Harry and Meghan Oprah interview.

[levtweeney]

Originally Posted by JoJo88

Quoting myself here, but I’m interested to know what those on the side of Harry & Meghan think they hoped to achieve.

See more...

I’m pretty much in the middle on this but I will try to answer you.

If we take what Harry and Megan say is true, and I believe they think it is the truth then of course they would want to share their experiences with the world. If what they say is true then we all should be appalled at the treatment they suffered and they should be able to reclaim their voices and call out everyone who contributed to the issue of racism, bullying and mental health issues they suffered from.

Now we come to being able to prove much of it? The press comments we can prove and verify so no real issue there. The feelings of suicide no one can question, if someone feels this way then that’s the way they feel. You can’t prove feelings and most of us are left having to either believe this or not. The racist/stupid comments from a family member is easily proved and it’s a shame they did not just say who it was.

Anyway like Megan said herself, she wanted to have her voice back and be able to speak out.

[bonnies mum]

Originally Posted by tocpe321

For me there seems to be polar extremes in this. It's a real Marmite issue.


Where the interview failed in my opinion is that Oprah didn't really question Meghan about the alleged racist comment. She should have asked more questions e.g. how was it said, what was the context, when was it said etc.

The fact that these questions weren't asked doesn't mean, IMO, that the whole thing can be consigned as woke nonsense, but it does cause issues.

See more...

Agree, The problem for me is that Meghan indicated something had been said while she was pregnant which demonstrated racism by “someone” in the RF., and which contributed to her suicidal thoughts. However, Harry said that such a remark was made at a much, much earlier time and appeared uncomfortable at being questioned on it(DH’s view as I didn’t watch). To ignore context & timing is to tell half a story & present a false narrative.

Strangely enough whilst texting I am watching Jeremy Vine and a lady (Jewel)with an American accent who described herself as black has just made this entire point!

[duchy]

I think it was very clear it was *their* truth and that they did feel attacked and that no one defended them.
I do think anyone would feel that way with the onslaught of the media, everything they did was attacked , the James O’Brien piece citing the differences between how identical actions by Kate and Meghan were reported on , Kate praised and Meghan attacked. To be constantly told to suck it up” by the Palace must have got old.
I’m not sure you can “prove” the “will your babies be black” comment with the Palace , never explain stance.
The media attacking Meghan clearly hit a nerve from day one with Harry and his ambivalence towards the press and the implication he at some level blames them for contributing to his Mother’s death can’t be ignored as a factor.
I do think there was a drip, drip effect and the Palace’s refusal to rebut even the biggest inaccuracies or to defend didn’t help. Had the palace stated for example that the photo shoot taking baby home from hospital wasn’t a tradition but a choice made by Diana and Kate and wasn’t expected of every royal (the Queen didn’t do it, Margaret didn’t do it, Anne didn’t do it etc) it would have stopped the fury stone dead , as an example.
How many of us could have stood daily criticism public ally and zero support on a daily basis for several years without wanting to escape from it and correct what was inaccurate.
Royal doesn’t mean that you don’t have feelings.
They are the most inoffensive of couples, both have worked hard, Harry served on the front line and then with Invicta , Meghan carved out a career (and as for the contemptuous “she’s an actress” , As if it’s an insult , in this day and age it’s just another profession) they are never going to sit on the throne so as a modern couple , both who have carried out charitable work beyond royal hand shaking for years before they met their biggest crime seems to have been to want to carve out a more relevant role .
No I don’t get the anger towards them , the willingness of a certain sector of society to attack their every move.
Did they get everything right ? Of course not , this is uncharted territory for the royals, a couple wanting to be modern and “relevant” and the Palace could have supported them better but many of the royal advisors appear stuck in the past and weren’t able to adapt and see if you want to modernise (asCharles claims he wants the monarchy to do) you can’t keep doing the same old thing.
William chose a woman suitable to be groomed as a future Queen , content to stay home and wait for marriage , Harry chose a woman with very different ambitions and probably an equal rather than the more placid Kate. Two men with very different futures , one who needed a wife willing to conform , the other trying to carve out a more useful role in life than the two previous “spares” and found a wife as equally willing to break the mould as he was himself.
I don’t for a moment believe “he broke his grandmother’s heart” she’s a very pragmatic woman , I do believe the attacks on him, his wife and even his child by the media and their followers probably have though. As she said “they are much loved family” .
Many of us didn’t follow family expectations in adult life , doesn’t mean our families should love us less because we made different choice to theirs surely ?

Originally Posted by levtweeney

I’m pretty much in the middle on this but I will try to answer you.

If we take what Harry and Megan say is true, and I believe they think it is the truth then of course they would want to share their experiences with the world. If what they say is true then we all should be appalled at the treatment they suffered and they should be able to reclaim their voices and call out everyone who contributed to the issue of racism, bullying and mental health issues they suffered from.

Now we come to being able to prove much of it? The press comments we can prove and verify so no real issue there. The feelings of suicide no one can question, if someone feels this way then that’s the way they feel. You can’t prove feelings and most of us are left having to either believe this or not. The racist/stupid comments from a family member is easily proved and it’s a shame they did not just say who it was.

Anyway like Megan said herself, she wanted to have her voice back and be able to speak out.

See more...

[SussexFamily]

Is there a difference between “their” and “the” truth?

That’s the void that needs filling, imo.

[duchy]

Originally Posted by SussexFamily

Is the a difference between “their” and “the” truth?

See more...

Truth is always subjective. You can present several people with the exact same set of facts and they will each come up with differing conclusions based on their own previous life experiences. It’s called the beholder’s share.
None of us are entirely objective no matter how much we think we are

[SussexFamily]

Originally Posted by duchy

Truth is always subjective. You can present several people with the exact same set of facts and they will each come up with differing conclusions based on their own previous life experiences. It’s called the beholder’s share.
None of us are entirely objective no matter how much we think we are

See more...

Except if you sit on a jury? ... and it’s a unanimous Verdict?

How would your version stand up in that scenario ?

Clearly ALL individuals arrived at the same conclusion, surely?

Just a thought...

[duchy]

Originally Posted by SussexFamily

Except if you sit on a jury? ... and it’s a unanimous Verdict?

How would that pan out?

See more...

Exactly the same.
The conclusions made by each juror are made based on their own experiences in life.
An example from when I did jury service was a rather stupid woman who announced to the rest of the jury that she believed that we should find the defendant guilty “”I’m not sure if he actually did it but he is clearly a habitual criminal so even if he didn’t do it, there’s probably something else he didn’t get caught for” For her evidence wasn’t relevant , the fact he was a certain “type” to her was enough for her to justify her position. (We didn’t find him guilty there was reasonable doubt and that outweighed her “gut” (and possibly the fact he was black) and the rest of the jury didn’t find her conclusion persuasive . Nonetheless she had heard the same evidence we had but come to her own “truth”. )
In the end she agreed (reluctantly) he wasn’t guilty beyond reasonable doubt but it illustrates that you can come to the same conclusion but for very different reasons .
Whether we like it or not none of us are unbiased , we reach conclusions based on our own previous life experiences and prejudices.

[SussexFamily]

Originally Posted by duchy

Exactly the same.
The conclusions made by each juror are made based on their own experiences in life.
An example from when I did jury service was a rather stupid woman who announced to the rest of the jury that she believed that we should find the defendant guilty “”I’m not sure if he actually did it but he is clearly a habitual criminal so even if he didn’t do it, there’s probably something else he didn’t get caught for” For her evidence wasn’t relevant , the fact he was a certain “type” to her was enough for her to justify her position. (We didn’t find him guilty there was reasonable doubt and that outweighed her “gut” (and possibly the fact he was black) and the rest of the jury didn’t find her conclusion persuasive . Nonetheless she had heard the same evidence we had but come to her own “truth”. )

See more...

I’m sorry it isn’t the same, I stated a unanimous verdict... where clearly all the jury members arrived at the same conclusion... which you said didn’t happen!

[levtweeney]

Originally Posted by duchy

I think it was very clear it was *their* truth and that they did feel attacked and that no one defended them.
I do think anyone would feel that way with the onslaught of the media, everything they did was attacked , the James O’Brien piece citing the differences between how identical actions by Kate and Meghan were reported on , Kate praised and Meghan attacked. To be constantly told to suck it up” by the Palace must have got old.
I’m not sure you can “prove” the “will your babies be black” comment with the Palace , never explain stance.
The media attacking Meghan clearly hit a nerve from day one with Harry and his ambivalence towards the press and the implication he at some level blames them for contributing to his Mother’s death can’t be ignored as a factor.
I do think there was a drip, drip effect and the Palace’s refusal to rebut even the biggest inaccuracies or to defend didn’t help. Had the palace stated for example that the photo shoot taking baby home from hospital wasn’t a tradition but a choice made by Diana and Kate and wasn’t expected of every royal (the Queen didn’t do it, Margaret didn’t do it, Anne didn’t do it etc) it would have stopped the fury stone dead , as an example.
How many of us could have stood daily criticism public ally and zero support on a daily basis for several years without wanting to escape from it and correct what was inaccurate.
Royal doesn’t mean that you don’t have feelings.
They are the most inoffensive of couples, both have worked hard, Harry served on the front line and then with Invicta , Meghan carved out a career (and as for the contemptuous “she’s an actress” , As if it’s an insult , in this day and age it’s just another profession) they are never going to sit on the throne so as a modern couple , both who have carried out charitable work beyond royal hand shaking for years before they met their biggest crime seems to have been to want to carve out a more relevant role .
No I don’t get the anger towards them , the willingness of a certain sector of society to attack their every move.
Did they get everything right ? Of course not , this is uncharted territory for the royals, a couple wanting to be modern and “relevant” and the Palace could have supported them better but many of the royal advisors appear stuck in the past and weren’t able to adapt and see if you want to modernise (asCharles claims he wants the monarchy to do) you can’t keep doing the same old thing.
William chose a woman suitable to be groomed as a future Queen , content to stay home and wait for marriage , Harry chose a woman with very different ambitions and probably an equal rather than the more placid Kate. Two men with very different futures , one who needed a wife willing to conform , the other trying to carve out a more useful role in life than the two previous “spares” and found a wife as equally willing to break the mould as he was himself.
I don’t for a moment believe “he broke his grandmother’s heart” she’s a very pragmatic woman , I do believe the attacks on him, his wife and even his child by the media and their followers probably have though. As she said “they are much loved family” .
Many of us didn’t follow family expectations in adult life , doesn’t mean our families should love us less because we made different choice to theirs surely ?

See more...

I agree with lots of this but not so much with William choosing Kate because she was willing to be groomed as a future queen. This is a little disparaging. I don’t feel Kate is placid just because she is quiet. I think both girls are different and that is fine but this feels like what the press did with pitting one against the other.

[duchy]

Originally Posted by SussexFamily

I’m sorry it isn’t the same, I stated a unanimous verdict... where clearly all the jury members arrived at the same conclusion... which you said didn’t happen!

See more...

Then your own prejudices have made you miss the point entirely. It’s about how you get to your conclusion not the conclusion itself.
One juror might rely on their gut alone , another on the evidence and both come to the same conclusion but how they got to “their truth” was entirely different .