Duchess of Sussex: Future Duties, Roles and Responsibilities

[FashionMaven]

I’m glad Meghan made that comment. As a woman I already have a voice. I don’t need to find it and I’d wager no other women do either. It’s infantilizing to say we women need to find our voices. No. We have a voice. What we need is the surety that we won’t be penalized or marginalized for using it.

Meghan was spot on.

It was also important to say because it shifts the focus from something women have to do (“find their voice”) to what society needs to do in response when we women use our voices (“listen empathetically and take action”).

 

[jacqui24]

I’m glad Meghan made that comment. As a woman I already have a voice. I don’t need to find it and I’d wager no other women do either. It’s infantilizing to say we women need to find our voices. No. We have a voice. What we need is the surety that we won’t be penalized or marginalized for using it.

Meghan was spot on.

It was also important to say because it shifts the focus from something women have to do (“find their voice”) to what society needs to do in response when we women use our voices (“listen empathetically and take action”).

I agree. As a young girl, I've always had strong opinions and wasn't afraid to voice it. I can't tell you how many times I've been told by various people, while I was growing up, that I had too many opinions or that I was too loud. And I've in the past tried to pull back some because multiple people have said that to me even though they can't tell me what is wrong with what I said. Society does treat women and men differently for saying or doing the same thing. Working in the financial industry, I've had the fortunate opportunities to sit down with some women and have a conversation about this. One of the women, whom I look up to a great deal, have been called pushy by others multiple times behind her back for simply going for what she wants. She's not aware of this, but I've actually been in conversations where this is talked about. Yet I don't hear the same comments about men. But seeing how she's apologetic about being who she is and is a successful businesswoman gives someone like me great hope for my future.

So with all the discussion about giving women a voice, I'm glad someone with Meghan's platform is talking about how we have a voice, now let's encourage it and nurture it and come together to listen and do something about it.

 

[Somebody]

It will be interesting to see how Meghan's interests will be incorporated but so far she hasn't shown that she is connecting her interests with other topics the foundation covers. The three royal patrons all talked about mental health and relste st least part of their work to this umbrella. It wouldn't have been that hard for Meghan to link her interest in advancing the issues of girls and women to this theme as well not to be restricted to only that but to show her interest and willingness to join the main work of the foundation next to expanding it to her own interest.

 

[jacqui24]

It will be interesting to see how Meghan's interests will be incorporated but so far she hasn't shown that she is connecting her interests with other topics the foundation covers. The three royal patrons all talked about mental health and relste st least part of their work to this umbrella. It wouldn't have been that hard for Meghan to link her interest in advancing the issues of girls and women to this theme as well not to be restricted to only that but to show her interest and willingness to join the main work of the foundation next to expanding it to her own interest.

They've added interest over the years to it. I believe conservation is also an issue for the Foundation. It just happens that mental health was a subject that's not addressed publicly often and was seen by some as something royals shouldn't do because some prefer their royals distant and stoic.

 

[Ronnsha]

It will be interesting to see how Meghan's interests will be incorporated but so far she hasn't shown that she is connecting her interests with other topics the foundation covers. The three royal patrons all talked about mental health and relste st least part of their work to this umbrella. It wouldn't have been that hard for Meghan to link her interest in advancing the issues of girls and women to this theme as well not to be restricted to only that but to show her interest and willingness to join the main work of the foundation next to expanding it to her own interest.

I believe Meghan will be allowed to champion her own causes. The foundation expanded when Kate joined, so I don't see why it can't do the same with Meghan. Her causes are so important and timely. Harry seems extremely supportive of her eagerness to work.

 

[Somebody]

Of course it will be expanded as it should be! And it is clear that women rights and Commonwealth are her areas of interest. My only concern was that she didn't even attempt to link her interests to any work of the foundation so far - while she said to be impressed by the campaign, she is not impressed enough to contribute apparently.

I am aware that the foundation covers many topics and not all (but many) are related to mental health but all patrons do something in that area as they noticed that was a common underlying issue. So, it would have been nice had she mentioned some connection to the focus areas of the foundation so far.

An overview of the topics mentioned by the four of them:
William: United for Wildlife, male mental health (specifically suicide prevention among young men), work-related mental health and cyberbullying
Catherine: early intervention regarding mental health (for children and related to parenting)
Meghan: empowerment of women in the Commonwealth
Harry: youth violence, sports-related mental health (regarding bad coaching experiences), sustainable tourism

And William talked about expanding the role of the foundation on the global level.

 

[jacqui24]

Of course it will be expanded as it should be! And it is clear that women rights and Commonwealth are her areas of interest. My only concern was that she didn't even attempt to link her interests to any work of the foundation so far - while she said to be impressed by the campaign, she is not impressed enough to contribute apparently.

I am aware that the foundation covers many topics and not all (but many) are related to mental health but all patrons do something in that area as they noticed that was a common underlying issue. So, it would have been nice had she mentioned some connection to the focus areas of the foundation so far.

I absolutely disagree that Meghan hasn't shown an interest in mental health or contribute. Meghan in the past has written extensively about her own struggles as a young girl and woman with knowing her worth and feeling that she's enough. And she's always encouraged women to know that they are enough just as they are. So is that topic female empowerment? Yes. Is that topic mental health related in that it addresses issues such as low self-esteem? Absolutely. Part of female empowerment is changing a mindset, which was also talked about yesterday in relation to the mental health issue they've taken on.

It just happens that her work in Rwanda and India and with UN is much more extensive and requires official affiliation with these organizations to do rather than something she can write about and publish on her own. And of course, we don't really think about things people do on their own as charitable work as much as the work they do with charitable organizations. However, to say she hasn't address issues related to mental health or shown any interest in it is inaccurate. Another example is her work with Dove's Self-Esteem Project. Just because she doesn't use the words mental health, doesn't mean she didn't address mental health related issues.

Again, there are other issues they work on as well. It just happens that this is a very new area to address publicly whereas there are other established charities and organizations for conservation.

 

[ACO]

Of course it will be expanded as it should be! And it is clear that women rights and Commonwealth are her areas of interest. My only concern was that she didn't even attempt to link her interests to any work of the foundation so far - while she said to be impressed by the campaign, she is not impressed enough to contribute apparently.

I am aware that the foundation covers many topics and not all (but many) are related to mental health but all patrons do something in that area as they noticed that was a common underlying issue. So, it would have been nice had she mentioned some connection to the focus areas of the foundation so far.

I don't see how one can even know because she made it pretty clear she couldn't get into it. She focused on a broad subject which we know just by her history is important to her. She praised the overall foundation but they all kind of stuck to their assigned topics of sorts. Once she is officially able to talk we can fully understand what she is or isn't doing.

 

[Somebody]

I absolutely disagree that Meghan hasn't shown an interest in mental health or contribute. Meghan in the past has written extensively about her own struggles as a young girl and woman with knowing her worth and feeling that she's enough. And she's always encouraged women to know that they are enough just as they are. So is that topic female empowerment? Yes. Is that topic mental health related in that it addresses issues such as low self-esteem? Absolutely. Part of female empowerment is changing a mindset, which was also talked about yesterday in relation to the mental health issue they've taken on.

It just happens that her work in Rwanda and India and with UN is much more extensive and requires official affiliation with these organizations to do rather than something she can write about and publish on her own. And of course, we don't really think about things people do on their own as charitable work as much as the work they do with charitable organizations. However, to say she hasn't address issues related to mental health or shown any interest in it is inaccurate. Another example is her work with Dove's Self-Esteem Project. Just because she doesn't use the words mental health, doesn't mean she didn't address mental health related issues.

Again, there are other issues they work on as well. It just happens that this is a very new area to address publicly whereas there are other established charities and organizations for conservation.

Please cite what she said yesterday at the forum in which she explicitly made this link of her interests to mental health or other focus areas of the foundation as that was what we were talking about. I clearly see the links, so again my issue was that she didn't make that link explicit yesterday while it would have been very easy for her to do so.

Of course she is still exploring but she didn't shy away from making a statement telling people that she fundamentally disagrees with a specific expression, so had she been so inclined I am sure she could have found a way to make that connection but she didn't. Instead she presented herself as someone within who looks forward to using the vehicle of the royal foundation to further her own interests.

 

[Ronnsha]

Meghan comes into this marriage with a proven track record of knowledge of certain subjects. Harry will surely allow her to continue her important work. It will not only benefit those who are in need of help, it will also bolster the strength of the foundation.

 

[jacqui24]

Please cite what she said yesterday at the forum in which she explicitly made this link of her interests to mental health or other focus areas of the foundation as that was what we were talking about. I clearly see the links, so again my issue was that she didn't make that link explicit yesterday while it would have been very easy for her to do so.

Of course she is still exploring but she didn't shy away from making a statement telling people that she fundamentally disagrees with a specific expression, so had she been so inclined I am sure she could have found a way to make that connection but she didn't. Instead she presented herself as someone within who looks forward to using the vehicle of the royal foundation to further her own interests.

Actually, what she said was that she couldn't get into specifics of what she will take on. She answered a question about her interest in women's rights and her past work. She talked about the issue in what, three or four sentence at best? She made a very good point, but I highly doubt anyone can thoroughly address the entire issue in three or four sentences. You can only give an overview to the core of the issue, which she did. Now if she had to go on and list all the possible angle she can go about answering this issue, then perhaps she would need all 30 some minutes of it to herself in order to do so. She was asked about the global perspective about the Heads Together campaign specifically in a separate question, which she did offer. The other three took most of the question about working on the Heads Together campaign, and Meghan largely stayed back because she didn't work on it. They did.

 

[Spheno]

One more opinion about Meghan
RACHEL JOHNSON: Royal Fab Four? I fear Meghan's a bit out of tune | Daily Mail Online

 

[Terri Terri]

Yes...another column by a white woman who thinks that the black girl from America should have kept her mouth shut and just let the white folk speak!

Amazing! It is mostly women who are the hardest on other women! Sometimes women are their own worst enemy!

Meghan is too self-assured, self-confident, intelligent and too good a public speaker for a black woman and some people can't help but pull her down!

 

[ACO]

"If you look at the Royal Foundation, it divvies things up, so Harry is Armed Forces, Kate is young people and mental health, and William is across conservation. Meghan – mark my words – will be banging the drum for wimmin. We will have our first feminist-activist princess."

So triggered. It is amazing. Women hating on women. Sad state.

 

[Pranter]

I don't recall that reaction from Harry...I mean come on, Harry knows exactly what he has...they are all aware by this point of her views on probably a wide range of issues.

Folks just aren't used to hearing members of the BRF speak so openly about it...Charles has 'slipped up' over the years and done it and folks lose their mind for a bit then move on.

Pretty evident to me the BRF is making some changes. Even if they take a long time to implement.


LaRae

 

[Pranter]

"If you look at the Royal Foundation, it divvies things up, so Harry is Armed Forces, Kate is young people and mental health, and William is across conservation. Meghan – mark my words – will be banging the drum for wimmin. We will have our first feminist-activist princess."

So triggered. It is amazing. Women hating on women. Sad state.

I think the article is silly over all ...however I don't think you can dismiss the fact that there are a lot of women out there who are very turned off by some of the women in the feminists movement. The ones that are not very pro-women themselves (unless you agree with their version of feminism).

I haven't seen any indication Meghan falls into that category...my guess is the author of the article is lumping Meghan in with the radical feminists.


LaRae

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Yes...another column by a white woman who thinks that the black girl from America should have kept her mouth shut and just let the white folk speak!

Amazing! It is mostly women who are the hardest on other women! Sometimes women are their own worst enemy!

Meghan is too self-assured, self-confident, intelligent and too good a public speaker for a black woman and some people can't help but pull her down!

Sorry but I think she brings up at least one good point and that is that Meghan shouldn't get too political especially about a flashpoint topic like feminism and womens rights which some on the far left have obscured with man hating.

I think the article is silly over all ...however I don't think you can dismiss the fact that there are a lot of women out there who are very turned off by some of the women in the feminists movement. The ones that are not very pro-women themselves (unless you agree with their version of feminism).

I haven't seen any indication Meghan falls into that category...my guess is the author of the article is lumping Meghan in with the radical feminists.


LaRae

There were hints that the author viewed Meghan in that way and I can't say I blame her because sometimes I get that vibe from her as well but I admit I might be wrong.

 

[ACO]

I think the article is silly over all ...however I don't think you can dismiss the fact that there are a lot of women out there who are very turned off by some of the women in the feminists movement. The ones that are not very pro-women themselves (unless you agree with their version of feminism).

I haven't seen any indication Meghan falls into that category...my guess is the author of the article is lumping Meghan in with the radical feminists.


LaRae

Well this authors seems to be one of them. She is extremely condescending in her statement. "Wimmins" -- Girl, please. I don't care what people call themselves. You want to be a feminist? Fine. You don't? Great. That is your business but all this extra nonsense is just that. Nothing Meghan has said or done deserves her words which basically implies she needs to go in a corner somewhere and just smile. How women wish that upon other women is beyond me. And it is even more ridiculous coming from female writers who once upon a time had to fight for their own respect. Which is why I have none for them.

 

[soapstar]

Yes...another column by a white woman who thinks that the black girl from America should have kept her mouth shut and just let the white folk speak!

Amazing! It is mostly women who are the hardest on other women! Sometimes women are their own worst enemy!

Meghan is too self-assured, self-confident, intelligent and too good a public speaker for a black woman and some people can't help but pull her down!

I don't get this from the article at all. She applauded Meghan for speaking out about women's issues, but then says Meghan has to be careful because many prefer the royals wives to be silent and not get involved in political causes. And this part of the article sounds like a slam at Meghan's critics.

In theory, the Royal Wives don’t do politics: they accept posies from little girls, they produce heirs and spares, they don’t go around using their romantic entrees into the Firm as a platform to lobby for lasting and much needed change in the patriarchal power structures of society – in a country they haven’t even lived in for more than a few months.

It just isn’t done… or at least it hasn’t been done, yet

Sure the article was a little snarky, but I thought it had some interesting points and thought her hardest dig was at Kate (she calls her a Stepford wife).

 

[Terri Terri]

I respect your opinions but I stand by mine own impression of the article. This columist applauding Meghan and then turning around to pull her down is disingenuous.

She applauds her for speaking out on women's rights BUT........As Jon Snow says on GOT....everything before BUT is BS!!!!!!!

So Meghan talks too much and Kate is a stepford wife!!!! WOW! And all this from a woman!!!!!

 

[Ish]

I don't get this from the article at all. She applauded Meghan for speaking out about women's issues, but then says Meghan has to be careful because many prefer the royals wives to be silent and not get involved in political causes. And this part of the article sounds like a slam at Meghan's critics.



Sure the article was a little snarky, but I thought it had some interesting points and thought her hardest dig was at Kate (she calls her a Stepford wife).

I read the article similarly. I don't think her point was that Meghan can't speak, but rather that Meghan is wrong in saying that Women in Britain have a voice.... which actually, I think Johnson missed the point that Meghan was making. Women do have a voice, in Britain, in the US, in much (if not all of the Western world); they just don't necessarily use it, and aren't necessarily listened to when they do use it.

I actually find Johnson's article a bit ironic... Meghan's saying women need to speak and be listened to, and Johnson is completely missing the point because she's not actually listening to what Meghan's saying.

 

[Somebody]

Yes...another column by a white woman who thinks that the black girl from America should have kept her mouth shut and just let the white folk speak!

Amazing! It is mostly women who are the hardest on other women! Sometimes women are their own worst enemy!

Meghan is too self-assured, self-confident, intelligent and too good a public speaker for a black woman and some people can't help but pull her down!

That's not at all what the article says. The author seems to caution Meghan as she comes across as an American feminist being very (too) outspoken before she is even a member of the firm and that's not necessarily the way to warm the British public to her (and public opinion is important even though royal families shouldn't strive to be 'popular'). All 'married in' members of the family need to know their place (as well as those born into the family as the elder is always more prominent than the younger).

I agree with the writer in that Meghan should try to show a little more sensitivity (and not come across as an American (=outsider) know-all) while she is only at the early stages of her new role as (a future) royal. There are many years to come in which she can advocate for topics close to her heart while always keeping in mind which institution she represents. I have no doubt that she will be a great advocate for these issues, so best to take the time to get to know Britain and it's people and in that way make sure that the people will listen as to one of their own. Right now, they can easily dismiss what she is saying as irrelevant/uninformed.

So far it seems that the transition is on the one hand rather easy as she feels very comfortable in the public eye (and seems to have found a purpose for life in her new role) but on the other hand not as easy as she needs to learn when and how to advocate for issues that are important in British society (step 1: really get to know British society). Harry even stressed the importance of getting to the root cause of issues and doing so takes a lot of time. And according to William; that's one of their advantages; they do have time.

 

[Pranter]

I just don't agree that women aren't being heard. Women are in all levels of jobs, military, government....if they weren't being heard and listened to they'd all still be in the 'secretarial pool'.

I'm really not sure what it is that women should be doing that they are not already able to do. Speaking of the western world ...not countries where women don't have rights.


LaRae

 

[ACO]

I read the article similarly. I don't think her point was that Meghan can't speak, but rather that Meghan is wrong in saying that Women in Britain have a voice.... which actually, I think Johnson missed the point that Meghan was making. Women do have a voice, in Britain, in the US, in much (if not all of the Western world); they just don't necessarily use it, and aren't necessarily listened to when they do use it.

I actually find Johnson's article a bit ironic... Meghan's saying women need to speak and be listened to, and Johnson is completely missing the point because she's not actually listening to what Meghan's saying.

You have a great point here.

I just don't agree that women aren't being heard. Women are in all levels of jobs, military, government....if they weren't being heard and listened to they'd all still be in the 'secretarial pool'.

As a female who is the supervisor and works alongside many men... I can see your point but can't really agree. I have to work extra hard to be heard on a daily basis despite my status. In fact many think I am in the position I am in because I am a woman and they had to meet some absorb quota. They think I can't hear them but I hear every word. So yes it is important for women to stand up for themselves and speak up.

 

[Terri Terri]

That's not at all what the article says. The author seems to caution Meghan as she comes across as an American feminist being very (too) outspoken before she is even a member of the firm and that's not necessarily the way to warm the British public to her (and public opinion is important even though royal families shouldn't strive to be 'popular'). All 'married in' members of the family need to know their place (as well as those born into the family as the elder is always more prominent than the younger).

I agree with the writer in that Meghan should try to show a little more sensitivity (and not come across as an American (=outsider) know-all) while she is only at the early stages of her new role as (a future) royal. There are many years to come in which she can advocate for topics close to her heart while always keeping in mind which institution she represents. I have no doubt that she will be a great advocate for these issues, so best to take the time to get to know Britain and it's people and in that way make sure that the people will listen as to one of their own. Right now, they can easily dismiss what she is saying as irrelevant/uninformed.

So far it seems that the transition is on the one hand rather easy as she feels very comfortable in the public eye (and seems to have found a purpose for life in her new role) but on the other hand not as easy as she needs to learn when and how to advocate for issues that are important in British society (step 1: really get to know British society). Harry even stressed the importance of getting to the root cause of issues and doing so takes a lot of time. And according to William; that's one of their advantages; they do have time.

American feminist being too outspoken.....she should know her place....American outsider!
All sly comments which means that Meghan should just be content to keep silent and disappear behind her 'betters'. Whatever!

 

[Somebody]

As a female who is the supervisor to many men... I can see your point but can't really agree. I have to work extra hard to be heard on a daily basis despite my status. In fact many think I am in the position I am in because I am a woman and they had to meet some absorb quota. They think I can't hear them but I hear every word. So yes it is important for women to stand up for themselves and speak up.

Being a tall white middle-aged man is still the profile of those who are 'automatically' (unconsciously?) best listened to. The more you deviate from this prototype the harder it can be to be heard/listened to. That's not to say that others' voices are not considered important but it takes more effort for them to be heard.

 

[GrammaSueSue]

Theodore Roosevelt — ‘People don't care how much you know until they know how much you care ...

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I don't get this from the article at all. She applauded Meghan for speaking out about women's issues, but then says Meghan has to be careful because many prefer the royals wives to be silent and not get involved in political causes. And this part of the article sounds like a slam at Meghan's critics.



Sure the article was a little snarky, but I thought it had some interesting points and thought her hardest dig was at Kate (she calls her a Stepford wife).

That's funny because I felt the hardest dig was at Kate as well. I didn't read it as her bashing Meghan but stating that she needs to be careful about what she says and how she says it. She even makes a good point about royal wives job being to accept flowers and have babies which I see as a dig against those who promote these standards in royal women. I do wonder if as an America Meghan can learn to curb her opinion; I know Charles has found it hard and he wad raised in the institution.

@Somebody I applaud your post and agree with it. I would quote you but it was rather long and I don't want to fill up the board.

As a woman and an American I would not want Meghan to come off as some known it all outsider. The country is extremely old and it would take me years to learn the history let alone the politics and I agree it takes time to learn the ins and outs of an issue.

 

[Somebody]

American feminist being too outspoken.....she should know her place....American outsider!
All sly comments which means that Meghan should just be content to keep silent and disappear behind her 'betters'. This wis why this article is disingenuous IMO.:

Yes, ANY future member of the family should know his/her place! Meghan is no exception to that rule. She is not yet a member of the family.

William and Catherine will always be above Harry and her in the order of precedence. They will once be their king and queen.

Furthermore, it would be hard to argue that someone who is new to the UK suddenly should tell those who have been preparing all their lives for their roles in the royal family and Britain what to do/focus on just because she fell in love with one of them; or tell the British public that they've seen things wrongly and need to amend their ways - she may have a point but there are other more effective ways (in the long run) to promote that message.

With time her role will grow as she learns from the more experienced members of the family; in that way she can become a valuable member of the family with her own characteristics and all she brings to the table - while they also learn from her perspective.

 

[ACO]

Being a tall white middle-aged man is still the profile of those who are 'automatically' (unconsciously?) best listened to. The more you deviate from this prototype the harder it can be to be heard/listened to. That's not to say that others' voices are not considered important but it takes more effort for them to be heard.

But isn't that exactly what Meghan pointed out. People don't have to find their voice but all they need to do is use it but just as importantly people need to LISTEN. That is what it really boils down too. People refusing to listen.