Princess Diana - useless. She was a princess, but instead of holding her head high, she was catting around?

Question

with non-Brits no less. They had to change the law, because she was supposed to be beheaded for adultery. And charities said she wasn't worth the effort toward the end. So why was she so great? Seems to me she was a lousy princess, which is what she chose to be.

Answer 1

i think Diana was mesmerized by prince Charles and all that went along with it...I didn't read anywhere before or after the marriage that Diana thought she was in anyway pretty...she looked very pretty in all the beautiful clothes provided for her.

The royal family didn't want her to participate in some of the charities Lady Di attended...they didn't want her to pick up or hold the diseased children. I think she did wonders for the royal family and helped their imagine.It was plain to see she was the most popular of all the royalty.I don't know why Prince Charles married her,and keep his s**t of a girlfriend too..I guess because he could.I think it was unfair to Diana,and he should have stopped it...why didn't he just marry the old Camilla in the first place? I think they fought over her alot...I think she was so depressed over her marriage,and she had every right to be,that she just didn't care...and who blames her?

Answer 2

She was hardly catting around. She was very private about her relationships after that dorky Charles. It is that she was so popular, is all. She was young, outspoken and well liked, by everyone, well except you. She wasn't afraid of change. She was a BIG draw for charities. She was a public figure who photographed well. So, why the hatred?

Answer 3

Are you forgiving Charles' infidelity? Don't split hairs. She was a great woman, in a miserable marriage. Evident from day 1.

Being happy with one's life has a lot to do with everyday decision making. You can almost make the arguement that if Charles had been a better husband, instead of a momma's boy, Diana might still be with us today.

Answer 4

I am sorry but the Princess has passed on...please let her rest in peace....what ever happens, happens for a reason....& now its all in the past..

Answer 5

No wonder your nick is heart_and_troll. Or is that heart OF a troll??? Please respect the departed and focus your ramblings to those who are STILL alive and COULD make amends while there is still time. Why are you barking at ashes is anyone's guess. Good luck purifying your cluttered mind.

Answer 6

Thank you.  Adultery on the part of the princess is treason because, in the days before DNA tests, a cheating princess could give birth to an heir not of the royal blood - an impostor.  Charles had Camilla, but Diana had maybe 9 lovers, at least one of which I know was married and at least one marriage that the wife blamed the divorce on Diana.

She chose to be a princess, even though she knew Charles' number before the wedding.  The cost of a hymen was very pricey.

Answer 7

should't charles be beheaded as well? he was go around with camilla while married to diana

Answer 8

a working job would be great for you to get

Answer 9

The flesh is not good ,does no good  at all and it defiles GOD .

But  we have a honorable king of kings and LORD OF LORD WHO IS PERFECT.

Answer 10

The Royal family looked down on her from day one because she was "not their kind".  To them, she didn't fit in their mold,she was too modest, too caring about other people and too down to earth. She didn't hold her head snobbishly in the air like snobbish Royalty, she was far too kind-hearted for that.

Princess Diana, was a true blessing to many lives....

Compassion and service to others, especially to the sick, the weak and the hurting, are more valuable qualities to be admired/esteemed over a smug heart and parading oneself as "Royalty" above others. I pity those who do.

Diana cared enough about others, to risk what people might say, and bend the rules.

A true Princess serves the needs of others, and does not ask that others serve her needs. She doesn't sit high upon her throne and look the other way, while there are unmet needs in the world or turn her head away from the broken-hearted,

Diana visited the needs of the hurting & sick children.  She held them in her arms, and visited them regularly.  She brought smiles and joy to many! Even though people criticize her for it, she followed her heart. That takes strength & good character to do that. And to me, THAT, is what gave her Royalty. When odds were against her, she did the best she could with what she had, and in my eyes, and in the majority of the world's eyes, these things,are the very qualities that made her a true Princess, worthy of honor, grace, & respect!

And as far as the marriage scandal goes, no one truly knows the truth of this except Diana and God. No one does, until they've walked atleast  one mile in another person's shoes.  Chances are, if we could do this, we wouldn't be so quick to throw stones.

I say, let Him who is qualified be judge- and let the one who is without sin cast the first stone....

http://www.princess-diana.com/diana/quee...

http://www.time.com/time/daily/special/d...

**The worst part of what's being said about her life and making these kinds of accusations about Princess Diana,  is that she's not even here to defend herself!. People really should be more careful what they say about the dead.....Besides, is it fair to spend so much time and energy arguing over  the dead & buried in this world, and ignore the living?

Answer 11

I agree.  She was *portrayed* by the media as beautiful but I didn't buy it; she had a big nose, was gangly, and had only an average figure.  I always thought she was a gold-digger; certainly she was never compatible with Charles (although he knew it - he knew that his marriage was always going to be something that had to please the crown and the public before himself).  Diana discovered the harsher realities of being in line to become queen, and mother to the next heir to the throne, and she couldn't deal with it, nearly killing herself behind closed doors.  What did she expect?  Did she think it was going to be *only* a life of glamour, photo opportunities, glitzy banquets, galas, royal performances, etc.?

As for her being a good mother, I despute that.  She did no more than average.  I can easily imagine her doing what the McCann's did with their daughter, swanning off somewhere leaving her children behind (although, of course, hers *would* have had someone looking out for them).  At the time of her death she was off gallivanting with her loving in another country from her boys.  She was quick (and media savvy) to produce a documentary with, was it Martin Bashir? when she was found out cheating on Charles; trying to portray herself as the wounded party.  Ooh, poor Diana, with her life of luxury, her every want and need catered for until the end of her days, dabbing at her pristinely made up eyes and batting her eyelashes for the cameras - Diana - 'photograph me holding that sick child' - Princess of Wales.  She used the media when it suited her, moaned when it didn't, and gained all her fabulous press on the back of it - and then people had the gaul to suggest that it was the photographers who caused her death!  She should have had more brains than to allow a drunk driver to take her anywhere.

Was she a 'lousy princess' or 'useless'?  It seems to me that she was the best they ever had, at least as far as bringing in royal revenue was concerned.  The majority adored her (more fools them) and were willing to overlook her failings; she sold an awful lot of magazines, I'm told!  She *was* worth her salt to charities (for whatever her being associated with one actually does).  Yet, what constitutes a *good* princess?  For me, this would be one who was at least publicly faithful to her husband, generally kept out of the public eye, and worked like a trojan for her fantastically privillaged lifestyle.  1 out of 3 (at best) doesn't cut it, so yes, she was a lousy princess!

Answer 12

An empty-headed bimbo who loved money and fame and fun.  O.K. she was a good mother, but isn't that what you are supposed to be?

Answer 13

What about what Prince Charles was doing? He wasn't faithful either!  He IS a lousy prince

Answer 14

I THINK THIS IS A MORONIC QUESTION!

Answer 15

Well, first off, her private life is really none of our business. Whether she was or wasn't 'catting around', is nothing to any of us and can only be of interest to her husband, family and the others directly involved.

As for the charities she supported, they have continued to do quite well off her, even raising money by selling her old clothes until fairly recently when (for the first time), a garment did not reach the reserve price ~ which was, incidentally, almost four times what the charity had paid for the frock. Doubtless they will sell it and make their money back at a later time.

I do think you may be incorrect in saying she was a 'lousy' princess. If her private moral behaviour is all that a princess is judged by (a very Victorian attitude, btw!), perhaps you are correct. But that is not all there is to any person. She was a devoted mother, a kind and caring patron of the various unfashionable charities (such as AIDS awareness) which she brought to the forefront of public attention, and provided interest for many millions of people for many years ~ an interest which continues today (albeit more and more morbidly).

Whether or not she was 'great' is open to opinion, but 'lousy' is taking the matter way too far.