Page 6 | Why is there more online vitriol towards Megan Markle than Andrew?

isthesolution · 23/10/2025 17:34

Media.

The media want you to believe Kate is perfect princess and therefore Meghan is cast as the villain.

Tiredofbullsit · 23/10/2025 17:36

jumpingthehighjump · 23/10/2025 17:32

Oh dear! Hope you get over whatever is troubling you....errr....'luv' 😂

Show quote history

Goady AF. Nothing troubling me. You are the one all over these threads like a rash. Maybe you would benefit from talking to someone? EAPs are highly recommended.

jumpingthehighjump · 23/10/2025 17:37

Indianrollerbird · 23/10/2025 17:30

Do stop lying. RF regulars do post on the Andrew threads and always have. There’s only so many times one can type “He should be in jail”.

I actually don’t have a problem with the death penalty for child abusers and traffickers, and that includes royals. Andrew needs to be investigated and tried, but apparently that’s not going to happen according to certain republican posters. There’s not much of a rational argument you can have with posters who just whinge that nothing will happen because “establishment stitch up”, which is what happened when I joined an Andrew thread last week. What’s the point of trying to converse with people like that? What are you expecting people to say? Nobody thinks he’s a good person.

You sound like you are annoyed you aren’t getting the chance to argue with people about Andrew through the frame of the Sussexes. If you think Meghan is being done a disservice, backing up goady threads like this that lump her in with the likes of Andrew just makes you as bad as the OP.

I don’t think you are anyone to talk about name changing.

Show quote history

What?

Do I know you? I've never seen your name before apart from the last week or so, so I don't know what you're on about

I am only saying that there are some regulars on the Meghan threads who never change their names and I don't see them on the Andrew threads

There’s only so many times one can type “He should be in jail”.

There is far far more to discuss than that as can be seen in the media in the UK the US and other countries. His titles, parliament, Royal Lodge, Sarah and more

Insult me all you like, don't care

Indianrollerbird · 23/10/2025 17:38

isthesolution · 23/10/2025 17:34

Media.

The media want you to believe Kate is perfect princess and therefore Meghan is cast as the villain.

The same media that called Catherine a boring frump and Meghan a breath of fresh air and the saviour of the monarchy? The same media that called Sarah Ferguson a breath of fresh air and much more interesting than boring Charles and Diana? You sound very naive about the workings of the media.

Tiredofbullsit · 23/10/2025 17:39

IAmATorturedPoet · 23/10/2025 17:34

I wouldn’t say it was odd, no.

It think it goes without saying that most people think Andrew is a revolting individual. I personally don’t feel like I need to be present on any/all recent Andrew threads expressing (yet again) my disgust at his behaviour. I have said it all before.

Show quote history

💯!

It’s not as if posters have to be seen reiterating their disgust in order to maintain ‘credibility’ using made-up names on an anonymous forum.

Hilarious!

Tiredofbullsit · 23/10/2025 17:41

jumpingthehighjump · 23/10/2025 17:37

What?

Do I know you? I've never seen your name before apart from the last week or so, so I don't know what you're on about

I am only saying that there are some regulars on the Meghan threads who never change their names and I don't see them on the Andrew threads

There’s only so many times one can type “He should be in jail”.

There is far far more to discuss than that as can be seen in the media in the UK the US and other countries. His titles, parliament, Royal Lodge, Sarah and more

Insult me all you like, don't care

Show quote history

Of course you don’t “know” me 🤣

That’s kind of the point here?

Not wasting any more energy on nonsense 🤣

jumpingthehighjump · 23/10/2025 17:42

Thank goodness for that, phew!!!

Tiredofbullsit · 23/10/2025 17:42

🤣🤣🤣🙄

Tiredofbullsit · 23/10/2025 17:44

isthesolution · 23/10/2025 17:34

Media.

The media want you to believe Kate is perfect princess and therefore Meghan is cast as the villain.

The media couldn’t give a crap about any of them. They will, and do, turn on anyone if they see ££££!

Indianrollerbird · 23/10/2025 17:48

jumpingthehighjump · 23/10/2025 17:37

What?

Do I know you? I've never seen your name before apart from the last week or so, so I don't know what you're on about

I am only saying that there are some regulars on the Meghan threads who never change their names and I don't see them on the Andrew threads

There’s only so many times one can type “He should be in jail”.

There is far far more to discuss than that as can be seen in the media in the UK the US and other countries. His titles, parliament, Royal Lodge, Sarah and more

Insult me all you like, don't care

Show quote history

Did I post about my name? No.

Why do you want to see certain posters in the Andrew threads specifically? All those conversations about titles etc have been happening for years and are happening now, prolifically because of Andrew Lownie’s book. But those conversations have been happening for years. Andrew’s name has never been far from the conversation about the Sussexes, because he’s constantly been brought up by sympathetic Sussex supporters. What is happening now, between many, many posters, including regular names on RF, is a real conversation about Andrew and Sarah and what they and they alone have done. And you want to drag the Sussexes in to that conversation. What other motivation do you have for requiring specific regular posters to post on those threads? And who are you talking about? What conversation are you wanting to have with them and why?

bluegreygreen · 23/10/2025 17:51

One would think they would like to be seen to be posting the right thing about Andrew and all that is going on but apparently not

Why does anyone have to be 'seen to be posting the right thing'? By whom?

It's an anonymous forum and posting is not compulsory.

ChatHeeBeeGez6298 · 23/10/2025 17:55

AtIusvue · 22/10/2025 17:32

Yes, because new revelation's have come to light even though he has retired from public life. Thanks to the British press and what they’ve been reporting on the last week.

Meg and Harry haven’t retired and are constantly pulling PR stunts to get themselves in the headlines and trending on SM.
If you have a problem with that, then your problem is with them, not those that choose to comment on those who live a celebrity lifestyle and publish their life on SM.

Edited

Show quote history

There you go again posting as if what Harry and Meghan have done is somehow comparable with the potential criminal activities of Andrew and Sarah F?

If anything, what the uncovering of Prince Andrew’s misdemeanours show, is that Harry had very good reason to take his wife and family away from a family who literally paid millions to cover up the sexual abuse of young trafficked women perpetrated by one of their own!

And it’s certainly made a lie of any objection that the RF could possibly have to H & M’s proposal of being half in and half out, as it appears that the late Queen and current King have not only tolerated, but covered up, both Andrew and Sarah consistently carrying out charitable activities on the one hand, while making making lots of profitable and dubious business deals for themselves on the side! For decades! In Andrew’’s case while being funded by the British tax payer! All while living in a £30 million pound mansion on crown estate property! Oh the irony!

And by the way, I never recall H& M saying that they had retired. Or that they would remain hidden at home for that matter! They always said they would continue to support the charitable projects that they were involved and interested in.

jumpingthehighjump · 23/10/2025 17:56

And you want to drag the Sussexes in to that conversation.

Please link to where I said that. Quite the opposite in fact

I won't reply to the rest of your post because it is twisting everything I said. In fact, I won't reply again whatever you say to me. Be as rude as you like!

jumpingthehighjump · 23/10/2025 17:59

ChatHeeBeeGez6298 · 23/10/2025 17:55

There you go again posting as if what Harry and Meghan have done is somehow comparable with the potential criminal activities of Andrew and Sarah F?

If anything, what the uncovering of Prince Andrew’s misdemeanours show, is that Harry had very good reason to take his wife and family away from a family who literally paid millions to cover up the sexual abuse of young trafficked women perpetrated by one of their own!

And it’s certainly made a lie of any objection that the RF could possibly have to H & M’s proposal of being half in and half out, as it appears that the late Queen and current King have not only tolerated, but covered up, both Andrew and Sarah consistently carrying out charitable activities on the one hand, while making making lots of profitable and dubious business deals for themselves on the side! For decades! In Andrew’’s case while being funded by the British tax payer! All while living in a £30 million pound mansion on crown estate property! Oh the irony!

And by the way, I never recall H& M saying that they had retired. Or that they would remain hidden at home for that matter! They always said they would continue to support the charitable projects that they were involved and interested in.

Edited

Show quote history

Well said

And let's not forget the numerous charities Sarah set up and the promise of profits from the Budgie books to charity...yet anything given to her charities was wiped out with her expenses

Sausagescanfly · 23/10/2025 18:02

I think that Harry taking parts of the media to court is the main driver for the vitriol against Harry and Meghan.

Indianrollerbird · 23/10/2025 18:03

jumpingthehighjump · 23/10/2025 17:56

And you want to drag the Sussexes in to that conversation.

Please link to where I said that. Quite the opposite in fact

I won't reply to the rest of your post because it is twisting everything I said. In fact, I won't reply again whatever you say to me. Be as rude as you like!

It's quite clear though, isn't it. You don't want to have the conversation about Andrew with the plethora of posters currently talking about him. You are the one complaining that you don't see regular posters from the Sussex threads on the Andrew threads. You want to have the conversation with them. Why? If not to bring up the Sussexes? Who have nothing to do with the Andrew situation.

jumpingthehighjump · 23/10/2025 18:10

How many times do I have to repeat it. You are making assumptions that just aren't true. On Andrew threads I want to talk about Andrew, Sarah, how the monarchy are handling it, royal Lodge, will they move out, the Guiffre book, the media and what they are saying here and across the pond, the Epstein files that's drift drip drip out of the US....not Meghan and harry unless it is particularly relevant at the time

I was just curious as to why the regulars on Sussex threads don't have much to say about Andrew. That's all

Indianrollerbird · 23/10/2025 18:18

jumpingthehighjump · 22/10/2025 10:59

I think those that post on threads about Meghan day in day out are the true fans because they keep her prominent and in the media but then complain about it.

Yes she's annoying but she hasn't done anything lately to talk about,but there always seems to be three or four threads running concurrently about her or Harry

Whereas Andrew is on every news channel, every chat program, all over the US media and other countries and what really amuses me is that a lot of die hard contributors to Meghan threads are nowhere to be seen on the Andrew threads! How weird is that. What is going on at the moment with him and Sarah really matters. They are talking about it being debated in parliament, unheard of.

This is what you said, straight out of the gate. That's not "curiosity" and it's not even true. That is you wanting to goad, and you wanting to discuss Andrew with regulars who speak about the Sussexes, because you want to tie the two conversations together - which is exactly what this OP is about.

bluegreygreen · 23/10/2025 18:20

I was just curious as to why the regulars on Sussex threads don't have much to say about Andrew. That's all

Do you also go on to threads in The litter tray and ask people why they don't post in The doghouse?

I happen to have posted on both Sussex and Andrew threads, but only because I have had things I wanted to say, not 'to be seen to post the right thing'.

It wouldn't occur to me that someone would check where I was posting. Neither would it occur to me to check where someone else was posting.

Indianrollerbird · 23/10/2025 18:25

jumpingthehighjump · 23/10/2025 18:10

How many times do I have to repeat it. You are making assumptions that just aren't true. On Andrew threads I want to talk about Andrew, Sarah, how the monarchy are handling it, royal Lodge, will they move out, the Guiffre book, the media and what they are saying here and across the pond, the Epstein files that's drift drip drip out of the US....not Meghan and harry unless it is particularly relevant at the time

I was just curious as to why the regulars on Sussex threads don't have much to say about Andrew. That's all

What are you expecting them to say that's different to every other comment about Andrew?

jumpingthehighjump · 23/10/2025 18:26

Indianrollerbird · 23/10/2025 18:18

This is what you said, straight out of the gate. That's not "curiosity" and it's not even true. That is you wanting to goad, and you wanting to discuss Andrew with regulars who speak about the Sussexes, because you want to tie the two conversations together - which is exactly what this OP is about.

Show quote history

Nope. Don't agree. I have never ever said I want to tie the two conversations together

Let's leave it there because I'm getting bored with this

ChatHeeBeeGez6298 · 23/10/2025 18:27

jumpingthehighjump · 23/10/2025 16:43

Anyone can NC but when there are highly prolific posters on Meghan threads who keep their names but not a squeak from them on Andrew threads, that is ODD
One would think they would like to be seen to be posting the right thing about Andrew and all that is going on but apparently not

Why would they hide their names or change them on Andrew threads?

Show quote history

Quite! And many of us know exactly what you mean jumpingthehighjump!

I agree that it is both very odd and amusing at the same time.

And I just don’t buy the disingenuous excuses about there being nothing further to discuss about Andrew! Really? You would have thought the fact that the late Queen and the current King appear to have been involved in deliberately covering up both Andrew’s sexual proclivities and his illegal financial deals, worthy of comment, but I don’t see many monarchists discussing that or starting debates about it.

A few regular posters on the monarchist side, until quite recently, were defending Andrew and saying that there wasn’t enough proof to establish his guilt! But now we have the proof that he lied blatantly over and over again, in public, funnily enough, there is no further comment… .

And how about the question that, as a result of Andrew’s misdemeanours and the subsequent cover up, whether the monarchy can any longer longer be trusted to police their own financial affairs? I would have thought that would be an interesting topic for debate? Similarly whether the royals believe themselves to be above the law? Funnily enough, I haven’t seen any monarchists starting threads like that… .

Tiredofbullsit · 23/10/2025 18:28

ChatHeeBeeGez6298 · 23/10/2025 17:55

There you go again posting as if what Harry and Meghan have done is somehow comparable with the potential criminal activities of Andrew and Sarah F?

If anything, what the uncovering of Prince Andrew’s misdemeanours show, is that Harry had very good reason to take his wife and family away from a family who literally paid millions to cover up the sexual abuse of young trafficked women perpetrated by one of their own!

And it’s certainly made a lie of any objection that the RF could possibly have to H & M’s proposal of being half in and half out, as it appears that the late Queen and current King have not only tolerated, but covered up, both Andrew and Sarah consistently carrying out charitable activities on the one hand, while making making lots of profitable and dubious business deals for themselves on the side! For decades! In Andrew’’s case while being funded by the British tax payer! All while living in a £30 million pound mansion on crown estate property! Oh the irony!

And by the way, I never recall H& M saying that they had retired. Or that they would remain hidden at home for that matter! They always said they would continue to support the charitable projects that they were involved and interested in.

Edited

Show quote history

Don’t be daft! Their leaving had precisely NOTHING to do with Andrew! That’s bonkers!

ChatHeeBeeGez6298 · 23/10/2025 18:29

Ghostellas · 22/10/2025 18:42

I’ve often wondered this. Meghan didn’t play ball with Piers Morgan and the press. Imo it worsened when the press realised they’d tapped into an undercurrent of racism and sexism that helped them generate loads of click bait revenue.

They were onto a winner. The Royal Family rely on the press so would never speak up against them.

Andrew is viewed by many as a playboy prince. But a determined divorcee is torn down at every opportunity. Loads of successful men in the public eye have self promoted, got divorced, been unscrupulous. A lot of the Meghan haters are Piers Morgan lovers. What does that tell you. It’s all very shameful.

Catherine barely says anything but even that couldn’t save her from the press. I think the best thing the RF can do now is exile Andrew and maintain a cordial personal relationship with H&M. That will reflect best on them.

Very interesting food for thought Ghostellas.

SevenYellowHammers · 23/10/2025 18:31

ladykale · 22/10/2025 10:21

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?

Tricky one OP . I mean what COULD it be ? Maybe two or three things that make MM different from the Duke of pork eh ? Good post but I reckon you know the answer!