‘Meghan’s Manifesto’: Meghan Markle and the Co-option of Feminism

Abstract

On 21st May 2018, two days after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle wed at Windsor Castle, the Daily Mail published the headline "Meghan's Manifesto: 'proud feminist' the Duchess of Sussex will take the royals in a striking new direction". The piece by royal correspondent Rebecca English-part of thirty-one pages of wedding coveragedescribed in celebratory tone how Markle's "candid" biography on the official royal website highlights a host of work dedicated to "social justice and women's empowerment" (2018:1), appropriating the language of feminist activism to describe a "manifesto" of objectives. This approach to reporting upon the new royal is far from unique, with headlines like "Why the Royal Wedding Is a Coup for Feminists" (Wright, 2018) and "How the Duchess of Sussex is smashing the royal glass ceiling" (McGoogan, 2018) abounding across news, comment and women's magazine titles alike to position the event as a feminist, post-racial utopia: a bi-racial, divorced, self-proclaimed feminist, American actor "modernising" (Duncan and Low, 2018) an ancient patriarchal institution. The representation of people of colour in the ceremony, from the African American pastor to celebrities such as Oprah Winfrey and Idris Elba, has been interpreted as Markle disrupting monarchical status quo through a 'rousing celebration

Doing impact work while female: Hate tweets, ‘hot potatoes’ and having ‘enough of experts’

“…While our original article argued that the version of feminism in representations of Markle ‘resides in a vague idea of modernisation and makes no reference to equality between the sexes’ (Clancy and Yelin, 2020: 3), in response we had the meaning of feminism explained back to us: a (re)definition that overlooked equality between the sexes:Feminism is not about women’s rights. As she said in her speech in NZ– feminism is about fairness.…”

“…Mary Beard argues that society has a ‘culturally awkward relationship between the voice of women and the public sphere of speech-making, debate and comment’ (2017: 8) and charts 3000 years of men telling women ‘to “shut up”’ (2017: 3). We had highlighted the silencing of ‘Markle’s activist voice’ (Clancy and Yelin, 2020: 3) and responses continued this tradition: ‘Couldn’t stand 5 minutes of her irritating voice’, ‘SHUT UP YOU MAD MARE’, and ‘This woman sounds like a bell end’ (Twitter.com). Savigny highlights ‘the focus on women’s bodies and appearance as a means to regulate women’ (2020: 9) and we were subject to this gendered scrutiny as a form of indirect silencing.…”

“…it is the meaning of feminism itself as popularly understood. (Clancy and Yelin, 2020: 3)…”

Brand Royal: Meghan Markle, feuding families, and disruptive duchessing in Brexit era Britain

“…By contrast, Markle is pathologized in commentary that calls up her biracial American identity, her celebrity and her feminist politics. That the terms of royal motherhood are so fraught is not surprising: the monarchy is built upon the agreement that women's bodies should function as biological machines to reproduce heirs and hereditary power (Clancy et al 2018).…”

‘This is a tale of friendship, a story of togetherness’: the British monarchy, Grenfell Tower, and inequalities in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

“…As I argue elsewhere, Markle's introduction to the royal family was initially invested in narratives of post-racial diversity (not difference) (Clancy forthcoming). Prince Harry and Markle's wedding in May 2018 was widely described at the time in the inter/national entertainment and news media as evidence of the British monarchy 'modernising', and the wedding was used as evidence of Britain (and the monarchy) being a post-racial, meritocratic utopia (Clancy and Yelin 2018). For example, The Sun's headline read 'Kisstory: Harry and Meg's historic change for monarchy' (Andrews 2018), American civil rights activist Al Sharpton claimed that it showed white supremacy 'is on its last breath' (Bitette and Alcorn 2018), and Spectator columnist Douglas Murray argued that it proved racism in Britain is a 'myth' (Murray 2018).…”