Pro Queen / anti M&H

You seem to have forgotten that MM was not only a successful and well paid actor, she had an impressive record of activism and involvement in women's rights and charity work

Totally ignored ! But then she’s American ?

Whether you liked the programmes she made or not she was successful.

Support the Queen, respect how she wants all to be fine with her family, do not have to agree with her personal decisions. Andrew and M @ H are one of them.

nadateturbe

I honestly do not understand why so many people feel the need to criticise Harry and Meghan so much. They may not be perfect but which of us is?

Me, of course!
I hope all the RF enjoy the day. I'm sure they will be united and behave with decorum around each other.
We will see.

Zoejory

To those who think we can't know anything, you're wrong. We can. A bit.

I'm sure loads of rubbish has been written about them. Never believe a word in the press. Etc etc. I agree

However, if you've seen the Oprah interview you can safely state as fact, certain things. Because it's straight out of the horse's mouth.

Up to 17 untruths were said in that interview. As they did keep saying they wanted their truth to be told. Fair enough. However a lot of what was said was not actual truth.

Poor old Justin Welby was almost criminalised. Meghan insisted that her and Harry were married in their garden. They weren't. It was a pointless fib. Untruth. Lie. But such a ridiculous one as well. Welby had to make a statement.

So watch the interview, hear for yourselves and know that, for once, we're hearing what they are actually saying.

Clearly, what they said during the Oprah interview, is what they actually said - that was not my point.

I'm talking about the media, the 'sources close to the family', royal watching pundits, etc.

You cannot deny that the media are constantly headlining M&H - printing pages and pages of stuff about them - sometimes inconsequential information - like a dress Meghan is wearing to some event or other. The tabloids know exactly what they are doing - they are stirring the pot, keeping up the rage. They are keeping the couple in the news because it keeps up the circulation figures.

I've no particular liking for either H or M, so I don't read much about them, and from what I've understood about the Oprah interview, it was ridiculous to make claims that weren't true... immature and childish.

Everyone seems to think they're craving publicity - so why don't the media stop giving it to them!

What I don't understand is why the Queen (and certain others) always headline the news for positive happy reasons, whereas reporting about M & H is always negative and critical.

People love a gossip and the reason the media publish stories about the Rf what they are wearing etc is for the public to have something to gawp at. Rift in the family! New baby! New outfit! if people didn’t lap it up , despite all those saying they aren’t interested, the papers wouldn’t print it. Ditto Kardashians, Beckhams, all the same.

Dickens wrote Families have black sheep,

Ah!

Meaning?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_sheep

^I hope all the RF enjoy the day. I'm sure they will be united and behave with decorum around each other.
We will see.^
Of course we will see and we’ll each see what we want to see. I hope the Queen is at least able to enjoy her Jubilee without hearing any of the backbiting that goes on.
Those who are going to enjoy the celebrations will see good things on TV and in the media. Those who don’t, won’t see anything, because of course, they won’t be watching TV or scanning the Internet or reading the papers, although sections of all three of those sources will be avidly watching for anything negative they can post, to keep up ratings.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwagon_effect

I should have said ‘Relevance?’ rather than ‘Meaning’. I will therefore rephrase my question.

Government and Parliament thrust a role on him, he chose to do something different from that. Most people did not have a role thrust on them by Government and Parliament. He has been picked on for exercising a right to choose his own way, a right that most of us exercised without being highly criticised for it.

I read once of a man who lived in New Zealand who had gone there as a young man from France. Nobody knew quite why he had done that. However, his family in France had all been school teachers and he was known in New Zealand in relation to his own descendants to be very strongly insistent that each should have the right to make their own choice of career.

Government and Parliament (not sure of the distinction) did not thrust a role on him. He was born into a particular role courtesy of the monarchy and the constitution, and was performing that role until he married a woman who wanted the ‘celebrity’ of marrying into the RF but not the obligations and customs attached to her position.

StarDreamer

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_sheep

... absolutely no idea what point you're making.

The term has been used for as long as I can remember to describe an individual who, for one reason or another, is at odds with his / her family, causing a rift, to some degree or other.

The RF is a family. Harry has caused a fracture in it - and by extension, so has Meghan. They are the black sheep of the family. Of course, there's also another member of the same family who can, for different reasons, also be regarded as one of the same herd. I had one in my own family. It happens.

Your jubilant Ah! seems to indicate you've discovered something more meaningful than the idiomatic expression established by usage to describe family "outcasts", "bad-eggs", "prodigals", "reprobates"... ah! - I've just given you another list to investigate!

Here's an idea. If you are planning a wedding one of the things which might go wrong is the bride changing her mind, so what if it's a royal wedding and a few days before, the bride is arguing with bridesmaids, in tears, and a bit emotional- she might opt out!!!! So you tell her the ceremony is just a public occasion and performance and she is actually getting married three days before in a garden. And she believes you. (Well she's American) and the great thing is when she tells people about it they think she's lying.

Nice try but I don’t buy that one.

Germanshepherdsmum

Nice try but I don’t buy that one.

Haha! I don't buy it either.

Germanshepherdsmum

Nice try but I don’t buy that one.

If Meghan wasn’t such an accomplished actress and used to, even delighting in, appearing in public I might buy it . . . But no. I don’t buy it either.

Sparklefizz

^Men who marry into the royal family are subservient , conformist husbands^

They are, Annie. Look at Prince Philip who had to give up his career.

Whether men or women, they have to try and fit in. It's reported that Meghan was given every opportunity to learn about Royal protocol, including one of the Queen's own assistants to give her advice, but that she didn't want to take it, and she thought she could change things to suit herself, never mind 1,000 years of history. (her "Hit the ground running" comment).

I've always thought that Annie's comment was right in that Meghan thought she would be "Queen Bee" and didn't like it when she wasn't. She was jealous of Kate's status.

Reported by who please?

Zoejory

To those who think we can't know anything, you're wrong. We can. A bit.

I'm sure loads of rubbish has been written about them. Never believe a word in the press. Etc etc. I agree

However, if you've seen the Oprah interview you can safely state as fact, certain things. Because it's straight out of the horse's mouth.

Up to 17 untruths were said in that interview. As they did keep saying they wanted their truth to be told. Fair enough. However a lot of what was said was not actual truth.

Poor old Justin Welby was almost criminalised. Meghan insisted that her and Harry were married in their garden. They weren't. It was a pointless fib. Untruth. Lie. But such a ridiculous one as well. Welby had to make a statement.

So watch the interview, hear for yourselves and know that, for once, we're hearing what they are actually saying.

What were the 17 lies? I would like to research them more so I can form an accurate opinion.

Joseanne

What I don't understand is why the Queen (and certain others) always headline the news for positive happy reasons, whereas reporting about M & H is always negative and critical.

Because it sells more papers.

Men who marry into the royal family are subservient , conformist husbands

They are, Annie. Look at Prince Philip who had to give up his career

On public occasions as his wife is H of S.
Not in private according to reports from his family.

Yes, I believe he was the boss at home and the Queen was happy with that. She’s deteriorated so much since he died and I think that says a lot about their relationship.