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

beakerjoe

dark crystal wrote: »

Of course ye do, well done.

I must say, it is amazing how well one can know a stranger from just one interview alone. I mean, diagnosing personality disorders and everything! Quite the feat!

I judge her from what I see. Its a fair opinion.

She put herself in the spotlight. My opinion is formed from what I see.

I see her as very disingenuous.

beakerjoe

dark crystal wrote: »

Of course ye do, well done.

I must say, it is amazing how well one can know a stranger from just one interview alone. I mean, diagnosing personality disorders and everything! Quite the feat!

And please , I didn't diagnosis anyone. Go away, calm down and return with a clear head.

What are you on about? Dont direct that at me.

Be right back

dark crystal wrote: »

This old chestnut...Philip was ancient and had been ill for yonks. Unlikely he saw or even cared about some interview in the US.

I keep hearing about these lies. What were they exactly and were they so terribly heinous as to warrant one or both of them being labelled narcissistic, histrionic, *insert another nasty name here* throughout this thread?

Maybe out of respect to the Queen and Prince Philip the interview should have been cancelled/postponed.

She implied that Archie didn't get a title because of his skin colour and not because he will have to wait until Charles becomes king. She also falsely claimed that they got married 3 days before their actual wedding.

beakerjoe

Be right back wrote: »

They decided to go ahead with the interview on global television despite knowing Prince Philip was so ill and part of their interview was based on lies. Not forgetting the more recent interviews Harry had on his own with Oprah. ..

You mean the 'off the cuff' interview that wasnt prepared or rehearsed?

Meghan put herself in the position to be judged, no one else did

beakerjoe

And if anyone believes Meghan isnt a huge narracisist, they are either in denial or not looking close enough.

dark crystal

beakerjoe wrote: »

And please , I didn't diagnosis anyone. Go away, calm down and return with a clear head.

What are you on about? Dont direct that at me.

I never said you did - where did I say you personally diagnosed anyone with anything?

My head is perfectly clear, thanks.

Edit: Ah, you just called her a narcissist yourself there in the post above, lol.

dark crystal

Be right back wrote: »

Maybe out of respect to the Queen and Prince Philip the interview should have been cancelled/postponed.

She implied that Archie didn't get a title because of his skin colour and not because he will have to wait until Charles becomes king.

That was her personal opinion, she didn't state that as a fact. She may well have been mistaken, but that doesn't mean she told a deliberate lie. The fact she wasn't entirely au fait with how titles work doesn't make her a liar.

She also falsely claimed that they got married 3 days before their actual wedding.

They did, in fact, have their own personal wedding ceremony 3 days before their official wedding, as confirmed by the archbishop or whoever performed it. The fact it wasn't a strictly legal ceremony doesn't make her a liar.

valoren

dark crystal wrote: »

That was her personal opinion, she didn't state that as a fact. She may well have been mistaken, but that doesn't mean she told a deliberate lie. The fact she wasn't entirely au fait with how titles work doesn't make her a liar.



They did, in fact, have their own personal wedding ceremony 3 days before their official wedding, as confirmed by the archbishop or whoever performed it. The fact it wasn't a strictly legal ceremony doesn't make her a liar.

Archie was born two years ago. The whole supposed title talks (or "concerns") literally happened years ago. You're suggesting, by the time she's chatting with Oprah, that she isn't up to speed in all that time as to the actual reasons why he wasn't given a title? If so then she is indeed ill suited to be a working Royal as she can't/won't familiarise with protocol or else she was deliberately engaging in race baiting to a predominantly American watching audience who likely (and understandably) know nothing about the rules and formalities surrounding titles and who, in lieu of that, might conclude that Archie wasn't given a title because the Firm had "concerns".

The two points outlined (the "wedding" and the no title) were actually ones they had to clarify subsequently and row back on.

MoonUnit75

Excellent marketing ploy: ‘That’s an unusual name?’ ‘Yes, she/I was named after her/my great-grandmother, the Queen of England’.

dark crystal wrote: »

That was her personal opinion, she didn't state that as a fact. She may well have been mistaken, but that doesn't mean she told a deliberate lie. The fact she wasn't entirely au fait with how titles work doesn't make her a liar.

One reason Harry wasn’t there for most of her lines. She has plausible deniability but he wouldn’t. He should have corrected it, she should have corrected it. It was pre-recorded, Harry must have seen it before it was broadcast and let the lie stand.

They did, in fact, have their own personal wedding ceremony 3 days before their official wedding, as confirmed by the archbishop or whoever performed it. The fact it wasn't a strictly legal ceremony doesn't make her a liar.

She said ‘we want our union to be between us’ and ‘we got married’, she could easily have clarified that they had a blessing but that wouldn’t get headlines. She’s either got a low IQ or was being deliberately manipulative and provocative.

Itssoeasy

dark crystal wrote: »

That was her personal opinion, she didn't state that as a fact. She may well have been mistaken, but that doesn't mean she told a deliberate lie. The fact she wasn't entirely au fait with how titles work doesn't make her a liar.



They did, in fact, have their own personal wedding ceremony 3 days before their official wedding, as confirmed by the archbishop or whoever performed it. The fact it wasn't a strictly legal ceremony doesn't make her a liar.

It wasn’t an official wedding though which is how it was presented. The Archbishop confirmed it happened but was very clear that it was not an official wedding like they claimed. The fact they back tracked shows it wasn’t as clear cut as they made it out to be.

She wasn’t clear about the titles in 2021 nearly three years married into the royal family ? I found out the rules after a few minutes on google, yet she was unable to learn about it being in the royal family.

JoChervil

dark crystal wrote: »

That was her personal opinion, she didn't state that as a fact. She may well have been mistaken, but that doesn't mean she told a deliberate lie. The fact she wasn't entirely au fait with how titles work doesn't make her a liar.



They did, in fact, have their own personal wedding ceremony 3 days before their official wedding, as confirmed by the archbishop or whoever performed it. The fact it wasn't a strictly legal ceremony doesn't make her a liar.

Are you a WUM trying to get all this discussion again? Read back all these 7000 posts, you will have perfect answers. Why people should repeat themselves?

Jequ0n

valoren wrote: »

People being critical of Meghan and Harry are not defending the Royal family. You've never met someone with a personality disorder? Lucky you.

https://www.healthline.com/health/histrionic-personality-disorder

The Oprah interview was a good example of high profile dramatic "antic" but Meghan telling Harry she was suicidal but didn't kill herself (and their baby) because she didn't want him losing another woman in his life was the clincher for me personally.

Maybe, maybe not.
I appreciate you might be speaking from experience but rest assured that you cannot pinpoint a specific “disorder” that easily. I do agree with you in principle but I dislike labels/ diagnoses put forward in forums.

dark crystal

JoChervil wrote: »

Are you a WUM trying to get all this discussion again? Read back all these 7000 posts, you will have perfect answers. Why people should repeat themselves?

A WUM? Wow, apologies for having a different view in this echo chamber and standing up for two people getting eviscerated for the crime of simply talking about their personal experience.

I'll leave the thread now, as it's not a welcoming place for anyone who doesn't ascribe to the demonisation of these two people.

Good luck to ye.

JoChervil

dark crystal wrote: »

There's a ganging up mentality on this thread that leaves a bad taste in my mouth, simple as that. Bang of the Daily Mail comments section off it tbh.

I don't have a problem with anyone having an opinion, but this thread has been unnessesarily vitriolic in places imo.

And M & H hadn't gang up against RF, had they? How tasteful!

You see vitriol here, while we see vitriol in their interviews. So only you have a right to see it?

JoChervil

dark crystal wrote: »

A WUM? Wow, apologies for having a different view in this echo chamber and standing up for two people getting eviscerated for the crime of simply talking about their personal experience.

I'll leave the thread now, as it's not a welcoming place for anyone who doesn't ascribe to the demonisation of these two people.

Good luck to ye.

And we are standing up for at least 3 (out of at least 4) innocent people being accused of racism...

beakerjoe

dark crystal wrote: »

A WUM? Wow, apologies for having a different view in this echo chamber and standing up for two people getting eviscerated for the crime of simply talking about their personal experience.

I'll leave the thread now, as it's not a welcoming place for anyone who doesn't ascribe to the demonisation of these two people.

Good luck to ye.

Alleged experience.

Be right back

dark crystal wrote: »

A WUM? Wow, apologies for having a different view in this echo chamber and standing up for two people getting eviscerated for the crime of simply talking about their personal experience.

I'll leave the thread now, as it's not a welcoming place for anyone who doesn't ascribe to the demonisation of these two people.

Good luck to ye.

I don't think they are being demonised, rather it's that people are beginning to see their true colours and how they really are.

Itssoeasy

I can’t understand why people think that public figures are above criticism. Harry and Meghan when they make public statements they have put themselves in a position to have criticism or praise. It’s a thing I don’t like about celebrities today, that any legitimate criticism is automatically construed falling under some -ism.

Em ugh pop pfft

No real opinion on it really but the backlash is insane imo.

She's curves, she's neurotic, too expressive talks too much etc. Megan is too sexy for the Royal Family Imo. I don't particularly like her or think she's attractive but she doesn't fit.

I don't follow the Royal Family but afaik prince Philip has a long history of racist and sexist remarks so that revelation is nothing new and would not surprise me if Megan was subjected to that from other members of the royal family either.

Leg End Reject

Lilibeth Diana ... what a clanger from the duo who claim oppression, racism and indifference.

The one grandparent who was apparently supportive was ignored, Doria obviously doesn't attract lucrative deals.

beakerjoe

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I can’t understand why people think that public figures are above criticism. Harry and Meghan when they make public statements they have put themselves in a position to have criticism or praise. It’s a thing I don’t like about celebrities today, that any legitimate criticism is automatically construed falling under some -ism.

Meghan and Harry could easily, as many celebs do, could hide away and enjoy their privacy to a point.

But they put themselves in the spotlight, they release statements, do interviews, do publicity engagements etc.... when you put yourself in that spot willingly, then you have to take the good with the bad.

Ive seen their interviews, statements, and rightly or wrongly Ive formed an opinion.

I believe Meghan is disingenuous, I believe shes showed a lot of narcissistic traits and I dont believe shes an honest person. Thats not to say shes spewing lies or is completely fabricating everything that she says, I just find it had to believe her.

She likes the spotlight IMO, despite the narrative she spins. She wants the public sympathy and empathy and IMO is trying to position herself as the next big thing, and to be fair shes doing a good job to a point.

I just personally dont buy in to the person shes portraying herself as.

Em ugh pop pfft

beakerjoe wrote: »

Meghan and Harry could easily, as many celebs do, could hide away and enjoy their privacy to a point.

But they put themselves in the spotlight, they release statements, do interviews, do publicity engagements etc.... when you put yourself in that spot willingly, then you have to take the good with the bad.

Ive seen their interviews, statements, and rightly or wrongly Ive formed an opinion.

I believe Meghan is disingenuous, I believe shes showed a lot of narcissistic traits and I dont believe shes an honest person. Thats not to say shes spewing lies or is completely fabricating everything that she says, I just find it had to believe her.

She likes the spotlight IMO, despite the narrative she spins. She wants the public sympathy and empathy and IMO is trying to position herself as the next big thing, and to be fair shes doing a good job to a point.

I just personally dont buy in to the person shes portraying herself as.

Maybe she did experience racism within the rf?

Em ugh pop pfft

Anyway ****in cheek of Pippa Middleton arriving at Kate and Wills wedding with her ass sticking out..stealing Kates thunder lol.

Kate..was so graceful. Pippa...****ing bitch.

She should have left her ass at home lol.

beakerjoe

Em ugh pop pfft wrote: »

Maybe she did experience racism within the rf?

Perhaps, I cant say for sure. No one can only those who were there.

I simply cant believe Meghan.

I can see a scenario where Meghan plays the victim and uses this narrative for her own gain.

Em ugh pop pfft

beakerjoe wrote: »

Perhaps, I cant say for sure. No one can only those who were there.

I simply cant believe Meghan.

I can see a scenario where Meghan plays the victim and uses this narrative for her own gain.

No doubt she's a flawed human being.

Of course shes susceptible to the new attention she's getting as part of the rf but also naive or maybe she is a conniving bitch trying to bring the rf down and started it all off with her suduction of poor vulnerable naive rich ass privileged harry..

Imo going by previous things said by the rf it is very likely she did receive some form of racism. She probably could have dropped it. Maybe she used it to her advantage or maybe it hurt her or was important to her to highlight. Who knows?

I don't really want to psychoanalyse these people as they have nothing to do with me.

JoChervil

Em ugh pop pfft wrote: »

Maybe she did experience racism within the rf?

If so, why she didn't say about it? She only said that she heard about it from Harry. While Harry said it was a one incident way before they married.

Em ugh pop pfft

JoChervil wrote: »

If so, why she didn't say about it? She only said that she heard about it from Harry. While Harry said it was a one incident way before they married.

I don't know what they said Jesus but isnt it a well known fact that prince Philip himself -who posters here btw seem like they'll be probably going around in black clothing mourning his death for the next year - has made numerous racist and sexist comments in the past and it's fairly likely that certain things were said to her?

Em ugh pop pfft

The thing is about discrimination especially within families, you don't want to say it out straight to the people or only really register after the fact.

I didn't watch the interview and have no intention of watching it but imo, going by past things that were said by the rf prince Philip particularly who all are crying over here, it's no shock to me that there would be an issue with Megan's race. Perhaps some stupid comments that others might let go but **** it why should she? How many times can a man turn his head and all that...

The thing I find strange is the vitriol towards her and what if she's is telling the truth? ...that people were racist to her?

Em ugh pop pfft

Shut the **** up Megan ?

JoChervil

Em ugh pop pfft wrote: »

I don't know what they said Jesus but isnt it a well known fact that prince Philip himself -who posters here btw seem like they'll be probably going around in black clothing mourning his death for the next year - has made numerous racist and sexist comments in the past and it's fairly likely that certain things were said to her?

Prince Philip lived very long and in different times, when PC was not on cards so much, so obviously made many mistakes. I never was interested in him. Only after his death reading some of his quotes I learned about it. But intention and context are also important. Some of them for me sounded like he was more cracking jokes than being offensive. But as I said I know very little about him and about these situations, so I can't judge. But I doubt any younger member of RF would behave in a racist way. Even I don't believe the Queen would do. If anything else, they all have enough good manners for it.