Harry & Meghan 14

[yolofish]

A thread for those who wish to discuss what's in the news and what your take on it is.

That vanity fair article is interesting thanks for posting curly

It’s also what a few of us think - Meghan wasn’t prepared enough. I suspect that is at Harry’s door rather than the RF as a whole. Both Kate & Sophie were introduced gradually after the Diana & Fergie years.

Lord alive. Let's just discourage anyone with a famous name or lots of money to just leave the disadvantaged alone and do nothing. Where is it fact that MM (let's be honest, that's who you're having a dig at) has expected something in return?

Oh give over Wendy. Threads meander all over the place. Hence cats, haggis and food. It meandered.

Another one who is Diana vintage. I respected Meghan saying she is a feminist but not convinced about anyone who self describes as a humanitarian.

I think they both wanted to get married. I think they both brought a great deal to the table and they both desperately wanted to lock it down and were BOTH terrified that if the other found out too much then they wouldn't go through with it. Both played all the issues and potential problems down and sprinted down the aisle.

Been there done that. It didn't end well.

Well that's really good for you and the charity you are involved with roussette and I'm pleased.

But the hard commercial reality of sleb/charity partnerships is what can each bring to the other? And, from the charity's side, how could the sleb potentially damage the charity?

A reasonably famous person endorsed a branch of the charity I was involved with, she took time out to get involved, it helped us a lot.

What did she do? How much was she involved?

I mean, for example, that woman off Corrie who does stuff for lions (Gail?), she gets really involved hands on it seems and is truly passionate about the cause. Other slebs, not so much. OK that's just one example and I'm not saying one has to pick up lion poo to be worthwhile, just that many slebs see charidee as a way of increasing their profile.

But aren't we supposed to be doing things differently on this thread? 🤷‍♀

Never mind, keep going on about it if you must. I'll just skim read and if I see "Trump" jump out. I will avoid.

Maybe she employed local workers to get their 'hands dirty' instead of it going to a teen for a poverty tourism visit which takes money out of the communities that actually need it. Or maybe she didn't. But one would not be better than the other in that case. Because it's all speculation and you don't know what happened - you just think it. Therefore it is so?

@WendyMoiraAngelaDarling

Please can you not target people. The Trump thread was mentioned in context. People have mentioned their work life, their daughter etc as part of the points their making. Please don't police this thread as well.

I don't want to say which charity and who (OK OK I get you'll pick up on that, but I protect my privacy and having been subjected to a stalking incident I'm careful)

Needless to say she spent time at our charity, it was in the papers, she took time out to keep involved and it resulted in a lot more badly needed volunteers to name just one aspect.

I'll just skim read and if I see "Trump" jump out. I will avoid

Oh for goodness sake! Can I request then that you don't mention cats because I don't have one?

What I posted on a previous thread was in context. Thasss allllll....

That sounds like a really successful partnership roussette and of course I wouldnt expect you to name names. Thats where and how sleb/charity partnerships should work. They dont always, and its bloody hard work getting the right kind of endorsement so kudos to your organisation.

Agreed yolo

Double Standards!

Don't worry I'm off to bed now. Talk about Trump all you like. I won't say a word 🤐

Wendy
No one can stipulate what direction a thread takes. It goes where it goes, that's the nature of a forum....

@WendyMoiraAngelaDarling

Could someone else who this poster might listen to point out how childish this is?

Targeting a poster can be seen to be intimidating people as well. I had a private message from someone saying they didn't feel they could post in support of Meghan because of the response from some people. This behaviour has an impact. I've reported - please can this not go on?

@yolofish

Do you tar Angelina Jolie with the same ‘charidee’ self serving brush?

I think they both wanted to get married. I think they both brought a great deal to the table and they both desperately wanted to lock it down and were BOTH terrified that if the other found out too much then they wouldn't go through with it. Both played all the issues and potential problems down and sprinted down the aisle.

Totally agree ^^

Or they fell in love, were glad they found someone they could trust and happily got married!

Ariadne I would think that Angelina is a big enough name for most charities to want to work with her... I think you might be missing the point. The charities want the sleb endorsement, the bigger the name the better (unless there is potential scandal attached). I'm also pretty sure that Angelina sees no harm to her own brand by endorsing charities. She may be perfectly altruistic, but she's not damaging her brand.

I think they both wanted to get married. I think they both brought a great deal to the table and they both desperately wanted to lock it down and were BOTH terrified that if the other found out too much then they wouldn't go through with it. Both played all the issues and potential problems down and sprinted down the aisle.

Also totally agree with this, they’re now having to deal with unpacking all of those issues that really should have been resolved prior to marriage

Bold fail

Met, I'd like to believe they both fell in love and got married. But way too quickly and with not enough preparation. Unfortunately due to nature, they couldn't take things slow because of Meghan's age so she wasn't able to be introduced quickly. That's my theory anyway

The RF was aware of this I think, and thats why they bent over backwards to accommodate her. She was allowed to do things much sooner than other spouses, ie Christmas at Sandringham. Surely though she'd have got a massive taster of what was to come, she could have broken off the engagement. Maybe that's why she put the wheels in motion to extricate them so soon after they were married. She got a look at the future, didn't like it but still wanted to get married

They met

There's a DM online article about Doris if anyone is interested. It's probably the most information I've seen about her. Those "friends" have been talking again.