Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Prince Harry the Timid
I never dreamed I’d post something about this. As much as I love our cousins across the pond, and as much as I appreciate their tenacious clinging to their quaint and fusty old ways, petulant drama surrounding “the royals” strikes me as about the most boring subject imaginable. This will be my only comment on the matter, I’m sure.
The fetching American princess is getting a lot of heat right now, and I want to put in a word in her defense. [Disclaimer: I wouldn’t recognize her if I saw her, but I understand she’s quite lovely.]
If Prince Harry can’t keep his wife in line, that’s his problem, not hers. I don’t care how “woke” she is, how much a progressive nutcase, how dissatisfied she may be with the crushing strictures of her high station, what a spoiled and narcissistic airhead brat she may be: if young Harry can’t run his own family, he probably isn’t man enough to represent his country.
It’s the prerogative of a princess to want all kinds of things. Harry should man up and say no.
It goes against tradition, and therefore is not “conservative.” It also seems selfish that that don’t really want to do their duty, when the reality is that they cannot escape who they are. I do think it’s a largely financial consideration for them. They are not in the line of succession unless a real disaster strikes, so I can understand them not wanting to be subordinate to the whatever the crown and family dictate. But I also think it weakens the monarchy and that perhaps Megan does not truly appreciate the sacrifices that the Queen has made for decades to preserve a very unique and special institution. I’m grateful for our revolution, but I think the longevity of the British monarchy and its relationship to constitutional government in the U.K. is worth respecting.
Great post Henry.
When they ask the actor formerly known as Prince what his pronouns are, he can simply answer: The Emasculated.
I’ll never forget your post: http://ricochet.com/619578/archives/quote-of-the-day-two-will-become-one/
And, in particular, this:
That’s what it’s all about, no?
I’ve given about as much thought to this as I have to the super bowl, which means not much. But, why doesn’t the Queen, figuratively speaking, bust them down to buck private and send them on their way?
Yes.
Well, whatever fault’s Meghan has in the Megxit kerfuffle she had at least the courage to do what Barbara Streisand, among others in Hollywood did not have the courage to do-move to Canada. Although I’m still trying to sort out who is being threatened with the move to Canada threat. Is it Canada, or the United States or in Meghan’s case the UK.
and [expletive]whipped never made it.
Not immanentizing the eschaton, monetizing the escutcheon:
Hat tip: Kim du Toit.
I think the future success of this hybrid role thingy depends on something about the interaction between service and privilege. While the “negotiations” were underway with Harry in the UK, Meghan already managed to appear at a Vancouver women’s shelter and get photoed in the center of a small line of beaming employees (0f course looking more glamorous than any of them). Was she invited? Did she ask to appear? How would they even have her number?
If the dynamic duo wants to truly seek privacy and not ask for special contributions to secure that condition, then they will probably be welcome most anywhere. If on the other hand, they want to control the press, “vacation” at their renovated palace across the pond, and just appear in an adopted location expecting applause (due to still being part time royalty) and that form ot self-employment comes across as “keep us safe until coverage is arranged so you can listen to our interfering wisdom,” well…not so much.
Did you stop taking crazy pills? I haven’t, not once I found them. They are the best.
I must say there is definitely a lot of black knighting going on on the Right here with respect to Meghan and Harry. Me thinks they doth protest too much. Here we have two Royals actually trying to make themselves interesting to us the tabloid consuming market and we complain about it. Worst of all people are choosing to take the side of an old dirty foreigner over a young sexy American? Where is the Nationalism? AMERICA FIRST! Has to also mean Americans First, in all things. Stand up for your countrywoman guys.
Plus, like I said in another post Meghan is way hotter than Kate and infinetly better looking than Elizabeth ever was. And as women have to be primarily judged and treated commensurate to their looks (its in the Bible okay, don’t at me…) we are obligated to take the side of the hotter one, as men. So based on this entirely reasonable standard I have to be team Meghan over team Elizabeth.
Gosh, not sure why everyone has the knives out for Meghan – what has she done wrong? I don’t agree with her politics, but I’ve seen nothing but class and graciousness from her.
Perhaps the criticizers here are highlighting why they are making this move in the first place – because people are vicious to her for some reason. I’ve seen some of the headlines in the British press, and vicious is the only word. She has been quite public about how hard that is to deal with on a daily basis.
How many of us would be able to bear up under that, knowing that is likely our fate for the rest of our lives?
As for those of you putting into crude terms what a wimp Harry must be in the clutches of his bossy, woke wife, why are you assuming the worst?
How about instead thinking about what we know to be true about Harry’s past and how that may be influencing his present? He had a beloved mother that was relentlessly pursued by the press and ultimately lost her life, partly due to that same press. He grew up witnessing the heartache and stress relentless press coverage (much of it untrue and/or unfair) placed on his already emotionally unstable mother.
With that background, perhaps he’s seeing the effect the relentless negative press is having on his wife (whether she is woke or not) and is especially sensitive to that.
Instead of assuming really critical things, how about thinking that perhaps Harry, not wanting to see history repeat, is actually loving his wife and son, and is trying to protect them? Maybe he doesn’t enjoy seeing his wife torn apart on a regular basis.
The fact is, we are not privy to their private lives, and so we, none of us, really know.
I just don’t understand the criticism and assumptions of the worst, but it’s shedding light on what people in the public eye have to deal with, often unfairly. Why not be fair?
Well… keeping my daughter away from men like you.
Why? Do you only want her associating with sexless eunuchs? That always ends badly.
No, I’m with Stina. As the father of five sons and one daughter, I completely understand. Men and women are different, and the social rules that used to protect women from predation have broken down. (Well, have been dismantled by people who thought it would be good to do so.) My girl is in college now, and I find myself wishing we were all Victorians.
Crimenutely. This is weird.
It’s widely reported that Harry posted, on the SussexRoyal Instagram account, a video related to his support for Britain in the Rugby World Cup, accompanied by something that some called “music” performed by a group calling itself “Stone Roses,” and containing the words:
(The rest of the “lyrics” are so moronic, I’ll just leave them out. You’re welcome.)
Given the millions of options to choose from, when it came to “soundtracking” his little post, I find this an odd choice. Almost an “of all the gin joints in all the world . . . “ sort of odd. (Although, when Ilsa walked into Rick’s, that really was a coincidence.) But Harry? How odd. Just give the middle finger to the British people, not to mention big bro and grandma, while you’re at it, why doncha?
I’ve had more than one experience with people sending messages to me in this way. Although in certain glad and happy circumstances, it might be charming, in the case of Megxit, it reeks of passive-aggression, and doesn’t look like a particularly rational form of communication.
Does anybody think this is just a little coinky-dinky?
De gustibus, etc, @MarjorieReynolds. But what an illuminating comment. There may be more to this than even met my critical eye . . .
Obviously I had to go check the sussexroyal Instagram account, and I don’t hear any lyrics at all. There’s just background music, and only 3 posts since the big controversy on January 8th. Also, I have never listened to Harry’s Instagram posts with the sound on, and his voice is just lovely.
I thought John Podhoretz comments on today’s GLOP podcast about Harry were interesting. He thought maybe Harry finally did a DNA test, confirmed that Charles isn’t his father, and said to hell with the whole thing. I wonder how the Duke of Sussex does a DNA test privately, but I could see him being tempted.
I think that’s unlikely–I’ve always thought Harry looks enough like some of the Spencers that I’ve never really put too much stock in the “wrong side of the blanket” theory, but who knows?
I kind of agree with the OP.
Really, Harry married someone much like her mother, Diana, only his wife was much older when she married Harry (her second marriage). She’s more formidable than Diana was. She was the same age as Diana when she died, when she married Harry. In many ways she is acting like Diana did. I even think she saw herself as another Diana, but she miscalculated. Basically since she was not in line to become Queen Consort like Diana was, Meghan’s future as a Royal was to be gradually sidelined by Kate Middleton. By the way Kate is just as formidable as Meghan, yet she goes about her business with humility.
I can see Meghan having a contempt for Kate because of that humility. A lot of the fights Meghan was having (I say this as an outsider looking in and filling in some blanks) was with Kate Middleton.
In the end, this is why Meghan decided to leave. She wasn’t going to be queen bee, or to put it literally, she wasn’t going to be the Queen.
Moving on, I don’t see that much difference between Harry and his father. He couldn’t control Diana even though he was almost 13 years her senior. This was mostly because he didn’t pay attention to her — she bored him.
I doubt that Harry has a lot of respect for his father, who committed adultery against his mother, though he probably loves him. Remember, even though Charles has been given more responsibility to run the family, it was still the Queen who had to step in and mostly resolve this issue, to the extent that it’s resolved.
I’m quite surprised. The Queen’s and Buckingham Palace statements are here.
I hope H&M both know what they’re doing. I guess we’ll see.
Just out of curiosity, if Harry decides in three years or so that he has screwed the pooch, dumps M, and wants back, what is likely to happen?
But the Spencers are Diana’s family, right? So how would him looking like the Spencers lessen the possibility that he came from “the wrong side of the blanket” on the paternal side?
I don’t know. I think they are making this up as they go along, as there’s not been a situation like this before. My guess, and it’s just a guess, is that one of them dumps the other (and I don’t think that’s all that unlikely), he’ll go back to the UK and resume a few official duties, but never be fully trusted or completely re-integrated into the firm. Looks to me as if Elizabeth and William (who I suspect are mostly in charge of this) have managed the best way through it that they can, and that they haven’t slammed the door in his face. I doubt that he’d pick up the royal title again, though, or be assigned major ceremonial roles in Britain itself. Perhaps they’d send him off to some sort of semi-working gig, like Governor General of New Zealand or something.
I don’t expect it does. I don’t think it cuts either way. But I don’t automatically assume, when I see a child who “takes after” his mother’s side of the family that it puts his paternity into question. And so much of the speculation seems to be based on who Harry “looks like.” And so much of the rumor-mongering seems to have to do with the desire to sell papers, books, and love letters. So I don’t pay much attention. Because he’s not going to take a DNA test (I shouldn’t think), so it doesn’t really matter.
Sexless eunuchs? Who said that?
One of the biggest lies sold to girls and young women is that men only like sexually available women. Meghan dresses like a sexually available woman. Kate dresses like a woman who needs a ring first.
Have you seen the statistics on girls describing their first sexual encounter? In the world of constant consent, girls still feel pressured to have sex. It isn’t something explicit that the guy does, but it is that girls think they’ll be dumped if she doesn’t put out with in a certain time frame… and how would a guy get to know you well enough to fall in love if he’s out after the 3rd date?
Henry is perpetuating that idea that women who come across as sexually available are more attractive than their attractive, but modest, counterparts. Ergo, he’s not someone I would want around girls or young women struggling with this problem.
Ah, I wasn’t aware that that’s what a lot of the speculation is based on. Thanks for taking the time to explain. :)
For the penny it’s worth, I agree with you. I don’t think his appearance puts (should put) Harry’s paternity into question either. If it did, I’d think William’s paternity would be brought into question as well since he looks -in my opinion- a lot more like his mother than his father.
Governor-General of Bermuda. It has been done before.
Well, I have to say, as someone who’s ambivalent about this whole thing, that I found Harry’s first public comments rather sad: https://news.sky.com/story/prince-harry-on-leaving-royal-role-there-was-no-other-option-11913070