Justine has called anti-Meghan sentiment here deranged

[vera99]

In the Telegraph today got to be worth a thread of its own. She is of course right !

her opinion is no more valid than anyone else's though is it?. And if anything people have softened towards M and are concerned about the risk to her and her children due to details revealed by H himself . I see lots of vitriol towards H for sure but not so much towards her.

I haven't seen that much. And I don't think it's anything to do with MM's colour/heritage. All celebrities get attention both good and bad. All the recent comments have been about Harry, because of his new book. Not MM, so the timing of this article is odd.
Looks like just a advertising /using the situation to get more users to mn, because money needed? Same reasoning as Harry writing the book.

Well no one here knows if she is a good person or not. No one here knows her. People judge Meghan off what has happened. People judge Harry of what has happened.

Agree.

Oh it's the Torygraph. Will give it a miss thanks.

Biting the hand that feeds you eh Justine?

@vera99

Thank you for posting the whole article, that was an interesting read. Tbf, the Megan comment is a small part of it and it seems a balanced interview.

None of us I suspect know either of them personally. I think it's fair to say they are both misguided. He also is coming across as very naive and gullible, sharing things that really should have remained private for his sake (why didn't she tell him to edit them out?) and there are a few aspects that don't paint Meghan in a good light which I'm surprised she allowed to be printed.

What I find concerning is that he will have pretty much burned every bridge with this tell all, because no one will trust him again. You don't expect a relative, a friend or colleague to go public with things that happened in private. He comes out of this looking very bad but crucially unable to cope in the real world

Justine dumped her husband of 30 years because she “fell in love”? Have I read that right?

Wow. Thank you for posting the whole interview OP. Not just on the Royal family thread but I I don’t get the impression that she likes MN posters very much. That’s a shame.

I’ve always thought that.

I got the impression that they'd been staying together amicably for the kids.

Is there a different thread about this Torygraph interview that isn’t linking it to H&M, I don’t care about that sad public family fall out really and don’t want to add to its traffic.

Well, she doesn't say that the posters are deranged, does she?

The phenomenon of a topic catching on and spawning many threads is what she's on about. Though I don't remember Madeleine McCann having a topic, and many more threads were deleted - barely any remain, because posters would keep posting the batshit from elsewhere on the internet.

That used to happen with H&M threads too (and there's a world of crap out there that's simply not permitted, but posters used to keep dragging it over)

But now they're still standing, because they're commenting on what Harry has put in to the public domain, and, as Justine says 90% is sensible comment (the rest must be the memes thread!)

The Royal Family wasn't set up for this though

It was created in 2011 ahead of the Royal Wedding that year, in response to user demand then

Oh dear. I've made all my money off you but I despise you a little bit . Not nice.

Wow that was an interesting read, thanks for posting! I hope she doesn't introduce any political leanings into the site though. Also for some reason the article equated cis/female women with heterosexual/being straight which is amusing

Love it that Justine Roberts is giving her site users a 🙄. She's right though, vitriolic views isn't in it.

Sorry, missed a word out:

The Royal Family topic wasn't set up for this though

A terrible person? Is she really?!?

what exactly has she done to be a terrible person and when did you last meet her?

Here @CurrentHun
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4714351-telegraph-interview-with-mumsnet-founder

Quite!

She comes across as Gerald Ratner.

But we’re not owned by private equity, we don’t have to chase profits and our values are that the site is unfiltered – we don’t do that Facebook algorithm thing where you see what you’re interested in. Anything you see is a true and fair discussion. If an opinion is legal we will host it, because that’s the only way of understanding the other side’s point of view.

But we do? We have now "Similar threads" on the bottom of every page.

I thought things hadn't been right for sometime, but falling in love again is what made her leave. I get her point about how a marriage that ends after 20/30 years is still seen as a failure, probably because even if not on paper there is still the notion that one party is to blame.

It makes no sense. There is no Harry and Meghan topic is there?

and The royal family section has been around for ages. Pre Meghan.

It’s odd that she calls groups all people posting about Meghan as ‘deranged’. So the pro Meghan and people who are just in between, are also deranged in her opinion? Anyone talking about it all?

I wonder what she would like people to discuss? Surely she could just ban all discussion on H&M if she really thinks it’s deranged. I am guessing she won’t. She is happy with ‘deranged posters’ as long as money is coming in.

Also sounds like she doesn’t have much to do with the site anymore, if she thinks the RF board was created just for H&M discussions.