Harry & Meghan what they’ll do next - Thread 2

[DandyAF]

Carrying on the conversation as the last thread finished mid-discussion.

@Tsukukuviri

Hi - I asked the question re: criticism. Thank you for your response.

As for the rest of your post regarding the dilemma of security and the ethics of keeping them "trapped" that's come up in this and other threads many times.

It's not an easy issue to address.

I don't think anyone wants them to be unhappy or unsafe.

For a start as I've posted above the general consensus has been that they should retain security provision at the current costs irrespective of their titles because they are doubtless targets and no one wants to see them put at risk.

The crucial concern for most of us is that as a couple of their wealth they have many options open to them in how to move forward.

They absolutely have the funds to live a safe, secure lifestyle in either the U.K. or abroad (as demonstrated by members of the Swedish royal family).

However the choices they wish to make to elevate them to their lifestyle of choice are beyond their means and they believe that the British public should pay for this.

Many include myself disagree. I'm fine with funding security at current levels but I'm absolutely against increasing that funding six fold to subsidise an aspirational lifestyle.

I don't want them trapped, unsafe or unhappy but equally I don't think it's an appropriate use of U.K. taxpayer money to springboard already wealth people into the realms of the super rich based where ironically any earnings won't feed back into the U.K. because they'll be paying tax abroad.

Finally going back to the issue of M being a role model. Isn't there a concern about making a role model of a woman who was relatively unknown on the world stage and celebrating a global status derived from marrying into one of the worlds most powerful white dynasty's?

When we talk about aspirational WoC (and sadly there are too few) I'm concerned that putting someone on a pedestal for who they married rather than what they achieved may be counter productive.

On the other hand the platform that marriage gave her delivers the opportunity to highlight issues she may otherwise have not, and it can be justifiably argued I feel that she was able to marry into the RF is a positive symbol of progression in itself.

Can I ask your thoughts on this?

What makes a MUA that good to be flown from NY? MM has a lovely face and good contours it seems. So why the need? And the bit I’m musing is could they do wonders for me? Or do you have to have the fine points first?

I mean I do try. I use eye cream, specialist face cream, concealer, foundation matched to my tone. Sometimes blend eye shadows etc all the usual. But what would a MUA and one from NY do extra to essentially give her a natural look?

I suspect the make up artist is someone MM knows personally and trusts. But did that make up artist give her an essentially natural look? You tell me (note - this is taken from a site whose posters are majority African American women, most of whom are not MM fans.) -

www.lipstickalley.com/attachments/eszcq_sxsaiuibx-jpg.1404725/

In any event, it was probably Charles' money that paid for that trip, so, not the taxpayer directly (albeit, indirectly).

I'll admit (aside from the environmental impact) I understand why M would want her favourite MUA for these events.

It was obvious she was going to be heavily photographed.

Though there are many very famous and talented MUA's in the U.K. who I'm sure would have jumped at the chance to do her make up, the confidence it gives to have someone you know, knows your face, favourite products, skin type, what works/doesn't wrt to colour/contouring and especially knows the "look" you like etc etc isn't to be underestimated.

You wouldn't expect a bride to have a test make up done by one person then someone different on the day when it matters.

It wasn't really an event for her to take risks in hiring someone new imho and given she'll be across the pond indefinitely going forward no reason to forge a relationship with a MUA in the U.K and to be fair her make up was stunning (though her underlying attractiveness is obviously a factor!).

But she must have used a MUA in UK before? Ok the more I think it can’t be true. Am blaming head cold and struggling to concentrate for work and I’ve thought logically it’s a mad suggestion she’d do this. So must be made up

@Tsukukuviri thank you for your thoughtful and insightful posts. I think an area to discuss race and racism would be enlightening.
WRT royals being trapped. Remember Meghan saying Yes before Harry had finished proposing. She had seen his life and had met all his family. She was desperate to join. They celebrated with a big fancy royal wedding. Why was she so blind to the concept that being royal includes service and to some extent conformity to expectations? It is hardly secret information.

I’m in a foggy mind mood! DP is full of beans jumping round the kitchen listening to music while he cooks and it’s exhausting me when I catch him out the corner of my vision as I’m curled up on the sofa ! Can’t moan I know!!!

Why was she so blind to the concept that being royal includes service and to some extent conformity to expectations? It is hardly secret information.

She didn't shy away from service at all. The "secret information" was the extent to which she would be attacked in the media, the racial element to some of it, and the failure of the RF, except for Harry, to take a stance against it.

I think she thought she would hit the ground running and change everything. As she herself said. She got frustrated.

Then she saw the fame value and took off everywhere. But they preached about saving the planet so got slated for that.

It’s the cost of security for them to live abroad that gets me.

I am with @SenecaFallsRedux on this. I suspect the reality proved rather shocking, more so than she expected. It didn’t help that it all happened so quickly, with barely time to breathe between some pretty Big life changing events, all happening in the public gaze.

@DeRigueurMortis (clever name!) I am struck by your question. Indeed, it was her marriage that gave her that elevated status, but I think the fact of the marriage itself is, interestingly, and almost paradoxically, what was so inspiring. I actually remember thinking, this says so much about Harry that he would marry a woman so not the “English rose” I think is the expression, and I thought it said something rather lovely about his father, grandmother etc that they seemed to welcome her, such a non traditional royal wife, so warmly.

The aspirational stuff for many women of colour was also about feeling “seen” and recognized, as in, there goes one of us. It is a weird thing to explain to those who are always “represented“ but for good or ill, the fact of her marriage made some women feel more “seen” and like the RF was getting over its colonial past.

There really is a sense of “collective achievement“ when a black woman, or man, succeeds in a perceived “establishment” activity, or in a predominantly “white” activity, winning an Oscar, Serena at Wimbledon etc. I was a teen when France won the 98 WC and Africa roared, it was Europe’s win but there had never been so many black players in a WC winning team before.

Africa claimed Obama for instance, while still being critical of US foreign policy. It was a sense of at last, one of us is up there.

So it is a sense of “collective achievement” and visibility. So yes, a black woman being in the RF was considered a huge deal in and of itself.

So yes, a black woman being in the RF was considered a huge deal in and of itself.
But I feel that too, as a white woman. I was really pleased and optimistic of what this positive message could bring.
But now I feel really disappointed and let down.

And the failure of the RF, except for Harry, to take a stance against it.

Do you know for a fact that they didn't take a stance Seneca?

A lot of the admin and communication for the RF is done behind the scenes. Just because it wasn't done publicly doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Agreed Angelina I feel the same way, and she WAS welcomed with open arms by the RF - going to Sandringham for Christmas premarriage, never offered to anyone else, special engagements with HMQ etc.

For me, the problem is kind of "we want to hit the ground running" (which is admirable) and then "running away" after less than two years.

But M does seem to lack staying power, moving swiftly on to whatever attracts her most next. As an actress, that is probably how you do it, move on to the next job. But it doesnt work when you marry into an established, staid institution.

It does make me sad that they could have done such good things from inside.

@Tsukukuviri

Thanks again for your response.

It's very interesting and illuminating to hear different perspectives.

I understand what you say about being "seen" and "collective achievement" but perhaps also feel that it's a sign of how much more progress needs to made, insofar there is a need (I'm not sure if "need" is the right word but I hope you understand my direction) to celebrate someone for a high profile marriage both due to that being "a huge deal" but also a lack of WoC who's achievements are globally recognised (and there are many who should be celebrated) but don't have the high profile to be widely known.

Prior to this mess I can understand why M was seen as a role model. However the way H and M have acted during and since their announcement leaves me feeling very cold to them both and I struggle now how anyone can reconcile their behaviour to being in any way inspirational or admirable.

Agreed here too, Angelina I thought she and Harry would work hard to support W & K, and hit the ground running in order to highlight and raise money for so many good causes.
Sadly that wasn't to be. Both of them are a huge and costly disappointment.

@Tsukukuviri you make good points thank you.
I wish Meghan had stayed and given things more of a chance. She had a lot more going for her as a working Royal than most WOC and could have done so much good just by turning up.

@Tsukukuviri

Thank you for all your posts. I find your perspective; representing many African women en of all walks of life quite fascinating and eye opening.
I think your request for a race board is great for understanding different POV, but I think people will need a strong stomach to post, because unfortunately rêve conversations on MN can be pretty robust.

Regarding, comments re: WOC I will preface this by saying I an WOC, but Asian. So we do not have the same history regarding slavery and that collective consciousness. I was however brought up in the UK, in a professional family but a very white town, so was not really aware of racism growing up.

Michelle Obama is quite frankly an icon and a role model for women; full stop; not black women only.

Your posts, Tsukukuviri, help me understand some of Meghan’s attitude.
If I have understood correctly; among black women, of which there is a much larger population in the US, she would have automatically had “support” np matter what her many “ mistakes” were.

In the UK, how I view it, is yes, there have been racist comments in the press about her. But the majority of the commentary, to steal a phrase, has been about “the content of her character”.

Unfortunately, her attitude towards her position, and specifically towards the Queen, has brought out a loyalty towards the monarchy that a lot of British people were possibly unaware that they felt. Harry has not been immune from this backlash either, but most people can see that this behaviour of “ having cake and eating it” has begun since Meghan.

Yes fizzy limes exactly that

thanks so much for this direction

@Tsukukuviri you're welcome I'm glad you find the role model discussion as interesting as I do.

Having a seat at the table, or a bum on the throne , is important. I can see that it's an achievement in and of itself the first time regardless of what the person sitting at the table or on the throne achieves.

Meghan really does (or has) worn many 'hats' here. That of woman of colour being one, but also of course that of actress. There is no doubt that some of the admiration or interest she gets is because she's a TV star, and so the cut of her jib was fundamentally different from the get-go and that is also a double-edged sword; providing admirers and detractors.

Regardless of how badly treated she has actually been by the RF, there is no doubt that she's leaving with some residual benefits. For a start, as an actress, her patronage of the National Theatre gives her connections and prestige that many actors would kill for. She wouldn't have got that if she wasn't Harry's wife, I'm not sure she even has any professional theatre experience (am happy to be proved wrong).

Likewise her relationship with the editor of British Vogue.

I'm sure she has and will use these opportunities to boost other people, but there's no doubt that both of them and other collaborations & connections have benefitted her personally.

Kate did not have this at a comparable time in her relationship or marriage with William; she probably doesn't have them now. But then she didn't have her own profession as such and she certainly hasn't seemed to want the spotlight.

Point is, Meghan's unique collection of characteristics have meant that in some ways she's been able to be given much more of a bite at the apple from the beginning, but in a ways that has been a big muddle when it comes to her wearing her various hats. (Hopefully this makes sense!!)

Yet again I agree with DRM in that
I don't think it's an appropriate use of U.K. taxpayer money to springboard already wealth people into the realms of the super rich based where ironically any earnings won't feed back into the U.K. because they will be pying tax abroad

It's so disappointing and shocking. It feels like complete lack of respect to the British people, not just in terms of the tax bill going forward but the idea of monetising the royal family 'brand' (which is built as much on public funding as on private wealth) for themselves.

Meghan and a Harry were given a huge, responsible role, as Commonwealth Ambassadors. Given the words Meghan used during her engagement interview, it seemed like the perfect job for her.
With the backing and platform of the RF, she could have spent the next 40 years effecting and promoting change in the 57 Commonwealth countries.
Unfortunately it would appear that she love bombed the RF, as well as Harry. She had done some limited humanitarian work to “ fit in”.

(Prior to Harry, she was a “foodie” as per her blog the Tig, as she was dating a chef, Cory Vitiello, who’s signature dish was, Roast Chicken.)

So in line with the thread, what’s next for Meghan? Hollywood of course ( and it always was).
Thé MUA flown in, flash photography, photos of her on Instagram, are all to prove to potential producers that she can make it in Hollywood as an Alister.

Unfortunately given the logistics of taking a Prince and their son to live on another continent; to fulfil her own agenda; means she has become a very expensive problem for the British tax payer, where resources are stretched to breaking point.

Do you know for a fact that they didn't take a stance Seneca?

I should have clarified that they haven't taken a stance publicly. I have no idea what they may have done or not done privately. The Queen alluded to the nature of the scrutiny that they have been under in her public statement, and I think that there should have been more of that earlier on and by others in the RF.

Scrutiny is kind of inevitable though... and as taxpayers, I wish we had more scrutiny available to us.

I have no objection to any member of the RF receiving expenses to attend a royal engagement (private jets etc excepted), but we don't have access to this information.

I do object to the fact that by deciding to step down from royal duties, live in another country outside of the pretty safe environment of the UK, we are still somehow expected to pay for their security over and above what they would receive if still living here.

I don't want them hurt, or unhappy - but I dont want to contribute a trebling security bill when we have nurses etc using foodbanks.

The Queen alluded to the nature of the scrutiny that they have been under in her public statement, and I think that there should have been more of that earlier on and by others in the RF

Perhaps there should have been, but the Queen and the RF don't tend to take a stance publicly about anything including when they're directly criticised themselves. The Queen's way would have been to do things behind the scenes, so it's likely that happened.

Thankfully we're not yet reduced to a royal family where all communication about every damn thing is done via social media and emojis and there's no nuance, privacy or have a quiet, professional word.

What is quite annoying is that all the attention tends to be on what H and M are doing rather than on the genuinely good work other members of the Firm are doing. Camilla gave a speech on domestic violence, today apparently but it has been given no real media coverage. Camilla works really hard on this, often behind the scenes but it has been completely overshadowed.

Likewise the work Sophie does, which largely goes unnoticed. Instead there are lots of photos of Meghan and Harry, mainly Meghan. The emphasis as usual is on Meghan rather than the charities or causes she is there to support.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odette_Hallowes