The previous post was getting a bit long, so here's a new post to continue to discuss the Sussex situation.
I am sorry for my absence; duty calls.
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.
Comments
I don't know what you mean by 'pregnancy complications in younger women' but younger women have a 1 in 4 chance of having a miscarriage. That's pretty high, and doesn't take into account all of the pregnancies where the mother hasn't realized that she's pregnant.
We seem to think that pregnancy is a routine affair but it's not. Every pregnancy is should be monitored for the best outcome.
Gentle Reminder: Please speak kindly about other posters.
You don't have to agree with their opinion anymore than they must agree with yours.
Since he apparently only has a couple of shirts and pairs of shoes, I'd go with her.
Moderation is on.
Its so odd! I can get to the letter, and it claims to be downloading, yet when I open the download, there is nothing there. Aargh.
I'll keep looking for it on the blogs I saw it just a couple days ago.
Thank you so much for your help!
Whether it is from previous terminated pregnancies, many years taking oral contraceptives, age or just an aversion to children and the child-bearing state, I still don’t believe that M ever bore a/the child known as Archie. We are born with all the eggs (oocytes) we will ever have and we lose some of them every month until they’re all gone so conceiving at almost 40 (maybe more?) years of age becomes more difficult. Those ovum lose viability as we get older and our hormones needed to conceive and for a chromosomally normal fertilised egg to implant in the uterus is more difficult. This is my oversimplified tale of why MeGain did not just recently miscarry of a child. Rant ended.
Meghan is high risk. There is no chance she doesn't know this.
That's the point when I come back to the basic question - how did she subvert the laws of physics and the settled view of medicine and biology?
She appeared to have a pregnancy bump of variable volume and negligible density which could be compressed into next-to-nothing one moment and regain its form the next, and which had no effect on her centre of gravity nor provide an obstruction to the movement of her legs. it also jiggled around independently of her body, as if suspended on elastic?
Is she really responsible only for crimes against literature, logic and good taste?
That's the point when I come back to the basic question - how did she subvert the laws of physics and the settled view of medicine and biology?
She appeared to have a pregnancy bump of variable volume and negligible density which could be compressed into next-to-nothing one moment and regain its form the next, and which had no effect on her centre of gravity nor provide an obstruction to the movement of her legs. it also jiggled around independently of her body, as if suspended on elastic?
Is she really responsible only for crimes against literature, logic and good taste?
Most people even if they dislike Markle swallow whole the idea that Markle gave birth and presumably has now suffered a miscarriage even though all the evidence about her suggests that that cannot be correct. Some time ago I in speaking to my sister and in passing casually mentioned that Archie was a Doll. She in disbelief said, he came though the post then. Well actually that is pretty much what must have happened. My sister thinks I am thus just a bit nutty. My sister reads the Mail. Interesting to observe that after a four months silence TorontoPapers is back and scathing. I put it this way: If Markle faked her first pregnancy Archie and within months of the marriage what reason would we have to suppose that she can conceive and if she cannot then the miscarriage must be false. As I was saying earlier though I now put it differently the ability to produce a child is especially for a new HRH is a sign of superior genes. The inability is a matter of shame.
You're right about Harry and I wrote (26.11 @11.21):
What about Harry in all this? I wonder if she deceived him or if he was in on the whole thing (assuming it's a lie)?
No one mentioned my post and I can't remember if anyone else mentioned Harry. On the other hand, you have to remember that she is the only victim and the only one suffering. I don't think Harry matters. I wonder if she's asked him if he was ok...
I tried to open the IRS letter and the link works and I could download. When I want to open the document, there is nothing, just a symbol to show that there's no photo. I bet it's been removed from the internet.
In addition to Diana's birthday and wedding anniversary occurring in July, Bea and Edo also got married in July. Here's an additional knife to twist in to the BRF: You all were celebrating Beatrice's wedding; meanwhile I was suffering the worst loss that can befall a mother! Harry was here too, somewhere . . . Don't we think Markle is still chewing glass over the Queen giving Bea one of her own vintage gowns and use of her own wedding tiara?
Ah, I see my mistake now. I was focusing on Meghan's July schedule, when I should have also been looking at the BRF's July schedule. For a "powerful" woman, Meghan can't plan her next move without looking at what actual happy people are doing.
Harry `Knuckles' Windsor - there's a name to play with.
Despite my misgivings arising from the engagement interview, I sincerely hoped she'd get the idea of what would be expected of her and that she would achieve good standing as a Royal Duchess, even if she was unconventional to some extent. I hoped, too, that she would make Harry happy.
The wedding gave me pause for thought but I still gave her the benefit of the doubt as it was early days, despite the rumours and unfavourable reports that were in circulation.
Her performance at Eugenie's wedding, however, was the very last straw. Starting with that terrifying stare down the TV camera, I was left in no doubt that something was very wrong. I had been incredulous at some of her earlier behaviour but decided I had now had to believe the evidence of my own eyes, rather than make excuses for her.
Her stated wish to `modernise' the monarchy, with her open political comments made me fear for the continued peace of the United Kingdom.
Sadly, that fear has not gone away.
I see that a second clergyman, Giles Fraser, also had high hopes for the union, expressed in the Guardian no less:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2017/nov/30/how-meghan-markle-might-bring-the-royals-closer-to-christ-the-king
What does he think now, almost 3 years later, I wonder?
I'm sorry, I think I didn't express myself properly.
When I open the link, I get to the IRS website and the page says 'Archwell Inc' and 'Determination letter', then underneath '>Final letters'. When I click on it, I get a link which supposedly downloads the document. This document must be a photo (?) of the letter because I get a symbol showing the photo is missing or inaccessible so it must be gone but would the IRS remove it at the behest of M&H? Doubtful, now I think of it.
So no, I didn't see the letter/doc so couldn't grab a screenshot.
"3...a convenient miscarriage story may help Meghan worm her way out of the self-created quagmire she is in with the Mail on Sunday litigation and the likelihood that immensely damaging information will come out about Meghan if the suit moves forward with testimony."
Yes, she likely considers herself untouchable now.
"I put absolutely nothing beyond Meghan. I believe she is THAT devious."
Agreed, as do a lot of us
"4: There is another reason. It also allows Meghan to publicly use a surrogate instead of hiding it as she possibly did with Archie."
Oooh. Hadn't thought of this angle!
https://scorpiotwentythree.tumblr.com/post/635769460131807232/hi-scorpio-thank-you-so-much-for-opening-up-your
I have been happily reading the excellent conversation here and have had nothing to contribute they has not already been said... then I found this on Quora.
The writer is a journalism student from LA and I chuckled all the way through the piece she wrote about Markle ... the grifter and hustler!
On a more serious note .. for those who have not delved into the history of the renovation of Frogmore Cottage, here is a history of planning applications to the council.
https://publicaccess.rbwm.gov.uk/online-applications/propertyDetails.do?activeTab=relatedCases&keyVal=PMWSBGNI0FS01
As late as July 2018, a third submission was approved to turn the three houses and flats into four houses, to add an extension, and to add a path and parking area. There were three applications for this, the first being given permission in February 2009.
I assume that the work required for renovations (electrical, plumbing, roof ...) did not require planning permission.
Then, in October 2018, there are two submissions, which are granted in December 2018, simply for internal and external work. Between then and July 2019, there are 4 more applications, all for external work.
The timeline on all this is interesting.
"4: There is another reason. It also allows Meghan to publicly use a surrogate instead of hiding it as she possibly did with Archie."
Oooh. Hadn't thought of this angle!
The UK laws are quite clear about surrogacy and titles. So if she did do something like this, then she not only gets the baby but lots of publicity about how awful they are to an innocent baby.
(the snarky side of my brain says something a rant she had about not serving her first on a platter for the public viewing but willing to do that to the next in ink/photos to make a point about how they are all unfair to her yet again).
"She appeared to have a pregnancy bump of variable volume and negligible density which could be compressed into next-to-nothing one moment and regain its form the next, and which had no effect on her centre of gravity nor provide an obstruction to the movement of her legs. it also jiggled around independently of her body, as if suspended on elastic?"
Excellent summary of why we all are skeptical. She did seem to "subvert the laws of physics and the settled view of medicine and biology" if you buy the line she was pitching.
We've often laughed at the claims that Markle is whip-smart. Many here have said she is not very intelligent and makes many many mistakes.
But I think that she has some kind of uncanny ability to always land on her feet even when she does dumb things.
And I believe she has a unique type of machiavellian grifter's intelligence the scale of which she rates on a very high level.
I agree with this. She's certainly sharp enough to know which moves to pull to hurt the most number of people at one time. If we knew as much about the Markles as we do about the Windsors, some details in Prince and Princess Harry's wedding might have been obvious open disses at her already snubbed family.
Claiming to have had a miscarriage is another coup for her -- and one that she outmaneouvered a lot of people to be order to pull off. Unless some hard evidence comes out to prove that she lied, well, she's innocent until proven guilty. And yes, she will be able to milk this for a long while yet.
On Thursday the Harkles, via their favourite media mouthpieces, told us they were having a quiet Thanksgiving dinner at home with traditional foods (like the great majority of other American families). Then on Friday People magazine told us that they are decorating their home for Christmas (again, like most American families).
I supposed this is their PR pitch to show us how relatable they are (private jets and Montecito mansions notwithstanding)? It all reminds me of a feature in a certain popular US tabloid called "Celebrities - they're just like us!"
@KCM1212 and Midge
I tried to open the IRS letter and the link works and I could download. When I want to open the document, there is nothing, just a symbol to show that there's no photo. I bet it's been removed from the internet.
______________________
I was able to open the document. It's...boring. *L*
What I find puzzling, but I can't say anything the bunt says or does surprises me any more, is this:
She threatened that she’ll take severe actions against the MoS if she wins.
What 'severe actions'? If she loses, she won't have enough money for another court case. I hope she loses and tries it on and that the MoS reveals everything they have on her. If this is true, then she's madder than a box of frogs.
@WBBM:
"She appeared to have a pregnancy bump of variable volume and negligible density which could be compressed into next-to-nothing one moment and regain its form the next, and which had no effect on her centre of gravity nor provide an obstruction to the movement of her legs. it also jiggled around independently of her body, as if suspended on elastic?"
@KC and WBBM: There is an excellent video clip of Meghan in a white dress (I think I saw it on Celt Views youtube channel) walking squarely toward the video camera. It is in slow motion and her bump is swinging WIDELY from side to side as she walks, which is not normal in a real pregnancy. If I can find it again, I will post a link.
From what you posted, it seems that the bunt thinks she will win trillions of pounds if she wins. She seems to suggest if she wins, she will then use some of her imagined trillions to take further action against them, which if course means they can sue her. Dies she imagine she can buy the MoS and fire people?
She is such a massive idiot. Cases like these have relatively minor cash rewards. I look forward to watching her being swept away under an avalanche of bills from both sides when she loses. Perhaps even from Thomas and the five friends.
Glad you enjoyed it. From my experience with narcs the older they get, the more out of control and unsuccessful their lives become.
The manipulation and gaslighting become obvious and as people avoid them, their status declines and opportunities dry up.
So now the only way for them to get the narcisistic supply they require is via anger, lashing out, making threats. etc. The charming narc is replaced by a raging narc.
That's when you run for cover. Even Greyrock doesn't work. They will destroy everyone within reach.
It makes me imagine a little scraggly ginger boy huffing and puffing at some nemesis with little freckled fists raised - but then when the nemesis raises back, he pouts and cries and grimaces and slinks quickly off to do a hobby in his room while his mommy puts on her big yachting hat and stands on the front step of their semidetached to rail at the passersby for making her young mouthy tot depressed.
Here is a link to a video of Meghan walking forward toward a video camera with her bump swinging WIDELY from side to side:
https://youtu.be/_vcBe9IjmU4
My conclusion as said before. Hissy Chrissy real and our flouting Megsy not real
Re Markle always landing on her feet. Nah, it is not her own special ability. It is her marriage to the son of the future King who makes her bulletproof. Royals cleaned and still clean all their messes.
If Harry is out of the equation nobody will care for her at all. Do you care about Fergie? I certainly don't.
I hate saying it, but to me it looks like the fabric is shifting from side to side. The fabric is silk-like so would move very easily. I blew the moving image up so I could see better, and you see that shift, but not the actual bump.
Its origin was the first British radio broadcast from somewhere London's Strand in 1922 using the call sign 2LO. Incorporated under Charter in the 1829s it comprises a number of terrestrial (originally the only one) and celestial television channels not merely broadcasting but producing its own material. It also runs countless local radio stations and four or five national stations - I am not sure whether the concept of local and national stations makes much sense to Americans. In addition it owns and runs half a dozen Symphony Orchestras, and is the worlds largest commissioner of new music with one hundred and twenty annual commissions. It also has the worlds largest record library - there are for example some two hundred thousand 78rpm shellac discs in the library.
It is perhaps best known to Americans for Masterpiece Theatre though not all costume drama is produced by it (i.e. Brideshead Revisited was not BBC produced). All this is funded by the licence fee. If you own and use a television set then you must pay the licence fee which presently stands at over one hundred and fifty pounds sterling per annum. This is much resented: in my time as a lawyer I heard many ingenious excuses why my client would be exempt - none were ever valid. To work for the BBC I mean at any level one must have attended the best University and speak the politically correct language now in fashion. The Government lean heavily on the BBC to do this and so they have no choice but to be woke - not if they want to keep their jobs. The BBC are thus anti Royal Family and as such will be pro Markle. There are calls to defund the BBC both for its extravagance and because no one wants to pay the licence fee. I am very much in two minds about this as although I do not have a tv set and thus a exempted from the fee I would be lost without the third programme (a radio station).
I have been inside both Broadcasting House and Bush House (from where they run the World Service).
“Meghan Markle’s Miscarriage May Lead to a Royal Reset”
....decorated with a big, red stamp graphic screeching “Learning Experience”!
Written by Tom Sykes, the article states that the NYT article and alleged tragic event may have a profound impact on Buckingham Palace.
He follows up this bold, pretend-time, click bait statement with the mumbled fact that they, uh, got “no comment” from the offices of Charles, William, and Buckingham Palace, with the Palace spokesman saying it was (um, obviously) a personal matter.
I suppose this is his idea of heavy-duty proof of impact.
In this Palm Springs pool-clear watery gruel, Sykes bravely waded on, and derived the idea that MM’s stunt and garbled essay (which zipped at breakneck speed past the soap opera-ish little recap of the miscarriage into a collage of hot social topics, and is sure to raise her up to the pantheon of essay writers along with her earlier “Dish Soap Bad”) will change the Palace. Impact! Because, reasons things.
Mr Sykes, like many, apparently missed what Sophie actually endured years ago. By the way, did he do any homework to check hospitals in LA.? Asking for a friend.
Tom Sykes also posted a piece on 25.11.20, saying a source told the DB that members of Harry’s family had been informed MM was writing her article! But, the source demurely declined to say which royals. Oh, Rachel, you coy, shy, privacy-protecting little minx. We see you.
Never have so many combined to support, defend and raise up someone so worthless, one whose inflating deflating plopping jellyrolling belt-on bump and an inert plastic dolly are thus far her only proven swings at holy young motherhood.
No wonder we are fascinated.
Exactly. I also suspect it may be a preemptive move on her part. If and when she loses the MoS case, truths will likely tumble out of files.
I'm undecided. The dress does look a very close fit and as if it's travelling with bump rather than over it to me but it could be an optical illusion.
Interesting camera viewpoint - not a buttonhole one, surely?????
That was taken March 9th, about 2 months before the stated birth date. At what stage does the bump get so big the mother has to waddle? Did we ever see her walking in any way other than normal? (That was the day she sat with her legs crossed, revealing so much that one poster mentioned `being able see up the breakfast!)
Or did she hide away before that stage?
As for the oft commented about various bump sizes, you know, I have never ruled our paranoiad Harry having her wear moon bumps on top of her bump as to not reveal where she was in the pregnancy in order to keep the paps away from the house or to confuse people, etc. That is a crazy theory, I admit, but since Harry is obsessed with keeping his family safe and given how much he hates the media, to me it’s a plausible theory.
I beg to differ, but the current UK government is most certainly not Woke, It’s the opposing political side that is Woke. It was me who said the BBC is Woke but its direction is not via our government. The BBC is anti establishment and anti-royal. It used to be the opposite and very much respected.
Megsy will feel right at home with the BBC just like she does with Netflix.
With
'r 'ed tucked underneath 'er arms She walked the bloody tower. The music hall version (UK) there is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQErY55m8vo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmWTkALTja0
---------------
Tatty..that's an interesting theory.
I wouldn't put it past him.
Or maybe that's the reasoning she gave him to justify it, knowing he'd buy into it.
She's devious and cunning like that. Play into his Diana fears.
Perhaps given he is Prince Harry, NYT just believed them, but it is my opinion that however NYT came to agree to let her write an essay, her PR or someone provided NYT with a short statement of proof.
@WWBBM
I noticed too the absence of waddling. I remember not being able to walk as fast and as easily at around 7 months. I certainly couldn't have stridden perched on 5" stilettos like MM. And I was very slim. MM never waddled (moonbumps are not heavy).
I am still team surrogacy. You know, some people really can't be bought. We treasure that in ourselves.
the thought occurred to me: then why have any one sign an NDA? apparently MeGain has everyone anywhere near her sign one. If one could be bought then there is no reason to sign one--not worth the paper its on.
Its a matter of personal integrity--for all involved because what are you hiding with an NDA?
There are two sides to every issue, not just yours.
The fun has really been squeezed out of this blog.
I'd say Mugsy has prompted a Royal reset by destroying for good and all Harry's relationship with his family on a personal level, and also destroying any future plans for his Royal role within the Firm. If Knuckles and Mugsy had been genuine in their intentions, they could have made great ambassadors to the Commonwealth. As it stands, both Harry's family members and the institution and the citizens of Britain and the Commonwealth have been horrendously let down. If Knuckles ever achieves sobriety and gets his head out of his arse, the regrets are going to be extreme. So far all he seems to regret, seems to me, are the loss of his shiny medals and soldier-cosplay. Does he regret that he will likely never see his grandfather again, or that he has broken Charles' heart & is not on speaking terms with his only brother? I'm sure the Queen feels betrayed and sad as well, but she does have 7 other grandchildren to comfort her. William has secured the future and will be a solid and reliable pair of hands for the Crown to pass into.
I've come to the conclusion that Harry had been planning a breakaway from his 'oppressive' life as a Royal. He wanted it; he just needed a push. Meg was not just a push; she was the Bulldozer that shoved him relentlessly into his new life, flattening and crushing everything in their mutual path. I really think that Hazza was very confident that he could manipulate his granny into acquiescing to their 'Out, Except when we Wanna Be In (for the sexy stuff)' plan . . .Losing everything, including his military associations never crossed his little mind. If it had, he'd have paid more attention to his duties. If he could get back in a time machine, would he attend the Marines' memorial at Deal and tell his wife that she could attend the Lion King premiere by herself and petition the head of Disney for her own voiceover work.
If Harry envisioned his life as a series of glamorous American holidays, interspersed with international tours that put his picture on all the magazines and overshadowed his brother, I'm sure he's woken up out of that little fantasy by now. Ever since 'Archie' entered the game, it's been all downhill.
Using a nearly 5-month old event to garner sympathy in an on-going legal proceeding that, in contrast to July, when the judge ruled in her favor against revealing the identities of the 5 friends publicly, now has turned against her by appearances is kind of odd. Well, it's Meg, so there is some sort of twisted reasoning here. Surely if she'd suffered this medical event back in July, there would have been some sort of continuance announced then on medical grounds? There were various hearings going on at the time.
So--the actual 'medical waiver' reason for the postponement might be a current pregnancy which is so high risk in light of 'what happened before' that Meg cannot bear any trial-related stress for the next entire year. Whether she's told the judge that her confidential medical matter is a current pregnancy or a brutal course of IVF . . would she be compelled to supply medical documentation signed off by a doctor? If she can't actually get pregnant or has no intention of it, she's courting the same risk she did before with Archie--sooner or later she would have to produce a living baby. Unless she just proposes to publicize another miscarriage every six months until she's 50 years old.
In the hypothetical scenario that Meg isn't lying and did lose a pregnancy in July . . such an event would be personally tragic, but not a tragedy of such extreme weight for the institution of the monarchy that it's going to turn the whole system on its ear. It's pretty likely that a number of Royal women have had miscarriages, but never advertised the fact. It is not a fact which everyone is entitled to know. Meg thinks she's the most special creature that ever walked this earth, but in this, she's not unique. What *would* make her *special* in this case is if she is making it all up, turning a painful situation that is all too real for other women into her own paid publicity stunt.
Odious.
I doubt there's any vetting done of opinion pieces except to check to see if the opinions are consistent with the NYT's woke policies. (A few times in the recent past political pieces haven't been and the editorial board has been severely criticized. So much for allowing diverse opinions.) Opinion pieces by guest authors are entirely different from news articles written by the paper's own reporters. And even there, verifying facts is often a joke.
Please read Puds post at 7:22 PM about Markle's NYT's opinion piece is a paid advertisement. Nobody is fact checking opinions, especially ones that generate income.
Also, can’t people be bought out of their NDA’s by the people who want the information? I seem to recall one of the Fox females newscasters broke hears because someone paid the financial penalty stipulated in the NDA. Also, maybe one of the Trump accusers? Anyway. I don’t know how NDA’s work. What about she told someone who told someone etc...?
Just throwing it out there.
Mel: Yes either of those work for me: his or her idea.
I absolutely know there are truths and situations and explanations more than what I suggest and assert. That is why I’m here....to figure the many things that “make you go hummmmmm” out. Perhaps none of us has been correct yet. Who knows.
I seriously doubt the NYT required any sort of proof for supposed facts contained in an opinion piece, whether the NYT paid an author or an author paid them.
The NYT has printed a lot of things that were outright lies. Walter Duranty may be the most egregious example of journalistic malfeasance (okay, outright Soviet propaganda) but he is far from the only one. There is a reason they are called Pravda on the Hudson.
Same thing with the miscarriage. I think over 50% of opinions I've read state that they don't believe her because she is a habitual and practiced liar.
I doubt she wanted her article in the Opinions section. Meghan wanted Front Page. I spoke to my friend who is a journalist and now runs a publication as Editor in Chief (previous Vice, Miami Herald). NYTimes would have wanted the scoop and an in depth article or series. This would require an interview with a journalist who uses critical thinking. I'm sure they asked her for this, and she declined. Thus, 'Opinion' section for her drivel. Lastly, they probably wanted to avoid a lawsuit.
Just got back from the grocery store. While I was in the checkout line, I noticed a lone magazine cover of Meghan in the black leather skirt, taken preHarry days. The title said Meghan desperate to be like Kim K. Several people have commented about her bronzer, injections, and new style being very Kardashianesque since returning to LA.
Indeed, if I see a headshot on a magazine sans the Ginger Prick while waiting at the grocery store, it is hard for me to tell which one is pictured. I'm anxiously waiting for the new version of her butt Kardashian style to make the cover, assuming there is room for it.
Also. Musty, from when I was on websleths, we would parse out theories and scenarios, and many times, the truth wasn’t anything we had discussed because we were missing information,. Then we would all be amazed at it. Of course, many times we were on the right track or right on.
I absolutely know there are truths and situations and explanations more than what I suggest and assert. That is why I’m here....to figure the many things that “make you go hummmmmm” out. Perhaps none of us has been correct yet. Who knows.
Indeed. It is the little pieces that do not fit the puzzle as it is currently believed to exist that can eventually lead to solving it.
With her morphing body shape, facial features and (alleged) pregnancy, I think I'm just going to infer "alien" from now on when she needs super secret privacy and can't attend court. You say pregnancy, I think it may be because she's about to resurrect herself a la Dr. Who and ain't nobody that wants to see that.
@Sally1975
So no, I didn't see the letter/doc so couldn't grab a screenshot.
................
@Maneki
Oh, I'm sorry - that was my fault. I misunderstood.
I'm glad someone was able to get at it in the end.😍
Looks like I have a lot of catching up to do on a variety of interesting posts!
"With her morphing body shape, facial features.... "
I don't know about the body shape, but her face looks quite different from her Suits days or even from her engagement photos.
Re magazine covers at the checkout
The only way I will believe the Narkle is pregnant will be when she does the naked pregnant pose on a mag cover--even then might be a bit suspicious.
It would be a royale first though (am purposing using the royale spelling for Narkle, a la the tv show The Royale Family (UK comedy series from way back).
I don't know about the body shape, but her face looks quite different from her Suits days or even from her engagement photos.
And not for the better, either. I thought she was attractive when she got engaged. I mostly remember the Wolverine-savaged jeans at Invictus and thought immediately, 'Boy, if she's getting engaged to Harry, she's going to have to up her style game." I know that ratty looking ensemble she wore was probably around $1200 dollars, inclusive of the trinkety jewelry which is so hard to see from a distance, it's a wonder she bothers trying to merch it. It's nearly invisible unless the photog does an extreme zoom shot or happens to be standing right next to her. This was my first exposure to 'Meg's 'Style''. Never has so much money been spent in the service of so little, then or now. Markle has the singular talent of spending $100K on an outfit and making it look like she got it at the Halloween store.
Her engagement appearance was interesting. I liked the dark green shift dress when she eventually took off the white bathrobe bag its hem was hanging out from under. Dirty beige strappy sandals without stockings that did not fit were an odd finish to a weirdly 'Early spring brunch in Santa Barbara wanna be' . . .it was a few days before December in London, and the weather reflected this. At the time I did not realize that they were standing in the sunken gardens at KP, or that it had been a favorite spot of Harry's mother's. Diana probably enjoyed the garden in the spring and summer when the flowers were blooming and not so much on a drizzly day at the end of November. I guess the couple picked this spot for their big announcement, but at the time I thought it meant that Harry had been prohibited from doing the photocall inside the palace or any of the palaces, owing to Meg not being allowed inside.
Mugsy & Knuckles . . .doin' it their way (which is to say, Meg's way) since 2016!
Mugsy thinks she's the most special woman in the world--Disowning the life of a Royal Duchess for the life she's living now is 'special' all right.
As pregnancy lasts nine months and as we do not know how far along Markle was let us split the difference and say she fell pregnant at the beginning of March. Neither Harry nor the publicity obsessed Markle had given the slightest hint either of the pregnancy or the miscarriage in say mid July. Now another four and a half months later we finally learn of the pregnancy and the miscarriage. No detail of the pregnancy nor details of the aftermath or the slightest hint as to the pregnancy or the miscarriage. What we learn about are Harry's knuckles (which are now markled) and the colour of the hospital walls.
In the future Harry who seems incapable of successfully following a script and Markle are going to have to keep up the pretence of the March to July pregnancy and how they kept it secret and likewise the July to November mourning for their loss. They will slip up.
Consider: I have a friend who prides himself on his ability to score with your sex indeed he asserts that he is better at doing so than everyone else although no one has ever seen any evidence of his prowess. He married some years ago and I have no doubt he met his wife on-line. He however asserts that he met her at a wedding in a foreign country (though no one recalls him saying he was going abroad). After that she visited him for a fortnight. She fell pregnant and has lost her looks and figure. He waxes lyrical about her great figure the two weeks she spent with him in England. Hang on! what has happened to her great figure when first they met at the wedding in the foreign country. It is that silent slip-up that gives the lie away. Harry will do likewise.
(pre-Estuary London vernacular: `th' proununced as `v', as in `a bit ov yer old 'ows yer farver'
Mid -word `t' of `tt' replaced by glottal stop as in ` a bi'er o' bu'er' - wot yer pu' on yer bread.')
-----
Some more thoughts on posture, the day she showed her thighs - Have you noticed how she strides out (viewed from the side - almost goose-stepping) a remarkably long stride for a any woman in heels like that?) Never once did I see her leaning back to counter the weight in her abdomen.
Like Harry did with the “they change so much in two weeks” comment at the presentation of Archie who is supposed to be two days old? You can bet he got room for that when they were out of camera shot. That was quite the acting performance of her lifetime. When I asked to show the babies face a little bit more, hairy pulled the blanket down about an inch, and Meg’s hand immediately flew up to cover the babies face and pat his head in what would be the fontanel on a real infant...The part that you are supposed to avoid.
This burst of maternal tactility was either to obscure the plastic features of a ReBorn doll or Meg just had to insert part of her body on camera because SHE was the centerpiece here. Or both. Harry is not bright, God bless him, but I also get the sense of someone not versed in having to lie about his every movement slipping into a moment of real honesty before remembering who he’s married to and what Kind of land mine filled hell his life is now.
In this instance I will give H the benefit of the doubt...It’s very possible that she wrote that story and fired it off to the New York Times with Harry’s knowledge. He barely features in this tale of parental devastation except as a clammy hand and some saline drenched knuckles. He was apparently tasked with picking up the pieces of her shattered heart also, but his input is entirely missing in this little vanity exercise. But whether he knew about it or not, she is orchestrated yet another clandestine pregnancy event that he has been dragged into as an unwilling participant. Yet another set of details to keep straight. If these two ever get interrogated by a police man, Their ruses are going to be all over with in minutes. H will never survive A solo interview more than two minutes.
Square baby bump, high baby bump, low baby bump, big baby bump one week, smaller baby bump the next week, not to mention the flat butt versus butt pads (oh, snap, I went and mentioned it, but I'm looking forward to the debut of her Kardashian (tm) butt).
It’s my guess that the Sussexes healthcare bills are being paid for by the royal family or by the UK taxpayers. Somehow I just don’t fathom Harry and Meghan signing up for one of those crappy Obamacare policies.
If Meghan is lying about the recent July fertility follies and also lied about Archie’s journey to this planet, and all the medical bills have been going to the RF or the UK government for payment, then the RF most likely knows whether or not Archie was born of her body and if Meghan had a miscarriage in July or not. That would be a huge fail of Meghan’s cunning ways if she hasn’t considered the information in her medical bills being known by HMTQ, palace staff, and government officials who normally pay these expenses.
I can see the RF, the Queen, and select trustworthy people on the palace staff or the government, but especially the Queen, holding her cards closely and patiently waiting to dump all the info the RF, palace staff, and the government has on the Harkles at the one-year review and crushing them like a pair of scavenging ants on the sidewalk.
It would be a case of turnabout is fair play.
After all, Meghan commonly uses the narcissistic tactic of bomb dropping on others and then walking away to leave the mess for others to clean it up. The way she informed Trevor she wanted a divorce, the letter to dad episode that has backfired on her, and publishing the Megxit announcement without first discussing it with HMTQ or at the very least informing her of their plans are three instances that come to mind.
If it is discovered that Meghan has faked anything related to her reproductive history, I am hoping the Queen will deftly give Harry and Meghan a huge dose of bomb dropping at the one-year review, which will be here in no time. It’s only about 90 days away.
Bombs away, Queenie!
https://help.nytimes.com/hc/en-us/articles/115014809107-How-to-submit-an-Op-Ed-essay
Oh, you reminded me of that old movie, Green Card (1990), starring Andie MacDowell and Gerard Depardieu. Do you know it? It won Golden Globe for best picture, a London Film Critics Circle award for best actor, and had several Academy Award nominations as well.
A romantic farce set in NYC, Andie plays a high-end, genteel gardener desperate to buy a one of a kind dream flat in the city with a stunning rooftop greenhouse in a fine vintage building. But alas, she needs a spouse to get approved by the building’s strict stuffy board. Enter Gerard, an effusive but slovenly Frenchman who may be able to help her get what she needs. (Seeing her flat, you can imagine why she might do anything for it!) Bebe Neuwirth has a great turn it as her socialite best friend.
Their desperation to get to know each other reminds me of your comment about the Harkle duo being grilled by immigration, trying to pass muster. What a comedy THAT would be.
What's come to mind to me after reading a lot about this miscarriage is that those who are not familiar with or aware of how a Narcissist organizes their lies. One of my sisters is a total Narcissist. We are used to her falsehoods so we know how to navigate. One of our favorite things to do to our Narcissist sister is create a story that we know she thinks she'd benefit from somehow. So we cast our fishing line and sure enough, she'll bite, hook line and sinker. What always occurs without fail is this::: A Narcissist's weakness is how they can manage to take some facts and mix them until they are the originator, center of attention, benefactor, heroine, etc. but what's MORE galling is how they can manage to BELIEVE their lies to honest to God believe their fabrications are 100% fact. IF Megs fabricated the miscarriage, she has completely convinced herself that it really happened. That's one reason it drives me crazy when someone says: "Well, that's her TRUTH." Bullpucky. There is no such thing as that. You're either on the bus or off the bus. There's truth and there's untruth. Fact or fiction.
Harry is probably quite worn down and has surrendered to Meg's BS "truth" for so long now he has reached total submission. Imagine him telling her she's full of it, or challenging her on anything false, which would be all day, all the time? He has Stockholm Syndrome for sure by now.
@punkinseed, agreed. Narcissists as you know are champion gaslighters so for all we know, she has Harry in a spin, doubting even facts he has known his entire life. I blame him for elevating her and following her and wreaking this havoc on his country and family. But, if he ever wakes up, I think he will need serious therapy to deal with the breadth of her deception. At that point, I may feel a tiny twinge of pity.
AnT
I do know Green Card very well; It’s one of my favorite romantic comedies. Gerard D. Was doing his first English language role and he was completely charming. He acted circles around Andie MacDowell, even in a language not his own. Brontë and George start out as a fraud, but fall in love and their fake relationship becomes real. The Hams shows zero evidence of that happening to them. Is it possible to have degrees a fake? If it seemed like they were going through the motions on their wedding day, They are if anything even faker three years after their engagement. Well the BRF Isn’t providing them with a facade for their lies.
I am disappointed that we never got a Green Card 2... Brontë flies to Paris and she and George’s get remarried, this time for real. Definitely consummated. Using the proceeds from the sale of the penthouse apartment, Brontë supports them for a while while Georges writes his music. She gets a part-time job in the Tuileries, and the couple buys a patisserie with a flat above. Within three years, Georges, The bread baking composer, has composed a modern rock opera based on their love story, And is the toast of Paris. Brontë gives birth to twins, a boy and a girl, And they buy a summer home in Provence. They are deliriously happy. Finis.
Secondly, the NYT posts editorials by famous/infamous people when they send in something. They've posted an editorial by Vladimir Putin which didn't make their readers too happy. They didn't only print positive comments that day, as I recall.
If you enjoyed Gerard Depardieu in Green Card, watch him in Cyrano de Bergerac. He was born to play this role.
Meg and Harry are the Millennial Macbeths, and we know what happened to them...
How did she get to the hospital- walk? Was Harry the knight in shining armour who took her? Was she so bad she needed an ambulance??
No indication of how long she was there.
Not a word of thanks for any helicopter pilot, driver, paramedic, porter, doctor, nurse, orderly, ward maid who contributed to her and who looked after her; one would think she was just dumped in that ward to live or die, as chance would have it, without intervention.
@JennS
You're right about Harry and I wrote (26.11 @11.21):
What about Harry in all this? I wonder if she deceived him or if he was in on the whole thing (assuming it's a lie)?
If she's now that deluded and bonkers, what next? Is she heading for a meltdown? This is a new level of crazy, even if the miscarriage happened.
My response:
@Maneki
It's so hard to figure out Harry's part in any of this anymore, isn't it? I think he is trapped in a web of deceit even though he was only partially complicit in it's making.
Meghan doesn't even include the fact that she is a 'wife' in her author's statement. She mentions being a mother but not a wife! She leaves Harry out right at the top before the article even begins.
I'm not sure how complicit he is with this latest drama but it could have been something she started on her own and he was then forced to follow along.
Great comment on how this is bonkers whether it happened or not! Such a huge contradiction between hiding Archie away and demanding privacy, to announcing to the world a miscarriage. I was still having trouble getting past the peeing in the bushes declaration!:-)
Watch this video of a visit to NZ house on 19 March 2019. Look how she walks with ease, squats with ease, springs back up unaided with ease. There are some photos first but if you scroll down a bit, you'll see the video.
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a26869592/meghan-markle-prince-harry-new-zealand-house-surprise-visit/
As for the hospital walk etc, I did wonder why she missed an opportunity to appear outside a hospital in a wheelchair (as is often shown in American films)?
Ah well, our Meg has never been good with details.
The truth is that she's just as aristocratic as Diana, but the family is descended from daughters rather than sons which is why they don't have titles or rather lost them because there are plenty of dukes, Earls and Viscounts in her family ancestry, immediate and ongoing from ye old Stuart times.
For starters she is descended from 2 of Charles 2's sons just like Diana.
She is a great grand daughter of the 6th Duke of Buccleuch (father's side) and 8th Viscount of Powerscourt (mother's side).
The Duke of Buccleuch's family name is Montagu-Douglas-scott which has produced several prominent members including the current duke of Northumberland aka head of the Percy family whose heir George was once touted as a romantic partner for Pippa Middleton. George is a great grandchildren of the 8th duke of Buccleuch.
Fun fact: the royal family matchmakers wanted Princess Margaret to marry the 8th Duke of Buccleuch, but as we know history went a diiferent way.
Fergie's father is a 1st cousin of Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester via their maternal family Montagu-Douglas-Scott - their mothers were siblings who were daughters of the Duke of Buccleuch.
The reason Fergie's father didn't have a title was because his aristocratic mother, Lady Marian, married Mr Ferguson who didn't have a title and thus the children didn't have titles.
As we see with Princess Anne, Princess Alexandra and the York sisters, if you marry a man who doesn't have a title then your kids will not have titles which is what happened to Fergie's father and the same happened to her mother's side of the family.
No one thinks Zara Tindall and Peter Philips are commoners just because they don't have titles and yet this conclusion is often drawn of Fergie.
For now, Fergie is the current Duke of Gloucester's 2nd/ 3rd cousin ( i often forget which is which) via his mother who is her father's 1st cousin via their membership of the Montagu-Douglas-Scott families.
Fergie is also a blood relation of the Dukes of Northumberland aka the Percy family via Lady Elizabeth, daughter of the 9th Duke of Buccleuch who married the 10th Duke of Northumberland and is the grandmother of the current duke of Northumberland.
And via her descent from Charles 2 is also a relation of the Spencer family as well as the royal family itself.
Due to Fergie and Diana's mutual descent from Charles 2 of England, William, Harry, Beatrice and Eugenie are the first generation of royals with descent from the senior MALE branch of the Stuart dynasty. The Queen is descended from the junior FEMALE branch of the Stuart dynasty.
Finally, as a direct result of her family connections and her father's job, she grew up around the royals just like Diana. You can find photos of the young Fergie having playdates with Andrew and Edward.
It's no accident that the young Diana was friends with Fergie and actually helped arrange the relationship between Fergie and Andrew.
Both have the same sugary over the top prose typical for a bad writer of "love romances"
Don't forget her letter to her father who broke her 'heart into a million pieces' and 'I crumbled inside'. Written in the same vein.
I thought this latest stunt (if the miscarriage never happened) would backfire but apparently not (not yet, anyway).
I think Turnitin can detect similarities between two texts. I hope the MoS lawyers have a team actively engaged on this task.
Don't forget her letter to her father who broke her 'heart into a million pieces' and 'I crumbled inside'. Written in the same vein.
I thought this latest stunt (if the miscarriage never happened) would backfire but apparently not (not yet, anyway).
I think Turnitin can detect similarities between two texts. I hope the MoS lawyers have a team actively engaged on this task.
I do rather enjoy the Turgid Prose (although it wasn't written for my amusement).
you said 'I thought this latest stunt (if the miscarriage never happened) would backfire but apparently not (not yet, anyway).'
MM no doubt is already seeing this as a PR victory despite all the red arrows on the DM positive comments, it will be just like her claim that her interview for the South African documentary was received well (really?... where?..) and her speaking out allowed all the silent downtrodden woman to stand up and not be afraid to use their voice... or some such guff
I think Clammy Harry is not entirely on board with all her shenanigans, he's probably the last to know of the stunts she plans but gets dragged along like a drip/puppy/hostage victim.
I first started to dislike or side-eye MM when I saw the engagement interview... he didn't seem to be in love, no gushing just very deadpan when speaking, MM was double clutching onto his hand which looked so needy and controlling. Plus all that bollocks about 'modernising' the Monarchy' - what on earth does that mean?... bring the 'common' touch or be like celebs? Get rid of the pomp with medals as it's too old fashioned? Harry seems desperate to get his back. Well we now know that she meant monetise the monarchy whilst sucking on the taxpayers teat whilst living in LA.
My next side-eye was her sticking her tongue out at the Sandringham walk after going to church, when the Queen broke with protocol to ensure she was invited - just really juvenile behaviour for someone in their late 30's. We all know that she was surrounded by advisors so there is no way she didn't know that is just bad manners. It was picked up in the media but she decided that she liked ruffling feathers & the attention she got from it she decided to do it again on Charles Birthday a few days after the wedding.
She's gone above and beyond to deliberately break protocol right from the start and throughout her brief time in the RF so she could then use the race card & the victim card in order to decamp to LA whilst pretending they were really going to stay in Canada.
I wearily blinked open my eyes my eyes which were glazed from the holiday excesses. I coughed experimentally to check whether I had contracted the Plandemic from China and wondered whether I would be magically wafted to an unnamed hospital where I would expire on a ventilator after staring at white walls although, come to think of it, death would be preferable. I would see every fingerprint on that white wall and would demand that hospital maintenance clean it immediately, even before the blood in the ER and surgical wards, because it offended me but first they must sign a NDA.
I imagined my poor husband, so bereft by my death, so unable to cope with my absence that he would have to subsist entirely on hot wings from Hooters brought to him on platters by over-endowed yet scantily clad waitresses. He would tip them well so they could afford clothing, the poor dears. Who would walk through our house built by love and pick up the trail of socks that he leaves so that I can find him and transport them at arms length to the laundry? Breonna Taylor would have, but the POLICE KILLED HER after her man shot one of them.
I clutched my husband close, humming a cheerful lullaby to soothe him, noting his back was clammy with my tears. He awakened, said "WHAT THE HELL is WRONG with you? It's 2 a.m. and 80 degrees in here and I have 6" of mattress. Move OVER."
... Megs Sugars are furious saying no one offered Megs support and the Palace only found out about the miscarriage just before Megs made it public knowledge...
I would have been shocked if they said anything at the time of alleged happening if they were told about it way back when.
Not just the never complain, never explain but rather
it was not their (BRF/P) place to release this to the public before JH&MM announced it
and the Palace announced they would stop reporting on them as of March 31st.
Do you think it is possible that the year of review ends on March 31st of 2021?
I think she picked July because it was a big month for the Royals with Bea's wedding that Meg was completely not a part of in any way shape or form. Bea scooped her by having a 'surprise' wedding and Mugsy couldn't get in front of it with her own PR attention-grab. I view this story as her pathetic attempt to spoil Bea's day after the fact. She wants everyone to picture her crumpled on the floor in a puddle of her own blood whilst the happy Secret Garden wedding was happening.
Again, Meghan's problem is that we're in the "Pics or it didn't happen" era. While it's obviously possible for something to happen without any photographic documentation, he who provides "pics" wins. Earlier, I said that she'd never be able to beat Chrissy Teigen's stark photo shoot with her badly-written melodramatic scene. (That Teigen got there first and did it with black and white photos must have made Meghan doubly furious. I'll bet she thinks she owns the idea of black and white photography.) Now let me add that she'll never be able to beat Edo and Princess Beatrice's wedding photos. "Secret Garden" is a perfect description of the latter's aesthetic: sweet, romantic, vintage, nostalgic.
Whereas the op-ed visuals are a throwback to the Duck, Rabbit video, sloppy pony tail and all. We learn that the house may also be in disorder, thanks to "rogue crayons," lost socks, and a schedule in which dogs get fed before a baby is checked. Who cares to see something like that? Much less have it burned into their inner eye?
It's only a win inasmuch as it gets her some pity and leeway. And because, as @Tatty has pointed out, it's pretty crass to ask a woman who has claimed to have had a miscarriage to prove it. Barring a confession or a whistleblower, Meghan's firstborn and her miscarriage will go down in history books as facts.
I wonder if it was her very own lies, rather than anything else featured on the news, which inspired her to write in her op-ed: "On top of all of this, it seems we no longer agree on what is true. We aren’t just fighting over our opinions of facts; we are polarized over whether the fact is, in fact, a fact."
Even on Nutty's blog, we are polarized over everything Meghan presents as "facts."
Either it happened in July and it was a non event, or it didn’t happen and she made it up for sympathy (it has been in her deck of cards). I think it’s a mix of the both, it happened but it was such an early pregnancy (I doubt she knew she was pregnant) that her and Harry got somewhat dramatic about another ‘Royal’ and moved on quite quickly due to how busy they were zooming. Only when Chrissy over shared her world (as usual) Meghan realized she could get positive attention (gross) to reverse her downward reputation trajectory. Meghan never has an original thought or idea, so there’s no chance she strategized this event and article without the precursor of Chrissy.
Meghan must be glued to the DM.
That was so brilliant, so devilish, so funny I am dying laughing and nodding and throwing roses for you to catch. Absolute genius. I am going to send it to a few friends, who will probably demand that the mysterious great SwampWoman continue writing the saga! And the “previously” portion as well. May I preorder? Throw the cleaning implements and grandchildren to Mr Swamp and sit thee down and write!
Oh my god. I cannot salute you enough. Thank you for writing this gem and sharing with us. You made my weekend.
It is amazing the depth Meghan goes on such mundane topics! LOL
Your thought that she was strongly inspired by (mimicking) Chrissy Tiegen’s sharing of a genuine loss is probably correct. She is probably fuming that Tiegen used M’s signature black and white imagery, and is shrieking at some poor SS staffer to photoshop a similar b/w photo essay, to release the day before Christmas of course.
Based on her essay descriptions, for her to show us the white hospital environment she dreamt up, we will likely be seeing her face and wig replacing the head of Robert Redford in the 1939 maternity ward hospital scene from The Natural. With Harry’s face stuck onto the body of Pop Fisher (Wilfred Brimley).
Can we stop all the woe-is-me over our wombs? We’re women, not victims
'Everywhere I look, it is the same: women falling to the ground, clutching their bodies in misery. Periods aren’t minor monthly annoyances — they’re torrential, life-altering horrors. Pregnancies aren’t simply a bit of a ballache — they’re prisons of shrieking woe. As for the menopause, well, let’s just say I think we left Kansas the minute Nottingham police installed crying rooms at police headquarters, where menopausal women could “cry or talk with a colleague” before returning “to the workspace”. Don’t normal women just go to the local café?
You look at these fainting Victorian consumptive dolls and think: are crying rooms really what feminists died for? In public life, in private conversation, at work, at home, online and off, I’ve noticed a whole generation of'
The article is by Camilla Long. Has anyone access to it?
A British body language expert rings in with his analysis of Megalo’s interview with the One Powerful World summit.
His verdict: deception throughout, or what Meg would referred to as inauthenticity. She might have planned to have a completely different fake sunny demeanor, But the interviewer threw a wrench in her façade with the comment about Meg being “not the only powerful woman here.” Meg totally misread the interviewer's intent. She had been completely gooey toward Meg and the comment was meant to convey that there was this sorority of powerful women all coalescing around these issues, so Meg had support. That is not how it was received, and Meg was in capable of Recovering her composure. She was pissed and raging inside For the rest of the segment. She speaking about empowerment and authenticity, of course framed in terms of herself, but normally the zoom chats Are accompanied by excessive and manic :-). That was an offhand comment meant to be supportive, but Meg felt completely exposed and was punishing the interviewer with flat and angry responses. I imagine that this demeanor is what Harry gets mostly at home. She is calm outwardly because she knows she’s being filmed, but I imagine as soon as it was over some breakable items got pitched around the living room.
Watch this video, and ask yourself what do you think the percentage is that this woman it’s being completely honest about a certain experience in July. I can’t wait to see what she comes up with to derail Christmas activities across the Pond.
I did think Meg looked the best here that she ever has looked actually, recycling the blue striped shirt look she had at Wimbledon 2018, whether or not it’s the same shirt. But any attempt at the Markle sparkle is decidedly missing.
As an aside, someone once posted a link to a website that traces people’s ancestry— we used it for Diana, and I believe it in an English site. Does anyone remember what I’m talking about and what the link is? Thank you.
YouTube has it — look for “12 years old Meghan Markle on Nick News in the 90s after protesting sexist commercial.”
(It just occurred to me....was she protesting “sexism” or the worrisome idea that someday she might be expected to do her own housework without servants or doting male parents around?)
Or inauthentically authentic?
Is there any discernible difference between these two possibilities?
---------------------------
The mathematical probability (that I've read) is that every English person (roughly, someone who hasn't had an ancestor from abroad for in last 200 years) has Edward III in their family tree.
I can't remember if it's every Northern European, or every European, who can claim Charlemagne as well.
Most of us had ancestors who were illiterate and too poor to bother about more than where the next meal was coming from. We didn't have the luxury of being able to focus on who our ancestors might have been. Bothering about precise blood relationships and descent only become relevant when one needs to keep money, property and power within the family.
I’ve heard it said that if one gets on a crowded bus anywhere in the country, one will be related, at several removes, to at least one other person already aboard, even if you don’t know it!
If you count back, doubling your number of ancestors at each generation and assuming 3 or 4 generations, perhaps more, in each century, the number of your presumed ancestors exceeds the total population very quickly, although of course some would feature several time over. Using the long generation times from my family, I once worked out that the number of my `ancestors’ became greater than the total English population in about 1350AD, in theory at least.
If we weren’t related, there wouldn’t be enough ancestors to go round.
I have hopes that her writing will eventually cause enough people to engage in projectile vomiting that a subgenre named for her will be included in the Bulwer Lytton fiction contest.
Meanwhile, I thought that this miscellaneous dishonorable mention was very appropriate for Our Heroine: "She swept into the ballroom, expensively dressed, coiffed, and bejeweled, her opulent display most obviously done for the same reason that a baboon has a red butt, both saying, "Pay attention to me!" submitted by Jack Ciotti, The Villages, Florida