Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Members
Posted (edited)

This clip was not part of the interview but very interesting. I think Harry is or maybe was naive about British society and culture. This was a wakeup call for him for sure.

 

I also don't understand those defending the monarchy on this. With The Commonwealth being celebrated, do people realize the population demographics of a good number of the countries that are part of it.  I believe Meghan and Harry initially asked if they could go live in one of those countries and fill their roles there and they were told no. Could you imagine the monarchy being this shortsighted. 

It's available on the CBS Website

 

Watch Oprah With Meghan And Harry: A CBS Primetime Special Season 2021 Episode 1: CBS Presents Oprah with Meghan and Harry: A Primetime Special - Full show on CBS

Edited by JaneAusten
  • Replies 151
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members
Posted (edited)

 

Don't forget the persistent rumors that James Hewitt is in fact Harry's bio dad. 

Please register in order to view this content

 

 

 

I think it was either William, or that ghoulish-looking Prince Philip.  

Edited by Khan
  • Members
Posted

 

If you look at the statement I was responding to (see below), you'll know what I meant.

 

 

 

 

Harry and Meghan are telling their story, how they experienced things. That doesn't necessarily mean that what they're saying is completely true. It's their truth, told from their point of view.

There are always two sides to every story, and we only get one side in this interview.

 

I'm not going to deny the possible existence of racism within the Royal family, because I don't know. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it exists. And Meghan obviously did face racism from the press, which is unforgivable, no question about that.

But at the same time I'm not going to take Harry's and Meghan's words as the absolute truth. I'm too cynical to believe that they did this interview without an agenda.

 

At the end of the day some people will believe them wholeheartedly, some won't. Some will probably put the blame on Meghan, accusing her of forcing Harry to break with his family. Some will blame Kate or William or Charles or the press or the institution of monarchy. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Members
Posted

 

The more time passes the more I realize how phony so much of their narrative has been due to likely cozy relationships with the press from the palace and the Middletons, from that whole story (which I think is now downplayed as it's so cringey) about her wearing a bikini at a fashion show to win him back, or whatever, to the attempts to make Pippa a big name and sex symbol, the cover-up of very damaging affair allegations, etc. The narrative of Kate and William being just like us, which really hasn't rung true, as they both seem so ill at ease and tone deaf they tend to be (I think Kate was going on last year about how hard it is for mothers now and included herself in that in spite of various nannies...). I try not to go with the mindset of good brother/bad brother, but there's just something about William that seems completely shut down - I know Charles is responsible for much of why his sons are the way they are, but it's sad to see that even Charles has more life or humanity to him than William when William is 35 years his junior.

 

(I know they have to do that to survive, but William seemingly being so chummy with the Tories doesn't help my opinion)

  • Members
Posted

 

I've already seen talking points from some people about how Meghan is "exploiting" racism and that what happened to her is not "real" racism. It brings back many of the old arguments surrounding Meghan from when this started (as there were so many debates about why black women should even care about or see her as someone to aspire to), and is being used to try to drown out the points she made. That polarization, and the whole mindset of "why should we care about this rich Hollywood actress," will probably continue to work in their favor, but in the long term this does, as you say, completely demolish the well-crafted media image of how the family was moving with the times and also took away much of the vibrancy and humor Harry brought. They are now left with various dull, sour people trying to pretend that they don't hate being among the public. The connection to the average British person is now just left with the Queen, who is over 90 years old. 

  • Members
Posted

Actually no there are not always two sides to every story. That mindset is the reason the US still sits on a possible move into fascism is because our own media and press corp treat people who spread outright lies about election results for example as the other side of an issue when it's an outright lie.

  • Members
Posted (edited)

This is the article from Buzzfeed that has the 20 headline stories covering Kate and Meghan and how they were approached differently between the two

 

For those of you here who seem to think Meghan is some master manipulator, if TRF was so in support of Meghan and Harry, I'd like one example where any of them stepped forward to contradict any of this. Enablement is complicity. And they were in on it. I frankly would not trust any of them at this point. As by the way they still all cover for Andrew who is an actual criminal.

 

Meghan Markle And Prince Harry UK Royal Reporters Coverage Compared To Kate Middleton And Prince William (buzzfeednews.com)

Edited by JaneAusten
  • Members
Posted

 

How is that even the same thing? 

Please register in order to view this content

 

Frankly the feeling I'm getting is that most people here had already made up their mind even before watching the interview that whatever Harry and Meghan were going to say would be the undeniable truth.

I don't doubt that if for example William and Kate now did an interview refuting what Harry and Meghan said noone would believe them. They would be accused of lying and everyone (or most anyway) would belive Harry's and Meghan's version even without any solid proof simply because they like them better than they like William and Kate.

 

We simply don't know what went on behind the scenes, and there is not one single truth. Kate might have been a cold, snooty bitch, jealous that Meghan was stealing the limelight; or Meghan might have made a complete nuisance of herself expecting everyone to indulge her every whim. William might have been jealous that Harry had found someone to love while he's stuck in a loveless marriage to Kate, or Charles might have favoured William over Harry and felt that Meghan was wrong for his youngest son. There's an endless list of possible scenarios.

And it could be a little bit of each and every one of those scenarios.

 

All of the people involved have their own version of events and they're all equally valid.

 

 

 

  • Members
Posted (edited)

I don't know how you can possibly expect institutional racism to not be a legitimately real thing in a centuries-old white monarchy, but at least you have your own voice and I'm not expected to read low quality screencaps of tweets from nobodies I don't know or care about who aren't posting here.

Edited by Vee
Posted (edited)

I totally believe she was a victim of racism. By those inbred royals. I also think she is milking it for all it's worth. Is that a bad thing no.  I'm Hispanic so i know a thing or two about racism hunty. You don't want to see my low quality screencaps block me. I know i will always be NOTHING. I don't need some stuck up witch to remind me.

Edited by victoria foxton

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Well, you are the most ill-informed, condescending person on this board so I am glad you enjoy mocking me? Or whatever you are trying to do lol.  You literally can't comprehend the simplest things about the show and don't watch, but are literally shaming me for being a women?
    • Please register in order to view this content

      One other side note, because now I've re-read 1993-1994.  I think that I found a ret-con issue. In 1993 after John finds out that Stefano is Kristen's father. It is not like I am claiming to have found nuclear fission, clearly mistakes happen.  But, I found this to be amusing. In 1993, Stefano becomes deadly ill, so Kristen tells John that she needs to be by her father's side, but not to worry about the deadly disease, because she's adopted.  Given, that I've always thought of Kristen as being adopted, until the more recent cannon that she is Stefano's biological child, it is interesting that in 1993, the week before Tony comes to town to announce that he is Kristen's fiancée.  Kristen is saying that she can't give blood to her dying father, because she was adopted.  So, the current reverse in cannon, neglects that detail. It is so funny to read this and then see Kristen and Tony in the crypt this week, 32 years later.  That's more than half the show's history at this point, amazing.
    • It was shuffled off the stove way before that. Think of the early summer stuff with Gio, Emma, and Dalton, which they basically dropped for weeks at a time, and then also put them on the back burner until recently.
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • After the slap it does feel inevitable - being arrested and thrown out right after her big win.
    • Yesterday it was Theo and Jada.  Today it's Chad and Belle.  What a mess.  
    • I asked my soap historian GPT to help pull together the best available sources on Daniel Pilon’s run, and here’s what the research confirms: * Pilon played Max Dubujak on *Ryan’s Hope* from 1983–88. * He began appearing as Alan Spaulding on *Guiding Light* in 1988. * An academic source notes that he appeared as **Max and Alan simultaneously in November 1988 * His later-life interviews mention major upheavals, including losing his home in the Northridge earthquake and declaring bankruptcy in 1994.  That’s the factual foundation. Now for the human side of it. I’ll admit Pilon was never my favorite Alan. The Spauldings are supposed to have that patrician, Midwestern money vibe, and suddenly here comes this very European-sounding gentleman sweeping into Springfield like he wandered in from a different soap entirely. It created a strange tonal shift, at least in my memory. Whether he was intended to be temporary is hard to pin down, but honestly, looking at what he was dealing with in his real life, I don’t know that the show ever had a truly stable window to figure it out. He was going through marital strife, while being talked about as the "next James Bond" back in Canada, and juggling work on two soaps at once is a lot. Under those circumstances, the question of whether he was the “right” type for Alan becomes almost secondary to the fact that he was working through multiple emergencies while stepping into one of GL’s biggest roles. So for me, the story of his Alan isn’t just about casting fit. It’s about an actor navigating chaos and the show adapting on the fly. Also, the proverbial soap hill that I would defend its honor, is that Ron Raines in the final week was so amazing, that for me, it erases all prior memories of his performance.  
    • I wish Nicole had swallowed but it is what it is lol 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy