As expected, controversy galore followed the royal revelations exposed during Oprah Winfrey’s televised interview of the self-exiled Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Your views of the British “firm,” the monarchy and its numerous appendages, may well influence your reaction to the gabfest.
But one incontrovertible fact was visible for all to see one and three-quarter hours into the one-sided tell-all—Harry’s naked shins.
How is it that someone of his stature and upbringing does not know that it is truly déclassé to display one’s skin when your pants leg inches up when seated and your socks are too short to cover up the gap? Was his gentleman’s gentleman off the day of the shooting? It is okay for Meghan to show off her ankles, as she did above four, or maybe five, inch heels, but it is most definitely not acceptable for Harry to blind viewers with the whiteness of his lower leg.
Harry’s not the first public figure to make this faux pas. Back in 2009 I pointed out President Barack Obama’s sartorial sin during an appearance on “This Week With George Stephanopoulos” (https://nosocksneededanymore.blogspot.com/2009/09/presidential-shin.html). I’m content to report that during subsequent sit-downs Obama wore sufficiently long hose.
It’s just not presidential or princely, er, dukey, to shock viewers with your ankle epidermis. Unless you choose to go sockless, which the red-haired Harry did not.
Tut tut, Harry. Time to admonish your personal valet, or if you’re now dressing yourself, order some over-the-calf length socks to cover up the royal shins.
