Just call me Harry. (Everything Harry & Meghan)

[Lemonade20]

There is always a need to bring up racism. We can't combat something we refuse to talk about.



For posting some batsh*t stuff. Which is why, when Prancer said people were reporting posts in this thread, my reaction was . While I've seen some infurating posts in this thread, I haven't seen anything that actually breaks the rules or is as crazy as some of her stuff.

So calling other people names in here isn't against the rules?

 

[Prancer]

So calling other people names in here isn't against the rules?

A), not exactly and b) as I said in my response to the report, nowhere in the reported post was anyone called a name.

 

[Lemonade20]

A), not exactly and b) as I said in my response to the report, nowhere in the reported post was anyone called a name.

Funny, I see a lot of posts about posters being called racists for expressing their thoughts

 

[AxelAnnie]

Something to take into consideration when posters criticize Harry and Meghan about security. What do you think happened when the tabloids attacked Meghan for “making Kate cry”. I believe that went on for a lengthy time. The palace should have said something immediately. Nobody in their right mind can’t possibly appreciate that the anger and death threats wouldn’t have escaluated.

I like Kate but yah. Big lesson learned Royals.

What does this have to do with Security?

 

[AxelAnnie]

Funny, I see a lot of posts about posters being called racists for expressing their thoughts

Ad Hominem.

"short for argumentum ad hominem, refers to several types of arguments, some but not all of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue. The most common form of this fallacy is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong"

Meaning - if you can't refute the argument attack the person.

 

[overedge]

Meaning - if you can't refute the argument attack the person.

I think most of your arguments for why the BRF aren't racists have been quite thoroughly refuted.

 

[Prancer]

Funny, I see a lot of posts about posters being called racists for expressing their thoughts

I haven't seen one yet, including in the ones you have reported (you are not alone in making reports). I've seen some people rather passionately defending their positions and sometimes saying some OTT things, but that's not the same thing.

But I must ask--let's say that hypothetically there were thoughts expressed in this thread that were racist thoughts. Why should those thoughts not be called out as such? If someone makes racist statements, is it wrong to say "You are a racist"?

Again, no one said that in this thread; I don't think anyone copped out to that degree. And if someone had, I expect that there would have been a major blowup and people would be told to settle down and either take it to PM or back off for a while until tempers cooled. But we have actually had some white supremacists on this board; when people called them racists, they denied it because that is not how they see themselves, but that's exactly what they were.

Who do you think we sided with? And do you think we shouldn't have sided with the people who called other posters racist in that example? After all, those white supremacists were just expressing their thoughts, too.

I strongly suggest that if you want to continue this conversation, you do so by PM.

 

[skipaway]

Exclusive Interview with the Letter ”G” in Lasagna ?

 

[canbelto]

@becca says not everything is about race. She's right. For instance, in an NBA game if a ref calls a foul on Lebron that's likely not about race. Referee gambling maybe. Point shaving maybe. But since the NBA is 80% black it's likely that ref fouls are not about race.

However, a royal wondering about the shade of Archie's skin is about race.

See how that works?

 

[becca]

@becca says not everything is about race. She's right. For instance, in an NBA game if a ref calls a foul on Lebron that's likely not about race. Referee gambling maybe. Point shaving maybe. But since the NBA is 80% black it's likely that ref fouls are not about race.

However, a royal wondering about the shade of Archie's skin is about race.

See how that works?

I never said that wasn’t a racist deeply problematic remark although we don’t know the context. But yes it is deeply problematic.
I mean there are videos of Harry making fun of other peoples race. So he is not one for glass houses.

And I also think this family may not have a lot of experience with interracial marriage so may not realize what it is appropriate. Once again not that it’s okay

Look their are people still to till this day think interracial marriage is wrong. No joke (unbelievable). So yes I believe racism is real. But these are the people that are really the problem.

We can all make problematic statements and I frankly think we all have our prejudices. But the people who won’t give others a chance and don’t recognize it’s a wrong.

If that was an issue the Queen would have never approved of the marriage and Charles and William looked thrilled on her wedding day. Absolutely thrilled. The video is evidence there says they wanted to wcome


The skin color comment yes is racist but

Archie not being a prince not necessarily. The royal family was moving in that direction before Meghan was in the picture. Charles was on record for wanting a stream lined monarchy for years.

Look with Harry and Meghan there was not just a race issue but a culture issue. I wouldn’t be surprised if her being American and the differences there also played a huge role

 

[Japanfan]

I have seen it I do believe it exists but I have also seen people claim racism unfairly. And that does nothing to help the situation.

That's much like minimizing sexism because some women allegedly make up rapes or sexual harassment. Obviously - what women go through when they bring forth such accusations and they are taken to trial is a real disincentive for reporting.

And you do know that for any one person who claims racism unfairly, there are thousands - and more - people who are victim to racism everyday, and say nothing about it? Largely because they don't expect anyone to listen, or because they fear punishment for speaking out.

Racism exists yes and cultural insensitivity but not everything is racism. There was no need to bring that up. And the fact that they refused to name names means they all got tainted with that brush. It is no right.

No, not everything is racism. But racism is largely entrenched in social systems and attitudes, not always consciously. It has a far-reaching sweep.

 

[MsZem]

Apparently the Daily Mail believe they have been wronged.

Daily Mail Owner Writes To ViacomCBS Demanding Removal Of “Inaccurate, Misleading & Divisive” Content In Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Interview

The Daily Mail's owner demands CBS remove "misleading" content from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's interview with Oprah Winfrey.

deadline.com

(it's not like there's a shortage of awful stuff from them)

 

[becca]

Because systemic racism is best solved by addressing it in private with a limited audience? That's not how it works.

That's much like minimizing sexism because some women allegedly make up rapes or sexual harassment. Obviously - what women go through when they bring forth such accusations and they are taken to trial is a real disincentive for reporting.

And you do know that for any one person who claims racism unfairly, there are thousands - and more - people who are victim to racism everyday, and say nothing about it? Largely because they don't expect anyone to listen, or because they fear punishment for speaking out.



No, not everything is racism. But racism is largely entrenched in social systems and attitudes, not always consciously. It has a far-reaching sweep.

Minimizing racism. I actually would agree some racism is unconscious. I would agree that racism is entrenched in our social system. I would agree it’s very pervasive.

But I got to say I have got to say sometimes I wonder much Urban multicultural experience some of you all have.

I think racism should be addressed In public but I don’t think publicly shaming others over a private conversation is the way to go.

We don’t know who said it and because they refused to name named everyone got blamed.

 

[Japanfan]

But I got to say I have got to say sometimes I wonder much Urban multicultural experience some of you all have.

And why is that?

I live in an incredibly multicultural city (Vancouver British Columbia Canada). We have a large Asian population and members of that population have been targets of violence since YKW erupted - also before that.

There was a case recently of an Asian woman who called for mental health help, and a police officer dragged her all the way down the hallway outside of her apartment, she only wearing her underwear, and then down the elevator into the lobby. In the lobby, the officer gave the women a strong kick in the head.

So, what's your point exactly, Becca?

 

[becca]

And why is that?

I live in an incredibly multicultural city (Vancouver British Columbia Canada). We have a large Asian population and members of that population have been targets of violence since YKW erupted - also before that.

There was a case recently of an Asian woman who called for mental health help, and a police officer dragged her all the way down the hallway outside of her apartment, she only wearing her underwear, and then down the elevator into the lobby. In the lobby, the officer gave the women a strong kick in the head.

So, what's your point exactly, Becca?

I am not talking so much about where you live. I am talking about working and interacting in environments where maybe there are actually less white people than minorities. And navigating that.

You stated that it’s not that common for people to accuse others of racism unfairly.
It you interacted every day in an environment like the above mentioned.

You would know there is a lot of distrust and because their is a lot of distrust accusations of racism is quite common. Even when peoples motives aren’t about race.

It also can be a lot of cases where people aren’t necessarily purposely trying to accuse someone of racism unfairly but the distrust leads to it.


There is a lot distrust understandable so. But we have to start giving others the benefit of the doubt.

No one picks the race group or culture they were born into. And this needs to be remembered.

This is why I am saying not everything is about race. I think the skin comments likely were racist although context. But the Prince issue may not be.

Based on my experiences of actually living and working in the environment mentioned I believe strongly in not jumping to conclusions. This is especially the case in a serious issue like race.

 

[PRlady]

“”No one picks the race group they were born into.” True. But if you’re born into the wrong one, you will have centuries of structural racism piled up against you. And if you’re born into the right one, you’ll have privileges so wide that you won’t even see you have them, the fish doesn’t realize he’s in water.

White people don’t get the benefit of the doubt because even if they are not personally prejudiced (very rare) they are still benefiting from a system that privileges them and provides advantages. This goes 5 million times more for the British royal family, whose privilege is astonishing. The benefit of the doubt goes to the biracial outsider who will actually see the rarified water those fish are swimming in.

 

[becca]

“”No one picks the race group they were born into.” True. But if you’re born into the wrong one, you will have centuries of structural racism piled up against you. And if you’re born into the right one, you’ll have privileges so wide that you won’t even see you have them, the fish doesn’t realize he’s in water.

White people don’t get the benefit of the doubt because even if they are not personally prejudiced (very rare) they are still benefiting from a system that privileges them and provides advantages. This goes 5 million times more for the British royal family, whose privilege is astonishing. The benefit of the doubt goes to the biracial outsider who will actually see the rarified water those fish are swimming in.

Accusing someone of racism unfairly isn’t right. Everyone on all sides must be given benefit of the doubt

We aren’t talking about affirmative action and pouring more resources into disadvantaged communities. I support this.

No doubt it was going to be very hard for Meghan but she chose to marry into that family with long-standing traditions and cultures.

And while yes allowances must be made there is a lot of talk about how Meghan didn’t want to listen to things about royal protocol etc. About remaining neutral in politics etc.

It a white American person married into the Japanese royal family the onus would be on the white person to learn that culture given what it means to Japan. And the cultural institution.

And going in announcing they were going to revolutionize the Japanese monarchy would not go over well

Some of this no doubt is due to American versus British but she choose to join a heridary monarchy

Suggesting it’s racism Archie isn’t a Prince when it’s a good chance his different treatment is because of who is Father is than who is mother is.

That Archie no matter who his mother was going to be treated differently than the Cambridge’s and that is the reality of marrying into a hereditary monarchy.

The royal family was setting this up when they changed the royals before George was born so that all Williams children would be HRH and deliberately chose not to mention Harry’s potential kids.

 

[PRlady]

Becca, last time. Prejudice is personal (and often unconscious.) racism is societal and structural.

It is literally impossible to believe that a royal family whose wealth is largely built on colonialism and the invention of race to justify colonialism is not racist. Individual members may be more or less prejudiced. The institution is built on racism.

 

[allezfred]

Accusing someone of racism unfairly isn’t right. Everyone on all sides must be given benefit of the doubt

This all sounds very reasonable until you realise that becca wants those who are discriminated against to give the benefit of the doubt to racists.

 

[becca]

Becca, last time. Prejudice is personal (and often unconscious.) racism is societal and structural.

It is literally impossible to believe that a royal family whose wealth is largely built on colonialism and the invention of race to justify colonialism is not racist. Individual members may be more or less prejudiced. The institution is built on racism.

I think that them being the head of the Commonweatlh should be questioned that is colonialism.

But the British royal family existed long before they colonized the world. And given it’s from Europe not surprising they are white just like you would expect royalty in Africa to be black.

I think given the UK is becoming multicultural it’s great and so a more diverse royal family is great but maybe it would have been better if it had been a British person of color who understood the culture better than an American

 

[becca]

This all sounds very reasonable until you realise that becca wants those who are discriminated against to give the benefit of the doubt to racists.

Except for the fact the royal family was going to change the rules regardless of who Charles Married and I suspect a lot of the anger toward treatment is more due to the fact that she married the spare and not the heir.

 

[allezfred]

Except for the fact the royal family was going to change the rules regardless of who Charles Married and I suspect a lot of the anger toward treatment is more due to the fact that she married the spare and not the heir.

Not talking about the British Royal Family. I am talking about you wanting to give racists a pass.

 

[PRlady]

I think that them being the head of the Commonweatlh should be questioned that is colonialism.

But the British royal family existed long before they colonized the world. And given it’s from Europe not surprising they are white just like you would expect royalty in Africa to be black.

I think given the UK is becoming multicultural it’s great and so a more diverse royal family is great but maybe it would have been better if it had been a British person of color who understood the culture better than an American

This version of the royal family is descended from a minor German princely house that flourished in the 18th and 19th centuries from direct domination of what were black and brown lands. Not that they treated their own white subjects much better.

I do agree that a Brit POC might have understood the culture better, but if The Crown was at all accurate in how “downscale” Maggie Thatcher was treated at Balmoral, I doubt she would have been treated much better.

 

[becca]

Not talking about the British Royal Family. I am talking about you wanting to give racists a pass.

Who says I am? If a member of the British royal family openly made racist comments I would condemn them. But we none of us where there or the context. So no I don’t agree with someone made a racist comment but I won’t say who. And it’s unfair my child is treated differently than the Cambridge kids when we’ll you have the whole issue of heirachy.

Now Harry had openly done racist things in public. And he apologized moved but the person of the immediate royal family who has been the worst is Harry.

I mean as an 18 year old I knew not to wear a Nazi uniform. Somehow I just “knew”

 

[FiveRinger]

Internal Review at The Talk and Sharon Osbourne
We will see what happens. Sharon AKA Karen Osbourne deserves whatever she gets. Her behavior was horrible. And as far as I'm concerned until she apologizes on air to her co-hosts, her latest Twitter message means nothing.

 

[becca]

This version of the royal family is descended from a minor German princely house that flourished in the 18th and 19th centuries from direct domination of what were black and brown lands. Not that they treated their own white subjects much better.

I do agree that a Brit POC might have understood the culture better, but if The Crown was at all accurate in how “downscale” Maggie Thatcher was treated at Balmoral, I doubt she would have been treated much better.

Yes it was the nearest non Catholic descendant of the house. All nations honestly are created through war and conquering though.

As for the Balmoral I thought both sides showed attitudes toward one another. Frankly one would think if they are going to be in the outdoors that proper shoes we’re needed that maybe you don’t Wear heels although someone could have given her shoes.
But I thought she looked down her noses at them with the parlor games and stuff.

Frankly I actually thought the time outdoors and the palor games outside was rather a nice family tradition. More families could spend time outdoors and playing games with each other.

Every culture has its good and bad aspects IMO and huge part is being willing to learn about someone else’s and be open minded

 

[jeffisjeff]

Everyone on all sides must be given benefit of the doubt

Yes, there are very fine people on both sides.

 

[once_upon]

In my opinion, the only person who gets to determine racism/bigotry exists, is the person who is experiencing it. Also, white privilege is not always recognized by the person who has it.

One of my son and daughter in law's best friends from high school is married to a woman of color. When I was first introduced to Renee, I had a fleeting thought of huh, that's unusual/different - wonder where they met. Then I was ashamed of my thoughts - and questioned if would I have wondered those things if she was blonde or auburn/fair skin? Immediately I knew I wouldn't. Fortunately I didn't blurt out anything but it existed none the less.

The Royals may have been moving to the no Prince titles but Archie is the first who is a descendent of a Prince and his grandfather will be King someday, as well as his Uncle and Cousin. The first in the linage to be treated this way. There has to be feelings of a "less than" and questioning by the parents if it's because of biracial heritage. White people can claim it's not - it was a change long due, etc. But im sure it doesn't feel like that to the people who are experiencing it.

I cant feel racism - I've never had that experience. Meghan has felt that, probably for all her life.

 

[becca]

In my opinion, the only person who gets to determine racism/bigotry exists, is the person who is experiencing it. Also, white privilege is not always recognized by the person who has it.

One of my son and daughter in law's best friends from high school is married to a woman of color. When I was first introduced to Renee, I had a fleeting thought of huh, that's unusual/different - wonder where they met. Then I was ashamed of my thoughts - and questioned if would I have wondered those things if she was blonde or auburn/fair skin? Immediately I knew I wouldn't. Fortunately I didn't blurt out anything but it existed none the less.

The Royals may have been moving to the no Prince titles but Archie is the first who is a descendent of a Prince and his grandfather will be King someday, as well as his Uncle and Cousin. The first in the linage to be treated this way. There has to be feelings of a "less than" and questioning by the parents if it's because of biracial heritage. White people can claim it's not - it was a change long due, etc. But im sure it doesn't feel like that to the people who are experiencing it.

I cant feel racism - I've never had that experience. Meghan has felt that, probably for all her life.

I am sorry but i disagree if someone says your doing something do to race. And the person knows in their head and heart that their motives aren’t about race that matters too.

And sometimes you can be 100 percent sure race isn’t involved because you would have held the same position on the matter if the person was white.

The idea that that royal family might have other reasons besides race in the whole Archie isnt a prince thing wouldn’t be fair.

If they do change the rules it will effect Louis and Charlottes kids too.

There is an element of benefit that should be given here and there are very good reasons the royal family has for feeling the monarchy has to be streamlined.

 

[PRlady]

I notice every single biracial couple in TV commercials and there are a lot more than even ten years ago. And every time I notice, I kick myself for noticing.

It may be true that Charles previously wanted to cut down the number of royals with full titles. Putting it into practice for the first biracial grandchild is totally tone-deaf at best.