Royal visit to Canada

Shalimar said:
Really? I know several Brits of the "cut glass accent" variety, who hold a vastly different opinion of Diana than the perjorative one you continue to espouse. It is a common human behavioural characteristic to assume that others share our prejudices. Often, they do not.
Click to expand...

I'm well aware that my views of Diana are only shared by a minority, both in your country and mine, though the minority is greater over here than it is over there - long legged blondes get a good press in America!

Please believe, however, that they are genuinely held, and have been since before her marriage , when she carefully posed before the light in a see through skirt, something no true royal, or even a lady, would ever have done!

I am not just being obstreperous!
 

I read that four of Henry VIII's six wives were commoners: Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour, Catherine Howard and Catherine Parr (although they came from noble families, particularly Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard - members of the powerful Norfolk family, they nevertheless held no titles of their own and were, as such commoners)

Edward IV married Elizabeth Woodville.

James II's first wife (and mother of Mary II and Queen Anne) was Anne Hyde, a commoner.

So then how could the queen mum be the first commoner to marry a royal?
 
Laurie said:
I'm well aware that my views of Diana are only shared by a minority, both in your country and mine, though the minority is greater over here than it is over there - long legged blondes get a good press in America!

Please believe, however, that they are genuinely held, and have been since before her marriage , when she carefully posed before the light in a see through skirt, something no true royal, or even a lady, would ever have done!

I am not just being obstreperous!
Click to expand...
Hmm. First of all, I am a Canuck, and I live in Canada, not America. We are not obsessed with blondes, either. Secondly, re the skirt incident. I think you are being very harsh, and exceedingly Victorian. Diana was very young, approx nineteen or so? I'm certain it never occurred to her to wonder whether or not her skirt was transparent. It would not have occurred to me at that age, and I certainly was not The Whore Of Babylon, Laurie. Lol.
 

About not shaking hands. It takes guts to jump into a crowd of adoring people to shake hands. Have you seen some of them? Politicians learn that when they jump into a crowd to shake hands, they will loose watches, cuff links, wallets, and especially wedding rings. Obama has been criticized for taking off his wedding ring, before jumping into a crowd.
 
They seem like a very likable couple, so unpretentious! The kids are so cute. Every time I look at them though, I think how Dianna was robbed of the opportunity to see her grandchildren. She would have been a proud grandmom!
 
Shalimar said:
Hmm. First of all, I am a Canuck, and I live in Canada, not America. We are not obsessed with blondes, either. Secondly, re the skirt incident. I think you are being very harsh, and exceedingly Victorian. Diana was very young, approx nineteen or so? I'm certain it never occurred to her to wonder whether or not her skirt was transparent. It would not have occurred to me at that age, and I certainly was not The Whore Of Babylon, Laurie. Lol.
Click to expand...

Most abject apologies, Shalimar, I totally failed to check your location!

As for it not occurring to Diana that her skirt was transparent, Diana never so much as blinked without calculating how it affected her appearance, and, once she was in the public eye, without checking there was a camera there to record the event.

Standards may be different in Canada though I doubt it, and the first thing my wife, herself still a young woman at that time, said was, "She should be wearing a slip, that is quite deliberate!", and as a semi-professional exotic dancer she knew a thing or two about attracting the male eye!

We'll have to disagree on this one I think - Diana is a" Marmite" person, either you love her, or you are disgusted by her.
 
Laurie said:
Most abject apologies, Shalimar, I totally failed to check your location!

As for it not occurring to Diana that her skirt was transparent, Diana never so much as blinked without calculating how it affected her appearance, and, once she was in the public eye, without checking there was a camera there to record the event.

Standards may be different in Canada though I doubt it, and the first thing my wife, herself still a young woman at that time, said was, "She should be wearing a slip, that is quite deliberate!", and as a semi-professional exotic dancer she knew a thing or two about attracting the male eye!

We'll have to disagree on this one I think - Diana is a" Marmite" person, either you love her, or you are disgusted by her.
Click to expand...
Fair enough Laurie, we will agree to disagree.
 
"I'm certain it never occurred to her to wonder whether or not her skirt was transparent"

Of course, if you were cynical like me you could google "Diana in transparent skirt ", click on "Images" and see just how many times it didn't occur to her that she was in a transparent skirt, and she just happened to be standing against the light and there just happened to be a photographer around!

But then not everybody is as cynical as me.
 
So Diana's skirt was a bit see-through against the sun, so what? What an uptight stodgy archaic attitude the critics have, those same types who need to cover up table legs. I doubt she set herself up that way, not being in the sex trade or a photographer.
 
Cookie said:
So Diana's skirt was a bit see-through against the sun, so what? What an uptight stodgy archaic attitude the critics have, those same types who need to cover up table legs. I doubt she set herself up that way, not being in the sex trade or a photographer.
Click to expand...
Honestly, I think people forget what it is like to be young. I remember mini skirts, crop tops, short shorts. A transparent skirt is small potatoes, good grief, she was wearing underwear. Chuckie had a permanent mistress,

but let's focus on teenage Diana's less than opaque skirt. News flash, all pretty young women, blonde or otherwise, are not obliged to live out some demure Victorian fantasy, merely to avoid being viewed as whores. The flaw lies in the inability of some to view women in a non sexual manner. So tedious.
 
Agree, Shalimar. Women are usually treated as sex objects by those whose minds are focused in that direction. Besides, at that time, Diana wasn't even a royal and did not have to adhere to the standards of that old school thinking. And the critique is interesting coming from someone who tells us his wife was an exotic dancer (what kind - stripper, lap dancer or pole dancer), sounds hypocritical to me.
 
"I think people forget what it is like to be young."

I don't. I was young at the time, and I made my comment at the time.

I bought my wife the hottest of hot pants and the mini-est of miniskirts and was proud to be seen with her.

She never pretended to be poor little, hard done by, terribly misunderstood little miss perfect though!
 
The royal family Diana married into were a cold unfeeling lot with very little empathy, showing almost no affection for even their own children. The queen spent very little time with her children and upon returning from a trip gave poor little Charles a mere pat on the head as a greeting. Philip was a hard taskmaster and Charles was raised by nannies and the Queen mother. Anyone in Diana's predicament would be driven over the edge, since it was an arranged marriage intended to produce heirs. Diana was a loving and affectionate mother to William and Harry, much more than anyone can say for the queen.
 
Shalimar said:
It can't be much fun being viewed as a broodmare.
Click to expand...

What did she expect?

That's what royal brides are for, even today, and not just royal brides but anybody who marries into the aristocracy.

Heir and a spare and after that they are purely decorative.

The Queen Mother knew that, and so did the Queen, producing her two and then going on to complete her family at a time of her own choosing, not as a state requirement.
 
Cookie said:
The royal family Diana married into were a cold unfeeling lot with very little empathy, showing almost no affection for even their own children. The queen spent very little time with her children and upon returning from a trip gave poor little Charles a mere pat on the head as a greeting. Philip was a hard taskmaster and Charles was raised by nannies and the Queen mother. Anyone in Diana's predicament would be driven over the edge, since it was an arranged marriage intended to produce heirs. Diana was a loving and affectionate mother to William and Harry, much more than anyone can say for the queen.
Click to expand...

Totally agree!
 
Laurie said:
What did she expect?

That's what royal brides are for, even today, and not just royal brides but anybody who marries into the aristocracy.

Heir and a spare and after that they are purely decorative.

The Queen Mother knew that, and so did the Queen, producing her two and then going on to complete her family at a time of her own choosing, not as a state requirement.
Click to expand...
I have counseled a myriad of young girls. Teenagers have stars in their eyes. Diana herself stated she was shocked to discover her husband had never loved her. Exiting this thread.
 
"Diana was a loving and affectionate mother to William and Harry"

Actually, like so many of her generation, she was totally besotted by them, to the exclusion of all else, including her, and their, Royal duties. Far from being a brood mare, she saw Charles simply as a sperm donor.
 
Laurie said:
"Diana was a loving and affectionate mother to William and Harry"

Actually, like so many of her generation, she was totally besotted by them, to the exclusion of all else, including her, and their, Royal duties. Far from being a brood mare, she saw Charles simply as a sperm donor.
Click to expand...

To hell with royal duties. The British Empire was an evil beyond compare that greedily grabbed everything it could get its hands on and killing everyone that stood in its way. And now England must apologize for their misdeeds for years to come, or else the monarchy will be rubbed out. Children are more important than stiff, uptight protocol. At least Charles was good for a couple of sperm, if little else.
 
I liked Diana too. Of course, she was not without fault as she showed her humanness. She was genuinely likable and that had nothing to do with her blondness. She was young when she married Charles and I do believe she really loved him up until she figured out what was really going on. What's so terrible about wanting to be loved?

She loved her boys and it really showed. That is a natural instinct to most mothers--even in the animal kingdom. I think William and Kate stand a good chance to be happy too. I think it is very important for a child to be shown real love and affection during the early years of life and it's even better if both parents are involved. As I write this, I can think of five people that I have known quite well throughout life that either had an abusive mother or abandoned by a mother and I can say, they have had and continue to have problems.

I live in the US, not in the UK. We don't have kings and queens in this country. Royalty or not, they are just people born into wealth yet they still have problems. Love may be the only real thing we have in this life and really, it is the most valuable.
 
" I think William and Kate stand a good chance to be happy "

But they wouldn't have if Diana was around. You think she would have shred the limelight, and William's love, with an attractive and vivacious and tremendously popular young woman?

I repeat, while it is perhaps only a minority who don't like Diana, it is a significant minority. Such is not the case with Catherine.

She is, so far as I can tell, and in the UK at least, universally liked, and bids fair to become as well loved as the Queen Mother, and there's no way Diana would have accepted that! I include myself among her admirers.

While I have no doubt she has her critics, I have never come across them, and along with Sophie, Countess of Wessex is doing much to restore the credibility of the Royal princes.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top