The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #781  
Old 03-08-2021, 04:41 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empress Merel View Post
But he is to blame for cutting them off, for not answering to the phone, not listening when Meghan was depressed, did nothing when she faced deep racism for years by the hands of the tabbloids and members of the family.

He is unofficial head of this family as Elizabeth gets older and older. This idea that Charles is some innocent bystander is absolutely foul. He hasn't been an innocent bystander the moment he married Diana.
I appreciate your point of view, I am trying to understand it. With respect to Meghan's depression, there is no indication that Charles knew about it. But I keep wondering why Harry didn't do anything to help Meghan at that point. Harry is an adult, after all.

Regarding the finances, Harry has money. He inherited at least $20 million from Diana, so why should Charles pay for his lifestyle if Harry was leaving to gain financial independence.

I don't have enough information about why Charles stopped talking to him. It certainly surprised me.

Regarding the racism, there was racism directed at Meghan, but not all criticism was rooted in racism. We know that one member of an offensive brooch, which was not written about extensively at the time. I am not sure I believe that someone speculated on how future children would look - Meghan and Harry gave very different stories, which was odd.

If it did happen, it probably was more thoughtless than racist. Harry has been caught making insensitive comments as well, so it is a bit hypocritical for him to be so critical. Racism implies hostility and I don't believe that the family was hostile. She herself said they were welcoming.
__________________

  #782  
Old 03-08-2021, 04:42 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Midlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,623
Just look at these headlines:

Queen and Prince Philip not behind Archie skin colour remarks

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...e-harry-meghan


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-b1814005.html


Disgusting that this should have to appear in a newspaper because of of the irresponsible words of Harry Windsor. I hope he's pleased with himself.

And look at Winfrey & King. Like vultures picking over a carcass. As if the BRF is anything to do with them.
__________________

  #783  
Old 03-08-2021, 04:47 PM
Kellydofc's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Out in the country, United States
Posts: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empress Merel View Post
But he is to blame for cutting them off, for not answering to the phone, not listening when Meghan was depressed, did nothing when she faced deep racism for years by the hands of the tabbloids and members of the family.

He is unofficial head of this family as Elizabeth gets older and older. This idea that Charles is some innocent bystander is absolutely foul. He hasn't been an innocent bystander the moment he married Diana.
Harry got over 20 million from Diana I think most of us could live our ENTIRE lives on that perfectly comfortably. Harry and Meghan chose to walk away and part of that was losing the financial backing of the royal family. This is how it has worked for every other non working royal. Harry and Meghan should NOT be an exception to the rule!

Charles apparently did answer the phone until he got exasperated. I'm sure we've all reached those points with family members. And more importantly we have no idea what happened to precipitate this. I highly doubt Charles just randomly decided to just stop taking Harry's calls for no reason. He just doesn't seem like that type of father.

We have no idea if Meghan ever went to Charles when she was depressed. From what she said it doesn't seem like it. If he didn't know how was he meant to do something. And if he did know I HIGHLY doubt he would have kept her from getting help given he actively helped Diana and his sons seek mental help and sought it himself. It is possible the help Meghan was offered was not the help she wanted.

The royal family does not dispute anything written in tabloids they have never done so in the past and they were not going to start for Meghan. We have no idea if any real racist remarks were said within the royal family. We have one remark that they can't agree on the timing of, won't say who said it and we have no context for. So again what was Charles meant to do?

Harry and Meghan are not innocent victims. They went into this situation thinking they would be equal to William and Kate or could make themselves equal to William and Kate and I think got bitter and angry when they found out that would not be the case.

They then left thinking they would be called back because they were oh so needed and then shock of all shock they're not because Harry isn't even the spare anymore. William has 3 children so while it would have been nice to have Harry and Meghan for official duties and as family members the succession is assured.

None of this is Charles' fault unless it is over indulging his younger son and not making it plain to him that his role in the royal family would become less and less as time went on. Or who knows, perhaps Charles did try to explain that to Harry and Harry chose not to heed the lesson and he's having to learn it the hard way now.
  #784  
Old 03-08-2021, 04:52 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Florida, United States
Posts: 226
I don't see how any pro-British Family fan can want these titles not to be stripped. Give Eugenie and Jack Frogmore cottage.
  #785  
Old 03-08-2021, 04:56 PM
Kellydofc's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Out in the country, United States
Posts: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess_Watcher View Post
I don't see how any pro-British Family fan can want these titles not to be stripped. Give Eugenie and Jack Frogmore cottage.
I thought Frogmore had already been taken away from the Sussexes. Am I remembering that incorrectly?
  #786  
Old 03-08-2021, 04:56 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: bedford, United States
Posts: 1,689
Wait, what am I missing? If there were all these threat to their babies safety and the Crown refused him his own security why didn’t H&M bite the bullet and pay for it themselves like Edward and Andrew do for their kids? That would have been the most expedient thing to do.
  #787  
Old 03-08-2021, 04:56 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empress Merel View Post
But he is to blame for cutting them off, for not answering to the phone, not listening when Meghan was depressed, did nothing when she faced deep racism for years by the hands of the tabbloids and members of the family.

He is unofficial head of this family as Elizabeth gets older and older. This idea that Charles is some innocent bystander is absolutely foul. He hasn't been an innocent bystander the moment he married Diana.
Charles is certainly to blame for his conduct involving Diana, and perhaps to some extent for the lingering impact their divorce and its fallout had on Harry. But regarding Meghan, there's not enough information to know what, if anything, he should have done differently. From what I can piece together, he'd been engaged in discussions with Harry and Meghan to try to find a solution that would let them step back on their terms while keeping some things like security. Harry and Meghan then publicly announced their plans to be part-time royals as a done deal, when they knew the palace hadn't agreed to it. That was the point at which he stopped taking Harry's calls, probably because he didn't trust Harry not to misrepresent anything he said, and perhaps also because he didn't trust himself not to say something he might later regret. I don't blame him.

I don't think Charles has any real control over what the tabloids print. They've said some pretty horrible things about him and Camilla over the years, much of which weren't true. Whatever his other failings, no one can doubt that he loves Camilla. If he couldn't stop those stories, I don't know why anyone thinks he has a magic wand that he can wave and make the press be nice to Meghan. And if anyone knows the futility dignifying tabloid nonsense by officially denying it, it's him.

Aside from that, we don't really know anything. We don't know who they asked for help, or how they asked. We don't know what exactly they asked for or why they didn't get it. We don't know who made the allegedly racist comment or whether it was racist at all. We don't know whether Charles was aware of any of this. It's not obvious to me why they'd have needed his assistance to get help for Meghan, and it doesn't sound like they ever addressed the offensive comment with the person who made it or with anyone else. Maybe he's responsible for some of those things, but without more to go on, I don't think there's enough to say any of it is his fault.
  #788  
Old 03-08-2021, 04:56 PM
Madame Verseau's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,784
The White House has weighed in, which surprises me

https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampprojec...ook-courage%2F

Support for courage to speak of mental health for Meghan. No comment on other matters in the interview. Speaks of special relationship between UK and US. The G7 summit in the UK is this summer. I think the "special relationship" is stated to assure there is no diplomatic fallout from the interview.
  #789  
Old 03-08-2021, 05:00 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by windemere View Post
Well, we will just have to wait and see how all of this turns out. Family conflicts are nothing new in the British royal family. They have been going on since 1066. Look at the relationship between King Henry II and his sons, and the relationships that the sons had with each other. As Katherine Hepburn said in The Lion in Winter "What family doesn't have its ups and downs ?"

Time heals all wounds, and it has always been the destiny of younger sons to leave home and seek their fortunes abroad. Maybe sometime in the future, when all the commotion dies down, the Sussexes can find a useful diplomatic role as liaisons for the royal family in the U.S.A.

I'd be surprised if Charles or William speak to Harry again. I doubt seriously they are going to have him as a liaison.
  #790  
Old 03-08-2021, 05:01 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,757
Apparently Meghan went to Bryony Gordon during that period where she was struggling. So that’s one person backing her story.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/li...-have-avoided/
  #791  
Old 03-08-2021, 05:01 PM
acdc1's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: somewhere in, United States
Posts: 2,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellydofc View Post
I thought Frogmore had already been taken away from the Sussexes. Am I remembering that incorrectly?
It is still, officially, their UK residence. They had to pay back the costs of the refurbishment, which came from taxpayer money, which they have already done. However, they have moved the rest of their furniture to California as that's where they will be permanently settling and they are letting Eugenie, Jack, and baby August live there (I don't know what the agreement was for that). It's very clear that they will not be coming back to the UK to live as a family, so I'm glad that Frogmore is getting some use out of it.
  #792  
Old 03-08-2021, 05:02 PM
Empress Merel's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: -, Netherlands
Posts: 2,794
Harry certainly didn't inherit 20 million from Diana and considering their high profile, security costs are through the roof. The Queen not paying for security, I get that. But Charles not paying for security is actually mind boggling to me. He even could've decided to set up an agreement where Meghan and Harry pay him back, but decided not to. That is ice cold.

Harry specifically states that Charles does not answer when his own son calls. He is that type of father.

When we say that the BRF does not dispute anything that is being said in the tabbloids, I cannot help but wonder then how we would classify all the ''sources'' blabbing to the press.
  #793  
Old 03-08-2021, 05:07 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,469
I decided that I'd watch it, to see it for myself.


It started off being reasonable enough. I can accept that she genuinely didn't realise that she'd be expected to curtsey to the Queen at a private family lunch.


But then she got really passive-aggressive about Kate, saying that the pictures of them together at Wimbledon weren't how they looked.


And then it degenerated into bare-faced lies. Saying that Archie wasn't given the title of prince because of his mixed race heritage, when, as has been pointed out umpteen times, it's because of rules made in 1917. And saying that that was something to do with security arrangements, when Beatrice and Eugenie (who *do* have the title of princess) don't get their security paid for. And that it wasn't her choice or Harry's that Archie hasn't got a title, when he was supposed to be the Earl of Dumbarton but she and Harry announced that they wanted him to be plain Master.


If she'd said she was upset about the security issue and thought Archie should have state-funded security because of the Sussexes' high profile, I could have understood that, but what she actually said was a pack of lies - and a particularly nasty pack of lies, because she was insinuating that the Royal Family racially discriminated against Archie, when they did no such thing.
  #794  
Old 03-08-2021, 05:07 PM
Prinsara's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: A place to grow, Canada
Posts: 1,502
Harry and Meghan seemingly tried to cut Charles out in the beginning by going over his head to the Queen when they wanted out. I would think he would have justification for not wanting to speak to them.
  #795  
Old 03-08-2021, 05:09 PM
Kellydofc's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Out in the country, United States
Posts: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess_Watcher View Post
I don't see how any pro-British Family fan can want these titles not to be stripped.
I don't think they can be stripped of their titles without feeding into Meghan's narrative. I think the best we can hope is that once Charles assumes the thrones they amend things to say that going forward only the children of the eldest child will receive titles. So in this case just George's children. I also wouldn't mind if their were no Duchies for Charlotte or Louis when they married.
  #796  
Old 03-08-2021, 05:10 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Midlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
The White House has weighed in, which surprises me

https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampprojec...ook-courage%2F

Support for courage to speak of mental health for Meghan. No comment on other matters in the interview. Speaks of special relationship between UK and US. The G7 summit in the UK is this summer. I think the "special relationship" is stated to assure there is no diplomatic fallout from the interview.
Why would there be any diplomatic fallout? It's a private matter. In terms of US-UK relationships it's not even trivial it's just irrelevant.
  #797  
Old 03-08-2021, 05:11 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 272
Harry and Meghan, between the two of them, had more than enough to buy a large acreage in the middle of nowhere, build a reasonably-sized house on it, build a tall fence around the whole thing, hire some full-time security, and live in peaceful obscurity for the rest of their lives while still leaving a nice chunk to their children. That's perfectly compatible with what they claimed to want when leaving the RF. They may not have had enough to pay for both LA-level security and a Hollywood mansion, but the fact that they want to be high-profile celebrities doesn't obligate Charles to foot the bill for that lifestyle. I don't think they really believed that pursuing fame put Archie at risk, but if they did, it's telling that they chose to do it anyway.
  #798  
Old 03-08-2021, 05:11 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by mary mary View Post
Harry specifically said that he did not go to any members of the royal family with the request for Meghan to receive treatment for her depression/suicidal ideation. That actually stuck with me a lot -- Meghan said she was ashamed or scared to tell Harry, and then when he joined the interview he said that he did not go to his family with the information because he was also ashamed.

I don't think the fault lies with any one person, but honestly I think a lot of the interview highlighted Harry's reticence to actually express the severity of the issues directly to his family. And Meghan should perhaps be just as upset about that -- she was pregnant and suicidal and needed help, and instead of her husband going to family to ask for help, he and Meghan meandered through the royal household bureaucracy (who they clearly don't trust) because *he* -- not just she -- was too ashamed to make clear the extent of her difficulty.

Honestly, much of the interview highlighted for me how little Harry did to prepare Meghan, and how much he hesitated to speak up or push back when he had more standing to do so than she did -- for example, he said that the comment from a family member about their future child's skin tone was something that took him by surprise so he didn't say much to respond, but yet he felt the need to pass on this comment to Meghan without being willing to push back as a white man whose own family member it was?

Literally none of this makes any sense to me. They were ashamed to tell family but not ashamed to tell the staff they did not trust?
And if they did not want to tell, why did they not get Meghan a therapist by themselves? I've been to therapy - you can literally just look up a therapist online and make an appointment. I don't see why Harry, especially, who has been involved in so many mental health campaigns & with mental health charities, would not know how to get Meghan help - discretely, if that's what they preferred.

And I still can't see anyone, family or staff, refusing a suicidal Meghan her wish to see a therapist or be admitted into a mental health clinic.
  #799  
Old 03-08-2021, 05:11 PM
Leopoldine's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
That is why I find it hard to believe that the Archbishop of Canterbury, as the most senior clergyman in the CoE, would go along with that farce, especially considering we are talking about a public wedding that cost millions, was televised worldwide and attended by the Queen and the RF?
Her Majesty is the head of the Church of England. I can't see the Archbishop presiding over Harry's secret backyard marriage ceremony without her approval ... which seems unlikely to have been given.

It must have been a private blessing, not an official ceremony.
  #800  
Old 03-08-2021, 05:13 PM
Nico's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 2,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empress Merel View Post

Harry specifically states that Charles does not answer when his own son calls. He is that type of father.
.
He's the father who walked Meghan down the aisle, welcomed her and her mother with open arms, paid her couture dresses and tried to find a decent solution for everyone involved when they wanted to be "out".

He is that type of father.
__________________

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 with Oprah III - Post-Interview, March 9th 2021 - Marengo The Electronic Domain 746 03-12-2021 05:30 AM




Popular Tags
america american archie mountbatten-windsor asian baby names biography birth britain britannia british royal family british royals buckingham palace camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing colorblindness coronation doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii family life family tree gemstones george vi gradenigo hello! henry viii hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume highgrove history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs king juan carlos liechtenstein list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchist movements monarchists monarchy mongolia mountbatten names nara period plantinum jubilee pless politics portugal prince charles of luxembourg prince harry princess eugenie queen elizabeth ii queen louise queen victoria royal ancestry royalty of taiwan solomon j solomon spanish royal family sussex suthida unfinished portrait united states of america wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:07 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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