Meghan and Harry 4: Working for Netflix

[viii]

Not once in their departure statement did they say they wanted privacy, so I’m not sure why people are holding them to this standard that they never wanted!

[anjulibai]

19 minutes ago, viii said:

Not once in their departure statement did they say they wanted privacy, so I’m not sure why people are holding them to this standard that they never wanted!

Because the British media keeps bringing it up as a talking point. 

[The Mother Dust]

Just throwing in my 2 cents to say that I like H&M.  Just like anyone else they are not above criticism.   Never really understood the level of vitriol that they've received (especially her) from some corners, i'm mainly thinking of social media here.  Just a few days ago this one youtube channel run by two women said "oh, she is going to be interviewed by "Okra."  The other one looked at her and sarcastic smiled, fake laughed, and said again "Okra?" "Yeah, Okra!" said the other one, with an equally sarcastic little laugh and smile on her face.   I wanted to punch both of them in the mouth for that.  I reported it instead. 

Edited March 4, 2021 by The Mother Dust

[omilona]

Well they've spent quite a few pennies on lawsuits regarding privacy, so there's that. What do you think about her bullying  multiple female staff 

 

Edited March 4, 2021 by omilona

[tabitha2]

Where there is smoke there is fire. If it was just two or three  accusations or rumors  I would say it’s trash talk but numerous stories of firing nannies, long time staff trying to leave, demanding/entitled behavior coming that have been floating around for years can’t be discounted so easily. What Meghan wants Meghan gets as the saying goes.

[Jackie3]

7 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

It’s not just Andrew. If the Queen had a major flaw it’s not interfering in her adult children’s and grandchildren matters and life’s and avoiding issues with them when she needs to put her foot down. She is no disciplinarian and never has been.

What in the world? Do you have adult kids? I do. The WORST  thing you can do try to  discipline *adult* kids. That's the way to chase them away. It's completely inappropriate too.

This sounds like something the fundies would recommend!

Why would anyone interfere with the lives of their adult children (and grandchildren!)? Your children aren't going to appreciate interference, not at all.  Grandchildren aren't going to let their grandmas boss them around, unless the relationship is really unhealthy.

If your adult kids ask your advice, fine. Otherwise, adults are adults. It's inappropriate and rude to try to "discipline" them or "put your foot down." At best, they'll laugh at you. At worst, they'll estrange themselves from you. What kind of "discipline" could a parent or grandparent impose, anyway? 

1 hour ago, tabitha2 said:

What Meghan wants Meghan gets as the saying goes.

That's a good thing! I really admire people who set out to get something, and are successful. Do you prefer cowing, submissive fundie women? That's not much of a model.

Edited March 4, 2021 by Jackie3

[viii]

Lawsuits for privacy are completely different. Harry and Meghan didn’t step back to live a private life and never appear in public again. They stepped back to live their lives on their terms, which meant giving up public service and becoming financially independent. That doesn’t mean they don’t deserve to keep the personal matters they want private. 

I figured you’d stick your head in here eventually, but I’m surprised it took this long.  

[Jackie3]

7 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

Huh? What did Kate ever do to anyone? She is just a very traditional Royal and will make a  traditional Queen consort some day. That is neither a praise nor criticism as I don’t think Kate is all that interesting really though she is perfect for William as a mate and that’s not nothing. 

Well, she's white and pretty. I really can't find anything to admire about her, other than that. (That seems to be enough for many people, though!)

She chose her college based on where William was going. That's pretty pathetic.

She has had no career or ambition of any kind, other than marrying William. That's sad. I'm more likely to admire a "B-list starlet" than a woman with no goals in life at all (except to marry well).

B-list starlets at least have the gumption to get headshots, take acting lessons, drive to auditions, get rejected, find an agent, take small jobs, learn to manage the money they make, budget, etc. That's a heck of lot more admirable than living off your parent's money and trying to marry well!

Kate was so desperate to attract William's attention, she walked down a runway wearing a see-through dress.She also lived with him in college. Nothing wrong with either of these, unless you criticize a Black woman for doing similar things.

Kate has never supported herself, and never earned enough money to do so. She's never even rented an apartment before--during her brief time before her marriage, she lived in her parents' fabulously expensive apartment, while she pretended she was supporting herself. She didn't even live alone.

Most of her "work" has been high-society charity work done with other rich ladies, for exposure and virtue signaling purposes.

[viii]

I think Kate chose her university before it was announced William was going there, unless she was privy to circle chatter before the rest of us peasants. 

[anjulibai]

32 minutes ago, viii said:

I think Kate chose her university before it was announced William was going there, unless she was privy to circle chatter before the rest of us peasants. 

A few royal reporters have said that she turned down a spot at Edinburgh to go to St. Andrews at the last minute, after it was announced that William was going there, and that it was her at her mother's prompting. 

[louisa05]

6 minutes ago, anjulibai said:

A few royal reporters have said that she turned down a spot at Edinburgh to go to St. Andrews at the last minute, after it was announced that William was going there, and that it was her at her mother's prompting. 

And they have zero proof of that. 

I pointed this out on a different forum earlier: what way of meeting a partner would have been sufficient to prove that neither William or Harry married someone who somehow set out to marry them? What meeting would have been sufficiently "innocent" to prove that? The really interesting thing is that no male partner of a royal has been accused of scheming to marry them. The closest is Louis Mountbatten being said to have schemed to get Philip married to Elizabeth. But Philip was never personally accused (at worst painted as the innocent pawn of his uncle). In contrast, Diana, Kate and Meghan have all been accused of scheming (along with their family members in the first two cases) to marry their husbands. This leads me to believe that that accusation is firmly rooted in misogyny. 

It is also notable that Kate quite literally LOST A JOB because of the press stalking her at work. Then she was accused of having no ambition and/or being too lazy to work by the same press. Kind of a no win situation. 

[Jackie3]

2 hours ago, viii said:

I think Kate chose her university before it was announced William was going there, unless she was privy to circle chatter before the rest of us peasants. 

Kate had gotten into her dream school (Edinburgh). She turned it down after William had been admitted to St Andrews. She took a gap year (so did William), got accepted to St. Andrews, and attended it with William. Her mother encouraged her to do all this!

Of course, she had to give up an excellent art history program at Edinburgh but her real career goal was marrying royalty. 

Edited March 4, 2021 by Jackie3

[The Mother Dust]

oof. Quote "I don't know how they could expect that after all of this time, we would still just be silent if there is an active role that the Firm is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us," Meghan said.

 

Edited March 4, 2021 by The Mother Dust

[LittleOwl]

I really do wonder if Wallis Simpson would have received a similar treatment if thier relationship was happening in the 21st Century. 

[Topaz]

4 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

Kate had gotten into her dream school (Edinburgh). She turned it down after William had been admitted to St Andrews. She took a gap year (so did William), got accepted to St. Andrews, and attended it with William. Her mother encouraged her to do all this!

Of course, she had to give up an excellent art history program at Edinburgh but her real career goal was marrying royalty. 

St Andrew’s is also a very well thought of university popular with the upper classes. It’s got high entry requirements (or did have at that time, I would imagine it still does but I haven’t had reason to check). She certainly wasn’t settling for a second rate education by attending it. St Andrew’s was reported to have a huge surge in applications after it was announced that William was going there so if Catherine did go there to try and meet William she’s far from the only one. 
 
I was in the same academic year as William and Catherine. St Andrew’s was one of the places I was considering (although I crossed it off my list before William was known to be going there), so I remember all this quite well.

[louisa05]

7 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

Kate had gotten into her dream school (Edinburgh). She turned it down after William had been admitted to St Andrews. She took a gap year (so did William), got accepted to St. Andrews, and attended it with William. Her mother encouraged her to do all this!

Of course, she had to give up an excellent art history program at Edinburgh but her real career goal was marrying royalty. 

Again, there’s no proof of any of this being true. Everyone is constantly up in arms that people believe lies in the press about Meghan, yet everything disparaging written about Catherine is accepted as gospel and that’s okay. 
It is well known that she dated someone else her first year of college. What an odd way to get a different guy! 

[viii]

Yeah, I'm not sure how much I believe the stories about Carole pushing Kate to be with William and become Queen. They seem like a very close knit family, and Kate went through horrible scrutiny while dating William. I just don't see a loving mother pushing her child through that, but who knows. 

That's the thing - 95% of the time we honestly just don't know the truth and likely never will.  

[Jackie3]

12 hours ago, louisa05 said:

And they have zero proof of that. 

There's lots of proof of that. Her teachers at Marlborough (her high school) have attested that she turned down a spot at Edinburgh. They were surprise because this had been her first choice.

Quote

According to Jasper Selwyn, the career adviser at Kate's boarding school, Marlborough College, she had ranked Edinburgh as her top choice and had a spot at her dream school.

"As far as I am aware she had a place confirmed at Edinburgh," he told royal expert and biographer Katie Nicholl in her book Kate: The Future Queen. "She was accepted through the usual UCAS routine. In those days, you applied for five courses and got acceptances and rejections depending on your grades. You chose one firm place and one insurance. Kate's firm choice was Edinburgh and that was confirmed."

 

Edited March 4, 2021 by Jackie3

[SweetJuly]

I really don't think it matters whether or not Kate or Meghan "aimed", "set out" or schemed to bag a prince.

They may as well have. Many did. I know I certainly would have tried my luck had I been in any way eligible or able to hang out somewhere a prince might pass through

What people seem to forget is: No matter how hard someone might try (or even be pushed) to marry someone, they really can't do it by themselves. The "target" has to respond favourably as well.

Meaning Kate was surely not the first or last girl to present herself seductively to William, and Meghan surely wasn't the first or last woman to try and charm herself into Harry's heart, and yet William decided to marry Kate and Harry decided to marry Meghan.

[viii]

I would have totally tried my luck as well, LOL. 

Going on more of what @SweetJuly said, William and Harry are surrounded by advisors and by people whose literal job is to protect them, not just physically but from people who want to use them. If Kate or Meghan had been truly worrisome, I feel like they would have been vetted out before either relationship had a chance to get serious. 

[Topaz]

If I had ended up at St Andrew’s I’d have certainly kept an eye out for William too. 

[LittleOwl]

2 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

Marlborough (her high school)

Having played hockey against Marlborough and hearing all sorts of rumours from there first hand... I highly doubt that. 

 

However, I'm happy to change my opinion if I read anything first hand from the school. 

[just_ordinary]

3 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

There's lots of proof of that. Her teachers at Marlborough (her high school) have attested that she turned down a spot at Edinburgh. They were surprise because this had been her first choice.

 

Lots of proof? Like one statement by one teacher? Kind of like the one odd school friend from Meghan’s past showing up and criticising her is now a trustworthy source? Or a petty father? A mean half-sister? On what basis do you decide what is a trustworthy source and what not?

I agree with the people that say, H&M have pretty bad PR people. Their timing is always off. The SA interview- why not wait 24h AFTER you wrapped the tour up?
Announcing their step back- why not tell BP they either come up with a coordinated statement in 24h or it goes public without them? A press leak could have been easily ignored. And it would have saved them the embarrassment of having to backtrack from their massive announcement in how they would move further, when they realised it would not be that way. 
Anouncing Archwell, with NO substance for months.

What I also find odd- why would they tell everyone who wants hear it how many lovely family zooms with the Queen or Charles they have (waffle maker anyone) if she is the biggest hypocrite of them all. Protecting Andrew, while punishing Harry, and as some say leaving them to the tabloid wolves to deflect. This doesn’t add up.
 

I am pretty sure the snippets we saw are carefully edited teasers to drum up the attention. I wouldn’t even be surprised they are juiciest bits and will not look the same if you watch it. They are like cliffhangers- the real story is probably mostly boring and tame. It could totally turn out that “the firm” Meghan calls out, is in fact not the FIRM. It could also be an analogy. Or it is the FIRM, indeed. But without context we can’t say for sure. 

The bullying stories aren’t new and I doubt any of them royal lot isn’t a pain in the ass to work for some/most of the time. If BP brought it up now, it’s a massive shot in the foot. It will always look as a desperate smear campaign. That’s why I could see the Times acting on its own, since H&M are basically deemed fair game since the interview was announced. But who knows, BP definitely had some idiotic PR strategies in the past. 

[viii]

30 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

I am pretty sure the snippets we saw are carefully edited teasers to drum up the attention. I wouldn’t even be surprised they are juiciest bits and will not look the same if you watch it. They are like cliffhangers- the real story is probably mostly boring and tame. 

The bullying stories aren’t new and I doubt any of them royal lot isn’t a pain in the ass to work for some/most of the time. If BP brought it up now, it’s a massive shot in the foot. It will always look as a desperate smear campaign. That’s why I could see the Times acting on its own, since H&M are basically deemed fair game since the interview was announced. But who knows, BP definitely had some idiotic PR strategies in the past. 

Agreed & agreed. 

The sneak peeks are like a movie trailer that always shows the funniest bits. By the time you watch the actual movie, they're not really that funny. 

[anjulibai]

8 hours ago, viii said:

Yeah, I'm not sure how much I believe the stories about Carole pushing Kate to be with William and become Queen. They seem like a very close knit family, and Kate went through horrible scrutiny while dating William. I just don't see a loving mother pushing her child through that, but who knows. 

That's the thing - 95% of the time we honestly just don't know the truth and likely never will.  

I agree with that - everything here is second and third hand, and we don't have access to objective primary sources like letters or emails or videos or whatever. 

My comment above was just that the story of Kate going to St. Andrew's just for William wasn't pulled out of no where, it's something that's been talked about by sources that have, at least recently, been friendly to Kate. Katie Nicholl for one.