Royalty Thread #11: Putting the "Fun" in Dysfunctional

[Judy]

The Iran plane crash is dominating headlines here in Canada and rightfully so. Just so tragic. My condolences to your country as well.

 

[canbelto]

So I'm a big opera fan so I decided to compare Meghan's situation to a bunch of unhappy operatic princesses who might have wanted their own "Megxits":

Megxit: Unhappy Operatic Princesses

Meghan, Harry and Baby Archie This week a bombshell was dropped upon the British Royal Family: Harry and Meghan announced on their Inst...

humbledandoverwhelmed.blogspot.com

 

[Vagabond]

Every princess secretly dreams of being a commoner someday.

 

[canbelto]

I only included princesses who married into the royal family.

 

[Judy]

And the plane crash has been the headline on the news for the past couple of days here in the UK with the royals saga moving down the order. Yes the royals are probably getting more airtime than over in Canada but that's because we are in the UK and it is our royal family. And to be honest I'm sick and tired of hearing that she was hounded by the British media - she wasn't hounded at all. She just didn't like some of the reporting that came her way. If you want to see hounding I suggest you go back and look at some of the video's of Diana being chased through airports and down streets by the paparazzi - literally running from them. Now that was hounding and pretty bad it was too. That has certainly never happened to Meghan.

the insanity over coverage for Diana was always just nuts. I guess you’d have to compare how Kate is covered and Meghan is covered. It is night and day. Kate has been used to attack Meghan.

 

[mag]

And to be honest I'm sick and tired of hearing that she was hounded by the British media - she wasn't hounded at all. She just didn't like some of the reporting that came her way. If you want to see hounding I suggest you go back and look at some of the video's of Diana being chased through airports and down streets by the paparazzi - literally running from them. Now that was hounding and pretty bad it was too. That has certainly never happened to Meghan.

This x 1000. There is a ton of brutal social media BS. The palace hired extra staff, comments have been turned off on a ton of YouTube videos and online articles. There has been a concerted effort to deal with the horrendous racist crap. Tabloids, which are not mainstream media or royal rota reporters, are poorly written, scummy fanfics which have printed some nasty stuff. Much of it made up. They do that about lots of people, it is made worse as there is clearly a racial component to what they write about Meghan.

None of that is the media hounding Meghan. None of that is required reading for Meghan or Harry. In fact they would have to go looking for it. None of that is likely to change based on the plan they have put forward. It may change if those people find someone else to pick on, or YouTube ups it standards, or people suddenly stop reading the tabloids. None of that is within Harry or Meghan’s control.

@Judy, yes, Kate has been used to attack Meghan just as Meghan has been used to attack Kate. I would argue that is a draw. Kate also went through the same cycle Meghan is currently. Kate was alternately attacked and vilified, praised and put on a pedestal, wash, rinse, repeat, for years. Not race based but class based. This is not new behaviour. It doesn’t make it right, it just makes it not unique to Meghan. The race portion may be unique, but the basic build them up swat them down part is not.

If the Sussexes were planning to withdraw from public life their complaints (media hounding) and their solution (withdrawal) would at least be consistent. As it stands, their solution seems to be more about trying to get away from the restrictions of being royal, while keeping many of the benefits. About trying to control what news is reported about them so they will no longer be criticized if they do something people don’t like. If they can convince their current employer to go along with that, more power to them, but I wouldn’t expect the mainstream media to be so compliant. I also wouldn’t underestimate the how quickly the Canadian taxpayer will turn on them if we are left holding a large bill for their security.

 

[MsZem]

the insanity over coverage for Diana was always just nuts. I guess you’d have to compare how Kate is covered and Meghan is covered. It is night and day. Kate has been used to attack Meghan.

Kate had to deal with paparazzi coming after her all the time when she was a royal girlfriend with little protection - you can see some pictures here and video here. Paparazzi also took topless photos of her with telephoto lens after her marriage.

If anything, Meghan didn't have to deal with the same degree of harassment because the relationship was long-distance and by the time she moved to the UK, it was quite official. There's no denying that there's been ugly coverage of her, but to suggest that Kate has had a great time of it is ridiculous.

Stans on social media have attacked both women. It's gross. There's no need to tear one of them down to make the other look better.

 

[canbelto]

I must have missed something because I've never seen any attacks on Kate either on SM or in print. I have seen a lot of KP comments that had to be deleted because people were calling Kate their "White Queen" and other white supremacist crap.

 

[Judy]

Meghan Markle is being criticized for doing the same things that Kate Middleton is praised for, and a royal expert says it wouldn't be happening if she were white

Markle received backlash when her bodyguard told fans not to take photos. But Middleton was recently called "down to earth" for the same thing.

www.insider.com

 

[manhn]

If you want to defend the British press, then okay.

 

[mag]

@Judy, really?

“When Markle's bodyguard asked spectators at Wimbledon not to take photos of her, there was serious backlash. However, when Middleton's bodyguard told fans the same thing during a recent shopping trip, she was praised for being "down to earth."”

Meghan was at Wimbledon where people were taking photos of the players. She was sitting in an area cleared of spectators. This was done because of who she is. People who were taking photos not of her but of players were asked to stop.

Kate was in a store with her two small children who are under the age of ten.

So, yes, let’s call those two situations comparable.

“For instance, an October 2018 InStyle article accused the Duchess of Sussex of breaking "royal shoe protocol" for wearing wedges. Several months later, InStyle published another article praising the Duchess of Cambridge for wearing the same type of shoes, hailing them as "the most versatile shoes of the summer."”

First off, I highly doubt there is a Royal shoe protocol.” Second, would you like me to link to all the times Kate has been critiqued for her hair and Meghan has been praised? And where Meghan was critiqued for her hair and Kate was praised. We could on with sleeves versus no sleeves, pants versus skirts, versus dresses. That is someone filling a column with fashion fluff. Because of their royal roles, Meghan and Kate have access to designers and clothing that we can only dream of. Stupid, insipid fashion columns is a small price to pay. The same was done with Diana and Sarah.

 

[puglover]

Nasty accusations and insinuations are not new. I recall following the death of Diana (which evidence appeared to clearly suggest was due to a driver 3 times over the legal limit of intoxication in France, and seat belt not fastened) there were conspiracy theories that the monarchy (Prince Phillip, I believe) was behind it and somehow facilitated it. Not too sure what worse could be said of you - so sadly it is the world we live in. As for me, I like them all, I LOVE THE QUEEN!!

 

[overedge]

In the past, Governor-General positions were occasionally used as a place to put troublesome royals who the family wanted to get out of the country, like when the Duke of Windsor was made Governor of Bermuda.

But the Governor General position (and Lieutenant Governor in the Canadian provinces) is not just ceremonial. There is the ribbon-cutting and patronage aspect of it, but it's also acting as the Queen's representative. That means signing off on legislation, giving the Throne Speech at the start of legislative sessions, giving advice to the Prime Minister or Premier on constitutional matters, and dissolving the legislative body when the Premier or Prime Minister steps down or no longer has "the confidence of the House". It also means appointing the new Premier or Prime Minister after an election, which can be tricky if there's a minority government or a tie between political parties in the number of seats.

So it's definitely not a part-time job. Since the Queen can't be physically present all the time in all of the Commonwealth countries, the Governor-General is supposed to be on the job all the time. Even if the job were vacant, Harry couldn't do it for only part of the year.

 

[mag]

I must have missed something because I've never seen any attacks on Kate either on SM or in print. I have seen a lot of KP comments that had to be deleted because people were calling Kate their "White Queen" and other white supremacist crap.

You do realize that is not an example of the media hounding Meghan? Those are nasty racist trolls writing in a comment section. The fact that the comments were deleted means there is a plan in place and people are attempting to deal with it. I have read a similar level of nastiness by people who praise Meghan and vilify Kate. Neither is right or good. Both are and should be deleted. Again, not the press hounding Meghan.

I guess you don’t remember the “Waity Katie” headlines or the “Whisteria Sister” headlines and comments that also brought Pippa (who, at the time was not a public figure nor was she dating one) into the nastiness.

Again, I don’t think anyone is arguing these sorts of attacks are right. What is being said is that there needs to be a distinction between the Royal Press Corp, The Tabloids, and Social Media and comment sections. They are not the same things. There also needs to be an understanding of how the behaviour of the paparazzi has changed since Diana’s time. While racist attacks are definitely some of the worst, that doesn’t mean someone like Kate isn’t hurt by stuff written about her. It isn’t a competition. As someone mentioned up thread, we don’t need to tear one down to bring the other up.

Interesting read:

What would it mean for Harry and Meghan to come to Canada? — CBC News

If Prince Harry and Meghan Markle end up spending part of their time in Canada, it could pose various legal, constitutional and immigration questions.

apple.news

 

[canbelto]

@mag don't you think the fact that KP has to work around the clock to delete racist comments represents a problem considering their Instagram is just pictures of W&K and other members of the royal family going out and about? A picture of Kate going to visit a charity shouldn't bring out a bunch of racists saying she's their White Queen. Meghan shouldn't be called a man, or a chimpanzee. The fact that users have to be blocked and comments deleted represents a huge problem.

 

[AxelAnnie]

Where is this figure of 30,000,000 from Diana coming form? According to this link both William and Harry inherited approx. £10,000,000 each on their 30th birthdays.

Who inherited what from Princess Di's will.

The Queen Mother certainly left more to Harry than William due to the fact that William is destined to have access to the funds produced from the Duchy of Cornwall at some point as well as become sovereign. Diana however spilt her estate equally between her boys.

I think I was incorrect. I confused his net worth with the amount of the trust.

According to Celebrity Net Worth, Prince Harry is worth around $40m (£30m). His money comes from a trust fund which was left to him by his mother Princess Diana, with Harry and William both inheriting their share on their 30th birthdays.

 

[mag]

@canbelto I agree, and have stated that, it is a terrible problem. I don’t think anyone here is disagreeing with that. My point is that has nothing to do with the reporters in the Royal Press Corp. and is not a reason to want to opt out of the Royal rota.

There is also nothing I can see in what they are proposing that is going to change the actions of those racist people making terrible comments. Which means either Harry and Meghan also don’t seem to understand the difference, or what they really want is control over the “news” that is reported about them. That, as one royal correspondent noted, is not how things are done in democratic societies.

 

[starrynight]

The more I think of it, it's tempting to have this revolve around Meghan, when Harry has probably been wanting to leave the royal family for a very long time, well before he met her. I do wonder if Meghan represented a ticket out for him and an excuse to leave.

It's disappointing to me that a royal like Harry, who was always a real favourite, doesn't want it (or the people) anymore. There's more to being a royal than just newspaper articles. It's the public that are excited to meet them at events, walkabouts, royal tours. And so the way this whole thing very visibly represents a middle finger to the royal family and the Commonwealth is regrettable.

And in that sense, if it becomes a case that Harry wants to leave for North America and potentially say to the people that he isn't interested in them anymore (and potentially doing a host of interviews and books that are critical to the country)... it's hard for him to justify living off millions of pounds of rent each year that has been paid by the people to the Duchy of Cornwall.

It's a long way from King George and the Princesses who refused to leave Buckingham Palace while London was being bombed in WWII - the famous quote from the Queen Mother: The children won't go without me. I won't leave without the King. And the King will never leave.

And I might just leave this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsrRFNhdCOE

For all the talk of others, the Queen has walked the walked and in my opinion will go down as one of the great feminist icons of female dignity and power in history.

 

[overedge]

@starrynight I think being a Royal is just like any other kind of job, in that some people enjoy it and others don't - I mean "enjoy" in the sense of liking the job duties, not just enjoying the money and perks that come with the position. The major difference is that people are born into that job, i.e. they don't decide they want to do it and then train for it or apply for it. They just have to do it.

So it must really suck for the Royal family members who don't like the job but who have to do it anyway. I think some learn to like it because they don't have many viable alternatives, and some grow into it. But maybe Harry isn't one of those Royals.

 

[taf2002]

If the Sussexes were planning to withdraw from public life their complaints (media hounding) and their solution (withdrawal) would at least be consistent. As it stands, their solution seems to be more about trying to get away from the restrictions of being royal, while keeping many of the benefits. About trying to control what news is reported about them so they will no longer be criticized if they do something people don’t like. If they can convince their current employer to go along with that, more power to them, but I wouldn’t expect the mainstream media to be so compliant. I also wouldn’t underestimate the how quickly the Canadian taxpayer will turn on them if we are left holding a large bill for their security.

I saw many waity Katie comments & the like for years. I never saw one thing to compare with calling your precious baby a chimpanzee. And that was a reporter, not in some comments section. As for keeping the benefits, people are acting like if H&M break away but still have a priviledged lifestyle it's somehow inconsistent with their stated goals. Even without Daddy's money they should be able to live lavishly on the money that is theirs.

 

[overedge]

@canbelto I agree, and have stated that, it is a terrible problem. I don’t think anyone here is disagreeing with that. My point is that has nothing to do with the reporters in the Royal Press Corp. and is not a reason to want to opt out of the Royal rota.

There is also nothing I can see in what they are proposing that is going to change the actions of those racist people making terrible comments. Which means either Harry and Meghan also don’t seem to understand the difference, or what they really want is control over the “news” that is reported about them. That, as one royal correspondent noted, is not how things are done in democratic societies.

This. I see horrible racist and hater comments on the most innocuous and inoffensive stories about H&M. That's not the media's fault for writing the stories. Some people are going to post cr*p no matter what the story is about.

 

[overedge]

I think I was incorrect. I confused his net worth with the amount of the trust.

Celebrity Net Worth is not a reliable estimator of how much money celebrities have.

 

[Lorac]

I saw many waity Katie comments & the like for years. I never saw one thing to compare with calling your precious baby a chimpanzee. And that was a reporter, not in some comments section. As for keeping the benefits, people are acting like if H&M break away but still have a priviledged lifestyle it's somehow inconsistent with their stated goals. Even without Daddy's money they should be able to live lavishly on the money that is theirs.

No it wasn't - it was an idiot DJ who was both vilified and fired for that abhorrent tweet. I'm not defending reporters who cross the mark but please don't lump this piece of shite in with them. Social media has a lot to answer for.

DJ fired for offensive tweet

 

[mag]

I saw many waity Katie comments & the like for years. I never saw one thing to compare with calling your precious baby a chimpanzee. And that was a reporter, not in some comments section. As for keeping the benefits, people are acting like if H&M break away but still have a priviledged lifestyle it's somehow inconsistent with their stated goals. Even without Daddy's money they should be able to live lavishly on the money that is theirs.

The chimpanzee comment was, I can’t even think of a word to describe it. I though it was a radio personality who said it, but I could be wrong. My understanding is he was fired on the spot - as he should be. (Ahh, @Lorac beat me to it)

As for living a lavish lifestyle, since you quoted me, I don’t think that has anything to do with it. It is a matter of whether they plan to live in the public eye or out of it. Canadians are well known, especially Vancouverites, for allowing celebrities to go about their daily business without comment, but if H&M are going to market themselves in order to promote their global charity initiatives, they will get press coverage, and it will be, for the most part, based on what they say and do.

In the article I posted above, there are a few of interesting bits. First, they would both have to go through the usual citizenship/immigration route. Meghan may have, of course, already started that. I doubt they are actually thinking about citizenship because they can live here for six months without it. Furthermore, Canadians cannot have titles - see Conrad Black. Second, they do not qualify under the current rules to get security protection from the RCMP, and private security in Canada cannot carry firearms. Finally, Harry has no official status based on his place in the Royal Family. Canada does not recognize succession. Basically whoever is the monarch is our head of state, but we don’t give status to those in the line of succession.

 

[overedge]

@mag One small correction: there are titles in Canada. Not "lord", "lady", "princess" and the like, but the Governor-General is "Right Honourable" and the Lieutenants-Governor are "Honourable", and they keep those titles after they leave the office. The Prime Minister, the members of the Privy Council, and the judges of the Supreme Court (federal and provincial) are also "Honourable" while they're in office. Conrad Black gave up his Canadian citizenship to be able to sit in the UK House of Lords and be given a lordship in the UK.

 

[becca]

You do realize that is not an example of the media hounding Meghan? Those are nasty racist trolls writing in a comment section. The fact that the comments were deleted means there is a plan in place and people are attempting to deal with it. I have read a similar level of nastiness by people who praise Meghan and vilify Kate. Neither is right or good. Both are and should be deleted. Again, not the press hounding Meghan.

I guess you don’t remember the “Waity Katie” headlines or the “Whisteria Sister” headlines and comments that also brought Pippa (who, at the time was not a public figure nor was she dating one) into the nastiness.

Again, I don’t think anyone is arguing these sorts of attacks are right. What is being said is that there needs to be a distinction between the Royal Press Corp, The Tabloids, and Social Media and comment sections. They are not the same things. There also needs to be an understanding of how the behaviour of the paparazzi has changed since Diana’s time. While racist attacks are definitely some of the worst, that doesn’t mean someone like Kate isn’t hurt by stuff written about her. It isn’t a competition. As someone mentioned up thread, we don’t need to tear one down to bring the other up.

Interesting read:

What would it mean for Harry and Meghan to come to Canada? — CBC News

If Prince Harry and Meghan Markle end up spending part of their time in Canada, it could pose various legal, constitutional and immigration questions.

apple.news

Kate has had plenty of haters and critics

@Judy, really?

“When Markle's bodyguard asked spectators at Wimbledon not to take photos of her, there was serious backlash. However, when Middleton's bodyguard told fans the same thing during a recent shopping trip, she was praised for being "down to earth."”

Meghan was at Wimbledon where people were taking photos of the players. She was sitting in an area cleared of spectators. This was done because of who she is. People who were taking photos not of her but of players were asked to stop.

Kate was in a store with her two small children who are under the age of ten.

So, yes, let’s call those two situations comparable.

“For instance, an October 2018 InStyle article accused the Duchess of Sussex of breaking "royal shoe protocol" for wearing wedges. Several months later, InStyle published another article praising the Duchess of Cambridge for wearing the same type of shoes, hailing them as "the most versatile shoes of the summer."”

First off, I highly doubt there is a Royal shoe protocol.” Second, would you like me to link to all the times Kate has been critiqued for her hair and Meghan has been praised? And where Meghan was critiqued for her hair and Kate was praised. We could on with sleeves versus no sleeves, pants versus skirts, versus dresses. That is someone filling a column with fashion fluff. Because of their royal roles, Meghan and Kate have access to designers and clothing that we can only dream of. Stupid, insipid fashion columns is a small price to pay. The same was done with Diana and Sarah.

I think both have had critics Waity Katie! I think living in public she gets it. I don’t think Kate saying no photos in a store is the same as telling people not to take selfies at Wimbledon! The people in questions weren’t even trying to photograph her.

I do think if they hope to be global celebrities they aren’t exactly going to escape the press.

 

[Parsley Sage]

Kate has had plenty of haters and critics


I think both have had critics Waity Katie! I think living in public she gets it. I don’t think Kate saying no photos in a store is the same as telling people not to take selfies at Wimbledon! The people in questions weren’t even trying to photograph her.

I do think if they hope to be global celebrities they aren’t exactly going to escape the press.

The two kind of go together.

 

[starrynight]

To be honest, I felt like the most damaging stuff in the lead up to the wedding all came from US gossip websites and paparazzi.

 

[MLIS]

The Governor-General in Canada (or any other Commonwealth country) is not what Harry and Meghan want. It is a very ceremonial and procedural role, even more than their current ones. Politically neutral, scrutinized for spending and behaviour, archaic ceremonies and photo ops, it would be even more limiting. Not to mention it would not be popular with the Canadian public to have a non-Canadian in the role, no matter how popular the individual. I think it’s pretty clear they’re looking to have more freedom and the opportunity to make money, taking up a role like that would not be the way to go.

Like many others, I have sympathy for them and completely understand why they might want to go in this direction, but think their execution has been terrible. Not for the first time, I might add. They have made so many missteps and it’s so hard to understand. They could have done this so differently.

 

[mag]

Apparently there will be a meeting on Monday: (Clearly they read my post and are getting together to give us all the required information )

https://youtu.be/A1RkUjcJAIE