Demographic(s) which determinedly support H&M no matter what

[Ratherhaveacupofteaandabiscuit]

I am bewildered that anyone can support H&M in light of all their shenanigans.

There is no need to base an opinion on what others write about them, these two show who they are with their own words and actions.

Who are the determined supporters and why would anyone close their eyes to the (inconvenient) truth to continue to fit a preferred narrative?

It reminds me of other scenarios where fans of celebrity figures insist their idol is wonderful despite all evidence to the contrary.

Is it sex, age, race, location? Is it an inability to change their mind after an initially favourable judgement was made?

I wonder what it is that unites die hard H&M supporters?

Hello - I really hope you’re right!

I like KC (for his genuine dedication over decades to really worthy causes) but I know he’s Ill, he’s getting on and he wants to see this horrible family quarrel mended. I’m afraid that this might lead him to make decisions on a personal basis which are not good for the institution of the monarchy and which will cause problems for his non-prodigal son.

You have noticed it, too.

I’ve noticed that no matter how cocksure, posts including the name Carolyn Griffiths will be ignored and avoided.

So many posts with reasonable criticism, backed up by hard evidence, are ignored, aren't they?

Although I might not agree with them, it makes me grateful for the very few HAM supporters who WILL actually engage with a discussion.

But yes, you usually get the provocative statement out of nowhere, then a disappearance, maybe to return with another out-of-context statement the next day. No discernible engagement with any facts at all!

Exactly. But they’ll stick faithfully to the ad hominem path - all criticism of these two is only from people who are racist, misogynist, royalist, obsessives, the unhinged, jealous, have no lives. I’m sure I’ve missed quite a few.

They meanwhile are morally superior, enlightened, kind, and basically perfect.

Yes, perfect evidence of my post above. Ignore questions about CG, attack other poster instead.

I think they were a destabilising factor at the start, with their very public exit coming at a time of a monarch towards the end of life (with a dying consort), the AMW scandal, the height of the BLM crusade, and a very vocal Labour opposition.

I think they are much less of an issue now, as time has shown that they really had no significant crime of which to accuse the monarchy, and that in fact many of the things they alleged were patently untrue.
There has been a smooth accession, and the King, despite his health issues, is growing into his role.
Sussex-leaning media (and others aiming for clicks) may spin stories of division between monarch and heir, but there has been no actual evidence of this.
The fifth-in-line becomes less relevant as each year passes.

Edit to add: Forgot my main point, which was that I think their exit will be assessed in the long run as much less of a destabilising factor than the exit of a king.

@bluegreygreen

I like that analysis - it's cheered me up!

One of the main reasons I find (strong) support for the HAMs depressing is that I cannot believe so many people fall for the fakeness. Can they really not see through them? I started to get an misgivings at the engagement interview!

This goes back to something I said earlier.
Their behavior will bother anyone that follows some of the most basic rules of socially acceptable behavior. Unless a person is the type to believe that these rules should not be applied to Harry and Meghan.

The people that do follow the rules but don’t believe they apply to HAM are fascinating, though. Those are the ones that I wish would be willing to truly engage in the discussion.

I find that quite insulting. Just because people don't agree with you 100%, that means we don't follow even the most basic rules of socially accepted behaviour??

I could throw back thoughts and ideas that I have about people who obsess on every single thing they do, but I won't lower myself.

They are not perfect, they have made some really really stupid mistakes but they don't deserve the multi million $ hate industry that has sprung up around them.

I save my ire for those that I think really deserve it.

I think you didn’t read my full post.

“I could throw back thoughts and ideas that I have about people who obsess on every single thing they do, but I won't lower myself.”

I would not take your thoughts and ideas personally because I know I don’t fall into this category.

Let me respond more directly here.

I doubt you personally are the type to publicly disparage your sibling’s marriage by denying that they married their spouse for love, for example. But also that you won’t criticize Harry for doing so.

I doubt you would notify the Daily Mail about a meeting your agent was having with your father’s staff in order to negotiate peace and and broker reconciliation. And doubly doubt that you’d then lie and blame your father’s staff for the leak. Yet, I also don’t think you’ll acknowledge that CG plainly said this info came from Harry and Meghan. Or that the that multi-million £ hate industry is being fueled at least in part by Harry and Meghan.

My question is, why ignore their bad behavior when it’s something you’d never do yourself?

I think some people who comment on here are unaware of the scale of the people making money from commenting on Harry and Meghan - and to a certain extent other members of fhe royal family.

If you only read posts on here it doesn’t seem too extreme compared to their behaviour which aims to keep them in the ‘news’.

There are the mainstream reporters - but they aren’t just doing the regular articles - many of them also do podcasts and blogs in addition.

Then there are the dozens of ‘amateurs’ who have created YouTube channels to talk about them.

And that doesn’t even touch all the social media comments on things like Twitter etc.

I do feel sympathy for H&M they are at the mercy of the social media / content creation age.

However - the sympathy is strained when so much of the reason they are the targets of this attention is because they are also courting it.

It always feels like this:

I only look occasionally at MN and sometimes peek through my fingers at the caustic Celebitchy, which I know is extreme with self-identifying Sussex Squad posters.

I don’t read the gossip mags or tabloid newspapers or watch videos or things like X, so I admit I’m not exposed to the full glare of anti-HAM content which is out there.

I only comment on what H and M say or have said, or what they’ve done. Yes, they’ve made mistakes, but some of those mistakes have seriously hurt and damaged other people - their own close relations - and that’s why I don’t see them as just easily forgiveable “mistakes”. You might say , just for the sake of argument, that it was a mistake to rush off and leave the RF so impulsively as they did. But it wasn’t a “mistake “ to do the OW interview, publish Spare and make the Netflix doc. These things weren’t little accidents or carelessness. I have lots of theories about what their motives might have been - and I think they have each had different motives sometimes, and H in particular perhaps no thought-out motive, just blundering stupidity and spite.

Sorry for rambling sentences - typing badly on my tablet!

Yes - meant to say that I agree H and M have suffered due to the peaking of the social media age where any idiot may not only put their thoughts out there but make money from them.

But on the other hand, they themselves have exploited SM for their own ends. You live by the sword, you die by the sword.

Their behavior will bother anyone that follows some of the most basic rules of socially acceptable behavior.

At an even more basic level than your later examples @OliveMyLove, most people do not publicly insult elderly unwell relatives, wash family dirty linen in public, or discuss siblings' private parts.

Or consistently and persistently bully employees and employees. Over a dozen separate reports from victims and witnesses since their time in California. That’s not counting the shocking behaviour previously at BP.

This is who they are nasty, grandiose, bullying arseholes.

I too would feel sorry for H&M being victims of the social media age - but for their courting of same and being fairly aware of what the result of their words on various platforms would be.

I am aware of a lot of the content which has sprung up around them and have no doubt some earn a few quid from it.

Again, sympathy is lost when they have done the same. (Spare, documentary/tv programmes etc.)

I’m not knocking them for making money. The thing is they have been disparaging and have disregarded the feelings of others while making theirs. I don’t think they (or those who feel they have done nothing wrong) can criticise others for doing something similar.

It is the world we live in.

I think it is still possible to keep so much of your life private. They don’t want to and so can’t feign upset when people chat about them.