Harry and Megan Relationship

Started by SophieChloe, January 09, 2017, 06:24:31 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Eri

#100
And some wonder why people don't like her ... everything about her comes out as fake and she seems to be desperate to show off a "persona" that she is not as a result the two don't match and that is why she is so despised ... even by her own sister ... too bad for her and her PR team her true colors came out since Day 1 and what we saw can't be unseen ...

Yale

You and others depise her . We get it. But what does it change?
Not a thing! Harry couldn't care how you and any others feel.
Ya know, I really believe some you think Harry will see these comments and break up with Meghan as a result. I mean, that is how some of your posts read. It's  funny.😃😃

Lady Deb

I really like how PH and MM have been able to keep to themselves. Some newspapers have printed constant fake, rubbish articles that seem to have been made up just to get a view clicks and feed the gullible. From the amount of articles written one would think that PH and MM have been seen together everyday, and that is not the case at all.

Personally, I would be embarrassed as a reporter to attach my name to an article such as MM's 'estranged brother wants an invitation to the wedding', or some of the other sexist and racist articles that have written. Meanwhile for months, PH and MM have kept things so private, good for them.

Kinkade

Quote from: wannable on January 22, 2017, 01:29:07 PM
I'm not a Meghan fan, but what I think is right, I will speak my mind. She has no power whatsoever to give any permission to estranged family members to speak truth or crap about her; selling their stories and very old pictures to the tabloids.


I was referring to Meghan's team of lawyers, agents and PR. She's an actress and she has a team. It shouldn't be a  surprise that the "insider info" always comes from US Weekly (an American publication). Other news media outlets quote US Weekly like it's the truth when in fact it's a tabloid. So conclusion points that most leaks come from Meghan's side.

With regards to her crazy family, I agree w/ most, it's not her fault to have that kind of family member. I'm sorry she has to deal w/ that. However, it does unjustly reflect badly on her public image. Which will matter to the Royal family, unless Harry gives up his title and lead a more private life like some of his cousins or second cousins. 

Yes, IA, these vacations are Harry's choices. Good or bad, he & Meghan made them. But leaking planned vacation, some before it even happens, doesn't look good. Firstly, who knows about these planned vacations? Secondly, there are no confirmations or pictures, but the press knows about them. Which luxury resort they stayed in, what they did, what they saw.... so somebody must be leaking. Logical reasoning points back to Meghan's team. ( I doubt her estranged family members know any of that)

It would be different if they were caught by fellow passengers in an airplane, thus confirming reports. Then I'd have to say that news came out by accident w/o either of their knowledge. But obviously, the way news have been coming out week after week is so calculated and planned, somebody must be playing puppet master.

Curryong

#104
^ Harry's breakup with Cressida was first reported in People magazine, a US publication. It was reputed at the time that it was given to them to stop grievances about an exclusive being granted to a British tabloid. All the tabs are disliked by the royals but in the event the Telegraph picked it up. Neither Harry nor Cressida had anything to do with that.

It was said at the time of the KP statement about Meghan last year that there was an implicit threat from Jason's team to the more outrageous British tabloids to 'play nice about this  or you won't get interviews, access etc in the future' and if not there are always US media outlets.

It was this that is believed to have turned the Daily Fail against the Harry/Meghan romance and has made them snarky about it ever since. So I wouldn't lay my last dollar on the US publications getting first grab on info because of it coming from Meghan's PR team at all. In fact that would be just too blatant, IMO,  and Harry, KP and Charles and Clarence House would be on to that mighty quickly.

Also, there is no limit to the imaginations of the British tabloid journalist. We don't know whether Harry and Meghan were cuddled up together under the Northern Lights, or indeed snuggled together in Meghan's Toronto home.

Tabloid Journalists are perfectly capable of googling details of luxury resorts and Toronto hideaways and spinning tales of pure gossamer about it all without the help of PR teams from either side.

I happen to believe that Harry and Meghan are a couple, but haven't shared a holiday yet.
She was at KP for some time and that's about all we know. I certainly think Harry was in Norway, with pals. Not so sure about his girlfriend.

Meghan hasn't spoken about the romance. Neither have her parents. The only two that have at any length are two half siblings Meghan hasn't seen or been in contact with for well over a decade.

If the BRF can survive a future Queen Consort's uncle having *** and stripper parties at Chateau Bang Bang and her cousin who gained momentary fame with a stripper act involving a golden crown, I think it can cope with a rather crazy half sibling on Meghan's side of the family.

Eri

NO Twitter or Instagram sightings EVER of Romeo and Juliet even on the rare occasions she has been in London ... she has always made sure we know she is in London when she is indeed in London (she is that desperate) so no excuse for her not being seen in London we know she is anything BUT discrete ... if you ask me he has gotten rid of her back in December and I will stand by my opinion until the two love birds of the Century are actually in the same Continent ...

Jennifer

#106
QuotePrince Harry's girlfriend Meghan Markle still 'haunted' by family's experience with racism

eghan Markle has recounted a shocking story about her family's experience with racism. The actress shared the painful anecdote with her readers on her lifestyle website The Tig, in honour of Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

Meghan, who has a Caucasian father and an African American mother, recounted a story her grandfather Alvin told her when she was 11. Her grandparents had packed up the car and were going on a road trip from Ohio to California with their three children including their daughter, Meghan's mum.

Read more:
Meghan Markle shares family's experience with racism

Double post auto-merged: January 24, 2017, 02:55:02 PM


QuotePriyanka Chopra opens up about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's relationship

On Wednesday night, Priyanka Chopra took home a People's Choice Award for Favourite TV Drama Actress and after accepting the statue, she spent a few minutes chatting with ET about her pal Meghan Markle. In the short video, the interviewer is overheard asking, "One of your best friends is dating a prince, and I'm wondering, are you in the running to be a royal bridesmaid?"


The 34-year-old's response was short and to the point: "No, but I'm just happy for Meg. And I hope whatever she does, wherever she goes in life, she's always happy."

"But you would be happy being a royal bridesmaid... who wouldn't be happy to be a royal bridesmaid?" questioned the interviewer. Laughing, Priyanka noted, "Well let's not jump the gun, let's give them their space!"

Read more:
Priyanka Chopra opens up about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's relationship

Double post auto-merged: January 24, 2017, 02:58:52 PM


QuoteMeghan Markle Spends a Week in India on Mission to Help Impoverished Girls

When it comes to a cause, Meghan Markle will switch time zones to lend a helping hand.

E! News has learned the 35-year-old Suits star recently jetted off to India in honor of Wold Vision Canada, an organization that works to support and sponsor children and their families living in poverty around the world.

Markle, who is a Global Ambassador for World Vision, launched her trip in New Delhi, where she traveled to various locations with the organization. She later flew to Mumbai where she was photographed arriving on Saturday. In the airport, Markle kept it casual in a black t-shirt, dark denim and a baseball cap with a jacket swung over one arm and a backpack on one shoulder. However, she did seem to pick up a souvenir along the way as her hand was decorated with henna tattoos.

Read more:
Meghan Markle Spends a Week in India on Mission to Help Impoverished Girls | E! News
"You've done it before and you can do it now. See the positive possibilities. Redirect the substantial energy of your frustration and turn it into positive, effective, unstoppable determination". ~ Ralph Marston

Kate

#107
Is any one here, familiar with Viral News?  I have them on FB and todays story is that Charles called Prince Harry for a eeting and Charles told him to get rid of Meghan . and " What are you thinking?".. The article says that Prince Harry has had to jilt Meghan and " call off the wedding"... I wish I knew how to give the web site address..  Viral News...   Just went back to FB to reread the article. The headline states that poor Prince Harry has jilted Meghan Markle...then goes on to mention the meeting with Charles..  Interesting..

Curryong

^ What's interesting is how this person from viral news (possibly a US site) knows what Charles said to his son, and the object of their meeting. Was Ms viral news hanging off the chandeliers at Clarence House, or did she disguise herself as a garden gnome in the gardens of Highgrove, lol!

Everyone is speculating at the moment about the state of this romance, because they haven't been seen together lately and Twitter and the media's having hysterics. Two freaky US bloggers have been spreading the news around the internet that Harry and Meghan split just before Xmas. They may have, they may not, but one New Jersey person, now located in the south of the US, and one New York PR person are hardly likely to know the truth any more than the rest of us, or Ms viral news.  Royal correspondents, who at least have some contacts inside KP, are insisting that it's a real romance and it's serious.

Harry would listen to Charles and his advice, but I doubt very much indeed that Charles would order his 32 year old son to dump his lover. Consider Charles's own history with the unsuitable Camilla and the fact that Harry has a fortune of at least $12 million. He could in theory freely walk away from the BRF and go and live in Canada with Meghan tomorrow. There's nothing stopping him doing that at all, though I don't believe he ever would.

I know this much. If Harry is in love with Meghan and wants to marry her he'll do it. It won't matter what anybody else says or does, and that includes internet trolls attacking Meghan every day. It won't make one iota of difference IMO. If he's split from her (and I don't believe he has) it will be Harry's decision and his alone. It will be the same if they're dating and if they marry

Kinkade

#109
Yes, I have heard of the theory that KP wants British papers to play nice, else they won't get scoops. Thus, the latest scoops goes to US publications to taunt the British press. But I read that theory from a gossip site, in which one of the writers shares a dermatologists w/ Meghan. So it all goes back to her. That is my way of thinking anyway.

It is also my theory that US publications are desperate to have an American princess to sell more rags, they're always jumping the gun and printing news w/o verification just to be the first and sell it. Denzel Washington just said this in an interview. And that Prinyaka interview was annoying, I'm glad she showed class in answering those reporters.

Back to Harry & Meghan, if they come out officially, their first interview would be British to be sure. So it doesn't make sense to me to warn British tabloids, when the end goal is to make them lovable to the British people. They can sell their popularity to Americans, sure, but American taxes don't support the BRF. 

At the end of the day, Harry will do what he want... I kinda agree w/ that. But if he's not careful and take care of his image, he might have to give up his title or live a quieter life. Question is, is that what Meghan envisioned her princess life would be.



Double post auto-merged: January 25, 2017, 09:58:23 AM


Quote from: Jennifer on January 24, 2017, 02:52:05 PM
QuotePrince Harry's girlfriend Meghan Markle still 'haunted' by family's experience with racism

Read more:
Meghan Markle shares family's experience with racism

Double post auto-merged: January 24, 2017, 02:55:02 PM




ok. I know I'm gonna get flak for this, but I'm kinda sick of Meghan repeating the mixed-race dilemma. She's the only biracial actress/public figure I know who keeps reiterating that she's biracial & all the racism she's gotten YET she doesn't seem to be actively championing BLM or her African American heritage.

President Barack Obama, Rashida Jones, Jesse Williams (grey's anatomy), Halle Berry, Jennifer Beals, Paula Patton ... know what they have in common... they're biracial. But they're not ashamed to identify themselves as black, because it is part of them. Halle Berry's daughter is 1/4 African American,but she always like to state that my daughter is black. I haven't even listed the half Asians or Latinas in hollywood or professional sports.

To end, I'm just gonna leave this quote from a Paula Patton interview:

BLACK, BIRACIAL, MIXED RACE?
Patton's childhood experiences were similar to those of other biracial women actors such as Thandie Newton (herself an ex-Mission Impossible cast member) and Halle Berry. Like them, she also holds strong views on race and its diversity of classifications. "I find [the word biracial] offensive," Patton stated. "It's a way for people to separate themselves from African Americans....a way of saying, 'I'm better than that.' I'm black because that's the way the world sees me. People aren't calling Barack Obama biracial."

Actress Paula Patton Bio: Ethnicity, Nationality, Parents Race, Mother Joyce, Father Charles



Double post auto-merged: January 25, 2017, 10:01:45 AM


I'm sorry this is a double post. My bad. I made mistakes and put my own comments in a quote.

ok. I know I'm gonna get flak for this, but I'm kinda sick of Meghan repeating the mixed-race dilemma. She's the only biracial actress/public figure I know who keeps reiterating that she's biracial & all the racism she's gotten YET she doesn't seem to be actively championing BLM or her African American heritage.

President Barack Obama, Rashida Jones, Jesse Williams (grey's anatomy), Halle Berry, Jennifer Beals, Paula Patton ... know what they have in common... they're biracial. But they're not ashamed to identify themselves as black, because it is part of them. Halle Berry's daughter is 1/4 African American,but she always like to state that my daughter is black. I haven't even listed the half Asians or Latinas in hollywood or professional sports.

To end, I'm just gonna leave this quote from a Paula Patton interview:

BLACK, BIRACIAL, MIXED RACE?
Patton's childhood experiences were similar to those of other biracial women actors such as Thandie Newton (herself an ex-Mission Impossible cast member) and Halle Berry. Like them, she also holds strong views on race and its diversity of classifications. "I find [the word biracial] offensive," Patton stated. "It's a way for people to separate themselves from African Americans....a way of saying, 'I'm better than that.' I'm black because that's the way the world sees me. People aren't calling Barack Obama biracial."

Actress Paula Patton Bio: Ethnicity, Nationality, Parents Race, Mother Joyce, Father Charles

Eri

Harry can live his life as he wishes without caring what the people who pay for his luxurious lifestyle think sure but if he continues like this he will be just another Andrew and soon ... that is what his uncle has always been guilty of and Harry is following into his footsteps ... as for the status of their so called relationship ... no way it survived all that time with the Royal family and her big mouth /attention seeking family ... he spend New Years Eve with his family and friends and not her ... it ended right there if you ask me ...

Curryong

#111
^^The theory that KP threatened British tabs with scoops going to US publications goes back to the row over the tabloids going on the attack over William (and Kate's) dullness and lack of work ethic months ago. Richard Palmer moaned on his Twitter page that the Royal family didn't sell newspapers any more. That's when I read it. It may well have been given legs by the fact that Jason K is an American and in charge of PR/Press relations at KP.

Harry can't lose his title. You can't de-prince someone. He was born a Prince of the United Kindom and that's it. Edward VIII, after he abdicated remained as Prince Edward.

Charles wants a slimmed down monarchy, with his family at the centre in the spotlight, in the next reign. Therefore, at least until George reaches his late twenties, Harry will be needed. He can't be retired off because four people, including an elderly King and Queen, just wouldn't be able to do it all. He'll be needed into the new reign and probably William's as well.

Eri

^ The American press getting all the "the goods" on the relationship has a lot to do with Megan and her PR giving THEM information ... let's not forget SHE was the one to LEAK the relationship to the press in the first place ... which makes her whining about the attention she so graved hilarious ... I guess she wasn't prepared for the kind of attention she got ...

sandy

Quote from: Curryong on January 25, 2017, 01:37:37 PM
^^The theory that KP threatened British tabs with scoops going to US publications goes back to the row over the tabloids going on the attack over William (and Kate's) dullness and lack of work ethic months ago. Richard Palmer moaned on his Twitter page that the Royal family didn't sell newspapers any more. That's when I read it. It may well have been given legs by the fact that Jason K is an American and in charge of PR/Press relations at KP.

Harry can't lose his title. You can't de-prince someone. He was born a Prince of the United Kindom and that's it. Edward VIII, after he abdicated remained as Prince Edward.

Charles wants a slimmed down monarchy, with his family at the centre in the spotlight, in the next reign. Therefore, at least until George reaches his late twenties, Harry will be needed. He can't be retired off because four people, including an elderly King and Queen, just wouldn't be able to do it all. He'll be needed into the new reign and probably William's as well.

In addition to George, Charlotte will be needed too. She will have the role Harry  has now. I am skeptical that Charles can manage this dream of his considering his next in line and his wife are lazy.

TLLK

Quote from: Curryong on January 25, 2017, 01:37:37 PM
^^The theory that KP threatened British tabs with scoops going to US publications goes back to the row over the tabloids going on the attack over William (and Kate's) dullness and lack of work ethic months ago. Richard Palmer moaned on his Twitter page that the Royal family didn't sell newspapers any more. That's when I read it. It may well have been given legs by the fact that Jason K is an American and in charge of PR/Press relations at KP.

Harry can't lose his title. You can't de-prince someone. He was born a Prince of the United Kindom and that's it. Edward VIII, after he abdicated remained as Prince Edward.

Charles wants a slimmed down monarchy, with his family at the centre in the spotlight, in the next reign. Therefore, at least until George reaches his late twenties, Harry will be needed. He can't be retired off because four people, including an elderly King and Queen, just wouldn't be able to do it all. He'll be needed into the new reign and probably William's as well.
I agree @Curryong. Harry will retain his title but about the only thing he could do is remove himself and his descendants from the line  of succession. Harry will be a major player in the next reign  and should he marry it will include his spouse as well. Quite likely Charles has been studying the European counterparts to see how they manage with a working group of six or less.

royalanthropologist

"Charles's own history with the unsuitable Camilla"

Have we learnt anything from the last 30 years??? :ugh: The most important qualification for a royal couple is their love for one another or at the very least respect one another enough to stay in that marriage. The so called virgin tests, royal blood tests etc. have brought nothing but misery for the monarchy. I would hope that Charles and Diana will be the last arranged royal wedding.  It would be scandalous for Harry to be denied his title simply because he fell in love with a woman that some consider "unsuitable". Meghan is not some serial killer so I really think people might be kind enough to give her a chance.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

sandy

#116
Charles should worry about the scaled down monarchy not because of marrying his mistress, but his second wife has not done as much as the others and I think will step down from duties. Also William, Harry, and Kate have not shown themselves powerhouses in the work department. Charles may have to rethink this. That said. Charles and Diana did not have an arranged marriage. An example of one is when George IV when Prince of Wales married Caroline of Brunswick. Papers were signed and he needed the money so he got a "dowry" from her. He disliked her on sight but did his duty and they had Princess Charlotte. Charles on the other hand courted many ladies before he set his sights on Diana Spencer. He asked her out and she said yes. Both were free to walk. Diana fell in love with him. So no it was no arranged wedding. Plus even if there were an arranged wedding it does not give the man an excuse to cheat. Camilla was in Charles life for years when he was serious about other ladies and when he married his first wife. I think once Camilla was let in, the royals would look like total fools if they forbade Harry to marry. She is a divorcee he is not. Charles and Camilla were both divorced and both had families from their respective first marriages.

Double post auto-merged: January 25, 2017, 06:27:14 PM


Quote from: TLLK on January 25, 2017, 03:26:46 PM
Quote from: Curryong on January 25, 2017, 01:37:37 PM
^^The theory that KP threatened British tabs with scoops going to US publications goes back to the row over the tabloids going on the attack over William (and Kate's) dullness and lack of work ethic months ago. Richard Palmer moaned on his Twitter page that the Royal family didn't sell newspapers any more. That's when I read it. It may well have been given legs by the fact that Jason K is an American and in charge of PR/Press relations at KP.

Harry can't lose his title. You can't de-prince someone. He was born a Prince of the United Kindom and that's it. Edward VIII, after he abdicated remained as Prince Edward.

Charles wants a slimmed down monarchy, with his family at the centre in the spotlight, in the next reign. Therefore, at least until George reaches his late twenties, Harry will be needed. He can't be retired off because four people, including an elderly King and Queen, just wouldn't be able to do it all. He'll be needed into the new reign and probably William's as well.
I agree @Curryong. Harry will retain his title but about the only thing he could do is remove himself and his descendants from the line  of succession. Harry will be a major player in the next reign  and should he marry it will include his spouse as well. Quite likely Charles has been studying the European counterparts to see how they manage with a working group of six or less.

Why would Harry even have to think of doing this? Unless he wants out he will be in the line of succession. If Camilla got the HRH and Harry decides on Meghan she would get the HRH too or the royals would look like hypocrites and be laughingstocks.

royalanthropologist

What is the opposite of a love match? We have to believe that C&D was an arranged marriage or that Diana was lying when said that her husband never loved her at all (courtesy of the Andrew Morton hagiography). These two are mutually exclusive propositions. Charles can't be the ogre that married a woman he never loved in order to have kids and then simultaneously be the ardent suitor who was corrupted by the evil Camilla. Anyway the C&D marriage was a disaster for the Windsors save for the birth of William and Harry. Hopefully they will learn their lessons and give people a chance to find partners they are comfortable with. If Harry loves Meghan then so be it. They will work something out...the monarchy always does, even if it means going back on their vows.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

sandy

#118
A man "never loving" a wife does not mean it's an arranged marriage.  There are marriages on the rebound, marriages for expediency (which I think was what Charles thought of when he married Diana), marriages of convenience and so on. An arranged marriage requires legal contracts, sometimes payment of sums of money from the bride's family and in a lot of cases, they don't meet until shortly before the wedding day.  Charles said he never loved Diana. Charles did not have to be an "ogre" to do this, I think he was and is very selfish and self centered and was pampered by his grandmother and surrounded by yes men (he allegedly gets angry when disagreed with). His problem that he thought of what was good for him and not thinking if his wife would not like his idea of marriage. He thought himself so important that he believed Diana would go along with the arrangement. I think he was and is egocentric. Camilla was around Charles for years before he married Diana Spencer. Charles did want heirs and could not have them with Camilla who would need to get a divorce and that was a no no back then. Charles wanted to have his cake and eat it too. Charles did find Lady Diana and asked her out. He was not some helpless baby. He chose to ask her out, he chose to propose and he chose to marry her. It is a cop out IMO for others to be blamed for his own decisions. Charles actually found Camilla years before he met Diana but had many other women as well. I don't think he felt her good enough to have his heirs. His naming her made him obligated to her and after her husband divorced her I think he knew marriage would have to be inevitable. I think he would have married Davina Sheffield had she not had a past (her ex came forward). She might have been able to deal with Camilla in no uncertain terms. I think Diana was used by Charles and the windsors. She was a disposable person to him and he pushed her aside when she had the heir and spare. Charles cheated on his "great love" while married to Diana with Janet Jenkins and other ladies. I think Camilla likes the perks and privileges and knows there can be no second divorce so she's set for life.

Double post auto-merged: January 25, 2017, 07:10:24 PM


https://www.google.com/search?q=davina+sheffield&rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-Address&tbm=isch&imgil=3sRzqaRhEhAaHM%253A%253B5tOcHN2iyk9sIM%253Bhttps%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.pinterest.com%25252Fpin%25252F82753711879013657%25252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=3sRzqaRhEhAaHM%253A%252C5tOcHN2iyk9sIM%252C_&usg=__RiLhb7JG-XJNjkoSC_Asb4m_2ww%3D&biw=1113&bih=763&ved=0ahUKEwi63IrI_93RAhWDNSYKHb1gD5cQyjcIKw&ei=7PeIWLq2F4PrmAG9wb24CQ#imgrc=YG65eGeFS970TM%3A

Davina and Charles

royalanthropologist

For me the bottom line is: Charles should never have married Diana. It was one of the biggest mistakes of his life. He, his unloved (or "difficult to love" if we are to believe the Dimbley/Junor books) wife and the monarchy paid a very dear price for that decision. In my view what he should have done is marry Camilla back in the day instead of dithering. Alternatively he should have divorced Diana in 1986 when they fell out for good. The next decade after that was a nightmare for them, the country and the monarchy.  Anyway that is all water under the bridge. As for Harry and Meghan; I would hope that they are happy and not pushed into living fairy tales that do not exist. That is how the C&D nonsense started with everybody and his uncle declaring that it was a "love match". Totally ridiculous. Charles looked as if he was being sent to his Crucifixion at his wedding and the bride was just a confused teenager being pawned amidst some nasty dynastic games.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

sandy

But he didn't marry Camilla back in the day. He made the decision not to. He should have had the maturity to move on and not take her on as his married mistress. He got involved with another married Lady Kanga, so he was not "exclusive" with Camilla. Camilla IMO was the last woman standing. Charles and Diana did keep up appearances for years and it was only in the early nineties that the problems were evident to the public (and before the Morton book). Diana's "sin" was complaining about Charles' lifestyle and his friends leaked nasty stories about her ca. the late eighties.  It was a love match as far as Diana was concerned. Generally weddings are supposed to be love matches and back then Charles was seen as a prize catch (the public had no inkling of his less than wholesome private life). I don't think William and Harry consider their parents marriage as "nonsense" for obvious reasons. I think the Great Love spin of C and C is nonsense. Once  divorced Charles married divorced (other woman) Camilla then it is difficult for the royals to turn down a marriage of a Prince to a divorcee, if it comes to that. If Meghan and Harry want to marry they will. I don't get the "fairy tale" references. If Charles had been halfway decent he would have leveled with Diana before he proposed and if she did not like the set up they could have broken up then and there. then he would not have to sulk at his wedding. What a disgrace

royalanthropologist

#121
All that is very well Sandy but as long as you base on this premise: Everything that Diana said was true and everything that Charles said was wrong. I rather suspect that Diana was not beyond the temptation to exaggerate her unhappiness or innocence in order to win public sympathy. She did try to destroy Charles and for some time it seemed that she and her allies would succeed... but again the Windsors survived that crisis.

I totally reject the idea that Charles is a monster. He is not and has never been. Neither is Camilla. All Charles did was to marry the wrong woman (for him) and leave the right woman hanging on for years. That is not a mortal sin; Just weak dithering. I for one I am happy that he has had a few years with the woman he truly loves. The fairy tale is the idea that Diana is an angel, Camilla is a witch and Charles is a devil. That is the stuff of fairy tales.

Double post auto-merged: January 25, 2017, 08:11:06 PM


"they could have broken up then and there"

On that I agree with Sandy entirely. Charles should never have dated, proposed to or married Diana. It was a terrible mistake. 
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

sandy

They both said the same thing. Charles said he was with Camilla. Diana said he was. Charles said he did not love Diana. Diana indicated the same thing. Both were on the same page as far as what happened. Dimbleby even used the Morton book as a reference for his book about Charles! The only thing is Diana took responsibility for her part in the divorce (50 percent) Charles never publicly took any of the blame. Charles tried to do a smear campaign on Diana with leaks by his friends to the media before Morton. It's all a matter of public record. Charles always had the upper hand and so did Camilla. Diana managed to share custody of the boys and did not become a "bolter" like her mother. The  alleged "right woman" did not "hang on" for  years, she married the man she was said to be in love with and had his children. Charles got busy with suitable and unsuitable women and visited Camilla's bed after she married the other man. Charles had his cake and ate it too. I did not say Camilla or Charles were  "monsters." I see them as self centered people who deserve each other. The "weak" dithering was destructive too. Charles is not a ditherer when he feels his huge sense of entitlement. BTW, royalanthropologist, I never called those names to the three of them. I blame Charles more because he knew the score and could have put his cards on the table and told Diana what he expected before he proposed. No, the Wales Saga  is not the stuff of fairy tales, it's the stuff of sordidness. 

royalanthropologist

"the Wales Saga  is not the stuff of fairy tales, it's the stuff of sordidness"

That is one of the most apt description of that marriage and the events that followed it. I hope to God neither Harry nor Meghan has to ever go through that.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

sandy

Look what happened to the "spare" Andrew and Fergie. It was called a real love match and they were "made for each other"and Charles and the Queen approved of Fergie. And look how that turned out.