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

Karppi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120935386#Comment_120935386

Well, there's Woke, and there's a "rich target environment".

I'm quite happy to hold my views about Harry and Meghan, based on their performance over the last few years. I don't need to do a research programme.

valoren

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120934501#Comment_120934501

You're contradicting yourself. From what falling out with the family (?) to they fell out because the family did nothing about the press. As mentioned before there is a major difference between say voice mail suspisicions in 2005 sparking what would become the general phone hacking scandal and getting a million quid in compo compared to being so precious that you'd willingly leave because the tabloids are sensationalising tittle tattle about stuff like bridesmaids fitting and you want things corrected i.e. you don't suffer the stupid stuff but you lawyer up when lines are crossed. There is a reason why the stupid speculative stuff isn't addressed because if you address one thing then everything after it needs to be addressed. That would be exhausting so it isn't done.

jm08

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120929309#Comment_120929309

According to the Daily Mail, he wasn't cruel. All regulations were followed when animal is injured. Please read this.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1308528/Prince-Harry-faces-animal-cruelty-claim-polo-ponys-stab-wound-spur.html

jm08

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120935361#Comment_120935361

No, the racism didn't stop. Just that it was published in 2020 the author was unable to see into the future. 😉

The author didn't discuss the use of the word 'mexit' because I don't think it was coined at that stage in 2020. Personally I don't think 'mexit' is racist or sexist, so no need to argue it. Its catcher than Harxit.

The paper argued extensively that the usage of language by the papers was racist, sexist etc. Danny Baker's contribution was truly shocking though - depicting Archie as a chimp. No wonder the far right nazis were discussing on social media that Archie should be exterminated and that Prince Harry was a race traitor (by the way those people have ended up in prison - their court case was a few weeks ago). Strange there hasn't been much about it in the British tabloids!

jm08

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120935386#Comment_120935386

Well, I think people are shocked at how racist English people actually are and the treatment of Meghan shone a light on it. The tabloids would not behave the way they do if they didn't know there was an appetite by the public.

Karppi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120935704#Comment_120935704

That story, and the death of a pregnant horse, Drizzle, and his illegal shooting of Hen Harriers, were effectively "managed" by the RF's PR team, no doubt to prevent Harry from being prosecuted. That would be the same Palace PR who he blames for leaking. He really ought to count his blessings.

Anyway, he's off to Singapore to play polo for the ironically named Royal Salute Sentebale Team. We shall see if he draws blood again.

jm08

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120935538#Comment_120935538

Actually, it was a bit more than title tattle. I seem to recall the tabloids referring to the Grenfell Tower ladies cookbook as the ''terrorist's'' cookbook. You think thats a bit of a laugh, do you?

She was being called a liar and a bully about the bridesmaids dresses. She was accused of bullying a child. That just isn't nice and if anyone said that about me, I'd expect the person concerned to put the record straight. She was then called a liar. If Kate had any integrity, she would have put the record straight. It was actually no big deal really that a bride is stressed anyway and there was no need for the pressure that her future sister in law put on her.

So it would have been exausting for the Palace PR staff to do their job, but its ok for Meghan & Harry to put up with any old **** because the palace staff might get exhausted.

When the King of Norway's sister's new black partner was getting racist abuse, the King of Norway made a statement saying it was unacceptable. So how come Charlie couldn't do the same for his son's wife?

valoren

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120935790#Comment_120935790

You're engaging in selective bias. One tweet. One article. One group. The reality is that those examples had consequences. The Compton article was criticised. Bakers reputation imploded. People go to jail. It's as if actual hatred and racism toward H&M is roundly condemned by most people.

valoren

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120935845#Comment_120935845

Why Charles? Why not the Queen? Etc. Etc. Maybe they thought Harry and Williams unprecedented statements sufficed in 2016? i.e. Back the f*ck off/Yes, what Harry said. They're senior royals too. They're adults not children. Charles not saying anything is the trap I refer to. So Charles goes apoplectic about Danny Baker? Then something insensitive is written weeks later. Charles re-iterates his point. Then, down the line, RandoAnon13435 says something insensitive in the Daily Mail comments. Charles/Press office does nothing. Bloody racists!

I'll tell you what, Meghan is quoted as saying the below in The Cut.

"Why would I give the very people that are calling my children the N-word a photo of my child before I can share it with the people that love my child?"

That's serious. The pool of people who were allegedly calling her son the n-word is pretty small. Think paper editors/royal correspondents who deal/dealt with official royal photos.

That to me is the same tactic as saying someone from another small pool of people (senior royals) had concerns about how dark their kid might be. I don't know about you but someone dangling such damaging accusations in a game of guess who has an agenda at play possibly to appear victimised, to elicit automatic sympathy. If such a person was named then they'd be destroyed yet they remain anonymous funnily enough. Maybe, just maybe, in being unable to have the press office micro manage a press who cottoned on to/got the solids on bad behaviour and, in retaliation, that it was tempting to smear the press and the in laws as racist. Just a thought.

jm08

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120935795#Comment_120935795

Ah, I see you are now moving on from the injured polo pony which was injured and looked after and was seen as fit enough to go back into the game. The death of Drizzle was from a heart attack not because it was pregnant. And it was after it was being playing polo and was ridden by both William & Harry. According to this article, Harry was crying when she died and neither William or Harry attended the lunch after the game because they were so upset.

https://www.equisport.pt/en/news/royal-polo-pony-collapses-and-dies/

As for the Hen Harriers. There was a claim by some anti-shooting people. The police were called immediately and Harry was questioned by them. The police didn't find the bodies of the hen harriers either. Surprising that the person who reported it didn't produce them. Since there was no evidence that hen harriers were actually shot, Harry & Co. could not be prosecuted.

jm08

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120935870#Comment_120935870

There is more than one bit of evidence from then. 'Exotic' DNA is another example. Please read the whole 39K words of that dissertation and come back to me then. It will help you to understand what racism actually is. I have no intention of dealing with a nonsense denial that it was only one group from you. Read it and come back with a comprehensive response as to why the research this person did does not stand up and I expect links to back up your theories.

valoren

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120936041#Comment_120936041

I don't need to read 39k words to understand what racism is but thanks anyway. Exotic DNA. If you think exotic holiday then one in paradise springs to mind not Mosney for example right? The person who wrote that, Rachel Johnson, said she actually used that word to infer that Meghan was beautiful. She was contrasting her heritage with that of Harrys. She was, using some basic reading comprehension, suggesting Meghan was better looking. How very racist. Hell, even the supportive articles are problematic because some want to see everyone through the prism of colour. She later admitted that, given todays spring loaded offense seekers sniffing around for everything and anything to cancel people for, she says she'd be targeted for writing words, expressing an opinion. Did the author writing 39k words contact Rachel Johnson about that article and discuss it or, in spite of that, suggest exotic can have a positive meaning? I didn't see that part yet. Good research/critical thinking would suggest seeing it from all sides as such.

She was wrong to use language open to misinterpretation be it deliberately or innocently. Meghan was mixed race and marrying into arguably the most famous family on the planet. Invariably her heritage would, shock horror, be addressed but it says a lot more about people who go through such responses to such a development with a fine tooth comb looking for offence and gotchas than those who can actually read between the lines and understand that someones heritage would be talked about.

Karppi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120936013#Comment_120936013

I’m not about to go head to head with your view, but just for the record

• The pony was injured because Harry dug his spurs into the horse’s side sufficiently “enthusiastically’” that he cut the horse and it bled. Incidentally, Prince William does not wear spurs while playing polo.
• Drizzle died of a heart attack. Drizzle was pregnant. Being pregnant does not inevitably lead to a heart attack. We are all living proof of that.
• Harry rode the pony that day, not William. Each player has their own pony, don’t you know.
• Apart from clearing up Harry’s messes from a PR perspective, the dogs would have brought the Hen Harriers back to the shoot.

Anyway, Singapore might offer Meghan a chance to crash the presentation of the trophy. She has form, you know

jm08

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120935870#Comment_120935870

How do you come to the conclusion that I'm engaging in selective bias when I am actually quoting the research of a 39,000 word dissertation who came to that conclusion? Please read the dissertation and critique it, rather than me.

valoren

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120936608#Comment_120936608

One paper. Are there others? Peer reviewed, consensus agreed upon ones for example? Selective bias because the conclusions suit?

You keep stating that it is 39,000 words like it's a landmark piece of work and that it's length conveys some sort of authority on it. I am reading it but I am also bearing in mind that people can also have a propensity to make something simple far more complex than it needs to be e.g. does someone really need to, for five pages, critically delve into the Baker tweet?

jm08

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120936341#Comment_120936341

1. Can you reference me with where you got your information as to how the pony was injured. Did you read the report about the incident from the equine club? For the record, Prince William gave up playing polo and sold all 12 ponies 3 or 4 years ago which he shared with Harry and were owned by Charles.
2. Each player uses at least four ponies per game. Another interesting fact is that a trained polo pony is worth about 200K, so I'd imagine that the owners (Prince Charles I believe was the owner of Drizzle) would not be inclined to damage them.
3. Some mothers do die from a heart attack when pregnant.
4. Since it is widely quoted that Harry cried when the pony died, I would expect that he actually cares about his ponies and animals in general.
5. Since the hen harriers were never found and the police were called there immediately, it sound more like an anti-gun people were trying to make an issue out of the Royal Family interested in hunting. I believe Harry has given it up since he met Meghan.
6. Any suggestions as to who you think should present the trophy in Singapore?

Karppi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120936808#Comment_120936808

I refer you to my previous comment

I’m not about to go head to head with your view

Oscar_Madison

It’s like a bath towel wrapped around her 😀

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12370991/EXCLUSIVE-Meghan-Markles-birthday-date-night-Prince-Harry-Smiling-Duchess-Sussex-leaves-trendy-Montecito-restaurant-celebrate-turning-42-couples-latest-loved-display.html

Karppi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120937621#Comment_120937621

Having read the article, I am wondering how come they had a "date night" with a guy who is apparently the husband of one of Meghan's mates?

Neyite

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120937853#Comment_120937853

A date night for her Birthday on a Wednesday, presumably so that international tabloids get the papped photos in time for her actual birthday, Friday.

Funny that she's happy to celebrate her birthday 2 days early, for oh... no reason and yet the kids missed the coronation because it was Archie's birthday and that was more important. Kids parties happen anyway on the nearest weekend day. And the lad was 4. He probably wouldn't have a clue what day or date it was.

It doesn't look like Harry got in the car either. He was leaning in like he was saying he'd be around at 12 to pick up the kids. It's also odd that they paw each other at state occasions and funerals of his nan but on a birthday date night they look like they barely know each other. It's a marked departure from their usual body language towards each other. It's very reminiscent of the times Charles and Di were miserably going through the motions in public but couldn't stand each other.

They haven't been invited to the family get together for the 1st anniversary of the Queen's death, even though they could neatly tie it in with their Invictus trip. Even Andrew and Fergie are invited FFS.

My guess is that they separated ages ago, likely sometime after the funeral, the lawyers are working on the details and until those are worked out, they've to grit their teeth and pretend all's well in paradise.

valoren

I don’t think he should feel snubbed about a family memorial assuming he feels that way. There was reportedly an open invite last summer for a Balmoral visit where Harry went to Birmingham and then to Germany. He chose not to see the Queen. That was his prerogative, he’d just been over for the Jubilee but she was 96 and clearly poorly. There wouldn’t be many more chances to meet up and that was how it transpired. Again that is his own private business. But then months later, after the Queen died, he went on his book promo tour and gave the classic we never said my family was racist, the british press were saying that. In essence his gran spent what were the last couple of years of her life with racist suspicions clouding her family while in all that time her grandson never felt it might alleviate that by volunteering a clarification. No doubt his relatives haven’t missed that gaslighting BS from him and so as far as invites go he’ll get token ones to official events and get ignored but as far as private ones go? Jog on pal.

ceadaoin.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120938205#Comment_120938205

Just looked at those photos and you are right, it doesn't look like Harry gets in. But the guy they are with does get in the back with her. Who has birthday dinner "date night" with their husband and another random guy? A bit weird

Leg End Reject

Apparently he got into the car:

Distinct lack of pawing and hand clutching though, she walked in front of him the entire time.

Karppi

Slightly off topic, but perhaps not, a friend of mine told me (many years ago) that following a long time and a lot of effort he was getting his wife round to the thinking that a threesome would help pep up their "activities". A week or two later, he told me that the wife was becoming increasingly interested and he was beginning to feel "cock-a-hoop" (if you get my drift) about the prospect - in fact, he'd got the perfect girl in mind for the ménage à trois, of course, and had quietly been working on her, too

Trouble was, when she said, "Yes", she also mentioned that she had been fancying a threesome herself since he first mentioned it, and she was sure that their mate Dave would be interested.

Oh, what a tangled web we weave...

rogber

So Meg and Harry are either secretly separated or in an open marriage, is that the general consensus?

maebee

Oh Oh:-

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12376965/US-life-coaching-company-staff-slam-Prince-Harry-100-employees-let-Duke-rakes-seven-figure-salary-chief-impact-officer.html

Karppi

Tom Bowers is usually spot on.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/23364397/meghan-ordered-prince-harry-snub-david-beckham/

Oscar_Madison

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120945133#Comment_120945133

Wow- that’s a great article- it’s not bitchy, just matter of fact and I’ve seen similar analysis articles recently- they’re all saying the same thing- H&M don’t know how to grow their brand . Harry especially, has been hoodwinked as to how to make a life out on his own. I’d say he’s big time regretting his book and tv show- back then no less now, it was cringe. It was also a very cheap dig at an institution that’s far more powerful than he is -and while the public bought his book in droves, it’s that old saying of Terry Wogans- “they’re not laughing with you, they’re laughing at you” Harry.

The writer, in fact the Beckam’s too, are spot on in terms of how not to grow a brand. It looks like they’re downgraded to junk status - when Harry does separate from Meaghan, he might get a few minor gigs with the RF and eventually regain some long lost sympathy from the British public but it’s clear that Meaghan has been behind an awful lot of the issues from the beginning and he’s clearly in denial

jm08

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120937506#Comment_120937506

Why not?

jm08

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120944784#Comment_120944784

Daily Mail being sued by Prince Harry. LOL.