Wasn't Princess Di just a gold digger?

[moaterboat]

I admit, modern British culture and the Royal family is not exactly my area of expertise, but I read through the wikipedia article on princess Di and here is what I gleaned from it

Born into a rich family descendant from royalty.

Let a very privileged upbringing

Married a prince

Cheated on him

Went on to have relationships with other wealthy men.

What has she actually done to contribute to society? Why was she regarded so highly? I'm not trying to say she was a bad person or anything, I'm just hoping someone can explain to me what all the fuss is about.

[ManaX]

There are two sides to every story, you should watch the film which basically tells you why. Either you didn't read much or you missed out the part where:

-Charles only married her because he needed a wife, he was really in love with a married woman called Camilla (who he married anyway after she died)

-Charles never paid attention to her, and was never really in love with her. Princes diana was 19 when she got married, very few people know what love really is that young.

-It's rumored Charles at one point denied that the children were his and that they were someone elses just because they were ginger

-he refused to hold them, and even now is not very fatherly with them

-oh and apparently he was cheating too during their marriage with you know who (Camilla).

- Diana's death was most likely a conspiracy, she divorced Charles and was going to marry Mohamed Al Fayed (son of harrods). They didn't like that the previous wife of the king was getting married to him (for various reasons) and so killed them both.

Conclusion, do the research before you jump to conclusions, She was NOT a gold digger, her life was very sad, :(.

[moaterboat]

First of all, no reason to get upset, I clearly stated that I asked this question looking for answers very much like the one you posted. In response to you comments I will say that cheating is never justified, even if her husband cheated on her. I don't guy into conspiracy theories, especially when the given explanation makes perfect sense (limo driver was drunk and crashed, stuff like that happens all the time).

[moaterboat]

Also, none of what you said shows that she wasn't a gold-digger she bounced around between several wealthy men. What else would you call that?

[ManaX]

Her family was quite rich too from ancestry. You tell me which poor man would be willing to chase after a woman who is a princess/was married to the king, and where would they meet? Of course she's used to luxury, she was already related to the royal family. How is the average guy going to protect her without the money to do so?

I don't really believe in conspiracy either but it didn't come out of nowhere, there is enough reason for the royal family to have wanted to kill her. They hated her.

[Darkfairie17]

Prince Charles also cheated on his wife. Their marriage dissolved and they both decided to go their separate ways. They both cheated on each other. What Diana did do, was she did do a lot of charity work. Especially for people suffering from AIDS and HIV. But I think people were fascinated by her because she was in some ways a celebrity. She also gave people a glimpse into the royal life. A lot of people want to know what it is like to be a royal and to have that fairy tale wedding. That is what the hub bub is about with all this royal wedding stuff.

[justlilly]

Princess Di also did a lot of things to help the poor and underprivileged as well as destitute people in third world countries. You can say that isn't much, but let's face it, that is a lot more than we can say for the rest of the royal family.

[moaterboat]

Hey, a well thought out, logical answer. From a fellow American no less. I guess being a decent human being put her so far above the rest of the royal family that the British people fell in love with her. That makes sense.

[Yeahhbro]

No she wasn't a gold digger, it was charles who lured her to be his wife and also when they broke up, she didn't get anything from the royal family, as the matter of fact they dispised her. And in her protection Charles cheated on her first with his misstress or this other women I don't know. Diana did a lot of charity work and was pretty humble as well. Funny thing is that Diana was more popular than Charles and the Queen herself. And the relationship she had with other wealthy guy was just after she broke up with Charles no harm there.

Plus if you were a woman and some really rich guy offered you to be your boyfriend would you not take the offer?

[moaterboat]

The wikipedia article said she got an apartment on palace grounds for the rest of her life, plus the fame that came with being the mother of princes. Sounds like she made off better than most divorced women.

[Yeahhbro]

off course she divorced charles, who wouldn't get that much media attention? And yes I guess she got an apartment but nothign else, I mean nothing compared to what she used to have before. I don't think she was a gold digger to be honest.

[moaterboat]

It isn't so much the marriage to Prince Charles, like you said, what woman would turn down a chance to be a princess? But after the marriage ended she continued to date only wealthy men. That doesn't give me the impression that she was a down to earth, lovable, genuine person that everyone can relate to.

[KarKingJack]

Lol, you seemed to have gleaned a lot of negative things, from that article, haha. That's all her personal life, though. I mean, that should be nothing of our concern, you know? She did a lot of work for the homeless, and a lot of work with sick people and poor people and stuff, to my knowledge. Which is pretty cool for someone of her social standing, like. She was the first person of that persuasion to do it for a reason other than, like, to make herself look good, pretty much.

Although, I certainly don't think she deserves the whole goddess-like worship she receives. That's just 'cos she died and everyones english. Hahaha.

[KarKingJack]

Although, I think its worth me saying, if that worship was coming my way I wouldn't try and stop people, deserving or not, so you know. I'm all for it, really, even though its a bit annoying.

[oneforthetruth]

How can you say cheating can never be justified. What about a woman, who is being beaten by her husband, and finds comfort in another man, who treats her with respect.

Most cheating is not justified, but some have a pretty good reason to.

Charles didn't love Diana, he married her because he needed a wife, think about that. Diana did love Charles, but he only was with her, to keep the Queen happy, he wanted Camilla. Think about that, being married to someone, who doesn't even LOVE you. Di was not a gold digger, like you say she was already privaledged, and birds of a feather tend to folk together. I am not actually a fan of hers, I'm not really a fan of the royals as a whole, but just because of her tital, doesn't mean she isn't human.

The simple fact is her life was not a happy one with Charles, and it wasn't happy, because he didn't really want her...

[moaterboat]

If a woman is being beaten by her husband, she should leave him. But that is beside the point. I can see your point that she was almost just a pawn in a scheme by the royal family to keep up appearances. You are the first person that actually made me feel sympathy for her. Maybe she wasn't a gold digger, but I have yet to be convinced that she is worthy of all the hero worship that is directed at her.

[oneforthetruth]

I guess a lot of people feel she did good in terms of the charity things she did.And she did do alot, but I can actually see your point, because I hate it when people call soldiers heros for a similar reason, back when people didn't know what war was like, I might have agreed..now I just think its you know the risk, yes you may be brave, but why would you want to go and kill other people for your country, which is effectively murder, but legal apparently, and get to call yourself a hero.

[tyt_2012]

You should not speak ill of the dead, that's very low of you.

[moaterboat]

That rule doesn't apply to public figures and royalty. People like that are more than individuals and are officially part of history, meaning we have a duty to analyze who they really were. Imagine how messed up this world would be if we ignored all the faults of all historical figures. Are we forbidden to talk about Henry VIII being a glutton, or Genghis Khan being a bloodthirsty warlord? Of course not!

You're being silly and illogical.

[tyt_2012]

Maybe I am, Maybe I`m not. The world will never know.

[Reallysorry]

If they're ill, it's OK to speak about them. The British royalty have always been wrteches.

[tyt_2012]

Take that back NAO!

[Shaun]

For that matter, what has the royal family 'done' to deserve all their wealth?

[cjwright79]

They are the natural leaders of otherwise pagan and ignoble tribes. Reading history is not always a bad thing.

[Shaun]

All I know about history is that the winners write it.

[moaterboat]

Very good point Shaun.

@cjwright79 I don't think the modern royal family is really deserving of the respect you heap upon it.

[Anonymous]

1. We all make mistakes

2. Nobody is perfect

3. She did a lot of humanitarian work and genuinely cared for people unlike most fake rich celeBRATies who only add their names to causes just to look good

4. Who are you to judge someone when you do not know them personally?

5. Why do you care?

[moaterboat]

1. yup

2. indeed

3. I keep hearing about all this humanitarian work, I did a little more reading, and yes she seemed to be a genuinely good person, but she still seemed to get into relationships with absurdly wealthy men, not just rich, disgustingly rich. Does that seem like the actions of someone who sees people for who they really are?

4. I am not judging, I am asking a question, I was very clear when I said I don;t know much about this topic

5. I'm curious.

[Opinion Owner]

I don't know about the wealthy men part and I don't really care, but anyway I do remember that they linked her to a male stripper and that makes her more of an interesting person.

[cjwright79]

I think you'll find that it's best-practice policy not to speak ill of the dead, at least not in a public forum. You hick.

[moaterboat]

speaking ill of the dead, you mean like this?

link

"Diana looked like damaged goods. She was damaged goods"

-cjwright79

I guess you are a hick and a hypocrite.

[cjwright79]

Well it's not her fault for being damaged.

But 'gold-digger' implies active subterfuge.

Nice try though.

[moaterboat]

You are horrible at backpedaling. Just admit you are a hypocrite.

[cjwright79]

You believe what you have to believe.

Is 'damaged goods' unkind and unflattering -- sure.

Does it impute active malice? No.

Does gold-digger? I think it does.

[moaterboat]

Stop trying to make this more complicated than it really is. We both spoke ill of the dead. The difference is I realize it isn't a big deal, while you are trying to squirrel your way out of it. Please stop, I'm embarrassed for you.

[cjwright79]

Congratulations, you are a certified idiot. Blocked for narcissism.

[dontknowwhattodo3]

hahhahahaha...i agree with moaterboat...

[cjwright79]

Sorry, did you want to get blocked too? Just say the word sugarplum.

[rocksongwriter]

She cheated on Charles, but I think Charles cheated first.

[moaterboat]

That doesn't excuse her actions.

[rocksongwriter]

It excuses her from being a gold digger. I mean, your premise is that she married Charles for his money, then went off and banged other guys. But it wasn't like that. Diana had every intention of being faithful to Charles, but he cheated and that's what drove her to do the same. Had Charles never cheated on her, she never would've cheated on him.

[moaterboat]

It isn't so much the Charles thing, it is the fact that immediately after divorcing out of a royal family, she dated a respected surgeon link and then Dodi Fayed. Both those were within one year of the divorce. Any one of those relationships or even two could just be chalked up to genuine love and affection, but 3 rich guys over the course of a year, well what else would you call it?

[rocksongwriter]

I see what you are saying. But she probably had social pressure to date rich guys. I mean...could you imagine what the press would say about her if she divorced Prince Charles and started dating the french fry cook at McDonald's? They would think she was loony.

[SlickRicky]

What have YOU actually done to contribute to society?

[moaterboat]

Well, since you asked, I helped with the relief efforts with the 2004 Indonesia tsunami, I have give lots of money to charity, I donate blood, and I for the past 5 years I have been doing weekly volunteer work with autistic kids.

I'm sure there is more, but that is just a few things off the top of my head.

[dontknowwhattodo3]

wish we were all so modest...

[SlickRicky]

So I'm looking at your profile and it says you're a 31 year old nontraditional student at a state college- so would you really consider wikipedia as a reliable source for well... anything?

[moaterboat]

For simple things like what a famous person has done with their life, I think wikipedia is more than sufficient. Do you think it is unreliable? If so please explain. What vital information regarding the life of princess Di is missing from the article?

[moaterboat]

@dontknowwhattodo3 I am actually a fairly modest person. I don't normally talk about things like that, but I was asked a question, and I answer questions honestly, I'm sorry if my honesty offends you.

[melencoly]

Wow wiki as a reference! That is good.

[moaterboat]

Seriously, why all the hate for wikipedia? I know that if you want info on something complicated, controversial, or seriously important, it is good to find another source, but for something as inconsequential as the life of a celebrity, wikipedia is more than sufficient.

[melencoly]

Wiki is fine to start but should definitely not be the only source of information. Your summary is not really the whole story and that's likely because you only looked at wiki.

[moaterboat]

It wasn't my only source of info, it was my first source of info. After I read that I decided to find out more by going to a website frequented by lots of British people and ask for more info, which is exactly what I am doing here. Sure beats spending money on a biography and spending a week reading it.

[melencoly]

I wouldn't read the biography either. Don't forget we are all made up of three people; The person we see ourselves as, the person others see us as, and the person we really are.

[Reallysorry]

Actually, more like a diamond digger.