, it did exist before.

[quote] Elizabeth, despite her loving image, was a high riding bitch.

She often told people she wasn't as nice as they thought she was. They thought she was joking. She knew she wasn't.

[quote] The title was to placate her and shut her up.

No. She actually hated being called the "Queen Mother". She had to put up with it because she shared the same name as her daughter, the Queen. If the Queen had a different name, the Queen Mother would simply have gone by Queen Elizabeth in the same way as Queen Mary and Queen Alexandra. At first, Queen Alexandra was referred to as the "Dowager Queen" and she put a stop to it right off. When she became a widow, Queen Mary stated that she wished to be known as Queen Mary. Writers sometimes called her the Queen Mother or the Dowager Queen, but they were incorrect.

When Queen Victoria became queen, her aunt was known as the Dowager Queen Adelaide. Victoria disliked this and thought it lacked respect and smacked of a demotion of sorts. She made it known that only in official government correspondence was Queen Adelaide to be referred to as the Dowager Queen or the Dowager Queen Adelaide. At all other times, she was Queen Adelaide.

Queen Mary was instructed after her marriage to address Queen Victoria as "Grandmama", but while she was growing up as a Teck princess, she called Victoria "Aunt Queen".

R60: No, but I see how simple you are when your royal-loving ass is handed to you, frau. I’ll write what I please and I’m more than pleased to see how it triggers a sad little royal suckup like you. Boo fucking hoo.

“Debbie Downer.” So original. So, what, 1992? You can’t even come up with an original retort. Pathetic.

You don’t get to decide what anyone writes. Don’t like it? Read what else is written here. I’m hardly alone in lambasting the layabouts you so sickeningly adore.

Just wait until everyone finds out that all of the members of the British royal family have no blood claim to the throne!

I think Diana's true love was Charles. He didn't want her, but she always wanted him. I love Diana, but her taste in men was terrible including the cheating motherfucker Charles.

My Mom thought her name is "Carmela Bowels."

Oh, dear. R87's Tuesday night drinky-poo turned into a half dozen drinky-poos or more. Thank you for your venom. It is noted.

R90. Well, she got the "bowels" part right.

Andrew Parker Bowles was the known as the best fuck in London. Charles was a boiled turnip in comparison, and Camilla wanted to get a leg over . . . okay, several legs over. . .while she was young, so she married Andrew. She knew Charles would keep.

Meghan will be Queen.

Mark my words.

Yes, queen of Frogmore. Nothing more.

If she fails to produce offspring, her days may be numbered.

Megs will be gone from the BRF by next summer.

[quote] Meghan will be Queen. Mark my words.

All three of William's current children would have to die (and all of their future children would ALSO have to die) before Harry dies in order for that to happen. The three children and all their future offspring stand in the line of succession before him.

Or maybe you think she'll ditch Harry for George in a few years? I am sure the thought has occurred to Meghan.

R94, Every fucking thread.

If the old hag outlives the Queen, she will be known as Duchess of Horsewall.

There are a lot of misconceptions on this thread.

First of all, Camilla is in no way obligated to take the title "Princess Consort" when Charles ascends the throne. Although in 2005, when they married, the Palace announced she would be taking that title when Charles inherited the throne, no legislation was passed ensuring this. By law, she will thus automatically become "queen consort" when he inherits the throne, unless special legislation is passed by Parliament changing her title to "princess consort" (which Charles would have to consent to). Most crown-watchers think this is extremely unlikely to happen: the "princess consort" declaration was made only to make her seem more palatable to the British populace, who fourteen years ago did not like her and thought she was trying to muscle her way in to take what should have been Diana's. It is FAR more likely that when Elizabeth II dies and Charles becomes king, Camilla will just assume the title of his queen, since that's already decreed by law.

All titles flow from the monarch, which is about the only thing s/he does have any actual power over. (Thus George VI was able to screw over Wallis, Duchess of Windsor, by denying her the "HRH" designation.) Even then, s/he has to get the assent of Parliament in most instances, and nothing regarding titles for living people necessarily remains in place when that monarch dies if the succeeding monarch wishes to change it. So Charles has pretty much final say over what title Camilla will be given when his mother dies.

Expect also for King Charles III to change the dynasty's cumbersome current name from "Windsor-Mountbatten" (decreed by Elizabeth II in the late 1950s) to "Mountbatten," by the way. It is customary for new kings who succeed their mother to take on the dynastic name of their father's family, as Edward VII did when his mother died: the dynastic name then became "Saxe-Coburg and Gotha," which was changed during WWII to the less Germanic and more English "Windsor."

[quote]Meghan will be Queen.

She'll have to murder a lot of people.

r102 The girl's been busy, her book club's latest pick is "Kind Hearts and Coronets."

she looks like an old boozer and smoker, and someone needs to get her a better bra

Ready for her closeup!

SOMEBODY DO SOMETHING WITH HER GODAWFUL HAIR.

Sorry about the caps. I just can't stand her or her hair.

Patsy Stone's grandmother

There's a soft spot in my heart for hookers. I like her.

R107-oh my god, you win! That had me cackling.

Never mind the bollocks Cam, just continue to go for the JEWELS.

No freaking way will the Windsor-Mountbattens become just the Mountbattens. THAT name might get dropped, but not Windsor: It's too associated with the BRF, and in this modern world of ours branding is everything.

I thought the hideous monstrosity had cancer. Why hasn't she croaked yet?

R106 Her hair is my favorite thing about her.

She uses liquor bottles for hair rollers.

She. Is. Fabulous.

She looks like a Golden Retriever's wrinkled ass.

Personally, I like Camilla and am SO SICK of unnecessarily complicated people with tormented emotional lives. She does what she does and seems to have a reasonably good time, and she loves Charles in her way. Which is quite enough.

It's been said Charles has told her he loves her hair as it is, so she's keeping it.

Without big hair of some sort, she couldn't wear the tiaras like the ones at r105. And no other woman in the royal family wants to wear them, so she's doing them a favor by not asking to wear the small ones.

Young pretty women like Kate are not supposed to wear big jewels, because their youthful beauty is more than enough ornament.

Ugly and wrinkled women like Camilla are supposed to wear big jewels to distract from their lack of beauty.

[quote] I thought the hideous monstrosity had cancer.

That was just a tabloid rumor.

I have never understood why people like Camilla don't update their appearances, especially hair styles.

She literally could have any of the top stylists in the world provide her position and age appropriate suggestions for clothes, hair, and makeup. Yet, she insists on going out in public looking frumpy. I'm not suggesting plastic surgery or anything, just more flattering hair and clothes. Jane Fonda seems to be able to do it. Helen Mirren. Judy Dench.

I cannot think of one PR or strategic reason why she continues to go around looking like this. At one point, I could see that she would say to herself, "hey, I'll never be able to compete against Diana" so didn't try. But, it just seems silly now to go around with that hair.

Homewrecking cunt! Stick a tiara up her ass and call her a taxi!

WHo the fuck cares with this lot? They're dinosaurs and need to be returned to their natural habitat: the bogs. They can choose how. I rather liked the old fashioned, ritual killings of the 'oak king' at winter solstice. It would be a wonderful nod to tradition, n'cest pas?

Those of you complaining about her hair are probably not British? That hairstyle or any sort of bad blonde helmet head are very common among England's upper classes, especially the horsey country set. She fits right in to her demographic.

r124 Like Princess Anne's ? Now that's a fine example of a helmet of hair on a horsey type!

Yes R125. I live amongst these ladies and I am forever perplexed and amused by the level of bad-hairness. And it seems the higher the social class, the worse the hair. I'm American, but have lived in the UK posh countryside for a long time. I sometimes feel like an anthropologist studying a local tribe. Ha.

I think it is universal with the horsey set. I live in a town in the Southern US that is a major center for world equestrians in the winter, and I see that style all the time.

As a woman of a certain age she no longer needs a tampon.

Southern US, huh?

This explains your curious obsession with nobility that wouldn't allow you to breathe the steam off of their feces.

You will be in the next round, but we will be merciful.

She was promoted to lady cup.

As I grew up I had much appreciation for Her. CCN and other media outlets made me hater her when I was younger as if I had to pick her over Diana. It's sad what happened to Lady Di (pun intended) but she and Charles were lovers before Diana came into the picture. I'm glad they married. That's a REAL love story.

I like Camilla's hair. It's overly bleached and anachronistically styled and it's just her. And really, when you're a royal, being stable, predictable and familiar is what it's all about. It's comforting.

Forgive the grammatical errors, I am drunk.

Camilla was never a glamour puss. They gave her a makeover when she married Charles, but now that they've settled in and the public has accepted her, I don't think she gives a shit anymore. I doubt she cares if she ever becomes Queen Consort or not.

R114 wins!

Well, it seems that Charles can do what he wants for a name -- "A proclamation on the Royal Family name by the reigning monarch is not statutory; unlike an Act of Parliament, it does not pass into the law of the land. Such a proclamation is not binding on succeeding reigning sovereigns, nor does it set a precedent which must be followed by reigning sovereigns who come after.

Unless The Prince of Wales chooses to alter the present decisions when he becomes king, he will continue to be of the House of Windsor and his grandchildren will use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor."

Homewrecker my ass! She and Charles were already in love before doe eyed Diana came into the picture.

[quote]She and Charles were already in love before doe eyed Diana came into the picture.

LOL

[quote]According to royal biographer Penny Junor: "[Camilla] was passionately in love with [Andrew] but he was a cad, he was bonking other people, some of her friends...So when she was introduced to Charles and he thought she was pretty special...he thought she was a bit of alright and she thought 'Andrew is at the moment off with Princess Anne, you know her brother, teach Andrew a lesson.' So she had a fling with Charles."

[quote]It's pretty clear at this point that Charles was in love with Camilla; Camilla's feelings at the time are less clear. Later, when Charles was stationed abroad in the Caribbean and Andrew had broken up with Anne, Camilla went on to marry Andrew. Charles wrote of his sadness to his uncle, Lord Montbatten, that "such a blissful, peaceful and mutually happy relationship" had ended. The Queen Mother and Princess Anne both attended Camilla and Andrew's wedding.

Rich women often "freeze" the style of hair they had as younger women so that they don;t seem to have aged as much with each passing year. Most often it's a kind of hairstyle that hides as much of their foreheads as possible so it also hides a lot of their wrinkles. Anna Wintour does this, for example, and so does Camilla. Their hairstyles always look out of date, but they do it so they look younger than they are (although poor Camilla is SO wrinkled that she can't hide her age much).

I wonder how Meghan would like to be styled, when she becomes Queen?

Lol R138

What a moron! Isn't that the same royal biographer that waxed lyrical about Diana and bitched about Camilla?

R140 Do you have a brain? She'll never become one so stop trying to live vicariously through her, ugly frau!

[quote]I think it is universal with the horsey set. I live in a town in the Southern US that is a major center for world equestrians in the winter, and I see that style all the time.

Wellington?

Only if she manages a clear round jumping fences

R139-ain't that the truth? My sister has her hair frozen in the late 70s/early 80s. It looks very dated (very Jaclyn Smith), but she does look younger than her 67 years, so it seems to be working for her. Honestly, if she got a better cut and style, she wouldn't look like herself.

R143 Aiken, South Carolina, we actually have seasons. We have numerous stables, an annual spring and fall steeplechase, harness races, polo matches year round, foxhunting, and we have hosted The Ambassador's Cup, at least once, for international polo. The rich, many of whom live in the North, winter here with their horses and are horse mad. We also have one of, if not the largest, urban forests in the nation, Hitchcock Woods, it is 2,111 acres. The main purpose of the forest is to be a beautiful place for people to ride their horses everyday.

Meghan is so beautiful compared to the ugly white hags Camilla and Kate. William is disgusting, like a boiled egg.

[quote]Lol [R138]

[quote]What a moron! Isn't that the same royal biographer that waxed lyrical about Diana and bitched about Camilla?

LOL - no idea.

What I do know is that the idea that Charles and Camilla were in love is patently absurd. He may have been in love with her, but she was clearly not in love with him...until the benefit of being a duchess outweighed her ability to snag someone richer, better looking, or more interesting.

There is only one Queen Camilla.

r146 South Carolina would have been my next guess. But Tryon.

R150 Tryon is North Carolina, but close to the border. Aiken is all about horses and golf, since we are in the Augusta, GA metropolitan area. I'm a bit of an anomaly, since I don't golf or ride. Though, it is nice seeing the equestrians around town in their tight riding breeches as they tend to have very nice asses.

I'm SO enthralled by this discussion of South Carolina.

Who cares about royalty when we can compare the attractions of various hamlets in The iodine State?

R152 Well to tie it back into royalty, the Duke and Duchess of Windsor did visit numerous times and Prince Edward came last year to visit our court tennis facility, one of the few in the US.

She wrote to me to ask if I'd do some show jumping but she wouldn't pay my stable fees so I said "neigh"

She's as sensible as her mother in law and so she will be loved.

Who the hell is supporting this horrible candidate Gabbard? I can't believe she made it onto the November debate.

Rottweiler Parker Bowles

OP is one of the deranged anti Diana loons. It identifies with Camilla because it, like Camilla is homely and nobody gives a shit about it.

Cammie had to bow out of a Remembrance appearance with Hopeless Harry and Renegade Rachel today due to a chest infection.

I think it's clear that these days, Camilla does the events she wants to do, and nothing more. She didn't go to Eugenie's wedding, either.

She's cool. Diana was tiresome.

she already bashed prince george for dialing the phone with a pencil. look at his teeth.

George is adorable. We might finally get a good looking Royal.

R158, I have horrible news for you...brace yourself...Diana has been DEAD for 22 years!

Got to give it to her, she kept her mouth shut and her legs open for her 'tampon' prince.

Ready for the guillotines yet? I'm getting impatient.

Wait-Diana died?

Camilla is great! Looking forward to her taking control.

The only thing Camilla will be taking control of is a gin and tonic.

r167 You do realize that about the only thing she will control is the menu that the Palace chef prepares and which brand of gin the Palace stocks.

You forget, R169, that she will likely control access to tiaras. So important.

I've made a hat for her. No scarves. They get in the way.

Yes, she will have access to a mountain of jewels. A mountain of them. And Charles will insist she be completely kitted out in them.

Their Majesties HRH King Henry Windsor and Queen Meghan.

I love the sound of it.

Do diamonds stop steel?

Bow down to your future King and Queen, bitches!

For a moment, perhaps.

Diana and Sarah used to call her "Camilla Park Your Balls"

I thought that was funny. This entire family could definitely live in a trailer park.

Harry and Meghan will never rule. This is not an episode of The Only Way is Essex.

Diana cheapened the Royal Family. Tragic. Camilla has done no wrong and has been good for Charles.

People prefer that Camilla not show up at public events. NOBODY wants to see that hideous creature!

Camilla just canceled an event. She has a cold.

A little more than a cold.

Camilla is suffering from farcy and glanders

100 years from now, Diana will still be a fascinating historical figures. She will never be forgotten. Whereas, Camilla will be but a footnote and an irrevalent one at that.

Charles and Camilla probably won’t be in the throne that long. The Queen still seems to be in fairly stable health and her mother lived to be over 100.

Meanwhile Charles seems to be constantly drinking, judging by his red face. If Charles goes, so does she.

Prince Charles and King Charles does not have the power to declare who is queen and who is princess consort. She will be the Queen.

I give the odds of Charles becoming King at 50/50. Not because they'll skip him for William, as of course they can't legally do that, but because he just won't outlive his mother.

But...if Charlie dies before QE, why wouldn’t the line of succession then go to Princess Anne or Prince Andrew?

No, R186. It doesn't work that way.

R186 Because his death wouldn't erase his children or grand-children from existence.

R126 - I also do not understand all the bad teeth. Many posh UK people have bad teeth. Many rich UK people, like Jeremy Clarkson of The Grand Tour fame, have teeth that are rotting out of their gums. I never understood this.

R186, if Charles had never had children, then you might be onto something. But since he has direct heirs, the line of succession follows the heirs.

Ewwwww....Queen of the Skanks maybe.

What will Meghan wear for her coronation as Queen?

R192 - How many bloody times do people have to post that Instagram likes or popularity polls are NOT how the line of succession is established? Charles, William and his whole family would have to be wiped out before 6th place Harry gets a chance. Duh.

Line of Succession For Dummies

1 Charles

2 William

3 George

4 Charlotte

5 Louis

6 HARRY

Have you got that now, simpleton?

Plane crash, r193.

R192 - Meghan has her own thread. Go post there.

Go douche your nasty cunt, R195.

[quote]Diana and Sarah used to call her "Camilla Park Your Balls"

Ha! I miss the Princess of Wales and Duchess of York keeping it real. They had, well Sarah still has, personality and pizzazz.

They aren't all allowed to fly in the same plane r194.

Camilla will be Queen Consort, I think that's already pre-determined. How much access to BP will her two kids have? Will they make balcony appearance during Trooping the Colour, as is tradition? I like her son Tom, he seems a laid-back, tipsy goofy sort (kind of like his mum). Don't know much about her daughter.

Will her kids do the long church walk at Sandringham at Christmas with the rest of the royals.

R197 - I like Camilla for the same reason I like Sarah, they both seem like a lot fun.

[quote]Their Majesties HRH King Henry Windsor and Queen Meghan. I love the sound of it.

R172. R174. There would have to be a Moldavian Massacre for that to happen.

"Don't know much about her daughter"

R198 - I think her daughter married someone very wealthy who I believe is a member of the Astor clan. Her son married Sara Buys who worked for a fashion Magazine which I believe was British Harper's Bazaar formerly Harper's & Queen magazine if my memory serves me correctly.

[quote] Their Majesties HRH King Henry Windsor and Queen Meghan. I love the sound of it.

I also love "Prince Archie."

That would be cute and hilarious!

[quote] They aren't all allowed to fly in the same plane [R194].

That's actually not true. Diana broke the previous tradition of having the children of the heir to the throne ride in separate planes back in 1983, when baby William flew with his parents to Australia. The wishes of the mother for the emotional health of her babies overrode the palace protocol, and Kate has followed suit with that while her children are very young.

However, George is six now, and will very likely soon be able to fly in a separate plane with a nanny, so if that plane crash that r194 creepily longs for does happen, it better happen in a year or two--after that he will likely no longer ride in the same plane with William and his siblings.

R199. I like Sarah, not Camilla. I have no use for Camilla for undermining Diana at every turn.

For r186: Here's the line of succession going down even further--and keep in mind it cannot be changed except by act of parliament (neither the queen nor Charles can change it by themselves or together):

1. Charles

2. William

3. William's eldest son, George

4. William's eldest daughter, Charlotte

5. William's second son, Louis

6. Harry

7. Harry's son, Archie

8. Andrew

9. Andrew's eldest child, Beatrice

10. Andrew's second child, Eugenie

11. Edward

12. Edward's son, James

13. Edward's daughter, Louise

14. Anne

15. Anne's son, Peter

It goes from there to Peter's two daughters, then to Anne's daughter Zara, then Zara's two daughters.

R205 - Thank you for posting. It is not that some people do not get; it is that some people do not want to get it.

What would happen if the succeeding heir was still a child? If something crazy happened and somehow George at 6 was to step up to the thrown, how would that work? Would he be King with some sort of interim sovereign?

I think Harry would become regent if George succeeded before he as 21 years of age or it might be 18 years of age. I am not sure on the age.

[QUOTE] Charles will insist she be completely kitted out in them.

It’s his right, since many of jewels will belong to him personally, others held by him on behalf of the state. Diamonds, pearls, and gems of Queen Adelaide, Queen Victoria, Queen Alexandra, Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother, and Queen Elizabeth. MOUNTAINS.

Camilla can carry jewels well, don’t worry. She’ll look exactly the way a royal consort should, she’s not shy for the big guns. Her hair is perfect for extravagant tiaras, and her cleavage and low necklines she favors are perfect for necklaces.

R208 - god help us if Harry is named Regent. I would think the Princess Royal should get that job.

I would agree with r208 that Harry would be the most likely choice to be designated regent for George if the queen and Charles were to die tomorrow and William were to take the throne before George is 18 . It's probably not official right now though, since George is not yet a heartbeat away from the monarchy.

I know it was official from 1936 to 1948 when George VI was king and Princess Elizabeth was under 18 that her uncle Henry, Duke of Gloucester, was officially designated the regent-to-be if she should succeed to the throne before her 18th birthday, but she was then literally a heartbeat away from the throne.

Harry's title in such a situation would be Prince Regent until George came of age.

See below...If women were treated equally at the time of Anne's birth and Louise's birth, the succession to the throne should be--in fact they could have switched the succession order for Aanne and Louise when they changed it when William's kids were born and Charlotte would succeed George. Succession order was switched in Sweden. When Prince Carl Philip was born:, he was on track to be king even though his sister, Princess Victoria, was older. When the succession order was changed and females could succeed based on birth order, Carl Philip was bumped down and Victoria was bumped up to be heir to the throne.,

1. Charles

2. William

3. William's eldest son, George

4. William's eldest daughter, Charlotte

5. William's second son, Louis

6. Harry

7. Harry's son, Archie

8. Anne

9. Anne's son, Peter Phillips

10. Peter Phillips's eldest daughter

11. Peter Phillips second daughter

12. Anne's daughter, Zara Phillips

13. Zara Phillips' eldest daughter

14. Zara Phillips second daughter

15. Andrew

16. Andrew's eldest daughter Beatrice

17. Andrew's second daughter, Eugenie

18. Edward

19. Edward's daughter, Louise

20. Edward's son, James

R211 - You go down the line of succession until you reach the first person over 21 when determining who the Regent is.

Before QEII was 18 or 21 (not sure on age), the next person in the line of succession over the age of 21 was her uncle, HRH Henry, Duke of Gloucester.

r211/r213 - Harry would not be regent for George. Kate would be first choice. If she weren't available for whatever reason it could be Harry, or another suitable family member. One thing certain, it would NOT be Andrew. Edward and Anne would ostensibly be around to help out if Kate wasn't available.

The old-school rules re Regencies whereby the next in succession became regent automatically were changed in the 1950s when Charles and Anne were heirs and minors. An addendum to the existing Regency Act made Philip regent in case of QEII's death, rather than Aunt Margaret which wouldn't have been appropriate. A similar addendum would certainly be created to put Kate in charge of a minor King George.

[quote] Harry would not be regent for George. Kate would be first choice.

Not likely. Kate is an anorexic commoner peasant. There's no way in hell they would bypass someone with actualy ROYAL blood - like Harry or Archie - for the daughter of a flight attendant.

Yeah... not gonna happen.

If anything happened to William, Harry would be in charge, until one of the anorexic hag's brood, is old enough to take over.

In the past, I would have expected it would be Harry, but with his recent actions I doubt it. The governments of the realms and the Commonwealth, would not want someone as obviously emotionally fragile and damaged as him to serve as regent.

Hello - they are not passing over George's MOTHER for anyone else. Not his wayward dipshit uncle, his pedo great-uncle, his imperiously royal great-aunt or anyone else. This is nearly 2020: they will appoint his mother first.

In her absence or death, it would be Harry (only if he's still living in the UK). And if he's not around, a joint regency could easily be created whereby Edward and Anne the Princess Royal could share that duty, until George is of age.

See the link for info re the Regency Act of 1953. A similar act would be passed to make Kate regent, if needed.

Kate is a cunt.

R192, something slovenly and ugly.

Someone above referred to Prince George stepping up to the THROWN. I’m going to go and thrown up now.

Correction: Kate is the MOTHER cunt, r218.

Correction: Kate is the MOTHER of ALL cunts, R220!

It's not Friday night on DL until all our Queens have weighed in on the Order of Succession, who gets to be the Regent and what kind of cunt poor Kate is....

We have Melania if you catch my drift. Something both countries have in common and will be that the spouses of leaders are…

[quote]when Charles becomes King, EVERYFUCKINGBODY will have to bow, scrape and curtsy to her as wife of the sovereign.

Only you royal obsessed minions in the UK. The rest of the world couldn't give a shit who she thinks she is. It's odd that you guys over there say the monarchy has no power anymore yet you believe in your core that you must bow down as some kind of master slave relationship.

She is basically the kardashian of the UK only uglier.

Markle could be regent. Problem is she never give it up and would poison George.

Since all the onion layers have been peeled back, Prince Dim Harry isn't going anywhere except off into the sunset. Good luck with the mental health and that wife, Dim.

I like Camilla, as time goes on. I think both Charles and Diana were to blame for the demise of their marriage. I was sad when Diana died, but I think she was probably high-maintenance and a lot of drama. Yes, I think she loved her sons and showed them affection. But if she had lived, I think the sons would have been with nannies or governesses quite a bit. I think Diana would have been traveling a lot, looking for a 2nd husband.

What would Harry even do if he and Sparkle were to quit the royal family? Wander around LA, pretending to be important? He's a known dullard who had to cheat his way through secondary school. He really has no other option in life other than to hold babies and cut ribbons for a living, like a lifelong pageant queen.

The bitch queen pedo protector will be the last. Trust me.

Cammie will show up for an engagement with the Queen and family.

Glad her highness is feeling better. There's an event tonight, and then the ceremony tomorrow.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Will and Kate at Royal Albert Hall this evening.

The Queen has arrived.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

LOL, it's where they belong.

R236 - Isn't Boris still married to his wife? Why is Mistress Claire even allowed to sit with the Royals? Yeah, the times have changed but does anyone have any class anymore?

Harry looks like he doesn't give two fucks about being there.

Like he couldn't care less.

He probably wants to be at home with his son.

It's not as if he hasn't been attending that boring crap for over 30 years.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R239 Out of all of them, other than the Queen who lived through WWII, he should feel the most connected to Remembrance events as a war veteran. However, he has become much too self involved.

R241 - Andrew flew a Navy helicopter during the Falklands War. Andrew is on the right next to PM Boris.

Hapless Harry looks lost in space.

Camilla is so hideous. Only unattractive losers can possibly like her.

R242 I was going to mention Andrew, but I didn't see him in attendance. Boris kind of blocks out anyone sitting near him.

Meghan looks absolutely radiant, with a fuller figure.

Just very natural. And happy. Unlike the anorexic hag in the front row, with her miserable looking husband.

This thread will be closed now that the Megaloon has arrived.

Yes, she does r246. Like a radiant barrel.

Sophie, Anne, Kate and Camilla.

R246 - Oh yes, Delusional One, Kate and Will look so miserable, don't they?

LOLOLOL, only a few days ago the Meg loon kept telling us Meg has slimmed down to her pre pregnancy body ... now that Meg has turned up as a black barrel, even he has to admit she has got a 'fuller figure'.

Hey Meg loon, just fyi: This is not a 'fuller figure' - this chunkyness is the result of having let herself go now that she has got the ring on her finger and the meal ticket aka Archie.

They're just so miserable, aren't they? LOL.

Is Markle showing up for the Armistice Day ceremony? Was she invited?

Not a Markell fan, but she looks good (for a change).

I like Sophie’s hair down. Very stylish.

Does anyone know of any good royal discussion boards? I see that the Meghan thread has been closed and it seems that soon there won't be any DL royal threads left, or they'll be closed right away.

It's interesting that the same fanatical poster is in the Harry Styles threads bashing other former One Direction members. Her posts provoke heated responses as they do in the royal threads, but those threads aren't being shut down. It would be nice to have an explanation.

Camilla looks well for being so sick recently.

R240. Where are Their Royal Highnesses Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie? They should be there...or are they beyond the photo frame? And would it have killed them to invite Sarah, Duchess of York?

I wonder if it would be allowable to start a vintage Royal gossip thread here, say pre-2000 events. That way, people could have fun discussing the historical Royal shenanigans without having to get involved with the dicier issues. Anybody with a subscription interested in starting one?

r257. This is a British Legion event and not a Royal family event such as Trooping the Colour. All the extras are not needed or probably wanted.

Is Meghan pregnant again?

R255, I'd love to get an explanation, too.

R258, there's no point in doing so - such a thread would get deleted. The webmasters don't seem to mind the DL getting infested and messed up by some trolls and they most certainly don't give a fuck about real, legitimate (and paying!) users.

Sophie looks fantastic tonight. She can be hit and miss but really looks good here. I would love Megs dress on a more petite frame..it is very 50's Grace Kelly if you imagine it with a tiny waist and the pointy bras they wore then. Nice to see Edward , Will and Kate having a giggle.I wonder who farted?

Meg’s plunging neckline was inappropriate.

So the Megloon got all the other threads shut down I see. There were about 5 threads yesterday and now they're all disappeared.

I finally subscribed in large part for the Dangling/ BRF threads, which were then 'mysteriously' shut down permanently too.

Why is DL censoring this topic? So we are not allowed to talk about the BRF on here anymore?

DL rewards the asshole trolls by shutting down threads they infect and censors the paying customers/content providers for responding?

Sounds like a plan - to lose business.

Nice to see that Harry didn’t wear his same old khakis and scuffed hush puppy shoes.

Inside the Duchy of Cornwall

It makes me sick that our last, very popular thread was deleted. We had collectively been trying to avoid the Sussexes, and had created a very rich thread full of historical interest. It was one of our better efforts, and now it's gone because of one deranged fangurl, who isn't even a subscriber.

That's a really good watch, r267. Shows a side of Charles I hadn't really seen before. He comes off incredibly well and is clearly a major positive force in those farmers' lives. Good stuff. Thanks for posting.

Speaking of the mass-deletions, has anyone ever seen another ultra-popular topic mass-censored before on here? I've been here since 2008 and cannot remember ever seeing this kind of censorship before. Can anyone else think of another example? It's really irritating, and weirdly unsettling.

I wish Muriel would just flat out explain what the rule is. Does she delete them? I don't really care about the why if so. Do Megantoinette's legion of the damaged hit F&F enough the system just freezes them and it dies? It is strange, R268... I've never seen anything like it and I've been here a long time. (I heard of the weirdness around the Prancing Ponies but I didn't witness it... I think this may be similar.) Anyway, it's a weird one.

R268 I think they do it to BRF threads and soap threads. Even though they appear to be two of the most popular types of threads. It makes no sense to keep shutting down threads that are popular. It would be like if McDonald's stopped selling Big Macs.

R270, Do you know if the soap threads have fanatical posters trying to shut them down?

R224 Oh dear, I see a deranged American MM fan has never heard of the Commonwealth and of course Camilla will be Queen of it all. As for bowing, no one is under any obligation to do so including in the UK or anywhere else.

R271 There always a few crazy people who post obsessively, then they get shut down.

I wonder how much all these rocks weigh. We don’t really talk about the necklaces here. This one is too much, IMO. Who’d have thought one could have too many diamonds?

There are loads of threads where people post obsessively r273. The only ones that get shut down are ones a specific, single pro-MM poster trolls and derails.

Our last BRF thread was humming along beautifully, with several hundred responses, until the deranged MM fangurl showed up and started posting. Many of us asked her to leave the thread, but she persisted, and that's when it was shut down. But she had earlier threatened the thread (I guess because we WEREN'T talking about her idol). It's a no-win situation. I had always assumed that it was comments about MM that were causing threads to be shut down, so I had been avoiding commenting on her, but it seems like any threads about British Royals have to be devoted to discussing MM's (non-existent) stellar qualities. I'm still a little too shocked to react, but I'm going to have to consider discontinuing my paid status if I'm not even allowed to post about the subjects that interest me.

The fanatic recently posted nasty things about Charlotte and George on the SWC Show part trois thread to bait people. It does seem like a lose-lose.

So this one non-paying individual is allowed to shut down paying posters?

So this loathesome, deranged troll now edits the DL?

I've got better uses for my $19.00. Like burning it.

If a plane crash were indeed to wipe out one branch of the royal family, why would it be the Cambridges and not the Sussexes?

R279, Because the MM fangurl lives in a world of fairy tales from Disney movies. They have the intellectual capacity of a 13 year old fangurl. They don't understand the British rules of succession. I will readily admit to being an American gay man, but my BF is black, and I've been deeply insulted as a racist, simply for offering a not-so-positive opinion of MM. In terms of how things work in the greater world, I always defer to the Brits, and you'll never find me arguing with them. I try to think that I know my place.

O. M. G.

Posts 250-280 are essentially ONE LONG COMPLAINT by the same person. With the same complaint.

"Why do my obsessive and racist Meghan Markle hate threads keep getting deleted?"

Do you really have to ask, you fucking nutcase? It's because you are insane.

And you're complaining about why you aren't allowed to start 10 threads a day, hating on Meghan Markle, from her "lack of decorum" to her being "unfit" for the monarchy, etc. etc. etc.????

You are clearly OBSESSED with hating Meghan Markle.

I get that. Everyone here gets that. And most of all, the Webmaster gets that.

You are the only person who doesn't.

Fuck the Sparkle threads - wtf happened to the -delightful- Mountbatten threads? there was a wonderfully long one here until today, it had wonderful ongoing discussion re the Romanov dynasty, Prince Philip's family origins and Dickie and a's wild swinging Jazz Age lifestyle. Barely a mention of they-who-shall-not-be-named; and it was deleted! One of the better royal posts we've had here in a while.

oh and r281, it is boring but there is -nothing- wrong with posting about disliking MM or any other celebrity. This is DL where we abhor the worship of the rich and famous. They are ripe for picking here. Take the sanctimony over to iVillage (does such a place still exist lol?) or LSA or wherever they tolerate that crap.

[QUOTE] . I'm still a little too shocked to react, but I'm going to have to consider discontinuing my paid status if I'm not even allowed to post about the subjects that interest me.

How arrogant of you to think a gay gossip site wanted to host your lectures on the Romanovs and other historical figures.

You're right, R283. There is nothing wrong with disliking Meghan.

However, what DOESN'T fly, is starting ten different threads per day, stating how much you dislike Meghan Markle.

And all of them UN-cleverly disguised as different variations of why Meghan is such a "monster."

It is psychotic. It's tedious. And most of all, nobody here wants to read that shit, over, and over, and over again.

We know that Charles does not get along with his father and Andrew, but is he close to any of his other siblings? Does he have any friends, or does he only have vassals? Does Camilla get along with anyone in the family? I remember rumours that she told one of her friends, early on in the Cambridges‘ marriage, that Kate was anorexic and couldn’t have children. I don’t suppose that endeared her to William, but they sure can keep appearances.

There is some poster who uses a French sounding name - not registered, input manually - to drive shut downs of anything mentioning the Great Marital Mistake of 2018. I don't know why posters don't F&F it. That might solve the problem?

Nut rightly off r284 there is nothing more gay than discussion re the Romanovs! Or anything else of a historical nature here.

r285 no one is making you or anyone else read them or stay in here, posting away with us 'tedious' losers. You've posted your same complaints a dozen times in here and elsewhere. Get a hint: we hear you, we don't care, most of us stay in one or two posts (I've never been in more than that at once on any single topic on DL). The Supernatural and cooking threads are awaiting your oh-so-scintillating presence - that is if you can contribute anything non-critical or policing of others.

[QUOTE] I get that. Everyone here gets that. And most of all, the Webmaster gets that. You are the only person who doesn't.

👏👏👏👏👏

The racist genuinely thinks there is only one 'Megstan' on DL, instead of a host of people who don't enjoy seeing the abuse, month after month. So pleased the tedious Romanov/Meghan hate thread was eliminated.

I saw the paranoid Welp Troll speculating that these threads are being nuked by MM's reps because it had never happened to any other threads. Not true, the Richard Madden/Brandon Flynn threads were all shut down and the stans moved to Tapatalk. If another is started up, it gets immediately deleted.

[quote]We know that Charles does not get along with his father and Andrew, but is he close to any of his other siblings? Does he have any friends, or does he only have vassals? Does Camilla get along with anyone in the family?

Charles is moderately close to Anne, whom he grew up with. He is close to her two children. He actually has had plenty of friends over the years, aristo types who are mostly brown-nosy but very loyal (Soames, Van Cutsem, Constantine of Greece).

Camilla gets on fine with most of them. Perhaps not Anne, due to the shared back history over Andrew Parker-Bowles, but otherwise she fits in. She's known most of them her entire life remember.

Why not just put it in the rules then, where everyone can read before posting, “no discussions are allowed on Meghan/One Direction/Richard Madden etc”?

Wonder how Cammie feels about QE2 since she's the one who forbid Chuck from marrying the tramp in the first place.

[quote]The racist genuinely thinks there is only one 'Megstan' on DL, instead of a host of people who don't enjoy seeing the abuse, month after month. So pleased the tedious Romanov/Meghan hate thread was eliminated.

There isn't one stan on DL, perhaps a few (4 or 5) but equally there's no raft of people sitting around agonizing and hand-wringing over the topics of threads here. Just a select weird controlling 1 or 2 who perpetually bitch about it in said threads, while absolutely NO ONE in them pays attention or heeds their dictatorial directives ("stop posting!", "stop talking about subject X!", etc)....

We're still here (yawn). And will be here. When are you gonna get the message? oh that's right.

R291, there is always a 1d thread. I don't know why you think racist discourse about a young mixed race woman's 'nappy hair' and 'melted candle nose' would ever be encouraged?

r292 I'm sure she's in awe of her, since that's how she was strictly raised to be. And Camilla wasn't banned for marrying Charles by QE or anyone else as much as she was more into APB in her youth and when he proposed first, she jumped to marry him. At that time he was her greater love/lust/suitor, although history ignores this fact.

R290, thank you for the reply. I was just looking at tge pictures from the Remembrance day concert and thinking how the seating arrangements and the pecking order would change when Charles becomes king. Surely Andrew will be banished and Harry and Meghan brought to the front. Would he still keep Anne around, or is she just there to support her mom and would otherwise prefer to retire? Sophie seems committed to her Royal duties, and she usually gets non very high-profile or glamorous ones, I can’t see Charles completely shutting her out. As for Camilla, I’m sure she can manage polite interaction with them fine when she has to during the official occasions or family events, but she seems to be bowing out of those quite frequently, so I would guess no particularly warm feelings on both sides? Is it true that she canceled her participation in the joint event with Harry and Meghan because in the absence of Charles they would outrank her and she’d have to curtsey to them both?

[QUOTE] it true that she canceled her participation in the joint event with Harry and Meghan because in the absence of Charles they would outrank her and she’d have to curtsey to them both?

You are nuts. They only have to curtsey to TQ and not always to her.

r297 the curtseying conventions are really on paper only. In reality only TQ and Philip are bowed/curtseyed to, in private or public.

r296: Charles I'm certain will keep Anne around when he is King, for sharing workload (the woman is a workhorse) and her advice and support. He trusts her. Andrew is a whole different story. Look for him to be totally backburnered when his mother dies. Possibly even removed as Counsellor of State. Charles will have nothing to do with him.

Camilla hasn't been feeling well lately and doesn't have great robust health imo. That has more to do with her cancellations than any personal or social reasons. She used to smoke like a chimney and I imagine that has caught up with her.

R298, that I could believe, but didn’t she attend some other event instead when she was sitting out Eugenie’s wedding? And weren’t there some other occasions like that when she chose public engagements over family events?

Camilla's approval rating has always been down in the low 20s so she won't be a popular queen. She might even die before Charles takes the throne.

And, R298, I’ll admit that I only know about curtseying what I learned on DL, but didn’t QEII specifically change the order of precedence so that the “blood princesses” would not have to curtsey to Camilla and Kate when they are not being accompanied by their husbands?

Missing Eug's wedding was strange, but it was supposedly a previously scheduled engagement. She likes Bea and Eug, I don't think there's personal animus there (she isn't fond of their mother though, one would guess).

Camilla isn't in a position to "choose" what events she would attend. Charles would overrule any questionable choices there. Camilla is pretty dutiful and wouldn't do anything to rock the marital or royal boat, not at her age.

R298 Not, only that but Anne is the Princess Royal, which she will remain until her death. It would be seen as bad form to try and sideline her especially given the fact that many years she performs more duties than almost anyone else.

R299 It is largely suspected that she didn't attend Eugenie's wedding because there is no love lost between her and Fergie, because Fergie was team Diana. And with it being Fergie's big return to a royal event, it would be best for her to not attend. She could have attended, no one would have stopped her, but it was thought it would easier for Fergie, to not have her there. The family was very concerned with how Fergie would handle her moment in the spotlight and wanted to make it as smooth as possible.

R302 I have no doubts that Camilla has enough common sense and sense of duty to not do anything completely out of line (like flying to NYC to watch tennis instead of visiting her mother-in-law in her summer residence), but I think she would not have any trouble telling Charles that she would rather stay home and drink instead of flying overseas for some boring state visit.

r301 yes she did, allegedly at the instigation of Anne and Princess Alexandra, both of whom didn't want to curtsy to Camilla after she married Charles. The order of precedence was changed to appease, and it applies in theory. But in practical actuality, no one is bobbing and curtseying to anyone in private. Only to TQ and Philip.

r304 Cam has a real fear of flying long distances, a real phobia. Is she gets out of long distance travel that's the reason, not because she wants to stay home and booze all day. Charles didn't allow Diana to do that, he wouldn't allow Camilla.

These two aren't going to grow up to be lookers, are they?

The minute the current queen dies, Queen Camilla will insist Anne and Alexandra curtsy to her. In fact, don't be surprised if she makes them kowtow entirely to her--they'll have to prostrate themselves on the floor in front of her if they want any money from the crown ever again!

Nope r307. If they curtsy to her, it's out of respect to the Crown, as they were strictly raised to have. Not to Camilla personally. Any bowing and curtsying is done to the person as a monarch (or their mate) and not to the person in a personal sense.

Their funding won't change an iota. Alexandra really doesn't receive must anymore anyways.

Here's Part II of the documentary of Charles and the Duchy of Cornwall.

I'm a long-time subscriber on DL, from before the time the Sussexes entered our world. And I'm a polite person who doesn't go around hurling insults at other people. I don't understand all the vitriol, and I just read the posts upthread with all the racist accusations, and I don't understand what's being discussed. I've always done what our Webmaster has instructed, and FFed racist posts. I've just read that our last (quite long) thread was full of racism, and somehow, I must have missed it. And now, it's impossible to use it as a learning message.

You guys need to stop talking about how 'ugly' this woman is, and how 'nappy and coarse' her hair is compared to 'English Rose' Kate's. That's racism, and you do it on every thread.

You also say she has a plastic face constructed out of Botox and fillers, when she had her current face aged 18 (just a little plumper).

R310, Why don't you just fuck right off, and find a different website to haunt? I just did a search, and you're the only person who has mentioned 'nappy hair' here, you fuckwit.

I rarely, if ever, hear a white person talking about a person's hair being nappy, Don Imus is the only one I can remember. Black people, however, often call out other black people for having nappy hair.

I don’t recall reading any post stating MM’s hair is nappy. What I’ve read is that she looks sloppy, including her hair, and that often is accurate.

MM looked great at another event recently, wearing a purple dress that just skimmed the body, her hair loose around her face. I just don’t get how she goes from looking great to a total disaster in less than a month.

As for disappearing threads, perhaps it’s time to make F&F paid members only.

Since Anne and Alexandra are royal by birth, wouldn't they only have to curtsey to Camilla in the presence of Charles?

Yes r314, technically. And if Charles isn't present, Camilla would have to curtsy to them.

r310 is the FCB troll (look it up). No one has used those terms to describe her hair here, not in this thread or elsewhere. LINK PLEASE. or shut the fuck up.

It's perfectly in line with DL standards to discuss her alleged plastic surgery, which she's obviously had, and its quality. GTFO if you can't handle it.

No real card-carrying DL denizen would ever call Kate an "English Rose" either. Gag gag gag.

No, because being queen consort would mean she fully outranks them. They can only ever be HRH, but she will one day be HM--and that outranks HRH. They will have to curtsy to her everywhere.

[quote]As for disappearing threads, perhaps it’s time to make F&F paid members only.

An excellent idea.

r317 I was referring to order of precedence as it stands now in my post at r315, while QEII is alive and Camilla is still DoC.

You are of course correct about that, once Charles is King and Camilla is consort.

Now that R310 has shown up, I'm going to repeat the request: is there another website where I can discuss British Royals? Because I expect that this thread won't last much longer. That asshole infects every thread about British Royals with their racism, and gets them all shut down.

R320, since when did protesting about racism count as racism? Only in your diseased, putrefying mind.

In the last thread (which was deleted for racism) someone said M's hair had 'nappy edges' and another was hoping Pss Michael wears her 'blackamoor brooch'.

I can't see any evidence of plastic surgery on M. You trolls have yet to provide a convincing side by side showing it.

While you attempt to steady your palsied fingers enough to use the collage function on your iphone 4s, here's a reminder of our stunning Megs aged 18. Exactly the same face.

R320, you could try opening a thread on Digital Spy, but your level of vitriol would probably result in a ban. The C word you're so fond of using is automatically asterisked out.

Okay, I've just deleted my DL subscription.My fellow DL posters I'm sorry, but I'm sick of this.

[QUOTE] Okay, I've just deleted my DL subscription.My fellow DL posters I'm sorry, but I'm sick of this.

Yasss!

"Work on my medicine, work on

Thus credulous fools are caught."

I doubt you, though. Have you cancelled your $1.50 a month direct debit in a fit of rage? What does deletion mean?

NOBODY gives a flying fuck about Camilla. She is nothing but a revolting creature.

There were absolutely NO racist posts in the last threads or any of them, that I can remember, and I've been here for all of them.

The only times the word "nappy" has EVER been used on these threads is by the lying Megstan itself, when it makes repeated false claims that there were other posters using that word. It only ever makes those claims about threads that have been deleted, knowing that no one can disprove it's lies.

Cancel your subscriptions and tell the DL webmasters you did because of a single, obviously non-paying Meghan Markle fan lunatic being able to destroy every single thread dedicated to the BRF.

Only in case they start losing subscriptions the webmasters might take care of the problem. They won't do anything about the problem if you don't address the problem and tell them you will cancel the subscription if nothing is done about the troll problem.

Sad, but true.

R327, the moderators' views of what a troll is will differ from yours. A poster expressing the opposite opinion from you is not a troll. Did you genuinely expect to be able to hate on and on and on without a single dissenting voice? On DL, of all places?

You also seem to expect everyone to express admiration for dowdy Kate, who has no discernible talent and dresses like a fifty five year old. Why would she appeal to gay men?

The only people who mention racism are the MM fans. They are also the ones who say racist things in the hope that the thread will be deleted, just like they are the ones who said horrible things about Archie when he was a baby. Yes they are crazy fans who will do anything to shut these threads down including pretending to hate MM because of her colour. They pretend they are long term users here and use words like "Frau" "crotch fruit" and "welp troll' or pretend they are British and keep saying "Brits" and "Daily Fail" Yet all the long term users on here know these wankers are just uneducated losers who have no life except worshiping some average actress who married well. They like her because she is so very average and therefore somewhat aspirational for them.

also I don't usually buy into any conspiracy crap but these threads have seriously deteriorated since MM employed the services of Sunshine Sachs.

[R328] zzz ...

Why don't you come up with something new for a change?

[QUOTE] They are also the ones who say racist things in the hope that the thread will be deleted, just like they are the ones who said horrible things about Archie when he was a baby. Yes they are crazy fans who will do anything

Sorry, but Trolldar proves you a liar. I checked the other posts of the Downs poster and they were all hate posts, going back weeks. Same was true of those talking about her nappy edges/coarse hair/extensions/bronzer/wide ass/ built like Doria etc.

You sound like someone with learning difficulties when you twist and try to blame Meg's defenders for all the hate posts, when their authors can be so easily verified on here.

R328 Honestly, is the the best you can do? you say the same shit over and over like some demented toddler

R332, you are slow witted. Not quick or sharp enough for Datalounge. The mods will think it's hilarious that one of the BRF posters has flounced because other posters won't let her be racist in peace. They probably hope more of you will follow.

One of my favourite moments of Camilla and William opening talking about MM and how awkward her and Harry were for trying to push in. I especially like William saying to them "not allowed" From 1:57 onwards, enjoy bitches

*openly ^^

You have to turn the volume up in the above video, but it is so worth it.

They don't even say that. You guys really are tinhats, aren't you? It's no wonder you keep recommending Danja Zone.

I don't understand how one person can get a thread closed. Does she threaten the site with a lawsuit? One can only FF a thread once, right?

R337 yes they do, William says not allowed then him and Camilla whisper and William says Harry and MM are doing it for attention, meanwhile he is fully cock blocking both Harry and MM and the final bit it when Camilla whispers it's so "awkward". It's the best! Turn it up and listen or is it too much to hear the truth about how everyone in the RF can't stand her lol

Who or what on earth is Danja Zone and why are they mentioned on a Camilla thread?

I'm sorry, R323. I don't blame you one bit. That last thread was utterly delightful. And we were sailing along beautifully. I don't understand how one person - or just a handful of people. - can get a popular thread shut down. Unless DL becomes a Markle Acolyte site and all negative discussion of her is banned in the rules, people are going to dislike her and voice their opinions. This is becoming like Kaiser at Celebitchy, who deletes any comments that don't please her and even bans posters who have the temerity to disagree with her. Interestingly, she's been outed as Chandra DasGupta, a woman who is either from India or of Indian descent living in Virginia. Some posters on other boards think the British history of colonialism in part explains some of her really weirdly focussed hatred targeted at Kate and her taking up for Meghan so blindly. That site has been losing posters hands over fist, and that's what's going to start happening on DL-at least when it comes to these popular threads. It's a pity. I love the history.

It's intetesting to see the fangurl so insecure and unhappy, just like Markle. R u ok?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R341 Thanks for asking

Remember when this thread was about me?

Yes., I do, darling at R344. I'm glad you're feeling better. You looked marvelous on the balcony. It was a cold morning, so I hope you're resting with a well-earned whiskey.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

I have to chime in with the posters despairing of this site and the Webmaster's continual deferring to this relentless Megstan troll; and I agree, why not make ww/ff buttons register/subscribe only? These are good, informative and fun threads and the only racism is in the addled head of the troll.

By the way, is there a reason that when I hit either one, both grey out but I don't see my vote counted?

R349, both the WW and FF buttons grey out when you hit either one. I'm not sure why. I believe you can see your vote if you leave the thread and then return, but I'm not positive about that.

R310 becomes unhinged whenever Meghan is criticized, yet she attacks other posters and criticizes other royals and celebs, even little kids, with great abandon. It's puzzling that she hasn't been suspended or banned.

I suspect that the Meghan troll is her PR at work. Again I question how one individual can get a thread closed. Who has that much power or influence?

If it's her PR or lawyers, R351, they must be making money hand over fist. Attempting to squelch negative criticism is like playing whack-a-mole. It's a terrible strategy that will drain their finances.

Here's the deal, mates: I'm going to create a thread praising Meghan. Of course our appreciation will be tongue in cheek.

And here you are:

Interestingly, the Megstan troll's efforts may only be serving to increase ire at Meghan when interestis otherwise waning. Judging by the decreasing number of 'hits' and comments on both fan and foe sites, Harry and Meghan fatigue is setting in. The novelty has worn off and people's minds are made.

On topic, hopefully we see Camilla at the Christmas walk this year. George, too.

Thank you R350, I hit ww for you (you had one vote) and left the thread, came back and can still see one vote and ww/ff greyed out. So, apparently I'm not allowed.

:(

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The Three Royal Top Femaleshave a discussion on the balcony.

I thought Meghan looked perfectly fine today (for a change), but it sort of broke my heart to see HM shed tears.

Andrew, Harry and William lay wreaths.

Haggard Cammie in her pearls and poppies.

Quite an intricate hair do on Kate.

Kate wore a special "Codebreakers" poppy in honor of her paternal grandmother.

She had her moments, she had some style

The best show in town was the crowd

Outside Buckingham Palace crying “Camilla Peron!”

But that’s all gone now

As soon as the smoke from the funeral clears

We’re all going to see how she had a Lady Diana murdered.

I don't think the Queen was being emotional, more that she just has the watery eyes that can come with ageing or post cataract surgery. Often when she is out and about she wipes her eyes or she chooses to wear sunglasses which help reduce irritation in dry eye syndrome.

R365 can't you please fuck off!

Oh Cammie! That dress, those shoes! You can do better!

"Is everyone ok"?

In the second picture above in R369, did Charles button his coat incorrectly? He's always impeccably dressed and tailored, so it just stood out to me. Maybe just a bad angle.

R370 No, the buttons all line up correctly. The problem is that it is a three button suit and he only buttoned the middle button, and all those medals are pulling down that side of the jacket. He needed to button the top button for the coat to appear smooth.

The last couple of years, Kate has nailed her look for Remembrance. Thank God those early, horrid curls are gone and replaced by an elegant updo.

Ah 371, you are absolutely right. I missed the weight of the medals. Thanks!

r372, Her face has barely changed but yes those sausage curls look bad now. was that the fashion at the time?

Well done to Camilla for turning up today and last night. Feeling crap with a chest infection is bad enough without having to look smart and meet people. I can go to work looking like a corpse with a hacking cough but nobody is critical about my appearance.

She should be queen. When the Prince of Wales becomes king, she, as his wife, will be the queen consort by right. A couple of years ago, "Vanity Fair" did a piece on her that showed her to be a down-to-earth woman, who has a home where she lets her down (as it were), and where even Charles relaxes. There was also a rumor a few years ago that she may be sick due to a lifelong habit of smoking. Hope that isn't true.

R354, Thank you so much. I've cackling away at that thread.

Camilla will never become queen, the British people would never stand for it.

R378, you're welcome. Don't forget to WW that thread.

What happens after ceremonies like Remembrance, etc. Does the whole family gather at someone's house for lunch afterwards or do they all go out to eat somewhere and then fight over the check? Or do they not lay eyes on each other again until the next mandatory meeting of The Firm?

R380. Some, but not all of them, go to IHOP for the Sunday blueberry special.

Camilla will be Princess Consort just as she, Charles and the palace said. That's it. No queen for her.

She'll be Queen. It's inevitable.

[QUOTE] . Some, but not all of them, go to IHOP for the Sunday blueberry special.

Here's the loon pretending to be an insider again.

[quote][R320], you could try opening a thread on Digital Spy, but your level of vitriol would probably result in a ban. The C word you're so fond of using is automatically asterisked out.

Whaaat? I'll have you know "cunt" is a long-protected word here on DL. For many, many years. It's use here - whether palatable or not to everyone - represents the freedom of this (still)-gay board.

The day it's banned on DL is the day it's no longer a gay board. And I say that as someone who doesn't necessarily use that word in my offline life.

Boy you can tell who the newbies are around here.

r382 Camilla will probably be titled and crowned Queen Consort. Charles did state that she'd be called "Princess Consort" at the time of their wedding, but in the intervening years his people have clearly signaled that won't be the case.

If the public overwhelmingly rose up and protested calling her this when the time arrives, they might back down and re-consider. But I think they're counting on most to be unconcerned or apathetic by then. Get used to hearing "Queen Camilla" in a few years.

For those who constantly question why the topic of the BRF has largely been banned, Muriel has said before that once a topic starts spilling into other threads or starts spamming the board it will be banned.

Of course, the people creating endless threads did not want to hear this, so now we are in the situation we are in.

Well, if she did not ban/paywall the BRF threads then there would not be multiple threads, now, would there?

The multiple threads situation is one of Muriel's making and of Muriel's alone.

I don't quite get the dynamic. It's an expected topic of conversation but of late it is being infiltrated and grey lined through sustained F&F assaults.

The problem doesn't seem to me to be the topic but an organized effort by outsiders to shut it down.

R354's kind Markle thread is gone!

Some people would much prefer to believe in a conspiracy theory than something that has been confirmed by the admin of the site.

No.

Point me to where it was confirmed, r390. Include a link, and cite the exact post number.

Because otherwise we're all going to think you're just another Megstan, telling baldfaced lies to hide how you're intentionally getting these threads shut down.

^^r391 is the lying Megstan, not r390

I thought Camilla looked quite nice this morning.

But I'm calling it now. Megs is pregs again.

HRH King Henry IX

[quote]Muriel has said before that once a topic starts spilling into other threads or starts spamming the board it will be banned.

R387. What does the following mean: "once a topic starts spilling into other threads" AND "starts spamming the board." Spilling into other threads? Spamming the board? Huh? What?

It wouldn't shock me if she were already pregnant again, R395. She and Harry have moved at lightning speed so far. I think she'll want another child pretty soon in order to reduce the chances of Down's syndrome or other age-related complications.

I LOVE how powerful the Spaz Troll is. You were such fools to antagonize him. He will now work systematically to ensure that all the anti Meghan threads are deleted or paywalled. I warned you guys, but you thought you knew best.

And this is different exactly how, r399?

r397 It's entirely made up. The Megstan wants to shut down all conversation of Megan, so along with derailing comments, racist comments, and mass ff's leading to deletions, it then chimes in to say "yuuuuu guise! You know we're not supposed to post, right?" in multiple, various ways.

Just another tactic to get all criticism of Meghan shut down. You see variations of it at r387 and also at r399.

Posters like R399 are why we can't have nice things.

Skippy, beloved of Kate stans, is fully convinced that MM and Archie have left the UK for the US permanently.

Anyone who starts naming trolls ie the welp or spaz is a dumb Megastan.

[quote]Some people would much prefer to believe in a conspiracy theory than something that has been confirmed by the admin of the site.

Please, pray tell, what has"the admin of the site" confirmed or elucidated at all. Muriel has never deigned to explain.

If you are in private conversations with the admin, well, then...

Of course Camilla will be Queen, most British people really don't care much about what happened so long ago with Diana and Charles. In fact I'd say most people know that she was quite a troubled person. Only the crazed Diana fans are invested in thinking Camilla will never be Queen.

Muriel states in the DL rules that trolls are 'anyone obsessed with a subject', which means the infantile, 'Megastan' fixated R404 and its ilk. Given that, of course these threads - which are set up with the sole purpose of 24/7 bitching about an irrelevant non lgbt individual - are being closed or deleted.

Liz will outlive Camilla at this rate.

She will be titled Queen Camilla, just as any other British wife of a King was given the title of Queen preceding her name. There will be no "Princess" or "Consort" nonsense about it.

And since she won't be the reigning monarch, her being "beloved by the masses" is quite irrelevant.

However, the future King Charles III, who will have been a long-time champion of environmental causes; of architecture that doesn't blight the landscape, particularly the London skyline; of physical fitness and sport; of "Buy British," especially supporting small farmers and producers; the father and grandfather of popular younger royals; and the oldest son and heir of the enormously loved and respected Elizabeth, who is yet remembered for being a Princess Royal who stayed in London during WW II;

WILL be beloved.

R395, Might be why Meghan is not quite back to Catherine-slim.

Are you seriously imagining that the BRF is not an appropriate topic for a gay gossip board, r407?

You are clearly - clearly - NOT gay. Not only that, but you clearly don't even know any gay men in real life.

You should get the fuck off this board, r407.

[QUOTE] Are you seriously imagining that the BRF is not an appropriate topic for a gay gossip board, [R407]?

The only royal the gays liked was Diana because of her work with AIDs sufferers. Why would the others be of the slightest interest, especially the decrepit queen, and ugly Charles and his ugly sons, who do nothing for the community. Kate isn't flamboyant enough to be interesting, and neither is Meghan.

It's no coincidence that ALL the brf threads have the OP greyed out, after dozens of gay men have F and F-ed it. Fraus are fascinated by the royals, not gay men. The Kaiser stan in particular is ridiculously hysterical and frau like. On and on about Kaiser doing this and that. Obsession disguised as hatred.

Poor thin-skinned Meghan. There are other multiple threads about other people or subjects that do not get shut down.

R413, can you name one other person on here who gets over a hundred threads of vitriol, except Trump? I'll wait.

Tatum O'Neal for one. As a celebrity she should be able to take it. She is not the first celebrity to get bad press.

Have any of you asked to speak to the manager about your issues of mistreatment? Perhaps you can get Karen to represent you and your grievances. Surely the manager will listen to Karen

OK, let's put an end to this once and for all.

[bold]Harry. Will. Never. Reign.[/bold]

So if we start several thread on, say, Camilla, Kate, Charles etc, they will get deleted, too?

Or is it just that threads dedicated to a particular person* will get deleted?

Btw, the thread created by the Meg loon shaming Kate is still there. Just mentioning ...

*Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex aka The Countess of Dumbarton aka Baroness Kilkeel

[quote]the enormously loved and respected Elizabeth, who is yet remembered for being a Princess Royal who stayed in London during WW II;

Your memory is failing. She was never Princess Royal and she spent the war at Windsor or in Scotland.

What I don't understand is the last BRF thread we had was mostly discussion of historical gossip. MM was hardly mentioned until one loony kept bringing her up, and then the thread got promptly deleted. I wish we could have a historical/vintage Royal gossip thread, where those of us interested in the old stories could chat without being harassed, paywalled, or deleted altogether.

R420, that thread was great - until the Meg minion decided to destroy it. No idea why the webmaster is doing nothing about the Meg loon.

Perhaps the DL did get mail by SS - it sounded like a dumb conspiracy theory first, but given what we've been experiencing here, there might be a modicum of truth to it. :-/

r420, That's exactly the point. Someone on that last thread even questioned if anyone was there, and I posted just to mention that I was busy reading all the articles and comments. I know that there are people who are much better informed than me, so I count on them to fill me in. To delete that thread was tragic.

Move on already.

I tend to think Charles will do alright, too. I hope TQ has a few more years to see the mess of Brexit and Dumb Prince Harry through.

It's hard to move on when every single time we get an interesting thread, it gets paywalled or deleted. I'd be happy to move on if we could have our discussions--many of which have NOTHING to do with MM--in peace. As it is, I'm getting fed up with DL and its kowtowing to loonies and paid PR.

I don't mind threads getting paywalled. I do mind them getting deleted because of the machinations of some looney fanatics and PR shills though.

Which ultimately begs the question: Why am I supposed to pay for a site infested with looney fanatics and PR shills dictating certain topics to be verboten?

Other members talk about being members for 20 or 25 years. I have no idea how they keep track of that. I know I've been a member since 2013, since that's when both of my parents died, and I needed to be able to talk to someone else, I talk on the BRF threads, because I at least know the subject. I'm a younger brother, with an older (straigh)t brother. So the family dynamics are very real to me. I thought DL was censorless, but apparently not. I mentioned on another thread that I had deleted my membership.

"DL rewards the asshole trolls by shutting down threads they infect and censors the paying customers/content providers for responding? Sounds like a plan - to lose business."

R265 - This is exactly the reason I have not yet become a subscriber.

Sounds like the field is becoming ripe for a new gay messageboard to enter.So long as they do everything DL used to do, I'll go there happily.

"How arrogant of you to think a gay gossip site wanted to host your lectures on the Romanovs and other historical figures.:

R284 - I really enjoy reading lectures on the Romanovs and other historical figures. Pleas post away!

I haven't subscribed for 3 reasons: 1, the attempt to force people to subscribe by paywalling interesting threads puts my back up. The threads are interesting BECAUSE of the posters, paid and unpaid, so people are being forced to pay for content they generate. 2, I've heard repeatedly of how glitchy the billing system is, with people getting charged multiple times for their subscriptions. 3, the way management has handled the BRF threads pisses me right off. The Meghan talk was confined to the Dangling Tendrils threads until those got deleted, after which the subject splintered and went into the other BRF threads, which up to that point were mostly either historical or at least vintage (the Diana and Fergie years) in their focus. The constant thread deletions and paywalls have only made matters worse. If management doesn't like the current state of affairs, it has only itself to blame.

The SWC thread, full of nasty insults regarding the Cambridge kids and created by Meg looney fanatic, is still there. As is the one shaming Kate where the stupid OP referred to her as the Duchess of Cornwall (!!!).

Quelle surprise ...

Meghan looks like she has pregnancy nose again.

The cheapies didn't help. Because they wouldn't pay, they started those ridiculous make goods time and time again and that contributed to spamming the board.

So between getting what you pay for and Megantoinette's army of defenders, it is where it is. It's ridiculous a gossip board can't rip one of the most rippable figures of the moment.

But let the cheapies at least own their part in creating this mess. Thanks.

R331 - What is Trolldar?

"Sophie seems committed to her Royal duties, and she usually gets non very high-profile or glamorous ones"

Princess Anne is just as committed as the Countess of Wessex to her Royal duties. Both ladies do numerous non very high-profile or non glamorous engagements. The Royal Family refers to the non-glamours non-high profile events as "Bread and Butter" engagements. The "Bread and Butter" engagements, such as handing out the awards at a high school science fair or ribbon cutting at the opening a new nursery school, are actually the most important engagements of the Royal family as they bring the Royals into the closest contact with UK tax paying public.

I have a friend who has a picture of her grandfather receiving a science fair award from the Queen Mother. This photograph, housed in a very expensive sterling silver frame, sits on top of the piano in the drawing room (whatever a drawing room is) and is one of the family's most prized historical family possessions.

"Spamming the boards" is an unintelligent criticism. As someone said upthread, the content is entirely user created. If people feel like making separate threads for specific aspects of a larger subject, they are welcome to it. People can scroll by if it's not to their taste.

As for multiple BRF threads, that is a "problem" created by Muriel herself, and should be entirely pinned on her. Users are merely responding as expected to her shutting down the most popular threads in the board.

Is Muriel shutting them down or does the system trigger it automatically with enough F&F?

She's more than shutting them down - she's deleting them

OK, must be the path of least resistance for her. Just get rid of it. Pavlov.

But why, R438, I wonder? If you don't like a thread, as people have said over and over, you can scroll by it. I don't give a flying toss about theatre gossip, so I don't click on those threads. (I spent a shocking amount of time on the Tatum O'Neil ones, I'll admit, and Scrantaaastic had me charmed..) Muriel's continual deleting does make me tin-hat wonder if SS is threatening a lawsuit. But why? This is just a little ol' gay board. It's not like we're swaying public opinion here. Who cares what we think? For the most part, we're discussing vintage BRF shenanigans. I just don't get it. The threads are popular. They generate content and clicks. Even if you're not a paying subscriber, you're creating ad impressions for advertisers. Who cares if some people deride Kate as desiccated and Meghan as a narcissist. The entire point of this website is gossip and pointless bitchery.

Move on whiners.

"Muriel" explains about a once a decade as near as I can tell. Wouldn't count on much but it is curious.

[quote] However, the future King Charles III,

He may not take the name Charles III. Years ago, several sources stated that he promised his grandmother he would be known as George VII to honour his grandfather.

Edward VII and George VI first names were Albert. Queen Victoria's first name was Alexandrina.

I have heard it suggested he will stick with Charles because he's been Charles for seventy years (and counting.) The convention of a regnal name is muted given the amount of time that has passed.

"pointless bitchery."

R440 - The pointless bitchery is also the reason I come here. You are NOT alone; I also really enjoy the Tatum and Ryan O'Neal threads and spend much too much time there but cannot help myself as I love old fashion Hollywood Gossip!

Why (or rather, how or could) SS threaten a lawsuit, R440, when the DL is (as every online publisher says it is) simply a platform and not responsible for its poster's views?

I mean, wouldn't the blowback (along the lines of "Duchess's PR firm seeks to shut off all online criticism" when, inevitably, they're found out), expose their client to even to worse criticism and ridicule if indeed that's the case and they're threatening websites?

DL isn't like ABC where the Royals could conceivably threaten to cut off their access for, say, royal interviews.

Agree, R446-I just don't get why Muriel keeps caving to Megstans. They're unhappy we don't universally love their idol. So fucking what? Most of us ignore them and only mentioned Meghan time to time. Why continue to shut down threads because one or a handful of people are upset? The last BRF thread that focused predominantly on the Romanov dynasty vis-a-vis the BRF is a prime example. It was humming along just fine until someone started in about how unfair we were too Meghan. We had barely mentioned her. Yet when that one poster started complaining, the thread was shut down. Why? Ugh, I'm off to help design Madonna's next persona. I don't think that thread will be closed anytime soon.

"until someone started in about how unfair we were too Meghan"

R447 - I agree with you as I was not and am not aware that the DataLounge is fair to anybody. Being fair is not a point of pointless bitchery.

And of course I meant "to Meghan," R448, not "too." It's Monday. I'm crabby and typing too fast. (I got that one correct.)

[quote] Edward VII and George VI first names were Albert. Queen Victoria's first name was Alexandrina.

Edward VII was always told by his mother he was supposed to reign as "King Albert Edward I," but he did not like being told what to do by his mother and equally did not like being compared to his father (who always found him wanting), so he reigned as Edward VII instead. Victoria would have been aghast (even though "Edward" was her father's name), but by that time she was dead.

George VI would have been happy to reign as "Albert I," but he was told by his ministers he should reign as George VI to emphasize continuity with his father, George V, after the abdication crisis to stress continuity with his father's reign.

I've never heard it satisfactorily explained, however, why Queen Victoria chose that regnal name when her family and her nanny always called her "Drina." It may be because she was named at the last second very impulsively--her mother gave her naming rights to thePrince Regent (Victoria's uncle), who announced at the baptismal font her name would be "Victoria Alexandrina": "Victoria" after her mother HRH Victoire, the Duchess of Kent, and "Alexandrina" after the Tsar of Russia, Alexander I, who was visiting the UK at that time. It may be that "Alexandrina" would have sounded too Russian as a regnal name, although at the time of her accession "Victoria" was every bit as odd a name as "Alexandrina" (she made "Victoria" eventually popular as a British name, however).

I doubt Charles will take "George VII" as his regnal name since his grandson will himself likely rule under that name, and also because everyone knows him as Charles, and he's in his seventies now.

Does anyone have any real dirt on the relationship between Camilla, William & Harry?

R451-I've read that William finally warmed to Camilla when she took Kate under her wing after William and Kate married. The exchange between William and Camilla during the Investiture Ceremony ("She only wants to be in the pictures; this is so awkward;""I know!") indicates a level of somewhat conspiratorial closeness. No clue on Cams and Harry.

She seems pretty nice to me.

Cams seems super. Had Diana lived, we long would have tired of her as the severely damaged intellectually limited person with BPD she was. I don't blame Charles for the break up of the marriage. Both were equally at fault. She wanted out of the wedding before hand. She should have walked.

I do wonder what it's like to be Will and Harry, knowing your parents should never have been together, got married for the wrong reasons. If either of them had had a spine, you wouldn't exist.

Lots of people were born because a condom broke or because Mom and Dad were too drunk to be careful or for some other ridiculously random reason. I think the real mindfuck in Harry and Will's case is that the whole world knows their Dad never loved their mother, and their mother had severe emotional issues and banged a hundred dudes before meeting her fate in Paris. That's what would give you anxiety.

R456 Yes, but I think it's different being the product of a one night stand or a broken rubber, than being the product of two people who were placed together deliberately despite being obviously wrong for each other.

The interesting thing is that there was a prince that was totally in love with Diana, but it wasn't Charles. It has been said that Prince Edward was completely in love with her and had been for most of his life. He was three years younger than her and they basically grew up together, with him worshiping her the entire time like a puppy. It isn't surprising that Sophie, especially when they got together greatly resembled Diana. I even read in one book, I can't remember which one, that Diana confided to Edward, at one point after the breakdown of her marriage, that she married the wrong brother.

Chrissy Metz, R414!

I'm glad that you fraus are finally recognising the power of the Spaz Troll/Sara Latham. All your future threads are doomed.

[quote]The only royal the gays liked was Diana because of her work with AIDs sufferers.

Speak for only YOURSELF there. There have been multitudes of BRF threads here over the decades, I've participated in nearly all of them so I'd know. Royalty has always been a moderately popular topic here, depending on who is in the headlines.

Eldergays like myself would know that Queen Daisy of Denmark is a long-standing DL ICON. Bona fide. We've always discussed her and other Euro royals, not just the UK family.

This thread is still here as it the SWC show one. Still going at nearly 500 posts - no one's canned it. Imo - fwiw, and I've been here a long time - the web master is culling an over-proliferation of same-topic threads all going at once, what they might perceive possibly as 'spam'; I don't think they even go into them to look. I don't believe they're in the thrall of any few posters carping about perceived "abuse" of MM or any other celeb. This board has been always been a free-for-all of celebrity takedown.

So I wouldn't fret much about what happens. Just keep posting within reasonable guidelines. There will always be these threads here.

Your attempts at humor are weak r460. There is no spaz or welp trolls. Non-existent. Now get back on topic.

Oh and want to THANK from the bottom of my heart, the OP of the most brilliant thread from yesterday, the now-gassed DoS Appreciation thread. So brilliant. Was so overcome laughing thought I was going to spit my drink (was out with friends when I saw it). The funniest thread here in a long time.

r418 was that you? take a BOW. I salute you.

The whole topic has been banned, so it's likely all the threads will get closed or deleted eventually unless Muriel is feeling particularly generous.

That's just how it works around here. Yes, there are another annoying troll filled topics, but there weren't 50 million of them running at one time.

Link please r464. The topic has not been banned. I've posted in these threads every day for months. The wm is culling multiple posts on same subjects - she just did last night - but this one and another are still ongoing. Older threads, hundreds of them, aren't deleted and are in archive.

It's a clear message from DL to stay within existing threads until near completion, and not spam the board with new ones beforehand.

'This thread is still here as it the SWC show one.'

The SWC one was started by ME, so I'm hardly going to ask Muriel to close it down, am I?

^ Again, blame the cheap fools who wouldn't pony up $1.50 a month. They were called on it but prided themselves. A bit of a false economy, it turns out.

Jaysus - I just saw the SWC threads.

Those people are batshit crazy!

who are you r466? can you reference a post no one can tell who you are but you.

'It's a clear message from DL to stay within existing threads until near completion, and not spam the board with new ones beforehand.

NOBODY spams the board with extra threads until the one they're posting on has been paywalled, bitch - why is that so hard for you to understand|?

You're a subscriber so you don't even know when the paywall comes down, do you? 90% of the people on the brf threads aren't subscribers so they can't post on them once the paywall comes down, SO THEY START NEW THREADS?

What is so fucking hard for you to understand about that?

R469, that poster is the enemy of our threads, the dreaded Spaz Troll.

This is the theme song of the doomed brf threads.

I can't wait for the "Camilla is Queen Consort" thread!

Turnabout is fair play. F&F this:

That thread is unnecessary and will get deleted r474. That's a perfect example.

Plus it's got a certain name in the title that's a big red flag.

Fuckwit at r470: I am not a subscriber. And this thread we're on certainly isn't paywalled, It nears 500 posts.

And yet, another fuckwit just went and started a new MM thread. With a glaring headline (that practically screams, "delete me").

Which will get deleted, and potentially send Murs on a hunt for other similar threads to punch out. See how that works?

R474, that's not my thread. Check Trolldar if you don't believe me, Fuglicia.

[quote]It's a clear message from DL to stay within existing threads until near completion, and not spam the board with new ones beforehand.

No shit Sherlock - that's what I said. As for a link, find the AMAs yourself. Muriel has clearly said several times before why she bans topics.

Where does Muriel speak out?

R464, yeah, that was me. You're welcome.

Wait a minute, R458-Edward was in love (or minimally had a crush) on Diana? She said she married the wrong brother? Mind blown! This is the first time I'm hearing this! Interesting, I saw a photo of Edward seated behind William at the Remembrance Day Event, and I thought how much William resembled his uncle. It was the first time I had seen the likeness.

I thought Diana had the hots for Andrew not Edward

We ALL had the hots for Andrew. Pre Perv he was hawt.

Will the cheapies not defend themselves?

No one liked Charles. Andrew was hot, and Edward looked like an A&F model when he was younger.

Edward was never attracted to Diana. He just wanted to wear her clothes.

Charles was also good friends with King Juan Carlos of Spain, until he took Diana to Spain for a holiday and the King tried to put his hooks into Diana. I don’t think they have any relationship now, although Charles is friendly with Queen Sofia.

Actually Prince Edward was quite wary of Princess Diana, he wasn't taken in by her glamour at all.

Charles would have known for years in advance that Juan Carlos was a massive womanizer who put his hooks to anything in a skirt that walked by, esp if it was young, blonde and upper class. He would not have been shocked by JC making any moves on Diana, I doubt he cared very much at that point as the marriage was very rocky.

Prince Edward would have been 16 when Diana met Charles so I doubt she considered him eligible.

Diana was hardly glamorous when she was younger

No surprises here ....

R491. Say what you will. Diana had IT. She always had IT. And that's why the entire world was fascinated by her.

5 Nov / Wills & Kate

[quoe]Actually Prince Edward was quite wary of Princess Diana, he wasn't taken in by her glamour at all.

Diana wasn't "glamorous" until a few years into her marriage. Why would he be "taken" by the hysterical wife of his much older brother? Was it an anti-"Dockyard Doris" PR attempt?

Aw, Will looks cute in glasses.

R496 and more hair. Minoxidil? The spray-on stuff?

Will should wear glasses and grow a bit of a beard.

My guess, r497, is post-photo touch-up.

He looks hot with glasses.

Here's a thread which might come in handy in case this thread is getting paywalled or shut down.

Could the Queen kill her?

It is EXACTLY that kind of paywall avoidance strategy that is SPAMMING THE BOARD.

Fuck you, you imbecile. Let a thread play out, however that may be, and then try again.

Do you miss stop signs too?

This SWC thread is still up.

Fuck off, R502.

Figures R504 created the spin off. Asshole. Play the game.

Fuck off R502 / R505.

Oh my goodness, R502. Why do you deign to abuse your fellow Datalounger who has been around here since '02 (sorry I missed the tower threads)

I do not think you are worthy

Your daily dose of secondhand embarrassment. I don't like her, but geez, this is awkward.

Speaking of Camilla, The Crown returns this weekend!

[quote]It is EXACTLY that kind of paywall avoidance strategy that is SPAMMING THE BOARD. Fuck you, you imbecile. Let a thread play out, however that may be, and then try again. Do you miss stop signs too?

You seem like a rather unnerved and really unwell person with little mooring and a lot of hate to spread. As we say in America "you do not seem nice."

But that is OK if it keeps you together. If you must know, I am the person who started the S-Mounntbatten-Windsor-C threads, the one that was abruptly brought to an end and the other after three posts about a's continental excursion that nearly ended in catastrophe.

So I must either be worshipped or considered a cunt by you and yours. Either way, you are who you are...

A still of Charles and Camilla from the latest season of The Crown.

r510 etc - many thanks for starting those threads. Those were the threads with the excellent Romanov discussions last week. Very good, shameful re the deletion.

I would give a more gentle reminder that it's probably best to wait until a thread is actually paywalled or deleted, and then start a new thread, rather than try to guess when the WM might strike and get ahead of her. I know one good reason you and others create new ones early, is to be able to post a directive link so others can follow to it, while a thread is still active.

However the multiple related threads on royal topics are attracting Murs's attention and (imo) ire, and she is responding in kind with deletions and closures. I know it's a vicious cycle, but it may be the better strategy to wait to being a new post. I leave you to your better judgment though on that.

R512, reason won't go down any better, but admirable try.

R512 I don't think that's true or else all multiple threads would be deleted. It's only specific threads about specific people that are pay-walled and/or deleted.

[quote]I would give a more gentle reminder that it's probably best to wait until a thread is actually paywalled or deleted, and then start a new thread, rather than try to guess when the WM might strike and get ahead of her.

Why do you think I did not do this? I started a new thread with a new title once the former was "paywalled" and unavailable. After my thread was deleted entirely, I started "Parte Cuatro" over 24 hours later.

I am so sorry my attempts are inadequate or too lame for your approval or acceptance.

Could you improve on my miserable attempts and resurrect? I'm too far an inadequate figure to do so.

Kate’s hair looks amazing in R494’s pic

Charles with Katy Perry in Mumbai.

I think that picture is from a previous year at R494.

Swipe for the life of Katharine, Duchess of Kent.

[quote]Charles with Katy Perry in Mumbai.

Does Camilla know?

And who designed that dress? Maria von Trapp's curtains?

Please see r-243 at this (now recently paywalled) sister thread for a succinct analysis of today's news.

I want to respond to this poster that Hilary Clinton I believe has ties to Sunshine Sachs. That would explain a alot. I also am ready to believe that all is def not well in the Sussex household, for this kind of brush-off to occur. And indeed, that Harry is blaming his family for his unhappy domicile. When it's all been mostly his fault from the beginning.

Alternate explanation: DoS is newly pregnant again, and genuinely isn't feeling up to the big formal gathering. She also may not want to be photographed for the Xmas church walk if she'll be showing by then...I realize it goes against the expected grain, but I can see her keeping a 2nd pregnancy under wraps for as long as possible.

r515 I was referring to the the creator of the Prince William glasses new thread linked at r500. The thread we're on here is still active and has 80 more posts to go. We'll be moving over there soon enough.

I hope we get a Damehood for Katy Perry and Rhianna who both do good work , before we get honours for the sussex sycophants. I think Amal has made her pitch now though and has moved her tongue to Charlies arse.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will spend the holidays with Markle's mother

R526. Great!! Me-again and Dimwit are massive royal pains in the arses. No one wants to see them anyway.

Maybe this will open Harry's eyes to what his married life will really be like. Two years and look what's happened.

R528. Explain further, please. I don't think Harry minds the past two years. I guess he may have thought he and Me-again would have been accepted more readily, but he wants to be the rebel and be on the outs. He also wants the money to maintain his pampered lifestyle.

So if he does the one, R529, will the BRF do the other?

One wonders.

I just think Christmas in California, or wherever they come to rest, will be very, very different from anything he's every known. Sort of Dukedom of Windsor, with training wheels. A look at his future. As to the second part, he barely married her two years ago. Who would have expected this as a consequence of Prince Harry marrying anybody. It's quite a path they're following.

R531. I am originally from New England, although I have lived in Southern California for many years. On the few times that I have spent in Christmas in California and not gone home, Christmas in California is a boring non-day. It's nice not to be traveling during the holidays, but Christmas is just blah in California.

And the Boxing Day shoot has nothing to do with pheasants.

Since 2011, K and W have spent three Christmases in St Barthes with Kate's family, but do we see them being dragged backwards over burning coals? Nope. Harry has actually been a lot more dutiful. The only Christmas he missed with the Queen was when he was in Afghanistan, in 2012.

That's a lie. They've never spent Christmas outside the country. And the Middletons only go to Mustique. Up your game, troll.

Bullshit r534. Name the actual years they were there with the Middletons for Christmas. Oh that's right - they weren't. With exception of one year, they've spent every of the married Christmases at Sandringham.

The Middletons went to St. Barts last year for New Years, but W&K stayed behind in the UK with the BRF. You know, where they are expected to be.

It was in the Daily Mail article, the same one you trolls are laughing about. Three Christmases without TQ already. Where they spent it we don't know but it was more than likely in St Barthes as they spend a fortune every year on tropical vacations.

LINK PLEASE troll at r537.

They have spent one Christmas in Bucklebury with the Mids. They were photographed going to church there on Christmas day - NOT in St Barts.

And they turned around next day and spent Boxing Day with the BRF. So in essence, split their holiday.

Meg and Harry are going to spend Christmas and New Year in the Maldives with Archie, far away from the fugly old queen and her threadbare traditions.

Block the troll and see how much disappears.

It's hilarious to see you fraus repeatedly engaging with the pro Markle posters, even though you know from bitter experience that your frenzied shrieks of CUNT and TROLL end with your threads either paywalled or deleted.

Kate has to be one of the oldest looking 37 year olds around.

Harry Styles flirting with Kate Middleton.

Old looking or not, Kate looks positively regal in whatever she wears. She doesn't look like a barrel.

Kate's face looks like an old sock that has been darned too often. A bit trans too, so tall and thin.

TRANS MIDDLETON AND THE DUKE OF FUG

And as Meg tries to make her way

To an ordinary world

Somehow these threads will survive

Why is Camilla called rottweiler?

R 511, they did a great job casting young Camilla. Quite big tits.

I’m not feeling Charles, though.

I meant R511, bah.

Kind of funny that the SWC Part Trois thread is now open only to subscribers at a mere 250 posts.

AFAIK this particular thread got created by the Meghan moron. It has got greyed out as well by now.

What goes around, comes around ...

Actually, R552, a better question is why this thread started by the Meghan moron who destabilizes every thread it visits is still here, not just grayed out. Other threads started by legitimate folks (or those trying to be snarky or ironic) get clocked out nearly immediately, closed or disappear altogether.

Muriel's past explanations, whenever it deigned to respond, simply do no hold any water. I'm starting to wonder if the "Meghan moron" is actually the webbie itself just being a cunt for the sake of being true to its spirit.

I didn't start this thread, bitches. I started Part Trois which got paywalled.

R553, there was a time before the boybander/MeAgain troll on this board. And remember, he does not work in isolation, he has colleagues here.

People mag is called kneepads b/c of thier thrist to print PR as Gospel, for erm, reasons. Perhaps they are not the only ones? SS clearly has a lot of clout here, stands to reason there is a motive we are unaware of, but we can all see the effects. MeMe is just an example, none of this is about Markel or her brand, really. When they overplay their hand the credibility of any of it goes out the window.

If this was a film, she would be a plan to bring down the monarchy. IRL she may just destroy Dim. Ungrateful sod that he is.

Meghan loves expensive beach vacations. She and Harry will likely spend Christmas or some other part of their me-time "recharging their batteries" in the tropics. They have a celebrity friend or two with luxury beachfront homes on secluded islands. Oprah, Clooneys, Elton, Ellen.... Undoubtedly, private jets (with carbon offsets, of course) are also on offer for the struggling couple. We probably won't find out where they vacation because they're keeping their plans secret for "security reasons". Just like their honeymoon destination remains a well-kept secret.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Princess Alexandra of Kent's granddaughter, Flora Ogilvy, is engaged to marry a tall Swede with a very long neck.

Prince William met Rita Ora last night.

Princess Anne's first wedding took place on this day in 1973.

As red as the plaid on his kilt.

Happy Birthday, Prince Charles!

When not wishing for world peace, impeachment and a cure for disease, I often wish Prince Charles would do just a slightly better job of getting his hair cut. Too many flyaway wisps. There, I said it.

I wonder if HM and Charles travel with a doctor... I know Charles travels with his bedroom furniture, paintings, food, etc. Seems like a doctor would be more important to have on hand.

The Palace is not going to publicize if Charles travels with a doctor, (though he almost certainly does). His health enough of a question mark without drawing further attention to it.

I still think there is a better-than-average chance that HM will outlive Charles, leaving William very much the next in line. It could also explain Harry and Meghan's frantic attempts to find another role/income stream for themselves, as you know William isn't going to give them shit after all of the recent shenanigans.

I know he often photographs super swollen... the latest feet pictures were pretty shocking... but that's basically circulatory or cardiovascular, isn't it? Prince Philip's father died of arteriosclerosis and heart failure (at 62.) No doubt medication and treatment is far superior today... but maybe that's it.

R556-It definitely would not be surprising if he keeled over from a massive stroke in the next few years. HMTQ may well outlive him. Or he may only wear the crown one or two years. That would be a sad sobriquet=Charles, the One-Year King. If William become king in his early forties, the UK may see a monarch who lasts 40-50 years. It's weird to e that I won't live to see George as king. Ah, life.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Harry needs to be praying to whatever deity his wife has told him he is permitted to pray to that his father does not pre-decease his grandmother. If Chuck goes first, William will see to it that the Duke and Duchess of DoAsWePlease will be up shit creek without a paddle.

r559 And we all know what that means . . .

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R574 - HM never looked at another man after she set eyes on Philip at the tender age of thirteen. To suggest anything else is, well, treasonous.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

If Chuck goes, I don't see HM lasting long. No matter the issues between them, he's her son and she's over 90. Was anyone surprised when the Queen Mum died a month after Margaret?

R574 - speaking of "The Crown", what do we know of the slily sexy Tobias Menzies, who was so deliciously evil in "Outlander" as Captain Jack Randall, who obligingly masturbated onscreen for us, to no avail, as he attempted to ravish Jamies' sister? And didn't he play a traitorous high-level MI6 officer in the earlier Craig Bonds? He's not handsome, but he is . . . interesting.

Sophie Wessex at a Women In Finance event.

R576 - Good lord, Bea looks like she's dropped two stone. She has to stop: the effect of those eyes in her diminishing face is not good. Have we had a wedding date and venue announced yet?

Now what are the odds of the Sussexes showing up?

The Wessexes seem low key and low maintenance.

R578 - Indeed. Hence my reference to Tennyson's phraseology about lights and thrones for the Cambridges, and the Sussexes realising the game is up.

Sometimes I wonder if they even told her that Margaret had preceded her.

Prince Louis.

Charles enjoys his grandchildren.

He seems very happy with his grandkids and Camilla's

Sweet

I don't think the Sussexes anticipated the torrent of negative backlash their little Christmas announcement garnered. Their PR has been all over the place and simply incoherent. They can trot out the Cambridges spent two Christmases with the Middletons all they like, but that was early on, and the Cambs were then able to drive on over to Sandringham and spend Boxing Day with the BRF. In recent years, I'm sure due to HMTQ and PP's advancing ages, they've been wisely spending their Christmas where it counts. The Sussexes had no clue people would be disgusted with blowing off a beloved aging monarch for LA. If this is PP's last Christmas, they'll never live it down. You'd think they would have learned from ghosting Pa Markle, but no, not these two. They seem incapable of putting duty above their petulant, misplaced vainglory. I love that the Cambs just quietly go about doing their duty. They are unbothered and seem so utterly regal in comparison. If Charles does pop off soon (which would be tragic, IMO, the Prince Who Waited), we'll see fireworks. What a riveting soap opera this is. Thanks, Rachel. You know how to bring the entertainment.

Exactly. Kate's parents are a few hours from Sandringham. Bill and Cathy split the holidays. If they ignored Sandringham entirely for the Middletons, they'd get blowback.

Harry and Meg love bad PR. It's the only explanation.

R584 -I say, Louis is going to break hearts someday!

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

From the Dickie Arbiter article at R569:

[quote] He added: 'I think the Queen is letting [Harry] get on with it, she's very pragmatic and certainly understand that Harry's got mental health issues and they need to sort it out.

More from the article at R569. Something seems so off here.

[quote] Her Majesty has given her grandson her full support but intriguingly royals sources said the monarch was in the dark about his festive plans until he called her at Buckingham Palace yesterday to decline her open invite.

r536, I think you mean "where the presumptive heirs William and George are supposed to be."

I don't think William and George are presumptive heirs, are they? I thought you have to be vulnerable to losing your place in succession to be a presumptive heir: Elizabeth II was the heir presumptive to her father when he became crowned George VI because presumably he and his wife could have yet had a male baby, which would have meant Elizabeth was no longer the heir. But no one can be born to replace William after Charles, or George after William. They can never sink lower than #2 and #3 in the line of succession--they can only stay the same or rise higher.

Harry married a Kardashian wannabe and it's getting to him.

King Archie

It's hard to believe anyone in the UK would care about what harry and Meghan do other than their fans, and they'll support them no matter what.

Harry and Meghan are just not in the picture anymore. They're no more interesting than the Gloucesters or the Kents, because Harry will never succeed to the throne.

It's hard to believe anyone in the UK would care about what harry and Meghan do other than their fans, and they'll support them no matter what.

Harry and Meghan are just not in the picture anymore. They're no more interesting than the Gloucesters or the Kents, because Harry will never succeed to the throne.

R597 wow you're smart! I'm guessing you don't get out of your basement much