True Love Marriages

[Mirabel]

I don't really get the concept with "true love". Is there such a thing as false love? Or no love at all? And if so - why should that be a problem if those who are married are both happy with the situation?

Back in Regency days, there was a thing that was once called creampot love.

Love in return for money or title or position.

I suppose there isn't a problem, if both people are happy. It might be considered a fair exchange.
But then be honest, and call it what it is.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I've always read/understood that it wasn't so much a love match as it was a practical marriage for both parties.

IIRC they lived separate lives after a certain point.



LaRae

Rainier was so visibly shattered at Grace's funeral that I had to avert my eyes from the camera at times. He was broken for years afterward and was never truly the same man again.

Even if it began as a marriage of mutual convenience, I am more than convinced that he truly loved his gorgeous Princess.

 

[Pranter]

Rainier was so visibly shattered at Grace's funeral that I had to avert my eyes from the camera at times. He was broken for years afterward and was never truly the same man again.

Even if it began as a marriage of mutual convenience, I am more than convinced that he truly loved his gorgeous Princess.

I'm certain they had feelings for each other at some point....I think she became very unhappy (reported that she lived mostly in France IIRC after a certain point in their marriage) for various reasons.

Perhaps he came to realize mistakes and had deep regrets and of course it's too late to make amends after someone passes.


LaRae

 

[Osipi]

Then again, there are many examples where physical looks really never entered the picture at all as a reason for falling "in" love. For example, Eleanor and Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

FDR And Eleanor Were A Modern-Day Romeo And Juliet

"Politically speaking, at least. FDR was a Hyde Park Democrat, while Eleanor hailed from the Republicans of Oyster Bay, Long Island. FDR’s mother, Sara Delano, thought her only son was too young to marry (he was 22 and Eleanor was 19 when they got engaged in November, 1903). She also never found Eleanor to be particularly impressive or attractive: Eleanor’s own mother called her “Granny.” Sara asked the couple to keep their engagement secret for a year and even took her son on a foreign vacation hoping that would change his mind. It didn’t."

After Reading This, You'll Never Look At The Roosevelts The Same Way Again

 

[Moonmaiden23]

As I posted before, it's just all so very tricky for outsiders to judge whether or not another couple has "true love".

By every account, JFK married Jacqueline Bouvier in 1953 because she was intelligent, Catholic, beautiful and "classy". His ambitious father Ambassador Kennedy is said to have engineered the marriage so that his son would have a presentable spouse when he achieved the White House.

Jacqueline was raised to marry into what her social climbing mother called "big money".

In other words even though the couple was physically attracted to and appreciated one another, neither of them was said to have married primarily for love.

JFK's affairs during the marriage are the stuff of legend, several of his biographers believe he suffered from a sexual addiction.

But after reading first hand accounts of the marriage from people who knew them well I am more than convinced that they loved one another deeply in their own way. For Jackie in particular this brilliant, handsome, profoundly flawed man was the love of her life. His assassination reportedly drove her to contemplate suicide.

She told one of her maids that as he lay dying in her arms in the Dallas motorcade she kept telling him that she loved him, because she had read that dying people can still hear and she wanted that to be the last thing he heard in this life.

You can just never know what really goes on in someone's marriage.

 

[Mirabel]

I'm certain they had feelings for each other at some point....I think she became very unhappy (reported that she lived mostly in France IIRC after a certain point in their marriage) for various reasons.

Perhaps he came to realize mistakes and had deep regrets and of course it's too late to make amends after someone passes.


LaRae

I don't know; I think they were both unhappy. A womanizer and an alcoholic? Doesn't sound like a recipe for a good marriage to me.

 

[Denville]

I think they were In love but had their problems. I don't think it was an easy marriage; Grace as an American didn't really understand royal life. But she did learn and adapt

Back in Regency days, there was a thing that was once called creampot love.

Love in return for money or title or position.

I suppose there isn't a problem, if both people are happy. It might be considered a fair exchange.
But then be honest, and call it what it is.

Regency days? Are you saying that people don't marry for convenience now?

I don't know; I think they were both unhappy. A womanizer and an alcoholic? Doesn't sound like a recipe for a good marriage to me.

Of course they were unhappy at times. Any marriage has its problems and bad times and I think that they didn't know each other that well and had more than average. But they did care for each other. Where are you getting the "womaniser and alcoholic"? I think they had separate lives at times and different interests, but underneath there was a core of affection.

 

[Mirabel]

Regency days? Are you saying that people don't marry for convenience now?

No, I'm not saying that.

Someone asked for another term (other than true love) and I mentioned what a marriage of convenience was once called.

Of course people still marry for the same reasons, but I haven't heard anyone use the term creampot love lately!

 

[Denville]

well the term may be a bit out of date, but the concept still exists. I'd say that many marriages such as marriages to millionaires and royals don't even reach any definition of love...

 

[Pranter]

As I posted before, it's just all so very tricky for outsiders to judge whether or not another couple has "true love".

By every account, JFK married Jacqueline Bouvier in 1953 because she was intelligent, Catholic, beautiful and "classy". His ambitious father Ambassador Kennedy is said to have engineered the marriage so that his son would have a presentable spouse when he achieved the White House.

Jacqueline was raised to marry into what her social climbing mother called "big money".

In other words even though the couple was physically attracted to and appreciated one another, neither of them was said to have married primarily for love.

JFK's affairs during the marriage are the stuff of legend, several of his biographers believe he suffered from a sexual addiction.

But after reading first hand accounts of the marriage from people who knew them well I am more than convinced that they loved one another deeply in their own way. For Jackie in particular this brilliant, handsome, profoundly flawed man was the love of her life. His assassination reportedly drove her to contemplate suicide.

She told one of her maids that as he lay dying in her arms in the Dallas motorcade she kept telling him that she loved him, because she had read that dying people can still hear and she wanted that to be the last thing he heard in this life.

You can just never know what really goes on in someone's marriage.

I don't think there's any doubt she loved him (at what point that occurred only she knows) ...I think he cared for her and had a lot of respect and admiration of her (he always seemed very proud of her in public) ...not sure that he 'loved' her (at least not when they married, she was a very suitable candidate for an up and coming politician) ....I think he was a very complicated and conflicted man due to his family and situation.



LaRae

 

[Osipi]

No, I'm not saying that.

Someone asked for another term (other than true love) and I mentioned what a marriage of convenience was once called.

Of course people still marry for the same reasons, but I haven't heard anyone use the term creampot love lately!

Today we have terms like "trophy wife" and "Daddy Warbucks" and "Sugar Daddy" and specifically getting more and more popular is "Baby Mama" and "Baby Daddy". Society is accepting more these days of single parents having children without marriage. Where it used to be quite acceptable to have arranged marriages and dynastic marriages and even pharaonic marriages, those have quite gone by the wayside for the most part and some even deemed illegal.

People come together for many, many reasons and there's really no set definition to define and measure the level of love, respect, mutual admiration or stability of a marriage one isn't involved in. Actually, I'd go as far as to state that with most marriages now, it would be more fitting to replace "till death do us part" to "as long as we both shall choose". I've actually seen this as part of wedding vows.

Each couple is unique and what works for one would be a disaster for another.

 

[Denville]

True in a way but all the same, I think that there are marriages that are clearly for some definition of love, some unselfish feeling or emotional attachment, and others that don't have any real emotional component, which are an arrangement of (usualy) an attractive woman marrying a man for his wealth and he wants to show her off as young and beautiful...

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Today we have terms like "trophy wife" and "Daddy Warbucks" and "Sugar Daddy" and specifically getting more and more popular is "Baby Mama" and "Baby Daddy". Society is accepting more these days of single parents having children without marriage. Where it used to be quite acceptable to have arranged marriages and dynastic marriages and even pharaonic marriages, those have quite gone by the wayside for the most part and some even deemed illegal.

People come together for many, many reasons and there's really no set definition to define and measure the level of love, respect, mutual admiration or stability of a marriage one isn't involved in. Actually, I'd go as far as to state that with most marriages now, it would be more fitting to replace "till death do us part" to "as long as we both shall choose". I've actually seen this as part of wedding vows.

Each couple is unique and what works for one would be a disaster for another.

Truer words, rarely spoken Osipi!

I have no doubt that there are some couples who have what they feel is a love story for the ages.

I am thinking of some very famous folks in the worlds of politics, entertainment and sports who would cause me to run screaming for the hills or reaching for Valium if I was part of a relationship like theirs but that's another thread.

 

[Mirabel]

Actually, I'd go as far as to state that with most marriages now, it would be more fitting to replace "till death do us part" to "as long as we both shall choose". I've actually seen this as part of wedding vows.

Why stop there?

Why not use "Unless something better comes along" or "Unless you get sick or old or unattractive and turn out to be a burden" or "Unless we can't afford the lifestyle I want."

That's probably what such people mean but don't want to state outright.

 

[C4A]

You have it right, Osipi, and you mentioned it too, moonmaiden23. Each couple is unique and only the partners in the marriage will determine if their union is a happy and fulfilling one, even if it seems lopsided from the outside. I think that Celine Dion and René Angelil were very happily married, despite their age difference. And so I also think that P Albert and P Charlene are happily married. They just seem close and content together, imo.


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community

 

[sthreats]

I was actually responding to posters who were saying that a rich/powerful man often marries "above his league" in that he will get a young and beautiful wife. Charles did, but he then formed a much happier partnership with Camilla. And another poster who said that Camilla and Charles were both "attractive", and IMO neither of them is more than average in looks. I did point out that whle many DID think Diana very beautiful not all agree /]


https://goo.gl/images/Gk2Bf3

I think on this picture and others Camilla is sexy. And back in the 70's Prince Charles was the action man with a slamming body.
So I think they were above average and more importantly they were attractive to each other. They still feel that way. It is very evident in their interactions. This is a true love match.

 

[Denville]

IM not disputing that they love each other, I think they do and that they also had a powerful sexual bond, probably still do. I just wouldn't call either of them particularly good lookng. Charles certainly dated many girls who were prettiter than Camilla, but she's the one he always returned to.

 

[royal rob]

I wonder how Camillia really feels about Charles is it real love or our affair caused all this trouble so best we are married so it looks like true love. We are told of her love for her 1st husband over Charles back in the early years. I think she might think sometimes " I'd rather be home with my family than all this royal duty how the hell did I finish up in this position "


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Osipi]

Anything that anyone puts on a couple from the outside looking in comes under pure speculation and is really kind of futile to even discuss. We don't know, will never know and its really none of our business to know. Perhaps someday down the lines an autobiography will come out about different people and then we get a glimpse into a relationship as it was.

One thing I will say though about couples that have been together happily for decades is that most likely their relationship probably has a lot of different levels to it and have gone through changes over the years.

 

[Denville]

I think we do have enogh info on some couples to make an educated guess. Charles and Camilla are not young, books have been written, he has talked to people, the meida. so we have a history of them. So I think taht they are definitley in love, I think she is not that keen on the royal life but she is willng to do it, for Charles' sake. and she's reasonably popular now. I think that she's done the job quite well, considering and she and Charles are good friends and have always known how to cope with whatever came up in thier lives. Of course love changes as life goes on, but if there is a bond, and the couple are wiling to keep on trying, it will keep on going.

 

[Queen Claude]

I wonder how Camillia really feels about Charles is it real love or our affair caused all this trouble so best we are married so it looks like true love. We are told of her love for her 1st husband over Charles back in the early years. I think she might think sometimes " I'd rather be home with my family than all this royal duty how the hell did I finish up in this position "


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

I've wondered about Camilla as well since we know so little about her but what comes to mind is the taped phone conversation between Charles and Camilla from the late eighties/early nineties. That conversation was famous for the "naughty" parts but there were quite a few declarations of love from her to him, one of which she said loving him was easier than falling off a chair.

My guess is that Camilla may have preferred Andrew as a husband, and may have even loved him more at some point, but, going by that tape, she definitely loved Charles by that time and presumably still does.

It seems to me that Camilla was fine with loving and being loved by Charles but that she did not feel the need to be married to him, at least not until circumstances were different, and even then I'm not sure Camilla wanted to marry Charles per se, rather others felt they needed to marry since it would not look right for the future Head of the Church of England to have a live-in girlfriend, which by the way she and Charles did not, and still do not, live together 100%, but that's another discussion.

 

[Denville]

She does live iwth him. A lot of married cuoples, esp royals have separate houses, if they can afford it.. and Camilla clealrly wants a bit of "me time", adn a place to spend time with her children and grandchildren without the fuss of royal life. she and Charles IMO are very happy together and know how to enjoy their time togethter and their time apart. Charles is alos a bit of a loner, by nature. I think that as a young woman, yes Camilla was in love with Andrew, but she's grown since then and grew to love charles as her first marriage got more difficult. She outgrew the "loving a bad boy" stage and while remaining friends with Andrew, fell in love wiht Charles....I think she woudl be fine with NOT being married to him, but like most people she probalby prefers the security of a settled legal partnership and of course in her position, it was necessary for her and Charles to tie the knot legally...

 

[royal rob]

I don't think "a lot" of married couples have separate houses I think it would be a very few. Wealthy couples might have 2 houses but that's different to separate houses. If you can only see your children and grandchildren in a different house that's a bit sad.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Denville]

I don't think "a lot" of married couples have separate houses I think it would be a very few. Wealthy couples might have 2 houses but that's different to separate houses. If you can only see your children and grandchildren in a different house that's a bit sad.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Lots of people live apart a lot of the time becuase of work, they may stay in hotels during the week and go home at weekends..or have a flat in London nad go home to the country. it isn't that unusaul esp among the upper classes or middle class well to do. And noone said she can ONLY see her kids in a separate house, but she problaby prefers to spend her time with them somewhere away from Highgrove which isn't all that big, and which IS a royal residence. Most of Camillas life, she has been an ordinary person and she probalby likes a house of her own, where seh can be more informal and where she can do her own thing while Charles is away or doing HIS thing. It may be that she has noisy grandkids and Charles woudl rather they tore up the carpets in another place than his nice house.. I think she and Charles know each other well enough to know that they enjoy their time togehter and their time apart.

 

[royal rob]

Yes lots of people can only get home at weekends because of work which is different to wanting to have separate houses and royal children have been bought up in royal palaces forever without the walls falling down. Anyway we are now OT


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Osipi]

Perhaps one sign of a lasting and mature relationship is that the people within the relationship don't feel they need to be glued at the hip to each other 24/7. It can also be said that a couple that feel very comfortable being around their partner 24/7 is a good sign of an enduring relationship.

It all depends on the people involved. Some couples are very "cutesy" and dress alike and just seem odd without each other whereas another couple could take separate vacations as their interests differ.

 

[Denville]

Perhaps one sign of a lasting and mature relationship is that the people within the relationship don't feel they need to be glued at the hip to each other 24/7. It can also be said that a couple that feel very comfortable being around their partner 24/7 is a good sign of an enduring relationship.

It all depends on the people involved. Some couples are very "cutesy" and dress alike and just seem odd without each other whereas another couple could take separate vacations as their interests differ.

I would say yes it all depends on the people involved. Some couples want to spend all their time together. others enjoy time together but alos like some space. I'd say personally that it is a sign of greater maturity to be able to spend some time apart.. because we ARE individuals niot "pairs", and I think most people need a bit of space And "me time". However of course if you get married, you presumably do it because you DO want to spend some time together..
I think that Camilla and Charles are mature, have been close for 40 years, and know each other well enough and trust each other, to be able to let go and leave themselves some space.. I think she enjoys being with her grandchildren, he enjoys time on his own for some hobbies. but they have a fair bit in common and like to be together as well and I'm sure thy enjoy their time together all the more for having some space from each other.
I have always spent a lot of time with my partner but we usually have separate holidays..
If people want to spend 24/7 together and both are hapy with that, then that's fine for them.. but most of us are in between. i'd say most people may love their partners but they don't want to work with them, spend every leisure hour with them as well.. they like the bits of separation..

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I wonder how Camillia really feels about Charles is it real love or our affair caused all this trouble so best we are married so it looks like true love. We are told of her love for her 1st husband over Charles back in the early years. I think she might think sometimes " I'd rather be home with my family than all this royal duty how the hell did I finish up in this position "


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

I've actually read in more than one Royal biography that Camilla's true love was Andrew Parker-Bowles, her chronically unfaithful first husband. She never really wanted the divorce.

However, carried along by events after the Charles/Diana separation and divorce she ended up married to the Prince of Wales, who almost certainly does consider Camilla the woman of his life.

Before anyone objects I am not stating that Camilla didn't or doesn't love Charles. However I do believe that she would have been just as content to stay married to Andrew Parker-Bowles.

"Fate happens" as the late Aristotle Onassis often said.

 

[Denville]

I've actually read in more than one Royal biography that Camilla's true love was Andrew Parker-Bowles, her chronically unfaithful first husband. She never really wanted the divorce.

"Fate happens" as the late Aristotle Onassis often said.

I think she fell out of love with Andrew. She got tired of the unfaithfulness, and she wanted a steadier man in her life and that was Charles. She did love Andrew when they were young and they are still good friends, but I think that she fell in love with Charles as time went on, because she knew she came first with him. Andrew wanted a divorce too, because he was in love with his second wife. but as long as Charles was tied to Diana, Andrew would not get a divorce and leave his wife open to attacks, but when it looked as if Charles and Diana were going to split up and Charles would be free to look after Camilla, Andrew wanted out. I think Camilla certainly wanted to be with her lover. Certanly from what I've read of her love letters to Charles, and conversation with him, she was fed up with Andrew then and was not as close to him..and wanted to be free.
I don't think she cared that much about a marriage, in itself, but she was older, she wanted a stable relationship and was happy to marry him...If the powers that be had said "we don't want you marryng Charles, but it would be Ok if you lived with him discreetly in private", I think she would have accepted that. however, I am sure she was not unhappy iwht the idea of being properly legally married and being Duchess of Cornwall etc...

 

[Pranter]

Hmmm I've always gotten the impression that Camilla is not a fan of the spotlight and would of been just as happy to NOT have the titles (or the marriage). I think she would of been perfectly content to remain living in the country with her horses and dogs and Charles visiting when his schedule allowed..and/or she joining him for various events.


LaRae