Skip to main content

Open Post: Meg books her first post-royalty job

According to the New York Post, Duchess Meghan has booked her first post-royalty job.

The Duchess will make "sporadic appearances" on a Netflix reality show about second weddings called "I Do, Redo," which stars her good friend Jessica Mulroney.

No date has been set for Duchess Meghan's first appearance on the show, which is filmed in Canada and released in 30-minute episodes.

What do you think of Duchess Meghan's exciting career move?


Comments

Liver Bird said…
I think the current mood in the UK is very much in favour of slimming down the royal family. The York girls are not particularly popular, and their father is easily the most disliked member of the royal family. So I doubt we'll see them take on a public role any time soon, esp as Charles has long been opposed to it.
Sandie said…
@SirStinxAlot: 'I could totally see Meghan showing up on the red carpet in a plunging neckline and a borrowed crown on her head. Maybe another transparent skirt?? It will be obvious that she is certifiably insane to everyone watching, including the producers, directors, etc. But I could laugh for a week.'

The entertainment value of an appearance on the red carpet at the Oscars will be entertainment for a week, so I will also be disappointed if they don;t show (although I don;t think they got an invite and it is ridiculous for them to get one).

Will she cling to him, look at him adoringly, push ahead and leave him standing behind her, guide him with a hand on his back? Of course, we know we will see such behaviour!

Will Harry be drunk/high?

Will she have an epic wardrobe/make up/jewellery/shoes fail?

Will Harry be caught desperately trying to make a deal for her ... anything?

Will Harry be caught eyeing another woman (he will be surrounded by beauties, albeit manufactured ones).

Will Megsy annoy/disrespect someone important?

How much hustling will Megsy do to hog the cameras on the red carpet?

The possibilities are endless!

Even if they do only attend after parties, she will find herself back in front of the cameras and loving it, and then talking too much to anyone important she can corner (with trophy husband following her around) ...!
LavenderToast said…
@LiverBird

I disagree about the York sister's popularity. Certainly, they are more popular than Harry is now. What their father is or isn't should not be a factor. Shame on anyone who (Charles or anybody) would hold it against them for what their father allegedly did. Charles shouldn't throw stones when he carried on terribly with a mistress while married to a woman who bore him two sons.

And while I'm at it, I want to speak in favor of Diana. who is vilified here on occasion about her mental health (maybe impacting Harry). No one mentions that PP mother was very affected by a serious mental illness, schizophrenia, and others in the Royal family has had mental illness but Diana is thrashed terribly with no mention that Harry may have had genes from his paternal side which contributed to his instability..
Liver Bird said…
"What their father is or isn't should not be a factor"

Royalty is all about who your father is or isn't though. None of them actually earn their positions and most of them are pretty mediocre individuals. It's all about who you are born to.

Numerous surveys have shown that the British people want fewer royals, not more. I would be very surprised indeed if we see the York girls become 'working' royals in the near future, or ever.
Fifi LaRue said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
AliOops said…
@Sandie

"Even if they do only attend after parties, she will find herself back in front of the cameras and loving it, and then talking too much to anyone important she can corner (with trophy husband following her around) ...!"

Whilst she natters on endlessly, senselessly, and excruciatingly tediously at said mark.
I predict lots of self-head-patting a la Elaine Benes.

Most of those people already know each other, and many will have good friends they want to party with. They aren't there to network with Beavis and Buttpad.
Liver Bird said…
The news in the UK at the moment is that political journalists staged a walk-out from a press briefing at Downing Street because certain media outlets had been excluded. The belief is that Johnson is trying to exclude those journalists who are most critical of him and speak only to those likely to give him a more positive reception. The journalists are saying - quite rightly - that public servants who are funded by taxpayers do not get to pick and choose who reports on them. Hence the walkout.

Remind you of anyone?
LavenderToast said…
@LiverBird

""Royalty is all about who your father is or isn't though""

Line of succession, yes, but that's it. If you are judged based on the morality/actions of your parents then Prince Charles should be tainted on the sake of morality as PP allegedly had affairs (even it has also been suspected of the Queen). Some may think a royal is entitled but many don't. I think it is is medieval (or maybe 'woke') to hold it against the York sisters what their father did or didn;t do. Not even 'woke' too but a vindictive anti-feminist thing to blame girls for their dad's alleged behavior (or poor judgement). I had a superb Dad, but if I hadn't (like my daughter did) I would hate society to blame me for his sins/ In fact in my daughter's case, she turned out so well I believe in part because she abhorred what he was.
xxxxx said…
The York sisters were raised to believe they'd be working royals.......

Charles screwed them on this, while issuing self serving propaganda on a slimmed down monarchy in the future. Notice how only his family does well in "slimmed down" Monarchy mode. Primogeniture made him a swollen headed, selfish jackass!

Charles is getting his karmic payback via Megs and Hapless shenanigans and abdications. Now the Monarchy is too slimmed down to carry out Royal patronages and other duties. So who among the Royals will Charles call on to perform Royal duties for a miserly compensation for an office and travel expenses, while Charles squanders millions on far way Hapless and by extension, Megsy Monarchy wrecker.
Liver Bird said…
"I think it is is medieval (or maybe 'woke') to hold it against the York sisters what their father did or didn;t do."

Royalty is medieval though! You get to enjoy massive privilege and have people bow to you simply and entirely because of who your father (or more rarely, mother) is.

"Not even 'woke' too but a vindictive anti-feminist thing to blame girls for their dad's alleged behavior (or poor judgement)."

It's not just that though. As I've said, there is zero appetite among the British public for subsidising more full-time royals. The aim is to emulate what has been done in every single one of the other European monarchies, and reduce the working royal family to the direct line of succession. So even if the York girls and their parents were popular - which they are not - they're still out. They may take on the occassional royal event, like the 'minor' royals in other European monarchies do, but there is very little chance of them being made 'full-time' royals. It's just not the direction the royal family is moving in.
buckyballs said…
The BAFTAS looked like a complete cringefest. I'm sure the Oscars will be too. So sick of these woke speeches.

I work in Visual Effects. Everyone works so damn hard. Just getting your movie shortlisted, never mind nominated is an honour.

H&M have no right to be at the Oscars. But then again neither does James Corden, so what do I know?
Ava C said…
I'm wondering how she would lay her hands on a truly jaw-dropping dress if Cinderella COULD go to the ball. She ruins everything she wears just by wearing it. If I was a designer I wouldn't want her near my stuff.

The other option is Pa-in-law's cheque book, and from all I've read he won't let her near that either. Yes to living expenses for a year but no to more beige caftans. Not now he's truly appreciating how many millions have been thrown their way without the slightest bit of gratitude or loyalty.

If I was a designer, Kate would be my goal. She can do no wrong at the moment. I so agree with an earlier comment seeing the Cambridges like a life-raft. That's how they come across, in the UK, when everything else seems uncertain and risky. We need them as part of building new trade and cultural links for the future. Thank goodness we have them.
I was thinking of RW's attempted gag about the name of the venue - bringing in Andrew & Harry was a gaffe, a real lead balloon. Brad Pitt's joke was unnecessary in the circumstances.

Strange how `enlightened' persons of other nationalities (I'm thinking of you, Bottom, and you Markle) are very quick to come to the UK and tell us what we're doing wrong and to pull our socks up, whether it's with film awards or university entrance/employment when:

a) you haven't what might have contributed to what you are objecting to (like lack of candidates - and why);

nor have you

b) looked in your own backyard and sorted that out first. We might respect you more if you did.

It may not strictly count as racism but it smells very much like it. At the very least, it looks like hypocritical virtue signalling.
hunter said…
Rebel Wilson's jokes were in very poor taste and not even funny. Isn't she Australian? She should know better.

I would DIE if Markle wore a tiara to the Oscars. That would be the best thing ever.
DesignDoctor said…
@buckyballs

Is Visual Effects synonymous with Special Effects, or is it a sub-category of Special Effects?

Have you ever seen the movie F/X from the eighties? I always liked that one!

If HAMS show up at the Oscars, I would think the visuals of Rach in her dress would need some special or visual effects to make her look good.

@Ava C

If I were a designer I would not want Rach wearing any of my designs either. Somehow she makes everything she wears look tacky. I did like her Goat outfit at Charles Birthday garden party. For once she wore stockings and looked well put together. Although I saw video of her going ahead of Harry.

It is beyond my understanding how someone who potentially had everything for the rest of her life threw it all away and took "her" Prince down with her.

I think she is poison now, and I do not see how they will book any honest, meaningful work.
abbyh said…

Elle, thanks for mentioning the genetic legacy potential. There is a lot about the body and mind we don't know about.

Raspberry Ruffle, I'm hoping that MOS already has that in their defensive list of articles they print which was unpopular to the person.

Liver Bird, a continuation of only wanting friendly reporting - tisk, tisk.

Lavender Toast, the commenting of PP's mother's medical issues meant he "lost" her when he was about 9 or so. I had not thought about that genetic linkage that way but could be.

Hunter, tiara anytime would make me laugh.

On blamed for what one’s father may, or may not have done ...

I was blessed with a good brain, the brightest of the cousins on either side of my family, and fortunate to have benefited from the 1944 Education Act when national policy was dedicated to educating youngsters like me to the limit without cost to us.

Aged 16, I sat the entrance exams for one of our best universities and was awarded a place. My mother’s sisters refused to believe, however, that I had achieved this fair and square on my own merit.

You see, one of my older cousins was `hot on maths’ and had high expectations of a scholarship to Royal Holloway College, Univ of London. Sadly, she could not pass GCE Ordinary level in a modern language as required by the Ministry of Education, and couldn't go to any uni to read any subject. (They're called Matriculation Requirements.) Rita failed French 5 times. I, OTOH, sailed through.

The aunts believed that my father, a Freemason, had put a `secret mark’ on my application paper and this `opened a back door’. Total rubbish! I ‘d watched him sign & date the document and that was it.

To this day, my cousins still believe this. It hurts deeply, partly when I think of the extra written papers, practical exams and interviews I went through as well as all the public exams I sat, but even more that they doubt my integrity and don’t believe me.

The nearest to an apology that they have ever come up with is `I’m not saying that you did anything wrong...' - leaving the unspoken message `but you did get in by your father cheating on your behalf!'

Dad was a mason only because he worked in an organisation where promotion was possible only if one was a Brother but it was no guarantee of getting on. I, OTOH, have been contaminated by association.
Humor Me said…
Good afternoon Nutties! late to the party today, but....

A baby Kraken has been released in the form of the latest offering from
harrymarkle.wordpress.com: "January 2020- The Sly Sussex Timeline".

that, and Harry becoming a punchline for awards season jokes. That has to hurt William, despite all that has happened in the past months.

I await the adult Kraken.
LavenderToast said…
@Abbyh

I did not mention PP's mother having schizophrenia as affecting him. Because yes, I know PP effectively lost her at age 9 but remarkably Princess Andrew (or 'Princess Alice of Battenburg') actually did some good in her life when she became a religious zealot, even becoming a nun. She was kind and generous to the poor. From what I read she even much later in life had a room at Buckingham Palace (tho she was kept out of view essentially). My point was that much is made of Diana's alleged instability but never is it mentioned all the history of mental illness and instability of royals on Charle's side.

And @Elle wrote recently about familial DNA having a link back14 generations, well then certainly Harry could be affected by some dangerous/negative genetic contribution from his father's side. Ther have been 15 generations between the infamous Henry VIII and Queen Elizabeth II Some posters here not long ago noted there was even some physical resemblance of Harry and Henry. I do not think Harry has murderous tendencies but surely he is (in my eyes) traiterous toward the Crown. Has he inherited some unfavorable personality traits; no doubt I think he has, to his determent.
@Lavender, Here's an article on familial DNA going back 14 generations. It has been tested in worms and mice, but in humans, it's a "hotly debated" subject by scientists, and nothing has been proven yet.

ciencealert.com/scientists-observe-epigenetic-memories-passed-down-for-14-generations-most-animal


Sylvia said…
Justin Sylveter 'E'News anchor his comments regarding the Harkles possible move to LA
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry warned off big LA move - 'Don't come here!' | Royal |
News | Express.co.uk
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1237099/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-Duke-Duchess-of-Sussex-LA-move-Royal-
LavenderToast said…
@JocelynsBellinis

Thank you for the link and I read it and understood it due to my knowledge of biology. The memories of those simple invertebrates are not probably too relevant to humans since we evolve not within a few yrs as the worms do but over centuries by and large. I sheepishly should admit I should have read the article first since now I see it is not relevant to the issue.

I knew DNA (for mental expression) goes back 14 generations and MORE;.it just becomes so complicated because of the multiple millions of combinations that can occur with each allele on each gene on each chromosome. Thus it is hard to predict any inheritance unless one is comparing a child's genes to their parent's exact genes. So although potentially a great, great, great....great (you get the number of 'greats' can be daunting up to 14 generations or more) grandparent could pass on a trait, we wouldn't know the effect and especially on something that is mutable and unknown to be directly inherited. However, science is believing some personality traits can be inherited but then the effect of the environment comes into play (the old nature versus nurture along with nature bent by nuture and a person's desire to go against or with the influence of others and society's messages to the individual that they choose to ignore or follow. It becomes so complex of an algorithm of life to fully explain where a person's personality traits come from.

In the end, IMO don't think Harry's action (including instability) is any more influenced by his mother than say his own desire influenced by MM or even some vague genetic reason from an ancient ancestor. In the end, however, as a modern human being, he has the ability to chart his life in spite of his genetics, good or bad.
FrenchieLiv said…
Rachel does not care about the Bafta because she is more interested in a larger and US audience but I can imagine she is currently not happy in Canada and Harry is being her punch-bag.

She tries very hard to stay relevant and to push her happiness therapy narrative but:
- Kate set foot on the red carpet several times while Rachel is still waiting for showing up on the red carpet in the US;
- Rachel was not in the US during the Golden Globes/Grammy Awards/ SAG Awards/Super bowl.
- Rachel was not able to comment on Kobe’s death. As she was a C list actress, she has no house in L.A (difficult to pretend Kobe was her neighbour/friend) and she couldn’t show off a picture of her with Kobe while so many celebrities did. She desperately needs to be in L.A.
- Rachel will not attend to the Oscars and she will not attend to Oscar parties this week which could be relevant for those 2 because of their fake environmental/women empowerment concern or love of documentaries (eg. Emily’s List Panel Event: Defining Women, Vanity Fair Hollywood Calling, Oscar Week: Documentaries, Monte Carlo TV Festival where Prince Albert of Monaco expected to be present, Essence Black Women in Hollywood Awards, Vanity Fair and Lancôme: Women in Hollywood, Red Carpet Green Dress Annual Pre-Oscars Gala, Global Ocean Gala where Sharon Stone is set to present & Prince Albert of Monaco expected to be present for his commitment to the planet and ocean conservation, A Celebration for British Oscar Nominees, Women in Film, Vanity Fair Celebrates Neon’s Parasite and Honeyland, International Documentary Association’s DocuDay L.A.......).

Oscar parties: Come on: Elton’s party is not an option!
Who would be interested in going to Elton’s party? People wants to hang out with Leo, Brad, Jen, ScarJo (=where you find big fish not outdated fish…).
I think Rachel wants to go to Beyoncé and Jay Z’s Gold Party.
The event will host guests like Rihanna, Drake, Diddy, Spike Lee, Leonardo DiCaprio, Adele, J.Lo, Alex Rodriguez, Pharrell Williams, Tracee Ellis Ross, John Legend, Chrissy Teigen, Ciara, Idris Elba, Michael B. Jordan, Orlando Bloom, Katy Perry, Usher, Natalie Portman, Serena Williams, Jennifer Hudson, Mindy Kaling, Lupita Nyong’o, Lily Collins, Shonda Rhimes, Ellen Pompeo, Rashida Jones and Gabrielle Union).
This is where she needs to be: black people (her beloved audience) + powerful couples + A+ list celebrities.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lists/oscars-2020-complete-guide-events-parties-updating-1274808/item/sunday-feb-9-1274802

All the rumours (house hunting in LA for so long, Kim Kardashian's endorsement company claiming to be taking offers …) shows she is bored, stuck with her 1,5/2 kid(s) and also that they are broken.


@ Lavender, I'm in no way a biologist, but it seems fairly clear that these studies are in the very early stages, and, of course, mice and worms have a very short lifespan, which does not compare with the lifespan of humans. You are also right that "nature v nurture" comes into play, too, so these studies have not proven anything. Of course, we may have some characteristics of our parents (both physical and psychological), but again, nature v nurture comes into play.
Glad we cleared this up!
Liver Bird said…
@FrenchieLiv

I agree. She must be bored witless. Awards season is reaching its climax and she is stuck in a borrowed home on Vancouver Island. And worse, Harry is back which means she has to pretend to be avoiding the press which means she can't arrange 'pap' photos anymore. She's like a fish out of water. She's going to go mad soon, if she hasn't already.
Unknown said…

@liver bird

Interesting that you say , Boris Johnson also wants favourable media around him. Men in positions of power have historically been known to twist the narrative. The coverage seen of him so far seems quite positive.

Even more interesting is that he had a 30 minute private chat with Harry, without any aides or media present around the time Harry quit.

Both men directly or indirectly are where they are because of taxpayers and taxpayers money. Only their titles differ. What could they have possibly
discussed? Especially since one enthusiastically advocated Brexit and the other Megxit. Both being successful at it too.

As for the Oscars, nobody I know cares about that. Just as the Miss Universe contests slowly declined in popularity, the Oscars are unknown.

Lemon tea



Ava C said…
@Liver Bird - Harry is back which means she has to pretend to be avoiding the press which means she can't arrange 'pap' photos anymore. She's like a fish out of water. She's going to go mad soon, if she hasn't already.

Since Harry's virtually unemployable on his own merits he's going to be the stereotypical unemployed male loafing on a sofa all day isn't he? What's Meghan going to do? Light a fire under him? Wouldn't help. And as you rightly say, she can't be Little Miss Publicity while he's there. What a situation she's got herself into. It's a modern morality tale.
The DM and its readers have finally picked up the story that the "Good News charity" the Harkles picked to highlight is a for-profit company. The readers are not pleased, going by the comments.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7961685/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-feature-t-shirt-advert-SussexRoyal-Instagram-page.htmR

Also, the owner of Good News charity, Michelle Figueroa, says that she wasn't told that the Harkles had picked her site for their Instagram. So, the Kristi@global person, who runs the for-profit PR company,and who is the PR person we discussed yesterday, put this up on her web page without telling the owner of the Good News charity. Figueroa says she was on vacation in Puerto Rico when her phone blew up with messages about it and then she learned of the news that the Harkles put her site on their Instagram page as their charity of the month. She tried to contact the Harkles, but they have not responded to her.

Sounds like the Harkles picked this charity out of thin air with no background check through Kristi, the person who hawks her book, merch and classes on her website claiming to teach you how to become an internet influencer, while hugging a dolphin in her bikini!

Can the Harkles do anything correctly or honestly? This is another major fail for them.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7924951/Journalist-Instagram-account-followed-SussexRoyal-heard-royals.html

CookieShark said…
Slightly off-topic, but does anyone have info regarding Prince George and his connection to the nickname Archie? I thought I read there was some significance for this name for him.
LavenderToast said…
@JocelynsBellinis

Thank you for responding.

I didn't want to say this as giving any true (mean 'proof') but scientists have found that people's feelings (like negative thoughts due to depression or conversely 'positive' type thoughts) can form new pathways in ou brains. Is this the same as those 'memories' found in the invertebrates as the study you cited indict...not sure. But it just goes to show our actions are so complex (although we may think we know why we act or react or think) so do we really know all the reasons why we do or say what we do, when in truth it can be due to past ancestral traits in us, more direct parental genetic contribution, our environmental influences, our beliefs/values and our unique personality we possess. What I'm getting at is that it is too simplistic to blame Diana (or Charles and especially Meghan) for why Harry does what he does. Of course, some factors may be stronger than others and that can be difficult to assess.

No need to respond@JocelynsBellinis Sorry if my comment has gone down a rabbit hole.

@Ava @LiverBird, It looks to me that MM is in a psychologically manic state, rushing around, trying to do deals that fall through or are questionable, like the Good News debacle. There seems to be no thought put behind her actions, just action for action's sake. I think it's more than any press she gets is a positive in her eyes. There is no logic to any of her failed deals or PR. It appears to be a psychological issue to me- mania. All of this rushing around like a crazy person is just not normal.
xxxxx said…
A laff from DM:

Tippi Thompson, manchester, United Kingdom, 2 minutes ago
By the time she's finished with Harry,he'll be carrying her bags.bellboy style.
Liver Bird said…
"Sounds like the Harkles picked this charity out of thin air"

It isn't a charity!
@LiverBird. I know. Remember, I followed the leads yesterday about Kristy and her "influencer" scam. I should have put the word "charity" in quotes.
The owner of the good news site is being laughed at in the DM comments, almost all saying that she's been Markled.
SwampWoman said…
JocelynsBellinis said...
@Ava @LiverBird, It looks to me that MM is in a psychologically manic state, rushing around, trying to do deals that fall through or are questionable, like the Good News debacle. There seems to be no thought put behind her actions, just action for action's sake. I think it's more than any press she gets is a positive in her eyes. There is no logic to any of her failed deals or PR. It appears to be a psychological issue to me- mania. All of this rushing around like a crazy person is just not normal.


Or maybe she really is desperate, no money coming in, and has anybody actually seen Harry with her? I have seen failing businesses/people flail desperately before, often doing things that work against what they are trying to achieve, starting new projects, discarding projects before they can be effective, selling new promises while not having fulfilled their old ones.

/Don't get me wrong, I always thought she was mentally unstable, but am putting it out as an alternative theory.
Oh, and Figuora said that she wrote a positive article about banana-gate and the sex workers. It just gets worse and worse.
Teasmade said…
Eeeuw!

Something I look forward to every Monday and Friday is the New Yorker crossword puzzle. So if you do it . . .SPOILER ALERT. I'm going to reveal an answer.

18A Very special delivery of 2019?





Ans: A R C H I E

Yeah, it was special all right!
FrenchieLiv said…
@JocelynsBellinis
In early January 2020, goodness_movement IG was a follower of @Kensingtonroyal IG BUT was not a follower of @Sussexroyal IG. Suddenly (I don't remember the day, but it was around Megxit), Michelle Figueroa unfollowed @Kensingtonroyal IG).
Figueroa doesn't tell the whole truth...
Teasmade said…
@CookieShark: I think "Archie" was the code name used by security for George. Spoiled now, of course.
@Frenchie, Very interesting. I hope more comes out about Figueroa, Katie and the Harkles. All is not as it seems. Figueroa is just a woman who is trying to become an internet influencer (money), with that Katie person behind her(money).
buckyballs said…
@DesignDoctor

"Is Visual Effects synonymous with Special Effects, or is it a sub-category of Special Effects?"

Visual Effects encompasses digital effects and practical effects (real-world hammer and nails stuff). So in a sense, it was Special Effects that was subsumed into Visual Effects, not the other way around.
Figueroa is a CNN en Espanol journalist. The plot thickens:

Michelle Figueroa
@Mfigueroacnn
CNN en Español Journalist and Founder of Good News Movement™️ Not really on here... Find me on Insta 🙂
@goodnews_movement

@ Swamp Woman, that's a good point about her desperation.
And Figueroa has *ONLY* 18 posts in one month on her twitter about the Markle pick.
Hikari said…
@JudyC,

>>>If Meghan shows up at the Oscars in a dress that's really jaw dropping, BP will immediately and swiftly pull the Harkles' financial funding, titles, etc. The hammer will come down hard.<<<

I've been waiting for nearly two years to see Rachel in anything that dropped my jaw in a good way. It's hit the floor plenty, but only because she looked so bad.

Rach is delusional enough to think that she and Hazmat will be the next Brangelina on the red carpet, and she's probably been working the phones hardcore to finagle an invite. The Oscar organizers would be brain-dead to extend invitations to the most divisive and shambolic couple since Wallis and David. The steaming hot mess on the red carpet that reeks of ordure would overshadow all the legitimate stars present. It would be in keeping with Rach's MO to just barrel ahead and try to bulldoze her way onto the red carpet anyway, sans invitation. It would be rather fun to watch that unfold on live TV. I don't want the Harkles anywhere near the Oscars, but if she did try that stunt, and was blatantly ignored by all the celebs and media outlets present, who refuse to speak to her or even look at her, do we think that would penetrate her Narc skull? If she storms up to Ryan Seacrest and shanghaies another star's interview in progress, I hope a couple of thick-necked bouncers drag her away and it's all filmed for Entertainment Tonight and TMZ. Welcome back to L.A., Rachel! If she stays away, she'll just release an IG statement to the effect that since she's so Royal, she didn't find it necessary to attend the Oscars and rub shoulders with all those non-Royals.

I dunno, though . . the Oscar ratings have been falling further into the toilet with every passing year. The Golden Age of Hollywood glamor and mystique is long gone. I'd say the Oscars have now sunk to Rachel's level. The Harkles may get invited to goose up the ratings by viewers tuning in to see the manure walking for themselves.
SDJ said…
Nutty and Nutty-ers, have you ever seen the play or the film King Charles III?

Written in 2014 it is about the ascension (sort of) of Prince Charles to the throne. In it, Harry falls in love with a black woman who helps convince him to leave the royal family. At the same time, she has some unsavoury photographs that a former boyfriend is trying to blackmail her with......
Charles gets into a major constitutional scrap regarding freedom of the press and finally, is convinced/blackmailed by his children to abdicate in favour of William. Harry dumps said girlfriend to go back into the family fold.

I remember seeing it years ago and finding it interesting. Now I think it was downright prescient.
Teasmade said…
@SDJ

I saw it . . it was controversial as it had the ghost of Diana wafting through at one point, right?

It had the late and lamented (very much, by me) Tim Pigott-Smith. His death crushed me. Although I haaaaated him in "Jewel in the Crown"!

Anyone else?
hunter said…
Hikari - if the Oscars wanted a ratings boost from showcasing HAMS, they would have to announce that in advance don't you think?
Fifi LaRue said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
OKay said…
I would not put it past Meg to crash the Oscars, and dare them to try to remove her.
JHanoi said…
charles may be able to manage with a slimmed down monarchy because he’ll still have anne and the wessexes around to help out , unless he’s planning on dropping them too. maybe charles is planning to eliminate alot of the patronages and thereby eliminate many of the ‘duties’/ handshaking / visits to open hospital and nursing care homes etc. the older generation, alexandria, gloucesters and kents won’t be around to help out much longer.

depending on when charles and then william ascends, william is going to need help. assuming H&M are still out of the royal fold that leaves just the cambridges and the kids may not be old enough to take on royal duties, or may not want to do royal duties, i think anne and the wessexes would still do their duty if able to. but i think william will bring the york girls into the fold if he can, not the husbands, just the girls if they want to make that move. at that point it will all be up to william/(catherine) and then george when he gets old enough.
Flooper said…
@LiverBird

""She's going to go mad soon, if she hasn't already.""

There is definitely truth to the old phrase 'Cabin Fever'. I don't care if it is a mansion, there is no house big enough to contain Meghan's ego and her grandiose plans....she probably can be heard in every room of the house, swearing when she calls a Hollywood contact in hopes of some gig and she can't get past the front desk assistant or calls one of these so-called friends of her and she gets a voice mail greeting because they don't pick up. Then Harry probably is stuck caring for Archie exclusively because Meg is on the phone or computer full time, 18 hrs a day. That is why they have to send RPO's out for food and even coffee (neither can't be bothered to turn on a Keurig or make a sandwich). Here is probably what's going to happen:

Harry: "Honey, Archie boy has a dirty nappie."
Meg: "You know how to change him darling, I'm busy right now:
Harry: "OK Babykins but you do it better".
Mrg: "Well it will be good practice, you know you wanted to raise him without a nanny"
Harry: "I'll try but can you check him after, Sweet Pea?"
Meg (with a strain in her voice): "Please let me finish H. I'm trying to get Igo since I need to get some work"
Harry: "Don't worry we have Pa's money, did you check our account for the deposit?"
Meg: "Damn, did you forget, it takes 10 business days to clear!"
Harry (prolonged silence)
Meg (irritated): "What...wait, I;m not OK"
Harry: "Sorry Megster, I thought you told me to be quiet if I'm upset. Are you OK?
Meg (bristling with anger): "No dammit, I'm NOT OK..and worse You aren't OK. I could just scream"
Harry: "No please sweetie, don't scream remember what happened the last time you did that, The RPO's came and pointed their guns at you".
Meg *screaming): "Don't remind me Ass.h,,e"
Harry: "No need to get angry Meg-baby, you know we shouldn't swear around Archie, since he already learned the ;F-word from you, erm I mean us."
Meg(gripping the phone tightly): "Can you just go outside, because I need to concentrate, I just got hung up on again:
Harry: "The Paps are out there. You know how I feel about them!?
Meg(erupting like a volcanic) "Grow a pair will you!!!
Harry (under his breath) "Maybe Wills was right"
Meg: "What did you mutter"
Harry: "Oh, uh, I just said "I hope your deals go alright"
Meg (shouting at the top of her lungs): "You don't make it easy"

And shortly thereafter behind the closed doors of a lovely mansion was the unmistakable scream of a man with a British accent, Within minutes a woman with what strangely appeared to have a Himalayan yak skin on her head sideways, walked out of the house in handcuffs in between two burly men while photographers at the fence took dozens of pictures. All the while the woman clearly was smiling and proud of herself. She was heard cackling and said "Now I can be a star in my own movie". TMZ reported latter that the Queen was quoted as saying "Off with her head" and it was announced the Disney Channel would produce its first ever 'Evil Princess' movie inspired by the diabolical Meghan Markle as infamous as her crime
abbyh said…

H&M crashing the oscars?

I might actually watch the walk to see if some funny and doesn't make sense editing happens.
Hikari said…
@hunter
>>>Hikari - if the Oscars wanted a ratings boost from showcasing HAMS, they would have to announce that in advance don't you think?<<<

That's why I don't actually think they were invited. Even on the (very far) off chance that it had been discussed, Harry's visa status would be rather up in the air at the moment, I should think. Unless they are already in L.A., as has been reported.

If the broadcast gets a ratings bump from the Harkles, it will be from viewers tuning in hoping to see the hot mess for themselves, hoping to see Haz confront Brad Pitt over being called a trophy. The wonderment is part of the PR, I suppose. I won't be watching on the night, but I will check out the Internet coverage. If I see Rach and H. I will throw up in my mouth ever so slightly. That's what the sight of either of their faces does to me.
Flooper, that was hysterical and probably on target 🎯😂😂
Also, meant to include LiverBird😂😂
Hikari said…
I just visited CharlatanDuchess and found this, posted very recently today, since it was not there earlier. No attribution available. This theory seems a bit la-la and I would have expected to find it over on Skippy, not TCD

Just . . read it and then I will offer my thoughts at the end.

******************

The Mysterious Markus Anderson
Anderson - Meaning: "son of Andrew"

Born: 1978, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada

Not much is known about his background, just that he moved from a small town in Canada to London when he was 18 to work as a waiter at the SoHo Club. Not sure how a Canadian citizen with no special skills had the work visa and contacts to land even a lowly job at a high-end establishment.

In 1977, Prince Andrew went to Lakefield College (in Peterborough, Ontario, Canada) for a semester. He’s been back repeatedly and is/was a patron there.

Markus Anderson has been an important player in Harry and Meghan’s relationship. And a weird coincidence - they gave Archie the middle name Harrison (‘son of Harry), something never done in the Royal Family before.

In short:

Prince Andrew lived in the same place as Markus Anderson at the time of his conception. No one knows anything about Markus Anderson, but he impressed the hell out of Meghan, who we know has an agenda and Markus was a means for her to meet Harry. Using Harrison for a middle name seems so random, but somehow sends a cryptic message in light of this possibility. Markus Anderson is a nobody with no formal education, no family to speak of, yet he ultimately rises to the upper echelons of London society and plays a matchmaker to a senior royal?

Impossible to prove, but I can’t help but think the timing, location and names don’t add up to something. It can’t all be a coincidence.

•No coincidences, IMO •

********************

This conspiracy theorist (not necessarily TCD, as there is no name attached, but if she didn't write it, she reblogged it, offering it some credence in her mind . .suggests that, yes, you read that right--Markus Anderson is the love child of Andrew, conceived during some wild oats sowing in Peterborough in 1977. The 'proofs' are: 1. Andrew was resident in the same city where Markus was conceived, at roughly the same time he was conceived, though by that logic alone, Prince Andrew might easily have fathered any or all of the children born in Peterborough within 9 months of his residency. 2. Some word play with Anderson vs. Harrison, which really doesn't float since 'Harrison' is Archie's middle name and Anderson is Markus's legal surname. I am not convinced by these 'proofs' that Markus wasn't born to Mr. and Mrs. Anderson of Peterborough who had nothing whatsoever to do with a visiting royal scholar from across the Pond.

Given how Markle has done all in her heinous power to wreck the significant life events and peace of mind of the York girls and by extension their parents, Andy's 'love child' really didn't do him any favors at all. If Markus could prove that he was Andrew's son, then he'd have motivation, not to mention something of a claim, to insert himself into the Royal family, rather than pulling strings for his talentless harpy friend to get in.

I just that that was pretty amusing. The mental wear and tear of the ongoing Suxxit Show is making just about everyone go a little doolally.

Please, God, make it stop soon!
Flooper said…
@Miss Scarlett
Thank you very much, you're so kind!
Anonymous said…
Re the ancestral DNA: certainly it is only theory re humans, but it's one that may explain even explain prodigies and phobias, etc. Worth reading about IMO. Here's a link: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/genetic-memory-how-we-know-things-we-never-learned/

DNA itself goes back much further than 14 generations, however. In fact, mitochondrial DNA can be traced back over centuries to the origins and provide haplogroup information that can really narrow things down if you're doing research on the fam (it changes very little over great spans of time), and Richard III's DNA stirred scandal:

"...His identity was confirmed through his mitochondrial DNA, passed down through the maternal line from his sister to two relatives alive today.

But further DNA tests soon uncovered evidence of a family secret. It emerged when researchers at Leicester University compared the Y chromosomes of Richard III and five anonymous male relatives of Henry Somerset (1744-1803), who claim descent from Edward III, the great great grandfather of Richard III..."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/25/richard-iii-dna-tests-uncover-evidence-of-further-royal-scandal

Not that any of that has anything to do with Rach & H really, but I haven't had a chance to catch up on today's events, and after skimming thru the comments, it doesn't look like any fresh hell has been stirred. Yet.
LavenderToast said…
@Elle Reine des Abeilles

>>>DNA itself goes back much further than 14 generations, however. In fact, mitochondrial DNA can be traced back over centuries to the origins and provide haplogroup information<<<

Of course, DNA goes beyond 14 generations. However, the mitochondrial DNA has its limitations because it is only showing maternal links between people. To complete the picture one needs to know the paternal DNA and that is assuming no mutation happens (which do from time to time) which alters the person belonging to a haplogroup perhaps.

Effectively I think most people want to know more than just their mitrochondria DNA related relatives since as happens, it is not unusual for women to have children fathered by more than one man. To know the Y-DNA contribution is to fully know how you compare to some potential relative.
DesignDoctor said…
@SDJ

I am interested in your recommendation for the movie King Charles III. Sounds good. It is available to rent on Amazon Prime and there is trailer.

https://www.amazon.com/King-Charles-III-Rupert-Goold/dp/B071449H91
SDJ said…
@DesignDoctor

I am interested in your recommendation for the movie King Charles III. Sounds good. It is available to rent on Amazon Prime and there is trailer.

https://www.amazon.com/King-Charles-III-Rupert-Goold/dp/B071449H91


It might be available on demand via PBS/Masterpiece in North America and BBC in the UK

Its worth a watch - it made me give William and Kate the side eye for a couple of months after I saw it!!
DesignDoctor said…
@SDJ

Thank you for the tip for PBS viewing.

@Teasmade

I am a Tim Pigott-Smith fan, too.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
“I am so blessed that I can show the world a side of myself that truly inspires me,” said Mulroney in a social media post after the show was announced last year.”

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂HILARIOUS!!

I am so blessed that I didn't choke on my lunch cracking up at this. COD: death by sandwich, time of death: lunch break. ⚰

(Yeah girl i inspire myself too. 🤣 the EFF?! Real people talk like this??)
Scandi Sanskrit said…
And Caitlin Moran?

Where have I heard that name before? Rings a bell.
Unbeweaveable said…
Meghan and Harry aren’t going to be anywhere near the red carpet. If they show up it will be to Elton John’s Oscar viewing party.

Neither of them is listed as a host or attendee, but maybe they’ll be surprise guests.

On the other hand, it’s super tacky to show up at a charity event and hustle for jobs. I also wonder how far Elton John is willing to cast his lot with Harry, after he mangled Megxit so spectacularly. Would Elton be willing to risk Will cutting off Candle in the Wind and access to dear Diana’s darling little royal grandchildren?
Scandi Sanskrit said…
@Unbeweaveable:

I wuv your Elmer Fudd username! 🥕
YankeeDoodle said…
the HAMS are being kept relevant by people like us, and a few other sites. Media moves on quickly, and once the initial oh gosh, oh my, how did you survive HAMS, being tortured by hundreds of millions of pounds spent on you from birth; lioving family; the world at your table; plotting from before your wedding about getting out of the only institution, and family in the world, that even trashy celebrities like pole dancing women who need to date/fake engagements with old sports with H and H, among celebrity diseases,; they will will pay millions for an invite to Buckingham Palace, not to a rent-an ex royal, with no looks, begging for money, and his wife. But pole dancers and cheap celebs, who try to put out messages against my country,, are trash.. Pathetic, and it makes me happy that these split sandwiches will always be begging for their money. Beyoncé will never see the royal family again after her trashing of our American anthem, too.

Elton John, I mean Sir Elton Johns, actually saying something against the Queen? Not with the two half sandwiches means good-bye. No knighthood for you, no Dames, even if the Queen is actually being suggested that she must give away medals, if connected anymore to the turncoat runners.. The Queen will say No. sorry, but put anybody backing HAMS into the the loo, or outhouse.

HAmS are trash, not class. Nobody wants to be bored to death with the near 70 year old Oprah and whining H and his soon to be ex-wife talk about mental health on a channel nobody has bought.

The HAMS are hamsters who are now separated from their cafes.
Anonymous said…
The Charlatan Duchess has an interesting post about Markus Anderson, who was born in Peterborough, Ontario in 1978.

Literally nothing is known about Anderson's parents. We don't know their names or where they live. We strangely know almost nothing about Anderson's background, except that he somehow received a visa to go to London and work as a waiter at Soho House in 1996. How does someone get a visa to go to London and be a waiter?

Here's the weird thing: Prince Andrew attended school in Ontario near Peterborough from January-June 1977. That's where he acquired the nickname "Randy Andy."

Hasn't Enty insinuated several times that someone in the royal family has an unacknowledged illegitimate child who did not grow up in England? Many people assumed he was talking about Harry . . . but what if it's Andrew, and what if that child is Markus?

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but this one is REALLY juicy!
Vince said…
Just wanted to say that I agree fully with this last post on Harry Markle:
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2020/02/03/january-2020-the-sly-sussex-timeline/


In short, the window for the Harkles has already closed, so to speak. They're already passe and a joke.

Right after Megxit, there was a moment of time where the Harkles had the spotlight and the momentum to try to strike while the iron was hot. But that moment is already gone, and it's never coming back.

Of course, they're not just going to give up and throw in the towel. But the walls are closing in on them fast. Their act isn't going to work in the current (Trump) USA, and even Canada seems to be pre-fatigued of them. Saw a poll where 75% of respondents don't want to pay for their security, or something like that.

They'll make some money, get some donations, but the "break the internet" days are finished and their irrelevancy grows by the day.

It's already over.



On another subject, I am delighted to see how happy and carefree the royal family looks these days. Gorgeous Kate and handsome Will enjoying the BAFTAs, the queen smiling broadly on a walk. The weight of the Harkles has been lifted. I am so happy for the royal family that they are free of the ingrates. Sure, the Harkles will appear at a few functions, but the charade is over. No one has to pretend any longer. The royals must be thrilled. Back to normalcy, not some absurd freak show that had been taking place for two years.

I'm so content with the situation right now. And really feeling like things will only get better from here for the royals.
buckyballs said…
@Texshan

Anderson does not have the googly eyes nor the oversized chompers.

Interesting theory, but the genes run strong in the BRF.

Look at Beatrice and Eugenie for reference.
`King Charles III’ prescient?

Naah! Surely it gave her, or the boyfriend/presumed royal bastard, the whole bloody idea.
Ava C said…
@Scandi Sanskrit query - Caitlin Moran is a Times journalist and has written several books including 'How to be a Woman' and 'How to Grow a Girl'. Her writing is original, funny and memorable. She can be an exhilarating read.

I was always an Elizabeth Taylor fan (I saw her on stage in London for my 18th birthday - an amazing present from my parents) and there was acres of newsprint when she died. Yet Caitlin Moran outdid it all in one tiny column, which totally captured Elizabeth Taylor. Forgive me for going OT with some extracts. The writing is amazing:

"[She had] a private jet called Elizabeth, two Oscars, skin like milk and the ability to drink any man under the table, she could walk into any gathering like the commander of a star fleet. No one was superior to her – but then, no one was worthy enough to worship her properly, either, until Richard Burton came along, for the first and then the second time, and kissed her right out of her shoes. Their relationship was like a bomb that kept going off: they were condemned for ‘erotic vagrancy’ by the Vatican at the start of their affair, but carelessly racketed around the world collecting Van Goghs, Pissarros, Rembrandts and diamonds, arguing, drinking and trashing big beds. [...]

"In a world where women still worry that they are ‘too much’ – too big, too loud, too demanding, too exuberant – Taylor was a reminder of what a delight it can be, for men and women alike, when a woman really does take full possession of her powers. Burton’s nickname for her was ‘Ocean’. Sometimes, it seemed too small.

"On my wall, I have a shot of Taylor in her late forties. She is with David Bowie – outdoors in LA, at a guess. Bowie is emaciated – at the height of his cocaine addiction, but still, clearly, both powerful and beautiful. He has his arms around Taylor’s waist – a thicker, rounder waist than her corseted days in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof; she is heavy, like wet roses. She looks like a banquet. As she puts a cigarette to Bowie’s mouth, her face is both lascivious and maternal – her lips are half-open; you can practically hear her coo, ‘Here you go, baby.’ In that one shot, she makes David Bowie – David Bowie – look like a helpless teenage boy. She was a storm front of a woman, in sapphires. Tonight, I will drink cold, cold champagne in her memory. Then eat a diamond."
Scandi Sanskrit said…
@Ava C:

Thank you. 🙏🏼 And fascinating read about Elizabeth Taylor.

I swear I know Caitlin Moran's name from something significant in my life for her name to stick out like that, but a Google search (which resulted in what Caitlin Moran is mainly known for) had nothing on me. It's a bit eerie.

Must've been something she did on the side or something (not Elizabeth Taylor). Because I've never read her books. Oh well, never mind. Thank you again. 💜
Scandi Sanskrit said…
Also OMG Ava C:

Who needs to break the Internet when you can get "condemned for ‘erotic vagrancy’ by the Vatican"??

Holy grail of baddassery. 😂😂 A life well-played~ 👏🏼
Hikari said…
@Texshan

I also had seen the charlatan Dutchess post about Marcus being the potential love child of Randy Andy and posted it earlier.

It’s a juicy theory, but one that ultimately Hass to be dismissed I think. Prince Andrew was in the same city where Marcus was born at the time he would have been conceived, but by that logic Andrew is the potential father of every child born in Peterborough in 1978. I’m not discounting that Andrew might have a love child somewhere, but making it Markus on the Bases that nothing is known about Markus’s parents or that his surname means Andrews son, or that he worked in London as a waiter when he was 18 is really flimsy. It’s only the association with Meg That would make it delicious. Markus looks nothing like Andy; If anything he looks kind of like Chris Pratt. As has been mentioned, the Saxe Coburg Battenberg genes are strong and they are not apparent in MA. As for the Vegas search and that “nothing is known about his parents”, I’d like to do my own research into Canadian records before swallowing that whole. The world at large knows nothing about my parents either; They don’t have any pictures on the Internet but a little digging into the proper offices will prove that they exist. I look at Markus And see a person very much like Meg, they are two peas in a pod really. Both hail from modest backgrounds But got a taste of the highlife and want to reinvent themselves into something grander then they came from. Obscuring their origins is part of the reinvention. Markus didn’t marry a Prince, so he can still fly under the radar more than Rachel can, whose constructed facade is crumbling faster than a sandcastle at high tide.

As for the key being Markus’s entre into London society as a waiter on s visa, that’s not odd. Canada is a Commonwealth country and youth from all over come to London to work in the service industry. I had a friend, a fellow American from Texas, who participated in a scheme during college where she spent a summer in London as a shop girl at Harrods. It would be far easier for a Commonwealth
citizen to obtain a hospitality visa. Frankly, the fact that Markus was a waiter sort of argues against the notion that he exploited secret Royal connections to get a visa; If that were true, it seems like he would have gotten a better job.

It’s a fizzy idea, but a nonstarter. Why would a secret love child of Andy work so hard on behalf of Rachel if he could have been promoting himself into the family instead?
Lol to the Marcus Anderson conspiracy theory. Do t believe it one but, but always fascinated how people's minds work to unravel the convoluted spiders' web of no-information. Since we know nothing about him, have never heard him speak, no idea about any of his ideas and have only barely seen him in MM related context, one could say and assume anything. He is never going to refute it after all.

His name does seem very similar to Archie's though, and I could believe that Meghan got the idea of her baby's name from his. Practically speaking it could allow the kid to go about his life - attend school, then uni, have a fantastic gap year etc etc all the while being called 'Archie Harrison' which indicates zero affiliation to the BRF.

Alas, this theory holds true only if the parents hadn't made this poor bub the most notoriously mysterious entity of the year 2019. Also, they could have just called him John Smith Mountbatten-Windsor and let the boy actually have a normal life.
Hikari said…
No idea what Vegas is standing in for in my last post. More iPhone mangling.
@Hikari

Perhaps you meant to write 'vague' instead of 'Vegas' ??
Hikari said…
Alice,

Well spotted! I had lost my own train of thought, but thanks to your hint I now recall that I meant to say “vague assertion”.

Rachel watchers are starting to go more than a little batty with the complete lack of verifiable information, and are going into overdrive Trying to fill in the blanks. This is a particularly inventive theory. Markus would have to go And be born in Peterborough! If he’d been born in Winnipeg, that would shoot that right to the ground.
Sandie said…
Did Meghan ever love Harry? Was she ever in love with him?

Yes and no ...

If you look at videos of the engagement announcement and interview and the wedding (especially the latter), she was giddy with excitement and there are photos of her at the wedding (one with her mother) in which she looks almost maniacal.

Harry opened the doors to wealth and worldwide fame, and the freedom that gave her ... to do whatever she wanted (she soon realised that the BRF were too restrictive for her and she did not like the UK so started making plans for an exit). He was the ultimate trophy husband with benefits, and he affirmed her in every way and let her dominate and control him, so of course she was in love with him. She was as in love with him as a narc can be.

The one thing he still has that she cannot provide for herself is the wealth. He is also still useful as a trophy husband (he can still open doors that she cannot) who adores her (can she find a replacement who will let her control and dominate as he does, and give her the adoration he does?).

None of this is coldly calculating on her part. She is simply being herself, driven by her core character and values. She believed she was in love with Harry, and when she dumps him, she will believe the story she puts out there in which she blames everyone and everything but herself.

I don't think the BRF know what they are dealing with (Harry certainly doesn't) and things are going to get very messy and ugly. Traits of the narcissist are revered and greatly valued in much of modern society (and are completely opposite of those of the Queen), so Meghan will always have defenders and supporters. She will need them to fund her because she does not have the talents to create wealth through creating something of value to society (if you discount entertainment).

Before you attack Meghan for who she is (and, to me, her values are despicable so I do understand), look around at society and see how she has the perfect environment to flourish in modern society. Selfies, Instagram sharing of every detail of one's life and for posting pithy quotes that are so woke, adoration of movie stars turning up to another awards ceremony wearing an outfit (never to be worn again) that cost the equivalent of what would house and feed a family comfortably for a year, children becoming wealthy promoting toys, a TV programme about couples who had a disappointing wedding so at huge expense they get the wedding of their dreams for the entertainment of the masses ...

All we can do is make conscious choices when we vote, shop and use services, and use the channels available to protest against corruption (at all levels). We can't stop people like Meghan from posting on IG and wearing hugely expensive dresses for a photo shoot, but we can enjoy the entertainment (for free in the Internet)!
none said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
none said…
A while back I read that on Markus's social media are several identifiers listed and one of them was father. I also read that he is gay.

My tinfoil hat theory is that MM told Harry she was pregnant, necessitating the quick marriage. After the marriage she then conveniently "miscarried".

Soon after she went public with a pregnancy. Harry was suspicious, which explains the overheard argument where he asked MM if she was really pregnant. She wasn't, but had made her pregnancy public, so at that point Harry and the BRF had to play along to save face.

So now MM needed a real baby. She secured a surrogate. The DNA I believe could be Markus's and that of the surrogate. Whatever the truth is, I really hope it comes out at some point.
Ava C said…
New Tatler article - the Cambridges to join PC and Camilla at an event next week, 11 Feb, visiting the Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre Stanford Hall to meet patients and staff.

https://www.tatler.com/article/the-duke-and-duchess-of-cambridge-prince-charles-and-the-duchess-of-cornwall-joint-engagement

Unusual for them to do an event like this together. It also looks like Harry's previous territory - one of the areas that seemed a natural fit for him. At least in pre-Meghan days ably managed by his much-missed-and-needed private secretary Edward Lane Fox.

That man would be worth his weight in gold to the BRF if they could get him back in time for Harry's inevitable escape back to Blighty. Although maybe that's TOO impossible a task, even for him. Can Harry ever be rehabilitated sans Meghan? Is it too late?
Ava C said…
This article also caught my attention, about the next series of The Windsors:

https://www.tatler.com/article/satirical-soap-the-windsors-predicted-megxit

They've been racing to keep up with events. I've watched the Harry and Meghan wedding episode quite a few times. SO funny. At the time we didn't realise quite how much of a determined misfit she would be, or that she was conducting such a short-term, calculated smash-and-grab raid on the monarchy and the country, but there were already plenty of red flags and lots of comic material to play with.
@AvaC

I read about the Will, Kate, Charly and Cam mega engagement as well. My verr first reaction - Lol, that seems like preemptive measure by the BRF, anticipating Harkles shenaniy at Oscars (which is in the 10th I believe).

An RR (Right hard Palmer was it?) tweeted that this unprecedented joint engagement is "unrelated to Harry and Meghans departure" but come on, it obviously is! It's now all hands on deck for the BRF trying to salvage their reputation, correct the optics and play happy families since the Sussexes so spectacularly dropped a nuclear bomb and left.
LavenderToast said…
@holly said;

""My tinfoil hat theory is that MM told Harry she was pregnant, necessitating the quick marriage. After the marriage she then conveniently "miscarried"""

I so agree with you and with my 'tin foil hat' on I want to add one ting twist. I think Meghan told Harry she miscarried because of all the intrusive press attention made her so stressed out. This would plat on Harry's mind that once again he couldn't protect the woman he loved from the mean press. So he was guilt-tripped into marriage, which I believe why we see Marcus, Dora gathered and Harry looking so somber, almost scared at the Invictus games. Harry was railroaded I'm sure even tho he might have had feelings for Meg. But she wore him down; and besides, that is one of the oldest tricks on the books, a woman telling a man she is pregnant by him. It might also explain why Harry didn't meet his future father-in-law, as Meg could have legitimately said my father will be so mad at you for getting me pregnant before marriage.
none said…
More on Markus whom I believe is a major player in the Harkle drama. There's been recent online chatter that Jennifer Aniston wants to connect with MM in Canada. Here's a couple pictures of Markus and Aniston together in 2009.

http://jenniferaniston1.blogspot.com/2009/03/jen-markus-anderson-grey-goose-pre.html
KCM1212 said…
@ava c

Wow! Thanks for the excerpt from Caitlin Moran. I Hard to pull the photo up to see it for myself. Amazing writing for an amazing woman. I made a mental note to be a stronger woman.

I will look for more by Caitlin Moran.

And may be eat a diamond.
Jen said…
@ Holly

The ONLY reason I could see Jen Aniston wanting to "connect" with MM is to maybe get her on The Morning Show (her apple tv show with Witherspoon and Carell) as herself. That's a possibility, but doubt she would make the connection herself. She could send someone....
none said…
@Jen

Here's one of the stories. Do I believe it? No. I find the connection though interesting.

https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/a30741218/meghan-markle-jennifer-aniston-plans-to-hang-out-in-canada/
gabes_human said…
@Cookie Shark. My understanding is that Archie was the code name chosen by the RPOs for George.
xxxxx said…
Being holed up in remote BC is so boring, except for the goodies from the local organic (what?) delicatessen and the random hike/photo op. So of course Megsy will have her people approach Jennifer Aniston's people about a meet-up. I am sure they have loads in common to discuss. If this takes place it will be at the Russian oligarch's mansion. Comped of course. Just like they do in Vegas, bringing back happy memories for Hapless.

Amazed like the rest of Nutties how Megsy blew the best gig she ever had. And all that was required was the Dumped Duo to show up for a few Royal duties. As others have said, the combination of living at Frogmore and the Hertfordshire estate that Charles offered, could have been made into a lucrative marketing machine. With the Hertfordshire estate issuing (selling) all kinds of natural-organic meats, jams, jellies, flowers, the possibilities were endless.
AND all this would have met with Royal approval. Hapless would be kept busy (idle hands being the tool of the Devil), have challenging marketing work to do, along with expert staff to guide him.
What a f-up by H&M! Millions would have jumped at such a chance.

BUT the minimal rural life did not suit them. But living remote in rural BS does? As in the Duo could have lived most of the time at Frogmore, close to London and where the action is. As their activity, usefulness, prestige increased, Megsy surely would have been allowed to fly out to LA for appearances on Oprah, Ellen, etc. and to do some acting.

I have to laugh at how foolish and egotistical this Duo were and are.
xxxxx said…
About that Hertfordshire estate that Charles offered them. Charles likes the rural people of England, while Megs and H seem allergic to the UK peasantry.

Royal snub: Prince Harry LA bound and disregards Prince ...
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1172713/royal-news-latest-meghan-markle-prince...
Sep 02, 2019 · MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are set to snub to Prince Charles’s plans for his second son to live on an estate in Hertfordshire. Express. Home of the Daily and Sunday Express.
KCM1212 said…
@Sandie

Thanks for the interesting insight into Megsy and her use of the modern world to gain what she needs, as well as the question of her love for Harry.

I watched a fascinating (and deeply disturbing) documentary last night about a narcissist and social media (Netflix's Don't F**k With Cats). A group of internet sleuths chased a guy who was hurting animals and posting the videos online. His behavior escalated, and the sleuths had to ask themselves if they were complicit by giving him the audience he craved.

Of course, Meghan was very much on my mind (oddly, he was from Toronto). I worry about what lengths she will go to for the fame and wealth she craves.

Hikari said…
@Sandie,

>>>Is Meghan in love with Harry?

If you look at videos of the engagement announcement and interview and the wedding (especially the latter), she was giddy with excitement and there are photos of her at the wedding (one with her mother) in which she looks almost maniacal.

Harry opened the doors to wealth and worldwide fame, and the freedom that gave her ... to do whatever she wanted (she soon realised that the BRF were too restrictive for her and she did not like the UK so started making plans for an exit). He was the ultimate trophy husband with benefits, and he affirmed her in every way and let her dominate and control him, so of course she was in love with him. She was as in love with him as a narc can be.<<<

I'd concur, only I'd never frame her feelings toward him as love for the man himself. Narcissists cannot feel love, except for themselves. She loved what Harry represented--She'd made it!--and she loved especially the version of herself reflected back to her in his adoration.


>>>The one thing he still has that she cannot provide for herself is the wealth. He is also still useful as a trophy husband (he can still open doors that she cannot) who adores her (can she find a replacement who will let her control and dominate as he does, and give her the adoration he does?).<<<

Harry's currency has diminished exponentially. The *only* thing he had going for him, from her standpoint, was his connection to the Royal family. Now that he's out (on her urging), and reliant on interest from his trust fund and whatever crumbs Dad is going to throw his way, his usefulness is nearly at an end. She'll keep him around as an escort to any red carpets she can finagle, but Harry is no longer connected. He's got no skills or resourcefulness of his own, either, to parlay into a successful post-Royal career. Haz is a professional mooch. She is, too, but she's got the hustle he lacks. I think Harry, wherever he is, is laying on a couch getting blotto every day and watching Suits reruns, perhaps. What else does he have to do? She's the one making all the deals, or trying to. She maintains the Instagram and the endless PR drivel. On his own, he's got no initiative. She will be reviling this pretty soon, if it hasn't already happened.

Hikari said…
>>None of this is coldly calculating on her part. She is simply being herself, driven by her core character and values. She believed she was in love with Harry, and when she dumps him, she will believe the story she puts out there in which she blames everyone and everything but herself.<<<

I believe the last half; as to the first half, we will have to disagree. Everything a Narc does is coldly calculating when it comes to how they may leverage others into usefulness to themselves. Where they are blind is their own motives . . they can justify what they do is good and right--because it serves them . . .and when their actions go sideways, of course they blame others, because to their mind, they can't be wrong. Meg was recently compared to a lioness ('Lyin Ass') according to MMTCD, which cracked me up. But that nickname is correct in identifying her as an apex predator. Everyone else is prey. Predators behave according to their nature, which is to hunt. We don't label the lion as 'evil' because it hunts other animals and slaughters them to eat. They do what they must. It's instinct, but it's calculated, too. A hunter who is *not* calculating isn't going to be very successful. Calling Meg evil isn't useful, even though her actions are evil to people with a moral center . . she is what she is. Which is why she will never, ever stop til she's dead. This is what the BRF is dealing with, and they are not equipped, because they have always operated out of a code of noblesse oblige. Even the troublemaking members still adhered to duty. Meg takes the notion of duty and takes a dump all over it. There is no duty or higher calling other than self-interest, and that absolutely drives her.

You're right that Meg is a product of her times and culture. The Instgram generation is the most self-absorbed in history, and despite their claims to wokeness, the least emphathetic. They only display empathy toward individuals who think, act, dress and pontificate just like they do . . when true empathy is the exact opposite: identifying with and caring for the suffering of those who may be completely different from oneself. I do have my moments of panic thinking that Meg's generation and the one coming up behind her will be the ones to care for me when I am old. I shudder to think what that 'care' is going to consist of. 'Cuz old folks aren't photogenic or hip enough for an Instagram feed.
Hikari said…
holly & Lavender Toast,

@holly said;

>>>""My tinfoil hat theory is that MM told Harry she was pregnant, necessitating the quick marriage. After the marriage she then conveniently "miscarried"""

I so agree with you and with my 'tin foil hat' on I want to add one ting twist. I think Meghan told Harry she miscarried because of all the intrusive press attention made her so stressed out. This would plat on Harry's mind that once again he couldn't protect the woman he loved from the mean press. So he was guilt-tripped into marriage, which I believe why we see Marcus, Dora gathered and Harry looking so somber, almost scared at the Invictus games. Harry was railroaded I'm sure even tho he might have had feelings for Meg. But she wore him down; and besides, that is one of the oldest tricks on the books, a woman telling a man she is pregnant by him. It might also explain why Harry didn't meet his future father-in-law, as Meg could have legitimately said my father will be so mad at you for getting me pregnant before marriage.<<<

Interesting and plausible theory about the potential 'miscarriage'. I don't doubt she could have pulled something like this.

But with all this talk of a "shotgun wedding", the timeline for a faux pregnancy is sincerely wonky.

Timeline:

May - Decemberish 2016
Rach and H enjoy bimonthly booty calls between Toronto and London. An extended holiday romance that is a few days a month together at most. So by the end of this period, they have maybe spent actually 2-3 weeks of time in one another's company.

Christmas-New Year's 2016
Harry breaks it off, thinking he'd had enough of the LDR.

April 2017
Meg ambushes Haz at the Inskip wedding in Jamaica. Neither he nor any of his friends look thrilled that she's there.

Spring - Summer 2017
No evidence that Harry is seeing her during this time

Late September 2017
In Toronto to open the Invictus Games, Haz is ambushed by MM, her mother and Markus Anderson. At what should be a triumphant event for Haz, he looks very stressed.

October 2017
MM puts all her stuff in storage and flies to London, ostensibly to live with H at NottCott, but many sources say she is at SoHo House. This would fit with having been banned from KP due to an earlier incident in summer 2016.

November 2017
The couple announces their engagement in the overgrown weedy patio garden at Frogmore, followed by the weirdest engagement interview ever. The bride-to-be is dressed in summery L.A. fabrics and is as thin as a rake.

******

S
Hikari said…
So . . if they reconnected at the Inskip wedding, she *could* have ambushed him with a pregnancy announcement in Toronto . . but she would have been 5-6 months along by that point . . and pictures at the event show her looking sylphlike in black. If she had conned him into a pregnancy, all the more reason for a swift and quiet wedding, since the bride was in the family way, right? THAT is a shotgun wedding.

But another month would pass before she moves to London and another six months after that before the engagement announcement. That would have been enough time to have a baby to term practically--so when's the 'miscarriage' meant to have happened? She wouldn't want to lose her trump card before the ring was on her finger.

November - May is a standard royal engagement of 6 months. Nothing shotgun about it. Charles and Diana's was even somewhat shorter at 5.5 months.

The bride's wedding dress was somewhat baggy, and there were the knowing smirks at the 'procreation of children' bit of the vows. But there's no way, if a faux pregnancy was in the works, that this would have been the *same* pregnancy she used to trap Haz with back in September, since it would have been over a year since she allegedly got knocked up before.

After the wedding, out of the baggy dress, of course, we saw no intimations of pregnancy for the next 5 months, until Eugenie's wedding. So by my count, that makes three (3) faux pregnancies in 18 months. No wonder poor Haz is so confused . . neither he nor Meg are any good at maths because neither seems to know how long the normal human gestation period is. For Meg to have been 'pregnant' for 18 months without visibly showing any signs, she'd have to be an elephant.

Of course, with 'Archie', she swung too far the other way, 'growing' a six, seven month belly in a week or a few days.

It's all so confusing . . .
Hikari said…
Meant to say 6 months to the wedding, not the engagement.
Hikari said…
So, the big mystery for me here is . . Does Harry love Meghan? Did he ever actually love her?

Harry's Pa made the famous 'c*ntstruck' remark. I think Harry was in this state during their dating period, when he was flying across the Atlantic at every chance. He was sexually infatuated, likely having conflagrated Rachel Markle with Rachel Zane, the office sl*t on her TV show. Something which Meg would have cultivated. I'm sure she was on her best, most adoring behavior during this phase and gave Haz the sex of his life (and Haz has had a lot of that.) But something curdled the romance . . lingering fallout over his GF being banned from any royal palaces due to her untrustworthiness? Yet as late as November 2016, he was still c*ntstuck, issuing his statement to the press to stop bullying his girlfriend. To which the press went, "Huh? Who?" The Wild About Harry article for Vanity Fair was around this same time, and Gan-Gan surely did not like *that*

So it appears that sometime around the Christmas holidays, H had reconsidered this relationship (maybe listening to advice, for the last time in his life) and ended it. They were not on intimate terms when they reconnected in April at Tom's wedding. The photos paint a picture of a desperate harpy bullying her way back into H's life, and a Harry in the throes of a panic attack, medication, drink or all three. Definitely compromised.

What a quick turnaround from that to getting engaged, especially since Harry looked frankly frightened and oppressed, both in Jamaica and at the Invictus Games. He looks like a man carrying a great burden, and has ever since. This is not a man in love. He is some sort of emotional hostage, but I'd call it fear, not love.

The question that is still not answered is . . Why??? What frightened Harry so much into essentially throwing away his life and future for this woman? Will we ever know? Will we ever know sod all about Archie? So many questions . . .
Scandi Sanskrit said…
 Hikari said...

I shudder to think what that 'care' is going to consist of. 'Cuz old folks aren't photogenic or hip enough for an Instagram feed.

☝🏼THIS.

It's like what Joaquin said about how people weren't talking about eating choices enough, when that is ALL climate change activists ever talk about.

The fact is this: https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/charts/60946/ghg2017_450px.png?v=196.3

9.6% greenhouse emission is agriculture
14.9% is residential

The rest if from transportation, industry, and commercial (all of which are related to consumption/buying habits).

So it's more pressing to make sure you unplug/switch if unused lights & electronics than it is to stop eating farting mammals.

But switching off your unused lights isn't Instagrammable, is it?

What are you going to post photos in the dark? Post a story everytime you unplug/switch off the lights? (And use up battery juice in the process?)

And veganism (in developed, Western countries) is about selling alternative products than it is about the simple omission of certain food groups.

It feels like half of the time we hear about Meghan's wokeness, it's:

- Meghan ate this vegan thing
- Meghan fed poor Archie that organic thing
- Archie is wearing organic garments
- Meghan sniffs vegan paint

It's all about what you consume. It's Patrick Bateman without the meat-axing, that's what it is.

I swear once H&M discover how great Balinese-Dutch chefs are at doing vegan food, she'll start flying chefs from Bali on a PJ.

Oh And all that Instagramming does take electricity... Which contributes to climate change too, just saying.

I hope at least they'll let Archie get an education. (They like to play dirty now, the Wokies, employing minors to the front line like little child soldiers/human shields. So when grown men criticise the cause, "they say how dare you argue with a child?" Parading minors is the latest trend in shutting down the conversation, don't you know...)
Jen said…
My guess is, she had blackmail on Harry. I don't believe she ever went the "I'm pregnant, you must marry me" route. For all we know, her mother is the mastermind behind this entire thing and that's why she was at the Evictus games. Anything is possible at this point.

I don't believe for one second that she has EVER loved Harry. The only person she loves is herself. Everyone she comes in contact with is bit player in her life drama, while SHE is the star. That's why she can easily ghost them when they are no longer pertinent to her story.
AliOops said…
Regarding the MA theories:

Lakefield is a small town about 15kms from Peterborough and quite picturesque - cafes, galleries, restaurants. It's hopping for its size in the summer when people are enjoying the cottaging season and associated watersports. Less so in winter when it's mostly snowmobilers and ice-fishermen. If the boys from LCS were looking to party with their fake IDs, Peterborough (a university town, with tons of bars) would be where they'd do it. Having said that, if they were swilling cheap draught with the locals at the Legion of a Friday night and one of them *ahem* got a townie in a predicament, said predicament would still be delivered in Peterborough which is the nearest hospital.

As to the working in London at 18 thing, there's what @Hikari said up thread, or he might have dual citizenship. A British grandparent is all that requires (and this area of South Central Ontario is awash with expats from the 50s, 60s, and 70s). Which, especially pre-Brexit would have probably been very handy sashaying through Europe for his current job.

LOL - maybe the angle wasn't acceptance by the BRF, but revenge....
none said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
none said…
@Hikari Great timeline. These potentially faux pregnancies not only helped ensnare her prey, but are standard operating procedure for MM. Confliciting information is released to keep the waters muddy and hide the truth.

There's a picture taken at The Invictus games "ambush" showing Markus confronting Harry who appears angry while MM looks uncomfortable. My guess pregnancy was the topic. Would explain Doria's presence.
Hikari said…
@Jen

>>>My guess is, she had blackmail on Harry.

Yes . .it's the only thing that explains such a 180 from breakup to wedding in a year. But this is the crux of the matter: What kind of blackmail? In this day and age, just getting a girl pregnant outside of marriage isn't enough. Nor are the persistent rumors that Haz is gay . . he could get past this if true and even become a hero to Rainbow nation--the first openly gay royal. It's not like his procreation is essential to the Crown any more. Before Wills had children, yes, it would have mattered more. Now, not so much.

We've gone 'round this mulberry bush . . . if it is blackmail, then it's something even worse than the Epstein revelations we've already had with Andrew. What's worse than sex with trafficked underage girls, or being overly fond of illicit drugs?

Dial M for murder, either accidentally or on purpose, in the course of sex games with the Epstein girls or similar. It would have to involve Harry himself, I'm thinking, because if it was something Andrew did, well, he's already in the sh*t . . why should Harry sacrifice himself to a woman he does not love in order to protect his uncle? No, the blackmail would have to be more direct, I'm thinking.

If it's simply a matter of an infatuated Haz swallowing whole her seductive plan for world domination and getting one over on his brother, and being 'King Harry' of the pop culture world . . he was talked into this after he'd already broken it off with her. He had ample time to reconsider this rash action, and didn't. He looks so miserable. He should have at least looked happy on his wedding day but he looked stoned or scared or both. Yet he clings to her.

I can't wait for all the case studies to come about this Sussex phenomenon.
PaisleyGirl said…
@Hikari, I find your theories re blackmail very interesting. What I cannot get my head around, however, is how Harry could still appear so infatuated at times by someone who was allegedly blackmailing him into a marriage he did not want. Sometimes Harry appears to go from infatuation to fear, sadness and disgust in one day. How is that possible?

Another fascinating character in this sorry saga is Markus Anderson. Does any of you Nutties know how he went from working as a waiter in London to his current jetsetting job at Soho House, hobnobbing with Jennifer Aniston? And how did he and Meghan meet? It seems this saga keeps coming back to Soho House and the mysterious Markus Anderson.
gloriosa said…
@Nutties,

Have always believed that something stinks in this whole PH/MM set-up, but what anybody's guess??

MA another set of question marks, the only time that I have heard of a fully fledged adult springing into being with almost no background (scrubbed??), is when they are in America's Witness Protection Programme, are deep undercover police (usually connected with world wide drug smuggling/possible human trafficking, or he is a spook planted to spy/gather evidence for whatever agency he works for, from those who make use of Soho House extra services.
none said…
MA is the most curious person in the Harkle saga. Take a look at this picture of him arriving at the wedding. His expression....

https://www.zimbio.com/photos/Markus+Anderson/Izzy+May/Prince+Harry+Marries+Ms+Meghan+Markle+Windsor/kJmAyXwqtRt
gloriosa said…
@ Nutties

MA Striding out at the Wedding, very much in control and wanting to be seen, next major outing the Baby Shower not really wanting to be seen or papped and appeared uncomfortable at the attention focused on him. No sympathy his friend? MM called them in the first place. Also lots of stories about him/MM in various exotic locations on The Tig but again very few photos. Why??
Jen said…
Another theory is that their marriage was an agreement; she marries him and gives him a child and helps him do something he hasn't been able to do himself...divorce the BRF. She gets worldwide recognition and money. They will part ways after X number of years, both getting what they wanted. Flimsy yes, but one can make the argument that its plausible.



Hikari said…
@Paisley

>>>What I cannot get my head around, however, is how Harry could still appear so infatuated at times by someone who was allegedly blackmailing him into a marriage he did not want. Sometimes Harry appears to go from infatuation to fear, sadness and disgust in one day. How is that possible?<<<

That is the most curious thing about this whole saga. We always knew what MM was in this for . . it's backfired on her, but she wanted to be a global celeb with unlimited merching potential. Harry has not benefited by any of this in the least. He looks like a haunted, hollowed-out shell of his former self. I really think he'll be dead soon, either by his own hand, or a drug OD or just general apathy.

Well, if Harry is on a drug cocktail, both prescription and recreational, combined with congenital bipolar/ADHD, his moods would be subject to his biochemistry. He seems to turn on a dime, so he's the rapid cycling variety if so. I think Meg has those tendencies, too, but the more long-cycling kind. In these people, the manic phase could last for months at a time.

With the Mystery of Archie, Meg has ensured that any separation from her was not going to be quick and painless, as it might have been after a 2 year marriage with no kids. I don't think Archie is their child in the traditional sense--he is more a weapon that MM is brandishing. By my estimation, all of the photographs of this child have been heavily tampered with. He has been represented at least some of the time by dolls. The only real proof of life we have is the video in South Africa, but that merely proves there is a baby, not that he's hers, on a permanent basis or otherwise. But how would they have been allowed to take a baby not their own to a high-risk foreign country and flaunt him for TV cameras as theirs? This is what I cannot fathom. There is absolutely zero bonding between this baby and his alleged parents. Zilch. Nada. That's typical of a Narc mom, but one would think Harry would display more paternal warmth. The baby doesn't know who these people are, and they treat him like a prop. Even if the nanny is doing most of the daily care, there should still be evidence that they have held this baby before and spoken to him. Neither of them barely look at the child.

Producing Archie is going to be more and more difficult as he grows. There should be no impediments to her selling a photo spread to People featuring Archie now--indeed, he's the only ace in the hole she's got left. This needn't violate the injunction against merching SuxxitRoyal--she'd just be Mommy Meg, cooing over her baby and talking about daily life with her son, the untitled private citizen and his love of all things Canada. So where are those pictures?

>>>Another fascinating character in this sorry saga is Markus Anderson. Does any of you Nutties know how he went from working as a waiter in London to his current jetsetting job at Soho House, hobnobbing with Jennifer Aniston? And how did he and Meghan meet? It seems this saga keeps coming back to Soho House and the mysterious Markus Anderson.<<<

He worked in a high end restaurant as I understand it. He could have impressed people with the nous to introduce him into their circle. Eugenie's Jack met the Princess while he was a waiter in a gastropub. Her connections helped him to enter the hospitality industry in a bigger way with the boutique liquor business. The fact that Jack was 'just a waiter' didn't deter Eugenie from choosing him. With the right kind of charm and customer service, an enterprising type can go far. It helps to work at a high end establishment where wealthy investors frequent and not say, Waffle House.
LavenderToast said…
@Hikari

Love your posts, so insightful and well thought out! However, I have one possibility in your timeline;

>>>April 2017
Meg ambushes Haz at the Inskip wedding in Jamaica. Neither he nor any of his friends look thrilled that she's there.

Spring - Summer 2017
No evidence that Harry is seeing her during this time.<<<

Perhaps Harry, or more likely Meg, did meet up with him during the Spring to Simmer block of time (like Aug. 2017). Meg could easily travel and not have paps follow her since there was no known relationship. I suspect she flew to London to meet and have sex with Harry. All it would take is one interlude to be able to give MM an opportunity to tell Harry she was allegedly pregnant in Sept. Hence why Harry looked so upset at Invictus. It would be easy for her to fake a pregnancy test. She being thin, she could pretend that she was not gaining weight (after all it usually takes some 3-4 months to show). Then engagement announced in November and she was invited to Christmas at Balmoral in December, against tradition because maybe Harry told Pa she was pregnant. Then sometime after she had an alleged 'miscarriage after December 2017; at this point, Harry was on the hook emotionally and otherwise as the wedding preparations were full steam ahead..

Fairy Crocodile said…
Don't know about you dear Nuttiers but i am happy Markles finally shut up and went under the surface for a while.

Whoever made them do this is a genius.
gloriosa said…
@ Nutties

Was in South Africa a couple of weeks after That Tour, plenty of rumours that the baby who met The Archbishop was a model baby hired in South Africa for an exclusive photoshoot and that MM wanted sole rights to the child for at least a year (these rumours were doing the rounds in the advertising/marketing industry). Baby in question is also older than Archie?? So an even bigger question as to why?? Also believe the ladies who paid to lunch have been left sorely disappointed, pity they didn't ask beforehand hand, could have told them they were throwing good money away after bad!
Sandie said…
@Hikari: Thanks for the feedback on Meghan and her feelings for Harry.

There is an interesting chart showing the differences between love and infatuation (I confused the issue by using the term 'in love') here:

https://www.diffen.com/difference/Infatuation_vs_Love

For Harry, the infatuation is clear (how can you love someone when you do not see who they really are?). Has that infatuation turned into lasting love, knowing who she really is and that she can never love him in the same way?

How calculating she was in ensnaring him may perhaps be revealed one day. But, can a narcissist fall in love (experience being in love)? Well, yes, but it is not lasting ...

Those with NPD are capable of love and brief moments of empathy AS LONG AS IT MAKES THEM FEEL GOOD OR THEY GET SOMETHING IN RETURN, and as long as they can control and dominate in the relationship. Meghan fell in love with the wealthy, well-known, popular young prince, not Harry (he is all those things but so much more as a whole person) and what he could give her. He affirmed her, supported her, gave her everything she always wanted, so she felt as if she was in love with him. She was giddy with the excitement of it, swept away with the excitement. What she felt for Harry was not infatuation or love or being in love with him, but it felt like it was for her. It's her normal.
Oh Fairy Crocodile, I hope you haven't jinxed it now. We are all enjoying the relative quiet. An essential reminder for us all to use this time and take a mental health week as well. They'll be back soon and we'll be pushed into overdrive with their latest cringefest.
Hikari said…
LT,

For Megsy's ruse to work, yes, they would have had to have sex at least once between April and September for her to show up at Invictus supposedly preggers but looking svelte.

But if that was her gambit . . Granny, my GF's pregnant! We need to get married! . . there appears to have been little sense of urgency on the RF side. If the bride was pregnant, why drag things out with a six month engagement . .and why permit a huge white wedding spectacle costing 42 million pounds? Surely ER's sense of propriety and morality would have meant that she'd consent to a wedding with the horse already out of the barn, but a quiet, private affair, speedily done, so that the parents to be could be properly married and settled to await the bairn. She could have claimed miscarriage between engagement and wedding, of course . . which would have been risky since Haz could still have called it off at that stage, particularly if she'd 'lost' her inducement to blackmail. At the time of the engagement it was known that a spring wedding would follow, not one within a few weeks.

That was, I believe, HM calling her pregnancy bluff. Surely a truly pregnant bride in love with the father would be keen to become a wife ASAP, with less fanfare than Meg received. I think HM said that if they wanted the big white wedding show in church, they'd have to wait six months--hoping Harry would reconsider. I think at this point any 'baby' was conveniently forgotten, and her dress was loose simply because it hadn't been tailored properly. She was happy to be skinny all summer until the York wedding, when she turned up in a maternity outfit. Even if she got pregnant during the summer, at three months at the most, she wouldn't have needed a maternity coat.

Given Harry's royal position, and really, any prospective father . . he shouldn't have believed it until he accompanied her to a doctor's appointment and saw the scans with his own eyes. Nobody has ever demanded proofs of anything from Megs and that's why the BRF is in this pickle.
DesignDoctor said…
@gloriosa

Use of a model baby in SA would explain the weird photoshopped Christmas card and the assertion that some have made of the pic of Harry and "Archie" in Canada actually had Meg's baby face photoshopped on the baby Harry is holding.
MeliticusBee said…
Just a brief comment regarding the repeated suggestion that Harry may be gay....
No effing way.
No self-respecting gay man would appear in rumpled mismatched clothing looking like he rolled out of bed....repeatedly.
Jen said…
@Lavender Toast,

Isn't there a rumored trip to Africa (Botswana) that MM/Harry took prior to getting engaged? Maybe that happened Spring/Summer (really summer, cause she was still with Corey in June, right?)
Animal Lover said…
@FairyCrocodile,
Agree with you on the quiet.
Maybe they are working out their future plans to be independent.
There is bigger news than them in the world.
LavenderToast said…
@Jen

Yes, there was a trip to Botswana and there was an allegation that they had some private marriage ceremony there. But after I checked for dates that is unlikely about the last part. They went to Botswana on their third date in 2016 (and stayed 5 days(, so that certainly would not work for the faux pregnancy scam in 2017.
MustySyphone said…
@NuttyFlavor

so agree with cutting off all tax payer funding immediately. Does not look good to continue funding these freeloaders at tax payer expense. Makes HM and PC look weak and that they don't have their "subjects' interests" at heart. Support your children with your own money please.

Re: wedding. I seem to remember reading before the wedding or shortly thereafter (I wasn't too interested at the time so can't remember specifics) that the wedding was rushed both for visa and because they both wanted a family very much (LOL for MM) and because of HER age they needed to get started right away. Also remember rumours that they were visiting fertility clinics.

My tin foil hat theory is that she convinced Harry that they would wait for a least a little while before having children (which would make sense since they actually spent little time living together before the announcement and you would want some alone time). As soon as they were married she jetted off to Canada alone (which I thought incredibly odd--newlywed going on a trip alone to Canada to see "friends" a couple of months after the wedding when said "friends" should be there?).

I think the Canada trip is when she arranged for a surrogate (not IVF as she was seen sipping a glass--just one-- of wine on the flight. You wouldn't risk a new implant over alcohol). Harry has no clue and believes she really is visiting friends.

Fast forward to Eugenie's wedding. MM knows that the surrogacy is working and gobsmacks Harry the morning of wedding. She insists on telling family immediately to avoid speculation as she would be "showing" during the tour. (Some times she did and some times she didn't. makes for an interesting pregnancy).

Harry is torn between wanting a family of his own and lieing to everyone that it is MM who is pregnant. He knows that to spring a surrogacy on the family without having discussed its legal complications etc would not be well recieved. By the family or the public. And MM wants all the attention and gifts a pregnant woman gets so -- tada-- Hollywood special effects moonbump.

Now Harry has no choice but to play along. He's too vain to confide in his family that she isn't really pregnant so they avoid family as much as possible. He is up to his eyeballs in lies and has no way out.

She plays to Harry's well documented desire to not be a royal. In her mind she can make them bigger than the BRF and convinces him that he will outshine PC and PW. She thinks she is Beyonce and he is Jay-Z only bigger, more famous, and certainly they will be more wealthy.

Harry swallows it hook, line, and sinker. He is now existing but not thriving in a loaned house in BC. He's got a wife that bullies him into submission, protection officers that no longer enjoy working for him, and a baby that may or may not be his.

I imagine he watches TV, plays a lot of video games, and gets stoned regularly in an effort to keep busy because he has nothing.

Just my thoughts.
xxxxx said…
Sanskrit said about veganism.......

If veganism was so great and healthful there would be plenty of vegan tribes and peoples that we could find throughout history. But there are none that I know of. I have read about the very healthy Hunzas and others who eat a 90% vegan derived diet along with 10% animal products such as meat, fish, dairy. Yogurt and cheeses.

India has tens of millions of vegetarians who eat dairy products along with their "vegan" food. But are there vegans in India? Few if any. They need that dairy supplementation.
Today's vegans would really be lost and deficient if it wasn't for all the modern, factory made rice protein powders and pea protein powders. Now hemp protein powders are popular. Matter of fact I have some of these protein powders in my refrigerator and use them.
If you want to experiment try pea protein powder. It is inexpensive, a complete protein but it is low in the amino acid methionine. So supplement pea protein it with methionine.... I must buy some methionine to test this out

wiki:
Methionine (symbol Met or M) (/mɪˈθaɪəniːn/) is an essential amino acid in humans. As the substrate for other amino acids such as cysteine and taurine, versatile compounds such as SAM-e, and the important antioxidant glutathione, methionine plays a critical role in the metabolism and health of many species, including humans. It is encoded by the codon AUG.


I have no vegan illusions, I am an omnivore, so I eat chicken, meat, fish, cheese too.
Jen said…
@MustySyphone
He's too vain to confide in his family that she isn't really pregnant so they avoid family as much as possible. He is up to his eyeballs in lies and has no way out.

I don't think it's so much vanity, but rather didn't want to hear "I told you so," from his brother.
xxxxx said…
@Hikari

Thanks! Your good posts at this current 200 nutty entries, with good analysis. You nail it! Sorry about using that cliché word.
Hikari said…
Bee,

>>>Just a brief comment regarding the repeated suggestion that Harry may be gay....
No effing way.
No self-respecting gay man would appear in rumpled mismatched clothing looking like he rolled out of bed....repeatedly.<<<

Not even if he were clinically depressed and more often than not, high?

I'm not in the Harry is gay camp myself, though there may have been some experimentation during the boarding school/army days. That's practically a running joke about British toffs. Harry's had some beautiful girlfriends, and Chelsy in particular was in his life for 11 years or so . . I don't think it was as a beard, either.

But Haz, not being the sharpest tool in the shed might have gotten himself embroiled in something shady in the world of Epstein, with either girls or boys or drugs or some combination of all three. He is easily taken advantage of by his lack of judgement. He doesn't trust the press but he seems to trust 'new friends' very easily and gets into compromising situations. (Nazi regalia; Vegas high jinks, et. al) If the SoHo House set was ganging up on him, I'm sure they could be persuasive.

I have a good pal who is a 40-something gay man who works in the service industry. He grew up in the country, very poor, and he's really good at traditionally rugged pursuits like hanging drywall and tilling the soil. He can hang some drywall in the bathroom and then settle in to enjoy his latest copy of Martha Stewart Living. His friends and family call him 'Martha Black and Decker'. When he's not at work, he goes around in flannel shirts and sweatpants he's had since college. He is gay but definitely not metrosexual. When he makes an effort to get dressed to go out, he can look nice, and he's got some nice clothes and cologne and stuff. It's not how he presents himself on a daily basis, and he's got choice words for gay men he deems too swishy. He may not be typical, but I think a lot of middle-aged guys from small/country towns who had to fly under the radar are more like this than the big city super groomed stereotype.
`In Hereford, Hertford and Hampshire,
Hurricanes hardly happen.’

From `My Fair Lady `The Rain in Spain’

The 2nd & 3rd of those counties are both quite handy for London Heathrow – I've lived most of my life in one or the other but, as far as I’m aware, The Duchy hasn’t any estates in either!

HerEfordshire is the remote one.
499lake said…
This morning I saw Nicole Kidman advertising Neutragena skin cream on a Washington DC area tv station So that leaves out Mm as a spokesman for a cosmetic company because she isn’t pretty and her skin looks terrible in closeups I know this sounds somewhat catty, but IMO, points that advertising cosmetics as a revenue stream is unlikely.
Hikari said…
Re. model baby Archie

>>>Use of a model baby in SA would explain the weird photoshopped Christmas card and the assertion that some have made of the pic of Harry and "Archie" in Canada actually had Meg's baby face photoshopped on the baby Harry is holding.<<<

I'm certainly not discounting the hired model baby theory. It's one I favor myself--I prefer this, because that means this little guy is not in the clutches of Super Narc and so will not have his life ruined.

The SA baby is the same one in the christening photos, so she had him under contract for some time. Even so--Africa is a dodgy place to take an infant on a lark . . not because you are planning to live there. Even if he were old enough for the required vaccines, that's a long plane flight and security risk . .all so a Narc woman can present her elaborate fantasy to the world? If I were the baby's mom, even a stage mom--I'd put the kibosh on such an extensive trip to an unstable region at his age.

If that kid doesn't have Meg's DNA . . his wonky eye and remarkable resemblance to her is quite a boon, coincidence-wise. I've been operating on the theory that this child has her DNA, probably not Harry's, and they were not granted custody, though to maintain the illusion of happy families, the birth mother/custodial parents were well-paid to provide limited access to 'Archie'. Which I think she no longer has after fleeing the RF.

HM mentioned Archie by name in a statement, and referred to him in the Christmas speech. I don't know what's going on there, but I'd stake everything I own on Meg not having a baby with her now. Hence the dolly in the woods and the complete non-sightings otherwise.
Hikari said…
Sandie

>>>Those with NPD are capable of love and brief moments of empathy AS LONG AS IT MAKES THEM FEEL GOOD OR THEY GET SOMETHING IN RETURN, and as long as they can control and dominate in the relationship. Meghan fell in love with the wealthy, well-known, popular young prince, not Harry (he is all those things but so much more as a whole person) and what he could give her. He affirmed her, supported her, gave her everything she always wanted, so she felt as if she was in love with him. She was giddy with the excitement of it, swept away with the excitement. What she felt for Harry was not infatuation or love or being in love with him, but it felt like it was for her. It's her normal.<<<

We agree on what Meg is getting from the relationship and how she sees Haz, but I think we are just using different terms. What you describe is an emotional buzz top of the world feeling that things are going her way, but it's not love and it surely isn't empathy. Meg's feelings all boomerang back to herself. She feels empathy--for herself. She is infatuated--with her own success in achieving her goal. Any 'love' or 'empathy' toward another person are just reflections of what that person is giving to her or doing for her. As long as H or another 'friend' behaves as Meg wants them to or says what the script calls for them to say, she's happy . .might even feel warmly toward the person, in the way that we are proud of a trained puppy who is performing well. But should the puppy misbehave and crap on her new Jimmy Choos . .the feelings turn dismissive or wrathful.

I can't actually diagnose Meg, of course, but she meets all the qualifications of a Narc, as diagnosed by other Narcs. She's got great empathy--with her own ideas and words. As long as somebody's in lockstep with her, it's good but should they defy her script in any tiny way? Disharmony appears.

It amazes normally functioning people that anyone would willingly sign up for this abuse, but that's what Harry has done. And he looks like hell for it, too.
Portcitygirl said…


There are some on here who have first hand experience with Narcs and understand them.
My mother is a malignant Narc. Much more dangerous than your average run of the mill overt narcs like so many actors. They destroy everything in their wake and surround themselves with flying monkeys to do their bidding. MM has surrounded herself with these types. JM for example.
These people have to be number one and will kill their children to get there. They are charming and can fool those even closest to them. If They discover that you have their number so to speak, you are scapegoated and discarded. They will run a smear campaign on you like you've never seen.

PW knew who MM was long before they married and I believe MM knew this. Hence, her indirect smear campaign against him beginning with the Rose affair.

PH, again only my opinion, I believe, is a narc as well. There have long been rumors of his insane jealousy. Remember Narcs must be number one. He was losing his position fast with each birth of Will's kids. I don't believe for a second that he wants privacy. He and MM just want to control their media presence and want to sue/hurt anyone who dares paint them in a negative way.

We all witnessed PW scarf MM and PH. As a malignant Narc this would have caused her extreme anger and resentment. We also saw them being forced over to the side at a banquet to let the more senior royals move ahead. They looked like sulking children.

PH would have never discarded his whole family per Mexit if he were not a Narc.
These people have next to no real feelings. They are pretenders.

I will always believe MM and her ilk had and have something to do with this ongoing
PA saga as well. There are so many more who are much bigger players embroiled here than Andrew. While sleeping with 17 year olds is gross when the men are 20 years older, we all know creepy men and women who do it and many times the girls/boys are willing. Virginia has a big unrestrained smile on her face in the pic if it is real and not shopped. Why are these women twenty years later going after only Andrew? Why no mention of all the other major players in this mess? The DM has an article about GM and there is 1 comment. Only one. A lot of shady af stuff going on here.

Lastly, Pitt, Rebel, and now Joaquin with his mocking curtsy to PW, totally disrespected PW and DC at the Baftas, imo.
JZ and Beyonce had a pic of MM with a crown on her head and then with Bey calling her my Queen at the Disney merch. I have long suspected Harry wanted to be bigger than the crown because he is a narc. What better way than to become a global player, look at who he has aligned himself with, one example being Google, and now we have an article in the DM with the headline- Why is Hollywood suddenly mocking the Monarchy? Why? PH found a maglignant narc to help him destroy his own family in his bid to outdo his brother. Time will tell if he can live with himself for it. Narcs don't like to be made fun of or hated. Their egos are the biggest in any room. Will he use Hollywood/ global actors, who care nought for him, to destroy his own family? I know my own mother would. These people are cold as ice. We have already seen him give the one finger salute to his family with Megxit. And concerning the Oscars, it will be hard for these two narcs to stay away. I can see and hear it- "Now presenting Their Royal Highnesses, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex..." All of the audience stands and applauds. My guess is the Oscar lovies will be fawning all over them in their speeches as well as throwing some shade towards the Monarchy back in England. It is a date almost too hard to pass up with Harry again flipping the finger to a once beloved "maybe" brother.
This is a really interesting article on the history of the Soho House, and how the membership committee worked to accept the first members in Toronto. Included are some of the very famous members, including Harvey Weinstein and many Hollywood stars. The names involved are incredible.
It mentions that they are very involved in the Toronto Film Festival, hosting dozens of parties for the festival. It also says that the Soho House rented a yacht for Cannes Film Festival. I'll let all of you put the pieces together on that one.

https://torontolife.com/city/soho-house-toronto/
499lake said…
@ Sandie. Her analysis about NPD and love is spot on. Everything that NPDs do are about making themselves feel good or are an effort to get what they want. For example, my NPD husband recently had a stroke. Now he can’t go any place without me or a caregiver. He wants to be free of me because I am preventing him from doing what he wants. So since his stroke, he has been loving, kind, praising me in front of his friends and generally compliant with my wishes. But as soon as his doctor lifts these restrictions, I predict that my husband will go back to his usual stubborn self where he refuses to follow my advice and will resort to his usual complaints. The only saving grace is that I have learned his NPD tricks and ploys. Sound familiar?
Portcitygirl said…
I also agree with the theories on the pre wedding fake miscarriage, the baby dolls, and the surrogacy. However, I do believe Archie is Harry's child per the Queen's speech.
Hikari said…
Portcitygirl,

As more truths about Harry emerge, and the skillful image management employed by the BRF for years to make their 'problem child' seem like a contributing member of the family--a ploy that worked far too well, rocketing Harry to the top of 'Beloved Royal' polls (how that must have burned those who really know him well), I too have decided that what we have here is not

Malignant Narc targeting Empathic Victim but actually a case of

Dominant Malignant Narc aligning with Lesser Narc, possibly of the fragile variety. Meg is a lot tougher than Harry, but she's had to be in her world and he's been cossetted his whole life. Which is why, whatever happens, I think Meg will survive and Harry most likely won't. It may take years, but Harry's life is effectively over.

Sorry to be so bleak, but that's my assessment.

In this dysfuctional partnership, Meg is the Leopold--the sociopath in the drivers' seat, calling the shots. Harry is her Loeb . .the bagman/yes man, with similar thinking and absence of moral center, but lacking the 'leadership' gene. Were he a stronger alpha type like William, the shoe would be on the other foot and he'd be controlling her.

We see flashes of dominance from Haz, like when he told her off publicly to turn the F*ck around on the balcony. I think that shocked her into compliance because he is normally so malleable.

Harry is not a nice person. He seems to have been warped at a juvenile stage of life and incapable of moving past it to fully integrated adulthood. He also seems to have had it in for William since they started regular school, at least.

My favorite photo of the two of them is Harry's first day at preschool, in matching uniform to William's gazing up adoringly at Big Bro. He was four to William's six. That might be the last time things were uncomplicated between the Wales brothers.
none said…
Agree with the Nutties regarding Harry also being a narc. MM is the alpha narc and Harry the beta.
KCM1212 said…
A n article in Town and Country concerns other runaway princesses.

Although their lives have few of the freedoms Harry and Meghan enjoy.

Again, I am stunned at the entitlement and self-absorption of this pair.

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/money-and-power/a29848986/dubai-princess-disappearance-divorce
Ava C said…
This isn't a new Vanity Fair article but it gives a really good cumulative sense of how the Queen must be feeling about life since Meghan arrived on the scene. Well worth reading, reflecting, and then thinking wow, imagine being in your 90s, head of state and having to deal with all this for several years now, never mind the PA scandal. She must be clinging on to what remains of her patience, to think of the long game. I would have gone ballistic by now. I certainly feel though, that once you have lost the confidence of the Queen, you'll never get it back.

Extract below but it's accessible online:

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/01/prince-harry-the-queen-relationship-problems?inline

>>>>> The Queen has always had a soft spot for Harry (only he could persuade her to star in that wonderful spoof with the Obamas for his Invcitus Games) but there is evidence that the relationship is not as close as it once was.

One source close to the Queen says her relationship with Harry came under immense strain in the run up to the royal wedding. “She was very upset by some of Harry’s demands and the way he went about certain things,” reveals the source. “He didn’t want to use the Queen’s staff for the wedding, he and Meghan brought in their own florist and cake makers, and Harry apparently asked the Archbishop of Canterbury to marry them before consulting the Queen and the Dean of Windsor, which wasn’t the correct way to do things.”

The source continued, “I think she was dismayed by his attitude in general and I remember speaking to her and her being rather upset by how beastly Harry was being. Their relationship was quite badly damaged by it all.”

Then there was the episode over what tiara Meghan wanted to wear, which is said to have resulted in a row between Harry and one of the Queen’s senior aides. The Queen was said to be so cross that she called Harry in for a rare dressing down.

Since then there have been other occasions where the Queen is understood to have been put out by her grandson’s behavior. She was apparently taken aback when the Duke suggested that the couple might live in a suite of rooms at Windsor Castle as their official residence. The Sussexes were politely but firmly told this would not be possible because Windsor is the Queen’s home. The Queen was also apparently upset not to be at Archie’s christening because the couple – who had kept the plans under wraps – hadn’t given her diary team sufficient advance notice. Then this summer the couple chose not to visit her at Balmoral when the Cambridges and the Queen’s other grandchildren traditionally go to Scotland for a short stay.

Even Christmas was an issue. The Sussexes were invited to Sandringham but the Queen apparently had to call them to find out if they were coming, only to be told they would be overseas. <<<<<

If you were deliberately setting out to burn your bridges with the Queen, you couldn't do a more comprehensive job than this. Harry Markle is very astute in her review of this entire saga, in that Meghan knew all along she didn't need to play nice and settle in as she never intended to stay, but Harry is key to all these slights and insults. Meghan couldn't have done it without him. He has only ever known royal life and was fully aware of the effect of his actions. Even factoring in possible addiction and emotional abuse won't get him off the hook.
Jen said…
@Hikari
ow Joaquin with his mocking curtsy to PW,

I don't think Joaquin Phoenix's curtsy was mocking, but rather he's an American who has never had to curtsy and was probably a little nervous. I just watched it and the look on his face made me think nerves.



KCM1212 said…
@hikari said


But if that was her gambit . . Granny, my GF's pregnant! We need to get married! . . there appears to have been little sense of urgency on the RF side. If the bride was pregnant, why drag things out with a six month engagement . .and why permit a huge white wedding spectacle costing 42 million pounds...

I had to laugh out loud at the idea of sparkles, hugely pregnant, in a slimfitting sheath, flicking aside her 40foot veil as she waddles down The aisle on Pcs arm, beaming liked The madwoman of Chaillot, stopping in front of HM to grin smugly and perform the briefest curtsy in the history of the monarchy, while rubbing her belly. During the service she deflates and inflates in time with the music.

A beautiful expression of love.
I think we have to go back to "Archie's" birth. All of the secrecy, the moving and shape-shifting belly,the change from a home birth to a hospital, the odd posting of the birth announcement with no doctor's signature, not showing Archie's face, etc. Did the RF have a DNA test done on "Archie"? If MM refused to do that, or the RF didn't think it was necessary, then the baby presented to HMTQ could have been a rent-a-baby, and HMTQ would have never known that the baby was not Harry's or Meghan's or both.

I agree that both H&M are narcs, and I think that Harry is a willing partner in this.
At this point, I think HMTQ and the other royals are fearful that Harry will commit suicide, and they obviously don't want that to happen, so they are stuck. Harry is just a shell of the man he used to be, but I think he is getting a kick out of bringing all of the trouble he can to the RF, and that shows spite and anger on his part, pushed along by MM.

The Harkles may be silent for a moment, but that doesn't mean that MM isn't working furiously behind the scenes to attain her goal of world-wide domination.
An aside on patronymics;

Having been an Iceland enthusiast for almost 50 years, I’m interested to see a patronymic here. Iceland is, I believe, the only country on W.Europe where this pattern of naming is continued – it has value where out-of-wedlock birth has long been common. After all, the identity of a child’s mother wouldn’t have been in doubt whereas that of its father might be.

Icelanders moving to Canada (according to Wiki) generally use an earlier patronymic as a hereditary surname, on the same lines as most other residents. (I can vouch for the confusion that being a wife with a different surname to her husband can cause. Having previously reverted to my maiden name by Deed Poll, after 2 changes by marriage, I refused to change again when I married a 3rd time. I couldn’t face the fuss nor the paper trail I’d have to produce in order to identify myself, when my original Birth Certificate would do. This really bugged other people, like my 3rd lot of in-laws but I just said I was being Icelandic about it.

Anyway, I see that there are many Andersons in Peterborough Ontario; one obituary notice is set against a photograph of Seljalandsfoss, a waterfall in S. Iceland tipping off the mass of Eyjafjallajokull (yes, that one!) on to the floodplain of the Markafljot (trans.Boundary river) and the sandur, the great glacial floodplain.
https://www.everhere.com/ca/obituaries/on/peterborough/ronald-anderson-7389911

This suggests to me that although the brand name `Archie Harrison’, reminds me of hunting for `commercial’ names for heroes in my romantic fiction, `Harrison’ really owes much of its existence to a Norse tradition remembered in Canada. I doubt if MM thought of it herself, as she hasn’t claimed Viking ancestry yet, has she?

Btw, I’m a complete failure at Romantic Fiction – RF to its devotees...
Hikari said…
@Ava,

>>>If you were deliberately setting out to burn your bridges with the Queen, you couldn't do a more comprehensive job than this. Harry Markle is very astute in her review of this entire saga, in that Meghan knew all along she didn't need to play nice and settle in as she never intended to stay, but Harry is key to all these slights and insults. Meghan couldn't have done it without him. He has only ever known royal life and was fully aware of the effect of his actions. Even factoring in possible addiction and emotional abuse won't get him off the hook<<<.

Meg's megalomania makes her reckless, but at least at the beginning, she was very cunning in how she employed her demands. She put her demands in Harry's mouth and used him as the intermediary so that there would be less blowback on her. She could claim 'innocence/ignorance' of the 'way things work around here' and surprise that her 'requests' were inappropriate. After all, she told H want she wanted and he dutifully demanded it on her behalf. But the one dealing with the courtiers and a pissed off Granny was him, not her. She was insulated, and could claim that she was taking her cues from him since he was the 'born royal'. Of course, we are pretty sure it was the reverse--Harry's been sulking about his role in the Firm for years, but he never had the initiative on his own to break away . . he hitched his wagon to hers and only went through with all this because she needled him into it.

It has occurred to me that he is also using her in turn . . 'What Meghan wants, Meghan gets!' But maybe it was Haz after all that wanted the gigantic wedding spectacular at least as much as she did, because that's what William got. Of course Wills is the future King so of course he got the Abbey wedding. The divorced (more than once?) American showgirl and the #6 did not rate an Abbey wedding, though I'm sure they demanded that, too.

Haz was a little too involved in the tiara matter to be a disinterested party. Can we imagine William haggling with Gran over which tiara Kate was to wear? And having a snit fit? No. But all H's own bad behavior can be framed as 'I'm a good husband protecting my wife/looking out for her.' It's like the arrival of Meg released the pressure valve and he's no longer making any attempt to hold in all his negative feelings toward his family.

I can't imagine mouthing off to my grandmother, and she was not the Queen of England. I think Haz has been a toerag for a very long time, even if he does look cute with random kids. Or used to. Just not 'his own'.
none said…
Harry is missing his British friends. Ok. The ones he didn't invite to his wedding so there was room for Oprah?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7966093/Prince-Harry-missing-British-pals-two-weeks-moving-North-America.html
Hikari said…
@Jen

That wasn't me who commented on Phoenix's speech/curtsy. I didn't watch, but I might have to queue up the YT video of him curtsying.

Curtsying is for the ladies; the men just bow their heads respectfully. In the Downton Abbey movie, Molesly has a buffoonish setpiece ending in an awkward curtsy for their Majesties King George and Queen Mary. It was a highlight of the movie, but he looked stupid. It was like a pantomime. So I think Phoenix was probably curtsying as a rude form of satire, because British male subjects don't have to curtsy and an American wouldn't have to do anything at all.

American citizens shake the hand of the President and call him 'Sir' but that's as far as the deference goes . . and sometimes not even that much!
Hikari said…
Wild Boar,

>>>This suggests to me that although the brand name `Archie Harrison’, reminds me of hunting for `commercial’ names for heroes in my romantic fiction, `Harrison’ really owes much of its existence to a Norse tradition remembered in Canada. I doubt if MM thought of it herself, as she hasn’t claimed Viking ancestry yet, has she?<<<

No, she hasn't. Vikings are way too male, pale, stale patriarchial for her current narrative. All those bloodsports. Animal furs. A diet of nearly all meat. Just not woke enough to suit.

Archie may be the fastest rising male name in Britain, but it never would have appealed to Meg if it weren't PGTips' call sign with the RPOs. She appropriated that just to cause a problem for the Cambridges, indirectly. The RPOs had to invent a new call sign for George, and it was just a childish move altogether.

'Harrison' may have a fine Norse tradition in Canada but that wasn't why Meg picked it, as she could care less about traditions of any sort. 'Harrison' is the line of luxury linens and home goods sold through Soho House. Towels, sheets, slippers, robes, etc. I can picture Rach and H getting baked one night in their comped suite at Soho House in Toronto and thinking it'd be a wheeze and a real finger in the eye to everybody to name their phantom baby after Meg's favorite bathrobe. The resemblance to Harry's name was a bonus and that's why they thought it was so funny.
KCM1212 said…
Madonna offers her apartment in NY to Haz and Mags. "Canada is too boring"

https://www.standard.co.uk/insider/royalssociety/madonna-offers-new-york-flat-prince-harry-meghan-markle-a4353496.html

But....it's a rental agreement!

Hahaha...as off the Sussexes are going to pay rent!
hunter said…
@Hikari - gloriosa suggested the baby was rented IN South Africa, so it wouldn't have been transported from the UK - other pics can be exchanged and photoshopped, like the Christmas card.

No I don't think Harry is gay, agree with aforementioned shenanigans.

No I don't think Marcus Anderson is Andrew's long lost son (very interesting theory though, A for effort to them).
CookieShark said…
@ Hikari: I wondered if she picked the name Archie to mess with the Cambridges, pure and simple. Was it about disrespecting the future king of England?
DesignDoctor said…
@CookieShark

I have always thought that was the reason she picked the name Archie--to disrespect the Cambridges.

@Hikari totally agree why he is named Harrison--connection to SoHo House.
lizzie said…
@KCM1212 wrote

>>>Madonna offers her apartment in NY to Haz and Mags....But....it's a rental agreement<<<

It's also only 2-bedroom. Fat chance especially with a nanny.
Is this the Madonna home that had a rat running around behind her when she was giving an interview?
Madonna is just trying to get some publicity with the younger crowd, and it's interesting that she went all in when she was living in GB, fake British accent and all.

Fair enough -I'd forgotten the household linen link.
xxxxx said…
holly said...
Harry is missing his British friends. Ok. The ones he didn't invite to his wedding so there was room for Oprah?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7966093/Prince-Harry-missing-British-pals-two-weeks-moving-North-America.htm


Like putty in her hands. We can say Hapless is to blame, that H was predisposed, that he had so many shortcomings that the BRF publicity wing covered up. But to me he could have gone either way, that with a better woman he would be OK now. He needed a woman who would provide the right kind of loving discipline. Not an underminer of the BRF and Hapless. Megsy was the worst choice, 9 on a scale of 10.
Portcitygirl said…
@Hikari,

I agree with you on your assessment of the narc hierachy
Of the Harkles. The malignant always wins and takes all in their wake. Would have been better for H if he were dealing with only the garden variety narc such as himself. Imo, the BRF way underestimated these two or H/MM do indeed have some dirt. Either way, Harry is a traitor to his blood family and by default his own mother because she was pro Monarchy and loved her other son of whom Harry seems hell bent on usurping.
Teasmade said…
@xxxxx

But what "better woman" would want him? What would he have to offer someone stronger, smarter, more together?

I don't know if you re US or UK, but here in the US we have "bros", frat boys, like dim Hooray Henrys if you ARE in fact Brit . . . we might have to date them at age 20 because the pickins are slim and "girls mature faster." But once you're pushing 40, you want an equal.

To me, Haz is a bro, and, as we all know, not a very bright one. So I ask again, who would want him besides a gold digger?

(Not attacking you, xxxxx, just the idea that he had any other chances.)
Hikari said…
@hunter

Re. the suggestion that Archie was rented in South Africa . .(just how bad does that sound, renting babies!)

That would smooth the travel issues, but it wouldn't explain why Tutu baby is the same baby we saw in July in Windsor. I favor the explanation that the baby's custodial mother was with the royal entourage, maybe in the role of one of the nannies. The baby is older than advertised and was therefore old enough to receive the required vaccinations for 6 months+. I think the baby we have seen as Archie is at least 4-5 months older than a May birthday . . which incidentally would coincide with the February 'baby shower'. If Meg went to pick up a baby at that time, he would have been 1-2 months old.

The Queen has acknowledged Archie, by name in her latest statement but I still feel there is some rank complicity going on over this child. Meg and Harry's behavior over this schism from the family has been bonkers. That episode in the park with the overgrown limp 'baby' in the sling is evidence of a profoundly disturbed mind. If there's no baby, then there is no real harm and Meg can be as cuckoo for coco puffs and stage all the pap walks she likes. But if those two have a real baby . . ? Child protective services on two continents should be investigating what the hell is going on. It is not a crime to parade a doll around and pretend it's your baby, as she has done on a number of occasions. It's not a crime to pretend to be pregnant. It should be a crime to falsify the line of succession to the British state. At this point, I don't care if the family isn't going to do anything about Meg's fraud in order to save face. I just want assurance that no real babies are in Meg's custody . .for their own safety and well-being.
Portcitygirl said…
Haha. Madge needs some rent money. Lol. Pay up Harkles. Subletting. Lol.
Hikari said…
How are the mighty fallen! From Kensington Palace to having Madge as a landlord . . that was a great trade!
Portcitygirl said…
The duo is probably too dumb to get it. Knowing them they are flattered!
Unknown said…
@Ava C

If that article truly portayed the Queens feelings about Harry's attitude before the wedding, then it says a lot. He was a different man from the child she knew, but then, the Queen has met hundreds of men, who say one thing to her face , but do another thing when out of her presence. Surely she could see that coming with her own grandson ? Does the Queen not have advisors and so forth, for goodness sake, a Queen has a court , all with people ready to provide advice and proof. Did they not advise her?
Even if these advisors were blind and deaf , why did she not act on instinct ?

In my opinion, with no mother in law , Markle had the direct route to whatever she wanted.

In my opinion, a son can live and manage without a mother, but without a fathers guidance , a son can easily lose his direction.

I don't buy Harry's nonsense about losing his mother. Or about his jealousy towards William. There might be jealousy towards William but on a smaller scale.

I think Harry is doing all this because he looked up to his father and his father has let him down, when he was needed the most. Reports about Harry doing minor drugs during his teen years and how his father handled it, could have started this meltdown. Now that he is far away from his teenage life, Harry has attempted to plug that hurt and pain by making life as painful as possible for his father.

I am no mind reader. But , realistically, the Queen has not been emotionally or financially or even politically hurt.

Not even William. Harry wants to hurt Charles only.

If he hurts Charles where it matters the most, then Harry has won. After all ,the laws of the jungle can be interpreted many ways. I can't recall all the human jungle laws, but that's open to interpretation.

Lemon tea
MeliticusBee said…
@Hikari
<..>

Now THIS is a theory I can get behind.

I have thought for a while that they must have some compromising material on him...and that SOHO house is the perfect setup for video capture.
So He did some "gay stuff" is certainly possible...or some other stuff which is worse than a prince being filmed in a gay sex thing. Ahem Prince Andrew.

But - of course, I proudly wear a tin-foil scrunchie.
MeliticusBee said…
OMG.
@Hikari
I can't seem to cut/paste without messing it up.

I was quoting your "But Haz, not being the sharpest tool in the shed might have gotten himself embroiled in something shady in the world of Epstein, with either girls or boys or drugs or some combination of all three. He is easily taken advantage of by his lack of judgement."
Jen said…
CNN is getting in on the action. February 16th..."The Windsors, A Royal Dynasty" the commercial showed H&M's wedding. Wonder how that will go?
Ava C said…
@Unknown - I don't buy Harry's nonsense about losing his mother. [...] I think Harry is doing all this because he looked up to his father and his father has let him down, when he was needed the most.

Yes, Harry's been reported as saying he has very few memories of his mother, which makes this whole saga all the more unforgivable when you think of how much William suffered throughout the War of the Waleses. Pushing tissues through the door to his sobbing mother. Promising to restore her HRH when he became king.

William has been through so much AND he was left to deal with Harry after Diana's death as his father was absorbed with his plan to formalise his relationship with Camilla. Those in the know agree that Harry started going off the rails when William went to university, which proves how absent Charles was and is.

Harry must have a lot of anger about that, and I expect he still feels that juvenile instinct to misbehave just to get his father's attention. So I think you're right, but again we come back to the point that he is now an adult. He has no right to drag Queen and country through a sea of continued adolescent angst.

I agree with various Nutties on this post that no worthwhile, sensible woman would want him though. Look at his ex Cressida Bonas, garnering respectable reviews for her role in ITV's White House Farm about the Jeremy Bamber murder case. A relatively small role but crucial to the story and she did it well. Harry lost a girlfriend who could actually act. Ironic.
MustySyphone said…
I wonder if the reality of what he's done has sunk in yet for Harry. Only a first class jerk would disrespect his own grandmother (the Queen no less) on the world stage like he has done.

And I've always thought MM was wicked smart (but not the admirable kind of intelligence). She figured out right away that actions do NOT have consequences (ones that would bother her anyway) and so she did whatever she wanted. There was no penalty as far as she was concerned. The rest of us were raised better and would be horrified if we were forbidden from walking around the castle without an escort or (publicly through a news leak) that we would not be loaned any jewels because of snubbing protocol. You don't get to keep and hawk the jewels so MM wasn't interested, didn't care about that "punishment". Even I knew the Queen prefers females wear tights for Royal engagements. But not MM. She doesn't like them so she doesn't wear them--screw the Queen. MM has no respect for anyone (includes you Oprah and Serena). Cut off all funding immediately and watch her cry (but you can't because, you know, Harry)
xxxxx said…
Teasmade said...
@xxxxx
But what "better woman" would want him? What would he have to offer someone stronger, smarter, more together?


Hapless Offered Royal status and a Royal lifestyle without drudgery, no commuting to a hated job and so on. Having babies, raising children in a stress free setting. Offered love too, hopefully. Anarchist Megs booted all this, what a nutter!

To me, Haz is a bro, and, as we all know, not a very bright one. So I ask again, who would want him besides a gold digger?

For every pot there is a lid. A very suitable lid, not xxxMegsyxxx! Harry is no bro now, so your argument is flawed. I am saying this nicely.
lizzie said…
Who would want Harry? Not many women, IMO.

Those who believe claims the royal family is toxic and life as a royal is unbearable won't.

Those who don't believe the family is toxic and don't believe Harry's poor-me claims likely think Harry has acted like a first-class jerk. So they won't want him either.

He's squandered whatever good PR he had. And I expect the women he dated seriously prior to MM, saw beneath the surface back then and found the unattractive qualities many of us now see. Immature, arrogant, spoiled, and a likely substance abuser aren't qualities most healthy women seek in a mate. Yes, he's rich but he's also known to be a personal tightwad. What's to want?
Ozmanda said…
With all the talk about sociopathy, NPD etc i thought it may be interesting reading to post indicators that in forensic Psychology is looked at to measure -
Forensic Psych has the psychopathy checklist to measure psychopathic traits

- Manipulative and Cunning
- Glib and superficial charm
- Grandiose estimation of self
- The need for stimulation
- Sexual Promiscuity
- Impulsive
- Callousness
- Lack of remorse
- Criminal Versatility

Sadists – need to feel empathy as it is by doing this they get the satisfaction from inflicting pain on others.

Psychopaths cannot be sadists as they are not capable of empathy.

Narcissistic personality disorder.

Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a personality disorder in which people have an inflated opinion of themselves. They also have an intense need for the admiration and attention of others. People with NPD may be generally unhappy and disappointed when they’re not given the praise or special favours they believe they deserve. Others may see them as snobbish and conceited, and may not enjoy being around them.

Malignant Narcissism –

Malignant narcissism refers to a specific, less common manifestation of narcissistic personality disorder. Some experts consider this presentation of narcissism the most severe subtype.

Exhibits strong mixes of narcissism, aggression, sadism and antisocial behaviour.

Psychopaths and Sociopaths are not interested in validation of any kind.
Sociopaths and Psychopaths and those suffering from NPD are not able to feel love.

They may pretend in order to gain what they want and manipulate others however the biochemical reaction between neuro peptides and dopamine pathways does or occur and the euphoric feelings that neurotypicals can feel over the reunion of loved ones is completely foreign to sociopaths and psychopaths.

Malignant narcissism requires the persecution of these emotions. A malignant narcissist can only obtain satisfaction and please from inflicting sorrow and pain on others.
SwampWoman said…
I believe I may have mentioned that I was binge-watching Fringe, a drama about parallel universes, weird things happening, etc.? Season 2, episode 1 has one Meghan Markle as a junior FBI agent.
abbyh said…

Interesting comments about the latest ideas.

I had not thought of H as possible a narc. Interesting thought.

I can remember several people describing M's behavior at the engagement talk and the recent walk in the park as "almost maniacal" and the almost crazy trial balloons without a clear plan goal.

What do you think about possible some bi-polar in the mix?
Scandi Sanskrit said…
February 4, 2020 at 7:16 PM

 @xxxxx said...


I have no vegan illusions, I am an omnivore, so I eat chicken, meat, fish, cheese too.

I have no illusions about it either. The only diet I follow is called the "Autoimmune Protocol Diet" and it does not ommit meats. (I just try to avoid eggs/milk because my body can't take it & I get sick, but I still put a slice of cheese in my sandwiches because I can't quit cheese, I like it too much. 😂😂🧀 Lots of traditional Indonesian food is vegan anyway, and it's cheap, we never brag about it.)

Lots of "clean eating" Instagram models/YouTubers have quit being vegan over health concerns...

Still wouldn't put it past Meghan to fly in a Balinese-Dutch vegan chef all the way from Indonesia to Canada/LA to rub in our unwashed plebeian faces, tho.

The only way to make vegan food palatable or tasty is by putting enough spices/herbs in it. Otherwise it tastes like cardboard.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
Expensive, pretentious, and it tastes like cardboard. 😂🤣
Scandi Sanskrit said…
KCM1212 said...

Madonna offers her apartment in NY to Haz and Mags. "Canada is too boring"

OOOOOH I KNEW IT. I KNEW SHE'D SAY SOMETHING

I was wondering when Madonna would finally say something!!

Thought it was weird AF that she'd been so quiet about H&M until now. I always thought she had a soft spot for Wallis.

She made that film about Wallis, "W.E." which I saw on repeat reruns on FX Asia (probably IDK like 13 or 14 times every time it was on, I'd have it playing to keep me company). I like the music in it. At has the same composer who did "A Single Man", Abel K.

(That was in ~2013¿ maybe, before I even realised Laurence Fox was in it.)

Anyway, Madonna's ex-husband made one of the best commercials of all time: https://youtu.be/xoOG32BXuvQ 🍊
This article looks like the latest 'Harry is such a homely, friendly lad' articles. It is so so cringy though. Is the DM taking the piss? Are they actually nocking Harry. The palace must be doing a collective face palm on reading this nonsense.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7966093/Prince-Harry-missing-British-pals-two-weeks-moving-North-America.html

Harry is apparently so homesick..he misses his frineymore than ever and is so a rice on their WhatsApp group. He keeps up with them by sending funny videos and gifs. Lol 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Sidenote - what is it with the Sussexes and whatsapp??? The family welcomed Mm by including her in the family WhatsApp group. Archie news was shared on and celebrated in the family WhatsApp group. Kate and Meghan had a falling out and fought on the family whatsapp group. They then stopped talking and left the WhatsApp group. Harry and Meghan celebrted their first Valentine's day post marriage via WhatsApp video call. Meghan joined the Sandringham summit via WhatsApp. She encouraged Harry and strengthened Harry's confidence and worked on their relationship by keeping in touch with him through WhatsApp!!

Why do the couple keep pimping WhatsApp? And does the DM have a spy in this secret Brf WhatsApp group because they keep mention whatsapp in their articles. ffs even teenagers have moved past WhatsApp relationships, you idiots.
YankeeDoodle said…
Why po we always look for zebras when remarking about the Dumb as s—t H?

Harry does not have dyslexia. He has an IQ a bit under 100. By lying and cheating, with teachers seething, he barely graduated what, in America, is 10th grade. He is a high school drop-out. Every teacher who gave him a passing grade, in all his courses, were paid off or threatened to be fired if anyone of them dared to tell the truth about Harry, and a few other low intellect family members, His art teacher, who did 100 percent of Harry’s work *without a passing grade in this art class, low I.Q. Harry could never have passed with lying to get into Sandhurst.’ The art teacher could not take it anymore from the idiotic Charles, and when the art teacher complained, she was fired. She won a small amount of money in court.

He is stupid. Stupid. Nasty. Jealous. Spoiled. Stupid.

As to any blackmailing regarding an early pregnancy, all it would take was for her to urinate on a stick, to confirm any blackmailing techniques. Maybe there was diseases exchanged, and thus blackmail. I am not sorry to say that Meghan had a fake pregnancy, and has at least one son. I believe that the son(s) are genetically HAMS, but a surrogate carried the spawn of them.

Very funny, but I was watching a ‘Sex and the City” marathon on Sunday, instead of being bored to death by people who do not stand up for our flag; pole-dancing and terrible lip-syncing has been performed by diseased women, as Kate Hudson called all women who date Alex. On one episode, the talk was how to get Harvey Weinstein to pay attention to Samantha, whomever, and how to get into his parties. Samantha was to,d good luck, Weinstein is powerful, and only Streep or Paltrow get his attention. I could not believe what I saw.
Maggie said…
@abbyh
What do you think about possible some bi-polar in the mix?

I'd guess cocaine use is nearer the mark!
So?

Are we back to Harry Markle's original proposition that it looks like a criminal conspiracy between Anderson, Ragland, Markle - and perhaps unknown others, to entrap, seduce & blackmail PH with a view to gaining untold wealth, regardless of any collateral damage to his nearest relatives and their constitutional position, whether or not they trash the reputation of an allied sovereign nation and possibly precipitate civil unrest and revolution?

More to it than that?

Might they expect any personal gain from collateral damage? Real conspiracy theory lurking here - could they be working for/being used by someone else, `not a friend of the UK'? Perhaps we shouldn't scream too loudly if we still have to contribute to their security - it might be in our best interest.
Fairy Crocodile said…
@KSM1212
after Madonna promised oral sex to all who didn't vote Trump she has a certain low standard hovering over her head. If she offers her hospitality to anybody in the public stage that person should be very worried.
none said…
@Wild Boar Battle-maid I'm in agreement with Harry Markle. Regarding your more to it than that question, I believe there is and the BRF knows all about it. Soho House holds the answers.
LavenderToast said…
Here is a link for an article saying Meghan is wanting 'world domination' but is deliberately not taking commercial work right now to avoid being called a gold digger. I am sure it is a PR puff to explain away why she hasn't gotten any jobs.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10892090/meghan-markle-world-domination-harry/

The sheer lunacy of seeing that in print that she wants 'world domination' should prove to anyone she is bat shit crazy.
xxxxx said…
YankeeDoodle said...
Why do we always look for zebras when remarking about the Dumb as s—t H?
Harry does not have dyslexia. He has an IQ a bit under 100. By lying and cheating, with teachers seething, he barely graduated what, in America, is 10th grade.


Haps flew helicopters in the UK military which takes intelligence. He might be one of these type of guys, who cannot handle large words, but as an air conditioner repairman can fix yours in 10 minutes. And on a real hot day when you are dying. (not literally) Yeah, you want to know this guy for emergencies!

Of course as the BRF Royale heir, second in line, this was never nurtured in him. It didn't have to be to make a living, a life, because his role was to be a Prince. For Checkbook Charlie to pay his way via the Duchy of Cornwall money spigot.

Lets give Princely Charles some credit for getting his hands dirty sometimes in his alt. rural life, running the Duchy of Cornwall. Palling around with, mingling with "his farmers". His Cornwall tenant farmers. Shepherds. This was shown in the UK documentary I believe. I should try and find it on the internet. Hapless had no such manual outlet except with helicopters. He had his chance with Megsy at the Hertfordshire estate that Charles offered the now Royally Dumped Duo. They turned down this generous offer.

Who (lulz) ended up in the boring stix anyway, though in British Columbia.
xxxxx said…
Wild Boar Battle-maid said...
So?

Are we back to Harry Markle's original proposition that it looks like a criminal conspiracy between Anderson, Ragland, Markle - and perhaps unknown others, to entrap, seduce & blackmail PH with a view to gaining untold wealth....


Some collusion was there. MM is a known factor and Anderson an unknown.
lizzie said…
@Yankee Doodle said

>> Why do we always look for zebras when remarking about the Dumb as s—t H?
Harry does not have dyslexia. He has an IQ a bit under 100. By lying and cheating, with teachers seething, he barely graduated what, in America, is 10th grade....<<

I'm not sure what is meant by an IQ "a bit below 100," but on most standardized IQ tests such as the WAIS, scores from 90-110 are considered to be in the "average range." If Harry's score does fall there (not sure how any of us could possibly know that) that certainly doesn't make him "dumb" or "low IQ" unless we are willing to say the average person is dumb/low IQ. In fact, nearly 70% of the population is thought to have an IQ between 85 and 115. Sounding like Lake Wobegon to me if that percentage is dismissed as dumb.

I think Harry has a number of problems, for sure. Based on things he's done and said he seems spoiled, arrogant, and angry. But I'm not sure we can measure his IQ from afar based on his observable behavior nor can we rule out dyslexia.
Hikari said…
>>>>Haps flew helicopters in the UK military which takes intelligence. He might be one of these type of guys, who cannot handle large words, but as an air conditioner repairman can fix yours in 10 minutes. And on a real hot day when you are dying. (not literally) Yeah, you want to know this guy for emergencies!<<<

I now find everything we were ever told about Haz's military training and service to be pretty suspect and probably more whitewash than reality. After basically flunking out of Eton (his best mark was a D in Geography; his B in Art was completely teacher-made--his art teacher did his project but didn't do it to A level because nobody would have accepted an A as Harry's work) he was admitted to Sandhurst with one of the lower passing scores for cadet candidates. Many people who are not academically inclined excel in the military with its emphasis on doing. I can accept that Harry was trained to fly the Apache helicopters. I don't think it's too likely that the (at that time) #3 to the British crown would have been permitted to fly solo missions in hazardous areas. Haz may have flown with instructors or with more experienced pilots; any solo outings were probably on the training ground, if he was permitted those. Perhaps he really was a bona fide Apache pilot. But if he was qualified to fly on his own and excelled at it, he could have explored other options for flying once returning to civvie life (if being a full time Royal is 'civvie') He didn't. The military service which allegedly meant so much to him (I believe he called his time in Afghanistan 'fun') wasn't important enough to him to fill his military patronages properly, as we have seen. Going to a Disney film was more important.

We were told that Harry was discharged early from his service due to his high profile threatening the security of his unit; actually he was discharged early for chronic insubordination and a number of incidents of racial slurs directed to fellow squaddies. 'Captain Wales', far from being a leader in his unit was an insubordinate, racist toerag who didn't feel the rules of military hierarchy should apply to him since he was a Prince. This kind of attitude would be crap for morale, and I wonder how sorry Harry's squad mates were to see the back of him in actuality. This is life-and-death stuff, not a pampered Prince's playground. I don't think Haz has displayed in his subsequent behavior evidence of inner courage and decency, to be the sort of soldier that could have someone's back in the field . . especially if that someone was a person he'd insulted with derogatory racial names in the barracks.

I think we must conclude that Harry's military career and skills as an Apache pilot have been as exaggerated as his career at Eton was. Past performance is the best indicator of future behavior, and Haz sure hasn't been acting like any sort of dedicated, highly trained soldier these last few years. And if he were truly skilled at, or interested in working with his hands, he could have offered himself for any number of jobs within the RF requiring mechanical aptitude, or been steered in that direction. Haz has pretty much been a waster when he wasn't in uniform . . yet William and Kate were the ones called 'work-shy'. Super ironic, that.


Hikari said…
>>>Lets give Princely Charles some credit for getting his hands dirty sometimes in his alt. rural life, running the Duchy of Cornwall. Palling around with, mingling with "his farmers". His Cornwall tenant farmers. Shepherds. This was shown in the UK documentary I believe. I should try and find it on the internet. Hapless had no such manual outlet except with helicopters. He had his chance with Megsy at the Hertfordshire estate that Charles offered the now Royally Dumped Duo. They turned down this generous offer.<<<

I have yet to see Charles' documentary, but I want to. His affinity for the land and its people puts me in mind of his ancestor, George III, called 'Farmer George', for similar agrarian interests, especially with livestock. His critics intended it derisively, but I think he wore it with pride. At 70, Charles now reminds me of his forebear in looks and demeanor. Charles was extremely hurt to have his generous offer of the estate in Herefordshire rebuffed . . It would have been far grander than Frogmore Cottage, and if not as fancy a house as Anmer Hall, potentially more land as a working estate than Wiliam has. Harry could have been a landed squire, with the potential to generate his own income from home farm products . . which his IG-mad wife could have developed into a thriving website and online business. Such ventures, promoting British-grown products with a Royal provenance would have been supported by the BRF, and Meg could have marketed to the Americans, too. But all that represented way too much work and was in outer Siberia in relation to Hollywood, so that was a no-go.

Harry might have even been able to install his own helipad at the country estate on the proceeds.

Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid!

Rach and H want to be showered with adulation and pots and pots of money for essentially doing *nothing* but showing up at parties, premieres and fancy dinners. Actual labor is anathema to both of them.
Hikari said…
Re. IQ Scales

Found a number of diagnostic scales

According to Stanford-Binet scale, IQ is classified as following:

Over 140 - Genius or almost genius
120 - 140 - Very superior intelligence
110 - 119 - Superior intelligence
90 - 109 - Average or normal intelligence
80 - 89 - Dullness
70 - 79 - Borderline deficiency in intelligence
Under 70 - Feeble-mindedness
Apart from the Stanford Binet-Scale, another scale popularly used is the Wechsler scale. Here, IQ is classified as:

Over 130 - Very superior
120 - 129 - Superior
110 - 119 - High average
90 - 109 - Average
80 - 89 - Low average
70 - 79 - Borderline
Under 70 - Extremely low/intellectually deficient

Besides, these two scales which use a standard deviation of 15, another scale in popular use is the Cattell's scale which uses a standard deviation of 24. According to Cattell's scale, IQ is classified as:

Over 160 - Genius Level
140 - 159 - Highly Intelligent
120 - 139 - Above Average
100 - 119 - Average
90 - 99 - Below Average

***********

As a layman, I had always assumed that if 100 was the median, it represented the cut-off for 'average' and dropping below that would be 'slightly below average', decreasing with every point. This is the Cattell's scale. The better-known but older Stanford Binet deems anything in the 90s 'average to normal', which seems a bit low to me, but I guess I have been overestimating the intelligence of the general population. If '90' is considered 'average', that means that half the test subjects fall 'below average'. Which means that as a society, there are loads of stupid people walking around . . something I can verify ancecdotally. I work in a public library so I am well-placed to observe the gamut of human intelligence coming into my doors every day.

I doubt Royals are ever subject to IQ testing, for fear of low results messing with their 'sanctified' position as lords over the rest of us. The current Royal family is not known as a brain trust, despite two degrees (second class) from Cambridge, and some University of London and Saint Andrews's. As a royal, there is no real incentive to excellence or individual achievement because you've got a job for life (unless you're Harry and run away from home) and will be passed along in all the most elite schools irrespective of actually doing the work because of the prestige having a Royal student adds to the school(s).

I peg Haz for the mid-to-high 90s. He seems like he might have AD/HD which would affect his focus and concentration and might be masking his ability to learn in some situations. He definitely appears to be a kinesthetic learner as opposed to more traditional teaching styles favored in schools. Diana was dyslexic, as is Beatrice, so it's there on both sides of the family.
@Hikari, ‘Diana was dyslexic, as is Beatrice, so it's there on both sides of the family. ‘

I’ve never read or heard that Diana was dyslexic, Beatrice yes, because she has spoken about it publicly. Diana didn’t manage an O level but that’s because she wasn’t particularly academic. 🥴
For the love of Mike, confusing Herefordshire & Hertfordshire is like muddling Washington State (or Washington County Durham) with Washington DC - get it straight please!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herefordshire

Mainly rural county with 1small cathedral city (Hereford), economically poor, on Welsh border. Where all those red cattle with white faces came from originally.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hertfordshire

Even smaller, but much higher population & significantly richer, mixed rural/suburban county, on edge of London, with 1 city (St Albans) & 3 large towns ( Watford, Hemel Hempstead, & Stevenage, home of our aerospace industry.
Where Harry Potter films come from.
By definition. most people are `average' at everything because that's how `average' is defined in the first place, something that all those who think they are `above average' drivers conveniently forget.

It's not the other way round. Standard Deviation and all that jazz.
luxem said…
@Hikari - enjoy your comments and agree!

I recently read that the RF had quietly walked back their claim that PH was an Apache pilot and instead described him as a gunner. He may have been trained in how to fly an Apache, but his actual job was much less impressive and more in line with the mental aptitude that PH exhibits.

Also, the article from the journalist who covered PH from his childhood (can't think of her name) stated that PH as a teen wanted to be a tour guide in the bush. A job like that requires a lot of "soft skills" - good with people, can stand/walk in all kinds of weather, able to memorize information, enthusiasm for subject matter, etc. That too, is more in line with work he seems capable of doing well. If, after divorce, he went to Africa to lick is wounds and did hands on work with the conservation groups to really learn about the subject matter, not just pontificate, he probably could be a crowd-drawing tour guide. In fact, he could make Travelyst a reality by leading tours in off-the-beaten path locations. But he really would have to humble himself and realize that doing something worthwhile and in the dirt is better than empty word salad speeches in fancy venues.
luxem said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Maggie said…
not taking commercial work right now to avoid being called a gold diggers

Could someone break it to them that that ship's well and truly sailed!
Maggie said…
not taking commercial work right now to avoid being called a gold diggers

Could someone break it to them that that ship's well and truly sailed!
SDJ said…
@Wild Boar Battle Maid:
`King Charles III’ prescient?

Naah! Surely it gave her, or the boyfriend/presumed royal bastard, the whole bloody idea.


Undoubtedly! And in true MM fashion, she didn't think/watch the whole thing through because in the end, Harry dumps her to return to the royal fold!! ;)
Maggie said…
Duplicate - sorry!
Scandi Sanskrit said…
Why do I have a feeling the Wechsler scale is most people's favourite? 😂😂

Popular posts from this blog

A Quiet Interlude

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

As Time Passes and We Get Older

 I started thinking about how time passes when reading some of the articles about the birthday.  It was interesting to think about it from the different points of view.  Besides, it kind of fits as a follow up the last post (the whole saga of can the two brothers reunite). So there is the requisite article about how he will be getting all kinds of money willed to him from his great-grandmother.  There were stories about Princess Anne as trustee (and not allowing earliest access to it all).  Whether or not any or all of this is true (there was money for him and/or other kids) has been debated with claims she actually died owing money with the Queen paying the debts to avoid scandal.  Don't know but I seem to remember that royal estates are shrouded from the public so we may not (ever) know. However, strange things like assisting in a book after repeated denials have popped up in legal papers so nothing is ever really predicable.   We are also seein...

The Opening Act of New Adventures in Retail

 I keep thinking things will settle down to the lazy days of spring where the weather is gorgeous and there is a certain sense of peacefulness.  New flowers are coming out. increasing daylight so people can be outside/play and thinking gardening thoughts.  And life is quiet.  Calm. And then something happens like a comet shooting across the sky.  (Out of nowhere it arrives and then leaves almost as quickly.)   An update to a law suit.  Video of the website is released (but doesn't actually promote any specific product which can be purchased from the website).  A delay and then jam is given out (but to whom and possible more importantly - who did not make the list?).  Trophies almost fall (oops).  Information slips out like when the official date of beginning USA residency.  (now, isn't that interesting?) With them, it's always something in play or simmering just below the surface.  The diversity of the endeavors is really ...