Remarkably, people are still talking about the Duchess of Sussex’s Archetypes podcast about the “bimbo” trope/stereotype. Some of it – especially in the British papers – was just misogynists gleefully running headlines with “Meghan” and “bimbo” together. But the rest of the “controversy” has been really stupid and awful, with people putting words in Meghan’s mouth or refusing to simply listen to what she said about working on Deal or No Deal. She was basically talking about how she felt like she was being objectified and treated like a bimbo, so she quit and moved on to other projects. At no point did she say “Deal or No Deal was trash, I hated it completely” or “everyone sucked on that show” or anything like that. There was nuance to what she said about being objectified (while still being grateful for a job) and that nuance was completely lost on so many people. So, how does Meghan feel about the “bimbo mess”? Us Weekly’s sources claim that they know.
Rising above. Meghan Markle “doesn’t regret” speaking up about her experience on Deal or No Deal, a source exclusively reveals in the new issue of Us Weekly. The Duchess of Sussex, 41, recently recalled what it was like to be one of the “briefcase girls” on the NBC game show, alleging on her “Archetypes” podcast that she felt like the job reduced her to a “bimbo.” Her comments quickly raised eyebrows, but the Suits alum is choosing to take the high road.
“This negative backlash is extremely disappointing to Meghan, but she’s learned a long time ago not to get too cut up or demotivated by those who wish to dwell in negativity, especially over something so trivial as a job she left many years ago,” the insider tells Us. “She knows that there are certain critics who will go to great lengths to stir the pot and call her out as a hypocrite in any way possible.”
The California alum, who wed Prince Harry in 2018, “doesn’t find it fair or easy to deal with” criticism from the public, the source adds. “Her general response is to shrug her shoulders and say it is what it is.”
Per the insider, the Bench author “has said what she wanted to say” about the topic — and wouldn’t take it back. “She’s moved on and hopes others can now do the same,” the source tells Us.
I actually hope this isn’t how Meghan feels! Granted, she’s doing the right thing by not addressing it or doing a follow-up mini-pod or what have you. But if she really thinks that the issue is about “something so trivial as a job she left many years ago” – like, girl, you were the one who brought it up! You told your “bimbo” story in your podcast, don’t try to play it off like “who cares at this point”! Which is why I doubt this is actually from Meghan or her people. The whole point of that story is that even Meghan has worked at jobs which put too much value on her looks and not her intelligence.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.
-
- 156795, Meghan Markle spectates from the stands on day ten of the US Open Tennis Championships. Queens, New York – Wednesday September 7, 2016. Photograph: © Ron Angle, PacificCoastNews. Los Angeles Office (PCN): +1 310.822.0419 UK Office (Photoshot): +44 (0) 20 7421 6000 sales@pacificcoastnews.com FEE MUST BE AGREED PRIOR TO USAGE
-
- 156795, Meghan Markle spectates from the stands on day ten of the US Open Tennis Championships. Queens, New York – Wednesday September 7, 2016. Photograph: © Ron Angle, PacificCoastNews. Los Angeles Office (PCN): +1 310.822.0419 UK Office (Photoshot): +44 (0) 20 7421 6000 sales@pacificcoastnews.com FEE MUST BE AGREED PRIOR TO USAGE
-
- 78048, NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK- Thursday May 17, 2012. Meghan Markle attends the USA Network Upfront 2012 at Alice Tully Hall at Lincoln Center in New York City. Photograph: © Demis Maryannakis, PacificCoastNews.com **FEE MUST BE AGREED PRIOR TO USAGE** **E-TABLET/IPAD & MOBILE PHONE APP PUBLISHING REQUIRES ADDITIONAL FEES** LOS ANGELES OFFICE:+1 310 822 0419 LONDON OFFICE:+44 20 8090 4079,Image: 527612712, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: WORLD RIGHTS, DIRECT SALES ONLY UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE IN CAPTION – Fee Payable Upon Reproduction – For queries contact Avalon.red – sales@avalon.red London: +44 (0) 20 7421 6000 Los Angeles: +1 (310) 822 0419 Berlin: +49 (0) 30 76 212 251 Madrid: +34 91 533 4289, Model Release: no, Credit line: Demis Maryannakis, PacificCoastNews.com / Avalon
-
- 108416, LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM – Monday November 11, 2013. Meghan Markle arrives for ‘The Hunger Games: Catching Fire’ premiere at Leicester Square in London. **UK, FRANCE, AUS, NZ, CHINA, HONG KONG & TAIWAN OUT** Photograph: © i-Images, PacificCoastNews **FEE MUST BE AGREED PRIOR TO USAGE** **E-TABLET/IPAD & MOBILE PHONE APP PUBLISHING REQUIRES ADDITIONAL FEES** LOS ANGELES OFFICE: +1 310 822 0419 LONDON OFFICE: +44 20 8090 4079,Image: 528868499, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: WORLD RIGHTS, DIRECT SALES ONLY UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE IN CAPTION – Fee Payable Upon Reproduction – For queries contact Avalon.red – sales@avalon.red London: +44 (0) 20 7421 6000 Los Angeles: +1 (310) 822 0419 Berlin: +49 (0) 30 76 212 251 Madrid: +34 91 533 4289, Model Release: no, Credit line: i-Images, PacificCoastNews / Avalon
-
- 108954, LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM – Tuesday November 19, 2013. Meghan Markle attends The Fourth Annual London Global Gift Gala at the ME Hotel in London. **UK, FRANCE, AUS, NZ, CHINA, HONG KONG & TAIWAN OUT** Photograph: © i-Images, PacificCoastNews **FEE MUST BE AGREED PRIOR TO USAGE** **E-TABLET/IPAD & MOBILE PHONE APP PUBLISHING REQUIRES ADDITIONAL FEES** LOS ANGELES OFFICE: +1 310 822 0419 LONDON OFFICE: +44 20 8090 4079,Image: 528999238, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: WORLD RIGHTS, DIRECT SALES ONLY UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE IN CAPTION – Fee Payable Upon Reproduction – For queries contact Avalon.red – sales@avalon.red London: +44 (0) 20 7421 6000 Los Angeles: +1 (310) 822 0419 Berlin: +49 (0) 30 76 212 251 Madrid: +34 91 533 4289, Model Release: no, Credit line: i-Images, PacificCoastNews / Avalon
-
- Meghan Markle attends the USA Network 2013 Upfront event at Pier 36 on May 16, 2013 in New York City.,Image: 544259673, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: WORLD RIGHTS – Fee Payable Upon Reproduction – For queries contact Photoshot – sales@photoshot.com London: +44 (0) 20 7421 6000 Florida: +1 239 689 1883 Berlin: +49 (0) 30 76 212 251, Model Release: no, Credit line: Dennis Van Tine / Avalon
-
- -West Hollywood, CA – 01/24/2013 ELLE Women In Television Celebration Presented By Hearts On Fire Diamonds And Wella Professionals -PICTURED: Meghan Markle -PHOTO by: Sara De Boer/startraksphoto.com -SDL_5300 Editorial – Rights Managed Image – Please contact www.startraksphoto.com for licensing fee Startraks Photo New York, NY For licensing please call 212-414-9464 or email sales@startraksphoto.com Featuring: Meghan Markle Where: West Hollywood, California, United States When: 24 Jan 2013 Credit: Sara De Boer/startraksphoto.com
-
- October 10, 2011: Meghan Markle attending The 2011 Distinguished Entertainment Industry Awards held at the Beverly Hilton Hotel in Beverly Hills, California. Mandatory Credit: INFevents.com Ref: infuslv-07/Orken|sp| Featuring: Meghan Markle Where: Beverly Hills, California, United States When: 10 Oct 2011 Credit: INFevents.com
I think that this is how she feels. Not in the sense that the job was too trivial to talk about but yes, it’s being played up as “another one of Meghan’s lies.” Why address each and every one given that anyone will focus on anything she says to try to make it seem like she’s a liar? And I mean, the job *was* trivial even if something that developed her perspective on things.
I don’t think so. Meghan ain’t feeling them… she’s entitled to her personal experience. She is moving forward… let them naysayers get mired in the mud with their own unsolicited variations, of Meghan’s truth.
You can be disappointed and yet still not all that invested in it. Of course she’s moving forward. It’s why we don’t ever hear her rebutting any of them. There’s no reason.
Totally maid up crap. This wording is not how Meghan expresses herself. Especially since she wants to have discussions around the archetypes. I believe it’s the opposite: she would have welcomed honest discussions around this specific archetype.
And, there is zero need to clarify words she didn’t say, who is gonna clarify other’s lies and misrepresentation? That’s odd. So, why do WE even buy into this click bite nonsense, started by the UK tabloids/ Daily Fail and parroted by the world gossip media?
This obviously wasn’t from her since they don’t use sources or outlets like this. Why would it be beyond the realm of possibility that she continues to have a baseline disappointment that there is an industry created to slander her but still keeps it moving? Because this isn’t a discussion, this is just people wanting to get headlines riding on what she said, or claiming it’s “another lie”.
She DID welcome honest discussions around this archetype, on the podcast itself.
@C, I agree so hard with this, “Why would it be beyond the realm of possibility that she continues to have a baseline disappointment that there is an industry created to slander her but still keeps it moving?”
I think you nailed it. What human being wouldn’t feel that way?
Not only all that, but the costume person was also telling her to suck in her gut when she was clearly only a size two. So that has got to mess with a woman’s head. She left for the sake of her mental and physical well-being. Objectify someone like that, and their whole purpose and life revolves around looks. That’s not what she’s about and she has every right to feel how she felt and express it. Maybe it will help steer other young women away from the damaging obsession there is to police woman’s bodies.
What she said about Deal or No Deal isn’t new, is it? Didn’t she say something like 10 years ago about what an uncomfortable experience it was? I can imagine her thinking “it is what it is” about the totally predictable backlash, but also thinking that her story was pertinent to the subject of her podcast.
Yea I think this is how she really feels. It definitely doesn’t feel good when your words are twisted and your meaning totally lost. Again, we live in a headline grabbing world now so obviously anything she says that’s mildly a criticism (wrong or right) will be hyped. I don’t think this is gonna change and probably will get worse as more of their projects roll out. Hope they have a really good PR team to help filter to limit any twisting of words
@Hangonamin: I Couldn’t have said it better. The mainstream gutter press purposefully conflates Meghan’s subjective perception as regard to her role on the show, with blistering criticism on the show itself. Her intimate sense of purpose and personal impressions are being overinterpreted and deflected as ungratefulness towards a decent-paying job.
Had Meghan criticized the show’s policies, she would have been labeled a difficult diva. Now that she shares her deliberations on the adequacy of work with one’s abilities and future prospects, she’s dismissed as a difficult diva. No matter what Meghan says and which angle she chooses to deliver it, she will be wrong in the eyes of some derangers.
It takes a really strong person to survive media mischaracterizations designed to elicit an emotional response comparable to entrapment and claustrophobia.
I know a highly educated, multilingual model and she pretty much confirms what Meghan says. You can be the smartest person in the room, but nobody cares what you have to say since you are a walking mannikin as far as they care.
All the crititism of her from people who wish they could get paid to look pretty and didn’t actually listen to what she said only proves her point. Whoopie Goldberg dismissed her feelings of being objectified, by claiming nobody cared what she looked like since she was like a living prop on the stage while people focused on the money, not realizing thats the very definition of objectification.
“ You can be the smartest person in the room, but nobody cares what you have to say since you are a walking mannikin as far as they care.”
Isn’t that a models literal job description though? Not to be cruel, but models are hired because of their looks. Your job is to walk/stand/pose in clothes. You’re not there to do data analytics.
I think that’s where some of us are confused. Like, yes, they don’t care what you think. They only care what you look like. Because you’ve been hired to look good. To be 1000% clear, I don’t think that excuses poor treatment of the models. They’re still professionals there to do a job.
If I am totally misunderstanding the industry, I am happy to be wrong!
Someone can be hired for their looks, but it doesn’t mean their intelligence should be discounted. That’s the point that I think she was making. Yes, they were hired for their looks, but it sounds like if they tried to step out of the “dumb bimbo” mold to maybe discuss being in law school, politics, being double major graduates from prestigious universities they were shut down. That’s the problem. I don’t think she was asking why weren’t they given a lectern during the show to hold their own Ted Talks. Just because someone is working behind the counter at Wendy’s doesn’t mean we can’t have a conversation about inflation. It sounds like the expectation was only for them to be pretty and empty shells.
@Dee: Yes, that was the expectation. It was the entire job description. She took the job that was never advertised as anything else, it was literally modeling. And it turned out she didn’t like it. That’s fine but honestly, it’s not that deep and I‘m still not sure it was a great example for the podcast. The person at Wendy‘s can discuss inflation but frankly, that is not what I am looking for from the person behind a fast food counter.
I think the problem – if we can even call it that – is that the story didn’t illustrate what she was trying to say.
i totally agree. i think the job description was you are hired to look pretty and hold a briefcase. no one is asking the models for their dissertation on the climate crisis. nor anyone at home would be interested in that. i don’t think there’s anything wrong with saying i’m hiring attractive people to hold a briefcase and be compensated for their time. and there is NOTHING wrong with a woman who chooses that as well. i think Meghan was probably trying to say hey i didn’t personally find that fulfilling to be up there only for my looks so that’s why i moved on but i was grateful for the experience and it opened doors. i feel like where it got misconstrued was where she threw words like bimbo and objectified in there and her ex-coworker probs felt belittled because that was not what they took out of it. she could have used the example to say women’s looks are more commoditized then men and that blurs lines when a woman wants to be more than her looks. all in all, i think there could have been better examples, like in situations where she was expected to speak her mind or be intelligent and she was distilled into her looks.
@Emmi- . I think the story does illustrate that we don’t realize how much we internalize until we are in the moment and realize that something bothers us more than we realized. And obviously that’s fine if that isn’t what you want from hypothetical Wendy’s person, as long as you don’t also say you’re just a cashier, and you are only here to give me my bacon classic no one wants to hear what you have to say, you knew what this job was when you took it , how dare you be upset. No one deserves that regardless of what a job is “advertised” as, and pointing out that you don’t like it, and bounced worked well to me. Again, I agree it was/is a stupid talking point taken out of context, but everything she says is taken out of context now so I doubt she cares.
What Emma said. Her actual job title was “briefcase beauty.”
What bothers me is that THESE are the types of jobs that women have to accept, being paid to be thin, pretty, and silent. You can say “well, that’s the entire job description,” but my point is, yes, that IS the entire job description, and THAT is a problem in the industry and society in general.
Since Meghan worked other modeling jobs and didn’t mention them, DOND must have gone above and beyond in the objectification. Once you hire a woman and then are still constantly telling her to suck it in, padding her bra, over-doing the make-up, etc., it likely seems like just that much too much. It’s time for the man as host, females as eye-candy template of game shows to be done. Even Price is Right started having male models finally in 2012.
Sorry what I meant is that they carry that stigma evwn when when they are off the clock.
Nobody expects them to spout on about optical physics when they are opening briefcases, but off stage they are given a dismissive wave if they attempt to engage someone on an intellectual level.
I agree 100%
I think Whoopie was only partially right. The contestants of course focused on the money, who cares how the girl looks. But the audience at home was checking out the eye candy more. And they are where the money for the show is.
But honestly, I’m surprised Meghan would have beem surprised at the backlash. Everytime anyone only slightly criticizes their past jobs, it happens. Surely she knew it will be the same with her.
We have no idea if M was “surprised at the backlash.” Because usWEAKLY doesnt know shidt.
Whoopie say ‘just take the job’ it’s a gig. That what she did! She took the job! but like many jobs, the description does not fit the reality. she is, like many other people talking about former jobs, saying why she Left. I have seen musician saying touring became too much they couldn’t cope, so I guess we could say, that their job description, they should know?
I’m sure it’s all very true and demoralizing, but at the same time… Your highly educated model was hired to look pretty. She knew it, everyone knew it. Especially if it’s an old show like that, where they do things a certain way and you know exactly what you’re being hired for. Why would people want to hear what she has to say? She wasn’t hired to say anything, she was hired to look a certain way. I struggle to imagine a situation where a model’s input can be genuinely necessary and very helpful, especially if we are talking about smarts in general and not, say, ideas about the photoshoot, which may be somewhat relevant, but still, I’m sure, not terribly appreciated, because other people have been hired to do that part. Clever outsiders solving problems for experts at the 11th hour mostly happen in the movies, IMO.
I think people are underestimating the power of unemployment. Sometimes you rationalize “yah I can do this” and then you’re in it and it’s too much. This was a girl trying to get a toehold in a hugely competitive business. You need to accrue hours to get a SAG card. As I understand it, Deal or No Deal checked a lot of boxes. That said, you get in the job and you realize you can’t do it. A lot of us have had similar experiences. For me it was sales and customer service. I had to go back to school. Everyone has their limits. She found hers.
LMAO Why do wannabe critics of everything M says and does, insist on MISREPRESENTING what she says and does, in order to make a fallacious argument? Jeeeeebus!
Case in point: “Why would people want to hear what she has to say? She wasn’t hired to say anything…”
Meghan never said she was hired to say anything. She never said she wanted folks to hear anything she had to say. She never said she wanted to say anything, FFS.
FYI it IS possible to treat someone as if they DONT have a brain WITHOUT that person saying anything.
Contrarily, it IS possible to treat someone as if they do have a brain/are an intelligent human being, WITHOUT that person saying anything.
And it IS possible to BEHAVE intelligently and be viewed as such WITHOUT saying anything.
When some old woman in a position of power screams at a young woman from across a room: “YOU GIRL-OVER-THERE-WHOSE-NAME-I-CANT-PRONOUNCE-AND-DONT-CARE-TO, SUCK IT IN!!!!”
How gauche. How uncouth. How unintelligent. How seemingly brainless.
How despicable do you have to be to not treat other human beings with even the barest modicum of respect, such that it is clear that you value them both for their outward beauty as well as their brain?
@Tessa if you have the time, listen to the episode. You’ll realize you’re stating the obvious and asking the wrong question.
@ Kingston 100%!!
Tessa, you have an interesting perspective. It’s possible that the models who are of average intelligence may find they are better able to be objectified–I’m not saying that’s true, but I’m saying it’s possible. Take intelligent women who are in a job that objectifies you and I believe it would be harder to bear. I’m of an age that when I started working women were still trying to find equality in the work place (and we still have a long ways to go today), and yes you would definitely be objectified by some men in the office. I didn’t quit, because I needed the job. I suspect that models, who have a short shelf life, are going to try to make as much money as possible because they will hit an age when they will no longer be wanted.
I am opposed to telling any woman that “that’s the job and you knew it when you started working there”. Does that mean that they must LOVE to be objectified? No, it does not. It means they’re going to stay around until they can find another job and who knows how long that will take. Don’t make it the model’s fault that people are incapable of treating models like people and not a piece of cardboard.
Just because you’re hired to be a “mannequin” doesn’t mean you should be treated like a dummy. I’m not saying this is what Meghan experienced, but I can imagine that people in these positions are talked down to and not treated with respect. “Mannequin” says, “I have a question,” and gets brushed off and told not to think and just go where they’re told. “You. Come here right now. Suck in your gut. No one wants to see a woman with a gut on TV.” There are ways to treat people that don’t make them feel bad. There is absolutely a way to do this type of thing without making people feel like bimbos.
The tabs are riding the DOND nonsense because they can’t go after Meghan’s angry black woman podcast without tripping landmines. I doubt Meghan is crying in her wine glass now. Archetypes has been nominated for a People’s Choice Award for most popular podcast. If it wins it’s an F U to her critics. PCA airs on Dec. 6, the same day the Sussexes are honored in NYC for their work through Archwell (The RFK Ripple of Hope Award).
What a double whammy.
I saw the nomination, but it didn’t register with me that it was the same day as the Kennedy award in NYC. Double whammy, indeed.
KINGSTON- let’s not misrepresent what we’re saying either. I don’t think *anyone* here would argue that models deserve to be treated poorly. Nobody deserves that, especially at work, period.
However, it *is* odd to complain that nobody cares how smart you are when the job is being pretty. Being smart has literally nothing to do with it. I am specifically referring to MONLETTE’s comment.
I don’t go to my marketing job annoyed that nobody cares that I am really good at ceramics. One has nothing to do with the other.
@Colby it’s interesting that you’d complain that @Kingston is misrepresenting what you said when you are *in the same breathe* making an assertion that is a complete misrepresentation of what Meghan said. And it is that very misrepresentation that @Kingston is trying to help you with. Frankly, I understand their frustration.
Colby, bottom line? Why doesn’t everyone just treat everyone else–models included–as PEOPLE not objects. It doesn’t take intelligence to be treated like a real live person, but it does take willingness on the other person’s part to treat you better than an object.
When it comes to Meghan certain people have to find something to be outraged about no matter what. I wish they would at least listen to what she says or at the very least read the provided transcript of the podcast but expecting due diligence from racist haters is probably never going to happen. I’ve listened to that podcast episode twice and read the transcript and seen other articles printed a long time ago about that show, she was right once again and I wish people would stop telling other people that how they felt was invalid. People are allowed to feel how they feel, end of story.
I think this noise from US magazine is pure nonsense. Meghan accomplished her goal by discussing this Bimbo trope. How it is interpreted by other’s is not on her. She accomplished her goal by many folks pro or con discussing this trope. As the Sussexes printed in multiple outlets only their spokesperson speaks for them. I do believe from what I have seen, the Sussexes are on the other side and are fully aware of how the gutter media press brigade operates and frankly they pay them dust as we all should because the Sussexes are being used to supply many folks with money and talking points. I am hopeful @Spotify offers Meghan a huge contract because she is good at this and has a large audience of supporters supporting her.
On a shallower note; I hope she kept that burgundy two piece outfit because she looks great in it.
Double shallow and off topic here. You’re so right, it is truly a lovely colour on her.
She was discussing the bimbo archetype and chose to share her personal experience that best fit that. It was not meant to be a slur.
The press beat us over the head with “briefcase girl is after Harry’s money” and now they want to act like it was the most valued job ever? Nope.
How often were pictures of Meghan on Deal or No Deal used to diminish her? All the time and by the same people who then complain that she pointed out that the show objectified the women. They just didn’t want to be called out on their acceptance of a sexist trope.
I doubt that Meghan or people spoken to us Weekly I don’t think Meghan is thinking about the podcast bimbo episode . It’s funny how meghan usually criticize are completely silent about the newest episode instead they would rather revisit this episode to create more nonsensical drama to drum up drama .
Neither Meghan nor any of her friends etc spoke to Us Weekly.
That said, I can see her being disappointed in a…..that’s your takeaway???….kind of way. Like she was trying to make a point about how women are viewed in the world and the takeaway by many was “omg she criticized a past job!!! If it wasn’t for her then she could have quit!!!” which she did, so the criticism just makes no sense.
I don’t think her publicist spoke to US, but this is trivial. Meghan was telling a story about a job she hated but grateful for the money and exposure. This is something most people experience but people twisted her words around into something she didn’t say or mean. At this point Meghan knows that no matter what she says or does it’s going to get twisted. So better to ignore and move on. A response would also be attacked and probably make things worse.
We’re in about day 10 of the new 11th commandment, thou shalt not speak ill of Deal Or No Deal.
I’m still gobsmacked at this kerfuffle.
Owe the backlash not being able to understand nuance, sadly that’s just the norm now. Decades of dumbed down news and us-or-them politics have wrought a general inability to understand nuance.
MM is entitled to her telling her story on her podcast!! These people drive me nuts. I listened to the episode and she says nothing disparaging about anyone and i can see why she would have felt like a “bimbo.” Being told to suck in her stomach and forced to go to a bra station before going on stage would probably leave me feeling the same!!
FFS! usWEAKLY?????
Talk about scraping the bottom of the gossip barrel.
Seriously, they’re picking over everyone else’s leftovers.
I feel like this is US Weekly is trying to resurrect the bimbo “controversy” for clicks. People have moved on.
This is just more made-up nonsense from some wanker hunched over a computer at a British tabloid. The language stood out for me as not strictly American English. For instance…”she’s learned a long time ago not to get too cut up or demotivated by those who wish to dwell in negativity”. There are other expressions in the article that bely it’s someone from across the pond writing it who doesn’t know sh*t from snowflakes what Meghan thinks. Her podcasts are brilliant, each and every one of them, and I hope she gets that award.
Anytime you put any thoughts or opinions out for the public, in any form, you are going to get backlash from some people. Everyone who has ever been on the internet knows that. You can be a random person and write something pretty innocent and get viscious backlash from strangers all over the world and even major scumbag politicians. Your words will be twisted in every which way, you will be maligned and dragged through the mud, and it will get nasty. We can all see this play out every single day in every dinky little Facebook group that exists.
Getting nasty backlash is a feature of putting your thoughts/opinions out there for the public which is never, ever going away for anyone. Millions of completely ordinary people have gotten rid of social media completely for this reason.
This is something currently being faced by countless scientists and academics as the general public decides to weigh into it and generate backlash to concepts they have zero understanding of. And, a number of academics have left academia precisely because of this.
Nasty backlash will always be a feature of having a media career. However, nobody is forced to have a media career. There are many ways to make a living. When you’re 5+ years into it, nasty backlash is very much no longer a surprise.
Still doesn’t make it right! People spewing nasty comments without using civility and their critical thinking skills need to reset their moral compass!
Who is saying it’s right? Nothing is right about this world or the general public in it. However, deciding to have a global media career literally is about putting your thoughts and opinions out there for the nasty global general public with everything that entails.
Take someone like Howard Stern. Howard Stern had a backlash every 5 minutes which he rightfully deserved. He also courted it though because he has the personality type to enjoy and relish that kind of conflict. Getting people stirred up is very gratifying for him. If you don’t have that kind of personality type where you get your kicks when people are riled up, even if you’re not doing it deliberately, having a global media career will grow tiring.
See also: Kardashians. The general public is constantly saying every kind of horrific thing to and about them and their very young children, some of it they’ve courted and other aspects of it, I’m sure are scary and draining for them. However, they have the personality types that ultimately get off on it all. If you don’t have the personality type it will be tough.
lol, Lola. comparing her to Stern and Kardashians. and acting like this is reporting rather than made up by a fake “source” (the writer’s imaginary friend). anonymous sources do not speak for Meghan, as she has made clear. this entire line of thought is disingenuous.
Fortunately, none of this applies to Meghan, given that she has not uttered a word since the bimbo archetype aired over 9 days ago.
Oh, have you heard the latest episode about the angry black woman trope? It was a great listen, just like all the previous episodes. It aired 2 days ago and some folks have listened to it several times on several different devices just to make sure the listening numbers are way up there.
And oooh, oooh…….. spotify says their Q3 profits and numbers are record-breaking and they credit M’s podcast, “Archetypes” with being part of the reason for that.
Woooh chile!…….M’s taking no prisoners and leaving her pathetic critics to continue eating her dust while she continues to Rise.
5 Years later.
It’s awesome that the profits and numbers and ratings are so high. But if it keeps causing them damage and distress, is it worth it?
Seriously, @Lola, folks must resist the urge to infantilize Harry and Meghan. Its bad enough those shidteaters on salty isle insist on referring to 40-yr-old and 38 yr-old men as “the boys.”
The fact that H&M have been thru five long years of life-threatening bullying on a global scale, created and propagated by “powerful forces” and have come out on the other side THRIVING and living a life thats completely designed, managed and controlled by them, having built it from scratch (as Harry has said from his own mouth) is visible for everyone to see.
And to remove all doubt that theyre indeed managing their life on their own terms despite the fact that the global-scale bullying continues from shitdhole country, theyre not shy about telling anyone who wants to know, that they actively take care of their mental health with the same vigor with which they take care of their physical health.
Its all good. Any damage and distress that anyone believes H&M are experiencing, are being managed quite well.
We all have our cross to bear. H&M are global examples of how to carry it with grace and compassion for all.
Lola, you assume it causes them damage and distress. I doubt that H&M actually read all of the crap that’s written about them by the British media. That’s what they pay people to do. If lies are told that are actionable and will damage their credibility to make money for their philanthropic endeavors, then they will sue. What they are doing is actually the opposite of damage and distress. They’re telling their own story, which makes the bm rabid, because they’re the only ones who are supposed to make up H&M’s story. Just ask them.
It’s a podcast with hot current topics – of course there’s gonna possibly be some backlash. We can’t treat everything she does like it’s the Oprah interview. She telling/sharing her story, that’s fine, she is so welcome to do that. But at one point it’s going to wear her out because it’s going to get too personal, the backlash of explaining rewording everything is going to be brain draining and she’s gonna want to keep more of herself for her true everyday life.
I’d love a lighter podcast topic too.
I have a different take. My life couldn’t be any more different from Meghan’s. But I know how damaging it can be to mind and body to quietly keep weathering storms that others create just to make your life miserable. Meghan is letting go of the toxicity in a way that helps others too. Even if she gets criticism for it, I can’t see how it could be any more draining than continuing to keep all that garbage bottled up inside. I’m personally finding her podcast to be very healing and educational. The Dragon Lady episode was particularly illuminating because I’m not Asian. I learned a lot from it. If there comes a time when Meghan decides to move on to less weighty topics, I’m sure I’ll still tune in but I’m really thankful she’s covering the heavy stuff now and in such a professional manner.
DuchessOfCambridge, since I seriously doubt that she ever read all of the crap that’s written by the bm and carried forward to social media by the derangers, I don’t think you have to worry about it wearing her out. She gets to tell her story/truth when and how she chooses. Those who don’t want to listen don’t have to.
Meghan isn’t trying to just entertain people, so I doubt you’ll get a “lighter podcast topic”. She wants people to listen and then talk about it. People are definitely doing that, so she’s accomplished what she set out to do. She’s also shining a light on archetypes that have been used forever to keep women/black women in their place. I seriously doubt she ever thought that the topics she chose would not bring out the haters.
“ Which is why I doubt this is actually from Meghan or her people.”
YUP I completed agree with you, Kaiser. I don’t believe for one second that this “source” is from Meghan’s camp. Meghan says what she wants to say in her podcast episodes and then moves on. She doesn’t need to clarify anything because it’s all right there still on Spotify for anyone who is coming in good faith.
After all the outrageous ways her words have been twisted over the last 6 years, I seriously doubt it’s the bimbo backlash that would get this reaction from her.
Is it just me or does anyone wonder why they’re still doing this? Whenever someone has experienced really damaging / traumatic / dangerous impacts from fame I wonder why they stay in the public eye instead of living a private life. Fame fades SO quickly. It’s really hard to hang onto even for people who are trying with all their might. A couple in their 40’s can fade out of fame in no time. Think of someone like Nicole Richie who was one of the most famous women in the USA in the 00’s for at least 5 years. Isn’t that bizarre to say or even think now? She decided to be done being famous and faded out abruptly even though she’s still been tight with A-List celebs all along. No paps are chasing Nicole Richie and it’s strange to even talk about her as a major celeb.
I sincerely wonder why they are still doing this to themselves. There are so many ways to make good impacts on the world that don’t involve offering yourself up to be torn apart by the public constantly.
I thought about it when Kim K. was held at gunpoint in her hotel room and robbed in Paris. Why would someone want to stay famous after something like that. In Kim’s case the answer is she is truly desperate and addicted to fame. But what would the motivation be for this couple with all the pain it continues to cause?
There are so many examples even in the royal family. Think of the Gloucesters. The Gloucesters have been working royals for something like 60 years. Does anyone even know who TF they are? It’s easy to fade out of fame if you want to even if you are in a royal family.
Eh. I’m not sure I agree with this assessment. Nicole Ritchie was more Flavor of the Month vs a top notch celebrity who walked away… like her sister in law, Cameron Diaz. There are tons of celebrities who have always been famous who navigate it well and those who do not. It’s a personal choice.
I think with Meghan and Harry at this point, “celebrity” is the price paid in support of their larger goals. It is just super unfortunate that Harry comes from a world where the invisible contract is much more toxic than Meghan. But I am glad they stand strong in the face of it vs cower and hide.
They didn’t experience traumatic and damaging impacts from “fame”. They experienced it because of a concentrated smear campaign from specific outlets that were getting the go-ahead from those in their own family. And the ones who are complaining about them now, are part of the same industry which has ramped up because they no longer have any access at all. But they are by no means universal or even a majority.
This is very similar to the “I thought they wanted privacy!” argument. They didn’t want “privacy”, they wanted autonomy and basic respect while they fulfilled certain public roles.
By the way, Harry is not in his 40’s.
Also people barely knew who the Gloucesters were at any time. It’s naive to think the son of Princess Diana would ever not be famous.
Exactly. PH is son of Diana and of the current king of the UK with a media in that country that believes they own (and know) him since he was part of the RF from birth and they have been reporting on him for that long. Also for PH to continue to be of use to his own initiatives that he founded or co-founded like Invictus Games and Sentebale, he will need to put himself out in the public eye. He also needs a high profile way of making enough money to provide security for his family because of being born royal and being considered a “race traitor” for marrying M. Meghan DID stay out of the public eye for months in the UK and they wouldn’t shut up about her. I’m sure Nicole Richie would appreciate the staying out of the public eye description since she was in a TV show from 2017-2018 and was a judge on a reality show in 2020.
Exactly. What lesson would racists and misogynists learn if every woc responded to abuse by hiding?
I think the part that is getting lost in translation is archetypes that “hold women back.” Society acts like beautiful women can’t be smart. The expressions and ideas of beautiful women aren’t given due consideration because they are deemed intellectually deficient. I think that was the point of the podcast episode.
Lol. This is US Weekly. AKA British tabloid American projection.
I know I’m going to get ripped about apart, but I think ya’ll are giving MM too much credit! Sorry, not sorry!
Too much credit for what? How so? Why do you think you will be “ripped apart” for an exceedingly vague and confusing statement?
A few things can be true at the same time. A person can be targeted by a deadly racial smear campaign. They can also happen to be beyond tone deaf, hypocritical and just grating as a person. There’s a reason why this is literally the only gossip website where the majority feel positively about this couple. When you go out there and complain about how much it hurt to look at mansions more expensive than the one you already have, and follow it up with this sort of thing, most people are going to feel a certain way about it. And I’m talking about people who WANT to like this couple and found the racial smear campaign terrifying to witness in real time.
If she’s so grating, why put oneself through the torture of following her? It’s almost as if it’s not enough for people to dislike. They need everyone and every online community to reflect their one-sided rivalries. It’s a mindset that’s somewhat understandable when it’s coming from a 15-year-old contrarian dealing with insecurities, but a little embarassing from the millennial or the Gen X.
At the time they were looking at mansions they DID NOT have one. They were living in someone else’s home. So please spare me the “want to like them” but first they have to be perfect crowd.
I only listened to the episode this week and I gained so much respect for Paris Hilton as a result. I never paid much attention to Paris but I did have some judgements about her. It’s very important to me to remember not to judge people I don’t know based on their looks or behavior as reported by Page Six, et al. For this reason, I found there to be tremendous value in this podcast, and that’s what the discussion should be about. Not another taken out of context comment made by Meghan, the smart one. 😉
See that’s my issue with how ameghan has handled Archetypes: the podcast is supposed to feel like listening in a personal conversation between women about their shared experiences- and it does that. However, I think Meghan could be more thoughtful about making sure to keep the focus on her guests – who usually have more significant insights/experiences to share than she does. That is NOT a knock on Her, but Paris Hilton’s story about being abused and her activism on teen reform schools is a much more powerful example of how people get pigeonholed by the nimbi archetype than Meghan’s- which is WHY Meghan had her as a guest. That’s not to say that she doesn’t also have insights to share, but the podcast has never been framed as a platform to tell her personal story – she’s presented herself as a convener and amplifier of the stories of others. If that’s the objective, then she and her producers need to figure out ways for her not to suck the oxygen out of the conversation. And even if it’s the tabloid press and haters twisting her words- she’s a professional, it’s her job to figure out how to work around that. Otherwise acknowledge that it’s a vanity project.
Another Dee, I have another perspective on that. I think that by sharing some of her stories, she lets her guest know that they’re not the only one who is being vulnerable. In order to discuss the subjects that are being discussed there has to be a level of trust. Sharing your own stories is one way to do that–I think it’s been successful to help establish the trust and makes the discussion more open.
Meghan is a wholy formed human being. she’s lived 41 years now. She has a lot of experience to draw from. If she’s supposed to just ask questions and not give feedback and sharing from her side this podcast wouldn’t be what it is. She’s allowed to have her life experience. I’m not sure why people want her to have arrived at the engagement to Prince Harry without any history/experience whatsoever. What’s up with that?
@Dee Or why people constantly want her to shut up and only let other people talk. Do other podcasters get this constantly?
I think we all know exactly why they are still harping on the bimbo thing. first, they enjoy getting to call women bimbos, and suggesting they deserve poor treatment. but mostly it’s because they can’t say a thing about the Angry Black Woman trope. twitter would have their heads, and they know it.
all of this criticism is nitpicky and weak, because Meghan is RIGHT.
also, these weaksauce suggestions that she should stop speaking out… “for her own good” no less. it’s all just more attempts to silence her. because they can’t argue with the substance of what she says. because, again, she speaks the truth. she’s right.
The article is something a RR would write. The words sources alone is a signal that the whole thing is somebody imagining Meghan’s reaction. I can’t imagine anyone who is close to Meghan or anyone in her organization speaking to this magazine.
I think one of the most interesting things about the podcast is Meghan’s experience or take on things in addition to the guests’. This is Meghan’s podcast, not an academic treatise. I’m sure lots of people listen to the podcast to hear more about Meghan herself as well as the archetypes. The podcasts are conversations, and that means a back and forth. They are not interviews or monologues.
I’m just glad the press and royalists won’t try to shut shame her anymore for being a brief case girl. I’m guessing Meghan is happy with this outcome.