What is your opinion of Frederik and Mary

[Australian]

Originally Posted by Batatinha

this is a totally new mary some years ago (from Le Soin)

I like the way Mary looks there and I like the way she looks now as well :)

[Margrethe II]

Originally Posted by capricorninin

It is obvious that it was to avoid any publicly noted interaction between Mette-marit and Letizia.

I'm not quite sure I understand this comment...Would you care to elaborate for me, please? :)

"MII"

[crisiñaki]

Originally Posted by Margrethe II

I'm not quite sure I understand this comment...Would you care to elaborate for me, please? :)

"MII"

Maybe because they are both women with "past"?

[pdas1201]

Can we get back on topic NOW?? This is a thread about Prince Frederik and Princess Mary and what bothers you about them. The Asturias couples and their public image has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic. Please don't drag them into the conversation, leading to the conversation being off-topic.

Thank you,
pdas1201
Danish Family Supermoderator

P.S. The next post veering offtopic will be deleted, if you have any questions or comments about the above warning, communicate them via PM.

[Princess BellyFlop]

Just a question: it was known that Charles in the end didn't appreciate being upstaged by the beauty of his wife Diana... then could it be possible that the PR people of the DRF present Mary as a fashionasta/fashion icon and not as a woman with strong opinions and values so she would not upstage her handsome husband in the non-look department?

[madeleine victoria]

Originally Posted by Princess BellyFlop

Just a question: it was known that Charles in the end didn't appreciate being upstaged by the beauty of his wife Diana... ]then could it be possible that the PR people of the DRF present Mary as a fashionasta/fashion icon and not as a woman with strong opinions and values so she would not upstage her handsome husband in the non-look department?

then i pity mary if its the reason why she is presented as a fashion icon than a woman with strong points..anyway, even though mary is presented that way, she always overshadows her husband.. IMHO..lol! actually after all i read the posts there's nothing that really bothers me about frederik and mary... they don't have the "wow" factor when they carry their duties.. they just don't capture my attention. they're just too plain... no offense to all mary fans.. all i care is what mary wears! ahhaha! she wears too much fashion than all other CPss of europe.. other than that i don't really care about the Danish crown couple..

[Margrethe II]

Originally Posted by crisiñaki

Maybe because they are both women with "past"?

Ahh...thanks :)

"MII"

[Margrethe II]

Originally Posted by madeleine victoria

she wears too much fashion than all other CPss of europe...

HRH the Crown Princess wears just as many designer labels as that of any other European Crown Princess.

"MII"

[madeleine victoria]

Originally Posted by Australian

I like the way Mary looks there and I like the way she looks now as well :)

is this really mary? why is she photographed like that?

[Princess BellyFlop]

Originally Posted by Margrethe II

HRH the Crown Princess wears just as many designer labels as that of any other European Crown Princess.

"MII"

Do you mean «as all of the other European Crown Princesses all together»?

[capricorninin]

Sorry about introducing the discussion about the Asturias. I was just trying to answer a question.

[tabbitha]

Originally Posted by madeleine victoria

is this really mary? why is she photographed like that?

Yes it is Mary 110%. She was asked to pose like that.

[Margrethe II]

Originally Posted by Princess BellyFlop

Do you mean «as all of the other European Crown Princesses all together»?

I mean that Mary wears just as much designer lables as say, Maxima, Mette-Marit, Letizia etc... I would think that if their were any one Crown Princess who endorses a wider spectrum of designer wear then it would be HRH the Crown Princess Pavlos, but I am certainly not going to get off topic so thats all I shall say about Marie-Chantal...

"MII"

[Lil princess lost]

Originally Posted by madeleine victoria

is this really mary? why is she photographed like that?

It was part of her starmakers course. A course she enrolled herself into in Australia. This course is designed to teach one how to present themselves in public. As part of the cousre Mary posed in front of the camera for a series of shots in order to become comfortable in front of it.
*Sorry if I am rehashing what people already know but 4 the sake of another person I had 2 xplain

Originally Posted by Princess BellyFlop

Just a question: it was known that Charles in the end didn't appreciate being upstaged by the beauty of his wife Diana... then could it be possible that the PR people of the DRF present Mary as a fashionasta/fashion icon and not as a woman with strong opinions and values so she would not upstage her handsome husband in the non-look department?

Princess Belly Flop

I don't think for a moment, that the DRF would ask Mary to dumb down to make her hubby look good. The world has been watching this Danish prince for years(even made a movie), so they know his capabilities and if he was not up to scratch, then they would rectify the problem, not camouflage it.

I think the fascination with Frederik and Mary is of course the fairytale factor which is still reverbrating around the traps. She was seen as a genuine commoner from an obscure part of the world. Nice but obscure!
The fascination with her is her absolute girl next door looks and friendly nature.
If she is anything like most Australians, she will have strong views about most things. We are brought up that way, but she has given up the freedom of expressing those opinions publicly.

Mary is not a rare beauty but she does have some nice features, which make up that girl next door look. Most people like the girl next door look. She also just happens to have a figure which looks good in the clothes she chooses.

The perception is that they are totally in love and I agree that they would be. In these days of uncertainty, a story like this is something to embrace and promote, which is what the press do.

Regards Jaques D.

[Australian]

Originally Posted by Princess BellyFlop

Just a question: it was known that Charles in the end didn't appreciate being upstaged by the beauty of his wife Diana... then could it be possible that the PR people of the DRF present Mary as a fashionasta/fashion icon and not as a woman with strong opinions and values so she would not upstage her handsome husband in the non-look department?

I think most people are now over or even beyond the Princess Mary fashion clothes horse thing, I think it's getting really old and stale now, and also tiresome

Isn't it normal for a woman to upstage her husband? IMO i think it is. When people see a famous couple together, i think it is normal for people to concentrate on what the woman is looking like and what she is wearing etc, so in fact, it is us as spectators and fans that is leading Mary to upstage her husband in our minds by only concentrating on her, and i think its perfectly normal with every famous couple.

[Idriel]

I do not believe that I was the one desperate to criticise

I find this statement rather hypocritical. I quote from your original message:

if two nice persons found in their heart to go to this baptism and showed warmth to Fred and Mary even when F&M didn't care to show up to their own child's baptism then why can't I also give them a chance?

It is equivalent to say: 'Oh X did that horrible thing but Y did forgive anyway'. So your statement contains an implied criticism, regardless of how you want to make it look.

the baptism of the future QUEEN of Norway - QUEEN, not royal butler! - took place on Saturday April 17 2004 - a whole big month before the weddings of Fred (on May 14) and Felipe (on May 21).

IMO it is justified that they would stay at home, and here why:
- going to a royal baptism is not just popping in and out a plane and showing up at the church. It takes a lot of organisation (protocol, security, planning, etc.).
-I am pretty sure that at a date so close to the marriage of the respective heirs to the throne (the future Kings, not a royal butler), both Royal houses of Denmark and Spain had to deal with their own protocol, security, catering, planning and organisational nightmares (plus other problems I can't think of). I don't think they had the time or the energy to properly prepare for the Norway baptism.
- a baptism, whether you like it or not, is not as high profile as a wedding. It make sense to me that the Royal houses would skip the baptism to concentrate on the princes respective weddings, and their appearances on each other weddings (Felipe came to the danish one, Frederick came to the Spanish one). I just think it was a matter of prioritization, and for me, it a reason good enough.

Last point:
I am not your chérie. I don't like being patronised and, beside, I reserve the privilege of this appellation to my dearest friends.
Needless to say, you're far, far away from by buddy list.

[Idriel]

Originally Posted by Princess BellyFlop

then could it be possible that the PR people of the DRF present Mary as a fashionasta/fashion icon and not as a woman with strong opinions and values so she would not upstage her handsome husband in the non-look department?

I am rather stunned by that statement. From all the concerns the DRF have, I think maintaining Frederick at the top of the 'most attractive' lists is pretty low on the list.
No, seriously, I can't see how exactly Mary is presented a s someone without strong opinions. She did expressed her own point of view on how she sees her new position and how she intends to deal with it.
I remember her saying something like: 'I'll do my best, and it will be enough for some, and not enough for other, but that's the way it will be'.
I think it shows that she is a pretty determined woman, with her own opinions.
Now, of course, she is not going to express her view on gay marriage or the war in Iraq.

[Australian]

I couldn't agree with you more Idriel

[Princess BellyFlop]

=Idriel- a baptism, whether you like it or not, is not as high profile as a wedding. It make sense to me that the Royal houses would skip the baptism to concentrate on the princes respective weddings, and their appearances on each other weddings (Felipe came to the danish one, Frederick came to the Spanish one). I just think it was a matter of prioritization, and for me, it a reason good enough.

Baptism is THE most important sacrement of the Church because without it you are NOT part of the Church. You can spend your life without the sacrement of marriage and be part of the Church but to be part of the Church you need the baptism.

Of course a baptism is not as fashionable as a wedding but it is a very meaningful ceremony. So meaningful that in earlier times godfathers and godmothers were chosen with great care as their responsibilities were enormous and important: to guide the child in his terrestrial and spiritual life and to protect him should something happen to his parents. That was taken very seriously then. That also explain why so many heirs to the throne have kings and queens as godparents.

Of course all of that could be meaningless to a non-religious or a shallow person. And my true point - and I should know because I wrote it dah? - was that Haakon and MM truly showed their full appreciation of the meaning of that ceremony by forgiving Fred & Mary and by coming to Christian's baptism despite MM's fear of flying (they made the effort of taking other means of transportation) and despite the seriously adverse weather at the time that forced them to change their plans on their way to the event. It thought it was beautiful to see the baptism of a future king with his royal and loyal godparents around him (Haakon, MM, Victoria).

And by the way Fred and Mary were NO SHOW at Felipe & Letizia's wedding, they were already on their honeymoon in Africa. But all of this is a matter of prioritization, and for some, it a reason good enough.