In November 1995, Princess Diana sat down with Martin Bashir for a recorded interview that the whole world saw and no one in power wanted to give her.
For fourteen years she was universally the most sympathetic woman. He held dying AIDS patients when no one would touch them. He walked through active minefields in Angola. She experienced everything, apparently, without apology – and used every bit of the institution she married into. His warmth made monarchy palatable. Her tenderness made the story bearable. His compassion was the thing that kept everyone looking, everyone believing, keeping the whole performance going when the cold machinery beneath it quietly put him down and called it duty.
Then he sat down in that chair, looked directly into the camera and said: “There were three of us at this wedding.”
He did not become cruel. He was not angry. He didn’t break down on camera and give them versions they could discard. He became specific. She named the thing just right, calmly, with the characteristic steadiness of a woman who has finished exploits and begun to see. And the institution that had built its entire recent history on its softness had absolutely no idea what to do with its clarity.
I deliberately did not think of Diana the night it happened to me.
I was sitting next to him—the bar, the kitchen table, the teacup I hadn’t even touched—watching him explain himself with the fluency of someone who had explained himself many times before. And somewhere in the middle of a sentence I’d heard in various forms over the years, I noticed I felt nothing. not anger not sad Not even less, the familiar pain almost felt and then not quite.
just nothing
Clear. Calm down. absolute
And then, inexorably, unprepared, Diana comes into my head. Not Diana in a wedding dress. Diana in the chair. Still. specific Done with absorbing. And I thought: Oh so this is what it’s like from the inside.
I felt everything he felt. It was never love. It was labor.
This part was the longest I sat before I could write it without jerking.
I thought my sympathy was love. I thought I could feel his feelings, guess his moods, adjust all my inner atmosphere to his without asking him — I thought that was what a deep connection felt like. What it was like to be a caring partner. What is happening, as I have been told and believed many times, A lot to handle But also uniquely understood seemed like
What it really was, I realize now, was a system completely working in his favor. Brought emotion. I process them. He created unrest. I absorb it. He made a wound. I felt it, named it, tended to it, resolved it back—and waited for the next one, because there was always the next one.
Diana did it for fourteen years on a scale that was public and documented and watched by millions who called it mercy. We saw his absorption and adjustment and handling and retention, and we called it grace. We don’t call it labour. We didn’t call this a woman slowly drained by a system that identified her empathy as its most useful resource and had no plans to replenish it.
Dr. Judith Orloff, whose research on empathy in intimate relationships came long after I needed it, describes it. Compassion without borders – The complete obliteration of the line between the other person’s mental state and your own, until you can no longer identify where they end and you begin. I recognized every sentence. I was living that dissolved life so long I started calling it love.
It was not love. It was the most efficient unpaid labor arrangement I had ever agreed to — and I agreed to it before I knew what I was signing.
I thought I loved him deeply. All I was really doing was driving him completely – and he had no intention of learning to drive himself.
Darkness is not anger. It’s precision. And precision was something he was never prepared for.
When I imagined what it would feel like to finally stop exploiting, I felt anger. Some of the volcanoes. Years of compression find a seam and split it open.
It was not anger.
Diana was in this chair. The special clarity of a woman who has withdrawn her investment — who sees something she’s pouring herself into and sees it for the first time, just as it is. Without feeling layered on it. Without the hope of distorting the edges. Without compassion softens every sharp corner into something enduring.
i saw him Not the version of him I’d been feeling my way through for years. Real architecture. Long ago I arrived at patterns running in a loop. The way every conversation comes back to the same center. The way repairs always incur a cost until I’ve already paid it.
My therapist once, on a Tuesday afternoon in the chair by the window, said something that I’ve returned to many times: “The clarity you’re looking for from him is already there. It’s something you can remember in every interaction—if you look at what happened rather than what you felt when it happened.”
Compassion overshadowed transparency for years. When it rose, what was below was not dark. It was sight.
Finally, vision.
Diana did not become cruel. He became clear. There is a version of this available to every woman who has spent years feeling for someone who will never stop.
It’s especially hellish for him — and here’s exactly why.
Your empathy wasn’t just a personality trait. This particular dynamic, it had infrastructure. It was what the whole thing functioned to be.
He needed to feel for you because he couldn’t feel for himself – not the depth or consistency needed for a sustainable relationship. He needed you to absorb the discomfort his behavior created so he never had to sit inside it to change. He needed you to reach across the void, because reaching told him he was still at the center of your world.
When your empathy turns—when you stop reaching out, stop absorbing, stop translating her emotional reality into something manageable—the machine stops. And for the first time, he’ll have to feel the weight of his own behavior without you on the mattress.
He is not equipped for this. That is the point. He specifically created a relationship with someone who was equipped, so that he would never have to be.
Nor was the institution equipped for Diana’s clarity. That’s why the interview broke something beyond repair. He spent fourteen years feeling, present, human energy that made the whole operation work. The moment he withdrew—the moment he stopped showing warmth for a structure that had none—the structure was completely exposed.
He will do everything in his repertoire to make your sympathy available again. To make you feel guilty for your own persistence. To reframe your clarity as coldness, your accuracy as cruelty, your reticence as proof that you were, he suggested more than once, is difficult at all.
It is the last move of something that has run out of other moves.
Priya told me this once, watching me describe a relationship with the flat stillness of one listening to the weather forecast: “The scary thing isn’t who you end up with. It’s how comfortable you are when you get there.” He was right. I was so fluent in her emotional language that I forgot I had my own.
When you remember your own language, what he sees is the first honest mirror held up to him.
He will hate it.
well
I was afraid of my own silence. I want to tell you why that was the wrong response.
What I felt at the kitchen table scared me at first because it felt like a loss. Like the part of me that felt deeply that finally years of feeling too much that felt too little.
I thought: What if I broke something in myself?
All I know now is that I didn’t break anything. I redirected it. Sympathy is not lost. It has ceased to be available — specifically, selectively, precisely — to one who is treating it as a resource while contributing nothing to its supply.
It showed up three days later when a co-worker cried in the break room and I stayed an hour without checking the time once. It turned out when my aunt called, exhausted, and I couldn’t hear exactly what she was saying. It appeared in every direction except the one pointed out over the years – and in every direction it turned, it worked exactly as it always had.
Diana’s sympathy did not disappear after 1995. The following year he walked through the minefields of Angola. He decided in the world that people were untouchable. He felt as deeply as ever—he only ceased to direct that depth to the institution which was draining it.
Your empathy is not broken. It’s not as dark as you fear. It’s just no longer available to someone who used it as a utility without an off switch
That’s not a loss.
That is intelligence.
Nothing you feel when you look at him is the absence of your depth. It is your depth, finally, to protect yourself.
Let’s
–
This post was Previously published at medium.com.
Love affair? We promise a better stay with your inbox.
Subscribe to get dating and relationship advice 3x weekly.
do you know We have 8 publications on Medium. Join us there!
***
–
Photo credit: Provincial Archives of Alberta at Unsplash
