A positive thread on Harry and Meghan (aka Thread 6)

[Mummy195]

@rousette

I'm sure you won't mind that your excellent link gets 'pinned'.

Some of the things MM did before marrying H.

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1282990766097301504.html

Seeing as how Kate produced 3 children in the last 9 years I don't think it's right or fair to compare her with others unless they also had their children at the same time. What is this obsession with pulling Kate to pieces?

Thé H G V license will be about driving horse boxes presumably.

Was so impressed with her. Fabulous woman.

There was some recent analysis of royal patronages, and tried to analyse financial benefit of having a royal patron.

In a 1 year period Anne has the most number of visits (70) to her patronages but because she has so many(300), her overall percentage was quite low (24%)

PW has the highest percentage of visits to patronages (290%) with DoC next with 144% and then PH at 133%. These are official visits not unofficial. DoS is not included as she didn't carry out any official visits during this period and she was on maternity leave and as she stepped down as a senior Royal her 'time' is 9 months rather than 12 months (same applies to PH).

it is interesting that I think PW is indicating he would prefer to see RF having a smaller number of patronages but being more closely involved with them - I think this ties in with PH/PW/DoC work on Heads Together campaign and related charities and also the DoC focus on early years. I think I agree with PW that having royals focused on a small number of cohesive campaigns and strategies over a longer term rather than scattergun approach will play dividends.

I think the source for the data was Giving Assist and I should acknowledge I've not fact checked their data or propriety.

Some people love to be mean to Kate, hence the up skirt photos of her on a previous thread. I don't get the need to diminish another woman in apparent defence of Meghan.

I also think the number of engagements is not necessarily a reflection of the work that they do as the length of time on each engagement and time spent doing background work isn't recorded. But agree that they aren't exactly down the mines and they have the advantage of excellent support staff.

Some people love to be mean to Kate, hence the up skirt photos of her on a previous thread. I don't get the need to diminish another woman in apparent defence of Meghan

I agree. And as I, personally, have said many a time, I have no beef with Kate and think she is perfect for the part, William struck lucky when she agreed to be his wife.
As much as I don't feel the need to diminish another woman in defence of Meghan, I also don't feel the need to put just about every other member of the RF on a pedestal to criticise Meghan. It works both ways. Let's be realistic.

I think it is a problem in society today particularly on social media, people are either seen as saints or sinners. The truth is most people are somewhere in the middle. As Obama said in his discussion about being woke on twitter, good people sometimes do bad things or make poor decisions.

I think putting anyone on a pedestal is a bad thing. I suspect Kate knows what is coming, as soon as H&M cease to be as newsworthy the press will be after her again and even worse for her, her children.

Absolutely. mrscampbell

This is an interesting article... many posters on here won't agree with any of it, but to me... I found it interesting and relatively balanced.

news.sky.com/story/new-harry-and-meghan-book-portrays-royal-family-as-uncaring-and-dysfunctional-12035952

I think this sums it up for me...

'For all the work over the decades to portray the monarchy as a modern institution, the descriptions of the grey suits, claims of leaks, and households briefing against each other give a sense of an old fashioned royal court from another era, an environment some may say is still too traditional for any modern couple to properly thrive'

Well maybe but they have all set up their own courts. Some of the people Meghan got rid of were young. They were not the Queens staff. Also Harry hadn’t complained before and was happy to share the Kensington Palace “Court” with his brother. It’s also noticeable Anne doesn’t have a personal “Court” at all and just gets on with life and does the most work. Again, HandM could have learnt from this and slotted in but they made it clear they wanted their own court.

You then get into the problem of how to staff it. It ended up needing guidance from people who know the ropes. They were not able to separate and entirely do their own thing. I think they got rid of 5 members of staff? So again, what they wanted was out of line with everyone else. This has always been the problem. This won’t change with The Queen still at the helm. Even Charles wouldn’t change much perhaps? But they could have had a great life without challenging anything.

i agree about Kate. but am a bit confused.
so its ok to be nasty about Meghan, but we must not say anything bad about Kate.....
is that not double standards.
(not saying I want to do either)

so its ok to be nasty about Meghan, but we must not say anything bad about Kate.....

Meghan deserves it, doncha know

Oh please don't do this - I thought this thread was evolving into something more balanced and mature, with some good natured humour along the way.

MyohMy
I have no idea on the 'getting rid of 5 members of staff'. Yes, agree what they wanted was probably out of line with everyone else. Yes, they shouldn't come in and want to change everything quickly but to me ... the royal family needs a bit shake up.
I bet we don't know half of it as far as the grey suits, competition between royal households and all of that. I imagine some of the courtiers have a job for life and maybe as they move on, and Charles becomes King, the RF can modernise and change in years to come. Personally I think there is a sea change coming... slowly... and long overdue. Whether Charles is the one to run with it, or if it will be William, who knows.

I have a view that won't be popular with many on here. I think we will look back in decades to come and realise that the change started with H&M leaving, and maybe in time to come they won't be judged so harshly. Yes, they ballsed it up a lot but it's started and it's overdue..... change...
first mixed race divorced woman to marry into the RF, opting out the 'stand on the steps photocall' after birth, and much more. Just because some things have been done for decades, doesn't mean it should carry on, I'm all for flexibiity and adapting to suit the times. And the public feel very different about the RF than say a generation ago.

myrtle Agree. Apologies.
But that works for both sides of the feelings on here. I'm all for rational discussion.

Re staff leaving - I have no idea what the average attrition rate is for a royal household but I would imagine it is feasibly higher in the early years as a new court finds its groove?

One thing I still don't really get - why is what Meghan and a Harry did with their post-birth photo shoot preferable to the standing on the steps of the hospital one? This isn't meant to be a X did it right/wrong, I just don't get it! I'd far rather get the whole process over and done with, and then gone home and ignore the outside world.

@Roussette. How does a phrase like ‘ Meghan deserves it doncha know’ fit into a rational discussion

Nishky Did you miss my apology? I'll repeat it.

Sorry, shouldn't have said that.

On the theme of change in the RF... here is an article showing how H&M have done it differently. Some posters will agree with, some not. Worth reading though..

www.businessinsider.com/meghan-markle-prince-harry-baby-boy-breaking-royal-tradition-2019-5?r=US&IR=T

I would agree that the RF is an institution rooted in the past, tradition, protocol and possibly some courtiers have a vested interest in keeping it that way. (For the avoidance of doubt, that is my surmise and my only evidence is history and accounts of recent history re Margaret and PP etc)

I can also see that it is the younger generation of royals that will have the best chance of achieving change and bringing the rf up top date. The problem for me is that change in such an institution can't ever realistically be one person or even one couple deciding how the future should look and implementing that quickly and without the agreement of others or any public debate.

I have no idea if what H&M wanted would have been an improvement. Given the hierarchical nature of the rf and the fact that's all of the structures around it are designed to support and protect that hierarchy, they were never going to achieve real change without the agreement and support of HMQ and PC and PW.

The phrase 'Royal Courts' with courtiers is so old fashioned and Shrek-like. The whole set up would be more credible if renamed 'Royal Offices' with staff. It makes sense that when new managers /CEOs arrive there should be a shake up of personnel until the balance is right and H&M would want a clear out of anyone not on their wavelength and likely to be unsupportive. Incidentally, supporting and advising MM on protocol was down to PH - the story about the H&M necklace illustrates that she was a prickly person to advise and it was best left to someone she trusted. I think she tried very hard at the start (I remember clips of her looking a bit lost at formal dos and eyeing those around her so she didn't offend) but presumably there came a day when she woke up and thought, blow that for a game of soldiers or some other woke expression.

Thanks to your article Rousette I've now discovered the convention of a grooms cake which I had never previously heard of!

meercat Agree with your post. And think H&M tried to run before they could walk.

lifetooshort you've summed it up for me! If, maybe they/she had been 10 years younger, she may have been more pliable (bit like Diana was initially). But MM wasn't. She was a 30 something bi-racial actress who had lived a bit. The necklace thing (it was tiny!) was probably a WTAF moment!

Thanks to your article Rousette I've now discovered the convention of a grooms cake which I had never previously heard of!

I thought I read it, but missed that bit!

Interesting story. All of the wedding talk reminds me of how embraced they were at the time by the public here and shows the RF did lots to welcome her. Many of those points raised wouldn't have been their choice as a young, Millennial couple but agreed to by the RF (and rightly so.) The informality with fans/ affection is visible with Kate and William too but I think we shouldn't conclude that the article means to compare them.

The financial independence thing - "book deals." Bit unfortunate, given the current context.

The article has published a few stories on them:

www.businessinsider.com/meghan-markle-prince-harry-royal-baby-boy-costs-2019-5?r=US&IR=T

This is a US publication I think.