A century or two ago, many people believed that Kings and Queens were sent by God to rule nations.
Very few people believe that any more; in fact, hardly anybody attends the European churches which are headed, in name, by their local monarch.
Instead, Royals are symbols of the nation. They are there to inspire, to unite, and to represent the contemporary moral code of the nation.
Right now, the UK is facing a moral crisis. Asked to be their "better selves" and help fight the Corona virus by staying out of public places, checking on vulnerable neighbors, and buying only what they need, many British citizens are complying.
Unfortunately, many are not.
Here's a few suggestions as to what the family should be doing right now.
Since he has experience serving on a suicide hotline, William might also be filmed making telephone calls to the elderly, just to check in on them and help them avoid loneliness. Several hotlines have been set up for this purpose; William could visit one of them and take a few calls with the cameras rolling.
It would be a good reminder for other British citizens to check in on their older neighbors.
Kate might even have an expert along to talk about how children could play outside within limits - for example, by playing in a park with their own ball instead of climbing on germy playground equipment.
Showing them FaceTiming, Skyping, Google Hangout-ing, or Zoom-ing their grandchildren from their smartphones would serve as an excellent example.
Perhaps part of the presentation could be one of Charles' staff showing how to set this up. A celebrity that would appeal to the older generation, like Ringo Starr, could also be drafted in for this purpose.
Alternately, the Queen could be shown FaceTiming with some of her other grandchildren, such as Savannah and Isla Phillips. Bonus if she shows the girls the dorgis (Vulcan and Candy) through her smartphone.
Finally, Beatrice and Edo should call off their fancy May wedding and get married immediately at the private chapel at Windsor. In attendance should be Queen, their parents, and Eugenie and Wolfie as Matron of Honor and Best Man. That's all.
This modest, keep-calm-and-carry-on wedding would endear them to British citizens, and maybe even get Bea the place as a working Royal she's wanted for so long.
Do you have any suggestions about what the Royals should be doing right now?
Very few people believe that any more; in fact, hardly anybody attends the European churches which are headed, in name, by their local monarch.
Instead, Royals are symbols of the nation. They are there to inspire, to unite, and to represent the contemporary moral code of the nation.
Right now, the UK is facing a moral crisis. Asked to be their "better selves" and help fight the Corona virus by staying out of public places, checking on vulnerable neighbors, and buying only what they need, many British citizens are complying.
Unfortunately, many are not.
Present and visible
This is a time when the Royal family should be present and visible. It should help boost public morale, as it did in World War II, and guide their citizens towards the behavior that will help others.Here's a few suggestions as to what the family should be doing right now.
William
William, at age 37, should use this moment to begin to establish himself as a leader. I would like to see him on video offering support to the medical personnel (no need to disrupt their work with a visit to a hospital) or using FaceTime to chat with patients.Since he has experience serving on a suicide hotline, William might also be filmed making telephone calls to the elderly, just to check in on them and help them avoid loneliness. Several hotlines have been set up for this purpose; William could visit one of them and take a few calls with the cameras rolling.
It would be a good reminder for other British citizens to check in on their older neighbors.
Kate
Kate, the Duchess of Cambridge, should serve as inspiration for families with young children. A video of the young Cambridges doing inexpensive home crafts - toothpick houses, painting pasta and glueing it to paper, even dyeing Easter eggs - would show empathy for the many parents now at home with their kids.Kate might even have an expert along to talk about how children could play outside within limits - for example, by playing in a park with their own ball instead of climbing on germy playground equipment.
Charles, Camilla, and the Queen
Charles and Camilla should show how the older generation can stay in touch with their grandchildren without the danger of contracting the virus.Showing them FaceTiming, Skyping, Google Hangout-ing, or Zoom-ing their grandchildren from their smartphones would serve as an excellent example.
Perhaps part of the presentation could be one of Charles' staff showing how to set this up. A celebrity that would appeal to the older generation, like Ringo Starr, could also be drafted in for this purpose.
Alternately, the Queen could be shown FaceTiming with some of her other grandchildren, such as Savannah and Isla Phillips. Bonus if she shows the girls the dorgis (Vulcan and Candy) through her smartphone.
Minor Royals
Other minor but popular Royals, such as Sophie, Countess of Wessex or Zara Philips, could be shown on video doing hand-washing demonstrations with their children, or learning from an expert about the various ways to say "hello" without shaking hands.Finally, Beatrice and Edo should call off their fancy May wedding and get married immediately at the private chapel at Windsor. In attendance should be Queen, their parents, and Eugenie and Wolfie as Matron of Honor and Best Man. That's all.
This modest, keep-calm-and-carry-on wedding would endear them to British citizens, and maybe even get Bea the place as a working Royal she's wanted for so long.
Do you have any suggestions about what the Royals should be doing right now?
Comments
The Queen has a lot of "soft power." Now is the time to use it.
First, the worst thing that may happen now is mass panic. Kate taking her kids shopping hopefully shows there is no reason to panic.
Second, I don't believe for a second she would have done this if there was any real danger. There must have been prior discussion and advice. Kate doesn't strike me as brainless, far from it.
I would also like some mini ads with the royal kids (vast majority of Brits adore them) showing how to make sure your kid is safe - wash your hands, don't touch your face, wash your fruit and vegs before eating - things like that.
I hope so much they stay safe and healthy.
A speech from the Queen would not do it in this situation. People are not going to keep calm and carry on. Many do look up to the royals and demonstrations of keeping calm and carrying on would be far better than a speech about it.
I especially love your ideas of demonstrating how people can keep in touch and what they can do with children who have to stay at home.
I have been horrified at the stories of old people in tears in shops as they find the shelves bare. Pensioners cannot afford to stockpile and the ridiculous hoarding people are doing leave vulnerable old people unable to buy something simple like toilet paper. Darn it, the first thing I would do, keeping my distance, is check up on elderly neighbours, go shopping for them, talk to them over the fence or across the balcony and just make sure they are OK. Where are the viral campaigns to start a neighbourly movement like that?
I closed the window and lost the link to your Covid-19 board so I hope you do not mind this here: 2 weeks after patient zero in my country, as of today, the number of diagnosed people was 51 ... ALL are people who have arrived from overseas bringing the virus with them. (It is a notifiable disease here so by law you have to be diagnosed by a health care practitioner and the results must be reported to our version of the CDC in the USA.) However, the government has already announced a 'state of disaster' and issued a list of what people must do and what action the government is taking (quarantine of 3 weeks for those repatriated from Wuhan, travel restrictions and bans, including a ban on travel to and from countries that are hot spots, visas cancelled, most borders closed, those who must travel beyond our borders will be tested, closing schools until after the Easter weekend for now, banning public gatherings of more than 100 people, suspending visits to prisons, and repeating clear guidelines for hygiene). There is no panic buying anywhere and no sign of people wearing face masks ... not yet!
Governments should not wait for the media to approach them but should be having daily press conferences keeping people up-to-date with information and guidelines.
For others, here's the link: https://nuttyflavorvirus.blogspot.com .
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8114549/Italian-airforce-plays-Pavarotti-singing-Nessun-Dorma-incredible-air-display.html
Yes, agree with all of you-RF should strike while the iron is hot. This is a perfect time to put out some tv spots of the kids doing hand washing, talking to grandparents on the phone or screen, etc. Could even set up donation baskets to be delivered to the elderly with toilet roll, cleaner, etc, crossword books, and things to do to help pass the time since they won't be able to go out for a while.
The Cambridge kids are a bit young for making baskets, but it would be a great activity for Sophie's kids, Lady Louise and Viscount Severn.
They could even be filmed delivering some baskets in the area of Bagshot Park.
In a few weeks the over 70 year olds will be told to self-isolate for 4 months (many are already). The royal family could show how the younger generation can communicate with older members eg Sky Talk/face timing. 😉
I will be surprised is either Camilla and Charles will be seem out and about during this time. I read they are going to Sandringham. I heard today (though not confirmed), there are cases of Covid 19 there. I’m in Norfolk too , and I believe we have very few cases...but perhaps the royals are safest here or Balmoral. However, what about their staff? Surely they will all have to self-isolate to keep the royals safe and virus free? 😉
For self-proclaimed humanitarians, we haven't heard a peep from them regarding how they are helping. They also appear completely tone deaf, as several stories have surfaced in the Mail since Commonwealth Day. Kate is bashed for being "uptight," H&M are "fearful" for their life after the Crown, and now they reportedly are setting up new office space.
One day the RF is "toxic," the next they are setting up plans several months in advance for Archie to see HMTQ. Perhaps we should be grateful for the comic relief they are providing?
https://linda-la-hughes.tumblr.com/post/612653451252580352/prince-harry-and-meghan-plan-to-open-new-office-in
There is a post here that includes images from the offices (scroll down):
https://the-charlatan-duchess.tumblr.com/post/612685721562677248#notes
I'm not so sure taking kids to the grocery store is a great idea. They aren't very likely to get sick but they can be carriers. And it likely means more RPOs have to go too. For some things (terrorist attack, for example) a message of "keep calm and carry on as usual, otherwise they win" may be a good message. I'm not sure that makes sense now.
At some point Canada will probably have to quarantine arrivals. Imagine this! Leave UK, arrive to Canada, be quarantined for two - four weeks in the name of protecting the two losers.
Not to mention exposure to virus goes exponentially at places like airports. Do they want to subject themselves to the risk?
Sorry, Canadians, looks like Dumbartons are set to continue siphoning your money to fund their lifestyle for quite some time. Unless Papa Charles coughs up more money.
I don’t think badly of Kate shopping with the kids. I just find it funny HB was the first with the story.
C-19 is a pandemic- Great Britain and the Commonwealth nations are hit. Travel bans exist.
Reassurance from HM at this time is appropriate. The fact that she is at the Palace, as in WWII, is reassuring. Her subjects cannot run to a summer home to escape the crowding, so she sets an example. Elizabeth on the throne for 60+ years has seen and done it all.
Let her reinforce what her experts are telling her. It will help in the long run.
1. Something: past comments and behaviour of the Firm regarding Covid-19.
First of all, William joked about Kate and him spreading covid 19 on the first day of their Irish tour.
As for HMQ, she wore gloves at ceremony. A few days later, she refused to shake hands with guests as she ditched gloves for reception.
Then, Royals didn't shake hands at Commonwealth Service (except some original ex-royal who hugged people…).
To top it all, Prince William told Kate he found the Commonwealth service ban on handshaking 'weird' - and warned her they would have to put on 'a load of hand gel' afterwards!
In a nutshell: the message of the Firm is NOT CLEAR.
This shows the Firm should have a common understanding of the disease and a UNITIED FRONT!
2. Someone is missing: PM Boris Johnson
My second point is this is a highly political and controversial issue.
Bojo's speech was quite scary and defeatist as he warned 'many more families are going to lose loved ones'.
Therefore, it is possible the BRF doesn't want to take a clear stand because the Firm fears a backlash.
Let’s say Kensington releases a video of Kate with the 3 kids in Kensington (=golden life) washing their hands while shelves are empty… The outcomes is uncertain.
I don’t think the BRF should keep quiet or disappear for one month because its role is to embody the values and the principles of the U.K.
However, the Firm better chose carefully what royals are going to do and closely coordinates with Boris.
This is Spanish royalty but shows that royal families are not without power. I picked up the news from a Spanish blogger who translated the news through Google translate.
1. I think it was last year that King Juan's private secretary was taken away from him and so he had to go through King Felipe's office.
2. King Felipe has renounced his inheritance from his father. The accumulated wealth his father has is from shady means.
3. King Felipe has cut of his allowance to his father.
Across Europe, royalty are removing HRH from those who are not in the direct line of succession, and removing them from official royal duties (make a career, get a job, take care of yourself). The BRF seems to be either lagging behind European royalty or standing firm against change. In any European royal family, Meghan and Harry would not be HRH and would not get any king of funding from the monarch or the taxpayer.
Interesting.
Re: Beatrice and Edo having a low-key, no-frills wedding at Windsor in the imminent future: The problem is that Edo’s family are in lockdown in Italy. They could not travel to the UK for the ceremony.
I hope KP issues a statement that it was safe and why. People are in panic mode and not thinking rationally. I get it that he needs to blow off steam (and Kate seems to be good at encouraging that), especially after losing a beloved brother in such a horrible and public way.
I think the self isolation is going to be hard for all and some more than others--especially those who NEED or demand media attention on an almost daily basis.The Pope recently was photographed walking down empty streets, blessing the houses. The blessing might not help that much, but I am sure it was a welcome distraction for those trapped at home.
I think if Charles or William or Camilla could be shown delivering or at least gathering up items from the Duchy shop to give away (as I doubt there are many buyers out and about) it would be a great PR move.
In my town in the US, the city [via neighborhood groups pushes the NextDoor app so neighbors can use it to connect about what is going on, thefts, neighborhood watch, help, free stuff to give away, city events etc. but I think anyone can join in if you go to their page. Perhaps, if you put little post cards out or have the city alert the elderly, so they know it is legit, especially the elderly might sign up....It is a great way to sort of know what is going on in your neighborhood or town.
Edo has posted this. I think it is lovely.
https://66.media.tumblr.com/823fbd71b53c5aa54a5995a1c4d009be/901e0da2c60c6f19-52/s1280x1920/4bb40abeb617ec9ea189ebbb733e880803a70aa7.jpg
OT alert for others:
You have been so kind about asking about my lost brother (w/dementia) and prayers. Great news...he called and told me he wants to come back. He is wrapping it up and will probably return in 2 weeks or sooner. Thank you and all the others here who prayed for me and his safety. Again prayers worked!
Now we who believe in prayer, need to pray for the end of COVID-19 and the safety of our loved ones and the world at large!!
I hope the two dregs spend their own money. I know that after the disgrace of the millions of dollars spent by American taxpayers for Meghan’s five day baby shower jaunt, that anybody who approves money for dregs should be fired. If the two dregs and their kid they leave behind like he is a nothing, not worth either parent’s love and attention, are allowed into the USA, our government will have hell to pay for allowing a non-citizen, Harry, into our country.
The government could bring some cheer to the British taxpayer by announcing that in view of the present crisis and the need to provide more funding for the National Health Service assistance to the old etc ALL funding for the rapidly balding ginger imbecile and his bint will be withdrawn immediately
CatEyes, I am glad to hear about your brother. That is great news.
I’ll be surprised if Charles and Camilla will do anything public engagements. Both are over 70, they’d be going against what the government is wanting to implement in around 2 weeks time; all over 70 year olds will be told to self isolate. They need to set an example by not being seen (when that’s is in place), and not flying in the face of it. We don’t know as yet whether there will be any consequences or repercussions if people don’t abide. 😟
This is a chance for the Cambridge’s to shine though, it’s a fine line, and won’t be easy to navigate and be seen to be doing the right and appropriate thing under very challenging times and circumstances . ☹️
@charade
OT alert for others:
You have been so kind about asking about my lost brother (w/dementia) and prayers. Great news...he called and told me he wants to come back.
@CatEyes: So happy to hear your brother has decided to come back. Yaaaaaaaay!
@ConstantGardener
Thank you! I will actually see him on the 24th as he wants me to take him to one of his physicians. I am getting my house nice and ready for him to move back in.
I was so overwhelmed by the kindness of people here, it really helped me thru these trying 3 months. I never lost hope though and in large part because I had faith in the power of prayer having overcome a fatal incurable illness before. In 2004 doctors and medical tests determined there was no hope, but was miraculously healed 6 months later. At the time I was a recluse (with only two family members in my life) so it was a few strangers I had briefly met saying they were going to pray for me, is what I attribute to my blessing. That is why I always take time to pray for others that I don't know but learn of their need (like Prayer requests on Skippy's blog).
I know some people here don't like personal comments but I cannot overlook giving thanks to those who have helped me.
On the Queen returning to BP, I think this is best if she follows all the precautions. The Harkles have really rubbed in the difference between the rich and everyone else and if the Queen went off to an actual CASTLE to get away from all this just think how that would seem.
I rejoice with you on the return of your brother!
Here’s why I posted. At the end of the article, a note invites readers to send a comment/ reaction to them about the article.
We have Nutty and so many great writers here who can really turn a phrase and succinctly rebut their portrayal of Meghan.
Many of its readers will happily jump on the race train, but if they receive a thoughtfully written letter to help peel back more of the layers leading to Meghan’s narcissism that is partially done in the article, it would be an opinion that has never crossed the mind of many of their readers or their editorial staff.
I do not consider myself to be nearly the wordsmith that some of the nutties on this blog, including our fearless leader are, so I’m posting this for anyone who would be up to the challenge of a reply to The Atlantic. Who knows, they might publish it. Are there any takers?
@AvaC
@Portcitygirl
Many thanks for sharing my joy! God Bless you all! And Thanks for who else might see this and comment. This will be my last post Nutties and thank you for those not complaining!
Someone mentioned food baskets from the Duchy of Cornwall and that’s a great idea too.
I’m guessing there might be a photo book associated with the photography of the royal family exhibit that is opening soon. Add a copy of the book as a keepsake when the food is gone.
Also, perhaps some of the younger royals like Beatrice could volunteer for a few hours at a local food pantry or food program for people who have lost their jobs due to businesses that have had to close due to the pandemic.
Please don't go! You will be greatly missed.
@CatEyes, I hope you come back!
@HappyDays, Brilliant idea re posting comments at The Atlantic article too! Hopefully, the author reads them and other posters too...maybe even get more Nutties!
Take all the millions they are giving or paying for the Harkles and buy food for the poor instead!!!!!!!!!!
No, no, no, would not leave. Just wanted to limit my comments about my brother as I do not want to annoy anyone.
I appreciate you mentioning the article in The Atlantic. Here is the link:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/princess-problem/608032/
I think you idea is good about some gifted writers here who should compose a letter to;
>>>Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.
Heck, maybe a number of us ought to write, as the lengthy article did not detail anything about how horrid Meghan was to the BRF, UK, Commonwealth, the public and her patronages. The Atlantic article has the absolute unmitigated gall to say Meghan 'is the best thing that ever happened the British royal family.'
There are a multitude of things we all could say to counter their conclusion. She is one of the worst things that has ever happened to the BRF, etc... One of the posters here, @Hikari is very talented and I wish she would respond to The Atlantic's request for a response from the public. But there are many others who could do an admirable job, and maybe @Nutty would do so.
Perhaps many of us should write regardless, and we could if we aren't shy, post a copy on the blog to share. I will write a letter but I don't know if I feel confident to share as I cannot do justice as many of ya'll can to the topic.
@Sandie, @Ava C. Loved your comments on #MeToo, "Liberation" was supposed to give us more choices, not make us prey.
@Sandie, We're on different continents, but united by values. Agree with just about every word of your posts.
@Happy Days, My family has subscribed to The Atlantic for almost 70 years, I cancelled my subscription a few years ago because I felt they weren't very much different from TASS. Hope posters will give them what for.
I still subscribe to the Atlantic and find it balanced and informative. I often disagree with this article's author, Caitlin Flanagan. In fact, I suspected she was the author the minute I read the description above. The Atlantic doesn't speak with a unified voice, and hers is one I rarely agree with. So I too would love it if some of our more outspoken and witty writers--and as Happy Days said, there are many here--would weigh in. I just skimmed the article and it's kind of, er, enraging. Go for it!
This is an opportunity to show the world that they are strong and and more than just figureheads. If they do right by their people the monarchy will once again be lifted up and supported by the entire country. They have this opportunity to really show their metrle in a way the world will never forget.
And in the meantime the two idiots will have to bite the dust!!!!!!!!!!
I thank G-d for your brother.
Never leave, please.
Unlike the RF during the Blitz when they were showing an example of carrying on as usual, Covid-19 requires exactly the opposite, ie that people not carry on as usual. If the curve is to be flattened, people need to self isolate, maintain social distancing and avoid circulating within the community as much as possible.
To that end, I agree that a PSA showing the kids washing their hands and NOT visiting with the elderly would be helpful.
While I think that Kate meant well, the model of her out shopping for non essentials (clothes) with the kids was a poor example to others and not the example that she should be setting.
>>>...perhaps some of the younger royals like Beatrice could volunteer for a few hours at a local food pantry or food program..<<<
Whatever the York sisters want to do is fine with me. I honestly like them and think they've gotten a raw deal PR-wise. They've been active in private charity work and I'd like to see more of them.
But since they became adults, SO much has been made of the fact that they aren't "working royals" and will never be working royals (although that certainly wasn't a given when they were much younger.)
I think it would be a bit unfair to expect either one of them to step up now to help make the RF family relevant during this crisis. I do agree that at their ages, Charles and Camilla shouldn't be running around in public much. Neither should Anne (69.5 years old) and certainly the Queen shouldn't be. The Queen's cousins who still take on royal engagements are elderly too. That said, I don't think the York princesses should be pressured to help the RF by suddenly becoming temporary RF workers after being refused the opportunity to do so for so many years.
The idea of streamlining the working part of the RF sounds good although it's never been clear if that mostly means savings on *some* security but otherwise the pot (like the Sovereign Grant) stays the same. But this crisis points out the problems with depending too heavily on senior citizens to carry the ball.
So glad that your brother is coming home. I am so very happy for you both! I also believe in the power of prayer.
The New Yorker printed this funny article of cartoons about what Rach and JH could sell in their Etsy shop. (I thought we could all use some humor.)
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/introducing-meghan-and-harrys-etsy-shop?
>>>>Would it Kill. Beatrice or Eugenie to volunteer at a local food pantry or food bank for a few hours and great photo ops...with everybody there prescreened, etc. Their lives have been one huge luxurious VACATION paid for by the TAXPAYERS. Surely they can spare a couple of hours from their incredibly busy schedules to perform an act of kindness for the world to see! Just a couple of HOURS ...THAT’S ALL!!!!!!!!!!<<<
I doubt it would "kill" them although I don't know the full details of their personal health situations. So I can't say it would be without risk.
I just don't be think they should be asked to take up the slack to help the RF look good. I'm also not sure how much taxpayers have supported them as adults. They both do have jobs.
It's Catherine, not Kate.
@Neutral Observer
@Yankee Doddle
@Design Doctor
Oh, I am overwhelmed by your kind words! Thank you so much!!
I would like to contribute something to the discussion tonight but have been composing a letter to Caitlin Flanagan who wrote that Atlantic article 'Harry and Meghan Overplayed their Hand'. Despite the title it is a vomit inducing piece slamming everyone regarding Meghan rather than really bringing out any positives about the 'undivine Ms. M'.
Goodnight all. Keep Calm and Carry On. :)
Karma is a b!tch, Harry and Meghan.
just found this - she's taking responsibility
"Harry says his brother William is selfish and cruel....oh, here's William visiting a crisis center! Harry says Duchess Catherine is stuck up and cold - oh, here's Catherine helping to make baskets for the elderly!"
As I said earlier the over 70 year olds are being told by the UK government to self-isolate. New police powers are being bought in, as I said last night there could be repercussions, here’s the news this morning.
‘Anyone who refuses to self-isolate could face a £1,000 fine or JAIL, as police are given new emergency powers, over-70s are told they face four-month lockdown and PM starts DAILY crisis briefings.’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8115033/Britons-urged-rally-round-countrys-old-folk-coronavirus-crisis-worsens.html
Many of the elderly will find this extremely challenging as many live alone with no family to bring them food or medication, not forgetting human company. How can our over 70 year old royals be seen to ignore the law? It would be a slap in the face to those abiding by it. One law for them and us. 😟
‘Anyone who refuses to self-isolate could face a £1,000 fine or JAIL, as police are given new emergency powers, over-70s are told they face four-month lockdown and PM starts DAILY crisis briefings.’
The fine and the threat of prison is at the moment for those refusing testing and going into quarantine. Things are changing daily ....maybe the elderly will be hit with a possible fine only.😉
How many bobbies (are they still called that?) are going to be willing to arrest Grandma or Grandpa?
There's also the bigger question about what happens when cops themselves begin to get sick, but that's a question for the other board, focused on the Corona virus.
https://nuttyflavorvirus.blogspot.com
To be honest, I think anyone with the ability to help - Royal or not - should be helping in any way they can.
If anyone thought it would be helpful to video boring old me making calls to the elderly or making baskets for shut-ins, I'd be there will bells on.
It's a very minor contribution, at a time when other people (medical staff, cops, grocery store employees) are being asked to make much more significant contributions.
>>>To be honest, I think anyone with the ability to help - Royal or not - should be helping in any way they can.<<<
Oh, I agree. The comment of mine you quoted was in the context of "what the *RF* should do to make itself relevant and useful during the crisis."
Perhaps I misinterpreted the blog post and many other comments. But the general point I thought people were making was this: With Harry and Andrew front page much of the last 6-8 months potentially making the RF look bad, the royals need to do very public things during the virus crisis to look good (and to be good, of course.) And in that context I don't think it's fair to the Yorks to be asked to be saviors *of the family* because they are young unlike TQ and Charles and Camilla. And they aren't (realistically) a future monarch like Will. And they don't have royal children like Will and Kate. So they should be out there doing public deeds. Yet much of the last 10 years the York sisters have been actively pushed away from being working royals in any sense of the term.
Perhaps they are doing things to help already in their role as private citizens. But just aren't seen doing them. Their coverage usually isn't positive if the press can help it, unfortunately.
Gotta love them bailing from the security of the BRF, at the very moment this virus starts killing the economy and greatly chilling the Hollywood economy. With so many Hollywood productions on hold, in a state of suspended animation, no new ones are needed to push into the pipeline. That Rach would produce for Netflix? What a joke! I predict the Royally Dumped Dumbartons will never produce anything for Netflix.
If Megs is wasting her time calling her old Hollywood contacts, they are all telling her to call back in MAYBE 6 months. That nothing is going on in Hollywood.
Did MM just say it was, or would be, and pocket the money? People have said Doria’s bank account has gotten quite healthy since the wedding...
So stupid of Charles to sideline these two lovely girls. And greedy, in the sense that he wanted his family and sons to have all the Royal prominence and acclaim. BUT then Harry turned into a complete dud, a revenge driven backstabber. So much for Charles' yammering about slimming down the Royal Family. This was Charles ego-tripping.
And Charles sidelined Eugenia and Beatrice because of his feuding with Prince Andrew.
As a Brit I find this idea horrendously patronising. I like the Queen, I like Kate and Wills, but I don't want them to show me how to bloody wash my hands! I have been washing my hands without royal instructions for decades, thank you very much.
In fact, I imagine that this is something the self-important and insufferable Meghan Markle would do: "look everyone, I care so much about you poors and unwashed masses, I am going to show you now how to wash your hands properly. Aren't I kind, caring and altruistic?"
The notion that any senior Royal would actually do a desperate Hollywood celebrity-style PSA, is completely ludicrous.
This is all very American, and there's nothing wrong with it if you're into this sort of stuff, but British people generally aren't into that.
https://countesscuriosity.tumblr.com/post/612693296939171840/linda-la-hughes-exclusive-hrh-prince-william
Ok, I'm not going to make myself popular here, but here I go:
As a Brit I find this idea horrendously patronising. I like the Queen, I like Kate and Wills, but I don't want them to show me how to bloody wash my hands! I have been washing my hands without royal instructions for decades, thank you very much.
This is all very American, and there's nothing wrong with it if you're into this sort of stuff, but British people generally aren't into that.
_____________________________________________________
As an American, I wholeheartedly agree.
I was taught from birth that it is not only acceptable, but mandatory, to "eat" one's pound of dirt during a lifetime to make one immune from bad germs. I have had my share of bad health, but germs are not one.
I salute you from across the pond.
Also, the truth about any "new police powers" is that you need individual police officers willing to carry them out.
How many bobbies (are they still called that?) are going to be willing to arrest Grandma or Grandpa?
There's also the bigger question about what happens when cops themselves begin to get sick, but that's a question for the other board, focused on the Corona virus.
https://nuttyflavorvirus.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
Indeed.
Thank you for your opinion, @Superfly.
What do you think it would be appropriate for the Royals do to right now?
Well, nothing new here ... Meghan has separated Harry from family, friends, home, way of life, destiny (my more straightforward way of saying what Routledge says).
As for the coronavirus ... it is very contagious but most people will not die (more than 95%) and of those who get sick, most will not require hospitalisation and some will not be sick or have very mild symptoms. Those who are vulnerable (will die or need hospitalisation) are the old and those who are weak. Telling those over 70 to stay indoors may seem like protecting them but it is actually targeting them. I look from afar and people have gone mad ... they are stockpiling toilet paper and fighting each other in supermarkets and acting not only crazy but very selfishly. Herd mentality is very strong (much stronger than common sense and compassion).
I think it is Woolworths that is opening an hour earlier exclusively for the old and vulnerable to shop in safety. As people have been pointing out here, there are many old people who are on their own and need someone checking up on them. This can be done safely (for the old people, not the young and strong who are not in danger).
Perhaps the Queen does need to make a speech telling people that it is time for caring ... and it can be followed by practical suggestions of how to help the vulnerable without endangering them (like Edo's tweet).
At the moment the royals seem removed from what is going on. I agree that they should not interfere with what the government is doing but their 'keep calm and carry on' seems to be having no effect and may turn against them. Aren't they connected to organisations who can be mobilised to check in on and help the elderly and vulnerable? Perhaps that would be an effective way to use soft power?
https://youhavebeenmarkled.tumblr.com/image/612741719126147072
(Superfly) -- As a Brit I find this idea horrendously patronising. This is all very American, and there's nothing wrong with it if you're into this sort of stuff, but British people generally aren't into that.
(Nutty Flavor) -- Thank you for your opinion, @Superfly.
What do you think it would be appropriate for the Royals do to right now?
__________________________________________
I would like to hear the answer to this as well.
Surely with under 1500 confirmed cases it is more than a trifle too early for members of the royal fmily to be required to make statements start packing baskets for the elderly or in fact start medddling in anyway in peoples lives - comparisons of what for the majority of people is a comparatively mild infection (deaths all have been of people with existing health problems) with the Blitz are ridiculous. Perhaps if the media induced hysteria died down there would be fewer shortages _ and incidentally @Sandie what country are you from - Woolworths closed down in UK about 10 years ago - and even if shops did open early to allow the old and vulnerable to shop safely how exactly would these people reach the shop?
"...separated Harry from family, friends, home, way of life, destiny..." Yes, and she's done all of that very quickly.
I read an article that said Markle "ruined his royalty". She has. I wonder when he will figure it out, if ever.
Yes. The best joke about Markle I read is: Meghan Markle, the first bride in history who turned a Prince into a frog.
LOL! That is funny and very true!
@Raspberryripple says over 70s selfisolat for 4 months she must read the Mirror because most reports I have read say 12 weeks that is surely 3 months.
Surely with under 1500 confirmed cases it is more than a trifle too early for members of the royal fmily to be required to make statements start packing baskets for the elderly or in fact start medddling in anyway in peoples lives - comparisons of what for the majority of people is a comparatively mild infection (deaths all have been of people with existing health problems) with the Blitz are ridiculous. Perhaps if the media induced hysteria died down there would be fewer shortages _ and incidentally @Sandie what country are you from - Woolworths closed down in UK about 10 years ago - and even if shops did open early to allow the old and vulnerable to shop safely how exactly would these people reach the shop
_____________________________________________
I assume you have grown up in a country that is not Britain, though Britain may be your home now.
I agree with you that the media are making the coronavirus situation worse than it actually is.
I further agree that those of us who are elderIly do not deserve to be swept away.
If I could, I would hug you.
In the same vein, I'm opposed to anyone from the family publicising any volunteer work they might do offensive to say the least. In any case, the best thing one can do, the best way to help in this crises is yo stay indoors and curb the urge to think one is above and beyond the Covid.
The UK television news is stating the the government says 4 months, which you may not have access to. The news has changed over the last 2 days. I also gave the DM link to the story. I don’t read the Mirror, but there’s was no reason to be rude, I found your comment rather patronising. ☹️
Here’s the link again:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8115033/Britons-urged-rally-round-countrys-old-folk-coronavirus-crisis-worsens.html
You may have hit the nail on the head here with patronizing. Another thing is royals never move in haste. Everything they plan to do will be chewed to pulp, digested many times and processed many times.
Kate and Wills tour to Australia to boost the regions that suffered from horrendous fires was agreed and planned, but it took time, it wasn't immediate response. Who knows what will happen now, probably will be postponed. Shame.
He explains the why someone is a narc and what you can do about it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-oDpao9_GY
There are quite a few victims here that recognize the Narc tactics used by Meg. This is for the rest of you.
Richard Grannon is my go-to life coach when I need positive advice. He's a recovering victim. He just posted this video and worth the time. "9 Ways Narcissists Abuse People" He has brought me up from the depths of despair. I recommend everyone watching this so you don't become a victim yourself. Narcs use the same tactics as cults.
______________________________________
AND -- I watched the video twice.
The thing I can't get away from is the way so many of these people seem to be so attractive.
This also has the potential to kill as many, just because it hasn’t yet, doesn’t mean it won’t. ☹️
You replied to Piroska
‘I further agree that those of us who are elderIly do not deserve to be swept away.’
It seems harsh I agree, but it’s a form of protection as that age group are the most vulnerable and susceptible to catching it. This is the reason given by the British government. We have to hope that all the necessary support will be in place to assist all those at home. 😟
This is off topic, Nutty has a Covid 19 blog.
I didn’t want to see you get into trouble. 🤗 You were the one who gave me the link to the new blog in the first place. 😜 Stay safe! 😍
I don't think the current situation compares to the Blitz. But people are scared all over the world. And Europe is currently the epicenter according to many accounts. The behavior of the King and his family likely did help their people during WWII (at least in my American mind.)
It may be too early for the royals to "do" anything. But silenting slipping away to their large, well-stocked country estates and carrying on as folks of leisure while people panic may not be the best move.
As an American, I can't imagine living through WWII in Europe. But I know from older relatives one thing that helped Americans get through that devastating war (while their family members were off fighting in it) was the general feeling that we were "all in it together." (Well aside from how some Japanese Americans and Americans of German descent were treated.)
People were given things to do---scrap drives, victory gardens, air raid drills, civilian coast guard duties, creative uses of rationed goods... I don't really know how much useable material came from the scrap drives, for example, (my mom remembered saving metal tubes from toothpaste for drives--you'd need alot of those to make a tank or even a helmet) but people felt they were doing something to help.
The virus already threatens to divide us. The haves from the have not. The young from the old. While it seems scientifically true that older people and those with underlying health conditions are at highest risk of dying from the virus, it doesn't help for people not in those categories to poo-poo the risks.
The best thing the royal family can do IMO is promote unity. Joking about the virus as Will did in Ireland probably isn't the way to go. Maybe PSAs aren't either.
@Lt.Nyota
I didn’t want to see you get into trouble. 🤗 You were the one who gave me the link to the new blog in the first place. 😜 Stay safe! 😍
_______________________________________________
Many thanks, dear friend :-)
Thanks for offering your opinion from the ground in the U.K. on the previous thread, I was one of the ones suggesting PSA’s, including a cute handwashing video featuring the Cambridge children. I can see that the possibility of Royals lecturing the plebs on basic hygiene practices from behind gilded walls being perceived as condescending, and wondered about it in my post briefly. However I think there is room for some sort of video response from the RF, with different messages produced for different audiences. A hand washing video with Charlotte and Louis and Mummy would be geared for little ones obviously. Beyond insanely cute positive PR, it could actually be helpful to the target audience...Young kids and their parents, provide an at home teaching opportunity and introduce the young royals to the nation in more than just still pictures. If Royals are to be the face of the nation, the Internet provides the way for this to be done the 21st century way. During this time when they have to curtail their in person engagements, an online video presence is a powerful tool. It’s just one suggestion, but I can’t think of another means by which the royal family can reach out to all citizens during this time. It’s also something that could be put together relatively quickly. I know that is not the Royal way...To do anything relatively quickly… There a preferred place is sedate, indeed nearly glacial. Prior to this virus hitting, I found the Royal response to tragic disasters in Bahamas and Australia worryingly insufficient. If messages of support from afar are all they are good for in a crisis, Then Internet videos about this crisis from the comfort of their Palaces will be right in their wheelhouse. With the speed that this crisis is developing, the typical palace way of operating means that everyone will have recovered or died before the Royals make any significant contribution to public morale. I don’t think Catherine taking the kids to Sainsburys counts as a significant contribution, but I’m sure she cheered up a few shoppers at her local shop.
I have read that the British people were nonplussed when the King and Queen toured bomb damage in London during the Blitz And felt Condescended to by this out of touch toffs ....Until Buckingham palace was bombed itself...16 times in total. Afterward the king and queen got cheers in the streets. In the current scenario then, do some members of the royal family need to get sick so as to not be seen as insufferably patronizing? This is a leadership moment; question is, will they seize it or will they cling to precedent? There is no precedent for the situation they are in now. Not since the bubonic plague, and we didn’t have the technology we do now for them to do more then shut themselves up behind palace walls. Post Megxit, they need a win. Good luck to them.
The 2009 H1N1 Pandemic: A New Flu Virus Emerges
From April 12, 2009 to April 10, 2010, CDC estimated there were 60.8 million cases (range: 43.3-89.3 million), 274,304 hospitalizations (range: 195,086-402,719), and 12,469 deaths (range: 8868-18,306) in the United States due to the (H1N1)pdm09 virus.,
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/2009-h1n1-pandemic.html
#####So swine flu in the USA ...12,000+ died and younger people were more effected than elderly. Because this flu set their already strong immune systems into a frenzy. A cytokine-storm (u can look that up) that was deadly.
I have read that the British people were nonplussed when the King and Queen toured bomb damage in London during the Blitz And felt Condescended to by this out of touch toffs ....Until Buckingham palace was bombed itself...16 times in total. Afterward the king and queen got cheers in the streets. In the current scenario then, do some members of the royal family need to get sick so as to not be seen as insufferably patronizing? This is a leadership moment; question is, will they seize it or will they cling to precedent? There is no precedent for the situation they are in now. Not since the bubonic plague, and we didn’t have the technology we do now for them to do more then shut themselves up behind palace walls. Post Megxit, they need a win. Good luck to them.
________________________________________
Nicely said.
Frankly, I am unashamed to state right out that the Harkles are delegated to the sewer with this crisis. You are far better than I to state the history and draw the analogies on World War II, which will always be the benchmark in British history, even given 1066 and the Battle of Hastings.
Those two idiotic, plastic, shallow beings will NEVER claw their way back from the obscurity they so richly deserve.
I hope!
Wow. Thank you so much for the video link. This guy is very very good at his analyses. His words made me think about my own experience and he is spot on. The one thing he doesn't speak about is the need to completely sever ties with narcs, as many other specialists do.
This is also a textbook breakdown of what Markle did to Harry. We could see it developing right in front of us. This could possibly explain why the RF is so mild towards him, impossible not to feel sorry for the victim and I believe somebody made the connection and explained it to them.
God works in mysterious ways, and if a single person found this blog and found your video and it equipped him or her against a narc in their future or present life, then it is great result indeed.
I also think the higher power will take care of Markle. She might have been a victim of abuse, including sexual abuse, that turned her into a monster. Her family is hardly what I would call a safe harbor. Something made her what she is. So I leave her to God who knows exactly what she deserves.
This makes me think what sort of horrible thing royal family did to have Markle enter their lives😒...
Princess Anne is carrying on with her engagements according to the beeb.
Of course she is! I think her physicians would have to knock her out and lock her in a room to keep her from doing her duty. (I'm sure her children are probably quite upset.)
@Lt. Nyota - they prey on the human need to be love and wanted. People thrive on praise, and most people believe others are inherently good. Then they go through a denial phase, thinking they couldn't have possibly been so wrong about someone, until they realize it too late. Cutting a narc out of your life is near impossible when it's a family member, or so you think, but a bit easier if it's a love interest, if you ask friends and family for help. Sometimes, it takes a light bulb moment like I had and realized that I had the power to not feel guilt in abandoning my mother.
_____________________________________
You are a star.
I have known narcs in my life, but thankfully have not had to live with them.
I hope and pray that your words reach those who need them. I hope and pray that those who need your words do NOT hit themselves for no reason. You have come through the other side. I thank you.
Yes, something happened to Meg, as something happened to my mother. In my mother's case, I know what happened, too involved to go into here, but it had nothing to do with sexual abuse, it was rejection and physical abuse by her first husband. It had nothing to do with her childhood, that I know of.
Meg may have been passed around on set. It's hard to imagine Mr. Markle allowing it, but he did work in Hollywood and we're aware of what happens to kids in Hollywood. But something did happen to her. Something happened to Harry as well, more than losing his mother. Harry gives me the humiliated vibe.
Here is the introduction to a short article that explains this:
Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is one of 10 personality-based conditions defined by the American Psychiatric Association as mental health disorders. People with NPD have a noted lack of ability to feel compassion or empathy, combined with a noted excess of self-regard. Current research indicates that these outward signs of a narcissistic personality are reflections of actual abnormalities within the brain. For instance, according to a study published in 2013 the Journal of Psychiatric Research, NPD-affected individuals apparently have unusual thinness in the part of the brain responsible for producing empathy. They also have unusually high levels of activity in other key brain areas.
https://www.recoveryranch.com/addiction-blog/brain-abnormalities-found-in-narcissists/
For many years prior to this research it was believed that upbringing caused narcissism, and that underneath the narcissism is deep insecurity and feelings of inadequacy. Brain scans in research show that both these beliefs are wrong. I have noticed on social media that some people are now putting out the idea that Meghan was sexually abused in childhood ... anything to explain why 'she must be damaged. Consider: 1. If Meghan's brain was altered because of something during pregnancy, her mother was completely unaware; 2. If Meghan inherited a brain abnormality through genetics, her parents were unaware of the risk; 3. If over-indulging Meghan in childhood and filling her head with ideas that she was special solidified rather than ameliorated narcissism her parents were unaware (being too harsh with a child can also be damaging).
The article is interesting to read as it summarizes exactly what NPD is and how it is diagnosed. Meghan may not have full-blown NPD but she certainly has some strong traits and seems unable to change.
Clearly, I'm not British, but it seems to me like bringing people together during this sort of national tragedy is the sort of thing Royals are good for.
It's like the closed national churches all over Europe and their silent clerics - if they don't provide comfort in times of shock and sorrow, what in the hell do they do?
In fact, I imagine that this is something the self-important and insufferable Meghan Markle would do.
In that case, I agree with Meghan. Get out of your castle and do something.
Still looking forward to a UK commenter saying how he or she thinks the Royals should show their faces in this crisis.
Clearly, I'm not British, but it seems to me like bringing people together during this sort of national tragedy is the sort of thing Royals are good for.
It's like the closed national churches all over Europe and their silent clerics - if they don't provide comfort in times of shock and sorrow, what in the hell do they do?
In fact, I imagine that this is something the self-important and insufferable Meghan Markle would do.
In that case, I agree with Meghan. Get out of your castle and do something.
__________________________________________
Markle is many things, but she has never been one to "let a crisis go without waste".
Somehow, some way, she will twist the coronavirus to be a personal blow to her, LOL
Having said that, you are correct -- time and time again, the Royal Family has squandered the opportunity to step in, in real time, to reassure the British public that they are with them.
You would think Diana's death would have taught them an important lesson. Sigh.
Personally, I’m not in favor of “stunts” but I would like to see the Queen address the nation in support when the time is right. The royals need to be wary of appearing condescending, they have all the resources in the world to protect and get them through the Covid crisis including a ventilator or two at BP should they need them, I’d bet.
The Belgian gesture was a good one, they have sent a supportive message to their people, and by leaving gifts outside the nursing home, they have not put themselves at risk.
In 1940, in the second month of the Blitz, the announcer of a BBC Radio program called Children’s Hour told listeners that they were about to hear the most important episode in the show’s history: Princess Elizabeth was going to address the children of the empire.
Fourteen years old, her voice clear and piping, Elizabeth told the evacuated children of England that she, too, was away from her family: “My sister, Margaret Rose, and I feel so much for you, as we know from experience what it means to be away from those we love most of all.” She reminded England’s children that they were engaged in something noble: “We are trying, too, to bear our own share of the danger and sadness of war.” But more important, “we know—everyone of us—that in the end all will be well.”
In the final, desperate months of the war came an announcement from Buckingham Palace: “The Princess wishes to throw herself heart and soul into the job,” said a spokesman, and for once you could hear someone’s voice in an official communiqué: Elizabeth, now 18 years old, was about to join the Auxiliary Territorial Service, where she was given a new title, Elizabeth’s responsibility during the war years was the same as that of her parents and also of every Englishman, woman, and child: to be unbroken. your courage, your cheerfulness, your resolution will bring us victory read one of the famous posters created by the Ministry of Information. Germany had tried to demoralize the English people, but their morale would not be broken. In the fetid Underground stations, they put children to bed in hammocks suspended between the tracks, they passed around cups of tea, and they sang music-hall songs and songs from the Great War: “What’s the point of worrying? It never was worthwhile.” In Buckingham Palace—which was shelled on 16 occasions—the King waited impatiently for the air warden to sound the all clear so that he could go out to the streets to inspect the damage and to console and inspire the people of London.Second Subaltern Windsor, and where she learned to drive and repair ambulances and trucks.
It was not sangfroid, exactly, because there was no bravado to it. It was simply the real thing: courage. “As I write, highly civilized human beings are flying overhead, trying to kill me,” goes the famous opening sentence of George Orwell’s The Lion and the Unicorn. His was an appeal for a socialist state, not exactly what Her Royal Highness called for on the Children’s Hour. But the two were united by a habit of mind that once defined the British character: a willingness to face great hardship with equanimity.
“I really tried to adopt this British sensibility of a stiff upper lip,” Meghan Markle said in the fall. “I tried, I really tried. But I think what that does internally is probably really damaging.”
“I’ve said for a long time to ‘H’—that’s what I call him—it’s not enough to just survive something, right? Like, that’s not the point of life.”
This was not courage, cheerfulness, resolution. This was the therapeutic mindset, feelings, California.
Here is Elizabeth Windsor, age 14, telling the children of the empire: “In the end all will be well.”
Here is Meghan Markle, age 38, explaining her worldview: “Like, that’s not the point of life.”
Meghan made these remarks in a documentary released in Britain on October 20 of last year. Although Harry and Meghan: An African Journey was nominally about the couple’s recent tour of Africa, it was principally about their shared misery. Just over two months later, they announced Megxit: their intention to reshape royal life so that it conformed to Meghan’s definition of thriving and happiness.
But don’t blame Meghan for bringing Hollywood levels of self-involvement to a country devoted to courage, cheerfulness, and resolution. Her desire to get out of the hard parts of life could be the most English thing about her. Or at least the most modern-English thing about her. The Queen is one of the last members of a remarkable generation, and Meghan has come to her great fame in an almost entirely different culture. With her chin trembling—and her simultaneous determination to grab hold of exactly what she wants—she fits right in.
When lady diana Spencer’s engagement to Prince Charles was announced in February 1981, I was home from college and working on the tenth labor of Hercules, a transfer application to the University of Virginia. My parents had read about the engagement in that morning’s New York Times (“Prince Charles to Wed 19-Year-Old Family Friend” it said below the fold, her very last day on Earth of being less famous than her husband), and that night we all watched the interview that the palace had released.
Read: The enduring fictions of Princess Diana
Newly appraising eyes fell on me. Both of my parents had occasion to say to me—several times each, or so it seemed— “She’s your age!” This wasn’t like when they noted that Nadia Comăneci (five Olympic gold medals) was “your age!” or that Jodie Foster (nominated for an Academy Award at 14) was “almost your age!” Here was a girl who hadn’t accomplished anything except to exist in female form for 19 years—something I myself had accomplished. I was the Nadia Comăneci of being 19 years old.
I, however, was not interested in the news. Who would want to marry Prince Charles? I liked Tom Petty.
But very quickly, I became mesmerized by Diana. It was because of her beauty, her glass coach, and her endless wardrobe, of course—but it wasn’t only because of those things. It was because she stood so powerfully on the side of emotions, and because she inhabited the world of sentiment that is—or once was—the true home of a teenage girl. And it was because she refused to allow that world to be crushed. Not by her cruel and unloving husband, not by the rigidity of the royal family, not by becoming a woman, and not even by the tabloids, which she loathed and which ultimately killed her. She was a classic figure from fairy tales and folklore: the persecuted heroine, and she raged against her tormentors not with aggression, but with feelings. You knew when she was happy, and you knew when she was suffering. And this deep emotional availability combined with her kindness for anyone meek allowed her to forge an unbreakable bond with the British people.
She would walk into charity wards and shelters, trailed by her complicated, rich woman’s problems, dressed to the nines, and on her way to aromatherapy or lunch or some other diversion of the well-heeled and self-involved, and instantly—mysteriously,against all odds—connect with the people she visited. They recognized her not just as Britain’s biggest celebrity but, improbably, as one of them. She was someone who suffered, someone who was trapped.
She did not believe in the stiff upper lip. She kneeled down so that she could talk with people in wheelchairs eye to eye. She hugged children and pulled them onto her lap. When many people considered AIDS highly contagious, she visited patients ravaged by it, grabbing their hands and bantering with them. She treated them as human beings, not as carriers of a shameful disease.
And when the time was right—when divorce was imminent—she used emotion to sway the public to her side. She told every secret thing, first to Andrew Morton, for his biography Diana: Her True Story, and then to Martin Bashir for his famous BBC interview. She described her “rampant bulimia,” her episodes of self-mutilation, and becoming so desperate for love and attention that she threw herself down a flight of stairs. She described the dirty trick that Charles had played on her: telling her he loved her, asking her to be his princess, but all along in love with another woman.
She said she didn’t care that she would never become the Queen of England, because she would be instead “a queen of people’s hearts.” The press mocked her for it. When she became a single woman, they said she was over, a has-been, desperate and irrelevant.
But the press is always wrong about these things. A year and a half after she made that pronouncement, she was killed in a car crash in Paris, and all of England rose up to prove her right.
Some 900,000 britons died in the Great War; not a family was untouched by it. The symbol of the armistice was a single flower, the red poppy of Flanders Field, and any person who wore it—that father or mother or brother or child—was understood to be someone who had suffered greatly, and whose silence, whose diminishment, were the products of a great sorrow borne bravely.
When Diana died, the sea of bouquets left outside her former home in Kensington Palace was five feet high in some places.
The flowers were offered in honor of a woman most people had never met—had never even seen in person. And yet people roamed the streets like zombies, keening and sobbing and holding on to one another. Optimistic Tony Blair optimistically said that the British people had found “a new way to grieve.” What the prime minister left out was the obvious self-involvement that the new way introduced.
“It’s something weird and strange that’s happening,” a young man told a reporter. “I’ve cried about this, and it’s partly for Diana and it’s partly—” he paused, and then located the exact and troubling truth—“for ourselves.”
Five hundred miles from London, in the green-velvet silence of the Scottish Highlands, two people for whom this disaster constituted an actual crisis were asleep in their beds when their mother was killed. William, age 15, and Harry, 12, were visiting their father and grandparents at Balmoral Castle, and when the terrible call came through, the shocked adults allowed them to sleep a few more hours before waking them. In one stroke they had to accept, as best they could, two truths: Their mother was dead, and they did not have the luxury of crying in the streets.
Twenty years after their mother’s death, the princes commissioned a documentary to commemorate the anniversary. In Diana: 7 Days That Shook the World, the young men spoke publicly for the first time about their experiences during that week.
“Both our parents had brought us up to understand as best we can that there is this element of duty and responsibility that, you know, you have to do things you don’t want to do,” William said in the documentary.
The only way to understand what happened during that week is to understand that the principals all knew they had double roles. The Queen understood that she was a grandmother and the sovereign; the boys understood that they were sons who had lost a mother and princes who would have official responsibilities; and Charles understood that he was a total ass, and that if he didn’t play his cards exactly right, he was going to be out on his ear.
As grandsons and grieving children, the boys would stay at Balmoral until the funeral, where they could have privacy and the comfort of their family, and where they could take long walks and begin to absorb what was happening to them. But as princes, they did not break from their schedule. A few hours after learning of the accident, they appeared in a royal car, bound for Sunday-morning services, two wan faces behind bulletproof glass. The Queen called ahead to tell the minister to make no mention at all of Diana or the accident, for that would be unbearable for the boys. How could they remain composed when reminded of the tragedy?
Afterward, the car stopped at the castle gates, and the family got out to admire—in a measured, respectful manner—the collection of flowers and notes that had already been left there.
The last thing I wanted to do was read what other people were saying about my mother,” Harry explained in Diana: 7 Days, “but at that point, I was still, you know, I wasn’t there. I was … I was still in shock.”
In Scotland, the two boys behaved in the old, formal way, but in London, emotion raged and ruled, emotion that had been uncorked from some deep place, but that also had an obvious element of performance. “Without any disrespect,” said a young man who had cried many times, “it’s like going to the movies.” The seawall breached, all of the emotions flooded in—not just sorrow for Diana, but anger at the Queen for remaining in Scotland. By staying there and focusing her attention on her grandchildren, she was unintentionally emphasizing a point of contention: that in divorce Diana had been stripped of her title, and was therefore not someone who should be mourned in the official way that a member of the royal family would be. But it was more than that; the crowd wanted something particular from her, something she was not raised to provide: a display of unbridled emotion.
“It’s a typical reaction of the royal family,” someone griped. “Stick to protocol; don’t worry about human emotion.”
“They must know how we’re feeling,” said another woman, “and we’d like to know how they’re feeling.”
“Why don’t they care about how we feel?” a woman outside of Buckingham Palace asked, in an aggrieved tone of voice. “Why don’t they care about us?”
It was impossible to believe that this was the same city that had once faced down the Luftwaffe and never blinked. The same country that had a plan for what to do if the Germans invaded by land. That plan was, literally, to “Keep calm and carry on,” as the poster said. Today it’s a reminder to go to yoga even if you can’t find your good top.
By the day before the funeral, the impulse to punish the Queen for her emotional reserve was eclipsed by the one to participate fully in one of the final stages of the Passion: the arrival of the boys in London. The brothers were brought to the crowds in front of Kensington Palace in something that seemed more like an offering than an official duty. Solemn in herringbone jackets and serious faces, they were released before Kensington Palace to do a walkabout, greeting the wild crowds pressed against the barricades. When people realized that the boys were at last among them, a kind of madness overtook them.
“It was like nothing you can really describe,” William recalled in Diana: 7 Days. “They were shouting, wailing, literally wailing at us, throwing flowers and yelling and sobbing, breaking down. People fainted, collapsed.” They reached for Harry, they pulled him toward them, and he had the impression that they didn’t want him just to ease their own grief, but to break down as they were doing. “Well, to whose benefit would that be?” he asked with some bitterness in the documentary.
Both men alluded to the obvious and outrageous imposition it had been for all these strangers to assume that they should comfort crowds who hadn’t even known their mother. But the next day was what was seared into collective memory: the sight of these two young, miserable boys walking behind their mother’s coffin, all the way from Buckingham Palace to Westminster Abbey.
People “still talk about the silence,” Harry said of that walk. “But what I remember is every 50 yards or whatever, certain people in the crowd, just unable to contain their emotion.” Still on he walked, his small hands clutched in fists, his eyes cast down. He tried to explain it to an interviewer many years later: “I was just making sure I did my mother proud.”
Several weeks later, Charles spoke for the first time about his sons and all that they had been through. He was proud, he said, that they had conducted themselves with “courage and with the greatest possible dignity.” At the time, it seemed cold to me. Who could expect—or even want—a 12-year-old and a 15-year-old to behave themselves with dignity in the face of such intense personal tragedy? But there was something powerful and true in their reserve; whatever emotions they were confronting, they were private, not for the delectation of the grasping crowds.
As for those grasping crowds, they marked a turning point of sorts for British culture. The English people, Theodore Dalrymple wrote, had undergone “Dianafication.” The once brave and resilient “had become emotionally incontinent and inclined to blubber in public when not being menacingly discourteous.” Now “our heroes and heroines … are all as banal as the rest of us.”
When i first became aware of Meghan Markle, I had two immediate impressions: She was the best thing that had ever happened to the royal family, and she wasn’t going to last five years. I thought she wouldn’t last because the marriage—and princesshood—would require her to give up a successful acting career that she has worked on since performing in plays at the Hollywood Schoolhouse. I thought she would miss her work—and also her friends, her freedom, her chance to be (according to the old feminist formulation) a person in her own right.
I have PTSD from my upbringing, but I'm not a narc, I'm a better person because of it. I've had therapy to reach to the point I'm at now, and I'm good. I had to stop blaming myself. I was the family scapegoat, so it was hard to overcome, but I did it.
Several of her prior psychiatrists/psychologists said it's rare, but does happen in early adulthood, probably from severe abuse. My mother is a victim too.
I'm sharing the personal information to give other victims hope and motivation.
As far as H&M, it's anybody's guess why they're the way they are. In Harry's case, being brought up to think your blood is better than anyone else's except your older brother is a great way to make a narc with esteem issues.
I thought Meghan was the best thing that had ever happened to the royal family because in a diverse Britain, she had done the impossible: made the crowd on the Buckingham Palace balcony just a bit diverse. Finally the country had a princess who looked like an awful lot of young English girls—and who was willing to speak openly with them about race and belonging. In the Africa documentary, she addressed a group of South African women by saying that she wasn’t there only as a member of the royal family. She was also there “as a woman of color and as your sister.” The cheer that went up sounded to me like a possible renewal of the lease that the Windsors have on the ridiculous, outrageous, marvelous monarchy.
Meghan and Harry met when he was in the midst of a reevaluation of his life and a growing understanding of how much of it had been shaped by the profound trauma of his childhood, and by the depression that had haunted him ever since.
Like many adults who suffered a childhood bereavement, Harry survived it by shutting it away, refusing to think about it. He has said that in all his life, he has cried only twiceabout losing his mother. Whenever he thought about her, he would push the thought away—it would only make him sadder and it could never bring her back. He served in the army—including a deployment to Afghanistan, where he flew Apache helicopters—with the kind of courage on which military forces depend: a form of extreme, young male courage that borders on recklessness. It was, he once said, the best “escape” he ever had from royal life. He was headed for a breakdown, and it came, right on schedule, when he left active duty.
It was two years of “total chaos.” Harry kept himself from punching someone by taking up boxing in a gym. His brother was so concerned that he urged him to seek professional help and, at last, he did—during which he realized how deeply depressed he had been for so much of his life. On the other side of “Keep calm and carry on” was a secret that used to be known only within English families, something that was rarely discussed in public: the unexpressed sorrow that reshapes a life.
Therapy was a revelation to him; he began to heal. He became an advocate for ending the stigma around seeking help for mental-health problems. He began to speak openly about the problems he had suffered, and he started a charity with his brother and sister-in-law, Heads Together, devoted to that cause.
And in the middle of all this, he met Meghan Markle. Here was someone who did not suppress her emotions or put duty ahead of personal happiness. Here was the daughter of “a free-spirited clinical therapist,” who had married a Hollywood producer, but then followed her bliss to Toronto for a television show, and ultimately divorced him. Here was a person who wrote emotive personal essays and ran a website called The Tig, a combination “Song of Myself”/selfie compendium/lifestyle blog. There was no experience, product, book, or insight that did not merit a public exploration of how it touched the sensibilities, emotional life, or feeling state of Meghan Markle.
But she wasn’t an airhead—not by a long stretch. She had education and experiences almost ideally suited to her new role. She had graduated from Northwestern, which has one of the top performing-arts programs in the United States, and where she majored in international relations as well as acting. She had spent a college semester in Madrid and interned at the American embassy in Buenos Aires. She had spoken on women’s rights at the United Nations, and had served as a goodwill ambassador for the respected charity World Vision, traveling to Rwanda on its behalf.
And Meghan proved very, very good at the work required of her. As Ronald Reagan and Princess Grace had shown before her, a career in acting is excellent preparation for many of the public functions that come with political or monarchical life. She looked sober and thoughtful on Remembrance Day; patriotic and upbeat at Trooping the Color; sophisticated yet casual at Wimbledon.
M
eghan’s openness to the emotional life, so much like Diana’s, was surely attractive to Harry. It also meant that she was equally ill-suited to the relentless attacks of Britain’s tabloid press, which, in addition to its usual, forensic-level campaign to discover every secret thing about a subject’s private life, had a new saw: racism. One of the intentions of those papers—which are historically conservative, entirely mainstream, and widely read—became reminding the public that a woman of mixed race had gained entry to the royal family. The papers considered the effect of her “exotic DNA” on the Windsor bloodline; they informed readers that she is a descendant of “cotton slaves,” that she is almost “straight outta Compton” because her mother now lives in Crenshaw, which is no closer to Compton than it is to Beverly Hills. Her mother—the one family member to whom she seems close—has been described as a “dreadlocked African American lady from the wrong side of the tracks.”
No one could blame her for wanting to take her baby and her husband and get the hell out of there.
n the Africa documentary, Meghan said that she was blindsided by what the tabloids have done to her. “I’m an American,” she said, her eyes wet with unshed tears. “I didn’t get it.” Was she implying that if she had known this, she might not have married Harry? “When I first met my now husband, my friends were really happy because I was so happy. But my British friends said, ‘I’m sure he’s great, but you shouldn’t do it. Because the British tabloids will destroy your life.’” Vulnerable and clearly hoping to present a sympathetic portrait, she said simply that she was naive.
That isn’t quite true. Meghan had hardly begun dating Harry when the tabloids launched their campaign. Long before the engagement, Harry issued a stern rebuke to the press: “It is not right that a few months into a relationship … Ms. Markle should be subjected to such a storm.” Of course, it did nothing to solve the problem, and of course she went through with the engagement and marriage anyway. She was in love, and she wanted to be a princess.
@AnimalLover, thanks for pasting that. An interesting side note - the Atlantic is now largely funded by Laurene Jobs, Steve Jobs' widow.
But the biggest font of her suffering seems to be not the racist innuendo, but the collaboration of the tabloid press with her father and two half-siblings, a trio seized by Shakespearean levels of malice and envy. Dad, the King Lear of Rosarito Beach, caused Meghan so much trouble at the time of her wedding that three months later she wrote him a now notorious letter, a salvo in the ongoing war of top-my-emotional-meltdown.
Her father eventually gave it to the Daily Mail, which published large parts of it. It was a classic of the form: a youngest daughter eager to reestablish herself as the darling of the family, and the dramatic tone was heightened by the intentionally lofty style befitting a newly minted princess. “Daddy,” it began, “it is with a heavy heart that I write this, not understanding why you have chosen to take this path, turning a blind eye to the pain you are causing.”
Understandably mortified that her father would give this letter to a tabloid and (presumably) that the whole world would know she had used the phrase “it is with a heavy heart that I write this,” Meghan and Harry seem to have made the decision that enough was enough.
On October 1, while the couple were still in South Africa, Harry announced they were suing the Mail on Sunday; he published a genuinely heartrending statement that included, “I lost my mother, and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces.” On October 20, they said they’d be taking a previously unscheduled six-week sabbatical from royal life. That night the Africa documentary, with its enumerated discontents, was broadcast in England.
It seemed clear that at the end of that time, something dramatic was going to happen. I assumed it would be an abdication—and who could blame them? The brave little boy who had walked so solemnly behind the casket, wanting only to make his mother proud of him—he should be allowed to live the life he wanted, with his beautiful wife and their baby son in some place far away from the cameras and daily gossip of London. Who would not have wished them well?
Instead, it was … Megxit.
Megxit is the most complicated, self-involved, grandiose, half-assed, high-minded, shortsighted, greedy-graspy, swing-for-the-fences, letter of partial, fingers-crossed resignation in history. When Edward VIII abdicated in 1936, he announced it to the government on December 9, and was on his way to Austria three days later. But Edward didn’t want to do voice-overs for Disney.
The foundation of the plan was sound: They would step back from being “senior” royals, which is a sort of HR designation indicating members of the family who work full-time for the Crown. And they would forfeit all public money and pay back the government for the renovations they had made to their English home, Frogmore Cottage. All of this might have provided them some small protection from the British tabloids. It would free them of the Royal Rota, a pool system for covering the family that includes the tabloids, and also allow them to make a case that they were not the sort of state-funded public figures whose doings were therefore a matter of public significance.
But everything else about the plan was focused on making them more famous than ever—so they hardly planned to lower their public profile. Moreover, they clearly saw their royal status as a value proposition that they could exploit to become independently wealthy. They had filed papers to trademark the term Sussex Royal on more than 100 consumer goods, including pajamas, hoodies, and pencils. Just how long can you be understood as royal when you’re hawking pencils?
And Meghan’s Hollywood dreams loom large over the project. They are rumored to have looked at Malibu rentals for a summer of A-listing it at the beach; they monetized Harry’s depression (a surprise speech about it to some bewildered JP Morgan heavy hitters at a Miami conference; a docuseries on mental health that he is executive producing with Oprah Winfrey); there was talk of a Netflix deal. This is what it means, apparently, to carve out “progressive roles” within the monarchy.
The whole scheme depended on the public’s understanding that the couple remains tightly braided with, and utterly essential to, the Royal Family. The lavishly beautiful website Sussex Royal shows three prongs of their endeavor:Supporting Community,Serving the Monarchy,Strengthening the Commonwealth.
They make it clear elsewhere on the website that these plans would not interfere with their solemn commitment to “fully support Her Majesty The Queen”; to “honour our duty to The Queen, the Commonwealth, and our patronages”; “to collaborate with Her Majesty The Queen, The Prince of Wales, The Duke of Cambridge, and all relevant parties.”
How does the Queen feel about all this? At the time of the announcement, she issued a rare personal statement: She gave her blessing to the young couple, who would now be free “to create a new life as a young family … while remaining a valued part of my family.” As for the deal points, she said, “These are complex matters for my family to resolve, and there is some more work to be done, but I have asked for final decisions to be reached in the coming days.”
But the Queen has had one main objective for all of her seven-decade reign: protecting and preserving the monarchy for future generations. When the final deal points were announced, the couple learned what Oliver Cromwell and others might have taught them: There is no such thing as a “progressive role” in a monarchy. Meghan and Harry lost out on almost everything they had presumed was theirs. They were forbidden from performing any royal duties; they were not to represent the Commonwealth in any way; they were not to use the term royal on anything they were selling or branding; their Buckingham Palace office would be closed; and they were not to use their highest titles, Royal Highness.
The couple’s future isn’t certain. They are hugely appealing and glamorous. Everyone in Hollywood is eager to host them. The first few years of this plan are going to be heady. But—as Harry has often said—as soon as William’s three children become old enough to emerge as individual figures, the klieg lights will immediately turn to them.
Harry and Meghan, it seems, have overplayed their hand severely. The Queen doesn’t need them, not at the price they were asking. Even in a Dianafied world, she still believes in certain ideals, foremost among them dignity and duty. And even now, when almost all is lost, she is still able to inspire it.
More than 1 million people lined the streets of London on the day of Diana’s funeral. It was the last day of the Passion and they wanted to bear witness to the still unbelievable sight of her coffin. “As flowers rained down onto the cortege from bystanders,” said an early report in the Independent, “the sound of shrieks and wailing filled the air.” “Diana!” they shouted. “God bless you!”
In Hyde Park, masses of people had camped out to get a good spot from which to watch the funeral on the giant screens that had been installed. They sat on the grass and clung to one another and, as they watched Diana’s coffin projected on the screens, they sobbed. They sobbed as they saw it arrive at Westminster Abbey, and they sobbed when her two unbearably sad boys walked behind it, into the church.
And then they heard the first sound of the service—several notes played on the grand organ that had been installed for the coronation of Elizabeth’s father, George VI. At first these notes were merely blasts of sound, but after the first measure, they organized themselves unmistakably: “God Save the Queen.”
Elizabeth II, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and of Her Other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.
She has never once put her personal desires ahead of her duty; she has presided calmly over the end of the empire, accepted change with equanimity, and—against all odds—kept the monarchy a vital institution in modern Britain.
In Hyde Park, the national anthem poured out of loudspeakers, and there was a moment in which the Dianified mourners seemed not to know what to do. But suddenly—following some instinct that was older than feelings—everyone in that massive crowd scrambled to their feet, and for that one minute, they stood tall, and they did not cry out. For that one brave and decent minute, they remembered who they were.
Respectfully disagree with the entire article.
However, I thank you for sharing.
Basically she says Meghan and Harry had the opportunity to be historical and inspiring but their(M's) greediness got the best of them and they lost.
Like most if not all disorders, there is a spectrum and the causes can be complex.
If life experiences developed toxic narcissism (we all have some degree of narcissism in our make up) in your Mom in early adulthood then there is hope that therapy can undo that damage. However, she has to seek the therapy and really want to change, and find the right therapist. (Your info about narcissism being developed as a PTSD response is very interesting.)
If Meghan is a narcissist because of genetics or in utero development, then her upbringing cannot be blamed for the causes, but probably solidified it. Hollywood culture cannot be blamed because thousands of children grow up in LA and are not narcs. I suppose it is a combination of factors. Her lack of compassion and common decency to family and friends (and the people of the UK) still astonishes me, but not only does she think she has done nothing wrong, but she sees herself as the victim and has brainwashed Harry to believe the same.
I had a look at the video linked above, 9 Ways Narcissists Abuse People, because my life has been destroyed by someone with narcissistic traits and I check out any new information I find to try and affirm that I am not mad! Meghan does not have to have all 9 apply to her to be a toxic narcissist, but should display at least 5 behaviours. I don't think it would be difficult to do that!
If Meghan is a narcissist because of genetics or in utero development, then her upbringing cannot be blamed for the causes, but probably solidified it. Hollywood culture cannot be blamed because thousands of children grow up in LA and are not narcs. I suppose it is a combination of factors. Her lack of compassion and common decency to family and friends (and the people of the UK) still astonishes me, but not only does she think she has done nothing wrong, but she sees herself as the victim and has brainwashed Harry to believe the same.
________________________________________
THIS.
There are narcs all over the world.
It is difficult what royal family can say what is not already said by epidemiologists. They would have to base everything on medical advice.
The only thing coming to mind would be a message that we have already spoken about here - be considerate about vulnerable people around you, check on your elderly neighbors and disabled people you know, help them with shopping, getting medication, call them daily to make sure they are fine. Especially in light of the latest government's initiative for all over 70s to self-isolate for 4 months.
I was struck how people steal things from elderly people's shopping baskets reducing them to tears. This is despeakable. This is something that is so ugly it can not go unaddressed.
Royals can only lead by example, really. Anne continues with her schedule. It will be useful if journalists follow her and show what precautions she is taking while doing her work.
"Basically she says Meghan and Harry had the opportunity to be historical and inspiring but their(M's) greediness got the best of them and they lost."
Neither Harry nor Meg has the talent or perseverance to be great. As they say, water finds its own level. Ending up as irrelevant, former royals was likely always the destiny for the Harkles.
Meg - climb over anyone and ghost people as soon as they're not useful any longer. Didn't even try to learn royal protocols and started throwing people under the bus in the greater royal circle as soon as things got even the slightest bit imperfect.
Harry - lost soul since youth. Stepping away from the military may have cost him any stability he had in his life. Married Meg too fast and ignored warning signs and the counsel of others while doing so. Seems hung up on his childhood even decades later.
As I've said before here, I feel like the Harkles are on a JLo/Alex Rodriguez trajectory. Speak on the Woke Capitalism circuit, take selfies for Instagram while trying to stay relevant, settle at a B- to D-level of stardom despite having a large amount of wealth (maybe like 750 million between J-Rod).
People know frauds and divas when they see them. It's hard to arrive at destination "greatness" if you're starting from below-average and you choose to travel on the path of foolishness.
Just comparing the two couples in terms of their famous-but-no-one-cares mediocrity and general irrelevance.
Those two idiotic, plastic, shallow beings will NEVER claw their way back from the obscurity they so richly deserve.
I hope! ‘
The best! We do indeed hope they will go from being senior and seen royals to obscurity and oblivion! 😜
While genetic/biologic factors very likely do play a role, observed brain differences between adults with NPD and those without NPD doesn't prove the brain differences are the cause. It could be that differing experiences caused the brain differences. Prospective brain imaging studies would be interesting (starting imaging in childhood) but would be extraordinarily expensive.
NPD is still relatively uncommon in the US population. I've seen estimates as low as 0.5% and as high as 6.0%. Even if 6% is correct and I don't think it is, in order to wind up with say, around 30 adults who develop NPD one would need to scan around 500 people from childhood on. Yikes.
It may also be that children with brain differences elicit different types of responses from those around them. Thus, IF M didn't show much empathy as a child, and IF Thomas was inclined to spoil her and see her as a perfect child (as certainly seems to be the case), one could hypothesize he might have avoided putting her in situations that would be difficult for someone without empathy. It may also be she had experiences that taught her to "display" empathy for her own purposes.
Like many families, my family has a collection of "home movies" from birthday parties. Sometimes the birthday child comes across as a bit entitled. But we don't have and I don't know anyone who has a movie of a child playing "Queen" even at her own party much less at another child's party (as we've seen with M.) M's issues go back to childhood IMO, not her experiences of the set of Married with Children whatever those may have been.
I managed to get in touch with Vovan222 (prankster) and asked him if somebody managed to stop them via a court order. Below is his reply (copied and pasted)
"We are preparing animation. for a couple more days. Sorry for the wait"
I got this response 23 hours ago.
Coronavirus: All indications are that the BRF are listening to the briefings from the government (perhaps they are not clear enough nor often enough and that is why there is so much confusion) and are keeping calm and carrying on because they know that it has been hyped up beyond control. The statistics are that 95% of people who are infected (and it is highly contagious) will be fine (most will be mildly ill, no worse than a bad cold, and some will not show any symptoms at all) and will not require hospitalisation. Of the about 5% who will become gravely ill, just under half will die.
What Nutty is suggesting actually makes sense. Yes, royals do not make infomercials nor get involved in politics, but they do change and adapt with the time. Maybe stepping in will help calm the situation and get people to remember compassion and humanity and make sure the old and vulnerable are OK (isolation is bad for one's mental and emotional well being and one's physical health).
Although I think the political response (very clear and detailed briefing from the President and Minister of Health) in my country has been superb as has the quick application of drastic action (way before it has become an epidemic here, but it will ...), my people are not immune to herd hysteria. A holiday resort, away from any large urban centres and in the countryside, has been taken over as a quarantine place for those repatriated from Wuhan and to be extra careful, they will be kept there for 3 weeks. The people in that province (who will not have any contact with these people, who do not have the virus - the government is simply being cautious) are in hysterics because they are being 'put at risk'. Human behaviour - panic and all decency, compassion, reason, caring go out the window!
NPD is still relatively uncommon in the US population. I've seen estimates as low as 0.5% and as high as 6.0%. Even if 6% is correct and I don't think it is, in order to wind up with say, around 30 adults who develop NPD one would need to scan around 500 people from childhood on. Yikes.
__________________________________________
Lizzie --- my worry is that the NPD have somehow managed to make their way into the upper echelons of our society, thanks to their attractiveness.
After she married in, she was routinely photographed wearing black or sleeveless outfits for Royal functions, which I thought was against protocol (please, anyone can correct me on this). She appears to have the worst manners ever, which were on display at the Commonwealth service for all to see. And if the story about overshadowing Camilla is true, then it seems to be just another case of MM upstaging another member of the RF.
She had enough time to learn the expected protocol, especially since she is so "whip-smart." But either she genuinely did not understand what was expected of her, or she did and didn't care. She seems surprised and angry that we do not love and admire her. It is my opinion that she and Harry bullied the Queen and the rest of the RF when they did not get what they wanted. Much of the public feels this way, and I suspect MM hates that.
I have no idea re how long it takes, depends on who does it and on what equipment. I would think it is a member of the prankster group working on it, perhaps Vovan and Lexus themselves.
The first one was not a studio Ghibli level but it was witty and funny, I think it takes time to come up with scenario.
Harry in red military uniform holding a cell phone and floating in a rather basic wooden boat called "Meghan" was good.
>>>If Meghan is a narcissist because of genetics or in utero development, then her upbringing cannot be blamed for the causes, but probably solidified it. Hollywood culture cannot be blamed because thousands of children grow up in LA and are not narcs. I suppose it is a combination of factors. Her lack of compassion and common decency to family and friends (and the people of the UK) still astonishes me, but not only does she think she has done nothing wrong, but she sees herself as the victim and has brainwashed Harry to believe the same.<<<
I am fortunate that my life has not been directly affected by a malignant Narc; I find myself gravitating towards psychological thrillers for pleasure reading in which psychopaths and sexual sadists feature prominently and sometimes I question such dark choices in my reading material and films. I'm sure if this was a real-life feature of my day-to-day, I would not seek out vicarious scenarios of it. My compassion goes out to all who are, or who have loved ones in the control of narcissists and other types of abusers.
I'm no expert, but aberrant psychology has been an interest of mine for a long time. I question whether someone can develop the traits of malignant narcissism suddenly, like a switch being flipped, in adulthood. I tend to think it more likely that those traits were always there, perhaps dormant or just more skillfully hidden until a precipitating event brings them out full force?
In Meg's case, a lot of people point to her success on "Suits" after years of struggling in the business as the crucible for her narcissism . . that's when, they say, she 'changed overnight' and started acting arrogant, like a big shot and treating people badly. A person who was not a narcissist to begin with would not have had this kind of reaction to a little bit of career success--that callous diva was always in there, but while she was still low-level and aspiring, she had to maintain the facade of sweet Meghan with a greater number of people. Being offered an entre into the Royal family with all its fame, wealth and privileges was the stage she was waiting for. Now she feels there is nobody in the world she needs to be nice to for show anymore . . she feels herself to be bigger than the Queen of England or the President of the United States.
Plenty of people can be spoilt and self-involved to varying degrees without being clinical narcissists. Even spoiled people usually have a few people, animals or causes they care deeply about, and are capable of compassion, remorse or other real feelings, even if their baseline is normally quite self-indulgent. Narcissism is a whole other level. They can only ape feelings without actually experiencing them. The only compassion they feel is reserved for themselves . .everyone and everything else is merely a prop for their egos. We have all seen how Meg's affect is generally always a bit off for the occasion--she's got a limited cache of stock learned emotive responses she falls back on time and again. The vacant zombie smile is one such. Meg will always be seeking out the cameras like a heat sensitive missile and smiling for them, even when a smile is very inappropriate. She can't gauge 'appropriate' and that's why she's usually getting it wrong.
It is a unique kind of emotional tone-deafness that renders them unable to navigate what the rest of us call human interaction. It really is a profound disability, but unlike other disabilities, the people around the afflicted are the ones who suffer and are hurt.
He's the Beta, the Loeb to her Leopold, as I've observed before. She's the brains, but he's the willing henchman who parrots everything she says and shares in her hedonistic selfish agenda without having the drive to have made it happen on his own. He's Play-Doh in her hands, but ultimately they seem made of the same stuff. His family must be beyond exhausted.
https://chinadigitaltimes.net/chinese/2020/03/%E4%BB%BB%E5%BF%97%E5%BC%BA%EF%BC%9A%E4%BA%BA%E6%B0%91%E7%9A%84%E7%94%9F%E5%91%BD%E8%A2%AB%E7%97%85%E6%AF%92%E5%92%8C%E4%BD%93%E5%88%B6%E7%9A%84%E9%87%8D%E7%97%85%E5%85%B1%E5%90%8C%E4%BC%A4%E5%AE%B3/
Do you think a person's own life experience will determine if the person will end pro or anti Meg?
I mean it looks like quite a few of us were burned by narcs and thus we can see the pattern of behavior a lot easier than people who weren't.
Others have excellent BS radar and see right through her rather basic scheming.
Some of it also depends on how you identify yourself. If you feel duty, perseverance, tradition, authority and teamwork are important you are more likely to end up with Kate and Wills.
If you feel the "old" world should be destroyed and the "new, modern" one built instead plus easily influenced by IG, FB Twitter you will most likely end up with Megsy. Especially if you also feel life hasn't treated you fairly because of racism, sexism and other -isms.
@ nutty "Nutty Flavor said...
Still looking forward to a UK commenter saying how he or she thinks the Royals should show their faces in this crisis."
What are they supposed to do and who am I, or you for that matter, to expect them to do anything, especially some sort of video for PR, like a show and dance? It's the government everybody's looking at, nobody is looking at the Queen or Charles right now. The governments' actions are what matter right now, not royal instagram videos about hand washing.
Nobody cares about 'good PR' for cute Charlotte and George washing their hands singing happy birthday. At least nobody sensible cares about this nonsense over here right now.
If things go really bad then the Queen might address the nation in a short and dignified message of support, but that's it. To put on trick&pony show right now to boost 'good PR' is unnecessary, gratuitous and not needed in the slightest.
It's exactly the sort of thing MM would do: undignified, patronising, moronic, self serving and self promoting
And to compare this situation to the Blitz......seriously? That's reaching to say the least.
@Alice James Surrey & @ Fairy Croc - I'm glad Im not the only one who thinks this idea is completely silly.
Ren clearly states that the Chinese president is working to save himself first and then appear to be the hero of it all with propaganda to cover up the fact that he is to blame for letting the virus go unchecked for a very long time. He exposes that the Chinese president is using the virus to prove to the world that the Chinese Communist system is the reason they have overcome the virus. What kind of sick people would think that causing a pandemic, then pretending to conquer it to win favor is the world and do a power grab is a good idea? Scary times we live in to live in a free world.
Thank you. I have lived for the whole of my almost 80 years in Britain and I and most of my friends in my age group consider ourselves to have sufficient experience of life to be able to decide for ourselves when to self-isolate should it prove necessary. I consider myself a lifelong nonsmoker to be much healthier than many who are younger than me.
With regards to the Royal Family - I still think that it is far too early for them to consider delivering speeches on national television about the virus. H
HM always spends a month at Windsor over the Easter period so she's only left London a couple of weeks earlier than normal
Putting out cute hand-washing videos or the like will just anger those who are worried about their lives, jobs, businesses and putting food on their tables.
Jlo can dance and act ( see Out of Sight and The Cell) she can't sing. Jlo and ARod may be narcissists but as you said they have talents. Meghan is famous by virtue of her marriage and Harry due to an accident of birth.
The Atlantic article is aimed at American elites so it's interesting to see the tide of opinion turn against them.
The BRF is probably waiting for their cues from the government which right now hasn't formulated a strategy. There were calls to do nothing to build up "herd immunity". That was shot down so it's on to Plan B.
It was very well received and people think he cares.
Harry strikes me as having very weak boundaries and/or a weak sense of self –worth. He thought he was great in the Army but couldn’t see how asserting what he saw as his `entitlement’ made him a right pain in the anatomy.
He’s as thin-skinned as MM when it comes others legitimately checking what he wants to do but insensitive to where their coming from. Sounds familiar?
Drugs and booze haven’t helped his equilibrium, together with indulgent parents severally trying to expiate their sense of guilt.
Whether he exhibits any other behaviours of full-blown n-ists is something we can’t be 100% sure about yet, though his comments so far about the RF are consistent with the `smear’ behaviour of a thwarted narc – doubtless, Smirkles has `worked’ hard on him. They now apparently feed off each other when they’re together, hence my folie a deux suggestion.
It is to be hoped that if he could break free, he might escape the bind she’s put him in.
Unfortunately, any mud thrown sticks – particularly with the `no smoke without fire’ believers who’ve never met a lying narc.
I once roared ` How dare you!’ at husband no 2, when I learnt he’d been telling a pack of lies about me. What I learnt though, was that all the adrenalin and hypoventilation made me feel great! Powerful! It was frightening really, all I’d done was make a lot of noise but it gave me a real buzz - presumably the energy of rage had the same effect on him.
I suspect it rewarded his brain `pleasure’ centres, like an addiction; in an MRI scanner that bit of his brain would have lit up like Blackpool’s Golden Mile. I heard a broadcast about `sex addiction’ in which MRI scans had shown something similar happens there. An addiction generated in the brain of the addict, without external substances being involved.
Thank you to all who have shared their experience of these evil people in response to my request – your stories are very sobering. It takes a lot of guts to admit that you can’t cope with it and then to escape.
My counsellor congratulated me on walking out on him – her words were `So many women don’t - that’s how men end up with a carving knife between their ribs.’
I believe all the tyrants ever to infest the world were/are narcissists. Other posters have just added another to my list
Yes! My thoughts precisely
At any rate, the UK Royals are entirely MIA at the moment. Rare to have an entire Daily Mail scroll page without them.
Mel Brooks and his son did a cute video with an effective message. No hands were washed.
Like many other publications, it's struggled to stay afloat in recent decades. It was most recently bailed out by Laurene Powell Jobs, Steve Jobs' widow.
It's published articles recommending reparations to African Americans, perhaps a worthy sentiment, but not very practical in a current America with an ever diminishing percentage of the population which has any ties to the Civil War, no matter what race they are. The vast majority of our population arrived on our shores post Civil War.
I stopped subscribing to it because it seemed to become such predictably millennial SJW tripe. They published an article last year accusing residents of a neighborhood in San Francisco of being racist because they reported a woman who made it a practice to steal Amazon packages in their area to the police because she was a black woman who lived nearby. I sympathize
with anyone who has financial difficulties & drug issues, but would prefer that they not steal stuff, especially from their neighbors. Mistrusting one's neighbors is unpleasant.
Caitlin Flanagan is the Atlantic's resident contrarian who's drawn a lot of fire from the traditional left, especially feminists. Her article seems to parrot Meg's own personal pr, but weaves that stuff in with a lot of admiration for the queen, & then ends with a bit of a take down of the Harkles. Flanagan can get pretty snarky. I wonder if she held back to please her ultral liberal editors.
I've started a lot interesting sounding articles in the Atlantic on things like healthcare & education, but they generally have turned out to be fact-lite opinion pieces, rather than worthwhile discussions. They have done some brave stuff, like the Anne-Marie Slaughter piece on 'Why Women Still Can't Have it All.' That was 8 years ago. I doubt they'd publish that now.
Sorry to go OT for so long, but just wanted to put the Harkle story into context. The Atlantic is a place that would be expected to be all in on Harkle fandom, but I suppose the fact they published a story that was faintly critical of them is a change.
Not sure I would expect them to have a position one way or another re Markle, as a person I mean. That's not the kind of thing they would cover She's more tabloid fodder.
And yeah, as I said last night, mostly can't stand Caitlin Flanagan.
Like Neutral, I have no time for SJW tripe, but I wouldn't expect that from the Atlantic--there's always Jezebel.com for that.
<> Just another opinion . . .
https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2020/03/16/the-private-goldman-sachs-coronavirus-meeting-thats-setting-the-internet-on-fire/#1775ddc350dd
Like everyone else, I've been exchanging anxious emails & texts with friends & family on how to keep safe. An old friend, a gay man of 74, who's survived both the AIDs crisis & the crime-ridden 70s in NYC, has made it clear to me he doesn't want to hear anything about Covid-19. Don't know whether it's staying calm, or just denial, but his refusal to be afraid made me feel calmer. So keep calm & stay healthy, everybody.
Yes! I think you are right. The one that I know was given a position anyone else would consider the ultimate job, with all kinds of special privileges. They would often not show up at work, causing other employees to have to cover for them, but this narc never faced the consequences any other employee would have faced. They had "charmed" enough of the people in charge that they got away with all kinds of poor behavior at work.
This person uses their "charm", an ability to make susceptible people fall for them with a particular smile or personal attention, to get into restaurants, get out of violations get free drinks, all kinds of low level privileges. A LOT of people are fooled by them, even after years of watching the behavior, but they don't really have friends like normal people have. They can spot a gullible person, and seem to enjoy working on someone who doesn't fall for them right away. There are still plenty of people who see through their facade.
Some operate at a low level, and I'm sure there are others who have worked their way up to high positions.
"A great idea just seen on Twitter," Edo wrote in a tweet on Sunday. "Would it be possible for the supermarkets to only allow elderly shoppers in first, so that they can shop before the rest of us, as the shops will be clean/disinfected, and before the shelves are all cleared. #elderlyhour."
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a31664929/edoardo-mapelli-mozzi-coronavirus-grocery-stores-protect-elderly-twitter/
"Since relocating to Vancouver Island the couple have the 'freedom to do whatever they want' because the locals 'don't bother them', the source added."
Wasn't it not too long ago that MM said she and Just Harry were being hounded by people there?
She never gives up, does she? But she also never follows through on her stories from her "sources" and can't keep all the lies straight.
https://twitter.com/edomm/status/1239316439363997701?s=21
I don’t this is an accident. The real Royals are not speaking yet, for whatever reason. Edo has the floor to himself, at a time when it is very convenient for both BP and his business to build up his profile.
I wonder what William’s relationship to Edo is like.
>>>And to compare this situation to the Blitz......seriously? That's reaching to say the least.<<<
Our comparison was a bit more nuanced than that. The comparison is meant to not equate the virus with Hitler's bombs, though it too is having a detrimental effect on British life. But this crisis is unprecendented in the way that the bombing of British cities was--it's a negative situation the country must face together, and the Royals, as the figureheads for the nation are in a similar position to lead by example and encourage their people into unity. The Royal family has no political power, but they have a very real inspirational power. I gather from the tone of your comments that you must be a republican . . not more so than I, an American, but I can admire the Queen for what she and her house stand for, or at least have stood for in former times. Watching this show unfold from a distance, it seems to me that they have an opportunity to be what Britain needs for cheerleaders for morale now as they were in the darkest days of the war. You are free to disagree; after all, you've got to live with the monarchy and I don't. We are just tossing around suggestions. Nutty has inquired several times what you as a Briton would prefer to see your Royals do. Do you have any ideas?
Boris has taken an uncustomarily defeatist attitude toward the inevitable spread; maybe that's what's got you so touchy.
1. Those she was at school with who went into the financial world are now making a lot of money whereas she is struggling to get a job and when she does, she won't get paid much (not until she spends many years climbing the academic and research ladder).
2. Nowadays when children are asked what they want to do when they leave school, an alarming number say they want to be influencers (make YouTube videos, and so on). Influencers are making a lot of money.
The latter is essentially what the Sussexes are pursuing, albeit with a woke, environmental, women empowerment bandwagon and a sprinkling of royal fairy dust. They have been together almost 4 years now and they have not built a school, a women's shelter, created a nature reserve, set up a bursary scheme, saved an endangered species or a forest ... and so on. Most of the people who are actually doing these things do not necessarily even have the money ... just a passion and determination to do something.
Harry at least does have a track record of actually creating something but Meghan was an infuencer on IG who blogged about food and travel and other fashionable stuff and did a lot of self-promoting. Her woke credentials she built on posting quotes and getting herself invited to events, especially if she could give a speech. If she was really interested in dong something that builds change, she should have let Harry keep his team and followed his lead, and done the work!
Another thing - I have found dozens of hand sanitizers in my home. None of my neighbors need them, and I barely have used them (bought for several cruises over last year). What do I do, as I wanted to give them to nursing homes, including my father’s but they will not accept them!
I am sorry - forgot about the virus post. But what to do with my first problem?
"Influencer" is a glorified ad person. They sell idea, image, impression, trend.
Those who are in ad business make a lot of money if they dramatically increase sales. Nothing new.
Wouldn't you agree that if you are a confident person, who achieved something in life, with a stable circle of real friends and relatives you wouldn't need one to tell you what to eat, wear or see? I don't.
Sorry I "talk" so much to you. I simply find your posts interesting and corresponding to my thoughts. I am not picking up at you!
I don't know how to accurately explain my thoughts on this, but is it really necessary for the royals to speak up now when they could be much more effective later if things get tragically worse with COVID? I think it's wise for them to hold back for awhile to see how things progress, and when the time comes, a message or televised speech from HMTQ would be more powerful. We are really only in the first weeks of this crisis, so they are following the adage, "keep calm and carry on."
And when her message or TV appearance comes, it will be with dignity and grace, not a cheap PR shot, but a true message of inspiration for the country. As the old songs says, you've got to know when to hold 'em, and know when to fold 'em. The lesser royals know this, too.
Edo is not yet a royal, so he can say what he wants, but I'm sure that whatever he says about COVID has been vetted by the BRF. He's not going to lose their good graces by going rogue right now. His (or their) idea about separate hours for the elderly to shop is a good one, though!
>>>Do you think a person's own life experience will determine if the person will end pro or anti Meg?
I mean it looks like quite a few of us were burned by narcs and thus we can see the pattern of behavior a lot easier than people who weren't.<<<
I have been surprised by the numbers of commentators here who have personal experience with a Narc in their lives and the lives of their loved ones. I know these people walk among us, but in general I think the garden-variety sociopaths aren't quite as blatant in their destruction as Meg. There are many worse than her . . any dictator you'd care to mention throughout history . . but do we doubt if Meg had real political power, that she'd be just as bad? Giving her this platform she's got now was bad enough.
I suppose a lot of factors influence one's thoughts about the Harkles . . age, race, socioeconomic status, politics, nationality. Meg is going to have a lot more support among the wokerati who think like her, and there are tons of them, or else she couldn't have slid into a Royal family terrified of criticism for not being 'woke' enough according to the right criteria. Caitlyn Flanagan's Atlantic article is getting a lot of flak here, presumably because the author is more conservative leaning and not a Diana sycophant; in my opinion she absolutely nails Diana's enduring influence on the crumbling of the stiff upper lip ethos in British society. Diana was 20 years almost exactly older than Meg, but we could legitimately call Diana the proto-Millennial with her emphasis on feelings over duty. She didn't singlehandedly create the current generational atmosphere, but she was one of its early standard bearers. It was her emphasis on her personal happiness that led us directly to the situation we have now with Harry. Charles wasn't that far off her in his emphasis for personal happiness either by putting his love affair with Camilla before his marriage, and not caring if his wife knew it. Diana could not do what generations of royal wives had done before her, tolerate her husband's mistress and accept that she had to share him. I'm not going to make the case that she *should* have, necessarily, but if she'd been able to employ the stiff upper lip to her husband's infidelity, it seems pretty likely that she'd still be Princess of Wales now, preparing to be Queen consort, and perhaps her youngest son would have turned out a stronger specimen less prone to a predatory narcissist and a lifetime of broken mental health if she'd accepted that her marriage had never and was never going to be the romantic fairy tale promised to the public . . but that given her position, it had to endure anyway.
Unlike Diana who had a quite nearly crippling empathy with people (though she knew the power of a really good 'caring' picture, too) Meg feels nothing for other people. She's learned how to parrot the 'right' things to say but she was never going to go anywhere near an AIDs charity or the like and mess up her borrowed couture. She is totally a product of an Instagram culture and has latched onto all those 'isms' that typify the younger, liberal set. Very opposite of stiff upper, community-based thinking. The Insta generation is at ground level all about Me and the trendy sayings and beliefs that make them feel good about themselves. Because feeling good and looking good is where it's at.
I think it also depends on how much attention a reader pays to pop culture and Royal coverage. At the time of the wedding (which I took the morning off specially to watch, as I had done in 2011 for William and Kate) I was the only one out all the employees in my building that watched the wedding. I polled a few people and they couldn't have been less interested. People that don't follow Internet or print tabloids have probably only seen a few pictures of Meg, once, and may regard her fashion choices as good, bad or have no opinion whatsoever. The MSM is starting to come out with more negative articles dissecting her behavior in the wake of Megxit, but up til at least last fall, it was nearly 100% fawning coverage on both sides of the Atlantic, except for online havens of sanity like this one, and our Tumblr blogger friends, et al.
Meg just isn't as big a deal as she thinks she is, and never has been. With Coronavirus decimating all her plans for world media domination, it seems like the luck may have finally run out on her magic timing.
It's her complete lack of substance I find so galling . . lack of substance bolstered by a tissue of lies. Those who still (still?) think she's a great, inspirational SJW just aren't looking more than skin deep. Not even that much--why don't the young Insta savvy girls call her out for her visible eyelash glue and bad weaves and stuff? Even for somebody who's nothing but image, she can't even get that right.
I have always known what I liked and what I didn't and have not been influenced to buy anything by any advertising or influencer. I am always amazed at people who rush out to buy stuff because they like the idea of it or because everyone is doing it and then yet another expensive gadget gathers dust on the shelf, but a lot do.
Perhaps those in the business of making money from product are becoming discerning and it is not how many views or likes you get but how much you sell that counts. Meghan's Vogue issue comes to mind. Comparably her issue did sell well, but not by a huge margin and most copies were heavily discounted from Day 1. If her capsule collection did as well as her PR said it did, why did she not carry it through and make it a seasonal capsule collection ... there are plenty of people in the business of making clothes and she could have established a permanent partnership with some and a seasonal partnership with others. Was it because she has no follow through or because it was not a success for those who participated (except for her friend) and word got around?
My favourite tarot reader has picked up that Meghan's best life choice would be influencing and merching, like she did with the Tig, from a platform where she has complete control and answers to no one.
>>>I agree with those above that the BRF shouldn't pander to the people by using PR stunts during this time of crisis.<<<
First let me say as an American I have no right to necessarily say what the Queen or the BRF should or shouldn't do about making speeches, videos, etc. about COVID-19.
But I can say I would find it silly is if Trump had his son Baron do a hand washing video, or Melania say anything on the subject. I do think a reassuring speech with Specifics on what the US Gov't will be doing could be good (although here much is determined by each Governor of the various states).
However, I think the Queen doing a reassuring speech might be worthwhile, but again I have no standing to really offer an opinion. Apologies to UK folks if I have offended anyone. My heart goes out to everyone in all affected countries. I did just spoke to my Pharmacist who is pretty astute and he feels that the virus will diminish as the months get warmer as typically most viruses do.
She looks great! She is sticking to the rules ... gloves, not touching face, keeping a social distance and contact to a minimum (probably shook hands with a few people). Sensible precautions do work, but it is difficult to avoid contact in a crowded space such as a city, by touch people who have the virus are leaving it all over the place so even picking something up on the shelf in a shop is a risk, and not everyone has RPOs to protect them from idiots.
Since most people who are infected won't die and many will not even be sick for very long, the problem is that it has an incubation period of at least a few days during which time the viral load is high and by going out you are risking infecting a vulnerable person.
That is how I have decided to think of this virus ... being careful extra careful, is about protecting the vulnerable people who are at great risk if they get sick.
First, let me tell you how glad I am that you found your brother! I hope he is home soon.
I'm an American, too, so I apologize if I offended anybody by giving my thoughts on the BRF. I also am concerned about every country that is dealing with COVID, and hope that your pharmacist is right about the warmer weather.
Nobody really knows what the right thing to do is right now, so it's logical that people will disagree on how things should be handled. There is no right or wrong here, just opinions, and I value all of those on this board, even if we sometimes disagree.
I have to disagree, sorry. This is the same magazine that said Kyle Jenner was a self-made billionaire! We know that isn’t true. 🥴
Looks like Markle and Harry are stuck with the quiet life they so craved.
I am sorry for their bodyguards. Are they stuck with the duo too?
CatEyes, I am so happy about your brother!
He had lunch with the Queen.
Can you point me to the article about this? That's so scary for the Queen!
Right. H&M are not going to be able to do that officially. But I was talking about the RPOs. If they do have teams on a schedule of two weeks in Canada then back to the UK (as reported), it's hard to see how that will work if supposedly Canada won't be letting non-residents in. A team can leave but a new one can't come in. And it's not as though London is virus-free. I know if I was from the UK and I had a family there, I'd not want to leave them. Supposedly RPOs for H&M were "volunteers." Hmmm.
I hope TQ hasn't been exposed. By Harry of all people.