The Royal Family #30

[bubbadabut]

Wow I miss a couple of days and it's all niggles and chinks in armour Have a bit of light relief from the Alternative Photo Archives....

 

[jkroche95]

I don’t think Diana would have liked any gf/wife, she’d have tolerated them but she gives me vibes of mum who thinks she’s the most important woman in her sons life.

i think she would have tried to compete with them

 

[FenellaTheWitch]

It does look cozy @FenellaTheWitch - I hope you get it!

Oh for FFS

Senior royals prepare to hold 'crisis talks' over Sussexes latest move

Senior royals are said to be bracing for the worst and will be prepared to address any unfounded accusations head on - after Harry and Meghan reportedly discussed 'repairing relationships'.

www.dailymail.co.uk

(but if anyone wants to buy me the fleece I would appreciate it)

 

[LoopyLou47]

was andrew ever convicted?

What has Harry been convicted of? Being annoying?

 

[WatermelonSugar22]

For the life of me I can't see that. It sounds the same but it means something completely different. It's also a pretty unique word in that there's not really anything else in the English language that conveys the same meaning.

Racist dogwhistling is done like this on purpose - they count on the general public (who aren’t victims of racism) not picking it up.

 

[Popcorn&Peanuts]

BIB
Oh perhaps Harry knew she was mocking his grandmother so he didn’t misunderstand at all. He knows her better than us - his face said it all.

Question - seeing that Harry does indeed know his wife better than us, does this mean we also believe him when he says she's a good person and praises her compassion, empathy, loving nature etc?

Or does the believing thing only work one way?

Genuine question btw because I am honestly confused as to why the benchmark is always changing when judging this woman. Is it so hard to admit that she's flawed and may not be everyone's cup of tea but is also human and therefore still capable of ocassionally being likeable?

 

[CuriousCat92]

I think they should ditch the curtsying. It was ridiculous even in the Queen’s time but perhaps understandable as she was from a certain generation.

 

[Boredofgrey]

Judy's half Irish herself so I'm lost


Agreed about the Tuvalu Throne business that would have caused a diplomatic incident most likely. The Jamaican land rover was another matter though (imo)


Precisely. I don't mind Kate but roughly 80% of conversations about her (and I'm being generous) are to do with hair and clothes

Sadly we talk about Kate’s looks as she has nowt else……….

 

[Jen667]

I'm still going to watch the first episode at least. They need to move on though - this has to be the last TV programme where they can talk about this. Who is going to buy Harry's book if it's all in this documentary anyway? I think they're actually driving more people to quietly support the RF at this stage!

"reveals more bombshell claims from the couple, including Harry claiming there is a 'hierarchy' within the Royal Family."

This is a quote from the daily mail! A hierarchy within the family imagine!!!

That comment about the hierarchy make me LOL. Like it's some stunning revelation! Supposedly they've found their freedom, they're happy, they're content. Great. So why keep going on and on about one very short period in your life? Because £££ that's why.

 

[Emsie]

It's very easy- and convenient for some- to find "racism" in any context these days. It fits the agenda of outrage.

Wouldn't be easy if it wasn't there.
Very easy for people who have not experienced racism to tell those that are that they aren't.
I'm not gay but if a gay person tells me it's homophobic I don't tell them it isn't. I listen and learn

 

[Lilliepad]

I wonder if it is racist that Sistah Space only supports black women that are victim's of domestic violence?

No. Pretty obvious that it’s not lol

 

[Glaschelle]

I thought Kate looked stunning in that green dress. Just shows that there's no pleasing everyone

 

[svdwoodsen]

All these women who marry into the RF are socially ambitious at the very least. Diana might’ve been naive but the Spencer family were calculated and wanted one of their daughters to marry Charles. Meghan Markle wanted the fame, money, and social climbing opportunities. Kate might be a more traditional choice compared to Markle, but there’s no way she would’ve let William jerk her around like that and dump her several times if he wasn’t the future king. I don’t doubt she does love William but the benefits he brought to her and her family are too good to ignore. Look at who Pippa and James were able to socialize with and marry, and how well the Middletons have done after her marriage (they were doing well before but not at this level). Her connection to William definitely helped and there’s no shame in calling a spade a spade.

 

[Boring Monday]

I don’t know, I feel like if you’re in a role where you’re meeting lots of people on a regular basis, common courtesy should be to be polite. I’ve not had anyone complain about my conduct at work because I keep up to date, not unfair to ask someone in a public facing role to.

I do think it seems to have been spun and whatabouteried and whatifferied beyond what it actually was.

This is a person whose job for 60 odd years has been to meet and greet guests of the Royal Family and put them at their ease … most people going to a Buck House reception are going to more than likely be a tad on the nervous side. The LiW are skilled in the art inconsequential chit chat and reading conversational cues to put people at ease … not refusing to hear what was being said and going at it like a dog with a bone until they got the answer they thought they wanted and making the guest feel anything but at ease. That was really, to me, where she went wrong whatever the subject matter.

 

[hannah123]

Optics matter. Especially to the aristocracy and especially to the Royals.

The optics of Oprah and George Clooney sat across from the Queen and Philip was far worse than any optics of a niece and no sister. Even her Suits costars that she’d spent 7(?) years with and become good friends with we’re shoved to the back ahead of people she’d met once. I’d say inviting a lot of those random celebs was a turning point for a lot of people and questioning her motives.

 

[LoopyLou47]

he Daily Mail is actively implying that it is racist to ask about someone's heritage. I s

I think, if LSH had said ' What's your heritage?' that would have been fine. It was ' where are you really from?' What's your nationality?' Nationzlity and heritage are different things) after she had been told numerous times that Ngozi was British that was the issue. Quite apart from badgering a guest for a full 5 minutes when she should have read cues. If the woman is openly anti monarchy, then common sense says you are ultra polite and don't hassle her about where she was really from, as if you are trying to catch her out, because she can't possibly be British. Or ask about the charity. LSH should have known what words to use, she had been around QEII long enough.

The scary thing is that she has a stylist.
I think it would have been better to wear a mixture of British high street to British designer, especially up and coming. Would have been the perfect opportunity.
I think a big problem with this outfit is that Kate likes to coordinate so the handbag, the shoes, the outfit are all the same colour and it can work but here it doesn’t.


According to online it’s a polo ($790) and skirt ($1590) by an American designer.
View attachment 1775983
The earrings cost $3100 - for such a bland ensemble it is rather expensive.

I think the styling and the early years thing stem from the same issue. She didn't spend any time developing her own views, making style mistakes, experimenting etc in her 20's because she was too busy turning herself into the Royals perfect bride, and now she doesn't know or probably care who she is. She just does as she's told.

 

[Miss Begotten]

It's well known that Harry is staggeringly thick. Borderline remedial

Well let’s face it, being staggeringly thick hardly marks him out in that family.

 

[Superdude]

Who is there to rely on now for this, when people just seem to want to fight and grab everything for themselves, and not try to make the world a better place?

Not Charles or William, certainly. Although Elizabeth II was good at exempting herself from pesky laws and regulations which might have impacted on her vast wealth ...

 

[Spurgyrose]

Ok- I have been reading the last discussion over several days with longer beaks and English is not my native language- is there a second meaning to niggling? Because I certainly have used it here and there. And from how I understand the word and looking at the headline it would rather read as if the author is actually not happy with their feeling and would rather be just all happy about it. (Obviously this could be just an excuse and it was about saying something negative all along. Which is definitely something the DF does .)
Or is it just that words look similar?
I don’t discard the argument that the DF used the visual similarity on purpose. They had been playing with words along the edge quite masterfully. But if it would have appeared in the Telegraph- would the interpretation be the same? So, is the problem the bubble it appeared in and not the word itself?

It’s not the word itself, it’s the context. Useless article (on the engagement photos) with a strange title that just looked like it was written so that they could shoehorn in that word for its 'visual'. I would also side eye the Telegraph if they wrote the same article with the same title, because, again, not exactly hard hitting journalistic content and strange title.

As other people have said, it's a subtle, subtle, dogwhistle which is frankly the most insidious kind of racism because as soon as you point it out everyone starts crying about not being able to use words anymore. But it adds up, it's what is known as microagressions. And I don't have any doubts that Meghan got her fair share of them from the press and maybe even the family itself. But I also think she trades on the race card as well, a lot of people of colour do. Combined with some people with the 'white saviour/social justice warrior' complex a lot of these conversations on micro-agressions and subtle forms have racism have become ridiculed and are not taken seriously. The 'problem' (ironically) is that few people are blatantly racist (no one would dare call Meghan the 'n' word flat out), but racism hasn't been eliminated by any stretch, so being all the more aware of these slights is important, but it's a far more nuanced conversation to have. And current discourse is devoid of nuance...

 

[Spurgyrose]

I wonder if it is racist that Sistah Space only supports black women that are victim's of domestic violence?

No, when it comes to issues like domestic violence sometimes cultural context matters. Every culture has domestic violence but some cultures might be more reluctant to report it because it's more normalised or they think it will bring shame on their family or culture to expose it. Some cultures might be apprehensive to go to a shelter because they view it a certain way or don't think their cultural needs will be met there etc. How you talk to victims will need cultural context, and when you're at your must vulnerable sometimes it's just nice to be with your own 'kind' who you're most at ease with and who you know will understand what you're talking about.

What's most important are the outcomes and if we find that having more DV support organisations that cater to specific cultures means better outcomes than that's the most important thing rather than half baked definitions of what is and isn't racist.