I'm sorry, but I don't understand why you are all so devastated. She was not our queen. Canadians, I still don't understand why she was yours. Yes, she was a nice lady and I liked her, but the British Empire and all its colonial history is not really something to be admired. Strange, very strange.
Queen Margrethe of Denmark is also a very nice lady, I'm sure, and has been on the throne for fifty years. Nobody seems to care less about her, though.
The Queens final prime minister and the Kings first prime minister, Liz Truss, has resigned after only 44 days in office. I hope the next Tory PM has the guts to call for an immediate general election.
Jay Lerner-Z said: "Why is Camilla known as "the Queen Consort" instead of just "Queen Camilla"?"
Queen Consort is used as the official title of the wife of the ruling King. Queen is only supposed to be used for the reigning monarch. Diana also would have been Queen Consort if Elizabeth had passed before their divorce. It's also why Prince Philip was never given the title of King Philip (though apparently only Prince Albert, husband of Queen Victoria, was the only one to ever officially be given the title of Prince Consort).
Going back up the line of queen consorts, they were just known as the Queen Mother, Queen Mary, Queen Alexandra. Camilla should now be "the Queen" or "Queen Camilla", just like they were. It seems to me that she is somehow "lesser" because she is not the first wife of Charles. Which I find wrong, unfair, and demeaning to second spouses everywhere. I'm fairly sure Diana would just be called Queen Diana.
It also makes no sense to me why only women consorts rise to queen, but men consorts do not rise to king. Like Philip. It's like that title is somehow more sacred. Misogyny, of course.
I'm sure that, should Charles's reign last for any length of time, you'll start seeing Camilla mostly referred to as just Queen Camilla, just for convenience, same as Philip was typically just referred to as Prince Philip, and not Prince Philip, Duke of Edinborough, Consort of the British Monarch.
It's also, in some ways, a step up for Camilla. The original engagement announcement back in 2005 said that she would officially be titled Princess Consort when Charles would ascend to the throne. Earlier this year Elizabeth had announced that it was her wish that Camilla be titled the Queen Consort when Charles became king, which was viewed as the Queen making a PR move and cutting off debate about what her title should be before it could really begin.
It also seems, at least based on wikipedia reading, that a lot of the rules and customs around titling changed with Victoria and during her reign, which would explain why the wives of the ruling king in the past may have had different titles. Or it could also be that we just think of them as Queens even though their official titles at the time may have been different. Like in the case of Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother. Her title while King George VI was still alive was indeed the Queen Consort of the United Kingdom and the British Dominions. After Elizabeth II was crowned she took on the title of the Queen Mother, and of course, because she ended up living another 50 years after that point, it's what most of us knew her as so is the title we will think of first in relation to her.
I might give it a go too. He seems like the sanest of the royals. Which is probably why he's not a royal anymore. Why do people like Piers Morgan hate him so much? I genuinely don't understand... do they begrudge him living his own life, not following the company line?
You're right, AEA AGMA SM. Time might make a difference. Camilla gets crowned at the coronation too, I think. That could change perception.
Anyway, I'm not too sure why I'm worrying about this. A nice distraction from elections and climate change, I suppose. If that's a good thing or a bad thing, I don't know.
Poor Harry. I'm starting to worry that maybe he is not so sane after all. The result of what he was born into, of course. Abolish this circus now, Britain.