Thanks for the reply. I love having someone with inside knowledge.
BTW, what do you think of the theory that Prince Harry is not the biological son of Prince Charles?
Thanks for the reply. You are right but I only asked out of curiosity. Looking it up, the theory appears unlikely. Princess Diana's affair with James Hewitt apparently only started after Prince Harry was born. Also see the pictures at . Note Prince Harry looks more like Prince Philip than Prince Charles does.It's possible, but not really important. Charles and the Family accepted Harry as legitimate, and Charles acted like a father. Therefore, to all intents and purposes, he is the father. Who provided the sperm is irrelevant if that is a detail the family don't care about.
Honestly as social norms change, if Diana was still alive, I suspect the public would be increasingly revaluating her position in her marriage in the same way Monica Lewinsky has been somewhat reevaluted.
And I think that is for the simple reason that she was 19 and he was 32 when they started seeing each other.
And like I have to say, as someone in my mid 30s who works in education, I know what I think of people my age who date teenagers. And I would not have a huge ammount of sympathy for someone who did that and then found his bride was immature and flighty.
It's interesting to ponder the late 90s in the uk without her death, anyway. It's difficult to trace direct consequences but it was such a huge event in pop culture and the british psyche that it must have changed a bunch of things.
Honestly this seems like a more interesting and plausible scenario, I'd be curious if it's a bit like Clinton where Charles gets flack continually but it changes from "how dare he divorce the People's Princess" to "why the fUCK did he start dating a 19 year old"
I think we'd have a period of Diana as aging banal figure of mockery, right up until Andrew's scandals start to come out. That's when "wait didn't Charles also--" starts to come up, because even though it's not legally or morally the same thing it's enough for a take. Whether it'd fully catch on I think depends on what Diana's doing at the time and if that makes her a 'bad victim' for some.
It depends on how he frames things or if they (somehow) reconcile
That's possible, they might have to come to some sort of accord because of the kids and grandkids (as unlike most divorced couples, if they're not it leaks to the Sun)
It'll probably involve a bit of "fuck the fam kinda did us dirty" I suppose, in a "fuck MAYBE if they cared more about us than about respectability they would've let me/you and Camilia marry and gotten over the respectability/finding a Acceptable Match thing long enough to pull you aside and tell you that this age and life experience gap was not going to work out and it wasn't fair to let either of you pursue something this doomed"
Instead of discussing what in all probability would happen, I say, we should just try to come up with something really funny.
Like, have Diana get involved more and more into political causes, leading to her joining Labour under Tony Blair, and being elected to Parliament, finally making it into the cabinet. Brown still loses in 2010, but this time, it isn't a Miliband that takes over the Labour leadership, but ex-Princess Di, who leads Labour to a landslide victory in 2015.
And now, as Prime Minister, she begins engineering to get her revenge! Like, proper House of Cards style!
If we're doing that scenario, we want it to be like Truss- Diana meets the Queen, who promptly carks it, and the next day Prime Minister Spencer has to proclaim King Charles.
May I say that I'm still trying to get my head around the idea of Diana as PM. I know Britain has had some PMs of questionable quality, but if you think Johnson was facile, superficial, self-obsessed, and with only a passing acquaintance of the concept of truthfulness, well, compared to Diana, he was a model of probity.
Oh, I'm not saying that it is likely, quite the contrary.
