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

Ms2011

superflyninja wrote: »

I think the reaction of oh poor Markle is probably a default reaction to see that interview with no context/background info.
I felt sorry for her and was kind of on her side. Until I was told about the actual facts. Then I quickly realised what an out and out manipulative hero/victim wannabe she is. I feel quite sorry for Harry in a way.

I was on the fence after the interview but after participating in the thread for the past few weeks I think I like her more

JoChervil

end of the road wrote: »

meghan was perfectly suited to royal life, young fresh and new blood for a modern era who would and could engage with the young generations, same with harry, fresh blood.

Well, it was what people hoped for. But has she delivered?

Watching this interview I couldn’t help but felt this musty rotten smell besides nice surroundings. Instead of chatting with a young fresh ambitious journalist they chose Oprah. How modern! But people choose people like them, so inside they are just like Oprah. And Meghan looked like an old biddy. But I guess “a victim” should look like a victim. And I used to like Harry but Meghan turned him into even more stiffen and judgemental person than his father is!

Ms2011

Ms2011 wrote: »

I was on the fence after the interview but after participating in the thread for the past few weeks I think I like her more

That's a turn up for the books. I honestly can't understand how you could make that judgement but each to their own that's what makes the world interesting.

Probably your opinion is a reaction to the posters on her criticizing her.

Ms2011

Deleted User wrote: »

Probably your opinion is a reaction to the posters on her criticizing her.

Some are a bit OTT and some I have found informative, I don't know alot about titles or security so I took those points on board.
But I've also seen first hand how the most innocuous comment is hopped on, twisted and torn apart until it no longer resembles its original intent. If it can happen here it just proves to me it can happen on a bigger scale in the media and indeed backs up Meghan's point of view.

superflyninja

Ms2011 wrote: »

Some are a bit OTT and some I have found informative, I don't know alot about titles or security so I took those points on board.
But I've also seen first hand how the most innocuous comment is hopped on, twisted and torn apart until it no longer resembles its original intent. If it can happen here it just proves to me it can happen on a bigger scale in the media and indeed backs up Meghan's point of view.

But that same thing is what Markle is doing IMO. She is twisting things to suit her agenda and I think there is fairly decent circumstantial evidence to support that.

I also think Markle invited this all on herself. She wanted to do the interview and she said all the things that people are poking holes in or criticising. Of all people, she knew what the media and the internet would do.
What alternative is there to questioning the veracity of her statements? Just blindly accepting what she said? Unfortunately, when you accuse someone of being racist, thats a pretty big thing. Cant just drop that bomb and walk away.

But you are correct with the media, they too hop on tiny details and manufacture some crazy story about it.

MoonUnit75

Ms2011 wrote: »

Some are a bit OTT and some I have found informative, I don't know alot about titles or security so I took those points on board.
But I've also seen first hand how the most innocuous comment is hopped on, twisted and torn apart until it no longer resembles its original intent. If it can happen here it just proves to me it can happen on a bigger scale in the media and indeed backs up Meghan's point of view.

Backs up Meghan's point of view? I guess she's just been very, very unlucky to have ended up with two families that needed to be cut out of her life, a long and still growing line of elite ex-staff who were just too unprofessional or inefficient for Meghan's needs and the world's media who just couldn't look past her exceptionally subtle difference in skin tone to give her a fair chance to prove her angelic and selfless nature?

Special mention of course for all those holders of highly coveted Wimbledon tickets who decided en-masse not to turn up and left an embarrassing halo of empty seats centred around the Duchess who was just there chilling with her mates. Their failure to take their seats really reflected badly on Meghan, shame on their insensitivity.

ceadaoin.

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

Backs up Meghan's point of view? I guess she's just been very, very unlucky to have ended up with two families that needed to be cut out of her life, a long and still growing line of elite ex-staff who were just too unprofessional or inefficient for Meghan's needs and the world's media who just couldn't look past her exceptionally subtle difference in skin tone to give her a fair chance to prove her angelic and selfless nature?

Special mention of course for all those holders of highly coveted Wimbledon tickets who decided en-masse not to turn up and left an embarrassing halo of empty seats centred around the Duchess who was just there chilling with her mates. Their failure to take their seats really reflected badly on Meghan, shame on their insensitivity.

She is the embodiment of the phrase "if everyone around you is the problem, maybe the problem is actually you". I mean, its just not possible for literally all those people to be horrible bullies, including an entire country. There is a common denominator there in all the situations though.

Ms2011

superflyninja wrote: »

But that same thing is what Markle is doing IMO. She is twisting things to suit her agenda and I think there is fairly decent circumstantial evidence to support that.

I also think Markle invited this all on herself. She wanted to do the interview and she said all the things that people are poking holes in or criticising. Of all people, she knew what the media and the internet would do.
What alternative is there to questioning the veracity of her statements? Just blindly accepting what she said? Unfortunately, when you accuse someone of being racist, thats a pretty big thing. Cant just drop that bomb and walk away.

But you are correct with the media, they too hop on tiny details and manufacture some crazy story about it.

That's what I dislike about 'trial by social media, people thinking that they've to right to tear someone apart because they 'invited it on themselves', like be the bigger person if that's the case.
Debate what she said ( and actually said, not leaked etc) until your hearts content, that can be done without the name calling, put downs and amateur psychiatry.

Ms2011

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

Backs up Meghan's point of view? I guess she's just been very, very unlucky to have ended up with two families that needed to be cut out of her life, a long and still growing line of elite ex-staff who were just too unprofessional or inefficient for Meghan's needs and the world's media who just couldn't look past her exceptionally subtle difference in skin tone to give her a fair chance to prove her angelic and selfless nature?

Special mention of course for all those holders of highly coveted Wimbledon tickets who decided en-masse not to turn up and left an embarrassing halo of empty seats centred around the Duchess who was just there chilling with her mates. Their failure to take their seats really reflected badly on Meghan, shame on their insensitivity.

It's great when a poster embodies your point for you!!

Ms2011

ceadaoin. wrote: »

She is the embodiment of the phrase "if everyone around you is the problem, maybe the problem is actually you". I mean, its just not possible for literally all those people to be horrible bullies, including an entire country. There is a common denominator there in all the situations though.

So why was she not a problem before she joined the royal family, did they just bring out the worst in her?

Mrsmum

Ms2011 wrote: »

So why was she not a problem before she joined the royal family, did they just bring out the worst in her?

The RF are not obliged to Meghan-proof everything for her. They really wouldn't last long if they were that insubstantial. I have always believed Meghan was probably grand in her own setting but didn't adapt well to another world. Imo they didn't suit her needs and she didn't suit their needs but they didn't badmouth her ever. She blamed all her woes on them which in itself shows poor character. I would add she also gave it way too little time. Anyone who moves away from home never mind Ito Meghan's situation, knows it takes time to settle in. Meghan cut and ran awfully fast.

Ms2011

Ms2011 wrote: »

So why was she not a problem before she joined the royal family, did they just bring out the worst in her?

But sure maybe she was?
I knew nothing about her until she started dating Harry. I still don't know much about her, other than she married him, then they talked about leaving, then they left, then she did that interview.
Maybe she is a difficult individual.
All I know is anyone that thinks a hundreds of years old tradition such as the royal family should change for her, seems to think a lot of their own self importance.

end of the road

JoChervil wrote: »

Well, it was what people hoped for. But has she delivered?

Watching this interview I couldn’t help but felt this musty rotten smell besides nice surroundings. Instead of chatting with a young fresh ambitious journalist they chose Oprah. How modern! But people choose people like them, so inside they are just like Oprah. And Meghan looked like an old biddy. But I guess “a victim” should look like a victim. And I used to like Harry but Meghan turned him into even more stiffen and judgemental person than his father is!

both her and harry did deliver while they were senior members, but they have stepped down now so wouldn't be able to deliver because they aren't doing royal duties any more.
oprah for whatever faults she may or may not have is a world famous journalist, who would be best place to give them the platform they needed to get their side of the story out there.

bubblypop wrote: »

But sure maybe she was?
I knew nothing about her until she started dating Harry. I still don't know much about her, other than she married him, then they talked about leaving, then they left, then she did that interview.
Maybe she is a difficult individual.
All I know is anyone that thinks a hundreds of years old tradition such as the royal family should change for her, seems to think a lot of their own self importance.

the royal family have been slowly changing for decades now and they will change again as time goes on.

Ms2011

bubblypop wrote: »

But sure maybe she was?
I knew nothing about her until she started dating Harry. I still don't know much about her, other than she married him, then they talked about leaving, then they left, then she did that interview.
Maybe she is a difficult individual.
All I know is anyone that thinks a hundreds of years old tradition such as the royal family should change for her, seems to think a lot of their own self importance.

And maybe she wasn't? Would stories like that not have surfaced by now?
I think she was wholly unprepared for how her life was going to change going into the royal family or completely understood what exactly being a member of the royal family entailed as opposed to trying to change anything. I don't think that kind of environment can be truly appreciated until you're in it.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

the royal family have been slowly changing for decades now and they will change again as time goes on.

Yep, slowly and as society changes. which makes sense.
Not overnight for one individual.

Ms2011

Ms2011 wrote: »

And maybe she wasn't? Would stories like that not have surfaced by now?
I think she was wholly unprepared for how her life was going to change going into the royal family or completely understood what exactly being a member of the royal family entailed as opposed to trying to change anything. I don't think that kind of environment can be truly appreciated until you're in it.

But I thought her problem was with the English media?

end of the road

bubblypop wrote: »

Yep, slowly and as society changes. which makes sense.
Not overnight for one individual.

oh no, they aren't changing as society changes as they are very much behind society in terms of time, but they are slowly but surely changing and taking baby steps.

bubblypop wrote: »

But I thought her problem was with the English media?

that was a massive problem for her yes, and then again it's not the english media as a whole but a couple of publications which are extremely problematic.

Ms2011

bubblypop wrote: »

But I thought her problem was with the English media?

She did of course have a problem with them which was exasperated by 'leaked' stories, some from inside the palace which she claims were spun to make her look worse than what she was.

Itssoeasy

Ms2011 wrote: »

And maybe she wasn't? Would stories like that not have surfaced by now?
I think she was wholly unprepared for how her life was going to change going into the royal family or completely understood what exactly being a member of the royal family entailed as opposed to trying to change anything. I don't think that kind of environment can be truly appreciated until you're in it.

Then Harry ****ed up royally in failing miserably to prepare his future wife for the realities of what being a member of the Royal family entailed.

Ms2011

Mrsmum wrote: »

The RF are not obliged to Meghan-proof everything for her. They really wouldn't last long if they were that insubstantial. I have always believed Meghan was probably grand in her own setting but didn't adapt well to another world. Imo they didn't suit her needs and she didn't suit their needs but they didn't badmouth her ever. She blamed all her woes on them which in itself shows poor character. I would add she also gave it way too little time. Anyone who moves away from home never mind Ito Meghan's situation, knows it takes time to settle in. Meghan cut and ran awfully fast.

I don't completely disagree with you in that it was a huge culture shock marrying into the royal family, one neither you or I will ever experience.
I don't think she spoke out because they didn't suit her needs, she spoke out because there were stories being leaked about her, some from inside the palace and she wanted to address some of those.
I don't think a time scale can be put on someone if their mental health is being affected to the extent she claims and no help forthcoming.

Itssoeasy

end of the road wrote: »

both her and harry did deliver while they were senior members, but they have stepped down now so wouldn't be able to deliver because they aren't doing royal duties any more.
oprah for whatever faults she may or may not have is a world famous journalist, who would be best place to give them the platform they needed to get their side of the story out there.








the royal family have been slowly changing for decades now and they will change again as time goes on.

Yes it is but you can’t expect an institution that old to flip a switch and change completely and neither Kate Middleton nor Meghan markle were going to change it quickly but hopefully it changes to a more Scandinavian model which might be its only way of survival. Where did Harry and Meghan get this idea they’d change it all though is my question.

valoren

Ms2011 wrote: »

And maybe she wasn't? Would stories like that not have surfaced by now?
I think she was wholly unprepared for how her life was going to change going into the royal family or completely understood what exactly being a member of the royal family entailed as opposed to trying to change anything. I don't think that kind of environment can be truly appreciated until you're in it.

Of course it's possible. However why not go onto Oprah, to use that connection and platform, and say that they wanted to step back from the "firm" but not the family, to use it to lay out their plans for activism or for charity. A more believable, and understandable narrative, would be that she was much too independent and opinionated to adopt the never complain, never explain modus operandi that's been in place for decades. It wasn't working. She wasn't thriving. She made the analogy of her being the Little Mermaid who had lost her voice to that end. It was stifling and suffocating but she'd met her husband, they fell madly in love and via, his status, they were stuck in the framework of the institution and made arrangements to sever ties. Another more believable development would be that they understood that the monarchy's power was in neutral permanence and with that in mind they sought to relinquish all that which would define them as Royals e.g. Harry's HRH title, their mutual titles i.e. just call me Harry. I think doing that would have been well received. They could have driven home the point that the agreement reached would be that they would retain their patronages and charitable foundation but as private citizens with no connection to the palace beyond familial connections. They could then talk freely about whatever subjects and topics they wanted to. None of that is juicy enough for Oprah though i.e. “Oh so you both want the freedom to express yourselves and couldn’t because of what the Royal family is all about and so you’ve both left and the British media helped make that decision easier?”

I think the entitlement at play here was that they still wanted their independence to do as they pleased but the issue was them also wanting to retain the titles and the financial support perks. They needed to leverage that to make their private income as Royal status would provide them with a unique selling point. It shouldn't have been surprising to them that this simply would not be entertained and no precedence would ever be set i.e. who is next to want a lucrative "divorce" from Royal duty? With them retaining their titles then they retain their connection and thus any conduct in their private lives would impinge upon the Monarchy. It reminds me of Princess Anne deliberately not wanting her own children to have titles. It was a protective and shrewd move knowing that their having a title would make them targets. If her son Peter had a title and got up to, for example, drunken mischief as a student then the headlines would be about "Prince Peter" as opposed to private citizen Peter Philips who, like a million other students, got up to drunken antics. There is no story as such as there is only one Prince Peter but millions of students. To be honest, I think they both cracked their sh*t at being told where to go with what they proposed and thus the inevitable interview was borne out of pure spite. Harry is independently wealthy enough to provide them both with a base to make a life for themselves. However, they could have rented a place instead of buying, they could have hired private security. What you don't do is buy a mansion before the Netflix/Spoitfy moolah actually hit's your account in lieu of cribbing to millions about how your dad cut you off.

Ms2011

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Then Harry ****ed up royally in failing miserably to prepare his future wife for the realities of what being a member of the Royal family entailed.

I definitely think he could have better prepared her or can you completely prepare anyone for that kind of life, who knows?
Harry was born into that life, its second nature to him and probably assumed she knew more than she did.
If I rocked up to Buckingham Palace I wouldn't have a clue what was expected.

Ms2011

Ms2011 wrote: »

She did of course have a problem with them which was exasperated by 'leaked' stories, some from inside the palace which she claims were spun to make her look worse than what she was.

when did she claim that?

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

that was a massive problem for her yes, and then again it's not the english media as a whole but a couple of publications which are extremely problematic.

The media was such a problem that Harry had to publish a request for them to respect Megs privacy. Trouble was that no one knew about her until then!

Ms2011

bubblypop wrote: »

when did she claim that?

In the interview.

Be right back

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The media was such a problem that Harry had to publish a request for them to respect Megs privacy. Trouble was that no one knew about her until then!

I think it was around the time she gave an interview to Vanity Fair and spoke about their relationship.

Ms2011

Ms2011 wrote: »

In the interview.

Ok, I just don't remember her blaming anyone in the palace for telling stories about her.

Be right back

This is the magazine cover.

Ms2011

valoren wrote: »

Of course it's possible. However why not go onto Oprah, to use that connection and platform, and say that they wanted to step back from the "firm" but not the family, to use it to lay out their plans for activism or for charity. A more believable, and understandable narrative, would be that she was much too independent and opinionated to adopt the never complain, never explain modus operandi that's been in place for decades. It wasn't working. She wasn't thriving. She made the analogy of her being the Little Mermaid who had lost her voice to that end. It was stifling and suffocating but she'd met her husband, they fell madly in love and via, his status, they were stuck in the framework of the institution and made arrangements to sever ties. Another more believable development would be that they understood that the monarchy's power was in neutral permanence and with that in mind they sought to relinquish all that which would define them as Royals e.g. Harry's HRH title, their mutual titles i.e. just call me Harry. I think doing that would have been well received. They could have driven home the point that the agreement reached would be that they would retain their patronages and charitable foundation but as private citizens with no connection to the palace beyond familial connections. They could then talk freely about whatever subjects and topics they wanted to. None of that is juicy enough for Oprah though i.e. “Oh so you both want the freedom to express yourselves and couldn’t because of what the Royal family is all about and so you’ve both left and the British media helped make that decision easier?”

I think the entitlement at play here was that they still wanted their independence to do as they pleased but the issue was them also wanting to retain the titles and the financial support perks. They needed to leverage that to make their private income as Royal status would provide them with a unique selling point. It shouldn't have been surprising to them that this simply would not be entertained and no precedence would ever be set i.e. who is next to want a lucrative "divorce" from Royal duty? With them retaining their titles then they retain their connection and thus any conduct in their private lives would impinge upon the Monarchy. It reminds me of Princess Anne deliberately not wanting her own children to have titles. It was a protective and shrewd move knowing that their having a title would make them targets. If her son Peter had a title and got up to, for example, drunken mischief as a student then the headlines would be about "Prince Peter" as opposed to private citizen Peter Philips who, like a million other students, got up to drunken antics. There is no story as such as there is only one Prince Peter but millions of students. To be honest, I think they both cracked their sh*t at being told where to go with what they proposed and thus the inevitable interview was borne out of pure spite. Harry is independently wealthy enough to provide them both with a base to make a life for themselves. However, they could have rented a place instead of buying, they could have hired private security. What you don't do is buy a mansion before the Netflix/Spoitfy moolah actually hit's your account in lieu of cribbing to millions about how your dad cut you off.

Never did I say that they were perfect people or that I agreed with everything they did, but I don't agree the interview was spiteful or that Meghan was executing some kind of master plan or made Harry do anything he didn't want to do.
She seems to be shouldering the bulk of the blame for some reason.