Diana tried to woo Charles away from Camilla using racy underwear

Started by Duch_Luver_4ever, August 12, 2017, 06:10:45 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Duch_Luver_4ever

The night Diana tried to lure Charles away from Camilla | Daily Mail Online

My highlights from the article and my comments in bold

Camilla had just been told that Princess Diana was coming to her sister Annabel Elliot's 40th birthday party.

'Why did that f****** b**** have to come?' she stormed.

It was being hosted by Annabel's close friend, Lady Annabel Goldsmith, at that time the wife of tycoon Sir James, owner of the Lodge.

That would have been hilarious to see, right out of a soap opera, hmmm James Goldsmith eh... ...."whats that, my daughter's coming to the party, splendid  :lol: :teehee: :lol:"

What astonished Charles's friends who were in on the secret of what the French call 'un amour fou' (an insane love) was how openly proprietorial Mrs Parker Bowles was becoming with the prince, and all while still married herself to Guards officer Andrew Parker Bowles.

never heard the affair called that before

She wanted to eclipse Camilla not only with her dress but also what she wore underneath it. She knew exactly what she had in mind as, earlier in the day, she had slipped into Harrods' lingerie department.

Now she stood in front of her own full-length dressing room mirror, gazing at her reflection. The exotic lingerie she had bought that afternoon was more daring than her usual ensemble – briefer, naughtier, more provocative. This was her desperate, possibly naive, gamble to rekindle the all-but-extinct sexual passion in her marriage.

She was realistic about the competition. Camilla may have been 14 years older than she was, but Diana knew the seasoned Mrs Parker Bowles had a comfortably bosomed allure that Charles, apparently, found irresistible.

I really feel for her here, she must be really out of sorts to go this route, given the lack of connection post Portugal, also, her trump card was her adorableness and sweetness. Most women go the sexy route cause its the only option, but shes so much more than that.

Pre bulimia she was certainly busty, as the first Emmanuel dress showed, but years of trying to make herself disappear had taken their toll in that regard. Although from the picture in the article it looks like Charles is wanting a matronly figure rather than a wife.


At that moment, as she would tearfully relate the following day to a confidante, the prince looked in, surveyed his lingerie-clad wife up and down and declared witheringly, 'You look ridiculous.'

Charles.... you're a ba$t@rd, just another time we hear him breaking her heart.

The close friend, an intimate of Diana who has never spoken out before, recalls her despair at being dismissed so coldly. 'Those three words shattered her,' says the confidante. 'They changed the whole momentum of the evening.'

This is very revealing as despite people making a lot of hay over the "confrontation" it always seemed to me rather muted, I always chalked it up to the way upper crusts fight, but this explains a lot, she had her legs cut out from under her before the event.

As Diana related, Camilla's extraordinary response was to tell her, 'You've got everything you ever wanted. You've got all the men in the world falling in love with you and you've got two beautiful children.

What more could you want?' Diana responded, 'I want my husband.' What staggered the princess was Camilla virtually saying that because she had William and Harry as well as endless admiration from other men, it made it all right for her to be sleeping with her husband.

So much sad irony here, her still wanting the one man that didnt feel about her like so many of us did. Also it sums up I think the view that perhaps Camilla thought she got some things out of the ruse her and Charles were running so why should she be upset over it, a corollary to Charles opinions.

That evening Diana had set out to save her marriage. But as she later admitted to friends, it was the evening she realised it was over.

Interesting, id heard of both events separately, but them happening on the same night explains a lot.
"No other member of the Royal Family mattered that year, or I think for the next 17 years, it was just her." Arthur Edwards, The Sun Photographer, talking about Diana's impact.

Curryong

Charles specialised in the withering remarks department. 'You look like an air hostess' when Diana wore a plaid coat. 'Just shopping, isn't it dear' when she tried to explain she was looking forward to visiting a child care centre in answer to an Arabian prince who'd asked about her plans on a MIddle Eastern tour 'You look ridiculous' when she was standing young tall and slender in lingerie.

Wonder what Charles says about the Rotttweiler when she's in one of her shapeless evening gowns. Bet he doesn't try and shoot her down in flames! She's squat and homely, just his type!

Charles likes women who are matronly, with large bosoms. It's often been remarked that Camilla resembles Charles's much loved nannie, Mabel Anderson. That's the mistake you made, Diana. You should have modelled yourself on Mabel and Charles would have fallen for you!

royalanthropologist

That episode was sad, cruel and uncalled for. I mean Charles' comment was just the pits. Even if you are not enthusiastic about someone, at least acknowledge the effort.

I can imagine going to that party, she was a band of nerves. She was in enemy territory. She knew that some people there were pitying her or alternatively laughing at her. Charles had just given her a little psychological blow. Camilla then ended by implicitly wondering why she was not like Queen Alexandra...sucking it up and finding a hobby. Not an edifying spectacle at all.

Diana used to describe how the QM used to watch her with curious eyes that had a hint of pity. Did the QM know more than she was letting on? It certainly seems Princess Margaret had an inkling judging by her comments that Camilla will never let go.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

tiaras

I agree. Camilla wanted to be more than a mistress. Unlike some rich men who have affairs she wanted to be in the wife territory. This is a problem. I happen to know someone who is fine with their hubby sleeping around but as long as it's discreet. This was never the case with camilla and charles. They openly wanted Diana out of the way or compliant and when she was neither they tried to play mind games.

This reminds me of Bernard-Henri Levy and his wife Maria Dombasle. He's still married to her but the mistress Daphne is publicly with him and everyone knows this relationship. Some affairs are not just that some affairs are actually two people who want to be together gking behind the wife's back.

Duch_Luver_4ever

 :goodpost: @royalanthropologist  I swear, the harder thing for me than the accident is finding out all these times she got hurt over the years.....its come out before that the QM let them use one of her places, so im quite sure she knew what was what, also given Charles regard for her and her role as supporter to him, when his mother wasnt there for him, I cant see how he didnt confide in her.

I also thought episodes like this showed both how incredibly strong Diana was, and at the same time how she could have been the way she was when she wasnt at her best, as far as dealing with people. It had to be an awful strain dealing with situations most of us would have died of embarrassment. Also when you always feel youre the last to be let in on a situation, it has to make one wary of people.

One thing the recent docs rehash in our mind is like @tiaras  said, they wanted Diana out of the way, as the first move in the WoW with the briefings about trying to claim her mad. in some ways she thought having the kids cemented her position, but they also made her position very precarious, in that her "job" was finished, and at least in Charles mind, if he could be rid of her, he would remarry.

We have no way of knowing how things would have played out had they been successful, but while we often discuss and critique Diana's exposure of the events in books, interviews, etc. It showed that it was likely the best of few options she had. Maybe we'd have all been saying "wasnt that sad they had to put Diana away all those years ago, I wonder how shes doing?"

"No other member of the Royal Family mattered that year, or I think for the next 17 years, it was just her." Arthur Edwards, The Sun Photographer, talking about Diana's impact.

royalanthropologist

I sometimes wonder whether after all these years, the character of the monarchy has changed at all. Henry VIII made it absolutely clear that women who could not bear him sons would be put away if they didn't go quietly. Diana may not have been beheaded but the end result was the same...she was out and the prince was free to marry whoever he wanted.

I was reminded of that when you mentioned that the kids being born placed Diana in danger of being kicked out since her function had effectively been served. Nobody, under any circumstances, should be treated like that. Ironically in this case Charles was annoyed that the second baby was a boy.

Perhaps those of us who think she was indiscreet are asking for too much. All the cards had been taken out of her hands and the last one she could possibly use was the media. Even that did not work out as Diana hoped.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

Duch_Luver_4ever

I think it just puts on a better demeanor for the increased public exposure.....I know some have claimed she would never be put away, and she certainly would have fought hard against it, but depending on how far they were willing to go, well never say never.

Yes, it was sad that spencer women are bedeviled by not seeming to deliver the right sex of baby, which is ironic since science has shown that the sex selection comes from the sperm not the egg, so for example it was johnnie that should have seen all the specialists, not Frances. Also charles spencer had many girls before that coveted boy.

I like your take on her "indiscretion" I think as more comes out, it will show she had few options, and even as she was adept at using them compared to the RF, it was a deal with the devil, or maybe like the house in a casino, eventually they win.
"No other member of the Royal Family mattered that year, or I think for the next 17 years, it was just her." Arthur Edwards, The Sun Photographer, talking about Diana's impact.

amabel

Quote from: royalanthropologist on August 12, 2017, 07:14:56 AM
I sometimes wonder whether after all these years, the character of the monarchy has changed at all. Henry VIII made it absolutely clear that women who could not bear him sons would be put away if they didn't go quietly. Diana may not have been beheaded but the end result was the same...she was out and the prince was free to marry whoever he wanted.

I was reminded of that when you mentioned that the kids being born placed Diana in danger of being kicked out since her function had effectively been served. Nobody, under any circumstances, should be treated like that. Ironically in this case Charles was annoyed that the second baby was a boy.

.
That's all absosulte nonsense.  Diana was the one who wanted out (or at least set in motion the whole WaR  that drove her out.  The RF kept on hoping that the 2 of them would shake down and keep up a fornt in public... and remain married.  They didn't "force her out", when she had had her children. 
And I question whether Charles was really "displeased that harry was a boy".  Why would he be?  If he wanted the "heir and spare" settled so that he could return to his relationship with Camilla, I'm sure he didn't really care what sex the spare was, but it was probably slightly better that it was 2 boys rather tan  a boy and a girl.
Not tthat I really think that Charles was just waiting to get Diana' past the having babies, stage so taht he could return to Camilla... but I think that the "He was disappointed that H was  a boy" was all Diana's imagination.
(or soemthng that she dreamed up years later).
Either way, if Charles wanted to remain in some kind of marital relationship with Diana, I'm sure he didn't really care if they had 2 sons or a son and daughter, and if he was moving on to Camilla, he CERTAINLY would not have cared.
And Its nonsense to say that "If Diana had looked like his nanny he woudl have fallen In love with her."
He loved Camila for herself... if he was going to love Diana, ti would be for herself.
I think he was certainly a liltte in love with her at first, they were sexually attracted, they were pleased iwht William.. but the rows, the dramas, the emotional moodswings on Dis's part were always there and while they boht tried ot overcome the distance between them it just did not work.

royalanthropologist

He he. It comes to something when even a striptease wont do. Diana must have thought: "FFS what more do I have to do to get this man's attention"  :hehe:

I hope that C&C sometimes take the time to reflect on their life. Things like this show that they were not nice at all. I can understand having marital problems but there are certain minimum expectations on how you treat other people, particularly if they are your spouse. The thing is; because they are silent and insulated from the less supportive members of the public, it is very hard to tell whether there is any remorse. Some people might interpret this as insolence, effectively saying: "Deal with it dears."

The article gives some insight that Camilla got some inspiration from Charles who told her that Diana was making his life hell. I think that encouraged Camilla to become even more vicious and dismissive, after all she thought she was getting back one for her lover who was being harangued by that "Mad Cow".

Spare a thought for W&H in this. It must take the patience of a saint to sweep it all under and move on. I know that men are much more pragmatic about infidelity than women so probably the responses would be different if Diana had had a daughter. Nevertheless, they must have some level of pent up rage and frustration. They cannot be seen to be disparaging Camilla in any way but they know that she effectively saw to it that her mother was pushed out of her marriage. It is a true test of psychological compartmentalization.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

Curryong

Sigh.

For someone who has said again and again for years on this forum and the other that you really like Diana, you don't seem sympathetic at all to anything she was going through in your last three posts.

Alone on a royal yacht. I don't think so, with hordes of officers and sailors and staff around and a Charles absorbed in van der Post, and who, according to his valet, rang Camilla on his honeymoon, even if you discount the Camilla photo in his wallet and the cuff links business. Seems like there were three people on that yacht, Diana, Charles, and his ex (but not for long) mistress. You know, the person who called her lover's wife 'mad cow'.

Alone at Blmoral. Yes, with people who's stiff upper lip was melded in concrete. And with a husband who did not change his daily habits one iota for his young bride. Fishing, shooting, long walks by himself, practically all day, just the sort of thing other grooms all do!

Also, moodiness was not confined to Diana. There are plenty of examples of Charles being moody and turning on people. They also had rows, in which Charles fully participated. He threw things and he shouted and it may have been he who broke the window at Althorp, during one of them. He was hardly passive and hugely forgiving and understanding during that marriage.

royalanthropologist

What??? Are you reading the same posts as me @Curryong? That is a very skewed and inexplicable interpretation of them right there.

"you don't seem sympathetic at all to anything she was going through in your last three posts. "

Really??? Maybe I am reading and writing a different language. Most people who have posted are pretty much agreed on the inappropriateness of what happened. I am not sure where the lack of sympathy theme came from.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

Curryong

Quote from: royalanthropologist on August 12, 2017, 10:17:58 AM
What??? Are you reading the same posts as me @Curryong? That is a very skewed and inexplicable interpretation of them right there.

"you don't seem sympathetic at all to anything she was going through in your last three posts. "

Really??? Maybe I am reading and writing a different language. Most people who have posted are pretty much agreed on the inappropriateness of what happened. I am not sure where the lack of sympathy theme came from.

I was addressing amabel about her last three posts (up till then) on different Diana threads. Primarily her last comment on this thread  and also 'Diana and eating disorder.' thread.

Trudie

It's pretty sad when a husband who has a beautiful young wife prefers the frumpy mistress who reminds him of his nanny. Of course Diana set the wheels in motion however I don't think it was to divorce it was to balance the falsehoods that she was a fruitcake imagining her husband was cheating on her which he was and their "FRIENDS" who leaking information to that effect were providing safe houses for Charles and Camilla. How hypocritical can it get. Diana was used and reacted accordingly



royalanthropologist

my bad @Curryong. Yes it does seem harsh to say that it was all Diana's fault that she was humiliated in that way. No matter how bad a marriage is, there are some indignities a wife should not be exposed to. Nobody should have to negotiate access to their spouse, certainly not with a married mistress. C&C were out of line on this one.

Also someone mentioned about the nanny...that may well be the attraction but I think Diana's case proved in a very public way that men are not always attracted to looks. You can be drop dead gorgeous and good old plane Jane will get one over you.

Camilla's comment about breasts was particularly catty. I hate it when women attack each other over ageing or looks. Content of character is very much open season but looks and ageing are a different matter.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

Duch_Luver_4ever

Well since amabel doesnt read my posts im not going to bother pointing out the several errors in her post, ill save my breath for ppl that know what theyre talking about.

On the plus side, seems like were having a rapprochement on the Diana thread and I think thats great, I hope my fellow Diana-philes can see the effort royalanthropologist has made in seeing both sides of C&C.  :consoling1:

As for looks and ppl reminding us of others, its a huge part of who we choose, and given what Charles was looking for and the limited moves he was willing to make to meet that person halfway on the giving affection side, of course someone who would be low maintenance on his end and deal with his high maintenance would be of a huge interest to him.

As for Camilla being catty about looks.....oh dear, I dont think theres an eye roll big enough LOL. But I think youre right about her being enbolded to get the claws out based on Charles tales of woe and sorrow living with Diana, so perhaps that was the reason for it, along with "Barbie" "That ridiculous woman" were some other nicknames she had for her, but Im guessing the "mad cow" one was the worst for being more gas on the fire of trying to play her off as mad for suggesting anything was going on.



"No other member of the Royal Family mattered that year, or I think for the next 17 years, it was just her." Arthur Edwards, The Sun Photographer, talking about Diana's impact.

Curryong

Thank you Royal, for making a big effort to see the other side of things. I post in completely different hours to the rest of you (almost opposite) and so sometimes I'm posting away in the early hours of the morning when I feel very tired and sometimes upset. But I do appreciate your effort very much  and Duch_'s too, of course!  :friends:

royalanthropologist

Thanks at @Curryong. I have actually never supported anyone being bullied or placed in a traumatic position. The thing is that many of the details from the royal household are sketchy and somewhat partisan so you never really get to know the truth. For example, I never in my life imagined Camilla being so catty about Diana because I tend to skip over the unpleasantness when reading books. To this date I have never listened to Squiggygate or Camillagate in full because I think it embarrasses all the parties involved.

The wooing incident just tugged at my heart. It was sad, desperate and the reaction was brutal. Then she had to go and confront a mistress who was anything but contrite. Camilla basically told her to stuff it and be grateful for her lot. Now that is something that is just unacceptable, no matter what the problems are in the marriage. It was not in Camilla's place to decide whether or not Diana was a good wife.
"In the past, people were born royal. Nowadays, royalty comes from what you do"...Gianni Versace

Trudie

@royalanthropologist the problem is also it went beyond that with Camilla effectively taking over as a hostess at Highgrove which was the marital country home. Camilla as a mistress didn't know her place and her ambition showed just how nasty a person she really is. Diana tried her hardest to be a good wife it was just impossible as in Charles mind Camilla was all that and more. Diana didn't go off the rails Charles and his set not to mention loyal staff knew Diana was through the moment Harry was born. Diana shouldn't have had to go to such measures to attract her husbands attention.



michelle0187

Pc was cold as ice towards diana  at the bday. It's pretty sad that she tried her best to look the part, hoping she would lure her husband back. God knows what he told his guests behind her back. That man knew how insecure she was about her weight and humiliated her. I read somewhere that he was very upset at her for confronting camilla.