Harry appointed senior exec at $1bn startup

[porcelaine]

Just seen that Harry has been appointed Chief Impact Officer at a billion dollar valued Silicon Valley startup.
This feels so unfair. I know people who have worked for years first qualifying then gaining experience in their field, without a hope of a job like this. Harry of the 2 A levels and zero formal work experience outside of the army. He can bleat about the hardships of privilege all he wants but he’d never get near a job like this as a private “normal” citizen.

@Mummy195

I have no idea what your link has to do with the thread title .

@Roussette

I was not trying to suggest anything, thanks.

I linked an article. Glad you agree that it's great for the Charity though.

Roussette - I doubt the Nottingham charity she donated £10,000 to, think that.

'SHE donated'

You seem to be incapable of playing it straight. Why do you feel the need to bend the truth all the time? Because you know the real facts don't support your agenda of total devotion?

[quote Mummy195]@RickiTarr

I am not MM, so please don't try that with me. Been here long enough to know the strategy that if you like MM, you are 'foreign'. Well done strategy. I am British born and bred with a long family tree. Not all British are xenophobic.

Parking lot was actually used a lot regarding that story, I assume because it was not a parking space. Used by British writers too.[/quote]
Everybody has "a long family tree" No one arrived on earth, fully formed in the last century or so. Daft statement.

[quote Mummy195]@RickiTarr

I am not MM, so please don't try that with me. Been here long enough to know the strategy that if you like MM, you are 'foreign'. Well done strategy. I am British born and bred with a long family tree. Not all British are xenophobic.

Parking lot was actually used a lot regarding that story, I assume because it was not a parking space. Used by British writers too.[/quote]
How did I suggest you were MM?

What I was suggesting is that you keep talking nonsense.

Then I saw some of your US vocabulary and thought that explained it. 🤷🏻‍♀️

family tree in the UK. duh !
So yes, American vocab. Good lord !

And you know very well I meant you don't get to nitpick everything I say and twist it like you do with MM, just as you are doing now.

I can’t engage with you any more @Mummy195 . Sorry it is just so hard to follow what you’re saying and why.

I’ve never “nit picked MM” in my life. It’s like you’re arguing with invisible people.

We are all just discussing current affairs and an archaic royal system, and what springs from that.

@Marmaladeagain

It's been hijacked by people that don't want to fawn over Harry - no, sorry - the thread would have stopped at one page then.

There aren't lots of people that want to fawn over Harry is the simple reason.

Oh is that what we’re supposed to be doing? 🤨

Lordy... I'm responsible for the flow of the threads now

Many many times I have said 'good post' or 'I agree with a lot of what you say' on midle of the road posts in which there is criticism. You obviously haven't noticed.

Fawning, cloying, adoring.... WTAF. I just kick back at the extreme dislike of people who certain posters who find anything to criticise them about.

And as you so succintly put it... they could do good things but everything else, the past about them outweighs that big time. They will never ever be released from the hate by certain posters, whatever they do.

If they were perfect, posters would still be bringing up ... but Eugenie, but the wedding, but the birth announcement, but ... now... the OW interview. But but but but. I've seen it. They go quiet for months (when they moved to US) posters were scratching around for something to criticise them about.

@Roussette

Wouldn't it be nice if once, just once, someone who really dislikes them said... yeah, that's a nice thing to do.

Sometimes there are posts on here which I agree with that talk about something stupid they'e done or which is daft, puzzling, irritating, whatever..
I agree with quite a lot of what the middle of the road posters say. And I tell them so.

Never seen it in return. Not ever. The dislike of them supersedes anything which is actually good, OK, or just not bad.

Of course the charity stuff is nice. Anyone lending their fame to a good cause is doing something valuable or worthwhile. Anyone running a trust that distributes funds to charities is doing a good thing.

OTOH, it’s the least we can expect of an extremely rich and pampered royal family.

Ahhh Impatiens wow... you've found something! You saw my link on the other thread.
You made no comment.
So I said 'she'? It was from their foundation, they sorted that, but me saying 'she' has riled you up. Strange.

You are really too intent in trying to catch people out, it's worrying and very weird.

I don't notice who posts. I concentrate on what they say. Suggest you try it.

@Roussette

Lordy... I'm responsible for the flow of the threads now

Many many times I have said 'good post' or 'I agree with a lot of what you say' on midle of the road posts in which there is criticism. You obviously haven't noticed.

Fawning, cloying, adoring.... WTAF. I just kick back at the extreme dislike of people who certain posters who find anything to criticise them about.

And as you so succintly put it... they could do good things but everything else, the past about them outweighs that big time. They will never ever be released from the hate by certain posters, whatever they do.

If they were perfect, posters would still be bringing up ... but Eugenie, but the wedding, but the birth announcement, but ... now... the OW interview. But but but but. I've seen it. They go quiet for months (when they moved to US) posters were scratching around for something to criticise them about.

I found it a massive relief when they went to Canada. Radio silence. Then they came back for the Commonwealth service and it all started again.

FWIW I’m reasonably sure that William didn’t name himself the sexiest bald man. That wouldn’t really work as PR.

Thank you RickiTarr yes absolutely

@ImpatiensI @Roussette please don’t bicker. You’re two of the saner presences in this discussion, even if you are on opposing sides.

Who on earth did? No one from this planet !

Smells like a PR stunt gone wrong, just like the 'we are not racist, look I have a black friend' PR stunt.

Thanks Ricki

@LittleBearPad

😂 at least my post is based on verifiable facts.

I remember the birth story happening. If you google it you can read all about it. There’s a link in this thread too.

This.

IIRC H&M announced prior to Archie's birth that they were "doing things their way" rather than Buckingham Palace protocol. This lead to a complete balls up with a middle of the night dash to hospital, Harry speaking to the press twice on the day Archie was born (once is normal), followed by the additional photo call after Archie had been introduced to the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh.

The reason for royal protocol is that it all runs smoothly and is less stressful. H&M deciding to go off piste just caused more drama, press appearances and stress than following the established protocol.

[quote RickiTarr]**@ImpatiensI* @Roussette* please don’t bicker. You’re two of the saner presences in this discussion, even if you are on opposing sides. [/quote]
Yes to this!!

My conclusion reading all this is that Harry is now basically functioning as a pantomime villain.

For a while he was a pantomime hero, and a particularly good one as he had the troubled past that we all like to see the hero overcome. Then he went off script so now he has to be the villain.

The point of the pantomime villain is that they are unambiguously bad. They have to be, because you don’t want to doubt yourself and your own good judgement as you sit in the crowd booing and jeering at them. No one wants to see nuance in a pantomime villain, you don’t want to think of them as struggling, or trying hard, or sometimes being good and sometimes getting it wrong (like most of us do in real life) - you just want to do a bit of good old fashioned booing at someone we can pretty much all agree is a bad guy.

If a pantomime villain does something “good” it is always for nefarious purposes. They just want to be seen as good, so don’t let them trick you! Normal people can be complicated but pantomime villains must always, always be motivated by self interest, greed, or a desire to harm others.

This is why everything about H & M is so polarised. They’re not real, they’re now just characters serving a function. All those things we might dislike about inequality, the ludicrousness of the aristocracy, privilege...we can aim it all at the pantomime villain, it’s what they’re there for (just don’t for god’s sake ever question the heroes!)

There may come a time when it is convenient for Harry to be recast as the pantomime hero, and if so all the stories in the papers about him will change (again) - as will the threads on here.

Until then though we can at least all convince ourselves that rather dull William is the dashing prince we really wanted all along

@Bluegrass

Great post. Yes. Totally agree. Well put.

I work in a corporate environment and can confirm that quite a few people very senior in the company did not earn their positions through hard work and being qualified, they got the position because they gained influence with the right people. This is how the corporate world works in a lot of situations. It is not fair, but it is what happens. Hence I'm getting out and starting my own small business, fully meritocratic!

Sorry but - one last bicker (I'm afraid bickering is a weakness of mine and lockdown hasn't helped one bit..)

Ahhh Impatiens wow... you've found something! You saw my link on the other thread.You made no comment.

And? I already asked you what comment you were expecting (presumably a grovelling apology from all the 'haters') but you didn't answer me.

So I said 'she'? It was from their foundation, they sorted that, but me saying 'she' has riled you up. Strange

It riles me up because I really detest how deceitful you can be, trying to get sympathy and kudos for M under false pretences.

You said 'she' donated the money as if 'she' had given it directly from her own pocket. But 'she' didn't, it came from a foundation with money raised from generous and decent people buying a book with recipes in by other decent and generous people.

If anyone deserves credit for this donation it's those decent and generous people. Stop trying to use that as leverage in your defence of H&M, it really stinks.

Bicker over. (Apologies @RickiTarr and @ImAncient)

Well done, wish you all the best.

@Bluegrass

My conclusion reading all this is that Harry is now basically functioning as a pantomime villain.

For a while he was a pantomime hero, and a particularly good one as he had the troubled past that we all like to see the hero overcome. Then he went off script so now he has to be the villain.

The point of the pantomime villain is that they are unambiguously bad. They have to be, because you don’t want to doubt yourself and your own good judgement as you sit in the crowd booing and jeering at them. No one wants to see nuance in a pantomime villain, you don’t want to think of them as struggling, or trying hard, or sometimes being good and sometimes getting it wrong (like most of us do in real life) - you just want to do a bit of good old fashioned booing at someone we can pretty much all agree is a bad guy.

If a pantomime villain does something “good” it is always for nefarious purposes. They just want to be seen as good, so don’t let them trick you! Normal people can be complicated but pantomime villains must always, always be motivated by self interest, greed, or a desire to harm others.

This is why everything about H & M is so polarised. They’re not real, they’re now just characters serving a function. All those things we might dislike about inequality, the ludicrousness of the aristocracy, privilege...we can aim it all at the pantomime villain, it’s what they’re there for (just don’t for god’s sake ever question the heroes!)

There may come a time when it is convenient for Harry to be recast as the pantomime hero, and if so all the stories in the papers about him will change (again) - as will the threads on here.

Until then though we can at least all convince ourselves that rather dull William is the dashing prince we really wanted all along

The trouble is though that they BEHAVE as if they’re in a pantomime, or a Disney film anyway.

Normal people can be complicated but pantomime villains must always, always be motivated by self interest, greed, or a desire to harm others.

See, that would wash if H&M didn't keep behaving in ways so clearly motivated by 'self interest, greed and a desire to harm others'. People haven't just pulled this stuff out of the air, it's right there in front of our noses in what they say and do.