Is there another couple in the world like The Sussexes?

[veraswaistcoat]

I was musing last night about this aspect - they had the world at their feet. Despite what Sussex Supporters like to suggest most people in the UK nodded their heads " yes it was lovely Harry was getting married finally" . I had never heard of the bride myself as I don't watch American tv shows of that ilk. She was black or biracial? It didn't even enter my head what colour she was initially and then as coverage started it didn't make one iota of difference one way or the other. I recall the day of the wedding - it was sunny and the pubs were full of royal cheer broadcasting the wedding.

And then it all started to where we are today.

Are there any other couples in the world who have gone through such a downfall? Is this a feature of the social media arena today?
We see P Diddy and Blake Lively and others exposed now through SM.
You can't count the Duke and Duchess of Windsor in this category as they were always unpopular.

Can you think of any examples of people who have fallen so spectacularly?

I know people say " they live in California, they have money blah blah" but their reputation is one that most people would not want.

Is it purely because of their seeming complaining and sense of entitlement ? I mean you don't see the real philanthropists in this way - in fact you rarely hear about them and what they do.

I can't keep up with these two

@Thedom
"Wellchild are receiving some really negative posts on X after posting Harrys' video. Suella Braveman is supporting the call for Harrys US visa application to be released. Their reputations are in the absolute toilet at the moment."

Ouch! I hadn't actually thought about this before but I could see why some might have something negative to say now. It's a bit awkward 😬

@Spectre8 you and one other poster who used to be on here and possibly still is with a name change are the only two people I can remember on here bringing up this " naughty Louis" theme time after time.

I think it would be a major mistake for them to take the children to Invictus. After years of hiding them it would turn into the Sussex children show as opposed to what it should be about - the games and the vets! I sincerely hope that they do not use other people's stories to try to boost their own profile but nothing would surprise me with these two. If they think they are being perceived negatively now then it would only be worse.

I don't know what the rumours consist of or how likely they are to be true but I think, if they do take the children, it would be a big jump from only issuing photos of them from behind (even in the recent Christmas card).
Even if they want to take them for the best of reasons - they're of an age to enjoy it; they're old enough to understand there will be public interest in them - it's a bad time to do it.
Regardless of motive, it will look like they're being brought out to offset recent bad publicity.
If they want to gradually introduce their children to public life (although there's no need to unless they grow up to acquire public roles themselves) they may be wiser to do so with small, gradual appearances over the next year.

Harry seems to be most effective and happiest in the Invictus situation when he is alone and able to concentrate on the people involved. I can recall a video from Canada before of Meghan playing the " oh look at me I'm going to slip on the ice, Harry" and him having to go back and get her. His face said it all.

Why do you your posts have to be so unnecessarily rude in tone FromTheOfficeOfJammyTodger?

It really doesn’t strengthen your arguments.

I think the negative psychological affects of fame on children are quite well known now and I think there is a world of difference between showing a few stills or snippets of family photos on a documentary which you have had a hand in making, and children being followed around in rl by paps and experiencing the reality of having a hundred or so lenses focused on you.

I think Harry, having experienced the latter, is quite right to protect his children to the degree that he does. To suggest that he is not giving his children a normal childhood is ridiculous. Both he and his brother have the resources to make private visits to countless destinations at home and abroad. And large homes to which they can invite their children’s

friends in privacy.

If anything, having three young children parade in front of the cameras at Christmas while so-called well wishers shout their names and give them toys they don’t need, is far less “normal”.

Also, it’s irritating when posters think they can assess the level of risk to H&M better than the former head of counter-terrorism policing in England, Neil Basu, who said in an interview to Channel 4 News:

"If you'd seen the stuff that was written and you were receiving it, the kind of rhetoric that's online, if you don't know what I know, you would feel under threat all of the time," he said.

When asked if there had been genuine threats to Meghan from the far-right, he added: "Absolutely. "We had teams investigating it. People have been prosecuted for those threats."

And frankly, if I was Meghan, and was aware of all the nasty threads about her just on one website aimed at middle class intelligent UK mothers, never mind all the endlessly hideous rhetoric published about her and her dh globally, then I would be keeping my dc far away from the public too.

I totally agree @LaMarschallin . If Invictus (it is happens) was a natural progression of their kids being with them at public events, then it wouldn't be so jarring, but it's not the case. And of course all eyes will be on the children who have not been seen in the flesh in years, and certainly the veterans will get nothing from the press, once again their efforts ignored. I guess it's possible that they view their Christmas card and MM's instagram reel about the dog that died as laying the groundwork for the media to react in a more measured way, but that would be a bit naive.

"
Even if they want to take them for the best of reasons - they're of an age to enjoy it; they're old enough to understand there will be public interest in them - it's a bad time to do it."

Of course there is public interest in them and much of it has been fuelled by Meghan and Harry themselves. They are the ones who have given titbits about one looking like Diana blah blah. They are the ones who have touted the potential skin colour in their racism accusations against the RF. Yes much of this interest will be gossipy as a result. It is a damn shame for these children.

@Onlystayingforhalfanhour543 Please don't tone police me.

I’ve seen it suggested that Invictus has said no to Meghan coming. This is probably just wild speculation but I really hope it’s true. I can’t see any good reason for her to be there and the cost to the charity isn’t justifiable. I’ve been very disparaging about the trustees’ conduct on this issue, but if they’re finally starting to exercise their authority that’s a good thing.

The fellow who was the main driver of the Winter games left Invictus, iirc, quite suddenly last Autumn. Which was a strange thing to do a matter of months before seeing his vision come to fruition. The two execs of the Canadian games also left or were let go abruptly. I wonder if he/they were unhappy about the expenses issue, which I believe dogged the games in Germany.

Um okay lol that's your choice yet here you are engaging with me? Am I not allowed to comment on your posts? Is that what you are trying to insinuate with that comment? If you are then you can't tell people to not comment on what you write.

It's really not that deep it's just a sm forum.

I can understand the need to get the Wales children used to public attention, interacting with crowds etc because of the position they are in. Harry and Meghan's children don't need the same preparation so I hope they are able to go as children and not treated as mini celebrities.

Good thing it's a choice if you want to or not 😉

Whichever path is chosen regarding privacy with the children has benefits and negatives. The stupid thing to do is try to play the moral high ground over your decision compared to others. Why do this? It is going to become increasingly difficult as children age to exclude from events but the long view seems to get ignored for small soundbites. Normally I can guess a gossip source from a planted source with Harry and Meghan but the last year of exclusives with a group of publications makes that extremely difficult. I have no idea why the business coupling, uncoupling and recoupling when a simple "we have a busy schedule that means we have to prioritise and that means unfortunately we cannot do everything together". Instead there is this PR jargon

I don't think they will bring them, they appear to have been quite keen to keep them out of the limelight which I can understand

I don't bring it up all the time probably the first time I have actually. Why can't I bring it up it's been mentioned before? The press certainly run with it, is that something worth discussing?

Harry was also labelled the cheeky and daylight one, now Loius too...is that something I'm sure both sets of parents would not want for their children?

That's not going to happen though, I'm afraid. They will be treated a mini celebrities, because their parents want to be major celebrities, and they have used their children to further that aim in nuggets, in Netflix and other money making vehicles. In particularly, as a pp mentioned, in talking about their looks and the daughter's resemblance to Diana, all eyes will be on them. That's why being realistic about your situation, and either completely shielding your kids as many Hollywood types seem capable of, or getting them used to being in the public gaze in limited/safe/ ways, as the RF have, would have been better.

Isn’t the narrative of ‘business coupling, uncoupling and recoupling’ just a narrative constructed by tabloids and social media?

@Onlystayingforhalfanhour543

“Also, it’s irritating when posters think they can assess the level of risk to H&M better than the former head of counter-terrorism policing in England, Neil Basu, who said in an interview to Channel 4 News:
"If you'd seen the stuff that was written and you were receiving it, the kind of rhetoric that's online, if you don't know what I know, you would feel under threat all of the time," he said.”

He said that more than 2 years ago about Meghan’s time as a working Royal which was < checks notes > more than 5 years ago .
Given that I was ticked off by a poster to referencing the OW interview as it was “ years ago” , can you or another Sussex Supporter confirm how far back we can go when making a point ?

You mean don’t criticise your posts?

Well how about you trying to make them a bit more polite to other users of this site?

Mylovelygreendress, on this thread, a page back, you brought up Katy Perry criticising Meghan’s wedding dress. So, I don’t think you actually do feel constrained about how far back you can go.

No, I mean tone policing. You can criticise away to your heart's content. Just don't tell me what or how to write.

Wellchild are receiving some really negative posts on X after posting Harrys' video

I'm not on Twitter/X, but what's he supposed to have done in the video @Thedom?

I thought Wellchild was one of the few remaining things Harry still gets good press for, so it would be a shame if he's trashed that too