Dutiful silence isn’t noble, it’s toxic - and no, Harry shouldn’t have married an ‘English rose’
9 January 2023, 16:48 | Updated: 9 January 2023, 17:13
More than a million viewers have now watched a clip on LBC’s various socials of a caller to my show on Saturday who claimed Prince Harry should have married a ‘proper English Rose’.
Most assumed the caller was making a euphemistic reference to the Duchess of Sussex’s race and I think that’s a reasonable conclusion.
Coming from a mixed ethnic background, it’s incredibly difficult for me to hear people use that type of language. However, being a person who is most often assumed to be white and moves through the world on that basis, it doesn’t surprise me.
I often think it would be easier if people simply admitted that the visceral dislike they have of Meghan is because she challenges their deeply held belief that a person of colour should ideally not be allowed into the Royal Family, but should remain eternally grateful and subservient if they do.
Instead, they talk about her being ‘manipulative’, ‘entitled’, ‘fake’ or say she isn’t ‘classy’ enough, without being able to provide any concrete examples.
These are well-worn stereotypes, often targeted at black women who only have to open their mouths in order to be instantly labelled angry, aggressive or jealous. It won’t change until white people confront their own prejudices.
For me, the more interesting element of the ‘English Rose’ caller was when she was talking about The Princess of Wales. Katherine, she argued, had ‘served her country’ by being ‘dutiful’. These are sentiments very often associated with the late Queen. We are told that it is these women’s stoicism and sacrifice that make them admirable.
This reminded me of a conversation I heard on a podcast, in which the host said she didn’t think Katherine looked happy. Her guest maintained that Kate’s happiness was immaterial. Her role, he claimed, was not to be happy, but simply to be visible. Weathering the storm. Looking elegant. ‘Representing the institution’.
What does it say about us as a nation that we believe aspirational women must remain silent in the face of adversity and, if they do speak, never do so in a way that really challenges the status quo? What do we really mean when we use words like ‘elegant’ (thin?), classy (white?), dutiful (quiet?).
Can Britain really call ourselves a progressive or gender equal society if a woman can hold the highest office in the land and yet only be respected if she suffers in silence, encapsulating patriarchal beauty paradigms?
Of course, even as I type the above, I can hear readers roaring ‘royal men are expected to be stoic too!’ – And course that’s true, albeit to a lesser extent. Prince Phillip, certainly, was the physical embodiment of the ‘stiff upper lip’.
I wonder, then, how that sits alongside the Prince and Princess of Wales’ high-profile work in the field of mental health? Having spent more than a decade working in this field, I am yet to meet anyone who has become better, more evolved or fulfilled by ignoring and stifling their emotions.
Trauma doesn’t work like that. It will always find an outlet, whether it’s in self-medication (alcohol or sex addiction for example), distraction (like overworking in a bid to never be left alone with your own disturbing thoughts) or violence towards others (whether physical or psychological).
Prince Harry, having benefitted from extensive therapy, understands this. He spoke in his ITV interview yesterday of how it is silence that enables the toxic cycle of suffering and abuse to continue.
Living in a culture which points at that toxic silence and calls it noble is anathema to our nation’s mental health. When Harry challenges it, he is fighting a battle for us all.
