Meghan and Harry in Hollywood

[mepps]

That interview was something...oooh child!
They burned ALL the bridges, especially Harry.
Not sure what he thought he was accomplishing, by taking down his entire family, and in such a passive aggressive way.
I'm not sure how he can ever go home. Meghan won America, which was always her plan, and it will pay off lucratively for her.
I wish them both the best, but I fear this will end in tears for them both.

 

[Benn98]

I can't find the interview anywhere online, well because I haven't been looking hard enough probably, will wait till later when it shows on ITV.
Apparently, Oprah sold the interview to CBS for $79 million, and I bet CBS tacked on another markup and sold it to ITV. And they've made sure to go live on Women's Day to shame any vilification of Meghan.

Shameless, the lot of them!

 

[badgalcrush]

If anyone want to watch this interview : https://vidlox.me/3wy22qvot3by

Some really interesting moments are cut

 

[MulletProof]

because I have a super early morning routine

it's all fun and games till you meet your match and she/he is excited that you are working too, and next thing you know, it's okay to call you Sunday at 8 pm or Tuesday at 5:45 am to go over the email you just sent.

Now.. you can't burn a bridge if someone else has done it for you. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I saw half of a livestream of the interview.. mostly the part with Harry. He seems pretty angry at his family (and with a good reason- what's with that 'either fully in or FULLY OUT'.. talk about having no minimal sense of family) but he seems particularly angry at Charles.. Charles' life seems to have been a walking disappointment, but we all know that right?. I really believe the Queen is out of it and that they get along with her well.. it's just sad that.. how many years can she have left? 5? Charles is up next so.. good luck with his Scorpio ways lol.

 

[ThatDudeOverTher]

So many angry Brits keep complaining that M&H keep wanting attention only when it suits them. Can one of you actually tell me how many interviews/press this couple actually did for themselves?? Because as far as I'm aware, it's ALWAYS the tabloids publishing nonsense about them every chance they get. They saturate all forms of media with news about the couple and people react to it as though it's M&H who are giving interviews.

Still to this day none of you can explain why the media fawned over Kate adoringly (nothing wrong with that) but skinned Meghan over the exact same things - cradling baby bump, avocados, shoes, etc etc

Also, it's frustrating that people seem to believe that just because you have some status (or your family does), money, fame, that you are immune to mental health issues or that you deserve to be bullied just for existing. The garbage "they are funded by tax payers" excuse is ridiculous! Tax payers also fund healthcare workers, sanitation workers, teachers, etc. Do they too deserve to be abused in this way or is it solely because this couple is also in the spotlight.

I also want one of you Royal sympathizers to explain the bit about the family being concerned about Archie's skin color before he was even born and protocol being changed while Meghan was pregnant so that he wouldn't be given a title. Are you also, like that turd Piers Morgan, going to say that she is lying about her mental health issues as well?

Every single person of color around the world believes Meghan. You know why? Because every. single. one. of us live that experience.

I'm disgusted!

 

[Benn98]

^Let's not even start the attention debate because the British public, my God the world, got to know Meghan Markle on the cover of Vanity Fair. Days later news of her engagement followed. Little over a year of marriage she guest-edited the September issue of British Vogue. These are not the markings of someone who sought privacy.

Also, the theory that the media fawned over Kate is brazenly untrue. People seem to forget that Kate was married for at least 5/6 years before Meghan and Harry got married. And during that period they've thrashed her for everything from being too lazy, hemlines being too short, clothes too expensive, her family being either too posh or not posh enough, 'waity Katie' meaning her biggest accomplishment in life was marrying Prince William. In short, the same petty stuff Meghan is being thrashed for. Comparing the media treatment of Meghan vs Kate won't hold up.

Whatever was said pertaining to the child on her mental health was uncalled for, tasteless, and indefensible. No two ways about that. But when it comes to everything else, I'm sorry, I simply don't see her as a victim.

it's all fun and games till you meet your match and she/he is excited that you are working too, and next thing you know, it's okay to call you Sunday at 8 pm or Tuesday at 5:45 am to go over the email you just sent.

No, please! LOL. That sounds awful

 

[ghostwriter10549]

They should have leaked all this information before start interviews, like Diana did and yes, the Diana situation and the H&M situation are very different, but I think that it would help Meghan to get more people on her side. Kate visible struggled in the first years and people saw that, but I think that the fact that she did not said anything, make us really like her, made her look strong.

Im not 100% on board on this narrative. The blatant racism is gonna cause real problems to the palace and I'm on H&M side, it can really bring some changes to the royal family, but beyond that, I'm bored actually, another royal family circus and Meghan is not interesting to me even as villan.

 

[ThatDudeOverTher]

^Let's not even start the attention debate because the British public, my God the world, got to know Meghan Markle on the cover of Vanity Fair. Days later news of her engagement followed. Little over a year of marriage she guest-edited the September issue of British Vogue. These are not the markings of someone who sought privacy.

I still fail to understand how appearing on Vanity Fair and editing Vogue is justification for the constant barrage of hate. As they explained in the interview, they were happy to continue performing their "service," they just wanted to step back as "senior" members because of the press attention that came with it... you know, a la Michael and his kids, but were not allowed to.

And there's simply no comparison between calling Kate "Waity Katie" and majority of the nastiness that have been leveled at Meghan. I mean, seriously, coming for her over eating Avocado and linking it to human rights issues? And as revealed in the interview last night, the story about how mean girl Meghan made Kate cry and which the press really went after her for, turned out to not only be wrong, but it was the other way around!

I haven't seen Meghan and Harry do anything to deserve any of this and Meghan's only fault is that she's an American woman and divorced actress who came and got the Prince. I'm not gonna throw the racism charge at everyone who don't like her, but it's visible to anyone with sense that there's more than a fair amount of it as well.

 

[Phuel]

I don’t have a horse in this race: I couldn’t care less about the Royals nor her if I tried any less (and that goes for Benn’s beloved Diana).

There’s no doubt that she was treated in a racist manner because of her biracial lineage. But anyone that thinks that had the table been reversed— that a White women marrying into a ME or African royal family wouldn’t be subjected to the same racist discrimination and scrutinized by their public, that only Black individuals ever face such racism and discrimination, would have to be either be ignorant and/or delusional. Racism is an equal-opportunity companion all around the world.

My impression, and likely the British public’s, is that the blatantly manipulative, calculating, and contrived self-serving image she’s pushed— starting with the hugely distasteful Vanity Fair coverstory move to further her CV as an actress is a main culprit for the British public for not taking to her. And now for the ultimate epic with an Oprah interview that’s the equivalent of being baptized Hollywood Royalty, her initiation into that club that she would never have gotten into had she not married a British Prince, is now complete. Good for her for her ferocious ambition, I suppose— but take some accountability for the backlash. If a layman such as myself can clearly see her tacky social climbing tactics, I don’t blame the family that she’s marrying into for shunning her— let alone the British public.

 

[MulletProof]

^ I always got the impression (an admittedly limited and mediocre one based on traveling/migrant communities rather than actually living in the region) that marrying white or just white-r is seen as positive among some groups, like 'ugh you did so well! your children are going to be stunning!', whereas marrying black isn't.. I've seen it a lot among Asians, same in Latin American communities, Northern African.. Indians, even among black men. But maybe I'm being wild with assumptions here...

I don't get this swinging to the extremes, is the public really unable to do just a bit better than that? she didn't even mention Kate hadn't been through any of that, or that Kate's the antagonist (she actually said she's a good person).. just suggested that the Palace will sometimes clear up some of the silliest rumor but somehow, they remained silent on the smear campaign carried out by the press, knowing it was taking a toll on both her and Harry. She said that Kate vs. Meghan nonsense was a turning point and it could've been prevented since it was based on a story that centered her as the bad one.

In my view, it's all kind of sexist really.. why not Meghan vs. Charles or Kate vs. Edward? .. no, it has to be women with superficial similarities like age and weight lol, but contrasting backgrounds and sense of fashion so you know what that means: WAR. These two are well into their 30s.. you know what happens in your 30s? you're not 'building' your circle of friends, you already have one, you're not suddenly going to replace your best friends with someone you barely know just because she's married to your husband's brother..

I still can't get on board with this 'ultra calculating, she had it all planned!' image.. I remember the Vanity Fair cover feeling like an open and tasteless invitation for the press and I'm still baffled Harry wouldn't stop that.. but I genuinely believe it was actually the opposite, a very poor and ignorant calibration of the international press.. and I feel like this perception is not rare among Angelenos like she is, just like she said in the interview, people in LA seem to truly believe that they 'get' the media far more than anyone anywhere else and that they can play the game and adjust the settings of 'exposure' and 'privacy' whenever they like because ~Hollywood~... little did she know, she was joining a more pompous Order of the Solar Temple.. even had to hand out the passport.

 

[ghostwriter10549]

^ I always got the impression (an admittedly limited and mediocre one based on traveling/migrant communities rather than actually living in the region) that marrying white or just white-r is seen as positive among some groups, like 'ugh you did so well! your children are going to be stunning!', whereas marrying black isn't.. I've seen it a lot among Asians, same in Latin American communities, Northern African.. Indians, even among black men. But maybe I'm being wild with assumptions here...

I don't get this swinging to the extremes, is the public really unable to do just a bit better than that? she didn't even mention Kate hadn't been through any of that, or that Kate's the antagonist (she actually said she's a good person).. just suggested that the Palace will sometimes clear up some of the silliest rumor but somehow, they remained silent on the smear campaign carried out by the press, knowing it was taking a toll on both her and Harry. She said that Kate vs. Meghan nonsense was a turning point and it could've been prevented since it was based on a story that centered her as the bad one.

In my view, it's all kind of sexist really.. why not Meghan vs. Charles or Kate vs. Edward? .. no, it has to be women with superficial similarities like age and weight lol, but contrasting backgrounds and sense of fashion so you know what that means: WAR. These two are well into their 30s.. you know what happens in your 30s? you're not 'building' your circle of friends, you already have one, you're not suddenly going to replace your best friends with someone you barely know just because she's married to your husband's brother..

I still can't get on board with this 'ultra calculating, she had it all planned!' image.. I remember the Vanity Fair cover feeling like an open and tasteless invitation for the press and I'm still baffled Harry wouldn't stop that.. but I genuinely believe it was actually the opposite, a very poor and ignorant calibration of the international press.. and I feel like this perception is not rare among Angelenos like she is, just like she said in the interview, people in LA seem to truly believe that they 'get' the media far more than anyone anywhere else and that they can play the game and adjust the settings of 'exposure' and 'privacy' whenever they like because ~Hollywood~... little did she know, she was joining a more pompous Order of the Solar Temple.. even had to hand out the passport.

She really that she could aim a Kim K celeb level without major backlash. Kim K, Taylor S, Justin B... All there "american royals" have all the love in the world and all the hate in the world, that's how the game is played and that's what the british royals never wanted for themselves, even Diana, but H&M, naively or not, turn all the cameras to them.

 

[Joromana]

I still fail to understand how appearing on Vanity Fair and editing Vogue is justification for the constant barrage of hate. As they explained in the interview, they were happy to continue performing their "service," they just wanted to step back as "senior" members because of the press attention that came with it... you know, a la Michael and his kids, but were not allowed to.

And there's simply no comparison between calling Kate "Waity Katie" and majority of the nastiness that have been leveled at Meghan. I mean, seriously, coming for her over eating Avocado and linking it to human rights issues? And as revealed in the interview last night, the story about how mean girl Meghan made Kate cry and which the press really went after her for, turned out to not only be wrong, but it was the other way around!

Lol... This is ridiculous.

Yes Kate Middleton experienced gossip. We all remember that. But it was NOWHERE NEAR the smear campaign that went on against Meghan Markle.

 

[Benn98]

Uhm, whose idea was it to convert This Morning's studio into Gail King's terrace? The level of cringe.

So the writer who published the story about Kate crying is also the royal correspondent for This Morning, and she states her case here. Starts at 6:43

 

[tigerrouge]

It’s all so sad and tawdry when it should be so happy and hopeful.

Marrying into the royal family of any country must be like stepping into one of the weirdest family structures in the world – I can see why someone would want to return to the freedoms of their former life.

As for Harry, at the moment, he may like to describe his former life as a cage, but his position protected him from so much of life – and now he’s out in the wilderness. While he may have riches and 'freedom' at his fingertips, that doesn’t necessarily translate into good mental health and happiness, and branding himself online as “his mother’s son” might come to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

If we ever find ourselves with a platform to speak to an innumerable amount of people, we would like to think we would be ready for it – that we’ve worked on ourselves enough to be able to “go high” in response to low things, like Michelle Obama advised.

Would we use that platform to raise awareness of issues, but employing the higher aim of the humanitarian, focusing on how to bring people together to a new understanding, a better way forward - or would we use it to sow strife and misunderstanding, looking no further than our personal grievances? That choice is the measure of the person we are, in that moment.

 

[LostInNJ]

Uhm, whose idea was it to convert This Morning's studio into Gail King's terrace? The level of cringe.

So the writer who published the story about Kate crying is also the royal correspondent for This Morning, and she states her case here. Starts at 6:43

It's funny how even when confronted with the truth, and the reporters on the show bring to her attention that all of what she is saying and said was addressed in the interview, she still refused to take accountability or believe she was wrong.

Not funny really; sad.

 

[Phuel]

^ I always got the impression (an admittedly limited and mediocre one based on traveling/migrant communities rather than actually living in the region) that marrying white or just white-r is seen as positive among some groups, like 'ugh you did so well! your children are going to be stunning!', whereas marrying black isn't.. I've seen it a lot among Asians, same in Latin American communities, Northern African.. Indians, even among black men. But maybe I'm being wild with assumptions here...

Not when it comes to “royalty”… They don’t need “White” association LOL No doubt there are many ethnicities that believe dating/marrying a Caucasian is seen as an elevated status for their own worth (…I’d even add that there are many White women that only ever date Black men for social status within their circles). I have friends that will only date people of a specific race or only of their own race: A French White woman who will only dates Black men; a Trinidadian who will only date Asian women; a Jamaican man who only dates Black women. It’s not a matter of observation but they’ve blankly said so. Are they racists…???

But speaking specifically of “royalty” and the importance of tradition/ceremony/pomp and circumstance, etc— there is this unspoken expectation that’s to be honoured. I was friends with a Kenyan Prince, and it was just accepted that he would marry whomever his family chose for him: Marriage and his future spouse was just protocol to him… that wouldn’t affect the least that he went out with many many White women— just wouldn’t marry one of them. Marriage was for the family lineage, while his own affairs were just that— his private affairs.

(Yay, tiger's back!)

 

[MulletProof]

^ you're right.. you did say royalty initially and it does change everything, even I am uncomfortable with the idea of a head of state marrying a foreigner (won't even get down to race).. no good reason really, I guess it just shows less.. patriotism, and why do I care about filthy concepts like patriotism? I don't know..

As for whether the choices of regular citizens are racists or not.. well... if I tell you I don't date anyone under 22, but yes to 22-37, but no 38-46, yes 46-55, no 55 and over... you could say these are simply my preferences, or say that my preferences are highly ageist, or that maybe I truly associate a certain level of attractiveness to a number and that can't possibly be rational.... and all of these statements would be right.

and that's what the british royals never wanted for themselves, even Diana.

I'm not sure about that, they always look like doodles so it's easy to suggest it's their call to receive zero of that obsessive attention for their looks/outfits/hookups and that scrutiny is exclusively reserved to their lavish lifestyle or sex trafficking hobbies.. but look at them when the genetic jackpot is hit and they come out like Diana or Amelia, they may not love it at first but they learn to do so eventually, always.

 

[Joromana]

^ you're right.. you did say royalty initially and it does change everything, even I am uncomfortable with the idea of a head of state marrying a foreigner (won't even get down to race).. no good reason really, I guess it just shows less.. patriotism, and why do I care about filthy concepts like patriotism? I don't know..

Ah, the good old 'it's not racism, it's a preference' spiel.

It’s not a matter of observation but they’ve blankly said so. Are they racists…???

Yes, they are racists. Fetishism is still a form of racism. Are they KKK-supporting etc extremists? No, I am sure they are fine people. It doesn't take away that it is a form of racism.

At the end of the day, we've all been indoctrinated with different forms of racism, whether conscious or not.

 

[Benn98]

It's funny how even when confronted with the truth, and the reporters on the show bring to her attention that all of what she is saying and said was addressed in the interview, she still refused to take accountability or believe she was wrong.

Not funny really; sad.

If Camilla (the writer) is so hell-bent that her version of events is in fact accurate (giving her the benefit of the doubt), then it must mean Meghan's own household conspired against her. Because they, knowing what the 'facts' were, didn't refute it.

And I wish people would stop going after Kate. I've been seeing a lot of 'if Kate knew the story was untrue why didn't she say anything? She's complicit!'. Well, if Meghan is to be believed, then Kate's hands were tied as well so why would she have this magical power to override the press office and send out a statement to correct the story?

Anyway, what an impossible situation but there are always two sides to a story. I can't remember what the public sentiment was like when Diana did her bombshell interview at the time and what impact it had, but I do remember that the love and respect for the monarchy remained unwavering. Maybe this time around their reputation is more damaged, but Meghan and Harry both showed nothing but respect for the Queen whenever they mentioned her in that interview and I doubt whether most Brits will think otherwise. And so because the Queen is still the cornerstone of the palace and wield all the public approval, I predict that the palace will issue a heartfelt statement which is needed considering the explosive claims, rise above all the noise, and get on with their duties. It's what being English is all about, well mostly. If they're clever enough they should address the matter of race through some of the initiatives. But they won't be doing tell-alls airing dirty laundry or 'clap back'.

I bet Anna's primary goal right now is to secure Meghan for a cover.

 

[ThatDudeOverTher]

If Camilla (the writer) is so hell-bent that her version of events is in fact accurate (giving her the benefit of the doubt), then it must mean Meghan's own household conspired against her. Because they, knowing what the 'facts' were, didn't refute it.

And I wish people would stop going after Kate. I've been seeing a lot of 'if Kate knew the story was untrue why didn't she say anything? She's complicit!'. Well, if Meghan is to be believed, then Kate's hands were tied as well so why would she have this magical power to override the press office and send out a statement to correct the story?

Both those things are exactly what Meghan said in the interview. They can't do things on their own. A lot of the viciousness stemmed from that story about her making Kate cry, which the royals and their team knew was not true. They (the royal apparatus) didn't refute the story and so, much of the public sentiment changed from being welcoming to hateful because it painted Meghan as a villain. Add to that, people like Piers Morgan who had a personal vendetta against Meghan, which he admits himself. He and Meghan went out once and he thought it was a nice "date" but never heard from her again. Though Meghan thought that she was just having drinks with someone. When people like that with national platforms can continuously attack someone's character, the more gullible in society will believe it. There was an article a day or so ago showing that Piers tweeted over 200(!!!) spiteful messages at Meghan in the last 2 years. 200!

She also said that they (she, Kate, Harry, and I presume also William) are not able to issue their own statements or really do anything without going through the "institution." She explicitly stated that even though it was the opposite that happened, she wouldn't say more on it because it wouldn't be fair to Kate and that she is a good person. I don't think Kate has the ability to refute those stories.

Btw, having to give up your passport, IDs, keys when you marry into the family is very strange. I'm sure there's reason for it, but it reeks of imprisonment.