Jump to content

Resistance is Futile - H&M Part 5


Fragile Bird
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Heartofice said:

Recently no, but she used to. You don’t remember the Oprah interview. You keep saying she has barely said anything but there is a litany of lies and exaggerations on her side. 
 

If she doesn’t speak directly to camera much these days it’s because she made such a mess of it before 

So you're mad she gave an interview explaining the struggles she was having marrying into a racist family and then beating her over the head for speaking too much while acknowledging she doesn't speak publicly much anymore.

Do you not get why that's weird? And again, the family she married into is full of liars, but you don't get nearly as mad at them. Wake up bruh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Yes I’ve seen the people you follow on Twitter. 

Oh, really? Are you cyber-stalking me? Following me about on the internet? How sad and pathetic, like the world's worst Disney animal. 

Anyway, enough of your bullshit. You are so fucking full of it. I have no idea what you are insinuating here, but on twitter, I follow mainly dogs and comedians and football journalists.

People like you and your ilk are blocked to fuck. 

Edited by Spockydog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

She doesn't talk that much, Harry does. And the queen talked by heavily influencing the British press. I'd say that's way more shady. Do you really think she had no idea about all the pro crown stories being fed to them or the ones denigrating the people she had issues with? Come on dude.

Doesn't talk much?  Yes, she's been quiet for the last 5 or so months.  But before that, there was Variety, The Cut, op ed in the New York Times, lobbying US Senators, a 6 hour docu-drama and Oprah.  There was the book Finding Freedom, which she collaborated on and then lied to the court about it.  There are the innumerable stories that come from "friends"...you know, getting your story out there w/out putting your name on it, just like the Royals do.  There are the zoom calls to charities and the award speeches and there was her 12 hour podcast.  Doesn't talk that much?  Come on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

So you're mad she gave an interview explaining the struggles she was having marrying into a racist family and then beating her over the head for speaking too much while acknowledging she doesn't speak publicly much anymore.

Do you not get why that's weird? And again, the family she married into is full of liars, but you don't get nearly as mad at them. Wake up bruh. 

I’m pointing out to you that the public don’t know anything about any of the royals because they don’t do interviews on personal matters. You have no idea what Kate is like because she doesn’t talk about herself.

Meghan has spoke A LOT, and it’s almost always about herself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LMGTFY Cas --

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/opinion/sunday/meghan-markle-prince-harry.html

Quote

From the very first headline about her being “(almost) straight outta Compton” and having “exotic” DNA, the racist treatment of Meghan has been impossible to ignore. Princess Michael of Kent wore an overtly racist brooch in the duchess’s company. A BBC host compared the couple’s newborn baby to a chimpanzee. Then there was the sublimely ludicrous suggestion that Meghan’s avocado consumption is responsible for mass murder, while her charity cookbook was portrayed as somehow helping terrorists.

Those who claim frequent attacks against the duchess have nothing to do with her race have a hard time explaining these attempts to link her with particularly racialized forms of crime — terrorism and gang activity — as well as the fact that she has been most venomously attacked for acts that attracted praise when other royals did them. Her decision to guest-edit British Vogue, for example, was roundly condemned by large parts of the British media, in stark contrast to Prince Charles’s two-time guest editorship of Country Life magazine, Prince Harry’s of a BBC program and Kate Middleton’s at Huffington Post, all of which were quietly praised at the time.

Her treatment has proved what many of us have always known: No matter how beautiful you are, whom you marry, what palaces you occupy, charities you support, how faithful you are, how much money you accumulate or what good deeds you perform, in this society racism will still follow you.

https://people.com/meghan-markle-prince-harry-named-racist-messages-sent-ex-police-officers-met-police-says-7644184

Quote

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were the subject of racist messages allegedly exchanged by former Metropolitan Police Service officers who now face charges.

On Tuesday, the Met Police announced that six former officers, who retired between 2011 and 2015, have been charged under the Communications Act 2003. The inappropriate messages were allegedly sent in a closed WhatsApp group from August 2018 to September 2022, a police statement said.

“Some of the posts referenced the government's Rwanda policy, while others joked about recent flooding in Pakistan, which left almost 1,700 people dead. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also featured in several images alongside racist language,” the BBC said.

https://www.vogue.com/article/meghan-markle-queen-elizabeth-ii-funeral-scrutiny-racism

Quote

The initial feeling of familial unity as the Waleses and the Sussexes stepped out to greet streetside mourners was palpable: a message of post-traumatic harmony between allegedly (allegedly, allegedly) feuding brothers and wives, of family patching up differences in a time of loss. Yet this sense of calm quickly descended into online commotion when Meghan carried her own flowers. With an unreadable, almost blank face at the procession, Meghan was accused of disrespectfully smirking. Both Sussexes were criticized for holding hands as they walked into Westminster Hall. Meghan’s also been criticized for acting, as if royal public engagements are not at their hearts performative.

I’m cataloging these gripes to showcase how absurd, and frankly minor, they are in the scheme of burying a monarch. They feel like nothings, mere drips in the ocean of national mourning. Hating on a woman for holding her husband’s hand at his grandmother’s funeral is utterly unhinged. Today’s headlines are calling Meghan a manipulative bully.

It’s difficult not to see the racism or to explain away the vitriol for Markle—the droning, relentless persecution—as anything but racial prejudice. Meghan’s behavior is in line with the Firm’s expectations for her. There was the fuss about wedding tights, and she wore tights this whole trip. Not to be too glib in the face of what’s shaping up to be a campaign of rampant discrimination, but after vocal concern about the coloring of her kids, she bore two light-skinned offspring. What more do these people want? It’s impossible to watch (white) Zara Tindall hold her (white) husband’s hand at the same event with zero criticism lobbed at them. For the record, I think Zara is great—I just can’t stand the double standard, the extra expectations on the biracial couple. Let’s not sugarcoat the idea that a Black woman’s display of affection and intimacy makes people more uncomfortable. Black actions are seen differently. They are scrutinized.

I wish there was a less clunky way of making this point; I wish the racism was elevated and sly and hidden and insidious, but it’s parading in plain sight and alarming in its boldness. Any non-white U.K. residents felt that all-too-familiar twinge of hostility as #MeghanMarkleGoHome trended.

One more for good measure - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/arts/invalidations-of-meghans-claims-of-racism-hurt-black-women

Quote

“It’s an insult when people are incredulous about the racism people like Meghan Markle experienced because that incredulity speaks volumes about what people refuse to see, what is right in front of their eyes all the time and that some people have to navigate daily,” she said.

“That takes a toll on a person and their mental health.”

Dr. Anita Thomas, executive vice president and provost at St. Catherine University in St. Paul, Minnesota

 

Edited by Week
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would imagine that both Meg and Harry were shocked by the impact that Spare had on their popularity.  Rather than catapult them into the stratosphere, it somewhat backfired.  It did show of course there is still a huge appetite for royal gossip.  But it turns out that Harry's own story of jealousy, pettyness and lack of introspection had a negative effect on his numbers.  I'd suggest that caused a retrenchment and is the reason why we have not heard so much from Meg lately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Week said:

From the very first headline about her being “(almost) straight outta Compton” and having “exotic” DNA, the racist treatment of Meghan has been impossible to ignore. Princess Michael of Kent wore an overtly racist brooch in the duchess’s company. A BBC host compared the couple’s newborn baby to a chimpanzee. Then there was the sublimely ludicrous suggestion that Meghan’s avocado consumption is responsible for mass murder, while her charity cookbook was portrayed as somehow helping terrorists.

Those

Worth pointing out every single one of these stories is not proof of racism but proof of massive over reaction of the press desperately looking for offence. 

Edited by Heartofice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cas Stark said:

Ah, so basically, the handful of stories I ALREADY mentioned.  You can do better. 

“It’s an insult when people are incredulous about the racism people like Meghan Markle experienced because that incredulity speaks volumes about what people refuse to see, what is right in front of their eyes all the time and that some people have to navigate daily,”

That's the point. Continued disagreement is covering your own eyes and ears to what others are seeing. You could consider what that says about your views or could continue to ignore it and confirm it for others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Politico:

Britain’s biggest bully: Racist tabloids

To be sure, racism in Britain is not restricted to the tabloids. But these newspapers — and a couple of broadsheets — are deeply complicit in the fomenting of racist and xenophobic attitudes in wider British society.  

As the liberal blogger Tim Fenton notes, the “evidence” of this role is easy to source in a myriad misleading, even outright false stories and opinion pieces: “One incendiary, bigoted, racist, hyperbolic, paranoid, negative, hateful, prejudice generating pack of lies after another. Day in, day out.”  

From the relentless demonization of migrants and refugees to scare stories about “no-go areas” in London (a falsehood reprised by former U.S. President Donald Trump) to lies about Muslims supporting Christianity under attack and banned Christian festivals, British tabloid culture is easily one of the top peddlers of bigotry across the nation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Week said:

“It’s an insult when people are incredulous about the racism people like Meghan Markle experienced because that incredulity speaks volumes about what people refuse to see, what is right in front of their eyes all the time and that some people have to navigate daily,”

That's the point. Continued disagreement is covering your own eyes and ears to what others are seeing. You could consider what that says about your views or could continue to ignore it and confirm it for others.

Oh the irony of this post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cas Stark said:

Of course.  Differing opinions, not viable.  If you don't agree that a half dozen 'racist' stories out of thousands=british press racist, totally, then you are problematic.  It's just not possible that any other answer is valid or can even be considered. 

Maybe you should just listen more to serial liar and fantasist Meghan Markle. #BelieveAllNarcissists

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I’m pointing out to you that the public don’t know anything about any of the royals because they don’t do interviews on personal matters. You have no idea what Kate is like because she doesn’t talk about herself.

Meghan has spoke A LOT, and it’s almost always about herself. 

Right?  My god she had Serena Williams on her dumb podcast right around the time she retired and still, everything came back to Meghan.  The headlines were nothing about anything Serena said but all about Meghan revealing again more horrors she endured that a heater in Archie's room smoked!!!  And the evil royals expected her to continue on with her events that day!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Doesn't talk much?  Yes, she's been quiet for the last 5 or so months.  But before that, there was Variety, The Cut, op ed in the New York Times, lobbying US Senators, a 6 hour docu-drama and Oprah.  There was the book Finding Freedom, which she collaborated on and then lied to the court about it.  There are the innumerable stories that come from "friends"...you know, getting your story out there w/out putting your name on it, just like the Royals do.  There are the zoom calls to charities and the award speeches and there was her 12 hour podcast.  Doesn't talk that much?  Come on.

Relatively speaking that's not much considering her level of fame. The implication here seems to be that she's not allowed to speak at all, which again pairs with this weird double standard for her. 

Like seriously, just as a concept wouldn't you rather a person look into a camara and tell you how they feel instead of privately manipulating the press? Seems odd to want the latter over the former.

36 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I’m pointing out to you that the public don’t know anything about any of the royals because they don’t do interviews on personal matters. You have no idea what Kate is like because she doesn’t talk about herself.

Meghan has spoke A LOT, and it’s almost always about herself. 

Maybe a lot compared to them, but not very much for a person with her level of fame. And like with Cas, I will again ask why you prefer the shady liars who you know are liars that hide in the shadows more than the person you think is a shady liar who says a bit in public? 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

Relatively speaking that's not much considering her level of fame. The implication here seems to be that she's not allowed to speak at all, which again pairs with this weird double standard for her. 

Yes! Finally you are getting it! Royals DO NOT speak to the press about their personal feelings! For a reason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Of course.  Differing opinions, not viable.  If you don't agree that a half dozen 'racist' stories out of thousands=british press racist, totally, then you are problematic.  It's just not possible that any other answer is valid or can even be considered. 

Again, not what was said but pop off queen. The "totally" just makes me laugh. Everything is all or nothing AND you have to qualify *very* overt racism in quotes as 'racist'. God forbid you have some pause for introspection. 

"Maybe we are the baddies?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Worth pointing out every single one of these stories is not proof of racism but proof of massive over reaction of the press desperately looking for offence. 

Calling a black person Straight outta Compton is a clear and obvious racial attack against a black person. Perhaps you know less about the US than we know about the UK. 

And calling someone's DNA exotic is xenophobic. The implications are pretty obvious. What's clear is that your head is in the sand and you're refusing to move it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Relatively speaking that's not much considering her level of fame. The implication here seems to be that she's not allowed to speak at all, which again pairs with this weird double standard for her. 

Like seriously, just as a concept wouldn't you rather a person look into a camara and tell you how they feel instead of privately manipulating the press? Seems odd to want the latter over the former.

Maybe a lot compared to them, but not very much for a person with her level of fame. And like with Cas, I will again ask why you prefer the shady liars who you know are liars that hide in the shadows more than the person you think is a shady liar who says a bit in public? 
 

It's the hypocrisy.  If you hate the media, especially the British tabloids so much so that you left the UK to 'remove public interest' in your actions, why are you giving any interviews?  In the same vein, they cut off her father for ? making money on a tabloid story about his wedding preparations, while they are fine to make tens of millions talking about their own families and don't seem to see a contradiction.

 

There is also the issue that so much of what she has said is untrue.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...