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

Itssoeasy

end of the road wrote: »

i guess they don't want to and are happy as they are? would harry and meghan's rolls require filling anyway as there is plenty between charles, kate and william to go round.

It’s a case of them not been given the option it seems but that was on the belief that Prince Harry and his future wife(decision was made prior to him getting married) would take on more roles so you’d think whatever they plans were for them need to be filed and if the British royal family wants to get younger, then getting the next generation involved seems like a logical step. But that’s me seeing it from outside Britain and at 35,000 ft as it were.

JoChervil

Sardonicat wrote: »

So it's democratic by not being subject to democratic process? Okay......

It is democratic in that way that is represents people sympathies.

Not so many decisions are made in a direct way through referendums (like it is in Switzerland). Most political decisions are made in indirect way through elected people and these people are elected in a democratic way, so yes in my opinion it is democratic.

valoren

Thinking about the "friend" speaking to the press and the “it’s what Philip would have wanted” is a good example of engaging in safe emotional manipulation. The Duke is dead. We can’t know if this reconciliation was actually what he wanted. It translates as “forgive me and welcome me back or else you’re snubbing the Duke’s wish”. The tone deafness of this originating from someone estranged with the majority of her own family is telling. As such, this is the sort of toxic sniping which is a cornerstone of manipulative people. To exploit the death of a senior royal is an opportunity. The probability is that the RF won’t seek to make amends after what happened and those supportive or sympathetic towards Meghan can determine (and get validation) that the RF are truly so cold that they wouldn’t follow the wish of a dying man, that their words about the Duke should strike as hollow. This isn’t obviously the reality at all and you need to be quite gullible to not see that this "friend" is simply a flying monkey engaging in abuse by proxy. It's now playing the "I tried to reconcile but got rebuffed" card. How many cards are left I wonder?

superflyninja

jm08 wrote: »

I think you have missed the whole thrust of the interview which was really about the racist British press (I'd say tabloids except I'd include the Telegraph in there) and the lack of support they got from The Firm in dealing with this. The whole point of the question mark about the colour of the child from a RF was a fear of the British press (IMO).



Where does she say she wants to get away from the media spotlight?



As for doing the interview - that was a fight back at the British Press, not at the RF who are very angry with her because she took them to court and won.

High five! I got a response! Finally! Albeit one that didnt really address anything I asked.....

Ok, so I dont think the interview was primarily focused on the British tabloids. To me it focussed around Markle and the RF in the main.
Now, just for the sake of argument, imagine I agree with you on the primary focus of the interview (I don't, but thats fine). All those questions I asked about still stand. Doesn't change anything. So what do you say about those points?

Also, do you think it was the correct fighting back tactic to drop such an interview on the world? She made such a balls of it, the tabloids now have even more ammunition against her. That interview has done her far more harm than good IMO.

If I was to be REALLY cynical Id say she planned it to a tee, intentionally making mistakes/inconsistencies in order to drum up as much noise and debate around the interview as possible. Which definitely has worked.


Oh here are the questions I raised:
1) Was she right to do such an interview in the first place? Throwing her husband's family under the bus to the world?
2) What she said about her private marriage ceremony was totally untrue. What sort of light does that throw on the rest of what she said? Yes its easily explained as a private ceremony that held no legal weight but she specifically didnt say that. Its like she has that soft landing built into a lot of what she said.
3) All her talk about security and withheld titles for her children. She insinuated it was racially motivated when in fact the rules were in place for a long time. The result would have been the same no matter who Harry married. Are we to believe she didnt google this or have Harry and/or the RF staff explain it all to her?
4) The racial comment/comments. Was it even racist? What context was it said under? Or is it against the law now for a white person to say anything at all about skin tone under any circumstances?
5) Vaguely and publicly pointing a racism accusation at a small group of people. That tars all of them with the racist brush.
6) She wants to get away from the media spotlight? By doing an interview broadcast worldwide with Oprah Winfrey? By signing Neflix/Spotify deals?

Neyite

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I know they aren’t working royals as it stands, but given that it’s obvious the senior royals will need to step up, why couldn’t Prince Andrew’s daughters not step in and fill Harry and Meghans roles ?

I don't think there's a need for them really. Charles was planning to slim down the working royals anyway, so Harry would really only have had such a high-profile as a royal because he was the son /brother of the monarch. If you think back to Margaret, It seems like they were looking at Harry being a similar support to the reigning king the way she was a support for her sister.

Andrew's girls are only titled as princesses because Andrew demanded it and the Queen caved, They should have been titled Lady instead. But he's always been an arrogant and entitled individual (at best) and given his recent scandals, I'd think lots of people would be deeply uncomfortable about him using his daughter's growing public profile being working royals as a backdoor way of redeeming himself. They seem to be nice enough women and are not at fault for the things their father did - it can't be easy to live with that so publicly, so they may not even want to be working royals. Right now they've got the best of both worlds - the occasional high profile outing, that link to Royalty, a few pet charities but otherwise they are free to do pretty much what they like and there's no Daily Mail following them on their 5th holiday of the year yelling for their heads.

In any case, Charles has none of the Queen's indulgence for Andrew and I would say he knows what a liability his brother is to his and William's role, so will keep him as far back in the background as he can manage.

Itssoeasy

Neyite wrote: »

I don't think there's a need for them really. Charles was planning to slim down the working royals anyway, so Harry would really only have had such a high-profile as a royal because he was the son /brother of the monarch. If you think back to Margaret, It seems like they were looking at Harry being a similar support to the reigning king the way she was a support for her sister.

Andrew's girls are only titled as princesses because Andrew demanded it and the Queen caved, They should have been titled Lady instead. But he's always been an arrogant and entitled individual (at best) and given his recent scandals, I'd think lots of people would be deeply uncomfortable about him using his daughter's growing public profile being working royals as a backdoor way of redeeming himself. They seem to be nice enough women and are not at fault for the things their father did - it can't be easy to live with that so publicly, so they may not even want to be working royals. Right now they've got the best of both worlds - the occasional high profile outing, that link to Royalty, a few pet charities but otherwise they are free to do pretty much what they like and there's no Daily Mail following them on their 5th holiday of the year yelling for their heads.

In any case, Charles has none of the Queen's indulgence for Andrew and I would say he knows what a liability his brother is to his and William's role, so will keep him as far back in the background as he can manage.

That’s incorrect as they are male line grandchildren of the monarch so under the rules they were always entitled to get a title. He didn’t need to demand anything at all. Princess Anne’s children could have gotten them because the queen wanted to do it, but Anne said no. And Edwards children had the same right as William and Harry due to being grandchildren of the monarch, but it was decided they wouldn’t get them. There’s a difference between not wanting them, and not been entitled to them. What Andrew is reported to have demanded, which may be where the confusing comes from, is he wanted his daughters to the working royals and charles told him in a upper class to go do one.

But yes Andrew has always come across as someone who believes people should like him just because and not for being a decent person.

Potatoeman

Sardonicat wrote: »

The mass hysteria over Diana's death baffled me. I lived in England in the 90s and she was regarded as a laughing stock by just about everyone I knew. If the RF hadn't caved and went for all that official and public mourning, they'd be gone. By caving into public pressure the essentially canonized her officially.

Dying was probably the best thing she could have done for her image. She was caught cheating on her husband then went on tv and blamed him for cheating first with no proof. All this when her sons were in boarding school and were not warned before hand. She also said Charles was unfit to be king. After the divorce she shacks up with a Muslim playboy who’s father is fighting with the government for years for a visa. Her son is the future head of the English church, was she going to come convert to Islam too? She seemed so intent on embarrassing Charles that she threw the whole family under the bus.

Megan in contrast didn’t like how things went then left the RF and gave a dig during a publicity interview insinuating racism. It’s not good but nowhere near the ****storm Diana created.

Leg End Reject

Potatoeman wrote: »

Dying was probably the best thing she could have done for her image. She was caught cheating on her husband then went on tv and blamed him for cheating first with no proof. All this when her sons were in boarding school and were not warned before hand. She also said Charles was unfit to be king. After the divorce she shacks up with a Muslim playboy who’s father is fighting with the government for years for a visa. Her son is the future head of the English church, was she going to come convert to Islam too? She seemed so intent on embarrassing Charles that she threw the whole family under the bus.

Megan in contrast didn’t like how things went then left the RF and gave a dig during a publicity interview insinuating racism. It’s not good but nowhere near the ****storm Diana created.

Charles was having an affair though, he continued his relationship with Camilla after his marriage. Diana's affairs came later.

The interview was a mistake, but she was lied to and that was, or is, being reviewed. It was unfair on William and Harry though, but Charles gave an interview after too.

The Muslim connection was problematic and has spawned the murder conspiracy theories.

Neither Charles nor Diana covered themselves in glory, but it's unfair to saw her death was the best thing to happen to her image. I'm sure she'd have preferred to be alive and raise her sons.

Neyite

Itssoeasy wrote: »

That’s incorrect as they are male line grandchildren of the monarch so under the rules they were always entitled to get a title. He didn’t need to demand anything at all. Princess Anne’s children could have gotten them because the queen wanted to do it, but Anne said no. And Edwards children had the same right as William and Harry due to being grandchildren of the monarch, but it was decided they wouldn’t get them. There’s a difference between not wanting them, and not been entitled to them. What Andrew is reported to have demanded, which may be where the confusing comes from, is he wanted his daughters to the working royals and charles told him in a upper class to go do one.

But yes Andrew has always come across as someone who believes people should like him just because and not for being a decent person.

Yes, they are princess regardless - but usual protocol is to style the title as lord/lady (eg, Lady Louise is a HRH and has princely title but is known as Lady Louise.) I read somewhere that Andrew wanted them to be styled as princess rather than Lady. I'll see if I can find that...



I agree - Andrew wanted the full security for his daughters to extend beyond their childhood, arguing that they were technically working royals because they attend some of the royal gatherings but they don't have official royal duties nor were they ever expected to, he was chancing his arm. He also asked for their future husbands to get titles so that his grandchildren would have titles and not be commoners. But that didn't happen.

Potatoeman

Leg End Reject wrote: »

Charles was having an affair though, he continued his relationship with Camilla after his marriage. Diana's affairs came later.

The interview was a mistake, but she was lied to and that was, or is, being reviewed. It was unfair on William and Harry though, but Charles gave an interview after too.

The Muslim connection was problematic and has spawned the murder conspiracy theories.

Neither Charles nor Diana covered themselves in glory, but it's unfair to saw her death was the best thing to happen to her image. I'm sure she'd have preferred to be alive and raise her sons.

If she didn’t die she would not be anywhere near a popular. It made her seem like a victim of the press when it was the driver speeding and splitting his attention on that caused the crash. It was lucky no innocent bystanders were killed.

Charles probably caused his own mess but he was never caught.

JoChervil

I actually believe Meghan is ready to put things behind her and move on. It is a natural consequence of uploading your load.

And it is a difficult situation. But for others. Because in life as well as we can observe here, when you upload your load, you feel ok till another person challenge you back. And a dispute can escalate into a quarrel easily, if response is too personal.

Here it is a different situation because it is asymmetrical. Both parties can’t behave in the same way. She uploaded her load. So she feels free and happy now, so she can easily forget about everything and move on. The same is with Harry. But everything is now in a RF court and they can do nothing about it. They can’t publicly rebut it. I think these remaining 4 could still try a legal action against Harry at this stage because Meghan heard racial remark from him. But they love him. And if they think, as I think he is a victim here, so they don’t want more troubles for him, so there is a little they can do to deal with it all. And taking family member to the court rarely ends well. I think they must have therapists to help to deal with such stuff to help them upload. But if you can’t do it in a direct way, it takes time. So any negative feelings created on RF side now won’t dissipate so easily. Also I suspect RF started something legal because this interview miraculously disappeared from CBS site and you can’t practically watch it again anywhere, only bits and pieces. I think CBS knows it is a bad egg.

It is a family feud, so it will be forgiven at the end but I don’t think H&M will ever be trusted again. Harry on his own can. He still has some integrity. He was ashamed during this part about wedding, wasn’t able to confirm or reject it, just said “just a three of us”. As well as he said about one conversation at the beginning of their relationship, so I think he can’t cheekily lie and if Meghan didn’t reveal this remark he wouldn’t do it. So on his own he can be trusted but as long as they are together any of them can.

But for sure the Queen will forgive him. She is old enough to know what matters and can see through people, so I think she has a big compassion for him, for both of them (I think all Meghan’s actions stem from insecurities, but it is her responsibility to deal with it instead of attacking others), while others will be more reluctant because they had been hurt much more. Also W&K have their own big family, so they don’t care much about Harry’s wellbeing. He is an adult and has made his bed in their eyes.

And it is all very complicated because if Meghan really bullied her staff with the help of her husband, so RF did a very wrong thing in protecting a bully. So trying to investigate it all can cause a huge part of blame fell on them as well. Ironically at the end they will probably pay exactly for that, what Meghan claimed they hadn’t done, for protecting her. So they will pay twice.

It is very difficult to fight with an in-law because you will hurt a family member married to them in a process. So there will be no winners at the end. Only public enjoyment and few bucks for Oprah.

walshb

Not sure if true, due to it being a friend/source, but the claim that Meghan is ready to forgive the RF.......Mother a jaysus......

JoChervil

walshb wrote: »

Not sure if true, due to it being a friend/source, but the claim that Meghan is ready to forgive the RF.......Mother a jaysus......

If someone was to do forgiving it would be RF, not them of course...

Neyite

I saw that headline too.

Maybe they wont want to be 'forgiven'

Be right back

walshb wrote: »

Not sure if true, due to it being a friend/source, but the claim that Meghan is ready to forgive the RF.......Mother a jaysus......

Why forgive the royal family when there's one person who made the remark?

walshb

Be right back wrote: »

Why forgive the royal family when there's one person who made the remark?

Indeed

Of course, not sure if true, but if it is, the absolute arrogance....

And as if the RF are sitting around praying for her forgiveness...

retro:electro

walshb wrote: »

Not sure if true, due to it being a friend/source, but the claim that Meghan is ready to forgive the RF.......Mother a jaysus......

It’s amazing isn’t it? Insightful into her character. Like I know I trashed your whole family on international tv while Philip was dying, accused member(s) of being racist and uncaring and not helping me when I was suicidal and not giving my son a title because he was mixed race, told the world Charles cut us off and said all of this without any proof but I’m ready to forgive you now.
Hilarious.

Be right back

walshb wrote: »

Indeed

Of course, not sure if true, but if it is, the absolute arrogance....

And as if the RF are sitting around praying for her forgiveness...

She's totally arrogant if it's true. They are mourning but Meghan has forgiven them so all is well. I doubt very much that Meghan is in their thoughts at all.

Neyite

retro:electro wrote: »

It’s amazing isn’t it? Insightful into her character. Like I know I trashed your whole family on international tv while Philip was dying, accused member(s) of being racist and uncaring and not helping me when I was suicidal and not giving my son a title because he was mixed race, told the world Charles cut us off and said all of this without any proof but I’m ready to forgive you now.
Hilarious.

It's the actions of a true benevolent royal...


...From the middle ages.

Leg End Reject

retro:electro wrote: »

It’s amazing isn’t it? Insightful into her character. Like I know I trashed your whole family on international tv while Philip was dying, accused member(s) of being racist and uncaring and not helping me when I was suicidal and not giving my son a title because he was mixed race, told the world Charles cut us off and said all of this without any proof but I’m ready to forgive you now.
Hilarious.

Megalomaniac Megain tries to portray herself as magnanimous Meghan.

A staggering lack of self-awareness.

retro:electro

William and Kate have been sharing pictures of their kids with Philip on their Instagram page. It’s sad to think that Archie will never have any pictures with either side of his family to look back on when he’s older.

retro:electro

Picture taken by Kate of all the great grandchildren. I think the shade is strong with this one :pac:
Nice pic. The Queen just looks like a regular granny here

Leg End Reject

retro:electro wrote: »

Picture taken by Kate of all the great grandchildren. I think the shade is strong with this one :pac:
Nice pic. The Queen just looks like a regular granny here

And "the bully" Charlotte throwing shapes!

retro:electro

Leg End Reject wrote: »

And "the bully" Charlotte throwing shapes!

Howling

retro:electro

Chaz looking like she’s about to deck the camera man one. Bet she’s pinching Louis too under that tender embrace

Mrsmum

retro:electro wrote: »

Picture taken by Kate of all the great grandchildren. I think the shade is strong with this one :pac:
Nice pic. The Queen just looks like a regular granny here

Archie was born after that picture so Kate just about gets away with it.

Be right back

Leg End Reject wrote: »

And "the bully" Charlotte throwing shapes!

And She's the centre of the picture too!!

retro:electro

Be right back wrote: »

And She's the centre of the picture too!!

Typical Chaz hogging the limelight

retro:electro

retro:electro wrote: »

Picture taken by Kate of all the great grandchildren. I think the shade is strong with this one :pac:
Nice pic. The Queen just looks like a regular granny here

Oh Dear. That’s really adding fuel to Meghan’s fire!

ceadaoin.

Mrsmum wrote: »

Archie was born after that picture so Kate just about gets away with it.

How old was he when they left? There probably aren't any pictures of all the kids together which include him anyway. I expect some press release or new photos to be released by the sussexes in retaliation though.