Prince Harry & Meghan kids

[Jennalong]

There is a photo of Harry with his children with reference to Fathers Day . It shows him cuddling his children , with the girl's face partially shown but the son is turned fully into Harry and you only see the back of his head.
In most photos that they post this is always the case .
Why do they do this ?

Tbh I doubt they would have a role as children of the monarch’s siblings don’t really have a royal role eg Peter and Zara, Princess Margaret’s children, Beatrice and Eugenie…

I didn't need to research it. A thread titled 18 easily tells you its 18,000 comments (1k per thread). If you can do simple maths its like 2 seconds of your effort to work it out.

What is sad is the sheer amount of comments...yet tou say I am obsessed? You don't find that number of comments obsessive behaviour by the few people who create them? Funny you ignore that point and go straight to attacking me

Why on earth have you counted the responses? Seriously?
Just let it be. Perhaps people have different opinions.

I would not spend any time looking at the number of threads about them and have no idea who these few posters are who create them - you counting the responses is weird imo.

How do you know that only a few people created them ….. unless you read all 18,000? That’s not a few minutes is it? Don’t be so disingenuous.

Then, don’t show them at all,

It’s at least 20 people including @LipglossAndLies posting over nearly 6 months. That’s a rough avg of 100 per day, 5 per person.

HAM have been very active this year with a quasi-royal tour, As Ever product drops, a clothing merchandise site, and many photos of the children on Instagram. Sentebale, Invictus, involvement in a film, trips to Geneva, Ukraine and even planted press about them coming to UK.

It’s hardly shocking that people talk about people who want to be talked about.

Edited to add, I’ve obviously missed many topics and events but I’m tired now from thinking about it and have to rest.

I think we need more detail on this - yup need posts itemised per poster, per topic .

H&M threads get busy and filled up more quickly than others for two main reasons - the pair of them are actively trying to be talked about and stay in the public eye with the bizarre things they keep doing for publicity, and secondly they are still marmite enough to attract some loyal supporters who come and argue on their behalf driving up responses and post engagement.

Contrast this with Andrew - no one is interested in defending him so those posts only fill up when it pivots to the pro and anti monarchy arguments.

Can anyone archive the DM article by Richard Eden today?

It’s a nothing burger of an article

https://archive.ph/i7yvv

Just so its clear since tou call me out specifically, how much have I posted on it? A handful I reckon less than 10 comment in 6 months. Compared to everyone else? That is nothing. Feel free to call out all the other names who clearly are posting far more...

You could say the royals have been equally active but again it doesn't generate the same number of comments.

Ah come on now, they're less entertaining than H&M! They're not doing day to day work, they're putting themselves out there for the clicks. Deliberately using their children and sharing their private lives.
The Trooping got some interest, but William visiting 3 homeless charities? What is there to say?
H&M are unpredictable, mercurial, mendacious , greedy and desperate for attention. Of course they're going to get a lot of interest!
They love it.

I’m not the one to suggest that posting on a forum about any topic is problematic and I’m not “calling you out” (horrible phrase, IMO)

I am simply doing the math for you. 18000 posts on any active forum with many active users over 6 months is not noteworthy.

When its focused on two people it is compared to other royal members who are just as active if not more with their engagements ..noone wants to discuss those? Why cos you can't get a laugh out of it? Not entertaining enough? Making fun of people is what you find entertaining...

Ok. Start a discussion thread on Camilla visiting a military event. She'll be polite, she'll be interested. It'll go well. How many posts will that get?Same with the other working royals.
The H&M quasi royal tour of Australia, where there were links to her outfits to monetise them, even the one she wore to Bondi Beach?
More controversial. More to discuss.

Apples and Oranges.

But now you’re attacking my character. You are tilting at windmills and have no facts.

Absolutely right - nothing more delicious that watching a pair of grifting, delusional, grandiose, preachy bullies - circling the drain and the world laughing at every clap back, interview, IG post, faux tour - they provide this hilarious content to the world for free. I expect all of their family, friends, colleagues and staff that they have exploited and bullied have some pleasure in the karma.

Yes indeed it was controversial, H full on slapped a life guard on the arse! sexual assault on camera yet tumbleweed from the media.

How'd you defend that, @LipglossAndLies ?

I don't think Camilla or anyone else in the family (other than AMW) would act similarly. Hence, nothing to discuss.

As a PP said, nobody wants to discuss those because there is very little to say. They turn up, do what’s expected fairly competently and go home. Harry and Meghan are controversial. They emphasise their royal status but do not conform to traditional royal behaviour norms. Meghan uses photos with seriously ill children and survivors of a terrorist atrocity to sell clothes. She gave a speech standing on a roundabout in Geneva with hardly anyone there. She posts photos of their children while Harry is warning parents of the dangers of doing just that. He gave a talk to some Canadian estate agents. They accepted an award for tackling racism in the RF and then denied that they claimed racism. They have both lied in court. Harry smacked some poor guy’s arse for no apparent reason. His book was quite unusual, both for the number of lies he told and for his willingness to breach the privacy of others. These are all talking points and just examples, there are many, many more. Does that make sense - that people who are controversial, publish a lot of content and are looking for attention have more people talking about them?

When someone resorts to insults they have already lost the argument !

Why has that post been deleted, I don’t get it

I had only just read that post myself and was wondering why the deletion. 🤷‍♀️

Is there a new MN guideline I’m not aware of that prohibits the mentioning of public transport?

I didn’t see it. It was a message to me? Public transport?