Sussexes and bullying campaign

[DeepThinkingGirl]

Hi everyone !

Does anyone find the constant bullying of the Sussexes to affect their mental health ?

I find the mainstream misogyny to be a reflection of how society really does view women as a whole and how othering it is of people of other cultures.

I think baby Lilibet would be very sad to know the world received her with such strong opinions against her naming. It’s really sad that the world so full of hate doesn’t provide a nice place for kids to grow confidently.

I feel like if this happens in a powerful royal family, what’s there to hope in your average family!

Btw I have in law issues and I find the attitudes towards the sussexes triggering and upsetting

@Gorgeouslilgirl

Honestly, people who go on about this are bonkers.

Can you name your child after family ONLY if you never criticise them directly or indirectly?!

They go on national TV and say how awful the royal family was to them, how they had to get away from them etc. Then they name their baby after the head of said family. Of course people are going to comment. Harry and Meghan started it by commenting first. They can't expect people to listen blandly without having their own thoughts on the matter.

@randomkey123

The only bullies are the Sussexes themselves who want to bully anyone and everyone who doesn't embrace their narrative.

No. Not true.

By that logic, if I critique Boris J, am critical of our democracy or critical of UK and unpatriotic?

People and institutions are two distinct things.

Besides he has not "slagged off" the RF.

Mind boggling. Yes of course you're right, he's only ever talked about how supportive it is and how happy he was. And that he didn't need to "find freedom" from it and his father and brother are not "trapped".

Is there some reason you're pretending that saying "the anonymous person claiming to be a palace source is lying" = "saying the Queen is lying"?

This has been explained before, but palace source means a member of staff in the palace press office. The Royal correspondents work with the RF press team all the time. It's not as if someone popped into a phone box to make an anonymous call to Jonny Dymond's answer machine with a hanky over their mouth to disguise their voice. They will have been instructed to brief the press in the usual way. Signed off by the Queen.

top trending story everywhere was about how mean Meghan was for using the Queens nickname 🙄

It was very clearly Harry’s family names (first, middle and double barrelled surname) being given to the baby and Harry who had criticised his family extensively on several episodes of a television series and a podcast (as well as on the joint Oprah interview). So quite honestly, anyone who tries to describe it as solely Meghan’s doing has a shady agenda. Maybe some people would assume name giving us a joint thing, but no way can Meghan take the blame for what Harry has done mostly solo and concerning his family.

Thank you @RickiTarr

Some people choose to be blind either way. On one side, Harry and Meghan can do no wrong. On the other side, Harry and Meghan can do nothing right.

Just silly, all round.

I’d be more concerned with your own mental health than any so called ‘bullying’ against Meghan and Harry if you get this upset over a couple of uber privileged strangers you have presumably never met or had any dealings with

I find war, third world hunger, sexism, our unequal society, etc etc far more detrimental on my MH to be honest.

I don’t think it is about H&M can do no wrong. It is the bullying which gets people to say, that’s enough.

Like why make nasty comments about what someone names their baby?

It says a lot about the low-lives who do that about anyone’s baby.

@AnotherName1334

Some people choose to be blind either way. On one side, Harry and Meghan can do no wrong. On the other side, Harry and Meghan can do nothing right.

Just silly, all round.

Yep.

It’s like Blur v Oasis or a football rivalry or something, but 1000 x more toxic. Posters just stepping right over facts and inventing things.

Thankfully there are more balanced posters than super fans.

@Bovrilly

Thank you *@RickiTarr*

YW. You were right. He said it. 🤷🏻‍♀️

@Gorgeouslilgirl

I don’t think it is about H&M can do no wrong. It is the bullying which gets people to say, that’s enough.

Like why make nasty comments about what someone names their baby?

It says a lot about the low-lives who do that about anyone’s baby.

This. I agree.

@Gorgeouslilgirl

By that logic, if I critique Boris J, am critical of our democracy or critical of UK and unpatriotic?

People and institutions are two distinct things.

This is the wrong way round, I'm talking about criticism of an organisation implying criticism of its leadership. Think about the times that an organisation has fucked up and the person at the top has resigned. It's because they are held responsible for the behaviour of the organisation. In the case of the RF the Queen has led it and made all the important decisions for decades. Any criticism of it must reflect on her.

@lemmein

I find it fascinating how invested people are in this - and actually mindblowing that people still support having a RF in 2021.

A few days ago the Good Law Project won their case against the government - top trending story everywhere was about how mean Meghan was for using the Queens nickname 🙄

I suppose they serve their purpose.

That's such a narrow view of human behaviour. A royal family feud, orchestrated and broadcast by Meghan and Harry on Oprah with dramatic music, pauses and facial expressions for effect will draw out the online crowds more than a boring old law thing. The Good Law Project is hardly going to get the same emotional response from audiences is it, that cannot be a surprise to anyone, surely.

You could say the same about any frollicy thing in the media, why do people watch strictly, why do they get invested in LI, when there are important issues to solve.

After all, it is Meghan and Harry not the RF who act out their vendetta in the global media.

The Sussexes have chosen to become the drama king and queen of the decade. If it is class and reputation they are after, they're going about it the wrong way. At the end of the day, they're only harming their own image. Positioning themselves as eternal victims while being incredibly thick skinned about their family's feelings will come and bite them in the backsides. They are only famous because Harry used to be the spare, which he no longer is. By destroying their relationship with the RF, they are destroying their only valuable asset. If Harry wasn't royal, wed hardly be talking about them.

When Charles become king, it will be interesting to see how having English/American princes and princesses in California will play out. The two of them will provide entertainment for years to come. I'd say that Meghan will come out of this better than Harry.

There is not a single name on earth that would not have sparked outrage because some people are just desperate to find things to be offended by

This a million times over.

Let's just wait for a photo. Cue more outrage at how she's holding the baby, how dare she now show Lili's face. How could Harry stand there like that, why is he doing this, why is she doing that. She's criticised as a mother on here. Ironic given this is a parenting forum.

I cannot get over the incensed frothing about this name. It's their choice... how many times has it been said on here that no one owns a name and FWIW I think Harry did run it past his Grandmother but the good old 'sources' still have to stir it up.

What I have found ridiculously hilarious is the number of posters on all these threads going on and on and on about 'why didn't they call her Doria'. 'Why didn't they call her Elizabeth'.
It's pathetic. Maybe they don't like the names! The threads that lay into MNers families for daring to criticise baby names, it's always 'your baby, your choice'. And before you say anything, he never criticised the Queen. See below.

Harry has criticised the Institution and its relationship with the Press. There is no getting away with the fact Kate is and was protected but Meghan wasn't.
I have linked sources on here endlessly proving that so won't be doing it again before anyone asks. And when I do, posters don't comment anyway because they don't like that fact proved.

@amusedtodeath1

If someone said awful things about my 95year old grandmother when her husband was dying/she was grieving I'd think they were cruel heartless bastards tbh. It doesn't matter why or who's in the right.

They would be bullying a vulnerable elderly woman.

What have they said about the Queen? All I have seen from them is criticism of the institution and a mystery family member making comments on Archie's skin tone.

He wants to step away from the Royal Family and live in a foreign country which is his choice. But why did he think that the tax payer would continue to pay for his security for him and his family? He would appear to be getting like Uncle Andrew and developing a strong sense of entitlement.

But why did he think that the tax payer would continue to pay for his security for him and his family?

They pay for their own security.
Unlike Andrew at £300,000 per year

There's the hounding and bullying (from people who think H&M can do nothing right so every single thing they do is picked apart) and there's stating objective criticisms where necessary and applauding them where necessary.

But for people who think H&M can do no wrong, both are lumped in as bullying or they say why even mention any criticism.

It's like for one side, it's either be 100% fans or say nothing. For the other side, it's either be 100% critical or say nothing.

@Roussette

But why did he think that the tax payer would continue to pay for his security for him and his family?

They pay for their own security.
Unlike Andrew at £300,000 per year

They do but he doesn't think they should.

Step away from mainstream media.

It's like for one side, it's either be 100% fans or say nothing. For the other side, it's either be 100% critical or say nothing

I agree. They are very polarising. But being on the more positive side, what gets me... even when there is something they have done which is honestly good, and it's been received favourably in general in the media, it's still pulled to bits on here. And often in an extremely unpleasant way.

I recognise their imperfections, I think they don't help themselves at times, and I've said that many a time but neither are they both spawn of the devil. And I loathe the vile names they are called.

they couldn't have the half in half out situation they wanted

To be fair why couldn't they?

There are many royals who hold titles, live in palaces and live off the Queen/Taxpayer, yet are not "working royals". The Wessexes and the Kents come to mind. Why couldn't it have been the same for H&M? After all Harry's not immediately in line to the throne anyway.

They do but he doesn't think they should

Well... if your Uncle who is a non working member of the RF, who has kept his military patronages and who has done some very dodgy deals in the past, and Epstein.... if he carries on with his funded security, I suppose if it were me, I'd be a bit miffed too.