The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 3: March - April 2021

[Erin9]

My guess is that the the story about Kate along with the skin tone comment happened within the private lives of the royal family where there's an element of trust that exists that they can be themselves without fear of it being blared on the next day's red top. Tiara gate involved actual Buckingham Palace staff the could rebut and disprove the story more credibly than family members that Meghan *knew* wouldn't respond to the claims.

Good point. That trust is now truly gone.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

I disagree. The couple made it clear that only one individual made such comment- they never passed judgment on the whole family. Moreover, any honest fair person would admit that the actions of one individual doesn't speak for the actions of many.

Let me play devil's advocate- imagine if Meghan simply said "it wasn't true"- no one would believe. She gave more details and many on this forum don't believe her- how much more so if she was vague. I never read Finding Freedom so I cannot comment on it- I can only comment om what I have seen and heard come out of Meghan's mouth via the interview.

I appreciate that you have taken the time and effort to consider exactly what they said and as a result, you understand that it is unfair to condemn the entire family based on this one anecdote, but many commenters are discussing racism and the royal family, not one individual. The reporters are not asking who made the comment but rather, is the royal family racist.

I understand that providing more detail may make Meghan more credible in some people's eyes. But I believe that it was unnecessary to say anything that made Catherine look bad. It would be very boring if everyone on this forum had the same point of view.

 

[Alisa]

One vague reference to one comment casts a suspecting shadow over each member of the family: Was it him? Was it her? All would be suspected, none would be excluded. So yes, the whole family was thrown under the bus.

Had the Kate incident been truly settled, with Kate apologizing, etc., then the way to address Oprah's question about it would have been to say, "Kate and I worked all that out, we're good. Next question." Instead she felt compelled to point out that Kate was supposedly completely at fault. I believe the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
Then there was the mention of "Waity Katie" and the subtle dig at Kate's work experience prior to the wedding. Meghan had to make sure we knew that she had worked a job since she was 13 years old. Contrast that to the notion that many still have that Kate did not have a "proper job" before she married William.

Meghan took several opportunities to disparage Kate during the interview. If you didn't catch them, I would suggest you take off the blinders.

On the countrary, I think the people who want to paint Meghan as a villain is clutching every opportunity her every word from the interview to portray as such. Where in the interview was there mention of a 'Waity Katie" or Kate's work experience prior to the wedding? Where?
Meghan brought up her working as a teenager not in relation to anyone but herself when she spoke about her life experience and work ethic. It wasn't a dig at Catherine or any other family member.

Alluding that the it could have been any one of the members of the family, outside of the Queen and Philip, most definitely is lining them all up with the wheels of that proverbial bus.

Just as if someone came out and said that "someone on The Royal Forums made this remark and its horrible", it would put each and every one of us under suspicion of having said it because we're all saying things on here. If it was something said three years ago, we'd be combing the archives to find out who the guilty party is.

If someone on The Royal Forums made a horrible remark. No honest and fair person would conclude that everyone on the Royal Forums is guilty and bad- only the individual who made the remark.

 

[Osipi]

On the countrary, I think the people who want to paint Meghan as a villain is clutching every opportunity her every word from the interview to portray as such. Where in the interview was there mention of a 'Waity Katie" or Kate's work experience prior to the wedding? Where?
Meghan brought up her working as a teenager not in relation to anyone but herself when she spoke about her life experience and work ethic. It wasn't a dig at Catherine or any other family member.

I'm going out on a limb here and state that we don't have to paint Meghan as a villain in this scenario. She did an excellent job of that all by herself. She painted a clear and precise picture of who she really is in big, bold strokes. We're just looking at the picture. ?

If someone on The Royal Forums made a horrible remark. No honest and fair person would conclude that everyone on the Royal Forums is guilty and bad- only the individual who made the remark.

In an effort to explain my thinking here, the only example of how something like this would whet the appetite to find out just *who* the guilty party is to recall a cliffhanger in a TV drama called "Dallas". People were left up in the air to try and figure out who was it that shot J.R. Same thing applies here. Everyone was a suspect.

 

[Alisa]

I appreciate that you have taken the time and effort to consider exactly what they said and as a result, you understand that it is unfair to condemn the entire family based on this one anecdote, but many commenters are discussing racism and the royal family, not one individual. The reporters are not asking who made the comment but rather, is the royal family racist.

I understand that providing more detail may make Meghan more credible in some people's eyes. But I believe that it was unnecessary to say anything that made Catherine look bad. It would be very boring if everyone on this forum had the same point of view.

The couple isn't to be blamed because reporters and commenters are asking the wrong questions. It's no fault of their own. I have read and reread Meghan's comments concerning Catherine and I still come to the same conclusion that nothing malicious was said. Meghan even said that Catherine did what she (Meghan) would have done if she offended someone. If Meghan wanted to villify Catherine she would've omitted that part as well as omitting the flowers and note part.

 

[Somebody]

See quotes from the interview about the Waity Katie comment.

She indicated it wasn't that bad as it wasn't racist.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

The couple isn't to be blamed because reporters and commenters are asking the wrong questions. It's no fault of their own. I have read and reread Meghan's comments concerning Catherine and I still come to the same conclusion that nothing malicious was said. Meghan even said that Catherine did what she (Meghan) would have done if she offended someone. If Meghan wanted to villify Catherine she would've omitted that part as well as omitting the flowers and note part.

I disagree in that it is easy to say that the couple can't be blamed for reporters asking the wrong question but whenever someone is talking to the media, they need to evaluate how the media may respond to the allegations. I think Meghan and Harry knew in advance how this interview would be perceived.

 

[Erin9]

The Duke & Duchess of Sussex & Family - General News March 2021 -

It was quite clear from the interview that whoever said it- said it a malicious and racist way. Why else would Harry say that it would be "damaging " to explain more and reveal the person's name?

No, it wasn’t clear.

For one- you have to find Meghan and Harry to be reliable to begin with. Their stories weren’t the same on this issue. And- we already know they lied- about the title issue for one. So, nothing is clear.

Furthermore- Harry calls it “damaging.” Could have been inappropriate, thoughtless. Who knows. Was it really racist? And who gets to decide that off of ONE comment? It was years ago.

If you take Harry’s version as closest to accurate- it was one time while they were dating. So, many years ago, and no one will remember this the same way, even if you assume everyone is actually doing their best to be honest. No one will ever “know” exactly what was said or intended.

We are talking about- according to Harry- one comment. Apparently said person never said anything racist before or after. Doesn’t sound like the individual actually was racist to me. And Harry- IMO- likely heard one thing while this person said another based on that alone. And who knows how Harry then relayed it to Meghan. Probably wasn’t EXACTLY what was said or intended. It never is.

No one IMO should have to explain themselves to millions of people until they die over literally one comment in a private conversation.

One that Meghan and Harry were so deeply upset and devastated over that they never bothered to address with the individual privately... but were perfectly happy to convey in vague terms to millions for a sympathy bid and to hurt Harry’s family.

They threw the entire family under the bus with this. Everyone looks bad now. And that’s how they wanted it. Well, particularly Meghan since she brought it up to begin with. She wanted everyone to be under scrutiny. That was the point of bringing it up. (And to give everyone another reason to feel for poor put- upon Meghan).

They were vague about what happened and inconsistent about when/how often. But- race is a buzz word..... so of course they had to say something on the subject so that they could complete the Victim Tour.

Private matters should have remained private IMO.

 

[Alisa]

I'm going out on a limb here and state that we don't have to paint Meghan as a villain in this scenario. She did an excellent job of that all by herself. She painted a clear and precise picture of who she really is in big, bold strokes. We're just looking at the picture. ?

I suppose like art- it is all subjective.

In an effort to explain my thinking here, the only example of how something like this would whet the appetite to find out just *who* the guilty party is to recall a cliffhanger in a TV drama called "Dallas". People were left up in the air to try and figure out who was it that shot J.R. Same thing applies here. Everyone was a suspect.

I'll give you an example if how I think. Once as a young child, my cousins and I were running around and playing in the backyard. One of my cousins pulled up a vegetable root! My grandaunt was upset and threatened to spank all of us if the culprit didn't come forward. My cousin refused to confess and after another threat of a communal spanking- I pointed him out. Yes- I snitched. But even then at a young age- I was never one to take other people's punishment.
So no- I never and will never interpret one individual's actions as being representative of the way the whole family thinks. That just makes no sense.

 

[leene]

It was quite clear from the interview that whoever said it- said it a malicious and racist way. Why else would Harry say that it would be "damaging " to explain more and reveal the person's name?

We don't know what was said exactly but if it is true that Archie could not be a prince because of his colour ( what Meghan suggested) and therefore could not have protection ( what they said as well) it is malicious and racist. They could go to court and probably win!

Oprah did not elaborate this further. Harry did not want to say the name, but Oprah could have asked whether they confronted the person, she did not. Was it said once, was it really malicious or stupidity etc etc.
I just don't get it... they just dropped bomb after bomb. This was not an interview, she just gave them a chance to say everything they wanted without being critical. On the long run this is not going to help Harry and Meghan.
Another example: They took my passport and car keys.Does she mean she was almost imprisoned?
Very peculiar! so peculiar that I looked deeper in to it. She traveled in her marriage more than 10 times, from Whale watching in Norway to a holiday home from friends in Italy to her babyshower in the USA.
She weakens her own story. It is only "they are all against me"

Harry said that the royal family is afraid of the gutter press and that the royals even invite them to the palace. That is very interesting and she should have asked more about that. Because this is seriously worrying. How can the royal family be freed from the gutter press. That is more interesting than whinging and telling 'the truth' about family members who can't defend themselves

 

[RosieStroud]

Alluding that the it could have been any one of the members of the family, outside of the Queen and Philip, most definitely is lining them all up with the wheels of that proverbial bus.

Just as if someone came out and said that "someone on The Royal Forums made this remark and its horrible", it would put each and every one of us under suspicion of having said it because we're all saying things on here. If it was something said three years ago, we'd be combing the archives to find out who the guilty party is.

At the risk of being shouted down, can I just respectfully raise a question and a humble opinion.

With regards to the opinion, I would agree that the Catherine/Meghan upsetting incident (whoever was the instigator!) needs to be put to bed. According to Meghan herself, this has been resolved satisfactorily. These differences happen, especially when people are stressed, i.e. wedding preparations. Most adults, having let off steam, will apologise, as appropriate and move on.

My question is around the alleged ‘racist’ conversation. Who was this question actually put to - Meghan & Harry together, Meghan alone or Harry alone? Do we know whether there were witnesses? Whilst I would NEVER condone racism in any form, to make any accusation one needs to be able to produce evidence to support it. I am happy to be corrected if I have missed something in the interview that answers this question.

Thank you.

 

[Osipi]

I'll give you an example if how I think. Once as a young child, my cousins and I were running around and playing in the backyard. One of my cousins pulled up a vegetable root! My grandaunt was upset and threatened to spank all of us if the culprit didn't come forward. My cousin refused to confess and after another threat of a communal spanking- I pointed him out. Yes- I snitched. But even then at a young age- I was never one to take other people's punishment.
So no- I never and will never interpret one individual's actions as being representative of the way the whole family thinks. That just makes no sense.

Thing is, the cliffhanger was resolved 8 months later and we found out who did shoot J.R. The culprit in your scenario was pointed out and justice was served to the person that deserved it. In the interview scenario, we'll probably never know who the actual culprit really is nor the context of what was said at the time or even the comment in the actual words that were stated. We're left hanging that someone in the royal family made a racist remark with the finger now being pointed that it could be any one of them outside of the Queen and Philip.

What would have happened if you hadn't snitched? The entire group of you would have been spanked. All of you would have been deemed guilty as charged. Maybe Harry *does* need to be a snitch?

 

[A Tudor]

New YouGov polls on H&M popularity.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-level-Oprah-interview-shows-YouGov-poll.html


It's dreadful.

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

At the risk of being shouted down, can I just respectfully raise a question and a humble opinion.

With regards to the opinion, I would agree that the Catherine/Meghan upsetting incident (whoever was the instigator!) needs to be put to bed. According to Meghan herself, this has been resolved satisfactorily. These differences happen, especially when people are stressed, i.e. wedding preparations. Most adults, having let off steam, will apologise, as appropriate and move on.

My question is around the alleged ‘racist’ conversation. Who was this question actually put to - Meghan & Harry together, Meghan alone or Harry alone? Do we know whether there were witnesses? Whilst I would NEVER condone racism in any form, to make any accusation one needs to be able to produce evidence to support it. I am happy to be corrected if I have missed something in the interview that answers this question.

Thank you.

Pretty much all we know was that it was a single comment, put to Harry and only Harry, early on in his relationship with Meghan.

 

[KrissyM]

Hello, I've been lurking here off-and-on for a few years and I never thought I'd join as my true interest in Royalty is mainly centered in the Renaissance, or the Regency. Not really hot topics from what I've seen. However, what fascinates me about The Duke and Duchess of Sussex is the all-in or all-out viewpoints.

For example, comments implying or outright saying, 'The Duke and Duchess' are "bringing the monarchy down" baffle me. I think it will take a lot more than an interview with Ms. Oprah to do that amount of damage to a 1000 yr old institution. There have been worse tell-all's and interviews in the last three decades. They've been well covered on these very forums.

Another thing I find nearly incomprehensible is the assertions made that the Monarchy cannot change its press policy or the LP's. Yes it can! The monarchy has adapted and evolved since time began. The monarchy of the Lancastrians is not the same monarchy of the Tudors, the monarchy of the Georgians is not the same as the monarchy of Victoria, etc. Today's monarchy is not the same monarchy as it was when I was a child. To survive all institutions must keep growing and changing. That's just life. The monarchy can change how the system works.

Note: What changes and how they should be made is a whole other discussion.

Finally, I believe the Duke and Duchess's comments are nowhere near as detrimental as most people seem to think.

 

[stunking]

I just watched a short review of the interview with Oprah (not the whole thing). It's on youtube. It's the behavior panel and they are experts on body language and the use of
language. Very insightful guys. Sinces Meghan take no responsibilty for what happend they sight her as being a narcisist. The interview was obviosly about Meghan. Harry did say the the so called racist remark was made in the begining and not when she was pregnant with Archie. It had nothing to do with him, they do name a couple of suspects and it is interesting how they arrived to them. It was a very cruel interview.

 

[Erin9]

The Duke & Duchess of Sussex & Family - General News March 2021 -

I'm going out on a limb here and state that we don't have to paint Meghan as a villain in this scenario. She did an excellent job of that all by herself. She painted a clear and precise picture of who she really is in big, bold strokes. We're just looking at the picture. [emoji2]
:

I would have to agree.

And in case there was any doubt left- her friend who gave the authorized follow up interview and the email release just helped confirm what was already pretty clear.

Plus- they proved it was a lie when they said that this interview was a one and done hatchet job.

All Harry and Meghan had to do was handle their exit with quiet dignity. Instead a year later, they’re still fuming. You’d think this had all happened yesterday to listen to them.

 

[Hallo girl]

I agree to an extent that I would have asked alot more questions about her mental health- especially since she made a big deal about suicidal and not getting the help she needed at that time. I wanted to know how did she get help? Is she in therapy?..etc..etc.

I disagree about the spirit of Archewell being at odds with the couple's. I don't believe they're bad people with no good intentions and as such cannot have a philanthropic foundation.
I believe they felt terribly disappointed and hurt at the treatment they received being senior members of the royal family. They never threw anyone under the bus- they simply explained how they felt and their version of the events- their "truths".

Exactly their version of events, and with another interviewer or at least a journalist who knows anything about Britain and the monarchy could have poked holes in a great deal of what they said.

I cannot really comment on the conversation as they have not provided us with enough detail, but to claim that Archie did not receive a title of prince or security because he is bi racial is wrong. Prince Williams children are the only great grandchildren to have titles. So either they conveniently forget the other great grand kids, is it 5 or 6 who do not have titles, or what they are saying is that they want Archie to be the same as Williams kids. If that is the case then be honest about it, they could have said they were disappointed.

Is the privacy issue now the reaction to Archie not being a prince, so they stamped their feet and said well no title then no pictures.

So that is maybe 'their truth' but it is not factual. The rules were not changed to ensure Archie did not get the title. He should be given one automatically when Charles becomes King.

Either they said it like that or Oprah has edited it to look like that is what they said.

Another story that possibly came out after the interview but she had to chose between security for Archie or less for herself on the Africa tour. Not her decision to make, these decisions are made by the security team before the tour even starts. It is called planning.


This has caused a great deal of trouble in the UK, our queen of nearly 70 years must be heart broken with the behaviour of her grandson, I can excuse Meghan not knowing the rules and the protocol but not Harry. But I do blame her for wording certain things in a certain way to make herself the victim. Nobody is saying we are perfect here, but she has stirred up so much trouble, not opening dialogue but causing trouble, she could have stayed and achieved so much,

What I have taken from this whole debacle is that there is jealousy in there somewhere.

Only the week before they were promoting compassion and kindness and then they throw out accusations with no evidence and incorrect facts.

They do appear to have a problem with the Cambridges, in particular Kate

 

[tommy100]

Couldn't see this posted but the Sussexes seem to have come of worst in the view of the British public after the interview:
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic...c-opinion-harry-and-meghan-falls-new-low-afte


I'm sure Charles will be peeved that he is the only other royal to see their popularity drop after the interview, that may backfire on H&M. No other royals saw their popularity decrease significantly & the number of people supporting the idea of monarchy has stayed the same.

 

[Kataryn]

When I read the email yesterday that the Sussexes wanted released....I wondered what the value add was supposed to be.

I seem to miss out on this email(s) that was in circulation. Can someone please point me to it?

 

[Hallo girl]

Another thing I find nearly incomprehensible is the assertions made that the Monarchy cannot change its press policy or the LP's. Yes it can! The monarchy has adapted and evolved since time began. The monarchy of the Lancastrians is not the same monarchy of the Tudors, the monarchy of the Georgians is not the same as the monarchy of Victoria, etc. Today's monarchy is not the same monarchy as it was when I was a child. To survive all institutions must keep growing and changing. That's just life. The monarchy can change how the system works.

Note: What changes and how they should be made is a whole other discussion.

Finally, I believe the Duke and Duchess's comments are nowhere near as detrimental as most people seem to think.

You are right they could have issued changes to make Archie a prince, but they didn't, it was because the Queen has lived to this great age that they had to change the rules for Williams kids.

What Meghan inferred , or how it was edited was that they changed the rules to stop him being a prince and that is factually incorrect.
Ps I am interested in the Tudor Kings and Queens also. Could have a good chat about our favourites.

 

[KrissyM]

You are right they could have issued changes to make Archie a prince, but they didn't, it was because the Queen has lived to this great age that they had to change the rules for Williams kids.

What Meghan inferred , or how it was edited was that they changed the rules to stop him being a prince and that is factually incorrect.
Ps I am interested in the Tudor Kings and Queens also. Could have a good chat about our favourites.

I'm more a Valois girl. Also, I realize they chose not to change the rules for Master Archie. I'm not sure that was the right choice, but since it doesn't impact my life I can't get worked up about it.

My point was this, the extreme anger about this interview is baffling. Other members of the Family have done and said much worse during the history of the Monarchy with far less anger and mercy showed to the Sussex's. Comparing them to The Duke and Duchess of Windsor is ludicrous in the extreme.

 

[Hallo girl]

I'm more a Valois girl. Also, I realize they chose not to change the rules for Master Archie. I'm not sure that was the right choice, but since it doesn't impact my life I can't get worked up about it.

My point was this, the extreme anger about this interview is baffling. Other members of the Family have done and said much worse during the history of the Monarchy with far less anger and mercy showed to the Sussex's. Comparing them to The Duke and Duchess of Windsor is ludicrous in the extreme.

I wouldn't compare them to the Windsors, that was a different time, different issues but I think other royal interviews have back fired on the person themselves. This couple appear to have gone out to damage the monarchy with some of what they said, the Queen is the head of the commonwealth over 50 countries , and Meghan accuses them of racist acts against her and her son with no evidence other than ' their truth '.

 

[Estel]

Had Meghan give multiple instances of various family members saying offensive and racists things then yes perhaps. However she gave just one incident of a one individual making such a statement. That is definitely not throwing the family under the bus.

Regarding the Kate incident it has been the one longstanding story that refuses to go away. People believe allegations about staff abuse because of that story. The reality is that Meghan portrayed Kate in a flattering way as someone who was kind and humble- someone who apogized when they were wrong and even gave Meghan flowers. Meghan said nothing bad about Kate.
The fact that you would believe Meghan made Kate cry despite the leaked emails that state otherwise and despite the fact that Meghan clarified that it was just the opposite just about says it all.

What exactly does it say? That there is a possibility that Kate could've cried? Is there none?

About throwing the entire family under the bus, yes, they've done so. So, let's just agree to disagree.

 

[KrissyM]

This couple appear to have gone out to damage the monarchy with some of what they said, the Queen is the head of the commonwealth over 50 countries , and Meghan accuses them of racist acts against her and her son with no evidence other than ' their truth '.

I think the key word is appear here. If I may point out some points I don't think have been brought out.

1. The interview was edited. We know this because 'outtakes' have been aired. We have no idea if the Sussex's had editorial approval.

2. From what I've read people seem either unable or unwilling to separate criticism from How the Firm does things from Who in the Firm does them. This is a major problem for any Monarchy in the 21st century.

3. Personally, I think a lot of the problem is that The Duchess is from the USA. US English and UK English are two totally different beasts.

4. The allegations of the Duke "not loving" his family is overdramatic and unfair. When he said The Prince of Wales and The Duke of Cambridge were "trapped" it's context suggested the media policy of the Firm. Something I'd suggest is seriously outdated now.

 

[Kataryn]

Pretty much all we know was that it was a single comment, put to Harry and only Harry, early on in his relationship with Meghan.

And we can imagine who said it, when a conversation brought on the rift between Harry and a "relative" and why Harry did react the way he did because I don't think he wanted his wife to p**s on his relatives shoes. For something that was probably a misunderstanding but IMHO brought Meghan's hatred on to that branch of the family. For the way that interview showed, there is not much positive energy and compassion within Meghan when it comes to the "treatment" of her and her son, for whatever reasons.

 

[Mbruno]

I'm more a Valois girl. Also, I realize they chose not to change the rules for Master Archie. I'm not sure that was the right choice, but since it doesn't impact my life I can't get worked up about it.

The general trend in other European monarchies (the Netherlands, Spain, and most recently Sweden) has been to limit the HRH only to children of the monarch, the heir (if not already included in the previous category), and children of the heir.



The UK already goes beyond that by also extending the HRH to all grandchildren in paternal line of a sovereign and to the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales. The latter rules have not been changed as of today, so Archie is still in the position to become a prince when Prince Charles becomes king (and the Palace even confirmed that when Archie was born).



Changing the rules now, i.e. in the current reign, so that another great-grandson of the Queen, in this case in collateral line, could be a prince from birth would not only go against the general trend to limit the number of HRHs, but also would be complicated for the Queen considering that she already amended the LPs of 1917 in 2012 to extend princely titles to all of William's children (and not only his firstborn son as before), thereby already increasing the number of people who are eligible to be HRHs. Besides, it would be clearly an unnecessary move as Archie will probably become a prince anyway in the future under existing rules.


So, yes, even though it doesn't affect me personally (as it doesn't affect you), I think that, objectively and thinking about public opinion and potential reactions, it was the right thing not to change the rules for Archie.

 

[ladongas]

I'm more a Valois girl. Also, I realize they chose not to change the rules for Master Archie. I'm not sure that was the right choice, but since it doesn't impact my life I can't get worked up about it.

My point was this, the extreme anger about this interview is baffling. Other members of the Family have done and said much worse during the history of the Monarchy with far less anger and mercy showed to the Sussex's. Comparing them to The Duke and Duchess of Windsor is ludicrous in the extreme.

It seems that most people on the forums believe that Harry and Meghan have committed high crimes and lied about everything, and that the BRF have made no mistakes about anything at all, including their treatment of their sons’ and (grandson’s) wives. There has been no noblesse oblige from the BRF on these sad issues.

 

[KrissyM]

Like I said, Master Archie having an HRH is so outside of my life that I can't have strong feelings about it either way. I simply see why an outsider could believe its unfair to make special exception for one set of kids and not all of them. This is a 21st century mindset. I still say this interview is positively mild compared to those made by other members of the family. All the anger is disturbing.

 

[Queen Ester]

It was quite clear from the interview that whoever said it- said it a malicious and racist way. Why else would Harry say that it would be "damaging " to explain more and reveal the person's name?

Because the person has a right to clear the air, as I said, we don't know what was said, if Harry does not want to name names, then he should prove an exact quote, let's agree to disagree on this one