Meghan and Harry 2: Now with Archie

[Bajovane]

1 hour ago, viii said:

LOL ok honey~

Ok Meggie. 

[NancyDrewFan1989]

3 hours ago, Bajovane said:

Oh wait,  no you don't.   Meghan was once close to her father.  He invested in her education and gave her the advantage she needed to get to where she ended up in life.  Supposedly she loved him.  Did he screw up?  Yes, with help from his other daughter.  She and Harry probably should have handled the situation better than they did, maybe he wouldn't have felt so intimidated.

At one point Meghan was close with her father. But, before she started dating Harry they were already somewhat estranged. It seems like when Meghan started dating Harry her father's family came back with a vengeance trying to gain access to her.

I think Meghan and her dad tried to make up. However, his actions before and after the wedding created more of a rift that seems irreparable at this point. Hopefully, they can come back.

5 hours ago, adidas said:

The Queen has released a statement:

Today my family had very constructive discussions on the future of my grandson and his family.

My family and I are entirely supportive of Harry and Meghan's desire to create a new life as a young family.

Although we would have preferred them to remain full-time working Members of the Royal Family, we respect and understand their wish to live a more independent life as a family while remaining a valued part of my family.

Harry and Meghan have made clear that they do not want to be reliant on public funds in their new lives.

It has therefore been agreed that there will be a period of transition in which the Sussexes will spend time in Canada and the UK.

These are complex matters for my family to resolve, and there is some more work to be done, but I have asked for final decisions to be reached in the coming days.

This statement seems to leave many open ended questions for me. I don't know how Harry and Meghan expect to make a living without public funds. The two of them aren't going to be able to hold down normal jobs without being hounded by the press. I hope that both Harry and Meghan take a lot of things into consideration when making financial choice, especially with security.

[QuiverFullofBooks]

1 hour ago, NancyDrewFan1989 said:

I don't know how Harry and Meghan expect to make a living without public funds. The two of them aren't going to be able to hold down normal jobs without being hounded by the press. I hope that both Harry and Meghan take a lot of things into consideration when making financial choice, especially with security.

Endorsements, being Instagram influencers, books, public appearances, etc. Like the Kardashians and the Duggars, but hopefully without the reality TV show.

[DalmatianCat]

24 minutes ago, QuiverFullofBooks said:

Endorsements, being Instagram influencers, books, public appearances, etc. Like the Kardashians and the Duggars, but hopefully without the reality TV show.

It will be interesting to see how interesting people continue to think they are once they are no longer connected to the royal family on a regular basis and have to jockey for exposure with all the other influencers out there. Harry and Meghan will never be more popular than they are now and in spite of their (I presume) genuine desire to make a difference, they’re going to learn that there are thousanda of charities looking for funding and thousands of people trying to get funding for their own charities and special projects. The royal family manages to raise so much money for charity *because they are royal* not because they care more or pick better causes. As they become just another celebrity couple (which seems to be the way things are going), they’re going to have a harder and harder time finding people actually interested in listening to their grand ideas...not saying that they don’t have good ideas, but most people who start charities do. 

[Blahblah]

Plenty of non-working royals get income from other sources. Zara Phillips/Tindall has endorsements and sponsorships and she and her husband have made some wise property investments.

There is also this Hong Kong business man who has both Zara and Fergie, as well as Zara’s brother Peter, on the payroll apparently.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/08/10/hong-kong-tycoon-hires-queens-grandaughter-zara-duchess-york/

[viii]

2 hours ago, DalmatianCat said:

Harry and Meghan will never be more popular than they are now

Unless she gives birth to a daughter and names it Diana lol

[acheronbeach]

I just read that Meghan moved her old corporation Frim Fram Inc. from California, where it's always been registered, to Delaware.  

Interesting... I wonder what the goal is moving to a state with ultra-private corporate disclosure rules?  I wonder what she plans to do with the company?

[just_ordinary]

10 hours ago, FloraKitty35 said:

I thought the blackamoor brooch was Princess Michael of Kent , not the Duchess of Gloucester.

Your right. I mixed them up. Thank you for correcting it. Unfortunately I cannot edit the original comment.

Edited January 14, 2020 by just_ordinary

[just_ordinary]

5 hours ago, Blahblah said:

Plenty of non-working royals get income from other sources. Zara Phillips/Tindall has endorsements and sponsorships and she and her husband have made some wise property investments.

There is also this Hong Kong business man who has both Zara and Fergie, as well as Zara’s brother Peter, on the payroll apparently.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/08/10/hong-kong-tycoon-hires-queens-grandaughter-zara-duchess-york/

And who would like to stand in the same corner as Fergie and Peter Philipps? There is a reason the public thinks they are shady af when it comes to cashing in on their connections. There is a reason Sophie and Edward had to step away from private business ventures. The public is already looking, just not too closely right now.

 

The statement reads pretty open. It great to hear that everyone seems to be eager to maintain family bonds and stick together as relatives. 

But it seems as if the last word about finances and titles hasn’t been spoken. 

If I were Harry and Meghan I couldn’t get rid of it fast enough. Because they receive public money (and it is public money if the BRF wants to admit it or not) every charity or business venture, every engagement, collaboration or gift will be hold to a unreachable standard of virtue. Could you imagine they give money to a charity/raise money for a charity using the Sussex Royal brand and it comes public the charity has a how ever so small problem with corruption or whatnot. They and everything they do will be under the looking glass. The British press and public will want to know. At least in the next 2 years (5 if there will be another child). The freedoms they seem to want can only be achieved by cutting the professional ties. 
The fact that they trademarked Sussex Royal months ago and that people spotted actions away from the spotlight (their joint Instagram, her Instagram, the move of her company) before anything got public will be just fuelling any rumours that things are not exactly as clean as they should be.
 

If they have good investment consultants they never have to lift a little finger. Harry inherited lots of millions from the Queen Elizabeth, the Queens Mother and from his mother. Meghan earned her own money (also a couple of millions if you add it all up I heard). But they should deal with, what is true for every normal person: don’t live above your means. If they can only afford the smaller villa than this should must be enough. It’s crazy to feel sorry if they get cut off financially. 

[hoipolloi]

53 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

Harry inherited lots of millions from the Queen Elizabeth, the Queens Mother and from his mother. Meghan earned her own money

The Washington Post reported that Harry is worth about US$ 39 million, a lot of it inherited from his mother & great-grandmother (the late Queen Mum), and Meghan is worth around US$ 5 million, mostly from her acting work with Suits.

Seems like plenty to go on with, if you ask me.

Edited January 14, 2020 by hoipolloi

[FluffySnowball]

13 hours ago, Pleiades_06 said:

Princess Michael was born in Nazi Germany ?

So what? My grandparents were born and/or grew up in Nazi Germany and didn’t turn out to be racists, antisemites or xenophobes. 

Edited January 14, 2020 by FluffySnowball

[laPapessaGiovanna]

Honestly I feel a bit annoyed by all the "apart from....there was no racism" discourse. Seriously people? Princess Michael of Kent is a known racist that never faced any sort of consequences for it (sorry but the Queen privately pouting and rolling eyes at her, if it even happened, doesn't count as consequences). One would think that being against racism would be above politics enough for the sovereign of a state like the UK to take a strong position about it, same with sexism (I absolutely agree with whoever noted that Kate has been routinely victim of sexist bullshit before a fresher victim came along*). But no, apparently it's not serious enough.

Same for the Daily Fail, it's the third most read newspaper and a known racist cesspool, but it's fine because "it's just the Daily Fail", so no consequences. And it's fine. 

Those referenced upthread were not the only episodes where Meghan was a victim of more or less veiled racism, here you can find another one (a UKIP dickhead said that her seed would be a permanent stain on the royal family) and here a blog associated to The Spectator says: "Obviously, seventy years ago, Meghan Markle would have been the kind of woman the Prince would have had for a mistress". And again here the Daily Fail says "Now that's upwardly mobile! How in 150 years, Meghan Markle's family went from cotton slaves to royalty".

*Re sexism, it seems like there's a "right way" to take it, like Kate, in silence, without ruffling feathers, waiting for it to pass, because this is what tabloids do and there's nothing to do about it. It's disgusting. With this I don't wish to criticize how Kate coped with it, I am sure she had her good reasons and probably for her the right thing was to ignore it, but speaking up against it shouldn't be problematic.

It seems like there's an expectation that if you belong to this rich, privileged bunch that accepts to put part of their lives in public then you have to accept whatever sexism and racism is thrown at you. A bit like a Faustian pact.

I guess this is the reason I like Republics more. No unhealthy mixing of private and public personae, no inherited privilege in exchange for being a target for tabloid mud slinging.

[nelliebelle1197]

16 hours ago, Bajovane said:

And who appointed you as the expert then?  Your entire quote can say the same thing about your own statements.

Hypocrisy galore here sweetie. 

 

You might want to dial this back for your own emotional well being.

24 minutes ago, laPapessaGiovanna said:

Honestly I feel a bit annoyed by all the "apart from....there was no racism" discourse. Seriously people? Princess Michael of Kent is a known racist that never faced any sort of consequences for it (sorry but the Queen privately pouting and rolling eyes at her, if it even happened, doesn't count as consequences). One would think that being against racism would be above politics enough for the sovereign of a state like the UK to take a strong position about it, same with sexism (I absolutely agree with whoever noted that Kate has been routinely victim of sexist bullshit before a fresher victim came along*). But no, apparently it's not serious enough.

Same for the Daily Fail, it's the third most read newspaper and a known racist cesspool, but it's fine because "it's just the Daily Fail", so no consequences. And it's fine. 

Those referenced upthread were not the only episodes where Meghan was a victim of more or less veiled racism, here you can find another one (a UKIP dickhead said that her seed would be a permanent stain on the royal family) and here a blog associated to The Spectator says: "Obviously, seventy years ago, Meghan Markle would have been the kind of woman the Prince would have had for a mistress". And again here the Daily Fail says "Now that's upwardly mobile! How in 150 years, Meghan Markle's family went from cotton slaves to royalty".

*Re sexism, it seems like there's a "right way" to take it, like Kate, in silence, without ruffling feathers, waiting for it to pass, because this is what tabloids do and there's nothing to do about it. It's disgusting. With this I don't wish to criticize how Kate coped with it, I am sure she had her good reasons and probably for her the right thing was to ignore it, but speaking up against it shouldn't be problematic.

It seems like there's an expectation that if you belong to this rich, privileged bunch that accepts to put part of their lives in public then you have to accept whatever sexism and racism is thrown at you. A bit like a Faustian pact.

I guess this is the reason I like Republics more. No unhealthy mixing of private and public personae, no inherited privilege in exchange for being a target for tabloid mud slinging.

You know what is a shame about that Daily Mail headline on slave ancestors? Another publication did a stunning piece on the how amazing it is that the world now allows the great greatgranddaughter of slaves to become a duchess and what that means. It actually moved me because it was a meditation on race and the sacrifices of slave forebearers. I bet the Mail ripped off that article with its sleaze.

[SweetJuly]

1 hour ago, laPapessaGiovanna said:

It seems like there's an expectation that if you belong to this rich, privileged bunch that accepts to put part of their lives in public then you have to accept whatever sexism and racism is thrown at you. A bit like a Faustian pact.

This is not at all limited to sexism or racism, though. The British Royal family generally deals with any criticism (or abuse) the same way - by publicly ignoring it, along the "never complain, never explain" motto.

After all, you'll never be able to silence your critics or your haters. There will always be someone who disagrees with you or trolls who will rip you apart no matter what you do. And anyone in the public eye will have to deal with this at some point: royalty, celebrity or politician.

The healthiest way to deal with it is indeed to simply ignore it. Don't read it, don't listen to it, don't burden yourself with it. If it's unjustified, it will go away over time, save the occasional unteachable idiot. If it's justified, someone close to you who actually matters (family, friends, colleagues) will probably have a quiet word with you about it at some point.

If you try to "defend" yourself publicly, you just open up a whole can of worms. You show yourself as vulnerable. You acknowledge trolls, trolls that will never fully disappear as mentioned above, and just provide them with a bigger platform. At best this will ensure that the abuse thrown at you will continue because people know it gets to you; at worst you'll get additional abuse for the way you deal with the abuse.... you get my point.

Look at Angela Merkel to give a republican example. She received absolutely vile abuse for her physical appearance at first. She never acknowledged it publicly, just made some very subtle adjustments in her hair and wardrobe, and otherwise carried on with her political work. Now only the dumbest idiots mock her for her looks, and receive, if at all, a very tired reaction.

[acheronbeach]

Tom Bradby (the journalist who did the African documentary of M & H) says - discussing their negotiations with the BRF - that they're considering a tell all with Oprah and "I don't think it would be pretty."

?

[viii]

I think it would be a bad move for Harry and Meghan to appear on Oprah. They'd probably lose a lot of the sympathy vote they're currently carrying. There will be some people who support them and acknowledge the trash inside the BRF, but I think they'd receive a lot of backlash for complaining about family. 

[acheronbeach]

15 minutes ago, viii said:

I think it would be a bad move for Harry and Meghan to appear on Oprah. They'd probably lose a lot of the sympathy vote they're currently carrying. There will be some people who support them and acknowledge the trash inside the BRF, but I think they'd receive a lot of backlash for complaining about family. 

It just strikes me as something close to blackmail.  And isn't this the exact sort of behavior that led Meghan to cut off her father?

Tom Bradby has been good friends with Harry for years so this is a legit source. 

[Screamapillar]

For me the elephant in the room is that they're doing all of this within months of having a baby.

Pure speculation, of course, but quitting your job, ditching your family, moving to Canada....these are all extreme actions that seem to back up Meghan tearfully alluding to not being "okay" postpartum. Family and career related annoyances that they could have handled before the baby are probably just not worth it to them now. Also, I don't think it's even been four years since Harry and Meghan first met. And way less time than that even living together on the same continent. Even with their millions and their extreme privilege, I don't envy the situation that they're living in right now.

[nausicaa]

18 hours ago, formergothardite said:

I don't know Meghan, I don't know how she feels about her dad, but you can love your parents while also not wanting them to be in your lives. Love isn't having to keep a toxic parent who has used you for money and fame in your life. And that is what he did. 

Yeah, I think I've made it pretty clear I have a bad feeling about Meghan Markle and where all of this is going, but I have zero issue with her cutting her paternal family off. They made it clear through their actions that they are shitty people who just wanted to manipulate and use her for her fame and money. Her grit and ambition to rise above what she was born into is something I actually do admire about her. I thought it was really despicable that Thomas Markle tried to make the days leading up to her wedding all about him. 

The stories from ex-husband and friends in Toronto are the ones that give me more pause. And also things she wrote herself on The Tig. 

[viii]

38 minutes ago, nausicaa said:

The stories from ex-husband and friends in Toronto are the ones that give me more pause. And also things she wrote herself on The Tig. 

I would hate for new people to judge me based off of people who knew me years ago. There's got be room for growth here. Meghan is not the same person today that she was 2-10 years ago - no one is. 

[tabitha2]

7 hours ago, hoipolloi said:

The Washington Post reported that Harry is worth about US$ 39 million, a lot of it inherited from his mother & great-grandmother (the late Queen Mum), and Meghan is worth around US$ 5 million, mostly from her acting work with Suits.

Seems like plenty to go on with, if you ask me.

Not for unlimited partying with A list Hollywood Set, continuously   Jet setting all over the Globe on what whatever philanthropic or Charity event takes their fancy that week, Keeping Meghan Dressed in the best designers, Housekeeping staff and nannies and They will want to pay the best media people of course  . All the While staying in 5 star hotels or On Hot spot Island vacations. 
 

Harry most likely has no idea what frugality is much less how to do it and Very highly doubt Meg will be about that either.  Can’t hang out with Beyoncé  or Heaven for fend professionally photographed  looking beatific hugging waifs in Mall clothes  

[Giraffe]

Personally I take anything her ex says with a grain of salt. I can only imagine what a couple of my exes would say about me!

Not saying she’s innocent, just that I don’t think an ex who’s not on friendly terms with her is a trustworthy source of information. 

Edited January 14, 2020 by Giraffe
Changing a couple words. Exes, not ex’s

[treehugger]

1 hour ago, Screamapillar said:

For me the elephant in the room is that they're doing all of this within months of having a baby.

Yes!  So much to this! I’m a firm believer in not making any major changes in your life (if not completely necessary) for the first year postpartum.  Those hormones can really wreak havoc with ones life and perception of reality.  
I also really wish people who have the privilege of doing so would take a “lie in” seriously.  Honestly, I believe every postpartum woman should be able to do so, but it would help if those who are able to would do so, to normalize it.  

[clueliss]

12 hours ago, acheronbeach said:

I just read that Meghan moved her old corporation Frim Fram Inc. from California, where it's always been registered, to Delaware.  

Interesting... I wonder what the goal is moving to a state with ultra-private corporate disclosure rules?  I wonder what she plans to do with the company?

That's a tax thing I believe.  Most publicly traded companies in the US are technically registered etc in Delaware.  (Hi, dorky accounting weirdness here)

[HerNameIsBuffy]

6 minutes ago, treehugger said:

Yes!  So much to this! I’m a firm believer in not making any major changes in your life (if not completely necessary) for the first year postpartum.  Those hormones can really wreak havoc with ones life and perception of reality.  
I also really wish people who have the privilege of doing so would take a “lie in” seriously.  Honestly, I believe every postpartum woman should be able to do so, but it would help if those who are able to would do so, to normalize it.  

Idk if her issues are due to post partum hormones, but under normal circumstances I fully agree with you about holding off major life changes.

Although in her case she's had so many monumental changes in the last few years, maybe she needs to get back to some kind of normality while she adjusts.

Also - any time someone advocates for taking maternity leave seriously I want to upvote it 1000x.  As a society we need to be better to new parents than we are in the US.