Harry and Meghan: Relationship Musings


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I would like to see them asked/discuss if they know what their plans are yet for incorporating Meghan into the charities Harry is in (if appropriate) and if she is going to maintain her current charities as well.

Also want to see what they say about children!


LaRae
 
Where they met and when (at least the month.) I'd like to see that cleared up. And who introduced them.
 
Yes; Sophie, Mike Tindall and even Beatrice and Eugenie’s boyfriends. Sophie (as a royal girlfriend) was turning up to events in the 90’s when one would never expected it. She was like an official member of the royal family before she was a family member.

Every once in a while Mike would turn up places with Zara and the family.

Beatrice and Eugenie’s boyfriends are or once known to show up to family gatherings at the races or flower shows.

I just think Harry and William are far more protective of their privacy. Especially with the things their parents went through back in the day. Also, they like sticking to protocol more.

But the girlfriends/boyfriends weren't attending Official Events.

:previous:

I'll never understand how incensed some people get over the idea that Harry (or any other royal) can't just go full-on selfish "me me ME!" when it comes to scheduling major life events that impact a lot of other people. Shoot, if you want to still have friends and family who don't complain about you behind your back, it's not really wise to do that as a regular person, either.

As I see it, it's not really any sort of hardship for a royal couple to fit their plans into the larger schedule. The genius to the way the calendar of traditional events works is that while there are very busy periods at certain, set times there are also other times in the calendar that are left more open and available for personal or one-off events to be slotted in. They do have a choice of dates to do what they want, it's just not completely unlimited. Working with the larger schedule will always be a part of royal life; if a couple can't handle that then they don't have even the basic coping tools for life as royals.

Absolutely. Everyday non-royal people plan their weddings around work schedules and the schedules of those people in their lives that they are most concerned about attending the wedding. I truly don't understand the people that are so upset that Harry and Meghan might take into consideration what else is going on in both their immediate families or closest friends lives when planning.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'll never understand how incensed some people get over the idea that Harry (or any other royal) can't just go full-on selfish "me me ME!" when it comes to scheduling major life events that impact a lot of other people. Shoot, if you want to still have friends and family who don't complain about you behind your back, it's not really wise to do that as a regular person, either.
:previous: Excellent comment.

Yes it is astonishing that some people believe that Harry and any other royal could demand that everyone in their royal family or government accede to their wishes. It doesn't appear to work that way at all.?
 
People are cracked in the head if they think they would plan a wedding where William and Catherine (or most of their immediate family) wouldn't be able to attend.


LaRae
 
But the girlfriends/boyfriends weren't attending Official Events.

The biggest official event Sophie attended was the Decommissioning Ceremony for the Royal Yacht Britannia. Other events were weddings, family gatherings and private family vacations and royal ascot.

No one should expect Meghan to attend something like the Field of Remembrance without being officially engaged or married. It’s why I said, it would be nice for her to attend next year. ;)
 
Last edited:
Sophie at the Britannia was definitely a one off. The only thing that comes remotely close is Kate attending William's passing out ceremony. Definitely any official event like remembrance day events we wont see Meghan at until there is an official engagement. Even then, certain events are usually reserved for marriage, like the church walks.

But she certainly could appear at Ascot or a garden show like Jack. But not with Harry in a carriage or official capacity. Just attending say lady's day and being in the royal box as it would not be accompanying him on an official event. The flower show Jack has gone to he has gone on a day when many royals were there, but again it wasn't an official event.

I don't think Meghan could easily hide in the background to any event. People are going to be keeping an eye out for her.

One reason would be nice if they marry end of May. June is so full of family events like trooping. It would be great for her to be able to be part of it.
 
I think with Meghan and Harry, what we see is what we get! And there's been precious little we've seen publicly because they are not interested in feeding the tabloid crap, or buying into the celebrity-tinged fascination surrounding them. They have drawn the lines regarding their privacy. Suffice to say that their relationship is serious, and Harry has been wanting to find his 'someone special' for a long time. From all evidence and accounts, Meghan seems quite remarkable and accomplished. But if H&M weren't genuinely clicking intimately on a deep level, the relationship would surely have ended many months ago.

I think Harry was prepared when he met Meghan, to conduct a relationship with her as under the radar as possible, in order to be able to spend quality time together out of the tabloid glare. He's said as much in a pre-Meghan interview in which he sounded a bit subdued and long-suffering re his love life (possibly because the interview occurred around the time he'd broken up with Chelsy Davy for good).

In any case, for both William & Harry, they witnessed their mother's trial-by-fire as she struggled with media hounding, amidst maturing as a person while coping with a broken marriage and dashed expectations. W&H were certainly affected by their parents' disaffection, their mother's emotional mistakes, their father's emotional indulgences, and ultimately by their mother's death which was a direct consequence of the media's over-obsessive intrusiveness. As we can imagine, and as has been said many times, there will not be a repeat of what happened to Diana. Many lessons have been learned by the royals in the aftermath of the Diana years.

As someone mentioned earlier, neither Kate nor Meghan are like Diana other than in their both being very kindhearted, good-looking and sartorially stylish. Unlike Diana, Kate has always been surrounded by caring and nurturing family members. And her loving husband William is also very protective and supportive. Meghan has a savvy sophistication and a down-to-earth sweetness which will see her through the royal maze. Plus, Meghan too has been blessed with loving parents, loyal friends, and a loving and protective partner in Prince Harry.

As far as H&M's relationship, after realizing how well they fit together, they still needed time to work through further building their connection in the face of geographic distance. They also had to figure out the best steps to take going forward, given the complications involved with Harry's royal status and Meghan's acting career commitments. Security concerns and clamoring from the tabloids have also been stuff they've had to navigate. With help from his closest advisers and mentors, Harry has handled everything like a pro. And Meghan's closest friends and her parents, and Suits producers, cast & crew have also been extremely supportive during this entire period, which is slowly ending, as a new chapter in the royal relationship begins.

Of course, H&M are not perfect. No one is in this world. However, it's just lovely to see two people in love, and it's nice that in current times, the love H&M share does not have to be denied or blocked by old-fashioned attitudes and out-of-date strictures that in the not too distant royal past, ended up destroying lives.

There is a 'fairy-tale' aspect to H&M's romance, but it's grounded in down-to-earth realities, genuine frienship, and respect for family heritage and traditions. Whichever way we each view the relationship is based on our own individual backgrounds and varying perceptions. In the end, what we think has very little to do with how H&M's story will unfold. Why are we interested in love stories? Why are we interested in royalty? The first is probably because as humans, don't we all seek love? That's what most stories in the world are about. And following royalty is sort of like watching any family drama unfold, but on a scale that's larger than life and mixed with metaphors, myths, surprises, as well as mundane universal happenings amidst the pomp and cirumstance of public ceremonies.

At this stage, neither Harry nor Meghan are interested in seeking attention or over-exposing the intimacies of their relationship. They are who they are, and they have each dealt remarkably well with the lives they've been given, and in Meghan's case, the public life she sought as an actor. Again that doesn't make either of them perfect. But it's part of what makes them appealing as a young couple in love who seem to have so much. But what they have and who they are in life has been hard won for each of them.

Therefore, H&M serve as role models in showing us that it's possible to overcome childhood trauma and the death of a parent and the divorce of parents. Meghan shows us that it's possible to reach for something beyond a middle-class modest upbringing, and to succeed beyond anyone's wildest imaginings. Meghan's example also demonstrates that on the other end of a successful career in the limelight can come unexpected love that brings with it a bevy of obstacles, mixed with difficult decisions and daunting situations. In Harry's case, we have seen him coming to grips with the burden of his royal stature and the grief suffered in his teenage years, to reach a place of maturity and a sense of purpose. In the process, both H&M have learned the importance of accepting personal responsibility and reaching back to help others.

So for me, the H&M love story is a guilty pleasure. :flowers: But I fully recognize that they are both fallible, imperfect people too. They are just trying to hold onto what they've found in each other on a larger than life stage where not every onlooker harbors goodwill. In any case, H&M have my fond regards, and I think many good-hearted people will be joining in the celebratory well wishes for these two young sweethearts! :twohearts:
 
Last edited:
I watched the documentary and I thought it was pretty okay. I was expecting something totally cringeworthy, but it wasn’t, IMO.
 
Yes, same here, Dman. Nothing in it that we didn't already know really, and David Starkey is a bit irritating, but it was fine overall.
 
^^ Yes, aside from cringeworthy Sam Grant, who's now trying to change her tune, the documentary is not completely tabloidy and exploitative. It skillfully mixes what's known, with available video of Meghan in acting clips, interviews, and public appearances. Plus some former acting acquaintances of Meghan's whom she's probably no longer in contact with, have respectfully weighed in to relate anecdotes about working with Meghan earlier in her acting career.
 
Yes, same here, Dman. Nothing in it that we didn't already know really, and David Starkey is a bit irritating, but it was fine overall.

David Starkey like to think of today’s royals as they were still in the 1400’s.

Yes, everything in the doc many of us already knew, but it was good. Nothing to write home about, but I enjoyed it.
 
The first documentary on the romance is also out on YouTube.

 
:previous:

So, that wasn't awful. I was definitely not expecting much. It wasn't much to write home about, but it wasn't awful, and it really could have been. So that's something! LOL!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Approval ratings for Meghan?

So Richard Palmer got the latest approval ratings for the Royal Family and for some bizarre reason Meghan is included in this list despite the fact that she is neither married nor engaged to Harry. Can someone please explain why she is included? It is incredibly unfair.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bizarre that she would be included. They have only dated for a year. Did they include previous GFs? As much as I love the thought of them getting hitched even I know that its not official until the Queen says its official via an official announcement.
 
No, no previous girlfriend was included. It seems a bizarre and quite arbitrary decision. The time to poll Meghan would be surely when she is married and actually working for the 'Firm' not when she's out of the country and not 'official'. And 50% of those polled stated 'Don't Know.' in respect of approval!
 
Well they have Sarah who hasn’t been married to Andrew for over 20 years on the poll. Plus Zara, Mike and Peter who are private citizens with no royal duties and Prince George and Princess Charlotte who are 4 and 2. Who disapproves of toddlers? So not much of a poll
 
So Richard Palmer got the latest approval ratings for the Royal Family and for some bizarre reason Meghan is included in this list despite the fact that she is neither married nor engaged to Harry. Can someone please explain why she is included? It is incredibly unfair.

It's because life is unfair and the press are money grubbing jerks. :lol:
 
Well they have Sarah who hasn’t been married to Andrew for over 20 years on the poll. Plus Zara, Mike and Peter who are private citizens with no royal duties and Prince George and Princess Charlotte who are 4 and 2. Who disapproves of toddlers? So not much of a poll

Its not about doing royal duties, its about popularity plain and simple. If it was about duties William, Kate and Harry would be further down a much shorter list. Zara and Peter are grandchildren of the queen, and sadly even though they are private citizens, they make the list. I don't get Mike being on there at all. If they are going to include him, Autumn should be as well, unless I missed her. Sarah and Meghan are not members of the family at all, and should not be included in the list in any ways shape or form.

Of course Meghan is on there, because the press is trying to play up the drama. Show whether she is going to be the savior or the ending of the monarchy as we know it :whistling: Of course because the whole future of the monarchy lays on if Harry marries her or not. :bang:
 
No, no previous girlfriend was included. It seems a bizarre and quite arbitrary decision. The time to poll Meghan would be surely when she is married and actually working for the 'Firm' not when she's out of the country and not 'official'. And 50% of those polled stated 'Don't Know.' in respect of approval!

Curryong, where did the "don't know" figures come from for the approval ratings? I've only seen the numbers that Richard posted, and they only include the don't know option for the next monarch question. I've checked the pollster's website and couldn't find anything about this poll.. could you share, please? :flowers:
 
I read the article about the approval ratings and I don't get why Meghan was mentioned, unless the intent is to spin a narrative that Brits have not accepted her. Twenty five hundred people were polled, with no clear breakdown of demographics.
 
I suspect Opinium included Meghan in the poll to generate attention and more stories about the data.

Opinium are in the business of selling their data services ("We help our clients harness the power of insight to build, grow, promote and make strategic business decisions.") Polls like this get eyes on the company and that translates into more business for them.

I suspect it's about how many narratives they can see coming out of the same data. They *need* one. Two would be better ("Queen's approval drops" "No-one wants Charles as king"). If they can get a third ("Only 1 in 5 approve of Meghan")? That's gravy.

Then you have the press side of it. They reported on it because Opinium included it.
 
I read the article about the approval ratings and I don't get why Meghan was mentioned, unless the intent is to spin a narrative that Brits have not accepted her. Twenty five hundred people were polled, with no clear breakdown of demographics.

Simple

1 get more people to read and vote
2 to try and continue their spin that Meghan is not as accepted as people hope.

They have been accused of racial comments and cant risk that again. So the poll is a new attempt to try and portray her as an issue.
 
Curryong, where did the "don't know" figures come from for the approval ratings? I've only seen the numbers that Richard posted, and they only include the don't know option for the next monarch question. I've checked the pollster's website and couldn't find anything about this poll.. could you share, please? :flowers:

In the early hours of the morning, Aussie time, I spotted on Richard Palmer's Twitter page a conversation about this Opinium poll. The figures were coming in thick and fast and I posted them as they came in on another Forum, not this one. Got the figures on Queen, Charles, and the others, and then posted this about Meghan on there.


'What is also amazing about this poll is that Meghan was included! What the.. !!! 33% of those polled said they thought she would be an asset to the BRF, 17% said No and 50% didn't know! That would be about right! They went into it a little more and 45% of 18 to 24 year olds saw Meghan as 'a breath of fresh air' as against 26% of 55 to 64 year olds. So, with 50% 'don't knows', the jury is out. However, she and Harry arent engaged yet!'

Now, whether RP was getting his figures muddled re Meghan and later corrected them, I don't know. He may have taken those figures down later. However, that's what I got from Palmer's Twitter at the time and what I posted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hel
In the early hours of the morning, Aussie time, I spotted on Richard Palmer's Twitter page a conversation about this Opinium poll. The figures were coming in thick and fast and I posted them as they came in on another Forum, not this one. Got the figures on Queen, Charles, and the others, and then posted this about Meghan on there.


'What is also amazing about this poll is that Meghan was included! What the.. !!! 33% of those polled said they thought she would be an asset to the BRF, 17% said No and 50% didn't know! That would be about right! They went into it a little more and 45% of 18 to 24 year olds saw Meghan as 'a breath of fresh air' as against 26% of 55 to 64 year olds. So, with 50% 'don't knows', the jury is out. However, she and Harry arent engaged yet!'

Now, whether RP was getting his figures muddled re Meghan and later corrected them, I don't know. He may have taken those figures down later. However, that's what I got from Palmer's Twitter at the time and what I posted.

Thanks, Curryong! I appreciate the info.
 
So Richard Palmer got the latest approval ratings for the Royal Family and for some bizarre reason Meghan is included in this list despite the fact that she is neither married nor engaged to Harry. Can someone please explain why she is included? It is incredibly unfair.

I'm not surprised she was included, KP's statement last year made her an "Official Girlfriend", in a way that the 3 Cs (Catherine, Chelsy, Cressida) never were. Her elevated position means she'll get this type of quasi-royal treatment.

I'm also not surprised that her numbers are low. Right now she's "just an American" who doesn't even live in the UK, she'll need to develop into a dedicated Brit before that foreign wariness wears off. Also the media has been way over the top about this relationship, to an embarrassing level, so this is just natural pushback against oversaturation.

I'm just surprised about George and Charlotte, if you're too young to know what a poll is, then you shouldn't be involved in one. :lol:
 
:previous:

Catherine, you don't mean Catharine Ommaney :ohmy: She was only confirmed in her own mind. :lol:

Other then Chelsy and Cress, the only ones relatively confirmed are Flea and Natalie Pinkam. He was 'linked' to basically any good looking woman he was seen hanging out with. Including unnanmed women he even touched when in the public eye.

In reality Meghan is #3 of serious relationships, though Cress is questionably serious (long time but always seemed more for fun for both).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not surprised she was included, KP's statement last year made her an "Official Girlfriend", in a way that the 3 Cs (Catherine, Chelsy, Cressida) never were. Her elevated position means she'll get this type of quasi-royal treatment.

I'm also not surprised that her numbers are low. Right now she's "just an American" who doesn't even live in the UK, she'll need to develop into a dedicated Brit before that foreign wariness wears off. Also the media has been way over the top about this relationship, to an embarrassing level, so this is just natural pushback against oversaturation.

Oversaturation? :ermm:Unless you go on sites that mention her a lot(DM and here) or you check up on her,read stuff about her.Then no, people aren't getting oversaturated.I hardly hear of her outside a select fandom and DM.Unless she appears on the news or on newspapers,then we don't really hear much.
:confused: Huh? With or without KPs statement,doesn't change the fact Meghan is still a girlfriend.What elevated position does she have that the others didn't?
The heading says ROYALS approval rating.Meghan isn't a royal,she isn't engaged to one,isnt married to one,hasn't done any engagements in Britain.She doesn't even live here.Them including her(George and Charlotte also) in a poll makes zero sense.
 
Simple

1 get more people to read and vote
2 to try and continue their spin that Meghan is not as accepted as people hope.

They have been accused of racial comments and cant risk that again. So the poll is a new attempt to try and portray her as an issue.

Bingo! This is exactly why. Just trying to spin a narrative. There is nothing new to report on the Meghan and Harry front right now, and as we know, "nature abhors a vaccum". Have to fill it with something. What better story than, "Meghan overwhelmingly unpopular/distrusted/etc."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom