Harry and Meghan, more news!

[callmeadoctor]

New thread following on old one: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/the_royal_family/3932323-Harry-and-Meghan-news?msgid=97617755

Ok, thread set up to discuss the book under What We're Reading in the Books section. That way those reading it can join, and those who want no contact with it can avoid!

I am amused at everything in that book possibly being accurate. This is a woman who called Diana a 'fake victim' and wrote about the Queen's healthy sexual appetite.

I am having a hard time understanding how she might know that

Its not of a case of not being bothered. Just not my type of book.

@ButteryPuffin

Ok, thread set up to discuss the book under What We're Reading in the Books section. That way those reading it can join, and those who want no contact with it can avoid!

Thanks, good idea, that way we don't have to fall out over it.🍷💂🏽

just hope they are not going to use it to back stuff up.

Since it's fine on this thread to say 'that's my view', others may differ', as shown yesterday, I don't think that should be a problem. Some people may agree with what the book says, others may not. It's all opinions, eh? Lol.

@BalloonSlayer
I think you will find that the idea of not working only ever applied to middle class women or middle class jobs. I am afraid my mother (born 1915), always worked, stopping for 6 weeks when I was born in her 40s.

Since it's fine on this thread to say 'that's my view', others may differ', as shown yesterday, I don't think that should be a problem. Some people may agree with what the book says, others may not. It's all opinions, eh? Lol.

That is fine, as long as posters don't think their opinions have more weight because they got them from a greedy and unpleasant aristo's work of fiction.

horrific, unbeliveably cruel, greedy and unpleasant aristo

TheNavigator, are you not laying it on a bit thick.

Nobody says anything like this about MM and they are accussed about being all sorts.

Relax a bit.

@Samcro, that’s fine (not your type of book). But you can’t pass judgment on its contents without reading it.

That is fine, as long as posters don't think their opinion has more weight because it's based on their expectation of a book they haven't actually read themselves...

Also: who decides whose opinions have more weight here? We all get to have our own views as long as we don't break Talk guidelines.

My step son is notorious for doing this. He will ask me my opinion on a subject and then lecture me on why I am wrong. I can’t be wrong it is my opinion. I can be factually incorrect but that is something different altogether.

roussette. How do you know that the Queen doesn’t have a healthy sexual appetite?

I can't remember where I read this but apparently, about 70 years ago, Prince Philip quipped that it took them a long time to leave home for engagements because HM couldn't keep her hands off him. By all accounts she was fairly besotted with him since she was about 13 so I can believe it.

she was right, he was very handsome.

[quote BlueTreeBlue]@Institutkarite why is it a hatchet job? It is very complimentary to both of them. She has highlighted both their achievements and many positive things. Yes there are also less positive things.[/quote]
Try reading my post. I didn't say it was a hatchet job. If you're going to quote me. Get it right.

@YouSayWhat

How do you know that the Queen doesn’t have a healthy sexual appetite?

Did I say she didn't? Nope
I have no idea, I really do not want to know that, and that is not what I was commenting on... whether she did or she didn't

But to have someone discussing the Queen's sexual appetite in a book is beyond the pale as far as I'm concerned. Horrible.

That was what I was saying.

Roussette: "But to have someone discussing the Queen's sexual appetite in a book is beyond the pale as far as I'm concerned. Horrible."

Well, I always thought that the imaginary Harry Flashman's reflection, after meeting the couple, on what a honeymoon Queen Victoria and Prince Albert must've enjoyed, was very funny. But then I immensely enjoyed George MacDonald Fraser's writing, and also I'm probably a vulgarian.

@Institutkarite I was merely asking why you thought it was so cruel and horrible.
I did get the meaning right therefore I don’t understand why you’re being so uppity about it. You sound like a very angry person and a bit ridiculous.

This is a woman who called Diana a 'fake victim' and wrote about the Queen's healthy sexual appetite.

Well Roussette, you brought the subject up. We wouldn’t even be discussing it if you hadn’t mentioned it.

You're the one speculating, not me.

Didn't 'Lady'Colin (I resent having to use her title) also say in another book that the QM didn't like sex and that's why it took a while for her to conceive. I think it's awful to write things like that and it's horseshit as well - who could know?

I am not speculating. When have I speculated Rousette? You raised the subject. It would never have been mentioned if you hadn’t mentioned it.

@TheNavigator

Well, Lady C does come across as a horrific and unbelievably cruel person, so no surprises there then. But I am sure many posters on here will enjoy it - as long as everything is MM's fault.

So it’s ok to make judgements about Lady Colin but not about other women in this thread?

You've said that once already YouSay. I won't be speculating on this about the Queen even if you are (asking me how did I know she wasn't)
Not answering you on this any more.

I agree MissEliza
In the context of a historical biography, maybe not so bad, but not with a living Monarch.
Just naff.

Wow is this all the thread is going to be about? Bickering about some book?