The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1301  
Old 03-19-2021, 12:58 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
Another egregious thing is that the royal firm allowed the U.K. media to publish reports that it was Meghan and Harry who didn't want to give their son a title, which was not the case. Also, the U.K. media continually slammed M&H for not presenting their baby outside the hospital, when that was something the firm never discussed with M&H, and never made any arrangements to take place. Meanwhile, unsubstantiated and ultimately false rumors of all types abounded in the U.K. media about everything from doulas, to natural births, to home births.
On the other side of the coin, the US executive branch of the government allowed the US media to print those blatant statements that there was a free and fair election among the people. Unfortunately though, the executive office of the US government played silly reindeer games in rebuttal and we see where that got us.

My point is that the monarchy has no control or censorship of the media to suit their agendas. They prefer to take the stance though of not playing silly reindeer games and adding fuel to the fire and get twisted and turned into something it's not.
__________________

__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #1302  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:04 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
I've listened to the entire interview twice, and Meghan clearly referenced that there were conversations about changing the current Letters Patent once Charles becomes King, with the purpose of denying Harry's offspring the HRH Prince/Princess designation. She didn't say it was going to happen. She said there were conversations about making that change. So it will be interesting to see what does happen in the not-too-distant future in this regard, particularly in light of these current revelations.

Meghan and Harry were rightly more concerned about the conversations surrounding their future child not being given security, particularly in view of the fact that M&H have both been subjected to death threats.
I do not think anybody on here is saying that Charles will never consider making changes, as those who follow the royal family and not just the Sussexs will be aware of the problems with too many titles, security , jobs etc etc. but I do not think there is any evidence that it is to down to Archie being Bi racial.
__________________

  #1303  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:06 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallo girl View Post
To be fair Curryong of all the things the couple raised in the interview, the cottage was not one of them as far as I remember unless it is on the cutting room floor.
I think the word cottage is giving the wrong impression of the property, it is substantial while still ideal for a family who had already stated their aim to be part time in the uk.

You obviously have strong views on this but your comparisons are not on a level playing field.

We have no way of knowing what plans for accommodation would have been running in the background for the future.

They probably decided that wining about FC in Windsor would not bring in much sympathy, as they are now living a 14 million dollar mansion
  #1304  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:06 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Midlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,598
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post

I don't have great hopes for such an insular, outdated institution in which dysfunctional attitudes and behaviors have now been more fully exposed.
The monarchy is not insular or outdated. In fact it serves a useful function in the modern British constitution & has an internationlist outlook.

Nothing has been exposed at all. Just someone's opinion expressed in an interview. For titillation & entertainment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
There's no reason to disbelieve the conversations that Harry relayed during the Oprah interview, regardless of 'recollections varying' by whomever. There's no way specific and multiple conversations of that nature, said to have transpired both before and after M&H were wed, can be misunderstood.

Plus, there's no reason to disbelieve or deny that M&H were told current Letters Patent would likely be modified when Charles became King in order to prevent Archie and any additional sibling(s) from becoming HRH Prince/ Princess, purely on the basis of concerns surrounding 'skin color.' Denying M&H's offspring royal titles has nothing to do with goals of 'slimming down the monarchy.' Harry and his future wife and children were always intended to be a core part of the 'slimmed-down monarchy.' That is until Harry met Meghan.
There are obviously valid reasons to question the credibility of Mr & Mrs Windsor. I suspect their venom clouds their veracity.

Harry Windsor's children would never have been working royals. That's very obvious.
  #1305  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:08 PM
Sunnystar's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Oregon, United States
Posts: 601
Frankly, the way H&M have handled this entire fiasco has all but guaranteed, IMO, a new LP from Charles removing the HRH for all but the children of the monarch, and the children of the heir, and possibly the children of the heir's direct heir, plus the appropriate spouses.

It won't have anything to do with racism either. It will simply be "well, they are not working royals, so there is no need for their children to carry the HRH title."

Archie & sister will get by on the titles they have due to their father being a Duke and that's it.
  #1306  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:10 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Missouri, United States
Posts: 947
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
Also, the U.K. media continually slammed M&H for not presenting their baby outside the hospital, when that was something the firm never discussed with M&H, and never made any arrangements to take place.
This is honestly almost laughably ridiculous and a really great way for them to deflect the bad press they got for their decisions and project that onto the palace instead by saying "but, but, but...no one told us we were supposed to do that! How were we supposed to know?" Really? I frankly cannot believe that anyone is buying that line. There was simply no possible way that they didn't know that Anne, Diana, Sarah, Sophie (with James and possible Louise when she was well enough), and Kate had all presented their new babies for a few moments before taking them home. They knew exactly what the norm was. And the fact that there was even a statement issued confirming that they would not, in fact, be following that tradition should suffice to show that they certainly knew and chose not to do so. But now that they need to somehow twist things to point fingers at others, they're trying to use the line that no one told them and they didn't know. Nope, not buying it.
  #1307  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:11 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
[B]I

Another egregious thing is that the royal firm allowed the U.K. media to publish reports that it was Meghan and Harry who didn't want to give their son a title, which was not the case. Also, the U.K. media continually slammed M&H for not presenting their baby outside the hospital, when that was something the firm never discussed with M&H, and never made any arrangements to take place. Meanwhile, unsubstantiated and ultimately false rumors of all types abounded in the U.K. media about everything from doulas, to natural births, to home births.
How many threads were closed down on this forum because of arguments around standing outside the hospital. The fans defended her right not to do it, with comments as she wants to spend time with her child not pose for photographs. With comparisons to other new mothers. She said nobody asked but they put out a statement to the effect that , and I am paraphrasing, that they wanted to be alone as a family for a short time .
Louis was born a month before the wedding did it not dawn on her that she might be asked to do something similar, or does it suit to say she was never asked.
  #1308  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:14 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Heather_ View Post
This is honestly almost laughably ridiculous and a really great way for them to deflect the bad press they got for their decisions and project that onto the palace instead by saying "but, but, but...no one told us we were supposed to do that! How were we supposed to know?" Really? I frankly cannot believe that anyone is buying that line. There was simply no possible way that they didn't know that Anne, Diana, Sarah, Sophie (with James and possible Louise when she was well enough), and Kate had all presented their new babies for a few moments before taking them home. They knew exactly what the norm was. And the fact that there was even a statement issued confirming that they would not, in fact, be following that tradition should suffice to show that they certainly knew and chose not to do so. But now that they need to somehow twist things to point fingers at others, they're trying to use the line that no one told them and they didn't know. Nope, not buying it.
but THEY were the ones who said that they wanted NOT to do the walk from the hospital and didn't want to show off the baby till they had time to take him home and spend some time with him. Its ridiculous... to claim that they didn't know about this or that they intended to do it, because they made a statement that they DID NOT want to do it.
  #1309  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:14 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Midlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,598
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
I didn't mention this in order for perfectly natural wondering to be used as some kind of excuse or cover scenario for the BRF. There's no mistaking what M&H said. Harry would never have told Meghan had the conversation not happened and completely upset him due to being brought up in terms of how their children possibly having 'dark skin' might look or what it would mean for the monarchy.

Then after Meghan became pregnant, there were additional conversations surrounding security and eventually changing the Letters Patent to prevent Harry's offspring automatically becoming HRH Prince/Princess. And once again, the excuse being used regarding 'slimming down of the monarchy' never was intended to be applied to Harry, his wife, and his offspring, until he met and married Meghan.
We don't need collateral lines to be populated with princes etc. Those times are over. The appetite in Britain is for a smaller monarchy. More modest. Less expansive.

None of this is new. The writing's been on the wall for at least two decades.
  #1310  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:16 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
What doors? are you saying you can't get a job?
I don't live in Britain, my friend does, and she can most certainly get a job, but unless you speak perfect RP and know people from the upper echelons, it's very difficult to move up the social ladder. She is a Russian and French tutor, and she has plenty of work among the middle classes, but every time she applied for a job among the upper classes,she was turned down, granted, I don't know if was not liked not because she is middle class, I am just relaying what she had told me
  #1311  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:16 PM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 3,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunnystar View Post
Frankly, the way H&M have handled this entire fiasco has all but guaranteed, IMO, a new LP from Charles removing the HRH for all but the children of the monarch, and the children of the heir, and possibly the children of the heir's direct heir, plus the appropriate spouses.

It won't have anything to do with racism either. It will simply be "well, they are not working royals, so there is no need for their children to carry the HRH title."

Archie & sister will get by on the titles they have due to their father being a Duke and that's it.
And according to what forum members, journalists, royal reporters, writers, bloggers and other people with insight into the modern history of the House of Windsor have all said for years that LP further restricting royal titles was going to come anyway had Harry married Princess Madeleine of Sweden, the landlady of the local pub or a biracial American actress. That Harry and his wife were intended to become core members of the working Royal family was always intended but their children never was.
  #1312  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:17 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
There's no reason to disbelieve the conversations that Harry relayed during the Oprah interview, regardless of 'recollections varying' by whomever. There's no way specific and multiple conversations of that nature, said to have transpired both before and after M&H were wed, can be misunderstood.

Plus, there's no reason to disbelieve or deny that M&H were told current Letters Patent would likely be modified when Charles became King in order to prevent Archie and any additional sibling(s) from becoming HRH Prince/ Princess, purely on the basis of concerns surrounding 'skin color.' Denying M&H's offspring royal titles has nothing to do with goals of 'slimming down the monarchy.' Harry and his future wife and children were always intended to be a core part of the 'slimmed-down monarchy.' That is until Harry met Meghan.

Sorry but that just isn't true. Meghan speaks of several conversations while pregnant, whereas Harry only speaks of one conversation before she was pregnant and says that it was a general question about what their kids would look like, not about Archie specifically. Meghan speaks about "concerns," Harry does not.

Here it is:
Oprah: Meghan shared with us that there was a conversation with you about Archie's skin tone.
Harry: That conversation I'm never going to share. But at the time it was awkward, I was a bit shocked.
Oprah: Can you tell us what the question was?
Harry: No, I'm not comfortable sharing that. But that was right at the beginning.
Oprah: Like what will the baby look like?
Harry: Yeah, what will the kids look like. But that was right at the beginning when she wasn't gonna get security, when members of my family were suggesting that she carries on acting because there's not enough money to pay for her.

Note that Harry did not want to share the question but Oprah skillfully got him to share it anyhow: What will the kids look like? That was the question, according to Harry himself.


Additionally, while Harry was always meant to be a part of the slimmed down monarchy, his kids never were. They were always going to be in the same position as Beatrice & Eugenie, and therefore not working royals.
  #1313  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:18 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Midlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,598
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
I've listened to the entire interview twice, and Meghan clearly referenced that there were conversations about changing the current Letters Patent once Charles becomes King, with the purpose of denying Harry's offspring the HRH Prince/Princess designation. She didn't say it was going to happen. She said there were conversations about making that change. So it will be interesting to see what does happen in the not-too-distant future in this regard, particularly in light of these current revelations.

Meghan and Harry were rightly more concerned about the conversations surrounding their future child not being given security, particularly in view of the fact that M&H have both been subjected to death threats.
Hopefully HRH etc will be kept to the main line. I would actually go further as I've mentioned before in the titles thread.

Security is a question for the Met Police because it comes out of taxpayer funds. If they want to pay privately that's up to them.
  #1314  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:20 PM
Fem's Avatar
Fem Fem is offline
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: UK, Poland
Posts: 709
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Heather_ View Post
This is honestly almost laughably ridiculous and a really great way for them to deflect the bad press they got for their decisions and project that onto the palace instead by saying "but, but, but...no one told us we were supposed to do that! How were we supposed to know?" Really? I frankly cannot believe that anyone is buying that line. There was simply no possible way that they didn't know that Anne, Diana, Sarah, Sophie (with James and possible Louise when she was well enough), and Kate had all presented their new babies for a few moments before taking them home. They knew exactly what the norm was. And the fact that there was even a statement issued confirming that they would not, in fact, be following that tradition should suffice to show that they certainly knew and chose not to do so. But now that they need to somehow twist things to point fingers at others, they're trying to use the line that no one told them and they didn't know. Nope, not buying it.
Here they are with Louise: https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod...0&resize=768:*
And with James: https://ta-images.condecdn.net/image...s-78594690.jpg
(With Louise Sophie stayed in the hospital for longer than usual, for obvious reasons...)

Honestly it was one of the more laughable parts of that interview. Of course they knew that that was expected. Damn, barely a month before the wedding they seen Catherine and William doing so. They organized it this way - and there are statements coming from their office that prove that.

The only thing I can believe is when they said to their office "we want to keep the birth private and don't want photos outside of the hospital" they were told ok. So, yeah, people might have not told them to do so, respecting their decision.
  #1315  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:21 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Ester View Post
I don't live in Britain, my friend does, and she can most certainly get a job, but unless you speak perfect RP and know people from the upper echelons, it's very difficult to move up the social ladder. She is a Russian and French tutor, and she has plenty of work among the middle classes, but every time she applied for a job among the upper classes,she was turned down, granted, I don't know if was not liked not because she is middle class, I am just relaying what she had told me
or possibly upper class people dont particularly want to learn Russian... Kate Middleton is middle class and she's married the future King.. Sophie RHys Jones likewise has married one of the queen's sons...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fem View Post
Here they are with Louise: https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod...0&resize=768:*
And with James: https://ta-images.condecdn.net/image...s-78594690.jpg
(With Louise Sophie stayed in the hospital for longer than usual, for obvious reasons...)

Honestly it was one of the more laughable parts of that interview. Of course they knew that that was expected. Damn, barely a month before the wedding they seen Catherine and William doing so. They organized it this way - and there are statements coming from their office that prove that.

The only thing I can believe is when they said to their office "we want to keep the birth private and don't want photos outside of the hospital" they were told ok. So, yeah, people might have not told them to do so, respecting their decision.
Or staff may have said "the press will get cross with you if you don't show off the baby for a few mins like most royal mothers have done.. but if you dont want to do it, we can't make you..."
  #1316  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:23 PM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallo girl View Post
They couldn't match up the stories, he said one conversation in the early days before they were even engaged she had said several conversations when she was pregnant...

I admire that you are putting up a defence for Meghan but it does not hold water.
It's not a matter of M&H 'matching up stories.' They spoke from the heart, based on their personal, painful experiences. The fact that somebody spoke to Harry about 'skin color' concerns before he and Meghan were married, does not negate that a number of subsequent conversations occurred once Meghan was pregnant.

I don't need to put up a 'defense' for Meghan. I'm merely sharing my views and perceptions in an honest, forthright way based on what I've seen, read, researched, witnessed and in certain aspects, personally experienced.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prinsara View Post
It strikes me that I don't think "Earl of Dumbarton" was ever used once in the interview, was it?

As in 'Archie has a title that we should have been using and chose not to, so we're focusing on the title that he was never meant to have at this stage, trying to gain sympathy from people who don't know how this works'.
M&H did not discuss the Earl of Dumbarton title in the interview that was edited and broadcast. I doubt Oprah knew much about that courtesy designation, or she probably would have brought it up. Since the name 'Dumbarton' was being made fun of online even before Archie was born, I would think there's a perfectly understandable reason why M&H decided that Archie would not be officially known by that title. Since no questions along those lines were asked of them, what any of us might assume is speculative.

In my opinion, the Sussexes have continued to endure more than their fair share of negative speculation. It's enough already.
  #1317  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:30 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
or possibly upper class people dont particularly want to learn Russian... Kate Middleton is middle class and she's married the future King.. Sophie RHys Jones likewise has married one of the queen's sons...

yes, you might be right
  #1318  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:35 PM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
Hopefully HRH etc will be kept to the main line. I would actually go further as I've mentioned before in the titles thread.

Security is a question for the Met Police because it comes out of taxpayer funds. If they want to pay privately that's up to them.
Yes, true. Both of these questions are now 'water under the bridge,' in regard to M&H's offspring. Harry is paying for his family's security. Both of their children will be raised in California, with likely some visits to the U.K. and to other locales around the world. They will be global citizens aware of the importance of having a social conscience. Neither will be in need of bearing royal titles. In fact, their parents aren't using HRH either.

Yet, Harry will always popularly be known as Prince Harry, plus his birthright as a royal prince, a soldier, a patriot, and a citizen of the U.K. will remain a part of him. And I'm sure he will pass the important legacies and lessons of his upbringing on to his children.
  #1319  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:40 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,347
There are all sorts of reasons that someone might be turned down for a job. Kate, Sophie, Mike Tindall and Autumn Kelly are all middle class.
  #1320  
Old 03-19-2021, 01:41 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Missouri, United States
Posts: 947
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
In fact, their parents aren't using HRH either.
True, they may not be using the HRH but, for a couple who clearly despises the RF and "The Firm" so much, they sure are using the heck out of those Duke and Duchess titles.
__________________

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
abu dhabi america american archie mountbatten-windsor baby names biography british british royal family buckingham palace camilla's family camilla parker bowles china chinese clarence house cpr daisy doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex earl of snowdon elizabeth ii family life fashion and style general news thread george vi gradenigo harry and meghan hello! hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume history hochberg hypothetical monarchs jewellery kensington palace king edward vii king willem-alexander list of rulers mountbatten names nepal nepalese royal family plantinum jubilee pless prince charles of luxembourg prince harry princess ariane princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn princess dita princess eugenie princess laurentien princess of orange queen louise queen victoria resusci anne royal jewels royalty of taiwan solomon j solomon spain speech suthida thailand thai royal family uae customs unfinished portrait united states welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:08 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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