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

Itssoeasy

Deleted User wrote: »

A niece of mine and her coloured partner had a baby a few years ago. Some of us discussed the possibility of the colour of the baby. Just like we’d have discussed it’s gender. Doesn’t make us racist or sexist. Just curious.

BY EOTRs reasoning Maryanne your family are out and out racists and should he publicly ostracised.

Itssoeasy

Be right back wrote: »

Wonder would William and Charles agree?

Not really their call being honest. I’m sure being the two next in line they’ll give their opinion but that’s about it. While the queen is alive she’s the boss and can invite them if she wishes. Well the balcony seems to be limited to those who carry out functions for the queen.

Immortal Starlight

end of the road wrote: »

add it together with more nothingness and you get, well, nothing.
so she put on a brave face near the end of the function she attended, certainly not proof she wasn't suicidal.
so the claim of her not being suicidal realistically has no basis.


Once again Meghan claimed she wanted to kill herself and her unborn baby and both herself and her husband didn’t get help for her. Her husband is involved with organisations that deal with suicidal people and he didn’t get her help and told her to put makeup on and dress up because they were going out to a function. Does that sound right to you? Nobody at the event at which she would have been the centre of attention saw her crying all night. Does that sound right to you? Have you ever cried for hours? It would take more than “putting on a brave face at the end of the night” to get rid of the state that would leave on both your makeup and big puffy red eyes not to mention how exhausted you would be after crying for hours. Still not one photographer got one picture (because none exists) of Meghan looking anything less than perfect on the night. Does that sound right to you?
I understand you will protest that any of this does not prove she wasn’t suicidal. Equally what you have said does not prove she was suicidal either and with her track record of behaviour I believe she was never suicidal.

MoonUnit75

Immortal Starlight wrote: »

end of the road wrote: »

add it together with more nothingness and you get, well, nothing.
so she put on a brave face near the end of the function she attended, certainly not proof she wasn't suicidal.
so the claim of her not being suicidal realistically has no basis.


Once again Meghan claimed she wanted to kill herself and her unborn baby and both herself and her husband didn’t get help for her. Her husband is involved with organisations that deal with suicidal people and he didn’t get her help and told her to put makeup on and dress up because they were going out to a function. Does that sound right to you? Nobody at the event at which she would have been the centre of attention saw her crying all night. Does that sound right to you? Have you ever cried for hours? It would take more than “putting on a brave face at the end of the night” to get rid of the state that would leave on both your makeup and big puffy red eyes not to mention how exhausted you would be after crying for hours. Still not one photographer got one picture (because none exists) of Meghan looking anything less than perfect on the night. Does that sound right to you?
I understand you will protest that any of this does not prove she wasn’t suicidal. Equally what you have said does not prove she was suicidal either and with her track record of behaviour I believe she was never suicidal.

When she described being suicidal she seemed more angry and indignant than sad or traumatised by it.

Immortal Starlight

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

Immortal Starlight wrote: »

When she described being suicidal she seemed more angry and indignant than sad or traumatised by it.

That alone speaks volumes. She’s not as good an actress as she thinks she is.

HildaOgdenx

Be right back wrote: »

Wonder would William and Charles agree?

Another interview with Oprah if they attend and are not allowed on the balcony... :P

tara73

Deleted User wrote: »

A niece of mine and her coloured partner had a baby a few years ago. Some of us discussed the possibility of the colour of the baby. Just like we’d have discussed it’s gender. Doesn’t make us racist or sexist. Just curious.

this. I was thinking this for a while.
discussing or speculating the colour of a newborn isn't racist per se. could be just neutral or curious. Especially as Meghan didn't claim someone said: hopefully it will be all white.
maybe the person(s) wished the baby to be coloured.

just discussing this, I feel it's all so much BS from the two.

MissShihTzu

Deleted User wrote: »

A niece of mine and her coloured partner had a baby a few years ago. Some of us discussed the possibility of the colour of the baby. Just like we’d have discussed it’s gender. Doesn’t make us racist or sexist. Just curious.

Just so you know. Black or brown people aren't called coloured these days. We consider it an insult, and a throwback to colonial days. We prefer to be called black, Asian or brown. In the same way, it's not considered acceptable to use the 'P' word when talking about East Asians. I refer to myself as black, as does my white husband and friends...

Purple Mountain

MissShihTzu wrote: »

Just so you know. Black or brown people aren't called coloured these days. We consider it an insult, and a throwback to colonial days. We prefer to be called black, Asian or brown. In the same way, it's not considered acceptable to use the 'P' word when talking about East Asians. I refer to myself as black, as does my white husband and friends...

Meghan Markle has openly called herself "a woman of colour" fwiw.

suicide_circus

MissShihTzu wrote: »

Just so you know. Black or brown people aren't called coloured these days. We consider it an insult, and a throwback to colonial days. We prefer to be called black, Asian or brown. In the same way, it's not considered acceptable to use the 'P' word when talking about East Asians. I refer to myself as black, as does my white husband and friends...

We? Did you chair a meeting or something?

MissShihTzu

MissShihTzu wrote: »

Just so you know. Black or brown people aren't called coloured these days. We consider it an insult, and a throwback to colonial days. We prefer to be called black, Asian or brown. In the same way, it's not considered acceptable to use the 'P' word when talking about East Asians. I refer to myself as black, as does my white husband and friends...

So I was told by private message by a disgruntled (banned) poster! Some are permanently outraged and would find fault no matter what term was used!

end of the road

suicide_circus wrote: »

We? Did you chair a meeting or something?

she didn't, but it is recognised to be good manners to either refer to people by their color, or as people of color.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

she didn't, but it is recognised to be good manners to either refer to people by their color, or as people of color.

Thanks.

iamwhoiam

end of the road wrote: »

she didn't, but it is recognised to be good manners to either refer to people by their color, or as people of color.

Do you mind me asking and I am not being smart but what is so different about saying people of colour or coloured ?
I dont use coloured because I understand its not good manners but am always curious why one is ok and one not

end of the road

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Do you mind me asking and I am not being smart but what is so different about saying people of colour or coloured ?
I dont use coloured because I understand its not good manners but am always curious why one is ok and one not

it's a good question tbh but i haven't a clue of the answer.
to me it would make sense that both would be treated the same as to me they are different ways of saying the same thing so theoretically both should be out with people simply referring to the individual colors instead.

suicide_circus

I accept that it is current convention to use people of colour, it's just unfortunate that it's an awful turn of phrase. To claim to know that all non white people (the vast majority of the worlds population) find something offensive is silly. The poster cannot claim to speak for billions of people.

retro:electro

end of the road wrote: »

it's a good question tbh but i haven't a clue of the answer.
to me it would make sense that both would be treated the same as to me they are different ways of saying the same thing so theoretically both should be out with people simply referring to the individual colors instead.

Well if you feel that way then why would you correct her and say this?

end of the road wrote: »

she didn't, but it is recognised to be good manners to either refer to people by their color, or as people of color.

You’re clearly being pedantic just for the sake of it. A complete waste of time engaging with. You haven’t a notion tbh.

MissShihTzu

suicide_circus wrote: »

We? Did you chair a meeting or something?

'We' as in people like me. Myself included. But you knew that, and are just trying to pick a fight. I'm not engaging. I don't have the time or the interest, TBH.

MissShihTzu

Purple Mountain wrote: »

Meghan Markle has openly called herself "a woman of colour" fwiw.

True. That's more an American/Caribbean thing, I think. We don't use that term at home, really....

MissShihTzu

suicide_circus wrote: »

I accept that it is current convention to use people of colour, it's just unfortunate that it's an awful turn of phrase. To claim to know that all non white people (the vast majority of the worlds population) find something offensive is silly. The poster cannot claim to speak for billions of people.

I didn't. But what you think isn't that important to me. Really.

What's the P word to describe asians?

MissShihTzu

MissShihTzu wrote: »

'We' as in people like me. Myself included. But you knew that, and are just trying to pick a fight. I'm not engaging. I don't have the time or the interest, TBH.

Who’s trying to pick a fight? In my innocence, I said “coloured” person instead of “person of colour “. It’s not my problem if you and the person who PMd me take offence! That I could understand if I’d used the “N” word!

The worlds going crazy with WOKE nonsense where someone gets offended over something of nothing. I’d hate to be around when a real problem hits them!

Leg End Reject

bubblypop wrote: »

What's the P word to describe asians?

I assume it's the one Harry used about a former army colleague. Think of the Bonner goalkeeper under Jackie Charlton.

Leg End Reject

Leg End Reject wrote: »

I assume it's the one Harry used about a former army colleague. Think of the Bonner goalkeeper under Jackie Charlton.

Oh.
Is that racist? I just thought it was short for Pakistani?
How is that racist?
Jesus, when I were a kid, living up North in England, everyone went to the paki shop, including Pakistanis. What happened?

Leg End Reject

bubblypop wrote: »

Oh.
Is that racist? I just thought it was short for Pakistani?
How is that racist?
Jesus, when I were a kid, living up North in England, everyone went to the paki shop, including Pakistanis. What happened?

It was common where I'm from too (even the N word was used without negative connotations) but is now in the same category as "chink" for a Chinese person.

I'm not sure when it became derogatory, but it's definitely frowned upon now.

HildaOgdenx

Saw the book Battle of Brothers by Robert Lacey that's referred to, upthread, in a bookshop yesterday.

On offer for seven euro or something. I didn't buy it though.

We already have a way of referring to people correctly and one that is unlikely to cause any offense --the person's name. All else is generalizing about groups based on skin colour (pathetic) and results in tedious and ugly psychodrama. It's so depersonalizing.

Monday morning rant over. Please continue :pac:

iamwhoiam

Leg End Reject wrote: »

It was common where I'm from too (even the N word was used without negative connotations) but is now in the same category as "chink" for a Chinese person.

I'm not sure when it became derogatory, but it's definitely frowned upon now.

I often wonder who decides one Monday morning that a word is suddenly derogatory . Is it a collective decision or how does it change to being suddenly an insult .
My mother for example would use the word coloured with absolutely no malice whatsoever and it was never intended as an insult .

retro:electro

It must be especially hard for the older generation to keep up. Words they’ve used with no malice all their lives are overnight considered offensive without them knowing. They put their foot in it then unknown to themselves. No wonder so many people just keep to themselves and say nothing. It’s a minefield now trying to work our what’s appropriate, there’s always someone ready to take offence even when they know you meant no harm. To me, person of colour and coloured are the same bloody thing. How can one be deemed acceptable and the other offensive? Ridiculous.

walshb

retro:electro wrote: »

It must be especially hard for the older generation to keep up. Words they’ve used with no malice all their lives are overnight considered offensive without them knowing. They put their foot in it then unknown to themselves. No wonder so many people just keep to themselves and say nothing. It’s a minefield now trying to work our what’s appropriate, there’s always someone ready to take offence even when they know you meant no harm. To me, person of colour and coloured are the same bloody thing. How can one be deemed acceptable and the other offensive? Ridiculous.

This sums up our world today

Everyone and their fooking mother tripping over themselves to find issues and aggro and offense and hostility...

People simply aren't happy to be happy...when stuff is juts ok and normal and casual, people cannot handle it...

And now every tit around has a voice because of social media and the internet...

Me included!!!