The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 3: March - April 2021


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
This was good.

I have to say- it does kind of look like Meghan wants to be Diana. She just adds the race factor in. This article made a good argument for it.

Someone else called Meghan manipulative and ruthless.

I enjoy any author who will call Meghan out on that stupid, over the top Little Mermaid reference. It was laughable. People actually fell for that?! I can’t take someone seriously who makes absurd analogies like that. And to think Meghan graduated from college....

I have to defend Meghan here on the Little Mermaid reference. It's a trademark of having a child that you read books to every night before they go to sleep. The story gets implanted permanently in your brain and you find yourself speaking like these storybook characters when you're in a totally adult situation. Like out to dinner with friends, you'll catch yourself going "I have to go potty. Be right back." :lol:
 
I enjoy any author who will call Meghan out on that stupid, over the top Little Mermaid reference. It was laughable. People actually fell for that?! I can’t take someone seriously who makes absurd analogies like that. And to think Meghan graduated from college....
When I heard the Little Mermaid's reference, I sat and wondered what the hell. Didn't this one turn into seafoam?


Ah, the differences between growing up in a (by then, very recently) ex-Communist country and growing up in Hollywood. In the first setting, it wasn't a sure thing at all that you'd grow up with a video to actually watch The Little Mermaid, so the chances that you'd read the fairytale were higher. To me, the Little Mermaid is always the Andersen's one. The other is Ariel.



It was mildly second-hand embarrassing to watch a grown, educated woman gushing over a film character without any indication that she was acquainted with one of the most famous literary fairytales on which it was based. But then, that's Meghan. That's Hollywood. Even when The Little Mermaid's story would have served her better, by mentioning that she wanted to avoid her fate, took her life in her own hands and achieved her Disney happy ending.
 
Last edited:
The latest they kept me in the house for 4 months story was that when she was staying in Windsor her and Doria wanted to drive to town to buy take out coffee but was banned. I would suggest she was advised for security it would not be a good idea, did nobody give them a coffee maker for a wedding present. Why would you want to drive in a car to buy a coffee to take it back home.

People do do that but they could have just used a coffee maker. Even if it was suggested that they didn't for security reasons we know they did go out in Windsor, indeed had pub lunches with Ellen DeGeneres so it clearly wasn't all the time.

The DM dossier said they couldn't pinpoint a time when she didn't appear either formally or informally (or go on holiday) for 4 months.

She's not Sheikhas Latifa or Shamsa here.

And Kate just made going go to a memorial/vigil/rally happen in a crowded place, in London, in a pandemic. I don't think there's many times when they're actually *banned* from going anywhere, if ever.
 
It would be a huge loss to royal followers over the world should the British Monarchy fall, but I have a feeling, that Charles and Camilla, William and Kate, George, Charlotte, and Louis would just fine. They are wealthy and healthy, it might even be a relief to them.

Do you think that might be Harry's goal? He seems to genuinely believe that his father and brother are trapped by a sense of duty in a system that's harming them. If the monarchy is abolished, they'd be free to move on with their lives (as Harry has done) without any lingering guilt from abandoning their duty. Or so it might seem to Harry, who may believe he's doing them a favor in the long run.
 
My favourite picture is the one in SA that's exactly Diana in Africa, down to the pose. Same outfit, same accessories, hands on hips everything. She knew what she was doing there, so she'd clearly done a lot of Diana research. Why couldn't she have researched royal protocol and expectations as well?



That lends credence to some staffers saying she was determined to be the poor outsider if she/they couldn't have it all their own way.



I do like that article pointing out that she didn't seem to have realised that she was the Fergie, not the Diana in "The Institution". Little different there.


Agreed- Meghan forgot she was Fergie. Ooops. And....she will never be Diana. For so many reasons.

Harry also seems to be mimicking Diana in his actions. The author drew a lot of parallels.

Oh...if the staff could talk....I have a feeling Harry and Meghan would not come out well in this.

“No family, no relationship, is improved by sharing grievances with several million others; after this, the distance between the Sussexes and Harry’s family may be greater than the physical space of the Atlantic Ocean.”

That was a good quote. So true. And very sad really. More for Meghan and Harry in some ways because they show by their words and actions what they really value...and what they don’t.

It occurs to me that the Spencer side of the family has just been quiet.

I have to defend Meghan here on the Little Mermaid reference. It's a trademark of having a child that you read books to every night before they go to sleep. The story gets implanted permanently in your brain and you find yourself speaking like these storybook characters when you're in a totally adult situation. Like out to dinner with friends, you'll catch yourself going "I have to go potty. Be right back." :lol:



Thanks for sharing. I appreciate it.

I watched the movie a number of times. I’m close to Meghan’s age. But Meghan using a Disney princess to compare herself to. It annoys me. It just felt over the top.

I’ve made movie/tv/book references myself- out loud or in my head. I work a lot with pivot tables on a project I have- and in my head I hear Ross on friends screaming “PIVOT....PIVOT.” Lol
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Plenty of ordinary people do enjoy driving out to buy their favourite coffee; sometimes every day.

Meghan's comment shows that the usual way of royal existence (considering security and media attention) was too confining for her.

It's obvious that Harry did not give Meghan enough time to understand the lifestyle he wanted her to embrace.

How horrid that Harry and Meghan have discussed family conversations with Gayle King. The Royal family can no longer speak with them in confidence.
 
Do you think that might be Harry's goal? He seems to genuinely believe that his father and brother are trapped by a sense of duty in a system that's harming them. If the monarchy is abolished, they'd be free to move on with their lives (as Harry has done) without any lingering guilt from abandoning their duty. Or so it might seem to Harry, who may believe he's doing them a favor in the long run.

Harry & Meghan certainly underestimated the British public judging by the YouGov poll results. More British people sympathise with the Queen & Royal Family than Harry & Meghan. Even the neither option is higher than Harry & Meghan option. The Sussexes are at their lowest popularity as ever :cool:

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic...ticle&utm_campaign=royal_family_favourability
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic...1/03/09/snap-poll-post-interview-harry-meghan

Ultimately, it's up the British public to decide via a referendum or general election (i.e. one party wins majority that has the pledge to abolish the monarchy) to decide who should the head of state. No matter how hard CNN or other American celebrity/Hollywood media wants to push their agenda, it's all depends on the British public. And they certainly are not buying into Harry & Meghan's narrative, the American "progressive" press or even UK's own social justice activists. Whilst there were slight decrease in support of the monarchy and some members of the royal family, but they are still in the positive (apart from Camilla) and safe-majority range (More than 50% in support of the monarchy). Harry & Meghan however have negative popularity.
 
It occurs to me that the Spencer side of the family has just been quiet.

But why would they get involved? They weren't the family he dragged onto Oprah. And it doesn't really serve them to either trash or back Harry, at least not at this point, not until and unless something else happens. Staying quiet appears to be the tactful and tasteful thing to do right now.
 
I wonder if Harry has seen the photograph of his 99 year old grandfather leaving hospital today. It should give him food for thought.



You would think.

I’m not holding out loads of hope though.

Philip being in the hospital sure didn’t matter.
 
Plenty of ordinary people do enjoy driving out to buy their favourite coffee; sometimes every day.

Meghan's comment shows that the usual way of royal existence (considering security and media attention) was too confining for her.

It's obvious that Harry did not give Meghan enough time to understand the lifestyle he wanted her to embrace.

How horrid that Harry and Meghan have discussed family conversations with Gayle King. The Royal family can no longer speak with them in confidence.

I do realise that, I was just being flippant with the coffee maker comment. It was the reference to being banned , and kept inside that so annoyed me. They choose to leave the city and go to Windsor but the story was at the time that they wanted their own private apartments in the castle itself and were told no.
She was not prepared for the role or alternatively had never intended staying in it anyway so didn't bother learning.
 
I watched the movie a number of times. I’m close to Meghan’s age. But Meghan using a Disney princess to compare herself to. It annoys me. It just felt over the top.

If you are actual royalty, comparing yourself to Disney royalty is a) more than a bit tacky :whistling:, b) pretty shallow :ermm: (so much for being a mermaid) , and c) showing how totally out of your depths you are (...Okay. So she might be on to something) :lol:.

Seriously, if you think RL royalty is meant to be like the Mouse Factory, you're going to have a problem.

Edit: And for that matter, I don't know when Meghan stopped watching Disney, but she isn't savvy or non-dramatic enough to realize/plug the parallels between her and Tiana instead – the POC in a lily-white world who did at least end up working with her Prince.
 
Last edited:
But why would they get involved? They weren't the family he dragged onto Oprah. And it doesn't really serve them to either trash or back Harry, at least not at this point, not until and unless something else happens. Staying quiet appears to be the tactful and tasteful thing to do right now.



I don’t think they should get involved right now. I’m just observing that they’ve managed to keep their views- whatever they may be- to themselves. And given that William and Harry are both their family- I think it’s best. Just interesting really.

So many outlets have discussed this, but what they think, no one has a clue. It’s impressive.
 
The latest they kept me in the house for 4 months story was that when she was staying in Windsor her and Doria wanted to drive to town to buy take out coffee but was banned. I would suggest she was advised for security it would not be a good idea, did nobody give them a coffee maker for a wedding present. Why would you want to drive in a car to buy a coffee to take it back home.
I think it's a cultural difference? I work in an international company and once or twice per year (well, excluding the damned 2020/2021) we get some visitors from the main office in NYC. I swear, every single one of them shows up in the morning, a cup of coffee from Starbucks in hand, while we look at them weirdly, because there is (a really good) coffee machine in the kitchen with free coffee :lol:

But I think this claim was disputed, as there hasn't been found a time when she has not left house for so long... So :whistling: She was able to leave her house whenever she wanted. She was able to leave the country whenever she wanted. She just wanted to portray herself as a victim of the big, bad institutions, with no respect to the people who paid for ther trips and lavish baby showers and hopping around Europe in private jets...
 
But why would they get involved? They weren't the family he dragged onto Oprah. And it doesn't really serve them to either trash or back Harry, at least not at this point, not until and unless something else happens. Staying quiet appears to be the tactful and tasteful thing to do right now.

The Spencer's are not daft, they are keeping close to the crown.
The family have always been courtiers, they will not be doing anything to rock the boat, not saying they don't support Harry but will keep it under wraps. They have another nephew who will be king one day.
 
When I heard the Little Mermaid's reference, I sat and wondered what the hell. Didn't this one turn into seafoam?


Ah, the differences between growing up in a (by then, very recently) ex-Communist country and growing up in Hollywood. In the first setting, it wasn't a sure thing at all that you'd grow up with a video to actually watch The Little Mermaid, so the chances that you'd read the fairytale were higher. To me, the Little Mermaid is always the Andersen's one. The other is Ariel.



It was mildly second-hand embarrassing to watch a grown, educated woman gushing over a film character without any indication that she was acquainted with one of the most famous literary fairytales on which it was based. But then, that's Meghan. That's Hollywood. Even when The Little Mermaid's story would have served her better, by mentioning that she wanted to avoid her fate, took her life in her own hands and achieved her Disney happy ending.


Yes the original Hans Christian Andersen tale didn't have a "Happy Ever After" prince for the Little Mermaid. Though as I recall, she was not transformed into sea foam because of her kind gesture to not kill the prince. I believe she became a spirit of the air?


Considering that Walt Disney's "Little Mermaid" came out in 1989 when Meghan was 7 or 8 years of age, she likely saw the Disney film in the theater or saw it on home video. Perhaps she even dressed up as Ariel the Mermaid for Halloween. From her interview remarks, that's the version that she remembers instead of the original tale.
 
Last edited:
Yes the original Hans Christian Andersen tale didn't have a "Happy Ever After" prince for the Little Mermaid. Though as I recall, she was not transformed into sea foam because of her kind gesture to not kill the prince. I believe she became a spirit of the air?


Considering that Walt Disney's "Little Mermaid" came out in 1989 when Meghan was 7 or 8 years of age, she likely saw the Disney film in the theater or saw it on home video. Perhaps she even dressed up as Ariel the Mermaid for Halloween. From her interview remarks, that's the version that she remembers instead of the original tale.
The Little Mermaid turned into seafoam and then she rose from it to become a spirit of the air. The tale was magnificently translated into Bulgarian and the story was so rich and dramatic that, IMO, it would have made a far better background for the dramatic part Meghan wanted to present. The knives cutting the Little Mermaid's feet (well, the knife-like pain) would have made such a magnificent comparison for Meghan's struggles at each step of the way.


Yes, that's the version she remembers IMO. For myself, I've watched the film many times (first time, the soundtrack was in *German* which, as you might imagine, was not fun for a kid not speaking the language but whatever). I love it. But a Disney princess comparison rubs me the wrong way. It exemplifies the Hollywood ways Meghan wanted to introduce to the RF. And not being acquainted with the original tale somehow fits with her overall approach that time-honoured practices weren't for her and she knew best...
 
It occurs to me that the Spencer side of the family has just been quiet.

A logical explanation could be that they rolled their eyes so badly, they went blind and need to call in assistance to roll their eyes back to them. :rolleyes:

[...]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I suppose ML and Durek haven't straight up publicly attacked and blackmailed her family but I'm not sure I could say it's hugely better. They've done a lot more than just one embarrassing stage show - that parts grieving people from their cash.

I just can't get over what huge ego there is to say all you want "The Institution" to do is protect you from the press whilst getting "upset" that everyone in the world took your accusation about the BRF being racist "the wrong way" and aren't really focusing on H&M in that scenario.

How no one wants to talk to the person who spent nearly 2 hours bringing up every little petty thing that went wrong and purposely distorted the truth for revenge.

And giving your new "friend" permission to say this on life TV in front of millions.

This is just preposterous. Think of the interview what you will but no one's "blackmailing" anyone. "Everyone in the world" definitely haven't reacted badly to the allegations of racism :lol: I suppose if you only read anti-Sussex viewpoints it can come off as such but in reality, there seems to be a big generational divide in the reactions to the allegations. On that, I think The Guardian's Marina Hyde said it best: "a problem if you're in charge of something that has to get handed down the generations". And what truths have they "distorted for revenge"? That's a pretty serious accusation.
_________

This thread has gone a bit off the rails, I think. A bunch of people who were already disproportionally negative towards the Sussexes prior to the interview now repeatedly affirming each other in their dislike of them. I definitely don't agree with everything the Sussexes have said and done but I think everyone in here could benefit from taking a deep breath and maybe attempt to take their most hateful glasses off when looking at them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you are actual royalty, comparing yourself to Disney royalty is a) more than a bit tacky :whistling:, b) pretty shallow :ermm: (so much for being a mermaid) , and c) showing how totally out of your depths you are (...Okay. So she might be on to something) :lol:.

Seriously, if you think RL royalty is meant to be like the Mouse Factory, you're going to have a problem.



Thanks. Part of what really made the Little Mermaid reference so irritating is exactly what you said.
 
But a Disney princess comparison rubs me the wrong way. It exemplifies the Hollywood ways Meghan wanted to introduce to the RF. And not being acquainted with the original tale somehow fits with her overall approach that time-honoured practices weren't for her and she knew best...

I keep thinking about this and I feel like almost any other Disney princess would have been less annoying.
-Aurora/Briar Rose/Sleeping Beauty, who was actually held hostage and without agency?
-Pocahontas, who braved lethal culture clashes and forged her own path?
-Tiana, like I've said, who worked and worked until she made it?
-Rapunzel, who just ran off with her guy to get what she wanted? (Maybe not Tangled.)

But Meghan was so determined to push the "she lost her voice" narrative, she didn't even think about the other ramifications of the analogy and the cluelessness involved. So, not enough of a Disney Princess fan, either, and no points for creativity or originality.
 
This thread has gone a bit off the rails, I think. A bunch of people who were already disproportionally negative towards the Sussexes prior to the interview now repeatedly affirming each other in their dislike of them. I definitely don't agree with everything the Sussexes have said and done but I think everyone in here could benefit from taking a deep breath and maybe attempt to take their most hateful glasses off when looking at them.

Actually, I'm one of the long term followers of the Sussexes that have been in their corner, always tried to see the positive aspects of things and refrained from becoming known as a "stan" or a "hater". This interview though has really made a huge impact on my opinion on them not only in regards to who they are and what they've purported to aim to do but as decent human beings that profess "kindness and compassion". It was a unexpected shock to me. Perhaps I was blind to things. Perhaps I didn't really see what some other people had been seeing. Perhaps I figured "naw... that can't be".

Actions speak louder than words and words amplify actions. I think a lot of us are still reeling from the impact of what's happened and this, actually, is the best way to deal with it. We're discussing in a calm, intelligent manner what we see, how we feel and figuring out just how in the hell the Sussexes will go forward from all this. It's what we do. ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I keep thinking about this and I feel like almost any other Disney princess would have been less annoying.
-Aurora/Briar Rose/Sleeping Beauty, who was actually held hostage and without agency?
-Pocahontas, who braved lethal culture clashes and forged her own path?
-Tiana, like I've said, who worked and worked until she made it?
-Rapunzel, who just ran off with her guy to get what she wanted? (Maybe not Tangled.)

But Meghan was so determined to push the "she lost her voice" narrative, she didn't even think about the other ramifications of the analogy and the cluelessness involved. So, not enough of a Disney Princess fan, either, and no points for creativity or originality.

The thing that killed me about the "losing her voice" analogy is that Ariel knew what she was doing. She agreed to the trade with Ursula and signed on the dotted line. She knew she had three days to win her prince. So, when did Meghan lose her voice exactly? While she and Harry were dating? Did she stifle her true self in order to win her Prince? The whole "Little Mermaid" analogy just made no sense at all to me at the time and it still doesn't.
 
That’s your stance osipi. However, many many posters did not like the Sussexes in the first place, have leapt upon absolutely everything that has happened in the past year, seen it inevitably in a negative light, and have continued the criticisms non stop on the Sussex threads. If the interview hadn’t happened it would have been something else.

I’ve been a Harry supporter for seventeen years, and have seen things imputed to him in these threads that are just beyond reason.
 
Do you think that might be Harry's goal? He seems to genuinely believe that his father and brother are trapped by a sense of duty in a system that's harming them. If the monarchy is abolished, they'd be free to move on with their lives (as Harry has done) without any lingering guilt from abandoning their duty. Or so it might seem to Harry, who may believe he's doing them a favor in the long run.

In all honesty, I think that Harry's goal at this time is to get more money, he can't see far down the road and realize that should the monarchy fail, he will not get a cent. Then, it would truly be all Charles' money.
 
In all honesty, I think that Harry's goal at this time is to get more money, he can't see far down the road and realize that should the monarchy fail, he will not get a cent. Then, it would truly be all Charles' money.

Other than the 5% funding from the Sovereign Grant for his public role doing engagements and duties and taxpayer funded security, everything else financially came from Charles' money to begin with. ;)
 
This is just preposterous. Think of the interview what you will but no one's "blackmailing" anyone. "Everyone in the world" definitely haven't reacted badly to the allegations of racism :lol: I suppose if you only read anti-Sussex viewpoints it can come off as such but in reality, there seems to be a big generational divide in the reactions to the allegations. On that, I think The Guardian's Marina Hyde said it best: "a problem if you're in charge of something that has to get handed down the generations". And what truths have they "distorted for revenge"? That's a pretty serious accusation.
_________

This thread has gone a bit off the rails, I think. A bunch of people who were already disproportionally negative towards the Sussexes prior to the interview now repeatedly affirming each other in their dislike of them. I definitely don't agree with everything the Sussexes have said and done but I think everyone in here could benefit from taking a deep breath and maybe attempt to take their most hateful glasses off when looking at them.

I think most of us are perfectly fine, but thanks for your concern. We are here to discuss the Sussex interview and other news that has transpired which is what this thread is meant for. Everyone is being civil as far as I have seen. I’m enjoying reading even if I may not agree with all points.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I dont think that things will ever be quite the same wiht the RF and Harry.. or at least not for a LONG time. They may have been kidding themselves some of them that this is all about MEg being difficult nad not blaming him so much. But his words and actions have shown that he is bitterly resentful about his own family, and doesn't care how much he hurts or damages them...

I personally think this was, for Harry, more than about what happened the last two years. I don't believe he was dragged into this interview. I think he wanted to 'burn it all down' on his way out the door. I really think his commentary that his father and brother were "trapped" wasn't out of any empathy for his family, but to hurt the standing of the monarchy. If Harry and Meghan cannot be the most loved members of the monarchy, he wants no one to be.

(This leads me to hypothesize that Harry could have purposefully misled Meghan on a few key facts, such as the fake wedding, that only HRH Princes get security, and that there was no plan to slim down the monarchy for his childrens' generation. He wanted an ally as angry and hurt as he was.)

So I very much expect this to only be the first chapter of Harry's public war against the monarchy. And that's really, truly, sad. I think the monarchy will survive, but Charles won't live forever. I have always worried that both brothers assumed that Charles's longevity gave them infinite time to mend their relationships. He was a vastly imperfect father, but I question that he was a terrible father.
 
My favourite picture is the one in SA that's exactly Diana in Africa, down to the pose. Same outfit, same accessories, hands on hips everything. She knew what she was doing there, so she'd clearly done a lot of Diana research. Why couldn't she have researched royal protocol and expectations as well?

That lends credence to some staffers saying she was determined to be the poor outsider if she/they couldn't have it all their own way.

I do like that article pointing out that she didn't seem to have realised that she was the Fergie, not the Diana in "The Institution". Little different there.

Is this the picture you are talking about?

https://akm-img-a-in.tosshub.com/in....CMblBQAfLcWZjcRdLV_vCNAgHog5l9&size=1200:675
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom