Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

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

1211212214216217443

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 259 ✭✭Will_I_Amnt



    I don't personally agree with the race card thrown around - I don't believe the treatment of Meghan would be any better if she were 100% Caucasian. I didn't really like Meghan myself right from the start - but it has gone too far and it is a repeat of what happened to Fergie Duchess of York in the 80's, a woman as Caucasian as a Caucasian can be. I don't know if you're old enough to recall the unfavorable comparisons between her and Diana (recall the "Duchess of Pork" headlines?). I'm pretty sure the same thing will happen in another 25/30 years to whoever Louis marries. It's fair game to bully the wife of the second son apparently. But never the future King's wife - after all, those who run these newspapers either have Knighthoods, OBE's or whatever - or hope to get one in the future. So they won't dare!



  • Registered Users Posts: 521 ✭✭✭DontHitTheDitch


    Ah, Buzzfeed. You pick your moments! Just when those defending Meghan and Harry Markle felt they had the high ground standing up against the Daily Mail.

    Are they actually comparing like for like? Meghan being 'the avocado whisperer' vs 'Kate was once gifted an avocado', to the interns at Buzzfeed, that's basically, like, the same thing like.

    What about the 'fashion' headlines, one article talks about Kate wearing nicer clothes, the Meghan one, well..

    "From the poor handling over the refurbishments of Frogmore Cottage to the wholly unnecessary and frankly rather precious secrecy that surrounded the birth of baby Archie, to the Clinton Card Instagram pictures, to the haughty refusal to name Archie’s godparents, the past few months have seen, not to put too fine a point on it, a catalogue of PR disasters in the Sussex Household.
    And now this. A guest editorship of Vogue featuring a list of inspirational women, half of whom no one’s ever heard of, many of whom are just celebrities, and all of whom have been seemingly chosen more for what their inclusion says about you than anything else."

    Good old Buzzfeed.



  • Posts: 8,856 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    All of that is supposition -you’re entitled to your view but in absence of obvious evidence or definitive version it’s equally plausible that Megan is the architect of her own downfall and it’s not them it’s her- which is the side of the fence I’m more likely to choose taking all of what I’ve read seen and heard into consideration

    And as for the far right and woke thing you said, sorry but that’s just too far out there to even give it a thought



  • Registered Users Posts: 259 ✭✭Will_I_Amnt


    The articles are from The Mail, The Express, The Sun and The Mirror. Buzzfeed only replicated them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,578 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Megan is the architect of her own downfall

    What downfall?

    Millionaires, living in Cali with their kids in a mansion. Also I assume the ginger one is about to be a left a massive wedge by Granny.

    Where did it all go wrong George?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,532 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    Kate has obviously had some work done, she looks younger now than in the 2015-2017 pictures in that article.



  • Posts: 8,856 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]




  • Registered Users Posts: 521 ✭✭✭DontHitTheDitch


    Buzzfeed offer the two lists of articles as being directly comparable: Kate being praised for the same thing that Meghan was criticised for. Reading the articles shows they are often not directly comparable at all.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,754 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    That is some assumption to make. So what you are alluding to is that Megan doesn't love Harry at all, only married into the title, fame and money. Even though she did the role for 4 years, was at the meet and greet of crowds yesterday?

    The exact same assumption could be laid at the RF door. Faced with a potential changer coming in, they and the media bound together to make sure that her environment was as difficult as possible and she was made sure to be aware that she was not wanted unless she gave up all her notions of being independent.

    Given how they treated Diana, the weight of assumptions is clearly on the RF as they already have done similar.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,627 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    No, it is not her right to refuse.....

    The RF was built on and has survived on rules and traditions. You may not agree with them, but it's their family, not yours.

    As a free woman, she can refuse, and then she will face the consequences. She thought she'd become a RF member, but without the need to conform. Arrogant and brazen behaviour, that has led to all this back and forth with her and the hubby.

    I said it from the start: she was just not cut out for that life, and rather than go gracefully, she couldn't!



  • Advertisement
  • Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,947 Mod ✭✭✭✭Neyite


    She joined the family - as family she's still in it. Nothing has changed there. The only reason that they appear to be kept at arms length is because she's wired up for her documentary to record everything, including private family stuff.

    What has changed is that both of them quit the family business. They didn't like the structure of it, they liked the CEO but didn't like what sounds like pretty much every layer of management. They also didn't like when other departments got the spotlight, and went out to grab it back whenever that happened. They wanted to pick and choose the bits that they liked, and leave the boring bits of their job to others. And they wanted to create new areas of business that go against the fundamental ethos of the company soley for their own personal profit stream. They didn't care if their short term gains resulted in the entire organisation going bust. They still don't.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,578 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    The only reason that they appear to be kept at arms length is because she's wired up for her documentary to record everything, including private family stuff.

    Huh?

    I take it there is tangible evidence she is wearing a wire?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,514 ✭✭✭valoren


    Oprah now claiming she wasn't expecting any bombshells in the interview and was surprised at the revelations. She also says she isn't one to interfere in private family matters. All she wanted to do was allow them the opportunity to explain why they left (...and make millions for Harpo). Someone needs to remind Oprah that she had editorial control of that interview and, since an unnamed family member was accused of being a racist, she could have pulled it all on principle and reimburse those who bought ad space or edit out those bits. Oprah rolled the dice on a pair of spoofers but I suppose making money off the back of it is some consolation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,532 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    Her faux shocked expression at the racism allegations belies that bullshıt. Is Oprah trying to distance herself before the memoir is published?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 119 ✭✭madeiracake


    Saw some close up photos of the walkabout and it does indeed look like a mic line running down Meghan's back to a square device are the front hip.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,239 ✭✭✭Be right back


    There were rumours that they were wearing microphones during the julibee.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,131 ✭✭✭Ms2011


    There's an identical bulge on the other side too which to me would suggest it's more likely to be part of the outfit she's wearing underneath the fitted coat.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,627 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Oprah was an absolute disgrace during that staged and choreographed attack. She was worse than H&M in how she just facilitated it. She’ll never live it down.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,532 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    It looks like a dart on the other side, the seam type dart, not an actual one.

    I doubt she'd get away with a mic with all the security though so I don't believe it is one. The backlash if they released a recording of private moments from either the jubilee or the funeral would finish them, and they can'tbe that stupid.

    The whole mic thing started when they both wore one to the event for the Invictus Games, but they clearly had cameras with them so no one thought it was private if they spoke to them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,474 ✭✭✭ForestFire


    You never heard of stereo??


    And it just so happens, the best distance between two stereo mics, is the exact same distance of that between a woman's..................🥺





    Ears....FFS.... Obviously its EARS.....(binaural recording)...

    ....of course 😇😁



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,239 ✭✭✭Be right back


    Oh I know, it's daft the things people believe. I read that apparently the man seated behind them during the julibee was wearing something to block their signal. He did seem to be keeping a close eye on them though! He now appears to be King Charles' right hand man.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,746 ✭✭✭Quantum Erasure


    You'd think they'd have access to more sophisticated recording technology than something out of the 70s...



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,532 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    A cunning plan to place a "concealed" mic to look like a rather large misplaced nipple. 🤣🤣

    That's getting into the realm of ridiculousness.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,141 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    yes, it is her right to refuse.

    the royal family was also built on slavery, pilligery, slaughter and colonisation.

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,239 ✭✭✭Be right back


    Yet she chose to marry into a family with such a history!



  • Registered Users Posts: 330 ✭✭cezanne


    My tuppence worth megan markle was not a suitable bride for the british royal family it was a culture clash and her motives were questionable. She has a huge thirst for fame and being known and she uses the title of Duchess in a way that is not acceptable in British aristocratic circles. Harry may use her as a crutch as he is still at a loss of his early mothering and unfortunately does not seem to have the stiff upper lip of his family. if they lived a happy sunny life in LA i would be fine with it but they dont they try to devalue the royal family and it has just given them a huge slap in the face, even evil Oprah is back peddling so fast now she might even lose weight !! :) So hopefully the next heir & spare choose more wisely !!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,339 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Bit late now for Oprah to be backing away from the content of the interview. I mean the glaring inconsistencies in the claims of racism should have been challenged more because as I’ve said numerous times on this thread, I have no time for monarchy and I think I applauded them leaving as monarchy is a weird institution, but also I don’t like the allegation of racism being thrown around, and certainly the proof needs to match the high bar to call make such an allegation, and I and others have said on this one point the evidence has been very contradictory.

    And if they weren’t going to name the person then they should have said nothing because it left it sitting out there and suspicion fell on people who are completely innocent, and I really didn’t like that.



  • Posts: 8,856 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Totally and it’s one of the key reasons a lot of people have no time for Megan today



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,141 ✭✭✭✭end of the road



    she uses her title in a way that is perfectly fine, whyy you would care about a foreign monarchy potentially being slighted a bit is very odd.

    the royal family do a perfect job of devaluing themselves, all of their own accord, to sensible grown up people.

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,141 ✭✭✭✭end of the road



    a small amount yes.

    mostly though it's the fact she mentioned she experienced racism from a member of the RF in the first place, the fauners both here and in the UK are unable to deal with that.

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,339 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Well then as you and many others here(myself included) have no time for the monarchy why didn’t they name the person ? It was said that it would be very bad for that person. If they had evidence of racism they should’ve named the person. They didn’t and also Meghan said the conversations were relayed to her by harry so it wasn’t even a first hand interaction, yet Meghan felt that second hand and very inconsistent account of a alleged racist conversation on worldwide TV.

    Would anyone here like it if a family member went on TV and said you a racist with no concrete evidence of it ? I know I wouldn’t.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,627 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Hmm. She mustn’t have known about all that other “stuff,” so.

    yes, as I already said: As a free human being she has a right to refuse. As a working/serving member of RF, she has no rights to refuse. She can, but then she will face the consequences.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,627 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    No, decent impartial and unbiased people are not ready to automatically believe serious allegations without some actual concrete evidence. And guess what, there still has been zero evidence of any actual racism concerning this allegation.

    you’re beyond funny at this stage. Your utter disdain for the RF has zapped you of any sensible and objective reasoning.

    and anyone who doesn’t toe the line with Meghan and you here are labeled RF fawners. Seriously, is this the best you can do?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,578 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    decent impartial and unbiased people are not ready to automatically believe serious allegations

    You mean that someone in the Royal Family may be a bit racist? yeah that's way too far fetched.

    Paying off a rape victim, sure yeah that's a given, but being racist absolutely not. No way.

    😂



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,627 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Not sure what Philip and Andrew have to do with Markle’s racist claim. Unless you’re trying to say that because one person in the RF, a man from an era years ago showed racist tendencies, that now we must believe automatically what Markle is claiming?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,578 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    You don't have to automatically believe anything, the rape victims silence was bought in February by the way.

    Your assertion that no decent people could believe the claim is farcical given they have done far worse more even more recently.

    Also it was Harry who claimed it not his wife.

    Maybe best to get a rudimentary understanding of the claim before you dismiss it outright.

    Anyway the claim is that there was direct conversations about how dark the child would be, given the institution we are dealing with, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind those conversations could have took place. It's hardly a mental allegation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,578 ✭✭✭✭Boggles




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,627 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Ok, so someone had a conversation on how the baby’s skin color would look.

    And? Was this worthy of labeling the RF racist on a public talk show? Throwing a racist claim out over a conversation that could well have been nothing but genuine and innocent observing?

    Can you not see why people are not ready to take this as meaning someone in RF was a racist here? Being labeled a racist is a very serious label.

    Let’s assume this conversation happened. Does it automatically mean it was with racist intentions by a a genuine racist?

    She and Harry claimed it. They are a unit here. She was part of the claim as well.

    They both clearly implied that the conversation and person involved was/were racist.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,578 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    If someone in an inherently racist institution is "concerned" about a baby's skin colour, then yes I can see why that may have been seen as racist.

    Strange hill to die on though, do you normally go out of your way to justify racist acts? Sure twas only a bit of innocent observation. 😂

    Not a great look lad.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    She should put up or shut up. Making such a claim is very serious and should have the accuser brought to book.

    Iagree with POT in that the Oprah interview turned most people off Meghan. Lies about the wedding that wasn’t and accusations of racism without naming and shaming showed her true colours.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,627 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Nonsense. You’re the only one dying on any hill here, ready to believe this claim purely because of a disdain for the RF. If it was any other family, you’d likely be dismissing it.

    Hanging this claim and believing it based off the historical makeup of a family. Deal with here and now. They made the claim based off a conversation in 2020 I think was the year. No one was named, and the actual story, a very vague conversation based off someone allegedly passing comment on how the baby’s skin color would look.

    and you, and some others have ran with this because of your own disdain for an institution. If it damages the institution I despise, that’s great. This is pretty much the ignorant logic at play here.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,627 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Can I ask. If she and Harry named them, does this mean people then must believe?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,678 ✭✭✭Multipass


    How quickly people forget that Harry is on record racially abusing army colleagues. Or was that just a bit of banter, unlike the very serious crime of wondering out loud which parent a baby will look like.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,578 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Lol.

    Calm down. You are having an absolute mare, you went from claiming no decent person would believe it happened, to accepting it may have happened, but it was not racist, but innocent observation. 😂

    I get it, you are a monarchist and when people say negative factual things about the Royal Family it upsets you, it upsets you even more when members of the family say them. That's fair enough.

    But please don't pontificate that people only have opinions out of unfounded or unfair distain.

    This family paid off an underage rape victim less than 7 months ago. But but but the Queen cut ribbons for 7 decades.

    But you don't have to take my word for it, when a senior member of that family is calling them horrific it's probably wise to put the flag down and reflect a little before calling other people out for "ignorant logic".

    Anyway I imagine by the time Charlie has finished his petulant tour, chastising aids and fighting with stationary mainly and the dust settles, support for your beloved institution will nose dive to the point not even the Daily Mail will care.

    Just a thought. 👍️



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56,627 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    If you bothered to actually read what I wrote, you'd see I said that people aren't "automatically" ready to believe an allegation, based off it just being claimed. I never said no decent person could believe it. So, maybe if you slow down and read what I wrote....

    Pointless discussing with you when it's clear you will only read what suits your narrative. That being, anything that damages the RF, I will run with

    I prefer some substance and evidence and two sides etc, before I am ready to make a call. That's just me. Impartial, logic and common sense. Shoot me.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,578 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Well he didn't lick it off a stone did he? 😂



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,867 ✭✭✭chooseusername




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,514 ✭✭✭valoren


    They claimed a racist remark was made by a Royal. Their story about that remark, in a pre-recorded and edited interview, differed which to anyone being rational was a red flag straight off. Recollections did indeed vary. They magnanimously said they wouldn't name the person. Then the inevitable speculation was that this must surely have been Prince Phillip who was notorious for his racial gaffes through the years i.e. do you guys still chuck spears at each other, the guy who was on his death bed when it aired. Uh oh! PR problem. The bombshell was neutered and then what happened? Oprah told Gayle King who told us that Harry told Oprah that it wasn't him or the Queen which quelled those suspicions which then naturally (and deliberately) fell on the other senior royals. Yet Oprah now says she doesn't interfere in private family business. It's telling that they could say who it wasn't but not who it actually was and thus leave room for speculation.

    Looking at it objectively then this was a divorced biracial American celebrity who married into the whiter than white British royal family. Despite what some might think this was celebrated as progressive. She was afforded advisors, PR, staff. In general most, including me, hoped she'd be successful at it. Given patrons, titles, property. She was one of the most famous women in the world and, of course, this attracted incredible media attention. Given the option to keep acting if she wanted to. If they are being racist then they are admittedly being pretty shite at it. Unfortunately the same rules of protocol applied to Meghan just as it did to literally everyone else in that unique family. Even when they wanted out they were allowed out albeit with restrictions as to what the "out" related to in their request for half in/half out e.g. we'd prefer if you weren't brand ambassadors using your HRH titles thanks very much.

    Even despite this reported racism and neglect Meghan still wanted to be linked. Odd. They even got money to get settled overseas and, with a year to review their options, they were open to coming back full time if they so wished. I think they wanted out and were aghast at what being out actually meant i.e. curtailing security, removing expenses etc.

    In the end I guess being sixth on the call sheet simply wasn't enough. It wasn't acceptable that those PR staff, the advisors and men in grey suits were not in situ with the express purpose of aggrandizing Meghan and Harry and their brand rather than the monarch. They believed their own hype and as someone brilliantly pointed out earlier they became the Brian McFadden of the Royal family i.e. an initial surge and honeymoon period going solo but without the longevity or likeability to sustain themselves. I can imagine the execs at Netflix watching the pomp and ceremony of recent days as well as the Jubilee in June and thinking this was what they were supposedly getting exclusive access and rights to but they invested in a pair of lemons.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,408 ✭✭✭✭Sardonicat


    We don't know what the conversation was. "Hey, Hazzar, I hope your sprogs don't end up pale, freckly gingers like you! Hopefully they'll take after their mother" That's a comment about the possible skin tone of their kids. Is it racist?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,578 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    No he didn't mention anything how freckly the child would be, just that there were conversations about how dark the child would be.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement