How do republicans who support H&M feel about 'princess' lillibet

[purpledalmation]

I mean how do you reconcile the, to me, gross hypocrisy of saying you want to leave the royal family to pursue your own projects and for privacy and would give up their royal titles.

Their own projects so far consist of trashing the royal family and making money from it, while clinging to their royal titles.

Privacy consists of reality tv shows, public therapy sessions and a book tour.

They touted their children's privacy and security as a reason for leaving yet they name their children prince and princess. A sure fire way to draw attention to them and reduce their security.

I honestly want to know how people who want the monarchy gone yet praise harry and Meghan for their bravery in standing up to the RF, square this circle?

I'm going cold turkey on meghan and harry, they annoy me too much. 😂

Thank you and @jeffgoldblum for the birthday wishes. xxx

😂

I’ll believe this when I see it

Rather uncalled for.

I saw a poster on Tik Tok make a comment that H&M really separate out the Monarchists from the Royalists.

Monarchists are those who are interested in and who support the Monarchy (regardless of individuals) and Royalists support personalities and tend to split into factions.

And he terms H&M supporters as very much Royalists who are not "Republicans" (who wouldn't support anyone associated with RF) because they wouldn't support H&M if they weren't in fact Royals.

Interesting viewpoint.

That's interesting. I admit to lumping Monarchists and Royalists together. I may have to rethink this

@MrsFinkelstein thats so interesting. I'd never thought of it that way but it certainly is a relevant viewpoint wrt my original question. Of course if H&M weren't royals there would be no interest in them and no controversy. That does support some comments by genuine republicans who say they don't give a toss about the monarchy or the Sussexes.

I suppose I must be a lukewarm (I'm sorry I just love all the dressing up) monarchist. I love history and the history of the monarchy is unbelievably rich and colourful. I guess seeing real kings and queens and knowing that they are linked to that history makes it so much more interesting than the alternatives. I, like everyone else, know the royals are just ordinary people in an extraordinary situation. They don't expect people to worship them, but they do represent our country's long history. Its no more important than that.

Well, whatever, they are definitely not republicans!

I'm a republican who wishes them well and hope they build a life they're happy with.

It seems a bit hypocritical to me for them to want to announce they're using their children's titles after spending huge amounts of time complaining about how damaging the firm is and how they needed privacy and be free.

Edward and Sophie's children are entitled to use HRH but they don't. Anne was offered titles for her child I believe but opted not to take them. If Harry and Meghan wanted more normality for their children they could have done it, just like other members of their family have.

This is not about wanting normality for their children obviously. There is no spine and it will be a few years before they pay for it.

Can I ask - why do you watch and read so much about someone you dislike so much? And watching and reading closely enough to recall what was said in an interview months ago. It’s bizarre. What a waste of your life.

I can’t think of anyone I view as a roaring hypocrite whose documentary I’d watch. What an odd thing to do.

The non-fiction on Netflix seems to be more train-wreck and less inspiration in general. The Murdaugh story on Netflix is popular right now.

MissTrip82 · Today 00:15
Can I ask - why do you watch and read so much about someone you dislike so much?

Not odd at all, in my opinion. Do you only take an interest in people you like? Do you not examine the goings-on of politicians etc whom you don't support?

It was me as part of a fictional training manual for prospective Royal's said as a joke in the context of what do they do exactly the 'work' thing that is much touted as part of their reason to exist.

@MissTrip82 I'm happy to answer your question. I watched the Netflix documentary because I felt sympathy for the couple and wanted to understand their POV following the Oprah interview which seemed at odds with facts. So the docuseries was free to watch on Netflix so I did. I was bored, sceptical and annoyed at the attempts to manipulate me (soft piano music, negative photos of the RF, soft focus images of the couple). Their own words exposed them for the hypocrites and liars they are and the fact checking I did was pretty damning. I thought I was maybe all Meghan, but reading Harry's book made me realise they are a well matched.

I think the most popular NF documentary ever is 'The Tinder Swinder', and I doubt it's because people admired him. Tiger King was also huge, again not because people thought Joe Exotic was a great guy.

People will almost always go for scandal and intrigue rather than wholesome and inspirational when it comes to TV viewing. Hence the popularity of the above, as well as the Sussex mockumentary.

‘Mockumentary’ is accurate.

I think people also find it amusing and compulsively cringe-worthy to see their delusional, grandiose, entitled and hypocritical words and actions exposed.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

The Cut article was also excruciating.

H&M maybe have not yet realised that this is exactly what the big media players (PenguinRandomHouse/Netflix etc) with whom they have collaborated are doing - sending them up but oh so subtly to maintain the collaboration.

These big media players know that their revenue stream comes from this style of mockumentary dynamic and they will milk it dry to get the viewing figures.

H&M are just one of the current commodities that these industries are monetising. The corporations have no loyalty to sell / tell a wholesome truthful story - they only have an obligation to their shareholders to maximise revenue by shifting the most units.

That "Cut" interview was something else. I genuinely thought it was a parody at first.
It just gets odder. Now we have princess "birthright" statements.
I genuinely don't know what their endgame is.

Didn't Harry say something a few years back about 'not wanting his wife to be a commodity'? Yet now, she and he are just that. Commodities in the entertainment business. Just last week, Harry was literally selling pay per view therapy sessions. You couldn't make it up.

When I read the 'Cut' interview I knew that Sunshine Sachs were no longer repping them. No way would a major PR firm allow a client to be openly mocked like that.

Their problem is that they take themselves incredibly seriously and have grandiose views about their own importance. Which makes them perfect fodder for a hilarious send up, whether in print or 'documentary' format.

First 500 free - get in early... 😀

Not according to Tatler it's a cost saving exercise bringing that in-house.

www.tatler.com/article/prince-harry-meghan-markle-part-ways-new-york-pr-firm-sunshine-sachs

While a Sunshine Sachs spokesperson reportedly declined to comment, an unnamed source told Eden: ‘When Sunshine Sachs began working with the duke and duchess, the plan was always for it to be temporary until a full-time internal team could be created. After they were hired, Sunshine Sachs worked alongside them to help the transition. All sides are on good terms and periodic advisory work continues.

The constant name changing is getting to be a bit much!

Yes, they can no longer afford SS so have had to hire amateurs to do their PR. And it shows.

Do you and your various user names always take unnamed sources at face value? Or just for your republican heroes, the Duke and Duchess?

What would Justine say?