Harry and Meghan stepping aside

123457

Comments

  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,699
    It's reported that Harry asked for a meeting with the Queen last year, but this was blocked (by someone other than the Queen). Undoubtedly going for broke has blown up in their faces and I would imagine they and their PR team realise they have screwed this up. Interesting that you seem to attach little blame to Harry - pretty sure it was a joint statement and he's just as much of a grown-up as she is. It's also possible that the Queen is more worried about becoming estranged from her grandson and great grandchild than a bit of bad press. I don't see how Charles is humiliated in this at all.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • shortfall
    shortfall Posts: 3,288
    rjsterry said:

    It's reported that Harry asked for a meeting with the Queen last year, but this was blocked (by someone other than the Queen). Undoubtedly going for broke has blown up in their faces and I would imagine they and their PR team realise they have screwed this up. Interesting that you seem to attach little blame to Harry - pretty sure it was a joint statement and he's just as much of a grown-up as she is. It's also possible that the Queen is more worried about becoming estranged from her grandson and great grandchild than a bit of bad press. I don't see how Charles is humiliated in this at all.

    I don't particularly like the he term but Harry looks like a real cuck at the moment. He's clearly just as much to blame for this as his wife but for different reasons, namely that he's too weak to stand up to her. Or that's how it looks to me.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,699
    edited January 2020
    You'll have to explain that one to me. I've obviously hit that point where I don't know what the kids are talking about. All sounds a bit men's rights-y, though.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • shortfall
    shortfall Posts: 3,288
    A cuck is a weak or servile man or a term of abuse for a man with moderate or progressive views. I'm using it as the former.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,699
    edited January 2020
    Still don't get why you think it's all her. How do you know it wasn't his idea? I mean it's such a cliché; real life isn't actually like Eastenders.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 12,694
    shortfall said:

    A cuck is a weak or servile man or a term of abuse for a man with moderate or progressive views. I'm using it as the former.

    U ok hun? You seem awfully involved.
  • shortfall
    shortfall Posts: 3,288
    rjsterry said:

    Still don't get why you think it's all her. How do you know it wasn't his idea?

    I don't.
  • shortfall
    shortfall Posts: 3,288
    orraloon said:

    shortfall said:

    A cuck is a weak or servile man or a term of abuse for a man with moderate or progressive views. I'm using it as the former.

    U ok hun? You seem awfully involved.
    You're probably right. I'm in a new job that involves a lot of driving and it's been wall to wall Meghan on LBC and Talk Radio.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,699
    shortfall said:

    orraloon said:

    shortfall said:

    A cuck is a weak or servile man or a term of abuse for a man with moderate or progressive views. I'm using it as the former.

    U ok hun? You seem awfully involved.
    You're probably right. I'm in a new job that involves a lot of driving and it's been wall to wall Meghan on LBC and Talk Radio.
    That explains a lot. Maybe try Radio 3 ;).
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • shortfall
    shortfall Posts: 3,288
    edited January 2020
    rjsterry said:

    shortfall said:

    orraloon said:

    shortfall said:

    A cuck is a weak or servile man or a term of abuse for a man with moderate or progressive views. I'm using it as the former.

    U ok hun? You seem awfully involved.
    You're probably right. I'm in a new job that involves a lot of driving and it's been wall to wall Meghan on LBC and Talk Radio.
    That explains a lot. Maybe try Radio 3 ;).
    I might have to. I find radio 2 and 4 increasingly hard work these days. I like the debates on LBC and Talk Radio but then James OBrien comes on and I just want to hit the radio with a large hammer.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,738
    edited January 2020
    shortfall said:

    rjsterry said:

    It's reported that Harry asked for a meeting with the Queen last year, but this was blocked (by someone other than the Queen). Undoubtedly going for broke has blown up in their faces and I would imagine they and their PR team realise they have screwed this up. Interesting that you seem to attach little blame to Harry - pretty sure it was a joint statement and he's just as much of a grown-up as she is. It's also possible that the Queen is more worried about becoming estranged from her grandson and great grandchild than a bit of bad press. I don't see how Charles is humiliated in this at all.

    I don't particularly like the he term but Harry looks like a real cuck at the moment. He's clearly just as much to blame for this as his wife but for different reasons, namely that he's too weak to stand up to her. Or that's how it looks to me.
    Oh mate you need to sort your attitude towards women out.

    Men can do things that their wives want *because they also want to do it or because they enjoy making their wife happy* That does not make you a “cuck”.

    What are you, incel?

    Why are you assuming he doesn’t want to go to Canada?
    _
  • shortfall
    shortfall Posts: 3,288
    rick_chasey said:

    shortfall said:

    rjsterry said:

    It's reported that Harry asked for a meeting with the Queen last year, but this was blocked (by someone other than the Queen). Undoubtedly going for broke has blown up in their faces and I would imagine they and their PR team realise they have screwed this up. Interesting that you seem to attach little blame to Harry - pretty sure it was a joint statement and he's just as much of a grown-up as she is. It's also possible that the Queen is more worried about becoming estranged from her grandson and great grandchild than a bit of bad press. I don't see how Charles is humiliated in this at all.

    I don't particularly like the he term but Harry looks like a real cuck at the moment. He's clearly just as much to blame for this as his wife but for different reasons, namely that he's too weak to stand up to her. Or that's how it looks to me.
    Oh mate you need to sort your attitude towards women out.

    Men can do things that their wives want *because they also want to do it or because they enjoy making their wife happy* That does not make you a “cuck”.

    What are you, incel?

    Why are you assuming he doesn’t want to go to Canada?
    I'm sure he does want to go to Canada, and if that's all there was to it I'd wish him well. But you know there's more to it than that, it's the manner in which he (they) have gone about it.
  • shortfall
    shortfall Posts: 3,288
    rick_chasey said:

    shortfall said:

    rjsterry said:

    It's reported that Harry asked for a meeting with the Queen last year, but this was blocked (by someone other than the Queen). Undoubtedly going for broke has blown up in their faces and I would imagine they and their PR team realise they have screwed this up. Interesting that you seem to attach little blame to Harry - pretty sure it was a joint statement and he's just as much of a grown-up as she is. It's also possible that the Queen is more worried about becoming estranged from her grandson and great grandchild than a bit of bad press. I don't see how Charles is humiliated in this at all.

    I don't particularly like the he term but Harry looks like a real cuck at the moment. He's clearly just as much to blame for this as his wife but for different reasons, namely that he's too weak to stand up to her. Or that's how it looks to me.
    Oh mate you need to sort your attitude towards women out.

    Men can do things that their wives want *because they also want to do it or because they enjoy making their wife happy* That does not make you a “cuck”.
    That's what I'd say if I didn't want people to think I was a cuck😂
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,738
    What, he doesn’t want to live in the various houses of his grandma and wants to live somewhere where he believes he and his children will get less attention from the press who he has been on record for saying helped kill his mother and was a menace in his childhood?

    I mean, I am shocked, shocked I tell you.
    _
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,589
    Fair few posts been made on this thread considering the amount of people protesting no interest in the royals at the start!
  • awavey
    awavey Posts: 2,368
    pinno said:

    I doubt that anyone on here has ever experienced life under the constant spotlight of the public and the media, so what's been t written thus far is pure speculation.

    As for 'Harry at the supermarket' doing 'normal' things... ...with his security. Hmm. How 'normal' is that?!

    my point on that is he isnt pursued by a press pack constantly tracking his every move, that supermarket thing didnt even feature in any of the tabloid newspapers because they werent interested, he has security,who frankly apparently blend in so much they look like he's just out with his best mates, because he is rich and considered a target, which is the same deal whether he is a senior royal in the public eye, or exceedingly wealthy retired Harry of the Canadian rockies.

    they arent in the constant spotlight of the public or the media if they choose not to be, Princess Anne hardly features in newspaper columns yet apparently she is the one who does the most royal engagements and openings and stuff, and yet you wouldnt even know she was doing it

  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 51,366
    awavey said:

    pinno said:

    I doubt that anyone on here has ever experienced life under the constant spotlight of the public and the media, so what's been t written thus far is pure speculation.

    As for 'Harry at the supermarket' doing 'normal' things... ...with his security. Hmm. How 'normal' is that?!

    my point on that is he isnt pursued by a press pack constantly tracking his every move, that supermarket thing didnt even feature in any of the tabloid newspapers because they werent interested, he has security,who frankly apparently blend in so much they look like he's just out with his best mates, because he is rich and considered a target, which is the same deal whether he is a senior royal in the public eye, or exceedingly wealthy retired Harry of the Canadian rockies.

    they arent in the constant spotlight of the public or the media if they choose not to be, Princess Anne hardly features in newspaper columns yet apparently she is the one who does the most royal engagements and openings and stuff, and yet you wouldnt even know she was doing it

    Sorry, but princess Anne hasn't quite got the street cred as the two sons William and Harry. Princess Anne's mother wasn't killed by an act that was predominantly driven by the media.

    @shortfall: Did you click that link I posted? The money raised by the royal wedding totally eclipses the cost. What's the bug bear you have with the tabloid(?) cliche about 'the public purse... at the expense of the taxpayer'?
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • Longshot
    Longshot Posts: 940
    The taxpayer earns royally from the royals, whatever the tabloids and anti-monarchists say to the contrary.
    You can fool some of the people all of the time. Concentrate on those people.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,738
    Longshot said:

    The taxpayer earns royally from the royals, whatever the tabloids and anti-monarchists say to the contrary.

    Recon they’d make a similar amount without the royals in the buildings tbf
    _
  • Longshot
    Longshot Posts: 940
    rick_chasey said:

    Longshot said:

    The taxpayer earns royally from the royals, whatever the tabloids and anti-monarchists say to the contrary.

    Recon they’d make a similar amount without the royals in the buildings tbf
    Doesn't matter, a deal's a deal. 'We' wouldn't have the buildings/land/income without it.
    You can fool some of the people all of the time. Concentrate on those people.
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 12,694
    awavey said:

    Princess Anne hardly features in newspaper columns yet apparently she is the one who does the most royal engagements and openings and stuff, and yet you wouldnt even know she was doing it

    Paraphrasing Monty Python's Holy Grail:
    "Who's that then?"
    "Dunno"
    "Must be a royal"
    "How can you tell"
    "Hasn't got sh1t all over 'er/'im"
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,738
    Fwiw, the irony isn’t lost on me that there are a bunch of Brexiters who are complaining the royal wants to leave the obligations of the royal institution but not the benefits.

    _
  • Longshot
    Longshot Posts: 940
    pinno said:


    Sorry, but princess Anne hasn't quite got the street cred as the two sons William and Harry. Princess Anne's mother wasn't killed by an act that was predominantly driven by the media.

    Which came first? The street cred or the low profile?
    You can fool some of the people all of the time. Concentrate on those people.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,866
    I seem to be in a small minority of people who would abolish the monarchy tomorrow but if we are going to keep them then I would like to see them thoroughly misuse their wealth and power.
  • shortfall
    shortfall Posts: 3,288
    pinno said:

    awavey said:

    pinno said:

    I doubt that anyone on here has ever experienced life under the constant spotlight of the public and the media, so what's been t written thus far is pure speculation.

    As for 'Harry at the supermarket' doing 'normal' things... ...with his security. Hmm. How 'normal' is that?!

    my point on that is he isnt pursued by a press pack constantly tracking his every move, that supermarket thing didnt even feature in any of the tabloid newspapers because they werent interested, he has security,who frankly apparently blend in so much they look like he's just out with his best mates, because he is rich and considered a target, which is the same deal whether he is a senior royal in the public eye, or exceedingly wealthy retired Harry of the Canadian rockies.

    they arent in the constant spotlight of the public or the media if they choose not to be, Princess Anne hardly features in newspaper columns yet apparently she is the one who does the most royal engagements and openings and stuff, and yet you wouldnt even know she was doing it

    Sorry, but princess Anne hasn't quite got the street cred as the two sons William and Harry. Princess Anne's mother wasn't killed by an act that was predominantly driven by the media.

    @shortfall: Did you click that link I posted? The money raised by the royal wedding totally eclipses the cost. What's the bug bear you have with the tabloid(?) cliche about 'the public purse... at the expense of the taxpayer'?
    Fair comment re the net cost of the wedding, point still stands that she and Harry didn't foot the bill. Same goes for Frogmore House. FWIW I'm not anti monarchy.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,699
    Do you think they had much choice about the kind of wedding they had? I'm not sure a few friends at the local registry office was an option.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,738
    rjsterry said:

    Do you think they had much choice about the kind of wedding they had? I'm not sure a few friends at the local registry office was an option.

    Definitely could have gone Charles & Camilla route and not invited every celeb around, but I don’t really know why this is relevant.
    _
  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 51,366
    shortfall said:

    FWIW I'm not anti monarchy.

    Didn't think you were.

    I tried to placate you with the rationale that this so called privileged existence is probably not what as good as what it seems on the surface.

    As others have said, I would not swap my life or the world for it.

    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • DeVlaeminck
    DeVlaeminck Posts: 8,744
    rjsterry said:

    Do you think they had much choice about the kind of wedding they had? I'm not sure a few friends at the local registry office was an option.

    Why not - no doubt they'd have faced a huge amount of opposition but it doesn't seem to bother them now. They could certainly have had a much lower key wedding at a private venue and argued that a huge state occasion wasn't appropriate in the 21st century for someone that isn't even heir to the throne.
    [Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,921
    No royal titles, no public money and paying back the money for Frogmore.
    Canadians are apparently lukewarm to them so green card it is then.

Categories