|
Post by kueifei on Apr 7, 2022 2:40:10 GMT
Big red flag.
It was not William's job to be there for her or listen to her problems. This messes kids up big time and William clearly never did learn that needy people are NOT his responsibility. William was NOT capable to handle her ongoing issues and he was JUST A KID! She had no right to do that to him and I was going to come on here and write something sympathetic to Diana, but after this, I just got ticked off.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 12, 2022 2:19:05 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Apr 12, 2022 3:01:43 GMT
More past dreck; I do defend Diana very little, but I sincerely hope that her life serves as a warning as to where young women end up when they think that marriage means they no longer have to make an effort. After getting the ring (marriage to a title and fat bank account was her main focus) she really did behave as if she didn't need to make any kind of an effort. I also think that had she been willing to grow up instead of growing into her own ego, she would have ended up seeing Camilla off. Diana was second place in terms of her marital status, but she was never treated as second rate. No one with her privileges had any right to indulge in the 'cult of true victim-hood' and with the couture, jewels, fat bank account, and the limitless adulation/lauding media coverage and two healthy boys who would have a secure and privileged life, her claims of being deprived is a huge slap in the face to those who actually do in fact suffer genuine deprivation. She schooled her sons to view their privileges as a burden or not enough for the idyllic myth of a normal life where there were no major demands. How little she even wanted to know the world as it was. Diana also ruined it for anyone who would marry William. Even if he had married a Nobel prizewinner, Diana's refusal to hold her own position and accept the dues meant that there would be extra pressure for the wives of William and Harry to provide the kind of drama that only she was able to maintain throughout her wasted life.
If she had accepted that marriage takes hard work and certain sacrifices, she would still be married and be on the verge of becoming Queen. If she had spent eight hours at the Prince's Trust or focused her considerable PR skills on promoting the Trust or Princess Anne's work, or the work of the BRF, Camilla would be a fond memory to Charles and not a fixture. I also think that Diana was someone who could have seen off Camilla if she had just been willing to stop regressing into her addiction to her own pain and pushing the envelope. I also sincerely think that she should have ended up THINKING before acting on impulse and it grates me that she didn't think that maybe questioning hereditary succession would dissolve the very world that she was protected by. I find it either bemusing or mystifying that she didn't want to get sincere help from a qualified psychotherapist and I find it irritating that she thought that William should restore her HRH after his ascension, despite the fact that it wasn't hers in the first place. It was a gift by marriage and it is insulting that she thought it would be William's job to give her something that wasn't hers in her own right. I also wonder if whether or not she really did see the realities that would otherwise be seen by those with a brain, that she was a highly pampered plaything and if she had decided to get educated and trained while married in practical things, that she would have earned the respect she craved.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 14, 2022 18:30:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on May 14, 2022 19:14:05 GMT
Stable people do not engage in bulimia, self harm, or active threats of suicide; they do not sleep around as much as she was proven to be doing and they do not stalk and verbally assault their married lovers and their wives. If someone threatens suicide, hospitalization is required (even if it is against the will of the patient) and self harm is a MAJOR red flag that requires institutionalization. Then there is the fact that Diana is written about by credible sources to have been subjecting Charles to chronic verbal assaults and accusations that are now known to be blatantly untrue and it is clear that there is no real concrete proof that Charles was guilty of what he was accused of early on. Throw in the fact that Diana's post-divorce life was spiraling completely out of control and it is clear that the palace was doing a lot of work in keeping Diana stable and safe. The Andrew Morton book has been outed as a pack of one sided lies and subtle accusations and in my view Andrew himself is discredited mainly because he is such a royal toady and the book is mostly fiction.
It is a known fact that an unfaithful husband does not cause a woman to be bulimic, that Diana had serious unresolved issues from her family's own mess and it is obvious that Diana has had serious problems taking responsibility for her actions. No one forced her to make herself sick and it is clear that if the BRF had worried less about image and more about substance, there wouldn't be issues. Diana gave the public her looks, her charm, her sexual glamor and her social adroitness. She however saved accusations, adultery, and who knows how much else for Charles. Like most toxic narcissists, she never gave a single bit of positivity to those who were 'inside' and then wondered why her husband shut down against her mentally and emotionally. Then when she had chances (like during her pregnancies and the early childhoods of her children) to really build and secure her bond of marriage, she ended up blowing it out of the water and then walked out on her nation.
Like a lot of narcissists, she really sincerely did think that she would be able to walk out with no wider repercussions; she would not see that after shredding her husband that he would turn away. Or that by insulting the nanny that it would result in a permanent backlash from HM and that HM would not negotiate with a woman who had thrown everything that the BRF had been eager to give to her back in their faces. Or that the "HRH" she wanted as part of a title, part of a status that she was not entitled to after an official divorce. She did not at all realize that there comes a point where she didn't belong in a family she insisted on harming. Then there is the fact that she lost her husband not so much (just) to Camilla, but she decided that she would ignore the feelings of a man who did in his own way love her, but the kind of love she wanted would only come from respect and respect has to be earned.
Diana refused to improve herself and wanted to remain a perpetual ingenue and there is nothing worse than dealing with a thirty-something year old woman who still insists on being treated as an equal, while being determinedly dependent. At 25 she was the mother of two boys and should have been doing what her peers were doing and that was setting aside her teen years, leaving behind her childhood for good, and also being smart enough to see and embrace her advantages. She should have been far more mature at thirty, but chose not to do that. She had resources, but she would NOT improve her mind, get specialized tutoring to gain qualifications (since going to regular uni would have been impossible with her obligations) and embraced the role of working mother with pride. That alone would have attracted Charles' focus and she could have by thirty-six been in a secure stable marriage and not divorced and an international joke in terms of certain types of behavior. She would have had so much pain behind her or avoided and she would still be alive and in the final steps to Queendom.
Camilla held on to Charles 'intimately,' but Diana could have superseded that if she had just grown up and developed a thicker skin like all women. Diana held all the cards in that she had the establishment on her side out of respect for being an aristocrat and also being Princess of Wales. She could have dealt Camilla a lot of blows if she had just stopped alienating herself from the people who just tried to help her maintain dignity worthy of the office/position and stopped running her life according to her feelings. She was not at all someone who was entitled to refuse to face concrete realities and deal with people according to who they actually were and not her image of them or the roles she assigned them in the narrative of her life. Diana lived her life according to a narrative and there is nothing more exhausting than being assigned a role and being pressured to act it out even if it has nothing to do with the reality of who the person actually is.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 24, 2022 16:48:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 24, 2022 17:24:30 GMT
Aside: Not true...
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 24, 2022 17:26:14 GMT
Aside: Nice how people who may not even been alive/aware of Diana when younger are suddenly royal experts?
I'm just getting that vibe here...
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 24, 2022 17:30:51 GMT
Aside: I can write about real royal mistreatment. THIS is not even on the radar.
Wishing Sussex stans would turn it down a notch? You don't seem to know royal history and quite frankly, should stop pretending that you do? You have NO idea?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 24, 2022 17:43:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Jul 27, 2022 4:43:44 GMT
Something I have now remembered to post:
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 27, 2022 12:09:29 GMT
Something I have now remembered to post: Wow!! And this is a review from 2003, but still seems very pertinent for today! Spot on...
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Jul 27, 2022 15:28:15 GMT
I don't think that someone's worth should be based on scientific progress, but I do believe that I am sick of hearing about how Diana had it rough. Throughout her numerous biographies and documentaries, it never focuses on all she had going for her. The biographies never dwell on her limitless wardrobe allowance, the fawning headlines, and the huge stock of jewels that she owned as consort to a crown prince. Then there is the fact that Diana never knew what it was to do without servants and not have a choice in the matter. Diana always had all that, plus people cheered her good life on. As for Jackie, she had a lot of privileges, but I am biased in favor of Jackie because unlike Diana, she knew she had a good life and knew there was a price to pay and she paid it to the full. Her lawsuits against the press were illogical (as most such lawsuits are) and I dislike how people write about both women as if they had a hard knock life. Sick and tired of hearing about Diana's 'burdens' as if she were the one writing her speeches and as if she were the one living a truly limited and marginalized life. She had supporters by the millions and she refused to even keep her troubles to herself or at least a therapist.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 30, 2022 15:04:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 30, 2022 15:06:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 30, 2022 17:29:22 GMT
www.celebitchy.com/777374/morton_its_ironic_that_prince_william_wants_to_posthumously_muzzle_diana/Morton: It’s ironic that Prince William wants to ‘posthumously muzzle Diana’ July 29, 2022 By Kaiser Prince William, Princess Diana, Royals On William demanding that the BBC never air Diana’s interview: “It is a supreme irony that it is her son who has led the calls to posthumously muzzle Diana, to silence her, to prevent her from being heard, from saying what she spent her life trying to articulate.”
Morton admits that Martin Bashir did fuel Diana’s paranoia: “Martin did contribute to her sense of paranoia, and her sense of being watched and so on. It was a febrile atmosphere at the time. We regularly swept Diana’s rooms at Kensington Palace for bugs. But Diana wasn’t the only one who was suspicious. The queen was baffled and concerned by the tapes that kept appearing. As well as the Charles and Camilla ‘tampon’ tape, there was ‘Squidgygate’ [in which Diana was taped talking to a friend candidly about a range of private matters] and a tape of [Prince] Andrew and Sarah [Ferguson] talking about their private lives. It’s understandable to conclude, when you have three intimate conversations by members of the royal family appearing on tape, that it is more than a coincidence, that it is a conspiracy.”
The Panorama interview is a historical record: “This is an important, historic interview that should be part of the public record. No accurate history or documentary of Diana can be made without referencing that interview. What she said was not an aberration; indeed, much of the ground it covered had been revealed in my book, Diana, Her True Story. For the BBC to lock it away in a vault is wrong.”
Diana had said all of it before: “The methods Martin Bashir used to get Diana to sit down and talk to him were underhand and deceptive, but the truth is that once the cameras were rolling, he didn’t twist her arm to say anything, and many of the things she said, such as discussing her bulimia, her suicide attempts, her husband’s relationship with Camilla Parker Bowles and the fact that she didn’t consider him fit to be King, were not aberrations. She was well known for saying these things to those in her circle, to the extent that they had become a kind of schtick. And they were all in my book, which had appeared three years previously. Panorama was a televised version of Diana: Her True Story. With the exception of the revelation about her affair with James Hewitt, Diana was only saying in that Panorama interview things that she had disclosed before to me.
Diana trusted the BBC to platform her story: “She very successfully used me to speak over the heads of the Palace ‘men in grey,’ as she called them, with Diana: Her True Story. Panorama was a similar attempt to reach over their heads and speak directly to her people—and it was a triumph. It is hugely ironic that somebody who tried so hard to articulate her message should find herself muzzled, after her death, by the very organization she trusted to deliver it, the BBC.
On Prince William’s claim that the Panorama interview made Charles & Diana’s relationship worse: “I’m afraid that is just not at all accurate. To say their relationship was terrible is obviously an understatement, but it was distant and angry long before Panorama, hence the separation in 1992. It is true to say that the interview did lead to the formal divorce. But after the divorce, the relationship actually improved, not least because Charles was able to have a more relaxed life with Camilla.”
[From The Daily Beast]
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 30, 2022 17:32:31 GMT
www.celebitchy.com/777374/morton_its_ironic_that_prince_william_wants_to_posthumously_muzzle_diana/ Some comments:Noki says: July 29, 2022 at 8:43 am This is a message to Kate to never even think about doing any post divorce running of the mouth. Because he is infatuated with this in an unhealthy manner, Harry im sure wasnt happy about the Bashir aspect but Keenshot is losing the plot. Reply Slippers4life says: July 29, 2022 at 8:53 am The more I think about it, the more I believe Kate is trapped in this abusive nightmare. I’m starting to think they dress her in buttons and wiglets on purpose. I still think she is a bully too. I still think she needs to be held accountable for how she treated Meghan and likely others. Two things can be true at the same time. I believe Kate is both abused and abusive. Reply C says: July 29, 2022 at 9:02 am I don’t see how that tracks and never have. Honestly, William protects her from a lot even if they aren’t close anymore. She’s allowed to spend as much as she wants and work as little as she wants and there are very few real repercussions and he’s made it clear before that an outright attack on her is an attack on him. This was made clear when Meghan wanted to correct the crying story: William expressed that his wife was “never to be dragged into idle gossip”. This is about William wanting to quash any ability for people to see what Harry meant when he said “I am my mother’s son”. Kate has never in her life ever wanted to rock the royal boat and wouldn’t know how to if she did. She was always desperate for their approval to the exclusion of real family togetherness, which was the polar opposite of Diana. Geegee says: July 29, 2022 at 9:11 am Bullies have often been bullied themselves. Becks1 says: July 29, 2022 at 9:13 am William only protects Kate in so much as protecting Kate protects him (which at this point means he protects her a lot.) while I think they can’t stand each other, I think as long as Kate is willing to play the game and not raise a fuss, William will continue to protect her. We saw the Queen reward Kate for keeping her head down when the Rose story first broke. I think that probably happens on a smaller basis on a regular basis in their marriage. William has private dinners at a club with a female friend, Kate picks herself out some new jewelry.
Do I think Kate is happy? IDK. Do I think her marriage seems healthy? No. Do I think she’s a victim of the royal machine? Sometimes. Do I think she uses that royal machine to hurt others when she can? Yes.C says: July 29, 2022 at 9:14 am And many bullies also haven’t been bullied. Kate’s been a bully since before she and William were ever even serious. And there are plenty of instances during the dating years.
I have an issue with the idea that Kate is suffering so she makes other people suffer. It’s kind of on the same lines as people insisting both she and Meghan cried and I object for the same reasons.Becks1 says: July 29, 2022 at 9:33 am @c I agree with you, I think it gives Kate an out she doesn’t deserve, similar to when people say things like “Kate has no choice but to do X.” Kate may be in a crappy marriage (of her own choosing, she knew William was an ahole when she married him) but that doesn’t excuse her actions towards Meghan, including letting her family trash her in the press. I used to be more on the side of feeling sorry for Kate because I would not want to be married to him, but I’m not there anymore. I can think that Kate is in an unhappy and unhealthy marriage AND think that she’s a garbage person who treated her SIL like crap. The former does not by any means excuse the latter and I think that’s the line that gets blurred sometimes in these discussions.C says: July 29, 2022 at 9:39 am Totally agree, Becks1. Personally I think “abuse” is not quite the word, because these people are all abusing each other and their children and I don’t think Kate is a victim in this dynamic. It’s absolutely not on the lines of what she has unleashed on Meghan and I think it’s kind of the same as when Cambridge fans equate when Kate got followed by some paps on her 25th birthday to the harassment Meghan has faced since the news she was dating Harry broke out up till today. Kate has never had to cry in bed from suicidal ideation because she felt the whole world despised her or her children were being racially abused so “nightmare” is not the word I would choose for her life. Watson says: July 29, 2022 at 10:19 am As much as i do think Kate is a terrible human being I do think she is also living a terrible life. For years, she even had her fashion identity stripped away from her through her Diana cosplays, and insecurity about Meghan. The only thing she has any control over is her weight, which we can see the consequences of. Ultimately she will never leave her gilded cage because she knows nothing else as her sole purpose for over a decade has been to obey her mom and be Williams doormat. All her spite will continue to be dispersed to Meghan and any other woman who is free, and independent, and celebrated for her looks or loved for their intelligence. It’s so depressing. Kate just depresses me.
C says: July 29, 2022 at 10:24 am If you look at William’s passing out parade in 2006 she was already cosplaying Diana by then. Some of her Boodles Boxing Balls dresses around then were also Diana cosplay. And her strapless black velvet dress right after she married William to cosplay Diana’s black velvet dress right after she married Charles. Earlier than that, she was cosplaying Jecca, before she and William were even established in the papers. I don’t think her identity has been stripped honestly, but that’s me. This is just who she is. Jan90067 says: July 29, 2022 at 10:53 am I do see what your saying. I’m thinking (and while never *excusing* her actions) Kate has literally been groomed from childhood to follow Carole’s orders/idea for her life. Remember, Carole was a HUGE Diana fan. I’m thinking she always had in her mind an idea for steering her girls to nab W or H. Pippa has a LOT more going for her (more moxie, more intelligent, more drive), and she was able to rebel/resist more than Kate.
Kate was aiming for W since her teens, with Carole steering that ship every step of the way (changing schools to get the girls in with W’s crowd, calling mothers to get Kate invited to parties with that crowd (this has been reported!). She had her do her gap year where she thought W would be, changed colleges to be with him, majors… She was *so* indoctrinated to nab W, by that time, I’m sure she thought it was HER idea!
I think with 2 decades of Carole’s pushing her daughter into W’s path, laser focused, and these last 2 decades *still* being propped up by Mummy Dearest controlling large aspects of her marriage/kids, Kate really IS a Stepford wife.
And I do think, as an amateur Psychologist (BS degree lo) that Kate has a LOT of anger in her. A. LOT. At Carole. But since she can’t take it out on Mummy, she’s always directed it on others, that she felt she could bully and put down. And she’s become a Gold Medalist at this. I just think she is a bundle of anger and resentment, esp. when she sees how Pip’s life has turned out.Nic919 says: July 29, 2022 at 11:00 am Nope. Kate choose this life and chased it for years. During that time she was a bully to the York sisters and cut off anyone who wasn’t going to help her achieve her goal of securing a ring. She knew exactly what she was choosing when she married William. And even if she saw it was somehow different than she originally thought, she can still at this very moment get a divorce. Diana set the precedent as princess of wales and kate isn’t even at that level yet. Kate is choosing to stay because she wants the title and the access to privilege. No one is forcing her to stay and no one forced her to participate in the smear campaign against her own sister in law. Kate is not a victim here. She may have a terrible husband but she remains because this is what she wants. Stop infantilizing this adult woman who has made the same choice over and over again for close to 20 years. She has the power to leave if she wants, in fact she’s getting Adelaide cottage because she has some power here. But she’s not getting a divorce because she is prepared to compromise. So again it’s not a choice most women would make, but it’s her choice and she is not a victim.
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Jul 31, 2022 0:50:24 GMT
I do not judge Diana for having struggles, but I resent her burdening others with them. She never learned how to shoulder her own issues and as for silencing his mother, Diana is dead and has been silent for two decades. Diana is not coming back and quite frankly, she has fans putting out yet another stupid documentary and lately all I see is a young girl who had it all, moved up to a prominent position, and then threw ti all away. She was taken advantage of as a teen, but she had resources to deal with it. Notice how throughout her entire narrative, nothing was ever her fault. If she had not shredded Charles or insulted the nanny, she would still be married and about to become Queen Consort.
Diana is dead and never coming back and she should stay dead instead of the living burdened with carrying her throughout their lives. The dead are dead and have no right to harass the living or chain themselves to the living. Neither Harry or William are her keepers and Diana has been honored more times than she deserved. She lived a life of excessive privilege, married into extreme privilege, and her last meal was held at a plush hotel suite and sipping champagne. As for the press, she played with fire and she burned down the credibility of the unquestioned succession. She burdened her son William with the 'duty' to restore an "HRH" to her that wasn't hers to begin with, it is a title that goes to the legal wife of the Prince of Wales. Not Diana.
Her biggest flaw was her refusal to let go. To let go of her childhood, her victim mindset, her self destructiveness, and her illness. if she had participated in treatment early and thoroughly, she would have ended up healthier and maybe still married. She had a lot of resources and a lot of supporters and she had so many who sincerely cared about her. She had a free ride through life and blew it and ended up dead in a Parisian underpass and it was a degrading death for a woman who was slated to be Queen Consort of Britain and the entire (then) sixteen nation Commonwealth. The entire planet at her feet and she threw it all away on being a good time girl. Her last year was her making a sexual spectacle of herself with sleazy men and her two young sons were likely humiliated.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 14, 2022 16:06:55 GMT
www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11110157/Dianas-bodyguard-says-shed-alive-duty-night-diedPrincess Diana's bodyguard she nicknamed 'Rambo' believes the royal would still be alive if he was on duty the night she died - saying he would always insist they wear seatbelts Former bodyguard Lee Sansum, 60, protected Diana during 1997 St Tropez trip Burnley-born ex-Royal Military says she would still be alive if he'd been on duty It's claimed no one wore a seat belt in Paris crash but Lee says he'd have insisted By HELEN ROBERTS FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 08:43 EDT, 14 August 2022 | UPDATED: 11:04 EDT, 14 August 2022
A former bodyguard of Princess Diana, who she nicknamed 'Rambo' after the 80s action character, says he believes she would still be alive if he had been on duty the night she died. Lee Sansum, now 60, opened up in an interview with The Sun about the night the royal, alongside Dodi Fayed, was killed in a car crash in Paris on August 31, 1997. He discussed how no one in the vehicle was wearing seatbelts - something he says he always insisted on.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 14, 2022 16:08:35 GMT
www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11110157/Dianas-bodyguard-says-shed-alive-duty-night-diedSome comments:Mamie Watts, Denver, 3 hours ago Yes, seat belts, but a sober diver would have been helpful as well. ReplyNew Comment 7413Click to rate 2 of 6 repliesSee all replies Gidds, Somewhere here, 30 minutes ago Miss Dior - the RF did NOT remove Diana's security - Diana herself refused them, as she was paranoid they were spying on her based on the lies Martin Bashir and the BBC fed to her. Diana chose not to have her own security and more importantly chose not to wear a seat belt. Trevor Rees Jones was the sole survivor- because he chose to wear a seatbelt. 020Click to rate John R D Martin, KIngs Lynn, United Kingdom, 26 minutes ago Miss Dior, Diana chose to dispense with her royal protection officer, possibly directly due to Bashir making her believe she was being spied on. 012Click to rate Hughbeach0624, Nowhere, United States, 3 hours ago Well the bigger issue is allowing a drunk guard to drive her ReplyNew Comment 10300Click to rate Lizziebd, Quad Cities , United States, 3 hours ago It's been 25 years. Stop. ReplyNew Comment 12273Click to rate sandiexx, Wellsboro, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago Ken Wharfe, Diana's former protection officer who looked after her for six years, recalled how he tried to dissuade Diana from renouncing all of her royal bodyguards after splitting from Prince Charles...to no avail. She chose to give up her security. ReplyNew Comment 5235Click to rate AVCE64, Victoria, Australia, 2 hours ago She was lied to even about this - told her PPO's were reporting what she was doing to the palace, which they were not. 438Click to rate By me for me, England, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago Diana would have been perfectly capable of making her own decisions. She chose who she had as security and whose car she got into. Diana made the decision to get in the car with an unknown drunken driver and to not wear a seatbelt. Diana died because of her actions. ReplyNew Comment 21210Click to rate jojo313, Steyning, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago Allegedly her seat belt wasn't working 7511Click to rate Coulas Canbee, Calmsville, 2 hours ago You have just made that up! 322Click to rate minuitmeow, Hue, Vietnam, 3 hours ago IT WASN'T SEATBELTS OR NO SEATBELT @ FAULT; IT WAS THE BOTTLE: The CHAUFFEUR WAS DRUNK. ReplyNew Comment 20157Click to rate Gidds, Somewhere here, 29 minutes ago But the Seat belt would have saved her - the dole survivor was the only person wearing one 015Click to rate Anglosaxon15, Leicester, 3 hours ago More concerning now is that William and his whole Family travel together in either one Helicopter or one Aircraft . ReplyNew Comment 10143Rated MineOpine, Anywhere, United States, 3 hours ago They need to remove Harry from the line of succession yesterday! If anything were to happen, he and Markle would bring the monarchy down before Harry could be installed as king. Harry has tra$hed his family and his countrymen as ra*cists and more and as a result of these attacks would never be accepted in that position.
|
|