Oprah with Meghan and Harry - Discussion Thread

[vyniildisk 12,689]

1 minute ago, Supersonic said:

Why would you expect riots LMAO I'm pretty sure 70% of the UK population thought questioning whether Archie would be "too dark" is a valid concern. Who do you think started the transatlantic slave trade?

how the baby being "too dark" would even be "valid concern"? and why would they even question such thing? is the UK population that backwards and racist?

[HIM820 1,874]

1 minute ago, Bebe said:

If you read my other comments in this thread and not just that, you will see I'm not anti-Harry or anti-Meghan by any stretch.

As I told another user:

"He is accustomed to a certain lifestyle, but there are also genuine security concerns (which he mentions) that are expensive to resolve. When he said that, if it wasn't for the wealth he inherited from his mother, he wouldn't be able to afford the security him and his family needs I don't doubt it. Especially in the U.K."

I think it holds true that there is a lot of depth and importance in revealing this story and exposing the Royal Institution for the outdated, out of touch, racist, classist, cold, imperialist garbage that it is.

I think it holds true that Meghan's experience is tragic, that she is a strong woman, that she has helped expose the institutional racism and classism that runs deep in U.K society.

I think it also holds true that moments where an Ex-Prince discusses having to rely on his mother's multi-million dollar fortune and Netflix deals comes across as a little bit tone deaf in a world where income inequality is a hot button issue and the world is in the middle of a global pandemic. I have no doubt it was a struggle for him. I have no doubt that if I lost $75,000 Diamond Earring at the Bottom of the Ocean I would be upset. But also: Kim, there's people that are dying.

Okay, but I didn't hear it that way. I also think think the whole "tone deaf" "Kim there's people that are dying" quote is so predictable and overused. There isn't really any comparison in my opinion. One is crying about a material object that can probably be replaced in some aspect, where her sister's comment is funny and justified. The other is merely bringing up what a shock it was to be cut off unexpectedly and not really knowing what to do or who to turn to. Then bringing up how he's thankful his mother set him aside money, as if she knew this day might come, because its been written about that she was always worried that something might happen to her children since they hated her so much, especially Harry who was not in line to the thrown. 

[Supersonic 49,376]

Just now, Dulo Peep said:

how the baby being "too dark" would even be "valid concern"? and why would they even question such thing? is the UK population that backwards and racist?

Every European country is. They just use the USA as a boogeyman to distract from the fact that they're just as bad.

[bionic 50,111]

4 minutes ago, Supersonic said:

Why would you expect riots LMAO I'm pretty sure 70% of the UK population thought questioning whether Archie would be "too dark" is a valid concern. Who do you think started the transatlantic slave trade?

Didn't Portugal start the slave trade

[BUtterfield 8 41,818]

Oprah said the interview was 3 hours and 20 minutes 

[Bebe 17,289]

2 minutes ago, HIM820 said:

Okay, but I didn't hear it that way. I also think think the whole "tone deaf" "Kim there's people that are dying" quote is so predictable and overused. There isn't really any comparison in my opinion. One is crying about a material object that can probably be replaced in some aspect, where her sister's comment is funny and justified. The other is merely bringing up what a shock it was to be cut off unexpectedly and not really knowing what to do or who to turn to. Then bringing up how he's thankful his mother set him aside money, as if she knew this day might come, because its been written about that she was always worried that something might happen to her children since they hated her so much, especially Harry who was not in line to the thrown. 

Girl, we are a bunch of gays on a Lady Gaga forum. Excuse me for being a little dramatic and facetious. 

I'm not going to go into the rabbit hole of Princess Diana conspiracies, because I feel like this is where it is heading and there are far more legitimate and important critiques of The British Monarchy that can be had. 

At the end of the day, I feel like there is value to this story in the way the institution of The Monarchy allowed a black woman to face a barrage of racist attacks, and closed its ranks to protect its own. I find the topics of mental health, tradition, racism, sexism, institutionalised power and privilege to be important and interesting. 

I don't find an ex-prince discussing being cut-off from what is essentially tax payer money after stepping away from his constitutional role to be a particularly heart wrenching story.  I won't defend how The Firm has treated "Megxit" but I don't think it's such an awful thing that Harry and Megan have had to rely on the enormous wealth of his mother, and leverage their own 'celebrity' to broker their own deals, instead of relying on funding through the Sovereign Grant.

While I don't doubt that having his father cut him off financially came as a big shock and was enormously difficult, in the grand scheme of things it really is a nothing story.

You don't hear it as tone deaf, I do, let's move on.

[bionic 50,111]

2 minutes ago, Bebe said:

While I don't doubt that having his father cut him off financially came as a big shock and was enormously difficult, in the grand scheme of things it really is a nothing story.

I suppose to a large extent it says a lot about Harry's ignorance. He thought he could walk away and still have his dad contribute to funding his lifestyle? How couldn't you see this coming

[Gimme More 35,802]

Come through Meghan 

EXPOSE THEM!

[Gimme More 35,802]

I'm sorry but if some people still don't think race plays a MASSIVE part in this you really are part of the problem.

Proud of Harry & Meghan speaking up finally! I hope they are doing better and that her pregnancy goes well under this insane amount of stress!

I for one do not blame they at all for escaping to the US!

[boyerased 2,889]

Wouldn’t be shocked if it was Charles who asked about skin color. He even complained that Harry was a ginger. 
 

I really do think that Meghan thought it would be smooth sailing but alas it wasn’t. The British press and the institution they were in are inherently racist and restrictive. They probably thought that after the Diana debacle they would be more open minded. Apparently the firm can’t still handle someone being outspoken—as it might hurt the brand that’s honestly about to expire once the queen kicks the bucket. 
 

As for Archie being a Prince. He wasn’t automatically entitled to be one. Same with Charlotte and Louis before. However it would have been considered, because by the time Charles becomes king he is entitled to be a Prince, as per George V’s letters patent. Depriving him of the title hints that they might not give it to him during Charles’ reign. 

[bionic 50,111]

1 minute ago, boyerased said:

Wouldn’t be shocked if it was Charles who asked about skin color. He even complained that Harry was a ginger. 
 

I really do think that Meghan thought it would be smooth sailing but alas it wasn’t. The British press and the institution they were in are inherently racist and restrictive. They probably thought that after the Diana debacle they would be more open minded. Apparently the firm can’t still handle someone being outspoken—as it might hurt the brand that’s honestly about to expire once the queen kicks the bucket. 
 

As for Archie being a Prince. He wasn’t automatically entitled to be one. Same with Charlotte and Louis before. However it would have been considered, because by the time Charles becomes king he is entitled to be a Prince, as per George V’s letters patent. Depriving him of the title hints that they might not give it to him during Charles’ reign. 

It was Kate, rumors seem to be suggesting.

Now they've walked away I wouldn't expect Charles to award Archie a title

[SwissMonster 30,688]

56 minutes ago, Miss Dolly said:

Still, don’t trust her. She doesn’t love Harry. 

Ma’am literally why would someone marry a royal if not love. To be bashed by the Media 24/7? To be literally trapped in a prison? To limit your freedom? Also it can’t be for fame either since she was a well known actress before too. So please she obviously loves him and she is the best thing that could’ve happened to Harry.
 

OT: The discussion in here is truly shocking, racism aside (which would already be enough to not support the royal family) it seems like some people forgot what happened to Diana. How can someone be even 1% on the side of the royals??

This interview was needed. Everything that exposes this firm is needed and I hope more people who had to do with the british royals will speak up in the future.

We tend to cancel stars for the smallest things. Why not do the same with the royal family? I’m shooketh some people say that she does this for publicity. So being silent about it is the solution? They deserve every expose possible and everyone who doesn’t think like that isn’t any better then these “royals” 

[HIM820 1,874]

28 minutes ago, Bebe said:

Girl, we are a bunch of gays on a Lady Gaga forum. Excuse me for being a little dramatic and facetious. 

I'm not going to go into the rabbit hole of Princess Diana conspiracies, because I feel like this is where it is heading and there are far more legitimate and important critiques of The British Monarchy that can be had. 

At the end of the day, I feel like there is value to this story in the way the institution of The Monarchy allowed a black woman to face a barrage of racist attacks, and closed its ranks to protect its own. I find the topics of mental health, tradition, racism, sexism, institutionalised power and privilege to be important and interesting. 

I don't find an ex-prince discussing being cut-off from what is essentially tax payer money after stepping away from his constitutional role to be a particularly heart wrenching story.  I won't defend how The Firm has treated "Megxit" but I don't think it's such an awful thing that Harry and Megan have had to rely on the enormous wealth of his mother, and leverage their own 'celebrity' to broker their own deals, instead of relying on funding through the Sovereign Grant.

While I don't doubt that having his father cut him off financially came as a big shock and was enormously difficult, in the grand scheme of things it really is a nothing story.

You don't hear it as tone deaf, I do, let's move on.

You and bionic (who I am beginning to suspect is Camilla) are confusing what I am saying. It's not the fact that he WAS cut off or that it was inevitable, because he 100% knew he would no longer be supported by the family (plus it has been stated here that Charles has his own money like much of the family does apart from the taxpayers) 

It is the fact that his family were treating him like a business entity but worse, and just immediately cut ties without discussion. There was no agreement about when it would end, a transition period etc. As I have stated before, I think they were looking at it more as a huge security risk and a way of explaining why they were no longer in contact with the family. That is not how you treat your child, grandchild, and great grandchild. Take the money aspect out of it, because it just shows there is a complete lack of love and compassion running throughout that family. I am happy he has found that now. 

[Better Day 5,766]

9 minutes ago, SwissMonster said:

Ma’am literally why would someone marry a royal if not love. To be bashed by the Media 24/7? To be literally trapped in a prison? To limit your freedom? Also it can’t be for fame either since she was a well known actress before too. So please she obviously loves him and she is the best thing that could’ve happened to Harry.
 

OT: The discussion in here is truly shocking, racism aside (which would already be enough to not support the royal family) it seems like some people forgot what happened to Diana. How can someone be even 1% on the side of the royals??

This interview was needed. Everything that exposes this firm is needed and I hope more people who had to do with the british royals will speak up in the future.

We tend to cancel stars for the smallest things. Why not do the same with the royal family? I’m shooketh some people say that she does this for publicity. So being silent about it is the solution? They deserve every expose possible and everyone who doesn’t think like that isn’t any better then these “royals” 

Why would someone marry a royal? She wanted to progress her image. She is just a poisonous. Vicious like the rest of the royal family. She isn’t as innocent as others portray 

[Supersonic 49,376]

28 minutes ago, Bebe said:

I don't find an ex-prince discussing being cut-off from what is essentially tax payer money after stepping away from his constitutional role to be a particularly heart wrenching story.  I won't defend how The Firm has treated "Megxit" but I don't think it's such an awful thing that Harry and Megan have had to rely on the enormous wealth of his mother, and leverage their own 'celebrity' to broker their own deals, instead of relying on funding through the Sovereign Grant.

While I don't doubt that having his father cut him off financially came as a big shock and was enormously difficult, in the grand scheme of things it really is a nothing story.

I agree that it's asanine to argue about this being some heart-wrenching story about how the royals threw Prince Harry and Meghan into poverty. Which they did not, HOWEVER I do think it's important to note that if Diana wasn't smart enough to pass down her wealth to her children through private inheritance, the situation might have looked very differently. We as regular people of course only see the opulence and equate being famous with being rich, despite most famous being not being that rich to begin with.

And there's a discussion waiting to be held as well: How do we feel about children from rich & priviliged families (who don't happen to sit on a fortune because their rich mother died prematurely) falling from grace and being cut of by their families for taking a stand on socially progressive things (or god forbid maybe even identifiying as LGBTQ)? Where does the sympathy end and start? 

I don't know if I'm misunderstanding things, but to me the story seemed to be: Harry & Meghan were already financially cut off before they announcened their retreat from the royal family. Not that it changes the story a lot, but I thought that would be a better explanation as to why both were so upset. I thought they were taking on duties of The Firm, without the support or compensation that usually comes along with it.