In her infamous TV interview with Martin Bashir, Diana, Princess of Wales, describes seeing herself as "a good product that sits on a shelf and sells well, and people make a lot of money out of you."
All celebrities are products, to some extent. Media companies use them to draw attention and sell advertising; the public projects their own emotions onto them - desire, anger, fear, hope.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are products, too.
And proudly so, which is why they have put so much energy into their @SussexRoyal brand.
Their supporters (paid and unpaid) will tell you that they are a contemporary and cutting-edge product, shaking up the Royal Family and moving it into the future with meaningful lectures on environmentalism, multiculturalism, and girlpower.
But very few people want this product.
The British public definitely do not want this product, which they are nonetheless obligated to pay for. And the American public is mostly indifferent.
Nobody is buying, and Meghan is angry.
And proudly so, which is why they have put so much energy into their @SussexRoyal brand.
Their supporters (paid and unpaid) will tell you that they are a contemporary and cutting-edge product, shaking up the Royal Family and moving it into the future with meaningful lectures on environmentalism, multiculturalism, and girlpower.
But very few people want this product.
The British public definitely do not want this product, which they are nonetheless obligated to pay for. And the American public is mostly indifferent.
Nobody is buying, and Meghan is angry.
Talking vs. listening
This week there were a number of comparisons between the Duke and Duchess of Cambridges' masterful visit to Pakistan and the Sussexes' ramshackle tour of South Africa last month.William and Catherine focused on Pakistan's positives; the Sussexes drew attention to South Africa's many negatives.
Most importantly, William and Kate appeared to spend a lot of time listening to their hosts, while Meg and Harry were there to talk.
And talk and talk and talk, largely about themselves.
When they weren't talking about themselves, they were taking pictures of themselves for the @SussexRoyal Instagram account.
Or video of themselves, for the documentaries that will be broadcast in both Britian and the US.
And, of course, overshadowing the entire trip with a last-minute lawsuit about breach of privacy.
Basic sales theorey
There are many versions of Meg's cv online, but looking back at her twenty years or so of job history, it doesn't seem like she's ever worked as a salesperson.It's about listening, not just to what your customer says but what they do not say - listening to their unsaid motivations, which are probably what's really driving the sale.
(One example: a young person in my circle was sent out recently to sell lottery tickets in front of a supermarket in support of her teen athletic club. My tip: the people you're approaching aren't buying a piece of paper, or even a chance on the prize. They're buying an image of themselves as the sort of person who will spend a few coins to support kids' sports, and perhaps revisiting a warm memory of themselves as a young athlete. That's the real product.)
Meg doesn't seem capable of thinking about other people's motivations - and probably doesn't care.
From her father to her first (second?) husband to Prince Harry, she's had a standard method of getting what she wants: throwing a raging tantrum until the browbeaten fellow finally gives in.
This is the tactic she is now trying on the British public.
Push and pitch and publicize
But Meg's angry letters and lawsuits and tearful interviews aren't working: they don't like her, and they're not giving in, at least not if the 26,000+ disparaging comments on a recent Daily Mail story can be believed.You simply cannot sell a product people don't want.
You can pitch and push and publicize and perhaps generate a little interest, but it doesn't last. In the long run, people will go where their true interests and desires, said and unsaid, are taking them.
The whole setup reminds me of another publicity campaign, from the late 1990s, for Oprah Winfrey.
Oprah was at the peak of her power and influence then, and she had just produced and starred in a movie based on the Toni Morrison novel Beloved.
Morrison was and is a very popular author, and Oprah was everywhere promoting the film; on her own show, on other people's talk shows, on news segments, in the print media, everywhere. It had all the earmarks of a Sunshine Sachs PR carpet bombing, although I don't know if Ken Sunshine himself was involved.
But the movie was a failure, coming in fifth in the box office on its opening weekend, well behind "Bride of Chucky." (Winfrey has since described the episode as the worst moment of her career.)
You can't sell people something they don't want.
And right now, they don't want Meghan.
Comments
What puzzles me is this: The British Royal Family is one of the most widely recognised, admired, respected and talked about 'products' on earth - and has been for a century and more. What's more, you don't actually have to DO anything - other than be born or get married - to be and remain a part of that 'brand'. Meghan married one of the most famous men in the world, and is now a part of the most famous and prestigious family in the world.
If you crave fame, it doesn't get better than that, does it? Why would anyone seek to jeoporadise all of this in order to be yet another Instagram celeb, constantly seeking out PR strategies, merching rubbish clothes and anxiously checking what is trending on Twitter. She and Harry could have a fantastic life. Much better, in many ways, than the more constrained and duty-bound life Kate and Wills will have. And instead of pinching herself and wondering how she managed to land such a spectacular deal, she's whining about how Piers Morgan doesn't like her?
I'm genuinely baffled.
I watched that interview clip of MM. When she thanks the interviewer for asking how she is because "No one's asked me that." Oh pah-leese!!! I'm gagging. Welcome to motherhood, except, I don't have a staff to help me out.
But I guess "They don't make it easy" do they?
Love you @Nutty!
That clip of Meghan whining is sickening after all the hardship that she saw while in Africa.
She needs to come back down to planet Earth and go away for awhile.
We are all sick of her and Harry’s whining!!
However, Mills doesn’t make it clear if it’s Meghan and Harry’s PR team based at BP who are the ones behind the promotion of the documentary either.
Mills goes on the say after:
‘A strange thing to do when you consider there is an unwritten rule in the Royal Family, that you don't do anything too high profile when other members of the family are on tour.’
So Mills knows it’s all a little odd and off.
She thinks she knows better than everyone and has made it clear that she has no clue. She is a spoiled girl/woman hooked up with a spoiled man/child. It is not a good look.
We have the Kardashian Klan to thank for popularizing manufactured reality. I think we are all at once tired of fame for fame's sake and much more aware of the machinations and manipulations.
This brand they are trying to create lacks authenticity. Something the younger people have no time for. They are trying to be everything but are nothing. They are hollow. Their words echo. They have become a walking illustration of the old adage, actions speak louder than words.
Now, I must turn my thoughts to our upcoming federal election. Canada is at a bit of a crossroads. Wish us luck!
The reason why nobody ever asks you "how you're doing" is because everybody ALREADY KNOWS how you're doing.
You can't stop reminding everybody.
Even when I'm trying to avoid you, Harvey Weinstein's PR firm keeps you on trending topics on my Twitter app. Have mercy on us. Please. 🎻
The public took Diana into their hearts because for all her privilege, she wanted her husband to love her and to genuinely help people who were suffering. She was relatable and admirable.
It’s difficult to feel any sympathy for someone who has gotten everything she’s ever wanted and whines that she wants more. Her father and Harry have both jumped at her every whim.
Markle comes off like Veruca Salt
Also, I wrote (again) in DM comments last night about the curious phrasing used by Meghan's defenders. All you need to do is look at the 'worst' comments and you'll see an astonishing similarity. The vocabulary, writing and viewpoints are so odd and so lacking in any understanding of the role the BRF plays in national life. As if they are all written by the same five people (No!) Today it has occurred to me that Diana's phrase from her disastrous Panorama interview, that she wanted to be 'queen of people's hearts', fits this mode exactly. At the time many winced at this. As with Alistair Campbell's/Tony Blair's 'people's princess'. Now it's all of a piece. How did this happen? Please make it stop.
Couple had to do with Harry’s popularity. The beloved son, so small behind the carriage. But, besides the invictus games, there hasn’t been a ton of goodwill built up. Drugs and nazi uniforms and dating blondes and some “hot Harry on a horse” photos.
I’m wondering if a lot of that goodwill had been generated by the Cambridges. Attractive couple who seEm happy,
Uncomplicated and, most importantly, great parents to winsome children. The assumption they would all be the “Fab Four”, in my opinion, was because people assumed Harry and Meg would behave like the beloved a Cambridges (I know I did. Before Meg, they all seemed to jibe so well).
Harry and Meg really believes their popularity was down to THEM and THEIR accomplishments and didn’t stop to realize analyze if they had done anything to merit that. If they had an ounce of self-awareness or could have listened to advice, they maybe COULD have built goodwill of their own while associating with the far more successful Cambridge brand.
Imagine if Meg’s PR had been about the foibles of an American in England. All the things she loves so much more about her new country. Meg learning to drive on the other side of the road. Her first picture cracking a Christmas crackers. What if she had gone on to talk about postpartum depression. Fertility issues. And yes, even then need to use a surrogate. She could have been vulnerable in a much more winsome way (a way that would have resonated with women over 35, much as she hates to admit that that’s her audience. Stop talking to 20 year olds Meg).
Unfortunately, she felt the best way to go was the ball-busting perfectionist who cooks 5 course meals for her friends (both of them), up at 5 to work and yoga and that perfectionist image is not only alienating but doesn’t mesh with the disheveled person and projects we often saw in public.
It didn’t have to be this way Harry and Meg. You wouldn’t take advice and you had to be adored. Those were your problems.
Oh 25k and counting comments on ‘oh woe is me’ Meghan article in the DM, the most I’ve ever seen.
" If I was Meghan I'd have breathed a sigh of relief on securing Harry. No more need to hustle. Bliss. However it seems she likes to hustle!"
You know, when she and Harry got engaged, like many others - and despite what some say that we were all determined to hate her becuase she's mixed-race - I thought the fact that she was an actress would be an asset. OK, she wasn't a ceelebrity herself - despite her best efforts - but she was on the fringes of the celeb world and clearly very comfortable with the spotlight. I thought that given that she was going to be the subject of huge press interest whether she liked it or not, it was just as well that she did like it!
Now though, I think the opposite. She was in the Hollywood hustling business for too long and it totally marked how she sees the world. 15 years of trying to hustle, sell herself, do anything to get herself into the headlines etc, has meant that she has no idea that none of the above apply in the royal family. She seems incapable of switching gears and it's a cringe to behold. She walked into more fame and fortune than she could ever have dreamed of, and now she wants to ruin it all in order to hustle on Instagram?
"I watched that interview clip of MM. When she thanks the interviewer for asking how she is because "No one's asked me that." Oh pah-leese!!! I'm gagging. Welcome to motherhood, except, I don't have a staff to help me out."
Now imagine she had said: "Of course I know that in many ways I am extremely fortunate. My son and I are healthy, thank god. I don't have money worries. I have a loving husband. I have a very low workload and a huge support staff which other women could only dream of. But motherhood can be hard for all women. I think we should bear that in mind and do all we can to make this challenging but wonderful time of life as easy as possible for mothers - all mothers. Here in South Africa I have seen mothers struggle against great odds and survive. They are an inspiration to me."
Really.... if she'd said something like this even an old cynic like myself MIGHT have bought it. But she just coudln't, could she? It's all about her. Always.
I'm not buying the crocodile tears or the "cameras-give-me-PTSD" BS myself. And I'm not buying the Queen's part of BP supported this, much less supported stomping on the Government-supported tours of BOTH South Africa and Pakistan for this appalling whine-fest.
The contrast could not be greater--On the one hand we have Will handling the press calmly and thoughtfully after the RAF plane couldn't land for 2 hours, Kate dressed properly not only at the mosque but everywhere they went with nary a wrinkle in sight, W&K at tea parties with sick children and at ceremonies with foreign leaders. On the other hand, we have M&H showing up in wrinkled disheveled clothes, Archie displayed only because Tutu was available demeaning Tutu in the process, Meghan violating cultural norms right and left (forcing women to sit on the floor, pushing in front of Harry, showing cleavage) and Meghan wearing a head covering fitting for a costume in a low-rent Hollywood version of "Meghan does a Mosque" an X-rated sex movie. And to top it all off, against the backdrop of a violent country where many people struggle daily to just to live, whining on camera how hard they have it. I really can't imagine being more disgusted.
You also have to factor in advanced B****t fatigue. As Louise500 said, it may be that the BRF now faces an existential threat. As we can't cherry-pick. In the shorter-term I think it will become increasingly difficult to stage-manage H&M appearances in this country. It's not just Dumbarton and Sussex that are problematic now.
It reminds me of Mad Men (I hope you’ve seen it) where Brit CFO Lane Pryce is like a square peg in a round hole with his American counterparts! We speak the same language, more or less, but we have inbuilt ways we do things, or see things. We are more reserved, even in this day and age, we do not blow our own trumpets ad infinitum, it’s vulgar. We champion underdogs, we do like giving to charity, but not if we’re told we’re unconsciously racist and should do it! We are getting better at understanding mental health, but not when the person talking about it talks about it in the context of themselves all the time. The BRF must remain unpolitical, their function is about making us the general public attribute a value to them in our lives and that of Britain. At this moment you have William and Catherine trying to give us insight into Pakistan, whilst H & M act like teenagers, with the boo hoos as the latest manoeuvre. Isn’t it like watching a toddler going through a routine of how to get what they want? Give the cute smiles and love, when that fails just grizzle incessantly.
Agree completely. Interesting that you mention 'Mad Men'. One of the themes of 'Mad Men' is that people don't change, despite what the self-help books tell us. I agree with that. I also feel - and I know this may be controversial - that people rarely overcome the cultural norms they were raised with. Harry was raised in an immenesely privileged and elite environment. He went to a school where almost all the other boys were from a similar background. Even when he was in the military, he allegedly had special treatment. He simply has no clue - none - about what it is to function in any other environment. Sure, he may have hung out with celebrities and partied in Las Vegas, but he did so as a prince. He never had to earn his way or accept the consequences of his actions - the royal machine smoothed everything for him, even if he's too thick to really appreciate this.
So if he does give up his 'working royal' status to head off with poor bullied Meghan and live in Los Angeles, he's in for the biggest shock of his life. That is her turf. Not his. He will go mad there, if he hasn't done so already.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/a-tale-of-two-tours-harry-and-meghan-v-william-and-kate-pakistan-tour-2q7x3bxzz
"It was all going so well. As they came to the end of their overseas tour, the young royals could congratulate themselves that their efforts to promote Britain and the royal family had gone even better than expected.
Then, with only 24 hours ago, a dramatic news development threatened to divert attention from all their good work.
This, of course, was the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, who on Thursday night were caught up in mid-air drama when a storm forced their plane to divert back to Lahore after twice failing to land at Islamabad.
But in an intriguing parallel, it was also the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, whose successful tour of southern Africa just over a fortnight ago was also interrupted by an explosive news development.
And it is the differences between the two couples that say so much about how to manage a successful royal tour — and, indeed, what the purpose of such tours is in the first place.
The storm that prevented the Cambridges’ plane from landing was alarming for those on board. The duchess, who described the flight as “quite an adventure really”, told reporters: “It was pretty bumpy up there.”
By the time it landed William was able to make light of it all, joking to his entourage and journalists at the back of the plane: “Doesn’t smell too bad back here. Just wanted to check you were all OK.”
That small moment summed up so much of the difference between William and Harry. Both brothers have good reasons to be wary of the press, but William has managed to overcome his reservations to build up a reasonable working relationship with the media, while Harry still struggles to consider the press as anything other than the enemy. Throughout his ten days in Africa he scarcely spoke to the media, other than when he was giving brief interviews to push whatever message he was promoting that day.
William often shares a joke with the media; Harry’s African tour, in contrast, while an undoubted success until it went wrong, was not long on humour.
In the Sussexes’ case, Harry’s diatribe against the tabloids — and the news that his wife was suing The Mail on Sunday— overshadowed the rest of the tour.
While the Cambridges’ unexpected overnight stopover in Lahore meant that they had to cancel one engagement — a helicopter flight over the Khyber Pass to view the border with Afghanistan — none of it detracted from what every observer judged to have been a highly successful tour.
Their plane may have been blown off course: their tour was not.
The royal biographer Penny Junor said it was a tour that “pushed all the right buttons” in terms of ensuring widespread coverage. Just as Harry followed in Diana’s footsteps when he visited the Angolan town where she made her famous walk through a cleared minefield, William and Kate followed in Diana’s footsteps on several occasions: in the Chitral Valley in the Hindu Kush, at a cancer hospital founded by Imran Khan, at the Badshahi Mosque in Lahore.
“It was our royal family doing what they do best, going round the world sprinkling fairy dust. They win hearts and minds wherever they go. They totally understand what is required of them. They are there to represent Britain, to represent the Queen — to promote Britain and the royal family around the world as a benign, caring and responsible nation.”
“You can go too far with the whole ‘Kate is Diana’s double’ thing. She is not. She is her own woman.
“But the job is the same job. She is doing what Diana did. And the job description is to look good, be compassionate, be interested and be supportive of your husband and supportive of the Queen.”
The tour had serious messages to get across, about climate change, for instance, and the UK’s security relationship with Pakistan. William spoke of the sacrifices made by Pakistan in the war against terrorism and the importance of the country’s security in keeping people safe on “the streets of the UK”.
But the couple also appeared to be enjoying themselves: playing cricket in Lahore, watching the dancing in a Kalash village or fussing over the puppies at a training centre for explosive detection dogs in Rawalpindi.
There was even a lighter moment in the hospital when Kate donned a toy tiara to enjoy a make-believe tea party with a little girl suffering from kidney cancer.
If both tours could be considered a success — a qualified one in the case of the Sussexes — they were also very different. The Sussex tour had more of a sense of personal mission, of a trip where the couple had key messages they wanted to get across, whether it was female empowerment, gender violence or climate change.
And then Harry derailed it all with that statement.
“They shot themselves in the foot,” said Ms Junor. “That tour had completely reset the dial for them. Yes, there had been negative coverage. But that tour put them back where they had been at their wedding. They were out there doing what royalty does best. They were getting deservedly good coverage. For him to release that statement soured everything.”
I just checked the DM and there's 27K+ comments now and the top 3 (all negative about H&M's whining) have over 30K upvotes.
Nutty - good to see you back. I missed your commenting during the chatting. Hope you are well.
on to commenting:
...she's had a standard method of getting what she wants: throwing a raging tantrum until the browbeaten fellow finally gives in.
This is the tactic she is now trying on the British public.
One thing that will clearly be an issue, sooner or later, no matter how much you throw yourself on the floor to kick and wail, Kate will be Queen and M will have to bow to her. Some sugars still seem to think that M will be a wonderful queen - oblivious to the idea that just like protocol has rank which determines where you stand, you can't become queen because you want it or by throwing enough tantrums. That's going to be a problem.
It's about listening,
This has been a long time behavior, trait which could possible be considered fatal in that when you are unwilling to listen (advise about how to handle an upcoming event, dress for the level of the occasion, what to eat/not eat) to the BRF - a royal family steeped in tradition, eventually the ranks will all close against you to let you spin in the wind as keeping you around could undermine their very existence.
She wants to be a Kardashian.
The Harry and Meghan sex tape is not far behind.
Oh, and should they both lose the HRH, then they would need to bow to someone who currently is of lower rank.
Just read that in one of the Diana bios. For someone who appears to be really big on how she has this really high ranking and therefore you need to bow to me, that she would need to bow to Prince Andrew, his daughters and so on.
This was a diplomatic tour, which is what Royal Tours are supposed to be about.
In the (too) brief interview on CNN with the Cambridges, William makes an important point, when talking about Pakistani security forces working with British security forces on this tour, that the inter-relations between Pakistani and UK security forces protects not only people in Pakistan, but people in the UK as well. He made the last point at least twice, hinting at preventing terror attacks without actually saying it. He was telling us why this trip was important.
When we consider that the trip and William's important comment (we're talking about preventing multiple deaths) was eclipsed by an excerpt from an interview with Smarkle complaining about her privileged life, we see the danger of media manipulation by Sunshine Sacks type PR forces.
The UK survived the blitz and fought in both world wars to make the world a better place. When the young men volunteered to risk their lives, they never thought that they were fighting in order to make Britain safe for the likes of Meghan Markle and Instagram to set the agenda.
We really need to take a hard look at the power of social media to manipulate the younger generation in particular.
This documentary is clearly filmed to portray her as a victim and underdog. She is trying to gain the viewer's sympathy. And Harry is supporting her.
She will never be contented with all her blessings because she is an ingrate. She's ungrateful to her Dad for giving her good education, ungrateful for the good life she's living now, ungrateful for having a healthy baby, ungrateful for having a husband who is clearly besotted with her.
@Nelo : I really enjoyed reading Rhiannon Mills' paper.
https://news.sky.com/story/royal-tour-william-and-kate-have-shown-how-they-should-be-done-11839071
Celt news formulated a theory to explain why BP helped those 2 to promote the documentary.
@Mama Lawma & Liver Bird : I'm 100% with you! She could have done/said so many meaningful things ... What a wast!
@Fairy Crocodile : I have seen everywhere on the Internet #weloveyoumeghan (probably created by SS.).
Like Celt news, I think BP has a long-term version : H&M have strengths (they don't take advantage of it) but they are their own biggest enemy....
@abbyh : when Kate will be Queen, MM will already be divorced for a while... She will do everything possible to avoid bowing Kate.
"When we consider that the trip and William's important comment (we're talking about preventing multiple deaths) was eclipsed by an excerpt from an interview with Smarkle complaining about her privileged life, we see the danger of media manipulation by Sunshine Sacks type PR forces."
You are right but....
Think about it. A few decades from now, in the age of Their Majesties King William and Queen Catherine, people will look at the photos of them bringing a smile to the face of a sick little girl. They will look back at the wonderful pictures of a glowing Kate, her face perfectly framed by her headscarf.
By contrast, Megs will be onto husband number 3 (and counting), her face pulled and filled and god knows what not, hawking anti ageing cream on day time TV. And Harry? When George, Charlotte and Louise are young adults and having children of their own, who will care about Harry?
Royalty is all about playing the long game, not competing over Instagram likes. Meghan has no clue.
@Louise I agree about William's comments, which I also found significant after asking myself last week why the Cambridges were taking the risk of going to Afghanistan. William has been training with the intelligence services, so perhaps this was a chance to show respect to the services' counterparts in Pakistan. Respect and honor is extremely important in Pakistani society.
That said, while I agree that "we really need to take a hard look at the power of social media to manipulate the younger generation in particular," I see no signs that the younger generation cares about the Sussexes at all.
From what I can see, the largest demographic of unpaid Meg supporters is Black career women in their 20s, 30s, and 40s, or at least people pretending to be. (Of course, not all women in that demographic are fans.) And I don't know if they like Meg personally as much as they feel the need to defend her.
True, she may have a different relationship with her mother, which means that she is close to NO ONE in her family. Whose fault is that? Certainly not the RF, the press or the people of the UK. She is not an orphan.. she abandoned her family on both sides. The feminist made her own mother sit on the sidelines while Charles walked her down the aisle. Should we pity her?
FrenchieLiv: Regarding #weloveyoumeghan.. this has already fallen off the top ten things trending on Twitter. It didn't even last 24 hours.
"From what I can see, the largest demographic of unpaid Meg supporters is Black career women in their 20s, 30s, and 40s, or at least people pretending to be. (Of course, not all women in that demographic are fans.) And I don't know if they like Meg personally as much as they feel the need to defend her."
I think that's true. She also has a large following among 'woke' white women, mainly but not exclusively American. But how big a demographic are they in the larger scheme of things? And what real use are they to Meghan in the long term?
I recall, in the past, seeing other statements from Buckingham Palace that clearly were coming from the Smarkles.
2) I am not good with technology so don't know how to post it here, but there is a very funny entry on Charlatan Duchess Tumblr showing Harry in various situations asking people to say nice things about Smarkle. It is a mock up, of course, but the best comedy blends with reality.
If this cry fest really had the approval of BP, it would be on the much more prestigious BBC, not tacky advertising funded ITV.
In the meantime, my 18-year-old granddaughter doesn't even know who she is. So much for her publicity.
But I agree that the woke contingent isn't as profitable as some media types seem to think it is. Douglas Murray had a funny piece in Unherd yesterday (https://unherd.com/2019/10/woke-gq-reeks-of-fear/) about the latest issue of "woke" GQ Magazine, with Pharell Williams on the cover wearing a floor-length dress that appears to be made from a yellow airplane life raft. "The New Masculinity" is the headline.
Murray writes:
"Time and again multinationals and public companies turn out to be as happy as junior members of the Royal Family to sign up to an ideology which will come to eat them next. If anyone is in any doubt about this trend, they should look to the men’s magazine GQ – or what we should more properly describe as the former men’s magazine, GQ.....Nobody will aspire to the its ideals now, and soon perhaps GQ will learn the mantra that Gillette and others learned before them: get woke, go broke."
I might have been wrong about the demographic, but the usefulness of these legions on IG, Twitter, etc commentators comes from their ability to monopolize the conversation, making many people believe them based on the sheer volume of their postings. They are able to manipulate reality.
For example, when #we love you meghan was trending in the top 4 on Twitter yesterday, even I believed that she had a lot of support. (She is, however, off the top 10 today).
If the RF also believes that she has mass support, they would be less likely to cut her loose. That's how internet warriors could be useful to her.
However, she doesn't have the thick skin of a Kardashian, therefore this little temper tantrum demanding that everyone stop being mean to her. She also doesn't have Pimp Mama Kris, who I imagine would probably figuratively slap Meg across the face and tell her to toughen up, buttercup, and keep your eye on the prize.
I was never a big royal follower, although I admire the Queen and of course I remember the Charles and Di wedding. My interest tends towards the older royal history (and may I say I think it's entirely too bad that they can no longer behead troublesome family members?) so this level of disgust I feel for the Harkles and the avid interest with which I read blogs like yours, Nutty, is completely new. Thank God you're all here.
They are like students who go wild when their teacher is sick and the substitute teacher can't maintain control.
Their brand lacks basic building blocks. And it's the reason why their PR is also having to into crisis management mode b for actually doing the brand building mode. And why is this happening? Because in their approach to life their only reference is the Cambridges and Diana.
They can invoke Diana in all their passionate appeals because she isn't actually there to smack them on their heads. A ghost is apparently free for use no questions asked. Their envy borders on vengeance. Their ambition borders on mania. And that is why they don't do their homework. They would have had so much more "success" if their basic idea of a game plan included anything more than the need to be liked.
Speaking of 'working' appareantly Meghan has an apperance on Tuesday for some 'youth' event at the Royal Albert Hall, but I've not been able to find any confirmation of it. We're in for another cringe fest no doubt.
There is no precedent in the Royal Family for the likes of Meghan Markle either. :-)
And you're right, their brand does lack basic building blocks. Plus, what they would say it represents - a social conscience, for example - it doesn't really represent, given the couple's travel and spending habits.
Meg could actually help build her own fashion brand by wearing only sustainable British labels, for example; there are tons of them these days. Tougher for Harry, because he is required to wear suits, but I'll bet it could still be done.
But to do this type of thing, you need really good staff, the sort of people who can do the research and build the necessary network of contacts. And then you have to actually listen to their advice.
Someone owns the rights to Marilyn Monroe and other dead celebrities' images. Can't they do the same with Diana?
I do think though, that if Philip and the Queen were 10 or 15 years younger, a lot of this nonsense would no have been allowed to happen.
Charles is ineffective and William has no official powers. There is really no one running the shop currently.
I know that it is a big stretch, but the monarchy of Russia effectively ended while the Czar was off with the troops during WW1, only Rasputin was minding the shop, and anti-monarchists took advantage of the situation. The British monarchy is ,of course, viewed far more favourably than was the Czar by his people, but my point is that someone still needs to be minding the shop.
Mischi - OMG, too funny for words. That would be so poetic.
IRL, I would think that if anyone owned her image sorta, it would be shared between the two boys. That she didn't make money that way when she was walking around being photographed limits it I suspect.
But that would be amusing in a watching a cat toy with a toy mouse.
After a year of marriage, a child, two royal tours (so to speak), I am appalled by the lack of protocol of MM and deference to her husband Prince Harry. This is the tell - this says it all. Harry can talk mental health issues and climate change all he wants - no one is listening because his string are being managed (okay - pulled) by MM. Meghan has not learn the lesson of Charles / Diana that William and Kate have learned. Kate goes out of her way not to upstage her spouse. The tour is about him, and occasionally "us". Kate is a supporting player and she gets it. Meghan refuses to learn this lesson and that is why no on is buying.
@emeraldcity noted recently that the family "enforcer" - whom I guessed to be either the elderly Duke of Gloucester or the Duke of Kent, and @emeraldcity did not correct me - has also been ill in hospital recently.
That may also be a factor.
This generation will need its own "enforcer."
Mike Tindall certainly has the look for the job, but Jack Brooksbank has been in the pub business, so I would bet he knows a few shady characters. Peter Philips is also a possibility.
Meghan should also note that once he becomes Prince of Wales the Duchy purse strings will pass to him, so au revoir to the 'bespoke' Givenchy! Though I doubt she'll still be with Harry, at least not as active members of the royal family, by then.
Make a call and have her cars get flat tyres on her way to all of her next appearances, for starters.
When she wants to step out from wherever to do a bit of shopping, have her protection officers announce that a threat has been called in, and they advise she not go out. If she does, then trail behind her quite a bit, so that she feels exposed.
Have her staff call in sick every day. Have food deliveries delayed for hours. Power cut off in her residence. Computer viruses. Her cell phone subscription cancelled. Clothing and moonbump deliveries delayed.
Make her life a living hell. All Charles has to do is give the ok and the severity of the disruption to her life he desires.
Longtime lurker here. Nutty, thank you for giving us this space and for your always-thoughtful insights.
@Ava C: "Well Kate HAS improved a lot, but I think that's mainly the assurance she's gained as the mother of three children and that she just needed a LOT of time to work her way in."
My theory is that Meghan coming on the scene made William and others in the RF--including the Queen--appreciate how solid Kate has been. And I think that has given her confidence in herself and pride in the way she has fulfilled her role since becoming DoC. I honestly think she just needed those around her--and maybe us--to realize that the job is way harder than it looks, and she has been pulling it off, for the most part, like a champ.
In her engagement interview, Kate said she intended to "learn the ropes." Meghan said she intended to "hit the ground running." Only in retrospect, after seeing Meghan run roughshod over everything, does the wisdom and humility of Kate's approach begin to fully emerge.
I don't think it's any surprise (or coincidence) that Kate received the GCVO, the highest ranking bestowed for services to the Queen in April. It hadn't been that long since she'd received the Royal Family Order. Seems to me that Dear Liz and William took a long look around and realized that maybe they really did luck out after all.
And also, that Kate's superpower is that her clothes do not wrinkle.
Someone has to be willing to make the call, and Charles isn't.
You need a heavy within the family who knows the right people to do the dirty work, and is willing to work with them to conceptualize a (hopefully nonviolent) plan.
Talking-to-plants Charles is not your man.
He is like a prince straight out of a movie. This should be such a happy time for him, and his brother is ruining it.
Mischi:"Have her staff call in sick every day. Have food deliveries delayed for hours. Power cut off in her residence. Computer viruses. Her cell phone subscription cancelled. Clothing and moonbump deliveries delayed. " All I can say is Hahahaha. I am laughing just thinking about it. It would be brilliant.
A few months back Nutty did a blog post about spares in the BRF and how this drama by Harry the spare almost follows a predictable pattern. So I for one don't buy that this is all MMs doing. We have known Harry for much longer than we have know Meghan. And just like Mm has a pattern of ghosting her family and friends, notoriously grifting through life and social climbing, Harry too has displayed a very steady pattern of being stubborn, rude, being spoilt, Petty, stingy and more or less a vapid, shallow entitled brat.
Also, we say MM invokes Diana all the bloody time but to me it's looking more and more that it's Harry who is projecting the ideal of Diana on himself. It's evident in his rants about unhappy misunderstood lonely childhood, his exaggerated wokeness and over eagerness to make statements with whatever meaning. He fancies himself as someone who gives invaluable soundbites - "the family she never had", " no one really knows the real me", climate change, population, Africa Africa Africa, privacy, his interview immediately after Archie was born, the recent statement about the lawsuits, his cryfest at well child awards. It's all a pattern that shows Harry facies himself as the prosecuted misunderstood angel driven to death by the crazy mad world.
Now imagine being in Meghan's shoes ( those that don't even fit her properly). And handling all of that AND being the world's best humanitarian AND trying prove she's more beautiful than Kate AND trying to convince the world she had lunch with Michelle O AND trying to fit into a dress she bought 3 years and 6 moonbumps back. What about her feeling? what about her dreams? Nobody has made it easy for her. Least of all Harry.
But I thought the Duchy pays for the expenses of the current POW's spouse and his descendants. For Charles, that means his wife and his sons and their families. But it's not clear to me that would continue when Will becomes the POW. Wouldn't (as the current Monarch's son) Harry's support and Meghan's support shift to the funding source the Queen now uses to support all her children except Charles?
"I do feel for the frustration that William must be feeling. After watching him on the Pakistan tour, I was struck by how he is the "whole package"... tall, handsome (sort of), athletic, fabulous wife, adorable kids.. equally at home flying a helicopter of drinking pretend tea out of a pink tea cup. Knows when to be serious and when to have fun. British reserve."
Absolutely. He and Kate have perfected the royal art of finding a balance between friendliness and reserve, modernity and tradition, glamour and approachability. And it's not as easy as it looks.
I'm not a monarchist and have been very critical of the Cambridge duo in the past. But if we are to have a monarchy, let it be led by people like this. And am I the only one who thought that during the Pakistan tour we were getting our first glimpse into how Wills and Kate might be as king and queen, rather than just as duke and duchess? I think Kate, in particular, has changed in a good way over the past year or two. Part of it may be the contrast with you-know-who but I think part of it also is that she has now completed her family - she seems to have a particular connection with Louis - and won't have to endure that awful HG again. She has definitely matured from the girl who used to twiddle her hair in public and wear skirts which blew up in the wind. You can see the future queen in the making.
"Wouldn't (as the current Monarch's son) Harry's support and Meghan's support shift to the funding source the Queen now uses to support all her children except Charles?"
You could be right. Maybe someone with more knowledge on such matters can clarify.
Anyway I think it's a moot point as it's highly unlikely Meghan will still be around by then.
Who cares? People tear their clothing, get embarassing stains, find out their clothes are too short or too long or too transparent, etc. It happens every day.
I don't know why the skirt thing is relevant, particularly since she was a new Royal at the time, just learning the pitfalls.
They have been so defensive from day 1 it's embarrassing to watch. It's like they are living a parody life.
"Who cares? People tear their clothing, get embarassing stains, find out their clothes are too short or too long or too transparent, etc. It happens every day."
Not to people who have entire teams making sure they are dressed appropriately, including sewing weights into hems, which other royal women do and which Kate now seems to do. If we're going to criticise you-know-who for showing too much boobage, I think it's OK to comment on Kate's unneccessary wardrobe malfunctions. Especially as I did specifically say she has moved on from this.
With Meghan, we forget to mention her blunders as they are so numerous - butt pads during her latest appearance where she wasn't scheduled to appear at all. Too tight dress. Sleeveless (we've forgotten about her completely ignoring that rule). No tights. The argument with Harry in the Range Rover afterwards. The hand holding with Harry.
That's about the same number of 6 years of Kate blunders all in one of Meghan's appearances.
It's easy for her to play the humanitarian role because it does not require long term investment or change on her part, but she is not able to revise history with her father. This is probably what sticks in her craw; she wants to say she paid her way through school herself and worked for it, but her father says he has bank statements to challenge it.
I am not an unkind person, although I'm not always a nice person. I don't wish MM any harm; but she does not appear to take responsibility for anything. It's always someone else's fault. The latest blitz of "Archie's feed times" and "No one asked me how I'm feeling" doesn't resonate with those of us who have serious health problems or who have to budget monthly to stay afloat.
Someone asked on Twitter, how come the camera clicking never traumatized Harry when he was dating Chelsea or Cressida? And others upthread have wondered why they are so obsessed with wearing their victimhood as a badge of honor. That is all Meghan's doing, IMO, and it's been her gameplay from day one if you ask me.
It reminds me of a book I read a long time ago called The Sociopath Next Door. I am not calling Meghan a sociopath, but the number one way to spot someone who is only out for themselves is: what is the first and strongest emotion they are always trying to make you feel? If it's pity for them, then run.
But it didn't all happen 10 years ago. Kate did have a Marilyn moment at a memorial site in India in 2016. The others were a few years before that in 2014 (on windy tarmacs during tours) So she had been a royal wife longer when those blow-ups happened than Meghan has now.
I suspect the wind incident stories got more traction because of stories in the press that Kate used to "moon" boys in school and had a nickname to that effect. (She WAS picked on in the press too.)
modicum OF sympathy
gamePLAN
Also, can someone please show me where to find these buttpads everyone is talking about?
I do think it's possible that Meghan's arrival did push Katherine to do more and ratchet up her wardrobe (it was fine in the past but became better). But so be it... after all the problems that she has caused, at least Smarkle was good for something.
I don't know much about the skirt issue, but agree that wardrobe malfunctions should be kept to the absolute minimum in her case... Katherine is not you or I.. she is a future Queen and needs to keep up the image. Because after all, without real power, the Monarchy is all about image.
Once you let that image drop, you've got... Meghan Markle and Harry.
The most scathing criticism of the Sussex duo is at Lipstick Alley, a forum for black women, where investigation and analysis are mixed with on-point wit. So, if black women are the base of her support, they are also the base of those who don't.
PR manipulation of public discourse and manufacturing support is dangerous. British people especially, who are funding the Sussexes, should take this more seriously. When a PR firm was hired to manufacture consent in South Africa, South Africans fought back and got them shut down. Bot supporters for the Markles have already been exposed in the media. I admit that South Africans did have the advantage of a huge email leak from whistleblowers. But South Africans took action. (Perhaps that is why one reason why the Markles are using a USA PR firm - it is out of the reach of the Chartered Institute of Public Relations).
I understand that the BRF institution, and the Queen especially gives support rather than takes action against those who mess up (and there have been some major incidents). Plus, Camilla was hugely unpopular (and there are still those who hate her) but become a full-time working royal. So, there is precedent for shoving the Markles down the public's throat, like it or not. However, there is also precedent for the opposite. Beatrice and Eugenie were 5th and 6th in the line of succession when they were removed from the list of funding. They do still appear at family, and even official, events (such as garden parties or an exhibition at BP) and even get to ride in carriages, but they do not have RPOs, nor offices and staff at BP, and have to pay rent for living in Crown property (as do Andrew and Edward). Harry and Archie are 6th and 7th in the line of succession. The Duke of Gloucester does a lot of official appearances but, like Beatrice and Eugenie, does not have RPOs, or offices and staff at BP, and pays rent for living in Crown property.
One commentator at Lipstick Alley said that the Markle debacle has become her favourite trashy, bad acting, ridiculous storylines soapy ...! Me too?
All I see in the ITV clip is crocodile tears. Poor me, boo-hoo. She's not sad, she's fearful she's already losing any relevance to the pop culture zeitgeist. Trust me, she will continue to force headlines with her embarrassing displays of narcissism.
Maybe if she had kept her family close, instead of treating them all like inferiors, she would have had a "soft place to fall" when/if her feelings are down. But no, she treated her family like shit, and tried to portray herself as a perfect innocent, a victim, a child, which in reality she is nearly 40 years old, and married twice, and has surely experienced her own personal feelings of doubt and unkindness towards others.
She just isn't a 19 year old Princess Diana swallowed into the Firm, any comparison is ludicrous and laughable. MM is reaping what she sowed.
Camila was hugely unpopular - she even got pelted with bread rolls in the supermarket - BUT she knuckled down and just got on with royal activities without making a fuss. Plus, she never ever complained that people didn't like her. In other words, the contrast with Meghan couldn't be more stark.
" Beatrice and Eugenie were 5th and 6th in the line of succession when they were removed from the list of funding."
Were they 'removed' or was it just that their security protection was taken away when they came of age, due to the fact that they were not working royals? I don't think the queen ever intended them to be 'working' royals, much to Andrew's displeasure. So I don't think they were 'removed' as such.
Moreover,she has a very loving and close knit family of her own -kids, grandkids that she keeps in touch with and clearly loves and they adore her. It's also a testament in her favour that most members of BRF, apart from Andrew, seem to get on fine with her and are seen laughimg, talking, even will and Harry before Harry got married.
- leaks to the media during her romance with Harry
- temper tantrum re the diadem
- the F word during the carriage ride after the wedding
- tongue stuck out after the church service
- bare shoulders at the balcony where no rf member ever bares shoulders
- return label attached to the red dress and plastic protectors still attached to bags
- wearing black at public royal occasions (royals wear black for mourning)-
- endless pushing past Harry and other protocol violations
- walking in front of the Queen
- insulting USA President
- wearing a see-through stripy skirt
- announcing her pregnancy at Eugenie's wedding reception
- showing her bra at somebody's wedding
- writing on bananas for sex workers (good job the charity never distributed them)
- ridiculous Archie birth secrecy
- the pub lunch that never was
- the private flights
- the Lion King attendance for money against the Marine band musicians charity
- spending obscene amounts of money on ill - fitting dresses
- idiotic make up showing eye-lash glue and face different colour to hands
- shape and size shifting bump that makes a popping sound when she sits down and stands up
- her horrible Vogue and charity dress disasters
- letter to father scandal
- Wimbledon scandal with pictures of her nobody was actually taking
- insulting staff and servants
- playing race card
- showing the bra during Africa tour
- petrol bombing all good that was forced out of the Africa tour
- making cardinal sin of publicity overkill during the W&K royal tour of Pakistan
- using Archie as publicity tool
Am I missing something dear Nutties? Feel free to add to the list.
That is what anyone would do who married her prince for love, and not for fame, wealth, privilege and global domination.
Meghan's attitude and behavior assure me that she doesn't love Harry. She is using him and when she has what she needs, she will dump him, just has she has dumped everyone else in her life. I doubt she is capable of really loving anyone besides herself. A year ago, I would have said "oh poor Harry, how sad for him." Now, I think he is getting exactly what he deserves. It makes me sad for that child though, whoever he is. The little "no one asks me if I'm OK" nonsense is her new reality, that the baby comes first now.
Much has been said about the contrast between the two tours in regards to clothing, the press, their attitudes, etc. What hasn't been much remarked on however is how The Cambridges operate very much as a team, and the Sussexes do not. William and Kate are always in sync. They do not have separate engagements. While they don't often touch, their physical closeness and frequent eye contact demonstrate to everyone that they are together. Kate is not kept away during the Diana moments. However, they donall this in a way that doesn't detract from their hosts. They were so professional that they made it look effortless.
The Sussexes, meanwhile, despite all of their clinging and PDA's are not a team. The separate engagements are one clue. The don't walk in step, rarely make eye contact, they don't have the sense of timing that long established couples have. Harry may think he loves Megsy, but again, she is using him, and they are in a big mess of their own making.
This mornings headlines:
Harry Speaks about Mental Health (Daily Mail)... most comments regarding him are negative.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez gave Meghan Markle a 'shout out' on Friday. Smeg's newest enabler. It's SO hard being famous. Really hard... comments negative for both AOC and Smeg.
Kate spent $12,000 on clothes for the Pakistan tour! How dare she!
Breaking news!!!... Smeg & Kate like use milliner.
New game.. spot the phony PR.
It's a trick, they are all PR.
Yes, I saw the AOC shout-out. I assume AOC was prompted by someone in the Democratic party network, possibly in New York, where Hillary Clinton is also based.
Sunshine Sachs is also closely involved in Democratic party politics, I believe.
There were several pro-Meg comments under the Times story Nelo referenced earlier. Assume that was Meg's minions as well. The Times gets fewer comments than the DM because of its paywall.
I think it's very telling that MM commented she would "hit the ground running" upon joining the RF. It actually shows how arrogant and self-centered she is.
The comments on the DM are over 27,000.
The best rated has 210 responses.
The next one down has a mere 80 something but one of them references the idea that a particular poster ought to take their comments to Frog Cottage and nail them to the door like Martin Luther.
The natives are very restless, verbal and not afraid to saying what they really think.
oh, and someone posted that they hope Piers will comment on the "documentary".
The show and the reviews will be quite the talk for the next several days. And then it will all pick up again when it is on in the US. It may break the internet but not the way people are thinking or projecting.
Forgot other headline: Andrew spotted riding horse. The horse is beautiful. I'm not a horse person, but this one is remarkable.
I am looking forward to the variety of Meghan Markle Halloween costumes we will be seeing.
My favourite will be anyone with the poo emoji hat.
I'm definitely not watching this "mockumentary" that they've put together. As far as BP approving this, I doubt it very much. I think they've gone rogue as with the statement that they put out there on the last day of their Southern Africa tour. They've gone rogue with this "mockumentary" without thinking of the consequences. All this is going to do is make them more reviled.
As far as Her Majesty cutting them off, I think she should dissolve their household. If they want a "household", they can pay for it. Make Frogmore Cottage their office since they don't live there anyway. Pay their PR, equerries, secretaries, valet, stylist, etc., out of their own pocket. If they do an event, they get paid for it and nothing more like Prince & Princess Michael of Kent - they get paid per engagement. They do have patronages so when they show up for them, they get paid. She can't revoke their titles without an Act of Parliament - if I remember correctly so all she can do is minimize their public engagement.
She could have had it so good but she squandered all the goodwill right at the outset so I say - you made your bed, sleep in it.
Two princes, two continents, two very different touring styles… and countless opinions on whether Team Cambridge or Team Sussex covered themselves (and us) in the greater glory. Perhaps honours are even – which would be nice. Even then, there’s no concealing the growing gap in how William and Harry interpret their duty to represent the Queen on such high-level diplomatic missions.
Inevitably, there has been an unseen extra member of both squads. Diana, Princess of Wales has been brought into play not just by the accompanying media (for whom sentimental parallels and great pictures are always difficult to resist) but by the princes themselves, most directly in tomorrow’s ITV special with Tom Bradby, who accompanied Harry and Meghan on their Africa tour.
Diana’s sons and their wives have literally and figuratively followed in her footsteps; even William’s unsettling encounter with bad flying weather in Pakistan was foreshadowed by his mother’s experience in 1991, when her Queen’s Flight aircraft was grounded by a violent thunderstorm.
Meteorology aside, perhaps the most revealing similarities and differences lies in how each prince has echoed their mother in revealing his feelings. These tours are hard work and are intended to achieve tangible benefits for British interests. But the invisible rewards can be priceless too – winning hearts and minds is a key tour objective, and that requires successful deployment of those most unstable of royal weapons: public displays of emotion.
It would be a stony heart that didn’t go out to Prince Harry this week as he was seen, watery-eyed, telling Bradby that everything he does reminds him of his mother, or struggling, close to tears, to complete his speech at the WellChild Awards. I attended many such events with Princess Diana and losing control of your own emotions was sometimes a serious occupational hazard made no easier by stress at the office, new dad anxiety and the sleep deprivation that goes with both.
This is the same new father who recently shared with us the difficulty he sometimes feels getting out of bed in the morning because of the burden he carries worrying about the world’s problems.
Predictably such gloom earned a raspberry from commentators who suggested that a fit and wealthy young man, with – according, bizarrely, to Hilary Clinton – a “gutsy” woman for a wife and a bouncing new baby might lighten up a bit. Morning tussles with impending global catastrophe might be seen as a bit of a luxury, especially if they occur in a house taxpayers have just spent several million pounds to refurbish.
Better a prince who thinks too much than too little, you might argue. And many welcome our enlightened times in which a prince (a prince!) can publicly reveal such vulnerability. What some condemn as a sign of weakness or self-indulgence is seen by others as proof of enlightened inner strength and sensitivity.
But, as we’ve recently seen, when royal thought is stoked by raw emotion the results can veer unpredictably from endearing, to mockable and finally to downright worrying. How else to describe the spasm of anger that soured the sweet success of Harry’s Africa tour and now condemns him and his family to long-term legal conflict with half of Fleet Street? Hard-fought litigation could quickly put global warming in the shade as a cause of bad Frogmore mornings.
Tears shed in public are a rarity in Windsor world. Many will remember the Queen discreetly dabbing her eye as the Royal Yacht Britannia was decommissioned (and who can blame her). Some may even recall the day Princess Diana visibly welled up when being addressed in fond and sympathetic words during an official engagement in Merseyside on the eve of her separation from Prince Charles. These two very different examples show both women in a good light: the first, acknowledging the passing of a faithful servant – the second an instinctive response to kindness publicly expressed at a time of great personal unhappiness.
Prince Harry’s WellChild display of emotion falls into a different category. Critics have suggested it was an overwrought attempt to steal airtime, while supporters contend it was a welcome display of common humanity. Either way, it certainly made as many headlines as what would otherwise have been William’s star turn in a jewel-toned sherwani, the same day.
Assuming, as we should, that the emotion was genuine and caught the Prince as much as the rest of us entirely by surprise, it resembles another occasion on which his mother wept. Significantly, though, that was in private. We were on tour in Africa; the last event of the day – a visit to a rural AIDS hospice for young children – was over. The officials and media had trooped off to their limousines and buses leaving Diana and a small entourage to watch the toddlers being tucked in for the night
Diana, characteristically, wanted to help, and I’ll never forget the image of her kneeling by each bed, accompanied only by a nun with a lantern, comforting each little occupant as they prepared for one more of a dwindling number of nights on this earth. As she straightened after the last bed, in the dim light I saw tears shining on her cheeks. But by the time she rejoined us they were gone, wiped away by the professional princess who was already back on parade.
There were no tears in Pakistan this week when Prince William agreed with a young well-wisher that he, too, was “a big fan” of his mother. But who could doubt the infinity of sadness concealed by such brief, good-natured and modest words. It seems William has adopted that most British of attitudes: that emotion makes a good servant but a poor master.
He and his brother are set apart, destined by birth for a weird public existence in which strangers can pick over their most private emotions. How they cope has been on worldwide display these past few weeks and it’s fair to say their methods are different – perhaps different enough to prevent them and their wives ever living up to Meghan’s early description of the foursome’s work as “unity at its best.”
When Princess Diana made her own first visit to Pakistan in 1991, she was introduced to the work of the revered Pakistani poet Sir Muhammad Iqbal. Much of what she read struck a chord with her. She painstakingly copied a verse and gave it to me after the tour, and another might have been especially written for princes navigating a life like no other: Destiny is the prison and chain of the ignorant.
Our system has put William, the future king, in that prison. To his infinite credit he is turning it in to a place in which to do his duty supporting the monarch while still being a committed father and family man. As he said in Lahore this week, when told how he and Kate had “radiated joy” wherever they had been: “We are very happy people.” It shows.
Harry’s prison has an open door, and no gaoler but of his own making. His undoubted gifts of empathy, compassion and charm flourish in sunlight and wide horizons. They are a far better – and happier – riposte to an unfair world than anything his lawyers can muster.
Brilliantly put. Lol
From what I'm observing, I don't see that to be true.
Most Americans do not know who Meghan is...
The ones who do, don't care and don't pay attention.
They have too much going on in their lives,
and if they're going to invest any of their
free time in entertainment, that time is not
going to be spent on the Royal Family and definitely not Meghan.
A few weeks back, there was a story on TMZ about
Harry & Meghan's PUB Outing.
The comments about Harry & Meghan were 99% negative.
If anyone loved Meghan and Harry, you'd think it would
be people who do invest their time visiting celebrity
sites like TMZ and yet, the majority of people had negative
things to say about the gruesome twosome.
From where I stand, most people are not buying what these two are selling. People in the world struggle. Even those of us with jobs and homes. When these two b_tch and moan and cry about how hard their lives are, it's just too much for people to take.
I have a good life. A home, a family, income, and I think about how expensive groceries seem to be now...
And, if I'm worried about the cost of groceries,
I can't imagine how people who have much less than I have
feel about Meghan and Harry's "life is so hard" nonsense.
I--who am no one, a working person in a medium-sized US city--pay exactly $79 for my every-four-weeks haircuts (color every three months). This is not unusual. It was a ridiculous thing to invent a scandal over.
The scandal is that men's haircuts are $15. "As a woman" (LOL) I'd suggest we put our outrage where it could be better used.
The problem with all these SJW's (or limousine liberals as they used to be called) is that they do not walk the walk.
And the longer The Queen and PC are perceived to do nothing, the stronger the sentiment gets.
Glad you are back.
I was wondering if Markle was referring to her mental health or physical health. Normal baby deliveries can result in serious after effects on the body. For that, there are visits to the gynaecologist. But we don't know who her doctors were. Still waiting for the info regarding Portland hospital. If she is having post partum issues down there, perhaps she was hinting at that. The reporters should follow that and change the narrative about her mental health issues. Not sure if I expressed that correctly.
@tweeymma... there's a difference between drawing a salary for continuing to satisfy the requirements of your employment contract, failing to do so gets you fired, and a taxpayer funded lifestyle of homes, private travel, security, and couture. HUGE difference. If you are going to travel by private jet at taxpayer expense, it's unwise to nag those taxpayers about their carbon footprints.
Celebrity does not equal credibility. If H&M still have some brain left between them, they should fire SS, try to reconcile with Tom Markle, and show British tax payer Archie, but I am afraid they have been living in the celebrity bubble for too long to recognize their mistakes.
Your list was pretty comprehensive. Allow me to add:
---staring at Catherine like she's Damian in the Omen at every opportunity
---consistently dressing out of season and out of sync for every single occasion. I get the merching, and understand how it could be profitable. But one supposes that the designers providing the clothes actually want their items to look *good*. Meg appears to be issuing a huge FU not only to everyone who has to look at her, but to the advertisers who are ostensibly paying her well to drive sales of their clothes.
---Constant virtue-signalling about feminism, environmentalism, and anti-bullying while 'hiding' behind her husband as a weepy 'vulnerable'female, the private jets, yes, but let's talk about how much environmental waste her little exercise in throwaway fashion generated for the landfills--'Smart Set' (plagiarized name and all)--while actually *living* zero of what she preaches
---a personal favorite: lolling around in the stands at Wimbledon high as a kite, basically flashing the world spreading her legs in a tiny short denim skirt. Surprised all of Meg's lady biz didn't wind up on the Jumbotron
---Going hatless in front of the Queen when specifically instructed to wear a hat.
---Disrespecting the Queen by turning her back on her on any number of occasions, including during the playing of the national anthem and flapping her gums meaninglessly
I can't do any more.
As a Lutheran, I find the notion of nailing the list of the Suxxits' offenses to the doors of FrogCott like Martin Luther with his 95 Theses against Rome amusing, but it'd be an empty gesture since neither of the Suxxits live at FrogCott or have ever set foot anywhere near it. Nor has anybody else, apparently, particularly the workmen who were allegedly carrying out the millions of pounds of renovation work.
I can (sort of) understand how it's possible to control the flow of information surrounding a clandestinely-obtained infant. Archie is not a historically listed building on a public footpath. But FrogCott is. For a year now we've been hearing about the flurry of activity, luxurious renovations, including the latest--a firepit barbecue . .and a stream of celebrity well-wishers coming to visit . .and how much Megs enjoys the lawn bowls from her window. It's all lies . . but why? It's not like they are living in the Forbidden City or the Kremlin. Why, in all this time have we not had so much as a single Instagram photo shot at Windsor by any of the citizens of the area?
The most distressing aspect of this whole circus is that not only is the world being gaslighted by Megs and Harry, but the gaslighting extends to the entire Royal family. So much unrest occurred over those FC expenditures . . so why not let the public at least see what their monies have bought, supposedly? Which would be the exterior work, and perhaps, the gardens. Just a few pics. But we get nothing. Deafening silence around the tot known as Archie.
It will be interesting to see what sort of reaction, if any, emanates from BP in the wake of this documentary airing. I've actually stopped expecting anything of an offically censorious nature to happen to the Suxxits. It's Bizarro World for sure.
1/2
/this is a proprietary and copyright work to be submitted in script form for season 2 of The House of Sussex, a Lifetime original/
November 11: royal watchers were shocked that TRH The Duke and Duchess of Sussex did not make an appearance on the balcony for Remembrance Day.
[later] November 11: The official Instagram account for TRH The Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced their planned relocation to a private community in the United States, where they may live in peace and raise their family. @sussexroyal. A thing is not necessarily true because a man dies for it. — Oscar Wilde
November 12: Disturbed by claims their post insulted veterans on Remembrance Day, Harry lashes out. “The papers continue to print lies! We obviously were addressing that my family needs a change of scenery and nobody should expect us to continue to be abused.
November 13: Freeloaders! Piers Morgan drops the mic on the Sussex pair, asking how they could serve the Queen from “a posh taqueria in Malibu.”
November 14: “This is harassment!” Harry lashes out at “threats and racist comments,” , announcing he will be known as Henry Wales while living in the States “So that my son is not concerned with the pressures I have endured my entire life.”
November 21: Home is where the heart is. People has exclusive snaps of The Duchess of Sussex at brunch at the Chateau Marmont with her long time best friend, Paris Hilton. Our eavesdroppers learned The Duchess will serve an organic tofurkey to Harry and Archie.
November through February, Meghan “surprised” at the zoo, the mall, yoga, church, Starbucks, a dance club, and tattoo parlor, all while toting Archie, who is wearing a hat, and a bespoke blanket, and whose face is not pixelated.
February 10: best Oscar looks. Our viewers were unanimous in approving Markle’s non-traditional Oscar look. “It’s about owning what your body looks like and wearing what you want even when it isn’t flattering.” #girlpower
February 12: #LaundryDay trends on Instagram, with photos of various influencers wearing baggy and ripped sweats, flannel shirts, greasy hair, and with visible acne and no use of filters. #LaundryDay is a movement in solidarity with Meghan Markle in response to Johnny Weir’s quip that he wouldn’t be caught dead wearing an olive caftan even if were laundry day.
February 13: datalounge backlash against #LaundryDay with #BurnIt, notes that Markle’s stans are homophobic. Taylor Swift apologizes for tweet that “women should stand for Meghan in the face of sexist claims the caftan was ugly.”
February 14: on Galentine Day, 4Chan issues creepy video saying the Instagram culture has marginalized men, thereafter purges all bots from Instagram, with the unintended impact that @SussexRoyal drops to 992 followers.
March 3: lights on in Frogmore per tweets by locals.
April 7: scaffolding up at Frogmore.are the Sussexes back already?
April 10: moving vans at Frogmore. Tweets claim vans are moving items IN to the home.
April 15: Chris Ship tweets that insiders confirm staff have relocated to Frogmore.
[later] April 15: Chris Ship tweets clarification. “Buck House confirms renovation of Frogmore upgraded wiring, removed asbestos at great cost only. Floor plan unchanged from permits.”
2/2
April 16: Chris Ship tweets exclusive: Windsor Council insider notes the permit variance for “outdoor barbecue” was a euphemism for a scorched crater left when Sussex duo’s fireworks disturbed soil. Council required remediation, but kept the issue quiet at the request of the Sussexes.
April 17: Cratergate. Queen summons Harry, who attends church with her in charming video.
June 13: Harry Wales spotted in London, partying with blondes after solo appearance at Trooping the Colour. Tabs report Skippy planned party for Prince, who quipped “I’m no longer a duke but I WILL live like a King!”
June 14: Harry confirms demotion! “Drunk Harry admits he relinquished title, mum on relationship with actress wife.”[/QUOTE
Couldn't help noticing that, no doubt in an attempt to appear 'vulnerable' she resorted to a conversational tic by women that is often employed and supremely annoying: the use of rising intonation at the end of every statement as if she is asking a question. Such intonation makes the speaker sound very young and very insecure. Not the presentation of a woman who ostensibly is so 'empowered' and who has received years of professional training in vocal delivery. That is, if we accept that she actually has the degree in communications and drama which she claims.
Meg actually has a fairly attractive speaking voice, when she's not whining like a little girl, but owing to the self-promoting drivel that comes out of her mouth it's hard to find anything about her attractive. If only she had been in reality even one-tenth of what she promoted herself as, she could have been a powerful asset for the RF. 'Asset' is the very last word in the English language to describe what she is.
A few commenters have wondered what Christmas at Sandringham will be like, but the next big family event is Remembrance Day. Will H&M have their own balcony? Will Anne be doing that great sidestep dance shuffle to block them from the Queen? Will there be a 4th row just for them?
Someone made a great comment about Mama Kris Kardashian. That’s what H&M need in their life - a momager to take control. They’re obviously not mature or smart enough to do it on their own. They just keep flailing from one disaster to the next.
Happy for your return, Nutty. We got a little out of line during your absence, but seem to be back on an even keel!
Sad because in the twilight of her reign she should be enjoying her life, family and a sense of satisfaction for a job well done, instead of the mass of woes that now confront her 93-year-old self in the form of Brexit and the scandals that have once again rocked her own house. She no longer appears to have that steely intestinal fortitude which has been attributed to her for the last 70 years.
Puzzled because it seems inconceivable that there are no sanctions in place for the profoundly disrespectful and damaging Suxxits, who continue to rampage as they like. Whether or not Charles has cut off funding their lifestyles, they are still everywhere in public engagements, including the tour just past. Public engagements are a mark of favor and the Sussexes need to be grounded. BP needs to quietly cancel/remove any standing engagements for them and issue a confidential memo to the press pool that from this point forward, the Sussexes no longer officially represent the Crown. If the press want to turn up to see the Duchess of Sussex preen in front of some department store, that's on them, but they will not be covering an official Royal engagement. At the same time, a full schedule of photogenic activities for the Cambridges and their kids need to be arranged so that the press corps will be stretched too thin to cover the sad Suxxit shenanigans, particularly if htey are no longer official.
Also from the department of worthy reads: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10167939/kate-middleton-flawless-superwoman-saviour-royals/amp/
"Take a bow, Kate Middleton… flawless Superwoman and saviour of the royals"
Perhaps the York girls should be promoted to working royal status, at least during Harry's 'mental health break', to help out. They could receive an honorarium per engagement but otherwise continue to pay rent as they have been. Some adult needs to sit Harry down and put it to him that this sabbatical *will* be happening and this would be an opportune time to get himself to rehab or an ashram or whatever to get his head together. Dismantle the 'power couple in their own minds' and see how many people/papps flock to see Megz merch without Harry.
In the meantime I have found a blog fabfoxly.tumblr.com and it makes an interesting read!
I wonder if the tabloids refusal to curate the comments is their subtle way of fighting back against the lawsuits. It seems like they are letting the public do all their shade for them.
Yes, it's obvious that she wants to be Kardashian light. Sigh. I find the Kardashians ridiculous and silly, but the one thing that you have to say about them is that they are not hypocrites. They don't make apologies for their ridiculous lifestyle, their obsession with plastic surgery, the porn star clothes. It's their brand. All their monetary pushes are about youth and their appearance. When Kim has recently tried to branch out from the eye candy (because as you age, you become less "sweet"), she's encountered a bunch of eye-rolling. There's a reason why Kim Kardashian is now yesterday's news and her sister Kylie is the focus of much of their media push. Markle is such a hostage to her narcissism that it's inconceivable to her that she's aged out of that strategy. She's trying to appeal to a demographic that is obsessed with youth and appearance (because SHE is obsessed with youth and appearance). And, let's face it, this is not Markle's strong suit. She's nearly forty, and appears in public with the dirty shoes, ripped hose, clothes that don't fit, etc. With every passing birthday, Markle is going to be more frantic, hence the "wokeness" since the lifestyle influencer gig didn't work. Only belatedly I believe does she now see that being "woke" has major pitfalls.
For one thing, it immediately divides her audience into different camps because its political in nature. Note the Cambridges' and their choices of charities. You really can't say anything negative about gardens, now can you? Markle fails again. You can't talk about the environment and take private jets. You can't talk about issues vis a vis poverty and the cost of child care that face women and then appear in a dress that cost 40,000 pounds and have full-time nannies. How can that not be considered hypocritical?
Had she appeared in off the rack clothes, ditched the wigs, and even, horror oh the horror, worn a wedding dress that she'd bought at J Crew, all of this would have been an enormous foil to whatever shade was being dished out. People would still carp about this not being "royal," but I don't believe any of it would have stuck. Such criticism would have come across as racist and churlish. But she couldn't play that game because she loves the high life. The clothes, the accessories, all the stuff.
I assume in her world view that what she's aiming for is casual chic, a foil to that ultra manicured Kate. As someone above described her, disheveled is a PERFECT word for her. Why are we supposed to pay attention to a woman who can't even reach for a hairbrush before she leaves the house? I might find the fashion choices of the Kardashians ridiculous, but they are curated to the nines when they appear. They aren't sloppy. Inevitably, she is.
I honestly think she doesn't get it. She keeps making the same unforced errors. The mosque visit and the headscarf. Oi! She's just handing it to Kate. Had she appeared with Tutu WITHOUT Archie so they could discuss the extremely serious issues facing SA, how much more relevant would that have been, more on "brand" But she reverted to her usual go-to strategy. I'll have Desmond Tutu gushing over my kid! What a squandered opportunity. This was Desmond Tutu, not Mr. Rogers!
She is her own worst enemy. Her narcissism sabotages her at every step of the way.
However, I question whether the sugars are primarily African-American women. As you yourself always point out, the amount of negative comments about MeMe on Lipstick Alley is outstanding. It is my experience that people in the black community in the States have very strong bullshit meters—particularly for the kind of bullshit that MeMe is dishing out. And anyway I don’t think Black women see themselves in Meghan, given that she has chosen to “pass” for white her entire career. Even if that is what Gayle and Oprah are selling.
(I ask myself how Blacks feel about the evolution of “woke”, a usage strictly within the African-American community to describe the apparent understanding of the Black racial and social justice experience to a pejorative term representing laughably over-PC sensitivity? I also don’t think MeMe understands the difference.)
I think the sugars (at least the unpaid ones) are the same as the Kardashians’ wildly successful demographic. These are women of diverse ethnicity who Wendy Williams would affectionately describe as “swirly,” running the gamut from biracial women to Mediterranean women, and possibly Arabic and Persian women. All do not see themselves represented in entertainment and the media because of its overemphasis on Western European and Scandinavian looks as the standard of beauty. While this is changing, it is still quite something for for someone who looks like them to have become a princess. Thanks to Disney cementing the princess myth into global culture they will cling to this supposed “first” no matter what. (I think this has been Markle’s only successful marketing of herself. )
Even though Markle’s only real interest is in winning over rich whites, the swirly sugars don’t see this because they only see their own face as the princess beside Harry.
It drives me absolutely nutty! You hear it so often now, but particularly more with the younger generation and not Meghan’s age group!
I’ve been trying to avoid seeing the ‘oh woe is me clip, but I saw it on E! Good Lordy, as if it wasn’t ghastly enough on its own, it was made even worse by that awful biased British presenter Melanie Bromley (?) who chipped in with her two pennies worth. She should know better, she’s so anti British, she should be banned from coming back to Blighty! Lol
What annoys me about Markle is that she destroys things. She destroyed her own family, she destroyed Harry’s previously good reputation, she destroyed his relationship with his family, and she’s destroying the goodwill many people, including myself, had for the Queen and the Royal Family. Harry seems to be a willing participant, but I do believe she was the instigator that set off previously-unnoticed character faults. I just hope she doesn’t destroy poor Archie’s life. Can you imagine growing up with those two self-pitying fools as role models?
She must live in constant fear that the truth will come out (partly what the lawsuit is about IMO). The world would have sympathized with a surrogacy story, but the British public will ***never*** forgive being lied to and being taken for fools.
Why she went with this approach is anyone's guess. She had to have threatened Harry with something in order for him to go along with it. Or maybe he really didn't know until it was too late.
@Liver Bird, et. al. People seem to always forget about the Duchy of Lancaster. Harry will lose funding once William assumes the role of Prince of Wales and the Duchy of Cornwall, as it was specifically designed solely for the POW and his heirs. Harry moves to the Duchy of Lancaster for funding. This is BIG MONEY, much more than the Duchy of Cornwall. It is the richest Duchy in the UK. Elizabeth funds all working royals and private royal funding out of the Sovereign Grant and the Duchy of Lancaster. Harry will not be cut off from funds at any time and I would not be surprised if his funding increased once Charles becomes king. Charles is far too weak to ever stand up to his sons.
It's a shame that William will be the heir to this mess, unless Meghan leaves. Even then, William will have to deal with Harry's fragile mental state. Harry inherited Diana's emotional instability and manipulative ways (I think Diana was borderline personality disorder, which makes his attraction to Meghan perfect sense, as we are drawn to what is familiar to us). I read a great comment on the DM last week. I'd cite the person, but I can't remember her DM name, but she was spot on. We are seeing the real Harry for the first time. If you look back he was ALWAYS manged by family members and PR. He rarely did anything without trusted advisers, family and competent PR. He as very carefully controlled in order to construct the "hero Harry" narrative. He was so popular at one point, people were lamenting that they wished Harry would be king and not William. I do that that time period went to his head and this is why we have the mess we have today. At that time, in swoops Meghan who puffs up Harry into believing his (and her) hype. Meghan separated Harry from his family, friends, advisers and competent PR. She is the sole person propping him up right now and his cracks are showing. This has to be exhausting for her but she also knows she has to be the one in control. She is determined to squeeze out every last drop from him and the RF before she bolts. She never really cared about Harry, only the facade of him and how that facade could promote her own brand.
All that said, I do think this documentary will succeed in promoting public sympathy, but only from those on the fence or who have no idea what is really going and have not done any research into the situation, as we all have. This positive movement will be short lived though, because those on the fence and those who are ignorant simply don't care about Meghan enough to become part of her cause. They have lives to lead, bills to pay, jobs, spouses and children. She's not that important to anyone but herself in the great scheme of things. I think the situation will calm down and go back to this same old stalemate, a war of attrition between sugars and "jealous haters" until Meghan divorces Harry or something really big, a huge scandal, is finally unleashed by the media. They are sitting on a treasure chest of dysfunction, but no one wants to pull the trigger, especially in light of the lawsuit.
I believe her holding the bump was more than just for photos. By placing her own hand on the bump, this prevented others from touching it.
But then I remembered that when Kate was emotional after having Prince Louis, Meghan went out of her way to be a bridezilla and make Kate cry.
Karma is a funny ol' thing.
Meghan's three-ring circus of untruths, half-truths, obfuscations and pantomimes (the pregnancy; 'devoted parenting' to Archie) would exhaust a normally-functioning person, but if she is the narc she exhibits as, drama is like oxygen to those people. She'd get exhausted if she things got too quiet. Most of us would like a nice rest, particularly if we were allegedly mothering an infant, but Meg needs incessant drama in order to feel alive. This came home resoundingly during the SA tour. Harry is dragging around like a zombie--this is a man in crisis; an exhausted man, in both mental and physical anguish--cf. that day he was so hobbled he could barely ascend the stage without assistance. He probably threw his back out with too much lying on the ground taking arty farty photos of the sun through tree branches. But the worse and more haggard and zonked he looked, the more Meg beamed and looked fresh as a daisy. She was in her element, sucking the life force right out of her husband. He is becoming a husk of his former robust self. As he decreases, she increases. Classic Narcissist relationship dynamic. She's the least exhausted she's ever been. Look at all the energy she's got to bring lawsuits. Meanwhile, her husband, in whose name one of the lawsuits is, has admitted openly that he can barely get out of bed in the morning.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall for some private time with the Sussexes. Is H. really as much of a basket case as he appears? Is his executive functioning really so low and childlike that he has needed somebody to dress him, coax him along and do everything for him including wipe his butt. And is she such a harridan to him in private as she seems with the screaming and the profanities? I wish we could get a glimpse into the dynamics of what is really going on behind the scenes.
This was a diplomatic triumph.. both for the UK in Pakistan and for the British monarchy back in the UK. Such a solid couple.
Yes, I too don't think she was pregnant, not with H's child, anyway. I was trying to be charitable. Chances are she used a surrogate with his - er - donation. To be fair, Archie does look very similar to H when he was a baby.
I don't think there will be any coming back from the Public Pity Party. I wish Charles would get some cojones, but I doubt it. I think they'll be gradually scaled back until all they do is attend premieres and make wacky speeches where one or other of them sniggers and then tries to male it look like they are overcome with emotion.
Incidentally, I was posted at Windsor and the RMA Sandhurst in the early 90s... I witnessed Charles berating Diana for having some buttons undone near the hem of a button-up skirt. The man is a fool.
Someone suffering from post partum depression would not be able to guest edit Vogue or "curate" a clothing line. They would also not be interested in getting dolled up for the Lion King and Misha Nonoo's wedding, nor would they have the energy to lectur the people of South Africa.
The Smarkles did not attend the reception. Hmmm....
However, in the past 24 hours it seems that some Markle sugars may have infiltrated, as it is mainly people hurling insults. Unusual for that site as it is generally very civil.
I hope we don't have a repeat of the farce where Kate is forced to be friendly toward them. It would make me laugh if William bought a new scarf for the occasion.
Someone suffering from post partum depression would not be able to guest edit Vogue or "curate" a clothing line. They would also not be interested in getting dolled up for the Lion King and Misha Nonoo's wedding, nor would they have the energy to lectur the people of South Africa.
True. A friend has a daughter who is debilitated. All kinds of jumping through hoops for their kid.
Like you, I am suspicious of anyone who can get it together to be able to pull out for a vanity project but cannot do what I call the day to day druggery like clean the bathroom.
I called sick to my boss once and he mentioned that there was a happy hour with different upper level people that night and would I attend? I told him that he ought to be suspicious if I was too sick to work but magically well to come party.
This is actually huge, as the Prince is, himself, a veteran.
As for Christmas at Sandringham - something will occur to keep them in the States.
With my post surgery eye/head bandage I thought I saw you wrote "...signature bum". LOL At this point she is also getting known for her butt pads (deliberately giving Kim K. a run for her money in the 'bum' department!
I would like to comment on someone putting a question mark on the number of marriages Meghan had. Harry's is her third marriage but her first marriage was annulled. From what I know it was a validly contracted marriage but was disssolved by annullment (which in California can be for one or more of several reasons.)
The reasons for an annulment can be due to the age of consent was not met, fraud, bigamy or one party was incapable of valid consent (like mental deficiency). Just because one of these factors exist (except in the case of minor status or bigamy) does not automatically invalidate the marriage. One party has to petition the court for an annulment. The judge can give wide discretion in the case of fraud.
I am a little familiar with this law,,,,(get ready to laugh) I have been married 4 times in California and got an annulment on three of them! 1 I didn't live with my husband at all. 2. I married an abusive man who ran over me shortly after I married him. and the first one I am ashamed to admit I ran off to Vegas drunk and impulsively married. I learned my lesson as I have been single now 32 years.
@Hikari: yes, underneath the vocal fry and rising intonation, she does have a nice voice. My husband and I watched some clips and agreed on that, but he also instantly recoiled because she’s so clearly manipulative. It’s a shame to use a gift for such shallow selfish gain.
@Louise: really well broken down analysis earlier, sorry I was away from the internet all day and couldn’t respond!
Skippy, who is endearingly loyal to all of the RF, & will not hear a word against Harry, posted this article from the Guardian in 2015. He sounds rather sweet & simple. Where is that guy? Where did the whiney sullen loser come from? Was he really always like this?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/may/11/prince-harry-id-love-to-have-kids-right-now
Loved Hikari's analysis of the dynamic between H&M. I saw this in action many years ago, very close to home. The man becoming tired almost to death. His partner somehow fuelling herself on his exhaustion and the chaos she continually renewed. Difficult to witness. Impossible to help. He had to rescue himself. He did in the end thank goodness, and now she's just a bad memory.
DM has a post (fairly new) about the We love Meghan support swelling the internet.
I think the so-called break is either H&M being forcefully told to STFU and lay low for awhile, or Harry’s going away for some much-needed respite and therapy.
MM has systematically gathered her own team, rather than relying on the experienced royal one, and when you take a close look at her Soho connections, who is supporting her and on the payroll of their "charitable" foundation, it gives this entire drama a far different flavour.
She was never going to just be a royal wallflower wife. But she wasn't expecting how tough an audience the English are. She's discovering it isn't Hollywood. It's not just that they don't like her, they can see through her.
Has everyone forgotten about Epstein and Prince Andrew? Blackmail has a way of keeping hands tied and lips zipped. What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.
I hope Harry gets the help he needs and I for one will be able, hopefully, not hear of Meghan for awhile. I really don't know how much more of her fright-fest I can take. The only thing I enjoy about this situation is reading the astute, intelligent opinions and facts that you bloggers offer. Thank you Nutty for this great environment,
I would be interested to read the opinions about that article from everyone here.
I don't want to be unsympathetic about suffering and unhappiness (Harry, at least, is a wreck), but what Tom Bradby fails to see is that the Harkles are victims of their own characters. Yes, it must be awful to be subjected to press intrusion, criticism and, sometimes, made-up drivel. However, they have not been subjected to anything worse than anyone else in the royal family. Their problem is that they cannot handle it (not the press attention, but the criticism and intrusion that they cannot control). They are wrong for the job and since there seems to be no ability for honest introspection from either of them, they are not going to change.
If Harry is being truthful, it seems he would like to relocate to Cape Town but logistics make this impossible. I interpret this as them not wanting to relinquish being working royals (with all the perks), or perhaps Harry wants to but Meghan does not want that (and does not want to live in Cape Town).
If they had an employment contract, they would be fired, or let go because they are not the right fit for the job!
This is not an intervention for Harry. If it was, his calendar would have been cleared and he would be in treatment already.
They are spending Thanksgiving with Doria, so mid-November could mean 20th'ish until after New Years. It's time off for the holidays.
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/page-1669 (page 1669, post 50044).
They are angry and scathing, but they have a point.
And I stand by what I said: The Markles are wrong for the job, and should not be working in charity at all because they are not capable of overcoming self-pity and experiencing empathy.
I've read people who actually believe that Harry perhaps needs a mental health break. Where can I sign up for this bullshit? Sounds like being royal guarantees me six weeks of spa visits. Every. Day.
Not that Meg and Harry care, but this means their RPOs (Royal Protection Officers) will have to be away from their own families over the holiday period.
The Bush family had many negatives, but they always stayed in the White House over Christmas specifically so their Secret Service team could have time with their families. Then again, they're a patrician family who knows how to treat the staff with respect and courtesy.
Meg, not so much.
@A Woman of a Certain Age, your post is brilliant. Yes she is scheming and cunning; this is also why many speculate that she has backers, because her connections are all of a certain type.
And I'm sorry but if Andrew is a pedo, and she is blackmailing the RF over that, and they are protecting him, they deserve to be toppled.