Prince Charles is ‘immensely sensitive’ & that’s why ‘he hides’ from Harry’s emotions?

Embed from Getty Images

Here are some photos of the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall at Royal Ascot Day 2. I haven’t seen Camilla’s dress identified but I suspect that it’s Bruce Oldfield, the same designer she wore to Day 1. Once again, she had a mask made to match her coatdress – this time the mask and dress were the same creamy off-white with pearls. I don’t know, I usually think Camilla looks fine. She always looks very blousy and comfortable, like she’s about to open the second bottle of wine. Charles once again looked impeccable in his three-piece suit. There were other royals in attendance, namely the Earl and Countess of Wessex and Princess Anne, the Princess Royal. She watched some of the races side-by-wise with… Andrew Parker Bowles, Camilla’s ex-husband. Anne and Andrew dated back in the day. He was quite a catch back then. I wonder how Camilla feels about Anne stepping out (as “friends”) with Andrew now?

As for how Charles feels about the proverbial elephant in the room, namely his younger son, his daughter-in-law and his two youngest grandchildren all living in California, we’ve heard various comments about Charles’ feelings over the past six months or so. Either Charles is full of rage, or he’s not. Either he’s conciliatory or he’s not. Either Charles is hyper-sensitive or he’s not. Mostly, I find it interesting to watch and see when Charles is excluded from royal commentary, because the gaps are more telling than the commentators’ spin. Us Weekly continues to quote from Princess Diana’s “friend” Stewart Pearce about all of this. Take this however you want:

Princess Diana‘s friend Stewart Pearce wrote the new book Diana, The Voice of Change, out now, and the author gave some insight into the people who surrounded Diana before her death in 1997. Pearce told Us exclusively that his comments are “just simply categoric observations about how perhaps [some royals’] behavior [were] not always as emotionally intelligent as it could be.”

He continued by calling out Diana’s ex-husband, Charles, 72. “For example, Prince Charles is a very, very shy man, a very sensitive and delicate man, but we see his public personality, but in private, he’s immensely sensitive,” Pearce explained. The voice coach noted that “when we’re sensitive, if we’re dealing with very strong, combustible emotion on the outside of us,” people tend to go with a fight or flight response. When Diana accused Charles of having an affair with Duchess Camilla, his response was clear.

“So, what he did was to shrink back and as a result of that became an aloof,” Pearce said. “Well, that doesn’t heal the challenge that’s taking place.”

The expert, whose father worked for the late Prince Philip, explained that Charles’ personality rings true in all of 36-year-old Harry’s recent public statements about the royal family, including when he revealed his father hadn’t spoken to him in a while. “That’s what Charles does. … He can’t deal with it because of his sensitivity, so he hides,” Pearce said. “And what Harry’s trying to do is to heal that. Not out of umbrage, not out of anger or revenge or criticism or accusation. … I felt that he was just somebody saying, ‘This is the way that it is, and this is why we want to make change.’”

[From Us Weekly]

I think Charles is “sensitive” when it comes to himself. He’s very droopy-dog, Eeyore-faced “how could this all happen to me,” but then he doesn’t show the same sensitivity to other people, like his late ex-wife or his sons. William shares the same self-absorption, only William’s narcissism seems almost pathological at this point. Besides, I genuinely wonder if Harry and Charles are even technically “speaking” right now. I still say that if they are communicating, it’s through letters or emails.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

63 Responses to “Prince Charles is ‘immensely sensitive’ & that’s why ‘he hides’ from Harry’s emotions?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. BayTampaBay says:

    I love Anne’s green silk dress! I hope my body is as good as her body is when I am 70.

    “She watched some of the races side-by-wise with… Andrew Parker Bowles, Camilla’s ex-husband. Anne and Andrew dated back in the day. He was quite a catch back then.”

    I will continue to think that Anne is and always has been involved with Andrew Parker Bowles in one form or another since they first met.

    • MissMarirose says:

      I love that she wears things from 20 or 30 years ago and they still look good. And they still fit!!
      How many of us can say that?

    • lunchcoma says:

      I’ve kind of low key wondered whether both of Anne’s marriages were quietly open on both sides, and the first one only ended when both partners decided that they were more compatible with their side pieces.

      • Talia says:

        The first marriage only ended when the tabloids got their hands on letters to Anne from husband #2. The RF made the best of of it and Timothy Laurence (who seems to be a decent man) got upgraded in public from temporary side piece like a number before him to someone Anne was deeply in love with and to whom she turned after Mark Phillips cruelly betrayed her (and to be fair, Mark P wasn’t behaving well at the time – he was being indiscreet to say the least). Add in a leak to the press of some graphic details about Mark’s other women (including an illegitimate daughter in NZ) and what could have been an epic scandal was quickly brushed under the rug.

        The RF seem to take the view that if you get caught cheating, it looks a lot better to cheat on your spouse with the person you have realised is your one true love, particularly if you can reveal (create) bad behaviour on the part of the first wife/husband. They followed the exact same playbook with Charles and Camilla – the official line was that she was the love of Charles’ life not one of a number of mistresses and that Diana was impossible to live with / unstable / stalking married men (insert other slur to justify Charles being unfaithful). I think the bad behaviour on the part of the spouse was more true in Anne’s case, plus unlike Diana, I think Mark was genuinely fine with the conduct of their marriage, at least until the RF threw him under the bus in the divorce.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        “Add in a leak to the press of some graphic details about Mark’s other women (including an illegitimate daughter in NZ)”

        I think this is what allowed Anne to proceed with her divorce and be seen as a somewhat innocent party. Mark Philips remarried and had a child with his second wife. I can not explain why but for some reason, I have always liked Timothy Laurence and Andrew Parker-Bowles.

      • Amelie says:

        I remember learning about Mark Phillip’s love-child in NZ and how she is also super into horses too. Phillips never recognized her as his and refused to have a relationship with her. Zara and Peter have a half-sister they’ve never met and have zero relationship with (not on them I guess to care). Kind of says a lot about Mark Phillips that he was a deadbeat father and couldn’t take ownership of the product of his one night stand.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Zara & Peter do have a relationship with their half-sister from their father’s second marriage. This legitimate half-sister is also super into horses and I believe her name is Stephanie. Stephanie’s mother is an American and also very into horses.

      • Talia says:

        Yes, but not with Felicity Tonkin, the child born while Mark and Anne were still married. Her mother had to sue for child support because not only has Mark P never seen Felicity, he refused to pay for her upkeep.

        I’m not saying he was wrong to get a DNA test but he could have done it privately and then sorted out payments rather than making the mother go to court. Of course, Felicity’s mother was a teacher while the second wife (and mother of his third daughter) was a multi millionaire Olympic rider.

  2. Snuffles says:

    So many fancy words for Charles is a coward and has spent his entire life avoiding confrontation and would rather do underhanded, shady shit to get his way instead of communicating and compromising.

  3. Cecilia says:

    Diana didn’t accuse charles of shit. He was having an affair. One that he himself admitted to. Not diana’s “friends” trying to gaslight her too…..

    • molly says:

      You’re not paranoid if you’re right!

    • Amy Too says:

      I read that more as “accused” meaning “confronted.” Like when she accused him to his face and tried to talk about it, he just ran away and refused to talk and got all distant. I don’t think he was referring to Diana talking publicly in her interview about Charles having an affair, and I don’t think he was trying to say that Diana’s accusation was unfounded or untrue. I think he meant when she spoke to him about it privately and let him know that she knew what was going on.

      Because I actually really liked what this guy had to say about Diana, Charles, and Harry and the way that Harry is dealing with the same sort of issues with Charles that Diana had to deal with: the refusing to deal with/talk about/hear anything that might make him uncomfortable or remind him that he acted poorly, and instead just giving the emotional silent treatment while waiting for the other person to either get over it or give up trying to address the issue with him. I liked how he acknowledged the pattern of burying your head in the sand and refusing to talk about anything difficult or hear from anyone about how you’ve hurt them that’s been going on in the RF and specifically with Charles. And how Harry is right to value emotional intelligence and try to get his family to realize they need to practice and beef up their EQ if they’re ever going to get better.

  4. TigerMcQueen says:

    Sensitive? I think they misspelled thin-skinned and self-absorbed. Because he’s obviously not very sensitive at all to the needs of others, demonstrated by shutting down and shutting out his wife and child.

    • SarahCS says:

      Yep, that was going to be my comment. Massively thin skinned and can’t handle anything but fawning devotion. The apple really doesn’t fall far from the tree does it? Thank goodness Harry got more of his mother.

    • Truthiness says:

      To put it more accurately, Charles is immensely sensitive to calls to “abolish the monarchy” and “end the Commonwealth.” When that drumbeat becomes louder in response to racism, corruption, classism, pedophelia and off shore bank accounts he clams up, lest he make the matters worse.

  5. BnlurNforever says:

    He’s a coward, he was always a coward and it seems he will always be a coward. Coward, coward, cowardly coward of a petty little man is Charles.

    • kelleybelle says:

      Sensitive? LOL He treated Diana like dirt, was insanely jealous of her, flaunted Camilla without regard for his wife, and cut off his son’s security and stopped taking his calls? Oh, real sensitive for sure. He is a PRICK is what he is.

  6. Woke says:

    The Queen and Charles have the same issue when the situation become difficult they freeze hide and hope for the best.
    Charles doesn’t know how to put others people feelings before him.
    As an human being i want them to kinda make peace but in that family the institution always come first so I hope Harry doesn’t hold his breath waiting for a reconciliation or a change.

  7. lunchcoma says:

    Sure, Charles. Fine. I actually even believe that.

    Coping with your own sensitivity by shutting out people after you’ve hurt them is dysfunctional. Follow your son’s example and get some therapy. Honestly, you should have thought about doing that 20 or 30 years ago. I know royals are behind the times, but therapy was mainstream in the 90s. It might have prevented some of the current problems.

  8. Amy Bee says:

    I don’t think Harry and Charles are communicating at all. As for Charles being so sensitive he shuts down, I don’t believe this. I think he freezes people out when they don’t do what he says and that he has a mean streak that seeks to punish people for doing things he doesn’t like. So he froze out Diana and belittled her when she became more popular than him and when she started to question him about Camilla. Then he got the Queen to strip her of the HRH and to take away her security when they divorced. With Harry he stopped taking his calls when Harry told him he wanted to leave and he cut him off financially and withdrew security when Harry went back to Canada. He punished Harry by banning him from participating in Remembrance Day and when he and Meghan announced that they were having another baby, Charles stripped them of their patronages before the one year review had expired.

    • Shoshone says:

      Yes. I know that the RF/BM said shortly after her death that Diana didn’t have protection officers because she refused the Royal security. They then blamed and shamed the victim (Diana) for her own death. I have believed this for decades.

      Now we know from Harry that Charles arbitrarily removed H&M&A security in 2020 while all the while leading the world to believe that he was a loving father paying for their security out of his own pocket. So sweet and loving. Harry certainly set that lie straight.

      Does anyone know the actual truth of why Diana did not have protection officers at the time of her death? Was this just another big lie by Charles and the BM? I think it might be. I think that Harry may have been sending a clear message to his father. I know what you did and and history has repeated itself and the whole world is going to know who you are.

      Charles is a tiny, tiny man.

  9. Sofia says:

    I’ll said it before but I doubt a voice coach for a woman who’s been dead for nearly 25 years knows the current 2021 relationship between Charles and Harry.

  10. Lilibetp says:

    I like Anne’s dress, but the brooch and name tag are too much.

  11. Myra says:

    “Whatever in love means”. Did they mean incredibly insensitive because that would make more sense.

  12. Plums says:

    lol at Anne attending with Andrew Parker Bowles, who I did not realize was still alive. Swear to god these aristocrats are all so incestuous when it comes to their affairs. Kate really was so dreadfully middle class to try to ice out William’s side piece, wasn’t she?

  13. Mf says:

    LOLOLOL. These royal commentators don’t know the meaning of the word sensitive. The term they’re actually looking for is: emotional cowardice. Charles keeps hiding from Harry’s pain because he is coward.

    • kelleybelle says:

      Remember they’re the same ones who said William “is an elegant man,” and “Please stop talking about William’s affair, it’s a violation of his human rights.” I rolled my eyes so hard I think I broke something.

  14. Liz version 700 says:

    Charles is a giant Jackass and that is why…. Insert a lifetime of cowardly acts. He will never be the man he should have been and he knows it. He is/was a terrible person period End of.

  15. Over it says:

    You know where I come from they call women like Anne slags. As for Charles, he is selfish and petty and deserves a lifetime of misery because he has bought nothing but misery to Diana and then started doing the same shit to Harry and his family because Harry won’t play the game at the expense of his wife and himself and his son. Charles is therefore a wimp .

    • Talia says:

      She had a type (i.e. immensely charming serially unfaithful men). If she went back to a boyfriend who she knew had an open marriage (since his wife was effectively her brother’s publicly acknowledged mistress) when she realised Mark P was having multiple affairs or alternatively she and Mark P agreed an open marriage, I don’t think that makes her a ‘slag’.

      Even with Camilla, it wasn’t the affair, it was the treatment of Diana that was appalling. If Charles had married a woman in her late 20s on the understanding she would give him a few kids and they would then both go their own way (Kate, anyone?), he wouldn’t have come off nearly as badly in the tabloids.

    • Carmen-JamRock says:

      So whats the equivalent name for a man?

      Doesnt exist, does it? Isnt it time to get rid of sexually offensive names for women, given to them by women-hating women?

      • BnlurNforever says:

        Isn’t Cad the name for men in these cases? Don’t get me wrong, I don’t call women names myself, in fact have never heard of this one, but men have names too in these cases. The damage to men’s reputation are not the same though so…

  16. Harla says:

    But Charles wasn’t “too sensitive” to throw his parents and their parenting skills under a double decker bus.

    • Tessa says:

      And he has to gall to be “shocked shocked” that Harry talks about him after he derided his parents and how “mean” his father was to him.

  17. Merricat says:

    Probably in the top three of toxic male excuses for emotional repression and brooding. Not romantic, Charles: dysfunctional.

  18. Mooney says:

    Why are we constantly getting sensitive and mature Chuck stories a lot these days?

    Man, I’ll never understand the lifestyle and relationships of these British aristos and royals. They have sidepieces, invite the said sidepieces and exes to wedding, spend their last years with them…..

    • kelleybelle says:

      The press has to spin in his favour because what he has done lately has revealed that he IS a cad. That’s why. Same with the embiggening stories on Kate. She’s a liar, she is mean, petty, inarticulate, inadequate, out of her league … so the press has to compensate.

  19. Eurydice says:

    OMG, I swear these people are all frustrated romance novelists. I’d say Charles has a hide like a rhinoceros. He’s got no problem kicking people to the curb and he’s not “hiding” from people’s emotions – he just doesn’t want to hear them. He’s made his decision and that’s that. My father was famously inarticulate about his emotions, but we always knew he loved us because of his actions. Charles should be judged by his actions, not by romantic psychobabble.

    • Tessa says:

      He had another married mistress Dale Tryon who wanted to talk to him one last time and he refused. Once he ousts people they are out.

  20. TabithaD says:

    I think Charles’ issue is that he has a very fragile ego and is prone to self-pity. He very clearly couldn’t cope with Diana’s huge popularity, and rather than rejoice in it (as being good for both of them), for some reason took it as a personal slight. Harry has a lot of his mother’s qualities, including the star quality, and my guess is that it triggers a lot of the same feelings in Charles as Diana did.

  21. Natalie C Tyler says:

    Charles is the kind of Narcissist who understands himself as the victim in any situation.
    It should be incredibly clear to us what a long-suffering victim he is. He is in too much pain to realize that there are other characters in life. Camilla knows how to treat him well, but nobody else understands his tragedy.

    My mother, the hapless victim in every one of life’s transactions, was precisely that way. And she wanted her children to worship her because she was such a victim! These people who are always victims often turn out to have been emotional predators.

    • MipMip says:

      It’s vulnerable narcissism, as opposed to malignant narcissism (former president Cheeto is textbook MN). My mother was also a vulnerable narcissist, the victim and hero of all of her stories. It took me until my 30s to start really unraveling all the emotional damage she did.

      Charles is the same, that may be why I follow Harry’s journey so closely.

      • Mustlovedogs says:

        @natalie and @MipMip. Me too. Hugs to you both. Daughters of these mothers can take a lifetime to come to terms with this form of “mothering” and its aftermath . ..

    • Tessa says:

      Camilla is very manipulative and probably derided Diana saying “oh Charles she does not appreciate YOU the way I do. Camilla also kept her own place and does not spend all her time under the same roof as Charles. Michael Fawcett apparently rules the roost and does the planning and managing for Charles’ royal residences.

  22. OnTheLevee says:

    Perhaps the better word for Charles is ‘fragile’. Being sensitive doesn’t preclude being brave or being kind or being strong. One can be sensitive AND acknowledge that their actions have caused harm AND summon the courage to work to make amends.

    Being sensitive AND deflecting AND acting with cruelty AND being unwilling to admit that one’s actions have caused harm is just being a fragile asshole with big feelings.

  23. SenseOfTheAbsurd says:

    What an absolute load of unmitigated balls. He’s only sensitive about his own feelings, not a single eff given about anybody else’s. But that’s historically consistent with previous Princes of Wales, who have always been shaped into narcissistic monsters.

  24. Likeyoucare says:

    Charles is a shit human being.
    We all know what he did to diana.
    Why are people trying to justify what he did to harry and meghan because he is a sensitive human being. He is not a good person and doesnt fit to be king.
    When a future king couldnt manage his own family why did they think he can handle a whole country.

  25. JustMe says:

    There is a big difference between being a sensitive person and one who is thin-skinned!

  26. Tessa says:

    Charles is not sensitive, he is as hard as nails, he ousted Diana and his other married mistress Dale Tryon (she was ousted by Charles) wanted to speak to him (she was dying) but he refused. And then there is the cold hearted behavior with the Sussexes. Prince Philip called him “precious” but not in a good way. I think Prince Philip hit the nail on the head.

  27. Tessa says:

    Charles was insensitive from way back. He and Camilla were dancing in front of APB ca. 1979 and could not keep their hands off each other so to speak. He did not care that the husband was watching. Then he took Camilla as his “escort” to Zimbabwe on a tour. A sensitive man would not get involved with a “friend’s wife” to begin with. Lady Dale Tryon’s husband (according to a documentary about her) had to discreetly stay away from home when Charles visited. The man can say he’s “sensitive” but he’s the exact opposite.

  28. Noor says:

    Hope they have a baby christening in California with Prince Charles and the Queen participating via zoom.

    The Queen should really step down in favour of Prince Charles as King. Now is a good time as ever. When everybody feel more secure, the competition between the heirs and with Prince Harry will die down.

    Prince Charles should take the longer term view and reconcile with Harry.

    • Tessa says:

      I have no faith in Charles. There was nothing stopping him from keeping Harry and Meghan and Archie in the UK. He let his elder son call the shots and did nothing. He took away security from the Sussexes and he sat back and watched his (then) youngest grandchild be likened to a chimp. I think things will be worse with Charles at the helm and even worse with William in charge. I doubt Charles will “imperil” his relationship with his HEIR and keep Harry cast out. I think Charles would want Harry back,,,but without Meghan. ANd he and William probably have the same mantra (when Harry comes to his senses).

  29. Mooshe1 says:

    If Camilla’s in her feelings I think it’s funny. But I hope Anne’s husband is okay with it

  30. Lucylee says:

    Someone described Charles’ dilemma as being torn between the son he doesn’t trust and the son who doesn’t trust him.

  31. jferber says:

    “Immensely sensitive”? I’d call him a soulless killer. Thanks for these words, President Biden. They seem to describe so many people in power.