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

Yep she had to apologise profusely and pay damages. Not sure why that’s amusing.

Is Julie Burchill the 'gender critical' one or is that Julie Bindel I'm thinking of? Or is it both of them?

Anyway, those comments about Lilli were disgusting. I guess she's in good company with Sarah Vine, Alison Pearson, Rachel Johnson, Camilla Tominey and Angela Levin, and not forgetting Piers of course. Most of them barely make an effort to disguise their bigotry - general bigotry, not necessarily racism before I get jumped on.

There's no actual discussion, just opportunities to take low blows.

This is just utter nonsense. How can you possibly say there's no discussion? Look in particular at posts from

@MaulPerton @skullbabe

@AutumnCrow.

There’s some conflating of Julie Burchill and Julie Bindel here, which I believe Julie Bindel may not be thrilled by.

She is trying a new PR tactic as seen in her latest paid cover with Variety, and the mix is as follows:

Tone down the royalty thing and use Meghan Markle - the woman
No staged appearances of Prince Harry in the interview
Drive the narrative and don't really answer the questions, drop references here and there that help you build the image you want for yourself
Reinforce being a mum, a normal person - (nice acting here)
Still a few slips about her intelligence etc, cant help saying she is good at scrabble. And the sorts
Philanthropy references in staggering contrast with 8000 usd dresses
A bit of the Julia Robert's smiles, giggles and innocence (good acting here too). The image and the weight she would like to have

Will it work?

🙄

I find it boring but then I am not your middle of the toad target market

Yeah better to hide if not helping the narrative right? 😅

She is undoubtedly trying to switch tactics.
The part where she says she would help whoever played her in a movie is hilarious and further proof of how vain she is.

It's so transparent, but plenty of people will lap it up. I do wonder what the RF say about it all or whether they read it at all.

How Julie Burchill is still allowed to work after suggesting Lili be called “Georgina Floydina’ is beyond me. Absolute disgrace.

A bit of the Julia Robert's smiles, giggles and innocence (good acting here too)

I thought the Meghan on a playmat having a kickabout was more reminiscent of Amal Clooney's self-infantilisation. Can you imagine if we saw a picture of Andrew, Charles or William in that pose? I have no idea why grown, accomplished women go in for the knock-kneed, billowy dress, finger-in-mouth, eyes downcast look well, I do, actually

Um, she was asked the question? And there's already been a film about Harry and her (think it was a Hallmark film) so not vain really since there's obviously interest in the RF and she has a high profile within that. Imagine a series of The Crown taking in the past few years - obviously she would feature. But this is another great example of any excuse to attack her.

One thing puzzled me about the variety interview ; MM said it was “ complicated” after The Queen died . Why ? Fortunately they were in the U.K. so were able to attend the funeral . Why was it complicated ? Yes, their DC were in the US but I am sure a nanny or Doria could have brought them over.

What is with all the Backgrid photos she has been putting out since she broke ranks with Sunshine Sachs. Backgrid are paid by her to get her face in the papers going about her contrived, celebrity life.
They do not follow people around taking photos against their will like conventional paparazzi. If that is not a clear indication of a thirst for fame and celebrity then I do not know what is.
It is clinging on to the mistaken belief that she has anything worthwhile to offer beyond the fact that she married a prince.

Agree . But no doubt someone will be xx along to say we are mean .

@Readinginthesun 🙄

I hadn't seen the Backgrid credits ...

Oh dear. That smacks of desperation to be using PAY-PER-PAPS.

But no doubt someone will be xx along to say we are mean .

Indeed, because this:

It is clinging on to the mistaken belief that she has anything worthwhile to offer beyond the fact that she married a prince.

is sociopathic levels of nasty. I'm not sure I've seen a more horrible comment on here actually. Human beings have value for lots of reasons that have nothing to do with personal achievement, of which she has plenty in any case. If people didn't want what she has to offer they wouldn't be listening to the podcasts or reading articles about her, something you're free to stop doing at any time.

Agree.

In her shoes, I would have flown back, got the dcs and then returned to the U.K. with them. Seeing his dgcs would have been a comfort to Charles. What was there really to do in the period between the Queen dying and her funeral.

have no idea why grown, accomplished women go in for the knock-kneed, billowy dress, finger-in-mouth, eyes downcast look well, I do, actually very reminiscent of 2000s American socialites spreads on vogue and HB, Tensely Mortimer , Lauren Davies ,now knows as Santo Domingo ,
Meghan still lives in the early 2000s.

I agree which is why I am puzzled about what was “ complicated “. It’s not as if they had to make the funeral arrangements.

If she’d flown out and back again, she’d have been criticised for the excessive flying.

You are probably right but I like to think most people would understand that they would want to see their DC .

Any reasonable person would understand a parent who wanted to get back to her small
dcs on the other side of the world. It’s not like they really care what the British public think anyway. I don’t think she wanted to leave H alone in the U.K.

It doesn't matter now. She is with her kids now. They will not remember the time she was away.