Is it okay to put family first? (Response to royal family stuff)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Also interesting how they had to make sure we all know they were cut off financially too.

Makes one wonder what they were thinking. They want nothing to do with living as working royals and want to make it on their own, but are wondering where the money is? I just think airing all the family dirty laundry like that in an interview is just in poor taste, while at the same time complaining about how you are portrayed in the media.
 
That's a fair question. I have no idea. We're in uncharted water. He did just call the entire family a bunch of racists. Since he threw a story out there and declined to identify a specific person.
They both know the RF will never stoop to their level even to defend themselves. H&M 's timing was to inflict as much pain as possible and upstage any other Royal event. MM is pleased as punch. She got her pound of flesh and then some. Shame on Harry! He knows better. Can't imagine him showing his face anytime soon.
 
The therapy thing... I don't believe she was denied help. Even Charles got help for Diana way back in the 80's when such things were far more "taboo." Granted, it didn't seem to help, but if Charles could get help for Diana way back then, then Harry surely could have gotten Me-again help now.
 
If you have a link to the hospital records please share them (also honest, genuine question, not starting an argument with you). Because I couldnt find any statement from a hospital or a doctor, and no one has seen them at a hospital, this is one of the reasons I doubt the miscarriage claim.

That's it with these things like suicide, miscarriage, rape. It grants you guaranteed sympathy. You can say it without having to prove it, because no one wants to ask that question. And guaranteed sympathy is exactly what Meghan needed at that moment.
Whether she had one or not, in both cases, she needs help.

Thank you... I respect your question. I tried looking actually right after my post.... but HPPA laws in the US prevent such information about being shared. If anyone at a US hospital shared that information, then they could not only lose their job, but likely could also be sued.

So no, I am sorry (lol the researcher in me hates not having a link)... I do not have a link. However It has been reported she went to a hospital. Many news outlets have carried that information.

I look at it logically. If you wanted to make up a misccarrige story, you could easly have had that at home, no need to embellish or fabricate a hospital stay which can liekly be verified if news outlets really wanted to... and then imagine the media feeding frenzy. Why take that risk, when you could get the same sympathy without a hospital detail.
Many people lose their pregnancies early and do not need special interventions.
 

My question is, if you wanted your first, no wait, second wedding "just for you", why did you just share that information? I was surprised that would be allowed as the televised event would have actually been a vow renewal ceremony.
 
Also interesting how they had to make sure we all know they were cut off financially too.

Makes one wonder what they were thinking. They want nothing to do with living as working royals and want to make it on their own, but are wondering where the money is? I just think airing all the family dirty laundry like that in an interview is just in poor taste, while at the same time complaining about how you are portrayed in the media.

They’re getting $200M from their Netflix and Spotify deals so it’s not like they’re in the poor house. I don’t feel sorry for people who are sitting on a couple hundred million bucks like they are.

They are totally and completely out of touch. What I’ve found to be the most disgusting part of all of this is how they seem just so totally clueless about how tone deaf their whining is.

They say one thing and act another way. And that’s hypocritical, which I have great disdain for.
 
Thank you... I respect your question. I tried looking actually right after my post.... but HPPA laws in the US prevent such information about being shared. If anyone at a US hospital shared that information, then they could not only lose their job, but likely could also be sued.

So no, I am sorry (lol the researcher in me hates not having a link)... I do not have a link. However It has been reported she went to a hospital. Many news outlets have carried that information.

I look at it logically. If you wanted to make up a misccarrige story, you could easly have had that at home, no need to embellish or fabricate a hospital stay which can liekly be verified if news outlets really wanted to... and then imagine the media feeding frenzy. Why take that risk, when you could get the same sympathy without a hospital detail.
Many people lose their pregnancies early and do not need special interventions.
Thank you for replying :) It was in her statement in the New York Times that they went to the hospital. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/25/opinion/meghan-markle-miscarriage.html
I do not know which story would be better, I think there is something to say for both. When you say it's at home, people will ask why you didn't go to the hospital (or at least see a doctor). The hospital narrative makes it more dramatic and serious.

They’re getting $200M from their Netflix and Spotify deals so it’s not like they’re in the poor house. I don’t feel sorry for people who are sitting on a couple hundred million bucks like they are.
The Netflix money is also meant to create the movies, isn't it? They have staff and actors etc. to be paid. Movies aren't cheap. Still, if half of the money is for them, and the other half for the movies, they are secured for a few years.

Completely new topic: What was said about the charities they are supporting and Archewell? The first part of the interview was about Meghan, but would also be about her philantropic ambitions.
I haven't seen the interview myself (it will be aired in NL on tomorrow), but I didn't see any headlines on this topic.
 
Last edited:
That's a fair question. I have no idea. We're in uncharted water. He did just call the entire family a bunch of racists. Since he threw a story out there and declined to identify a specific person.
This was Oprah's angle and reason for the interview, IMO. Line up the "racists" and shame them.

After all, that could be the only reason that people don't like Meghan. Racism. It can't be because she is a shallow excuse for a human. Nope. It's the color of her skin. Oprah was almost foaming at the mouth to perpetuate this narrative.

(Don't forget, Oprah cried racism in Paris when she was not allowed to enter the Hermes shop. It was closed for a private party. How dare she was not deemed more important than those that reserved the shop:rolleyes:)
 
Last edited:
Also interesting how they had to make sure we all know they were cut off financially too.

Makes one wonder what they were thinking. They want nothing to do with living as working royals and want to make it on their own, but are wondering where the money is? I just think airing all the family dirty laundry like that in an interview is just in poor taste, while at the same time complaining about how you are portrayed in the media.
And for Harry to whine about having to use his inheritance to live on is beyond the pale. I think of what so many have lost during this last year...so so sad. They leave in the middle of a pandemic with no plan to support themselves? Something is really off with these two.
 
My question is, if you wanted your first, no wait, second wedding "just for you", why did you just share that information? I was surprised that would be allowed as the televised event would have actually been a vow renewal ceremony.
I’m actually surprised the Archbishop had the time to do this and was willing to do this.
 
With regards to the first wedding, its being reported that it was just them and the Archbishop of Canterbury. No witnesses. For a marriage to be legal in the UK there has to be at least 2 witnesses. So was the first one a blessing, and the second the real deal?
The Daily mail article I read said it wasn't known if the Archbishop could overide the legality of needing witnesses. Also, it has to be somewhere with public access, just in case someone wants to storm in and oppose the marriage (oh William, where were you that day!)
Meghan was an actress. I don't believe for one minute she wasn't happy to be in the limelight for that day
 
The hate watchers did not disappoint! I really appreciate the commitment to the hate. Pages and pages of fun.
As far as I am concerned, this is no different from any of the trashy reality show threads. I feel we are all commenting on pure entertainment. Fake people having fake problems and outlandish storylines.


I am enjoying this thread immensely. I love that I am in agreement with posters I normally don't see eye to eye with.
 
As far as I am concerned, this is no different from any of the trashy reality show threads. I feel we are all commenting on pure entertainment. Fake people having fake problems and outlandish storylines.


I am enjoying this thread immensely. I love that I am in agreement with posters I normally don't see eye to eye with.
I've been reading exactly what I expected. Comedy Gold!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.





New Posts










Save Up to 30% on Rooms at Walt Disney World!

Save up to 30% on rooms at select Disney Resorts Collection hotels when you stay 5 consecutive nights or longer in late summer and early fall. Plus, enjoy other savings for shorter stays.This offer is valid for stays most nights from August 1 to October 11, 2025.
CLICK HERE













DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest

Back
Top