Jump to content

Menu

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Ktgrok said:

 <snip>

This is also a thing in say, the medical field - the push to discuss compassion fatigue, burn out, etc. 

<snip>

Yeah, sorry, I can't see an equivalence here. Burned out medical professionals/first responders are so  much like an unhappy royal family member (who married into it as an adult) who is surprised that they are targets of papparazzi and the tabloid press and that people say mean things? Like it's a new thing?  

 

Edited by marbel
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 700
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Well, the problem is that some people wish that the British Royal Family was more spiral-based, but then Harry married someone who was more mastery-based, and instead of being able to blend the two we

Saw this today:  If anyone has a right to be angry at Harry and Meghan it's the people of Sussex, who have been left leaderless without their Duke and who are now defenceless against incursions f

Maybe we should discuss Saxon vs Singapore for awhile.   😏😬😱😂

Posted Images

37 minutes ago, moonflower said:

 

so as they're wealthy, I would assume it's rude for them to complain to the world at large (worse off than they are) about money troubles.  Is that what they're complaining about?

It's in poor taste, is what it is. Just like I wouldn't go to a homeless shelter pondering out loud if I'm going to eat steak or lobster for dinner, and complaining about it because I'm so tired of eating both.

Edited by Islandgal
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

people are annoyed because they "claim" they want to be financially independent, - but they want Charles to keep giving them harry's allowance, they want the UK taxpayer (or Canadian - Trudeau volunteered) taxpayers to pay their securities costs.  (which is well over a million pounds a year, PLUS their travel costs).

the want the perks, with none of the responsibilities.  They want to monetize their titles - which seems to be very disrespectful of the monarchy.

and for all meghans claims of wanting privacy - she really enjoyed her day trip (by sea plane) to Vancouver yesterday with her photo op for a women's shelter.  IF she wanted privacy so much, she could have done so *privately*.

They can't go from being senior royals who are not allowed to earn money to totally self-supporting overnight, including covering all security costs, staff costs, travel expenses, etc.

As for "monetizing their titles" — Sussex Royal is a charity, not a for-profit company.

There is a difference between wanting a reasonable degree of privacy in your personal life and becoming a hermit. They've never said they want to become hermits who will never again be seen in public. They clearly intend to continue their charity work, and one of the ways they help charities is by providing visibility and bringing attention to the charity by making appearances. Which is what she did. And it was the staff at the women's shelter who released the photos, not Meghan.

They are supposed to become totally self-supporting overnight, doing jobs that are in no way related to who they are (because that would be "cashing in" on their identities as royals), and they need to do charity work in return for their privileged life, but they must do so while never being seen in public doing anything related to charities?

Edited by Corraleno
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I have wondered......is it actually possible for the son of the monarch (or soon to be monarch) to actually renounce his title?  The monarch has to bestow the titles, doesn't the monarch have to be the one to take it away?  Edward abdicated the crown, but he still received a title from his successor.  If QE2 (or Charles once he is on the throne) didn't want them to renounce their titles, for political or other reasons, would they be able to?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SereneHome said:

Well, what they are unhappy about only they really know.

Harry didn't chose to be born into the royal family, but  MM made a very conscious choice. Regardless of what she is unhappy about it's really hard to feel any kind of sympathy for her.

And there it is in a nutshell. It’s really hard for some to feel any kind of sympathy for a person who is lied about every day, made fun of, had racist remarks spoken about, because she knew who she was marrying.

Lack of sympathy. Lack of empathy. For a human who has done what? Heaven help us all. 

Edited by Dotwithaperiod
  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gardenmom5 said:

people are annoyed because they "claim" they want to be financially independent, - but they want Charles to keep giving them harry's allowance, they want the UK taxpayer (or Canadian - Trudeau volunteered) taxpayers to pay their securities costs.  (which is well over a million pounds a year, PLUS their travel costs).

the want the perks, with none of the responsibilities.  They want to monetize their titles - which seems to be very disrespectful of the monarchy.

and for all meghans claims of wanting privacy - she really enjoyed her day trip (by sea plane) to Vancouver yesterday with her photo op for a women's shelter.  IF she wanted privacy so much, she could have done so *privately*.

Where have they saw that they want to continue getting an allowance forever, that they want taxpayers to fund their security forever, etc? Is this fact that we are taking about, or just malicious gossip, or plain out assuming the worst?

As for that - are we really saying working with a charity like that is a bad thing?

22 minutes ago, Dotwithaperiod said:

And there it is in a nutshell. It’s really hard for some to feel any kind of sympathy for a person who is lied about every day, made fun of, had racist remarks spoken about, because she knew who she was marrying.

Lack of sympathy. Lack of empathy. For a human who has done what? Heaven help us all. 

This. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Islandgal said:

It's in poor taste, is what it is. Just like I wouldn't go to a homeless shelter pondering out loud if I'm going to eat steak or lobster for dinner, and complaining about it because I'm so tired of eating both.

 

Right, what I'm saying is I thought the complaints were that they were complaining about something else (not money).  Are they really complaining about being poor?

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, StellaM said:

 

This.

Like I wouldn't wander up to our boardies friend whose house burned down and say 'the smoke's been so bad, I've had to stay inside in my room, thanks for asking'.

Right. But she didn't walk up to someone, she said it in a general public way. Just like on here someone will vent about a late package, or a dishwasher that will be delivered late, but that doesn't make them terrible for saying so in a place where those that can't afford to order fun stuff or have a new dishwasher may read it. 

We have boardies who like you are facing national disasters, boardies who have lost loved ones, facing terrible illnesses, etc, but we at the same time have people post about more mundane things. Like royalty or brands of socks to buy or to vent about rude inlaws or kids who won't go to bed on time. Generally, we don't start ranting that they shouldn't be complaining about rude family or delayed dishwashers when there are others on the forum who are worse off.  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, moonflower said:

 

Right, what I'm saying is I thought the complaints were that they were complaining about something else (not money).  Are they really complaining about being poor?

They are not complaining about being poor. They are complaining about the harassment from the press. It is what they have said publicly- to the press - so the audience for their complaints were absolutely the correct audience. It is what they have followed up with in lawsuits so their actions follow their words to the letter. 
 

Yes, they do use the press to some advantage- as someone else pointed out- to bring visibility to the issues and to the charities. It’s why charities want them to be involved. 
 

I have no real opinion on whether the UK should have a monarchy. But it seems like the modern role of that monarchy primarily revolves around patronages of various charities on a wide range of issues. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Corraleno said:

They can't go from being senior royals who are not allowed to earn money to totally self-supporting overnight, including covering all security costs, staff costs, travel expenses, etc.

As for "monetizing their titles" — Sussex Royal is a charity, not a for-profit company.

There is a difference between wanting a reasonable degree of privacy in your personal life and becoming a hermit. They've never said they want to become hermits who will never again be seen in public. They clearly intend to continue their charity work, and one of the ways they help charities is by providing visibility and bringing attention to the charity by making appearances. Which is what she did. 

They are supposed to become totally self-supporting overnight, doing jobs that are in no way related to who they are (because that would be "cashing in" on their identities as royals), and they need to do charity work in return for their privileged life, but they must do so while never being seen in public doing anything related to charities?

Harry has nearly 40M pounds in inheritance from his mother and great-grandmother's estates.  claims of "they don't have any money of their own" - are ridiculous.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, StellaM said:

 

To an audience of Brits, many of whom have suffered more than you (or she) can imagine over the past ten years. 

Have you read anything about the affects of austerity in Britain ? Have you read about people dying from lack of food ? Have you read about people with disability being denied any kind of support ? Have you read about the housing crisis ? Have you read about the massive issues around unenployment and underemployment ? Have you read about the cutting of transport, such that some people are literally trapped and unable to access medical care ? Have you heard about the CAHMs waiting list, and the rising mental health issues ? Or, given they only affect, poor Brits, is that not something you (or they) bother to educate yourself on, when discussing a British problem ?

To me, it was exactly as if I had responded to Melissa saying her son just worked a 30 hour shift fighting fires and had levels of carbon in his blood that were incredibly unhealthy with 'Yeah, I've been wheezy, thanks for asking'. But more importantly, I am far from the only person in that British audience who felt appalled at the narcissism on show.

 

Or pensioners burning books for heat because it's cheaper than coal?

Edited by gardenmom5
  • Sad 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to @StellaM and others, I've been looking into the poverty situation in the UK. I remember reading something a few years ago, but I had no idea the state of things now. For anyone else who needs to catch up, just do a Google search for The Guardian + poverty, for recent articles. Especially note the number of homeless children, and the condition of the elderly. This is astounding. I've had my head down over my country's problems, only remembering occasionally that historically, these same problems move in near-global waves. 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

Right. But she didn't walk up to someone, she said it in a general public way. Just like on here someone will vent about a late package, or a dishwasher that will be delivered late, but that doesn't make them terrible for saying so in a place where those that can't afford to order fun stuff or have a new dishwasher may read it. 

We have boardies who like you are facing national disasters, boardies who have lost loved ones, facing terrible illnesses, etc, but we at the same time have people post about more mundane things. Like royalty or brands of socks to buy or to vent about rude inlaws or kids who won't go to bed on time. Generally, we don't start ranting that they shouldn't be complaining about rude family or delayed dishwashers when there are others on the forum who are worse off.  

I don't feel that this is a fair comparison. When you become royalty, you're held to a different standard. When you're in that kind of position, it is considered poor form to vent to us mere subjects, especially regarding a topic that is perceived to be trivial to so many. It comes across as if she is out of touch. 

I don't think it's fair for anyone to be dragged through the mud, publicly or not, but sadly it is the modern day reality of many in high places, or many in not so high places.

It's human nature. Is it right, no, will it stop, no. 

 

Edited by Islandgal
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, StellaM said:

 

It's ridiculous.

I cannot explain how ridiculous it is being asked to feel sorry for people with 40M pounds + in the bank, which equates to the resources required to deal with ALL the major problems life throws in their way, including the problem of defamation.

 

Right... "they are HUMAN BEANS!!" Well, yeah. But they are human beans with enough scratch to deal with almost all their problems. That was true of the Duchess even before she married literally a prince lol  I do not begrudge her her money, nor Harry his inheritance from his mother. But it is A FACT, in the factiest, truthiest way possible, that they have enough money to get on with it and go live regular rich people lives. 

Everyone here who is criticizing them has said "just take your own money and go." Not off-with-their-heads!

And my original point was that they could have done that quietly. Insofar as they are flesh and blood just like me and you and all of everyone,  it's a family matter. The fact that the papers had "the story" and was going to break it is immaterial. They **could have** (and don't you tell me they couldn't've) just let the paper do its thing and done what they themselves said was the right thing. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Islandgal said:

 

 

Almost no one [edit: in the USA] cares one way or the other. No one I've spoken to this past week except my own husband and one particularly up-to-date on the news guy even knew she was American or that this whole thing is happening. This board is not even close to representative of the US haha.

Edited by OKBud
  • Like 8
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, OKBud said:

 

Almost no one cares one way or the other. No one I've spoken to this past week except my own husband and one particularly up-to-date on the news guy even knew she was American or that this whole thing is happening. This board is not even close to representative of the US haha.

I may need to delete that before I dig myself into a deeper hole!!!!

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, StellaM said:

 

There are - and this is without hyperbole - horror stories, particularly among those who are poor + disabled or poor + elderly. 

Do you honestly think the same isn’t true in the US, the only western country with essentially no safety net? 

I'm not interested in discussing further. Just pointing out that what you wrote above is standard issue in this country. And it’s getting much, much worse. Given the similarities in our conservative governments, I can’t imagine any American would be surprised that it doesn’t look different in Aus or Britain or even Canada (which suffered mightily under Bush's lackey Harper) except at least you all at least have health care. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

First time I ever heard of Meghan was when my DHs aunt (German lady married to Army Lt Colonel) started posting about her engagement. Aunts opinion was that she was an insufferable bubble-head. Neither I nor any other family had heard of her. If friends were familiar with her work or love life they never mentioned it. Nobody I know talks about William & Kate. My familiarity begins and ends with the covers of the tabloids at the grocery store. And from here! I think I’m a pretty normal representation of America in this instance. So yeah, the intensity of feeling in this thread can’t be representative of America. 

Edited by SamanthaCarter
  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

I don’t care that Meghan is American. 

(Just tagging along with this one so my comment makes sense...not attaching specifically to you, Jean.)

No, but you have to admit that the Royal Family is batting 0-3 as re: American brides.  

Wallis Simpson, Sarah Ferguson, Meghan Markle wouldn't show up on the list "People Who Married In and Have Been an Asset to Our Royal Family."

:-) 

ETA:  At least we are past the head-lopping stage.

 

  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StellaM said:

 

This.

Like I wouldn't wander up to our boardies friend whose house burned down and say 'the smoke's been so bad, I've had to stay inside in my room, thanks for asking'.

the 56K pounds on her engagement dress  - and she wants to be seen as caring and understanding by the poor.  try out of touch, with an unwillingness to learn.

as for your example - there really was something audacious about listening to someone whine about paying capitol gains on exercising stock options when we'd been dealing with long-term unemployment and were living beneath the poverty level.  seriously - some people need to just not say anything.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Patty Joanna said:

(Just tagging along with this one so my comment makes sense...not attaching specifically to you, Jean.)

No, but you have to admit that the Royal Family is batting 0-3 as re: American brides.  

Wallis Simpson, Sarah Ferguson, Meghan Markle wouldn't show up on the list "People Who Married In and Have Been an Asset to Our Royal Family."

🙂

ETA:  At least we are past the head-lopping stage.

 

Sarah Ferguson isn't an American - Where ever did that come from?  she also has aristocratic background (if you dig deep enough) 

- and is a descendant of Richard II via illegitimate children . . 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

Sarah Ferguson isn't an American - Where ever did that come from?  she also has aristocratic background (if you dig deep enough) 

- and is a descendant of Richard II via illegitimate children . . 

Oops!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OKBud said:

 

Almost no one cares one way or the other. No one I've spoken to this past week except my own husband and one particularly up-to-date on the news guy even knew she was American or that this whole thing is happening. This board is not even close to representative of the US haha.

Yeah; my husband doesn’t know her from Bob, except for some awareness of their climate change stances.  But he did say “the coverage between the two brothers and their wives seems pretty slanted, why is that?”.

He’s not a particularly celeb aware person, and has no fondness for what little he knows about them.  And yet a quick scan of headlines and twitter bytes made it obvious even to him that there seems to be a double standard at play.  But I’d hazard that most people know next to nothing about any of them, IRL.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patty Joanna said:

Oops!!!

Well, still 2 for 2.  😏

wallis was the real scary one. .  the stopped putting classified documents in the King's Box prior to the abdication. - the information was making it's way to Germany.  Even while she was with David/Edward - she was involved with some German military officer.  she was a busy girl.

Frankly - Edward VIII was completely inappropriate for the throne - the world should be grateful he was forced out.

People often don't believe the accusations of their Nazi connections.  when the crown did their episode on it - they ended with pictures of Edward and wallis with hitler, and the documents showing their was a plan in place to over throw the English crown and put him back on the throne as a german puppet.  (England sent him to the Bahamas in an attempt to keep him out of trouble.)

eta: for history - I've read a fair bit on this subject from various sources.  David was willing to sell out his country to the germans

Edited by gardenmom5
,
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

wallis was the real scary one. .  the stopped putting classified documents in the King's Box prior to the abdication. - the information was making it's way to Germany.  Even while she was with David/Edward - she was involved with some German military officer.  she was a busy girl.

Frankly - Edward VIII was completely inappropriate for the throne - the world should be grateful he was forced out.

People often don't believe the accusations of their Nazi connections.  when the crown did their episode on it - they ended with pictures of Edward and wallis with hitler, and the documents showing their was a plan in place to over throw the English crown and put him back on the throne as a german puppet.  (England sent him to the Bahamas in an attempt to keep him out of trouble.)

eta: for history - I've read a fair bit on this subject from various sources.  David was willing to sell out his country to the germans

 

Yup.  Very very creepy.  Much more than nincompoopery.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MEmama said:

Do you honestly think the same isn’t true in the US, the only western country with essentially no safety net? 

I'm not interested in discussing further. Just pointing out that what you wrote above is standard issue in this country. And it’s getting much, much worse. Given the similarities in our conservative governments, I can’t imagine any American would be surprised that it doesn’t look different in Aus or Britain or even Canada (which suffered mightily under Bush's lackey Harper) except at least you all at least have health care. 

 

They have those governments, when they have them, plus LITERAL ROYALTY 🤣🤣🤣

(plus "regular," American-style, celebrities too, so don't even)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OKBud said:

And my original point was that they could have done that quietly.  

Well, I doubt they could have done it quietly, lol. 

They did announce it, sure, I don't see how you avoid that. It's going to get out anyway and even more rumors would be flying. What I'm seeing is them saying, We're going to step back, and the palace replying, whoa there, it's complicated! It is perhaps the palace that is dragging this out (for what may be valid legal reasons, I have no idea). I'm sure it's rather more involved than turning in your two weeks' notice. 

Circling back to Americans caring a lot about the story: I don't have irl conversation about this, I haven't overheard any in the grocery store, and I haven't seen it on my Facebook feed. I just saw a pretty active thread with an intriguing title and thought, hmm, I could do laundry, or I could click this . . . 

Like many WTM discussions, it has wandered some interesting paths. 

And digressions, like . . . H&M did not have a prenup. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

You just click 'edit,' Island Gal 🙂 If someone else knows how to erase quotation boxes themselves, I'd love to hear it! I've run into that problem twice this week.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, katilac said:

And digressions, like . . . H&M did not have a prenup. 

That is really interesting! It sounds very lovely, in a messed-up way. By which I mean: how low our collective* expectations are!

Read "just my expectations alone" if you don't see yourself in that comment, thx.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, OKBud said:

You just click 'edit,' Island Gal 🙂 If someone else knows how to erase quotation boxes themselves, I'd love to hear it! I've run into that problem twice this week.

Thank you! 🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, StellaM said:

 

To an audience of Brits, many of whom have suffered more than you (or she) can imagine over the past ten years. 

Have you read anything about the affects of austerity in Britain ? Have you read about people dying from lack of food ? Have you read about people with disability being denied any kind of support ? Have you read about the housing crisis ? Have you read about the massive issues around unenployment and underemployment ? Have you read about the cutting of transport, such that some people are literally trapped and unable to access medical care ? Have you heard about the CAHMs waiting list, and the rising mental health issues ? Or, given they only affect, poor Brits, is that not something you (or they) bother to educate yourself on, when discussing a British problem ?

To me, it was exactly as if I had responded to Melissa saying her son just worked a 30 hour shift fighting fires and had levels of carbon in his blood that were incredibly unhealthy with 'Yeah, I've been wheezy, thanks for asking'. But more importantly, I am far from the only person in that British audience who felt appalled at the narcissism on show.

 

So now it is narcissism to express being upset about being lied about, to express issues with mental health, etc in a public space? 

As for poverty, I can walk down the street and see people who are homeless, a large percentage of our school children in the area are homeless, my sister is constantly handing out deodorant and food to her students, and huge numbers of people die here every year for inability to afford healthcare. We top the list for western countries with poverty. It is a known fact here that you have nearly a 100 percent chance of being turned down for disability the first time - plan on spending years appealing and then longer after that to get payments, IF you ever get it. And of course, you will need medical documentation of the disability which so so so many can't afford because we have no national healthcare so they can't afford a doctor. 

And again, she didn't speak to someone directly - it isn't like you responding to Melissa directly. It is more like you posting a separate thread about the wheezing. Those who don't give a darn are not forced to read it. Those who don't give a darn about the royal couple and their thoughts/feelings are not forced to watch interviews/specials about them 

3 hours ago, StellaM said:

 

It's ridiculous.

I cannot explain how ridiculous it is being asked to feel sorry for people with 40M pounds + in the bank, which equates to the resources required to deal with ALL the major problems life throws in their way, including the problem of defamation.

Again with the idea that wealth = happiness. It doesn't. 

And NO ONE asked you to feel sorry for them. But rumors and flat out lies are being spread about them. And people are exusing it because hey they are rich so it's okay to think the worst of them

 

2 hours ago, OKBud said:

 

Right... "they are HUMAN BEANS!!" Well, yeah. But they are human beans with enough scratch to deal with almost all their problems. That was true of the Duchess even before she married literally a prince lol  I do not begrudge her her money, nor Harry his inheritance from his mother. But it is A FACT, in the factiest, truthiest way possible, that they have enough money to get on with it and go live regular rich people lives. 

Everyone here who is criticizing them has said "just take your own money and go." Not off-with-their-heads!

And my original point was that they could have done that quietly. Insofar as they are flesh and blood just like me and you and all of everyone,  it's a family matter. The fact that the papers had "the story" and was going to break it is immaterial. They **could have** (and don't you tell me they couldn't've) just let the paper do its thing and done what they themselves said was the right thing. 

So the problem is that they made a press release? One that corrects some of the rumors and lies? Again, don't care, don't read it. 

2 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

the 56K pounds on her engagement dress  - and she wants to be seen as caring and understanding by the poor.  try out of touch, with an unwillingness to learn.

 

And yet her wedding dress was about 1/4 of what Kate Middleton's was, so does the same apply to Kate? Her wedding dress was over 400K.  And do we know that Megan spent that money on the dress, or did the designer loan it to her for the photos as is common with celebrities for certain occasions, etc? If we don't know, but are judging her for that, spreading gossip, why is that okay?

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dotwithaperiod said:

And there it is in a nutshell. It’s really hard for some to feel any kind of sympathy for a person who is lied about every day, made fun of, had racist remarks spoken about, because she knew who she was marrying.

Lack of sympathy. Lack of empathy. For a human who has done what? Heaven help us all. 

Oh please,.  Yes, WE are the ones with a problem.

I've yet to figure out what exactly requires empathy in this situation.  And please don't go into "lied about" bc she is an actress, it happens to 99% of actresses so wasn't anything new there

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

 

And yet her wedding dress was about 1/4 of what Kate Middleton's was, so does the same apply to Kate? Her wedding dress was over 400K.  And do we know that Megan spent that money on the dress, or did the designer loan it to her for the photos as is common with celebrities for certain occasions, etc? If we don't know, but are judging her for that, spreading gossip, why is that okay?

an engagement dress isn't a wedding dress.  

kate's engagement dress was an off-the rack $300 (that promptly sold out gaining business for the vendors)

meghan's (it was stated at the time it was *purchased*) couture dress was $75,000/56,000 pounds

as for wedding dresses - you must be confused.

Meghan's was the dress reported to cost 387,000 pounds - (Kate's was 250,000 pounds)

one and two

I'm judging her for her attitudes. (I also find her disagreeable attitudes - common among the celebrity set.)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

an engagement dress isn't a wedding dress.  

kate's engagement dress was an off-the rack $300 (that promptly sold out gaining business for the vendors)

meghan's (it was stated at the time it was *purchased*) couture dress was $75,000/56,000 pounds

as for wedding dresses - you must be confused.

Meghan's was the dress reported to cost 387,000 pounds - (Kate's was 250,000 pounds)

one and two

I'm judging her for her attitudes. (I also find her disagreeable attitudes - common among the celebrity set.)

The ones I saw that came up with the high number for Megan were based on fashion "experts" who were guessing that a gown like that "could" cost up to that much. Ones that I saw that said they had sources put it much lower. Around 100,000 pounds or (at the time) $135,000. . Whereas the numbers for Kates were $434,000. 

Now, did they pay that? Who knows. Who cares? But the idea that costly dresses are a reason to hate on Megan, but not the other royals makes little sense. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, OKBud said:

 

Right... "they are HUMAN BEANS!!" Well, yeah. But they are human beans with enough scratch to deal with almost all their problems. That was true of the Duchess even before she married literally a prince lol  I do not begrudge her her money, nor Harry his inheritance from his mother. But it is A FACT, in the factiest, truthiest way possible, that they have enough money to get on with it and go live regular rich people lives. 

Everyone here who is criticizing them has said "just take your own money and go." Not off-with-their-heads!

And my original point was that they could have done that quietly. Insofar as they are flesh and blood just like me and you and all of everyone,  it's a family matter. The fact that the papers had "the story" and was going to break it is immaterial. They **could have** (and don't you tell me they couldn't've) just let the paper do its thing and done what they themselves said was the right thing. 

If they were to just go off quietly, you think the press and the British subjects would've just ignored them? Or do you think they should've just taken everything the press would've thrown at them? Because I can't imagine the "conversation" going well if they had just ghosted the royal obligations. 

Harry and Meghan are standing up together saying, "This is what we want to do." After that announcement, in this very thread, Meghan has been compared to a manipulating, isolating, abusive spouse, they've been taken to task for spending too much money (on a wedding and engagement dress for crying out loud - something like probably 75% of people spend an inordinate amount on their wedding), upsetting/springing it on the Queen, and having too large of a carbon foot print.

Now would all that happen if they just quietly settled down somewhere? I have to believe after reading the 15 pages of this thread that it would be much worse. 

So let's say that Harry doesn't show up for a week or two's worth of family/royal obligations with no public notice. Is it a) he's nursing a black eye? After all, he hasn't hung out with his school mates in a long time. Should we do a check on Archie? b) shirking his job and taxpayers are paying for this immature, irresponsible behavior? They spent *my* money on that overpriced cottage/engagement dress/christening (and they didn't even schedule that properly!)! c) his or her mental illness (or both) that the Royals can no longer keep under wraps? He acts just like my Uncle X who has Y diagnosis. or d) doesn't Meghan realize it's Harry's job and family? She knew what she was getting into before she married him. If Meghan travels to a charity function, but no one has seen Harry, she's all "Look At Me, I'm a Princess". And who's paying for all this security detail anyway if he hasn't shown up at ribbon cuttings in 2 weeks?!? And why do they even pay for a nanny if Harry's not going to show up to his duties!?! I didn't have one. Note: Almost every single thing in this paragraph was said in some manner in this very thread AFTER Harry and Meghan announced they wanted to step down. You think they deserve to have worse things be said about them?

Yes, they have $ to start life as private citizens but I don't get the impression that they can just waltz off into the sunset. It's a complicated withdrawal system due to finances, public relations, family obligations, and probably a whole slew of other crap I can't even think of at 4 am!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

Or pensioners burning books for heat because it's cheaper than coal?

 

15 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

Or pensioners burning books for heat because it's cheaper than coal?

We have all of those problems right here in the US. There are very wealthy here who also complain about paying too much in taxes, yet we reduce them even more. Why aren’t we talking about that here? Why aren’t the tabloids and Fox and most of MSM bitching about those rich people, why does it only seem like one faction is annoyed, lol?  Why aren’t we worrying about that in this thread? Yep, that was sarcasm. 

Matne I should have added obtuse to my worry about lack of sympathy.

 

15 hours ago, Lang Syne Boardie said:

Thanks to @StellaM and others, I've been looking into the poverty situation in the UK. I remember reading something a few years ago, but I had no idea the state of things now. For anyone else who needs to catch up, just do a Google search for The Guardian + poverty, for recent articles. Especially note the number of homeless children, and the condition of the elderly. This is astounding. I've had my head down over my country's problems, only remembering occasionally that historically, these same problems move in near-global waves. 

Yep, and one of the causes is the same in all of these countries.

Edited by Dotwithaperiod
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, OKBud said:

 

Almost no one [edit: in the USA] cares one way or the other. No one I've spoken to this past week except my own husband and one particularly up-to-date on the news guy even knew she was American or that this whole thing is happening. This board is not even close to representative of the US haha.

This board is more like the comment section on The Hill, in my opinion.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SereneHome said:

Oh please,.  Yes, WE are the ones with a problem.

I've yet to figure out what exactly requires empathy in this situation.  And please don't go into "lied about" bc she is an actress, it happens to 99% of actresses so wasn't anything new there

 

I rest my case. You’ve proved my point.  I’m guessing that, by your logic, homeschoolers shouldn’t be concerned about being called loony, because a huge majority of the media surrounding homeschooling deals with idiots who abuse their kids. No trouble if I assume you’re one? No need to call me the same, lol, my kids are grown😜

Edited by Dotwithaperiod
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, StellaM said:

 

 

You didn't unironically call the people of the UK 'the British subjects', did you ?

 

 

Oh, gosh, that's my bad. That's what I get for posting on a thread during a 4 am insomnia episode. I missed it in my 10+ edits before posting. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, beckyjo said:

Oh, gosh, that's my bad. That's what I get for posting on a thread during a 4 am insomnia episode. I missed it in my 10+ edits before posting. 

I'm so glad I'm not the only one who edits and re-edits.  And I still find glaring mistakes after I post.  🙄

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dotwithaperiod said:

I rest my case. You’ve proved my point.  I’m guessing that, by your logic, homeschoolers shouldn’t be concerned about being called loony, because a huge majority of the media surrounding homeschooling deals with idiots who abuse their kids. No trouble if I assume you’re one? No need to call me the same, lol, my kids are grown😜

This is so not comparing apples to apples but OK, I'll play

If you go into homeschooling not knowing the possible future hardships in can bring and then decide to quit bc it is hard to handle - I would feel terrible for you.

If you go into homeschooing with eye wide open, KNOWING that you will be insulted, lied about, called names but decide to do it anyway,  and then say "oops, too much for me", I will say "OK, you tried, no biggy", but no, sympathy will not be the feeling I will have for you.

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, OKBud said:

 

 No one I've spoken to this past week except my own husband and one particularly up-to-date on the news guy even knew she was American or that this whole thing is happening. 

 

18 hours ago, SamanthaCarter said:

First time I ever heard of Meghan was when my DHs aunt (German lady married to Army Lt Colonel) started posting about her engagement. 

 

16 hours ago, Arctic Mama said:

Yeah; my husband doesn’t know her from Bob, except for some awareness of their climate change stances.  But he did say “the coverage between the two brothers and their wives seems pretty slanted, why is that?”.

 

So am I the only one who watched Suits and knew her from that show before she even started dating Harry?

2 hours ago, PrincessMommy said:

I'm so glad I'm not the only one who edits and re-edits.  And I still find glaring mistakes after I post.  🙄

Haha! I sometimes feel like I should have my signature as "Reason for multiple edits: found another mistake." 😂

Edited by Lady Florida.
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Lady Florida. said:

So am I the only one who watched Suits and knew her from that show before she even started dating Harry?

 

 

That's how DH knew of her. 

For my part I didn't even know USA was still a channel lol but I think it's funny now. USA---she's an American....you get it 😊

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...