My good lady would of turned that into a planter with in minutes of landing!
2 Likes
The whole thing around Harry and his wife.
We don’t like the media attention in the UK, so we’re going to America to escape it.
The best way to escape it … go on an Oprah Winfrey show, which won’t attract any media attention in the UK at all.
Thankfully The Queen has seen through the wait and see year and acted appropriately.
Markle for all her “Hollywood” savvy was extremely naive if she thought she could effectively dictate terms to The Queen. I don’t think Harry had any say or part in this. Obviously didn’t do the background check of The Queen seeing the effect a divorced American woman had on the Royal Family.
3 Likes
What effect was that as opposed to that of a divorced English woman with children?
1 Like
I’d blame the father… 
Seriously though, Harry had huge respect (especially from the military fraternity) for his active tours in the British Army.
To me, all gone now; the sniping (which I would place very firmly on Megan’s shoulders) & very recent petulance about “service is universal” is totally unacceptable.
1 Like
I really don’t understand why anyone cares what they do.
Just let them go. If you’re upset about them leaving, stop reading news about them.
4 Likes
I think you’re over simplifying their desire.
They are hoping to escape the invasion of privacy by the media which they experience in the UK
Going on telly is controlling what the media sees they are ok with as they are volunteering for it.
Tom Hanks is happy to go on talk shows and be questioned about his career/latest film but he’s not ok having his family being hounded by the paparazzi and exposing elements of his private life.
For some reason people think it’s OK for Tom to have that outlook but ridiculous for members of the Royal family to have the same relationship with the media
4 Likes
No, I don’t think that’s quite it - I certainly think they want to control the media narrative, but I think that they want to do so to a degree that is impossible.
Tom Hanks does interviews to plug his stuff, but other articles are written about him all the time, none of which he has control over. He accepts that on the basis that he can control/limit how much others see of him - he doesn’t fall out of clubs half naked, or sleep with randomers - but that he can’t control/limit who, and how much, others look at/for him.
That, it seems to me, is where the dreadful duo diverge from him - they want to control not only what others see (and who doesn’t?), but who and when others may look at them.
This is where the cherry picking thing comes from - that one day they want millions of people to watch them on TV, and the next they want to be private individuals who no one is interested in.
To me, their adventures and travels look like the petulance of those who discover anew, at each stage, that the world hasn’t changed, that the rules they railed against in London still apply in Toronto, and LA - they want to be both public and private, adored and ignored, rich and poor, in the firm and out of it, and each new change they make is simply the slamming doors of teenage tantrums.
If they had simply wanted to retire from public life, to drift out of the papers and the scandal rags, then they should simply have bought a ranch in Alberta - they are collectively worth about £40million, they could buy a place that stretched from one horizon to the other, and only be seen in public when buying cattle feed or whatever. For the first year or so they’d have had paparazzi, but end the world would get bored of pictures of ‘man buys cattle feed’, and ‘woman in slightly grimy jeans buys bags of sugar’.
Limited public duties but unlimited public funds. Unlimited publicity but limited scrutiny. Unlimited influence but limited accountability.
Sorry, but that’s not how the world works…
The problem that they have, is that the media’s treatment of Meghan is so farcically negative it makes one seriously question whether there is in fact a racial element to it.
Check out the link below, the media treatment of Kate v Meghan, when they do the exact same thing: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.buzzfeednews.com/amphtml/ellievhall/meghan-markle-kate-middleton-double-standards-royal
If that was my wife getting that level of abuse, I’d be trying to get away from them too.
3 Likes
The problem is that if that is how they feel, and they wish to get away from the media who treat them so unfairly - which they are absolutely entitled to do - becoming Netflix producers and going on Oprah Winfrey is a novel way of getting away from the media…
1 Like
I think a lot of the difference is that post Diana they feel they can’t get away with going after a Princess of Wales for Headlines, whereas MM is seen as an Actress and therefore fair game.
But you can see why Harry would be rightly annoyed at William for not saying anything about it. The difference in treatment, when they do the EXACT SAME THING is ridiculous!
2 Likes
Being a member of the Royal Family means 24/7 media attention, do or say something wrong or ill-advised and the media are all over it. But the British people are forgiving, given they probably say and or do worse things, but no one takes much notice.
I don’t have any problems with Catherine. From the first time she appeared with William, I thought he had done well for himself. A good looking honest girl, seemingly no airs and graces and she has proved to be good for him and a good mum. She seems to have adopted the right model for being a Royal spouse, half a pace behind and not an equal, in public at least. I never saw Markle adopting this role. There was also the fact she reportedly left a load of her clothes etc back across the pond, which made you think she wasn’t fully committed. So she’s come across for me as disingenuous and manipulative.
When you get married you (or we did) would expect to take all your things with you and make a commitment to your spouse, not keep a foot in both camps. One of the couples in the village 2 of their children married over the pond and after their honeymoons took a load of their clothes and special items to the US and Canada, all but a few items special to mum and dad was given to charity shops.
@Giminion I refer to Mrs Simpson, which you probably knew. It was pity Charles couldn’t have married Camilla earlier, but I think she knows in certain circles she’s probably not fully accepted, but has been good for Charles, which is the most important thing.
I don’t know whether you censure you for the misogyny or the racism. Please choose and I’ll I’ll apply the ban 
6 Likes
Pardon? You’ve lost me there.
Can you elucidate.
You’ve been racist and misogynistic in your post…worthy of a ban and pEp would like you to choose which one you’d like to be banned for…
1 Like
How on either count?
Not sure where what I said indicates I dislike women, odd given I’ve been married to one for over 30 years and have 2 daughters, all of whom I love.
As for racist again how or where.
So the white woman you refer to by first name. You think she’s attractive (enough to comment on), she’s “a good mum”, she’s “honest”, no “airs or graces”. She’s only allowed to be behind her husband, not an equal (only in public though so that’s fine right?)
The non white woman you refer to by surname. You didn’t see her acting identically to the perfect white woman, so it’s obviously not true.
You’ve described her as manipulative and disingenuous simply for daring to have some clothes in another continent.
Quite how committing to someone in marriage means you aren’t allowed to own your own clothes somewhere I don’t know, but if you feel you can in a way that doesn’t make you come across as more of a misogynistic oaf than you already do, feel free.
Racism and misogyny aren’t simply using the N word or beating women. Take some time to educate yourself, for your own benefit.
6 Likes
Just watched some of the briefing, Huw Edwards told us everything we needed to know before anyone official came out.