Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread

A bit lost on Osaka's drama, so I can't comment on it.:noworry:

On our topic, some of us will learn about Silent Birth! :biggrin:

A source recently told New Idea that the couple is planning to have their child through silent birth, "Meghan and Harry feel they've been through enough in their own lives and are anxious to start over with their baby girl, and that means giving her the most peaceful entrance possible into the world," the source stated.

WHAT IS SILENT BIRTH?
According to The Church of Scientology, reported by The Bump, the words that a newly-birth child hears during its labor may have an impact throughout its life that's why they want to eliminate any noises...

L Ron Hubbard, founder of Scientology, explains the importance of silence during birth. Giving birth without any noise can avoid "engrams" which is "the impressions formed in the brain because of "physical pain or painful" experiences."

"Maintain silence in the presence of birth to save both the sanity of the mother and the child. And the maintaining of silence does not mean a volley of sh*ts", Hubbard wrote in his book "Dianetics"




Meghan wants a silent birth? Can she please do us all a favor and actually live a silent life?!
 
I think it’s not about women of colour that Piers is protesting. It’s about evading responsibility but wanting the reward and that’s right up H & M alley.

I think next I will tell my boss that for the sake of my mental health, I will not deliver my report on time as deadline is just making me depressed and sad. And the review meetings! My god! Such hostile questions! I will skip them too!

PS. No disrespect to people with real mental illness and I reserve my sympathy for them. But I just feel mental illness has become an easy get out of jail card to evade responsibility. Just like the race card. And am speaking as a WOC.
One million % yes!!! ITA. There are many people with serious mental health issues that need help, then there are those jumping on the band wagon and using it an excuse that others would be jerks to even question.
In my profession, my mental health is tested every.single.day. The stress and responsibility is off the charts. If I didn't show up because I'm "not mentally up to it today", I would be utterly vilified and fired on the spot for putting others at risk. I am very fortunate to not have depression or any serious psychiatric condition, but stress and anxiety can be mentally detrimental too, but I can't use that as an excuse. How many people don't have stress in their lives? It's called life. I wish every day was a stress free vacation in Shangi-La :rolleyes:
 
A bit lost on Osaka's drama, so I can't comment on it.:noworry:

On our topic, some of us will learn about Silent Birth! :biggrin:

A source recently told New Idea that the couple is planning to have their child through silent birth, "Meghan and Harry feel they've been through enough in their own lives and are anxious to start over with their baby girl, and that means giving her the most peaceful entrance possible into the world," the source stated.

WHAT IS SILENT BIRTH?
According to The Church of Scientology, reported by The Bump, the words that a newly-birth child hears during its labor may have an impact throughout its life that's why they want to eliminate any noises...

L Ron Hubbard, founder of Scientology, explains the importance of silence during birth. Giving birth without any noise can avoid "engrams" which is "the impressions formed in the brain because of "physical pain or painful" experiences."

"Maintain silence in the presence of birth to save both the sanity of the mother and the child. And the maintaining of silence does not mean a volley of sh*ts", Hubbard wrote in his book "Dianetics"




Well you ‘learn’ something new every day haha.
I guess I must insane as though it’s all a bit hazy I’m pretty sure I wasn’t peaceful throughout my last childbirth
The only other similarity I see between H/M and Naomi is Naomi gets an incredible amount of vitriol on social media, but the similarity ends there. A lot of the hate she gets is for her appearance, not her actual actions. It starts with her first claim to fame, when she beat Serena Williams in a tournament - Serena had lost her temper with a referee on the court and got penalized for it and Naomi ended up winning. Serena's actions weren't her fault at all but she was booed across the stadium after her win and she was crying on the court. Serena even hugged her and tried to console her. For a 23 year old, it's absolutely understandable to have mental health issues from that type of hate. Of course, it's your job and you deal with it and move on but we're watching the ugly learning experience.
I can see why it’s upsetting to get heckled but it doesn’t necessarily follow that would lead to mental health issues, it doesn’t necessarily follow that any kind of negative experience will result in depression as is my understanding, it depends on the person and their ‘wiring. Not that I’m saying she can’t be depressed but that it’s not cause and effect.


To me, this incident is part of a wider problem that reporters just get stereotyped as the villains for doing their jobs.
if they were calling her ugly or useless or chasing her in the streets that’d be one thing but asking repetitive questions about her technique and history playing on clay at a Tournament press conference seems perfectly reasonable to me and to claim they ‘doubt’ you and therefore you don’t want to interact with them is a little unreasonable on that basis considering this is the journalists’ livelihoods.


T
BINGO .. and funny that you should mention this because it happened yesterday!

Now, here I am .. literally hanging onto the Grocery Cart with my Cane clearly on top, hobbling around (and yes - it was my choice to go into the store since I have not been in it since Nov-2020 due to my horrendous surgery) .. and yet, she expects ME to open the door for her! She did not even ask, she merely gave me the "hairy eyeballs" (as in 'OPEN THE DAMN DOOR FOR ME YOU FLOORMAT'), to which I the following happened:

  1. ME: "is there something wrong?"
  2. HER: "well - I thought YOU could open the door for me, you see I have my child in his pram"
  3. ME: "oh - well, so sorry .. but the MRO (mind reading option) was turned off"
  4. ME: "You can clearly see that I have mobility issues, with a big Cane on top of my cart"
  5. ME: "You could have asked nicely instead of giving me the hairy eyeballs"
  6. ME: "but since you chose to give the hairy eyeballs, eff off and do it YOURSELF"
.. and just like the other times when I give it back, I get the "SHOCK" of "well - how dare she speak to me like that and not PERFORM what she was TOLD"!
I have never heard this hairy eyeballs expression before! We learn so much on this thread.
Can you be on the Scientology bandwagon and advocating for therapy? I thought those two didn’t go together.. I think this rumor is wrong.
well they love their contradictions as we know. Perhaps they’ll pitch a Scientology themed mental health podcast :lol:
 
Staying on topic here:

Seems like H&M are following Diana’s playbook:
[Full article in spoiler]

The truth about Princess Diana and the myth she created
By Maureen Callahan
The 20th anniversary of Princess Diana’s death is more than a month out, yet the summer of 2017 seems all Di, all the time.

Three primetime network specials have already aired in May. US Weekly published a special bookazine that same month; People plans one for July 21, to tie in with a two-night ABC special in early August. A repackaged edition of Andrew Morton’s 1992 blockbuster expose “Diana: Her True Story” hits shelves on Tuesday; National Geographic publishes “Remembering Diana: A Life In Photographs” Aug. 1. HBO has announced its own Princess Diana documentary, and the Weinstein Company, working with AMI Media, has their own August project for TLC.

Enlarge ImagePrince Charles and Princess Diana in 1981 following the announcement of their engagement.AP
As The Post reported Wednesday, a Princess Diana musical is likely coming to Broadway. The second season of Ryan Murphy’s anthology “Feud” will retell Diana’s acrimonious 1996 divorce from Prince Charles, heir to the British throne.

“It’s about that pain, of the dissolving of a fairy tale, particularly for Diana,” Murphy said in April. “It starts with the filing of divorce papers and takes you up to her death.”

Though there’s nothing revelatory here — no new information, no counter-narrative — the collective hunger for all things Diana remains. Hers clearly is a story we like to be told over and over again, a post-modern parable about the vicissitudes of wealth, fame, beauty and idolatry — everything that goes to the true power of myth.

Yet amid all these retellings, one inexorable truth will be ignored: Diana actively created her own mythology.

Not since Jackie Kennedy’s masterful post-assassination theater — from deplaning in her blood-spattered pink Chanel to staging her husband’s funeral to demanding that her “Camelot” anecdote, which was a total lie, end the interview she granted to Life magazine days later — had a post-modern public figure so assiduously crafted her own narrative.

Like Jackie, Diana claimed to hate the press while expertly manipulating it to her own ends. Both became global celebrities through their first marriages, and when those marriages ended, each used the mass media not just to maintain their status but enlarge it, crying victim all the way.

“My life is just torture,” Diana said in 1992, a complaint that made tabloid headlines in the UK. Her marriage was unraveling, and she was plotting her life after Charles. “Bloody hell, after all I’ve done for this f – – king family . . . I’ll go out and conquer the world . . . do my bit in the way I know how and leave him behind.”

Enlarge Image Princess Diana sits in front of the Taj Mahal on Feb. 11, 1992.AP
Diana often lamented her lack of intellect, but she was an intuitive genius, a savant at branding and marketing. Here she was, the latest member of an institution whose leaders had, among other things, beheaded wives, imprisoned relatives, executed staffers, and abdicated the throne while sympathizing with Hitler, yet she somehow transformed her husband’s pedestrian infidelity into the biggest scandal facing the monarchy ever.

Her famous pose outside the Taj Mahal in February 1992, a forlorn and lonely princess at the world’s largest monument to love, laid the groundwork for her story arc — no matter that Charles was actually on the trip.


“Diana, driven to five suicide bids by ‘uncaring’ Charles,” read the headline of the UK’s Sunday Times on July 7, 1992. “Marriage collapse led to illness; Princess says she will not be Queen.”

Given how stringent libel laws are in the UK, and the institutional power that the monarchy exerts over the British press, these headlines were bombshells in one sense only: They had to be coming from inside the house. For the first time since the invention of the printing press, a top-level member of the royal family was committing a form of treason.

Diana had, in fact, spent most of 1991 secretly working with British reporter and admirer Andrew Morton on a book, one that would ostensibly reveal all. Here too, her particular genius is on display: Diana presaged confessional culture by years.

She understood that by stripping away the royal artifice and revealing her dirty little secrets — bulimia and self-harm, suicide attempts and a sexless marriage — the public would love her more, not less. Princess Diana was the first “Real Housewife,” and as all the best housewives do, she understood that survival depends on scripting and selling your narrative.


On July 16, 1992, “Diana: Her True Story” was published. Shrewdly, Diana had never met with Morton face to face, which gave her plausible deniability — yet as even Morton acknowledges in a new foreword, Diana easily defaulted to her fawn-in-the-woods act.

“It was a part she played with aplomb,” Morton writes. “The author and TV star Clive James fondly recalled asking her over lunch whether she was behind the book. He wrote, ‘At least once, however, she lied to me outright. “I really had nothing to do with that Andrew Morton book,” she said. “But after my friends talked to him I had to stand by them.” She looked me straight in the eye when she said this, so I could see how plausible she could be when she was telling a whopper.’”

Whopper indeed: In his new foreword, Morton reproduces Diana’s own handwritten line-edits.

Enlarge ImageReuters
Just as she depicted herself as a lamb to the slaughter on her wedding day, a 19-year-old virgin victimized by a bloodless cabal of royals, Diana knew well before her wedding that her fiancé was in love with Camilla Parker-Bowles. An aristocrat herself, she knew that royals, especially monarchs and monarchs-in-waiting, had affairs more often than not, and she went ahead with it.

She was insider cast as outsider, a role the media was complicit in propagating. Diana branded herself the only member of the royal family who cared about the little people — no matter that her mother-in-law, Queen Elizabeth, had braved the Blitz — and she could be clueless and *****y while doing so.

Enlarge ImagePrince Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles at Windsor Castle on their wedding day on April 9, 2005.Getty Images
She wrote to Morton of her vision for the royal family, her dream of hosting garden parties at Buckingham Palace for “all the handicapped and wheelchairs — which we did just before we got married — people who’ve never seen Buckingham Palace let alone been on the grass. But they are not allowed too many wheelchairs because it ruins the grass.”

She told friends she considered “POW” short not for Princess of Wales but Prisoner of War — not a good look for a burgeoning humanitarian.

Diana also refused to take any blame in the collapse of her marriage, to acknowledge that her increasing hysteria — her constant self-harm, suicide attempts and rage-filled tantrums — were enough to push anyone away. Instead, she told Morton of her shrink’s succinct diagnosis upon first meeting. “He said: ‘There’s nothing wrong with you; it’s your husband.’”

More crucially, Diana hid key information from Morton: She herself had cheated on Charles, with more than one man, early and often.

There was her bodyguard, 37-year-old Barry Mannakee, in 1986; car salesman James Gilbey, circa 1989, followed by Oliver Hoare, a married art dealer who broke it off, only to have Diana stalk him, calling his home up to 300 times. Then came rugby player Will Carling and, most famously, James Hewitt, who publicly claimed he was involved with Diana from 1986 through 1991.

Yet as this information slowly dripped out, public opinion remained heavily pro-Diana.

An aging palace couldn’t grasp how to dismantle her swift-moving character arc. Post-separation, Diana was photographed in workout gear, driving to and from her London gym, picking her children up from school, taking them to Disney for vacation — just another modern single mom on the go, albeit one making sure her boys wouldn’t be contaminated by the crown.

Enlarge ImagePrincess Diana in “The Revenge Dress”Getty Images
It took Prince Charles two years to give his version, sitting for a primetime interview with star journalist Jonathan Dimbleby.

This was an unprecedented move for a future king of England, and Charles, looking and sounding uncomfortable, admitted to cheating on Diana only after the marriage had “irretrievably broken down, us both having tried.” But Charles couldn’t win. The British public felt no sympathy; instead, they felt he’d debased himself and the monarchy.

The same night Charles’ interview aired, Diana scored another coup with what came to be called “The Revenge Dress”: For a party at the Serpentine Gallery, she wore a tight black strapless cocktail dress, cut well above the knee, neckline plunging.

Enlarge ImageDiana reinvented herself again, this time as a globetrotting humanitarian.Getty Images
“She wanted to look a million dollars,” said Anna Harvey, Diana’s stylist. “And she did.”

Diana made Charles’ admission look feeble and weak, and, more importantly, knocked him off the front page. Her message: You may prefer the older, haggard Camilla, but to look at me, the rest of the world will never understand why.

Diana did it again in 1995, granting a wide-ranging interview to Martin Bashir. Dressed in a smart black suit, eyes rimmed with kohl, Diana sought to blunt her own infidelity by volleying right back at Charles and Camilla.

“There were three of us in this marriage,” she said, damp eyes looking up from a bowed head. “So it was a bit crowded.”

More than 25 million people watched the interview, which was announced on Charles’ 47th birthday and aired on Queen Elizabeth’s 48th wedding anniversary — another piece of nonverbal jujitsu.

In it, Diana also claimed to be a victim of palace backstabbing, of orchestrated attempts to depict her as mentally ill, and as a target of sinister plots to get her to “go quietly.” The knife twist: Diana claimed her husband wasn’t fit for the British throne, his sole purpose in a life otherwise spent in purgatory.

As for herself, Diana said she had no more humble aspiration than to be “a queen of people’s hearts.”

After the couple divorced at the Queen’s insistence in 1996, Diana reinvented herself again, this time as a globetrotting humanitarian. Now her focus was on sick kids and landmines and meeting with Mother Teresa rather than movie stars — but still, she fought hard to retain her title.

Enlarge ImagePrincess Diana with Dodi al-Fayed in Paris on Aug. 31, 1997.Splash News
In the summer of 1997, Diana allowed paparazzi to catch her on vacation with Egyptian playboy Dodi al-Fayed, though she was fresh off a secret, two-year relationship with Hasnat Khan, a Pakistani heart surgeon she called “the love of her life.” She’d even visited Khan’s extended family in Pakistan in May 1996, proof that she could live a private life when she chose.

In the weeks and months after Diana’s death, chased through a Paris tunnel by paparazzi, there was much recrimination of the media.

Even today — even as those who knew Diana admit she used the press to cover her romance with al-Fayed, hoping to make Khan jealous — the prevailing narrative paints Diana as pure victim, hounded by a soulless media, consumed by our own prurient interest. Why couldn’t we all just leave her alone?

That, truly, is the biggest fairy tale of all, and one much more interesting to hear.
Brilliant. It takes a few decades but people finally start to come around.

Ha
my favorite is the mom with the stroller who lets you hold the door for her and then doesn't say thank you .....I have been known to say loudly "you're welcome" when this happens
So funny. Me too!
 
It is really over-simplistic to say because some young women have committed suicide in the past over cyber-bullying it follows that someone else will react in that way. In fact a beef I have with Oprah interview is the way she led from MM’s depression to asking about suicide as though that were a natural progression when that’s not how all depression sufferers feel and Oprah is normalising a dangerous extreme of behaviour as part of the standard manifestation of the condition.

I'll just address this here because it does touch on M/H. I wasn't saying because SOME women have committed suicide from cyber-bullying that ALL women will react this way... my point was because some women do get depressed by it, then it's a plausible reason for anyone to get depressed. Plausible as in not necessary but possible. I certainly don't get depressed by things some other women do and I'm sure I get depressed by things others don't. That's obvious.

I think Oprah was definitely ham-handed to ask someone who appeared depressed, "Did you want to commit suicide?" as if it was the logical conclusion but that is not where I was going with that.
 
Desire to be in the spotlight??? NO... :lol:


Whoa! What a steam roller. I'm sure Harry was read the Riot Act later for not introducing her first thing. She feels she must nail everyone with word salad at every opportunity. Without Harry she is a total NOTHING. I can better see now how she must be insanely jealous of Kate. She must have thought of every possible way to force her and William to step aside so SHE could be Queen. Of course that wasn't possible so obviously the BRF is racist. Who's going to ask her if she's OK when she behaves like that? What a biaytch.
 
OMG guys...it's happening!

Prince Harry Is Contradicting Himself
An examination of interviews that Harry has given over the years shows inconsistencies and omissions in the story he is now telling the world.

Posted on June 1, 2021, at 6:51 p.m. ET

sub-buzz-6680-1622582674-1.png

Apple TV


In a series of interviews this year, Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, has made explosive claims against the royal family — the people and the institution — going into detail about the damaging toll his upbringing has had on his mental health.
Yet during some of these conversations, Harry takes on the role of revisionist historian, contradicting past statements he’s made about his mental health issues and the support — or lack thereof — he received from the royal family. The picture he paints is that of an uncaring institution ignoring his cries for help, of a man suffering in silence until Meghan Markle came into his life. But his past statements and what he’s saying now don’t always line up.

FULL ARTICLE BElOW
 
Last edited:
Okay, I'm going to put one more here since it is about the comparison with H&M. As I find out more about Naomi I think I now know what Piers Morgan was talking about. Let me play devil's advocate and see if it changes anyone's feelings at all.

In the last year alone Naomi made (depending on where you read it) somewhere between $35 to $55 million. She made about $5 million of that from winning tennis tournaments. The rest came from lucrative endorsement deals with big companies, among them Nike, Beats by Dre, Mastercard, Louis Vuitton, and Tag Heuer. She makes so much money she overtook Serena Williams and Naomi is now the world's highest paid female athlete.

Whether she likes it or not, Naomi the celebrity athlete is a brand (in a way Harry and Meghan could only dream). As such she has a team of publicity agents, sports agents, lawyers, and others, all working in tandem to ensure her financial success. She does commercials and print ads for her companies which requires her to perform in the presence of many people.

She also has an agreement with Athlete Speakers (https://www.athletespeakers.com/speaker/naomi-osaka) where for a fee of $100,000 and up, you can hire Naomi to be your keynote speaker, make a corporate guest appearance, or get her to come for an exclusive meet-and-greet. Is that something a person who suffers from incredible "shyness" does?

Here's where the comparison to Harry and Meghan comes in. Naomi seems to be perfectly fine with public speaking and answering questions if it is for something fun or lucrative, like a paid appearance. Is it possible she just doesn't like talking to the press because she's not getting anything out of it? Isn't that similar to Harry and Meghan not wanting to do their boring royal assignments and instead starting to market the hell out of themselves? Is that what Piers meant?
Actors go through the same ridiculous media circuit when promoting a film and they answer the same dumb question over and over... but that's part of their contract.

I do like the comparison you made with Harry and Meg. It's more fun to be paid.
 
Desire to be in the spotlight??? NO... :lol:

I cannot believe how ill-mannered she is! (I'd use another word, but then I'd have to use lots of *** to make it tpf-acceptable)
At least this time she only shoved herself in front of him. No use of those pointy elbows.
And she has shoved herself in front of HMTQ too, so this was small potatoes to her.
(I knew an office narc like her in this respect. It was quite comedic if you weren't the one being pushed out of the way.)

I feel for Naomi. She is just a baby to me at 23 and I understand how she feels being frozen by depression and not wanting to play along with public interviews. She was willing to pay the fines, face the consequences of breaking her contract... I don’t think it’s a good look for Piers and the likes to be writing harsh things about this young girl. Good thing Naomi has enough money to do whatever she pleases. Wish her well.
OT but I'll put in my 2 cents. Naomi may need better minders and lawyers. Once you reach the top of your field, there are certain concessions you can squeeze out of event organizers. The French Open rules likely contractually require winners/losers to attend media conferences but, if she had a good lawyer, she can negotiate to minimize the number of conferences or the duration. The penalty clauses are a deterrent, but not supposed to be a way out. Otherwise, every tournament winner could just say, "Oh, it's only $X. I'll just pay it. No big deal." Being willing to pay the fine doesn't mean you should be actively breaking a contract that was supposedly signed in good faith. If Naomi did this whenever she felt down, her sponsors might not say anything in public, but they would take the attitude into consideration for contract offers and renewals. Her sponsorship contracts would have the same type of penalty clauses for no-show or inability to meet requirements.

Okay, I'm going to put one more here since it is about the comparison with H&M. As I find out more about Naomi I think I now know what Piers Morgan was talking about. Let me play devil's advocate and see if it changes anyone's feelings at all.

In the last year alone Naomi made (depending on where you read it) somewhere between $35 to $55 million. She made about $5 million of that from winning tennis tournaments. The rest came from lucrative endorsement deals with big companies, among them Nike, Beats by Dre, Mastercard, Louis Vuitton, and Tag Heuer. She makes so much money she overtook Serena Williams and Naomi is now the world's highest paid female athlete.

Whether she likes it or not, Naomi the celebrity athlete is a brand (in a way Harry and Meghan could only dream). As such she has a team of publicity agents, sports agents, lawyers, and others, all working in tandem to ensure her financial success. She does commercials and print ads for her companies which requires her to perform in the presence of many people.

She also has an agreement with Athlete Speakers (https://www.athletespeakers.com/speaker/naomi-osaka) where for a fee of $100,000 and up, you can hire Naomi to be your keynote speaker, make a corporate guest appearance, or get her to come for an exclusive meet-and-greet. Is that something a person who suffers from incredible "shyness" does?

Here's where the comparison to Harry and Meghan comes in. Naomi seems to be perfectly fine with public speaking and answering questions if it is for something fun or lucrative, like a paid appearance. Is it possible she just doesn't like talking to the press because she's not getting anything out of it? Isn't that similar to Harry and Meghan not wanting to do their boring royal assignments and instead starting to market the hell out of themselves? Is that what Piers meant?
That is a very good point, although I would hope that she isn't like them. Just two of them is more than enough for the world.

@jelliedfeels
Yeah, this thread has that outlaw feel.
We’ve got the perfect bag, too:lol:

View attachment 5098681
:heart::heart::heart::heart::heart::heart::heart::heart::heart::heart:
And thanks for starting the NO thread.