Did Charles and Andrew marry against type?

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by jcbcode99

I wonder if part of her insecurities during their marriage was that she would compare herself to his previous girlfriends and feel that she would come up short? If you measure based on looks alone, perhaps--

I may be being cynical but Andrew was good looking, so much that his brother called him the Robert Redford lookalike, he was his mother's favorite, and was quite fun-loving and charming. Guys with those natural attributes rarely seek out a woman just because of her personality. They're interested in appearances and how their choices look to other men and having a beautiful, leggy, glamourous blonde by your side is the easiest way to gain status and respect in the eyes of other men.

In fact I think Charles lost what would have been respect from half of the population not for choosing a mistress but for merely choosing a mistress older and less attractive than himself. If he had chosen a woman who was even younger and prettier than Diana, he would have had all the world's men envious and admiring him. I think Esquire way back ran an article about Charles and said he'd gotten his women wrong. It said he married his mistress and had an affair with his wife. In other words, he should have married the slightly boring. slightly plain but dependable Camilla and had an affair with the beautiful, exciting but emotionally unstable Diana.

That way when he got bored with the predictability of wife Camilla, he could get out of himself and his position for a while with the captivating and slightly dangerous Diana. Then when Diana got too emotionally unstable for him to deal with, he could kiss her off with an excuse, Sorry, darling, wife and family call. I simply must go and no one would have thought the worse of him.

[sirhon11234]

Originally Posted by ysbel

I may be being cynical but Andrew was good looking, so much that his brother called him the Robert Redford lookalike, he was his mother's favorite, and was quite fun-loving and charming. Guys with those natural attributes rarely seek out a woman just because of her personality. They're interested in appearances and how their choices look to other men and having a beautiful, leggy, glamourous blonde by your side is the easiest way to gain status and respect in the eyes of other men.

In fact I think Charles lost what would have been respect from half of the population not for choosing a mistress but for merely choosing a mistress older and less attractive than himself. If he had chosen a woman who was even younger and prettier than Diana, he would have had all the world's men envious and admiring him. I think Esquire way back ran an article about Charles and said he'd gotten his women wrong. It said he married his mistress and had an affair with his wife. In other words, he should have married the slightly boring. slightly plain but dependable Camilla and had an affair with the beautiful, exciting but emotionally unstable Diana.

That way when he got bored with the predictability of wife Camilla, he could get out of himself and his position for a while with the captivating and slightly dangerous Diana. Then when Diana got too emotionally unstable for him to deal with, he could kiss her off with an excuse, Sorry, darling, wife and family call. I simply must go and no one would have thought the worse of him.

A perfect example of what you just said is the movie Fatal Attraction.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

A perfect example of what you just said is the movie Fatal Attraction.

What you are talking about the Camilla as dowdy dependable wife/Diana as slightly crazy mistress scenario?

Its not a scenario whereby Charles would have gotten more respect from me; I think in this scenario he would have acted more like a cad but I'm cynical enough to think his reputation among men would have been better and his reputation with women wouldn't have taken such a beating.

[sirhon11234]

What you are talking about the Camilla as dowdy dependable wife/Diana as slightly crazy mistress scenario?

Exactly, Mike Douglas' wife in the movie was a dependable wife and stable. While his mistress Glenn Close was the exact opposite.

And what exactly is a cad?

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

Exactly, Mike Douglas' wife in the movie was a dependable wife and stable. While his mistress Glenn Close was the exact opposite.

And what exactly is a cad?

A guy who is a jerk. If Charles had taken this scenario, he would have gotten a lot more sympathy but to my mind he would have been more of a jerk.

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

Exactly, Mike Douglas' wife in the movie was a dependable wife and stable. While his mistress Glenn Close was the exact opposite.

And what exactly is a cad?

Definition of cad :
"a man who behaves dishonorably, esp. toward a woman : her adulterous cad of a husband."

But I doubt I could qualify Charles as a cad ...

[Elspeth]

I'm fairly sure that if Charles had married Camilla, he wouldn't have been looking for a young, glamorous mistress. He seemed to me to have more in common with George VI than with Edward VII.

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

I'm fairly sure that if Charles had married Camilla, he wouldn't have been looking for a young, glamorous mistress. He seemed to me to have more in common with George VI than with Edward VII.

Exactly. I'm one of those who think that when you've found the 'right' person, there's no need for you to go see elsewhere.

[COUNTESS]

I agree, I think if he married Camilla he might have been satisfied. But he didn't, and, yes, he is a cad. He qualifies very well.

[jcbcode99]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

I agree, I think if he married Camilla he might have been satisfied. But he didn't, and, yes, he is a cad. He qualifies very well.

So, would that make Diana a "cadette" ?
I just couldn't resist!

I do think that Charles would have been content with Camilla--they seem to have an ease of relationship that only comes when there is a strong sense of unity and trust.

[marmi]

The topic of the thread is "types" - and they have been addressed, but what about Diana's age (when she was married) - I'm in the same age bracket, and sure, there are a few couples that I know of who are engaged/married at 20 but (and this will sound cynical) no-one expects the relationship to last. People change so much and are still discovering themselves - starting careers, travelling... There have been posts about Diana presenting hereself as a country girl, and questions and to the accuracy of this; but what I think is that it's perfectly possible that she simply changed - discovered new things, people etc Its normal. (Please note that I'm saying that I think its possible, not that I'm stating my opinion of what happened in any way - I simply dont feel that I know enough to give a definitive opinion (remember my age...)

[jcbcode99]

Marmi, you sound as if you are concerned we will attack you! Nothing at all to fear from us, I assure you.

I have made the same point and wondered the same thing myself--and I think there is some validity to what you suggest. In fact, there may be a whole lot of validity--but we'll never really know. Skydragon made an interesting post about Diana never liking Scotland when she visited her mother and that she did in fact live in a fashionable section of London, sooo.....it is hard to say. But, I will say that I say an interview with her where she said she believed from a young age that she was destined for great things and many have said that she had always had a crush on Charles.....so she may well have duped him. I hate the idea of Charles being duped by a 19 year old. I will say that on other threads that I do think she misrepresented herself early on the relationship and I will stand by what I said.
But, like you pointed out, that is a young age.

[marmi]

Not so much worried about being attacked - rather not wanting to get people up in arms!

I guess what it comes down to is that we'll never really know - Charles is unlikely to speak about it now, and Diana can't; so all we can do is exactly what we are - discussing, guessing, etc

[GlitteringTiaras]

Originally Posted by ysbel

Then randy Andrew who had a bevy of startlets and good lookers in his black book married the country girl kinda klutz that Sarah was. Right now he's dating Angie Everheart, who is a blond beauty starlet who is much more the type of woman I expected him with in the first place.

Wait? Woah?! What?!!

I've been sleeping under a rock when it comes to news about Andrew, but I had no idea he is dating her. She dated Howard Stern for a year. Prior to that she was apparently dating Prince Albert then she moved on to Joe Pesci then onto some other older man. Angie is also known as F-list actress whose direct to video movies also play late night on Cinemax (if you know what I am talking about...)

Back on topic...

Going against ones traditional type the outcome tends to be grim, and in the case of Charles and Andrew, well, they confirmed what many believe. Sometimes opposites don't work.

I believe, Sarah was Andrew's true match, even though she doesn't seem to be his type physically. Unfortunately, things didn't work out, but they do seem to have a fantastic relationship post-divorce.

Regarding Charles, I dunno... he should have married Camilla decades ago.

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by jcbcode99

So, would that make Diana a "cadette" ?
I just couldn't resist!

Well in fact she is (IMO). They cheated and I'm not a Di fan who thinks he's the only cad in the couple. Diana had numerous lovers and today she's still (globally) the one who is considered as the victim. IMO, they were two desperate souls with no possible escape. But the worse is that with being overwhelmed by their own sadness, they didn't pay attention to what William and Harry would say about them sleeping in their lovers bed and having a row every time they spoke to each other.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by countess

He had his life, she made a very poor attempt at trying to attract him and then, I think, she was destroying herself in her anger. That is the real pity. She allowed her anger at him and the siutation she was in, to run her life. She probably justfied everything from that anger, which lead to a very sad ending. No one of us, has the right to judge how and what she felt when she made these foolish decisions.

Originally Posted by countess

I agree, I think if he married Camilla he might have been satisfied. But he didn't, and, yes, he is a cad. He qualifies very well.

[bolding is mine]

Countess, I am a bit curious your criteria for judging people. You've exhorted to people not to judge Diana for one reason or another and then you turn around and have no problems judging Charles.

I have no problem with judging others, I do it all the time and I offer no apologies for it. What strains a person's credibility with the group is when one person exhorts the rest of the group to give someone a break and that we don't have the right to judge then they seem to forget their previous aversion to judging when the target of judgment changes.