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

ceadaoin.

end of the road wrote: »

there was no middle finger to anyone.
people choose to line the streets and the public want to fund the royal family.
the public expected the over the top expensive wedding, it was a spectical for them.

Except they weren't entitled to that spectacle. They are the ones who demanded the same budget as William and Catherine had. They could have had the type of wedding they apparently really wanted without any issues. Harry isnt the heir to the throne, he doesn't have any of those expectations. Don't you think its a bit off to demand something and then complain about it after getting it?

Be right back

end of the road wrote: »

there was no middle finger to anyone.
people choose to line the streets and the public want to fund the royal family.
the public expected the over the top expensive wedding, it was a spectical for them.



good article? more like a whinge fest by a hasbeen still upset because he didn't get an invite.
time for him to put on the big boy pants and get over it, the wedding was what? a few years ago at this stage.

I don't think anyone would have expected a big, over the top wedding if Harry and Meghan didn't want one.

irishblessing

superflyninja wrote: »

If you think its unfair people are now judging H&M based on the interview, do you not think it unfair that she is effectively doing the same to the RF? Very publicly, giving her opinion on the situation, throwing out racist accusations amongst other things?
Don't forget, most, if not all of this discussion is brought on because Markle did the interview in the first place.
She threw her husband's family under the bus on an Oprah interview, televised across the world.

She has come out and willingly given the interview. So that makes it fair game for discussion. I dont need to be Dr Fraiser Craine to see how she has twisted the facts to suit her and the very clever, vague way she presented the information. She made it sound that she and her family were singled out, denied security and titles because she was mixed race. Which is quite untrue apparently and something she would have known prior to her marriage.

To me its a huge red flag that she did the mud slinging interview in the first place, it also is apparent from the interview that she got a great many things wrong, whether knowingly or not and we also got to see how she presented that information. Taking all that into account, she does not come out of it well and only gives weight to all those stories about her dropping friends, so many staff leaving etc.

Do we know for sure? No. But her actions speak louder than words.

You know Harry was there too, right? You know he has said this was his decision he made for his family and he is speaking up also. The misogyny here is ridiculous. Bet this comment triggered at least 5 of you. :pac:

Ms2011

Be right back wrote: »

I don't think anyone would have expected a big, over the top wedding if Harry and Meghan didn't want one.

Considering how people reacted to them not putting Archie on display on the steps of the hospital like Kate had done with her 3 children I think people would have felt just as snubbed if they didn't have a big wedding too.

Leg End Reject

irishblessing wrote: »

You know Harry was there too, right? You know he has said this was his decision he made for his family and he is speaking up also. The misogyny here is ridiculous. Bet this comment triggered at least 5 of you. :pac:

Harry has been criticised as sitting beside her like a gormless lapdog.

Don't start the misogyny nonsense, there's enough threads for that already.

retro:electro

Ms2011 wrote: »

Considering how people reacted to them not putting Archie on display on the steps of the hospital like Kate had done with her 3 children I think people would have felt just as snubbed if they didn't have a big wedding too.

There is a happy medium between having a small private affair and demanding a £32 million pound wedding with a listers you’ve never even met in attendance. The food alone cost half a million and the marquee to house all the a listers was another half a million. A marquee for one night, costing more than most people’s houses.
They could have still have had the small affair they wanted after the televised event. That way everyone gets what they want. Nobody forced them to go through with the spectacle and their attitude towards it it’s pathetic. It was only a spectacle because they insisted it be one. The public don’t see much after the church so what they did after that was totally up to them.

Be right back

Ms2011 wrote: »

Considering how people reacted to them not putting Archie on display on the steps of the hospital like Kate had done with her 3 children I think people would have felt just as snubbed if they didn't have a big wedding too.

Did they? I always felt sorry for Kate having to do that but was it expected of her as her kids are next in line whereas Archie isn't.

Ms2011

Be right back wrote: »

Did they? I always felt sorry for Kate having to do that but was it expected of her as her kids are next in line whereas Archie isn't.

Yes, Meghan not doing the whole standing on the hospitals steps after giving birth was seen as another snub and shirking of yet another royal tradition.

chooseusername

Ms2011 wrote: »

Yes, Meghan not doing the whole standing on the hospitals steps after giving birth was seen as another snub and shirking of yet another royal tradition.

Archie is a changeling , don't you know!

end of the road

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Except they weren't entitled to that spectacle. They are the ones who demanded the same budget as William and Catherine had. They could have had the type of wedding they apparently really wanted without any issues. Harry isnt the heir to the throne, he doesn't have any of those expectations. Don't you think its a bit off to demand something and then complain about it after getting it?

no no, to be clear, i was referring to the public.
the public expect the over the top royal wedding and it is a spectical for the public's benefit.
sure, they possibly could have had the wedding they wanted without issues on the RF'S part, but no doubt the tabloids and their readers would have been whinging like nobody's business had they gone with a low key affair.
ultimately they had to have the spectical wedding or else, just look at the whinging because megan didn't pose on the steps just after giving birth to show off the baby.

retro:electro

Nobody forced them to spend £32 million and invite a load of a listers they barely knew. Their disdain over the spectacle they created is quite laughable. Didn’t Meghan have a tantrum because she didn’t get to wear the tiara she wanted. The most expensive Royal tiara in their possession, no less.

dark crystal

retro:electro wrote: »

Nobody forced them to spend £32 million and invite a load of a listers they barely knew. Their disdain over the spectacle they created is quite laughable. Didn’t Meghan have a tantrum because she didn’t get to wear the tiara she wanted. The most expensive Royal tiara in their possession, no less.

It's a bit disingenuous to suggest a big wedding wasn't something the public wanted. A Royal wedding is a great money spinner for the British economy. I think I read it brought in the region of approximately 1 billion to the British economy or thereabouts. The Royals themselves love a bit of public pomp and splendour.

No idea about the tiara thing, but I suspect this story was probably 'leaked' by an 'insider' to some tabloid or other.

Edit: The tiara wasn't the most expensive it seems - that was Eugenie's.

https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/fashion-news/royal-wedding-tiara-expensive-641101

Ms2011

retro:electro wrote: »

Nobody forced them to spend £32 million and invite a load of a listers they barely knew. Their disdain over the spectacle they created is quite laughable. Didn’t Meghan have a tantrum because she didn’t get to wear the tiara she wanted. The most expensive Royal tiara in their possession, no less.

Did she? Just like she made Kate cry??

The venue they had their wedding at could accommodate 800 people, there were 600 at the wedding, wonder why they didn't stuff another 200 A listers they didn't know into the church seen as how they are such dictating people who demanded as big a spectacle as they can get.

end of the road

retro:electro wrote: »

Nobody forced them to spend £32 million and invite a load of a listers they barely knew. Their disdain over the spectacle they created is quite laughable. Didn’t Meghan have a tantrum because she didn’t get to wear the tiara she wanted. The most expensive Royal tiara in their possession, no less.

they weren't "forced" as in "if you don't spend that money we will whatever" but it was most certainly expected that they would put on a show wedding for the benefit of the public, who expected a show.
being forced to do something can come in many forms.

retro:electro

dark crystal wrote: »

It's a bit disingenuous to suggest a big wedding wasn't something the public wanted. A Royal wedding is a great money spinner for the British economy. I think I read it brought in the region of approximately 1 billion to the British economy or thereabouts. The Royals themselves love a bit of public pomp and splendour.

No idea about the tiara thing, but I suspect this story was probably 'leaked' by an 'insider' to some tabloid or other.

Edit: The tiara wasn't the most expensive it seems - that was Eugenie's.

https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/fashion-news/royal-wedding-tiara-expensive-641101

It was Eugenie’s tiara that she initially wanted. :pac:
She was told no as Eugenie already had it reserved for her wedding six months later. This is where the famous “what Meghan wants, Meghan gets” line came from. Harry said it to The Queen’s long standing dresser when she said she couldn’t have the tiara she wanted.
I also never said the public didn’t want a big wedding. I have never had any issue with her wedding actually, and I understand these things cost millions; the only ones who seem to have issue with Harry and Meghan’s wedding is Harry and Meghan.
I specifically said they could have had a small and private celebration after the televised event, if that’s what they wanted. I don’t understand why they would call their own wedding a “spectacle” when it is they who insisted it be so.

retro:electro

Ms2011 wrote: »

Did she? Just like she made Kate cry??

The venue they had their wedding at could accommodate 800 people, there were 600 at the wedding, wonder why they didn't stuff another 200 A listers they didn't know into the church seen as how they are such dictating people who demanded as big a spectacle as they can get.

Yes. It’s pretty well known information that there was a row over the tiara. It’s even written about in Finding Freedom.

walshb

Ms2011 wrote: »

Did she? Just like she made Kate cry??

No no no...

Kate made her cry.......Meghan thankfully cleared up this such serious and important news for us..

Now, you won’t hear anything whatsoever about crygate from Kate...

Possibly, because as a grown woman, she doesn’t feel any need or urge to give it a second thought..

Or, maybe she just doesn’t see any reason to divulge any personal interactions they may have had to the whole world..

You know, trying to be above such petty trashy gossip..

Being regal n all.

dark crystal

retro:electro wrote: »

It was Eugenie’s tiara that she initially wanted. :pac:
She was told no as Eugenie already had it reserved for her wedding six months later. This is where the famous “what Meghan wants, Meghan gets” line came from. Harry said it to The Queen’s long standing dresser when she said she couldn’t have the tiara she wanted.
I also never said the public didn’t want a big wedding. I have never had any issue with her wedding actually, and I understand these things cost millions; the only ones who seem to have issue with Harry and Meghan’s wedding is Harry and Meghan.
I specifically said they could have had a small and private celebration after the televised event, if that’s what they wanted.

Where did that info come from?

Can't believe I'm actually debating tiaras!

suicide_circus

This thing was years in the planning

Ms2011

retro:electro wrote: »

Yes. It’s pretty well known information that there was a row over the tiara. It’s even written about in Finding Freedom.

There was most likely a discussion surrounding the tiara like there was a discussion about the flower girl dresses but the exact conversation will never be known. Is requesting a particular tiara the same as demanding?

dark crystal

walshb wrote: »

No no no...

Kate made her cry.......Meghan thankfully cleared up this such serious and important news for us..

Now, you won’t hear anything whatsoever about crygate from Kate...

Possibly, because as a grown woman, she doesn’t feel any need or urge to get very it a second thought..

Curious where the story came from in the first place though. Such a private moment and yet it somehow gets leaked to paint Meghan as the agressor.

Would make you think.

Ms2011

walshb wrote: »

No no no...

Kate made her cry.......Meghan thankfully cleared up this such serious and important news for us..

Now, you won’t hear anything whatsoever about crygate from Kate...

Possibly, because as a grown woman, she doesn’t feel any need or urge to give it a second thought..

Or, maybe she just doesn’t see any reason to divulge any personal interactions they may have had to the whole world..

You know, trying to be above such petty trashy gossip..

Being regal n all.

Ok my 'Kate crying' analogy just went completely over your head there!

retro:electro

dark crystal wrote: »

Where did that info come from?

Can't believe I'm actually debating tiaras!

It’s been reported on a lot over the years

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1326069/meghan-markle-prince-harry-tiara-royal-wedding-angela-kelly-the-queen-finding-freedom/amp

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.thesun.ie/fabulous/6663754/truth-prince-harry-what-meghan-markle-wants-outburst/amp/

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1326002/Meghan-Markle-tiara-wedding-Queen-latest-Princess-Eugenie-Greville-Emerald-Kokoshnik-tiara/amp

walshb

dark crystal wrote: »

Curious where the story came from in the first place though. Such a private moment and yet it somehow gets leaked to paint Meghan as the agressor.

Would make you think.

But seriously, who the fook cares? Did it even happen?

We are only hearing it from Markle.

These stories and innuendo and gossip have been around since eternity, and some far more salacious and damaging and scandalous...

It’s utterly pathetic that Markle even thought of this kind of strategy in that interview...

“I didn’t make her cry, she made me cry.” What absolute trash that is..

It just beggars belief...

walshb

Ms2011 wrote: »

Ok my 'Kate crying' analogy just went completely over your head there!

No, it didn’t. But my reply went over yours!!!

dark crystal

retro:electro wrote: »

It’s been reported on a lot over the years

It’s been reported on a lot over the years.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1326069/meghan-markle-prince-harry-tiara-royal-wedding-angela-kelly-the-queen-finding-freedom/amp

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.thesun.ie/fabulous/6663754/truth-prince-harry-what-meghan-markle-wants-outburst/amp/

Sorry Retro, but both those publications are staunch anti-Meghan rags in fairness. I'd take anything they reported about her with a large pinch of salt!

dark crystal

walshb wrote: »

But seriously, who the fook cares?

These stories and innuendo and gossip have been around since eternity, and some far more salacious and damaging and scandalous...

It’s utterly pathetic that Markle even thought of this kind of strategy in that interview...

“I didn’t make her cry, she made me cry.” What absolute trash that is..

It just beggars belief...

Yeah, whoever leaked that story wanted the public to care. Seems to have worked a treat on many.

retro:electro

dark crystal wrote: »

Sorry Retro, but both those publications are staunch anti-Meghan rags in fairness. I'd take anything they reported about her with a large pinch of salt!

You’re entitled to feel that way. Strange she never sued though.. or felt the need to clarity these “mistruths” (if they are so) on Oprah!

walshb

dark crystal wrote: »

Yeah, whoever leaked that story wanted the public to care. Seems to have worked a treat on many.

Me, personally would take any these type leaked stories with a pinch of salt..

Source this and source that. Such contrived embellished nonsense most the stories are..

And, even if it did happen...who the fook goes on a chat show to tell the world? How pathetic is that, knowing it was a private moment, and knowing the other person will not be commenting on it?

And even if Markle HAD to tell us, why not simply say it never happened. I did not make Kate cry. And leave it there..

dark crystal

retro:electro wrote: »

You’re entitled to feel that way. Strange she never sued though.. or felt the need to clarity these “mistruths” (if they are so) on Oprah!

In fairness, if she sues she gets bashed and if she clarifies false stories with Oprah she's called a liar or childish, so she really can't win!

There were so many negative stories, I honestly doubt there would have been enough time to cover them all. Oprah was the one who asked her about the Kate story, so she was only responding to the question asked. She wasn't asked specifically about the tiara rumour.