THE headlines have been heaving with it. Royal correspondents have prattled on TV about the possible next step in their ‘careers’. Meghan can claim that she has a profession – acting – and is planning to return to it. Harry doesn’t really have a job. He officially resigned from his ‘duties’ some years ago as a key member of the royal family, but other than having sympathy for British servicemen who’ve been injured in wars, he really doesn’t do much. And yet he’s on our screens time and time again.
Five deaths that got a lot of attention from the media last week were those of the five teenagers in Kildare who drove up a motorway In the wrong direction. All five were killed and the car they struck left three women and a child seriously injured. That story filled the headlines for a few days, then moved on.
The treatment by the British media of the returned royals and those in the fatal car collision was deficient, bordering on incompetent.
All things considered, Harry and Meghan must be two of the least interesting members of the British royal family, and that’s saying something. Harry buttons and unbuttons his jacket while mumbling forgettable nothings into his ginger beard; Meghan I have never heard speak, not in real life. In the series Suits, of course, she spoke and played her part adequately. Not in a way that would make you gasp at her acting skill and screen presence.It was bubble gum acting – she chewed it, she spat it out, agus sin é.
The point I’m clumsily trying to make is that neither Meghan nor Harry would be worth watching or listening to if they didn’t have their roles in the House of Windsor soap series.
The young men in the car we’ll never know about, never see again, except through the occasional head and shoulders picture. But we’ll remember them as the epitome of teenage recklessness, with tragic consequences for themselves and others.
Media reports took care to note that at least two of the five killed were young Travellers. You could almost hear the public mind tick when that detail was released. They were Travellers, were they? Well, we know what they’re like. Refuse to integrate into normal society, lead brutal and unhealthy lives, bring trouble wherever they go.
But consider this: Did we need to know they were Travellers? What purpose did it serve but feed the public prejudice and reinforce the clichéd thinking about that section of our population?
Travellers face discrimination in renting and buying goods/services. They have poorer access to suitable housing or sites. They have higher levels of poverty and unemployment. Other deep-rooted Traveller problems include barriers to school attendance, progression to and completion of further education, worse health outcomes and obstacles to obtaining respectful healthcare, including serious mental-health inequalities. They face stereotyping and abuse in public life and online. And Traveller men on average die ten years earlier than the general public; Traveller women nearly eight years.
To draw attention to these factors is not to excuse the damage the teenagers in the car inflicted on the occupants of the other car as well as themselves. Of course they behaved recklessly, with ghastly results. But if you’d been faced with those disadvantages listed above, are you sure you wouldn’t have found yourself in similar circumstances? And even granted our comparatively privileged lives, most of us who are male have memories of dangerous and stupid behaviour when we were young.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
As for Harry and Meghan – how awful to have to choose between a life of obscene luxury in Britain or California.
