Royalty Thread #8.....A Pregnant Pause

aftershocks

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,218
Ratings
13,282
There is not really any reason why the Duke and Duchess of Sussex should have a pied-à-terre in Central London. Frogmore Cottage is about 45 minutes' drive away from Kensington Palace. Prince Andrew and Prince Edward live in the vicinity and don't have second homes in London...
As pointed out already, Prince Andrew, Prince Edward, and the Princess Royal (Anne) all have places to crash in London. :D Anne has some digs at St. James Palace, and office space at BP. I'm sure there's ready accommodations available for any and all royal family members at BP if/when needed. No need for hotel reservations, ahem. The perks of being royal are surely something we can barely imagine! The Sussexes reportedly will continue to maintain offices at KP. For the moment, nothing has been said about whether or not they will retain Nott Cott for a crash pad. In any case, Will & Kate surely have enough room in their 21-room Apt 1-A for an occasional stay-over by any family member. :lol:

There's a whole lot we don't know about the inner workings of the British royals and their household matters. Still, some things are fairly well known, but not examined that much. Now, with Harry marrying an American divorcee of variant ethnic background, there's been increased interest in the goings-on of the British royal family. Not that everyone gives a flying hoot. ;) Anyway, due to renovations and upgrades taking place at BP, Andrew and Edward have moved their London digs to St. James Palace:
https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...hie-prince-andrew-forced-to-move-from-palace/
For some interesting (albeit slightly dated) behind-the-scenes background, read Brian Hoey's Not in Front of the Corgis (2013).
________________________________________________________

I get @taf2002 not caring so much about Angelina meeting with Sophie Wessex, but I posted the news because it's related to an event/ organization that the British royals support. It was not a casual one-off occurrence. I also mentioned the news as an example of the royals not publicizing appearances in advance, which is happening more and more these days. Plus, Angelina Jolie is admired by the Queen for her humanitarian work, and thus Angelina was named an honorary dame of the British empire by QEII in 2014. Since Angelina is not British, she is not officially addressed as 'Dame Angelina.'

Here's an overhead view of Frogmore Cottage: https://postimg.cc/gXCg98C3
Wow, that's some comedown for the Sussexes. :rofl: NOT! I'll bet anything that the renovations likely will include whatever soundproofing might be deemed necessary. Plus tourists are already restricted to limited visits during the year to Windsor Castle and Frogmore House. I will bet that serious security measures will be taken around Frogmore Cottage, with the tourist footpaths removed and diverted elsewhere. And free rein around the Frogmore House environs will surely be severely restricted going forward.

In retrospect, this engagement pic of Meghan & Harry taken one year ago on the grounds of Frogmore House, near Frogmore Cottage speaks volumes:
https://www.instagram.com/p/Bc94pLODFLd/?utm_source=ig_embed
 
Last edited:

taf2002

Fluff up your tutu & dance away.....
Messages
22,017
Ratings
16,593
TBH, I am interested in what even minor members of the family do. I would have been interested in Sophie Wessex's event if Angelina hadn't been mentioned. But the lead-in to the article was all about their meeting & explanation of the event was lower down under their photo. I admit my feelings about AJ colored my remarks and no, this isn't anything about Jennifer A. I haven't liked her since the days of having Billy Bob's blood around her neck & kissing her brother on the mouth. (Lots of families kiss on the mouth but generally it's just a peck, not a real kiss. Ick!) And this year's long public dragging out of her custody battle hasn't improved my impression of her. She may be a wonderful person in private but her public persona needs work. But back to the royals!
 

PDilemma

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,534
Ratings
2,266
@aftershocks George has been photographed in long pants and even jeans many times over prior to Meghan and Harry's wedding.

For traditional events, he has worn shorts. Nothing wrong with that. If that story is true, Meghan just needs to stop. She married into a very traditional family--and a different country and culture as well-- that has very important reasons to uphold those traditions and if she truly has notions of bucking every single one to prove something (and what that proves is beyond me), she needs to grow up. It is not fair to Harry, first of all. If the royal family gives up all tradition, it loses its purpose and its mystique. Some of that mystique needs to exist in order to retain the monarchy. Kicking all traditions to the curb because you think you're special is not how to ingratiate yourself to the people you agreed to officially represent when you agreed to the marriage.
 

taf2002

Fluff up your tutu & dance away.....
Messages
22,017
Ratings
16,593
@aftershocks George has been photographed in long pants and even jeans many times over prior to Meghan and Harry's wedding.

For traditional events, he has worn shorts. Nothing wrong with that. If that story is true, Meghan just needs to stop. She married into a very traditional family--and a different country and culture as well-- that has very important reasons to uphold those traditions and if she truly has notions of bucking every single one to prove something (and what that proves his beyond me), she needs to grow up. It is not fair to Harry, first of all. If the royal family gives up all tradition, it loses its purpose and its mystique. Some of that mystique needs to exist in order to retain the monarchy. Kicking all traditions to the curb because you think you're special is not how to ingratiate yourself to the people you agreed to officially represent when you agreed to the marriage.
I didn't click on every link above so I don't know WTF you're talking about. I have seen no evidence that Meghan wants to change everything, esp to "prove" something. I don't think she "needs to grow up". Who are you to say? I think the Queen has enough moxie to put her in her place if she puts her foot wrong. In the meantime, why don't you give her a break? Apparently the girl can't do anything right. I read today that her baby bump was too big. She's obviously having twins or she's farther along than she said because we all know no one in the history of the world has a baby bump this big with one baby in her 1st trimester, right? (My last miscarriage started showing at 2 mos. I was obviously lying about how far along I was. :rolleyes:)
 

aftershocks

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,218
Ratings
13,282
If that story is true, Meghan just needs to stop.
:lol: I doubt that it's true. The tabloids have been going crazy making things up to cast aspersions on the Duchess of Sussex and to stir up negative noise. Did we hear anything like this from Meghan's lips??? Nope!

And of course, Gary Janetti's shtick is humorous parody that sometimes crosses a line.

I'd never seen Prince George in long pants. He wore 3/4 length pants at Pippa's wedding last year, but at H&M's wedding in May was the first time I saw George in long pants. He looked cute. :)
 

mag

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,430
Ratings
9,393
I always thought the short pants thing was originally because kids are growing and so with short pants their clothes last longer because they are already short. Sounds very practical to me. It is also what all of George’s peers are wearing at that age. Now I don’t think kids need to all be same, but purposely making your child different to make some kind of point seems a bit cruel. Beside, little Sussex will have to wear the same school uniform as everyone else. I think the whole thing is much ado about nothing. Both Meghan and Kate have not had many engagements of late (Kate has had a few more than Meghan but is clearly working only part time right now and Meghan seems to be very part time - that is not a criticism just a statement of fact) so the press is looking for something to write about.

As for how far along Meghan is, I have no doubt she was well past the three month mark when they announced her pregnancy. I know they haven’t announced a date, but delivering past the date decided by the press would be very stressfull - just ask William and Kate as that is what happened with George! By waiting to announce the pregnancy they have given themselves some breathing room on the other end. Furthermore, given Meghan is over 35 I am sure they would have waited for the results of an amniocentesis before announcing. Again, I don’t know why this is such a big deal other than the press need something to write about. I really don’t think H&M are obliged to give us all the details!
 

Lorac

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,533
Ratings
2,651
I didn't click on every link above so I don't know WTF you're talking about. I have seen no evidence that Meghan wants to change everything, esp to "prove" something. I don't think she "needs to grow up". Who are you to say? I think the Queen has enough moxie to put her in her place if she puts her foot wrong. In the meantime, why don't you give her a break? Apparently the girl can't do anything right. I read today that her baby bump was too big. She's obviously having twins or she's farther along than she said because we all know no one in the history of the world has a baby bump this big with one baby in her 1st trimester, right? (My last miscarriage started showing at 2 mos. I was obviously lying about how far along I was. :rolleyes:)
I was under the impression they announced the pregnancy at the 3 month mark - she is therefore well into her 2nd trimester at this point - probably closer to 5 months along. The bump I have seen in some pics is about right for that time scale. As to twins - the same was said of Kate with her extreme morning sickness as apparently that was the norm when you are carrying twins :rolleyes:. But people do love to speculate. Hopefully Meghan is having an uncomplicated pregnancy and being spoilt rotten by her husband.
 

aftershocks

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,218
Ratings
13,282
Just in case people thing George never wears long pants:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/69/e2/d4/69e2d48d504dd697572894c0979d3ba4.jpg

ETA: another time, photo on the far left https://i.pinimg.com/originals/0b/62/a9/0b62a9f3059c1717bc3027eafa711f48.jpg

Harry and Meghan’s wedding was not the first time.
The first image in the jeans when Prince George was a bit younger is a rather obscure picture, likely a casual private occasion. It's the first time I've seen this picture, and it's nice to see and to know George has worn long trousers at times, so the shorts are not strict protocol -- but shorts are largely what we've seen him wear in public, aside from the special occasion weddings he's participated in.

The gold 3/4 length gold pants at Pippa's wedding is what I already noted, and it's obviously a formal event which took place in May 2017. Meghan and Harry's wedding took place in May 2108 and that's the first time I saw George in long pants (obviously a matching uniform to what Prince Harry wore).

The other two outfits in the second link are what Prince George wore as a page boy at weddings this year, and those weddings took place after H&M's wedding. The dark blue pants with white shirt and green flower print sash is what George wore to Eugenie's wedding in October. And the other light blue 3/4 length pants George wore at a friend of his parents' wedding in July or August. Prince George was in fine marching/ dancing form on that occasion. :D

In other interesting news, the Duchess of Sussex made a surprise appearance today at the British Fashion Awards to present Givenchy's Clare Waight Keller (who designed her wedding dress) with a special award. Meghan looked so lovely from head-to-toe in a one-shoulder black velvet evening gown with gold strap heels. She cradled her baby bump proudly and spoke to the audience so thoughtfully and gracefully. Once again, an embargoed appearance. The audience was apparently pleasantly surprised.
http://madaboutmeghan.blogspot.com/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S63brIUd39I
 

mag

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,430
Ratings
9,393
The first image in the jeans when Prince George was a bit younger is a rather obscure picture, likely a casual private occasion. It's the first time I've seen this picture, and it's nice to see and to know George has worn long trousers at times, so the shorts are not strict protocol -- but shorts are largely what we've seen him wear in public, aside from the special occasion weddings he's participated in.
I agree that shorts tend to be for public occasions. I also found another photo of George out on his scooter in long trousers so I suspect for every day wear, other than school, he does where long trousers when the weather is cold.
 

aftershocks

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,218
Ratings
13,282
^^ Indeed, that makes sense. We don't normally get to see many private photos of George and the other royal youngsters, as William and Harry are very protective of their family's privacy, and especially want to keep their children out of the camera's gaze as much as possible. We've seen very few pictures of baby Prince Louis to date.

Here are more close-up pictures of the Duchess of Sussex at the fashion awards event. She looks so blooming happy, as she lovingly cradles her baby (bump):
https://www.whowhatwear.co.uk/meghan-markle-british-fashion-awards
https://www.hellomagazine.com/fashi...5492/meghan-markle-fashion-awards-dress-bump/

I'm loving Meghan's elegant look with minimalist jewelry and dark nail polish!
 
Last edited:

Zemgirl

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,842
Ratings
17,994
The Nobel Prize award ceremonies were held yesterday (Peace Prize in Oslo, everything else in Stockholm) which means lots of royals, gowns and bling. Here's a roundup from Order of Splendor, and WTF is Princess Victoria wearing?! Sometimes the Swedish royals take their recycling too far, and that is one gown that should have stayed in storage.

I think Princess Christina is the royal winner here, and Princess Sofia with the dramatic look. Among non-royals, it's great to see more women among the Nobel laureates: Donna Strickland (Physics), Frances Arnold (Chemistry) and Nadia Murad (Peace, not pictured in the post). I hope to see even more in the future.
 

Jenny

From the Bloc
Messages
20,709
Ratings
8,655
The Nobel Prize award ceremonies were held yesterday (Peace Prize in Oslo, everything else in Stockholm) which means lots of royals, gowns and bling. Here's a roundup from Order of Splendor, and WTF is Princess Victoria wearing?! Sometimes the Swedish royals take their recycling too far, and that is one gown that should have stayed in storage.
I like it! Maybe not for this occasion, but it's a beautiful dress that would look great on any red carpet, perhaps Cannes for example.
 

Skittl1321

Well-Known Member
Messages
17,303
Ratings
9,337
Furthermore, given Meghan is over 35 I am sure they would have waited for the results of an amniocentesis before announcing.
Since Meghan has said she wants a more natural birth, I doubt she would have an invasive procedure like an amniocentesis done due solely to her age. If that is standard of care in the UK, it definitely is not in the US. They are only done when there is another indication of an issue. There are blood tests that can be done (much earlier than an amnio- most doctors won't do an amnio until 16 weeks; the NIPT blood tests can be done at 10 weeks) that rule out the most common genetic anomalies, and can be done early in pregnancy with no risk to the fetus.
 

Skittl1321

Well-Known Member
Messages
17,303
Ratings
9,337
Having an amnio doesn’t mean one can’t have a natural birth experience.
Certainly it doesn't. I have planned hypnobirths for all my pregnancies. I have had invasive testing on all of them. Because the first one showed a reason for it. If it hadn't, I'd never have done unnecessary tests.

I'm merely saying that someone who talks up natural birth is unlikely to choose to get one without indication that one is needed. People who want natural births generally want to avoid unnecessary interventions, especially ones with risk of harm to the fetus. There is zero reason to believe Meghan has had an amniocentesis.

She MAY have had one, if other testing indicated there might be a problem with a baby; but it is NOT a standard test for women over 35. Thinking she wouldn't announce a pregnancy until after she gets the results of an amnio is pretty bizarre to me- she would need to be nearly 18 weeks pregnant when she announced for that to be the case. (Amnio results aren't instant, and ask previously stated it is dangerous to do them too early in pregnancy.) I mean, if we want to assume invasive tests, why not assume she got a CVS? She can do that around 10 weeks, and know full genetic information as early as 12 weeks along. But I also doubt she did that, as it isn't routine for "geriatric pregnancies" now that non-invasive options are available.
 

AxelAnnie

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,712
Ratings
5,799
Who knows what Megan thinks would be a "more natural way"? I can see her having an amnio, but that puts the Crown in a rather precarious place. What to do if there is (heaven forbid) bad news? That would be a mess to sort through.
 

Jenny

From the Bloc
Messages
20,709
Ratings
8,655
I would think the Royal Family is pretty particular about what kind of medical tests are performed and by who and what happens to those samples.
 

mag

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,430
Ratings
9,393
Well I had my kids many moons ago, but amniocentesis was a fairly standard test in Canada for women over 35. I have no idea what tests Meghan would or wouldn’t have had, and it is really none of my business. My original point was is simply that all of it is none of our business and that there are lots of reasons why Meghan may have been past the three month mark when they announced her pregnancy. Again, there is certainly no rule about when they need to announce.

Now for something that is totally none of my business and has no effect on me what so ever, but really, really, bugs me for some reason, I do wish Meghan would stop walking around cradling her bump, especially in both hands. Some of those photos from the fashion awards are just plain odd (IMHO, of course.)
 

Skittl1321

Well-Known Member
Messages
17,303
Ratings
9,337
Well I had my kids many moons ago, but amniocentesis was a fairly standard test in Canada for women over 35. I have no idea what tests Meghan would or wouldn’t have had, and it is really none of my business. My original point was is simply that all of it is none of our business and that there are lots of reasons why Meghan may have been past the three month mark when they announced her pregnancy. Again, there is certainly no rule about when they need to announce.

Now for something that is totally none of my business and has no effect on me what so ever, but really, really, bugs me for some reason, I do wish Meghan would stop walking around cradling her bump, especially in both hands. Some of those photos from the fashion awards are just plain odd (IMHO, of course.)
Non-invasive prenatal testing first became available in 2011, and was widely available by 2014.

I'm with you on the cradling. It doesn't need to be constant.
 

puglover

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,506
Ratings
2,502
I get your point about the cradling but I find it kind of endearing. Here is a very accomplished woman who has had a lot of success, been admired for her body and her looks and her fashion choices, who seems to be thrilled to be pregnant. We hear so much about the trials and sacrifices of pregnancy - or the super women who wear bikinis 3 weeks post-partum. I thought Kate showing herself within days of giving birth still with a tummy was so freeing for other about-to-be moms. Meagan's happiness seems contagious.
 

fan

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,874
Ratings
1,539
I’m 16 weeks and cradle almost constantly - I’m having a lot of pain and cramping. Who knows if that’s why Meghan is doing it?
 
Messages
7,039
Ratings
10,980
I’m 16 weeks and cradle almost constantly - I’m having a lot of pain and cramping. Who knows if that’s why Meghan is doing it?
Yeah, I’m 18 weeks and do it for the same reasons. Also, the bump is at the stage that it’s super hard to ignore and it just feels natural to have my hands on it. It’s kind of like when pockets are in just right the place. Your hands just go there. Shrug.
 

Jimena

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,768
Ratings
1,237
Yeah, I don't get the calls for her to stop cradling her bump. I was the same way when I was pregnant. And it wasn't a conscious action. It's just where my hands ended up.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 2)

Top