Meghan and Harry 5: Oprah, Racism, and Gossip! Oh My!

[viii]

Zero idea about name. I’m sure they will honor Diana in some way. I really thought Meghan was the type to like old classical names but Archie Harrison was such a WTF moment. 

Love the idea of Henrietta for a middle name. 

[just_ordinary]

I have absolutely no clue. Archie Harrison seems so away from anything that I though possible. It’s neither classic royal, classic toff (even though Archie is not that unusual) nor what I would have thought for going down an American route. I don’t think their picked Harrison exactly a nod to Harry, but who knows. If so, it would only be fair to reference Meghan this time (even though I find those Father-Son / Mother-Daughter naming schemes very conservative, why not find a way to go Father-Daughter / Mother-Son?). Rachel is a beautiful name - so maybe a Rachel Diana or Rachel Frances? 
Somehow though I doubt we see a Diana reference, or we would see both mothers. Or not- the Diana narrative is certainly strong with them. 
As you notice, I have absolutely no clue

[viii]

9 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

I don’t think their picked Harrison exactly a nod to Harry, but who knows. 

I don't think Harry giving his son the middle name of 'Son of Harry' was an off chance, lol. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

9 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

Rachel is a beautiful name - so maybe a Rachel Diana or Rachel Frances?

I think Rachel is a nice name as well, but isn't it Meghan's first name and she goes by her middle?

As someone who also goes by her middle name I assume she's not a big fan of her first name, as it makes life a lot easier if that's what you go by.  I hate mine and sometimes it comes up as a suggestion in baby name threads and people like it and I just cringe and want to say nooooo please don't do that to a baby!  But just because I hate it doesn't mean other's wont....but I'd have let my daughter go through life as "baby girl last name" before giving her my first name. 

I personally think they should name her Elizabeth Thethird.  Just because I would find that amusing.

[Topaz]

I think Diana is most likely to be the middle name. Maybe Doria as well to honour both grandmothers, but if they stick to 2 names like Archie has then I expect Diana to win since Doria is alive and will have opportunities to be connected to her granddaughter in other ways. I really hope they don’t go for Diana as a first name to avoid constant comparisons.

If they want to go for a version of Meghan’s name then they could use Margaret or one of its many variations or nicknames. Daisy or Pearl are subtle nods while still sounding like her own person. 

I guess the first name to be something popular but unexpected like Archie was. No idea what though.

Tongue-in-cheek guess: Augusta, to upstage Eugenie a third time.

[HerNameIsBuffy]

Not because it's trendy, but I've always liked using surnames as first or middle names when it flows....and I like Spencer as a middle name.  I actually kind of like it as a unisex first name. 

I got lucky when I named my daughter after my mom in that it was also the same name as her dad's much beloved grandmother so we got a 2 for 1 on honoring matriarchs.  Doria and Diana both start and end with the same letter so if it were me I'd probably try to do something cute with that although I don't like any I've seen mentioned thus far.  

If I had a time machine and was going to name more kids I'd hit my gedcom file as I have some cool surnames in my family tree that I'd really like as first names.  (Although not too many interesting first names as it seems like every grandmother going back was a Mary, Margaret, Anne/Anna, Jane, or Elizabeth.  The men are worse....William, James, Thomas, George ad nauseum.  I'd always get excited when something more interesting turned up, but creativity when it comes to first names is seriously lacking in my family.)

 

Edited March 29, 2021 by HerNameIsBuffy

[just_ordinary]

14 hours ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

I think Rachel is a nice name as well, but isn't it Meghan's first name and she goes by her middle?

As someone who also goes by her middle name I assume she's not a big fan of her first name, as it makes life a lot easier if that's what you go by.  I hate mine and sometimes it comes up as a suggestion in baby name threads and people like it and I just cringe and want to say nooooo please don't do that to a baby!  But just because I hate it doesn't mean other's wont....but I'd have let my daughter go through life as "baby girl last name" before giving her my first name. 

I personally think they should name her Elizabeth Thethird.  Just because I would find that amusing.

I also go by my middle name. But it wasn’t a conscious choice on my part. My parents decided that the second just felt more natural and fitting. The other one is just a second name. And while I would never consider using my own name for my child, many use second names and I think it doesn’t matter in what order they are on your birth certificate. Don’t know what’s the reason in Meghan’s case though.

I had to chuckle about Elizabeth III. but then I wondered- since reading here, I learned that those “trash” names like Princess etc. have a root in black culture as a reaction that black people were often just calmed by their first name by whites (and not respectfully by their second name). And that mocking those names is racist. At least that is how I understood it. Calling her Elizabeth III. would most definitely be mocked to no end and some tabloids would even construct some headlines about treason (again ?). And then they would probably give another lecture about history and racism..... 

My biggest wish is that the uk media starts ghosting them. That would be just wonderful. They have most definitely an US public focus (in how they do and talk), so just leave them there. The US tabloids can have them (and weren’t it 2/3 headlines from us magazines that Oprah showed at the interview?). Let’s see how they function without the perpetuated victimhood with the British press. At the moment I am still unsure how much substance they have:
Sussex Royal Website where they wanted to educate about the pandemic and work against false information about it, turned into an outlet for their own pitty story and when they couldn’t keep the name they dropped the cause all together. They could have easily set something up. Everyone can set up a website.

Their Netflix deal hasn’t brought any result till date. And it seems all they do is saying yes or no to projects others scout/pitch and evaluate.

Their podcast has one or two episodes. For voices that are new and haven’t been heard yet (or so).... Elton John? Stacy Abrams? Naomi Osaka? Non of their guests was a fresh voice.

With those ventures they also fundamentally changed their relationship with the public. They are creators now. The public is now consumer of real content, and they will ask for more or turn away pretty fast.

Apart from that, the only thing they did was open their private purse (which is not bad exactly but it is also not what they set to do) or talk. In lengthy ways. 

Now, Harry has two jobs, while on is more being part of a think tank for 6 months. Let’s see how well that goes. CIO could be a good fit, but somehow I doubt he will be able to come to terms to work for someone in kind of a regular job. Even though I think this dose of almost reality (for the majority of people) will do him good. Stability, respect and set rules (office times, being pushed to do things, getting paid for your work...) can be very beneficial for mental health. Till date the output of their own ventures is extremely sparse. You would have thought Harry would work on that instead of doing something else. But I get that those bills don’t pay themselves. Also a great lesson in real life. It will be interesting how Meghan will go on - taking a longer break? Taking on more duties around Archwell?

Edited March 30, 2021 by just_ordinary

[QuiverFullofBooks]

There’s a funny article on the Sussexes in the Financial Times that ends by pointing out that a hereditary monarchy isn’t really the best model for promoting diversity, fairness, and equality. (“The British press...has been very weak at challenging the lack of racial, religious, or cultural diversity, though, in fairness, it has absolutely nailed calling out people who dislike being photographed at Wimbledon.”)

[HerNameIsBuffy]

14 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

I had to chuckle about Elizabeth III. but then I wondered- since reading here, I learned that those “trash” names like Princess etc. have a root in black culture as a reaction that black people were often just calmed by their first name by whites (and not respectfully by their second name). And that mocking those names is racist. At least that is how I understood it. Calling her Elizabeth III. would most definitely be mocked to no end and some tabloids would even construct some headlines about treason (again ?). And then they would probably give another lecture about history and racism..... 

I just want to go on the record that I had never heard that and the only thing I was mocking was line jumping the succession thing.  

[DalmatianCat]

22 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

With those ventures they also fundamentally changed their relationship with the public. They are creators now. The public is now consumer of real content, and they will ask for more or turn away pretty fast.

Apart from that, the only thing they did was open their private purse (which is not bad exactly but it is also not what they set to do) or talk. In lengthy ways. 

Now, Harry has two jobs, while on is more being part of a think tank for 6 months. Let’s see how well that goes. CIO could be a good fit, but somehow I doubt he will be able to come to terms to work for someone in kind of a regular job. Even though I think this dose of almost reality (for the majority of people) will do him good. Stability, respect and set rules (office times, being pushed to do things, getting paid for your work...) can be very beneficial for mental health. Till date the output of their own ventures is extremely sparse. You would have thought Harry would work on that instead of doing something else. But I get that those bills don’t pay themselves. Also a great lesson in real life. It will be interesting how Meghan will go on - taking a longer break? Taking on more duties around Archwell?

Your take on Harry’s work prospects made me think of this article that made me snort out loud when I read it. Especially the last paragraph:

And Harry sat there beside her, 7,000 miles from home, in the land of rich Californians and Meyer lemons and eucalyptus trees trailing Spanish moss. He had plighted his troth to this unexpected and very beautiful woman; he had hurt his grandmother, and alienated his father and his only brother. He had thought that having Bishop Michael Bruce Curry deliver the homily at his wedding would reverse a thousand years of English racial attitudes, but he had been wrong about that.**He was a combat veteran, a prince, the grandson, great-grandson, and great-great-grandson of English monarchs, and now he was going to have to think up some podcasts.

[tabitha2]

Biggest laugh I had all week and so true!  
 

Harry the confused rescue chicken ROFLMAO

[tabitha2]

I would like to edit but apparently can’t any more but some truths have come out in the Sussex Saga...What’s done in dark always comes to the light. 

Lady Colin Campbell has revealed its was Princess Anne that made the infamous statement about Archie and it had nothing to do with Race at all. In short She was not sure how Meghan would fit in with her “LA mentality” and the children would always be between worlds and clashes would happen 

I don’t think she would so blatantly and public ally lie about a senior  Royal so I tend to believe her. YMMV

 

And Harry and Meghan were upset William was getting more than them and learned when Charles was King the money they would be getting would be on Anne’s, Edward’s  and The Queens  cousins level. They could not be expected to work like that! How dare! So They wanted a specific amount of money guaranteed when his father and brother were king and the Palace would not play ball. 
 

 

[viii]

1 hour ago, tabitha2 said:

Lady Colin Campbell has revealed its was Princess Anne that made the infamous statement about Archie and it had nothing to do with Race at all.

Wondering how dark the child's skin has absolutely everything to do with race. If it truly was Anne that made the comments, then she ain't shit. 

1 hour ago, tabitha2 said:

And Harry and Meghan were upset William was getting more than them and learned when Charles was King the money they would be getting would be on Anne’s, Edward’s  and The Queens  cousins level. They could not be expected to work like that! How dare! So They wanted a specific amount of money guaranteed when his father and brother were king and the Palace would not play ball. 

I have such a hard time believing this. Why would Harry ever expect to make the same amount as William? It's two separate "roles" and I just struggle to believe that after thirty odd years, Harry would suddenly demand more. He is very much on Anne/Andrew/Edward's level since it will be the exact same relationship once Charles is King, and I just find it hard to believe that this has come as a surprise to Harry and Meghan. 

[tabitha2]

That’s the point... according to Lady Colin no one did that or even implied it! Watch the video for Pete sakes. Jesus.

 

Harry and Meghan are that entitled and inflated simple as that IMO

[HerNameIsBuffy]

51 minutes ago, viii said:

I have such a hard time believing this. Why would Harry ever expect to make the same amount as William? It's two separate "roles" and I just struggle to believe that after thirty odd years, Harry would suddenly demand more. He is very much on Anne/Andrew/Edward's level since it will be the exact same relationship once Charles is King, and I just find it hard to believe that this has come as a surprise to Harry and Meghan.

I have no doubt that he knew it would be less than William, but the logic of being on par with the others is lost on me.

Isn't the argument for keeping the monarchy always that it brings in tourism and keeps public interest?  Tourism is from other countries and as an American non-royal watcher I have known who Harry was since he was born, but I had no idea there was an Anne or Edward until I started reading this thread.  

So why wouldn't the one who is actually known, by orders of magnitude, more than the others (outside of their realm) get more?  The argument is always that the family is a business, the firm....in business the more high profile people get more money.

2 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

Lady Colin Campbell has revealed its was Princess Anne that made the infamous statement about Archie and it had nothing to do with Race at all. In short She was not sure how Meghan would fit in with her “LA mentality” and the children would always be between worlds and clashes would happen 

This literally makes no sense.  The comment was about skin color, not cultural fit.  That's about race, genetic ethnicity plain and simple.

Edited March 31, 2021 by HerNameIsBuffy

[viii]

42 minutes ago, tabitha2 said:

That’s the point... according to Lady Colin no one did that or even implied it! Watch the video for Pete sakes. Jesus.

 

Harry and Meghan are that entitled and inflated simple as that IMO

Sorry some of us work and we can't watch dubious videos whenever we please. Given this lady said it had nothing to do with race, it shows she isn't credible, imo. 

[tabitha2]

It’s not a popularity contest.  Anne and Company are younger children of monarchs and Harry will be in same position as Anne. Why should a fella in the same position get more money than his aunt who has been a senior working Royal long before The former was even born and works 5 times harder get less money? 
 

 

Edited March 31, 2021 by tabitha2

[anjulibai]

Lady Colin Campbell doesn't know shit. She is sketchy as fuck and I wouldn't believe a single word that comes out of her mouth. 

[tabitha2]

1 minute ago, viii said:

Sorry some of us work and we can't watch dubious videos whenever we please. Given this lady said it had nothing to do with race, it shows she isn't credible, imo. 

So you just gonna be that stupidly obstinate? And arrogant enough to think you know more than her? Wow.  That you don’t want  see that you actually could be mistaken about something must be too much for you to handle...
 

The relevant  portion starts at 9:38 BTW. 

[viii]

12 minutes ago, tabitha2 said:

It’s not a popularity contest.  Anne and Company are younger children of monarchs and Harry will be in same position as Anne. Why should a fella in the same position get more money than his aunt who has been a senior working Royal long before The former was even born and works 5 times harder get less money? 

But it kind of is a popularity contest. The royal family really only functions as a tourist attraction, at this point. They have no legal standings anymore and they only exist due to tradition. People pay good money to see them, hear them, and buy things that have their faces on them. Why shouldn't it be a popularity contest? If you told the average person they could either go see Princess Anne or Prince Harry, 9/10 they're going to go see Harry. I get that Anne works harder than Harry, harder than anyone else in the family, but if you judge how much she works to how much her life gets funded, it's not balanced. 

8 minutes ago, tabitha2 said:

So you just gonna be that stupidly obstinate? And arrogant enough to think you know more than her? Wow.  That you don’t want  see that you actually could be mistaken about something must be too much for you to handle...
 

The relevant  portion starts at 9:38 BTW. 

I don't think I know more than her, but I don't think I believe everything she says to be gospel truth. I'll watch the video later, but given that this woman compared Meghan Markle to Adolf Hitler, I can't really say that I give two shits about her opinion. She's an asshole.

She's also, according to her ex husband, a complete fake. The only way this woman has any sort of nobility connections is because she married into a noble family and the marriage lasted less than a year, which she's been milking since the 1970's. Let's not pretend this woman is on the same level as the royal family.  

Edited March 31, 2021 by viii

[HerNameIsBuffy]

14 minutes ago, tabitha2 said:

It’s not a popularity contest.  Anne and Company are younger children of monarchs and Harry will be in same position as Anne. Why should a fella in the same position get more money than his aunt who has been a senior working Royal long before The former was even born and works 5 times harder get less money? 
 

 

Is it a business and a brand or not?  Is the justification for maintaining the monarchy the tourism?  If both of those things are true then why shouldn't people who are higher profile and draw people to the business get more money?

People aren't paid by their employers based on seniority and hard work alone...it's mostly market value of the position and the value in dollars your worth to the company.

If it's just distribution of private family wealth then it's none of anyone elses business as long as they divest themselves of taking any public money in any way.  

[tabitha2]

Maybe maybe not about Lady Colin  but Given all the trouble and controversy Meghan has caused since her marriage, her blatant and bizarre lying, her incendiary claims and that Harry has turned into a voiceless shade since Meghan appeared and that we know Anne is an honest straight  shooter with no patience for fools what she stated has a definite ring of truth. 

 

If you have race on the brain 24/7 and everything anyone says is racist, has racist implications and truly want to see racism in everything I just feel bad for you. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

1 minute ago, tabitha2 said:

If you have race on the brain 24/7 and everything anyone says is racist, has racist implications and truly want to see racism in everything I just feel bad for you. 

How is a comment about the skin color of a child about anything but race.  If the comment was about cultural fit you'd have an argument, but the comment in question was about the color of a child's skin.  That has nothing to do with anything except genetics.  

[tabitha2]

Oh my holy shit! It was not! 
 

Start at 9:38! 
 

Lady Colin maybe a fake or fraud or trashy but the fact is she is far closer to the Royals and Royal sources than anyone here. She has been proven right numerous other instances so I will tentatively believe her. 

[viii]

8 minutes ago, tabitha2 said:

Lady Colin maybe a fake or fraud or trashy but the fact is she is far closer to the Royals and Royal sources than anyone here. She has been proven right numerous other instances so I will tentatively believe her. 

One glance at this woman's biography and majority of her royal books are condemned as inaccurate and fantastical. She also doesn't believe racism in the UK exists and she defended Andrew. 

I can see why you like her.