Meghan & Harry Interview

[Murphy101]

I think William was smart or just scared to go slowly. I think he needed to be absolutely sure that if Kate married him, she’d know what she was getting in to and the family and the firm would have time to ease her into it. Even so Kate and William have spoke about how it takes a toll on mental health and that they work hard to mitigate that privately.

Maybe it’s bc Meagan is an actress and felt she wouldn’t need that. Idk. But it seems they seem to think they were going to change everything to meet their needs and were genuinely shocked it didn’t go that way despite everyone everywhere constantly telling them so. 

[mlktwins]

2 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

so you say I’m having my friend over here. Or whatever.  This seems... idk  I can believe it bc it smells fishy.

I am so confused. None of that makes any sense to me. One I was not under the impression her Australian tour was particularly successful?  Two, she says she’s suicidal and can’t be left alone and then complains they took her passport and keys? Um. Hell yeah. I would too!  And then did he leave her alone or what?

No...you really should watch.  A lot of your questions would be answered.  From their perspective anyway.

She told him in the morning she was suicidal.  They had an engagement that night.  Harry said she shouldn’t go and he said she shouldn’t be alone.

[Melissa Louise]

1 minute ago, Katy said:

Harry thought the tour was successful and that triggered the bad media leaks from inside the firm.

She wasn't complaining, but when she joined the family all of her freedom was taken from her.  I guess try to watch the interview because I clearly am not explaining it well.

No, you're fine, and I'm nearly at my stop so I'll be out of your hair in a min 🙂

[Katy]

4 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

I think William was smart or just scared to go slowly. I think he needed to be absolutely sure that if Kate married him, she’d know what she was getting in to and the family and the firm would have time to ease her into it. Even so Kate and William have spoke about how it takes a toll on mental health and that they work hard to mitigate that privately.

Maybe it’s bc Meagan is an actress and felt she wouldn’t need that. Idk. But it seems they seem to think they were going to change everything to meet their needs and were genuinely shocked it didn’t go that way despite everyone everywhere constantly telling them so. 

Harry's perspective was that the racism added a vicious layer of both threat and stress that no one else had to navigate. And basically that his family was trapped too.

I don't understand why 'private' and 'stiff upper lip' is a thing that needs to be kept at all.  It should be normal to get mental health help when you need it.

[Murphy101]

10 minutes ago, Katy said:

Harry's perspective was that the racism added a vicious layer of both threat and stress that no one else had to navigate. And basically that his family was trapped too.

I don't understand why 'private' and 'stiff upper lip' is a thing that needs to be kept at all.  It should be normal to get mental health help when you need it.

I don’t even understand what being private and having a public stuff upper lip has to do with it. It’s perfectly acceptable to not want to share everything about their emotions or private lives with everyone else. That’s got nothing to do with seeking medical care. 

[Katy]

10 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

I don’t even understand what being private and having a public stuff upper lip has to do with it. It’s perfectly acceptable to not want to share everything about their emotions or private lives with everyone else. That’s got nothing to do with seeking medical care. 

Being told to deal with it privately, and you're not allowed to have medical care because, and these are my words, "Just suck it up."  No mental health care for you.

[Katy]

Interesting twitter thread by a former coworker of Meghan, defending her:

 

[Tanaqui]

So, I honestly don't have an opinion on who, if anybody, might have a personality disorder among the British royal family, and I'm certainly not going to venture one based on a few interviews.

However, I *will* remind everybody that it is possible for you to have more than one abusive person in your life - like, say, an abusive and toxic natal family AND ALSO an abusive and toxic spouse.

[Sdel]

16 minutes ago, Tanaqui said:

 

However, I *will* remind everybody that it is possible for you to have more than one abusive person in your life - like, say, an abusive and toxic natal family AND ALSO an abusive and toxic spouse.

And having one probably significantly raises the odds of having the other.....

[Tanaqui]

Intuitively it seems like people raised in abusive households are more likely to either a. abuse their spouse or b. marry an abusive person and, at any rate, end up with abused kids, and certainly any number of people are just bound to tell you that this is how it happened to them/their parents/other people they know... but I don't know what the actual data says.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I like all of the young royals.  Or I should say, the current young royals and the former young royals. 

[Carrie12345]

I don’t follow the royals closely, and I haven’t seen the interview, but I don’t see how it’d be all that hard to understand how a person can go from “It’s okay, I’ll be able to handle this” to “OMG, this is WAY worse than I ever could have imagined and I’m not going to be able to live like this.”  I mean, it’s not exactly the first time.

[TCB]

9 hours ago, Katy said:

Harry thought the tour was successful and that triggered the bad media leaks from inside the firm.

She wasn't complaining, but when she joined the family all of her freedom was taken from her.  I guess try to watch the interview because I clearly am not explaining it well.

You may well be explaining it well but it is difficult to believe all that literally. And The Firm is what the royal family call themselves. I don’t think it refers to some sinister group holding them prisoner or whatever.

The thing is, you will only hear one side of this because I’m pretty sure the royal family won’t respond with their side, so keep that in mind.

[Katy]

24 minutes ago, TCB said:

You may well be explaining it well but it is difficult to believe all that literally. And The Firm is what the royal family call themselves. I don’t think it refers to some sinister group holding them prisoner or whatever.

The thing is, you will only hear one side of this because I’m pretty sure the royal family won’t respond with their side, so keep that in mind.

Philip called the business of the family the Firm. Diana referred to the Firm derisively when they also controlled, manipulated, and prevented her from getting help. It was made clear that both believe the business of the family and those who work for that business is entirely separate. 

The family preemptively responded with the Queen’s call for unity. 

I believe them. Obviously there are two sides to every story, but nothing that shocking was said here. Frankly I think it’s a bit shocking it took them this long to break the rules and speak out. Harry might have been trained to keep his mouth shut but Meghan has been trained to call out injustice, especially as applied to her own children. 

[MercyA]

Okay, now I have to watch it.

[Scarlett]

I believe them because the idea that Meghan is some sort of manipulator who planned all of this from the beginning makes zero sense.  Why would she do that?  Marry a prince and go live as a senior royal in a palace just so she could take them both away from it all?  

And as Harry said, it is just history repeating itself.  His mother, though not perfect herself, suffered greatly being married into that family. Add in the race element and her being an American and it was just not sustainable.  A fact she realized after she lived it for a bit.  All of this talk about 'she knew what she was getting herself into.'  I doubt anyone can really understand what it is like to live that life.  And all the money in the world doesn't make up for not being able to leave the house for months on end.  She had left the house twice in 4 months and was told she could not go eat lunch with her friends. That is just awful IMO.

Also the idea that they did this so they could make their own money....again ridiculous.  If they had stayed as senior royals they had all the money they needed.  But when they went to Canada and lost their security they had to make money.  He says they weren't penniless because he had his mother's money but he said his main priority was to make enough money to pay for security.  

 

[TCB]

5 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

I believe them because the idea that Meghan is some sort of manipulator who planned all of this from the beginning makes zero sense.  Why would she do that?  Marry a prince and go live as a senior royal in a palace just so she could take them both away from it all?  

And as Harry said, it is just history repeating itself.  His mother, though not perfect herself, suffered greatly being married into that family. Add in the race element and her being an American and it was just not sustainable.  A fact she realized after she lived it for a bit.  All of this talk about 'she knew what she was getting herself into.'  I doubt anyone can really understand what it is like to live that life.  And all the money in the world doesn't make up for not being able to leave the house for months on end.  She had left the house twice in 4 months and was told she could not go eat lunch with her friends. That is just awful IMO.

Also the idea that they did this so they could make their own money....again ridiculous.  If they had stayed as senior royals they had all the money they needed.  But when they went to Canada and lost their security they had to make money.  He says they weren't penniless because he had his mother's money but he said his main priority was to make enough money to pay for security.  

 

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. 
I do not believe that it is possible for anyone in the royal family to keep a 36 year old prison and forbid her leaving the house. 
If they truly want to be private and left alone I don’t think these sorts of actions will help them achieve their goal. There are always 2 sides to a story but you probably won’t hear the other side.

I can completely believe that she might not have understood what she was letting herself in for, and overestimated her ability to cope. You still don’t achieve privacy and a quiet life by having a long interview with Oprah. I also feel sad that this will increase the rift between Harry and his family.

[Katy]

There was a bunch more clips on CBS This Morning that are now on YouTube. And Oprah made it clear this morning that the comments about the baby’s skin color were not from his grandparents.  

Which makes the most likely candidate Charles, IMO.  Especially because it was made clear their baby would not be given a title or security even when Charles becomes king. 

If the palace cared about H, M, A, or future daughter they would still have security.  They know there are credible threats for racist  reasons and they refuse to protect them. Which means they either think it would be more convenient for them to die like Diana or they thought the threat could be used to control them. 
 

Diana talked about needing help and being refused it. Fergie talked about needing help and being refused it. Both Wills & Harry discussed it publicly and THEN were allowed a therapist. But Meghan is lying?  Right. 

[Scarlett]

12 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

so you say I’m having my friend over here. Or whatever.  This seems... idk  I *can* believe it but it smells fishy.

I am so confused. None of that makes any sense to me. One I was not under the impression her Australian tour was particularly successful?  Two, she says she’s suicidal and can’t be left alone and then complains they took her passport and keys? Um. Hell yeah. I would too!  And then did he leave her alone or what?

Her passport and keys were not taken because she was suicidal.  Those things were taken from her when she first arrived and not given back to her until they left for Canada.

As for the friends and wanting to go out for lunch...she wanted to go OUT.   That was her request.  And she was told no.  

[Storygirl]

She actually didn't say that she was imprisoned. She didn't use that word. But her choices were limited to what was approved, and that is believable to me. The comment that she didn't have her passport or ID  -- I don't think this was personal to her, but that there is a staff that handles all of the documents for all of the royals.

Some of the comments in this thread make is sound like she was forced to stay at home for months. She didn't say that she was literally locked in; she just was dependent upon the staff to approve her social engagements. And because she had been getting a lot of negative press, they wanted her to stay out of the public eye.

[Scarlett]

34 minutes ago, TCB said:

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. 
I do not believe that it is possible for anyone in the royal family to keep a 36 year old prison and forbid her leaving the house. 
If they truly want to be private and left alone I don’t think these sorts of actions will help them achieve their goal. There are always 2 sides to a story but you probably won’t hear the other side.

I can completely believe that she might not have understood what she was letting herself in for, and overestimated her ability to cope. You still don’t achieve privacy and a quiet life by having a long interview with Oprah. I also feel sad that this will increase the rift between Harry and his family.

I never got the impression they want to be completely left alone.  They want the threatening racists of the world to leave them alone.  I mean, they are both very extroverted people.  

[Amira]

A woman doesn’t have to be literally locked in her house to have her choices so thoroughly limited that she only actually leaves the house twice in four months. I’m a little shocked at people blaming Meghan for the circumstances she described, or saying that she should have known what she was getting into.  Having experienced a similar type of unwanted isolation for very different reasons, I know in a small way how incredibly oppressive this can be, even if someone can claim that I could have left the house whenever I wanted to.  I knew exactly what I was getting into, and it was still awful.  

Also, a significant amount of human trafficking that goes on around the world is against competent adult women who are trafficked into forced labor or sexual situations where they cannot leave the place they are living. I’m certainly not trying to say Meghan was trafficked, but plenty of women are not able to leave home for a wide variety of reasons.  Even people who are very privileged in many ways.

[Selkie]

9 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

I haven't watched the interview yet but I remember reading about some conflicts in the Royal Family due to Prince Charles wanting to reduce the number of senior royals. Perhaps that is why they didn't want to give the baby a title? 

From what I’ve seen, British people are saying that great-grandchildren of the Queen typically do not get titles, so there should not have been that expectation on the part of Harry and Meghan. Kate and William’s children got titles because they are in line for the throne.

[Katy]

12 minutes ago, Storygirl said:

She actually didn't say that she was imprisoned. She didn't use that word. But her choices were limited to what was approved, and that is believable to me. The comment that she didn't have her passport or ID  -- I don't think this was personal to her, but that there is a staff that handles all of the documents for all of the royals.

Some of the comments in this thread make is sound like she was forced to stay at home for months. She didn't say that she was literally locked in; she just was dependent upon the staff to approve her social engagements. And because she had been getting a lot of negative press, they wanted her to stay out of the public eye.

Right, but the bad press was because of leaks from the same staff who wouldn’t let her meet friends. 

9 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

I haven't watched the interview yet but I remember reading about some conflicts in the Royal Family due to Prince Charles wanting to reduce the number of senior royals. Perhaps that is why they didn't want to give the baby a title? 

Is it okay that this only came up when Harry married someone of mixed race and was expecting?  Do you really believe this economizing would have happened if that Chelsea something who Harry dated for years had been the one he married and for some reason was experiencing credible death threats while pregnant with his grandchild?

[itsheresomewhere]

One thing I just wonder about-  William has a big thing with promoting mental health and getting therapy.  He has openly talked about how Harry and himself have benefited from therapy.  Why not ask his brother for help with it unless they really are barely speaking.  
 

[Katy]

4 minutes ago, Selkie said:

From what I’ve seen, British people are saying that great-grandchildren of the Queen typically do not get titles, so there should not have been that expectation on the part of Harry and Meghan. Kate and William’s children got titles because they are in line for the throne.

But in the interview Meghan was told normally her baby would get a title (and the security that goes with it) automatically when their grandparent became the monarch. An exception would be made for her child, who would NEVER be given a title, no explanation was given. But it was during multiple conversations concerning the worry of how “it would look” if the baby was too dark. 

[Katy]

2 minutes ago, itsheresomewhere said:

One thing I just wonder about-  William has a big thing with promoting mental health and getting therapy.  He has openly talked about how Harry and himself have benefited from therapy.  Why not ask his brother for help with it unless they really are barely speaking.  
 

Or he did ask for help and William also said, “this is the way it is, we all deal with it, Dad is right it won’t look good.”

[Scarlett]

1 minute ago, itsheresomewhere said:

One thing I just wonder about-  William has a big thing with promoting mental health and getting therapy.  He has openly talked about how Harry and himself have benefited from therapy.  Why not ask his brother for help with it unless they really are barely speaking.  
 

Harry did not say who all he asked for help for his wife.  But he was turned down by whomever he asked.  He was vey frightened for her so I am sure he did all he could.  It is the main reason he decided to get them out of that way of life.  They thought they could just step back and work for the family from a distance so that Mehgan could function....but that was denied them and then everything was taken away....security etc.   

[Selkie]

1 minute ago, Katy said:

Right, but the bad press was because of leaks from the same staff who wouldn’t let her meet friends. 

Is it okay that this only came up when Harry married someone of mixed race and was expecting?  Do you really believe this economizing would have happened if that Chelsea something who Harry dated for years had been the one he married and for some reason was experiencing credible death threats while pregnant with his grandchild?

A lot of the bad press was because of Meghan’s mega-expensive baby shower.

Reducing the number of royals has actually been a topic of conversation for some time. Some of the other European countries (Sweden is one of them, I believe) have done so in order to relieve the taxpayer burden. There has been pressure on the British Royal Family to do the same.

[Janeway]

I don’t like Meghan at all. She is nothing more than “Hollywood.” Before they ever married I knew she would go Hollywood on Harry. I guarantee she will eventually leave Harry and accuse him of some sort of abuse. 

[Dmmetler]

13 hours ago, Katy said:

When they won't let you call anyone for help, what can you do?  She can't sneak a psychiatrist in.

She specifically said she repeatedly asked for help, they said no.  She said her passport, her everything was taken away.  She couldn't call an uber to take her to a hospital. She was trapped. Even HR said, "I'm sorry, you're not an employee so I can't help you."

What about something like Curative or Better Help, which is online? I believe Curative even includes psychiatrists as well as counselors. 

[catz]

I'm the last person who is going to defend the royal family.   I am sure there is a ton of dysfunction there and I find it truly bizarre there is still a royal family being buoyed in the UK.  

I struggle to understand how a reasonably functioning adult couldn't arrange for a private psychologist/psychiatrist.  And I give pause to straight up believing this one sided story from a couple (one who is literally an actor) who benefitted in the millions for giving this interview.  I don't doubt there was  racism, mental illness, power plays with money, etc.  I do think Meghan was treated horribly by the British media.  I just suspect there was dysfunction playing at both sides.  It's actually hard to imagine Harry being emotionally mature and healthy after his upbringing and his mother's tragic death.  Given Meghan's family background, it's not surprising she would have mental health issues.  It will be interesting to see if their marriage lasts. Diana lived a very tragic life but she also had a lot of dysfunction and made a lot of poor choices. 

Since they're cashing in, I hope some other insiders decide to cash in so we can get more of the story.  

Edited March 8, 2021 by FuzzyCatz

[Scarlett]

1 minute ago, Selkie said:

A lot of the bad press was because of Meghan’s mega-expensive baby shower.

Reducing the number of royals has actually been a topic of conversation for some time. Some of the other European countries (Sweden is one of them, I believe) have done so in order to relieve the taxpayer burden. There has been pressure on the British Royal Family to do the same.

Why would she get bad press ?  It was thrown by Meghan's friend.  Paid for by Meghan's friend.  

[Katy]

5 minutes ago, Dmmetler said:

What about something like Curative or Better Help, which is online? I believe Curative even includes psychiatrists as well as counselors. 

I presume you still have to pay for that somehow?

[Katy]

8 minutes ago, Dreamergal said:

Only George would automatically get a title since he is the heir. Charlotte and Louis needed letters of patent from the Queen to give them the title of Princess and Prince and HRH. Archie and his sister should get the title of Prince and Princess when Prince Charles becomes King as grandchildren of the monarch. The question is will they ?

The children of Prince Edward are not HRH. He will become Duke of Edinburgh after his father passes. But they are Lady Louise and Viscount Sevren. Archie should be Earl of Dumberton automatically because Harry is a Duke, why is he Archie Mountatten-Windsor ? Was that decision Harry and Meghan's or made from outside and said they decided ?That is the question. Princess Anne made the decision for Zara and Peter. Who decided for Harry and Meghan ? It was said they decided, faced backlash as not giving Archie his birthright. That is the question now.

According to this interview they were told Archie & siblings will never receive titles or security. 

[Scarlett]

1 minute ago, Katy said:

I presume you still have to pay for that somehow?

And can you imagine being able to trust just who ever you find on line when you are Meghan married to Harry?  

[Scarlett]

1 minute ago, Katy said:

According to this interview they were told Archie & siblings will never receive titles or security. 

With no explanation as to why. And the biggest fall out from that is that he received no security.  But eventually they took it away from Harry too.  That was nothing  more than vindictiveness IMO.

[Selkie]

3 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Why would she get bad press ?  It was thrown by Meghan's friend.  Paid for by Meghan's friend.  

Bad optics because it was so lavish and she flew over on a private jet. She and Harry have made heavy use of private jets while at the same time preaching about the environment.

[Paige]

29 minutes ago, Storygirl said:

She actually didn't say that she was imprisoned. She didn't use that word. But her choices were limited to what was approved, and that is believable to me. The comment that she didn't have her passport or ID  -- I don't think this was personal to her, but that there is a staff that handles all of the documents for all of the royals.

Some of the comments in this thread make is sound like she was forced to stay at home for months. She didn't say that she was literally locked in; she just was dependent upon the staff to approve her social engagements. And because she had been getting a lot of negative press, they wanted her to stay out of the public eye.

I agree. Just because she consented to the rules doesn't mean she felt she had a choice or that she didn't feel significant pressure to do as she was told. She probably could have pitched a fit and done whatever she wanted, but at what cost? They were trying to follow the rules and protocol for a while and to fit in. Many women have more theoretical choices than what they consider to be actual possible choices at the time. 

I wasn't going to watch but ended up turning on the last 30min because I was sucked in by twitter comments. I found them naïve and credible. It's not a crime. I'm sure both sides could have behaved better but I find the hate on Megan to be strange. I don't know her or the royal family enough to have a strong opinion on their characters. I think it's unlikely that any of them are sociopaths or anything more than people trying to do their best. I don't have much sympathy for rich people problems, though. I'm quite sure they could afford a modest apartment in small town USA on the millions that they already have without breaking a sweat. They could probably afford that security with a modest lifestyle, lower their profile, let people forget about them, and continue to live privately the rest of their lives if they wanted to. But they want more, so I'm not too sympathetic. Lots of people want more. 

[Katy]

1 minute ago, Selkie said:

Bad optics because it was so lavish and she flew over on a private jet. She and Harry have made heavy use of private jets while at the same time preaching about the environment.

Do you have a link for preaching about the environment?  I’ve heard Charles go on about it but not them. 
 

Besides, they are not Al Gore, buying up multimillion dollar beach mansions and taking private jets. They’re a couple whose every move was planned for them by the same staff that lied about them to the press. A couple whose staff and security traveled with them n these tours. 

[Scarlett]

1 minute ago, Paige said:

I agree. Just because she consented to the rules doesn't mean she felt she had a choice or that she didn't feel significant pressure to do as she was told. She probably could have pitched a fit and done whatever she wanted, but at what cost? They were trying to follow the rules and protocol for a while and to fit in. Many women have more theoretical choices than what they consider to be actual possible choices at the time. 

I wasn't going to watch but ended up turning on the last 30min because I was sucked in by twitter comments. I found them naïve and credible. It's not a crime. I'm sure both sides could have behaved better but I find the hate on Megan to be strange. I don't know her or the royal family enough to have a strong opinion on their characters. I think it's unlikely that any of them are sociopaths or anything more than people trying to do their best. I don't have much sympathy for rich people problems, though. I'm quite sure they could afford a modest apartment in small town USA on the millions that they already have without breaking a sweat. They could probably afford that security with a modest lifestyle, lower their profile, let people forget about them, and continue to live privately the rest of their lives if they wanted to. But they want more, so I'm not too sympathetic. Lots of people want more. 

Money is not all there is to this.  Money has created a lot of the problems.  But all the money in the world doesn't make up for the abuse she was enduring.  

[Katy]

3 minutes ago, Paige said:

I agree. Just because she consented to the rules doesn't mean she felt she had a choice or that she didn't feel significant pressure to do as she was told. She probably could have pitched a fit and done whatever she wanted, but at what cost? They were trying to follow the rules and protocol for a while and to fit in. Many women have more theoretical choices than what they consider to be actual possible choices at the time. 

I wasn't going to watch but ended up turning on the last 30min because I was sucked in by twitter comments. I found them naïve and credible. It's not a crime. I'm sure both sides could have behaved better but I find the hate on Megan to be strange. I don't know her or the royal family enough to have a strong opinion on their characters. I think it's unlikely that any of them are sociopaths or anything more than people trying to do their best. I don't have much sympathy for rich people problems, though. I'm quite sure they could afford a modest apartment in small town USA on the millions that they already have without breaking a sweat. They could probably afford that security with a modest lifestyle, lower their profile, let people forget about them, and continue to live privately the rest of their lives if they wanted to. But they want more, so I'm not too sympathetic. Lots of people want more. 

The kind of security they need probably runs in the millions annually. Each guard alone is typically an ex special forces guy making well over $100k salary. And that sort of staffing demands a larger house. 

[Scarlett]

2 minutes ago, Katy said:

Do you have a link for preaching about the environment?  I’ve heard Charles go on about it but not them. 
 

Besides, they are not Al Gore, buying up multimillion dollar beach mansions and taking private jets. They’re a couple whose every move was planned for them by the same staff that lied about them to the press. A couple whose staff and security traveled with them n these tours. 

That is what I was thinking....would she even have been allowed to travel commercially?  And she is American...it is not unreasonable her American friends would want to throw her a baby shower.  

[Tanaqui]

Okay, I don't get people saying "I don't believe her because she's literally an actor" and words to that effect. That's her job. It doesn't mean she's a liar. You either believe somebody or you don't, but the fact that she's an actor has nothing to do with it. Anybody could be a good liar, but we can't say "Joe's a good liar, therefore, everything he says is always false".

[Selkie]

5 minutes ago, Katy said:

Do you have a link for preaching about the environment?  I’ve heard Charles go on about it but not them. 
 

Besides, they are not Al Gore, buying up multimillion dollar beach mansions and taking private jets. They’re a couple whose every move was planned for them by the same staff that lied about them to the press. A couple whose staff and security traveled with them n these tours. 

Just google it and you’ll see plenty of links.

[Selkie]

4 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

That is what I was thinking....would she even have been allowed to travel commercially?  And she is American...it is not unreasonable her American friends would want to throw her a baby shower.  

I’ve seen news stories about WIlliam and Kate flying commercial.

Edited March 8, 2021 by Selkie

[Katy]

1 minute ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Well, based on what I'd read a few years ago about Charles trying to streamline the monarchy, yes I believe this might have happened. Charles was trying to kick out his brothers and sister too. 

I thought the title was based on being the grandchild of the sovereign. Archie will be the grandson of Charles when he becomes king. 

The big mistake the family made was tying the title to security. Surely they could have offered security even without the prince title. 

Except they don’t seem to care whether any of them die. 

 

2 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Well, based on what I'd read a few years ago about Charles trying to streamline the monarchy, yes I believe this might have happened. Charles was trying to kick out his brothers and sister too. 

I thought the title was based on being the grandchild of the sovereign. Archie will be the grandson of Charles when he becomes king. 

The big mistake the family made was tying the title to security. Surely they could have offered security even without the prince title. 

Until the pregnancy with Archie the title was tied to being a grandchild of the sovereign. During Meghan’s pregnancy they were both told there would be an exception for their children, concurrent with multiple conversations concerned about how dark the children would be. I find the timing of that to be extremely worrisome. As if Charles wasn’t already known to be a self-serving jerk. 

[SKL]

53 minutes ago, Dreamergal said:

I am sorry for sounding condescending. But I have friends right now who live this life in my country of origin. They are always escorted by a husband or a son, always driven everywhere, they do not come out of the house unless absolutely necessary. No unplanned trips ever, everything comes to the house. These are very wealthy people and these are my friends who got married young against their will. When I go back, I cannot just drop in, we cannot go out to eat or go shopping. There is always someone in the room with us. These are very traditional families and they are veiled, not just muslim but hindu too. 

It happens. It is real. Unless you have had to give up your passport, your id cards, not have a key to yourself, go places at will, you will never get it. Sorry. I believe Meghan.

ETA: It happens in royal families. Look up Princess Haya (queen Noor of Jordan step daughter), look up Princess Latifa (step mom and step daughter). the BRF is great friends with the husband and father of these two women. 

I had an overnight visit with a young Indian family in the US.  The husband literally yelled at the wife (in front of me) for going out to get a carton of orange juice.  It was chilling.  Her sister in India doesn't live like that - other than the limitations of local customs.  The difference is in how conservative the husbands' families are/aren't.

I am sure some of what Meghan said is true, though I am not a Meghan fan.  I think the decision to go on Oprah speaks volumes, and not in a good way.  If they had something to communicate, there were other ways to do it.

[Scarlett]

2 minutes ago, SKL said:

I had an overnight visit with a young Indian family in the US.  The husband literally yelled at the wife (in front of me) for going out to get a carton of orange juice.  It was chilling.  Her sister in India doesn't live like that - other than the limitations of local customs.  The difference is in how conservative the husbands' families are/aren't.

I am sure some of what Meghan said is true, though I am not a Meghan fan.  I think the decision to go on Oprah speaks volumes, and not in a good way.  If they had something to communicate, there were other ways to do it.

What other way?  

[Katy]

2 minutes ago, SKL said:

I had an overnight visit with a young Indian family in the US.  The husband literally yelled at the wife (in front of me) for going out to get a carton of orange juice.  It was chilling.  Her sister in India doesn't live like that - other than the limitations of local customs.  The difference is in how conservative the husbands' families are/aren't.

I am sure some of what Meghan said is true, though I am not a Meghan fan.  I think the decision to go on Oprah speaks volumes, and not in a good way.  If they had something to communicate, there were other ways to do it.

Why was it acceptable for Fergie to speak to Oprah but not Meghan, who was friends with Oprah before she ever met Harry?