JAN MOIR: If Harry & Meghan care so much about fairness, they should demand ‘bullying’ 보고서가 출판되다
What do Harry and Meghan stand for these days? That is the question I ask myself as the Sussexes gallop hither and thither across America, cherry-picking good causes or tragic incidents or graveyards upon which to lavish their concern.
They spare no one, not even themselves, when they offer comfort to all. Sometimes with a camera crew in tow to capture every last glutinous drop of Sussexian compassion, 누군가에게 '필요한 모든 수단을 동원하여' 작업을 완료하도록 요청하고 공작이 자주 발견된 지역의 지도를 표시했습니다..
You can depend on these self-styled royals-in-exile to turn up, perhaps even uninvited, but always mustard keen to be seen applying their dripping poultice of paternalistic sympathy onto society’s wounds.
What do Harry and Meghan stand for these days? That is the question I ask myself as the Sussexes gallop hither and thither across America, cherry-picking good causes or tragic incidents or graveyards upon which to lavish their concern
메건과 해리, please exactly describe your brand of modern compassion, I hear you all cry. And they oblige on their Archewell website, explaining that ‘compassion means listening with open ears to the suffering of communities’.
And then to channel their troubles and woes ‘into action for those who need it the most’. Unless they happen to be members of their own staff, 물론이야.
For now we learn that a long-awaited report into how allegations of staff bullying by the Duchess of Sussex were handled by Palace officials — and what, 만약에 어떠한, changes to working practices were made — will never be published. 뭐?
No comment, nothing to see here. Please move along quietly as frantic courtiers beat the retreat on the royal drums of discretion.
Fearing heightened tensions between the Sussexes and The Firm — or future damaging revelations from the eternally peeved pair — the findings will never be made public.
대신, the report will be sealed inside a lead-lined casket, tied to a ten-ton gargoyle and hurled into the depths of the Buckingham Palace lake.
Yet from the school shooting in Texas to the abortion debate to the war in Ukraine, nothing escapes their attention. Protesters are pictured above outside the Supreme Court
화기애애한 미국인 커플, 비행기에서 뛰어내린 후 성관계를 시도하다 결국 병원에 실려? What a slap in the face for those employees who risked personal and reputational damage by speaking out about the Duchess’s alleged bullying in the first place. How must they feel, realising that they are merely collateral damage in a much bigger war?
The Palace should be ashamed of themselves. 몇 년 전, a number of royal staff members believed they were targeted, bullied and persecuted by the Duchess of Sussex when she was a working royal. It was said that she left staff in tears and drove two assistants out of their jobs — although her lawyers claimed this was untrue and that Meghan was the victim of an ‘orchestrated smear campaign’.
The problem is that now no one is willing to have a tootle on the trumpet of truth.
So we will never know what really happened — which suits the Sussexes just fine.
당분간, it is becoming clear that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are officially bombproof. The sinking of this report suggests that the Palace are terrified of them and that no one can dare criticise them, else they will be accused of racism, 성 차별, colonialism or of bullying a poor, motherless son who never got over himself and never will.
It just makes things worse. For in the end, the smears — on both sides — only get bigger and bigger, an oil slick of obfuscation and mystery that drags everyone into its greasy maw.
이번 주, some demented Meghanites are even suggesting that the report named the Duchess of Cambridge as the bully in residence and not the sainted Meghan. And that is the reason why it has been hushed up.
당분간, it is becoming clear that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are officially bombproof. The sinking of this report suggests that the Palace are terrified of them and that no one can dare criticise them, else they will be accused of racism, 성 차별, colonialism or of bullying a poor, motherless son who never got over himself and never will
Given that the report was looking into HR procedures, this cannot possibly be true. And if it were the case, you can be sure the Sussexes would be clamouring for clarity. Meghan would be insisting the report is published to clear her name.
B ut what happened to listening with open ears, 메건과 해리?! If the couple really were the champions of the underdog that they endlessly purport to be, if they truly are really those doughty fighters of oppression and defenders of justice, then they would insist — nay, they would DEMAND — that the report is published.
Those poor, crushed serfs, toiling in the royal palaces, getting shouted at for leaving the paperclips in a mess, left to suffer alone in the darkness, with no lovely duchessy poultice to alleviate their pain.
Were they silent or were they silenced by the Palace? That is the question Oprah is not going to be asking any time soon. 그 동안에, Meghan continues to use her UK title to meddle in U.S. politics and no one says a word.
‘Appalled’ Dakota should have read the Fifty Shades books first…
Dakota Johnson described the making of the Fifty Shades of Grey films as ‘psychotic’ in an interview for Vanity Fair magazine.
No matter that she became a huge star after being cast as Anastasia Steele in the bonktastic three-film franchise, Dakota complained about the author of the books who interfered and maintained creative control over the film adaptations.
That would be E. 엘. 제임스, aka Erika Mitchell from Willesden, whom the actress described as ‘incredibly cheesy’. 과연. Fifty Shades was a huge success, just not with fans of literature.
In E. 엘. James’s deathly prose ‘desire pools dark and deadly’ in every man’s groin, while nipples have a habit of ‘pebbling’ when no one is looking.
And when James writes that an ‘erection springs free’ she doesn’t mean a new fence got knocked over in a gale.
No wonder Dakota was appalled.
But didn’t she read the books before she signed up?
Dakota Johnson described the making of the Fifty Shades of Grey films as ‘psychotic’ in an interview for Vanity Fair magazine
세의 나이에 67, Carole Middleton wore a white denim jacket to Wimbledon
세의 나이에 67, Carole Middleton wore a white denim jacket to Wimbledon.
‘Was that entirely wise?’, I asked myself, in the manner of Sergeant Wilson questioning the sartorial choices of Captain Mainwaring.
For the denim jacket is difficult! Fraught with danger! Nigella was an early adopter, Bella Hadid likes hers and Gina Coladangelo wore a blue one to accompany Matt Hancock to the Chelsea Flower Show.
She looked lovely, but one fashionista sniped that Gina was another ‘middle-class woman wearing their utterly unoriginal jackets over their surrendered wife dresses, thinking they look edgy in their Veja trainers’.
So bitchy! But is it true?
Tomorrow night the new BBC2 series My Life As A Rolling Stone begins with a winning profile of Mick Jagger. The older he gets, the more I love him — is that wrong?
세의 나이에 78, Mick explains to the cameras that he is reluctant to be portrayed as the band’s ‘control freak’. 왜? ‘Because that is boring,’그는 말한다. It is clearly not how he sees himself, although Keith Richards points out that Jagger is indeed in control because ‘someone has to be’. And it is certainly not going to be Keith, who always looks as though he is going to nod off over his guitar.
At the Hyde Park concert last weekend, the Stones sounded better than ever and there were even a few good jokes. ‘Elton John played here last night, Paul McCartney is at Glastonbury and now you have got us,’ Jagger told the audience. ‘I just want to thank you for giving all us newcomers a chance.’
If only Emma was as bovvered as Andy
얼마나 사랑스러운! Wimbledon is here at last and our marvellous British tennis stars are… oh dear. 수요일에, Andy Murray and Emma Raducanu both crashed out of the tournament in the second round.
This means that their dreams — and ours — are over for another year. Yet the manner of their exits could not have been more different.
After being beaten in straight sets by rising French star Caroline Garcia, Emma came across as someone who had lost her scarf at Wimbledon station, not someone who had lost at Wimbledon. ‘There’s no pressure; I am only 19,’ she said, with a shrug of insouciance that only youth can afford.
그 나이에, life stretches before you like a golden ribbon; endless, limitless. It is only when you get to Andy Murray’s age (35) that you realise you’re playing ‘beat the clock’.
When Andy was 19, he beat Andy Roddick in the third round at Wimbledon and was distraught when he lost to Marcos Baghdatis in the fourth round. It would take seven more years of sweat, toil and tears before he actually won the tournament. For Andy it was always a big deal. Every second of it. Even today, he still burns with the fire and ambition of a true champion.
이에 비해, Emma is part of a generation of athletes who seem to be more concerned about their mental health than winning titles. They are just not that bovvered!
While that is an admirable attitude, it doesn’t always lead to a groaning trophy cabinet. And if you don’t want to win, what the hell is the point?
Speaking of Wimbledon, two things. 첫째로, who let all the oiks in? During Murray’s match against John Isner, the crowd sounded and behaved like beered-up hooligans at a football match. Why didn’t the umpire tell them to shut up?
두 번째로, we need to talk about Andrew Castle. The Partridge-esque BBC tennis commentator gets worse every year. ‘Isner a family man. Two children to Murray’s three,’그는 말했다, as if that were somehow a victory for the home team. He also talked about Andy’s ‘educated hands’ when he was playing ‘undeniable tennis’.
Worst of all were the repeated references to Isner’s 6ft 10in height. We don’t need to hear that he has to go ‘a long way down to pull up his socks’.
Go to war over that wink
Was it fair of Dominic Raab at PMQs to mention that Angela Rayner was at Glyndebourne? 물론이야! If it had been Boris Johnson attending the opera or stuffing his face with champagne, you can bet that Keir Starmer would have had something to say about it.
Yet many, including Angela herself, are trying to turn this into the latest battle in the class war. ‘Never let anyone tell you you’re not good enough,’ she tweeted about the incident.
Oh come off it. That is not what Raab was suggesting at all.
I’m far more offended by the fact that he winked at her across the despatch box.
That was far more troubling. Indefensible! And just a bit creepy.
I’m far more offended by the fact that he winked at her across the despatch box