Aren’t the rich and privileged allowed to be upset?

[Untailored]

Prince Harry, Brooklyn Beckham, Liz Hurley…..I could go on.

There’s an attitude on MN that seems to be if you’re rich and privileged you’re not allowed to complain about anything. You’re not allowed to be upset or angry or hurt. You’re just ‘spoiled’, ‘whining’ or ‘playing the victim’.

It’s really unpleasant and I can’t help wonder if there’s an undercurrent of jealousy behind it.

Totally.

We have no idea what kind of mother VB was unless you were actually part of that family and even then people are treated differently within the same family.

It’s obvious people like the Beckhams use PR for their brand so I wouldn’t be the slightest bit surprised if they didn’t use it against their own son. It’s just like people passing on (untrue or out of context) gossip about their children to family and friends to control the narrative and get people on their side and I’ve definitely seen that happen.

Of course they’re allowed to be upset.

But both Brooklyn and Harry are complaining about the trials of being born into a wealthy famous family whilst simultaneously having a “career” and relationship which is only possible due to the position they have been born into. It’s hypocritical. You don’t see either of them changing their name fully and trying to build a life as a regular non-celeb person.

I would have a lot more sympathy with their complaints if they acknowledged that their situation has its privileges as well as its downsides.

I think the problem with both Brooklyn and Harry, is that they are not really very bright, and having been brought up in the public eye (H because he was part of the RF, and BB on Instagram, etc), they are not really in a position to get a 'normal' job. For example, Harry could hardly get a job at MacDonalds, or B&Q, and I know BB did work in a coffee bar as a teenager, but they want something that will pay for the lifestyles they are used to. (Influencer?)
So after complaining they want privacy, they write their grievances in the public domain.
There is a lesson here, I think, that parents need to be aware of, on over exposure on social media (though I realise this can be difficult if a member of the RF).
And children should all be taught skills for some kind of employment, which is not dependent on portraying your life on social media.

Somebody made the excellent point that this wasn't about Brooklyn being rich, it was about the fact that he could have been rich AND been given privacy (as many celebrity children have).

It's silly to talk about the fact that he enjoyed the swimming pools, the expensive cars etc as if 1) we are SUPPOSED to provide our kids with stuff and we enjoy doing it and 2) his implication is that those things were afforded at the cost of his personal privacy to protect their brand image and income. He probably would have wanted to feel less anxious and have one fewer yachts.

The pure idiocy of people saying "well if they want privacy, why do they go to the press themselves" - they'll never get privacy, because the press are vultures and the people who consume that kind of media are vile and obsessed with drama to distract them from their boring little lives, so they'll keep being chased and hounded.

It will never be a proper private life; H & M and BB will always have the press chasing after them for pictures and exclusives etc because of the lives they were born/married into, so why aren't they allowed to use that relentless press attention to air their own views?

We see their lives as a commodity to gossip about and read about in magazines, but as soon as they use that press attention to air their own views or hit back at critics, people get uncomfortable and say "no. This is supposed to be a one way deal; we're in control and you are objects to gossip about and criticise, you don't get autonomy". The hypocrisy is wild.

Do you think it's OK for 'manners' to be used as a cover for how this country works?

Why do you think it's always the rich who think it's uncouth to talk about money?

And yes, health outcomes are one of the most unfair outcomes of this awful situation.

Far more important than giving 'my head a wobble' over politeness on a random online forum that I promise you the royal in question never read.

Rich and privileged people are allowed to be upset, as much as anyone else.

In the current court case, 'being upset' isn't quite enough. Their lawyers will have to prove that there was unlawful information gathering (UIG - phone hacking, phone tapping, or blagging; not just leaks or journalists paying people for information).

Prince Harry has been told by a judge in a previous legal case that a sense of grievance doesn't translate into a legal argument. Unfortunately he isn't always able to distinguish between the two. He has talked several times about the cases against the media being a crusade, and he and his lawyer have been warned a few times in this case by the judge (in pre-trial hearings) not to try to pull other cases in or turn it into a public enquiry.

It's not about manners. How ridiculous! It's about common decency. It's about acknowledging that people can have struggles and challenges despite their apparent privileges. We have already covered on this thread that money isn't related to lots of form privilege.

I had a very modest upbringing in a relatively deprived area that features in the list of poorest regions you reference but I can see that I was definitely privileged in many ways. I had a loving stable family that were invested in me. I was born able bodied and I am naturally quite able academically. I am white. I didn't have lots of siblings to compete for resources with. Ultimately I had a happy childhood with little trauma and I am grateful for that.

Am I more or less privileged than a rich person that may have had more material advantages and access to better healthcare? It's hard to say isn't it? I absolutely would not trade places for example with the Duchess of Cambridge and have experienced cancer at such a young age irrespective of the fact she had access to the best healthcare available. She is lucky in many ways but that is incredibly unlucky and at a human level I feel deeply sorry for her.

You seem so blinded by rage about financial inequality that you fail to see that life is unequal in almost all aspects. Some people live healthy lives and get struck down by cancer in their 20s, some smoke, drink and don't look after themselves and live to 100. Some grow up in happy but poor households whilst others are rich but stuck in dysfunctional families. We mustn't lose the capacity to empathise with each other despite our differences.

The fact of the matter is I do not think the comments I read were remotely acceptable. End of.

I think it tells you a lot about the person's value system if they think money negates all else. I can't think of anything worse than being raised by famous and extremely wealthy parents, it's a pressure most people couldn't cope with. I'd rather be piss poor. Rich kids are no more responsible for the circumstances of their birth than poor kids.

I’n with you on the “ban the word jealousy” train

Brefugee hasn’t answered my question so I’ll try you. @CurlewKate what word should be used instead of jealousy?

Sometimes people are jealous, so why should that word not be used if it's appropriate?
Maybe it hits a bit close to home for some people.

Maybe it hits a bit close to home for some people.

This. Why do posters feel the need to attack and sneer at people on class grounds describing them as ‘inbred’, ‘entitled’, ‘braying’ and so on.

BB has every reason to be aggrieved IMO, but the examples of abuse he gives don’t help his cause.

A second dress mishap, Mum not helping with dogs in distress & the worst thing he’s EVER faced in his life (!) to date - his Mum dancing ‘on’ him. No words.

Money doesn’t buy happiness until you have money and then what do you have to complain about? 😤

The last one is dreadful, though. Grim.