Prince Harry: Relationship Suggestions and Musings 2016-2017

[Curryong]

Other women who became royals have managed to adapt and adjust, however. I'm sure Marie of Denmark, Crown Princess Mary of Denmark, Maxima of the Netherlands knew nothing about Royal protocol or the customs of their adopted countries when they first met their husbands. They even had to learn a new language.

So did Maria Teresa of Luxembourg, who was of Cuban descent and probably was ignorant of the culture and history of the country where she is now Grand Duchess. Grace Kelly left a mega career to settle down to Royal life in Monaco as well as having to communicate in French. So did Charlene. At least there won't be language difficulties in Meghan's case, IF she does end up marrying Harry. She may well learn things very quickly. And Maxima, at least, gives me the impression of being a strong and independent woman who wouldn't be afraid to speak out!

[Dman]

Originally Posted by Cocoasneeze

That's true. I think Harry wouldn't have pursued a relationship with Meghan if there was a hard brick wall against them long term. That statement he gave was a huge indication to me, that his plans with Meghan are very long term.

It was a very strong and passionate statement. It's something the media and others weren't used to. They are used to statements William used to issue. Harry's thoughts and feelings were a bit more pronounced.

[HistoryGirl]

good point. It's difficult. Leaving her career would be tough enough. It's not whether she's winning Academy Awards or not. It's the idea of going from an independent woman to some prince's wife. Then on top of that, having to tone down your feelings about important issues for fear of offending.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by Skippyboo

I don't think just living in Canada part time for 5 years erases the previous years of living as American where freedom of speech is engrained as a fundamental right. But as a Royal you give a lot of that freedom of speech up. You can't comment on government policies, no voting etc.

Well, she knew about poppies, didn't she ? So, she is not totally ignorant about British and Commonwealth traditions.

Personally, I always thought it would be politically convenient for Harry to marry a girl from a Commonwealth realm like Canada or Australia. An American who lives (part time) in Canada would not quite match my wish, but it would be close. More broadly speaking, although we have never had an American marrying into the royal family, there have been many examples of American women marrying British peers and getting settled in British society.

[cepe]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Other women who became royals have managed to adapt and adjust, however. I'm sure Marie of Denmark, Crown Princess Mary of Denmark, Maxima of the Netherlands knew nothing about Royal protocol or the customs of their adopted countries when they first met their husbands. They even had to learn a new language.

So did Maria Teresa of Luxembourg, who was of Cuban descent and probably was ignorant of the culture and history of the country where she is now Grand Duchess. Grace Kelly left a mega career to settle down to Royal life in Monaco as well as having to communicate in French. So did Charlene. At least there won't be language difficulties in Meghan's case, IF she does end up marrying Harry. She may well learn things very quickly. And Maxima, at least, gives me the impression of being a strong and independent woman who wouldn't be afraid to speak out!

I do understand yr point of view. But they are not British with the British rules that bind. The recent comments by Queen Margrethe about what did or did not make someone Danish - that would be unacceptable in the UK.

Its more of a straight-jacket which applies to everyone, regardless of position in the hierarchy. And changing it will take yrs. Charles will probably try and not succeed (too soon after HMQs style). You cannot compare the lack of freedom in the UK with the freedom available to Euro royals

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by cepe

I do understand yr point of view. But they are not British with the British rules that bind. The recent comments by Queen Margrethe about what did or did not make someone Danish - that would be unacceptable in the UK.

Its more of a straight-jacket which applies to everyone, regardless of position in the hierarchy. And changing it will take yrs. Charles will probably try and not succeed (too soon after HMQs style). You cannot compare the lack of freedom in the UK with the freedom available to Euro royals

I'm not quite convinced that the amount of freedom (or lack thereof) British royals have is that much different from continental royals. The main difference IMHO is that British royals are subject to greater media attention. But then, again, as Curryong said, moving to a foreign country like the Netherlands, Denmark, Monaco or Luxembourg, whose history and customs may be totally unknown to you, and having to learn a new, often difficult foreign language as an adult, must be far more intimidating than moving from the US or Canada to London.

[Angel.10]

Originally Posted by Cocoasneeze

That's true. I think Harry wouldn't have pursued a relationship with Meghan if there was a hard brick wall against them long term. That statement he gave was a huge indication to me, that his plans with Meghan are very long term.

I totally agree.

Meghan is very intelligent, I saw several interviews of her, I think she could learn super fast about britanic culture. Regarding the queen's opinion, this is difficult to know. After I watched the movie "Diana" with Naomi Watts, I had a terrible impression of her. In the movie, she is portrayed as cold and authoritarian, but I don't know if portrayed the truth

[Rudolph]

There was chatter after Kate married that she'd like to go the United Nations route but it was quickly and firmly explained to her that it wasn't possible.

Meghan may or may not settle down with Harry. If she does it will require an almost complete overhaul of her life.

Everything she is doing in her life right now would have to stop.

The only way around it, is maybe, just maybe if she didn't take a title herself.

But I doubt that would work even if it was realistic a realistic option.

[Curryong]

It's a bit of artistic licence, isn't it? I remember that Aussie made for TV film about Crown Prince Frederick and Mary Donaldson's romance, and Queen Margrethe was portrayed in that as an ice queen, whereas I'm sure she welcomed both her daughters in law with open arms. If you see YouTube films of the private Harry with his Grannie she's very far from an cold authority figure.

[Skippyboo]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

There was chatter after Kate married that she'd like to go the United Nations route but it was quickly and firmly explained to her that it wasn't possible.

Meghan may or may not settle down with Harry. If she does it will require an almost complete overhaul of her life.

Everything she is doing in her life right now would have to stop.

The only way around it, is maybe, just maybe if she didn't take a title herself.

But I doubt that would work even if it was realistic a realistic option.

Has there been a British Royal that has worked with the UN? We see this with the European royals but I don't recall a British royal getting involved with the UN. Look at the speech that William gave at the Foreign Office where he said that the U.K. has to work together with other countries which is totally true and then got accused by the press as being pro EU.

[Dman]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

There was chatter after Kate married that she'd like to go the United Nations route but it was quickly and firmly explained to her that it wasn't possible.

Meghan may or may not settle down with Harry. If she does it will require an almost complete overhaul of her life.

Everything she is doing in her life right now would have to stop.

The only way around it, is maybe, just maybe if she didn't take a title herself.

But I doubt that would work even if it was realistic a realistic option.

Meghan will carve out a role where she can still make a huge difference. Again, the couple only been dating for a few months. We are getting ahead of ourselves.

[Curryong]

I can see Meghan and Harry doing all sorts of things including trying to make a difference in African communities. In Britain Meghan could take on charities connected with the Arts. There are many, many things she could do if and when they marry!

[Alisa]

Is anyone else dismayed by the fact that we have yet to see the couple photographed together?

After such a poignant declaration and acknowledgement from KP I was hoping we would get a photo. I was even more optimistic when Meghan flew over. But nothing? 😕

[Queen Claude]

What pops in my mind is the discussion not too long ago about the monarchy under Charles and the role of the York princesses. Harry is the future Prince Andrew and his children are the future York princesses, and if the model of monarchy is the streamlined one where the British Royal Family is defined as the children of the monarch, then how strict should things be for Harry's wife knowing that her children, while grandchildren of a monarch, for them being part of the family business that Harry is part of is not an option. I can see the argument being made that Harry's wife, and maybe even Harry himself, should have greater latitude because their descendants are expected to make their way in the world but not as royals.

Using Meghan as an example, I can see her not being able to make comments like the one she made about moving to Canada if Trump won the election, but can the BRF really be overly controlling of Meghan's choices since the expected direction of the royal family is one where her children are not royal, and if heaven forbid she and Harry get divorced, while she will be able to keep the fancy title, assuming that she agrees to take it in the first place, but other than that, she will have to fend for herself, a la Sarah Ferguson.

[BoySetsFire]

Originally Posted by Queen Claude

What pops in my mind is the discussion not too long ago about the monarchy under Charles and the role of the York princesses. Harry is the future Prince Andrew and his children are the future York princesses, and if the model of monarchy is the streamlined one where the British Royal Family is defined as the children of the monarch, then how strict should things be for Harry's wife knowing that her children, while grandchildren of a monarch, for them being part of the family business that Harry is part of is not an option. I can see the argument being made that Harry's wife, and maybe even Harry himself, should have greater latitude because their descendants are expected to make their way in the world but not as royals.

Using Meghan as an example, I can see her not being able to make comments like the one she made about moving to Canada if Trump won the election, but can the BRF really be overly controlling of Meghan's choices since the expected direction of the royal family is one where her children are not royal, and if heaven forbid she and Harry get divorced, while she will be able to keep the fancy title, assuming that she agrees to take it in the first place, but other than that, she will have to fend for herself, a la Sarah Ferguson.

unless you follow royalty, spend your entire adult life social climbing to become a royal a la kate middleton or are part of the royal family most people, espescially americans, don't know anything of the tradition that royalty generally remains apolitical never making public statements. taking all of this into context, i highly doubt fro his point forward she will be making any such statements and if she does it will only be another sign that she will likely never marry harry.

i think this is a situation where he is more into her than she is into him. i believe she enjoys the publicity and the idea of being royalty but at the end of the day shen isn't willing to fall in line like kate and the others to get the title. i think someone in her camp leaked the relationship.

[royal rob]

So if they get married it couldn't be a big wedding in the Church of England because she is divorced ???
Charles couldn't marry in church. Anne got married in Scotland, Margaret couldn't get married in England and would have had to give her position and live out of the country same as the duke of Windsor
So what's the rule now.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

[Pranter]

Hmmm good question but I'd say if Charles couldn't get married in the Church and Anne had to go to Scotland...Harry won't be able to either. I never expected Harry to have a big fancy wedding. I figured it would be on a smaller scale more like Zara's. Maybe a destination wedding.


LaRae

[Ish]

The CoE has allowed divorcees to marry in a church since 2002, provided that whoever performs the ceremony consents to it.

In the case of Charles and Camilla, I believe the issue wasn't so much that they couldn't get married in the church as it was decided that given the circumstances it was probably best that they didn't - the fact that the two of them played parts in each other's divorces being a big part of the issue.

[royal rob]

Originally Posted by Pranter

Hmmm good question but I'd say if Charles couldn't get married in the Church and Anne had to go to Scotland...Harry won't be able to either. I never expected Harry to have a big fancy wedding. I figured it would be on a smaller scale more like Zara's. Maybe a destination wedding.


LaRae

Andrew had a big wedding so did Margaret both in the same position as Harry.
So I think if he married anyone not divorced it would be a pretty big affair.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

[Pranter]

Very different eras when Andrew (remember the oppulent 80's?) and when Margaret married (sister to the Queen at the time..and a very different time in history).

Harry doesn't seem like a big fancy wedding type of guy.


LaRae