The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1261  
Old 03-19-2021, 09:12 AM
Queen Ester's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
I'm not certain which events and which PDA by Meghan you are referencing @Moran. Both Harry and Meghan noticeably hold each other's hands, touch, caress and rub each other in public (on the shoulder, knee, back, arm, ear, head, or hand). There is plenty of video evidence available. Everyone obviously can view these tactile displays of love and affection whichever way that strikes them. Harry has often spoken of how much his mother Diana would grab and hug him and his brother lovingly, and how much he misses her presence. It seems to me that Harry is overjoyed to have found a loving, beautiful, supportive and accomplished partner in Meghan. He has said as much in words and actions.

I don't see M&H's connection as one of mother and son. It is clearly a soul mate relationship that has changed both of their lives on an intimate and personal growth level for the better. If only the rest of the world would view them in a reasonable manner and stop hating and/or obsessing over who they are, over everything they do, and over what they have found in each other.




I don't personally feel that the Queen and Prince Charles are specifically 'racist.' They may hold some unconscious biases as a result of being insulated, indoctrinated and often the subjects of chatter and over-protection for all of their lives in the 'gilded cage' bubble.

Certainly, the institution of monarchy and the British culture has a documented history of racism and classicism. The experiences that M&H have revealed are sparking needed conversations in Britain and elsewhere. We all need to lead with understanding and compassion, rather than with antagonism.
I agree that Britain is a class-based country, but not a racist one.

It has been this way for centuries and I doubt that the system will change any time soon. My close friend(white) moved to London from the USA and she confirmed that unless you were born into aristocracy or the upper class in Britain the doors are closed to you
__________________

  #1262  
Old 03-19-2021, 09:26 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Ester View Post
I agree that Britain is clas based country, but not a racist one.
It's being this way for centuries and I doubt that the system will change any time soon. My close friend(white) moved to London from the USA and she confirmed that unless you were born into aristocracy or the upper class in Britain the doors are closed to you
I've seen those who have personally experienced racism in Britain speaking out publicly about the subtleties of British racism, and the widespread denial that it exists.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
I assume you mean "classism" - "classicism" would suggest an interest in Latin and Greek.

I don't really take your point about the institution of monarchy having a "documented history" of racism. Yes, for example, it's known that Edward VII behaved badly towards Abdul Karim, Queen Victoria's Indian attendant - although it's equally well-known that Queen Victoria was very close to him. But would it be appropriate for me to walk out into the street and accuse my neighbour of being a racist, on the grounds of something that his great-great-grandfather might have said or done 120 years ago?
Indeed, thanks. I do mean 'classism.' I will correct my misspelling.

Quite often the denials of being racist are more vociferous and rampant than any desire for self-examination and self-reflection. In other words, apparently being called out as 'racist,' is felt by some people to be more alarming than actually engaging in racist behavior and attitudes.
__________________

  #1263  
Old 03-19-2021, 09:44 AM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 10,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
I assume you mean "classism" - "classicism" would suggest an interest in Latin and Greek.

I don't really take your point about the institution of monarchy having a "documented history" of racism. Yes, for example, it's known that Edward VII behaved badly towards Abdul Karim, Queen Victoria's Indian attendant - although it's equally well-known that Queen Victoria was very close to him. But would it be appropriate for me to walk out into the street and accuse my neighbour of being a racist, on the grounds of something that his great-great-grandfather might have said or done 120 years ago?
Edward VII and especially VIII's racism was markedly more serious than behaving badly towards one of Queen Victoria's Indian servants. Even though I am AA I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt and lots of leeway before calling someone a racist because I do believe we are approaching 1950's McCarthy era levels of hysteria/suspicion at this point.

But... though it's pointless and unfair to measure all past racial attitudes and behaviors against the standards of the late 20th and early 21st century- because literally almost EVERYONE before then could be considered a bigoted racist-Edward VIII was in a league of his own. He was reportedly horrified and deeply offended when offered Communion from the hand of a Black priest at a church service in the Commonwealth.

But I am way off topic.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice". Martin Luther King Jr. 1929-1968
  #1264  
Old 03-19-2021, 09:57 AM
Queen Ester's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by TLLK View Post
Moran-I believe that you've made some excellent points here in pointing out the Queen's "reluctance" when it came to granting residences (as well as the Family Order) to the newlyweds in the BRF post-Diana/Sarah years. She appears to be moving cautiously in these departments so Nottingham Cottage has definitely seen its share of bachelors and newlyweds enjoying it as a starter home.
Katherine did not get a family order until a few years ago
  #1265  
Old 03-19-2021, 10:04 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Queens Village,, United States
Posts: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
I think this is something that even their friends and supporters say. They are impetuous and what they want today isn't necessarily what they want tomorrow.

Diana was like that too to a certain extent. It's all very worrying really.

I am sure Harry hasn't taught about anything long term. I mean it's pretty dreadful
Well nobody expected COVID to hit. Total lockdown and activities grinding to a halt. Complicated plans. Big Time.
  #1266  
Old 03-19-2021, 10:04 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 5,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Ester View Post
Katherine did not get a family order until a few years ago

Yes that is correct and even Camilla and Sophie did not receive theirs immediately upon marrying into the BRF. Sarah Ferguson never received one either.
  #1267  
Old 03-19-2021, 10:08 AM
Queen Ester's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
I've seen those who have personally experienced racism in Britain speaking out publicly about the subtleties of British racism, and the widespread denial that it exists.



Indeed, thanks. I do mean 'classism.' I will correct my misspelling.

Quite often the denials of being racist are more vociferous and rampant than any desire for self-examination and self-reflection. In other words, apparently being called out as 'racist,' is felt by some people to be more alarming than actually engaging in racist behavior and attitudes.
Britain is not that different from other countries in terms of racism, but I believe the issue was that the Royal Family is racist and I don't believe that
  #1268  
Old 03-19-2021, 10:16 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,285
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
I don't personally feel that the Queen and Prince Charles are specifically 'racist.' They may hold some unconscious biases as a result of being insulated, indoctrinated and often the subjects of chatter and over-protection for all of their lives in the 'gilded cage' bubble.

Certainly, the institution of monarchy and the British culture has a documented history of racism and classicism. The experiences that M&H have revealed are sparking needed conversations in Britain and elsewhere. We all need to lead with understanding and compassion, rather than with antagonism.
With me, some of the experiences that Harry and Meghan have related, verbatim, in the interview, were totally false and meant to insinuate racism. The claim of Archie being denied and prevented from being a Prince of the United Kingdom because of his possible skin tone is a biggie. It wasn't a smear by the press. It wasn't the big, bad monarchy proclaiming Archie as a lesser person because he is biracial. It was a point of view that showed clearly that Meghan was wrong on this point. For me, Meghan put her own foot in her mouth. It wasn't the press. It wasn't bias or history or anything other than Meghan proclaiming something that wasn't so.

As much as there is a history of classism and racism and not only in the United Kingdom, there is also the history of sexism that has prevailed world wide for centuries until women stood up and were called "suffragettes" in the early 20th century and later on, said "no" to the bra and burned them. When I think about those women, I realize that it was because of the fight for equal rights for women that the whole issue of the LPs making all the Cambridge children Prince/ss at birth actually was a winning point. The Act of Succession to the Crown (first established in 1701) was amended in 2013 to change male primogeniture to absolute primogeniture. A woman born first would be heir apparent rather than heir presumptive able to be replaced by a male. The LPs were pertinent to the Cambridges because their first born would be an heir to the throne. None of that was about Archie or any child of Harry's. The monarchy plain and simply dealt with an issue of sexism.

The bottom line for me is that Harry and Meghan have hit a very low point in their public lives with this interview. They opened mouth, inserted foot and brought a whole world of hurt down on their heads for the way that it made them look in the court of public opinion. No one held a gun to their head and forced them to do this. No one can blame anyone else for the repercussions from this interview on anyone else but Harry and Meghan. There was nothing positive that came out of it but rather, just here, its generated page after page after page of facts that disprove what was stated in front of millions of people worldwide.

It's not about racism, sexism, classism, or any other "ism" we want to drag up. It's about two people putting on a spectacle for the world with crocodile tears and OMG faces and a whole lot of mistruths that were laid out as *entertainment* for the US audience. If there was any kind of a hint of "kindness and compassion" towards others in this interview, I really must need my eyes examined as I missed it totally.

But that's just me and how I see it from where I'm sitting (without coffee... I need coffee!)
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #1269  
Old 03-19-2021, 10:44 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: N/A, Bulgaria
Posts: 259
Well said, Osipi. The matter isn't if there is racism in the UK and even the RF. The matter is that Harry and Meghan claimed there was and didn't have anything to back up this claim with, rather than an easily disproven claim of Meghan's and a vague reference not against any individual but a crowd who is known to not fight back publicly because engagement is just going to incite more press barrage - something that the Sussexes insistently claim they aim to avoid. They couldn't even get their stories straight about the latter which immediately cast suspicions not only on its veracity but its actual meaning for the couple. I mean, if something has hurt both me and my SO this much, we would have talked it to death between us and at least know what exactly had taken place.
  #1270  
Old 03-19-2021, 10:55 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 89
I found this article while checking news today:

'Canadians back Meghan Markle, want no role for Royal Family in Canada'

https://globalnews.ca/news/7704854/r...n-markle-role/

'Two in three Canadians, or 66 per cent of respondents, said the Queen and the royals should not have any formal role in Canadian society, as they are “simply celebrities and nothing more.” That’s up two per cent over last year and six per cent since 2016, Ipsos says.

Roughly six in 10 people said the relationship between Canada and the monarchy should end when the Queen dies, although only about half of Canadians (53 per cent) supported the idea of a referendum on the monarchy, according to the poll. Nearly eight in 10 Canadians felt the Queen has done a good job in her role.'
  #1271  
Old 03-19-2021, 11:13 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
With me, some of the experiences that Harry and Meghan have related, verbatim, in the interview, were totally false and meant to insinuate racism. The claim of Archie being denied and prevented from being a Prince of the United Kingdom because of his possible skin tone is a biggie. It wasn't a smear by the press. It wasn't the big, bad monarchy proclaiming Archie as a lesser person because he is biracial. It was a point of view that showed clearly that Meghan was wrong on this point. For me, Meghan put her own foot in her mouth. It wasn't the press. It wasn't bias or history or anything other than Meghan proclaiming something that wasn't so.
...

It's not about racism, sexism, classism, or any other "ism" we want to drag up. It's about two people putting on a spectacle for the world with crocodile tears and OMG faces and a whole lot of mistruths that were laid out as *entertainment* for the US audience. If there was any kind of a hint of "kindness and compassion" towards others in this interview, I really must need my eyes examined as I missed it totally.

But that's just me and how I see it from where I'm sitting (without coffee... I need coffee!)
I disagree with you that Meghan and Harry are at 'a low point,' or that they put on a selfish 'spectacle' devoid of kindness and compassion. A lot of hardball has been played against M&H, complete with constant gaslighting and nonstop vitriol in the U.K. media. It amounts to character assassination. M&H's decision to speak out and tell their truth, and speak truth to power is surely one they didn't take lightly. I don't condemn them for feeling fed up and for hoping that by speaking out boldly and forthrightly that some measures would at least be taken by the firm to as Harry said, "Call off the [royal rota] dogs."

Failing that outcome, at least M&H brought to light more fully what they personally experienced behind palace walls over the first two years of marriage, during a time which should have been the happiest of a young couple's lives. The difficult experiences they faced are now on record and documented. This is an opportunity for the institution of the monarchy to 'stop the bleeding' and the pain on both sides. Sadly, as Meghan said, "A lot has been lost already."

I don't have great hopes for such an insular, outdated institution in which dysfunctional attitudes and behaviors have now been more fully exposed. Simply because two young, charismatic people fell deeply in love, and have been popularly embraced with genuine goodwill by many people, it's not the best or smartest tactic by any entity or individuals to continually attempt to marginalize and demonize them. And this holds true for any projected or untold reason.

The royal firm does have some sway over the media, and they have used their leverage in the past to protect certain members of the family. But that's obviously a selective enterprise, confirmed by many royal reporters on social media and in documentaries about the royal family.
  #1272  
Old 03-19-2021, 11:37 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Ester View Post
Britain is not that different from other countries in terms of racism, but I believe the issue was that the Royal Family is racist and I don't believe that
By virtue of someone bringing up the issue of possible skin color of Harry's future children, that could be termed many things, including bias, ignorance, stupidity, controlling behavior masquerading as faux, misplaced concern, etc. Institutional racism breeds casually biased, unexamined attitudes and beliefs, especially by those who have never personally been subjected to discrimination.

As Harry said, he was not familiar with the subtle and vicious underpinnings and overtones of what racism feels like and how it can often be directly and indirectly experienced in different situations, until he met Meghan and witnessed it in a personal way.

The fact that Meghan has been written about in the U.K. media in such derogatory ways with racial overtones abounding should not be dismissed or evaded. At two days old, M&H's son Archie was depicted by a British commentator as a chimp. The monarchy and the British empire were built via colonization and racist practices.
  #1273  
Old 03-19-2021, 11:41 AM
tihkon2's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Stafford, United States
Posts: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sionevar View Post
I found this article while checking news today:

'Canadians back Meghan Markle, want no role for Royal Family in Canada'

https://globalnews.ca/news/7704854/r...n-markle-role/

'Two in three Canadians, or 66 per cent of respondents, said the Queen and the royals should not have any formal role in Canadian society, as they are “simply celebrities and nothing more.” That’s up two per cent over last year and six per cent since 2016, Ipsos says.

Roughly six in 10 people said the relationship between Canada and the monarchy should end when the Queen dies, although only about half of Canadians (53 per cent) supported the idea of a referendum on the monarchy, according to the poll. Nearly eight in 10 Canadians felt the Queen has done a good job in her role.'

OK, now where's the part about them backing Meghan?
  #1274  
Old 03-19-2021, 11:42 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Franklin, United States
Posts: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
I'm not certain which events and which PDA by Meghan you are referencing @Moran. Both Harry and Meghan noticeably hold each other's hands, touch, caress and rub each other in public (on the shoulder, knee, back, arm, ear, head, or hand). There is plenty of video evidence available. Everyone obviously can view these tactile displays of love and affection whichever way that strikes them. Harry has often spoken of how much his mother Diana would grab and hug him and his brother lovingly, and how much he misses her presence. It seems to me that Harry is overjoyed to have found a loving, beautiful, supportive and accomplished partner in Meghan. He has said as much in words and actions.

I don't see M&H's connection as one of mother and son. It is clearly a soul mate relationship that has changed both of their lives on an intimate and personal growth level for the better. If only the rest of the world would view them in a reasonable manner and stop hating and/or obsessing over who they are, over everything they do, and over what they have found in each other.




I don't personally feel that the Queen and Prince Charles are specifically 'racist.' They may hold some unconscious biases as a result of being insulated, indoctrinated and often the subjects of chatter and over-protection for all of their lives in the insular 'gilded cage' bubble.

Certainly, the institution of monarchy and the British culture has a documented history of racism and classism. The experiences that M&H have revealed are sparking needed conversations in Britain and elsewhere. We all need to lead with understanding and compassion, rather than with antagonism.
And they may not hold any unconscious bias as they have traveled throughout the commonwealth and seen the best and worst of humanity.

You stated that the institution of monarchy and the British culture has a documented history of racism and classism. There are also documented attempts and successes to change this. I'm not saying things are perfect, but your comment seems to imply that we believe the current accusations because in the past these things happened.

If that is the case, how do we ever move forward? If one incident in my past will be held against me for the rest of my life, what is my incentive to change? If we cannot believe these changes are possible how are we to believe that Harry's former actions do not reflect his current beliefs? Is he the only person capable of change?

I would not want to be judged by the actions of my ancestors. My grandmother was racist. Her actions were appalling. I think it made my mother's generation, my generation and my children's less so. It made us very aware of the hurt and damage.
  #1275  
Old 03-19-2021, 11:48 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,195
If the Royal Family held any real power over the media, then would we have heard about:


1. "Camillagate"
2. "Squidgygate"
3. "Sophie and the Fake Sheikh"
4. Prince Andrew's dealings with Jeffrey Epstein
5. Princess Margaret's affair with Roddy Llewellyn
6. All the "Waity Katie" stuff
7. All the unpleasant claims about Beatrice and Eugenie being scroungers
8. The leaked letters from Princess Anne to Tim Laurence
9. Toe sucking
10. The various allegations over the years that Prince Philip had affairs

etc etc etc?


I wish there were some way of stopping these nasty personal attacks on people. There was a documentary on earlier this week about Caroline Flack, Prince Harry's friend, who took her own life partly as a result of being hounded by the media after she was arrested for allegedly assaulting her boyfriend. I've already mentioned the time Kay Burley did a prime time interview with a publicity-seeking woman whose only claim to fame was saying she'd had an affair with David Beckham. It's all horrible. But I don't see how it's the fault of the Palace.
  #1276  
Old 03-19-2021, 11:48 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,285
Their "truth" though wasn't playing hardball. Hardball would be taking issues somewhere that would effect a change. Their "truth" had no substance behind them outside of a blanket statement declaring (x) happened. No substance behind it that would lead to fact checking. In fact, the skin tone statement cannot be verified as being proven to have racial undertones to it. Their "truth" was their perspectives and meant to believed without hearing the *other* side of the story which, in fact, was brilliantly stated in an official statement "recollections may vary". I do not doubt for a minute that Harry and Meghan did run into a lot of brick walls on things but we also realize that the brick wall isn't talking.

BTW: I believe that the Anunnaki from Nibiru genetically created man from a lower hominid. That's truth to my power so it's how things *really* are because I said so. To me, that's the way Meghan and Harry defined their "truth". It's true to them but doesn't make it empirical truth.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #1277  
Old 03-19-2021, 11:51 AM
eya eya is offline
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: -, Greece
Posts: 19,096
Prince Harry spotted near his home with his bike


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...interview.html
__________________
#ΜΕΝΟΥΜΕ ΑΣΦΑΛΕΙΣ! #StaySafe! and the 2021!!
  #1278  
Old 03-19-2021, 12:03 PM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by LilaDawson View Post
And they may not hold any unconscious bias as they have traveled throughout the commonwealth and seen the best and worst of humanity.

You stated that the institution of monarchy and the British culture has a documented history of racism and classism. There are also documented attempts and successes to change this. I'm not saying things are perfect, but your comment seems to imply that we believe the current accusations because in the past these things happened.

If that is the case, how do we ever move forward? If one incident in my past will be held against me for the rest of my life, what is my incentive to change? If we cannot believe these changes are possible how are we to believe that Harry's former actions do not reflect his current beliefs? Is he the only person capable of change?

I would not want to be judged by the actions of my ancestors. My grandmother was racist. Her actions were appalling. I think it made my mother's generation, my generation and my children's less so. It made us very aware of the hurt and damage.
I think it's important for what has been experienced by M&H to spark conversations, and that has already happened on a number of news and talk show programs in the U.S. and in the U.K.

No one is saying that 'one incident in anyone's past' will be held against them for the rest of their life. M&H simply stated what happened to them, and a lot of conclusions have been jumped to because it's obviously an emotional, powder keg issue that's usually avoided.

It might be advisable to stop taking what M&H said personally or as some kind of condemnation of Harry's entire family. It also behooves everyone to stop being in denial that racism exists, simply because you may have never experienced it yourself or you don't want to believe that it exists, or you may have different notions about what it means and how it manifests.

There's nothing wrong with wondering what future children of a multi-ethnic union will look like. There was a lot of wondering and speculation online once Meghan became pregnant with her first child, and even before M&H married. Even non-multi-ethnic couples often talk about who their unborn baby might resemble, and what gender it will be, etc. However, there's a problem when someone in the British royal firm posits the question in connection with concern or worry over 'what that would look like or mean for the monarchy if future children of Meghan & Harry were to have dark skin.' I think someone or a group of people within the firm would benefit by enrolling in courses on biology and human genetics, in addition to undergoing sensitivity and social awareness training.

The palace should also immediately consider doing a thorough house cleaning, along with consolidation of staff under one umbrella, much like Sir Christopher Geidt envisioned and was subsequently canned for proposing in the 2017 palace fiefdom power struggle. The British monarchy is undergoing a seismic shift of a transition which in fact began long before Meghan and Harry ever met.
  #1279  
Old 03-19-2021, 12:05 PM
Queen Ester's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
By virtue of someone bringing up the issue of possible skin color of Harry's future children, that could be termed many things, including bias, ignorance, stupidity, controlling behavior masquerading as faux, misplaced concern, etc. Institutional racism breeds casually biased, unexamined attitudes and beliefs, especially by those who have never personally been subjected to discrimination.

As Harry said, he was not familiar with the subtle and vicious underpinnings and overtones of what racism feels like and how it can often be directly and indirectly experienced in different situations, until he met Meghan and witnessed it in a personal way.

The fact that Meghan has been written about in the U.K. media in such derogatory ways with racial overtones abounding should not be dismissed or evaded. At two days old, M&H's son Archie was depicted by a British commentator as a chimp. The monarchy and the British empire were built via colonization and racist practices.
First of all we don't even know if it's true about a person in the RF saying something about Archie's skin color, and until Harry and Meghan state who it was, we might just as well it was an acquaintance or a very minor royal. They should bite the bullet and reveal the person. If You Have Said A, You Must Also Say B.
Second, Britain abolished their slavery practice 30 years before the America.
  #1280  
Old 03-19-2021, 12:09 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Missouri, United States
Posts: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Their "truth" though wasn't playing hardball.

It's true to them but doesn't make it empirical truth.
This. 100% this. "Their truth" may certainly be their belief and their perception of something but that certainly does not make "their truth" empirical truth. Sometimes there really is no in between, no gray area, no murky spots. Sometimes things really are as simple as yes/no, black/white, up/down. In this case I can think of several things that were claimed in that interview that are patently and demonstrably false. The biggest of those, of course, being the Archie and the title issue. It is simply a complete falsehood to state that he didn't receive a title because of concern about his skin color. An out and out blatant falsehood. They can call it "their truth" all they want and maybe they've convinced themselves that it's true but it's not. Period. There's over 100 years of written record evidence to prove that they are incorrect.

Absolutely no one should believe anything is the absolute truth just simply because it came out of Harry and Meghan's mouths. And before anyone asks, yes, I'd say that about anyone and any statement. Just because they say something is true doesn't make it so and when there is demonstrable proof that they were lying or at best incorrect, I'm hard pressed to take as gospel anything that these two have to say, particularly when it involves yet another "poor me, won't someone defend me, they left me to fend for myself as an adult" kind of whine. Honestly, at first, I was a little bit floored by the number of highly educated and intelligent individuals I saw who bought their lines hook, line, and sinker. Then it hit me. Those people are all American. Every single one of them. And none of them have more than a passing interest in royalty, really only enough to say "the Queen certainly seems like a lovely woman" and really nothing more. And they bought it all because they were exactly the target audience. The audience that wouldn't know better and really didn't care and couldn't be bothered to dig deeper, ask questions, or actually look up the answers to these things. While that kind of thing, I'm sure, makes Meghan and Harry feel like they're receiving a ton of support of the "big bad meany press and that stuffy old royal family" kind in the short term, as more falsehoods and vaguely misleading pieces of the interview are debunked I suspect they'll find that it falls away quickly or even backfires spectatularly.
__________________

Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 2: December 2020-March 2021 JessRulz Current Events Archive 874 03-07-2021 08:05 PM




Popular Tags
america archie mountbatten-windsor background story baptism biography britain british royal family buckingham palace camilla canada china chinese commonwealth countries countess of snowdon customs daisy dna doge of venice doll dubai duke of cambridge duke of sussex elizabeth ii emperor family life family tree fashion and style george vi gustaf vi adolf hello! highgrove italian royal family jack brooksbank jacobite japan jewellery king edward vii king willem-alexander książ castle line of succession list of rulers mary: crown princess of denmark meghan markle nepalese royal jewels plantinum jubilee prince charles of luxembourg prince constantijn prince dimitri prince harry princess ariane princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn walailak princess ribha queen consort queen louise queen mathilde queen maxima royal ancestry royal court royal jewels serbian royal family solomon j solomon speech suthida taiwan thailand uae customs united states of america wales wittelsbach


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:29 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×