Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Harry and Meghan-part 2

999 replies

BertrandRussell · 01/07/2019 07:45

Following on from this -it was just getting interesting. Someone posted about how Meghan called herself a feminist but hadn’t earned the title. I was interested to know how you earned the title- but the thread ended.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Original poster
BertrandRussell · 01/07/2019 21:21

So- they get no credit for Harry coming out and talking to the Press about the baby- which none of the others have done- which melted even my icy republican heart a bit? No credit for the fab picture with the Queen and Doria?

OP posts:
IWannaSeeHowItEnds · 01/07/2019 21:22

Yes, it's the lack of effort to even put a veneer over the attitude that the public is just a cash cow.

I'm not anti mm - I like that she had a career and was her own person - she didn't just wait around for her boyfriend to make his mind up. Not so sure about km - she seems to work very hard at displaying no personality whatsoever. Which is a shame. And I think she was mad to go back to a man who'd already dumped her.

NaturalBornWoman · 01/07/2019 21:22

Weren't William and Harry's christenings totally private? I think they were in buck house in the music room or somewhere. Pics were taken and released but I don't remember them being outside in public.

OKMorty · 01/07/2019 21:24

That’s exactly the sort of example I mean Bertrand. Harry decided for whatever reason to talk to the press and his natural charm shine through. As a result he got people on side.

MsMaisel · 01/07/2019 21:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Outsomnia · 01/07/2019 21:25

The quid pro quo for using taxpayer money for your lifestyle is to feed us with stuff from their lives.

It's a bargain. If it is not fulfilled the pack fights back.

MauritiusNext · 01/07/2019 21:26

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

escapade1234 · 01/07/2019 21:29

It's like they have to constantly remind the public who's boss, or that they only tolerate them

That’s exactly my reading of it as well.

Reinforced by the bloody awful hand and foot photos of the baby.

IWannaSeeHowItEnds · 01/07/2019 21:29

How much credit does a man need for talking about his baby for a few minutes. It's not difficult.
If they aren't deviating too much from other royals in terms of behaviour, that's not public perception. They do need to help themselves a little bit, if they want public support.

GlitchStitch · 01/07/2019 21:31

People who read the tabloids are also people who are interested in the monarchy, who turn out to greet them etc. On the previous thread somebody mocked people who would want to see a stranger's baby, but it's these 'sad, gullible' people who help the monarchy to survive. They need the goodwill of the public, and if that isn't happening then they need to look at how they are being received and why, not dismiss the same kind of people who lined the streets with flags for their carriage ride.

LaurieMarlow · 01/07/2019 21:31

it's the lack of effort to even put a veneer over the attitude that the public is just a cash cow.

What on earth have they done that’s worse than air miles Andy, private jet Charlie and Kate ripping out a perfectly good kitchen after ten minutes in Anmer hall? They are nowhere near the worst offenders.

Charley50 · 01/07/2019 21:36

@zonkin - I agree with your lucky family lottery.
I also think the government could be made up of randomly picked 25 - 65 year olds who achieved good grades at GCSE, and would be just as 'successful' as what we've currently got!

GlitchStitch · 01/07/2019 21:37

The hand and foot photos are what celebrities do when they have an exclusive deal with OK magazine for first baby pics. I thought it was ridiculous.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 01/07/2019 21:38

All they said was that they weren’t releasing details of where she was giving birth. Probably sensible

Make that definitely sensible, if only for saving us from Kay Burley's yammering and the idiots in union jack suits (though sadly not the fake town crier)

On the feminism thing, I agree that Meghan describing herself thus was an innovation - though it seemed a bit much to suggest Harry was one too - but I'm just not sure what the point was. Unless she honestly thinks she can persuade the RF of feminism's merits, of course ... in which case good luck with that

OKMorty · 01/07/2019 21:38

@Glitch

Someone said it was like a game of Mr Potatohead. Putting all the parts together to make up a full potatohead! 😂

IWannaSeeHowItEnds · 01/07/2019 21:40

They haven't done anything worse but the thread is about them. Also no one wants to see more of Andrew than we do already but there is a lot of affection for William and Harry and therefore more interest.

Some of the criticism of mm is unfair - the engagement ring thing for ex

TheBigBallOfOil · 01/07/2019 21:42

Oh god I just don’t care
I am a feminist
I am a stick of rhubarb
I am a big ball of oil
All statements above about equally meaningful
Why can’t they just FUCK OFF????

LaurieMarlow · 01/07/2019 21:43

They haven't done anything worse but the thread is about them

Funny, I haven’t seen a thread on here about Andy for years.

You singled them out for criticism without in any way acknowledging that the rest of the royals are worse, so you could at least own that.

Original poster
BertrandRussell · 01/07/2019 21:49

Lots of non celebrities do the foot photos too..

Isn’t it interesting that someone said they made us wait to hear the baby’s name, when it was actually the same time as George and Charlotte and two days sooner than Louis? I think that’s a brilliant example of them being criticised for something they hadn’t done.

OP posts:
LaurieMarlow · 01/07/2019 21:54

The other thing that I thought was interesting was that Kate Middletown’s wedding dress was more than twice the price of Meghan’s. A quarter of a million compared to 100k.

LaurieMarlow · 01/07/2019 21:55

The foot thing is everywhere. All over Facebook. I couldn’t accuse them of originality there.

IWannaSeeHowItEnds · 01/07/2019 21:55

Laurie my first post said she is no better or worse than any other royal when it came to spending. I must admit I had forgotten about Andrew . But it's not singling H and M out to talk about them specifically on a thread titled Harry and Meghan!
I think I've been fairly balanced - there are things M has done which I think didn't deserve the level of bitchiness she received and other things where I believe H and M do deserve some criticism.

LaurieMarlow · 01/07/2019 22:00

IWanna looking back over your posts I can see that you’re also accusing them of hiding the baby, whereas their actions have been entirely in line with the Cambridge’s on that front, so you’re judging them more harshly than the others all over the place.

Original poster
BertrandRussell · 01/07/2019 22:01

Wondering how many people I annoyed with this gem 18 years ago. I actually had to get them printed and post them

Harry and Meghan-part 2
OP posts:
FannyWork · 01/07/2019 22:04

The thing I don’t get about calling her a gold digger or a schemer, they seem to assume that she doesn’t really love him or find him attractive and married for fame.

But really? Incredibly handsome man, charming, popular with the ability to provide for a family very comfortably, and basically be her knight in shining army. and shaggable tooHe would be very, very easy to fall in love with him so I don’t think it’s true.

It it was Anna Nicole Smith and her geriatric husband or Hugh Hefner and his bunnies fair enough, but it’s not.