True Love Marriages

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Yes, but it's not just adultery that can destroy a marriage, is it? There can be coldness, emotional abuse, withering contempt, a long lingering drifting apart, so that a couple no longer has anything to say to each other.

nd Sarah and Andrew were always smiling and happy in public. In reality, none of us really know how tensions play out in these families, affecting marriages.

I cannot understand this idea that infidelity is the only thing that can damage or destroy a marriage. There are loads of things usually far more commonplace than affairs. Its much more likely that they have found they dont have much in common, or that when the flush of passion is over, they dont like each other. Or quarrels about money and children... Or in royal cases, Im sure a lot of issue about "being royal" and fitting inot the RF as in laws.

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Sounds very good. The attractiveness is deeper than just looks.

well I would say that what Camilla has is sex appeal. She may not be a beauty but her lively personality and a certain earthiness make her attractive to men. But in terms of looks she's average, so is Charles. However I think what they have is a real love going back a long way.. They have been friends for a long long time, and in unpromising circumstances have remained close...

[Moonmaiden23]

Originally Posted by Denville

I cannot understand this idea that infidelity is the only thing that can damage or destroy a marriage. There are loads of things usually far more commonplace than affairs. Its much more likely that they have found they dont have much in common, or that when the flush of passion is over, they dont like each other. Or quarrels about money and children... Or in royal cases, Im sure a lot of issue about "being royal" and fitting inot the RF as in laws.

AMEN. Emotional infidelity, physical or emotional cruelty...any of the above would be as or even more devastating than a meaningless physical affair and perhaps even more so.

For me, anyway.

[Denville]

There are lots of things, mostly just falling out of love or plain old getting bored...

[Pranter]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

Not only that...but in these times, eyes are everywhere, and indiscretions will out.
It's really difficult to cover up affairs for very long.

Yes and people are always very aware of how much time the couples spend together (or not). The media was onto C&D long before the public knew...and nowdays I'm afraid there would be no restraint by the media at all if a royal couple was 'having issues'.



LaRae

[Pranter]

Originally Posted by ricarda

Oh dear, the body language readers! If you go back to the year 2004 you can find posts on this board about the wonderful body language between Joachim and Alexandra, a couple so much in love, and this was posted a couple of weeks before their divorce was announced. (And Joachim told later that their marriage had been in trouble for a couple of years. That was his real story) I guess those posters just interpreted their body language the way they wanted it to be. Or Joachim and Alexandra were just incredibly great actors.

I dare say that some royals receive a LOT more press coverage than others. There are many more pics and video out nowdays and when you see enough of them you can pick up on body language.

You can be a great actor...but you will be found out if there is enough coverage. There are patterns you can see if there are enough public outings/pics/videos etc.



LaRae

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by Denville

I cannot understand this idea that infidelity is the only thing that can damage or destroy a marriage. There are loads of things usually far more commonplace than affairs. Its much more likely that they have found they dont have much in common, or that when the flush of passion is over, they dont like each other. Or quarrels about money and children... Or in royal cases, Im sure a lot of issue about "being royal" and fitting inot the RF as in laws.

I don't think anyone has said that infidelity is the only thing...of course, many other problems may end a marriage.

But in the case of some royals (and their consorts) infidelity does cause a sudden rift. In earlier times, it was not unexpected, but today, many will simply not put up with it. Diana would not put with with Charles and Camilla, for instance.

[MARG]

Originally Posted by Denville

That's true. I think that there are some who most people would see as beautiful, and others that have to be described as "homely" but all the same ideas of beauty can vary widely. Pr charles had a very beautiful wife, and now a rather average looking one. I think it is obvious which one he loves most. All the same, not everyone found Diana beautiful..
In any case I think that affection adn respect are more important than "romantic love."

True. You have to measure like with like. I would dare to say that the majority of attractive young women are somewhat average in their 60's.

Originally Posted by Curryong

Camilla was never more than average in looks, with a rather rictus gummy smile. She was attractive to males because of her personality, sense of fun, rather than any glamour or prettiness.

I think you have the right of it Duc. Pretty is as pretty does, saying nothing whatsoever about the character of the woman nor telling the depth of her love for her husband as does the pretty ordinary current crop of royal husband tell anything of their love for their wives.

Everyone likes a picture perfect couple but, on closer inspection, almost none are particularly drop-dead-gorgeous. But rather they bask in the love of their husband or wife and the reflected glow is what we see. Now that is lovely indeed.

[CyrilVladisla]

Crown Prince Frederik and Crown Princess Mary of Denmark: true love

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nHoWjrsT3o

[Curryong]

Yes, if you ignore the ....er, better not mention it!

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Pranter

I dare say that some royals receive a LOT more press coverage than others. There are many more pics and video out nowdays and when you see enough of them you can pick up on body language.




LaRae

sorry but no. even the most popular royals aren't out in public that much compared with their time in private. And as people have said, there are people who seem to be in love and all PDA who were in marital trouble, and end up divorced. The reason C and Di were seen as unhappy was that Diana in particular didn't try very hard to put up a front, after a time.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by MARG

True. You have to measure like with like. I would dare to say that the majority of attractive young women are somewhat average in their 60's.
I think you have the right of it Duc. Pretty is as pretty does, saying nothing whatsoever about the character of the woman nor telling the depth of her love for her husband as does the pretty ordinary current crop of royal husband tell anything of their love for their wives.

indeed.

But that's not the point. This point is about Physicla good looks and even as a young woman, Camilla was never good looking. But she had a fun personality... but no, not great good looks

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

I don't think anyone has said that infidelity is the only thing...of course, many other problems may end a marriage.

But in the case of some royals (and their consorts) infidelity does cause a sudden rift. In earlier times, it was not unexpected, but today, many will simply not put up with it. Diana would not put with with Charles and Camilla, for instance.

Many people Ive found on such forums as this, seem to act like the only problem in a marriage is infidelity. I think with Regard to C and Diana, that their affairs were the result of their marriage being a failure, not the cause.. OK Charles did have a lingering affection for Camilla but I think that that would not have been a major problem if he had had enough closeness with Diana to build a marriage with her. the main problems in their marriage was that they just had very little in common and were not compatible emotionally or practically... If you took Camila out of the equation those problems would have remained and damaged or destroyed the marriage. I think that boht of them would have found other lovers.. in due course.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by ricarda

Oh dear, the body language readers! If you go back to the year 2004 you can find posts on this board about the wonderful body language between Joachim and Alexandra, a couple so much in love, and this was posted a couple of weeks before their divorce was announced. (And Joachim told later that their marriage had been in trouble for a couple of years. That was his real story) I guess those posters just interpreted their body language the way they wanted it to be. Or Joachim and Alexandra were just incredibly great actors.

Joachim and Alexandra are the best example that what you see is not always what you get. If any couple came close to two Disney turtle doves, then it were J&A. This one was released short before their separation. Aaaawww.... Just fake, so it seemed (the marriage was poor for years).

[Lee-Z]

Originally Posted by Denville

But that's not the point. This point is about Physicla good looks and even as a young woman, Camilla was never good looking. But she had a fun personality... but no, not great good looks

But why do you feel the need again and again to mention Camilla's "not great looks" (which by the way is subjective, as in your opinion, some of us might see this differently) in a thread about True Love...
If it's about True Love, looks alone are never decissive imo (because they fade)

And can we please keep the Camilla/Diana/Charles triangle out of this thread, there are plenty of other threads to go on (and on and on) about that

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Yes, if you ignore the ....er, better not mention it!

I was thinking the same thing! It's a pretty picture though.

[xenobia]

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?

There is no way of measuring feelings. And when it comes to marriage, the relationships that starts out with big passion aren't always the one who stand the test of time.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Lee-Z

But why do you feel the need again and again to mention Camilla's "not great looks" (which by the way is subjective, as in your opinion, some of us might see this differently) in a thread about True Love...
If it's about True Love, looks alone are never decissive imo (because they fade)

And can we please keep the Camilla/Diana/Charles triangle out of this thread, there are plenty of other threads to go on (and on and on) about that

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.

[sm1939]

What about princess graces and prince Rainer ?

[Duke of Marmalade]

Originally Posted by sm1939

What about princess graces and prince Rainer ?

They hardly knew each other when they got married, at least by today's standards. Rainier needed glamour for Monaco to put it on the map for the rich and famous and Grace liked the thought of marrying a Prince.

They had to fight hard for the survival of their marriage, Rainier not sharing his wife's hollywood past at all and Grace struggling with her husband's men's man attitude and putting Monaco first.

[Pranter]

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