Huff, puff. Following Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex’s decision not to bring their children to London in the wake of the failure to grant the family police protection, the public and papers across the nation are lining up for a go on their favourite hobby horse: aren’t the Sussexes a nightmare? What prima donnas, to cancel at the last minute; how cruel, to keep the kids from their grandfather, the King; and what’s Meghan got against the UK, anyway?
Gee, let me think. I’m no particular fan of the Duke and Duchess – royalty makes me nauseous, aspirational lifestyle nonsense bores me to tears – but you don’t need to be a devotee to see how irrational the public’s attitude to the couple is. Were we in some kind of warped, collective romantic relationship – the nation and the Sussexes – we’d be the aggrieved, bitter ex. The kind who corners you at a bar after one too many beers, going on about how crazy their former partner was until it’s abundantly clear that the problem is not with the absent party (at least, not only) but the speaker themselves.
This latest mess is particularly exemplary. The hostile uproar at Harry saying he and his family face threats in the UK, hence the security request, surely only proves another of his points, that they are unfairly treated. But make no mistake – we’ve been the villains all along. To really wring out my romance metaphor: Harry and Meghan might have instigated the “break up” by leaving both the Royal Family and the country back in 2020, but we left them no choice.
After their 2018 wedding, Meghan was subjected to jaw-dropping levels of racism and misogyny-infused scrutiny, leading to mental health struggles including suicidal thoughts. Considering that his mother princess Diana died in a car crash fleeing paparazzi, it’s not surprising that Harry’s threshold for such hounding might be less than towering. And if staying in the UK felt neither emotionally nor physically safe for his family then, why would that have changed?
In fact, things are arguably worse now – because when they left, the Sussexes were still covered by the police security granted automatically to working royals. With his latest request for police protection denied, Harry is in a very difficult spot. He can’t legally pay for the police, but nor could any private firm he employed carry firearms or share intelligence with law enforcement. As such, this isn’t an issue that money can solve. It’s not a tantrum from Harry and Meghan but a genuine spanner in the works from the state, one that feels punitive.
Harry might have stepped away from his role as a working royal, but the idea that he and his family would need less security as a result is ludicrous. And while I understand the argument that taxpayers ought not foot the bill, I don’t see why a technicality should mean Harry and co are treated any differently to the rest of his ghastly family, whose police security is funded as a matter of course.
Whatever you think of their tell-alls (the infamous Oprah interview, Harry’s explosive memoir Spare) or their variously naked bids for cash/stardom (Meghan’s $14-a-jar jam, a personal highlight), there’s no logical corollary that the Sussexes ought to put themselves – not to mention their children, seven-year-old Archie and five-year-old Lilibet – in undue danger. However self-evident that seems, I’m under no illusions that any of it will stem the nation’s tide of general griping – tit for tat worthy of the bitterest ex. Whisper it: it’s not them, it’s us.
Hence then, the article about only in britain could a man trying to protect his family face this much vitriol was published today ( ) and is available on inews ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Only in Britain could a man trying to protect his family face this much vitriol )
Also on site :