Harry and Meghan: Wedding Suggestions and Musings

[jacqui24]

Would have liked to see some charities in the Commonwealth realms.

I'm glad that they've focused charities that are personal to them rather than just so that the Commonwealth can be represented. It's a personal choice, not some political correctness.

 

[Rudolph]

I'm glad that they've focused charities that are personal to them rather than just so that the Commonwealth can be represented. It's a personal choice, not some political correctness.

I think you can do both. There’s no limit to the number of charities you can support. The Cambridge wedding fund supported 26 charities.

We’re told how important the realms are so it would have been nice to see Canada, Australia and New Zealand get some love.

 

[jacqui24]

I think you can do both. There’s no limit to the number of charities. The Cambridge wedding fund supported 26 charities.

We’re told how important the realms are so it would have been nice to see Canada, Australia and New Zealand get some love.

But if they don't have charities there that they've either worked with or know a lot about at this moment. Why should they pick it just to be politically correct? This is a private wedding whereas Cambridges had to consider that it was a semi-state affair. If they wanted to concentrate on fewer charities to make greater impact for each, good for them.

 

[ACO]

India isn’t a realm where the Queen is head of state.

The Cambridges chose the Canadian Coast Guard Auxiliary and the Royal Flying Doctor Service in Australia for example as part of their wedding fund.

Well that is what the Cambridges did. Harry and Meghan picked charities close to their hearts and are letting the public decide which one they will endorse personally unlike W&K who just split it up via a public fund. Both great. Just different approaches.

 

[jacqui24]

Posting the link to the Twitter thread for those who want to see the 7 charities they highlighted. Cool mix of projects that represent the couple. I was surprised there wasn't a more specific project re: youth violence but maybe Street Games is the nod to that.

https://twitter.com/x/status/983308877486837760

And Wilderness UK as well I guess? It supports vulnerable urban youth and introduces them to rural employment.

 

[Rudolph]

Well that is what the Cambridges did. Harry and Meghan picked charities close to their hearts and are letting the public decide which one they will endorse personally unlike W&K who just split it up via a public fund. Both great. Just different approaches.

You’re right different approaches. A wedding fund makes sure all charities get an equal piece of the pie. Smaller charities aren’t left out.

By just naming 7 charities and saying you can make donations if you like in lieu of gifts isn’t nearly as fair.

2 or 3 charities may receive 90 percent of the money and the other 4 or 5 get nothing.

 

[Cocoasneeze]

You’re right different approaches. A wedding fund makes sure all charities get an equal piece of the pie. Smaller charities aren’t left out.

By just naming 7 charities and saying you can make donations if you like in lieu of gifts isn’t nearly as fair.

2 or 3 charities may receive 90 percent of the money and the other 4 or 5 get nothing.

It's up to the people donating to which charity they want to donate to. All of these charities are getting a lot of attention.

 

[ACO]

You’re right different approaches. A wedding fund makes sure all charities get an equal piece of the pie. Smaller charities aren’t left out.

By just naming 7 charities and saying you can make donations if you like in lieu of gifts isn’t nearly as fair.

2 or 3 charities may receive 90 percent of the money and the other 4 or 5 get nothing.

I don't see the problem here. They listed 7 charities covering issues near and dear to them. The public can decide how much or little they give. It is their personal choice.

I preferred doing my own research and deciding on which charity to donate. I am donating to three of them. It is no disrespect to the others but if I am going to give a significant amount of money I want it to go directly to the organization of my choice.

I am sure others likely feel the same. Nothing stopping anyone from giving and I am sure they will all see significant donations. There is really no need to turn something positive into something negative.

 

[jacqui24]

You’re right different approaches. A wedding fund makes sure all charities get an equal piece of the pie. Smaller charities aren’t left out.

By just naming 7 charities and saying you can make donations if you like in lieu of gifts isn’t nearly as fair.

2 or 3 charities may receive 90 percent of the money and the other 4 or 5 get nothing.

How is that not fair? Whoever gives the gift gets a say in how that money is spent. Seems like the more fair approach to me. And I don't think any of the charities they picked are large charities. In fact, they seem to have a focus on the smaller charities that could benefit a lot more from the support and attention. So I'm not sure how the smaller charities aren't left out point works here.

And btw, building a more personal relationship directly between the donor and the charity actually leads to more repeat gifts in the future. If they do one collective fund, how do I know where my money went? This requires me to care a bit about the charities that's receiving the donation because I spend more time looking at their cause rather than just the wedding.

 

[Pranter]

I read (in the official statement) that they went with small charities for that reason, so they can get some attention (and money). I think it's a great idea and I really love the one that focuses on getting kids involved with farming programs /rural skills.


LaRae

 

[Rudolph]

Supporting small charities isn’t anything new

The gift fund will support 26 charities of the couple’s choice, incorporating the armed forces, children, the elderly, art, sport and conservation.

Each was hand-picked and chosen with careful thought.

Many of the organisations are small local projects with extremely limited budgets and they spoke yesterday of their great delight and surprise at being chosen, acknowledging that the recognition alone was a real boost.

“It is fantastic news for us and we are extremely honoured and flattered that our work has been acknowledged in such a public way," said Gareth Harper of Northern Ireland-based Peace Players International which uses basketball to unite young people from Catholic and Protestant backgrounds

“We met them when they were in Belfast last week and were very impressed with how knowledgeable they were about our work and how committed they were to the initiative. We were able to say a personal thank you, it’s a huge boost.”

St James's Palace said in a statement: "Having been touched by the goodwill shown them since the announcement of their engagement, Prince William and Miss Middleton have asked that anyone who might wish to give them a wedding gift consider giving instead to a charitable fund.

“Many of the charities are little known, without existing royal patronage, and undertake excellent work within specific communities.

"They are charities that have a particular resonance with Prince William and Miss Middleton and reflect issues in which the couple have been particularly interested in their lives to date."

Read more: William and Kate ask for charity donations in lieu of wedding gifts

 

[Terri Terri]

This thread is about Harry and Meghan and what THEY have decided to do as part of their wedding. What Kate and William did for their wedding is not relevant here!!!! Both couples supported charities for their weddings...I didn't know that there was a competition to see who can support charities better!!!

 

[ACO]

^^^ Seriously. Just because they did a lump fund doesn't mean Harry and Meghan's method is wrong. This is exhausting. I'm glad they doing it their way and hope they continue doing it their way. Good for them!

 

[Osipi]

I was very impressed with the seven charities that Harry and Meghan have chosen to highlight.

As I see it, instead of sending a personal gift to Harry and Meghan themselves, what donors are doing is supporting something that is close to the both of them. With each charity, we see the need that Harry and Meghan see and our gifts of donations are helping to keep the work these charities are doing alive and active.

Its not about representing the Commonwealth. Its not about anything other than assisting Harry and Meghan in doing what they wish to do to make this world a better place. Its getting the public involved and aware of places where these two people want to make a difference.

So much better than toasters and blenders and shrimp forks.

 

[Terri Terri]

Exactly!!!! But for some, everything Harry and Meghan does will be wrong!!!!

 

[AlowVera]

This thread is about Harry and Meghan and what THEY have decided to do as part of their wedding. What Kate and William did for their wedding is not relevant here!!!! Both couples supported charities for their weddings...I didn't know that there was a competition to see who can support charities better!!!

Yes could we please allow Harry and Meghan the space to have their own conversation and ditto for Kate and William. Not everything is a competition or pissing contest.

 

[royal rob]

Would have liked to see some charities in the Commonwealth realms.

I was thinking the same thing very disappointed

 

[Osipi]

I'm not disappointed at all that Commonwealth charities were omitted. Its not a game of what country to spread the wealth to but rather charities and organizations that are *personal* to the couple.

Should this type of event happen 10 years from now after both Harry and Meghan have much more experience dealing with causes in Commonwealth nations, then I'd be surprised that they were omitted.

We're looking strictly at *personal* support of charities and organizations here rather than geographical demographics. These charities have been selected because they mean something to the couple.

What struck me was looking at the list of charities and either seeing Meghan and Harry in pictures with them or like, in the case of Scotty's Little Soldiers, remembering about when Harry, William and Kate threw a garden party for families who have lost a family member serving in the UK armed forces at Buckingham Palace last May. I *see* the involvement this couple has had with the organizations. It makes it so much more *personal*.

I think *personal* is the key word behind these charities and not because this couple is *royal*.

 

[royal rob]

But they are royal aren’t they !

 

[Osipi]

Its also the private and personal wedding of a member of the British Royal Family. They're keeping the personal in it. Not everything in their lives is going to be dictated by being "royal". They are human beings that happen to be royal. Not royal personages that happen to be human.

 

[ACO]

Alexi Lubomirski Dishes on Snapping Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Engagment Pics (Exclusive) | Entertainment Tonight

Alexi Lubomirski talked about shooting their engagement photos and revealed he was invited to the wedding. Nice interview.

 

[Curryong]

Harry has been criticised by some people on forums in the past for concentrating efforts on African charities and endeavours not British ones. Now Harry and Meghan have chosen a broad mix of British and overseas charities, including Commonwealth ones, there's still criticism by a few here. Sheeez!

 

[MARG]

I read (in the official statement) that they went with small charities for that reason, so they can get some attention (and money). I think it's a great idea and I really love the one that focuses on getting kids involved with farming programs /rural skills.


LaRae

Spot on, I keep wondering why the sniping keeps on coming. It doesn't really matter what they plan, it does not please those "keeping score". To those who do not approve, I can only say do not participate, after all, nobody is twisting your arm.

 

[Rudolph]

The Queen is head of state of 16 Commonwealth realms. I’m not criticising Harry and Meghan for picking these 7 charities, I’m just pointing out it would have been nice to see representation from Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

 

[ACO]

The nitpicking on all things Harry and Meghan is overkill. So is the constant need for some to compare every aspect of their life to the Cambridges. It's not a competition. Sigh.

 

[Osipi]

Perhaps its the view that anyone that is royal should have their entire lives dictated by the wishes of the monarch, the public or the government and be puppets on a string to push and pull in whatever direction is deemed acceptable for the flavor of the day.

When it comes to this upcoming wedding, its a private and personal family event that the bride and groom have chosen to let the public in on. They didn't have to do that. They also didn't have to select charities at all. They didn't have to invite people from the general populace to attend or have a carriage ride throughout Windsor or even release any kind of details of this wedding.

This is their wedding with their choices. Nothing more.

 

[Somebody]

I agree that they are completely free in choosing their charities and they seem to have chosen quite broadly so people will hopefully feel connected to at least one them. However, the asking for donations is very much part of it being a royal wedding. This is what is expected of them (and what luckily most likely corresponds with their own wishes given that they have far more money to their disposal than the average person who might want to give them a wedding gift -again due to them being part of the BRF).

I personally don't really understand why people would donate to charities chosen by someone else (on the occasion of a specific event in their lives) instead of donating to charities that you yourself think could use your support (independent of other people's life events), however, that might be a cultural issue.

 

[royal rob]

Harry has been criticised by some people on forums in the past for concentrating efforts on African charities and endeavours not British ones. Now Harry and Meghan have chosen a broad mix of British and overseas charities, including Commonwealth ones, there's still criticism by a few here. Sheeez!

I must have read it wrong I only saw British charities nothing for Australia or Canada

 

[Osipi]

I agree that they are completely free in choosing their charities and they seem to have chosen quite broadly so people will hopefully feel connected to at least one them. However, the asking for donations is very much part of it being a royal wedding. This is what is expected of them (and what luckily most likely corresponds with their own wishes given that they have far more money to their disposal than the average person who might want to give them a wedding gift -again due to them being part of the BRF).

I personally don't really understand why people would donate to charities chosen by someone else (on the occasion of a specific event in their lives) instead of donating to charities that you yourself think could use your support (independent of other people's life events), however, that might be a cultural issue.

Actually, selecting charities for donations in lieu of wedding gifts is not something that has always been done and expected at British royal weddings. This will be only the second British royal wedding that has done this.

It was far more commonplace for the royal couple to receive gifts from all over the world that would be put on display after the wedding. I love the idea of the charities far more than a castle full of gifts from all over that the couple probably would never use.


http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-12912188

 

[Curryong]

I must have read it wrong I only saw British charities nothing for Australia or Canada

There was a charity for India, which is in the Commonwealth the last time I looked!