Meghan’s latest Archwell podcast- Paris Hilton

[susan12345678]

Having started threads on earlier editions of the Archewell podcast, I felt compelled to comment on the latest - an interview with Paris Hilton - on the theme of the Bimbo.

I’ve not listened - but have read a summary - and the premise strikes me as rather hypocritical.
Meghan apparently mentions taking part in a diplomatic motorcade in Argentina during an internship at the Embassy, a role she claims to have received for her intelligence and education, but neglects to mention that her uncle arranged the (very brief) role for her or the small matter of failing the diplomatic exams. The implication seems to be that she should have been destined for a stellar professional career but sabotaged these possibilities by taking on ‘bimbo’ roles in a short-sighted effort to pay the rent.

The truth of the matter is that she may never have succeeded in a more intellectual or professional career and being a ‘bimbo’ actually served her extremely well - after all, she is someone of middling talent and would never have gained the prominence she has, or access to a wealthy husband, without these ‘bimbo’ roles.

In general, one only has to look at Instagram, Only Fans, Sugar Daddy sites to appreciate the true scale of the ‘bimbo’ economy which was Meghan’s natural habitat. It’s not going anywhere- and it’s an amusing conceit to imagine, now that she’s in her 40s and safely married to a rich man, that it was all somehow beneath her all along

I think that her main downfall is trying to hyper intellectualize everything when she is not blessed with a great enough intellect to pull it off. This has opened her up to ridicule and eroded (rather than enhanced) her credibility. She has set up her own mental gymnastics challenge which has defeated her rather badly. It probably does not help to have Harry fawning over her every word because he is incapable of appraising her with competence. She has constructed an echo chamber full of bright, young employees throwing around their buzzwords in all directions who are ultimately too afraid to stand up and tell her that she is sounding ridiculous or making obvious mistakes.

I think that she endeavours to fit the Naomi Wolf mode - extremely bright and attractive in equal measure. She wants to hobnob with the intellectual heavyweights by day and be belle of the ball by night and be known to confuse her critics and be seen to have the last laugh. However, this has proven to be a tad over ambitious and those critics are laughing harder than ever.

I noticed in her Variety interview, she kept saying ‘my husband’ instead of Harry. It was like she was trying to minimise him and make it all about her. She’s only getting on these magazine covers because she’s married to H.

What I’m more curious about is why US Deal or No Deal needed to have box girls in the first place? I’m sure the UK version didn’t have them.

I don’t think it was necessarily the type of show that had an audience who WOULD objectify the girls, and I would say they were chosen for personality and engagement as well as looks. But surely they weren’t actually needed in the first place?

As Goldberg pointed out, the contestants and viewers were solely interested in what happened to the money. The outfits were primarily about uplifting a dull mid afternoon show mainly watched by retired and unemployed people.

The whole thing is of course a sham built around the fact she is a celebrity. Like most celebrities when they get into this lark she has absolutely nothing of worth to offer people and resorts to a load of guff and okay sounding phrases which mean nothing. It will convince the gullible but no one with any sense will take any notice of it

Just as well the other briefcase girl didn’t say that and specifically wanted to say she wasn’t made to feel like a bimbo and was grateful for the opportunity. She also was keen to share that she wasn’t attacking Meghan but was wanted to make sure that it didn’t come across as a hostile work environment.

So there we go - a coworker agreeing that they were not there for their intellect but keen to make sure that people were aware that the work environment was respectful.

What about the other suitcase girl who has come out denying there were various “stations “for padded bras , fake lashes etc ?

This would be brilliant to listen to and thanks for expanding on this. I think that this is one of the challenging aspect of the podcasts for me - I would like more depth in many of the topics she has assessed but interestingly, the Dragon Lady episode showed me that perhaps my frustrations are because I am already way ahead in my understanding and analysis of many topics - but I am very surface level in others and that is where the podcasts are pitched to. I still think the podcast structure could be better but love her voice and delivery so she should keep that.

Went back and had a look - you’re right. The other woman said there was no bra station but said nothing about lashes or tan or hair.

Meghan specifically said that there was a “cookie cutter” idea of how they should all look. I understand that to mean that they all had to look the same. Please have a look at them all - on each show they all look fairly homogenous.

I can’t think of anyone else in the public eye who constantly refers to their spouse in this way. It’s odd. Especially for someone who calls themselves a feminist.

Even if she “ just” denied a bra station ( not sure the interview is clear), it is yet another example of recollections varying .
If Meghan just wants people to talk about her then fine but to constantly utter stuff that is then robustly denied is not a good look .
And if she didn’t want to be portrayed as a Bimbo ( her word) why on earth take that role 2 years later where the sole purpose of it was to suggest oral sex ?

It is a classic example of a barely successful actress bagging a prince towards the end of her career and now trying to rewrite her past into some kind of palatable Cinderella tale. She wishes to whitewash her past decision making. It really feels like the podcast guests primarily serve as props to disguise this covert intention and act as filler. The podcast is really all about covertly promoting her needs. What is her ultimate motive in doing all of this? Probably cleaning up her record for when she runs for office in the future.

She really is getting some bad press at the moment.

Let's give Meghan Markle the applause she deserves

Oops, forgot to add the link!

Not Julie Burchill who got fired from the Telegraph for saying that they should have called Lilibet Georgina Floydina or Oprah Beyoncé writing a snide column in the Spectator being linked to. Good lord.

In Deal or no Deal she was not acting. She was a pretty model - the scenery so to speak. As a person whose sole purpose was to open briefcases, call out numbers, smile and look pretty - she felt unfulfilled. She felt she had more to offer.

In 90210 she took the role because it was an acting gig and would add to her reels. Like many other actors who have acted in sex scenes. She has had sex scenes in other things she has acted in too. Like many other actors. Some actors have won awards for TV shows and movies they have been in where they have acted in sex scenes. Some of these actors have said that they did things before they achieved success that they weren’t too happy with but did it anyway because they wanted the money and to get a foot on the ladder (for example Meghan Fox). Many attractive actors have parlayed this into successful careers - Brad Pitt spent many years as pretty boy scenery. Many of them like Meghan talk about it and say they weren’t happy, say they are grateful for it like Meghan did, and say they went on to do what they really wanted, like Meghan did.

If you do a search on Julie Burchill you’ll see she is admired by many on Mumsnet, skullbabe. I’m not saying everyone has to find every opinion she expresses admirable, but it would be foolish to suggest her opinions are valueless.

Also on your second post skullbabe - I don’t think Meghan has anything to apologise for in her past career. She was determined to make it in the entertainment industry and accepted the decorative and objectified roles that were part and parcel of getting her name known, paying the bills, getting her one step closer to hopefully getting that elusive big break. And (unlike hundreds and hundreds trying to so the same thing) she achieved it. I actually admired the grit and drive she must have had to do that.

It’s actually now her attitude of how beneath her true self that all was that I find makes me roll her eyes. All of her previous career was her free choice, and something she stuck out for years and years as she built her career. She chose to go into the superficial, youth and beauty obsessed entertainment industry in full knowledge of what that entailed (as she has often told us, she grew up on the set of Married With Children). She must have wanted to be famous quite a lot (understatement!). It’s more than a little ridiculous to try and suggest otherwise now.

I agree apart from the running for office comment. She is not remotely qualified to run the country.

I am happy to be thought of as foolish then. Very happy.

Burchill is a racist, a bigot and a misogynist who continually has to apologise for her vile articles, views, tweets and retweets. She usually has to apologise when it gets close to the wire with court cases and legal action. But sometimes she's just too late and has to pay out.

I have not seen 'many' on MN admire her but perhaps I haunt the wrong threads. Luckily for me

That's all I'll say on her.

As far as I’m aware Julie Burchill has not apologised for those comments. I forgot that she was the one who was taken to court by Ash Sarkar for libel and had to pay damages. I’m happy to be considered foolish by people who find her admirable.

taken to court by Ash Sarkar

😂😂

I think I better hide this thread. It is now rapidly descending down the elevator of stupid (again).

What is the point of this post? It's hard to take the entire thread seriously when you have the same posters who dislike this woman post over and over again about their hatred of her. There's no actual discussion, just opportunities to take low blows. Pick any topic on Meghan, start a post - same people, same vitriol - just different day.