[user104658]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Youtube video

*press play*

Oh look it's another angry big pink bald bloke, what a shock.

Oh look he's whining about Meghan's dad based on the completely nonsensical notion that offspring "owe their parents" adoration (and access to their children) "no matter what" - an argument I suspect borne out of the fear that one might find themself cut off from family because of their past behaviour. Here's a thought; how about, forge a strong relationship with your kids and you won't have to worry about that later... instead of being an arsehole parent and expecting "everything to be OK anyway because faaaamily".

No one is "owed" grandkids, or access to them, spare me the tears.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

*press play*

Oh look it's another angry big pink bald bloke, what a shock.

Oh look he's whining about Meghan's dad based on the completely nonsensical notion that offspring "owe their parents" adoration (and access to their children) "no matter what" - an argument I suspect borne out of the fear that one might find themself cut off from family because of their past behaviour. Here's a thought; how about, forge a strong relationship with your kids and you won't have to worry about that later... instead of being an arsehole parent and expecting "everything to be OK anyway because faaaamily".

No one is "owed" grandkids, or access to them, spare me the tears.

That "faaamily " reminds me of Peggy Mitchell

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

*press play*

Oh look it's another angry big pink bald bloke, what a shock.

Oh look he's whining about Meghan's dad based on the completely nonsensical notion that offspring "owe their parents" adoration (and access to their children) "no matter what" - an argument I suspect borne out of the fear that one might find themself cut off from family because of their past behaviour. Here's a thought; how about, forge a strong relationship with your kids and you won't have to worry about that later... instead of being an arsehole parent and expecting "everything to be OK anyway because faaaamily".

No one is "owed" grandkids, or access to them, spare me the tears.

It's an abusive mindset, 'I can treat my kids as badly as I like and I'm still owed access to them and my grandkids because I brought them into this world and I own them.' Hideous.

People who defend Meghan Markle's dad after everything he's done are either defending him purely because doing so paints Meghan in a disingenuous bad light or because they see themselves in him which means, like you said, they fear being left out of the cold for their own sins.... Or both, honestly.

[rusticgal]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

It's an abusive mindset, 'I can treat my kids as badly as I like and I'm still owed access to them and my grandkids because I brought them into this world and I own them.' Hideous.

People who defend Meghan Markle's dad after everything he's done are either defending him purely because doing so paints Meghan in a disingenuous bad light or because they see themselves in him which means, like you said, they fear being left out of the cold for their own sins.... Or both, honestly.

So whats the difference between what he did and what Meghan has just done?...

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

So whats the difference between what he did and what Meghan has just done?...

Here we go again

Where has Meghan been bad mouthing her family for clout ? Please tell me?.

The Oprah interview was critism of the institution ,and was getting their story out there. They never said anything bad about the Queen .

I've lost count the amount of media who ring both Thomas & Samantha have done , as they forever drag Meghan's name through the mud . What is the goal exactly? Apart from sympathy and CASH .

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

So whats the difference between what he did and what Meghan has just done?...

You mean, you need to be told the difference between a parent selling their kids out for money, painting them as the villains because they (the father) believe they are entitled to access despite doing their best to ruin their child's happiness for money? Let's not even get into the fact that his other daughter is writing a series of books about Meghan.

Versus doing an unpaid interview to highlight the mental health struggles of Meghan's situation, and going to lengths to point out the difference between the family and firm? Being complimentary about the queen and even still protecting the racist that said what they said about Archie? The Oprah interview was all about her struggles, she didn't even really slam anyone in it, it was all about her state of mind and the failures of the system to help her.

Do you really need me to point out the difference here? Really?

[Crimson Dynamo]

SIR – Mental ill-health is a disorder that needs professional help. Rational
sadness, as a response to circumstances, is not an illness, however. To
encourage young people to see themselves as mentally ill whenever they
may be unhappy is dangerous and can be harmful.

It would be so good to see the beautiful and undoubtedly influential Duchess
of Sussex perhaps extol and demonstrate the virtues of strength and
humour.

Marion Wilcocks
Beare Green, Surrey


SIR – Poor Duchess: the world at her feet and still she was so unhappy.

I am 81, in declining health, and my looks have long gone. I’ve been more or
less restricted to my home for a year.

A few weeks ago, I wrote in my diary: “Sometimes I feel a great black cloud
descend on me – utter despair.” I didn’t call my GP – she’s got enough to
cope with. I didn’t contact my son or daughter, as both have problems of
serious loss of income.

What I said to myself was: “You’re not in a war zone. You’ve money in the
bank, a husband, a fine roof over your head, warmth, telephone, internet,
plenty to eat, even Zoom and an iPhone. Get a grip, be determinedly jolly,
smile, laugh a bit – otherwise you’ll go under.”

I counted my many blessings. Could the Duchess not have done the same?


Val Stevens
Carnforth, Lancashire

----------------------

two interesting opinion letters to the DT on the thread subject

[user104658]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

SIR – Mental ill-health is a disorder that needs professional help. Rational
sadness, as a response to circumstances, is not an illness, however. To
encourage young people to see themselves as mentally ill whenever they
may be unhappy is dangerous and can be harmful.

It would be so good to see the beautiful and undoubtedly influential Duchess
of Sussex perhaps extol and demonstrate the virtues of strength and
humour.

Marion Wilcocks
Beare Green, Surrey


SIR – Poor Duchess: the world at her feet and still she was so unhappy.

I am 81, in declining health, and my looks have long gone. I’ve been more or
less restricted to my home for a year.

A few weeks ago, I wrote in my diary: “Sometimes I feel a great black cloud
descend on me – utter despair.” I didn’t call my GP – she’s got enough to
cope with. I didn’t contact my son or daughter, as both have problems of
serious loss of income.

What I said to myself was: “You’re not in a war zone. You’ve money in the
bank, a husband, a fine roof over your head, warmth, telephone, internet,
plenty to eat, even Zoom and an iPhone. Get a grip, be determinedly jolly,
smile, laugh a bit – otherwise you’ll go under.”

I counted my many blessings. Could the Duchess not have done the same?


Val Stevens
Carnforth, Lancashire

----------------------

two interesting opinion letters to the DT on the thread subject

Advocating stoicism in the face of emotional distress and implying that a lack of said stoicism is a weakness is not new, nor is it interesting. It's what they used to call the great British "stiff upper lip" and it's partly responsible for generation upon generation of absent coping mechanisms and casual alcoholism. Yaaay.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Advocating stoicism in the face of emotional distress and implying that a lack of said stoicism is a weakness is not new, nor is it interesting. It's what they used to call the great British "stiff upper lip" and it's partly responsible for generation upon generation of absent coping mechanisms and casual alcoholism. Yaaay.

i really dont think that is correct

[user104658]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

i really dont think that is correct

OK but I'd be interested to know if you can think of any old-school British advocates of stoicism who don't count "a glass of wine" as one of their primary stress coping mechanisms. Nicotine used to be another one of course, though that seems to be becoming less popular.

[Kazanne]

I've seen the newspapers posted on here ,I never once thought that any were pitting Kate and Megan against each other ,I am no fan of tabloids and media but I honestly did not come to the conclusion they were 'pitted' against each other, seems to me a lot is already in peoples heads and they are putting their spin on things, the same as when Harry first got with Megan ,I did not see any colour at all, it was only when some were saying she was not popular because of her skin colour that I even thought about it, again its just in some peoples heads and because someone says they don't like a person it may be because of their character NOT colour ,it's annoying now.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

I've seen the newspapers posted on here ,I never once thought that any were pitting Kate and Megan against each other ,I am no fan of tabloids and media but I honestly did not come to the conclusion they were 'pitted' against each other, seems to me a lot is already in peoples heads and they are putting their spin on things, the same as when Harry first got with Megan ,I did not see any colour at all, it was only when some were saying she was not popular because of her skin colour that I even thought about it, again its just in some peoples heads and because someone says they don't like a person it may be because of their character NOT colour ,it's annoying now.

Old articles have even been reposted on this forum over the past weeks , the clear contrast of Meghan & Kate is very much obvious. There's also a dash of sexism thrown in. But the narrative of the toxic media has always been 'meghan the villian' & 'kate the angel' . You have to be blind not to see that .

Meghan was even described in one as "straight out of Compton" , which shows utter ignorance when she WASN'T even born in Compton .

Then there's this racist cow, who said disgusting things like Meghan would "taint the royal blood"

Youtube video

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

Old articles have even been reposted on this forum over the past weeks , the clear contrast of Meghan & Kate is very much obvious. There's also a dash of sexism thrown in. But the narrative of the toxic media has always been 'meghan the villian' & 'kate the angel' . You have to be blind not to see that .

Meghan was even described in one as "straight out of Compton" , which shows utter ignorance when she WASN'T even born in Compton .

Then there's this racist cow, who said disgusting things like Meghan would "taint the royal blood"

Youtube video

Absolutely right.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

Old articles have even been reposted on this forum over the past weeks , the clear contrast of Meghan & Kate is very much obvious. There's also a dash of sexism thrown in. But the narrative of the toxic media has always been 'meghan the villian' & 'kate the angel' . You have to be blind not to see that .

Meghan was even described in one as "straight out of Compton" , which shows utter ignorance when she WASN'T even born in Compton .

Then there's this racist cow, who said disgusting things like Meghan would "taint the royal blood"

Youtube video

I don't follow or buy tabloid fodder or take notice of much of the media, they are all in it to make money, I have never ever thought of one being a villain and one being an angel, we don't know them ,so those defending Megan to the hilt could be totally wrong WE DONT KNOW !! and vice versa, people are acting on here like she is their closest relative, she is nothing to us as the others aren't, To try and force feed people that Megan is a faultless soul is as daft as me telling you Andrew has an impeccable past, and people insulting others on here for having a different opinion is frankly pathetic.

[rusticgal]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

I've seen the newspapers posted on here ,I never once thought that any were pitting Kate and Megan against each other ,I am no fan of tabloids and media but I honestly did not come to the conclusion they were 'pitted' against each other, seems to me a lot is already in peoples heads and they are putting their spin on things, the same as when Harry first got with Megan ,I did not see any colour at all, it was only when some were saying she was not popular because of her skin colour that I even thought about it, again its just in some peoples heads and because someone says they don't like a person it may be because of their character NOT colour ,it's annoying now.

I dont read the tabloids either. The tabloids have deliberately done it...but its no surprise. There is no love lost between the Tabloids and Meghan...and since Meghan made a point of trashing Kates reputation they will play them off each other.
Sadly if you dont like a 'person of colour' for many...its only for one reason. We are starting to see the real Meghan...and its not pretty imo.

[joeysteele]

It was blatantly obvious they used the Kate at the vigil picture to present the ' nice one' image.

Then added at the very top, the ' bad one ' image of Meghan Markle and the now older bullying story.

It's incredible anyone cannot see the agenda there.
Or defend it.

However, it's very clear to me and it seems to the majority of others on here.
To even have the divisive comparison at all on the back of a murder of a young Woman by a police officer.
Well that's the real sick part of it all, for me.
It's also to me unbelievable anyone would defend it.
As I've said today to only fortunately 3 people off here.
Just about everyone else I've spoken to off here find it inappropriate at best.

[Parmy]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

It was blatantly obvious they used the Kate at the vigil picture to present the ' nice one' image.

Then added at the very top, the ' bad one ' image of Meghan Markle and the now older bullying story.

It's incredible anyone cannot see the agenda there.
Or defend it.

However, it's very clear to me and it seems to the majority of others on here.
To even have the divisive comparison at all on the back of a murder of a young Woman by a police officer.
Well that's the real sick part of it all, for me.
It's also to me unbelievable anyone would defend it.
As I've said today to only fortunately 3 people off here.
Just about everyone else I've spoken to off here find it inappropriate at best.

Says a lot about the person when they dismiss Kate's obvious motives of sisterhood when she made her appearance.


To then use a rag they dont read to defend the honour of a two bit actress is beyond me.

Also, the **** who murdered the poor woman was an off duty police officer...the that would just make him a male at the time.

Its sick to bring the angle of him being a copper, and that was evident in last night's ending to the vigil when it all became political.

As ****ing usual.

[arista]

Nasty France

[arista]

Poxy French


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ter_mailonline

[Marsh.]

The constant misrepresentation of "Meghan trashing Kate" is rather amusing.

It wasn't Meghan who brought 'the flower girls story' into the public domain. She's more than entitled to comment on stories written about her that are false to paint her in a bad light. She went to great lengths to get across that Kate made a big effort to apologise for what is always a stressful time for family with weddings, and Meghan accepted. The entire point of the story was to illustrate how stories are misrepresented to trash Meghan's reputation. Not by the family, but the institution that failed to support her and the gutter trash media.

To turn that into some form of "Meghan TRASHED Kate" is not even an opinion, it's a complete lie.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

The constant misrepresentation of "Meghan trashing Kate" is rather amusing.

It wasn't Meghan who brought 'the flower girls story' into the public domain. She's more than entitled to comment on stories written about her that are false to paint her in a bad light. She went to great lengths to get across that Kate made a big effort to apologise for what is always a stressful time for family with weddings, and Meghan accepted. The entire point of the story was to illustrate how stories are misrepresented to trash Meghan's reputation. Not by the family, but the institution that failed to support her and the gutter trash media.

To turn that into some form of "Meghan TRASHED Kate" is not even an opinion, it's a complete lie.

It is Marsh.

Because that's exactly what she did, said Kate had apologised.
Other than that she rarely referred to Kate and not negatively either.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Youtube video

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Youtube video

Another disingenuous liar.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Youtube video

All the positive headlines around the engagement and wedding

[Marsh.]

The Daily Mail pretending not to be a misogynistic, racist rag full of lies.

Hilarious.