Skip to main content

Meghan and Body Confidence: Some thoughts on last night's fashions

Last night's premiere of The Lion King presented us with two women, Beyoncé and Meghan, who are a bit bigger than they were a year or two back.

That's fine, from my point of view: they're both 37 (although both have been rumored to be older), both recently gave birth (well, at least Beyoncé did), and both are well within healthy weights for their heights.

That's where the similarities end, however.

Beyoncé appears to be embracing her new figure, turning up in a goldenrod dress that showed off her thicker legs and stronger torso. (In fact, came close to showing off too much of it - the dress kept tumbling off and Beyoncé had to clutch at it to hide her modesty.)

Meg, however, seemed to be fighting it with a dress that is clearly a size or two too small. The cheap-looking shiny fabric is straining at the back, and her breasts are flattened and look ready to squeeze out the top of her bodice.

Ageing with grace

One of the worst things celebrities do is try to cosplay their former selves. Madonna is the best-known offender at the moment: wouldn't it have been wonderful if this once-revolutionary woman had been able to lead her generation in ageing with grace?

Even ageing like her own idol, Marlene Dietrich, would have been lovely.  Marlene continued her lounge act into her 70s, wearing a long-sleeved, sparkling evening gown.

Instead, Madonna confronts the public with skin-baring fashions and unattractive plastic surgery. While she can still probably fit into a leotard she wore in 1979, she looks awful.

Compare Madonna to Meryl Streep, who is larger than she used to be (and certainly also has undergone some plastic surgery) but dresses her age and acts her age. She looks great.

Stuck in the 1990s

Meg is often said to be stuck in the 1990s when it comes to her look. From her engagement photos to her back-to-the-camera Christmas card to her Instagram images, she's attracted to the style of a 1990s Calvin Klein ad. Even last night's dress had a 90s vibe.

But it makes no sense to be stuck in the 1990s, or even the early 2000s, when it comes to your own body.  Meg is no longer the "hot girl" she was cast as in various low-budget productions: she's a woman, a woman approaching middle-age, and it's okay to look like one.

Whatever insane things she had to do as an actress to remain camera-weight, she no longer has to do. Most of the Royal ladies - from Sophie Wessex to Zara Tindall to Bea and Eugenie to the Queen herself - have healthy figures.

The exception, of course, is the Duchess of Cambridge, and this is one of the few areas in which Meg really doesn't need to emulate Kate.

(I often wonder why Kate stays so extremely thin. Is it because she thinks it looks good in photos, because her husband prefers it, or because she has such an extensive wardrobe in small sizes? Harder to do as many "rewears" if she puts on 10 or 15 pounds.)

Fighting with your own body

Fighting with your own body is exhausting and I wouldn't wish it on anyone, even Meghan. Unfortunately, she doesn't seem able to accept her body as it is. 

Ever since she joined the royal family, she's been wearing clothes made for a body she doesn't have, from the long white trousers that dragged on the ground at her last Wimbledon (made for a taller woman) to the pleated ecru skirt worn to this Wimbledon (made for a column-shaped woman, not box-shaped Meg.) 

There's nothing wrong with Meg's body the way it is now. She just needs to dress to flatter it. 

Meg insists on acting as her own stylist, and she's not very good at it. But if she's going to choose her own clothes, perhaps it would be helpful to find another celebrity of a similar age and with a similar body shape she could emulate.

Alternately, she could take inspiration from the clothes she's already worn that have been hits. The blue cape dress she wore to a state dinner in Fiji was almost universally praised - why not make colorful cape dresses her signature style?

The flared-from-the-waist navy dress she wore to last year's polo match - site of the supposed $1 million kiss - was also very flattering. For daytime, Meg could do versions of this silhouette in every possible hue and fabric, done "bespoke" (her favorite word) by a talented British tailor.

It could be her daytime trademark, much like Kate's coat dresses. Why not give it a try?

Comments

Anonymous said…
@Ozmanda, a vote was held and we no longer have to provide any real details other than age, height and weight, plus a bathing suit photo from the neck down.

😉🤣😉🤣😉🤣😉🤣😉🤣😉🤣

Okay so not really. No details at all. Pls stay.
Anonymous said…
So no Happy Birthday for Camilla? Seriously, WTH? Are they trying to be booted from the BRF? How childish is this? I think that this signals that there is much more going down behind the scenes, and I wonder if PH maybe *did* disappear for the 48 hours because this has got to be a little stressful. And then the $3M went straight to H&M Foundation for them to spend as they please? Again, seriously?
MaLissa said…
Technically he can use his father's subsidiary title Earl of Dumbarton just like Prince Edward's son James uses Viscount Severn.
Tea Cup said…
To echo an earlier comment upthread, I also infer Beyonce's greeting "My princess" as a clear distinction that Meghan is the inferior whilst giving the benefit of optics that appear to pander to both rabid fan bases. Beyonce is colloquially known as Queen or Queen Bey and by bestowing the moniker "my princess" it seemed to me a patronizing dig from someone with a much higher stature who was putting someone in their place. But Me-gain is so self-absorbed in her own hype it probably went completely over her very swollen --literally-- head.
Ozmanda said…
I want to know also, I cant find anything on it!
Ozmanda said…
I grew up with one parent being a alcoholic and the other a drug addict, when I saw the bloating and the rapid back and forth with her body type I was sure it was alcohol. Harry's unkempt appearance looked like he has been on the drugs also. I don't know what is going on but I wouldn't be surprised if they were both imbibing.

I have always had the unproven theory that she has some serious dirt on either harry or someone else in the royal family.
NikNak said…
@Elle, I read your 'claw' comment in the voices of those little aliens in Toy Story and I laughed so hard.
Anonymous said…
@NikNak, that is exactly how I say it in my head every time I see her and "the claw, the claw!" Glad you laughed, too.
NikNak said…
@Nutty, Thanks so much for this blog. So many people in the UK are side eyeing this disaster. 'Are you seeing what I'm seeing' is pretty much everyone's opinion. Megs needs to lay low for awhile.
Anonymous said…
I said that, and yes, I've been "the queen" since childhood, and I immediately heard shade in that. When someone calls me "princess", I am quick to remind them that I am queen and have no desire to be "princess". And I'm not kidding lol.
NikNak said…
I requested a day off to watch the Royal Wedding. Sat happily ready for the Bride. That dress was thoroughly disappointing. Her hair was a mess. I was genuinely feeling let down.
Anonymous said…
I just checked again, and nothing. Who does this? MM is just so low-rent. What a _______ ____. And I didn't know this about Camilla, but now that I do, she's been move up my favorites list quite dramatically: "The Duchess has a keen interest in animal welfare and in 2006 became Patron of @TheBrooke, a charity that aims to improve the lives of vulnerable working horses, donkeys and mules..."
Lady Luvgood said…
Mischi, do some reading I am absolutely correct in that Archie will automatically become HRH and without changing the law of succession and letters patent no one can decline that title for him.
I think it is an Edward VI or some such Latin letters after the Edward that spells out who inherits title and who doesn’t.
It is a big deal to change it, it was done recently before George was born and I am pretty sure had to be voted on in House of Lords and or parliament.
If Charlotte had been born before George she would have been the heir to the throne, which until the law was changed was not possible, as only males could inherit titles etc.
Jdubya said…
Me-Again Sparke "The Charlatan Duchess" has documents from their new foundation. Lots of them and one of them lists Meghan as Princes of the United Kingdom. i tried to cut & paste it here but it wont work. this should be the address

https://66.media.tumblr.com/551b281b2c0bad29d4a62950526cb70f/fe444097d0ecc430-c7/s1280x1920/3921e291537059c11cad68c9f03190e25aa8cdae.jpg
KayeC said…
@Suzanne, Anne's first born, and the Queen's first grandchild, is Peter Phillips. I believe, when he was born he was fifth in line, (maybe sixth?) but that Anne refused a title for him, and later Zara (which means Princess, ironically). This was the first time in hundreds of years that a legitimate grandchild had not been given a title.

Also, I think it has been reported that Edward will inherit the Duke of Edinburgh title from his father, Prince Phillip, after he passes.

***Question, if there was a change that led to daughters inheriting titles, does that mean that Beatrice could inherit her father's dukedom? Making her the Duchess of York?
KayeC said…
@Suzanne, Anne's first born, and the Queen's first grandchild, is Peter Phillips. I believe, when he was born he was fifth in line, (maybe sixth?) but that Anne refused a title for him, and later Zara (which means Princess, ironically). This was the first time in hundreds of years that a legitimate grandchild had not been given a title.

Also, I think it has been reported that Edward will inherit the Duke of Edinburgh title from his father, Prince Phillip, after he passes.

***Question, if there was a change that led to daughters inheriting titles, does that mean that Beatrice could inherit her father's dukedom? Making her the Duchess of York?

I posted above but didn't see, so sorry if this is a double post.
KayeC said…
Agree about Camilla! She seems to be a sharp cookie, but also fun. I always felt bad about how she and Charles were not allowed to marry. But being only one generation from his Uncle Edwards abdication, I don't think renouncing his title for love was ever going to happen. I do not condone cheating, and I think Diana was a very special person (she had that je ne sais quoi,) but she and Charles were not a good match. Camilla seems to be the strong woman he needs. And she is a genuine animal lover!
Now! said…
I've only heard rumors - I have not heard it reported by any mainstream outlets.

His security team must have been thrilled. I wonder when they'll begin quitting, just like Meghan's.
Now! said…
I have seen talk about it! What a terrible position he must be in - having to basically investigate his own brother.

Shakespearian.
Ozmanda said…
Her comment "They don't make it easy" is telling to me. This pretty much highlights her personality type as being narcissistic and the complete inability to "read the room". If this is true this won't get better as she is hardwired to be completely selfish and no empathy.
marvelousmagda said…
Considering the black dress, MM's headlights are walleyed. No foundation garments. Is that the female version of commando? I saw that pic of commando PH in a blue suit on someone's site yesterday. Need eye bleach.
RE: the staged saga at the polo match. That was a classic movie script of the dressed in rags, (that dress) wronged woman holding her starving baby in her arms waiting in the cold and snow for the man who abandoned them to come by. Totally manipulation to embarrass him in front of his friends and family. UGH! Evil through and through
Oldest Older 201 – 221 of 221

Popular posts from this blog

Is This the REAL THING THIS TIME? or is this just stringing people along?

Recently there was (yet another) post somewhere out in the world about how they will soon divorce.  And my first thought was: Haven't I heard this before?  which moved quickly to: how many times have I heard this (through the years)? There were a number of questions raised which ... I don't know.  I'm not a lawyer.  One of the points which has been raised is that KC would somehow be shelling out beaucoup money to get her to go "away".  That he has all this money stashed away and can pull it out at a moment's notice.  But does he? He inherited a lot of "stuff" from his mother but ... isn't it a lot of tangible stuff like properties? and with that staff to maintain it and insurance.  Inside said properties is art, antique furniture and other "old stuff" which may be valuable" but ... that kind of thing is subject to the whims and bank accounts of the rarified people who may be interested in it (which is not most of us in terms of bei

A Quiet Interlude

 Not much appears to be going on. Living Legends came and went without fanfare ... what's the next event?   Super Bowl - Sunday February 11th?  Oscar's - March 10th?   In the mean time, some things are still rolling along in various starts and stops like Samantha's law suit. Or tax season is about to begin in the US.  The IRS just never goes away.  Nor do bills (utility, cable, mortgage, food, cars, security, landscape people, cleaning people, koi person and so on).  There's always another one.  Elsewhere others just continue to glide forward without a real hint of being disrupted by some news out of California.   That would be the new King and Queen or the Prince/Princess of Wales.   Yes there are health risks which seemed to come out of nowhere.  But.  The difference is that these people are calmly living their lives with minimal drama.  

Christmas is Coming

 The recent post which does mention that the information is speculative and the response got me thinking. It was the one about having them be present at Christmas but must produce the kids. Interesting thought, isn't it? Would they show?  What would we see?  Would there now be photos from the rota?   We often hear of just some rando meeting of rando strangers.  It's odd, isn't it that random strangers just happen to recognize her/them and they have a whole conversation.  Most recently it was from some stranger who raved in some video (link not supplied in the article) that they met and talked and listened to HW talk about her daughter.  There was the requisite comment about HW of how she is/was so kind).  If people are kind, does the world need strangers to tell us (are we that kind of stupid?) or can we come to that conclusion by seeing their kindness in action?  Service. They seem to always be talking about their kids, parenthood and yet, they never seem to have the kids