Royalty Thread #9. Welcome Archie, the red headed heir, don’t care!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Even though the fact of the Royal Foundation split has been yawn-worthy, there are a myriad amount of interesting commentaries going on among royal reporters regarding the split. Everyone closely following the British royals knew the split was going to happen since March of this year when it was officially mentioned that rethinking and reorganization would soon be taking place. In any case, Richard Palmer has a notion that it's not actually Meghan and Harry who wanted the split to happen.* In general, Harry and Meghan have been tagged with being responsible, with especially a focus on Meghan. Katie Nichol suggests that is a sexist characterization. I would agree that the underlying truth about the split is probably very different from most of what has been written.

To smooth things over and to try and make the negative stories go away, the royal p.r. machine has been busy describing the split as a divergence of the brothers' paths and roles in life, which of course makes sense. It's just that it brings up a question of why the split wasn't simply decided upon and put in motion in advance of H&M's wedding, or shortly thereafter. The least sound explanation is that Kate & William are more 'restricted' in what they can do, which some royal reporters have aptly questioned (in the same way that I did). For example, why should William & Kate be considered 'restricted' when 'being restricted' in the role of Prince of Wales never stopped Prince Charles from creating expansive endeavors and groundbreaking outreach projects that have benefited people in Great Britain and around the world in important ways.

The 'restricted' narrative is just an excuse. Overall, the split makes sense. It's just the underlying tense dynamic, chiefly between the brothers that is surely the precipitating reason for the split. William has been described as controlling, and Harry has likely been asserting himself more as he has come more into his own. I commend both the Duchess of Sussex and the Duchess of Cambridge because I get the feeling that both brothers can be quite a handful to deal with at times. ;)

* https://twitter.com/RoyalReporter/status/1142013756022624256 Richard Palmer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQQIGTUMTDo ITV report with Chris Ship

www.ibtimes.com

Prince William’s ‘Takeover’ Of Royal Foundation Underscores His Authority Over Harry

Prince William is accused of taking over the Royal Foundation and not splitting it with Prince Harry.
www.ibtimes.com www.ibtimes.com

www.harpersbazaar.com

Meghan and Harry Split from Joint Charity with Kate and William

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are leaving The Royal Foundation to set up their own charity vehicle.
www.harpersbazaar.com www.harpersbazaar.com
 
This is the kind of OTT crap that isn't funny, but there you go, supported by the BBC:
:rolleyes: :wall:

In more lighthearted news, it was announced that Prince Harry will be attending the first baseball game between two American teams, played on British soil:
www.townandcountrymag.com

Prince Harry Will Watch the Yankees and Red Sox Face Off in London

The Duke of Sussex will be on hand for the first major league baseball game held in Europe.
www.townandcountrymag.com www.townandcountrymag.com
 
aftershocks said:
Yep Meghan is who she is, and it's so fascinating watching the clusterf*ck going on in this thread, in other royalty related forums, on Twitter, Facebook, tumblr, Youtube, and in the media -- both tabloid and mainstream -- simply because of who Meghan is, where she came from and who she married. There are strange commentaries on all sides that really make me take some serious pause. There's a whole group of people who think they own Meghan, Harry and Archie, juxtaposed by all the OTT haters, and contrasted by a number of folk similar to some of the people in this thread who continuously get all bent out of shape for reasons they will apparently never ever come to grips with.
Click to expand...

I think that you are conflating what you are reading on other sites with what you are reading here. You appear to get all defensive when there is nothing to get defensive about. (You accused me of saying that Harry had no say in decision making and of being condescending about Meghan, but when I asked you to back those accusations up, you haven’t.) Yes, there have been a few strange comments, but for the most part, people here are not Meghan haters and are interested in what she is doing, but not blinded to her (or any other member’s) faults by OTT devotion. I like following the royals because I am particularly interested in the causes this new generation are supporting and also for the fashion. Speculation about their lives is kinda fun and the reality is none of us know what is really going on, but because this is a skating board, the chance of any member of the Royal family reading it is slim to none.

On a lighter note, it looks like George and Charlotte will be in another wedding party:

www.townandcountrymag.com

Prince George and Princess Charlotte Will Reportedly Serve as Bridal Attendants in Yet Another Wedding

One of Prince William's closest friends is marrying a teacher from George's school.
www.townandcountrymag.com www.townandcountrymag.com

ETA: While it is not my call, I would really prefer if we could refrain from posting links like the one in the post above this about Meghan being trailer trash. Whether they are about Meghan or any other member of the Royal family. Copying those links gives them oxygen they don’t deserve and just encourages the behaviour. To each their own, of course, but I for one will not be clicking on them.
 
mag said:
You accused me of saying that Harry had no say in decision making and of being condescending about Meghan, but when I asked you to back those accusations up, you haven't...
Click to expand...

I've already highlighted your posts and pointed out where I disagree with you and where I perceive you to be condescending toward Meghan. Again, you and a few other posters have a tendency to over-focus on criticizing Meghan and to opine that she needs to 'learn her place'; that she's 'not a team player'; that she 'needs to learn the rules'; that she 'doesn't have the skills to deal with family friction and misunderstandings'; that for Meghan 'the jury is still out'; that Meghan probably finds royal life 'restricting' and that the 'flexibility' you think the Sussexes have is "not nearly as much as [you] suspect Meghan will want"; that Meghan is somehow attempting to 'change the rules'; that if Meghan doesn't learn to deal with friction and "doesn't help Harry develop those skills... it is going to be a bumpy ride," etc, etc. This is just a sample of some of the comments recently made by you and Lorac, without my even referencing any of dear old AxelAnnie's snippets, among others. All of these critiques I find to be loaded, and as well such views eliminate Harry from playing much of a role in their family communication, interactions and decision making.

And then there's other posters here fixated on my admiring Meghan and/or both Harry and Meghan. I've never denied that I admire them, but I also think they are human and fallible, as most people are in this world. I base my opinions on knowledge accumulated from reading, viewing interviews, engaging in research and reflection on the royals over a long period. And regarding Meghan, I've read her own writings, and gathered quite a bit from her former Tig, Instagram and numerous speeches, in-depth interviews and features on her, many of which are still on Youtube. With Meghan being a member of the British royal family, it's rather unusual that there's so much in the public domain about her. That's of course due to her career that pre-existed her entry into the British royal family. I have critical things to say of a thoughtful nature, some of which I have voiced. But for the most part, I don't see any need to add to the climate of incessant criticisms against the Duchess of Sussex.

From all that I've learned about Meghan (even in the absence of intimately knowing her), IMO the bottom line is that Meghan appears to be someone who is simply being herself and trying to hold onto her identity and authenticity as she supports her husband and continues to pursue her passion for helping others. At the same time, she seems grateful for her blessings as she goes about the business of enjoying her life to the fullest. She is surely trying to block out all the noise and heedless negativity so she can concentrate on what truly matters. And there are lessons in that. I think there's common sense and truth in the adage she once cited on her Instagram: "Be the change you wish to see in the world."

As far as your suggestion that I'm conflating OTT views from other sites, I disagree with you. I'm fully aware that royalty watching has never been an intense focus on FSU. I'm able to distinguish between the generally milder takes on this site from the more outrageous and contentious views on other sites. There are reasonable and fair-minded royalty watchers here and on other sites, in addition to the usual suspects whose takes are constantly critical and perhaps unconsciously overly negative.

You can take a look back at your posts, or continue not seeing what you don't or can't see. Whether or not it's at all possible for any of us to get beyond personal defensiveness, it would certainly behoove all of us to take a good long look at our motivations, perceptions, and our thought processes in relation to our individual upbringings and to the global culture in which we all live. If you don't think anything I have to say applies to you, that's fine too.
 
Re: Another wedding. OMG George and Charlotte are the cutest dang children EVER!

Mag - you are so much better than I. You are interested in the charity work.............I just want to look at the tiaras!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: mag
You know what @aftershocks I think that if you check out my posts in regards to Meghan I am more often that not complimentary - in fact even in the post where I stated that I felt she wasn't a team player in relation to the Royal Foundation I explained why I thought that and then stated I felt the decision to split made perfect sense for both couples. But you then chose to be simply rude and condescending in regards to my comments and used a whole slew of emojis to make fun and try to belittle me - a classic attempt to try to shut up those who disagree with you. You then gave some examples of why Meghan must be a team player which don't stand up to any scrutiny and get defensive and rude when people point that out. Now you're saying I said things I didn't - no direct quotes but an implication that I am definitely refuting here. You clearly think very highly of Meghan and that's fine but both myself and others are allowed to have our own thoughts and comments as well and will continue to do so regardless of the passive aggressive bullying that you love to employ.

And to add lightness to my post - I wonder if the Queen's great grandkids will be off to see this movie when it is released here next month :D

The Queen's Corgi
 
^^ Go back and check your posts. I only cited what you and mag actually stated in your posts. Me calling out what I see as OTT negativity toward Meghan, which I disagree with is not 'bullying,' but you can think otherwise if it makes you feel better.

mag said:
ETA: While it is not my call, I would really prefer if we could refrain from posting links like the one in the post above this about Meghan being trailer trash. Whether they are about Meghan or any other member of the Royal family. Copying those links gives them oxygen they don’t deserve and just encourages the behaviour. To each their own, of course, but I for one will not be clicking on them.
Click to expand...

Good for you. Out of sight, out of mind doesn't always cut it though, particularly not with the current climate of OTT tabloid and Internet negativity toward the Duchess of Sussex. This 'comedy show' characterization is an example of the beyond the bounds, outrageous, and often 'racially' coded digs toward Meghan that began as soon as her background was exposed to the wider public when it was revealed she was dating Prince Harry. Let's not forget that their relationship was confirmed by the necessity for Harry's unprecedented press release calling out the "racial undertones of comment pieces; and the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls and web article comments."

A Statement by the Communications Secretary to Prince Harry

Since he was young, Prince Harry has been very aware of the warmth that has been extended to him by members of the public. He feels lucky to have so many people...
www.royal.uk www.royal.uk

While there aren't any such overt attitudes often expressed here, the culture we've all grown up in sometimes lends itself to the harboring of negative, discriminatory views. That's in part why the very existence of Meghan in the British royal family has led to a firestorm of unfounded criticism, and not just by trolls. It's fine to be critical of any royal. I have voiced critical opinions at times about Meghan that conveniently get overlooked. But I don't have much to say that's of a critical nature about her because there's simply too much negativity already abounding against Meghan. Similar to the firestorm of opinions that have dogged Hillary Clinton, Meghan has become a lightning rod and a polarizing figure, for no reason other than the fact of her being multi-ethnic and born to a black woman, and that she's also a divorced American feminist actor [code word: 'celebrity'] who married into the British royal family.

No one needs to dwell on any of this. It's lovely to be able to simply post delightful observations about royals in general. But the Duchess of Sussex and the rabidly negative attitudes that have developed against her in other venues aren't going away, and can't be ignored, especially not when similar attitudes trickle into commentary here, despite the defensive denials.
 
Last edited:
If we're stating our preferences, then I will say I like the fashions, the pictures, and the charitable works. I think the family all have difficult jobs that they didn't really ask for, and I give them credit for not getting caught rolling their eyes or making faces.
Plus I've used the ignore feature, it makes me happy and content.
 
aftershocks said:
I only cited what you and mag actually stated in your posts.
Click to expand...

You cherry picked partial phrases and then spun them to fit your warped narrative.

aftershocks said:
Good for you. Out of sight, out of mind
Click to expand...

This is completely and utterly offensive. I am happy to discuss, argue, and even disagree, but that statement is beyond it even for you. That you would even think such a thing given my posting history shows your complete and utter inability to read for comprehension and/or that your obsessive interest in Meghan has warped your sense of reality. That is seriously one step too far.
 
I would hate to see what @aftershocks thinks about The Daily Mail, some of the Facebook groups, the YT comments, and the Instagram comments on both "theroyalfamily" and "kensingtonroyal's" IG accounts. Really the only places I discuss the royals is here and on a royal fashion blog where the moderator strictly enforces the "no hate speech" rule.

The vast majority of posters here (there's one that I also have on ignore but for totally different reasons) treat the royals as a lighthearted escape. It's fun to follow their fashions, to indulge in some royal gossip, and that's it. This is as mild as it gets.

@aftershocks obviously hasn't been to the forums where protocol is endlessly discussed and debated EVERY DAY. Omg Kate crossed her legs at the calf and not the ankle and why isn't she doing the Duchess Slant? Omg Meghan's hat is too small to count as a fascinator! Omg Sophie opened her own car door! It goes on and on, and it is tedious and I stopped following those forums.

@aftershocks obviously hasn't run into the "Diana widows" who lament daily about how heartbroken Diana would be if she saw her sons married to a "commoner" and an "American." Camila is obviously unforgiven. For whatever reason the Diana widows have a large and vocal presence on Quora, a Q&A site that occasionally also doubles as a celeb gossip site due to some of the questions asked ("how easy is it to get a selfie with Lebron James?" etc.).

And actually @aftershocks doesn't have to venture very far if she finds this thread too much for her. Ever been to "The Trash Can" where the fans of certain skaters dominate the threads to such an extent that non-ubers sometimes feel like we're intruding on a private party with the snotty, rude comments towards the non-uber posters.

So really, this royal thread is one of the best places to discuss Meghan. And Kate. And Maxima. And whoever else. To use a "woke" term, it's almost a "safe space."
 
^^ For someone who is supposedly ignoring aftershocks, @canbelto strangely appears to be obsessed with aftershocks. :P

Right @mag, project on me what you yourself are doing in a defensive manner. I said 'good for you,' because it is good if that's your preference to ignore this unfunny, beyond the bounds and clueless characterization that has no bearing whatsoever on who Meghan is, and doesn't even come close to any reality. If you don't want to read about it, seemingly you feel more comfortable ignoring its existence. And that's your right to do so. Nothing even close to this rabid characterization has happened to any other British royal in recent memory. Not to this level.

I went on to point out why I linked the article which panned both the show and the BBC, but just like you have projected on me, you can be selective and ignore the gist of what I said. Talk about reading for comprehension! The comedy show characterization is indicative of the very scary pile-on, baseless attacks against the Duchess of Sussex that are rampant on the Internet. When some of that negativity unintentionally or unconsciously trickles into comments here, I feel it's important to call it out and not pretend it's okay. Why you are acting so offended and defensive is something you should ask yourself.

Lorac made this seemingly innocent comment which I found rather confusing:
Lorac said:
It is sad that this split has just fuelled the feud rumours and the rather formal birthday wish from Harry and Meghan to Wills yesterday didn't really help that either.
Click to expand...

I don't see any connection between a 'formal birthday wish' and the Royal Foundation split which was mentioned earlier this year to be in the works. I didn't see any birthday greeting to William on sussexroyal account so I went to kensingtonroyal to figure out what you might be referencing. But lo and behold, I couldn't find the 'formal' greeting from sussexroyal to William because of all the bullying attacks against sussexroyal and Meghan. You speak of me 'bullying' you for simply pointing out where I disagree with you. Here's what actual bullying attacks look like:
https://www.instagram.com/p/By9wlCtFy5d/
If there was only the well wishes and the positive comments, it wouldn't be so hard to find the original sussexroyal greeting.

There are a few people trying to calm down the trolls and attackers, and those sensible comments along with the well wishes are worthwhile. But the pile-on attacks against sussexroyal and Meghan are scary, especially over a formal birthday greeting that I seriously doubt was posted by either Meghan or Harry. They have staff to manage their Instagram account and to post formal birthday greetings that btw are typically posted by staffers for all the royal accounts. Sometimes the greetings are more personalized, but not always. Meghan is surely involved in drafting some of the sussexroyal posts related to charities and events but she has staff to handle most of the posting. Had sussexroyal not posted a birthday greeting for William, there would have been attacks blasting sussexroyal and Meghan for that. The fact that a greeting was posted by sussexroyal means it must be analyzed and slammed for not being good enough, along with other baseless vitriol. :drama:

It's really curious to think that a formal birthday greeting posted by sussexroyal account has anything to do with helping or hurting the foregone conclusion of the Royal Foundation split. Are you buying into the negativity of these attack comments against Meghan?

This is one of the more levelheaded and common sense comments calling out the attacks against Meghan on the kensngtonroyal birthday greeting post:
"Can people please stop with this nonsense?? How do you know that they haven’t all spoken on the phone or texted or something else. Instagram is definitely not their primary mode of communication with each other."

I would add that we don't know what goes on behind-the-scenes, and none of us are members of the British royal family. We can have our opinions and speculate, but the knee-jerk blaming and criticizing of Meghan can come to no good. It serves no one well.
 
Last edited:
mag said:
For those of us who enjoy sparkly things, an article about Meghan’s engagement ring. Looks like some diamonds have been added in addition to the third ring.

www.google.ca

The Story Behind Meghan Markle's Newly Redesigned Engagement Ring

The band looks entirely different now.
www.google.ca www.google.ca
Click to expand...

So this will result in a lot of drama...but I'm not sure why anyone needs their extravagant engagement ring (est. worth $350,000) revamped one year into their marriage.

This is the kind of stuff that makes people question Meghan & Harry and their priorities.
 
PDilemma said:
So this will result in a lot of drama...but I'm not sure why anyone needs their extravagant engagement ring (est. worth $350,000) revamped one year into their marriage.

This is the kind of stuff that makes people question Meghan & Harry and their priorities.
Click to expand...

I don’t know, I am a firm believer that people should choose their own engagement and wedding rings. They are something, theoretically, that they will wear every day for the rest of their lives. They should be something they really love and that feel comfortable on the finger. Having not seen Meghan’s ring in real life and obviously never tried it on, it is hard to say if maybe the balance was a bit off on her finger or perhaps the design wasn’t quite right. Who knows? They can clearly afford the changes. If Meghan likes it better or it is more comfortable, or both, why not?

I do think it is funny that Charles was much more modern than his sons. He allowed his fiancé to choose her own ring!
 
PDilemma said:
So this will result in a lot of drama...but I'm not sure why anyone needs their extravagant engagement ring (est. worth $350,000) revamped one year into their marriage.

This is the kind of stuff that makes people question Meghan & Harry and their priorities.
Click to expand...
YEP!!!
 
mag said:
I don’t know, I am a firm believer that people should choose their own engagement and wedding rings. They are something, theoretically, that they will wear every day for the rest of their lives. They should be something they really love and that feel comfortable on the finger. Having not seen Meghan’s ring in real life and obviously never tried it on, it is hard to say if maybe the balance was a bit off on her finger or perhaps the design wasn’t quite right. Who knows? They can clearly afford the changes. If Meghan likes it better or it is more comfortable, or both, why not?

I do think it is funny that Charles was much more modern than his sons. He allowed his fiancé to choose her own ring!
Click to expand...
I designed my engagement ring....twice (two marriages, same guy.....shoot me). I cannot imagine that Meghan did not see and try on this ring as they were getting read to announce their engagement......exactly to prevent something like this. Things like engagements, births, etc are all carefully orchestrated.

I can just see myself looking at my $350.000.00 engagement ring, and saying......you know, honey, I think it needs a little more bling.
 
aftershocks said:
I don't see any connection between a 'formal birthday wish' and the Royal Foundation split
Click to expand...

The connection is the rumors about a feud and it's literally in the quote from Lorac.


PDilemma said:
So this will result in a lot of drama...but I'm not sure why anyone needs their extravagant engagement ring (est. worth $350,000) revamped one year into their marriage.

This is the kind of stuff that makes people question Meghan & Harry and their priorities.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with it but I don't really like the revamped version. I think the band looks too thin for the size of the diamonds and like it might break at any moment.
 
PDilemma said:
So this will result in a lot of drama...but I'm not sure why anyone needs their extravagant engagement ring (est. worth $350,000) revamped one year into their marriage.
Click to expand...
Maybe she doesn't need to but just wants to. Would you have a problem with that? There are worse ways to spend money.
 
Vagabond said:
Maybe she doesn't need to but just wants to. Would you have a problem with that? There are worse ways to spend money.
Click to expand...

I am sure the jeweler and her/his employees are happy to have business.

In other news, looks like William and Kate May be touring Asia in the fall. I love tours because that means lots of new clothes to look at!

ca.sports.yahoo.com

Duke and Duchess of Cambridge 'set to tour Asia' this autumn

Kate and William have previously visited Singapore, Malaysia and India.
ca.sports.yahoo.com ca.sports.yahoo.com
 
Last edited:
I had to wait 30 years for an upgrade - I have a third of a carat now, (wow!!!) which I paid for myself and its a lab created stone, so it was $$ and not $$$$$. I'd actually be terrified to wear a ring that big and expensive. :wideeyes:
 
Maybe they changed the ring for their wedding anniversary or to commemorate Archie's birth or both. Could be something they said they'd do for some reason or another. :)
 
ballettmaus said:
Maybe they changed the ring for their wedding anniversary or to commemorate Archie's birth or both. Could be something they said they'd do for some reason or another. :)
Click to expand...

Meghan is actually sporting 3 rings on her ring finger the 3rd being an eternity band that may or may not have been a gift from Harry for their 1st anniversary or Archie's birth but was spotted at the TOTC. It is also very narrow as is her wedding band so I wonder if the redesign of the engagement ring is to make a set. Personally I prefer the ring before the redesign but Meghan seems to prefer narrow bands and they are sitting on her finger not mine.
 
mag said:
I don’t know, I am a firm believer that people should choose their own engagement and wedding rings. They are something, theoretically, that they will wear every day for the rest of their lives. They should be something they really love and that feel comfortable on the finger. Having not seen Meghan’s ring in real life and obviously never tried it on, it is hard to say if maybe the balance was a bit off on her finger or perhaps the design wasn’t quite right. Who knows? They can clearly afford the changes. If Meghan likes it better or it is more comfortable, or both, why not?

I do think it is funny that Charles was much more modern than his sons. He allowed his fiancé to choose her own ring!
Click to expand...

Both things that don't require additional diamonds as a fix. Just saying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

aftershocks
  • Locked
Royalty Thread#12 Tiaras, Palaces & Gilded Cages
32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
86K
aftershocks
aftershocks
TAHbKA
Vaytsekhovskaya's interview with Nikolaev
Replies
2
Views
2K
kosjenka
kosjenka
quiqie
Anton Sikharulidze interview
2
Replies
54
Views
20K
Limonite
Limonite
Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information