Harry and Meghan wedding chat- the build up!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I like that they cleared up how they actually met (on a blind date of sorts) in May 2016 (probably soon after Meghan had broken up with Canadian chef, Corey Vitiello). Harry & Meghan said they quickly set up another date before Harry had to go away on a trip. They apparently kept in touch via texting and arranged to meet again when Meghan visited Wimbledon in late June/ early July 2016. They were set up together by a mutual friend whom they didn't want to name. But since they said 'she,' I believe it is designer Misha Nonoo. Meghan met Nonoo at a dinner party in Miami several years ago, through another friend. Nonoo was born in Bahrain and grew up in Britain. Meghan wore Nonoo's 'The Husband' shirt on her appearance with Harry at the Invictus Games. That seems relevant. When later asked about it, Nonoo said she thought it was sweet, but that she didn't know in advance that Meghan would be wearing the shirt.

Apparently, Nonoo is not interested in receiving the kind of attention that widespread confirmed attribution would bring identifying her as H&M's 'matchmaker.' Nonoo was formerly married to Alexander Gilkes, a former school friend of Harry's. And Nonoo is also a friend of Princess Eugenie's. It's been said that Eugenie and Harry have gone on double dates together with their significant others. And Nonoo has often vacationed with Meghan along with other close friends, including Priyanka Chopra and Markus Anderson of Soho House.
https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyl...er-misha-nonoo-fashion-designer-a3662846.html
https://us.hellomagazine.com/royalty/12016110218531/prince-harry-meghan-markle-love-connection/
http://ca.hellomagazine.com/royalty/02016110230726/prince-harry-meghan-markle-designer-misha-nonoo /
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...s-matchmaker-fashion-designer-wife-of-school/
Pic of Meghan, Misha Nonoo and Markus Anderson on vacation in 2016
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/11/07/14/3A269C7800000578-3913252-image-m-8_1478529112492.jpg

Harry & Meghan seem so happy together and uber comfortable in each other's presence. Meghan is a very strong and confident young lady with a casual, but classy style. The white wrap coat and green dress (Canadian brand) she wore were clearly in homage to Diana's memorial white garden at KP where H&M greeted the media for the photo call. I wish we could get a more close-up look at the ring Harry designed. The proposal was obviously very simple and low-key, which seems to indicate how Meghan and Harry likely wish to live their personal lives for the most part. It will be interesting to see where the wedding will be held and which designer Meghan will choose for her dress. She knows a lot of designers from her work on Suits.

I was surprised to learn H&M went on a five-day trip to Africa in August 2016, during the time when their relationship was still undercover and not known by anyone except their closest friends and loved ones. So the August 2017 three-week trip to Botswana was a chance to go on a much longer vacation in Africa, but it was not their first visit there together.

That bit about the corgis taking to Meghan right away was funny and familiar. Dogs and cats just know when they are around humans who love them to the max. The Queen's corgis are known to be temperamental, but they knew immediately that Meghan is their kind of person. :lol:

I hope we soon get to see a pic or two of Meghan and Harry with her two very cute doggies, Bogart and Guy. :D
 
taf2002 said:
I don't recall that Princess Anne or Princes Andrew or Edward received any pressure to have children, even from the royal watching public, and especially after Charles had his heir(s).
Click to expand...
That was a totally different time Pre-Social Media and Pre-Diana on whom there was a huge spotlight shining.
 
AxelAnnie said:
That was a totally different time Pre-Social Media and Pre-Diana on whom there was a huge spotlight shining.
Click to expand...

My point was that I don't think any pressure will be put on Harry & Meghan either. Although there was one question about it in that interview. I had planned to have children (didn't work out) but I hated being asked about it when I was engaged and newly married. It was no one's business when or if I planned to have kids & it seemed terribly intrusive to me.
 
Develop a life limiting illness (like MS) and nobody bothers asking you :cheer:

While a curse at times, I've been grateful nobody has bothered me! I didn't want kids anyway!
 
skatesindreams said:
I won't be reading those comments.
Why dignify them?
Click to expand...
To play the Harry & Meghan Get Engaged Drinking Game! :lol:

Gazpacho said:
The chances of a successful pregnancy go down dramatically after age 35 even with IVF. There are women who have children in their 40s, but there are many women who no longer can because of age even with fertility treatments. The IVF success rate for a 40-41 year old is only 15.6%. For a 42-43 year old it's 6.6%, and above 43 it's less than 2%.
Click to expand...
Couples having IVF are couples with fertility problems. The overall rate of success for the procedure isn't very good even before 40. It's less than 50% in fact.

According to this article, your chances do decline after 35 but are still pretty good from 35-39.

http://www.parents.com/getting-pregnant/trying-to-conceive/getting-pregnant-at-every-pregnancy-age/

It says that you have a 15-20% chance of getting pregnant in any one month. The chance before 35 is 20% so that means some women in this age bracket haven't experienced reduced fertility yet. Your chance of conceiving within a year is 78% vs. 86% before that.

The real drop-off comes when you enter your 40s. Given that many women start going through menopause in their 40s, that makes sense.

Of course, individual reproductive history comes into play. The women in my family don't tend to go through menopause until their 50s, for example, which means a "change of life" baby is a possibility for much longer than average!
 
Just finished watching their interview, and I'm considerably impressed with her. She's extremely articulate, seems to be very intelligent, and also seems to be a natural for the work ahead of her. Congrats to them both, they deserve every chance at happiness.
 
Vagabond said:
Expecting a woman of any age to "pop out those babies soon" is appalling. :scream:
Click to expand...
It's definitely very old fashioned but the only way to maintain a Royal Family is make sure there's more family coming to continue the line. They won't be under the same scrutiny as William & Kate but there are many royal titles and positions to be filled in the 'family business', as it is sometimes referred.
 
clairecloutier said:
Is that definite? I was just reading an article, I think in the Telegraph, that said she would probably keep Meghan as her "official" name.
Click to expand...
Maybe because of my love of "Little Women" but I like Meg over Meghan. They look so happy. Congrats to them.
 
clairecloutier said:
Well, Harry said in the interview that they'll start a family "soon." :)
Click to expand...

Doesn't surprise me. He spoke about wanting kids and such long before he met Meghan -- I don't think he would have married a woman who didn't want children. A few years ago he talked about wanting to marry the right girl, have kids, etc, but wanting it to be with the right person.
 
Oh, the drenching romance of it all! We have watched Harry, from the days of his toothy schoolboy grin in his little prep school cap to that solemn walk behind his mother's coffin to falling out of nightclubs with his unsuitable friends.

All that turbulence is behind him now, as he faces the future with the woman he loves by his side. It's all too fabulous. And so is she.


Actually a nice DM article by the :EVILLE: Jan Moir (no, I haven't looked at the comments!)




http://dailym.ai/2BgBwtk
 
Well, the question that's going to keep me up at night is: are they going to make Meghan give up nail polish? :watch:
 
A friend of mine had her first (and only) child at 47. The kid was born via c-section due to the mom's age but other than that, she sailed through the pregnancy and the kid is now 5, happy, health and couldn't be loved more.

That said, we don't even know if they want to have children or if both are fertile. Right now, they seem to want each other and that's enough for me. I'm happy for Harry that he's found "the one" and has found his way and I'm hoping it'll last forever because I'm a hopeless romantic and I think everyone deserves it.

Are royals allowed to adopt?
 
AxelAnnie said:
Do you have kids? Of course a woman can deliver a healthy baby after forty. Not the issue. It is when the woman is 60 and has a kid in college, and 70 with her first grandchild. That is when it catches up with you.
Click to expand...

I have a friend who became pregnant at age 48 and wasn't going to have it - then she realized that this was her last change to have children, and went through with it. She's 55 now, and the child is eight, so she will be 65 when her child is in college.

It's probably easier for people to judge my friend and say she made the wrong decision, especially give the her child is very difficult and wild. She gets kicked off the school bus regularly, and police had to be called once because was wielding a knife in a school yard. So, it's even possible that she'll end up in a facility of some sort as a teen, and my friend - who herself has lived life on the wild side - is well aware of that.

All that said, my friend loves her daughter dearly of course.

There are so many parents who choose to have children in less than ideal circumstances - too poor, too busy, too unsuited for the role, too sick, too unstable, too young, too old.

My point here - if there is one - is that the desire for children and decision to have them doesn't always seem rational. But in many cases, it does seem natural. Part of that is probably the desire to love and nurture.

I don't really I have the right to judge women who decide to procreate in less than ideal conditions, unless they are incapable of being a parent. There would be a whole lot less children in the world if women needed conditions to be ideal in order to give birth.

I have no children precisely because conditions (finances, living space) weren't right for it. But sometimes I wish we'd just gone ahead and had one anyway, and regret our decision.

Anyway, I digress, rant done and SORRY.

Proceed. . .
 
Last edited:
SHARPIE said:
Oh, the drenching romance of it all! We have watched Harry, from the days of his toothy schoolboy grin in his little prep school cap to that solemn walk behind his mother's coffin to falling out of nightclubs with his unsuitable friends.

All that turbulence is behind him now, as he faces the future with the woman he loves by his side. It's all too fabulous. And so is she.


Actually a nice DM article by the :EVILLE: Jan Moir (no, I haven't looked at the comments!)


http://dailym.ai/2BgBwtk
Click to expand...

Oh I don't know Sharpie that article had several small but sharp little digs throughout it in regards to both Harry and Meghan as well as the Royal family in general but I expect nothing less from Jan Moir. It was carefully edited to appear as a positive opinion piece so kudos to whoever edited it.

Still I do agree that Harry has matured into an amazing young man after several mis-steps that so many people have growing up but not under the intense scrutiny that Harry had. In the past few years he has found his niche and works hard to prompt and support the causes he believes in as well as representing the Queen as and when is needed. Whoever he married would have to take on some of those responsibilities and Meghan has already shown she is more than capable of speaking in public with intelligence and compassion.
 
Here's a nice bit of news from the above article:

Markle will become the fourth patron of a charitable foundation currently run by Harry, his brother William and wife Catherine.
Click to expand...
 
I'm glad Harry and Meghan will get to have the wedding they want at Windsor. With limited seating, invitees will be true family/friends and not "oh there are 1500 seats, so they need to be filled with random government officials".
 
Gazpacho said:
So it's okay that she's divorced? I'm thinking about the Wallis Simpson controversy. Does this mean that Harry has to give up his place in line to the throne, not that it was ever going to happen with William's kids ahead of him. I guess since Charles was allowed to marry Camilla it must be okay for a potential heir to marry a divorcee, but Camilla won't be called Queen, suggesting that the Royals still are somewhat uncomfortable with it.

Also, Megan is 36 years old. Better pop out those babies soon or else there might not be time.
Click to expand...

She has probably frozen her eggs over the years. Tons of Hollywood actresses do this.
 
I like that she is not from an "important, wealthy" family. I'm impressed by people that have to pull their own weight to make something of themselves and she certainly has done that. Daddy didn't write a check so she was accepted at Northwestern. She had to use her own brainpower to gain entry. And I like that she was philanthropic before she met Harry and I'm sure going forward it will be something that will be very important to both of them. I know people have their claws out because she isn't from the right family with the right look and the proper etiquette. And she is divorced which also might be a no-no if you want to marry a royal though Charles and Camilla have helped in that area. And of course there will be those that say she "trapped" Harry. To me that seems ridiculous. Harry isn't some teenager: The man has been around with a lot of women. He should have a good idea of who and what he wants in a mate. I saw a news feature once on American women who actually moved to England to try and track Harry. I thought that was nuts. I like that her ambition was for her career and she didn't up and quit her job right away to follow Harry here and there. And I thought she did a good job in "Suits." All in all I like her. She won't be "enough" for many but for Harry she seems to be more than enough.
 
floskate said:
No doubt in my mind this WILL be televised. Heck even Edward and Sophie's was televised!
Click to expand...

I think I read that it would be televised and that Harry and Meghan were working to ensure the public were involved in some manner.

I saw a clip of a US columnist from LA on breakfast tv today saying the American people are so invested in this that they won't be satisfied with anything less than a large state wedding and a kiss on the balcony of Buckingham Palace. Looks like they are destined for disappointment in at least one of those requirements if not both.

I hope Harry and Meghan stay firm in their desires for their big day and have exactly the service and celebration they want.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 7 (members: 0, guests: 7)

Similar threads

H
Marina Kielmann looks back on her life
Replies
4
Views
1K
Private Citizen
P
canbelto
Bridgerton thread (with spoilers)
Replies
28
Views
5K
canbelto
canbelto
T
Big Brother 25
Replies
29
Views
3K
Habs
Habs
Sylvia
Laura Lepistö's autobiography published April 2024 in Finland
Replies
6
Views
5K
Frau Muller
Frau Muller
L
Gamez/Korovin
2
Replies
58
Views
10K
Wyliefan
Wyliefan
Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information