The Royal Family

[Harry]

I haven't watched the interview but it will air shortly.

As a parent of mixed race kids I can see a casual conversation about the likely skin tone of the child as being a fairly standard thing that could have occurred in any household. Fun speculation chit chat.

However definitely possible a jackaninny like Charles would fret over it as being a bad thing. Probably fairly standard for what my grandma would do though if I'm honest. That generation absolutely haven't modernised at the rate of the younger generations.

It seems a huge stretch to think they'd deny the kid a title because he might been black though given that would obviously be a catastrophic example of racism and they should be too well stage managed for that

[DeadLinesman]

I’d have more sympathy if they just said “we’re also doing this for the money”.  The fact they’re whoring themselves out whilst crying about privacy is fucking hilarious.

[Honey Honey]

Unless it was Philip who said something in which case the whole of Britain already knows he's a raging racist but we pat him on the head because he's about 200 years old.

 

[Harry]

8 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said:

I’d have more sympathy if they just said “we’re also doing this for the money”.  The fact they’re whoring themselves out whilst crying about privacy is fucking hilarious.

They weren't paid for the interview tho yeah?

[Stan]

13 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said:

I’d have more sympathy if they just said “we’re also doing this for the money”.  The fact they’re whoring themselves out whilst crying about privacy is fucking hilarious.

 

4 minutes ago, Harry said:

They weren't paid for the interview tho yeah?

Come on, Phil. Fact-check! 

[Tommy]

A bunch of dinosaurs who are completely detached from reality are racist? Shocking. 

[DeadLinesman]

22 minutes ago, Stan said:

 

Come on, Phil. Fact-check! 

 

27 minutes ago, Harry said:

They weren't paid for the interview tho yeah?

Gentleman. There was a reason a ‘2 hour interview’ had almost an hours worth of advertisements. The whole thing is aimed at creating publicity for the upcoming nextlix show and various other business opportunities. All to pay for security apparently, even though Harry specifically says they’re fine because he has his mums money?

I’m not a Royalist, I just hate fake people. Can spot them a mile off and always have been able to. When I said they’re doing it for the money, I meant the whole show, not the interview yesterday. For people that whinged and moaned that they just wanted a quiet normal life, they announce the sex of their baby on Oprah. Just fuck off.

[Tommy]

5 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said:

 

Gentleman. There was a reason a ‘2 hour interview’ had almost an hours worth of advertisements. The whole thing is aimed at creating publicity for the upcoming nextlix show and various other business opportunities. All to pay for security apparently, even though Harry specifically says they’re fine because he has his mums money?

I’m not a Royalist, I just hate fake people. Can spot them a mile off and always have been able to. When I said they’re doing it for the money, I meant the whole show, not the interview yesterday. For people that whinged and moaned that they just wanted a quiet normal life, they announce the sex of their baby on Oprah. Just fuck off.

Do you have a portrait of the Queen in your house? Like Mr. Bean? 

[DeadLinesman]

1 minute ago, Tommy said:

Do you have a portrait of the Queen in your house? Like Mr. Bean? 

Absolutely not. Nobody should be born into power.

[RandoEFC+]

I've seen the headlines and highlights this morning. My opinion hasn't really changed from what I posted earlier.

Just now, DeadLinesman said:

 

Gentleman. There was a reason a ‘2 hour interview’ had almost an hours worth of advertisements. The whole thing is aimed at creating publicity for the upcoming nextlix show and various other business opportunities. All to pay for security apparently, even though Harry specifically says they’re fine because he has his mums money?

I’m not a Royalist, I just hate fake people. Can spot them a mile off and always have been able to. When I said they’re doing it for the money, I meant the whole show, not the interview yesterday. For people that whinged and moaned that they just wanted a quiet normal life, they announce the sex of their baby on Oprah. Just fuck off.

I still strongly disagree with takes like this. When you see what gets printed about them in the British press, and hear some of the stuff they were subjected to as part of the Royal Family, unless you think they'd make up a bunch of stories like that for publicity and sympathy, not necessarily all from the other members of the family but more the institution itself, they're entitled to find themselves their own platform to tell their side of the story.

The arguments that "she knew what she was letting herself in for" and "cry me a river in your £5bn mansion" are eerily similar to the responses the likes of Raheem Sterling and other black footballers faced when they dared to speak up about racial abuse at football matches. "He's earning £200k a week so he should be able to put up with it".

Also I don't believe they've ever said anywhere that they wanted to live as hermits and never be seen or heard again for the rest of their lives. Meghan Markle was a Hollywood actor before she even met Harry and he's said about 1000 times that he wants to continue his public-facing charity work on mental health and stuff like the Invictus games. The Mail, Express, Telegraph, Sun and the rest of the cesspit have put a lot of effort into conflating the two but not wanting the media to illegally contact and pay members of your family and friendship group for information they can use to run negative and inaccurate stories about you, and not wanting to have any sort of public life at all in any way, are in fact two very different things.

[DeadLinesman]

2 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

I've seen the headlines and highlights this morning. My opinion hasn't really changed from what I posted earlier.

I still strongly disagree with takes like this. When you see what gets printed about them in the British press, and hear some of the stuff they were subjected to as part of the Royal Family, unless you think they'd make up a bunch of stories like that for publicity and sympathy, not necessarily all from the other members of the family but more the institution itself, they're entitled to find themselves their own platform to tell their side of the story.

The arguments that "she knew what she was letting herself in for" and "cry me a river in your £5bn mansion" are eerily similar to the responses the likes of Raheem Sterling and other black footballers faced when they dared to speak up about racial abuse at football matches. "He's earning £200k a week so he should be able to put up with it".

Also I don't believe they've ever said anywhere that they wanted to live as hermits and never be seen or heard again for the rest of their lives. Meghan Markle was a Hollywood actor before she even met Harry and he's said about 1000 times that he wants to continue his public-facing charity work on mental health and stuff like the Invictus games. The Mail, Express, Telegraph, Sun and the rest of the cesspit have put a lot of effort into conflating the two but not wanting the media to illegally contact and pay members of your family and friendship group for information they can use to run negative and inaccurate stories about you, and not wanting to have any sort of public life at all in any way, are in fact two very different things.

Thanks for taking my response and muddling it in with some racist rhetoric and stuff that I didn’t even allude to. Much appreciated.

[Honey Honey]

I think it's fair to say it's part of a pitch for their new life in America to some degree. So what though. They'll probably never have a life in Britain, not any time soon.

There will be a large state funeral probably in the next year or so and half of the attention is going to be on whether they turn up, if they turn up who are they sitting next to, who are they talking to etc. etc. 

It ain't going away.

Good luck to Harry in America. 

[DeadLinesman]

4 minutes ago, Steve Bruce Almighty said:

I think it's fair to say it's part of a pitch for their new life in America to some degree. So what though. They'll probably never have a life in Britain, not any time soon.

There will be a large state funeral probably in the next year or so and half of the attention is going to be on whether they turn up, if they turn up who are they sitting next to, who are they talking to etc. etc. 

It ain't going away.

Good luck to Harry in America. 

This. Unfortunately, it’s seen as attacking the country as a whole if you attack the monarchy to a very large proportion of society in my opinion. I’ve seen the Diana interview several times and it’s sincere and moving. This was made for TV rehearsed bollocks with cued over the top responses to questions and answers that were completely scripted by both the presenter and interviewees. To even compare it to what happened to Diana in the 90’s is awful.

[Stan]

3 minutes ago, Steve Bruce Almighty said:

I think it's fair to say it's part of a pitch for their new life in America to some degree. So what though. They'll probably never have a life in Britain, not any time soon.

There will be a large state funeral probably in the next year or so and half of the attention is going to be on whether they turn up, if they turn up who are they sitting next to, who are they talking to etc. etc. 

It ain't going away.

Good luck to Harry in America. 

The worrying thing from that is that even if some of the attention is on them at attending the funeral of a loved one, how is that their fault? 

They'll get blamed for attending even though they've said they want nothing to do with the 'Royal' stuff. But should that come in the way of wanting to say goodbye to a relative? It shouldn't, but parasites like Piers Morgan will still make it all about them, then rage on GMB or whatever shit he's on wondering why they get so much attention. A vicious circle and the people who become the victims end up copping all the shit when it's the exact thing they want to escape. 

[MUFC]

Isn't just Megan pointing the finger but Harry is doing the same thing.

Not surprised about the skin completion comment, if true. What do you expect from a bunch of outdated people who's supporters are from a generation all on zimmer frames.

[Honey Honey]

1 minute ago, Stan said:

The worrying thing from that is that even if some of the attention is on them at attending the funeral of a loved one, how is that their fault? 

They'll get blamed for attending even though they've said they want nothing to do with the 'Royal' stuff. But should that come in the way of wanting to say goodbye to a relative? It shouldn't, but parasites like Piers Morgan will still make it all about them, then rage on GMB or whatever shit he's on wondering why they get so much attention. A vicious circle and the people who become the victims end up copping all the shit when it's the exact thing they want to escape. 

Clearly because they think he's in the wrong in the first place. The heart of that problem is people taking sides. Some are so vested in the royals, like yourself, they've picked a side.

Even at a pleb funeral you get gossip and eyes on any people at "war". The view of that is determined by whose side you're on.

[RandoEFC+]

17 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said:

Thanks for taking my response and muddling it in with some racist rhetoric and stuff that I didn’t even allude to. Much appreciated.

You've focused on 1-2 lines of my post and ignored the rest, which I'm just going to let slide because I can't be arsed spending all morning on at this.

Every argument we can possibly have about it on here is going to be played out across every news channel, radio talk show and social media platform 100 times over in the next week. 

Personally, my biggest takeaway from this is that I'm glad after the vitriol that's been fired at the pair of them by the British media and the abject failure of their family to offer them any meaningful public support in light of this, that they've been brave enough to stand up for themselves and have their say. They could have been paid £1,000,000 each for the interview and I genuinely wouldn't care, because I'm more interested in someone with the platform and the influence to have a pop back at our despicable media establishment than I am about the rights and wrongs of how much attention two famous people are "allowed" to seek.

This whole thing has been a massive own goal for Buckingham Palace. The William/Harry generation for me had the potential to reinvigorate the Royal Family's image across the world with the pair of them along with their wives all pretty forward-thinking public figures and good, modern ambassadors for the monarchy in different ways. Instead the relationship between the brothers will be characterised by the never-ending soap opera that the newspapers have managed to stoke between them. This will rightly inspire a lot of "oh my god, who even cares" reaction to the majority of royal coverage over the coming decades where they could have had a new lease of life.

[DeadLinesman]

4 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

You've focused on 1-2 lines of my post and ignored the rest, which I'm just going to let slide

Well that’s nice. You didn’t even focus on any of my post and just decided to lump my take in with those that racially abuse Raheem Sterling for earning money (for some reason), thinking they should be hermits and accuse them of making things up. 
 

I literally said this is to boost the brand. If you don’t think it is, that’s your opinion. I also stated that you don’t go on TV to announce the sex of your child if you wish for privacy. If you think that’s normal, again, that’s your opinion. 
 

Just don’t reply to me and throw in a hundred different topics which weren’t even involved in my post whilst adding ‘I don’t agree with takes like this’. It’s pretty fucking offensive.

[RandoEFC+]

1 hour ago, DeadLinesman said:

The whole thing is aimed at creating publicity for the upcoming nextlix show

@DeadLinesman, you said this in your post. My response was:

1 hour ago, RandoEFC said:

When you see what gets printed about them in the British press, and hear some of the stuff they were subjected to as part of the Royal Family, unless you think they'd make up a bunch of stories like that for publicity and sympathy, not necessarily all from the other members of the family but more the institution itself, they're entitled to find themselves their own platform to tell their side of the story.

I took your point to mean that the only reason they've done it is to boost their Netflix show. I'm deeply sorry if I was mistaken, but this is why my counter point was that, no, actually I think they're looking for a platform to respond to the vitriol that gets written about them in a setting where they're able to have their say.

1 hour ago, DeadLinesman said:

For people that whinged and moaned that they just wanted a quiet normal life, they announce the sex of their baby on Oprah. Just fuck off

Then my response to this bit is below:

1 hour ago, RandoEFC said:

Also I don't believe they've ever said anywhere that they wanted to live as hermits and never be seen or heard again for the rest of their lives. Meghan Markle was a Hollywood actor before she even met Harry and he's said about 1000 times that he wants to continue his public-facing charity work on mental health and stuff like the Invictus games. The Mail, Express, Telegraph, Sun and the rest of the cesspit have put a lot of effort into conflating the two but not wanting the media to illegally contact and pay members of your family and friendship group for information they can use to run negative and inaccurate stories about you, and not wanting to have any sort of public life at all in any way, are in fact two very different things.

For what it's worth, doing a baby's gender reveal on television is the sort of thing that makes me physically sick, but to focus on that as the big issue of an interview where a woman talks about having suicidal thoughts and having members of her husband's family deciding whether or not the shade of her unborn baby's skin is going to be a cause for concern or not. 

As for the Markle/Sterling comparison, I never actually said or even suggested that you used the arguments I described. You'll see that if you read it again, I can understand why you think it was aimed at you because I quoted you but I can make other points in a post, whilst also responding to points you made, without having to specify every single time whether or not I think you've said what I'm referring to, can't I? Again, I'm very sorry for any offence caused by me mentioning that, and if I was unclear that I was talking about arguments *that get made* rather than arguments *that you made*.

[nudge]

2 hours ago, DeadLinesman said:

Absolutely not. Nobody should be born into power.

You mean strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government either? 

[Azeem]

Lol Piers Morgan tweeted people are trying to silence him.

[Honey Honey]

Now Oprah has said the racist comment wasn't the Queen or Philip, my money is now on Charles  

[Bluewolf]

How do you put a thread on ignore?? 

[Stan]

1 minute ago, Bluewolf said:

How do you put a thread on ignore?? 

Don't click in to it ? 

[Whiskey]

3 minutes ago, Bluewolf said:

How do you put a thread on ignore?? 

@Stan @DeadLinesman @Cazza @CaaC (John)

Any ideas?