Megxit

[lambskin]

I care about them as much as they care about me.

 

[telephone89]

I understand very well about racism without being lectured by you @distrcts, my parents were immigrants in the 1950’s and subjected to racism. My point is that Harry & MM have not been subjected to racism by the British press or the British people, and labelling us as snooty or classist, when these labels are only being used about a particular race, i.e. us Brits, is a form of racism.

We are a very multi cultural society in the UK, and nobody I know is a racist, I’m not saying it doesn’t exist, but if I were to have made such statements about Americans in general, I’m sure I would have caused offence.

If I were a racist, I’d hardly be delighted that my son is marrying a lovely Vietnamese girl, or have just spent Christmas with her entire family.

Are you f***king kidding me? The british press has been straight up racist to Meghan. Like straight, f**king racist.
"EXCLUSIVE: Harry's girl is (almost) straight outta Compton: Gang-scarred home of her mother revealed - so will he be dropping by for tea?"
A radio host tweeted a picture of a chimpanzee while making note of Archies birth.

Maybe you don't get these references, but they are extremely racist.

And for f**ks sake, "british" isn't a race, and calling someone snooty is NOT A RACIST TERM. What in the ever loving lord have you been drinking?

 

[Austina]

Of course I get them, but that is 2 examples, not the whole of the British press or the British people.

If you need to resort to bad language or insults, there’s very little point in bothering to comment further, just be careful you don’t hurt yourself when you fall off your imaginary moral high ground.

I’ll put you on ignore so I don’t have to see any more of your ridiculous drivel.

 

[MJ_Mac]

You were the one drawing a conclusion that I was drawing conclusions about a nation for watching a film. I wasn't talking literally about the film, I was referring to that show as one example among many (Upstairs, Downstairs being another), of shows conceived of, acted by, directed and produced by British people for British audiences. I understand that the events and characters depicted are of a bygone era, so their attitudes and actions reflect values of earlier times. However, the plethora and success of that plethora of period dramas, means that the British do hold nostalgia and longing for the past. And I suggest that seeing so much of that stuff, where the upper classes are acting a certain way, and looked up to, does have subliminal effects on the audience. I was not so specific with my words explaining this, and you misconstrued my words to mean something else.

Of course some English speaking people in America and Canada and Australia also lap up period dramas, but those shows are not being produced for American audiences, but for British ones. It's true that in Hollywood the upper class type characters have a British accent. But in Hollywood this type of character may be played as a villain in contemporary times, without the same type of nostalgia.

Technically only the British entertainment industry and media are producing work that glorifies the upper class, and this is only a subset of the British population, but I would argue that these period dramas produced by Brits for Brits are a part of British culture in the present day. You can't argue away the artistic or business ownership of this type of cultural export.

@voce - I have no words! This is so incredibly offensive that I am speechless. Actually I am not speechless but if I were to say what I wanted I would get a major hand slap from Ella.

 

[telephone89]

Of course I get them, but that is 2 examples, not the whole of the British press or the British people.

If you need to resort to bad language or insults, there’s very little point in bothering to comment further, just be careful you don’t hurt yourself when you fall off your imaginary moral high ground.

I’ll put you on ignore so I don’t have to see any more of your ridiculous drivel.

Lol. Feel free to do so, but you'd do well to educate yourself on what racism is. Please do not continue trying to play the victim in this scenario pretending to be hurt by racism against your british self.

eta - And for f**ks sake, I'm going to leave this here

People Who Swear May Be Happier, Healthier And More Honest

Damn right.

www.huffingtonpost.ca

 

[voce]

@telephone89 I am reminded of when someone I know (and disagree with) said that the Iranian government is not a corrupt, lying institution because, at that point by his count, they only lied to their citizens twice--once when they said they killed 80 Americans, and again when they said they were not responsible for the downed plane. At what point do you say that it's only certain government officials who lied, and that's no reason to form an opinion of the entire government of Iran given that the lies are condoned and dismissed as the sins of only a handful of corrupt people?

Did the Iranian government lie? Yes.
Were Harry and Meghan subjected to racism? Yes.

To me, this is a yes or no issue. Whether it ocurred once, twice, or more times...if it's happened even once, it has happened.

I think the controversy and drama surrounding Megxit comes from having different people look at the same thing that happened, drawing different conclusions, filtering the same event through very different perspectives.

Maybe the reason I give offense, is that I spoke truthfully about my personal impression about a certain aspect of British culture. I can change that impression that comments of other people, the British media, and British history have helped to form about as much as I can change the status quo situation that a lot of people seem fixated on taking offense to my opinions, rather than respond to my appeal for a little more sympathy for a struggling young couple. When you hate the messenger, is it right to ignore the message the messenger tries to convey? I will shut up now because my biggest flaw is talking too much. Just ignore me if you find my comments offensive.

 

[partgypsy]

I think what anyone could truthfully say, is that they do not know exactly what percent is racist, what percent is classist, what percent is being due to an outsider. But it is painfully obvious from the very beginning, she was judged extremely harshly and ascribed the worst motives to any of her behavior. Since this began before they knew anything about her, I am assuming it probably has to do with her race, that her family is not "top drawer", that she was divorced, that she is not royal, that she is American. Kate got some negativity, but the amount and degree of hostility towards Meghan was breathtaking. These are media outlets she and Harry HAVE to meet and greet with as part of their Royal duties (rota).It is not at all lost on me the irony, after having made her feel so unwelcome and excluded, the same media sources are kicking and screaming how DARE she, she CANT refuse media access. If it was me personally, I'd give them the two-fingered salute. As far as all the money issues, where do they get their money maybe because I'm not British I really don't care.

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

I think Meghan should have stayed away from reading the newspapers and not read into social media
but i understand thats eaiser said than done when they want to communicate with the younger generations
But this is smother example of the far reaching harm social media can do

it never crossed my mind in a heartbeat that there would be an issue im this day and age with Harry choosing a bride who wasn't 100% WASP

 

[PintoBean]

If I were a racist, I’d hardly be delighted that my son is marrying a lovely Vietnamese girl, or have just spent Christmas with her entire family.

I feel like there are better ways to express the good news of your expanding family. The choice of words comes off like someone saying, "I'm not racist, I have (fill in the blank) colored friends."

 

[arkieb1]

Meghan has been subjected to both racist and classist statements in the worldwide media, racism because her mother is a black woman and classism because she was not born into the British or any other aristocracy. She is a commoner by birth and on top of that the daughter of a black American woman. And, she has been married before.... Tiny amounts of media have celebrated these things suggesting someone from a more "normal" background could be good for the Royal House but many many more articles and images particularly in the trashy tabloids have been horrifically biased against her.

We cannot forget that not that long ago Prince Charles and his generation were simply not permitted to marry someone from a much lower class beneath him or someone (Camilla at first) that was the wrong religion and divorced, let alone someone from a different or more diverse cultural background.

The Royal "rules" have been changed and relaxed for modern times..... in fact the media at first, also attacked William's choice of Kate because she wasn't strictly from old formal British circles of elite families either, referring to her family as trashy and new money and things like that in the media well before Meghan arrived on the scene.

And Prince Charles rather than abdicate, sort Royal permission (ie changed centuries of rules) to marry Camilla.

 

[kenny]

I think it's important to keep in mind every media outlet is a for-profit business.

They make money giving readers whatever the hell readers want to read.
What's good and true does not sell as well as garbage.
Why? Because (good/bad/right/wrong) tons of people are garbage.
Garbage readers = garbage media ... in Britain and in America, presumably everywhere there are humans.

Blame readers.

Ethical, honest, independent, and agenda-less media is dead, if it ever truly existed.

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

Meghan has been subjected to both racist and classist statements in the worldwide media, racism because her mother is a black woman and classism because she was not born into the British or any other aristocracy. She is a commoner by birth and on top of that the daughter of a black American woman. And, she has been married before.... Tiny amounts of media have celebrated these things suggesting someone from a more "normal" background could be good for the Royal House but many many more articles and images particularly in the trashy tabloids have been horrifically biased against her.

We cannot forget that not that long ago Prince Charles and his generation were simply not permitted to marry someone from a much lower class beneath him or someone (Camilla at first) that was the wrong religion and divorced, let alone someone from a different or more diverse cultural background.

The Royal "rules" have been changed and relaxed for modern times..... in fact the media at first, also attacked William's choice of Kate because she wasn't strictly from old formal British circles of elite families either, referring to her family as trashy and new money and things like that in the media well before Meghan arrived on the scene.

And Prince Charles rather than abdicate, sort Royal permission (ie changed centuries of rules) to marry Camilla.

I thought the trouble with Camilia was that she had a past as in previous boy friends as in not a virgin
her ex husband is Cathloic and her children were raised in the faith but Camilla never converted

But you'r right Kate did get a hard time from the gutter press right back as waity Katie, her parents cashing in with the princess parties (like no one had ever had that idea before
) and also accusing her of being work shy when she concentrated on her babies rather than royal engagments.

the press wrote all those things for months stirring up trouble between Kate and Meghan just like they compaired Di to Sarah and fun loving Fergie who was once a fresh of breath air became a lonely navy wife and could never compete with Diana's glamor

Meghan really did go into this with rose computer glasses on (as one does when one is in love) and Di and Fergie too
but i think give H & M some time
Edward and Sophie sorted then selves out after a while after some real disasters, they have a whole life ahead of them
but don't allinate Harry from his own country and the people who love him

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

I think it's important to keep in mind every media outlet is a for-profit business.

They make money giving readers whatever the hell readers want to read.
What's good and true does not sell as well as garbage.
Why? Because (good/bad/right/wrong) tons of people are garbage.
Garbage readers = garbage media ... in Britain and in America, presumably everywhere there are humans.

Blame readers.

Ethical, honest, independent, and agenda-less media is dead, if it ever truly existed.

Your dead right
ive bearly brought a woman's magazines since Di's car crash

id love the media to go back to fact base reporting
i don't care about opinion pieces
give me the facts and i prefer to make up my own mind

 

[kenny]

... id love the media to go back to fact base reporting
i don't care about opinion pieces
give me the facts and i prefer to make up my own mind

The problem today is the "facts" reported by many media outlets (not in their opinion sections) practically ARE opinion pieces.

Why?
Again, media has figured out that unbiased facts neutrally reported are not as profitable as coverage that's slanted to fit the bias of their particular group of readers.
There have always been newspapers catering to this or that part of society, but the Internet and social media has magnified this ugly cancer (of democracies claiming to have a free press) exponentially.
Too many people today expect their chosen news source to pander to their political and religious views.
Chicken, meet egg.

Though disastrously divisive for a democracy with a free press, I see no hope or solution for this.

 

[MaisOuiMadame]

The problem today is the "facts" reported by many media outlets (not in their opinion sections) practically ARE opinion pieces.

Why?
Again, media has figured out that unbiased facts neutrally reported are not as profitable as coverage that's slanted to fit the bias of their particular group of readers.
There have always been newspapers catering to this or that part of society, but the Internet and social media has magnified this ugly cancer (of democracies claiming to have a free press) exponentially.
Too many people today expect their chosen news source to pander to their political and religious views.
Chicken, meet egg.

Though disastrously divisive for a democracy with a free press, I see no hope or solution for this.

Hmm, my experience and view is slightly different. The press in Germany is rather neutral as a whole. Don't get me wrong, there ARE trashy tabloids. But no one takes them seriously and some opinionated newspapers. As a whole, though, the main news are trying to be very neutral. The reasons are many and I won't go into all the historical details,but today it boils down to the fact that we still have state owned networks. Those are never controlled by the government directly,but by a board that legally has to have a diverse set-up . Funding is via fees. Program Hasbro include cultural pieces and neutral news. Totally unthinkable in the US. Quality has deteriorated since the introduction of private networks.bytvthe Very existence of the old school media outlets has a very neutralising effect. People watch the state channel news at 8-8.15 pm. That's national benchmark for news. It's no frills, no fun,no glitter, no emotion. Foreigners are shocked each time, lol

 

[arkieb1]

I think it's important to keep in mind every media outlet is a for-profit business.

They make money giving readers whatever the hell readers want to read.
What's good and true does not sell as well as garbage.
Why? Because (good/bad/right/wrong) tons of people are garbage.
Garbage readers = garbage media ... in Britain and in America, presumably everywhere there are humans.

Blame readers.

Ethical, honest, independent, and agenda-less media is dead, if it ever truly existed.

The media and social media not only write what readers want to read they have the power to persuade some people that various things must be true, like for example voting for Trump was the best and most feasible option...... that is when I have issues, when people are actually to stupid to sort out fact from reality.

Take all the heated Trump debates we have had on here (there were many while you were away) people from both sides were quoting dubious internet articles as "facts" the same with the gun control debate. Just because something is written in the media or on the internet as we both know, doesn't make it right or true.

IMOH "facts" and the "truth" these days seem much more fluid.....

 

[lissyflo]

... wow ...

I respectfully request that you read a LOT more about racism before you start talking about it. The lack of understanding you have shown about racism is a prime example of how people can be very racist and classist without realizing it. Your ignorance of the problem does not mean the problem does not exist.

I said I wouldn’t read this thread any more but I don’t like upsets and arguments and it’s niggling at me, especially when in terms of the fundamentally important issues here we’re all on the same side - none of us, thank god, are agreeing with the drivel written in the rags.

I’m not claiming to talk for @Austina but she and I seem to have been angered by the same points here and I wanted to try to clarify why, on my behalf anyway. I hate derogatory comments or sweeping generalisations being made about ANY group of people, be they grouped by race, nationality, accent, politics, job, whatever. I also dislike the idea that it’s okay to be dismissive and sneery about a particular group of people because they’ve never been overtly persecuted or discriminated against. It’s exactly the idea that it’s ok to make blanket generalisations about some groups of people that give bigotry and “isms” a foothold in society to start their insidious creeping. Blanket statements attributing assumed morals/character/whatever to any group are wrong, biased and bigoted.

A number of comments in this thread have made blanket comments about Brits in a number of offensive ways. One post (now sensibly deleted) stated that all “Brits are racist as Brexit shows”. I and a number of others have, not surprisingly, taken offence. Maybe use of the term racism is technically incorrect but the sentiment behind it appears the same from where I’m standing.

 

[Tekate]

I must say after the meeting with the Queen (who should retire imho ) the families have weathered the trauma/drama and are living their lives, since so much reported today IS opinion, outright lies or SPIN we don't really what was going on. I can say the Queen referred to the Duke and Duchess as the Sussex so they keep their titles. She sounded like she loved her grandson, wonderful to know. The rest we just don't know. Personally everyone should be happy.. being a royal isn't like a hundred years ago, they are regular people and while it's plush, it's also harsh. Best to luck to the crown, enfamile and everyone here.

 

[Austina]

That would be funny @PintoBean if it weren’t for the fact that my parents were ‘coloured’

 

[JPie]

@Austina

Facts:

It is possible to be a minority and a racist. Case in point: my aunt says the most astoundingly horrible things about black people, and she is Chinese.

When people make sweeping generalizations about the British, that's not racism because the British are a nationality, not a race. You could argue that the generalizations are inaccurate, unfair, or unkind, but you are wrong to characterize them as racism.

 

[partgypsy]

I grew up watching BBC shows via PBS such as news, comedy (Monty Python, Dave Allen), dramas, and quiz shows so judging by their tv I thought Brits were much more educated and discriminating than the average American.
Imagine my shock when I saw that the newspapers were the complete opposite of my expectations, less standards than the Enquirer! And I thought US had trash tv market cornered, but they outdid us with Love Island. My world is rocked knowing these two disparities live together.

 

[arkieb1]

I don't think the British are any more or less racist than any other parts of the world. Unfortunately racism exists everywhere on the planet. I did say I thought there were parts of the British population that are more classist than the rest of the world and I maintain that is true. If British people are offended by that then perhaps they should be.... I'd guess the people that are the most classist probably don't care.

 

[Calliecake]

I’m sorry for some of the comments that have been directed at you @Austina.

@Austina is a long time poster here who has never made an unkind or racist statement to anyone here. I’m baffled at why anyone would feel the need to be mean to her.

 

[kenny]

I think this is is a good example of why discussing racism is against PS rules.
Like abortion, religion, and politics, it's an important but hot-button issue that elicits deep emotions, so it's nearly impossible to discuss on a public forum without the train running off the tracks.

I realize that racism is considered a factor in Megxit, but maybe it's best if we avoid that aspect of the topic.
Okay?

 

[Calliecake]

I think this is why discussing racism is against PS rules.
Like abortion, religion, and politics, it's an important but hot-button issue eliciting deep emotions, so it's nearly impossible to discuss on a public forum without the train running off the tracks.

I realize racism that is considered a factor in Megxit, but maybe we should all just avoid that aspect of the topic.
Okay?

I have a hard time judging another country when the US has much to be ashamed about when it comes to racism. We need to clean up our own backyard before we worry about what others are doing. We have seen things the past three years becoming acceptable here that I never would have imagined happening. It’s sad and depressing.

 

[canuk-gal]

I’m sorry for some of the comments that have been directed at you @Austina.

@Austina is a long time poster here who has never made an unkind or racist statement to anyone here. I’m baffled at why anyone would feel the need to be mean to her.

Yes CC. Don't know either.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I have a lot of thoughts, none of which really matter in the grand scheme since I’m not a UK taxpayer, and none of it keeps me up at night. But here goes ...

Setting aside all the trash-rag stories and claims - legitimate or not - of “stiff upper lips”, actual or perceived biases, ‘Granny likes them better than us’, media, etc., and only considering Harry & Megan‘s statement that they desire privacy, family safety/security, financial independence and protection of/entitlement to their mental health/feelings (I’m unclear what they’re actually wanting in that regard) as the basis for this decision to step down from royal duties, I ask myself:

~ Why did they make the most public announcement possible via social media about their intentions and desire for privacy?​

~ Why would they leave the safety & security of residing on well-protected/guarded estates, and move to another country, even for only half of the year?​

~ Why would they not - PRIVATELY - have made all the necessary arrangements & discussions, allowed the Palace to issue a statement (as they usually do on such matters) that the couple have chosen to lead a more private life and step back from some royal duties; and then simply slip away to Frogmore or their location of choice quietly? (This so reminds me of people who dramatically post they are quitting social media in a huff, then never actually leave ... grow up already!)​

~ How do they claim to want ‘financial independence’ - as millionaires in their own right - while launching a ‘royal’ brand to hock sweats & socks while continuing to also keep a hand in Charles’ wallet (e.g. Duchy) to fund them?​

I’m no ‘royal’, but I have common sense ... and NONE of their actions make sense to this ‘commoner’.

Further ...

It’s my understanding the Monarchy (perhaps also parliament, UKers?) does not permit any member of the royal family to profit personally from their royal titles/positions; so if you want to be a regular ‘working guy or gal‘, drop the titles and ‘royal’ brand. I don’t see it appropriate that they choose what to do with a brand that is directly linked to the Royal family because that puts the actual Royal family’s ‘brand’ and role at risk.

Harry didn’t have a choice into what family he was born, so I’d cut him a little slack there, but he could have - respectfully -renounced his title and left quietly to live a ‘semi-normal’ working life if he really wanted. Megan, however, chose to join that circus, and she’s not some random 20-yr-old with no experience, worldly exposure, or internet; so I don’t buy the excuse she had ‘romantic, rose-colored glasses’ on and no idea what she was marrying into.

Lastly, I don’t see it as Harry & Megan’s role to “change the future of the Royal family or Monarchy”; I believe that is the Queen’s job/prerogative, then Charles’ and William’s job when they ascend the throne, respectively. If the people who call her/them ‘their Queen/King’ don’t like their choices/examples/et al, they wouldn’t exist. Does that mean Harry/Megan would have no influence? Of course not ... in fact, they probably could have had a LOT of influence as William’s brother (if there wasn’t this apparent pissing content between them) and they remained ’senior royals’ once the Queen passes and William gets closer to ascending the throne. But like it or not, the monarch - not the siblings or spouses - is the ‘head’ and makes the decisions. Don’t like it? Don’t marry into it or remain part of it.

IMO all signs point to dollar signs:
~ One/both come across overly-entitled;
~ Harry has perhaps been overly-influenced by someone who wants to be an ‘influencer’ but not ‘influenced’ herself; and/or,
~ There was/is fear by Harry/Megan that William won’t pony up as much money when he runs the Duchy; thus they were banking on the Queen being more lenient and likely to approve their plans than Charles or William.

 

[yssie]

The British press was utterly horrid to Waity Katie too. They subjected her to years of wretchedness before turning in unison to fawn over their newest princess.

I think the takehome here is that the tabloids indulge no-one but their gossip-mongering readers.

 

[Bron357]

I just hope it all works out for them.
i hope they can have another baby (a little girl) and enjoy a mostly normal life. But it’s not going to be easy.
even if they step back from being senior royals, do you think the Press will leave them alone? Not likely.
the Press is never going to quit, they never quit with poor Princess Di. They followed her everything single moment.
They will still need media coverage and support for promoting their charities so I’m not sure how they can achieve the publicity they need / desire without it being intrusive?

 

[lissyflo]

The press here (non-tabloid before anyone asks!) reported an article yesterday from the Canadian press, reportedly a monarchist-leaning paper. It was saying that the Sussexes shouldn’t be welcomed for prolonged stays in Canada if claiming senior royal status as it raised significant constitutional issues for Canada - welcome as royals for short stays or private citizens for long stays was the gist I took. I don’t know what they specifically meant by senior royal status, but the article implied there may be issues under their currently stated plans, so possibly retaining a royal title might be too much for them to be welcomed as private citizens. I liked the line that they “liked their royals close to their hearts but not their hearths”!

That was from a monarchist- leaning paper; I’m not sure whether more republican feelings would lean towards a stronger view in the same direction, or whether the constitutional issues of having royal titles living in the country wouldn’t matter if it holds no place for them anyway. Either way, it confirms the myriad of issues and complications they face.