Royalty Thread #11: Putting the "Fun" in Dysfunctional

[overedge]

I believe they are staying there for free.

The house is still a multi-million-dollar mansion, regardless of what they're paying to live in it.

And incidentally there are many not-for-profit groups in the Victoria area that work with underprivileged women, people with mental illness, etc. Meghan didn't have to take a seaplane to Vancouver if she wanted to visit a group doing that kind of work.

 

[overedge]

So PEOPLE prettied up Vancouver for their article. I've never heard of such a thing.

Vancouver Island. Not Vancouver.
Prettying it up fits into their whole (and largely false IMO) narrative of H&M just being a regular couple chilling in the woods with their baby and doing yoga and going for hikes.

 

[mag]

The house is still a multi-million-dollar mansion, regardless of what they're paying to live in it.

And incidentally there are many not-for-profit groups in the Victoria area that work with underprivileged women, people with mental illness, etc. Meghan didn't have to take a seaplane to Vancouver if she wanted to visit a group doing that kind of work.

I wonder if H&M have added someone new to their team. They are playing the PR game (visit to the downtown Eastside scheduled perfectly with the Queen’s announcement.) Much better than they have in the past.

I still think 90% of this move had to do with Meghan being homesick for North America. For all her work and volunteer work, I don’t think she has ever really lived outside NA and Toronto is about as American a city as you can get outside the US. I agree that Harry not wanting a royal role may predate Meghan, but moving out of Britain I don’t think came from him.

I am not judging Meghan. Moving and living in a completely different country with a very different culture can be unsettling. Add in marriage, a baby, and becoming a Duchess, and well it probably would have been more shocking if she was happy. Hopefully Harry will not have the same difficulty adjusting to life in NA.

 

[canbelto]

I wonder if H&M have added someone new to their team. They are playing the PR game (visit to the downtown Eastside scheduled perfectly with the Queen’s announcement.) Much better than they have in the past.

I still think 90% of this move had to do with Meghan being homesick for North America. For all her work and volunteer work, I don’t think she has ever really lived outside NA and Toronto is about as American a city as you can get outside the US. I agree that Harry not wanting a royal role may predate Meghan, but moving out of Britain I don’t think came from him.

I am not judging Meghan. Moving and living in a completely different country with a very different culture can be unsettling. Add in marriage, a baby, and becoming a Duchess, and well it probably would have been more shocking if she was happy. Hopefully Harry will not have the same difficulty adjusting to life in NA.

I think Meghan might have found the rules surrounding being a royal really weird. I remember reading that Diana (who was born into a very aristocratic family) found some of the royal rules weird. Like for instance one year the Queen passed out presents and it was a bar of soap. She started laughing but everyone had to pretend it was the most special present ever.

 

[mag]

Queen Elizabeth Requests Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Return to U.K. for Royal Event — People

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will reportedly be returning for their last round of official royal engagements

apple.news

 

[mag]

I think Meghan might have found the rules surrounding being a royal really weird. I remember reading that Diana (who was born into a very aristocratic family) found some of the royal rules weird. Like for instance one year the Queen passed out presents and it was a bar of soap. She started laughing but everyone had to pretend it was the most special present ever.

I thought the royal family was quite well known for quirky gifts. I remember an article where an example was given the Princess Anne gave the POW a door mat - or perhaps it was the other way around. I find it hard to believe Diana wouldn’t have been aware of that.

 

[cygnus]

Well there is soap and there is soap. I have given soap as a gift before- nice crafty handmade scented stuff. You can't assume the gift was a Dove bar or Pear's or the house brand from Sainsbury's (if such a thing exists).

 

[taf2002]

Vancouver Island. Not Vancouver.
Prettying it up fits into their whole (and largely false IMO) narrative of H&M just being a regular couple chilling in the woods with their baby and doing yoga and going for hikes.

Yes but remember that H&M didn't write the article.

 

[Judy]

I think Meghan might have found the rules surrounding being a royal really weird. I remember reading that Diana (who was born into a very aristocratic family) found some of the royal rules weird. Like for instance one year the Queen passed out presents and it was a bar of soap. She started laughing but everyone had to pretend it was the most special present ever.

Their rules are weird. Would anyone honestly like to live there? I would like to visit but never stay. It would be like living in a cage. Not to mention that for the woman you are very limited.

 

[mag]

Yes but remember that H&M didn't write the article.

It was in People though. That particular publication has pretty much been the spokes person, through “friends” of H&M. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with that, but I would suggest they are playing into the narrative.

 

[cygnus]

Their rules are weird. Would anyone honestly like to live there? I would like to visit but never stay. It would be like living in a cage. Not to mention that for the woman you are very limited.

Remember that a lot of these "rules" aren't really rules- just stuff that is made up from rumours and old anecdotes, and a few are just common sense when you live in a fishbowl. I wouldn't believe most of them- and many of them are contradicted when you look at what they actually do, as has been pointed out many times in this thread.

As for women- the last century and a half of British royalty has been dominated by powerful women, from Victoria to Queen Mary and the Queen Mother to the present Queen.

 

[aftershocks]

It was in People though. That particular publication has pretty much been the spokes person, through “friends” of H&M. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with that, but I would suggest they are playing into the narrative.

Good grief!

Maybe you need to be in therapy to figure out what your beef is exactly. Practically every post about M&H you knee-jerk negatively criticize followed by qualification probably just to make sure you aren't accused of not liking them. IMO, your posts come off like you have some (perhaps unconscious) issue with the Sussexes, particularly with Meghan.

FYI:
People magazine must also be the 'spokesperson' through 'palace insiders' for Kate and William...

Princess Kate

Princess Kate

people.com

 

[canbelto]

Remember that a lot of these "rules" aren't really rules- just stuff that is made up from rumours and old anecdotes, and a few are just common sense when you live in a fishbowl. I wouldn't believe most of them- and many of them are contradicted when you look at what they actually do, as has been pointed out many times in this thread.

As for women- the last century and a half of British royalty has been dominated by powerful women, from Victoria to Queen Mary and the Queen Mother to the present Queen.

The one I find the weirdest is that you can't cross your legs. Why not?

 

[manhn]

If Harry and Meghan intend to move to Vancouver, it’d make sense to establish some connections to certain social and financial organizations in the city.

If not for this thread, I would have no idea where they currently live. Our headlines are about pipelines, Uber, Coronavirus, car insurance and snow.

 

[aftershocks]

The one I find the weirdest is that you can't cross your legs. Why not?

That's not a rule. It's just a matter of social etiquette, but the way it's reported in the media is always ridiculous. It's not that royal ladies can't cross their legs. They do. There are plenty of pictures of the royal ladies sitting with their legs carefully crossed.

The 'Duchess slant' with both legs pressed together and tilted at the knees is simply a comfortable and safe way of ensuring there's no 'Basic Instinct' view. Wink wink... e.g., see Sharon Stone in Basic Instinct.

 

[AxelAnnie]

The one I find the weirdest is that you can't cross your legs. Why not?

Because one leg over the other can give quite the view up one's skirt

 

[Barbara Manatee]

The one I find the weirdest is that you can't cross your legs. Why not?

There is no such rule. Take a minute on google and you'll find plenty of pictures of royal women crossing their legs from the Queen on down. As @cygnus said, almost all that stuff is made up.

 

[Judy]

There is no such rule. Take a minute on google and you'll find plenty of pictures of royal women crossing their legs from the Queen on down. As @cygnus said, almost all that stuff is made up.

yeah that’s not a rule. There are def rules in there though ... like living in a gilded cage.

 

[aftershocks]

yeah that’s not a rule. There are def rules in there though ... like living in a gilded cage.

Perhaps 'unwritten rules.' According to an anecdote in Michelle Obama's memoir, Becoming, it's royal courtiers more than the Queen who are sticklers about following certain 'protocol' directives.

None of us can know exactly what it's like, but from what we've seen on the outside looking in, royal life for a lot of royal women can become like living in a 'gilded cage.' But there are also a lot of perks. I guess it comes down to finding peace and purpose somehow, or if you're happy in your marriage or if you have enough support and understanding. For those who don't, like Princess Margaret, and Diana PoW, living the royal life can become a living hell.

Being royal isn't exactly easy for the men either. Prince William of Gloucester, Prince Philip, and Prince Harry come to mind.

 

[overedge]

Yes but remember that H&M didn't write the article.

I never said they did. But it's obvious that PEOPLE doesn't want to upset its sources for inside info on H&M. So the more that PEOPLE can promote the idyllic (fake) image that H&M are trying to push, the more that insider info is likely to flow PEOPLE's way.

 

[aftershocks]

So the more that PEOPLE can promote the idyllic (fake) image that H&M are trying to push...

I wouldn't call the Sussexes enjoying their home life, taking care of their son, and hiking on Vancouver Island as 'fake' or necessarily 'idyllic,' even though the mansion they currently reside in is gorgeous and the views are spectacular.

From what I've learned about Meghan from her interviews, writings, speeches, her former Instagram and her former blog, she seems to be a person who enjoys life, appreciates her blessings, tries to live each moment fully, cares deeply about giving back to others, and she also believes in working hard because that's what she grew up seeing and learning from both of her parents. Are M&H perfect people? Certainly not. As adults in their late thirties, they are still learning and growing. Meanwhile, they definitely seem genuine in their public interactions, passion projects, love for each other, and love for their son.

So while M&H are surely interested in promoting a happy family image, I don't see any reason to suspect that they are passing off 'fake' details about their lives together. There were 'insider' sourced stories during their courtship as well which emphasized how much they enjoyed chilling together at home. This laid back, down-to-earth aspect of their lives was also mentioned during their engagement interview. They must also be very relieved to have gained a bit more control over their lives by escaping some of the overheated royal bubble.

I'm quite sure that M&H are also planning and working behind-the-scenes on putting their new foundation together. The way Meghan surprised us with the launch of her first project as a royal, Together: The Hubb Community Cookbook, and later with the British Vogue guest editorship that she worked on while pregnant and on maternity leave, I have learned to simply wait and be surprised about what Meghan and Harry will do next.

Apparently, they will have no shortage of high-powered celebs, movers-and-shakers, and corporate execs wanting to meet and spend time with them:

Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, Jennifer Lopez, and Alex Rodriguez Went on a Dream Double Date Last Week

Is this the new fab four?

www.elle.com

 

[aftershocks]

Princess Beatrice's handwritten engagement thank yous have surfaced. Her stationery monogram is 'B for beautiful'

https://i.ibb.co/W3Qbzdb/60-E21277-BE1-B-4592-90-DC-991-AFD3-AC6-F8-copy.jpg

Chapel Royal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There's a huge amount of family history attached to this venue with the weddings of Queen Victoria & Prince Albert (1840); the future George V & future Queen Mary (1893); and Victoria, Princess Royal & Prince Friedrich Wilhelm of Prussia (1858) future Emperor & Empress of Germany, all having been married there.

Apparently the Chapel's seating capacity is about 100, so it looks like a smaller, intimate family wedding, followed by a larger reception at BP which apparently may include guests who were not invited to the wedding ceremony. Some observers have suggested that Beatrice and Edo may plan a destination bash, as an after-wedding celebration. Or maybe they are simply planning an elaborate honeymoon which will likely remain undisclosed. The wish for a private wedding may have something to do with Edo having a child out-of-wedlock, whose privacy they want to protect. It's possible that a private wedding was always planned.


The report about the Queen summoning the Sussexes to England for Commonwealth Day services is interesting but not surprising. I seriously doubt though that Archie will be taken to the service. He's too young. Whether or not Archie accompanies his parents back to Britain is a different story. Perhaps he will be with them if they plan to stay for longer than several days. But I've never seen small children or toddlers attend Commonwealth Day ceremonies.

 

[taf2002]

Apparently, they will have no shortage of high-powered celebs, movers-and-shakers, and corporate execs wanting to meet and spend time with them:

Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, Jennifer Lopez, and Alex Rodriguez Went on a Dream Double Date Last Week

Is this the new fab four?

www.elle.com

I hope not. This surprises me. I don't know anything about Alex R but JLo just doesn't seem classy enough to rub elbows with them. What do they talk about? Her pole skills?

 

[MsZem]

Awwww, the tiniest of crown princes turned four last week:

Crown Prince of Bhutan celebrates his 4th birthday

Yesterday, the Crown Prince of Bhutan, Jigme Namgyel Wangchuck (also called the Druk Gyalsey or Dragon Prince), celebrated his 4th birthday. To coincide with his birthday, his father, King Jigme Kh…

royalcentral.co.uk

And I don't remember if I posted this already, but if so, Oscar is so cute in it that it's worth sharing again

New photos released of Crown Princess Family of Sweden – Royal Central

royalcentral.co.uk

 

[skatesindreams]

Alex R is a very successful businessman; with worldwide connections.

 

[taf2002]

Oscar is at the age that when told to smile he grits his teeth. Most families have lots of photos like that. So annoying!

 

[canbelto]

I hope not. This surprises me. I don't know anything about Alex R but JLo just doesn't seem classy enough to rub elbows with them. What do they talk about? Her pole skills?

JLo is a talented dancer and has a huge following among Latinx people all over North Ameruca as does Arod.

 

[Lorac]

Oscar is at the age that when told to smile he grits his teeth. Most families have lots of photos like that. So annoying!

At least he's smiling now. It took him a while and it was a lovely family picture.

 

[MsZem]

Oscar is at the age that when told to smile he grits his teeth. Most families have lots of photos like that. So annoying!

I'm not annoyed Oscar is adorable and Estelle is lovely.

 

[kwanfan1818]

And incidentally there are many not-for-profit groups in the Victoria area that work with underprivileged women, people with mental illness, etc. Meghan didn't have to take a seaplane to Vancouver if she wanted to visit a group doing that kind of work.

The downtown Eastside is more bang for her and their buck, being cited as the poorest postal code in Canada. I don't know if this is true, but I've been told by people who do charity work that poverty in Victoria is more similar to poverty in Seattle, ie, far more spread out than concentrated in a single neighborhood. (You can see that difference clearly by comparing the two street papers, Megaphone in Vancouver, which is so concentrated on the downtown Eastside, and Real Change in Seattle, which is more diverse and also focuses on urban poor and economically marginal people.)

Is poverty better hidden in Victoria, being the provincial capital?

Toronto is about as American a city as you can get outside the US.

Depends on where in the US you are from. Vancouver isn't about as American a city as you get outside the US, if you're from the Pacific Northwest. Toronto is as alien as big Midwestern and East Coast cities. And Toronto isn't at all like what I know of Dallas, Denver, Albuquerque, Miami, etc. Denver doesn't even remind me of Calgary. (I've never been to Edmonton, having had to abandon a planned opera trip a few years ago.) I haven't spent enough time in Houston to make the comparison.