Meghan Markle and Prince Harry News and Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. As a member of this particular club this piece was annoying to read. Meghan is an absolute shitastic writer and really needs to stop trying. The part below just didn't happen. No way, she's just full of shit. I'm sorry for her loss, because I do know what it's like, but stop the flowery over descriptive prose with unnecessary embellishing because she comes across as an idiot instead of a real person.

"I dropped to the floor with him in my arms, humming a lullaby to keep us both calm, the cheerful tune a stark contrast to my sense that something was not right," she wrote.

It is so interesting that you pulled out these sentences as untruthful. I was cringing at their dishonesty as I was reading them only minutes earlier on the NYTimes.

Ultimately I think Markle is just not as smart as most people, and that is why she keeps pitching things incorrectly, striking the wrong chord and pissing a large portion of the population off. That and the fact she is a narcissist.

I'm the PP you responded to. The whole thing reads like she's painting herself as an ethereal Madonna come down from heaven instead of a real person experiencing raw emotions. The miscarriage experience sucks. There's a lot of blood, and I was scared, angry, and just sad. I wasn't kissing my husbands clammy hand wet from our mutual tears. I was numb, in shock, and trying to understand what was happening. None of this piece resonated with me or felt true. Who is the intended audience?

As a narcissist, it's unlikely she even felt those emotions--they are emotional sponges and thrive on the need for admiration, empaths are highly sensitive and in tune with other people's emotions. Many women don't go through a lot of emotion or grief over a miscarriage, especially early on. But it doesn't fit her narrative at all, and it would not suit her image to say "hey, I had a miscarriage, these things happen and it wasn't that big of a deal".

Everything she does and says is manipulative. She lost me years ago when she said she didn't know who Harry was when she was told about him. Yeah, right.

I immediately thought- the narcissist is taking control of her narrative again. I can’t believe the NYT published it. Everything, right down to seeing that woman crying on the street rang so hollow. I haven’t looked at the NYT comments on her piece since this morning. There were over three hundred at the time and they were resoundingly positive. Exactly the opposite of DCUM. So many women pouring their hearts out to her as they had experienced miscarriages as well.

[Anonymous]

Playing the victim. Again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. As a member of this particular club this piece was annoying to read. Meghan is an absolute shitastic writer and really needs to stop trying. The part below just didn't happen. No way, she's just full of shit. I'm sorry for her loss, because I do know what it's like, but stop the flowery over descriptive prose with unnecessary embellishing because she comes across as an idiot instead of a real person.

"I dropped to the floor with him in my arms, humming a lullaby to keep us both calm, the cheerful tune a stark contrast to my sense that something was not right," she wrote.

It is so interesting that you pulled out these sentences as untruthful. I was cringing at their dishonesty as I was reading them only minutes earlier on the NYTimes.

Ultimately I think Markle is just not as smart as most people, and that is why she keeps pitching things incorrectly, striking the wrong chord and pissing a large portion of the population off. That and the fact she is a narcissist.

I'm the PP you responded to. The whole thing reads like she's painting herself as an ethereal Madonna come down from heaven instead of a real person experiencing raw emotions. The miscarriage experience sucks. There's a lot of blood, and I was scared, angry, and just sad. I wasn't kissing my husbands clammy hand wet from our mutual tears. I was numb, in shock, and trying to understand what was happening. None of this piece resonated with me or felt true. Who is the intended audience?

As a narcissist, it's unlikely she even felt those emotions--they are emotional sponges and thrive on the need for admiration, empaths are highly sensitive and in tune with other people's emotions. Many women don't go through a lot of emotion or grief over a miscarriage, especially early on. But it doesn't fit her narrative at all, and it would not suit her image to say "hey, I had a miscarriage, these things happen and it wasn't that big of a deal".

Everything she does and says is manipulative. She lost me years ago when she said she didn't know who Harry was when she was told about him. Yeah, right.

I immediately thought- the narcissist is taking control of her narrative again. I can’t believe the NYT published it. Everything, right down to seeing that woman crying on the street rang so hollow. I haven’t looked at the NYT comments on her piece since this morning. There were over three hundred at the time and they were resoundingly positive. Exactly the opposite of DCUM. So many women pouring their hearts out to her as they had experienced miscarriages as well.

Well I'm glad some women who've experienced miscarriages found this helpful and relatable. I've always found her actressy and insincere, and nothing about this op-ed change my mind.

[Anonymous]

She talks about herself a lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The level of virtriol on here for a woman who has has a miscarriage is truly horrific.

No. What is horrific is her trying to take advantage of something experienced by many people and trying to shamelessly capitalize on it by pushing a selfish agenda to keep her name in the spotlight and make "are you ok" a thing. Have some standards, woman. The writing is utter shit and overwrought to boot.

Exactly. This is about making “Are you OK?” a thing and such a transparent attempt at changing how negatively her “no one asked if I’m ok” gaffe went down. That she is using a miscarriage to do it AND tying it to global suffering and “the loses we all share” is barf-o-rama. Shame on the NYT. I promise her Northwestern peers who attended the J school are recoiling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. As a member of this particular club this piece was annoying to read. Meghan is an absolute shitastic writer and really needs to stop trying. The part below just didn't happen. No way, she's just full of shit. I'm sorry for her loss, because I do know what it's like, but stop the flowery over descriptive prose with unnecessary embellishing because she comes across as an idiot instead of a real person.

"I dropped to the floor with him in my arms, humming a lullaby to keep us both calm, the cheerful tune a stark contrast to my sense that something was not right," she wrote.

It is so interesting that you pulled out these sentences as untruthful. I was cringing at their dishonesty as I was reading them only minutes earlier on the NYTimes.

Ultimately I think Markle is just not as smart as most people, and that is why she keeps pitching things incorrectly, striking the wrong chord and pissing a large portion of the population off. That and the fact she is a narcissist.

I'm the PP you responded to. The whole thing reads like she's painting herself as an ethereal Madonna come down from heaven instead of a real person experiencing raw emotions. The miscarriage experience sucks. There's a lot of blood, and I was scared, angry, and just sad. I wasn't kissing my husbands clammy hand wet from our mutual tears. I was numb, in shock, and trying to understand what was happening. None of this piece resonated with me or felt true. Who is the intended audience?

As a narcissist, it's unlikely she even felt those emotions--they are emotional sponges and thrive on the need for admiration, empaths are highly sensitive and in tune with other people's emotions. Many women don't go through a lot of emotion or grief over a miscarriage, especially early on. But it doesn't fit her narrative at all, and it would not suit her image to say "hey, I had a miscarriage, these things happen and it wasn't that big of a deal".

Everything she does and says is manipulative. She lost me years ago when she said she didn't know who Harry was when she was told about him. Yeah, right.

I immediately thought- the narcissist is taking control of her narrative again. I can’t believe the NYT published it. Everything, right down to seeing that woman crying on the street rang so hollow. I haven’t looked at the NYT comments on her piece since this morning. There were over three hundred at the time and they were resoundingly positive. Exactly the opposite of DCUM. So many women pouring their hearts out to her as they had experienced miscarriages as well.

Well I'm glad some women who've experienced miscarriages found this helpful and relatable. I've always found her actressy and insincere, and nothing about this op-ed change my mind.

I’m the PP and agree with you. If it helps some people, that’s great. It doesn’t change the fact that she is the definition of a narcissist.

[Anonymous]

Please don’t derail this thread with mean pointless crap about birth control and age of conception. There are other threads for that nonsense. This is a thread about Meghan and Harry, and why we like or don’t like them. Meghan’s column would have been tone-deaf PR if she were 24 instead of 40. Actually, it would have been less tone-deaf at 24, because we could forgive her juvenile writing more easily. This is about her and how she behaves, not about fertility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please don’t derail this thread with mean pointless crap about birth control and age of conception. There are other threads for that nonsense. This is a thread about Meghan and Harry, and why we like or don’t like them. Meghan’s column would have been tone-deaf PR if she were 24 instead of 40. Actually, it would have been less tone-deaf at 24, because we could forgive her juvenile writing more easily. This is about her and how she behaves, not about fertility.

Well said.

[Anonymous]

I guess I could google this, but did she actually say somewhere that she had to use fertility treatments?

[Anonymous]

LOL this thread and its sister thread on GOMI are so weird. It’s like a parallel universe. Most people I know in real life are indifferent or slightly positive toward Meghan. She seems like one of the most inoffensive people on the planet. I REALLY don’t get the strong feelings here! Imagine caring and posting that much about a celeb that you don’t even like. Couldn’t be me!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LOL this thread and its sister thread on GOMI are so weird. It’s like a parallel universe. Most people I know in real life are indifferent or slightly positive toward Meghan. She seems like one of the most inoffensive people on the planet. I REALLY don’t get the strong feelings here! Imagine caring and posting that much about a celeb that you don’t even like. Couldn’t be me!

NP. same here. This is so odd. Have not seen this level of hatred directed at any other celeb (except Trump)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL this thread and its sister thread on GOMI are so weird. It’s like a parallel universe. Most people I know in real life are indifferent or slightly positive toward Meghan. She seems like one of the most inoffensive people on the planet. I REALLY don’t get the strong feelings here! Imagine caring and posting that much about a celeb that you don’t even like. Couldn’t be me!

NP. same here. This is so odd. Have not seen this level of hatred directed at any other celeb (except Trump)

Well, and Gwyneth, Hilaria, and pretty much any other woman discussed here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL this thread and its sister thread on GOMI are so weird. It’s like a parallel universe. Most people I know in real life are indifferent or slightly positive toward Meghan. She seems like one of the most inoffensive people on the planet. I REALLY don’t get the strong feelings here! Imagine caring and posting that much about a celeb that you don’t even like. Couldn’t be me!

NP. same here. This is so odd. Have not seen this level of hatred directed at any other celeb (except Trump)

Well, and Gwyneth, Hilaria, and pretty much any other woman discussed here.

I have no idea about Hilaria other than she has a lot of kids. Gwyneth has been a celeb for a long time and really puts herself out there for mockery a lot with the Goop stuff. I feel like she’s A LOT more out there doing and saying weird stuff than Meghan ever was. To my observation, Harry and Meghan come out with a (probably staged, but they all do it) paparazzi picture or doing a photo op every few months and a few people just go absolutely rabid about it and make up all kinds of outlandish theories and motivations behind it. It’s honestly very weird.

[Anonymous]

She is so shallow, immature and narcissistic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The level of virtriol on here for a woman who has has a miscarriage is truly horrific.

Not surprising. The comments here are disgusting and Reddit level vile.

I am relatively neutral on MM (really loved her wedding and think they are a cute couple, but don't really get what their deal is now). However, the idea that a woman having a miscarriage means that you can't dislike her or disagree with any of her actions (including the choice to discuss her miscarriage in the NYT) is silly. Miscarriages are super common. They suck, but they aren't a get out of jail free card. You can criticize a woman who had a miscarriage, just like you can criticize someone who's lost a parent or someone who has a chronic illness. It's fine.

Now, if people were criticizing her FOR having a miscarriage, that would actually be vile. But people are mostly just unmoved by her essay and/or annoyed by her choice to publicize this event. That's all fair criticism, whether you agree with it or not.