Vanity Fair podcast

[Atlasvue]

Carrying on.

Employee feels Harry is happy doing charity work and is happy for meghan to do all the work to make money so he doesn’t need to

Approximately 20% of paramedic staff develop PTSD.

When William visited the firehouse in NYC, he discussed PTSD with them. One of them commented favorably that William knew what he was discussing with them.

https://pagesix.com/2023/09/19/prince-william-tells-fdny-heroes-to-talk-about-mental-health/#:~:text=Royal%20Family-,Prince%20William%20tells%20FDNY%20heroes%20to%20talk%20about%20mental%20health,line%20from%20brother%20Harry's%20campaign&text=Prince%20William%20met%20firefighters%20from,himself%20was%20a%20first%20responder.

Of course not. There’s class differences in all countries. What I find so gross about the monarchy is the glorification of Intergenerational wealth to equate God-given privileges.

It’s perverse, really. They can’t do the simplest things. They can do some
Very advanced things though - speak foreign languages, walk in heels, ride horses, converse world leaders. But can’t work a kettle or do the dishes. And we’re paying for their upkeep in absurd wealth. The social contract to allow this is that the royals go around smiling and don’t complain about the flip side of their wealth and privilege. Like William and Kate manage so gracefully. To be clear, im
no fan of them either, but I can see how they fulfill the social contract, live up to expectations.

Harry and Meghan broke the social contract by starting to articulate the flip side of royalty. How incredibly shorty sighted. Nobody wants to hear that, and the counter argument is so easily made - of it’s so hard to be a royal, give it all up then!

that’s why the whole RF are so afraid of them and so angry. They can see how dangerous they are to the illusion that is monarchy.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/royals/article-14302527/U-S-bible-takedown-Harry-Meghan-America-love-Sussexes.html

https://archive.ph/1Br9L

‘So why has a title that was long one of the couple’s most fervent press cheerleaders performed such a drastic U-turn? One answer is that it’s reflecting the changing mood of the US media which, once the couple’s greatest champions, in recent times has turned sour.

As it has shifted over time from fawning to frosty in its attitude to the Sussexes, the US Press can console itself that the British media did precisely the same in the two years or so between their marriage and abrupt departure to North America. Has the couple who try so hard to win hearts and headlines discovered once more that there’s only so much Sussex virtuousness that any country can take?’

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/royal-family/article/harry-and-meghan-dismiss-distressing-allegations-in-vanity-fair-lfbqggrss

https://archive.ph/0Mb4j

‘The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are understood to have dismissed allegations against them reported in a Vanity Fair article that sources close to the couple described as distressing.’

LOL, well as it turns out, they are the only ones dismissing it.

Wouldn't have expected anything better for them, it;s just another 'mean' aggressive and disdainful response, typical bully behaviour They are so arrogant and obnoxious.

Turns out Sharon Stone said something nice about them FIVE years ago and that has been revisited to show they are or possibly were 'nice' neighbours.

The desperation is just silly now.😂

I see they're reverting to "our staff already spoke to US weekly to deny these claims" - which were from the HR exposé so they clearly can't get anyone new to speak out in their defence!

I’d say I’d feel sorry for them but they knowingly caused distress to Catherine and William over the years so you know…

"on Harry, I consider him a deeply traumatized person. I don’t think he operates on a normal level and he may never be able to. He seems ok, he’s down stupid things but don’t think he seems mean, just a bit thick." [My underlining for emphasis.]

I think this once widely-held view of Harry will diminish the more he speaks and writes, and reveals himself rather than some media-trained facade. I personally think, on the evidence, that he's a very mean person indeed.

A pivotal moment for me was how bad-tempered he became when Anderson Cooper put it to him that he could relinquish his titles. The mask really slipped then.

It is also mean of him to let his own lies stand about his family members and his country.

It is mean of him to let his own wife's lies stand about his family members and his country.

It is mean of him to let his paid mouthpieces' lies stand about his family members and his country.

It is mean of him to let the strange squad cult's lies stand abut his family members and his country.

He has a mean streak a mile wide.

I think the current crop of royals (Charles and William) are barely maintaining their side of the social contract. Charles has been ill of course, as has Kate, but even before then. Apparently they want to change from appearing at loads of events to more focus on fewer of them. Turning up at five dinners per week and umpteen openings and civic events, plus the necessary travel, might be incredibly dull and draining but that is what they are paid to do. Their wealth is their compensation for their lack of choice in being required to do this. If they cease to appear to be ‘hard working’ they will lose public support.

Younger children of the monarch are always a problem as they obviously have access to the same wealth as their monarch-bound oldest sibling as they grow up. But continued access to wealth, as they are gradually released from the threat of being the back-up, grates with the public. Even more so if they ‘flaunt it’ through a celebrity lifestyle. Their role is to live lives of quiet wealth on their country estate which their grandchildren inherit as a gracious dry-rot ridden money pit in eighty years time.

Meghan complained at one point about not being paid to do royal duties. Harry should have put her straight immediately - they already had been and handsomely too. But he didn’t seem to realise that either.

This was his interview at The New York Times DealBook Summit last month which is very revealing as his mask slips as he is quite agitated and derailing. There is clearly a lot of tension with the interviewer.

I’ve been the ‘God-given’ line cropping up again. Not just on here.

The Divine Tight of Kings was abolished in Britain in the Glirious Revolution of 1688

No monarch since then could possibly have believed that God had anything to do with constitutional position since then (irrespective of personal faith or absence thereof)

This is the point isn't it? They (or at least Meghan - I've never believed that living in Montecito in a vulgar, Italianate mansion was Harry's dream), wanted to live the millionaire lifestyle of extremely wealthy Hollywood movers and shakers like Oprah. That was Meghan's dream along - to be a huge star, to have that kind of power and wealth and influence and to be able to dispense her patronage as as a philanthropist and be loved and feted and written about in glowing and never-critical terms by an adoring press to be lapped up by an adoring public. That's why the live like they do and where they do. Because, let's face it, they could've bought a ranch in e.g. Montana and lived a quiet, comfortable and happy life off their savings. According to numerous reports, they had at least £25 million between them in 2020. The vast majority of us could live a very nice life on that!

No one who believes God has granted them any particular role in life will think that God was bound by an act of parliament in deciding to do so.

I just read this in the news. They really are getting desperate.

I don’t think it would take much actually for the mask to slip completely, and for him to go into full on rage and tantrum. That would really be the end of him and his lecturing and holier than thou act. He’s teetering on the edge.

I honestly think the big mistake wasn't going on Oprah, it was trying to live like Oprah.

They had their head turned by Tyler Perry's place, but as Meghan said herself, they were out of the LA bubble. They'd have done much better with a ranch somewhere private and "cheap".

I think you are generalising enormously!

I've met members of the RF and they've been absolutely great at what they were doing. They're all individuals and I'm sure the experience of meeting Princess Margaret (a previous generation or 3 away, let's be honest) would be very different from that of meeting KC or Princess Anne - the Prince Philip or QE2. While I can believe that Margaret (and some European royals....) might look people up and down disdainfully, my experience of meeting others was very down-to-earth, pleasant and informal. It might be expectiations - I just needed them to be professional and pleasant, which they were in spades - I didn't need them to be my best mate!

I don't think your experience would be generally true - especially for the current British RF (Awful Andrew excepted...)

If it's true that they said it this is interesting; I suggested yesterday that they may now have difficulty finding anyone to speak up for them, and maybe that's becoming reality

Interesting words used as response 'dismissed' and 'distressed' .... careful not to 'refute' but potentially minimise? And the distress is to themselves - not showing any concern for the dozens of ex-employees impacted by their behaviour.

They absolutely could have moved to a ranch somewhere, lived a quiet life, started a Polo academy for the super rich for income and done just fine. But - as we all know - they didn’t actually want privacy, they want glamour & adulation. Now they’re getting the attention they so craved, but for all the wrong reasons. Idiots.

Yet last year for around 3 months they were living quietly (dont beed ro move to a rnach to do that), no news articles etc. So much so someone started a thread wondering where they were.

So do you honestly think if they went and lived a quiet life, people would also leave them alone e.g. not talk about them since there was nothing new to talk about. Of course not, and that thread someone started and plenty commented upon shows that it does not matter what they do people will continue to talk about them.

3 months is hardly a long time to stay quiet. If they don't say anything for a year I would expect interest to die off but 3 months is nothing. It's the sort of timescale you would expect a new project to take to germinate. Naturally people are going to wonder what that project might be, what they are doing next