Opinions may Vary . A genuine question about why Meghan and Harry seem to attract such differing views.

[BasiliskStare]

I post this more in hope than experience but I would be really interested in a proper discussion about those who are fans or supporters of them , those who aren't and indeed ( of which there are many ) , those who are indifferent.

So - I'll start. There was an interesting post on another thread which said M&H come over as David and Goliath , standing up against "the Institution" - my paraphrase.

No spitting , no fighting , mind the furniture 😂

It's difficult with Twitter (my TikTok is royal free) as it's the most tribal and even though I've blocked the worse offenders both sides it's brutal. The Sussex supporters played the where's Kate hand too hard IMO, it made Catherine the underdog, the victim of the story ( which she was), it was pure bullying at its finest. The supporters are loud but I do think the reach has reduced even on here, a look at the first half of 2024 the board was a very different place. I don't know what happened to the Spanish journalist who spouted really awful crap but I hope she lost work. I really dislike when one gets bad or good press the other is dragged and even when it's the men it's still the women. There is fair criticism such as WLM and the podcast with Jamie but there also vile criticism and rumours that have no place.i dont think that happens here and when its done it usually post and leave posters.

With the possible exception of Anne, few of the others have followed the Queen's own non-controversial line, and maybe it's about time someone did

I agree with you most of the time, Puzzled but I think TLQ cut various controversial lines rather successfully.

TBF she was heavily aided by residual public and parliamentary deference but if the fam as an entity ever wanted a master class in PR and deflection they should look no further than Gan-Gan.

Absolutely ruthless in preserving the interests of 'The Firm'.

Its seemingly a classic case of folie a deux.

PH wasnt anti-establishment / RF pre MM - in fact his main issue was wanting to find a bride who would and could handle the role.

MM is classic NPD - 'kiss-up, kick down' for her own ends.

She thought no one was watching at BP - she had gotten away with it for years before - only the art director from The Reitmans commercial went public (pre PH) to say she was the meanest person he had ever encountered - she was top dog on that - however she didnt say boo to a goose on Suits as she was a minor cast member.

Her bullying behaviour continued back in th US when a string of victims and witnesses spoke out to numerous credible publications - describing how her behaviour towards people just doing their job caused some so much mental injury they required professional MH services to recover from her onslaught. None of these publications have beeen sued by the highly litigeous pair.

PH is her flying monkey - shes played him like a fiddle through the NPD idealise, devalue and discard process - (step 3 is a 'when' not 'if' - his face tells me he's in devalue phase right now - but he thinks its his family).

Agreed and wanted to add it’s a sad day when people feel that someone’s decision as to how they communicate what is going on with their health is reduced to a PR “fail”

I think it was clear at the time more was going on than the public was being told but I can't see where what was said was less than straightforward without compromising the right to the medical privacy we all enjoy.

I don't see C as a masterclass in medical PR. We know nothing more than he chooses as again is his right.

The lying?

Let me make a correction. Lisa Hanna is not only a celebrity (a former Ms. Jamaica) she was also a sitting MP at the time of the Jamaica trip.

Per Lisa's OpEd in the Guardian:

"Much fuss has been made of my supposed snub of the Duchess of Cambridge because of a two-second manipulated clip taken out of context. I have nothing but respect for Catherine as a person, and I treated her with that respect and cordiality, as evidenced by many other photos and videos of our interaction. I do not have any quarrel with the duchess herself, the people of the United Kingdom or the government."

I did not ‘snub’ Kate Middleton. But Jamaica needs more than royal regrets over slavery | Lisa Hanna | The Guardian

But the truth of the matter is, there was no paparazzi harassment of H&M in the UK.

Or indeed in the US.

Other than when summoned for casual photo ops or being inexplicably yet fortunately present to record near catastrophic car chases, obvs.

I can’t get past the OW interview, it was downright malicious and really revealed the person she is. I’m not keen on the term “hate” but I have a very deep dislike of her.

That said, I have to admit that for someone with little discernible talent and moderate but not exceptional good looks she seems to have the Midas touch. There is something so deadly ambitious about her that it’s almost admirable.

There is something so deadly ambitious about her that it’s almost admirable.

Not sure about the admirable part, but this week's revelations from QEII's late cousin and lady in waiting, Lady Elizabeth Anson, seem to support the ruthless ambition.

Seconded.

@DappledThings

“I have a lot of sympathy for Meghan being unwilling to buy into all the petty rules of dress codes and curtseying at certain times and walking in a set order and all that. I'd make a terrible royal wife because I'd not be able to get on board with the always wearing hats and curtseying to my own FIL and I'm not surprised she was seemingly really thrown by all that nonsense.”

Whether or not she thought it was nonsense , she chose to marry into the family, chose ( at first) to be a working Royal and happily accepted the £32 million wedding, the beautiful home , designer clothes , staff , security etc etc .
Several people have come forward to say that she knew a lot about the RF , she had books about Diana , she talked about W and C’s wedding on The Tig .
She wasn’t a teenager , she was a woman in her mid thirties who is - supposedly- intelligent. If she found it hard to accept that her SIL would always be senior to her, maybe she should have said no to Harry .

Andrew Holness's behaviour towards W & C, and the situations he created to make them look bad and further his republican cause, was utterly lacking in class or statesmanship

You're quite right, @RandyRedHumpback, it was - but then despite them having been independent since the 60s he's made quite a career of insisting that Jamaica are still somehow oppressed by having the Queen/now Charles as Heads of State
A braver man could easily arrange a referendum to settle the issue once and for all, but I wonder if he'd get the result he'd like

On W&K's visit I hadn't realised that the vintage Jeep ride was the Jamaicans' own suggestion, and bearing in mind that refusing could also have caused offence it's hard not to wonder if the couple were set up to a certain extent

@CathyorClaireI very much agree with what you said about the Queen's ruthlessness in protecting the monarchy, and probably I'd have done better to say that she handled controversies more "behind the scenes" IYSWIM?
Which come to think of it wasn't a whole lot better ...

I don't know what to say to that though other shrug and say "so what?"

So she accepted the privilege of the but didn't want to learn all its traditions and rules? If it was my family she'd apparently offended I could imagine feeling pretty angry. I don't get why anyone cares enough to be offended on behalf of the rest of the royals.

The offence doesn’t have to be committed against me personally for me to think it’s wrong.

i get very angry when lies and slurs are used to hurt people, royal or otherwise.

We can check off the "Why do you care?" box for bingo...

She accepted the privilege etc in return for being part of an ancient institution which has its own rules and regulations. Whether you agree with it or not, it is what it is. It’s not just the family who expect you to abide by the rules, it’s the general public. We don’t want to hear that she was surprised that she wasn’t “getting paid” for appearances. We don’t expect to see her barging past the late Queen to get in to a car. We know that she will always be junior to Catherine because that is just the way it is. As was said above, she wasn’t forced to marry into the Royal Family. The curtsying in private is a bit of a red herring because I’m pretty sure it wasn’t compulsory. But if it was what the late Queen expected, then fair enough. It was to show respect to the institution of the monarch, which is our actual Head of State As for causing offence to the family, a lot of that is just about having manners as pp have said. I’m not sure why Meghan thought she could join the family and just carry on as she always had. This is why it was a mistake for them to rush if she wasn’t clear about what she was getting in to. But she didn’t want to hear that. She thought she knew better until reality bit her on the arse

I think her depression if it was that was just a realisation that she wasn’t able to dominate and control the way she thought she could .

If you say so! I'm pretty sure I'd have tried to bypass plenty of the ridiculous rules if I'd married in. And as a member of the general public I don’t particularly take an interest in whether any of them follow all those rules other than finding it really cringy how Catherine curtseys every time she's greeting the King. It's very silly.

If she found it silly she shouldn’t have married the son of the future King. It’s really that simple.

Why? It’s just a mark of respect and an old tradition. What’s wrong with that? In the armed forces, you salute a superior. Same sort of thing. It’s just tradition and it roots us to our past. Lots of other countries have traditions that if you examine them are pretty silly, but we understand that it’s rude and ungracious to belittle them. So why belittle those that belong to our own Royal Family?

'It's really cringy how Catherine curtseys every time she's greeting the King. It's very silly.'

Do you have the same attitude to religious prostration?

If you find it silly how do you square that with the requirements of a working royal. I'd find it silly rubbing noses but that was what was required in New Zealand, I'd rather curtsey. Part of the job description is having to grin and bare it. If you can do it in other cultures why not Britain. I hated saluting and having to call idiots sir and maam but I'd joined the military.

Multiple posters asking similar.

Do I find it similar to religious genuflecting or lying fully prone? No, that's not bowing to a fellow human being.

The rest of it comes down to the idea that being in the royal family is a job and tjat in public you are always on duty in the job. So expected to curtsey to your FIL because other people can see you so he's not your FIL, he's the King. Personally I think that's rather daft. And I don't think I would ever be able to take seriously the idea that he was a someone separate to my family and that I had to curtsey to. I do find it cringy and the rest of the performance. I don't see breaking any of that protocol as important.

It is a not-so-subtle PR trick to play the negative word association game with Catherine and the words cringey and silly. Princess Anne, Sophie, Fergie, Louise, Zara, Beatrice, Eugenie...all have been filmed curtseying to the King.

But only one target has been selected.

And by the way M, never had a problem with people curtsying to her during her brief stint in the Royal family. Even after she left, in Colombia she taught girls how to curtsey to her.

Ohhhh...the hypocrisy!