Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

I am genuinely worried for Harry's mental health now after this

668 replies

Squabbledee · 06/01/2023 23:04

Give it another week of worldwide chewing over his words and all the drama it's creating, I'm genuinely worried for Harry. How can you go anywhere and hold your head up after you've opened yourself to such ridicule? He might want an un-royal life but he is a prince non-the-less. Where's the dignity? He really, really needs help. I sincerely hope it gets it. The fallout from this won't be forgotten in a hurry. And to top it off, how can he make his family truly secure now?

OP posts:
Tripofalifetime343 · 20/01/2023 08:57

Boulshired · 20/01/2023 08:31

This is what Harry has done to his mothers own legacy, a legacy that he in the past has tried to protect. There was a deep cleanse of her past when she died, and for most an attitude of let her rest in piece. She was an outstanding woman but in Harry going after Camilla and in someways the press opens up his own mothers flaws and because people didn’t speak about the negatives surrounding Diana doesn’t mean it was forgotten or erased. I’d say people have been respectful to Diana for nearly 30 years but that doesn’t mean history can rewrite itself

I disagree on two counts:

  1. the framing of Diana as an hysteric has been out there since a strategic PR campaign was launched to rehabilitate Camilla which in doing so, sold Diana down the river. And it is still continuing today. Gyles Brandreth, a long term friend of Camilla, called Diana an hysteric out-of-the-blue on a morning tv show a couple of weeks a go. Harry therefore has a point!

2.so many negative things we hear about Diana have been filtered through negative press. No one is saying she was a saint, she was a woman under a lot of pressure, who had had a troubled childhood. But the people who worked with her all say she had tremendous energy, instant rapport with those she was visiting, and went about her work very professionally. Funnily enough that is rarely written about nowadays and I think we all know why!

Tripofalifetime343 · 20/01/2023 09:05

I wish people would wake up! This article from Newsweek is interesting:

www.newsweek.com/camilla-sums-everything-wrong-royal-family-1725050

Boulshired · 20/01/2023 09:05

Tripofalifetime343 · 20/01/2023 08:57

I disagree on two counts:

  1. the framing of Diana as an hysteric has been out there since a strategic PR campaign was launched to rehabilitate Camilla which in doing so, sold Diana down the river. And it is still continuing today. Gyles Brandreth, a long term friend of Camilla, called Diana an hysteric out-of-the-blue on a morning tv show a couple of weeks a go. Harry therefore has a point!

2.so many negative things we hear about Diana have been filtered through negative press. No one is saying she was a saint, she was a woman under a lot of pressure, who had had a troubled childhood. But the people who worked with her all say she had tremendous energy, instant rapport with those she was visiting, and went about her work very professionally. Funnily enough that is rarely written about nowadays and I think we all know why!

this conversation has exploded because of Harry Oprah, Netflix and book. Camilla versus Diana is playing out across social media because of the book. People pointing out that Diana was also a third person in marriages when Camilla is branded all sorts for having an affair. Diana and Harry’s penis ridiculed on American television directly from his book. His book has ignited the conversations

hoooops · 20/01/2023 09:07

according to Patrick Jephson, Diana was being framed as being “mentally troubled” by the palace

I thought it was established that she was mentally troubled. Are you saying she didn't have mental health issues like bulimia? That is wild if that was all made up by the palace, the paranoia, throwing herself down the stairs etc.

ThighMistress · 20/01/2023 09:11

I know someone very close to the Spencers since the 1960s. And they say Diana was always “odd”. I think she was driven to misery by a marriage acceptable in an earlier era, and she was a pawn.

I guess she was a poor choice of wife: if Charles wanted to retain a mistress then the rf should have made a straight-talking arrangement with a willing wife (breeder).

Similarly with Meghan: she should have been told before that she was not on equal footing with W&K, that you have to do the drudge visits, and that you cannot monetise the position.

Assuming that people know “the rules” or will tacitly accept them clearly doesn’t work.

MarshaMelrose · 20/01/2023 09:18

Tripofalifetime343 · 20/01/2023 09:05

I wish people would wake up! This article from Newsweek is interesting:

www.newsweek.com/camilla-sums-everything-wrong-royal-family-1725050

What's wrong with Camilla working to turn a poor image around? Indeed nothing Mic Wright, an avowed republican, writes says that she isn't exactly what her new image portrays. Rather that the old image was inaccurate but held to be true because of people's, strong feelings about Diana.

If people believed inaccurate information about who you are, wouldn't you want to correct it?

Tripofalifetime343 · 20/01/2023 09:20

hoooops · 20/01/2023 09:07

according to Patrick Jephson, Diana was being framed as being “mentally troubled” by the palace

I thought it was established that she was mentally troubled. Are you saying she didn't have mental health issues like bulimia? That is wild if that was all made up by the palace, the paranoia, throwing herself down the stairs etc.

I have no idea about the stairs episode but I think by the time Jephson came to
work with her she had overcome the bulimia and he said she rarely if ever suffered from illness of any sort.

Tripofalifetime343 · 20/01/2023 09:31

MarshaMelrose · 20/01/2023 09:18

What's wrong with Camilla working to turn a poor image around? Indeed nothing Mic Wright, an avowed republican, writes says that she isn't exactly what her new image portrays. Rather that the old image was inaccurate but held to be true because of people's, strong feelings about Diana.

If people believed inaccurate information about who you are, wouldn't you want to correct it?

Absolutely but not at the expense of someone else, particularly my partner’s children. And not when the message you are spinning is untruthful.

And it ignores that what was done to
Diana as a young woman was a huge injustice and that Charles and Camilla were complicit in deceit and spinning against her. They wanted her to shut up and accept the fact that her husband was with someone else while being married to her, and pretend all was well in public! It’s not a good way to treat the mother of your children and he is reaping the consequences with Harry now.

And yet somehow, in the establishment and the press, it’s all hushed up and this person graduates to become monarch and head of the Church of England. Just perfect!

MarshaMelrose · 20/01/2023 09:42

I re-read the article. There are no details in there of Camilla doing Diana down. Rather she went out of her way to befriend journalists,who had always been critical of her. We often hear journalists saying she's popular among the press because she engages with them and gives them a quote or a comment. Sounds to me like that's a smart move.

I honestly don't see any attacks on Diana. If there have been, they don't seem to have affected her saintly status because she's held in higher regard today than she ever was when she was alive.

Diana died over 25 years ago. Charles and Camilla have been together 30 years. They're clearly happy together. Diana had made her peace with Charles before they died and they were on friendly terms. Time to let it go.

Tripofalifetime343 · 20/01/2023 15:14

That particular article left out the specific details of Operation PB as described by Jephson and run by Mark Bolland and Peter Brown which can be read about in Jephson’s book but it does give you a sense that nothing is as it is presented in the papers and how the public lazily swallow the stories they are fed! And you conveniently overlooked the reference to Jeremy Clarkson btw MarthaMelrose!

It’s interesting that you choose to describe Diana as saintly in a sarcastic manner so beloved of the tabloid media because no one thought she was that including herself. It may have all happened 25 years ago and no one is doubting that Charles and Camilla are a good match for one another - they are certainly that - what is objectionable is how certain aspects of this debacle have been swept under the carpet and how certain senior royals have, and still are, willing to lie to the general public when it suits them.

Those same senior royals or their staff apparently disagree with you about it being “time to let it go” btw because the briefing is still happening all these many years later.

MissMarpleRocks · 20/01/2023 15:24

Oh fffs.

C& D had an arranged marriage. If Diana didn’t understand that then the fault is with her & her family.

I’ve had an arranged marriage. Most of my family have, it’s for each parent & family to protect their own. We all understood what it meant, why didn’t she? Her sisters clearly did - they let her down when she said she didn’t want to go through with it & they told her it was too late. One of her sisters went out with Charles & didn’t want to marry him. She clearly understood.

If anyone let her down it was her own family. Not Charles or camilla. Diana had plenty of her own affairs. She also threw her stepmother down the stairs, that’s not a rational act.

Diana wasn’t a saint. She was a flawed human being like all of us.

MonsoonMadness · 20/01/2023 15:41

Diana didn’t see it as an arranged marriage. She thought Charles loved her.

Sugarfree23 · 20/01/2023 15:54

In that case she was being incredibly nieve, they'd met 7 times when they announced the engagement.

Would you encourage a friend, colleague, sister, daughter to arrange a wedding with someone they'd only met 7 times?

MissMarpleRocks · 20/01/2023 15:59

MonsoonMadness · 20/01/2023 15:41

Diana didn’t see it as an arranged marriage. She thought Charles loved her.

Considering she wanted to call the whole thing off & her family persuaded her to go through with it I wonder if she did. None of my cousins ever thought they were in love with their proposed spouses. How could they? They’d met a few times. Same as C&D.

Sugarfree23 · 20/01/2023 19:12

Her wanting to call it of but her family not backing her must have been tough. Diana was so so young too.

While we call know Diana had affairs, and her marriage being a bit crowded.

Am I right in thinking, other than talking about the affairs, they never said anything bad or nasty about each other?

MonsoonMadness · 20/01/2023 21:26

Sugarfree23 · 20/01/2023 15:54

In that case she was being incredibly nieve, they'd met 7 times when they announced the engagement.

Would you encourage a friend, colleague, sister, daughter to arrange a wedding with someone they'd only met 7 times?

She was a very naive very young inexperienced girl. By the time she had doubts it was too late.

MsBucket · 21/01/2023 04:48

EpicChaos · 19/01/2023 02:37

@HamBone " Anne and Edward are also “spares” and seem pretty balanced-yes, Ann had a failed marriage and Edward struggled to find a career path, but they seem to have got through it. "

Ann is so down to earth, that she was even invited to and attended Capt'Mark Phillips daughters wedding a few months ago. Not only that but the girl had been a very regular and welcome visitor to her home since she was a kid. That seems like a very well balanced person to me.

I did not know that. It seems like Anne is very levelheaded.

EpicChaos · 21/01/2023 15:22

MsBucket · 21/01/2023 04:48

I did not know that. It seems like Anne is very levelheaded.

Yes, there was film footage of her heading into the church but i can't remember what programme actually showed it but yes it was Capt. M Phillips daughter, Zara's half sister.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread