I find it fascinating

[CaraVirra]

I’m trying to understand something, and I’m asking this in good faith.

After looking into the Meghan and Harry situation, I’m genuinely confused about the level of hostility directed at them by the British public… especially when that hostility extends to their children.

I’ve read widely and tried to identify what concrete harm Harry and Meghan have actually done to the British public, and I’m struggling to find a clear answer.

The turning point people seem to cite most often is Harry’s book. But even there, it’s a personal account of his experiences inside an institution. If anyone has a reason to be angry about that, it would logically be the royal family… not the public.

So I’m left with a question I can’t quite resolve:

Why is the public so angry on behalf of an institution that hasn’t asked them to be?

Is this a cultural expectation around loyalty to the monarchy? A reaction to breaking tradition? A media-driven narrative that hardened into public sentiment?

I’m not here to defend or attack anyone. I’m genuinely interested in understanding the reasoning from people who feel strongly about this, because from the outside looking in, the intensity of the reaction doesn’t seem proportionate to any identifiable public harm.

If you’re willing to explain your perspective without defaulting to insults or assumptions, I’d appreciate the conversation.

I am sorry lovelygreendress. There is a huge huge difference between the heir and now King's son marrying a biracial woman and a Duke no one could name in a line up... his GC.
One has the attention on them big time. The other no one knows.

We will agree to disagree . In a few years time Harry will be languishing down the LOS and will be even more irrelevant .
By the way , the DoG is the grandson of George 5th
And Harry is not the heir .

I never said Harry was the heir. When Harry married, Charles was the heir which is why I said 'heir and now King'.
I worded it clumsily, apologies. I obviously know Harry isn't the heir!

I am just amazed that you think the guy that married the Duke of Gloucester's daughter has as much exposure as Meghan Markle and the public would know her! I doubt anyone could name her but I looked it up, her name is Lady Davina Windsor, Iove the Maori names of her children..
Interestingly, (only to me!) her husband comes from Gisborne. I've been there and went to a little school where the primary age children did the most wonderful maori concert. Memories!

And that’s what it sounds like when someone doesn’t have a proper point to make - accusations of racism.

You have no idea what race I am but thanks for the assumption.

Am I wrong then - QE2 wasn’t head of the commonwealth?

Obviously I am not being clear enough . I never said anything about exposure , I was purely addressing those who claim that Meghan was the first mixed race person to marry into the RF .
She wasn’t.
That’s it .

Pat “wasn’t hot”; she was “small, mousy, frazzled” with her hair in her eyes. Harry and his classmates mocked her stiff knees and crooked spine, which forced her to go down stairs backwards

But isn’t that just a basic description?

No it's not just a basic description, @CaraVirra
If he had to mention the matron at all, that would have involved saying the she had some diabilities/challenges and empathising as an adult even if he couldn't do it as a child, but it's the mockery which showed him for exactly what he is, especially when he claims to advocate for the diabled when it suits

And that's the answer to your original question ... some of us don't like ugly behaviour and don't like liars, and sadly this pair appear capable of little else

At the time of their marriages Mrghan was marrying the 6th in line to the throne, the current monarch's grandson whereas Gary Lewis was marrying the monarch's cousin once removed who was then about 30th in line. It's clearly far different.

I had never heard of Lady Davina or Gary Lewis until this thread prompted me to look them up. Pretty sure a vastly larger number of people can name Meghan Markle than Gary Lewis and pick either out of a crowd.

Last time I am saying this ….
Meghan was not the first mixed race person to marry into the RF . That is not why she is disliked by so many .
Telling lies , making untrue allegations and brazenly monetising her Royal title whilst saying titles ( Except Mom) don’t matter . Those are things most people don’t like . Nothing to do with skin colour .

Thank you

My point exactly. Hardly anyone will have heard of Lady Davina Windsor or know who she married.

Let's rephrase it. Meghan was the first biracial woman to marry a son of the heir to the British Monarchy. A grandson of the Monarch (at the time)
That sorts it.

.

I agree totally. They don’t impinge on my life in any way.

I am similar in age to Kate and will, got married and had kids around the same time. I actually feel sorry for Kate in all of it. She was like a sister to Harry, and according to the engagement interview, very welcoming to Meghan.

then came the complaining/snidey comments and betrayed privacy in press, books and interviews. The Dutch version of the Scobie book claim about racism, Never corrected (though just unconscious bias according to Harry in a different interview). The bullying by the Sussex squad when she had cancer, never rebuked once by the Sussexes.

I get that Meghan didn’t like the unfavourable comparisons in the press, that she was criticised for the bump cradling and avocados that Kate was praised for. Not withstanding that the royals grey rock most press articles apart from the most egregious (such as topless photos and articles about Kate’s body weight). Kate was pregnant with HG, gave birth and was very postnatal during the run up to the wedding. They knew she was pregnant and when the baby was due.

She was still criticised for not taking Meghan shopping, not wanting to share make up, for not hugging, for having concerns about bridesmaid fittings being in time (and was proven right when they didn’t fit) for trying to advise that protocol is followed with bridesmaid tights, for bringing round flowers after a falling out, for needing William home to help with the kids the night before the wedding, for some vague and never clarified rumour about being racist, and the whole onslaught of online bullying that followed. Repeating names like Waity Katie, never using her chosen name or title.

The PW seems like a perfectly nice if somewhat reserved woman and I get the feeling that Meghan wanted to dominate and use the friendship. When she didn’t get that, she and Harry have allowed all this to play out in the press/books/interviews and have never corrected any of the rumours they have fuelled. This is why I think William will have the hardest time forgiving Harry. The effect of this on Catherine’s life and mental health, and the whole family can’t be overstated.

I am not saying that Meghan didn’t have a difficult time, but I struggle to see why Catherine has become such a target for their anger and unkindness.

I think most people dont really care about H&M.
IMHO they made a big mistake by publicly trashing the RF, they underestimated the respect many round the world have for the RF, and they massively overestimated their popularity.

The only currency they really have is giving stories about the RF, and I would blame Charles and William for no longer wishing to engage with them, why would they when they are at risk of having another load of public griping about them

That such sexist and disablist writing. I am astonished Meghan supports this as a self certified feminist.

"Wasn’t hot” reduces Pat entirely to her sexual and physical attractiveness. The focus on her appearance (small, mousy, frazzled, hair in her eyes) reinforces the idea that women are primarily valued for how they look, rather than who they are or what they do. Harry represents Pat's body and mobility as objects of ridicule and reinforces nasty stereotypes about women and disabled people. This isn't 'just' a rich, privileged, white, public school boy objectifying girls his age (which would be disgusting enough) but he is dehumanising a woman who was caring for him and an authority figure.

I am astonished the editor kept this, it's incredibly politically incorrect and not in line with the inclusive culture of the publishing industry post pandemic.

So Meghan married an arrogant, unkind ignorant sexist. How does that fit in with the image of a feminist she lis to paint.

Except that it doesn’t. I made the original point in my post so pardon me for weighing in. Regardless of whether Harry was the son of the King, there were biracial members of the royal family before Meghan. Their place in the hierarchy is irrelevant, the royal family had no problem with them and they are seen at family events. That is the point @Mylovelygreendresswas making.

You have no idea what the Royal family feel about anyone. You can surmise of course. As can I.

And Meghan was a lot closer by relationship to the core of the Monarchy, unlike QE2's cousin's daughter's husband.

Did I say I did? They seem pretty agreeable with each other, that’s the best indication I have.

Harry’s proximity to the King is irrelevant. He will never be King, his children will be the last in his line to have the title of Prince and Princess. They are increasingly remote from the throne, not least because they are currently and most likely permanently estranged from the heir.

No-one in the royal family remotely cares what his wife’s racial heritage is. I don’t think they ever did.

Thanks for explaining but I am beginning to think some posters are deliberately missing the point .

Not so much missing the point but I think including people so far down the line of succession and so far out of the public eye as being in the royal family is stretching a point. They are royal adjacent really.

No it isn’t just a basic description. To the poor lady who went into work day after day to care for those boys, who’s every step when she climbed those stairs must have been painful, who probably felt pride that she worked in one of the most elite schools in the world and I’m sure her family did too. To that lady it was probably heartbreaking to learn that all those boys were mocking her disability and judging her looks.
Not only that but the book was a best seller I can imagine the humiliation of knowing that around the world people were discussing that passage.
even the boys who went to school with H must have either thought “shut up Harry” and their parents thinking I hope my son didn’t do that.
Being able to imagine how other people feel isn’t something everyone has. I think it is lacking with H, and kind of explains why you started this post op.

Basically now it’s been pointed out that Meghan wasn’t the first in the family, the argument no longer holds water and a new definition must be found.

I think this had better be my last post on the subject, but I fail to see what anyone’s place in the hierarchy has to do with anything. The direct line of succession is William and his children. Nobody else matters.

I am talking direct family as you will see from my posts.

Yes, a new definition has been found. Because you cannot liken QE2's cousin's daughter's husband to direct family like Harry's wife (grandson and then son to the Monarch)

I have worked in education my whole working life and I have always been devoted to my pupils. If any of my former pupils described me like that, I would be gutted. As you say, she was probably quite proud of the fact she worked in a school with such a prestigious name and with a prince. I believe she may have already passed away when H wrote Spare. Also, I remember being disrespectful about some of my teachers at school, not to their face, but behind their backs. For example, I remember I had a Yugoslavian geography teacher with a very thick accent. I didn’t think much of her. However, as an adult, I looked back and thought how brilliant she was to be able to teach her subject in a foreign language. H is incapable of thinking about things from other people’s perspectives.

@KittyTinker That was what I thought when I read "Spare".