[Ammi]

...I think that you miss the point, bots...the point is how the media and some of the public will focus on what their own mindset is...it’s not about what ‘one woman said’...the ‘outrage’ often comes from the thought or suggestion of racism/prejudice...rather than the racism/prejudice itself, which should surely be the first focus...the way it’s focused on is sadly so often with dismissal...

[bots]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...I think that you miss the point, bots...the point is how the media and some of the public will focus on what their own mindset is...it’s not about what ‘one woman said’...the ‘outrage’ often comes from the thought or suggestion of racism/prejudice...rather than the racism/prejudice itself, which should surely be the first focus...the way it’s focused on is sadly so often with dismissal...

i think its a step too far to say something may be attributed to racial bias when there is zero evidence to back it up other than nebulous connotations or what they explicitly say is not considered a crime.

[Ammi]

...racial undertones are attributed though .....which was acknowledged by the Palace as well with their original statement..(...I’m not sure if that was around the time, just after Rachel Johnson made her ‘exotic DNA’ comment...)...that comment most definitely had racial undertones..when has a comment like that ever been made of any other Royal lady..?...that was very specific to Meghan and her heritage...and that was in the very early days...as the lady in the interview said...(..sorry I don’t recall her name...)...’racism is at the heart’...is the thing that should be focused on in 2020, rather than dismissed in the way it often is...I think it was Dezzy that said, there is often more media/social media and (some) public etc outrage at suggestions of prejudice, than there is at the prejudice itself..hence it being dismissed as of lesser significance, when it really isn’t at all and shouldn’t be...it’s the foremost thing, surely...