Princess Diana curtseyed

[LouisFerdinand]

In 1995 when she visited Japan, Princess Diana curtseyed to the Emperor and Empress.         
Princess Diana in Japan, 1995 - YouTube     
 
:curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy:

[TLLK]

Her ballet training certainly gave her grace and balance.  :)

[LouisFerdinand]

Princess Diana curtseyed to King Juan Carlos of Spain.   
In pictures: King Juan Carlos abdicates the Spanish throne | Diana and Princess diana

[Duch_Luver_4ever]

she did a lot more than "curtsey" to him  :girlblush: :blowkiss: :lol:  :thumbsup:

[royalanthropologist]

Careful. You might be attacked for mentioning sacrilegious things.  :hehe:

[sandy]

Oh please, Diana was not involved with Juan Carlos. That's just gossip. Why would she get involved with a compulsive womanizer like him. It is not sacrilegious it's more Diana bashing.  It's so bad that photos of Diana's curtsying turn into gossip. Not purpose of this thread. Next she'll be accused of bedding Clinton, bedding Elvis and be abducted by space aliens. More National Enquirer grist mill and Colin Campbell tall tales. What is the point of this idle gossip? Bash Diana, make her look bad? What exactly? Some take the gossip to the depths saying Juan sired William.
Double post auto-merged: September 27, 2017, 02:27:31 PM

So if Lady Colin's words are taken as gospel then I suppose we all have to believe the Queen Mum was born illegitimate.  Diana was no Zsa Zsa racking up notches on the old bed post. She got involved with Hewitt later that year.
Double post auto-merged: September 27, 2017, 02:28:21 PM

Juan Carlos was a serial philanderer. And a lot older than Diana.
Double post auto-merged: September 27, 2017, 02:30:46 PM

Back on topic. Diana was a graceful, elegant woman and curtseyed very well.

[Curryong]

Maybe it's me finding Juan Carlos deeply unattractive but I've never believed that he would be the type the young Diana would be attracted to. He's a slimy philanderer as far as I can see, and Diana falling for his charms to the extent of having her first child by him is IMO extremely unlikely.

It was Diana's misfortune that she was madly in love with her husband during those early years, and would hardly fancy a holiday fling with a much older Lotheario like JC. There may well have been an attraction on JC's part. That I can well believe, but 20year old Diana opting for an affair under the noses of her hostess, Queen Sofia, Charles, and JC's children (who were also present at the villa.) Not likely!! 

[sandy]

I had understood that there were some issues between England and Spain regarding the route of the Britannia on the  honeymoon. And the claims of Juan Carlos are contradictory. Some say 1986 then some say he was involved with Diana at the time she would conceive William which seems like something miraculous since he was nowhere near her.

[TLLK]

That I can well believe, but 20year old Diana opting for an affair under the noses of her hostess, Queen Sofia, Charles, and JC's children (who were also present at the villa.) Not likely!! 

Yes I agree that it is unlikely that she had a fling with JC during that visit to Spain.

[Duch_Luver_4ever]

Well, to be accurate, the picture in question is from 1987, not the honeymoon. Yes there was some friction between Spain and UK over Gibraltar and he had boycotted the wedding. But by the mid 80s that was all patched up, thats the period of time im referring to @Curryong not the honeymoon.

C&D were often separated during the holidays in Spain, Charles painting /riding/hunting in places like grenada and Diana near the water, which she enjoyed. Im sure you all recall the story of the photos of Diana/JC in a compromising position that were snapped up and the photog paid off to avoid them being published. By that time the marriage was on the rocks, she was looking for romantic reassurance, and JC would certainly know how to do that with his experience. Queen Sophia had long ago by then realized what he was like and suffered in silence.

Also look at pics of them together, I know shes flirtatious a lot but theres some serious chemistry between them that you dont see with her in other pics.

[sandy]

The photos never turned up. I don't think Diana went for anything in pants who paid attention to her. She was involved with Hewitt in 1987 and he never mentioned anything about JC. COlin Campbell is the one who is beating this allegation to death.  I don't believe her and I think she makes up stories.

Why would Diana want  a serial cheater, she wanted someone permanent in her life. NOt someone who racks up scores on his bedpost. Besides which he was a lot older than Diana. Diana was not that desperate. I think she should be given some credit for that.

The point is that the sleazy gossip encouraged even more tittle tattle by people who claimed Juan Carlos sired William. Diana is dead and can't defend herself.

I see no chemistry, just a womanizer used to flirting with anything in skirts.

Diana was more discriminating about who she got involved with than hopping into a bed with an older man well known to be a womanizer. No future in that for her.

[TLLK]

Well, to be accurate, the picture in question is from 1987, not the honeymoon. Yes there was some friction between Spain and UK over Gibraltar and he had boycotted the wedding. But by the mid 80s that was all patched up, thats the period of time im referring to @Curryong not the honeymoon.

C&D were often separated during the holidays in Spain, Charles painting /riding/hunting in places like grenada and Diana near the water, which she enjoyed. Im sure you all recall the story of the photos of Diana/JC in a compromising position that were snapped up and the photog paid off to avoid them being published. By that time the marriage was on the rocks, she was looking for romantic reassurance, and JC would certainly know how to do that with his experience. Queen Sophia had long ago by then realized what he was like and suffered in silence.

Also look at pics of them together, I know shes flirtatious a lot but theres some serious chemistry between them that you dont see with her in other pics.

Okay I'll admit that there was some flirty chemistry, but @Duch_Luver_4ever  I truly believe that Diana would have not followed through on a dalliance with JC.  I'll admit that  in the 70's and 80's that he was considered to be a charismatic man. The fallout from this affair would have just been too awful to consider IMVHO. Keep in mind that Sofia's brother, Constantine the former King of Greece  and his wife Anne Marie, who is the sister of Denmark's Queen Margrethe are a close friends of the BRF. This would have been seen as a huge insult to Sofia.  I believe that Diana instinctively  knew she would have hell to pay from ALL of the  European Queens and Queen Consorts if that had ever happened.

[sandy]

I don't think Diana would have even remotely considered bedding the older womanizer. She was also  involved with Hewitt at the time. I think that Diana did not go for "anything in pants."

[royalanthropologist]

There is some irony in this statement below by @sandy

"Diana was more discriminating about who she got involved with than hopping into a bed with an older man well known to be a womanizer."

Otherwise, my sympathies are with Queen Sophia. Because she was not a charismatic, beautiful young princess with a devout following of press sycophants and believers; her marital woes were largely ignored or taken as part of the deal. I am sure she would have appreciated even a fraction of the sympathy Diana received for her own failing marriage.

As for curtsying, Diana was good at it. She had no problem paying homage to foreign royalty. The people she disliked and disrespected was the BRF. I think the only time she actually made a hush of a foreign visit was that disastrous South Korean visit. Otherwise she was a picture of royal princess throughout her marriage, despite everything.

[Curryong]

I don't believe that Diana and JC were lovers.

However, whether Sophia was beautiful, charismatic or not, it's not true that her marital woes have been ignore or underplayed in Spain or that she hasn't received supportive sympathy from the population.

It's a different sort of sympathy from the sort Diana received because there was no 'War of the Bourbons'. For better or for worse Sophia took her husband's cruel infidelities without speaking out publicly or flinching or demanding a divorce.

However, although JC was/is widely admired for helping to establish democracy in Spain, his behaviour towards his wife has certainly not drawn wide support. It's well known that he treated his marriage as an arranged match, left his wife's bed as soon as he could after the birth of their youngest child and has relentlessly pursued women for years. He had a permanent mistress for a long time.

His long-suffering wife has received huge sympathy and it's well known her son Felipe is very supportive. Miserable marriages are the same everywhere, and when a man virtually leaves his wife to get on with things while he spends time with a mistress, then public empathy tends to go to what the public sees as the wronged party.

My feeling is that even if Diana had done a Sophia and said nothing, public support would have naturally veered in her direction simply because the presence of Camilla would have become known, as such things generally do. So it's not guaranteed that in those circumstances Charles's reputation would have been any better in the 1990's than it was in reality.

[royalanthropologist]

True in as far as if Diana had adopted the Sophia coping mode, she would probably still be the princess of wales. People would talk about her beastly husband and the cruel mistress but there would be no divorce. Diana decided that she was not going to do that. If Charles was not going to be a "proper husband" to her, she was going to expose it all.

Of course every decision we make has consequences. Like I said in another post, she pushed the issue and finally got a clear answer but that answer did not give her much comfort. Charles basically said "Camilla is non-negotiable. I want a divorce."

[amabel]

she did a lot more than "curtsey" to him  :girlblush: :blowkiss: :lol:  :thumbsup:

What does that mean?  I can't imagine how a Diana fan would believe that she was capable of such behaviour.  She was stupid at times and very selfish but for one thing I hardly think she was likely to have an affair with a cousin of her husband who was alos a monarch.. and where an affair would have cuased an appalling scandal.  Her affairs appear to have been largely with people who were "Not in" the Royal circle except for Olvier hoare.

Double post auto-merged: September 28, 2017, 06:42:26 AM

True in as far as if Diana had adopted the Sophia coping mode, she would probably still be the princess of wales. People would talk about her beastly husband and the cruel mistress but there would be no divorce. Diana decided that she was not going to do that. If Charles was not going to be a "proper husband" to her, she was going to expose it all.

Of course every decision we make has consequences. Like I said in another post, she pushed the issue and finally got a clear answer but that answer did not give her much comfort. Charles basically said "Camilla is non-negotiable. I want a divorce."

Of course he watned a divorce.  He was unhappy with her as she was with him.. but he would not have pushed for the divorce, until she made the marriage completely impossible.  Then he DID decided that since his affair was publicly known anyway, since Diana was using the meida against him, what was the point of trying to keept the marriage going.. and I'm sure that before the queen agreed to a divorce he was eager to end his marriage.

[sandy]

Diana had affairs but she was not a nymphomaniac who jumped into bed with anybody who flirted with her.

HE made the marriage completely impossible. Why is Diana's side not considered, amabel. She was with a man who was more and more emotionally distant to her and had the mistress play hostess in Highgrove.  HE used the media against her.Remember how Nicholas Soames slammed her publicly? ANd his friends leaked stories. Why is it that he is considered Superman and Diana such a "pest." She was a human being and she was rejected in a humiliating way. SHe could have walked away like many women would have done but she had to consider she might lose custody of the boys. CHarles should not have married Diana if he did not love her. He wanted to have his cake and eat it too.  Diana was  getting her side out for protection. COnsidering the medical letters recently revealed and Charles' friends leaking stories way back when, she did it as protection to get her side out there. I can hardly blame her.
Double post auto-merged: September 28, 2017, 11:53:59 AM

True in as far as if Diana had adopted the Sophia coping mode, she would probably still be the princess of wales. People would talk about her beastly husband and the cruel mistress but there would be no divorce. Diana decided that she was not going to do that. If Charles was not going to be a "proper husband" to her, she was going to expose it all.

Of course every decision we make has consequences. Like I said in another post, she pushed the issue and finally got a clear answer but that answer did not give her much comfort. Charles basically said "Camilla is non-negotiable. I want a divorce."

Why should a woman live in a sham marriage. Sophia was not rejected sexually since she was not dumped early in the marriage. Juan Carlos had no Camilla in his life just one night stands and conquests. One of the mistresses did not play hostess in Sophie's home

How come Charles could not make sacrifices. Marriage is for two people. NOt a dictator of a husband who had to have his way or the highway.

No, Diana would  probably have been dumped anyway. Camilla would probably have moved into the home and flaunted her position as mistress and had nothing but scorn for the "mouse" of a wife and cackled to the Highgrove set about the ridiculous creature. 

Camilla was the other woman and she should have left the scene. Diana the wife.

If Charles wanted the mistress he should not have married anybody and had his arrangement with the PBs go on and on until his mother relented and his grandmother died.

[royalanthropologist]

@sandy. People get dumped. Part of being an adult is learning to cope with rejection.  If someone does not like you or love you, rejecting you sexually is not an illogical step. Charles no longer wanted to be with Diana and was with someone he preferred so he left the home. That was it. There was nothing Diana could do to help matters. If she had decided to put up and shut up, he would probably have remained a distant husband and in time he would have developed an affection that was sufficient enough to keep up the marriage.

Diana did not want to do that so he left. It is what it is. No use saying he should have put in more or should have tried this. He got tired of living with Diana. It happens and people split up.

Sophia found her formula and it worked for her. Likewise Queen Syliva and Queen Alexandra found theirs. Diana tried the avenging wronged woman routine and it did not quite work out like she wanted. Charles did not run back to her in fear of the press or of losing the throne. He just drifted further and further away the more she threw a stink about things. The ultimate stink was panorama and that is when he asked for a clean break.

When you marry someone, you ought to make an effort to understand who they are and what they like. Hoping that they will change for you is a bit ambitious. They can make a few adjustments but not fundamentally change. Diana wanted a changed Charles. It was never going to happen. Had he really been in love with her, perhaps he would have changed but he was not. The first sign of problems was his cue to leave.

When she presented her ultimatum, he chose the other woman and quit the marriage. Some women would not have presented an ultimatum but Diana was not like that. She wanted his full and unfettered attention. All her friends talked about Diana's demand for constant attention and unquestioning loyalty. Any time you wavered in your support, she cut you off. Perhaps she wanted that in her marriage, not taking account of the fact that hers was a very reluctant husband who only married her out of duty.

[Curryong]

So, 'when you marry someone you ought to make an effort to understand who they are and what they're like.' Yes, you should. And when did Charles ever try to do that for Diana?  He married at an a middle aged 32 and expected his bride (or Amanda or any young woman he married) to do all the adjusting that had to be done in the early part of the marriage.

And again you write constantly of how Charles got tired of Diana's ways because he was never in love with her. Well, it's a great pity isn't it, that in his great maturity and intellectual superiority at 32 he didn't come to that conclusion BEFORE he decided to marry without love, isn't it?

[TLLK]

I don't believe that Diana and JC were lovers.

However, whether Sophia was beautiful, charismatic or not, it's not true that her marital woes have been ignore or underplayed in Spain or that she hasn't received supportive sympathy from the population.

It's a different sort of sympathy from the sort Diana received because there was no 'War of the Bourbons'. For better or for worse Sophia took her husband's cruel infidelities without speaking out publicly or flinching or demanding a divorce.

However, although JC was/is widely admired for helping to establish democracy in Spain, his behaviour towards his wife has certainly not drawn wide support. It's well known that he treated his marriage as an arranged match, left his wife's bed as soon as he could after the birth of their youngest child and has relentlessly pursued women for years. He had a permanent mistress for a long time.

His long-suffering wife has received huge sympathy and it's well known her son Felipe is very supportive. Miserable marriages are the same everywhere, and when a man virtually leaves his wife to get on with things while he spends time with a mistress, then public empathy tends to go to what the public sees as the wronged party.

My feeling is that even if Diana had done a Sophia and said nothing, public support would have naturally veered in her direction simply because the presence of Camilla would have become known, as such things generally do. So it's not guaranteed that in those circumstances Charles's reputation would have been any better in the 1990's than it was in reality.

I agree with @Curryong that the Spanish press largely overlooked JC's  infidelities for decades due to his popularity at home among  the people and his broad appeal across all political parties. This was the man initially dubbed "Juan Carlos the Brief" because there was such a low expectation that the monarchy would be able to survive the post-Franco years. While people might not consider themselves monarchists, by and large they were "Juan Carlists." The press only turned against his behavior in recent years and he wisely chose to abdicate. For the time being, Felipe enjoys the approval of his nation and hopefully that will continue.

There have been stories in the past of Sofia and the children packing up and getting ready to leave JC over his philandering. At some point the couple reached their decision on how to continue publicly and how they'd live privately. I've always understood that Sofia spends many of her weekends in London with her brother and sister-in-law, though she may be dividing her time between Madrid and Geneva in order to see her grandchildren. During her early years in Spain she didn't choose to cultivate friendships among the aristocracy and the then Franco associated political elite, which was a wise decision IMHO. Allegedly Franco was waiting until a male heir was born to either JC and Sofia or one of the other pretenders before giving his final blessing as to who would be his successor. (Apparently he didn't like that Sofia had been raised as a member of the  Greek Orthodox church.)

Sofia chose a different path than Diana because I believe that she had one goal in mind which was to see Felipe succeed his father as King. She's accomplished her main objective and now the couple largely live separate lives.

Because of the difference between time and societies, I don't know what the reaction of the British people would have been if Diana had chosen Sofia's way. (Spain was a more conservative society in the 70's and 80's than the UK in the 80's and 90's) I believe that she might have faced some criticism from women's groups for not divorcing her spouse (much like Hillary Clinton) but by and large I believe that the public would have been sympathetic.

[royalanthropologist]

I agree with @Curryong entirely  about Charles not making the effort to know her or give in to her demands. Marrying Diana was one of the stupidest things Charles has ever done. He let everybody down by doing that. Diana was not really a good match and he did not love her. Neither was he prepared to even tolerate her to keep the marriage alive. 

Actually @TLLK, I always felt a hostility to Hillary simply because she chose to stand by her man. Hillary was not about to let some intern destroy her life and they blamed her for not making more of a fuss. Diana played into the feminist agenda but paid a heavy price for it. In all probability she did not want the divorce and felt aggrieved that Camilla seemed to have gotten it all yet she was pushed out.

[amabel]

so why are you hostile to Hillary because she chose to ignore Bill's sily affairs, and cool to Diana because she Did NOT ignoire Charles' affair
Personally I think it is up to people how they want to arrange their marraiges...
HIllary knew that Bill's affairs were just about sex.. Diana knew that Charles had gone back to Cam because he loved her...

[royalanthropologist]

Perhaps I was not clear in my communication at @amabel. I am not hostile to Hilary at all for the decisions she made. Rather I feel/sense that there is hostility from other women towards her. I think Hilary is a very pragmatic woman and I admire that. Sometimes you have to be pragmatic to win the long game. If you get too emotional about things, the decisions you make can hurt you in the long run.

[amabel]

Oh I am sorry, I thought you mean that you didn't like Hill C because she stayed iwht Bill.  but I think she has stayed wit him partly out of ambition, he brought her near to the Presidency and she was able to use it as a springboard to run herself.. and parlty because she knew his affairs were just sexual and they didn't bother her that much.
But Diana I think could have at least had a friendly relationship with Charles if she'd settled for a half loaf.  The RF did'nt mind her having affairs provided she was discreet, but she picked Hewitt who talked.. and then outed other affairs such as Hoare by her chasing after him when he left her.  She had interesting work, she had her sons, she had her friends..and the public adored her (mostly) but she got into the whole thing with Charles and pushed herself out of the RF.. and they turned cool on her as did many of her own class..a nd her own erratic behaviour became public.. and that began to turn the British public against her...