canbelto
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 9,178
So you like a racist, colonialist institution? Got it.
The Heir, The Spare and the “Baby Brain” -The Prince Harry and Meghan show rumbles on…
- Thread starter SHARPIE
- Start date
So you like a racist, colonialist institution? Got it.
puglover
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 2,749
I love my country of birth also, although I am aware of tragic policies that have been far from admirable. I have wonderful memories of gathering around the radio and eventually the television as a child and listening to the queen's Christmas message. I have always found much to admire about her and found her to be a steadying influence in my life. I prefer to focus on the good that they do.
canbelto
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 9,178
I loved the Queen too, and was saddened when she passed away. But I can't imagine actually liking the institution of royalty that much. What good do any of them actually do nowadays?
puglover
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 2,749
I guess it is really in the eyes of the beholder. To name but a few: the King, for example, has been a very vocal advocate for climate control and has operated his own farms in a very future conscious way for decades. We can all picture Princess Diana with her arm around AIDS patients and venturing into fields strewn with landmines. My BIL died of AIDS in the late 80's and her example was so amazing to us as airlines would not fly those suspected of having AIDS at the time. During COVID William and Catherine were engaged in reaching out and finding heros in the most unlikely places.
I think it is truly tragic that Meghan was made to feel so unhappy as there was such an opportunity there for her to be a role model for women of colour and to have another perspective heard. Greater influence then she will ever have from California.
I think royalty has the unique opportunity to say things of importance without a political agenda and I feel the queen frequently did that.
Back to ENDGAME:
"The Dutch translator has insisted the names were in the manuscript she received. “As a translator, I translate what is in front of me,” Saskia Peeters told Mail Online. “The names of the royals were there in black and white. I did not add them. I just did what I was paid to do and that was translate the book from English.”
Scobie insisted on the ITV This Morning show he had “never submitted a book that had their names in it”, and could only talk about the English version that he wrote.
He said he had never used the word “racist”, and that his book referred to “unconscious bias” . The inclusion of the names was still being investigated, he said.
Asked on BBC Newsnight whether the names had been deliberately included in the Dutch version to generate interest in the book, Scobie said he was “hurt” by “conspiracy theories that this is a publicity stunt”.
There is speculation that one explanation could be the Dutch publisher was sent an early draft of Endgame by mistake before lawyers removed the names.
www.theguardian.com
"The Dutch translator has insisted the names were in the manuscript she received. “As a translator, I translate what is in front of me,” Saskia Peeters told Mail Online. “The names of the royals were there in black and white. I did not add them. I just did what I was paid to do and that was translate the book from English.”
Scobie insisted on the ITV This Morning show he had “never submitted a book that had their names in it”, and could only talk about the English version that he wrote.
He said he had never used the word “racist”, and that his book referred to “unconscious bias” . The inclusion of the names was still being investigated, he said.
Asked on BBC Newsnight whether the names had been deliberately included in the Dutch version to generate interest in the book, Scobie said he was “hurt” by “conspiracy theories that this is a publicity stunt”.
There is speculation that one explanation could be the Dutch publisher was sent an early draft of Endgame by mistake before lawyers removed the names.
What happens next?
Buckingham Palace made no official comment but sources have reportedly indicated it is “exploring all options”. Whether this includes the possibility of legal action, and if so against who, remains unclear."
What is the royal race row and why is it back in the news?
A book has named Charles and Catherine as royals alleged to have discussed skin colour of Harry and Meghan’s unborn son
canbelto
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 9,178
Scobie is so close with H&M, there's no way he wrote anything without their approval.
marbri
Hey, Kool-Aid!
- Messages
- 16,721
On this one point alone I present the following:Back to ENDGAME:
"The Dutch translator has insisted the names were in the manuscript she received. “As a translator, I translate what is in front of me,” Saskia Peeters told Mail Online. “The names of the royals were there in black and white. I did not add them. I just did what I was paid to do and that was translate the book from English.”
Scobie insisted on the ITV This Morning show he had “never submitted a book that had their names in it”, and could only talk about the English version that he wrote.
He said he had never used the word “racist”, and that his book referred to “unconscious bias” . The inclusion of the names was still being investigated, he said.
Asked on BBC Newsnight whether the names had been deliberately included in the Dutch version to generate interest in the book, Scobie said he was “hurt” by “conspiracy theories that this is a publicity stunt”.
There is speculation that one explanation could be the Dutch publisher was sent an early draft of Endgame by mistake before lawyers removed the names.
What happens next?
Buckingham Palace made no official comment but sources have reportedly indicated it is “exploring all options”. Whether this includes the possibility of legal action, and if so against who, remains unclear."
What is the royal race row and why is it back in the news?
A book has named Charles and Catherine as royals alleged to have discussed skin colour of Harry and Meghan’s unborn son
I don't know a direct link to video of this so this will have to do.
airgelaal
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 5,986
Not necessarily. If a person thinks that his book can destroy the monarchy, then he can also think that he should decide what to publish himself.
kwanfan1818
RIP D-10
- Messages
- 38,114
Tied to his environmental activities, the King has been instrumental in reviving the British wool industry, which has saved rare sheep breeds from extinction.
Do I think the institution -- and I don't think that despite the shows of do-gooding, that it is a-politcal by any means -- is worth the good it does and has done? No. But that's me.
Do I think the institution -- and I don't think that despite the shows of do-gooding, that it is a-politcal by any means -- is worth the good it does and has done? No. But that's me.
once_upon
Spy
- Messages
- 31,508
That's true of any book. No matter who tells the story. So W/K or H/M or C/ C or any number of persons can destroy the monarchy with a tell all book and pretend it's from anyone else.
MacMadame
Doing all the things
- Messages
- 59,496
No one book is going to destroy the British monarchy. A series of books from multiple sources and POV... maybe.
ballettmaus
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 18,911
The monarchy survived Diana's death. It's hard to believe that a series of books would then bring it down.
once_upon
Spy
- Messages
- 31,508
I guess I wasn't clear. I meant ANYONE could have a book written with or without their assistance or whatever. Or it could be anyone masquerading as someone else.
I was responding to the.poster who said Meghan's and Harry's purpose in doing anything is to bring down the monarchy.
I was responding to the.poster who said Meghan's and Harry's purpose in doing anything is to bring down the monarchy.
What if someone wrote that they're lizard people?
I think Elon's got that one covered.
manhn
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 14,919
England seems extremely tied to the Monarchy. But the rest of the Commonwealth? I see my own personal trajectory when it comes to the Monarchy, and I don’t think I am a minority in Canada. But it’s also a legal quagmire to remove it too, so you really really really want it to remove it to deal with all of the legal matters. It’s like my crack in the in my car window when a rock hit it (just after I bought the car). I don’t want to spend the time and money to get it fixed, but it’s not like I want that crack in my window.
It is more about what Canada does when it come to things like celebrations and festivals. I don’t want Canada spending a lot of money on that sort of thing.
It is more about what Canada does when it come to things like celebrations and festivals. I don’t want Canada spending a lot of money on that sort of thing.
DreamSkates
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 3,402
Ok then, if drama is what they desire then drama is what they will get.
MacMadame
Doing all the things
- Messages
- 59,496
taf2002
Fluff up your tutu & dance away.....
- Messages
- 29,090
There was a lot of backlash when Spare was published, mostly on Meghan. Do you really think that kind of thing is what she desires? I've seen a lot of hate for her lately re Kate & Charles blamed for racial remarks. Meanwhile Piers Morgan (one of the most despicable people on the planet) is receiving NO backlash that I've seen. Meghan has not said one word about the RF in a long time. I guess just living your life is a bad thing.
mattiecat13
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 790
I don't understand why Meghan gets the blame for the situation between her, Harry and the RF. She's no angel (witness the Oprah interview) but it's Harry's family and he's the one who wrote Spare and agreed to the Netflix documentary (though I do suspect they both cooperated with Omid on Endgame via a third party). And if she's really dictating Harry's behavior behind the scenes, well, shame on him, a grown man, for listening to her. Meghan gets all the vitriol while Harry is seen as the hapless dupe to her machinations.
MacMadame
Doing all the things
- Messages
- 59,496
You don't understand why the POC woman gets the blame for things the couple does rather than the white guy who comes from royalty?
ballettmaus
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 18,911
I don't think this is a matter of race. For some, maybe, but I think Meghan could have been the whitest person on earth and would still have been blamed because of how it looks: Harry, William and Kate seemed inseparable then along comes his girlfriend and later wife and suddenly, there's a rift in the family and Harry leaves. Of course, his wife gets blamed. Any wife in any family would have been blamed by the "other side" in that situation because she's the outsider and the variable that changed everything.You don't understand why the POC woman gets the blame for things the couple does rather than the white guy who comes from royalty?
Personally, I do believe that Meghan has something to do with it but not in the way that it looks like. Rather, I think that it's because Harry has the (unresolved) trauma from his mother's death and he loves her and wants to protect her. So, Meghan's unhappiness likely prompted his reactions but I've said so before, I do believe this is on Harry. He should have heeded the advice to wait and not get married right away in order to give Meghan a chance to get used to the royal family and a different kind of spotlight. He should have familiarized her with customs and traditions beforehand. It would have made things easier for her and it would probably have prevented several misunderstandings. And if she still had realized that this is not for her then it might have given them the chance to decide what their future should look like before the wedding.
I get that Harry may not have wanted to wait too long because of their wish for children and her age. Still, from what I've read, I think it's obvious that he had not prepared Meghan well enough for what to expect and I don't blame her one bit for being overwhelmed. If you add the racism and hatred that then was directed at her to that, it is more than understandable that she was unhappy. I don't think there's any person who wouldn't be.
I think the idea of a royal life is very different from what it actually is like. At least, for the British royals (and probably for the Spanish as well). The Scandinavian and Dutch royals do seem to lead a more relaxed life.
MacMadame
Doing all the things
- Messages
- 59,496
I didn't just say POC, I said POC woman. Make of that that what you will.
Karen-W
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 40,438
Oh, I think this is on both of them and they both share blame.
Harry 100% rushed into marriage after less than 18 months in a long-distance relationship. He had a history of failed relationships where the women ultimately blamed, in part, the British tabloid media's invasiveness as well as his own, as noted above, unresolved emotional trauma related to his mother's death and life in that royal fishbowl. He jumped, way too fast, into proposing before Meghan had lived in the UK long enough to really get a feel for what was to come because he was scared she would walk away. And, honestly, if you read Spare, you get a sense of the anger in him simmering just below the carefully constructed facade that he dealt with by drinking too much and emotional outbursts that were a LOT for those around him to handle.
Meghan also rushed into the marriage - she wanted the level of fame that came with being a member of the world's most famous royal family. She also came from the entertainment industry which has a different attitude toward accepting luxury goods & clothes than the BRF - the BRF doesn't do endorsements, instead, you pay for your clothes, etc, plus you don't wear jewelry from questionable givers like MBS unless it's been approved by the government. She really did not understand that the BRF is accountable to the British public and how those optics matter in a way that Hollywood doesn't concern itself with. I think she really believed that royal life really was all about hobnobbing with celebrities, having the best seats at Wimbledon, wearing designer clothes to charity galas, cutting media deals on the side (remember Harry suggesting to the Disney CEO at The Lion King London premiere that Meghan would be a great narrator for some documentary?), and being able to handpick her "projects" with very little oversight or input from anyone - certainly not the Cambridges (when they were still sharing an office & communications team) nor the Prince of Wales (despite the Duchy of Cornwall funding them entirely), and maybe even not the Queen herself. She just didn't think any rules applied to her - which is also Harry's fault because, again if you've read Spare, he certainly didn't seem to grasp how he really wasn't equal to William in the hierarchy and that things like HRH Prince/Princess titles were likely to not be in the cards for his own kids regardless of who he married, or that he and his wife weren't going to have an open checkbook for housing and clothes. It just never occurred to him because he never paid attention to any of those things. And, when it became apparent that royal life was not at all what she had envisioned, Meghan started, as she had done in the past, looking for an exit strategy that WOULD get her what she wanted. In Harry, she had a perfect, emotionally immature and still-traumatized mark and it was easy enough to cast herself in the role of the hounded, harassed innocent who only he could rescue.
But, really, that's on Harry when it's all said and done. He wanted out as much as she did - and he's said that many times over the years, long before he met Meghan. She just gave him the path by which to pursue his long-desired exit from the BRF. All of his protestations through the years that he'd never leave because he knew William needed his support? Hollow. If they were truthful, he'd have not behaved like the selfish, emotionally stunted man he really is. And, let's not think for one second that Meghan is "sharing" information with close friends (or Omid Scobie) without Harry's by and leave. I've come to believe Meghan would be perfectly happy living the Hollywood celebrity fake philanthropist lifestyle that she now has and that most everything now coming out is being driven by Harry's inexplicable jealousy of and anger towards his older brother. He is boiling mad that he didn't inherit the Duchy of Cornwall and that he and his wife actually have to earn the money necessary to fund their lifestyle and that his only real currency/earnings value is because he is a Prince of the UK and NI and nothing else. There's no value beyond the accident of his birth family, but he is too immature to accept (or maybe even realize) that he threw away the outstanding opportunities he had with his excellent education to either attend university or pursue a real career with the British Army.
Meghan is a go-getter and a hustler. She will land on her feet just fine. The real question is how long does she continue to put up with Harry? They both have toxic character traits - one of hers is excising people from her life once they've outlived their usefulness. God knows, I wouldn't want to deal with Harry the man-child for as long as she has. I do give her a lot of credit for hanging on this long, but I'm skeptical we'll be talking about them as a married couple in five years.
Harry 100% rushed into marriage after less than 18 months in a long-distance relationship. He had a history of failed relationships where the women ultimately blamed, in part, the British tabloid media's invasiveness as well as his own, as noted above, unresolved emotional trauma related to his mother's death and life in that royal fishbowl. He jumped, way too fast, into proposing before Meghan had lived in the UK long enough to really get a feel for what was to come because he was scared she would walk away. And, honestly, if you read Spare, you get a sense of the anger in him simmering just below the carefully constructed facade that he dealt with by drinking too much and emotional outbursts that were a LOT for those around him to handle.
Meghan also rushed into the marriage - she wanted the level of fame that came with being a member of the world's most famous royal family. She also came from the entertainment industry which has a different attitude toward accepting luxury goods & clothes than the BRF - the BRF doesn't do endorsements, instead, you pay for your clothes, etc, plus you don't wear jewelry from questionable givers like MBS unless it's been approved by the government. She really did not understand that the BRF is accountable to the British public and how those optics matter in a way that Hollywood doesn't concern itself with. I think she really believed that royal life really was all about hobnobbing with celebrities, having the best seats at Wimbledon, wearing designer clothes to charity galas, cutting media deals on the side (remember Harry suggesting to the Disney CEO at The Lion King London premiere that Meghan would be a great narrator for some documentary?), and being able to handpick her "projects" with very little oversight or input from anyone - certainly not the Cambridges (when they were still sharing an office & communications team) nor the Prince of Wales (despite the Duchy of Cornwall funding them entirely), and maybe even not the Queen herself. She just didn't think any rules applied to her - which is also Harry's fault because, again if you've read Spare, he certainly didn't seem to grasp how he really wasn't equal to William in the hierarchy and that things like HRH Prince/Princess titles were likely to not be in the cards for his own kids regardless of who he married, or that he and his wife weren't going to have an open checkbook for housing and clothes. It just never occurred to him because he never paid attention to any of those things. And, when it became apparent that royal life was not at all what she had envisioned, Meghan started, as she had done in the past, looking for an exit strategy that WOULD get her what she wanted. In Harry, she had a perfect, emotionally immature and still-traumatized mark and it was easy enough to cast herself in the role of the hounded, harassed innocent who only he could rescue.
But, really, that's on Harry when it's all said and done. He wanted out as much as she did - and he's said that many times over the years, long before he met Meghan. She just gave him the path by which to pursue his long-desired exit from the BRF. All of his protestations through the years that he'd never leave because he knew William needed his support? Hollow. If they were truthful, he'd have not behaved like the selfish, emotionally stunted man he really is. And, let's not think for one second that Meghan is "sharing" information with close friends (or Omid Scobie) without Harry's by and leave. I've come to believe Meghan would be perfectly happy living the Hollywood celebrity fake philanthropist lifestyle that she now has and that most everything now coming out is being driven by Harry's inexplicable jealousy of and anger towards his older brother. He is boiling mad that he didn't inherit the Duchy of Cornwall and that he and his wife actually have to earn the money necessary to fund their lifestyle and that his only real currency/earnings value is because he is a Prince of the UK and NI and nothing else. There's no value beyond the accident of his birth family, but he is too immature to accept (or maybe even realize) that he threw away the outstanding opportunities he had with his excellent education to either attend university or pursue a real career with the British Army.
Meghan is a go-getter and a hustler. She will land on her feet just fine. The real question is how long does she continue to put up with Harry? They both have toxic character traits - one of hers is excising people from her life once they've outlived their usefulness. God knows, I wouldn't want to deal with Harry the man-child for as long as she has. I do give her a lot of credit for hanging on this long, but I'm skeptical we'll be talking about them as a married couple in five years.
Harry the man-child is an interesting thought ... this is probably the reason why he married an older woman. She must be everything. Mother, lover, friend, business-partner. Never saw it this way, but if true it's quite a burden. Reminds me of this 40-campaign by Meghan where he is juggling outside while she is inside, bringing women back to work. He looked like a totally superfluous prop.
skategal
Bunny mama
- Messages
- 12,454
It will take alot to convince me that Harry didn’t consciously or unconsciously choose Meghan because she represented a new way of life for him (either inside or outside the BRF.)
In other words he knew she wouldn’t take any BS and this is exactly what he wanted in a wife.
In other words he knew she wouldn’t take any BS and this is exactly what he wanted in a wife.
MsZem
I see the sea
- Messages
- 18,617
Chelsy Davy and Cressida Bonas didn't take any BS, either. They just chose to do it without Harry
(which I suspect also factors into his views on the media and the BRF)
skategal
Bunny mama
- Messages
- 12,454
Yes. He was looking for a way out and his romantic choices reflect that.Chelsy Davy and Cressida Bonas didn't take any BS, either. They just chose to do it without Harry
(which I suspect also factors into his views on the media and the BRF)
If Chelsy had wanted to marry him, he would be living full time in Zimbabwe now.
Jenny
From the Bloc
- Messages
- 21,865
I agree with this, but would insert "I don't think this is just a matter of race." I do also agree with @MacMadame on the idea that a woman is being blamed for any number of things that aren't her doing - and that's part of it.
The other part though is that Meghan is American, which is, depending on how you look at it, anywhere from a big problem to somewhat of a joke - in other words, simply not suitable. Plus she's an actress and a divorcee. Doesn't help that one of the first things they did as a couple was try to monetize their royal brand.
Remember when Diana came on the scene, she was considered entirely suitable because of her youth and innocence, her shyness, and importantly, breeding that was more British than the Royal Family themselves. Yes Grace Kelly very successfully became the widely admired (still) Princess Grace, but that was a happy little fairytale package of an American "princess" marrying into one of the more obscure royal families with little practical implication beyond glossy articles in Hello magazine.
Also agree that Harry saw her as his ticket out, and Meghan saw him as her ticket to a degree of fame and a lifestyle she wasn't anywhere near achieving on her own. The fact that they are still using the titles, insisting on them for their kids, says a lot to me.
