So, do you believe the royal couples revelations made tonight?

[selectabo]

I did. felt more authentic than I've expected. You?

Haven’t RTFT, but I do believe that they feel they’re telling the truth. This was their version of the truth. I do believe her feelings were real. However, with all situations there’s more than one side to the story. It would be interesting to hear what other senior royals consider to be the truth. Objectively, I think what really happened was probably somewhere in the middle.

@wewillmeetagain

I can't believe why people are questioning Charles cutting them off financially!! Erm because hes a grown man who no longer works for the family firm therefore is no longer entitled to the financial rewards for that! What nearly 40 year old man should expect his father to pay his bills?

The protections was provided by Met officers who had to be flown out and accommodated. They were on rotation every 3 weeks I think. That was enormously expensive and the tax payer is footing the bill. The officers themselves were away from their own families and friends for weeks at a time. It was completely unsustainable and if H had the least bit of sense, he would have seen that. He expected the tax payer to keep him and his family whilst he and his wife did nothing in return. Popping back to see their charities a couple of times a year does not constitute work or justify the expense involved.

No I don’t. Too many story lines that don’t make any sense.

I didn't see the interview but am I to understand that they claim they started her public royal life by lying in front of millions whilst making a legal statement (that she was free to marry when she had got married three days before) and coopted the archbishop of Canterbury to not only undermine a large public event upon which millions had been spent on their behalf only a few days later but also require him to lie to the country and to God?

@Tibtom

I didn't see the interview but am I to understand that they claim they started her public royal life by lying in front of millions whilst making a legal statement (that she was free to marry when she had got married three days before) and coopted the archbishop of Canterbury to not only undermine a large public event upon which millions had been spent on their behalf only a few days later but also require him to lie to the country and to God?

No

I'd love to hear the Archbishop's take on this too.

Anyone get the feeling MM thought being a Royal meant lots of money and status for nothing and was surprised at the amount of work / engagements that the working Royals are expected to carry out.
And it's a job for life not just until you hit 60 and collect your pension?

I wasn’t convinced at all. Not sure what racism occurred other than the discussion about their future children’s skin colour which has been wildly speculated about but actually no one knows the context in which it was discussed, also it was a private conversation that Harry chose to disclose.

I also thought it was very underhand the way they chose to reveal it, by implicating no one they implicated everyone, so now people are speculating so and so said it, or so and so for this reason etc. Heard on the radio that Kate was the one who said it because she didn’t like Meghan!

It’s also laughable that people in the US think the UK is a very racist country on the basis of this interview - again, what racism occurred against Meghan? The press didn’t like her? Her child didn’t receive a title? Well neither will Princess Eugenies son, both being styled Master.

In fact she didn’t even specifically mention any incidents of racism apart from the private conversation which we can discount because they refuse to actually discuss what was said or given the person who said it a chance to give their version of the conversation. Seems like people are just dramatising it all on her behalf.

Also I feel for Prince Charles, he stopped speaking to his son maybe because he was disappointed that Harry turned his back on them, without giving it a proper chance.

I’m not a royalist but I do feel the RF have been played! No way are they perfect but the incidents she recounts apart from the skin tone conversation sound like normal practice for royals: having their diaries controlled and managed, getting on with public duties when they are having issues on their private life, the palace refusing to be drawn on spats between sister in laws, or commenting on every tabloid news.

Also the decision to not give Archie a title makes sense.. people want the RF to modernise and they need to limit the number of minor royals they support - why does it have to be a race issue that they decided not to give Archie a title.

I do think it’s a shame they bailed the way they did, people expected a lot from Meghan when she first arrived, expecting that she would modernise the RF etc, she could have made positive changes if they’d decided to stay. Instead now they’re a young chequered couple estranged from both sides of their families.

Golightly that's exactly it. They issued an announcement without agreeing it with the Queen and said that their security would continue to be funded. Harry expected it. He expected the British taxpayer to fund them living outside of the UK, anywhere they liked. Unbelievably arrogant and out of touch. And he's still whinging about it.

Claudia so they didn't claim to have got married three days earlier?

They did say did they not that they'd been properly married days ahead?

I think they told their truth about how they felt. As in, I don't think they are actively lying or making shit up. I do think there is probably another side to a lot of it which would also be "the truth" to someone else. A lot of it seems like naivety or misunderstandings that spun out of control or were misinterpreted as having malicious intent.

I really don't like how anything other than full throated acceptance and support of everything they have to say or do is being spun as racism in certain corners of the internet and media.

There is no question that the tabloid treatment has been awful and there has been racism. The double standards for MM have been horrendous - I remember thinking a few years ago that if she wore the same dress as Kate to the same function, it would be reported as a triumph for Kate and a faux pas for Megan even though it was the same dress.

It may have been rowed back on afterwards.

@Lockdownbear

Anyone get the feeling MM thought being a Royal meant lots of money and status for nothing and was surprised at the amount of work / engagements that the working Royals are expected to carry out. And it's a job for life not just until you hit 60 and collect your pension?

Yep. I think she thought it would be like being a Hollywood A-lister.

The reality sunk in, she got frustrated and engineered her Hollywood dream.

Didn't Meghan say something last year about a friend warning her that if she married H 'the British press will destroy you' - sure I remember her saying something like that?

The things that jarred for me and take some creditably away from what they are saying are:

1. she didn't know what she was getting into having done no research. H didn't tell her and she thought it was like a celebrity world. I can believe she thought that but I find it hard to believe at no point did they have a conversation about this. Why wasn't she given any training? Then she wouldn't have made blunders and the press be so nasty about that.
2. MM says "I don't go for grandeur" what a load of rubbish and to me comments like this made her less credible and this is why people don't like her. She trying to come across down to earth and one of us whilst having ££££ baby showers, massive mansions, pirate jets and designer dresses. Please don't paint the public as being stupid.
3. wanting the RF and tax payer to continue paying for security after they left and saying he had to do those Netflix's deals to afford that. What a load of rubbish! Why should we pay for them now they aren't royals? Plus, I am sure the money left from his mother, reportedly £14 million would cover that. They just didn't want to reduce their lifestyle. Don't plead poverty.
4. They never admit to their privilege, it's all poor me, they stopped paying for me, I felt afraid as we didn't have security. They come across as so entitled and out of touch with reality. It doesn't sit well with people.
5. saying Archie wouldn't get a title because of his race. Completely misleading and untrue. If the RF don't answer the allegations I hope at least they put that one right.
6. very over sensitive in the early days about the press saying she made Kate cry and wanting RF to stick up for her. They can't do that over every little thing.
7. H had previously got help with his MH they could easily have seeked help elsewhere without going through the institution. Why didn't she do that? Again, it's like they wanted someone else to do everything for her.

But she did get a hard time from the press, they should have supported her with MH and racism. I can see why they left and it's very sad she felt suicidal. I do feel sympathy and believe her when she says the reality is different to the fairytale.

Meghan said they actually got married 3 days earlier. Called the Archbishop up apparently, and he nipped over.

And the Archbishop is completely silent on this. What did happen?

I will be interested to see how the bullying claims play out.

The tone of the interview very much painted them as quite passive victims - almost meek. Bewildered and naive. The princess who lost her voice. The prince who was trapped in a guided cage. Thrown to lions with their infant son.

Yet the Times article paints a very different picture. It told a story of two almost impossible teenage like brats that everyone was trying to placate but nothing was ever enough. Having been through work place bullying myself the claims again seemed pretty convincing. The behaviours described sounded very familiar. It didn't read as a hatchet job.

But the two versions are completely incompatible.

I think Harry and Meghan (particularly) did a great job at putting over their side of events. I would love to hear the other side but I doubt we ever will.

Judging by most social media I've seen so far, if you're a white person you have no right to even ask the question, let alone have a view about it, the racism stuff at least. (I'm not clear whether non-white people are allowed to question the truth in the allegations.)

The accepted line is 'If they said they've experienced racism from the Royal Family and mental health struggles, that's it. They did. Believe them. If you don't you're a racist bully. And they are both soooooo brave for speaking out despite their wish for a private life away from the cameras.'

Anyone non-white can claim racism at anytime and has no need to prove it (unless they want to being legal action or criminal charges) and if someone claims they've had mental health issues they can say whatever they like with no scrutiny or challenge.

The positive trickle down of their interview might be that regardless of whether they're telling the truth, those who believe them and who have faced similar struggles might feel more able to seek support.

The negative might be that unsubstantiated allegations start being levelled at ordinary people unable to defend themselves.

The burden of proof may well exist in law still but it has certainly been diminished in day to day life as a result of all this.

I'm just mystified that in a 'no holds barred' interview Oprah didn't ask Harry about his own past racist behaviour and comments. No that would have been very interesting!

I believe both that Meghan bullied staff and that she was subject to some racist comments, but it seems you have to pick a side.

It was riddled with contradictions and inaccuracies.
Prince Harry also came across terribly badly once he joined her on the "Show of the Century". He sure isn't the brightest spark but I didn't actually realise he was quite as dense as he obviously is.

She, however, was a great actress. Something I haven't actually heard about her acting capabilities whilst in the Show Suits from which she was written out of.

I didn’t buy her account of feeling suicidal. I have known a person to be actually suicidal, where they cannot be left alone. They don’t tell you they cannot be left alone. They don’t have the comprehension at that point. They are not usually aware enough of their situation to be able to so eloquently describe how they’re feeling. They’re certainly not usually able to explore so many avenues for support without someone else handholding them through it. I was surprised to hear Meghan felt so suicidal that she went to HR (what even is that in terms of the royals and why would she be doing that, HR is surely for staff not actual members of the family), consulted with Diana’s friends - again, she was very new in the scene but she’d managed to make a close confidante out of one of Diana’s old friends? She went to senior members of the family to explain her distress? This seems so atypical of my experience of someone feeling suicidal. And her husband didn’t bother doing any of these things?

A woman planning suicide whilst pregnant is such a serious and terrifying thing, that would take you a long time to recover. Yet barely two years later Meghan is full recovered, living a fairy tale (her own words) and has so much vocabulary to eloquently describe her experience, likening herself on two occasions to fairytale princesses. (Rapunzel and The Little Mermaid).

I found the whole thing so rehearsed and false and performed. Tailored to a gullible, fawning American public.

I got the feeling she’d been rehearsing her answers in the bathroom mirror since 2017.

Don’t get me started on her weird interjections about Private Secretaries being CEOs. WTF? And Christmas parties for tabloids in exchange for better press. And her refusal to use titles for any members of the family except the Queen but she was clearly royally fucked if at her own child not having one. The grandeur doesn’t mean much to me... says Meghan, living authentically, from her £10m house in California.

Well that was a Oscar winning performance by a Hollywood Actress!!

Just Amazing, can’t believe anyone ever said she was a second rate actress!! She is just fantastic, I nearly believed it every word she said!!

Then I remembered it’s just a performance!! She is playing the victim!! And she is doing a very good job at it !!

@Tibtom

Claudia so they didn't claim to have got married three days earlier?

It was said in a follow up conversation sitting in a chicken coop and then it cut off back to the proper interview. I took it to mean they just wanted something for themselves so had a ceremony just the two of them. She’s American, you can get married by an Elvis impersonator there. I don’t think she meant it how you’re taking it.

@OldRailer

They did say did they not that they'd been properly married days ahead?

In which case they publically made false legal statements and coopted the archbishop to do so likewise. Even if the archbishop did not recognise their ceremony as a marriage, if M+H did then the statements they made at the beginning or the windsor wedding were a lie.