The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Step Back as Senior Royals: January 2020

[Alison H]

I think there's still a gender issue here, as well. No-one expected Princess Madeleine of Sweden's husband to give up his job - because he's a man. No-one expected either Mark Phillips or Tim Laurence, or indeed the Earl of Snowdon, to give up their jobs - because they're men. Although, to be fair, Sophie carried on working after she got married.

Maybe they're just unlucky with their particular jobs? PR and acting are both very public things. If Meghan had worked in a bank, for example, and had been able to arrange a transfer to an office in London, I think people would've been OK with that, but it would've been rather weird to've had the future king's daughter-in-law appearing in EastEnders or Holby City. If she'd wanted to carry on working, and we don't even know whether she did or not.

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by Countessmeout

Harry abd Meghan were adults. They had years of adult experience. Harv both had long term relationships which showed them both what they wanted and what they didn't want in a partner.

These aren't a couple who ran off and eloped after weeks or months blindly. They were in love and both at a stage where ready for marriage and kids.

Just because you date for a long time doesn't heir you any more stable. You get to a point where it's seen as the natural next step. Some people like the Cambridges marry, some like Beatrice and Dave break up.

That's true, but the difference with Meghan was that she was relocating to a another country, and her life was completely changed.
So it might have been better to have a period of adjustment; instead she left her TV series and immediately plunged into wedding preparations.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Alison H

There used to be a rumour that the Queen didn't want any of her descendants to marry until they'd been with their partner for at least 5 years, after what happened with Charles and Diana. Times have certainly changed - William and Kate living together before marriage would have been unthinkable a generation earlier. I would think she did have concerns about how quickly things moved between Harry and Meghan, but how much could she have done about it? If she'd refused permission, they'd have got married anyway, and it would have been awkward and embarrassing and caused bad feeling.

We've probably all had times when we've felt that a friend or relative was rushing into things, but there's not much you can do about it. Commenting on someone else's relationship or choice of partner is a sure-fire way to cause offence, however well you might mean it!

She could technicaly have refused permission but I agree, while I think she did try to suggest that couples now spend at leaset a few years living close by or together, if someone is determined ot marry, it would not work to foribid it. And I think H and Meg have shown that they would be very headstrong...

[Marengo]

I would find it rather odd if a relative is dictating when a person should get married. Certainly the trajectory to marriage is different for couples and they should be free to decide on their own. Not that I think the Queen has dictated the couple anything in that regard btw.

Originally Posted by QueenMathilde

We all knew it had to happen - Caitlyn Jenner has reached out to them. She wants to work closely with them.

What exactly does that mean? 'Reaching out'? She called them or twittered at them? Wished them good luck on instagram? And how do we know that she did?

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Marengo

I would find it rather odd if a relative is dictating when a person should get married. Certainly the trajectory to marriage is different for couples and they should be free to decide on their own. Not that I think the Queen has dictated the couple anything in that regard btw.



What exactly does that mean? 'Reaching out'? She called them or twittered at them? Wished them good luck on instagram? And how do we know that she did?

I think it would have been a lot better if the queen had been more pro active in stating that royal couples should get to know each other and have a relationship of a few eyars, before marrying. Its possible that Haryr and Meghan if they'd spent more time together in England, would have realised that Meghan was finding it hard to fit in and that neither of them really wanted to be full time working royals.

[QueenMathilde]

Originally Posted by Marengo

What exactly does that mean? 'Reaching out'? She called them or twittered at them? Wished them good luck on instagram? And how do we know that she did?

https://radaronline.com/exclusives/2...lifornia-move/


With anyone else I would say "It's Radar Online". But it's a Kardashian - they have them on speed dial. If it's in there Caitlyn herself released it. It would be a disaster for them to meet any of the Kardashians.

The Financial Times is also criticizing what is being called the "Megha-Mansion" they are supposedly looking at buying. They said it is too expensive and would eat into a large amount of their money. They don't now how much they will earn and they shouldn't spend money they don't have yet.

[bekalc]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

That's true, but the difference with Meghan was that she was relocating to a another country, and her life was completely changed.
So it might have been better to have a period of adjustment; instead she left her TV series and immediately plunged into wedding preparations.

My understanding is their might have been immigrantion issues to she had fiancés visa six months.

Studies show couples with two to three years of courtship before marriage less likely to divorce. But studies show after that couples are actually more likely to divorce. If your facilating that long there may be issues with the relationship. There may be differences to for very young and older. There was also the issue of kids and the older Meghan waited the harder it could make it.

Women should be careful about giving men too many years if they want kids.

[yvr girl]

Originally Posted by Eskimo

Canada and the US have no issues with someone have several citizenship's. I am not sure about the UK. I am also not sure if the UK allows people in the immediate line of succession to have dual citizenship (pledging allegiance to someone besides the Queen). Yes, Archie is entitled to US citizenship but I am not sure he actually has got a US Passport.

If you are a citizen through birthright do you actually need to take an oath? I'm sure Archie could get a US passport just by filing some documents.

[Alison H]

An ordinary person can hold treble nationality in the UK. It usually happens because someone has an Irish grandparent and then one British parent and one parent from somewhere else, but I don't see why someone couldn't have British and American citizen via their parents and then acquire citizenship somewhere else through residency. I don't know if there are any specific rules for royals, but I presume that if you're a US citizen by birth then you don't need to pledge allegiance to anyone.

There could be all sorts of taxation and legal issues, though!

[Marengo]

Originally Posted by QueenMathilde

The Financial Times is also criticizing what is being called the "Megha-Mansion" they are supposedly looking at buying. They said it is too expensive and would eat into a large amount of their money. They don't now how much they will earn and they shouldn't spend money they don't have yet.

Wouldn't that be a concern for the couple only. Why would the FT or anybody else be entitled to tell them how they are to spend their own money?

Originally Posted by QueenMathilde

With anyone else I would say "It's Radar Online". But it's a Kardashian - they have them on speed dial. If it's in there Caitlyn herself released it. It would be a disaster for them to meet any of the Kardashians.

It seems to be all hearsay than and nothing tangible has happened. I can't see why we should run along with the celebrity obsession of the US entertainment press.

[Sterling3763]

Originally Posted by Marengo

It seems to be all hearsay than and nothing tangible has happened. I can't see why we should run along with the celebrity obsession of the US entertainment press.

Agreed. The barest rumors and the most ill-supported speculation are being treated as hard fact on this portion of the forums.

How about we wait for Harry and Meagan to actually finalize a purchase, deal, or event before we begin reacting?

[Hallo girl]

Originally Posted by Marengo

Wouldn't that be a concern for the couple only. Why would the FT or anybody else be entitled to tell them how they are to spend their own money?



It seems to be all hearsay than and nothing tangible has happened. I can't see why we should run along with the celebrity obsession of the US entertainment press.

So the US do have the celebrity stories and press, possibly not tabloid newspapers but celebrity stories.
I asked previously on this forum ( not this thread ) about tabloid press in the USA and was told they do not have anything like that.
So the poster who told me they do not have tabloid newspapers was correct, but there is a celebrity style press , I wondered at the time because I had heard of different magazines that appeared to print rather wacky stories.

Originally Posted by MARG

To me, it seems that Harry and Meghan not only did not get any of the changes they wanted. Instead, it looks like they got kicked out of the Kingdom! There are reports of moving vans at Frogmore Cottage and H&M official wedding memorabilia has been removed from sale at royal outlets.

So, not just the Kingdom but the Family as well. It is not a good look for the BRF as the Net releases stories of Harry "not being well" and "controlled by Meghan and Doria". Ugh, it all leaves me with a very nasty taste in my mouth.

I am not surprised re the moving vans, Archies things alone , also their clothes and personal effects. We all know they are going to be away for a substantial amount of time.
Another possibility is that some of the furniture, art etc is on loan from the royal collection and is being returned.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by yvr girl

If you are a citizen through birthright do you actually need to take an oath? I'm sure Archie could get a US passport just by filing some documents.

Archie doesn't have to take any oath to become a US citizen as he is considered a natural-born citizen under US law (i.e. someone who acquired his citizenship when he was born).

However, if Archie decides to become a naturalized citizen of Canada, and if he is 14 or older at that time, he will have to take the following oath as required by law:


"I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen."

Note that the text of the oath uses British/Canadian spelling "fulfil" as opposed to the usual American spelling "fulfill".


PS: If he were under 14, I understand his parents would have to sign the oath on his behalf, but, in any case, Archie would be bound by it.

[wyevale]

We all know they are going to be away for a substantial amount of time.
Another possibility is that some of the furniture, art etc is on loan from the royal collection and is being returned.

One wonders if some resourceful person has calculated just how many nights this couple actually spent under the roof of this elaborately refurbished 'home' ?

[Hallo girl]

Originally Posted by miss whirley

I consider a year and a half too short, especially since she moved to the UK the same month she got engaged. How much time did she really see Harry before that? A couple weekends a month, a couple weeks in the summer/winter here and there..that year and half becomes more like 3-4 months of total time together.

As for needing the help, at what cost? Both Sophie and the Duchess of Gloucester do lovely work but they are largely unnoticed in the UK, most people don't know they exist. So the low-key work of Sophie and DoG isn't worth the epic messes that are Fergie and Meghan. Imagine if the late Earl Snowdon and Mark phillips had represented the firm their scandals would have been exponentially magnified. It was very lucky for the firm that they were private citizens. The way I see it having married-ins of younger sibs in the firm is High Risk, Low Reward. And that isn't good business sense.

I do need to defend the Gloucester family on here, they do work low key but they have given up their entire married life to the royal family.

He was the second son ( the spare as we talk about on here ) he had a career as did his girlfriend. They were looking forward to living a completely private life , marriage children etc etc.
Fate stepped in and the heir died, everything changed for them.
They stepped up, and yes over the years the place in the succession dropped but they still supported the queen, as they do to this day. Quietly and with dignity.
Their children have kept a relatively low profile, just got on with their lives.

That is why i also do not think that Harry wanted to move away because he was just the spare.
There is a much bigger picture going on there.

[lirienn]

For some time Meghan was talking with Elen and will appear at the show. What a mess. Harry clearly had no clue what he was getting into. I believe he will start seeing it clearly now and it'd be tough.

[Alison H]

I don't know why the press report some of this stuff :-). They're not going to buy a whole new set of clothes, books, gadgets, baby stuff etc to have in Canada, and their stuff isn't all going to fit into the 23kg luggage allowance you get on a passenger plane!

[Hallo girl]

Originally Posted by wyevale

One wonders if some resourceful person has calculated just how many nights this couple actually spent under the roof of this elaborately refurbished 'home' ?

There will be somebody somewhere has it worked out, or in the process of.

Originally Posted by lirienn

For some time Meghan was talking with Elen and will appear at the show. What a mess. Harry clearly had no clue what he was getting into. I believe he will start seeing it clearly now and it'd be tough.

I am sure it will be to promote good causes and their foundation.

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by Hallo girl

So the US do have the celebrity stories and press, possibly not tabloid newspapers but celebrity stories.
I asked previously on this forum ( not this thread ) about tabloid press in the USA and was told they do not have anything like that.
So the poster who told me they do not have tabloid newspapers was correct, but there is a celebrity style press , I wondered at the time because I had heard of different magazines that appeared to print rather wacky stories.

Oh we absolutely have celebrity gossip magazines--People, Us, In Touch, National Enquirer, Star--just to name a few.

We even have TV shows devoted to celebrity gossip.

Originally Posted by Alison H

I don't know why the press report some of this stuff :-). They're not going to buy a whole new set of clothes, books, gadgets, baby stuff etc to have in Canada, and their stuff isn't all going to fit into the 23kg luggage allowance you get on a passenger plane!

But if they are moving all their stuff to Canada, then I would venture a guess that Archie may not come to Britain and any visits won't be for more than a few days at a time.

[caethi]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-prince-harry-and-meghan-face-sussex-royal-trademark-challenges/

Things may not go so easily for them in terms of their "trademark". The article doesn't reveal much about the motivation for the challenge but it may hold things up a bit.

So it seems as if they are still going to use "Sussex Royal". Given that they are no longer working royals, this seems a bit rich to me.