Cas Stark

Just now, Spockydog said:

I have several mixed race friends, who all, very strongly, identify as being black. My friends are proud of their heritage, and if some random white dude was to sneer hat they are not black but mixed-race, I'm pretty sure I know how they'd react. 

 

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. 

4 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

What the fuck is this shit? One of the most offensive things ever posted on this messageboard. 

What's offensive about it?  It's a fact.  She's biracial.  

7 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

If it weren’t for the fact that I am about to leave my house I’d leave a much longer answer, but holy crap, it’s 2023, wake up to the reality of what many white people think about biracial people. Hint: they ain’t white.

But then again, our English neighbours back in the 60s didn’t consider Italians white other. Or Portuguese or Spanish people. 

The 60s were 60 years ago.  Times and attitudes have changes since then.  

The 'spike' is because there is been a lot of news about them lately.  There was the 'car chase'. Harry's court testimony.  Then, Spotify dropped them.  This did seem to have opened the gates a bit, with insiders spilling details the public hadn't heard before.  They didn't get the full Spotify payout.  Bill Simmons called them fucking grifters.  Specifics about their dumb podcast ideas are coming out.   Kelly Osborn went on a rant.  Also, someone, probably H&M, floated the Dior deal and that was a news cycle.  Now, still more is coming out about their Netflix deal and ideas.

With respect, trolling through social media accounts from their weird fanbase the #sussexsquad, suggests perhaps others need to get out and touch grass.  

Lastly, I hate to be a stickler, but Meghan Markle isn't 'black' she is biracial, a black mother and a white father.  If I met her on the street my first thought on her ethnicity would probably be Italian or South American.  With her hair straight she looks completely racially ambiguious, she could be any of about a dozen various ethnicities and nationalities.

1 hour ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Yeah, bullshit.

It’s baseless speculation because a) No one can read their thoughts (ie “what they are considering”) and b) there’s no plausible source for this story; unless whoever is reporting it has a microphone in their bedroom or at their kitchen table. The palace comms people are no longer in the loop and anyone the Sussexes would confide in don’t deal with the tabloids.

You know how I know? Lillibet’s christening was only reported after the fact (a story the tabloids would have paid serious money for) and Harry’s first court appearance. They didn’t even know he was in the country until after his fucking plane landed. 

And you never answered my question: what result would you approve of? Whether or not they changed their name to “Spencer”, what result wouldn’t garner criticism from you? Most people don’t even know them by their last names anyway.

Never had a job? False. And spare me the, “eat the rich” malarkey. You were the one who brought up the fucking tiara nonsense a few threads back. 

I would approve if they renounced all their titles and became Mr. and Mrs. whatever,  and Harry and the children were out of the line of sucession.  As for their last name, I don't care.  Changing it to Spencer would just be more evidence of how nuts they are, but I don't have any objection to it.  I do expect that eventually when they've squeezed everything they can out of the monarchy that they will give up the titles and go full republican.

18 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

 No, he said they weren’t racist. He had to clarify and dig himself out of the big hole Meghan dug him in

 

That was so strange.  If he never intended for his family to be branded racists as a result of that interview, why not correct the record at the time?  Why let those accusations go on and on for years until he randomly asserts, oh no, not racist, we never said that, it was the media.  

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I don't care about the figures who don't matter. The Queen gave off every negative vibe you guys lay at Meghan's feet and then some and again, protected her son who probably slept with a lot of underaged girls. 

Is his father, the king, a good person? 

Stop. They've had a ton of power, wealth and influence. Just because they're not running the government doesn't mean they have a ton of control and we know they've been using the media to manipulate the public for ages. Quite being so naïve. 

They don't have any control.  They're basking in the dwindling light of past centuries and the affection of people like me who like pagentry, tradition and big jewels.  The very fact, that as Harry says, they have to have strategies to pacify the tabloids tells you they have no real power.  They are at the mercy of the media and have been for several decades. Harry is right when he says they're trapped in a mutual relationship there.

I get it, you don't like the royals or the aristocracy, that's fine.  But you attribute to them all kinds of powers and bad behavior for which there is no actual evidence.

Charles is weak and probably arrogant.  I don't know if he meets the threshold for 'bad person', he was an environmentalist years before it became mainstream.   I think you're in the distinct minority on getting evil vibes from the 96 year old grandma.  She always seemed like a nice lady to me, nothing special, no great intellect or talent there, but a nice lady who was doing what she saw as her duty.  We can just agree to disagree here.

8 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

So continue the lie by being quiet? That's great...

It's also worth noting Meghan hasn't actually said all that much and her opinions are not very controversial. But she gets harassed in an unusual way. Perhaps ask yourself why that's happening. The answer should be pretty obvious and it's not because she's a jerk when she married into a faimly of jerks. 

So holding on to a multi generational grifting power structure is worse than marrying into it? Okay buddy. 

And I'd burn it all down too because again, the royals are talentless idiots who think they're better than all of us because of their birth. There are not good people and you're sucker to believe so. Frankly Harry is one of the few honest ones among them. 

You keep saying that, they're not good people, but on what evidence.  What is wrong with Princess Anne?  Or her children?  Or Andrew's children?  Or Edward?  How are they bad people?  Why was the Queen a bad person?

I do believe Harry is dishonest and is not a good person as evidenced by his factual statements and behavior.

You know the royals haven't had any power in centuries right?  That during the peak of Empire, they were already figureheads.  Queen Victoria was just branding by that point.  I mean, I'm sure she enjoyed getting all the jewels, but blaming the royals for colonialism is not accurate unless you want to go way back to the Stuarts and the Tudors.  The Windsors have always been just window dressing with no real power.

1 minute ago, Week said:

This is sad shit that you are trotting out to further justifying your obsession with Harry and Meghan that really does not seem healthy. More than sad, disgusting really.

Wasn't it like a week ago that you patted yourself on the back for how few posts you had recently made in this thread? I'd advise that you go back to whatever healthy hobby or coping mechanism you had found yourself to avoid these slavering diatribes.

Really?  On a web site where thousands of words have been spent on the importance of a lemon tree in a fictional universe, and you fear for my mental health over a few dozen posts about the British royal family?  Try harder.

4 minutes ago, Week said:

Sorry, I'll replace pedophilia with paying to rape teenagers edit: and actively working to cover up the crime.. Does that make you happier?

As for racism, we absolutely do not need one word from Meghan to know that the royal family is a racist institution. As most are that have existed for as long as they have.

Ah, so no evidence needed then.  Just guilty as [not] charged. I thought as much.

4 minutes ago, Week said:

Ok, I didn't care much but now I'm really on her side. To think that she could do more damage than the pedophilia, extravagance, and racism that family is now steeped in is quite impressive.

When did they change the definition of pedophilia to 17 year olds?  You might want to alert the authorities since the vast majority of countries including the UK and most of the US have the age of consent at 16.  As for racism, that's a claim Meghan  has made, I guess if you find her honest and credible, that's up to you.  I'll give you extravagance, but that's baked into the cake, that's part of of the appeal.  I was personally disappointed the royals didn't break out the tiaras for Charles coronation.  What's the point of having dozens of nearly priceless tiaras if no one wears them because some dips***  bolshevik wannabes are going to start blabbing about the they should be sold off to fund road repair.

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Lol. Projecting is accusing Meghan of having all the worst traits of the royal family while not holding them accountable for their garbage which is far worse. I've never said she's a wonderful person or anyone I'd want to spend time with, but given the amount of hate some of you have given her I'd think you'd shit on the royal faimly itself a hundred times more.

I don't agree they are far worse.  At the worst, they're simply trying to hold onto their positions, I can't blame them, I would do the same.  Meghan has taken all of the privilege, the fame and the money that comes with that family's unique position and spit on it.  She has been actively working for literally years to harm the family and the institution they represent.  That is vile and is in a class by itself.  

6 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

It's commonly said of Charles that he would have been a failure if he had to live a normal life. And he's king. They're all pretty unimpressive people. And they're mostly jerks. The royal family is the perfect example of why we shouldn't have royal families based on blood (which in and of itself is fucking weird to still defend). If you want a ceremonial figurehead, elect one every few years and give them no power of any kind. Don't give it to one family to abuse for generations. I do not get this constant need to hold Meghan to a higher standard than the Queen who fucking raised a sex offender she protected while being an even bigger asshole than Meghan is. Think about that. It makes no sense.

You're projecting.  You don't like the royal family and you think the hereditary aristocracy is bad, fine.  Ask yourself, why Meghan continues to call herself the Duchess of Sussex and was so hot to ensure her chileren got the Prince/Princess titles.  Maybe she doesn't actually share your view there, when the title affords her all kinds of privilege. 

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I think you can say that about most of the royals.

The Queen was probably far worse than her. She just didn't say anything publicly and also privately used the press to her advantage. 

Maybe.  Prince Phillip is on record saying that royals need to remember people don't come to see the individual but the 'role' which seems pretty self aware to me.  The Queen's father was also humble about his own lack of capabilities.  I'd imagine being at the pinacle of your country's social system, living the life of an oligarch, you'd need to actively work not to be an arogant jerk though.

Meghan, in her short few years as a super famous person has done many, many things that show me she is manifestly not a nice or sincere person.  I can't say the same for the queen.  Maybe she was a cruel bitch, but I doubt it.  Too many people from across the world including the Obamas spoke too fondly of her.  At the very least, QEII kept any bad deeds behind closed doors and that served her very very well.  Her grand daughter in law would have been wise to take a lesson there.

Instead of a mural you could look into wall paper, they have the stick ons in a lot of mural like almost full wall patterns that,while not cheap, are not crazy expensive either.

39 minutes ago, maarsen said:

Why single out Harry as not being too bright? The apple did not fall far from the tree.

He's the only one who doesn't seem to understand that everything he has is due to his parents.  The idea that Vladimir Putin and Zuckerberg and the Pope would talk to Harry shows exactly what an entitled prat he actually is, and that all of his progressive talk is fully performative.  When he looks in the mirror he sees His Royal Highness Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, a Blood Royal and Very Important Person.  When he says 'just call me Harry' its the equivalent of the Lord of the Manor throwing out coin on his birthday to the peasants.

At least Meghan, while I don't think she is a nice person, has a list of accomplishments that pre date her involvement with Harry.

9 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Why would this be interesting? One way or the other, why the hell do you even care? Would you even approve one way or the other? 

And why is it “a problem” if they don’t address this? Something that I guarantee you is baseless speculation. And have you not been paying attention? The sheer volume of shit that gets published about them in the British tabloids and they’re supposed to answer all of it? Touch grass.

How can you guarantee its baseless speculation?  Indeed, one of Harry's chief complaints about the palace staff was that they would not answer 'all of it' and he was again and again advised that it was both foolish and impossible to address every single dumb story.  Harry's MO is to threaten to sue over stories he considers false, exactly what he did over the stupid Lilibet kerfluffle.  It is a reasonable conclusion that if they don't deny something there is a reason for it. 

It would be interesting that anyone who is almost 40 would be considering a name change as part of a rebranding effort.  I have no idea why anyone at this point defends either of these two strange and unkind people.  Prince Harry, he who barely graduated from UK version of high school and has never had a job thinks his peer group is Putin, Zuckerberg and the Pope.  That is beyond laughable.  

News about the royals is entertaining for some people, some many millions of people, including me.  I don't need to 'touch grass' but thanks for the concern.  Bless your heart.

Talk to me like I'm stupid: 

If they were going to view the titanic, which is in a specific place, why is it taking so long to find the sub?  Is it because its so small? or too deep?  

From what I understand, she only did the celebrity interviews herself.  The riff raff eperts were interviewed by staff.  That's fine I guess, but not really 'on brand' with Archetypes which was supposed to showcase stories of the marginalized and shine a light on ?something? new.  If the podcast had aired in 1982 instead of 2022, it might have been fresh and illuminating. This is their chief problem with anything outside of the royal family, their views/ideas are totally Basic 101, points that anyone can pick up googling for 10 minutes.

It will be interesting if they deny the stories that they have/are considering changing their last name to Spencer.

**This is another downside of suing everyone all the time.  When you decline to sue or demand a retraction it leaves the impression that whatever has been said must be true.  

I'm shocked, no one has yet made a joke about how their 'hearts will go on'....

24 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

NYC’s trash problem is as epic and constant as its rat problem.  

I think the plants did ok from the smoke.  So much of it is that I haven’t really had time when the weather was nice enough to garden/it has not been super warm so far, so everything is about a week behind where it was last year + I got some things in later.  Oh well.

Yeah but the two are intertwined, and if the city focused on the actual problem...trash that is accessible to rodents, the rat issue would diminish.  But, we always seem to prefer to treat the effect and never the cause in the US.  Poisoning animals by the thousands is despicable even if they are rats.

I don't see any effect of the wildfire smoke on the plants so far.

If we would simply control and manage our human garbage, including fines for failure to keep your trash secured, and not allowing people to live in public parks, etc. etc. that would probably eliminate the rat problem.  But I guess it's easier to poison animals.  Sad, but not surprising.

13 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Since we're talking about a Masshole, let's use Belichick as an example. Greatest NFL coach ever. Not sure many would disagree. Also, kind of an awful GM and shit at evaluating talent. Simmons knows what sells in sports media even if a lot of it is due to others and his personal opinions are lazy and uninteresting. There's no reason to assume he'd be good at producing and marketing a podcast about two former royals who as I've always said are not very interesting. I'm sure they're both a pain in the ass, but he probably is too. 

I wonder how BB would be as a podcaster?  Probably no middle ground, either fantastic or terrible.  Yes, he is terrible at evaluating talent, I could never understand how that was possible.

The salient point for me here is that he calls them, not lazy, untalented, boring, rambling, but grifters.  There has to be a lot that went on behind the scenes for him to use that particular word.  

2 hours ago, Zorral said:

How did the garden react to those awful smoke days?  And your birds and bees?

Our community garden seems to have gotten enough rain since then to help from at least immediately visible effects on all of the above.  I saw a cardinal this weekend -- and never have seen one there before.  And bees were swarming the hollyhocks.  But the robins, which had been more than I'd ever seen together at one time in any previous spring -- I haven't seen any since. 

BTW, the poison action on the rats -- killed all the squirrels.  As squirrelly as they are, I miss their liveliness.  Saw a big fat contented sleek rat merely ambling about, in the daylight, open space, not in the least cautious or concerned.  

Those things always backfire.  Nature's way of telling us that ya know, poisoning animals en masse is not the answer.  But, we never learn.

Isn't he the spotify executive who is in charge of monetizing podcasts? 

Wouldn't that mean that his opinion on Meg and Harry's podcast career is something more than 'meaningless'?  

ETA...the capacity to recognize and nurture talent IS a talent.