Is it okay to put family first? (Response to royal family stuff)

[snappy]

Actually she is 38.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

If I am correct, Meghan is nearly 30 years old.
With that, I will assume that she knowingly has done everything she has done with full knowledge and intent.
To do what she has done, with Harry's blessing or not... to ingratiate herself in to the royal family, get everything she has gottten and will be getting, but then to say, "Sorry, I am leaving the country, I'm out."


I am not a royal hater, I have not been a Meghan hater, I am not racist in any way.
I judge solely by a persons actions.

And this is coming from somebody who knows all about entitled and controlling inlaws!
Have you all heard of the acronym TANSTAFL.
It seems that they not only want their free lunch, but the cake and the icing on the cake too.

She is actually almost 40

 

[RedAngie]

His “in” is his grandmother THE Queen, Her Royal Highness, Elizabeth II and NOT Ms. Meghan Markle Windsor-Mountbatten former television actress

Whatever you say, hon.

 

[Boardwalk Jedi]

I have so much to say, but I will gracefully decline and in Elsa’s words, “Let it go.” It’s just not worth it.

Alright. Not everyone falls in line with others thinking, which is why I respect whatever the Sussexes are thinking.

 

[Praying Colonel]

His “in” is his grandmother THE Queen, Her Royal Highness, Elizabeth II and NOT Ms. Meghan Markle Windsor-Mountbatten former television actress

At the risk of being one of those "Well, ACTUALLY" people, Queen Elizabeth is Her Majesty, not HRH.

Paul McCartney said so.

 

[TLSnell1981]

Whatever you say, hon.

It doesn’t matter if it’s right or anyone likes it. Queen Elizabeth II has way more clout in some countries (including Canada). Meghan really isn’t that important in a Global sense. She is a former television actress who is married to the 6th in line to the British throne. May be harsh, but true

 

[TLSnell1981]

I agree with this completely. I can see cutting off other means of support if the Sussexes don’t want to be working royals, but their need for security is something he was born into and should be provided to him/them regardless of the work he does or does not do.

I can see that a transition period is needed. Princess Diana is the sad proof. Although, Harry has an inheritance of $40M. I think he should pick up the tab, if he wants to be totally independent. He can certainly afford it.

 

[TLSnell1981]

At the risk of being one of those "Well, ACTUALLY" people, Queen Elizabeth is Her Majesty, not HRH.

Paul McCartney said so.

I think both work perfectly fine.... her official title has changed a few times. You are correct...HRM or ma'am when addressing THE QUEEN.

Ironic...Yoko and Meghan

 

[cabanafrau]

I found this interview to be interesting.

Didn't watch it all, but it was interesting. My take was that this reporter was sincere and genuinely believes what he's saying. I also recognize that it's entirely normal that he may not recognize his own biases, or be aware that a good deal of what he sincerely believes is an accurate viewpoint is in fact shaped by his sources, who may have biases and agendas of their own of which he is entirely oblivious. He seems to be overlooking the reality that a lot of his insight into the royals isn't as direct from them as he's interpreting it to be. His job is to cover a story. When he's used to getting friendly cooperation from palace staff channels and the information turns out to be on the money as far as accuracy goes for many years it's natural that he would believe that all of what they share is absolutely true. I'm sure sometimes he's made inquiries and gets crickets back, but he understands that to be because they're supposed to keep quiet about something.

How easy would it be for a palace staff who is feeling uneasy about an American, or someone with virtually no idea about how aristocracy works on a day to day level, or a woman of color, or someone from Hollywood, or someone who's beyond the years of being an impressionable girl ready to accept their instructions without question to receive media requests to interview the Duchess either to not pass along the request to her, or advise her that media interviews are really not done by the family except under extraordinary circumstances to get her to decline the request herself, and then tell the press the Duchess declines?

If a refusal is expressed to the media in a way that's different from the normal refusals it's only natural for the press to read something into the differences and assign them to what they know to be the obvious difference. The same thing could be said about changes in Harry since marrying. On the outside it may look that Megan is the cause or in fact dictating the changes. If negative comments and press about his wife and/or child are like waving a cape in front of a bull when it comes to Harry it's entirely possible that the changes are in fact led by Harry. If that's the case and Harry feels he's only reacting to nastiness towards Megan and he sees her being blamed for changes it may only make him feel he is absolutely right to pull in tighter and withdraw, closing the loop on a vicious cycle.

Maybe this reporter is right on the money and this whole mess is led by a very calculating woman who's tearing apart this family unit and doing tremendous damage to the monarchy for unknown reasons. I'm merely suggesting that the reporter may be sharing what he's genuinely hearing and seeing, but may not understand how and why his vantage point is compromised.

 

[VandVsmama]

Didn't watch it all, but it was interesting. My take was that this reporter was sincere and genuinely believes what he's saying. I also recognize that it's entirely normal that he may not recognize his own biases, or be aware that a good deal of what he sincerely believes is an accurate viewpoint is in fact shaped by his sources, who may have biases and agendas of their own of which he is entirely oblivious. He seems to be overlooking the reality that a lot of his insight into the royals isn't as direct from them as he's interpreting it to be. His job is to cover a story. When he's used to getting friendly cooperation from palace staff channels and the information turns out to be on the money as far as accuracy goes for many years it's natural that he would believe that all of what they share is absolutely true. I'm sure sometimes he's made inquiries and gets crickets back, but he understands that to be because they're supposed to keep quiet about something.

How easy would it be for a palace staff who is feeling uneasy about an American, or someone with virtually no idea about how aristocracy works on a day to day level, or a woman of color, or someone from Hollywood, or someone who's beyond the years of being an impressionable girl ready to accept their instructions without question to receive media requests to interview the Duchess either to not pass along the request to her, or advise her that media interviews are really not done by the family except under extraordinary circumstances to get her to decline the request herself, and then tell the press the Duchess declines?

If a refusal is expressed to the media in a way that's different from the normal refusals it's only natural for the press to read something into the differences and assign them to what they know to be the obvious difference. The same thing could be said about changes in Harry since marrying. On the outside it may look that Megan is the cause or in fact dictating the changes. If negative comments and press about his wife and/or child are like waving a cape in front of a bull when it comes to Harry it's entirely possible that the changes are in fact led by Harry. If that's the case and Harry feels he's only reacting to nastiness towards Megan and he sees her being blamed for changes it may only make him feel he is absolutely right to pull in tighter and withdraw, closing the loop on a vicious cycle.

Maybe this reporter is right on the money and this whole mess is led by a very calculating woman who's tearing apart this family unit and doing tremendous damage to the monarchy for unknown reasons. I'm merely suggesting that the reporter may be sharing what he's genuinely hearing and seeing, but may not understand how and why his vantage point is compromised.

I agree. All reporters, regardless of their political leanings one way or the other, have their own biases that inadvertently creep into their work sometimes.

 

[Searc]

It doesn’t matter if it’s right or anyone likes it. Queen Elizabeth II has way more clout in some countries (including Canada). Meghan really isn’t that important in a Global sense. She is a former television actress who is married to the 6th in line to the British throne. May be harsh, but true

She lived in Canada for 7 years while working there. That had to be done via legal means through the government, before anyone knew her name. I have no idea what that process was (a green card, working visa?), but she didn't live and work there without the government knowing.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Didn't watch it all, but it was interesting. My take was that this reporter was sincere and genuinely believes what he's saying. I also recognize that it's entirely normal that he may not recognize his own biases, or be aware that a good deal of what he sincerely believes is an accurate viewpoint is in fact shaped by his sources, who may have biases and agendas of their own of which he is entirely oblivious. He seems to be overlooking the reality that a lot of his insight into the royals isn't as direct from them as he's interpreting it to be. His job is to cover a story. When he's used to getting friendly cooperation from palace staff channels and the information turns out to be on the money as far as accuracy goes for many years it's natural that he would believe that all of what they share is absolutely true. I'm sure sometimes he's made inquiries and gets crickets back, but he understands that to be because they're supposed to keep quiet about something.

How easy would it be for a palace staff who is feeling uneasy about an American, or someone with virtually no idea about how aristocracy works on a day to day level, or a woman of color, or someone from Hollywood, or someone who's beyond the years of being an impressionable girl ready to accept their instructions without question to receive media requests to interview the Duchess either to not pass along the request to her, or advise her that media interviews are really not done by the family except under extraordinary circumstances to get her to decline the request herself, and then tell the press the Duchess declines?

If a refusal is expressed to the media in a way that's different from the normal refusals it's only natural for the press to read something into the differences and assign them to what they know to be the obvious difference. The same thing could be said about changes in Harry since marrying. On the outside it may look that Megan is the cause or in fact dictating the changes. If negative comments and press about his wife and/or child are like waving a cape in front of a bull when it comes to Harry it's entirely possible that the changes are in fact led by Harry. If that's the case and Harry feels he's only reacting to nastiness towards Megan and he sees her being blamed for changes it may only make him feel he is absolutely right to pull in tighter and withdraw, closing the loop on a vicious cycle.

Maybe this reporter is right on the money and this whole mess is led by a very calculating woman who's tearing apart this family unit and doing tremendous damage to the monarchy for unknown reasons. I'm merely suggesting that the reporter may be sharing what he's genuinely hearing and seeing, but may not understand how and why his vantage point is compromised.

Arthur Edwards isn't just a reporter, he is a Royal Photographer, and as such he has a presence and insight into the Royal Family like few others have, as well as long term relationships with many of them. His insight is almost like no other.

https://www.news.co.uk/who-we-are/top-talent/arthur-edwards-2/
"Arthur Edwards is The Sun’s legendary Royal photographer and has been credited for taking the greatest Royal pictures of all time.

Over almost four decades wherever the royal family have travelled, Edwards has gone with them. He has captured more than 200 royal tours across 120 countries. He’s been behind the lens at seven royal weddings, four funerals and seven royal births.

Arthur has developed a close bond with several members of the royal family and is often referred to as the House of Windsor’s favourite snapper. This was confirmed in 2003 when the Queen made him a Member of the Order of the British Empire (MBE) for ‘outstanding service to newspapers’ –a week later she jokingly asked him why he wasn’t wearing his medal."

 

[cabanafrau]

She lived in Canada for 7 years while working there. That had to be done via legal means through the government, before anyone knew her name. I have no idea what that process was (a green card, working visa?), but she didn't live and work there without the government knowing.

I have no idea how it works, but the fact that she went to Canada as part of the cast of a TV series might have made her eligible for the status to work there at that time. I'm not sure if it granted her the ability to remain once that production ended and decide to open a restaurant and stay as the proprietor. In order to apply to live and work there she might be required to prove that she already has a job waiting.

With Harry a born member of the British Royal Family and fully a British citizen I have no idea what privileges that would bring in regard to living and working in Canada. For that matter I don't know if Megan's marriage or her lack of British citizenship would allow her any privileges or be a barrier to her that wouldn't apply in Harry's case.

 

[cabanafrau]

Arthur Edwards isn't just a reporter, he is a Royal Photographer, and as such he has a presence and insight into the Royal Family like few others have, as well as long term relationships with many of them. His insight is almost like no other.

https://www.news.co.uk/who-we-are/top-talent/arthur-edwards-2/
"Arthur Edwards is The Sun’s legendary Royal photographer and has been credited for taking the greatest Royal pictures of all time.

Over almost four decades wherever the royal family have travelled, Edwards has gone with them. He has captured more than 200 royal tours across 120 countries. He’s been behind the lens at seven royal weddings, four funerals and seven royal births.

Arthur has developed a close bond with several members of the royal family and is often referred to as the House of Windsor’s favourite snapper. This was confirmed in 2003 when the Queen made him a Member of the Order of the British Empire (MBE) for ‘outstanding service to newspapers’ –a week later she jokingly asked him why he wasn’t wearing his medal."

Are you suggesting that to complete his assignments he simply gets on the phone with the Queen, Prince Charles, etc. or that they call him directly? I'd bet that the staff are the gatekeepers that orchestrate these things and therefore have extensive relationships with him in a way that the family does not. I'm not suggesting he's a bad guy, bad at his job or even has any malicious intent at all. I'm just suggesting that the good working relationship he has with the family has limits.

 

[Maggie Gallagher]

I have so much to say, but I will gracefully decline and in Elsa’s words, “Let it go.” It’s just not worth it.

I got the gist of what you were saying, and I'm sure your husband has followed your traditions too and that you developed new traditions together. Also, I'm guessing that you loved Diana for her humanity, not because she gave up everything for the RF.

Good for you showing restraint when someone came for you. If someone took that attitude with me, I don't know if I would have had the self-control to "let it go."

 

[Pea-n-Me]

The RF should be paying his security. He needs security because he was born a prince. It’s not something he chose. The RF should’ve paid his security while he was on vacation too.

I agree with this completely. I can see cutting off other means of support if the Sussexes don’t want to be working royals, but their need for security is something he was born into and should be provided to him/them regardless of the work he does or does not do.

For a couple that thinks the RF is unwelcoming, uncaring, out of touch, racist, sexist, boring, etc., it's ok for them to take money from them.

I think I'd have to decline on principle alone!

 

[Maggie Gallagher]

This situation reminds me of Wallis Simpson and King Edward VIII:

Wallis Simpson (born Bessie Wallis Warfield; 19 June 1896 – 24 April 1986), later known as the Duchess of Windsor, was an American socialite divorcée whose intended marriage to the British king Edward VIII caused a constitutional crisis that led to Edward's abdication. Wallis grew up in Baltimore, Maryland.

He chose love over the royal family.

 

[gwynne]

Arthur Edwards isn't just a reporter, he is a Royal Photographer, and as such he has a presence and insight into the Royal Family like few others have, as well as long term relationships with many of them. His insight is almost like no other.

https://www.news.co.uk/who-we-are/top-talent/arthur-edwards-2/
"Arthur Edwards is The Sun’s legendary Royal photographer and has been credited for taking the greatest Royal pictures of all time.

Over almost four decades wherever the royal family have travelled, Edwards has gone with them. He has captured more than 200 royal tours across 120 countries. He’s been behind the lens at seven royal weddings, four funerals and seven royal births.

Arthur has developed a close bond with several members of the royal family and is often referred to as the House of Windsor’s favourite snapper. This was confirmed in 2003 when the Queen made him a Member of the Order of the British Empire (MBE) for ‘outstanding service to newspapers’ –a week later she jokingly asked him why he wasn’t wearing his medal."

Thank you for posting this. Receiving an MBE is quite special. Good for him!

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Are you suggesting that to complete his assignments he simply gets on the phone with the Queen, Prince Charles, etc. or that they call him directly? I'd bet that the staff are the gatekeepers that orchestrate these things and therefore have extensive relationships with him in a way that the family does not. I'm not suggesting he's a bad guy, bad at his job or even has any malicious intent at all. I'm just suggesting that the good working relationship he has with the family has limits.

It doesn't matter who calls or arranges things, fact is that he is present with the members of the RF in order to capture their most precious moments photographically, and therefore he gets to experience life with them that few do, X40 yrs, so he does have amazing insight. What I got from that interview is that he loves Harry very much. It looked like he was about to cry a few times. Much of what he said is what I also see reflected in many of the Comments I've read from the people of the UK. Harry, and Meghan, were much loved, and people were pulling for their happiness and excited to be a part of it.

 

[Searc]

This situation reminds me of Wallis Simpson and King Edward VIII:

Wallis Simpson (born Bessie Wallis Warfield; 19 June 1896 – 24 April 1986), later known as the Duchess of Windsor, was an American socialite divorcée whose intended marriage to the British king Edward VIII caused a constitutional crisis that led to Edward's abdication. Wallis grew up in Baltimore, Maryland.

He chose love over the royal family.

The situation is in no way similar.