Harry and Meghan - OP updated with Threadbanned Users 4/5/21

dark crystal

JoChervil wrote: »

We really don't know what happened. What we do know is:
- she didn't introduce her fiancee to her father, what a wonderful daughter!
- he landed in the hospital (what could have been stress related)
- he didn't walk her to the altar (what each father would love to do and what could have been the result of the above, and the above - the result of her earlier treatment of him)
- she cut him off entirely
- she bad mouthed him in this interview

I don't see any of her losses in it but I see his great losses. And I judge the situation after the results.

Wow, you'd swear the poor, downtrodden man had all this misfortune hoisted upon him through pure chance or misfortune! Unbelievable!

If you really don't know what happened, you can track the timeline of when he started betraying his daughter back to three days before her wedding - that's when he got paid for the first set of paparazzi shots.

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a20674064/meghan-markle-dad-staged-photos-thomas-markle-royal-wedding/

He then says he had a heart attack - yet film shot by TMZ & the Daily Mail show him out buying fast food during the time he should have been in hospital. Not one shred of proof that he had a heart attack, either.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6813025/thomas-markle-heart-surgery-royal-wedding-made-up/

He then sold his first interview to the British press six weeks after the wedding.

He then sold the private letter his daughter had written him pleading with him to stop speaking to the press. He ignored her pleas and sold the actual letter to the Daily Mail.

He went on GMB and told his daughter's chief tormentor, Piers Morgan, that he would continue to speak to the media each month until his wayward daughter relented and talked to him. Yep, that's called blackmail.

He turned up outside Oprah's house looking for an interview. This was staged and photographed by The Sun.

https://www.thesun.ie/news/6762679/meghan-markle-dad-thomas-letter-oprah-interview/

But, yeah, Meghans the one totally at fault in that not at all toxic relationship. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

dark crystal

JustAThought wrote: »

I remember years ago when Harry was larking around in Afghniatan doing store supplies and ‘operations’ that his colleagues took the unprecedented step of complaining that his unnecessary and protected presence brought huge risk to them as a unit and made them unprecedented targets. they wern’t prepared to die as a by-product of a rocket launch 2k away so some terrorist could claim dibs on killing royalty who was really doing no real function there. I remember thinking how much they must have resented and despised him to come out with that to the media - a highly tracable and career ending move.

As for Harry who had to give up his half assed army ‘titles’ and was boo-hoo’ing over it - he does realise its more than an extension of Eton playing fields but with guns - that the men out ‘fighting’ swear lifelong oath to serve Queen and country and give up their lives and survive horrific mutilations and life changing injuries for their pledge to serve their queen and country.
The same one Harry wants nothing to do with but still wants the glory and pomp from and to brek decades old rules and established protocol to get princley titles for his son and their security bill paid. Not out of his millions thou - taxpayers pockets .

I wonder how all those mutilated soldiers feel watching him toss away all his duties and responsibilities and loyalty to the crown.

Quite the tirade - I take it you've served in the military yourself?

Anyway, here's a few comments from other people he 'larked about' in Afghanistan with had to say about him.

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a30514323/prince-harry-stepping-down-military-response/

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/u-k-veteran-says-prince-harry-defended-him-anti-gay-n1116671

But sure, you probably know better.

Be right back

dark crystal wrote: »

Wow, you'd swear the poor, downtrodden man had all this misfortune hoisted upon him through pure chance or misfortune! Unbelievable!

If you really don't know what happened, you can track the timeline of when he started betraying his daughter back to three days before her wedding - that's when he got paid for the first set of paparazzi shots.

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a20674064/meghan-markle-dad-staged-photos-thomas-markle-royal-wedding/

He then says he had a heart attack - yet film shot by TMZ & the Daily Mail show him out buying fast food during the time he should have been in hospital. Not one shred of proof that he had a heart attack, either.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6813025/thomas-markle-heart-surgery-royal-wedding-made-up/

He then sold his first interview to the British press six weeks after the wedding.

He then sold the private letter his daughter had written him pleading with him to stop speaking to the press. He ignored her pleas and sold the actual letter to the Daily Mail.

He went on GMB and told his daughter's chief tormentor, Piers Morgan, that he would continue to speak to the media each month until his wayward daughter relented and talked to him. Yep, that's called blackmail.

He turned up outside Oprah's house looking for an interview. This was staged and photographed by The Sun.

https://www.thesun.ie/news/6762679/meghan-markle-dad-thomas-letter-oprah-interview/

But, yeah, Meghans the one totally at fault in that not at all toxic relationship. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Why didn't Harry meet her dad at all? Was he really going to meet him for the first time just before the wedding?

retro:electro

I believe he only went public with the letter after Meghan’s five friends went to other outlets and leaked the contents of it and he wanted to set the story straight. I think he had it in his possession for months and never intended to do anything with it until her friends started blabbing. It’s actually the one thing I’ve sympathy with Meghan over, I can’t imagine the stresses of having your, lets face it, trashy father blabbing all over tv about you when you’re now one of the most famous women in the world. But he also did a lot for her, and he felt abandoned when she met Harry.

She should have done more to ensure he didn’t fall victim to the tabloid’s snare and it’s just shameful that she never introduced him to Harry. I think she was a bit mortified of him to be honest, maybe he doesn’t fit her aesthetic anymore. I think Thomas has handled some things woefully but equally Meghan had a duty to protect him and not abandon him in the midst of chaos. If she felt she was in over her head then surely she can empathise that he was too. But to sue ANL for publication of her letter to him and then go on Oprah and trash Harry’s family and have Gail King go on tv and relay a private phone call to the world surely has to be hypocrisy in its truest form? Maybe Meghan is more like her father than she would like to admit.

end of the road

JoChervil wrote: »

When you do it in time to please US public over UK public, so don't be surprised, if people and press in UK don't like you.

complete nonsense.
whatever her reasons for waiting to announce the birth, it does not justify anything, especially the ridiculous treatment.

retro:electro wrote: »

Denied by who? Oh come off it! Don’t be so ridiculous. Her security moved people who had already been sitting in their seats to make way for Meghan who turned up wearing jeans to an event with a strict dress code, another FU, I’ll do what I want. Very strange how Oprah didn’t ask her about this and those headlines weren’t shown. It was a turning point for many people.

again this is just speculation with no basis that you want to be true.
so far, nothing has been provided that is tangible to show her security moved those people on.
she went to an event wearing jeans, perhapse the event does have a strict dress code which prohibits such, or maybe it does allow them, but either way it's a non-issue and those in charge of the event obviously had no issue and that's their call.

the fact that gibberish like this was a turning point shows that really we have spoiled elements of the public pissed off because their little fairytale nonsense had some changes for once, and i'm afraid that says more about them then it does megan.

retro:electro

end of the road wrote: »

complete nonsense.
whatever her reasons for waiting to announce the birth, it does not justify anything, especially the ridiculous treatment.



again this is just speculation with no basis that you want to be true.
so far, nothing has been provided that is tangible to show her security moved those people on.
she went to an event wearing jeans, perhapse the event does have a strict dress code which prohibits such, or maybe it does allow them, but either way it's a non-issue and those in charge of the event obviously had no issue and that's their call.

the fact that gibberish like this was a turning point shows that really we have spoiled elements of the public pissed off because their little fairytale nonsense had some changes for once, and i'm afraid that says more about them then it does megan.

You said it was denied that security moved people from their seats. Who denied it?

end of the road

JustAThought wrote: »

I think you’ll find that if you look at the ‘contract’ between the taxpaying public and the royalty you will very much find there are financial payments from the public taxes to support and financially pay for them. Security, salaries, - cold hard cash.

The Frogmore fiasco was part of this - all those millions spent on upgrading a house they them chose to abandon, let lone the cost of their security, wedding, Harrys annual HRH income etc.

No wonder people have a pain in the a**** listening to them whinge about their misery and abandoning their duties and still wanting all the perks that go with it - houses, opening and attending prestige events, heading up preferred charities like the commonwealth brief and opera brief and F1 rallies and armed forces events.

I remember years ago when Harry was larking around in Afghniatan doing store supplies and ‘operations’ that his colleagues took the unprecedented step of complaining that his unnecessary and protected presence brought huge risk to them as a unit and made them unprecedented targets. they wern’t prepared to die as a by-product of a rocket launch 2k away so some terrorist could claim dibs on killing royalty who was really doing no real function there. I remember thinking how much they must have resented and despised him to come out with that to the media - a highly tracable and career ending move.

As for Harry who had to give up his half assed army ‘titles’ and was boo-hoo’ing over it - he does realise its more than an extension of Eton playing fields but with guns - that the men out ‘fighting’ swear lifelong oath to serve Queen and country and give up their lives and survive horrific mutilations and life changing injuries for their pledge to serve their queen and country.
The same one Harry wants nothing to do with but still wants the glory and pomp from and to brek decades old rules and established protocol to get princley titles for his son and their security bill paid. Not out of his millions thou - taxpayers pockets .

I wonder how all those mutilated soldiers feel watching him toss away all his duties and responsibilities and loyalty to the crown.

i'm well aware they receive funding from the public purse, that is what the public have decided, presumably on the basis that they bring in more then they take out.
frogmore was being rennevated anyway, it's a historical building belonging to the royal estate, so it was not going to be left.
they abandoned their "duties" they have no duties as far as i'm concerned, because they were forced out by the british tabloids and those who lap up their nonsense.
the real reason the "public" are pissed off is that their little fairytale entertainers decided they had enough of being people's plaything, and remember it's only a subsection of the public, most i suspect don't really care either way.
some members of the unit he served with expressing concerns about him being there and that they did not want the greater risk does not mean they didn't like him, it just means they had concerns, justified concerns, about him being there and the greater risk it would have brought to them.
i would imagine soldiers who have had the misfortune to experience injuries have varied views on the matter of him deciding to step back as a senior member of the royal family.

dark crystal

Be right back wrote: »

Why didn't Harry meet her dad at all? Was he really going to meet him for the first time just before the wedding?

He didn't bother attending her first wedding either, nor met her first husband beforehand. He didn't sell any stories about that, though.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

complete nonsense.
whatever her reasons for waiting to announce the birth, it does not justify anything, especially the ridiculous treatment.



again this is just speculation with no basis that you want to be true.
so far, nothing has been provided that is tangible to show her security moved those people on.
she went to an event wearing jeans, perhapse the event does have a strict dress code which prohibits such, or maybe it does allow them, but either way it's a non-issue and those in charge of the event obviously had no issue and that's their call.

the fact that gibberish like this was a turning point shows that really we have spoiled elements of the public pissed off because their little fairytale nonsense had some changes for once, and i'm afraid that says more about them then it does megan.

I take it that you are in team Meagain.
She clearly said that nobody knows but the wedding certificate that they have on their wall is the one performed secretly by the Archbishop in their back garden with no witnesses. A clear falsehood.
Their thrashing of the Royal Family is inexcusable, no matter what your opinion of the institution of the RF is.
As is her treatment of her own father. Imagine marrying someone without making any effort to meet both their parents?
Harry cones across as a weak individual. He’s cut himself off from his family. A decision that he will come to regret.
Never complain. Never explain. Or if you do offer an explanation, try and stick to the facts!

Be right back

dark crystal wrote: »

He didn't bother attending her first wedding either, nor met her first husband beforehand. He didn't sell any stories about that, though.

Apparently he did. This is a picture of them apparently taken at it.

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

I take it that you are in team Meagain.
She clearly said that nobody knows but the wedding certificate that they have on their wall is the one performed secretly by the Archbishop in their back garden with no witnesses. A clear falsehood.
Their thrashing of the Royal Family is inexcusable, no matter what your opinion of the institution of the RF is.
As is her treatment of her own father. Imagine marrying someone without making any effort to meet both their parents?
Harry cones across as a weak individual. He’s cut himself off from his family. A decision that he will come to regret.
Never complain. Never explain. Or if you do offer an explanation, try and stick to the facts!

i'm not team anyone really, just don't like to see someone being thrashed on the basis of nothing and nonsense that wouldn't even register as a first world problem.
her own father brought the loss of his relationship with his daughter on himself, how hard is that to understand? why should she continue to placate and have a relationship with someone who obviously doesn't value her? sometimes, just sometimes, people have to cut out toxic individuals, and doing so is necessary.
we don't know harry will regret his decisions, i get people might want him to do so as it suits their institution supporting viewpoint, but maybe in years to come it will turn out that he will have in fact made the best decision for him.
we won't know until he tells us, if he even does, given realistically it's none of our business.

retro:electro

end of the road wrote: »

i'm well aware they receive funding from the public purse, that is what the public have decided, presumably on the basis that they bring in more then they take out.
frogmore was being rennevated anyway, it's a historical building belonging to the royal estate, so it was not going to be left.
they abandoned their "duties" they have no duties as far as i'm concerned, because they were forced out by the british tabloids and those who lap up their nonsense.
the real reason the "public" are pissed off is that their little fairytale entertainers decided they had enough of being people's plaything, and remember it's only a subsection of the public, most i suspect don't really care either way.
some members of the unit he served with expressing concerns about him being there and that they did not want the greater risk does not mean they didn't like him, it just means they had concerns, justified concerns, about him being there and the greater risk it would have brought to them.
i would imagine soldiers who have had the misfortune to experience injuries have varied views on the matter of him deciding to step back as a senior member of the royal family.

Your posts can’t seem to grasp the concept that most people have no issue with them leaving. It’s complete sense and if they wanted to make their own path in life and live a life of privacy then more power to them, I would do the same myself. People take issue with and are confused about their desire to leave and not be reliant on public funds but not one year later go on Oprah and cry the poor mouth that at the ripe old ages of pushing 40 they’ve been forced to sign multi million dollar contracts with Netflix and Spotify because daddy Charles has cut them off. ( something that has apparently been disputed by Charles as he is alleged to have been privately supporting them this whole time)

The fact that they seem to want it both ways is what irks people. If you want to leave then leave! No one would blame you for wanting to raise your child away from the fanfare, but to allege that the institution is racist and cares little for those in the throes of suicidal tendencies and then at the same time moan because your son was not granted the title of prince by that very institution is pure ridiculous hypocrisy. If it’s so racist and uncaring then why would you want the title? They wanted the freedom to live in LA and shmooze with the likes of Oprah and The Clooneys with the benefit of having their backsides wipes by the RF as they shirked any duties, picking and choosing what they wanted to be involved in and carving a path of celebrity for themselves while capitalising on their Royal titles. Nobody in their right mind would begrudge anyone privacy if that’s what they wanted. But it’s not. They wanted to leave on their own terms while still reaping all the benefits even though they’re not working. If you can’t understand that at this stage there’s not many more multi quote marathons that will make it any clearer

end of the road

retro:electro wrote: »

Your posts can’t seem to grasp the concept that most people have no issue with them leaving. It’s complete sense and if they wanted to make their own path in life and live a life of privacy then more power to them, I would do the same myself. People take issue with and are confused about their desire to leave and not be reliant on public funds but not one year later go on Oprah and cry the poor mouth that at the ripe old ages of pushing 40 they’ve been forced to sign multi million dollar contracts with Netflix and Spotify because daddy Charles has cut them off. ( something that has apparently been disputed by Charles as he is alleged to have been privately supporting them this whole time)

The fact that they seem to want it both ways is what irks people. If you want to leave then leave! No one would blame you for wanting to raise your child away from the fanfare, but to allege that the institution is racist and cares little for those in the throes of suicidal tendencies and then moan because you’re son was not granted the title of prince is pure ridiculous hypocrisy. They wanted the freedom to live in LA and shmooze with the likes of Oprah and The Clooneys with the benefit of having their backsides wipes by the RF as they shirked any duties, picking and choosing what they wanted to be involved in and carving a path of celebrity for themselves while capitalising on their Royal titles. Nobody in their right mind would begrudge anyone privacy if that’s what they wanted. But it’s not. They wanted to leave on their own terms while still reaping all the benefits even though they’re not working. If you can’t understand that at this stage there’s not many more multi quote marathons that will make it any clearer

oh i grasp it where such is that actual viewpoint, but realistically viewpoints being held on that basis only are not the majority.
the fact they left in the first place is a major part in a lot of people's viewpoint and denying that reality isn't going to cut it with me, i'm afraid as you only need to look at this thread alone.
the reality is their supposed crying poor mouth and all else is the biggest non-issue going, the fact that erks people is simply down to people looking to be erked over nothing.

retro:electro

end of the road wrote: »

oh i grasp it where such is that actual viewpoint, but realistically viewpoints being held on that basis only are not the majority.
the fact they left in the first place is a major part in a lot of people's viewpoint and denying that reality isn't going to cut it with me, i'm afraid as you only need to look at this thread alone.
the reality is their supposed crying poor mouth and all else is the biggest non-issue going, the fact that erks people is simply down to people looking to be erked over nothing.

Are you ever going to answer this?

as for wimbledon, there is no evidence people were removed from their seats because she was there, it has been denied that this was the case and so far nobody has been able to provide anything tangible to prove otherwise, all we know is people apparently moved and that could have been for any reason including of their own accord.

Denied by who?

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

oh i grasp it where such is that actual viewpoint, but realistically viewpoints being held on that basis only are not the majority.
the fact they left in the first place is a major part in a lot of people's viewpoint and denying that reality isn't going to cut it with me, i'm afraid as you only need to look at this thread alone.
the reality is their supposed crying poor mouth and all else is the biggest non-issue going, the fact that erks people is simply down to people looking to be erked over nothing.

I have left (moved on from) a few jobs and a marriage over the last 50 years. I never, ever ridiculed those that I’d left. Respect those who employed you. Learn from your mistakes. Put them behind you and move on.

end of the road

retro:electro wrote: »

Are you ever going to answer this?



Denied by who?

it was mentioned back in the thread by another poster.

JoChervil

dark crystal wrote: »

Wow, you'd swear the poor, downtrodden man had all this misfortune hoisted upon him through pure chance or misfortune! Unbelievable!

Exactly unbelievable! In life the same as in crime films the culprit is usually the person who profited the most from the situation. And who profited the most from all this misfortune?

Even you can see that it is improbable. So it was very likely manipulated by the person, who profited the most from it.

dark crystal wrote: »

If you really don't know what happened, you can track the timeline of when he started betraying his daughter back to three days before her wedding - that's when he got paid for the first set of paparazzi shots.

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a20674064/meghan-markle-dad-staged-photos-thomas-markle-royal-wedding/

So the quote from your link:
"Whether or not Meghan's father benefited from the photos is unclear."

dark crystal wrote: »

He then says he had a heart attack - yet film shot by TMZ & the Daily Mail show him out buying fast food during the time he should have been in hospital. Not one shred of proof that he had a heart attack, either.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6813025/thomas-markle-heart-surgery-royal-wedding-made-up/

And who benefited from this situation? Meghan having all limelight for herself and Prince Charles walking her down the aisle

He then sold his first interview to the British press six weeks after the wedding.

He then sold the private letter his daughter had written him pleading with him to stop speaking to the press. He ignored her pleas and sold the actual letter to the Daily Mail.

He went on GMB and told his daughter's chief tormentor, Piers Morgan, that he would continue to speak to the media each month until his wayward daughter relented and talked to him. Yep, that's called blackmail.

Or that's can be called the only mean of communication left for him..

A
He turned up outside Oprah's house looking for an interview. This was staged and photographed by The Sun.

https://www.thesun.ie/news/6762679/meghan-markle-dad-thomas-letter-oprah-interview/

In contrast to Oprah's interview, which was all far from been staged....

But, yeah, Meghans the one totally at fault in that not at all toxic relationship. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Weirdly, it became a toxic relationship, when she wanted to marry Harry and her family didn't fit her new lifestyle

JoChervil

dark crystal wrote: »

He didn't bother attending her first wedding either, nor met her first husband beforehand. He didn't sell any stories about that, though.

Not true:
https://www.thesun.ie/news/3563094/meghan-markle-boasted-she-would-serve-marijuana-at-her-first-wedding-to-trevor-engelson-before-she-met-prince-harry/

“Guests included both Meghan’s parents Doria and Thomas, her only family members, as well as Suits stars Patrick Adams and Rick Hoffman.
…
The wedding was funded mostly by Thomas Markle and Trevor’s parents, but Meghan and Trevor picked up some of the costs themselves.”

https://extra.ie/2018/12/09/entertainment/celebrity/guests-were-gifted-marijuana-at-meghan-markles-first-wedding-claims-her-father
“Her mother Doria, and father Thomas, both walked her down the aisle, followed by a reception at the famous Jamaica Inn hotel.”

JoChervil

JoChervil wrote: »

Not true:
https://www.thesun.ie/news/3563094/meghan-markle-boasted-she-would-serve-marijuana-at-her-first-wedding-to-trevor-engelson-before-she-met-prince-harry/

“Guests included both Meghan’s parents Doria and Thomas, her only family members, as well as Suits stars Patrick Adams and Rick Hoffman.
…
The wedding was funded mostly by Thomas Markle and Trevor’s parents, but Meghan and Trevor picked up some of the costs themselves.”

https://extra.ie/2018/12/09/entertainment/celebrity/guests-were-gifted-marijuana-at-meghan-markles-first-wedding-claims-her-father
“Her mother Doria, and father Thomas, both walked her down the aisle, followed by a reception at the famous Jamaica Inn hotel.”

“ In an interview with the Mail On Sunday, Thomas, who is now estranged from Meghan and the royal family, claims guests were gifted marijuana at Meghan’s first wedding.

The guests were allegedly welcomed with a gift of a small fabric bag which contained a welcome note from Meghan and Trevor, along with a small plastic ‘baggy’ of marijuana.”

Keep calm and carry on.

retro:electro

[Deleted User] wrote: »

“ In an interview with the Mail On Sunday, Thomas, who is now estranged from Meghan and the royal family, claims guests were gifted marijuana at Meghan’s first wedding.

The guests were allegedly welcomed with a gift of a small fabric bag which contained a welcome note from Meghan and Trevor, along with a small plastic ‘baggy’ of marijuana.”

Keep calm and carry on.

Classy.

OscarMIlde

valoren wrote: »

My sister in law, a toxic narcissist, wasn't getting her way during a weekend visit to me in London in 2009 and had a meltdown which involved screaming abuse at me and involved threats of violent retribution from her family.

You've spoken about this before. I hope you're alright. That is such a horrible thing to go through, especially since obviously you feel bad for your brother, but also betrayed by him. It's such a tough situation. I commend you on holding firm and not giving in. It's really the only way of dealing with people like your sister in law. They will claim black is white and up is down if it suits them, and it becomes very easy to doubt yourself.

retro:electro

I would personally never challenge a narcissist, because they don’t know how to let things lie and the best course of action is to sometimes just say I’m sorry you feel that way and ignore and move on. They are completely incapable of introspection, will rewrite history to their benefit and will leave you open mouthed at how they rework events to place themselves as victims. It’s like their brains are wired in a completely different way. That’s why The Palace’s response was so perfect. Most people would back down or relent when faced with truth or fact, but to a narc it’s like a red flag to a bull. And the sad thing is that there is no cure —- and so they just leave a long line of destruction in their wake. I guess time will tell how things will play out for Meghan and Harry but I’m in 100% agreement that she is a narcissist who divides and destroys and plays the victim, and I’m entitled to that opinion as much as anyone else is theirs. I believe the truth will out about her soon. She has many fooled, that’s for sure.

extra gravy

retro:electro wrote: »

Classy.

She's Californian and they're not as uptight or as snobby about weed as some Irish people.

retro:electro

extra gravy wrote: »

She's Californian and they're not as uptight or as snobby about weed as some Irish people.

I smoke weed on an on and off basis. No issue with that at all. Handing it out at my wedding on the other hand.. to my parents and my husband’s parents and his family...

Yeah that’s trashy. In the same way I wouldn’t hand out naggins or packs of Marlboro lights

irishblessing

retro:electro wrote: »

I would personally never challenge a narcissist, because they don’t know how to let things lie and the best course of action is to sometimes just say I’m sorry you feel that way and ignore and move on. They are completely incapable of introspection, will rewrite history to their benefit and will leave you open mouthed at how they rework events to place themselves as victims. It’s like their brains are wired in a completely different way. That’s why The Palace’s response was so perfect. Most people would back down or relent when faced with truth or fact, but to a narc it’s like a red flag to a bull. And the sad thing is that there is no cure —- and so they just leave a long line of destruction in their wake. I guess time will tell how things will play out for Meghan and Harry but I’m in 100% agreement that she is a narcissist who divides and destroys and plays the victim, and I’m entitled to that opinion as much as anyone else is theirs. I believe the truth will out about her soon. She has many fooled, that’s for sure.

Wow, you don't know this woman and you certainly even have less of an idea as to any diagnosis. That said one can see enough from her publicly and the information that gets out about her to see that clearly she's a very decent and lovely person. She seems to have "fooled" everyone but a few nasty's like Piers Morgan and people obsessed with trashing her on boards, lol. How on earth did she manage to do that to the people who know her best and worked with her for years too. She must be exhausted by it all. :pac:

extra gravy

irishblessing wrote: »

Wow, you don't know this woman and you certainly even have less of an idea as to any diagnosis. That said one can see enough from her publicly and the information that gets out about her to see that clearly she's a very decent and lovely person. She seems to have "fooled" everyone but a few nasty's like Piers Morgan and people obsessed with trashing her on boards, lol. How on earth did she manage to do that to the people who know her best and worked with her for years too. She must be exhausted by it all. :pac:

The boards experts know her better than her friends and colleagues sure, they even think they're "entitled" to diagnose her with a personality disorder. Strange bunch, no point arguing with them though.

valoren

You often get the deflection that people are not qualified to diagnose people with personality disorders and thus their opinion consequently holds no weight. Take for example Trump. It's pretty much a given that the man is an overt narcissist. You don't need a qualification to see that he is. However, if say you have a high level understanding of how a car engine works do you need to be a qualified mechanic to be capable of determining that something is wrong with the engine, that it needs to be looked at? You won't be able to fix it but you can certainly tell that something is wrong. It's the same analogy here with Meghan. You have someone who was afforded a platform, who was welcomed but who has subsequently managed to split a family apart, who has cast racial aspersions on a family and has made no admission of their personal culpability or their own contribution to any of it. Red flags galore. My interest in this is purely in highlighting that Cluster B personality disorders are an important aspect of mental health which when unchecked can be very destructive but they're an aspect of mental health which, from my experience in consuming media, is seldom spoken about.

Here's an example from the interview. Consider the below statements and ask yourself which one will garner a reaction from social media, will generate headlines and discussion in the print press and media, will invite questions for clarification, will invite attention.

1.    “Nobody knows this but three days before the wedding we rang the Archbishop of Canterbury and we asked if he could perform a private rehearsal of our wedding vows. He was kind enough to do so and it was a beautiful memory for us both particularly before the full spectacle days later of the wedding day. We have those vows framed in our room. It was like a fairy tale.”

2.    “You know, three days before our wedding, we got married. No one knows that. But we called the archbishop and we just said, ‘Look, this thing, this spectacle is for the world but we want our union between us.’ So, the vows that we have framed in our room are just the two of us in our back yard with the archbishop of Canterbury.”

I would think that Meghan is smart enough to grasp that she wasn’t formally (or legally) married three days before the actual ceremony or that feeling married does not make you actually married. The first is a description of the standard practice of going through a wedding rehearsal. It would get lost in the “bombshell" scope of the interview with the only noteworthy aspect being that it involved the Archbishop. The second is a provocative description of actually getting “married” in secret while the ceremony three days later was for show and good for business. For someone who wants to seek privacy and who loathes press attention, she has a funny way of inviting that attention upon herself. You'd think it was all deliberate. It’s subtle narcissism like this which totally piques my interest.

extra gravy

extra gravy wrote: »

The boards experts know her better than her friends and colleagues sure, they even think they're "entitled" to diagnose her with a personality disorder. Strange bunch, no point arguing with them though.

You don't think her friends/colleagues in the entertainment business might have a vested interest in being fake? I don't think any of the actors have had much success apart from Suits? I might be crazy but I suspect they see her sitting on the couch next to Oprah, signing deals with Netflix, and probably they are seeing networking opportunities and dollar signs when they view her. So they play it safe and be fake so as not to burn that bridge.

retro:electro

irishblessing wrote: »

Wow, you don't know this woman and you certainly even have less of an idea as to any diagnosis. That said one can see enough from her publicly and the information that gets out about her to see that clearly she's a very decent and lovely person. She seems to have "fooled" everyone but a few nasty's like Piers Morgan and people obsessed with trashing her on boards, lol. How on earth did she manage to do that to the people who know her best and worked with her for years too. She must be exhausted by it all. :pac:

There have been plenty of people who have come out over the years who say she is either not as she seems or that she has dropped them as friends once she made it big. Staff, family, and friends alike. Not just “Piers Morgan and a few people obsessed with trashing her on boards”. She’s even being investigated for bullying staff members. So yes, she must be exhausted by it all.
Time will tell.

irishblessing

It's not a deflection to call it what it is. - mean spirited armchair psychology. It's a ridiculous pursuit no matter who it's levelled at. Nobody has absolutely any business imputing a mental disorder on another person. It's desperate carryon to even try to defend that, it's a nonsense and everyone knows it.

And what would you call an obsession with frequenting an online thread all day every day in order to tear down another human being? Must be a diagnosis somewhere in there...

1/2. Getting married to an American means something different as they are able to get married up a tree if they wanted to. What's important are the vows and intentions. No-one is married until the license is lodged with the registrar so technically everyone's idea of "getting married" is skewed towards the ceremony, the vows, the intentions. See how that works? Slating her for no reason other than to impose bad intentions on her in order to pick her apart. Why can't some of you just let them be and wish them well...