CuriousByNature

Never met him, but he used to go by a different name - sorry I can't remember what it was. I think it was Dmitry something or other, maybe. His previous profile had many more photos, and if I recall he may be Russian, or speaks Russian?

I hope he uses a thimble when he's doing the tapestry. Can't be too careful.

Clearly he's into the BFE 🤣. With the added bonus of perforating your lower intestine and bruising other internal organs. Charming.

Do you get to choose between a table massage and a grand piano massage?

Well hopefully H&M will remain safe, and can live a happy and productive life away from the obligations that had been expected of them as royals. I imagine the royal life is extremely suffocating, and despite the luxuriousness of it, not everyone is cut out to be part of that lifestyle. And hopefully the rifts that exist can mend over time.

I would disagree that unnamed sources or palace insiders mean the royal family - but there is probably no way to confirm it one way or the other. I also don't think anyone was out to 'destroy' Diana. Diana sadly destroyed herself, and this was a huge loss for many people around the globe. She never deserved having to be second fiddle in her own marriage, but I also don't think any of the conspiracy theories generated by the Al Fayed family hold any water. Hers was a tragic story, in any case. As for being cut off financially and having security removed, I think it's important to remember that H&M are millionaires many times over, and there was never any fear that they would suffer financially after breaking away from 'the firm'. They have more than landed on their feet, and live a lifestyle more luxurious than the vast majority of people. The security detail was taxpayer funded, and it was tied to H&M being working royals. When they chose to leave that role, it is understandable that they would also have to give up some perks. Security was not simply removed - it was security paid for by the public taxpayers that was removed. Like a number of other members of the family, H&M now need to pay for their own security. They can more than afford it. One of the big arguments against the royal family is how much they cost British taxpayers. I personally think their value outweighs the cost, particularly when QEII was still alive. But to keep paying for the upkeep of H&M, who made it very clear they did not want the responsibility of being working royals, would be a slap in the face to British taxpayers. The royal family has been a boring lot for a very long time. One only needs to look at the lives of some of the former monarchs to see how tame the current royal family has become. Ever since Victoria, the royal family has tried to portray themselves in a superior light and as moral guideposts for the nation. It isn't realistic at all. I'm not sure the royal family is on borrowed time. I thought they would be after QEII died, but it seems that things are modernizing slowly under Charles III, albeit slowly. I expect that by the time William is king, the royal family will be closer to the Scandinavian royals in terms of character. Far fewer on the public payroll, far fewer in the public eye. They can't continue on as they did for the past century and expect to have any relevancy to anyone.

All we have is one side of the story - the side that H&M have provided and that the media laps up eagerly. There is always another side, but in this case it is unlikely it will ever be offered because traditionally, the royal family doesn't hang out their laundry for the world to see.

H&M crave attention, money, and relevance - and were more than happy to spill the beans and launch accusations about things they knew the Royal Family would remain silent about and not attempt to defend. He did not try to 'walk away' - he could have done so, like other members of the family had done, but he chose to stomp out in a way that dragged his family through the mud. He has a gigantic chip on his shoulder, which may be understandable given his unusual circumstances as the son of a monarch and the expectations that entails, but he mishandled his exit from royal life miserably. Harry unfortunately bit the hand that fed him, and then expected to be continuously fed by that same hand under his terms and conditions. With so much real suffering in the world I still can't fathom how so many people manage to give their attention to two people who remain more privileged and pampered than 99% of society.

and people would need to know the difference between 'hetero' and 'homo', which might be a challenge for some people these days

Wellbutrin is pretty hit and miss from what I've heard. I'm glad you could come off it and hope that whatever you may be taking is very effective for you.

It may have started as trend in the 1970s with the advent of characters with extraordinarily full lips. 🤣

It could be revere if its a midnight ride. And if you're with an English man and the British are coming.

And they never got married. Not even a shotgun wedding.

Their love story has about 40 holes in it. Too soon?

same here - 20C

He's apparently over 6 feet tall. Do you think he could manage to reach it?

I didn't think otherwise. Like you, I also find many people to be beautiful that would not necessarily fit the definition of 'classically handsome', and particularly the definition based on the standards of Bronze-age Greece. I've edited my original comment a bit to hopefully improve the clarity of the point I was trying to make - that the term 'classical' makes me think of representations made by Greek and later Roman artists - not that I consider that to be an accurate definition myself.

I was only saying that the term 'classic handsomeness' can be taken back to the Greek notions of what they considered to be beautiful - and that was a very narrow definition that is not broad enough to include what many of us today would consider to be beautiful. It isn't that the subject of a Greek statue should be considered unattractive, but rather, that the ancient measure of classic handsomeness is but one, fairly narrow definition.

When I think of beauty or handsomeness in a 'classical' sense I immediately associate that with what I personally consider to be the unrealistic and narrow standards put forward by sculptors working during the Classical period of Ancient Greece, and the copies of Greek sculpture later created by Roman artists. It's all very mathematical and balanced, but I find these pieces to lack necessary elements that would make them approachable if they were living beings. To me, this is where beauty and handsomeness diverge from attractiveness. Not to mention, the classical standard did not include non-Greek races and ethnicities, so this narrowed the definition of classic beauty and handsomeness even further. Thankfully the standard is not set in stone (pun intended) - and probably for most people, attractiveness is not dependent on some global ideal of physical perfection, but rather, a mix of elements which foster connection and relationship.

Calling @Simon Suraci, calling @Simon Suraci... please pick up, @Simon Suraci

You may have missed some opportunities, but your approach sounds very respectful towards the providers - which is far more important in my opinion.

I never had a doctor that was an ant, but I did have an aunt who was a doctor.