Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Both Harry and Tyler talking about H&Ms marriage. Why?

357 replies

Sunblessed · 07/12/2024 09:57

Please note, this thread is to discuss the rumours surrounding Harry and Meghans marriage. For those posters who don’t like to speculate, this thread isnt for you.
Now with Harry discussing his marriage in public, on stage with the worlds media watching, then it’s fair comment to discuss such issues.

To my point! Why did both Harry and Tyler allow questions about the marriage and why did they both talk?

There’s always rumours about H&M, that’s nothing new. In these interviews that are requested, possible questions are talked about beforehand with their teams and anything off limits will be strictly outlined. Many celebs will have a strict policy on not discussing certain issues. It’s why we will never see Tom Cruise getting asked about Suri etc

So why oh why, was questions about their marriage/rumours allowed?

So at the Dealbook conference Harry was asked a question about H&M suddenly doing their events separately. Indeed, Harry’s appearance at Dealbook was a surprise when he was slated to appear at Tyler Perrys award months ago.

Question:

There's articles left and right about, you know, 'Why are you doing independent events? Why aren't you doing them together?'" Sorkin said. "Is that a good thing for you, in a way, that there's so much interest in you?"

Harry reflected that the media speculation is "definitely not a good thing," adding: "We've apparently divorced maybe 10, 12 times as well. So, it's just like, what?"

So Harry and his team allowed a question about the rumours of their separation and thrn Harry took it even further by actually talking about divorce rumours, when the interviewer said no such thing.

Theres rumours all the time about their marriage. Remember last year when the Sun had an article that he had a hotel room on standby at a nearby hotel? He didn’t come out then and talk about those rumours. Yet, talk of their separation seems to have upset them this time that they’ve felt the need to talk about it. This wouldn’t have been done without Meghan approval either

Which brings me to Tyler. He gave an exclusive interview to E! Where he again, talks about Harry and Meghan relationship:

"They love each other," Tyler told E! News at the Paley Honors Fall Gala, where he was honored with the prestigious Paley Honors award. "They have a beautiful family and I just want the best for them."

Tyler giving an exclusive interview would not have allowed a question on the couple unless it had been ok’d. What we don’t see in the E! Article is what question he was asked to give that somewhat odd reply. Was he asked if they’ve split? Was he asked why Harry didn’t appear with Meghan? Who knows! But it must have been a something questioning their relationship to give out an answer like that. A answer which makes the relationship look like it’s in trouble by saying he wants the best for them. Why did he allow that question in an exclusive interview?

I think it’s because M&H have been rattled by the rumours and annoyed that people have picked up upon him bailing from the Tyler Perry awards and not having been pictured with his wife in months. So they’ve allowed these questions to try and bat away the rumours.

But Tyler saying they love each other and he wants the best for them is hardly a ringing endorsement, it actually sounds more like he’s rooting for them to pull through.

Harry never shuts down the split rumours either, he just laments the press (even though it isn’t the press) for stating he’s been divorced 10/12 times. He doesn’t actually say something like- yes, we’re really focusing on our individual projects right now, busy trying to get as much done as possible and separating projects has allowed us to do that. But rumours about a marriage split are completely wrong and untrue.

So H&M PR have told them to quash the rumours this week, because it looks like they were rattled. Which only leads you then to think, that it’s probably true. They probably are going through something right now.

You don’t make your whole brand about your partnership, then suddenly start doing separate projects and not being seen together in public. Something has gone wrong in the previous approach for them to come up with the conclusion that they can’t be seen together. That he won’t be seen with his wife.

My feelings are that they are taking time out and a step back from the intensity of the last few years. Not necessarily a spilt, but they in their personal lives as well as professional, are trying to work out who they are and what’s their direction. They became enmeshed with each other and that isn’t healthy. They’ve relied on each other too much because both have abandoned their families. It’s not really all that surprising when we know the couple have struggled with poor mental health. It was only 5 years ago meghan was having suicidal thoughts and Harry’s troubles are well known.

So all these rumours have hid a nerve I’d say. I think they really need to step away from the limelight and retreat. Because it looks like it’s going to cost them their relationship.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
ElsaLion · 08/12/2024 19:27

I too believe that not is 'harmonious' between Harry and Meghan (though I don't believe things ever were, an earlier poster mentioned the euphoric highs and subsequent lows that have been evident throughout their time together).

I also question the true nature of their relationship with the alleged children (popularly described as the 'invisikids' by commentators online). The circumstances surrounding the birth of both were mysterious, and I do believe they were born to surrogates. Also the many weeks both H&am have spent away from the children, on tours etc and the fact they are barely ever seen in public. I wonder if there are even children living with them? The whole situation seems off.

namechange1975 · 08/12/2024 19:54

ElsaLion · 08/12/2024 19:27

I too believe that not is 'harmonious' between Harry and Meghan (though I don't believe things ever were, an earlier poster mentioned the euphoric highs and subsequent lows that have been evident throughout their time together).

I also question the true nature of their relationship with the alleged children (popularly described as the 'invisikids' by commentators online). The circumstances surrounding the birth of both were mysterious, and I do believe they were born to surrogates. Also the many weeks both H&am have spent away from the children, on tours etc and the fact they are barely ever seen in public. I wonder if there are even children living with them? The whole situation seems off.

If anyone seriously believes this then they are nuts.

WinterCrow · 08/12/2024 20:29

namechange1975 · 08/12/2024 19:54

If anyone seriously believes this then they are nuts.

Unfortunately it's a common You Tube trope, and I have wondered if it's one that is being promoted deliberately precisely to be able to say that critics of H&M are nuts. I'm afraid that I'd have to include Harry's own bizarre story of Archie's supposed door-to-door 2-hour epidural, gas-guzzling, takeaway chicken-eating birth in that.

However, not all criticism and critique of H&M is nuts.

Rhaidimiddim · 08/12/2024 20:31

It is interesting that, in the last few days, posts have appeared on various RF threads that refer to the yachting allegations and the surrogacy allegations, and use the terms 'moonbump' and 'invisikids'. And have not been deleted.

Something is shifting.

Galdownunder · 08/12/2024 20:32

What does yachting mean in this context please?

EdithWeston · 08/12/2024 20:35

Galdownunder · 08/12/2024 20:32

What does yachting mean in this context please?

Prostitition

MN used to delete all repetition of that particular rumour. Pity MNHQ changed policy on that one.

headhonchoponcho · 08/12/2024 20:38

namechange1975 · 08/12/2024 19:54

If anyone seriously believes this then they are nuts.

Agree. Totally ridiculous.

headhonchoponcho · 08/12/2024 20:41

WinterCrow · 08/12/2024 20:29

Unfortunately it's a common You Tube trope, and I have wondered if it's one that is being promoted deliberately precisely to be able to say that critics of H&M are nuts. I'm afraid that I'd have to include Harry's own bizarre story of Archie's supposed door-to-door 2-hour epidural, gas-guzzling, takeaway chicken-eating birth in that.

However, not all criticism and critique of H&M is nuts.

"Unfortunately it's a common You Tube trope, and I have wondered if it's one that is being promoted deliberately precisely to be able to say that critics of H&M are nuts."

Yes its possible it could be baiting - trying to see if any 'shy' H&M 'haterz' come out fo their MN closet...

WatchOutMissMarpleIsAbout · 08/12/2024 20:47

I’m no H&M fan but some of the rubbish spouted about them is awful.

CathyorClaire · 08/12/2024 20:51

He was naive and made a deal with the devil

I don't think he was naive at all.

Just injudiciously hoisted his colours to the wrong petard and now scurrying around to cut the cable.

Sunblessed · 08/12/2024 20:51

Obviously the kids exist. But there will always be nonsense around their existence when they don’t publicly show their children but are happy to use other peoples kids as part of their own PR. In addition, bang on all the time about how they love being a parent, yet in Harry’s case, is often away from home.

OP posts:
CathyorClaire · 08/12/2024 21:12

Mylovelygreendress · 08/12/2024 15:09

What’s happened to the 4 book deal ? So far only Spare and The Bench .

The Bench wasn't part of it.

According to the number crunchers the profits on 'Spare' didn't cover Harold's advance.

He's already said while he has enough for a second book he's not going there and Rachel's contribution was allegedly a wellness book (because that's a totally underdone trope).

No idea what the fourth was supposed to deliver but IMO Waagh's our lot.

Mylovelygreendress · 08/12/2024 21:42

Interesting @CathyorClaire . I don’t know anything about the publishing industry but does anyone know what happens if the deal isn’t completed ?

EdithWeston · 08/12/2024 21:47

CathyorClaire · 08/12/2024 21:12

The Bench wasn't part of it.

According to the number crunchers the profits on 'Spare' didn't cover Harold's advance.

He's already said while he has enough for a second book he's not going there and Rachel's contribution was allegedly a wellness book (because that's a totally underdone trope).

No idea what the fourth was supposed to deliver but IMO Waagh's our lot.

Presumably a wellness book could tie in to ARO and lifestyle

PigglyWigglyOhYeah · 08/12/2024 23:05

WatchOutMissMarpleIsAbout · 08/12/2024 20:47

I’m no H&M fan but some of the rubbish spouted about them is awful.

I agree. I really dislike them for various reasons, but some stuff people go on about is properly nuts. Can you imagine the old Queen cheerfully going along with the charade of surrogacy and moonbumps and all the rest of it? She would never have had her photo taken with baby Archie if there was skulduggery going on.

Having said that I do think it's properly weird that those children don't get to race about at the polo and at social events attended by their parents (as far as we know from what is reported in the press). I assume they socialise 'normally' with other kids in other situations because if they are just holed up in that many-bathroomed mansion they are going to grow up seriously peculiar.

cavea · 09/12/2024 06:36

They have stopped publicising images of their kids since the Netflix show, the early Christmas photos cards and the photos of Lilibeth when they were last in the UK as a family. I think Harry realised it contradicted his stance on his security paranoia, and I would say they are also aware the kids looks and behaviour will be scrutinised and compared to their cousins as they get older. That being said, I do think Meghan would have been up for a People or VF family photo spread if Harry was, and it wouldn't surprise me if that still happens at some point, maybe if they do take the kids to an Invictus game like Meghan hinted.

Sunblessed · 09/12/2024 07:13

Yeh, I do think Harry’s red line is the kids privacy. But if he really valued it, he and meghan would go off and live a quiet life.

OP posts:
CarefulN0w · 09/12/2024 07:35

I recently saw a video of Harry misbehaving as a child with Diana. Not any kind of gotcha as small children do misbehave at times. But if Harry was a "spirited" child, the strictures of royal duties and the expectation to behave - no doubt laid down frequently- might have made these events a miserable experience for him. It's understandable that he would want to protect his children from such things.

Sunblessed · 09/12/2024 07:41

Protect his children from behaving themselves?

The ‘strictures of royal duties’ only really require you to be able to have dexterity in your hands to cut a ribbon and not turn up in a nazi uniform. It’s not that hard.

OP posts:
cavea · 09/12/2024 07:43

I think we all teach our kids and have expectations they should behave appropriately in certain environments, church, restaurants, public places, visiting other people etc, While the Royal family have very different events, the parenting and expectation is not that different than those of us who take our kids to church weekly.

MayaKovskaya · 09/12/2024 07:56

I agree with you, @cavea and @Sunblessed .
It's not difficult to work with children and explain the expectations of behaviour. Most manage it.

Baital · 09/12/2024 08:02

I agree up to a point, although there was a lot of nasty comments about Louis a couple of years ago, with people diagnosing he was ND when he just looked to be fidgety in an age appropriate way! Not to mention the poster here who insisted that they knew forca fact that George was too stupid for Eton but William was having a tantrum because he wanted George to go to his old school...

So there will always be some people who will find something to have a dig about, no matter how normal the behaviour.

smilesy · 09/12/2024 08:11

Baital · 09/12/2024 08:02

I agree up to a point, although there was a lot of nasty comments about Louis a couple of years ago, with people diagnosing he was ND when he just looked to be fidgety in an age appropriate way! Not to mention the poster here who insisted that they knew forca fact that George was too stupid for Eton but William was having a tantrum because he wanted George to go to his old school...

So there will always be some people who will find something to have a dig about, no matter how normal the behaviour.

I agree there will always be those who have a dig about how the children appear / behave but I think the issue was more that the poster meant that Harry didn’t enjoy the events as a child so he didn’t want to subject his children to those events 🤷‍♀️

CarefulN0w · 09/12/2024 09:09

Sunblessed · 09/12/2024 07:41

Protect his children from behaving themselves?

The ‘strictures of royal duties’ only really require you to be able to have dexterity in your hands to cut a ribbon and not turn up in a nazi uniform. It’s not that hard.

Sorry - I probably didn't explain my point very well! Harry is the eternal victim, so yes he probably does think those behaviour expectations were unreasonable. Whilst failing to notice that his sibling and cousin were required to behave similarly. Hence my post about Harry "protecting" his children.

Another angle is that if H was more spirited than William he may have received more tellings off. Feeding his resentment.

Mylovelygreendress · 09/12/2024 09:18

Baital · 09/12/2024 08:02

I agree up to a point, although there was a lot of nasty comments about Louis a couple of years ago, with people diagnosing he was ND when he just looked to be fidgety in an age appropriate way! Not to mention the poster here who insisted that they knew forca fact that George was too stupid for Eton but William was having a tantrum because he wanted George to go to his old school...

So there will always be some people who will find something to have a dig about, no matter how normal the behaviour.

Ah yes I remember the comments about Louis who was simply being an excited wee boy . The children’s clothes are also criticised .
And that poster who claimed to have inside knowledge about George being thick but the rules for Eton were to be bent for the Heir .
So in that respect I think H and M are right to protect their DC but they were hypocritical to allow them to be filmed for their NF series .