Harry, Meghan and the Royal Family

[backontrack]

I don't care for any of them, but I do not like the incumbent royals one bit (especially Philip). I also think that the tabloids are engaging in racist dogwhistles - "exotic DNA"??? - and that there's a real problem in this country where we see racism as an unfortunate consequence of race rather than a genuine entrenched social problem.

I don't believe Harry or Meghan deserve their platform. We should be giving this attention to the climate emergency, or to child poverty, or holding the government to account. I'm sceptical of what they both actually want out of this process.

But you do not - you absolutely DO NOT - accuse someone of lying when they say they were suicidal. I can't get my head round what Piers Morgan was thinking. I also don't understand why he's so het up about Meghan when there's someone else in the Royal Family being ignored...

What about Prince Andrew?

 

[Lucan]

Maybe someone did mention the colour of the baby, but probably as an observation or comment rather than anything overtly racist, and it's been blown up. Would there have been any outrage if they said "We might have another ginger in the family!"?

Exactly. If people were really as modern as they claim to be, or like to think they are, there would be no issue with discussing the colour of the baby. It would be like discussing whether the child of a blond husband and a raven haired Caucasian wife would have blond or black hair. For a long time it was a family joke that I have blond hair while my parents had black and dark brown. No-one seemed to find it offensive.

Years ago I nearly married a dark-skinned Malay girl from Penang, I would have considered someone asking how our baby would look to be a reasonable question. It would depend how the question was asked of course.

 

[backontrack]

Why is our country losing its collective sh*t over this nonsense? Does this link to the "stupid people taking over the world" thread?. It is trivia and celebrity nonsense. The country is burning and THIS is what people are worried about. FFS.

[sighs]

Right on the money.

And the thing is that it's intentional on behalf of the media overblowing it all.

The royals have always been a distraction; a great big, puffed-up pageant for the people. It's their sole remaining purpose: diverting our attention from things that actually matter, stealing airtime from the big issues. They're also a handy way of letting the government bury bills and announcements - remember Snooper's Charter going through on the last Royal Wedding? - and for spinning themselves as true Union Jack-wearing patriots, like Tony Blair after Diana.

In my opinion, all this fuss just makes the UK seem tinpot and fickle.

Years ago I nearly married a dark-skinned Malay girl from Penang, I would have considered someone asking how our baby would look to be a reasonable question. It would depend how the question was asked of course.

Yes, but you're not actually the "dark-skinned Malay girl", are you?

You can put yourself in Harry's place, but not Meghan Markle's.

 

[Darandio]

I also don't understand why he's so het up about Meghan when there's someone else in the Royal Family being ignored...

Because he stupidly thought he had a chance with her a few years ago. Then she met Harry.

There also appears to be a few people in the thread who share the same views as him with regards to her talking about mental health. That's quite worrying.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Is there an option for: don't give a stuff?

I created the poll on the assumption that any rational person in the 'don't give a stuff' category would see the thread title and not bother opening the thread

But you do not - you absolutely DO NOT - accuse someone of lying when they say they were suicidal. I can't get my head round what Piers Morgan was thinking. I also don't understand why he's so het up about Meghan when there's someone else in the Royal Family being ignored...

You don't? Ever? Even if you feel you have a good reason to think that the person is probably lying (or exaggerating or deliberately trying to gain sympathy)?

What would you do if - say - Donald Trump, or someone who you knew to be a pathological liar suddenly claimed to have felt suicidal? Would you say 'Oh because they are saying THAT it must be true, even though I know they lie about everything else' or would you say 'Hmmmm... I'm not sure if I buy this'?

(For clarity, I'm not trying to accuse Meghan of anything here. I'm talking in more general terms - just concerned about this idea that seems to have taken hold that if someone says something about their mental health, you always 100% believe them, even if the evidence suggests otherwise. As far as Piers Morgan was concerned, I think his comments were a bit over the top and insensitive, but I'm dubious that he should have been sacked for them).

 

[Calthrop]

I created the poll on the assumption that any rational person in the 'don't give a stuff' category would see the thread title and not bother opening the thread

"Smiley" noted; however -- nowadays, regardless of how little one's interest in or concern about certain matters, may be: the incessant bombardment of material about them from the "news industry", can hardly fail to do some besetting of one, no matter how hard one tries to disregard it all. I see thus a justification for "signing on", to the minimal extent of registering that one indeed does not give a stuff.

(Posted by one whose interest in the Royals is so non-existent, that for a long time I had trouble remembering which prince was which, out of William and Harry. Had to resort to an aide-memoire involving a brother of mine who happens to be called William, and who happens to have a son called Harry; thus, W. is older than H.)

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Yes, but you're not actually the "dark-skinned Malay girl", are you?

You can put yourself in Harry's place, but not Meghan Markle's.

I don't think that really makes a difference.

Let's make the situation more comparable. I'm assuming in the following that you are a white heterosexual male. If I'm mistaken about any of that, apologies, and feel free to adjust the next paragraph as appropriate .

Imagine you move to Nigeria or somewhere where being white makes you one of a tiny minority. You marry a lovely woman from the majority black community. Are you really going to take offence if one of her black Nigerian friends speculates in a curious, friendly, manner, about what colour skin your baby will have? Personally I feel very certain I would not be offended - it would seem like a perfectly legitimate thing to be curious about. (Obvious disclaimer - we don't know if that's comparable to the situation with the unknown Archie conversation, but based on what has been said, it seems possible).

 

[ABB125]

I don't think that really makes a difference.

Let's make the situation more comparable. I'm assuming in the following that you are a white heterosexual male. If I'm mistaken about any of that, apologies, and feel free to adjust the next paragraph as appropriate .

Imagine you move to Nigeria or somewhere where being white makes you one of a tiny minority. You marry a lovely woman from the majority black community. Are you really going to take offence if one of her black Nigerian friends speculates in a curious, friendly, manner, about what colour skin your baby will have? Personally I feel very certain I would not be offended - it would seem like a perfectly legitimate thing to be curious about. (Obvious disclaimer - we don't know if that's comparable to the situation with the unknown Archie conversation, but based on what has been said, it seems possible).

Quite. As long as it's asked in a polite way, asking about an unborn baby's skin colour should be no different to asking about, for example, eye or hair colour. In practise, that won't necessarily be the case.

 

[Typhoon]

As far as Piers Morgan was concerned, I think his comments were a bit over the top and insensitive, but I'm dubious that he should have been sacked for them.

I was under the impression that he walked. He's probably got another job lined up at a higher salary somewhere where he can mouth off to his heart's content. I won't be having any sleepless nights over his demise!

 

[backontrack]

You don't? Ever? Even if you feel you have a good reason to think that the person is probably lying (or exaggerating or deliberately trying to gain sympathy)?

What would you do if - say - Donald Trump, or someone who you knew to be a pathological liar suddenly claimed to have felt suicidal? Would you say 'Oh because they are saying THAT it must be true, even though I know they lie about everything else' or would you say 'Hmmmm... I'm not sure if I buy this'?

There's an incredible simple answer to this:

If I doubted it, I'd just keep it to myself, because me saying they're lying doesn't do anything but create grief either way. There you go.

The risk that you're wrong, and that they are being sincere - which you have no way of telling - isn't worth the vindication of being right, unless you have an extremely fragile ego like Piers and need to fuel it in whatever narcissistic way you can. It should be obvious that it's a bad idea to discredit someone's suicidal urges - so obvious that I don't think I need to explain why.

 

[SuspectUsual]

I can't get my head round what Piers Morgan was thinking

I’d imagine something along the lines of “how can I get some free publicity”

As long as it's asked in a polite way, asking about an unborn baby's skin colour should be no different to asking about, for example, eye or hair colour

Do you really believe that?!? The point is why the question is asked, and if you think the answer is the same as why someone might ask about hair or eye colour, you’re incredibly naive

 

[Spamcan81]

I agree with all of this. There are other inconsistencies too...
- She said that she hadn't done any research on them so didn't know what she was getting herself into. I struggle to believe that. She seems a pretty smart person, so there's no way she wouldn't have done any research on the British Royal Family. And even if she didn't herself, then there's no way Harry - having seen what Royal public life did to his mother - didn't extensively brief her on what to expect. If he didn't, that's gross negligence on his part.
- She said she had no freedom and her passport was taken away. Yet somehow had at least a dozen foreign holidays in her time with them...
- She also claimed they were officially married three days before the public wedding spectacle, just the two of them and the Archbishop in their back yard. There's no way that would be a licensed venue, and they would have needed witnesses for it to be legal.
- Harry claimed his father cut him off financially. Even if that's the case, he still has inheritance from his mother. And what does he expect - he leaves the Royal Family and the duties behind, and still wants to be paid?

When you put all this together, it is then hard to believe the rest of what they say - especially that parts that can't be either proved or disproved (the infamous racist comment in particular). And against the backdrop that the accusations are levelled at people who will not answer back in public, then they are very easy shots to make. Maybe someone did mention the colour of the baby, but probably as an observation or comment rather than anything overtly racist, and it's been blown up. Would there have been any outrage if they said "We might have another ginger in the family!"?

And, on top of all this, they had the gall to bleat about all this (especially the financial part!) whilst she is wearing a £3000 dress sat in a £10m mansion in California, whilst many in the US and the UK are suffering terribly from unemployment and hardship during the virus, not to mention all the forgotten poor of developing nations who have been absolutely shafted by the West during this last year. Not to mention their constant banging on about privacy, yet they are parading themselves in front of TV cameras at any possible moment.

The mental health side is very important, though, and this should not be lost amongst all the furore. However, I don't believe any of the Royals are mentally sound - it is a completely dysfunctional insitution on a human level. But again I can't believe Meghan had no idea about this and Harry didn't give her any warning.

How can any mention of the colour of the baby not be racist? His skin colour is totally irrelevant so why would anyone make mention of it? Unless they were ever so slightly racist.

 

[alex397]

You don't? Ever? Even if you feel you have a good reason to think that the person is probably lying (or exaggerating or deliberately trying to gain sympathy)?

No, you don’t. Especially if don’t actually know the person. Well, unless you are a police detective investigating something, and even then you’d need to be careful.

A common reason why people do not open up about mental health, especially suicidal thoughts, is because they think they won’t be believed, or people will accuse them of attention seeking. We need to move away from that. Regardless of whether Meghan was truthful of not, publicly disbelieving her (whether on national TV or on an Internet forum) sends out a strong negative message that we need to avoid.

 

[kristiang85]

How can any mention of the colour of the baby not be racist? His skin colour is totally irrelevant so why would anyone make mention of it? Unless they were ever so slightly racist.

Can all comments about a factual thing such as skin colour automatically be racist? I don't think so, and that is a dangerous road to go down. Had they said a clumsy comment "I hope Archie has Meghan's beautiful skin genes rather than Harry's blotchy ginger ones! Haha!" would that be racist? No. Would it be a fact that they commented on the colour of Archie's skin? Yes. So she wouldn't be telling a mistruth there.

By not saying what was said and in what context, we cannot automatically assume it was racist. And given Meghan also inferred that it was due to racism that Archie didn't get a royal title, when in fact it was a protocol that has been in place for 100 years, then it makes you question her narrative even more.

 

[alex397]

Can all comments about a factual thing such as skin colour automatically be racist? I don't think so, and that is a dangerous road to go down. Had they said a clumsy comment "I hope Archie has Meghan's beautiful skin genes rather than Harry's blotchy ginger ones! Haha!" would that be racist? No. Would it be a fact that they commented on the colour of Archie's skin? Yes. So she wouldn't be telling a mistruth there.

By not saying what was said and in what context, we cannot automatically assume it was racist. And given Meghan also inferred that it was due to racism that Archie didn't get a royal title, when in fact it was a protocol that has been in place for 100 years, then it makes you question her narrative even more.

I’m not sure in what sort of context it would be acceptable, unless it was the parents themselves that brought the topic up. If I had a friend or family member in an inter-racial relationship about to have a baby, why on earth would I ask them what colour it would be?

 

[AlterEgo]

No, you don’t. Especially if don’t actually know the person.

A common reason why people do not open up about mental health, especially suicidal thoughts, is because they think they won’t be believed, or people will accuse them of attention seeking. We need to move away from that. Regardless of whether Meghan was truthful of not, disbelieving her sends out a strong negative message that we need to avoid.

There’s probably a middle ground between “always believe everything someone says about suicide” and “never believe anyone ever and shut them down”.

Someone’s claim about low moods and having suicidal thoughts would probably carry more weight to a disinterested observer if they weren’t spoken about in a two hour pity-me interview which contained a lot of things which were untrue, misremembered or simply exaggerated. I’m afraid that’s life for you.

I’m not sure in what sort of context it would be acceptable, unless it was the parents themselves that brought the topic up. If I had a friend or family member in an inter-racial relationship about to have a baby, why on earth would I ask them what colour it would be?

You’re right about this. At best, it is a tactless question given the prevailing culture.

 

[alex397]

There’s probably a middle ground between “always believe everything someone says about suicide” and “never believe anyone ever and shut them down”.

Someone’s claim about low moods and having suicidal thoughts would probably carry more weight to a disinterested observer if they weren’t spoken about in a two hour pity-me interview which contained a lot of things which were untrue, misremembered or simply exaggerated. I’m afraid that’s life for you.

It doesn’t matter if Meghan was exaggerating or falsifying it, it is irresponsible (especially on a major national TV programme) to be publicly stating that she is lying about suicidal thoughts.
This topic really should not be brushed off as “that’s life”

 

[WelshBluebird]

I don't like the royal family, so my views are going to be pretty biased already.

However, asking what colour the baby is going to be is at very best crass and done deaf, and at worst racist as hell.

As for the media's response - the UK media trying to suggest it isn't racist and trying to play victim themselves has been both hilarious and sickening to watch at the same time.
This is the same media that has battered the country with racist headlines for decades. So much so there's a damn meme going around of racist front pages from The Sun and The Daily Mail. This is the same media that hacked phones not that long ago, including some relating to some really horrific crimes. The idea that they are now sitting around feeling sorry for themselves and trying to play the victim is just unbelievable. The UK media has no morals and will destroy people when it wants to. For them to now be complaining that someone dare's to call them out on their bull is beyond words.

It doesn’t matter if Meghan was exaggerating or falsifying it, it is irresponsible (especially on a major national TV programme) to be publicly stating that she is lying about suicidal thoughts.
This topic really should not be brushed off as “that’s life”

100% this.
And anyone who has told friends and family (either in person, or more likely via social media) that they don't believe her have basically also told their friends and family that they won't believe them if they come to them to talk about mental health issues too.

 

[Spamcan81]

Can all comments about a factual thing such as skin colour automatically be racist? I don't think so, and that is a dangerous road to go down. Had they said a clumsy comment "I hope Archie has Meghan's beautiful skin genes rather than Harry's blotchy ginger ones! Haha!" would that be racist? No. Would it be a fact that they commented on the colour of Archie's skin? Yes. So she wouldn't be telling a mistruth there.

By not saying what was said and in what context, we cannot automatically assume it was racist. And given Meghan also inferred that it was due to racism that Archie didn't get a royal title, when in fact it was a protocol that has been in place for 100 years, then it makes you question her narrative even more.

So would you ask a mixed race couple what colour the skin of their baby would be? In what context would you find that acceptable?

 

[ABB125]

Do you really believe that?!? The point is why the question is asked, and if you think the answer is the same as why someone might ask about hair or eye colour, you’re incredibly naive

I agree that for many people, the question would be asked for racist reasoning (whether conscious or unconscious). We don't live in a "perfect world".

(I've edited my the post you quoted slightly for clarification.)

How can any mention of the colour of the baby not be racist? His skin colour is totally irrelevant so why would anyone make mention of it? Unless they were ever so slightly racist.

It's only racism because society (for centuries or even millennia) has deemed skin colour to be a physical attribute by which to categorise people. This categorisation shouldn't happen, but unfortunately it still does.
If at some point in history someone decided that all people with (for example) blue eyes were inferior to people with green eyes, and categorised the population accordingly, would we be arguing about whether asking what colour eyes the baby will have is "eye-colourist"? Possibly, I don't know. If categorisation of humans due to skin colour had never existed, would we be arguing about whether asking what colour skin the baby will have is racist? Probably not: eye colour has never (to my knowledge) been used as a segregationary physical attribute, so asking about eye colour causes no issues. Therefore, if in this parallel universe where eye colour replaces skin colour as the (wrong but still existent) segregationary characteristic, I see no reason why asking about skin colour would cause any issues.

 

[AlterEgo]

It doesn’t matter if Meghan was exaggerating or falsifying it, it is irresponsible to be publicly stating that she is lying about suicidal thoughts.
This topic really should not be brushed off as “that’s life”

Morgan went too far on national television, but he was entitled to hold those views and to say what he thought. He’s odious but that’s neither here nor there.

I don’t think it’s helpful to “gold-plate” mental health in this way.

 

[kristiang85]

So would you ask a mixed race couple what colour the skin of their baby would be? In what context would you find that acceptable?

I wouldn't, of course not. But we don't know what was asked because she was never specific.

I'm just saying it's unfair to jump onto a group of people accused of saying a racist comment, when said comment has not been specified, and the accusation has been made by someone who has already twisted a fact to say that a decision was racially charged when it was nothing of the sort.

Personally, I think a comment must have been made, but it was most likely a clumsy innocent comment made by someone of an older generation rather than anything racially malicious. But the fact it was said is being used as part of their agenda to justfiy why they left. If it was a really abhorrent comment, surely she would have quoted it verbatim rather than being vague?

 

[Spamcan81]

I agree that for many people, the question would be asked for racist reasoning (whether conscious or unconscious). We don't live in a "perfect world".

(I've edited my the post you quoted slightly for clarification.)

It's only racism because society (for centuries or even millennia) has deemed skin colour to be a physical attribute by which to categorise people. This categorisation shouldn't happen, but unfortunately it still does.
If at some point in history someone decided that all people with (for example) blue eyes were inferior to people with green eyes, and categorised the population accordingly, would we be arguing about whether asking what colour eyes the baby will have is "eye-colourist"? Possibly, I don't know. If categorisation of humans due to skin colour had never existed, would we be arguing about whether asking what colour skin the baby will have is racist? Probably not: eye colour has never (to my knowledge) been used as a segregationary physical attribute, so asking about eye colour causes no issues. Therefore, if in this parallel universe where eye colour replaces skin colour as the (wrong but still existent) segregationary characteristic, I see no reason why asking about skin colour would cause any issues.

We don't live in this parallel universe of yours so asking about an unborn child's skin colour is tactless at the very best. To any normal person it is an irrelevance so one has to question the mind set of anyone who would ask such a question.

 

[kristiang85]

We don't live in this parallel universe of yours so asking about an unborn child's skin colour is tactless at the very best. To any normal person it is an irrelevance so one has to question the mind set of anyone who would ask such a question.

And this is the point - being tactless is very different from being racist. By not making the distinction of what was said by one individual, we cannot simply level accusations of racism at an entire family, which is what the media (mainstream and social) pile-on is doing. And Meghan surely knew that would be the case.

 

[ABB125]

We don't live in this parallel universe of yours so asking about an unborn child's skin colour is tactless at the very best. To any normal person it is an irrelevance so one has to question the mind set of anyone who would ask such a question.

Indeed, I agree it's tactless and I can't think really think of a situation in which it would come into the a conversation unless brought up by the parent(s). I just don't think that it can automatically be assumed to be racism without knowing the context of the question.

 

[MotCO]

I'm wondering whether the view was that it wouldn't look good for her. Whilst we wish mental health issues could be laid out in the open (and such a revelation would benefit members of the public with such issues), it is quite possible that "someone in the palace" was visualising headlines of 'Mad Meg' and hordes of photographers outside some medical institution (as when Philip went into hospital). The press is unforgiving and the palace knows it.

Harry and William have both spoken publically about mental health in the past. If Harry or Meghan were suffering, I'm sure that the British public would let them take a back seat for a few years to sort the problem out.

I thought we were quite lucky that these forums were a Harry and Meghan free zone until this thread started.

I voted that my sympathies were with the Queen and the rest of the royal family. I think there are a few inconstencies in Harry and Meghan's story which I would have liked to see Oprah Winfrey challenge a bit more.

• Meghan said that she asked for help with her mental health problems from "someone in the palace" and was refused help because it "wouldn't look good for the firm". This doesn't ring true because there is no reason why Meghan couldn't have received medical help in complete confidence. Also, if someone in the palace (who?) refused her help, she could have gone to Prince Harry or the Queen who I would imagine would be only too keen to get her all the assistance she needs.
• Meghan and Harry tried to imply, without explicitly saying so, that Archie was denied the title of a Prince because of "concerns over the colour of his skin". This is utter bovine excreta, as the rules on who can be called a Prince or Princess were laid down by King George V over 100 years ago, when the House of Windsor was first established. Whilst it is true that the Queen can change the rules to give Archie the title of a Prince, the plan is to slim down the monarchy after the Queen dies, with only those in the direct line of succession having the title of Prince and Princess in future. I can't help thinking that Meghan was motivated by jealousy that William and Catherine's children have the title of Prince whereas her children don't.
• Regarding the alleged comments over the colour of Archie's skin, the Queen needs to investigate exactly who said what to who, and on how many occasions. In any case, if Harry and Meghan considered the comments to be inappropriate, what did they do about it? If I had been in their position, I would have told anyone making such comments to mind their own business, and that the matter would be taken further if those comments were repeated. By telling the whole word that unspecified comments were made by an unspecified person, they are putting the monarchy on trial in the court of Faceache and ****ter, rather than take appropriate action to deal with the matter. How would you deal with such a problem if it arose in your family or workplace?

There are a lot of similarities between Harry & Meghan and Edward & Mrs Simpson.

By trashing his family and the monarchy in the way he has done, Harry has damaged the chances of there being a reconciliation in the future.

He will live a life of virtual exile in the United States, and his children will grow up with very little contact with their extended family in the UK. And as Meghan doesn't exactly get on with most of he family, Harry and his children won't have much contact with his relatives in the United States either.

And I cannot help but feel that Meghan will dump him in a few years time, once she has got what she wants out of him.

I agree with most of what you wrote, the exception being "And as Meghan doesn't exactly get on with most of the family"; it should be "And as Meghan doesn't exactly get on with most of her family and his family". And that should have told us something; only her mother attended her wedding which is somewhat strange.

"And I cannot help but feel that Meghan will dump him in a few years time, once she has got what she wants out of him." I share the same feelings. Would she have been so famous had she not married Harry? I get the sense that she is using him for her own ends (whatever they are - being rich and famous?), and could well dump him when he is no longer required.

Whether she did this or not, the level of media scrutiny on Meghan has been insane, right from the very start. Our tabloid media should be ashamed of the hysterical way they treat people, regardless of their status.

I'm not sure about this. I think she was warmly welcomed into this country, her wedding was well received, and she had a lot of good publicity. Somehow, she has managed to turn this all on its head, whereas with the right approach, she could have remained popular. Which leads on from my point above - what is her agenda?

 

[duncanp]

We don't live in this parallel universe of yours so asking about an unborn child's skin colour is tactless at the very best. To any normal person it is an irrelevance so one has to question the mind set of anyone who would ask such a question.

I agree that it is somewhat sensitive to ask about an unborn child's skin colour, and you should not do so unless you know the parents really well.

I think the point with regard to Harry & Meghan is that, if they found the remarks unacceptable, what did they do about it. If I were in their shoes I would have told whoever made the remark to go away and mind their own business, and then reported the matter to the Queen, so that the matter could be investigated and the person making the remark forced to apologise.

It is similar to what would happen in the workplace if someone makes a racist, sexist or homophobic comment. Workplaces have a disciplinary code by which such matters can be investigated and appropriate sanctions imposed.

By making unspecified allegations against an unspecified person, they have only increased the speculation.

 

[ABB125]

By making unspecified allegations against an unspecified person, they have only increased the speculation.

[cynic] And increased their media coverage* [/cynic]

*which they apparently hate

 

[duncanp]

[cynic] And increased their media coverage* [/cynic]

*which they apparently hate

I pretty much agree with everything Nigel Farage says in this video.

Now I know Nigel Farage isn't everyone's cup of tea, and a lot of people disagree with him on various topics, and think he is a bit of a nutcase, but if you listen to what is being said, rather than who is saying it, I think he makes a lot of sense.

Harry can't see that he is being used, and Meghan will dump him when she has no further use for him, or say that their relationship can only continue on her terms.

 

[yorkie]

For me personally - I was curious enough to watch the interview, and also read some of the reactions, and my overall impression is that life confined by all the restrictions of monarchy was evidently not for Harry and Meghan, so I guess they are better off with the life they have now chosen. But it's very sad to see a family torn apart in the way that seems to have happened, and it also seems to me a bit odd for Harry and Meghan to have gone so public about stuff that should perhaps have been resolved privately - but of course, impossible to know for sure what pressures they were under. And I find it very hard to judge the accusations they have made: Some of them could be serious (the discussion about skin tone, obviously), some may represent misunderstandings, and some do give the impression of a sense of entitlement (Thinking here of their obvious anger at not being supported financially - I'm not sure why they should expect financial support from the monarchy once they've stepped back from being working royals and moved abroad).

Exactly what I was thinking.

Is there anyone on this forum who was given a lot of money from their family and is now complaining that their family are no longer subsidisng them at the age of 36? I think we all know the answer to that one!

Why is our country losing its collective sh*t over this nonsense? Does this link to the "stupid people taking over the world" thread?. It is trivia and celebrity nonsense. The country is burning and THIS is what people are worried about. FFS.

Is any random member of the public really worried about it? I doubt it.