Harry and Meghan #136 Ofcom's spoken, now all the crockery's broken!

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
To be honest that Spencer film sounds right up my strasse. A clip from the review:

No doubt it took an outsider to make a film that’s as unreverential as Spencer, which dares to examine the royals as if they were specimens under glass. At heart, of course, Larraín and Knight’s tale is utterly preposterous. It’s a tragedy about a spoiled princess who lashes out at the servants; a thriller about a woman who has only 10 minutes to get into her dress before Christmas dinner is served. But how else do you play it? The monarchy itself is preposterous. Spencer presents the whole institution as little more than a silly ongoing game of dress-up, a farce that depends for its survival on everyone playing along and propping up the illusion, the old moth-eaten brocade. Anybody who doesn’t is ostracised, crushed or cast out in the cold, with the scarecrow and the pheasants and the shivering security men. “Will they kill me, do you think?” says Diana, half-joking, and such is the level of fury and tension that just for a moment we believe that they might.

Sounds a bit 'Discreet Charms of the Bourgeoisie'..ish Plus, the director's Brazilian and they love their magical realism. I wouldn't get too bothered about it. Besides, it irks me somewhat that the right-wing monarchists have all the best anti-sussex tunes these days.

As a leftie I want to see more takedowns of the sussexes in the media from that angle but they're thin on the ground.

Up the revolution and off with their heads!
 
Reactions: 29
If the institution is a “sinister body corporate, ready to inflict wounds and ice out any interloper”, then why have Catherine, Camilla and Sophie settled in so well? Why is the focus only on Diana and now HW?!
And I keep coming back to it: if the 'institution' is so bad, why are they holding onto their titles & demanding titles for their children? Why name a child after the Queen?
It just makes you look like a hypocritical, money grabbing embarrassment. But it's completely non sensical because they are biting the hand that feeds them.
 
Reactions: 58

Maybe Tom Bower's 2022 book will depict the Meghan & Harry we Tattlers see.
maybe someone will make a movie of that.
 
Reactions: 34
But why do you have to be 'right wing' or 'left wing' not to believe the lies peddled by Smegatron?

I bet that most on this thread (well certainly myself) don't subscribe to either end of the extreme spectrum and are just ordinary people who are fed up of being lied to.

This idea that if you support the Queen vs Harkles it makes you a 'right winger' is rubbish.

As for the press the Guardian is absolute fucking shite these days and anti women
At least the only other leftist paper the Mirror has called the Harkles out, but as you say it would help if criticism of the Harkle wankers came from all sides.
 
Reactions: 59
Has this been posted yet?
Also I've been reading of a gagging order the press have about 666s child many years ago. Twitter or tumbler or somewhere
 
Reactions: 29
But why do you have to be 'right wing' or 'left wing' not to believe the lies peddled by Smegatron?
Hmm Do I want to get into a deep political discussion on how the 'Left' and 'Right' are portrayed in todays society? How people who once considered themselves 'Left' and now so horrified by the Left that we're suddenly 'Right'?
Er...no. I really don't. Okay, that's it. Back as you were everyone.
 
Reactions: 37
Being as it was so close, and still relevant, I’m going in again

Harry and Meghan #137 Princess Pinocchio, are you OkDokieOh?
 
Reactions: 69
Lady C 'plunging right in'


Haz at GQ Awards More presentable than usual. But a clip-on bow-tie was a no-no. Hair and teeth given the Hollywood treatment. Lady C said Haz looked like a rat when he smiled or wtte so teeth a definite improvement. Speech unimpressive and showcased Haz's misguided paranoia re. jabs.
Hypocritical Smeg complains of unwarranted attention but has free rein to criticise others/asked for no 'old, male, stale reviewers' - smacks of elitism. Smeg is 'plastic shoes pretending to be leather'.
Haz juggling his balls. Apt considering his bonkers comment on 1st amendment and demeanour of someone who has been neutralised.
H & M are totalitarians - anyone who disagrees with them not tolerated. İnvent agendas that create chaos eg racial disharmony.
 
Reactions: 35
I was thinking of pundits like Morgan (although he used to be labour) and Andrew Neil etc. The media has pitched the anti-sussex argument as one of support for the monarchy versus what they call the 'woke' Sussexes.
Even left-liberals have adopted the Sussexes as an embodiment of progressive identity politics. Anti-Sussexes have accused them of espousing 'Marxist' ideas when they couldn't be further from Marx than Groucho.

My point would be that identity politics and 'wokery' is not at all radical, in fact it segues very nicely into a neoliberal, individualist self-centred culture. Its no accident that a lot of identity politics supporters are libertarian; the idea being that it is your choices that determine your life, and not your economic/social status. The Sussexes 'fit' the identity/woke profile precisely because it does conceal, at its heart, a tendency towards gestural politics which makes great claims but keeps the elite exactly where they want to be. But this is getting off topic and preachy so I'll stop.

You don't have to be 'right wing' to support the monarchy but it helps. There is nothing that is outside of politics. (Goes off to polish bust of Lenin)
 
Reactions: 18
Happy New Thread!

What a beautiful comparison here, one looks princess-like and then... There is not one acceptable part of the dress, the overall look, the overly tight bust, the (lack of) posture...!

Wow!...That moon bump/preg stomach does not look real AT ALL! ( on Rachael)
 
Reactions: 28
I'm certain she'll stage a real fucking car crash one day soon. Maybe she'll even find a tunnel for it.
 
Reactions: 25
@Carpediem69 I loved the video you shared with me with the corgis xx.
There was more than one cute clips and I watched more than once..one was even with the corgi watching the queen on TV lol xx.

Thank you again and let me give you a strawberry to say thanks .



@Cinnamon.girl .
I've just saw your fat corgi pic while looking at my reactions to my pics...that made me smile xx
 
Reactions: 35
I agree with this so much!!!!!!!!!!
Why doesn't the RF remove the phantom children from THE LINE until they are fully vetted ? Why can't the TITLES be put to sleep until reason and maturity is demonstrated? All reasonable things to do. Put the responsibility on H&M to repair and make amends. The sugars are a very small group in the US, and a good portion of them are bots. It is the people of the UK who matter. So simple to quiet all of this down. The failure of the RF to do this makes them look GUILTY , with lots to hide.
 
Reactions: 30
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.