Taking a break from the funeral in Rome, Slate now turns its attention to the wedding of Charles and Camilla, pointing out that:
In an age when preposterously coiffed tycoons engage in serial matrimony with ever younger and more beautiful partners, Charles is doing his bit to atone for the sins of rich, middle-aged men everywhere. He's making an honest woman of his age-appropriate partner, a woman with whom he is well-matched in looks, habits, and hobbies, whom he has known and loved for more than 30 years. Charles' mistake was to get his weddings out of order: He married his first wife second and his trophy wife first.
Let's be honest with ourselves: we're giving the Duke of Rothsay (his much-cooler-to-pronounce title in Scotland, where is not the Prince of Wales) such a hard time because most of us would have chosen Diana over Camilla any day of the week,( though perhaps not in 1971 when Charles and Camilla first met and Diana was 10 years old). We're appalled by his taste more than his morals. Diana was a hottie, Camilla gives us the skeevies.
Then again, only Charles had the opportunity to fuck both of them, and he probably had his reasons for wanting to be Camilla's tampon rather than Diana's stud. In other words, there are other variables to consider here that we (thankfully!) aren't privvy to.
I - for one and in spite of the off-language characterization - wish them well. Camilla takes away from what little glamour Charles had but probably makes him much happier. Sod the tabloids, I say.
Diana a hottie? Anorexia to me. Mrs. Parker-Bowles may not have too much fat on her body either, but I guess she have normal feeding habits, including meat.
Posted by: kjell | April 08, 2005 at 01:43 PM