It was “, 'a bit naughty' to imply Archie 'couldn't be a prince because of the possible colour of his skin' when it was due to strict rules,...”

[RickiTarr]

Hugo Vickers made me laugh with his phrasing. So British to say “a bit naughty”.

Also, seriously high lights how many people don’t understand the rules or can’t explain the rules well, and no American has a hope of grasping our quaint & complicated rules and institutions, really.

Sorry, it’s the Daily Fail, but funny.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9340545/Why-Meghan-Markle-bit-naughty-referring-Archies-skin-colour-prince-discussion.html

@figgygal
The lived experience and recent surveys of BAME people in the U.K. show that Britain has a racism problem. 65% of BAME Britons report being racially abused to their face once or multiple times. 84% of BAME Brits consider Britain to be either a somewhat racist country or an extremely racist country. These threads only confirm it. Collectively sticking fingers in ears wont make it go away I’m afraid.

And that goes for anyone that marries someone from a different country and/or culture. You make an effort to educate yourself about it and if you actually love the person you’re marrying you make the effort to keep your head down and learn before opening your mouth and making a fool of yourself.

Lavanderrose - whilst I accept I am going by what has been reported there seem to have been numerous instances of M losing members of staff tag lag, arguments with courtiers etc. I based my comments on these but accept we will never know the full story.

@BlackBrowedAlbatross

The reason the York girls had their security removed was because it was deemed not needed.

I think it was to cut costs and was partly to do with Home Office and Met budgets. Anne and Edward also lost their 24/7 protection, but surely the risk is the same for them as it has always been.

The assessment was done because unnecessary expenditure had to be cut. It was deemed the York girls didn’t need security at all.

Anne, Edward and Sophie had security only on engagements. Risks change over the year (for example the IRA threat to the royals has lessened, but other threats are newer).

It’s been deemed as necessary that George, Charlotte and Louis have full time security so I can’t blame Harry for questioning why Archie doesn’t need it when he’s no less high profile than the Cambridge children and specific threats have been made against him.

It’s a reasonable query because security should be based solely on need. Not position or title.

I think those saying Meghan didn't try and acquaint herself with the role obviously didn't listen to her last night.
Or only listened to the bits they want to hear.

She said she worked really hard trying to do the right thing, trying to understand it all, writing to members of the RF saying she will work hard at supporting the RF etc.

She tried so hard I read this morning she was told to dial it down 50%. To be 50% less than she was.

So she's criticised on here for not researching, not trying and yet she's told by the RF not to try so hard or do so much.
Disheartening

Following the excellent clash summary on the first page, it was suggested last night that when they said Archie wasn't to be given a title the inference of changing protocols wasn't while the Queen was still going, but that when Charles becomes King the protocol (where Archie would be entitled to the Prince title) would be changed to prevent it.

Like the summary before, streamlining is something Charles has long wanted to do apparently so perhaps not so unsurprising. But if you were in Harry's shoes it would sting a lot given Charlotte and Louis were already granted that in advance and you would perhaps marry up those other horrible conversations with the fact the cull was coming a lot closer to home than possibly thought.

Why should the UK tax payers pay to secure people who are not 'working for the country' and who are millionaires?! If they'd just shut up and live the private life they supposedly want, their risk would be significantly reduced and they could pay for security themselves. They are self seeking, lying chances. I'm more pissed off at Harry than Meghan on the Title for Archie issue, he knows how it all works why is he peddling this bollocks about it being due to race?

@JustLyra the Cambridges are at significantly higher risk, PG is the direct heir, Charlotte after him and so on. If your argument holds so much water why was OK for B&E to have their security removed when they were in the same position as Archie?

[quote ChocolateSantaisthebestkind]@JustLyra the Cambridges are at significantly higher risk, PG is the direct heir, Charlotte after him and so on. If your argument holds so much water why was OK for B&E to have their security removed when they were in the same position as Archie?[/quote]
The York girls had their security removed as adults. The difference between adults and children is pretty clear

The Cambridge children are not at significantly more risk when you balance out the direct threats being made against Archie and his parents.

The children are all very high profile, very at risk and clearly should be protected.

Princess Anne's two children do not have titles despite they being grandchildren of the monarch. Anne and their father did not want them to have titles.
I'd like to get Anne's views on the interview.
Prince Andrew's daughters do have the title Princess.
I wonder why Edward and Sophie's children aren't Princess Louise and Prince James ? She is Lady Louise and he is Viscount Severn.

@JustLyra If they had stayed in the UK at Frogmore the security would have been there by default. When with his DPs there would have been Police Officers, in the house as well, any nanny would have been highly security trained. They do not work for or represent the UK now, why the hell do they think the UK should foot the bill? They have the money to pay and could have fallen into private obscurity very easily if they had wanted, they don't. Cake and eat it.

@LadyEloise

Princess Anne's two children do not have titles despite they being grandchildren of the monarch. Anne and their father did not want them to have titles. I'd like to get Anne's views on the interview. Prince Andrew's daughters do have the title Princess. I wonder why Edward and Sophie's children aren't Princess Louise and Prince James ? She is Lady Louise and he is Viscount Severn.

Edward’s children are HRH Prince and Princess. Their parents just opted not to use it.

S&E requested they be given the Titles from the Earldom, @LadyEloise.

[quote ChocolateSantaisthebestkind]@JustLyra If they had stayed in the UK at Frogmore the security would have been there by default. When with his DPs there would have been Police Officers, in the house as well, any nanny would have been highly security trained. They do not work for or represent the UK now, why the hell do they think the UK should foot the bill? They have the money to pay and could have fallen into private obscurity very easily if they had wanted, they don't. Cake and eat it.[/quote]
The security would only be there by default while he was in the house or with his parents.

Clearly they felt that he should have security, like the Cambridge children do, when out without them, or when at school for example.

There was to be no security for him specifically at any point.

As I posted earlier in the thread the Wessex children have the HRH Prince/ss titles but their parents chose not to use them. They can decide for themselves at 18 according to their mother, but she doesn’t think they will.

@RickiTarr

Maybe she genuinely was baffled by it all *@Insertfunnyname* ?

It must all sound bizarre to an American, let alone a natural born disruptor.

She must have met Princess Anne and Prince Edward's kids who are grandchildren of the reigning monarch and they aren't princes or princesses. It might sound bizarre but she can't have thought it was racism.

I can imagine it would feel hurtful when William's children have the titles, I can understand that, but as he said, "a bit naughty" to imply it is racism.

@ChocolateSantaisthebestkind

Why should the UK tax payers pay to secure people who are not 'working for the country' and who are millionaires?! If they'd just shut up and live the private life they supposedly want, their risk would be significantly reduced and they could pay for security themselves. They are self seeking, lying chances. I'm more pissed off at Harry than Meghan on the Title for Archie issue, he knows how it all works why is he peddling this bollocks about it being due to race?

This

@eaglejulesk

They want to live a private life, they don't want to do royal duties - but they want a title for their son In other words they want the perks but they don't want to do the work!

This totally. They would like wealth, titles, rich lifestyle. For what? For being a second son of a wealthy family with power and an American actress who had a moderately successful career.

I think it's rather dishonest to say "we want to be financially independent" then complain about putting your hand in your pocket to pay for private security. It comes across like what they meant was "we want to be able to make money privately through capitalising on our royal titles, whilst continuing to be funded by the state" which is a very bad look. Beatrice and Eugenie are princesses who don't have publicly funded security so I can't imagine they really thought being a prince was all it took for Archie to have his own security. If they were simply saying "we wanted security" it would be different but it's "we wanted him to be a prince to get security" which doesn't ring true. Meghan might not understand that but Harry would.

I do think there has been bad behaviour on both sides and I am 100% ready to believe there's some pretty rampant racism running around the older members of the royal family, and the institution of the commonwealth itself is frankly a colonial holdover which I can totally see as offensive to people of colour. However, Harry and Meghan are not objecting to institutional racism, nor the existence of the monarchy. Indeed, they want to retain the Dukedom, they want their son to be a British prince, they want to retain that prestige and rank. If they actually gave a damn they'd abdicate their titles and then be free to do as they please. They're happy to use allegations of racism to perpetuate a victim narrative but they want to retain the perks and privileges of a fundamentally racist institution. That's why I don't like them and I can't get behind them. They have a total lack of self awareness.

Harry came out of this the worst in my opinion. He seems upset he can't have his cake and eat it! That's life , mate.

If they were simply saying "we wanted security" it would be different but it's "we wanted him to be a prince to get security" which doesn't ring true. Meghan might not understand that but Harry would.

That’s what they did say. They’ve said they were specifically told he would only have security if titled so they said they wanted him titled because they wanted the security.

Which is why the RF really need to clarify the situation because security should be based on need, and only need. Not title, position or anything else.

'Harry came out of this the worst in my opinion. He seems upset he can't have his cake and eat it! That's life , mate'

Yes and just breaching people's privacy all over the place. All these unsubstantiated claims! he is no better than a tabloid editor.

How can they cause such a massive hoo ha. I thought they wanted to shine lights and create love and compassion globally?

Spot on Chocolateandamaretto
I do think there has been bad behaviour on both sides and I am 100% ready to believe there's some pretty rampant racism running around the older members of the royal family, and the institution of the commonwealth itself is frankly a colonial holdover which I can totally see as offensive to people of colour. However, Harry and Meghan are not objecting to institutional racism, nor the existence of the monarchy. Indeed, they want to retain the Dukedom, they want their son to be a British prince, they want to retain that prestige and rank. If they actually gave a damn they'd abdicate their titles and then be free to do as they please. They're happy to use allegations of racism to perpetuate a victim narrative but they want to retain the perks and privileges of a fundamentally racist institution. That's why I don't like them and I can't get behind them. They have a total lack of self awareness

[quote Ostryga]@Nith

Have you not seen the hate, violence and awfulness spewed at them every day? If anything the risk is much, much more severe for H&M than PW.[/quote]
But why should the British taxpayer pay for their security in another country when they are not working royals?