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

extra gravy

BettyS wrote: »

Or maybe this poster has had a tough life and has a different perspective on the matter, coloured by their own experience

I remember person A, a very privileged person in many ways (good job, nice husband, looks amazing, travels) tell my dear friend B (who spent years trying for IVF with her husband, she had a still birth, husband couldn’t cope and died by husband and then went on to have advanced breast cancer aged 45 with the whole chemo and radiation shabang) how hard person A’s life was. Now granted, nobody knows what person A is going through at home. But come on, should we condemn person B for not being sympathetic and cajoling friend B?

We are on a pseudoanonymised forum. Few of us know what person is behind the boards name. We don’t know the life that they have experienced. They may have traumatic lives and far be it for us to judge them for not being an appropriate level of sympathetic towards Harry and Meghan.


If my friend B was on the site, I wouldn’t judge her if she didn’t coo-coo over Harry and Meghan.

There's a difference between not "coo-cooing" and calling people "vile" "parasites" etc. And from my own experience, I've found that the people who have had the toughest lives are actually the kindest and most compassionate people and they wouldn't be spending their evenings angrily insulting total strangers on a forum.

Jane98

tara73 wrote: »

where can one watch the full video?? youtube just gives snippets or boring discussions about it. thanks.

Its probably on the RTE player cause Rte2 showed it.

BettyS

extra gravy wrote: »

There's a difference between not "coo-cooing" and calling people "vile" "parasites" etc. And from my own experience, I've found that the people who have had the toughest lives are actually the kindest and most compassionate people and they wouldn't be spending their evenings angrily insulting total strangers on a forum.

You are making sweeping generalisations there!

Having a very hard life does not necessarily equate to becoming zen and empathetic.

People respond very differently to adversity

My friend B in her dark days can be very cutting and unsympathetic towards others. I will tell her by your rule of thumb that her life wasn’t actually that tough because she is not nicer to others! QED

JoChervil

Penn wrote: »

She did try and sort it out, and wrote him a letter after her wedding asking him to stop talking to the media.

And he leaked parts of it to the Daily Mail.

I get it, he's still alive and therefore there is still a path available to reconciling with him, and that may be something she tries in the future.

But for now at least, I can completely see why she believes that relationship is lost, because how on earth could she possibly trust him? He was on Good Morning Britain yesterday with Piers Morgan again.

Any time there's any news about Meghan, he's on TV talking about them. The onus is on him to stop. I think until he does and shows he can, and that he won't just run off and do an interview the next time Meghan does reach out to him, then I think it's absolutely fair that Meghan considers the relationship with him to be lost.

Well, writing to father to shut up is not reaching out to him in my books...

cnocbui

jimwallace197 wrote: »

From the one who has made nearly 20 posts on this topic over the last two days, calling me brainwashed?? lol. Its funny the delusion that exists amongst the perennially offended especially on behalf of these two parasites.

And for someone calling me presumptuous to tell me then I'm one of the DM's brainwashed drones without knowing the first thing about me says it all really. Do you realise how stupid that sounds?

If this were tennis, I'd think it sounds like an unplayable return of service.

Yakov P. Golyadkin

TomTomTim wrote: »

The irony of this being said in a thread about supposedly oppressed multimillionaire royal. My point had nothing to do with victimization either, you've simply added that variable, as posters like yourself always do. I was simply backing up another posters point.

The point your backing up is complaining about white men being subjected to 'racial' slurs. There's your victimisation.
I'm simply scoffing at the idea that angry middle aged white men are somehow oppressed, as posters like yourself always claim.

Am I doing this right?

retro:electro

I remember reading this at the time and finding it quite sad that Meghan acted this way towards a former friend and agent. Having known each other for years, even holidaying together, she blanked her at an event she attended with Harry. She also calls bs on the claims that she didn’t know who Harry was before meeting him. And yes daily fail link but it’s actually written by said former friend.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7876707/amp/Meghan-mission-bag-prince-RULE-world.html

extra gravy

BettyS wrote: »

You are making sweeping generalisations there!

Having a very hard life does not necessarily equate to becoming zen and empathetic.

People respond very differently to adversity

My friend B in her dark days can be very cutting and unsympathetic towards others.

I was speaking from my own experience of people, I didn't say hard life automatically = empathy. And having dark days doesn't justify being an asshole to others.

Arthur45

extra gravy wrote: »

I was speaking from my own experience of people, I didn't say hard life automatically = empathy. And having dark days doesn't justify being an asshole to others.

Nothing worth being an asshole. Hope karma takes care of those kinds of people.

BettyS

extra gravy wrote: »

I was speaking from my own experience of people, I didn't say hard life automatically = empathy. And having dark days doesn't justify being an asshole to others.

No, this woman who lost her baby, husband and future prospects of children should be Suzy sunshine with everybody?

Expressing an opinion is not being an asshole. We cannot all share the same opinion.

People come from different vantage points. It doesn’t mean that the different points are wrong

JoChervil

extra gravy wrote: »

Or they were smart enough to know that some people would assume the worst of them so clarified the money question straight away. I think we can see from this thread and the likes of Morgan that assuming the worst is exactly what a lot of people have done.

Why people see money as the only possible gain from this interview?

acequion

anewme wrote: »

You cant make allegations against people and then tell them to drop it.

Thats exactly what Piers Morgan did yesterday.

Stop insulting me like you tried to do today and I wont respond to you.

Leave it at that so.

I made no allegations against you nor did I insult you. What I did was very robustly challenge your arguments and challenged your misinterpretations of what I'd said. If you can lash it out you should be able to take it right back. When I realised that we have very different viewpoints and no point in continuing what was clearly becoming a fight, I asked you about 4 posts ago to drop it. Yes everyone has the right to want to drop an argument that's going nowhere and derailing a thread. Bringing Pier Morgan, who I never once mentioned, into it is just ridiculous.

I think you like to have the last word then be my guest, though I'm at a loss to imagine what more is to be said.

cnocbui

extra gravy wrote: »

Do you get this angry often or just when you're insulting two people you've never met?

Shhhhh - but I think he's really Peirse in a clever disguise -

anewme

Everyone has challenges in their life irrespective of status.

Depression, addiction, mental illness are not discriminatory.

Not one family that has not been impacted in some way.

Not a reason to be nasty to others.

BettyS

cnocbui wrote: »

Shhhhh - but I think he's really Peirse in a clever disguise -

That to me is more a typical example of bullying than what that poster said to you. You are ridiculing on a personal level because he expressed an opinion? Be kind, but only if it is to somebody with the “correct” viewpoint

anewme

BettyS wrote: »

No, this woman who lost her baby, husband and future prospects of children should be Suzy sunshine with everybody?

No one hss to should be Suzy Sunshine.

But no one should be a verbal or emotional punch bag for others either.

No ones life is perfectl

BettyS

anewme wrote: »

No one hss to should be Suzy Sunshine.

But no one should be a verbal or emotional punch bag for others either.

No ones life is perfectl

Please do share the posts where you think that the posters made you or Meghan\Harry into a verbal or emotional punchbag?

You seem to conflate people who are not sympathetic with Meghan as being nasty people.

The point of my original post is that shame on the people who judge and berate the posters who are not overly sympathetic towards Meghan. Who knows what troubles or tragedies that they faced?

extra gravy

BettyS wrote: »

Expressing an opinion is not being an asshole.

I don't think anybody said that? There's a difference between giving an opinion in a reasonable manner and giving one in an unnecessarily aggressive way involving personal insults. I'm sure you can appreciate the difference.

anewme

acequion wrote: »

I made no allegations against you nor did I insult you. What I did was very robustly challenge your arguments and challenged your misinterpretations of what I'd said. If you can lash it out you should be able to take it right back. When I realised that we have very different viewpoints and no point in continuing what was clearly becoming a fight, I asked you about 4 posts ago to drop it. Yes everyone has the right to want to drop an argument that's going nowhere and derailing a thread. Bringing Pier Morgan, who I never once mentioned, into it is just ridiculous.

I think you like to have the last word then be my guest, though I'm at a loss to imagine what more is to be said.

In all seriousness now, go back and read the posts.

Thsts all that can be said on it.

BettyS

extra gravy wrote: »

I don't think anybody said that? There's a difference between giving an opinion in a reasonable manner and giving one in an unnecessarily aggressive tone involving personal insults. I'm sure you can appreciate the difference.

But where is the line? And truly, without the prosody of the spoken language, how can we truly interpret the tone of the message being conveyed?

Who arbitrates what is reasonable? And what are the criteria? These are genuine questions!

cnocbui

sebdavis wrote: »

She was one of the main 4 characters in Suits. Part of the main storyline from the first episodes till the last ones she starred in
She was worth a couple of million before she even met Harry so she didn't do too bad did she.

I believe it was between 4 and 5 million. Significantly more than Harry has ever 'earned'.

AllForIt

Did Meghan really need to bring Kate into it. "She made me cry, no SHE made ME cry". All sounds like a childish teenager spat. I'd send them both to their rooms.

anewme

jimwallace197 wrote: »

She is absolutely vile, a complete and utter liar and he is an out and out fool out of touch with reality.

The people defending them here need a reality check. This was a cold calculated move to garner them as much support as possible at a time when it looks like Philip is on his last legs, did they care? not a jot. I cant believe in some respects the Queen took her call with faux concern for Prince Philip.

Such an air of victim hood from two privileged spoilt brats. Try living in the real world nowadays. So shameful and disgraceful.

I'm glad at least a lot of people here can see through her lies and deceit.

jimwallace197 wrote: »

So what if her parents got divorced at 6, plenty of other kids parents do as well unfortunately.

As for starting her first job at 13, happy for her to provide more details on that although I doubt she will.

Plenty of people starting working at that age and younger in this country for many years including myself.

Starred in Suits?? Seriously, I couldn't believe how poor acting wise she was, she must have been saving her best performances for real life. The show is corny crap and she wasn't even a major player in the series, more of a bit part role.

A pretty face willing to screw over anyone including her own family amongst many others to further her own career. That's what I see.

She is a textbook narcissist.

Well if that's not trying to turn others into a verbal punchbag, I don't know what is.

I think its safe to say Jim might not like them.

The word faux is very popular in this thread. Is this the next buzzword like woke I wonder.

walshb

AllForIt wrote: »

Did Meghan really need to bring Kate into it. "She made me cry, no SHE made ME cry". All sounds like a childish teenager spat.

Utterly pathetic.

The more you think if it, the more pathetically snide and immature and childish the interview is.

At the end if it all, you’re scratching your head thinking wtf is the big deal here?

An interview purely to crave publicity and limelight, and done at the expense of pathetic criticisms of your in laws..

BettyS

cnocbui wrote: »

I believe it was between 4 and 5 million. Significantly more than Harry has ever 'earned'.

You post many times about how posters should be nice to Meghan. But you make a very dismissive and patronising remark about Harry. There is hypocrisy there

extra gravy

BettyS wrote: »

But where is the line? And truly, without the prosody of the spoken language, how can we truly interpret the tone of the message being conveyed?

Who arbitrates what is reasonable? And what are the criteria? These are genuine questions!

Well I think we can use common sense in most instances. Do you think it's reasonable to call people you don't know "vile parasites" when there's no evidence they have committed any acts that would justify such an insult? These aren't two serial killers, the language being used to insult them in several posts is over the top.

walshb

cnocbui wrote: »

I believe it was between 4 and 5 million. Significantly more than Harry has ever 'earned'.

Harry doesn’t earn money

Money is beneath the royals...

That’s what makes them royalty

Money is seen as vulgar..the royals are all about status and standing and privilege..

Money is for “commoners.”

Heart Break Kid

walshb wrote: »

Harry doesn’t earn money

Money is beneath the royals...

That’s what makes them royalty

Money is seen as vulgar..the royals are all about status and standing and privilege..

Money is for “commoners.”

Easy to say when your mother leaves you £10 million in her will

cnocbui

BettyS wrote: »

You post many times about how posters should be nice to Meghan. But you make a very dismissive and patronising remark about Harry. There is hypocrisy there

Your fake outraged opprobrium has been noted.

walshb

Heart Break Kid wrote: »

Easy to say when your mother leaves you £10 million in her will

Harry actually touched on it with James Corden a few weeks back when he said we don’t carry money.

Royals don’t have any relationship with money like normal joe soaps..

Their lives are so far removed from normal every day life..