Meghan and Harry 3: Working Towards Financial Independence

[tabitha2]

I don’t know bout all that but I am all for these fabulously wealthy Adult children doing what they want to be happy but doing it efficiently, respectfully, drama free  as possible and not expecting the public or dad or foreign governments to still pay for their supposed freedom and security

 

 

Edited March 10, 2020 by tabitha2

[treehugger]

If Dad wants to pay for them, he is well within his rights to do so.  He won’t be the first fabulously wealthy daddy to do so, nor will he be the last.  

[Beermeet]

Personally,  I think it is important what one wears to certain events.  It's easy to break down;  is it ok to wear white to a wedding ( unless the couple deemed it a 'white party') or a funeral? Would you?  I would not.  Bright red to match the marine's outfits? This was a tribute to dead people.  Inappropriate.  Again, it's not Oscar's.  

I would love to be more on H&M's side. At first, I was.  How they have handled this has turned me off.  I don't care if Charles pays for everything,  just stop with the rhetoric and live. The photo of Megan walking with Archie and her dogs on a trail, supposedly hounded by paparazzi and snuck up on. Well, why is she smiling big right at the camera?  She's happy, her security and dogs are not bothered one bit. Am I supposed to believe this wasn't intentional?  The baby hanging out of his carrier is surely FJ fodder.  Idk. Not buying it.  I'm sure it was tough for Harry, bittersweet.  However,  lots of bitter for someone who is finally free. He kept decorum all these years but can't now. Tbh, I'm worried for him.  I didn't expect his demeanor to be largely like that.  It was hard on him. Too hard.  Is he really sure? Happened so fast. 

Edited March 10, 2020 by Beermeet
Wrong word

[tabitha2]

We should all be concerned for Harry. It’s fact that inherited mental and emotional instability run on both sides of his family. Not even mentioning the not handled adequately trauma of losing his mother at 12. I Honestly don’t think   Most of his life choices in the last two years  have not been well thought. 

Edited March 11, 2020 by tabitha2

[Pleiades_06]

Article and video linked below  from an interview in which British “royal watcher” Victoria Mather commented Markle is  “5 clicks up from trailer trash.”

She also said “the Queen is the most important woman in the world.” To whom??? What an Anglo-centric load of crap. 
 

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/meghan-markle-trailer-trash-144927667.html

Edited March 11, 2020 by Pleiades_06

[Beermeet]

28 minutes ago, Pleiades_06 said:

Article and video linked below  from an interview in which British “royal watcher” Victoria Mather commented Markle is  “5 clicks up from trailer trash.”

She also said “the Queen is the most important woman in the world.” To whom??? What an Anglo-centric load of crap. 
 

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/meghan-markle-trailer-trash-144927667.html

And, where is this woman, as far as clicks up from the RF go?  What an asshole.  I have no doubt many in the RF share that sentiment though.  I can't help but view them that way.  What cemented it was a Netflix show about aristocrats renting out their homes to anyone willing to pay so they could keepup with expenses. The people who had weddings/parties there would chat with the owners and inquire if they feel that they ( the paying folk) were beneath them. Oy boy.  Most said yes. Because superior bloodline. Ugh,  Gross.   I wouldn't want to be a part of this institution.  I could see wanting out. I just think they ( mostly Harry, who KNOWS) are playing it wrong. Don't try and one up the Queen.  She has so much more experience at this than them. Be smart. Chill. Baby steps. Get what you want but be smart.  This isn't some normal family or the Duggars. This is the BRF.  Be careful.  All the BRF does is play these games; for centuries to keep themselves relevant.  It's not a normal family dynamic whatsoever.  I hope they learn. I just heard an ad for the woe is me documentary on Vice as I type. Like, really?  M&H are in England rn. That is a bad move.  They need to stop playing victim real soon. It's not a bad idea to be fairly silent about this move away from the family.  They are giving too much ammo. 

[SweetJuly]

Yeah, the concept of a monarchy and the many rules of protocol that come with it are pretty ridiculous to a republican. Just like the notion of a god or following religious laws are ridiculous to an atheist. However, our personal opinions on the subject don't matter given that the Sussexes clearly had and have no issue with the concept of monarchy/aristocracy itself.

It's beyond obvious from their recent statements that they had no intention of ceasing to be “Royal” – they wanted to be “Royal”, but on their terms choosing what to do when and how free of any restrictions, expectations, and the authority of members ranked higher than them.

 

Now I get it, it sucks. Royal families are a very unhappily meshed up version of a family business. Your grandma, your father, and your brother are not just your elders, they are also your boss and (representatives of) the Head of State. And the hierarchy of your professional life translates into a hierarchy in your private life that is upheld not just by your family itself, but by flunkies and courtiers, the public, and actual laws. When you have a fight with your grandma or father, you are also having a fight with your boss, and it must be an incredible mindfuck trying to distinguish when something is personal and when it is crossing the line into professional. Finally, those who outrank you in the family can always pull rank to put you in your place, even if the original disagreement was wholly personal in nature.

Unfortunately that’s what you sign up for when you join a royal family. Hereditary royalty is based on family membership, rank, and protocol, there is no way around it. When you marry into the family, especially in the UK, you accept a class society that places you incredibly highly above everyone else. Your position comes with special titles, special rights, and special treatment. It does, however, mean that you are expected to comply with rules that may be quite restrictive, and that someone is always above you unless you happen to be the Sovereign.

 

The only way out would be to get out completely. Freely renounce everything – titles, position, money, taxpayer-funded security - and become Mr and Mrs Mountbatten-Windsor. It would have been amazing and inspiring if they had done that. Bar the occasional "they are abandoning the Queen", the public response would have been overwhelmingly positive and supportive. It's the "have their royal cake and eat it"-attitude and disingenuous claims to humility and normalcy that are bothering and upsetting people.

[PlentyOfJesusFishInTheSea]

25 minutes ago, SweetJuly said:

Yeah, the concept of a monarchy and the many rules of protocol that come with it are pretty ridiculous to a republican. Just like the notion of a god or following religious laws are ridiculous to an atheist. However, our personal opinions on the subject don't matter given that the Sussexes clearly had and have no issue with the concept of monarchy/aristocracy itself.

It's beyond obvious from their recent statements that they had no intention of ceasing to be “Royal” – they wanted to be “Royal”, but on their terms choosing what to do when and how free of any restrictions, expectations, and the authority of members ranked higher than them.

 

Now I get it, it sucks. Royal families are a very unhappily meshed up version of a family business. Your grandma, your father, and your brother are not just your elders, they are also your boss and (representatives of) the Head of State. And the hierarchy of your professional life translates into a hierarchy in your private life that is upheld not just by your family itself, but by flunkies and courtiers, the public, and actual laws. When you have a fight with your grandma or father, you are also having a fight with your boss, and it must be an incredible mindfuck trying to distinguish when something is personal and when it is crossing the line into professional. Finally, those who outrank you in the family can always pull rank to put you in your place, even if the original disagreement was wholly personal in nature.

Unfortunately that’s what you sign up for when you join a royal family. Hereditary royalty is based on family membership, rank, and protocol, there is no way around it. When you marry into the family, especially in the UK, you accept a class society that places you incredibly highly above everyone else. Your position comes with special titles, special rights, and special treatment. It does, however, mean that you are expected to comply with rules that may be quite restrictive, and that someone is always above you unless you happen to be the Sovereign.

 

The only way out would be to get out completely. Freely renounce everything – titles, position, money, taxpayer-funded security - and become Mr and Mrs Mountbatten-Windsor. It would have been amazing and inspiring if they had done that. Bar the occasional "they are abandoning the Queen", the public response would have been overwhelmingly positive and supportive. It's the "have their royal cake and eat it"-attitude and disingenuous claims to humility and normalcy that are bothering and upsetting people.

Eh, I bet they would have got lots of pushback for just leaving too. People are crazy.

[kachuu]

If Meghan wasn't smiling or showing any sign of irritation, every headline would be

"PROOF: Duchess at WAR with royal family"

"Meghan ruining Prince Harry's life & dragging him away against his will!"

"Angry pissed & selfish American TAKING DOWN OUR MONARCHY"

 

She can't win for anything. However, I think she looked absolutely stunning in everything she wore.

[tabitha2]

I don’t know. When she and Harry appeared to be annoyed or put out with other and she looked very unhappy  at the Trooping of the color people did comment but it was not a huge controversy that I can recall. 
 

Real Talk the vast majority  of the manufactured Soap opera antics and high drama concerning Meghan comes from same tabloids who have Camilla a Scheming EVIL!! Drunk and the Queen dying ANYTIME NOW!  

[just_ordinary]

As my post brought it up:

I adore Kate. I think she did well in positioning herself and building her role (even though I wish she would do some things differently). But I wouldn’t call her very glamorous and she often misses the mark at events that call for glamour. More so in the last years. She brought some absolutely spectacular outfits in the beginning though. I still hope she will find the right style to get tons of wear out of the incredible jewellery that BRF sits on. At least as PoW or Queen. Maybe Queen Maxima, CP Victoria, Queen Silvia, Queen Margarethe and Duchess Maria Theresia can write a handout?
And as others brought them up:
CP Mary can look very elegant and glamorous but it’s always under the more minimal approach of the Scandinavian attitude. Which is beautiful, can look very dramatic but it’s in no way similar to the “old Hollywood” glam. 
Q Letizia is very hit and miss in my opinion and she didn’t bring more than a handful showstoppers in 2019.

I had high hopes that Meghan could bring some old Hollywood glam and dramatic outfits. The Queen did it very well in her early years. It’s just not Kate’s style or better, her style is often not what I had wished for. Just an example- we saw glimpses of a pink gown and an fantastic up-do for Prince Charles’s 70th birthday. From what I saw probably a better choice for the us state banquet than the white ruffle dress. 
 

So yeah, for my standard Kate isn’t the most glamorous. She represents the Crown with other qualities. It’s obviously very subjective. Is that a problem? 

Edited March 11, 2020 by just_ordinary

[tabitha2]

If The Queen had any old Hollywood  Glam moments IMO it was simply because she was young and pretty in that particular era and her position required her to. She dressed beautifully and appropriately Of course was never the  stunning clothes horse her  sister or Jackie K were. 

 

[just_ordinary]

1 hour ago, tabitha2 said:

If The Queen had any old Hollywood  Glam moments IMO it was simply because she was young and pretty in that particular era and her position required her to. She dressed beautifully and appropriately Of course was never the  stunning clothes horse her  sister or Jackie K were. 

 

I beg to differ:

Spoiler

And what exactly is holding Kate back emulating this? She is young and pretty and her position would be fitting. There are enough examples of other royal ladies having a take on that (most notably CP Victoria in that stunning red gown for the NP). It’s just not her style and that is fine. But I think it’s also fine to hope someone in the BRF would do it. My hope lay with Meghan and I think if they had stayed we maybe would have gotten it. Maybe not, but the last outfits pointed to it.

[tabitha2]

I will agree CP Victoria rarely ever misses a beat with her formal wear. It helps the Swedish ladies have really good hair and like to really use the hair jewelry and intricate braiding to play it up:)

[SweetJuly]

The Swedes also share the opulent family vault freely with one another except for a couple of tiaras reserved for Queen Silvia. The Queen appears to be a lot more restrictive with access to "her" tiaras, and the British royals only wear tiaras to high state occasions. It does make these events even more formal and impressive, but I do mourn the scarcity of tiaras worn for my viewing pleasure.

Anyway, if we're discussing regal glamour, nothing will ever beat Máxima at the inauguration of King Willem-Alexander. Perfection.

[viii]

2 hours ago, SweetJuly said:

The Swedes also share the opulent family vault freely with one another except for Sofia**

There, I fixed it for you, lol. It seems like Sofia was given a tiara on her wedding day and it's the only one she regularly wears, she just switches the jewels out. 

[just_ordinary]

4 hours ago, viii said:

There, I fixed it for you, lol. It seems like Sofia was given a tiara on her wedding day and it's the only one she regularly wears, she just switches the jewels out. 

I think she either really likes it or there is a difference between being a daughter and a daughter in law. The tiaras Victoria and Madeleine got for their birthdays are pretty ugly- Sofia definitely lucked out in this department. It would also raise some eyebrows to be gifted a beautiful, versatile tiara and then not wearing it. She has worn at least three other family tiaras (6 button, cut steal bandeau and amethyst tiara), some more than once. So I assume she could borrow most of them if she wanted too. Obviously not the State Jewels, the ones reserved for the Queen and the one that Victoria inherited a couple of years ago.

The BRF may own a lot of tiaras and jewels but a not so small amount are actually “owned by the Queen in right of the crown and pass from one monarch to the next”. The royal collection isn’t for her to loan out. 
Additionally, the BRF isn’t bringing out their big guns as regularly as some other monarchies (very much to my disappointment). Add to that, that Camilla knows that many would not be happy with her diving in and using it, and Kate is just not the type of big jewellery. Sophie has a private tiara and she has one on loan iirc. Kate regularly wears the same earrings and bracelets from her majesty. I think the Queen makes a point in long term loans rather than switching it every year. It might be her personal preference or maybe a plain organisational decision (insurances, transport, cleaning, repair, maintenance, who gets what when...).

I wish they all would ask for something different. It gets tiring and repetitive. Kate is in the position I have the highest expectations of (rank and public sympathy). Hopefully the Lovers Knot retires for 50 years or so.  It needs puffy hair (Camilla would wear it fantastic but it’s no realistic option). Maybe with a more voluminous up-do and properly seated (not like one of her headbands)? It would be wonderful to see a lesser used tiara. The lovers knot is not the most beautiful or intricate piece, I wish Kate could find another go-to option. Same goes for Sophie.

[just_ordinary]

I did look a bit further into Camilla because I wanted to find out more. To my surprise she has worn three different tiaras from the Queen (a fourth is rumoured to be loaned to her. The Teck Crescent hasn’t been seen in decades so I take that rumour with a grain of salt. I wish Kate would wear it.). I could only remember 1. But to my excuse- the Greville and Durban can be remembered similar if you don’t see them side to side (high, all diamond but still airy).

She also uses two beautiful diamond necklaces from the Royal jewel vault (and a third she owns privately). The impressive collection of pearl chokers is her own though.

Most intriguing though- the 4 (2 rubies, 1 emerald and 1 sapphire) necklaces that are reported to be gifts received at official visits to Saudi Arabia  I am not sure if 1 ruby necklaces is maybe a remodelled version or if they are indeed two different necklaces. As official gifts, they are hers as long as she lives and will then be passed on to the sovereign and become part of the royal collection.

Kate has also worn 3 different tiaras and 5 necklaces (would love to see the Diamond collect again. Maybe with the other strands?). She also has to date worn 5 earrings, 4 brooches and 3 bracelets from the vault.

[Palimpsest]

Re. the lending of tiaras by the Queen, I do think she's a bit stingy with them.  But when she does loan them out, sometimes long-term loans, it seems that she has strong opinions on who gets what based on hierarchy and the history of the piece.  But also the comfort level of the wearer.  It takes practice to balance a heavy tiara and some are more comfortable than others.

1 hour ago, just_ordinary said:

But to my excuse- the Greville and Durban can be remembered similar if you don’t see them side to side (high, all diamond but still airy).

I think you mean the Greville Boucheron (looks like a honeycomb) and the Delhi Durbar tiaras.  I think they are both enormous and quite hideous.  Camilla can pull them off but she has puffy hair, wears them well, and must have the neck muscles of a carthorse.  She wears other pieces of the Greville collection too - those two chest-plates of many stranded diamond necklaces.  The Greville collection was left to the Queen Mum, who left them to QEII, and I think they are in the Queen's personal collection.  Mrs Greville had quite vulgar taste (IMO) but Camilla can carry them.  Very competently, just like the Queen Mum.

Sophie got screwed on her cobbled together wedding tiara but she has a nice and comfy-looking aquamarine one.  I think that one was bought for her.

Kate gets stuck with the Cambridge Lover's Knot, because Cambridge, not Diana's old one.  It is supposed to be very heavy and the pearls rattle annoyingly when you turn your head.  The Cartier Halo (or Scroll) tiara she wore for her wedding is a light and comfortable beginner's tiara.  I think the other loaner she has is the Lotus Flower, again a light and comfy tiara.

[Beermeet]

I was looking at the Royal family's IG and saw this gorgeous tiara. Wow!  I hadn't really considered how heavy some must be seeing as I've never held one. This one must be a big gun. Also, how do they keep these tiaras in place? I don't think bobby pins are going to cut it!  Look at It goes with their all about me posts. The other two show deference to the Queen and the people, not themselves.  Just sayin'. 

Edited March 14, 2020 by Beermeet

[Beermeet]

Oh, dear.  I was at the hair salon with my daughter as I posted up there. The shop is in a Bermuda Triangle of wifi. Sorry for the weird post! 

After the bobby pin sentence, I wanted to say how I couldn't help but notice how the Royal and Kensington IG's had posts focused on the Queen and mostly the service the Royals engage in. Unlike the Sussex's, who post about themselves.  My phone bugged out. Anywho, my daughter has really great hair rn

 

 

[adidas]

Coincidentally, our gossip news has an article today wondering what tiara Princess Beatrice might wear for her wedding. It’s worth a read because of the history notes. 
https://honey.nine.com.au/royals/princess-beatrice-royal-wedding-tiaras-guide/94e902af-9884-44af-9739-f5807c8e45bb

[just_ordinary]

The Grand Duchess Vladimir is a real stunner isn’t it? The Queen brings it out pretty regularly which I think is fantastic. I also wonder how they make sure it stays put and I wonder how strong her neck is. My guess is, that her regular tiaras are actually very subtle reworked so that they fit her skull perfectly. That would also explain why she doesn’t lent out some of them- maybe she wishes have to option to wear them comfortably herself. But that’s obviously complete speculation on my part. 
Like the Queen, I do prefer the “white” version with the pearls. I am a big fan of all-diamond tiaras and there only a few with other jewels that can play in the same league for me. The pearls don’t spring out straight and give a more homogeneous look.

 

@adidas: interesting read. I doubt we will see the Vladimir or the Burmese ruby. The Burmese ruby is part of the royal collection as its pieces stem from an official gift and the Vladimir is used for mostly important functions by the Queen. I don’t think we will see a tiara the Queen uses a lot herself. 
The York tiara is a safe guess. Beatrice is the oldest daughter and the tiara might stay with her at one point. I can see her carrying it well but I secretly wish for something else.

I cannot see her choosing emeralds after her sister went that route. The piece is also not in the possession of the Queen. 
The Turquoise could look incredible against her hair but somehow I cannot see her ever choosing it if it was in offer- which it won’t if it isn’t in the vault anymore. A bit pointless bringing them  up.

Strathmore Rose or Teck Crescent would be my dream sightings but a classic fringe is nice too.

 

[Beermeet]

@just_ordinary I absolutely love your tiara knowledge! TY!  Personally,  I prefer the look of all diamonds or precious colored jewels on them. I'm not a huge fan of pearls.  Besides a classy single string for whatever occasion.  However, like the Queen's necklace in the photo above ( which I find gaudy), when you are rocking the real deal it doesn't really matter.  They ARE impressive!  The real deal aspect backs any piece up!  

Also, the pictures of QE when younger,  wow!  She dressed beautifully.  Love that time periods style.  Gorgeous and so feminine.  ?

[just_ordinary]

@Beermeet

Most of it stems from this blog:

http://orderofsplendor.blogspot.com/?m=1
 

the author stopped blogging there but still covers the Queen’s jewel outings (the other blog can be find through the linked one). It gives a fantastic overview of the vaults of several European monarchies and appearances. At point there was was massive poll with the readers to pick the most popular tiara in different categories. It was very informative and so much fun.

Edited March 16, 2020 by just_ordinary