View previous topic | View next topic

Megxit

Page 3 of 19
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 17, 18, 19  Next

barbados
1340752.  Fri Jan 17, 2020 10:14 am Reply with quote

I don’t know what motivates, for example, someone not to think that she is anything more than a third rate actor. I’d guess that it wasn’t motivated by anything other than not rating her acting ability (I’d guess if it was a slight on her character then the term actress would have been used rather than actor.

However my suggestion wasn’t that none had been racially motivated - the overseas paper that asked the question “how black will the royal baby be” is most definitely rooted in racism. The suggestion was that there has been a need to retort mostly in the style of Ali G in as much as “you are only saying that because I is black”

 
PDR
1340753.  Fri Jan 17, 2020 10:44 am Reply with quote

dr.bob wrote:

It's hard to deny that the treatment of Meghan by the press has been very different, and much more negative, than their treatment of her sister-in-law. Are you completely sure that absolutely none of that negative coverage has been motivated by racism?


I'm not sure he made that claim. But your determination that all that was required for something to BE racist would be the view of the receiver that it was racist - irrespective of any facts, context or intent.

If I said I view your view that the Scottish approach to university fees was superior to the English one* was clearly racist would you accept that it was not your place to gainsay it, and therefore feel obliged for making the claim?

PDR

*I think that's what you suggested, and I am clearly exaggerating to illustrate the point, so please accept that this is for rhetoric purposes only and I make no such suggestion.

 
Jenny
1340754.  Fri Jan 17, 2020 11:42 am Reply with quote

No racism eh?

So the Daily Mail articles about her being “(almost) straight outta Compton”i and having “exotic” DNA are in your view in no way racist?

Princess Michael of Kent ended up having to apologise when she wore an overtly racist brooch in the duchess’s company. Do you think that was simple thoughtlessness? That the Princess didn't have another jewel she could adorn herself with?

Danny Baker compared the couple’s newborn baby to a chimpanzee. Funny joke, eh? Not racist at all?

And - Daily Mail again, no surprise there, there was the ludicrous suggestion that Meghan’s favourite snack is responsible for mass murder. No other link they could have drawn to avocados? Not even avocado toast as a millennial snack?

The Daily Telegraph portrayed her charity cookbook as somehow helping terrorists.

Her guest-editing of UK Vogue magazine drew storms of criticism - unlike every other Royal who has guest-edited a magazine.

If you see no racism in all of this, you are wearing blinkers.

 
barbados
1340755.  Fri Jan 17, 2020 11:54 am Reply with quote

Jenny wrote:
No racism eh?


who is suggesting that?

 
'yorz
1340763.  Fri Jan 17, 2020 4:39 pm Reply with quote

Alexander Howard wrote:
In this case, the claims of racism have been slung around by the press as a way to avoid thinking, not expressed by Her Royal Highness as far as I am aware. (Anyway, she's not black, if ever that made difference.)

Meghan's title is not HRH. She has literally distanced herself from the racist onslaught. If you think there is no racism involved - please search the internet. Plenty of proof.
Here's an example.
There are more Black people who will embrace her as Black than there are white folk who will call her white.

 
Zziggy
1340784.  Sat Jan 18, 2020 6:54 am Reply with quote

Bahaha are there actually people questioning whether the treatment of Meghan Markle is racist

 
barbados
1340785.  Sat Jan 18, 2020 10:22 am Reply with quote

'yorz wrote:

Meghan's title is not HRH.

It is.
Marrying a prince qualifies you as a princess. Her title is Her Royal Highness Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex. Had she been the daughter of Prince Charles, rather than the other way round, the Harry would not qualify as a prince (in the same way that Princess Anne's husbands have not become princes)

 
'yorz
1340798.  Sat Jan 18, 2020 1:20 pm Reply with quote

Zziggy wrote:
Bahaha are there actually people questioning whether the treatment of Meghan Markle is racist


"Yeah buh no buh - that's nothing to do with racism; they just don't like the uppity woman." [/sarcasm]

 
'yorz
1340799.  Sat Jan 18, 2020 1:42 pm Reply with quote

barbados wrote:
'yorz wrote:

Meghan's title is not HRH.

It is.


I stand corrected. Mind, I cannot recall having heard her being called HRH; it's been Duchess (of Sussex) so far.

Addendum: Hah. I now read that Harry & Meghan will from now on refrain from using those HRH titles.

Article

 
barbados
1340800.  Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:23 pm Reply with quote

They will always be "Royal Highnesses" it goes with the entitlement. Whether they choose to use that is personal choice, Prince Edward, because he is so far down the pecking order sees no need for the royal highnessness to be such a big thing - so he doesn't feel the need. No doubt had he wanted to he could have picked up a dukedem, but opted for an earldom making it easier to not use the title.

 
'yorz
1340802.  Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:04 pm Reply with quote

As I said, they will no longer be using those titles; these haven't been stripped off them.

 
barbados
1340803.  Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:33 pm Reply with quote

However, going back to Jenny's offerings......
The straight outta compton article is about where Meghan's mum lives, and centres around whether Harry would be going there for tea. Is it really about race? or would it more likely be an insight into the differences in the family background? You cannot deny that the article is pretty accurate - there is a huge gulf in the neighbourhoods their families live.
It's a shame to pick up on two words in an article about whether a mother would be happy with the relationship (written from the point of view of the mother) You could have picked out that no one cares if she is mixed race, but that wouldn't fit with the assumption of racism - particularly from the Daily Mail which is such an easy target when it comes to race. However if you insist on picking up on those two words (you could have picked the comment about pictures of bananas) you could have included the rest of the sentence for context, which - quite rightly suggests the blood line could do with some thickening.
Do I think that Princeess Michael of Kent is thoughtless? You are aware of her arent you? she is probably the most thoughtless person in the "firm" but, look at the brooch. That is a moorish prince, not a slave (which is the suggestion leading to the racist overtones) and as someone from continental Europe, she would not have made the connection between a moorish prince, and racism.
When the Danny Baker tweet occured, it was there for a very short time, when he realised that it actually was offensive. He then removed the tweet, and apologised profusely. Those that know him suggest that he doesn't have a racist bone in his body, and I cant think (even being a Millwall fan who aren't known for their diversity acceptance) of another instance where he has made a racist comment.
Can you tell me where in the article about the avocado the racism occurs? It suggests that the growers in Mexico are exploiting the workers. Are you suggesting that the Duchess of Sussex is offended by the suggestion that people should take care to ensure that they source their avocados from a less exploitative market?
The Telegraph article about her cookbook suggests that the mosque where the community kitchen is has terror connections. Is that untrue? I couldn't see anywhere in the article that suggests the Duchess supports terrorism in anyway, and it also points out that the kitchen is seperate from the mosque. There is a suggestion that she may have been poorly advised to get involved on something that can be linked to terrorism (albeit a very loose connection) perhaps she has in this case - but the report isn't critical of her.
The criticism of the Vogue editing is an odd one, there is a lot of suggeston that she was criticised, but the only offering was over the political nature of the editorial - I haven't read the magazine. If that is the case then the criticism is justified, one thing the royal family have been very careful to do since the reformation is to stay out of politics.

 
Alexander Howard
1340807.  Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:50 pm Reply with quote

barbados wrote:
They will always be "Royal Highnesses" it goes with the entitlement. Whether they choose to use that is personal choice, Prince Edward, because he is so far down the pecking order sees no need for the royal highnessness to be such a big thing - so he doesn't feel the need. No doubt had he wanted to he could have picked up a dukedem, but opted for an earldom making it easier to not use the title.


The unspoken, unacknowledged, reason that Prince Edward received an Earldom is that he has been promised the title 'Duke of Edinburgh' when it is available, and if he had been made 'Duke of Wherever', his first title would have priority over Edinburgh. An earldom though is trumped by a later dukedom.

 
Jenny
1340809.  Sat Jan 18, 2020 4:14 pm Reply with quote

"Straight outta Compton" references the movie, barbados, not the actual neighbourhood. If you're not aware of the implications I can't help you.

Yes I do think that Princess Michael's choice of brooch was racist. There are plenty of less pointed jewels she could have worn. She didn't need to wear anything drawing attention to race.

I was amazed at Danny Baker's lack of judgment, but it does go to show how deeply unacknowledged racism runs that he even thought about it, never mind did it. This is somewhat like Princess Michael's choice of brooch.

An article about the poor treatment of workers in avocado farms did not have to make any reference to Meghan at all - she was literally dragged into that one in a totally unnecessary way.

The mosque/terrorism/cookbook link was also unnecessary - none of these things had to involve her at all but a deliberate choice to do so was made.

However, I see that you are determined not to see what you don't want to see, so I'll leave it there.

 
barbados
1340810.  Sat Jan 18, 2020 4:15 pm Reply with quote

Out of curiosity, when (if) that happens will he revert to hrh in his style?

 

Page 3 of 19
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 17, 18, 19  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group