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

clairecloutier

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,356
So I read a new article about Meghan & Harry in Vanity Fair. It's written by Katie Nicholl, who often writes about the royal family for VF and bases her stories on anonymous sources who are said to be closely placed to the royal family.

Anyhow, you can take it all with a grain of salt , but here are some interesting bits from the article:

-- Supposedly the breach between the Sussexes/Cambridges was originally caused by William questioning Harry's relationship with Meghan, and how fast it was progressing. Harry did not appreciate this. At one point the brothers were not on speaking terms, but relations have improved recently.

-- Meghan was interested in a home birth, but instead gave birth in Portland Hospital in London because she was a week overdue. The delivery was "uncomplicated" and Doria was present.

-- The queen was reportedly delighted with with her great-grandchild and, according to the article, is personally fond of Meghan.

-- There have been no serious discussions of Meghan/Harry moving abroad, but they are expected to take some longer trips abroad (possibly months-long trips).

-- "The Sussexes will have a suite of rooms at [Buckingham] Palace for when they need to stay in the capital, in keeping with other members of the royal family who have offices at Buckingham Palace."

-- For their official work office, they have hired a communications secretary and are recruiting for a private secretary, an assistant private secretary for Meghan, a digital editor, and at least 2 press officers. Meghan "is said to want a new approach when it comes to PR."

-- At home in Frogmore Cottage, they employ a nanny, a housekeeper, and two assistants. "The couple do not have a chef, and Meghan does the cooking," says the article (including blending green juices for Harry in the morning). Supposedly, Meghan also does all the grocery shopping online!

-- Meghan does not have a regular stylist. For their first photo shoot with Archie (a couple days after the birth), Meghan styled herself and did her own hair, nails, and makeup.

-- They want Archie to have "an ordinary life," as much as possible, and that's why they declined a royal title for him and picked names that they personally liked, instead of traditional family names. Archie will become HRH when Charles becomes king.

-- Harry has quit smoking and rarely drinks alcohol since meeting Meghan. He also practices meditation.
 

Zemgirl

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,331
Almost anything about the royals is better than what has been posted here over the past fortnight.
Indeed. Here's a roundup of royal events that do not involve anyone's hair:
  • The name of Meghan and Harry's new charitable foundation has been revealed and it is very imaginative.
  • It turns out that Sophie Wessex won the Wimbledon royal fashion parade.
  • Princess Mako is visiting Bolivia and wore what looks like an excellent kimono.
  • Queen Maxima and King Willem Alexander are getting a new plane. As with the Sephora trip, they are clearly just like us!
 

Lorac

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,688
George is adorable and is growing into a very good looking kid. As always Kate captures the essence of her child. 😍
 

IceSlider

Active Member
Messages
117
Tabloid headlines I personally think are ridiculous
I think only four words are needed in that sentence the first two and the last two but sensation sells and we seem to buy it, which I guess, if you're in the business of maling money from media, is the point.
 

Wyliefan

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,444

mag

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,783
Okay, some people really need to get a life:


I think it would be odd for H&M to use George’s title in a birthday wish. (And for person who said he is HRH Prince George, no, he is not, he is HRH Prince George of Cambridge. He is not the son of the monarch yet.) I also don’t understand why people think they needed to use his name at all. It was a comment left on an Instagram post. It was clear, because it was under his photo, they were referring to George.

I may not agree with everything H&M do, but this seems like some serious looking for something to fault.
 

MLIS

Well-Known Member
Messages
256
I kind of feel like any ridiculous criticism like this of Harry and Meghan (or William and Kate, for that matter) shuold just be met with "Yeah, but are they implicated in a child sex trafficking ring?" I mean, seriously. Meghan is on the front page for days because she didn't wear pantyhose in the presence of the queen or whatever ridiculousness they dream up, and over there is Prince Andrew? Give me a break.
 

overedge

Mayor of Carrot City
Messages
25,952
I thought a "statement bag" was a big-ass handbag with a huge show-off designer logo on it. The statement being, I am way richer than you and I have no taste :rofl: I wouldn't call a little kid's toy unicorn purse a "statement bag".
 

MacMadame

Cat Lady-in-Training
Messages
29,116
I thought a "statement bag" was a big-ass handbag with a huge show-off designer logo on it. The statement being, I am way richer than you and I have no taste :rofl: I wouldn't call a little kid's toy unicorn purse a "statement bag".
I looked it up and technically a statement bag is a bag that "makes a statement." So I guess it can be any bag? I mean doesn't everything you wear make a statement even if that statement is "um, what?" :lol:
 

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,953
I think it would be odd for H&M to use George’s title in a birthday wish.
Yeah, because that's always how you address family ;)

I bet if they had done that the same people would have been upset over how impersonal and formal it is to use their nephew's title in the birthday wish.
 

puglover

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,636
Just utterly ridiculous!! William and Harry are, after all, Diana's boys. If people truly loved and mourn her - why can't her beloved sons and their families just live as happily ever after as they are able without the constant fault finding over literally nothing!!
 

aftershocks

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,284
^^ Sadly, a lot of this ridiculousity toward the Sussexes and toward Meghan in particular, is about jealousy. But I'm with you regarding simply relaxing and enjoying their love story. Being royal has never actually been easy, hello. Everyone should take an enlightening romp through the bloody, star-crossed, fascinating history of the British monarchy. :eek:

I'm all about being happy for two people who are deeply in love, and being inspired for who Harry and Meghan are as individuals in their own right. I admire them for what they are trying to accomplish together in their public lives, and for the joy they have achieved in their private lives. Being in love is more than just a notion. It's about hard work and sacrifice, as much as it is about passion and fulfilling rewards. They are human and they surely have arguments and get on each other's nerves, or they will eventually. ;) But they also clearly feel blessed and lucky to have met, courted, married, and conceived their beautiful son, Archie.

Add the 'schnizzle'* fizzle and headache of royal status to the mix and boy, you better have your acts together. For the most part, the Sussexes appear to be on point against a sea of haters, admirers, gawkers, and palace drama. Not to mention the salty and negative royal reporters who are unsettled about a new day dawning which puts their bread & butter royal cash flow in jeopardy. :COP:

*coined from a Dick Buttonism :p

Some interesting reading: Young Elizabeth: The Making of a Queen, by Kate Williams

Some interesting viewing: Two documentaries about William & Harry; one was put together in the months after their mother's death, and the other is an update filmed during their later teens and early twenties:

You must sign into Youtube in order to view:
Prince William & Prince Harry: Prisoners of Celebrity: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLSZ4MN1qzU
-- The part about the older Freddie Windsor in his youth being considered a wild child bad influence on the Wales brothers is rather illuminating; also revealing is the part about Harry being better at sports and more impulsive and risk-taking than William. Harry clearly has always worn his emotional heart on his sleeve, while William is much more sensitive and reserved. I think their personalities actually suit their royal roles, albeit with a few bumps and twists along the way. Since William's charity polo team recently won against Harry's team, William, who is naturally left-handed has apparently worked very hard to become a good polo player; polo is a sport in which you must use your right hand to play.

Princess Diana's Legacy: William & Harry https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZBeCTlcwxA
Anthony Holden: "Not long before she died, the Princess brought up to me her concerns for Harry in that William would always be the center stage one who was going to be King. Diana was worried rather touchingly that William would get all the girls and that poor Harry who was a couple of years younger would be left out. [:lol:] So, she was already taking steps to make sure that they would always be treated equally although in royal standing terms, William would always be number one."

Sadly, Diana did not live long enough to help guide her sons through their difficult teens and early twenties. Royal courtiers took charge over-protecting William, and allowing Harry to take the fall for most of their mutual youthful escapades. Fortunately, they have both turned out fairly decently as upstanding human beings with their heads on straight, despite their current 'sibling rivalry' tensions which are in the process of being smoothed over via palace p.r.

Diana's closest friends have said that she was concerned about the role William would have to play in light of him having a sensitive personality, and that she felt Harry would ultimately be okay since he was more outgoing and fearless. Both have needed strong women by their sides, and that has happened for each of them. All in all, I think HM, the Queen is largely at ease regarding the future of the British monarchy.
 

aftershocks

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,284
The Duke of Sussex with Dr. Jane Goodall:


ETA:
Additional documentaries (you must sign into Youtube to view the first one):
Harry: The Mysterious Prince: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eERF0pNsfMs

Reinventing the Royals: Princes Willliam & Harry (part of a recent series on the British Royal Family, pre-Meghan):
 
Last edited:

Jenny

From the Bloc
Messages
20,802
^^ Sadly, a lot of this ridiculousity toward the Sussexes and toward Meghan in particular, is about jealousy.
Obviously we are all speculating here, but I don't buy this idea at all. So often when anyone is criticized, people blow it off saying "they're just jealous," and most of the time, IMO, there's a lot more to it. When people say that to people, to soothe them perhaps, "don't worry dear, they're just jealous of you" I think it's even a disservice to that person, because so often it's not that at all.

I mean who really wants to be Meghan at this point? Are we not long past the point where the idea of marrying a real live prince is something girls dream of? Surely after everything Diana went through, and now that every idiot in the world has a voice that can be heard, the last thing you'd want is to put yourself in that position.

So what are we jealous of? Her looks, her career, her (not) charmed life as a royal? Certainly not her family, most of us would be privately pained and publicly humiliated in her place. Her happy marriage and baby? OK, but lots of people are pretty, have careers, are happily married with lovely children but without all the challenges Meghan now has.

I think the reality is that Meghan is fresh meat. The story is new, they are unfortunately contributing to it with some of their actions and decisions, in some cases it's just happening (her family), but in the end, I think the type of people who just want to pick and point and criticize will find other targets soon enough. A lot of this crap directed toward Meghan isn't about her at all, it's about the people who have a sad need to do it.
 

Zemgirl

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,331
I mean who really wants to be Meghan at this point? Are we not long past the point where the idea of marrying a real live prince is something girls dream of? Surely after everything Diana went through, and now that every idiot in the world has a voice that can be heard, the last thing you'd want is to put yourself in that position.
If one must be a royal, it's better to do it in a more low-key setting, like Sweden or Denmark. I've mentioned this before, but Meghan is basically equivalent to Princess Marie of Denmark. Who ever hears of Princess Marie? She just does her thing and wears the occasional tiara.

The next royal thread should have tiaras in the title. Given all the royal kids, it can be Toddlers and Tiaras :D
 

aftershocks

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,284
Obviously we are all speculating here, but I don't buy this idea at all. So often when anyone is criticized, people blow it off saying "they're just jealous," and most of the time, IMO, there's a lot more to it. When people say that to people, to soothe them perhaps, "don't worry dear, they're just jealous of you" I think it's even a disservice to that person, because so often it's not that at all.

I mean who really wants to be Meghan at this point? Are we not long past the point where the idea of marrying a real live prince is something girls dream of? Surely after everything Diana went through, and now that every idiot in the world has a voice that can be heard, the last thing you'd want is to put yourself in that position.

So what are we jealous of? Her looks, her career, her (not) charmed life as a royal? Certainly not her family, most of us would be privately pained and publicly humiliated in her place. Her happy marriage and baby? OK, but lots of people are pretty, have careers, are happily married with lovely children but without all the challenges Meghan now has.

I think the reality is that Meghan is fresh meat. The story is new, they are unfortunately contributing to it with some of their actions and decisions, in some cases it's just happening (her family), but in the end, I think the type of people who just want to pick and point and criticize will find other targets soon enough. A lot of this crap directed toward Meghan isn't about her at all, it's about the people who have a sad need to do it.
To each their own perceptions. I still believe that quite a lot of this unbelievable hate against someone they don't even know (and I'm talking about on-line trolls who say the most vile things about Meghan all over the Internet) has to do with jealousy. And frankly, there's no logic involved with jealousy. So it's not about being jealous of the cliche 'fairy tale.' A lot of people don't stop to examine their emotions and motivations, but clearly there are a lot of women, many in the U.S., but also in other countries who apparently feel some kind of strange ownership over Harry and simply dislike the fact that he married Meghan, because they seem to think, 'Why her? Why not me?!' As laughable as that thinking is. The Twitter and Instagram accounts of haters were studied and a report came out last year or early this year with a 'country of origin' breakdown that was reported on CNN (and also discussed briefly in other documentaries and news reports).

The fact that Meghan does not have the expected profile we are used to seeing for someone marrying a prince of England is a huge factor. So jealousy is a big part of it, as well as prejudice. If Meghan's Mom was not so visibly African-American, or let's say if Doria was Hispanic, Italian, or even Asian instead, there might be a bit less venom and hate being directed against Meghan (who frankly does not 'look' like what many people typically think of as 'black' or 'African-American').

Meghan herself has discussed this conundrum in the past, pointing out how there were occasions when she would be among groups of peers in college and in work situations who were 'white,' and someone would off-handedly make jokes about 'black people,' not realizing her ethnic background. Meghan portrayed so-called 'white' characters in both of her Hallmark films. However, Meghan has never hidden her ethnicity. Her mother and her maternal grandmother nurtured her with love and they are black matriarchs. Meghan has written about never being comfortable associating herself strictly as either white or black. She famously told the story of how her father advised her to 'draw her own box,' and not give in to others' notions of which box she should check off on forms asking about 'race'. This advice from her father came when she was a child and he was more nurturing.

On Suits, the producers, the creator, writers and directors were willing to bring Meghan's actual ethnic heritage into the storyline as a simple fact, not a huge deal. So the actor, Wendell Pierce, was cast as Meghan's character's Dad, and a 'white' female actor with auburn hair played the role of her mother. Meghan later related that when her character's family storyline first aired a couple of seasons in, she began receiving Twitter messages of surprise and worse from fans, e.g., "I didn't know you were black!" As if it's a disease or something. :duh:

Again, there are different perceptions, but it's a fact that Meghan's heritage is a huge factor in how her marriage to Prince Harry is being viewed in certain quarters. Perhaps many people have a hard time accepting that truth. It's not speculation, btw. You might wish to downplay the death threats against Harry and Meghan. You might wish to push aside as 'marginal' the fact that Harry was targeted and physically threatened as 'a race traitor.' These are uncomfortable and disheartening displays of dangerous vileness that no caring human being likely wishes to contemplate. But these harmful attitudes exist, just as much as unconscious bias exists in the minds of many people, including some royal reporters, and including some posters here. What was that earlier reference to Kate having 'better genes than Meghan' about, if not unconscious bias? In fact, Meghan and Harry are very distantly related, just as Kate and William are also distantly related. Meghan and Kate share a common distant ancestor (via marriage). I've posted about this before, and I've linked relevant genealogy charts. But what the hey. I guess some people aren't interested in fascinating genealogical details.

Yes, Meghan is 'new' on the royal scene and there's a lot of interest for that reason. Perhaps at some point, hopefully soon, the OTT fascination will slowly decrease. But since the royal wedding last May, the interest in Meghan and Harry has increased. And let's please be honest that a great deal of the criticism against Meghan is completely uncalled for and is not equivalent to the negative criticism Kate has received at times. Kate was certainly never relentlessly dogged, slammed, and maligned by tabloids and mainstream media outlets during any of her pregnancies. And your claim that Meghan and Harry are "unfortunately contributing to [the criticism] with some of their actions and decisions," sounds like something you are repeating from media articles and broadcast anchors.

IMHO, Meghan and Harry are just being themselves and trying to live their lives in the way they feel is right for them. The fact that they exist as a couple is the reason for the fascination, and for the hate, and for the nonstop criticism. There is nothing the Sussexes can do that will please everyone. So they are apparently determined to live in a way that is fulfilling for them while at the same time givng back to others because that's a passion they both share, regardless of the patronage duties inherent in their royal roles.
 
Last edited:

Jenny

From the Bloc
Messages
20,802
The fact that Meghan does not have the expected profile we are used to seeing for someone marrying a prince of England is a huge factor. So jealousy is a big part of it, as well as prejudice.
Logical fallacy. That Meghan may not fit the expected profile doesn't equal jealousy.

Again, there are different perceptions, but it's a fact that Meghan's heritage is a huge factor in how her marriage to Prince Harry is being viewed in certain quarters. Perhaps many people have a hard time accepting that truth. It's not speculation, btw. You might wish to downplay the death threats against Harry and Meghan. You might wish to push aside as 'marginal' the fact that Harry was targeted and physically threatened as 'a race traitor.' These are uncomfortable and disheartening displays of dangerous vileness that no caring human being likely wishes to contemplate.
I'm not downplaying the fact that Meghan and Harry are targets of racism and prejudice. My post was about jealousy, which is something completely different.

And your claim that Meghan and Harry are "unfortunately contributing to [the criticism] with some of their actions and decisions," sounds like something you are repeating from media articles and broadcast anchors.
:HA!: Go ahead and speculate all you want about celebrities, but when you speculate about your fellow royal fans, I'd be careful of assuming anything, because in this case, you really have no idea.

IMHO, Meghan and Harry are just being themselves and trying to live their lives in the way they feel is right for them. The fact that they exist as a couple is the reason for the fascination, and for the hate, and for the nonstop criticism. There is nothing the Sussexes can do that will please everyone. So they are apparently determined to live in a way that is fulfilling for them while at the same time givng back to others because that's a passion they both share, regardless of the patronage duties inherent in their royal roles.
If I may make a suggestion, we all might want to consider speaking less of hate and racism because while these are very, very important issues, in this context much of what we are doing is feeding the fire by repeating what haters say, linking to where they say it and generally giving the entire thing too much airplay, which can also serve to legitimize their claims. If enough people are talking about it, it must be true, right?

I think most of us on this thread, including you, are here because we like the royals and we like talking about them and it's fun. They may have all kinds of stresses, but we don't have to :)
 
Last edited:

mag

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,783
So the actor, Wendell Pierce, was cast as Meghan's character's Dad, and a 'white' female actor with auburn hair played the role of her mother.
That “ ‘white’ female actor” is Megan Gallagher. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megan_Gallagher

Yes, Meghan is 'new' on the royal scene and there's a lot of interest for that reason. Perhaps at some point, hopefully soon, the OTT fascination will slowly decrease. But since the royal wedding last May, the interest in Meghan and Harry has increased. And let's please be honest that a great deal of the criticism against Meghan is completely uncalled for and is not equivalent to the negative criticism Kate has received at times. Kate was certainly never relentlessly dogged, slammed, and maligned by tabloids and mainstream media outlets during any of her pregnancies. And your claim that Meghan and Harry are "unfortunately contributing to [the criticism] with some of their actions and decisions," sounds like something you are repeating from media articles and broadcast anchors.
There has definitely been a lot of criticism of Meghan that is nothing but ugly racism. There has also been the same build her up, tear her down, stuff that Diana, Sarah, and Kate also went through (although in Kate’s case it was more tear her down okay we accept her now - I am sure you remember “Waitie Katie.”) None of that is minimized by, or changes the fact that Meghan has made some unforced errors of her own. The obvious one was wearing jeans to Wimbledon. She has both a private secretary and an assistant private secretary, both who could have told her, had she inquired, that she should definitely not wear jeans to Wimbledon. It doesn’t matter that she was there “in a private capacity” (which I would argue is ridiculous but that is for another time) wearing jeans was disrespectful to her hosts who would have to scramble to find somewhere to seat her and deal with members who are annoyed because they are not allowed to wear jeans. It also gave off a very loud “I am special and can do what I want” message. That may not have been what Meghan intended, but again, it is not as though she couldn’t have figured it out in advance if she had given it some thought. There are reports that she and Kate text regularly. Assuming that is true, she could have also asked Kate about the dress code.

@aftershocks, it is clear that you really, really, admire and respect Meghan so I just want to make it absolutely clear so you don’t need to respond to me by telling me I don’t, or that I have some underlying hatred of her or something like that. I don’t know Meghan. I probably never will. I have no strong feelings either way about her in the same way as I have no strong feelings either way about Zara or Autumn Phillips. But I do believe in being as fair as possible. It is quite possible for Meghan to be the target of some pretty awful racist hate, and for her to have made some unforced errors of her own. Those two things are not mutually exclusive.
 

aftershocks

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,284
That Meghan may not fit the expected profile doesn't equal jealousy.
In isolation, sure. But combined with all of the prevalent evidence? Okay, keep on attempting to downplay jealousy and prejudice as huge factors in the context of online comments and media stories about the Duchess of Sussex. Many who consciously or unconsciously harbor such emotions and attitudes surely have a hard time owning up to their emotions. Personally, I have often stopped to examine my own underlying feelings as well. We all react to people and events based on a number of individual experiences and motivations.

I'm not downplaying the fact that Meghan and Harry are targets of racism and prejudice. My post was about jealousy, which is something completely different.
That you don't think jealousy can be a factor in racism and prejudice is interesting. But if you don't see it, or if you unable to contemplate it as a factor, that's your business.

Go ahead and speculate all you want about celebrities, but when you speculate about your fellow royal fans, I'd be careful of assuming anything, because in this case, you really have no idea.
I'm not 'speculating about celebrities' when I say that it sounds like you are repeating criticisms of the Sussexes that have frequently been opined and whined about in the media.

...in this context much of what we are doing is feeding the fire by repeating what haters say, linking to where they say it and generally giving the entire thing too much airplay, which can also serve to legitimize their claims. If enough people are talking about it, it must be true, right?
Discussing it may make many of us feel uncomfortable or annoyed, but IMO, it's much better to point out subtle and or blatant prejudicial attitudes rather than trying to ignore such attitudes and pretending they don't exist and are not prevalent. There are posters here who frequently banter and laugh over the extreme OTT ridiculous examples of 'Meghan hatred.' I would agree that linking to those preposterous, way-out imaginary claims about Meghan and her son, Archie, is not exactly helpful. But blatant examples of prejudicial comments and attitudes perpetrated by royal reporters should be pointed out and not tolerated. The same goes for dangerous, hatred-driven threats toward the Sussexes.

Just putting the realities of subtle and not-so-subtle prejudicial attitudes (as well as plain old simple jealousy motivated by a variety of factors) into focus and context should be helpful for everyone who is openminded. :) I do agree with wanting to also engage in lighthearted discussion, hopefully combined with intelligent conversation about current cultural realities.

Thanks @mag for looking up details about Megan Gallagher, and pointing out her name. It's nice to learn more about her life and career.

The obvious one was wearing jeans to Wimbledon. She has both a private secretary and an assistant private secretary, both who could have told her, had she inquired, that she should definitely not wear jeans to Wimbledon.
Meghan wore jeans to Wimbledon without any intention of sitting in the royal box, which is NOT a problem, except for the faux brouhaha created by the media. It pays to look beyond blaring headlines designed as distraction and clickbait. The Duchess of Sussex expressly attended Wimbledon that day to watch her friend, Serena Williams, play tennis on a court that was NOT Centre Court. This story was 'made-up' by people who have their noses out-of-joint about Meghan. Plus, the additional story that came out about Meghan not wanting people to take photos of her was blared a week after the Wimbledon visit in question. Many observers believe the additional 'photo-gate' story was put together in order to distract from the news about Jeffrey Epstein, which also implicates Prince Andrew. Just because Meghan's RPOs are always around to protect her, does not mean she asked for the RPOs to request fans to not take pictures of her.

Of course Meghan is not perfect. It's rather silly to have to constantly state this fact. None of us are perfect. There are minor things I could comment on of a critical nature that I perceive about Meghan, and I often do comment critically on sartorial matters. But since so much of the commentary about Meghan these days is polarizing, OTT, negative and inflammatory, which mostly has not much to do with who she actually is as a person, it's next to impossible to carry on fruitful, intelligent conversations about Meghan and the phenomenon of her love story with Prince Harry.
 

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

Top