You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Harry and Meghan fuss
- Thread starter Rascal
- Start date
You haven't responded with facts though. You have interpreted what was said in a particular way and you have asked me the nature of her insinuation. The fact remains, and it runs through nearly all of your comments on this issue, that she did not directly say what you have repeatedly said that she did. As I suggested earlier, this would not stand in court.Haha I’ve calmly responded with facts to probably the biggest idiot on the website and you think I need turning off and on again?
I preferred you as Fode in the Hole mate :-)
While I believe that she had made a link to the treatment of her children and the racist overtones of her own treatment, and things she heard, I do not believe that she was wrong to do so, particularly when faced with such appalling media treatment at the same time. We do not operate in a bubble: we are human beings and feel the swell of public opinion, and the injustice of newspaper reports that compare us unfavourably to another, for identical behaviours.
The question I have asked, several times, is why are you so focussed on this singular issue?
I don’t think she is a racist.It’s nothing like it, mate.
Suggesting Meghan isn’t a racist does not make one a communist, unless you are Donald Trump.
I think she’s used a racism claim falsely to lash out.
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
I was under the impression Archie will become a Prince now Charles is on the throne.
I also suspect that any son of Prince Harry would have been a Prince at birth if the mother wasn’t Megan. Institutions like digging up old rules when it suits them, and ignoring them when they don’t.
The first part is true that they appear to be entitled to the title Prince/Princess.
At the moment, the Harry kids aren't even referred to as the appropriate Lord/Lady that they would be entitled to (I think Archie may even have been a Earl), due to a decision of the parents that they shouldn't be styled as such.
It'll make people chunter more if, after refusing to use a lower title, that they then take up Prince, etc - not that both sides of the argument need an excuse to chunter conspiratorially and/or inaccurately.
I think the second part has no basis in fact, and is merely an unproveable theory.
There does appear to be a potential clash between extending the number of Prince titles and also wishing to slim the monarchy down, although I don't think that Prince without benefits adds much to the weight.
Alan Harper's Tash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 58,796
That where we disagree. You think she has and we don’t. It can be implied, but not proven.I don’t think she is a racist.
I think she’s used a racism claim falsely to lash out.
Mr Kobayashi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2020
- Messages
- 16,714
If you read past the first paragraph you will see that it was reversing sexism to female Royals.
William’s daughter wasn’t given the title of HRH due to her being female, but his son was.
Harry’s children weren’t given the title due to George V slimming down the Royal Family.
Under this protocol, Prince George's siblings - Charlotte and Louis - would not have received the title either.
But in December 2012, the Queen also issued a letter patent which said that all of Prince William's children would be entitled to be princes or princesses and get the HRH title.
I think we can all agree the merit in doing both actions is completely different?
Sexism > Racism?
The media issue is separate to Royal convention though, why are you equating her treatment in the media to the point about Archie being a Prince or not?You haven't responded with facts though. You have interpreted what was said in a particular way and you have asked me the nature of her insinuation. The fact remains, and it runs through nearly all of your comments on this issue, that she did not directly say what you have repeatedly said that she did. As I suggested earlier, this would not stand in court.
While I believe that she had made a link to the treatment of her children and the racist overtones of her treatment and things she heard, I do not believe that she was wrong to do so, particularly when faced with such appalling media treatment at the same time. We do not operate in a bubble: we are human beings and feel the swell of public opinion, and the injustice of newspaper reports that compare us unfavourably to another, for identical behaviours.
The question I have asked, several times, is why are you so focussed on this singular issue?
Someone said she has done nothing wrong, I think she has and gave this example, then you and a couple of others keep responding to me.
It’s nothing more than a discussion about Meghan’s interview.
Do you think implying Archie wasn’t given the title of Prince due to racism, rather than a Royal convention, was the right thing to do?That where we disagree. You think she has and we don’t. It can be implied, but not proven.
Harry’s children weren’t given the title due to George V slimming down the Royal Family.
William's children would not have been princes until last Thursday according to the old George V rules.
The Queen stepped in upon Prince George's birth to change the old rules and give him the title of prince.
The "row" was why she did this for one grandson and not the other.
You pinning it all on a Royal convention that the Queen tore up 5 years previously isn't a very strong argument.
I didn't equate them. I said that I could understand her feeling the way she did when there were racial mutterings from within the palace, clearly, and also a growing body of mistreatment from the media. They are, of course, two separate issues but she is one human being, who naturally would have felt pressure from both sides.The media issue is separate to Royal convention though, why are you equating her treatment in the media to the point about Archie being a Prince or not?
Someone said she has done nothing wrong, I think she has and gave this example, then you and a couple of others keep responding to me.
It’s nothing more than a discussion about Meghan’s interview
To sum up what I wished to ask: do you believe that there is racism within the palace? Do you believe that part of the reason for the media reporting, and the public's support of it, has a racial overtone?