Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dylanisabaddog

Harry and Meghan

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

Aye Fevero, its bit more deep and complex than The Sun would have us believe. 

Yes - Nobody though has argued on the news or elsewhere (well almost as above) that the comment wasn't racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

We'll have to beg to differ. I certainly didn't give the child's colour any thought at all. 

It has crossed my mind in the last couple of days what would have happened if William had met Meghan. Would the heir to the throne have been allowed to marry her? 

Let's be honest here, Kate was probably picked out for William while they were both teenagers. That's how that stuff works at the top level. Harry was the renegade who got naked in Vegas with a bunch of hookers, if either of them was going to end up marrying a soal actress (not saying there's anything wrong with that) it was always going to be him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

Let's be honest here, Kate was probably picked out for William while they were both teenagers. That's how that stuff works at the top level. Harry was the renegade who got naked in Vegas with a bunch of hookers, if either of them was going to end up marrying a soal actress (not saying there's anything wrong with that) it was always going to be him.

Not for a moment. If there had been a marriage arranged by the royal family for William it would have been with someone higher up the social scale. It anyone picked out Kate for William it was either Kate or her mother or both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Not for a moment. If there had been a marriage arranged by the royal family for William it would have been with someone higher up the social scale. It anyone picked out Kate for William it was either Kate or her mother or both.

Yep , let's not forget that Kate's family are in fact settled  'jopsies'.

😇

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Herman said:

I think this sorry episode highlights how well the British media can groom us into hating people with no evidence other than hearsay and gossip. Sad how easy it is too. 

Anyway now they've gone who is next? A tenner we'll be hating Carrie Symonds a hell of a lot more by the end of March. 

Very true, and quite interesting that even a public figure who was already used to dealing with the US media, for heavens sake, moved over here and found the British press 'absolutely toxic'.

Can't argue with her judgement but sadly it really highlights how low this country and its standards have fallen.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bill said:

You don’t have to be racist to make that remark probably 90% of the population thought the same thing going through their mind

I'm afraid you are guilty of thinking that the rest of society has your mindset. I have no doubt you're right that there is a signficant proportion of the population who did contemplate the colour of the couple's offspring, but have no idea how you arrive at a figure of 90%.  I can assure you that for 100% of the people in my circle it simply never occured to them to wonder about such a thing. And therein lies the real issue. I have no doubt that you are not a racist of the likes we see populating far right wing groups, but you do have to wonder why such a question went through your mind. What possible significance could it have regarding your own or anybody else's acceptance or treatment of the baby? If that question raises itself in your mind then it does indeed mean that colour matters to you, and it is certainly worth asking yourself why.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

And bongo bongo land. But I doubt it was him although it has to be Queenie, the Duke or Charles. If it's actually true. Either way as a staunch Republican I'm loving every minute of it 😂

Yes it's a lose-lose for the Royals.

Either Harry and Megan are self-serving s h i t s or they aren't and the remaining Royal family is. I love the right wing tabloids in meltdown on this (see Pier's Morgan for example). 

Either way it shows that the extended family as a whole is well past its sell by date as anything other than a social media reality TV show. Perhaps it can replace big brother for Channel 4. Can we vote who's in or out ?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Not for a moment. If there had been a marriage arranged by the royal family for William it would have been with someone higher up the social scale. It anyone picked out Kate for William it was either Kate or her mother or both.

Indeed Purple! Diana had been picked out for Charles as a virgin from an aristocratic background. The terrible consequences of that ill-matched arrangement certainly meant that they wouldn't interfere with the partner choices of her children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

I must admit I never thought of her as other than a good looking woman.

But her personality seems very unstable and insecure to me. 

And I don't think its reasonable for a few pundits to be saying the Royals are racist. For goodness sake the Queen is head of the Commonwealth!

Personally as a Republican, those two would be the first up against the wall. From a military man he has become a complete foppish wimp. And she seems nothing more than someone who couldn't handle the microscope.

The sooner we pack the lot of them of to Balmoral or Sandringham, the better.

 

Totally agree KG!

Pundits have been falling over themselves all day to claim.............'now we know the awful truth about the Royal Family'. Always two sides to every story and the attached gives just that. Of course it will be instantly dismissed as it's from that 'right wing rag The Telegraph'. Packed full of detail though and it deserves a thorough read. If only half is true it reveals a thin skinned, bitter and twisted Harry who shacked up with an arrogant, minor celebrity actress who has cut out all previous friends it seems and surrounded herself with 'Yes' men  / women.  

The inside story of the rift between Harry and Meghan and The Firm (telegraph.co.uk)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, yellowrider120 said:

Totally agree KG!

Pundits have been falling over themselves all day to claim.............'now we know the awful truth about the Royal Family'. Always two sides to every story and the attached gives just that. Of course it will be instantly dismissed as it's from that 'right wing rag The Telegraph'. Packed full of detail though and it deserves a thorough read. If only half is true it reveals a thin skinned, bitter and twisted Harry who shacked up with an arrogant, minor celebrity actress who has cut out all previous friends it seems and surrounded herself with 'Yes' men  / women.  

The inside story of the rift between Harry and Meghan and The Firm (telegraph.co.uk)

Seems like you're unsure which side you stand on. I think maybe the Mercutio response is probably most apt here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

And I don't think its reasonable for a few pundits to be saying the Royals are racist. For goodness sake the Queen is head of the Commonwealth!

I appreciate me and you sit on the same side of the Republic fence KG, but the royal family are inherently racist. 

"If you stay here much longer, you'll all be slitty eyed" to British students in China

"It looks like it was put in by an indian" remarking on an old fuse box

"Still throwing spears?" To an aboriginal aussie

All Prince Phillip and there are numerous others on public record.

You equally can't use the Commonwealth as evidence of non-racism. That's incredible as an argument. Firstly she didn't choose that title so to say her views have any bearing on it at all is silly and secondly the Commonwealth is largely made up of countries who we conquered and massacred the natives in the empire. The Commonwealth is literally founded on slavery and racism so to say that is evidence the Queen isn't racist is incredulous. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if I heard the bbc news correct tonight!

1, the comment about the skin colour was made to Harry before the wedding, pre pregnancy and the context as highlighted not known. If you listen to her she pauses and thinks of how to phrase it! Then says comments made!

2, her son apparently has no right to be a prince as he’s not a direct descendant to the throne, he will be given the title of Prince once Charles takes to the throne!

3, as soon as they gave up the royal duties they gave up any right to have bodyguards paid for by the British tax payers!

4, there’s no way this woman could be bullied and to talk about taking her own life is very troublesome to me, in these tough times lots of people have faced this for real, to use it for sympathy in an interview is a little poor in my taste!

Don’t think they've done themselves any favours this side of the pond but they’re racking in the millions in the US, now you see why Opra got an invite to the wedding!

I have no love for the royals, they are just what they are, but in fairness this was fully loaded and you can see how uncomfortable Harry is!

Edited by Indy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not and will not watch the interview. For more than one reason.

I don't get the love in with Oprah. Whats the real difference between her and Kyle? Only what she earns.

Apparently the interview involved questions about his family but not hers. Unbalanced and one sided.

Interview to put the record straight. But it involved a nice fat fee.

And I think the Royals are as dysfunctional a family as any soap opera.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, kick it off said:

I appreciate me and you sit on the same side of the Republic fence KG, but the royal family are inherently racist. 

"If you stay here much longer, you'll all be slitty eyed" to British students in China

"It looks like it was put in by an indian" remarking on an old fuse box

"Still throwing spears?" To an aboriginal aussie

All Prince Phillip and there are numerous others on public record.

You equally can't use the Commonwealth as evidence of non-racism. That's incredible as an argument. Firstly she didn't choose that title so to say her views have any bearing on it at all is silly and secondly the Commonwealth is largely made up of countries who we conquered and massacred the natives in the empire. The Commonwealth is literally founded on slavery and racism so to say that is evidence the Queen isn't racist is incredulous. 

Then I guess our definitions of a racist differ.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, keelansgrandad said:

Then I guess our definitions of a racist differ.

 

Not sure how you interpret Phillip's comments any other way but each to their own i guess. Elizabeth has never apologised for her family's role in the slave trade, in fact she has never even acknowledged it. Charles has, Elizabeth has never thought it worthy of comment apparently.

She dishes out honours every year that refer to "the empire" which she has refused to change even though black people are literally refusing to be honoured because of the racist connotations. In fact one of the medals literally depicts an angel clad in white and fair skinned trampling on "satan" who appears to have no devilish characteristics other than darker skin.

Princess Michael of Kent (married the queen's cousin) is literally the daughter of a **** SS officer. 

The first person of colour to marry into the family has literally been hounded out within a couple of years.... Sure the press is a major part of that, but firstly why weren't the royal family protecting her? Prince Andrew can literally getting away with touching kids up and the palace can make that disappear but Harry can't get away with marrying someone who isn't white?

Aside from that - the only circles she will really have been mixing in are the "royal" ones. I wonder why she thinks the UK is incredibly racist (imagine an American feeling that the UK is incredibly racist?!).... We'll agree to disagree but I'm baffled as to why you're so adamant they're not racist. Phillip at least is clearly racist, not in a KKK way, but in a priveleged elderly white man way. If I were a betting man, I would guess the others are just better at keeping the mask up than Phillip.... After all, how do you stay married to someone for decades despite frequent racist comments if you're not on board with that? I would never marry someone who made racist comments because it would go against my intrinsic values and beliefs.

queen royal badge

Edited by kick it off
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m sorry KIO, but why should the Queen need to apologise for something centuries before her? Slavery was a massive part of the global trade, its was awful but it’s history not to be repeated, not bought up at every opportunity to use as a stick for the racist card!

If the comment was made none of us know the context, the comment and the manner, it’s just conjecture! It wasn’t even in her earshot, just told to her by third party! One side of the story, Jesus just go back to the 70’s for bad taste in racism, should family members of all those actors apologise on their behalf?

Surely it’s best to let things like this be a teaching to the future not a weapon to be used in each new comment which has upset people because of how it’s been reported! 

Edited by Indy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 "Who appears to have no devilish characteristics other than darker skin."

problem with this argument is you have then gone on to paste a picture of satan depicted as having white skin with a reddish hue and a serpent's tail....  now I'm no scholar but 'red' and 'serpent' are kinda commonly associated with the devil....

Edited by Barbe bleu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, kick it off said:

Not sure how you interpret Phillip's comments any other way but each to their own i guess. Elizabeth has never apologised for her family's role in the slave trade, in fact she has never even acknowledged it. Charles has, Elizabeth has never thought it worthy of comment apparently.

She dishes out honours every year that refer to "the empire" which she has refused to change even though black people are literally refusing to be honoured because of the racist connotations. In fact one of the medals literally depicts an angel clad in white and fair skinned trampling on "satan" who appears to have no devilish characteristics other than darker skin.

Princess Michael of Kent (married the queen's cousin) is literally the daughter of a **** SS officer. 

The first person of colour to marry into the family has literally been hounded out within a couple of years.... Sure the press is a major part of that, but firstly why weren't the royal family protecting her? Prince Andrew can literally getting away with touching kids up and the palace can make that disappear but Harry can't get away with marrying someone who isn't white?

Aside from that - the only circles she will really have been mixing in are the "royal" ones. I wonder why she thinks the UK is incredibly racist (imagine an American feeling that the UK is incredibly racist?!).... We'll agree to disagree but I'm baffled as to why you're so adamant they're not racist. Phillip at least is clearly racist, not in a KKK way, but in a priveleged elderly white man way. If I were a betting man, I would guess the others are just better at keeping the mask up than Phillip.... After all, how do you stay married to someone for decades despite frequent racist comments if you're not on board with that? I would never marry someone who made racist comments because it would go against my intrinsic values and beliefs.

queen royal badge

I think you are using republican arguments and mixing them with racist ones.

Empire, honours etc are all part of something that has no place in life today. They are confined to history. Just like the slave trade. But shouldn't be erased from history. There is no Utopia. 

And you are the one illuminating Meghan's colour. Whether or not she was hounded out, it wasn't her colour but her relationship with her family that had the press frothing. Months earlier she was the darling of the tabloids and colour was never highlighted. And until we hear any replies, you are judging on her apparent bitter remarks.

And yes, Andrew should, if guilty, be horsewhipped. No human being is untouchable. But I guess any family would want to cover up if they had a paedophile in their family.

Princess Michael isn't disliked because of her SS links. Its because of her arrogance of being a royal. Would you turn against DF if it turns out his Grandfather was a Concentration Camp Guard?

I believe in evolution not revolution. I believe we try and accept the past and look forward to improving the future. I did want to change the World by revolution as a younger man but realised as I got older that its not the best way. We are friends with Germans, Japanese, Italians who all were enemies not that long ago. Hopefully the newer generations of those nations have accepted the universal olive branch handed to them post war.

The remarks the out of touch DofE made weren't funny. They weren't, speaking as a white man, overtly racist. They were offensive and had the stink of colonialism.

And that is why the Royals should go. He should have been told at the time, you are rude and offensive so apologise. But apparently he is in a privileged and untouchable position.

And as far as defining racism, I guess we should ask other races and not just our opinion or definition.

But we need to also accept that anti racism isn't just black lives. Ask the DUP, not just Robinson. Ask many brexiteers about their thoughts on immigration. Ask Australians about Aborigines or Kiwis about Maoris or Pacific Islanders. Actually, many Kiwis cannot be bothered to use the word Pacific.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hidden Figures in Film4 now. A far more rewarding evening on true deserving  people who struggled against prejudice than the Oprah soap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

Hidden Figures in Film4 now. A far more rewarding evening on true deserving  people who struggled against prejudice than the Oprah soap.

Excellent advice YF. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Is it over yet ? There were trailers for the Exorcist too 😉

Could anyone tell the two apart?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Picture the scene – the D&D of S, on their much publicised tour of Africa, were in Malawi – one of the very poorest countries in the world. For several days they’d been meeting people whose stories would make anyone with a scintilla of perspective realise just how lucky they are. Children who’d lost limbs from land-mines, lost relatives from starvation or internecine warfare – and what was their reaction? They decided that was the appropriate moment to announce to the world, via their friendly stooge Tom Bradby, that their life as members of the Royal Family wasn’t easy. It beggared belief. Meghan thought we all needed to know it’s really, really hard being Royal whilst being a new mother – as though the vast retinue of domestic servants doesn’t ease the pressure, even just a little bit – and, as if that wasn’t enough of a burden, poor Meghan complained that no one had thought to ask if she was okay.

The mind boggles. Truly, it takes superhuman levels of self-absorption to spend time with children who’ve lost their limbs and their families to a war and then turn to the camera and whine, “Yeah, but what about meeeee?”

Whilst I have no interest in watching the Oprah interview there is a grim fascination that comes from just how tin-eared the two of them are doubtless going to be. The trouble is there will be plenty in their new target audience – America – who will lap this sanctimony up, and imagine that poor Harry and Me-Again are victims. Incredibly, there seem to be one or two posters here who feel the same.

They’ve lectured us on climate change – castigating people who most likely take one flight a year for their holidays – before they themselves hop into the sybaritic comforts of a private jet, that will take them off for another much-needed break from the pressures of their opulent life. Not to mention that, to ensure their tour of Africa was at the right level of comfort, special cars were shipped out to waft them from one photo-op to the next. Their carbon footprint must be absolutely staggering – but God forbid a newspaper might question the Sussexes’ claim to be “committed environmentalists”. Any criticism is obviously proof of racism.

The suggestion – echoed by some on these very pages – that any criticism aimed at the Duchess of Sussex must be rooted in racism is completely unsupported by any evidence or even common sense. You can’t deny that, during their engagement and for the wedding itself, the coverage was universally positive and everyone seemed perfectly happy with the idea of her bringing a fresh and different outlook to the hide-bound monarchy. The matter of her heritage was seen as a positive.

It was only when the two of them started on this ghastly “celebrity” path, constantly virtue signalling and associating themselves with “woke” totems that the tenor of the coverage changed. Surely, that would be more down to their perceived insincerity and hypocrisy than any evidence of racism towards her?

Just imagine the messages that will pour forth from their Netflix documentaries – Meghan reinventing herself as Feminist role model – though ‘Marry a Prince and give up your day job’ is a somewhat regressive feminist message in 2021, isn’t it? It could hardly be more hypocritical if Harry, as a member of the Royal family, criticised someone for nepotism.

LA is welcome to them. A city built on insincerity and hollow adulation of fame. It’s a shame because Harry seemed as though he was a decent sort. He obviously enjoyed his time in the Army and seemed keen to dedicate himself to the Invictus games, association with Military charities and general royal duties. He enjoyed enormous amounts of good will from the British people and seemed to be growing into his role. Any such good will has since evaporated.

When you live in a gilded cage it is never advisable to complain to those outside that your golden handcuffs chafe.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Indy said:

I’m sorry KIO, but why should the Queen need to apologise for something centuries before her?

Because she's the head of ****ing state and that's part of the job? 5 US Presidents have apologised for it, King Phillipe of Belgium apologised for it, The olowu of the Iwo people in Nigeria has apologised for it, the Church of England and Bank of England have apologised, even the CEOs of various business institutiions such as Lloyds have, yet the queen, whose ancestors were directly involved, hasn't. That's kind of the point of using this kind of thing as a "teaching moment" - it has to be acknowledged, not swept under the carpet.  That's also one of several reasons I don't buy her being a great head of state. She doesn't say or do anything, except once a year releases a video.

10 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

 "Who appears to have no devilish characteristics other than darker skin."

problem with this argument is you have then gone on to paste a picture of satan depicted as having white skin with a reddish hue and a serpent's tail....  now I'm no scholar but 'red' and 'serpent' are kinda commonly associated with the devil....

Accept the serpent tail (although it looks more like a black skinned mermaid to me than the devil). The skin hue seems to vary by medal design. Here are some clearer versions of the same medal (slightly different designs) that have been used.... Recipients can now opt for an updated design that doesn't feature dark skin after Michael Palin and the governor general of Jamaica refused to wear their medals and demanded a less racial design.

medald1

Calls for redesign of royal honour over 'offensive' image | Honours system  | The Guardian

 

Edited by kick it off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, kick it off said:

 

Calls for redesign of royal honour over 'offensive' image | Honours system  | The Guardian

 

That’s your evidence of racism in Britain, an angel standing over a serpent of some kind on a badge? The bible is full of references of light and darkness which seems a frankly more plausible reason for the skin tones of the characters than trying to conflate it with colonialism 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...