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 😂

'Why do M&H attract such differing views?'
My views have changed over the years and have wobbled up and down a sliding scale. They started off at the woo-hoo-this-is-a-fun-couple-I'm-liking-what-I -see, quickly dropped a few notches at the hit-the-ground-running statement and the engagement interview (started to have serious doubts there) and then went into freefall at the OW interview.

Now? Well, now I'm stuck somewhere below half way (but only just) because I tend to let go of the past quite easily and all I see now are a couple who has little or no influence on the UK any more, having a stab at different ways to pay their huge bills; an attractive little family settled in California with a lot of soap opera going on but, to me anyway, totally irrelevant. I like having a nosey peek at articles about them but not interested enough to follow them. So, an individual with differing views over the years.

Please read my post.

i said this ‘filter’ has served well in the last 200 years:Victoria, Edward VII (who turned out to be a much better king than anyone had expected), Gerorge V, then EVIII took himself off and you surely know the rest.

Strewth.

They have damaged the UK, though and have the potential to do so again. Apart from their general clownish antics, those ‘royal’ tours were very provocative and could have become a diplomatic nightmare for the UK.

My issue with them is totally about their embarrassing behaviour and their attempts to exploit family issues for dollars. I don’t care about silly M and her flower sprinkles.

Petitchat - I think you forgot to answer the question. But I can see why you’d post a cop out reply like the one above.

Agreed, but don't you think over time they are becoming less relevant, particularly as the RF refuses to engage? I'm not sure that many still see them as a threat and any embarrassment caused seems to be come back at them. The quasi royal tours? Yes, be interesting to see how the next one unfolds

Absolutely typical though - as said on here so many times!

Answer the question? Engage with discussion points?

Nah - just make a silly irrelevant response and run away.

(Yawn, eye roll.)

I do hope so!

But Meghan is ruthless and will cling on to her royal connection with her claws. She has issued several not-so-veiled threats to the RF about further damaging revelations. And of course the pair of them are a car-crash real life soap opera - truly the gift that keeps on giving, for the press.

Totally, Bontonbonbon !

We’re playing that old favourite, pigeon chess, again.

@CoffeeCantata It’s so boring. I wish just one person on the anti-monarchist band wagon had the first clue about British history, British Law and the constitutional role of the monarch. It is not difficult to learn this stuff!

Have we stopped talking about the phenomenon of M&H fans?
The discussion about the Empire is interesting-obviously individual members of the RF didn’t personally do any conquesting and pillaging, but if you’re the Empress of India with the Kohinoor in your crown you have to take some responsibility, surely?

edited to say it wasn’t in Victoria’s crown-it was in a circlet she wore. The Queen Mother had it in her crown…

Who is the Empress of India? The last one was the late Queen Mother, when Queen Consort.

I meant Victoria. Sorry-I thought that was obvious.

@CoffeeCantata

When I saw the desperate mention of raping, pillaging and colonisation as a desperate means of detraction from a thread that’s obviously hitting home, I did wonder has the poster ever asked themselves why are Harry and Meghan hanging on to their titles and connection to the RF then?

But then that would mean seeing them for who they are and we know they’d rather pluck their eyeballs out than face it.

No, it wasn't obvious. Victoria was the first Empress of India. Plus, I replied before you edited the post.

I wouldn’t actually bother.

Some are too entrenched in the hatred of all things British and RF that they cannot see anything else. I think this is why they support Harry and Meghan so much, without critical thinking that Harry is as British as they come and Meghan would not be where she is today apart from her marrying into the British royal family.

It's a strange paradox, isn't it?

As I said, sorry. If anyone says Empress of India I think Victoria.

So do you think M&H fans hate Britain? Maybe some do-but I think a lot of them actually have a romantic image of the Monarchy-and feel thet M&H were unfairly done out of their part in it. I think people are giving the fans too much credit for intelligence, thinking skills and literacy…

I think it's hard going because not many of their fans seem willing to actually explain what they like about Harry and Meghan.

The Empire discussion is interesting and could do with it's own thread. Where i would like to add a discussion about why only the UK is seen as an evil Empire when in fact lots of European countries behaved extremely badly. It seems oppression and arrogance are hard wired into being an Empire from the very start of history right up to the present day (see the current colonial powers US and China).

I think some of them hate Britain but, and I also agree with your last sentence, a lot of what is said on social media by their fans is just ignorant.

I think a lot do. Many of their paid talking heads for documentary seem to.

The Koh-I-noor is the perfect example. Many republicans only know the talking point they were given and not the actual history of the jewel. It was taken as the spoils of war by many Indian kings, stolen and re-stolen over and over in the 15th and 16th century by various rulers. To the point where several people now feel they have a claim on it.

No one really knows much about its early history. At least four different governments have tried to claim it. Indian acknowledged on the last few years that it was surrendered voluntarily to the British government as part of the Treaty of Lahore and that is was ‘neither plundered nor stolen’

So, really, not as big deal when you’ve bothered to read about it. The sister jewel is also not in India. It is held by the Iranian government. Should they be returning theirs to India?

Did the wicked British teach the Indians how to play cricket?

I frequently ask why they are so desperate to hang on to their titles and have inflicted them on their DC whilst living in a Republic . The answer ( if indeed I receive one) is always birthright or why shouldn’t they ?
If they were so confident in their own abilities (!) they would drop them but the fact is that they need the Royal association to stay relevant . In many ways they are more Royal than most of the RF !

Well, you're making a lot of claims on behalf of fans on this thread. Are you speaking for yourself? If not, I suspect that the fans are probably not a hive mind, over avocados, clickbait or any other issues.

That's all they have, the royal connection. What are they without it?