Why is there No Meghan Markle and Prince Harry meltdown the monarchy debate?

[Catlady in training]

If the press, media and the public is giving Meghan Markle the mistreatment, just because she is part Black, I don't think it is the case. The Brits elected an Indian man as their Prime Minister not too long ago. Mayor of London is a Pakistani muslim. Men and women of color have served as ministers on the Prime Minister's Cabinet through different administrations.

You guys had a black president. Has no black celebrity experienced racism since then?

[Zauriel]

Sunak was not elected PM, he was selected by the Torries in power when their last two PMs had to resign in disgrace. Not sure if the British Public cared if Markle was Black, but the Royals seemed to have had a problem with it.

Then why did the Queen Elizabeth approve of Prince Harry and Meghan's marriage? Why did Prince Charles walk Meghan down the aisle to the altar? Why did the royal family attend their wedding?

You guys had a black president. Has no black celebrity experienced racism since then?

I have never been to the UK, but I assumed racism is less severe in the UK than in the USA

[Tendrin]

I have never been to the UK, but I assumed racism is less severe in the UK than in the USA

lol no.

/10char

[PaulBullion]

gosh that attention grabbing sounds an awful like the interviewees of the Documentary.

Then why did you do it?

[Starrius]

You guys had a black president. Has no black celebrity experienced racism since then?

As a multicontinental American that is highly multiethnic, I never believed in the one drop rule nor hypodescent rule.


I am all for getting rid of the residue of Scientific Racism which the social constructs of the races are. I stopped believing in them over 7 years ago. I was brainwashed to believe in the social constructs of the races during my early conditioning as a child in 1970s and 1980s. I have experienced racism for being a person that is around half Sub Saharan African. I've been called the n'word numerous times. My first time was my 9th birthday. The last time was back in 2009. There have been people have tried to make me identify as black. Maybe those experiences why it took me so damned long for me to stop believing in the social constructs of the races when I was around 44 years old. I am 51 years old. Reading about genetics of human populations, learning a lot about my ancestral roots from genetic testing and genealogy including connecting with long lost family, and Rachel Dolezal Soul Woman fiasco were factors in why I changed my views about social constructs of race. I have grown to now despise them.


I don't believe that we can fight and eradicate racism by acknowledging and embracing the social constructs of the races which were created out of racism. I believe that we have to fight and eradicate the social constructs of the races themselves. We have to let go of our prejudices and conditioning that have been based on long time false beliefs about our human existence.

In order to do that, we have to educate ourselves and others about the Genetics, Anthropology, and History of us Homo Sapiens.

Most importantly, all of us have to treat each other like we want to be treated.

In the Bible, Jesus supposedly said:

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

[4theEarth]

Then why did you do it?

Do what? create an attention-grabbing title? Grabbing attention isn't right or wrong last I checked. As stated, this is interesting to me as a fake battle of right and wrong in the PR world that only touches upon politics and perhaps can inform how we look at politics.

[4theEarth]

To me the interesting subject is how PR is able to use social media, like this board, to perpetuate certain themes which are internalized and reinterpreted for free across platforms. It is notable how "meghan the villain" is a big theme as perhaps the most polarizing but this post by kidfresh shows me my own bias. I had started to see this story as much more one of Harry's making if from the other perspective where he is the evil force. But I am trying not to get drawn into the stories that are being created. I have to admit that it is just the one that I like best as it hangs together.

They are just like any other celebrity story. I watched the documentary and I thought it was good. The hate on Megan in particular is just extraordinary. I mean she can't even breathe in the UK press without body language experts and "Royal Watchers" etc saying shes secretly trying to outdo kate or something. Is it the most important thing going on in the world no.

Well, I wouldn't call it just celebrity as they are attached to the head of state of the UK and its commonwealth line of succession who receive money from the government or did before they checked out. What they do or did reflects on the monarchy as a whole which has a whole persona to maintain. There are institutions involved, not just people.

But, I still find it fascinating especially with the juxtaposition of the press and their history with Harry's mother. People act like it is so out of the ordinary for Harry to be so upset at the press. He very clearly has deep rooted hate and disdain for them. They literally chased his mother to death. He has seen press manipulation and harassment his entire life. But, suddenly everything is Megan's fault.

Sounds like a simplification of a situation that Diana was responsible for. To which Harry's hate is blinkered, he can't see his mother for who she was. A woman out of her depth with delusions that her celebrity could be used to hurt the royal family and dictate to the press about her privacy. She reaped the whirlwind. And frankly this level of REVENGE is out of the ordinary and intentional now on Harry's part. What ever else one might think about Diana it is Harry who married Meghan and took on the various subtexts of that choice. Texts like race, nationality and class. It is his agency which has been driving the news cycle as much as his wife.

I mean the worst things they bring up in the series is the depths of harassment and collusion of paparazzi and the Royal press offices. We can see ourselves the salacious headlines they print about her specifically at every turn. She's a succubus who took over Harry's mind and MADE him leave his family. He has said over and over again he wanted to protect her. He is the one who tried to move them to South America, or Canada anywhere to get them away from the press vultures.

It seems reasonable that anyone who supports an institution would want to see that institution undisturbed by the various challenges to its moral authority. Part of that authority is derived from a formalism that is being subverted by the means of attack. "Tell all" documentary and following it with a book are antithetical to the created remove of the monarchy from such public outings.

I mean I don't see any defense against what they are saying. The press did relentlessly attack her over and over again for nothing. That segment they did with the headlines Kate gets vs the ones Megan gets for basically the same things anyone can see that. That isn't subjective.

Not sure what this references but "the facts" are doctored so claims of objective truths here are misplaced.

They explained wanting to sue the papers for illegally using her personal letters. I mean its a fact it happened, and she eventually won in court. But, they had to leave the family and fight themselves. That alone proves they tried to ask for help. The whole just grin and bear it, we all had to live with it ya'll can too. I mean I can see why Harry would be fucking pissed. His mom died from that relentless nonsense. And he himself brought up the racial hate element that made it all darker.

Meme alert here - Fighting for you family seems to be one of the last accepted macho things to do rather than grin and bear it. It is an appeal to animal instincts made social. It is aggression plain and simple. Agression for particular ends as well.

I find them totally believable simply because so much of it was in the public eye. And they didn't even specifically call out family members when we all can see Harry could go IN if he wanted too. They were purposefully holding back especially him you can see in the part he brings up the dispute with William. There is way more there he could dig into if he wanted. The most he said was they clearly disagree and had a few shouting matches.

Believable is a misplaced word in this PR battle as clearly this is about spin not some hidden truth. What else is it when a privacy lawsuit is lathered up with emotional damages and a miscarrige? The excess and lack of any real cause and effect is a joke.

If there was something from the "other side" clearly explaining what in the world Harry and Megan in particular were doing that was so outrageous. I mean explain why you wont tell the truth about the press releases and salacious articles. They were clearly stressing her out. Why not say this **** is fake, this isn't real. Stop. Harry went into detail explaining the media relationship. They could have told them to stop lying. But they didn't. I mean where is the dispute or counterclaims?

The english saying "'it just isn't done old boy' comes to mind about what the monarchy won't be doing. It is a cultural expectation that is American to think one can have it all celebrity and privacy at one's choosing.

What has she done? Did she slap servants? Did she tell the Queen to **** off? The way they act in the UK press and these royal watchers its just like that. But, with nothing to back it up.

Could it have to do with the way they have appeared to have mocked and cheapened the monarchy both in private and in public. The fact is that she has spoken about her "mistake" about the protocol of curtsy and they were basically given a cease and desist in developing their "SussexRoyal" brand. I am just going to quote here what I casually found online:

"One thing that completely changed my mind about her: when she went on a global platform with Oprah to gossip, complain, falsely accuse, over play the race card and create drama and division with her victimhood rhetoric. I did not believe most of what she said and only exposed her true colors and her craving for attention and control.More information came after that showed her true character:Her arrogance at Wimbledon ( we all saw the photos)Her bullying to former palace staff (her own lawyer confirmed)Her participation on Finding freedom when she had denied it (we all saw all those texts and emails) that proves how manipulative and a liar she is.The way she has treated her family on both sides, not to mention Harry’s.But the main reason I will always dislike her is for all the hatred and vitriol she has created against the Royal family after all they did for her. I have read personally all the dead threats and hatred toward the Cambridges for things she has said and complained about that don’t even sound real. We all have seen all the division, drama and pointless conflict she has created as a result of her false accusations and victimhood nonsense."

Clearly there are somethings that people are seeing as facts of being a gross and self centered person.

And some say they should go away and be quiet. Its their story. Their lives. They feel they are being slandered, and lied about. They have every right to clear their names and speak imo if they are going to get dragged through the mud.

That sounds correct if they weren't trying to live off the celebrity and chaos they have caused. It is not really their story, only their spin on the various things that have happened since their huge and celebrated wedding. If they hated her so from the start, why the big show now? Being quiet means being quiet. Politico put her in the camp of narcissists for a reason and Harry is doing just as much to lash out and create a buzz. For her it is the money and he for revenge. The Sussexes' media company, Archewell Productions, is making a range of programs for Netflix - an arrangement thought to be worth millions of dollars after blowing a wad of his inheritance to move to California. Archewell also makes podcasts for Spotify, including the Archetypes series about famous women.

So, to my narrative the focus should be on Harry as the money grubbing and resentful Ginger that is using his dead mother to attack a position that he will never have and married a woman that he hoped would offend and rile his relations with his expectations about race, class and nationality. When it didn't happen as explosively as he hoped, he goaded his wife to being all of his stereotypes to attack what he was offended by namely the institution that he has a love hate relationship with. He loves his role as spoiler and is using that to play to an audience that enjoys such as a kind of righteousness. There is in this PR fight a up and down where to be up in the American perspective is to be down in the British one. There is something very perverse in picking a life mate that will further your war against an institution from which you have been marginalized from.

[4theEarth]

So strange but so obvious. love the use of "targeted"
NY Post

Andrew Tate targeted Meghan Markle over ‘racism’ claims before arrest
Story by Bruce Golding • 2h ago

Andrew Tate mocked Meghan Markle’s complaints about royal racism as a “cop-out” and called her a “dislikable person” shortly before his arrest in an alleged human trafficking and rape scheme.

The controversial social-media figure made the comments during an interview with Piers Morgan that was posted online just one day before Tate was busted in Romania last week.

“It’s kind of hard for Meghan to say that the UK is a racist country when the leader of the UK has darker skin than her and the mayor of London has darker skin than her,” Tate said.

“I think it’s just a cop-out and her not wanting to be perspicacious and self-reflective enough to understand that she has attacked an age-old institution.

“There are people who are very patriotic about that institution. and by attacking it and bringing a degree of distaste to it, there’s many people who don’t like her,” he continued.

Tate was arrested for an alleged human trafficking and rape scheme.
The former kickboxing champion and contestant on the British “Big Brother” TV show was arrested Friday, along with his brother and two other women.

They’re accused of running an “organized crime group” that trafficked women and forced them to appear in pornographic videos “meant to be seen on specialized websites at a cost.”

REUTERS

Does this render what he was saying about race untrue? Post as exemplar of tabloids takes this story both ways regardless. It recirculates the charges against her while damning the messenger.

[4theEarth]

Barbra Walters is dead but the Celbrity interview as PR stunt lives on. The 60 min. interview that is flacking Harry's book is already drawing out counter attacks and predicably it is coming from the marginal media even as it goes mainstream.

Case and point Newsweek is running this

Story by James Crawford-Smith

Ex-Real Housewives of New York City star Bethenny Frankel has taken aim at Prince Harry in her latest viral TikTok video, responding to the news that he has recorded a sit-down interview with Anderson Cooper for CBS' 60 Minutes to air ahead of the release of his tell-all memoir Spare this month.

Frankel told fans, "can we be done!" with the prince and Meghan Markle, after a clip from his interview with Cooper was released in which he describes the royal family's silence about issues faced by the couple as "betrayal."

The announcement of the interview with Cooper comes as Britain's ITV has also secured a 40-minute sit-down with the royal to be aired on Sunday ahead of Spare's release on January 10.

The new round of interviews comes less than a month after the release of Harry & Meghan, the six-part Netflix docuseries in which the couple reopened old wounds with a range of bombshell claims against the royal family, including that Prince William terrified Harry by screaming at him during a 2020 meeting.

"I just looked at my feed and I saw Harry talking to Anderson Cooper. Is this new content? Is this 2023? I feel like it's groundhog day!" Frankel told her million TikTok followers on Sunday.

"I woke up, I'm Billy Murray and the groundhog is telling me what the weather is again. Can we be done now? When do we get to be done, 2024?

"We watched it. We got it. We're sorry. Racism exists. The monarchy is archaic. You had a rough time of it. Here's a couple of hundred million for your podcast, book and documentary and go with god and enjoy your life with your beautiful wife and family in the United States of America," she continued.

Referencing the prince's troubled relationships with members of his family in Britain, the reality star said: "Since you can't stand those people so much, you never have to speak to them again if you don't want to and you never have to go to the U.K. again."

"We want the Ferber method," she concluded. "We want the babies to just stop crying and we're going to leave them in the other room but you guys just want to be held and picked up and keep whining."

This is not the first time that Frankel has been outspoken in her criticism of Harry and Meghan.

Most recently, in December, the star lampooned the Sussexes Netflix series for being a "smash and grab job for money."

"If you are being trolled by the media, the royal family gave you the advice to say nothing because that's the advice that most very famous people are given," she said in another TikTok video. "If you add gasoline to a fire, the fire blows up even bigger. It feels like they—and Meghan in particular—just keep wanting to tell us more."

Previously, Frankel's harshest criticism has been of Meghan, something she has doubled down on after coming under fire for tweeting negatively about the duchess following her 2021 interview with Oprah Winfrey.

"Cry me a river…the plight of being a game show host, fairly unknown actress, to suffering in a palace, w tiaras & 7 figure weddings for TWO WHOLE YEARS to being a household name w@Oprah on speed dial, fetching 7 m for interviews, hundreds of millions in media deals," she wrote at the time, before later tweeting an apology.

Frankel's latest tirades have been less forgiving and more explicit in their criticism.

In September, she took to her podcast JustB to critique Meghan's recent media outputs in an episode titled "The Real Housewife of Buckingham Palace."

"I don't think people like Meghan Markle because I think she talks down to other people," she told listeners. "I think she's sanctimonious and I think there's this subtext of elevation. She's up there, we're down here…She's very self-important and she's very much like a Housewife in that she can't stop talking about the very thing that she wants to be irrelevant."

If bashing the monarchy is a cash cow bashing the Sussexes may be just as lucrative.

[Gray Lensman]

I have never been to the UK, but I assumed racism is less severe in the UK than in the USA

Remember that the US is an offshoot of the UK. Nearly every negative you can find on one side of the pond has a reflection of some sort on the other.

[Kirby101]

Then why did the Queen Elizabeth approve of Prince Harry and Meghan's marriage? Why did Prince Charles walk Meghan down the aisle to the altar? Why did the royal family attend their wedding?

I have never been to the UK, but I assumed racism is less severe in the UK than in the USA

Appearances and protocol. I was speaking of what is reported behind the scenes.

And less racism than the US is about as low a bar as you can find.

[4theEarth]

Appearances and protocol. I was speaking of what is reported behind the scenes.

And less racism than the US is about as low a bar as you can find.

that is so interesting https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/2.../?singlepage=1

[Kirby101]

that is so interesting https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/2.../?singlepage=1

Was this a phone survey? Who did the call in Yemen and Kyrgyzstan?

[The Gold Stream]

that is so interesting https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/2.../?singlepage=1

too bad north and south africa cant be like west africa

edit: nevermind i missed nigeria

[4theEarth]

Was this a phone survey? Who did the call in Yemen and Kyrgyzstan?

The methodology is posted very clearly. Disagree if you like but let's hear an honest answer rather than a mischaracterization.