AIBU to think it's still a while before we accept a fully black person marrying into royals?

[ncdincasethisthreadflops]

Im not convinced it's quite as progressive as everyone's suggesting... I don't think a wedding has to be a political statement either but I do wonder if she wasn't mixed race if she'd be accepted by them as things stand in 2018?

A good friend of mine is very very very minor, but royal enough to need permission from the Queen to marry

I thought only the first 6 in line to the throne needed her permission. After that they don't

England had a 'fully' black queen in the 18th century.

Another ridiculous thread. Propagation and nothing more.

Why would anyone make an issue of that? She can be Catholic, the law was changed in 2015.

She can't be a monarch if she had stayed Catholic though. Obviously a long shot, but I'm surprised no-one takes issue with the fact that to be the king/queen or consort you have to be in the Church of England!

She's not going to be monarch though, she could still be wife of the monarch and a catholic though, even though thats not going to happen.

why would anyone take issue with the fact that the head of the church of england has to be a member of the church of england?

I understood that she wasn't actually Catholic but had gone to a Catholic private school. Not all people attending Catholic schools are Catholic; around here a fair few are Muslim.

The law used to be that descendents of one of the 18th century Georges had to ask permission to marry. The law was changed pretty recently so all pps could be correct.

By the way, anyone spotted that the previous Duke of Sussex married twice for love, both times without permission? Victoria eventually made her aunt by marriage a Duchess in her own right so she could sit with her husband rather than be titled as a daughter of a peer, well away from him; she couldn't be Duchess of Sussex though as the marriage wasn't technically legal.

Can you imagine the backlash if harry had not been allowed to marry because of her race. That would be stupidly short sighted of the Queen and would probably spell the end of the royals.
In any case I don't think the Queen is racist.

Time will tell whether she is really 'accepted', but it's more likely to depend on her behaviour than her background. Diana wasn't really accepted although she had the right credentials. If Meghan keeps her head down it will all be fine.

Nope. They did not. Only the first six in line to the throne need the Queens permission to marry, even Harry did not need it.

This only came into force in 2013, OP's friend must have got married before that.

Just to add, Harry is currently Sixth in line. It was announced on the news before the wedding that the Queen gave consent.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44097434

Jesus wept, what exactly is ‘fully black’? I’m sure Meghan doesn’t feel any less black
For being dual hertitage. And who’s ‘we’ exactly? Your definitely not speaking for me with this idiotic post.

Do you mean you can't accept it? Who else are you talking For?

YANBU OP.

I don't think many PP are aware of how different things are for biracial people who "pass" as white and those who don't. It's definitely an argument that the lighter your skin, as a black or Asian or biracial person, the more privilege you're afforded in a predominantly white society.

I actually looked up a past interview of MM's when a debate was raging on Facebook to see how she described her own ethnicity, and she said she considers herself to be biracial, not a black or white woman. Yet people ignore her right to assert her own identity in favour of trying to make the royal family seem more progressive, going on about how Harry has married a black woman. She doesn't see herself as a black woman.

It's pretty gross imo how someone who is biracial is usually considered to be the non white ethnicity from their heritage. When they are equally both. It has very nasty connotations with the sorts of beliefs that say 'even one drop' is too much. MM is no more black than she is white, and I think it'd have been unlikely the wedding would have been as embraced by the public as it has if she'd been a black woman. Just like I find it difficult to imagine Obama being elected had he been black and not biracial. Because we still live in a racist society.

Yes we had a black queen in the 18th century!

And a surprisingly modern, philanthropic woman she was too!

But she probably raises more "How black is black" and 'colourisms' questions!

Sooo,.......... the US has had a black President,.............
The UK Royal family has warmly welcomed a mixed race woman in marriage, there are countless black judges, sports stars, scientists and lawyers.......yet still you want to think that the world is still not progressive enough?

You have a large chip on your shoulder whilst most people think its a non issue.......

Queen Charlotte was "black" if you follow the now debunked and, frankly, racist "one drop rule". Her (single) black ancestor was 15 generations prior in the 1200s! By those standards, almost all of us here are black too.

yet still you want to think that the world is still not progressive enough?

Yeah? Okay.

Call off the striving for social justice, civil rights, egalitarianism between the sexes, etc.

Two high profile figures are biracial, and plenty of black people have obtained some pretty decent jobs. So I guess, worldwide, we've achieved an end to racism. Awesome!

What do you mean debunked, balsamic?

I wasn't mentioning it as if it's a scientific theory. It's a racist belief held by many racists, obsessed with 'racial purity'. How can you debunk a bigoted belief?

How long until a 'fully white' person is married into an African royal family? Or the Japanese royal family?

Oh ffs!

Ffs, 'A fully black person'

Harry fell in love with Meghan.

I bet he doesn't give to shits if you don't think she's 'black enough' to count.

Threads like these piss me off.

Nice to see the Markles finally accepting a ginger person into their family.

WALKING...of course we have not had an end to racism in the same way we still have sexism and many other predjuces,
but to infer Meghan may not have been accepted so warmly, were she to have had different hair and degree of colour in her skin, is simply looking for racism where l see none.

I think it is relevant though, the level of her 'blackness'. I don't think the royal family have much relevance but they are here and The Establishment and I think the OP is not BU to say it.

I very much doubt the royal family would have been as accepting if Meghan had her mum's skin tone of darker. It is about colour. That's pretty much what racism is about. And of course she's completely and utterly beautiful, that helps.

I'm white but live in a very mixed inner city area and have diverse friends and family. What strikes me most, more than colour, is that Doria looks so damn normal. Like an actual human being! She could be one of my friend's mums or any number of women I actually know. A social worker and yoga teacher is slightly posher than some people I know but pretty normal.

All of the other royals, their relatives, anyone in that world, is in a different world to anyone I know.

What's special about the Markle isn't that they're 'different', it's that they're normal. Remember the fuss about Kate being a commoner? That just meant she wasn't already related to him. She is not like us.

If Harry married a mixed South Asian or East Asian person would people being saying she isn't dark enough? It doesn't matter the Queen would have given permission they wouldn't want another Charles, Diana situation, doesn't matter if they were green.