As someone who has travelled extensively and worked abroad, I know a thing or two about being an outsider.  You’d think being gay would be an issue, but I’ve found foreigners tend to be biased against Americans.  I thought about this during Meghan and Harry’s interview with Oprah.  Nobody mentioned that the Brits could have troubles with her being a Yank…to say nothing of being a divorcée or an “actress” (well, an actress from the USA Network).  The problem is because she’s black – or black-ish.  That’s the heart of every slight.  I counter that hypothesis with two words – Princess Diana.  Di had problems with the royal family and the press – more than Meghan – but there was never a more Caucasian person.  Except, perhaps, Fergie – and I don’t recall anyone in the royal family jumping to her defense when the paparazzi captured that toe-sucking incident.  Frankly, I think being disliked is par for the course when it comes to royal in-laws.  Aside from Kate…but that’s another kettle of fish.

I completely believe that someone queried about the possible skin color of Harry and Meghan’s child.  Thanks to Whoopi Goldberg, I’ve now learned that this topic comes up virtually every time an interracial couple has a child.  Of course, context is everything – and that remains a mystery.  Racial prejudice was also presented as the reason why Archie is not a prince.  But that isn’t the case – as Harry and Meg well know.  The issuance of titles was formally put into place by George V in 1917.  Basically, the further down you are in the line of succession, the fewer perks.  This includes titles, and security is limited to working senior royals.  When Harry was “the spare” (third in line for the crown, after Charles and William), he was important.  Now that he’s sixth (and living in America)… not so much.  Yes, QEII could make an exception – as she did with William and Kate’s kids.  Only George was obliged to be a prince.  Charlotte and Louis probably got titles to avoid any sibling rivalry.