The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f34/)
-   -   The Duke and Duchess of Sussex: Transition & Future (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f34/the-duke-and-duchess-of-sussex-transition-and-future-47165.html)

carlota 02-16-2020 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by muriel (Post 2293783)
I am not sure how Meghan's job as a royal was "compromising one’s health, including mental”...But if she had been willing to ignore the press and just focussed on her work, IMO, she would have been fine.



I agree. All royal consorts faced scrutiny yet they concentrated on what mattered and earned the respect and trust of the people. Meghan (along with her husband who had the trust of the people and lost it) failed at that because moaning, hypocrisy and wanting to play by your own rules when you’re part of a well established institution only gets you so far. She needs to understand that she isn’t (and that she was never meant to be) the star of the show.

wyevale 02-16-2020 05:46 AM

Quote:

She needs to understand that she isn’t (and that she was never meant to be) the star of the show.
Not anymore, her [brief] significance in the National life of the UK, is at an end - what she is able to make of her life elsewhere is 'another thing', but as regards the UK, she has relegated herself to irrelevance.

ACO 02-16-2020 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by muriel (Post 2293783)
I am not sure how Meghan's job as a royal was "compromising one’s health, including mental”...But if she had been willing to ignore the press and just focussed on her work, IMO, she would have been fine.

How do you know she would be fine? How would any of us know how Meghan was truly treated behind closed doors? Her relationships with not just the family but the many who work with for and with them? Honestly we have no idea what took place, so who is to say her mental health behind the scenes wasn’t at risk?

At the end of the day it is Harry who she married. He and Archie are all that’s truly important in the grand scheme of things.

Kataryn 02-16-2020 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Durham (Post 2293285)
I'm not sure what the distinction is between personal & royal monies. What is the source of Charles "personal money"? If it's inheritance from the late Queen Mother then she had no money of her own (earned or from the Bowes-Lyons) just what was left to her by her husband. What was the source of that money? It certainly wasn't any sort of earned income.

Charles has money because his immediate ancestors had money. That money came from the public purse/ancient duchies in one form or other. I'm not so sure the British public would therefore be quite so sanguine.

The public should go for removal of the monarchy and the nobility and then take away all money from all the people, then distribute the money equally under all Britons, like wise the grounds. Only then you could try to have a say in what Charles does with his money, IMHO, for it belongs to him according to the system and as long as you don't change the whole system, you cannot do anything but accept.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wyevale (Post 2293792)
Not anymore, her [brief] significance in the National life of the UK, is at an end - what she is able to make of her life elsewhere is 'another thing', but as regards the UK, she has relegated herself to irrelevance.


I think they both wish it was that way, but the tabloids take any news they get, any pic... Irrelevance should look different!!

muriel 02-16-2020 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ACO (Post 2293793)
How do you know she would be fine? How would any of us know how Meghan was truly treated behind closed doors? Her relationships with not just the family but the many who work with for and with them? Honestly we have no idea what took place, so who is to say her mental health behind the scenes wasnít at risk?

To suggest anything otherwise would be pure speculation and conjecture.

Based on public information, it is fair to say that she does not appear to have strong familial bonds. So to that extent, that she did not form bonds with his family, and possibly some of his close friends, is no surprise. Which does not mean that she was treated badly in any way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ACO (Post 2293793)
At the end of the day it is Harry who she married. He and Archie are all thatís truly important in the grand scheme of things.

This is perhaps the key difference in our points of view. When you marry into the "core" of the BRF, you marry the individual and you sign up to a lifetime of service to the family, the institution and to the Kingdom and the Commonwealth. You don't spend walk in, spend a few months doing the projects that you are interested in (albeit no doubt with enthusiasm and gusto), then go onto national television and slight the very family who have provided you with the platform by suggesting that they have not asked about how she is doing often enough, and then publicly announce that you are leaving without having the consent of the head of the family and institution, all within 18 months. Talk about commitment to the role you took on!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kataryn (Post 2293800)
The public should go for removal of the monarchy and the nobility and then take away all money from all the people, then distribute the money equally under all Britons, like wise the grounds. Only then you could try to have a say in what Charles does with his money, IMHO, for it belongs to him according to the system and as long as you don't change the whole system, you cannot do anything but accept.

Thank you for your advice. I am sure the good people of these fair lands can decide for themselves how they want their institutions of state and society structured. :flowers:

Denville 02-16-2020 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by muriel (Post 2293805)
Thank you for your advice. I am sure the good people of these fair lands can decide for themselves how they want their institutions of state and society structured. :flowers:

True, I dont know what the nobility have to do with anything.. anyway. I think that people accept that Charles will help Harry, but he has used the Duchy funds to help other people, to re invest and to help his charities and also to provide funding for his sons to do their royal work. Now looks like he will have to at least temporarily help Harry till he gets to earn his own money. There is no "law" about how to use the Duchy funds, but to give a large sum of money to someone who ISNT part of the working royal family, to spend a lot of money to help him with his expenses when he has quit his work as a ROyal, doesn't seem right to me.
Its possible that Charles may need to take on other royals on a temporary basis to assist with the royal duties that Harry, Meg and Andrew were doing - He may elect to do so on a limited basis, ie saying "this is just temporary and does not mean that you will be paid this allowance for life..." but Im sure he's not that happy to feel "I have to also continue to pay an allowance to Harry when he has quit the job and gone away"... and he may wish, while still being willing to help, to cut down on what he spends on him.

Betsypaige 02-16-2020 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by muriel (Post 2293803)
To suggest anything otherwise would be pure speculation and conjecture.

Based on public information, it is fair to say that she does not appear to have strong familial bonds. So to that extent, that she did not form bonds with his family, and possibly some of his close friends, is no surprise. Which does not mean that she was treated badly in any way.



This is perhaps the key difference in our points of view. When you marry into the "core" of the BRF, you marry the individual and you sign up to a lifetime of service to the family, the institution and to the Kingdom and the Commonwealth. You don't spend walk in, spend a few months doing the projects that you are interested in (albeit no doubt with enthusiasm and gusto), then go onto national television and slight the very family who have provided you with the platform by suggesting that they have not asked about how she is doing often enough, and then publicly announce that you are leaving without having the consent of the head of the family and institution, all within 18 months. Talk about commitment to the role you took on!

I really agree with the last point in particular...though I don’t think a lifetime commitment necessarily has to be a lifetime if someone is truly unhappy. My major issue is that Meghan didn’t even give this “life” 18 months because it’s clear that she and Harry had planned this out for many months before they actually left. I loathe her comments in the Africa interview and how she and Harry showed complete disrespect and contempt for the Queen, Charles and the entire institution. Then again, if all that counts for Harry are Meghan and Archie, that explains his behavior - and perhaps it’s just as well that he split. Everyone in the BRF has sacrificed and will continue to sacrifice; the Queen, Charles and even William have spent time away from their family. Crown and country are extremely important to them. By ditching his family, Harry has put them all in an untenable position because they’re going to have to somehow replace the work that he and Meghan would have done. It’s nice to say that all that’s important to him is wife and child...except, what about his father and brother ? To not even give this a real chance is just aggravating.

Denville 02-16-2020 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by muriel (Post 2293803)
To suggest anything otherwise would be pure speculation and conjecture.

Based on public information, it is fair to say that she does not appear to have strong familial bonds. So to that extent, that she did not form bonds with his family, and possibly some of his close friends, is no surprise. Which does not mean that she was treated badly in any way.



This is perhaps the key difference in our points of view. When you marry into the "core" of the BRF, you marry the individual and you sign up to a lifetime of service to the family, the institution and to the Kingdom and the Commonwealth. You don't spend walk in, spend a few months doing the projects that you are interested in (albeit no doubt with enthusiasm and gusto), then go onto national television and slight the very family who have provided you with the platform by suggesting that they have not asked about how she is doing often enough, and then publicly announce that you are leaving without having the consent of the head of the family and institution, all within 18 months. Talk about commitment to the role you took on!

I agree... but I think that IF Meghan and Harry had approached the queen when they planned ot marry, and said out straight that they didn't want to be part of the working party, that Harry had issues wth the press, that Meghan was an independent woman who was used to running her own life and earning her own living.. and that in short they did not think that they wanted to sign up for a life of being part of the working RF and doing various duties.. I think the queen would have been dismayed.. because she and Charles had always intended H to be a full time worker and had hoped to keep the RF "small" with just the 2 sons and their wives doing the job, as time went on and the older cousins etc dropped off, BUT she would have taken it on board and agreed ot their having an independent life..
but they didn't. They both seemed very enthusiastic initially about doing the royal job.. Meghan seemed very confident and able to handle it, and I wold imagine that the RF thought she had plenty of confidence, she had experience of "performing in public" and knew about charities etc and she was a good royal worker...
I dont say that Meghan nevr intended to stay in the Royal job.. and only put in a year or so to increase her visibility.. but its hard at times not to feel that she did see it as a short term job and that if it didn't seem enjoyabl any more, or she did not want to do it, she and H would just up and leave.

wyevale 02-16-2020 07:58 AM

Quote:

Irrelevance should look different!!
The tabloids tend to ignore those in middle-age, [and nearing 40, that won't be long] especially when they live abroad - The lady should be able to sink into obscurity if that's what she REALLY wants ..

Personally I don't believe she does.

Denville 02-16-2020 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wyevale (Post 2293817)
The tabloids tend to ignore those in middle-age, especially when they live abroad - The lady should be able to sink into obscurity if that's what she REALLY wants ..

Personally I don't believe she does.

I cant help thnking that if the big issue was the Press and a feelng that she was unhappy because not popular/not appreciated...then she and Harry WOULD want to lead a quiet private life and would not have been talking about a charity foundation or earning hteir own income. THey aren't short of money... and IMO if they really wanted to lead a quiet life, they would live on what they have and some help from Charles.. they would NOT want to do public speaking etc. They could always do small scale charity work like normal people do, go to a centre for homeless people and volunteer, help with raising money in a small way, enjoy their freedom from public duties and be with tehir children etc. THey could lead a worthwhile life as private citizens..

carlota 02-16-2020 08:22 AM

yes. the fact that they want their royal foundation, speaker engagements, etc suggests to me that they don't have any intention of leading a more private life. if they did want a private life, they aren't short of money and could do that tomorrow. what they really want is the fame and the glory of their title and position but in their own terms whilst also the money and the press interest that comes with any appearances or work they undertake.

and yes, the time commitment of 18 months is hardly impressive. thank godness meghan understood what her new role in the BRF meant when she got engaged (as they spoke during their engagement interview), otherwise it would have been more like 6 months!

Juno 02-16-2020 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi (Post 2293768)
both are too old to have not taken such a huge step seriously and look deeply into what it meant. When Meghan said yes to the ring she said yes to his lifestyle and family; that she is jumping ship on the commitment she made to the BRF says something. I completely understand why a rift has apparently been forming between Harry and other people.

Both are also old enough enough to make their own decisions and choose to do what they believe is best for their family. Ultimately, when Meghan married Harry, she made a vow to HIM as he to her.

Quote:

Originally Posted by muriel (Post 2293783)
I am not sure how Meghan's job as a royal was "compromising oneís health, including mentalĒ...But if she had been willing to ignore the press and just focussed on her work, IMO, she would have been fine.

I am not sure either. Like you, I donít know the exact reasons they left, but stepping back from Senior Royal duties was what they chose.

Durham 02-16-2020 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denville (Post 2293818)
I cant help thnking that if the big issue was the Press and a feelng that she was unhappy because not popular/not appreciated.. then she and Harry WOULD want to lead a quiet private life and would not have been talking about a charity foundation or earning hteir own income. THey aren't short of money... and IMO if they really wanted to lead a quiet life, they would live on what they have and some help from Charles.. they would NOT want to do public speaking etc. They could always do small scale charity work like normal people do, go to a centre for homeless people and volunteer, help with raising money in a small way, enjoy their freedom from public duties and be with tehir children etc. THey could lead a worthwhile life as private citizens..

Absolutely. They have the choice & the means to live their lives exactly like this. Many people in Britain would wholeheartedly respect that & wish them the very best.

XeniaCasaraghi 02-16-2020 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juno (Post 2293826)
Both are also old enough enough to make their own decisions and choose to do what they believe is best for their family. Ultimately, when Meghan married Harry, she made a vow to HIM as he to her.

You already know the answer to this statement, others have already pointed out that saying yes to Harry was saying yes to the BRF as well.

I don't doubt that Meghan could have stuck around only a year to cement herself on the Alist so she can now start being around other A listers, apparently she is cultivating relationships and meetings with Jennifer Lopez, Alex Rodriguez, and the Obama's.

Juno 02-16-2020 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denville (Post 2293818)
I cant help thnking that if the big issue was the Press and a feelng that she was unhappy because not popular/not appreciated.. then she and Harry WOULD want to lead a quiet private life and would not have been talking about a charity foundation or earning hteir own income. THey aren't short of money... and IMO if they really wanted to lead a quiet life, they would live on what they have and some help from Charles.. they would NOT want to do public speaking etc. They could always do small scale charity work like normal people do, go to a centre for homeless people and volunteer, help with raising money in a small way, enjoy their freedom from public duties and be with tehir children etc. THey could lead a worthwhile life as private citizens..

I don’t think their issue with the press was that they weren’t more popular...They made it very clear that still intend to do charity and humanitarian work. Both have actually shown that this is important to them, and in my imo, they are good at it. I don’t know what you mean by “normal” people, but right now they have the popularity and platform to make a larger impact. And that’s a good thing; the more people they can help, the better. Even if one doesn’t agree with Harry and Meghan’s decision, I don’t understand the reasoning that they should only do charity in a “small” way. Why just help with “raising money in a small way” when they have the ability to do so much more and can positively impact more lives for the better?

Quote:

Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi (Post 2293834)
You already know the answer to this statement, others have already pointed out that saying yes to Harry was saying yes to the BRF as well.

Well, obviously she said yes to Harry, and they both said no to the BRF, at least as Senior Royals, so no, saying yes to Harry, isn’t saying yes to the BRF as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi (Post 2293834)
You already know the answer to this statement, others have already pointed out that saying yes to Harry was saying yes to the BRF as well.

I don't doubt that Meghan could have stuck around only a year to cement herself on the Alist so she can now start being around other A listers, apparently she is cultivating relationships and meetings with Jennifer Lopez, Alex Rodriguez, and the Obama's.

The rumors that they are hanging around with Jennifer Lopez , Alex Rodriguez, etc... came from the press. This is exactly what I’m talking about. The press report it, and people believe it. Jennifer Lopez supposedly wasn’t even in Miami when H and M were.

Denville 02-16-2020 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juno (Post 2293838)
Well, obviously she said yes to Harry, and they both said no to the BRF, at least as Senior Royals, so no, saying yes to Harry, isnít saying yes to the BRF as well.

but they said yes to the BRF in terms of accepting the role of working royals, with particular coverage of the commonwealth. If they didn't like the idea of being working royals - if they wanted more freedom to choose their own charities or what sort of work they wanted, the time to say "no" to the RF was back when they got married.

Juno 02-16-2020 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denville (Post 2293848)
but they said yes to the BRF in terms of accepting the role of working royals, with particular coverage of the commonwealth. If they didn't like the idea of being working royals - if they wanted more freedom to choose their own charities or what sort of work they wanted, the time to say "no" to the RF was back when they got married.

I donít disagree, but itís kind of a moot point because they didnít say ďnoĒ when they got married to the BRF, they said ďnoĒ now, and no one knows the reason except the people involved. Of course we can speculate- they were unhappy, she never intended on staying, family discord, etc... but itís all speculation. The fact is they left, so they have to focus on the future. Personally, I want them to have a successful foundation if it can be beneficial to people.

Denville 02-16-2020 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juno (Post 2293836)
I don’t think their issue with the press was that they weren’t more popular... They made it very clear that still intend to do charity and humanitarian work. Both have actually shown that this is important to them, and in my imo, they are good at it. I don’t know what you mean by “normal” people, but right now they have the popularity and platform to make a larger impact. And that’s a good thing; the more people they can help, the better. Even if one doesn’t agree with Harry and Meghan’s decision, I don’t understand the reasoning that they should only do charity in a “small” way. Why just help with “raising money in a small way” when they have the ability to do so much more and can positively impact more lives for the better?

...And if they can do good as private citizens, why set up a charity foundation? I would say that one would get more satsiffaction out of smaller scale work wehre they can engage with people, which Harry is good at.. than a Foundation which will be a diffrerent ball game. IMO there are too many foudnations competing for donations and I would have said that a wealthy couple who were leading a quiet life, would have lots of free time to give to something more hands on, which I would have thougt that Harry would find more satisfying.

ACO 02-16-2020 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denville (Post 2293853)
...And if they can do good as private citizens, why set up a charity foundation? I would say that one would get more satsiffaction out of smaller scale work wehre they can engage with people, which Harry is good at.. than a Foundation which will be a diffrerent ball game. IMO there are too many foudnations competing for donations and I would have said that a wealthy couple who were leading a quiet life, would have lots of free time to give to something more hands on, which I would have thougt that Harry would find more satisfying.

Why not have one? It has been in motion it seems for a while. It was their plan and seems to be their passion project. Just because that is your assumption doesn't make it so. They could do small and big projects. That is very much up their alley it seems. It is very possible to do both. They already were doing both.

I do wonder how long they will be in the UK next month. The claim is a few engagements but it seems March will be the end of their position as full time royals.

XeniaCasaraghi 02-16-2020 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denville (Post 2293848)
but they said yes to the BRF in terms of accepting the role of working royals, with particular coverage of the commonwealth. If they didn't like the idea of being working royals - if they wanted more freedom to choose their own charities or what sort of work they wanted, the time to say "no" to the RF was back when they got married.

They also said yes when they had a public royal wedding on the public dime. Plus they said in the interview that they were ready to work and serve the British public then they throw in the towel in only a year!


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:08 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises