Harry & Meghan 13: Doing the Dance of Deniability

[Coconut Flan]

Continued from here:

This seems a good time for the new thread title as the final three episodes open Thursday.  The deniability dance is more likely about these three.  

Harry seems doomed to live down to his reputation of being impulsive and hot headed.  

[Jackie3]

1 hour ago, Coconut Flan said:

Harry seems doomed to live down to his reputation of being impulsive and hot headed.  

He's done well for himself, nonetheless. He seems extremely happy.

[Jackie3]

On 12/8/2022 at 10:24 AM, TN-peach said:

And then there is the exaggerated curtsy she demonstrated for when she met the Queen. 

Yes, no one ever makes fun of the royal family. You don't make fun of your betters. 

I never understood why Meghan curtsied anyway.  The Queen is not our ruler. Meghan is a US citizen. The US broke free from Britain centuries ago.

Nancy Reagan chose not to curtsey to the Queen. Michelle Obama hugged the Queen--and the Queen told her that royal protocol was all rubbish. 

Meghan should've just extended her hand for a polite handshake, and if the Queen didn't like it, too bad. Sounds like she wouldn't have minded though. 

Assuming nonBritish women are expected to curtsey to the BRF. .. . do British ladies curtsey to other monarchs? Do British women curtsey to King Mswati of Eswatini and his 15 wives for example? Or King Salman of Saudia Arabia?  I hope so.

 

Edited December 12, 2022 by Jackie3

[noseybutt]

Stating the obvious. Individuals representing nation states follow different protocols that are well thought out in advance and intended to advance diplomatic goals.

[just_ordinary]

It would be crazy if H came out with anything regarding W and cheating. I mean what’s the point? If he wants to make a point in not getting the same level of PR protection he doesn’t have to stoop so low. And let’s just hope he is squeaky clean in that regard or someone will print something not even 24h later. In the end those press offices are doing their job. Protecting the heir(s) to the throne. Is it fair? No. But that doesn’t mean H is the fall guy. Just that his shit doesn’t get covered up. It’s not created to make him look bad. 
I find two things absolutely baffling 

(1) where is all this footage coming from. Why would you film in those moms if you are not intending to make it public? So that was the aim from the start? Which is crazy because (2) they themselves said they would just step back from being senior royals but still be open to do lower level work and tours and honour the queens work yada yada yada. And then said that they would do Oprah and that’s it. 
That’s pretty inconsistent. And that makes it impossible for me to root for them. And I rooted for them even after Oprah.

[Jackie3]

6 minutes ago, noseybutt said:

Stating the obvious. Individuals representing nation states follow different protocols that are well thought out in advance and intended to advance diplomatic goals.

In that case, here is British protocol from the royal website. You can do whatever you want when you meet the Queen!

Quote

There are no obligatory codes of behaviour when meeting The Queen or a member of the Royal Family, but many people wish to observe the traditional forms.

For men this is a neck bow (from the head only) whilst women do a small curtsy. Other people prefer simply to shake hands in the usual way.

So there is no rule for Meghan to breaks. Sounds like the media just wanted to invent something to criticize.

[Jackie3]

1 minute ago, just_ordinary said:

If he wants to make a point in not getting the same level of PR protection he doesn’t have to stoop so low.

Yes, he shouldn't stoop low. He should take the high road, like the Palace did, by leaking information to the press.

[viii]

@louisa05 It all depends on what you believe at the end of the day. Personally, I hope that William hasn't cheated. He grew up in a dysfunctional family where he was used as a weapon between two cheating parents. I would hope those memories would serve as a painful reminder and he wouldn't put his own family through that. However, there have been numerous stories over the years regarding William straying, and I wouldn't be surprised if some of them were true. Even the most devote family man is capable of cheating. 

As for your classist suggestions, again, it all depends on what you believe. There's plenty of stories out there that William tried to find a girl from his circle, but none of them wanted to sign up for that lifestyle. Personally, I think he found a partner in Kate that he was looking for, and she checked all his boxes, and he checked hers. They seem incredibly well suited towards each other. 

That still doesn't mean that unfaithfulness can't happen. There will always be stories made up about William and Harry both, due to just who they are and what families they were born into. Whether or not you believe the stories is up to each individual person. 

Now - back to snarking on Harry. 

Edited December 12, 2022 by viii

[hoipolloi]

1 hour ago, just_ordinary said:

where is all this footage coming from. Why would you film in those moms if you are not intending to make it public? 

Agree. Seeing all of those photos, videos, etc. that were "in the moment" just makes the whole documentary weird and for me less credible.

Who does do that? Or, is this what millennieals-GenXers do nowadays -- living their lives so as to be captured on social media?

[AmazonGrace]

 

2 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

In that case, here is British protocol from the royal website. You can do whatever you want when you meet the Queen!

So there is no rule for Meghan to breaks. Sounds like the media just wanted to invent something to criticize.

Yesterday Meghan was mistreated by the BRF because nobody told her the rules.

Today there are no rules.

I am looking forward to tomorrow's version.

[Jackie3]

1 hour ago, AmazonGrace said:

 

Yesterday Meghan was mistreated by the BRF because nobody told her the rules.

Today there are no rules.

I am looking forward to tomorrow's version.

Me too!

Personally, I never felt she was mistreated because "no one told her the rules." As an American, why should she follow British rules anyway?

I felt she was mistreated because they insulted her, her clothes, her son,  her hometown, her mother, her father, her job in Tv,  her status as a divorcee. 

[AmazonGrace]

Of course not, no rules apply to Americans.

If you're an American it means you should do whatever the hell you want, no matter where you are.

[Jackie3]

49 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

Of course not, no rules apply to Americans.

If you're an American it means you should do whatever the hell you want, no matter where you are.

Yes! Exactly. Showing sovereignty to another country's ruler is ridiculous. People died to win our independence from British rule, how disrespectful to ignore that.

What if British protocol required you to kiss the King's toes (barf!) ? Or kowtow 100 times? Or hop in place till he said stop?

Ideally, the King should show courtesy to his guests, and accept all greetings--whatever they are-- with good humor. Even the Queen said that royal protocol was "rubbish."

Besides, according the Palace website, a handshake with the Queen is just been fine. Except to those who are just dying to make a curtsey to someone.

[SoSoNosy]

Angelina Jolie came very close to a curtsey; I really couldn't tell whether it was one or not.

 

[Jackie3]

58 minutes ago, SoSoNosy said:

Angelina Jolie came very close to a curtsey; I really couldn't tell whether it was one or not.

 

It's really only commoners who care whether it's a real curtsy or not. Or very insecure royals.

Edited December 13, 2022 by Jackie3

[Jackie3]

Quote

But something tells me that if he had wanted a life partner from those circles, there were would have been a long line to choose from. 

Women from aristocratic circles have the best of both worlds. They have money, jewelry, vast estates, servants. They also have the ability to live a private life. Why would they want to give that up? I suspect George, Charlotte and Louis may one day have trouble finding mates for this very reason. There will be lots of people who want to party with them, but very few who want to put themselves in that gilded cage.

[Jackie3]

8 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

And that makes it impossible for me to root for them.

They are doing OK without that.

[just_ordinary]

No member of the public has to curtsy or bow the monarch. It’s a personal choice. Some do, some don’t. You see that all the time. 
Inside the family is another matter though. Obviously you won’t get thrown into the tower but on the other hand if that’s a family tradition in a family where all are happy enough to cater to the wish of the head, of course they expect someone marrying in, wanting to have a place on the pay roll to follow suit. This and other stiff family traditions are well known in the public and to H. There is NO reason to be surprised or unprepared. Heck, the minute it became clear they were going serious enough to meet the family at one point, she could have found out and more importantly he should  have clued her in. There is tons of video snippets out there if people curtsying to the Queen. 

[tabitha2]

59 minutes ago, Jackie3 said:

Women from aristocratic circles have the best of both worlds. They have money, jewelry, vast estates, servants. They also have the ability to live a private life. Why would they want to give that up? I suspect George, Charlotte and Louis may one day have trouble finding mates for this very reason. There will be lots of people who want to party with them, but very few who want to put themselves in that gilded cage.

 

Real life is neither Downton Abbey or Bridgerton. The upkeep of one of these ancient piles plus maintaining the land plus Taxes and death duties is prohibitively expensive. Its common for these aristocratic families to live in one section of a huge manor  because they can’t afford to repair and heat the rest.  The fantasy of lavish living and scores of servants and vast  wealthy is pure Hollywood . Tourism, use for filming locations, renting spaces for events and is how most of the titled families survive now. What wealth they do have almost always goes to the eldest son and heir and the rest must work or marry money. 
 

 

[Jackie3]

2 minutes ago, tabitha2 said:

 

Real life is neither Downton Abbey or Bridgerton. The upkeep of one of these ancient piles plus maintaining the land plus Taxes and death duties is prohibitively expensive. Its common for these aristocratic families to live in one section of a huge manor  because they can’t afford to repair and heat the rest.  The fantasy of lavish living and scores of servants and vast  wealthy is pure Hollywood . Tourism, use for filming locations, renting spaces for events and is how most of the titled families survive now. What wealth they do have almost always goes to the eldest son and heir and the rest must work or marry money. 
 

 

I don't think anyone would take Downton Abbey or Bridgerton for real life.

However, not all aristocrats are poor. Many are extremely wealthy. The wealthy ones are unlikely to give up their freedom to marry a senior royal.  I suppose the poor ones might marry one of them for their money, but that's just sad for everyone involved.

[tabitha2]

Again even with the wealthiest the major part of that goes the heir with the rest living on trust funds or working  And even the wealthiest don’t have a retinue of servants anymore but staff that may amount to a nanny and housekeeper at most. 

[Jackie3]

3 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

Heck, the minute it became clear they were going serious enough to meet the family at one point, she could have found out and more importantly he should  have clued her in.

Yes, that is what people in love think about. How to act when you meet your loved one's granny.  

In any event, Meghan was a US citizen then. They were not engaged. A handshake was fine--and that's straight from the source, the Palace website!

[Jackie3]

1 hour ago, tabitha2 said:

Again even with the wealthiest the major part of that goes the heir with the rest living on trust funds or working  And even the wealthiest don’t have a retinue of servants anymore but staff that may amount to a nanny and housekeeper at most. 

Your point escapes me. Who cares whether the wealthy have a swarm of servants or not?

Either way, Britain's dukes, earls and viscounts are unlikely to find life in a gilded cage attractive. This is true whether they have 20 servants or 2.

As aristocrats, they can  go to Starbucks, travel abroad, go out dancing, walk their kids to school--all without paparazzi chasing after them.  They can wear any color without worrying about matching their MIL. They don't have to ask the King for money. They don't have to spend their lives shaking hands and pretending it's "work."  They can marry without asking the monarch for permission. Who would give that up, for life in a gilded cage.

Finding a spouse for the Cambridges will be pretty challenging--who would want that life? Maybe only a person who had nothing else going on (Kate MIddleton, for example)

Edited December 13, 2022 by Jackie3

[Jackie3]

Quote

Bingo. That’s why I must question the claims of them being “clearly in love”

I'll let them know. They care a lot about what you think. They do look miserable, I have to agree.

 

. 

Edited December 13, 2022 by Jackie3

[catlady]

4 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

Your point escapes me. 

No surprise there.