Yep exactly this.
Yep exactly this.I get your point. It’s caused more of a media storm than they probably originally imagined. Because without context, or even knowing who, it’s just a guessing game. I would like to think it was meant harmlessly and was just how H&M interpreted. But until we have further elaboration we will never know.
Define 'concern' and give us the context of the conversation. They have been deliberately vague about his and I think that's for a reason.I think the issue is, key word, ‘concern’. If there was going to be an issue if Archie was darker. What that might mean. A open conversation started by H&M in a lighthearted nature of what their baby might look like is different.
A) If it was never brought up in a form of discussion by the parents, it should of never been talked about.
B) The issue is, why was there concern? Why did there need to be a discussion alluding negatively to the fact Archie might of been ‘darker.’ What is so awful about a mixed race or a black baby? Nothing. That’s just the racism. No excuse.
It's not really meaningless, as it was still thought of as a concern ( if it was) it doesnt make it ok that it's all fine now because hes white! The problem is with the person who thought it was a problem in the first place. And wondering something in conversation with both parents in a social situation is very different to pulling the white father aside and asking how dark he thinks his children would be. The conversation was had before Meghan was pregnant I think.Also, although it is absolutely meaningless, Archie is clearly fair skinned so this whole conversation is just a joke.
I'm just framing it in the context of which it was raised by Meghan in the interview. Again, I have not seen it, just read the livestream comments from the Guardian and seen snippets. I believe she was alluding to her children not being given royal protection or the HRH based on the fact they could be dark skinned. Again, please do correct me if I am wrong. But I felt that was what she implied. Archie is not dark skinned so I don't think his skin colour had any bearing on these decisions.It's not really meaningless, as it was still thought of as a concern ( if it was) it doesnt make it ok that it's all fine now because hes white! The problem is with the person who thought it was a problem in the first place. And wondering something in conversation with both parents in a social situation is very different to pulling the white father aside and asking how dark he thinks his children would be. The conversation was had before Meghan was pregnant I think.
Why is Harry again being let off the hook here? The conversation was had with Harry. He relayed it to Meghan and said himself he was shocked by it. He knows his family and would presumably know how to take it. Or is evil Meghan putting thoughts into poor dimwit Harry's head again?But that word 'concern' could very well be a carefully chosen term by Meghan. I doubt very much ANY of the RF said they were 'concerned'. I mean, they weren't blind, they know Meghan is mixed race so why the concern.
That's the thing!I don’t know if I’m the only one but I have no idea what to make of it all
I don’t think Harry and Meghan are making it up but at the same time their story has so many holes and contradictions I’m not sure what to believe. I believe if they wanted to ‘set the story’ straight the interview with James cordon was enough I don’t think this Oprah interview was needed
I also have mixed race relatives and when they had children the colour of the skin was discussed along with, hair, nose, eyes etc. However if racism is in the royle family then it does fully need investigating and holding that person to account regardless of who it is. Coming forward now and confirming oh it’s now the Queen or Phillip just turns the whole thing into even more of a circus.
I feel they have a similar relationship love/hate relationship with the media to what Diana had. Court them for attention today but want nothing to do with them the next day. Having said that I do think Meghan gets treated harshly but the media do love the create a villain but I don’t think they will ever ‘step away’.
Harry said it was before marriage even and Meghan said the conversation was when she was pregnant. They contradicted each other.It's not really meaningless, as it was still thought of as a concern ( if it was) it doesnt make it ok that it's all fine now because hes white! The problem is with the person who thought it was a problem in the first place. And wondering something in conversation with both parents in a social situation is very different to pulling the white father aside and asking how dark he thinks his children would be. The conversation was had before Meghan was pregnant I think.
Yes, there was such an allusion and Oprah was goading towards it and that's just feckless and absolutely not based on any reality.I'm just framing it in the context of which it was raised by Meghan in the interview. Again, I have not seen it, just read the livestream comments from the Guardian and seen snippets. I believe she was alluding to her children not being given royal protection or the HRH based on the fact they could be dark skinned. Again, please do correct me if I am wrong. But I felt that was what she implied. Archie is not dark skinned so I don't think his skin colour had any bearing on these decisions.
They might not have personally viewed it a bad thing if Archie's skin tone was dark. Their "concern" might have been for him having to go through life being a victim of racism from other people if he had very dark skin.I think the fact in that discussion between Harry and whoever, the alluding that there may be negative consequences if Archie was darker. Obviously, an open discussion of what a baby would look like isn’t necessarily negative on its own. For me, it’s context like you say- why it matters and why this person viewed it as a bad thing if Archie was dark.
True- we don’t have a clue of the context now. Which is why I wish they elaborated, but obviously we won’t get that now.They might not have personally viewed it a bad thing if Archie's skin tone was dark. Their "concern" might have been for him having to go through life being a victim of racism from other people if he had very dark skin.
Meghan and Harry have been a bit vague here so we can't really make a decision without clearer details and context.
People like his grandad and great grandad?They might not have personally viewed it a bad thing if Archie's skin tone was dark. Their "concern" might have been for him having to go through life being a victim of racism from other people if he had very dark skin.
Meghan and Harry have been a bit vague here so we can't really make a decision without clearer details and context.
To be honest Brits are similarly obsessed with people with ginger hair too. Anyone who has ginger hair and has kids is open to comments regarding whether the kids will be gingers, or worse.People like his grandad and great grandad?
All these users with in-laws who are mixed race etc and asking their brother or sister what colour will the child be, I'm like wow. I'm a black woman and if my husband's sister just casually wondered to him what colour our child would be then I'd be like wtf.
I reckon it's William. I can't warm to him at all. To me he just seems sly and two faced.For some reason I suspect Camilla.
I also think - they didn’t seem to clarify was these comments raised by them with the RF at the time? Was it looked into? Or did they just discuss it between themselves and then rake it up now ? Did Harry just hear the comments and not respond or answer ? And then just shocked tel Meghan? If so, I think it’s unfair to berate people about something publicly that you never raised as an issue with them at the time. I understand that may have been difficult for Meghan to raise, but the comments were made to Harry. And surely he could have voiced that as inappropriate at the time and given the individual a chance to apologise. If he does say in the interview then yes it’s fair enough but to me that’s not clear that it was actually raised as an issue privately initially.Why is Harry again being let off the hook here? The conversation was had with Harry. He relayed it to Meghan and said himself he was shocked by it. He knows his family and would presumably know how to take it. Or is evil Meghan putting thoughts into poor dimwit Harry's head again?
I never realised some of Boris’ kids are mixed race, mind you I’m not actually sure he knows how mang kids he has and where they all are.4 of his children are mixed race. I wonder if he will be asked if anyone asked him how brown they would be when they were born, and if he found it offensive!
That's the thing!
The Corden interview was actually really good, Harry was good in it and I had sympathy for them.
The Oprah interview, as you say, many holes and contradictions, they contradicted each other, gave different timelines and contradicted earlier versions they put out themselves.
Plus the cheek of wanting security paid for, a title for the child etc. and Oprah leading them on and interrupting when Meg was explaining that their kid/s aren't entitled to any titles to begin with (except courtesy titles and honorifics for a duke's child).
Also the whole spin, they made it clear they never wanted to leave, they wanted a half in half out approach and that's not happening with the Windsors because of conflict of interest (being a de facto civil servant/diplomat funded by the tax payer and at the same time purusing commercial streams with potentially politically engaged organizations? No go.).
Literally their exit statement a year ago said "we want to be half in half out", now it was all so terrible, she had her documents taken away, but a year ago she (they!!) was happy to remain inside? What?
Of course the tax payer doesn't pay for your security when you don't work for the tax payer anymore, I mean, hello?
Bea and Eug had theirs taken away, Zara's and Peter's kids have no titles, bloody heck, doesn't Harry know this???
And that Meg didn't have "help". Please. She portrayed like she had to google protocol, the hymn, literally everything. Wasn't Harry there to help? Didn't she ask Liz/Chuck/Will/staff for help?
She literally said "there's no princess school like in the movies" and then said "it's not offered to everyone", which one is it now?
Harry was still top of the chain, of course she would've been given help understanding the institution if she'd asked, she received everything else she asked for, incl a much more expensive wardrobe than Kate had (1st year and maternity) and Kate was already a spendthrift.
Harry said it was before marriage even and Meghan said the conversation was when she was pregnant. They contradicted each other.
If it is true and they were making these comments/asking these questions with that tone, then it was absolutely not ok, but it boggles the mind if true. Again, I know and don't doubt they're all shyte overall, but some things are really just astonishing.
Yes, there was such an allusion and Oprah was goading towards it and that's just feckless and absolutely not based on any reality.
The limit to HRHs and "prince/ss" was set about 100 years ago when there were so many "HRH prince/ss" that even the Windsors couldn't keep up.
It now needs further restriction and slimming down. Not to be evil, but because the times have once again changed and they are slimming down anyway.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?