Just call me Harry. (Everything Harry & Meghan)

[canbelto]

Well, that makes it perfectly okay to be nasty about her. Someone else did it first!

You should ask yourself why you feel the need to denigrate one woman to lift up another. It's not a nice thing to do.

Because the British press now builds her up as St Kate compared to Evil Meghan and I'm tired of it. If I have to read one more article which chastised Meghan for crossing her legs when Kate also crosses her legs when she sits I'm going to scream.

 

[skategal]

And here I thought things would be better here without aftershocks, silly me.

Yes if only the Meghan supporters would just be quiet, life would be so much easier around here.

 

[skategal]

There are royal brides who faced worse from the public and the press; that the abuse wasn't racist didn't make it nice for Camilla to be labeled a homewrecker, Maxima to have to deal with the fallout from her father's actions, Mette-Marit to be seen as inappropriate because of her partying past and Sofia for doing glamour modeling and trashy reality shows. This doesn't mean what Meghan dealt with from some quarters was okay, and she and Harry are very much within their rights with the decision to step away. But yes, a longer engagement may have helped avoid some of the issues they ended up dealing with.

All of those women were marrying Heirs to the throne.

Extra scrutiny of someone who will be Queen is expected.

However, it is not right that those other women were also treated badly.

Meghan married 7th in line to the throne and dropping.

Like it would take a massacre (God forbid) before she and Harry would be on the throne.

Her scrutiny is WAY, WAY, WAY over the top compared to her role in the BRF.

I realize that Harry's wife would always get attention but it has been too much and totally racist.

Why do they care so much who Harry (7th in line to the throne) marries?

Why is it such a sport/pass time to prove she is unsuitable?

They did the right thing by leaving.

 

[Karen-W]

Some of my issues:
1. Endlessly talking about getting together "too fast". Too fast to whom? I married my husband after 3.5 months after meeting him. We've been married over 35 yrs. For H &M it was over a year. YOU (including William) don't get to decide anyone else's timeline.

2. Accusing them of wanting to have their cake & eat it too. (Who doesn't?) Harry has a proud military background. The Invictus Games was his baby. Meghan started the cooking program. What would it hurt to let them continue? I felt & still do that taking away patronages they started was mean-spirited & spiteful of the queen. I can see not using them for ribbon-cutting events but those things were different.

3. Blaming them for the timing of the Oprah interview. They have gotten so much criticism that the interview even exists that the timing is a moot issue. When would be a good time for it? Never? For the last time, CBS will decide. Besides, PP is 99 - he's been in iffy health for years. He's going to die sometime - we all are. I doubt life as we know it is going to stop when he does, even in the UK.

4. Blaming them for being entitled & having more than certain posters have. Some of the people here seem outraged they get 3 squares a day. Meghan may have gotten her 1st audition in Hollywood because of who her daddy is but then she had to prove herself. She was rich thru her own efforts before she met Harry. Some people seem to think that being rich is the be all & end all of everything. They should be able to put up with any despicable thing just because they're rich. There's a difference between a photo op & someone with a long-range camera taking pictures thru your windows.

ETA: btw when I said "yeah, it's exactly the same thing" I should have put this: Obviously some people need to have sarcasm pointed out.

Point 1 - you can't compare your marriage to H/M for several reasons. 1) They didn't even live in the same country/continent for the first 12-15 months of their relationship, 2) not only did she pick up and move to the UK and get married less than 3 months later, she got engaged to one of the world's most high profile bachelors who happens to be subject to intense media scrutiny (earned, fair or not), so, unless you are telling us that you're husband is someone similarly high profile...

Point 2 - already addressed by another poster

Point 3 - the "blame" for the timing of the Oprah interview only started happening yesterday when Philip was moved to the other hospital; if he had remained in the private hospital for the routine treatment of the bladder/kidney infection as was the assumption until the move to St Barts (with its top cardiovascular unit) then I doubt there would be any "oh, H&M should ask Oprah/CBS to hold off". It really is only due to rising concern over Philip's health and, regardless of his age, he still is the patriarch of the family so it feels, somehow, disrespectful to him as a beloved grandfather to let that interview air if he really is close to death. And none of us really know the answer to that, but Harry probably does. CBS is going to get the ratings for that interview whether it airs this week or in 2 months, so what does it matter if they are asked to have some tiny bit of respect for a dying man's family by holding back in airing what could be a controversial interview?

Point 4 - No disagreement here. There is nothing wrong with being rich. There is nothing wrong with taking advantage of an opportunity presented because your parent had a connection. No one should have to put up with long-range cameras taking pictures through your windows, regardless of your wealth or celebrity. Unless you're doing something illegal and then, well, the police/investigators would have a proper search warrant, I would hope.

Let me translate the criticisms re: a longer engagement

“A longer engagement would have been better because it would have been more time for everyone to scare Meghan off and then Harry wouldn’t have married that terrible woman unsuitable to be Royal who doesn’t know her place.”

Well, it certainly scared off plenty of other royal girlfriends - Harry, Andrew, and Charles can give you a list... This has been going on for the past 50 years, Meghan is hardly the first royal girlfriend, then bride, to have endured the intense scrutiny of the British press. But, as others have pointed out, moving in royal circles your entire life and being deemed "suitable" by the grey men running the firm is certainly no guarantee of a long, successful, happy marriage - Diana and Sarah are prime examples of this.

Again the microaggression is off the chart. Would you have dictated what you thought a proper engagement length was if Meghan was an upper-crust white English rose? No you wouldn't. But because she's black you have all this concern-trolling that she's "not a good fit" and "didn't know what she was getting herself into."

Also Meghan and Harry had a short engagement because Meghan is older and there's a ticking biological clock. Had she waited as long as Waity Katie her ovaries would have dried up.

Philip and Elizabeth had a rather short engagement and got married very young. Her father Bertie was not happy actually. That obviously didn't work out.

Oh, please. Chelsy Davy got plenty of scrutiny as Harry's GF, so did Cressida Bonas - both were white, upper-crust women, and Cressida comes from one of the bluest of blueblood families in all of England. Chelsy would have faced the same sort of criticism that Maxima got from the Dutch press, over her father's ties to the Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe had she and Harry wound up engaged. Cressida would have gotten the same "she's an ACTRESS/DANCER" criticism - ie, she's too plebian or celebrity for the BRF. And let's not even discuss how Camilla, who comes from an aristocratic family with long ties to the BRF was deemed wholly unacceptable back in the 70s when she and Charles first met and dated.

As far as her "ticking biological clock" - strange... If they had waited a year to become engaged after she moved to England, that would have put their wedding in May 2019 and let's say they immediately started trying to have a baby as they did with Archie... She would have had a baby last spring. Given that she's now pregnant with her 2nd child, I'm not sure I'm buying the idea that her ovaries would now be dried up now and unable to have children had they waited a year...

P&E 1) had known each other since they were young teenagers so they were made to wait several years before courtship was even allowed, 2) she got married about the same age as many other women in the 1940s and he is 5 years older than her - I bet if you looked at an average age of marriage chart from that era, they would be on the median - times have changed and people (especially women) get married at an older age. Additionally, they are of a generation that didn't believe in divorce, and certainly not within the BRF, and also, the media was a far different animal during their courtship and early years of marriage than it is now - far more deferential to the BRF.

 

[marbri]

All of those women were marrying Heirs to the throne.

Extra scrutiny of someone who will be Queen is expected.

However, it is not right that those other women were also treated badly.

Meghan married 7th in line to the throne and dropping.

Like it would take a massacre (God forbid) before she and Harry would be on the throne.

Her scrutiny is WAY, WAY, WAY over the top compared to her role in the BRF.

I realize that Harry's wife would always get attention but it has been too much and totally racist.

Why do they care so much who Harry (7th in line to the throne) marries?

Why is it such a sport/pass time to prove she is unsuitable?

They did the right thing by leaving.

Has everyone forgotten about Sarah Ferguson?
And Harry and Chelsea dated a long long time and she just gave up because of the press.

 

[MsZem]

All of those women were marrying Heirs to the throne.

Extra scrutiny of someone who will be Queen is expected.

However, it is not right that those other women were also treated badly.

Sofia married Prince Carl Philip, who is not the heir to the Swedish throne; his sister Victoria is the Crown Princess. He was briefly next in line to the throne as a baby, but they changed to absolute primogeniture and made it retroactive (unlike Norway, where it was done going forward). C-P was third in line at the time of his marriage and is now fourth, where I expect him to remain for the foreseeable future.

Another example of a royal bride who got plenty of flack is Princess Mabel of Orange-Nassau, who was married to the late Prince Friso. Although given some of her past associations, this was understandable. Still, he gave up his place in the line of succession and they moved abroad - to England, in fact.

 

[skategal]

Sofia married Prince Carl Philip, who is not the heir to the Swedish throne; his sister Victoria is the Crown Princess. He was briefly next in line to the throne as a baby, but they changed to absolute primogeniture and made it retroactive (unlike Norway, where it was done going forward). C-P was third in line at the time of his marriage and is now fourth, where I expect him to remain for the foreseeable future.

Another example of a royal bride who got plenty of flack - Princess Mabel of Orange-Nassau, who was married to the late Prince Friso. Although given some of her past associations, this was understandable. Still, he gave up his place in the line of succession and they moved abroad - to England, in fact.

Do you really think that Meghan should
put up with bullying just because other Royal brides got bullied too?

Does that make it better or easier for you to accept?

I’m not really following the logic here?

It doesn’t make Meghan’s experience less worse because others had it bad also especially when the media targeted something she couldn’t change about herself (her race.)

No one should have to put up with that especially this day and age when we know more and can see how badly some of this vitriol impacted the lives of others (Diana, Sarah)

 

[overedge]

From the Daily Fail link that was posted yesterday, the "blaming" of Meghan re the interview timing is pretty sketchy. The story sounds like the Fail reporters phoned up some royal "experts" and asked them, what would be the reaction if Philip was ill and if the interview was aired when it was scheduled. And that gave the experts the opportunity to bloviate about how this would make H&M look insensitive, etc. etc.
Which then gave the Fail the opportunity to spin the story as "H&M criticized for letting interview go ahead".

So IOW the Fail set up a very hypothetical scenario, got some "experts" to say something about it, and then blew it up into a story that made it sound like this is a growing issue. These are typical British tabloid tactics, and they don't just do it to H&M. I can't count the number of times I've seen a story on one day saying something like "Aliens might be in outer space", and then a few days later, another story saying "Concerns raised about aliens in outer space" - when it was the tabloid that raised the "concerns" in the first place. It's funny on one level, but it's also really irresponsible.

 

[AxelAnnie]

Again the microaggression is off the chart. Would you have dictated what you thought a proper engagement length was if Meghan was an upper-crust white English rose? No you wouldn't. But because she's black you have all this concern-trolling that she's "not a good fit" and "didn't know what she was getting herself into."

Also Meghan and Harry had a short engagement because Meghan is older and there's a ticking biological clock. Had she waited as long as Waity Katie her ovaries would have dried up.

Philip and Elizabeth had a rather short engagement and got married very young. Her father Bertie was not happy actually. That obviously didn't work out.

They had a short engagement....after having know each other since she she was 12.

 

[MsZem]

Do you really think that Meghan should
put up with bullying just because other Royal brides got bullied too?

Yes, clearly that is what I'm saying

You argued that extra scrutiny of someone who will one day be queen is to be expected, I pointed out that it's been the case even for women who did not marry heirs to their countries' thrones (Sofia, Mabel).

So in short, Meghan's experience is not unusual, contrary to what some have argued here. The specifics are unique to each royal bride (and in some case to the men too, e.g. not everyone was thrilled with Victoria's choice of partner), but marrying into a royal family brings a lot of attention with it, not all of it positive. This is because some people are jerks. Racist jerks, in Meghan's case. Classist jerks, for some of the others. Or just garden variety unpleasant people.

If Meghan and Harry had been willing/able to take things more slowly, it may have been easier for her to adjust to her new life and ignore the noise.

 

[Karen-W]

From the Daily Fail link that was posted yesterday, the "blaming" of Meghan re the interview timing is pretty sketchy. The story sounds like the Fail reporters phoned up some royal "experts" and asked them, what would be the reaction if Philip was ill and if the interview was aired when it was scheduled. And that gave the experts the opportunity to bloviate about how this would make H&M look insensitive, etc. etc.
Which then gave the Fail the opportunity to spin the story as "H&M criticized for letting interview go ahead".

So IOW the Fail set up a very hypothetical scenario, got some "experts" to say something about it, and then blew it up into a story that made it sound like this is a growing issue. These are typical British tabloid tactics, and they don't just do it to H&M. I can't count the number of times I've seen a story on one day saying something like "Aliens might be in outer space", and then a few days later, another story saying "Concerns raised about aliens in outer space" - when it was the tabloid that raised the "concerns" in the first place. It's funny on one level, but it's also really irresponsible.

Yes, and I'm not necessarily of the belief that Harry & Meghan are somehow at fault for the interview timing. Did we expect them to be omniscient and "know" that Grandpa Phil was going to wind up in two different hospitals for going on 3 weeks when they agreed to this interview and the air date? I suppose some people might but I'm not one of them, lol.

 

[skategal]

So in short, Meghan's experience is not unusual.

If Meghan and Harry had been willing/able to take things more slowly, it may have been easier for her to adjust to her new life and ignore the noise.

Her experience is unusual as she is the first Woman of Color marrying into the BRF and the first to experience racism for it.

Why do other women getting bullied get repeatedly brought up in this thread and other places when Meghan says she was bullied if not to diminish her experiences? Or suggest that she should have just put up with it?

Your last line suggests that if they had taken it slow, she may have been able to adjust to and ignore the bullying?

Why on earth should she?

 

[MsZem]

Your last line suggests that if they had taken it slow, she may have been able to adjust to and ignore the bullying?

Why on earth should she?

You continue to misread my posts.

Famous people - and royals are very famous people - often get negative attention. It is unfortunate, and often not remotely their fault. It seems to me better for one's own peace of mind to ignore this sort of noise.

Though I do know that Princess Sofia has made online bullying one of her causes, I think in part because of her own experiences.

 

[canbelto]

Something different about Meghan: unlike other people who married into the BRF she worked most of her life and was an independent earner. Diana ... what was she going to do? Her whole life was spent prepping to be the rich wife of an aristocrat.

So Meghan probably already knew of people at Netflix and Spotify and other media/entertainment channels. This meant she didn't have to stay put when her son was being called a chimp. What is wrong with a woman in 2021 having definite money-earning skills?

In the real world, women are expected to know other skills besides cutting ribbons and looking pretty in a fascinator.

 

[skategal]

It seems to me better for one's own peace of mind to ignore this sort of noise.

I'm not misreading anything.

You just admitted that according to you, (who isn't the victim here) that she should ignore it and/or put up with it.

Meghan, the victim, obviously feels differently.

Again, why should she ignore racial bullying against herself?

Not to mention how damaging that is to your self-worth, it's only making things worse for the next one who marries into the family.

If my child told me they were being racially bullied in school, I wouldn't say "That's okay....someone else was last year too."

I'm truly baffled.

 

[Jenny]

1) Its my experience that when someone has this totally irrational hatred of someone they don't know from a hole in the wall, the reasons are usually sex and race.

Then your experience is perhaps limited. "Totally irrational hatred of someone they don't actually know" - the kind seen in the comments sections and on social media for example - can yes often be based on sex and race. More than that though, it can be rooted in fear of something different than themselves, and thus the totally irrational hatred that is based on religion, on gender, on socioeconomic status, or political beliefs. It can also be based on envy - of someone's privilege, wealth, success, good fortune or anything else that a totally irrational person does not have and blames others - notably those who do have it - because of their own circumstances.

However, I think we are continuing to talk about two different things here. I think everyone here agrees that yes there is a lot of totally irrational hatred directed at Meghan that is based on racism. As I recall, aftershocks was also of the opinion that in addition to racism, much of the hatred of Meghan was also based on envy, or as she put it jealousy of many things, including marital and maternal happiness, her beauty, intelligence, talents and career success, and all the attention she gets.

But all that is very different than having opinions, some of them critical, about the choices a person makes, the actions they take and the things they say, which is for the most part what we do here at FSU.

I guess for some there is no middle ground - you either love her or you hate her - but I don't see it that way at all. I think most of the posters who participate in the royalty threads have a genuine interest, and therefore want to discuss and debate the details with others who share that interest. Doesn't make any one of us a totally irrational hater, or a racist, or sexist.

 

[MacMadame]

Not sure why getting rid of just one side of the would fix anything.

I did expect the mind-reading to end. Silly me.

2) Waity Katie wasn't my nickname for her. It's the nickname the British press assigned her when she waited for that ring.

It's a slur against her. I don't think we should be repeating it.

Because the British press now builds her up as St Kate compared to Evil Meghan and I'm tired of it. If I have to read one more article which chastised Meghan for crossing her legs when Kate also crosses her legs when she sits I'm going to scream.

You don't have to read those articles. Also, calling Kate a bad name isn't going to make them stop.

If Meghan and Harry had been willing/able to take things more slowly, it may have been easier for her to adjust to her new life and ignore the noise.

Or not.

I personally would like Harry to grow a thicker skin and not think his wife is going to die because the press hounds her as this is unlikely and not having these fears would make life a lot easier for him. But I think standing up to racism is a good thing so I would be disappointed if the two of them just shut up and took it when that happened. And I don't think waiting longer to get married would have made the racism go away. Maybe it would have been easier for Meghan but Harry's other girlfriends didn't have that experience. Waiting didn't make it easier for them at all.

 

[MsZem]

I personally would like Harry to grow a thicker skin and not think his wife is going to die because the press hounds her as this is unlikely and not having these fears would make life a lot easier for him. But I think standing up to racism is a good thing so I would be disappointed if the two of them just shut up and took it when that happened. And I don't think waiting longer to get married would have made the racism go away. Maybe it would have been easier for Meghan but Harry's other girlfriends didn't have that experience. Waiting didn't make it easier for them at all.

That last part is a good point, and having two serious relationships end because his partners didn't want to live in a royal fishbowl couldn't have been fun. Harry has talked about how much he's struggled with his mother's death (and no wonder!). It very likely affects much of their perspective on the press and their relationship to various media.

I wonder if for Meghan, the Africa trip so soon after Archie's birth was also challenging. It was planned far in advance, and obviously it meant a lot to them to be able to do it. But it's a hard thing to do so soon after becoming a mother for the first time. Many of my friends were still on maternity leave at that point, and having to take an extended trip like that, where you constantly have to be "on", would have been unimaginable.

 

[cygnus]

They had a short engagement....after having know each other since she she was 12.

As AxelAnnie says- they had known each other since adolescence and had corresponded for years. They were also not especially young for the times- 21 and 26 at the time of the wedding.

 

[canbelto]

Then your experience is perhaps limited. "Totally irrational hatred of someone they don't actually know" - the kind seen in the comments sections and on social media for example - can yes often be based on sex and race. More than that though, it can be rooted in fear of something different than themselves, and thus the totally irrational hatred that is based on religion, on gender, on socioeconomic status, or political beliefs. It can also be based on envy - of someone's privilege, wealth, success, good fortune or anything else that a totally irrational person does not have and blames others - notably those who do have it - because of their own circumstances.

However, I think we are continuing to talk about two different things here. I think everyone here agrees that yes there is a lot of totally irrational hatred directed at Meghan that is based on racism. As I recall, aftershocks was also of the opinion that in addition to racism, much of the hatred of Meghan was also based on envy, or as she put it jealousy of many things, including marital and maternal happiness, her beauty, intelligence, talents and career success, and all the attention she gets.

Well I'm not at all envious of Meghan. I watched Suits and thought it was pleasant but Rachel wasn't a favorite character or anything. I don't think Meghan's all that pretty or interesting and I also don't envy being married to Harry, as from the few interviews I've seen with him he seems to have a hatred of the press bordering on paranoia and also seems impulsive and maybe not that pleasant. Unlike aftershocks, I didn't think their love story was anything special.

However, I do think the criticisms of her actually have nothing to do with what she's done but are British tabs' racist clickbait. And it's depressing to see the same microaggressive lines being pushed in this thread. Like calling her "pushy" or Harry "p__sywhipped." One poster even said Kate had "better genes" than Meghan. All the nitpicking on protocol (she rubbed her belly! she crossed her legs!), all the "poor Harry" posts, the endless comparisons to Diana and Kate. That actually has nothing to do with anything Meghan;s ever done or said. It's just racist, sexist, xenophobic, Anglo-centric bullying.

 

[Jenny]

OK I wasn't going to but I have to address the word "pushy," which until a few days ago I had no idea was a racial slur against Black women. Just did some searching, and yes I see that Meghan has been referred to as pushy, and in fact Princess [same word].

But really? I've heard that word my whole life, in many contexts, and regardless of race. Salespeople can be pushy, and restaurant reviews sometimes complain that waitstaff a pushy. Teenage kids who are sexually aggressive with their partners can be pushy. People who try to wedge themselves into conversations or get themselves invited to things are called pushy. People who press others to do things, like say "come on, you go first" could be called pushy. That family who kept nudging up against my bag in the security line at the airport in Miami a couple of years back was definitely pushy.

So yeah it's not a nice thing to be called, although it's often warranted by a person's behaviour, but there's no way that it automatically equals racism toward Black women.

 

[Japanfan]

A normal couple can get engaged quickly. This is not a normal couple. Meghan didn't realize what she was getting herself in.

The same could be said of many 'normal' people, or average people, for a myriad of reasons.

 

[Karen-W]

Well I'm not at all envious of Meghan. I watched Suits and thought it was pleasant but Rachel wasn't a favorite character or anything. I don't think Meghan's all that pretty or interesting and I also don't envy being married to Harry, as from the few interviews I've seen with him he seems to have a hatred of the press bordering on paranoia and also seems impulsive and maybe not that pleasant. Unlike aftershocks, I didn't think their love story was anything special.

However, I do think the criticisms of her actually have nothing to do with what she's done but are British tabs' racist clickbait. And it's depressing to see the same microaggressive lines being pushed in this thread. Like calling her "pushy" or Harry "p__sywhipped." One poster even said Kate had "better genes" than Meghan. All the nitpicking on protocol (she rubbed her belly! she crossed her legs!), all the "poor Harry" posts, the endless comparisons to Diana and Kate. That actually has nothing to do with anything Meghan;s ever done or said. It's just racist, sexist, xenophobic, Anglo-centric bullying.

Seriously, you are the one who interpreted my comment about her "wings being clipped" as code for "pushy black woman". Stop trying to put words in other people's mouths.

As far as any the term "pushy" - this is NOT a term that is limited to just black women. As I pointed out, and you ignored, Sheryl Sandberg wrote a best-selling book, "Lean In", about how women in general can combat that "pushy" or "aggressive" label in the workforce, especially in breaking the glass ceiling. Moreover, Meghan isn't even the first royal to have been called "pushy". Go Google search "Princess Pushy" and see all the articles, dating back decades, about Princess Michael of Kent - a blueblood aristocrat herself who married into the BRF.

You really, really, really are bringing way too much of your own baggage about racism and micro-aggressions to this discussion and, clearly, don't follow/haven't followed royalty (not just the BRF but European and Japan also) for long enough to make solid arguments to back up your claims.

 

[Judy]

1) Its my experience that when someone has this totally irrational hatred of someone they don't know from a hole in the wall, the reasons are usually sex and race.
2) Waity Katie wasn't my nickname for her. It's the nickname the British press assigned her when she waited for that ring.
3) She was still 21 which is much younger than Harry and Meghan when they got married.

Kate was 29 when she got married unless I missed something.

 

[canbelto]

Kate was 29 when she got married unless I missed something.

Which was a 9-10 year courtship. If Meghan had waited that long she would have been 45-46 and her ovaries definitely would have been dried up.

 

[Karen-W]

Which was a 9-10 year courtship. If Meghan had waited that long she would have been 45-46 and her ovaries definitely would have been dried up.

No one said she needed a 9-10 yr courtship but at least a year living in the UK would have been good.

 

[overedge]

No one said she needed a 9-10 yr courtship but at least a year living in the UK would have been good.

I thought she was living in the UK with Harry, or was there most of the time, before he proposed to her.

 

[Karen-W]

I thought she was living in the UK with Harry, or was there most of the time, before he proposed to her.

The Suits contract ended sometime in mid-2017. My offhand recollection is that she stillhad her place in Toronto during the Invictus Games that year (late Aug/early September) and completed the move after that, and they were engaged by the end of November. So, at best, she was in the UK for 5 months, probably closer to 3, when they got engaged.

 

[MacMadame]

I thought she was living in the UK with Harry, or was there most of the time, before he proposed to her.

She was.

Something to keep in mind, while what was made public may have seemed fast, there was stuff going on behind the scenes earlier than when the relationship was made public. So maybe it was fast, maybe it wasn't. Maybe it being fast was a contributor to the problems, maybe it wasn't.

We sort of know that William thought it was fast (assuming the rumors are true) but we don't know if that's because it really was or because he thought 9-10 years was a reasonable amount of time to date/be engaged.

So yeah it's not a nice thing to be called, although it's often warranted by a person's behaviour, but there's no way that it automatically equals racism toward Black women.

It doesn't automatically but a lot of times when it is directed at a Black woman it is code for "not knowing their place" and "their place" is code for "back of the bus."

I do think the UK tabloids lost their collective minds when Harry got engaged to a Black woman, let alone divorced and American. They said blatantly racist shit and they also got fully on board with a lot of racist tropes and microaggressions. Black women being called pushy for perfectly normal behavior is a common one. It's also sexist because it's used against all women just for having autonomy.

 

[overedge]

The Suits contract ended sometime in mid-2017. My offhand recollection is that she stillhad her place in Toronto during the Invictus Games that year (late Aug/early September) and completed the move after that, and they were engaged by the end of November. So, at best, she was in the UK for 5 months, probably closer to 3, when they got engaged.

I think she was spending as much time as possible with him in the UK after they started going out together. Not the same as living there full-time, admittedly, but at least she would have got some sense of what it was like "across the pond".