Harry & Meghan 8: Time's Most Insufferable

[zee_four]

On 10/8/2021 at 7:15 PM, just_ordinary said:

@viii I am not sure she actually cut out Jessica to be honest. It seems they are still friends but less close/public. Isn’t M the godmother of one of her kids and very probably the other way round? 

Not having a relationship to your step siblings isn’t unusual, especially if you didn’t really grew up together. And people bashing you publicly don’t need to be surprised if they are cut off and certainly not welcomed with open arms (oh the irony).

 The story with her father is quite different though. She used to write a few gushing blog posts about him on her blog. It’s very unclear when it really went down hill (before or after Harry).

So I don’t think she really has a pattern of cutting people out. More like, being close to people for some time. Probably work triggered, most people form bonds at work that frizzle out after leaving. That’s also very normal for actors. Don’t think Jennifer Aniston and Lisa Kudrow spend so much time together as they used while on set together.

My mom is originally from Ontario and she has a huge family still there concentrated in SW Ontario, like Kitchener/Waterloo is the center and it goes from London/Serbia with a few in Windsor north into Huron County where she grew up and east to Toronto. She lived there in her early 20s and growing up she brought me there to visit and I now have many close friends in family in the City. 

They're not ones to gossip but I've heard numerous first hand stories from a variety of people I trust who knew her and/or her co-workers/crowd when she lived in Toronto fiming Suits. They all have the same base of her being very rude to those she deemed "underneath" her like cleaners, servers, cab drivers, etc. and even staff behind the scenes on the showvwhen she was alone or in limited company, but when in public or larger crowds would make a show of how much she respects those _____ (filling in overdramatic patronizing fluff about identifying with and supporting the working class).

 

If the stories didn't center around those types of experiences, they were about how she was a very flimsy and fake friend. Whatever she wanted or "needed" (with a very loose entitled definition of need) she always managed to become super amazing BFF with someone who could provide this, unbeknownst to the individual. But then as soon as she no longer needed them, found someone else who made her look better/could give her what she wanted better/made her look like the next Princess Di, beautiful, respected, humanitarian of the century, they would be replaced. It didn't take long for a well earned reputation to develop in the neighborhood she lived in and in the groups she ran in around Toronto  

Many of the people I've heard the stories from have been PoC, women, LGBTQ. Not that in anyway means she was being discriminatory but it counters her main comeback and defense, that racist and misogynistic haters are attacking her because she is a black woman. 

 

[just_ordinary]

@zee_four This might all very well be true, and I wouldn’t be surprised. But as long as no one that feels she treated them unfair, rude or used them like this speaks out, it is all just hearsay from the cousin of my neighbours best friend. 
It’s not even second hand account. That’s why I don’t see any real evidence. Some things point to it, but there is really nothing worthwhile in the open.

And with how polarising and controversial as they are, people could make an easy buck to come forward and tell how she treated them rudely when they waited on her or similar. Especially the UK press would jump on it. There are not even good first hand accounts on the web- because they would have been found by now and printer on the first page as well.

Edited October 25, 2021 by just_ordinary

[zee_four]

20 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

@zee_four This might all very well be true, and I wouldn’t be surprised. But as long as no one that feels she treated them unfair, rude or used them like this speaks out, it is all just hearsay from the cousin of my neighbours best friend. 
It’s not even second hand account. That’s why I don’t see any real evidence. Some things point to it, but there is really nothing worthwhile in the open.

And with how polarising and controversial as they are, people could make an easy buck to come forward and tell how she treated them rudely when they waited on her or similar. Especially the UK press would jump on it. There are not even good first hand accounts on the web- because they would have been found by now and printer on the first page as well.

I understand. That's why I mentioned it here with all the caveats. 

 

However I can say, since I know and trust the people who have had the experiences with her directly, the fact that because they aren't selling that to the press does not in a year make it not legitimate. Some people aren't assholes looking to stoke drama for a few bucks. Just because she was awful to them doesn't mean they have to be awful people and go to the tabloids.

 

I'd never sell someone out to the tabloids no matter how awful they were to me because I'm opposed to that type of media and have been the victim of slanderous media that pretty much ruined my life.

 

Peoole can take it or leave it, but knowing the people who told me and that they do live in her old neighborhood and/or worked there or in film and television industries, its pretty solid. I've heard the same theme in stories from people who don't know oeach other too. 

 

I just wanted to add this because the part about her using people that you objected to, isn't just in that one post BRF incident, there's a plethora of stories about her pre Harry and pre BRF that are exactly the same. I just wanted to share some of the situations there's pretty strong accusations of here behaving in the same way, that's all. 🌞

[EmCatlyn]

10 hours ago, zee_four said:

I understand. That's why I mentioned it here with all the caveats. 

 

However I can say, since I know and trust the people who have had the experiences with her directly, the fact that because they aren't selling that to the press does not in a year make it not legitimate. Some people aren't assholes looking to stoke drama for a few bucks. Just because she was awful to them doesn't mean they have to be awful people and go to the tabloids.

 

I'd never sell someone out to the tabloids no matter how awful they were to me because I'm opposed to that type of media and have been the victim of slanderous media that pretty much ruined my life.

 

Peoole can take it or leave it, but knowing the people who told me and that they do live in her old neighborhood and/or worked there or in film and television industries, its pretty solid. I've heard the same theme in stories from people who don't know oeach other too. 

 

I just wanted to add this because the part about her using people that you objected to, isn't just in that one post BRF incident, there's a plethora of stories about her pre Harry and pre BRF that are exactly the same. I just wanted to share some of the situations there's pretty strong accusations of here behaving in the same way, that's all. 🌞

Thanks for posting.  It is too bad that no biographer who is trying to be objective has interviewed some of these people who had “snooty Meghan/manipulative Meghan stories.”  (Maybe there is no biographer trying to be objective?) Any tabloid story would not be reliable whether they rave about or condemn Meghan.

(I am in a similar situation about Taylor Swift, btw.  I know several people who I trust who have less than flattering stories about her as well as stories that contradict stories she has told about her highschool experience.  None of them are going to come forward to the tabloids.)

As far as Meghan goes, I don’t need stories from people who knew her in person to suspect that she is a bit arrogant, self-centered, and inclined to dramatize.  😉

[EmCatlyn]

Quote

According to author Christopher Andersen, who wrote the book Brothers and Wives: Inside the Private Lives of William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan ….  “Harry always seemed an ideal fit for life in America, and his marriage to Meghan sealed the deal…. Harry has always seemed slightly embarrassed by his position at the top of Britain’s class system and would like nothing better than to fit in like a regular bloke.”

Showbiz Cheatsheet, citing Vanity Fair

While I can see that Harry may have wanted to be a “regular bloke,” his life in America is not exactly that of a “regular” person.  It also strikes me that Meghan was the opposite.  She didn’t want to be an “ordinary” anything. 

There is a lot of irony there.

[louisa05]

6 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

While I can see that Harry may have wanted to be a “regular bloke,” his life in America is not exactly that of a “regular” person.  It also strikes me that Meghan was the opposite.  She didn’t want to be an “ordinary” anything. 

There is a lot of irony there.

He has not the slightest clue how regular people live. He may think this is it. 

[tabitha2]

I suspect His notion of “regular” is closer to very wealthy connected commoners and lower level aristocracy similar to The Middleton and his more Distant cousins. 

[just_ordinary]

He most definitely never meant he wanted to live like the 95% of the world. It was always meant to be rich, well connect and powerful. Just without his families baggage and more privacy. I also don’t think he wanted to be regular without a title. Otherwise they would have bought a smaller proper for maybe just 3-4milion dollars when money was “tight”. You now, scaling back according to budget. They wouldn’t have refused any titles for their children- not just said so and then sitting at a Oprah crying their boy won’t be a Prince, admitting they actually wanted the titles very very much.

The “regular” bloke narrative is as stupid as the “relatable” Cambridge’s. 

[EmCatlyn]

12 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

He most definitely never meant he wanted to live like the 95% of the world. It was always meant to be rich, well connect and powerful. Just without his families baggage and more privacy. I also don’t think he wanted to be regular without a title. Otherwise they would have bought a smaller proper for maybe just 3-4milion dollars when money was “tight”. You now, scaling back according to budget. They wouldn’t have refused any titles for their children- not just said so and then sitting at a Oprah crying their boy won’t be a Prince, admitting they actually wanted the titles very very much.

The “regular” bloke narrative is as stupid as the “relatable” Cambridge’s. 

I think the “regular bloke” thing may have referred more to “not standing out” rather than lifestyle.  I do think it is possible that Harry yearned not to be a public figure.  In contrast, Meghan obviously chose to be a public figure.

To complicate things further, Harry has obviously been raised with the idea that his privileged position made it necessary for him to serve, to have a positive impact on the world. In pre-Meghan interviews he said he was worried that he had little time to make that impact because when the Cambridge kids got older (and presumably when William was king) he would get less attention/have less influence.

I agree that he has no real idea how ordinary people live.  To be fair, how much do ordinary people know about how aristocrats and/or the super rich live?  

I have been on a private jet once: an air-ambulance to take my father from Greece back to the US. after he had been in a horrible accident.  And it was so expensive that the “average” American tourist couldn’t afford it.

The very helpful woman who was our contact at the US embassy told me that my dad was the first American in the two or three years (or was it 5?) she had been working there who was able to fly back on an air ambulance.  Others had to stay in Greece until they got well enough to fly on a regular plane or died.  (The only reason my parents could afford it was that my dad had paid for travel insurance that covered 1/3 of the cost and my brother cleaned out his own savings to advance the cash for the other 2/3s.  My parents reimbursed him— they had retirement savings and an excess major medical policy that kicked in— but it needed a lot of resources that the “average tourist” doesn’t have. As it was, we were delayed for a week in getting everything settled.)

My point is that the way the Sussexes and their friends live is as alien to me as the way I live must be to Harry.   And yet, I am luckier than “the average person” in many ways.  

The irony in all this is that both Meghan (who knows better) and Harry (who may not) try to identify with “ordinary people” while at the same time expecting and enjoying special privileges.

Edited October 27, 2021 by EmCatlyn
Fix

[just_ordinary]

@EmCatlyn It’s definitely a very fine line. They all are normal people but in exceptional life positions. If they want to connect with the rest without appearing patronising or having their heads in the cloud they either need to have a captivating personality or try to appear somewhat relatable.

I think Diana had most definitely a personality that made people forget about her privileges and that she also had no idea what “normal life” means.
The Queen is from another era and has the aura of the Crown that makes people be fine and pretty forgiving. 
 

W&K and H&M have neither. W&K are in the position were they need to proof they are worth the privileges granted by the UK. As they are not the hardest workers they at least portray the Brady Bunch Windsors but also try to connect about relatable life experiences. That’s a fine line and they more often get it wrong than right imo. 
H&M are free from those justifications but it seems they are still completely into building themselves as the Diana’s 2.0 (humanitarian angles, globally beloved and the biggest victims of them all) and as the public is not falling to their feet (as it did with young Harry for a couple of years) they also try to portray themselves as relatable. They are anything but. 
I am not sure what course is more annoying to the public though. PC being his royal privileged self, doing cool stuff from a position of power but also missing the tone in his educational outburst from time to time. Or those couples, that very badly act normal which is a farce really, and have a tendency to go the do as I say not as I do route.

[käsekuchen]

On 10/25/2021 at 9:18 PM, EmCatlyn said:

(I am in a similar situation about Taylor Swift, btw.  I know several people who I trust who have less than flattering stories about her as well as stories that contradict stories she has told about her highschool experience.  None of them are going to come forward to the tabloids.)

Please tell.

[EmCatlyn]

3 hours ago, käsekuchen said:

Please tell.

I don’t want to get into it here, but basically, her account of herself in high school doesn’t match what people who went to high school with her tell. 

[EmCatlyn]

10 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

….. W&K are in the position were they need to proof they are worth the privileges granted by the UK. As they are not the hardest workers they at least portray the Brady Bunch Windsors but also try to connect about relatable life experiences. That’s a fine line and they more often get it wrong than right imo. 

H&M are free from those justifications but it seems they are still completely into building themselves as the Diana’s 2.0 (humanitarian angles, globally beloved and the biggest victims of them all) and as the public is not falling to their feet (as it did with young Harry for a couple of years) they also try to portray themselves as relatable. They are anything but. 

I am not sure what course is more annoying to the public though. PC being his royal privileged self, doing cool stuff from a position of power but also missing the tone in his educational outburst from time to time. Or those couples, that very badly act normal which is a farce really, and have a tendency to go the do as I say not as I do route.

I honestly don’t care what William and Kate do or how they present themselves. It’s part of their job to try to appeal to the public. 

I don’t see them pretending to be “ordinary folks.”   Their narrative seems to be that in spite of their status and privilege they are a nice family with charming children.  Whether this is mostly true or mostly an act I don’t know, but it seems to me that they aren’t claiming that they are “ordinary,” only that there are parallels between their lives and that of ordinary people.

This is different from Harry and Meghan who claim to have given up the status thing and become “ordinary people” but are clearly preoccupied with status.  The inconsistency between their expectation of privilege and their claim of ordinariness is what I find irritating.

I don’t actually fault people born to privilege for not knowing how others live. In fact, it is very hard to know how anyone else lives— the assumptions we make about people’s lives (even what we define as ordinary or privileged) will depend on background and individual life experience.  However, I do fault people for not learning, for not seeing the other side.

Meghan has some idea (because she was raised middle-class) but instead of educating Harry, she has embraced and endorsed his assumption of privilege.  This would be fine, if she weren’t simultaneously trying to “connect” with people by over-stating the ordinariness of her background.

 

[just_ordinary]

Kate pretending she had to cut her children’s hair, when she had several visible professional hair appointments or acting as if she was actually homeschooling them all the time rubbed many people the wrong way. Especially because she still had in house 24/7 childcare AND it’s not as if she had to figure out how to balance taking care of her children and showing up for work to pay the rent. She should have better acknowledged how much the situation made parents struggle and that even they in their extremely privileged position found it hard- so it must have been so much harder for others. You know showing compassion without acting as if she had to go through the same thing. Maybe concentrating that they as parents worry how the isolation would affect the children and how hard it is to explain?

It just rubbed many the elongated way. We all now they are beyond privilege, so please don’t act as if we are dumb.

They toned it down afterwards. I guess least they listen to their PR people, not like others we discuss here.

[QuiverFullofBooks]

12 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

they are still completely into building themselves as the Diana’s 2.0 (humanitarian angles, globally beloved and the biggest victims of them all) and as the public is not falling to their feet

That’s a really interesting point. Diana is a terrible role model because she was so utterly unique. Maybe Harry is thinking that he’s living out his mother’s dream of moving to California and raising children there. If Diana had lived to do it, I think she would have floundered too (but she would have handled it better than the Sussexes).

[viii]

1 hour ago, just_ordinary said:

We all now they are beyond privilege, so please don’t act as if we are dumb.

A million stars to you. 

[just_ordinary]

2 hours ago, viii said:

A million stars to you. 

Thanks-

just wanted to add -no idea what the elongated way is.  my autocorrect is completely f*up at this point.

And of course, the not acting as if we were dumb is directed at the Royals etc. not the users here. I noticed it can read a bit misleading.

[EmCatlyn]

22 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

Kate pretending she had to cut her children’s hair, when she had several visible professional hair appointments or acting as if she was actually homeschooling them all the time rubbed many people the wrong way. Especially because she still had in house 24/7 childcare AND it’s not as if she had to figure out how to balance taking care of her children and showing up for work to pay the rent. She should have better acknowledged how much the situation made parents struggle and that even they in their extremely privileged position found it hard- so it must have been so much harder for others. You know showing compassion without acting as if she had to go through the same thing. Maybe concentrating that they as parents worry how the isolation would affect the children and how hard it is to explain?

It just rubbed many the elongated way. We all now they are beyond privilege, so please don’t act as if we are dumb.

They toned it down afterwards. I guess least they listen to their PR people, not like others we discuss here.

As I said, I figure whatever “show” the Cambridges put on, it’s part of their job as royals.  The weird thing about the Sussexes is that they supposedly got out of the “job” but still have a “show” going on.

Regarding the homeschooling, I can believe that Kate had to engage with it —though not as much, I’m sure, as parents who had no “staff.”   I am not sure about the haircuts, but it could be argued that they were trying to keep outside contacts at a minimum, and while having Kate’s hair look great was considered worth the risk, the kids’ haircuts could be trusted to Kate.

Obviously, they publicized these things thinking it would make folks see of them more like “ordinary people,” but aside from the question of how much it was just “for show,” their mistake, I think, was to suppose that the public wants to think of them as “ordinary people.”   Part of the role of the monarchy is to be out of the ordinary.

[Xanariel]

The Cambridges' role in the image of the monarchy is actually going to be pretty interesting going forward. I thought it as notable that it's been reported William was concerned not just over Andrew's sex scandals, but the fact that Andrew appeared "ungrateful" for his privileges and how that would be perceived by the public. 

Balancing the grandeur of the monarchy with public affection is a pretty damn tricky balancing act. One of the most notable examples is actually probably the Queen Mother - dressing in pearls and pricey clothes to visit bombed sites in WW2 because "they'd dress up to see me too", and getting boos on occasion...only to get cheers when Buckingham Palace was bombed and she famously remarked that she could "finally looked the East End in the place" (a very poor area of London heavily struck in the Blitz). 

William's role is probably going to be very similar to King Felipe of Spain, in trying to present a stable, pared-back monarchy that's very sensitive to public opinion and maintains glamour while also avoiding embarrassing shows of extravagance or waste. 

Don't know if either if them will succeed, but I definitely don't envy Felipe the job of trying to put out the flames of his family's never-ending scandals. 

[just_ordinary]

@Xanariel that’s an extremely good comparison. Especially as both countries also struggle with strong independence movements (Spain‘s is even more serious as they actually tried to hold a referendum without the ok of Madrid and they definitely didn’t take that well. This is a very active vulcano just waiting to erupt again.).

[EmCatlyn]

Quote

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are planning to spend Christmas with the royal family amid Queen Elizabeth's recent hospitalization. According to a source who spoke to Us Weekly, Harry is “hoping to go back home for Christmas with Meghan, if not before so that she can finally get to meet Lilibet and see Archie again.”

Cosmopolitan

The report is based on a “source” that said Harry was worried that the Queen might die before he saw her again.  I can believe that he may have this concern, especially given his experience with his mother.  I can also believe that he might want to come back for Christmas and maybe get that hypothetical christening of Lili done.

What I wonder is whether the Queen will welcome him or will put him off.  My guess is that she is being advised against letting the Sussexes come, either on the grounds that feelings are still too raw, or that H & M can’t be trusted, or both.

[viii]

I imagine if Harry asked to come home for Christmas, she would welcome him and his family. I can’t see her refusing them. 

[EmCatlyn]

16 minutes ago, viii said:

I imagine if Harry asked to come home for Christmas, she would welcome him and his family. I can’t see her refusing them. 

I think so too, but there are reports from Palace “insiders” that it is felt that the presence of H & M at Christmas would make things awkward.  So it is possible that they would be only welcomed with clear limitations/boundaries that they might not like, and they may opt to stay on this side of the Atlantic.

I suspect they would have come for the Diana-statue dinner if they had been encouraged/welcomed.  The timing of the New York jaunt was such that it could have been done on the way to the UK (spend a few days in NYC to rest before flying across the Atlantic) with the possible hope of christening Lili at Windsor. (And maybe film a little more for Harry’s documentary.)  I have wondered if they were told that they (and their cameras?) would not be welcome.

Who knows?  The whole thing is a nice real-life soap, to be sure. 😉

 

[just_ordinary]

5 hours ago, viii said:

I imagine if Harry asked to come home for Christmas, she would welcome him and his family. I can’t see her refusing them. 

Most definitely. But, depending on the Queen’s health, their Christmas is probably still the very ceremonial Sandringham affair. It’s highly structured and regimented and I don’t see H&M being up for it. They wouldn’t allow cameras at all, but if not being allowed to film your family visit is a reason to feel snubbed you most definitely need to check your attitude and priorities.

I doubt this would be a real issue though. The issue would be if there are no concessions made to cater to their wishes like certain rooms, certain schedule changes, meeting who in what setting, curtsying (and if I were Kate I so would let out my bitchy side and be glued to William 24/7 so that both have to curtesy to me), maybe uninviting a certain racist (if it’s not the closest relative) and whatever else they get their knickers in a twist about.

But the experience with PP might have the effect that H&M are willing to get on with it like the rest. I think H is hurt that his grandfather didn’t meet his daughter. If you think how highly he spoke of him and his support - this must sting. Especially after it became public that Eugenie arranged it for her son. If he misses the chance to meet the Queen again in relatively good health and have her meet his children that’s going to be another massive downer. And the tabloids would never let them live it down. I would bet some of those articles are sitting in clouds already written.

If that is their real concern though, nothing keeps them from going today. The children aren’t in school and HMTQ has no engagements. H&M also don’t have jobs that chain them to set working hours in defined places. They can go places quietly and I highly doubt that a quiet visit would be prohibited. The only reason might be COVID concerns with a testing quarantine period required - especially for the unvaccinated children (A goes to nursery, but they could easily take him out and quarantine at home before leaving). Under such circumstances they might also be able to see others of the family. But that would mean to make sure your blabbing friends shut up for once. And I think all photos taken including a member of the RF would maybe have to be property by the BRF. Especially now, that the Queen’s health is s public matter. So they cannot use them as they wish but would have to get an authorisation. They can probably have them on display in their home but their friends cannot take a snap and post them on Twitter or give them to newspapers. And they can choose which one should be used in BRF authorised documentaries. If you think about it, that’s a hell of a restriction- if I am right. But if it’s really because you want to see your beloved grandmother and to have her see the children, that shouldn’t be something to delay a trip  I mean, she could very well be dead till Christmas. The woman is 95- she is in a position where should could drop dead without warning or just from age any second, and has been for years. So waiting till Christmas is a gamble.

I can see them coming over around Christmas time, maybe joining Christmas service or afternoon tea but staying in the countryside and not going for the whole shenanigans. It would be interesting where they would stay. Especially if they don’t want to be in the main house. The Cambridge’s have Amner Hall, but I doubt they will let them in without 24/7 observation. 

Edited October 31, 2021 by just_ordinary

[tabitha2]

Welp. Meghan has taken to getting  private phone numbers via  Kirsten Gillibrand and cold calling female republican senators. While using her Royal title. It’s not only inappropriate but going down like a lead calling apparently. Susan Collins said she was happy to talk but cares more about what the citizens of Maine think and Shelley Moore Capito thought she taking a blocked number call from Joe Manchin. 

Just never learns how not to shoot herself in foot does she?