Prince Harry: Relationship Suggestions and Musings 2016-2017


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mbruno said:
Meghan graduated from Northwestern University in 2003 with a double major in Theater and International Relations. That is a fact which has been backed up by numerous sources.

On Meghan being political, my fear, however, is that Meghan, like many Americans, may have the illusion that the British Royal Family can actually influence public policy and, accordingly, may be tempted to see her marriage to Harry as a way to do so. Although the monarch and, to a lesser extent, the heir to the Crown may still have a marginal (albeit declining ) political influence (mostly due to their direct line of communication with the government) , Meghan, as the wife of the 5th in line to the throne, will have no such power. Again, if she expects to have any political influence then, she may be indeed on her way to a disappointing (but not necessarily "rough") awakening.
Click to expand...

If Meghan picks up a newspaper at all, she'll have seen the coverage of Charles' "black spider memos". It was covered in WaPo, NYT, the Toronto Star, The Globe and Mail, and the National Post. So the basic premise -- that it was a problem for the PoW to try to influence policy -- has been well covered in North America. Unless she strikes you as someone who doesn't pay any attention to the news, she's likely fine.
 
She is listed as Rachel Markle and not Meghan at Northwestern ? I hadn't thought of that!!

I bet Harry calls her Rachel and not Meghan. I think Meghan is just for show business.
 
American Observer7 said:
She is listed as Rachel Markle and not Meghan at Northwestern ? I hadn't thought of that!!



I bet Harry calls her Rachel and not Meghan. I think Meghan is just for show business.
Click to expand...



Her friends seem to call her Meghan. It really depends on when she started using the name. My husband has gone by his middle name his whole life- since he was a toddler at least. His school has him listed by his formal name but no one calls him that.

KP referred to her as Meghan in their official letter.
 
American Observer7 said:
She is listed as Rachel Markle and not Meghan at Northwestern ? I hadn't thought of that!!

I bet Harry calls her Rachel and not Meghan. I think Meghan is just for show business.
Click to expand...

Her friends call her Meghan. Schools and any official documents they issue would have her official name, rather than what she goes by, on it.
 
:previous: Yeps. Just like Harry is Prince Henry of Wales but no one really calls him Henry. :D
 
Yes, unless you legally change your name, any legal document has to have your proper name on it. Would never occur to me to look at official university records under Meghan.

The wedding will be Prince Henry and Miss Rachel Markle. Harry and Meghan in private or unofficial.
 
Countessmeout said:
Yes, unless you legally change your name, any legal document has to have your proper name on it. Would never occur to me to look at official university records under Meghan.

The wedding will be Prince Henry and Miss Rachel Markle. Harry and Meghan in private or unofficial.
Click to expand...

Funny story. My grandmother's name -- so far as I've always known -- is E.... M.... [last name]. But then one day I saw her birth certificate, where it was listed as M.... E..... [last name]. I asked her about it; E & M were her aunts, and M was the older of the two. My great-grandparents wanted to call her E, but M was the older of the aunts. So they put M first on the birth certificate and called her E.

However, her passport, nursing diploma, and driver's licence were all under E.... M.... [last name]. When I asked her what she'd signed in the registry when she married Grandpa, she said "E.... M...., of course". To which I asked her if she was actually married.
 
Countessmeout said:
Yes, unless you legally change your name, any legal document has to have your proper name on it. Would never occur to me to look at official university records under Meghan.



The wedding will be Prince Henry and Miss Rachel Markle. Harry and Meghan in private or unofficial.
Click to expand...



Not necessarily...

My grandmother had 4 names including her last name (I- M- I- Last Name), but always went by her first middle name (M-). She had some legal documentation that listed her as I- M- I- Last Name, others that were just I- M- Last Name, and others still that were M- Last Name; it all just depended on the documentation. I had to make a call for her once regarding a prescription for her and had her BC ID, her healthcare card (government issued), SIN card, and her personal insurance card, each which had a different name on it.
 
But Meghan Markle is not the age of any of our grandmothers. Authorities have generally become much, much bigger sticklers for to-the-letter legal names than in past generations.
 
Meghan has said in an interview that even though she was named Rachel Meghan by her parents, she has never been called Rachel. I guess it was her parents decision to start referring to her as Meghan from childhood & it stuck! It is not unusual for some parents to call their kids by their middle name.
On a side note there is already a precedence for royals to go by their middle names. Queen Victoria for instance was actually christened Alexandrina Victoria. So Meghan is in good company!

On all official documents & during her wedding vows she will be referred to as Rachel Meghan, but at all other times she goes by Meghan. I’m pretty sure Harry also calls her Meghan along with any other cute & mushy nicknames they’ve given each other!

Interview where she talks about her name (15 seconds in)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlX-62WAVtQ
 
Osipi said:
Actually, at the time Harry and KP released the statement to admonish the press for their treatment of Meghan and her family, I saw it as them putting their money where their mouth is so to speak. It wasn't issued just because Meghan happened to be the girlfriend of Harry's at the time but because it was downright bullying and harassing and intrusion tactics against another human being that resulted from a press interest because of a royal.

already on such matters.

At least thats how I see it.
Click to expand...
I doubt it. I'd say that it has to do with the fact that meghan is a serious girlfriend of H's.
 
You have to admit though that the action taken amplifies the stances W&K&H were/are taking on bullying. In fact, I believe the Duke of Cambridge has an engagement on cyberbullying that just has been posted not too long ago.

Either way, the action was called for and was taken and heeded. That is really all that matters in the long run.
 
hel said:
If Meghan picks up a newspaper at all, she'll have seen the coverage of Charles' "black spider memos". It was covered in WaPo, NYT, the Toronto Star, The Globe and Mail, and the National Post. So the basic premise -- that it was a problem for the PoW to try to influence policy -- has been well covered in North America. Unless she strikes you as someone who doesn't pay any attention to the news, she's likely fine.
Click to expand...

As an American who does pay attention to the news, I will say that it is still possible for her to not understand how the BRF works and that they are to be seen and not heard. It could be difficult for her to accept that IF she marries Harry she no longer has the right to an opinion.
As for Meghan's name, I find it funny that this is such an issue here when Harry has never gone by his legal name.

AlowVera said:
Some people are mad at Meghan for being upset over the media's racist coverage of her mother's family. They see nothing wrong with the coverage stating that Meghan should just keep quiet over the racist overtones and accept it. So as always instead of supporting the victim the champion the rights of the racist media and place the blame on the person who did not ask for the abuse. I find it all sad.
Click to expand...

Who are these gosh darn people? How pathetic!
Speaking of the racist coverage towards her what exactly went down about that? Was it legit news that were directing racist comments to her family?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
XeniaCasaraghi said:
Speaking of the racist coverage towards her what exactly went down about that? Was it legit news that were directing racist comments to her family?
Click to expand...

As it is pretty much water under the bridge now, suffice to say, its an area of conversation that's best left alone. We've been advised by our moderators to steer completely away from any kind of discussion relating to Meghan's biological makeup and I think its for the best.

If you really want to delve into what happened to have Harry issue the statement from KP, I imagine that its all to be found by doing a simple search. All I can say is that the statement issued was warranted.
 
Osipi said:
As it is pretty much water under the bridge now, suffice to say, its an area of conversation that's best left alone. We've been advised by our moderators to steer completely away from any kind of discussion relating to Meghan's biological makeup and I think its for the best.

If you really want to delve into what happened to have Harry issue the statement from KP, I imagine that its all to be found by doing a simple search. All I can say is that the statement issued was warranted.
Click to expand...

True it is water under the bridge, the statement mostly put a stop to all the ridiculous headlines about her mother's side of the statement, so IMHO it worked.
 
Mbruno said:
Meghan graduated from Northwestern University in 2003 with a double major in Theater and International Relations. That is a fact which has been backed up by numerous sources.

On Meghan being political, my fear, however, is that Meghan, like many Americans, may have the illusion that the British Royal Family can actually influence public policy and, accordingly, may be tempted to see her marriage to Harry as a way to do so. Although the monarch and, to a lesser extent, the heir to the Crown may still have a marginal (albeit declining ) political influence (mostly due to their direct line of communication with the government) , Meghan, as the wife of the 5th in line to the throne, will have no such power. Again, if she expects to have any political influence then, she may be indeed on her way to a disappointing (but not necessarily "rough") awakening.
Click to expand...

I feel like we're being a bit unfair towards Meghan when it comes to her expectations of what it would be to be a British Royal.

Don't get me wrong, I was completely in this camp when the relationship was first made public. Meghan was a public person who had been outspoken about her beliefs in interviews. She was very active on social media. As an American, she grew up with a culture that promotes freedom of speech and the idea that everyone is equal. These are ideas that aren't exactly compatible with the system of monarchy, or with how Harry has typically lived his life.

But Meghan's behaviour since this relationship became public has been different since the relationship became public. She's not spoken to the media, she's not discussed her relationship publicly. Since Christmas she's almost entirely stopped using social media. She's not spoken about politics (at a time when many American actors are very vocal about everything going on in the US right now). She's not done much to promote her own show, and ended not one but two business ventures. She has done a lot to appear to be fitting into the idea of what the wife of a British Prince should be. Does that mean that this relationship is going to be smooth sailing from here on out? Not necessarily. But I do think we should look at her actions and recognize what she's doing for what it is.
 
Ish said:
Not necessarily...

My grandmother had 4 names including her last name (I- M- I- Last Name), but always went by her first middle name (M-). She had some legal documentation that listed her as I- M- I- Last Name, others that were just I- M- Last Name, and others still that were M- Last Name; it all just depended on the documentation. I had to make a call for her once regarding a prescription for her and had her BC ID, her healthcare card (government issued), SIN card, and her personal insurance card, each which had a different name on it.
Click to expand...

Then things have become a lot stricter now a days. Because when you apply for any ID you have to give valid ID and names have to match. I used to do all the scheduling and billing for a doctors office, and I can tell you the issues it causes if you some how manage to get around using your legal name. Actually a legal contract can be considered null in many cases if you don't use your proper.

One piece people sometimes get away with it is their health card. Learned quickly when entering a patients information to look at name on drivers and on health card. Because often didn't match. And pharmacies would call to get a new perscription issued as names didn't match. Because pharmacies require picture ID, and your drivers license has your legal name.

If you don't want your legal name on legal documents, change it.
 
Queen E said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlX-62WAVtQ
Click to expand...

Interesting interview. :flowers: She's very dynamic, as well as gracious. She totally owns the space, maneuvers the pace and dialog to make the interview hum along. (Knows exactly what the camera is seeing of her, too). I could see her as having her own interview show. She's sharp. She's got the edge.

If her relationship with Harry winds up being an interesting interlude for her (and him) but no more, she has what it takes to do whatever she wants. I'd steer her towards television news/interviews etc. I'd watch her. Good chemistry.
 
Definitely agree. She has a comfort and natural ease with the camera even when not scripted acting. She doesn't have a nervous twitch, keeps eye contact. Will be very natural if they wed. And if not, then she could do good in an interview show or even something like the talk.
 
I don't understand all the fuss about her name. Harry's is easy as when his parents made his name public they stated that he would be called "Harry" which is no big deal with people shortening names.

Meghan is called by her second name and is obviously quite used to explaining it, after all, she has a passport and she was married, both of which would have required a birth certificate or other "official" document stating Rachel is her first name. Best of all, it doesn't bother her and she seems to use it as an excellent ice-breaker.

I know that in the world we live bureaucracy demands we adhere to our actual birth name as things like border control etc. are that much tighter. But I don't have much faith in a bureaucracy that demands one thing and makes no room to actually accommodate it. Nine out of ten formal documents that have little boxes to fill in the letters of your full name don't have enough little boxes. I mean, really?
 
I don't think people here are really fussing over her name. Someone just realized they needed to use her legal first name rather than her chosen name to verify a fact, and that spurred a little bit of side discussion about legal names.
 
 
I guess we really will never know until we get an official announcement.
 
They all cite The Mirror, which cites Star magazine, a tabloid. Lol, reminds me of all those articles about Cressida and Harry on the verge of marriage. But who knows, maybe he will propose after even barely a year ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
I'm basing my own engagement speculation on Harry's and Meghan's own actions, these tabloid gossips always predict engagement. For everyone. But Imo, Meghan wouldn't have ended her blog and Reitman contract unless they've had serious planning for their future, and both are on the same page. But this is all jmho, and I might be wrong.
 
One thing that is pretty much certain is that Harry and Meghan are still very much a couple at this point and she's in London to attend a wedding with him that will generate a lot of interest in and of itself.

There are so many indications that this relationship is heading to an engagement between the two but I have to say that for me, its not going with Harry to a wedding nor is it reports that the Queen may have given her permission or that she wound down on several things she's been doing such as her blog and her involvement with a clothing contract.

I've not seen too much about it lately but the biggest possible indication that these two are serious was the report that Harry and Meghan may head to Africa and Lesotho to visit Harry's Sentebale and meet Prince Seeiso. If Harry is taking Meghan to visit and see what happens at Sentebale, which is something very near and dear to Harry's heart, this isn't your ordinary "date" or "meet the friends" type of thing. He's sharing with her a passion of his and to do that, he has a pretty good idea that Meghan is not only interested but perhaps even eager to be a part of it. From what I know, I don't think he's ever taken someone with him to Sentebale that he's been connected romantically to.

So, that's the biggest indication for me. If and when an engagement happens is anyone's guess right now but I think they're clearing the path towards a future together.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

CyrilVladisla
Prince Heinrich of Bavaria and Henriette Gruse - April 22, 2017
Replies
0
Views
1K
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
muriel
Luxembourg RF jewels: Suggested changes and additions
Replies
13
Views
806
muriel
muriel
Marengo
  • Locked
Charles III: Coronation Information and Musings - Part 2
15 16 17
Replies
501
Views
53K
Marengo
Marengo
iceflower
Princess Estelle and Prince Oscar News Part 2: January 2024 -
Replies
6
Views
2K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
iceflower
  • Sticky
Sweden: Birthday and Anniversary Wishes 2024
Replies
27
Views
1K
An Ard Ri
An Ard Ri

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom