The "Royal Racist"

[GrimDamnFanjo]

The discussion is still rumbling on...
Over on the Daily Mail site there's yet another article about whether H&M will name names.
This I found was interestingly written as it only seems to mention one other family member...

If Harry had any integrity he’d name the racists! Why would you say they exist but not name them?! We’re paying for bigots, it’s so unfair. (Usual apology… sorry not a monarchist)

It's 'racist' not 'racists'. There's only one stupid enough to say something like that, silly old bag.

@Backstreetsbackalrightdadada

If Harry had any integrity he’d name the racists! Why would you say they exist but not name them?! We’re paying for bigots, it’s so unfair. (Usual apology… sorry not a monarchist)

Because although they love suing people they dont want to put themselves in the position of being sued.

@StormzyinaTCup

On PA.... I know! He's making mad dashes between palaces, apparently the Queen is still at Balmoral and as he hasn't been outside the door for horseriding or anything at Royal Lodge, he's slunk back up there!

If Harry had any integrity he’d name the racists! Why would you say they exist but not name them?! We’re paying for bigots, it’s so unfair

Integrity haha, he's done the only thing he can do. not name the racist.
You'd all be furious and incensed on here if he had done.

Headline on the DailyFail...
Harry names racist remarks came from PC/PW/whoever

can you imagine if he did name the racist.....mn would explode.

@serenster absolutely spot on. Their narrative changed only after they were told No

Yes! When I saw the OW interview, my first thought was 'thank god he didn't say who it was'.
But of course... the fact he hasn't is just another stick to beat him with. If he had.. it would have been another stick too.

Because although they love suing people they dont want to put themselves in the position of being sued

Who are they suing?

I know abbout Meghan winning a privacy lawsuit against the DM. Is there someone else they're suing?

I’m not sure why naming the person would have been seen as a stick to beat him with. Surely it would be better to do so and put an end to all the speculation. Also, their entire claim starts to sound dubious because they are vague about it as has been said many times. To say they are not “drip feeding” is disingenuous. This whole epilogue of Scobie‘s is a massive drip feed.

I’m pretty sure the recollections vary statement means the person / persons identified by Harry ( who was present when the comments were said ) has been identified internally and refutes the recollections Harry has presented

Thus Harry and Meghan can’t go public as it will be strongly refuted
How much better for them not to name the person
a) it can’t be denied
b) more people can fall under suspicion

If they are sure of there recollections they should have the courage to back them up

*their !

Just like many problems on MN the commonsense approach to family problems is to sit down and discuss in a sensible manner. People are never told to air their problems on an internationally viewed interview with Oprah Winfrey. 🤣🤣

Totally disagree on naming.

OF COURSE he'd be maligned on here if he had done.
Some posters would be beside themselves with anger and outrage that he had

As I said before, there's very little speculation about who it is elsewhere, it's a MN thing and has carried a whole thread

But derxa they aren't an ordinary family are they?

Lol I have read enough racism threads on MN to know that of course they will be attacked after naming the person .

This whole epilogue of Scobie‘s is a massive drip feed

Well, it would be if H&M had anything to do with it, but of course they've said repeatedly that they don't collaborate with him. No doubt some believe this, but bearing in mind things such as Justice Warby's remarks about how he came to have an ANL case story, I'm afraid I'm not one of them

And isn't it rather ironic that so many call for openness among the RF - which I definitely do agree with - and yet tie themselves in knots to justify the couple not naming the alleged racist/s? Certainly there'd be a media storm if they did, but then (if it's true) the guilty party should have thought of that before saying whatever it was

Personally I'm of the mindset "if you've got something to say just say it" ... otherwise the narrative can easily start to look like attention seeking and mischief making

@Roussette

But derxa they aren't an ordinary family are they?

There's no such thing as an ordinary family. All families are unique. Anyway most people on here would argue that the Royal family are no better than anyone else. And I would agree. The interview was a disaster for both sides. If a family member had said to me 'I have concerns about your future baby's skin colour' I would have insisted on a conversation about it there and then.

@StartupRepair

I've always thought that prior to the wedding they should have sat h and m down and said that Harry would get to be an Earl just like Edward. Then when Charles became king Harry could be a Duke and kids princes if they wanted. This would have set expectations and showed them that their path would be different from the Cambridges. The Wessexes are a good model as the son of the monarch and retaining some privacy and normality for their DC.

I wonder if they ever sat Harry down, at any point in in his adult life, and told him that there might be changes.

Many people, including me, have interpreted "Archie won't be a prince" as a natural result of the slimming down that we have heard of for years.

derxa

It's obviously not like other families if you have to book weeks ahead with a member of staff to see someone you're closely related to, and if said staff release (mis)information in the press about you. Not to mention if you're dependent on them financially and for your home and personal security. Can you see some differences there?

As for misinterpreting - come on! It's easy enough to tell the difference between something clumsy and well-intentioned, and a family member sharing 'concerns' about how dark Archie would be, which however way you slice it is not acceptable!

It might be easy for Meghan to tell the difference if she had heard the comment firsthand, but she heard it after the fact, from Harry.

@Aspiringmatriarch

derxa

It's obviously not like other families if you have to book weeks ahead with a member of staff to see someone you're closely related to, and if said staff release (mis)information in the press about you. Not to mention if you're dependent on them financially and for your home and personal security. Can you see some differences there?

The person was right there in front of them. Do you honestly believe that Harry is so weak that he couldn't have set this person straight right away? Prince Charles still paid for Harry's lifestyle despite him going to live in another country and rubbishing the whole Royal family.

I believe he may have been taken aback, needed time to reflect etc. I also think people can be very good at couching things so they have a certain amount of plausible deniability. I still don't think they would have 'rubbished' them i.e. disclosed the facts if it was something a simple conversation could have fixed. You have to look at the situation in its entirety including their position within a frankly pretty opaque institution. But I guess you prefer to make excuses for racist gaslighting, so you do you. 🤷‍♀️

@Andylion

As for misinterpreting - come on! It's easy enough to tell the difference between something clumsy and well-intentioned, and a family member sharing 'concerns' about how dark Archie would be, which however way you slice it is not acceptable!

It might be easy for Meghan to tell the difference if she had heard the comment firsthand, but she heard it after the fact, from Harry.

I don’t get this reasoning at all. So unless Meghan heard it herself then Harry must be confused?.

Gosh yes... sometimes you just need to process what you hear without a kneejerk reaction.

@Aspiringmatriarch

I believe he may have been taken aback, needed time to reflect etc. I also think people can be very good at couching things so they have a certain amount of plausible deniability. I still don't think they would have 'rubbished' them i.e. disclosed the facts if it was something a simple conversation could have fixed. You have to look at the situation in its entirety including their position within a frankly pretty opaque institution. But I guess you prefer to make excuses for racist gaslighting, so you do you. 🤷‍♀️

I agree with this.