Meghan Markle: Family and Background - November 2017-May 2018

[Gawin]

You are correct, the two have spoken. I was also confused, American Observer asked when they would meet.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Pranter

I normally might think it is strange...but considering Tom is in Mexico and they are in the U.K. ..plus the advent of Skype where you can talk face to face...kinda makes sense when you have long distance relationships.


LaRae

Meghan just went to California for a few days, so if it had been a priority, it would have been very easy to arrange. For close to a year and a half either one of them was crossing the Atlantic Ocean at least every 2 weeks; so travelling is not the problem... So, the excuses that he lives in Mexico thus making it hard is not very convincing (and I am aware that Harry and Meghan didn't give that as an explanation, they didn't say anything on the subject other than that Mr Markle and Harry had not yet met).

[AlowVera]

We are not privy to every waking moment between these two. So we simply do not know if they have since met or not. Just like we did not know about the first trip to Botswana.

[jacqui24]

There could a hundred reasons as to why they haven't met. Perhaps some people just don't feel like they have to be up their adult child's love life. I mean she's dating a decent guy that she's in love with. Does a face to face meeting really change that? It's not like Tom Sr. is ever going to tell his daughter not to marry someone that's deemed good enough by her judgment.

[Cocoasneeze]

We actually don't know if they've met at this point or not. At the time of the engagement interview they hadn't met yet, but that might have changed between now and then.

[Zaira]

Actually, yes, I do think its strange that her father had not met Harry at the time of the engagement (and likely hasn't since). Meghan is reportedly close to her dad and we know Harry made every effort to introduce Meghan to the "key" members of his family including his father and stepmother.

So yes, it struck me as highly irregular. But according to one tabloid report or maybe People Magazine, they regularly FaceTime so whatever floats their boats. He will meet him soon enough.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I also thought it strange that Harry hadn't met her father. We don't know the reason so shouldn't speculate by putting out weak excuses like he lives in Mexico.

[Osipi]

One can be intimately close with a family member and not see each other face to face for years at a time.

Tom Markle, Sr. will be there when it really counts and that, to me, is all that matters.

[MaiaMia_53]

Originally Posted by Somebody

The person who probably created most confusion is Meghan herself as she (repeatedly) stated that they had half a year / 6 months (don't remember her exact words) for themselves to really get to know each other before it all exploded in the media. 6 months before late October is late April, not late June/early July. So, it seems as if she made an honest mistake and it truly were only about 4 months but in this way Meghan contributed to the confusion about timelines.

I thought Meghan was confused about the timeline too until I reasoned that she was counting from July to mid-December when the first pictures of her and Harry together were published in newspapers. Likely Meghan considers the publication of pictures of them together as the major media explosion. Yes there was Harry's statement in early November, which was a confirmation and a warning to the press to back-off. It also seemed like a declaration to Meghan from Harry that he would always have her back, protect her and put their relationship first.

So even though the confirmation of the relationship happened four months in, we never saw them together until their night out at the play in December. That's about six months, since the initial set-up activity happened in June. I would think they both googled each other, and they may even have texted each other regarding the best meeting date, which turned out to be early July when Meghan was in London for Wimbledon.

ITA with everyone that the former agent, Gina, was not invited to the wedding, so a bit of sour grapes and she decided to spill for moolah. The more people who are not close to Meghan but who had some association with her reveal private details, the more impressed I am with Meghan. So yes, she's a fallible human being with a strong character, a kind heart and an indomitable will. Harry's a lucky guy and he knows it. Meghan surely feels lucky too. They both deserve their happiness together.

'Haz'? Hmmm, too bad some of these ? revelations weren't available prior to the completion of the upcoming Lifetime movie.

[jacqui24]

It's interesting how being ambitious and picky and like to move on is spoken with a negative tone when it comes to a woman, isn't it? I don't see those underlining comments with men that marries royal women nearly as often. And yes, I'm well aware it's more than Meghan Markle. But this is a prime example as it is what's going on right now.

[ACO]

I don't see it as a negative and frankly the fact these people running to the press proves they weren't worth staying in her life. Her ex agent is telling private business because she hurt she didn't get an invite. Ever stop and wonder this why she don't trust you?

[Royal Suitor]

Likewise I don't have an issue with stories claiming Meghan is ambitious, enterprising, calculated, etc. She has repeatedly described herself as ambitious in her career and that she had to work hard to get the Tig off the ground and taken seriously, including cold calling celebrities to get content. I do agree that the media is spinning it as a negative because she's a woman whereas I think it shows savvy business acumen.

My issue is when people extend that ambition to her personal life implying that she was on a life long pursuit of Harry to better her station in life. I know the narrative isn't specific to Meghan. Many royal brides get the same social climber label. It's just disappointing that 200 years later every woman is still portrayed as one of Pride & Prejudice's Bennett sisters.

[AlowVera]

I agree the problem is with the media using ambition as a dog whistle especially when it is used to describe a woman. I also find it funny that they seem to believe that moving up is a bad trait. That MM wanting to move from bit jobs to series regular shows that she is ruthless? Perhaps it is a UK thing that you should always stay the same and never grow or advance within your profession.

[Pranter]

The U.K. still has class/social levels so it's more than her being a woman or not growing/advancing with your profession. There's that other layer.


LaRae

[Cocoasneeze]

It's frustrating, as toy guys have already said, that Meghan being ambitious and striving hard in her career to do what she wants is seen as a negative trait. They're ignoring the fact that she's been hard working from since she was a teenager.

And transferring that ambition to reflect her relationships and friendships isn't right. All these people she doesn't have in her life in personal or professional capacity are showing exactly why they're out of her life. She didn't and hasn't used friends or relationships to advance her in life, and that's easy to prove by facts from her life.

[MARG]

Originally Posted by Royal Suitor

Likewise I don't have an issue with stories claiming Meghan is ambitious, enterprising, calculated, etc. She has repeatedly described herself as ambitious in her career and that she had to work hard to get the Tig off the ground and taken seriously, including cold calling celebrities to get content. I do agree that the media is spinning it as a negative because she's a woman whereas I think it shows savvy business acumen.

My issue is when people extend that ambition to her personal life implying that she was on a life long pursuit of Harry to better her station in life. I know the narrative isn't specific to Meghan. Many royal brides get the same social climber label. It's just disappointing that 200 years later every woman is still portrayed as one of Pride & Prejudice's Bennett sisters.

Male boss gives staff a right bollicking about standard of work. They needed a wake up call. Female boss does same . . . she's got permanent PMS. It's the same old story and all we have to do is use our brains, ignor it and be positive.

Morton and her ex agent really did an evil number on her but I'm pleased to see YouTube posters aren't quite as gullible as they were. Many clips dissecting articles and books and trashingthem. A clip from E News really cracked me up. They asked her 'Suits romantic interest and his wife what they were giving H&M for a wedding present. He looks at his wife, smiles and says a Vitamix! The daft interviewer with more hair than wit didn't get it. It sailed right over her head but they stayed in character seriously looking at the camera and sticking it to Morton. It was a wonderful way to get their point across without betraying a friend.

[QueenElizabeth2Fan]

Is Meghan's royal descent listed in this thread? I looked at her Wikipedia page, and wondered if I could get more information about pedigree charts linking her to royals, or anything else substantial like a full list of her royal ancestors.

[Gawin]

Originally Posted by QueenElizabeth2Fan

Is Meghan's royal descent listed in this thread? I looked at her Wikipedia page, and wondered if I could get more information about pedigree charts linking her to royals, or anything else substantial like a full list of her royal ancestors.

I posted the links in the "Genealogy of Meghan Markle" forum:

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums...ml#post2064822

[Royal Suitor]

Originally Posted by MARG

A clip from E News really cracked me up. They asked her 'Suits romantic interest and his wife what they were giving H&M for a wedding present. He looks at his wife, smiles and says a Vitamix! The daft interviewer with more hair than wit didn't get it. It sailed right over her head but they stayed in character seriously looking at the camera and sticking it to Morton. It was a wonderful way to get their point across without betraying a friend.

I needed you on Friday Marg. That interview had me . 3 posts of explanation in another thread and I'm still not sure everyone else got the joke.

[Madame Verseau]

The tabloids are reporting that Meghan's ex husband Trevor Engelson dated Bethenny Frankel. Frankel herself told the press. Thanks to her and Morton Trevor's life is an open book, pun intended.