If you love The Daily Beast’s royal coverage, then we hope you’ll enjoy The Royalist, an all-new members-only series for Beast Inside. Become a member to get it in your inbox on Sunday.
There was much scorn poured on Prince William this week after he took to the stage of the British Academy of Film and Theatre Arts (BAFTA), of which he is president, and expressed dismayed amazement at its all-white and overly male short-lists.
Prince William used his speech at the so-called British Oscars to voice his concerns about the lack of diversity among the award winners after all 20 stars nominated for acting awards were white, and the shortlist for best director was all-male.
ADVERTISEMENT
He said: “In 2020, and not for the first time in the last few years, we find ourselves talking again about the need to do more to ensure diversity in the sector and in the awards process—that simply cannot be right in this day and age.
“BAFTA take this issue seriously, and following this year’s nominations, have launched a full and thorough review of the entire awards process to build on their existing work and ensure that opportunities are available to everyone.”
The Times (of London) headlined a subsequent story about William and the significance of the speech: “Woke William: A Millennial Prince Comes of Age.” Right-wing commentator James Delingpole in Breitbart said William’s speech deserved an award of its own for “glib, canting, thick as pigshit idiocy by a really not that bright heir to the throne,” and the “weapons-grade moronitude which poured forth from his privileged gob.”
There was also a tidal wave of social media opprobrium from the left, which crashed down upon William the next day.
These critics accused William of rank hypocrisy, saying that it was a bit rich for him to be telling the Academy to level up their race relations game, given that the biggest soap opera of all, the British royal family has notably failed, in recent weeks, to hang on to its own only non-white cast member, Meghan Markle.
It’s an entirely legitimate reaction to William’s comments, of course, and there is little doubt that what they perceived as racist attitudes were a factor in Meghan and Harry’s departure from the U.K., and from their day-to-day royal duties.
Most reasonable and disinterested judges, presented with some of the more offensive headlines and chimp jokes of the past few years, would not seriously dispute the recent “crystal clear” assertion of John Bercow, former speaker of the British House of Commons, that Meghan was “the victim of explicit and obnoxious racism.”
Be that as it may, William’s comments on Sunday night were a clear attempt to reclaim his onetime position as an upper-class warrior for diversity, and may be interpreted as a signpost, telegraphing his determination to continue using his position to campaign directly for racial and gender equality, much as Harry and Meghan may consider that their turf.
Roll your eyes if you must, but, once rolled, remember that the roots of William’s activism go back to the ground-breaking example set by his mother, Princess Diana.
She was the first member of the royal family to embrace LGBTQ people as equals—and as dear friends, spanning the very famous (Elton John), to her dear friend Adrian Ward-Jackson, who died with AIDS in 1991, and with whom Diana sat during the final moments of his life.
Indeed, Diana made headlines when she held hands with a dying AIDS patient at the Middlesex Hospital in 1987, and in a 1991 speech she said: “HIV does not make people dangerous to know, so you can shake their hands and give them a hug. Heaven knows they need it.”
Elton, one of Diana’s best friends, said of her AIDS activism: “AIDS was considered to be a gay disease. For someone who was within the Royal Family and who was a woman, and who was straight, to have someone care from the other side, was an incredible gift.”
Diana would take William and Harry to HIV charities and homeless shelters, making them by far the most worldly-wise royal kids in recent memory.
Although gay staff have always kept the palace machine running (long-term gay employees were less likely to have children, and family-appropriate accommodation at the palace is in short supply, whereas single rooms are plentiful), they were often required to keep their sexuality as a kind of open secret.
Incredibly, the Queen did not have an openly gay footman until 2017, and he quit in 2018 amidst accusations of homophobia.
One famous story of the Queen Mother referring to two of her servants as “two old queens” serving “this old queen” is often given as evidence of her marvelous sense of fun and lack of prejudice, but some have found in it evidence of a deeply patronizing streak towards gay people.
As the veteran LGBT activist Peter Tatchell has pointed out, since the queen ascended the throne in 1952, the words “gay” and “lesbian” have never publicly passed her lips. Prince Philip’s history of racist and sexist comments, often presented as hilarious “gaffes” which shed light on his simple humanity, is also well known.
Charles has never been openly racist like his father, although the isolation and privilege in which he was reared meant that friendships were carefully curated for him, with little effort made to bring him into contact with anything vaguely resembling “the other” as a young man.
<p><em>If you love The Daily Beast’s royal coverage, then we hope you’ll enjoy The Royalist, an all-new members-only series for Beast Inside. <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/membership?via=membership_page_inline_link&source=inline_link_royalist">Become a member to get it in your inbox on Sunday</a>.</em></p>
William and Harry, however, had a completely different experience, thanks of course to the influence of Diana who surrounded herself, simply, with people—including people of color and LGBTQ people.
Diana got involved with countless charities that dealt with ignored, derided and underprivileged sections of society, and was particularly famous for her work with the homeless. She became a patron of the London-based Centrepoint charity for the homeless, a role William took up after her death.
In 2015, William gave a notable interview to British gay magazine Attitude, in which he deplored homophobic bullying and discussed how he would react if his kids came out (he said he’d support them but would be “nervous” about the bullying and abuse they might face).
The Daily Beast contacted several charities William works with but, understandably, they didn’t want to talk about their famous patron. The palace was also reluctant to discuss William’s charitable ambitions, but it seems safe to assume that he won’t be shying away from charities that promote social inclusion anytime soon.
The writer Christopher Andersen, author of the best selling biography Diana’s Boys, about the princes as young men, told The Daily Beast, “Diana adored Harry, but she always saw William as the more sensitive, empathetic, perceptive, and socially-conscious of the two. That burden has always fallen on the Heir. After all, it’s William who will be King and have a real shot at bringing about change.
“William couldn’t have picked a bigger stage than BAFTA to stake his claim on being the royal brother with the social conscience.
“On the other hand, it’s been Harry and not William who has really repeatedly bucked the system, by marrying Meghan Markle and then by striking out on his own in an unprecedented fashion.
“In the future, we can expect to see William and Harry vying for the title of Most Woke Royal.”
