@mag, I apologize for tagging you as the person who made that clueless comment about Meghan 'not having as good genes' as Kate. It was PDilemma, and Barbara Manatee had gently pushed back. No
@ballettmaus, there was not 'major' push back, but at least there was some push back. In any case, I should have made sure who made the comment in order to avoid erroneously tagging the wrong person. The commentary about hair (Kate's and Meghan's) was randomly bandied about later in that thread by a number of posters, but that's not what I was referencing.
Having looked through that exhausting thread commentary, in fact there was a lot of commentary about 'genes' and 'jeans' in that former thread.
Go figure. At one point (p.21, post #601) mag made a comment about 'intellectual gene pool' in comparing Diana vs Kate, and disparaging the royals' intellect generally, then later apologized for being harsh. Actually, it is true that many of the British royals tend not to have a very academic bent. In the biography of QE-II,
Young Elizabeth, there's a lot of discussion about Queen Elizabeth's parents having neglected the academic educations of their two daughters. The British royal who was considered the most academically-inclined in modern times was Prince William of Gloucester.
This is not an excuse for me thinking it was mag who made the comment in question, but mag and I did have a lot of run-ins in that last royalty thread surrounding what I felt were continual negative putdowns toward Meghan. What I perceive as slights, of course, were not made by mag alone. In my post #546 in that last thread, I quoted some of the comments by Lorac and mag that I disagreed with. I also took issue with a sentence in mag's post #330 on p. 11 suggesting that Meghan needed to give Kate more time than 3 weeks between Louis' birth and the royal wedding on May 19. That doesn't make any sense because Meghan did not have sole control (or perhaps any control at all) over the actual wedding date that would be chosen. A lot of logistics are involved in royal family scheduling. The date had to be chosen prior to the parties involved knowing exactly when Kate would give birth to her third child. The date for M&H's wedding was probably run by pertinent family members before being finalized.
In the last royalty thread, pages 11 - 24, 34 and 35+ are rather ummm, I don't know what word to use to describe the commentary, let's just say interesting, especially in light of some of the roller coaster emotions we now know M&H have been going through since their wedding, and especially since last fall and throughout this summer.
ETA:
Meghan's color combination is complimentary (in the same family) but different. Her purply red top somewhat matches her shoes, and the leather skirt is a slightly different hue in the red family. I love the pop of color on her:
Meghan's up-do is fine, except the straggly portions are more straggly-looking than usual. But it's Meg's casual vibe, and it works for her. She's been wearing some nice repeats from her working wardrobe, but this is a new outfit, although the skirt is a different color in the same skirt design she's previously worn:
I'm a disappointment because you wish to forget what you said in the other thread. 
royalcentral.co.uk
www.insider.com
royalcentral.co.uk
www.ibtimes.com
