Relationships between Members of the British Royal Family


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Their turn in the barrel? You missed the part in the story that said they alternate years. Harry didn’t attend last years board meeting.

Court Circular 7 December 2017 Kensington Palace

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, Joint Patrons, the Royal Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry, today held a Board Meeting at Kensington Palace.
 
Last edited:
You all remember, the Cambridges had two engagements on Tuesday and flew to Cyprus and back for an engagement Wednesday.

I'm not surprised they didn't plan to attend Thursday's Foundation events especially as Harry and Meghan were attending.

I don't doubt that William and Harry don't always see eye to eye on things but to believe they are so estranged that they can't attend the same event is ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
And just to be 100 accurate, Meghan didn’t attend the board meeting either. As KP said this meeting dealt with issues pertaining to Harry. Meghan did go to the party afterwards though.
 
Let's all be a bit logical here. As far as Harry and Meghan's courtship, we have to remember just how good these two were at doing it under the radar without anyone knowing their comings and goings. The press couldn't snuffle them out, get pictures or even get a decent story to print about them. Where were the reports of this "feud" back when it was happening with Harry wanting to be engaged?

Remember how surprised we all were when we found out that Harry and Meghan had been spending a lot of time together at Nottingham Cottage for quite a while with no one knowing? Everything really was kept quite private. Now, all of a sudden over a year later, these stories are coming out. Where from and what reliable sources is what I'd like to know.

And just to be 100 accurate, Meghan didn’t attend the board meeting either. As KP said this meeting dealt with issues pertaining to Harry. Meghan did go to the party afterwards though.

This makes a whole lot of sense. Although all four of them are patrons of the Royal Foundation, they each have their own separate areas of interests and projects that have their own separate management boards and staff. The Royal Foundation is the big umbrella that covers all of them. I'd never expect to see William at a meeting for the Invictus Games as that's primarily Harry's project.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If they were disgruntled before about having access to Meghan, they ain't seen nothing yet.*
THIS! I would not be surprised if the birth and christening of their child/children will be private and closed to the media with only a few official photos of the events.:whistling:

As a matter of fact, with their penchant for complete privacy, we might jusk wake up one day with the child being born and no one would be the wiser!:lol:
 
Yes Osipi, that's what I'm afraid of. More disgruntlement about reduced access which will result in more anti-Meghan articles in the tabloids that millions read.

Especially as that article was accompanied by another one containing a thinly disguised barb about an ancestor of Meghan's, Mary Bird, having worked as a servant in Windsor Castle. There's also a third article about uncomfortable body language between the four at the February Heads Together Symposium when the possibility of arguments was mentioned by the interviewer.
 
Last edited:
Let's all be a bit logical here. As far as Harry and Meghan's courtship, we have to remember just how good these two were at doing it under the radar without anyone knowing their comings and goings. The press couldn't snuffle them out, get pictures or even get a decent story to print about them. Where were the reports of this "feud" back when it was happening with Harry wanting to be engaged?

Remember how surprised we all were when we found out that Harry and Meghan had been spending a lot of time together at Nottingham Cottage for quite a while with no one knowing? Everything really was kept quite private. Now, all of a sudden over a year later, these stories are coming out. Where from and what reliable sources is what I'd like to know.

.

This basically. The timing of all these various version of this feud is what’s troubling. Where was all these tension stories when it was happening? It certainly wasn’t for the lack of trying to dig for information from the press. In fact, we were told the exact opposite in regard to some of the stories back then. And now all of sudden the Sussexes are moving to Frogmore and these supposed sources are talking when they’ve been silent for two years? It’s hard to buy it.
 
Interesting article there by Emily. She didn't really paint anyone in a favorable light. Heck she downright insulted their intelligence. Just seems to me the press is determined to make this rivalry a thing.
 
This basically. The timing of all these various version of this feud is what’s troubling. Where was all these tension stories when it was happening? It certainly wasn’t for the lack of trying to dig for information from the press. In fact, we were told the exact opposite in regard to some of the stories back then. And now all of sudden the Sussexes are moving to Frogmore and these supposed sources are talking when they’ve been silent for two years? It’s hard to buy it.

I agree, it is extremely odd that all this is exploding into print right now. If all this drama were going on all this time, there would have had to have been some hint of it sooner than the last few weeks.

I've said before-even IF William counseled his brother to not rush his relationship with Meghan, now that Harry is married and has a child on the way it is insane to believe William is trying to break up the Sussexes' marriage. That makes no sense whatsoever.
 
Last edited:
That was included in the palace denial that I referenced , that they switch off. The point is the rags are dovetailing events to fit a narrative.
 
Y'know what all this reminds me of? The behavior of the press at the time of Diana's death. Clamoring for the Queen to show herself and for the family to be out and about in public to "console" them. No respect at all for a family in shock and deep mourning.

Perhaps they figure if they throw enough dirt around about the interactions between the members of the BRF, it'll spur them on to playing puppets for the press to prove otherwise. To me, that's pure bullying. Instead of stealing their lunch money, they're stealing their private lives and interactions.

It ain't going to work.
 
Interesting article there by Emily. She didn't really paint anyone in a favorable light. Heck she downright insulted their intelligence. Just seems to me the press is determined to make this rivalry a thing.

The press haven’t taken too well to the fact that Harry is protective of Meghan and they’re being kept at a distance. William has done the same thing to Catherine and the media didn’t take well to that either. The press couldn’t wait for Harry to get married, so they could create this idea of friction between the couples.

Right now, veteran royal watchers aren’t buying it -rightful so- but after a while the stories will start to stick.
 
Y'know what all this reminds me of? The behavior of the press at the time of Diana's death. Clamoring for the Queen to show herself and for the family to be out and about in public to "console" them. No respect at all for a family in shock and deep mourning.

Perhaps they figure if they throw enough dirt around about the interactions between the members of the BRF, it'll spur them on to playing puppets for the press to prove otherwise. To me, that's pure bullying. Instead of stealing their lunch money, they're stealing their private lives and interactions.

It ain't going to work.

Yes, I think the BRF learned from their experiences with the bullying press in 1997 and won't be bullied again. If any press wanted more access, this is the opposite of what they should have done.
 
Yes, I think the BRF learned from their experiences with the bullying press in 1997 and won't be bullied again. If any press wanted more access, this is the opposite of what they should have done.

Yep, the press want more access to Meghan. They’re not getting it so they’ve decided to make Meghan the bad girl. Although she haven’t done anything to deserve this kind of treatment.
 
I definitely think right now the press is trying to force some kind of reaction from the royals. They think if they trash them all enough that they will feel the need to do some damage control and maybe we might get a "Royal Four" engagement or the ladies might have another "Duchess Day Out" or something to that effect. I don't think it will work.
 
I definitely think right now the press is trying to force some kind of reaction from the royals. They think if they trash them all enough that they will feel the need to do some damage control and maybe we might get a "Royal Four" engagement or the ladies might have another "Duchess Day Out" or something to that effect. I don't think it will work.

I don’t like the royals playing at the presses low level, but I don’t think it would hurt for some Royal Fab Four appearances to happen. We might not get that though. Just the family pre-Christmas lunch and the Christmas church appearance.
 
I definitely think right now the press is trying to force some kind of reaction from the royals. They think if they trash them all enough that they will feel the need to do some damage control and maybe we might get a "Royal Four" engagement or the ladies might have another "Duchess Day Out" or something to that effect. I don't think it will work.

I hope it doesn't work. Or the press will see this as a successful formula to getting their way. It will encourage them to do the same thing in the future, with escalation. It's like a misbehaving child, you don't reinforce their bad behavior.
 
I hope it doesn't work. Or the press will see this as a successful formula to getting their way. It will encourage them to do the same thing in the future, with escalation. It's like a misbehaving child, you don't reinforce their bad behavior.

That’s a very good point too.
 
I definitely think right now the press is trying to force some kind of reaction from the royals. They think if they trash them all enough that they will feel the need to do some damage control and maybe we might get a "Royal Four" engagement or the ladies might have another "Duchess Day Out" or something to that effect. I don't think it will work.

This might be the first time it is happening to the fab four but this has always been the press reaction to Meghan whenever she doesn't appear from the public eye for more than a week and a half and there are no future engagement announced.

The press doesn't quiet down during the time Meghan is absent they become louder and hostile throwing one negative story after an other almost in a attempt to smoke her out. They fall silent when she appears and starts up again when she rests.

I don't think it's a coincidence that the stories started right after the tour. The press had 16 straight days of Meghan where they were able to publish stories and pictures about her on tour which were likely very profitable for the papers and since then it has only been mostly private engagements so what they are doing is hyping up a big story for that the next time they are seen together (Christmas) so they are creating a bigger demand for those pictures and that story to make up for that.

Meghan has gone through this cycle and it hasn't made her change her schedule yet so I doubt the other royals will either.
 
Last edited:
This might be the first time it is happening to the fab four but this has always been the press reaction to Meghan whenever she doesn't appear from the public eye for more than a week and a half and there are no future engagement announced.

The press doesn't quiet down during the time Meghan is absent they become louder and hostile throwing one negative story after an other almost in a attempt to smoke her out. They fall silent when she appears and starts up again when she rests.

I don't think it's a coincidence that the stories started right after the tour. The press had 16 straight days of Meghan where they were able to publish stories and pictures about her on tour which were likely very profitable for the papers and since then it has only been mostly private engagements so what they are doing is hyping up a big story for that the next time they are seen together (Christmas) so they are creating a bigger demand for those pictures and that story to make up for that.

Meghan has gone through this cycle and it hasn't made her change her schedule yet so I doubt the other royals will either.

I did notice that with the Markle debacle during the Summer silly season.
 
The tabloid press follow royal events closely enough to know that attendance at the board meeting is alternated between William & Harry. Even if they didn't know or had forgotten, it would be easy to check. It's obvious that there's an agenda against Meghan & they are pursuing it by looking for anything to cast her as trouble & a toxic influence on the family.
 
As well, the Royal reporters know that Harry is fiery and protective of his wife. They might be hoping to spark a response from him on the lines of the letter of November 2016. Something they can chew over in numerous articles over Xmas and the New Year.
 
The vile U.K. tabloid media targeted Meghan for two years straight, continue to do so and even large sections of the so-called reputable media outlets/reporters have joined in. But it’s incredibly naive not to be believe that the latest spate of attacks aren’t insider jobs. I struggle to believe the relationship between certain members of the BRF and it’s newest member is as cosy and pleasant as some would like to believe. Whether some admit it or not Meghan is a strong biracial woman of colour with well established views and her own background in humanitarian work. And a black mother. I feel Harry marrying someone so completely different to the norm really unsettled quite a few members and caused some disquiet during the courtship. The anger from within is only now spilling out into the open these past few weeks. Yes, the Windsors have never been short of a few divorced members and remarriages, and the family’s past and recent histories are littered with brides from different countries. Also, there’s the odd actress married into the firm long before Meghan (Harry dated an aristocratic one, too).. But all have one thing in common which much maligned Meghan doesn’t. Others may have been picked apart in the past. But that was/is nothing on the scale and intensity to what’s been happening since. Not on the same level, not even a minute bit. Remember, Meghan as a royal bride hasn’t committed adultery within her marriage, she’s not rubbishing royal family members in the media. Not having her toes sucked by lackeys either. She’s not a Windsor family member or bride with controversial racial views or behaviour. Nor is she a royal with global suspicion or accusations of controversial disgusting activities. What’s happening to her is in my view completely unacceptable and unjustified.

I know that in some quarters before the H/M wedding it was predicted the marriage wouldn’t last, and some still repeat the same. Thing is, Meghan is a strong individual but she’s only human and experiences emotions as well. If things do go wrong and I pray not, IMHO it will be more a case of powerful influential people deliberately making life within her marriage/royal life so miserable and unbearable to cope.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As I have said on this forum before....it would be incredibly naive to think that Meghan as a biracial, American, divorced actress would be wholeheartedly accepted by ALL of the courtiers and staff of the royal family and even some members of the family itself.

That just would not be realistic. All people have their own prejudices, biases and beliefs. Remember that staff especially work for the royals for decades!

I would imagine that SOME courtiers and staff see themselves as being more royal than the royals...just like some royal watchers!:D

When he was single, Harry preferred a certain type. What's more...his two most serious girlfriends could have been twins - WHITE, blonde, blue eyes from wealthy/aristocratic backgrounds.

Meghan was a SHOCK! I distinctly remember when the relationship became publicly known, Meghan was written off as Harry's latest fling. Even when he released that unprecedented statement, there were a lot of people who still refused to believe that the relationship was serious.

I am sure that there are SOME family members , courtiers and staff who are absolutely incredulous that Harry married Meghan.

People are human beings. It is what it is.
 
Last edited:
Anyone with a lick of sense would of caught on that when Harry released the statement that this was not a fling.

As far as the men in grey go...they are lucky it's not 500 years ago. They didn't want the Queen to marry Phillip either.

I don't think there was any way that Harry married Meghan if his close immediate family did not get along with or weren't okay with the idea. I think there was a good reason he told the Queen and DoE first before anyone about Meghan. All of them have been very public in their support of Meghan from the start. William did not have to release a statement in support of Harry ... none of them had to make the various little gestures that have been made to show support.

They are a close family and they need the support of one another...they all work together and will work together the rest of their lives ...seems like I recall either Harry or William saying (at the event with the 4 of them last year) they were more or less stuck together the rest of their lives. So you kinda have to make things work.



LaRae
 
As I have said on this forum before....it would be incredibly naive to think that Meghan as a biracial, American, divorced actress would be wholeheartedly accepted by ALL of the courtiers and staff of the royal family and even some members of the family itself.

I don’t see any evidence that antipathy towards Meghan in royal circles has anything to do with “ race”. As hard as it may be for Americans to accept that, the truth is “ race” is not as central to social relations in the UK and other countries as it is in the US.

The major problem with Meghan is that many people , like Piers Morgan in his DM article, still see her as a ruthless social climber who uses people to advance her own agenda and discards them when they are no longer needed ( I am just quoting Piers here ).

Personally, I also feel she doesn’t understand yet her position in the Royal Family ( or, to put it in another way, how the Family’s hierarchy works) and has been trying to punch above her weight since she came in as revealed in the Telegraph’s article. That kind of attitude would obviously trigger a reaction from staff and even Family members.
 
Last edited:
I see terms as biracial or references to a race or colour popping up and that is the last thing which would cripple in my mind when seeing Meghan. I noticed that this only pops up in anglosaxon media.
 
I don’t see any evidence that antipathy towards Meghan in royal circles has anything to do with “ race”. As hard as it may be for Americans to accept that, the truth is “ race” is not as central to social relations in the UK and other countries as it is in the US.

The major problem with Meghan is that many people , like Piers Morgan in his DM article, still see her as a ruthless social climber who uses people to advance her own agenda and discard them when they are no longer needed ( I am just quoting Piers here ).

Personally, I also feel she doesn’t. understand yet her position in the Royal Family ( or, to put it in another way, how the Family’s hierarchy works) and has been trying to punch above her weight since she came in as revealed in the Telegraph’s article. That kind of attitude would obviously trigger a reaction from staff and even Famiily members.

There's plenty of racism and bigotry in the UK, but I do think that there may be an element of truth to the idea that Meghan may have ruffled feathers (or enraged and offended some, depending on your viewpoint) among staff by not understanding her and Harry's relative positions in the pecking order. She admitted herself that she was not someone who followed the royals, so she may not have grasped exactly how hierarchical thing are, and how that affects staff as well as the family itself. I can easily see how she might have tread on toes in the beginning, and how that might have some lasting effects in how she is perceived by staff.
 
Personally, I also feel she doesn’t understand yet her position in the Royal Family ( or, to put it in another way, how the Family’s hierarchy works) and has been trying to punch above her weight since she came in as revealed in the Telegraph’s article. That kind of attitude would obviously trigger a reaction from staff and even Family members.

I can't read Telegraph articles as they are behind a pay wall.
I can accept that as an American, it would be hard for her to acclimatise to the way things work in a monarchy.
But in what way has she tried to punch above her weight?
 
The tabloid press follow royal events closely enough to know that attendance at the board meeting is alternated between William & Harry. Even if they didn't know or had forgotten, it would be easy to check. It's obvious that there's an agenda against Meghan & they are pursuing it by looking for anything to cast her as trouble & a toxic influence on the family.


Yes they do have plenty of resources to see that there was a pattern of alternating between the Cambridges and Harry over the years. Harry attended the meeting this year as a solo engagement, but Meghan joined him for the Christmas reception later in the day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom