What I heard M say was the comments about the baby’s skin tone came while she was pregnant; when subsequently asked by Oprah to elaborate, H said it was before they were married. H looked taken off guard at the question from Oprah, which leads me to suspect the comment was not made at all
I also don’t believe they were ‘married’ three days before there ‘spectacle for the world’. It is my belief that a UK married requires two witnesses and must be held in a places accessible to the public (for any objections) Furthermore, I highly doubt they have the Archbishop of Canterbury on speed dial to pop over for a threesome in the back yard!
yes, that was weird, but privilege, in the first sense, means your rights aren’t any one else’s - you get to order people around who are high-ranked to everyone else. On the other hand, they’re low ranking royals.
Don’t know whether it’s plausible in that context or not.
It should be easy to confirm (or not)
I don’t know how to edit my post, so adding on another - sorry!
I found it interesting to note M said she and Eugenia were friends before she met Harry - well, that’s interesting…even if we believe M knew nothing about H before they met, you don’t think she’d call Eugenia and ask her for the lowdown on her cousin? You don’t think M would Google Harry? I’m sorry, that makes no sense to me, especially as she later claimed she Googled the National Anthem Heck, I’d Google the pest contoller before I’d let him/her in my house, nevermind somebody I’d let in my bed!
The pre-wedding wedding.
I totally believe the “racist” comment. It’s quite possible whoever said it didn’t even realize it’s racist to wonder about skin tone or worry the baby will be “too dark” (because some consider being racist is either being a UKIP lout or thinking negatively about Asian subjects). Being a royal means you’re a superior being so dark&superior would probably be hard to compute for some (relatives or courtiers). But in the context of the Palace, absolutely.
I say that 100% the person that made the comment about the children’s skin did not understand that Meghan and Harry thought it was racist.
There was a snippet from Harry that the family told him that they couldn’t (didn’t want) to support Meghan and that she should keep working as an actress. I would have like to have heard more of that conversation. Is this something that the “new monarchy” wants? That minor royals (Harry and Meghan) will still work like the other royal cousins? (Like Andrew’s and Anne’s children) so Meghan should continue to earn a living and Harry should pursue a vocation? Were they saying that the family would not support them in the future or that is the plan? I was very confused by that statement. Harry seemed very put out about that.
Meghan seems very angry about the pulling of Harry’s security and paying for her children’s security costs. Do Princess Margaret’s children have security that is paid for? Or is it different for her since the line of succession goes through males? (Although that has also changed recently).
Something else that was questioned, but a full answer never given was about Meghan’s popularity on the South African tour. They said it was a great success, but the firm wasn’t happy about it. They skirted the reason being jealousy, but then never delved into it more. I think Oprah asked Shy, and there was no opinion really.
So what could be the possible reason for the Palace not to be thrilled with that success. We’re they wanting her to fail? But why? And who would be jealous? William. So many questions left unanswered.
I don’t think the royals control what’s in the tabloids at all. If they did all those really damaging stories would have been buried. Remember Fergies toe sucking or being called The Duchess of Pork or Charles’s phone call with Camilla and wanting to be a tampon. That was horrendous. British people hated him after that.
Another thing I don’t understand is the power of the Tabloids over the British people. If they are known to be full of lies, why are they taken seriously? We have the stupid Inquirer, bu I know no one who reads it. I think my Elderly Aunt before she died.
So, I don’t understand why they hold so much weight and why the royals can’t just ignore them. It’s not like people are throw ing tomatoes at them when they walk some red carpet or show up,fir charity events.
They had to be successful but not so successful that they overshadowed those who uprank them. William may have been jealous but with an institution this old, often it’s not personal but institutional: the keepers of the protocol (relatives, William, courtiers, ill-wishers) may have felt the lower-ranked couple had gottent too big for their britches and should be brought down a peg.
Actually just returned here to post as I read a summary by Dr.Atwall discussing Princess Gouramma, Duleep Singh, and Sarah Bonetta Forbes, all “adopted” by/into the Royal Family in Victorian times. Look them up it’s actually quite interesting. Dr.Atwall thinks Meghan Markle reminds her of Princess Gouramma (although, spoiler, 19th century princesses of color don’t end up in a mansion with a prince and a few million).
I’m not sure what at this point will make them feel comfortable or protected by the Royal family. They seem to have a lot of resentments and fractured relationships. And Meghan seems to have poor relationships with her family of origin as well, except for her mother . Most people have some family problems but they don’t get played out on an international stage! Going on Oprah is certainly guaranteed to keep the squabbles going .
She’s fame-hungry and he’s a fool. She’s trying to channel Diana, but she’s nothing like her. She is absolutely calculating and is not some naive 19-year-old.
She’s a mediocre actress (unlike Grace Kelly) and he’s “prince of nothing” (Bill Maher). Without their connection to the British royal family, they are nobodies. They are sawing off the branch on which they sit. “We want our privacy, but pay attention to us!”
I saw the piece of the Oprah interview again and Meghan actually said that the issue was about the flower girl dresses and I didn’t hear her mention tights, but I may have missed that. But she didn’t go into detail about what actually transpired.
Apparently it is protocol for maids of honor (flower girls in US parlance) to wear stockings at royal weddings. It’s a tradition of archaic dress. The thing is, it wasn’t “Meghan’s” wedding. It was a public display and ritual occasion paid for by the UK taxpayers, ultimately. I also read that there was an issue with the fitting of the dress. Who knows. In any case, the whole interview was in extremely poor taste and I think Harry will live to regret the day that he trashed his family on primetime TV to appease his wife. It certainly won’t help his children.
The Queen has 9 great grandchildren. 6 of them have no titles; the only 3 that do are the Cambridge children, William’s offspring. None of the rest have publicly funded security. Why did they think their child deserved more?
Agree. Can’t see how this helps his children. I thought it was interesting that he seemed surprised that his father cut off some of his money and that he had to dip into the millions his mother left him to support his family! I always liked him and wish him well, but come on, you’re a grown man.
Yes, the tone deafness of it. Expecting people to pity him, especially in this time when people are unemployed and hungry. I think he got sucked into celebrity la-la-land. His own mother would not have been so tone-deaf. I always kind of liked Harry because he inherited his mother’s common touch, but he appears to have lost it.
