The Royal Family

[murphy]

1 hour ago, Nalis said:

We'll never know the full truth from either side but calling out Meghan's comments on taking her own life doesnt warrant any value and I dont really understand it.

 

Is she lying? The public will never know

 

Is the benefit of calling Meghan a liar massively outweighed by the harm caused should she not be lying? Most definitely.

That's a good point but I'm going to assume that Meghan is not glued to FT.

 

Meghan has often had a group of friends rallying her cause or leaking to the media and the source assumed to be Meghan herself.  This is nothing new, it is a tried and tested media tactic going back years but are we really supposed to believe that if Meghan was so unhappy as to be suicidal that it would not have been leaked to a friendly journalist?  Or is it more likely that history is being rewritten here to create this wronged martyr?  It just doesn't have the ring of truth for me.

 

 

[Voll Blau]

14 minutes ago, murphy said:

That's a good point but I'm going to assume that Meghan is not glued to FT.

 

Meghan has often had a group of friends rallying her cause or leaking to the media and the source assumed to be Meghan herself.  This is nothing new, it is a tried and tested media tactic going back years but are we really supposed to believe that if Meghan was so unhappy as to be suicidal that it would not have been leaked to a friendly journalist?  Or is it more likely that history is being rewritten here to create this wronged martyr?  It just doesn't have the ring of truth for me.

 

 

The most prominent journalist in the country called her a liar. She doesn't need to be glued to FT to see what's being said about her claims of suicidal thoughts - and neither, much more importantly, do people who are having suicidal thoughts themselves.

 

You've clearly made your mind up and think she'd happily make literally everything going through her mind public for a bit of attention though.

[Scotch]

14 minutes ago, murphy said:

That's a good point but I'm going to assume that Meghan is not glued to FT.

 

Meghan has often had a group of friends rallying her cause or leaking to the media and the source assumed to be Meghan herself.  This is nothing new, it is a tried and tested media tactic going back years but are we really supposed to believe that if Meghan was so unhappy as to be suicidal that it would not have been leaked to a friendly journalist?  Or is it more likely that history is being rewritten here to create this wronged martyr?  It just doesn't have the ring of truth for me.

 

 

That' not really how mental health issues work. 

 

It's in our nature to hide our vulnerabilities, not least the ones we don't understand. Hundreds of thousands of people, if not millions of folk around the world suffer from such thoughts every day with their closest friends and family clueless. 

I could name a list of dozens of high profile folk off the top of my head who appeared strong, happy and successful where it later came out that they were struggling. 

 

My point is, its not something that she would have spoken about freely and the fewer who did know about it, the less likely it would have been leaked because A, they would know that a leak would be easily traceable and B, they were probably trusted, notable personel and family members. 

[murphy]

1 minute ago, Foxy_Bear said:

That' not really how mental health issues work. 

 

It's in our nature to hide our vulnerabilities, not least the ones we don't understand. Hundreds of thousands of people, if not millions of folk around the world suffer from such thoughts every day with their closest friends and family clueless. 

I could name a list of dozens of high profile folk off the top of my head who appeared strong, happy and successful where it later came out that they were struggling. 

 

My point is, its not something that she would have spoken about freely and the fewer who did know about it, the less likely it would have been leaked because A, they would know that a leak would be easily traceable and B, they were probably trusted, notable personel and family members. 

Yes, I understand that but my point is that Meghan was asking for help but was denied it.  She was doing the opposite of bottling it up, apart from in public.  In private she was asking for help apparently and being denied it although she didn't say that she told anyone that she was suicidal.  I think if she was not being heard she would have most likely spoken to a sympathetic journalist as a way of getting that story out there and getting help.  I'm thinking back to Diana and bulimia etc

[Scotch]

4 minutes ago, murphy said:

Yes, I understand that but my point is that Meghan was asking for help but was denied it.  She was doing the opposite of bottling it up, apart from in public.  In private she was asking for help apparently and being denied it although she didn't say that she told anyone that she was suicidal.  I think if she was not being heard she would have most likely spoken to a sympathetic journalist as a way of getting that story out there and getting help.  I'm thinking back to Diana and bulimia etc

Its probably something that she SHOULD have done in all honesty but I think the problem she would have had at that point would have been finding it within herself to find a "sympathetic jounalist".  There is no denying that they have had their fingers burned by the media on numerous occasions so I suspect there was probably a sense of distrust and even paranoia when it came to talking to the press in the fear that they would be turned on.

[Jon the Hat]

38 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

OT, the other staff they've hired suggests that whilst not quite on the scale of Fox News, it's going to be certainly hinting at it. Tom Harwood, Dan Wootton and multiple Brexit Party/Reform UK representatives. Given Andrew Neil's publishing history having him positioned as an arbitrator of balance is quite something. Had to tone that down with his BBC role.  

I'm not saying it wont be centre right leaning, but comparing that to Fox news who told America that Biden stole the election and is now facing billion dollar lawsuits from the voting companies is ridiculous.

[murphy]

2 hours ago, Voll Blau said:

The most prominent journalist in the country called her a liar. She doesn't need to be glued to FT to see what's being said about her claims of suicidal thoughts - and neither, much more importantly, do people who are having suicidal thoughts themselves.

 

You've clearly made your mind up and think she'd happily make literally everything going through her mind public for a bit of attention though.

My scepticism stems from the fact that I can't see beyond this interview being a PR exercise in deflecting blame onto the palace (certainly they acknowledge no fault of their own) and appearing to be blameless victims.  As such, I have a hard time taking anything said on face value.  However, I must admit I didn't consider this (above) and on reflection I accept that this particular issue is not something that I should be speculating about, so I withdraw my previous comment on the matter.

[Voll Blau]

1 minute ago, murphy said:

My scepticism stems from the fact that I can't see beyond this interview being a PR exercise in deflecting blame onto the palace (certainly they acknowledge no fault of their own) and appearing to be blameless victims.  As such, I have a hard time taking anything said on face value.  However, I must admit I didn't consider this (above) and on reflection I accept that this particular issue is not something that I should be speculating about, so I withdraw my previous comment on the matter.

Fair enough. I've no issue at all with people not taking everything the Sussexes say at face value by the way. We'll never hear the full story and, above all, this is just a very sad story about a family which has been torn apart.

[MANFACE]

Woke, loves attention, gotta pay the bills.

[Stoopid]

I suppose Oprah's so rich and powerful that no-one's felt able to say to her er, Oprah, maybe you want to think again about those glasses? 

 

[Nick]

10 minutes ago, MANFACE said:

Woke, loves attention, gotta pay the bills.

Is this a serious comment or an old white man parody spoof account post?

[Blarmy]

50 minutes ago, Nick said:

Is this a serious comment or an old white man parody spoof account post?

Are you saying status-driven attention seekers don’t exist?

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, Blarmy said:

Are you saying status-driven attention seekers don’t exist?

 

6 hours ago, Nalis said:

We'll never know the full truth from either side but calling out Meghan's comments on taking her own life doesnt warrant any value and I dont really understand it.

 

Is she lying? The public will never know

 

Is the benefit of calling Meghan a liar massively outweighed by the harm caused should she not be lying? Most definitely.

I know you answered this post already but IMO there wasn't really a rebuttal of the logic involved in that last sentence.

 

It might be worthy of a response now, because it would seem that "status-driven attention seekers", though they exist, tend to cause less overall damage (as opposed to personal) than disregarding someone genuinely wanting help as one.

 

 

4 hours ago, Voll Blau said:

The most prominent journalist in the country called her a liar. She doesn't need to be glued to FT to see what's being said about her claims of suicidal thoughts - and neither, much more importantly, do people who are having suicidal thoughts themselves.

 

You've clearly made your mind up and think she'd happily make literally everything going through her mind public for a bit of attention though.

This is a point that might be worth considering too.

[Blarmy]

7 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

It might be worthy of a response now, because it would seem that "status-driven attention seekers", though they exist, tend to cause less overall damage (as opposed to personal) than disregarding someone genuinely wanting help as one.

Which does the most damage is irrelevant though - that’s  just a “yeah but” argument. If someone thinks that’s what Meghan is they have a right to say it. Me, I don’t know one way or the other.

 

I would also add (although I probably shouldn’t) that being status driven and attention seeking are two of the traits listed on the DMT5 for cluster B personality disorders. Now, if you think NPD, BPD and ASPD don’t cause much damage you’re off your rocker.

 

Disclaimer: I’m not saying Megs has a cluster B personality disorder.

 

Point of note: Even if she does have a cluster B personality disorder she doesn’t deserve to be treated badly by anyone, including the press, because of it. 

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Blarmy said:

Which does the most damage is irrelevant though - that’s  just a “yeah but” argument. If someone thinks that’s what Meghan is they have a right to say it. Me, I don’t know one way or the other.

 

I would also add (although I probably shouldn’t) that being status driven and attention seeking are two of the traits listed on the DMT5 for cluster B personality disorders. Now, if you think NPD, BPD and ASPD don’t cause much damage you’re off your rocker.

 

Disclaimer: I’m not saying Megs has a cluster B personality disorder.

 

Point of note: Even if she does have a cluster B personality disorder she doesn’t deserve to be treated badly by anyone, including the press, because of it. 

Really? Personally, I think it's key for considering the balance of probability and which way it might go in such things - similar to the arguments if it is better in criminal cases to have a greater proportion of criminals caught at the expense of wrongful convictions or greater favour of presumed innocence at the expense of allowing some criminals to slip through the net.

 

Of course each case should be judged on its own merit, but that balance of probability is critical for a baseline from which such judgement should start.

[LiberalFox]

I would say "who cares" but then apparently millions of people wanted to watch the interview and it's generated an 18 page topic on here. 

[Blarmy]

54 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

 

I know you answered this post already but IMO there wasn't really a rebuttal of the logic involved in that last sentence.

 

It might be worthy of a response now, because it would seem that "status-driven attention seekers", though they exist, tend to cause less overall damage (as opposed to personal) than disregarding someone genuinely wanting help as one.

 

 

This is a point that might be worth considering too.

For the press, 100%. Completely agree. For anyone actually involved in this, all possibilities should be considered.

 

As this is a discussion forum, where opinions are put forward but cannot influence anything, I don’t think anyone should be vilified for suggesting unsavoury possibilities. And they are possibilities, as we have no evidence either way.

[Pliskin]

20 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

Not commented on this yet because yesterday the whole internet was utterly toxic on the issue.

 

The British Press are a ****ing disgrace. We've known this for decades but still haven't been able to do anything about it. Their relentless negative and derogatory coverage of not only the Royals but vulnerable people and minority groups continues to be utterly disgusting. This needed to be stopped 20 years ago.

 

But the whole interview just feels really, really unsavoury to me. Making very vague claims on the biggest platform, without the right of reply, or context, about your own family just seems utterly devoid of class. It's also a bit tone deaf to be claiming you're a victim, during a global pandemic when millions of people have lost their lives, loved ones, jobs and freedom, from the lawn of your rented mansion in LA. 

 

They're also playing on people's ignorances about royal protocol and history. 

 

For me, while their claims are concerning, I'm not impressed with their behaviour. 

Absolutely spot on. 

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, Blarmy said:

For the press, 100%. Completely agree. For anyone actually involved in this, all possibilities should be considered.

 

As this is a discussion forum, where opinions are put forward but cannot influence anything, I don’t think anyone should be vilified for suggesting unsavoury possibilities. And they are possibilities, as we have no evidence either way.

Can't disagree there, other than an observation that one can't know whether or not what is written here influences or not.

Edited 10 March 2021 by leicsmac

[spacemunky]

Although I don't care much about this story, it's dominating the news over here. 

 

I guess it's at least better than Covid or Trump.

[Koke]

The monarchy is a useless institution, not just the British monarchy, but all monarchies around the world, and people are getting angry and falling out over it. Some traditions are good, other traditions need to be binned off. If you're a hardcore royalist then you need to seriously re-evaluate your life.

[spacemunky]

Just now, Koke said:

The monarchy is a useless institution, not just the British monarchy, but all monarchies around the world, and people are getting angry and falling out over it. Some traditions are good, other traditions need to be binned off. If you're a hardcore royalist then you need to seriously re-evaluate your life.

My boss at my last job was a royalist. Always struck me as an odd thing to be, but she was originally from Sheffield and was very old. I would mostly just smile and nod when she'd bring the topic up.

 

I get that people love the whole pageantry of it all. I mean we still raise little girls(sorry, girls and boys) to want to be Princesses. Did we not learn anything from Diana?

[StanSP]

8 hours ago, Lionator said:

Regardless of Meghan, hearing a prominent famous person say 'I don't believe she was suicidal' hits home for somebody who has felt suicidal myself and had people telling me I am putting it on. He's always had terrible takes when it comes to mental health, I'm glad it's that which has done for him here.

Definitely. When you think how strong ITV had gone in the 'Britain Get Talking' initiative they didn't really have a choice but to give him the boot. Not least the fact that when someone did speak out (Meghan and Alex Beresford) he shot then down, accused them of lying, walked off etc. 

 

It just didn't shine a good light on it all and I'm glad they made the right decision in getting rid. 

[KrefelderFox666]

Has Meghan had a hard time coping with demands being part of the Royal family? Probably.

 

Is she blowing a lot of this out of proportion? Highly likely.

 

Is the Royal family corrupt? Absolutely.

 

It's a bit of a weird one because anyone with half a brain can see that the Royal institution is rotten to the core and not something that you should be proud of. Does it help represent the country's image and bring tourism in (before COVID)? Yes it does. But why, is the question? Why does an economically strong country rely on something like the Royal family other than "tradition"? Royal family, religion, politics, it's all interlinked and one big mess. I am sure not everyone inside the Palace is bad but as a whole, the negative outweighs the positive. Diana was the one person that was way above anything ever seen and we all know how that turned out.

 

Does Meghan need to speak out, probably not but maybe it helps her mentally, let's not just throw that away. Do people need to believe every word she says, definitely not. No one is coming out of this with a good image, seems like a lose lose scenario. The Royals have a bad image anyway and this just compounds all that. Harry was always in the shadows and he is not really backing the Royal family up.

 

What can be said is that Harry and Meghan have shown strength in coming out with this and in the first instance, removing themselves from the Royals (2 years ago or whenever they did).

 

Too many members of the public are stuck in traditions and heritage even when it has become so far outdated and exposed.

[SecretPro]

11 minutes ago, KrefelderFox666 said:

Has Meghan had a hard time coping with demands being part of the Royal family? Probably.

 

Is she blowing a lot of this out of proportion? Highly likely.

 

Is the Royal family corrupt? Absolutely.

 

It's a bit of a weird one because anyone with half a brain can see that the Royal institution is rotten to the core and not something that you should be proud of. Does it help represent the country's image and bring tourism in (before COVID)? Yes it does. But why, is the question? Why does an economically strong country rely on something like the Royal family other than "tradition"? Royal family, religion, politics, it's all interlinked and one big mess. I am sure not everyone inside the Palace is bad but as a whole, the negative outweighs the positive. Diana was the one person that was way above anything ever seen and we all know how that turned out.

 

Does Meghan need to speak out, probably not but maybe it helps her mentally, let's not just throw that away. Do people need to believe every word she says, definitely not. No one is coming out of this with a good image, seems like a lose lose scenario. The Royals have a bad image anyway and this just compounds all that. Harry was always in the shadows and he is not really backing the Royal family up.

 

What can be said is that Harry and Meghan have shown strength in coming out with this and in the first instance, removing themselves from the Royals (2 years ago or whenever they did).

 

Too many members of the public are stuck in traditions and heritage even when it has become so far outdated and exposed.

This.

 

People forget that traditions and heritage doesn't always = good. Some of it positively stinks and needs resigning to the history books for good.