The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #521  
Old 08-03-2019, 12:29 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,567
I had to ask myself a question. If I had a cause or an organization that needed to be promoted and funded, what would I do? In fact, I did what many accuse the Sussexes of doing. I submitted my "cause" to well known persons. Harry and Meghan themselves. They asked us to submit causes and people working for the greater good on their Instagram account. They gave me a space to bring attention to a cause that a woman that used to post here and she's taking her world by storm working for it. Its a shot at getting the message out there to more people. I'd be over the moon if well known personages or celebrities became a voice because frankly, it does reach more people. Ordinary, everyday people like I am don't have the deep pockets or create interest in a vast amount of people like well known people do.

I am more interested in the "why" Harry and Meghan do what they do and the innovative ways they're doing it rather than finding fault with every little thing. I like the known fact that throughout her pregnancy and during her maternity leave, Meghan has been shown to be quite active and involved. It tells me that she's embracing her royal role with Harry as something she wants to do rather than something she's required to do. I don't see any self gratification or self aggrandizement at all but that's just me and my perspective.

Its all in names. Names can be used for the greater good. Names can be used to make us scratch our heads and wonder why this world is going to hell in a hand basket at a blinding speed. Names can be dropped, shortened, shouted, whispered and even used as an expletive. What's important is for the greater good is the names that are associated with it and those are the people that are giving their names to causes, issues and organizations to make us aware of them, find support for them and many of them have deep pockets that put their money where their mouth is.

I follow what The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are up to here at TRF because I admire the work they do, the causes that they back and their ability to reach people. Even with the negativity bombarded at this couple, underlying it all is the "why". That's what is important to me. There is a method to this madness and it seems that, in the end, the causes, issues and organizations end up being the real winners.
__________________

__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #522  
Old 08-03-2019, 12:39 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 6,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post
I think you make some really good points, and only time will tell if the Sussex version of a reboot for the duties of the BRF's women will be a good one or not. I think the problem comes in that once you concentrate on getting "buzz," the corollary is that not all buzz is going to be positive. Diana found that out, and she's just one example. Buzz or public attention is a double-edged sword and it's impossible to completely control it. I do think the Sussex machine could do a much better job in targeting and directing that buzz than they are currently, however.

And all that begs the question over whether "buzz" is all that effective in actually stimulating changes as opposed to just getting on the cover of magazines or showing up frequently on Twitter and Instagram. I'm not sure how much effect being tagged a gazillion times has on people actually getting out and doing something, as opposed to being media warriors. There's a lot of talk and outrage, but how well does that translate to action?
I think it's been forgotten that Meghan has been in the BRF for barely 14 months. Of that, five months has been spent on maternity leave. She did not receive any patronages for several months. Isn't it a bit early to be condemning her and Harry for being all talk (or outrage) and no action.

(And she did after all perform quite a few engagements before her marriage, so we know she's willing and enthusiastic.) Surely it would be fairer to wait until Meghan has at least completed a full twelve months as a fulltime Royal before judging her performance as below what some expect of her?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #523  
Old 08-03-2019, 12:48 PM
duchessrachel's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Birmingham, United States
Posts: 926
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
I've wondered for a long time about where the argument actually lies between the royals and the public anyway. No one is holding a gun to the royal family's head demanding that they be there. If they want privacy and find it all so awful I'm sure that no one in the country would insist that the whole thing continue. In this day and age it's all rather silly anyway to expect one single family to be shoehorned into a certain way of life without choice. I enjoy watching them like many other people but to look at a 6 year old child ie George and tell that child that he HAS to be the future head of state that is obviously unfair both to him and to other people in the country who would rather have a democratically elected one. I feel in the past the royal family didn't kick out at being who they were in the way the younger members do now. The Queen's generation and her parents, aunts and uncles accepted that they traded in certain aspects of their private lives in exchange for the enormous privilege they enjoyed. They didn't go around planting bushes and trees everywhere and hiding the name's of godparents etc because they knew that giving the public access to these things was part if what a royal family is. Now, I'm not criticising those who do these things but it has got to a point where anything the public gets to know about comes across as grudged so I would suggest that if the younger members really don't like it all that much then we should perhaps end the whole set up. They can then go on to have the lives they would prefer and all the constant drama can stop once and for all.
I agree with these two statements. I am an American and the existence of the Royal Family does not affect me because my taxes do not go to them. However, purely as a fan of the Royal Family, I would hate to see them go away because I love all the clothing and jewels and seeing them interact with the everyday man. I also think they bring in a lot of tourism to Great Britain which certainly helps the economy. For instance, I would love to tour Great Britain to see the castles, Big Ben, Windsor, etc, but if the Royal family ceased to exist, I could care less about going. No offense whatsoever to anyone who is British, but these landmarks would cease to be relevant to me. The royal family creates a mystique around Britain. Anyway, when Harry was interviewed by Melody Hobson two or three years ago, he had the gall to suggest that young people “have all the solutions” to fix the world’s problems more so than older people because of all their connectivity. Gee, I can’t imagine how the world has managed to survive all these years. Also, when asked by Melody Hobson about the number of charities he, William, and Kate support as compared to his Grandmother, he says that we no longer live in a world where it works to just show up once a year to an event. I say tell that to the hundreds of charities of which the Queen supports by showing up once per year. I am sure they greatly appreciate it. He says you have to be involved and passionate about your work. I agree that it is good to be passionately involved with charities and I admire Harry for his work with Invictus and he, William, and Kate for their work in mental health, but passionate involvement is not necessary for every charity. I guess all these charities that have the Queen, Prince Philip, Prince Charles, Princess Anne, and the Duchess of Cornwall as their sponsors can just kiss Royal patronage goodbye when they die if it is not one that the younger royals are "passionate" about. Associating with the everyday people and showing care about the "small things" is the bread and butter of the Royal Family. It does not always have to be something big. I really believe that that Princes Charles, Harry, and William should stay away from the climate change cause. The Royals are supposed to be politically neutral and this is a politically charged topic. There are many people who don't believe in climate change and have strong feelings about that and cite evidence for their beliefs just as those who believe in climate change do. Therefore it is a political issue. Some of the people that Meghan put on the cover of Vogue are very politically divisive people. She should have chosen everyday people in Britain and the Commonwealth since that is her and Harry's focus. The Queen is a great example to follow. For 67 years she has been a unifying force for Great Britain and the Commonwealth by gracefully doing her duty, remaining politically neutral, interacting with the everyday people and not making celebrities or politically divisive people her focus. She has involved celebrities in things and has recognized them with OBE's, but that is far different than calling them forces for change. I have never heard her complain about her privacy being invaded. However, it appears that Harry thinks her way of doing things has to change for the future. In some ways it does, but don't rewrite the whole playbook. What the Queen has done has worked for 67 years. Why does it need to be "fixed" if it has mostly worked? To me, they appear to want to shut out the everyday person but cater to celebrities. I was so excited when Harry and Meghan first started dating and I hated the criticism they received. I was thrilled when they got married. However, with what I consider their missteps I am losing interest. I consider William and Kate to be private, but they are not anything in that respect like Harry and Meghan. They seem to strike the right balance. William has made some political statements in the past, but he seems to somewhat learn from them. Harry does not appear to. Maybe he and Meghan will eventually strike the right balance, but these younger royals seem to want to have their cake and eat it too. They need to make a decision what they want more.
Reply With Quote
  #524  
Old 08-03-2019, 01:11 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 3,894
I don't think the climate change issue is that politically charged in most of the world. In most countries the vast majority is in agreement that climate change is taking place; they mainly differ as to what should be done.
Reply With Quote
  #525  
Old 08-03-2019, 01:26 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,567
Climate changes *are* affecting our earth but its not solely all due to man made abuses of our planet. Its something we all need to be concerned about and just the fact that its mentioned right here in this thread, shows that the conversation is ongoing. There may be a bazillion different ways proposed to deal with climate change but the most important factor is being aware of a need to begin with.

As burps can be heard around the world instantly now, so can conversations reach more people than ever before. Awareness is so much better than ignorance about issues. We're intelligent, thinking human beings and with awareness, we then form our own opinions then we share them. That's what conversations do.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #526  
Old 08-03-2019, 01:37 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by duchessrachel View Post
I agree with these two statements. I am an American and the existence of the Royal Family does not affect me because my taxes do not go to them. However, purely as a fan of the Royal Family, I would hate to see them go away because I love all the clothing and jewels and seeing them interact with the everyday man. I also think they bring in a lot of tourism to Great Britain which certainly helps the economy. For instance, I would love to tour Great Britain to see the castles, Big Ben, Windsor, etc, but if the Royal family ceased to exist, I could care less about going. No offense whatsoever to anyone who is British, but these landmarks would cease to be relevant to me. The royal family creates a mystique around Britain. Anyway, when Harry was interviewed by Melody Hobson two or three years ago, he had the gall to suggest that young people “have all the solutions” to fix the world’s problems more so than older people because of all their connectivity. Gee, I can’t imagine how the world has managed to survive all these years. Also, when asked by Melody Hobson about the number of charities he, William, and Kate support as compared to his Grandmother, he says that we no longer live in a world where it works to just show up once a year to an event. I say tell that to the hundreds of charities of which the Queen supports by showing up once per year. I am sure they greatly appreciate it. He says you have to be involved and passionate about your work. I agree that it is good to be passionately involved with charities and I admire Harry for his work with Invictus and he, William, and Kate for their work in mental health, but passionate involvement is not necessary for every charity. I guess all these charities that have the Queen, Prince Philip, Prince Charles, Princess Anne, and the Duchess of Cornwall as their sponsors can just kiss Royal patronage goodbye when they die if it is not one that the younger royals are "passionate" about. Associating with the everyday people and showing care about the "small things" is the bread and butter of the Royal Family. It does not always have to be something big. I really believe that that Princes Charles, Harry, and William should stay away from the climate change cause. The Royals are supposed to be politically neutral and this is a politically charged topic. There are many people who don't believe in climate change and have strong feelings about that and cite evidence for their beliefs just as those who believe in climate change do. Therefore it is a political issue. Some of the people that Meghan put on the cover of Vogue are very politically divisive people. She should have chosen everyday people in Britain and the Commonwealth since that is her and Harry's focus. The Queen is a great example to follow. For 67 years she has been a unifying force for Great Britain and the Commonwealth by gracefully doing her duty, remaining politically neutral, interacting with the everyday people and not making celebrities or politically divisive people her focus. She has involved celebrities in things and has recognized them with OBE's, but that is far different than calling them forces for change. I have never heard her complain about her privacy being invaded. However, it appears that Harry thinks her way of doing things has to change for the future. In some ways it does, but don't rewrite the whole playbook. What the Queen has done has worked for 67 years. Why does it need to be "fixed" if it has mostly worked? To me, they appear to want to shut out the everyday person but cater to celebrities. I was so excited when Harry and Meghan first started dating and I hated the criticism they received. I was thrilled when they got married. However, with what I consider their missteps I am losing interest. I consider William and Kate to be private, but they are not anything in that respect like Harry and Meghan. They seem to strike the right balance. William has made some political statements in the past, but he seems to somewhat learn from them. Harry does not appear to. Maybe he and Meghan will eventually strike the right balance, but these younger royals seem to want to have their cake and eat it too. They need to make a decision what they want more.
Well that's what I think too. The Queen Mother, the Queen, Princess Margaret etc had the press through good times and bad but never 'explained or complained' during the bad and during the good were not obsessed with hiding themselves or their children away. As I said, I'm not making a judgment on William and Harry but if they want their position in life to be a constant game of cat and mouse between themselves and the press/public then perhaps they are in the wrong situation and should just jack the whole thing in. I personally don't want that to happen but I'm finding their attitude really tiresome.
Reply With Quote
  #527  
Old 08-03-2019, 01:50 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,567
For me, it all boils down to one word. Respect. No royal that works for the "Firm" and for the people for the greater good should have to fight tooth and nail for their private lives to remain just that. Private. Its not right that someone that is perceived as a public commodity should have every aspect of their lives both public and private be the subject for general consumption to amuse the masses.

This is the difference between then and now. Once the public engagements were over and done with, the older generation of British royals pretty much were left alone. Now it seems that the younger generation of working royals need to slam the castle gates, lower the portcullis and fill a moat with alligators to maintain their private lives.

There's something to be said of having the perk of being anonymous and of no interest to anyone. I appreciate that.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #528  
Old 08-03-2019, 01:51 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: SL, United Kingdom
Posts: 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by duchessrachel View Post
I agree with these two statements. I am an American and the existence of the Royal Family does not affect me because my taxes do not go to them. However, purely as a fan of the Royal Family, I would hate to see them go away because I love all the clothing and jewels and seeing them interact with the everyday man. I also think they bring in a lot of tourism to Great Britain which certainly helps the economy. For instance, I would love to tour Great Britain to see the castles, Big Ben, Windsor, etc, but if the Royal family ceased to exist, I could care less about going. No offense whatsoever to anyone who is British, but these landmarks would cease to be relevant to me. The royal family creates a mystique around Britain. Anyway, when Harry was interviewed by Melody Hobson two or three years ago, he had the gall to suggest that young people “have all the solutions” to fix the world’s problems more so than older people because of all their connectivity. Gee, I can’t imagine how the world has managed to survive all these years. Also, when asked by Melody Hobson about the number of charities he, William, and Kate support as compared to his Grandmother, he says that we no longer live in a world where it works to just show up once a year to an event. I say tell that to the hundreds of charities of which the Queen supports by showing up once per year. I am sure they greatly appreciate it. He says you have to be involved and passionate about your work. I agree that it is good to be passionately involved with charities and I admire Harry for his work with Invictus and he, William, and Kate for their work in mental health, but passionate involvement is not necessary for every charity. I guess all these charities that have the Queen, Prince Philip, Prince Charles, Princess Anne, and the Duchess of Cornwall as their sponsors can just kiss Royal patronage goodbye when they die if it is not one that the younger royals are "passionate" about. Associating with the everyday people and showing care about the "small things" is the bread and butter of the Royal Family. It does not always have to be something big. I really believe that that Princes Charles, Harry, and William should stay away from the climate change cause. The Royals are supposed to be politically neutral and this is a politically charged topic. There are many people who don't believe in climate change and have strong feelings about that and cite evidence for their beliefs just as those who believe in climate change do. Therefore it is a political issue. Some of the people that Meghan put on the cover of Vogue are very politically divisive people. She should have chosen everyday people in Britain and the Commonwealth since that is her and Harry's focus. The Queen is a great example to follow. For 67 years she has been a unifying force for Great Britain and the Commonwealth by gracefully doing her duty, remaining politically neutral, interacting with the everyday people and not making celebrities or politically divisive people her focus. She has involved celebrities in things and has recognized them with OBE's, but that is far different than calling them forces for change. I have never heard her complain about her privacy being invaded. However, it appears that Harry thinks her way of doing things has to change for the future. In some ways it does, but don't rewrite the whole playbook. What the Queen has done has worked for 67 years. Why does it need to be "fixed" if it has mostly worked? To me, they appear to want to shut out the everyday person but cater to celebrities. I was so excited when Harry and Meghan first started dating and I hated the criticism they received. I was thrilled when they got married. However, with what I consider their missteps I am losing interest. I consider William and Kate to be private, but they are not anything in that respect like Harry and Meghan. They seem to strike the right balance. William has made some political statements in the past, but he seems to somewhat learn from them. Harry does not appear to. Maybe he and Meghan will eventually strike the right balance, but these younger royals seem to want to have their cake and eat it too. They need to make a decision what they want more.
Meghan hasn’t actually complained about her privacy being invaded neither has she demanded that her privacy be respected, so unless there is irrefutable evidence to the contrary rather than taking as gospel accusations from the usual unreliable rabble - I’d apply some CS and be a bit more cautious, but that’s just me. Also bearing in mind that there ARE credible risks to the Sussex family in particular I wouldn’t begrudge their security detail taking the necessary preventative measures that are needed either!

Furthermore it strikes me as odd that Meghan gets accused by some of elitism just because she guest-edited (for a worthy cause I might add) British Vogue, a magazine whose covers have been graced by plenty other women of the royal family. The nature and structure of the British monarchy itself (and some might argue the current head) is the very definition of elitism and all this handwringing and faux-outrage just rings hollow in the grand scheme of things. This caring, good-natured woman has been doing the so-called “bread and butter” stuff that some like to grumble about since the day her engagement to Prince Harry was announced.

All these ructions all over the shop simply because she diversified a publication usually geared towards a certain type and featured a variety of women from different backgrounds and races doing their bit for humanity

(Just going to add that baby Archie deserves the same level of privacy that other non-royal/untitled children of working royals had while growing up.)
Reply With Quote
  #529  
Old 08-03-2019, 01:53 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
Well that's what I think too. The Queen Mother, the Queen, Princess Margaret etc had the press through good times and bad but never 'explained or complained' during the bad and during the good were not obsessed with hiding themselves or their children away. As I said, I'm not making a judgment on William and Harry but if they want their position in life to be a constant game of cat and mouse between themselves and the press/public then perhaps they are in the wrong situation and should just jack the whole thing in. I personally don't want that to happen but I'm finding their attitude really tiresome.
You are right it is possible to have a private and public life. I accept that the royals cannot just wander down the street and pop into Mcdonalds for a burger on the way home etc etc. On the other hand it is possible to conduct personal close friendships away from the glare of publicity and as a result enjoy a private life.
Reply With Quote
  #530  
Old 08-03-2019, 02:14 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 6,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
For me, it all boils down to one word. Respect. No royal that works for the "Firm" and for the people for the greater good should have to fight tooth and nail for their private lives to remain just that. Private. Its not right that someone that is perceived as a public commodity should have every aspect of their lives both public and private be the subject for general consumption to amuse the masses.

This is the difference between then and now. Once the public engagements were over and done with, the older generation of British royals pretty much were left alone. Now it seems that the younger generation of working royals need to slam the castle gates, lower the portcullis and fill a moat with alligators to maintain their private lives.

There's something to be said of having the perk of being anonymous and of no interest to anyone. I appreciate that.
Me too, Osipi. And it's worth reiterating, I think. The Queen Mum, Princess Margaret (who did have her own issues with the media) and Prince Philip and the Queen haven't had to live the majority of their young lives in the full gave of 24 hour news services, critical Twitter and Tumblr sites, online tabloid articles every few hours, people with cell phones who report every time they see a Royal out on a family occasion. It was and is a completely different world and set of circumstances.
Reply With Quote
  #531  
Old 08-03-2019, 02:19 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: SL, United Kingdom
Posts: 387
I hope Meghan is enjoying the remainder of her maternity leave despite the noise
Reply With Quote
  #532  
Old 08-03-2019, 03:28 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
Perfectly said, and yes, it still stands today.
They are there to serve others and not to promote themselves.
They have to do their duty to the public and in return people accept their enormous privileges such as wealth, influence, being role models etc etc
One will not go without the other.
Their duty includes to share important milestones of their private lives without the secrecy or drama that comes along with celebrities who will share as they like or don't like or gain from sharing or giving hints.
Royalty does not work that way, at least not in Britain.
She’s not promoting herself. She’s promoting people and charities and other organizations. Raising awareness on non political issues. It’s what the royals do.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #533  
Old 08-03-2019, 04:24 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 597
According to Reuters, readers line up for a copy of British Vogue edited by Duchess of Sussex.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-b...-idUSKCN1US1HZ
Reply With Quote
  #534  
Old 08-03-2019, 05:05 PM
Madame Verseau's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fijiro View Post
According to Reuters, readers line up for a copy of British Vogue edited by Duchess of Sussex.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-b...-idUSKCN1US1HZ

This is interesting. Apparently with all the back and forth on the issue people are deciding to judge for themselves and buy a copy. I've seen some anecdotes that some plan to buy more than one. I am curious to see the initial sales numbers of the magazine.

For the cover one of the 15 is a 16 year old girl, Greta Thunberg, who advocates climate change. While some her age hang out at the mall she spoke at Davos for her cause. Luminary Bakery is an organization out of East London that helps marginalized women. This is not headed by a celebrity chef and Meghan gave a nod to them.
Reply With Quote
  #535  
Old 08-03-2019, 05:06 PM
HereditaryPrincess's Avatar
Heir Apparent
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 12,208
Personally I think it's good that wealthier people and royalty/nobility contribute to a lot of charities and causes for those less fortunate. Some people are so ridiculously rich that they don't know what to do with their money (as an example, not quite the same, with the Beckhams - they've just bought a summer pad in Miami when they have several other houses elsewhere) and I'd rather they donate the remaining money to a charity cause than for trivial things they won't need.
__________________
"For beautiful eyes, look for the good in others; for beautiful lips, speak only words of kindness; and for poise, walk with the knowledge that you are never alone". Audrey Hepburn

*
"Think of all the beauty still left around you and be happy". Anne Frank
Reply With Quote
  #536  
Old 08-03-2019, 05:40 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,827
There are two things I disagreed with Harry and Meghan on:

1. Not announcing the hospital where Archie was born.
2. Not announcing Archie’s godparents and not selecting a press camera and few royal reporters to cover the arrivals and departures for Archie’s christening.

I just think those two things were decisions that could’ve been done differently.

That being said — Meghan, hasn’t done anything to bring on such a major backlash she has unfairly received. She is doing her royal duties and carrying out her obligations to her royal patronage’s and charitable interests like other members of her family are doing.

There’s nothing controversial about what, Meghan, is doing. I think once the maternity leave is over and the family get back to work, things can potentially calm down.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #537  
Old 08-03-2019, 05:51 PM
Ista's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 2,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by HereditaryPrincess View Post
Personally I think it's good that wealthier people and royalty/nobility contribute to a lot of charities and causes for those less fortunate. Some people are so ridiculously rich that they don't know what to do with their money (as an example, not quite the same, with the Beckhams - they've just bought a summer pad in Miami when they have several other houses elsewhere) and I'd rather they donate the remaining money to a charity cause than for trivial things they won't need.
I think it's wonderful when extremely wealthy people give money to a charity, or fund a foundation or initiative. Where it gets tricky is when someone is extremely wealthy, and then tells others who are not wealthy at all what they should or should not be doing in a way that shows they really have zero comprehension about the tradeoffs the average person makes to keep a roof over their heads, food on the table, and their children clothed. I'm all for bringing awareness to social issues--we need that, and we all need to be mindful of the impact of the choices we make. But members of royal families like the Sussexes have many, many more choices because of their relative wealth and status, and it would be a good thing for them to keep that in mind when they speak, something not everyone in the BRF has managed 100% of the time, and which always sparks a certain level of outrage and resentment. Prince Harry is getting the same kind of blowback that others have gotten in the past for similar reasons.
Reply With Quote
  #538  
Old 08-03-2019, 06:21 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Glasgow, United Kingdom
Posts: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
There are two things I disagreed with Harry and Meghan on:

1. Not announcing the hospital where Archie was born.
2. Not announcing Archie’s godparents and not selecting a press camera and few royal reporters to cover the arrivals and departures for Archie’s christening.

I just think those two things were decisions that could’ve been done differently.

That being said — Meghan, hasn’t done anything to bring on such a major backlash she has unfairly received. She is doing her royal duties and carrying out her obligations to her royal patronage’s and charitable interests like other members of her family are doing.

There’s nothing controversial about what, Meghan, is doing. I think once the maternity leave is over and the family get back to work, things can potentially calm down.
I disagree with you on point one. Could you imagine the maelstrom of cameras and reporters outside the hospital? The press would probably be go as far to try and find out what happened to the placenta.
Reply With Quote
  #539  
Old 08-03-2019, 08:17 PM
Zaira's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: A, United States
Posts: 1,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
There are two things I disagreed with Harry and Meghan on:

1. Not announcing the hospital where Archie was born.
2. Not announcing Archie’s godparents and not selecting a press camera and few royal reporters to cover the arrivals and departures for Archie’s christening.

I just think those two things were decisions that could’ve been done differently.

That being said — Meghan, hasn’t done anything to bring on such a major backlash she has unfairly received. She is doing her royal duties and carrying out her obligations to her royal patronage’s and charitable interests like other members of her family are doing.

There’s nothing controversial about what, Meghan, is doing. I think once the maternity leave is over and the family get back to work, things can potentially calm down.
Agreed 100% with the two things you highlighted as missteps.

Look, Meghan and Harry have largely done with is expected of them. They have shared their special moments with the public, gone about their duties, and done as Queen and country have asked including two tours will Meghan was pregnant, one while she was in her third trimester! They have both shown devotion to their patronages and also shown how invested they are in using their platforms for overall good.

To be honest, Meghan has exceeded expectations in a massive way. Two successful projects on the books, one happening in the first four months of her being a royal with Together, three foreign tours or visits, day aways, a duchy visit, taking on new patronages (including some from the Queen), a new project already announced, all while adjusting to the role, a new country, a pregnancy and baby.

But what I will say is that I am personally really proud of Meghan and what she has accomplished thus far. I am also happy, if wishing sometimes it wasn't the case for my own mental well-being while royal watching, to see the conversations around race in the UK that have been happening with more frequency thanks to Meghan. I don't know if it will lead to change, but I hope more awareness at least.

I am also proud of how much Harry has grown these past 6 years in particular. He has truly come a long way. I hope we see him increase his work load in the fall and I am excited for his new conservation project.

I am anxiously awaiting my own issue of Vogue. I have several girlfriends in the US who have asked me to have my bestie in London send over several copies too for them. I've seen a lot of excitement amongst women of color in my circles about this issue. Whether that translates into sales, Idk. But for me, it doesn't really matter either way. I am super excited to continue to see what Meghan and Harry do next!
Reply With Quote
  #540  
Old 08-03-2019, 08:17 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTchic View Post
I disagree with you on point one. Could you imagine the maelstrom of cameras and reporters outside the hospital? The press would probably be go as far to try and find out what happened to the placenta.
I was talking about after Archie was born and mother and baby went home. I think not saying where the birth took place was unnecessary. That’s done and over with though.
__________________

__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
archie mountbatten-windsor, duchess of sussex, duke of sussex, meghan markle, prince harry


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
Duke and Duchess of Sussex, General News 3: February - May 2019 JessRulz Current Events Archive 731 05-12-2019 06:13 PM
Duke and Duchess of Sussex, General News 2: December 2018 - February 2019 soapstar Current Events Archive 675 02-20-2019 06:26 PM




Popular Tags
alqasimi archie mountbatten-windsor aristocracy belgian royal family birthday celebration charles of wales chittagong cht clarence house countess of snowdon cover-up crown prince hussein crown prince hussein's future wife crown princess victoria crusades cypher danish history denmark duke & duchess of cambridge; duke of cambridge duke of sussex dutch history dutch royal family felipe vi french revolution future genealogy germany hamdan bin mohammed henry v hill historical drama house of bernadotte house of glucksburg house of grimaldi house of orange-nassau house of saxe-coburg and gotha jerusalem jumma kent languages marriage mbs mohammed vi monaco christening monarchism norway norwegian royal family official visit palaces palestine popularity prince charles prince harry princely family of monaco queen paola romanov family royal tour shakespeare spain spanish royal startling new evidence state visit sweden swedish history thailand tracts united kingdom unsubscribe usa


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:41 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×