Meghan & Harry: WE QUIT

Sir_Name · 20-02-2021 7:24am

cnocbui wrote: »

You clearly don't actually understand the term.

It’s a term in slang language that infers extreme dedication to a cause, or used as an ironic/humorous response to an idea/statement.

Anyway, I think you’re response was extreme.
Inferring the Queen has a deal with tabloids to the detriment of H&M. Ridiculous... the Queens mantra is to never explain/complain etc. Imagine the headlines if she rang him up... Queen dictating journalists.. no freedom of speech etc etc

H&M can do what they like, if they thought for one second that they could have a blend of both public duties and essentially being celebrities they were stupid. I do feel they want privacy only on their own terms. Which is their prerogative. However if you only want to dictate the narrative while also selling your interviews etc to the highest bidder then they themselves are also to blame. Generally, you can’t have one without the other.

While I agreed with the judgement outcome of the letter in the court, the hypocrisy is also annoying as it is widely known she (her/friends) also leaked information from that letter to other outlets?
H&M could be the nicest people on earth it’s not like any of us know them, personally I don’t think they come across as the most sincere in their actions.

20-02-2021 8:51am

cnocbui wrote: »

Let's say, for arguments sake, William and family are all tragically involved in a fatal transportation accident. You will then find out just how much of nobodies they are not.

I think there's something about the family not all travelling together? Because of this very reason.
Now that's probably proper travelling and not just nipping to the in-laws for Sunday dinner!

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 20-02-2021 9:21am

Deleted User wrote: »

I feel sorry for the Queen. After all the fanfare and joy and goodwill from when they got married, and now, to this ugly spat within the family. And none of it is her fault. She is admirably stoic when all around are losing their heads. But at her advanced age she must feel incredibly sad at what Harry's become.

What has he become?

Compared to the complete embarrassment that is Prince Andrew, I can’t think of anything Harry has done that is that bad.

Treppen · 20-02-2021 3:06pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

What has he become?

Compared to the complete embarrassment that is Prince Andrew, I can’t think of anything Harry has done that is that bad.

Let's face facts, Harry was never Royal blood anyway (unless you count Diana's side) so this is all moot.

20-02-2021 4:12pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

What has he become?

Compared to the complete embarrassment that is Prince Andrew, I can’t think of anything Harry has done that is that bad.

He has become a hypocritical virtue signaller who lectures the plebs about climate change while hopping on private jets left right and centre. He seems like Meghan's puppet, he speaks but it's her words coming out. He claims the UK media are racist without a shred of evidence to back it up.

Of course compared to Prince Andrew he is not too bad, but Harry has gone from being widely loved, a bit of a lad but with a good heart, to being derided for the double standards, to now being mostly pitied for the sorry situation he finds himself in, not even allowed to wear a military uniform anymore for example despite his previous service.

Prince William on the other hand seems like a much more stable, down to earth guy in comparison.

Nqp15hhu · 20-02-2021 4:20pm

I don’t think the U.K. media is racist. People here would’ve embraced her had she got on with her duties and didn’t try to constantly be “woke” and change the Royal Family to suit her own agenda.

I don’t believe she had long term plans to stay in the U.K. though.

razorblunt · 20-02-2021 4:53pm

Nqp15hhu wrote: »

I don’t think the U.K. media is racist. People here would’ve embraced her had she got on with her duties and didn’t try to constantly be “woke” and change the Royal Family to suit her own agenda.

I don’t believe she had long term plans to stay in the U.K. though.

Embraced ffs. The vast majority couldn’t give a shît just a bunch of old grannies harking bark to a different time and those weirdos that buy fine China with faces of the royals printed on the and cry when a royal dies. Lickers of boots.

Itssoeasy · 20-02-2021 4:53pm

Ah well sure if they aren’t bothered then let them off. I presume they’ll be relinquishing the titles of duke and duchess of Sussex then ? I mean it seems only fair to lose it if you’re not using it. In fairness Harry did seem to be the one of the brothers who you’d go for pints with but that’s changed it seems.

I mean the idea of a royal family is a bit strange to me being Irish but as history it’s interesting. In fairness the other European royalty while still being separate seem to be a bit of Craic at least.

Anyway, I see Prince Charles has visited Prince Phillip in hospital which at the age he’s at is a concern. 99 is some innings in fairness.

Stateofyou · 20-02-2021 5:18pm

Deleted User wrote: »

He has become a hypocritical virtue signaller who lectures the plebs about climate change while hopping on private jets left right and centre. He seems like Meghan's puppet, he speaks but it's her words coming out. He claims the UK media are racist without a shred of evidence to back it up.

Of course compared to Prince Andrew he is not too bad, but Harry has gone from being widely loved, a bit of a lad but with a good heart, to being derided for the double standards, to now being mostly pitied for the sorry situation he finds himself in, not even allowed to wear a military uniform anymore for example despite his previous service.

He has explained that at times when travelling (it's not all the time)they travel the way they do for security. Meghan even had threats against her.

It's also laughable to claim there isn't a shred of evidence to back up the racism that happened. It's well established, simple google search blows it out of the water if you cared to. You probably won't.

cnocbui · 20-02-2021 5:53pm

Sir_Name wrote: »

It’s a term in slang language that infers extreme dedication to a cause, or used as an ironic/humorous response to an idea/statement.

Anyway, I think you’re response was extreme.
Inferring the Queen has a deal with tabloids to the detriment of H&M. Ridiculous... the Queens mantra is to never explain/complain etc. Imagine the headlines if she rang him up... Queen dictating journalists.. no freedom of speech etc etc

H&M can do what they like, if they thought for one second that they could have a blend of both public duties and essentially being celebrities they were stupid. I do feel they want privacy only on their own terms. Which is their prerogative. However if you only want to dictate the narrative while also selling your interviews etc to the highest bidder then they themselves are also to blame. Generally, you can’t have one without the other.

While I agreed with the judgement outcome of the letter in the court, the hypocrisy is also annoying as it is widely known she (her/friends) also leaked information from that letter to other outlets?
H&M could be the nicest people on earth it’s not like any of us know them, personally I don’t think they come across as the most sincere in their actions.

Koolaid I take to be the unthinking acceptance and repeating of propaganda. Where H&M are concerned, the Daily Mail is the main production centre for H&M propaganda - all of it negative.

In short, the royal rota system is a pool of journalists from British newspapers (including the four tabloids listed above), which have special access to the royal family. In addition to simplifying security and logistics, the rota is used as a way for the country’s press to independently report on members of the royal family and to hold them accountable to the British public, as they receive some taxpayer funding. (Want to know more? Here’s a more thorough explanation.)

It’s fairly safe to assume that Harry and Meghan sought financial independence, so they could also be free of the rota system.

https://newsthud.com/harry-and-meghan-tell-four-british-tabloids-they-will-never-deal-with-them-again/

Apparently, the DM turned on Meghan when she refused them access which they considered their right under the agreement.

The DM are so obviously manipulating the public with endless sycophantic, suggary articles about how wonderful Kate is, turning water into wine, walking on water, apparently her farts smell like lavendar or honesuckle, depending on which multi thousand pound garment she is wearing and so conscientiously and admirably 'recycling' by donning for a second time. It makes me want to throw-up; They do the exact opposite with Meghan.

It's pure Summer Queen vs Winter Queen and is so blatant I can't comprehend how people can's see through the calculated deliberateness of their very lucrative theme.

McGinniesta · 20-02-2021 5:54pm

James Hewitt must be so proud.

cnocbui · 20-02-2021 6:03pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

He has explained that at times when travelling (it's not all the time)they travel the way they do for security. Meghan even had threats against her.

It's also laughable to claim there isn't a shred of evidence to back up the racism that happened. It's well established, simple google search blows it out of the water if you cared to. You probably won't.

You need to sharpen your Google skills, apparently.

Yes, the UK media’s coverage of Meghan Markle really is racist

The UK press’s continued denial of racism just shows how entrenched these attitudes are.
By Maya Goodfellow...

Part of my job as an academic is to examine how racism functions in the UK. Ever since Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex, and Prince Harry announced they were stepping back from their “roles” as senior royals, there’s been a debate in British media about whether the coverage of Markle has been racist. A debate that has — in a sad but predictable turn of irony — reproduced racism while denying it is prevalent.
...
For example, the press has talked about her “exotic DNA”; described her as “(almost) straight outta Compton”; attacked her for the very things that Kate Middleton, Prince William’s white wife, has been praised for; and compared the couple’s son to a chimpanzee.
...
Maya Goodfellow is an academic and writer. She holds a PhD from SOAS, University of London, and she is the author of Hostile Environment: How Immigrants Became Scapegoats.

https://www.vox.com/first-person/2020/1/17/21070351/meghan-markle-prince-harry-leaving-royal-family-uk-racism

Muahahaha · 20-02-2021 8:12pm

Nqp15hhu wrote: »

I don’t think the U.K. media is racist.

Raheem Sterling and other black footballers would disagree with you. Sterling even called out the Daily Mail for how they portray black footballers in a negative light compared to white ones in a positive light. Its very subtle what they do but there is no denying what they are up to.

20-02-2021 8:30pm

Muahahaha wrote: »

Raheem Sterling and other black footballers would disagree with you. Sterling even called out the Daily Mail for how they portray black footballers in a negative light compared to white ones in a positive light. Its very subtle what they do but there is no denying what they are up to.

Is it conscious or unconscious though? I think when he made the example it seemed like a lot of journalists actually thought he made a fair point and since then Sterling has received nothing but rave reviews. The fawning coverage over Marcus Rashford, while mostly justified, feels a little bit like they are overcompensating in terms of trying not to appear racist.

Water John · 20-02-2021 8:42pm

Elements of the media in the UK feel it's their right to decide which coloured person to praise and who to villify. By praising some doesn't negate that they are being racist.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 20-02-2021 10:22pm

Deleted User wrote: »

He has become a hypocritical virtue signaller who lectures the plebs about climate change while hopping on private jets left right and centre. He seems like Meghan's puppet, he speaks but it's her words coming out. He claims the UK media are racist without a shred of evidence to back it up.

Of course compared to Prince Andrew he is not too bad, but Harry has gone from being widely loved, a bit of a lad but with a good heart, to being derided for the double standards, to now being mostly pitied for the sorry situation he finds himself in, not even allowed to wear a military uniform anymore for example despite his previous service.

Prince William on the other hand seems like a much more stable, down to earth guy in comparison.

The Royal family has always lectured the lumpen proles. What else is new?

21-02-2021 6:06am

Water John wrote: »

Elements of the media in the UK feel it's their right to decide which coloured person to praise and who to villify. By praising some doesn't negate that they are being racist.

But how do you separate valid criticism of someone's hypocritical behaviour from genuine racism. If I criticise Floyd Mayweather for beating women is that allowed or is it racist because white people beat women also? A few out of context quotes does not a racist media maketh.

21-02-2021 6:09am

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

The Royal family has always lectured the lumpen proles. What else is new?

In modern times I don't recall the same stark "do as I say not as I do" type of double standards. Prince Charles harps on about the environment, sure, but he doesn't seem so blatant about applying a different standard to himself. He genuinely seems to care about the environment and loves being out in nature rather than it being opportunist and a chance of some good publicity.

21-02-2021 6:16am

cnocbui wrote: »

Koolaid I take to be the unthinking acceptance and repeating of propaganda. Where H&M are concerned, the Daily Mail is the main production centre for H&M propaganda - all of it negative.

https://newsthud.com/harry-and-meghan-tell-four-british-tabloids-they-will-never-deal-with-them-again/

Apparently, the DM turned on Meghan when she refused them access which they considered their right under the agreement.

The DM are so obviously manipulating the public with endless sycophantic, suggary articles about how wonderful Kate is, turning water into wine, walking on water, apparently her farts smell like lavendar or honesuckle, depending on which multi thousand pound garment she is wearing and so conscientiously and admirably 'recycling' by donning for a second time. It makes me want to throw-up; They do the exact opposite with Meghan.

It's pure Summer Queen vs Winter Queen and is so blatant I can't comprehend how people can's see through the calculated deliberateness of their very lucrative theme.

It's interesting that they broke their own boycott of the DM when they wanted some good publicity. Recently they release a statement to the press association on the new pregnancy, which entitled those 4 tabloids to run with the story. Again the double standards......they won't engage with the evil racist media outlets......unless it suits them to.

If they were consistent they would have chosen which newspapers could use their statement/photo. They knew exactly what they were doing. It's just so transparent and insincere everything they come out with.

valoren · 21-02-2021 9:58am

It's all about making their mutual millions.

Do you know how much someone like Kylie Jenner earns with one instagram post? It’s estimated at $1.2 million. For one post promoting/plugging a product. Given the number of follower’s she has and the consequential reach of such an audience then it explains how she can command such a fee. Even someone like UK reality TV “star” Gemma Collins is in on the influencer business model. She says the most she has made in one day is £75,000 on Black Friday posting paid promotions. That is the price of a house in some UK cities. For one day of “work”. Think of the ex-US Presidents and world leaders who charge vast sums of money to give private speeches for companies. Now obviously not just everyone can command that kind of money, you need to have some status, fame or reputation to leverage. What better status and fame than being a member of the British Royal Family? The prospect of making hundreds of millions was a motivating factor.

Meghan had a blog called The Tig styled as “a hub for the discerning palate - those with a hunger for food, travel, fashion & beauty.” That is the market she was aiming for, to leverage her status and use it for similarly lucrative paid promotions such as the above. She would be the “Wife, Actress, Mom, Duchess”. He'd be styled as the father, the husband, the regular bloke, the veteran who happens to be a Prince. They'd latch onto "issues" which are "personal" to them but it all leads to Books, speeches, TV shows, Instagram endorsements, commercial collaborations, “Sussex Royal” branded products. The end result is multi-multi-millionaire status.

A stumbling block towards that was the Royal Family policy of not cashing in commercially on their privileged position. I think Harry and Meghan leaving Royal duties was done expressly to forge the media career described above; security expenses covered with a few paid promotions. Crucially it would have been very attractive to Harry to earn his own income and not have to rely on the glorified pocket money of say the Duchy of Cornwall. The prospect of being cap in hand to his brother down the line was another motivator to get out of the Royal dodge. I think he was very much a factor in foregoing his royal duties to support this plan. They planned to have mutually compatible careers in the media by giving lucrative speeches and promoting products and services for a fee. However the Covid pandemic has (temporarily) inhibited this plan from coming to fruition and with lockdowns the couple were contained and incapable of networking to the multi millions awaiting them. The PR has been ongoing to control a positive narrative in lieu of normality resuming. The blurbs about public pressure, an unwelcoming Royal Family, intense media scrutiny and a striving for privacy are all a cover for the underlying “having their cake and eating it too” agenda; to extricate themselves from stifling royal duties but also leverage that status in a move to the US to make significant amounts of money.

Stoolie · 21-02-2021 11:18am

Cringe factor through this thread. The son of the king of a foreign country and his wife , and we are fawning over them and wrapped up in their antics !

Best to ignore , methinks

Stateofyou · 21-02-2021 11:30am

Stoolie wrote: »

Cringe factor through this thread. The son of the king of a foreign country and his wife , and we are fawning over them and wrapped up in their antics !

Best to ignore , methinks

Yet imagine caring enough to click on the thread and comment. :pac:

Lads, don't be interested in anyone or anything outside of Ireland, Stoolie doesn't approve. :rolleyes:

Stateofyou · 21-02-2021 11:32am

Deleted User wrote: »

It's interesting that they broke their own boycott of the DM when they wanted some good publicity. Recently they release a statement to the press association on the new pregnancy, which entitled those 4 tabloids to run with the story. Again the double standards......they won't engage with the evil racist media outlets......unless it suits them to.

If they were consistent they would have chosen which newspapers could use their statement/photo. They knew exactly what they were doing. It's just so transparent and insincere everything they come out with.

What has their pregnancy announcement got to do with DM? DM were "entitled" to release it, so because they'll write about them if they sneeze wrong that's breaking their boycott of them?

Anyway, I thought it was the photographer himself who released the image and made comment.

Mrsmum · 21-02-2021 11:36am

I have to say, for me the moment I can't get past was when Meghan stood on African soil and whinged about her own problems. Nobody asks if she is ok after spending the day with women living really tough lives. My jaw still drops when I think of it. She was not even there privately on her own time on a holiday or something but only there representing The Queen ie working. Who, pours forth a sob story when they are on the job. Shockingly unprofessional. And going on about poor me, in Africa of all places, 100% self centered and 100 % tone deaf. Couldn't respect someone like that.
It's shouldn't be any problem if they wanted to quit royal life but I do think Harry, for his own sake, should have taken care at all times to still protect future relationships with his family.

Muahahaha · 21-02-2021 6:05pm

Yeah Meghans moaning on their Africa trip was completely tone deaf, it was a real wtf? moment

silverharp · 21-02-2021 6:57pm

I'd be surprised is they grow old together, if PaddyPower had 10 year odds on a divorce it would be worth a tenner bet

chite · 22-02-2021 10:16pm

While journalists are obsessing over them 2, most people seem to be ignoring Matt Hancock's handling of the cronyistic covid contracts (alliteration ftw).

https://twitter.com/zarahsultana/status/1363118324511571972?s=20

Mr.Wemmick · 22-02-2021 11:07pm

chite wrote: »

While journalists are obsessing over them 2, most people seem to be ignoring Matt Hancock's handling of the cronyistic covid contracts (alliteration ftw).

Exactly.

And people follow suit - roll in the muck as told to do by the Daily Fail.. just like sheep, as seen on this thread. Megan is selfish.. Megan is mean.. to be hated.. on and on, like fools. Who cares? Who knows her? Is she a criminal like many in the government? No. Like their rich crony tory-funding mates? No. Is she a Pedo like some in the RF? No.

I hope she and her husband are the beginning of the end of the UK monarchy and the Trump-like corruption that goes on in the UK.

Good luck to them.

Stateofyou · 23-02-2021 10:40am

Mrsmum wrote: »

I have to say, for me the moment I can't get past was when Meghan stood on African soil and whinged about her own problems. Nobody asks if she is ok after spending the day with women living really tough lives. My jaw still drops when I think of it. She was not even there privately on her own time on a holiday or something but only there representing The Queen ie working. Who, pours forth a sob story when they are on the job. Shockingly unprofessional. And going on about poor me, in Africa of all places, 100% self centered and 100 % tone deaf. Couldn't respect someone like that.
It's shouldn't be any problem if they wanted to quit royal life but I do think Harry, for his own sake, should have taken care at all times to still protect future relationships with his family.

When I read things like this, it's so plain to see the difference in how people are treated. When it's a famous person and you're behind a keyboard, people especially have no hesitation in being unkind and unsympathetic. Would you tell a friend or family member who broke down whilst in work that they are being unprofessional and you've lost all respect? I doubt it (and sincerely hope not). Many people struggle to keep their sh-t together in work, in social situations, parenting-whatever it is. People need more understanding and kindness, less judgment and harsh words.

But what your post reminded me of is a handful of my work colleagues or clients over the years who have had mental health issues or crises. IN the workplace. People aren't robots, and we usually don't get to choose the time or place when the final straw breaks the back. We don't and didn't tell these people they're shockingly unprofessional going on about their own problems while at work. We listened, empathised, and got them the help that they needed. No one attacked them while they were down.
Maybe it's too easy for people to forget M&H are real people, going through a ton of trauma, grief, and change.
When the statements like above are made, it hurts all of us in recognising and supporting each other's mental health. It's ok to not be ok, whether you're in work, at home, on holiday, royal or ordinary citizen. People reading the above and seeing similar reactions towards them doesn't help the larger conversations about mental health and removing stigma. It doesn't help anyone to feel more comfortable about speaking out and releasing their burdens and getting help.

23-02-2021 10:48am

Stateofyou wrote: »

When I read things like this, it's so plain to see the difference in how people are treated. When it's a famous person and you're behind a keyboard, people especially have no hesitation in being unkind and unsympathetic. Would you tell a friend or family member who broke down whilst in work that they are being unprofessional and you've lost all respect? I doubt it (and sincerely hope not). Many people struggle to keep their sh-t together in work, in social situations, parenting-whatever it is. People need more understanding and kindness, less judgment and harsh words.

But what your post reminded me of is a handful of my work colleagues or clients over the years who have had mental health issues or crises. IN the workplace. People aren't robots, and we usually don't get to choose the time or place when the final straw breaks the back. We don't and didn't tell these people they're shockingly unprofessional going on about their own problems while at work. We listened, empathised, and got them the help that they needed. No one attacked them while they were down.
Maybe it's too easy for people to forget M&H are real people, going through a ton of trauma, grief, and change.
When the statements like above are made, it hurts all of us in recognising and supporting each other's mental health. It's ok to not be ok, whether you're in work, at home, on holiday, royal or ordinary citizen. People reading the above and seeing similar reactions towards them doesn't help the larger conversations about mental health and removing stigma. It doesn't help anyone to feel more comfortable about speaking out and releasing their burdens and getting help.

Don't you think that spending a day meeting people living in abject poverty in Africa would give some perspective on any real or imagined problems? We all have troubles, but a little self-awareness would make most people feel grateful for all the privileges and luxuries we have in comparison to people like that. I'm talking about running water, electricity, basic things like that. To then complain to the media while they are physically standing yards away from people with real, serious problems, well, that just seems a little bit jarring for most people.

Stateofyou · 23-02-2021 10:59am

Deleted User wrote: »

Don't you think that spending a day meeting people living in abject poverty in Africa would give some perspective on any real or imagined problems? We all have troubles, but a little self-awareness would make most people feel grateful for all the privileges and luxuries we have in comparison to people like that. I'm talking about running water, electricity, basic things like that. To then complain to the media while they are physically standing yards away from people with real, serious problems, well, that just seems a little bit jarring for most people.

Going by your logic then, Wojtek, no one in first world countries should be having notions thinking they have "real" problems. That's belittling and dismissive. And I'm sure they are very aware of their privilege and luxuries, as we all have. We are all aware that someone, millions, in other countries have it far worse than we do. That reality doesn't mean we aren't allowed to struggle or suffer in our own lives. Honestly, your post is just as bad.

They didn't ignore what they were there to do, and got on with it the best they could. They did their job. They can help and serve and be going through something at the same time, too. It's not mutually exclusive.
They have really serious and painful personal issues. It's not helpful to anyone, at any time, to just dismiss their mental health issues, or anyone's, and tell them to buck up and think of all the other human suffering. That causes more harm no matter who you are.

meeeeh · 23-02-2021 11:04am

Privileged people can find it hard too so I have no issues with that. That being said if you are in a crisis a journo on a trip to Africa probably isn't the person qualified to talk to.

Anyway royals are paid very well to dance like monkeys for public. In my opinion they should be able to step away if they want to. They are also entitled to have whatever family spat they want to have like anybody else. That doesn't mean I will listen to some empty self help drivel on Spotify though.

Mr.Wemmick · 23-02-2021 11:25am

Stateofyou wrote: »

Going by your logic then, Wojtek, no one in first world countries should be having notions thinking they have "real" problems. That's belittling and dismissive. And I'm sure they are very aware of their privilege and luxuries, as we all have. We are all aware that someone, millions, in other countries have it far worse than we do. That reality doesn't mean we aren't allowed to struggle or suffer in our own lives. Honestly, your post is just as bad.

They didn't ignore what they were there to do, and got on with it the best they could. They did their job. They can help and serve and be going through something at the same time, too. It's not mutually exclusive.
They have really serious and painful personal issues. It's not helpful to anyone, at any time, to just dismiss their mental health issues, or anyone's, and tell them to buck up and think of all the other human suffering. That causes more harm no matter who you are.

It's akin to the old poor babies in Africa cringe patronising rhetoric - used to hear it non-stop in the 80s growing up. Now it's internet warriors climbing on one's high horse to judge. Good grief. No one knows her!

Similar to a wealthy Mum or Dad who have children with medical or learning difficulties, how dare they get upset or have a mental crisis, when oodles of money to afford therapies and support is not an issue while the bulk of the disabled population struggle with very little support..

It's a childish disregard and a long whinge.. no one knows the woman. She comes across in the media like the late Diana, both fragile and failed to have that mental strength just to put up and shut up. Sinead O'Connor is another one who can not keep quiet, must be difficult feeling fragile a lot of the time and like you're drowning in a mental crisis.

Good luck to Megan. More power to her.. reckon she will do more good in the future on a charity mental-health basis than a bag full of useless royal family add-ons.

Stateofyou · 23-02-2021 11:27am

meeeeh wrote: »

Privileged people can find it hard too so I have no issues with that. That being said if you are in a crisis a journo on a trip to Africa probably isn't the person qualified to talk to.

Anyway royals are paid very well to dance like monkeys for public. In my opinion they should be able to step away if they want to. They are also entitled to have whatever family spat they want to have like anybody else. That doesn't mean I will listen to some empty self help drivel on Spotify though.

People have a right to speak out on whatever platform is available to them. Whether that's to a friend, on social media, at a conference, or making a public statement.
I also think they made a positive impact on other people's mental health in speaking out, not just their own. When famous/popular people speak out about issues that affect a lot of people, it can reach and impact a lot more people. I actually felt the opposite to some here. I respected them more for being brave enough to speak out. When Meghan specifically said not a lot of people have asked if she's okay, and that she's not, they are not okay, I think it took a hell of a lot of guts to do that. It normalises speaking out, instead of damaging yourself more keeping it all in. She was also trying to function in a very dysfunctional family system at that time "The Firm." That's unique to them and all the dynamics at play. They used a platform they had to help themselves and others at a time they needed to. Many do the same with the resources they have.

meeeeh · 23-02-2021 11:33am

Stateofyou wrote: »

People have a right to speak out on whatever platform is available to them. Whether that's to a friend, on social media, at a conference, or making a public statement.
I also think they made a positive impact on other people's mental health in speaking out, not just their own. When famous/popular people speak out about issues that affect a lot of people, it can reach and impact a lot more people. I actually felt the opposite to some here. I respected them more for being brave enough to speak out. When Meghan specifically said not a lot of people have asked if she's okay, and that she's not, they are not okay, I think it took a hell of a lot of guts to do that. It normalises speaking out, instead of damaging yourself more keeping it all in. She was also trying to function in a very dysfunctional family system at that time "The Firm." That's unique to them and all the dynamics at play. They used a platform they had to help themselves and others at a time they needed to. Many do the same with the resources they have.

They have a right to speak out as much as they want to or as much as people want to listen to them. However I don't think their waffle is good for anything else but their bank balance. The only problem is that there is a whole pile of bored celebrities at home at the moment who also think they are overqualified to talk about mental health. They might have more competition than they expected.

Stateofyou · 23-02-2021 11:38am

meeeeh wrote: »

They have a right to speak out as much as they want to or as much as people want to listen to them. However I don't think their waffle is good for anything else but their bank balance. The only problem is that there is a whole pile of bored celebrities at home at the moment who also think they are overqualified to talk about mental health. They might have more competition than they expected.

So according to you, they weren't suffering with mental health, it's only "waffle" and some kind of agenda to line their pockets- at a time when they hadn't even stepped back as senior royals?

Everyone is qualified to speak about mental health. Everyone. And I think it's great that they are. It takes an enormous amount of courage that many don't have.
Everyone seems to pay attention to them love them or hate them so at the end of the day good messages are being put out and received due to their status. Good for them, because they are obviously good people doing their best. They're not doing shady, illegal, shallow bs.

meeeeh · 23-02-2021 11:47am

Stateofyou wrote: »

So according to you, they weren't suffering with mental health, it's only "waffle" and some kind of agenda to line their pockets- at a time when they hadn't even stepped back as senior royals?

Everyone is qualified to speak about mental health. Everyone. And I think it's great that they are. It takes an enormous amount of courage that many don't have.
Everyone seems to pay attention to them love them or hate them so at the end of the day good messages are being put out and received due to their status. Good for them, because they are obviously good people doing their best. They're not doing shady, illegal, shallow bs.

I think shallow is actually their modus operandi. I'm sorry but they are an intellectual equivalent of chicken nuggets. They are not shady or illegal or anything else but their biggest contribution to the good of society is the lawsuit they won and some charity work Harry did for soldiers. As for celebrities talking about mental health they followed the path of any other actor, singer, model or sports person who is not qualified to do anything else after they lost their original job.

Stateofyou · 23-02-2021 12:09pm

meeeeh wrote: »

I think shallow is actually their modus operandi. I'm sorry but they are an intellectual equivalent of chicken nuggets. They are not shady or illegal or anything else but their biggest contribution to the good of society is the lawsuit they won and some charity work Harry did for soldiers. As for celebrities talking about mental health they followed the path of any other actor, singer, model or sports person who is not qualified to do anything else after they lost their original job.

Eh... what? Harry was well educated and Meghan is a college graduate, who pushed to change inequity around her since she was a child. Her mother reared her to be involved in charity work. I think they've both done amazing work in their lives separately and together. That is their biggest contribution to society, which continues now.

They didn't lose their jobs. Meghan chose to give up acting to marry Harry. They both chose to leave their positions as senior royals as it was harming them and their mental health.

If we all waited to be "qualified" to have impacts on our communities or the world (whatever that even means) then we'd all be worse for it. That just seems like such small minded thinking. Don't bring down others who are sticking their necks out and striving to help and make positive change where they can. All you need is empathy, courage and resources- not "qualifications." Life qualifies us all. Luckily these two have those things in spades.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Mrsmum · 23-02-2021 12:10pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

When I read things like this, it's so plain to see the difference in how people are treated. When it's a famous person and you're behind a keyboard, people especially have no hesitation in being unkind and unsympathetic. Would you tell a friend or family member who broke down whilst in work that they are being unprofessional and you've lost all respect? I doubt it (and sincerely hope not). Many people struggle to keep their sh-t together in work, in social situations, parenting-whatever it is. People need more understanding and kindness, less judgment and harsh words.

But what your post reminded me of is a handful of my work colleagues or clients over the years who have had mental health issues or crises. IN the workplace. People aren't robots, and we usually don't get to choose the time or place when the final straw breaks the back. We don't and didn't tell these people they're shockingly unprofessional going on about their own problems while at work. We listened, empathised, and got them the help that they needed. No one attacked them while they were down.
Maybe it's too easy for people to forget M&H are real people, going through a ton of trauma, grief, and change.
When the statements like above are made, it hurts all of us in recognising and supporting each other's mental health. It's ok to not be ok, whether you're in work, at home, on holiday, royal or ordinary citizen. People reading the above and seeing similar reactions towards them doesn't help the larger conversations about mental health and removing stigma. It doesn't help anyone to feel more comfortable about speaking out and releasing their burdens and getting help.

Lol I have no intention of wasting any time arguing over MM. I have given my opinion of her and now my time is better spent.

Stateofyou · 23-02-2021 12:12pm

Mrsmum wrote: »

Lol I have no intention of wasting any time arguing over MM. I have given my opinion of her and now my time is better spent.

Then you already have wasted your time according to your own standards.
Translation: now you realise how badly your post comes across and it's not really defensible so you can't. LOL.

Mrsmum · 23-02-2021 12:13pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

Then you already have wasted your time according to your own standards.
Translation: now you realise how badly your post comes across and it's not really defensible so you can't. LOL.

Lol.

Stateofyou · 23-02-2021 12:18pm

Mrsmum wrote: »

Lol.

:pac::pac:

meeeeh · 23-02-2021 12:39pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

Eh... what? Harry was well educated and Meghan is a college graduate, who pushed to change inequity around her since she was a child. Her mother reared her to be involved in charity work. I think they've both done amazing work in their lives separately and together. That is their biggest contribution to society, which continues now.

They didn't lose their jobs. Meghan chose to give up acting to marry Harry. They both chose to leave their positions as senior royals as it was harming them and their mental health.

If we all waited to be "qualified" to have impacts on our communities or the world (whatever that even means) then we'd all be worse for it. That just seems like such small minded thinking. Don't bring down others who are sticking their necks out and striving to help and make positive change where they can. All you need is empathy, courage and resources- not "qualifications." Life qualifies us all. Luckily these two have those things in spades.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Look they are very well paid for what they do and they are making their work public. We are perfectly entitled to be critical of their work after all they are selling it to us. We can review perfumes, books, clothes or any other product so we can review their contributions. Not buying their stuff doesn't make me small minded. It just means unlike you I won't be their customer.

Stateofyou · 23-02-2021 12:45pm

meeeeh wrote: »

Look they are very well paid for what they do and they are making their work public. We are perfectly entitled to be critical of their work after all they are selling it to us. We can review perfumes, books, clothes or any other product so we can review their contributions. Not buying their stuff doesn't make me small minded. It just means unlike you I won't be their customer.

I hear you but just to clarify, the comment about being small-minded in thinking was in regards to your statement about "qualifications" to be in a service/charity type role and speaking up about issues important to someone. It had nothing to do with purchasing products as a consumer, but I think you already knew that.

meeeeh · 23-02-2021 12:48pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

I hear you but just to clarify, the comment about being small-minded in thinking was in regards to your statement about "qualifications" to be in a service/charity type role and speaking up about issues important to someone. It had nothing to do with purchasing products as a consumer, but I think you already knew that.

Charity is product just like anything else. It's part of the brand.

JustAThought · 23-02-2021 12:51pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

Eh... what? Harry was well educated and Meghan is a college graduate, who pushed to change inequity around her since she was a child. Her mother reared her to be involved in charity work. I think they've both done amazing work in their lives separately and together. That is their biggest contribution to society, which continues now.

They didn't lose their jobs. Meghan chose to give up acting to marry Harry. They both chose to leave their positions as senior royals as it was harming them and their mental health.

If we all waited to be "qualified" to have impacts on our communities or the world (whatever that even means) then we'd all be worse for it. That just seems like such small minded thinking. Don't bring down others who are sticking their necks out and striving to help and make positive change where they can. All you need is empathy, courage and resources- not "qualifications." Life qualifies us all. Luckily these two have those things in spades.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Harry is supposed to be as thick as pig****. He may have inherited 20m and been born a royal but he was forced to stay back a year and hd to give up one of his two courses ‘to focus on the other’ - Art and Geography ffs. At age 16. We do 7 or 8 homours level subjects here as standard til 18. He could barely scrape a C in one. And thats with private tutors, 20k a year school fees and a whole academia egging him on to not fail. Harry could hardly be failed out of Eton could he? Sure - anybody can be unlucky in the brain department but lets not try and make an einstein of him
just because he’s inherited huge wealth.

Stateofyou · 23-02-2021 12:51pm

meeeeh wrote: »

Charity is product just like anything else. It's part of the brand.

You're just changing the conversation now when it suits you, instead of answering questions or keeping the meaning and context of what was written between us.
Why are you doing that?

Charity work is a product now, ok... :rolleyes:

Mr.Wemmick · 23-02-2021 12:52pm

meeeeh wrote: »

Look they are very well paid for what they do and they are making their work public. We are perfectly entitled to be critical of their work after all they are selling it to us. We can review perfumes, books, clothes or any other product so we can review their contributions. Not buying their stuff doesn't make me small minded. It just means unlike you I won't be their customer.

But there is no objectivity: being critical of their work, lol. Her work?! It's about insulting her, her intentions, her behaviour, how she presents as a person. Good grief.. talk about a strong whiff of whataboutery with folks. The way the tabloids have attacked her is very personal and the sheep follow and continue the hate as seen all over this thread.

Buying her stuff, being a customer of theirs is neither here nor there, but you use it your last sentence to grandstand and throw an insult at another poster. LOL.

Stateofyou · 23-02-2021 12:53pm

JustAThought wrote: »

Harry is supposed to be as thick as pig****. He may have inherited 20m and been born a royal but he was forced to stay back a year and hd to give up one of his two courses ‘to focus on the other’ - Art and Geography ffs. At age 16. We do 7 or 8 homours level subjects here as standard til 18. He could barely scrape a C in one. And thats with private tutors, 20k a year school fees and a whole academia egging him on to not fail. Harry could hardly be failed out of Eton could he? Sure - anybody can be unlucky in the brain department but lets not try and make an einstein of him
just because he’s inherited huge wealth.

Nice. And where did you come by this information, Daily Mail? Bet you think that everything you read there is true, and now you're basing all your outrage on a story you read in some rag. And Harry is the thicko? Brilliant stuff.

JustAThought · 23-02-2021 12:53pm

Stateofyou wrote: »

You're just changing the conversation now when it suits you, instead of answering questions or keeping the meaning and context of what was written between us.
Why are you doing that?

Charity work is a product now, ok... :rolleyes:

it certainly is. Look at the lists of charities on the Charities regulator list and follow up on what the company directors do and what salaries they draw - from the charities funds. Its eye watering in many instances. The day of the landed gentry doing poorhouse work and paying for it from their own pockets is long over.

Meghan & Harry: WE QUIT

Comments