Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.....I still don't understand why they did this interview if not to hurt the royal family and stir stuff up.
Totally agree. What exactly was the point? What has been the constructive result?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXRunner
IFor ordinary people, who were taught to have some sense of respect for their parents, this is not normal behavior.
Agree with this, too. And doubly for offspring of what is arguably the most prominent family in the world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maiden_fern
Optics be damned, air your dirty laundry on TV, float ideas of royal racism, and demand your privacy.
Quite the dichotomy, isn't it.
Of course, there are cultural differences. HUGE. Which is why they should not have married. Meghan no doubt chafed at the protocol - and, in the end, wasn't enjoying taking a back seat in stature or having to adhere to the neverending rules.
She got the better of this deal. Married a royal, her children offspring of the House of Windsor, she (and they) can trade on that. Big win-win for her.
Harry not so much. Serious family rift - which is not nothing. The family rift was avoidable - and for that they are both to blame.
The interview was bad form plain and simple - and totally unnecessary. It accomplished nothing of value, hurt his family and damaged the Monarchy for no good reason.
I'm sure many people never watched the show or knew of Meghan Markle, prior to her engagement to Harry. This doesn't however take away from the fact that she played Rachel Zane on Suits for seven seasons (2011–2017).
I'm not sure if you are familiar with the acting world, but anyone who has a recurring role on a network tv sitcom or cable show, for several seasons, due to the show's popularity/ratings, is considered a success, among actors. Was she a A lister? Absolutely not, but her time on Suits, allowed her to become a millionaire. Additionally, as I pointed out in a prior post, she created a very popular lifestyle blog, "The Tig," which had many high profile lucrative sponsorship deals.
I'm not a millionaire; therefore, I'm very careful about critiquing the "success" of someone who independently achieved that status.
I'm not critiquing her success. But, just because she made some money, it doesn't give her the right to be so rude & state outright lies. I have known people with money & they mostly showed more class, than I saw on that interview. Same with people who had little (money).
Totally agree. What exactly was the point? What has been the constructive result?
Agree with this, too. And doubly for offspring of what is arguably the most prominent family in the world.
Quite the dichotomy, isn't it.
Of course, there are cultural differences. HUGE. Which is why they should not have married. Meghan no doubt chafed at the protocol - and, in the end, wasn't enjoying taking a back seat in stature or having to adhere to the neverending rules.
She got the better of this deal. Married a royal, her children offspring of the House of Windsor, she (and they) can trade on that. Big win-win for her.
Harry not so much. Serious family rift - which is not nothing. The family rift was avoidable - and for that they are both to blame.
The interview was bad form plain and simple - and totally unnecessary. It accomplished nothing of value and hurt his family and the Monaracy for no good reason.
Though this wasn't addressed to me, I've noticed that many have asked, "why did they partake in that interview?"
I believe they did the interview -because they wanted the story to be told, in their own words. Part of Meghan's frustration was that she felt so many falsehoods and lies were told about her. Obviously, she wasn't able to counter the narrative while still being part of the institution. Since both are no longer working royals, they were free to tell their side of the story, for better or worse, and they took advantage of the opportunity to "set the record straight," while setting the stage for their next venture (i.e. producing content for Netflix).
The interview wasn't that controversial to me, because they didn't say anything that people, who were in the know weren't already aware of. I think a number of people are frustrated by the perceived lack of loyalty, but such is life.
You mentioned that Harry didn't get anything out of the deal, but I would argue that he finally got the "freedom," that he said he wanted.
Your concern is for the monarchy, but it's clear that Harry and Meghan placed a much higher premium on themselves and Archie. I don't blame them for doing so.
Last edited by Gia_inNova; 03-13-2021 at 04:18 PM..
I'm not critiquing her success. But, just because she made some money, it doesn't give her the right to be so rude & state outright lies. I have known people with money & they mostly showed more class, than I saw on that interview. Same with people who had little (money).
Clearly, we weren't privy to any of the discussions at the palace; therefore, we can't emphatically state who was lying. But I don't doubt that Harry and Meghan felt that the situation was unhealthy for themselves and their baby.
Though this wasn't addressed to me, I've noticed that many have asked, "why did they partake in that interview?"
I believe they did the interview -because they wanted the story to be told, in their own words. Part of Meghan's frustration was that she felt so many falsehoods and lies were told about her. Obviously, she wasn't able to counter the narrative while still being part of the institution. Since both are no longer working royals, they were free to tell their side of the story, for better of worse, and they took advantage of the opportunity to "set the record straight," while setting the stage for their next venture (i.e. producing content for Netflix).
The interview wasn't that controversial to me, because they didn't say anything that people, who were in the know weren't already aware of. I think a number of people are frustrated by the perceived lack of loyalty, but such is life.
You mentioned that Harry didn't get anything out of the deal, but I would argue that he finally got the "freedom," that he said he wanted.
Your concern is for the monarchy, but it's clear that Harry and Meghan placed a much higher premium on themselves and Archie. I don't blame them for doing so.
They could have issued a brief press statement (closer to the time of the actual events) to "tell their side."
It was for nothing more than to elicit sympathy, seek revenge, and sell their brand in America.
Meghan is naïve if she thought her marriage to the duke wouldn't cause a controversy in the royal kingdom. The royal family is all about bloodline.
But in strolls Meghan, a successful actress who blows the lid on the Oprah Show. Oh, come on. And I'm supposed to believe she's an innocent victim of the nasty royal family?
For all I know she had this planned long before she even met Harry, just like Diane.
Look at the shame Princess Diane brought the Queen and the royal family. She was a thorn in all their sides. She never loved Prince Horse Face. She loved the idea of being a princess.
Harry will eventually regret the day he met Meghan, in my opinion.
I won't waste one moment of sleep over any of it. Let the Brits worry about it. They already think there's nothing wrong with being ruled by royalty.
Totally agree. What exactly was the point? What has been the constructive result?
Agree with this, too. And doubly for offspring of what is arguably the most prominent family in the world.
Quite the dichotomy, isn't it.
Of course, there are cultural differences. HUGE. Which is why they should not have married. Meghan no doubt chafed at the protocol - and, in the end, wasn't enjoying taking a back seat in stature or having to adhere to the neverending rules.
She got the better of this deal. Married a royal, her children offspring of the House of Windsor, she (and they) can trade on that. Big win-win for her.
Harry not so much. Serious family rift - which is not nothing. The family rift was avoidable - and for that they are both to blame.
The interview was bad form plain and simple - and totally unnecessary. It accomplished nothing of value, hurt his family and damaged the Monarchy for no good reason.
Well, that’s one perspective. Another is that she (and he also) has been getting unceremoniously lambasted by the British press (mostly of the Murdoch variety), even for things they praised the other wife. The family not only didn’t protect her, they courted that same press who were attacking her, giving the air it was being done with their approval. She also stated she was never trained on the protocols you say she “chafed”; you can’t expect someone to thrive if they’re set up to fail from the start. If being continually libeled by the press (in some ways illegally, as the successful lawsuit shows) and shut out by the family who should be protecting them, they likely thought going public was their only option.
I’m kinda enjoying all talk of Harry being corrupted by the evil (dark) American, breaking him away from his beloved family. A more believable conspiracy would be Harry marrying an outsider (like his beloved mother), forcing them to accept her as family, and using the rift as an excuse to leave the whole charade when they didn’t. Quite possibly he never forgave them for how Diana was treated and wanted them to see how someone could truly break from the iron grip of being a part of that family.
I agree with some of what you're saying but I want to point out that the show she was a costar on Suits, along with a bevy of other costars. Also, I don't live under a rock, but until she hooked up with Harry, I had honestly never heard of "Suits" OR Meghan Markle. Oh well, I guess I'm uncool.
Exactly , same with me. They can find "sympathy" in the dictionary under the letter "S".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
