Meghan & Harry: WE QUIT

Stateofyou

Itssoeasy wrote: »

My impression from watching people talk about William and Harry is that after their mother died the British public became very protective of them. I don’t recall whether Kate Middleton was universally at the outset but being a member of the royal family isn’t a normal existence and most of them seem to get on with it. I think if Meghan and Harry had given it a few years then maybe the reaction to them leaving might not have been so negative. I mean I think the current situation will change whether Harry and Meghan like it or not when the queen dies and Charles becomes king.

An institution like the British royal family isn’t going to fundamentally change over night seeing as it’s been in existence for centuries.

Who says they didn’t help him ? I mean he’s spoken on TV about the struggles he had after the death of his mother with William and Kate and it seemed like he was getting past it.

Harry explicitly said his mental health was being destroyed, and Meghan said she was not doing well.

Mental health issues will not wait for a more "convenient" time...

BettyS

Stateofyou wrote: »

Harry explicitly said his mental health was being destroyed, and Meghan said she was not doing well.

Mental health issues will not wait for a more "convenient" time...

I am playing Devil’s advocate here. So, granted he left for mental health reasons. But when he was talking to the executive from Disney about a role for Meghan and they lined up the Netflix, Oprah and Corden deals, the UK public saw them using their royal positions as a springboard to bigger and higher things. It seems in the eyes of the British public like it was his strategy all along to reach stardom, rather than a need for seeking equanimity.

Ultimately, they are free persons. They are free to choose their course in life. Nothing is worth compromised mental health. It is the actions post-leaving that may have presented them in a negative light. I am not defining right or wrong, I am certainly in no position to do this. However, the issue now is the public perception.

Itssoeasy

Leroy42 wrote: »

And yet he has turned his back on the whole thing. So whether you, or anyone else, thinks he was past it, or will get past it, seems to be the opposite.

Institutions change all the time. Was a time when divorce wasn't allowed. When the Queen didn't pay taxes. Hell when the queen was in sole charge.

They didn't want to change it. They didn't want to stand up to the media. The worried that standing up to the media may result in the media being less fawning to them and thus place their institution in jeopardy from a public losing interest.

The Queen has done a great job in bringing the Royal family back into the hearts and minds of the general public. But it's a marketing company, and Harry didn't want (as far as I can tell) to be part of the game. He doesn't seem to buy in that the price for their place in the media, is to have lies, and private details leaked.

The queen could have done something to help, should have done more to help. They didn't. How much they did or didn't do, I've no idea.

But nobody seems to be even asking. Its all Meaghan's fault, coming over here, with her notions and looking to change things. Get back in your box.

And even they way they dealt with Harry, Rather than accept he wants to change things, he wants to step back from 100% but still do lots of good work, they gve him an ultimatum. Our way or the high way.

I didn’t say that. Prince Harry said on tv that he had started to address those issues. He also said it helped he had William to talk to about it which seems to have broken down which is an awful shame if true.

I don’t disagree that there’s an element of self preservation involved with the royal family and the press but they both use each other to keep things as they are.

It’s a sad situation wrapped up a bizarre institution which probably amplifies the issues at hand. And btw Harry was well able to use the press to his own ends previously. Surely he could have played the press at their own game.

BettyS

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I didn’t say that. Prince Harry said on tv that he had started to address those issues. He also said it helped he had William to talk to about it which seems to have broken down which is an awful shame if true.

I don’t disagree that there’s an element of self preservation involved with the royal family and the press but they both use each other to keep things as they are.

It’s a sad situation wrapped up a bizarre institution which probably amplifies the issues at hand. And btw Harry was well able to use the press to his own ends previously. Surely he could have played the press at their own game.

Correct me if I am wrong, I agree with your point. Additionally, do the royal family not have immense power over what the UK press can report?

Stateofyou

BettyS wrote: »

Correct me if I am wrong, I agree with your point. Additionally, do the royal family not have immense power over what the UK press can report?

Kate's published topless photos taken with an extreme long lens from the treetops suggest otherwise...

Stateofyou

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I didn’t say that. Prince Harry said on tv that he had started to address those issues. He also said it helped he had William to talk to about it which seems to have broken down which is an awful shame if true.

I don’t disagree that there’s an element of self preservation involved with the royal family and the press but they both use each other to keep things as they are.

It’s a sad situation wrapped up a bizarre institution which probably amplifies the issues at hand. And btw Harry was well able to use the press to his own ends previously. Surely he could have played the press at their own game.

He literally said he's not going to be bullied into playing a game that killed his mum.

the purple tin

Stateofyou wrote: »

Kate's published topless photos taken with an extreme long lens from the treetops suggest otherwise...

Prince Andrew's interview as well. That would never have been aired if they had the power to stop it.

Stateofyou

BettyS wrote: »

I am playing Devil’s advocate here. So, granted he left for mental health reasons. But when he was talking to the executive from Disney about a role for Meghan and they lined up the Netflix, Oprah and Corden deals, the UK public saw them using their royal positions as a springboard to bigger and higher things. It seems in the eyes of the British public like it was his strategy all along to reach stardom, rather than a need for seeking equanimity.

Ultimately, they are free persons. They are free to choose their course in life. Nothing is worth compromised mental health. It is the actions post-leaving that may have presented them in a negative light. I am not defining right or wrong, I am certainly in no position to do this. However, the issue now is the public perception.

Missed this one.

Well I read the Disney documentary she voiced was all for charity, and the fee donated directly to elephant conservation.
Why wouldn't they use their best / biggest / only leverage to support themselves and their charitable foundation? I disagree on the point about stardom. He already has that as a royal prince.

The issue with public perception I think is due in large part to the relentless negative media printing lies people read as gospel and it turns perceptions and support against them. Of course they need to take control of their own truth. I also think many have issue with her skin tone.

the purple tin

BettyS wrote: »

Yes, but allegedly there was another, more damaging story about them that never made the light of day in the UK.

They must have a certain amount of pull anyway.
There was very little reporting of the Jimmy Savile connection to the Royal Family after it all came out about him.

afro man

Stateofyou wrote: »

Kate's published topless photos taken with an extreme long lens from the treetops suggest otherwise...

Think this was the French Media that released these pictures they would not listen to the British Monarchy

BettyS

Stateofyou wrote: »

Missed this one.

Well I read the Disney documentary she voiced was all for charity, and the fee donated directly to elephant conservation.
Why wouldn't they use their best / biggest / only leverage to support themselves and their charitable foundation? I disagree on the point about stardom. He already has that as a royal prince.

The issue with public perception I think is due in large part to the relentless negative media printing lies people read as gospel and it turns perceptions and support against them. Of course they need to take control of their own truth. I also think many have issue with her skin tone.

Kate was mauled by the British press not so long ago. She was apparently too common for William. This had nothing to do with her skin colour.

the purple tin

BettyS wrote: »

You are using the argument of false equivalence.

On a slight tangent, the median salary in this country is 40,000. If two people make 80,000 per year, and have to pay childcare costs and rent, raising 40,000+ for the deposit can feel like scraping it together.

You surely cannot deny the immense privilege the royals have? The closest most of us on Boards will get to a private jet is as a spectator from afar. The money they have by any world standard is obscene

You are forgetting about Aonghus Von Bismarck :pac:

BettyS

the purple tin wrote: »

You are forgetting about Aonghus Von Bismarck :pac:

I laughed aloud at that one!

BettyS

Stateofyou wrote: »

Missed this one.

Well I read the Disney documentary she voiced was all for charity, and the fee donated directly to elephant conservation.
Why wouldn't they use their best / biggest / only leverage to support themselves and their charitable foundation? I disagree on the point about stardom. He already has that as a royal prince.

The issue with public perception I think is due in large part to the relentless negative media printing lies people read as gospel and it turns perceptions and support against them. Of course they need to take control of their own truth. I also think many have issue with her skin tone.

I don’t think that they were any worse to Meghan. I am enclosing the top comment from an article in 2010. Plenty more examples out there. They were really cruel to both, but they did not single out Meghan

Stateofyou

afro man wrote: »

Think this was the French Media that released these pictures they would not listen to the British Monarchy

That's true, forgot that!

On second thought I suppose the royal family probably do have some power over what the UK press can report, it's part of the "game" Harry mentions is it not?

But I remember they did speak out on the racial undercurrents and overt reporting of Meghan in the early days, so obviously they had to be pulled up on that shíte.

Stateofyou

BettyS wrote: »

Kate was mauled by the British press not so long ago. She was apparently too common for William. This had nothing to do with her skin colour.

When was that, before they were married? Why would it have anything to do with her skin colour?

BettyS

Stateofyou wrote: »

When was that, before they were married? Why would it have anything to do with her skin colour?

You said that the British public mauled Meghan because of her skin colour. There are plenty examples of very cruel comments after Kate and William got married.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1377487/amp/Kate-Middletons-character-shaped-generations-social-climbing-matriarchs.html

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1331545/amp/Kate-Middleton-The-making-middle-class-Princess-PART-1.html

Stateofyou

BettyS wrote: »

I don’t think that they were any worse to Meghan. I am enclosing the top comment from an article in 2010. Plenty more examples out there. They were really cruel to both, but they did not single out Meghan

I absolutely think Meghan endured far worse, and the articles they ran comparing them both and the hypocrisy of the same action being ok for Kate but not Meghan. Then there's the racism element, being a foreigner and actress. All those examples have already been posted here on this thread. Regardless, I think the gutter press is such an ugly part of society, I would welcome seeing stricter rules on what they can publish and requiring proper sources.

BettyS

Stateofyou wrote: »

I absolutely think Meghan endured far worse, and the articles they ran comparing them both and the hypocrisy of the same action being ok for Kate but not Meghan. Then there's the racism element, being a foreigner and actress. All those examples have already been posted here on this thread. Regardless, I think the gutter press is such an ugly part of society, I would welcome seeing stricter rules on what they can publish and requiring proper sources.

Well, read the links and associated top comments that I said and then make up your mind

Nobody was ever going to be good enough for the British public’s princes

Stateofyou

BettyS wrote: »

Well, read the links that I said and then make up your mind

Did you edit your post? Didn't see those there before.

Well I'm not disagreeing that Kate also bore a huge brunt of the gutter press. But in my opinion Meghan had it far worse. And I can only imagine how it feels to give up your life and move to a new country and without your own family support, only to be vilified.

Their situations are very different, but at the end of the day I think what happened to both women is very wrong.

Stateofyou

BettyS wrote: »

Well, read the links and associated top comments that I said and then make up your mind

Nobody was ever going to be good enough for the British public’s press's intrusion on the princes

Just one slight edit I would add -

BettyS

Stateofyou wrote: »

Did you edit your post? Didn't see those there before.

Well I'm not disagreeing that Kate also bore a huge brunt of the gutter press. But in my opinion Meghan had it far worse. And I can only imagine how it feels to give up your life and move to a new country and without your own family support, only to be vilified.

Their situations are very different, but at the end of the day I think what happened to both women is very wrong.

I tried to enclose the JPEG’s of the articles but they were too big to attach to my post, so I had to edit and add the URLs

Muahahaha

Leroy42 wrote: »

With all that money and privilege the easiest thing for Harry to have done is kept his mouth shut, turned up to the odd event, and lived his life. Like the majority of the royal family actually do. But he didn't, couldn't, opt for that. He needed things to fundamentally change. You can bet he brought issues up with his Da, the queen etc. It is sad that they couldn't bring themselves to look to actually help him.

I know everyone thinks the queen is amazing, but as a grandmother, as a parent, as a role model, she seems to be completely lacking. Her family is completely screwed up.

Just on that one thing for me stood out during the fall out was that bit where Harry and Meghan announced they were stepping back and he wanted to meet with the Queen. But her people wrote back to his people saying she was busy and she wouldnt be available for another two weeks. I thought there was somethng very off about that.

I know he cant just rock up to Buckingham Palace unannounced but even the fact that in order for him to meet his own grandmother he cant even ring her up and ask for a meeting is bizarre. Instead he has to do all this faffing around with his courtiers writing a letter to her courtiers and then them having to wait for a reply in which case it comes back and says she's busy for two weeks, like c'mon now. I mean she might be the Queen but shes also his grandmother and shes giving him the cold shoulder at a time when her grandson would have appreciated her counsel. Her actions in that episode kind of suggested that she is was not able or willing to separate the institution of the Royal Family from Harry himself as a person and as her grandson.

Aside from the above the Queen had no problems being photographed in the back of a horse drawn carraige with Prince Andrew just a week or so after his infamous car crash interview. That staged photograph of the two of them together on the way to church was a clear signal that she was sticking by Prince Andrew no matter what the fall out from the Epstein affair. I think its remarkable the treatment Andrew got there vis a vis how Harry was treated when he just wanted a meeting, Im doubting Andrew had to write her a letter and wait for a reply, they just got straight on with the PR stunt.

cnocbui

BettyS wrote: »

Correct me if I am wrong, I agree with your point. Additionally, do the royal family not have immense power over what the UK press can report?

They have no power, otherwise Murdoch and his underlings would never have dared hack Prince Charles' phone and release the titilating details.

seamus

This made me chuckle today;

https://twitter.com/Luiseach/status/1366396456412737540?s=20

the purple tin

Stateofyou wrote: »

I absolutely think Meghan endured far worse, and the articles they ran comparing them both and the hypocrisy of the same action being ok for Kate but not Meghan. Then there's the racism element, being a foreigner and actress. All those examples have already been posted here on this thread. Regardless, I think the gutter press is such an ugly part of society, I would welcome seeing stricter rules on what they can publish and requiring proper sources.

That's something else you notice about rags like DM and the Sun, they nearly always use unnamed sources like- 'a source within the palace said...' or 'a source close to Joe Soap said...'. When you see them using anonymous sources there is a good chance the reporter themselves is just making crap up to back up and pad out their own story.
Have a close read of the statements by these 'sources' they all usually speak in a very similar style, make short, concise and dramatic statements, just like journalists.

bitofabind

BettyS wrote: »

Kate was mauled by the British press not so long ago. She was apparently too common for William. This had nothing to do with her skin colour.

Yeah people forget about this and tend to compare 2018 Kate to newly wed 2018 Meghan, when that's a pretty redundant comparison. The press gave Kate a really hard time for years before she married William, she was known as "waity Katy" because they were together for so long before the proposal and mocked for her non-aristocratic background. Before that, Sophie the countess of Wessex was set up by the press not to mention Fergie the "Duchess of Pork".

The British press is like an Irish mammy, no woman is good enough for their royal Princes and no new wife gets an easy ride. Meghan walked into a job she didn't understand and then wanted to change all the rules, be the new "woke" princess and do things her way and it was never going to happen. I've no doubt Harry wanted to leave for years before she came along, but now they've burned loads of bridges to be able to do that and they have far worse consequences for Harry than for Meghan, who basically has tarnished all of his family relationships and his privileges within the Royal family structure.

BettyS

bitofabind wrote: »

Yeah people forget about this and tend to compare 2018 Kate to newly wed 2018 Meghan, when that's a pretty redundant comparison. The press gave Kate a really hard time for years before she married William, she was known as "waity Katy" because they were together for so long before the proposal and mocked for her non-aristocratic background. Before that, Sophie the countess of Wessex was set up by the press not to mention Fergie the "Duchess of Pork".

The British press is like an Irish mammy, no woman is good enough for their royal Princes and no new wife gets an easy ride. Meghan walked into a job she didn't understand and then wanted to change all the rules, be the new "woke" princess and do things her way and it was never going to happen. I've no doubt Harry wanted to leave for years before she came along, but now they've burned loads of bridges to be able to do that and they have far worse consequences for Harry than for Meghan, who basically has tarnished all of his family relationships and his privileges within the Royal family structure.

I think that the British public felt that Kate earned her stripes. They saw Meghan make a few faux-pas before earning her stripes, such as the Wimbledon incident, the celebrity-studded wedding and the high staff turnover. These actions were too radical and too rapid a departure from the status quo for certain Royalists.

It must be challenging to enter into the Monarchy as a woman in her 30s. I couldn’t do it! All the protocols and pretentiousness would drive me insane. The concept of ranking based on birthright rather than meritocracy seems ludicrous

Nqp15hhu

BettyS wrote: »

I think that the British public felt that Kate earned her stripes. They saw Meghan make a few faux-pas before earning her stripes, such as the Wimbledon incident, the celebrity-studded wedding and the high staff turnover. These actions were too radical and too rapid a departure from the status quo for certain Royalists.

It must be challenging to enter into the Monarchy as a woman in her 30s. I couldn’t do it! All the protocols and pretentiousness would drive me insane. The concept of ranking based on birthright rather than meritocracy seems ludicrous

It was her choice to sign up to that, along with all the taxpayers funds that she received.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

the purple tin wrote: »

Prince Andrew's interview as well. That would never have been aired if they had the power to stop it.

Actually, I read (I can’t remember where exactly) that Andrew and the firm believed that the interview had gone really well and they were happy for it to be aired. IMO, that’s revealing of their contempt for the general public that they thought that that horseshit interview would be well-received.