Showing posts with label Harry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Harry. Show all posts

Tuesday, 19 April 2022

I shred comments like these for breakfast...

If you've had the misfortune to read my blogs before you'll know where this rant is going.

I am an EGALITARIAN. I believe that fundamental equality is an ABSOLUTE BASELINE of where we should be working from as a society. The fact people think there's equality when there blatantly isn't is INFURIATING.

In the interests of full disclosure I identify as agender which basically means keep your gender stereotypes and expectations out of my cornflakes.

I am also an opinionated potato meaning I can't keep my rants to myself if my life depends on it.

And no, I do not apologise for swearing.

So, I saw this comment and just had to shred it:

"How ridiculous, what inequality has his wife suffered because of her "race", she's excelled & married a Prince to boot. His children will thrive just like other children, regardless of their "race", with the added advantage of their wealthy parents which others don't have. As for his daughter having to deal with "gender equality", this is the real world & women are quite able to hold their own with men these days. I doubt very much that Harry and his family will experience the problems that ordinary working class families will."

1) "What inequality has his wife suffered because of her "race"" - first up, FUCK OFF WITH THE SCARE QUOTES. How dare you imply that it's anything less than a real and valid factor in how she's been treated?! How goddamned BLIND are you that you can't see the racism in the thread you are currently commenting on??? One thing that particularly gets me in every damn thread is the microaggression of misspelling her name. Honestly, there's an article where (9 times out of 10) it's in the headline but somehow y'all type 'Megan' over and over.

Here's an example of a multitude of times Meghan has been disrespected for doing the EXACT SAME THINGS as her white sister in law: https://www.boredpanda.com/uk-media-double-standarts-royal-meghan-markle-kate-middleton/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=organic

Catherine is disrespected in two ways - calling her Kate which she hates, and referring to her by her maiden name ten years and three kids into her marriage - but never once have I seen her called a gold-digger or a monkey.

Sure, there are a couple of other differences, Meghan is American, an actress and a divorcee... but I personally have never seen one comment that has even implied those factors have anything to do with the constant stream of hate she's been subjected to.

TBH I think that the public's general loathing of Meghan has a lot to do with her cutting out her toxic af abusive father... who just so happens to be her white parent. If she was seen to be 'embracing' her white family (even though they're the worst trash) I imagine the public might be a little kinder. Which is the stupidest reason for keeping a man like Thomas in your life.

2) "she's excelled & married a Prince to boot" - you really can't see this as being the cause of a lot of her problems?! I don't know how much sh*t she got on a daily basis before she was linked to Prince Harry but I am willing to bet vital body parts that it was a drop in the ocean compared to what she's dealt with over the past few years.

3) "His children will thrive just like other children, regardless of their "race", with the added advantage of their wealthy parents which others don't have" First up, not all children thrive... lots of minority ethnic and mixed kids really suffer, especially in an education system which expects them to fail, and often leads them by the hand to that eventuality.

Even if Harry & Meghan opt for private education Archie & Lilibet will still be in a minority. They'll be additionally othered by their royal status too.

And just go look at the substance abuse and suicide rates among the kids of celebrities. Rather than growing up in an ivory tower they tend to burn up under the magnifying glass of public scrutiny. Wealth provides many privileges but it causes many more problems; but more than that it's the royalty aspect... they can never escape. Wealth provides no protection or respite.

4) "As for his daughter having to deal with "gender equality"" again with the scare quotes like gender equality is a thing that exists. Women are asked about babies & relationships in interviews, men are asked about their work. Women serve less time for the same crime, men are less likely to get custody of their children.

There are DOZENS of articles on the sexualisation of young female celebrities, with special attention to how gross it gets when they 'come of age':

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/stephaniesoteriou/millie-bobby-brown-18th-birthday-creepy-sexualized-child

https://www.sheknows.com/entertainment/slideshow/2509093/celebrities-sexualized-young/

What on earth makes y'all think Lilibet will escape this???? Even if she's fortunate enough to grow up fat and fugly enough not to be targeted that way she'll be forever disregarded and disrespected as a human being because women pretty much only have value if they're attractive.

Similarly Archie will run a very minimal risk of public comment on his looks or body type. That, my dear gammon, is why gender equality doesn't exist.

5) "this is the real world & women are quite able to hold their own with men these days" Again, the 'real world' (which this guy clearly knows very little about) is rife with gender inequality but women shouldn't have to 'hold their own' like it's a goddamned battle!

6) "experience the problems that ordinary working class families will" Gatekeeping suffering is a really bad look. The bizarre idea that only the 'working classes' experience problems in life... IT DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT!!! I'd rather be 'poor, obscure, plain and little' than face the wrath that the royal family, celebrities and other in-the-public-eye people face.

The idea that rich people don't suffer like poor people supposedly do is nonsensical. Take the sad, current story about footballer Cristiano Ronaldo and his partner Georgina Rodriguez. Y'all think they don't suffer the loss of their twin baby boy any differently than any working class family?! *Maybe* they're better placed to pay medical costs, funeral costs, therapy to cope with their bereavement... but that's as far as money, status, or privilege goes. The practical aspects only, the pain itself is universal.

There are people bitching about why they were having more children anyway when they already have a daughter together and Ronaldo has other kids via surrogacy (er, large families are okay?), people posting crying-from-laughter emojis, people choosing to make nasty jibes at his skill as a footballer. And I know there's been worse, although thankfully most threads have been good at getting the most offensive stuff deleted fairly quickly.

Even some of the gestures of sympathy are dubious af - everything happens for a reason and it's God's will are incredibly hurtful things to say. Then there's this:

"Liverpool fans are planning a minute's applause in the seventh minute for Cristiano Ronaldo during Manchester United's visit to Anfield this evening following the heartbreaking news of his baby son's death.
Absolutely class!"

How the hell is applauding a dead baby an act of respect or 'class'?! the time-honoured gesture is a SILENCE. I hate to think how the public would react if Archie or Lilibet passed... Commemorative tat memorabilia perhaps?! Just think how Meghan was treated when she revealed she'd miscarried another child... accusations of her cashing in on the loss mama label. Speculation she was lying.

At least most working class families get to suffer their problems, bereavements, etc. etc. in relative obscurity and comparative peace.

Monday, 29 April 2019

Royal Baby Name Guesses

Royal baby name odds, from William Hill, updated 29/04/19

Source: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2019/04/29/royal-baby-name-odds-title-meghan-markle-prince-harry/

Girls
1. Diana 4/1
2. Victoria 7/1
3. Alice 12/1
4. Grace 12/1
5. Isabella / Isobella 12/1
6. Elizabeth 14/1
7. Alexandra 20/1
8. Harriett 20/1
9. Rose 20/1
10. April 25/1

Boys
1. Arthur 16/1
2. James 16/1
3. Edward 25/1
4. Albert 33/1
5. Alexander 33/1
6. Christopher 33/1
7. Daniel 33/1
8. Henry 33/1
9. Phillip 33/1
10. Joseph 40/1

My Opinions
For girls I'd like to throw Diana, Grace, Isabella, Harriett, Rose AND April out of consideration. IF a month name were to be used, May would be better as Harry's great great grandmother Mary of Teck was known as May, and we're nearly in May now. That leaves Victoria, Alice, Elizabeth and Alexandra from the top bets... Harriet was on my list of preferred names but not with two t's and because it was a great grandmother's name.
For the boys names I'll throw out Edward, Albert, Christopher, Daniel, Henry and Joseph. I think it very unlikely the baby will be named Henry as that's Harry's proper name and that is rather out of fashion of late. That leaves Arthur, James, Alexander and Phillip. Arthur Alexander was one of my top picks if I'd ever had a boy.
A good few people have suggested the idea of twins in which case using Elizabeth and Phillip would be rather nice but I don't think twins are especially likely as Meghan is allegedly planning a home birth and has apparently gone to full-term. Not that these things CAN'T happen but an older first time mum having Royal twins at home seems a stretch too far and an early labour is statistically more likely.
Obviously many other names have been suggested including a nod to Meghan's mother, Doria...I wonder if they might splice Doria and Diana like Renesmee in The Twilight Saga who was named after Bella's mum Renee and Edward's adoptive mum Esme. Daria? Dorana? Hmmm...
Unlisted names I think might make an appearance are Helena and Leopold.

My Prediction
Names in order of preference and using the Royal family's tendency to give four Christian names:
Girl: Helena Alice Doriana Victoria
Boy: Arthur Alexander Leopold James

Now just for time to tell.

EDIT - 03/05/19

Royal baby name odds, from William Hill, updated 03/05/19
Source: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2019/05/03/royal-baby-name-odds-meghan-markle-prince-harry-boy-girl/

Girls
1. Diana 4/1 (no change)
2. Allegra 8/1 (new)
3. Grace 8/1 (up from #4 at 12/1)
4. Alice 12/1 (down from #3, same odds)
5. Isabella / Isobella 12/1 (no change)
6. Victoria 14/1 (down from #2 at 7/1)
7. Elizabeth 20/1 (down from #6 at 14/1)
8. Alexandra 20/1 (down from #7, same odds)
9. April 25/1 (up from #10, same odds)
10. Catherine 25/1 (new)
Harriett and Rose have left the top 10 in exchange for Allegra (rather like it) and Catherine (good name but the same as Harry's sister in law? That'd be a tad odd...although it would put those stupid feud rumours to bed).
I've started thinking of Eleanor as a good, classic Royal name long overdue for a comeback. I am still VERY much of the opinion that if they don't use Doriana for a daughter they are very very wrong indeed. So my updated girls' name is now Eleanor Doriana Victoria - also shifting to the three christian names pattern adopted by William & Catherine.

Boys
1. Arthur 12/1 (up from 16/1)
2. James 16/1 (no change)
3. Albert 20/1 (up from #4 at 33/1)
4. Edward 33/1 (down from #3 at 25/1)
5. Alexander 33/1 (no change)
6. Christopher 33/1 (no change)
7. Daniel 33/1 (no change)
8. Henry 33/1 (no change)
9. Oliver 40/1 (new)
10. Phillip 40/1 (down from #9 at 33/1)
So only one new entry - Oliver has been a very popular name in the UK for a long time but it's association with Oliver Cromwell makes me point and laugh at the idea of it being used as a Royal baby name.
I'm still quite happy with my boys' name guess but if I was switching to a 3 name combo I'm not sure which I'd drop... Arthur Alexander Leopold, Arthur Leopold James? Hmmm, wonder if either of them are James Arthur fans?! Maybe Harry is more of an Ed Sheeran fan...remember the commemorative plate incident (source: https://planetradio.co.uk/heat/entertainment/celebrity/ed-sheeran-prince-harry-mistake-plate/)? Maybe for a 2nd guess I'll go Arthur Leopold Edward ;)

CONCLUSION
#BabySussex was a BOY - delivered safely on Monday 6th May 2019 at 05:26 BST and weighing 7lbs 3oz. It was announced on the 8th that Harry and Meghan are naming their son ARCHIE HARRISON MOUNTBATTEN-WINDSOR, he does not have a title at this time. Basically all the top guesses were wrong - from the expectation of a girl to the two or three expected middle names. No idea where Archie might've appeared in the betting, if indeed it was suggested at all. On the plus side maybe their naming a potential future daughter 'Doriana' isn't so unlikely after all!

Someone on Twitter disagreed with my bet on 'Arthur' (despite it being the top of the bookies shortlist by that time) "as Pippa just had a son she named Arthur" ...Pippa being Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge's sister Philippa Matthews nee Middleton. As such she is no relation to Harry & Meghan so her choice of baby name is fairly irrelevant.
If such a thing were a factor it obviously means very little to the Royals as evidenced by Prince Louis of Cambridge, William & Catherine's third child. Louis Arthur Charles was born a little over a year ago. Not only does he share a name with older brother Prince George (George Alexander Louis) and his father (William Arthur Philip Louis) but he also has a STEP COUSIN of the same name! Prince William and Prince Harry's stepbrother Tom Parker-Bowles has two children LOLA (b. 2007) and FREDDY (b. 2010) and their stepsister Laura Lopes has three children ELIZA (b. 2007) and twins GUS and LOUIS (b. 2009) - all these step cousins having been born since Prince Charles marriage to their grandmother Camilla in 2005.

I very much like the name 'Archie' but I'm not a huge fan of 'Harrison' because - and you can laugh at this - I don't like surnames used as Christian names. Yes, I know 'Heggie' is a surname and yes, I chose it myself. Surnames are good as gender neutral names though...
Speaking of this a good few people liked the name 'Spencer' - after Princess Diana's maiden name - for a child of either gender. Despite her enduring popularity I can't imagine it being used as a Royal baby forename, a middle name perhaps, but overall I would rather William and Harry looked to the future in their own families. Not only that but let's not lose sight of the fact that Catherine and Meghan both have their own families and connections - it is not only William and Harry who might want to commemorate loved ones in their naming of their children.