Yes, fun to see Harry hoist with his own petard, but his charity helps children

It’s delicious to have the same race card played against Harry, as he and wife Meghan Markle played against his own family.

It feels mean but I like seeing Prince Harry accused of racism to a black woman.

Delicious to have the same race card played against Harry, as he and wife Meghan Markle played against his own family.

Sophie Chandauka, chairman of the Sentebale charity for AIDS victims, which Harry co-founded in Lesotho, even smeared him with a word that’s new to me.

She said some people “mistreat people, and then play the victim card and use the very press they disdain to harm people who have the courage to challenge their conduct”.

Harry and Meghan have played the race card against the Royal Family. Picture: Samir Hussein

But she was “a woman who dared to blow the whistle about issues of poor governance, weak executive management, abuse of power, bullying, harassment, misogyny, misogynoir”.

“Misogynoir”? Misogyny and noir, geddit? It means a hatred or contempt for black women.

Of course, it seems as baseless as Harry and Markle’s claims that Harry’s family were racist.

Harry hates black women? So why did he marry one?

And if Chandauka is a victim of sexists and racists, why did Harry’s charity appoint this black woman, and why are two of the five trustees now wanting her to quit themselves black, one a black woman?

Prince Harry with Sophie Chandauka. Picture: Getty

This race card is often played by scoundrels using the colour of their skin to hide their sin. It’s easy to play, impossible to answer, so no surprise to me if Chandauka would also rather play it against Harry than answer the trustees’ criticisms.

Trashing a white prince was always a sexier story, especially when a pro-Chandauka source accused Harry of asking her to deny his wife bullied her at a polo event.

But I’d guess the trustees were actually upset that their charity was reportedly in a “very vulnerable position” after losing a big sponsor of its annual polo fundraiser, starring Harry.

Chandauka would rather play the race card against Harry than answer the trustees’ criticisms. Picture: AFP

Chandauka then allegedly spent $800,000 on consultants in a failed attempt to attract lots of American donors, while demanding up to $617,000 for her essentially part-time voluntary role.

Now Chandauka is bleeding the charity by fighting the trustees in the High Court, and even slammed the door on any return by Harry, claiming “the toxicity of its lead patron’s brand” hurt donations and hirings.

Yet the charity’s website shows Harry is central to its publicity and fundraising.

That’s where the laughing stops.

Yes, fun to see Harry hoist with his own petard, but his charity helps children, and they – not Chandauka – are the real victims.

Originally published as Yes, fun to see Harry hoist with his own petard, but his charity helps children