Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Original poster

Sussexes and bullying campaign

432 replies

DeepThinkingGirl · 11/06/2021 00:59

Hi everyone !

Does anyone find the constant bullying of the Sussexes to affect their mental health ?

I find the mainstream misogyny to be a reflection of how society really does view women as a whole and how othering it is of people of other cultures.

I think baby Lilibet would be very sad to know the world received her with such strong opinions against her naming. It’s really sad that the world so full of hate doesn’t provide a nice place for kids to grow confidently.

I feel like if this happens in a powerful royal family, what’s there to hope in your average family!

Btw I have in law issues and I find the attitudes towards the sussexes triggering and upsetting

OP posts:
bluebell34567 · 12/06/2021 12:26

@Roussette

bluebell

There's an hour highlights programme BBC2 20.00 tonight. The queen looked like she really enjoyed it.

oh thats nice i can watch it then.
bluebell34567 · 12/06/2021 12:27

thank you Smile

GalaxyGirl24 · 12/06/2021 15:36

I agree OP and think it's absolutely ridiculous how invested people are in the name of someone else's baby! Also in trying to find dramas and pin them on Meghan. It's honestly shocking and completely agree about misogyny and I would add racism, in how she's been received and generally represented in the media.

No one bloody knows what happens in the royal family and for all we know the Queen, Kate or William could be the worst of them! How many bad MIL/SIL/BIL stories are on here and yet people refuse to entertain that anyone is to blame but the Sussexes!

SnoopyLights · 13/06/2021 16:13

Harry has maintained throughout all this situation that the Queen and Prince Philip have not been at fault.

Lots of people like to use family names for their children and the senior members of the Royal family have a limited pool of acceptable names.

As Harry moves down the line of succession he can afford to relax the formalities expected of Kate and William when naming their own children, even if he wants to maintain the tradition of using family names in some form for his children.

Kate and William gave Charlotte the middle names Elizabeth Diana and nobody complained about that.

Harry obviously wanted to call his daughter after his mother and grandmother, but with Elizabeth Diana already used by Kate and William, as Charlotte's middle names, can you imaging the criticism they would have faced if they had given their daughter two of the three names his brother had already used? No doubt Meghan would have been unfavourably accused of copying Kate again as well).

They've found a compromise they are happy with, we've no real reason to assume the Queen is unhappy about the name, and they have also said their daughter will be known as Lili.

I can't see that they have done anything wrong here, and I feel that had they gone with another name entirely which had no Royal connections, some people would still be complaining that it was proof that Meghan was cutting out the Royal family even further by not having a Royal name for her daughter.

Roussette · 13/06/2021 18:00

@SnoopyLights

Great post. You've encapsulated it. Total sense.

StillCoughingandLaughing · 13/06/2021 18:19

@DeepThinkingGirl

I really think these dramas are sucking the joy out of the beautiful moments that are meant to be enjoyed by the sussexes
They.m could have avoided said ‘dramas’ by not telling lies about their families on international TV.
StillCoughingandLaughing · 13/06/2021 18:21

@Gorgeouslilgirl

It is possible that Jane is lovely as a friend but is rubbish at managing accounts
She probably won’t thank you for saying it on The Oprah Show, though.
Gorgeouslilgirl · 13/06/2021 18:27

If Jane’s company/employees trashed me in public and Jane stood by, oh yeah, I would have no qualms going public with my side.

Why would my feelings be less important than Jane’s?

Gorgeouslilgirl · 13/06/2021 18:32

I must admit in real life I’m very conflict averse and would probably say nothing but would stew inside for ages!

My dh would tell me to stand up for myself. In fact, he would probably stand up on my behalf! But then, he is fighter with strong self worth and boundaries and has no problems with saying what he thinks 😃

I’ve now finally started pushing back and speaking my mind. It is utterly liberating and once I have said it, publicly if need be, it is as if a weight has been lifted

Gorgeouslilgirl · 13/06/2021 18:35

So a long wavy of saying I have no problems with MM saying what she felt and experienced publicly.

After all, the allegations and criticism were often very public too. And I think everyone should stand up against racism, sexism and micro aggressions

It is like saying don’t speak about sexism because some poor man’s feelings might be hurt!

TotorosCatBus · 13/06/2021 19:06

Kate and William gave Charlotte the middle names Elizabeth Diana and nobody complained about that.

Mark and Zara also used Elizabeth as middle names for their daughters. The point is that they used Elizabeth (her full name) rather than Lilibet which was believed to only be used by Philip and HM's parents.

Nobody is surprised that Diana was used. I suspect bookies weren't even taking bets that it would be a middle name.

Lili/Lily as the name would not have created so much news

TotorosCatBus · 13/06/2021 19:07

Harry has maintained throughout all this situation that the Queen and Prince Philip have not been at fault.

They were not the people who expressed concern about Archie's skin colour but when H spoke about his father's upbringing, that is a criticism of the Queen and PP

SnoopyLights · 13/06/2021 19:33

"Harry has maintained throughout all this situation that the Queen and Prince Philip have not been at fault."

"They were not the people who expressed concern about Archie's skin colour but when H spoke about his father's upbringing, that is a criticism of the Queen and PP. "

Maybe so, maybe not, but still, it was not a criticism of how they have treated him personally, or a criticism of how they have treated Meghan, Archie, and now Lili. So it's not unreasonable to choose a name which proves how highly he thinks of his grandmother.

"Lili/Lily as the name would not have created so much news"

That's what they implied they will be calling her day to day, much like any parents giving a longer name but using a shortened version most of the time.

Any name they chose was always going to be picked over. Might as well choose the name they love and feel best honours both their new daughter, and her great-grandmother. If they had just gone with Lili it would have caused speculation that it was short for Lilibet and people would have been asking why they hadn't used the full version. The Queen might actually be thrilled and honoured, it might be just the news she needed at a time like this.

I don't feel that they have named their daughter to create news, but some media outlets will always go out of their way to make news where none exists.

For example I have blocked an advert on Facebook from The Independent because it has a picture of Harry and Meghan with Kate and William, and the headline is speculating which women would win in a fight. The "journalist" responsible for that shit seems to think it would be Kate, according to the headline (I refuse to click on the "article" itself. Neither Kate nor Meghan has done anything to create that "news" but there it is all the same. Unfair to both women.

StillCoughingandLaughing · 13/06/2021 19:40

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

StillCoughingandLaughing · 13/06/2021 19:42

@Gorgeouslilgirl

So a long wavy of saying I have no problems with MM saying what she felt and experienced publicly.

After all, the allegations and criticism were often very public too. And I think everyone should stand up against racism, sexism and micro aggressions

It is like saying don’t speak about sexism because some poor man’s feelings might be hurt!

It’s fine - more than fine; it’s laudable - to stand up for yourself, but don’t invent issues that don’t exist.
TotorosCatBus · 13/06/2021 19:46

Neither Kate nor Meghan has done anything to create that "news" but there it is all the same. Unfair to both women.

Quite. Same goes to the #TeamSussex #TeamCambridge tribalism that their PR companies seem to be drumming up online when most people dgaf about either and the women themselves aren't trash talking each other like boxers.

Jacopo · 13/06/2021 19:52

Where is OP?
Anyway, so many things which they said in the Oprah interview have been proved to be inaccurate, as far as I’m concerned EVERYTHING else they said needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. All of it.

CallmeHendricks · 13/06/2021 21:02

That is SO missing the subtleties of the point, @SnoopyLights.

It really isn't as simple or innocent as picking a family name to honour a grandparent.

"we've no real reason to assume the Queen is unhappy about the name," I think we have, in light of the news today that the Queen/Palace will no longer remain silent when "mistruths" about the family are published. Just think for one moment about the huge statement that is.

Gorgeouslilgirl · 13/06/2021 21:13

I have no idea what that means.

I hope it means the end of shadowy ‘unnamed sources’ shit stirring with impunity

Gorgeouslilgirl · 13/06/2021 21:14

And I wish it applied when mistruths about H&M were being published and the Palace didn’t stand up for them

RickiTarr · 13/06/2021 21:16

@Gorgeouslilgirl

I have no idea what that means.

I hope it means the end of shadowy ‘unnamed sources’ shit stirring with impunity

You are completely misunderstanding how it works. The editor and the lawyers have to be satisfied that the source is good enough or information wouldn’t be published or broadcast.

The BBC isn’t inventing sources or basing reports on anonymous phone calls.

RickiTarr · 13/06/2021 21:21

@Gorgeouslilgirl

And I wish it applied when mistruths about H&M were being published and the Palace didn’t stand up for them
Why on Earth would the palace be doing PR you r comms management for a pair of people who leak AGAINST the palace and members of the royal family constantly? PR never works like that.

H&M are the ones who voluntarily left the tent (the royal family) and started pissing in (slagging the royal family off to the press).

If I kept shit talking you to the media through leaks and ‘friends’, would you be happy to tell the world how great and misunderstood I was? You would have to be a total mug to do that.

Gorgeouslilgirl · 13/06/2021 21:22

What does it mean a “source is good enough”? What is the standard of proof they need to show?

And if it is indeed all above boards and robust, why can’t these sources be named? After all they are hardly whistleblowers at risk like Snowden!

If they are not speaking in an official capacity on behalf of the Head of State, then they are simply gossiping, no? What they are saying are not matters of public interest.

Gorgeouslilgirl · 13/06/2021 21:25

I’ve never seen a head of state institution run in such a cloak and dagger way. With unnamed sources running amok.

H&M were part of the institution and working royals when lots of rubbish was published, with “unnamed sources”. The palace should have clamped down then.

CallmeHendricks · 13/06/2021 21:35

"Rubbish" has been printed about the Royals for ever and a day. It's not unique to Harry & Meghan, regardless of what they might have us believe.
The Royals have always adopted a "least said, soonest mended" approach. Their stance has always been that to respond just give legs to the whole thing. Of course they weren't going to go public and say "oh, by the way, in the run-up to the wedding, emotions were running high and so-and-so got upset because such-and-such thought a, b or c." Can you imagine the precedent that would set, and the can of worms it would open.
To be honest, no one CARED who cried, if anyone of both did.

The fact that the Queen has let this be known at this time (after ALL this time) speaks volumes!