Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To feel sad for Prince Harry

417 replies

OldManRivers · 06/06/2022 12:07

Have been looking at the photos today of Harry in the car being driven from the airport in America back to his home. He looks so sad. It must be very difficult for him to attend a huge family occasion like that with his role drastically changed, and to see all of his family but now he's on the sidelines popping in so very sporadically.

Also I can't help but think he must feel sad to think his children won't grow up around their cousins, and extended family. Meghan doesn't have any family except her mother so they don't have any in America either.

Originally he and Meghan wanted to carry on being part of the royal machine and do appearances etc but also have some independence so it's not as though this life was their original plan, where it seems like they're sidelined and alienated. AIBU to think regardless of what's gone on it must be very hard for him to be in another country, away from his ailing grandmother who he is very close to, and feel like a bit of an outcast?

OP posts:
fUNNYfACE36 · 09/06/2022 14:42

This reply has been deleted

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

Femalewoman · 09/06/2022 15:17

His decision. He is an adult in age but perhaps not emotionally..

DeadHouseBounce · 09/06/2022 15:27

Who really cares, they seem to have fancied a lighter workload and more "celebrity" type lifestyle while still being attached to the UK taxpayer teat, doesn`t work like that unfortunately. Reminds me of a bass player from a famous rock band who was allegedly kicked out for fully exploiting the global travel/party aspect of the band while not coming across as totally committed to the band that was funding the party!

DFOD · 09/06/2022 15:27

JemimaPuddlegoose · 09/06/2022 14:29

Ain't that the truth. For all the sneering that was done at the Middletons, there's something to be said for normal people who know how to behave

Gary Middleton being a pimp and drug dealer who beats up women in public, made his money from God's knows what dodgy and unsavoury sources, and spills gossip to the tabloids.

Pippa Middleton's gun scandal.

Pippa Middleton's desperate and embarrassing social climbing and quest to find a titled husband, leading one family to tell the press their son was not dating her and had nothing to do with her.

The whole Nazi marshmallow thing, James Middleton's many failed careers, and attempt to grab the limelight solely on his royal connections.

The entire family exploiting their royal connections like billy-o in the most vulgar and nakedly self-serving way possible.

Carole Middleton constantly leaking to the press and betraying the RF but revealing private royal conversations to her favoured journalists.

Carole Middleton's own employees going to the press about what an abusive boss she was.

The financial dodginess around Party Pieces.

Party Pieces exploiting royal events such as Archie's birth to flog cheap crap (after leaking nasty stories about Archie's mum to the press).

Using royal money to conduct expensive renovations for a house (eg a new driveway) by claiming it was necessary for security as William would be a regular guest, then immediately selling the place.

The whole tacky "Rival Court" thing complete with fake Boxing Day shoot.

And of course encouraging Kate to spend her youth stalking William (following him to the same small village in South America, dropping out of her university at the last minute when it was revealed he wasn't going there as reported and being forced to write a formal letter of apology by her school, sabotaging a fashion student's showcase design so she could prance around half-naked instead of wearing the outfit she'd been given) because the family raised their daughters to never work but only pursue rich husbands.

You appear to have very unusual ideas as to what constitutes "knowing how to behave."

Proof?

As you ask PPs - please can you link to evidence for each of the above claims you have made.

DFOD · 09/06/2022 15:30

DFOD · 08/06/2022 15:44

Two or three things going on possibly?

H&M left due to racist British press

H&M left due to internal family friction

H&M left to seek a new freer more rewarding life elsewhere

Maybe all true. But sad that the family have fallen apart.

@JemimaPuddlegoose can you elaborate further on the purpose / benefit of the RF smearing H&M in the press and why HMQ would sanction this on her vulnerable grandson?

@JemimaPuddlegoose are you able to elaborate further on the purpose / benefit of the RF smearing H&M in the press and why HMQ would sanction this on her vulnerable grandson? I am not goading I am genuinely interested in your understanding of the RF / press dynamics.

JemimaPuddlegoose · 11/06/2022 14:04

Look at p13, I and others discussed it in some detail.

The Firm is set up to protect the monarch and direct heirs, and everyone else exists to support and boost them. Nobody is allowed to outshine the heirs (the smear campaign against Diana started because she was more popular than Charles). Married-in royals get thrown to the wolves as a test of loyalty. Kate has protection now because she kept her mouth shut during the years the press were brutal towards her. Harry and Meghan failed the loyalty test by insisting on protecting their children, rather than letting them become props in a toxic and racist system; they had to be punished for that, and punished to send a message to anyone else thinking of leaving.

There's an agreement between the press and the RF, the RF give the press stories in exchange for being allowed a certain degree of control over the narrative. Sometimes this is basic stuff like "if we give you regular access to our kids, leave them alone the rest of the time." Some of the time it's "we'll give you scandals on minor royals if you kill scandals on the heirs."

This happens all the time in every area of public life. It's extremely common for talent agents and publicists and especially record companies to leak scandals about less important clients, in order to protect more famous clients.

The royal tabloid machine feeds on scandal because that's what sells papers. At least one royal has to be the designated headline-generator. It was Margaret, then Diana, then Fergie, then the York girls, then Kate, then Meghan. Have you not noticed how negative articles about William and Kate have ramped up since Harry and Meghan left? Today alone there are goady tabloid articles hinting that Kate has an ED, and a big article in the Mail slagging off Will and Kate for exposing their kids in the public eye so much. Because someone has to take H&M's place as designated family tabloid whipping boy.

The RF don't have total power over the press, but they can decide who is protected and who isn't. Heirs get protected. Blood royals get protected over married-ins. Compare the non-stop hateful coverage of Meghan during her pregnancy when her only crimes had been "eating avocados" and "wearing nail varnish", with the coverage of Andrew for using royal money to pay off a raped minor. When Sophie Wessex (I know she's a married-in but also supposed to be close friends with the Queen and the Queen's favourite) was caught on camera selling access to royals and slagging people off, the Queen personally intervened to ask the press as a personal favour to leave Sophie alone. No such protection for Meghan.

It's pretty obvious the RF were leaking like mad about Harry and Meghan, the Jason Knauf and Melissa thingy case alone is absolute proof of corruption, and it's pretty telling that the RF were releasing damaging stories about Meghan at the same time they were doing everything in their power to stop the press reporting on William's alleged affair with Rose Hanbury.

Harry was born to be the sacrificial lamb because that's what second borns are within the royal system. The Cambridge kids are still small yet the press are already creating personas for them "mature and well-behaved George vs naughty Louis" exactly like how William and Harry were painted in the press when they were kids (which by account wasn't even accurate). I guarantee in 10-15 years the press will be outright demonising Charlotte and Louis and creating scandal out of whatever normal teenage things they do, while still painting George as an angel, and no one will question it because we've been reading that George is the good one and Louis the brat since they were tiny.

Look at the terrible press coverage when Harry was a youth, even as a tiny kid the press would regularly paint him as naughty and rambunctious, as a teen it got even worse. There are lots of alleged incidents where William's involvement in things was covered up, or photos of Harry leaked to the media but not similar photos of William. Books written about royals (like the feuding brothers one) have contained some shocking allegations about Charles giving the media damaging photos and stories about a then-underage Harry as part of a quid pro quo for them to kill damaging stories about himself or William. The RF could easily have protected Harry and they would have done if he'd been born first.

The RF also use the press to keep people in line. "Do as we say or we'll smear you in the press" is a pretty powerful weapon of control. How often have we seen royals step out of line, even in a very minor way (like Eugenie making sure she was seen with Harry at a high profile event in California, making a very public statement of support) followed immediately by some negative story or leak in the press? Who leaked the yacht photos of Eugenie's husband, and was it due to her support of Harry?

And we can't ignore racism, both from the press and the RF. Harry saw the racial component to Meghan's abuse and the racism towards his newborn son (posters engage in racism-denial a lot here but it is a fact that two British Neo Nazis were convicted and jailed for planning to kill Harry for being a "race traitor", and literally three days ago news broke that a white supremacist podcast publicly called for Archie to be "put down" because having mixed blood made him "an abomination" and called for Harry to be executed for treason, for permitting white DNA to mix with black DNA - imagine if people were publicly calling for YOUR children to be killed, if dangerous criminals were being convicted for planning to kill you for having mixed race kids??) He didn't want his child to go through what he went through, because the additional factor of racism would turn an unpleasant experience into a dangerous one.

Now Harry has broken two cardinal rules, refusing to be a sacrificial lamb and putting his children before the Firm, and pulling back the carpet to reveal the grubby agreement between RF and press. He broke a rule so he had to be punished.

His mother did the exact same thing - outshone the heir, then broke the code of silence to talk about how she was gaslighted and emotionally abused. Look what a huge smear campaign they conducted against her, when she could have been the RF's biggest asset.

I think also the agenda behind the original smear campaign was to drive Meghan away. Nobody ever thought Harry would leave too. I believe their end goal was to drive Meghan away and cause a divorce, resulting in a chastened Harry coming back into the fold with his tail between his legs and doing whatever was asked of him as he no longer had anyone in his corner putting his well-being ahead of the Firm. I don't think they'd accept any wife for Harry unless it was someone very passive who wouldn't interfere in the WKH dynamic. Certainly not a strong wife saying "you don't have to tolerate being treated as lesser just because you were second born."

IncompleteSenten · 11/06/2022 14:23

He made a difficult decision and he feels sad about it. That doesn't mean that it wasn't the right decision for him, just that it wasn't an easy decision with no downside.

Roussette · 11/06/2022 14:29

@JemimaPuddlegoose
Excellent post
So much I agree with.
The 'symbiotic' relationship between press and RF is very damaging. And when the Queen dies the whole thing is going to implode because it will be no holds barred for the Press. They keep on the RF's side out of respect to the Queen. It will be different and I really don't think the RF will be able to manipulate the press so easily when she goes.

Well done Meghan for winning that case against AP, that's another reason to have it in for her, she gave them a bloody nose and they'll never forgive her for that. How big typeface did the apology have to be again?!

And I believe Harry's case against them re phone hacking is still ongoing. Everyone else has accepted damages, he refuses to.
Good

DFOD · 11/06/2022 14:43

DFOD · 09/06/2022 15:27

Proof?

As you ask PPs - please can you link to evidence for each of the above claims you have made.

@JemimaPuddlegoose - I see from your recent post you were unable to link to any evidence of the claims you have made here.……

DFOD · 11/06/2022 14:45

JemimaPuddlegoose · 11/06/2022 14:04

Look at p13, I and others discussed it in some detail.

The Firm is set up to protect the monarch and direct heirs, and everyone else exists to support and boost them. Nobody is allowed to outshine the heirs (the smear campaign against Diana started because she was more popular than Charles). Married-in royals get thrown to the wolves as a test of loyalty. Kate has protection now because she kept her mouth shut during the years the press were brutal towards her. Harry and Meghan failed the loyalty test by insisting on protecting their children, rather than letting them become props in a toxic and racist system; they had to be punished for that, and punished to send a message to anyone else thinking of leaving.

There's an agreement between the press and the RF, the RF give the press stories in exchange for being allowed a certain degree of control over the narrative. Sometimes this is basic stuff like "if we give you regular access to our kids, leave them alone the rest of the time." Some of the time it's "we'll give you scandals on minor royals if you kill scandals on the heirs."

This happens all the time in every area of public life. It's extremely common for talent agents and publicists and especially record companies to leak scandals about less important clients, in order to protect more famous clients.

The royal tabloid machine feeds on scandal because that's what sells papers. At least one royal has to be the designated headline-generator. It was Margaret, then Diana, then Fergie, then the York girls, then Kate, then Meghan. Have you not noticed how negative articles about William and Kate have ramped up since Harry and Meghan left? Today alone there are goady tabloid articles hinting that Kate has an ED, and a big article in the Mail slagging off Will and Kate for exposing their kids in the public eye so much. Because someone has to take H&M's place as designated family tabloid whipping boy.

The RF don't have total power over the press, but they can decide who is protected and who isn't. Heirs get protected. Blood royals get protected over married-ins. Compare the non-stop hateful coverage of Meghan during her pregnancy when her only crimes had been "eating avocados" and "wearing nail varnish", with the coverage of Andrew for using royal money to pay off a raped minor. When Sophie Wessex (I know she's a married-in but also supposed to be close friends with the Queen and the Queen's favourite) was caught on camera selling access to royals and slagging people off, the Queen personally intervened to ask the press as a personal favour to leave Sophie alone. No such protection for Meghan.

It's pretty obvious the RF were leaking like mad about Harry and Meghan, the Jason Knauf and Melissa thingy case alone is absolute proof of corruption, and it's pretty telling that the RF were releasing damaging stories about Meghan at the same time they were doing everything in their power to stop the press reporting on William's alleged affair with Rose Hanbury.

Harry was born to be the sacrificial lamb because that's what second borns are within the royal system. The Cambridge kids are still small yet the press are already creating personas for them "mature and well-behaved George vs naughty Louis" exactly like how William and Harry were painted in the press when they were kids (which by account wasn't even accurate). I guarantee in 10-15 years the press will be outright demonising Charlotte and Louis and creating scandal out of whatever normal teenage things they do, while still painting George as an angel, and no one will question it because we've been reading that George is the good one and Louis the brat since they were tiny.

Look at the terrible press coverage when Harry was a youth, even as a tiny kid the press would regularly paint him as naughty and rambunctious, as a teen it got even worse. There are lots of alleged incidents where William's involvement in things was covered up, or photos of Harry leaked to the media but not similar photos of William. Books written about royals (like the feuding brothers one) have contained some shocking allegations about Charles giving the media damaging photos and stories about a then-underage Harry as part of a quid pro quo for them to kill damaging stories about himself or William. The RF could easily have protected Harry and they would have done if he'd been born first.

The RF also use the press to keep people in line. "Do as we say or we'll smear you in the press" is a pretty powerful weapon of control. How often have we seen royals step out of line, even in a very minor way (like Eugenie making sure she was seen with Harry at a high profile event in California, making a very public statement of support) followed immediately by some negative story or leak in the press? Who leaked the yacht photos of Eugenie's husband, and was it due to her support of Harry?

And we can't ignore racism, both from the press and the RF. Harry saw the racial component to Meghan's abuse and the racism towards his newborn son (posters engage in racism-denial a lot here but it is a fact that two British Neo Nazis were convicted and jailed for planning to kill Harry for being a "race traitor", and literally three days ago news broke that a white supremacist podcast publicly called for Archie to be "put down" because having mixed blood made him "an abomination" and called for Harry to be executed for treason, for permitting white DNA to mix with black DNA - imagine if people were publicly calling for YOUR children to be killed, if dangerous criminals were being convicted for planning to kill you for having mixed race kids??) He didn't want his child to go through what he went through, because the additional factor of racism would turn an unpleasant experience into a dangerous one.

Now Harry has broken two cardinal rules, refusing to be a sacrificial lamb and putting his children before the Firm, and pulling back the carpet to reveal the grubby agreement between RF and press. He broke a rule so he had to be punished.

His mother did the exact same thing - outshone the heir, then broke the code of silence to talk about how she was gaslighted and emotionally abused. Look what a huge smear campaign they conducted against her, when she could have been the RF's biggest asset.

I think also the agenda behind the original smear campaign was to drive Meghan away. Nobody ever thought Harry would leave too. I believe their end goal was to drive Meghan away and cause a divorce, resulting in a chastened Harry coming back into the fold with his tail between his legs and doing whatever was asked of him as he no longer had anyone in his corner putting his well-being ahead of the Firm. I don't think they'd accept any wife for Harry unless it was someone very passive who wouldn't interfere in the WKH dynamic. Certainly not a strong wife saying "you don't have to tolerate being treated as lesser just because you were second born."

So in all that, you are saying that The Queen throughout her reign - as leader of the RF firm is responsible for the strategic planning, sanctioning and active implementation of direct lies and smearing of her own emotionally vulnerable grandson PH from when he was a very young child, including when he had tragically lost his mother? To achieve and cover up what exactly when he was a child?

DFOD · 11/06/2022 14:48

Roussette · 11/06/2022 14:29

@JemimaPuddlegoose
Excellent post
So much I agree with.
The 'symbiotic' relationship between press and RF is very damaging. And when the Queen dies the whole thing is going to implode because it will be no holds barred for the Press. They keep on the RF's side out of respect to the Queen. It will be different and I really don't think the RF will be able to manipulate the press so easily when she goes.

Well done Meghan for winning that case against AP, that's another reason to have it in for her, she gave them a bloody nose and they'll never forgive her for that. How big typeface did the apology have to be again?!

And I believe Harry's case against them re phone hacking is still ongoing. Everyone else has accepted damages, he refuses to.
Good

Do H&M realise the The Queen is behind all the smearing and racist press?

Roussette · 11/06/2022 15:10

Where have I or anyone specified the Queen?
We haven't.
There's Press secretaries at all levels, private secretaries, PR staff, individual royal staff like KP and CH, royal household Press offices, communications staff et al

Where you got just the Queen from I do not know. She's very elderly, I doubt she knows 10% of what goes on as far as leaking of stories and relationships with royal staff and the press

JemimaPuddlegoose · 11/06/2022 15:12

I see from your recent post you were unable to link to any evidence of the claims you have made here.……

Everything I've said is well-documented and can easily be found yourself.

I'll happily provide proof the second the anti-Meghan posters provide proof for all the wild claims and allegations they've constantly and repeatedly made about her and Harry.

JemimaPuddlegoose · 11/06/2022 15:14

Isn't it funny how posters making up the most wild claims about Meghan are literally never asked to provide proof?

DFOD · 11/06/2022 15:19

JemimaPuddlegoose · 11/06/2022 15:14

Isn't it funny how posters making up the most wild claims about Meghan are literally never asked to provide proof?

But you asked PP to link to evidence - which is great!

Just asking you to keep to the standards you set for yourself - on the long list of issues you highlighted about the Middletons.

JemimaPuddlegoose · 11/06/2022 15:24

So you can't provide proof for any of the wild claims made about Harry and Meghan?

PinkTonic · 11/06/2022 15:24

This reply has been deleted

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

DFOD · 11/06/2022 15:25

Roussette · 11/06/2022 15:10

Where have I or anyone specified the Queen?
We haven't.
There's Press secretaries at all levels, private secretaries, PR staff, individual royal staff like KP and CH, royal household Press offices, communications staff et al

Where you got just the Queen from I do not know. She's very elderly, I doubt she knows 10% of what goes on as far as leaking of stories and relationships with royal staff and the press

So you are suggesting that The Queen had employed all of these press secretaries over decades and decades who do all of this nasty smearing of her grandson since he was a child and she isn’t aware of what they are doing? Doesn’t investigate? Can’t fire them? They are all rogue? With random agendas?

DFOD · 11/06/2022 15:25

JemimaPuddlegoose · 11/06/2022 15:24

So you can't provide proof for any of the wild claims made about Harry and Meghan?

I have never made any wild claim about anyone.

Roussette · 11/06/2022 15:29

JemimaPuddlegoose · 11/06/2022 15:14

Isn't it funny how posters making up the most wild claims about Meghan are literally never asked to provide proof?

I want proof that Harry sits in his swimming pool all day!

Why, because it's something that would explain stuff is it called 'conspiracy theory crap'?
Do you think the royal households don't leak stories?
Would you introduce me to the person with the name 'a royal source' then because there has been literally hundreds if not thousands of stories by him/her

DFOD · 11/06/2022 15:32

This reply has been deleted

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

Roussette · 11/06/2022 15:35

DFOD · 11/06/2022 15:25

So you are suggesting that The Queen had employed all of these press secretaries over decades and decades who do all of this nasty smearing of her grandson since he was a child and she isn’t aware of what they are doing? Doesn’t investigate? Can’t fire them? They are all rogue? With random agendas?

Have you ever known a woman in her 90s? Do you honestly think she is an all seeing all knowing superpower who knows EXACTLY what is happening in every corner of the monarchy?
These royal households run the show. She is incapable of knowing every single little thing that is happening, even more so now given her age
As if!
Where did I say they are ALL rogue, you do like putting words in people's mouths. Rogue isn't the word I'd use anyway. Just versed in preserving the RF at ANY cost

JemimaPuddlegoose · 11/06/2022 15:41

LOL at people claiming that saying the Middletons have exploited their royal connections, or that Gary Goldsmith was arrested for beating up his wife "conspiracy theory crap". GrinGrinGrin

The incident in Paris with Pippa and the gun, the James Nazi marshmallow incident, the article with quotes from Party Pieces employees claiming she was a bullying boss, uncle Gary's misdeeds many more, these are all well-documented. Why do you refuse to look for them?

Doesn’t investigate? Can’t fire them? They are all rogue? With random agendas?

This is exactly what I've been saying. Posters keep insisting that the Lilibet birthday party must have been confirmed by people high up in the Palace, and I've asked at least twice if they think the Queen personally authorised a leak exploiting her baby great-great-grandchild and smearing her great-grandson, or if someone in the Palace leaked it without senior royals knowing.

Of course they completely ignored my question!

I'm certainly very curious about William giving Jason Knauf the extremely prestigious job as CEO of the Cambridge Foundation after Knauf repeatedly broke his NDA by leaking stories about royals to the press, completely bungled his actual job, and also was implicated in corruption scandals.

Either William is a complete gullible idiot who has no control over his own foundation, or Knauf was spying on Meghan and leaking stories about her under William's orders.

Which is it? Or will you all ignore that question too?

Roussette · 11/06/2022 15:45

And let's not forget Jason Knauf was at Uni with Dan Wootton (GB News) who has officially said on camera he has a royal source. His narrative about Meghan is horrible.

DFOD · 11/06/2022 15:46

Roussette · 11/06/2022 15:35

Have you ever known a woman in her 90s? Do you honestly think she is an all seeing all knowing superpower who knows EXACTLY what is happening in every corner of the monarchy?
These royal households run the show. She is incapable of knowing every single little thing that is happening, even more so now given her age
As if!
Where did I say they are ALL rogue, you do like putting words in people's mouths. Rogue isn't the word I'd use anyway. Just versed in preserving the RF at ANY cost

I am just trying to encourage you to consider the idea that any media coverage will be a wild mix of facts, lies, opinions, hyperbole, speculation and spin by the media to sell their papers from a variety of sources both inside and outside of the RF - alongside a proactive strategic PR campaign with briefings (leaks) from the RF/Firm which if as is suggested is to throw others under the bus to protect the monarchy - it then comes down to the very simple fact that The Queen employs these people to smear her grandson on her behalf. That’s the logical conclusion of this analysis.