More than likely the whole thing was pre-arranged, to serve political purposes, like when can a princ stop becoming one , as well as how can a starlet not take advantage of roles they actually kill for?
Some things/feelings cannot be staged… looks genuine, to me. Why do you think it’s not?
Why do the Many try/attempt to harness/reign-in the Minority’s love? Why are they jealous of such genuine pure love? Is it because they don’t have it?
You’re talking about a dude who married someone else, right? That’s a choice he made that should be respected.
Reply to what I actually said, and not what you presupposed/you think, I said?
If you do not have the capacity to imagine that, then do not reply to me further! Take your feelings elsewhere… coz philosophy knows not what feelings are!
_
Don’t play me, ok! for I am not whom you think I am!
Got it!?
_
Watch how you talk to people, yeah! mind your manners… coz they be lacking, much!
I’m not playing. Don’t my lack of manners prove that I don’t even know what game you’re playing?
I have this book that says you’re wrong about feelings & philosophy, but it should be noted that feelings are body and emotions are mind/interpretation (ty Dr. Snyder):
Many & minority … I’m not sure what that has to do with anything.
It should just be assumed that everyone finds everyone else attractive, especially if they are statistically normal. It’s like… and???
Are we like molecules that just automatically bond when there’s a vacancy in our valence?
Um… mayhaps. Hence boundaries. Hence respecting chosen bonds…if that’s the agreement between the molecules.
If you make 5,000 different agreement styles unique to each bond… good luck maintaining the integrity of that …tenuously constructed scaffolding… shall we say.
_
I want, I want… what do I want! …a more humorous and engaging narrative/reply, perhaps. [-o<
May-haps I ask too much… as per. 
Sorry. I’m apparently no good at whatever it is I’m expected to be doing right here.
I’ll take my happy tales elsewhere, so you’ll both need to exercise your hate elsewhere… oh look, I did take it elsewhere already, earlier ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop … 3#p2897379
There’s no money in happy endings, and even though his book was leaked online -before it’s official publication date- it’s still being bought… in its millions.
I would suggest that some are envious… because they will never experience such attraction/feelings/love?, as that… me, I am enamoured of they’re enamour. 
I don’t have any negative feelings about his choice in spouse. Isn’t she the one who doesn’t censor herself? Cool beans in my book.
MagsJ, I think some of what you are describing present in this relationship, some envy, some political calculation like the anti-monarchial’s pressure on tabloid, so it’s an entangled complex set of relationships that everyone tries to simplify to suit their needs.
However the engine which is pulling the cart , can not go a straight course , for everyone plants their own perception.
Most certainly , whatever outcome comes to be the outcome that actually is anticipated, do not take all views into consideration, and where fissures arise there follow optical illusions that follow in tow, and the Crown , hopefully follows a sensible line, with minimal damage done in this age of increasing uncertainty; one might say.
_
Did you actually see what I posted? 
Whatever you wrote, I ain’t reading… you have both obviously missed the entire point of the video…
…and that has what to do with me finding that video footage enamouring? …you have insinuated something against my person, that I didn’t insinuate. How did you conclude that, from what I said in my post? Truly baffling…
Before Meghan and Harry met and married, they obviously both had past partners and crushes, so your insinuation is both unfounded and inflammatory.
Again, Ichthus’ opinions do not necessarily reflect mine, and it’s obvious you miss the part of how the conclusion derived of me appears to lack a proper foundation it’s self; in light of that MagsJ, you might double take on your conclusions pertinent to me. I have not written for at least 5-6 blogs relating.
The thing is, it should be obvious to anyone that there is a desire on my part for a synthetic unity between extreme positions taken on any position.
I’m just saying what is the point in dwelling on a past that will never obtain so long as he is married? I had no idea you interpreted me as insinuating the other thing… now I understand why you were upset yesterday.
After having read your post, I still stand by what I said.
…what has that got to do with anything?
I don’t think we were in the same discussion… coz your reply was totally independent to the contents of my post.
…dwelling on? …that is how you feel about it, not I.
I’d already stated my thoughts in my post… not sure why your adding to my thoughts, instead of stating your own. This is beyond odd!
…baffled, not upset. I don’t appreciate others putting words in my mouth, through presuppositions and such, without adequate context explanation and such.
You keep tagging your thoughts -on matters- onto mine, like you think that you know what I insinuate, when you don’t. Next time you do it, rather than afford you a reply, I’ll point it out instead, so as not to waste my time.
How do you figure I’m tagging my thoughts onto yours rather than (as you recommend) adding my own?