The Harry and Meghan fuss

[Citizen of Legoland]

This is mostly my thought - it is currently being judged after the 'prosecution' and without any rebuttal, although I don't think there will be anything substantive as one, nothing more than an acknowledgement of regret/review but no details.

The 'how dark is your child' on the face of it is indefensible, but without the context of the question, I don't see how it can be certain how bad it was.

You'd be surprised what is said within families about what a baby will look like when it's born. Will it have red hair like the mother, will it be tall like the father, and yes, when there are two different skin colours at play, will it be dark like one parent, light like the other or somewhere in-between.

Like you said, I think it's context here. Unless someone has said "I hope it doesn't look like a n*****". Unfortunately, people of a certain age don't see the issue with things like this, they DO have the welfare of the people at heart, they're just so used to saying things a certain way. I've got lots of relatives who say things wrongly, and I always point out what can/can't be said. Maybe I do it too and aren't aware.

This wasn't said directly to Meghan, it was relayed to her by Harry. That itself is interesting as I wouldn't relay something like that to my wife if a relative had said something, but then I wouldn't choose to disown my family like Harry has decided to do.

 

[smudgedj]

Does Oprah Winfrey look like Ian Wright in a wig? Or do I need new glasses.

 

[Rascal]

View attachment 12066
View attachment 12067
Who's this, Dick Emery?

He had a penchant for the "fishermans" cap as well. The Flat cap is a well established symbol of the working class

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Witness testimony is evidence, yes. Not proof , but even if it were a false allegation it would be evidence.

I didn't accuse anyone of individual racism, I said institutional, so I am not going to prove something I haven't said. Meghan Markle made the allegation, I am entitled to interpret it is a clumsy conversation prompted by outdated institutional attitudes, your entitled to believe it is complete bollocks.

Go read my comments in the Burnley thread about their lack of black footballers, I think you would think it unwise to play that card. I am not a comic book compound character of Ben Elton/Ash Sarkar/Will Self or whoever's views you want to construct a strawman against.

You are certainly entitled to interpret anything you like, but don't expect
that supporting your interpretations with racism allegations you've just admitted you cannot substantiate gives any weight to it.
Institutional racism is simply your blanket descriptive intended to validate what is simply dislike of what you see around you. You can't support it, point to it, or prove it, which makes it a worthless stance, really.

 

[Invisible Man's Bandage]

So the Queen is racist bigot who denied her great-grandson a title as she was worried about how black he would be?

That's what it boils down to so it's up to you to decide what is 'your truth'.

My truth is that it is complete bollocks.

 

[MikeF]

So this couple want privacy but then go on the Oprah Winfrey show? Hmmmmm ok

 

[Ancient Citizen]

He had a penchant for the "fishermans" cap as well. The Flat cap is a well established symbol of the working class

Lol, yes a real son of toil was Lenin.

 

[Mike Cledford]

He had a penchant for the "fishermans" cap as well. The Flat cap is a well established symbol of the working class

Where does my Barbour flat cap fit in?
The old girl cut my hair almost to the bone and l must choose between my cord fisherman's or Barbour caps.

 

[carlosthejackal]

If only people were offended by the monarchy harbouring an alleged rapist and paedo then maybe I could understand the faux outrage on here and in the country

 

[Kazzydeyna]

So the Queen is racist bigot who denied her great-grandson a title as she was worried about how black he would be?

That's what it boils down to so it's up to you to decide what is 'your truth'.

My truth is that it is complete bollocks.

Actually Meghan speaks highly of the queen.
It is unnamed other royals and members of the household that come out of this very badly.

If she names names she would be accused of attacking people who by convention aren't allowed to defend themselves in public.

Forget her for a minute. Think of Harry.

Baring in mind what he saw his mother be subjected to, does anybody actually believe he would allow his wife to tell outright lies publicly and then join her in the sofa to legitimise those lies?

I don't. I think on balance she's telling the truth.

For sure, after her majesty passes away the best solution may well be to consign the whole charade to history.
The only thing that gives me pause on such an idea is the fact we'd then have an elected head of state and I'm not sure that wouldn't be even worse as they would then want their own political power.

Might be best to leave the monarchy in place albeit vastly reduced: Monarch, heir, 2nd in line paid a civil servants salary with a subsidised rent on one place of residence.
All other property confiscated by the state and used to provide funding for public services.