Jump to content
GHScorpiosRule

From Across The Pond: Royal Weddings and Scandals

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, MissAlmond said:

^^^This is truth.^^^  Samantha doesn't want contact with Meghan.  She wants contact with Meghan's money.

I don't think it's the money, I think she wants Meghan's life. Samantha was an actress also, I have no idea if she was successful or not, but I'm sure the multiple sclerosis pretty much put an end to any career she might have had. Then Meghan got a job on a popular series, & got to live the whole working actress, red carpet & fans kind of life. Samantha was probably extremely envious at that point. Meghan is living the life Samantha wanted, yes, money is part of it, but I think everything else she doesn't have is what is really digging at Samantha at this point. 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, GaT said:

I don't think it's the money, I think she wants Meghan's life. Samantha was an actress also, I have no idea if she was successful or not, but I'm sure the multiple sclerosis pretty much put an end to any career she might have had. Then Meghan got a job on a popular series, & got to live the whole working actress, red carpet & fans kind of life. Samantha was probably extremely envious at that point. Meghan is living the life Samantha wanted, yes, money is part of it, but I think everything else she doesn't have is what is really digging at Samantha at this point. 

ITA.  I read somewhere that Samantha wants to skin Meghan and wear her as a coat.  

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, MissAlmond said:

ITA.  I read somewhere that Samantha wants to skin Meghan and wear her as a coat.  

"it rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again"

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, MissAlmond said:

^^^This is truth.^^^  Samantha doesn't want contact with Meghan.  She wants contact with Meghan's money.

 

Samantha wants Meghan's money, fame, life, clothes, probably wanted Meghan's toys when they were kids even though they weren't raised together.  If Samantha wasn't targeting Meghan with her envy and jealousy, it would be someone else.  Meghan's fame just gives Samantha a bigger audience to try to play to.  Samantha has no self-esteem, self-respect, or self-awareness.  Everything wrong with Samantha's life is someone else's fault.  Samantha will never accept that her choices landed her where she is.  Just as she will never accept that Meghan earned her life.  No one handed Meghan anything, but Samantha will never see that.  In Samantha's lunatic world, Meghan is a horrible person because Meghan is a great person who is liked, and Samantha isn't.

Quote

I don't think it's the money, I think she wants Meghan's life. Samantha was an actress also, I have no idea if she was successful or not, but I'm sure the multiple sclerosis pretty much put an end to any career she might have had. Then Meghan got a job on a popular series, & got to live the whole working actress, red carpet & fans kind of life. Samantha was probably extremely envious at that point. Meghan is living the life Samantha wanted, yes, money is part of it, but I think everything else she doesn't have is what is really digging at Samantha at this point. 

I bet this jealousy started long before Meghan became successful.

Samantha has all the traits of a sibling abuser and a narcissist.

Edited by TigerLynx
  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with the above posts saying it’s not (or at least not entirely) Meghan’s money Samantha wants. If it were just the money, according to a lot of the articles I’ve read about Meghan since the press started writing about her as Prince Harry’s girlfriend, then fiancée, now wife, she was supposedly worth (at least) $5 million from her Suits salary, endorsements, & whatever other sources of income she had at the time before she even met & married Harry. Samantha (& whomever else) could’ve gone after the money even before Meghan became involved with Harry. What at least Samantha wants, I think, includes that whole Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous thing that comes with being a royal (I’m not sure I’m describing this adequately; hopefully you still get my point).

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, TigerLynx said:

I bet this jealousy started long before Meghan became successful.

Samantha's own mother, brother, youngest child, and ex-husband have all said she's hated Meghan since the day Meghan was born and I've always believed it.  

 

14 hours ago, TigerLynx said:

probably wanted Meghan's toys when they were kids even though they weren't raised together.

They were never kids together, period.  Samantha is 17 years older than Meghan.  It's another Samantha spin they were practically playmates and, as par for the course, the gossipmongers never challenge her on it either. 

Edited by MissAlmond
  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, MissAlmond said:

Samantha's own mother, brother, youngest child, and ex-husband have all said she's hated Meghan since the day Meghan was born and I've always believed it.  

And then Megan went and married a freakin'  prince. And not just from any royal family but *that* one. Who would have thought it in a million years?

If Samantha was just borderline jealous, that pushed her over the edge to insane.

  • Like 15

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, BW Manilowe said:

From ET Online: It Looks Like Doria’s Not Spending Christmas with Meghan, Harry, and the Royal In-Laws After All 

Nor is she moving to England anytime soon, apparently.

Translation, all these media people really know shit about Harry and Meghan's life. Which is why they still can't say where they honeymooned, can't even get the gender and name of their new dog right, and how many times have they now insisted her mother is moving to be with her, is already in England, was in England?

One week People Magazine was writing how Meghan is so isolated and has lost all friends because she doesn't know who she can trust and the next week, apparently she quietly flew to Canada where she hung out with all her close friends from her years living in Toronto.

And while they're running around with all their bullshit headline after headline, Harry and Meghan apparently visited the Hubb kitchen with none being the wiser, probably thanks to Camilla Tominey's little hit piece putting these people's lives in danger, suggesting they're terrorists. 

 

7 hours ago, GaT said:

Interesting article in Vanity Fair

Inside the Markle Family Breakdown

The minute I realized Samantha was a key source of this article, I found something better to do with my time. I got the cliffs notes at another board and as I suspected, this like all the other "in-depth" articles allowed them to spew their revisionist history and give their version of the truth and never get called on their shit. A perfect example was the first paragraph where once again Samantha declares she was completely misquoted in that first interview she gave once Meghan and Harry's relationship was made public. The one where she called her a social climbing, selfish narcissist who always wanted to marry into the royal family. 

And the writer just leaves it at that. Never asking her, okay, you were supposedly misquoted for that interview but what about all those tweets you sent pretty much saying the same things about her? No one ever puts Samantha on the spot for these things. How her own mother and child, so fed up with her hateful tweets about Meghan, did one interview just to say how awful a person she's always been, that she always hated Meghan, etc. No, instead they just give her platforms to feed her narcissistic delusions and spin the narrative they want to create about Meghan - the Hollywood, demanding diva. 

Never mind that Meghan lived and worked quietly for years in Toronto, living in a suburb, not some rich, fancy, swinging single area. But a suburb where her neighbor was a husband and wife and their two high school children. And that life included going to yoga, working on her blog, traveling, walking her dogs and participating in women's causes. But all of sudden everyone wants to paint her like she was some over the top, demanding, red carpet obsessed Hollywood diva.

Edited by truthaboutluv
  • Like 22

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, truthaboutluv said:

Translation, all these media people really know shit about Harry and Meghan's life. Which is why they still can't say where they honeymooned, can't even get the gender and name of their new dog right, and how many times have they now insisted her mother is moving to be with her, is already in England, was in England?

One week People Magazine was writing how Meghan is so isolated and has lost all friends because she doesn't know who she can trust and the next week, apparently she quietly flew to Canada where she hung out with all her close friends from her years living in Toronto.

And while they're running around with all their bullshit headline after headline, Harry and Meghan apparently visited the Hubb kitchen with none being the wiser, probably thanks to Camilla Tominey's little hit piece putting these people's lives in danger, suggesting they're terrorists. 

 

The minute I realized Samantha was a key source of this article, I found something better to do with my time. I got the cliffs notes at another board and as I suspected, this like all the other "in-depth" articles allowed them to spew their revisionist history and give their version of the truth and never get called on their shit. A perfect example was the first paragraph where once again Samantha declares she was completely misquoted in that first interview she gave once Meghan and Harry's relationship was made public. The one where she called her a social climbing, selfish narcissist who always wanted to marry into the royal family. 

And the writer just leaves it at that. Never asking her, okay, you were supposedly misquoted for that interview but what about all those tweets you sent pretty much saying the same things about her? No one ever puts Samantha on the spot for these things. How her own mother and child, so fed up with her hateful tweets about Meghan, did one interview just to say how awful a person she's always been, that she always hated Meghan, etc. No, instead they just give her platforms to feed her narcissistic delusions and spin the narrative they want to create about Meghan - the Hollywood, demanding diva. 

Never mind that Meghan lived and worked quietly for years in Toronto, living in a suburb, not some rich, fancy, swinging single area. But a suburb where her neighbor was a husband and wife and their two high school children. And that life included going to yoga, working on her blog, traveling, walking her dogs and participating in women's causes. But all of sudden everyone wants to paint her like she was some over the top, demanding, red carpet obsessed Hollywood diva.

 I wish I had skipped the article. I don't know why I thought maybe this one would be different and write about the crappy treatment Thomas SR, JR and Samantha have been treating Meghan. Samantha losing custody of all her kids, her own mother and kid fed up with her. Nope, none of that. Of course not. Can't have that.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

Would any of these rags eagerly spewing the Other Markles' mud truly want folks like that in their  own lives?! Is there a way we can get a New Year's resolution going to simply ignore the Other Markles and let them stew in their own as befitted Cinderella's steps?

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, Blergh said:

Would any of these rags eagerly spewing the Other Markles' mud truly want folks like that in their  own lives?! Is there a way we can get a New Year's resolution going to simply ignore the Other Markles and let them stew in their own as befitted Cinderella's steps?

I will say this, I remember sometime in the summer Hello Magazine made a statement that they weren't going to report anymore on stuff regarding her father and any of that because they deemed it a "private family matter" and to their credit, they've stuck to that. They completely ignored Thomas Sr. last self-serving television interview and pretty much just ignore the family entirely. 

  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:

Translation, all these media people really know shit about Harry and Meghan's life. Which is why they still can't say where they honeymooned, can't even get the gender and name of their new dog right, and how many times have they now insisted her mother is moving to be with her, is already in England, was in England?

And this in a nutshell explains why some of us don't believe a word the gossipmongers say and recognize there's an agenda being pushed.  

Edited by MissAlmond
  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post

As promised, The Swedish Royal Family (Crown Princess Victoria, Prince Daniel, Princess Estelle, and Prince Oscar) annual Christmas video.  I can't believe how chatty Oscar is now!

 

  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, MissAlmond said:

As promised, The Swedish Royal Family (Crown Princess Victoria, Prince Daniel, Princess Estelle, and Prince Oscar) annual Christmas video.  I can't believe how chatty Oscar is now!

 

 

Speaking of the Swedish family, I can't remember, did they ever find their stolen jewels?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:

Speaking of the Swedish family, I can't remember, did they ever find their stolen jewels?

The recovered some of them.  Some authorities believe they were stolen for a private collector just as someone on this board <cough cough, me> theorized at the time.  

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/this-was-an-order-theft-thieves-steal-swedens-royal-jewels-and-escape-by-speedboat-1327754

https://www.thelocal.se/20180913/one-arrested-over-stolen-swedish-crown-jewels-strangnas

https://www.apnews.com/ce74238b726a453bb61a21294b43384b

http://royalcentral.co.uk/europe/sweden/second-man-arrested-over-the-theft-of-the-swedish-crown-jewels-111629

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, MissAlmond said:

Thanks.   I was wondering the same thing.   It looks like they have "persons of interest" in custody but haven't gotten their hands on the jewels.   Has anyone seen Amanda lately?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I wish I had skipped the article. I don't know why I thought maybe this one would be different and write about the crappy treatment Thomas SR, JR and Samantha have been treating Meghan.

The Markle's have become a live version of "Cold Comfort Farm".  Sr crying to all and sundry Meghan needs to come back because he saw something nasty in the woodshed.  Samantha & Jr nodding in agreement, reminding Meghan she's "Thomas Markle's Child." 

Edited by MissAlmond
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, BW Manilowe said:

This starts out as a cute little story about the Queen, but then ends with the usual rubbish by a court "reporter" about how Will and Harry will have to put their squabbling behind them for Christmas. 

Another story I read - I guess the court "reporters" are clutching their pearls about being called racists. 

And they are asking for examples. Ok. I never knew bright-colored nail polish is not done as a royal until Megan got fingers wagging in her direction for doing so. I liked when websites pointed out the hypocrisy by showing Princess Diana and Princess Beatrice wore bright-colored polish in the past as well. 

Every move Megan makes is being negatively scrutinized. Why would that be?  Because you feel she doesn't belong there. And Why Would That Be. 

I am sure the Dukes and the Duchesses are getting along fine. 

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Macbeth said:

This starts out as a cute little story about the Queen, but then ends with the usual rubbish by a court "reporter" about how Will and Harry will have to put their squabbling behind them for Christmas. 

Another story I read - I guess the court "reporters" are clutching their pearls about being called racists. 

And they are asking for examples. Ok. I never knew bright-colored nail polish is not done as a royal until Megan got fingers wagging in her direction for doing so. I liked when websites pointed out the hypocrisy by showing Princess Diana and Princess Beatrice wore bright-colored polish in the past as well. 

Every move Megan makes is being negatively scrutinized. Why would that be?  Because you feel she doesn't belong there. And Why Would That Be. 

I am sure the Dukes and the Duchesses are getting along fine. 

I am sure they are just fine.  William and Harry have not lived in close proximity to one another since childhood and, even then, spent loads of time at boarding schools.  The notion that if they are not living in adjoining apartments, they are on the outs is just ridiculous.  I have a bunch of siblings, we are very close, see each other all the time, talk daily, and, yet, do not live in the same building.

People magazine has a cover story on the two Duchesses this week.  It is fairly evenhanded, I think.  They claim that the reason Kate came to tears at the dress fitting was because Charlotte's dress didn't fit properly, that the fittings were put off until the last moment and there might not be time to fix it.  It probably had something to do with postpartum hormones, but it was hardly a raging argument with Meghan who, I am sure, was not in charge of scheduling the fittings for the kids' outfits.

The article also very rightfully points out that Harry and William have very different positions in the family and that Harry, in particular, has a lot more flexibility in his role within the royal family and it only makes sense that, now that he is married, he and his wife are going to be stepping outside of William and Kate's shadows and establishing their own identity as members of the family.  The article was very positive about this development.

The article also points out that perhaps part of the reason that Meghan has had some changes in the personnel working with her is because she is the first woman to join the royal family in a prominent role who already had a well established career and public reputation, not to mention a sizable income of her own.  The sources for People say that the issue was really one of communication; that Meghan, being an American who has been responsible for herself for a long time, is very plain spoken and specific about what she wants.  She is also detail oriented and very savvy about her own public image.  The source said that this was not something that those in the palace were used to seeing from a royal by marriage.  The source also called her 'a breath of fresh air' and said that her influence was causing important and needed changes in the way the family operates.

  • Like 18

Share this post


Link to post
51 minutes ago, doodlebug said:

They claim that the reason Kate came to tears at the dress fitting was because Charlotte's dress didn't fit properly, that the fittings were put off until the last moment and there might not be time to fix it. 

YMMV but aside from thinking the People article in general sounded like a rehash of the stuff the British tabloids had been saying, just with their own spin, I call bullshit on that specifically for what you mentioned lower down in your comment. Like you noted, the article mentioned Meghan being very detail oriented and specific in what what she wants and I'm supposed to believe that that same woman left fittings for the bridesmaids up to the last minute, for her wedding that was going to be a global event? Especially since a number of the bridesmaids weren't living in England - her two goddaughters (her friend Benita's twin girls who I believe live in California) and Ivy, Jessica Mulroney's daughter who lives in Canada, which meant having to coordinate a number of schedules, etc.

Like I said above, I honestly am to the point where I don't buy these people know much of anything. I think it's a lot of assumption, speculation and maybe hearsay in terms of an off hand comment here or there that is then spun into some narrative and spin. As I said above, People was the one who one week wrote that Meghan was so isolated from all the friends she'd lost because she couldn't trust anyone.

But then the next time it was how she secretly spent time with all her friends. Then come to find out that Jessica Mulroney came into England, helped Meghan with her Ireland trip wardrobe, left and they were none the wiser until well after. People was the one who added onto the ridiculous pile on over the summer about how frustrating Meghan found some of the royal rules like her not being able to wear pants like she wanted or how she wanted to wear a power suit and she was told she couldn't. Except for how she'd worn pants at least a dozen times at that point and had worn a power suit more than once.

Edited by truthaboutluv
  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, doodlebug said:

I am sure they are just fine.  William and Harry have not lived in close proximity to one another since childhood and, even then, spent loads of time at boarding schools.  The notion that if they are not living in adjoining apartments, they are on the outs is just ridiculous.  I have a bunch of siblings, we are very close, see each other all the time, talk daily, and, yet, do not live in the same building.

People magazine has a cover story on the two Duchesses this week.  It is fairly evenhanded, I think.  They claim that the reason Kate came to tears at the dress fitting was because Charlotte's dress didn't fit properly, that the fittings were put off until the last moment and there might not be time to fix it.  It probably had something to do with postpartum hormones, but it was hardly a raging argument with Meghan who, I am sure, was not in charge of scheduling the fittings for the kids' outfits.

The article also very rightfully points out that Harry and William have very different positions in the family and that Harry, in particular, has a lot more flexibility in his role within the royal family and it only makes sense that, now that he is married, he and his wife are going to be stepping outside of William and Kate's shadows and establishing their own identity as members of the family.  The article was very positive about this development.

The article also points out that perhaps part of the reason that Meghan has had some changes in the personnel working with her is because she is the first woman to join the royal family in a prominent role who already had a well established career and public reputation, not to mention a sizable income of her own.  The sources for People say that the issue was really one of communication; that Meghan, being an American who has been responsible for herself for a long time, is very plain spoken and specific about what she wants.  She is also detail oriented and very savvy about her own public image.  The source said that this was not something that those in the palace were used to seeing from a royal by marriage.  The source also called her 'a breath of fresh air' and said that her influence was causing important and needed changes in the way the family operates.

I too read the article, and I concur. There are also cultural difference. Meghan is a black woman born and raised in the USA, was married before etc- she’s going to have a different communication style than Kate, who’s been around as William’s girlfriend since she was 19 and British.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

I believe Kate came almost to tears about the dress.   A) hormones and B) she wanted the wedding to be perfect for her new sister in law and was upset that an ill fitting dress might ruin the pictures.   In other words, more concern, than anger.   She certainly was NOT angry at Meghan about the situation.   

 

But you know, if there are two strong women, they MUST be pitted against each other.    Sophie missed most of this by marrying in after Diana's death and Sarah's divorce.   Can you imagine the headlines with THREE Windsor wives?    There would have been talk of alliances and two of them "ganging" up on one, etc.   

  • Like 18

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

I believe Kate came almost to tears about the dress.   A) hormones and B) she wanted the wedding to be perfect for her new sister in law and was upset that an ill fitting dress might ruin the pictures.   In other words, more concern, than anger.   She certainly was NOT angry at Meghan about the situation.   

 

But you know, if there are two strong women, they MUST be pitted against each other.    Sophie missed most of this by marrying in after Diana's death and Sarah's divorce.   Can you imagine the headlines with THREE Windsor wives?    There would have been talk of alliances and two of them "ganging" up on one, etc.   

Very true (bolding mine). 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

BTW,

 

   This week's People cover story seems to be trying to make a teapot tempest  between the Duchesses of Cambridge and Sussex and even quotes some supposed 'insider' about the Duke of Sussex becoming more testy- yet not a WORD in the piece about terrorist threats having been made to the Duke of Sussex solely due to his having chosen someone of a different ethnicity!  Really, People, who WOULDN'T become 'testy' at being threatened by strangers who wanted to end one's own life just because they refused to accept one's choice of spouse?  Consider the article an utter FAIL, People

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post

IMO, some people in and out of the palace grew too comfortable with fun-loving, third wheel Harry and these articles are a reflection of their angst.

Edited by MissAlmond
  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, merylinkid said:

 

But you know, if there are two strong women, they MUST be pitted against each other.    Sophie missed most of this by marrying in after Diana's death and Sarah's divorce.   Can you imagine the headlines with THREE Windsor wives?    There would have been talk of alliances and two of them "ganging" up on one, etc.   

I remember that before Megan came along there were a couple of "scandalous" stories about Kate's shopping sprees. But now that Megan is on the scene, the press have their sights on her. 

Gore Vidal was very close to Princess Margaret and asked her why she put up with all the lies being said about her in the press. And she responded that when you have 2 sisters and one has to be good, the Queen, the other has to be evil.  There is nothing to be done about it. She had resigned herself to the situation. 

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

The source said Meghan was a breath of fresh air and her influence was causing important  and needed changes in the way the family operates

Sources, sources. So which one should we believe? Maybe like someone said here earlier, she  really is a diva bitch behind the scenes.  Who knows? Only time will tell if it's a case of no smoke without fire.

As for being a breath of fresh air, so was Sarah Ferguson in the beginning. And no, Meghan isn't going to change a thousand --year old institution assuming it needs any changes in the first place. They' re giving her more leeway than Kate but that' s because she' s never going to be queen. One day soon Harry and Meg will be as unimportant as Andrew is now.

I frankly take the recent spate of stories with a big pinch of salt, however.

I follow the going-ons of the royals for the fun of it. I don't adore any one of them and I dont give a damn about them except for the entertainment they provide me.

I don' t hate.Meghan but if I want to, I will. She gets her fair share of love from devoted fans so if others want to hate her for non - racial reasons, feel free.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, shang yiet said:

Sources, sources. So which one should we believe? Maybe like someone said here earlier, she  really is a diva bitch behind the scenes.  Who knows? Only time will tell if it's a case of no smoke without fire.

As for being a breath of fresh air, so was Sarah Ferguson in the beginning. And no, Meghan isn't going to change a thousand --year old institution assuming it needs any changes in the first place. They' re giving her more leeway than Kate but that' s because she' s never going to be queen. One day soon Harry and Meg will be as unimportant as Andrew is now.

I frankly take the recent spate of stories with a big pinch of salt, however.

I follow the going-ons of the royals for the fun of it. I don't adore any one of them and I dont give a damn about them except for the entertainment they provide me.

I don' t hate.Meghan but if I want to, I will. She gets her fair share of love from devoted fans so if others want to hate her for non - racial reasons, feel free.

What a refreshing post!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, shang yiet said:

And no, Meghan isn't going to change a thousand --year old institution assuming it needs any changes in the first place.

The monarchy is constantly changing.  It went from absolute with true power to constitutional with symbolic.  The Saxe-Coburg-Gotha's became The Windsor's, the Battenburg's became The Mountbatten's, to push aside their German roots and not have Brits confuse them with Cousin Willie.   It has always changed  for it's own survival.  But they can ahead and not change; republicans hope they don't, They're more than ready to burst through the doors.  It's no skin off my back if that happens, let's hope those whose future job disappeared, know how to find a new one.    Meghan may be a bitch in some eyes, but at least she's a bitch who knows how to work. 

 

1 hour ago, shang yiet said:

I don' t hate.Meghan but if I want to, I will. She gets her fair share of love from devoted fans so if others want to hate her for non - racial reasons, feel free.

You do you.  

Edited by MissAlmond
  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post

Miss Almond,

 

 VERY good summary! I don't agree with all of it but you make some very good points. I happen to think that the British monarchy has survived due to its willingness to bend when needed (and I also hope it DOES survive since it gives its subjects ties to earlier heritage). No, I sure don't want one here (as the US has NEVER had one) but somehow losing the monarchy in the UK would be like losing a member of the family.  No, I sure don't think Meghan is a b-word (or any other kind of profane word) but I do think she's helped at least some of the Windsors re-discover their purposes.

 

 BTW, the Mountbattens didn't eagerly change the name from Battenburg but were virtually commanded to do so by their cousin George V when he was changing the Royal Dynastic name to Windsor- knowing full well that if they refused to follow suit , he could refuse to receive them and being plain old 'Mr. and Mrs. Battenburg' instead of Lords and Ladies Mountbatten was not something any of them relished!  

Edited by Blergh · Reason: make some
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Blergh said:

I happen to think that the British monarchy has survived due to its willingness to bend when needed

Bend.  Change. Call it what you will.  A smart monarchy senses the winds of change and adjusts accordingly.

Edited by MissAlmond
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, shang yiet said:

Sources, sources. So which one should we believe? Maybe like someone said here earlier, she  really is a diva bitch behind the scenes.  Who knows? Only time will tell if it's a case of no smoke without fire.

As for being a breath of fresh air, so was Sarah Ferguson in the beginning. And no, Meghan isn't going to change a thousand --year old institution assuming it needs any changes in the first place. They' re giving her more leeway than Kate but that' s because she' s never going to be queen. One day soon Harry and Meg will be as unimportant as Andrew is now.

I frankly take the recent spate of stories with a big pinch of salt, however.

I follow the going-ons of the royals for the fun of it. I don't adore any one of them and I dont give a damn about them except for the entertainment they provide me.

I don' t hate.Meghan but if I want to, I will. She gets her fair share of love from devoted fans so if others want to hate her for non - racial reasons, feel free.

I agree with a lot of this. Everyone is free to dislike Meghan or Kate or Harry or Will. Some people hate the royal family altogether. I mean if hating random celebrities isn't a Constitutionally protected right, it should be. Do I think people are too nasty on social media? Yeah. Do I think a lot of it is racism? Yeah. And that "Meghan's Mosque" stuff was way way way way out of line. Sometimes publications need to stop and think -- SHOULD we, not just CAN we, publish this.

As for the various "sources" ... we honestly don't know what is going on. This source says they're fighting, another source says they're okay. But I wouldn't be surprised if there was some tension, because think about your family. When was the last time everyone in your family got along? Yeah. Everyone has family fights and squabbles and dysfunction. So now think about a family that has recently added a member, plus they have to deal with an insane press and nutty fans. People get stressed out. They disagree. They might have a fight. It's normal. It's also entirely possible that everything is roses and candy with them. But what does it matter to us? It makes no difference to me if Harry and Wills are fighting.

I do like Meghan a lot. And I also enjoy the entertainment of the royals. I like looking at pics of them and seeing them wearing clothes that I'll never be able to afford. Maybe one day if Meghan's Everlane tote goes on sale I'll treat myself.

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Minneapple said:

People get stressed out. They disagree. They might have a fight. It's normal. It's also entirely possible that everything is roses and candy with them.

Or they get along well enough but aren't best friends because there really is no reason to be. I mean how many people are best friends with their in-laws? I think that's been a key factor in all these stories - there's no middle ground. The royal press either wanted these people to be some "Fab Four" tight unit or Meghan and Kate hate each other and their tension is tearing the brothers apart. There's no space for a middle ground. 

You can see that when the first batch of stories earlier this year was how Kate was a woman of all trades who was guiding Meghan on everything under the sun. When that fell way flat and Harry and Meghan had a very successful international tour and Meghan was lauded for her poise and intelligence, it became time to cut her down to size. And so the narrative shifted to angry black woman being a bitch to everyone and anyone and tearing the once fabulous trio apart.

When the truth may simply be that  Harry and William married two women who in many ways are quite different and they get along well enough but they're not best friends and they don't have to be. And more importantly, while of course they are still close and love each other as two brothers can, Harry and William now both have their own families, lives and identities. But that's not dramatic enough for tabloids because it's not what gets them clicks. So Harry and Meghan's move to Windsor can't just be because they want somewhere more private and less intrusive to raise their kids and instead must be because there's a civil war going on between Meghan and Kate or to hear them tell it, Meghan and every single person. 

 

21 hours ago, shang yiet said:

They' re giving her more leeway than Kate but that' s because she' s never going to be queen. One day soon Harry and Meg will be as unimportant as Andrew is now.

Serious question but what is this  leeway that Meghan has been given that wasn't given to Kate? Because far as I can tell, I have yet to see Meghan do anything particularly outrageous or different or unbecoming of a Royal. It's the media and people online who keep pushing a narrative of these supposed broken protocol, despite the fact that many others online repeatedly pull up the receipts to show that no, there is no protocol about this. So what leeway? 

Seems to me that's a line some use when others criticize Kate for not doing more or being more vocal in her role. Ingrid Seeward, one of the many annoying British royal watchers went as far, when others praised Meghan's giving multiple speeches on her and Harry's royal tour, to say that Kate will be Queen one day so she doesn't have to speak but instead just stand and look beautiful.

For the record, this is not my criticizing Kate herself. But it just seems to me that "breaking protocol" or "Kate will be Queen" is the cop out anytime someone says well Meghan does this and Kate doesn't. When personally I just think they're two different people who navigate their roles in the way that works for them. 

As to the bolded, as long as Harry doesn't end up a (alleged) sexual assaulter and potential pedophile, I certainly hope so. Maybe then their every move will no longer become fodder for all the ways the evil, angry American woman has come and torn him from his friends and family. 

 

21 hours ago, shang yiet said:

so if others want to hate her for non - racial reasons, feel free.

Seems to me many already do. 

Edited by truthaboutluv
  • Like 21

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Minneapple said:

Everyone is free to dislike Meghan or Kate or Harry or Will. Some people hate the royal family altogether. I mean if hating random celebrities isn't a Constitutionally protected right, it should be.

I totally agree that there is a 'nothing to see here' quality in disliking a celebrity or even random person you come in contact with.  Some people just rub you wrong in undefined ways.  Sometimes I think dislike isn't necessarily about the person him/herself but more a reaction to the lionization others place on that person. i know myself I have a list of 'irrational dislikes' of various celebrities.  They haven't done anything intrinsically bad or dishonest, I just don't 'get the love' so to speak.  But in that case I typically ignore them until or unless something about them come across my radar that I want to comment about (like Priyanka Chopra and her try-too-hard wedding, for instance).

What I don't get is the concept of outright hatred. Hate is a very strong emotion and requires, imo,  a lot of emotional investment.  Usually when I really dislike a celebrity it comes with receipts.  Like Lena Dunham for instance.  She has said and done some objectively awful things. 

I could understand hating the idea of the Monarchy.  I mean, Morrissey has made a that almost a second job.  But centering that hate onto Meghan (and many do) is weird since outside of Baby Louis she has been a member the shortest time.

Since we've all been so graciously granted permission to hate her, I wonder what has she actively done that really, really merits that hate by us rando internet observers?  Not just the garden variety dislike or the 'I don't get whats so great about her' baffled dislike  --  but 'hate' since that is the word being used? 

  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, DearEvette said:

I wonder what has she actively done that really, really merits that hate by us rando internet observers?  Not just the garden variety dislike or the 'I don't get whats so great about her' baffled dislike  --  but 'hate' since that is the word being used? 

She committed the sin of being born mixed race, that's enough for some people. They may claim it's a lot of other things, but that's really it.

  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, GaT said:

She committed the sin of being born mixed race, that's enough for some people. They may claim it's a lot of other things, but that's really it.

There's also some not being born into high status, but 'marrying up', into the world's most posh family. Get back down here into suburbia.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Joe said:

Get back down here into suburbia.

Or as the Daily Mail said it, Compton.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, DearEvette said:

But in that case I typically ignore them until or unless something about them come across my radar that I want to comment about (like Priyanka Chopra and her try-too-hard wedding, for instance).

Is that wedding DONE done yet?  I'm not sure.  

2 hours ago, DearEvette said:

Since we've all been so graciously granted permission to hate her, I wonder what has she actively done that really, really merits that hate by us rando internet observers?  Not just the garden variety dislike or the 'I don't get whats so great about her' baffled dislike  --  but 'hate' since that is the word being used? 

To be fair though, I think some people use the term "hate" rather loosely, as opposed to those who would seriously harm Meghan if they could.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Kate and other royals have also gotten a lot of pantyhose-level criticism. Sarah Ferguson from upper middle class family got her baptism of fire early even before she gave birth. Any woman Harry married would have received the same media criticism regardless of class or race. Cressida or Chelsea would have been targeted as well.

As for leeway, I just mean that the further you are from the throne, the more freedom you have.

Yeah,  'hate' and "love' here are loose terms. I doubt there is an army of enraged psychos out there plotting to hunt down Meghan with a knife. 

Regardless, the monarchy will survive with or without any changes coming from Meghan.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
46 minutes ago, shang yiet said:

Kate and other royals have also gotten a lot of pantyhose-level criticism. Sarah Ferguson from upper middle class family got her baptism of fire early even before she gave birth. Any woman Harry married would have received the same media criticism regardless of class or race. Cressida or Chelsea would have been targeted as well.

As for leeway, I just mean that the further you are from the throne, the more freedom you have.

Yeah,  'hate' and "love' here are loose terms. I doubt there is an army of enraged psychos out there plotting to hunt down Meghan with a knife. 

Regardless, the monarchy will survive with or without any changes coming from Meghan.

Didn't you hear about those thugs who actually have threatened the Duke of Sussex's life for daring to marry someone of a different ethnicity?!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

https://www.marieclaire.com/fashion/a25559572/meghan-markle-christmas-day-church-outfits-compared/?utm_medium=social-media&utm_campaign=socialflowFBMAR&utm_source=facebook

 

Merry Christmas to those who celebrate! I think that this cranberry shade is very flattering on Kate and she should wear it more often. I saw her wear a similar color to Princess Eugenie’s wedding. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

BW Manilowe,

 

 Thanks for that! I'm always interested to see what photos make the Queen Christmas Table and this year there was one of the Prince of Wales with the two generations of his immediate family evidently celebrating his 70th Birthday as well as one I don't recall seeing before of himself as an infant being held by his parents . Nice photo of the future George VI in his WWI uniform.

     Also, liked her giving her the history of that hymn of peace written when the guns of that horrible war had barely cooled. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×