Although I'm no fan of Meghan Markle, I've never wished that any physical harm would come to her. If I ruled the world, she'd have a long and uneventful life presenting low-cost jewelry on a home shopping network at 3am.
But it's a violent world we live in, and the Royal Family's own history is bloody. Although a major member of the family has not been seriously injured since 1979, when an IRA bomb blew up Philip's and Charles' mentor Louis Mountbatten, the threats are constant. (Princess Anne also fought off a kidnapping attempt in 1974).
All members of the Royal Family, from the Queen to Prince George, have been targeted by terrorists, and the Sussexes were the target of violent images by a racist extremist shortly after their wedding.
Unfortunately, Meghan doesn't seem to take her own security very seriously.
The crowd had been expecting her - a security threat in itself.
And although audience members were presumably metal screened and bag checked before entering, there were no barriers to keep them away from Meg as she took her spotlight stroll from the Royal Albert Hall's loggia, down through the stalls and the floor seating, and finally to the stage.
Fortunately, there was no one with a plastic knife - or even an unwieldy bear hug - leaping out to assault the Duchess, who was glowing with the attention received during her extended entrance.
Meghan's Royal Protection Officers must have been having hissy fits.
In January, her female bodyguard quit, reportedly for personal reasons, although she was the third person on Meghan's staff to quit in a very short period. At the time, a report in the Daily Telegraph (quoted in the paywall-free Daily Mirror) said:
And in February 2019 a post on the question-and-answer site Quora - since deleted - said
Donald Trump, for all his faults, is reportedly popular with his Secret Service team; he's had security around him since his construction career took off 1980s, so he respects their advice and follows it. He even thanked them in his election-night speech.
(Jimmy Carter, a relative nobody before taking office, was reportedly the worst President to guard; he was rude and treated the security team like servants.)
One ex-RPO, who now runs a private security service, told the Daily Express:
How much more exhausting that job must be when the person you are supposedly protecting will not co-operate.
But if you're a bad guy (or bad gal) and can't get to a high-value target, you go to easiest target available, which is why bad people stage attacks at Christmas markets and Ariana Grande concerts.
Or you focus on Duchess Meghan, who is walking through a large audience with no protection in order to squeeze out every last bit of attention for herself.
First of all, it would create an image that Meghan is a martyr - just as Harry sees his mother.
And there would be suggestions that the cause of the attack was negative articles about Meghan in the tabloid press.
What would that mean for press freedom, or freedom of speech in general?
Secondly, it would be the font of endless conspiracy theories. Was the Royal Family behind the attack? Who gave the go-ahead - was it Charles? William?
Thirdly, it could be a source of tension between the US and UK.
If the incident took place in the the UK, American law enforcement officials would presumably have to be involved in the investigation because Meghan is a US citizen. Should it take place in the US, the UK security services would have to be involved because Meg is part of the British Royal Family.
If it took place in a third country - Canada? Mexico? Botswana? - things would get even more complicated.
But listening to good advice has never been Meghan's strength.
But it's a violent world we live in, and the Royal Family's own history is bloody. Although a major member of the family has not been seriously injured since 1979, when an IRA bomb blew up Philip's and Charles' mentor Louis Mountbatten, the threats are constant. (Princess Anne also fought off a kidnapping attempt in 1974).
All members of the Royal Family, from the Queen to Prince George, have been targeted by terrorists, and the Sussexes were the target of violent images by a racist extremist shortly after their wedding.
Unfortunately, Meghan doesn't seem to take her own security very seriously.
The long walk at Royal Albert Hall
Earlier this week, Duchess Megan took a long, slow walk through an arena-size crowd at Royal Albert Hall.The crowd had been expecting her - a security threat in itself.
And although audience members were presumably metal screened and bag checked before entering, there were no barriers to keep them away from Meg as she took her spotlight stroll from the Royal Albert Hall's loggia, down through the stalls and the floor seating, and finally to the stage.
Fortunately, there was no one with a plastic knife - or even an unwieldy bear hug - leaping out to assault the Duchess, who was glowing with the attention received during her extended entrance.
Meghan's Royal Protection Officers must have been having hissy fits.
Meg's bodyguard quit in January
This isn't the first time Meg's casual attitude towards security has been in the news.In January, her female bodyguard quit, reportedly for personal reasons, although she was the third person on Meghan's staff to quit in a very short period. At the time, a report in the Daily Telegraph (quoted in the paywall-free Daily Mirror) said:
Unlike someone who has grown up in the royal family and has been used to having close protection from an early age, it can be constraining.
Even though she was a famous actress, she could still do what she wanted in the way of getting around freely.
But in her current role she can’t go anywhere without her protection team, and that’s a massive constraining force on an individual like her.
And in February 2019 a post on the question-and-answer site Quora - since deleted - said
I know someone who worked security recently for a visit to a city in the North West of England.
He said that Meghan was rude and made life difficult for the security team that day.
For their safety Harry and Meghan were asked to walk down one side of the rails and then up the other side. Harry was more than happy to oblige.
Meghan didn't listen. She was crossing from one side to the other saying hello to people. Smiling and stopping to speak to her fans.
Security asked her again and again, please stay on one side so we can protect you properly. Her response was, I will walk where I like.
Professional security people prefer experienced clients
Professional security people find it easiest to guard people who are experienced being protected and who appreciate it.Donald Trump, for all his faults, is reportedly popular with his Secret Service team; he's had security around him since his construction career took off 1980s, so he respects their advice and follows it. He even thanked them in his election-night speech.
(Jimmy Carter, a relative nobody before taking office, was reportedly the worst President to guard; he was rude and treated the security team like servants.)
The pressure of a walkabout
Royal Protection officers are very highly trained, and their duties involve putting their lives on the line for their Royal charges.One ex-RPO, who now runs a private security service, told the Daily Express:
The most pressured part of a protection officer's role is a walkabout with the Royal Family.
They are very much principals of the people and they want to go to speak to the public and the public wants to speak to them.
It may only last for 15 to 20 minutes but it's mentally draining. You'll go back into the safety of a vehicle or a building afterwards and think, 'That was hard.'
You're constantly checking out people in the crowd.
You're looking at hands, you're looking at eye contact, you're looking at dress - that's very relevant at a time like this when we are dealing with suicide bomber-type scenarios. Why has someone got a very heavy winter coat on on a lovely summer's day?
There was always the potential that something could happen and you were always thinking, 'What if?' What if I open the door now and we have an IED [improvised explosive device] go off? What if I open the door now and we take shots? What if I open the door now and the principal falls out of the car because we haven't parked in the right place and they step into a pot-hole? What if? What if? What if?
How much more exhausting that job must be when the person you are supposedly protecting will not co-operate.
Not the highest-value target
Meg is not one of the highest-value targets in the Royal Family - that would be Charles, William, George, or the Queen herself.But if you're a bad guy (or bad gal) and can't get to a high-value target, you go to easiest target available, which is why bad people stage attacks at Christmas markets and Ariana Grande concerts.
Or you focus on Duchess Meghan, who is walking through a large audience with no protection in order to squeeze out every last bit of attention for herself.
The aftermath
Unfortunately, an attack on Duchess Meghan - even one that did not physically injure her - would have serious repercussions.First of all, it would create an image that Meghan is a martyr - just as Harry sees his mother.
And there would be suggestions that the cause of the attack was negative articles about Meghan in the tabloid press.
What would that mean for press freedom, or freedom of speech in general?
Secondly, it would be the font of endless conspiracy theories. Was the Royal Family behind the attack? Who gave the go-ahead - was it Charles? William?
Thirdly, it could be a source of tension between the US and UK.
If the incident took place in the the UK, American law enforcement officials would presumably have to be involved in the investigation because Meghan is a US citizen. Should it take place in the US, the UK security services would have to be involved because Meg is part of the British Royal Family.
If it took place in a third country - Canada? Mexico? Botswana? - things would get even more complicated.
The best approach
The easiest and best approach would be for Meghan to simply listen to her security experts and keep herself safe, so she can live a long, healthy, obscure life selling tacky jewelry to insomniacs.But listening to good advice has never been Meghan's strength.
Comments
https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2019-10-21/meghan-markle-tabloid-war-lessons-from-the-crown
Here's the thing about jealousy of the royals. I think in Kate's case there has often been quite a bit of Meeowing in her coverage, especially in the UK. Hilary Mantel's Barbie doll comment comes to mind. Now Ms. Mantel is obviously an accomplished & brilliant woman, (although I did find Wolf Hall to be a bit of a slog), but perhaps someone like her might find it a bit galling when a rather ordinary young woman like Kate, albeit a very nice & pretty one, glides into an easy looking berth like royalty. I know such women always try to make it seem as though they're worried about Kate being stifled in her gilded cage, but whatever.
Megs presents a completely different proposition to the forward looking & politically correct. Because she can legitimately claim to be a WOC, the politically correct can simultaneously signal their moral virtue in their support of a lowly WOC, but can secretly feel smugly condescending at the same time, because she is, after all, a lowly, weak WOC. So it's a win-win for them. They can appear to be nice people, while reenforcing their own sense of superiority. JMHO.
Everyone is different, I know...
In the prior thread, I wrote about the different reasons (as I knew it) in California one can get an annullment.
I wonder how successful one of the Smart Works ladies would be if they showed up for a job interview in Meg's getup? She was at a daytime 'work' event, after all.
I'm ok with Megs' getup for a Friday night hitting the bars with one's gal pals, but not for a married mother of an infant at 'work,' much less a royal one. I do think the more sylph like one is in a tight leather F**k Me skirt, the better. Speaking of F's, I think this outfit is a big FU to the Royal Family.
At Gender Equality, think Harry’s suit look wrinkled and the only reason he is angry is because the press is there. It is never her.
Then there is her love of leather while proclaiming to all tht she is a vegan.
@Maggie Remember the quote from The Usual Suspects, "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist”?
This is Meghan and Harry. Am certain she has convinced Harry that the Royal Family is a cult that brainwashed him. All the while she was brainwashing him within her cult of two.
If one must dress like that to get the audience's attention, it's the opposite of empowerment.
@Alice, spot on: "It also helps her in her cause to appear to be carefree, approachable, one amongst the people.the narrative to sell would be 'oh she was so down to earth, always laughing and hugging, she never let anyone down if they wanted to shake her hand or get a hug, and she never once cared about her own safety. She is such a humanitarian!'"
Yes, this! Even if she doesn't fancy herself Diana 2.0, martyr edition, she does seem to see herself as a successor to Di's humanitarianism and People's Princess persona.
I really think another pregnancy would be the worst possible thing she could do. The great British public hasn't forgiven or forgotten all the insulting PR management of the last one. That sequence of events was, I think, as damaging as all the spending. Easily. To hit us with a re-run, when her popularity is really tanking (thanks Breitbart) would be crazy, crazy, crazy. But hey. That's what she does best!
I have never heard of the Ben&Jessica/Justin connection but I guess it would make sense. Off- spring of political royalty so they must travel in the same circles. I haven't really paid attention. And these circles are rather small in Canada.
Back to the dastardly duo - neither looks worse for wear. Rested, well-fed. The 6-week hiatus will be telling but I fear it may be more deception and gaslighting. The truth never to be known. And, dollars to donuts, madam does not stay quiet or hidden. I imagine it is going to put the Barnum in Bailey and give us a spectacular circus.
I saw the photos of today's event, the latest in Harry and Meghan's Woke AF Tour, and I cannot believe she went out wearing three different shades of red. And WHY does she think those stupid hunks of hair hanging in her face are a good look? Honestly, this chick is pushing 40. You'd think she'd have her act together by now when it comes to her physical appearance, but time after time it's a clothing fail, hair fail, and makeup fail. She's a mess.
I would love to see the PoW documentary. I am very interested in country life, farming, handmade goods, etc. Sounds right up my alley. I am not a fan of Charles, but I must say that by all accounts his management of the duchy has been excellent.
The constant hair pushing really bugs me. Someone who isn’t a narcissist would have seen a video or two of themself constantly pushing their hair and been mortified. Realized it was an unconscious gesture and worked to not do it anymore. Don’t get me started on her foundation and bronzer, another thing a normal human would see on footage of themself and strive to fix.
At one point, pre Harry, she gave an interview where she said she refuses to cover her freckles, she loves them. She’s now moved on to freckle-colored bronzer.
I do sometimes feel bad for her. But then I catch myself and it goes away. I do think she is pretty though. And yes to whomever said she just looks different. Then again, I looked different at 40 than at 35.
Midwesterner here. NO HUGS. We just don’t really do that in my neck of the woods. I even hate shaking hands. Don’t touch me lol.
I am most likely headed to a bad place, but I already knew that anyway.
Lainey is so despicable, that she's also one of my favourite topics.
Her writing about Meghan recently is so over the top, one wonders if it was written by an obsessed stalker with a psychiatric holding order.
I agree. She is either bipolar or her doctor is experimenting with some pharmaceuticals whose dosage hasn't been adjusted properly.
Now my ire has turned towards Charles. I blame him for not stopping the dreadful duo. He is the one who initially got rid of Lord Geidt and I bet top dollar that though the Queen brought LG back Charles is not listening to him. Charles is “hurt.” Meanwhile the Harkles know exactly how weak Charles his and keep doing what they love, now rolling out their grifting foundation to all the commonwealth nations.
Who let them have that foundation to begin with? Even if the county of Sussex can’t take the Harkles’ titles away, it needs to sue the Harkles for taking the name of the county for their personal money laundering and grifting brand.
But he was left £6.5million by his mother Princess Diana, which through investments is likely to have grown substantially since her death in 1997.
In addition, Prince Charles pays the costs of William’s household. Last year he spent £1.6million on personal expenses for himself, his wife and his sons.
And eight years before her death the Queen Mother reportedly placed two-thirds of her money in trusts for the benefit of her great-grandchildren. But the newly-titled Duchess of Cambridge has no income.
Without a prenup, it is left to lawyers to battle out a settlement if a couple divorce. The Duchess of York received £15,000 a year from Prince Andrew when their marriage ended after ten years in 1996.
But Princess Diana’s lawyers got her a £17million pay-off when she divorced Prince Charles.
sorry - this is the article i was quoting from
This written by Anne-Marie O’Connor—white person.
How does she know this statement is true? Why does this white chick speak for the Black community?
As I’ve said, it is my experience that black women have excellent bullshit meters. Look what we’ve seen on Lipstick Alley.
Wendy Williams is an astute reader of her audience and would never criticize Markle if the prevailing wind among African Americans wasn’t blowing that way. Did you see the black woman on stage at The Price is Right event who actively avoided greeting Markle? Markle was going in for the sisterhood photo op but the woman wasn’t having it.
I can’t speak for black women either, but Anne-Marie O’Connor is an bought ahole.
1. No Sussex claw!
2. She used the duchess slant instead of her usual crossed-leg position (although the table probably prevented the crossed legs...)
3. Flattering colours, fairly flattering silhouette
Baby steps!
I do wish she would wear British labels. She seems to avoid them like the plague.
https://twitter.com/OAanmoen/status/1187765283018235905
What would be your reasons for not doing all you could to fit into the family in your supporting role?
What a fantastic one-liner!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1. She has rarely been seen without makeup since her marriage. So who knows.
2. She slathers bring her on her face like there is no tomorrow. In SA at times she stayed off of it, so she looked different.
3. She probably got some face lift? And it's just about setting in?
4. She wears wigs, clip on, then she ditched them some days and that's when she actually looks nice.
5. Her face looks better with side part straight hair, no wigs, no bronzer. In SA esp, she did that a couple of times and looked completely different.
6. Her mental state is reflected in her face, as in her attitude IMO. Some days she is like a Godzilla on a mission, so brazen and in your face. Those are the days she looks manic and harsh. When she is playing the shy, coy, relatable as f*** girl next door her face her body her demeaner is all changed. That's one very odd thing about her.
Anyway. I am not surprised to hear Meghan is a hassle and rude. Her little beady rodent eyes and frenzied grin doesn’t hide the glitter of cruelty in her eyes. I don’t want anything to happen to her either, of course not, but I can’t say I wouldn’t like her to just go away. GO AWAY! We have enough lecturing, nagging, wanna be mommy types trying to tell us how to live and how terrible we are.
It's the same she has done with everything else. Yes, we know that there have been tweaks here and there, but not in a way that makes it look obvious and tacky. That's what style is
As for meg...poor girl. The only time I ever saw her dressed like what I think a Duchess should look like was soon after their wedding....something out in he garden, at Charles birthday maybe..she had on a pretty soft pink dress with a pink hat, her hair pinned back. And wearing stockings! She looked very nice. And then what a shock to see her dressed like all kinds of weirdness ever since then!
This would tie into the idea of another baby.
Diana watched what Fergie got and knew she wanted more because her sons were next in line and she didn't have a lot of back up (education, job skills, inheritance). Her phone bill was in the thousands.
1. Your HRH, your skirt is red and your blouse and shoes are what appear to be magenta. Is this what you mean by 'monochrome'? Because in my world that constitutes two colors, and 'mono' means 'one'.
2. Is Yourself actually able to breathe in this skirt or sit down? It looks a bit snug. That is some Herculean zipper doing its work back there.
3. You will have to forgive me since I am not as engaged and woke as Yourself, but do you experience any internal dissonance at all when you proclaim yourself a vegan while at the same time wearing designer leather goods? Or are those shoes and skirts 'pleather'? Please advise.
4. Please take a moment and select which look you were actually aiming to hit today, on an official engagement at the home of Her Majesty, the Queen:
a) A Royal Duchess representing the Queen of Great Britain.
b) Samantha Jones from Sex & the City working a cocktail soiree in Manhattan circa 1999 with a particularly rumpled junior executive as her date.
c) A convention circuit prostitute escorting your current john. One more tour of the free bar and then you two are going straight up to the room. Or perhaps you have just come straight down from the room?
d) A 'Secretary' audition reject who stole her audition outfit from the Suits wardrobe room
5. What do you plan to do with Harry's testicles which you currently keep in a safe at Soho House?
a) Have your jewelry designer friend gold-plate them and fashion them into earrings?
b) Wash them down with a glass of the Tig?
c) Send them to William in a velvet-lined box with an extortion demand as a warning of What You Are Capable Of?
d) Post an arty photo on the SussexOfficial Instagram as a call to arms for your sugars?
e) Ever restore them to their rightful owner? He's looking really lost without them.
I am uncertain whether Haz has one boy or two. He had to have an operation as a child for an undescended testicle, but I don't know if it was damaged or had to be removed. So perhaps a matched pair of earrings is out; she could hang the remaining one as a rear-view window ornament or perhaps as a pendant. If she gets it crusted with tiny diamonds it could match her oh-so-classy wedding band upgrade.
Discussion of Harry's meagre allotment of the Windsor family jewels no doubt constitutes 'bullying'. Good thing I am not a major tabloid newspaper. Underneath the levity is a genuine concern that Meglodon has deprived her husband of something(s) which should be his by right. If that's not marital abuse, I don't know what is.
Plus, he has brought this on himself. If he still acted as though he had his birth-issued pair in his possession, there'd be no reason to joke about it. But they appear to be most definitely gone now. I'm sure that is the real reason he is so agitated these days. She's holding them hostage and won't give them back.
Better to be honest like Kate who wanted to be a stay at home wife and mother ( albeit a royal one).
Showing up for a women's empowerment event wearing a slutty secretary outfit is ridiculous.
She's acting all the time, but only in the form of the most basic imitation and she's incapable of then understanding how it was received and why. She never develops and she never learns. Transmissions are one-way only. Outwards. Hence her unending hustle as she's not spending energy on introspection and self-examination.
I was pleased to see that the DM's review of her current lower clothing spend cut no ice with readers today, who think either she's been ordered to do it or it's a dishonest, insincere PR strategy or she's been cut off. And whatever it is, everyone (apart from commentators like FairySparkles from somewhere sparkly or something like that - can only read it once) has decided it's Too Late.
Well, as I understand it (only vaguely, since I don't have the items in question) the testes live in the abdominal cavity until they descend at puberty. That is the same area affected by hernia. I read that he had this operation at seven years of age, which is far too young for puberty but they must have been aware of a blockage and maybe he was hurting so they had to act at such a young age. Having only one functioning testicle compromises a man's fertility but not totally. I know a man with one testicle who has fathered at least three kids. Three acknowledged ones, anyway.
It's hard for a civilian man to confront a lack of fertility; imagine how much worse the pressure on a royal in a world where bloodlines are everything. Hence the shenanigans over Archie, and hence, why H.'s family might have put it about that he had a 'hernia' operation as a young boy. If Haz is thusly afflicted, that would be one more reason for his self-esteem to take a hit. Harry just can't measure up to his brother in any arena. Certainly not in his taste in wives.
Perhaps Meg used up her allowance for the 2019-20 year and is wearing low-cost outfits until the new fiscal year comes around. (If it ever comes around for her.)
Alternately, after her overspending in the 2018-19 year, perhaps her budget was cut sharply for this fiscal year. (The famous $100,000 Morocco caftan would have been part of the last fiscal year's budget.)
>>>@Hikari, hilarious post. As for Harry's testicles, I think she's already removed them, or the one remaining one. She sliced them up into thin slices,had them gilded, (Harry was gelded), & wore them with her black jumpsuit to sit on the floor with moms who had Aids in SA. Sorry, I just couldn't resist.<<<
Perhaps she sauteed them after slicing them thin in a little garlic and enjoyed them with a nice Chianti . . ? Probably any number of recipes available since the British are keen on sweetbreads.
******
If healthy testicles are descended at birth, then why do I so often hear the phrase 'Have your balls dropped yet?' I assumed that was a secondary sex characteristic signalling sexual maturity and that they wouldn't be fully descended in very young boys. Kind of akin to girls getting their breasts growing in.
I've got no brothers and nobody of the male persuasion around with whom I could possibly discuss such a delicate topic . . but there is always WebMD!
Now that Edward Lane Fox is gone, it seems no one is checking for Harry before he goes out the door. The Queen can complain later (and does - we saw William apparently responding to her complaints about his short-sleeved shirt during Kate's garden exhibition) but by then the event is over.
People who feel out of control of their own lives tend to rebel in the only way they can.
That said, I believe she thought that the Morocco caftan was going to be her outfit to wear onstage at the Oscars, perhaps to present one of the Best Picture nominees, as her PR friend Serena Williams ended up doing alone.
For a once-in-a-lifetime event like that, she may have thought a big spend was worthwhile, particularly when it wasn't her own money.
>>>In fact there's a faint possiblity that some of her blunders abroad might have been because she & what's-his-name don't get the briefings & advance work that the other royals do . . .Megs has been criticized for not accepting proffered food items in foreign countries, perhaps she has allergies or something, or wasn't briefed on how to interact with certain cultures. Maybe she doesn't have the staff to help her look & act professional on her engagements. Again, very puzzling.<<<
I'm sure Meg was provided with several protocol advisors upon her advent into the Firm, but as we know, Meg does not listen. Nor does she possess enough humility to be instructed. When she is instructed yet does nothing as she has been taught to do it, either she's dumb as a landfill OR she willfully refuses to do anything she is told, ever, to assert how much better and smarter she is than everyone else. Toss up. I'm going with 50/50 on that.
Meg illustrates two really unfortunate signature Narc traits in combination:
1. She is better than everyone else around her in every way possible, so no one has anything to teach her. She is here to Teach Them!
2. Narcs tend to overestimate their mastery of skills and abilities and think they outdazzle everyone else no matter what they attempt. Hence Meg's thespian career on a par with Dame Helen Mirren and the beautiful 'calligraphy' on display in her diatribe to her estranged father. She already knows everything worth knowing in her own mind. It's impossible to teach someone like this a damn thing.
She probably came in pre-engagement and assured everyone she'd done a whole degree in international relations and was eager to 'hit the ground running'. They took her at her world and declined to teach her things she already knew, according to her. I think allowing her to make an international a$$ of herself in Morocco was an early form of Royal shade-throwing. "You already know internatinal protocol for every country and religious group via osmosis? Have at it then, girlie!" Ditto the 'Abduction from the Seraglio' look in SA.
The problem is, in Markle the BF have come up against a person who is utterly immune to embarrassment or shame. Harry is not immune; he's carrying a double load, his n' hers, which is why he looks like such utter shite these days.
I'm trying to reconcile how these Narc traits correspond with the allegedly fragile ego that makes them wig out at any criticism. I'm having a hard time with it.
If healthy testicles are descended at birth, then why do I so often hear the phrase 'Have your balls dropped yet?' I assumed that was a secondary sex characteristic signalling sexual maturity and that they wouldn't be fully descended in very young boys. Kind of akin to girls getting their breasts growing in.
Well, I'm not sure why you would hear that phrase unless they are intimating that the person they are addressing is infantile and/or less than manly.
I forgot to mention that the testes can be drawn back up into the abdomen from the scrotum when infants are quite young, and can play peek-a-boo. If you had livestock, you would know, because you would have to make sure that the testes were in the scrotum before you removed them. All males can have undescended testicles that require attention because, in addition to fertility problems, they can become cancerous.
>>>I also noticed that zinger from Smarkle about no one noticing Harry's work. Wowza.<<<
Harry, the poor sod, is now in the Narcissist's Devaluation phase, I believe. The love-bombing stopped within 5 months of the wedding, with Bump Gate and the daily screaming matches about the 'pregnancy'. Harry's now in the wilderness. 'Dispose' is coming shortly. Maybe during the '6 Week Break' in America. Feels a bit soon, but it seems to me that she's accelerated her meglomaniacal plan since the 2nd trip to NYC. She's probably got some hot deals in the pipeline and has to be in America for them. Harry's going to be dumped in the New Year, let's hope.
In the context of adult men questioning pre-teen boys it could be either. I thought it was also a developmental phase.
Anna85: I also noticed that zinger from Smarkle about no one noticing Harry's work. Wowza.
Was this some kind of bad horrible joke? This is one of the worst things I've ever heard a woman say about her husband, well, except for maybe "Of COURSE the baby isn't yours. To become pregnant I needed a man!"
That is such a lack of respect being shown for her husband that I'm embarrassed for both of them.
Given the coolness, I would have been concerned of a Farrah Fawcett moment.
Well said, @Ava C. That's one of the most astute readings of Markle's character that I've seen.
The video where Smarkle puts Harry down can be seen here beginning at 1:15.
Otherwise, it is the usual word salad about "communities working together", although strangely this time she said "communities and territories". Territories? Does she now think that she is the Empress Victoria?
I think their clothing allotment should be given to a royal stylist who approves all purchases.
They have a royal budget but look common.
I am from SA, and I lost all respect for these 2 since they used our country as the background for their supposed misery.
We live in a country ridden by crime, economic downfall, joblessness and extreme division. We worry for our and our children's future, and they come here to beg sympathy in their privileged selfishness.
I started reading up on them, and I believe she is absolutely manipulating Harry, and this has been further established through this comment today, the way he was treated like her servant and how she completely puts herself at the center of things.. It's just me me me all the way. She is not serving any cause but her own.
Sounds like you would make bank in Hollyweird.
The video where Smarkle puts Harry down can be seen here beginning at 1:15.
Also at 1:02 where she basically says that no one noticed as much the work Harry had been doing and then laughs hysterically.
But I agree, it is me, I, moi without end.
Sounds like you would make bank in Hollyweird.
LA is a town where housewives take pole dancing & eating your newborn's placenta is a thing. That's in the last several years, I don't know what's going on there now. I did have an old buddy who worked for a big studio's top exec's wife for a while when my friend was in her twenties. I don't know what the wife did, because my friend did everything from tutoring her kids to ordering the flowers & hiring the caterers for her dinner parties. The wife did not have a job. My friend was pretty scathing about the wife's manners, she did say that in LA 'old money means 2 years.' So yeah, LA Isn't like a lot of places.
I'm going to descend into off topic socializing here, but I have to say, SwampWoman, some of the dinners you make for SwampMan sound delicious, & I'm a vegetarian! I haven't eaten bratwurst or pork, shredded or otherwise, in years. Some of the very best pork I've ever had (in my omnivorous years) was from a little hole-in-the-wall place in the Florida Everglades in the middle of nowhere. They roasted it some underground bbq thing that was like a Hawaiian Imu. The pork could be eaten with a fork, it was so tender, & the BBQ sauce was to die for. We brought a jar home, & my husband was miffed when I managed to finish it before he could. We should have bought a case. I don't know what the name of the place was, & it was years ago. All I know is that it was within driving distance of Miami. I know Megs & What's-it would probably prefer you give up anything that produces methane gas, but I hope you & SwampMan enjoy many more years of omnivorous dining together.
She is vile.
This from 2013...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uEq19sAf10
Harry's face dropped when she insulted him.
https://thewoksoflife.com/chinese-bbq-pork-cha-siu/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10215142/meghan-markle-hand-over-text-messages-court-battle-dads-letter/
She’s done nothing , a third rate actress/climber.
Clothing- her reds do not match, the sweater and shoes seem close enough but the skirt is the wrong color. She needs hose.
And also desperately needs to either cut the loose strands or tack them down. She’s constantly fiddling with them and it’s not cute, sexy, ingenueish, attractive. It’s extremely distracting from what ever word salad point she is trying to make. She needs to pay attention to other world leaders or their wives and see that flyaway hair doesn’t work.
She doesn’t listen to her RF advisors or much of anyone but maybe SS. She’s started this last week to wear /rewear clothes, limit or reduce the super expensive designer stuff to be more relatable. They used the battery car instead of a gas car to appeal to the climate change crowd.
There’s a new tatler pole saying 55% of brits think shes good for the RF. They dont empathsize that the poll was from Sept 6-8 long before H & M stirred the pot with their war on press and RF drama.
I do have to admit I like her lower smooth speaking voice, probably years of training at NW. I happen to have a hi-pitch shriller voice and am envious.
that panel wearing a super short dress that showed her nether regions to the audience?
AGAIN, she is channeling poor beloved departed ? departed beloved ? Diana but she can’t because there is no genuine, sincere warmth in her. Everything she does is just for show and sadly, so transparent to us who have eyes and can see through her.
—In South Africa Fred-DoH blurted out to the doc film crew that he is infertile and then begged them not to run it.
I buy him blurting. Think the stress of all the lies is getting to him so he is unconsciously blowing it.
—BP told him he had to join his wife today to watch or and rein her in. This could be the reason for her toxic derision. She is angry at him for caving to their pressure, alrhough toxic derision is her normal state when not figuring out how to get something from you.
—I think she is chomping at the bit to make a beeline for Alex Ohanian. Tired and mixed metaphors I know.
Yes Mischi the RF and Fred-doH have no experience in fighting dirty, leaving that to courtiers. But the Tommy Lascelles of the world seem to be gone. They have to go big on her—like High Treason. Nothing else will ever work.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/spains-queen-letizia-mother-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7614701/Meghan-Markle-poll-reveals-55-public-think-good-Royal-Family.html?offset=102&max=100&jumpTo=comment-476868613
But something seems off here. Am I reading this polling currently? So only 54% of those polled expressed an opinion, and of those only 55% responded positively towards Meghan? I believe I'm right in saying that a 'decline to answer' is usually weighed as a negative in polls. The picture seems decidedly less approving to Markle when the numbers are understood in the correct context...
Ashley does state that she has sources and quotes them, but her videos could be just as pie in the sky as anything else like the myth that black women love Meghan.
The fact that she quoted people who heard Harry as having said it out loud was what was of interest.
Letizia has had a similar bad rap as Meghan, but she is no where near MeMe’s sociopathy.
Knowing Meghan's background, as much as we do, and entering into such a well known institution and family, why wouldn't she want to fit in, become a well liked member and still have the global exposure for her causes?
Do you think it's narcissism, or a big payday, or the limelight and fame or as some have suggested, to bring down the monarchy? Tbh, there's not much higher on the ladder she can go except to bag a billionaire. She's getting a little too long in the tooth for Hollywood fame and she don't have an original thought in her head to become a respected global humanitarian, not to mention she strikes me as rather lazy, swoop in, read speech, take credit, swoop out. How hard is it to regurgitate your speech for the umpteenth time?
So, if you were Meghan, what would possibly motivate you to do what she’s been doing for the past 2 yrs, everything she does seems to be crafted, on purpose, to be as divisive as she can with the BRF and the public!
'The survey suggests 55 per cent of adults think she has been good for the monarchy while 45 per cent disagree.
However, only 54 per cent of respondents expressed an opinion on the question.' https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/26/tatler-survey-finds-meghan-markle-good-royal-family/
So, 29.7% of those participating in the survey think she is good for the monarchy, 46% declined to express an opinion, and 24.3% do not think she is good for the monarchy. She does not have a high approval rating.
Unfortunately, there is not enough information on the rest of the questions to unscramble the stats.
Her background suggests she has often jumped from man to man. I think from the beginning, life with Harry hasn't been what she thought it would be based on their time spent dating in a long-distance way. After all, their 3rd date was spent in Botswana! And there were rumors he took her to Norway to see the Northern Lights.
I think she wants either a big payoff OR more freedom to be a "global star" she believes herself to be. That means less expectation she'll have to do "boring & stuffy crap" the BRF does. No charity shop openings and factory appearances, and certainly no tramping around in muddy boots at Balmoral!
I think she hates being compared to Kate (or to any woman.) I also don't think she realizes she's a bit "long in the tooth" in some ways. But even if she does, with a big payoff I think she thinks she can live a life of celebrity, receiving adulation and attracting men whenever she wants. After all, she's not looking for a meaningful "normal" relationship with a man.
For many of us, the BRF might be "the top." But the things that I'd find amazing--the history, the castles/art/surroundings, the overwhelming respect for the Queen, the proximity to future Kings and Queen consorts-- may not appeal to Meghan and in fact, may repel her because it's not all about her.
Re publicly insulting Harry...
I also notice MM didn't use Harry's name, or his title. She talked about "he", and "him". Now he doesn't even warrant a name, despite being him being her husband, her superior in rank (a born royal) and someone who she knows is generally struggling with his mental health and "not ok".
What a piece of work. She has no manners, no compassion, and no kindness.
The Twitterites say that by Archie is "King" because babes are the "King" of the household!!!! Not in any houses that I've entered. Queen is an name! Look at Queen Latifah! Anyone that thinks they wish ill on the Cambridge family are nuts!!! They don't have a mean bone in their bodies!
https://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/1195864/Meghan-markle-prince-harry-itv-documentary-Africa-the-queen-royal-news
At first I typed 'M&H'. Never done that before. Our subconscious minds move fast. Probably a reflection of Meghan's behaviour this week.
This piece only runs through the same criticisms as all the others. I think folk are getting jaded now. It's hard to remain in a state of high indignation when the BRF does nothing day after day. DM comment numbers have built far more slowly this week, and not to such heights, even though Meghan has failed to turn a new leaf (apparent clothing economies are failing to make traction so they can't be the reason). Even Samantha's return, though largely welcomed, was slow to build comments. Perhaps this is good news. Meghan's defenders are as indiscriminate as she is as attention is only assessed by volume. Indifference may pierce their armour when all else has failed.
that panel wearing a super short dress that showed her nether regions to the audience?
The Flycatcher?
The Honeytrap?
And why can't she address a real issue affecting girls and female empowerment? Something like female genital mutilation, cases of which are rising in the UK and requiring treatment in the NHS.
If you're in male-dominated fields, you're probably in areas where the renumeration is better than average, so very competitive, whether you're male or female. Yes, every female alive has been exasperated at times by male condescension, but it might make you feel a little better if you recognize that men are just as ruthless & undermining to one another in a competitive workplace. You're probably so busy pulling knives out of your own backs that you don't have the energy to deal with what your male colleagues are going through. Yes, even sophisticated workplaces in fields like banking & law, for example, can develop a sort of 'gang' mentality, where people form protective alliances, & pick on selected victims very subtly. Professional polish can mask a world of sins. If it makes you feel any better, the men you work with are probably no less miserable at times than you are. There are also situations where women are just as undermining of one another as any man is. When everyone from the top down is under pressure to produce, it's hard to have a stressless workplace.
One of the reasons you might be so irritated by Markle is that she's worked in a male dominated dysfunctional field as well, but she's resorted to a lot of stuff you would never dream of doing! I think any actor has to be pretty thick skinned, but some manage to remain at least superficially likable. Megs doesn't seem to be able to do that. The fact that she did a huge passive-aggressive rage number on Harry at their event yesterday is a big red flag that that relationship is toxic. If she's like that in public, they're probably throwing things at each other in private. Hope this makes sense. Dashed off another rant, now must get busy!
The mansplaining in one job was so bad that I started stuttering. Did my male colleagues mansplain their colleagues comments?
I think you need to trust that I am a good judge of my own experience.
Unfortunately, an attack on Duchess Meghan - even one that did not physically injure her - would have serious repercussions.
(...)
Secondly, it would be the font of endless conspiracy theories. Was the Royal Family behind the attack? Who gave the go-ahead - was it Charles? William?
Please, let's not give MM (or her PR) any ideas. Before you know it, they'll hire someone to fake an attack on her for exactly the results mentioned.
I was actually hit by a female colleague at a job. No one believed me because I am 6 feet tall and she was petite. My co-workers actually made fun of me, by approaching me and asking if that was "hitting"?
They made fun of me until that female colleague started hitting them. Then, they were all jumpy and worried about her coming back to kill us all after she got fired?
Or how about department lunches where everyone is invited except for me? Is that competitive behaviour as well?
Or all the managers in the company discussing me at their manager meetings, although I didn't do anything and stayed below the radar (as much as someone who is my height could)?
Or how about no one in the office talking to me, not giving me a ride to office lunches, and blaming me for everything that went wrong?
Or complaining about my behaviour to my manager and having him reprimand me without asking me my side of the story?
Or installing spying software on my computer?
Is that all collegial competitivity?
So please just don't talk about anything you know nothing about.
I wish when she was being interviewed and she whined about what was being printed the interviewer had said "I thought you don't read any press on you, that is all just noise" (to use her words).
I agree with Misty's assessment that MM did NOT want Harry at the roundtable yesterday and resented it. She spoke of him "crashing the party" and insulted his past work in front of the roundtable, then laughed about it.
This is the same as publicly regifting the Invictus onesie. There are people who are just clueless, but she appears at times to have a truly malicious, mean-spirited streak.
I forgot to say that when I was in university, there was a fellow student who followed me around and basically stalked me. He told everyone that I was his girlfriend. When we graduated and he couldn't follow me around anymore, he told all of our classmates that I had dumped him because I didn't need him anymore. He got the best marks in the entire class. I was lower down, but still had good marks. Everyone believed him,so instead of having a network of classmates that could help me in my career, I am considered toxic and everyone avoids me.
So Neutral Observer, you really shouldn't talk out of turn. You have NO F*CKING IDEA what I have to do to make a living.
A couple of things:
1) That survey. You know, they asked adults and that was not specified to age break down.
I think that because her target age group is most likely to have only a mobile, they would be least likely to questioned.
2) There are people who are just clueless, but she appears at times to have a truly malicious, mean-spirited streak.
Do you remember that at some horse event she, Kate and I want to say Camilla, someone fell off their horse. The later two were photographed showing signs of worry. Someone else was more laughing or smirking or something not showing concern.
Possible alleged bullying.
There is a difference between criticism and racism just as there is a difference between claiming bullying and speaking truth.
What I would like to know is if this is directed out of, say our usual suspect, how would it play out legally in terms of where the court would be?
Could charges be brought in England instead of the States? How would potentially different laws applied work out legally I wonder?
How would the Palace handle it as this would be charges against a member of the BRF?
If Samantha had been controlled before by NDAs, speaking now would mean that the NDA is up in the air so ... could there be something that might be useful to assorted members of the BRF or that M would not want to be out there and that if Samantha could be controlled even temporarily by this legally, actually assorted messages might come out which could really be damaging? sometimes you don't kick that fire ant hill
Just a side note about male dominated industries. I have spent most of my working life in them and other than getting fired because I refused an affair with my boss, I don't really care to get into a whole lot of this or that about it. It's work and I try to leave work at work. I blur over that the way when the comments take a turn weaving into politics or some other topic people might not agree about. I blur over most of the comments which I don't care about and pick up with it settles.
I just don't want the blog to be shut down over this kind of not getting along.