Meghan and Harry 4: Working for Netflix

[meep]

6 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

Doriana?

Will say though that I find combo-names often a bit cringe. Renesmee anyone?

Yeah, they definitely have to be careful with it. I don't like when it's super explicit like that. That's why I still think my top choice is Dorian/Doriane. It's an actual name on its own, short, but still can be used as a nice nod to both moms. 

[SPHASH]

Didn't watch the interview but from what I read this morning Harry and Meghan are smart to get the hell out of Dodge.  I'm rooting for them to succeed in life.

My feeling it was Will who made the comment about how Archie was going to look.

I don't blame Meghan but I think she could have done more research into Diana, Sarah, and even Wallis Simpson's history to see how Royal in laws are treated.

As for Harry yes he was naive to think things would change for Meghan.  The Monarchy is too set in it's ways and antiquated.

I really hope this interview leads to the end of the Monarchy but I doubt it will especially after the way they protected Andrew.

Edited March 8, 2021 by SPHASH

[QuiverFullofBooks]

Another mystery is the identity of the female family member who told Meghan to lay low. My guess is Kate, but it’s also possible that it could be Camilla, Anne, or Sophie. The lower-ranking ones probably wouldn’t have dared.

[anjulibai]

1 minute ago, QuiverFullofBooks said:

Another mystery is the identity of the female family member who told Meghan to lay low. My guess is Kate, but it’s also possible that it could be Camilla, Anne, or Sophie. The lower-ranking ones probably wouldn’t have dared.

I am guessing Camilla, given her experiences. Only she's received even close to the amount of hate that Meghan has, and I can see Meghan reaching out to her specifically because of that. 

[Coconut Flan]

Don't look for subtle from these two in a name.  Harrison for Harry's son anyone?

[viii]

I kind of hope they avoid combining Diana and Doria. It's cringey, plus you'd want the baby to have an identity of their own, rather than just be named after grandmothers, especially one that is passed away. That's a lot to put on a baby.

 

[anjulibai]

Just now, Coconut Flan said:

Don't look for subtle from these two in a name.  Harrison for Harry's son anyone?

I thought that was cute!

[just_ordinary]

4 hours ago, kachuu said:

What I took from the interview is that they had conversations for years and were ignored. The water was turned on and slowly came to a boil so to speak. The hate & racist crap didn't start when they dated; it accumulated over time.

I also think it was interesting how Americans see royalty as celebrities because that is very much how they are portrayed over here, right? We don't have "Royalty" in that sense so it's hard for us to understand these ancient (arguably outdated) rules & rituals.  Meghan even said she was surprised she had to curtsy in private to the queen which, honestly, I would too. I assumed a lot of the formality that we see on TV would not be as intense behind closed doors.

 

4 hours ago, viii said:

I have followed royalty for years but even I had a moment while watching the Crown where I was surprised that they curtsied in private and whatnot. I think I probably would have googled it beforehand meeting the Queen, but I can see how Meghan thought it was public fanfare. I don't personally believe the narrative that she was really unaware of Harry, I think that's perhaps a bit exaggerated. 

The whole mental health thing is concerning, though. I really admired William and Kate with their initiative in mental health, but the fact that Meghan was so blatantly and repeatedly denied help to the point she had to go to engagements because she couldn't be trusted to be alone... that's huge. That undermines their cause in a huge way and shows that William especially is all talk and ZERO action. I don't think this interview is going to help repair Harry's relationship with his brother, but nor should it necessarily, not if that's going to be William's stance. (And you can't tell me when they mentioned going to senior members for help that William wasn't one of them or wasn't part of the discussion)

Granted I am a long term royal watcher but this is pretty common knowledge. There have been plenty of articles about how Kate has to curtsy to Eugenie and Beatrice if she isn’t with Wiliam (and how much she hates it, or the other way round when he is present. Typically tabloid gossip).

I think Harry and Meghan exaggerated their naivety to fit their storyline to a point where they almost look stupid. I mean, he knows the system, and by all accounts (if you believe him) was aware of the downsides for years. How the f*** does he not practice curtsying with his wife to be??????? Meghan seemed so eager at their engagement interview, why would she not do some research, ask her husband, read online? She said she was acquaintances with Eugenie first- how could she not know about Harry? I think they bend the truth to add to the fairytale in that case. It’s fine but it’s so blatantly obvious it actually undermines them. 

I am also pretty astonished that they made the whole 2h mostly about the past. I was sure they would want to shine a light on their future. Now, they made the BRF the topic instead of their future endeavours and projects. It’s a dangerous line. I thought they would try to shake off the smell of clinging onto royal stuff. I also wonder how they really came from their first announcement of stepping back to this interview. That’s worlds apart. Their wording and their story definitely changed dramatically. I get packing away the velvet gloves but it also feels like a comeback.

[kachuu]

4 minutes ago, anjulibai said:

I am guessing Camilla, given her experiences. Only she's received even close to the amount of hate that Meghan has, and I can see Meghan reaching out to her specifically because of that. 

I am betting on Eugenie. Didn't she say they were friends before M & H got together?

[meep]

11 minutes ago, viii said:

I kind of hope they avoid combining Diana and Doria. It's cringey, plus you'd want the baby to have an identity of their own, rather than just be named after grandmothers, especially one that is passed away. That's a lot to put on a baby.

 

Now that you say it, I could see this coming from Harry, wanting to avoid anyone associating his daughter as a "mini-Diana."

[QuiverFullofBooks]

22 minutes ago, kachuu said:

I am betting on Eugenie. Didn't she say they were friends before M & H got together?

Yeah, she might be close enough to Meghan that she felt comfortable offering advice. Plus Meghan seemed more annoyed about the situation than by the person. There’s also the implication that the conversation took place at Meghan’s home, which makes Eugenie more likely than the others.

[DalmatianCat]

30 minutes ago, anjulibai said:

I am guessing Camilla, given her experiences. Only she's received even close to the amount of hate that Meghan has, and I can see Meghan reaching out to her specifically because of that. 

I kind of feel bad for whoever offered that advice because they probably genuinely thought they were being helpful. I can see it being Anne, Camilla, or Kate and considering they follow the principle of “never complain, never explain” they probably had no other advice to give (because since when has responding to the tabloids ever worked anyway?). Camilla’s press has gotten better over time because she’s never bothered trying explain or justify anything in the Charles/Diana/Camilla triangle and after awhile (decades for her) there’s just no new angle to cover.

[closetcagebaby]

28 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

 

Granted I am a long term royal watcher but this is pretty common knowledge. There have been plenty of articles about how Kate has to curtsy to Eugenie and Beatrice if she isn’t with Wiliam (and how much she hates it, or the other way round when he is present. Typically tabloid gossip).

I think Harry and Meghan exaggerated their naivety to fit their storyline to a point where they almost look stupid. I mean, he knows the system, and by all accounts (if you believe him) was aware of the downsides for years. How the f*** does he not practice curtsying with his wife to be??????? Meghan seemed so eager at their engagement interview, why would she not do some research, ask her husband, read online? She said she was acquaintances with Eugenie first- how could she not know about Harry? I think they bend the truth to add to the fairytale in that case. It’s fine but it’s so blatantly obvious it actually undermines them. 

I am also pretty astonished that they made the whole 2h mostly about the past. I was sure they would want to shine a light on their future. Now, they made the BRF the topic instead of their future endeavours and projects. It’s a dangerous line. I thought they would try to shake off the smell of clinging onto royal stuff. I also wonder how they really came from their first announcement of stepping back to this interview. That’s worlds apart. Their wording and their story definitely changed dramatically. I get packing away the velvet gloves but it also feels like a comeback.

I’m kind of wondering if Harry downplayed (maybe not even purposely) things to Meghan or felt like he could protect her/it wouldn’t be that bad because he didn’t want her to bail and he thought she would leave if she knew the full extent of what she was signing up for, both in terms of media attention and family issues. 

[ADoyle90815]

The name of Drina actually sounds like what Queen Victoria's mother called her as a nickname.

[DalmatianCat]

11 minutes ago, closetcagebaby said:

I’m kind of wondering if Harry downplayed (maybe not even purposely) things to Meghan or felt like he could protect her/it wouldn’t be that bad because he didn’t want her to bail and he thought she would leave if she knew the full extent of what she was signing up for, both in terms of media attention and family issues. 

I can see that...the two most serious long-term relationships he had before Meghan (Chelsy Davy and Cressida Bonas) both mentioned the relationship breaking up because they couldn’t handle the pressures of Royal life. It must not have ever occurred to  them that Harry could just leave. Up until Meghan I always wondered if Harry would eventually get back together with Chelsy the way William did with Kate.

[viii]

51 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

I am also pretty astonished that they made the whole 2h mostly about the past. I was sure they would want to shine a light on their future. Now, they made the BRF the topic instead of their future endeavours and projects. It’s a dangerous line. I thought they would try to shake off the smell of clinging onto royal stuff. I also wonder how they really came from their first announcement of stepping back to this interview. That’s worlds apart. Their wording and their story definitely changed dramatically. I get packing away the velvet gloves but it also feels like a comeback.

I think this was always meant to share about why they left. And yes, their wording and story changed but I think that's because they had put something forward as a suggestion and it was denied. So then they had to improvise. Netflix and Spotify were never a part of their original plan; they wanted to become royal family members who lives their own lives and turn up for the big events. I think that was a fair plan, but apparently the firm didn't. 

6 minutes ago, DalmatianCat said:

I can see that...the two most serious long-term relationships he had before Meghan (Chelsy Davy and Cressida Bonas) both mentioned the relationship breaking up because they couldn’t handle the pressures of Royal life. It must not have ever occurred to  them that Harry could just leave. Up until Meghan I always wondered if Harry would eventually get back together with Chelsy the way William did with Kate.

I've always believed that Harry wanted to leave without realizing it. Both his girlfriends broke up with him due to the pressure, but it wasn't until he found someone to run with that made him realize it was possible. 

[Pleiades_06]

1 hour ago, hoipolloi said:

Re: BRF in general. IMO, generations of in-breeding, limited & distorted socialization, and having one's life controlled by hereditary courtiers (who may be the ultimate villains here) result in what we've seen. In the past, due to boot-licking press in lockstep with the courtiers, we just knew less about all of this.

This-exactly. It’s not just a family-it’s a company with a brand. The courtiers and those loyal to this institution are enabling it to continue. 
 

Just in case anyone forgot, there really was bias in how Meghan was treated. Here’s a handy summary of headlines: 

Spoiler

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.buzzfeednews.com/amphtml/ellievhall/meghan-markle-kate-middleton-double-standards-royal

 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

2 hours ago, closetcagebaby said:

What in your mind have they done to deserve comeuppance?

I'm beginning to think Meghan personally kicked her dog at some point.  Otherwise I don't understand the level of vitriol for total strangers.  

I take that back...I have that level and more for Trump, but because he was an in a position of power and actively harmed people.  

17 minutes ago, Pleiades_06 said:

The courtiers and those loyal to this institution are enabling it to continue. 

I understand people who have a financial motive allowing this nonsense to continue, what I will never understand are Americans who loyally defend this stuff.

Spoiler alert....we fought a little war a couple hundred years ago so we didn't have to support the British monarchy.  They are just celebrities to us...like Kardashians with posher accents.

46 minutes ago, viii said:

I've always believed that Harry wanted to leave without realizing it. Both his girlfriends broke up with him due to the pressure, but it wasn't until he found someone to run with that made him realize it was possible. 

That's one of the beautiful things about finding a true partner with whom to go through life.  You make each other stronger, braver.  You can do things together knowing you have each others backs which would be far too intimidating to do alone.

I am not saying they have this, unlike some I don't profess to know any intimate details, but I hope they do.  I wish that for everyone in a relationship.

That doesn't make the partner Machiavelli.  Just a partner who wants the same things and is willing to deal with the crap in order to build something together.

Edited March 8, 2021 by HerNameIsBuffy
apostrophes are my nemeses

[front hugs > duggs]

This is a random side note, but Harry's naivety as been mentioned a bit. I feel like with certain things, Meghan had to almost translate between royal and 'peasant'. Harry mentioned at one point a private secretary, and Meghan kind of goes, "well, that's almost like the CEO". I think he realizes he was raised differently for sure, but I'm sure many times something that seems so normal to him is so far removed from what most people are used to.

[Lollipopgirl]

1 hour ago, closetcagebaby said:

I’m kind of wondering if Harry downplayed (maybe not even purposely) things to Meghan or felt like he could protect her/it wouldn’t be that bad because he didn’t want her to bail and he thought she would leave if she knew the full extent of what she was signing up for, both in terms of media attention and family issue

I think this is exactly what happened and have done for a while.

[SoSoNosy]

I remember the infamous 'What Meghan wants, Meghan gets!', to which his grandmother said "not necessarily".  I heard that that dustup was over Meghan demanding a tiara that QEII wasn't willing to loan out, but it could have been anything, or even fictional.  Charles has announced that when he becomes King, there will be fewer royal titles.

[hoipolloi]

This guy's work is brilliant, and these depictions of the completely vile Piers Morgan are SPOT ON:

From March 2020:

From March 2021:

[Lollipopgirl]

I’m watching this from the UK. I totally agree they pitted her against Kate and she was very unfairly treated by the British press at times. I do find it odd that she’s calling Sarah Ferguson Fergie, I’m certain they don’t call her that. Plus they always refer to Kate as Catherine. Otherwise as a Brit I just think this is so sad. She had a lot to offer. Whatever really went wrong, and I’m not sure we’ll entirely know the truth, it’s sad for all of them I think.

[hoipolloi]

In which Piers Morgan gets his worthless ass handed to him:

 

[hoipolloi]

And one more stunning image from Cold War Steve: