Skip to main content

The Long Slow Walk into the Sunset

 I've been quite worried about The Queen.  Each morning I wake up and wonder - did she pass?  how do I put a black border around this space?  what to write?  

I know that this would be a well planned out announcement and ceremony (the plans probably were started before her coronation) as  these are the people who live/breath, are immersed in protocol of how this should be done and think of all kinds of contingencies.  It is in good hands.

But I also think about the emotional fall out for the family, the employees who have a chance to see her in situations none of us get or the citizens of the UK - many of whom have never known another monarch before you get to the world's response. 

Or just the sheer loss of knowledge from dealing with the intricacies the politics of different countries, regime changes.  The world has changed so dramatically since she was crowned, let alone born.  I am reminded of my grandmother who once said that she could remember her first car ride and how fast it seemed to be zipping along at a racy 20 miles an hour.

Today I read that she will not have the traditional welcome to Balmoral ceremony.  Craigowan Lodge was fitted for a wheelchair lift.  Yes it is good to be accessible but I kind of wish it had happened before this.  It would have lessened the sadness of the need for it now.

The future is feels more heavy with each day.  Her world is getting harder to move about.  

So let's talk.

Please take a moment to read the rules as they change over time in response to what is happening.

Thanks you.



  

Comments

abbyh said…
Nutty and us Mods strive as much as possible to make this a welcome and friendly blog. Please do keep in mind that everyone posts with the risk of potential dissent, criticism, and unpopularity. We depend on Nutties to keep this place respectful and hopefully fun.

Guidelines for this blog is as follows:

-Keep discussions on the Sussexes. Politics must be strictly related to their involvement. Off topic subjects are permissible but should be limited and are subject to the discretion of Mods.
-Be civil and courteous in discussions.
-Anonymous or unknown posts are not allowed.
-Please try to keep the conspiracy theories down.
-Do not discuss the blog, blog history, or other posters.
-No personal attacks both direct and indirect.
-Please de-escalate "fights" by dropping the subject.
-Please remember that the focus of the blog is on others, not any individuals posting here. So if your name is not attached to something posted, please begin with the idea that what is written is not likely to be directed at you if it upsets you.
-Posts which may be deemed too many flat statements/too provocative may not posted on the blog.
-And, thank you posts are nice.


Mods do their best to ensure the guidelines are met. However, lapses happen because moderating this blog is a 24/7 responsibility and we all have jobs and families to care for. If you see overlooked issues, please feel free to message us so we can address them.

Thank you again for all your patience and support.

Moderation still on.
abbyh said…
Additional clarification

This blog is a safe space for those critical of H&M. The blog welcomes friendly discourse and difference of opinions but repetitive posts that add little substance but to criticize opinions different from theirs are subject to not being published and/or removed. Posters may be banned for a pattern of inflammatory and disruptive posts.

Sandie said…
https://twitter.com/BaronessBruck/status/1556478429926608898?s=20&t=L55-QeCv5SjrDP0X3xDdPg

A tweet from Misha Nonoo (13 August 2016) that reads: 'When only children find sisters'.)

Samantha should add this to her evidence!
OCGal said…
Good morning, Nutties, one and all!
Svetlana said…
This resonates with me. It is disgusting that the celebitchy sugars post such hate towards HMTQ, it is not uncommon to read they wish her dead, or make drastic comments when an event is cancelled, such as the Balmoral public greeting, that “they probably couldn’t get her out of bed”. Their idealization of Harry and his first wife is so deranged that their toxic hate spills over to the rest of the family; they are all painted with the same brush. It’s just poor wee innocent Hawwy and his super kind and benevolent wife all day all the time. Ironic they can’t reconcile the fact that the only hateful words out of the mouths of a RF member are from their own. Awful, awful people.
Observant One said…
Good morning to you @OC Gal!

I fully agree with your post, @ Svetlana. It disgusts me that HMTQ has been forced to deal with the ugly behavior of her grandson and his wife during her final years. I doubt they will ever be forgiven for the painful lies they told while the Prince Philip was on his deathbed. I am concerned about the couple hijacking her funeral for their own benefit, when that day comes. I hope that the team who planned the Jubilee will execute similar control of the services and keep them out of sight. I dare say it would be for their own protection. I believe that they have benefited from the public’s respect for the Queen and when she passes, they will receive severe backlash.
SwampWoman said…
In my experience with my mother and my in-laws, people nearing the end of their lives decline slowly, then quickly. They will rally, giving one hope that they are improving, then they will have another decline, then rally, giving one hope that they are improving. They never reach or surpass their previous level of health.

I fear that that is what we are seeing with HRM. She has been such a steadfast beacon for the British people, such a constant in a changing world. Can Prince Charles/King Charles fill those tiny yet redoubtable shoes? I worry about the future without her, and I'm not even a citizen.

I pray that she is just being protected due to an excess of caution and not due to having additional health issues.
Karla said…
Awful, awful people. I agree!
The Sussex squad is an organization that follows the guidelines of its leaders: MM and Harry.
Yes, they use extreme words. But Harry knows and allows these attacks.
I'm starting to wonder if it's Harry who is using MM's narcissism and creating chaos in his own family.
The queen is probably living her last years of life (I'm so sorry this is true) and yet Harry insists on writing his memoir during this period.
Remembering that when Harry's interview (to Oprah) aired, Prince Philip was already sick. He died shortly afterwards and Harry at the funeral worried that he would not be able to wear his military uniform.
If Harry is as vulnerable a narcissist as I imagine him to be, his memoir consists of a deliberate vendetta against the Queen (which he does subtly and tricks the world into thinking otherwise).
After all, for him (in his sick heart) the queen did not support him in his half inside and outside the British Monarchy. And for Harry she reached out to William and Kate. Not for him and MM.
...
Hypersensitive to criticism
People with vulnerable or covert NPD are very sensitive to criticism. They may perceive insults where others do not and are likely to become defensive easily. They may act in a vindictive or passive-aggressive way if they believe that someone has slighted them. Covert's are vengeful and merciless Gods and Goddesses, and they will make you pay for what you did to them and they will ad to your punishment, every other hurtful and painful thing that they perceived was ever done to them.

When Harry says MM looks like Diana. In fact, I suppose it's Harry who looks like Diana (at her worst).
...
Candace Owens discussing "D List Actress" Meghan Markle.
https://twitter.com/__gemini__8/status/1556301770623799299?s=20&t=AfUa-T-5PP2ZY7HQL2Onpg
Mel said…
they will make you pay for what you did to them and they will ad to your punishment, every other hurtful and painful thing that they perceived was ever done to them.
--------
Yep.
Humor Me said…
I admit - the third tab I open in the morning is the DM to see if the headline is "London Bridge has Fallen." Our world will not be the same without her - William is trying to emulate her, and reflect her leadership (what would GanGan do is not funny at this point. Charles will be his own man. I was trying to explain this to my SIL last night, who is clueless about the Empire, HMTQ, what is represents, and how most Americans admire HM for her preseverance and wisdom.
Harry - is an adult who is Peter Pan. He has never grown up, where William did. As long as the Cambridge children are alive, Harry is irrelevent.
But - and Harry knows this and will play the "I am a Prince, and in the line" for as long as he can. HMTQ knows what Harry has gone through prior to MM; her love for her grandson is apparently stopping her from cutting all ties (Succession/ counseler of state/ Duchy).
As we across the Pond watch what will become of Andrew and how HM/ Charles handle him, we await to see if this will predict what happens to Harry.
Long live HMTQ! from a Yank in Indiana, USA
Mel said…
If Mm truly *did* go to HR, it had to be during business hours, eh? Not in the middle of the night.

And, even though that department was not the place for Mm to ask for help as she is a member of the employer group, not a member of the employee group, her being there at all, let alone what she was there for, would have triggered instantaneous alerts to senior staff and senior royals.

There would have been instant alerts to probably both the Queen's and Prince Charles' staff, who would have instantly alerted the principals themselves.

If either knew about a suicide threat, don't you think that instant action would have been taken? A doctor would have been on the premises within minutes?

(Although one does wonder if she was closeted away for a time....thus the comment about her keys...to what?...passport, whatever else, being taken away.)

We didn't hear anything about that. Not a peep. Not a micro-hint that something, anything, was awry. You'd think that would have leaked out. Maybe not the details, but the generalities. That a royal was not happy, at least. Or a health emergency on the premises. But nothing. Not even a slight wafting of the air. No tremors in the force.

My vote is she made the whole story up about approaching them saying she was suicidal.

I think she *did* approach them about the spa. She'd been told no by PC or his staff, and was trying to do an end run around that.

Once again, she can't just tell the truth. She has to embellish with details which are completely not plausible. And that's where it all falls apart.
Fifi LaRue said…
@Karla: Very insightful about vulnerable NPD, similar to BPD.

The Queen: On FB I've seen Famous People Who Have Met the Queen, images going back to the beginning of her reign. The Queen has outlived many of the celebrities she's met in her lifetime.
@Mel

IIRC in MM's interview with Oprah, when she dropped the info about being suicidal and receiving no help from RF, her expression was very steely. I find that very telling. I would expect to see some glimmer of the past distress appear in her emotions in the retelling of such a sad and critical juncture. Also, I agree that if she had reached out to palace officials with such distress that Harry would have screamed to the hilltops. But, not a peep from Harry. HMTQ has demonstrated that while she is Head of State and works diligently in that regard, she also loves her family members and wouldn't ignore such a plea for help. Surely Harry would have reached out to his grandmother in that instance.

I wish HMTQ many more peaceful days with those beloved family members who are there to support her and love her without wanting anything in return. Except her most gracious regard.

I'm from Texas and have only known HMTQ as the UK monarch during my lifetime. God bless her.
Mel said…
I also think she had gotten wind of the bullying complaint and was trying to do an end run around that.
Karla said…
Fifi LaRue

I confess that I know little about BPD, but as you mentioned, I will try to research the topic. Thank you ❤️❤️
...
Mel ❤️❤️
Girl with a Hat said…
The Queen has Mars in her 1st house astrologically. She is the Energizer Bunny. Definitely has a lot of life force.
Hikari said…
Karla

I'm starting to wonder if it's Harry who is using MM's narcissism and creating chaos in his own family.
The queen is probably living her last years of life (I'm so sorry this is true) and yet Harry insists on writing his memoir during this period.
Remembering that when Harry's interview (to Oprah) aired, Prince Philip was already sick. He died shortly afterwards and Harry at the funeral worried that he would not be able to wear his military uniform.
If Harry is as vulnerable a narcissist as I imagine him to be, his memoir consists of a deliberate vendetta against the Queen (which he does subtly and tricks the world into thinking otherwise).
After all, for him (in his sick heart) the queen did not support him in his half inside and outside the British Monarchy. And for Harry she reached out to William and Kate. Not for him and MM.
...
Hypersensitive to criticism
People with vulnerable or covert NPD are very sensitive to criticism. They may perceive insults where others do not and are likely to become defensive easily. They may act in a vindictive or passive-aggressive way if they believe that someone has slighted them. Covert's are vengeful and merciless Gods and Goddesses, and they will make you pay for what you did to them and they will ad to your punishment, every other hurtful and painful thing that they perceived was ever done to them.

When Harry says MM looks like Diana. In fact, I suppose it's Harry who looks like Diana (at her worst).


Harry is an enigma, for sure. * would like to think she's an enigma but once we read up on the Narc Playbook, she's breathtakingly easy to figure out.

Harry is less so. Such Machievellianism as attributed to him if we class him a covert narcissist--a vengeful and merciless god--does not seem to fit a man who routinely allows his wife to lead him around by the hand and steer him as she would a toddler. I don't think he's merely playacting at being dim and eager to please her--I think he is that. But he's also got a short fuse and a long list of grievances.

In his own way, Hazza is as damaged as his wife. His current behavior seems inexplicable because for the better part of 35 years, the Palace had done an ace job of hiding what a volatile disturbing mess Harry is. A ticking time bomb, for sure, the fuse finally set alight by combining forces with a partner as hellbent on domination and destruction as he is. Even before Diana died or the marriage broke up . . even as a very small child, there was something very unsettling about Harry. Both children dealt with the simmering stewpot of marital discord between their parents in different ways. Both were angry and entitled little boys. William aka 'Basher' routinely threatened his nanny with execution in the Tower if denied something he wanted. Charming. But he grew out of this, though his adult temper is still a force to be reckoned with, it is said. High tempers run in the Windsor blood--HMTQ, as demure as she is now used to slug her baby sister, and that knowledge took me aback, I can tell you. My little sisters were often a trial to me but I never punched one of them. A slap, yes. Hair pulling maybe. No right hooks. Anyway, no one should be painted in perpetuity with the brush of childish indiscretions and William has developed other qualities of restraint and compassion to balance out that temper.

Hikari said…
Harry has not. I'd go out on a limb and state that he may actually be constitutionally incapable of feeling love toward anyone but himself, a malady shared by his wife. He was attached to his Mum . .and he was a very demanding child . .but for small children, 'love' is not some grand philanthropic emotion, but extremely practical--they love the people who give them things and make them feel safe and comforted. Maybe Diana's death irretrievably broke something in Harry . . or maybe he was irretrievably broken to begin with. Archival footage and photos of Harry with his family members pre-Smeg show him often laughing and appearing to be enjoying himself. It seems that H could be agreeable some of the time, so long as he was being entertained and given what he wanted. But I now believe that any feelings of 'love' he once had for his father, brother, grandparents, cousins or anyone else including school mates and former girlfriends was of the most superficial and shallow kind. Which is why it's been relatively easy to throw everyone in his life away and pursue his dreams of curdled glory with his partner in crime.

Who knows what William now feels toward his brother; I expect it's very complicated, but Wills ought to know better than anyone if there's any 'there' there in Harry. As young boys and men, they could roughhouse on the sporting field and call that 'closeness' . .maybe that sufficed then. But I'd be so bold as to say that the former 'best friends/always have each others' backs' motif between the brother Wales before M and Catherine entered the picture might be more Palace gloss. Because the public *expected* the two bereft sons of Diana to cleave together and have a bond stronger than with anyone else. The two were trotted before the cameras often enough for jocular exchanges with the press to bolster this narrative.

But what if for William, it's never been like that? As the dutiful elder brother, it has fallen to him to always look out for Harry, prop up Harry, clean up after Harry. But has Harry ever looked out for William? I doubt it. Harry looks out for Harry, perhaps because on the inside, where fraternal love and care should be, there's just a big empty pit of Self. * has widened the cracks that were already there within the Royal family to a chasm, but I think there were definitely cracks there before. That's why it's been so easy for Haz to break off and do his own thing. Worrying about his uniform at his grandfather's funeral is completely in keeping with a person who is only capable of feeling the shallowest of emotions toward other people. I'd go so far as to say that he feels nothing but contempt for William and Charles and precious little more than that for his frail grandmother.

Who knows what she feels for Harry? Does she keep the ties that bind them in place out of love . . or duty . . or a desire not to be bothered at her age by an interfamily matter that should be Charles's to hammer out? Harry is lost to them now, with or without *. Does she see that or is she, or anyone really still thinking a reconciliation is possible?
Sandie said…
https://twitter.com/magalidmathias1/status/1556635368752967680?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1556635368752967680%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=

What is this? Is this from an old programme or is it new PR?
SwampWoman said…
Oh, snap. I just read in the Daily Mail (so it must be true!) that Britney Spears will be singing a duet with Sir Elton on "Tiny Dancer" which is retitled "Hold Me Closer".

I know that y'all are as shocked as I am that Prince and Princess 6 were not asked to perform. This must be an oversight on Sir Elton's part. Perhaps Prince 6 can juggle children and birth certificates while Princess 6 demonstrates the stripper pole and tapdancing around the facts. They would *probably* sing but have probably been stricken with laryngitis from screeching at staffers.
Hikari said…
@Ilya,

Can you post a link to the IG photo you are referring to? I've been looking on IG and found numerous photos with Bea and Eugenie together but she looks fine to me in all of them. She was absolutely stunning at an event she attended in London at the National Gallery with Edo on June 23rd, six weeks ago. Six weeks is enough time to decline, I suppose, but I haven't come across the picture you mean.

Both Bea and Eugenie can look very attractive in photos and they can also look quite awkward depending on the day, particularly Bea. They were both beautiful on their wedding days. Maybe the photo you saw caught Bea on an off day. Sometimes she chooses hats or hairbands which are not flattering to her face. I saw some recent photos of her addressing a work event in a white suit and she had her hair scraped back off her face. Not her best look as she needs a fringe. I think she's got lovely hair but it's not always styled optimally.

Bea might be prone to hyperthyroidism based on her protruding eyes. I had a friend with similar eyes and she was on medication for that.

It's not my impression that Beatrice has anything to do with the Sussexes these days, unlike her younger sister, so I doubt very much that Harry would be in touch with her in any form.
Hikari, here. https://www.instagram.com/p/ChAXylqoayI/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y= It could be a bad angle, but she has seemed to me to be thinner and thinner each time we see a photo. I feel like she looks sick in this one. I have a soft spot for the sisters because of their idiot parents.
@Hikari said, Bea might be prone to hyperthyroidism based on her protruding eyes. I had a friend with similar eyes and she was on medication for that.

Off Topic

She’s had protruding eyes her whole life. If you look at both Sarah and Andrew they both have been photographed with popping and staring eyes. I think she has inherited her eyes from her parents. 🫤

My own Mother has suffered from hyperthyroidism. It’s very dangerous and if not treated can lead to death. 😟

Here’s the most recent photo I’ve can find of Beatrice with Eugenie.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11092525/Princess-Eugenie-shares-sweet-Instagram-post-wishes-sister-Beatrice-happy-birthday.html
Karla said…
Hikari was a great read.❤️
Mel said…
I agree that Beatrice is looking thinner. But I think she's looking quite nice. The weight loss suits her. Not nearly as dumpy looking as she used to look.

Not as busty...maybe better fitting undergarments combined with weight loss have done wonders for her?

Her clothing choices lately have also upped her game. Much better fitting, complement her figure and coloring.

Possible also that any health issues have been better addressed, causing her to look healthier. She does seem to have a glow about her lately.

I think that she's looking quite fine.
Maneki Neko said…
@Raspberry

@Hikari said, Bea might be prone to hyperthyroidism based on her protruding eyes.
......
She’s had protruding eyes her whole life.
-------------+++

Exactly this. I find both Andrew and Bea look very much like Queen Victoria in profile: same bulging eyes, same nose and chin. I think it's heredity, not a health issue.

https://cdn.britannica.com/64/188264-050-ED80E5D4/Victoria-1890.jpg
Fifi LaRue said…
I just looked at the photo of Beatrice. She looks really good. Both sisters, with their husbands, were at the royal wedding in Greece.
Maneki Neko said…
@Karla

Harry at the funeral worried that he would not be able to wear his military uniform.
............
Yes, and reading your sentence it occurred to me was that all that Harry was worried about? Not being able to wear his uniform? His grandfather had just died, his grandmother was in need of comfort and his preoccupation was his uniform, or lack of it. He should have been there to offer support, comfort, love. But as we saw with the Oprah interview, there was no support, no love for the royal family, his family. When the Queen passes, it will be too late.
SwampWoman said…
Princess Beatrice looks okay to me. Most younger people are so overweight that seeing a person of normal weight seems abnormal.
Sandie said…
By the time we get Harry’s book, no one will care any more

The Duke of Sussex's book is set to be published later this year, but Harry fatigue will set in well before then
CELIA WALDEN
...
https://archive.ph/2022.08.08-162031/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2022/08/08/time-get-harrys-book-no-one-will-care/
-----------------
No news or gossip in the article, but plenty of dollops of sarcasm.
Karla said…
Maneki Neko
Your words have accurate notes.❤️❤️
....
I Used To Be Meghan Markle’s Biggest Fan, But Now I’m Convinced She’s A Narcissist

http://www.eviemagazine.com/post/i-used-to-be-meghan-markles-biggest-fan-now-convinced-shes-narcissist
Hikari said…
Memo to Celia (aka Mrs Piers Morgan—I bet that couple has some interesting dinner table conversation eh!)…Harry fatigue set in, oh, about Day 3 of the Australian tour for this reader. It’s been a long almost 4 years, let me tell you. After the Lion King debacle when he dissed the Royal Marines—that was the Rubicon. I said “There’s no coming back from this.” He was dead to PP from that hour. Wonder if the dumb Twit even realized what he’d done?

In other news, my Tom Bower book finally got here today. Am waiting til I’m fresher to dive in but the thing is quite a doorstop. Tom did not stint on the pages.
Rebecca said…
I like Celia Walden’s “working titles” for Hazmat’s “literary memoir”:

By Royal Disappointment
Yet Another Royal Opus
Harry: Fear And Loathing In Kensington Palace
I Feel Bad About My Royalty
My Journey to Me-Ville
Me, Myself and I: A Journey Into Narcissism
Harry: My Life In Whinges
Rebecca said…
I recommend reading the comments for the Celia Walden piece. A couple suggestions from readers:

Game of Thrones: How I Lost All Respect Because I Didn’t Understand The Rules of Inheritance
I'd buy a version by J.K.Rowling, Harry the Syphilitic Prince
Rebecca said…
Another reader title suggestion:

Spare Me
DeerAngels said…
Thank you so much for sharing these concerns about HM. I feel less alone with these thoughts and feelings. It reminds me after PP was put in a hospital and came home for his last days. I found myself holding my breath as first thing was to see if he had passed. I have found myself doing this for HM since the jubilee. I felt she was hanging in with all her might to reach that milestone.
Rebecca said…
Gone With the Winge
Rebecca said…
Harry's book outlining his 'truth' should be called 'HELP!'.
Observant One said…
@Sandie

The Telegraph article was nicely lighthearted, with wonderful sarcasm. Well worth the read.
Fifi LaRue said…
@Karla: An excellent book about BPD is Understanding the Borderline Mother. There are four types, and the author gives a comprehensive write up of each type, plus their typical partners. It is riveting reading, especially is one had a BPD mother.
Ralph L said…
The Cambridges arriving back at Kensington Palace recently

I hope the neighbors' delphiniums weren't flattened like Audrey Forbes-Hamilton's.

William's coat is a good two inches too short. I hate that style.
Sandie said…
https://mobile.twitter.com/magalidmathias1

Tell me @voguemagazine was hired to rehabilitate Meggie Jong-un tattered image without telling me
-----
https://www.vogue.co.uk/fashion/gallery/meghan-markle-royal-fashion?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_social-type=owned
------

Major PR campaign for her in all editions of Vogue. I think they are going to get Markled!

Thanks to everyone for putting a smile on my face by sharing alternative titles for the hapless one. Hilarious!
Hikari said…
Ilya,

I took a look at the picture and I see what you mean about Beatrice looking quite thin in the face. However, I took a look at the Hello! video of her outside the church at the Greek wedding (I'm presuming the IG photo is from that same trip, perhaps a later or earlier reception? With Euge now living in Portugal and Bea having a busy summer of her own I don't think the two sisters have been together since the Jubilee weekend before this), she looks very nice. I think the angle of her head which is in kind of 3/4ths profile, plus the dim indoor lighting and the color she's wearing, a sort of ivory, echoing what Eugenie is wearing combine to not flatter her face the best. It's possible that she has been dieting following the birth of Sienna. Her features have always been more delicate in contrast to Eugenie's, whose are more robust. Any weight loss, even of a healthy kind would show up most in the face. I have a long narrow face myself and notice that whenever I drop a few pounds my face looks thinner even though that's not where I need to lose it. I'd have to see a series of photos including full length shot to decide if she's too thin.

Bea is the elder but as she keeps very much to herself, I always get the impression that Eugenie tends to dominate the relationship. There's only one York sister constantly on IG. How'd you like the gag-inducing appellation 'my special big sissy'? I don't think Bea does any social media. Probably for the best. But E's very active IG account is proof that the 'non-working' Royals may use their own SM. Surprised Princess Twat hasn't relaunched the Tig yet, but I imagine she's prohibited from the terms of Megxit. I think we all know that Harry is still receiving money from Charles and Eugenie is not.
Hikari said…
Re. Vogue Markling

Her 'guest edited' version of Brit Vogue was so poorly received, I think they marked it down to 1 pound and they still couldn't get rid of all the copies. Ed E. must have a little autonomy as editor for that market but I have to think that all the international Vogue editors report at least loosely to the flagship editrix in New York.

Anna Wintour's reputation is not what it once was, when she inspired the ruthless fictional version of herself in "The Devil Wears Prada"--the movie is more than 15 years old now and the book older still. There are whispers that AW has lost her edge and might be going senile. I read there is a move to remove her and replace her with someone younger. Nature of the biz. Maybe this will be her last September issue, and if so, boy, she's going out with a doozy if she REALLY means to make the Toxic Twat of Montecito the cover girl. But hey, we just need to wait a week or two after it hits newsstands and we can probably get a souvenir copy of this debacle for $1.
Hikari said…
@Fifi LaRue

I was prompted by your recommendation to look that book up. The author is often cited in professional and lay mental health websites and this site has a comprehensive explanation of the types and each type's affect on children. I think this is a ripe ground for discussion.

I just skimmed the lengthy article but I'm wondering if the author addresses in her book the possibility/prevalence of someone with BPD being of a mixed type? I'd say Harry's wife meets the markers for both the Queen and the Witch subtypes about equally. It'd be more easy to gauge which if we could actually be a fly on the wall in Montecito and see for ourselves if there are in fact any children there for her to interact with. We know she aims to monetize 'the little darlings', allegedly. But it says the 'Queen' lives through her children and puts them on display to burnish her own image. We've seen a tiny bit of that, with children we cannot be certain are actually hers, the photo ops are so few and far between and so weird. I'd expect, if * were actually a mother with Queen subtype BPD that she'd be showing them off a whole bunch more . . trying to get them modeling/acting contracts and trotting them out for TV. IF she actually had kids, bringing them to the Jubilee and showing them off in the window with all the little cousins would have given her so much favorable attention--a lot of the stress she causes would have been overlooked if the kids were actually present.

That's why I believe that she's got NO children in her custody. There are too many reports from the ground of zero children being seen. Trevor Coult, once given an honor by Her Majesty reports that he's got a mate on the ground crew at that airfield and there were NO children, baby gear, nannies, etc. deplaning or boarding with the Harkles. Who is more likely to be lying about the existence of children--the Harkles or a retired and highly decorated military officer? Yeah, he's a YouTuber with subscribers to keep happy, but Trev is as keen to get to the mystery of the children as we are. Also, the Jubilee was their last ditch effort to get material for their Netflix documentary. Prince Louis wouldn't have entirely stolen the show over the weekend if the Sussex kids were seen.

But they weren't and after grumblings as to why not reaching a feverish pitch . . she produces this picture of 'Lilibet' with a full head of teeth and no legs--hours AFTER touching down in California. That was so weak. In the absence of flesh and blood kids with her, I'd have to say she leans more to the Witch/Sadist category. Which is why it'd be a blessing if she did not in fact have access to any children.

She likes to play at being the Waif and the Hermit: "Aw, the big bad world is so dangerous for widdle innocent vulnerable new mommy me". I'd say Diana was Waif primarily with elements of Hermit, particularly after Martin Bashir fed her paranoia. But was she not also a bit of the Queen--holding the entire household captive to her capricious moods? How many evenings did 8-year old William have to feed Kleenex through the bathroom door saying "Don't cry, Mummy"? I find these categories quite situationally fluid. I suppose everyone has a dominant strain but other elements will leak in depending on the situation.


https://childhoodtraumarecovery.com/blog/4-types-of-borderline-mother-witch-hermit-waif-and-queen/
Sandie said…
https://mobile.twitter.com/royalinstablog/status/1556316740057014278

I think I was wrong, very wrong. Serena Williams and her daughter are on the September cover.
HappyDays said…
Serena Williams has announced she is going to retire from professional tennis. I guess she will be able to hang out more with her “close friend” Harry’s wife.
Humor Me said…
I (finally) have my copy of The Book and I have finished the chapter "College".
Take aways that surprised (and saddened) me:
~ Thomas is a lovely pushover father - he paid for partically everything in her life up to "Suits". The monies this man shelled out for * is astounding.
~ Did Doria really want to be a mother versus all the rumors of where she might have been in * formrative years.
~ * was not a latch key child as so many children are - she was a "latch on" child, set up in part be her father. How unusual (and generous) that one of these friends' family took her to Europe! Wow!
~ I have lost count of the # of boyfriends at this point she may/ may not have moved in with.
~ that * turned down theatre studies when the professors saw talent.
~ and Samantha's real name is Yvonne.
~ and there was no lottery win.

Have a good day!

Fifi LaRue said…
@Hikari: Kween Twat will not be on the cover of any Vogue simply because AW did not invite Twat to the Met Gala, which is the event to be and be seen at.


I don't recall the author discussing mixed types. I thought of my mother as being a mix of Hermit and Witch, but no, she fit the Witch subtype perfectly.

Dr. Remani (spelling) discusses BPD, but her explanation is so broad and generalized as to be non-useful, IMO.

In the Oprah interview Twat presented herself as the Waif, suicidal, no control over her environment, a victim. But Twat is none of that. I don't have the book in my possession, so as to remembering the subtypes, I'd say that Twat is the Queen subtype.

If the Sukkits did have children, they would have been trotted out at crucial events, i.e., the Jubilee, to steal the limelight from the other Royal children. Twat would have them dressed in darling clothes, and the clothes going up on M's Mirror with ordering information.

Joan Crawford was an example of the Queen subtype. She brought out adopted daughter Christina at every opportunity for her own publicity.
SwampWoman said…
Good grief. I wasn't aware of how big a cheerleader Yahoo was until I looked at it, and it seemed that every story was about Witch Woman. How boring.

Serena Williams retiring? That is news, I suppose, but anybody that follows tennis knew it was coming. She worked hard. She deserves every bit of acclaim that she has achieved. She made her own fortune as has her sister.
Maneki Neko said…
@Sandie

Thanks for the link. Vogue now finds * inspirational and a style icon, by the look of it. What a load of old cobblers.
By the way, Serena has just announced she's retiring from tennis.


@Karla 4.03 am

Thank you for your kind words
Humour Me said, Did Doria really want to be a mother versus all the rumors of where she might have been in * formrative years.

This was my takeaway from the book too. 🥴Doria just didn’t seem to interested in her child or marriage and family life as a whole. Thomas basically bought Maggot up, despite Doria being physically around in her early years.

@Maneki Neko,

Arh yes, Queen Victoria! I knew there was someone in the family who Bea truly looked like; the name just escaped me. 🤗
Este said…
Guess who just made the September issue of Vogue? Serena Williams, who is also using this moment to break the internet by letting us know she is retiring. That's got to be the ultimate get for Vogue. Wow, wow, wow!

Wonder what her former BFF thinks of this? I think it's delicious.
Hikari said…
Guess who just made the September issue of Vogue? Serena Williams, who is also using this moment to break the internet by letting us know she is retiring. That's got to be the ultimate get for Vogue. Wow, wow, wow!

Wonder what her former BFF thinks of this? I think it's delicious.


Este,

I guess I am glad to hear that rumors of AW's incipient senility have been exaggerated. To put Serena on the cover of the September issue is some lovely shade (no pun intended here) that we can bask ourselves under whilst we discuss. Considering their history and that Serena herself has been distancing herself hardcore since the debacle at the U.S. Open in 2019 when Markle and her surprisingly modest chest (for a breastfeeding mummy) practically flashed Serena's husband and alienated her mother . . Serena had asked * not to come, so when Archie's Mum turned up anyway, in her denim miniskirt to make out with the Jumbotron, why didn't Serena send word to have her moved out of the family box? I would've. Because *'s antics were so distracting that S. lost the match. It was after that, I think, when S. is heard in an audio clip saying "I don't know her", in reference to M. The 'we are only acquaintances, NOT friends" drum has been beating for a while now.

Serena is wise to retire now. I might have said she should have done it last year, after a torn hamstring ended her Wimbledon bid in the first round. Retiring with a serious warrior injury would have been a more dignified exit than announcing her retirement after exiting again in the first round, this time due to a loss rather than a withdrawal. Serena will be 41 on her next birthday in September and she's now at the spot Roger Federer is: The two most decorated tennis players in the history of the game are both in their 40s and, once impregnable, are now routinely losing in early rounds to teenagers half their age. That is the unforgiving and merciless nature of sporting glory.

When one is a veteran facing an inevitable retirement, far better to announce that after one has won (again) rather than a few years into a losing streak.
Hikari said…
Between Beatrice and Victoria, there is a marked similarity particularly in certain photos. The Queen's youngest daughter, also named Beatrice looked a lot like her as a girl so it's sometimes hard to tell which image belongs to whom.
-----------------------


https://scontent.fosu1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.18169-9/16649211_621540124701282_8437750579201287685_n.png?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=9267fe&_nc_ohc=3iLG-9jNvAgAX-UZ3jM&_nc_ht=scontent.fosu1-1.fna&oh=00_AT8j8SyHi51yerqAF9IwBz-8JQR-nT-qUEAtT_RLtV6AvA&oe=6316E55C

https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/106/590x/Royal-1388746.webp?r=1611587101269

https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/106/590x/488492_1.jpg

https://historiana.eu/ua/5f172fb0-deaf-4ed8-964a-98903320abe6/7b5cbe7b-d339-4192-8c0d-50ab6617da62/Queen%20Victoria%20-%20Queen%20Victoria%20as%20a%20young%20woman_The%20Wellcome%20Library.jpg
Sandie said…
As the reporter who broke the story of the bullying allegations against the Duchess of Sussex, I will of course be discussing them in my book," Low told Newsweek. "But it goes deeper than that: it delves into how the relationship between Harry and Meghan and their closest advisers went so badly wrong.

"It also asks whether anything could have been done to prevent the disaster that was Megxit—and, indeed, whether Megxit really was a disaster."

Speaking to 60 Minutes Australia earlier this month, Low described the Sussexes as having "gotten themselves into a situation where they believe that anyone who is not 100 percent for them is against them and they are very keen to portray themselves as victims; victims of the media and victims of the royal family."

"In their view, it's a black and white world. You're for them or you're against them," added the writer.

https://www.newsweek.com/prince-harry-memoir-release-book-meghan-bullying-leak-writer-1731680
Lady C doesn’t think Tyler Perry’s birthday wishes to Maggot were a dig etc.

Stop at around 35 minute mark….that’s where she starts talking about it….🥴

https://youtu.be/JF-TStZN04I
SwampWoman said…
I wasn't previously aware that Beatrice and Queen Victoria looked so much alike. Lovely. Are there any other Royal ladies (and gents) whose appearance hearkens back to their ancestors? (Because of the inbreeding, I expect that there are lots of them.)
Girl with a Hat said…
they should hire Beatrice to play young Victoria in a movie
Hikari said…
GWAH,

The first picture I posted was from The Young Victoria where Bea had a role as a lady-in-waiting.
Sandie said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2163963/Will-Duchess-Cambridge-curtsey-Princess-Beatrice-Eugenie.html

An interesting article from June 2012 about who curtseys/bows to whom in the royal family, in public and in private. What comes across is that Catherine was always eager to fit in and do the right thing so she did not mind at all (that unless William is with her, those of royal blood outrank her).

Can you imagine someone trying to explain these rules to TBW?
SwampWoman said…
Oh my gracious, I just saw that y'all in Europe may be in some danger from radiation due to Russian shelling of Ukrainian power plant or plants? Apparently this is part of the plan to destroy Ukraine.
Yahoo & the Independent are describing those who criticize the thumb-kissing photo as `trolls' - not what I understand as `trolls'.

Fol-dee-rol... Here's a trip down memory lane for Nutties of a certain age...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbfzUPWNfVE
Hikari said…
@Sandie

I’m curious to know whether the rule for Catherine will expire when she is promoted to Princess of Wales? Presumably once she is Queen Consort she will not be required to curtsy to the ‘blood royals’? How far down does that extend, I wonder? Does Catherine curtsy to Prince Michael of Kent for example? Would she technically have to courtesy to her own children because they are blood royals through their father?

I know the Crown is roundly disparaged here but I do think they have an etiquette consultant to get that right. There is a scene in the first episode where Princess Elizabeth (Claire Foy) Returns from Malta after receiving news that her father is undergoing surgery for his lungs. When she enters the room where the other Royals are gathered, she goes up and greets her mother with a kiss and then curtsies to her. The shoe was on the other foot in the next episode when she comes back from her truncated Kenya tour to view the body of the King, and when she emerges from his room, she receives curtsies from the Queen Mother and Margaret. One of the highlights of the entire series is when Queen Mary arrives all in her mourning weeds, and the at that time 80 year old Dame Eileen Atkins goes down into such a deep curtsy she’s practically kneeling on the floor in front of her granddaughter, the new Queen. I presume in time, if Catherine is still living when George becomes the king she will have to curtsy to her son in turn. That has got to feel weird.
Sandie said…
Can't copy the link as the site is beset with major pop-ups that won't go away ...

It is in The Daily Star (so huge dose of salt required) but it is reported that the duo have moved into an apartment in Beverley Hills that is owned by Tyler Perry.
Sandie said…
It is referred to as a 'pad', so not necessarily an apartment.
@Sandie -

It'd be like me trying to explain to a cousin (A) why another cousin (B) who was said the be `hot on maths' couldn't get to university.

At that time, not that long after the war, there was little public money available to support students from families of modest means in Higher Education, so the then-Ministry of Education had a rule that in order to qualify one needed to show signs of general ability, as well as being good at one's subject. Besides the basic school qualification in maths & English language, one needed a pass in a foreign language as well, usually French.

Cousin (B) had sat the exam (O-Level) 5 times and failed every time. I expect that she took the line that the requirement was `stupid' and relied on her mathematical brilliance dazzling the Entrance Tutors.

Cousin A refused to follow my explanation - she left me in no doubt that she too considered the requirement ridiculous. It was like talking to a brick wall.
Sandie said…
Sorry, I think it may be an old article about them living in Tyler Perry's property.
Este said…
@Raspberry Ruffle...thanks for sharing what Lady C had to say. I'm incline to agree with her here as well. None of this changes the fact Bower's book is a bomb. Lady C did Tom Bower a bona fide solid in her stellar reviews of a book I'm still committed to buying and reading soon. So that lends credibility, for me, for sure.
Girl with a Hat said…
@Swamp Woman, you've got it all wrong. The nuclear power station is in Russian hands. The Ukrainians are shelling it so if there is an accident, it's on the Ukrainians, not the Russians.

Also, can we please limit the political comments here? There's no need to discuss the war here, as it has nothing to do with the Sussexes at all, and if this comment is not posted, then the incorrect comment about the Russians doing the shelling needs to be removed as well.
Girl with a Hat said…
@SWamp woman,

your comment about Beatrice resembling Queen Victoria because the family is "inbred" is quite incorrect.

I am the spitting image of my great-great-grandmother and our family is far from "inbred". These things happen except most people don't have pictures of portraits of their ancestors to be able to compare.

I remember during the Bicentennial of the French Revolution in 1989, a French magazine had an article about the prominent people involved in the event, and had a portrait of one such person of the period, and his descendant of 200 years later, and they were spitting images of each other.
Girl with a Hat said…
@Hikari,

Princess Michael of Kent is not a blood royal. So Catherine wouldn't have to curtsy to her.

Observant One said…
Royal Resemblances

In addition to Bea resembling Queen Victoria, I think that Eugenie resembles the late Queen Mother, especially through the eyes and eyebrows. I also see many similarities between Queen Mary and the current Queen and Princess Anne. Prince Edward, the Earl of Wessex looks like a carbon copy of Queen Mary, especially his mouth. H looks just like both of Diana’s sisters. Earl Spencer has a slight underbite, so that must be where H got his. I can’t see much Windsor in him. William is a combination of his mother and some distant Windsor males.
SwampWoman said…
Girl with a Hat said...
@SWamp woman,

your comment about Beatrice resembling Queen Victoria because the family is "inbred" is quite incorrect.


Hmmm. Since most of the royalty of Europe only married among cousins in the past, I would expect a certain similarity of features. Much like people in isolated regions who marry among the same distant relatives over and over and share a resemblance as well as genetic anomalies.
Ralph L said…
IIRC, on her own, the Princess of Wales curtsies to the Princess Royal but no other princesses.
Sandie said…
@Hikari
When Catherine becomes Queen, her status outranks blood royals, but not as Princess of Wales. For the latter, she would only outrank a blood royal if William is with her. Camilla (who technically is princess if Wales) must curtsy to Anne, but not if she is with Charles.
Rebecca said…
The latest issue of People magazine has been out for a few days already, I believe, but Kate is on the cover: The Making of A Queen.

I hope Twat enjoys it.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Hikari
I presume in time, if Catherine is still living when George becomes the king she will have to curtsy to her son in turn. That has got to feel weird.

It would be disorienting, of course, but I think Catherine has been preparing herself for it since George's birth -- if not his conception.

What would have been more humiliating was Diana's loss of the HRH after the divorce, which meant (as I recall it!) that she had to curtsy to both her sons, even while they were still just Princes. Hence the famous story about Prince William promising her that he'd restore it when he became King. She'd still have to curtsy to him then, but at least he'd be the actual crowned head, and she wouldn't have to do it to the rest of her estranged in-laws.

Your mentioning of scenes in movies reminds me of another: The moment in The King's Speech when Bertie's daughters, who have been calling him Papa all their lives, look at him in awe, curtsy, and address him as "Your Majesty." As he had never expected to be King, that would have beyond weird for all of them.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Sandie
Can you imagine someone trying to explain these rules to TBW?

I'm sure many people tried and ran up against two brick walls: Her narcissism and a certain disdain of ancient traditions that even non-narcs often share today.

Former late night show host Conan O'Brien once visited Ghana and actually received an audience with the then-Asantehemaa (Queen Mother). I'm sure he was trying to be as respectful as possible, but his natural awkwardness caused him to violate protocol and turn his back on the Royal. Some people pointed this out in the comments to the video clip on YouTube -- which, of course, attracted replies like: "Well, those 'rules' are BS anyway. Good on Conan for showing them how silly they're being."

If a narc already thought that all those rules were silly, then he or she would publicly flaunt behavior that violates them. But of course it's all subjective. * ate it up with a spoon when people curtsied to her.

Though in all fairness to *, the time she turned her back on the Queen was more likely due to thoughtless self-absorption rather than to ideological disagreement with hierarchy. In flirting/love-bombing mode, with Prince Charles as her target, she ignored all the women in the area. In that moment, in her narc mind, the Queen was nothing but another woman to compete with for a man's attentions.
Sandie said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11096433/Harry-Meghan-warned-mountain-LION-prowling-close-14m-Montecito-mansion.html

Perhaps because I am African I have a different perspective, but I say 'Let the lion have some chickens for heaven's sake'!
Magatha Mistie said…

Polho Bare

Surprised to hear
with her Vice like grip
She couldn’t get her mouth round
the stiff upper lip
Early days, fully lit chit
Was a Pro of the old
grin and bare it…

It's easy to over-estimate the level of inbreeding in European Royals & aristos and underestimate that among the plebs! In the past, we were all `inbred' because there were so few of us, although at 4th cousin level the risks appear to have been low. The coming of the bicycle helped widen the pool of potential marriage partners in English rural communities in the 19th.

We still have places where everyone is related to everyone else but the wider availability of motor transport since the war has made a difference.
Family resemblances can persist for centuries - I used to know a descendant of the family of Anne of Cleves - even after 500 years I could still see a facial resemblance to the portrait sent to Henry VIII. I can think of a couple of other examples (300 and 100 yrs) but that's the longest.
Magatha Mistie said…

Meh having to curtsy
to Kate at the dress-fitting
probably caused her nasty jibes.
I’m presuming haz was absent but,
he may have been standing in
as wig weaver.

To me, William at times looks a thorough Hanoverian (no doubts as to his paternity!) rather like the portrait of Geo I's eldest, Frederick, Prince of Wales. At other times, he has resembled Prince Charles Edward (1720-88) aka Young Chevalier/Pretender, or Bonnie Prince Charlie, doubtless thanks to Stuart genes from his mother.
Magatha Mistie said…

God Save the Queen

Her body is failing
her mind still intact
No one knows
when God will act



Magatha Mistie said…

@Rebecca
Love it.
How about Eton Mess…

Sandie said…
Post in thread 'Meghan Markle unpopular opinions thread pt 8' https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-8.4943382/post-84573918

Check this out!

The prince has been reduced to 'the husband' of the alliterate one, even though he was invited to speak at the UN and she just tagged along.
The black and white photography is a favourite of the alliterate one.
Thus post was done some time after the UN failed speech. PR is getting desperate!

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

https://actionaid.org/who-we-are

The NGO - sounds like just the sort of organization that the duo would latch onto.
abbyh said…
Could we please back away from the comments on who is shelling whom.

I agree it would be really bad. Ok.

It is a little too tangential for the moment to our topic.

Thank you.
More pics of William Herbert, 18th Earl of Pembroke, son & heir to 17th Earl with whom Diana is said to have had an affair before she met James Hewitt:

https://www.adriangottlieb.com/painting/the-earl-of-pembroke/

https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/news-photo/18th-earl-of-pembroke-william-herbert-is-photographed-at-news-photo/138655219

https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/18th-earl-of-pembroke-william-herbert-is-photographed-at-news-photo/138655223

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/604960162424361145/

There are a couple others to which I gave the link of one previously - but I can't recall which.

Funnily enough, there's an old slang phrase which could be applied to H - `He's a right 'erbert'. What a curious coincidence...

BTW Getty is ignorant of English geography:

There's a tiny village called Wilton on Teeside in the NE ie Middlesbrough, ie in Cleveland, but Wilton House, seat of the Herberts, is at Wilton, a town in Wiltshire, just west of Salisbury and the place of origin of Wilton carpets.

George Herbert, 17thC parson & poet, eschewed Court life and family wealth and lived quietly as rector of Bemerton, now a suburb of Salisbury. If only H had followed his example.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Herbert
Magatha Mistie said…

@Fifi

Exactly

Meh wasn’t invited
along to the Met Ball
Anna decided
they’re worth sweet
feck all
No way was she going
to cover the *unt
With a picture of meh
and her ‘kids’
Cunning stunt…


re Vogue:

Is the * piece really an `advertorial', a paid-for piece cobbled together by * and her familiars, masquerading as legitimate journalism but really just a `commercial'? It should say so, even if in very small print.
Hikari said…
Girl,

Not to Princess Michael of Kent no— But her husband is a blood Royal and he was the one I mentioned.
We mustn’t forget the The Queen despite receiving the best access to health professionals for her entire life, is still very much mortal like the rest of us. 🫤

Lady C alluded to (and it’s not always easy to decipher what she really means IMHO) that both Maggot and Mole’s behaviour over the last 2 years or so has had a detrimental effect on her health, and obviously plans are moving into place for the next phase.😔

She is 96 years old, it’s a truly remarkable age and milestone to reach, but what these two have done and are continuing to do, is truly reprehensible. The despicable pair have said they aren’t attacking the Queen, but we know they have been and are. Lady C says that Sir Edward Young’s involvement in getting Mole’s security removed was at the Queen’s request. So Mole suing the Home Office is a direct attack on his Grand Mother. 😟😞

@WBBM,

Mole’s Father

I know there’s many who’d like to see Mole paternal come under serious scrutiny, but Mole has Charles short stubby fingers, his close together eyes and Lady C says Mole is very much like Louis Mountbatten to look at, which personally I can’t see as much.

I know Diana was unstable and seen as a loose cannon, but I don’t think for one single minute she’d let herself get impregnated by anybody but her husband. To believe she had an affair is one thing (she had many), but a baby (with the 17th Earl of Pembroke, who incidentally is dead and therefore unable to defend his name or character) is a stretch. IMHO, it comes off as no better than a muck racking activity, and on par with Maggot’s flying Monkey’s. 🥴😞
Girl with a Hat said…
@Hikari,

Sorry, somehow I kept reading that as "Princess Michael of Kent".
Girl with a Hat said…
@Rasperry Ruffle,

There is a behaviour in narcs that no one seems to have commented upon, even among the experts, and that is they turn on beloved people as these loved ones grow older. I have seen it myself in my acquaintances, and it's often quite surprising how fast it happens, and without any provocation. It's like the narcs detest the weakness of the aged, and need to attack it in some way, probably because they dislike any sign of weakness within themselves.


Hikari said…
Magatha,

Meh having to curtsy
to Kate at the dress-fitting
probably caused her nasty jibes.
I’m presuming haz was absent but,
he may have been standing in
as wig weaver.


I just had a thought--was Meh also obligated to curtsy to then-3 year old Princess Lottie, a blood royal Princess from the moment she was conceived? Of course Meh is toxically jealous of Catherine, and a curtsy to her is bad enough, but to a thee-year-old? A Narc's head would come off. This may explain the all-out HATRED directed to tiny Charlotte during the wedding ceremony. Presumably Haz would not have to bow the head to William's children as a fellow HRH, would he, though they outrank him in the succession? Does the deference kick in after a certain age or all the senior-age Royals required to genuflect before infants?

Though I kind of live for that delicious day, presuming H lives long enough which is no sure bet, when Uncle Harry has to shuffle in and bow his head to King George VII. If I were George, I think I'd also insist on the 'not turning the back on the Royal Presence' as well and force Uncle Harry to shuffle out of the room backwards. William could do the same, though something tells me that H will not be invited to that coronation.
Hikari said…
These are some of the pictures I attempted to post the last time the question of Harry's paternity and non-resemblance to the Windsors came up. Actually it's easier just to go to Google Images and put in "Harry/prince Philip/Charles". I have to disagree with the idea that Harry looks more like James Hewitt than he does a Mountbatten. He really is the spit of Philip--through Charles. The older Harry gets the more Charles asserts himself in Harry's features. James Hewitt's got brown eyes, very dark auburn hair and a rounder face. Harry's angularity, body shape, jawline, eyes and teeth all scream Philip to me. Clock the now very famous photo of Lt. P. Mountbatten, red beard and all, on the cover of Life Magazine in 1945. We could be looking at Harry . . before Haz went off the rails.


https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-25914cf14aad32d58b72e1e9820bae41-lq

https://external-preview.redd.it/uLmRJL1xeSHFngBAPtS2IvxITWN1_36yv00LCzfJty4.jpg?width=960&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=3072afef4b5555dbdab47970c8eed1c85912eb22

https://www.newidea.com.au/media/31050/prince-philip-7.jpg?width=720&center=0.0,0.0

-----------

Eugenie and Queen Mum
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/6d/ab/d7/6dabd75fddf607cb72e0cb32c2ada152.jpg

There is a similarity in face shape and the set of eyes and the brunette coloring. I've always thought E. strongly favors her dad. Beatrice got Sarah's hair and Queen Victoria is in there too. Both the Windsor and Spencer families have a lot of big teeth.

I think Edward favors the Queen the most of all her children, and it's been said that the Queen favors her grandmother Queen Mary. Edward's daughter Louise strongly favors Queen Mary, I think.
Este said…
Serena does refer to Meghan as her friend in the Vogue article but seems to focus on the time she spent getting ready for the royal wedding. It's interesting, the faint signaling of support from two celebs after the fact. Seems like everyone knows she's toxic but are staying pretty much silent. The the woke version of Sophie's choice: when you can't renounce a fraud without looking like a turncoat to the cause; stay silent.

Omid wants us all to know his next book will "rock" Harry's family like they haven't been poking the Queen's eye enough already. Yeah, we'll take some more of the same losing strategy that makes us look like bullies! Like Lady C puts so well, when she gets into character, Slap 'em once! Slap 'em twice!.

Looks like Harry is ready to dump Sunshine Sachs. Their PR is no good, LOL! These two haven't yet figured out it's not the PR that's no good!!

Welcome to the long slow fade to pop oblivion! Voices will be raise; feet will be stomped; and yes, hair will be pulled, on the way to being hustled out the door, like its Prince Charles' 70 birthday party.
lizzie said…
I've read the RF only curtseys to TQ as a rule. I know we've seen MM curtsey to Charles but I don't recall ever seeing anyone else in the RF do that. But as I understand it they don't go around bowing and curtseying to each other and nobody curtseys or bows to children. I seriously doubt having to curtsey to Charlotte is what caused MM to come unglued at the dress-fitting assuming she really did freak out. And even if she was supposed to curtsey to Charlotte (I'm sure she wasn't anymore than Charlotte is expected to curtsey to George) I'm pretty sure MM wouldn't have done it anyway. And there aren't any curtsey police!
Who will be George VII?

It's not such a daft question as it might seem. It's by no means certain that Charles will use his own name, even though his mother used hers and I've seen it suggested that Charles may take the regnal name of `George'.

It might help to signify a break with his past, shedding the association with Stuart misrule, and is a `solid' sort of name associated with an unpromising king who rose magnificently to the challenge of being monarch at a time of great crisis, even though it undoubtedly shortened his life.

Also, Charles III eventually would have been the name of the king, after James III, had the '45 succeeded, so this might upset some of those north of the Border who still consider themselves to be Jacobites.

As for the other matter, pure speculation with no solid evidence.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Hikari
I just had a thought--was Meh also obligated to curtsy to then-3 year old Princess Lottie, a blood royal Princess from the moment she was conceived? Of course Meh is toxically jealous of Catherine, and a curtsy to her is bad enough, but to a thee-year-old? A Narc's head would come off. This may explain the all-out HATRED directed to tiny Charlotte during the wedding ceremony.

Oh, this was probably it! Even if the courtiers hadn't insisted on the rule, simply learning about it would have made * furious. The bullying of Princess Charlotte during the fitting and the glare to terrorize her in public at the wedding was intended to even the score. This would be petty enough on its own without factoring in the fact that Charlotte was still a toddler.
Hikari said…
@WBBM

On the question of Charles's regnal name:

Given the history of the name Charles, it is super quizzical that Elizabeth and Philip would have chosen that moniker for their firstborn son in the first place. I assume eyebrows may have been raised at the time over the choice. Charles has "George" as his last middle name, but seeing as the Queen was so close to her beloved Papa, tragically departed far too soon, it's a wonderment to me that she didn't want George for her son's first name. None of her sons are named George. While there is a historical rationale for ditching Charles as his regnal name, I think at this point in time, after the longest tenure as the Prince of Wales in history as Her Majesty's liege man under the name of Charles, changing it now would be rather silly. As a younger man, Charles may have looked forward to a longer reign but the female genes are strong and it was not to be. Expecting his subjects and courtiers to master a new name as he ascends the throne in his dotage, destined to reign perhaps 10 years? Could be longer but HM could defy all the doomsayers and surpass her mother in years. 5, 6 years more on and Charles is looking 80 square in the eye--To switch names at this stage feels like a stunt, really. It's his right to do it of course and Young George could just as easily be George VIII as VII. Heck, if a name change is desired than Charles might as well be bold and choose Arthur II. It's been 70+ years and will be more still since Britain has had a George on the throne. If he wanted to project true continuity he'd call himself Elizabeth III and earn mad woke points with the Rainbow Coalition.

Charles has always fancied the Arthurian Legend and William bears that name as well. To call himself Arthur II would probably be the most exciting thing about Charles's bound-to-be brief time on the throne.
Sandie said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11099953/Prince-Harry-Meghans-Archewell-Foundation-receive-award-advocating-Afghan-refugees.html

They have bagged themselves another award.

Forgive me for being cynical, but I think this is how this works... Yet another new organization looking for donations. Archewell will give them some money, but they need something in return ... a gushing social media post at least, but an award is even better (to plump up their CVs as philanthropists and global humanitarians). The financial donation is not big but it guarantees the organisation noticeable media coverage.
Hikari said…
WBBM,

To me, William at times looks a thorough Hanoverian (no doubts as to his paternity!) rather like the portrait of Geo I's eldest, Frederick, Prince of Wales. At other times, he has resembled Prince Charles Edward (1720-88) aka Young Chevalier/Pretender, or Bonnie Prince Charlie, doubtless thanks to Stuart genes from his mother.

When William was a youth, before he lost all that gorgeous hair, his Spencer genes were tantamount, it seemed. He looked to have Diana's large eyes, nose and smile. He certainly has got the strapping Spencer body frame, rather than the weedier frame sported by Harry. Diana was very athletic. Catherine is also athletic but Diana was much larger-boned. Now that William is 40, his Windsor side is asserting itself more. He still reminds me very much of his mother, but when I saw a shot of Charles and his two sons in profile, it's unmistakable that they've all got Philip's nose. People say Charlotte looks like the Queen but she looks like her father more so--their eyes are identical. I see more of Philip in William these days.

Charles Stuart was quite effeminate wasn't he? Not something William could be accused of. No matter what certain distasteful rumors insinuate . . those are barking up the wrong tree altogether, to quote River.
abbyh said…
Well my my my.

Oprah's Harpo has filed suit against a podcast which is all about her and her cultural relevance over concerns it would lessen her image or imply she was supportive of it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-11099329/Oprah-Winfreys-company-sues-Oprahdemics-podcast.html

The video I just watched before this was the BLG talking about how * personally contacted CNN to have them delete a piece someone did on the not quite accurate statements in that interview. That was successful. Getting the guy fired - not as successful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ97BusrO8M&t=339s
HappyDays said…
In a Neal Sean video report Tuesday. August 9th, titled “Meghan New Crisis — Has She Given In?” Mr. Sean discussed the impact of Tom Bower’s book. He said it is thought that some of the people Bower talked to for the Revenge book who did not want to originally go on the record might now be willing to speak about their experiences with Meghan and that what they say could end up in additional chapters containing their revelations in the paperback edition of “Revenge.”

Looking forward to the paperback!

Thank you, Hikari, for the pics of H, Charles & Philip, both bearded and clean-shaven - I don't think I've ever seen any of them before. I agree with you.

Beards can be so misleading - there's a photo of my paternal grandfather taken c.1900 which makes him the spitting image of Edward VII and there's no way that he could have been involved with us. I did have the intriguing thought a couple of weeks ago, however, that aristocratic plantation-owners, fathering children on slave women, may have resulted in even more descendants of Edward III than has been reckoned so far.

re the name `Arthur'. Victoria used the name for one of her sons as did Henry VIII. James I & VI saw himself as a `new Arthur', uniting England and Scotland as `Britain' once more.

Sadly, there's no solid evidence that `King Arthur' ever existed. The Round Table at Winchester has been dated to c1290 AD, painted up in reign of Henry VIII. There are no contemporary British written records for the period 400-600 AD, for all that the so-called Dark Ages are far less `dark' than once thought, thanks to archaeology. There is evidence of high-status British life continuing in the South West after the end of Roman Britain but the significance of the Artognou stone is debatable.

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

Arthurian legend is just that - legend, created after 1066, embroidered by Tennyson. Don't get me started on what English Heritage has done at Tintagel.
Sandie said…
Oprah: She has the money to win this? Maybe not if a jury has to decide. My personal view is that she does not have a case, especially as she is not seeking financial damages or to shut down the podcast ... she wants them to stop using her name. However, since the podcast is about her and the impact of her brand, that makes no sense. You can't have it both ways: spend your life building immense wealth, power and influence and then bring a lawsuit like this. By the way, the podcast is immensely flattering and supportive of everything Oprah. Perhaps a case could be made that it actually enhances and increases the value of her brand? Nonetheless, it is interesting.

But, I think this shows that there has been no falling out between the Harkles and Oprah. They are cut from the same cloth. Brand, control, domination, trademark and copyright everything ...
Sandie said…
https://the-best-soap-opera-ever.tumblr.com/image/692206289179361280

An interesting excerpt from Revenge, talking about the campaign to control the media (for MM). Personally, I think she has lost this control.
Este said…
Jessica is not done trolling Meghan on her Instgram. She's got a picture of herself puckering her face like a fish while wearing a gold crown, pretending to be the Queen, no doubt. It's real housewives juvenile shade directed at her former Mean Girl in Arms.

I'm sure Meghan and Harry are out for blood and I've no doubt they will use Omid to push the very limit of dirt that they can get away with publishing but I'm not worried about their Revenge, post Bower Bomb. It's not just his book either, it's 2 years of no real achievements; it's Pearl getting dropped; it being ghosted by celebrity friends; it's the reality emerging to everyone but them. They played a bad hand and came up snake eyes.

There's no recooping these losses in large part because, unlike their role model Diana, they never had the talent or put in the work needed to cash out. Meghan thought she could walk over everyone on the way to instant, freeze-dried, just add water worldwide celebrity and we see how well that worked out for her. But hey, let's blame Sunshine Sachs for the past 2 years. That's why they're paying them the big bucks...to make them worldwide stars! Nobody told them you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Oh dear, oh dear.
@Sandie - I have always had a hard time understanding how she ever had this kind of control of the media. Even though she was made a Duchess upon her marriage to Harry, I can't imagine CNN would kow tow to her. She doesn't represent the Queen or the Royal Family since they stepped down so they shouldn't worry about the RF becoming angry. I suspect it's *'s history of litigious behavior that makes them think twice. But realistically, how many lawsuits can they really afford?

Ah well, I'm not part of the sycophantic crowd.
Maneki Neko said…
Prince William and Kate Middleton's Royal Foundation increased its income from £6.7 million to more than £20.4 million in two years, figures reveal - days after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle dissolved their UK charity
Previous figures from UK Companies showed that the now-defunct Sussex Royal charity had US$380,000 (£280,624) in its accounts in 2020 and spent at least US$55,600 (£41,084) on attorneys.
.....
I hope the fur is flying in Montecito 😁

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11102205/Prince-William-Kate-Middletons-charity-income-14million.html
Hikari said…
Well, Nutties,

I finally cracked my copy of Revenge. I got to page 5 and had to set it down and go, "Whoa." Tom has spilled so much dirt already and it's barely started.

Takeaways:

1. Tom spotted Doria, 'a slim, beautiful 24 year old Black woman with a nose stud' across a crowded TV studio and was instantly smitten. Within just a few weeks, Doria had moved herself into Tom's place (a pigsty, reading between the lines), where Tom was raising his two teenage kids despite working long-ass days at the studio. I had not realized that Tom was the full-time custodial parent of Tom Jr. and Samantha but this sounds like he was. Of the two siblings, Tom Jr. bonded more with his father's new wife because Doria commiserated with him about his forced busing to a predominantly black school an hour away where he was routinely beaten up for 'integration' purposes. Apparently Doria contacted the school administration on Tom Jr.'s behalf and managed to convince them that he experienced plenty of 'diversity' at home and could be pulled from the busing scheme.
Hmm, moving in extremely swiftly on romantic targets/meal tickets before the love bombing wears off and the targets have time to think is a classic maneuver by narcissists. * learned how to grift and graft off men from watching the maternal source.

2. Tom Snr. was over the moon about his new daughter, who came along about 18 months after their wedding on December 23, 1979 at some whoo-whoo New Age religious center in L.A. Doria was less invested in the baby and would disappear for long stretches to work for a relative's cannabis-growing concern in Humboldt County. Tom Sr. admitted that both he and Doria and everyone they knew drank, smoked and partied a lot, but after the baby was born and he went back to working 18-hour shifts at the TV studio, it swiftly became apparent that he and Doria were 'incompatible'. Thomas was shocked at the amount of weed Doria consumed. She was basically always smoking weed and drifting around at all hours of the day in her pajamas, out high in the driveway and etc., despite having a baby in the house.

3. Things were rockier with Samantha. After the birth of Meghan, Doria decided to try her hand at a jewelry business, having failed out of a number of other careers, including make-up artist which she had been training for when she met Tom Sr. She named the company 'Three Cherubs'--for herself, Tom and the baby. Samantha felt the name was a deliberate snub to her and her brother. Why not '5 Cherubs'? like they were being excluded from the 'true' family.

4. Thomas was the first one to use the nickname 'Flower', despite * attributing that solely to Doria. He wanted 'Meghan'; Doria wanted 'Rachel'. Tom B. says Rachel was instantly forgotten. I don't know about that; * may have always been Meghan at home but even up through college all her school friends seemed to know and address her as 'Rachel'. It was afterwards when she decided to market herself as an influencer/actress that she dropped 'Rachel' from her resume and had 'new' friends start calling her Meghan. Which means "Pearl" in Welsh, so we can see the derivation of the stillborn animated series Pearl. Everything * does is designed to be self-referential.

5. Flower/Pearl was raised from birth by both parents to believe that she was extraordinary in every way conceivable and never wanted for anything.

We have extrapolated a lot of this already but this is only after 4 pages. I'm strapping in for quite a read.
Sandie said…
@Hikari
I am delighted you are reading the book. It is packed with information, mostly from what has been published in the media, but here and there a new bit of information appears in the narrative ... e.g. the way she behaved on the Reitman's shoot was a rumour doing the rounds on social media but Bower confirms everything with all the details.

Because it is so dense, I am sure I missed some stuff so I am looking forward to your sharing of highlights for you.

At the end, I was left with the sense that she had so much privilege and so many opportunities and she has made such a mess of it all. Marrying into the royal family may be very difficult, but with the right attitude and humility, it is not difficult to find guidance and to understand the values and purpose of the monarchy. I think her personality disorder is a real disability for her and the tragedy is that she cannot see that and is married to a man who enables her stupidity and surrounds herself with staff and friends who do the same.
Martha said…
@hikari….many thanks for the recap for the first five pages. Jam packed with info!
Este said…
@Hikari Thanks for that thorough analysis of FIVE pages. WOW. This is a bomb.
Sandie said…
I don't think Bower took a deep dive into all their shady business affairs. People on social media have been talking about this for quite a while. I suppose it will take some time for an author to catch up and do some investigating ... I came across this but have not verified if it is true:

-----
Archewell LLC was registered with the Secretary of State in Wyoming June 15, 2022

-----
Sussex Group LLC was registered with the Secretary of State in Wyoming June 14, 2022

-----
MWX Global Management LLC was registered with the Secretary of State in Wyoming September 5, 2019
------

Why Wyoming?

"It’s called the Cowboy Cocktail, and in recent years, the coveted financial arrangement has attracted a new set of outsiders to the least populated state in America.

The cocktail and variations of it — consisting of a Wyoming trust and layers of private companies with concealed ownership— allow the world’s wealthy to move and spend money in extraordinary secrecy, protected by some of the strongest privacy laws in the country and, in some cases, without even the cursory oversight performed by regulators in other states."
Este said…
And the more I ruminate over it, the more I think Oprah's playing us. Tyler's tweet was support she absolutely had to get and he's a mogul. And he and Oprah are tight. So, no, I don't believe Oprah 2.0 is NOT happening. I just think, Meghan being Meghan, she couldn't wait to drop that nugget on the heels of Bower's Bomb just like her Vanity Fair cover betrayal. Regardless of the crass move made they made when Oprah's father was dying, there is still dynamite to exploit there with these two. And, I don't see why Oprah would walk away from making bank off that? Really. Why wouldn't she want to interview Meghan again? Meghan's not done with us but yeah we are most definitely done with her.
Rebecca said…
From the Spectator:

Prince Harry presiding over ‘toxic boys’ club,’ former employees claim

Employee reviews of BetterUp make for damning reading

Cockburn is fond of a periodical check-in with modern Renaissance men. And they don’t come much more multi-talented than Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, Mr. Meghan Markle, formerly HRH. Following “Megxit” and his departure from official royal duties, the people’s prince has kept busy by locking himself into lucrative positions at some of the planet’s most prestigious companies. His multiple deals — Netflix and Spotify to name two — were not uncommon for an up-and-coming sleb, but the most bizarre of his roles was joining the “mental fitness” start-up BetterUp as “chief impact officer.” Oh, how we smirked, with the occasional eye roll, firm in the belief that he’d be back in Britain soon enough, groveling to granny for his lovely old life back.

Yet judging from the testimonies of ex-employees, BetterUp seem to be professional in nothing other than virtue-signaling, and while they may talk the talk, by all accounts, they do not walk the walk. On Glassdoor, one employee branded the company a “Toxic Boys Club,” claiming they felt discouraged to speak up when something didn’t sit right, and that “wartime” language was used to push people to their limits. Another claimed that BetterUp was a “psychologically unsafe place to work,” saying, “everyone is uncomfortable and living in fear. It’s keep your head down… do your work, don’t get on someone’s bad side. No one will go to HR as HR is close to the leaders.”

Cockburn was shocked to hear claims that the company is rife with nepotism, something in which Harry, the original nepo-baby will be well-versed. Employees claimed that the “inner circle was impenetrable” because of how incestuous the leadership was. “They lie, play games, test/watch/spy on employees… it’s a pretty nasty underbelly.”

Another said that they can’t wait for a Netflix exposé. Cockburn can’t help but speculate that a documentary might be the only way that Netflix will recoup any of the $100 million from the deal they struck with Duke and Duchess Dolittle, as the expensive ‘partnership’ declared in 2020 has so far resulted in… nothing.

Naturally, and given that online testimonies can’t be verified, Cockburn approached the startup for comment before publication — and will include their response if one is provided.

When Harry packed up Frogmore Cottage for Montecito, it looked as if he had it all planned out. Privacy, financial independence and wellness were suddenly at the top of his agenda — a far cry from the brash, publicly-funded prince for which the world had developed a soft spot. Two years later and it seems that the promise of a new life in Jonestown wasn’t all it was cracked up to be; after jumping from career to career — and not really doing much in any of them — Harry seems a bit lost.

Earlier this month, keeping on trend with his new image as the prince of wellness, Harry Krishna found himself interviewing athletes and psychologists in a promotional film for BetterUp. The clip starts with Harry calling on us to remember that we “all have greatness within us,” before adding that he now uses his free time to better himself, revealing, “It’s either for workouts, taking the dog for a walk, getting out into nature, maybe meditating.”

It got Cockburn thinking: this bizarre transition to Holistic Harry happened pretty fast. His days, which used to be filled with public engagements and parties, now see him meditating in Montecito, announcing that we should all take time for ourselves, even proclaiming that if we don’t like our job, that we should just quit like he did. What are the characteristics of a cult again? A charismatic leader who is preoccupied with money-making; an us-versus-them mentality, mind-numbing techniques such as meditation, elitists who think they’re saving the world and so on and so on…

If Cockburn were to offer one piece of advice, it would be that Harry may be better off without BetterUp. Oh — and don’t drink the Kool-Aid.
Rebecca said…
Prince Andrew will continue to get taxpayer funded, round the clock police protection. Does this mean Harry will prevail in court and get the same?
Fifi LaRue said…
@Hikari: Thanks for the summary of the first few pages. Doria excluding two children from the family, Samantha and Tom Jr. who lived at the same address as Tom Sr. and Doria, smacks of borderline personality disorder.

Doria put on the coquette act at the wedding, looking demurely downward, while hiding the witch that she is. Imagine having a daughter more vicious than oneself, telling the mother when to jump, and how high, and then criticizing the jump.
I believe this is a very recent offering from BLG, though I can't seem to get back to where it was flagged up at side of something else where it says it was quite new:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6XszwXqe3g

The key point is that JER says wwtte that the give-away is that they have never sued, or threatened to sue anyone who cast doubt on her first `pregnancy'.
Sandie said…
Some tea (Theresa Longo Fans)...

https://mobile.twitter.com/barkjack_/status/1557923344179249152

-----
Steps are being taken: transparency, written warning (from legal, contractual standpoint) such that if deal doesn't materialize the steaming giant is protected from unfair/wrongful suits.

Potential BUY OUT mulled (worse case scenario)
(pay them off with NDA, be done with it).
-----
The best case scenario is content is delivered & analyzed for popularity & it's a hit.

What will happen? It's unclear right now.
The streaming giant is preparing for worst, hoping for best. That's the full update!
Magatha Mistie said…

@Rebecca
Thanks for the Spectator
article by Cockburn, enjoyed it.
Reckon haz would be better off
without BottomUp…
Cockburn is probably to blame
for the mess he’s in now 😉

A Special Reserve @WildBoar
“Never say Cock say Co” 😬

Sandie said…
@Rebecca
Thanks for the article from Spectator. Interesting reading!

I do take issue with the unqualified bashing of meditation. It is a practice that helps tremendously with health and wellbeing and spiritual 'connection' but, unfortunately, it can also have many detrimental effects in the hands of the wrong people. One of the potential pitfalls is that it can lead to self-absorption, so I can see how narcissists would promote it (for all the wrong reasons). It is ironic because the last thing a narcissist wants is authentic self-connection and self-awareness, and the detachment from thoughts and desires, but that is what you do in genuine meditation. By detachment, I mean be aware of but detach from thoughts and feelings. A person doing genuine meditation would never act in the reckless, thoughtless, selfish way that the duo have and do.
Magatha Mistie said…

@Fifi
Doria’s demure, downward look
was to hide her salivating
smirk.
She gave herself away when she
licked her hungry lips…

Sandie said…
@Rebecca
I read the article on Andrew's protection with much dismay. The British public will not be happy with spending millions on Scotland Yard protection for Andrew and the Harkle family.

Perhaps the protection provided for Andrew is because of genuine threats. The cost is a tenth of what Scobie claimed, but even so, it is a considerable expense.

In my opinion, Andrew should be used as an example of how a royal can pay for private protection that works closely with Scotland Yard. That could be used as a blueprint for the Harkles.

The York scandals are not over. They have gotten away with not paying huge debts by pleading poverty but Sarah has just bought prime property in London. Unfortunately even if Charles and William are concerned and not in support of taxpayer-funded security for Andrew and the Harkles they actually cannot interfere with the decisions made, but they will experience the negative effects of them.
Sandie said…
Doria: Bower does reveal that Doria intervened to get Tom Jnr moved from the school he was bussed to in the California diversity policy (he was placed in and bussed to a 'black' school, where he was bullied). There are numerous photos of Tom Jnr and Samantha with Doria's family. Doria was very young and seemed to not be maternal, so it is understandable that she did not take on the role of mother to her two teenage stepchildren. I don't think she was deliberately trying to exclude them, although when the daughter met the Prince she then colluded with her to exclude all Markles, including father, from her life. So I may be wrong in my 'defence'!

I am also not sure that cutting people out/excluding them is a sign of borderline personality disorders. Apologies for being argumentative, but people misunderstand and misdiagnose BPD. Anyone can display one or more of the traits and not meet the criteria of diagnosis. BPD is debilitating and impossible to hide. For example, there is no way Diana could have performed the public role she did for so many years and have the disorder. People with BPD are not bad people, nor psychopaths, nor even necessarily narcissists. They have a self-sabotaging disorder that is an extreme handicap for them and a nightmare for the people close to them. Suicide attempts and violence are common with people with BPD, and intimate relationships with them are extremely challenging and draining.

Apologies if I have offended anyone!
------

We don't have to wait too long for the Valentine Low book. It is going to be interesting!
Sandie said…
https://skippyv20.tumblr.com/

She is still trying to control the narrative through any outlet she can.

No, she is not a princess. She is entitled to use the title Princess Henry because of who she married. That does not make her a princess.
Magatha Mistie said…

Insufficient Surety

Oh to be the second son
Getting away with
having such fun
Involved in scrapes
with regularity
And then demanding
top security…

@Magatha -

I always liked the gag about `Chomondeley, pronounced Marjoribanks' (to be phonetic about it `Chumley, pronounced Marchbanks') and who can forget Captain Mainwaring?
Stephanie_123 said…
@Sandie

Thank you for the info on the “Cowboy Cocktail”.

My husband’s comment when I read him the description: “Well, that explains why Harry was sitting in the gutter in Wyoming. He was actually there to do some type of business.”
Hikari said…
@Sandie

The tricky thing about BPD is that it may only be apparent to the sufferer’s intimate circle. Everything you describe about BPD could be applied to Diana, I believe: self-sabataging, interpersonally very challenging to live with in relationships, suicide attempts—we know of at least one well-documented one, When she flung herself down the stairs at Sandringham when she was newly pregnant with William. Even though it may have been a gentle roll down a plush staircase, at the very least that counts as a histrionic and reckless bid for attention, because even though the intent might not have been to kill herself, she wanted everyone to think she was prepared to do it and she could’ve hurt the baby, the heir to the throne.

As for being violent, at least one of her biographers mentioned the incident when a teenage Diana intentionally pushed Raine Spencer down the stairs at Althorp. These two incidents involving staircases forced me to see the angelic Saint Diana in a different light I don’t mind telling you. Attempted murder of one stepmother is never cute or benign regardless of one’s mental health status or attractiveness. That is Bad Seed territory. I’d say Doria got off lightly with Samantha when I consider how it must have been for Earl Spencer’s second wife at home. Marriage into the royal family with its pressure cooker expectations and constant publicity, and the blatant disrespect shown to her by Charles and Camilla as they carried on in front of her no doubt exacerbated all of her mental health issues. On those grounds, I do feel sorry for her, But neither do I think it’s fair that all the blame for Diana’s unhappiness and self-harming behaviors or even her multiple affairs be laid at Charles’ feet. That high strung filly was messed up in the head when he got her. His subsequent behavior made it worse, but he did not cause Diana’s lid to not be screwed on tight. Diana played her part to ensure she got to be Princess of Wales by being quite deceitful about herself. She was a far better actress than Harry’s wife will ever be if she convinced the whole royal family during the Balmoral test weekend, which she passed with flying colors, that she loved every thing about the country. Nothing could’ve been further from the truth, but Diana knew that was her audition that she absolutely had to pass.

Royal engagements are tightly choreographed affairs and in the main are generally brief and superficial visits to charities for photo ops and perhaps a short speech. This is the kind of visiting that Diana did, and being such a good actress that she was she could manage these appearances and be dazzling. She saved her falling apart and histrionics for when she was at home, out of the public eye. I think she absolutely believed that she was being genuine in her altruism, but her visit to AIDS hospitals in the lake were never unaccompanied without a phalanx of photographers to document her goodheartedness. Partially that was beyond her control, but she also became masterful in manipulating the media message in her favor in her war with the Windsors. I do think she suffered from BPD—Waif subvariant. This is why I believe Harry was so susceptible to his Hollywood actress trying the same tack. It felt familiar.
Girl with a Hat said…
for those who have a twitter account, check out Jesus Enrique Rosas' account. He has many pictures side by side of Edward VIII and Wallis interacting and the same exact body language by twit and twat. There are too many to link to. That angry face she had in the car after the military dinner where she wore the red dress (Not the one with the weird bust), the one with the cape, for example, there is an almost identical pose in a car by Wallis some years before with her hubby beside her. It really is amazing
Este said…
@Barkjark also tweeted that Some streaming giant execs growing tired with a couple repeatedly citing mental health reasons to explain away missing key deadlines and conflict.. My bet is it's Spotify.

Their last hope is now feverishly writing to get out their and sling as much mud as they can get away with at Harry's family. But mudslinging will just make them look vengeful, which they clearly are, for the temerity of Harry's family not giving into their demands. This third installment of diminishing expectations of their pretend shadow kingdom in Montecito isn't going to make up for for the past two years of freedom where they failed to deliver any product or content people want to consume to fund an IPP lifestyle on second row royal budget. They obviously misjudged the work, talent and time needed to step into Tyler's and Oprah's media mogul-ship. There's no instant freeze dried version of what they achieved. And that, not Harry's family's response to their oversized demands, was their fatal mistake. Now it's too little, too late. Windows of opportunity don't stay open forever if you fail to deliver. They've burned all the bridges they could have used to save them now.
Ralph L said…
there is no way Diana could have performed the public role she did for so many years and have the disorder.

Then what was her problem? The aromatherapy and colon cleansing sure didn't work. Perhaps it was excessive hair-product inhalation.

My late narc step-monster also had Munchausen's, so it's difficult to tell how much of her nuttiness (if I can use that term here) and which of her many quackeries went with which disorder. Dad had to pay $250 (on top of several million over 24 years) for a box of Tony Robbins videos received too late, alas, to fix her after she keeled over from a pulmonary embolism at 67, to everyone's relief. For several years, she was down to skin and bones and implants after pills ruined her colon.
@Hikari points out that Diana always had a phalanx of photographers - the pic that I'd criticise most strongly is here:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4733472/Charles-knew-Diana-s-affair-didn-t-care.html

It's the one in the surgical mask at Harefield Hospital, all doe eyes and poking-out hair, watching a heart op which IIRC was performed by Khan, to which my reaction was `WT..?'. As she seems to be surrounded by nurses, rather than unmasked medical students, it looks as if she was down on the floor in the theatre, not in a viewing gallery. Perhaps a Nutty with a medical background might care to comment as to whether this is a likely assessment?

This also mentions that she supposedly asked Paul Burrell to consult a priest about the possibility of a `secret marriage' to Khan. Is this where * got the idea?
Girl with a Hat said…
the sugars on twitter are desperately trying to reach the $30k goal for fund raising for Sentebale. I wonder how much of that will actually find its way to the charity in question and how much of it will be sent to Sunshine Sachs for stories on how the Queen bakes cakes for the twat
Enbrethiliel said…
@Hikari
. I do think she suffered from BPD—Waif subvariant. This is why I believe Harry was so susceptible to his Hollywood actress trying the same tack. It felt familiar.

It is said that we are attracted to partners who remind us of our most difficult parent. We subconsciously hope to repair the old relationship by doing better in a new one.
Girl with a Hat said…
https://twitter.com/Knesix/status/1558121480977801217

Wallis and the twat even have the same legs.
Fifi LaRue said…
If one has had a very close relative(s) with BPD, that person knows plenty about it, and how it manifests, and how BPD people hide it from the public, or secondary family. Diana was very public; we didn't get to see her up close and personal, day to day.
Girl with a Hat said…
from a comment at CDAN about an emergency service having to use Naldextrone to revive someone who was OD'ing:

I heard that prince harry often stays at Elton John's house on the beach in Malibu. Maybe it was him, he has used drugs before and he has giant psych problems.
Fifi LaRue said…
BPD do exclude those family members by whom they feel threatened. Jealousy trumps maternal or step-mother love.
xxxxx said…
With Salman Rushdie being stabbed and severely injured, the Duo will have to hire and spend more on bodyguards. They get to whine more how they need Royal protection when back home (for H) annoying the UK.
Sandie said…
One thing I do agree with, because I think it gets to the heart of the attraction, is that she reminded him of his mother, at a deep unconscious level. It seems that William healed his grief through the woman he fell in love with; the opposite happened with the hapless prince.

A person can 'get away' with having a personality disorder and not be diagnosed or treated if they are very wealthy and/or talented. We know the Harkles are not talented in any kind of useful or admirable way but they are wealthy. Bad behaviour reported in the media? Buy good press, silence the truth, sue everyone, buy awards ... Because of world-wide connection to The Internet and a large degree of freedom of speech in the world, it is ultimately a fruitless strategy. The chapter in Bower's book about the Reitman's photo shoot is a brutal expose, but it was on social media long before the book was published. Sadly, whatever the personality disorder, if it is not acknowledged or treated it probably becomes more entrenched and the likelihood of complete unravelling increases. (The harm to others also increases.) The support of the SS, Scobie and many others is actually not good for them or anyone else.
xxxxx said, With Salman Rushdie being stabbed and severely injured, the Duo will have to hire and spend more on bodyguards.

It would be the lamest reason yet. Salman had a fatwa issued against him from when he wrote the Satanic Verses. Salman went into hiding for years because of it. 🥴
I can't imagine a terrorist attack on the Narckles - only the dimmest of those of ill will would think it would have a devastating effect on Britain, unless innocent bystanders were hurt or killed of course. It'd be completely counter-productive.
Sandie said…
This might be interesting:

https://youtu.be/skBnpWcqyp0

In the three hundred and thirtieth episode Lady Colin Campbell addresses the rumours about William and Catherine's separation; who is responsible and who benefits; how Meghan and Harry's conduct has affected The Queen and Thomas Markle Sr.; how Thomas Markle Jr's YouTube channel dose of medicine to Harry and Meghan; the purpose, history and existence of The Commonwealth explained: how Meghan's conduct has detrimentally affected it and race relations within it; how Meghan's pre-marital posturing re The Commonwealth was not borne out by her post-marital conduct; important differences in American and Commonwealth racial experience: how Meghan and Harry's muddling of the differences has had a damaging effect; Meghan's wardrobe while a royal and how it reflected her personality defects; the lack of comparables between Meghan and the Duchess of Windsor despite her attempt to adopt Wallis' s mantle; what she hopes to achieve by likening herself to Wallis: the underlying threats; the meaning (and lack of it) of Meghan and Harry's award for Aghan Refugees; the Wagatha Christie defamation trial and its consequences: how Coleen (Mrs Wayne) Rooney trounced Rebecca (Mrs Jamie) Vardy; similarities between Mrs Vardy, Meghan Markle and Amber Heard; Kevin Federline's ill-advised Instagram post and how it exposes him and the other members of Britney Spears's family to legal threats: why it appears to vindicate Britney and condemn the rest of her family.
Sandie said…
Sources tell me repeatedly an "inability to agree" or sign off on a variety of aspects complicates matters.

Close scrutiny & brabbling. Experienced industry pros aren't always willing to appease onerous ignorance.

From Theresa Longo Fans Twitter!
lizzie said…
Sandie wrote:

"A person can 'get away' with having a personality disorder and not be diagnosed or treated if they are very wealthy and/or talented."

Maybe but in the US it's actually somewhat rare for anyone--regardless of talent or SES-- to be diagnosed with a personality disorder *unless* the person is also experiencing what the DSM used to call an Axis 1 disorder. Those are disorders like mood disorders, anxiety disorders, substance use disorders and so on.

Personality disorders are ego-syntonic. The symptoms don't feel foreign or feel like something is wrong to the person who has them. In contrast anxiety symptoms or mood symptoms feel wrong-- they are ego-dystonic and that may lead a person to seek help leading to a diagnosis of the PD as well as the "Axis 1" disorder. That doesn't happen with only a PD. People with a PD usually don't feel they need treatment. (Avoidant PD might be an exception.)

A personality disorder does restrict a person and keeps someone from living up to his/her potential. But PD's *usually* don't cause a person to come to legal attention like say, alcohol abuse. It can happen, particularly with Antisocial Personality Disorder (although most criminals don't have APD.) But other personality disorders are often "below the radar." Even most people with Borderline Personality Disorders aren't bunny-boilers or full-fledged stalkers after experiencing a romantic rejection. Personality disorder symptoms may limit occupational success and that's where family wealth matters most IMO.

So far as MM goes, I do not happen to believe the hazing super glue story. But if there were "incidents" TM's money might have covered them up just as royal influence covered up for Harry (and probably others!)
Hikari said…
xxxx said, With Salman Rushdie being stabbed and severely injured, the Duo will have to hire and spend more on bodyguards.

It would be the lamest reason yet. Salman had a fatwa issued against him from when he wrote the Satanic Verses. Salman went into hiding for years because of it. 🥴


I'd heard that this had happened but I had not read the story in-depth. When hearing 'stabbing' and 'New York', one quite naturally assumes 'New York City'.

Mr. Rusdie was stabbed onstage at the open air Amphitheatre in Chautauqua, New York, a tiny gated community, an exclusive enclave, that for 8 weeks every summer hosts the Chautauqua Institute. It is a place for the arts and for lectures given by world-famous artistic, political and religious figures. I worked there for three summers during college in a guest house and one of the big hotels. It is an ecumenical sort of place--every religious denomination one can think of has a guesthouse which is meant for the spiritual retreat/renewal of its clergy families and missionary staff. It is also a popular summer resort area that attracts fishermen, boaters and water enthusiasts to Lake Chautauqua. The Atheneum Hotel is a grand old Victorian lady some say is modelled on The Grand Hotel on Makinac Island. It's a genteel sort of place, quite expensive to stay on the grounds and the patronage tends to be primarily well-educated and affluent retirees, many from the New York City area. Mr. Rushdie's assailant would have definitely stood out. He would have needed to purchase a gate pass and pass a security check to get on the grounds, so the fact that security missed a knife is worrisome.

This will bolster the Harkles outcry for Royal protection because if a famous person can get violently assaulted in Chautauqua, New York, it can literally happen anywhere.
Sandie said…
@lizzie
Thanks for that great input.

People who would 'qualify' to be diagnosed with NPD are unlikely to because they do not or rarely seek diagnosis or treatment. They do not see anything problematic or unacceptable about themselves at all ... everyone else is at fault.

However people who would 'qualify' to be diagnosed with BPD are very different. They lose jobs, alienate partners and family, attempt suicide, and can be very violent and destructive. (and sometimes stalking is part of the unravelling in an episode). They are very likely to seek diagnosis and treatment. They may act the victim and blame everyone else for everything, but their lives become unmanageable and so they do end up in treatment.

I would assume that someone with NPD would end up in treatment if their lives become unmanageable or if they were threatened with losing something that is very important to them. I just do not see TBW in that position. So, strictly speaking, we can call her a narcissist but we should not say she has NPD as she has not been clinically diagnosed, even though she 'ticks all the boxes'.

And, I suppose, personal background, wealth, occupation and intrinsic personality do have an effect on how a person manages a personality disorder. So, yes, a person who qualifies for a diagnosis may never seek treatment and thus remain undiagnosed because their lives are manageable or wealth/position/talent allow them to not be accountable for their behaviour.

There is a therapy that uses radical acceptance where the aim is not to seek causes (play the blame game), or dwell on diagnosis or 'cure' someone, but to teach and practice acceptance and coping skills so that the person can get along with others and live a productive and manageable life. It is useful for helping people with personality disorders but I doubt it would be useful for a narc!
-----
What surprised me in the Bower book was the chapter about the Reitman shoot. I always thought marrying the Prince went to her head and she went off the rails in terms of behaviour. But she was already a grandiose rude delusional twat before she even met the Prince. And I still giggle about her photoshopping requests (to add a waist to her SpongeBob figure and to hide her feet). Christmas cards from the Duchess and her family (and other photos) reveal that she still is rather heavy handed with her favourite Photoshopping (or whatever program she uses).
Sandie said…
@Hikari

The statistics show that a non-famous defenceless completely innocent person is much likely to be killed or severely injured in an attack by a madman than the duo. That is the reality.

Although Rushdie had been living without security for many years (in America) he was always going to be a target.

Thanks for the background info about the venue. How the heck did a known crazy radical get into that venue with a knife?
SwampWoman said…
Hikari said: This will bolster the Harkles outcry for Royal protection because if a famous person can get violently assaulted in Chautauqua, New York, it can literally happen anywhere.

Hmmm. A person in Dick's Sporting Goods pulled out a machete and hacked an employee and left him with serious injuries, then attacked some random people in the parking lot. Were they any less important or less deserving of protection than Rushdie?

Shouldn't the venue itself have had security since they know about the fatwa? I'm sure they could have covered the expense. Even our local fair has paid off-duty police officers to help keep people safe. And then there's Rushdie himself. Why didn't Mr. Rushdie have at least a temporary bodyguard because he should have known better than anybody what religious hatred means?



SwampWoman said…
Ooops. Should have mentioned that the machete attack was in Long Island, New York.
Karla said…
Hikari
Diana x ladder
Perfect!👏👏👏
...
Fifi LaRue I love you.❤️
...
I have an Instagram account. And after Tyler Perry called MM Princess, I went on his insta and asked him to respect the UK and its traditions. I told him that for her to be a princess, only the British monarchy could give her that title.
Today, a page titled Tyler Perry fan, came to answer me and made a request to be my follower on insta. (My page is closed and so is this one) I think I was "markled".😂😂😂
lizzie said…
Sandie,

I pretty much agree with all you wrote. But so far as differences between NPD & BPD in help-seeking behaviors, there are all kinds of confounds, I think.

For example, while some studies have shown BPD is more common in women, other studies have not shown a sex difference. But most studies DO show the rate of BPD is higher in women in clinical samples. In general, women are more likely to seek help than men. Further, most studies show the rate of NPD is higher in men (although women may show "narcissistic traits" at the same rate.)

Patients with BPD tend to have very high rates of "Axis I" co-morbid disorders. In some cases, those disorders may be what brings them to treatment rather than the BPD. According to https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK430883/

80% to 96% of those with BPD have a mood disorder, 88% an anxiety disorder (including PTSD, now in a separate section from anxiety disorders), and 64% a substance abuse disorder.

Women with BPD also have higher rates of eating disorders than the general population.

I know it's not the majority opinion, but I'm not completely convinced MM has NPD although she seems to show some traits. But she also shows histrionic traits IMO. Definitely not a psychologically healthy person!
Karla said…
Lizzie

' Iknow it's not the majority opinion, but I'm not completely convinced MM has NPD although she seems to show some traits. But she also shows histrionic traits IMO. Definitely not a psychologically healthy person!
...

I think like you. MM is a challenge. However, I think she may be Amber Head type and suffer from comorbid.
...

Can someone be histrionic and narcissistic?
It is possible to have traits of both histrionic personality disorder and narcissistic personality disorder. The two conditions can occur at the same time in the same person, which is called comorbid.
lizzie said…
Sandie wrote:

"Can someone be histrionic and narcissistic?
It is possible to have traits of both histrionic personality disorder and narcissistic personality disorder. The two conditions can occur at the same time in the same person, which is called comorbid."

Yes, absolutely someone could have traits of both Narcissistic PD and Histrionic PD (or any other 2 or more PDs) but that wouldn't be co-morbidity, at least not in the way I was using the word in my previous post. Co-morbidity *for me* would mean meeting the full criteria for both PD's. Certainly that can happen but that's not what I meant (since I'm not sure MM qualifies for a diagnosis of even NPD despite exhibiting some traits.) It's quite possible some people use the word "co-morbid" to apply to traits but I've not heard it used that way.

Depending on the edition of DSM, a person can be diagnosed with "Mixed PD" or "PD Not Otherwise Specified." In both cases though, the person has to reach a "threshold of impairment" to be qualified as personality-disordered. But having traits of 2 or more PDs is not uncommon. At all. Think I may have at certain life points as have most people I know. After all, personality disorder traits are just exaggerations of normal personality traits. A trait here and there doesn't necessarily rise to the level of impairment. But looking at MM, I think it's fair to say there is some impairment.

While both HPD and NPD fall into the old Axis II Cluster B (dramatic erratic) and overlap of symptoms within clusters is common, personally I'd think it would be rare to see someone meeting the full criteria for both NPD and HPD. Traits yes, full diagnosis no. But that's JMO.
Karla said…
No, it wasn't Sandy, it was Karla. And yes, I said dashes.

" People with narcissistic personality disorders often struggle with other conditions as well. More specifically, additional personality disorders are often seen with NPD, and HPD is one of the most common personality disorders to be comorbid with NPD"
...
Narcissistic Personality Disorder: Diagnostic and Clinical Challenges
Eve Caligor, M.D.,Kenneth N. Levy, Ph.D.,Frank E. Yeomans, M.D., Ph.D.
Published Online:30 Apr 2015https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2014.14060723
Kiss
Magatha Mistie said…

Bone of Contention

All quiet on the
best western front
Beavering away
plotting political stunt
PR lacking monetary injection
Need to raise funds
for madams election
Now down to sad sack
and his derelict erection…

Sandie said…
https://twitter.com/Purple25Pie/status/1557347889759657986?s=20&t=jBFcVjexQd3J75LMZf_sMQ

Check out the video in this link ... a compilation of evidence of a deranged woman.

I am convinced it is not BPD, which manifests in the teen years or twenties, a time when there normally may be emotional turmoil, immense peer pressure, confusion about identity ... But, maybe she is unique ... the role in Suits seemed to have pushed her over the edge. Yes, there was evidence of narcissism from early childhood, but the frightening, impossible to hide, craziness seemed to manifest after she moved to Canada.

Do you think the hapless prince has realized he married a crazy woman? Is he trapped because of memories of his mother and the mistaken belief that if the divorce had not happened, Mummy would still be alive? If this is how she 'reveals herself' in public and in interviews, what is she like behind closed doors?
Magatha Mistie said…

@Sandie
What I see is a deranged,
maniacal, malignant being.
Wouldn’t like to label her 😉

lizzie said…
Karla, I'm so sorry. I thought that was Sandie's post. (I was reading on my phone!)

I see the info you posted in your prior post came from here
https://www.verywellhealth.com/histrionic-vs-narcissistic-personality-disorder-5215359#:~:text=Can%20someone%20be%20histrionic%20and,person%2C%20which%20is%20called%20comorbid.

But you posted using the word "traits" and the original quote referred to "conditions." Co-morbidity usually doesn't refer to traits. That aside, that website also says:

"The primary difference between people with narcissistic personality disorder and those with histrionic personality disorder is that people with NPD have an inflated sense of self and expect others to have the same view of them, while people with HPD want the approval and attention of others without necessarily believing they are deserving of it."

The article also points out those with NPD seek positive attention while those with HPD tend to be satisfied with any kind of attention. (The latter sounds more like MM to me.)

I'd say those are pretty major differences. Central, in fact. So I will stick to my original position-- within a cluster there is often trait overlap. Seeing narcissistic traits with histrionic ones wouldn't be unusual. But seeing true full-blown NPD with full-blown HPD would be, IMO, and likely represents faulty diagnosis or a fault with our classification system or both. For example, if NPD truly involves compensating for underlying insecurities then maybe there really isn't a difference between HPD and NPD. But that's not the way DSM is set up. And too, parsimony does dictate the fewest diagnoses that explain all the data should be given, not the most.

The link you recently posted does say NPD is co-morbid with lots of stuff-- namely substance use disorders, bipolar disorder, and other personality disorders like antisocial, borderline, schizotypal, and passive-aggressive personality disorder (now deleted from DSM) as well as HPD. It's unclear how much of those co-morbidities in PDs result from lack of parsimony.

I know NPD is the popular view of MM. And it seems to be a popular diagnosis used to describe people we don't like who seem to be self-centered jerks. (And that sounds like MM!) Sometimes the diagnosis is warranted I'm sure but sometimes it's not. (Diagnoses seem to undergo fad usage by the public too.) Most studies report the prevalence rate of NPD is 1) higher in men than women 2) higher in younger adults 3) higher in single people 4) under 7% overall across the lifetime with several larger studies reporting a lifetime prevalence of 5%. In either case, there just isn't someone with NPD on every street corner. But most experts think narcissistic traits are on the rise. Many more people feel entitled and lack empathy than used to be the case.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-second-noble-truth/202106/are-there-really-so-many-narcissists

I'd say entitlement and lack of empathy fits MM perfectly. But those terms fit an awful lot of people these days, unfortunately.

According to https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5783345/#:~:text=Narcissism%20is%20increasing%20in%20modern,1992%20in%20adolescents%20%5B2%5D.

"The endorsement rate for the statement “I am an important person” has increased from 12% in 1963 to 77–80% in 1992 in adolescents." That's a huge change.
Sandie said…
https://www.marthastewart.com/8299762/prince-harry-meghan-markle-prince-princess-royal-titles

Just one of the dozens of articles pushing the princess angle. Who thinks it likely that she will start calling herself princess? Princess Meghan? HRH Princess Meghan?

@MM said: 'deranged, maniacal, malignant'. That is what I see as well in that compilation video. Married life behind closed doors must be rather lively, to put it mildly! Will he ever look at her and realize that it is who she is and was before he met her, that she stalked him until she captured him, and that he is trapped in a nightmare that could get very much worse?
Sandie said…
@Karla
Interesting that HPD is often comorbid with NPD. Not that we are diagnosing ... let us say that we recognize the traits! I doubt that she will ever be clinically diagnosed, unless she is forced to, but even then, as we saw with the Johnny Depp trial, a person can refuse or choose a clinician that will give us the diagnosis we want. Unless it is a criminal trial because then the state gets to choose a clinician.
Sandie said…
He has a bestseller, for this reason only:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/19503595/prince-harry-diana-final-moments-book/

"PRINCE Harry has been “intensely focused” on investigating Princess Diana’s final hours for his new book.

Official judicial sources in Paris say the Duke of Sussex’s researchers have been seeking information about the car crash that killed his mother 25 years ago." ...

I doubt that there will be any earth-shattering revelations but not everyone would have read and watched everything about the accident and her death, and having it all in one place will definitely attract major interest.
Sandie said…
https://youtu.be/wLdbBLmgAGQ

TBG shares an article in the Express that has since been deleted ... an experienced PR guy gives his opinion: she has political opinions and is getting ready to ditch the husband.
Este said…
It's now being report that Harry is intensely investigating his mother's death. So, he's frantically trying to die dad to mom's death? He's is just thoroughly thoroughly disgusting.
He has no decency, the depths he's willing to sink to to punish his family for not submitting to their demands to say nothing of the stress this has put on his grandmother, who he claims to love. There is absolutely no coming back from this. The two are just vile and nauseating human beings who deserve each other. What they have done to their families is unforgiveable.
DesignDoctor said…
@Sandie
That video is really telling. I agree. What must * be like behind closed doors? Scary!
Bower’s book really blows the lid off her personality and behavior!
Sandie said…
@Marnie
That bit of information from Lady Antonia Fraser is bizarre.

Does anyone remember the story of her being booked for a fashion shoot (I think that is what it was) and then there were a series of bizarre emails from her 'assistant' cancelling the deal. Later she claimed to have no knowledge of what happened, but a cursory investigation showed that the emails came from her computer.

I was disappointed that Bower did not even mention this in the book.

I have never believed the story that they never lived at Frogmore although some people are convinced. If this were true, the Queen, Prince Phillip, Prince Charles and Camilla, William and Catherine, all the Yorks and who knows what other Royals are all part of a conspiracy to defraud the British public and taxpayer. I do think it is possible that they did not spend a lot of time there (holidays, babymoon in a swanky hotel, trips here and there, stayovwlers at Soho House), but it was their official residence and all their staff knew that.

She is also the one who claimed that her half brother and half sister are distant relatives that she does not know.

That is a crazy woman!
Observant One said…
For Nutties who are interested in Personality Disorders, I suggest this link to the Merck Manual - Professional Edition, considered the gold standard for diagnostic information.

https://www.merckmanuals.com/professional/psychiatric-disorders/personality-disorders

The link takes you to an overview of Personality Disorders. The menu on the left provides links to each sub-type. In my opinion, * appears to fit solidly in Cluster B, with at least 5 traits of HPD and 3-4 traits of ASPD, BPD and NPD. But, I am not a mental health professional, just an experienced nurse who married into a family afflicted with many personality disorders, likely caused by an emotionally distant mother who openly pitted her children against each other.
DesignDoctor said…
@Sandie
I remember the story of her being booked for a fashion shoot the pretending to be her assistant who cancelled it. She was caught to be the “assistant” herself.
Maneki Neko said…
@Sandie

That video on Twitter is scary. You need to look carefully, at first glance * looks very smiley but now and again you can see how the mask drops. She can't maintain the facade for more than a few seconds, yet she's supposed to be an actress. She also does that bizarre thing mentioned before with her tongue between her upper teeth and her lips. You wouldn't want to get too close to someone like that.
Fifi LaRue said…
I looked briefly at the compilation on Twitter of *. The one where she's about 11 years old, and mouths the word "What?" rolls her eyes, totally contemptuous towards the adult filming her. IMO Thomas Sr. made the mistake of being a guilty parent and indulging the little monster, instead of knocking the crap out of her, one way or the other. * was running the show at home starting as a pre-teen.
Hikari said…
Fifi,

I just found that shot you were referring to… Thomas was behind the camera filming his little princess on one of their fishing trips. Timestamp says May 1993, so just a few months after the Nickelodeon segment.

I gather that Thomas used his industry connections to get Nickelodeon to send Linda Ellerbee to his daughter’s class, where “little Meghan Markle” was the unabashed star of the piece. She looked like a bossy little snotrocket even then and the other girls pictured with her do not look thrilled. I can’t deny that my feelings about child Meg are influenced by what I know of her adult self, but she appeared to be a conceited, contemptuous spotlight-hogging deeply unappealing child. She’s also had massive amounts of work done to present as she does now. A cute toddler that morphed into a sulky ad homely AF adolescent. It’s also interesting that up until the age of 14 or so she had such a high-pitched voice and now has this extremely mannered way of speaking. I think her voice is probably as fake as the rest of her.
Hikari said…
@Sandie

I’d be interested to know whether the Harkles actually stayed at Frogmore Cottage on their recent visit, or if Harry was truly there along with the Brooksbank family on those two occasions in 2021 when he was forced to quarantine. Frankly it never made sense to me that Harry would be quarantining in the same household as an infant after having come from the Covid hotbed of Southern California. As for the more recent trip, since the PR about Harry’s wife hosting a birthday extravaganza for the elusive Lilibet at FC has been proven to be bogus, I’m not sure how staunchly we can believe that the couple stays there either together or singly.

I do believe that it functions as Harry’s “official UK residence” because he needs a listed address on paper to be a counselor of state. I also believe that both Harkles would have viewed being offered the then-derelict former staff quarters as their family home as a great insult And would’ve refused categorically to step foot in it. Remembering that Madam thought that she raided an entire wing of Windsor castle as “her house”, or the equally grand Frogmore House, Her ego would have prevented her from graciously accepting the relatively modest cottage that had fallen intovsuch disrepair even staff couldn’t use it. I think the intent had been for some years to renovate it into a suitable residence for some royal, since the papers had been filed with the council some years before Harry’s marriage. There were other properties in Windsor Great Park that would’ve served, Including the cottage that William and Kate are looking to take over. I do think being assigned FC was the sort of “second row Royal” accommodation that neither Harkle would have found acceptable. They certainly didn’t evidence any interest in staying in the UK to actually live in it. I presume that a Palace flunky is sent around every day or two to collect any mail. Antonia Fraser’s anecdote just bolsters my theory. Depends on when she sent this letter; is there a chance that MM could have marked that envelope herself when it was forwarded to her? Refusing to receive any mail address to her at the hated address would be in keeping with her narcissism. It would be a further way to pretend that she has nothing to do with that unwanted house.
Fifi LaRue said…
@Karla: I just scroll past the posts of one person who's posts just exactly reveal who she is. There's no helping those who refuse help.
Observant One said…
RE: the Twitter video clips posted by Sandie and discussed by Fifi, Hikari and Maneki

I agree that the video montage of * was unnerving, at the very least. I had to wonder what sorts of frightening things she is capable of doing in private, because she was barely able to control her jealousy, indignation and obvious rage. I daresay she is likely much worse than anything we have discussed here.

After reading the comments and wondering why we all seem to feel the same about her, I recalled an interesting guest on Oprah around 15 years ago - Gavin de Becker, a security expert who trains people how to predict and prevent violence. He explained that humans have primitive instincts that help us avoid physical danger and identify dangerous people. Our intuition signals us when something is wrong, before we have the chance to cognitively recognize it. All too often, we try to override our intuition by rationalizing it away. He explained why we should trust our instincts and never dismiss our intuitive signals, because they are rarely wrong.

Perhaps * evokes an intuitive danger signal and that explains why many of us are compelled to try to understand her. The engagement interview, the meme of coat flicking during her first “pregnancy” and the Twitter montage caused intuitive responses in me, like the hair on the back of my neck standing up. Her facial expressions and gestures seem so unnatural, even maniacal when you think about the double arm grab. Initially, it was reasonable to assume she was nervous or learning her role, but as time went on it became more obvious that our initial instincts were right. In addition, most of their friends have dropped them like a hot potato, a strong indication that her issues are indeed very serious and very real.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Hikari
This will bolster the Harkles outcry for Royal protection because if a famous person can get violently assaulted in Chautauqua, New York, it can literally happen anywhere.

This may be true, but imagine hearing about the stabbing of a controversial author and making it all about yourself, a D-list actress who couldn't get cast in a hemorrhoid commercial. It is, as @SwampWoman said, as if a random Joe got attacked in a Dick's Sporting Goods and a random Jane across the country believed there was a chance she would be next. It's a seven league leap!

In all fairness to * though, our minds leaped to a possible connection, too. The perils of thinking one step ahead of the Dollars!
Sandie said…
We’re delighted to announce Meghan and Harry, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be attending the One Young World Summit in Manchester this September! 🌏

The Duchess will be delivering a keynote address at the Opening Ceremony ✨

https://mobile.twitter.com/oneyoungworld/status/1559078475058798592

He is letting her grab what he has left to get the spotlight, just like she did with the Invictus Games. This time she is doing it in the UK.
Sandie said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11112189/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-visit-UK-month.html

The Daily Mail has more details.

I guess they are going to get full-on taxpayer funded security and VVIP eacorts wherever they go. Pap walks in London for her? Does she have any friends left in the UK?

And the PR chatter about visits with the Queen and reconciliations to start now ... she has to bolster the royal connection because it is all she has.

Maybe the family can arrange to be elsewhere in the UK and make sure they are photographed far away from London!
Sandie said…
I should have read the article. Here is the summary:

Couple will go to Manchester for One Young World Summit, an event which brings together young leaders

Will go to Invictus Games Dusseldorf 2023 One Year to Go event, before returning to UK for WellChild Awards

First time in UK since the Platinum Jubilee in early June and follows reports they'd been invited to Balmoral

Today's announcement comes soon after it emerged Harry had filed a second lawsuit against Home Office
Sandie said…

Theresa Longo Fans
@BarkJack_
Replying to
@quickbeam71
no plans for divorce whatsoever, that we know of.
They're co-conspirators. Co-collaborators.
Things are volatile at times, sure. Petty, petulant behaviours witnessed by some who have passed it along to us.

https://mobile.twitter.com/home
We just can't get shot of the blighters:

https://uk.yahoo.com/style/harry-meghan-visit-uk-next-070124874.html

`Harry and Meghan to visit UK next month for first time since Jubilee'

It's for the Invictus Games - how I wish they'd just clear off - they aren't welcome here.
Apparently it's for some sort of `Summit' in Manchester, as the Vth Games have already been held.
Sandie said…
https://the-empress-7.tumblr.com/post/649443779697344512/plants-archives

If anyone wants to take a deep dive I to the past, there are links to archived blog posts at the above link. I think Bower's book affirmed that not only was the analysis true, but there was evidence uncovered that was worse!

The royal family should read this stuff before thinking about being sucked into some kind of reconciliation story!
Sandie said…
Earthshot Prize the Boston is early December? So no clash?

When do royal family usually leave Balmoral/end summer holidays and return to work?

Schedule of the wannabe most popular/famous/influential/wealthy Royals:

@OneYoungWorld
2022 Manchester Summit on 5 September,
@WeAreInvictus
Düsseldorf 2023 One Year to Go on 6 September in Germany and the
@WellChild
Awards 2022 on 8 September in the UK
Hikari said…
Happy Birthday to HRH The Princess Anne, The Princess Royal, constant support of her mother.

What a Queen she'd have made, if things had been different--but Charles will have a wise bedrock at his right hand when he ascends, along with his consort. Let's hope that two sensible English women will keep Charles from wandering away into the ether as he's apt to do.

Anne, Philip's favorite 'son' was the spitting image of him when younger. She was quite the stunner, even more so in equestrian garb than in tiaras and gowns. I think in her way, she is a more exceptional person than any of her brothers. She's made the most of a sticky position (#2 to her brother) but has never evidenced any bitterness over it. The hardest working Royal and the one who stands least on ceremony. Zara is very like her, I think.

https://twitter.com/CambridgeCrown/status/1558987981121134592/photo/1
Hikari said…
P.S. Keep your eyes peeled for any birthday wishes for Harry's aunt emanating from Montesh*tshow. What are those betting odds, you reckon? Anne was one who had the Twat's number from the first.
Girl with a Hat said…
I read on twitter that there is a Global Citizen event going on in NYC at the same time that the twats are going to be in Manchester, but the twats weren't invited so they decided to make it look like they were otherwise engaged, so that was the reason they won't be attending.

If you recall, that was the event in NYC last year where she appeared in that white embellished mini dress that was actually very beautiful but where she was an ungroomed mess.
Ralph L said…
One Young World Summit

That isn't for people who believe the Earth is ~4,000 years old?
DesignDoctor said…
@Sandie
Thank you for posting the link to the Tiaras and Houseplants compilation. That is a very interesting timeline of how the BRF supported * refuting her claims.
I especially appreciate the links to the news articles which support the text.
Observant One said…
@Ralph L - No, your observation is quite right. The One Young World Summit is sponsored by the World Economic Forum. Apparently, * likely does have political aspirations.
1 – 200 of 456 Newer Newest

Popular posts from this blog

Is This the REAL THING THIS TIME? or is this just stringing people along?

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

A Quiet Interlude

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

Christmas is Coming

 The recent post which does mention that the information is speculative and the response got me thinking. It was the one about having them be present at Christmas but must produce the kids. Interesting thought, isn't it? Would they show?  What would we see?  Would there now be photos from the rota?   We often hear of just some rando meeting of rando strangers.  It's odd, isn't it that random strangers just happen to recognize her/them and they have a whole conversation.  Most recently it was from some stranger who raved in some video (link not supplied in the article) that they met and talked and listened to HW talk about her daughter.  There was the requisite comment about HW of how she is/was so kind).  If people are kind, does the world need strangers to tell us (are we that kind of stupid?) or can we come to that conclusion by seeing their kindness in action?  Service. They seem to always be talking about their kids, parenthood and yet, they never seem to have the kids