Meghan and Harry 3: Working Towards Financial Independence

[viii]

3 hours ago, Giraffe said:

What 12 year old in a state of raging grief is going to think to question anyone’s suggestions? Imo to say either of them thought it was a good idea willingly went along with it, even if they agreed at the time, is remarkably ignorant of child development.  What else were they supposed to do? 

Yes, I don’t judge William or Harry. I judge the adults that failed them. Someone aka THEIR FATHER should have protected them and said no. 

[Coconut Flan]

No one should have even suggested it to begin with if they really cared about them as kids.

[just_ordinary]

I agree with the judgment of the boys walking behind the coffin. They should have been with their father, either arriving privately and shielded from the public or at the most driven in a car with dark windows behind it. 
This was a massive misjudgment of the Palace and more importantly the family (one of many regarding the family). But what I find almost just as horrifying is the pressure the public put on them to show the boys. As if they were public circus animals. I don’t care one ounce of people just wanted to give them their condolences. It was a hysterical, intrusive and disgustingly voyeuristic mindset. Everyone in their right mind should have realised that those boys owe them nothing regarding their mother’s death. 
I do think no one forced them though, but they just went with the suggestion and only realised afterwards that they were failed massively. Or maybe they felt uncomfortable beforehand. Who knows. We only know, that they regret it deeply now and found it damaging. Which all adults should have foreseen and prevented.

I am surprised about Eugenie and Jack and Frogmore. If they stay long term, Meghan and Harry won’t use it. The five older cousins (Wales, York and Zara) are said to be close but I guess the only proof we have are Zara and Wiliam as that is a pairing we actually get some snippets from time to time. Apart from that it’s always the siblings but there were not many sightings of the cousins privately together. It’s probably a mix of PR (as if we all don’t know that this family is the opposite of close knit) and tabloids fiction. If they are not best friends they are competing against each other. Just what will create the most money. Mark my words- when the Sussexes come to the UK they will certainly not stay with Eugenie and her family. Especially as it seems that the belongings of the Sussexes were stored elsewhere. 
My question is- can they actually rent it out as they are not the actual landlords but would have been living their rent free with lots of perks? I know the York sisters are not permitted to live rent free as they are not full time working royals, but I also doubt they ever paid more than a family price in rent for crown or family owned property. Eugenie and Beatrice are also said to be extremely close to the Queen so I doubt she wasn’t consulted in that matter. But as many have pointed out, no one has any idea what those people really feel and think and what their relationships with each other really are.

That is something that bothers me a lot with The Crown. While many events are factual we get fed a lot of fiction in between. There is no account for most of the conversations we see. They could have never been or gone completely different. I find that more and more bothersome the more still living people are around. It seems many viewers take it as factual and not as in interpretation. I am extremely sad for the widow of Hugh Lindsay. She explicitly didn’t want her tragedy incorporated but they did it anyway. I mean, it is not as if it brought the real storyline along? The whole storyline around Charles and Diana could have just continued without it. While the Wales defined the headlines around the monarchy very much, there have been more matters shaping the BRF we see now. Maybe I am just bored? I think there is nothing new to learn. The Wales drama has been told from many different angles, some of them by Diana herself, and in many different ways. This is just another one, but it’s neither revealing new things or more controversial than others. The only thing that makes it controversial is that have build a reliable reputation and don’t clarify that it is still just a fictional tv show based on real elements.

The court case drama gets rather tedious. I hope the delay doesn’t mean serious health problems! Both sides agreed to it and kept it confidential so there must be a strong reason. I am not sure the newsgroup would have been as amicable if it was a pregnancy. The actual timeframe has more to do with court timetables. I still think she will lose this fight - the grounds she build the case on were weak from the start. She could have had more success with other claims. 

[adidas]

Meghan has written a piece about having a miscarriage in July  

edited to add link:

https://honey.nine.com.au/royals/meghan-markle-duchess-of-sussex-reveals-miscarriage/3067943f-fe73-4501-af42-05ba7a0c87a1

Edited November 25, 2020 by adidas

[DalmatianCat]

2 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

But what I find almost just as horrifying is the pressure the public put on them to show the boys. As if they were public circus animals. I don’t care one ounce of people just wanted to give them their condolences. It was a hysterical, intrusive and disgustingly voyeuristic mindset. Everyone in their right mind should have realised that those boys owe them nothing regarding their mother’s death. 
I do think no one forced them though, but they just went with the suggestion and only realised afterwards that they were failed massively. Or maybe they felt uncomfortable beforehand. Who knows. We only know, that they regret it deeply now and found it damaging. Which all adults should have foreseen and prevented.

^This about the public pressure. I give the Royal family a bit of wiggle room because I think they initially were trying to protect the boys and grieve privately (they did stay quiet at Balmoral for several days), but there was so much backlash from public that they overcorrected. It was an odd situation...Diana and Charles weren’t married and she wasn’t part of the Royal family anymore, so who was obligated to do what and who was in charge of the funeral was probably in flux for a few days. I think the Windsors initially thought it would be the Spencers responsibility to take care of the funeral, but the massive outpouring from the public necessitated they get involved just because they had access to the needed resources. There had never been a situation before were a former member of the Royal family had died and also caused such a shockwave through the country. For a family who loves protocol they didn’t have a playbook for how to deal with this and were making it up as they went along.

[just_ordinary]

@DalmatianCat true, but honestly I wonder what their advisors did all day? The family could be excused with shock and grieve (but I definitely think the adults cannot be fully excused). Even if they weren’t fans of Diana, she was part of the family and the mother of the boys and not ill or something. It will have affected all of them to some extent. The advisors and PR people could have foreseen that there would be the need for a bigger gesture. Not the extend of it all but still. And someone should have sat for a minute and told them to not let them walk. Honestly, they really employ some very shortsighted and/or incompetent people. And still do (just look at the whole Andrew horror or the Megxit drama). Their crisis management is lacking at best. 
 

On the other hand, I wonder if they realise that those scenes of the boys walking behind the coffin is one of the reason people love them so much, care so much, are forgiving and protecting. The public opinion might be much more indifferent and certainly with less sympathy without the sentiment it created: “my heart broke for them....”. I am sure they would be happy to trade but it has elevated those two into a very plushy realm of poor Diana’s boys. Children loose parents all time, these two are neither an exception or had the most traumatic loss. But they benefit from public sympathy bonus points for it as no one else. Even as they are already middle aged men with families of their own. As I said, I am sure they would gladly do without. The loss of a parent is hard to overcome and I don’t doubt it still hurts and they still shed some tears or feel depressed or angry from time to time. But let’s face it, they would be judged a hundred times harder for their actions if the public didn’t have those pictures and therefore feels a (twisted) bond.

Edited November 25, 2020 by just_ordinary

[clueliss]

My personal suspicion is that Prince Philip thought it was just fine because as a kid he’d had to walk behind the caskets of his sisters brother in law and their children and it didn’t kill him.  Ergo if the public wants us to make a show, they can do the same thing,  (thanks to The Criwn for making us aware of that dandy tidbit from his past)

[viii]

3 hours ago, adidas said:

Meghan has written a piece about having a miscarriage in July  

edited to add link:

https://honey.nine.com.au/royals/meghan-markle-duchess-of-sussex-reveals-miscarriage/3067943f-fe73-4501-af42-05ba7a0c87a1

Very sad, and I feel bad for my comment now suspecting that she's pregnant. I am glad she had the courage to speak about her experience, even if I am sure there are some that will ridicule her for "attention seeking". I hope her and Harry have a good support system around them as they navigate this loss. 

[just_ordinary]

It is indeed very sad for them. I am happy they had the privacy to grieve and could decide if and how to talk about it. I will say that I find her piece in the times more curated than raw, but honestly I cannot fault her for it.

[viii]

1 hour ago, just_ordinary said:

I will say that I find her piece in the times more curated than raw, but honestly I cannot fault her for it.

I also find it very polished, but that's probably because it is. It has been roughly 4-5 months since her miscarriage, and she probably rewrote this piece several time, having it come across as so edited. There's a stark difference between her experience and Chrissy Teigen's, but Chrissy was updating as it happened, which is why hers felt so unbelievably raw and painful. 

[SweetJuly]

3 hours ago, clueliss said:

My personal suspicion is that Prince Philip thought it was just fine because as a kid he’d had to walk behind the caskets of his sisters brother in law and their children and it didn’t kill him.  Ergo if the public wants us to make a show, they can do the same thing,  (thanks to The Criwn for making us aware of that dandy tidbit from his past)

I could imagine that perhaps Philip thought it would help the boys to be able to show their respect to their mother. That somehow it would make them feel better to be part of the group of 'men' who honour Diana by walking behind her coffin? Maybe it actually helped him with his grief when he walked behind the coffin of his sister and her family, and he thought it would be the same for William and Harry?

Maybe William and Harry even wanted to do that at the time, being grief-stricken helpless boys whose mother had been taken from them in a sudden and brutal manner. Maybe they felt it was a way to connect with and say goodbye to her, and were not prepared for how horrific the experience would actually turn out to be? The imagination of a teenager can be very different from reality, and yes, it was an absolute failure on behalf of the adults in the princes' lives that they either went along with it or even actively pushed for it.

[louisa05]

8 minutes ago, viii said:

I also find it very polished, but that's probably because it is. It has been roughly 4-5 months since her miscarriage, and she probably rewrote this piece several time, having it come across as so edited. There's a stark difference between her experience and Chrissy Teigen's, but Chrissy was updating as it happened, which is why hers felt so unbelievably raw and painful. 

Connecting it to her much criticized “are you ok” documentary moment is way too PR packaged. It comes off as trying to fix that debacle by exploiting a personal tragedy. 

[nokidsmom]

9 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

But what I find almost just as horrifying is the pressure the public put on them to show the boys. As if they were public circus animals. I don’t care one ounce of people just wanted to give them their condolences. It was a hysterical, intrusive and disgustingly voyeuristic mindset. Everyone in their right mind should have realised that those boys owe them nothing regarding their mother’s death.

I remember feeling pretty horrified at how the crowds reacted to the boys as if they "needed" them.  Both when they came out to review the tributes at Buckingham Palace and during the funeral.   They were subjected to the needs of other people and while I think the RF had really no idea of that, it put the boys in an extraordinarily tough situation.  

On one level I can understand how the people reacted.  Diana was someone that so many related to, in one way or another, and I can see that the boys were seen as a living connection to her.  But it still to subjected them to a lot more than anyone else in their position even considering the "fish bowl" of being in the royal family.

That both William and Harry are still affected to this day is no surprise.

[just_ordinary]

1 hour ago, louisa05 said:

Connecting it to her much criticized “are you ok” documentary moment is way too PR packaged. It comes off as trying to fix that debacle by exploiting a personal tragedy. 

I wonder if we might find a cultural clash here? I know that many Europeans I talked to about H&M (talking about social bubbles) agreed that their PR after they decided to leave sounded very dramatic and like something from a tv show which we identified as a more US American speech pattern. It seems that the way the information was phrased sounded more like it could be played out in a drama series then what you expect from real life people. For me it has too much pathos and emotions seem to be used to push the information down your throat instead of trusting the right emotion would be triggered. I don’t know if it makes sense? I just found certain gestures, actions or words too much and I am inclined to believe it has to do with cultural differences on Meghan’s and Sunshine Sachs’s part than calculating PR. It’s the same with normal Americans I talk too. They say AWSOME, I say nice. They say HORRIFIC, I say not ideal. They say it will be a CIVIL WAR, I think it will be tough time. They seem to have stronger reactions to it and it translates to being a bit hysterical and dramatic, which is probably not the case. 
It would certainly explain why their PR so phenomenally backfired in Europe. It just feels fake. I mean the whole point of PR is to create a positive (or selling and unique) image for the public so it is obviously calculated. But everyone has other strategies they can accept better and make them at least want to believe it’s true. The quieter, more subdued, long term strategy works better on me.

However, a loss is a loss. And if they find it helps them, they can deal with it however they  like. 
My other, more critical opinions under the spoiler.

Spoiler

I do find it a bit complicated that they seem to jump into whatever cause has the most publicity at the moment. Feminism, BLM, Veterans and now miscarriages. It might be completely coincidental but that how it looks sometimes. But I am a cynic and very judgmental.

 

Edited November 25, 2020 by just_ordinary

[Coconut Flan]

3 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

I wonder if we might find a cultural clash here? I know that many Europeans I talked to about H&M (talking a out social bubbles) agreed that their PR after they decided to leave sounded very dramatic and like something from a tv show which we identified as a more US American speech pattern. It seems that the way the information was phrased sounded more like it could be played out in a drama series then what you expect from real life people. For me it has too much pathos and emotions seem to be used to push the information down your throat instead of trusting the right emotion would be triggered. I don’t know if it makes sense?

Staged? Yes.  I'm American and find much of their recent behavior overly staged and overly dramatic.  One doesn't usually fall to the floor with the first cramp of a miscarriage.  I had several and never fell to floor with any of them.  Nor have I ever found miscarriage to be a hidden topic.  Right now the entertainment shows can't seem to go more than three weeks without reporting on a miscarriage "tragedy."  I may be on the hard hearted side, but to me a miscarriage is not a tragedy.  Again the exaggerated, dramatic language you were speaking about.  It's a misfortune, it's sad, but a quite regular occurence and closer to 25% of pregnancies than the 10% quoted.  

 

[nausicaa]

20 minutes ago, nokidsmom said:

I remember feeling pretty horrified at how the crowds reacted to the boys as if they "needed" them.  Both when they came out to review the tributes at Buckingham Palace and during the funeral.   They were subjected to the needs of other people and while I think the RF had really no idea of that, it put the boys in an extraordinarily tough situation.  

I found, and still find, the strange tunic tearing by the public after Diana's death uncomfortable, and frankly, kind of disturbing. 

And I have zero connection to the woman. How terrible for those two young boys to have to go out into those crowds and be expected to manage the extreme emotional distress of others mourning what was a constructed persona for them, but was actually the boys' own mother. 

I don't know how the BRF didn't forsee that. But perhaps this falls under the general issue of them not understanding just how popular Diana was and what the response would be. I don't think anyone anticipated it, though I do think some of the zeitgeist was contagious hysteria rather than truly held feeling. 

[nausicaa]

19 minutes ago, Coconut Flan said:

Staged? Yes.  I'm American and find much of their recent behavior overly staged and overly dramatic. 

I'm American born and bred as well. I won't speak to the miscarriage essay because I've never had one, but many times she has struck me as deeply inauthentic and I just can't shake it. 

But she isn't alone in that. As I get older and understand the certain set of skills actors have and how their job is basically to manipulate, I can't enjoy most Hollywood interviews or promotional materials. It really turns me off from the whole thing while also freeing me from putting famous people on a pedestal. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

15 minutes ago, Coconut Flan said:

Staged? Yes.  I'm American and find much of their recent behavior overly staged and overly dramatic.  One doesn't usually fall to the floor with the first cramp of a miscarriage.  I had several and never fell to floor with any of them.  Nor have I ever found miscarriage to be a hidden topic.  Right now the entertainment shows can't seem to go more than three weeks without reporting on a miscarriage "tragedy."  I may be on the hard hearted side, but to me a miscarriage is not a tragedy.  Again the exaggerated, dramatic language you were speaking about.  It's a misfortune, it's sad, but a quite regular occurence and closer to 25% of pregnancies than the 10% quoted.  

 

Bolding mine - I agree.  It's not something I bring up in casual conversation, but I've never known women to be particularly reticent in discussing this amongst ourselves.  And they are far more common than 10% if you count early miscarriages.  Back when my mom was having kids they wouldn't confirm pregnancy before the end of the first trimester, but with the early testing kits we've seen how often it happens before other signs of pregnancy would occur.

I think it depends on the circumstances.  I had one a few days shy of 20 weeks and the initial cramping did make my legs buckle - if I'd been holding one of my kids I'd have gotten on the floor or into a sitting position fast to make sure I didn't drop them.  

Idk if I'd use the word tragedy now, since I got pregnant with my youngest within weeks and if I'd had that baby he wouldn't be here, but it certainly felt like a tragedy at the time.  Granted it was four days before my mom died and we were sitting around her in a vigil at that point, so losing my baby and my mom at the same time...and since I was so far along and had been showing it added an element of major emotional difficulty for me at the funeral when relatives who didn't know would mention my pregnancy.  I still look back at that time and wonder how I was even functional.

Had it not been tied to my mom's passing, I still would have considered it a major loss closer to tragedy than not.  

But the other one I had very early (which would have seemed like just a late period had I not taken an early test) didn't affect me in the same way.  I was sad and it was a shame, but I didn't grieve the loss of that child - if that makes sense.   But I absolutely get why someone could be devastated from an early loss as well, I think for me it's so dependent on the individual and their circumstances.  Everyone's level of grief, or lack there of, is legitimate for them.  

[viii]

I think if you also look at the year Harry and Meghan have had. Whether they have brought it upon themselves or not is irrelevant; they've had a rough year and this was probably something they were really looking forward to. A moment of joy in a bleak year. Plus, we don't know what kind of fertility problems they might have. Nitpicking that she used the word tragedy seems like more of an appropriate comment on royaldish than here. 

[bea]

Miscarriages aren’t discussed nearly enough - not until you have one. And then you find out half the women you know and are related to have had one. Honestly, if I had known the statistics, I would have been better able to cope with mine. I felt horribly isolated. I think it depends on your circumstances, your family, and often your age. Megan doesn’t seem to have a huge family or support system (I didn’t), so it might have been more traumatic because of it.

I may be in the minority, but I thought the essay was heartfelt and well-written. Most of the women I know in the baby loss/infertility “subculture” online spoke very positively about the article. I think many of us had the knee-buckling experience, not necessarily from physical pain, but from the idea that this was a miscarriage, it wasn’t a ligament twinge, this was a loss.
It’s an awful feeling. I hope she’s recovered. I hope all of us recover from this year.

[Coconut Flan]

THIS is the sentence I wrote: 

Quote

 Right now the entertainment shows can't seem to go more than three weeks without reporting on a miscarriage "tragedy."

I was referring to entertainment news shows repeatedly using the word tragedy.  I can't remember if Meghan used it or not.  Words have power.  If we repeatedly label something in a certain way, it will become that for many people.  

We're currently living with quite a bit of exaggerated word power so should become more aware of it rather than less.  

I almost posted defining a major difference between a very early loss and those closer to mid-term or later to avoid the conflict.  There is absolutely a difference.  

[tabitha2]

I have empathy and compassion for both of them for this loss and And I hope they go on to to have as many healthy babies and pregnancies as they wish. But this word salad letter with it’s timing and the Lifetime movie script bathetic wording is classic Sussex  attention grab. 

[just_ordinary]

1 hour ago, viii said:

I think if you also look at the year Harry and Meghan have had. Whether they have brought it upon themselves or not is irrelevant; they've had a rough year and this was probably something they were really looking forward to. A moment of joy in a bleak year. Plus, we don't know what kind of fertility problems they might have. Nitpicking that she used the word tragedy seems like more of an appropriate comment on royaldish than here. 

Just to clarify- as I brought my problems with their phrasing up. I don’t raise my eyebrows about the phrase tragedy.

@bea It was well written and it was heartfelt BUT it also came across as exactly for this purpose. Her description of her own experience reads to me like the perfect curated narrative and nothing I can relate too (having two miscarriages under my belt). I get having weak knees or feeling the gut punch. But the way she described it leaves me completely disconnected. I find miscarriages have found their way into the open quite a bit though, but I also think those statistics imply something that isn’t there. Many woman have very sadly more then one, so you will not find as many woman having had one than the numbers show on first sight. You can very easily be the only one in your circle. That’s the nice thing about that internet. It’s easier to connect over wide distances. Maybe it’s different in the US? My country had tons of coverage about abortion and miscarriages in the last couple of years. But in the end, most people will still be shocked- you just don’t expect it to go wrong. Just as you don’t expect to die when you start your car. Only after something happened you remember the numbers and connect on this level to others.

[Pleiades_06]

4 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

Maybe it’s different in the US? My country had tons of coverage about abortion and miscarriages in the last couple of years

Not really different and I think you’re relying on stereotypes. 

Honestly part of H&M’s beef was how people “other” Meghan’s speech and behavior. She can’t say anything without it being ascribed to her culture. 

Edited November 25, 2020 by Pleiades_06

[HerNameIsBuffy]

8 minutes ago, Coconut Flan said:

THIS is the sentence I wrote: 

I was referring to entertainment news shows repeatedly using the word tragedy.  I can't remember if Meghan used it or not.  Words have power.  If we repeatedly label something in a certain way, it will become that for many people.  

We're currently living with quite a bit of exaggerated word power so should become more aware of it rather than less.  

I almost posted defining a major difference between a very early loss and those closer to mid-term or later to avoid the conflict.  There is absolutely a difference.  

I agree with the press sensationalizing everything and using the most emotion evoking words as click bait.