The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1361  
Old 11-16-2016, 05:29 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 12,993
I would imagine there was no need for Meghan to have security in London because no one expected to see her. Now if she spent a significant amount of time in the UK, the need for security might change.

In reference to having security in Toronto, I can see why there is a need. Especially since reporters know where she lives, have tried to sneak into her home and it is somewhat public knowledge where Suits films.

A big difference IMO.
__________________

__________________
.

  #1362  
Old 11-16-2016, 07:15 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
I would imagine there was no need for Meghan to have security in London because no one expected to see her. Now if she spent a significant amount of time in the UK, the need for security might change.

In reference to having security in Toronto, I can see why there is a need. Especially since reporters know where she lives, have tried to sneak into her home and it is somewhat public knowledge where Suits films.

A big difference IMO.
I agree. I think her security situation will be taken care of though.
__________________

__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
  #1363  
Old 11-16-2016, 07:36 PM
Emme's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: East Coast, United States
Posts: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippyboo View Post
Funny now Harry supposedly want to hire a retired police officer for when Meghan is in the U.K. but allowed her to walk around Kensington alone just after the press complaint letter which confirmed the relationship. He could have asked someone on his staff to go with her if he was so concerned.
Hmmm... I wonder if maybe she did have some sort of protection shadowing her in London, but we just didn't see it...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Angel.10 View Post
I agree. I bet even on a wedding for next year
Yes! I am sticking to the prediction I made pre-Harry letter:

- Engaged over the holidays, perhaps not publicly announced for a while
- Wedding in May 2017

  #1364  
Old 11-16-2016, 10:00 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Washington DC, United States
Posts: 489
Meghan will have a ring on her finger soon!

I also predict that when she and Harry will engaged when she returns from her trip with Harry and that their wedding will be in early 2017.
  #1365  
Old 11-16-2016, 10:06 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Marietta, United States
Posts: 139
See,im thinking a June 2017 wedding.I can't see him letting this one go.She is too perfect for him.
  #1366  
Old 11-16-2016, 10:32 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,395
I do love weddings, especially Royal ones! However, I'm being a bit more cautious than some here. IF they are serious about each other longterm, and it is still a question really of whether it's going to last, then I certainly don't think it's going to take years for Harry and Meghan to be married.

Meghan's age alone would mean a fairly short dating then engagement period, I would have thought, if there are going to be children. I don't think the process can be speeded up too much though. The BRF is a cautious institution.

Still, what do I know! I was convinced Cressida was The One in spite of Harry looking less than enthusiastic when they were out together! I still think that was a serious romance that was killed off by social media commentary.
  #1367  
Old 11-16-2016, 10:41 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Marietta, United States
Posts: 139
I'm sure the reason Harry dated Chelsy and Cressida for over a year both was because he wanted them to get used to the idea of being royal and charitable.The reason he seems so stuck on Meghan is because she already knows what to do because she already does it and is willing to take on the role.His other serious girlfriends didn't want to.They were rich blondes and Meghan actually has a job and is successful.Many members of Royal families INCLUDING his marry after 6-18 months although some do not last.These two seem so compatible its inevitable for a wedding and hopefully with many years.
  #1368  
Old 11-16-2016, 11:02 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,854
All this talk of Harry and Meghan sprinting to the altar makes me grimace a bit. The BRF tends to have bad luck with quick courtships.

Successful Marriages-

~The Queen and Prince Philip. The Queen was in love with him for 8 years before marrying him.
~Charles and Camilla. Well, they had a 30+ year marathon to the altar.
~Tim and Anne. We believe they were together about 6 years before marrying. The timeline is a little vague because she was still legally married to Mark during that time.
~Edward and Sophie. Married after 6 years together.
~Peter and Autumn. Married after 5 years together.
~William and Catherine. Married after 9 years together.
~Mike and Zara. Married after 7.5 years together.

Unsuccessful Marriages-

~Mark and Anne. Married after 1 year together.
~Charles and Diana. Married after 1 year together.
~Andrew and Sarah. Married after 1 year together.




If they marry before 2019, I'll be very wary of their longterm success.
  #1369  
Old 11-16-2016, 11:18 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilacmagnolia View Post
I'm sure the reason Harry dated Chelsy and Cressida for over a year both was because he wanted them to get used to the idea of being royal and charitable.The reason he seems so stuck on Meghan is because she already knows what to do because she already does it and is willing to take on the role.His other serious girlfriends didn't want to.They were rich blondes and Meghan actually has a job and is successful.Many members of Royal families INCLUDING his marry after 6-18 months although some do not last.These two seem so compatible its inevitable for a wedding and hopefully with many years.

What do you mean she knows what to do ??


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
  #1370  
Old 11-16-2016, 11:21 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,395
I agree that Meghan has a proven record in charity work since 2014 and can certainly make successful speeches. She's also used, because of her profession, to meeting and greeting all sorts of people in a pleasant manner. I hope Meghan will learn quickly about British customs and traditions and the protocol that is so important in the public life of the BRF. It will be a lot to absorb but if she is determined to do it for Harry's sake she will, IMO.

Even if Chelsy had dated Harry for ten years not five she would still have rejected the Royal lifestyle IMO. She was never interested.

I do think Cressida would have been willing to take Royal life on, but whatever love was there between herself and Harry couldn't withstand social media trolls.
  #1371  
Old 11-16-2016, 11:29 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Marietta, United States
Posts: 139
I don't think it has anything to do with how long they dated before...The royal family are notorious for their infidelities and most of their "long term" marriages are from cheating on their first partner and finding someone else as they get older than they were when they married.We don't know if Peter &Autumn,William&Catherine,Zara&Mike will last because those are more recent marriages...When people are younger they will date for many years but when they get more mature in age they know what they want...It shouldn't take 3 years if she's "The One"...Just like Meghan dated her previous husband for a decade before they married and they divorced 18 months later.Everyone works at their own paces.I think they will last just like Princess Grace and Prince Rainier after their 3 dates or whatever the story is.
  #1372  
Old 11-16-2016, 11:36 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,395
Yes, of those mentioned as having disastrous marriages, two were quite young when they wed, Diana was just 20, Anne 23. There's a great difference in maturity between those who marry into Royal/married life in their early to mid twenties and those who embark on matrimony and Royal life in their 30's.

If Meghan and Harry wait for over well over two years before they wed then the likelihood of them having more than one child will appreciably diminish.
  #1373  
Old 11-16-2016, 11:36 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Marietta, United States
Posts: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal rob View Post
What do you mean she knows what to do ??


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

I am saying she is dedicated to her work as an philanthropist and is a very hard worker,a great speaker,bilingual,very well educated...That is a major role for a future princess and she has all the qualities...
  #1374  
Old 11-16-2016, 11:37 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,854
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
I agree that Meghan has a proven record in charity work since 2014 and can certainly make successful speeches. She's also used, because of her profession, to meeting and greeting all sorts of people in a pleasant manner. I hope Meghan will learn quickly about British customs and traditions and the protocol that is so important in the public life of the BRF. It will be a lot to absorb but if she is determined to do it for Harry's sake she will, IMO.

Even if Chelsy had dated Harry for ten years not five she would still have rejected the Royal lifestyle IMO. She was never interested.

I do think Cressida would have been willing to take Royal life on, but whatever love was there between herself and Harry couldn't withstand social media trolls.
I think the bigger hinderance was her lingering feelings for Harry Wentworth-Stanley. Throughout her romance with Prince Harry it was reported he was worried he would lose her to her ex, and once they split she ran back to her ex's arms. Presently the two seem very happy and committed, they might be the pair to announce an engagement after the holidays, instead.
  #1375  
Old 11-16-2016, 11:38 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilacmagnolia View Post
I don't think it has anything to do with how long they dated before...The royal family are notorious for their infidelities and most of their "long term" marriages are from cheating on their first partner and finding someone else as they get older than they were when they married.We don't know if Peter &Autumn,William&Catherine,Zara&Mike will last because those are more recent marriages...When people are younger they will date for many years but when they get more mature in age they know what they want...It shouldn't take 3 years if she's "The One"...Just like Meghan dated her previous husband for a decade before they married and they divorced 18 months later.Everyone works at their own paces.I think they will last just like Princess Grace and Prince Rainier after their 3 dates or whatever the story is.

Theirs was more or less arranged by his priest. It also included money her father paid for her dowry It has been said it wasn't a really happy marriage. She was upset she couldn't act anymore and he had affairs from what I have read over the years


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
  #1376  
Old 11-16-2016, 11:42 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Marietta, United States
Posts: 139
Meghan is a very fit woman so I don't think she will have problems producing children but Harry did strike me as a man who wanted 3 children instead of the typical 2...I do think she has a higher likelihood for multiples at 35...I don't understand why some people are saying 35 is too old for children...If a woman is in good shape she could could continue having children into her early 40's...
  #1377  
Old 11-16-2016, 11:57 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,854
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilacmagnolia View Post
Meghan is a very fit woman so I don't think she will have problems producing children but Harry did strike me as a man who wanted 3 children instead of the typical 2...I do think she has a higher likelihood for multiples at 35...I don't understand why some people are saying 35 is too old for children...If a woman is in good shape she could could continue having children into her early 40's...
I agree that Meghan having children at a later age shouldn't be a problem. Sophie Wessex had her first child when she was two months shy of her 39th birthday, and she had James at 42. Donna Air is currently 37, and James Middleton has talked about their future together and how he would like children-plural.

If Harry and Meghan marry in 2019, depending on their breastfeeding viewpoints, they could still have between 2-4 children. Now if some people were expecting Harry to have a gigantic, Queen Victoria sized family, then yes, Meghan probably couldn't do that, even if she raced to the altar in 2017.
  #1378  
Old 11-17-2016, 12:12 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,395
Fertility does decrease once a woman nears forty, however.
  #1379  
Old 11-17-2016, 12:29 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,854
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Fertility does decrease once a woman nears forty, however.
Decreases, sure. Disappears, no.

The Queen wasn't a spring chicken when she had Prince Edward, and that was before all the new IVF technology. If Harry's wife struggles to conceive, he has the resources and the contacts for her to visit the best fertility doctors in the UK. If Meghan can't do it naturally, you'll very likely read about 40-year-old Meghan having twins/triplets/quads/quints; and the following year her doctors receiving a OBE for their help.
  #1380  
Old 11-17-2016, 12:36 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,981
It doesn't matter how fit you are once you hit the late thirties the chances of having a healthy baby drop. The older you are the older your eggs are and all sorts of problems happen. And who are we to say she wants children enough to take this risk .
These are real people with all problems that happen in life they are not living a fairytale
__________________

Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
america archie mountbatten-windsor asia baby names birth britain britannia british british royal family camilla camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house colorblindness commonwealth countries coronation crown jewels customs duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family life fashion and style gemstones george vi gradenigo gustaf vi adolf hello! henry viii hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs jack brooksbank japan kensington palace king edward vii lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchist movements monarchists mongolia mountbatten names nara period pless politics prince harry princess eugenie queen consort queen elizabeth ii queen louise royal ancestry solomon j solomon spanish royal family st edward sussex suthida taiwan tradition united states of america wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:30 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×