Meghan has been named one of 25 most influential women by FT

[antelopevalley]

"Meghan Markle has become a symbol of resilience for many silenced women. Specifically speaking, for women of colour and, even more specifically, mixed-race and black women. Her experience within the royal family resonated with those who have had to navigate historically white, elitist institutions that are, at best, not built with them in mind and, at worst, outwardly hostile.

The royal family is an establishment largely maintained through silence and complicity. It’s this, in part, that makes Meghan’s choice to use her voice so powerful. This year she launched a podcast, Archetypes, where she interrogates the labels used to contain and inhibit women – fitting, given the projection and smears she has endured from the press. For the black community in particular, it was hard to watch her demonisation by the British media and public. But seeing her come into her own, and use her platform to speak about what matters to her, has sent a message even louder than she may have intended."

www.ft.com/content/8428d275-a9ba-46e7-9c39-78b847c5cef7

I wouldn't be giving Meghan any awards for being creative.

Being destructive, fair enough.

Never mind it's the first time I've had an unexplained post deleted in almost 18 years. Perplexing

Not true.

This is so, so weird. The FT is normally a really good, sound newspaper.

I read your posts, you're very keen to ascribe to Meghan all the 'traits' and insinuate she has a personality disorder. The reality is without a) knowing her well personally and b) having a real understanding of psychology (not one from Google), you shouldn't be throwing these kinds of statements around. As I've pointed out, the examples you give can be interpreted in a couple of different ways, and without the proper context we're not in a position to make a judgement. Which obviously won't stop you doing so.

Being rich and paying for PR really pays off.

Meanwhile poor and disadvantaged women who are a hell of a lot braver and achieve survival, face racism and racism prejudice are of no real concern to this woman.

I ascribed 3 traits, there’s far more traits so please stop embarrassing yourself now.

she didn’t have this conversation with a South African - one conversation was filmed as the other SA cast member denied it , but don’t let reality get it the way, perhaps she manifested the mystery cast member and he arrived on a unicorn

@Tillsforthrills

the women in SA had to stand and listen to how hard she had it. poor Meghan

MM Supporters love to do this, wildly protest about how nasty people are calling MM a cockroach (agree that it’s nasty btw) and then do the exact same!

Love to see this, well deserved!

The doe eyed Meghan ‘but no one asks me how I am” 🙄

...Towards someone who had just happily used the term herself, which was the entire point of my post. I don't think I wildly protested? But someone who says that deserves to have it thrown back at them.

No they didn't. It was a separate interview, not a speech to them.

I ascribed 3 traits, there’s far more traits so please stop embarrassing yourself now.

You don't determine whether I'm embarrassing myself, thanks. Far more embarrassing IMO to be trying to position yourself as some kind of expert, when you very clearly aren't.

There's so much vitriol against MM on MN - what's wrong with people? If I don't like someone in the public eye, I might mention it once, then shrug and move on with my life.

I’ve never said I was an expert, in fact the opposite. Why don’t you go back and read my posts slowly and carefully ?

By throwing around (misusing) terminology associated with a personality disorder, you are trying to position yourself as knowledgeable about a very complex matter. But thanks for clarifying that your opinion on this isn't worth paying much attention to.

I’ve used the terms correctly 👍

You are misusing terms associated with a stigmatised disorder by ascribing them to someone you don't know on the basis of a few cherry-picked examples that you've also misrepresented.

trying to pretend you’ve been told that the people of South Africa think your wedding is in the same league as Nelson Mandela’s wedding is textbook grandiosity 🤣

Handing our back backs via your security guards to homeless people in front of journalists as teaching moments - more grandiosity right there

need I continue

Bar was pretty low then, a bit their morals and scruples. 🙄

This is what you need:

Diagnostic criteria (DSM-5)

A preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love. A belief that he or she is special and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people or institutions. A need for excessive admiration.

In the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), [1] NPD is defined as comprising a pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), a constant need for admiration, and a lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by the presence of at least 5 of the following 9 criteria:

• A grandiose sense of self-importance


• A preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love


• A belief that he or she is special and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people or institutions


• A need for excessive admiration


• A sense of entitlement


• Interpersonally exploitive behavior


• A lack of empathy


• Envy of others or a belief that others are envious of him or her


• A demonstration of arrogant and haughty behaviors or attitudes

Oh it's textbook? So you must know a lot about it then. And you know she didn't say her wedding was in the same league. Just that it was celebrated. As per a comment that was made to her.

Maybe the recipients of the backpacks were pleased to get some useful items. Nothing particularly grandiose about it.

They can't stop talking about her. This is why there are way more articles about Meghan and Harry than any other members of the Royal Family. Ironically they keep Meghan and Harry in the public eye at least in Britain.

I appreciate that but my point is that we don't know Meghan and none of us that I'm aware of is either qualified or treating her as a patient. If you have an opinion of her, fine, but don't try to give it this false veneer of legitimacy. It's crass. We're not privy to that level of information about her, whether speaking clinically or in lay terms (a distinction which is deliberately blurred in these types of discussions).

So you think the FT has been paid off to put her in the list? You really Struggle with the idea that some people admire her don't you. So much so that you have to come up with some kind of conspiracy