Just call me Harry. (Everything Harry & Meghan)

[Polaris]

Is implicit bias training a very corporate America thing?

 

[MacMadame]

Charles, I suppose, could fund security from revenues out of the Duchy of Cornwall, but where do you draw the line?

I'd draw it where my son, who was getting death threats, was safe. Security should be based on need, not on birth order.

 

[canbelto]

Is implicit bias training a very corporate America thing?

Yeah it's huge now. Many companies require it.
Also @Karen-W implicit bias workshops were scrapped by the British parliament:

'Unconscious bias training' to be scrapped by ministers

The government scraps anti-bias training for civil servants and wants it to end across public sector.

www.bbc.com

 

[Coco]

So you are asking for a source ...why?

 

[Polaris]

Yeah it's huge now. Many companies require it.
Also @Karen-W implicit bias workshops were scrapped by the British parliament:

'Unconscious bias training' to be scrapped by ministers

The government scraps anti-bias training for civil servants and wants it to end across public sector.

www.bbc.com

My point exactly. Implicit bias is a very American (corporate) thing and might be a foreign concept in other countries. BRF is also an institution filled with old, white people, and not a multi-ethnic corporation.

 

[Karen-W]

Is implicit bias training a very corporate America thing?

Well, having worked for 2 major corporations in the last 5 years, I'd have to say no.

My current employer is doing more than my previous employer but, so far, no implicit bias training.

For what it's worth, I work in the mortgage industry and every single corporation I've worked for dating back to the early/mid-00s has had yearly training on fair lending practices and I remember learning about red-lining a good 15-16 years ago.

 

[wickedwitch]

A Prime Minister will be brave enough one day to do this.

Apparently Chrétien thought about it but got too bogged down in Quebec separatism to give it a go.

My take on the interview:

The Queen is wonderful.

I don't understand how anyone could think the Queen is wonderful. She's in charge. This is all her fault to some extent, if just due to inaction.

(And in some cases, due to her actions. I don't think Charles is the one protecting Andrew.)

 

[starrynight]

Harry and Meghan’s security costs were estimated to be about £12,000 per day.

That amount is a hugely controversial spend from tax payer money, so that needed to stop obviously.

Then there was the option of Charles bankrolling himself from the proceeds of the Duchy of Cornwall. That’s still £4 million per year of money from British tenants going overseas to private individuals. I can see why that was also a controversial spend too.

 

[Polaris]

I don't understand how anyone could think the Queen is wonderful. She's in charge. This is all her fault to some extent, if just due to inaction.

(And in some cases, due to her actions. I don't think Charles is the one protecting Andrew.)

Yeah, I don't get H&M griping about how terrible the Firm / Institution / BRF is and then praising the Queen. The Queen is the head of the institution. A lot of blame lies with her if the organization she is leading is a hot mess and she isn't doing anything about it.

 

[starrynight]

Yeah, I don't get H&M griping about how terrible the Firm / Institution / BRF is and then praising the Queen. The Queen is the head of the institution. A lot of blame lies with her if the organization she is leading is a hot mess and she isn't doing anything about it.

They are smart enough to know that levelling blame at his very popular 95 year old granny would go down like a lead balloon.

 

[overedge]

The detail that stuck with me is why Meghan went to HR to ask for help. She's an adult, she's had jobs in the real world, she knows who's an employee and who isn't. And she clearly wasn't an employee of the BRF. So why would she go to HR?

I also didn't understand how she could be so surprised that there were racists in the BRF and in the royal household. If she could use Google to look up how royals cross their legs, she could have Googled about racism in the British aristocracy. I find it very difficult to accept her claims that she didn't know anything about the BRF and everything was a shock to her. She might not have known how oppressive it really was to be a royal, but to claim that she knew nothing is just not credible.

The impression I came away with is that she is not as smart as she thinks she is, and he is a very vulnerable person. I understand that they went through an awful time, and they shouldn't have been attacked the way they were, but OTOH they also seem willing to spin facts in ways that they think will gain them sympathy. And I still think Oprah is a terrible interviewer.

 

[starrynight]

I think a lot of this could have been mitigated by them living together for a decent while before they got married.

They moved very fast into marriage and barely lived together before they got engaged. I think it’s very likely there was never enough pause for her to be fully aware of the job and the culture clash before the engagement happened.

 

[MacMadame]

Harry and Meghan’s security costs were estimated to be about £12,000 per day.

That amount is a hugely controversial spend from tax payer money, so that needed to stop obviously.

Then there was the option of Charles bankrolling himself from the proceeds of the Duchy of Cornwall. That’s still £4 million per year of money from British tenants going overseas to private individuals. I can see why that was also a controversial spend too.

But how controversial would it be if either of them were harmed due to inadequate security?

 

[starrynight]

But how controversial would it be if either of them were harmed due to inadequate security?

Yeah good point.

But likewise think of all the benefit that £12k a day taxpayer money could benefit regular citizens in things like welfare, schools, hospitals and roads etc

I can understand why the British public don’t want to pay the way of private citizens who live abroad.

It’s clear that Harry believes himself to have a lot of entitlement to other people’s money. I guess he was born into that way of thinking. But I don’t think it’s easy to say he should just keep getting access to funds. It’s a complex situation.

The extent to which royals can continue making money off Britain is basically down to the court of public opinion. They can’t over play (or overspend) their hand.

I think Harry’s issue is with his father not giving him money. Charles could probably go against public opinion by giving the £4 million a year. But gosh isn’t that a squabble of the 0.0001%?

 

[becca]

But how controversial would it be if either of them were harmed due to inadequate security?

But one could point out that if they choose to live in the UK the costs would be less also that if they choose somewhere quieter costs would be less. That by advertising for attention they increase their own security costs. You cannot complain you want freedom and expect others to foot anything. There absolutely is entitlement

 

[MacMadame]

But likewise think of all the benefit that £12k a day taxpayer money could benefit regular citizens in things like welfare, schools, hospitals and roads etc

If it's coming from The Duchy of Cornwell (or whatever it is that Charles gets his money from), then it's not money that would go to those purposes no matter what.

I have to say I'm appalled that a millionaire father wouldn't help his son's family get the necessary security. I can see saying you won't pay for it forever but during the transition period, until the couple has their own sources of money, it seems perfectly reasonable to pay for things like that and other necessities like health insurance.

 

[becca]

You do not know that for certain. You might be fairly certain she wouldn't, but people do things you don't expect because they are curious or they are suspicious or any number of reasons.

Plus...We've all heard or know of someone who forgets to log out and the page you left open is read by someone else.

It’s still not the same thing because it’s not people who know her. Anything I have said
Here I have said to her and i have not said much she would be more angry if I went on Facebook and announced to people she knows

All I said is she refuses to get the vaccine. And is visiting me I mean how many people in world could that apply to a lot

 

[starrynight]

If it's coming from The Duchy of Cornwell (or whatever it is that Charles gets his money from), then it's not money that would go to those purposes no matter what.

The Duchy of Cornwall is a vast amount of land and houses the royal family owns. So farmers and tenants pay rent for their homes and land and it goes to Charles.

So it is his money. But at the same time, it’s the rent money of lots of people.

So there is a sense that the public has some kind of input into its use. Charles could always use it for champagne baths or something, but I don’t think that would be a popular thing if it was to get out.

Now of course it’s controversial with some if that kind of land ownership should even be a thing.

So it’s not straight forward for Harry to expect £4 million of that money to go into the USA every year. In that situation the money isn’t even stimulating the local job force in the UK.

 

[becca]

If it's coming from The Duchy of Cornwell (or whatever it is that Charles gets his money from), then it's not money that would go to those purposes no matter what.

I have to say I'm appalled that a millionaire father wouldn't help his son's family get the necessary security. I can see saying you won't pay for it forever but during the transition period, until the couple has their own sources of money, it seems perfectly reasonable to pay for things like that and other necessities like health insurance.

Actually Charles used the Duchy to fund a lot of charities. He doesn’t have to at all and most Prince’s of Wales used to get rich. So yes that money absolutely could go to better things.

Charles owning that much in Cornwall is actually controversial. The fact that he does hand over a lot of the money to charities helps blunt the criticism. Him using the money to support Harry’s life style would but go over well.

Eventually it is Williams and so there was more than amount of entitlement on Harry’s end. William may want to use the revenues to set up funds for Louis and Charlotte which will be his right.

I think Harry’s inheritance is a pretty large transition money.

 

[starrynight]

Actually Charles used the Duchy to fund a lot of charities. He doesn’t have to at all and most Prince’s of Wales used to get rich. So yes that money absolutely could go to better things.

Charles owning that much in Cornwall is actually controversial. The fact that he does hand over a lot of the money helps blunt the criticism. Him using the money to support Harry’s life style would but go over well.

All of this rests on a delicate social contract between the royals and the public.

To funnel that much money out of the British economy would have upset a lot of people. The money wouldn’t have created UK jobs or benefited the locals in any way.

Upset the people too much and they will start to ask for ownership of their land.

 

[starrynight]

But anyway, money issues aside, this interview makes it very clear how damaged and non-existent the relationships are between Harry and the rest of his family.

I mean it’s one thing to fight about these issues privately, but the public expose designed for maximum impact and punishment is nuclear and it’s going to cause a storm that won’t be forgotten for decades.

Seems to be a recurring thing with this family that every generation has an enormous messy conflict. I don’t think I ever realised things were this bad between the family members. What a sad mess.

 

[MacMadame]

Actually Charles used the Duchy to fund a lot of charities. He doesn’t have to at all and most Prince’s of Wales used to get rich. So yes that money absolutely could go to better things.

But probably wouldn't. And this is the safety of his kid and his kid's family we are talking about.

 

[starrynight]

There’s so much mixed messaging about the money side. Initially it was promoted that Harry and Meghan wanted to be independent and were proud of paying back the money for the house and making their own way. So it’s surprising that behind the scenes they still wanted Charles to support them. It shows how much guff and window dressing is in marketing.

Re the titles - it seems they wanted special exception made for Archie to be a prince - even though that wasn’t protocol. If that was just about security entitlement, wouldn’t Archies security have been taken care of through Meghan and Harry? I suspect Archies life is going to be a lot easier not being a Prince. I recall at his birth, it was said they chose not to give him a title as they wanted him to have a normal life. That seemed consistent with the informal name 'Archie' rather than Archibald. I am actually really surprised they wanted the title of 'Prince' especially organised for him. It does seem inconsistent with their views on the impact of the royal family on people's lives.

 

[once_upon]

But probably wouldn't. And this is the safety of his kid and his kid's family we are talking about.

Yeah, I think that is a huge thing. "Dad doesn't love me or his grandson and this is proof, very public proof". Again I go back to the rumors of parentage - being treated widely different than William (and Kate), and Meghan being treated as less than any of the family.

This is more likely to be a Charles and Harry issue. And Meghan and Harry feeling a bit alone in the world - them against us.

Money/equality is only part of it. It's more scceptance and love being the major factor.

I dont think she is a conniving person, in it for whatever fame, title, etc.

I do think she is a driving force in their Disney and Spotify venture only because she has worked outside the Royal Family business and has connections to a different world. I feel that they are deeply in love and that they believe it is them against the Royal world.

 

[MsZem]

Re the titles - it seems they wanted special exception made for Archie to be a prince - even though that wasn’t protocol. If that was just about security entitlement, wouldn’t Archies security have been taken care of through Meghan and Harry? I suspect Archies life is going to be a lot easier not being a Prince.

Zara and Peter Phillips don't seem to be suffering.

I haven't watched the interview and don't want to comment based on media coverage/social media chatter, except for the technical matter of Archie's title: I'm not sure if Earl of Dumbarton could have been used as a courtesy title, because that's Harry's title in Scotland (similar to Charles being Duke of Rothesay and William being Earl of Strathearn). But at the very least, as the son of a duke he should have been known as Lord Archie and not Master Archie.

I remember how happy the 2018 royal wedding thread was. It's so sad for things to have turned out as they did.

 

[CantALoop]

A few hot takes (I barely follow BRF news, but I couldn't help but be engrossed by the interview)

- I found it disturbing how whenever Meghan sought out advice on how to deal with the tabloids, the BRF and staff said things along the lines of "it happens to everyone", "we all went through it at first", etc.
I think those placating statements are horrifying and ignoring the big issue - why does any new BRF fiancee have to go through a mandatory public hazing in the tabloids in the first place?

- Like in a lot of family drama, I think the truth probably lies somewhere in between. IMHO H&M did make some muddled statements (presumably to protect themselves or others), but it didn't seem like anything was an obvious fabrication. I do believe that Meghan and Harry are really concerned for their and Archie's safety, but I don't quite buy that they're naive and was swept up in everything without any agenda. I also think they're very ambitious and want to control/rewrite their own narrative instead of the tabloids and BRF doing it for them.

- Speaking of ambition, when Meghan talked about how she relinquished her passport and often didn't step outside for days, it reminded me of Empress Masako of Japan. Before she became a Princess, Masako was an ambitious and highly-educated polyglot who was set on a career in diplomacy. Allegedly she finally accepted the Crown Prince's marriage proposals because he proposed she could use her education, ideas, and skills to bring new life to the Imperial Palace. In a controversial book published about her and her mental health, there was a part about Masako not being able to leave royal premises without permission, having no money or credit cards, giving up her passport, not being able to drive, and constantly being watched by imperial staff. Meghan's story rang eerily similar - two ambitious women who had hoped to change the world for the better, but found themselves constantly battered by a maelstrom of tabloids while being kept in a gilded cage.

In the end, I hope that H&M, Archie, and their future girl can find safety, and they also find success in using their ventures as a force for good as they proposed in the end of the interview.

 

[becca]

But probably wouldn't. And this is the safety of his kid and his kid's family we are talking about.

His kid who choose to walk away let’s point this out here. Harry choose to walk and we only have their point of view. From the point of the palace they tried to with Meghan and nothing was good Enough.

 

[becca]

Yeah, I think that is a huge thing. "Dad doesn't love me or his grandson and this is proof, very public proof". Again I go back to the rumors of parentage - being treated widely different than William (and Kate), and Meghan being treated as less than any of the family.

This is more likely to be a Charles and Harry issue. And Meghan and Harry feeling a bit alone in the world - them against us.

Money/equality is only part of it. It's more scceptance and love being the major factor.

I dont think she is a conniving person, in it for whatever fame, title, etc.

I do think she is a driving force in their Disney and Spotify venture only because she has worked outside the Royal Family business and has connections to a different world. I feel that they are deeply in love and that they believe it is them against the Royal world.

Treated wildly different. There is going to be differences due to the nature of royalty. William is going to be King Harry won’t.

Harry was treated all of his life as more special than his cousin’s.

Did Peter Phillips have a 45 million dollar wedding? Did Zara?

However there are good parts of being Normal they have less press intrusion etc.

Charles didn’t pick which child was first born.

Due to an accident of birth Harry was treated as more special than just about everyone else. But the same accident of birth made someone else the future King.

 

[skategal]

I don't understand how anyone could think the Queen is wonderful. She's in charge. This is all her fault to some extent, if just due to inaction.

(And in some cases, due to her actions. I don't think Charles is the one protecting Andrew.)

I agree she's culpable.

I should have said H&M didn't say anything that isn't already out regarding the narrative of the BRF.

I wouldn't expect them to say things negative about the Queen.

 

[starrynight]

Due to an accident of birth Harry was treated as more special than just about everyone else. But the same accident of birth made someone else the future King.

I think Harry has been close enough to the jackpot to really feel like he was missing out though. The other cousins are all in the same boat together, but Harry has to deal with the fact that his elder brother will be king. That's pretty high stakes - it's your face on the coins of 35 countries. The impact of that would have become gradually more real as they got older.

I do wonder if all the talk about the money for security was aimed at explaining the very high profile media roles they are stepping into. i.e. we have been forced to do this because we need the money for security.