 |
|

02-22-2011, 10:57 AM
|
 |
Former Administrator
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,223
|
|
It seems significant to me that neither Andrew nor Sarah have remarried or formed long lasting relationships with other people. I know that they have done a good job in remaining on excellent terms which initially was to ensure a stable upbringing to their children, but even so, the girls are now grown up and Andrew and Sarah were still in their 30's when they divorced. Perhaps they are the loves of each other's lives and after the difficulties of the early 90s the only option at the time was to divorce.
__________________
JACK
|

02-22-2011, 11:26 AM
|
 |
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 3,145
|
|
There may be a remarriage in the future, but not until HM and HRHPhilip are gone.
|

02-22-2011, 02:08 PM
|
Nobility
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bronx, United States
Posts: 430
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel
From what I have read, Andrew has dated a great many women since the divorce! (Over 50 was the count I read). I heard that he's often out in the London clubs as well.
It's true that he hasn't formed a lasting relationship, but one reason may be that he was burned so badly the first time (let's face it, Sarah made him a laughingstock in front of the whole world) that he's simply unwilling to risk it.
I think the best thing he could do for himself is sever all contact with her, have her move out, and let it be known that he will not be responsible for her debts. As long as he allows it, she will cling to him and rely on him to bail her out.
I realize she is the mother of his children, but those children are adults now and he should concentrate on his own life.
|
I think it's obvious that she wears the pants in that relationship. Divorced or not he's shown that she can do as she pleases. Maybe he is waiting for the chance to remarry her but he doesn't look good the way he's jumped to bail her out in the last few years.
|

02-22-2011, 02:28 PM
|
 |
Imperial Majesty
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 13,594
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sliver_bic
I think it's obvious that she wears the pants in that relationship. Divorced or not he's shown that she can do as she pleases. Maybe he is waiting for the chance to remarry her but he doesn't look good the way he's jumped to bail her out in the last few years.
|
Not sure I understand why he needs to remarry her, and take on all that comes with it.
|

02-22-2011, 06:57 PM
|
 |
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 3,145
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel
Not sure I understand why he needs to remarry her, and take on all that comes with it.
|
Did someone say he needed to remarry her?
|

02-22-2011, 07:04 PM
|
Nobility
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bronx, United States
Posts: 430
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by KittyAtlanta
Did someone say he needed to remarry her?
|
Some would argue (not saying myself but some) that, considering Sarahs inability to control herself that he does. Ultimately if they both want to remarry there is the possibility that Charles or William might say do it if only to bring Sarah back under the control of the crown.
|

02-22-2011, 08:23 PM
|
 |
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Portland, United States
Posts: 4,069
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sliver_bic
Some would argue (not saying myself but some) that, considering Sarahs inability to control herself that he does. Ultimately if they both want to remarry there is the possibility that Charles or William might say do it if only to bring Sarah back under the control of the crown.
|
But how would they control her? She clearly is her worst enemy--unless she's grown up and will stop beating herself up--and when she gets depressed or down all the bad habits come out and the all sorts of things could happen.
Were I the crown, I wouldn't even try.
__________________
"Not MGM, not the press, not anyone can tell me what to do."--Ava Gardner
|

02-22-2011, 09:16 PM
|
Nobility
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bronx, United States
Posts: 430
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russophile
But how would they control her? She clearly is her worst enemy--unless she's grown up and will stop beating herself up--and when she gets depressed or down all the bad habits come out and the all sorts of things could happen.
Were I the crown, I wouldn't even try.
|
The problem is that Andrew, short of being cut off himself, will never let her fall. Normally that's the way to teach someone who's been such a pain but as long as he's around that won't happen. Damned if they do. Damned if they don't, apparently.
|

03-28-2011, 07:39 AM
|
 |
Nobility
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: St Helens, United Kingdom
Posts: 307
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel
I think the best thing he could do for himself is sever all contact with her, have her move out, and let it be known that he will not be responsible for her debts. As long as he allows it, she will cling to him and rely on him to bail her out.
I realize she is the mother of his children, but those children are adults now and he should concentrate on his own life.
|
Sever all contact with Sarah? Eeeh, that's a bit harsh, Mirabel. They obviously still have feelings for each other and one day, their daughters might give them grandchildren. It would be best for the grandchildren if Andrew and Sarah were remarried to each other, or at least getting on as well now as they have done for the past 18 years.
__________________
Princess Diana, the best Queen this country never had
|

03-28-2011, 10:38 AM
|
 |
Courtier
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: WPB FL/Muttontown NY, United States
Posts: 853
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catherine Helvin
.... It would be best for the grandchildren if Andrew and Sarah were remarried to each other....
|
Why?
I mean, I can almost buy into the idea that Andrew and Sarah would be better married to each other to facilitate the raising of their own children, but - grandchildren? Are you anticipating that the grandchildren are going to be living with and being raised by Andrew and Sarah?
Seriously - why? Unless it's a bid for Sarah to remain funded, underwritten, fed & watered by Andrew....but really, grandchildren, that's a bit of a stretch.
__________________
"Me, your Highness? On the whole, I wish I'd stayed in Tunbridge Wells"
|

03-28-2011, 07:44 PM
|
Commoner
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: west, Canada
Posts: 24
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catherine Helvin
Sever all contact with Sarah? Eeeh, that's a bit harsh, Mirabel. They obviously still have feelings for each other and one day, their daughters might give them grandchildren. It would be best for the grandchildren if Andrew and Sarah were remarried to each other, or at least getting on as well now as they have done for the past 18 years.
|
Andrew and Sarah seemed to have proven they can co-exist divorce. They lived in the same home for years, to allow the girls to have one home. They have always had one of the most civil divorces possible. I'd not be opposed to see them remarry if they chose, but I don't see how it would be 'best' for grandkids. Many grandchildren have grandparents who are divorced, and have to split their holidays, even more than usual as there is also the father's family. I don't see Andrew and Sarah not being able to continue to peacefully co-exist for the sake of their family.
|

03-29-2011, 08:34 PM
|
Aristocracy
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 203
|
|
I remember an interview that Andrew gave around the time of his 50th birthday. He basically said that remarriage was not in the cards that they were both happy with the relationship the way it was...or something to that effect.
The relationship that they have now basically gives both of them the best of two worlds. Sarah can live like a royal with none of the responsibilities and Andrew has his family and the freedom to date whoever he pleases. They seem quite happy with the arrangement.
|

04-02-2011, 09:26 AM
|
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,785
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kakieanne
The relationship that they have now basically gives both of them the best of two worlds. Sarah can live like a royal with none of the responsibilities and Andrew has his family and the freedom to date whoever he pleases. They seem quite happy with the arrangement.
|
Well, yes, but the point is that Sarah should not be living like a royal since she is one no longer.
This is what provokes so much criticism of her, and of her enabler, Andrew.
IMO, they are viewed by much of the public as parasites who only take and give little back.
I don't think Andrew would be regarded quite so badly if he cut Sarah out of his life, which is why I advocated that he do so.
|

04-02-2011, 10:15 AM
|
Nobility
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bronx, United States
Posts: 430
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel
Well, yes, but the point is that Sarah should not be living like a royal since she is one no longer.
This is what provokes so much criticism of her, and of her enabler, Andrew.
IMO, they are viewed by much of the public as parasites who only take and give little back.
I don't think Andrew would be regarded quite so badly if he cut Sarah out of his life, which is why I advocated that he do so.
|
He can't.
There are plenty of people who have remained civil, friendly and even loving with their ex but this is beyond anything I've seen. He's tied to her in such a deep way that I'm not sure he'd know how to live without her in his life.
|

04-02-2011, 10:21 AM
|
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,785
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sliver_bic
He can't.
There are plenty of people who have remained civil, friendly and even loving with their ex but this is beyond anything I've seen. He's tied to her in such a deep way that I'm not sure he'd know how to live without her in his life.
|
True; there are some who find this romantic, but I think it's terribly unhealthy.
|

04-02-2011, 12:19 PM
|
 |
Serene Highness
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central Florida Area, United States
Posts: 1,434
|
|
Many couples after they get a divorce aren't civil to each other. It seems like Prince Andrew and Sarah basically have been civil towards each other. I don't think that you could live in the same house after a divorce if you weren't civil towards each other. If they are both happy with the arrangments that they have, who are we to judge them, then.
|

04-02-2011, 02:05 PM
|
Nobility
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bronx, United States
Posts: 430
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nascarlucy
Many couples after they get a divorce aren't civil to each other. It seems like Prince Andrew and Sarah basically have been civil towards each other. I don't think that you could live in the same house after a divorce if you weren't civil towards each other. If they are both happy with the arrangments that they have, who are we to judge them, then.
|
I think you're mistaken what civility is. Civility would be acting in a respectful manner toward one another, at times despite their differences. This relationship is way past that or just about anything else.
Plenty of couples still love one another but simply can't be married because it impedes on their independence so they choose to live apart but remain friends who hold each other in lofty regard. They respect each other and show it in their actions. This relationship is somewhere way beyond that. With his unflinching loyalty, despite her repeated moments of idiocy, Andrew is beyond lovesick. She has him under her heel, whether through ownership of his heart or something a bit more disturbing, she holds him firmly in place.
|

04-02-2011, 03:03 PM
|
Serene Highness
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada, Canada
Posts: 1,225
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sliver_bic
This relationship is somewhere way beyond that. With his unflinching loyalty, despite her repeated moments of idiocy, Andrew is beyond lovesick. She has him under her heel, whether through ownership of his heart or something a bit more disturbing, she holds him firmly in place.
|
I'm just not one of those people who finds Andrew lovesick, nor do I think Sarah 'has the goods' on him. I think he is just committed to Sarah because he sees her as family.
Besides, without Sarah, I think Andrew would be a rather lonely person. He has all those friends in high places, but do they really know him or really care about him beyond what he can offer them? All his siblings are married and he isn't said to be that close to them anyway. Why would Andrew cut ties with Sarah when she is probably his closest friend and the one person who knows him best?
|

04-02-2011, 03:44 PM
|
Nobility
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bronx, United States
Posts: 430
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmay286
I'm just not one of those people who finds Andrew lovesick, nor do I think Sarah 'has the goods' on him. I think he is just committed to Sarah because he sees her as family.
Besides, without Sarah, I think Andrew would be a rather lonely person. He has all those friends in high places, but do they really know him or really care about him beyond what he can offer them? All his siblings are married and he isn't said to be that close to them anyway. Why would Andrew cut ties with Sarah when she is probably his closest friend and the one person who knows him best?
|
Bit unhealthy though. Not because of his connection with her, which I would agree with you on, I mentioned the possibility of him not being able to live (i.e. function properly) without her. And normally, I'd wouldn't complain, as many people aren't lucky enough to have that person in their life that so understands the way they tick but Sarah has done some things that abuse that trust and he's kept walking along.
So maybe it isn't something negative that she has on him but she's certainly taken advantage of his loyalty to her. Arrogant or not, he doesn't blink an eye to help her, even when it puts him in a world of hurt in the process and she knows it. Realistically the least cynical way I can see this relationship is two lonely individuals who found their soulmate but neither grew up properly.
|

04-02-2011, 04:45 PM
|
 |
Majesty
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,305
|
|
Yes, I think that the world might be a lonely place for Andrew. He seems to have friends who offer him "fun", but does he have any who stick around when things get tough. Sarah, for all the scrapes she's gotten into, won't say a bad word against him. These two have been through a lot together.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmay286
Besides, without Sarah, I think Andrew would be a rather lonely person. He has all those friends in high places, but do they really know him or really care about him beyond what he can offer them?...Why would Andrew cut ties with Sarah when she is probably his closest friend and the one person who knows him best?
|
|
 |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|