This is what I think. People are falling over themselves to prove that aristocrats and Royalty, who are born into privilege and who's entire existence and position is based on them being superior based on their class could not possibly feel superior to people who were not one of them. There have been account after account of these dinosaurs at the Palace, yet it is apparently always the fault of other people that they cant be decent and respectful to people they come across who do jot share their very specific background.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I usually don't watch these kind of videos, but she made a few good points:
- why did NF go there if she doesn't like the BRF?
- why did NF not say to SH that she was uncomfortable or offended?
- why is her only witness also anti-monarchy?
- why would she wear an African dress and change her name from Marlene to Ngosi if she did not want to talk about her heritage?
Yes, that's possible, that is what manipulators do and also sales people.
And seriously, why did she say "Hackney" first - when this is where her office is based?
Do you really think she didn't understand what the question was?
It seems like she was playing this conversation to some extend. That is what it looks like to me (my opinion).
Kate should wear trousers more often. She looks great in them, and in jeans.
Princess Di was a fan of jeans and chinos for informal occasions, even though we always think of her in dresses.
It doesn't make sense to me entirely.
The first paragraph I agree with, I had outlined the same. Positive discrimination is legal and it focuses on marginalised groups.
The second argument is not so clear to me. In this acute situation a bi-racial woman has been disadvantaged because of her race (bi-racial), so it appears to be negative discrimination. There is no evidence that bi-racial women have a bigger advantage due to their "proximity to whiteness", on the contrary, it is said that they often fall through the cracks (even Meghan spoke about this) and are even more marginalised. This woman was turned away on the basis of her race, which caused her to be disadvantaged (as opposed to obtaining an advantage, as with positive discrimination).
I also don't understand why they turn a woman in need away. Seems not very charitable to me.
Will the real ngozi please stand up?
That isn't her real name
That isn't her real name
She sounds like a troublemaker. A low-budget Camilla Batmanghelidj.
I hate to break it to you but Cliff Richard isn’t his real name. And Elton John is actually called Reg!Will the real ngozi please stand up?
That isn't her real name
What’s your bleeping point?
You can't blame them for feeling superior when thay've been treated like that their entire life , how would you feel if you had people curtsy ,military parades in your honour ,thousands of people cheer and wave flags as you pass
it's ridiculous to think they'd feel or act like working class people or have anything in common ,it's a 24/7 privileged position that the public gave them .
I have no time for either Hussey or Ngozi. Both distasteful in different ways. Hussey, given her background and numerous Commonwealth visits, should have known better...but we only have Ngozi's "truth". There's always a certain amount of embellishment that goes on when the other person doesn't have the right of reply.
Ooh...er.........and shades of Bridget Jones III...
Elton John has legally changed his name from Reg Dwight to Elton Hercules John.
I hope that Elton wasn't offended if asked "what do you do"?
Elton: I am standing around, chatting.
Person: No, what do you DO!
Elton: I am doing nothing, breathing, chatting.
Person: No, WHAT do you DO!
Elton: I am a singer.
Person: Here we go, a pop star. I knew it when I read "Elton" on the name tag.
On a more serious note:
I think the "effing" point was that it is strange that she uses her African middle name instead of her British first name and is then offended when asked about her heritage. I find this a bit strange as well.
She's a race baiting ethnic costume wearing appropriator and soon to be outed for embezzlement from her "charity"
There have been several Caribbean descent people who have changed their names to African names, because of the slavery connotations of have 'western' names and surnames of slave owners.Will the real ngozi please stand up?
That isn't her real name
Again I agree that biracial women often fall through the cracks but the argument is that they need to focus on the most marginalised because they only have so many resources.
They do have advantages due to their proximity to whiteness. That is what colourism is all about. Even Meghan touched upon how society views her as opposed to someone like Serena Williams.
Your last point counteracts your first though. They’re turning away because they’re focusing on other women in need. The argument is that they’re focusing on people that are usually left behind, if they do away with that practice they’re doing a disservice to those initial people, no?
She may be an unpleasant person or whatever but the conversation was witnessed/overheard by several people who are not connected to her, including a Tory MP, all of whom felt uncomfortable about it. This has been mentioned several times on this and the previous thread so it's simply not true to say that we only have her truth.
Also, if Lady Hussey was the household mentor for Meghan, this opens up that old can of worms again about racism against Meghan in the Royal Household.
If you simply take the conversation content out of it, it has never been polite to badger guests about subjects they clearly don't want to talk about, regardless of the subject. Lady Hussey was there as a Lady of the Household whose role was in essence an assistant host and she failed dismally.
I doubt that Lady Hussey will suffer any financial worries, given that her role since 1960 has always been unpaid and purely honorary. Personally, rather than relying on unpaid friends or whatever, the royals would be better off simply paying for professional PAs and whinge or whatever to friends at home later.
No, I think from a legal perspective the argument of marginalised communities cannot be employed when they are disadvantaging other marginalised groups - especially if those groups (bi-racial) are closely linked to the supported group (black) and three is limited data as to whether bi-racial women really are more privileged and especially in the context of DV.
I thought the MP was also asked about this background, but at a different event?
do you have a source of the different people that overheard the conversation (asking out of curiosity). Thank you
But they’re not disadvantaging other groups? There are many DV support charities that can be utilised, they are just choosing to focus effort and resources in a specific place?
Like for instance, charities that specifically look to house homeless LGBT youth due to the nuances of their situations as opposed to just homeless young people?
So the Daily Mail is actively implying that it is racist to ask about someone's heritage. I suppose they will be saying that Black History Month is racist too next. Golly. Freedom of speech is important people.
Google. It's amazing how many sources one can pull up.No, I think from a legal perspective the argument of marginalised communities cannot be employed when they are disadvantaging other marginalised groups - especially if those groups (bi-racial) are closely linked to the supported group (black) and three is limited data as to whether bi-racial women really are more privileged and especially in the context of DV.
I thought the MP was also asked about this background, but at a different event?
do you have a source of the different people that overheard the conversation (asking out of curiosity). Thank you
- Status