Harry and Megan: changed my mind after episode 5

[Lotzana]

I was never a massive H&M hater but I wasn't keen on how they kept going on about their experiences and being constant victims. Why not just let it go?

However after episode 5 where they explain the events around their decision to leave, I find myself feeling really bad for them and surprised at how different it was to the narrative we were fed in the press.

If it's all true what they say then it's appalling how they were treated and Im not surprised they want to set record straight.

I know many will say it's not all true and they're lying/ exaggerating but I'm not inclined to believe these royal secretaries/ William / Charles are all saints while H&M are the big villains either.

We only see a very polished version of the royals in public and everything is well controlled and orchestrated. Who's to know what it's really like behind the facade?

Yabu - can't stand H&M regardless of what they claim in the documentary

Yanbu - documentary made me rethink my view of them too and question narrative in press

Oh here we go again "Oh it is very noticeable that sending all white Royal couples to tour Commonwealth countries".

So what are you saying because the RF do not have arranged marriges to specificaly diversity their family they are in the wrong? Are you suggesting we should control whom they fall in love with?

I guess every non mixed white familiy in the UK is a rasist family because they all do not have enough diversity. What a joke, if this was the other way round there would be riots in the street.

I agree. The 2 main issues were a. The need for the 'blood' RF to be prominent (ie not 'outshone' by marrying in ones - this was a big issue with Charles & Diana too). This is both strategic & jealousy based. Members are treated as 'The Firm' first & family 2nd (if at all), with each Members offices (staffed by workers whose individual Jo s rely on their members survival / prominence briefing against each other via .... b. The Press. A vile mirror of (certain elements of) British Opinion, which also creates/ stirs up that Opinion too.

If the residency in South Africa was a firm plan which was scuppered when the press got hold of it ( The Times), why did Harry say in his interview with Tom Bradbury, whilst in Africa, that it would be marvellous to live in Africa, but it didn't seem as if it could be possible at the current time.

Why did he say this, if things planned out the way they claim in the Netflix docuseries.

It should either have been a hush, hush secret - the scheme - or, the Press has already leaked it, and he is cross about it, so doesn't talk about it again, to serve them right for having the temerity to anticipate the Golden Couple's plans.

The way he said it to Tom Bradbury sounded like it was a cherished dream to live there, but practical obstacles stood in the way.

You wouldn't bleat about the Press printing your anticipated moves, and then, unbidden, and not in a response to a particular interview question, say to Bradbury it would be great to live on the Continent.....but.

He did keep it secret though. He didn't say "watch this space, wink wink" or "NO I AM NEVER MOVING TO AFRICA EVER EVER STOP ASKING ME ABOUT AFRICA". Both would have been bloody weird. He's probably trying to be as genuine as possible without saying anything. Stop picking at nothings. If he'd said no not moving there and then did, you'd no doubt be bitching about his lies.

I've found it fascinating on so many levels. Disclaimer: I am not a fan of the RF and would rather the Queen had been the last non-elected head of state, but here we are. (maybe this kind of "documentary" will be the beginning of the end. We, in respect of the RF, are certainly living in Interesting Times)

I think they honestly believe what they are saying. That is why this is "their truth" and their "lived experience". I also believe that other people who were involved in the events will have a different recollection. These points-of-view are all valid for the people who hold them. The "Truth" is probably a different version but that really doesn't matter unless it is out and out provable lying.

There are some things they have said that had me rolling my eyes. I simply do not believe, that having actually met someone, and been engaged to them, that you don't know about, or can't work out what, a walkabout is. I mean, she's not about to be dumped in the Australian outback, is she? I also simply refuse to believe that she had no clue about some aspects of the RF after having met several of them.

I can believe that she didn't know that even in private they cling to their noxious notions of precdence and "rank" and "seniority". That is batshit to me and i grew up vaguely adjacent to some of all this pomp and protocol. The idea that my fiancée says "lunch with granny today" then right before you go in says "you have to curtsey" is baffling. he could have said that before. But i also don't believe that there weren't staff members available to tell her all these protocol things (would be prepared to believe they didn't tell her for whatever reason)

And as for the different perceptions of racism, we see it on MN on here all the time. And this is why there is an area called Black Mumsnetters. How often do we have a poster saying "this happened to me it's racist and makes me feel bad and not included in British life" and dozens of people going "oh you're too easily offended, it's not racist it's bantz" and the like. If i were a black mumsnetter i would be permanently angry and only hang about that part of the site. (I read it, i don't comment, i hope I'm learning things that i may have otherwise never known)

All their photos are beautiful. All the little film clips are very professional. They have a nice life in so many respects, but would you want the press flying drones over your house? So, my opinion: it's their story as they see it. They have been planning this for a while, it is clearly aimed at the US market and is designed to make them bankable so they can earn a living. The further they are away from the core of their family, the less valuable they become.

I know many will say it's not all true and they're lying/ exaggerating but I'm not inclined to believe these royal secretaries/ William / Charles are all saints while H&M are the big villains either

Very sensible of you, OP. Of course this isn't a court of law, but I usually find it wise not to confuse hearsay and evidence with any of this bunch - doubly so if it's coming via the trash media rather than the people themselves

For me the only real difference is that H&M have gone out of their way to advertise the fact they lie through their endless blatherings, but that's not some get of of jail free card for the RF - it's just that they're better at hiding their own deceits

Bitching? Surely you mean commenting.

Harry and Meghan have used a docuseries about the course of their love story, to cast serious accusations against the Royal Family. It is perfectly acceptable to question both their motives and the validity of their interpretations.

The Netflix series is quite a serious challenge to the credibility of the Royal Family. Those who think the institution plays an important Constitutional role have a right to scrutinise what they say to Netflix.

I don't even think that their own explanation is a strong one, i.e., - that once a plan leaks, it rarely takes off. I think plans do take off, even after they've been leaked, if they are sufficiently well- established.

It's their constant attacks and criticisms which are galling. I don't see this as a personal matter but one of national importance. Respected US journalists are saying the the Palace will need to address some of the couple's claims. So it is serious.

Other Royals, such as Lady Amelia Windsor have generated a flutter of press interest, due to their modelling career and glamour, but not fanning the flames of interest has kept the curiosity levels low.

I think it is clear that keeping a low profile dries up press interest. Meghan was only in the RF a short time, so her newness guaranteed interest - and the excitement surrounding the arrival of a new royal baby. That is why she featured in the press. I don't interpret it as an overshadowing of the other Royals and a big problem for them. It was essentially to be expected at that time. So generally I don't buy Meghan and Harry's overarching take on what was happening.

Are you trying to up the viewer rate OP? Hmmmm?

Respected US journalists are saying the the Palace will need to address some of the couple's claims. So it is serious.

As america are a republic, the palace owes nothing to US Journalists or the US as a whole. We do nopt anser to the US no matter how great they may think they are.

They are entitled to belive all the celebrity recoloections and truths all they like. But the Place is a UK institution. To be honest all the garbage I hear from mainly US defenders of the Marckles is quite histerical inaccurate bollocks, they were not the slightest bit intrested in the royals until Megan came on the scene.

Its another band wagon to jump on that aligns with their hatered of certain circles and people.

Why couldn’t they have done that in

Canada? It doesn’t make any sense.

because the RF changed the goal posts, its what they had wanted to do but it wasn't to be. Whether the place made the right dissuasions or not I don't know?

But the meeting with the two heirs to the throne and the queen on the throne, making sure they keep popular against Harry who wanted to do his own thing for whatever reason

very well put. The Palace definitely have an agenda. All this happened around the time it was rumoured William was allegedly having an affair, so makes you wonder if M & H were sacrificed

The other thing to remember is that even if you’re a prince, you can’t just set up residence in another country. Canada and South Africa have immigration laws, neither Harry nor Meghan are automatically eligible to live there, whereas Meghan and Archie could move back permanently to the US whenever they wished and Harry has eligibility as her spouse.

I think it would be arrogant and disrespectful to just assume you could roll up to another country and live there, because you like it!

It certainly was hard to bieve MM had never seen a royal walk about (or the equivalent done by anyone famous) as a privileged, private school educated USA woman. Many people in the US watch things like royal weddings etc and she is also an actress so would have been exposed to even more different situations. Anyway perhaps it was so.

Like someone said above their comment about Nottingham Cottage was just utterly appalling. Had they no idea how that would sound to anyone trying pay their rent in 2022 or find a property as close to London as they can to rent out. That cottage in Kensington is more than big enough. Even if they thought it was very small it is a very privileged comment to make and you have to be pretty tone deaf to think that comment would go well on a programme like this to ordinary people.

M&H know the royal family is very unlikely to sue them for libel and chose to make statements that even if true are pretty nasty to make so they seem to have chosen to burn their boats and ensure their children fall out with almost everyone on both sides of their families. That is a sad choice to make.

The concept of a walk about is a bit odd.

When celebrities do it, they're on the red carpet. They're going in to a screening or award show or there is some sort of event. They walk the carpet, greet fans and do journalist questions. There is an end goal and to the walk and a point; they're promoting something and also showing off whichever designer has dressed them with lots of posing.

A royal walkabout is nothing like that. They're doing some sort of visit/ribbon cutting/charity event or they're just doing a stop during a tour or a city or whatever. Whilst doing that, they go to whatever the streets are lined with people, stop the car, pop out and walk around chatting to members of the public for a set time period. No interviews with press, no signing autographs, no posing for red carpet photos. It is just walking about talking to members of the public.

It can be about promoting the charity they are visiting or the town they are in but it isnt about promoting themselves (in the same way it is for celebrities).

Bingo

I'm very sad that Harry and William's relationship has broken down to such an extent and that it will probably never recover.

Harry clearly feels (rightly or wrongly) very betrayed and William won't ever feel truly able to trust Harry again.

Given the uniqueness of their upbringing losing the only other person in the world who can fully understand your experience is incredibly sad in my view.

Like others (royalty included) H&M are human and imperfect and this isn’t news. However you’ll find it’s Megan and Harry who have been extensively criticised by the press. I’m sick to the back teeth of endless tittle tattle written by so called ‘journalists’. I have no faith or trust in the trashy papers, full of divisive bitchy rubbish.

I didn’t have very strong feelings about H&M but watched documentary. It’s clear the press were horrible to Meghan but they also were to Kate.

Overwhelmingly, I just find the whole thing distasteful and a bit pathetic. Two privileged multi millionaires sitting in their mansion moaning about their grievances is just pathetic. I feel that anyone who will sell images of their children, which they have as part of this, and air their family issues publicly is not someone to be trusted.

Hopefully they can move on but they may not be ready for Netflix to start developing negative documentaries about them once they have gotten as much from their ‘truth’ as possible.

So just wanted to check… if you’re a privileged multi millionaire, it’s ok to be racially abused? Be trolled? subject to clearly organised attacks on SM?

like you’re not allowed to be depressed if you’re rich.

Ok then.

the media has been appalling

KM did come in for flak, but none of it on a racial level. That’s a line that was only crossed with Megan.

go back to Crampton? Straight outta Compton?

KM’s uncle was a coke head and there were more skeletons in her closet than in the local cemetery. Even taking her on for that isn’t coming even close to being racist enough to spout shit like go back to where you came from (despite her never coming from either place)

stop buying this utter shit call the tabloid press. Stop reading the fucking MoL!

Is your DH the head of the UK and 14 Commonwealth realms?

Is your DH Head of the Commonwealth of Nations?

Is your DH head of the UK armed forces and that of 32 military formations throughout the Commonwealth?

Is your DH Supreme Governor of the Church of England?

Very poor to time their apology to Ms Fulani after this Netflix series has hit.

@Diverseopinions I agree with your views. I am not a lover of theRF But I do support our constitutional monarchy. What, for instance, would the alternative be if it was disestablished — someone like Boris Johnson or another inept politician as head of state. It is highly unlikely that a US type Republican system would be introduced as that would be too disruptive so we’d end up having a French orGerman system of Government. It wouldn’t be any cheaper ad the Head would require stately homesetc and the RF would demand costly compensation.
H and M are doing everything they can to throw theRF under the bus which in these difficult times could destabilise the monarchy for a generation or more and sooner or later lead to its collapse. Once or rather eccentric new king gets into his stride the general public may not feel so fondly about the Institution as they did when we had a Queen.
Perhaps H and M should be reminded that Europe and the US are full of folk from what were previously royal families which were overthrown

I’m in two minds about constitutional monarchy because they don’t use their voice in any meaningful way. This means that inept people can become de facto head of state - and that could be more dangerous.

Who do you think another country’s head of state will call first? The prime minister or the monarch?
They would call the one with real power and influence to do something meaningful and that’s the prime minister.

Technically we have two kings, seen as though people said Rishi Sunak was coronated.

Isn’t constitutional monarchy a half-assed monarchy?

I think constitutional monarchy can still be useful if it wields soft power well. I also think that the monarchy should take ‘defender of the faith’ more seriously because of how that has a knock on effect on the justice system. The Crown is the symbol of justice.

I’m just not sure if the royal family we have possess a strong enough sense of justice or care enough about justice or understand that justice is complicated. Do Charles, Camilla, Kate or William realise the Crown is a symbol of justice? The coronation oath is about law, mercy and justice. I hope they don’t swear their oaths and think it’s a bunch of meaningless words and a formality.

Well, they have a very enviable life and lots of lovely friends. Most importantly, they seem to have freedom. So I get why they left... but they have not handled the relationship well! They should have just remained neutral stating the need to move away due to the lack of privacy. Harry can do that as he is 'spare!'

Harry has a Oedipus vibe going on