Harry and Meghan are so petty and bitter

[BigFluffyHoodie]

They knew that announcing Meghan's new venture would be big news. So they dropped it 45 minutes before William was due to speak yesterday evening. At an awards ceremony dedicated to harry and William's mother's memory.

But that wasn't good enough. Oh no. They then announced the winner of their own awards. While the Diana awards were still going on and Prince William was handing out prizes.

Is there no level this petty, bitter couple won't sink to?!

Me too. It’s plain as the nose on your face that the two of them are total hypocrites. Both spoilt, narcissistic and entitled with no self awareness whatsoever.

A NY Times article that I enjoyed reading:

How the Windsor Women Became Human Shields

Reading the comments section is certainly not like reading most the DM comments sections on all articles ‘royal’.

There’s a whole other world out there.

I think they became a poster couple for anyone who dislike the RF, for 1,001 different reasons. And initially it was possible to project those reasons onto them for leaving.

As time has gone on it has become more and more apparent that their reasons for leaving were utterly self centred. But some people have not been able to cope with that, and have dug in instead

Not to mention Harry playing polo. One of the most unsustainable sports you can get! Constantly watering polo fields, and flying horses and players around in jets. Or driving them in heavy lorries for thousands of miles.

I think what they wanted was to be global humanitarians, being praised and applauded at events while buffered from daily stresses with an enormous cushion of wealth, security and servants. Pretty much what they had as royals in fact.
Instead what they have is philanthropic efforts which look like virtue signalling to drive their commercial brand which is struggling on the open market because their talents for either business or creativity are at best limited.

The thing is, they are not global humanitarians - it's very much ' do as I say not what I do"!!

I wrote a long post answering this question - explaining about the different reasons I have for having opinions different from ones like yours about H&M (although not in all they’ve done). But I deleted it because I’ve written it many times before. I’ve done the whole answering of posts like yours many times, just as other posters have done - explaining why your ‘reality’ is not my ‘reality’. I have noted that answers vary, and are quite often nuanced.

But I’ve also noticed that no matter how many times people have taken the time to respond to questions like yours (or similar questions), that their answers aren’t listened to. And the question gets asked again and again and again. How many times can a person explain? I’m done. Most of those who support H&M are also possibly done explaining I think. (My impression only, as I don’t speak for them)

I can spend an hour or longer drafting a response and detailing what and why I think about H&M the way I do, and then click on POST and I have found that I am likely to get 2 different types of responses from the people who have asked (but also I’ve experienced a 3rd type of response - there being no acknowledgement to my explanatory post at all).

The first type of response will be a poster having picked out one small point of my post and they’ll criticise that bit, with no acknowledgment that I might just be right about the other points I have made. So I don’t know if they’ve agreed with the rest or not.

Or the second type of response - eg ‘what tosh’ or ‘rubbish.’ I’ve spent ages writing an answer to questions, and it’s waived away with a one or two word dismissal. I’m not a masochist so why persist with my explanations/sharing my view point? Posters don’t have to agree, but the outright rejection of answers, that have at least some validity is … well it just makes it a waste of time to write out yet again, the reasons why I might see H&M’s side.

Could it be that you are ‘struggling to understand’ because you don’t want to understand? That you are happy with how you think about this very broad topic? The fact that you have written of ‘the reality’ well, it appears you’ve made your mind up… as they say. You aren’t open to other perspectives on this. I suspect you don’t want them. You are here for confirmation of your beliefs.

Theres nothing ‘wrong’ with me. I just don’t agree with you.

That's quite a long post explaining why you won't write a long post!

Runnerinthenight · Yesterday 23:03
I really, really struggle to understand why some people stubbornly refuse to see the reality of the Harry and Meghan situation? They vaunt sustainable, then she sets up a luxury website. They vaunt environmentalism, but consistently take private jets. They set themselves up as the epitome of kindness and consideration, but treat their families like shit.

What is wrong with those who are so blind they cannot see?!!!

This is a brilliant summing up! Yes, totally.

Some people like H & M for reasons which are either a bit of a mis-reading of them (that they're anti-monarchist, for eg) or because they have just swallowed uncritically everything which has come out of their mouths. Both of these positions I find incomprehensible and I confess to frothing a bit, not about H & M, as their supporters like to imagine, but at the rank stupidity of what these supporters say.

For me it's the H & M's hypocrisy and virtue signalling I just can't bear. The wanting to fly around the world, dress up, be applauded and lecture us all while living a life of celebrity luxury. Oh, and the insistence on being 'royal' in a totally inappropriate context. But I'll stop there.

Ive said it before in this thread and didn't want to bang on but I think its a question of what people's moral standards are and how perceptive they are. If they have lower moral standards, they won't find anything to criticise in throwing your dying (they knew that) grandparents under a bus and deliberately setting a touch paper under their family under the height of the BLM furore (so max damage predictable) by making false accusations of racism on Oprah. If they aren't perceptive, they won't think of the hypocrisy of the private jets, the use of royal titles, the lies, the complaints of lack of privacy while not allowing their family or other people privacy, the talk of kindness yet the cruelty to their own fathers. The bullying. I think some people close their ears and eyes to that (I dont know what they see instead..pretty lady? Nice frocks?) but most people know good from bad (which is why the polls put M&H at the bottom of the popularity chart).

I dont know what they see instead..pretty lady? Sometimes I think that's it. They're dazzled by her looks 🙄Handsome is as handsome does

Gosh, what a fancy thesaurus way of saying “if you like H&M, you’re stupid”.

being royal wasn’t good enough or rich enough. She wanted mega wealth with added royal on top to elevate her above the normal mega wealthy. She’s delusional enough to think she could achieve it, but in reality she’s just vulgar. That’s why she went to a church service dressed in £50k worth of Dior haute couture and posed on the steps like she thought she was a Hollywood icon. That’s why I have no time for her, along with the cruelty and hypocrisy.

Thanks for the compliment! I thought I just wrote what I thought in a clear way but nice you think it's fancy!

No, I wasn't actually saying that people are all stupid. I'm sure some very clever people like them. Being clever doesn't mean that their moral compass necessarily points the right way re judging good from bad. That could be for all number of unknown reasons.

Good point @Walkingwashingmachine

It comes down to values, i think. If what seems to be important to them - the status, the being seen in a certain way even if it is all surface and no substance - is also important to you, then probably you will admire them.

You don’t think saying “I dont know what they see instead..pretty lady? Nice frocks?” is a sneering comment on people’s intelligence? You’ve said anyone who finds anything defensible about H&M or likes them has lower moral standards, lacks perception, doesn’t know good from bad. Dress it up how you want, but you’re very clearly saying you’re right, they’re wrong and they’re stupid to boot: idiots fooled by a frock.

In any case, I thought it was the thesaurus that was fancy rather than the comment.

(Not a Sussex squad person or particular H&M fan; a disclaimer I feel I have to add.)

I just think the True Believers defend the indefensible (which could be for many reasons when it comes to ability to judge good from bad, as Ive said) and I'm just idly discussing what has got them in that position. There's no point arguing with them obviously but it's certainly interesting.

What words in my original post did you think I needed a thesaurus for? It's not usually something I have a need for so I'm interested to know what you think.

I remember reading really nutty posts when the M&H thing first blew up, along the lines of H&M should be king and queen because they are more popular . Reveals something of the Mean Girl schoolgirl attitudes of some.

Even lately there was a post suggesting that with the main players out of action, M&H should come back and take the reins. So much for people saying their republicans

they are republicans

I fully appreciate that Wickedlywearynamechanges’ counts below apply equally to both sides of these factions (as MNHQ terms them) and also know well that no-one’s that likely to change their deeply held opinion by being challenged on the internet…🤣

Could it be that you are ‘struggling to understand’ because you don’t want to understand? That you are happy with how you think about this very broad topic? The fact that you have written of ‘the reality’ well, it appears you’ve made your mind up… as they say. You aren’t open to other perspectives on this. I suspect you don’t want them. You are here for confirmation of your beliefs.

With supporters of Harry and Meghan however I do wonder whether there will ever be a tipping point? I can appreciate that many sympathised massively with them for the treatment Meghan received in the press and social media, for example. But Meghan and Harry have not been like dragonflies suspended in amber - they have been keen actors in their own story. Which has included (along with philanthropic ventures) lying to the press about Archie’s birth, lying to the Court about Finding Freedom, launching SussexRoyal and their half-in, half out manifesto then spinning that completely when it didn’t fly, Oprah, Spare, Netflix, countless articles and interviews and podcasts and puff pieces and dubious awards and publicity campaigns…

I do wonder whether there is ever a point where some of the entrenched supporters will maybe start to wonder if perhaps they weren’t the people they have built them up to be?

Oh that's easy. Their attention will immediately transfer when younger more exciting royals start doing interesting things as adults. Remember Prince Andrew and Prince Edward were young and cool once.

Walkingwashingmachine
Ive said it before in this thread and didn't want to bang on but I think its a question of what people's moral standards are and how perceptive they are. If they have lower moral standards, they won't find anything to criticise in throwing your dying (they knew that) grandparents under a bus and deliberately setting a touch paper under their family under the height of the BLM furore (so max damage predictable) by making false accusations of racism on Oprah. If they aren't perceptive, they won't think of the hypocrisy of the private jets, the use of royal titles, the lies, the complaints of lack of privacy while not allowing their family or other people privacy, the talk of kindness yet the cruelty to their own fathers. The bullying. I think some people close their ears and eyes to that (I dont know what they see instead..pretty lady? Nice frocks?) but most people know good from bad (which is why the polls put M&H at the bottom of the popularity chart).E

I agree with this.

Another thought I've had for a long time but haven't dared to put my head above the parapet...

If you look at MN's AIBU you'll frequently find people who've suffered bad treatment from friends, and it's sometimes clear just where the problem lies - that they're allowing themselves to be taken in, exploited and used by the 'friend'. My reading of all the posts unquestioningly admiring Meghan has shed light on this for me. I just cannot help thinking 'But surely you can see through the act! It's as clear as the nose on my face..' Reading about people who are taken in by, well, narcissists, to use an over-used (but in this case, justified, I think) term helps me to understand why people adore Meghan. Her charm, for me, is totally superficial and I strongly suspect they'd quickly sing a different tune if they had to work for her.

To me Meghan has always given off 'mean girl' vibes. It's things like the actressy gushing - which I suspect gets switched off pretty damn quick when the cameras aren't rolling - and going on about being a 'hugger', implying that people who aren't comfortable with that are somehow lacking. It's well attested that she has a reputation for being unkind to staff and 'menials'. I've met people like her and I just cannot imagine trusting her if I met her.

So for me it's just about whether you see through Meghan or not, and that's not a voluntary, conscious thing - she either attracts or repels depending on your life experience or personal values.

Very well put.

I would also add that the world in which we live and the values we are being encouraged to uphold are superficiality and appearance based. Basic honour, integrity, truth and accountability aren’t seen as valuable anymore. Very sadly. So H and M appeal to those who admire celebrity culture and superficial performance , along with empty virtue signalling.
I see M’s calligraphy as being indicative of her personality. All style and no substance.

@Seizethedog and @CoffeeCantata both of your posts are spot on.