UK United Kingdom Royal Family / Royal Families Drama General Thread - formerly "Prince Harry and Meghan to step back as senior royals"

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
1613740615135.png

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have announced they will step back as "senior" royals and work to become financially independent.

_110441486_hi059012660.jpg


In a statement, Prince Harry and Meghan also said they plan to split their time between the UK and North America.

The BBC understands no other royal - including the Queen or Prince William - was consulted before the statement and Buckingham Palace is "disappointed".

Senior royals are understood to be "hurt" by the announcement.

In their unexpected statement on Wednesday, also posted on their Instagram page, the couple said they made the decision "after many months of reflection and internal discussions".

"We intend to step back as 'senior' members of the Royal Family and work to become financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty The Queen."

They said they plan to balance their time between the UK and North America while "continuing to honour our duty to the Queen, the Commonwealth, and our patronages".

"This geographic balance will enable us to raise our son with an appreciation for the royal tradition into which he was born, while also providing our family with the space to focus on the next chapter, including the launch of our new charitable entity."

A Buckingham Palace spokeswoman said discussions with the duke and duchess on their decision to step back were "at an early stage", adding: "We understand their desire to take a different approach, but these are complicated issues that will take time to work through."

The couple's announcement on Wednesday comes two months after the Duke of York withdrew from public life after a BBC interview about his ties to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who killed himself in August.

 
Last edited:
There was an interview aired earlier, as for twitter. Some takes (because I haven't watched myself):

View attachment 4221270
View attachment 4221282
View attachment 4221291
View attachment 4221299
View attachment 4221300
View attachment 4221315
View attachment 4221323
View attachment 4221328
View attachment 4221330

Camilla:
View attachment 4221336

I find that hard to believe, honestly:
View attachment 4221416


I think this is one of the most important things of the interview:

View attachment 4221319
View attachment 4221338

"I didn't do the thing everybody saw us doing!"
There were 2 interviews. One with Tom Bradby on ITV in Britain and one with Anderson Cooper on 60 Minutes on CBS in the US. There wasn't really much new in either of them because I think they were filmed before the books leaked earlier this week. Neither of these guys gave him any pushback and I think Harry said somewhere (not during the interviews, somewhere else) that his therapist was in the room while he was talking to them. Harry was all over the place contradicting himself, he kept sniffing and everything is everybody's fault but his. I think there is more of the CBS interview on their morning show tomorrow if you can stand it.
 
He's not doing the talking, it's all Meghan.
She may behind this book/Netflix show and the "woe is me act" but he's actively going along with it, and is as much to blame as she may be. The anger and resentment are real and he's doing a good portion of the talking himself. Harry's not too stupid to understand bragging he "killed 25 Taliban" is ill advised and carries risk, not just for him but all the royals; he just doesn't care. Publicly airing private grievances may feel good right now, according to whatever therapist Markle dredged up but he'll live to regret it, and so will his children.
 
It's wild to think a man born with a 24 karat gold spoon in his mouth is trying to make plebians feel bad for him. Meghan I can get, she's 56% American middle (maybe even working) class. Needless to say she likely knows what it's like to eat McDonalds for dinner and told no she can't get toys and clothing.

With that said I don't like Meghan, but looking over the gameplan I see that yes her trying to be a star made sense especially here in the states. But she doesn't represent anything. She doesn't represent Anti-Royals because she still wants to be treated like royalty. She doesn't appeal to goldiggers because she's not telling the tips to scoring your own rich guy. It's an elaborate PR campaign with no message.

Going back to Harry, "MUH DEAD MUM, MUH ESTRANGED FAMILY RELATIONS, MUH SUBSTANCE ABUSE." Join the club you think the majority of Americans live lives like the family on "7th Heaven?" No the fictional families my generation related to were The Bundies, The Simpsons, and The Sopranos. Your depression isn't special, it's utterly mundane to me.

Harry wants to cry about not being the favorite child, and that makes me think of AJ Soprano. Either stay in your mansion and shut the fuck up or drown in your swimming pool faggot.
 
Harry's not too stupid to understand bragging he "killed 25 Taliban" is ill advised and carries risk, not just for him but all the royals; he just doesn't care.

It might be a 4d-chess move to incite a few death threats. Then he can use that as ammo in an attempt to guilt the Windsors into paying for his private security detail once again, since the security risk would stem from work he did as a member of the royal family. If they are as cash-strapped as folks in this thread have been saying, paying a couple million per year for security has got to sting.
 
It might be a 4d-chess move to incite a few death threats. Then he can use that as ammo in an attempt to guilt the Windsors into paying for his private security detail once again, since the security risk would stem from work he did as a member of the royal family. If they are as cash-strapped as folks in this thread have been saying, paying a couple million per year for security has got to sting.
In that last TV interview, he heavily hinted Diana was killed and that maybe MeAgain would be too. He did everything but say openly she was whacked. Now he's going to the supposed culprits for security? He's an idiot.
 
Last edited:
It might be a 4d-chess move to incite a few death threats. Then he can use that as ammo in an attempt to guilt the Windsors into paying for his private security detail once again, since the security risk would stem from work he did as a member of the royal family. If they are as cash-strapped as folks in this thread have been saying, paying a couple million per year for security has got to sting.
He's currently in the middle of a legal dispute to get International Protected Person status. He might use the threats in that case to get that. If he gets IPP, it would be governments paying for it-- including the US.
 
It's wild to think a man born with a 24 karat gold spoon in his mouth is trying to make plebians feel bad for him. Meghan I can get, she's 56% American middle (maybe even working) class. Needless to say she likely knows what it's like to eat McDonalds for dinner and told no she can't get toys and clothing.
While Meghan was growing up, Thomas Markle worked as the lighting director on Married with Children, for which he was very well paid. Meghan's mom fucked off to who-knows-where after the divorce; he had full custody of Meghan. He paid for private-school education, her tuition and expenses at Northwestern University, and an internship in Argentina, and he admits that he spoiled her to make up for her not having a mom around. He bought her a car, he rented her apartments, and he used his connections to help her get her first roles.

Meghan likes to tell a story about working hard to pay for her own college, and bootstrapping her way through life up until her role in Suits, but the fact is her dad made very good money and paved her way through life. She did work at various jobs in high school and during her college years, but it was to pay for any extras her father wouldn't cover. Her mom (who is black) didn't really show back up until Meghan was an adult, and didn't play a significant role in Meghan's life until it became a huge advantage for her to be seen as a woman of color that she was willing to quit claiming she was white, and show off her black mama.

Meghan had a very privileged existence. She got everything she needed, and more, with the exception of being raised to be a decent human being, rather than a fame- and image-obsessed malignant Narcissist. That shit, you can't buy for your kid.

With that said I don't like Meghan, but looking over the gameplan I see that yes her trying to be a star made sense especially here in the states. But she doesn't represent anything. She doesn't represent Anti-Royals because she still wants to be treated like royalty. She doesn't appeal to goldiggers because she's not telling the tips to scoring your own rich guy. It's an elaborate PR campaign with no message.
Meghan represents Meghan, and will stand for whatever gets her the money, power, and prestige she's after. She's a junkie for those things, and, like any junkie, will say and do whatever she has to in order to get her fix, and keep the supply coming. If it suited her purposes to re-brand herself as a black conservative, she'd do it. The only cause that matters is everybody knowing who she is, and being the most important person in the room at any given moment. That's it.
 
While Meghan was growing up, Thomas Markle worked as the lighting director on Married with Children, for which he was very well paid. Meghan's mom fucked off to who-knows-where after the divorce; he had full custody of Meghan. He paid for private-school education, her tuition and expenses at Northwestern University, and an internship in Argentina, and he admits that he spoiled her to make up for her not having a mom around. He bought her a car, he rented her apartments, and he used his connections to help her get her first roles.

Meghan likes to tell a story about working hard to pay for her own college, and bootstrapping her way through life up until her role in Suits, but the fact is her dad made very good money and paved her way through life. She did work at various jobs in high school and during her college years, but it was to pay for any extras her father wouldn't cover. Her mom (who is black) didn't really show back up until Meghan was an adult, and didn't play a significant role in Meghan's life until it became a huge advantage for her to be seen as a woman of color that she was willing to quit claiming she was white, and show off her black mama.

Meghan had a very privileged existence. She got everything she needed, and more, with the exception of being raised to be a decent human being, rather than a fame- and image-obsessed malignant Narcissist. That shit, you can't buy for your kid.


Meghan represents Meghan, and will stand for whatever gets her the money, power, and prestige she's after. She's a junkie for those things, and, like any junkie, will say and do whatever she has to in order to get her fix, and keep the supply coming. If it suited her purposes to re-brand herself as a black conservative, she'd do it. The only cause that matters is everybody knowing who she is, and being the most important person in the room at any given moment. That's it.
Fascinating, I only knew that the father went bankrupt and was in poor health so it made me assume he wasn't a high earner.

Thank you for correcting me. I would have imagined someone well connected would have done more beyond a USA Network cable show nobody cared about.
 
While Meghan was growing up, Thomas Markle worked as the lighting director on Married with Children, for which he was very well paid. Meghan's mom fucked off to who-knows-where after the divorce; he had full custody of Meghan. He paid for private-school education, her tuition and expenses at Northwestern University, and an internship in Argentina, and he admits that he spoiled her to make up for her not having a mom around. He bought her a car, he rented her apartments, and he used his connections to help her get her first roles.

Meghan likes to tell a story about working hard to pay for her own college, and bootstrapping her way through life up until her role in Suits, but the fact is her dad made very good money and paved her way through life. She did work at various jobs in high school and during her college years, but it was to pay for any extras her father wouldn't cover. Her mom (who is black) didn't really show back up until Meghan was an adult, and didn't play a significant role in Meghan's life until it became a huge advantage for her to be seen as a woman of color that she was willing to quit claiming she was white, and show off her black mama.

Meghan had a very privileged existence. She got everything she needed, and more, with the exception of being raised to be a decent human being, rather than a fame- and image-obsessed malignant Narcissist. That shit, you can't buy for your kid.


Meghan represents Meghan, and will stand for whatever gets her the money, power, and prestige she's after. She's a junkie for those things, and, like any junkie, will say and do whatever she has to in order to get her fix, and keep the supply coming. If it suited her purposes to re-brand herself as a black conservative, she'd do it. The only cause that matters is everybody knowing who she is, and being the most important person in the room at any given moment. That's it.
I didn't know any of that stuff about her dad, but I did notice during the Netflix series that they kept using the same one or two photos of him that made him look SHIFTY and EVIL. It was so blatant.
 
Fascinating, I only knew that the father went bankrupt and was in poor health so it made me assume he wasn't a high earner.

Thank you for correcting me. I would have imagined someone well connected would have done more beyond a USA Network cable show nobody cared about.
Thomas Markle won $750,000 in the lottery in 1990 and apparently paid for a lot of things out of that along with his earnings. I think he also helped Doria open a travel agency which led to tax issues. That almost got him into trouble. Then Doria disappeared for a while; the rumor is that she was in jail, but no one has found any record of it.

https://www.businessinsider.com/megan-markle-father-won-lottery-spent-winnings-2018-4 (archive running like molasses right now)

  • Meghan Markle is preparing for her royal wedding to Prince Harry, which is just over a month away.
  • A new biography on the "Suits" actor will be released soon, entitled "Meghan: A Hollywood Princess."
  • Meghan's father, Tom Markle, won $750,000 in the California State Lottery in 1990, according to an an excerpt from the book published in The Sunday Times.
  • Though he has since declared bankruptcy, Markle used his lottery winnings at the time to pay tuition to his daughter's private school.
As Meghan Markle prepares to marry into the British royal family, her father's story may be one of riches to rags.

A new book about Prince Harry's fiancée — "Meghan: A Hollywood Princess" — includes details about the actor's life and childhood. Princess Diana's controversial biographer, Andrew Morton, wrote the in-depth biography about Markle, which will be published April 12.

Included in the book and detailed in an excerpt published in The Sunday Times, is a story of how Meghan's father, Tom Markle, won the lottery when she was a child — and subsequently lost the money.

The elder Markle was known as a frequent purchaser of lottery tickets who spent thousands of dollars pressing his luck, according to Morton. He won the California State Lottery in 1990, "scooping $750,000 with five numbers, which included Meghan’s birth date," Morton wrote. Meghan was born on August 4, 1981.

With inflation, Markle's winnings would be worth about $1.5 million in 2018. Unfortunately, he eventually wound up filing for bankruptcy.

Tom Markle was a successful Hollywood lighting designer and was serving as the lighting director on the long running soap opera "General Hospital" when he met a makeup artist in training, Doria Ragland. Ragland became Markle's second wife and Meghan's mother, but the couple was already divorced by the time he won the lottery.

To avoid further financial difficulties from his divorce with Ragland, Markle sent a friend to pick up his lottery winnings from Chicago, according to The Times. Meghan's half-brother, Tom Jr., said that his father lost the bulk of the lottery prize when the same friend convinced him to invest a portion of his winnings into a jewelry business that later failed.

Markle didn't lose all of his money from his friend's scam, however. He gave Tom Jr. money to start a flower shop, bought a car for his daughter Yvonne, and paid Meghan's tuition at a Catholic school with his winnings.

"If Meg marries Harry she’ll have won the lottery of life but dad winning the lottery helped us all," Tom Jr. told the Mail. "That money allowed Meg to go to the best schools and get the best training."

As a student at Immaculate Heart, Meghan was a star in the classroom and in drama class. She was also named Homecoming Queen at the private all-girls school. After graduating from the Catholic school, Meghan Markle earned a degree from Northwestern University.

After college, Meghan Markle — like her parents before her — made a living in television. She appeared as a briefcase model on the game show "Deal or No Deal" and has starred on "Suits" since 2011.

In 2016, Tom Sr. declared bankruptcy over $30,000. With little in savings and no income during retirement, the father of the royal-to-be is in a precarious financial position.

It is not uncommon for lottery winners to lose their fortunes and wind up with less money than they had before their winning ticket. The rise and fall of lottery winners often comes with massive spending sprees.

The royal wedding between Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will take place May 19.


Boozing, bust-ups and bankruptcies: Meet Meghan Markle's family, Prince Harry!​

They have been together just a few short months and, so far, Prince Harry's girlfriend Meghan Markle has shown herself to be the model of grace, elegance and cast-iron discretion. Sadly, the same cannot be said of her extended family.

Indeed, the House of Markle is a disputatious, motley collection of individuals who, between them, have a long record of boozing, bust-ups and bankruptcies, the Daily Mail reported.

Only last weekend it emerged that her half-brother, Thomas Junior, had spent the night in police cells in Oregon after being arrested for allegedly holding a gun to his girlfriend's head.

He was twice the legal alcohol limit for driving and faces up to five years in jail if convicted.

So who's who in the family? And will any of them be invited to that Royal Wedding which is being so confidently predicted for our head-over-heels Prince Harry? Here, we unearth the roots of a fascinating family tree ...

DAD WHO'S DOWN TO HIS LAST £160​

Meghan is 72-year-old Thomas Wayne Markle's only child from his second marriage, to Doria Ragland, which ended when their daughter was six years old. He was previously married to Roslyn Markle, with whom he has two older children, Thomas Markle Junior, 50, and Samantha, 52.

He is retired and lives in a modest apartment in a downmarket area of Los Angeles.

One thing that's certain about the Prince's prospective future father-in-law is that he is absolutely hopeless with money - something Harry might want to bear in mind in years to come.

At his peak, Thomas Markle was a successful lighting director in Hollywood, working on the hit U.S. TV sitcom Married... With Children and drama series General Hospital.

He earned enough to send his daughter to private school.

However, following his divorce from Meghan's mother Doria, a certain amount of financial chaos reigned.

He has been the subject of four tax liens over the past 19 years - a lien being a legal claim against your property when you neglect or fail to pay a debt - which suggests a haphazard approach to tax returns and general paperwork. He has been hit with demands ranging from £1,853 to £43,527.


He filed for bankruptcy in June last year with credit card debts of £24,181 and just £160 in savings, and was barely surviving on a meagre pension and state handouts.

You might think this a perplexing state of affairs, given his daughter's successful television career and gilded social life - but he and Meghan are said to be very close and she often talks lovingly about her father.

'BOOZY' BANKRUPT HALF-BROTHER​

Probably the black sheep is Thomas Markle Junior, Meghan's half-brother from her father's first marriage. Now 50, he has been bankrupt once and divorced twice, and is facing trial on gun charges.

He lives in the city of Grants Pass in Oregon and has worked as a cameraman, labourer, handyman and glass fitter.

He has given interviews about Meghan and 'shared' pictures of her as a baby.

In one interview in January, he claimed that Prince Harry had met Meghan's father Thomas, which prompted an unsavoury spate of mud-slinging with his older sister, Samantha.

She claimed her brother was talking nonsense, saying no such meeting had taken place, adding: 'Meghan does not speak to my brother: she can't stand him so he has no business talking. My father hates him, too, and will not talk with him.'

Thomas has two sons - Meghan's half-nephews Tyler, 27, and Thomas Markle III, with his ex-wife, florist Tracy Dooley, whom he divorced in 2001. His second marriage, to Iohannes Rawha, ended in 2009.

Whatever his relationship with his father, Thomas Jr seems to have inherited his lack of financial sense: he, too, filed for bankruptcy in 2013, citing debts of £71,868 and just £8 in his wallet.

Thomas Jr was taken into custody late on Thursday last week after a row with his girlfriend, Darlene Blount.

He was charged with unlawful use of a dangerous weapon and menacing domestic violence, for which he could be jailed for a maximum of five years.

Ex-wife Tracy, 51, said she paid his £1,221 bail bond and son Tyler issued a statement on his father's behalf, saying: 'I am incredibly sorry for my actions and I'm especially sorry to everyone affected by my drinking. I am seeking help and I promise I will be the best person I can be going forward. Thank you for understanding.'

However, Thomas Jr then claimed the words were not his, that he hadn't asked his ex-wife for money and hadn't spoken to his son 'in weeks'. No wonder Meghan is said to keep this side of her family at arm's length.

BLABBERMOUTH HALF-SISTER​

Samantha Markle, 52, is Meghan's half-sister from her father's first marriage, and Thomas Markle Jr's full sister. A one-time actress and model, she has MS and is confined to a wheelchair, and makes ends meet selling jewellery while trying to raise money to fund the feature films she writes.

A twice-divorced mother-of-three, she has gone by various names over the years, including Yvonne Marie Grant, Samantha Grant, Samantha Grant Markle, Samantha Rasmussen and Yvonne Markle-Hale. She has also upheld the family tradition of going bankrupt: she and her second ex-husband, Scott Rasmussen, jointly filed for bankruptcy in 2003 with a long list of creditors.

A bit of a blabbermouth, she is by far the least discreet of the Markles. She also seems to change her tune on Meghan as often as her name.

Initially, she dismissed her famous half-sister as a social climber, adding menacingly that 'once the Royal Family found out how she had treated her own family, Harry wouldn't want to continue a romance'.

Then came a volte-face as she claimed she had been misquoted, gushing: 'I love Meghan and would never say these things.'

But she could not deny earlier posts on Twitter, in which she took a vicious swipe at Meghan, writing: 'Disability should not be an embarrassment to my sister. She has hidden that I'm in a wheelchair. That is not right.'

She quickly tried to explain these away, too, saying: 'Meghan is lovely but, as everyone knows, families sometimes have disagreements.'

Before Christmas, she enthused about Meghan again in a TV interview in which she described her as having 'the eloquence of [former U.S. Secretary of State] Condoleezza Rice and the grace of Princess Diana'.

'She's not wild, she's not garish, she's not a partier. She's just very beautiful and conservative, very real, very giving. She's just a peaceful person,' she said.

For all her intimate insights into her half-sister's character, her ex-husband, Scott Rasmussen, says she and Meghan haven't spoken for nearly nine years.

He also disputed Samantha's assertion in an interview that she had raised Meghan until she was 12.

'They are not close at all,' he said. 'Even when she was married to me, [Samantha] was always complaining about her sister.

'She would say, "Oh, Dad is helping her in her career. Why isn't he helping me?" And I'd be thinking, well, because you have a bad attitude.'

Samantha rubbished his remarks on Twitter: 'Divorced him in 2003. He doesn't know me or my family.'

Samantha has been criticised for giving media interviews, with one tweet reading: 'You're bitter she's successful in life while you're sitting there refreshing Twitter' - to which she retorted cryptically: 'You cannot see what the soup is made of if you don't stir the pot.'

She has suggested that her family would make great subjects for a 'cheesy reality TV show'.

Let's hope she was joking.

IMPOVERISHED BUT LOVING MOTHER​

Doria Ragland, 60, has worked for the past year as an 'older adults therapist' at the Didi Hirsch charity in Los Angeles and seems to be the shining light who has kept Meghan on the right track in life.

She lives in a modest LA home which she inherited after her father Alvin died in 2011.

Meghan is her only daughter. She has never spoken about the royal romance, except to tell reporters: 'Look, I can't really say anything.'

She has also kept details of her past admirably private. What we do know is that she met Thomas Markle while working as a temp at ABC television in about 1980. It is not known how long they were together before she gave birth to Meghan in August 1981.

The couple stayed together until Meghan was six years old but divorced in 1987 on grounds of irreconcilable differences. After that, Meghan lived with her mum but her dad saw her regularly.

In 1999, Meghan moved out to attend university in Illinois, where she studied theatre and international relations. For a period after that, Doria struggled financially.

In 2002, as Meghan was starting her acting career, Doria filed for bankruptcy, saying she had no property of her own and reported heavy credit card debts of £42,900.

Her own total assets were declared at just £7,677, and she said she was working as a self-employed saleswoman for a business called Distant Treasures, with a monthly income of £1,341.

Her bank accounts were said to have only £813 in them.

This state of affairs, according to the filing, was nothing new. Her income for 2001 was said to be £10,357 and for 2000, £9,542.

While recovering from the bankruptcy, she had a landlord dispute in 2003. She had moved into a two-bedroom apartment with a friend - an exchange student - and her landlords attempted unsuccessfully to evict her.

But despite these hard times, Doria has worked continuously for at least the past six years. She has reinvented herself in the fields of social work and yoga therapy.

From 2008 to 2010, she worked at a day centre with adults who had memory loss, and has latterly been an older adult social service advocate and 'yoga brain therapist'. She and Meghan are said to remain extremely close.

MOTHER OF HER HALF-SIBLINGS​

Roslyn Markle, 71, was Thomas Markle's first wife and they had two children together, Thomas Jr and Samantha.

She now lives in Albuquerque, New Mexico. She is estranged from her daughter and in 2015 relations between the pair became so bad that Samantha took out a restraining order against her mother, though it was dismissed a week later.

They are still at war. Roslyn Markle claimed Samantha was out to get attention and money on the back of the royal romance. She said: 'She thought she was just going to be able to discredit Meghan and Prince Harry was going to say, "Oh well, ta ta with you".

'But when she found out they were still dating and the relationship might be going somewhere, she wanted to get into the limelight. She wants back in Meghan's good graces because of the attention.

'Now she's sucking up to her. She just wants money. She has always demanded money from Meghan. I just don't want Meghan hurt.

'Meghan is very pretty, very nice, very polished and very classy. I never hear anything but good about her from my son, Thomas.

'But Samantha has been dogging her for the last 20 years. Everything she has said about her is a lie.'

Samantha came straight back at her mother with a particularly vicious tweet: 'My father divorced Roslyn when I was ten.

'Roslyn has always been estranged and I was raised by my grandmothers and my father.'

She added: 'All those people in Albuquerque don't know Meghan, nor do they know me.

'I was raised by my father from age 11. I'm a mental health counsellor and educated. I moved to southern California with my father.'
 
Last edited:

Prince Harry and the Value of Silence By Patti Davis​

Jan. 7, 2023

During the early stages of my father’s Alzheimer’s, when he still had lucid moments, I apologized to him for writing an autobiography many years earlier in which I flung open the gates of our troubled family life. He was already talking less at that point, but his eyes told me he understood.
I thought of that moment when I read that Prince Harry, in his new memoir, wrote about his father, King Charles, getting between his battling sons and saying, “Please, boys, don’t make my final years a misery.”
Time is an unpredictable thing. What will someone’s last memory be? I had the gift of time with my father, which allowed me to apologize, even though a disease hovered between us and clouded our communication. King Charles’s words reveal a man who is aware of his mortality and who would like his offspring to be aware of it as well.
My justification in writing a book I now wish I hadn’t written (and please, don’t go buy it; I’ve written many other books since) was very similar to what I understand to be Harry’s reasoning. I wanted to tell the truth, I wanted to set the record straight. Naïvely, I thought if I put my own feelings and my own truth out there for the world to read, my family might also come to understand me better.

Of course, people generally don’t respond well to being embarrassed and exposed in public. And in the ensuing years, I’ve learned something about truth: It’s way more complicated than it seems when we’re young. There isn’t just one truth, our truth — the other people who inhabit our story have their truths as well.
Prince William has, I’m sure, his own take on the physical fight that Harry has described. To really understand the dynamic between the brothers, to broaden the story and make it more complete, William’s truth has to be considered as well. Harry has written that, after William hit him, William told Harry to hit him back, which he declined to do. But by writing about the fight, he’s done exactly that.
Harry has also expressed a wish that his relationship with William, and with his father, heals. Maybe that will happen, but they’ll have to walk a long distance across a battlefield that he has now expanded.
Years ago, someone asked me what I would say to my younger self if I could. Without hesitating I answered: “That’s easy. I’d have said, ‘Be quiet.’” Not forever. But until I could stand back and look at things through a wider lens. Until I understood that words have consequences, and they last a really long time.
Harry has called William not only his “beloved brother” but his “arch nemesis.” He chose words that cut deep, that leave a scar; perhaps if he had taken time to be quiet, to reflect on the enduring power of his words, he’d have chosen differently.

Silence gives you room, it gives you distance, and it lets you look at your experiences more completely, without the temptation to even the score. Sometime in the years ahead, Harry may look back as I did and wish he could unspeak what he has said.
I’ve learned something else about truth: Not every truth has to be told to the entire world. People are always going to be curious about famous families, and often the stories from those families can resonate with others, give them insight into their own situations, even transcend time since fame flutters at the edges of eternity.
But not everything needs to be shared, a truth that silence can teach. Harry seems to have operated on the dictum that ‘Silence is not an option.’ I would, respectfully, suggest to him that it is.
Archive
 
I agree, but

There isn’t just one truth, our truth — the other people who inhabit our story have their truths as well.
Nope. This is a liberal concept that has opened the gates for a lot of insanity and I'm not letting it pass.

If your father treats you badly, then that's the truth: your father is an asshole. The fact that there is some explanations for it, such him being abused by his own father as well, doesn't make him less than an asshole. The truth is that your father beat you and all explanations he could give won't erase that he was an abuser.

Prince William has, I’m sure, his own take on the physical fight that Harry has described. To really understand the dynamic between the brothers, to broaden the story and make it more complete, William’s truth has to be considered as well
The word the author is looking for is not "truth" but "perspective". Truths are absolute, perspectives aren't.

The truth is that Harry married a woman who didn't care for his family traditions and beliefs. He brought a problematic person to the family and expected the family to adapt to her instead of asking his wife to do it instead. She mocked them, she accused them of racism, she mocked the Queen, she mocked other members of the family, and she made up stories about them targeting her specifically. All these things are verifiable truths. All of this happened.

In the same way, Harry being the "spare" of the family is true. He was born because the family needed one extra heir. And it's also truth that people mock him for being allegedly a bastard. It's also true that he has unresolved issues about his parents' divorce and the death of his mother, issues that William seems to have handled better. But it's also true that the family loves him the same as William and that he's been provided not only with the best all of his life, but that best are things that only a very small fraction of the human population will ever have, such as a freaking ROYAL TITLE.

There is not such a thing as William's truth on the matter. The truth is that he's gonna be King and his brother is trashing him, his father, and the whole family and Royal institution. Harry's lucky that William doesn't have the power to arrest him and lock him up in some tower.
 
If your father treats you badly, then that's the truth: your father is an asshole. The fact that there is some explanations for it, such him being abused by his own father as well, doesn't make him less than an asshole. The truth is that your father beat you and all explanations he could give won't erase that he was an abuser.
the point is that something being true is not sufficient reason to publish and broadcast it. it's about (lack of) trust, loyalty and decency.
family is family, embarrassing and humiliating them in public is a serious betrayal from which there is almost no coming back.
 
This is the first hard confirmation I've seen that Buckingham Palace has lawyers involved in this whole shitshow.



Royal family lawyers ask US broadcaster to hand over Prince Harry interview​

Intervention could show Buckingham Palace is concerned over remarks made by the Duke of Sussex to promote his tell-all book, Spare

The Royal family’s lawyers asked a US broadcaster to hand over the Duke of Sussex’s latest interview, as he expressed concern for royal children and suggested that Queen Elizabeth II was powerless to help him.

A legal firm acting for Buckingham Palace contacted ABC while the Duke’s Good Morning America interview was on air, saying it needed to consider exactly what was said and “the context in which it appears” in order to have the opportunity to respond.

Royal sources insisted it was a standard “right of reply” letter, but it raised the prospect that they were concerned about something specific that the Duke may have said.

Neither Buckingham Palace nor Kensington Palace has so far commented on any of the allegations made in the Duke’s memoir, Spare, despite their highly personal and potentially damaging nature.

However, the Queen Consort is widely reported to be the King’s “red line”.

In his ITV interview on Sunday evening, the Duke repeated a claim, also made in his book, that Camilla leaked a story about her first meeting with Prince William to the press.

He has also alleged that his own interests were “sacrificed on her PR altar” and referred to her as a “villain” who left “bodies in the street” as she strove to rehabilitate her image.

It is a matter of public record that the Queen Consort did not leak the story about meeting William. The details were leaked, inadvertently, by Camilla’s own private secretary, who was eventually sacked over the incident.

Palace lawyers asked both ABC and CBS, which also broadcast an interview with the Duke on Sunday evening, for a copy of the Duke’s interviews but the requests were declined.

The Duke has faced criticism for making a slew of intimate family revelations in his memoir.

But he insisted on Good Morning America that the book, which is officially published on Tuesday, could not make things any worse than they already were.

And despite it all, the Duke did not rule out a future role working for the monarchy, admitting that he and his wife want to support the Commonwealth and that was “of course on the table”.

The pre-recorded interview was the third to be broadcast within 24 hours as the Duke embarked on a media blitz to promote his book.

It will be followed on Tuesday with an interview in People magazine and a live appearance on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert in New York.

Family relationship was already at rock bottom​

The Duke was challenged on the view that he had “sold his family out” with his book, but insisted that he felt it was the only way he could “protect” himself.

He added: “I thought about it long and hard, and as far as I see it the divide couldn't be greater before this book.

“I genuinely believe that if me and my family can reconcile ... but first there has to be compensation and accountability. And if that doesn't happen, then that's very sad. But I will focus on my life.”

Prince Harry has not spoken to the Queen Consort ‘for a long time’​

The Duke adopted a more conciliatory tone towards his step-mother than in previous interviews, insisting that he had “a huge amount of compassion” for Camilla.

He said that any deals or trading of stories that happened many years ago had likely taken place because she was “led to believe” it was the best way to rehabilitate her reputation.

“We haven't spoken for a long time. I love every member of my family, despite the differences, so when I see her we're perfectly pleasant with each other,” he said.

“I don't look at her as an evil stepmother. I see someone who married into this institution and has done everything that she can to improve her own reputation and her own image for her own sake.”

Hopes to be ‘joined at the hip’ with Prince William again​

The Duke admitted that he harboured hopes of one day being “joined at the hip” with his brother again, but alleged that the prospect would “terrify” the press.

He also repeated his claim that the family would not find peace “until the truth is out there”.

He added: “There's a lot that I can forgive, but there needs to be a conversation in order for reconciliation, and part of that has to be accountability.

"I just hope that there's a way that we can have a conversation that is trusted within that conversation that isn't then spilled to the British press. That's where I am."

Royals’ behaviour towards Meghan based on media reports​

The Duke blamed the press for driving a wedge between Meghan and the Princess of Wales, suggesting that media coverage influenced how the royals behaved more than their own personal experiences.

He alleged that William was “jealous” of his position as the spare, saying: "But I have more freedom than he does, right?

“So his life is planned out for him. I have more flexibility to be able to choose the life that I wanted."

Therapy​

The Duke admitted that he wished he had been given the opportunity to do some form of therapy in the wake of his mother’s death, so he could have spoken about her and celebrated her life.

He said he probably would have partied less and taken fewer drugs in order to “find a feeling or numb a feeling”.
 
I really wonder about the quality of the therapy Harry has received, because none of the therapists he's seen have apparently covered a basic dictum with him: words have power.

Words have power. This is why therapists will often push clients to verbalise incidents of abuse, or name abusers, or simply name things that have happened to them as abuse, in the private therapeutic setting.

The private therapeutic setting is a crucial part of this, because there are things that once said - once articulated out loud even if only for a therapist to hear, once acknowledged by being spoken aloud - can't be taken back.

This is often the point when a client steps away from therapy, because the push to name and acknowledge is really painful, particularly for people who have a continuing relationship with the people they now identify as abusers. There are things you can't say, even in confidence, and then go and sit round the family dinner table on Sunday like nothing's happened. There are battles you simply don't have the weapons to fight right now, or ever, and you do not unleash your monsters until you think you can fight them.

The idea of therapy for trauma is to unpack things one at a time, like peeling an onion, until you are ready to confront the really difficult, most painful parts of your experience. Many people admit the most traumatic experiences of their life for the first time in therapy as an adult. Where and when it's finally safe to say out loud, "this happened, I have not been able to cope with it".

I watched that interview last night, and Harry is absolutely nowhere near the stage of therapeutic progress where he should be talking to even his nearest and dearest about this shit, let alone a television audience. That shit last night was shit for therapy. The feelings about 'sibling rivalry'? The feelings of being let down by his father? The feelings of being second best? You take that shit to therapy appointments for a long fucking time, quite probably years, before you are willing to cross that terrain in public. And by 'in public', I mean with understanding close friends. I do not in any way mean national television.

Harry clearly thinks he has made a lot of progress in therapy. He hasn't. He is hurt and angry and going Rambo on everyone he can find to blame. He's where you are when you start therapy. Not when you write a fucking book about it.

Words have power. Harry today and for a long time is gonna find out that that is a double edged sword. He lost a mother, and he's not processed that. The person he trashed the most last night lost the same mother. When you dig up your family wounds for everyone to gawk at it, they aren't just your wounds. It's not just you who is gawked at.

I honestly don't think he appreciates the magnitude of what he has done. His mother went ham on her ex and her ex's mistress in interviews; both people she could much more effectively cut out of her life and ongoing relationships than an only surviving parent and an only sibling. Harry thinks he's cutting the toxicity out of his life. He's sawing off the tree branch he's sitting on.

Any competent therapist would not have advised him to do this.
 
Nope. This is a liberal concept that has opened the gates for a lot of insanity and I'm not letting it pass.
True, but I think things can get very muddy in close relationships like these, sometimes people are blind to their faults and things aren't so white and black. I have seen similar situations, misunderstandings and miscommunications can go along way when everyone is entrenched in their own point of view and hurt.
The word the author is looking for is not "truth" but "perspective". Truths are absolute, perspectives aren't.
And many times the truth doesn't align with any of the perspectives present.

By the way patti davis is nee Reagan.
 
Back