Lab
See how this opinion breaks down by gender, political spectrum and generation — and who shares your view.
Gender
13 comments
Meghan Markle, the actress that married into the royal family with Prince Harry, would only be destroying Prince Harry in the sense that she is ending the British monarchy's long line of whites only members.
Since Meghan became the Duchess of Sussex, she has been mired by the British tabloids as a disease-carrying emigrant that will ultimately bring the end of the British monarchy, which has long been exclusive to lineage members who are predominantly white.
The most poignant detail in Meghan Markle's interview with Oprah was when she revealed members of the royal family expressed "concerns" over her then-unborn child's skin. This bombshell insinuated that there had been heated discussions about race and accepting outsiders, since Meghan is not descended by a lineage of royalty
The racism that confronted Meghan from the royal family and the British tabloids proved to be psychological damaging to the point where Meghan contemplated suicide. The apparent racism within the royal family became so prominent, that she and Prince Harry announced they were stepping back from the duties of the royal family. Immediately, the tabloids suggested that Meghan forced Harry into the decision, and was forcing him into difficult decisions.
Obviously, suggesting that Prince Harry was forced to step back from being prominent members of the royal family due to Meghan is an unfounded claim, especially since the royal family hardly reveals anything. Meghan also criticized the royal family's refusal to defend her from the racist tabloid press.
Since there is only so much we can know about the issues within the royal family, it is wrong to speculate that Meghan is "destroying" Harry in the sense that he is relinquishing his royalty status. It is a claim that insinuates that the British royal family must remain a symbol of whiteness in the UK. It is not Harry's fault, nor is it Meghan's that they are stepping back. It is the fault of pervasive racism to maintain the status quo that places them in a difficult position.
We should not be blaming Meghan for her problems.
We should be empathetic with her.
CITATIONS:
Dreazen, Yochi. “Why Meghan Markle’s Engagement to Prince Harry Is Controversial.” Vox, 15 Dec. 2017, www.vox.com/world/2017/11/27/16705282/meghan-markle-prince-harry-engagement-royal-family.
Grady, Constance. “Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s Oprah Interview about the Royal Family, Explained.” Vox, 9 Mar. 2021, www.vox.com/culture/22319714/meghan-markle-prince-harry-oprah-interview-cbs-explained.
I am also against but for none of the reasons you offer.
I think it virtually impossible for a person to destroy another with all the advantages existing for both. She may have changed life as he knew it.
Life is about compromise. If the lifestyle of the Royal family doesn't suit them then it is their choice to walk away, a decision made as a couple. They are able to walk away because there is a line of succession established that doesn't include or need them. They are also financially secure which gives freedom.
I am against soul baring in such a public way, it is not a reality show to persuade people to take sides and as in most things I believe there is fault, cultural and lifestyle differences and I do not mean racially, on both "sides". No winners here.
This is not "The Crown" !
I agree wholeheartedly that their marriage has ultimately resulted in compromising, especially if that is the nature of life. But with the royal family, the situation is a bit complicated. Meghan spoke at length in the interview about the monarchy's isolationist lifestyle from the general public to the point where she had to ask for permission to get in touch with her old friends.
The fact that the tabloids relentlessly portrayed her as a negative outsider due to her racial background made their lifestyle all the more unnecessarily tiresome. With the tabloid press, the guards would place more restrictions on her private life. Prince Harry is sixth in line to succeed Queen Elizabeth, so naturally the tabloids will portray his probable assumption of the throne as a threat to the English lifestyle with Meghan being a negative influence.
Another reason this is more complicated than it looks is that the goings on in the English Royal Family is shrouded in secrecy. But it was apparent that members were insulting Meghan's background. Princess Michael, for instance, was photographed wearing a racist brooch during a Christmas gathering with Meghan.
Like I said before, this is a time for empathy with Meghan, and not a time for guessing who did what and why. Yes, they are financially secure but their celebrity status makes them a target for tabloids to portray as negative influencers to the aristocratic lifestyle.
Harry being sixth in line means that he is extremely unlikely to accede to the throne and that gives him more freedom to choose his lifestyle.
Has it occurred to you that effectively "asking permission" to see her friends could all be tied up with security and her personal safety?
I would hazard a guess that if you held almost any family up to the scrutiny the Royal family receives then we would find skeletons in the cupboard, hurtful remarks and fallings out.
I accept the differences in the lifestyles led by Meghan and Harry were very different and they have needed to find a way of life to suit them both, that is their choice.
In my opinion the "Oprah" interview was misguided. The Queen herself said you can't be half in the Royal family in respect of the public face but that they are much loved family members.
For any family/friends etc the way to resolve a problem is not to discuss it publicly and in this particular case sensationally but to address it with those you have differences with.
This interview in the greater part has been devisive, taking sides helps nobody, what they all need is resolution and conciliation.
I think the elephant in the room is.. how on Earth has it been missed that this suicidal ideation seems to completely stem from royals talking about her child's skin color (when this is something I'd assume nearly every parent of mixed-race children consider, along with their extended families and neighbors and friends and friends of friends) and also from public opinion of Britons who can be a shade cruel at times. In England the royals are treated like politicians, not like a child-gloves affair of respect and admiration, and each royal expects the kind of talk.
So, a woman gets to freeze the sensibilities of millions of watchers as soon as she says she felt like not existing any longer? Teenagers feel that way every couple months over not having cool-enough shoes. There's a stigma about not being sensitive to someone's ideations, and with good reason; they could harm themselves and obviously they are in pain. But what about a case like this, where a grown woman who's accomplished a good deal, rests her very life on what strangers think about her, and what in-laws might decry about her spawn? Of the millions of persons who have affairs far-worse in their lives, I could name 20 of them in 2 minutes, whom I know closely. More than half are learning from their adversities and all of zero are crying fire in a theatre about suicide.
Why are people expected to suspect persons of deranged abuses just because a self-styled victim claims suicidal feelings of her own, and why does this necessitate that these boogeymen are actually to blame always?
She is upsetting an institution and people feel one way or another. I am all for leaving families if there's enough discomfort, but also for the work it takes to lengthen one's fuse which she is refusing to do.
I greatly disagree with the general point you're making here. I'm not a fan of the royals, and think that far too much importance and ceremony is put on an outdated symbol of wealth and superiority.
But this hyper-focus on whether or not a human being's feelings of suicide are 'justified' or 'fair' because they come from a place of privilege just seems a bit ridiculous. And reducing depression and suicidal thoughts down to teenagers who don't have 'cool-enough shoes' feels a little...insensitive to the realities of both the depression experienced by teenagers, and the depression of Megan.
I'm fully aware that Megan is coming from a place of privilege, and millions of people without that privilege suffer from suicidal idealization, but also millions of people don't have to suffer a sustained and constant hate campaign from the tabloids.
And yes she did marry into the royal family, but using that to put the blame of the horrific bullying she's been subject to onto her feels akin to victim blaming.
I do agree that the interview was a pretty questionable choice. But also when there is so much negative news surrounding you, there's probably going to be a lot of anger and wanting to change the narrative there, so I can sort of understand it.
TL; DR - I am against this opinion because I believe that Meghan Markle is an excellent influence on Harry because she was the driving force behind a revolutionary break from anachronistic ideas about royalty, expectations, marriage and entitlement.
Meeting Meghan has been a pivotal moment for Harry who was raised following the royal protocol and way of living in every aspect of his life. From a very early age, Meghan has evolved as a feminist and a 'politically vocal' person, as Katherine Hignett says, 'blasting President Donald Trump as "misogynistic" and "divisive" in an appearance on The Nightly Show with Larry Wilmore in 2016', as the The Independent noted' ( Newsweek ).
Her charity work continued after her marriage when, together with Harry, they have 'been involved in various philanthropic projects'. They make each other stronger and the fact that they are both active in important political issues of equality shows the multiple ways they prove to be a power couple.
The recent interview with Oprah revealed how Markle's position and experience within the royal family have urged Harry to take a step away from the royal life. Alexander Kacala, Maura Hohman and Amy Eley list 11 things we learned from the interview, as Meghan 'told Winfrey that there were "concerns and conversations" among the royal family ahead of her son Archie's birth about "how dark his skin might be"' ( Today ).
Indeed, race is a huge reason Meghan felt discriminated against and her mental health was badly affected. This was definitely one of the main reasons they took the decision to walk away and start a new life, something that gave Harry the opportunity to start afresh and reinvent himself as a person, a defender of equality, and a strong opposer of pressures that led to his mother's death.
I believe that Meghan is a great influence on Harry because she brought to the table opportunities for re-thinking identity and human values threatened within the royal family.
Identity appears the be the central driving force to this whole controversy.
Naturally, the British Royal Family prides itself on lineage, which is predominantly white, and as symbols of the United Kingdom. But their overwhelming identities as white can inadvertently insinuate that Britain is a nation predominantly exclusive to white people, something that absolutely has to change.
What makes this issue more complicated is that the British royal family has an isolationist policy. As a result, Meghan had to get permission just to get in touch with any of her friends, which left her constantly feel as if she might as well be in prison. And the fact that the tabloids frequently targeted her as an outsider threatening to bring a reckoning to the British royal family's long-lasting traditions, resulting in the end of the overall identity to the country as they know it made it all the more stressful for everyone involved.
Prince Harry is actually sixth in line to assume the throne after Queen Elizabeth either resigns or dies. Although the possibility of his assuming the throne is not something to dwell on, it is an integral aspect to why he easily gets caught up in the racial controversy surrounding Meghan beyond her racial identity.
When kings or queens and successions are involved, it's natural for people to envision these figures as if they lead a kind of Game of Thrones-esque lifestyle. But Meghan wants nothing to do with the politics of the British aristocracy, as is apparent on her Instagram page where she posts photos advocating social progress (such as an online video call with Malala Yousafzai).
It's easy to assume Meghan "should've thought it through when she married into the royal family", but I think that misses the point of this dilemma. The point is that Meghan's plight exposes racial tensions within the British aristocracy we probably never would have known had she and Harry never gotten together, or how great lengths the British tabloids would go to portraying non-white individuals marrying into the royal family as negative influencers.
As members of the general public, the best we can do is offer our support and express our empathy for Meghan and her plight.
Just like all of us, she did not get to choose her identity. Our identities is a dilemma we all grapple with at some point. If Meghan's identity with regards to the royal family means change is in order, then we have all the more reason to cheer her and Harry on for.
This opinion seems quite misogynistic.
Harry is a 30+ year old man. He is quite capable of making his own decisions. To shift all the blame on Meghan and use the word 'destroying' him is very problematic.
Their decision to leave the Royal family was a decision made by the both of them. I really dislike how this opinion depicts the idea that Meghan is responsible for the supposed 'downfall' of Harry. It makes Meghan seem like an evil witch and Harry has been manipulated into her spells.
Why does the woman receive all the blame when the man was equally involved? For me, this opinion paints a very misogynistic image that I am totally against.
Meghan is not destroying Harry at all. They are a couple who fell in love, and the two of them made the decision to leave. It is completely unfair for the woman to receive all the blame; it perpetuates the gender inequalities regarding the differing ways that men and women are discussed about.
Not.
If you see Harry's and Meghan's last interview with Oprah, it was Harry and Meghan's decision to leave the Royal Family for their mental health and the best for his family.
Harry wasn't forced to leave the Royal Family, it was his personal choice, and I think it should be as respected as if they had chosen to stay.
I think that the British press is relatively conventional, and the moment Harry and Meghan started dating, they disliked her. It doesn't make any sense to blame her for anything; she wants to look after her family and has chosen the best for her mental health.
I always like to hear both sides of the story, but I don't think Royal Family would brave enough to tell theirs.
TL;DR – While we might not be privy to all of the facts, I think it’s more that a little obvious that Meghan is in no way responsible for any of the issues that have arisen. Add to that the fact that there are similarities between this incident and that of the late Princess Diana’s and this whole situation speaks volumes.
I think that in a stunning sense of clarity, this whole issue is less about Meghan (and Harry) and more about perhaps, the somewhat old-fashioned views and rules concerning "royal protocol." Even the late Princess Diana was subject to this type of pressure.
Arianna Davis, digital director of OprahMag.com who has written about Meghan extensively, also notes out that we shouldn’t be so quick to point fingers at Meghan. Evidence of how particularly, unjust Meghan’s been treated (compared to other royals) can be found in how she’s been criticized on: having a baby shower; the way she held her baby bump – and now, the way she holds her son, Archie; the dark nail polish she wore to an event; putting her hands in her pockets; wearing wedged shoes; eating avocado toast, etc.
If any of these issues have even one shred of truth to it, this is alarming. While I admit to understanding little about royal life and royal protocol, what do dictating things such as this have to do with being a royal? Not much if you ask me. And Davis further backs this up by very astutely pointing out to us that, “It's no coincidence that the most harshly critiqued royal also happens to be the first Black family member since Queen Charlotte of the 19th century.” Also adding, that Meghan is an American who is divorced and that both of these labels have not been looked upon in a favorable light by the monarchy for a good many years.
Even British journalist and author, Afua Hirsch, confirms that there is obviously an issue with regards to race here when she says: “I think what Meghan Markle’s experience has shown me is that when you put a woman of color into that space, which has always been abusive, there are particular issues.” Also adding onto that, that, “She’s more vulnerable because she’s visibly different.”
What’s more, Harry has been very outspoken regarding the unfair treatment of Meghan from the media since the beginning of their relationship. It is in fact, because of the way his wife has been treated that he decided to protect both her and their son. Clearly, Harry is a man who knows his own mind. He was even quoted as saying that he did not want history to repeat itself – obviously referring to his mother.
It’s important to note that while Harry's well acquainted with following royal protocol, he's never been one to play by the rules and has been standing up for himself since long before Meghan arrived on the scene. In fact, on more than one occasion he's mentioned his disdain regarding some of the things (protocols, rules,) that come along with being a prince. So then, this has actually been a long time in the making – further evidence that while Meghan might have been the catalyst for this situation, she is indeed, not (responsible for) destroying Harry or the Monarchy.
So instead of pointing fingers at Meghan, what we should actually be doing is supporting both Harry and Meghan for protecting themselves and their family – a right every human being and parent has.
TL;DR - Meghan Markle is straight up toxic, and Harry is a mess as well. Though I would put my money on Philip dropping the ball on this one.
I sure got you with that outrageous tl;dr. If I'm completely honest fairly uneducated on this issue, but it has popped up all over my feed for the last week. It's rather concerning to see how politicized this issue has become and how everyone is already taking a side on the matter, yet there is so much left unanswered. As an American who cannot possibly keep up with British tabloids, so I have a few questions as an unassuming spectator:
Who was being racist?
This is my biggest problem; we don't know who to target or was being racist. I absolutely believe we should investigate the royals if someone committed a racist act, but as of today, I still don't who we're talking about. I feel Meghan and Harry were alluring to someone in particular, but they never gave any details on the interview. The lack of detail gave the impression that the whole royal family was guilty because everyone is a suspect. Maybe this is a systemic issue of outdated practices, or maybe Meghan and Harry want us to think all of them are racist; who knows. Lack of detail leaves too much room for assumptions, and no one can verify the facts.
What's with this notion of protecting the Royal image if they were probably racist?
I get political commentators wanting to protect their country's institutions. But it's a totally plausible situation, these sound like serious accusations. Of course, I'm talking about Piers Morgan.
Why is it wrong to criticize Meaghan?
This is probably what makes this situation so contentious. It almost feels impossible to argue against her claims because she was so miserable and wanted to end her life. Not saying we shouldn't believe her, though I do think we have to question her intentions considering how questionable her approach was and how much baggage she has.
Why is the monarchy so secretive about this?
Again, is there any investigation being done?
Why did they decide to talk about this in an interview with Oprah?
Does expressing this with Oprah solve the issue? Or does it fire up more hate?
TL;DR Meghan Markle is not destroying Prince Harry
Setting aside the context of their status; relationship and experiences with social and news media, this perspective is potentially inflammatory for a variety of reasons. The wife as a “ball and chain” is an old and unwelcome caricature. An adjacent opinion might refer more to her impact on his status as a member of the royal family and as a public figure, but the verb “destroying” completely robs Prince Harry himself of any agency and characterises Megan Markle as some sort of malicious villain. Regardless of personal perspectives on the monarchy as an institution and the lifestyle it affords these few people by birth; this is an unfair and seemingly very harmful line of thought.
The larger question here is about exactly what Meghan Markle is destroying. There is only so much insight the wider public can glean into their private and personal relationship so by what metric are we measuring this destruction? If not his happiness; or his quality of life, or personal finances, then what? A better reading of this might be that is his role as a public representative of the royal family that is challenged by their relationship. Even so, it’s worth examining what it is about Meghan Markle that some perceive as a threat to both Prince Harry and the royal family. As Harry himself observed in his recent interview: “…if the source of information is inherently corrupt or racist or biased then that filters out to the rest of society.” (1)
Make the case or invite a friend to comment!