Princess diana

Agree Iam , mental illnesses can devastate families , this is not criticism it’s a fact

Diana genuinely touched hearts. She filled a yawning gap between the public and the monarchy at a time when their validity was being questioned as never before. Unfortunately for all concerned the House of Windsor failed to recognise a rapidly changing world, the need for change and the asset they had in Diana. In fact, Charles was jealous of her.

Whilst the Queen was loved by many, she was remote, bound by archaic tradition and mostly silent. Diana was young, beautiful and charismatic and wanted to make the Royal Family relevant. Sadly they and their hopelessly out of touch advisers threw the baby out with the bath water.

Instead, they humoured Charles as he took advice on modernisation from Jimmy Saville who was middle aged, not remotely considered a modern icon and never had been. He was also known behind the scenes (including to royal advisers) as, at best, unsavoury.

The royal family also indulged Charles' affair with Camilla Parker Bowles as it was considered quite acceptable for the Prince of Wales to have a mistress. They saw nothing intrinsically immoral in it or damaging to their own reputation. In fact they were decidedly irritated at his 19 year old wife's objections and branded her "difficult".

Diana's support for causes such as AIDS, homelessness and the abolition of landmines not only spoke to a new generation but to governments too and her campaigns were highly effective. She achieved more in her short life than many heads of state or politicians.

She would have made a good ambassador for Britain and Tony Blair was poised to offer her such a role but of course she died before that came to fruition.

I admit, I didn’t have your inside knowledge with the late Queen or Tony Blair

You’re doing it again Annie, allowing your views on Diana to blame her for the awful damaging break down of the marriage, the ramifications from which continue.

I have not spoken of the marriage Iam

Mental illnesses and conditions cause terrible pain and distress in families, whoever the family is.

Families consist of spouse, children, parents, siblings and extended families

Anniebach

He did not say that, the press certainly did.

He said 'whatever love is' .
he showed he didn't love her by preferring camilla

you have a real 'thing' about Diana don't you!

lemsip

Anniebach

He did not say that, the press certainly did.

He said 'whatever love is' .
he showed he didn't love her by preferring camilla

you have a real 'thing' about Diana don't you!

You know, what he actually said was ‘ Whatever ‘in love’ means’, and, despite what Burrell says, she did not ‘look horrified’.

Quote lemsip Tue 09-Jul-24 10:40:46
Anniebach
He did not say that, the press certainly did.
He said 'whatever love is' .
he showed he didn't love her by preferring camilla

you have a real 'thing' about Diana don't you!

I have a real ‘thing’ about lies and ‘it must be true it’s in the papers’

1995. Diana tv interview ‘ replying to a question about
Mrs. Parker Bowles. (There were 3 in the marriage so it was a bit crowded’

2005. Police investigated a letter written by Diana in 1995,
‘My husband is planning an accident in my car, brake failure
serous head injury so he can marry Tiggy’

It was given much press coverage that at a Christmas party
Diana said to Tiggy ‘I am sorry about the baby’ Tiggy was awarded damages from BBC in 2022 Martin Basheer had lied to Diana.

I speak of this as one reason I believe Diana was mentally ill,
she was lied to , yet in the BBC interview still accused Camilla.

William spoke of it when it was made public, he was angry and
said the BBC and Basheer had played on his mother’s paranoia.

I am not attacking Diana,

Daddima

lemsip

Anniebach

He did not say that, the press certainly did.

He said 'whatever love is' .
he showed he didn't love her by preferring camilla

you have a real 'thing' about Diana don't you!

You know, what he actually said was ‘ Whatever ‘in love’ means’, and, despite what Burrell says, she did not ‘look horrified’.

I remember the interview very well. Almost as if it was yesterday. I thought it an incredibly strange thing for him to say post engagement and to camera, even allowing for the royal family's stilted emotions. Diana, who was only 19 years old and very sheltered, did not look horrified but she was certainly uncomfortable and confused. Rightly so as it transpired.

Check out the whole interview where when asked if they were in love, Charles, quite matter-of-fact, said “Whatever in love means”.

Diana blushing with embarrassment, said emphatically, “Of course!” I said at the time Methinks she doth protest too much!

She wanted the fairytale more than the man IMO and he need a virgin - a recipe for disaster, what?

I really don’t believe the ‘must be a virgin’ Charles had many relationships, one with Diana’s sister, all would have been virgins ?

You know, what he actually said was ‘ Whatever ‘in love’ means’, and, despite what Burrell says, she did not ‘look horrified’.

I have seen the whole film clip on one of those Channel 5 documentaries, and after Charles has said that, she says "Of course!" and then looks away to the side and seems on the verge of tears.

Diana was hard done by, whatever you like to think Annie. She was only 19 and young for her age, and had every right to expect her husband to love her. He didn't, and he made that clear, and everything that followed stemmed from that.

She thought it was the fairytale, she was so young & she would've thought if he asked to marry her, he must love her. I'm sure she was in love with him in her schoolgirl way, & I think if she hadn't been, she wouldn't have married him. Diana & Meaghan share(d) an openness that Catherine doesn't have, Catherine has poise instead, but I don't think their personalities are similar from the limited insight we have. King Charles is a good egg, but Diana - I think she was just amazing, such an asset for the UK (she was the undisputed most famous woman in the world for years) why squander & neglect her magic? Life is so sad.

Quote Sparklefizz Tue 09-Jul-24 20:54:02
You know, what he actually said was ‘ Whatever ‘in love’ means’, and, despite what Burrell says, she did not ‘look horrified’.

I have seen the whole film clip on one of those Channel 5 documentaries, and after Charles has said that, she says "Of course!" and then looks away to the side and seems on the verge of tears.

The full interview is on uTube, the look to the side is repeated many times, must have difficult being interview for tv.

Anniebach

I really don’t believe the ‘must be a virgin’ Charles had many relationships, one with Diana’s sister, all would have been virgins ?

Charles dated and slept with many women, that is true and was no secret. In fact almost every dalliance was reported in the press. However, you are missing the point entirely. He wasn't going to marry them. His future bride had to be a virgin, that is fact. Diana was examined by a doctor at some point before the wedding to confirm it. Diana related the humiliating process years later and it has been confirmed by other sources. If she had not been a virgin, the marriage would not have taken place. That is why there was such a disparity in their ages as suitable virgins in the 1980's were becoming increasingly hard to find.

I do not believe that Diana was examined to make sure she was a virgin before she married, although I would think she was.

I expect she may have been examined to make sure she would be able to bear children.

What sources ? You think all the girls he dated were bedworthy
but not marriage material, I do not

What a good job the RF have moved on, in terms of marrying virgins, living together before getting wed, etc.

Different times over 40 years ago.

If Charles and Diana had shared more of life together beforehand, they would never have married.

Calendargirl

What a good job the RF have moved on, in terms of marrying virgins, living together before getting wed, etc.

Different times over 40 years ago.

If Charles and Diana had shared more of life together beforehand, they would never have married.

What a good job the RF have moved on, in terms of marrying virgins, living together before getting wed, etc.

Yes. If those rules had not applied then Charles would have married the love of his life instead of being prevented from doing so, he would not have been sent away and she would not have married someone else.
He would not have been coerced into an unsuitable arranged marriage which made both of them unhappy.

However, every cloud has a silver lining, theirs being their two sons.

The fairy tales are so loved, the innocent princess, the wicked godmother, evil queen

Sorry?