The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #2401  
Old 05-05-2017, 06:23 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Freehold, New Jersey,, United States
Posts: 97
Here's a quick question:

I was telling my mom about some of the royal houses Diana is related to. That caused my mom to say "So it (Charles & Diana's marriage) was a setup!"
I'm slowly starting to think it really WAS a setup. Because Charles could have wanted a woman who had a more impressive bloodline than he did.
Thoughts?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2402  
Old 05-05-2017, 06:42 AM
JR76's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 1,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenElizabeth2Fan View Post
Here's a quick question:

I was telling my mom about some of the royal houses Diana is related to. That caused my mom to say "So it (Charles & Diana's marriage) was a setup!"
I'm slowly starting to think it really WAS a setup. Because Charles could have wanted a woman who had a more impressive bloodline than he did.
Thoughts?
Diana did not have a more impressive bloodline than Charles but if that was what he was after Europe was full of elligible princesses with 1500 years of breeding to chose from. That said although not a complete setup it has been said that their respective grandmothers were pulling a few strings to get the pair together.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2403  
Old 05-05-2017, 06:44 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,670
I don't actually think that Charles and Diana's marriage was a "set up" in the sense of moving people around on a chessboard to make all the right moves and win a game but if we do look at it objectively, we can see that, at the time, everything that was deemed right and proper was checked off and given the royal stamp of approval.

Diana came from the right background. Diana didn't have much in her past that could come back and bite them in the butt so was pretty much looked at as the "virginal" bride to a future king. Diana and Charles seemed to take to each other well enough that they'd be compatible in a marriage. Diana was young enough that she could "grow" into her role as The Princess of Wales and be advised on how to do it. Charles wasn't getting any younger and knew he had a duty to provide the heir and the spare for the monarchy.

Many marriages around the world have started out with less. With Charles and Diana, no one could have begun to guess that two people who had only "dated" a short time and known each other for a short time could be like oil and vinegar when it came to day to day life as partners. Each had their own perception of what marriage should be like. Both Charles and Diana wanted partners that would be there for them. Diana wanted adoration and a husband that worshiped the ground she walked on. Charles was used to having everything his way and most likely felt that Diana would fall in line with that. There's probably a million other reasons that could be pointed out where they were totally incompatible.

I do think they went into the marriage with the best of intentions but had they perhaps spent more time together and really got to know each other, they would never have married.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #2404  
Old 05-05-2017, 10:43 AM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 3,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I do think they went into the marriage with the best of intentions but had they perhaps spent more time together and really got to know each other, they would never have married.
I now disagree with that. I think Diana was determined to land Charles, and if it took longer, she would have maintained the necessary pretenses to please him. Maybe Charles would have seen the disjunct with a longer courtship. We'll never know.

I have begun to have a radical view of how these two entered the marriage. And it's not flattering to Diana. Keeping in mind that the Diana 'spin' (in the Morton book), that has held such sway in the popular imagination, was intended to deflect attention away from her (by then) numerous dalliances with other men, not to mention the long-standing affair with James Hewitt, I question whether Diana actually did enter the marriage intending to stay 'true' to Charles.

This is something that has just occurred to me as I considered how rapidly into the marriage Diana engaged in serious flirtation. I think (in her immature way) she thought of herself as untouchable (protected by the respect in which the BRF was held) and beyond consequences. She only ever showed distress in public after she was 'caught' or was suffering the consequences of her actions (Morton book - separation; Hewitt revelation and police action regarding phone calls - Panorama interview).

JMO of course but the whole thing makes no sense unless one factors in Diana possibly not being as devoted to monogamy herself. After all, that is what she saw modeled by her parents, and likely all around her growing up. And when one looks at them both through the 80's it is never Diana who looks disquieted. She always looks radiantly happy. It's Charles who looks like he is disillusioned.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #2405  
Old 05-05-2017, 11:15 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
I now disagree with that. I think Diana was determined to land Charles, and if it took longer, she would have maintained the necessary pretenses to please him. Maybe Charles would have seen the disjunct with a longer courtship. We'll never know.
Oh I have no qualms about thinking Diana was dead set on landing The Prince of Wales. Not Charles really but The Prince of Wales. She was naive and had fairy tale dreams in her head and the idea of being The Princess of Wales was the predominant factor in her aims to land Charles. I've read in several places that at one time, Diana rode a tricycle through the halls of Buckingham Palace chanting "I'm going to be Princes of Wales". How true that is is not certain in my mind but it sounds like it describes her mindset.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
I have begun to have a radical view of how these two entered the marriage. And it's not flattering to Diana. Keeping in mind that the Diana 'spin' (in the Morton book), that has held such sway in the popular imagination, was intended to deflect attention away from her (by then) numerous dalliances with other men, not to mention the long-standing affair with James Hewitt, I question whether Diana actually did enter the marriage intending to stay 'true' to Charles.
To be honest, I'm more inclined to believe that she simply didn't know what the heck she was doing. She applied the tactics she used to win Charles over with basically anyone she met and didn't give any thought to its outcome. She craved attention. She craved acceptance and she had absolutely no moral compass to guide her in these things. I think she basically saw every man she met as a possible Barbara Cartland hero that would sweep her off her feet and fill her lonely hours and rescue her. When things really started going south and her reputation was at stake, it was then that her manipulation skills came into play and she contrived ways to not look like the "bad guy" in anything and be portrayed as the "victim" much like some of the heroines in the same Barbara Cartland romances had to endure. If she had entered the marriage with the intention of not being true to Charles, I don't think the things about Charles that bothered her to the point of obsession would have happened.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
This is something that has just occurred to me as I considered how rapidly into the marriage Diana engaged in serious flirtation. I think (in her immature way) she thought of herself as untouchable (protected by the respect in which the BRF was held) and beyond consequences. She only ever showed distress in public after she was 'caught' or was suffering the consequences of her actions (Morton book - separation; Hewitt revelation and police action regarding phone calls - Panorama interview).
I agree with you that she probably thought that she was "protected" and above reproach no matter what she did and quickly found out otherwise that it wasn't the case. This is what makes me think that she maybe had a narcissistic personality disorder in the respect that everything she did was because it felt good at the time and benefited Diana. Outcomes and backlash never really fit into the picture because I don't think Diana was that much of a forward thinker to weigh the causes and effects of what she'd do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
JMO of course but the whole thing makes no sense unless one factors in Diana possibly not being as devoted to monogamy herself. After all, that is what she saw modeled by her parents, and likely all around her growing up. And when one looks at them both through the 80's it is never Diana who looks disquieted. She always looks radiantly happy. It's Charles who looks like he is disillusioned.
I don't think it was a lack of devotion to monogamy or her parents but from her actions, I would be more apt to say that the one person Diana was most devoted to was herself. Although she is cited for her compassion and her affect on the people she met, we have to remember too that the public adoration of Diana fed her self esteem. Diana in public was a totally different person than the Diana in private as I'm really finding out.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #2406  
Old 05-05-2017, 12:26 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Freehold, New Jersey,, United States
Posts: 97
This is a very interesting discussion!
Also, is there any ancestry talk in this "Charles & Diana" thread? If so, can anyone post links to it? I've tried finding even something, but can't find anything.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2407  
Old 05-05-2017, 12:40 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,670
You were pretty much on the right track posting in the Princess Diana Ancestry and Family thread. This thread is for focusing on the marriage of Charles and Diana and discussions relate to that. The moderators like us to keep on topic and that keeps the thread from going off on all kinds of tangents.

I could have sworn there was a Spencer ancestry thread in the Royal Genealogy section of TRF but I couldn't find it. My eyes are playing tricks on me today methinks. There's a lot more about royal geneaology in this subforum of the board.

Royal Genealogy - The Royal Forums

Maybe you can find what I've missed.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #2408  
Old 05-05-2017, 03:22 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,371
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenElizabeth2Fan View Post
Here's a quick question:

I was telling my mom about some of the royal houses Diana is related to. That caused my mom to say "So it (Charles & Diana's marriage) was a setup!"
I'm slowly starting to think it really WAS a setup. Because Charles could have wanted a woman who had a more impressive bloodline than he did.
Thoughts?
thoughts???? why on earth would he want that? He's the future King.. she wasn't royal...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2409  
Old 05-05-2017, 04:12 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenElizabeth2Fan View Post
This is a very interesting discussion!
Also, is there any ancestry talk in this "Charles & Diana" thread? If so, can anyone post links to it? I've tried finding even something, but can't find anything.


Not in this thread, no. There's plenty in the genealogy threads though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenElizabeth2Fan View Post
Here's a quick question:

I was telling my mom about some of the royal houses Diana is related to. That caused my mom to say "So it (Charles & Diana's marriage) was a setup!"
I'm slowly starting to think it really WAS a setup. Because Charles could have wanted a woman who had a more impressive bloodline than he did.
Thoughts?


Diana did not have a more impressive bloodline than Charles. That's a myth.

Diana was from the British aristocracy and a good family, that's what made her attractive as a potential royal spouse. She came from the right background.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2410  
Old 05-05-2017, 04:34 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,371
Obviously Ish. She wasn't royal. But she was upper class and of the rank and cirlcle that socialised with the RF and were considered suitable as marriage partners once the BRF stopped its practice of marrying (usually)German royals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JR76 View Post
. That said although not a complete setup it has been said that their respective grandmothers were pulling a few strings to get the pair together.
not true. Noone "pulled strings..."
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2411  
Old 05-06-2017, 06:17 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,243
I think that Diana was infatuated with Prince Charles and thought that she loved him and could be a good wife. My impression of Prince Charles from the interviews he gave during their engagement was that he was happy to be marrying her and had found the "right" person to be Princess of Wales. I don't think that either of them went into marriage expecting to have to compromise on things and deal with disappointments.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2412  
Old 05-06-2017, 08:11 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,371
well yes of course she was. its ridiculous to suggest that she was planning on marryng him and having affairs on the side or that she expected him to do the same. She was clearly naïve abouot such matters, even if not as horrified by the concept of affiars as some seem to be.
And while I think she really wanted to marry him, she was not hellbent on doing so to the point of lying or doing anyting she could in the sort of brutal way that some seem to think of her.
I think if she and he had courted for longer, they would still have married because both of them had a strong desire to find a partner, and wed.. he because he had turned 30 and was at the age where he had to commit and find a wife... and she because she had been brought up to marry well and she was not likely to wish for any career other than that of wife and mother. She was young, not very clever, not educated and had no prospects other than doing a little job as a nanny, and seeing her friends.. and she was'nt going to buck the idea that was still prominent among her class that girls should marry well and as early as reasonably possible. And he wanted to marry because he knew that it was time, that if he waited much longer there would be a huge age gap between him and his bride and that as Philip put it, there wouldn't be anyone left.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2413  
Old 05-07-2017, 07:09 AM
Jacknch's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk/Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 5,925
Please note that several posts have been removed as they are off-topic. The Charles/Diana/Camilla triangle is not up for discussion. Please note that posts relating to the Panorama interview have been moved to the The Panorama Interview: November 20, 1995 thread. Posts relating to Diana's ancestry can be made here: The Panorama Interview: November 20, 1995
Please note the topic of the thread before posting so as to avoid de-railing the discussion.
__________________
JACK
Reply With Quote
  #2414  
Old 05-07-2017, 10:39 AM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
I now disagree with that. I think Diana was determined to land Charles, and if it took longer, she would have maintained the necessary pretenses to please him. Maybe Charles would have seen the disjunct with a longer courtship. We'll never know.

I have begun to have a radical view of how these two entered the marriage. And it's not flattering to Diana. Keeping in mind that the Diana 'spin' (in the Morton book), that has held such sway in the popular imagination, was intended to deflect attention away from her (by then) numerous dalliances with other men, not to mention the long-standing affair with James Hewitt, I question whether Diana actually did enter the marriage intending to stay 'true' to Charles.

This is something that has just occurred to me as I considered how rapidly into the marriage Diana engaged in serious flirtation. I think (in her immature way) she thought of herself as untouchable (protected by the respect in which the BRF was held) and beyond consequences. She only ever showed distress in public after she was 'caught' or was suffering the consequences of her actions (Morton book - separation; Hewitt revelation and police action regarding phone calls - Panorama interview).

JMO of course but the whole thing makes no sense unless one factors in Diana possibly not being as devoted to monogamy herself. After all, that is what she saw modeled by her parents, and likely all around her growing up. And when one looks at them both through the 80's it is never Diana who looks disquieted. She always looks radiantly happy. It's Charles who looks like he is disillusioned.
IMO flirtations do not equal planning on having an affair. IMO Diana had so many men in her closet because she got married so young and for her this was her dating. Charles had already done all his dating and knew who he wanted to settle with, Diana had yet to find hers. Being a flirtatious girl isn't a bad thing, Diana always craved attention, too much IMO. I don't necessarily buy the evil Diana setting out to ensnare Charles; I think she fooled herself into thinking they could work out. And both Diana and Charles tried to stick it out in their marriage, or that's what I think.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #2415  
Old 05-07-2017, 02:41 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 3,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
IMO flirtations do not equal planning on having an affair. IMO Diana had so many men in her closet because she got married so young and for her this was her dating.
Yes, it was.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
Charles had already done all his dating and knew who he wanted to settle with, Diana had yet to find hers.
You don't know that. That's the single fiction that is the fuel that gasses up the whole marriage scenario train as endlessly repeated, from leaving the station to arrival.

Key to the whole thing is believing (not knowing for a fact) that Charles was set on someone from the moment he walked down the aisle. We have no evidence of that except what Diana spun in later years (to 'explain' and deflect from her own numerous adulteries by then). Given Diana's penchant for lying, her say-so is not convincing in my book.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
Being a flirtatious girl isn't a bad thing, Diana always craved attention, too much IMO.
Would you say the same if it were Charles who was seriously flirtatious? If he was wouldn't that have hurt Diana? Just wondering if the same applies to him. Is Charles to have different sensibilities as well? Having a wife that not just flirts but seriously foments infatuations? How do you think he felt about that? What might have been his reaction?

BTW she wasn't a 'girl', she was a young woman, just married.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
I don't necessarily buy the evil Diana setting out to ensnare Charles;
Who said she was 'evil'? Why does that word get said so often? Everyone lies a bit here and there but Diana lied to Charles when they were dating about a couple of significant items (by her own admission). You don't find that concerning? That she misled the man into thinking they had compatible lifestyle interests?

Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
I think she fooled herself into thinking they could work out.
Fooled is perhaps the operative word but for another reason. More likely, she fooled herself into thinking she would control the situation, that once she was Charles' wife she would be free to dictate. (The bulimia is a symptom of the controlling). She was able to do so to a remarkable degree for a few years as it was. Charles' eventual resistance to being endlessly controlled gets characterized as his 'being spoiled'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
And both Diana and Charles tried to stick it out in their marriage, or that's what I think.
The marriage was destined to be an aristocratic arrangement and that's what it would have been had it not been for Rupert Murdock and aggressive sniffing-out tabloids and tapes (those tapes have never been explained, 'who' arranged those tapes? Maggie?)

They would have 'stuck it out' had not Diana's behavior become so aggressively worse and worse by the year, likely aggravated, not by Charles btw, but the genuinely disconcerting impossible-to-identify 'who' surveilling royalty at that time. Remember she was stalking a married man by the time of the panorama interview, her behavior had become extreme. The police were involved. The marriage would definitely had been 'stuck out' because divorce wasn't an option. But Diana forced that hand by her own wild behavior, yet in this I would offer a unique perspective rarely (if ever) suggested: that Diana wound up unwittingly 'working' hand-in-glove for the unknown parties wanting to bring down the monarchy. Just an idea. I have always been fascinated by the tapes released of Diana and Charles. Those tapes are key to the whole thing.

Anyone else have a clear bead on the timeline of the tapes and the Morton book?
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #2416  
Old 05-07-2017, 05:06 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 1,071
Given her stalking and other various antics, if she had not been titled and attractive and rich, she would have had a long criminal record and ended up committed for her own safety and that of others. As for her relationship with her kids, parading her various lovers and her emotional issues she placed on William's shoulders she would have lost visitation rights. I get fed up with how every rotten thing Diana did to people was excused on so many grounds by so many people. Frankly after her divorce she could have really pulled it together, but chose to make even bigger messes and caused a lot of pain to a lot of people.

Even her vaunted love affair with Dodi was in fact built on a breakup; supposedly Dodi was engaged to a former model Kelly Fischer, but few people like to remember that.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2417  
Old 05-07-2017, 05:12 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,243
Diana's tape was recorded New Year's Eve in 1989 and became news in August of 1992. Charles' tape was recorded on December 18th of the same month and was published in January 1993.

The release of the "Squidgygate" tape looks as though it was a response to Morton's book, certainly, although the part about Diana's fear of becoming pregnant wasn't released until just before her tour of Nepal in March 1993. I just found an article suggesting that this second release might have had to do with an election in Australia! More of Princess Di's Alleged Phone Tape Played - latimes

These tapes, plus the Morton book, the Dimbleby book and interview, and Diana's Panorama interview were gifts to those who would have liked to see the demise of the monarchy.

Whenever there's a visit to Canada by members of the Royal Family, the media always manages to find people who are against the visit for various reasons. The events of the early 90s are, in my view, the same things writ large. The desire to "put things out in the open"/"set the record straight" might have come from Charles and Diana, but I think that these things were used to weaken the idea of the monarchy. There was so much more at stake here here than the breakdown of a marriage.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2418  
Old 05-07-2017, 06:09 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,879
Lady Nimue I did not state that Charles walked down the aisle intended on settling with Camilla. I said that by the time they both started affairs Charles had already dated any women and he didn't need to go through the gambit again, he only wanted an affair with one woman. As opposed to Diana who had no real boyfriend before Charles and so was just starting her dating life in the mid to late 80s.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #2419  
Old 05-07-2017, 06:15 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by AristoCat View Post
Given her stalking and other various antics, if she had not been titled and attractive and rich, she would have had a long criminal record and ended up committed for her own safety and that of others. As for her relationship with her kids, parading her various lovers and her emotional issues she placed on William's shoulders she would have lost visitation rights. I get fed up with how every rotten thing Diana did to people was excused on so many grounds by so many people. Frankly after her divorce she could have really pulled it together, but chose to make even bigger messes and caused a lot of pain to a lot of people.

Even her vaunted love affair with Dodi was in fact built on a breakup; supposedly Dodi was engaged to a former model Kelly Fischer, but few people like to remember that.
Just to clarify I am in no way excusing Diana's behavior. I am as hard on her as anybody and I get irritated by those who paint her as a constant victim of everything. I just was pointing out that being a flirt doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing and it is not indicative of Diana going into her marriage intending to cheat.
As for her other behavior, mostly the lying, it is clearly a bad thing and its nobody's fault but her own.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #2420  
Old 05-07-2017, 06:31 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
Just to clarify I am in no way excusing Diana's behavior. I am as hard on her as anybody and I get irritated by those who paint her as a constant victim of everything. I just was pointing out that being a flirt doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing and it is not indicative of Diana going into her marriage intending to cheat.
As for her other behavior, mostly the lying, it is clearly a bad thing and its nobody's fault but her own.
When I really stop to think about it, the person that really did a job of painting Diana as a victim was Diana herself. Everything that went wrong had someone else to blame for it.

A lot of people have a flirtatious nature (both men and women) and its no indication that their relationships and/or their marriages are unhappy ones or that they expect the flirtations to lead to something else. Unfortunately, I've never been any good at flirting but I do admire those that are at ease with it. It does make a person feel at ease if its done in casual niceness without sounding like its a pick up line. Diana was good at breaking the ice with people she didn't know and this is where perhaps her flirtations fit in. They were harmless.
__________________

__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diana princess of wales, marriage, prince charles, prince of wales, princess diana


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Charles and Diana Picture Thread Josefine Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 444 06-17-2017 04:02 AM
Charles and Diana: Visit to Italy - 1985 jun5 Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 57 09-02-2012 10:35 PM




Popular Tags
austria birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess victoria current events denmark duchess of cambridge eveningwear earl of snowdon family french general news gloucester hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta margarita infanta sofia italy iñaki urdangarín juan urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein monarchy morgan news nobel 2017 prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince harry prince liam prince nicholas prince oscar prince sebastian princess beatrice princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess mary casual style princess mary current events princess of asturias princess sofia princess sofia eveningwear princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen mathildes hats queen maxima queen silvia state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family the duchess of cambridge fashion vatican victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:31 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises