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 !

Maybe there’s an element of discussion on this subject previously having been VERY heavily moderated (there certainly seemed to be a set of different - and unwritten - rules about Meghan topics). Now people seemingly are allowed to give their opinion without being deleted with a vague “Not in the spirit” reason given, it’s all a bit “genie out of the bottle”.

But they are options, if you want to read further in the same or similar subject.
SM algorithms don't give you the option, they shape your content to what they consider to be your tastes (or to what suits their narrative), it's not a choice

Tbf I don’t use other SM much as it doesn’t allow such simple cross section of opinion (bar aggression if posters don’t want to hear stuff trying to drive others off)

But I agree with pp re disdain for the user and topics that keep the site going, and opinions on here are just as valid as those in the article

So the majority of the article is about important issues like the cost of childcare and women's rights, but because the first paragraph is about the very recent release of Harry's book, the article gets reduced to vitriol about Meghan? That's journalism for you. Justine can't control the narrative any more than Harold can.

Bloody hell. Even she’s at it flogging her opinions in order to moralise over the lowlife.

Let’s not forget that she is the one profiting from it all.

They are so strongly anti-Meghan we’ve had to do what we did with Madeleine McCann and cobble it into one topic because it seems slightly deranged. Ninety per cent of our content is incredibly supportive, but attention is drawn to the controversial topics, which are very active because people have very strong feelings.”

I'm sure if MM said she'd vote Tory Justine would change her mind 🙄

My takeaway from that is she never reads the feminism threads if she believes 'trans women' are as vulnerable as 'cis' (sic) women in women's prisons.

She mustn’t to use that offensive term

Yes, we don't see only what we're interested in, but there is an algorithm suggesting similar threads.

Quite. And it sticks in my craw that posters have been banned over the years for views that are increasingly publicly accepted (in the same vein as those who didn’t like Meghan on the basis of stories that now look like they were true). I don’t see MN saying “We got that wrong, we apologise, you can come back now”.

When was the interview given?

Before or after the Harry leak?

“Muddled through with a series of au pairs” is just so delightfully Mumsnetty

The way some topics in the media take off is slightly deranged tbf. They are usually the ones where posters have the opportunity to rip strips off another woman. Of course Mumsnet as a business is going to capitalise on the clicks that brings, while taking the opportunity to tut and head shake.

After the Harry leak explicitly mentioned by her in the article.

Madelaine Mccan has a separate topic? I didnt know this, all I remember is any thread or mention of he name was deleted pretty quick.

Oh yes, she does indeed.

@vera99 Thank you.

I don't remember there being a separate topic for Madelaine Mccan either, but I avoided clicking on any threads which mentioned her because some posters were absolutely awful and it upset me too much to read them, so maybe it passed me by?

I avoid the royalty threads now as I find them similarly insane. People talking like they know the family, it's bizarre (to me).

Apart from this one of course 🤣

Yes totally agree! I really didn’t realise how hateful the British public could be. Definitely deranged. There are more posts about the H&M and more hatred shown towards them, than politicians who actually create policies that affect our day to day life and operate in a corrupt manner which strips money/resources from the British public.

If you don’t like them, don’t engage with the content, don’t read the books or watch the tv show. I can only conclude that British people want to be distracted and have a hate figure, rather than focusing this anger on people who have actually changed their lives for the worst! I can only refer to it as mass brainwashing! Very bizarre!

In other words, water is wet. She is of course, right. The hatred for Meghan is way off the charts. It's also typical misogyny running through it; if Harry hadn't met Meghan, if Meghan hadn't come in, if Meghan wasn't controlling Harry, etc etc etc. It really harks back to the evil she-devil seduced a prince for fame (as if she needed it, she needed this 'fame' like a hole in the head), and money (as if she needed it, she has more than he did) and is controlling him and when she dumps him he can return etc. The woman is always controlling the strings (never mind that Harry is around 5 to 8 times more forthright and aggressive than she is, we barely hear from her), the woman is in control, the poor deluded man is not his own person and has no brain and no personality, all men are weak victims who don't have a mind or will of their own. Women are our own worst enemies. The narrow-minded bigotry, the sexism, the inward misogyny is bloody fucken disgusting, especially for 2022/2023.

Seems like an own goal.

The BRF attracts a lot of attention, now and in the past. People were interested in Diana because she was going to be Queen of the most high profile monarchy one day, not because of her 'inherent star qualities' whatever that would be. The fact that she was pretty and photogenic obviously contributed to the interest. With Megan, people are interested because harry was one of the most eligible bachelors in the world and there had already been lots of attention on harry and his previous girlfriends (who were smart enough to get away). The attention was there purely because of Harry being a British royal prince. Megan did cause ripples because she's American, an actress, older and divorced and probably with the press also because she's mixed race although she passes as white in her public person and how she presents herself. The press did have a field day, taht's tabloids for you, they were pretty horrible and taunting about Chelsea as well. Since Megxit we can judge H&M for ourselves and many find that they come across as insincere, untrustworthy and full of themselves. Megan does cut a good figure on photos and film but what comes out of her mouth is not impressive. With the OW interview, the NF series and Harry's book, they have lashed out and insulted and hurt many people in Harry's family and beyond. We don't need the tabloid to tell us this, we're getting all this nasty stuff first hand from them. Harry has sold his heritage and soul to the highest bidder. I do hope this is all going to calm down so that we can move on from this opportunistic and entitled duo. They are not the stars they think they are.

I think they missed the point that Harry's book had just been leaked to the press and that the stuff he came out with when supposedly they wanted their privacy was unbelievable. People were discussing how he lost his virginity because he had put it in the book in grim detail - but as usual not naming any names - thus leaving everyone to speculate. All these threads haven't been about hating MM they've been about his 'revelations'.

I love how they have to explain that TERF is an insult though.

Well, that's a bit bloody ungrateful, given the advert revenue they are harvesting from the Sussex Squad and the rational people alike with all these stupid pop-ups. 😂

Harry and Meghan put themselves out there. The publicity shy couple do it again and again in a very po-faced way, making very serious allegations and claims of racism and violence and lack of suicide support against others without a shred of photographic or video evidence (they will have taken pictures of these alleged dogbowl fisticuffs scratches on Harry's back).

Then when they are shown to be hypocrites by their own admission - 'babybrain' gate, Harry's therapist on speeddial, Meghan accepting gifts, best man bollocks, mare and the spare - we should shine a light on that.