Sarah, Duchess of York Current Events 13: October 2008-February 2009

[udyusa]

I so agree, Sky. Humans Do need love and be loved to survive. It has been proven among the primates especially, that they do not do well when they are deprived of love and companionship. Who and What will??

 

[udyusa]

Very interesting, E and O. We will have to wait and see if anything of interest transpires....

 

[kimebear]

Camilla was not a Duchess at the time and of course, she only committed adultery with the man she has now married, the same cannot be said of Sarah.

I'm having a really hard time wrapping my brain around the justification that Sarah can be condemned for adultery because of x, y & z, but the same rules fail to apply to Charles and Camilla. By the same token, I could say that Sarah didn't commit adultery with the Prince of Wales.

However, I was not talking about Sarahs adultery when I wrote my post, just an observation on human nature and unlike many on here, I do not see adultery as a 'sin', just the breakdown of a relationship, but one that people can pass through with dignity and discretion. The suggestion of waiting till the divorce is finalised is all very well, divorce can take time, especially if one of the couple doesn't consent (5 years + court time), you are a long time dead.It may be one of the reasons a person cites as the cause of the breakdown of their relationship but there is no law against it.

I don't see adultery as a sin either. I do see it as a gross violation of trust. All the discretion in the world doesn't soothe that hurt.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Oh yes, I agree that humans need to love and be loved. Definitely. I don't agree with crossing the line into having a sexual affair while married to someone else, though. That was my point.

That is not a problem. Humans also need to love and be loved, to have companionship Most animals deprived of these things fail to prosper.

 

[udyusa]

Point taken, Mermaid, and I totally agree with Both of your points! I fear we may be crossing a fine line here, however, and might also be treading on thin ice??

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Let's not concentrate only on the adultery. My point was that she didn't commit adultery because she did not love her husband anymore, but because she was unhappy with her situation - and this maily because of the fact that she had married the "poor" son of the queen. Thus she consorted with men who could help her financially, accepted the divorce and started to sell her "fame" as a former HRH to the customers of Weight Watchers. If you compare this to Sophie Wessex, who as well tried in the beginning to use her Royal connections but accepted that this couldn't go on for the sake of her new family - then I must say Sarah was a failure. Plus she brought her children into it: holidays with her boyfriend, parties with convicted gangsters, Marihuana-trips to the Caribbean, accepting a convicted boyfriend for Beatrice who started to talk about them to the media afterwards, allowing Beatrice's boyfriend to watch private performances where Sarah made fun of the queen and the institution of the monarchy... And all that should be overlooked because she attends charity balls for poor children or accepts money for being a "keynote" speaker at charity conferences?

Of course, Sarah has her good sides, but these don't outweigh what she has done. She of course is not evil incarnate but she is not a laudable lady either.

 

[Mandy]

Let's not concentrate only on the adultery. My point was that she didn't commit adultery because she did not love her husband anymore, but because she was unhappy with her situation - and this maily because of the fact that she had married the "poor" son of the queen. Thus she consorted with men who could help her financially, accepted the divorce and started to sell her "fame" as a former HRH to the customers of Weight Watchers. If you compare this to Sophie Wessex, who as well tried in the beginning to use her Royal connections but accepted that this couldn't go on for the sake of her new family - then I must say Sarah was a failure. Plus she brought her children into it: holidays with her boyfriend, parties with convicted gangsters, Marihuana-trips to the Caribbean, accepting a convicted boyfriend for Beatrice who started to talk about them to the media afterwards, allowing Beatrice's boyfriend to watch private performances where Sarah made fun of the queen and the institution of the monarchy... And all that should be overlooked because she attends charity balls for poor children or accepts money for being a "keynote" speaker at charity conferences?

Of course, Sarah has her good sides, but these don't outweigh what she has done. She of course is not evil incarnate but she is not a laudable lady either.

This is bashing! It is has nothing to do with Sarah's current events. You are simply rehashing past events to belittle Sarah and make her appear unworthy in the eyes of other members who don't know her. This is exactly why some posters don't visit this thread anymore. They are sick and tired of this vendetta against Sarah.

Btw, adultery is adutery. Camilla was married while having a liaison with Charles so she is just as guilty of adultery as Sarah. Remember, the question is, "Have you slept with a man other than your husband?" and the answer is "yes" for both women. The question is not how many men have you slept with! If you can't forgive Sarah, you shouldn't forgive Camilla either. Otherwise, it is double standards.

 

[muriel]

Btw, adultery is adutery. Camilla was married while having a liaison with Charles so she is just as guilty of adultery as Sarah. Remember, the question is, "Have you slept with a man other than your husband?" and the answer is "yes" for both women. The question is not how many men have you slept with! If you can't forgive Sarah, you shouldn't forgive Camilla either. Otherwise, it is double standards.

I am not in any way condoning any adultery, whether it was C&C, Diana and x, y , z....... or Sarah and whoever. IMO one of the key reasons Sarah fell lower still in the public's esteem is that her affair was not private in any way. Being photographed whilst having ones toes sucked off, whilst the girls look on, is not classy, is it?

 

[Jo of Palatine]

This is bashing! It is has nothing to do with Sarah's current events. You are simply rehashing past events to belittle Sarah and make her appear unworthy in the eyes of other members who don't know her. This is exactly why some posters don't visit this thread anymore. They are sick and tired of this vendetta against Sarah.

Btw, adultery is adutery. Camilla was married while having a liaison with Charles so she is just as guilty of adultery as Sarah. Remember, the question is, "Have you slept with a man other than your husband?" and the answer is "yes" for both women. The question is not how many men have you slept with! If you can't forgive Sarah, you shouldn't forgive Camilla either. Otherwise, it is double standards.

You're right - it has nothing to do with Sarah's current events. But I didn't bring up this topic - I just wanted to explain why I don't have a positive or even balanced opinion about Sarah. It was asked if there can't be a little balance between the good things she does and the bad. In this case for me the bad outweighs the good. Nothing else. Call that bashing, okay. But this is my opinion and I tried to explain it in detail.

And surely you are not serious that on mentioning past events that formed my opinion of Sarah I am trying to "make her appear unworthy in the eyes of other members who don't know her." - Look, we can't discuss people if the past is sealed. It's not as if I mentioned things that I invented. These things were reported and much more were told by Sarah herself in her autobiography. Members who don't know about Sarah should not form opinions about her but get information first. To tell me I'm bashing her when I mention things she did is unfair.

As for forgiving: I have nothing to forgive Sarah or Camilla for because I'm not their former spouse. But I can understand Charles' and Camilla's situation after reading a lot about it while I still cannot understand Sarah's motivation. Love for me is a better reason than boredom, unhappiness with one's achievement and greed. But that's just me.

 

[Menarue]

Who knows her or doesn´t know her on this thread? If reading the truth about her makes her unworthy in new members eyes well - so what! They should read her own book and then judge for themselves but if they are only going to hear that she is a wonderful person here and believe it they are being fooled.
By the way what are her current events?
Camilla has nothing to do with this thread, she had a lover and ended up marrying him and she is going to be Queen of England one day and is earning respect in the meantime.
Sarah did not marry any of her lovers, perhaps it was because that way she could keep her title which she needed or she wouldn´t have been able to earn her living and pay off her debts. I am glad that she has paid off her debts because a lot of people must have been in difficulty when she owed them money.

 

[Skydragon]

I'm having a really hard time wrapping my brain around the justification that Sarah can be condemned for adultery because of x, y & z, but the same rules fail to apply to Charles and Camilla. By the same token, I could say that Sarah didn't commit adultery with the Prince of Wales.

I can't understand why. Sarah was at the time of her affairs a member of the Royal Family, had she just been Sarah Z, it wouldn't have mattered. had she only had the one affair and then married the chap, that wouldn't have been so bad, but she didn't. She had more than one affair and stayed with none of them, therefore it was only for 'a bit of fun', the me, me, me syndrome where nothing and no one else matters.

I don't see adultery as a sin either. I do see it as a gross violation of trust. All the discretion in the world doesn't soothe that hurt.

In that, I believe you are wrong. The fact that your husband/wife is having an affair is bad enough, but to have it broadcast to the world, or at the least your friends and family is the worst thing, I would imagine. Discretion doesn't soothe the hurt but it makes the pain less and the recovery easier.

Let's not concentrate only on the adultery. My point was that she didn't commit adultery because she did not love her husband anymore, but because she was unhappy with her situation - and this maily because of the fact that she had married the "poor" son of the queen. snipped.

I couldn't have put it better!

Remember, the question is, "Have you slept with a man other than your husband?" and the answer is "yes" for both women. The question is not how many men have you slept with! If you can't forgive Sarah, you shouldn't forgive Camilla either. Otherwise, it is double standards.

Who asks such a question, certainly not the divorce court. The question is 'how many', that is why hookers, prostitutes whatever you want to call them, are despised, as are gold diggers.

Sarahs multiple affairs are a minus point but they are not the entire reason I find it hard to see any good points in her.

 

[Warren]

Now that everyone has had ample opportunity to state and restate their justifications for continuing the Sarah-bashing entertainment,
we'll close this thread and open a new one.​

The new current events thread will be just that. Those who wish to continue in the same vein as this closed thread are welcome to read through their old posts here. The new thread will not become a rehash of members posting what they have already posted many times previously,
nor will it be used as a vehicle to post bitchy and defamatory statements.​

Sarah, Duchess of York current events part 13 can be found here.​

¤​