[ SECRET POST #5088 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5088 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 09 secrets from Secret Submission Post #728.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

But that argument could be used to justify anything, for Pete's sake. Anything at all.

[(Anonymous)]

If you cannot see how it's relevant when the comment above explains exactly what Americans don't get, then nobody can help you.

[(Anonymous)]

It reminds me of talking about the Romani with Europeans. Europeans will say the most transparently racist shit and then say it's not racist because you Americans just don't get it! It's not racist because gypsies really are subhuman vermin!

[(Anonymous)]

I can't help but wonder how many.conversations you've had with Europeans about the Romany. For a start, it's 'travellers' most people have a problem with in the UK - and that's because a minority of them will break into private land, squat until they're moved on, and leave rubbish and human faeces. Travellers are different to Romany gypsies.

My grandma was Romany (although kicked out because she married an outsider). She never got any flack, nor did my Dad.

[(Anonymous)]

DA
okay, but we're not talking about the Romani. Nor is anyone denying there might be a racist element to some of it. All we're trying to say is that, whilst race is probably a factor, it's a relatively small one when compared to the fact that she's not upper class and not a Brit.

As for comparing her to Kate, firstly the coverage of Kate in the UK press was not always positive (quite a bit of it was nasty), and secondly there is a very big emphasis on the Duty of the Royals - after all, a commonly held view is that if the is taxpayer funding their lavish lifestyles, they need to perform their Royal duties. William and Kate do (well, ish, but they get flack in the press for not doing enough). Harry and Megan did significantly less, before deciding to reject their duties altogether (whilst still wanting the UK to pay for a lot of stuff). Which accounts for some of the disparity in coverage.

[(Anonymous)]

This.

[(Anonymous)]

I know that we're not talking about the Romany. It's an analogy to illustrate why I think the argument "oh, well, you just don't understand because you're not from here" is not a useful argument, especially when it comes to topics around race and prejudice.

Second - I do agree that race isn't the only thing going on here. But I also think that perceptions of race can, in a background way, shape the perception of all the things that you lay out here.

[(Anonymous)]

look, there are several people in this thread telling you that class is a big factor. The UK is known for being super weird about class, and it infiltrates everything here. Everything is seen through the lens of class and status. Class mobility here is practically non-existent. It is so completely and totally ingrained in every single system here. And whilst things are slowly getting better, it's still BAD.

That is what we're trying to tell you. And what you seem super reluctant to accept.

And whilst I do think that having outside perspectives is useful and can help identify prejudices and blindspots, that doesn't come at the expense of literally ignoring everything the people who live there are telling you.

So I'm going to set it out super simply for you.

1. Yes, there is probably a racist element to the way MM was treated.

2. Class and not being a Brit was the bigger factor.

[(Anonymous)]

Well, we've now argued down from "Race really didn't enter into it, it never needed to" to "it was definitely racist, among other things" so I'm happy with that.

And I'm not saying that race was the only factor. But what I do think is that there's a massive gap in the perception of Middleton and Markle (after all as others in the thread have pointed out Middleton herself is new money) that's not fully explained by differences in their actions, and the simplest, most probable explanation is that race plays a major role in that difference.

[(Anonymous)]

But the thing is, in the UK, the simplest and most probable explanation for that gap isn't necessarily racism. That's what we're getting at. The difference between Kate and Megan isn't just one of race - it's also of class and nationality.

Kate is English and upper middle class. Her parents are well off and have white collar jobs. She studied at an old, posh university.

Megan is American and working class. Her parents are working class and divorced. She's an actress. She went to a good university but not an Old Boys UK one like Kate.

Those differences are a big deal in the UK, which gets constantly underestimated in terms of importance by non-Brits. Your status in the social hierarchy is incredibly important here - even more so if you're marrying a Royal, which is the ultimate representation of our class system in all its leased up glory.

[(Anonymous)]

*messed up

[(Anonymous)]

+1 to all this.

Americans look at Britain and see mini-America in terms of race relations. They don't get it at all, then act butthurt when people who actually live them in the UK try and explain it.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah.

The UK has issues with racism, just like everywhere else. We're not unique in that respect. But the targets, dogwhistles, nuances, language, etc are different - again, just like it is everywhere else. UK racism is different to US racism, just as both are different again to Japanese racism, French racism, South African racism, Australian racism, etc. Add that to the way it intersects with other concepts and ideas in each culture, and you get a completely different landscape where things rank differently in terms of importance.

[(Anonymous)]

I love this. Like clockwork, every time something about racism in Britain comes up, some Brit comes in and explains that Americans don't get it because their racism is deep and nuanced and complex, unlike America where racism is simple and stupid. You found a way to make even your racism sound better than ours. Never change, Britain.

[(Anonymous)]

DA, no, that's not it at all. Brits are saying that their racism is different. No less messed up, but the nuances are different. That goes both way, btw. We don't always get some of your nuances either.

[(Anonymous)]

^This

There are a lot of nuances to US racism that we don't get, in the same way that a lot of Americans don't get ours. It's not a question of superiority. It's just different.

[(Anonymous)]

Lol. Hurt yourself with that reach?

That's not what I said at all.

I said that there are differences between cultures (you know, like there is with everything). Not that US racism is simple and stupid. Just that it's different.

Learn to read.

[(Anonymous)]

SA

Also, why the hell are we arguing over this? All racism is stupid. UK. US. All of it. Turning it into some weird wank is also stupid.

Yeah. No. I'm out.

[(Anonymous)]

Also, Megan is a divorcée herself.

We had a Royal abdicate over marrying an American divorcée not that long ago...

[(Anonymous)]

that's not fully explained by differences in their actions, and the simplest, most probable explanation is that race plays a major role in that difference.

Hard disagree.