Harry and Meghan-part 2

[BertrandRussell]

Following on from this -it was just getting interesting. Someone posted about how Meghan called herself a feminist but hadn’t earned the title. I was interested to know how you earned the title- but the thread ended.

I don’t think Meghan married Harry to b part of the royal family. She married him because he was right for her. His family is irrelevant (I hope) to that decision.

Ah come on now, really?

I don't think the Tindalls are comparable since they are not titled and don't put themselves in the public eye in quite the same way. They do put themselves in the public eye. They were on Top Gear this week. Mike is on gmb promoting his golf charity. They're forever on the Daily Mail website pictured at the racing and eventing. They're quite media savvy.
I must admit I think I would get on with Zara. She reminds me of a lot of farmery horsey women I know.
I fear the Sussexes are out on a limb and losing touch with the others. Just a feeling.

GlitchStitch I agree with you.

I've actually read posts on MN claiming that Meghan inadvertently stumbled into a relationship with a prince and is bravely tolerating the fame and fortune for the man she loves. Surely it's possible to like or defend her without spouting that nonsense. Did anybody really believe her claims that she knew nothing about him?

“What do you think earns someone the title feminist?”Well,I don’t think it’s a title. But to me, a feminist is a woman who thinks women should have full equality. And who always puts women front and centre, and who always thinks how her words and actions will affect women. And for A woman in Meghan’s position to openly call herself a feminist is pretty remarkable. As is the commitment to women and girl’s education she made at that Fab 4 press conference. It may not seem like much- but it’s more than any other royal woman has done.

She does, she grew up during WWII when even the royals were rationed and had to make do and mend and make sure nothing was wasted. She reuses gift paper and tag
The wealthy didn't have to suffer rationing in the same way as everyone else. Churchill suspended rationing for his private members clubs so they were still guzzling champagne. And if I got a gift from The Queen, one of the richest women in the world, I wouldn't want a bloody reused gift tag! It's false parsimony. Pretending you're frugal when actually you're hoarding money that could be spent on helping your grandson renovate one of your houses so the Taxpayer didn't have to shell out of paying your staff above minimum wage.

That’s interesting Bertrand. So do you consider Meghan a feminist? Or has she had to renounce her feminism because she’s married a prince?

I think you can be a feminist and marry a prince. Whether she is or not time will tell. But calling herself a feminist is more than any other royal woman has ever done. And that- I suspect is one of the reasons the Press hate her.

But calling herself a feminist is more than any other royal woman has ever done

Didn’t QE1 do pretty much that with her heart and stomach of a King speech over 400 years ago? But I agree that few women who have married into royalty have shown much resistance against the patriarchy.

Not certain that a person has to earn the right to call themselves a feminist. If you believe in equality of opportunity for men and women then you are a feminist. Of course some people will do more than others to try and ensure that equality of opportunity. But all are still feminists.
It's not entirely realistic either to expect women to always think about how their words and actions affect other women - therein lies the path to saying mm shouldn't have married PH because it looks bad. Or sahm shouldn't make that choice because they disadvantage women in the workplace who don't get to benefit from having that support system at home. People still have to be free to live their lives in the way that works best for their family.

Bertrand you say that people can have different opinions but not different facts. The facts are that the Cambridge's showed off their babies almost immediately and then retreated into their private lives. Probably that wasn't what they really wanted to do but it's kind of the price for having all those people willing to shower you with money and privilege. The Sussex's chose not to. They are having a completely private christening. They took a comparatively long time to announce the name and let the press take photos. I don't think they can take that path while simultaneously expecting all the good bits of being royalty.

You can call yourself anything you like but fine words butter no parsnips.

Agreed. But actually using the F word is an innovation. Who knows what will happen next?

“The facts are that the Cambridge's showed off their babies almost immediately and then retreated into their private lives”
Didn’t the Sussexes do the same? With the addition of Harry himself chatting to the Press and a brilliant family photograph as well? And did they take longer to announce the name than the Cambridges? And I will put money on there being Christening pictures....

Just checked. George and Charlotte 2 days. Archie- 2 days. Louis? No idea.

Louis was four days!

“They need a PR revamp”

So what do you think they ought to be found that they aren’t?

It's the announcements that they are doing things privately I think that annoy people. I believe it's been confirmed that christening pictures will be released so why not just say he's being christened on x day and we will be sharing pics after? Why the stuff about it being private? Same with the birth. She did a photo call in heels and a dress at 2 days post partum anyway so what was the point of the announcements about it being private? Why not just Meghan went into labour and had the baby, we'll be sharing pics in a couple of days?

I think they are making issues and causing bad feeling when it isn't necessary. Bad PR again.

I haven’t seen the christening announcement. Is it on Instagram?

It's like they have to constantly remind the public who's boss, or that they only tolerate them. Anybody with a brain cell would know that taking about something being private and to shield from the public in the same week they've been savaged for their spending of public funds isn't going to be well received.

It's been widely reported in the media with the wanting it private being attributed to the Sussexes. It's not going down well, and if the story isn't accurate then their PR should be rectifying it.

Harry lost his mother at such a young age and he has openly spoken about what a toll it took on his mental health and emotional well being.

I think he’s displayed throughout his life a rebellious nature that is prone to drama. Diana was the same and he learned from her a hatred of the media, tempered with knowledge of its power.

I think he is making the same mistake as Diana which is using press when it pleases him and snubbing them when it doesn’t. And that’s not how any relationship works. He would be wise to realise this and play the game properly. William has learned through his own troubled relationship with the media that you cannot beat them and so it’s better to join them and develop some sort of mutual respect.