Harry and Meghan 15

[prayawaythefundie]

1 hour ago, TN-peach said:

Harry is back in town for Court

 

https://news.sky.com/story/prince-harry-arrives-at-high-court-for-phone-tapping-and-privacy-case-12843423

 

It annoys me that he can come back to the UK for court but not to see his dying grandparents.

Not sure if that‘s fair. He flew to Balmoral instantly and I wouldn‘t bet on the royal family keeping him totally up-to-date on his grandparents health.

Edited March 27, 2023 by prayawaythefundie

[just_ordinary]

I don’t see the problem with the times around their death, but I do see some hypocrisy in saying you are so close, especially as he loved to emphasise his great personal relationship with HMTQ and then not trying your best to meet her when she was already frail but not dead quite yet. Her health was speculated on for the whole year of the jubilee. And it’s clear it’s not easy to just pop in for tea, and I do believe that H got some extra hoops at that point. But if they really wanted to, in the light of her deteriorating health - which was obvious to everyone with eyes- they could have arranged for a longer stay in the UK to make sure she got to meet her great granddaughter named after her. And maybe with the knowledge that this might be the last time to see her.
Now, I don’t think H&M are in the position to do all the bending to the rules of the other side. It’s always to two to tango. But in my experiences, sometimes it just isn’t worth it. I think they had a right to think she would have found time for tea to meet the newest addition over some visit to some stables. But HMTQ had also the right to ask them to come when she felt physically up for it, when it fit with her duties and to have no pictures (that H&M could use. I am absolutely in favour of pictures that would belong to the RF and H&M got them for their private album. It’s not L’s fault and she now won’t have this picture.). I am truly sad this last meeting couldn’t happen. 

I also don’t think it’s outrageous if H&M want the first meeting between their daughter (and basically A as well, he probably remembers nothing) and their paternal grandfather and maybe aunt, uncle and cousins on their turf. The Windsors can travel in secret. They do it at least once a year. I would expect both sides to give in a little. The royals travelling to the US, H&M making sure to truly shut up about it and both parties being a bit more flexible around dates. And for the record, Charles should have attended the christening of his grandchild. If he can pop into France for three days for business, he can pop over the pond for this. Yes, security. Yes, carbon footprint. It would not be the first nor the last time for a 24h round trip.

A lot of the issues at play seem to stem from hurt feelings over the preferential treatment of his brother over him and now of his niece and nephew over his own children. Which is obviously fine in terms of royal business but not in private. H seems to have a hard time to distinguish between those two and to be fair sometimes it’s impossible. 

It’s a really sad situation for the whole family. I still hope in 15-20 years they might rekindle of some sorts. Relationship seldom stay the same but are more fluid. 

Edited March 28, 2023 by just_ordinary

[prayawaythefundie]

Wasn‘t it reported that the two Lilibets did meet last summer during the jubilee?

Edited March 28, 2023 by prayawaythefundie

[Coconut Flan]

I think it's ludicrous to expect the 70 something year old grandparents to make a 24 hour flying trip for the christening.  That would be ridiculous to me even if they weren't the BRF with diaries planned months in advance.  My children would get an earful from me should they expect that of me and I only live 150 miles away.  Harry and Meghan IMO should have visited the queen at Balmoral.  They were the ones who moved away and if Harry had the great relationship he thought he had, he would have.  It doesn't take much to realize your grandfather who is approaching 100 and has been hospitalized should be visited if you ever plan to see him again or that your 96 year old grandmother is looking like a retirement community grandma who gets taken out only for Sunday dinner and it's time to make one or two more visits.  

Edited March 28, 2023 by Coconut Flan

[viii]

3 hours ago, prayawaythefundie said:

Wasn‘t it reported that the two Lilibets did meet last summer during the jubilee?

Yes, I think Harry said in his book that his daughter did meet the queen. 

[DalmatianCat]

7 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

I don’t see the problem with the times around their death, but I do see some hypocrisy in saying you are so close, especially as he loved to emphasise his great personal relationship with HMTQ and then not trying your best to meet her when she was already frail but not dead quite yet. Her health was speculated on for the whole year of the jubilee. And it’s clear it’s not easy to just pop in for tea, and I do believe that H got some extra hoops at that point. But if they really wanted to, in the light of her deteriorating health - which was obvious to everyone with eyes- they could have arranged for a longer stay in the UK to make sure she got to meet her great granddaughter named after her. And maybe with the knowledge that this might be the last time to see her.
Now, I don’t think H&M are in the position to do all the bending to the rules of the other side. It’s always to two to tango. But in my experiences, sometimes it just isn’t worth it. I think they had a right to think she would have found time for tea to meet the newest addition over some visit to some stables. But HMTQ had also the right to ask them to come when she felt physically up for it, when it fit with her duties and to have no pictures (that H&M could use. I am absolutely in favour of pictures that would belong to the RF and H&M got them for their private album. It’s not L’s fault and she now won’t have this picture.). I am truly sad this last meeting couldn’t happen. 

I also don’t think it’s outrageous if H&M want the first meeting between their daughter (and basically A as well, he probably remembers nothing) and their paternal grandfather and maybe aunt, uncle and cousins on their turf. The Windsors can travel in secret. They do it at least once a year. I would expect both sides to give in a little. The royals travelling to the US, H&M making sure to truly shut up about it and both parties being a bit more flexible around dates. And for the record, Charles should have attended the christening of his grandchild. If he can pop into France for three days for business, he can pop over the pond for this. Yes, security. Yes, carbon footprint. It would not be the first nor the last time for a 24h round trip.

A lot of the issues at play seem to stem from hurt feelings over the preferential treatment of his brother over him and now of his niece and nephew over his own children. Which is obviously fine in terms of royal business but not in private. H seems to have a hard time to distinguish between those two and to be fair sometimes it’s impossible. 

It’s a really sad situation for the whole family. I still hope in 15-20 years they might rekindle of some sorts. Relationship seldom stay the same but are more fluid. 

A general impression I had from Spare was that Harry wasn’t nearly as close to his grandmother as he’s purported himself to be…or to anyone else in the family. Since Harry is not the most reliable narrator it was hard to distinguish if they’d used to be closer or he’d just always wished/imagined they were closer. Even his story about how he wanted to be able to talk to his grandmother privately before he left the family, he made it out to be that the advisors cancelled the meeting and they were somehow responsible for it. In actuality, the Queen could have just decided she didn’t want to have to deal with Harry and asked her advisors to cancel the meeting because she preferred to spend the time with her husband and doing what she felt up to in the last few years of her life and figured Harry and Charles could sort their issues out later. No one really knows.

[just_ordinary]

37 minutes ago, viii said:

Yes, I think Harry said in his book that his daughter did meet the queen. 

Right. I kind of forgot about that. But I had the impression an earlier meeting was wanted. 

[Jackie3]

If Meghan had made a “joke” about hanging Louis over the balcony, the internet would be in an uproar. And with good reason. 
 

When an old, morbidly obese white man jokes with other old white people about hanging Archie over the balcony, the world is silent. 
 

Poor Archie. What a world he’s growing up in. As he plays with his Duplos and his trains, he has no idea that grownups are making jokes about him, and hoping his mom and dad fail.

 

On 3/28/2023 at 7:55 AM, prayawaythefundie said:

Wasn‘t it reported that the two Lilibets did meet last summer during the jubilee?

Why does it matter if they met? One Lilibet is dead and the other is too young to remember any meeting. 
 

 

 

I know it’s thought  that H and  M are “irrelevant.” However, this group is certainly doing their best to keep them relevant! So much interest in the minute details of their lives!!

 

Meghan just won another award  for her work on Archetypes, She must be bursting with pride and happiness. Her life is really working out. Her podcast content has been well-received indeed. 

The award she won is called the Gracie Award. 
 

 

Samantha Markle’s defamation lawsuit against Meghan has been thrown out of court. This is turning out to be a great week for. H&M.

 

On 3/31/2023 at 12:54 PM, Coconut Flan said:

I like the description of strange relationship with reality:

https://nypost.com/2023/03/30/meghan-markle-has-strange-relationship-to-reality-insiders/

I like that the author never met Meghan, or any of the royals. She creates her own reality about Meghan, a total stranger. 

Quote

She described Markle as a “striver” who wanted to be a “household name” and rise above her  family’s “shaggy-dog-tale” life.

Why do we criticize ambitious women in 2023?

I think it's great to be a "striver." And it's fine to want to be a "household name." Good for her!

There's so much sexism in the world today--THIS is the worst we can say about. a woman?

 

If we must describe ambitious women as "bad", Queen Camilla was the most ambitious social-climber of all.

 

On 3/27/2023 at 11:49 AM, prayawaythefundie said:

I‘m confused: Did Kate lose private secretaries or press secretaries? Or is that basically the same job?

Side note: The Sussexes quit right before the start of the pandemic. Whatever the reason for them losing staff when they were still working royals, it wasn‘t Covid.

The reports of high turnover continued after the pandemic began. In other words, after their move to Montecito they continued to be so relevant that people were paying attention to their staff turnover.

Given that it's Meghan, you'll probably want to attribute it to bossiness or satanic worship. In reality, there were probably multiple reasons, perhaps covid was one of them.

 

On 4/2/2023 at 12:30 PM, nelliebelle1197 said:

The writer the article is discussing is a well- known reporter at Vanity Fair who has covered Meghan since she met Harry. She has interviewed her and her family. So not some random "Lady Colin Campbell" faker.

You think you'd meet a person, before you wrote an article saying she was "warped" or had a "strange sense of relationship with reality."  I don't see any evidence that MM and this author has ever been in the same room together.

This author has profited off Meghan Markle for many years. She even hunted down icky people like Samantha Markle, who was desperately glad to talk to her (or anyone!), I am sure. Meghan has paid her rent for a long time.

But I haven't seen a link that proving she's ever spoken to MM. Do you have one? (I'm not saying it exists or doesn't exist, I'd just like to see it)

Yes, this woman has grifted off Meghan for many years.

 

On 4/2/2023 at 8:18 PM, QuiverFullofBooks said:

Lady Colin clearly has it in for Meghan, but she’s not fake. She should stop using her ex-husband’s title since they were married for five minutes ages ago, but it’s legit.

Legit in what way? Does being a "Lady" mean you know more about Meghan Markle? It simply means you are member of the British aristocracy, which doesnt impress many people nowadays. Does it impress you?

 

On 4/2/2023 at 12:30 PM, nelliebelle1197 said:

The writer the article is discussing is a well- known reporter at Vanity Fair who has covered Meghan since she met Harry. She has interviewed her and her family. So not some random "Lady Colin Campbell" faker.

The writer has never met Meghan Markle.

 

Meghan has been awarded the Women of Vision Award by the Ms Foundation. It will be awarded by Gloria Steinam. It's great their charitable work is being recognized.

 

On 4/3/2023 at 1:23 AM, hoipolloi said:

They are wildly false. 

Sheʻs a lying asshat and a major grifter, making money off her BRF fables, lawsuits, and the suckers who subscribe to her social media channels.

So many people make money off the BRF. Look at Robert Jobson--first he writes a book about Archie's birth, then he jokes about holding him over the balcony rails. 

Edited March 29, 2023 by Jackie3

[Coconut Flan]

I like the description of strange relationship with reality:

https://nypost.com/2023/03/30/meghan-markle-has-strange-relationship-to-reality-insiders/

[nelliebelle1197]

On 3/31/2023 at 12:54 PM, Coconut Flan said:

I like the description of strange relationship with reality:

https://nypost.com/2023/03/30/meghan-markle-has-strange-relationship-to-reality-insiders/

The writer the article is discussing is a well- known reporter at Vanity Fair who has covered Meghan since she met Harry. She has interviewed her and her family. So not some random "Lady Colin Campbell" faker.

[viii]

Spoiler

“She was desperate for the press to be interested in her,” she said, describing Markle and Harry’s battles with the press as “an ace up the hole” for the couple because any press manipulation that they themselves engage in is now “justified.”

Ding ding ding. 

[QuiverFullofBooks]

7 hours ago, nelliebelle1197 said:

So not some random "Lady Colin Campbell" faker.

Lady Colin clearly has it in for Meghan, but she’s not fake. She should stop using her ex-husband’s title since they were married for five minutes ages ago, but it’s legit.

[nelliebelle1197]

1 hour ago, QuiverFullofBooks said:

Lady Colin clearly has it in for Meghan, but she’s not fake. She should stop using her ex-husband’s title since they were married for five minutes ages ago, but it’s legit.

She is a fake. She is not connected in the circles she claims. She is not even British. She lies about easily disproven stuff - she claims her adopted sons were childhood playmates of William and Harry yet the boys, who call themselves “counts” when they have no titles, were born around 1993, far too young to have been friends of the princes. Her royal “bios” are chocked with stuff she just made up out of thin air.

Edited April 3, 2023 by nelliebelle1197

[hoipolloi]

3 hours ago, nelliebelle1197 said:

Her royal “bios” are chocked with stuff she just made up out of thin air.

They are wildly false. 

Sheʻs a lying asshat and a major grifter, making money off her BRF fables, lawsuits, and the suckers who subscribe to her social media channels.

Edited April 3, 2023 by hoipolloi

[tabitha2]

Finally we know. According to the news outlets Harry will Attend the coronation and Meghan will stay home with the children. 

[Coconut Flan]

It seems none of their alleged demands are being met.  

[tabitha2]

Because their demands were unrealistic entitled bullshit. 

[Jackie3]

11 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

Finally we know. According to the news outlets Harry will Attend the coronation and Meghan will stay home with the children. 

If this couple is truly irrelevant, why were you waiting? Who cares?

 

11 hours ago, Coconut Flan said:

It seems none of their alleged demands are being met.  

 

The "demands" were reported by "royal experts" not the palace.

We don't know what these "demands" were.

Harry certainly has the right to make demands if he wants to--it's the BRF, it's not God. It's called setting boundaries.

We don't know if these demands (if any) were met or not.

 

10 hours ago, Mama Mia said:

Sad. I wish he was taking the kids at least. I know they are tiny, so it doesn’t really matter, but it’s so tough on families when there is extreme conflict between spouses/ siblings / in-laws and it negatively impacts ALL  the relationships. At the end of it this is just any other family melodrama, just with insane amounts of bling and power and extra bizarre dynamics. 

Can you imagine what the British media would do to those two little children? Archie has already been called a chimp. Haters make up "funny" names for them. Other haters deny they exist. One journalist made a "joke" about dangling Archie over the balcony. 

Harry is right to protect them.

Charles could easily have made it much safer for the children to visit by issuing a statement to the media. He did not. 

The kids will get to know Eugenie's children. As for the other royals, nothing is stopping them from visiting in California if family connection is so important. Travel works both ways.

 

Meghan has made her last bow to the BRF. I doubt she'll ever do so again. She's free.

 

Meghan said "no" to their big party (joining a rather large group of people).

It's like she gave them the finger.

This is a huge PR disaster for the royal family. They look just terrible.

[Mama Mia]

1 hour ago, tabitha2 said:

Finally we know. According to the news outlets Harry will Attend the coronation and Meghan will stay home with the children. 

Sad. I wish he was taking the kids at least. I know they are tiny, so it doesn’t really matter, but it’s so tough on families when there is extreme conflict between spouses/ siblings / in-laws and it negatively impacts ALL  the relationships. At the end of it this is just any other family melodrama, just with insane amounts of bling and power and extra bizarre dynamics. 

[viii]

6 hours ago, Coconut Flan said:

It seems none of their alleged demands are being met.  

We know absolutely none of this. It’s so annoying to watch people run with speculation and clickbait like it’s the truth, just because they hate H&M. 

[Lollipopgirl]

I think this is probably the best solution to a difficult situation. The fact that it’s Archie’s birthday provides a good back door for Meghan. Apparently Harry’s making a flying visit for the 1pm ceremony only so he won’t be away for long.

[prayawaythefundie]

Well, what difference does it make? Things are really bad between the Sussexes and the working royals and the world knows. Nobody would be fooled by any smiles on camera and if there ever is a chance for reconciliation, this won‘t be it. Meghan is right in staying home with the kids and celebrating Archie‘s birthday and it‘s quite possible for Harry to feel he should have done the same afterwards. I think his attendance was what took so long to decide on.

[Jackie3]

Archie's birthday is just an excuse. Harry and Meghan don't want to expose her to abuse. Because the tabloids would have abused her relentlessly, if she had gone. Why would she go? It's great she had the agency to set such a boundary.

 

It seems that Meghan has said "no" to the most powerful family in the UK. Good for her! I bet she will never curtsy to another British monarch.

 

This turn of events is really sad for the media.

Although they've been saying they didn't want her to come, they really did. They could make bank over photos and articles about her. Her "no, thanks" has cost them a fortune.

 

 

On 4/12/2023 at 12:01 PM, Mama Mia said:

Sad. I wish he was taking the kids at least. I know they are tiny, so it doesn’t really matter, but it’s so tough on families when there is extreme conflict between spouses/ siblings / in-laws and it negatively impacts ALL  the relationships. At the end of it this is just any other family melodrama, just with insane amounts of bling and power and extra bizarre dynamics. 

1. They weren't invited

2. Meghan would want to be present for Archie's birthday

3. The British media has called Archie a "chimp" and talked about holding him over the balcony.

4. Security

5. He doesn't want to give the press photos of his kids to sell. Nor would I!

6. Travel works both ways. The royal cousins could easily be flown to California

 

[just_ordinary]

It’s really a sad and messy situation. I don’t think this visit will help to defuse the situation. H will feel isolated and W&C will think he is ever so petulant and dramatic. It bound to hurt. I have to say, H not attending might actually be more helpful to not rub it in for both parties. Maybe some real distance would help. There is nothing wrong to reduce contact to birthday and Christmas cards/calls and a little something for the children for some time. H still seems so lost regarding his professional future and what course his life is going to take. When he finally arrives at a good place he might be able to get over the hurt and injuries (justified or not). C and especially W should also get their act together. It’s ok not to want stuff to get out if you talk in private but they are far from innocent in the whole mess. Some time apart and a new start in some tears, with a bit of a clean slate should be possible if everyone involved is ready to leave things behind. It might never be as close as before, but maybe more distance could actually be a good think and less to an amicable relationship on the same level? Away from the royal business. Father and son instead of monarch and number 5 in line. Brothers instead of heir and spare. If H gets his act together he could he really happy outside the whole royal world. He has a freedom W&C will never have. Maybe one day he will realise that hanging on the titles is actually holding him back. (If he can start inventing himself anew that is)

[Jackie3]

34 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

It’s really a sad and messy situation. I don’t think this visit will help to defuse the situation. H will feel isolated and W&C will think he is ever so petulant and dramatic. It bound to hurt. I have to say, H not attending might actually be more helpful to not rub it in for both parties. Maybe some real distance would help. There is nothing wrong to reduce contact to birthday and Christmas cards/calls and a little something for the children for some time. H still seems so lost regarding his professional future and what course his life is going to take. When he finally arrives at a good place he might be able to get over the hurt and injuries (justified or not). C and especially W should also get their act together. It’s ok not to want stuff to get out if you talk in private but they are far from innocent in the whole mess. Some time apart and a new start in some tears, with a bit of a clean slate should be possible if everyone involved is ready to leave things behind. It might never be as close as before, but maybe more distance could actually be a good think and less to an amicable relationship on the same level? Away from the royal business. Father and son instead of monarch and number 5 in line. Brothers instead of heir and spare. If H gets his act together he could he really happy outside the whole royal world. He has a freedom W&C will never have. Maybe one day he will realise that hanging on the titles is actually holding him back. (If he can start inventing himself anew that is)

 

People talk a lot about him holding onto the titles. Is it hypocritical? Maybe, maybe not.. But he's certainly within his right to hold onto them. They are probably a part of his identity at this point. 

I mean, the royal family is constantly hypocritcal, and few people seem to mind. Flying to an enviornmental conference in a private jet? Using helicopters to move from one home to another? Quite hypocritical. Harry is just continuing an old family tradition.

Harry's titles actually have created his a million-dollar security need. The titles enable him to get money to meet that need. That's reason enough to hold onto them.

You can estrange yourself from a toxic family and still claim an inheritance. In many ways, if you have endured abuse, you have even more right to that inheritiance. That's how I see the Sussex's position. They've been hounded by the press for years. Why not keep one of the things they got from being royal?