Jump to content

Spare a Moment for H&M, Part 3


Tywin et al.

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Oh, you mean there were occasions where they were acting like, "A family"? Gold star for them.

And I'm sorry, this whole, "they weren't alway shitty to him" transactional bullshit doesn't fly either. I guarantee you there isn't an abusive parent anywhere in the world that can't say that they were, on balance, good their kids.

"Yeah I used to beat him with a lead pipe, your Honor, but what about the 99% of the time I wasn't beating him with a lead pipe? What about all the meals I prepared for him or the clothes I bought him? I'm actually a fucking great parent when you think about it!"

I'm speaking from some experience on this. My extended family is dealing with their own drama.

Fuck his family. 

 

Has Harry claimed Charles abused him?  Or some other member of the royal family abused him?  That's news to me.  He paints his father as distant, which I'm sure is true. 

He claims he revered his paternal grandparents.  I will only say it is a whole lot of cognitive dissonance to hate and despise everything about the monarchy, the royal aides, every single thing and blame so much of his alleged misery on these people while failing to remember that it was his grandmother at the top of that hierarchy, calling the shots.  It was his grandmother, not courtiers or the Daily Mail who ultimately refused to give him the deal he wanted which set this whole debacle in motion.   

Worth remembering that what they wanted was to stay working royals on their own terms...life in North America, do million dollar deals and keep their patronages and all the other royal stuff. They did not want to quit or intend to quit.  It was only after big Liz said no to their plan, that this turned into needing to flee Britain to save his family.  More utter BS from H&M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Yes, but you don't see any other members of the family complaining and whining about their life of vast privilege and coddling do you? 

I  don't seem them forsaking the coddling altogether as Harry has—which is a point in his favor though admittedly his reasons are couched in not giving the same protection and respect as others.

4 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

I think that consulting a psychic and believing they relayed a message from your dead mother

Eh unfortunately superstitious acts like this aren't uncommon. If that was a benchmark for mental illness most religious people would qualify—they don't.

8 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

asking for guidance at the grave are very, very, very weird and disturbing. 

It very, very, very, very much isn't.

I really wonder how you can not people often do things like this when they visit graves or deceased loved one talk as if they're directly speaking to them.

10 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

The rest of the royals haven't tried to build their own brand on the bones of the monarchy, as H and M have. 

Unfortunately.

14 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

The rest of the royals for the most part, don't complain in public, don't trash the family or the monarchy in public.

Harry publicly supports the institution of the monarchy. 

Trashing members or complaining about members of the family is fine if they do something worth trashing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

When did the press hound Harry for pics of his kids?

Sigh I've already explained in a way that a reasonable, good faith interlocutat could understand how there's an agreement between the press and the royal family to allow some controlled pics of the kiddies in exchange for a semblance of privacy the rest of the year.

Anyway Why do think it's wrong for people to be weirded out by Clarkson’s rant about wanting to strip Markle naked in public and fanasize about her funeral?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Sigh I've already explained in a way that a reasonable, good faith interlocutat could understand how there's an agreement between the press and the royal family to allow some controlled pics of the kiddies in exchange for a semblance of privacy the rest of the year.

Anyway Why do think it's wrong for people to be weirded out by Clarkson’s rant about wanting to strip Markle naked in public and fanasize about her funeral?

I'd hardly call that being hounded.  I'm not sure what your point is?  Yes, the RF has a 'deal' where they release photos of the children and in return, nobody hassles them...as Harry and William were hassled when they were children.  Harry and Meghan are fine with releasing photos of their children, as they have done on multiple occassions.  So, again, same/same. 

Clarkson's walk of shame rant was bizarre and stupid and stupidly self destructive and he's paying the price for that stupidity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Has Harry claimed Charles abused him?  Or some other member of the royal family abused him?  That's news to me.  He paints his father as distant, which I'm sure is true. 

Not remotely what I said and you know it. And there are other forms of abuse beyond just physical.

Quote

He claims he revered his paternal grandparents.  I will only say it is a whole lot of cognitive dissonance to hate and despise everything about the monarchy, the royal aides, every single thing and blame so much of his alleged misery on these people while failing to remember that it was his grandmother at the top of that hierarchy, calling the shots.  It was his grandmother, not courtiers or the Daily Mail who ultimately refused to give him the deal he wanted which set this whole debacle in motion.   

He has nothing but good things to say about his paternal grandparents. And why is it cognitive dissonance? It is not paradoxical to separate criticism of a dysfunctional system and feelings for the people in that system. And what the fuck does his affection for his grandmother have to do with "royal aides"? is it a package deal. If he loves his granny he has to kiss their asses too? Some family.

Was QE2 "at the top" of that system, "calling the shots" as you say or was she trapped in it the way they all seem to be? Maybe she does as she's advised, maybe by people who may have their own agendas. That's not entirely clear to me. It's worth noting that, in times past, Royal courtiers were almost exclusively military men, not the marketing or media personalities they are today.

And "the deal he wanted" as I understand it sounded perfectly reasonable to me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Yes, the RF has a 'deal' where they release photos of the children and in return, nobody hassles them

That's blackmail.

Tell me how you'd feel if the only way to keep strangers from harassing your child is to give them pictures of them?

Can you not sympathize with someone feeling even just a bit peeved at that?

9 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Harry and Meghan are fine with releasing photos of their children, as they have done on multiple occassions.

No not the same—there’s a difference sharing a family photo on Facebook and a stranger taking a picture of your kids without your permission as you drop them off from school.

If a guy takes pics of a woman at the gym while she's exercising he can't just point to her having an Instagram to get out of being looked at as a fucking creep.

9 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Clarkson's walk of shame rant was bizarre and stupid and stupidly self destructive

Dude he expressed wanting to do what'd be categorized as a sex crime and yearning for them to die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Not remotely what I said and you know it. And there are other forms of abuse beyond just physical.

He has nothing but good things to say about his paternal grandparents. And why is it cognitive dissonance? It is not paradoxical to separate criticism of a dysfunctional system and feelings for the people in that system. And what the fuck does his affection for his grandmother have to do with "royal aides"? is it a package deal. If he loves his granny he has to kiss their asses too? Some family.

Was QE2 "at the top" of that system, "calling the shots" as you say or was she trapped in it the way they all seem to be? Maybe she does as she's advised, maybe by people who may have their own agendas. That's not entirely clear to me. It's worth noting that, in times past, Royal courtiers were almost exclusively military men, not the marketing or media personalities they are today.

And "the deal he wanted" as I understand it sounded perfectly reasonable to me. 

No, it was a non starter.  Harry and Meg had already shown that they weren't team players by this time.  How could they possibly be seen to represent the queen and the rf, while doing huge deals with netflix, while calling up US Senators and putting out political statements?  It would never have worked.  If it didn't work with bland, nice, harmless Edward, it would never ever work wtih Harry and Meghan.  Again, it's weird that anyone would defend the idea of keeping only the fun parts of being a royal and forgoing all the duty parts so you can make money as if its something noble instead of something incredibly selfish and short sighted.

I would imagine the queen in the early days was much guided by the real 'men in grey suits' but the woman who held more institutional memory than anyone else except her husband and a few old aristocrats, held in thrall by some 30 something PR people?  I don't know think so.  The queen pretty much only ever showed the steel when she was forced into it, over Margaret's desire to marry the married guy back in the 50s, finally telling Charles and Di to divorce and telling Harry he can't have his cake and eat it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cas Stark said:

No, it was a non starter.  Harry and Meg had already shown that they weren't team players by this time.  How could they possibly be seen to represent the queen and the rf, while doing huge deals with netflix, while calling up US Senators and putting out political statements?  It would never have worked.  If it didn't work with bland, nice, harmless Edward, it would never ever work wtih Harry and Meghan.  Again, it's weird that anyone would defend the idea of keeping only the fun parts of being a royal and forgoing all the duty parts so you can make money as if its something noble instead of something incredibly selfish and short sighted.

The way he tells it he was given five options. He chose "option 3". He was then told option 3 was not possible. If there was anyone negotiating in bad faith, it wasn't him.

In hindsight, The RF should have made option 3 work. Fuck them if they don't like the result.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

That's blackmail.

Tell me how you'd feel if the only way to keep strangers from harassing your child is to give them pictures of them?

Can you not sympathize with someone feeling even just a bit peeved at that?

No not the same—there’s a difference sharing a family photo on Facebook and a stranger taking a picture of your kids without your permission as you drop them off from school.

If a guy takes pics of a woman at the gym while she's exercising he can't just point to her having an Instagram to get out of being looked at as a fucking creep.

Dude he expressed wanting to do what'd be categorized as a sex crime and yearning for them to die.

I have a lot of sympathy for the straight jacket that is royal life.  Unlike so many others on here, I don't resent them for their prvilege or their money.

Again, no one was taking pictures of the royals being dropped off at school or 'harassing any royal children'.   Meghan made this up, it's a lie.  It has not ever happened with William's children and would not have happened with her children either.  

This is the bargain the rf made maybe as early as Victoria, certainly it was in full force throughout the 20th century where the royals traded glimpses of their lives in return for being 'newsworthy'.  It isn't a bad bargain, but of course, there is a trap there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cas Stark said:

Again, it's weird that anyone would defend the idea of keeping only the fun parts of being a royal and forgoing all the duty parts so you can make money

The duty being attending parties and having parades thrown in your honor—for the lowly of millions of pounds a year.

3 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

the woman who held more institutional memory than anyone else except her husband and a few old aristocrats, held in thrall by some 30 something PR people?  I don't know think so.  

Unlikely true.

5 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

The queen pretty much only ever showed the steel when she was forced into it, over Margaret's desire to marry the married guy back in the 50s

Quote

Margaret soon grew close to Group Captain Peter Townsend, a war hero and royal equerry, and their secret relationship was revealed at the coronation of her sister, Queen Elizabeth II in 1953. However, Townsend was an older man and a recent divorcé, and the relationship was said to be frowned upon by the Church and Parliament.The Queen and Prime Minister Anthony Eden eventually reached an agreement in which Margaret could marry Townsend in exchange for forfeiting her rights to succession. Ultimately, Margaret chose not to follow through with the arrangement, and she announced her split from Townsend in October 1955.

Wow she sure stuck up for her sister there.

9 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

finally telling Charles and Di to divorce

That's a rumor spread by one of Diana’s butlers. 

11 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Harry he can't have his cake and eat it.

That's too vague to even mean anything.

 

She bailed out her son for fucking minors and kept him on the royal family tit. Did she show her steel there?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

The way he tells it he was given five options. He chose "option 3". He was then told option 3 was not possible. If there was anyone negotiating in bad faith, it wasn't him.

In hindsight, The RF should have made option 3 work. Fuck them if they don't like the result.  

Yes as I said they were never going to get the deal they touted as a 'done deal' when they 'stepped back' via instagram.  Never.  It would have been nothing but an ongoing series of controversies as far as the eye can see.  It is a testament to  Harry's lack of vision/understanding that he didn't see this from the get go and really thought his grandmother would capitulate to the pressure of the 'resignation' being made public before the deal was finalized.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

The duty being attending parties and having parades thrown in your honor—for the lowly of millions of pounds a year.

Unlikely true.

Wow she sure stuck up for her sister there.

That's a rumor spread by one of Diana’s butlers. 

That's too vague to even mean anything.

 

She bailed out her son for fucking minors and kept him on the royal family tit. Did she show her steel there?

 

It isn't, it's right there in the letter she wrote to Diana.

Duty:  Attending boring events where you are always smiling and courteous, giving speeches, always being 'on' at all times in public, basically doing the job of a politician without any of the power.

Having your cake and eating it:  Keeping your free security, your royal patronages and all the spectacle involved in high profile events that goes with being a full time working royal... while at the same time making millions profiting off the royal family, living in the US, not doing any day to day royal events.  It's like resigning your job in a snit, then doing a bunch of interviews trashing the company and being shocked and hurt that you lost your company car and credit card and are not invited to the holiday party.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Yes as I said they were never going to get the deal they touted as a 'done deal' when they 'stepped back' via instagram.  Never.  It would have been nothing but an ongoing series of controversies as far as the eye can see.  It is a testament to  Harry's lack of vision/understanding that he didn't see this from the get go and really thought his grandmother would capitulate to the pressure of the 'resignation' being made public before the deal was finalized.

They went public because that palace staff that you hold in such high regard leaked it to the press. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

They went public because that palace staff that you hold in such high regard leaked it to the press. 

Ah right, so Harry and Meghan forfeited the ability to shape the rest of their lives in order to prevent Dan Wootten from getting a scoop.  Seems kinda short sighted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

You haven’t said a reasonable thing your entire time on this forum. 
 

so when were they hounded for pics of their kids?

Thats mean :P

Oh When they blackmailed Harry and Megan for pics of their kids a couple times exchange for not making their lives hell for the rest,

22 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Unlike so many others on here, I don't resent them for their prvilege or their money.

It’d be great if they weren't paid millions of pounds by the public because of their bloodlines.

22 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Again, no one was taking pictures of the royals being dropped off at schoo

Because the royals tend give into the tabloids blackmail by giving over some pics.

If they didn't we’d see more conduct when Charles and Harry attended school.  You know the type of hassling I assumed you were acknowledging.

 

22 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Meghan made this up, it's a lie.

She didn't lie on this particular instance.

 

22 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

It has not ever happened with William's children and would not have happened with her children eithe

If she just played along with the black mail and given strangers pics of her kids.

16 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

It isn't, it's right there in the letter she wrote to Diana.

Ah.

16 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Duty:  Attending boring events where you are always smiling and courteous, giving speeches, always being 'on' at all times in public, basically doing the job of a politician without any of the power.

Duty: attending parties full of social elites. Attending parades thrown in your honor. Occasionally having to do. speech to people who've been primed all your life to see you as a representation of God.

It's a great grift not without some pitfalls but a gift most people would take up happily.

Her job was all the fun parts of being a major politician with none of the worry of loss of station or actually having to do anything to improve/maintain a the standard of living of most people in society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Ah right, so Harry and Meghan forfeited the ability to shape the rest of their lives in order to prevent Dan Wootten from getting a scoop.  Seems kinda short sighted.

I could find the bit in his memoir there he talks about this but I'm pretty sure he that, once the thing was agreed to in principal, he was advised by the Queens henchmen to get a statement out before the tabloids went with it. But no, let's go with "Blindsided the Queen!!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

I could find the bit in his memoir there he talks about this but I'm pretty sure he that, once the thing was agreed to in principal, he was advised by the Queens henchmen to get a statement out before the tabloids went with it. But no, let's go with "Blindsided the Queen!!"

As far as I know, that is an inaccurate representation of what happened.  No agreement had been reached at all, this is why Harry is still angry that he lost his royal [free] protection when he quit as a working royal. 

None of those details had been addressed at the time of their announcement.  Harry and Meg went ballistic over Dan Wootton, [or a more cynical take would be that they released the version of the deal they wanted as a power move to increase their bargaining power] and so they put out their instagram statement, allegedly giving the palace only 15 minutes notice.  That is pretty close to 'blindsiding the queen'.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

As far as I know, that is an inaccurate representation of what happened.  No agreement had been reached at all, this is why Harry is still angry that he lost his royal [free] protection when he quit as a working royal. 

None of those details had been addressed at the time of their announcement.  Harry and Meg went ballistic over Dan Wootton, [or a more cynical take would be that they released the version of the deal they wanted as a power move to increase their bargaining power] and so they put out their instagram statement, allegedly giving the palace only 15 minutes notice.  That is pretty close to 'blindsiding the queen'.  

The mere fact that we're talking about this in terms of "negotiation" and "power moves" demonstrates how dysfunctional this whole fucking mess is. He was right to get the hell out of there. Fuck his "family". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

The mere fact that we're talking about this in terms of "negotiation" and "power moves" demonstrates his dysfunctional this whole fucking mess is. He was right to get the hell out of there. Fuck his "family". 

When you want a change in status from your employer, whether it is a family business or not, it will involve negotiation.  That isn't a dirty word.  The world is full of family businesses where 'family' and 'business' are co mingled.  The rf isn't alone in this challenge.

But we can agree to disagree on H, and his family and who is the victim/victimizer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

The people who should have had his back and instead sat back and did nothing while he was being served up? Who were themselves disclosing private conversations?

Fuck his family.

Funny, how those who are comparing Harry's behavior with Lady G's, haven't noticed that she too, WAS NOT THERE FOR HER CHILDREN, and she too admits that much of their troubles and sad outcome is because of that.

That she's asked their permission (though at least one of them, and maybe 2 of them, cannot say, and were not in a situation to give permission -- i.e. funeral referenced above -- might well be doubted -- the Mail etc. better get cracking on this!

Gads, the haters are such broken records.  The exact same blahblahblah dragged up out of the tabloid sewers every flare up -- which convinced the sane, non-haters not at all -- yet here we go again repeating word for word the same blahblahblah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...