Engagement of Prince Harry of Wales and Meghan Markle: November 27, 2017

[ACO]

I also believe she met Harry late June. On her IG she was in London that week that was like June 28 - July 3. I think? I believe it was like the 29th or so when she met up with Piers. It's all the same timeframe. Harry said they met then met again for back to back dates. I can believe she was being pursued by a few guys that went nowhere once she met Harry.

[ACO]

Originally Posted by jacqui24

I will say, I chuckled a little when Harry was talking about sharing a tent in Botswana in 2016. I thought that was a bit of oversharing that people can make a few headlines about. I'm sure we are over the days of thinking royals don't have sex, but really. I did see one op-ed peace later that talked about this, but the media actually didn't make a big deal of it.

Yeah I was surprised. Some US shows picked up on it and made fun but it seemed their focus was more on the fact they met on a blind date. Seems that threw the media for a loop. Harry kept bringing it up too but also wonder if they didn't focus on it cause it highlighted just how wrong they had been about them. The press just knew her birthday trip there was the first time. Oops. Wrong.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

David Beckham fell for Victoria watching the "say you'll be there" video. I still find that adorable.

[Cocoasneeze]

Meghan met Piers for drinks on the 29th of June? (I just read it here) and stated, that she was recently single. That should clear up any speculation about the relationship overlapping with hers and Cory's.

I also don't get why Meghan and Harry would lie about the timeline and how they met. Had Harry seen suits before, it wouldn't have been stalkerish, it's a popular TV show, multiple people watch it. I simply don't get why their narrative and story of how and when they met is questioned, or suggestions about some sort of overlap re Cory are thrown out there, when there's no proof for this to be true. There's actual proof to back up, that Meghan was single when she met Harry.

[Lady Nimue]

Originally Posted by MARG

I would have to agree. I have to admit, all this dissecting of their love affair is starting to cross lines when Harry is accused of lying because it doesn't fit someone's understanding of what he said, what she said and what the media said. Harry and Meghan were there, we were not!

It is a simple matter of being judicious regarding what one accepts through one's filters. None of the story is really our business when all is said and done, and if there is a desire to keep some of it back, especially given all the speculation, it's a veil one can understand being drawn without naming it as 'lying'.

Consider the proposal story: it is unlikely that was the moment of the proposal, but as someone here even suggested, it was the moment the ring was brought out. There is a lot of 'theatre' involved. I thought that would have been universally divined. The stories told have elements of truth but would never be the 'whole story'. JMO of course.

[Cocoasneeze]

Originally Posted by Lady Nimue

It is a simple matter of being judicious regarding what one accepts through one's filters. None of the story is really our business when all is said and done, and if there is a desire to keep some of it back, especially given all the speculation, it's a veil one can understand being drawn without naming it as 'lying'.

Consider the proposal story: it is unlikely that was the moment of the proposal, but as someone here even suggested, it was the moment the ring was brought out. There is a lot of 'theatre' involved. I thought that would have been universally divined. The stories told have elements of truth but would never be the 'whole story'. JMO of course.

I used to think, that they had gotten engaged way before, I thought it had happened before Meghan gave her VF interview. I have however changed my mind. I do think they had an agreement, an outline to their future, as in Meghan would move to the UK once filming of Suits ended, he'd propose, etc etc. But I don't think he did propose until they did say he proposed.

I don't think we hear the whole story, I don't think we should know the whole story, but I do think, that the timelines we have been told have been accurate.

[Lady Nimue]

Originally Posted by Curbside

I think he might "fib" because it is slightly unseemly/stalkerish to see some chick on TV and start asking around about her based on what she looks like. Not to mention the fact that it's the kind of detail I think most people would want to keep private. I would guess they looked each other up after the idea of meeting up was floated to each of them separately.

I think she may have been at the tail end of a relationship with a chef in Toronto, and she/they may not want to raise the specter of fooling around on one's bf, and that may be why their timelines didn't exactly match up.

A nice summation. In their engagement interview we saw a few times when the two of them clearly see things differently (not to the point of a divorce but they experienced things differently). Harry agreed with the interviewer that the courtship had been a 'whirlwind', smiling happily at the thought (reflecting the fact that 'he came, he saw, he conquered' perhaps, acing out all competitors). Meghan however resisted that characterization, perhaps reflecting that she was the one that resisted maybe? Held back? Was cautious? No whirlwind for her.

They agreed that July was the kick-off (after one blind date). I am just more inclined to think there was more lead-up. And it's okay if they choose not to give the press the satisfaction of having gotten some of it right (I see Harry more inclined to have this attitude of push-back on the press, less inclined to let them feel good about themselves in the 'game' of PR, I see evidence of this).

Originally Posted by Curbside

Agreed. It doesn't matter to me one way or the other, I'm just pondering why they (or anyone, really) might not give all the details of the circumstances of their meeting. So if he saw Meghan on TV and pined for her for months before tracking down every single person she might know to demand a blind date, thus sabotaging her relationship with the previous boyfriend (just throwing out some off-the-wall scenarios), or if it was exactly as they say it was, it's private and I wouldn't fault anyone for wanting to keep some details of their relationship private. It's none of our business, and all's fair in love and war!

I do recall during the interview that they seemed to slightly disagree on when they met, but I just sort of shrugged it off as not all that important.

Exactly! The blips regarding timeline suggest to me that they had an agreed upon scenario, and Meghan often turned to Harry to make sure she was getting it right. Harry was certain, Meghan less so.

Originally Posted by Zaira

Agreed. These are not simply material things. Giving up your country is difficult. Moving away from friends and ever further from family is difficult. Giving up your source of income is BIG to me. At least in the America I grew up in, having your own income and means to support yourself/doing work that matters to you is a huge thing of value and worth. I couldn't imagine giving up that degree of independence to basically be reliant on the wealth of my husband and of his father. Meghan has her own wealth which will be well invested, but that is IMO very different than continuing to work for your own income. That goes beyond a matter of mere materiality to me.

Giving up her ability to speak freely and to make decisions about her life without having to stress about the political or optics/PR issues that will result is also big. I mean, we can talk all we want here about the royals being able to do what they want, but that isn't true. Just look at the furor caused b the cost of her engagement dress. They are up for public consumption whether that is right or not. That lack of control isn't something to take lightly. Meghan had to give up her roles in organizations she seemed to really care for and be excited. Also a hard thing to do.

Not only that, yes Harry comes with a job and a lot of privilege and wealth. But marrying him also comes with some pretty significant subtractions. Meghan is only human, and love isn't enough to cover all issues that come up in a royal marriage, as we have seen.

I think these two will be great, but those pretending love or marriage is automatically in and of itself sufficient for all that Meghan is giving up have a rather sanguine view. Harry will IMO really need to go the extra mile to be a support and advocate for Meghan as she tries to carve out a place and role for herself.

Love your last paragraph. Exactly so! See it how you will (I see Meghan as the Leo she is) but Meghan has been a powerfully self-directing person all her life. That is not going to go away. I do believe she is genuinely in love, wrapped up warmly in Harry's full on care and absorption in her. But she is still someone who has been self-directing. Like the Queen gave over the family to Philip, maybe Harry will give over the family to Meghan, but Meghan's past suggests a far more independent woman than the protocols of British royal life may be able to account for.

We cannot know exactly how much Harry explained (to Meghan) was intractable considerations of royal life, and what he sees as negotiable going into the future. We can only wait and see. These times leading up to the wedding are likely stressful times for the couple (but especially for Meghan). Its a lot for her to have agreed to so fast.

I send them both good ju-ju!

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Lady Nimue

A nice summation. In their engagement interview we saw a few times when the two of them clearly see things differently (not to the point of a divorce but they experienced things differently). Harry agreed with the interviewer that the courtship had been a 'whirlwind', smiling happily at the thought (reflecting the fact that 'he came, he saw, he conquered' perhaps, acing out all competitors). Meghan however resisted that characterization, perhaps reflecting that she was the one that resisted maybe? Held back? Was cautious? No whirlwind for her.

They agreed that July was the kick-off (after one blind date). I am just more inclined to think there was more lead-up. And it's okay if they choose not to give the press the satisfaction of having gotten some of it right (I see Harry more inclined to have this attitude of push-back on the press, less inclined to let them feel good about themselves in the 'game' of PR, I see evidence of this).


:

If they were trying to cook up some story, they would’ve gotten their answers straight. What we do know is Meghan is just bad at math and has been traveling back and forth so much since this relationship begin that it probably felt a lot longer for her. Add on top of that, her and Harry have been so private about it that they did spend a lot of time at home and just gotten to know each other very well. Another reason why I think Meghan probably just did the math wrong? She said two years. There is just no way. That would’ve taken them back to November 2015. That’s just not correct in any sense as Meghan didn’t travel to U.K. that much until that fated trip in late June/early July 2016. He managed to convince her to fly to Africa for their third date, you think it would’ve taken that long before? Please. Harry’s got more game than that. Plus, if there was a lead up, then it’s not a blind date.

Originally Posted by Cocoasneeze

I used to think, that they had gotten engaged way before, I thought it had happened before Meghan gave her VF interview. I have however changed my mind. I do think they had an agreement, an outline to their future, as in Meghan would move to the UK once filming of Suits ended, he'd propose, etc etc. But I don't think he did propose until they did say he proposed.

I don't think we hear the whole story, I don't think we should know the whole story, but I do think, that the timelines we have been told have been accurate.

Yea, I definitely think they’ve already decided they have a future together at that point. Camilla Tominey did report in her article the day before the engagement was announced that Meghan filled out Guy’s doggie passport in Summer ( I seem to recall she said early Summer, but I’m not certain) and used KP as destination address. If I wasn’t in a relationship with a man for the long haul, I’m not moving my dog to a different country.

I know Harry said he sourced the center diamond from Botswana, but we don’t have clarity on whether he picked up in Botswana or if Cleaves and Co sourced it for him and gotten it directly. If he picked up the diamond from Botswana himself, he had to have done that during that trip.

[Lady Nimue]

Originally Posted by jacqui24

Plus, if there was a lead up, then it’s not a blind date.

Well, that's true.

[Zaira]

Originally Posted by jacqui24

If they were trying to cook up some story, they would’ve gotten their answers straight. What we do know is Meghan is just bad at math and has been traveling back and forth so much since this relationship begin that it probably felt a lot longer for her. Add on top of that, her and Harry have been so private about it that they did spend a lot of time at home and just gotten to know each other very well. Another reason why I think Meghan probably just did the math wrong? She said two years. There is just no way. That would’ve taken them back to November 2015. That’s just not correct in any sense as Meghan didn’t travel to U.K. that much until that fated trip in late June/early July 2016. He managed to convince her to fly to Africa for their third date, you think it would’ve taken that long before? Please. Harry’s got more game than that. Plus, if there was a lead up, then it’s not a blind date.

I personally think there is some murky area with the timeline and I doubt its just that Meghan is bad at maths.

But at the end of the day, I don't care? Like its a non-issue with me...[]

[Jacknch]

Please avoid making personal comments about other members' posting styles - several posts have been edited to remove such personal comments including subsequent responses. If you wish to have a personal conversion or debate, please do so by private message and not in this thread.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by Lady Reem

Well travelling from all over to marry their Princes doesn’t appear to have done Mary, Maxima, Charlene et al any harm. I mean they haven’t keeled over as yet Mary all the way from Australia to become a Danish Princess, imagine that? Maxima from Argentina to the Netherlands. These were previously high flying career women. South African sportswoman Charlene left it all behind for her Albert. There’s also the French Marie. Plus a few other women from other countries marrying into the British Royal Family.

Meghan will do just fine, she loves charity work and had her acting to put a roof over head, a job she obviously enjoyed. But whereas before, her charitable endeavours were time-limited, she will now have plenty of time to devote herself fully to a career of charity work on a much bigger platform. She also wants to start a family and at her age a change of direction regarding her acting career was likely needed anyway.

I don't know about Mary, but I don't think we can compare Máxima's position to Meghan's. For starters, Máxima kept her religion (she didn't convert to the Dutch Reformed church despite early pressure to do it) and also kept her Argentinian citizenship (which she says she is unable to give up under Argentinian law). In any case, she visits Argentina quite often and even bought a house there, if I am not mistaken. Furthermore, she is the queen consort and one who, according to many observers, has an unusual influence on her husband to the point that some people argue she co-runs the royal household. While being queen imposes certain demands and obligations on Máxima that Meghan will never have, we can say on the other hand that, now that W-A is king, Máxima doesn't have to "do as she has been told" in the way Meghan will always have to do within the BRF.

[Cocoasneeze]

I don't think there's really any confusion about the timeline, and imho there's nothing factual or even remotely factual to support this. There is Piers Morgan of all people saying, that Meghan told him she was recently single when they met for drinks. That supports Meghan and Harrys's timeline, and I don't really get why their timeline is even questioned. But this is just my opinion, and not meant to put down other people's opinions.

[Royal Suitor]

From the VF story and the engagement interview clearly the message is that they started dating in July. I'm willing to go with that. Meghan took pains to make sure the VF article corrected the date. The inconsistency for me has always been in the 5-6 mos they were supposedly dating in secret. Camilla Tominey's story came out at the very end of Oct and Harry's declaration was 1st wk of Nov. At that point, the secret was out. That's not 5 months. If they would stop saying almost 6 months in secret, then folks would stop questioning the timeline. But hey if Meghan can round 16 mos up to 2 years then rounding 4 mos to 6 isn't that big of a deal. I love this couple but my wedding gift to them would be a calculator.

There are also a bunch of lazy media outlets still reporting that they started dating in May/June. That doesn't help. As others have said, I don't think we got the whole story (they don't owe us that) but I do think what they've shared was the truth. Others may be concerned about lies of omission but in this case I'm giving them a pass.

[Terri Terri]

I have a question for everyone....did you all think that Harry and Meghan will get the kind of crowds being seen on their engagements? TBH, it is very surprising to me that they are generating this kind of attention.
Did Kate get an assistant before she was married?
I think the royal house must be shocked given that Meghan is such an unconventional bride!!!!!

[Curbside]

Originally Posted by Terri Terri

I have a question for everyone....did you all think that Harry and Meghan will get the kind of crowds being seen on their engagements? TBH, it is very surprising to me that they are generating this kind of attention.
Did Kate get an assistant before she was married?
I think the royal house must be shocked given that Meghan is such an unconventional bride!!!!!

The public had far more time to get used to Kate as a royal bride than they have Meghan. She is so different from what people expected and probably will be for some time, that I do not see interest fading any time soon.

[Pranter]

I've said this for a long time (about Harry initially) folks are not going to lose interest in Harry like they have Andrew (being a second son farther away from the throne)...Harry has a totally different type of charisma AND because he is a son of Diana.

Meghan has only upped the interest and from a new field of royal watchers...more Americans and of course people of color who are for sure watching her now.

This couple (and their children) are going to be of interest for decades to come.


LaRae

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Pranter

I've said this for a long time (about Harry initially) folks are not going to lose interest in Harry like they have Andrew (being a second son farther away from the throne)...Harry has a totally different type of charisma AND because he is a son of Diana.

Meghan has only upped the interest and from a new field of royal watchers...more Americans and of course people of color who are for sure watching her now.

This couple (and their children) are going to be of interest for decades to come.


LaRae

Andrew has other issues that made him unpopular, I don't want to get into that here. However, Harry is certainly very charismatic and personable with the people.

Originally Posted by Terri Terri

I have a question for everyone....did you all think that Harry and Meghan will get the kind of crowds being seen on their engagements? TBH, it is very surprising to me that they are generating this kind of attention.
Did Kate get an assistant before she was married?
I think the royal house must be shocked given that Meghan is such an unconventional bride!!!!!

I will say that they are slightly different situations. Meghan has other things on her plate in terms of dealing with immigration things (yes, I know they have lawyers, but some she will have to do on her own) and she doesn't have her mom and sister in the country with her to help with the wedding planning. She has some friends in UK, but most are either in Toronto or LA, and can't help out as much with the wedding. Plus, she'll still spend some time traveling abroad to see family and friends.

[Countessmeout]

Meghan isn't a normal bride who has a lot of planning to handle for a wedding. Yes she will be hands on but she will have palace staff, and a wedding planner and more. And thankfully modern technology, her friends like her stylist Jessica, are only a skype away for advice.

[FashionMaven]

Originally Posted by Pranter

I've said this for a long time (about Harry initially) folks are not going to lose interest in Harry like they have Andrew (being a second son farther away from the throne)...Harry has a totally different type of charisma AND because he is a son of Diana.

Meghan has only upped the interest and from a new field of royal watchers...more Americans and of course people of color who are for sure watching her now.

This couple (and their children) are going to be of interest for decades to come.


LaRae

Completely agree. I think I've been just a tiny bit surprised at the explosion of interest - I think I expected that to happen earlier - but I'm not surprised at the actual interest, if that makes sense. I just think people in general were slow (both in the US and the UK) to cotton on to Meghan being "IT" for Harry ... and then after the engagement announcement when Meghan was on the cover of every tabloid in the newstand (I should have taken a picture), I think people went nuts for Meghan.

I think they are going to generate interest for a very long time... For Americans, she's the next Grace Kelly. That's just huge for us.