Positive thread on Meghan again

[Mummy194]

Now that at the other knock off MN chat has been shut down, we seem to have an influx of those posters on here with new or encouraged accounts.

For those who are not interested in trawling through negative post after the other. You can come on here for positive news about Meghan and Harry.

Why not, everyone else seems to be viewed positively, without 'cynicism'. I don't mind taking this at snail pace, we just post on the good things about H&M, they sure seem to be doing a lot of that lately, and it's really buried under the negativity on MN.

This discussion over Meghan's psychiatric problems is awful though. Just leave the poor woman alone. She needed help and didn't get it, end of story. There is literally zero reason to think she was lying and it's a disgusting thing to insinuate imo.

@Aspiringmatriarch

This discussion over Meghan's psychiatric problems is awful though. Just leave the poor woman alone. She needed help and didn't get it, end of story. There is literally zero reason to think she was lying and it's a disgusting thing to insinuate imo.

she put them out in the public arena though.

I'd like to know if Charles is getting help and support for the second public trashing by his son.

@Aspiringmatriarch

Good for him indeed! I like his naturalness and heart on the sleeve spirit but I've always warmed to that type of character

So agree @Aspiringmatriarch on her struggle with her mental health. It pisses me off big time with those that dismiss it or disbelieve it.
I've spent too long with people struggling with this so I am consciously having to hold myself back on here

Keyring what is your point? She put them out in the public arena... and... what?

I too hope Charles is ok. I'm sure this is a painful situation for him. I don't lay much blame for that on H&M though.

@Aspiringmatriarch

Keyring what is your point? She put them out in the public arena... and... what?

I too hope Charles is ok. I'm sure this is a painful situation for him. I don't lay much blame for that on H&M though.

if you put something out in the public arena, you can expect it to be discussed by the public.

I don't believe you truly believe what you wrote in your second sentence.

Ok

It's a shame that H&M can't give some consideration to the mental health of their family members. Not sure how Catherine felt about "Waity Katie" being dragged up again by Meghan or how the rest of the family feel about being trashed by their grandson/son/brother but I don't suppose its doing a lot for their well-being.

They can talk about their own mental health without involving people they're supposed to love.

@lakeswimmer

It's a shame that H&M can't give some consideration to the mental health of their family members. Not sure how Catherine felt about "Waity Katie" being dragged up again by Meghan or how the rest of the family feel about being trashed by their grandson/son/brother but I don't suppose its doing a lot for their well-being.

They can talk about their own mental health without involving people they're supposed to love.

+1

Could you link me to the waity Katie comment by Meghan?

I'm prepared to be educated on this

She said this in the Oprah interview: “Kate was called ‘Waity Katie,’ waiting to marry William,” she said. “While I imagine that was really hard—and I do, I can’t picture what that felt like—this [racism] is not the same.”

Ahhh so she was being supportive

I thought so, yes.

@Roussette

Could you link me to the waity Katie comment by Meghan?

I'm prepared to be educated on this

She referred to it in the interview with Oprah. She said “Kate was called ‘Waity Katie,’ waiting to marry William,".

@CallmeHendricks

I wonder if TM was simply struck rigid with fear, at the prospect of travelling all that way and being centre stage at the sheer "spectacle" of a royal wedding. We can surmise all we like, but we don't know his reasons for dealing with those feelings, if that was indeed the case.

maybe he was ''invited'' but not invited.

@Roussette

Ahhh so she was being supportive

Well that's one interpretation.

Another interpretation could be that she was being dismissive by suggesting that Catherine didn't have it as bad as she did and by dredging up an unflattering image of Catherine being forced to "wait" for William to pop the question.

You could also interpret as being disrespectful as she was referred to as Kate/Kate Middleton throughout the interview rather than Catherine/Duchess of Cambridge.

Not about H and M per say but.....
I have been binge watching Suits since last week (on season 2) and I love it.
She is a lovely actress and I love her character 'Rachel' in the show.

Hopefully once baby no. 2 arrives, H&M can settle into cosy domesticity in California.

Suspect this is the high point of their 'relevance' - and they will graduallly fade into the background while younger celebs come to the fore. When they've sung all they can for their supper, they might find the endorsements and sponsorships fade out too. For they are ostensibly a one trick pony couple, riding on the back of the RF's global fame, whilst simultaneously trashing the institution and its members.

You could also interpret as being disrespectful as she was referred to as Kate/Kate Middleton throughout the interview rather than Catherine/Duchess of Cambridge.

William and Catherine married ten years ago. I don't think there have been any waitie Katie mentions in the British press for about twelve years. I wonder how Meghan heard about it and why she felt the need to raise the topic to the wider USA public who had probably never heard about it before.

I would say disrespectful is a kind interpretation.

I think this is a good example of the whole positive/negative interpretations going on. They're discussing bullying, and racist bullying, and that these aren't the same - that racist bullying has an added dimension. So I take it at face value. I'm curious why you don't? I see this so often and I wonder why I'm getting such a different impression.

Taking things at face value is to believe whatever comes out of someone's mouth is the truth and therefore without question. If we all looked at things with that lens then by default everybody would always be telling the truth and no one would question anything.

Looking at things through a different lens due to eg. knowledge of behaviours or a lived experience gives a different view/opinion to that of just face value.

@ShamedBySiri

You could also interpret as being disrespectful as she was referred to as Kate/Kate Middleton throughout the interview rather than Catherine/Duchess of Cambridge.

William and Catherine married ten years ago. I don't think there have been any waitie Katie mentions in the British press for about twelve years. I wonder how Meghan heard about it and why she felt the need to raise the topic to the wider USA public who had probably never heard about it before.

I would say disrespectful is a kind interpretation.

totally agree.

[quote Roussette]@lakeswimmer
As I said, you don't believe her, that much is obvious

@Aspiringmatriarch
Great post
So agree on the podcast. I've listened to it unlike many who criticise. It's warm and funny and about 2mins out of 1hr30 taken up with any of the criticisms on here.[/quote]
do we have to believe everything she says?

You believe what you want! No one is making you do anything!

'It honestly sounds on here that posters don't believe what she felt at the time. I hope I'm wrong'

I certainly believe anyone who says they have had mental health problems. I think the unbelievable thing is 2 intelligent people would think HR, who deal with staffing issues, would be the first port of call when the RF are all exceptionally privileged and have direct access to any private health care they require.