Is it okay to put family first? (Response to royal family stuff)

[Pea-n-Me]

And the people who are right are those who go along with the crowd?

Maybe this story is new to some, but others have been following it for a long time and rightly have their own opinions.

 

[neverlandsky]

The interview wasn't groundbreaking and extremely carefully worded which I expected. Just a rehashing of everything already known. Honestly, with M&H and The Royal Family, it's absolutely a no win scenario. M&H have the luxury of choice and aren't obligated by birthright or duty. They had the great privilege to either fall in line or exit. They chose to exit and will continue to live a privilege life without The Royal Family. The Royal Family (Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Charles, & Prince William) are obligated by birthright and duty without much of a choice. It's well known and expected given it's a monarchy based upon the undivided sovereignty. The divide happened the moment Prince Harry was born of it being the heir and the spare. It's been an uphill battle ever since. Made even more difficult once Diana passed.

 

[Mrs. W]

One thing to keep in mind with all this is that Meghan is lying.

You think she was lying? I guess it’s hard to say for sure. Most of what Meghan and Harry said can only be verified by the people involved, and that certainly does not include me.

However, Harry was the one to say people made comments about his son’s skin tone, and he said they did so from the beginning. It’s hard for me to imagine he and his wife lying about that.

 

[Karin1984]

Regardless of what is their truth, the palace truth or the true truth, what good did this interview do?

This was burning bridges. With this in the open, how can they say they want to be back for special events like the unveiling of Diana's statue, the 100th and 95th birthday of the duke and the Queen, Trooping of the Colour. Maybe in a few years they can go back and try to mend their relationships, but everythig this year will be too soon.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

You think she was lying? I guess it’s hard to say for sure. Most of what Meghan and Harry said can only be verified by the people involved, and that certainly does not include me.

However, Harry was the one to say people made comments about his son’s skin tone, and he said they did so from the beginning. It’s hard for me to imagine he and his wife lying about that.

Harry himself was rumored for decades to have been fathered by a man that Diana had had an affair with.

It has probably made him sensitive to any commentary about “appearance”.

Naming names would‘ve made the accusation more credible, and there was no better time to do it than during that interview.

 

[DisneyJamieCA]

One thing to keep in mind with all this is that Meghan is lying.

And your proof is where?

Go ahead!

There will easily be tens of thousands of Comments by morning and the vast majority, from all over the world, are not favorable.

Actually, what I’ve seen on social media is overwhelmingly in support of her (and Harry). The ugliness has been mostly here.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

And your proof is where?

Actually, what I’ve seen on social media is overwhelmingly in support of her (and Harry). The ugliness has been mostly here.

Depends where you read.

 

[Cheburashka]

And your proof is where?

Where is Meghan's proof for her outrageous claims?

Meghan has a long track record of using people and then dropping them when they no longer benefit her or obey her, including family members. Notice how the interview selectively didn't explore the issues she's had with her family of origin? She only had one family member at the wedding, and has cut the rest of her family out of her life. Her father, who she admits was very supportive of her growing up and sacrificed to pay for her private school education, she dropped right before the wedding because he tried to arrange for paparazzi to take more flattering pictures of him. She dropped her decent husband by mailing her wedding ring back (they were living separately at the time due to her working in Canada), without even telling him first. She has used and suddenly dropped numerous friends over the years. She has been on record for years as having mistreated her staff. Most recently she has used and dropped the British royal family. She has succeeded in separating her husband from his family.

Notice how in the interview she never acknowledges that she made any mistakes? It's everyone else's fault, for everything. No, I don't believe what she says. Only a gullible person who doesn't know her history would.

 

[DisneyJamieCA]

Where is Meghan's proof for her outrageous claims?

Meghan has a long track record of using people and then dropping them when they no longer benefit her or obey her, including family members. Notice how the interview selectively didn't explore the issues she's had with her family of origin? She only had one family member at the wedding, and has cut the rest of her family out of her life. She dropped her husband by mailing her wedding ring back (they were living separately at the time due to her working in Canada), without even talking with him first. She has used and suddenly dropped numerous friends over the years. She has been on record for years as having mistreated her staff. Most recently she has used and dropped the British royal family. She has succeeded in separating her husband from his family.

Notice how she never acknowledges that she made any mistakes? It's everyone else's fault, for everything. No, I don't believe what she says. Only a gullible person who doesn't know her history would.

Nope. I asked where your proof is she’s lying. Answering with a question of your own negates your claim.

You not believing her doesn’t mean she’s lying. That’s called an opinion.

 

[mousefan73]

So I just woke up and haven’t had a chance to watch the interview but read the headlines.Going to read the updates in this thread what I’m drinking my morning coffee. The only thing I don’t believe that I just read is the fact that she supposedly was so naïve to know that the family did not kneel in front of the queen for real, and that she claims she never did any family research or Harry research online while they were dating. I call BS on that. Do you think of any of us we’re going to meet the queen on a personal level we forgot to do our research first? Or ask? You can’t tell me that if any of us got a date with someone super famous we wouldn’t do a quick Google?

 

[Cheburashka]

You not believing her doesn’t mean she’s lying. That’s called an opinion.

The royal family is not racist. There is plenty of evidence to back that up. You believing Meghan's claims without her providing any evidence is called gullible.

 

[mousefan73]

Regardless of what is their truth, the palace truth or the true truth, what good did this interview do?

This was burning bridges. With this in the open, how can they say they want to be back for special events like the unveiling of Diana's statue, the 100th and 95th birthday of the duke and the Queen, troping of the colours. Maybe in a few years they can go back and try to mend their relationships, but everythig this year will be too soon.

Good point. We’ll know in the near future as I fear Phillip is nearing his exit

 

[Karin1984]

Good point. We’ll know in the near future as I fear Phillip is nearing his exit

I don't think Meghan will ever be back. This year definitely not, I can imagine she will be extra careful being pregnant.

I wonder about the consequences for the entire family and their titles. It's not a small matter to announce on international television: I come from a racist family.
Especially the part about members of the royal family being concerned about Archie's skin colour. If not necessary you wouldn't want to ever speak with that member again, but what if it was someone in the close circle.
Archie and his sister will want to know at some point in time. He will see this interview.

I wouldn't say there weren't big revelations, but there are big consequences. Not just for the family, but also for the entire commonwealth. This could have political consequences.
The tone of the interview was more 'we didn't go due to the harsh media, but because my family is racist'. That's a completely different reason to go.

I can imagine that maybe on the short term, for their business in the US, this could be a right decision. But for the long run, I wonder why they did this interview.

 

[mousefan73]

I just want to come in on the whole skintone thing. It’s only natural to be curious how a child looks when it was born. Maybe this royal was speaking out loud what most people think. Most people are curious to know how a child looks when both parents come from different race/ethnic backgrounds. We have mixed races / ethnic couples within our family and when there’s pregnancy there’s always the family discussion wondering what side the child’s gonna take more from. these conversations are often initiated from the parents themselves. Now maybe making a statement like I hope that child’s not too dark that something different and crossing lines. I haven’t watch the interview yet so I don’t know what Megan and harry were implying specifically in this situation

 

[schumigirl]

I struggle to believe she wasn`t "allowed" to have help with mental health issues after apparently going to HR. Saying someone (again not named) told her it would look bad for her to be seen having help. We`d never have known she had help unless they decided to share if that was the case.

Where was her husband then who would do anything to help her. William, Catherine and Harry himself launched the Heads Together charity which brought 8 mental health charities to unite together.

Harry couldn`t have found her help? My husband is the first person I turn to......and he would make darn sure I was ok. He had the ways and means to make this happen. But, I truly don`t believe she was told she couldn`t have any help.

I found the clips I`ve seen too self serving and won`t watch the full interview tonight. From people who have seen it saying there wasn`t one word of, you know maybe we made a mistake along the way.......it seems to be all "woe is us"

No questions about her family, nor the criticisms levelled against them about their hypocracy and again with the colour of their childs skin.....no context. You can`t just throw out half accusations, which is what they`ve done.

As mousefan pointed out above, depending on the context this could have been a regular conversation between families. We don`t know.....we don`t know any of it first hand.

Having Scottish roots, I have a couple of cousins who have very red hair, when one who is a typical pasty skinned white girl married a very dark Italian man many years ago, they joked she had no idea what colour her childs hair and skin would have, she hoped the child would predominantly have his skin colour so they could sit longer than 4 minutes in the sun before burning.

Could it have been a similar conversation? Not a clue......but to drop hints about racism in his family and not follow through is cowardly and leaves more questions to be answered. As they should be if it was said in a racist way, no one would deny that.

As for not knowing she had to courtsy in front of the Queen......nonsense. I also don`t believe she didn`t know Harry and all that went along with it. Too many discrepancies from the beginning.

So many things now being reported, like she asked Harry to ask the Queen if they coud live in Windsor Castle! Maybe explains why Frogmore Cottage was never going to be good enough.

It seems to be quite a sycophantic interview, all one sided, no awkward qustions about many things that should have been covered if it was a no holds barred interview.....it doesn`t seem to have been that.

I do hope the Royal Family respond to this show.

 

[PaulaSB12]

Nope. I asked where your proof is she’s lying. Answering with a question of your own negates your claim.

You not believing her doesn’t mean she’s lying. That’s called an opinion.

The proof is what she said about her son being denied the title of Prince due to them being worried about how dark he would be. In 1917 George V set the rules (the queen had to write letters patent to give Charlotte and Louis title). The grandchildren of the queen or king would be princess or prince the eldest great grand child of the eldest son of the eldest child and heir would be prince or princess. The children of the second son would be lord or lady until the heir became monarch at which point these grandchildren would be eligible to become prince or princess. Archie was denied the title of Earl by his parents not by the queen. And now we find out that multiple million marriage was a fake second wedding!

 

[Cheburashka]

And now we find out that multiple million marriage was a fake second wedding!

Not really surprising as when the couple announced Meghan had gone into labor with Archie, she had actually already given birth to him several hours prior. It's weird how she admits to deceptions like this, yet many people gloss over that and still believe everything else she says.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...

 

[mousefan73]

Watching SKY news and the Royal correspondent said something interesting. „ Somethings in the interview just don’t add up“ She said that Megan was not left alone and that as a BHP correspondent she knows that Megan had a great team around her working with her. So it’s not like she was left to fend for herself.

Particularly the item about her not being able to get mental help. The more I think about it it doesn’t make sense either since even William and Kate and Harry together had their organization for mental health and have been pushing that for years

 

[EMom]

I didn't watch the whole "they wouldn't make/didn't want Archie to be a prince" speech, but it sounds like someone didn't read the rule book. I think that until Charles is king, Archie isn't a prince. This was nothing but a softball interview with plenty of spin.

I do not believe for one hot second that she was suicidal. She plays Harry like a fiddle. Diana's story of flinging herself down the stairs while pregnant because she was feeling suicidal is well known. How do you manipulate a husband who has serious unresolved mommy issues? You frighten him into thinking he will lose his wife and child just the way he lost his mother.

As for him "saving" her....I must call BS. How do you make a husband think it's HIS idea to leave his home, family, and history? Scare him the way she did, but cry that there is no way out. He says that there is, and that you two can step down as senior royals. Then you protest that you simply CANNOT ask him to make such an enormous sacrifice and he says he WANTS TO!!! In fact, he INSISTS! He gets to "save" you the way he could not save his mother. Yeah....MM is good at this. BTW, I've seen a similar scenario play out. Play the victim, make the other person the savior, and you get what you want, while making them think it was their idea. Genius.

It is all too telling that NOTHING is their fault or responsibility. Clearly, nothing is ever HER fault. She confesses her true mistake was in trusting and believing the Firm. Ugh. It is plain they wanted the perks, and little of the responsibility.

Was I right? Did an actual tear ever FALL and mess up her makeup? Or did she bravely wipe the tiny crocodile tears away as soon as she worked them up?

 

[EMom]

The proof is what she said about her son being denied the title of Prince due to them being worried about how dark he would be. In 1917 George V set the rules (the queen had to write letters patent to give Charlotte and Louis title). The grandchildren of the queen or king would be princess or prince the eldest great grand child of the eldest son of the eldest child and heir would be prince or princess. The children of the second son would be lord or lady until the heir became monarch at which point these grandchildren would be eligible to become prince or princess. Archie was denied the title of Earl by his parents not by the queen. And now we find out that multiple million marriage was a fake second wedding!

Tell me more about the "two weddings" business!