Just call me Harry. (Everything Harry & Meghan)

[MsZem]

Entire post

You could have just written "no".

 

[overedge]

The newest PEOPLE magazine has an article that claims it has exclusive content from the H&M book. I'm not sure how much is exclusive beyond Harry's favorite texting emoji being a scary ghost .

One thing that really stood out for me was that, according to the anonymous friends, when H&M were dating, Meghan got a charm necklace that had the initials H and M on a chain (not a present from H, if I recall correctly). She went out shopping or something and was photographed wearing it. Then she got a phone call from an unnamed Kensington Palace staffer who recommended that she not wear it again in public, so that the paparazzi would be less likely to bug her and try to get pictures of the necklace. She told her friend that she was really upset because she wasn't used to getting phone calls from her boyfriend's staff telling what she should and shouldn't wear, and because it seemed that the paparazzi were going to take photos of her, and she was going to get criticized online, no matter what she did or wore.

Maybe at that point she didn't realize how truly nasty and invasive the British tabloids can be. And if she took the necklace off and was photographed without it, then the tabloids might go off about how H&M's relationship was over and speculate about what happened. But I also felt, reading this, like maybe the staffer was trying to give her helpful advice, and she could have found some way to address what they were worried about. Like put the charms on a longer chain, so she could still wear them but put them under the neckline of her top. Or hide them under a scarf.

It just seemed to me that if she misunderstood this request, or didn't push back and explain why she didn't want to do it - or tell them not to tell her how to dress - then things were off to a really bad start, from well, the start. I'm not completely blaming her because maybe it was wrong of the staffer to tell her what they did, but they might not know that it wasn't a good idea to tell her if she didn't tell them not to do that.

 

[mjb52]

I was talking to someone who works at a cultural institution in the LA area and I was joking around like, "Now that Prince Harry lives near LA wouldn't it be awesome if he stopped by for a visit," thinking they would be like "omg yes how awesome" and instead they were like "that would be a nightmare" because of all the security, and it really made me think about how hard it must be to have Harry's kind of personality, where I genuinely believe for all that has been discussed earlier in the thread about how maybe he sees things as issues that aren't that serious compared to the issues "ordinary" people have to deal with (the tiara and shopping things), he seems to have this desire to be a normal guy but he will always have to deal with that being his reality.

I know that there is definitely a oh booo hoo for the rich and famous attitude a lot when it comes to celebrities or people like Harry talking about not having privacy but I just can't imagine not being able to come and go as I please (well actually I used to be able to not imagine it but I guess now it isn't as hard as it was but I hope this will end!) without it being a disruption to everything around me. I would just really hate that and it isn't something that he will ever be able to get away from completely, which I think must be really difficult to deal with and part of why he seems to have such frustration about the press (as they are one factor in that being his reality). So whatever failings he has and perhaps Megan has, I am sympathetic to their having to deal with an existence that is restricted in a weird way that is hard for me to imagine. I really value my freedom, and other people having their freedom as well, and for me personally I will take it over all the money in the world.

 

[ballettmaus]

It just seemed to me that if she misunderstood this request, or didn't push back and explain why she didn't want to do it - or tell them not to tell her how to dress - then things were off to a really bad start from well, the start. I'm not completely blaming her because maybe it was wrong of the staffer to tell her what they did, but they might not know that it wasn't a good idea to tell her if she didn't tell them not to do that.

If it went down in the way described then I don't see anything wrong with the staffer telling her. The staffer has the experience, they knew what they were talking about and they had a good reason to do what they did. Maybe they could have said to not wear it or find an alternative way to wear it so that it doesn't show. But other than that, I can't find anything wrong with it considering how the paparazzi are.

 

[aftershocks]

Meanwhile, the positivity abounds surrounding the good that the Sussexes are actually doing and inspiring others to do:

Meghan will be making an appearance next week at another virtual summit, involving The 19th (a fair and inclusive journalistic reporting initiative, founded by Emily Ramshaw). Meghan reportedlly will interview Ms. Ramshaw on the final day of the summit:

Meghan Markle Will Join ‘The 19th* Represents Summit’ to Talk Gender, Representation, and the Future of News

The duchess has participated in countless interviews. This one will be different.

www.glamour.com

Meghan Markle to Make Her Debut as a Moderator at the 19th Represents Virtual Summit

This time around, the Duchess of Sussex will be the one asking the questions.

www.harpersbazaar.com

Schedule

The 19th is an independent, nonprofit newsroom reporting at the intersection of gender, politics and policy.

summit.19thnews.org

Other notable participants over the five days of the summit (as listed in the above schedule), include Hillary Clinton, Stacy Abrams, Kamala Harris, Zoe Saldana, Meryl Streep, Melinda Gates, Tulsi Gabbard, et al.


Harry has spoken out against hate on social media:

Prince Harry hits out at social media for creating 'crisis of hate'

Duke of Sussex urges advertisers to demand companies do more to curb hate speech online

www.theguardian.com

And he has recently talked with Rashad Robinson, President of @ColorofChange:
https://twitter.com/rashadrobinson/status/1291792464110444545 Full video to be available soon


U.K. charity, Migrateful has received 8,000 pounds from Meghan (via The Royal Foundation per funds generated from ongoing sales of the Together cookbook, the first project Meghan launched while she & Harry were still under the RF umbrella). Migrateful is a "London-based charity which organizes refugee-led cooking classes." So that is an excellent way for the Hubb Community cookbook profits to continue benefiting cooking and immigrant-related causes:

Queen Elizabeth II reacts to shocking interview with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry - The Canadian News

After the shocking interview of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, Elizabeth II reacts. The queen agrees to deal with accusations of racism and ensures that …

thecanadian.news

Meghan Markle Donates $10,000 in Support of Refugees, Asylum Seekers, and Migrants

Since dissolving their Sussex Royal foundation, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been putting their remaining funds to good use.

www.townandcountrymag.com

Sign in - Google Accounts

In addition, patronages and charities supported by Meghan are continuing to collaborate in mutually beneficial ways:

Meghan Markle is part of a moving new fashion initiative

Isn't this lovely?

www.hellomagazine.com

Previously, SmartWorks has collaborated with Luminary Bakery on initiatives to support women in need.


The #inspiredbyMeghan fundraising initiative is continuing to raise funds for CamFed (which has resulted in providing first year college scholarships for at least 20 young women in African countries (probably more to date as the campaign continues).

The Sussex Squad activist (Dani Trin of Portugal) who spearheaded this fundraiser (as well as the former ArchieDay fundraiser) was recently interviewed by Omid Scobie on his HeirPod podcast. In the same episode, Scobie addresses the firestorm of commentary about his book with Carolyn Durand, Finding Freedom:

The HeirPod - Royal News & Interviews Podcast - ABC Audio

Get "On Heir" every week with royal experts Emily Andrews & Omid Scobie as they take you behind the scenes of the biggest royal stories and palace intrigue, including the latest on Prince Harry & Meghan Markle's wedding and Duchess Kate’s third baby.

abcaudio.com

 

[aftershocks]

You could have just written "no".

In the first place, your question wasn't asked with any sincerity or genuine interest in receiving a response from me in the first place, as your putdown quip above further attests. You have already decided. Those who are more open-minded and less knee-jerk on the topic of the issues swirling around Meghan & Harry are not outnumbered here.

 

[aftershocks]

I also felt, reading this, like maybe the staffer was trying to give her helpful advice, and she could have found some way to address what they were worried about. Like put the charms on a longer chain, so she could still wear them but put them under the neckline of her top. Or hide them under a scarf...

Seriously? It really wasn't so much about the jewelry. The tabloids at that point were just eager to track the recently revealed love story. And they were eagle-eyeing everything to do with Meghan Markle. You couldn't even see what was on the tiny necklace, except for the tabloid blowing it up to suss out that the necklace had the two 'H' & 'M' initial charms, whch at that point represented further proof of a happening love story with a WOC twist. So truthfully, it all boils down to tabloid excess for the clicks which represent dollars.

Above all, the entire ovedone critical analysis that continues to ensue, IMO, represents some form of either negative over-fascination and/or jealousy of two people who are obviously very much in love. I'm not talking about you specifically in this regard, but the overdone negative/positive fascination generally. The person who spoke to Meghan was apparently one of the royal courtiers, or 'grey men' as Diana called them. I don't see the criticism as 'helpful advice.' Meghan was mainly criticized for being seen smiling in the photograph.

Even among the Sussex Squad, there are OTT reactions ostensibly in support of M&H. Yet some vocal supporters (who do not all agree with each other) really get hot under the collar, almost in a possessive way. This is because many of them identify with Meghan. The way she's been treated recalls similar prejudices they have personally experienced. In that respect, I understand their anger, though I don't agree with the extent of some of their emotional outbursts. While positive support of the Sussexes and in particular of Meghan foreground the Sussex Squad movement, many supporters of Meghan are very upset by what they see as intentionally harsh and uncalled for criticism against a WOC who plainly is not accepted by some people (including royal courtiers, some low level staffers, a majority of royal reporters, members of the British aristocracy, some members of the royal family, and rampant Sussex haters and trolls). For these people, Meghan is a WOC who does not deserve to be occupying 'a royal space,' especially not as the cherished girlfriend, now wife, of the beloved 'ginger prince.' Anyone who is being honest, can't really ignore the blatant reality of this bottom line. OTOH, many people seem to be trying mightily to avoid it, or downplay it's major relevance.

If it went down in the way described then I don't see anything wrong with the staffer telling her. The staffer has the experience, they knew what they were talking about and they had a good reason to do what they did. Maybe they could have said to not wear it or find an alternative way to wear it so that it doesn't show.

How do you know how much experience this particular staffer has/ had? Also, we can only speculate at the reasons and intentions of the staffer. Again, the way this has been described, I don't see it as being so much about the jewelry. OTOH, maybe it was largely about what the jewelry revealed. Perhaps at that point, the particular staffer (and others connected to the royal firm) were simply thinking the less visible evidence of M&H's 'love' relationship, the better. IOW, many were perhaps crossing their fingers in hopes that what some observers preferred to characterize as 'a fling,' wouldn't last. The upshot is that Harry only further tightened protection around the courtship, and they both concentrated on doing everything they could to keep their relationship and public sightings of them as under wraps as possible. Meghan was fortunate to be working with a group of people on a top-notch production in Canada who also tightened security around her, and respected the privacy of her relationship with Harry.

I certainly was more than a bit naive at the time in thinking that those relatives closest to Harry would be so glad and supportive to see him finally finding 'true love.' Or at the least, finding someone who was making him so visibly happy and mellow, with a pep in his step. But nah, apparently there were only a few relatives who welcomed Meghan, including the Queen and Prince Charles (at least after they met her and got to know something of her character, background and accomplishments). Meanwhile, royal courtiers and some others have reacted publicly in ways that have revealed they never accepted Meghan. Or they were surprised and put off by her strong personality, and by the increasing praise and popularity Harry & Meghan were generating, especially during and post the South Pacific tour.

 

[taf2002]

If the story is true that a palace staffer suggested to Meghan not to wear the necklace in public then I think it was really out of line & even offensive to tell her what to or what not to wear. But it doesn't seem reasonable that that really happened. Wouldn't it make more sense that the courtier would talk to Harry instead? I can't believe that some courtier took it upon him/her-self to call a complete stranger to discuss a necklace. It sound fantastic.

 

[Lemonade20]

Harry’s always been the naughty one because he can get away with it. He’s not a black sheep, but he has made poor decisions in the past. One is MM, sorry. I think it’s bs that she said she gave up her life but she won’t compromise for her new family. Sometimes I wonder if she’s more in love with the idea of being in a royal family only to find out where she stands and she didn’t like it. You can blame other people around you, the media, etc but it all starts with your attitude. MM could have handled all of this better instead of embarrassing Harry and suing everyone who pissed her off

 

[taf2002]

Harry’s always been the naughty one because he can get away with it. He’s not a black sheep, but he has made poor decisions in the past. One is MM, sorry. I think it’s bs that she said she gave up her life but she won’t compromise for her new family. Sometimes I wonder if she’s more in love with the idea of being in a royal family only to find out where she stands and she didn’t like it. You can blame other people around you, the media, etc but it all starts with your attitude. MM could have handled all of this better instead of embarrassing Harry and suing everyone who pissed her off

Since she agreed to leave the royals it doesn't seem like she's in love with being in a royal family. I don't have any ideas about her thoughts or desires & neither does any of us. As for MM being a bad decision, who are you (or any of us) to judge? That's pretty insulting to say.

 

[puglover]

I guess I am mostly hopeful that there is a way back from this and any fallout the book creates. Harry and Meghan are clearly a beloved couple that have caught the romantic imaginings of millions. They are most attractive and well spoken and modern. Even the fact they have sought a separate and independent role for themselves and their family going forward seems totally understandable and actually in line with what both Charles and William and other royal families seem to be envisioning for the future. I obviously have not read the book but it seems they can't have it both ways - "they didn't protect us enough from the vile press - and they tried to tell me what to wear about a necklace with both of their initials" seems contradictory to me. As it seems very unlikely that Archie will have much of a sense of family from Meghan's side except for a grandmother, I hope whatever happens here does not build further obstacles with the Windsors. I know family can be who you choose it to be and the Markles have certainly burned all their bridges but I wish for healing for Harry, Meghan and Archie and Harry's family.

 

[puglover]

double post sorry

 

[Lemonade20]

Exactly, they can’t have it both ways.

 

[ballettmaus]

If the story is true that a palace staffer suggested to Meghan not to wear the necklace in public then I think it was really out of line & even offensive to tell her what to or what not to wear.

I think putting it that way ignores the reasoning behind it. It wasn't about the necklace. It was about what the necklace was about and what the paparazzi would do once they noticed it.

If the person you dated put you on the radar of people who stop at nothing wouldn't you want someone to advice you on how to best avoid the feeding frenzy and stay mostly under the radar?

 

[starrynight]

Read another excerpt. This time one about how Harry's school friend Tom Inskip also advised Harry to take it slower with Meghan and then got cut off.

Not actually sure if this book is meant to be favourable to Harry & Meghan or not? It's just kind of Kardashian stuff - petty and gossipy fluff. Unless there's still something interesting left to be revealed in further excerpts, the book doesn't seem to be too significant?

 

[taf2002]

I think putting it that way ignores the reasoning behind it. It wasn't about the necklace. It was about what the necklace was about and what the paparazzi would do once they noticed it.

If the person you dated put you on the radar of people who stop at nothing wouldn't you want someone to advice you on how to best avoid the feeding frenzy and stay mostly under the radar?

Maybe. But I wouldn't want it coming from someone like a palace staffer, a complete stranger. If that person was really concerned about some tiny little charms shouldn't he alert Harry & let Harry decide if it's an issue? Maybe he was afraid Harry would have told him to mind his own business. I think it was worse to draw attention to something that 99 ppl out of 100 wouldn't give a sh*t about or even notice. It's not like she decided to wear shorts to an evening date.

 

[starrynight]

Given how much Harry says he hates the media, I expect the staffer was trying to help by stopping a new date throwing out bait to the paparazzi.

The royal family is such a delicately balanced thing and that’s why advisors who are often extremely skilled and experienced people with backgrounds in business and politics are brought in. But of course a prince with no education and an actress would know better than all of these people....

 

[overedge]

Maybe. But I wouldn't want it coming from someone like a palace staffer, a complete stranger. If that person was really concerned about some tiny little charms shouldn't he alert Harry & let Harry decide if it's an issue?

I'd think it would be worse for your boyfriend to tell you how to dress than for your boyfriend's employee to tell you the same thing. The employee is doing their job, even if they're misguided in what they're trying to do. Boyfriends telling their girlfriend how to dress are usually control freaks, which is a whole other set of problems.

I think it was worse to draw attention to something that 99 ppl out of 100 wouldn't give a sh*t about or even notice. It's not like she decided to wear shorts to an evening date.

If 99 out of 100 people wouldn't give a sh*t about it, the paparazzi wouldn't be taking photos of it. Obviously it was interesting to a lot of people, because it was interpreted as evidence of H&M being more than just casual friends.

What I understood from the story was that the staffer wasn't concerned about the necklace itself, i.e. whether it was appropriate or tasteful. They were concerned about the attention it was drawing from the paparazzi, and that it was creating even more intensive tabloid interest in the H&M story.

 

[RoseRed]

I mean, I've seen tabloid stories about Taylor Swift's 'J' initial necklace (oh she's not wearing for a few days, oh we haven't seen them together for a while but she wore the necklace so they must be fine, etc.). So it doesn't surprise me at all that there would be attention on Meghan's necklace. But Taylor already had plenty of experience with being very famous and having everything photographed and scrutinized, so I assume she made an informed decision to wear that necklace (and draw attention to it by mentioning it in a song lyric). Meghan wouldn't have that experience to necessarily know how much attention something like that would draw, so I think it makes perfect sense for someone to tell her that she should think about it. Whether it was handled in the best way is hard to tell from the outside, but guidance on something like that seems helpful.

 

[taf2002]

Given how much Harry says he hates the media, I expect the staffer was trying to help by stopping a new date throwing out bait to the paparazzi.

The royal family is such a delicately balanced thing and that’s why advisors who are often extremely skilled and experienced people with backgrounds in business and politics are brought in. But of course a prince with no education and an actress would know better than all of these people....

Sarcasm on? IMO A prince or an actress or just humble me knows what's best for our own selves. You may be fine with someone else telling you how to live - I'm not. Imo a skilled person wouldn't have made a big deal out of some tiny charms. If it was bothering Meghan then she would have taken the necklace off without being told.

 

[ballettmaus]

Sarcasm on? IMO A prince or an actress or just humble me knows what's best for our own selves.

I think you're underestimating the craziness of paparazzi and what length they will go through to get a story. Remember, a while ago, one of them took a photo of a topless Kate from miles and miles away.

 

[overedge]

I think you're underestimating the craziness of paparazzi and what length they will go through to get a story. Remember, a while ago, one of them took a photo of a topless Kate from miles and miles away.

Plus the UK tabloids are much more widely read and more predatory than the US tabloids. They're daily papers, not once-a-week magazines like the National Enquirer and the Globe. The staffer may have thought, understandably, that as an American Meghan may not have really understood the fierce attention she was going to attract from the UK media as soon as she was linked to Harry.

 

[taf2002]

I think once the necklace was noticed it didn't really matter if she kept wearing it or not. YMMV

 

[MacMadame]

I think once the necklace was noticed it didn't really matter if she kept wearing it or not. YMMV

Well that was my thought. Not to mention, they would have the same field day if she took it off. OMG, are they broken up already?!

 

[aftershocks]

What actual difference did Meghan wearing the necklace make though? It's a tempest in a teapot. The public already knew that Harry was seriously dating Meghan. Regardless of whether or not Meghan wore the necklace, she was mainly taken to task by the courtier for being shown smiling. This, after she'd been criticized online for looking expressionless in previous pap photos that had been taken of her after it was publicly revealed by a royal reporter that she was dating Prince Harry.

The statement to the media that Harry personally wrote and got permission for KP press officers to release on November 8, 2016, had confirmed his relationship with Meghan. It was essentially a plea by Harry for the media to back off their harassment of his girlfriend. The very fact that a statement of that nature was released by the palace was unprecedented. Harry's cautionary words to the British press demonstrated the serious nature of his relationship with Meghan, and it also showed that the media had crossed the line from the very beginning in ways that Harry was not going to stand for. Nor should he have stood for any of it. After Harry's press statement, M&H continued trying their best to keep their relationship private and under-the-radar. It wasn't necessary for any royal courtier to telephone Meghan about wearing a charm necklace. The courtiers should have been calling the press to inform them to 'back-off,' as a way of further reinforcing Harry's statement!

There's actually nothing Meghan could or can do without being constantly criticized and railed against. No matter what she does, those who dislike her will find whatever contradictory ways they possibly can to criticize her, despite whether or not such criticisms make any sense. I think Meghan realized over the course of 2018 summer (post the royal wedding) that she was going to be criticized right and left for anything and everything. As a result, she seemingly decided to focus on being herself and to cease bending over backward to fit others' conflicting demands, notions and expectations, since that's an impossibility. If you're going to be heavily criticized regardless, you might as well try to be yourself and above all, be true to yourself.

I wonder why posters aren't questioning the veracity and egregious claims in some of the hit-piece, hack job books that are suddenly abounding about the Sussexes. The book by Durand and Scobie has been thoroughly researched, with quotes and factual details backed up by at least two sources. Another thing to remember (but I guess it's useless for me to continue pointing out): the Sussexes did not write this book. They knew it was being written, and they allowed their friends to speak with the authors, but neither Harry nor Meghan saw or approved the manuscript prior to the book's publication. The authors have said their intent was to try and provide a more fair and balanced account of incidents that have been relentlessly and inaccurately bandied about in the British tabloids (and picked up worldwide by mainstream media outlets), as a result of purposely damaging palace leaks.

This whole drama is not about Harry & Meghan doing something wrong to the royal family. It's about Harry & Meghan (and especially Meghan) being purposely smeared by the British tabloids with assistance from palace insiders. H&M have also been targeted by royal reporters because of Harry's refusal to give in to their threats and negative reporting by providing extensive personal access to himself and his family. The incessantly negative, rabble-rousing tabloid press do not deserve to ever enjoy insider access to the Sussexes.

 

[ballettmaus]

How do you know how much experience this particular staffer has/ had?

If the advice was given in the way it was said then it sounds like someone who knows what they're talking about. And yes, I'm also assuming that no one who is new would be so bold as to call Prince Harry's girlfriend and give advice about something they have no experience with.

There's actually nothing Meghan could or can do without being constantly criticized and railed against. No matter what she does, those who dislike her will find whatever contradictory ways they possibly can to criticize her, despite whether or not such criticisms make any sense

Criticism does not equal dislike.

 

[aftershocks]

Criticism does not equal dislike.

The incessant, ceaseless and ongoing negative criticism of Meghan DoS, certainly equals something on a number of unpleasant levels. Whether it's dislike, jealousy, prejudice, over-fascination, unaccountable hatred, desire by the media to make clickbait money off of her, etc., the vast majority of the criticism is undeserved.

The tabloid media's definite intent with their negative criticism (when M&H were senior royals), was to force the Sussexes to give them greater access in exchange for more positive stories. As Harry has unequivocally stated, he's not going to play any games with the media. It's hurtful enough for him that such practices contributed to his mother's death. He's obviously going to protect the young family he has yearned for, and now has, with every fiber of his being.

 

[taf2002]

If the advice was given in the way it was said then it sounds like someone who knows what they're talking about. And yes, I'm also assuming that no one who is new would be so bold as to call Prince Harry's girlfriend and give advice about something they have no experience with.

Criticism does not equal dislike.

When the criticism is of every last thing that someone does then it certainly equals dislike:

paparrazi: OMG she is wearing H&M charms...this must be serious
KP: the necklace is already being discussed but I must tell Meghan she shouldn't have worn it because I'm officious that way
FSUers: how dare she announce their relationship to the world? that's for KP to do

I am not a big royal watcher. I mostly like the tiaras & the beautiful houses/palaces, etc but lately I have felt that someone besides AF needs to defend both Meghan & Harry against all this bile.

 

[MacMadame]

When the criticism is of every last thing that someone does then it certainly equals dislike:

I believe she meant the criticism from the palace not to wear the charm. Which was not everything she did because it was early days. That was my interpretation anyway.

I believe that this sort of "input" from The Firm is pretty common for the royals. If you are going to be one, you need to learn to suck it up, ignore what you think is stupid and implement the stuff that makes sense. If you can't do that, you are going to be in for a rough ride as a royal.

 

[MsZem]

This is the Harry and Meghan wedding thread, which was very very positive (as it should have been).

Hold on to your fascinators, it could be a snarky ride! It's Royal Wedding Day! Wheeee!

https://ibb.co/f3FLQo - The bunting is up in Zante! :lol: I'm sooo ready! :watch:

www.fsuniverse.net

Since then they've made some good decisions and some not so good ones, so they don't generate as much good will. It doesn't mean that everyone now hates them; they're imperfect, just like everyone else. Except with more money and less privacy.