Duchess of Sussex: Future Duties, Roles and Responsibilities

[MARG]

She was promoted as someone who could adapt and hit the ground running. That hasn't happened.

Oh for heaven's sake, she's only been married a little over three months and I wouldn't say that they exactly had a normal length honeymoon. Both her engagement and those three months have been learning about the BRF and how they do things, William and Harry's "The Foundation" and finding a niche for herself there. Any actual patronages etc. are vetted by HM and BP for the simple reason that one has to be invited to be a Patron. If she is and if it is deemed acceptable, then and only then will she accept and it will be announced by KP.

That is what the senior royals role is, supporting HM in a way that she finds best suits her. Running off half-cocked is not an option. HM may want her to wet her feet on a few mundane ribbon cuttings or plaque unveiling, we don't know. But one thing is for certain, the UK is not the US or Canada, they do things differently and whether you accept it or not, there is a cultural divide to navigate with sensitivity and understanding.

The way some people run on I think they expect her to be faster than a speeding train and leap over tall buildings in a single bound!

 

[Iluvbertie]

By hand holding, I meant assistants and training and so on. They had 11 staff on the Dublin trip. And she still messed up.

How did she 'mess up' in Ireland?

 

[sophie25]

How did she 'mess up' in Ireland?

I think by saying she was glad the abortion referendum went the way it did, or words to that effect. I was amazed that she said it as it's still a very emotive subject in Ireland and as a royal she should obviously be keeping her political opinions to herself. I thought this is the first thing royals are taught, especially concerning a country that has nothing to do with them.

 

[Cocoasneeze]

I think by saying she was glad the abortion referendum went the way it did, or words to that effect. I was amazed that she said it as it's still a very emotive subject in Ireland and as a royal she should obviously be keeping her political opinions to herself. I thought this is the first thing royals are taught, especially concerning a country that has nothing to do with them.

She actually didn't say anything like this. All this speculation is based on one tweet, which basically said, that Meghan was pleased at the referendum results, the next tweet clarified, that the person tweeted that they interpreted Meghan being pleased at the result, that Meghan hadn't actually said anything to really suggest that.

 

[Somebody]

By hand holding, I meant assistants and training and so on. They had 11 staff on the Dublin trip. And she still messed up.

The number of staff has nothing to do with being more or less experienced. William and Catherine take about the same number of staff with them when on a trip abroad.

She was promoted as someone who could adapt and hit the ground running. That hasn't happened.

She did. She is adapting and started doing engagements the week of the engagement announcement and has been doing them ever since.

 

[Cocoasneeze]

She was promoted as someone who could adapt and hit the ground running. That hasn't happened.

She did more engagements after the engagement announcement, than any royal fiancé before her. So her actions pretty much suggest, that it has happened.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I think by saying she was glad the abortion referendum went the way it did, or words to that effect. I was amazed that she said it as it's still a very emotive subject in Ireland and as a royal she should obviously be keeping her political opinions to herself. I thought this is the first thing royals are taught, especially concerning a country that has nothing to do with them.

Hardly messing up at all.

It was a simple comment - if even made as the reference to it has now been removed from the twitter account - and not political as it was AFTER the vote had been taken. Had she said something before the vote that would be a different matter but not afterwards.

 

[sophie25]

Hardly messing up at all.

It was a simple comment - if even made as the reference to it has now been removed from the twitter account - and not political as it was AFTER the vote had been taken. Had she said something before the vote that would be a different matter but not afterwards.

No I still don't think she should have said it.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The Queen made a clear interference in the Scottish referendum before the vote. That was unacceptable - even with the approval of the government of the day.

William made a number of 'pre-EU' statements in the lead up to the referendum - again because the government told him to do so.

These were attempts to interfere in the political situations.

Saying something after the event is not interfering in a political situation as the situation has been resolved by a democratic vote of the people concerned. There is nothing wrong with a royal supporting a democratic vote.

 

[Cocoasneeze]

No I still don't think she should have said it.

She didn't say anything, though. The person sge was talking to said, that they interpreted, that Meghan was pleased at the result. That Meghan said nothing political.

 

[muriel]

The Queen made a clear interference in the Scottish referendum before the vote. That was unacceptable - even with the approval of the government of the day.

William made a number of 'pre-EU' statements in the lead up to the referendum - again because the government told him to do so.

These were attempts to interfere in the political situations.

Saying something after the event is not interfering in a political situation as the situation has been resolved by a democratic vote of the people concerned. There is nothing wrong with a royal supporting a democratic vote.

If you are referring to the 2014 Scottish referendum, I don't believe HM "made a clear interference". From memory, all she said to a member of the public outside Crathie was that she hoped people would consider the matter carefully before voting.

Please let me know if you think there was another "interference" on the part of HM.

 

[jacqui24]

By hand holding, I meant assistants and training and so on. They had 11 staff on the Dublin trip. And she still messed up.

She was promoted as someone who could adapt and hit the ground running. That hasn't happened.

All royals have assistants. I’m not sure why that’s being held against her. Does it mean other royals don’t know what they are doing? No. It means they have staff. And Omid, who was covering the trip, said that usually there is a private secretary with each royal at the reception and introducing them to who comes up to them and chats with them. However, Meghan didn’t look like she needed the private secretary as she looked like she already knew who she was talking to a lot of times. Meaning she actually went above and beyond and did homework on those invited before hand. And no, she didn’t mess up.

 

[Osipi]

By hand holding, I meant assistants and training and so on. They had 11 staff on the Dublin trip. And she still messed up.

She was promoted as someone who could adapt and hit the ground running. That hasn't happened.

It takes a lot of staff to keep things running on an even keel. Each has their own specific job to do. They are not there to babysit, direct or control the royals they work for.

Y'know, HM loves when something goes amiss. It eases the everyday routine of things going perfect. Little bumps in the road is what will make a trip memorable sometimes.

It also happened that the wedding happened shortly before the time came for the BRF to wind down for the summer. No one is doing much of anything right now and so, its not only Meghan. We're just now seeing future engagements pop up for early fall. Lots will start happening with Harry and Meghan especially with the upcoming down under tour in October.

Meghan is doing just fine.

 

[Chloep]

No I still don't think she should have said it.

GOOD THING THAT SHE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SAY ANYTHING. This has been pointed out with links SEVERAL times now.

I cannot for the life of me fathom why we have this exact conversation every other week....

 

[Dalriada]

GOOD THING THAT SHE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SAY ANYTHING. This has been pointed out with links SEVERAL times now.

I cannot for the life of me fathom why we have this exact conversation every other week....

I think it’s because they way the story was reported in the Irish Times and Irish Independent, it was thought the articulate words of the government party Senator were reported as reliable first time round before she came under pressure from her government minders to “voluntarily clarify” the tweet.

 

[Cocoasneeze]

I think it’s because they way the story was reported in the Irish Times and Irish Independent, it was thought the articulate words of the government party Senator were reported as reliable first time round before she came under pressure from her government minders to “voluntarily clarify” the tweet.

It was all based on one tweet. In which the party senator didn't actually say, that Meghan said anything.

Where does this 'before she came under pressure from her government minders' come from? Any source for that?

 

[Rudolph]

Well, if the referendum wasn’t discussed, and Meghan didn’t say she was in favour of the result, why the tweet from the senator saying she interpreted Meghan being pleased with the result. Surely the senator can’t read minds.

 

[jacqui24]

Because the senator did bring it up. Meghan said they followed it with interest. Royals are politically neutral, not ignorant of current events.

 

[Chloep]

I think it’s because they way the story was reported in the Irish Times and Irish Independent, it was thought the articulate words of the government party Senator were reported as reliable first time round before she came under pressure from her government minders to “voluntarily clarify” the tweet.

She clarified way before most publications picked it up - the papers didn't care for that though. One of the UK trash paps run a sensational story and it snowballed from there. Not one 'publication' ran a follow up or retraction.... Bc truthful and ethical reporting is not in their interest.

It was sensationalist media misrepresenting the senators positive comment for their usual dog whistling practices.

 

[Rudolph]

Irish newspapers reported the senator’s comments. It was after that, the twitter mob got involved.

Dalriada is right, it was only after the comment went viral, was the senator forced to ‘correct’ what she said.

 

[Cocoasneeze]

The senator tweeted her first tweet, then quickly tweeted her clarification. All before ant news papers printed their stories.

 

[Chloep]

Tweets have time stamps, I'll leave it at that.

 

[ACO]

Actually a reporter asked her. She corrected him. He keep badgering her and she kept correcting him. She had deleted her tweet and clarified. He had screenshot it and questioned the original comment. That is what went viral. That entire exchange. It made the issue bigger than it likely would have been but it was expected.

 

[Rudolph]

Someone posted an article a few weeks ago from The Daily Beast, written by Tom Sykes. People here were praising the article for defending Meghan. In the same article, Tom Sykes, an Irishman, made reference to Meghan’s support for abortion. Even he said if she could do it over, Meghan probably shouldn’t have discussed the referendum. You live and learn.

 

[jacqui24]

I don't think an article defending someone from abuse has anything to do with what happened in Ireland. Royals can't stop people from bringing up political situation. They can only control what they say. Meghan's comment about following it with interest was politically neutral, and it only came after a democratic vote has determined the outcome. Case closed.

 

[Cocoasneeze]

Tom Sykes wasn't there to hear the discussion take place though. All there are are a few tweets, now deleted, and blown out of proportion.

 

[ACO]

And I am pretty positive this same conversation occurred then that she didn't say anything because she didn't. People want to call the woman a liar, and that is their right but she explained herself more than once. That is all she can do.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

As usual, some observers are making a mountain out of a molehill when it comes to Meghan-gazing and overanalyzing with negative intent. In my opinion, M&H aren't about to allow anything cooked up by media trolls, despicable tab/paps and haters, et al, to come between them. The only thing that's going to happen is more battening down of the hatches to preserve and protect their privacy.

None of us really know Meghan, but by all accounts, those who actually do know Meghan well, and those who have had the privilege of meeting her and sharing time with her, all sing her praises. There's an OTT enormous amount of scrutiny focused on Meghan, which most people simply could not handle. The fact that Meghan is handling the media deluge, by not reading anything positive or negative that's being written is the way to go. The fact that Meghan is acquitting herself with grace, calm and dignity amidst the swirling noise and interest circulating around her, is quite remarkable.

It's beyond laughable how some haters are latching onto anything they can find, even exaggerated nonsense, to somehow try and turn whatever they can into a negative against Meghan. The fact that some people and media outlets will relentlessly continue spouting unfounded negativity says everything about them and nothing about the Duchess of Sussex.

I am reminded of some of the things Meghan herself has said and written. The Vanity Fair interview from last September comes to mind. Meghan spoke of not allowing any of the outside 'noise' to affect or impact her life. The Duke & Duchess of Sussex will continue going about their business, with unending encouragement and love from their closest friends, loyal family members, and genuine supporters around the world. Meghan also said in the VF interview that she's never defined herself by any of her relationships. And I don't see her changing that authentic self-directive. In fact, I am quite sure Meghan's loving husband, the Duke of Sussex, would never allow her to betray her authentic self for him, nor for anyone else.
...

 

[Denville]

She actually didn't say anything like this. All this speculation is based on one tweet, which basically said, that Meghan was pleased at the referendum results, the next tweet clarified, that the person tweeted that they interpreted Meghan being pleased at the result, that Meghan hadn't actually said anything to really suggest that.

It sounds odd ot me that anyone would "decide" that she had been pleased by the result, based on - what exactly?

 

[Cocoasneeze]

It sounds odd ot me that anyone would "decide" that she had been pleased by the result, based on - what exactly?

We have no way of knowing, as the whole issue was based on basically two tweets or so. Which are now deleted.