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.

“ Marriage is one of the holy sacraments of the church”

Like fuck. So people who don’t get a church marriage are not married?!

She is American, she can call whatever day she took her vows with her partner a marriage if she wants to. Loads of people in America do. My friend got married to her husband in her house and they wrote up their own poetry vows (we were quite bohemian in those days 😃). And she called that her wedding day. Not the day she went to the registrar for her marriage certificate.

Talk about making something about nothing 😂

It was what they felt was a private swapping of vows or whatever. Does it honestly matter?
Don't answer that actually, because for some it is just such a huge thing and that baffles me.

What I find weird is how much and how incessant the criticism of this sort of thing goes on. OK, it was corrected. End of. Yet here we are still talking about it on and on and on...people just seem to revel in her saying something wrong, like a 'gotcha' moment.

None of us are perfect or infallible. Maybe she worded it wrong, maybe she didn't mean it like it came out, maybe maybe maybe.

It's hardly crime of the century. And I can predict the replies to this post already. In fact I can predict the replies to most posts on here.

@ChiefInspectorParker

What do you mean 'the way she spoke'?

Choosing that moment, on the tour, to say that not many people had asked if she was okay. Choosing to say it to tv cameras. Making the tour and the coverage of the tour about her.

Tone deaf doesn’t begin to describe it.

Look at Princess Diana. She liked being in the spotlight. She had awful struggles and emotional pain. When she went to visit people who were suffering she used her star power and charisma to make it about them.

Imagine her coming out of an AIDS ward or a minefield and when asked about it, saying ‘well actually not many people have asked me if I’m okay’.

agree.

'Because she actively said they were actually married three days before and the public marriage was a spectacle'

Yes it was a bit odd, the pair of them seemed to be almost smirking at the fact they'd tricked everyone 🙄.

You might think it's nothing @Gorgeouslilgirl and that's your prerogative, not everyone is religious. But if you are religious enough to want to be married in Church, then you need to respect the rules of the church.

If Justin Welby didn't view marriage as one of the holy sacraments he wouldn't be Archbishop of Canterbury.

@sundayistheday

Sorry, who are you and why are you tracking what I post?

Do you do the same with the detractors, those that post incessantly about how awful MM is?

No, thought not.
Just jog on.

I've just watched Charles and Harry - father and son divided.
www.channel5.com/show/charles-harry-father-and-son-divided/
Two things stood out for me. First of all, Harry totally blamed Charles for pulling him out of Afghanistan after only 6 weeks when the (foreign) press outed him and Charles admitted, on camera, that he'd pushed for it to protect Harry. I remember reading at the time that he was pulled out to protect the others who had also become more vulnerable - it would explain a lot of H's resentment if this wasn't made very clear to him. The second thing that struck me was how uncomfortable M looked at all the public events on the programme, she looked as though she was itching to get it right but was never quite sure where to stand or when to sit, etc. For such an independent and previously confident woman, this must have been pretty hateful for her. The programme has helped me understand how miserable they were.

If it hadn't been the Archbishop of Canterbury, but a newly qualified curate they had claimed that about, they priest in question might very well have lost their job

I've heard it all now

And who has time to post nonsense about someone else and call them “untrustworthy”...

I said I had a sandwich for lunch. But really, it was an open slice of bread with cheese smeared on it. But in Denmark we fo call these ‘open sandwiches’. But under British norms, it is technically not a sandwich. So I’m untruthful and hence untrustworthy 🙄 Truly it sounds equally batshit to bang on about what date someone considers they were wedded. As long as she puts the right date on legal papers, what’s your beef?

I know it's not the crime of the century; it's something I think you are possibly only shocked by if you are a churchy person. I am a churchy person and I was, and remain, shocked by it.

@BalloonSlayer

You might think it's nothing *@Gorgeouslilgirl* and that's your prerogative, not everyone is religious. But if you are religious enough to want to be married in Church, then you need to respect the rules of the church.

If Justin Welby didn't view marriage as one of the holy sacraments he wouldn't be Archbishop of Canterbury.

It's not actually considered a Sacrament in the Church of England. For Catholics, yes, but not the C of E.

Why do you say you've heard it all now Rousette? Did you think that clergy don't get investigated for misconduct?

by Hanid: she moaned about her lot in one of the poorest Countries in the world whilst representing HMQ. It showed a lack of respect, manners, societal awareness, and empathy.
so true. especially whilst representing HMQ part.

@Roussette

It was what they felt was a private swapping of vows or whatever. Does it honestly matter? Don't answer that actually, because for some it is just such a huge thing and that baffles me.

What I find weird is how much and how incessant the criticism of this sort of thing goes on. OK, it was corrected. End of. Yet here we are still talking about it on and on and on...people just seem to revel in her saying something wrong, like a 'gotcha' moment.

None of us are perfect or infallible. Maybe she worded it wrong, maybe she didn't mean it like it came out, maybe maybe maybe.

It's hardly crime of the century. And I can predict the replies to this post already. In fact I can predict the replies to most posts on here.

Yes, that's absolutely true for normal people and I can totally see how that can happen. No in real life it matters very little but when you do a high profile interview where you want people to believe your truth about a very important family and want to have your say, it's not great to then say other things which are later proved to be untrue. It puts the rest of the interview into distribute. It Irritates. Rather like in a court when giving evidence and then the person gets found to be unreliable as they have lied about something else. Obviously she wasn't under oath though.

Maybe it was a slip of the tongue or she didn't mean it like that but again it's a failure to read the room, it's a failure to think how this might come across. Millions of people watched the wedding and supported her and Harry, including myself, millions of tax payers money was spent on the wedding, millions of people went to London especially to see the wedding and to wish them well. Describing something like that as a spectacle is rather irritating to those people who brought into it. It makes her look a certain way.

I actually don't care that much but can totally see why this would cause a dislike of her in others. I can't understand why others can't recognise that.

Did you think that clergy don't get investigated for misconduct?

No.
But it is highly unlikely that the clergy who is marrying a member of the RF would get sacked

@Lucaslucas1612

I thought Meghan was caught out about two points in the interview. One- that she was married three days before by the Archbishop. Who then said this wasn't true. Two- when she said Archie wasn't given a title due to the colour of his skin but it turns out he was never going to be given a title, the rule had changed beforehand. She did twist things to suit her own narrative so I guess you could wonder how close her truth matched the real truth. It makes her look untrustworthy. I suspect there's her truth, the RFs truth and the real truth in between.

Wedding date wasn't a lie, it was true for them, they held a private commitment ceremony prior to the big day. As do many people in Europe, America and other countries. It just isn't common in the UK, thus UK commenters could not get their heads around it. Just a misunderstanding by British detractors. Certainly no lie. It has since been explained on here over and over and over and over and over in many threads that it isn't common in the UK, but it IS common in Meghan's culture.

And the Letters Patent proved they told the truth about the title. LP can be changed, it was changed for Charlotte and the information they were given was that it meant Archie would be Prince when Charles ascended the throne.

Again, no lie there. There were no lies they told, only myths and misunderstandings by their detractors. There is yet to be one thing they said on OW that has definitively proven to be a lie.

Surely the right date is their wedding day?

Describing something like that as a spectacle

Even the papers refer to royal weddings as spectacles. You find it derogatory. I don't.

Of course, I'm open to any evidence they lied, but so far all the attempts to prove they lied have fallen flat.

@Roussette

It was what they felt was a private swapping of vows or whatever. Does it honestly matter? Don't answer that actually, because for some it is just such a huge thing and that baffles me.

What I find weird is how much and how incessant the criticism of this sort of thing goes on. OK, it was corrected. End of. Yet here we are still talking about it on and on and on...people just seem to revel in her saying something wrong, like a 'gotcha' moment.

None of us are perfect or infallible. Maybe she worded it wrong, maybe she didn't mean it like it came out, maybe maybe maybe.

It's hardly crime of the century. And I can predict the replies to this post already. In fact I can predict the replies to most posts on here.

I know Rousse, we should just all accept the wedding was an "spectacle". An expensive one paid by all of us, I should say. What a choice of words, what was she thinking! And funny they let that bit go live too. Unhinged is the word, Someone must have been fired there an then in the "Foundation" team.

But many people have a private ceremony and an official one. We celebrate our personal wedding and that’s the day I mentioned when people ask about when we got married. And put our official one on legal documents.

It is such a non issue 🤷‍♀️

No one has called us liars

@Billandben444

I've just watched Charles and Harry - father and son divided. www.channel5.com/show/charles-harry-father-and-son-divided/ Two things stood out for me. First of all, Harry totally blamed Charles for pulling him out of Afghanistan after only 6 weeks when the (foreign) press outed him and Charles admitted, on camera, that he'd pushed for it to protect Harry. I remember reading at the time that he was pulled out to protect the others who had also become more vulnerable - it would explain a lot of H's resentment if this wasn't made very clear to him. The second thing that struck me was how uncomfortable M looked at all the public events on the programme, she looked as though she was itching to get it right but was never quite sure where to stand or when to sit, etc. For such an independent and previously confident woman, this must have been pretty hateful for her. The programme has helped me understand how miserable they were.

I agree. I think she was desperate to do the right thing at the beginning and really wanted to hit the ground running as she said. I genuinely think she wanted to help and do her bit. I think the press were extremely mean when they picked her up on every single mistake she made. It is strange though that she was in this situation and no one was helping her through the protocol . She could have been a real asset if it had worked out. I think it's very sad the press did treat her as they did, I can imagine it must have been hard for her and I can sympathise despite what others think. It's sad it affected them so badly they decided to leave.

It was a spectacle (I didn’t watch it, crowds make me nervous). And a spectacle that bought in tourism and revenue to local businesses, apparently.

Maybe Meghan felt she was conceding to British public opinion by having a big wedding. Maybe the public begrudge the amount spent.

All this points to the need to do away with archaic pomp and traditions associated with RF and let people live their own lives however they want to

I'm not a royalist and I've never gotten the issue with the word 'spectacle'. Perhaps it would offend some royalists who enjoy the pomp and pageantry, but lets be fair here, it is a show for Monarchists and the subjects of the Monarchy. I feel that every word she says is dissected. People forget that she is African American. An American, and they speak differently. I think people don't keep that in mind. They are more frank than the British. More forthright. They speak differently. People I feel, need to make adjustments in their mind for that. Saying spectacle and saying they were 'married' a few days earlier are cultural idiosyncrasies. In a time where most people talk about the positives of multiculturalism and promoting understanding of races and cultures, it's strange that Meghan wasn't given tolerance and understanding of these things, and the British feel the need to impose their world view (ie about 'marriage') on the African American woman.