The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1181  
Old 03-09-2021, 12:53 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Washington DC, United States
Posts: 489
In regard to Archie, whoever said it should be a shamed of themselves. What kind of thing is that to say to his parents? Secondly, to lie and make it seem as though it was Harry and Meghan that did not want Archie to have the title prince. And to not give it to him is just plan wrong. Now, I do care about tradition and rules or what happened in 1917. The Queen did it for William's children she should have done it for Harry's children as well. And she still should. I do not care where Archie is the in line of succession.

Having the first biracial royal baby in the family is something to be celebrated. And if who I suspect made those remarks to Harry, that person should be ashamed. If I were Harry, none of them would see those children again. They do not deserve to.
__________________

  #1182  
Old 03-09-2021, 12:54 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Observer7 View Post
In regard to Archie, whoever said it should be a shamed of themselves. What kind of thing is that to say to his parents? Secondly, to lie and make it seems as though it was Harry and Meghan that did not want Archie to have the title prince. And to not give it to him is just plan wrong. Now, I do care about tradition and rules or what happened in 1917. The Queen did it for William's children she should have done it for Harry's children as well. And she still should. I do not care where Archie is the in line of succession.

Having the first biracial royal baby in the family is something to be celebrated. And if who I suspect made those remarks to Harry, that person should be ashamed. If I were Harry, none of them would see those children again. They do not deserve to.
Everyone in the UK knew he wasnt going to be a Prince on birth. The title he would have used was Lord or Earl of Dumbarton. It was there decision not to use this and that was reported.
__________________

  #1183  
Old 03-09-2021, 12:55 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,595
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
How many versions of that simple statement were written. I am all for writing the most emotive you can first and peeling it back. It was an excellent statement and I am sure the first draft was something akin to

'I am sorry they have such a hard time but they drove us and our staff around the bend. We don't agree with the racism claim and you of anyo e has been caught out or racism it is Harry. We appreciate the Sussexes are very damaged and we will deal with it privately.'

The real kicker in it. Recollections vary.
I'm assuming that was not how it was put at the meetings over the last couple of days. Peeled back many times I think.
  #1184  
Old 03-09-2021, 12:57 PM
roseroyal's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Rose Bush, United States
Posts: 5,275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fem View Post
There was another program - Oprah did a morning show on CBS on Monday, talking about the interview, they also released some footage that didn't make it to the main interview.

Tabloids and racism:

Sussexes "snubbed" by the Queen:

Race factor:

Duchess of Sussex about her family:
Whoa.. I thought the Queen ran the show. Sounds like there’s one person running the show and the Queen and whoever they are they need to go!
  #1185  
Old 03-09-2021, 12:58 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: cu, United States
Posts: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by camelot23ca View Post
My main question is still whether Harry interpreted the remark correctly and then described it accurately to Meghan. Whatever he said to her, she took it and ran with it.



And again, by their own admission, neither of them ever addressed the issue with the person in question. Why not? I truly can’t think of a legitimate reason to not have a private discussion with their family member but instead decide to make vague accusations in public several years later.
Yes, I agree. I said earlier that I put a lot of blame for the alleged racist conversation(s) with Harry. Classic white person approach that *he* is made uncomfortable/shocked by the comment so therefore avoids the awkward conversation with his family member, and then later feels the need to share the comment with Meghan, who will naturally be upset by it and is in a more vulnerable position to do anything about it (as biracial, and it not being her family). The burden should absolutely been on Harry to address any comment, and not to go to Meghan and let the two of them fret and stew about it together and feel more of a sense of persecution.

I realize they're very isolated now, so I'm not hoping that the two of them get upset with each other but I think Meghan should have been upset with Harry for his very poor handling of this (and seemingly other situations). By their own narrative, he failed to take some clear opportunities to protect her.
  #1186  
Old 03-09-2021, 01:04 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,595
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Observer7 View Post
In regard to Archie, whoever said it should be a shamed of themselves. What kind of thing is that to say to his parents? Secondly, to lie and make it seems as though it was Harry and Meghan that did not want Archie to have the title prince. And to not give it to him is just plan wrong. Now, I do care about tradition and rules or what happened in 1917. The Queen did it for William's children she should have done it for Harry's children as well. And she still should. I do not care where Archie is the in line of succession.

Having the first biracial royal baby in the family is something to be celebrated. And if who I suspect made those remarks to Harry, that person should be ashamed. If I were Harry, none of them would see those children again. They do not deserve to.
Harry and Meghan disagreed with when and how it was allegedly said and Harry looked shocked that it came up. We're dealing with a 3rd hand account of a several year old conversation without any context what so ever. I think it's important to remember that.

I 100% agree racism is terrible and should be called out and stamped out but this isn't a clear cut accusation at all.

Harry and Meghan could have used Earl of Dumbarton or Lord Archie but chose not to. They wanted him to be a regular kid. That was said by their favourite leaker Omid Scobie.

It has not done Bea or Eugenie the slightest bit of public good to be HRH Princess. It just brings expectations that aren't met and a lot of public bitching about them. Peter, Zara, Louise and James have it easier.

The reason she did it for William's children is that she didn't want a situation where Lady Charlotte Windsor was the Queen in waiting whilst her younger brother was behind her in the succession but was HRH Prince George. That was fair for siblings.

It should also be noted that in the same time frame several European monarchs stripped their previously titled grandchildren and relatives of titles in order to slim down. It wasn't personal.

They did celebrate Archie's birth. There are lovely photos of HM and PP meeting him (with Doria) looking ecstatic. Harry gushed about zoom calls and presents from HM and the family on James Corden *after* he had filmed this interview.

It was also Meghan and Harry's wish to keep everything else about Archie as private and secret as possible. They didn't want him to be a public figure at all and even turned down an Australian firefighting helicopter being named after him because he wasn't royal.
  #1187  
Old 03-09-2021, 01:05 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Observer7 View Post
In regard to Archie, whoever said it should be a shamed of themselves. What kind of thing is that to say to his parents? Secondly, to lie and make it seems as though it was Harry and Meghan that did not want Archie to have the title prince. And to not give it to him is just plan wrong. Now, I do care about tradition and rules or what happened in 1917. The Queen did it for William's children she should have done it for Harry's children as well. And she still should. I do not care where Archie is the in line of succession.

Having the first biracial royal baby in the family is something to be celebrated. And if who I suspect made those remarks to Harry, that person should be ashamed. If I were Harry, none of them would see those children again. They do not deserve to.
The main reason that the LPs were issued for the Cambridge children before George was born is because under the existing LPs, if George had been Georgina, she wouldn't be entitled to hold an HRH or Princess until Charles became King. George, being born second, would be HRH and Prince simply because he was male. The problem was solved not only by amending the Act of Succession to absolute primogeniture but also ensured that all the children by the heir to the heir to the throne were titled from birth. This, I believe, is a consequence of Queen Elizabeth's very long reign on the throne regardless of the sex of the child. Great grandchildren of a monarch never really had to be considered much before.

It's not a personal thing at all. It's a matter of tradition and protocol within the hierarchy of the monarchy.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #1188  
Old 03-09-2021, 01:06 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 830
H&M interview drew less ratings than diana's from back in the day.

https://www.thewrap.com/oprahs-megha...995-bombshell/
  #1189  
Old 03-09-2021, 01:10 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
It should also be noted that in the same time frame several European monarchs stripped their previously titled grandchildren and relatives of titles in order to slim down. It wasn't personal.
Look at Sverre Magnus in Norway - he's the son of the heir apparent, but not even an HRH like his sister - only a 'mere' HH...
  #1190  
Old 03-09-2021, 01:11 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenMathilde View Post
H&M interview drew less ratings than diana's from back in the day.

https://www.thewrap.com/oprahs-megha...995-bombshell/
Thanks. We know that there are more potential viewers than in 1995 but a lot of people watch online (I think they have a way to count the number). Regardless, but that just speaks to Diana's incredible popularity.
  #1191  
Old 03-09-2021, 01:12 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Observer7 View Post
In regard to Archie, whoever said it should be a shamed of themselves. What kind of thing is that to say to his parents? Secondly, to lie and make it seems as though it was Harry and Meghan that did not want Archie to have the title prince. And to not give it to him is just plan wrong. Now, I do care about tradition and rules or what happened in 1917. The Queen did it for William's children she should have done it for Harry's children as well. And she still should. I do not care where Archie is the in line of succession.

Having the first biracial royal baby in the family is something to be celebrated. And if who I suspect made those remarks to Harry, that person should be ashamed. If I were Harry, none of them would see those children again. They do not deserve to.
I wouldn't count on them making him a prince after all this. Or the girl a princess. Charles would have to do it when they turn 18 and according to harry he isn't even answering his calls.
  #1192  
Old 03-09-2021, 01:14 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,315
I think that the statement from Buckingham Palace was very generous, considering that Harry and Meghan told outright lies about Archie being denied a title, that Meghan attacked Kate and that Harry went into some very personal details about his relationship with Prince Charles. I'm quite sure that Archie will always be a much loved member of the family, although sadly I'm not sure that the Queen will ever see him again, but I can imagine that a lot of unprintable things are being said about Harry and Meghan.


However, the alleged comments about skin colour are out there now, and people are speculating as to who it was. I've heard people saying that, if they don't name them, it means it must be Prince Charles or Prince William because they wouldn't bother protecting a less senior royal's reputation. That's utter nonsense, and I've never seen the slightest indication that either Charles or William hold racist views, but this is the situation that Harry's created. Unless someone admits that it was them, or unless the Palace says that Harry got it wrong (and, even then, it'd be their word against his), it's rather a mess.
  #1193  
Old 03-09-2021, 01:16 PM
Claire's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,548
The interesting thing about his is other TV networks and newspapers, magazine and journalists especially ones that wish to scoop Scobie to the 2nd book have already started. It will not be long before M&H are suing everyone in the US as well. And one can only wonder what they will dig up. They have irreversible created their own private hell.
  #1194  
Old 03-09-2021, 01:17 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
Thanks. We know that there are more potential viewers than in 1995 but a lot of people watch online (I think they have a way to count the number). Regardless, but that just speaks to Diana's incredible popularity.
As someone who remembers it it was a different situation
Diana was going to be queen.
  #1195  
Old 03-09-2021, 01:17 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
Thanks. We know that there are more potential viewers than in 1995 but a lot of people watch online (I think they have a way to count the number). Regardless, but that just speaks to Diana's incredible popularity.
Also the way we view things are different. Less competition on networks back in 1995 than 2021 in the era of streaming. Either way that is quite a number.

Just glad they did release a statement. It was needed since the royals are still going out on engagements and they don't need to be ambushed with questions.

It has been stated.
  #1196  
Old 03-09-2021, 01:24 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenMathilde View Post
I wouldn't count on them making him a prince after all this. Or the girl a princess. Charles would have to do it when they turn 18 and according to harry he isn't even answering his calls.
My understanding is that it won't be a matter of Charles making their children princes and princesses, but he may issue a new LP that retroactively takes away their titles. Actually, I think he will issue a new LP but it would not be retroactive but would resolve the problem going forward. I think the Queen did not make Archie a prince in order to give Charles and William more flexibility to act as future circumstances dictate.
  #1197  
Old 03-09-2021, 01:48 PM
Marengo's Avatar
Administrator
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 22,837
This thread has reached 60 pages within two days. This thread is now closed. You can continue the discussion in a new thread:

Duke and Duchess of Sussex: Post-Interview with Oprah.

You can use quotes from this thread in the new thread. Some posts have been moved. Please conmtact the mod. team if you want to see other posts removed too.

Apologies for any inconvenience.
__________________

__________________
TRF Rules and FAQ
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
abu dhabi america american history archie mountbatten-windsor background story biography birth britain britannia british royal family buckingham palace camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles china chinese clarence house commonwealth countries countess of snowdon daisy doge of venice doll duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family life fashion and style george vi gustaf vi adolf hello! hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume imperial household jack brooksbank japan jewellery kensington palace king willem-alexander książ castle line of succession list of rulers mountbatten names nepal nepalese royal jewels plantinum jubilee prince charles of luxembourg prince constantijn prince harry princess ariane princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn princess chulabhorn walailak princess dita princess eugenie princess laurentien queen louise queen maxima resusci anne royal ancestry solomon j solomon spain speech suthida taiwan thailand united states of america wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:29 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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