Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Gillian Mostyn — Sun, 21 Mar 2021 16:42:50 GMT

[quote userid="10320" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229365#229365"]Perhaps it's more useful to focus on the action rather than the person? It seems very possible that someone who doesn't necessarily hold any racist views could say (or do) something racist through ignorance or a lack of understanding.[/quote]

Absolutely .. and that is what I meant. Lovely folk can just 'get it wrong'.

Apart from anything else, none of us are immune from unconscious bias.

[quote userid="10320" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229365#229365"]I wonder how the idea that the British royals have some right or duty to reign, however distantly or benignly, over those cultures affects the way they are viewed?[/quote]

I'd like to think that being part of the commonwealth is both voluntary and beneficial these days. I agree that the history of that rule does us no favours as a country.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Lucy Fleming — Sun, 21 Mar 2021 13:15:35 GMT

It's an interesting thought, isn't it? I would tend to agree that they're likely to be a lot more cosmopolitan and in some ways familiar with other cultures than many, but I wonder how the idea that the British royals have some right or duty to reign, however distantly or benignly, over those cultures affects the way they are viewed?

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229364#229364"]I am often surprised at the racist comments I sometimes hear from people whom I'd never expected would utter them[/quote]

Perhaps it's more useful to focus on the action rather than the person? It seems very possible that someone who doesn't necessarily hold any racist views could say (or do) something racist through ignorance or a lack of understanding.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Gillian Mostyn — Sun, 21 Mar 2021 11:25:46 GMT

[quote userid="10320" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229363#229363"]I found this an interesting comment - I'd love to hear more about why you feel this is the case.[/quote]

I suppose because I've always thought racism has its roots in fear of the unknown/unfamiliar. The idea that other people are somehow 'different' when, in fact, everybody the world over is the same, just with different approaches to the same human issues. But that's just my take on it.

Therefore, as a group of people who have been 'forced' into interacting with other people of all races, cultures, colours and backgrounds from a very early age, I can't imagine them to be racist as such. Like I said - they may have led sheltered lives, be socially awkward and unable to express themselves very well, but racist? I just can't see it. But obviously it is all just speculation. I am often surprised at the racist comments I sometimes hear from people whom I'd never expected would utter them.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Lucy Fleming — Sun, 21 Mar 2021 10:52:56 GMT

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229061#229061"]But his family? I must say I struggle to imagine a group of people who are less likely to be racist. [/quote]

I found this an interesting comment - I'd love to hear more about why you feel this is the case. I'm not suggesting I think the RF are particularly racist, but I can think of several groups that are probably less likely to hold racist views.

I wonder if part of the issue with the way we think of this is everyone thinking of racism differently. It seems like for some, the word can only mean an active hatred of people of a different race/ nationality/ skin colour/ religion, and a desire to see them harmed or eliminated - old-fashioned, bedsheet-wearing, cross burning racism. Hopefully that is very much on the decline. But thoughtless actions or comments that are rooted in generalisations about a community are much more likely.

Do I think the RF are racist? Not particularly (I mean some of them might be, I don't know them personally). Is a comment about the skin colour of a mixed-race child, without considering the impact on a parent who has likely experienced hurtful comments in the past, a racist comment? Probably. Can people who aren't racist thoughtlessly say something racist? Easily.

Anyways, having now watched the interview (which was mostly quite boring) I have a few thoughts on some of the things in it (or more, on how they've been reported)...

The security furore: was Harry naive to think security would be able to magically continue in a different country? Definitely. But I can imagine he's spent most of his life having it drummed into him how important his security is, probably especially in his teens and young adulthood when I imagine having bodyguards all the time must have chafed. Stepping back as a working royal doesn't change public and press interest in his life that much, so it seems disingenuous for the head of the protection division to state publically that there was "no threat" to them after this.

It's been very sad to hear so many disbelieving comments about Meghan's revaluations on the state of her mental health, and those along the lines of "what could she possibly have to be depressed about" - that's really not how depression and anxiety work.

The Kate/ Meghan "who made who cry" story. Is it a bit petty to come out publicly and say "actually, it was Kate who made me cry"? Yes. But lord, how frustrating must it have been to have 2 1/2 years of an incorrect (non) story dredged up and repeatedly used by the press as evidence of how much of a demanding diva you are. "Never complain, never explain" might be an admirable motto, but perhaps needs updating in the days of newspaper website comment pages, social media and the "sidebar of shame"? After all, in the words of the late, great Terry Pratchett, "a lie can run around the world before the truth has got its boots on."

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Bob Russell — Thu, 18 Mar 2021 17:30:31 GMT

Judges do not decide guilt or innocence, a jury does. The prosecution has to provide a compelling case beyond reasonable doubt. Magistrates sit as a panel in the magistrates court, again a compelling case beyond reasonable doubt has to be made. Whilst their personal opinions may impact their decisions indirectly it is not supposed to influence them.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Thu, 18 Mar 2021 16:55:33 GMT

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229268#229268"]Define 'private'.[/quote]

Anything that is not clearly designed for public broadcast.

It's a bit of an irrelevant point, because public speech should be free too.

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229268#229268"]Slight omission, but you forgot to say 'in my opinion'[/quote]

As did you.

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229268#229268"]

Evelyn Barbour-Hill said:
No, you are still wrong. And, er, who s going to decide the dividing line anyway?

Slight omission, but you forgot to say 'in my opinion'. And the decision is left to a judge. As is common in law.

[/quote]

Hmmmmm... so it depends upon the judge's personal opinion? Or are there going to be some guidelines, some directives... and maybe before we know it some government orders...

We live in a country where it has already been "established as a principle" that any crime is a "hate crime" – and hence for some reason must be punished more severely – if the victim says it's a hate crime. Where an assault is punished more severely if it was "racially motivated" (why?).Where anything is "racist" if the recipient says it is. And judges cannot go against that.

We've already seen a case where a bloke was sacked for voicing his opinion that "trans" people could not change sex. He lost his case for unfair dismissal, the judge stating that "such an opinion was not worthy of consideration".

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229268#229268"]

Evelyn Barbour-Hill said:
Who's comparing them?

You. In your previous post.

[/quote]

Nope. You compared them. I simply pointed out that the words of Abu Hamza and Piers Corbyn (just two names that happened to come to mind, one a Wahabi Muslim, one a swivel-eyed loony) were examples of things that had to be allowed as the price of freedom.

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229268#229268"]

Well, the law generally follows the definition "as commonly understood".

No it doesn't. Most people think there's such a thing as a common-law wife. There isn't.

[/quote]

Er, no, I don't believe that the phrase "common-law wife" appears in any legislation, and I don't think many people think that a "common-law wife" is a legal wife. It was always just a euphemism for living over t'brush. Nowadays people just say partner, though I've noticed that newspapers have taken to saying fiancée.

When there's a word or term in a law it's taken to mean that word or term as commonly understood, unless it's been given a strict definition by law.

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229268#229268"]

Evelyn Barbour-Hill said:
Dictionaries are a handy guide. I haven't looked up "hateful" but i do know what it has always meant until now.

But the leguislation doesn't say hateful speech.

[/quote]

No, but somebody introduced the term on this thread and seemed to imply that it was synonymous with "hate speech". So it was something to discuss.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Gillian Mostyn — Thu, 18 Mar 2021 07:36:54 GMT

[quote userid="2131" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229264#229264"]No it isn't[/quote]

Define 'private'.

[quote userid="2131" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229264#229264"]No, you are still wrong. And, er, who s going to decide the dividing line anyway?[/quote]

Slight omission, but you forgot to say 'in my opinion'. And the decision is left to a judge. As is common in law.

[quote userid="2131" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229264#229264"]Who's comparing them?[/quote]

You. In your previous post.

[quote userid="2131" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229264#229264"]Well, the law generally follows the definition "as commonly understood".[/quote]

No it doesn't. Most people think there's such a thing as a common-law wife. There isn't.

[quote userid="2131" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229264#229264"]Dictionaries are a handy guide. I haven't looked up "hateful" but i do know what it has always meant until now. [/quote]

But the leguislation doesn't say hateful speech.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

janine redman — Wed, 17 Mar 2021 23:49:25 GMT

And then what about people who perceive hateful speech pertaining to weight , height , any other visible physical or mental characteristics etc . In my youth calling someone “four eyes” because they wore glasses was hateful speech. And what is acceptable now may not be acceptable tomorrow, and who decides what is hateful may depend on a vociferous minority, not the apathetic majority.
if there are laws based on opinion and not fact then they are open to interpretation which may change. If we are not free to challenge and criticise things then we are in trouble as a society. Personally I think individuals should be taught to stand up for what they believe in and be free to express opinions as long as they are respectful of everyone else’s.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Wed, 17 Mar 2021 23:00:43 GMT

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229187#229187"]

Evelyn Barbour-Hill said:
What people might say in private is no damn business of the law.

Of course it is.

[/quote]

No it isn't.

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229187#229187"]

Disagree. There is a very big difference between hate speech and controversial opinions.

[/quote]

No, you are still wrong. And, er, who s going to decide the dividing line anyway?

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229187#229187"]You can't compare Abu Hamza with Piers Corbyn. The former is encouraging people to go out and kill other people. The latter is just a controversial journalist/politician.[/quote]

Who's comparing them? Oh, you just have.

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229187#229187"]

Evelyn Barbour-Hill said:
By the way, "hateful speech" would surely mean something that is hated by somebody hearing it, not speech that is expressing hate.

I doubt that's the definition in law tbh.

[/quote]

Well, the law generally follows the definition "as commonly understood".

Dictionaries are a handy guide. I haven't looked up "hateful" but i do know what it has always meant until now.

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229187#229187"]

A lack of control over hate speech can lead to war .. it is too late to stop it at that point. (The Nationalist Socialist Party).

[/quote]

Suppression of freedom of speech can also lead to war. Via revolution.

Were you referring to the Nazionalesocialistiche Deautsche Arbeiterpartei? If so, that's a very simplistic, naive, not to say erroneous, view of the origins of the Second World War. And are you suggesting that if the NSDAP had somehow been prevented from spouting hatred of Jews they would not have come to power and there would have been no War?

Suppression of free speech is one of the marks of totalitarianism. It's fascism (oh the irony).

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Stephen Pointing — Wed, 17 Mar 2021 14:12:10 GMT

The former, of course, but as has already been demonstrated here by your, my and Evelyn's comments it will be interpreted differently by different people. My concern is that "hateful" speech will be reported as "hate" speech on a fairly regular basis and I really think the police have more important things with which to concern themselves. I will be awaiting the first such report of a disgruntled teenager reporting his/her parents to the police for something that he/she disagrees with them having said - perhaps as means of getting back at them for some actual or perceived slight. It is opening a Pandora's box of unknown consequences.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Gillian Mostyn — Wed, 17 Mar 2021 13:43:04 GMT

[quote userid="13196" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229206#229206"] I think there is a real difference between "hate" speech which has as its aim inciting others to harm or injure another person or persons and "hateful" speech which is just expressing your feelings about someone else because you genuinely don't like them or their behaviour but is your right to say so. [/quote]

Which of these do you think is being restricted by the new law in Scotland, which is where this part of the conversation started?

https://www.gov.scot/news/hate-crime-bill-passed/

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Stephen Pointing — Wed, 17 Mar 2021 12:27:19 GMT

[quote userid="2131" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229183#229183"]By the way, "hateful speech" would surely mean something that is hated by somebody hearing it, not speech that is expressing hate.[/quote]

That is how would interpret it. I think there is a real difference between "hate" speech which has as its aim inciting others to harm or injure another person or persons and "hateful" speech which is just expressing your feelings about someone else because you genuinely don't like them or their behaviour but is your right to say so. I suspect there is plenty of the latter happening in private households up and down the country on a daily basis. If reported to the police they wouldn't have the man/woman power to deal with it. I suspect it might even be going on as I write this inside the Salmond and Sturgeon households about their respective adversaries.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Bob Russell — Wed, 17 Mar 2021 09:17:31 GMT

Presumably the next step is to have smart speakers programmed to report all discussions that the authorities deem inappropriate so action can be taken.

Sorry! I believe things have already gone more than far enough. Even Thought for Today on Radio 4 this morning was full of fear and hate. Aimed squarely at men. I understand the vast majority of attacks are by young men on other young men.

We are in real danger of falling in to a totalitarian world even if the motives appear good.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Gillian Mostyn — Wed, 17 Mar 2021 07:34:21 GMT

[quote userid="2131" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229183#229183"]What people might say in private is no damn business of the law.[/quote]

Of course it is. Just because hate speech happens 'in private' (how do we define private?) doesn't make it immune from the same laws that control it in public. Obviously the law is only going to hear about it if the person being spoken to has reason to report it as a crime. But if we can reduce hate speech in the home, especially around children etc, then that will carry through to the public sphere.

[quote userid="2131" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229183#229183"]

Indeed what people might say in public should be very little the business of the law.

The right to free speech trumps everything else, except, possibly , to a degree, in wartime (which we ain't).

The downside of this fundamental right is that you have to tolerate people like Abu Hamza and Piers Corbyn, but free speech has to be universal.

[/quote]

Disagree. There is a very big difference between hate speech and controversial opinions.

A lack of control over hate speech can lead to war .. it is too late to stop it at that point. (The Nationalist Socialist Party).

You can't compare Abu Hamza with Piers Corbyn. The former is encouraging people to go out and kill other people. The latter is just a controversial journalist/politician.

I doubt that's the definition in law tbh.

The United Nations document is quite good at defining it.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/UN%2520Strategy%2520and%2520Plan%2520of%2520Action%2520on%2520Hate%2520Speech%252018%2520June%2520SYNOPSIS.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiHs8Hg57bvAhUNXsAKHRAQDF0QFjABegQIARAG&usg=AOvVaw2OjIPa2HqzI7Jrl_J9jBbv

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

janine redman — Tue, 16 Mar 2021 23:38:09 GMT

The ability to listen to arguments and points of view you might vehemently disagree with is an integral part of free speech . Silencing people you disagree with is no way to to build a society. In fact tolerance of other people’s beliefs and ideas is essential and only by listening to other people’s point of view might you change your own and only by rational and open discussion can we mature . It’s a bit like inhibiting a dog which growls at you > you might silence the growl but not the emotion and then you go straight to the bite !

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Tue, 16 Mar 2021 23:30:54 GMT

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229161#229161"]

Stephen Pointing said:
Hateful speech will not be tolerated anywhere.

Quite rightly.

[/quote]

Jeeee – eez.

If I lived in Scotland I'd be arranging to leave, sharpish.

What people might say in private is no damn business of the law.

Indeed what people might say in public should be very little the business of the law.

The right to free speech trumps everything else, except, possibly , to a degree, in wartime (which we ain't).

The downside of this fundamental right is that you have to tolerate people like Abu Hamza and Piers Corbyn, but free speech has to be universal.

Gradually, gradually, Orwell's 1984 is creeping up on us.

By the way, "hateful speech" would surely mean something that is hated by somebody hearing it, not speech that is expressing hate.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Stephen Pointing — Tue, 16 Mar 2021 16:15:07 GMT

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229161#229161"]which would hopefully not be hateful but may not be PC.[/quote]

We'll have to wait and see how the first case pans out in Scotland. Personally I think it is a very slippery slope to be policing what poeple say in the privacy of their own homes. When they've developed that machine that can read our minds we'll all be at risk of thought crimes as well. Who knows where it will end.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Gillian Mostyn — Tue, 16 Mar 2021 16:08:51 GMT

[quote userid="13196" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229127#229127"]Hateful speech will not be tolerated anywhere. [/quote]

Quite rightly.

I wasn't talking hate speech. I was talking about being honest about how you feel - which would hopefully not be hateful but may not be PC.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Stephen Pointing — Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:33:34 GMT

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229061#229061"]We should all be able to have open and honest conversations within our own family[/quote]

You might have to be careful what you say to each other in your own home from now on if you live in Scotland. The Scottish government is keeping an eye on you - no matter where you are! Hateful speech will not be tolerated anywhere.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Arlo Guthrie — Mon, 15 Mar 2021 10:01:33 GMT

[quote userid="2131" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229065#229065"]No, I don't. What was the story for which that was the headline? What actually was the headline? In what publication was it?[/quote]

The story was that some ukipper's girlfriend had said that Meghan's seed would taint the royal family. I think the headline was reported in different ways in different places. Daily Mail, for example, shared on Facebook here: https://www.facebook.com/DailyMail/posts/meghans-seed-will-taint-our-royal-family/3263025717090487/ prefacing / highlighting the 'tainting seed' part of the story.

No doubt that it's a racist remark. The point is that someone has decided to make a headline out of it, which I would argue is itself racist - especially when it is a story concocted out of a quote made by someone who nobody knows or cares less what they think!

[quote userid="2131" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229065#229065"]By the way, the curtsey story is pretty silly and a pretty poor choice for an illustration of how "badly prepared" she was.[/quote]

Yeah, I thought you might think that. We'll have to disagree. I don't personally know the Queen well enough to know how she feels about curtseying, but it's not really the point. It's about how daunting it must be for the new in-law. And whilst curtseying or not may not be that big a deal, it seemed representative to me of how ill prepared she was.

[quote userid="2457" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229085#229085"]'I'm a royal so I should get my security paid for' argument. He needs to have a chat with the countless celebrities/rich folk/aristocrats that have to manage their own security every single day. They manage it pretty well - and I'm sure he has plenty of friends in high places! [/quote]

I think as royals they face a greater threat than the average Hollywood a-lister and, as he correctly said, that is a level of risk he had no choice over whether he was prepared to accept or not (unlike actors). So I think it is completely wrong to remove his security overnight. It needs to be removed over a period of time. ie, it could be probably reduced over the course of his life - by the time he is in his 70s, he is probably at far less risk, and his children can be brought up anonymously.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Gillian Mostyn — Sat, 13 Mar 2021 11:05:50 GMT

[quote userid="9239" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229082#229082"]I had enough of them. I'm no royalist but Jesus Christ what a pair of crybabies. If you don't like the court then pack your things and off you go. Get a job and live your life how you want it. [/quote]

I wouldn't have put it quite so bluntly but that's pretty much how I feel. And I don't get the 'I'm a royal so I should get my security paid for' argument. He needs to have a chat with the countless celebrities/rich folk/aristocrats that have to manage their own security every single day. They manage it pretty well - and I'm sure he has plenty of friends in high places! There's a reason many celebs holiday on Necker Island and similar - it is secure!

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Francisco Gomez — Sat, 13 Mar 2021 05:37:51 GMT

I'm interested not because I care about the monarchy, but because it has touched a nerve about how society thinks and how journalists have the power to change society's political course. I reflected about this here: https://link.medium.com/UMpdBKv4xeb

Evelyn is correct to asume a different outcome if the interview had been conducted by Andrew Neil and his snowflaky 'Woke Watch' idea for his new GB channel, but I don't believe that makes it any more ethical or even 'impartial'.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Dinu Catilina — Sat, 13 Mar 2021 00:58:51 GMT

I had enough of them. I'm no royalist but Jesus Christ what a pair of crybabies. If you don't like the court then pack your things and off you go. Get a job and live your life how you want it.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Coopers Wamae — Fri, 12 Mar 2021 00:05:34 GMT

[quote userid="2131" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229065#229065"]How can British police possibly provide security for private citizens living permanently in the USA? [/quote]

This are not some typical private citizens,the are Royals any layman would expect some kind of reservation for them. Given that the British police do not offer protection outside the British territories, it's the Royal Guard [Many folks get pulled from the SAS] who are well known to perform some high level clandestine ventures including including protecting the Monarchy.

As Arlo pointed out their protection is a closely guarded secret and £4mil is just the tip of the iceberg.

RE: Is anyone else sick of the Meghan and Harry soap opera?

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Thu, 11 Mar 2021 20:41:42 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229058#229058"]I completely disagree with the idea that they don't deserve protection because they left the UK.[/quote]

That's not what I said and not what I meant.

How can British police possibly provide security for private citizens living permanently in the USA? If poor Salman Rushdie had moved to the USA, would you expect the British police to continue their operation to protect him? As has been pointed out, it would not even have been allowed by the US authorities.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229058#229058"]I think the media coverage of her has at the very least carried a lot of racist / sexist etc undertones.[/quote]

Sorry, I couldn't agree less

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229058#229058"](remember the headline about her 'seed' tainting the royal family?)[/quote]

No, I don't. What was the story for which that was the headline? What actually was the headline? In what publication was it?

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/off-duty-discussions/29724/is-anyone-else-sick-of-the-meghan-and-harry-soap-opera/229058#229058"]Diana was equally ill prepared for life as a royal, and much of what we have seen playing out here is a rerun of her life. [/quote]

But soon as the engagement is official, the lady gets ladies in waiting and secretaries and all sorts of other advisors. That's the "induction course" and if Prince Harry didn't help he blinkin' well should have done. Maybe sometimes the prospective princesses just don't like the advice they are getting....

The paps and the meeja were indeed a horrible experience for the naive young Princess of Wales, sure. But the Duchess of Sussex was a Hollywood actress, no stranger to the behaviour of these people.

She hadn't googled Prince Harry, she knew nothing about being royal... well, perhaps not. But she could have learned quickly. Why did not Harry, who knew he was effectively signing her up for a job, sketch things out for her?

By the way, the curtsey story is pretty silly and a pretty poor choice for an illustration of how "badly prepared" she was. The Queen is not cross or upset if a lady just bows rather than the conventional curtsey – in fact she wouldn't say anything even if some overawed young lady forgot to do either. In the event, Miss Markle chose to learn quickly to curtsey (it's not hard, five minutes is plenty) and kudos to her for doing that.. You know, I think, perfectly well that the five-minute lesson was not "her preparation for life as a royal".

But these wranglings are not the reason I care or the reason we are having this thread. The point is that by "going on Oprah" they got themselves a super-sympathetic hearing in before a huge audience most of whose members probably know nothing about the British monarchy or the Royal Family, many of whom will have taken the allegations and slanderous suggestions unquestioningly. This was a deliberate enterprise to hurt the Royal Family, and the effect was to give aid and comfort to those who hate the monarchy.

(PS and by the way. I'm surprised no-one pulled me up for referring to the Duchess of Wessex. Prince Edward's wife Sophie is of course the Countess of Wessex).