General News about the Sussex Family, Part One: May 2019 - March 2020

[HereditaryPrincess]

I will need to tell my LGBT friends in the UK that face homophobia everyday in the UK that there is apparently a "consensus" on the issue so all is good.

Charles' Country Life cover(s) also touched on climate change--a hot button issue even in the UK with lots of people calling climate change activists "alarmists" and "extremists." Charles has long been called political including on this issue.

Kate's HuffPo stint included an article from Michelle Obama who WAS FLOTUS at the time and thus in a political position versus Meghan asking Michelle (forever FLOTUS in my heart though she is) while she is only a former FLOTUS now. SO again, not controversial. William interviewed Jacinda at Davos about mental health...I again didn't see any hand wringing about that.

And I am not going to keep going down this vein. But it should be noted, that many of the 'traditional' BRF issue areas you highlighted as her not being into she HAS done things for or have a patronage in. In fact for Vogue, some of the people she picked for the cover focus on those very areas.

I agree. Especially with your point on LGBT+ - I have a transgender friend who is too scared to go out in public with his partner for fear of transphobic comments on a daily basis. And let's not even start on his own family, who refuse to refer to him by his new name. He's just one of the many examples of LGBT+ people here in the UK who experience daily homophobia. Homeless members of the community are increasing and only recently we had two young girls who got attacked because they refused to kiss in front of a group of drunken teens on the bus. So, I think this is a hot-topic and rightly so, because we need to address homophobia and casual homophobia that is still very prevalent in British society. Whilst the UK seems more accepting as LGBT+ couples can now marry freely, socially a lot of people still hold conservative views about the community. I don't know from first hand experiences but as I said, I have a lot of LGBT+ friends who have.

 

[Zaira]

Yes, to all of this. Meghan guest editing is completely non-controversial, since there is plenty of precedent for it, and I am 100% sure that there will be more stints like this by other BRF members in the future.

I also see no evidence that the Queen signs off on each and every thing the other members of the family do (or wear, which we've seen suggested on some threads). She'd hardly have time for anything else if she did, and she clearly has better ways to spend her time.

Precisely! She would be a rather busy lady if she had to personally review and sign off on all the family's various projects.

I am sure for bigger things she does sign off. Something like Invictus which is a massive undertaking and involves foreign governments, military, etc., she probably did give approval for.

Vogue cover? Maybe not (cool though I think the whole thing has been!) ?

And I also want to take a moment to wish the Duchess a happy birthday! Harry's little note on IG was extremely cute. Meghan should be proud of what she has accomplished in the past year. I look forward to even more going forward!

 

[Rena M.]

Precisely! She would be a rather busy lady if she had to personally review and sign off on all the family's various projects.

I am sure for bigger things she does sign off. Something like Invictus which is a massive undertaking and involves foreign governments, military, etc., she probably did give approval for.

Vogue cover? Maybe not (cool though I think the whole thing has been!) ?

H&M live in the backyard of HM, so I can imagine The Queen dropping by (e.g. for an avocado toast ) when she enjoys horse-riding. They can also bump to each other in the park. She could be better informed than we think

 

[Frelinghighness]

If I was in pr I would say everything they have done to “ do it their way” has created giant interest in the Sussex couple. You name it from not wearing normal maternity clothes to the name, the baptism, the support privacy issues, number of child, I can’t keep count and this is only six months. I have stopped playing along, I don’t care, I do remember when fergie was the darling and how that evolved. If you wanted to be left alone you would be dull, dull, and not rock the boat. Check out the glousters, the queens cousins, who has heard of them? Good bye, eager news flash royalty

 

[Cocoasneeze]

Everything Sussexes do, or don't do, will be news, and if not on its own, Piers Morgan and Daily mail will turn it into a controversy, and then other publications pick that up, and it becomes a big story.

I'd like to add, that Matt Haig, who was thrilled to have part of his book in the Vogue edition, tweeted that he had received noticeable increase in negative trolls on social media after that. He even had a negative, based on false information too, article written about him, because a magazine wanted to have a go at Meghan. Which makes me 100% support Archie's godparents wanting their names kept out of public.

 

[Lumutqueen]

This is moving stuff from Matt Haig
https://www.instagram.com/p/B0thflqAB8x/

Meghan makes this world brighter for so many people

That handwriting is to die for.

 

[Mey]

A lovely note

And a reminder to those complaints that Meghan didn't include men.....she did. Yes the cover focussed on women, but the magazine goes well beyond the cover.

Matt Haig is a gifted poet and writer. Not only was his poem included by Meghan on positive body image, but he is a vocal figure on mental health.






There isn't the 'usual charitable fare'. All royals have their own passions and things to take on.

And if you don't think that the other royals have taken on topics that are controversial:
-Charles certainly has caused a lot of stir on his political pressure over green energy
-Camilla has taken on domestic violence
-the fantastic four are taking on mental health issues
-Eugenie is taking on human trafficking


And other then choosing a former first lady, what exactly is controversial about the topics she chose???

Meghan's patronages:

-Association of commonwealth universities: education, very popular royal topic, queen's own patronage
-The royal theater: arts, again a very popular royal topic, again queen's own patronage
-Mayhew- animals, something you mentioned, shelters a common royal theme such as Camilla
-Smart Works- helping women prepare for job interviews and get back into things
-queen's commonwealth ambassador- very much the royal prerogative


There is nothing wrong or controvercial on focussing on women. And certainly the only patronage she has that focusses on women is Smart Works. The theater, animal shelter, commonwealth universities all focus on men and women. As does her support of the heads together campaign with Harry and Cambridges.

I don't think any of those patronages have a political element though. Charles at one time perhaps with his green agenda but there is a consensus about climate change here. This isn't the States, there is no mainstream climate denial. What Charles gets into trouble for is trying to impress his ideas on politicians without public scrutiny or a constitutional mandate.

There is also no political controversy over domestic violence. Everyone believes domestic violence is wrong.

There is no political controversy over mental health and that falls in the traditional royal arena of sickness and disability. No one is going to argue they shouldn't be highlighting that.

Eugenie isn't a working Royal on the tax penny but still, you won't find anyone in this country saying that human trafficking is a controversial subject.

You can't compare these things to promoting the Prime Minister of New Zealand.

I'm a feminist but I know that feminism isn't a safe topic. Its political by nature. If you are campaigning for equal rights and opportunities you need a political element.

 

[Heavs]

I don't think any of those patronages have a political element though. Charles at one time perhaps with his green agenda but there is a consensus about climate change here. This isn't the States, there is no mainstream climate denial. What Charles gets into trouble for is trying to impress his ideas on politicians without public scrutiny or a constitutional mandate.

There is also no political controversy over domestic violence. Everyone believes domestic violence is wrong.

There is no political controversy over mental health and that falls in the traditional royal arena of sickness and disability. No one is going to argue they shouldn't be highlighting that.

Eugenie isn't a working Royal on the tax penny but still, you won't find anyone in this country saying that human trafficking is a controversial subject.

You can't compare these things to promoting the Prime Minister of New Zealand.

I'm a feminist but I know that feminism isn't a safe topic. Its political by nature. If you are campaigning for equal rights and opportunities you need a political element.

So LGBT rights are a done and dusted issue so it's fine for William to pose on the cover of Attitude, Harry can try to break the stigma of AIDS by getting tests publicly done but feminism is so controversial 100 years after women got the vote that Meghan should probably not mention the word ever? Hmm....


I think things like climate change are more accepted in the UK than they are in the US for example but I don't think it's an uncontroversial issue and it certainly was when Charles started. He's credited with helping get people talking, why can't Meghan be credited with some other things? "Feminist" and empowering girls and women also covers much of the ground Camilla and Eugenie (and Sophie) are talking about as well. Many of the women featured aren't exactly bra burning, they're campaigning for rape victims, domestic violence victims, FGM victims, education and breaking the mould of what is "beautiful".


Mental health is still regarded as a taboo subject in the UK, that's why Heads Together and Princes William and Harry talking about their struggles are so important. It's not an inherently political subject but it is when they talk about funding, which they have done. William interviewed Jacinda Arden at Davos on the subject, should he have stayed away from her, lest that be seen as political or interviewed her opposite number as well?


I personally have no problems with Kate Guest Editing The Huffington Post but it's 100% more inherently political (and liberal and feminist) in it's agenda than any Vogue feature with JA or Michelle Obama, who were one of many. Just say Huff Po and people already have an opinion good or bad.

 

[MARG]

Ah . . . what a thing of beauty. To receive an envelope in the mail, with a beautifully enscribed address on gorgeous stationary is a wonderful treat. Each year for me sees the arrival of just such an envelope, enclosing a totally personalised Christmas Card enscribed with just such a hand.

Finding such a joy in your mailbox is a treat in this Twitter world. My regret is that I can no longer reciprocate in kind. I shattered my wrist and can no longer form those wonderful letters. Calligraphy, sadly, is a vanishing art taking time and thought most people don't have time for.

I know how much time, thought and work goes into such gestures and am inspired by Mehan's commitment to keep up such personal acts which, until her marriage, were her personal trademark. When you think of the amount of time and the sheer scale of such gestures in her new reality you cannot help but admire her.

 

[Cocoasneeze]

I love the fact, that Meghan still sends these thoughtful, personal, handwritten notes to people to thank them. A wonderful, heartworming gesture.

 

[BaiSoSo]

I don't think any of those patronages have a political element though. Charles at one time perhaps with his green agenda but there is a consensus about climate change here. This isn't the States, there is no mainstream climate denial. What Charles gets into trouble for is trying to impress his ideas on politicians without public scrutiny or a constitutional mandate.

There is also no political controversy over domestic violence. Everyone believes domestic violence is wrong.

There is no political controversy over mental health and that falls in the traditional royal arena of sickness and disability. No one is going to argue they shouldn't be highlighting that.

Eugenie isn't a working Royal on the tax penny but still, you won't find anyone in this country saying that human trafficking is a controversial subject.

You can't compare these things to promoting the Prime Minister of New Zealand.

I'm a feminist but I know that feminism isn't a safe topic. Its political by nature. If you are campaigning for equal rights and opportunities you need a political element.

[/B]

So LGBT rights are a done and dusted issue so it's fine for William to pose on the cover of Attitude, Harry can try to break the stigma of AIDS by getting tests publicly done but feminism is so controversial 100 years after women got the vote that Meghan should probably not mention the word ever? Hmm....


I think things like climate change are more accepted in the UK than they are in the US for example but I don't think it's an uncontroversial issue and it certainly was when Charles started. He's credited with helping get people talking, why can't Meghan be credited with some other things? "Feminist" and empowering girls and women also covers much of the ground Camilla and Eugenie (and Sophie) are talking about as well. Many of the women featured aren't exactly bra burning, they're campaigning for rape victims, domestic violence victims, FGM victims, education and breaking the mould of what is "beautiful".


Mental health is still regarded as a taboo subject in the UK, that's why Heads Together and Princes William and Harry talking about their struggles are so important. It's not an inherently political subject but it is when they talk about funding, which they have done. William interviewed Jacinda Arden at Davos on the subject, should he have stayed away from her, lest that be seen as political or interviewed her opposite number as well?


I personally have no problems with Kate Guest Editing The Huffington Post but it's 100% more inherently political (and liberal and feminist) in it's agenda than any Vogue feature with JA or Michelle Obama, who were one of many. Just say Huff Po and people already have an opinion good or bad.

Agreed Heavs- if one listens to Meghan's pov on feminism it is about making sure that girls/women have access to basic needs, education, jobs etc. I don't see how that is any more political than LGBT/Climate/Mental Health. Everyone should be supportive of 1/2 the population having access to those things.

 

[BaiSoSo]

The Sussexes have shed light on some new (lesser known) organizations around the world as recommended by fans and royal followers.

https://www.instagram.com/p/B0xeTfjJlBP/

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I don't think any of those patronages have a political element though. Charles at one time perhaps with his green agenda but there is a consensus about climate change here. This isn't the States, there is no mainstream climate denial. What Charles gets into trouble for is trying to impress his ideas on politicians without public scrutiny or a constitutional mandate.

There is also no political controversy over domestic violence. Everyone believes domestic violence is wrong.

There is no political controversy over mental health and that falls in the traditional royal arena of sickness and disability. No one is going to argue they shouldn't be highlighting that.

Eugenie isn't a working Royal on the tax penny but still, you won't find anyone in this country saying that human trafficking is a controversial subject.

You can't compare these things to promoting the Prime Minister of New Zealand.

I'm a feminist but I know that feminism isn't a safe topic. Its political by nature. If you are campaigning for equal rights and opportunities you need a political element.

There is no consensus about climate change and there is no consensus about LGBTQ rights, just as many issues that affect women have a political element.

There are still many who don’t believe climate change is anything actions of people have caused, just normal variations of weather.

There are still many who believe LGBTQ is a choice and “those people” can choose differently because it is an “immoral lifestyle against the Bible.”

There are still people who believe someone with mental health issues just aren’t trying hard enough to suck it up and could be less depressed if they just tried. That is why mental health care is not on par with physical health, and in my country any sort of heathcare is a poltical nightmare.

If all viewed sex trafficking the same, the women who are forced into prostitution wouldn’t be punished more than their abusers or pimps.

 

[Rudolph]

For example Meghan’s climate change choice Greta Thunberg makes AOC look like a moderate. Greta is a 16 year who knows absolutely nothing about climate change science.

Her ‘proposals’ would have Europe go back to basically the stone age and bankrupt western democracy.

That’s why many are saying Meghan’s picks represent a certain ideology.

 

[BlackHat]

For example Meghan’s climate change choice Greta Thunberg makes AOC look like a moderate. Greta is a 16 year who knows absolutely nothing about climate change science.

Her ‘proposals’ would have Europe go back to basically the stone age and bankrupt western democracy.

That’s why many are saying Meghan’s picks represent a certain ideology.

This contains more inaccuracies and pure opinion than anything Meghan has or has meant to have done

 

[JR76]

For example Meghan’s climate change choice Greta Thunberg makes AOC look like a moderate. Greta is a 16 year who knows absolutely nothing about climate change science.

Her ‘proposals’ would have Europe go back to basically the stone age and bankrupt western democracy.

That’s why many are saying Meghan’s picks represent a certain ideology.

All Greta Thunberg says is that we have to listen to what the overwhelming majority of climate scientists have to say about climate change and act upon that for human civilisation to survive. But as your post shows this is not something given and therefore controversial. Regarding AOC, her proposed policies seems quite moderate to a European like myself.

 

[Osipi]

What I do like about bringing things like climate change, LGBT rights and mental health issues to the forefront of discussions is that it may (notice I say may and not that it will) poke people into actually doing some reading and research on these issues and find out exactly why these are somewhat hot topics and become more informed to make rational decisions.

With information at our fingertips more than ever before, I do think we've become lazy and and look too much for other people that are supposedly "in the know" to tell us what is what and what we have to do. Some have ideas that are pulled from somewhere way out in left field in a galaxy far, far away and are extreme and some say there's no problem whatsoever.

When people like Meghan highlight issues and problems and people that are trying to educate people on certain issues, I believe what she is doing is putting information in front of us to make us all more aware of a need, a cause or something that needs to be talked about and changed and we can be part of the solution rather than a part of the problem.

Its kind of sad when someone is sincerely trying to bring issues to our attention that need it, more is done to find fault with the messenger than actually paying attention to the need that is being presented in the first place. On the other hand and on the more positive side, this messenger really has been able to get people to sit up and take notice and her incentives have met with some amazing results.

Just by watching a video of Richard Branson's crew diving to the bottom of the Great Blue Hole and finding a plastic bottle there has geared me into choosing containers that can be recycled rather than one use plastic bottles that I'd been throwing in my trash. Of course, I'd love to take a plastic bottle and twist it like in the commercial and turn it into a pair of Rothys shoes. Now, where did I first hear about Rothys shoes in the first place? Oh yah! Meghan wore them on her tour down under last year.

 

[Hallo girl]

I think the resistance is also not wanting to change the concept of what a royal woman does. A female royal, from where I sit, is expected to smile, look pretty, wear fashionable clothes (but not too expensive, but come on), give a generic speech, cut a ribbon or unveil a plaque, and not to have an opinion. That may have been fine in the queen mother's day or how the more senior royal may operate, but they represent a specific demographic who are familiar with that approach. Times have changed and so has the role of women in society. Women are more active in various facets of life and for the monarchy to stay relevant that should be reflected in the royal house. Meghan, in my opinion, is expanding the traditional roles with taking initiative and using different ways to champion her causes. She is not lobbying members of Parliament to have legislation changed or abolished; nor is she trying to influence how people should vote on local or national affairs; for that would be going into the realm of the political. I like Meghan's approach because it is getting more buzz than it would in the more traditional way, although some level of the attention is unwarranted. But criticism, when fair, comes with the territory when you step outside the box.

I found this story in the Daily Mail a little odd. It's pulling from a Tatler article

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...azine-claims-old-school-trophy-wife-dead.html

Trophy wife comment aside, it seems like an acknowledgment of change of affluent womens' role in society and what they can do.

If you think the Queen Mother was this little quiet soul who just cut ribbons and smiled nicely then you do not know your history. Yes I will agree that things were different in her day, but nobody under estimated her influence or strength of character. The Duchess of Windsor found that out.

I think it is unfair to say nothing has changed in all these years, they have, maybe not as fast as some would like, but they have. With a strong woman at the helm.

Mistakes were made in the past and they will again but everybody needs to learn from them, and avoid the pitfalls.

 

[Rudolph]

Emily Andrews has an exclusive: Prince Harry prepared for his barefoot speech on climate change at Google Camp (to which he commuted by private jet & helicopter...) by getting his toes done. He & Meghan enjoy pedicures, massages & other treatments at posh Coworth Park hotel.

I must admit I had a laugh over this. Kind of like the time he shaved his chest for her.

 

[Lilyflo]

Emily Andrews has an exclusive: Prince Harry prepared for his barefoot speech on climate change at Google Camp (to which he commuted by private jet & helicopter...) by getting his toes done. He & Meghan enjoy pedicures, massages & other treatments at posh Coworth Park hotel.

I must admit I had a laugh over this. Kind of like the time he shaved his chest for her.

What's wrong with using their local spa hotel & getting pedicures & massages? I do that. Some men in my family do that. Why do you find such normal behaviour so funny? I expect other men in the royal family have massages & pedicures too (particularly if they play sport).

 

[soapstar]

This thread is about Harry and Meghan and not other royals, so let’s move on from the comparisons. Let’s also move on from discussing politics and debating feminism, climate change and other social issues.

Any further off-topic posts will be deleted.

 

[Zaira]

Meghan's penmanship is amazing! Mine is chicken scratch! (if one is being nice lol).

What's wrong with using their local spa hotel & getting pedicures & massages? I do that. Some men in my family do that. Why do you find such normal behaviour so funny? I expect other men in the royal family have massages & pedicures too (particularly if they play sport).

We know why.

Also, I remember similar articles about other royal men. Honestly, about time men learn the joy of a pedi. Last time I was getting my own mani/pedi, a lovely old chap, must have been 70, was convinced by his wife to sit down and get one. He was very skeptical, said "this is simply not done for men of my time" but by the end, he was a big fan ?

 

[Countessmeout]

What's wrong with using their local spa hotel & getting pedicures & massages? I do that. Some men in my family do that. Why do you find such normal behaviour so funny? I expect other men in the royal family have massages & pedicures too (particularly if they play sport).

Because its over the top luxury and beyond what 'common people' could do. Don't they know they could have gone down the road to the corner nail salon and probably got a couple's discount. Real royals would do that

This type of article serves two purposes:

-One to of course once again emphasize the money the couple spend. Meghan's need to have the 'same person' do her feet every time making her sound like she is pushy once again.

-Playing the 'Meghan has changed Harry, he is no longer the rough and tumble prince everyone loves'. Having 'military sources' mocking Harry for having such feminine procedures done.

 

[Elenath]

Is it even certain he went to the Google camp? Has anyone seen him there?

 

[Hallo girl]

Because its over the top luxury and beyond what 'common people' could do. Don't they know they could have gone down the road to the corner nail salon and probably got a couple's discount. Real royals would do that

This type of article serves two purposes:

-One to of course once again emphasize the money the couple spend. Meghan's need to have the 'same person' do her feet every time making her sound like she is pushy once again.

-Playing the 'Meghan has changed Harry, he is no longer the rough and tumble prince everyone loves'. Having 'military sources' mocking Harry for having such feminine procedures done.

If this is true I think it is sad that this could not remain private, there are other areas of their lives that privacy could be debated but this is their private lives. Once again I qualify my words by 'if this is true ' they themselves will know who was aware of the details.The parts about asking for the same person, I do that, I have the same person colour my hair and do all my personal things, lots of people do that.

 

[Fijiro]

Is it even certain he went to the Google camp? Has anyone seen him there?

That's a good question. Is there evidence of him being there, like a picture or something.

 

[Kataryn]

Emily Andrews has an exclusive: Prince Harry prepared for his barefoot speech on climate change at Google Camp (to which he commuted by private jet & helicopter...) by getting his toes done. He & Meghan enjoy pedicures, massages & other treatments at posh Coworth Park hotel.

I must admit I had a laugh over this. Kind of like the time he shaved his chest for her.

I think this is eactly what they consider to be private (me, too!).
Aand why they didn't want the paps (and I'm sorry to include the a bit more serious photographers in this now as well) to know about the godparents. Because they thought they'd fit no matter what they might have stored in their past and what they want to keep private. Can you imagine a divorce story suddenly being told to all and sundry just because one of the divorcees a godparent of Archie? Because it's "newsworthy" to think in public about if they are the good influence on the little guy???
As for the hotel: the only result is that now H&M have to change places for their treatments, making them even more private than they were!

 

[Rena M.]

Is it even certain he went to the Google camp? Has anyone seen him there?

That’s a load of nonsense. They even don't know the name of their dog

 

[DuchessMia]

That's a good question. Is there evidence of him being there, like a picture or something.

No, there isn’t.

 

[Elenath]

That’s a load of nonsense. They even don't know the name of their dog

I’m sorry, what is nonsense? There are reports he won’t to Google camp and lots of people are getting their panties in a twist over a supposed chartered flight, so my question is... is it certain he went. Or are people getting pissed off over nothing. It’s work related while their dogs name is private.