Prince Albert and Princess Charlene's Relationship - Part 2

[Leslie2006]

I just hope Charlene is happy with Albert, but something tells me they won't make it past five years and perhaps 2 or 3 children. There's 20 years in age between them, and he has a reputation as a ladies' man and 2 illegitimate children to prove it. I just don't see it lasting.

 

[COUNTESS]

Funny, it is only of late that this reputation of "being a ladies man" exists. I thought he was gay, which was fine, as he was never mentioned with any ladies and then came the children. And it was amazing that Jazmin surfaced, years later, when Coste was making a grab for monetary reward for Alexandre. And, yes, Madame Royal, some people must find fault, with those who seem to have made a bigger stake in life. I do not know what the future will bring them, but no one else does, either. Supposition, that is all.

 

[LadyMacAlpine]

Funny, it is only of late that this reputation of "being a ladies man" exists. I thought he was gay, which was fine, as he was never mentioned with any ladies and then came the children. And it was amazing that Jazmin surfaced, years later, when Coste was making a grab for monetary reward for Alexandre. And, yes, Madame Royal, some people must find fault, with those who seem to have made a bigger stake in life. I do not know what the future will bring them, but no one else does, either. Supposition, that is all.

Albert has been linked to many women over the years. Where have you been? Naomi Campbell, Olympian Mary Wayte, Brooke Shields, Lisa Marie Presley, Angie Everhart, Alicia Warlick, Daryl Hanna are only a few.

 

[NGalitzine]

Albert has been linked to many women over the years. Where have you been? Naomi Campbell, Olympian Mary Wayte, Brooke Shields, Lisa Marie Presley, Angie Everhart, Alicia Warlick, Daryl Hanna are only a few.

Yes his name was linked with many interesting ladies over the years but at the same time there were many people, no doubt including some posters on these boards, who claimed that he was gay and that they knew this to be fact. Then these children popped up so now he his the playboy of the western world, so it was a no win situation for him,.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

The women Albert was linked to over the years were more or less famous "walkers", all the same type. I never thought that he had a serious relationship with one of them. My impression has always been that he is playing on both ends of the field, who knows.

 

[Aliza]

I'm sure that P.Charlene's ability to birth babies was checked and verified.

According to Prince Rainier, Grace Kelly's reproductive capacity was not checked before they became engaged and married, contrary to popular myth. He denied it on the record in 1988 when he co-operated with the book, "Rainier and Grace". He noted that they could have adopted if they had failed to conceive. I understand that option is no longer available for the Grimaldi Princes, but if Albert put Charlene through any tests like that and she submitted to them instead of telling him where he could "go" - then I would have no sympathy for her no matter how Albert behaves.

Personally, I believe there is a genuine friendship and love between them, though perhaps they're not "in love", but IMHO, liking one's partner is what gets marriages through the rough times while the emotion of being "in love" can grow from friendship, and it will ebb and flow as is the norm for every couple I've ever known who has made it past the honeymoon phase.

I think today's expectation of always being madly in love with your spouse as advocated by films and romance novels is partly responsible for the current high divorce rate. Love and commitment in marriage are often decisions to be affirmed over and over again when romance takes a back seat to crying children and worries about the mortgage, for example. If Albert and Charlene have this attitude then I would wager they will last until "death do them part" and that romantic love will also spark between them if it has not already.

 

[Nice Nofret]

... but IMHO, liking one's partner is what gets marriages through the rough times ....

I think today's expectation of always being madly in love with your spouse as advocated by films and romance novels is partly responsible for the current high divorce rate. Love and commitment in marriage are often decisions to be affirmed over and over again when romance takes a back seat to crying children and worries about the mortgage, for example....

That's also my thoughts on lasting relationships - romance and "beeing in love" is highly overrated and a lot of people have a "romantic" notion about marriage - that's why they are so disapointed in live and their partner ... . in the end

A good marrige is much more about respect, friendship and sharing once trouble than about romance ... it's more like a wholesome meal than chocolate cream

 

[Sancia]

That's also my thoughts on lasting relationships - romance and "beeing in love" is highly overrated and a lot of people have a "romantic" notion about marriage - that's why they are so disapointed in live and their partner ... . in the end

A good marrige is much more about respect, friendship and sharing once trouble than about romance ... it's more like a wholesome meal than chocolate cream

Being in love is not incompatible with being down-to-earth and willing to go together through the difficulties. At the contrary, many people who commit themselves into weddings, and in christian wedding, know their relation has to be built again and again every day if they want it to last forever.

 

[Renata4711]

The trouble is that PA has shedloads of "chocolate cream", and few wholesome meals as Nice Nofret puts it.

So, how, at his age, will he learn these lessons? He is 53....

 

[Nice Nofret]

Being in love is not incompatible with being down-to-earth and willing to go together through the difficulties. At the contrary, many people who commit themselves into weddings, and in christian wedding, know their relation has to be built again and again every day if they want it to last forever.

Quite right - only the second part is likely to be forgotten - after the romance has gone

But back to A & C: it still leaves one wonder, what SHE hopes to get out of it. For him it's quite clear to me .. it's about an heir .. her motive?

 

[dbarn67]

The trouble is that PA has shedloads of "chocolate cream", and few wholesome meals as Nice Nofret puts it.

So, how, at his age, will he learn these lessons? He is 53....

Huh? Is meant to sound so offensive? In hope not.

 

[LadyMacAlpine]

Yes his name was linked with many interesting ladies over the years but at the same time there were many people, no doubt including some posters on these boards, who claimed that he was gay and that they knew this to be fact. Then these children popped up so now he his the playboy of the western world, so it was a no win situation for him,.

And some people are still saying the marriage is a sham he really is gay. Jazmin was known about when she was a toddler here in the States due to the paternity suit and is in a book published in 1998 she wasn't anything new. Then before that 1987 another paternity suit was filed against him and Bea talked about her fling with him in Tabloids and TV. The test did prove he wasn't Daniels father.

The women Albert was linked to over the years were more or less famous "walkers", all the same type. I never thought that he had a serious relationship with one of them. My impression has always been that he is playing on both ends of the field, who knows.

Duke, Mary was as wholesome as you could get and he was in love with her and wanted to marry her. He had a reputation even in college of being a ladies man. Some of you may be to young to recall. Also his parents didn't allow him to take dates to the Balls etc. Mary was the first one I heard of who he took to a Ball.

I said my peace I'm done.

 

[Duchess]

if they married for love thats great if they didnt thats fine as well marriage for thousands of years had nothing to do with love.
getting married for love is a victorian era invention. if they like each other and have made an agreement that she produces an heir and then is taken care of financially.
helps to raise the child but is free to live her own life i see nothing wrong with it royals have done this before its nothing new.

as long as bolth are happy with the choices they have made then good for them

i have no problem with this either - it's quite realistic really - however this woman is extremely unhappy so something is wrong.

 

[Princess of Durham]

i have no problem with this either - it's quite realistic really - however this woman is extremely unhappy so something is wrong.

When was the last time you talked with Charlene????

 

[Duchess]

When was the last time you talked with Charlene????

when was the last time you did? call me crazy but when does a woman, happily anticipating her wedding purchase a one way ticket back home days before her wedding and try to leave the county only to have her passport confiscated? when does a happy bride sleep in a hotel 10 miles down the road from her husband on her honeymoon?

 

[Princess of Durham]

First, we do not know that the runaway bride, passport confiscation story is even true, probably nicely made up by the news media.

As to sleeping ten miles away ... if PA has business meetings that she is not included and most importantly they have been together for five years (does anyone really think they've never slept together) and when she is in a city that she knows very well .... why wouldn't she stay at a luxury hotel on the beach as opposed to a high rise business hotel in downtown???

It sounds like a very practical arrangement for two people who know each other well.

I'm not in the perfection game BUT neither do I slurp up every bit of tabloid silliness that's put before me.

 

[Renata4711]

Princess -
There's nothing to add to this .... it all sounds plausible....
so, why have so many of us a bad feeling about the whole setup ?

 

[Grandma828]

The time at the IOC meeting was not the honeymoon per Albert.

 

[Duchess]

First, we do not know that the runaway bride, passport confiscation story is even true, probably nicely made up by the news media.

no, we don't know that it's true but we also don't know that it's untrue.

As to sleeping ten miles away ... if PA has business meetings that she is not included and most importantly they have been together for five years (does anyone really think they've never slept together) and when she is in a city that she knows very well .... why wouldn't she stay at a luxury hotel on the beach as opposed to a high rise business hotel in downtown???

It sounds like a very practical arrangement for two people who know each other well.

a practical arrangement? on their honeymoon? if the trip were for any other reason other than their honeymoon then this statement MIGHT make sense but no...not on their honeymoon.

I'm not in the perfection game BUT neither do I slurp up every bit of tabloid silliness that's put before me.[/QUOTE]

 

[Smush]

Princess -
There's nothing to add to this .... it all sounds plausible....
so, why have so many of us a bad feeling about the whole setup ?

Yepp. I can only agree with you.
They are together for over 5 years. Sleeping apart is not such a big deal if you have a whole life to share with
This whole discussion and rumors are really p... me off! Sorry

 

[Zonk]

But here's the thing, when the wedding date was changed, it was changed because of a schedule conflict with the IOC meeting. This was announced last year. It was also announced LAST YEAR that Albert and/or Charlene would be attending the meeting and that the honeymoon would be afterwards.

I guess I don't understand why that is not understood because the regular Monaco followers commented on it last year if I am not mistaken.

Originally posted by Iceflower on August 2, 2010 in http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...monaco-and-miss-charlene-wittstock-28070.html

The Princely Palace has announced today that the wedding dates have changed!

Instead of July 8th and 9th, the wedding will take place one week earlier on July 2nd and 3rd!

(Also changed to Saturday and Sunday, instead of Friday and Saturday)

The date was changed as to the first meeting of the International Olympic
Committee (IOC) in Durban from July 5 to 9, the couple plans to attend
and Prince Albert's wish to dedicate their first journey abroad to South
Africa, the new princess' home country.


** Monaco: changement de dates pour le mariage du prince Albert **

** Le prince Albert II et Charlene Wittstock avancent la date de leur mariage **

 

[Renata4711]

Remember many months ago, when there were several alterations to the schedule for the wedding and honeymoon? Well, now it just got worse....

How can such a botched-up event be allowed to be staged? What about all the palace staff?

 

[sophie25]

The SA trip wasn't their honeymoon, it was NEVER intended to be their honeymoon and the people who keep referring to it as such are really annoying me.

 

[Princess of Durham]

The SA trip wasn't their honeymoon, it was NEVER intended to be their honeymoon and the people who keep referring to it as such are really annoying me.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

According to Prince Rainier, Grace Kelly's reproductive capacity was not checked before they became engaged and married, contrary to popular myth. He denied it on the record in 1988 when he co-operated with the book, "Rainier and Grace". He noted that they could have adopted if they had failed to conceive. I understand that option is no longer available for the Grimaldi Princes, but if Albert put Charlene through any tests like that and she submitted to them instead of telling him where he could "go" - then I would have no sympathy for her no matter how Albert behaves.

Personally, I believe there is a genuine friendship and love between them, though perhaps they're not "in love", but IMHO, liking one's partner is what gets marriages through the rough times while the emotion of being "in love" can grow from friendship, and it will ebb and flow as is the norm for every couple I've ever known who has made it past the honeymoon phase.

I think today's expectation of always being madly in love with your spouse as advocated by films and romance novels is partly responsible for the current high divorce rate. Love and commitment in marriage are often decisions to be affirmed over and over again when romance takes a back seat to crying children and worries about the mortgage, for example. If Albert and Charlene have this attitude then I would wager they will last until "death do them part" and that romantic love will also spark between them if it has not already.

Your last paragraph is probably one of the wisest, most mature and concise things I have ever read on any message board.

Thanks for posting it!

 

[CordeliaFitzgerald]

I'm inclined to believe Charlene is telling the truth, and the media are attacking her for reasons unwarranted.

If one goes by the media articles, Charlene was crying buckets of tears at the religious ceremony---and there's no mention about the civil ceremony at all. I tracked down 2 highlights videos on youtube (I wasn't able to watch the wedding live) of the civil and religious ceremonies.

In the civil ceremony, she is beaming. She keeps smiling and looks so serene. In the religious one, she doesn't break down until the very end when that song is being sung. The media knows most people won't track down/don't know about the civil ceremony---so they can spin as "look! she cried! she's unhappy she couldn't flee! and now she's stuck playing a role!"

I remember in a Princess Grace biography, she said that she was extremely exhausted by the time she departed for her honeymoon. That the whole week has been packed, crammed full with activities and celebrations and she was soooooo glad when they got away on the yacht for the honeymoon. I imagine it's the same for Princess Charlene. The tears are happy tears, but also come from being glad the loooooooong week is nearly over.

While I do think the Grimaldis have a "shady, sleazy" element to them, I don't think they would intentionally hurt one of their own, which Charlene essentially is since she was with Albert for 5 years. They've been through too much tragedy. And Albert is constantly described as being soft, gentle, and a people pleaser, so I think somebody in the press has a grudge against him which came out with the wedding.

Anyway, I wasn't interested in Albert until I heard he was engaged, and now they he and Charlene are married, I'm eagerly looking forward to what they'lll do together for Monaco. Whatever happens in their private lives, I think their interests (sports, charities, fashion, etc) compliment each wonderfully and that will benefit Monaco greatly.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Agreed. Even if this were a business trip and not a "real" honeymoon, staying in separate hotels in the same city just doesn't make sense. At their worst, Charles and Diana at least slept in the same building.

a practical arrangement? on their honeymoon? if the trip were for any other reason other than their honeymoon then this statement MIGHT make sense but no...not on their honeymoon.

 

[smdouglas]

Agreed. Even if this were a business trip and not a "real" honeymoon, staying in separate hotels in the same city just doesn't make sense. At their worst, Charles and Diana at least slept in the same building.

I - and many other folks - have said it before, but it doesn't seem to have sunk in. THE TRIP TO SOUTH AFRICA RIGHT AFTER THEIR MARRIAGE WAS NEVER INTENDED TO BE A HONEYMOON (do your research). THE HONEYMOON WAS INTENDED TO START AFTER THE IOC MEETING. GET IT RIGHT!

 

[Queen Penelope]

I - and many other folks - have said it before, but it doesn't seem to have sunk in. THE TRIP TO SOUTH AFRICA RIGHT AFTER THEIR MARRIAGE WAS NEVER INTENDED TO BE A HONEYMOON (do your research). THE HONEYMOON WAS INTENDED TO START AFTER THE IOC MEETING. GET IT RIGHT!

Mermaid stated that even if it wasn't a "real" honeymoon. So my guess is she is aware of the talk that this isn't the "actual" honeymoon. More to the point - no need for all caps. We're all of differing opinions, and even if we don't agree, we're all adults and should voice our oposition respectfully.

Real honeymoon or not - I'm not spending my first weeks as a married woman in a different hotel than my husband, irregardless of how long we've been together. I mean, to each their own, and after 5 years to them it's probably no biggie, but you would have to agree it is a bit of an eyebrow raiser. Poor advising by their aides if no one said anything to them...

Ps. Wow did Pierre ever look like Stefano at the wedding!!

 

[Kataryn]

Agreed. Even if this were a business trip and not a "real" honeymoon, staying in separate hotels in the same city just doesn't make sense. At their worst, Charles and Diana at least slept in the same building.

I bet William and Catherine didn't spend the last weeks before their trip to Canada together for every night. They surely seperated because he worked his full shifts on RAF Valley according to the media and she somehow shopped for clothes - and not on Anglesey! So why is their "sleeping in seperate beds while she is on a businesstrip" never mentioned?