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

So why calling it marriage then, not just their private exchange of vows?

No idea? Riiiight, of course you don't. I literally explained it to you. You are of course not contrarian at all yourself and these two hypocrites, to my mind, merely serve as a vessel for you to ramble on about the Royal family. Also, a girl? She's 42, not some babe in the woods.

Sir Smelly Johns. Love it.

She was called a "young mother" earlier in the thread too lol. No need to let reality get in the way of the victim narrative

Yes, a young mother, not a street wise person who must have a backbone to survive in the acting world and also married once before.

You see the thing is disliking the Royal Institution would be quite normal, constant rage posting about a young lady whose crime appears to be calling an exchanging of the vows a marriage isn't.

Some things arent worth demeaning yourself responding to. Which is something I should have considered when replying to this comment tbh.

This is a great example of a manipulator at work. She did specifically say she got married 3 days before the actual wedding. She said that, there was no Daily Mail reporting on it from unnamed sources, its there on video. In my mind, she phrased it like that because she knew full well she didn't actually legally get married but wanted to spin some sort of magical, romantic story while at the same time dismissing her public wedding ceremony as just a bit of theatrics. Another reason she is a victim. If anyone calls her out on it she can claim she misspoke, that legally she knew it wasn't an actual, legal marriage ceremony but to her it was. The story was all about generating sympathy and attention for the poor little rich girl, trapped in a golden prison.

Its an incorrect statement by her but one she can easily retcon if needed. Its very typical of her vague, ephemeral statements all geared towards showing her as the poor put upon, innocent victim. Its plain to see the game she and Harry are playing. Sure Harry in a recent interview claimed that Merkle never accused the RF of racism. Its simply wordplay, she promoted that story to Oprah who ran with it. Merkle didnt actually say the words but did everything but say the words to make it crystal clear.

There was no victim really in that story, well maybe the priestyman because he had to clarify it was not a marriage ceremony. As others well know, establishing that Merkle is this loose and wooly with the truth muddies the waters of everything else she said in that interview. Where that becomes serious is the racism allegations. Again, a vague, woolly bit of mud slinging. She left it open to interpretation as to what was said, who said it etc and yet it had the effect she wants. Same with her hints that the titles for her children were being withheld because racism.

It's safe to assume most people know you can't get legally married with only 3 people present.

Maybe it was a slip of the tongue, nerves, trying to describe it in a guise people could relate to... varies reasons that don't have to be a lie.

They never actually thought the Oprah interview through fully. Ignoring that between them they couldn't even agree on or provide a proper context on a pre-recorded interview, they were going to go on it and say that a senior royal made a racist comment about their son, that there was a general anti-Meghan sentiment in the palace predicated on institutional racism to the point that they would be indifferent to her topping herself. A major f*ck you for not giving them what they wanted (half in and half out) and a coup for Oprah in broadcasting that. They would be able to cover themselves by magnanimously refusing to name the person who said it as this would destroy/cancel them. The suspicion was supposed to fall on all of them collectively. However, when it broadcast, they forgot that anyone vaguely familiar with the royal family would deduce that a "senior royal" making a "racist" remark must surely be Philip who had a history of saying stupid things. It was chalked up as yet another crass and racist remark by someone with a racist reputation. Saying a racist said something racist (again) completely neutered their actual intent. You want to cancel the 99 year old racist idiot who was ill in hospital and soon to kick the bucket? G'luck with that.

Given the contents of Spare then obviously the targets were Charles, Camilla and William. The proof that there was maliciousness at play was them clarifying via Gayle King on CBS that it wasn't the Queen or Philip. That was their mistake and it back fired on them. If you can say who it wasn't then, consequently, say who it was. Sh*t or get off the pot, have the courage of your convictions. Oh but then the clap back was that they'd get sued? Well ask Oprah or Tyler Perry for a loan then to cover legal costs. Organise a go fund me and get those in the Commonwealth to donate because their head of states institution is racist to the core. Be proactive. Go all in.

That among the rest of the logical fallacies lost them the support of anyone neutral. There was no need for them to do the Oprah interview and as such it was all self-inflicted. There was, for example, no Boards thread until that interview. No one could care less about two royals going overseas. If they got what they wanted (the freedom to do collabs/merching, full time security, access to premiere royal events etc.) then the implied bravery of them outing a bunch of racists simply wouldn't have occurred at all. In the end, per the Tom Bower book, the racist (or unconscious bias) comment was Camilla joking with Harry wondering if their child would have a ginger afro. I mean, first she turned his old bedroom into a dressing room and now that. Freedom flight ahoy!

My man! High five!

Who said the word evil?

Im going to go ahead and assume you mean me when you say people. I never said I hate her. I called her a master manipulator and as an armchair psychologist, I do think she displays clear narcissistic tendencies. I do think she is highly manipulative, selfish, a massive hypocrite and an attention seeker.

Why do you think "people" are hiding their "real" reasons for hating (again your choice of word) someone? Can you not accept what Im saying and the reasons I say them?

This example with the 3 days prior marriage is just that, an example, from an interview choc full of examples. As you well know. Those other examples of her manipulation of the truth are far more serious of course. The example of when the ceremony took place is harmless but does illustrate nicely her manipulation.

As Im blue in the face from stating, my interest in this is from having dealt with similar individuals in my immediate family. Its very interesting to see something similar played out in public.

And just to add, if Im wrong about H&M then Im wrong Ill accept that without fuss. I'm not that invested. But this thread is entertaining. The gaslighting and love of H&M from you is if nothing if not inventive. Its always fun to see what crazy spins you put on things. Keep it up!

Nah, not buying it.

As an aside isn't amazing the amount of people on the internet who diagnose successful famous women with narcissism, rarely gets levelled at men.

I always found that interesting. I must look into actually.

Yeah because nobody has accused say Donald Trump or Kanye West of narcissism

rarely gets levelled at men

Rarely not never, although I don't think anyone levelled that at Kanye. I have heard unhinged. Which would be accurate.

the real reason for disliking Markle is that she is a woman! I'm a damn dirty misogynist, caught rapid!

Your words, not mine.

I merely made an observation, which I tend to research.