Meghan and Prince Harry are moving to the U.S./Canada - OFFICIAL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What's fascinating or puzzling about blind allegiance?
It's not like it's anything new.

I think for me it's just interesting to watch people. For me the haters are far more interesting because they've invested real effort in hate. It's a negative emotion, something that's a burden to carry (and that therapists would advise putting down). But the haters are wildly invested in living in a fantasy life where MM is a real-life bad guy. They really feel it; they invest a lot emotionally in building up their story, which is often only tangentially related to reality. Why spend so much emotional energy in knowing every detail (or making up details) about someone you hate? Why not just ignore her?

I find the MM stans less interesting. I guess I get idolizing someone, or it makes more sense. You don't want to see their flaws, you buy the image because it's a happy story or whatever. I don't share that for the royals, but at some level it makes more sense to me. Essentially, it's a little way the MM stans make their days happier. But the MM haters are making their days worse by collecting and nurturing this hatred.

[Anonymous]

Every time I think a big part of the world has moved on from racism, I see something like this thread and I’m reminded how far we need to go.

It’s also funny to see how threatened the Kate fans are by Meghan. Their fixation with painting Kate as perfection and Meghan as pure evil is bizarre. They’re both just women in the public eye.

However, the way the Kate stans rabidly deny any existence of racism in Meghan’s decision to leave is eye opening. They rabidly defend the press -“It was just ONE reporter who called her baby a monkey!” They look the other way at all the other publications with racist undertones and pretend that unless someone calls Meghan a n*gger in print, there is zero racism. “She’s whiny. She’s high maintenance. She’s doing too much - why is she showing up Kate? No, actually, she’s a quitter, she’s not doing enough!”

Why are Kate stans so threatened by Meghan I will never understand. It’s not like the two are in competition for anything. The line of succession is determined by the men they married. It doesn’t matter if Kate sits at home and eats bon bons all day and Meghan becomes the most beloved princess in the world. William is still going to be king, followed by Kate’s son - George. Meghan’s son doesn’t even have a title!

I wish someone could explain why the Kate Stans are so obsessed with Meghan... it makes no sense!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. I don't frequent this forum but stumbled upon this thread. As the DD of a diagnosed narcissist (my father), I can't believe folks have the hubris to opine on Meghan's mental health and her marriage. You don't know M&H, will never interact with them on anything other than a superficial level and they have absolutely no impact on your life. Why such emotion? For your own mental health, I gently suggest you move on.

You talk too much sense for this MMhater thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Every time I think a big part of the world has moved on from racism, I see something like this thread and I’m reminded how far we need to go.

It’s also funny to see how threatened the Kate fans are by Meghan. Their fixation with painting Kate as perfection and Meghan as pure evil is bizarre. They’re both just women in the public eye.

However, the way the Kate stans rabidly deny any existence of racism in Meghan’s decision to leave is eye opening. They rabidly defend the press -“It was just ONE reporter who called her baby a monkey!” They look the other way at all the other publications with racist undertones and pretend that unless someone calls Meghan a n*gger in print, there is zero racism. “She’s whiny. She’s high maintenance. She’s doing too much - why is she showing up Kate? No, actually, she’s a quitter, she’s not doing enough!”

Why are Kate stans so threatened by Meghan I will never understand. It’s not like the two are in competition for anything. The line of succession is determined by the men they married. It doesn’t matter if Kate sits at home and eats bon bons all day and Meghan becomes the most beloved princess in the world. William is still going to be king, followed by Kate’s son - George. Meghan’s son doesn’t even have a title!

I wish someone could explain why the Kate Stans are so obsessed with Meghan... it makes no sense!

Only Meghan fans keep bringing Kate into the conversation, or Charles or William, quite oblivious to their rank, standing and established public opinion . The only one they have not whined about yet is the Queen. Why does she get to wear the big crown and fly in private jets

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
USA is a poster child for racism based on socioeconomic stratification. If you're rich and wealthy and black, you're fine. It's even lauded to make your way up from nothing - see Barack Obama, Oprah, Beyonce, Will Smith, Kamala Harris, Condoleeza Rice etc.

Britain however is a class-based system that no matter how wealthy you are - you are lower than those born into nobility. And not only is the nobility a class unto themselves they are also stratified within that based on land or financial wealth alongside heritage. Heritage which as a baseline - means being purely white if not of Anglo-Saxon heritage for 10 direct generations at least.

The point is - in Britain no matter how successful you become, you're still your class. i.e. the Rebekah Vardys and Victoria Beckhams of the world.

So I honestly think the U.S. is better because once you make it - acceptance is guaranteed. You just have to work hard or be born with enough money. Then move to like-minded areas.

Impossible to do and find in the UK. So yes, I don't blame Meghan for leaving. She was the 4th highest ranking woman in Britain among the nobles, but couldn't escape the double punch of being born middle class AND biracial.

Kate had to deal with the same thing and still gets ragged on for being born middle class. The Queen Mother (the current Queen's mom) was ragged on within the royal family for being born to ONLY a minor noble and not one with well-landed heritage or provenance either.

It's ridiculous.

Britain's class system has eroded to resemble the one that exists in the U.S. for all practical purposes except membership in the upper classes. And that latter part only comes into play when you aspire to become one of them, which you really don't have to be to succeed. I mean how many people would realistically marry into the Royal Family or landed aristocracy? It's a negligible number.

In every sense in contemporary Britain, money and education rules, very similar to the U.S. In fact, there was a stinging article I read a couple of years ago about the "Death of the Sloan Ranger" which said, basically, the Sloans are now reduced to acting as concierges for the Nigerian, Kazakh or Russian money who hire them for their access. Otherwise, unless you're rich, your heritage matters very little. Without money or the right education, nobody cares.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
USA is a poster child for racism based on socioeconomic stratification. If you're rich and wealthy and black, you're fine. It's even lauded to make your way up from nothing - see Barack Obama, Oprah, Beyonce, Will Smith, Kamala Harris, Condoleeza Rice etc.

Britain however is a class-based system that no matter how wealthy you are - you are lower than those born into nobility. And not only is the nobility a class unto themselves they are also stratified within that based on land or financial wealth alongside heritage. Heritage which as a baseline - means being purely white if not of Anglo-Saxon heritage for 10 direct generations at least.

The point is - in Britain no matter how successful you become, you're still your class. i.e. the Rebekah Vardys and Victoria Beckhams of the world.

So I honestly think the U.S. is better because once you make it - acceptance is guaranteed. You just have to work hard or be born with enough money. Then move to like-minded areas.

Impossible to do and find in the UK. So yes, I don't blame Meghan for leaving. She was the 4th highest ranking woman in Britain among the nobles, but couldn't escape the double punch of being born middle class AND biracial.

Kate had to deal with the same thing and still gets ragged on for being born middle class. The Queen Mother (the current Queen's mom) was ragged on within the royal family for being born to ONLY a minor noble and not one with well-landed heritage or provenance either.

It's ridiculous.

Britain's class system has eroded to resemble the one that exists in the U.S. for all practical purposes except membership in the upper classes. And that latter part only comes into play when you aspire to become one of them, which you really don't have to be to succeed. I mean how many people would realistically marry into the Royal Family or landed aristocracy? It's a negligible number.

In every sense in contemporary Britain, money and education rules, very similar to the U.S. In fact, there was a stinging article I read a couple of years ago about the "Death of the Sloan Ranger" which said, basically, the Sloans are now reduced to acting as concierges for the Nigerian, Kazakh or Russian money who hire them for their access. Otherwise, unless you're rich, your heritage matters very little. Without money or the right education, nobody cares.

...Sloanes were not actually a new breed, but the last gasp of the English aristocracy. Many of their habits and mannerisms, as chronicled by York, would have been familiar to toffs from generations back. The countrified clothes, the passion for dogs, the veering from wild overstatement to comic understatement ("Rather boringly, my entire family has been wiped out in an avalanche"); so far, so Mitford sisters.

What made Sloanes different was that - like the Thatcherite "barrow boys" who invaded the City at the same time - they were not ashamed to be seen making money. While their parents were stuck in Wiltshire trying to hold the crumbling family estate together with Sellotape, the younger set emigrated to west London and made their fortunes in advertising, PR, finance or property.

At least, it seemed like a fortune at the time. Since then, the Sloane Ranger has been elbowed aside by a new class of global super-rich whose opulence makes City salaries look like pocket change.

Not that the City is a safe berth for poshos any more. Since Thatcher's Big Bang in 1986, the old City firms - those ancient citadels of genteel nepotism - have been swallowed by international investment banks, whose bosses neither know nor care about the English class system. Saying lavatory instead of toilet gets you nowhere in this merciless meritocracy.

A wave of European and American bankers has been sucked into London, buying the Sloane's traditional stomping grounds before being themselves driven out by a second, even richer, wave of Nigerian oil barons and Chinese widget billionaires.

The younger generation of Sloanes can be found now ranging furtively through Peckham and Hackney Wick, disguised as Nordic fishermen. They can't even perform the single-most-important duty of the aristocracy: sending their children to public school. Those, too, have been bought by oligarchs.

This riches-to-rags tale has been greeted with surprisingly little Schadenfreude. It's easier to feel fond of a ruling class once it is facing extinction. Especially when you're afraid you might be next. The forces of downward mobility already have the middle classes firmly by the throat. Who are we to gloat?

Besides, the line between Sloane Rangers and the rest of us was more porous than we realised. They went to school with the upper middle classes. They were rich, certainly, but not in the way Posh and Becks are. They had comfy houses in Fulham - not Beverly Hills-style palaces with underground swimming pools.

The new moneyed classes are so preposterously rich that it is hard to accept them as part of the social fabric. Your chances of getting to know an oligarch, through work or at the school gate, are as slim as your chances of bumping into Beyonce at the supermarket. No wonder we mourn the Sloane Rangers: at least we felt we knew them.

https://www.afr.com/life-and-luxury/fashion-and-style/its-official-the-sloane-ranger-is-dead-20150222-13lbe8

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's fascinating or puzzling about blind allegiance?
It's not like it's anything new.

I think for me it's just interesting to watch people. For me the haters are far more interesting because they've invested real effort in hate. It's a negative emotion, something that's a burden to carry (and that therapists would advise putting down). But the haters are wildly invested in living in a fantasy life where MM is a real-life bad guy. They really feel it; they invest a lot emotionally in building up their story, which is often only tangentially related to reality. Why spend so much emotional energy in knowing every detail (or making up details) about someone you hate? Why not just ignore her?

I find the MM stans less interesting. I guess I get idolizing someone, or it makes more sense. You don't want to see their flaws, you buy the image because it's a happy story or whatever. I don't share that for the royals, but at some level it makes more sense to me. Essentially, it's a little way the MM stans make their days happier. But the MM haters are making their days worse by collecting and nurturing this hatred.

To pp, I feel the same as you. I feel like there are sides to this for a lot of people. I lean to one side on some aspects, and to the other side for other aspects.

Mostly, I’m observing some disgusting behavior and illogic on both sides.

The most disgusting belongs to the extreme haters. Claims of photoshopping constantly even for stupid things. Really Gross things said about Archie. Really crazy conspiracy theories.
Both sides are employing bad logic and bad debate.
And for the fans, the extreme ones will absolutely not admit that they are personally anti monarchical, perhaps anti white. I have stopped reading certain outlets that I used to like because they (or comments) are so anti William and Kate, it’s like something was done to them personally. They’ve long claimed there is nothing about this that brings the monarchy, but once this news hit the mainstream, that’s exactly the first reactions of non-royal watchers.

There is so much we don’t know.

[Anonymous]

^ ‘Brings’ = ‘brings down’

[Anonymous]

Theory. I think the beginning of problems goes 150% back to this chain of events:
-Meghan or someone tells someone about Kate’s odd behavior that ended up in a blind
-blind published
-Cambridge team finds Meghan untrustworthy. Whether or not it was forgiven, warmed over, who knows. Maybe they never trusted Harry’s date after that. Maybe they worked it out personally.
-but their aides would never trust her again. Well, it turns out Harry picks this girl, their relationship develops for the long term
-Harry and meg make fast plans. Not only for marriage but for kids. They both know what they want. I’ve been there. Family is concerned. Again, I’ve been in that exact position with my now husband.
-Will and EVERYONE is telling Harry to slow down. Days, engage, marry at a slower pace. Kids at a much slower pace.
-at this point, Harry again knows what he wants, made up his mind. A little bad blood between everyone.
-marriage good afterward the press starts really leaning in.
-the already adversarial courts both lean in against each other, esp in terms of small leaks. Gets worse and worse, trust is completely lost.

Worsened and worsened, with Will coming out on top of the press rivalry. H&M no longer trust them as family, and they definitely don’t trust one inch of the press pack that travels with them constantly. Undermining them at every hand. Can’t convince other senior royals to step in because it’s too heavy a hand to play against free press (perhaps). They had to get out of that.

[Anonymous]

Days = date

[Anonymous]

Theory lady here.

If the Crown season 9 does not include the blind and an actress as Lainey Lui.. I will be disappointed. Her decision to publish that blind was both inevitable (real royal juice is hard to come by!) and motivated by her previous dislike of the royals—maybe goes back to being Canadian, maybe goes back to dislike of white privilege (um hello Will! White and privileged) and people that don’t do anything with their privilege.

I was a looooong time reader, and I always loved that she covered royals when a lot of outlets just don’t, or they keep it glossy. I appreciated lainey’s smart takes, but her bias against will and Kate previous to this is at least 51-49 on a 100-pt scale.

Popcorn came out for me when she published the blind. But it goes into this whole mess. It was the beginning. Or maybe Kate hates everyone ha ha. Maybe she’s a fu;?$n’ introvert.

I’m rambling. I say the above about LL with love. Real fan, and I know someone on here is connected to here, or at least someone used to be here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Theory. I think the beginning of problems goes 150% back to this chain of events:
-Meghan or someone tells someone about Kate’s odd behavior that ended up in a blind
-blind published
-Cambridge team finds Meghan untrustworthy. Whether or not it was forgiven, warmed over, who knows. Maybe they never trusted Harry’s date after that. Maybe they worked it out personally.
-but their aides would never trust her again. Well, it turns out Harry picks this girl, their relationship develops for the long term
-Harry and meg make fast plans. Not only for marriage but for kids. They both know what they want. I’ve been there. Family is concerned. Again, I’ve been in that exact position with my now husband.
-Will and EVERYONE is telling Harry to slow down. Days, engage, marry at a slower pace. Kids at a much slower pace.
-at this point, Harry again knows what he wants, made up his mind. A little bad blood between everyone.
-marriage good afterward the press starts really leaning in.
-the already adversarial courts both lean in against each other, esp in terms of small leaks. Gets worse and worse, trust is completely lost.

Worsened and worsened, with Will coming out on top of the press rivalry. H&M no longer trust them as family, and they definitely don’t trust one inch of the press pack that travels with them constantly. Undermining them at every hand. Can’t convince other senior royals to step in because it’s too heavy a hand to play against free press (perhaps). They had to get out of that.

I think you are exactly right. This is what happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Theory lady here.

If the Crown season 9 does not include the blind and an actress as Lainey Lui.. I will be disappointed. Her decision to publish that blind was both inevitable (real royal juice is hard to come by!) and motivated by her previous dislike of the royals—maybe goes back to being Canadian, maybe goes back to dislike of white privilege (um hello Will! White and privileged) and people that don’t do anything with their privilege.

I was a looooong time reader, and I always loved that she covered royals when a lot of outlets just don’t, or they keep it glossy. I appreciated lainey’s smart takes, but her bias against will and Kate previous to this is at least 51-49 on a 100-pt scale.

Popcorn came out for me when she published the blind. But it goes into this whole mess. It was the beginning. Or maybe Kate hates everyone ha ha. Maybe she’s a fu;?$n’ introvert.

I’m rambling. I say the above about LL with love. Real fan, and I know someone on here is connected to here, or at least someone used to be here.

Huh?

[Anonymous]

Sometimes I think it is hard to untangle what is racism and what is general anti-Americanism. There’s marrying a commoner and then there is marrying an American. I think the Brits kind of feel like Americans are fun to have fun with but please don’t bring one home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Theory lady here.

If the Crown season 9 does not include the blind and an actress as Lainey Lui.. I will be disappointed. Her decision to publish that blind was both inevitable (real royal juice is hard to come by!) and motivated by her previous dislike of the royals—maybe goes back to being Canadian, maybe goes back to dislike of white privilege (um hello Will! White and privileged) and people that don’t do anything with their privilege.

I was a looooong time reader, and I always loved that she covered royals when a lot of outlets just don’t, or they keep it glossy. I appreciated lainey’s smart takes, but her bias against will and Kate previous to this is at least 51-49 on a 100-pt scale.

Popcorn came out for me when she published the blind. But it goes into this whole mess. It was the beginning. Or maybe Kate hates everyone ha ha. Maybe she’s a fu;?$n’ introvert.

I’m rambling. I say the above about LL with love. Real fan, and I know someone on here is connected to here, or at least someone used to be here.

Huh?

Canadian Gossip blogger, closely connected to MM best friend’s husband Ben Mulroney, published several pieces of gossip on Kate Middleton.

I searched, this was one.

https://blindgossip.com/she-didnt-offer-a-ride/