There is no shortage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle detractors. Snark like “Duchess of Difficult,” accusations of social climbing, and suggestions that a former member of the British army is “whipped” by his wife are easy to come by.
It’s even more disturbing (and sexist) when this level of venom is lobbed at one woman merely to prop another (in this case, Kate Middleton) up.
Yet, for all the vitriol op-eds like to lob at the Sussexes — especially Markle — there’s nothing to suggest that this rancor is shared by the royal family.
In fact, there’s plenty of evidence to suggest the opposite.
In a new book called “Finding Freedom,” co-authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand say that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s departure from the British royal family was met with “sadness and tears.”
It’s true that Markle felt “imprisoned” by the Palace. But that has far less to do with Markle’s “Hollywood ambitions” and more to do with her inability, as an American, to adapt to British political life.
While entertainers and politicians easily cross over in the United States — which has embraced rugged individualism since its inception and currently has a reality star sitting in the Oval Office — this is not the case in the United Kingdom, which still has a clear delineation between commoners and royals.
And this is to say nothing of the various racial undertones inherent in Markle’s presence in a notoriously “all-white” monarchy.
Meghan Markle, more than any other modern royal, gave a human touch to the British monarchy.
Today, young Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor — whose parents have eschewed a royal title for him — turns one.
But there was some suggestion that his birth, one year ago today, was a political statement.
Unlike other royals in the line of succession, Archie has dual citizenship. He was also the first royal in the line of succession to be born “in secret.” (No one knew where Markle gave birth until after the fact.)
And just one month before he was born, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle announced that Archie’s birth would be a private affair.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are very grateful for the goodwill they have received from people throughout the United Kingdom and around the world as they prepare to welcome their baby. Their royal highnesses have taken a personal decision to keep the plans around the arrival of their baby private. The Duke and Duchess look forward to sharing the exciting news with everyone once they have had an opportunity to celebrate privately as a new family.
This was a far cry from Duchess Kate’s M.O. when she gave birth, where even the hospital wing was a matter of public record.
And many of the details of Archie’s life — which would have been made public by other royals — were kept private.
Even this was a political statement. Are not the British royal family entitled to a measure of privacy, especially for their youngest members?
Certainly, the Palace seems to think so.
After all, there have been no official statements to suggest that there is any rancor between “The Firm” and the “rebel monarchs.” In fact, the British royal family was the first to wish young Archie a happy birthday today.
Throughout her life, the late Princess Diana — Prince Harry’s mother — tried to buck the traditions of “The Firm.”
This was especially true after she divorced Prince Charles and left royal life.
At the time, Princess Diana’s decision to court the press about her new “normal” life was deemed improper and a slight to the royal family.
It’s only in hindsight, many years removed from her death, that we realize her criticisms were valid.
It’s lunacy to suggest that Diana wouldn’t approve of Meghan Markle’s decision to buck the firm’s traditions.
And it’s further lunacy to suggest that Diana wouldn’t approve of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, when she was insistent on giving her sons a “normal” life.
Not only would Diana cheer on Megxit, but she would also be the first one to wish Archie, her beloved grandson, a happy birthday today.
And rather than lob rancor at little Archie’s parents today, we should do the same.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of CCN.com.
This article was edited by Josiah Wilmoth.