Harry & Meghan 10: Even Less Relevant to the BRF

[nokidsmom]

6 hours ago, Four is Enough said:

Well I certainly wouldn't have  called my child by a nickname, queen's nickname or not. Not on their birth certificate. And my opinion doesn't matter a hill of beans, but I'm putting it out there nonetheless. Feel free to scroll by.

I know that to some, using the nickname might seen to be a nice gesture, but in this case, Lilibet was a particularly personal one for the Queen and IDK, it just didn't sit well with me, using something so personal even if there was permission.   It also didn't sit well that just 3 months prior, H&M did their Oprah interview really slamming the RF and while they didn't specifically mention anything negative regarding the Queen, she is still the head and part of that evil RF  that they heavily criticized, yet they named their daughter after her.    It was just so confusing IMHO.

[tabitha2]

It’s not even proper nickname. A toddler 94 years ago could not pronounce her name ,only a small handful of people ever used it and all those people are long dead. All very odd when there any number of Elizabeth variations they could have used to honor her. 

[prayawaythefundie]

1 hour ago, Jackie3 said:

Aren't Harry and Meghan free to name their daughter whatever they want? 

They certainly are. And everyone else is free to feel irritated by their choice. 

[EmCatlyn]

1 hour ago, tabitha2 said:

It’s not even proper nickname. A toddler 94 years ago could not pronounce her name ,only a small handful of people ever used it and all those people are long dead. All very odd when there any number of Elizabeth variations they could have used to honor her. 

The funny thing, I thought, was that they are going to nickname her “Lili.”

As far as “honoring” the Queen was concerned, I think naming her “Elizabeth” and then using “Lilibet” as the nickname would have been sweet.  It is their business what they call their child, but the claim that calling her “Lilibet” honors the Queen doesn’t convince.  They just liked the name, for whatever reason.

We have discussed before that H & M are occasionally “tone-deaf,” and this may be an example. They may not have considered that using the Queen’s private nickname without her enthusiastic approval might seem disrespectful to some people.

The Queen may not have minded, but it appears that it caught her by surprise, and she certainly gave no indication of “enthusiastic approval.”  So if they were hoping to please her with the name, the odds are they failed.

[viii]

I think Harry and Meghan just like to be different than everyone else. Majority of Royal (great) granddaughters have Elizabeth in their name and while Harry wanted to honor his grandmother, god forbid he use the same name as everyone else did. They do call her Lili though, I think. Or at least that’s what they said they’d do. 

(Especially since Williams daughters middle names are Elizabeth Diana.) 

[prayawaythefundie]

3 hours ago, viii said:

I think Harry and Meghan just like to be different than everyone else. Majority of Royal (great) granddaughters have Elizabeth in their name and while Harry wanted to honor his grandmother, god forbid he use the same name as everyone else did.

Yes and I think that‘s understandable. I wouldn‘t want to use the exact same name for my child as ten of her cousins already have. (Still would have stayed clear of Lilibet.)

[just_ordinary]

I think H (and M, but mostly him) is desperately trying to hold on to his royal connections because, let’s be honest, that’s his claim to fame. Without it, as it’d clear to see, there is not much to work with. He could have doubled down in the whole veteran/military thing or the Sentebale/AIDS stuff. Mental health is a bad fit, because he seems to be every much affected and is NO good example for the healing powers of therapy. Being Prince Feminist is also not really working. We hear M voice about how much he supports feminism but he has obviously nothing to contribute in his own words (wearing a t-shirt with a slogan is not impressive or shows any knowledge or passion in my books). Educating people about job choices - tone deaf. The think tank - never came up again. Playing Polo - nice hobby. 

But being HMTQ grandson, being PC and more importantly Diana’s son, being William’s brother. That brings attention every time. And as he is not on good terms with his father and brother (as far as we know), and no one can be really mad at an adorable, dutiful, living for the nation 94year old (current narrative) she is a good pick to tell everyone how close you are. How you have topics she can’t talk to anyone else too. How you make sure she is surrounded by the right people. How incredibly close you are because she was honoured you chose her nickname for your child. Bad luck BP is silent and not supported his claims. I do wonder though if they regret the choice? The Queen angle is not working as well as they might have thought. 

[prayawaythefundie]

@just_ordinary That is a very profound analysis of Harry‘s situation. Thank you and I agree!

[Jackie3]

14 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

I think H (and M, but mostly him) is desperately trying to hold on to his royal connections because, let’s be honest, that’s his claim to fame.

The guy lost his mother at the age of 13.

On 7/6/2022 at 1:26 PM, nokidsmom said:

it just didn't sit well with me, using something so personal even if there was permission. 

If you are looking for reasons to hate on a baby, that's fine. But it's really a non-issue, because:

1. Why would they need permission from anyone regarding their daughter's name? 

2. If the Queen doesn't like it, who cares? It's not her kid.

3. There are plenty of reports that said the Queen gave permission to use the name (not that permssion was needed)

4. They don't even live close by, the Queen won't hear  or see baby Lilibet very often, if indeed the name offends her. 

5. She is in her mid-90's so she won't be affected by this "bold move" for very long ( if indeed the name offends her)

6. It's possible the Queen just said, "Oh, nice name!" and went on with her life.  If she is as "hard-working" as the Palace claims, she has lots of other things to do and think about. 

Truth is, I doubt this fantastically wealthy 96-year old is tossing and turning in her bed at night, because there is a beautiful one-year old in California named Lilibet.

Perhaps she eschews the ugliness and is delighted to have another adorable baby in the family. Maybe she focuses on that. 

Edited July 7, 2022 by Jackie3

[Jackie3]

On 7/6/2022 at 1:43 PM, tabitha2 said:

It’s not even proper nickname. A toddler 94 years ago could not pronounce her name ,only a small handful of people ever used it and all those people are long dead. All very odd when there any number of Elizabeth variations they could have used to honor her. 

I find this concept of hating on a small baby to be off-putting. I realize that having Meghan as a mother will bring along some residual hate for the poor kid, along with being biracial, unfortunately. But really, Lilibet only 1. 

Her naming was between Mom and Dad, and no one else. I'm not a fan of telling parents what to do. The fact that it's not a "proper nickname" to you is irrelevant.

"Apple" is not a proper name either, or Grimes or  X AE A-XII, but for whatever reason, there's a lot less outrage. 

Edited July 7, 2022 by Jackie3

[Seahorse Wrangler]

Here's Horrible Histories Victorian Names..

[Jackie3]

Look at that little sweetie.

She has no idea that some people don't want her named after a Queen.

She is beautiful.

 

Edited July 8, 2022 by Jackie3

[viii]

It always bugs me she has no legs in that photo lol 

[tabitha2]

I happen to think all these children and the ones not pictured are beautiful and worthy even if they mostly belong to horrible no good very bad regular Royals and thus are lesser beings in  our  trollerina’s eyes

 

Edited July 8, 2022 by tabitha2

[EmCatlyn]

Quote

The Duke of Sussex faced "significant tensions" with a top aide to the Queen involved in downgrading his security, a court has been told.

Challenging the decision, Prince Harry's lawyer said he had not been aware Sir Edward Young, the Queen's private secretary, played a role.

The decision was "materially prejudiced" as key information was withheld, Shaeed Fatima QC said.

The duke lost full protection after he stepped back from royal duties in 2020.

Without a guarantee of police protection, Prince Harry believes it is too dangerous to bring his family from the US to visit the UK - which his lawyer has previously said "is and always will be his home".

The duke's legal team argued the decision about his security by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as Ravec, was invalid because of "procedural unfairness".

BBC News, 7/7/22

 

Apparently, all the talk about “courtiers” and the “Buckingham Palace” people who had it in for Meghan and Harry comes down to some specific feuds which may or may not have influenced whether or not H and M got police protection.

Interesting that Harry keeps saying the UK is still his home, though he has bought property and made a life for his family somewhere else.  (I don’t doubt he feels that way.  I just don’t see him treating it as home. But then, I can barely afford a house in one location, and that has to be home.)

[viii]

Why wouldn’t he say the UK is home for him? He was born and raised there, spending 30+ years there while he has spent 2 years in the US. I’m sure his heart is still very much in the UK, no matter where he’s currently living. 

[just_ordinary]

@EmCatlyn I am not convinced it boils down to just some feuds. No doubt they had problems with the general system as well. Which is all fair and well, we all know it’s not exactly a plushy place to be (I think that’s pretty much common knowledge). I think there are several reasons that all played an import part. 
Some systemic, some personal (on all sides). What’s still baffling is that H seemed to have been clueless about the world he lived in. Attacking on of the Queen’s advisors is interesting. I don’t believe she is not ok with their actions, no matter how often he acts as if he and her have THE BEST relationship.

Edited July 8, 2022 by just_ordinary

[EmCatlyn]

5 hours ago, viii said:

Why wouldn’t he say the UK is home for him? He was born and raised there, spending 30+ years there while he has spent 2 years in the US. I’m sure his heart is still very much in the UK, no matter where he’s currently living. 

As I said, I (personally) find it strange, but I can see that he sees it as his home.  My snark was about being able to have two homes. (Presumably he regards the house in California as home also.)

 

[Jackie3]

1 hour ago, EmCatlyn said:

As I said, I (personally) find it strange, but I can see that he sees it as his home.  My snark was about being able to have two homes. (Presumably he regards the house in California as home also.)

 

He lost his mom as a young boy, and inherited her money which allowed him to buy another house.

That's something to snark about? I am sure he'd rather have his mother.  I guess I don't understand snarking on someone because of a tragedy. His mother died in a horrendous car crash. That's why he has the house -- it's really not something to envy!

I've known people who lost their moms young and it is a life-long tragedy.  

William also has lots of money, which he squanders here and there. I have not seen any snark about his spending. Maybe because he married the right kind of wife, so it's OK.

 

On 7/6/2022 at 3:45 PM, EmCatlyn said:

It is their business what they call their child, but the claim that calling her “Lilibet” honors the Queen doesn’t convince.  They just liked the name, for whatever reason.

Liking the name is a perfectly valid reason. Liking the name AND also honoring granny are both valid reasons. It was probably a mix of both. 

It must feel intolerable to imagine the Queen was pleased by their uppity move. But maybe she was. 

Maybe the Queen was delighted and touched! Maybe she gave them a big hug with tears in her eyes, and they felt truly loved, and the Queen will have a special connection with Lilibet as a result.

That kind of family love is a good thing. If it bothers you, it might be good to look at why.

In any event, I really think this baby should be left alone. I understand you don't  feel this baby merits such a profound and special name.  However, picking on a 1-year old is cruel, and even a bit bizarre, imo.

When she googles her name in 10 years, I wonder what she'll think. These Americans don't like my name? 

 

Edited July 8, 2022 by Jackie3

[Jackie3]

On 7/6/2022 at 3:55 PM, viii said:

I think Harry and Meghan just like to be different than everyone else.

People like this are usually far more interesting than those who follow all the "rules."

[viii]

1 hour ago, EmCatlyn said:

As I said, I (personally) find it strange, but I can see that he sees it as his home.  

I guess I just don’t understand why you personally find it strange that Harry, born and raised in the UK, considers it home, despite freshly moving to another country. I don’t understand the confusion over his roots, seems like BEC moment to me. 

1 hour ago, Jackie3 said:

He lost his mom as a young boy, and inherited her money which allowed him to buy another house.

That's something to snark about? I am sure he'd rather have his mother.  

Yes, because if Diana had never died, Prince Harry wouldn’t have the financial means to own two homes. 🙄 Like, come on. You’re going to have to troll better than that. 

[samurai_sarah]

On 7/6/2022 at 8:13 PM, Jackie3 said:

Sorry, do you NEED someone's permission when naming your child? Because we didn't consult with anyone about our kids' names. Aren't Harry and Meghan free to name their daughter whatever they want? 

Common courtesey suggests that you at least ask.

[tabitha2]

While the Queen can’t legally stop family members from naming the baby anything they want It’s a very strong and old tradition and a matter of great respect in the BRF to run baby name through the monarch to see if  they approve of the parents choice. It’s reportedly why Beatrice is named Beatrice instead of Annabel and Why Princess Margaret was not named Ann like her mother had wanted.  

[Jackie3]

1 hour ago, tabitha2 said:

While the Queen can’t legally stop family members from naming the baby anything they want It’s a very strong and old tradition and a matter of great respect in the BRF to run baby name through the monarch to see if  they approve of the parents choice. It’s reportedly why Beatrice is named Beatrice instead of Annabel and Why Princess Margaret was not named Ann like her mother had wanted.  

Well, that's a silly rule and it's good they broke it (if they did). You can respect the monarch without asking her permission for something that is solely a parents' decision.

You know, it used to be a rule that royals couldn't be close friends with divorced people. That was to uphold the Queen's role as head of the Church of England. Well, that rule is gone and it's a good thing, too! 

The Queen should've kept her nose out of Fergie and Andrew's business, too. That's good parenting--letting your adult children make their own decisions. The world not have ended if It was Annabel and Eugenie today, instead of Beatrice and Eugenie. 

When Charles is King, I have a feeling he'll say, "What? Um, name the baby what you want, Wills. It's up to you."

He seems less power-hungry. Elizabeth used to demand her little friends curtsey to her when she was only 11! "Curtsey, girl, curtsey!" she'd say.

Edited July 9, 2022 by Jackie3

[EmCatlyn]

4 hours ago, viii said:

I guess I just don’t understand why you personally find it strange that Harry, born and raised in the UK, considers it home, despite freshly moving to another country. I don’t understand the confusion over his roots, seems like BEC moment to me. 

It has to do with my personal history. I did not grow up in one country. By the time I was 12, I had lived in four different countries. I have always associated “home” with where I live “now,” not where I lived before.  I wasn’t criticizing Harry.  I was just saying that I didn’t have a personal understanding of what he felt.  I did say that I could see he felt that way.

As for the rest, I find it harder to be sympathetic to Harry’s complaint that he can’t “go home” without police protection than I would if he didn’t also has a very comfortable (not to say lavish) home where he has chosen to live.  This doesn’t mean that I think he shouldn’t feel that the UK is his home.