Love her or hate her—or love to hate her—there's no getting around the fact that when Camille Grammer opens her mouth, people listen.
Well, guess what? She ain't done talking. In an interview with E! News, the most hated Real Housewife of Beverly Hills proved she had a few more revelations up her sleeve—and far more importantly, that she wasn't afraid to show 'em.
Hey, Kelsey? You might want to cover your ears for this…
First of all, props to Camille, whose time on reality TV certainly showed her how to cut to the chase.
"I'm just shocked when women come after me," she said, explaining that women often approach her to let her know how seemingly classy they perceive her estranged husband to have behaved in comparison to herself.
"Kelsey…Kelsey got another woman pregnant when we were still married."
"That's been hurtful," she went on. "There's a difference between reality TV and reality. There's a big difference."
Grammer went on to explain away the disparity between her on-screen character (insecure, enemy to women everywhere and pretty much universally despised) with her actual self (none of those things, she claims).
She also noted that if she had known how the show would end up, she never would've signed on.
"Absolutely not. If I had known that Kelsey and I were separating, and this was gonna happen, there's no way I would've shot the show.
"What can you do? I mean, it was a good diversion while going through this, because it kept me busy, so that's a positive."
Reliving the events of the show and the disintegration of her marriage was very hard for Grammer.
"It's hard to expose your personal life publicly, and everyone has an opinion. Emotions still run high," she said. "I was getting bombarded by negativity. It's a little too much sometimes."
She said that she was able to rely on some of her fellow housewives through this ordeal, namechecking Lisa Vanderpump, Taylor Armstrong and Adrienne Maloof.
In other words, everyone but Kyle and Kim Richards.
"Kyle and I are like oil and water," she said of her on-screen adversary. "We clash at times; it's just our personalities." Still, she adds, "I think Kyle's a riot."
As for her role on the show of de facto villain, Camille said that placement came as the biggest shock to her.
"When I first started the show, I would've never thought I would've been the villain. I guess I say some things that are controversial—and I do—and I claim them and I own them and I'm sorry that I say them and I'm sorry that I hurt them," she explained.
"And it's very uncomfortable to relive that…I'm glad that I had this experience, but I don't like how it's depicted me. I don't think it's a correct depiction of who I am as a person, and that hurts. I mean, I could go with it and say, 'OK, I'm the villain,' and go with it and play it up. But I'm bombarded by negativity. I feel like I'm getting kicked by both ends."
Which begs the question of whether or not she'll return for a second season.
"If there is a second season…we've been discussing it. I think after we watch the reunion show, we'll discuss it with producers and we'll figure it out," she said, noting that the filming of the reunion lasted a whopping eight hours.
"It's hard for me because I'm a sensitive person and I'm going through a lot. In time I may be able to embrace [the villain role], but at this time…not so much.
"Divorce in itself is so difficult to get through. The next few months there's gonna be a lot of changes in my life, and I don't know if I want to play that out on camera."
Especially since the divorce itself got played out for the entire cable-subscribing world to see.
"I didn't want to expose too much of what's going on and I knew things were happening," she said of her hesitance to allow the cameras to follow her during the latter half of the Housewives shooting schedule.
Which is right around the time Kelsey told her he wanted a divorce.
"I found out right before the Tonys that he wanted a divorce," she said. "I didn't even want to fly in for that, but Kelsey said, 'You're filming the show, we have to do this for the show.' He said basically, 'Camille, be professional, get on that plane.'"
And they say romance is dead?
Still, for all her talk of Kelsey's terribly insensitive handling of the situation, Camille still cares for her soon-to-be ex.
"I think when you've spent 14 years with somebody, you still care about them. I'm really disappointed about how it went down. I think what he's done to me is horrible, disrespectful to myself and to my children, but I just want to move forward with my life."
But not, apparently, as quickly as Kelsey wants to.
Earlier today, Camille filed her response to Kelsey's request for a quickie divorce, asking the judge not to sign off on their split until all matters concerning spousal and child support, division of property and other assets, attorney's fees and custody issues over their daughter Mason, 10, and son Jude, 7, are settled.
Camille filed for divorce on July 1 of last year, meaning in California, should her request be denied, a quickie divorce is possible six months after the initial filing. So, now.
"I do not want to lose substantial spousal and legal rights that I understand presently exist," she stated in the declaration. "Until judgment has been entered on all remaining issues and has become final, the parties will continue to be considered as 'spouses.'"
So why would she do that? Well, first of all, it would prevent Kelsey from remarrying, something he's publicly stated he's itching to do.
"I do not believe this is a sufficient reason to prejudice my rights to the community estate, especially given the large and complex nature of our estate," she wrote.
Just how large and complex are we talking? According to the documents, their estate is valued around $120 million.
And should Kelsey jump down the aisle despite her objections, she asks that his new wife not have any interest in community property assets, that Kelsey not be allowed to change the beneficiary listed on the family trust, and that he must notify her before purchasing any additional real estate.
Still want to be real housewives, ladies? A hearing on the matter is set for Jan. 26.
—Additional reporting by Claudia Rosenbaum