On Friday, the Sussexes’ spokesperson confirmed that the Duchess of Sussex would travel to Geneva, Switzerland over the weekend. The photos in this post are from Sunday, where Meghan made a speech, inaugurating the Lost Screen Memorial. The Lost Screen Memorial is something Prince Harry and Meghan created in concert with their Archewell Philanthropies and The Parents’ Network, and it highlights the young people who have died because of social media. Meghan wore a sedate, wide-legged Armani pantsuit and her hair was slicked back. After she spoke, she spent time with some of the families who flew in for the event.
Meghan Markle is in Switzerland to send a global message about safer digital spaces. The Duchess of Sussex, 44, stepped out in Geneva on Sunday, May 17, for an event debuting the Lost Screen Memorial in Geneva’s Place des Nations, ahead of the opening of the 79th World Health Assembly. She was joined there by World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus (whom she previously joined on a trip to Jordan with Prince Harry earlier this year), global health leaders and families affected by online harm to see the illumination of 50 lightboxes, each displaying the lock screen image of a child who lost their life as a result of online violence and digital harm.
At the ceremony, Meghan paid tribute to the children remembered in the installation and underscored the urgent need for stronger global protections for children online. She began her speech by stating that safe online spaces are “not simply a technology issue,” but a “public health issue.”
“Behind me stands The Lost Screen Memorial,” she continued, referencing the photos and names of 50 children who died by suicide as a result of online bullying and digital harm. “Each name belonged to a child who was loved beyond measure. A child whose laughter once filled a kitchen. Whose shoes once waited by a front door. Whose future once felt limitless. Now their faces ask the world questions we can no longer avoid: How many more millions of children will be harmed by products that, while innovative, are still designed without sufficient safeguards?” Meghan asked the crowd.
The Duchess of Sussex went on to compare the dangers of online spaces to other widely recognized public safety concerns, noting that governments and policymakers have long intervened to protect children in those other areas.
“We did not tell parents to create their own seatbelts. We did not ask children to test unsafe medicine. We did not shrug at poisoned water or defective toys and call it the price of progress,” she said. “We acted. And now the world must act again.”
She urged the global community to take action, stating that the threat to children and families is growing stronger by the day, especially due to the nature of artificial intelligence (AI).
“Across lived experience, court cases, authoritative medical and media journals, and testimony from families, a clear and urgent picture is emerging,” she said. “At the same time, advancing technologies, such as AI, are not just repeating past mistakes — they are accelerating and amplifying them. The risks are compounding,” she added.
Meghan concluded her speech on a note of hope, insisting that “these outcomes are not inevitable.” “Speak up. Demand better from the platforms shaping our children’s lives. Be an example in your own social media use of how to be intentional in every like, comment, post, and share. Hold your community to the same standard. Support laws and leaders committed to child safety by design, transparency and accountability online. Write to your elected representatives. Ask what they are doing to protect children in digital spaces. Because when enough voices refuse to accept harm as the cost of connection, change becomes inevitable.”
I saw some photos and stories from people who attended the event in Geneva and they described it as very moving, and they were honored that Meghan spent time talking to them and embracing them. Meaningful, impactful, important, and the work was supported by WHO and UN officials.
The Daily Beast’s Tom Sykes was also there, “reporting” for the DB and for his Royalist Substack. He’s already written a screed about how Meghan’s speech was “an Audition for a Political Role No Electorate Would Ever Give Her.” In it, Sykes bizarrely argues this: “I couldn’t help thinking, that if this is the stuff she wants to do, wouldn’t she have been a thousand times more effective doing so from within the incredible platform being a member of the royal family would have given her? Wouldn’t that platform have been worth any number of fights over backstabbing, bridesmaids dresses and lip gloss, or a broken dog bowl?” Ah, yes, why didn’t Harry and Meghan put up with 24-7 physical and emotional abuse for the rest of their lives so they could do the exact work they’re doing now?
Photos courtesy of Getty Images.
What a powerful and moving event. I love her comparison to things like seatbelts or defective toys, because she’s right – sometimes its slower than we would like, but the government and private companies CAN and DO take steps to protect children. For some reason social media and the online space in general is exempt from that.
On a superficial note, Meghan looks beautiful and the outfit was perfect for the occasion – polished and professional but not showy or glamorous.
As for Tom Sykes – lol, maybe he missed the memo, but Meghan has a global platform now. She doesn’t need the BRF, she’s bigger than them. And a big part of that is because of the press. Sykes didn’t go to Italy to follow Kate’s tour but hopped on a plane to Switzerland in a hurry didn’t he?
Yes, I joked about her wearing color yesterday but this was just right. The comparison to seat belts is so valid. I can’t believe that man went to Switzerland.
Sykes only confirms that the BRF is about petty family stuff and not real issues when he says she should have stayed. Even before the cookbook was released we saw the games they were playing, especially Kate and her suddenly broken Britain idea. (From Catherine Quinn).
These are not serious people. And Kate quoting Bob the builder only confirms how shallow they are even on supposedly serious issues.
At this point it’s obsessive, his turning up to this event. Stalking behaviour and extremely unhealthy. He needs quite serious help.
“As for Tom Sykes” — you correctly point out that his choice to follow Meghan to Switzerland, but not Kate when she went to Italy thoroughly undercuts his argument that she would have been “a thousand times more effective doing so from within the incredible platform being a member of the royal family.” Seriously, if being “within the incredible platform [of] being a member of the royal family” is truly “a thousand times more effective” than not, then Sycko would have gone to Italy, not Switzerland.
But even focusing on that unworthy comparison elides the main reason Meghan is so much more effective outside the supposed “incredible platform” — in order to stay inside the strictures of the “royal family” that also required her to submit to BRFCo’s press Associates, she would have had to be 50% less of herself.
So his argument is it didn’t make sense to leave an environment where you have to provide all of the labor, and give someone who has caused mental, emotional, and physical harm to you complete control over your livelihood, because you could have stayed there and do what you’re doing now without any of those issues?
This is him just trying to workshop his angle. Because despite what we may personally think due to his behavior, I don’t think most royalists are stupid. They’re angry because they know that this is what you expect to see from a future King and a future Queen. Not sitting in race cars and guffawing while making pasta.
There is room for levity and joking, but it has to be balanced by seriousness and actual hard work as well. You can’t just be lightweight all the time, and then expect for the seriousness to be imbued from above because you’re not smiling in a picture and furrowing your brow.
This right here is why the copying is just an exercise in futility. You can wear the same designers, you can try to stage the same photo ops, you can do the same crafts at events for photos, but this you can’t replicate. You can’t replicate the intelligence, and the empathetic ability to connect. Their efforts are gold foil on top of tin.
Just home trying to workshop is angle. This, dee2! Bc it’s performative. For engagement.
Him not home!
No. The royal family would never have allowed her this big a role. They’re always afraid she’d outshine Kate. So she’d be very restricted and restrained
Absolutely 100%
How refreshing that she was there to honor those children who died and to get people to act and put safeguards in to protect children. There were no maniacal smiles or jazz hands or posing for pictures just a big call for action based on facts and lives lost!
So true! It was very moving! Side note: the derangers believe that Meghan orchestrated the whole event in order to compete with Kate’s “successful ” trip to Italy, her maniacal smiles and her making pasta! Are they really serious? How can they compare the two trips and the work beside them? As if it’s so easy to get WHO to cooperate for an event at the last minute ! I guess they judge by their own example: didn’t someone from the rota let it slip that Kate’s trip was organised after the successful Australian tour of Harry and Meghan?
Yeah I’m sure this was thrown together at the last minute with the cooperation of the WHO’s Director-General.
But like we all know, every accusation is an admission. Kate’s Italy trip WAS thrown together at the last minute as a reaction to Meghan’s Australia tour.
These people think that because their “beloved” royals are always playing catch up and on the defensive in terms of scheduling events and work that the same is true for Meghan and Harry. And its not. They’re busy people who work with even busier people and these kinds of events are planned well in advance.
This was not last-minute. Please.
TS writes like an abuser it brings back many triggering feelings reading his darvo.. Meghan’s speech brought tears to my eyes she is so good at what she does.
This. He speaks from the abuser’s perspective.
I find Tom Sykes exhausting. He assumes that Meghan and Harry would have been allowed to pursue the work that they’ve been doing since leaving the royal family. Work that makes Will & Keen look like the dilettantes they are.
This!!! When he himself has acknowledged the family viciously competes with each other and the range of official interests they are “allowed” to have is incredibly limited. He thinks she’s there just to speak at a WHO event and any such event would do, not that she is there to speak specifically about social media. Because that’s how the rest of them all think.
Ditto. They would have been relegated to ribbon cuttings and photo ops so as not to compete with other members of the family!!!
@Elizabeth – ITA. I was thinking when I saw that Meghan was travelling to Switzerland how busy Harry and Meghan are even though they have a young family. We taxpayers are repeatedly told that the reason why W&K do not do as many public appearances as other members of the BRF is because they are “hands on” parents who do school runs etc. However, the MSM when making this excuse repeatedly ignore that Louis (W&Ks youngest) is two years older than Archie (H&Ms oldest).
As for Tom Sykes; once again the message has gone right over his head. In her speech said that if adults find it hard to cope with online bullying how can we expect children to manage (owtte). Yet here he is ensuring that he gets a few digs in to make sure his rancid followers have something to rage against.
I can’t help but think that if remaining a member of the royal family was such an incredible platform and automatically made the speaker’s message so “effective,” then WHY, oh why, is Tom Sykes following Meghan to Switzerland while he completely ignored Kate’s trip to Italy? Can’t he explain that? Just by his own actions, he’s undermining his own message.
A profound speech by Meghan representing the deceased children and a call to help prevent more unnecessary loss. To travel from California to Switzerland to represent these families and future children speaks to the importance of this issue to her and her organization. I applaud Meghan and Archewell Philantropies.
What a wonderful speech for a very important initiative.
And Harry&Meghan can achieve more away from the BRF, no way they they would have been allowed to overshadow the left behinds
Meghan’s speech and her entire presentation highlight so well why she was viewed as a threat within the monarchy. Just compare it to Kate’s Italy trip, which was so lightweight and boring. Meghan stands out so much while Kate blends into the scenery. It’s not about beauty or elegance but about presence. That’s why the Sussexes are still viewed as a threat; they make the left behinds look bad.
Agree completely. Meghan’s speech was beautiful and the comparisons to seatbelts and dangerous toys were spot on. Kate didn’t give a speech, she talked about Bob the Builder and hugged some kids.
Kate has been married for 15 years. In all that time she could have polished herself into who Meghan is today. She has the resources (time, money and access). She could be creating change and movements. But she has always chosen not to because that would mean applying herself to something that doesn’t serve her interests or those of her family.
I agree totally. Neither Harry nor Meghan would have been allowed to do this high profile work, supporting Ukraine, writing opinion pieces for the Times and the New Statement, working with the WHO and inaugurating the Los Screeen Memorial, if Harry and Meghan had stayed within the royal institution because Harry and Megahn’s work overshadows and shows of the lazy couple and their pretentious work. Thanks god Meghan and Harry escaped.
She and Harry wouldn’t be doing work like this or making speeches if they had remained. If she had developed an interest in this work it would have been crushed by the institution. They’re not interested in doing important work, the only thing that matters is promoting the monarchy. I’m guessing Sykes isn’t a complete simpleton and knows that
What an excellent, and moving speech from Meghan. It really had me tearing up a little.
@Chrissie: This is so true. People forget that the Palace made Meghan give up her work with WorldVision and UN Women before she married Harry. There was no way they were going to let Meghan do what’s she’s doing now.
Does Sykes even realize what he’s saying? If this type of global work was possible from within the BRF then why aren’t others doing it? Is Sykes suggesting the others lack the passion for humanitarian causes? 🫢
This was a really moving event. I have zero faith social media companies will do anything but it will always be important to advocate for change. And at the very least, honour those who have lost their lives to social media because these tech bros won’t do it.
As for Sykes, he’s very much speaking as an ardent monarchist. Everything begins and ends at the royal family. You can’t do anything without them successfully because it shows that the royals are not in fact, the ultimate ideal. Which goes against their whole worldview.
What a well-done speech about an increasingly vital subject. Thank u, Meghan and everyone else working on this.
Tom Sykes’ comment encapsulates the press, Palace and royalists’ anger towards Meghan. They believe that she should have been grateful that she was let in the Royal Family and should put up with the emotional and racial abuse for the sake of a bigger platform. Anyway she and Harry are doing good work and don’t need the Royal Family to do it.
Can you take out an international restraining order? And no, his garbage can’t be excused as “journalism.” Sykes is vile though not personally violent, but he whips up his audience of violent lunatics.
First of all, your question is a good one, and I mean that. The only thing that I would quibble with is whether Sykes is not personally violent. Like Charles Manson, his hand may not personally hold the weapon but if, decades after Diana’s death, the media is back to its orgy of piling on one member of the royal family (a woman who has left) like they were leaping on a gazelle in the jungle, then they create an atmosphere where harm could come that person. I think that makes them also responsible for anything that happens if some nut who is inspired by their words goes on a rampage.
How much bigger could her platform been? The event and her speech are all over the media, print media, social media. Widely discussed. They don’t need the RF for global attention. They have it. Without having to ask for permission. No grey suits telling them “you can’t do that, you will overshadow the heir”. Did the WHO contact Kate for a speech? Did the assembled leaders ask William to join the discussion? Nope. They rather speak with the Sussexes.
These people like Sykes have spent the past seven years telling us that the royal family couldn’t defend Archie when he was being compared to a chimpanzee. That family, their staff and the media have attacked her for supporting the families of Grenfell Tower through kindness, a speech and a cookbook that helped them find a way to support each other through community. They attacked her for doing things as simple as closing her own car door, wearing black nail polish during a personal event and saying she was a woman of color and sister to the people in South Africa. So Sykes can miss me with the lies that she would be allowed to do any of this on behalf of that racist family who still can’t handle that the woman of color (who is still a royal by the way) is better than them at every turn. It has been almost ten years of the media telling us how the Spare and his wife have to be less than the incompetent heir and wife to avoid overshadowing them. There was never an option for the Sussexes to do this while inside the institution.
Such a thought-provoking, touching and meaningful speech, you can see a throughline in her writing style in this speech.
This Lost Screen Memorial is such an innovative and poignant tribute to the children who died and their parents who have to live with the lost daily.
As a fellow nerd 🤓 , I am so happy seeing Meghan with WHO, giving this speech AND co-creating Archewell to develop such an initiative with her team , as this is what she studied, remember this is what she would do in the offseason of Suits . She did Tig and UN and other NGO work. So happy seeing meaningful Meg again.
Watching her speech on her IG, I was so excited and pleased for her , knowing 2026 Meg is living her teenage and college dreams , that she gets to still live her dream for international relations.
I know in today’s world , we mustn’t place people on pedestals too much, but I really admire her, I admire and respect her for getting out of bed, for still living a life, for being a mother, creating a joyful home for her children ( from what she post on IG) , and on top of that, created a business that is a natural evolution of one of her passions and then living her other passion of what she studied – well done to her . I cannot imagine how hard it has been and still is, but she keeps going. Full respect and admiration for her. She is a true inspiration!
Now that I have master the art of ignoring the negative media agenda around her, it occurred to me, while watching her speech on her IG, that Meg doesn’t PR a lot , you only see her when she is in action mode – launching, executing and driving the continued evolution of the initiatives.
I guess maybe as the media has painted such negative caricature, the one upside from that, is it removes that weird part of PR where there is a lot of saying what a person will be or do and how and her communication just goes right into what she is doing. So it’s Meghan Markle is doing xyz in (place) on (date), then you see her doing it or she just shows up without pre – press , in action mode.
I like that, Fluff PR is so cloying and icky, especially these days.
Well done Meghan 👏
As for that DB guy, in a way he is admitting what we her supporters already know , but he has taken a position, so he can’t say it outright so it’s his spin. Ahhh bless his heart. Hopefully one day he gets to thrive in sunshine!
I wonder if Tom never feels embarrassment. He screamed anther Olive Garden kitchen, then he hopped on a plane to fly to Switzerland to stalk her but couldn’t be bothered to hop on one to see kitty . It’s like this derange fool has zero common sense. If Meghan is so irrelevant, then stop stalking her , stop writing about her but then what would you do to make Money Tommy , because the wanks and kitty certainly aren’t paying your bills
As for Meghan speech it made me cry . To think about the pain and suffering and loss to all these children . We need to do better for out children and the ones who are still to come / . Tom is dishonoring these children lives by reporting on nonsense and not the seriousness of this tragedy. He is an embarrassment
Meghan was never meant to be confined in the cage of the royal institution. I’m glad she is free to fly. She outshines all of them with her integrity, intelligence, kindness, and yes, ambition. She wasn’t going to thrive in that dusty old, racist institution. Kate will continue with the fluff stuff for the rest of her days. That’s her role in the firm. They all understand that.
Totally agree. Even without the violent, racist attacks, in my opinion a woman like Meghan could never have survived that institution.
She is brilliant, educated, empathetic and a high achiever. Her spirit would have been crushed. Thank God both Meghan and Harry knew their worth and had the courage to leave.
Actually, @Sharon, being fluffed for the rest of her days in the firm was indeed supposed to be kkkhate’s role, even after what I and many others continue to believe was a serious DV incident in Dec 2023 that precipitated her disappearance for the first 6 months of 2024 while she healed, and their subsequent hail-mary grab at the kancer-card.
They had planned to fluff, buff and bluff her path to the crown even as the serfs become more and more agitated by the poor ROI.
HOWEVER, with H&M’s global impact continuing to grow; and with the manufactured narrative about “I thought they wanted privacy” failing to take off; and with the continued exposure of the mediocrity of their great white hope for the crown, it seems to me that the men in grey are becoming desperate. [Exhibit A: the increasing hysteria in content and tone of the stories from their accolytes such as #PsychoTom.]
And as we all know, desperate, cornered animals are very unpredictable………and dangerous.
Sykes is a known a###t. Sounds like he’s off the wagon. Maybe his can join peg in rehab.
So — intriguingly enough — I came across the following passage, verbatim, this morning on Instagram, on a channel called thinkentrepreneurs. And as ever, no pun, if you look at the monarchy in its current state as a workplace / office drama, with a bad HR dept, it all fits: “ The reason incompetent people keep getting promoted has nothing to do with luck. Is not incompetence at the top. It is not office politics. It is not even nepotism. It is one specific structural pattern. Most organisations do not promote the best performers. They promote the safest ones. The ones who do not challenge. Do not threaten. Do not expose how little control is happening above them. That is the pattern. Organisations reward visibility, not competence. The person who is seen the most gets promoted more than the person who performs the most. Showing up loudly beats delivering quietly. Every single time. If your work is excellent but invisible, you are being outmanoeuvred by people who are average but loud. This is not fair. But it is the structural reality of every large organisation on earth. Competence makes people above you nervous. When you are genuinely good at your job, you expose how little control and skill exists above you. That makes you a threat. And organisations do not promote threats. So instead of developing strong leaders, these systems recycle weak ones. Every layer protects the one above it. The goal stops being excellence. The goal becomes comfort. And comfort is the enemy of every high-performer in the building. Loyalty gets promoted over leadership. The person who nods along, agrees with everything, and makes upper management feel comfortable, will almost always get the role over the person who is actually the best leader. When loyalty beats leadership at every level, the organisation fills up with people who are very good at agreeing and very bad at deciding. And then everyone wonders why nothing actually changes. The cycle is self-protecting. Once mediocre leaders are in place, they hire and promote people just like them. Not because they are malicious. Because hiring someone better than you feels like signing your own demotion. Every new layer of leadership protects the one above it. The real talent gets passed over. Gets frustrated. Gets ignored. And then does one of two things: burns out completely or walks out entirely. Mediocrity becomes the culture. Once the cycle runs long enough, average stops feeling average. It becomes the standard. Any anyone who performs above that standard starts to look like the problem, not the solution. You cannot fix a broken system from inside it alone. But you can protect yourself. Make your work visible to the right people. Build relationships above your direct manager. Document your results consistently. Never let your value be invisible. Bad managers are not failing up by accident. They are being rewarded for being unthreatening. Once you understand that, you stop being confused by who gets promoted. And you start making smarter decisions about where to invest your talent. Once you understand how the system really works, you stop being blindsided and start playing strategically.”
Independent thinkers cannot be controlled and that always scares an organization.
Just printed this out for some young people I know who are just starting out.
Well Said and So True!!!! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Whenever H &/or M has a public-facing event, I become quietly nervous for them, even tho I’m also always confident that they’ll hit it out of the park bcos they’re so competent, knowledgeable and thoroughly repared to meet the moment.
Nervous, bcos I know that no matter how excellent they are, journotrolls in the shitmedia will always make it their duty to nitpick an unimportant sliver of something relatimg to the moment and depend on their lemmings in SM to run with it, thereby seeking to dilute H&M’s effect.
So that’s me prior to H&M’s public events.
And then, inevitably, they flawlessly hit it out of the park.
In the final analysis, the onus is on H&M’s supporters such as myself, to recognize the deliberately created chaos and confusion by the plethora of bad actors out there; ignore the professional distractors/gaslighters/Stochastic Terrorists; and focus on and amplify the positives of H&M’s impact.
Tom Sykes is typical of the rota and left-behinds in viewing the BRF as the center of the universe. But England is a relatively small country that squandered its influence because of Brexit. It’s not an empire anymore, thank the Lord.
The world has moved on. And so have Meghan and Harry, who are having real — not just imagined — impact.
Meghan’s speech was moving and powerful. Especially the line about [paraphrase] if predatory and harassing behavior online is almost unsurvivable for an adult then how we can expect children to deal with it?
Making the digital space safer is clearly something Meghan is passionate about. That passion is probably a combination of her own lived experience and because she has children. She must worry that the same entities conducting stochastic terrorism against her via social & legacy media will one day target her children. The fact that Tom Sykes and others like him who are engaging in stochastic terrorism against Meghan dismiss or minimize her work is unsurprising. Harry and Meghan continue to rise above the noise and do meaningful and impactful work.
Meghan’s speech was moving and impactful. Her acting experience makes her a very strong speech maker. I don’t have young children or grandchildren and wasn’t aware of all these deaths of children related to social media. It’s shocking and heartbreaking. Utilizing her platform to raise awareness is truly admirable.
It’s fairly well known that a lot of actors can’t give speeches; they’re terrible at it. She and Harry write their own speeches (I’m sure with some input if appropriate) and they both speak very well because they have practised it and are speaking their words from their hearts.
We can agree that it’s a great speech but let’s please make it about the victims.
Lots of people like to credit Meghan’s ability to give great speeches to her being a former actress when that isn’t the case at all. As Lamb Chop pointed out, lots of actors and actresses are unable to give great speeches. There is footage of Meghan at an early age before she became an actress where she gave great speeches to big crowds. There is a video of Meghan giving the commencement speech at her 8th grade graduation ceremony in front of classmates, their families and faculty. This isn’t something she learned. Some people are just naturally great speakers, Meghan is one of them.
I’m believe that Meghan would prefer that the focus be on the content of her speech and the victims rather than how good she is at giving a speech.
I really do like the work Harry and Meghan are doing on children and social media. However, there is a lot of criticism about the fact that Meghan frequently posts pictures of her children on social media. It is nice to see pictures of the children now and again but I think that she has definitely increased the number of pictures of the children much more than i would. There are a vast number other things she could use and post to feed her platforms.
Meghan never posts photos showing her children’s faces, not since they were babies. She never puts them in danger — her IG posts would not allow them to be picked out of a crowd, and give the public no access to them at all — and danger to children from social media is the theme she spoke about in Geneva. If you’re implying Meghan is being hypocritical by including some faceless photos and videos of her children on social media, no, she is not, she is making sure to protect them at every turn.
I like that they post photos of their life. They don’t show the kids’ faces but it’s important in a media system that tries to dehumanize and villify Meghan in such obvious (racist) ways. I think it’s good she reminds people of their most important work – being parents.
I don’t see a lot of criticism. Except from those who have negative feelings towards Meghan. To begin. With. I think the sussexes are doing this for the safety of the children. Eugenie s eldest son was photographed from the back and I did not see any criticism about Eugenie and jack
But isn’t that the point? She’s concerned for the welfare of children using these online platforms, be they her own or other people’s. Social media should be a place to share those moments and be safe. That H&M have a family life and share glimpses of it is not hypocritical, it’s the reason these platforms need to be more responsible for all our sakes.
Here is my issue with that argument about her posting discreet and carefully crafted photos and videos of her children. The argument has never been that people shouldn’t share images of their children online or that children shouldn’t be able to enjoy the positive aspects of social media, but that there needs to be safety measures in place to protect people from bullies, predators and other harmful behaviors online. To me complaining that she posts images of her children (where their faces aren’t seen, by the way) is no different from complaining to people of color for being in any space where racists might say or do something towards them. It’s the tired and misogynistic argument of saying that how a woman might dress is the issue and not the perpetrators who might verbally, emotionally or physically assault them. It’s placing the blame on the victims or potential victims and not holding the perpetrators to account. Meghan’s speech was powerful and there were so many aspects of it that deserve to be talked about, one of which is the part where she addressed how changes have been made to protect children and others concerning seatbelts, water and food regulations and needing to implement safety measures on social media to protect our kids shouldn’t be something that parents have to ask for. We should all want children to be safe and posting photos or videos of her children or anyone else posting photos of their children will never be the problem. The problem is the people who abuse the lack of protection on social media to bully, threaten, entice suicide or to sexually abuse children and adults. We need to stop blaming victims for the evil of those who prey on them.
Actually, Megan would never have been permitted to give a speech like this if she were still a “working royal” – it would be considered too political. Remember the drama when she mentioned Me Too?
This was such an important event and I am so glad Queen Meghan brought attention to this issue.
I dare Kate to style her hair in the way Meghan has just done. It would be so unsuitable for Kate, but the bad look is competing with the copycatting urge, so we’ll see what happens.
I’m just recalling Meghan and Harry’s trip to Columbia in 2024. It occurred a couple of months prior to an historic meeting convened by the UN of the first ministerial level meeting on Ending Violence against Children. I think this topic was one of the issues they were visiting. That group must also be meeting as part of the overall agenda at the conference in Geneva this week. These connections gives us quick birds-eye view of the depth and collaborations of Harry and Meghan’s of their “show up and do good” type of philanthropy. It is sustained and impactful.
There is an inherent structural problem in the monarchy that prevents the royals’ charitable work from being actually charitable: it is that the monarchy’s purpose is to perpetuate the monarchy, to preserve its privileges, wealth, and power (such as it is) for a vanishingly small group consisting of one family and their courtiers. Because these privileges are entirely antiquated and undeserved, the royals do charity only to promote an image of themselves as deserving of their privileges. But no other charity workers on this earth are compensated at this level. Nor are actual charity workers doing it merely to fend off criticism of an institution that perpetuates a ludicrous inequality. “Royal duty” isn’t a duty to charity, it’s a duty to the monarchy itself. This is why royalists are livid about the Sussexes doing *actual* charity: because their charity doesn’t benefit the monarchy. Sykes gets it twisted because he claims they’d be more effective at promoting charity if they were working royals. But it’s not true, because royals don’t promote charities to benefit the charities, they do it to promote and justify themselves. And that’s also the reason why the royals would never allow the Sussexes to do high-profile charity “work”: because by outshining the king and the heir, they would be undermining the monarchy. That’s why the Sussexes actual role as royals was not to do charitable work, but to provide foils for the heir—because that role was seen as promoting the reputation of the heir, and therefore the legitimacy of the monarchy.
🎯
🎯
The new talking points for the internet troll bot army are that the event was sparsely attended and that Meghan was very upset, by that—and, anyway, how hypocritical of her to talk about children’s online safety, when she posts about her own kids on IG!