Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Do you think some of you are addicted to hating Harry and Meghan?

1000 replies

wowwhataday · 11/05/2025 09:33

More and more these manic threads are popping up on mumsnet, wild posts and theories and then hundreds of posts brimming with excitement about catching them out or exposing them. It’s like a game or a hunt. Have many of you crossed the line from interested to addicted?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
Reallyhowisthatthecase333 · 12/05/2025 18:40

BigWillyLittleTodger · 12/05/2025 17:55

Saying you just stumbled across these threads is like someone explaining an affair by saying they fell into someone’s vagina, it’s really very easily avoidable

Brilliant! 😂😂 it’s always the same MO isn’t it, supposedly new posters who happen to just stumble across these threads, normally with the caveat of whilst ‘preparing the tea’ and ‘I’m not a H&M fan but’ then they clutch their pearls in horror to give everyone a severe telling off with lengthy posts over many pages, using all the negative terms on this thread at regular posters, it’s quite funny really 😂.

I find it tedious how regularly this argument
is rolled out with the sole intent of suppressing debate.

Posters who stick up for H&M are not one homogeneous mass.

Most reasonable people find it possible to feel sorry for anyone who find themselves at the centre of a hostile, global, media storm whether you like them as individuals or not. It’s called ordinary human sympathy.

And I simply can’t understand why frequent posters on the RF board who purport to support King Charles and Camilla, continue to add to that storm, because none of it reflects well on the RF as a whole.

Anyone who has lived for a while and reads a newspaper can see that the way the press have vilified and commodified H&M to such an extreme degree, while at the same time portraying W&K as almost saint-like figures, is bound to end badly for all of them.

Reallyhowisthatthecase333 · 12/05/2025 18:43

Serenster · 12/05/2025 18:32

What if they are the ones addicted to being in the news cycles?

And I don’t know how you can claim there isn’t much to say given they have released many “behind the scenes” photos and videos of their (private) lives this week alone.

I also muse with interest about how there is a new book about Diana out this month (still producing bestsellers nearly 30 years after her death!). Called “Dianaworld: An obsession” the blurb states:

For more than forty years, Diana, Princess of Wales, has been mythologized to the most extraordinary degree. Adored and lionized by some, ridiculed and traduced by others, Diana has always commanded a cultural presence unmatched by any other member of the royal family.

For better or for worse, the British Royal family bestride the world of popular culture like film stars and soap stars combined. We think we know them (we don’t). They inspire fascination, respect and contempt. If they intentionally engage with that fascination - as Diana did, as Meghan does - then that fascination grows. Plus ça change….

Edited

Oh here we go. Heaping blame on a deceased woman from an unstable family who was nineteen when she joined the RF.

Really unpleasant Serenster.

Edited to say that of course we don’t know anything about the RF. They are very clever at showing the parts they want us to see and hiding the rest. And we fall for it as a collection of nations every time!

FenellaFeldman · 12/05/2025 18:46

The press doesn't commodify and vilify H&M while simultaneously sanctifying W&C. That's just nonsense.
H&M have chosen to be controversial figures and have shown a singular determination to remain in the headlines. They are prepared to share many details of their lives, and the details of others in the RF by monetising gossip and invading the privacy of the RF.
They have benefited from being in the royal family, yet for years have chosen to monetise it in the worst possible way.
Live by the sword?
They could end this tomorrow. They won't, they love being celebrities and being in the headlines.

Serenster · 12/05/2025 18:51

Oh here we go. Heaping blame on a deceased woman from an unstable family who was nineteen when she joined the RF.
Really unpleasant Serenster.

I think you must have misread my post, as I haven’t done any of the above.

Reallyhowisthatthecase333 · 12/05/2025 18:53

FenellaFeldman · 12/05/2025 18:46

The press doesn't commodify and vilify H&M while simultaneously sanctifying W&C. That's just nonsense.
H&M have chosen to be controversial figures and have shown a singular determination to remain in the headlines. They are prepared to share many details of their lives, and the details of others in the RF by monetising gossip and invading the privacy of the RF.
They have benefited from being in the royal family, yet for years have chosen to monetise it in the worst possible way.
Live by the sword?
They could end this tomorrow. They won't, they love being celebrities and being in the headlines.

You really think that they could end press interest in them tomorrow FenellaFeldman?
I very much doubt it. Far too many people are buying cars and building kitchen extensions off the back of the clicks they provide. Bashing them has become a lucrative, global industry.

Profhilodisaster · 12/05/2025 18:56

The threads on MN about H&M are really just discussing the many media reports , Meghan's own podcasts and ones she has appeared as a guest. , interviews given by Harry , photos released by Meghan , court cases brought about by Harry, books written by Harry- they put themselves out there so 🤷‍♀️
Edited to add: And the posters on this platform are probably a tiny percentage of the amount of people who discuss them.

FenellaFeldman · 12/05/2025 18:56

Reallyhowisthatthecase333 · 12/05/2025 18:53

You really think that they could end press interest in them tomorrow FenellaFeldman?
I very much doubt it. Far too many people are buying cars and building kitchen extensions off the back of the clicks they provide. Bashing them has become a lucrative, global industry.

No. I never said that. It would be too hard because for years they've whipped it up and been deliberately controversial, and sold their stories of the RF to whoever would pay.
They could stop putting themselves on social media every day, just to start, and Harry could just ease up on slagging off his family.
Just an idea.

FenellaFeldman · 12/05/2025 18:58

Also, @Reallyhowisthatthecase333 no-one has profited more from their actions than the Sussexes themselves.
"Spare" raked in £millions. It didn't just pay for a kitchen extension, did it?

BigWillyLittleTodger · 12/05/2025 19:21

@Reallyhowisthatthecase333

Posters who stick up for H&M are not one homogeneous mass.

Oh the irony! Pot, kettle 😂😂😂😂 yet this whole thread is about regular posters who are being treated particularly by you as one homogeneous mass, what was it you said again? if you can’t take it, don’t deal it out 🤷🏻‍♀️

Some people seem to spend huge chunks of their day speculating and gossiping in a nasty way about this couple, Looking at all of these threads collectively; it is not a pleasant read, and yet when challenged, many of these same posters claim that the discussions are reasonable, well informed and intelligent! Whereas I would use the adjectives: obsessed, prejudiced and unhinged!

BigWillyLittleTodger · 12/05/2025 19:24

Most reasonable people find it possible to feel sorry for anyone who find themselves at the centre of a hostile, global, media storm whether you like them as individuals or not. It’s called ordinary human sympathy.

Oh I feel for people, just not Meghan and Harry a deeply unpleasant couple who have been vile to their families and staff, I do feel very sorry for their victims of their bullying in particular.

PrettyFlyforaMaiTai · 12/05/2025 19:29

Reallyhowisthatthecase333 · 12/05/2025 18:43

Oh here we go. Heaping blame on a deceased woman from an unstable family who was nineteen when she joined the RF.

Really unpleasant Serenster.

Edited to say that of course we don’t know anything about the RF. They are very clever at showing the parts they want us to see and hiding the rest. And we fall for it as a collection of nations every time!

Edited

Erm I don’t think that’s what they meant. I think you might have misread the post and jumped to conclusions there!

foreverblowingbubbless · 12/05/2025 19:36

IDipYouDipWeDip · 12/05/2025 17:31

There should be less of it now that you can’t change names on threads? Or do you mean they change names when posting on different threads?

Edited

Oh I'm sure you know what i mean.

Munnygirl · 12/05/2025 20:02

Reallyhowisthatthecase333 · 12/05/2025 18:40

I find it tedious how regularly this argument
is rolled out with the sole intent of suppressing debate.

Posters who stick up for H&M are not one homogeneous mass.

Most reasonable people find it possible to feel sorry for anyone who find themselves at the centre of a hostile, global, media storm whether you like them as individuals or not. It’s called ordinary human sympathy.

And I simply can’t understand why frequent posters on the RF board who purport to support King Charles and Camilla, continue to add to that storm, because none of it reflects well on the RF as a whole.

Anyone who has lived for a while and reads a newspaper can see that the way the press have vilified and commodified H&M to such an extreme degree, while at the same time portraying W&K as almost saint-like figures, is bound to end badly for all of them.

I find their fans arguments tedious as well 🥱 Most people are sick and tired of the pair of the. Cue the outrage

Munnygirl · 12/05/2025 20:08

Reallyhowisthatthecase333 · 12/05/2025 18:53

You really think that they could end press interest in them tomorrow FenellaFeldman?
I very much doubt it. Far too many people are buying cars and building kitchen extensions off the back of the clicks they provide. Bashing them has become a lucrative, global industry.

Which they feed. It’ would be incredibly naive to think that they count. She is an “influencer “ after all. How else is she going to flog the jam and pancake mix?

IDipYouDipWeDip · 12/05/2025 20:13

foreverblowingbubbless · 12/05/2025 19:36

Oh I'm sure you know what i mean.

Not really because you can’t change names on threads anymore. If you mean that people change names between threads, then yes, they will. When you mention working shifts and different personalities, I’m not sure what you mean but it’s the internet and anything is possible. I’ve read other people who claim that both William and Harry’s ‘people’ have people posting here to support them so maybe that’s what you mean or Sussex squad etc. All of which I can believe happens, but I don’t know if that’s what you’re getting at or whether you just mean people are trolling and name change just for the fun of it?

If by saying ‘I’m sure you know’, you’re insinuating that I’m a sock or involved in any ‘shift work’ or trolling, then you can check with mumsnet and they can assure you that I’ve been around for a long time and that other than this thread, I’ve not posted on the Royal family board very much over the time I’ve been here. I posted when Kate announced she had cancer in support of her, when the Queen died, a few of the children’s birthday photo threads and a handful of times on the thread about Harry’s book. Please feel free to check with mumsnet.

Munnygirl · 12/05/2025 20:17

IDipYouDipWeDip · 12/05/2025 20:13

Not really because you can’t change names on threads anymore. If you mean that people change names between threads, then yes, they will. When you mention working shifts and different personalities, I’m not sure what you mean but it’s the internet and anything is possible. I’ve read other people who claim that both William and Harry’s ‘people’ have people posting here to support them so maybe that’s what you mean or Sussex squad etc. All of which I can believe happens, but I don’t know if that’s what you’re getting at or whether you just mean people are trolling and name change just for the fun of it?

If by saying ‘I’m sure you know’, you’re insinuating that I’m a sock or involved in any ‘shift work’ or trolling, then you can check with mumsnet and they can assure you that I’ve been around for a long time and that other than this thread, I’ve not posted on the Royal family board very much over the time I’ve been here. I posted when Kate announced she had cancer in support of her, when the Queen died, a few of the children’s birthday photo threads and a handful of times on the thread about Harry’s book. Please feel free to check with mumsnet.

It’s only the fans that like to check mumsnet for posting history of others as illustrated copious times in this thread. Most normal people can’t be arsed.

IDipYouDipWeDip · 12/05/2025 20:24

Munnygirl · 12/05/2025 20:17

It’s only the fans that like to check mumsnet for posting history of others as illustrated copious times in this thread. Most normal people can’t be arsed.

I looked at posting history, I couldn’t be described as a fan as much as you might like to say that. As I said, please check with mumsnet but my comments on Harry and Meghan have been rare and about things in Harry’s book.

Munnygirl · 12/05/2025 20:26

IDipYouDipWeDip · 12/05/2025 20:24

I looked at posting history, I couldn’t be described as a fan as much as you might like to say that. As I said, please check with mumsnet but my comments on Harry and Meghan have been rare and about things in Harry’s book.

I’m not going to check as that would be stalker behaviour (though some posters on this thread think it’s fine)and I have far better things to do

BemusedAmerican · 12/05/2025 20:30

Reallyhowisthatthecase333 · 12/05/2025 18:40

I find it tedious how regularly this argument
is rolled out with the sole intent of suppressing debate.

Posters who stick up for H&M are not one homogeneous mass.

Most reasonable people find it possible to feel sorry for anyone who find themselves at the centre of a hostile, global, media storm whether you like them as individuals or not. It’s called ordinary human sympathy.

And I simply can’t understand why frequent posters on the RF board who purport to support King Charles and Camilla, continue to add to that storm, because none of it reflects well on the RF as a whole.

Anyone who has lived for a while and reads a newspaper can see that the way the press have vilified and commodified H&M to such an extreme degree, while at the same time portraying W&K as almost saint-like figures, is bound to end badly for all of them.

In the past month William has been criticized in UK media and on this board for attending Easter mass in his local church and for wearing a dark blue suit to the pope's funeral. So no, he isn't treated like a saint here or in your media.

PrettyFlyforaMaiTai · 12/05/2025 21:03

Reallyhowisthatthecase333 · 12/05/2025 18:40

I find it tedious how regularly this argument
is rolled out with the sole intent of suppressing debate.

Posters who stick up for H&M are not one homogeneous mass.

Most reasonable people find it possible to feel sorry for anyone who find themselves at the centre of a hostile, global, media storm whether you like them as individuals or not. It’s called ordinary human sympathy.

And I simply can’t understand why frequent posters on the RF board who purport to support King Charles and Camilla, continue to add to that storm, because none of it reflects well on the RF as a whole.

Anyone who has lived for a while and reads a newspaper can see that the way the press have vilified and commodified H&M to such an extreme degree, while at the same time portraying W&K as almost saint-like figures, is bound to end badly for all of them.

The press have commodified and vilified H&M because they were easy to wind up. They went into full defensive mode pretty much straight away and showed they were easy to provoke (letter to the press, keeping the press on the other side of the water during their engagement interview).

Catherine was HOUNDED by the paparazzi at the beginning of their relationship (to the extent of being called a bitch and whore in order to provoke her walking to her car), had her privacy invaded by having her phone hacked, being photographed in a private situation and on private property sunbathing naked (which was posted in magazines worldwide), taunted with the nickname Waity Katie, having radio presenters phone the hospital when she was pregnant to try and get medical details (this also happened with her cancer diagnosis, don’t forget) and having that poor nurse commit suicide because of their actions. Even now she is still called work shy on this board. William has also been called work shy, even as recently as this week in a popular newspaper (and no, I’m not getting into this debate of if he is or isn’t! You have your opinion, you are entitled to think what you think) so he is certainly not sainted. But for the most part, for better or worse, they rose above it and kept quiet. So there isn’t much to criticise them for.

Not only did Harry and Meghan not ignore it, they went on the attack and had to have their voice heard ad nauseum. And when people criticised and picked holes in their stories, they changed the story. They attacked people who weren’t able to respond due to the royal ‘never complain, never explain’. They dished private details about their family, like talking about William’s genitals and private conversations between family members. They decided to leave the establishment but then wanted to keep all the perks that they already had. And when they didn’t get what they wanted, they lashed out and said it’s a royal cover up.

Admittedly they have now for the most part tried to walk away from the above, but the mud has stuck and they cannot escape their own words and actions.

The British press are far from saints, they do pounce once they’ve chosen a victim (I remember watching a documentary that said they were going to go after Catherine and William because one of them didn’t smile or co-operate for a photo op) but tabloids aren’t a nonprofit organisation, they want things that get them clicks and revenue. Is that right? No, but to pretend Harry and Meghan are the only ones who have suffered at the hands of the press is ridiculous. Half of the stuff they have been criticised for is down to their own doing and out of their own mouth (see Harry’s visa application because he admitted to drug use in Spare, see Harry renegading on the royal racist narrative (Oprah interview) and saying it was the British press who said this, see Meghan saying they got married before the official wedding only to be denied by the Archbishop of Canterbury). This is why people criticise them.

BasiliskStare · 12/05/2025 21:33

To answer your question @wowwhataday - No I am not addicted to H&M. I think they have both jumped the shark , so interested and amused not addicted. But I do take interest in , particularly Harry's court cases - especially when they involve tax payer's money - , M's clinging on to Royal titles to keep themselves relevant . But honestly I think the world in general is getting less interested in them and they are looking more and more like they are trading on the RF by the month.

Where I do think Harry deserves scrutiny is - not just Sentebale - that has gone to the Charity Commission , But African Parks - he is silent on this (other than he passed it up the line) He is now a Director - I think he could do more.

I think M should be allowed to do her commercial things but be respectful that they are not meant to use the royal titles to do it - so stop being DoS and just be MM - you are famous & rich enough by marrying Harry

So that's my answer , but I reserve the right to comment on people who give BBC interviews , imply that people in this country (UK) are working against them , imply that the UK public is a danger - and to be fair I am going back to that stupid ENL video on their NF documentary there - so - old - I admit there, people who claim our judiciary and Ravec is influenced by "dark forces" - that coming to the UK is not safe when one could be whipped from airport to Royal protected residence , yes I'll take interest in that.

Probably a longer answer than you wanted - the short answer is "No." 😂

IDipYouDipWeDip · 12/05/2025 21:39

Munnygirl · 12/05/2025 20:26

I’m not going to check as that would be stalker behaviour (though some posters on this thread think it’s fine)and I have far better things to do

Advanced search is really easy to use and doesn’t take long so hardly stalker behaviour to show that OP is right or wrong in calling people addicted, which was what they asked.

Munnygirl · 12/05/2025 21:46

IDipYouDipWeDip · 12/05/2025 21:39

Advanced search is really easy to use and doesn’t take long so hardly stalker behaviour to show that OP is right or wrong in calling people addicted, which was what they asked.

it doesn’t matter how long it takes, it’s still stalker behaviour

IDipYouDipWeDip · 12/05/2025 21:55

Munnygirl · 12/05/2025 21:46

it doesn’t matter how long it takes, it’s still stalker behaviour

So spending a short amount of time looking up users to see if OP has a point is stalker behaviour, but posting 60 posts a day about Harry and Meghan is not addictive or obsessive behaviour. 👍

Lol.

BustingBaoBun · 12/05/2025 22:04

Munnygirl · 12/05/2025 21:46

it doesn’t matter how long it takes, it’s still stalker behaviour

Why do you say this? I have had loads of posters bringing up something I've said years ago, and looking me up and questioning me on previous posts. Or saying... you once said this, you once said that. They aren't doing it from memory! Mumsnetters do it ALL the time and you're naive if you think not. And if you find it stalker behaviour, that's really your problem to be honest.

I personally can't be bothered as I am fairly tuned in to a poster's writing style to work out who they might be, if I should want to know, but mostly I don't care.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.