Why is there more online vitriol towards Megan Markle than Andrew?

[ladykale]

I find it ridiculous how there is consistent hate towards Megan markle when she does pretty low key things like launching jam that no one is being forced to buy. People were delighted that she is no longer using HRH titles and even said she shouldn’t call herself the Duchess of Sussex (even though that is distinct from royal titles).

On the flip side - NO ONE has called for an actual investigation into Prince Andrew on the days that he claimed to be at Pizza Express in Woking, when his movements are logged by the royal gamily and his security detail so they eill
know exactly where he was!

He slept with an underage victim of sex trafficking who
conveniently died by suicide shortly before her memoir naming and shaming many individuals came out.

Limited criticism of the late Queen who used £12million
pg her personal money to pay off an underage sec trafficking victim & shielded him from any investigation.

Disgusted by it all and was amused to see the vitriol on an article about Megan breathing, whereas limited calls for Andrew to be investigated by any U.S or UK authorities!

WHY?

There are photos of QE 2 laughing with Trump. There are photos of King Charles laughing with Trump. There are photos of Catheine smiling with “warm body language’ at Macron for his state visit and photos of Macron winking at Kate.
You’re reaching so hard you’ll do yourself some damage!

No, you’re twisting what I said.

Nobody is arguing Catherine for example, should have insulted Trump or caused a diplomatic scene. Being polite is part of the job. That’s not the point.

The point is this:
When Meghan has a distant or indirect association, people treat it like proof of her character.

But when senior royals make visible, voluntary choices outside strict protocol, like fawning to Trump, walking Andrew into public events or presenting warmth that goes beyond neutral diplomacy, it’s excused by some monarchists as just duty, when most people know it's alignment.

That’s the inconsistency I’m pointing out.
Politeness during a state visit isn’t the issue.
Selective outrage is.

Princess Diana doing her job, just as Catherine does her job and they are/were both incredibly good at diplomacy.

Princess Diana met with Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe during a 1993 visit to the country, which was partly motivated by Zimbabwe's dependence on foreign aid and its struggle with the AIDS epidemic

The meeting was a formal courtesy visit, and her presence was seen as a way to draw international attention to Zimbabwe's problems, while Mugabe was also personally charmed by her.

Sorry I have no idea what you are trying to say at all !
you clearly don’t understand how politics or the way monarchy works within that context, so there is no point trying to explain any further.

Yes I think we need to stop engaging with a poster who says they are “not that invested” yet demonstrates completely the opposite and who reveals with every post that it is just a hatred of Catherine in particular.

The Royals are doing it because it is part of their job. They can't be seen to be political. Meghan isn't a royal and doesn't have a job where her presence or manner is important to anyone except herself and her income. She in a way needs to be even choosier about who she mingles with. However her years as a party girl sitting on old men's knees are out there online - dressed as a sexy maid, giving a blow job in a car, creeping around Rory McIlroy and others. We can see what Meghan's character is. She seems to have done anything to climb up.

I understood your point just fine, I simply disagree with it.

If you don’t want to discuss further, that’s completely fine, but dismissing my argument as ‘not understanding politics’ doesn’t actually address anything I said

Last time I repeat that: The Royals ‘doing their job’ doesn’t explain why some of them choose to go far beyond neutrality in tone, posture, and voluntary appearances with Andrew and other questionable people, which had nothing to do with state duties. That was the point being discussed.

Bringing up long-debunked internet rumours about Meghan’s private life is irrelevant and says more about the sources you’re relying on than about her, specially when you don't hold the royal family accountable with proper facts in the face. None of that answers the actual issue: the double standard where senior royals’ voluntary choices are excused, while Meghan is judged on fabricated stories.

If you have a counterpoint about the public behaviour of the royals, make it. Personal smears aren’t a substitute.

Because she’s a woman.

But you haven't explained what precisely Catherine did with Trump that other members of the RF have done with him, or that she hasn't done with other dignitaries on state visits.

First: apologies

Second: I hope that Andrew faces justice; by which I mean that if there is sufficient evidence of a case to answer it is brought appropriately and the trial proceeds as it should, rather than by media; that if he is found guilty he pays the due penalty; that more powerful men on both sides of the Atlantic are no longer able to use him as a convenient decoy. I am not sure all my hopes will be realised.

Third: I do not question any poster's legitimacy, and have apologised for one assumption above. I have also not been the person suggesting others shouldn't be posting.

Fourth: I am happy not to engage with you again.

The moment arguments dry up, the twisting and personal attacks start, it says more about the poster than the subject. Classic.

I don't need to interact with you so you can ignore each other just fine.

That is because my point was clear, sadly I don’t understand yours because it isn’t logical and has the underlying purpose of trying to liken a relevant senior royal on government business to an irrelevant ex royal on her own personal business as a means to excuse her behaviour!
its akin to explaining that h from steps shouldn’t be criticised because the prime minister did something similar during his workday! 🤷‍♀️

Why are you apologising?
if posters want to make use of the facility to name change, they cannot then complain if other posters don’t recognise them or think they are new! 🤷‍♀️

Racism people will not admit it, but clearly is . White pedo gets less hate than an annoying brown lady. Who apparently controls everything think her husband thinks and does . apparently even when Harry does wrong some__ how it’s Megan fault wonder why that is .

Jesus, it’s in incredibly simple.

One Head of State meets another Head of State and their representatives, instructed by their respective governments.

It’s not hard to follow.

?????? What does this even mean! 😬

Exactly what I said

Do try again with more clarity.

😂

As discussed many times, everyone hates Andrew, everyone, so there is less debate. When everyone agrees what is there to talk about.
MM has people who like her and people who don’t - hence the debate.

It’s very red dwarf isn’t it!
“ they’re all dead Dave! “ “ but what about John ?”..”they’re all dead Dave” ..”but ….”
“everybody’s dead Dave!”

Ok I made a mistake and meant princess Michael of Kent...yes i got the name wrong it was a simple mistake im owning it by saying so. Its not a crime to make a mistake and rectify it when I realise I have. No need to get some snarky.

Point still stands other members of the rf have been proven to make racist remarks or wear racist items so its not just Harry

Who apparently controls everything think her husband thinks and does . apparently even when Harry does wrong some__ how it’s Megan fault wonder why that is .

You will find plenty of threads on this board clearly criticising Harry for his own actions,

If the white pedo lady is Ghislaine Maxwell, then most of the US is questioning her cushy time in prison.

BTW, in response to a previous poster, my father cut off a large number of his family because they were associated with organized crime. However, the nature of his job caused him to have to interact with people with organized crime connections. He was always polite and professional because he had to be as part of his job.