German documentary about Meghan

[sausawyee]

www.skynews.com.au/lifestyle/celebrity-life/every-detail-will-be-checked-bombshell-meghan-markle-documentary-delayed-while-producers-seek-legal-advice/news-story/e56d56d3e60f37af6a31da01b455f0b2?amp

I have seen several newspapers referring to this German documentary. It's the first I've heard of it.

Quite!

I know nothing about M&H and care less. But I am, unfortunately, living in a Monarchy, so I do care a bit about the behaviour and morality of the head of state.

Why is your gauge of his morality centered around his love life? What about his being an early proponent of looking out for the environment, even when he was roundly mocked for it? His first speech on the environment was when he was 21. He is considered an international expert on climate change and lobbying against corporate interests destroying the environment. He turned Highgrove into a thriving organic farm and is at the forefront of advancing biodiversity and sustainability. He even publishes his own yearly carbon footprint so he's not hiding behind his environmentalism, he's being open about his own impact (unlike his arse of a younger son). What about his starting The Prince's Trust in 1976 that has helped (to date) around 1 million young people from disadvantaged backgrounds into work, business and rehabilitation? He always was and is so much more than Diana's husband, Diana's cheating husband, Diana's ex husband and Diana's nemesis.

I agree with inflictus here.

What do you mean by 'behavour and morality'? It sounds as though you're defining it very narrowly to a sexual context. Some of the most liberal and visionary politicians would have failed the sexual morality test, JFK and Martin Luther King to name but two! But Adolf Hitler was faithful to Eva Braun, so fine.

I agree that leaders need to be morally decent people, but I'm not interested in what goes on in their bedrooms - only in the way they behave in the wider world, and as inflictus has said, KC has a great track record - and he stuck his head above the parapet and got mocked for being a crank long before the majority view came round to the wisdom of what he was saying.

What on earth has KC's previous messy and regrettable marriage got to do with anything now? He even publicly did penance for his behaviour, both on Jonathan Dimbleby's interview and at his wedding to Camilla. What more do you want him to do?

I'm not interested in whataboutery. Charles married a very much younger woman for the purposes of producing an heir with absolutely no intention of being faithful to her. Wht other famous people did or did not do is irrelevant. It wasn't a "messy" marriage-it was a marriage he entered into cynically. She was a disaster waiting to happen. But he was the main driver, and should have known better.

Well he didn't, they got married, we know the rest.
Time to move on.

But I am, unfortunately, living in a Monarchy, so I do care a bit about the behaviour and morality of the head of state.

So - let me try and get this straight: you care about KC's sexual morality because he's a HoS, but you don't think the sexual morality of other HoSs (and politicians) is relevant?

Your response makes no sense!!

My advice: just try and forget about KC and Diana - those days are long gone!

Did he tell you that himself? Did you get it from a TV drama?

And Diana voluntarily married a much older man, catapulting herself from obscure sloan destined to marry another obscure sloan into the woman who would be queen, with a platform and profile that no other woman of such limited talents has had before or since. And as for "marriage for the purposes of producing an heir" - that covers pretty much every marriage where children are wanted by the participants who want a secure relationship as a pre-requisite - that's not confined to royals. I am pretty sure her children were very much wanted and loved by them both.

Her family would have known about this. She tried to get out of it. Her sisters said - too late. The buck stops with them not Charles.

How do I know this? I’ve had an arranged marriage as have most of family. When you say you don’t want to go ahead it’s on your own family to get you out of it as they are the ones who have made the arrangements on your behalf. They either should have investigated more (ie made enquiries) or stopped it. They didn’t.

Also it’s sometimes seen as ok for the females to withdraw after agreements but not the men as that can impinge the girls reputation for some stupid reason! Up till agreement is made (word given is the term) anyone can withdraw.

@CoffeeCantata
"So - let me try and get this straight: you care about KC's sexual morality because he's a HoS, but you don't think the sexual morality of other HoSs (and politicians) is relevant?"

Happy to discuss the sexual morality of other HsoS if you want to. But I thought we were talking about this country. And my opinions are formed from being an adult t the time it was all happening- unlike, I suspect many others on here.

I was an adult when it happened.
However, I suspect that even those on here who weren't, are still able to use their critical faculties.

@Theinflictuswithrictusgames"And Diana voluntarily married a much older man....." As a troubled and not particularly bright 19 year old.....

I think most of us commenting were adults at that time - because we actually wouldn’t care otherwise
My children, born 1997 onwards really couldn’t care less about Diana. It’s who’s in the RF (or close enough) that they are interested in, and even then only when there’s a big event on.

I do think some people here seem stuck in the past.

Except that if you rid yourself of the hereditary monarch as head of state, you are replacing it with an elected head of state and seeking to find the perfect, flawless human to head your country. And on your standard of morality, you would pass up someone like JFK, Martin Luther King, Bill Clinton, half the French presidency and who knows who else based on their sex life and not on their political one.

And I was an adult at the time of Charles & Diana’s marriage. Yours isn’t the only point of view based on age.

So? People left school at 15/16 in those days and became working taxpayers, considered to be adults. Diana was a working woman herself when she got together with Charles - she wasn’t a child.

Diana didn’t remain a 19 year old. She grew up, became a mother and got the world’s biggest platform afforded to a woman of little talent - which she knowingly exploited to the full. She married a flawed man, but a decent one who was also subject to the expectations of his family and a nation. She decided to have affairs, harass the wives of her affair partners, triangulate her eldest child in her issues, tried to cut her children off from their father and generally made a complete mess of her situation. She was her own worst enemy because she could control her own actions and failed to.

It’s not whataboutery though, @Theinflictuswithrictusgames has written an excellent post on the morality of King Charles, a morality that has a hugely positive effect for millions of people and because you are apparently a republican you choose to hone in on the part of his life from 40 odd years ago because it suits your personal agenda, I don’t suspect you really care that much about his love life it’s just a useful stick to beat him with and as inflictus says in a later post, good luck finding a bona fide saint for your republican utopia.

So? People left school at 15/16 in those days and became working taxpayers, considered to be adults. Diana was a working woman herself when she got together with Charles - she wasn’t a child.

Absolutely, Diana wasn’t fresh out of finishing school with no experience of the world, she had worked as a nanny for a private agency and then worked in a Kindergarten, she lived independently in a flat share with other girls, she wasn’t like many 19 year olds today who seem to stay ‘children’ for a lot longer, I think some posters look at their 19 year olds who they still treat as children and project that onto Diana.

I was an adult at the time. I have no idea what KC intended, not sure how you know. Has he told you he had no intention of being faithful?

Very true, I was married with one child, a mortgage and a job when I was 19. It wasn't that unusual then.

How do you know how bright she was, she was definitely a shrewd operator which isn't for the stupid.

Bower made the point that she immediately thought her role meant that she could cash in, she asked for free goods and services and seems to have been angry at being stopped. I wonder if the desire to monetise their connections and status was the trigger for leaving.

I don't know and I never will but I'd lay a small wager M thought she would front and centre ( hitting the ground running ) & he husband saying she would be good at representing the RF. But I think when she realised it was slow and steady wins the race - she wan't so fussed. I suspect she just wanted the titles , the money and the fame - BUT BUT I could be wrong. I thought she saw how she could take that to the US and earn a fortune.

Look I hope they are happy but without Harry being 2nd son of KC - really how much fame etc would they have as a fairly minor actress and plain Captain Wales . & they seem to be milking it. I wish they would stop trading on the RF when they have just bunged out so many half / un truths

I always thought that Meghan assumed that 2 brothers would be treated equally and that she and Harry would have equal status to William and Catherine . For reasons we don’t know , she has a deep dislike of Catherine and wasn’t willing to walk behind her or have second choice of tiara etc .

@Mylovelygreendress why she didn't do the basic level of homework before taking on this role beats me.

Happy to discuss the sexual morality of other HsoS if you want to
@CurlewKate

My point is precisely that I don't want to! I don't think anyone's (legal!) sexual activity is relevant to their job. I'm arguing that leaders need to have a decent moral code in their wider role - which KC, JFK and Dr M L King all did/do. That's all I ask - I don't want to know about their marital infidelities!