The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #301  
Old 11-04-2005, 07:33 PM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
I have a lot of problems with this story. For one, I find it hard to believe that Lady Tryon agreed to spend time vetting all of Charles potential wives just to be mistress number two and take what was left of Charles after Diana and Camilla were finished with him. Why would she go to such trouble to be 3rd in line?

In fact, if Camilla and Dale both vetted Charles' girlfriends, it makes far more sense that both were doing it as friends and not as Charles' mistresses number one and two. Friends do look out for each other and they have been known to check out each other's potential girlfriends, boyfriends,etc. You're just getting to know someone, you don't know whether to take it to a more serious level, you ask your friends because you trust their judgment. My own friends have done it for each other.

I don't know about Vanity Fair but as close-mouthed as Camilla is, I'd be surprised that she picks the type of friends that talk to reporters. We haven't gotten any juicy gossip about Charles' and Camilla's relationship after the beginning of Charles' marriage and these stories came out several years later.

Charles is the Prince of Wales. If Diana was so keen on an "arranged marriage" as everyone is suggesting, then how hard could it be to be Mistress Number Two??
__________________

  #302  
Old 11-04-2005, 10:03 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiaraprin
Charles is the Prince of Wales. If Diana was so keen on an "arranged marriage" as everyone is suggesting, then how hard could it be to be Mistress Number Two??
tiaraprin, I really don't believe that either Charles or Diana were keen on an arranged marriage - at least a formally arranged marriage where everybody knows its just for show and children. But a couple can go into marriage with different expectations and this is the main reason marriages fail.

For Charles, I believe, practical considerations did come into play, such as producing a heir and marrying someone that would be approved. But all heirs to the throne have to think of those things. Charles at that stage of his life did not want to take risks and wanted to comply with what was expected of him. But he also wanted to marry an English girl because of his strong physical attraction to the English look and he had a wounded sensitivity that was similar to Diana's so he and Diana did have this in common even if they didn't have much else.

Diana, because she was so young, is harder to read. As a young girl, Diana idolized Prince Charles from afar and had pictures of him in her room. She did not know him well even when they married. She did have an unhappy childhood and it is not unusual for a young girl to rush into marriage from an unhappy childhood with the hope that then things will be all better. They don't necessarily love the flesh and blood human being that they're marrying, they're looking for someone to make everything alright. And the royal family at that time had an image of all that is upright and respectable in the British character. A marriage like this hardly ever works but it doesn't keep people from trying.

In fact Charles did have a history of unequal relations even if not with women. He and Andrew got along quite well as long as Andrew idolized his older brother. When Andrew grew up and became his own person, the brothers were estranged. For someone like Charles, being idolized by a young pretty girl can be a great boost to one's self-esteem in the same way that the public acclaim and adulation became a boost to Diana's self-esteem. And one feels very affectionate and caring to others who boost one's self-esteem. It never works in the end however because then the other person eventually finds out that you're human with flaws.

But to your question about Lady Tryon, I'm sorry I don't see her taking a number two mistress position with Charles because I think Charles did have some sincere but misguided affection for Diana at first and even if Lady Tryon didn't have to compete with Diana, she would have had to compete with Camilla. Plus I cannot see Charles with his lack of decision making and fear of risk taking going into a highly public marriage with two mistresses in his pocket. That is highly risky no matter how mousy you think the future wife is. I can't even see him taking one mistress in the marriage.

At this stage in his life, Charles did not take decisive action, he fell into things that others decided for him. And I don't think Camilla had that much control of him at this stage of his life to change this aspect of his character. My belief is that only the pain of a failed marriage was enough to force Charles consider taking risks to be with Camilla. At that point the risk could be seen as less than the real pain of a failed marriage.
__________________

  #303  
Old 11-05-2005, 06:37 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
I really don't believe that either Charles or Diana were keen on an arranged marriage - at least a formally arranged marriage where everybody knows its just for show and children. But a couple can go into marriage with different expectations and this is the main reason marriages fail...
What a brilliant post Ysbel, absolutely full of wisdom and insight.:)
  #304  
Old 11-05-2005, 01:05 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,584
Yes, but it is perfectly acceptable among the British aristocracy to have mistresses and lovers both ways, at least in the older generation.

Charles was a product of Lord Mountbatten, who married Edwina to use her as an ATM, and Prince Prince Philip as well, who had affairs literally all over the globe.

When you come from this type of environment is it any wonder these things happen?

Tom Parker Bowles saw both parents cheat throughout their marriage. Hopefully, he will realize this is not normal or acceptable in a marriage and won't hurt Sarah by doing this.

Men have been happy to share their wives with the current and past Princes of Wales.

It adds a certain social cachet and chicness and gives you visibility in the ranks of the aristocracy.

I find it disgusting and flagrant. Diana WAS a modern woman who could never, and nor should she have had to, understand why if she was married he needed someone else as well. Of course both her parents had lovers during their marriage as well.

What is wrong with these people? Are they trying to really prove the only reason for marriage in their class system is really just to produce an heir?

Do any of them have a happy, two person marriage??????
  #305  
Old 11-05-2005, 07:21 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 589
What I found unacceptable for Diana was that she chose to have her lovers while she always complained that Charles had Camilla.
Some historians said that Prince of Wales or Kings were allowed to have lovers because they didn't marry for love. Upper class married upper class because they can combine their power, fortune and stauts through marriages and passed to their children. Their marriages were convenient marriages.

What I felt happy was that royal families finally realised that marriages should be based on love rather than anything else. They learnt from Charles and Diana's marriage. It was a lesson for all people who needs to enter the marriage. Nowadays we don't have strong sense of duty like the Queen and the Duke. We may put our personal happinss before the Duty. Marriage should be an exception. People should marry for love. I felt sorry for Diana's death but I wish Charles and Camilla well. They are victims of conventions, traditions, royal constraints, public opinions, their mistakes in youth, and other. Just don't let history repeat itself. I think the stories of Duke of Winsor, Princess Margaret, and Prince Charles were enough love tragedies in royals.
  #306  
Old 11-05-2005, 07:48 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,584
I agree none of them are perfect. But I will never understand how a mistress or lover is perfectly acceptable for the wife or the husband.

I am thrilled my husband is a real man who does not need to prove himself how macho he is by sleeping with another husband's wife.

That is why I cannot respect or give any good wishes to any of their marriages. I honestly do not think any of them realize what marriage is truly and really about.

That is why I thrilled I am not royal because if Prince Philip had been a thorn in my side telling me who I could or could not marry, he would have conveniently had his mouth superglued shut permanently so I could have some peace to make up my own mind.
  #307  
Old 11-05-2005, 08:06 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
Diana WAS a modern woman who could never, and nor should she have had to, understand why if she was married he needed someone else as well. Of course both her parents had lovers during their marriage as well.
I don't think Diana was all that modern a woman. She may have modernized the monarchy by bringing a more human touch to how they approached things or in how she raised her children, but in terms of values, I think she was a traditionalist.

I think at heart Diana was a naive young girl who had a rough childhood with her parents constantly fighting and ultimately divorcing. In Charles she saw not just an escape from that life but a fairytale one, one that would make her believe in true love and princes sweeping regular girls off their feet. Charles wasn't that type of person and he wouldn't give her the riding off in the sunset picturesque life she anticipated.

If her parents had affairs during their marriage then it was one example to Diana. Not a good one, but it was an example to her that it was okay to do this. She may not have wanted to accept it when Charles started up his relationship with Camilla after their marriage, but with her lack of confidence and the stronger will of the monarchy fighting against her, Diana stood no chance. Ultimately she became as bad as her parents and Charles: She had multiple affairs of her own.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
Tom Parker Bowles saw both parents cheat throughout their marriage. Hopefully, he will realize this is not normal or acceptable in a marriage and won't hurt Sarah by doing this.
The same could be said for Laura Parker Bowles and William and Harry. All four kids watched all four of their parents have affairs. (I am not sure about Andrew Parker Bowles having affairs however. I think he just stood by and watched his wife have one.)

Things will probably be harder for William and Harry when they get married. The example of a marriage set by their parents was a terrible one. Not only did both Charles and Diana air their public laundry for the world to know, the worst thing in my eyes is that Diana drew a young William into the problem by confiding in him about his father's affair and terrible deeds.

Charles and Camilla can at least say they had one long term adulterous affair - we know that they are committed to each other at least. Diana had several affairs with people who didn't mean anything to her other than as a means to hurt Charles.
__________________

  #308  
Old 11-05-2005, 08:12 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,584
Actually Andrew Parker Bowles's second wife is the woman he had an affair with for much of the latter half of his marriage with Camilla.

I hope all four of these offspring either are smarter than their parents were, or have been explained that marriage should be between two people in love, not arranged, not forced, AND NEVER WITH LOVERS TAKEN ON THE SIDE!
  #309  
Old 11-05-2005, 08:12 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,584
How low have we sunk in values and sanctity when we view this all as normal, acceptable, rational behavior.......
  #310  
Old 11-05-2005, 08:14 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,584
And giving Camilla a bracelet the day before he was married and keeping in touch with her instead of focusing in his marriage was not his fault either...

None of them are saints, but let's not white wash what really is factual history here with a fluttering of hands clasped to the sides of our heads and deep sighs of love..

C'mon...we all live in the real world compared to these people...
  #311  
Old 11-05-2005, 08:18 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 2,383
In some circles of society and in some countries more than others the acceptance of lovers outside of marriage is simply the norm. It may not be your's or mine preferred way of living but for many other it is just the lifestyle of choice. Many life choices may be the "norm" for someone but that does not mean it is for everyone else.

grevinnan
  #312  
Old 11-05-2005, 08:22 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by grevinnan
In some circles of society and in some countries more than others the acceptance of lovers outside of marriage is simply the norm. It may not be your's or mine preferred way of living but for many other it is just the lifestyle of choice. Many life choices may be the "norm" for someone but that does not mean it is for everyone else.

grevinnan
Well said grevinnan.

Adulterous affairs may not be right by your standards or by my standards or by your next door neighbour's standards. But in some social circles and countries it is the norm, even expected. In some countries and religions taking on several wives is okay. I couldn't ever be part of that personally but that doesn't mean that other women can't live with that.

We can't any more pass judgement on such an aspect than we can pass judgement on somebody's religion or cultural beliefs.
__________________

  #313  
Old 11-05-2005, 08:32 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,584
Oh please..give me a break. Maybe in some backward third world country it is.

I certainly can pass judgement on a person who breaks their marriage vows. I have seen it happen with my own parents.

I have no problem ignoring the person who caused all the pain from it.

If you are not adult enough to work through your marital problems, then get a divorce or anullment.

It is a little more than "Oh wow, what are going to get from Crate and Barrel?????"
  #314  
Old 11-05-2005, 08:36 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
How low have we sunk in values and sanctity when we view this all as normal, acceptable, rational behavior.......
Well, in the past the nobility and royals had to marry for reasons other than personal ones, and it was accepted that after heirs had been produced incompatible couples could find their emotional fulfillment elsewhere. As this sort of requirement was ending and marriages were being made more for love, so that it shouldn't have been necessary to find one's soulmate somewhere other than in one's spouse, the permissive society happened along and promiscuity became more the norm anyway.

I found it interesting that the Queen Mother, as Duchess of York, was friendly with Lady Furness when she was the Prince of Wales's mistress; her aversion to Wallis seemed to be that Wallis was ambitious and indiscreet, not that she was a married woman who was the Prince's mistress.
  #315  
Old 11-05-2005, 08:37 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
Oh please..give me a break. Maybe in some backward third world country it is.

I certainly can pass judgement on a person who breaks their marriage vows. I have seen it happen with my own parents.

I have no problem ignoring the person who caused all the pain from it.

If you are not adult enough to work through your marital problems, then get a divorce or anullment.

It is a little more than "Oh wow, what are going to get from Crate and Barrel?????"
So you're saying that countries or religions in which polygamy is acceptable are "backward?" That is really a very ethnocentric way of thinking. There are wonderful and different customs and traditions all around the world and one shouldn't pass judgement on them just because we are not familiar with them or don't understand them.
__________________

  #316  
Old 11-05-2005, 08:43 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,387
Ah Lady Marmalade, the English aristocracy has always been a mystery to me. In some ways, they are more foreign than the royals. A royal expert once said on 60 Minutes that the aristocracy married the first wife to preserve the bloodlines and the second wife for pleasure.

Guys who without warning break off their marriage from their wife of 20 years to marry some stunner half their age to prove their manhood or worse run off with their wife's best friend don't get much sympathy from me. I think its disgusting. But if the marriage is bad and they found someone more supportive then I still don't like it but I understand it more. If that makes any sense. :) At least they left for someone they love rather than for someone who just strokes their ego. I would be really mad if my husband left me just for ego. I would be really hurt if he left me for someone he loved more but then I'd have to chuck it up to the fact that our relationship wasn't meant to be. For me, in some sense, it would be easier to get over. In other words, if he's going to leave me, he'd better have a damn good reason for doing so!

When people marry they think they love each other and that it will work out but its hard to really know a person until you're married. I don't think royal marriages are as cold-bloodedly arranged as it appears. Love is not the only consideration in any marriage: compatibility, loved ones' relationships with your family and friends, shared goals and aspirations all play a part in the marriage equation.
  #317  
Old 11-05-2005, 08:49 PM
sara1981's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North Little Rock, United States
Posts: 3,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
Tom Parker Bowles saw both parents cheat throughout their marriage. Hopefully, he will realize this is not normal or acceptable in a marriage and won't hurt Sarah by doing this.
oh my god!

TPB saw his parents have cheat of had affair about his mother had affair with the Prince of Wales and his dad had affair with another woman! who told you about that!

Sara Boyce
  #318  
Old 11-05-2005, 08:52 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth
Well, in the past the nobility and royals had to marry for reasons other than personal ones, and it was accepted that after heirs had been produced incompatible couples could find their emotional fulfillment elsewhere. As this sort of requirement was ending and marriages were being made more for love, so that it shouldn't have been necessary to find one's soulmate somewhere other than in one's spouse, the permissive society happened along and promiscuity became more the norm anyway.

I found it interesting that the Queen Mother, as Duchess of York, was friendly with Lady Furness when she was the Prince of Wales's mistress; her aversion to Wallis seemed to be that Wallis was ambitious and indiscreet, not that she was a married woman who was the Prince's mistress.
I did find Camilla was in a very difficult position. She was between Charles and APB, two favourites of Queen Mother, and Princess Anne and the Queen I suppose. How can Camilla let this happen? How can she live with that? Such a tough woman!Arguably, it was the closeness of APB with royal family which created its own chance for Charles and Camilla to rekind their love. They two are really in love with each other.

It is said in somewhere that Charles resented Andrew because he made Camilla miserable in her marriage with Andrew because Andrew's flings are usually Camilla's friends. That was very painful.I think Jilly Copper mentioned that as well. So Charles may help Camilla heal her wounds in Andrew's philanding which finally led to their commitment to each other. I believe this because Camilla was really deeply in love with Andrew when she was young. I heard you can tolerate your friends's philanding but not your lover's philanding. I guess Charles is quite commited to Camilla since his youth.
  #319  
Old 11-05-2005, 08:55 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,387
I just wanted to add that I do respect true love and companionship between people and I support it because I think its very rare. In a sense, Charles marriage to Camilla confirms the power of love because they do love and support each other and are finally together. It would have been great if Diana had taken that example and found someone who loves and supports her as well as Camilla loves and supports Charles.

Lastly, I think life is too short and there is too much unhappiness in the world to begrudge someone else some happiness just because you both made a mistake when you married. For better to be relieved that at least someone found some happiness and go out and find some love and happiness of your own.

So I am a softie - I do believe in true love. :)
  #320  
Old 11-05-2005, 09:17 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Elspeth made a very important point here, which is the tradition in extremely wealthy families, the nobility/aristocracy and among royal families was to marry for reasons other than love. It doesn't matter what country or culture we can point to, it happens in all Western cultures, including the USA.

Diana came from one of the most aristocratic and ancient families in the English peerage. The Spencers have long married for titles, power, ambition or to bring themselves closer to the Sovereign. This is very much a tradition among the British peerage and is hardly unacceptable or unusual. Diana certainly understood that long before she ever met and married Prince Charles.

Both Diana and Charles were very attracted to each other from the start and they both have made clear they were in love. While, on the surface, it certainly looks like an arranged marriage, it most certainly was not. Yes, it's true Diana was a perfect candidate in terms of her background and bloodlines to marry the Prince of Wales. Yes, it's true Prince Charles needed to settle down, get married and have children. But, they both made the choice to marry of their own free will because they were in love.

It is well-documented that both Lady Fermoy and the Queen had reservations from the start. The Queen wasn't sure if Diana was too young to become Princess of Wales and assume a lifetime of public duty. She also had concerns that Charles and Diana had nothing in common and their passion would wear off. Lady Fermoy felt Diana was too immature and naive to marry into the royal family and warned her of the immense responsibility that came with the marriage.

I don't believe for a moment that Charles had any intention of continuing his relationship with Camilla after marrying Diana. Nor do I believe the Princess simply decided one day to start having affairs. The marriage began to break down because they never had much in common, Diana had serious mental health issues, the unrelenting spotlight and pressure of the media caused them both to lose perspective and their respective courtiers drove a wedge between them over time.
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
camilla, diana princess of wales, duchess of cornwall, prince charles, prince of wales, princess diana, relationships


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
Diana/Charles/Camilla's Relationships Part 2 Warren The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 935 12-07-2005 07:49 PM
The Great Baby Guessing Challenge Part 4 Alexandria General Royal Discussion Archive 17 05-16-2005 09:02 PM
The Great Baby Guessing Challenge Part 3 Alexandria General Royal Discussion Archive 24 04-10-2005 07:33 PM
The Great Baby Guessing Challenge Part 2 Alexandria General Royal Discussion Archive 7 03-06-2005 12:20 PM
King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia, Current Events Part 1: November 2002-June 2004 Josefine Current Events Archive 300 06-12-2004 09:13 AM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch state visit e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece harald illegitimate children kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander may 2016 member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats princess stéphanie's evening gowns queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion royal visits september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark state visit to france succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:32 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises