H&M Fathers Day video

[Bickybics]

So they are showing faces now, how long until they are including them in everything, showing them fully.
I feel like this is a bit desperate now. It was their last card to play, the children. They’re trying anything now for attention, what do they have left, showing private videos of them after all the criticism about the Wales children being on display.
One thing about them is they always surprise me.

I can’t believe you actually wrote that.

Rebecca says there is huge loyalty towards the RF and agree they have their careers to think about .
But everyone has their breaking point .

I’ve read that they are called sugars because Meghan’s critics think her fans are too sweet on her and they want to pour vinegar on all that saccharine sweetness. I can see the logic to that as I recently said her fans are incapable of ever seeing her as less than absolutely perfect. One of Meghan’s biggest and most high profile sugars is white. I could be wrong, I googled it. Google didn’t seem to come up with anything (that I saw) that indicated racial motivation for the nickname.

Why? That is my understanding of the use of the term.

Why do you think the term is used for Meghan’s supporters?

See my post.

Bit of stirring perhaps?

Sorry that explanation makes no sense. It reads like a retrofitted description created to explain away the indefensible use of the term

Where did you see that, sounds interesting, I’d like to read it pls

I'm brown/Indian. Good attempt at making up a ridiculous racism narrative. Haven't had one of these for a while. They are called sugars because they sugar coat every ridiculous thing H&M do in defiance of logic, reason and truth. They call posters like me salty. Shall I make up a racist narrative about that? Let's see. Indians were subject to salt taxes during the British Raj, and that's why they say I'm salty. Bloody racist Sussex Squad. Disgusting! Can you imagine how that makes me feel?

I’ve read that they are called sugars because Meghan’s critics think her fans are too sweet on her

That's what I "read somewhere" too. Also, that they sugar-coat all H&M's actions.
If someone was trying to find a derogatory term for black Americans to do with plantations wouldn't something like "Cottons" be used?
I'm sure lots of people remember reading something somewhere which is fine until it turns into fact when it's no more than vague recollections.
Or retrofitting - a handy new word I've just learned.

I remember reading somewhere ‘sugar’ is apparently used as a slur by certain people because they think it’s only black people that support Meghan. Something to do with sugar plantations and black Americans. Seems pretty disgusting to use that term. I wonder how it feels to the black women who come on this board and see it

You're no different to Meghan and Harry and Oprah with that vile post.

Where on earth do you go to read things like that? Shocking

Pretty sure it was on social media (twitter pre X), I’m remembering it being explained pretty clearly by Black American posters. Which is why it makes me almost shudder when I see it used. However people have rationialised using the term, I hope they think twice about it knowing the racial connotations.

Okay you all got me curious to look into it more as well. I asked chatGPT what was behind the use of the term and here is what it came back with (and it’s even worse that I thought). My god.
(the rest of this post below is copy pasted from ChatGPT).

Here’s a breakdown of the racial and historical undertones of the term “sugar” and why its use to mock Meghan’s supporters is especially loaded and troubling:

1. “Sugar” and Its Colonial History

• Sugar plantations were central to the transatlantic slave trade.
• From the 16th to 19th centuries, millions of Africans were enslaved and forced to work on sugar plantations in the Caribbean, the Americas, and other European colonies.
• The sugar industry was built on the brutal exploitation of Black bodies—with horrific conditions, high mortality rates, and no freedom.
• Sugar became a luxury item in Europe, but its sweetness was rooted in immense Black suffering.

2. “Sugar” as a Racially Charged Term

When Meghan Markle’s supporters are mockingly called “sugars” by her critics—many of whom support the British monarchy—the term takes on a double meaning:

• On the surface, it’s meant to belittle her supporters as “sweet but stupid” or “blindly devoted.”
• Below the surface, the use of “sugar” echoes the colonial, racist legacy of Black servitude and commodification—particularly in Britain, where the monarchy profited historically from slavery and imperialism.

In this sense, it becomes a coded racial slur, linking:

• Meghan’s Black heritage
• Her presence in a historically white, colonial institution (the British monarchy)
• And the online harassment that is steeped in racist power dynamics.

3. The Power of Language in Racist Dog Whistles

• Using terms like “sugar” allows racists to cloak their racism in seemingly innocent or sarcastic language, making it harder to call out directly.
• But to many Black and post-colonial scholars and observers, the term is a microaggression loaded with historic weight.

4. Weaponizing Colonial Symbols Against a Black Woman

• Meghan Markle is the first Black woman to marry into the British royal family in modern times.
• Her mere presence challenges centuries of white royal imagery and British imperial nostalgia.
• Using a term like “sugar” evokes a colonial fantasy where Black people were commodities, suggesting Meghan and her supporters are naïve, manipulative, or “unworthy” of royal dignity.

✅ In Summary The use of “sugar” to describe Meghan Markle’s supporters isn’t just internet slang—it’s rooted in a colonial and racist past, especially:

• The sugar-slavery economy
• Racially coded dehumanization
• And the weaponization of sweet-sounding language to enforce white supremacist narratives.

It’s a textbook example of how language can carry the legacy of empire and racism—even in seemingly small, everyday ways.

Well if ChatGPT said it then I know it’s a lot of 💩

The trouble with chatGPT is that it tries to please people using it.
Try putting in a photo of yourself and ask how old you look for an instant ego boost!

I asked "Why are Harry and Meghan supporters called Sugars?" and got the following (which I've copied and pasted, obviously):

The term "Sugars" used to describe supporters of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle is a nickname that originated online, particularly on social media platforms like Twitter (now X), Tumblr, and Reddit.
Here's a breakdown of the origin and usage:

1. Origin as a Diminutive or Derogatory Term

• The term "Sugars" likely evolved from the word "sugarcoating" — implying that supporters of Harry and Meghan "sugarcoat" or idealize them, ignoring criticism or controversy.
• Some believe it originated as a pejorative label used by detractors (especially within anti-Meghan or anti-Sussex circles) to mock what they saw as blind devotion or overly positive takes.

1. Adopted by Fans

• Over time, some Harry and Meghan fans reclaimed the term and started using it self-referentially and humorously.
• This mirrors other fandom behaviors where initially negative labels are turned into badges of honor.

1. Comparison to Other Royal Fandoms

• The royal online space is divided: fans of William and Kate are sometimes called "Cambridges" or "Keeners", while Meghan and Harry supporters are often referred to as "Sugars".
• The online discourse can be quite polarized, with different camps using these nicknames to distinguish themselves or mock the other side.

In Summary:
"Sugars" is an informal, often sarcastic or mocking term originally used by critics to describe Meghan and Harry fans, suggesting they are overly sweet or uncritical in their support. It's sometimes embraced by the fans themselves as a tongue-in-cheek label.

Me again!
Eta How did you phrase your question?
I tried not to give any cues as to what answer I expected.

No arguments from me about ChatGPT being 💩 a lot of the time. But it did make me hold my breath as I was reading that explanation.
I definitely would not continue to use a term that had such connotations but we’re all different.

I definitely would not continue to use a term that had such connotations but we’re all different

Yes. We’re all different. And it’s still you who’s no better than Meghan and Harry and Oprah.

Certainly doesn't look like you can rely on chatGPT, given the very different replies JustNavy and I got.
Hard to tell which of us was at Eton and which was in Switzerland when we first remembered reading the term.

Is that the narrative pushed by the likes of Christopher Bouzy on forums like Lipstick Alley?

Calling out potentially racially charged language is something we should all strive to do.

Well it’s on several different searches by different sources on Google. I didn’t create the word, I’m just saying I googled why and those type of explanations were the only ones that came up. Nothing came up about racism 🤷‍♀️

I didn’t use ChatGPT or any AI equivalent.

Just back to Meghan wanting the truth - sorry if posted before

My original post was based on explanation given by black American posters. I asked ChatGPT for more context. If posters here choose to continue to use the term, not much I can do about it.

I don’t understand her response to what she would do differently, she answered by saying what she wants others to do differently. 🤔