Of course it is, it’s 100% factual! I strongly suggest that everyone use the credibility of this fabulous animated series to develop all their beliefs 
2 Likes
Um…ok?
3 Likes
I believe I was the first to mention the South Park episode on this thread, because I’ve been watching it since its inception. And I’m a big fan. Not every episode is winner, such as episode 1 of this season. But the H&M episode was hilarious. And I don’t follow the Royals at all.
When SP satirizes world news, historical and/or religious events, etc., such as the episodes on Mormons, Scientology, Trump, Bin Laden, Pandemic, etc., they do go to great lengths to get the facts essentially correct. They even have posted messages on screen during episodes to the effect “This is what “xyz” believes” or “This is what actually happened.”
As @twoinanddone mentioned above, in the H&M episode, South Park went to painstaking detail to use the animated version of the H&M magazine covers on one of the character’s houses.
So, while they have substituted the Queen and Prince of Canada instead of England, change the names and such, SP is generally accurate, but for the hyperbole to get laughs.
8 Likes
I’m not a H&M hater, but did find the episode very funny. I do not like Charles and Camilla and haven’t since the early days, but that doesn’t mean I think everything they do is rigged to hurt Meghan, or that everything Meghan says is great or ‘her truth’. I don’t believe her father sold her out and think that H&M could have done more for him to get to the wedding without hitting all the potholes he did.
I just don’t understand what they want. They said they wanted to resign their duties and they did. What now?
I read recently that Eugenie and Jack might move to the LA area and Harry is helping them find somewhere to live. Hope that happens and at least some cousins are close by for his kids.
I really think the biggest loss is to H&M’s children. Not the publicity but the cousins, aunts, uncles, traditions, holidays. H&M can do what they want, be on the cover of Vogue, accept awards, give interviews, but the kids will learn how to read soon and will know that they could have attended great fun things in England all their lives and weren’t given the opportunity to do so.
2 Likes
My understanding is all they wanted is not to be portrayed as monsters. Eating avocado? Must have blood on hand. Touching a pregnant belly? Selfish (or whatever), wearing a certain piece of clothing? Flaunting royal protocol! I mean they just wanted not to have to deal with this sort of absolute hatred.
4 Likes
That’s probably a little harsh. I think people use the word “hate” far too easily. I can’t really think of anyone I personally hate. But oh well…
I do think that if I had the money that mast most say they do, I could effectively disappear - if that’s what I wanted to do. So, I do think they want attention- yes.
2 Likes
They didn’t want to go into hiding! They just wanted to step back from 100% royal duties, but just do a percentage. Support the Queen, but forge their own income, too. I’m sure they knew they couldn’t go “unseen” or private to do that. I believe the whole privacy thing is media made-up and South Park doesn’t help for those who already believed it.
I have mixed feelings about all of them after I read Spare. I’ve never been a Charles/Camilla fan anyway. I read a biography on him that actually leaned on his favor, but still not a fan. I don’t like William/Catherine as much anymore and feel the same about Harry. I guess I think they are all just a bunch of entitled people living off the backs of the public, doing everything they can to continue to freeload.
3 Likes
Everybody should just go and watch the South Park episode. It’s available online for free on the South Park website. It’s pretty darn funny. “Worldwide Privacy Tour!”
6 Likes
The last 30+ years have taught the royal family that attempting to mix commercial and royal activities is disastrously misguided. There were huge problems in the late 80s when Edward tried the same (this was the low point: How Royal Family's 'excruciating' 80s game show became TV disaster of the year).
So since then the line has been clear: you are either 100% in or 100% out. Meghan might not have understood this history, but Harry absolutely should have known and told her not to even try.
4 Likes
Agree!
I don’t think the Queen has ‘part time’ royals. Would they only get half a house to live in? Only get invited to be on the balcony for half the waving? They asked, the answer was No, so they had to make a decision of what to do based on what the offer was. They decided. I don’t even think that was the wrong decision, but they didn’t get the reaction they expected.
All celebrities get mocked on SNL, in magazines, on the late night shows. Some take it in stride, and usually those doing the jokes, roasts, skits do respect some of the wishes of the celebs, like leaving their kids out of it, not mocking race or religion, focusing on the public parts of their lives. But usually the celebs that join in with the jokes have a little better outcome. Presidents have appears on SNL and late night talk shows and even poke fun at themselves. I thought Harry did a pretty good job on the late night shows he appeared on.
Maybe he should try hosting SNL?
It will be a while before their kids are reading about the British monarchy. But when that day comes, who knows how they will react. Isn’t it just as likely that they will think “Thank heavens Mom and Dad got us out of that fishbowl. It would be awful to have all those newspapers and social media sites reporting our every move. And there is no way I’d be willing to courtesy (or kneel or bow) to my grandparents! (And maybe even my aunt and uncle; I’m not clear on the rules.) And when I want to marry, I’m sure not going to ask my grandpa for permission!”
Moreover, it’s clear that William and Harry weren’t close long before the split, so there’s no guarantee that Harry’s kids would have been spending much time with his brother’s kids even if he and M had stayed in the UK.
Moreover, there are 2 siblings involved and it is not unlikely that they will react differently.
3 Likes
To all of you saying a version of “that’s how the Royal Family have always done it and H&M should have known better”. Would that be an acceptable answer in a business or corporate environment? Just because it’s always been done that way doesn’t mean that’s the best way to do it. I think a part of Harry’s motivation is that he wanted to push back on the ‘that’s how it’s always been done’ because he has seen first-hand the negative effect the “way it’s always been done” has had on his family.
7 Likes
Because there are so many commonalities between a 1000 year old hereditary monarchy and a corporation? How many family businesses have to plan for their descendants to remain in charge of a multi-billion dollar enterprise for the next 1000 years?
5 Likes
There is a Netflix show called “Explained”, with 30 minute segments discussing all sorts of issues. One was Royalty and how they’ve managed to exist in modern times. Fun to watch.
Harry himself said as much. In an interview I read around the time the book was released he said he wanted to save his family from themselves. (Now, whether the rest of the family wants to be saved by Harry is another question.) He speculated that in time his family may thank him for writing his book. Frankly that strikes me as wishful thinking, but who knows. However dysfunctional, if the current methods are working for them, what incentive do they have to change? I don’t regularly follow the British media so I don’t know, but maybe his book and other public statements are winning over public opinion. The public might then put pressure on the royal family to change their ways.
It looks to me like a type of situation I’ve seen before in people who grew up in dysfunctional families. Harry is newly “therapized”, seeing his life with new eyes, and really wants the rest of his family to see things the way he sees them too. My guess is it’s far more likely they won’t. We don’t always get what we need, let alone what we want, from our family of origin. Fortunately, we can create the sort of family we want in our new families, and he seems to be doing that.
6 Likes
And yet he wants to use the money from the ‘way it always was’ to change things to the way he wants it.
I think he has every right to walk away and take with him the things that are his - his mother’s money, his property (if he has any). He had to leave behind things that weren’t his or only ‘lent’ to him like certain titles, his military honors (not the pension or things he earned), his houses he rented. What his father gives him is up to his father.
I came to accept this in my own life by reading self help books like Adult Children of Alcoholics. A lot of it is about control and power. Harry is still struggling with loss (or giving up) power, still struggling with what he can control. He still has a platform and can get a lot of coverage. IMO, he needs to use that to go forward, to establish his fundraising programs, to start earning money he wants to use for those programs (and for himself).
IMO, he’d get a lot further by going along with some of the platforms making fun of him. As I said, go on SNL, laugh along with South Park, invite more interviews with lower level media (not Oprah but People Magazine or one that Meghan has some connection with).
2 Likes
Absolutely the opposite, he’s alienated the vast majority of the British public. There’s a strong “keep calm and carry on” mentality in the UK that objects vehemently to airing your dirty laundry in public. My mother is typical, her reaction is “he needs to shut up and grow up”. There’s no way H&M could move back to the UK now.
6 Likes
My 95 year old mother-in-law who lived through the Blitz is not a fan and doesn’t have a lot of sympathy for him either.
3 Likes
Meghan is simply not likable. She/they want to make it about race, or a difference of opinion on royal duties, or whatever. But things would be very different for Harry if she weren’t such a troublemaker.
5 Likes