Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Oprah, H and M.

566 replies

lapisamethyst · 01/07/2023 19:42

Are they considered close friends? And Gayle, Oprah's bestie, is she still on side H&M...she appears to have gone quiet.
Or has the now known lies from their Oprah interview changed their friendship I wonder?
It all seemed so pally but did it stand the test of time?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
21
Origamee · 03/07/2023 07:17

WatchOutMissMarpleIsAbout · 03/07/2023 07:10

I can’t get excited about transactional relationships tbh. I’d say initially a lot of friendships may start off like this. School gate for example, one parent bonds with another helps out with pick up drop offs. Another is a Client business relationships that turn into friendships.

You meet like minded people in everyday life. Royals & celebrities are put in each others paths. They get on after a transactional meet. I don’t see a real difference.

A bit odd to invite people you don’t know to your wedding. But then several of my cousins had their wedding invitation placed in the newspaper in case people had been forgotten 🤷🏻‍♀️and that’s just as weird to my mind & I’ve grown up with that!

This is a good point i think, at the end of the day people in that sphere meet through their work more often than not, just as many other people do.

Ohpleeeease · 03/07/2023 07:22

I wouldn’t set too much store by who gets invited to a royal wedding, half of the guests are there because they have provided or will provide a service that the royal family wish to acknowledge.

WatchOutMissMarpleIsAbout · 03/07/2023 07:37

MrsMaxDeWinter · 03/07/2023 07:15

A bit odd to invite people you don’t know to your wedding.

Does this apply to William and Kate too, whose wedding was packed to the rafters with people they didn't know, or is it just Harry and Meghan who are odd?

Maybe they invited people whom they wanted to get to know? In the Clooneys case, it certainly worked as they seem to be friends now?

That’s what you took from my post? There is no pleasing some on here! Unless 100% fawning you may as well not bother.

Yes I think it’s odd if it was H&M that invited people they didn’t know. If it was their parents or the Queen who wanted guests thats not weird if H&M didn’t know them. W&K I assume would have had to invite heads of state. I assume who they didn’t know.

There were certain people at my wedding I didn’t know but who had to be invited to keep face for my parents or my in laws. (Cultural) but the point is someone knew them. We didn’t invite people we didn’t know on the assumption we would become friends later on.

WatchOutMissMarpleIsAbout · 03/07/2023 07:38

Ohpleeeease · 03/07/2023 07:22

I wouldn’t set too much store by who gets invited to a royal wedding, half of the guests are there because they have provided or will provide a service that the royal family wish to acknowledge.

Sorry I missed this. Yes that’s a good point & perhaps changes my view a little about the service part.

MrsMaxDeWinter · 03/07/2023 07:43

We didn’t invite people we didn’t know on the assumption we would become friends later on.

And that was YOUR wedding. You invited who YOU wanted to invite to YOUR wedding. Good for you, and I hope you had a lovely day.

Ohpleeeease · 03/07/2023 07:43

But I also agree with you @WatchOutMissMarpleIsAbout that it’s very odd to invite strangers that you want to get to know.

I might be misremembering this but didn’t Clooney provide some of the alcohol for the reception through his business? Idris Elba MC’d I think. Those people would get an invitation because they were making a contribution to the event, not as friends.

Iwantcakeeveryday · 03/07/2023 07:48

MrsMaxDeWinter · 03/07/2023 06:52

As for George and Amal Clooney, Amal threw Meghan a baby shower, with their other friend Serena Williams. The Clooneys invited Harry and Meghan to visit them in Lake Como. George has also publicly defended her against what he saw as unfair attacks when she was pregnant.

And this is what he has said about them both when asked about their friendship:

“We live not too far from one another and we have dinners and stuff and we’re friends with them for all the reasons that you’re friends with anybody. They’re just really nice, fun, kind people, they’re a very loving couple, and they’re going to be great parents.”

But let's assume that ALL their friendships, with the Clooneys, with Oprah, with Gayle, Tyler Perry. Serena Williams etc are transactional. So what? What has that to do with you?

The transactional friendships you should be worried about are between your King, a public servant, and his cash for access mates. You should be worried about the transactional relationships between members of the royal family and people like Piers Morgan, who is accused of hacking phones in the past and at the same time states that senior members the Royal Family reached out to thank him for his attacks against Meghan. And you should be concerned about the transactional relations between your Queen who talks performatively about violence against women while palling with a man willing to share with the nation his sexual fantasy about the violent humiliation of her husband's daughter-in-law.

So when it comes to Oprah, Tyler, the Clooneys etc, Meghan and Harry have chosen well, because the other Royals seem to prefer the company of unethical people like Piers Morgan and Jeremy Clarkson, not to mention criminals like Jimmy Saville, Laurens Van Der Post and Jefferey Epstein.

I'll take the black self-made billionaires any day!

Thank you so much for your posts and correcting the gossipy inaccuracies floating around!

The transactional friendships you should be worried about are between your King, a public servant, and his cash for access mates. You should be worried about the transactional relationships between members of the royal family and people like Piers Morgan

Absolutely this! But for some reason, the ROYAL board, doesn't talk much about the actual working royals at all.

MrsMaxDeWinter · 03/07/2023 07:58

@Iwantcakeeveryday

Oh they will trawl back all the way to 2018 to find a reason to throw potshots at Meghan while ignoring the long royal histories of friendships with paedophiles and other unsavoury characters.

Roussette · 03/07/2023 08:10

Absolutely this! But for some reason, the ROYAL board, doesn't talk much about the actual working royals at all.

Haha @Iwantcakeeveryday that made me laugh! Yes, absolutely. Why the heck aren't we talking about what the actual RF are doing... you know... those people we pay for!
They're a tad boring, that's why. I just imagined Royalists would be interested in the actual working taxpayer funded royal family, silly me!

But I do take comfort from the fact that... if there are pages of ciriticism of H&M about who they had to their wedding over five years ago, they're doing something right because there's nothing much else to talk about. We'll be back to roast chicken and the engagement interview soon!

Iwantcakeeveryday · 03/07/2023 08:10

MrsMaxDeWinter · 03/07/2023 07:58

@Iwantcakeeveryday

Oh they will trawl back all the way to 2018 to find a reason to throw potshots at Meghan while ignoring the long royal histories of friendships with paedophiles and other unsavoury characters.

I know. Its amazing isn't it? There is much more relevant and more recent things to talk about, including their spending, but instead we people are going on about the wedding from 5 years ago, their jobs, their marriage... Oprah! I mean move on people! This is the royal board and there isn't much talk about the royals is there? Maybe even royalists are bored of them?

Roussette · 03/07/2023 08:13

Iwantcakeeveryday · 03/07/2023 08:10

I know. Its amazing isn't it? There is much more relevant and more recent things to talk about, including their spending, but instead we people are going on about the wedding from 5 years ago, their jobs, their marriage... Oprah! I mean move on people! This is the royal board and there isn't much talk about the royals is there? Maybe even royalists are bored of them?

Jinx! Exactly what I said.

I summarised the Royal report financials on another thread into bullet points to make it easy to look at and discuss. Very very few were interested. I don't know why this board is called Royal Family to be honest, I'll refrain from saying what I think it should be called 🤣

Iwantcakeeveryday · 03/07/2023 08:16

Well so many posters spend their days repeating they're no longer royals, why do they use their titles etc etc so why are there threads here about them? Shouldn't they be elsewhere?

MrsMaxDeWinter · 03/07/2023 08:20

@Roussette

If there are pages of ciriticism of H&M about who they had to their wedding over five years ago, they're doing something right because there's nothing much else to talk about.

There was a thread from January that got to 9 pages of frothing about her wedding guests before it died out. She was accused of the cardinal sin of gasp, not inviting her exes!

The exes whom she has never talked about, and who have been utter gentlemen in not blabbing about her to the press or otherwise drawing attention to themselves. Yes, those exes. They should have been at the wedding damn it!!

Iwantcakeeveryday · 03/07/2023 08:21

@MrsMaxDeWinter I have always thought it weird the royals invite exes. Or in Charles' case, then current mistress and future wife!

MrsMaxDeWinter · 03/07/2023 08:26

In Charles's case, it certainly kept all options open!!

I had a funny conversation with a friend who believes that if Camilla outlives Charles, she will remarry Andrew Parker Bowles, so that she becomes once again Mrs Parker Bowles!

Mylovelygreendress · 03/07/2023 08:32

MrsMaxDeWinter · 03/07/2023 07:15

A bit odd to invite people you don’t know to your wedding.

Does this apply to William and Kate too, whose wedding was packed to the rafters with people they didn't know, or is it just Harry and Meghan who are odd?

Maybe they invited people whom they wanted to get to know? In the Clooneys case, it certainly worked as they seem to be friends now?

William and Kate’s wedding was different as he will be King in the future . It was more of a State occasion with a public holiday so protocol dictated that Heads of State etc had to be invited . It is well documented that William went to HM about the list and there were changes made to accommodate more of W&K’s friends .

MarcelProust · 03/07/2023 08:38

Iwantcakeeveryday · 03/07/2023 08:21

@MrsMaxDeWinter I have always thought it weird the royals invite exes. Or in Charles' case, then current mistress and future wife!

Lol.

Would she be allowed to bring the Parker Bowles to the palace?

MarcelProust · 03/07/2023 08:39

MrsMaxDeWinter · 03/07/2023 06:51

I understand it was the opposite, it was harry and Meghan who wanted to do Oprah, they approached her, well before the wedding, they wanted to do an interview and the palace said no. She was then invited to the wedding by harry and Meghan and even given a pre interview at their cottage, where they showed her just how small it was.

This is wrong, and has been contradicted at least twice, using direct words from all persons concerned. The only reason you know she visited their cottage is because you heard them say she did, so it is interesting that you chose not to believe the rest of what they, and Oprah, have put on record on this subject.

All three confirmed in the interview that yes, Oprah wanted to interview them. It was a huge story, an independent American mixed-race woman marrying into the very white royal family. For Oprah especially, it would have been a huge interview for the US market.

Harry and Meghan declined on palace advice, as they confirmed, and Oprah confirmed in the interview. But they established a warm relationship, with Oprah becoming close to Doria. Harry and Meghan then left and nothing prevented them from talking to a woman who, by this time was their neighbour, and their friend.

Oprah is really close to Tyler Perry, in fact, she is their link to TP. Black Twitter had much fun with memes around the fact that the grandson of the Queen had to be "rescued" by two black billionaires, who both grew up dirt poor but now "rescued" a prince and his wife.

oprah is a business woman first and foremost, of course she wanted to do it, what a coup. I think folks are forgetting the six part doc series they did next going even further, evidence of their desire tk do this.

Yes, Orah wanted to do it, which is why she approached them.

it’s not like they did Oprah, expressed regret and got on with doing other stuff. They doubled down on it and did Netflix then a book and harry did multiple interviews to flog it. And Meghan even accepted an award for battling racism in the royal family, and that battle was in part cemented in the Oprah interview.

Not sure why they should express regret? You forget that during the lockdown, the stories about them were absolutely crazy, even as they were doing nothing. You also forget that some in the press actually said "they can expect no mercy". They had every right to speak to counter the kind of disinformation you have given in this very post. It's curious that Jeremy Clarkson is defended for sharing his violent sexual fantasy about Meghan, but Meghan is excoriated for daring to speak about her own experiences. I guess free speech is not free to all!

Some more misinformation from you as Meghan did not accept an award for "batting racism in the royal family". That was the Daily Mail spin on it. You are welcome to read the actual citation yourself. It does not mention the Royal Family at all, in fact, the focus is less on racial justice than their work on mental health.

Great post.

Thanks for the clarifications.

GlorianaCervixia · 03/07/2023 08:56

Their award was for racial justice, mental health and other social justice initiatives, and this is what Kerry Kennedy - president of the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights who hold the Ripple Awards - said about why they were awarded the prize: "They went to the oldest institution in U.K. history and told them what they were doing wrong, that they couldn't have structural racism within the institution; that they could not maintain a misunderstanding about mental health".

So, yes, their award was partly for their work "battling racism in the royal family".

CathyorClaire · 03/07/2023 09:59

I summarised the Royal report financials on another thread into bullet points to make it easy to look at and discuss. Very very few were interested

I appreciated that summary, Rousette 🙂

It was disappointing that the discussion fizzled out once the £15K cost of a single flight between residences was raised but I assumed it was because it made defending the indefensible too hard.

MrsMaxDeWinter · 03/07/2023 10:03

GlorianaCervixia · 03/07/2023 08:56

Their award was for racial justice, mental health and other social justice initiatives, and this is what Kerry Kennedy - president of the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights who hold the Ripple Awards - said about why they were awarded the prize: "They went to the oldest institution in U.K. history and told them what they were doing wrong, that they couldn't have structural racism within the institution; that they could not maintain a misunderstanding about mental health".

So, yes, their award was partly for their work "battling racism in the royal family".

The official citation makes no mention at all of the Royal Family.

“When The Duke and Duchess accepted our award laureate invitation back in March, we were thrilled. The couple has always stood out for their willingness to speak up and change the narrative on racial justice and mental health around the world,” said Kerry Kennedy, president of Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights. “They embody the type of moral courage that my father once called the ‘one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change a world that yields most painfully to change.’”

"Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, have demonstrated a lifelong commitment to building strong and equitable communities, advancing the global dialogue around mental health, and advocating for a better world – both on and offline. They co-founded Archewell Foundation in 2020 with a mission to uplift and unite communities. In a short time, they have done so in remarkable ways: from supporting Afghan refugees seeking resettlement to uplifting families in the United States in need of paid parental leave; investing in organizations working in Ukraine, to partnering with the NAACP to create the first-ever Digital Civil Rights Award; working with the World Health Organization, People’s Vaccine and Global Citizen to champion vaccine access globally, to raising funds to purchase doses for frontline health workers; among many other initiatives."

You may not agree that this work is worthy of an award from the RFK Foundation, but it is definitely NOT about the Royal Family.

https://rfkhumanrights.org/press/robert-f-kennedy-human-rights-announces-the-duke-and-duchess-of-sussex-as-recipients-of-the-2022-ripple-of-hope-award

Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights announces the Duke and Duchess of Sussex as recipients of the 2022 Ripple of Hope Award | RFK Human Rights

Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights today announced that Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, have been named this year’s Ripple of Hope Award laureates in recognition of their work on racial justice, mental health, and other social impa...

https://rfkhumanrights.org/press/robert-f-kennedy-human-rights-announces-the-duke-and-duchess-of-sussex-as-recipients-of-the-2022-ripple-of-hope-award

AutumnCrow · 03/07/2023 13:05

This award business really puzzles me, the more that is written about it.

Vanity Fair, which has normally been pretty sympathetic to the Sussexes, said,

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were presented with their award by Kerry Kennedy, the daughter of Robert F. Kennedy, who thanked the busy couple for showing up and explained that they were receiving this recognition because they spoke out against racism within the royal family.

This does suggest that Kennedy, one of the awards organisers, said this directly to them at the ceremony, in public, hence why it has gone on record.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2022/12/prince-harry-meghan-markle-ripple-of-hope-awards-robert-f-kennedy-human-rights-princess-diana-ring

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Honored for Fighting Racism at the 2022 Ripple of Hope Awards

The Duchess also wore an aquamarine ring that once belonged to Princess Diana for the occasion.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2022/12/prince-harry-meghan-markle-ripple-of-hope-awards-robert-f-kennedy-human-rights-princess-diana-ring

MrsMaxDeWinter · 03/07/2023 13:14

From the same article:

She also cited their work raising money for victims of the Grenfell Tower fire in 2017, the way they've leveraged their platform and the Archewell Foundation in support of the Black Lives Matter movement, partnered with the NAACP to great the first-ever-digital civil rights award, championed global vaccine access during the pandemic, support veterans through the Invictus Games, and advanced gender equality through Meghan's Archetypes podcast and support of women-owned businesses.

I have no idea what was said in the room, but the award citation I have posted from the RFK Foundation's website makes no mention of the Royal Family.

Meghan Markle Sends a Message of Support to Grenfell Fire Survivors

Three years after the tragedy, Meghan reached out to the Hubb Community Kitchen, a food pantry she visited frequently during her time in the royal family.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/06/meghan-markle-message-to-grenfell-fire-survivors

AutumnCrow · 03/07/2023 13:17

Yes, I've read the award citation.

Kerry Kennedy seems to be the one who ran with the narrative of 'speaking out against racism in the royal family', actually at the award ceremony.

MrsMaxDeWinter · 03/07/2023 13:24

Oh I am glad you read the full article, because it looked like you cut off the rest of her remarks to give the wrong impression that that was the sole reason she gave.

As I have already said the citation makes no mention of the RF.

Swipe left for the next trending thread