To think that if the only black adult in your family says they have experienced racism...

[Overcastcloudy]

... it's counterproductive to send a white man out to say, We're very much not racist?

That just is never going to end well. Ask Ian Murray how it worked out for him.

I couldn't care much either way about the Royal Family. Just baffled at the headline of William saying this.

I wholeheartedly agree that women can be each others worst enemies, that we would do much better - and society too - if we judged each other less and worked together more. However, we are not a hive mind thank God, nor do we all even necessarily want the same things or share the same values. Plenty of women voted for Trump, for example, as is their right in a democracy. But even if we have similar outlooks, if for instance we can share a collective aspiration for a more equal society with better opportunities and outcomes for marginalised groups, then we can still have our individual views on people and scenarios based on our own judegements and experience and instincts. I am not going to automatically believe and support every single woman every single time, I find the notion that I would bizarre. Women are just people, as flawed as anyone.

@Marmaladeagain

Carl Beech everyone in the UK is aware. Cokie it is weird to keep telling us why we are wrong about everything and you have absolutely no awareness of current affairs in the U.K. or how the royals in fact work. Time after time your misunderstanding of UK culture yet you tell us we should listen to you. It is getting silly now. You said I look for argument - it is people endlessly explaining why you assuming racism at every point of this thread is ridiculous.

To say to a person from the U.K. that Beech is just one person, good god I am lost for words.

Carl Beech everyone in the UK is aware Did I say they weren't?

You are really getting silly now. No one has yet to explain to me "why assuming racism at every point of this thread (not that I have done that, I have not) is ridiculous".

Beech IS just one person, what is your point? I am lost for words at your obstinate ignorance and twisting of words to argue a narrative that you created.

@derxa

See this is part of the problem, that you don't understand that it is about believing the victim. REGARDLESS of it being about racism, about sexual abuse or about rape. I didn't say I didn't believe her about racism but we have no information about who said what and when. I meant that rape and sexual abuse are extremely serious crimes which carry a jail sentence. You knew exactly what I meant.

@derxa race hate can also be a crime under legislation. Racism can have as deep affect as abuse and rape. Ask any POC. You are minimising the affect of racism. It shows you still don't get it.

ask Sarah Chatto if she thinks Archie is being treated differently - same position niece/nephew to reigning monarch. Archie won’t be nephew to a reigning monarch until William is on throne.

Not being treated differently. You disagree but actually not possible to disagree - it is a fact. So just revealing you don’t understand, again.

Harry is irrelevant in the family. George and his descendent are the future. If not Charlotte. Harry is a nobody in the show always was going to be.
Carry on saying racism, doesn’t sound clever though.

Harry always was on downwards trajectory and he’d be giving way to Williams children at all events over next few years. He doesn’t like it and blames it on Meghan. Can you really not understand that? You misunderstand so much about what RF are and I know it suits your republican agenda. But nasty to use racism for that end, don’t you think?

[quote Cokie3]**@Topmum66* Then why don't you believe Meghan 100%? It's because you are prejudiced against Meghan and don't want to believe her so make up your mind that she has* to be lying. It says a lot about you that you don't believe her.[/quote]
its really really lame that we all have to 100% believe her or we must have some sort of personality defect or be racist , it says a lot about your mindset that you have to say these things to people , there are a lot of people that dont bloody well believe her and we arent all sick sociopathic individuals luv ! there is plenty to suggest shes lying , and not much to suggest she isnt , harry isnt much better , but if you believe her thats great , but give it a rest with your dumb accusations to those of us that dont

It is a genuine question, but if the independent enquiry into this matter discovers that the conversation Harry had with this person about Meghan cannot be proved and was just a verbal conversation that he didn't tape or have any correspondence about with nobody else overhearing it or any other evidence that it did take place at all ( apart from Harry's word) what will happen? If Harry did have a tape of what they actually said, could that person be arrested and tried for hate crimes?
I am puzzled as to what the outcome could be of an accusation that really cannot be proved either way. Could The palace spin this as a ' misunderstanding' or lack of communication or one person taking it all the ' wrong way' ? It did happen a few years ago as well.
In the meantime Meghan had Archie and continued with a few Royal duties with people she then knew had prejudices against her, if indeed that what was meant by the original conversation that went on. She could have then confronted them herself , maybe?
It's hinted during their interview that Archie wasn't given a title of Prince because they were actually being racist, yet he was offered the Duke title , which they turned down.
This whole case hinges on one conversation between two people. Its going to be hard to prove anything I would have thought.

@Cokie3

You speak of ‘facts’ yet Harry and Meghan have given us no solid facts. You defend your opinions as facts, but they are not.

Her blog post (The Tig 2004) is available on google.

You 100% absolutely believe anything she says because she’s part black. If you go to a jury and the defendant is black, would you even listen to what he is accused of without first wanting to hear the evidence?

I am BAME and not as imbalanced as you are to brand everyone racist and sexist who disagrees with you. It’s getting old now.

As you’ve pointed out before - a woman can be sexist/racist. Yet if anyone else says anything negative about a woman, you attack them. So you are allowed to doubt, accuse and attack women but no one can say a word wrong about MM? Don’t be so naive and vindictive.

@the80sweregreat

I would love to know what was said. I think that whoever it is needs to be held fully accountable. Harry and Meghan obviously believe they should protect him. Why?

[quote Topmum66]@Cokie3

You speak of ‘facts’ yet Harry and Meghan have given us no solid facts. You defend your opinions as facts, but they are not.

Her blog post (The Tig 2004) is available on google.

You 100% absolutely believe anything she says because she’s part black. If you go to a jury and the defendant is black, would you even listen to what he is accused of without first wanting to hear the evidence?

I am BAME and not as imbalanced as you are to brand everyone racist and sexist who disagrees with you. It’s getting old now.

As you’ve pointed out before - a woman can be sexist/racist. Yet if anyone else says anything negative about a woman, you attack them. So you are allowed to doubt, accuse and attack women but no one can say a word wrong about MM? Don’t be so naive and vindictive.[/quote]
yes this topmum , its like getting attacked by the playground bully for having a different opinion and not believing MM and harry for that matter . luckily iv for a think skin and dont give a rats bottom what she tells me i am or must be , but its this sort of stuff that puts people of commenting or saying what they think

@Marmaladeagain

ask Sarah Chatto if she thinks Archie is being treated differently - same position niece/nephew to reigning monarch. Archie won’t be nephew to a reigning monarch until William is on throne.

Not being treated differently. You disagree but actually not possible to disagree - it is a fact. So just revealing you don’t understand, again.

Harry is irrelevant in the family. George and his descendent are the future. If not Charlotte. Harry is a nobody in the show always was going to be.
Carry on saying racism, doesn’t sound clever though.

Harry always was on downwards trajectory and he’d be giving way to Williams children at all events over next few years. He doesn’t like it and blames it on Meghan. Can you really not understand that? You misunderstand so much about what RF are and I know it suits your republican agenda. But nasty to use racism for that end, don’t you think?

Archie won’t be nephew to a reigning monarch until William is on throne. The issue is that they want to remove that option. That is what you are missing.

Not being treated differently.
Yes, if he has his Prince title removed when Charles becomes King, he IS being treated differently. That, is a fact.

Harry's children were always going to be Prince/Princess on Charles ascension. The RF want to remove that. That is what you are ignoring.

You misunderstand so much about what RF are and I know it suits your republican agenda.
This is not about a 'republican agenda', even though you have prejudged me on the basis of that. This is about facts versus your lies.

No, it's really lame not to believe her, @chaosrabbitland and it is very sociopathic. There is ZERO to suggest she is lying. If you go around disbelieving a woman is a victim of racism because you are twisted with hate then that is on you. But you have offered not a single sliver of evidence that she is lying. As I said, all evidence so far proves that she is telling the truth. If you can't put up (evidence she is lying) then shut up, as the saying goes.

I think it's clear that the intention to change the title after Charles ascends is due to racism,

It is not at all clear. Anyone who has known for years about Charles's plan to slim down the monarchy thinks it's pretty clear that that is the reason the rules were to be changed.

1. You don't know for a 'fact' she was welcomed into the RF by the entire RF with open arms

She said she was in their engagement interview

2. I think it's clear that the intention to change the title after Charles ascends is due to racism, and I believe those other black people who say that's what they believe too

It’s what one person says. There’s absolutely no evidence for it.

3. She has not lied about anything, and you nor anyone else has yet to prove she has

She lied about being married before the ceremony.

“he was offered the Duke title , which they turned down.“

Doesn’t mean she felt her child should be left out what he is born into. It’s like saying

“ok Harrison is a big name surname, all firstborn and his children get the surname Harrison—- yes let make that little girl a Harrison too rather she gets married or not- all the rest will be a Harris

Then suddenly, when it is your child’s turn to be a Harrison, they say “no, you will be a Harris”

I forgot to add “children and grandchildren”

All the other European monarchies are slimmed down. It was obviously going to be the case that when the queen dies (with all that she stood for) there is not going to be public acceptance for a big royal family. People want to be more modern and equal.

It was always going to change with Charles.

Why a humanitarian is going on about titles is beyond me.
Are you bored at work cokie ? Playing silly beggars on MN suggests you are.

@Andylion

I think it's clear that the intention to change the title after Charles ascends is due to racism,

It is not at all clear. Anyone who has known for years about Charles's plan to slim down the monarchy thinks it's pretty clear that that is the reason the rules were to be changed.

The Letters Patent governing this are well documented and they are 104 years old. They are easily googleable.

They are clearly not about race. They would apply to any bride and children of a family member in Harry’s position. OTOH they are explicitly sexist, so it’s easy to see that difference in them in the way they make no reference to race but differentiate by sex.

So I feel anyone persisting in insisting that this aspect of the whole fandango- the title issue- is to do with race is being deliberately disingenuous and asserting it repeatedly, knowing it’s false, in the hope it will stick.

Meanwhile, there’s been no progress on clarifying what the alleged skin colour remarks were all about and who said them and why, which is potentially where the real racism lies.

[quote Topmum66]@Cokie3

You speak of ‘facts’ yet Harry and Meghan have given us no solid facts. You defend your opinions as facts, but they are not.

Her blog post (The Tig 2004) is available on google.

You 100% absolutely believe anything she says because she’s part black. If you go to a jury and the defendant is black, would you even listen to what he is accused of without first wanting to hear the evidence?

I am BAME and not as imbalanced as you are to brand everyone racist and sexist who disagrees with you. It’s getting old now.

As you’ve pointed out before - a woman can be sexist/racist. Yet if anyone else says anything negative about a woman, you attack them. So you are allowed to doubt, accuse and attack women but no one can say a word wrong about MM? Don’t be so naive and vindictive.[/quote]
I have googled The Tig 2004 And have gone through TEN very long pages and found no reference to Kate and William's wedding bar *“Little girls dream of being princesses. I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power. And grown women seem to retain this childhood fantasy. Just look at the pomp and circumstance surrounding the royal wedding and endless conversation about Princess Kate. So when my dear friend, Misan Harriman, introduced me to Princess Alia Al Senussi, I had a bit of a “pinch-myself-I’m-emailing-with-a-princess” moment. The Al Senussi family was exiled from Libya when Gaddhafi seized the throne in a coup d’état. But that hasn’t stopped Alia from flexing her respective royal muscle. Alia is on the Board of Trustees for Global Heritage Fund, where she concentrates on their activities in Libya.

So yeah, she’s cool.

She graduated from Brown in 2003 with a double major in International Relations & Middle East Studies. She also has her MSc in Law, Anthropology & Science from the London School of Economics, and is working on her PhD in Middle Eastern Politics.

So yeah, she’s smart.

As VIP Relations for Art Basel, the world’s premier international art show for modern and contemporary works, she actively promotes Middle Eastern art on a global level. Shifting preconceived notions, and advancing the understanding of some lesser known works is all part of the day job for this incredible woman of the world. It is my pleasure to find out what gets this Princess ticking in her TIG Talk.” - Meghan Markle, July 2014*

Which says nothing about Kate or the Royal family. To be sure I haven't missed anything, I have ctrl+F'ed the words royal, kate, and william. And have come up with ZERO bar that entry so far. So if anyone has a DIRECT LINK to it, can they please, please give me it?

@Andyhuman the 'slimming down of the Monarchy' is an EXCUSE. Charles eagerly changed it for Charlotte. Come on! As Blueberries said in a former thread:
"we used to have this huge pool in my local area of Virginia that has been around for years, when segregation became against the law, and more people who were not white started using the pool, the owner of the pool decided to pour concrete the pool because he did not want to share it . He claimed it is costly to maintained but black people were not fooled. They know exactly why he did it. And they were absolutely correct because my husband’s grandfather used to work there and knows the person. He specifically told him that he didn’t want to share the pool. He won’t admit it in public but he will admit it privately. People today still debated why he did it (on Facebook) white folks say”no, he did it because it was costly to maintain” black folks say no he did it because of Racism. And they argued back and forth. But it is from racism.

When you see things start getting taken away once a black person enter a picture, and it happens way too often, you know it’s racism . It’s no coincidence."

@Alsohuman No, she did not lie about being 'married' 3 days before. She WAS married in the sight of God. It is very common for American and European couples to have 2 weddings. One is for themselves/private/religious, the other for the govt paperwork/public. You simply misunderstood.

"Not being treated differently.
Yes, if he has his Prince title removed when Charles becomes King, he IS being treated differently. That, is a fact."

Do you know who Prince Edward is, son of a our monarch. Harry would have one day been in same position when Charles takes the throne.

Edward's children could have had the titles prince and princess but chose not to use them and didn't go down that route as the UK (the place you don't know much about) had already realised they don't want endless minor princes and princesses knocking about. People often complain that they don't know who so and so is because the next generation they become irrelevant.

Edward's children have to earn a living in due course and are prepared for normal life. Edward is kind of the cusp of the things changing so it was his decision to make and not use the title, unlike his needy older brother Andrew and Fergie were banging on about their daughters should be Princess. It was considered a bit distasteful at the time as the direction of travel was well known.

Charles is well known for wanting to slim it down quite significantly (I know you won't know that) - so the way it is changing in the future has always been known.

Harry knows this but he is sticking his fingers in his ears. It has and was always the way - he doesn't want to be a Prince Edward one day and he's having his meltdown very publicly that he is isn't important now that Prince George is growing up.

People like you calling to get rid of the monarchy are on of the reasons they're slimming it down........

Do you know who some of our other minor princes and princesses are in the UK? Grandchildren of monarchs no longer alive. No, like you, we don't really know who they are by the next generation.

Surely there must be more to read than the one racist pamphlet you seem to have- there's a whole world you appear to have missed learning about whilst racist hunting everywhere.

@Cokie3

No, it's really lame not to believe her, *@chaosrabbitland* and it is very sociopathic. There is ZERO to suggest she is lying. If you go around disbelieving a woman is a victim of racism because you are twisted with hate then that is on you. But you have offered not a single sliver of evidence that she is lying. As I said, all evidence so far proves that she is telling the truth. If you can't put up (evidence she is lying) then shut up, as the saying goes.

she has said that a conversation about the babys skin was mentioned several times in conversation to harry by a royal she wont name , he then came on and said it was one conversaion before they were married , their storys dont match up , but if the comment was made they need to name the person who said it so the whole of the family isnt under a cloud of suspicion , she sat there and made out that she had to hand over her passport and keys like she was entering a bloody prison , rather than she actually had the use of her passport as its emerged she had 13 trips or more in her time with the royals after her wedding .. she claimed to know hardly anything about the family yet from her blogs . friends coming forward its now clear she knew much more than she let on . archie was not going to be made a prince and harry should have at least made her aware of that , but they both said before he was born i believe they did not want a title for him , just archie so he could have a normal type life , shame oprah neglegted to pull them both up on that one , yet suddenly now ohh its because shes mixed race he was denied it ! they both knew he wasnt going to be made a prince and both said they didnt want a title anyway , these are just some of the reasons why i dont believe what she or harry are saying , yet its very sociopathic of me lol , you seem to have a problem with people that dont have the same viewpoint as you and frankly its a worrying trait you really need to look at , especially when your getting all personal with your accusations .

@derxa

Why a humanitarian is going on about titles is beyond me. Are you bored at work cokie ? Playing silly beggars on MN suggests you are.

@derxa Again, you prove you have no understanding of issue. Because she is humanitarian that means she should accept herself and her son being treated differently? It's NOT ABOUT the title. It's about what being treated 'differently' MEANS to black people, as Blueberries so adequately showed. You are an example of the ignorance that exists. You simply don't get what being 'othered' means. It's not about the title. It's about what it MEANS to have something removed that others have.

You just don't get it. Worse, you've demonstrated you don't want to get it.

yes this topmum , its like getting attacked by the playground bully for having a different opinion and not believing MM and harry for that matter . luckily iv for a think skin and dont give a rats bottom what she tells me i am or must be , but its this sort of stuff that puts people of commenting or saying what they think
This is a chat site where people have as much right to post what they want within the talk guidelines.