Why Megan Markle’s Story is So Triggering for Survivors of Abuse
Dedicated to mom.
TW: mention of DV, pedophilia, anti-Blackness and sexual violence.
Gendered language is used, but this article is meant to be inclusive of all victims and survivors of racialized cis-heteropatriarchy/colonialism.
It was watched by no less than 17.1 million people, according to the LA Times. I am, of course, referring to Megan Markle’s bombshell interview that aired this past Sunday. And who better to formally usher in the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for their Montecito debut and welcome them back into society than the Queen-Mother of American media, her royal highness, Oprah Winfrey. If anyone can go toe to toe with Queen Elizabeth II, it is her. Harry and Megan, for their part, were armed only with their backyard chicken coop to signal that they were assimilating full speed ahead into L.A. culture. California, a land where the people may be modified, but the poultry I assure you is not.
Speaking of the inorganic and genetically engineered, I have no interest in engaging with the romanticization of the royals. I am not the person who will stay up till 3 am to catch a glimpse of Kate Middleton’s Alexander McQueen wedding dress or binge the Netflix series, The Crown. I am, however, someone who harbors a very one-sided feud with Prince Charles, which makes me a part of an unofficial and not so exclusive club, made up mostly of immigrant mothers. We abhor Prince Charles for his alleged treatment of our beloved Princess Di and have been nursing a decades-long grudge. If anything, this recent interview only validated the feelings I held as a 5-year-old. Charles is the personification of Oscar, the Grouch, residing in and protecting his trash kingdom. Of course, I understand this characterization is unfair because Charles is simply the predictable, privileged, and mediocre product of a declining British Monarchy and a royal family which even has connections to Nazism. He really is just a small part of a 1200-year-old institution that represents the subjugation of people of color. The crown simply put, is nothing more than a relic of racism, misogyny, colonialism, and slavery.
The British legacy in my home country of Pakistan and India is colorism, oppression of the feminine, the upholding of caste, feudalism, anti-Blackness, the legal framework for homophobia, and the strict gender binary. To this day, our motherlands are still not free from the symbolic and not so symbolic clutches of the monarchs. The former British territories are still linked to their colonial pasts and are referred to as the Commonwealth. Queen Elizabeth II serves as the figurehead for this international organization. Royals often point to their charitable contributions to their former subjects to justify the continuation of their formal roles. One could argue that there would be no need for their charity if there were never any violent exploitation. But try telling the royal family that they are utterly useless freeloaders. Something tells me they’ve heard it before.
Having said all of that, what draws us royal detractors to the defense of Princess Diana and Duchess Megan? When it comes to both of these women, their power resides in their openess and vulnerability, although these are the very characteristics weaponized against them. Viewers, I sense also, see themselves in the stories of racism, chronic invalidation, misogynoir, bullying, and mental health struggles discussed by the Duchess in her recent interview. The racialized sexism Markle experienced at the hand of the British media was irrefutable. However, one topic that I felt was still missing from the larger national dialogue was the potential probing of whether the Royal family’s treatment of Princess Diana and Duchess Megan could be categorized as domestic violence. I’m not sure that this is what either of these women would label it, and I would never want to assume or claim anything on their behalf. Still, even though I don’t believe Megan explicitly used the word abuse, there were glaring red flags.
When Markle shared that she didn’t have access to her passport while living in the U.K., this was alarming. Withholding one’s passport is a common abusive tactic used against migrant workers and has on occasion been used against royal members to deter them from fleeing. I am sure the Duchess was in a better position than these women and was fortunate to have her British husband’s support, but her mentioning the lack of access to her passport was disturbing. There is also added concern because we are only now learning about the controlled isolation of influential figures like Britney Spears or the terrifyingly tragic tale of Princess Latifa of the UAE. All these situations seem to show how powerful institutions can perpetuate falsehoods and gaslight not only their victims but the general public. The Britney Spears documentary and Megan Markle’s interview mostly show us that we need to believe survivors and should be apprehensive of narratives sold to us by cis-male-dominated powers. Additionally, we are reminded that wealth, education level, or status are privileges, but can not always shield one from abuse or exploitation.
Notably, there is a form of domestic violence that we rarely hear about: “in-law abuse,” or abuse that one’s in-laws perpetrate. In South Asian communities, in-law abuse is an incredibly prevalent form of domestic violence. It is even a popular plotline for numerous Pakistani and Indian tv soaps, yet also simultaneously too taboo to discuss in polite society. After witnessing Princess Diana and Megan Markle’s interviews, I couldn’t help but wonder, along with the skin lightening creams and digestive biscuits, did we also inherit familial abuse and the devaluation of the divine-feminine from our former colonial overlords, or is in-law abuse our own failure as South Asians? Regardless, I do know one thing the accountability has to come from us.
Signs of in-law abuse in South Asian families are; isolation from family/ friends, unfounded attacks on one’s character coupled with threats, intimidation, and coercion. Often women are also discouraged from their career aspirations or their work is impacted by their partners. The children are sometimes also seen as a reflection of the perceived failures of the mother. There can be a preoccupation with a baby’s skin color or sex. In many cases, there is a lack of financial and bodily autonomy for the woman. The abuse can also present as verbal and, or physical.
A British-Pakistani woman who spoke of her experience with familial abuse was Faryal Makhdoom. Faryal’s husband, Amir Khan, is a boxer that frequently competes in the Common Wealth Games. In 2016 Makhdoom made allegations of verbal, physical, and economic abuse against Khan’s family. Although Faryal had supporters, the Pakistani diaspora seemed to be overwhelmingly offended she publicly shared this private family matter. Few were as outraged by the actual abuse. Part of the issue was that Faryal was not a perfect victim, but the truth is no one ever is. Overall, it was clear that Faryal’s well-being came second to the family’s reputation, which meant there was an expectation to maintain secrecy. I saw this as a parallel to Megan’s story, where the royal family seemed to be more preoccupied with preserving their image over Megan’s mental health. These experiences also reveal the oppressive tendencies of a nuclear family blueprint. Families are also institutions in their own right and serve as microcosms for society. The nuclear family in these situations is not always inclusive or safe. Still, they must be preserved at all costs, despite the harm done to individual members (usually women and those with queer identities). Ultimately, we may also need to decolonize the European interpretation of these relationships to keep up with society’s changing gender politics.
The singling out of one person or one daughter-in-law is also a widespread phenomenon in abusive situations. Megan touched upon the lack of protection for herself and the differences in how she was treated compared to Kate. Again, in this case, it was blatantly racial, but in other instances of abuse, the reason is not always so apparent. Why are some spared from the abuse and others targeted? I suppose one woman is often favored to mask the abuse of the other.
Although what I took away from Megan’s interview is admittedly speculative, and unfortunately, we can’t make a perfect comparison between in-laws and the British royal family. I still think making a connection between cultural hegemonies to our interpersonal lives is essential because our values as a society do reflect the principles (or lack thereof) of those who have power over us. So much of the toxic culture we see today is a product of British monarchs, given that they colonized half the world and helped create the current social order. Prince Andrew was a shining example of this. The violence of Prince Andrew was not a random aberration. It was the same patriarchy that the crown has always represented. That is why Megan Markle’s honesty is more of a threat to the monarchy’s foundational core than Prince Andrew’s confirmed predatory behavior and pedophilia. The system that creates violence will not be the system to end the violence. So yes, I think the monarchy did play an active role in Megan’s trauma and likely indirectly in our collective post colonial trauma by disguising their violence as tradition and normalcy.
Ultimately, I hope that the British empire’s intergenerational survivors can fully divest from these violent systems of anti-Blackness and globalized patriarchy. We can do this by actively unlearning, avoiding historical revisionism, and by decolonizing our mindsets. We owe it to ourselves and future generations. I will start by shedding the famous and emotionally void “stiff upper lip” we have adopted from British culture. Instead, I will practice the radical vulnerability of Megan Markle. This can be done by openly discussing “taboo” topics, because silence and secrecy only ever protect our abusers and the oppressive status quo. It is also evident that these systems of cis-heteropatriarchy and white supremacy feed on one another to survive and thrive in the shadows, so let’s let these systems starve by naming them.
Comparing herself to the Little Mermaid, Megan Markle felt she had lost her voice upon marrying a prince. Today she has not only reclaimed her voice, but she has also initiated a thunderous outcry for long-overdue accountability, a commitment to truth and finally reparations for the global south by abolishment of the monarchy. Ok, the last part may be wishful thinking.
If you or someone you know is experiencing DV, a resource is the National Domestic Violence Hotline. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/fysb/programs/family-violence-prevention-services/programs/ndvh
