Of course we’re getting more quotes from the Duchess of Sussex’s conversation with Gloria Steinem. We discussed the preview yesterday, where Meghan and Gloria were speaking in more general terms about the need for young women to really get out to vote this year. But it looks like the conversation got more specific about feminism and about Kamala Harris and what it feels like to have a mixed race woman on the ticket. Some highlights:
On Prince Harry’s feminism: Meghan saw The Glorias, a film about Steinem’s life, and she said as she’s gotten older she’s come to understand “it’s not mutually exclusive to be a feminist and be feminine.” Steinem then replied, “Well, you can be a feminist and be masculine and a guy.” “Like my husband!” Meghan said. “I love that when he just came in he said, ‘You know that I’m a feminist too, right Gloria?! It’s really important to me that you know that.’ ”
On how Harry is a great feminist example for Archie: “I look at our son and what a beautiful example that he gets to grow up with a father who is so comfortable owning that as part of his own self-identification. That there’s no shame in being someone who advocates for fundamental human rights for everyone, which of course includes women.” Steinem added, “And also that he is a nurturing father. Because then your son will grow up knowing it’s OK to be loving and nurturing.” “Well said,” Meghan replied. “I know it’ll mean a lot to him when I share that.”
On Kamala Harris: “I’m so excited to see that kind of representation. You know, for me, being biracial, growing up, whether it was a doll or a person in office, you need to see someone who looks like you in some capacity. As many of us believe, you can only be what you can see.”
Harry was actually self-identifying as a feminist for years before he met Meghan. I remember Harry going on international tours solo and adding in events with women’s groups and using his speeches to talk about the rights of girls and women and how men need to stand up for the rights of girls and women. He was on that path and walking the walk before he even met Meghan. I agree with her about Kamala Harris, even though that sounded awfully close to an endorsement! As a half-Indian woman, it’s amazing to see someone with a similar background on a national ticket. I never really thought I would see it.
Photos courtesy of Instagram, Avalon Red and Backgrid.
Do it Meg! Get political! Endorse Biden and Harris. Be woke as you possibly can be. With Black people being systematically killed, who the hell cares about the petty outrages of Piers Morgan and Dan Wooton?
well said!
Amen to that sister!
Harry was celebrated in list of top 10 Male feminists in the Torygraph in 2013. That was before he married a mixed race American and the media decided he was emasculated and p-whipped.
Meghan said she was excited about the representation of Harris [as a POC nominee] similar to how the Queen & Sophie have talked about more women represented in politics. Although yes think we can guess who she’s NOT voting for for president.
I’m not American but I thought talking Meghan about voting suppression with Stacy Abrams was more ‘political’ & more like something to make the palace uneasy. I know there will be lots of briefing in time for this weekend‘s papers
That’s an interesting fact. It also shows how racism affects the way people perceive things. He was a celebrated feminist when he dated white girls, but now he is “emasculated and p-whipped”. Somehow the “I-don’t-see-colour” crowd always end up seeing the negative side of pretty normal, random acts/events when people of colour are involved.
*Just edited to add that the palace should mind their own business.
@ Arbritguest, she spoke to Stacey Abrams, because she has a nonprofit organisation, that fights Voter Suppression. We all know which side Meghan is anyway, because she had a life before Harry. You are right, those rotten rotas will make a huge song and dance about it, come; Sat and Sunday.
He opened the Nepal Girls’ Summit in March 2016. Rebecca English was a royal correspondent accompanying the Nepal tour for the Daily Mail. Her report of 23rd March – ‘He’s very brave’: An emotional Prince Harry high fives a little boy who has had six toes amputated as he meets burns victims during a tour of a Kathmandu hospital’ is worth a read. It includes some of his opening speech at the Girls’ Summit.
“we need to acknowledge that so many countries and cultures are failing to protect the opportunities of young women and girls in the way they do for boys. I believe it is vitally important for men like me to acknowledge this as loudly and openly as role models do like President Bhandari, the US First Lady Michelle Obama and activists like Malala. As the First Lady has said, change needs to come from the bottom up. We won’t unlock these opportunities for young women and girls unless we can change the mind-set of every family and community. To achieve this, it cannot just be women who speak up for girls”.
The comments below that report are also worth a read. They include several making comparisons with the Cambridges.
I think he joined in that Emma Watson thing didn’t he? Anyway, yes he was identifying as a feminist years before he met Meghan, though I am sure she will be “blamed” for this. If it were me, I would use the word “credited”. But I know we live in the real world.
The only people who would “blame” Meghan for her husband believing that women and girls are equal to males are garbage people. Frankly I would be surprised if it registers at all.
I love that they continue to leave a trail of good work behind them–they let their actions speak for them, and the contrast between those actions and what is written about them by the Brit tabs is so remarkable, people can’t help but notice. They left an all-talk, no walk environment and now watch them go.
She cant.Not yet.Harry and Meghan are still restrained by BRF.
What are they going to do? Kick her out? Force her into exile? Smear her in the press? Those ships have already sailed.
Harry was def openly feminist years before Meghan, which is great.
I have to say though, I find it such a sad statement on the state of our world that men still get lauded and praised for identifying as feminists – like, congrats on meeting the baseline for being a decent human being and recognizing me as a whole person with rights???
At this point, I’ll take it. We’ve lost decades of progress in four years. It was only in 2014 that I realised that right wing politics were gaining lots of traction among young people. It was actually a topic on feminism that drew my attention to this issue. In 2016, I was the only person in my circle to believe that Hillary would lose. Everyone thought, no way would the US vote for such a conman. Alas.
oh I’ll take it too, but it’s just kind of sad to me that we are so thrilled to accept basic acknowledgments of our humanity from men, ya know?
It’s really sad. I mean now, we even have women saying that only the head of the household should vote. I feel like I went to sleep and woke up in another timeline.
And weird to assume all or even most heads of households are men.
I feel like even though my husband makes more money than me because he works full time and I work part time, everyone in my house views me, the wife/mother, as the head of household. Even the dog—when he needs to be let out or fed, he comes to me, even if that means standing outside a closed bathroom door when my husband and kid are actually closer to the back door or the kitchen. My husband relies on/defers to me about the family calendar and social visits and what we’re doing this weekend or for this holiday or birthday. My son comes to me when he wants permission to buy something or go somewhere. I make the decisions about which dentist, doctor, pediatrician, and orthodontist we all go to. I’m in charge of our money and budget, and my other family members ask me if we have enough money to buy this thing, or upgrade this, or fix this, or go on this trip. My husband and son both do their share of the housework, shopping, and cooking/feeding themselves, I’m not saying I do everything myself, but I’m the person who came up with the chore list and wrote the grocery list, I’m the general Director of the family. And I feel like that’s true of a lot of women. We are generally very much the head of the household even when we are living with a male partner.
So while the idea of “only the head of household gets to vote” is undemocratic and stupid to begin with, it’s also so bizarre/backwards to me that other women still even consider their husband to automatically be the head of household, when if they were to add up all of the physical, mental, and emotional labor contributions they make to keep the household running smoothly, and compare it to what their husband/male partner does, they would generally come out ahead. Why do you think lifelong bachelor or widower men always had a sister, older daughter, niece, or housekeeper move in with them? Because the men couldn’t take care of themselves, their household, or their own children on their own. You often hear of widows or never married women living alone or together with another woman, but you would rarely hear of a single man of any age living completely on his own, managing his own household. I don’t think you can be the Head of Household if you aren’t able to survive and manage the household on your own without a woman there to help out.
Yes, the concept would not even work in my society as we are matriarchal, so it’s the women that would get to vote and very few men
@Myra, you said, “I feel like I went to sleep and woke up in another timeline.” I completely agree with this and it’s so disorienting. Didn’t it feel for like a minute there that things were improving a little on many different fronts? Then it all went to %%$## and I don’t understand if I was just naive, or we really took a great, big, giant step backwards.
I want to wake up now, please!
To me, these are the kind of conversations that Meghan and Harry want to be having, and part of the reason being full time royals left them feeling unfulfilled. I think they want to make a marked difference in areas they truly care about.
Let the Cambridge’s call out the bingo numbers and hang out at Amner Hall. (Not that supporting seniors isn’t important, but you know what I mean)
It’s crazy to me that Meg is so non controversial but everything she does is so out of line and terrible according to British tabloids.
This is going to get some people mad (as usual)
G: “And also that he is a nurturing father. Because then your son will grow up knowing it’s OK to be loving and nurturing”…
M: “I know it’ll mean a lot to him when I share that.”
—I wish more men in parental/caregiving/authority/mentor positions felt like this. And not just accept the idea that women are naturally nurturing and men are not.
ITA My partner is an excellent cook. The womxn in his maternal family are as well! So I think he would have always appreciated good food. However, his father cooked as much as his mother did when he was little. His dad would bake break and make him school lunches. His father choices normalised cooking as an act of nourishment & joy regardless of gender.
I’ve been with so many men LOVED my cooking. However they’d rarely think to cook for me or… even just express gratitude by doing the dishes. Or help me carry groceries home.
I get that not everyone likes to cook. I’ve just met so many cis men who have no idea how to nurture themselves or others with simple domestic tasks. The ones who do tend to either have had loads of therapy. Or there were positive role models like uncles and dads that supported their mama instead of undermining her.
@marcelmarcel genuine question, why do you spell Women as Womxn, but men as men? Should they both not be womxn and mxn, or women and men?
@mynameisPearl I spell womxn the way I do because it decentralises men/man in the word that describes AFAB people. It comes from the intersectional feminism and is meant to be inclusive of BiPoc womxn, trans womxn and non binary folk. I love it because I think it’s fairly easy to understand I’m referring to AFAB people. Even for readers unfamiliar with the ongoing dialogues about intersectional feminism, decolonisation & queer theory.
I continue to spell men the way I do because it makes sense. Of course AMAB people can centred in a word made to describe them. If a trans man asked me to spell the word differently I’d happily do so. But nothing I’ve come across in my readings or conversations with others imply that AMAB people are uncomfortable with the traditional spelling of men/man.
I think everyday language can be an important tool in activism. Because using inclusive language can allow us express our frustration with the toxic Eurocentric patriarchy.
Anyhow I hope that answers your question ☺️ I realise it’s a long message but I wanted to clearly explain my reasoning.
Out of curiousity, Marcel Marcel, in conversation you just say ‘women’? Every time I read womxn it sounds different in my head. I can’t think what you would use in spoken English that doesn’t have that connotation, though.
@Thirty Nine yeah I just pronounce it the traditional way. Cuz as you say there’s no alternative pronunciation that’s universally understood (to the best of my knowledge). I been use the phrase AFAB depending on who I’m talking to. Like if English is someone’s second language I don’t want to be a snob and use new terminology that hasn’t entered the mainstream. So in that situation I’ll use a phrase like trans sisters to show my support of trans womxn.
If I’m calling out a racist I tend to use the most specific & simple phrasing possible. It gives them less room to go on toxic generalised tangents.
Since language is so contextual I think it’s fun to just adjust terminology to fit a situation. (Aside from hate speech which is always unacceptable).
Anyhow I probably replied too late for you see this. I just find the uses of language fascinating so it was a thought provoking question.
It is so weird how people turn the word ‘feminist’ when the basic meaning is equality.
People working against something will always find a way to turn a word (or anything) into a negative to suit their purpose.
As we’ve said, Harry had done the work before meeting Meghan, but people keep saying this change was all because of her. Folks were just not willing to listen and believe Harry when he stated his truths. You can see their shared beliefs are what attracted Meghan to Harry.
If Harry wasn’t already better than he was when younger, I don’t think Meghan would have fallen in love with him. Actually, I don’t think the Harry from years past would have fallen in love with Meghan either. I think he’s been doing the work on himself for some years now and by the time he met Meghan it all fell into place and rather than change Harry, Meghan’s presence has only supported the changes he himself made.
We know he’s been in therapy. Maybe part of that therapy was “my family is this, I’m that and they’re telling me I HAVE to be this but I’m not so who am I and how do I be me”…and one of the first things my councilor did was have me complete a values circle. I still base my life decisions on that values circle. Once values, morals and principles are out in your opened heart and mind, it’s hard to go backwards. And then…he met Meghan, a woman who has lived her life openly with a strong work ethic, values, morals and principles in ACTIONS not words and BINGO….he’s hers for life.
@Prayer Warrior, you are correct. It’s hard to go back once you’ve learned those hard lessons and I think you are right, this is probably what happened to Harry.
There seems to be a pretty low bar for what constitutes “work”. This is cringey to me – how did this turn into being about Harry? He shouldn’t have inserted himself into this – it doesn’t add anything to the conversation.
I think “did the work” here is referring to going through therapy to work on mental/emotional health issues, trauma recovery, etc. I don’t think it’s primarily about his learning about the importance of feminism and advocating for women & girls (though he did that, too).
Boy, did the point miss you by a mile. The point is that feminism is for everyone and SHOULD involve everyone.
I might be going against the grain here, but I think it’s smart for them not to endorse Biden/Harris now, and not because of restraints from the BRF. It appears they want to work with social programs and charitable work, not political work. A lot of these issues have become political but weren’t previously. Think of climate change for a good example, and immigration used to be apolitical believe it or not. In the US when you go political no matter which side almost 50% of the people discount you as the wrong political side and lose the message. Now I realize at least 30-40% people, specifically the right, are just bats-hi* crazy and unreachable, but there is a portion which isn’t. I do think it’s a good idea to speak to the ones in the middle, and the ones who are apolitical now cause they are just sick of the whole mess. I realize others are going to say you should be full in, but at this point I’m just exhausted from it. It’s odd, I have perhaps done more in terms of donating, distributing campaign material and just being involved for Biden and the democrats than I have for any candidate ever. However, if I was asked if I was enthusiastic about this election I would say no. Partly because Biden is milk toasty, but mostly because I’m tired of all the drama. I want milk toast for a few years after all this crap. Then there is the shell shock of 2016, and until we have a definitive winner who is not a Trump, I don’t think I’m going to feel comfortable again. Now my final reason why I don’t think the Sussexes endorsing Biden/Harris is a good thing is celebrity endorsements don’t work. If they did we would be saying Madam President now. It’s obvious what they think we don’t need an endorsement.
Agree with your points overall, but unless Meghan and Harry does something that pleases most right wingers (e.g. loudly praising SAHMs etc), their main audience will always be liberals/left wingers, or rather, right wingers will continue to hate them. Even then, they won’t even show support unless liberal start piling on them for being problematic. Many of them already discounted them the moment they spoke about climate change and feminism.
Obviously from a PR perspective I would like to see them more on a apolitical side but as you said, a lot of issues in the US are political. I’m from Asia and things like climate change are already accepted as fact ages ago!
There are so many wonderful comments here so far and I second them all.
WhatI love about Harry and Meghan as a couple is that they were fully formed individuals when they met. As Harry kept trying to point out as he was leaving the UK, Meghan remained the same person he fell in love with. Neither of them drastically altered who they were for each other. They recognized they were kindred spirits and could be an incredible team. And so they are!
(Quick shout out to JA Lowcountry Lady. I haven’t seen you post in awhile and I hope you’re well and thriving. Thanks for being so kind to me when I started posting.)
@Guestwithcat
I wholeheartedly agree. And I think they’re such a good team cause they carry the same values and it was just strengthened in each of them when they got together. They are so powerful in that way. And to insecure ppl, that self-assurance is like, threatening to them or something. It’s quite sad. But H & M are thriving and hopefully more at peace now.
Whether she endorses Biden/Harris or not is besides the point. We know who Meghan is and we know that Meghan doesn’t support Trump or anything the current GOP stands for. She doesn’t need to spell that out. She’s an advocate for women, always has been and encouraging the female vote is part of her advocacy. All she has to do is continue to encourage women voting, speak of what women gain with political involvement and she’s doing her work.
So true. We already know Meghan doesn’t stand for anything Trump does. She doesn’t have to say “I’m voting for Biden/Harris”. We know she is.
Harry being a feminist was one of the things that attracted Meghan to him, I’m pretty sure.
I support Meghan’s acknowledgement of the groundbreaking & culturally resonant moment that Kamala’s VP nomination represents. The fact is historic, and if the-thousand-years-of-tradition folks think history is too political, they can just stuff it with their hypocrisy. I prefer that Meghan doesn’t endorse anyone. Her work speaks for itself; it’s so important to inspire voting and stand against voter suppression. Go Meghan and Harry, always ready and doing the work.
Yes Harry was a feminist before he met Meghan. He was a proper representative of the BRF and along with Meghan would be missed as a progressive senior member.
Kaiser:
I hoped months ago when she dropped out that he would choose Kamala Harris. Similar to Barack Obama, she is a transformational figure and I literally cried a few tears of joy when he named her to be his running mate.
Here’s to you and all of the women out there who get shit done and just wanna see someone who represents doing the work of running our country. 🙂
Harry has always said all people male or female should be represented as equals in public and private-Meghan did mention back in 2018 that Harry supports feminism-then I knew what attractions began to shape for them-Harry wants women/girls to be the best human they can be and not be put down because they are female-their work should have equal value and respect. My hats are off to the Sussexes for this viewpoint-in today’s world it is greatly needed-I did not know Harry was recognized in 2013 for his work on women’s rights and progress. So anybody saying Meghan changed him-a big fat lie-he was already there.