Let's try this again...
Recently there was (yet another) post somewhere out in the world about how they will soon divorce. And my first thought was: Haven't I heard this before? which moved quickly to: how many times have I heard this (through the years)? There were a number of questions raised which ... I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. One of the points which has been raised is that KC would somehow be shelling out beaucoup money to get her to go "away". That he has all this money stashed away and can pull it out at a moment's notice. But does he? He inherited a lot of "stuff" from his mother but ... isn't it a lot of tangible stuff like properties? and with that staff to maintain it and insurance. Inside said properties is art, antique furniture and other "old stuff" which may be valuable" but ... that kind of thing is subject to the whims and bank accounts of the rarified people who may be interested in it (which is not most of us in terms of bei
Comments
seems harkles are a bit quiet today. Guess Haz is putting in a full day of work while the mrs concocts and plots for April.
I am curious if H$M plan to have photos taken outside the hospital this go round or just pap shots from a distance.
Feel free to check out my comment on the previous blog post. It's second to last. I am keeping all criticisms from Nutties in mind and seeing where to improve.
: ) There had been a long string of motherly, if not dowdy, first ladies, and that's basically what Jackie was known for.
Jackie and her sister were brought up to marry well and were known as clothes horses. Um . . I can't think of any other similarities?
Trying to figure out if I am curious enough to go search out Yahoo News or not.
I hope everyone who contributes, stays, and leaves their conspiracy theories at home.
I do wish someone would fatten her up a little. She just looks unnatural, like Chinese foot-binding, but it does show considerable self-discipline.
Considering his mother's and aunt's bulimia, and his uncle's first wife's anorexia, and his parents' spectacularly failed marriage, it would be surprising if W (& H) didn't marry someone with "issues."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-9410055/TALK-TOWN-Meghan-Markle-left-furious-pal-hated-emojis.html
I do wish someone would fatten her up a little. She just looks unnatural, like Chinese foot-binding, but it does show considerable self-discipline.
Considering his mother's and aunt's bulimia, and his uncle's first wife's anorexia, and his parents' spectacularly failed marriage, it would be surprising if W (& H) didn't marry someone with "issues."
Catherine is 5'9" and at the time of her marriage, her weight was listed at 125 pounds.
I've never seen a waist that tiny that wasn't wearing a Civil War era corset. The Middleton women are all petite-boned and I know Catherine works very hard to maintain that figure. She was bullied at school for being so tall and thin, so she does come by her frame through genetics, which I imagine is supplemented by a great deal of hard work and self-discipline, as you say. It has been suggested that pre-children, she was known to work out 6 hours a day. 3 babies on, her figure is still more or less unchanged.
As other commentators have observed, Catherine is extremely sporty and athletic and has visible muscles. Someone with anorexia would not look as fit. Though Diana is proof that it's possible to be both athletically built and bulimic and not always show the effects.
I believe Catherine is a naturally slender person but what else she has to do to maintain that figure only she and her husband probably know. Let's hope that it's just rigorously clean eating, exercise and a high metabolism. I'm 4 inches shorter than Catherine and 125 pounds is the very lowest end that considered healthy for my height. Not that I'm in any danger of ever reaching that. I think I last weighed 125 pounds in the seventh grade.
Cancel/woke seems to be largely a generational thing, not a political thing.
I can't even respond to some of these right-wing talking points. Not can't -- I don't.
I think from your last post on the last blog post that you may finally be seeing the light. This Is a right-leaning blog, and it's getting worse. I wish you'd start your own blog that's fair and balanced.
@charade,
I appreciate your conundrum. You don't own the blog, but you run it for Nutty. It's her views that start the discussion, and then you're left with picking up the pieces. How about starting a blog of your own that has an owner who actually cares about her blog and will see that all are treated fairly? Nutty is never here to fight her own battles. She just got you to do it- for free! It doesn't matter if Nutty is paid or not or if this is her hobby. Hobbies take work, but I see none from her, and all from you. You're being taken advantage of, and you don't recognize that.
When a poster says that Biden was trained by the KKK, I think most people will say that is going way too far. It's an outright lie, but it is allowed to stand. Show me the receipts.
Charade, you have a responsibility to the blog and its posters here, but we have bullies who write massive posts with nothing but right-wing gibberish here, and then you let a comment like that stand? That's unconscionable.
If you have too many things going on in your life, maybe it's time to stand down. I mean that kindly, because the way it's going now is not working.
People began complaining about this on the first page of the last blog post, asking for Harkle gossip, not a political blog. The excuse that MM MAY AT SOME TIME TRY to go into politics is just that-an excuse. Every one of those posts were pure conjecture.
Nutty started a landslide here with her right wing post about Biden, so what did she expect? If her blog is for people of all political persuasions, then her posts should reflect that. She hasn't learned anything from her COVID blog debacle, which she ran into the ground by pure neglect, and it was taken over by extremists.
I'm sorry that you're stuck in the middle of this. It's Nutty's blog, but you're doing all of the work. If it was charade's blog, I think things might be dramatically different here, if you're strong enough to give more than a polite, "please be nice" comment. That's does nothing against the few here who just blather on and on and on, and inserting their political views in the midst of three pages of drivel.
Yes, the word is "drivel," not "dribble," Children dribble from their mouths when eating. "Drivel" means it's nonsense. These are the words that just drive me crazy here, as they are written by the people who think that their long passages of drivel must mean that they will appear to be intelligent.It does not.
The comment above from Elsbeth 1847 put me in mind of this for marriage to PH will have reduced MM's friends to three plus Harry. Who will those three be? A person with hundreds of friends has no friends at all and celebrity friends are as Aristotle observed in the Ethics, friends of utility. It is friends of pleasure that we are concerned with here so who would they be? Curious that with the infamous letter there are said to be five friends.
My mother was the same height and weighed 115 when she married at 28, but she'd gotten pretty ill working for The Company in divided Vienna. They sent her home, and my parents had a 3 week engagement before my father went back to sea.
I was 6'2" and 125 when I graduated from HS, so I know scrawny. If your collarbones can hold water, you're too thin.
And maybe Nutmeg herself directing them specifically to draw comparisons that associate her with the White House? (Even though we can safely assume it's not as First Lady that she wants to occupy the place)
If I didn't know she had PR, I'd be even more nervous about her being in the papers with all these ridiculous mentions of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis , but please God it has to be just more Sunshine Sachs blather?
Doesn't it?!
Can a girl get some reassurance here?
If you google `Romania Sports.Gazette' you'll get a good clutch of leads if you're interested.
This one's worth reading for example:
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/making-of-collective-how-a-documentary-captured-a-news-team-uncovering-a-major-government-scandal
The film itself should be on BBC4 catch-up for a few weeks.
That's all for now folks.
Also the H/M blogger is under work pressure from her blogs and books. Yes she is writing a book. She mentioned this six months ago. Also she now also has her Harry Markle blog duplicated on substack where she has to police the comments. More time consuming.
https://harrymarkle.substack.com/ <<<----- HARRY/MARKLE blog where you can comment
She seems as intent on pushing this new direction as she did her royal agenda as per this blind item largely thought to be about her when she set her sights on joining the BRF.
https://blindgossip.com/everyone-loves-classy/
Whether she succeeds is anyone's guess.
At first i filed it in the pile of her walter mitty PR eg she was auditioned for Bond, the Queen was writing her a thank you note for a good Australia (?) Tour, or wasit throwing her a birthday tea at Balmoral. Then there was Kate throwing her a babyshower plus a spevial invite to Doria to spend christmas at Sandrigham.
However, this politics push is gaining traction rather than disappearing as quickly as it appeared so will she succeed?
I don't think she will simply because she has the attention span of a fruit fly and she doesn't like working hard or being challanged.
So this is more wasted PR.
I assume the poster was referring to Sen. Robert Byrd of WV, who was a known Klan leader before he became the parliamentarian of the Senate and the great benefactor of his state.
There were still plenty of old ex?-segregationalists in the Senate when Biden joined. As Kamala pointed out, Biden said he was anti-busing in the early 70's--otherwise, he couldn't have been elected in Delaware. My uncle was school board chairman in a Wilmington suburb then, and that was a very hot button issue.
@Opus re Robin Dunbar-
His `Anatomy of-' books are excellent, for all that they were published 30-ish years ago. I agree completely about claiming that one has umpteen friends is often silly, if not delusional.
I understand where you're coming from. I tried to ignore the right wing rhetoric here, but over time, it's become worse and worse. Now, it's blatant, and I don't want to be involved in an extreme right position. So I'm leaving after I defend my original post. The replies only further my reason for leaving. Biden taught by the KKK? Hitler Youth? Does anybody but an extreme right wing person put this on a blog about The Harkles or anywhere else? That's as far right as you can get.
***********************************************
It's allowed to stand, so I guess the best thing is for Nutty to come out and designate this as the right-wing blog that it's become. I think that's the only answer. Then, these people can have their own right wing blog and push any agenda that they want.
The others can certainly find other blogs to read about The Harkles without political content that's skewed extremely right, only because Nutty has allowed it to be. Nutty is the owner. No matter how she passes the buck to charade, Nutty is responsible for content.
It seems The Independent ran a write up by a black aristocrat who confirmed Meghan's allegations of racism.
Now it seems the author faked it all.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/meghan-markle-black-british-harry-oprah-b1816497.html
“Walter Mitty PR” wins the Latte of the Day! Too perfect.
"I missed this entirely. Anyone else?
It seems The Independent ran a write up by a black aristocrat who confirmed Meghan's allegations of racism.
Now it seems the author faked it all.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/meghan-markle-black-british-harry-oprah-b1816497.html"
That's hilarious.
I wish i'd read the original story.
Funny that the title didn't give away the story because existing, Marquess titles are very rare within the British peerage compared to other titles. Most are extant.
Plus aristocracy flex their titles in the Times and the Telegraph if they they use them in print.
Methinks it's a mischief maker at work. Regardless of skin-colour, anybody claiming to hold that title would have been seen off by anyone who does feature on those lists.
A life peer would be a baron.
Perhaps the tone on the Harry Markle blog also seems changed because the site has gone on to act on its grievances with its petition. And then there's the book. To me it feels like it's not only commenting on the couple any more. The site sees the aftermath of Harry and Meghan in a serious context of allegiance to and honour of country and crown.
It's interesting to consume the variety of reactions to Harry and Meghan through blogs, tumblr, twitter and Youtube accounts. There's Skippy where they still discuss if it's the real double agent Harry or a Farry (fake Harry) in pictures and videos. Then there's the whole section of psychics and their readings. Oh boy some of the readings can be so bizarre that its comedic. Some feel very calming when it all gets too much. Fame Vixen was popular when she decoded the kinds of cosmetic procedures Meghan's probably done. Plenty of Brit commentators too from the light and easy According2Taz to the warrior Yankee Wally.
I am ready for some H&M schadenfreude.
@Wild Boar Battle Maid
I read some unverified chatter that the writer is actually a New York student.
Absolute face palm moment, is it not!
https://blindgossip.com/meghan-markle-furious-over-friends-behavior/
Emails
@Acquitaine, she has a definite pattern, doesn't she? Or do I mean M.O.? I'm not so sure I agree with your assessment of her attention span; she certainly tends toward the scattered "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" way of operating, but she also seems to be single minded to the point of psychosis in her focus on what she wants.
My mother had dementia, so I'm very familiar with it. Yes, I do believe that Biden may be in the beginning stages of dementia. Biden was the best choice out of the two candidates. My vote for Biden was a vote against Trump, as I'm a centrist and an Independent. There was no other choice to get that madman out of office. Thank God we succeeded. These ARE extremists.
I have plenty of friends who are Republican, and we have great conversations about politics, but what we read here goes over the bounds of great political conversation to outright lies about Biden and Harris. These comments are completely made up, and as right wing as you can get.
I'm not going to waste my time trying to get these right wingers on here to change their minds about anything. They've proven to me time and again that they are not worth it. I'm just glad that I don't have to deal with them in real life, and I'm not going to say what I really think of them.
It does bother me greatly that Nutty allows this, so if you're going to start a blog about The Harkles that is fair and unbiased, and distances itself from politics, sign me up! We really need a place like that.
Best wishes, and if you start a blog, I'll be there! :)
Now, it's a beautiful, sunny day, so I'm going to take a long walk on the beach with my BF and head down to our favorite trattoria for dinner, while they attend to their sheep or pigs or God knows what. Sounds like hell on earth to me. Ew.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9414851/Prince-Harry-trying-bright-Meghan-Markle-career-Silicon-Valley.html
https://www.vice.com/en/article/rknaa6/meet-the-two-scottish-rappers-who-conned-the-world
He said he is a clout-chasing aggressive idiot that is very bad at his job as an ‘agent’. He didn’t like communicating with him.
Meghan finds all these people, doesn’t she?
Fact check: Robert Byrd, eulogized by Joe Biden at funeral, was not KKK Grand Wizard
By Reuters Staff
7 MIN READ
"Social media users have been sharing content online that claims Democratic Presidential nominee Joe Biden eulogized Robert Byrd, asserting he was the grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK). This claim is partly false. Though various prominent politicians eulogized Byrd at his funeral, the senator was never the grand wizard of the KKK and he has acknowledged and apologized for his membership during his youth.
One post reads: “When he died in 2010, former-KKK Grand Wizard Robert Byrd was eulogized by Joe Biden. Go ahead Facebook fact-checkers. Verify this. I DARE YOU!”
Reuters Fact Check has previously debunked claims relating Byrd and his relation to the KKK, which can be seen here and here .
Robert Byrd served as U.S. Representative for the state of West Virginia from 1953 to 1959, and as a U.S. Senator from 1959, until his death in 2010.
Biden did deliver a eulogy for Byrd on July 2, 2010. A video of the speech can be found here and a transcript can be found here here .
Other prominent political leaders such as President Barack Obama and President Bill Clinton also spoke at the funeral."
the above is what politicians do when a member of the Senate or House dies. Opposing parties go to their funerals and give eulogies. It's always been that way.
Maybe you should do a little more reading from various sources before any more falsehoods get printed here today.
Now back to my favorite subject - how was Harry's first day of work? did megs pack him his lunch?
He formed a local branch of the KKK when he was in his 20s, (I think) but I don't think he was in it longer than a few years. In all fairness, most poor young white men in his neck of the woods leaned that way.
He was very typical of his generation in his home region, even after he disavowed the Klan, in that he was very much opposed the The Civil Rights Act ( I believe he filibustered it) and made some unfortunate comments all through the 60s, but he was also one of the first, if not THE first Congressman with black aides and he also pushed for integrating the Capitol police.
While I never backed Sen. Byrd's politics, he DID back OBAMA for president, who also gave a eulogy at Byrd's funeral.
I know we're on moderation, so I hope this gets to you. Thanks for being the voice of reason here concerning Sen. Byrd. If more people like you actually read and understood the news, we wouldn't have any problems here.
Sen. Byrd was a member of the KKK in the 1940s for a very short time!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8u_2lp2zNtA
Things I found interestingly odd. It is just text on a background without any sort of reference as to where it was filmed or why it was filmed there. There is a finger around the 5:40 mark but that's it. We never see the person filming it. Whom ever this is, they have been on youtube for about 2 years now.
Re:Blind Gossip/ ghosted friend who sent the voice note complaint about Meghan’s emoji addiction-
All of that makes me think Meghan writes into Blind Gossip herself. Whenever news is running low on her random obscure blinds pop up about her that don’t cause her harm, but keep the ‘Meghan was a victim’ narrative flowing. It also leads me to believe she is refuting the fact a lot of known people aren’t backing up her claims. She wants to avoid Katherine McPhee and I wonder why.
For those reasons I’m going with Victoria Beckham.
DM has an article about health hacks the royals use (i.e. Kate wears anti-bacterial coated gloves).
Guess what Grip's is?
Wait for it......
MUSHROOM LATTES! And coincidence is .... its the brand she's been linked with!
Megaphoney
Megalomania, and her love of conflicts
Her sole purpose now, entering politics
Deluded, and dangerous, she’s aiming for senator
Left, or right, or in the middle
Should band together, to halt her new fiddle
We need to prevent her
and Oprah, her mentor
From being left, right, and centre
@MustySyphone
They didn’t mention Wills scarf
Guaranteed to ward off megxiles
Declassified Misinformation
The horizontal gold digger
Has set her sights bigger
A Prince of the realm, so passe
She still can’t quite figure
How her wokist de rigueur
Resulted in being seen as declasse
Update: 27 March 2021.
On 12 March we published an article under the headline: ‘I’m a black British member of the aristocracy. I love the royal family — but I know what Meghan said was true.’ Questions have been raised about the title the author claims to hold. An investigation is ongoing, and a further clarification will be issued in due course.
That seems to be as far as it goes at present.
----
Browsing the internet suggests to me that there's a lot of confusion about the terms `aristocracy', `nobility' and `elite', as in
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_British_people#Nobility
In the UK, the Nobility, aka the Aristocracy, know who their ancestors are going back centuries - each link has to be backed up by documentary proof. If you're not in any published Peerage eg Burke's or Debrett, you're not an aristocrat.
Digging into my own ancestors, I found that in the early 19thC someone claimed the dormant title of Lord of Athenry (the oldest Irish barony) and went to court over it. Even the Attorney General accepted the claim but the evidence wasn't strong enough for the House of Lords to accept it - so tough luck on the Appellant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baron_Athenry
`Elite' is a much more elastic term and doesn't equate to either of the other two.
Bye Fellatio
Whatever’s been hidden
By those that were bidden
Can still be revealed
Megs fate will be sealed
As her demands for transparency
Show the world all her lies, mega fallacy
Love Megaphoney!!
It's a Megxiteer call to arms!
🚩🏁🚩🏁🚩🏁🚩
I must just say though that I've admired Jackie Kennedy for over 50 years. Yes she was lazy and self-absorbed with her 4 day weekends in Virginia but she did restore - not redecorate - the White House. She established the committee that continues with such work today and the links to private donors that saved tax-payers a huge amount of money. She invited poets, writers, musicians etc. to the White House, so the Arts became part of national life instead of being forgotten. She also helped to save the historic Lafayette Square in Washington.
So Meghan can't begin to be another Jackie, whose attention to detail and standard of grooming was legendary. Moreover, was there ever a more private person? Think what she would have made of that Oprah interview! Meghan can't live up to her, and even if she did, it would be pointless because, ahem, "Jackie wasn't President my dear" as Lady C would say. Or anything in politics. Jackie had zero interest there. As JFK said about his wife, "She breathes all the political gases that flow around this, but she never seems to inhale them."
They really should keep files on what they have said over the years.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1416743/Prince-Harry-news-queen-mother-inheritance-Royal-Family-finances-funding-Meghan-Markle-US
Prince Harry's finance claim uncovered: Queen Mother inheritance he failed to mention
PRINCE Harry was given millions of pounds from the Queen Mother after she died despite recently claiming Princess Diana's inheritance was all the money he had after being cut off from royal funding.
WBBM, thank you for the YouTube video.
The Independent article has been taken down but I found two articles, on from the Spectator and one from foxhole news (? never heard of it). They're both similar:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-ndependent-s-peerage-fake-news
https://foxhole.news/2021/03/29/the-independent-to-admit-massive-error-in-publishing-royal-family-racism-rant-by-phoney-black-aristocrat/
This website has a link to an article by a journalist, Ned Donovan (incidentally, Tessa Dahl's son) and here is an excerpt:
Alexander is a bullshitter, and ‘The Marquess of Anaville’ doesn’t even exist.
I was the first journalist to contact Alexander and receive a reply. Yet the response was just a further demonstration of fantasy.
Embarking on a bizarre ramble, the non-aristocrat said: “The press was urged not to comment as the process for collateral inheritance is still going through the proper channels.
“If you decide to run a story I assume you’ve already spoken with the Lord Chancellor, right? The title stands… You’ve been in touch with the Crown Office? Committee on Privileges?”
I don't think he was helping Megsy with this sort of drivel.
Alexander then accused me of ‘not fact-checking’. Yet, of course, his claim to be a British aristocrat had already been fact-checked many times over.
Holy Moley Megaloney
The Queen moves quite slowly
With wisdom, tact, and surely
I’ve no reason to doubt
She’ll give megs a big clout
All a question of clime
She’ll pick the right time
Sayonara to megs, the unholy
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1416743/Prince-Harry-news-queen-mother-inheritance-Royal-Family-finances-funding-Meghan-Markle-US
Supposedly Beckham and PH settled it and VB didnt do it. (psycho MM probably was the culprit)
But even if the Beckhams and Harkles, `settled it`, if i were the Beckhams id drop the Harkles as good friends and just put up with them as acquaintances at social events.
I certainly wouldnt defend or comment on them publicly.
QUEEN MOTHER LEFT PRINCE HARRY MORE MONEY WILLIAM WILLIAM IN HER £14MILLION WILL TO PROTECT HIM
The Queen Mother who passed away 2002 gave a larger amount of money in her will to Prince Harry then Prince William.
As Prince William is second in line to the throne, Queen Elizabeth's late mother wanted to protect Harry's financial future.
When Prince Charles becomes King, Prince William will inherit the role as Prince of Wales and there for the Duchy of Cornwall and all the private estate that entails
Meanwhile, Prince Harry will get nothing.
The exact amount Harry inherited remains unknown, a 2002 BBC report says the "bulk" of her £14 million estate will go to the Duke of Sussex "since William will benefit financially by becoming king."
'The horizontal gold digger' and other poems 😂.
You're right that the Queen moves slowly. This brings to mind 'Though the mills of God grind slowly, yet they grind exceeding small'. Let's hope the end is nigh.
"https://foxhole.news/2021/03/29/the-independent-to-admit-massive-error-in-publishing-royal-family-racism-rant-by-phoney-black-aristocrat/
This website has a link to an article by a journalist, Ned Donovan (incidentally, Tessa Dahl's son) and here is an excerpt:
Alexander is a bullshitter, and ‘The Marquess of Anaville’ doesn’t even exist.
I was the first journalist to contact Alexander and receive a reply. Yet the response was just a further demonstration of fantasy.
Embarking on a bizarre ramble, the non-aristocrat said: “The press was urged not to comment as the process for collateral inheritance is still going through the proper channels.
“If you decide to run a story I assume you’ve already spoken with the Lord Chancellor, right? The title stands… You’ve been in touch with the Crown Office? Committee on Privileges?”"
That is the funniest conversation.
And the BS artist doesn't realise that his questions are actually giving him away.
Why would the Lord Chancellor be involved? They are the head of the ministry of Justice - The secretary of state for Justice.
What the hell is collateral inheritance in this situation? Google tells me it's medical term for genetic inheritance.
The Crown office is the body in Scotland responsible for the persecution of crimes - perhaps a clue about this person.
Committee on privileges refers to a select committee within the House of Lords that deals with House of Lords members' privileges.
I'm genuinely surprised that The Independent was so easily taken in.
Can't blame a hustler for trying it on.
Steerpike
The Independent’s peer review disaster
14 March 2021, 10:14am
"Oh dear. Ever since Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's bombshell Oprah interview aired, a debate has been underway in the press over allegations of racism in the monarchy. So Mr S read a comment piece on the progressive newspaper-turned-website the Independent with intrigue. With the eye catching title: 'I'm a black British member of the aristocracy – I know what Meghan said was true', Alexander J. Maier-Dlamini the 11th Marquess of Annaville, said that he had no doubt the Duke and Duchess were telling the truth given his own experiences in aristocratic circles.
The only problem? His title does not appear to actually exist.
Despite claiming to be the 'last of the Irish peerages' there is no record of 'Annaville' in the London Gazette, Burkes or the Roll of the Peerages. The only references to the title appear to be online and by or about the author – curious given that in theory there should, with ten previous holders, be a few hundred years worth of history.
And there's also the small matter that there are only 34 marquesses in the UK and Ireland, with the last person to be created in the peerage of Ireland being George Nathaniel Curzon in 1898. Annaville claims to be married to 'Prince Sungani Dlamini, hailing from the Kingdom of Eswatini'.
Of Harry and Meghan, he writes: 'As a member of that same aristocracy, I’m telling you that I unequivocally believe that they are telling the truth' and claims racism is 'prevalent' in such circles.'
He writes:
“'When a white peer either inherits or is brought in, never do you hear major questions. Whether it is recorded in Debrett’s or happens with little fanfare, white people entering the aristocracy are welcomed with open arms and no interrogation. That hasn’t been my experience. A “show me your papers” attitude has become part of my daily existence. Asking for a family history from me when I arrive at functions, for instance, is de rigueur.'
Hmm. It is a pity that the Independent didn't actually ask to see Annaville's papers in this case. His Twitter account appears to be ignoring questions about his heraldry except for the comment that: 'today required a *lot* of weed'.
The article has now been taken down, with links to it instead directing to the homepage. Mr S understands an internal probe has been launched and a correction is imminent. So much for peer reviews!"
Of course he gets that treatment. It's not because he's black, it's because he's an imposter.
Queen Mother left Prince Harry more money than William in her will due to royal rule
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/queen-mother-left-prince-harry-23796808
Part of Harry's victim backstory is the QM not treating him as well as William as she spent more time with William. This makes clear she was being a realist - William as a future king - but she still thought of Harry.
I don't know how accurate this is though, as QM's finances are deliberately shrouded in mystery, as are all Royal trusts. I remember her overdraft being estimated at £4M at the time of her death and a BRF insider was reported as saying "Multiply that by 10".
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9417643/Andrew-Morton-baffled-Meghan-Markles-mental-health-accusations.html
"Baffled" is the polite way to put this ... we all know what he means.
It is confusing though. While it says the Queen Mother left 14 million for W&H "to share" (no will would be written that way IMO) the article also says "A statement released at the time read: "Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother has bequeathed her entire estate (which mainly comprises the contents of her houses) to The Queen."
It's also been reported (in other places) the QM died in debt and QEII had to pay those debts off (probably to avoid having to sell off her art treasures-- I don't know about the UK, but in the US a daughter wouldn't be responsible for a deceased parent's debts. Assets would be used though regardless of the deceased intentions to leave those to particular people.) Further it's been reported the QM deliberately left more money to Harry than Will since Will would have the Duchies, first Cornwall then Lancaster.
Knowing that Harry would need to be provided for, I would think it unlikely that she would allow the funds to be accessed by some random woman that married him for his money.
I suppose that she could have been unaware of how bad he was at the time.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9417853/DAN-WOOTTON-ITV-tried-gag-Meghan-Markle-too.html
From The Great Gatsby. Sound familiar?
“They were careless people,” Nick Carraway, the narrator, concludes about Tom and Daisy Buchanan, characters whose excesses ultimately destroy the lives of those around them. “They smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”
I'm old enough to remember the kerfuffle in 1994 when it was reported that the QM had divested the bulk of her fortune into trusts for all her living great-grandchildren as well as Margaret's 2 kids. At the time it was reported that William and Harry received alittle more than the others with their share favouring Harry due to William's future ducal and Monarchical inheritances. The report said the trusts would be available to each beneficiary at *21yrs.
*Somewhere in the mists of time the age of the trusts changed to 25yrs and 40yrs.
Here is a 2002 Guardian article that references that inheritance from 1994.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/apr/03/queenmother.monarchy2#:~:text=In%201994%20the%20Queen%20Mother,hurdle%20was%20cleared%20last%20year.
QM did it to beat the 7yr law of tax avoidance on inheritance.
However, divesting her fortune was no reason for the QM to rein in her extravagant lifestyle. She continued to live as she always lived. Like a wealthy Edwardian aristocrat which is what she was. A habit she imprinted on her grandson Charles.
Her government annuity barely covered her expenses and The Queen was forced to pay off debts every year afterwards to meet her lifestyle decisions.
When she died, she had accumulated debts from her ongoing extravagant lifestyle, but she also bequeathed her estate to the monarch and by law monarch is exempted from inherirance tax so once again she avoided inheritance tax on her remaining estates, and the debts therein were the result of her lifestyle in the 7-8 yrs lived after divesting her fortune.
A similar thing happened with Margaret where she divested her fortune to her children to avoid that inheritance tax.
In Margaret's case it didn't work out so well because her children proceeded to sell off their inheritance while she was alive. She was said to have been particularly devastated that they sold off her house in Mustique as she'd hoped to still enjoy it for rest of her life.
And her remaining estate after death was subjected to inheritance tax which prompted another sale of her goods to meet the obligation.
Re. Harry Markle
Initially I enjoyed this blogger’s posts because she was one of the first that I recall in the blogosphere who recognized that something was not as it seemed with Harry’s new girlfriend, and she wasn’t afraid to say so. I also appreciated her perspective as someone with research skills who was a British citizen and could report on what was happening on the ground as it were. I appreciate Tax on YouTube for the same reason—I think of her as the British Everywoman on the ground.
Harkle drama has become a crusade for Harry Markle. I don’t think she eats sleeps or breeds anything else these days. I was rather crestfallen when I saw the petition on her website. She is within her rights to put one up, and those who wished you are within their rights to sign it, but what does she really hope to achieve with this? I know what she hopes to achieve, rather the question should be how does she really suppose the Queen will respond to her peevish online demands? I hate to say it, but she’s varying into crackpot territory now and losing perspective. I understand the anger, I really do. And now that Meg has returned to the country of her birth dragging her Handbag behind her, it’s Americans turn to get bent out of shape and frustrated over the breathtaking hypocrisy and waste of this talentless couple who suck up resources, try to ingratiate themselves into the halls of power with no redeeming qualities whatsoever, And demand taxpayer support for their Hedonistic, frivolous, useless selves.
The difference is that unlike Meg, Harry may still have people who live him and want him back, Despite himself. What people on both sides of the Atlantic are now howling for the Queen to do is nothing that has been done or had to be done in hundreds of years. The call is for him to be completely cut off from his family, his country, and everything he has ever known. It’s a figurative beheading that Harry Markle wants.
That would be the most effective strategy for sure, but it’s not clear at all that Harry he has the mental capacity to truly understand that kind of ultimate consequence for something which I believe he viewed as just a gap year or two in Hollywood. I really think at the outset of this he believed that he’d get a holiday in the sun for a year, rub elbows with Hollywood celebrities, and return to England as a big shot and rub that in William’s face. I don’t think when he was complaining about England’s crappy weather and wanting to make his own money that he meant for this to be a lifetime of exile, never again seeing any of his family for the rest of his life. This may be what happens, and do we think Megan gives a sh*t? Meanwhile, imagine being a grandmother whose highly troubled grandson has run away from home, A mentally challenged boy with documented drug problems and a prisoner in an abusive marriage. Another family in this situation could struggle privately with their anger, and try to do interventions privately, But Harry’s family does everything under public scrutiny. Is it any wonder that his grandmother perhaps Is hoping that the kid will come to his senses and fences can be mended without such extreme measures? I have a feeling That perhaps the full extent a Harry’s dumb ass behavior is being kept from the Queen. With Philip possibly in his last days, it’s not like she doesn’t have other things on her mind. Harry and his lying tart must feel like a lesser pressing issue under the circumstances.
I don’t think Harry Markle is going to get satisfaction through her online petition, but I understand her motivation to feel like she is doing something to express the discontent of the people. Something has to come to a head but I do not believe Aggrieved petitions on the Internet will accomplish anything. BP staff may be monitoring the activity and mention it, but In the end it’s super easy to ignore that stuff if you just leave the computer switched off. A Prime Minister Constantly in one’s ear urging action on the other hand has been known to get results, but I don’t think Boris is going to insert himself into this matter. He has his own problems with Brexit. ER will act in her time, or she will do nothing. All anyone can do is wait and see.
I did reply earlier, it's disappeared, bit like that odd sock you always end up ;)
I don't believe the QM left that amount to William and Harry, there are other grandchildren to consider.
I think she left a small sum to each grandchild to be invested in a trust fund. That seems to be how the royals do things.
Her money was tied up in property, jewelry, paintings etc. easy for any debts to be paid off without breaking the bank.
They really like to keep their wealth private so it's hard to know what's true or made up.
Headline: Prince Harry’s New Fake Mental Health Care Job Is a Farce
"Silicon Valley’s exploitative entrepreneurial set has come to rescue the recently detached royals from a life outside the upper crust, to the detriment of the rest of us."
More at the link
Seems like the US press is starting to get a little more aggressive?
I didn't think this person was female - pics show black male - with same-sex marriage. Author probably thinks `marquess' is female (just a variant spelling). Wife of a marquis/-ess is a `marchioness'
How ITV tried to gag me on Meghan too: Our brilliant new columnist, DAN WOOTTON - the man who broke Megxit – on why the woke threat to free speech is the biggest issue of our time
A couple of paragraphs:
Meghan was allowed to share her 'truth', as she branded it, to Oprah Winfrey without even the slightest hint of scrutiny. That's despite the fact she unleashed a dossier of ludicrous claims that defied long-dated royal protocols, historical fact and basic believability, according to many staff members I've spoken to who lived through her tumultuous two years as a member of the Royal Family.
...
But that's the way Harry, Meghan and their breed of intolerant woketopians operate: Be kind to everyone... unless they say something with which you disagree. At that point, they want you erased from the mainstream media and polite society.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9417853/DAN-WOOTTON-ITV-tried-gag-Meghan-Markle-too.html
Heard Harry took a wellness day today. A day of work is just too hard 😉
Maybe "Alexander J. Maier-Dlamini the 11th Marquess of Annaville" bought her title. As it has been mentioned before, you can just buy one off the internet. It must have come from somewhere. Funny it was debunked though.
Since he apparently couldn't perform any work in the military, it will *indeed* be interesting to see if he stays at his *job* for any length of time or gets the old heave ho soon (but I'm sure it will be wrapped up with a bow in a nice little package of "left for other opportunities").
I know I don't care to hear about the mental health struggles of a ne'er do well prince, and I would bet that I represent the vast majority. I damn sure wouldn't want to buy *any* mental health counseling that he is fronting when he looks depressed or high all of the time. That is not exactly my idea of mental health, okay, thanks, bye!
/If he read any of the emergency preparedness plans for California in the event of "the big one", he'd be on a plane back to England PDQ.
I do recall reporters saying that they are sat on loads of tea regarding the markles.
Think they are waiting until the Queen is no longer around before they release it all.
I would like it all to come out now, sod the waiting..
@WBBM...
Maybe "Alexander J. Maier-Dlamini the 11th Marquess of Annaville" bought her title. As it has been mentioned before, you can just buy one off the internet. It must have come from somewhere. Funny it was debunked though.
Hunh. I did not know that, being impressed by the people in the present, not who their ancestors are/were. And now I can't even be impressed by their putative ancestors since it is purchased. What silliness. It could lead to bigger and better opportunities, I suppose: "Now featuring The Bare Baroness of Kilkeel and her exotic dances that won a Prince of the Realm entertaining nightly at Bare Assets Gentlemen's Club!"
IF I were going to buy a title off the internet (which I'm not because I do like my privacy), it would have to come with royal singers extolling my virtues ahead of me (it may take me awhile to think of something appropriately virtuous) with people tossing (dried) rose petals for me to tread upon. Fresh rose petals may be too slippery and open liability lawsuits for slip and fall cases.
I'm sure Magatha Mistie could come up with something appropriately upbeat about how if I am displeased by a person, I have alligators to dispose of the evidence.
Hey, I just found out that referring to a person as "color-blind" is now considered racist. What idiot comes up with these things? I suppose "hard of hearing" is going to be racist as well. (Maybe it already is.)
Some organisations let you have title to a tiny piece of land and give you a certificate - like Highland Titles which seems to operate as a charity fundraiser for a nature reserve.
Then there's `Elite Titles' whose postal address takes one to a very ordinary-looking copyshop/printers in Newton Abbot, Devon. Nothing up-market about it - probably an accommodation address. They are keen to point out that these are only `fun' titles and, while they may improve the way one is treated, they are not to be taken as `real'.
Some of these `titles' are like those fake birth certificates we came across a while back, about the same level as some purchased degrees. One firm, `Manorial Titles' was run by a serial fraudster called Fothergill aka `Baron' Fothergill.
NB:
https://freiherrvonquast.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/advice-on-buying-a-manorial-title-c2a6-httpwww-msgb-co-uk.pdf
- is a good source of sensible information to help one not to be a fool who is easily parted from their money.
The real aristocracy can be said to `all know each other' or at least know another member who will know (after all, they've been marrying each other for centuries) and are difficult to fool, unless one has taken great trouble to learn their habits (ie the way they speak, eat, dress and hold their cutlery - which they call `silver')! Their antennae are fine-tuned to pick up fakes.
New Lady C video.
Lady C REVEALS the Royal Meghan & Harry wouldn't name + why Prince Albert intervened
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDOSTQ9mhPI
Quite liked these bits from the article,tho it's all really good.
Harry and Meghan like to suggest they support new voices in the media and public life, but in fact they're typical of the establishment and the elite: Using connections that come with Harry's royal blood and Meghan's telly fame, including ITV big wigs via their news presenter BFF Tom Bradby, to scare critics into silence."
"I'm the opposite. I want people with whom I disagree to be given platforms to express their views, however ridiculous.
My belief is that the more people hear from the likes of Harry and Meghan, and allies including Gayle King and Owen Jones, the more honest and hardworking folk realise they're talking privileged nonsense."
And nice to see him go after the Twerp too
"And the couple's hagiographer Omid Scobie – who is drip-fed press releases that he passes off as news – even had the cheek to do down one of our great biographers Tom Bower, whose books on everyone from Boris Johnson to Simon Cowell are essential historically, because of the colour of his skin.
Responding to news of Bower's new book on the Sussexes, Scobie tweeted: 'Oh good, another angry white guy writing about Meghan Markle.'"
It's good to see the "drip drip" of refutations on the Sussex lies. Every day their lies are exposed. The Wootton article on cancel culture was excellent.
I liked these bits especially:
"Harry and Meghan like to suggest they support new voices in the media and public life, but in fact they're typical of the establishment and the elite: Using connections that come with Harry's royal blood and Meghan's telly fame, including ITV big wigs via their news presenter BFF Tom Bradby, to scare critics into silence.
I'm the opposite. I want people with whom I disagree to be given platforms to express their views, however ridiculous.
My belief is that the more people hear from the likes of Harry and Meghan, and allies including Gayle King and Owen Jones, the more honest and hardworking folk realise they're talking privileged nonsense."
And on the Twerp:
"And the couple's hagiographer Omid Scobie – who is drip-fed press releases that he passes off as news – even had the cheek to do down one of our great biographers Tom Bower, whose books on everyone from Boris Johnson to Simon Cowell are essential historically, because of the colour of his skin.
Responding to news of Bower's new book on the Sussexes, Scobie tweeted: 'Oh good, another angry white guy writing about Meghan Markle.'"
'It’s a figurative beheading that Harry Markle wants.' Absolutely, and the blogger is baying for it.
Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown - to have to swing from being the queen fielding an attack from within to a grandmother concerned for her vulnerable grandson, all under public scrutiny, is a burden of her position she takes on with the classic stiff upper lip. A keep-calm-and-carry-on kind of way. For all their greed for top positions and felicitations, Harry and Meghan would have melted under such pressure a long time ago.
https://youtu.be/uDOSTQ9mhPI
Same here, it did occur to me that the author might think 'marquess' was the feminine of marquis?? If so, this shows a staggering lack of knowledge of English and of the aristocracy...
I would also like to agree with Lizzie that it is hard to imagine the QM writing in her will that her two grandsons should themselves decide to share her fortune as they see fit. With a will you either give everything you own to one person or two or more in identified shares. With trinkets you sometimes get the 'share amongst yourselves' but that is only sensible with trivial things and even then the trouble is that no one can agree as to what is trivial when family heirlooms of sentimental value are in question. Such vagueness leads to Family Squabbles and is best avoided. Imprecision is the toast of the Chancery bar.
Perhaps Meghan overstepped in trying to get them to get deals for her and meet with big-wigs. Perhaps the truth of their lies came out over dinner, ‘so how’s netflix’? It could be as simple as Kat noticing Meghan trying to one up her pregnancy with the speculative pap stroll that evening (rude) and decided they were forever going to get used. Perhaps it was that they blurted out how much Charles gave them for years and last year, when they here led to believe they were struggling and needing daddy’s and mommy’s guiding hands, friends, and help all along. Archie is a great guess, too. They’ve never answered a single child question with any normalcy or sense.
Whatever happened she and David were smart with this and I’m dying to know! Absolutely zero support with the miscarriage story and thereafter. No gushing tribute after the Oprah interview. What. Happened.
A Tweet from the 11th Marquis: Alexander J. Maier-Dlamini 3 days ago:
Alexander J. Maier-Dlamini
@MaierDlamini
"funny how quiet critics get when they realize they were wrong
all i ask is that you search your souls for your true intentions
oh and you can totally fuck off now"
god save the queen"
Flag of United Kingdom
GIF (of HM)
The Tweeter claims a connection with Northern Ireland, follows a strongly Unionist Twitter a/c, uses the Union Flag, has a nice gif of HM and adds `God Save the Queen'
So was this a `gotcha' aimed at the Independent, to show that they desperately wanted it to be true? Certainly, the Unionist flavour suggests someone who is not a sugar! Someone who'd be known as `Scotch Irish' on the west side side of the pond ie fiercely loyal to the Crown.
If this is so, well done, Sir! Had you posted on 1st April, it might have been too obvious!
PS There's an Annaville in Corpus Christi TX but the name is used for several new housing estates in Co. Meath (the R of Ireland) - geography suggests just one builder naming them in honour of a beloved family member.
Yes, feel free to use it!
New Lady C video.
Lady C REVEALS the Royal Meghan & Harry wouldn't name + why Prince Albert intervened
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDOSTQ9mhPI
I rarely have the patience for her videos. But I did watch this at 1.5 speed or more and with captions on. Tea spilled indeed!
@Opus,
Goodness me, it had just occurred to me after your last comment that I didn't recall hearing the news when Carrie Symonds had the BojoBaby. He's coming up on his first birthday, that's how much Corona has messed with my sense of time.
I am relieved to see that rumors that were flying fast and furious of a split (planted by the PM's political enemies, it is said . . Meghan Markle tactics if ever there were) and the couple hopes to marry this summer. Who knows, young Master Wilfrid Lawrie Johnson, Esq. (future Old Etonian) will be walking by then and be in the ceremony, though probably best not to give him the ring lest he swallow it.
Bonking Boris's colorful love life and many children by an indeterminate number of partners (the PM himself refuses to officially number his offspring, possibly because he himself doesn't know how many he's got) is impossible to keep up with. Power must be an industrial-strength aphrodisiac, because BoJo has a spectacularly unimpressive personage. He looks like a haystack perched atop an unmade bed. Must be his personality! He looks like he'd be genial company down at the pub, back when people were allowed to relax in pubs for hours at a time. The sex appeal eludes me, but that chicken hair seems to be an irrepressible turn-on for a mystifyingly large cohort of women. It's almost like Bojo is selling himself like he's a blonder version of Hugh Grant and the birds are eating that up!
I don't think the PM looks very well, to be honest. Aside from the normal dishevelment, he looks very haggard. No more boyish looks. The lingering effects of Covid plus the Brexit stress and new fatherhood (again) are taking a visible toll. Boris is the same age as me; when I heard last spring that he'd been rushed to hospital in an ambulance, I was very concerned, and for Charles, too. If those two can pull through and do the kinds of heavy engagements they do, I suppose I can buck up and stop painting worst-case scenarios about what might happen when I get my second vaccine dose on Thursday.
Carrie-on-NutNut.
The future Mrs. BoJo is channelling Beatrice a bit in the Hello! photograph above.
Whatever happened she and David were smart with this and I’m dying to know! Absolutely zero support with the miscarriage story and thereafter. No gushing tribute after the Oprah interview. What. Happened.
Re. the Mysterious Radio Silence of Harry's American Father and Meg's former Immaculate Heart alumna
Though we were told ad nauseum that Grip and Drip met the Fosters for dins-dins at some very swanky non-vegan steakhouse, I actually don't believe a word of it. All we saw was Meg merching an outfit on a dark street that literally could've been anywhere. I almost peed myself laughing when the Fosters' 'day out in Beverly Hills' was immediately copied by Meg & Harry doing their own version . . with Smeg looking like she was dressed for the Iditarod in, what was that, October? The day it was a balmy 80 degrees in Los Angeles?
My money is on the Fosters having had enough being celebrity name-drop fodder for Meg while not being important enough to introduce to Archie, the Incredibly Advanced Invisible Boy.
David is a patriarch of many, is he not? And particularly after Katherine gave birth to her own baby, the ridiculousness of Meg's continuing fiction that she's hands-on mother of the year to an active toddler who is invisible, silent and exists on air just got way old. How many times did Dave and Kat drop hints that they'd love to see 'Archie'? How many outright asks were there, countered by what sort of ridiculous excuses? "Oh, Arch isn't here right now . . he's at a Woke Up Baby! weeklong camp with his reiki practitioner and his life coach. We'll be sure to tell him you asked after him."
Methinks David has removed himself and his wife from the orbit of Cray-Cray. The couple had to fend off future fake stories about fake vegan birthday parties and playdates that never happened.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1417020/meghan-markle-baby-news-Duchess-of-Sussex-home-birth-girl-Prince-Harry-latest-Royal-Family
MEGHAN Markle is planning a home birth for her and Prince Harry's second child, according to reports.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are expecting a daughter in the summer. And Meghan is said to be planning a home birth at their £11 million mansion in Montecito.
https://twitter.com/hrrysgreysuit/status/1376694000652984324?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1376694000652984324%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpublish.twitter.com%2F%3Fquery%3Dhttps3A2F2Ftwitter.com2Fhrrysgreysuit2Fstatus2F1376694000652984324widget%3DTweet
I saw J. Bellini's comment a few pages back about peeps not answering comments, I just wanted to tell her I really enjoy her comments, but don't answer many comments, mostly because by the time I try to read through the rest so as not to repeat what someone else said, I forget where I saw what I wanted to reply to. I'm a mess with that, apologies to J. Belinis and others who have replied to me in the past, I'm not ignoring anyone, truly. I'm really terrible with this unthreaded format, it's me who is at fault here, maybe I'll master it someday. Again, apologies.
Just actually what is the next direction for them?
That question is right up there with Pilate's query to Jesus, "What is truth?"
I have a direction in mind for Mugsy--westerly. When she encounters the Pacific Ocean, she should just keep on going. Straight on to Japan, where they could probably find a club gig for her catering to guys with fetishes for aged Western "hostesses" with fake teeth and false hair.
Harry needs to be extracted by a MI6 swat team and taken to an undisclosed location for a re-education/exorcism. If he makes sufficient progress, maybe they can let him out for Philip's 100th.
In its current incarnation , The New Republic is a left leaning US publication. Interesting they took a swipe at H&M:
Prince Harry’s New Fake Mental Health Care Job Is a Farce
Silicon Valley’s exploitative entrepreneurial set has come to rescue the recently detached royals from a life outside the upper crust, to the detriment of the rest of us.
Having dramatically exited one country’s putrescent ruling class, the former Duke and Duchess of Sussex have officially leapt into another: After landing multiyear content deals with both Netflix and Spotify, celebrity content merchant Prince Harry announced that he would be grabbing two more ersatz fiefdoms, each befitting his new American celebrity: a role as commissioner alongside others in the “thought leader” set at the Aspen Institute, and a C-suite position at BetterUp, a self-improvement tech company in Silicon Valley valued at $1.7 billion. The hires made international headlines—an outcome no doubt helped along by the couple’s ratings-smashing, heartstring-yanking Oprah interview this month, effectually marking the debut of their American brand.
Naturally, as former senior royals—in a universe Meghan and Harry convincingly depicted as toxic, stifling, and racist—the duo are hardly new to the rigors of branding. In some ways, the new lives Harry and Meghan are building together bear a striking resemblance to the ones from which they so dramatically flounced: Literal and figurative royalty are both clubs of which you will never be a part, nor will you come to enjoy the prestige, material wealth, or access to the most exclusive spaces on earth that these celebrity demigods enjoy. But if there’s a lesson to be learned here, it’s that while the United Kingdom’s royal mega-influencers may be publicly provisioned, there’s far more money to be made off privatized brands.
There is no need for an apology! Most of us here miss some posts due to the extremely long threads. I know that I've missed responding to people because
I've missed their post, and others have said they have that problem here, too.
So, post away, and don't worry!
Kind of stupid the above link but have your fun evaluating the truth here
____________________
Harry and Meghan snubbed: Queen to reject Sussexes' offer to advise Royal Family
THE QUEEN and other members of the Royal Family have rejected Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's offer to advise the Palace on how to become a more diverse workplace.
By OLI SMITH
PUBLISHED: 00:00, Mon, Mar 29, 2021 | UPDATED: 14:08, Mon, Mar 29, 2021
For the alienated young Harry, that brand is increasingly associated with mental health. To his credit, it’s an issue about which he’s long been outspoken and that he’s made a centerpiece of past philanthropic work in Africa. Harry was tapped last year by the same elite six-figure speaking agency that reps the Obamas and Clintons to offer talks on mental health; he is also co-producing a docuseries for Apple TV on the topic with Winfrey—a project the legendary interviewer and doyenne of synergy seamlessly plugged as she drew out the couple’s harrowing story of their departure from royal duties in front of tens of millions of viewers.
In his new capacity of “Chief Impact Officer” with BetterUp, Harry will reportedly guide that firm’s social mission as well as perform a public-facing role as mental health advocate. As the prince himself put it in his introductory blog post, “My goal is to lift up critical dialogues around mental health, build supportive and compassionate communities, and foster an environment for honest and vulnerable conversations.”
Harry’s interest in mental health is sincere—he suffered the traumatic loss of his mother at a young age and has been open about his own struggles since. Meghan, too, recounted experiencing suicidal ideation as tensions mounted with the royal family and ultimately prompted the couple’s exit. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with the idea that individuals can, and should, tend to their mental health in ways that make them happier—as Meghan and Harry both illustrate, mental illness can take hold in anyone, regardless of class status. And if people like Harry, Meghan, Oprah and others can use their media platforms to help reduce the stigma around mental illness, that’s all to the good—but overemphasizing stigma as the primary barrier misrepresents the problem.
The cloyingly techtopian jargon underpinning this venture into which Harry’s potentially profitable rising star has been absorbed raises red flags. The sort of commodified advocacy firms like BetterUp support locates the path toward better mental health solely in individuals’ heads, failing entirely to confront the structural determinants of mental health. Instead, it merely lends the discussion a progressive sheen.
The fact is, the overwhelming majority of mental anguish in society is materially produced: People living below the poverty line are more than twice as likely to develop severe mental illness as those above it. Low incomes are also associated with stress, depression, and suicide attempts. Chronic homelessness deteriorates mental health, as do evictions. There are studies showing that unemployment drives depression and that low wages drive suicides. Deindustrialized regions also experience rising levels of mental illness and domestic violence after widespread job loss. One famous Princeton study found that money indeed buys happiness—income was positively correlated with levels of satisfaction up to $75,000—a relatively high salary in the top eightieth percentile of earnings.
Unfortunately, mental health care can be notoriously difficult to access: One study found a whopping 56 percent of respondents who wanted mental health care said they couldn’t afford it. Moreover, mental health providers commonly take cash only, declining any insurance at all, let alone lower-reimbursing Medicaid plans that cover poor patients. If, as Harry and Meghan demonstrate, no one is immune to these challenges, the overall burden of mental illness in the United States could certainly be significantly reduced through economic redistribution.
Naturally, there’s a hitch: Achieving those improvements would take robust public investment in communities, as well as universal health care provision, housing, and other forms of social support—things that have historically only been won through class struggle to confront the structural power enjoyed by Harry, Meghan, and their new stateside plutocratic pals. These solutions certainly find little support among multibillion-dollar firms like the one that’s eager to parade the former prince around as proof of how dedicated it is to building a better society—that specifically doesn’t threaten its own profitability.
Even more sinister, BetterUp appears to be using Harry as a way to more trongly associate its product with mental health. Before it began leaning into individual counseling, BetterUp was a job-coaching app, pitched largely to managers looking to optimize their professional workforce by helping them find more meaning in their workplace. As Founder Alexi Robichaux put it at a tech conference, “We had this profound sense at the time that we had this opportunity at work where, for the first time maybe in human history, work could actually be a platform that helps us flourish and lead more fulfilling lives instead of work being a more exhausting platform that really took out of us in exchange for money … how could work be a partnership with our employer and a partnership with the company, where it wasn’t just an economic exchange but also an existential exchange happening too?”
We already have an innovation that both bolsters workers’ satisfaction as well as their sense of meaning in the workplace and can lay claim to a proven track record for improving the mental health of workers to boot: It’s called unions, and the tech titans into whose social orbit the Sussexes have become enmeshed have spent years attempting to destroy them. Ultimately, building a world in which we can all thrive, far from the mental health concerns from which Harry and Meghan now purport to free us, will require more than a rosy social mission peddled by royals on either side of the Atlantic: It will require increasing the power of labor relative to capital. Somewhere in her veins, this knowledge stirs within Meghan Markle, a fact that revealed itself during her time in Oprah’s televised confessional: “At my old job,” she noted, “I had a union.” But the Sussexes are the bosses now, and inequality is good for business.
Natalie Shure is a writer and researcher in Boston. Her work focuses on history, health, and politics.
@D1, oh how nice-she must be jealous of Zara now and the attention Zara & Mike got for their unplanned home birth. A 40 year old having a planned home birth? I highly doubt it, unless they bring in all of the monitoring equipment and have a medical staff on hand. She really does need to try harder. It's a little too obvious.
On the spot and impromptu Mike called Zara a (birth) warrior and this is what she was just one week ago. Megs will competing against this. Same age are Zara and Megs or close to it.
See 8.14pm
I remember this about 'coffee without milk'. Do you remember how some London boroughs (Islington, Haringey) said you had to say 'green [rubbish] sacks/bags', not black - even though they were black...
I don't live in London. I don't remember anything about rubbish sacks, but it woulsn't surprise me I worked in Local Government until I retired.
Archbishop of Canterbury @JustinWelby
t was a great honour to have a telephone audience with Her Majesty The Queen this afternoon. I was able to update her on the work of @churchofengl and throughout the pandemic and wish her a happy Easter. May God continue to bless and protect her and her family.
https://twitter.com/JustinWelby/status/1376945837071294464
I thought he was (a lot) older than I am!
No worries about the second shot; you should* be fine.
*Except a significant amount of people in Florida that had their second vaccine for two weeks came down with the virus. It *could* be a faulty batch of vaccine or maybe it wasn't stored at the correct temperature. It could also be from the administration spreading illegals with the Brazilian variant throughout the US (and the vaccines aren't effective for the Brazilian variant).
MeAgain Pregnancy Diary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=divacWVoUMg
https://twitter.com/LizzieITV/status/1376992696162779144
https://www.itv.com/news/2021-03-30/i-married-harry-and-meghan-at-the-royal-wedding-not-in-the-days-before-says-archbishop-of-canterbury-justin-welby
March Madness basketball?
Don't you mean Frozen Four hockey? Three of four teams from MN, and all five Division 1 hockey teams made it to the NCAA tournament! (Can you tell I live in northern MN?)
***
On to Harkles' topics...
I bet $mirkle is steaming mad that Zara made the news giving birth on the bathroom floor. Now that's a headline! What will our $mirks do to try to top that?
I still struggle to understand how anyone with a brain could believe MM's lie in the Oprah interview about not being able to access mental health services. William, Catherine, and Harry were ALL about mental health before she entered the picture. There is just NO WAY she would have been barred from finding support or a professional to talk to. I do think Harry is thick enough that he might have missed the obvious signs of depression, but then, I don't think she had any because I don't believe she was depressed to begin with. She probably spent all her time concocting ways to usurp the crown from the Cambridge line and determining how to one-up EVERYONE. That's exhausting work, ya' know.
I think it's hilarious that Just Harry has these "jobs" now. They'll be over soon enough when it becomes clear he doesn't have anything to add and his shine over being Royal will fade as he lacks access to the BRF. Why would any member of that family speak to him when any conversation will be immediately leaked to the CBS Morning Show? So let Harry enjoy his payday now, because I don't think it'll still be around in a year or two. He's getting better at reading his script, and as The Daily Mail says, there are "so many words, so little information" in them.
Blather on, Harry! Blather on.
1- Walby. The Queen instructed him to publicly call Meghan a liar! Fantastic. The gloves are truly off! Good news.
2- The Fosters. Thank you all so much for the summary of what’s known around this situation. I like the theory that David didn’t want to be apart of Meghan’s absurd phantom press stories. Hopefully the biographer gets to the bottom of this!
3- Meghan’s ‘Zara-one-upping’ home birth plan. HAHAHAHAHA. Surrogacy confirmed.
4- Where *is* ‘thou-doth-protest-too-much’ Gayle? Do they feel Markled by the *betterup* deal?
5- Have had a back and forth with BetterUp and will have insights here soon.
It seems to me that Markle shares something in common with any number of Mulatto or as we must now say mixed-race people who by any ordinary standards have done very well for themselves. I am thinking of people like Lewis Hamilton and Colin Kaepernick. Like Markle they burn with resentment and no amount of assurances of good will makes any difference indeed it only makes things worse because they can never have the one thing they really want. What in my view they hate (and I sense that Obama is the same) is that they resent the fact that one of their parents by shagging a dark-skinned person made them non-white. Not really black but not really white either and thus unable to properly fit in with their own race because they do not have a race. It is not the RF but Markle who is obsessed with race. No wonder then that she hate hate hates the Duchess of Cambridge - Kate has no reason or cause to make life difficult for Markle. From Markle's point of view Kate appears to have everything; three happy healthy children, the confident masculine husband, the beautiful home and also, she is white though I would just say English. She did not earn whiteness or Englishness; her parents did that for her. Thomas Markle (who seems to be a good man) and who did everything any father could do for his daughter failed to do that one thing that Markle would give up all her wealth and infamy for namely a white mother and so she takes her vitriol out on her father and by extension white people generally. Markle has spent her entire adult life trying to cover up her blackness; she has for decades worn permanent whiteface. Wealth and fame only seems to magnify human resentment.
If tomorrow the 31st March passes without any comment from the RF, this will in my view be worse for Markle - killing with kindness - than if as we devoutly wish the titles etc be removed. If the titles are removed Markle can resume her rant about the evil RF. If the RF do nothing Markle must continue to stew in her own juices.
@Snarkyatherbest
March Madness basketball?
Don't you mean Frozen Four hockey? Three of four teams from MN, and all five Division 1 hockey teams made it to the NCAA tournament! (Can you tell I live in northern MN?)
@Mischief Girl: Nice to know another Minnesotan is here. I was born in Minneapolis and grew up there for most of my childhood until my family moved to the West Coast. I still have lots of family there and try to get back for visits when I can. As a snow lover, the cold weather doesn’t bother me a bit.
As for the Harkles, I am tending to agree with Piers Morgan who thinks Harry might be annoyed that Meghan so heavily dumped on his family in the OW interview. I am guessing she let him think she was going to just complain a little bit, while all thevtome intending to dump all over them. He looked uncomfortable in that interview.
Not one bit surprised they are having a “home birth” because I think in the UK it was much easier to hide it being a surrogate birth and not have to address the reports that no physician signed the birth certificate as being the attending medical professional at Archie’s birth.
@Mischief girl - I know minnesota well; went to Brainerd for family vacations every year growing up!!
Cheers @JennS @Maneki 😘
@Swampie
Can I change alligator, to crocodile 😉
The Mail on Sunday's sarcastic apology to Meghan Markle
THE Duchess of Sussex has demanded a front page apology from the Mail on Sunday after winning her court case against them. Here’s how they’ll do it:
TWO years ago, we printed excerpts from a private letter between the Duchess of Sussex and her estranged father, a kind, caring man who is the real victim in all of this.
The excerpts were printed in good faith. We had no idea that Ms Markle felt she had something to hide, was desperate to stop the public seeing her true colours, and would go running to the courts like criminals do. And for that we are deeply sorry.
We sincerely apologise to Ms Markle for her errroneous perception that this newspaper did something wrong, and regret that she is such a fragile millennial snowflake that what can only be classified under British law as ‘banter’ was taken so badly.
That this apology has been delivered while her husband’s grandfather is in hospital is also deeply regrettable, and will likely upset Her Majesty at such a difficult time. Again, we are sorry. We did not want to apologise and made every effort not to do so.
We must also apologise to Kate, the Duchess of Cambridge and the true Queen of the People’s Hearts, for the suffering caused by having such an ungrateful, selfish fake of a sister-in-law. As always, Kate remains ravishing, a marvellous contrast and would never sue us.
Please forgive us for our clumsy attempt to save Britain’s great Royal family from being destroyed by an American interloper who has hypnotised our poor Prince. We only felt our readers, who have never forgotten that slattern Wallis Simpson, deserved it.
Finally, we very much regret that Meghan wears murder jewellery, permanently traumatised Palace staff by shouting at them, turned Frogmore Cottage into a sex tavern, and drove a white Fiat Uno through Paris on the evening of August 31st, 1997.
We really are so, so, sorry.
Can I change alligator, to crocodile 😉
Sure! There are lots of alligators around my place, but I could probably sneak some crocs up from south Florida if I had to (those pesky wildlife officers get all pissy about things like that). Say, could I interest you in some caimans? They're small yet aggressive!
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2021/03/blind-item-8_30.html
TUESDAY, MARCH 30, 2021
Blind Item #8
Could there be an alliance? Yes. I am not sure exactly how it would benefit the two children on the same level as the ginger one. He can't change the rules and get them money. There is no one who would listen to him across the burned bridges to get them money. That being said, it is one of those siblings who is responsible for leaking the name of the relative. Maybe the siblings are throwing bombs on their own to extort payments for themselves.
I cannot figure B & E doing anything to blow up their lives within the family.
I'm thinking CDAN is on the wrong track. IF they are leaking info, it isn't to benefit H&M. It's the opposite. At least I hope so !!!
If it’s speculation that it’s E and B, I’d just go with the usual ‘Fergie’ as the leaker. But who really cares that it’s Anne. No one.
It makes a lot of sense that she is hurling abuse at Anne. She’s meant to get the military titles. I’m sure she’d be happy to see one of the hardest working monarchy members get fired like Andrew.
Meghan is such a lunatic.
There doesn't seem to be a lot of interest in the vaccine for the under 50-year-old contingent here.
I'm curious as to whether the lower risk age groups are rushing to get vaccines in other parts of the world or whether they are somewhat wary as well.
FF was quite clear that when the pregnancy was announced at her wedding ..."It didn't go down particularly well with Eugenie..."p 237.
Or that odd stuff about Frog Cott.
This! A thousand times this.
Not surprised she exchanged some sort of vow thing on another day in a garden.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEUIZWyieAk
Don't remember if he came right out and said it, or hinted so broadly there was no mistaking who he meant.
So why would anyone need to leak it again? Or is the implication that B or E is who leaked it to him?
Its interesting Megs doesnt touch Bea. Does she know some of Eugenie's darkest secrets from the Soho set. Is it because of Jack, and they got custody of the Clooney's in Megxit? Did Eugenie let loose about Megs to Harry, to the family? Is Eugenie the kind hearted one (narcs like to target them) and Bea is bitchier? Lady C - please address this; I need to know ;-)
------------
I live in Midwestern US. It's hard to answer your question beyond my own experience. But I can share my take on it.
I'm in a group of volunteers who help people obtain appointments for the vaccine. I wouldn't say younger people are rushing exactly but we certainly do have a lot of younger people asking for help getting appointments. They're not demanding it this week, but want to know that they're locked into an appointment as soon as possible. I've been pretty astounded at the number of requests.
They're so greatful for whatever help we can provide. Lots of times they're the ones at risk, but other times it's someone close to them at risk.
Now that we've helped who we can, they're asking for volunteers to arrange transportation for those who are housebound. I'm volunteering to drive. It's kinda fun because if the day is warm enough I put the top down on the convertible, which they get a kick out of.
It's certainly been a rewarding experience.
p. 285 Starts off with they were going to register the kid as dual citizen but they don't say if they did that or not.
It goes on to talk about how worried they were about the titles and that their kids would automatically be titled when PC became King. So they "...shared concerns..." to PC about this and he mentioned that he would consider issuing a new letters patent (I guess making it not an automatic thing).
p 345 After it was announced that the USA would not be paying for their security, Meghan "rolled her eyes" and "...and had always planned to cover their own security costs after March 30."
p 160 JH (not any of the palaces) demanded a team to assist her in adjusting to her new role in life. This was the team which she could "...trust in all situations...". The team was Amy Pickerill, Heather Wong, Ed Lane Fox and Jason Knauf.
p. 161 Kate had the same informal training as she got ("...exit a chauffeured sedan...when to curtsy to members of the family several rungs up the hierarchy...") but she wanted etiquette lessons also. (I find that odd as much of the meet and greets done by the BRF have a certain etiquette to them such as no selfies or autographs, how to move on to the next person in line and where you have to stand in relation to someone of higher rank. People like ELF and possible Jason had been with the system long enough to know all of this how a public function rolls.)
It goes on but this is a start.
Guy and Bogart will be able to sleep through it as there will be no need for `a dog that barks in the night'.
It'll be like Edward Thomas's `Adlestrop' - nobody will leave and nobody will come.
Have we worked out when it's due? Wouldn't be 21st April by any chance?
@WildBoar
I reckon Doriana will be born
on 1 July, Diana’s birthday
Or the 4th, Independence Day!
That's made me suddenly remember that, for many people myself included, Kate (yes I know 'Catherine' but there will be two Catherines here) wasn't getting a grip on her role in her earlier years. It was only when Catherine Quinn became her Private Secretary that she turned it around. I remember that no one expected CQ to stay long as she was previously CEO and Associate Dean at Oxford's Saïd Business School and Kate seemed to be doing little that merited such a high-powered Private Secretary. She would be under-employed and bored out of her mind.
I remember how impressed I was with Catherine Quinn's style. Very elegant and understated. At the time Kate was still having issues with her skirts in the wind and looking a little too 'girlfriend' rather than 'royal' - something that NEVER happens now. I also had a colleague who moved to one of the charities Kate was working with, except she really wasn't. Only came once or twice a year. Now it's entirely different. Kate is hands-on. Enjoying her role as much as she can given her sister-in-law's antics. (I greatly admire Kate now, as she provides vital stability. If she wasn't in the BRF, I don't think William would be as settled in his role and future reigns in my lifetime would feel lacklustre and uninspiring. There would be nothing to look forward to)
My point in bringing this up is that there ARE obviously still failings in the Royal training and support system as Kate only started firing on all cylinders when she got support from a specific, exceptional person. As a system, BRF induction was not and still does not appear to be as good as it should be. I know there are other factors such as William's reluctance to engage with HIS role at that time (compared to now), being based in Anglesey and George being a demanding baby, but Kate could still have been better, for a long time.
Of course Catherine Quinn could not have achieved a Kate-standard turnaround for Meghan as Meghan knows best. I don't think there's an organisation in the world that could successfully work with her. To say nothing of the widely-held suspicion that she wanted it all to fail so she could scuttle back to the US, her 'victimhood' ready to sell to the highest bidder.
However that is not the point. I'm thinking of the future partners of the Cambridge children. I hope by then 'the system' will be better. Certainly it will have learned from the Meghan experience, though not the lessons she wishes to be seen to be teaching them. I mean real lessons.
You forgot to add “and perfectly timed for the news cycle”
Kate was also much younger than Meghan. Meghan had held jobs throughout her adulthood, she knew how to get her act together and refused too.
The most important aspect you bring up is that William picked a woman that could support him and the Monarchy. We saw Meghan try to love bomb the public at the engagement interview. She hit the ground running alright, back to America! I think Harry fell for the lie, and perhaps it wasn’t a total lie until Meghan realized how boring and restrictive the job of being a Royal is, as she stated in her idiotic Oprah interview. “It’s nothing like CeLeBrItY, the *horror* (honestly how stupid did she sound there!!!). Lol.
The point being, a senior Royal needs to select their mate appropriately for the future ahead. A divorce older woman from another country in all likelihood wasn’t going to work!
I like the fact that he's so private, inscrutable and already a power to be reckoned with in the BRF. If I'm still alive when he becomes king, I think his reign will be far less exhausting to observe as he'll just get on with it and not allow any shenanigans.
It's difficult to say who makes the best choice as royal mate. I get bothered when I think that the BRF remains dysfunctional and Kate succeeded by living her post-university life very differently to her peers. She followed the Priscilla Presley route to marrying a king. No job. A long period of living like Rapunzel, just waiting for whatever time he chooses to give you. Strictly limiting and controlling friendships to avoid leaks and controversies. Your family assisting you to make it work. I've always been struck by the similarity, at that phase of their lives. Very few women could cope with that. Which doesn't bode well for the future, if Kate's way is the template that works. I guess what matters is who you are doing it for. With William there seems to be reciprocity. With Harry, zilch, which is why reasonable women ran a mile.
I agree completely about the difference Catherine Quinn made. Prior to that, Rebecca Deacon, Kate's secretary, often appeared to be Kate's "girlfriend" during outings. Rebecca wore very short skirts and often looked a bit rumpled and overwhelmed too. Here are some photos: https://www.gettyimages.com/photos/rebecca-deacon?family=editorial&phrase=rebecca%20deacon&sort=mostpopular
To be fair to her, Rebecca was younger than Kate and began working for the RF (Will and Harry, that is) on a memorial concert for Diana. So she probably wasn't a great choice to be a private secretary for any working member of the RF anyway. She'd also worked for Harry as some sort of assistant. I'm pretty sure though she was Will and Kate's choice for Kate's secretary. So I'm not sure they would have accepted a Catherine Quinn type early on even if the RF had suggested that. Early on, it did seem W&K wanted to project an air of informality and touted a streamlined staff. That didn't always work out for the best IMO.
I bet $mirkle is steaming mad that Zara made the news giving birth on the bathroom floor. Now that's a headline! What will our $mirks do to try to top that?
---------
You know she's very good at squatting in bushes ;), the garden would make a good setting, with the hens clucking in the background.
Britain is a model to the world of a successful multi-ethnic society, a major review concluded last night.
It found no evidence the UK is institutionally racist – in a rejection of the common view among activists.
The Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, set up by Boris Johnson in the wake of the Black Lives Matter protests, concluded that although Britain is not yet a 'post-racial society', its success should be a model for white-majority countries.
Commission chairman Tony Sewell said the UK had progressed into a 'successful multi-ethnic and multicultural community' which was a 'beacon to the rest of Europe and the world'.
He warned ministers must also consider the needs of the white working class, saying his report had uncovered how 'stuck' some groups were.
But this morning Dr Sewell insisted he was not denying the existence of racism - but railed against people deploying the charge of institutional racism 'willy-nilly'.
Etc.
Tony Sewell is black, by the way.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9420563/Britains-race-revolution-Landmark-report-says-UK-model-world-diversity.html
Now, are the gruesome twosome going to apologise to the BRF and the British people? I hope they choke on their cornflakes.
Apart from Cringe, which other Royal brides `hit the ground running' in their first year or so of marriage? Diana may not be a fair comparison insofar as she married the man who was Heir Apparent.
Charles had left the Navy in 1976/1977 (his Wikipedia entry contradicts itself - I haven't time to check any more deeply) so he had several years before his marriage in which to build his civilian life of duty and was perhaps better able to induct D into what was expected of her. When Did D `fly solo', as it were, rather than just accompany C on his engagements?
At the time of their marriage C was 32 and had been a full time working Royal for at least 3 years; Wm was 28 at the time of his marriage and was still employed as a pilot until Late July 2017. We know he is learning `how to be D of Cornwall' but, beyond that, IIRC, I read somewhere that preparation for taking the throne has to be considered as well but I can't give a reference.
Perhaps a fairer comparison would be made between Catherine & Fergie, as wives of second sons?
And look where `hitting the ground running' got us - as done by a woman who thought she knew it all but failed to read the job description before she tore it up.
She must be planning something to be one up on warrior Zara.
What a sad excuse of a human being she is.
I'm looking forward to the black and white photos the are going to release.
Fergie seemed to dive in to her royal duties like a labrador into the sea. I always kept an eye out for her at the time as I had similar colouring, long hair and a fondness of black velvet bows (sorry!). I really liked her. Her wedding felt altogether happier than the Waleses. I think things could have been much better for Fergie if she hadn't been left to herself so much. The press she got about her weight problems was plain mean. These days I'd set Ashley Graham on those journalists.
The idea of working royal brides / spouses is not set in stone. Some work immediately and others ease into it and others never do anything at all.
The ones we remember tend to be the ones that worked consistently and very publicly. Or did something monumental in their working lives eg Charlotte with Small Pox, Albert and all his projects.
In the past century, all (entire family included here) work regardless of their personal feelings on the matter because George 5 and Mary realised that they needed to wed their existence to public opinion to fortify themselves against the tide of abolished Monarchies. You can blame them for the public expectation of working royals.
For the 80s and 90s brides, you also have to consider the era. Women working was empowering message pushed everywhere. Housewives not so much. Power suits. TV shows like Dynasty. Songs like 'Independent Woman' by Destiny's child. Girl power. Laddettes etc. Having your own money.
The previous decades had done their bit, but it was the 80s and 90s that really saw this type of view of women come into it's own.
To that end, all the royal brides, Diana, Fergie and Sophie went to work immediately. That's the only thing no one has ever complained about them or found fault as far as their work record.
There was no easing into their royal roles. No 'hitting the ground running' PR. The societal idea of superwoman extended as much to them as it did women working and breaking glass ceilings in work spaces.
Sophie was even praised for combining her royal role with regular work as she continued working on her PR business, RJ-H PR.
Diana started working on her honeymoon - that royal yacht toured the med with stops at various countries were diplomatic receptions were held at each stop.
Her first solo engagement was Princess Grace's funeral where she represented the royals and UK.
Charles and Diana did a mixture of couple and solo until their marriage broke down. Then they went strictly solo, but Palace PR sold the change as a more efficient way of working, nothing else to see *here*.
Fergie's rep started to get ruined because she took lots of holidays in between work engagements, but it was a matter of framing as she did work steadily, it just looked bad that she was frequently holidaying as well. She was solo almost immediately due to Andrew being away most of the year on naval ship postings around the world. Famously she saw him for just 42 days one year.
Sophie's approach was very professional. She'd work at her job most of the week then go do a day or two royal duties, solo or couple.
With that example of royal brides, you can understand why Palace PR pushed Kate's PR the way it did. Especially after building a rep for not working during the dating years - this may be true or false, but that was the perception the palace needed to overcome.
I think Meghan's PR people researched Kate's rep online, looked at internet commentary and the PR around her and decided to push her as a contrast. They co-opted the phases used for Kate and as they'd muzzled the press with cease and desist letters to IPSO, no one contradicted their PR push.
I think it's hilarious that she failed so badly given how hard she PR pushed, and was given a coterie of royal aides that included ex-ambassadors David Manning and Fiona Mcilwha to help her.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9422015/Meghan-Markle-likely-run-president-struggle-criticism-biographer-claims.html
Well, I certainly hope that our grandchildren don't feel that way, but we never thought it was the color of their skin but the content of their character that counted. (Their skin shades shades range from nordic pale to medium brown.) We believe in meritocracy.
Thinking further about the origins of all this, I was a Kate Middleton Review lurker when Meghan first arrived on the radar and I remember we thought she was really going to show Kate how it's done. I fell for it completely. Influenced by seeing ads for clothes she disdained later on but actually suited her far better. I thought she looked lovely on The Tig. I didn't come across those really tacky photos with Jessica Maloney etc.
I was then astonished at how badly Meghan was dressed for the engagement announcement in the garden at Kensington Palace. The bathrobe. Bare legs. Dirty, tarty, ill-fitting shoes. What's going on?!?! I thought. Who IS this?!?! Then came the £56K transparent engagement dress with dress-down Harry (a pattern they've stuck to ever since) and my illusions shattered once and for all. If she'd paid the Suits team to train someone to do her makeup and wardrobe she'd have been far less of an issue. But then, she didn't want to succeed here did she?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AAv6w8Mjs4
No hat with the Queen but a hat at Wimbledon. Bare legs. Off the shoulder at Trooping the Colour. Three sizes too big. Or too small. Transparent. Label hanging down. Plastic still on handbag/purse. Dragging in the mud. Gossiping during the National Anthem. Walking in front of the Queen. That's before you get to worse things like the Lion King premiere, being the most expensively dressed royal in Europe and making a travesty of the birth of the child who is seventh in our royal succession.
She chose to be blisteringly divisive in a country that was enduring the fallout from the EU referendum. The very next day after that vote, visiting students started coming to me in tears because they were being threatened in the street and told to go home. Friends were no longer speaking to each other. Things hadn't improved much by the time Meghan arrived. Now, when we are beginning to draw breath after Brexit and (hopefully) the worst of the pandemic, she does this to our country. The US doesn't know what it's harbouring.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9422221/Queen-makes-engagement-mark-Centenary-Royal-Australian-Air-Force.html?ito=email_share_article-top
The engagement photocall, interview and photos were really surprising, but i assumed it was her hollywood persona that was not as easily shed as her dating PR had indicated.
That engagement dress still makes me wince. A skater frou frou outfit for pictures destined for history books.
If nothing else, Meghan should have appreciated the history she was making and used that to guide her, but as we now know that was not her intention at all and she has no concept of history, culture, basic manners.
I found that quite surprising because of the effort she made to join that type of society.