@shallow-blue saidObviously you were there so know exactly what happened!
Well, no. Her involvement went rather beyond the single image you remember.
Like the rest of us you heard many things then come to your own conclusion.
-VR
@torunn saidHad he married Camilla instead, do you think there would have been heirs?
I partly agree with you. She was privileged and moved in privileged circles. The thing I feel very uncertain of is - did she really know what she was doing marrying prince Charles, before it was too late? He was already in love with another woman who was also in love with him - a bad start for a marriage of that dignity. Sure it has happened before in the royal history but the individual pain and embarrassment is still the same.
The Royal Family was in desperate need of new genes.
@shallow-blue saidThe rank misogyny on display here rankles, especially when it is accompanied by giving Charles a pass.
I'm sorry, suzi, but that is an astoundingly naive way of looking at someone who was, after all, the alpha bitch of the Sloane Rangers. (Look that term up, you might learn something surprising.) She knew very well what she was going for, and it was status, not love. Being a brood mare was all part of her own plan at least as much as theirs.
As for discarding... ...[text shortened]... n a dare. No, he was not perfect, but she was rather further away from being a saint than he.