Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex

[Emeraldlady]

I’m a bit afraid to ask this question on the news forums. But I genuinely don’t understand why there is so much hatred for this girl. I’m pretty sure I’ve read most of what’s out there about her history and personality and it just doesn’t measure up to this awful vitriol that she is receiving from people. Any ideas?

 

[Lou2U]

A lot of the vitriol has been whipped up by the UK press. A lot of classism, misogyny, racism and double standards. Honestly, there is nothing many UK tabloids like better than the opportunity to pit women against each other and tear people down. And now because she has refused to continue this way, she is criticised for “taking Harry away”, for daring to talk openly about her mental health, for not “showing her son to the public”.

Also, she is suing some UK press, so they are spitting venom against her for that.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I don’t hate her and I almost never even give her a thought.
I don’t find her terribly interesting, but then I don’t find Will and Kate interesting either.

Harry is mildly interesting to me because he’s a bit of a maverick, he’s handsome, and also my husband and FIL were both named “Harry” so it’s interesting to see someone else with the name, it’s not very common nowadays at least in USA.

I’d really like to see more of the ladies who wore those bonkers hats on TV.

 

[ATraveller]

The tabloids have their problems but some events haven’t helped.
The Duchess has made statements that are deemed political when royals nowadays are expected to be neutral.
Then when the Sussexes decided to announce they announced their “resignation” it was made aware they bypassed the Queen.
Now we’re aware she and Harry were trying to profit from their royal status. That’s not lawful.
The Duchess also released a video when she was guest editing Vogue magazine where it was self-congratulatory.
The last two have made me lose respect for the couple.

 

[Zach]

I don’t follow it but I’m guessing she’s viewed as an outsider. If I was British I’d probably feel the same way.

 

[Irishmom2]

I had only ever seen her on the tv show Suits and I really wasn’t impressed with her as an actress. Next time I heard of her again, she was “seen with Harry.”
So far, I am not impressed with her as a duchess either.

 

[do_justly_love_mercy]

From what I’ve read about her I’d guess:

1. She’s a woman.
2. She’s a woman of color.
3. She’s American.
4. She was an actress.
5. She was previously married and divorced.
6. She comes from a just about middle-class family with a number of rather dysfunctional members.
7. She has opinions and isn’t afraid to express them.
8. She’s prepared to take on the tabloid press rather than tolerating/appeasing them.
9. She’s given Prince Harry the confidence to assert his desire to live something approaching a normal life.

 

[Emeraldlady]

The tabloids have their problems but some events haven’t helped.
The Duchess has made statements that are deemed political when royals nowadays are expected to be neutral.
Then when the Sussexes decided to announce they announced their “resignation” it was made aware they bypassed the Queen.
Now we’re aware she and Harry were trying to profit from their royal status. That’s not lawful.
The Duchess also took part in a podcast where she was practically bragging.
The last two have made me lose respect for the couple.

But the thing is… I’m an avid royalist. I have read all the details associated with those events you’ve cited and have found nothing that equates to attacking the royal family. Everything seems fine with the royals as far as the process of their exit and emigration. It’s all happening in consultation. Everytime there is a conspiracy theory advanced, the Queen negates it with her response to the couple. The vitriol to me seems to stem from conspiracy theories rather than the facts.

 

[Emeraldlady]

From what I’ve read about her I’d guess:

1. She’s a woman.
2. She’s a woman of color.
3. She’s American.
4. She was an actress.
5. She was previously married and divorced.
6. She comes from a just about middle-class family with a number of rather dysfunctional members.
7. She has opinions and isn’t afraid to express them.
8. She’s prepared to take on the tabloid press rather than tolerating/appeasing them.
9. She’s given Prince Harry the confidence to assert his desire to live something approaching a normal life.

My first thought was that her family is a problem for the royals and it is so prudent of her to go for some measure of detachment to stop them making a circus of her royal involvement. I’m quite sure the Queen would see the benefit of this.

 

[TK421]

I’m a bit afraid to ask this question on the news forums. But I genuinely don’t understand why there is so much hatred for this girl. I’m pretty sure I’ve read most of what’s out there about her history and personality and it just doesn’t measure up to this awful vitriol that she is receiving from people. Any ideas?

General dislike towards royalty and people in highly privileged positions + she’s ethnically diverse and doesn’t fit the stereotyped portrait of the royal family. It’s a double whammy for clickbait media that likes to take a person’s image and burn it at the stake.

Can’t say that I blame them for wanting to step out of the role.

 

[ATraveller]

Everytime there is a conspiracy theory advanced, the Queen negates it with her response to the couple.

I’m unsure what this refers to.

The tabloids love drama and are more than happy to invent some if it’s not present. That’s out of the Duchess’s control. What she is in control is what she says. Royals are supposed to be neutral. Being outspoken isn’t appropriate for royals since Prince Albert made it customary in the 1800’s.

I’m a constitutional monarchist. I was happy they were planning to move to Canada. But the details are disappointing.

 

[TK421]

What she is in control is what she says. Royals are supposed to be neutral. Being outspoken isn’t appropriate for royals since Prince Albert made it customary in the 1800’s.

That’s a very silly expectation, if you ask me.

It reminds me of Supreme Court Justices in the US and how they are allegedly “neutral”. Seriously: please spare me such a ridiculous notion. Some people might be better pretenders than others, but there is no such thing as neutral. It doesn’t exist.

 

[Zach]

In the long run it doesn’t matter what anyone thinks of them. They’ll be richer than 99.999 percent of the people on the planet. The scribblers will be scribbling while these two will be in their mansions and yachts sipping $500 a bottle champagne. Not a bad trade off.

 

[ATraveller]

That’s a very silly expectation, if you ask me.

It reminds me of Supreme Court Justices in the US and how they are allegedly “neutral”. Seriously: please spare me such a ridiculous notion. Some people might be better pretenders than others, but there is no such thing as neutral. It doesn’t exist.

The monarch is the personification of the state. And unfortunately other members of the royal family are tied to it. For the monarch to “take a side” can be seen as the other side is somehow less legitimate.
And it’s great to have an institution where politics is absent. All I have to do is look at America where people are constantly trying to remove the President because of the wrong opinions.

 

[TK421]

And yet, different members of the royal family express opinions. Even Queen Elizabeth has expressed opinions before although she is very careful with her words. Why? Because they are flesh and blood human beings, and expecting total neutrality out of them is unfair and unrealistic.

I don’t mind very much Britain keeping their royalty around, but if you actually expect the ‘neutrality’ thing to be honored all of the time, it’s not the last time you’ll be disappointed.

 

[Emeraldlady]

And yet, different members of the royal family express opinions. Even Queen Elizabeth has expressed opinions before although she is very careful with her words. Why? Because they are flesh and blood human beings, and expecting total neutrality out of them is unfair and unrealistic.

I don’t mind very much Britain keeping their royalty around, but if you actually expect the ‘neutrality’ thing to be honored all of the time, it’s not the last time you’ll be disappointed.

Yes, the Queen was clearly opposed to Brexit. She has a way of getting her position across.

 

[Jen95]

I guess I just feel like they can’t have it both ways:
If you’re going to marry an actual prince, and enjoy the trappings, which she seemed to be doing at her royal wedding, then there’s a flip side to that as well. It kind of seems like they hadn’t given it enough time, IMO.

 

[ATraveller]

And yet, different members of the royal family express opinions. Even Queen Elizabeth has expressed opinions before although she is very careful with her words. Why? Because they are flesh and blood human beings, and expecting total neutrality out of them is unfair and unrealistic.

I don’t mind very much Britain keeping their royalty around, but if you actually expect the ‘neutrality’ thing to be honored all of the time, it’s not the last time you’ll be disappointed.

Prince Charles and Prince William are doing a good job of that. Though unlike the Duchess, they try to be more careful.
They maybe human like the rest of us but they recognize they are in a place of privilege, one that they didn’t earn. With privilege, they can use it for good like keeping a country united or abuse for personal gain. The Duchess had to work for hers so the understanding in America is different.

 

[Zach]

Yeah what did she expect to waltz in there and have everyone bow down in worship as she enjoyed all the privilege without any of the scrutiny and sacrifice.

 

[ATraveller]

Yes, the Queen was clearly opposed to Brexit. She has a way of getting her position across.

Maybe. We don’t know. All sides try to claim the Queen is on their side knowing that it’s not a good practice. It’s possible to read more into something one says or wears.