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

The royal family

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Positive thread on Meghan again

1000 replies

Mummy194 · 07/05/2021 19:16

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.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
27
GlencoraP · 16/05/2021 17:31

Michael Jackson used an entirely different type of product .

CokeDrinker · 16/05/2021 17:36

@JaniieJones

'this thread has shown me never to underestimate the level of lunacy around Meghan, how irrational and eaten up with hate some posters are, how Meghan truly makes some posters unhinged'

I don't think 'lunacy' is a very PC or #bekind word to use these days I'd rethink that in future if I were you.

Fwiw I really do not 'hate' either of them I just think to rightly advocate for compassion and kindness but to show absolutely neither to your own families is a bit rich that is all.

I think they have shown compassion and kindness to their families. I also think they've been assertive when they needed to be and open when they needed to be. I've looked as objectively as I can at what both have said, and for the life of me I genuinely cannot see anything uncompassionate or unkind about their families. I think they've been measured. More measured than what many would be.
smilesy · 16/05/2021 17:37

I think we have established elsewhere that Olay creams are not aimed at people with vitiligo. Those would have to be prescription strength creams that remove pigment. Not lighten the skin as the Olay cream claims. That is all.

StormzyinaTCup · 16/05/2021 17:37

No, you compared Meghan being upset in SA to her complaining about the lack of gluten-free options while others (presumably) starve. In other words, trivial rich people problems. But it's not trivial if you're being bullied or you're in a dark place mentally.

I think you may have misunderstood my posts, Coke was saying we should mention poverty in SA across random threads, I was given an example of where I would call out the poverty situation and where I wouldn’t. Absolutely nothing to do with MM complaining about a GF diet.Confused

CokeDrinker · 16/05/2021 17:38

@GlencoraP

Michael Jackson used an entirely different type of product .
It was still a skin-whitening product (Hydroquinone) he used.
amusedtodeath1 · 16/05/2021 17:41

I'm sure Doria is a lovely person, she's been through some stuff and although she's turned her life around there was a time when she also was dysfunctional. I admire Doria greatly she handles it all with aplomb.

My point was the Middleton's seem to be a very close family, in a traditional way. Their vast close not family is hardly the same as just Doria on her own. None of it was meant as a criticism, quite the opposite.

CokeDrinker · 16/05/2021 17:42

@smilesy

I think we have established elsewhere that Olay creams are not aimed at people with vitiligo. Those would have to be prescription strength creams that remove pigment. Not lighten the skin as the Olay cream claims. That is all.
If someone only has mild Vitiligo, they may choose to use Olay creams. We don't know the reason every user chooses the creams. The point is that skin whitening in itself is not a bad thing. Only people who need a reason to nitpick will grasp at that. Is it possible people who want white skin will use it? Sure. Just as people who want darker skin will buy fake tan. Or use tanning beds. It's a product. If people choose to be whiter or darker in skin tone, that's their choice. It doesn't have to mean racism or anything deeper than what it is.
SueSaid · 16/05/2021 17:43

'I think they have shown compassion and kindness to their families'

GrinGrin

Lucaslucas1612 · 16/05/2021 17:43

[quote CokeDrinker]@Lucaslucas1612 They haven't 'criticised' anyone who doesn't follow their values', you are still lying and making things up.

talking about issues such as climate change (big sin!)

and what others should do about this- which could be taken as preaching at times
If that is seen as 'preaching', so what? Is it not needed, in 2021, to make people aware? Why is that wrong? Perhaps nobody should promote social issues, and where would we be if everyone took your opinion and nitpicked out of resentment anyone trying to do any good?

Other members of the RF don't do that
Again, not true. Charles does. He promotes saving the planet and is a well-known ecologist (or ecologically-minded, whatever the term is) and advocates reducing carbon footprint. So does the Queen and other royals.

But it's ONLY Meghan and Harry that get criticised. I and others are fed up with the hypocrisy and unfairness.[/quote]
FGS coke you really are determined to miss the point of everyone's post aren't you? This is the last time I will engage with you as you just don't seem to want to understand what others are pointing out.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with standing up for these issues, I fully support people standing up for issues on race, climate change and those who promote worthwhile charities. Good for them for using their positions as a platform to do this.

BUT what doesn't sit well with me and I guess others, who don't dislike them as such and don't think they are nasty, horrible people, is that they then:

A) use private jets continuously to get around and go on holidays whilst telling others we all need to make changes, we are all responsible for the climate emergency. Saying that they have planted some trees so it's ok.

B) complain about being treated unfairly and having lies said about them and having no right to reply. Then doing a very public interview saying all sorts of criticisms about the British press, the RF and 'the firm'.

C) complain that the RF are racist and they have been singled out and treated badly by them and the press and the British public for the colour of her and her sons skin but then sign a contract with P & Q.

D) say they are being hounded by the press and have no privacy etc so we re moving and stepping down from the RF. fair enough. Then use their titles as much as they can to further their own causes, do high profile interviews, sign tv deals etc but don't want their dc pictured going to school.

When you continuously put yourselves in the limelight and choose to give opinions and stand up for issues which you believe in inevitably you will come across people who disagree with you and criticise you. You will also expect people to scrutinise your own life if you are promoting certain certain causes and giving your opinion of certain things. You need to practice what you preach or you are seen as a hypocrite. This is the issue with these two.

Also, I don't actually have a particular problem with MM as a person but I think both their actions are confusing. They need to learn to read the room. They have made a few silly mistakes which have been unfortunate but have added fuel to the fire.

smilesy · 16/05/2021 17:43

Here is an article on the issue with skin lightning creams like Olay

www.nytimes.com/2020/06/25/business/unilever-jj-skin-care-lightening.html

GlencoraP · 16/05/2021 17:45

These creams are marketed in a way which suggests that lighter skin will make you more marriageable or more likely to be successful at work . That is why there is a racist undertone

CokeDrinker · 16/05/2021 17:47

@StormzyinaTCup

No, you compared Meghan being upset in SA to her complaining about the lack of gluten-free options while others (presumably) starve. In other words, trivial rich people problems. But it's not trivial if you're being bullied or you're in a dark place mentally.

I think you may have misunderstood my posts, Coke was saying we should mention poverty in SA across random threads, I was given an example of where I would call out the poverty situation and where I wouldn’t. Absolutely nothing to do with MM complaining about a GF diet.Confused

My point is it is all about relevance. Someone always has it worse off than someone else. So even a woman on here asking about Domestic Violence could, theoretically, be met with 'at least you aren't starving in Africa'/'at least you aren't in India dying from the global pandemic'.

Even a woman on here in a controlling relationship is better off than the proverbial starving in Africa and the dead in India or those in Gaza. Every thread on here could be compared. But it's only Meghan/Harry that are. If you aren't going to tell the controlled wife living in the safety of London that she is lucky she isn't 'starving in Africa', is lucky 'she isn't in Gaza', or is lucky she 'isn't dying from the pandemic', then there is absolutely no reason to bring it up regarding Meghan/Harry.

Aspiringmatriarch · 16/05/2021 17:48

@GlencoraP

My point is not whether they should or shouldn’t but about the optics . It is already being criticised in the US . Why jump into the lions den if you don’t have to
Because they're human I guess? Anyway, too early to say if it will be a net good or bad thing.
CokeDrinker · 16/05/2021 17:49

This reply has been deleted

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

Samcro · 16/05/2021 17:52

Wow this thread has taken an odd turn.
Is there nothing people won't use as a stick to beat M with.

GlencoraP · 16/05/2021 17:52

@CokeDrinker I cannot believe that you just typed that

SueSaid · 16/05/2021 17:53

'These creams are marketed in a way which suggests that lighter skin will make you more marriageable or more likely to be successful at work. That is why there is a racist undertone'

Yes covert racism, unbelievable that some are excusing it.

Angiedx · 16/05/2021 18:08

It seems to me that rather than Meghan being truly accepted by many, she was merely put on probation, not only as a senior royal but also as a human being.
Almost as if from inception it was acceptance for now but we expect you to screw up so will scrutinise all you do. From then on it just seems to be a case if ‘ gotcha’ .

The talk of millions being excited on the day of the wedding, that was for the spectacle not for the person Meghan is. I think those people would have turned out regardless of who Harry’s bride was ( likely though that more poc also turned out due to Meghan being mixed race, not all I know I say this as one who was only interested in part due to that ).

Meghan was never going to be able to reach the impossible heights many seem to have set for her simply because she is a fallible human being.

Take SA maybe some SA women who have experienced pre or postnatal depression took comfort from hearing someone in such a financially privileged position talk about finding things hard. They are more than just their country’s poverty/crime/hardship issues.

Also had she lied and said she was ok then later admitted she wasn’t at that time that would have been another gotcha moment stick to beat her with .

Aspiringmatriarch · 16/05/2021 18:14

Spot on I think Angiedx.

Itreallyistimetochangethings · 16/05/2021 18:18

@GlencoraP

The thing is this is a thread about Meghan and any comment about Prince Michael is whataboutery.

I note no comment about the P&G deal .

Have you read the thread... it's already been discussed
SueSaid · 16/05/2021 18:19

'It seems to me that rather than Meghan being truly accepted by many, she was merely put on probation, not only as a senior royal but also as a human being.'

🙄

She was welcomed and more than 'accepted', many thought she was great. Then her and Haz decided to do it their way and they weren't allowed so decided to do some rather unpleasant back stabbing.

StormzyinaTCup · 16/05/2021 18:20

Even a woman on here in a controlling relationship is better off than the proverbial starving in Africa and the dead in India or those in Gaza. Every thread on here could be compared. But it's only Meghan/Harry that are. If you aren't going to tell the controlled wife living in the safety of London that she is lucky she isn't 'starving in Africa', is lucky 'she isn't in Gaza', or is lucky she 'isn't dying from the pandemic', then there is absolutely no reason to bring it up regarding Meghan/Harry.

The point I’m trying to make, and I’m now questioning if you really are interested in it, is they were actually in SA and would have spent a large part of their tour seeing the scale of poverty with their own eyes, so their comment at that particular time was inappropriate and I have said so, in the same way that I would say ‘give your head a wobble’ in the example I gave up thread. It would be odd if I posted about poverty anywhere/everywhere if the common theme was not SA.

Itreallyistimetochangethings · 16/05/2021 18:27

@StormzyinaTCup
I think the black SA would have been encouraged knowing she was being open about how she felt. I also assume she showed empathy with their struggles while she was there - it is also possible to say she could do both. But to use this as another stick to beat her supposedly on behalf of the poor Africans is a bit disingenuous I think.

Zuluqueen · 16/05/2021 18:27

I’m from South Africa(Durban) and I don’t know anyone who was offended about what Meghan said in that interview 🤷‍♀️.Im not speaking for the whole country of course , but I find it funny that this is such a big deal to some people.

Aspiringmatriarch · 16/05/2021 18:29

I hope you wouldn't tell someone to give their head a wobble if they were asked how they were and had an emotional reaction because clearly, they weren't ok. It's not like Tom Brady asked Meghan about poverty in SA and she said "who cares about that, let's talk about my problems". Honestly, such mean-spirited griping. He asked if she was ok. Sometimes if you're feeling low, a question like that can catch you off guard.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.