Sir Kenneth Olisa: Conversations about a baby’s skin color happen everywhere

Buckingham Palace has blatantly called on their political allies to publicly come to the defense of King Charles and his alleged racism. It’s crazy that we’re here – Omid Scobie’s Endgame came out last week, and only the Dutch edition carried the “names” of the two people who allegedly had “concerns” about how dark the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s children would be. The names were written by Meghan in a letter to then-Prince Charles in 2021. According to the Dutch mistranslation, the names recorded by Meghan were: Charles and Kate (the current Princess of Wales). Instead of merely shrugging the whole thing off as a publishing/translation snafu, the palace and their press allies have clearly telegraphed that there is some truth to the “mistranslation,” or that those were the names Meghan wrote in her letters to Charles. As Omid Scobie said – and Piers Morgan seemingly half-admitted too – these names have been widely known in British media circles for some time.

Well, as I said, Charles has now called on whatever political ally he can find. There have been several political figures and civil servants coming forward with full-throated character statements about how Charles is the most woke ally ever and he would never say or do anything racist. Not only that, but the palace is waging an adjacent campaign to claim that it’s not even bad or racist to talk about babies’ skin color. Again, as Meghan and Harry have both said, these were not “conversations about what the baby would look like,” there were CONCERNS about how dark the child would be. These palace campaigns are especially disgusting when they’re using any and all Black Britons they can find to speak the palace’s talking points. Speaking of:

King Charles III’s representative in the capital has defended the royals against ‘nonsense’ claims that discussing Archie’s skin colour is racist, declaring: ‘In my family discussing the features of an unborn relative is not just harmless, it is part of the joy of anticipation’. Sir Kenneth Olisa, the first black Lord-Lieutenant of London in the role’s 500-year-old history, has accused critics of failing to keep an ‘open mind’ about what is usually a positive conversation between members of a ‘loving family’.

His comments came after equalities campaigner Sir Trevor Phillips was equally dismissive, declaring: ‘There is no family of colour anywhere in the world where that conversation doesn’t take place’.

Sir Kenneth Olisa told MailOnline: ‘The alleged exchange was private and so none of the rest of us can possibly have a view. However, in my family and in those of my friends and acquaintances, discussing the features of an unborn relative is not just harmless, it is part of the joy of anticipation’.

Sir Kenneth, who was named Britain’s most influential black person in 2016, has repeatedly said he has ‘never once encountered the slightest hint of racism’ in his many years of working with the royals. He believes that if the conversation did take place, many people have been too quick to condemn it as a ‘vulgar, racist question’ – rather a benign, innocent conversation amongst loved ones.

Speaking exclusively to MailOnline after Omid Scobie’s book raised the issue again, Sir Kenneth said: ‘I commented on this nonsense back in 2021 when it first emerged in the Oprah interview. The intervening years haven’t given me any reason to revise my opinion. Quite the opposite. It is a fact that the only way to understand someone’s comment is to know the context and their intention. Therefore, only those who are privy to a conversation can decide how to react’.

As Lord-Lieutenant of London since 2015, Sir Kenneth has accompanied many members of the Royal Family on engagements in London, including Queen Elizabeth II, who appointed him. He represented the Queen in the capital for seven years and is continuing in his role under King Charles III. He has also supported the Prince and Princess of Wales, Prince Harry and his wife the Duchess of Sussex, when she carried out official duties.

[From Daily Mail]

All of these people swearing up and down that they’ve never witnessed Charles doing or saying anything racist has the feel of all of those character witnesses who come out of the woodwork whenever a high-profile man is accused of abuse. “I never saw him abuse anyone” is all well and good, but it doesn’t actually negate the accusation. “The king was never racist around me” is even less believable. The sleight of hand around conversations/concerns about the baby’s skin color is even less slick – again, Harry and Meghan both said that there were “concerns.” Not super-innocent conversations about “how dark do you think the baby will be” (although that’s loaded enough for these colonizers) but actual CONCERNS about the baby’s skin color and what that would “mean.” Prince Archie wasn’t even given royal protection, the palace said nothing as the baby was compared to a monkey and I still find the “smoke in South Africa” story fishy as hell. These were not innocent conversations.

ETA: I did f–k up the names in the headline! Two men are quoted in the Mail piece and I confused myself in the headline – Olisa is the one saying it’s natural to talk about skin color, and Olisa is the man in these photos.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

94 Responses to “Sir Kenneth Olisa: Conversations about a baby’s skin color happen everywhere”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Becks1 says:

    So here, he says “Therefore, only those who are privy to a conversation can decide how to react.”

    So okay. Harry decided how to react, and he found the conversation hurtful enough that he told Oprah he would never say who it was. Meghan said it would be “very damaging” to them.

    This was NOT “will the baby look more like Harry or Meghan?” again – as mentioned in the post – this was CONCERNS about how dark the baby would be “and what that would mean.”

    Nothing about that is innocent anticipation of a baby’s birth.

    • jemmy says:

      @Kaiser – fyi the person walking with Meghan is Sir Kenneth Olisa & not Sir TrevorPhillips( Ex Government Minster for Equality / Inequality

      • Becks1 says:

        both are referenced/quoted in the article.

      • Kingston says:

        Its a natural mistake to make. There you are, faced with 2 black-apologists-for-racists, with both of them on bended knees, asses in the air, busily licking the boots of their betters. Its naturally difficult to differentiate between asses.

    • Taytanish says:

      Don’t you just like when someone comes out and says with all their full chest that “‘There is no family of colour anywhere in the world where that conversation doesn’t take place”? That is crazy!! Yes there are millions of families of color in the world where there’s absolutely no discussions about skin color of any kind, whether out of curiosity of out of racism/colorism/classism. The colonialists brought with them a lot of colorism and classism based on skin tones to my land. The hierarchy, according to them, was they as whites were at the top, then the Asians, (Indians or Pakistanis or Arabs etc) were the next, then the light skin black people were the next and so on and so forth. Beauty and smartness was based on people’s skin tones and thus education opportunities and jobs would also be availed based on people’s skin tones. The whites ruled at the top, those of Asian origins would rule directly under the white man, and then light skin black man would be next in line etc. This is still prevalent in our lands till today, fair skin is beauty, a fairer person is more beautiful than a darker person; so, people maim themselves with skin lighteners to try to make themselves fair etc. And there are lots of people that still discuss how fair their unborn child will be or what skin tone they want their child to be. But NOT EVERY family engages in those kinds of discriminatory convos. Mind you, we have millions of mixed tribe marriages/families where people from tribes that are naturally darker toned marries a someone from a naturally fairer skin tone tribe. But to millions of us a baby is a baby regardless of skin tone and none of us even cares about skin tones, leave alone be “concerned” about what a baby’s dark skin will mean for a certain family. So, to say that ALL families of color in the world discusses their unborn child skin tones is not true at all.

      • Simba"a Mom says:


      • Mel says:

        My Mother is very “color struck”, my husband is light skineed and has gray eyes ( he’s Black), we NEVER entertained any conversation that even had a hint of ” what color would the kids be”. She got her feelings hurt more than a few times. No one has to entertain that and people of color who engage in those kinds of discussions have a colonized mindset. I said what I said.

    • Red Snapper says:

      My best friends mother is white and her dad is from the Caribbean, so my friend is brown and can pass for Native, Latina, and Asian. Her ex husband is blonde blue eyed German and I was legitimately curious about what colour her baby would be and I said so. I’m not embarrassed to admit this because there’s a difference between curiousity and concern. Shame on them

    • Lavinia says:

      This is one of the most interesting articles I have read about all of this, highly recommend, RS Locke is brilliant I think:

    • MoxyLady007 says:

      When we were expecting our two children, my husband and I talked about them. Because we were so excited to see their faces! But it was in a dreamy – why will they look like? I cannot wait to meet them! Will they have hair? My husband was born with a ton of wild black rock star hair. And I was a little baldy.

      It was never with concern or worry or that we didn’t want the baby to have any of our traits. Although I wouldn’t have wanted them to inherit my anxiety for example.

      The royal family did not have these type of excited conversations. They had racist conversations of concern regarding the tainting of their inbred blood line.

    • MoxyLady007 says:

      When we were expecting our two children, my husband and I talked about them. Because we were so excited to see their faces! But it was in a dreamy – why will they look like? I cannot wait to meet them! Will they have hair? My husband was born with a ton of wild black rock star hair. And I was a little baldy.

      It was never with concern or worry or that we didn’t want the baby to have any of our traits. Although I wouldn’t have wanted them to inherit my anxiety for example.

      The royal family did not have these type of excited conversations. They had racist conversations of concern regarding the tainting of their inbred blood line. I said what I said.

      • kirk says:

        The conversations of the holier than thou supremacist rf specifically excluded the soon-to-be mother, Meghan. Why?

  2. Toya says:

    None of those pictures are of Sir Trevor Phillips…

    • Becks1 says:

      Sir Trevor Phillips gave the quote Kaiser paraphrased in the headline. Sir Kenneth Olisa is also quoted in the article and is the one pictured with Meghan.

  3. Sure sure let’s round up the people of color who are willing to say they are not racist around me. It’s always the answer to I’m not a racist I have a black friend. They just keep showing exactly what they are and that is A VERY RACIST FAMILY!!! I’m sure the next picture of Peg we will see is him with a person of color. These idiots are so predictable.

  4. Eurydice says:

    Nitpick, pick, pick. The entire picture in the RF is one of verbal, emotional and physical abuse. From the very beginning, the stories have been that almost everyone in the various palaces hated and was suspicious of Meghan. When Meghan was subjected to outright racist attacks by the press, there was dead silence from the RF. Most of the negative stories in the press were provided by the palaces. H&M were not “loved ones” in the family – and when it comes to conversations about them and their child, none were innocent.

  5. Amy Bee says:

    Kaiser, that’s not Trevor Phillips in the photos. Trevor Phillips is now a Sky news presenter and he wrote a bonkers piece about Archie being a symbol for a united UK when he was born.

  6. MinorityReport says:

    You know what? He’s right. These conversations DO happen everywhere, but…hear me out…colorism is based on white supremacy. In India, China, America, etc., we talk about how dark our Black and brown children will be in the context of hoping they’ll be light skinned and have Caucasian type hair BECAUSE we know and hope that being less dark will help smooth their path in life. It doesn’t negate where this speculation evolved from or the harm it does to dark skinned peoples.

    • sunny says:

      Correct!! 100% correct. Because often proximity to whiteness because of white supremacy does help to smooth the path of their lives. It is a horrible consequence of a racist system.

    • equality says:

      Well put. That’s sad. And proof that just because something commonly happens doesn’t make it right.

    • Mabs A'Mabbin says:

      This is SO accurate. White being the barometer is the problem. Plus it’s really hypocritical since, on a very basic level, white is but a reflector.

    • Becks1 says:

      Thanks for this take – didn’t occur to me before. So its almost two sides of the same white supremacist coin. Nonwhite families are having the “how dark will they be” conversation bc they want them to be lighter because they know it will make their life easier because of colorism and white supremacy. The Windsors would be having the same conversation for similar reasons – not for an easier life but because they would want the baby to be lighter because of racism/white supremacy.

    • ecsmom says:

      Exactly. Let’s apply the same logic here. I have never seen Charles sexually harass a woman in my presence. Besides women are commonly sexually harassed at their workplace.

      None of this is okay

    • Nerd says:

      The conversation was about CONCERNS and HOW IT WOULD LOOK FOR THE ROYAL FAMILY. That is not a normal conversation about curiosity. They were racists conversations. The conversations you described are racists in nature. To make any reference to a persons skin tone being better or worse than someone else’s skin tone is racist. That’s what these people who are trying to make excuses for the royals CONCERNS don’t seem to understand. Being curious about a child’s potential inheritance of a parents facial features or their hair or eye color is one thing, which these conversations were not. Being CONCERNED about what their children’s skin tone will be and questioning HOW THAT WOULD LOOK FOR THE ROYAL FAMILY is a totally different situation (A RACIST SITUATION) and the royals and their black complacent friends are trying to pretend that they are the same thing. They are absolutely not the same thing.

      • SaySo says:

        THIS.THIS. THIS. Want to set up a think tank to figure out what a brown-skinned child would mean for the RF is absolutely where the drama is. The fact that so many people are dancing around this erks me.

    • Christina says:

      Exactly, @MinorityReport. In our family, it’s always been about how hard will the baby have it? In the United States, being light skinned brings advantages because it is a racist society that hasn’t processed it in many corners. The Mexican side of my family was delighted with my blue eyes and white skin, and my indigenous-faced sister was deeply hurt by it. I watched people discriminate against my friends and family while I stood next to them while giving me preferential treatment because they thought I wasn’t with them. My face and skin belong to my mother’s Scottish rapist who came to Los Angeles from Fife in 1967: thanks,

      These men are blanketing their own nests by kissing Charles’ ass.

  7. swaz says:

    Why are people so surprise 🙄🙄🙄THAT FAMILY INVENTED RACISM 😫😫😫

    • Maxine Branch says:

      So agree with your point. How any person of Black descent can stand with those folks and speak this nonsense speaks to how little they think of themselves. If a born Prince who was born into this family was taken aback and hurt because of these conversations is enough. Also agree, that smoky room in South Africa remains highly suspicious to me. Colonizers will always remain true to their past, POC are beneath us and will taint our global image. As if those folks lives are not tainted just from being a part of that colonizing family who currently lives off generation wealth stolen from country’s they colonized.

  8. Brassy Rebel says:

    I can’t believe that this crew of troglodytes can find actual Black men to deflect for them. Claiming there can’t possibly be a racist (who even ever has a random racist thought) in that rotting bunch makes you NOT CREDIBLE by definition.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      To expand on this since I didn’t have time earlier, these Black men are also defending the whole racist royal institution which should shock us all. The monarchy is built explicitly on the concept of inequality. Some people are more valuable, worthy, important (whatever you want to call it) than others with people born “royal” sitting atop the pile. And POC, needless to say, are at the bottom below all white people. Monarchy anchors a hierarchical society where everyone has their place and is expected to know it. This is what these Black men caping for Charles are defending. It’s truly disgusting to see at anytime but utterly mind blowing in the 21st century. Racism is absolutely INTRINSIC to the whole royal concept and institution.

    • Christina says:

      Money. Privilege. Power. That’s the exchange.

  9. SueBarbri33 says:

    I get furious every time I see this little puppet. One of the things that actually really angers me about this whole skin color question issue is….it sounds like the RF actually, genuinely believed that Meghan would have an answer for questions around Archie’s skin tone. That’s what grinds my gears more than anything: are Charles and Kate and William and Camila and whoever else really so sheltered that they believe that Meghan could have said “well, since he’s 3/4 white, Archie will be a light cocoa brown with hair that can be easily straightened…” Or that she’d maybe *assure* them by saying “well, he won’t be as dark as Alexandre in Monaco because I’m not 100% African…”? Do they really think that African ancestry is so bad or different that they believe it doesn’t work like other people’s DNA? It’s not as if having one tall parent and one short parent will always produce medium-height children. That’s so ridiculous I don’t even know how to cope. I woke up angry this morning!

  10. Jane says:

    Context is everything, and it’s what’s missing in all of this. Discussing what a child may or may not look like is not necessarily racist but it could well be, depending on the context. And it’s worth noting that high status people of colour interacting with the royals on prestigious ceremonial occasions such as Sir Kenneth Olisa are not likely to be subjected to racism the way that low(er) status ones such as Ngozi Fulani are.

    • Eurydice says:

      The context here is that a WOC married into the whitest family on the planet and they spent all her time with them trying to get rid of her. In this context any and every conversation about her unborn child was negative.

    • Over it says:

      There is no context needed . These Windsors said what that meant . They were worried about what Meghan the half black woman child would look like next to their all white children on the palace balcony. They didn’t want trooping of the color to involve any other color other than white on that balcony. White is the only color that they want the peasants standing below them and gazing up at them to see . Please don’t even try to justify or make excuses for these plain racist and when black folks come out here to carry water for racist , they set us back further into ever expecting racism to end .

    • Moneypenny424 says:

      Context IS everything. When my black family and I wonder about what a baby’s skin tone might be, it is curiosity because we know a baby can be any shade. The context is not negative (well, it is with some of my older West Indian relatives, because, colonialism).

      The context here is that a racist white family was concerned that the baby would be dark skinned, which they felt was a bad look for them.

  11. Nerd says:

    This POS knows exactly the difference between what was claimed by Harry and Meghan and what the royals and their mouthpieces are trying to twist this into. They weren’t discussing the possible “features” of their future children. They were sharing their CONCERNS about their future children’s skin tone AND how it would look for the royal family. As Harry said in the Anderson Cooper interview there were CONCERNS not a curiosity about the potential skin tone. They were discussing the potential hair color or eye color. They were CONCERNED about children’s potential skin tone and how it would look within the royal family and to the public at large.

    • Jais says:

      Honestly, at this point, it was a kindness that they don’t deserve to blanket the conversation as just “concerns.” I’m convinced if we knew the actual words and details of what was said, it would be bad bad. That said, the royals could say the n-word at this point and the BM would gaslight everyone into thinking it was okay.

  12. Laura D says:

    Oh I’m sure the BRF are very polite to these people to their faces. However, I wonder whether the king would have been so polite to them if one of their daughters married into the family.

    Harry told us that there were ‘concerns’ and no matter how many people the BRF trot out to support the king and his DIL there has not been a shred of evidence to disprove what Harry said. We’ve seen the king take away Harry’s family’s security, cut off finances, and evict them from their home. We’ve witnessed the family being snubbed at more than one major event. They were told they couldn’t christen their little girl at a royal chapel and declined an invitation to her christening in “Overseas.” There is only ONE set of pictures of the king with his mixed race grandson and zero pictures of him with his mixed race granddaughter. The same grandchildren who he hummed and ahhhed about admitting they were entitled to titles the very second he became king.

    Yet, despite of all the damning evidence against the institution these people are still trying to say there is no racism within the BRF. If they really do believe the BRF treat all colours within the family equally then I have a bridge in London I can sell them.


    • MsIam says:

      I second your rant! I saw video the other day on the queen mother and her thoughts on black people and their DNA. She was clearly a white supremacist. Since she was one of Charles mentors I’m not surprised that concerns about Harry and Meghan’s children would be top of mind for him. And no one seems to want to discuss the other part of what Meghan said of how the convention would be changed so the baby would be denied a title and security. What does “Sir” Trevor think of that? I guess will never know.

    • kirk says:

      I have concerns over the color of money that was refunded to H-M when they were kicked out of the cottage they paid for.

    • kirk says:

      I have concerns over the color of money that was refunded to H-M when they were kicked out of the cottage they paid for.

  13. sparrow says:

    I agree with this chap, to an extent. I’ve said it elsewhere – speculation among both sides of a family is joyful. I do wonder however how people keep forgetting “concerns” , which doesn’t align with benign speculation.

    • Jais says:

      Why wonder about how they keep forgetting “concerns”? They’re not forgetting. They’re purposely omitting. They want to convince people that it wasn’t a racist conversation, that it was just joyful speculation, which is absolute bullshit. This is gaslighting 101 and transparent as hell. This was not a joyful conversation between family members. But his comments do absolve the RF and any racist readers at home wondering if they’ve ever said something insensitive to a POC. Spoiler alert. They probably have. So yeah, no, I don’t agree with this chap to any extent.

    • Over it says:

      He said conversations among a loving family. Well sir, the Windsors are not a family and most importantly definitely not a loving family. They are a firm. A poorly managed run racist firm

  14. equality says:

    He ‘never once encountered the slightest hint of racism’? So he has never heard or read about or seen videos of Phil’s “gaffes”? He has never heard about or read about or seen video of remarks Charles has made or times he has failed to support POC in his household? He has paid no attention to video of Will making remarks about delivery people? He is fine with the royals being exempt from employment requirements and the fact that W&K employed only those with pale skin tones? How nice for him that the royals play nice when he is around, but he has no regard for others like Ms Fulani who they haven’t played so nice around? He’s not helping himself out in defending them, and he’s certainly not helping out anyone else who has to deal with them.

  15. Flowerlake says:

    Never speculated about a baby’s skin color and never heard that happen amongst my family/friends either, so no, not everywhere.

    It’s just weird to me.

    Mostly the focus is on the pregnancy itself when I talk with about someone who is expecting and when they’re due etc, not so much on the unborn baby itself yet.

    • equality says:

      Gender. That is usually the focus with most people I know.

    • sparrow says:

      It’s happened to me and my family members, because we are sometimes so different in colouring from spouses etc. I don’t find it offensive, as long as it involves all parties. There was huge speculation with my brother’s wife, who is Scandinavian blonde and we are dark olive, and with my partner who is pretty completely opposite to me. It was just nice and involved everyone. This was obviously not nice and didn’t involve everyone.

      • Laura D says:

        Exactly @sparrow. It’s conveniently forgotten that Meghan (the mother of the king’s future grandchildren) wasn’t included in any of the conversations about the ‘concerns.’ If these were innocent conversations then why didn’t “they” say these things when she was around. “They” might be nice and polite to the faces of the likes of Trevor Phillips and Kenneth Olisa and they may even drop them the occasional fancy title. However, from what we’ve seen, god help any of them (and their children) if they had the misfortune to marry into that awful family.

  16. Amy Bee says:

    Ken Olisa also said that the Queen believed in BLM….Anyway, if Meghan and Harry thought that the conversations were only curiosity, they would not have talked about it and it wouldn’t have been problematic. But anyone who has “concerns” about a baby’s skin tone is worried that the baby will be too dark. I’ll add that the “concerns” probably were also about Harry having a baby with Meghan. I don’t believe that Charles wanted Harry to marry Meghan nor did he want mixed race grandchildren.

    • equality says:

      Maybe she did or maybe she didn’t believe in BLM. Is there proof out there? If she never publicly supported what use is her “belief”?

      • Amy Bee says:

        I don’t believe that the Queen was aware anything that her staff didn’t tell her. The courtiers would not be talking about BLM.

  17. Kate says:

    What’s really shocking to me is how the RF thinks any of the avenues they are taking is helpful to them. Of all times (from a PR perspective) to “never complain, never explain” this would be it. Omid Scobie is saying there was a translation error and the names were never in the book, and if the media didn’t keep fanning the fire it would likely quiet down if the media were to focus on it being a translation error and leave the rest alone. It’s incredible how incompetent their strategists are.

  18. Lurker M says:

    OK enough is enough, let’s disabuse everyone (especially That Family and their little minions) of the notion that they aren’t racist. It is Racist full stop, period!!!

    I’m not having this debate they and the BM are trying to use to muddy the water, distract and confuse.

    IT IS RACIST, freaking acknowledge it and apologize, all this bulls**t explanation just makes me think they’re Racist as hell.

    Granted the explanation isn’t for the Black diaspora or even Black British it’s to soothe the conscious of White people so they don’t feel bad about their casual Racism let alone the blatant Racism.

    I’m glad she came home and I’m glad those babies will never be around those RACIST a** holes, lord knows what would have happen behind closed doors to them.

  19. Lili says:

    So every one now wants to discount Harry and Meghan’s thoughts and feelings if you weren’t there and know the context they were living in when the concerns were raised you need to step off. They were living in a hostile environment and the perpetrators are still being hostile. Which is what makes this all the more unsavoury

  20. Vanessa says:

    If a black person marry into a white family and the family sit around discussing how dark the child will be it’s racist. The fact that the royal family is running around try to say it wasn’t racist and get their band of hired people of color to defend and explained away why what Charles and Kate said it’s not racist shown that it was completely racist vile discussion. As a black woman its so disgusting to see how some people of color are willing to over look the mistreatments of Meghan and will defend the royal family knowing full well how they feel and how they treated black peoples .

    • Ciotog says:

      The Windsors are not a family of color, so the defense doesn’t even make sense. I’m sure that Harry and Meghan talked about their future children lovingly, wondering about who they might favor, but then again they can actually claim to be a family of color.

  21. Chichi says:

    Isn’t this the same guy that once said the UK was “sleeping into segregation” because minorities like to live in ghettos? Or something to that effect… come on.

  22. lanne says:

    Who didn’t predict that the next thing they would do is claim that “concerns about how dark a baby will be” is not racist. In a country that, according to the Tory government, has no racism?

    This makes me sad for POC in the UK. How many people will have to grit their teeth and listen to conversations at work where white people decide whether or not something is racist or not? Or get dragged into conversations where they’re asked to “prove” that XYZ is racist or not.

    All this tells me is that the royals had no intention, and have no intention, of allowing anyone nonwhite into their royal line. Harry is being “punished” for bringing Meghan into the family and Meghan is being “punished” for daring to believe she could actually belong.

    The royals are showing the whole world who they are. It’s time people start believing them. No benefit of the doubt when it comes to race. The only purpose of black people is either to clean up after them, or function as background props to aggrandize whatever ridiculous idea about themselves they are espounding. Black people are not equals. Not peers. They are employees, or grateful supplicants. Or fashion accessories. (oh look how daring that royal is, wearing kente cloth!). It’s vile.

  23. Lurker M says:

    Also they don’t get to determine what is or isn’t Racist.

    Just the audacity of it all to tell a Black person what they are experiencing, feeling or dealing with is not Racist.

    We know, usually can’t believe it and if we’re telling you it’s so the next person doesn’t have to deal with your nonsense

  24. Cel2495 says:

    Nah is not normal to ask a biracial couple about the skin color or their future children. It’s racist in every single conversation or context. That family is racist plain and simple and they have always been.

  25. VilleRose says:

    Conversations about a child’s appearance happen before a baby is born, sure. I know some biracial couples but I didn’t think to ever ask them what skin color their future children may or may not have. I’m sure expecting biracial couples talk about it but they’re allowed to, it’s their own baby.

    Harry and Meghan have never framed the conversation as innocent curiosity, they made it sound like the people asking had serious concerns about what would happen if the babies were dark. The BRF being a 1000 year old institution with most of its wealth being amassed through colonialism and oppression–there’s no way that none of them didn’t have “this is going to taint our royal blood” thoughts. There’s a reason people love Bridgerton so much–not only for the attractive people and swoony storylines, but because there is no way on Earth that the “Great Experiment” of having a Black Queen marry a white King would ever have happened and we like the fantasy idea that Shonda Rhimes introduced to us. But it sadly isn’t real and was never going to be real. The BRF rejected Meghan and Archie, they rejected Ngozi Fulani. William will regret his “We are very much not a racist family” outburst.

  26. Roseberry says:

    Trevor Phillips is also a black man, of Caribbean heritage. When he was plain Trevor Phillips, he was widely discredited by the black community for holding “misguided and dangerous “ views about race and was eventually thrown out of the Labour Party. He joined Sky news in a regular weekend slot to further platform his increasingly right wing views- and wouldn’t you know it, he got a knighthood!! He’s being incredibly disingenuous and should know better, his wife being of mixed Iranian heritage as well.
    In conversations about baby’s skin colour, context is everything, I’m from the Caribbean, when I took a DNA test I got back a wonderful pie chart with 12 different colours representing the different countries/ethnic groups in my heritage. Of course we have loving family conversations about who and what a new baby might look like- certainly none of us siblings look alike ranging from skin colour, eye colour, hair colour and texture!
    I imagine the conversation amongst the lily white royals went nothing like ours and probably included phrases like “can you imagine” , “what if he looked like his grandmother “, “supposing he had an Afro “ !!!

  27. Over it says:

    I guess December is call up a tilted black month to defend our racist assesses. When will my fellow black folks finally remove their heads from up their former colonizers asssessss and admit that this isn’t okay . Concerns about how black a child will be is not the same as wondering if he will have his mother brown eyes or his father red hair . . I am ashamed to see people my color act this way for these slave upholders.

  28. kelleybelle says:

    More “we’re not racist” BS, gotcha. It was CONCERN, and WHY should it have been concerning? Because you’re all racists! They’re tripping all over themselves trying to lie to defend this lame-assed airhead. Jesus Christ.

  29. LeahTheFrench says:

    “The first black Lord-Lieutenant of London in the role’s 500-year-old history”. I mean… The cognitive dissonance is that article is mind-blowing. It took 500 years for the institution that is the Monarchy to nominate someone non-white to this position – who is “the personal representative of the monarch”, according to wikipedia – but apart from that, no racism to be worried about with royals.

  30. Nerd says:

    So what they are saying is that it was definitely Kate and possibly even Charles who had multiple conversations stating their CONCERN about the potential skin tone of their children, but they want us to believe that being CONCERNED and worrying about HOW IT WOULD LOOK LIKE FOR THE ROYAL FAMILY, isn’t racists but what normal none racists people discuss all of the time? That is total BS and it was absolutely RACIST. And anyone who gives examples of experiences they have had with the same situation or know of someone who has experienced that ARE DESCRIBING RACISM. Racism isn’t just the obvious use of the N word. It is also showing a fear, CONCERN and narrow minded view of POC, among a host of other examples of racism. I only question if it was Charles since he was the one who initially wrote Meghan asking her for the names so it wouldn’t make sense if he was one of the two racists having these talks with Harry. I believe the other racists was actually William, but the media are using the poor translation to say it was him and protect the future of the monarchy, William who is willing to do their bidding. These conversations about CONCERNS and questions about HOW IT WOULD LOOK LIKE FOR THE ROYAL FAMILY were RACIST. If these conversations were innocent why then did the RF and their media friends claim for two and a half years that these conversations never happened and that Harry and Meghan lied about there ever being conversations about race? If the conversations were so innocent why lie for this long instead of describing the innocence of the conversations? They protest too much and their refusal to acknowledge any of the clear racism Meghan, Archie and Lili have faced in the media, friends and their social media makes this all BS.

  31. Mary Pester says:

    Methinks the pillocks doth protest TO MUCH, they had to trot out all these people of colour to try and pump up Charlie and keen but isn’t it funny that they all say it’s natural to ask, but none of them actually talk about the word “CONCERNED”, like we all know, the devil is in the detail!!

    • Jais says:

      Exactly @mary pester. They are protesting way way
      too much. It just makes it more obvious that RF members did in fact say some really racist shit. And honestly, Kate Middleton clearly didn’t like Meghan. Camilla Tominey has been telling us for days that she didn’t. So why is Kate discussing the skin color of a baby who’s mom she clearly despises? A woman she didn’t even want to share her chapstick with. Kate never ever needed to say a word about Meghan’s baby’s skin color. Neither did William Charles or Camilla.

      • Mary Pester says:

        @JAIS, your right lovey, it should never have been a point of discussion!! It just shows the “we are so much MORE than you” mentality. All the rota comming out in force are actually proving the Royals have sooooo much more to hide. How I would love Harry and Megan to start dropping FULL receipts, including Kates note. Then let’s see a real meltdown by the paps!!

    • SenseOfTheAbsurd says:

      Like we can’t see that this false narrative of loving family curiosity and anticipation depends on ignoring the part where it happened in the context of a years-long vicious racist hate campaign against Meghan, in which the gang of inbreds and the media were in cahoots.

  32. Tursitops says:

    Someone should deftly inflict the Socratic method on these people. I’m not guaranteeing that it will work, but it might.

    Rationale Person: Racist Kate, how would you feel if someone were positing that your child might be too lightly-toned to fit into the family?
    Racist Kate: But that doesn’t make any sense. No one has a problem with light-skinned people. Only dark skin is a concern.
    Rationale Person: Exactly.

    It’s sometimes necessary to turn the conversation around and confront the transgressors with the opposite scenario to show them how absurd their positions are.

  33. Gabby says:

    How many more pompous old men are going to pop up to lecture us on what is and what is not racist? It’s like a Whack-A-Mole game, and I have my mallet ready.

  34. Kingston says:

    “Sure-but would you let your daughter marry one?”
    [Dreams From My Father by President Obama]

    That, right there, is what Harry faced and what greeted M the moment he brought her into that moribund cult.

    President Obama describes this phenomenon quite aptly in his book, Dreams From My Father, leading up to the union of his white mother and black father in 1960 America.

    The royalracists apparently are out in their numbers today, surrounded-by-black-people-to-show-how-not-racists-they-are, and trying desperately to make sane onlookers believe that this age-old question which rears its head, either subtly or boldly, in every white household with a history of racism, did not form the basis of their instinctive rejection of M when Harry brought her into that institution…..,even long before they realized he was serious about her and that she was “the one.”

    “Yes, but would you let your [white] son/daughter marry one?”

    Interestingly, while a similar question is sometimes asked in black families when a white potential spouse is introduced, the question is usually underlaid by fear and anxiety on the part of the black family for the discrimination that they KNOW the couple will face in a white-majority population.

    Every black person with a measure of self-esteem should cringe at the vulgar, nakedly shameless display of “we have black friends” or “see, we can socialize/be friends with black people” which is the go-to response by the monumentally cretinous racistroyals and the troglodytes that advise them.

    Bully did it right after the Oprah interview when he and kkkHATE went walking with some poor beseiged black woman; and a plant in the group of onlookers blurted out: “sir are the royal family racists?” (or words to that effect.) Which gave Bully the perfect opportunity to say the words his handlers told him to be sure to utter on that engagement: “We’re definitely NOT a racist family,” with the unspoken part being: see, we’re allowing this black woman to walk with and breathe the same air as us! So how can we be racists against black people?

    Chuycky, cowmilla, bully, kkkHATE, sofiesta and to a lesser extent pooredward….They. All. Do. It.

    Do they seriously believe we dont know that they single-mindedly campaigned against M from the get go?

  35. Square2 says:

    After really started paying attention to what happened in Britain & what’s the real BRF & BM in the past several years; I’m no longer shocked that highly accomplished black & POC Britians are defending the RF, ignoring racism in the Firm, dismissed Meghan’s treatment during her stay in Britain.

    After all, these Sirs, Dames, or _BMs want to keep their “hard-earn” power, position & privileges. Now I’m just disappointed in these people when article like this shown up (especially in the Academic world). I’ve stopped watching some TV shows (eg. Stargazing), listening songs because of the principles’ view on racism.

    I mean, darn it, personal integrity means nothing to these people.

  36. Lauren says:

    The more the royals protest the more I’m beginning to think they might just be vile racists

  37. Genetics are crazy and fascinating and it’s okay to have curiosity and wonder what a baby might look like. Of course if you loved and cared about someone, your curiosity wouldn’t be based on a concern of how it looks for your family.

    The conversation that should have taken place:
    Regardless of what their future kids might look like, they will face racism in their life. The entire conversation should have been about how to protect the kids from it.

  38. J.ferber says:

    Personally, I’ve never had such a discussion in my life. I’d consider it racist and offensive. But not in Opposite World, I guess, where the very first speculation would naturally be about the skin color of a newborn.

  39. Saucy&Sassy says:

    They can do all of this performative stuff, but there are so many racist columns of print that the brf never said a word about. Nothing. The picture that was published saying something about the royal baby going home and showing a chimp dressed up can never be whitewashed. In the US we have lots of issue surrounding race and particularly with the MAGA group, but I would be astonished if anyone here would not see that photo as blatant racism. No one in the brf said one thing condemning the person who put that out there or the actions of the media publishing it. In the face of media racism, silence is complicity.

    H&M made it clear that there were concerns about the color of Archi’s skin. CONCERNS. Tell me again that you’re not racist

  40. blunt talker says:

    To have concerns about the baby’s skintone is not the same as saying who the baby will look-concern means there were certain royal family members thought a darkskin baby would cause a problem especially when photos were taken and given to the public to look at-they were trying to stress this to Harry before he was married and after Meghan became pregnant with Archie-the royalist who compared Archie to a monkey was thinking along the same lines.

  41. bisynaptic says:

    Sir Kenneth Olisa, the first black Lord-Lieutenant of London in the role’s 500-year-old history—

  42. Well Wisher says:

    Who decides what is considered natural??