Prince Harry: Relationship Suggestions and Musings 2016-2017

[Abbigail]

Originally Posted by Countessmeout

Many people f stay in the same career oath their working life. You don't have to change careers to grow. You take promotions, new challenges, new responsibilities. Doctors for instance are often extremely ambitious people. Their success is not hampered by not changing careers. They grow within the medics. Field.

The reality is Yes you are giving up a career. You may be getting a new one, but that doesn't mean you aren't still leaving a career behind.

Honestly if you marry a royal it better be About more than love. You may say you are happy to give up your isn career, freedom And privacy but all marriages have a honeymoon period. Your marriage is not always going to be happy, especially when you have outside stresses. If the only thing that makes you happy is your spouse, you are going to be miserable. There has to be something more.

Are you happy changing careers? Will you be satisfied cutting ribbons? And even then, only part time at best. Are you prepared to spend your free time at home with kids (not everyone dreams of being a stay at home mom). The reality of total hours, it is like being a housewife in the fifties. Your main job is home with the Kids. But you were involved in ladies groups, church, had dinner parties fir your husbands work. In this case though the church groups and dinner parties are royal engagements. The excitement if trooping, Ascot and holidays will wear off.

Honestly I would never. No matter how much I loved the guy. Being Kate would be miserable for me. I didn't spend over eight years in. University to do 200 engagements or so and even those tours and shaking hands. I am a nurse. I need to be taking care of people, and I don't mean as a mom. I don't need to be a royal to make a difference. I likely put in twice as many volunteer hours a year, ontop of a full time job, as royals do.

So yes, for royals as long as there are double standards about working, there will be issues finding spouses in modern times. And the older they wait to marry the harder it will be. The longer a person is working and building their life, the less likely to give it up even for love. Usually when you marry, you build a life by blending with your husband. Nit given up all you are.

All good points. But ultimately, the importance of one's career varies depending on the woman. What might be impossible for you or I could very well be acceptable for another. Not every woman prioritizes a career, which is why I imagine some royal women are ok with giving up established careers. And doing so doesn't make them any less self respecting or admirable.

[Curryong]

Some details about Meghan's recent activities in India.

Inside Meghan Markle's Moving Charity Visit to India - Us Weekly

[Cocoasneeze]

I think someone who's really invested in their career, wouldn't even pursue a relationship with a royal of Harry's level, not a serious one anyway. I might be completely off the mark, but I think Meghan might find equal satisfaction, and be passionate about other aspects in her life, acting isn't the only thing she has going on. Perhaps she'd love a platform, where she can make a difference through charities, which she's already been doing before meeting Harry. And IF she and Harry do get married, she'll get more of a platform for that.

IMO, and I'm only guessing, the fact that she has stopped posting on her personal IG, suggests, that the she and Harry are getting more serious, and thinking about a future together.

BTW, I love that crazy stalkers didn't deter her India trip. The trip is getting press attention now, without security risks.

[Alisa]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Some details about Meghan's recent activities in India.

Inside Meghan Markle's Moving Charity Visit to India - Us Weekly

So the "reports" about the trip being cancelled for security reasons were clearly wrong.
Good for Meghan!

[AlowVera]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Some details about Meghan's recent activities in India.

Inside Meghan Markle's Moving Charity Visit to India - Us Weekly

This article was very informative and on point. I think hygiene issues and how it affects girls in poverty is an important and specific issue. I hope Meghan continues to focus on this. I do hope that the media has start to cool down, its great to see they can focus on Meghan and Harry's individual projects without being stupid or silly.

[miche]

People do know that actors/celebs get paid to be ambassadors for UN, UNICEF, ETC right? Its another part of the job

[Curryong]

Yes. So do royals, as part of their job. However, it's how they do the job that count. And if Meghan becomes a Royal all this experience will help. She is clearly valued by World Vision Canada, and enjoys the challenge.

[Osipi]

After reading the article in US Weekly about Meghan's work with World Vision, I have to admit that until now, I had not realized the extent that young girls in the poorer sections of India needed focus on for a reason most of us females just take for granted as a normal human function. The article puts into very clear context what Meghan is striving to do without severely going off tangents about her relationship with Harry. In fact, it was treated more or less as a side note.

I do kind of get the impression that Meghan is a woman that is very dedicated to what she believes in and her aims are totally altruistic to make a difference in the lives of those that she aspires to reach and educate and support. It matches, for me, the passion and the dedication and the desire that Harry has to make differences in the lives that he touches and reaches out to. I can only imagine what these two people together would be like working on the world stage together as a team.

Although taken at different places at different times and most likely before they even met each other, seeing Meghan in a photo with the children in Rwanda and then remembering pictures of Harry with the children in Lesotho, I had to think that perhaps the two photos were a bit of a sense of deja vu. Two people with the same aims for a better and healthier life for children who were perhaps destined to meet up with each other to form a dynamic team on a world stage that will reach thousands if not millions of people to promote their causes and concerns is perhaps something meant to be.

This puts to rest too any concerns I would have that Meghan would put her acting career before a loving marriage and a world stage to promote the pressing needs that need to be addressed. Her character, to me, seems to be more of an altruistic nature to make a difference rather than success in an acting career for herself and fame and fortune. Harry has found himself a real gem of a woman who is not only extremely beautiful on the outside but also on the inside. Actions (and not the lights, camera, action type) speak much louder than words.

Originally Posted by miche

People do know that actors/celebs get paid to be ambassadors for UN, UNICEF, ETC right? Its another part of the job

I would imagine that the expenses (travel fare, lodging and food) would be paid by World Vision itself but I'm just guessing that they would not be "paid" for their time and energies as in a paycheck for going and Meghan would be classified as a volunteer for the organization.

Doing a little bit of digging, I did find out exactly what an ambassador for World Vision is and its not only celebs and actors/actresses but everyday people such as you and I are that could aspire to also be an ambassador. I think our own Countessmeout has attested to that fact before and I'm sure she'll correct me if I'm wrong.

http://www.worldvision.org.uk/get-in...me-ambassador/

[Dman]

Originally Posted by Osipi

After reading the article in US Weekly about Meghan's work with World Vision, I have to admit that until now, I had not realized the extent that young girls in the poorer sections of India needed focus on for a reason most of us females just take for granted as a normal human function. The article puts into very clear context what Meghan is striving to do without severely going off tangents about her relationship with Harry. In fact, it was treated more or less as a side note.

I do kind of get the impression that Meghan is a woman that is very dedicated to what she believes in and her aims are totally altruistic to make a difference in the lives of those that she aspires to reach and educate and support. It matches, for me, the passion and the dedication and the desire that Harry has to make differences in the lives that he touches and reaches out to. I can only imagine what these two people together would be like working on the world stage together as a team.

Although taken at different places at different times and most likely before they even met each other, seeing Meghan in a photo with the children in Rwanda and then remembering pictures of Harry with the children in Lesotho, I had to think that perhaps the two photos were a bit of a sense of deja vu. Two people with the same aims for a better and healthier life for children who were perhaps destined to meet up with each other to form a dynamic team on a world stage that will reach thousands if not millions of people to promote their causes and concerns is perhaps something meant to be.

This puts to rest too any concerns I would have that Meghan would put her acting career before a loving marriage and a world stage to promote the pressing needs that need to be addressed. Her character, to me, seems to be more of an altruistic nature to make a difference rather than success in an acting career for herself and fame and fortune. Harry has found himself a real gem of a woman who is not only extremely beautiful on the outside but also on the inside. Actions (and not the lights, camera, action type) speak much louder than words.

Great comment and I agree.

[Osipi]

Just because I can.

These two photographs are representatives of what I'd call deja vu

http://newswire.co.ls/wp-content/upl...o-620x330.jpeg

http://artistcollective.ca/wp-conten...arkle_hero.jpg

[miche]

Is it ever justified to pay a famous person to support or promote a charity's cause? Celebrity agents are happy to say that it is justified and that it does happen, but charities are more reluctant to be drawn on the issue.

An exception is World Vision, which says that it rewards its 'artist ambassadors'. The international children's charity has paid £28,000 to Sadie and the Hotheads, a folk-rock band fronted by the Downton Abbey actor Elizabeth McGovern, for their "time and resources" involved in promoting the charity at their concerts.

Paying celebrities - where do charities draw the line? | Third Sector

” In addition, World Vision has paid her band £28,000 to fund the recording of their latest album and a UK tour, in return for which they have agreed to promote the charity.

The good causes of the famous ‘benefit themselves more than the charities’ | The Independent

[Osipi]

You've made some good points Miche and I'm not discrediting them one bit. I did notice that the $28,000 from World Vision to the band though were precisely stating it was to cover expenses for recording and the subsequent UK tour. It doesn't state how much the band actually profited from this endeavor.

There are most certainly charities and organizations that spokespeople can and do make money off of but I don't believe this is the rule of thumb. Harry and Meghan both seem (notice I said seem) to be doing what they do because of a passion to make a difference rather than to make a profit. Not everyone is like that. Harry's endeavors such as with Lesotho and his conservation work in Africa and becoming an "ambassador" for United for Wildlife doesn't put money into his pocket but it would be silly to presume that organizations would not do what they could to alleviate the expenses that occur to be able to do the things he does.

Debating whether or not Meghan was paid for profit would go around and around as we have no real facts of how Meghan's expenses were handled for her trip to India and also, it'd take the thread off topic. Is it so really hard to believe that someone would do something out of the goodness of their heart?

[miche]

Okay we will leave the financial part along.
Yeah its hard to believe that some people do it from the goodness of their heart. Royals do it because let face it its part of their job descriptions in the world they live in today.
And when it comes to the celebs world, some celebs are able to do charity behind the scene without the publicity and writing blogs about it. So when a celebs get promote for the charity that they do with the photoshoot and all. Its a public image exercise for both the charity organization and the celeb.
Its something Hollywood and organizations have been doing for decades, its a business model. Call me cynical but I don't believe "the out of the goodness of their heart"

[AlowVera]

Originally Posted by miche

Okay we will leave the financial part along.
Yeah its hard to believe that some people do it from the goodness of their heart. Royals do it because let face it its part of their job descriptions in the world they live in today.
And when it comes to the celebs world, some celebs are able to do charity behind the scene without the publicity and writing blogs about it. So when a celebs get promote for the charity that they do with the photoshoot and all. Its a public image exercise for both the charity organization and the celeb.
Its something Hollywood and organizations have been doing for decades, its a business model. Call me cynical but I don't believe "the out of the goodness of their heart"

In the end it helps amplify certain issues. So is there any harm done? I don't put anyone on a pedestal not even Prince Harry or even Princess Diana but when something positive happens, I call it a positive.

[Cocoasneeze]

Originally Posted by miche

Okay we will leave the financial part along.
Yeah its hard to believe that some people do it from the goodness of their heart. Royals do it because let face it its part of their job descriptions in the world they live in today.
And when it comes to the celebs world, some celebs are able to do charity behind the scene without the publicity and writing blogs about it. So when a celebs get promote for the charity that they do with the photoshoot and all. Its a public image exercise for both the charity organization and the celeb.
Its something Hollywood and organizations have been doing for decades, its a business model. Call me cynical but I don't believe "the out of the goodness of their heart"

Does it really matter? If someone does charity work, and gets good PR
for ir, it doesn't take away from the fact, that the charity benefits as well, and that's what counts in the end of the day. Charities benefit greatly from the PR celebs bring them, why is it so wrong if it brings good PR for the celeb too? I highly doubt that the monetary benefits are that big, that it would be benefiting the celebs, it's mostly covering some costs for the celeb doing the charity.

[AlowVera]

Originally Posted by Cocoasneeze

Does it really matter? If someone does charity work, and gets good PR
for ir, it doesn't take away from the fact, that the charity benefits as well, and that's what counts in the end of the day. Charities benefit greatly from the PR celebs bring them, why is it so wrong if it brings good PR for the celeb too? I highly doubt that the monetary benefits are that big, that it would be benefiting the celebs, it's mostly covering some costs for the celeb doing the charity.

Honestly why must we hide our good works. We should normalize charity, normalize helping others, publicize it often instead of hiding it because of false modesty. So much bad stuff going on, I see nothing wrong with reporting on the good. I actually learned something from Meghan's trip about how important hygiene is for poorer nations and in fact also in America as well. So IMHO the publicity regarding the trip was successful.

[ladongas]

Even the sainted Mother Teresa received criticism for some of the things she did which seemed to benefit herself and her staff. Being cynical and skeptical about everything leaves little room for belief in goodness in our world.

[Osipi]

Cynicism is all well and good and in the unsafe world we live in today, its wise to be alert and question things.

For me though, after having followed Harry for quite a few years and just seeing how open and passionate he is when it comes to whatever it is he is involved with such as Sentebale and Walking with the Wounded, I cannot imagine him being any less passionate or open when it comes to finding someone that is a good fit for him. I think too that it wouldn't take Harry long to sniff out an imposter pretending to care and do good works for their own personal gains.

Over the years Harry has had to met a multitude of people he knows are just "kissing up" to him or trying to impress him and when someone comes along that is authentic and real and sees Harry the person, that he'll hold onto as something rare in the world he moves in.

[AmberG]

Originally Posted by miche

People do know that actors/celebs get paid to be ambassadors for UN, UNICEF, ETC right? Its another part of the job

I do not think so, coverage of travell expenses, per diems, visa expenses maybe lecturing... depends of the country legislation and overall policy...

Her potential married life with Harry is basically predetermined and she will have no saying in many areas, businesses wise especially. She wil never be allowed to outshine Kate or to work more or to maybe be involved in charities she likes because maybe Kate will be interested dor that area... if she is so energetic as you say so, no whay she will sit at home and does nothing 90% of the time and Harry would not be able to help her ...

[Osipi]

I really think that should it come to the point that there is a marriage, I would also believe that Harry and his wife would not only get along good with William and Kate and there would be good communications between them even to the point of them working together on common issues but with separate engagements. As time passes, its a given that William and Kate would have a more dominant role as the Prince and Princess of Wales (should Charles created William as such) but I don't feel that in any way they would want Harry and his wife to feel subservient or subjective to them.

Like Kate, Harry's wife will be given the opportunity to find out just where she wants to fit into the scheme of things and also be given the time to adjust to not only being a member of the royal family but to also adjust to marriage and perhaps start their own family.

I don't think the British royal family and the "Firm" are as autocratic as you paint them out to be.