Jump to content

Cas Stark

Members
  • Posts

    16,446
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Cas Stark

  1. And either way, if you were supposed to leave for the trip today, he should have communicated with you that it's off. I'm sorry, which doesn't help you.
  2. I haven't read the whole thread, did you have a 'talk' with him about joking you were broke? I had a different take on that than most everyone else. You might be paranoid, but that's a lot of non responsiveness in a short time. Good luck and keep us posted.
  3. It sounds like you need a trainer and probably more exercise for the dog.
  4. I haven't killed a bee or spider in decades. The one year we tried growing small hot peppers they did amazingly. Tomatoes just don't do well, the back yard is too shady and they don't thrive in pots in the front. Flowers are doing well so far, although squirrels continue to dig them up now and then. I wish cities did more tree planting, it seems a no brainer. When you go to a wealthy area, its always leafy and green. Why we don't try to replicate that in non wealthy urban areas is beyond me.
  5. You don't think she wears those Jenny Packham floral dresses--a little nip here and tuck there--that could have been worn by the queen mother back in the 40s by accident do you?
  6. I said 'personna'. I'm not so sure about that anymore. Our confessional culture of the last few decades doesn't seemed to have helped anyone's mental health, statistically speaking. Instead, it has created a society full of naval gazing, fragile, infantilized people who are incapable of functioning without all kinds of 'supports'. Maybe our grandparents had something there with the idea of getting on with things.
  7. LOL. "Sources close to Harry and Meg say........" https://www.instyle.com/meghan-markle-prince-harry-sick-tired-cheap-shots-spotify-netflix-7554630
  8. TBH, it doesn't seem like Harry ever understood how things with the media worked. The idea that 'royals sources say/palaces sources say' or Charles best friend going on the record are acts sanctioned by the family as some kind of insider revelation is weirdly naive. Didn't everyone already know this and that it was done to give the royals and especially the monarch some plausible deniability and wiggle room. Exactly the same as 'white house sources say' 'friends of Brad and Angie say. I also don't believe that his brother or probably anyone was dropping stories about H and M to deflect criticism. Whether they say that because they're paranoid or they really believe it, I have no idea. Disrupted an existing industry?? WTF?? Harry and Meghan have if anything revived and expanded the existing industry of royal experts. They provide a nearly unending stream of new content for books, blogs, and the Daily Mail. Similarly, the couple's seeming belief that somehow leaving the UK would reduce tabloid coverage of them was also mind bogglingly naive, if true.
  9. Yes, it's a virtue. I praise Kate Middleton for her placid stepford wife public personna that she never lets slip. I praised the queen for the same thing. They're playing a role and they know it. Presumably most people don't go to work every day and spend all day emoting about their personal lives. It's the same for the royals, when they're out, they're on the job. Fine. I also imagine it's useful as a shield in providing a public v. a private life. I don't believe you are incapable of knowing that this is different that outright lying, exaggerating and dishing private family dirt for money.
  10. I vaguely remember when Edward was trying to be a producer? I give him credit for attempting to do something on his own, it's too bad it was a failure. I also watched a documentary that he hosted about one of the royal palaces/castles and I thought he was fine, good even. He looks ill to me these days, almost emaciated. Yes, the media took it very easy on Sophie for the motorcade incident. Another Hollywood insider, Jeremy Zimmer, slammed the Sussexes yesterday, saying basically that just because you're famous doesn't mean you have talent. No lie detected.
  11. No, there isn't. They are two of the most famous people on the planet. Harry has been famous his entire life. The fact that millions and millions of people are interested in the British royal family should not be news to anyone. The fact that many people have observed the behavior of these incredibly famous people for the last 5+ years and come to conclusions different than yours is no kind of outlier of anything. I don't know why so many people buy into this narrative since it is almost wholly lacking in any substance or evidence. Indeed, the last person who flounced out of the British royal family and his divorced American wife also came in for a lot of negative press for a long time. Same/same. The idea that there have been dozens of racist stories about Meghan every week for months or years is nuts. Anyway, we're not getting anywhere here, which should be okay. People should be able to hold different, even negative, views of famous celebrities without all sorts of weird innuendos and accusations being attached.
  12. Certainly, from a PR perspective, Meghan is the best thing that ever happened to Kate. She went from being Waity Katie, Two Kitchens Kate, 'wisteria sister', lazy and always sneered at for not being an aristo....to now she's tagged as a perfect royal and always gets great press. Now. That wasn't the case in the past. To compare the two is odd why? They are married to brothers, the two sons of the current King and Diana. Many, many parallels there. You also should not compare the terrible press M and H get now...after all their trashing of the royal family, the British media and even the British public...with how they were treated before they bounced. Apples to apples. ETA...'empty suit' is the literal job description, which in hindsight, is the perfect 'job' for Harry and Meghan. Dress up, show up, speak platitudes.
  13. If you wanted to make a case that WOMEN who marry into the royal family are treated immeasurably worse than men, then the evidence there is overwhelming. That's sexism, not racism and thus, Meghan's treatment during her time as a working royal was nothing out of the ordinary, despite that I'm sure as a human being, it's difficult to endure such a harsh spotlight.
  14. Now you're just making stuff up to bolster your argument that you think think must be true. The only royal I'm aware of who supposedly is difficult behind the scenes is Andrew. Not Kate. Not William. Not the queen. Not Camilla. Not Edward and Sophie. Maybe Charles I'm not sure on him. Not Anne. What tons of people are you referring to here? I will say again that both Camilla and Kate were treated worse by the media and for far longer than Meghan was during her short time as a working royal.
  15. When exactly did they do that while they were still 'working royals'? Now she has gotten more negative press, of course, that isn't what I said. I said that Kate endured years of negative press, while Meghan didn't get any negative press until stories about her behavior began leaking. The Lee Atwater quote is completely irrelevant to this issue AND is from the 1980s, you know 40 years ago. Meghan was dragged for allegations of bullying, for allegations she wanted to keep freebies, that she demanded a specific tiara, for allegations she was mean to Kate, that she failed to follow royal protocol, that she had a Kardashianesque baby shower. None of that has any kind of racial undertone.
  16. Eh, the actual evidence that race was a factor in negative media coverage is very, very slim. There was a handful, and by 'handful' I mean probably less than six, stories that could reasonably be considered to have any kind of racial angle. The 'straight outa compton' story and the 'exotic dna' stories. As far as I know, and I follow the royal stuff pretty closely, that's it. Of course there were racist comments on social media, but that isn't the same thing. Meghan got rapturous coverage until details about her actual behavior began to leak out. Did the palace let this stuff leak because she was biracial? Or because she was behaving terribly? That is unknowable. What is knowable is that there were years more negative stories about Kate and Camilla and Fergie than about Meghan. Years and years more and certainly the Camilla coverage in the 90s was much more vicious than anything written about Meghan, with the possible exception of the Clarkson piece where he admits desiring a Cersei Lannister walk of shame for her.
  17. Hmmm. I was wishing Mike and Gus would kill him by that time. He is sympathetic in the first handful of episodes, I'm sure everyone fist pumped when he blew up the dudebro's car at the gas station and when he blew up Tuco's building. There was a vein of sympathy that remained for a long time, but he was pretty obviously an asshole from early on,
  18. I don't know that I ever recall seeing 'restrained' and 'Guy Ritchie' in the same sentence. That idea is appealing though.
  19. Sometimes a spoon is just a spoon. Maybe they lose staff a high rate and were accused of bullying, wait for it, because they are difficult to work for. Maybe entertainment insiders are criticizing them, Spotify ended the deal, etc. because they are difficult to work with and don't have the requisite 'talent' to make the difficulty palatable. Maybe people who find the couple unlikeable base that on their words and actions and not her ethnicity. Just a thought.
  20. Can't find anything to watch. Found deep in the dregs of Tubi a 1988 documetary on Richard Burton. Very enjoyable, but sad, as we was another one of those people who achieved all of his dreams, but wasn't happy. Also interesting, no narration, just people talking about Burton, clips of him, of his films and some footage of Wales. Also, easy to forget how much real poverty still existed in the early 20th century in Western Europe.
  21. You often speak as if once something was true, it must always be true. If George V was racist, then it follows that his descendents, 100 years later must also be racist. If any given institution or country was racist in the past, then they must still be racist today. That seems to me objectively wrong. In the US, African Americans are doing better than they have ever done in the past, better economically, educationally, culturally. Yet many people here speak like it is still 1960 or maybe even 1940 with no acknowledgement of the massive strides that have been made over the past half century.
  22. In the US 'woman of color' encompasses a lot of ethnicities that aren't considered black. Is it controversial now to not consider Asians and people from Latin America as black? And for the record, while I am old, one of my parents is non white and I am not male.
  23. She can obviously identify as whatever she wants, I mean, that goes without saying. But to my knowledge she has always identified herself as 'biracial', indeed sometimes she has identified herself as caucasian and spoken at length of growing up as biracial in the US. Sometimes, when people don't like you or what you say they find reason to be 'offended' and always choose the most negative possible interpretation of other people's words.
  24. And there is the difference. Barack Obama is also biracial but identifies as black. Meghan to my knowledge has never identified herself as black, but as mix-ed race, going so far as to say she was never treated like a 'black woman' until she married Harry. The issues around driving/camping/shopping/walking while black is predicated on the individual visually appearing 'black' , if the cop/shop owner/karen looks at you and sees an Italian or a Brazilian, then it isn't going to be the same situation ,but I'm sure you will be offended by that as well.
  25. What's offensive about it? It's a fact. She's biracial.
×
×
  • Create New...