Harry and Meghan 15

[samurai_sarah]

Carry on from here:

 

Edited April 1, 2023 by Coconut Flan

[noseybutt]

Some thread titles are missed. The last one was *chef’s kiss.*

[Jackie3]

This is nice to see. Of course, she'll will go by Lilli for now.  Harry and Meg have given their kids choices and options.

Hard to believe Archie is #6 and Lilli #7! There are royalist turning republican because this list has been updated. I"m not sure what ugliness is going on in their minds.

 

Edited March 9, 2023 by Jackie3

[prayawaythefundie]

I love it when people fawn over their favourites being in the line of succession right after going on about how useless / unhealthy the monarchy is. 😄

[viii]

None of the spots really matter except 1 and 2. Let's not forget that Andrew, the disgraced Duke of York, began his life as #2 and is now currently 8. As people grow up and begin families of their own, they will drop further and further. The only ones that really matter in the LoS (not the family) is William and George. 

[Jackie3]

2 hours ago, prayawaythefundie said:

I love it when people fawn over their favourites being in the line of succession right after going on about how useless / unhealthy the monarchy is. 😄

I agree! The titles are pretty useless! They are especially meaningless in the US

However, these titles were their birthright and I hate to see anyone denied their birthright, useless or nnot. Particularly biracial little children who are inadvertently part of a very racist institution.

 

[tabitha2]

So  Archie will be Duke of Sussex in time and presumably will pass the title to his first born son. But that pretension means little in Britain and absolutely nothing in the states if they stay.  It will only add glamour to Socialite/glitterati set to have a real Prince and Princess at their parties and whatnot in many years if fate has that in store for these kids 

[Jackie3]

54 minutes ago, tabitha2 said:

So  Archie will be Duke of Sussex in time and presumably will pass the title to his first born son. But that pretension means little in Britain and absolutely nothing in the states if they stay.  It will only add glamour to Socialite/glitterati set to have a real Prince and Princess at their parties and whatnot in many years if fate has that in store for these kids 

Exactly. And that's pretty meaningless. It's clear the current Duke and Duchess don't care about that stuff, since they left the very country where it actually matters. No one will care in California, except for the shallowest people. I doubt Archie's childhood playmates will care.

With that said, it's something that belongs to the children -- their birthright, really--so it's not really Harry and Meghan's to give up. They are smart to leave it for the kids to decide. Kind of like religion--wait till the kids are grown and can decide for themselves.

It also says something about their character that they refused to let a racist institution take something--even something pretty meaningless--away from their kids. I mean, there's no real evidence that Charles tried to take the titles away from the kids, but it is a little strange that that website was only updated today. The Queen's been dead six months.

Edited March 9, 2023 by Jackie3

[just_ordinary]

10 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

So  Archie will be Duke of Sussex in time and presumably will pass the title to his first born son. But that pretension means little in Britain and absolutely nothing in the states if they stay.  It will only add glamour to Socialite/glitterati set to have a real Prince and Princess at their parties and whatnot in many years if fate has that in store for these kids 

But the Duke of Sussex title was never in question. The Duke title will go on till his line dies out. The P/P ends with them though.

[KnittingOwl]

13 hours ago, viii said:

The only thing Sweden did was remove the HRH. The children of CP and Madeleine will still be royal family members and retain their Prince and Princess titles.

The children of CP and Madeline no longer show up on the royal family website. They used to be listed. Granted, they are not as old as the Danish princes, but Princess Leonore is the next oldest after Estelle and is 9. She’s certainly old enough to know that she’s being treated differently than her cousins. 

[just_ordinary]

On 3/10/2023 at 11:19 AM, KnittingOwl said:

The children of CP and Madeline no longer show up on the royal family website. They used to be listed. Granted, they are not as old as the Danish princes, but Princess Leonore is the next oldest after Estelle and is 9. She’s certainly old enough to know that she’s being treated differently than her cousins. 

This whole whining is just stupid. The older boys and the two other ones were treated differently before. Nothing changed on that front. They just can’t use their title to make money- because let’s face it - their family and connections opened those modelling doors. And at least one used his title in a  pretty trashy commercial. If there was a chance to keep the titles longer it went out of the windows that second.
But apart from printing new business cards- their family won’t treat them any differently. They didn’t have any privileges removed. 
The whole drama is just bizarre to me to be honest. Because if anything, they had cut away something they wouldn’t need anyway if they are actually doing their own thing. But if you are using your title as a pillar in your professional outlook (instead of talent or hard work) - well, i am not exactly sympathetic. 
I don’t think those ex-HRH /princes should openly complain. They still have the resources and connections. They will fall on their feet. And they grandparents are hardly treating them differently than before. The Swedes are great at PR in that regard. And I actually do believe Madeleine and CP prefer less spotlight and the scrutiny that comes with it. Both had a hard time. Now they can basically work if and what they want to and still be uber privileged. Their children can continue to life like this with even less public scrutiny. 

[SoSoNosy]

I have what is obviously a very United States question.  They seem to say that they ill be vacating Frogmoore College after the coronation, so why wouldn't the children have the proper security that their parents are demanding.  Isn't Frogmoore Cottage on the grounds of Windsor Castle one of the most secure properties there are?  If I am glaringly I am wrong, then I humbly apologize.

[Jackie3]

2 hours ago, SoSoNosy said:

I have what is obviously a very United States question.  They seem to say that they ill be vacating Frogmoore College after the coronation, so why wouldn't the children have the proper security that their parents are demanding.  Isn't Frogmoore Cottage on the grounds of Windsor Castle one of the most secure properties there are?  If I am glaringly I am wrong, then I humbly apologize.

Security means much more than "no one can enter the Windsor Castle grounds." It also means bodyguards, drivers, people watching your house, etc. 

Harry grew up being followed by a bodyguard everywhere. I think all the senior royals have bodyguards at all time. It's funny  when the press promotes this idea that the Cambridges live alone, with. no servants staying in their house. I am sure there are bodyguards in that house 24/7.

I can see why they'd need it, with the amount of hate leveled against them. 

[just_ordinary]

4 hours ago, SoSoNosy said:

I have what is obviously a very United States question.  They seem to say that they ill be vacating Frogmoore College after the coronation, so why wouldn't the children have the proper security that their parents are demanding.  Isn't Frogmoore Cottage on the grounds of Windsor Castle one of the most secure properties there are?  If I am glaringly I am wrong, then I humbly apologize.

This whole security thing is completely played up to be honest.
They haven’t used the place but for maybe two weeks since they left. If they only always stay a couple of days they simply don’t need it. There are numerous guest accommodations for high ranking guests or family members in Windsor, BP or KP (or Sandringham and Balmoral but they don’t apply here). All under good security. It’s not as if they have to book into a public hotel.

I will say though- if I were the RF I would most definitely not trust them at the moment to not film and record. So I would put them into Frogmore when they come over. It would just not be theirs anymore to come and go as they choose but an accommodation they get by my choosing. But I would also put W&K into the Castle because little P/P in a castle make great pictures for PR and Andrew into Adeleide Cottage. Preferably I would put him into a far far away little accommodation (North Scotland?) but I get why you want him to be close and under surveillance. This idiot would get into real trouble quicker than you can enjoy having him out of your hair.

Of course they will have the same tight security as his other family members for every outing concerning the coronation. They will get protection in general just got the one that H wishes for. But they won’t be chased down the street by a horde of paparazzi either. 

[Jackie3]

1 hour ago, just_ordinary said:

I will say though- if I were the RF I would most definitely not trust them at the moment to not film and record. So I would put them into Frogmore when they come over. It would just not be theirs anymore to come and go as they choose but an accommodation they get by my choosing. But I would also put W&K into the Castle because little P/P in a castle make great pictures for PR and Andrew into Adeleide Cottage. Preferably I would put him into a far far away little accommodation (North Scotland?) but I get why you want him to be close and under surveillance. This idiot would get into real trouble quicker than you can enjoy having him out of your hair.

 

I can't believe you feel a sex offender deserves the luxurious digs used by the heir to the throne. There are dozens of small apartments he could live in. . . there's the Quonset huts the male servants have lived in. .. but you give him Adelaide? Wow, the power of being royal. . . you can be best friends with a sex offender and people still want to give you great stuff.

As for H&M. . . why shouldn't they film and record? The whole world films and records the royal family. What exactly are you afraid they will record? Presumably everyone is dressed and behaving themselves, so what's the worry?

How would you stop them, anyway? Put them on house arrest? Strip search?  Why would they ever come again? And the RF NEEDS them to come, as often as possible. No, they are going to have to play nice with Harry and Meghan, since H&M hold all the cards. They don't' need anything from the RF at this point.

I'd be far more worried about what Andrew might do than anything Harry and Meghan will be up to. Funny how the focus is on the people who DIDN'T commit sex crimes.

It's like how Britain focuses on the cost of Meghan's lunch, over the cost of the Coronation.

 

 

Edited March 12, 2023 by Jackie3

[klein_roeschen]

5 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

This whole security thing is completely played up to be honest.
They haven’t used the place but for maybe two weeks since they left. If they only always stay a couple of days they simply don’t need it. There are numerous guest accommodations for high ranking guests or family members in Windsor, BP or KP (or Sandringham and Balmoral but they don’t apply here). All under good security. It’s not as if they have to book into a public hotel.

I will say though- if I were the RF I would most definitely not trust them at the moment to not film and record. So I would put them into Frogmore when they come over. It would just not be theirs anymore to come and go as they choose but an accommodation they get by my choosing. But I would also put W&K into the Castle because little P/P in a castle make great pictures for PR and Andrew into Adeleide Cottage. Preferably I would put him into a far far away little accommodation (North Scotland?) but I get why you want him to be close and under surveillance. This idiot would get into real trouble quicker than you can enjoy having him out of your hair.

Of course they will have the same tight security as his other family members for every outing concerning the coronation. They will get protection in general just got the one that H wishes for. But they won’t be chased down the street by a horde of paparazzi either. 

The gist I get out of the whole security discussion is, that security is just a strawman. They want to be treated as special snowflakes but can't demand that, so they dress that up as a security issue. Harry and Megan are in less danger than Willian and Kate or Charles and Camilla.

And for Andrew and well Fergie, I could imagine a place like South Georgia would be very far away with easy to control who comes and goes. And very little population.  

 

[Four is Enough]

I could be wrong but I believe the Sussex dukedom is bestowed by the monarch, not a hereditary dukedom. I'm not sure Archie will inherit it.

[Loveday]

16 minutes ago, Four is Enough said:

I could be wrong but I believe the Sussex dukedom is bestowed by the monarch, not a hereditary dukedom. I'm not sure Archie will inherit it.

I googled this awhile back because I was curious, and found that yes, Archie will inherit the Sussex dukedom. Apparently, though, there's a petition circulating calling for the title to be withdrawn from Harry, but I don't know if it can be without a serious lot of bother. 

[viii]

I believe Parliament would have to step in to strip Harry of his dukedom and I’m pretty sure they have better things to do. 

[just_ordinary]

4 minutes ago, viii said:

I believe Parliament would have to step in to strip Harry of his dukedom and I’m pretty sure they have better things to do. 

That’s right. The only times this happened was on grounds of high treason. So as long as H is not marching into the UK with an army of French mercenaries that’s not going to happen (and the UK hasn’t tried people for high treason in a while Iirc).

And the government absolutely has much more pressing matters - and probably will for the foreseeable future. That’s exactly why real life politics will swallow every move of a republic.

The only way I can see this happening is as part of a bigger package with several new rules in the same direction. Maybe if it’s drawn up perfectly and can be presented as a favourable and swift action it might pass both houses alongside other smaller stuff.

[Jackie3]

7 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

The only way I can see this happening is as part of a bigger package with several new rules in the same direction. Maybe if it’s drawn up perfectly and can be presented as a favourable and swift action it might pass both houses alongside other smaller stuff.

You can only hope, right?  But Andrew can keep his Dukedom. I guess women being sex trafficked is not such a terrible thing.

 

Cost of the coronation:: 100 million pounds

Cost of Meghan Markle's salad: $18

It's an outrage! How dare she throw (her own) money around like that!  She had no right to eat a nice lunch.

I have to laugh when the press says she isn't "relevant" then write articles like this. Her lunch overshadowed the "work" of the royal family that day.

 

 

11 hours ago, klein_roeschen said:

The gist I get out of the whole security discussion is, that security is just a strawman.

I agree! Nobody in Britain dislikes Meghan and Harry. The head of security who said there were "very real threats" was just lying. Probably he just wanted attention.

Edited March 12, 2023 by Jackie3

[prayawaythefundie]

19 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

Cost of Meghan Markle's salad: $18

It's an outrage! How dare she throw (her own) money around like that!  She had no right to eat a nice lunch.

Ok, I have to ask (sorry everyone): Is this you being weird or the tabloids? Because that‘s just such an intriguing combination of ridiculous & boring.

Edited March 13, 2023 by prayawaythefundie

[Loveday]

1 hour ago, prayawaythefundie said:

Ok, I have to ask (sorry everyone): Is this you being weird or the tabloids? Because that‘s just such an intriguing combination of ridiculous & boring.

I'm beginning to suspect this troll IS the tabloids. The style of writing, the constant reading into posts something that is simply not there...it all points to former employment at the Stun or the Daily Fail, or some other sleazy bog roll of a 'newspaper.'  

[Jackie3]

Wow, Sophie Wessex struggled to curtsey to a mixed race woman. Now she's "relieved" she doesn't have to.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11848813/Sophie-Wessex-relieved-royal-ranks-means-no-longer-curtsey-Meghan.html

This explains the BRF's concern about Archie's skin color. They didn't want to bow to a mixed race man, especially one with really dark skin. Terrible optics!

I wonder what would happen if everyone stopped curtseying and bowing to the BRF. Would  the sun rise?

 

4 hours ago, prayawaythefundie said:

Ok, I have to ask (sorry everyone): Is this you being weird or the tabloids? Because that‘s just such an intriguing combination of ridiculous & boring.

Thanks for asking. The tabloids were the one costing Meghan's lunch. It's how they prove she's irrelevant, by reporting on her lunch choices.

[Mama Mia]

3 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

Wow, Sophie Wessex struggled to curtsey to a mixed race woman. Now she's "relieved" she doesn't have to.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11848813/Sophie-Wessex-relieved-royal-ranks-means-no-longer-curtsey-Meghan.html

This explains the BRF's concern about Archie's skin color. They didn't want to bow to a mixed race man, especially one with really dark skin. Terrible optics!

I wonder what would happen if everyone stopped curtseying and bowing to the BRF. Would  the sun rise?

 

Thanks for asking. The tabloids were the one costing Meghan's lunch. It's how they prove she's irrelevant, by reporting on her lunch choices.

Just out of curiosity , is $18 for a salad supposed to be expensive or cheap? Because that’s about the average cost of a big lunch /entree type salad where I am ( also California ) , at an average sit-down restaurant.