The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1841  
Old 01-12-2020, 08:21 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Mokane, United States
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaira View Post
I do think that is critical. Meghan is obviously very close to her mother but Doria lives an ocean and continent away

Kate has been lambasted over the years for seeming too dependent on her mother but IMO her family was an invaluable base for her, William and the kids.
I think we've actually discussed this several pages back but yes, I completely agree that this type of family background is so incredibly important for the success of those marrying into the family. Truthfully I'm not 100% convinced that Meghan is as close to her mother as some of the press has led us to believe but maybe she is. It's definitely clear, though, that the family background and stability or lack thereof has been a huge factor in the comfort, adaptability, and success of those marrying into the BRF.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
Have to smirk at double standards.

I noticed your post criticizing the fact we haven't seen Archie interacting with the other kids and family outside christening and birth photo. He is seven months old, what were you expecting??? Photos of him and Louis at a mommy and me class??

How many photos of Louis did we see his first year? Or any of the Cambridge kids for that matter? Other then birth and christening, basically birthday and Christmas photos. We have actually seen just as much if not more of Archie then we saw of his cousins at this age.
Smirk all you want, the fact remains that it's become increasingly clear that whatever family ties there may have been, and frankly I think they were probably tenuous at best, are rapidly deteriorating or are completely broken between Harry and Meghan and the rest of the family. It's true that we rarely saw pictures of the other children as infants but we have seen many, many pictures of the cousins (Zara, Peter, William, etc.) with their children. While yes, Archie might be too young to roll around on the hills with the bigger kids, he's certainly not too young to be taken to events to be interacted with by the rest of the family while his parents spend time having fun with the adults. And as far as we can see and based on some comments that I believe Mike Tindall (possibly one of the others but I think it was him) made, I truly don't believe there's been any of those fun family days out at polo, fairs, eventing days, or other places that so many of those fun photos of both the older and younger cousins have come from over the years.
__________________

  #1842  
Old 01-12-2020, 08:26 PM
Zaira's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: A, United States
Posts: 1,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Heather_ View Post
I think we've actually discussed this several pages back but yes, I completely agree that this type of family background is so incredibly important for the success of those marrying into the family. Truthfully I'm not 100% convinced that Meghan is as close to her mother as some of the press has led us to believe but maybe she is. It's definitely clear, though, that the family background and stability or lack thereof has been a huge factor in the comfort, adaptability, and success of those marrying into the BRF.
What evidence do you have that she isnt close to her mother? By every account and every stage of her life and now as a royal Doria has been there.
__________________

  #1843  
Old 01-12-2020, 08:29 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Harry and Meghan seek global trademark for Sussex Royal brand

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...ex-royal-brand

I honestly think that the Sussexes should be prevented from using their titles and especially the word ‘royal’ in their commercial projects.
What if the "trademark" and the "brand" is directly related to the Sussex Royal Foundation though. We've seen it time and time again where incentives (such as Invictus Games and United for Wildlife) are on the global scale and not confined to the UK.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #1844  
Old 01-12-2020, 08:30 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
Have to smirk at double standards.

I noticed your post criticizing the fact we haven't seen Archie interacting with the other kids and family outside christening and birth photo. He is seven months old, what were you expecting??? Photos of him and Louis at a mommy and me class??

How many photos of Louis did we see his first year? Or any of the Cambridge kids for that matter? Other then birth and christening, basically birthday and Christmas photos. We have actually seen just as much if not more of Archie then we saw of his cousins at this age.
All of this. In fact I remember the jokes of the "forgotten child" in regards to Louis because we went months without seeing him. It has been proven that we have actually seen more images of Archie at this age than the others. We barely saw the Cambridge kids at this age. They are older now. It makes more sense they are more active and visible now.

Frankly we have zero idea what will happen with Archie. We have no clue how many times any of this family have seen him. None. Also Meghan has close friends, including her best friend, who lives in London. She has two small children herself. Not sure why people want to claim she will never step foot again in the UK when she has ties there outside of the royals.

A lot of assumptions.
  #1845  
Old 01-12-2020, 08:32 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Mokane, United States
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaira View Post
What evidence do you have that she isnt close to her mother? By every account and every stage of her life and now as a royal Doria has been there.
Absolutely none at all. I simply said that I'm not 100% convinced that she's as close to her mother as some reporters would have us believe. I really have no solid evidence at all, it's just my opinion. And I think I was more convinced about how close they were before all of this blew up. But Meghan has spent so much time pulling the "poor me, I'm so mistreated, no one supports me, my mental health is so fragile" card that in this time of pretty great upheaval, when she's fled to Canada, and the whole world is talking about her and her husband and the way they've conducted themselves, it would seem to me that if she really were as close to her mother as we've been led to believe then her mother would be in Canada supporting her and being there for her while she figures out her next move in this high stakes game. Instead we've seen pictures of her mother at home in LA. Now, I realize that she does have her own life and responsibilities but, speaking as a parent, when your child is going through something this chaotic and possibly traumatic on such a public stage, most parents who are truly close to that child would make every effort to be with them.
  #1846  
Old 01-12-2020, 08:34 PM
Leopoldine's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
Have to smirk at double standards.

I noticed your post criticizing the fact we haven't seen Archie interacting with the other kids and family outside christening and birth photo. He is seven months old, what were you expecting??? Photos of him and Louis at a mommy and me class??

How many photos of Louis did we see his first year? Or any of the Cambridge kids for that matter? Other then birth and christening, basically birthday and Christmas photos. We have actually seen just as much if not more of Archie then we saw of his cousins at this age.
If you read your history books, no one saw baby Prince Andrew for quite a while after his first photos as a newborn. This led to speculation that there was something wrong with him. After that, he started appearing in newsreel films and selected BRF film clips.
  #1847  
Old 01-12-2020, 08:34 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
That will never happen. Becoming a US Citizen requires one to renounce foreign titles of nobility. If he and Meghan really wanted to renounce his titles, they would have done so quietly.
Becoming a US citizen does not require renouncing foreign titles of nobility. There are actually several US citizens who hold foreign titles of nobility. The only thing is that those titles are not legally recognized inside the US and, therefore,, won’t appear in any US document for example.

The only people in the US who are barred from accepting foreign titles of nobility are actually people holding a public office under the United States ( according to the emoluments clause in the US constitution).

Upon becoming a US citizen, Harry would have, however, to renounce allegiance to ” any foreign prince”, including in this case his grandmother and, in the future, his father. That is part of the citizenship oath.
  #1848  
Old 01-12-2020, 08:41 PM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,754
Whew...

I'm with Osipi and others who are being reasonable in their views regarding the news stories, and mostly waiting to see how things further develop.

I just saw this report by Keir Simmons of NBC:



The 'Megxit' may sound catchy, but it's an inaccurate descriptor, plus it has also been the name widely used by Meghan haters and online trolls. The better descriptor is probably 'Sussexit'




  #1849  
Old 01-12-2020, 08:50 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Heather_ View Post
Absolutely none at all. I simply said that I'm not 100% convinced that she's as close to her mother as some reporters would have us believe. I really have no solid evidence at all, it's just my opinion. And I think I was more convinced about how close they were before all of this blew up. But Meghan has spent so much time pulling the "poor me, I'm so mistreated, no one supports me, my mental health is so fragile" card that in this time of pretty great upheaval, when she's fled to Canada, and the whole world is talking about her and her husband and the way they've conducted themselves, it would seem to me that if she really were as close to her mother as we've been led to believe then her mother would be in Canada supporting her and being there for her while she figures out her next move in this high stakes game. Instead we've seen pictures of her mother at home in LA. Now, I realize that she does have her own life and responsibilities but, speaking as a parent, when your child is going through something this chaotic and possibly traumatic on such a public stage, most parents who are truly close to that child would make every effort to be with them.
Wasn't this parent also apparently with them for many weeks? It has been 2 months of non Doria sighting and now when most people have return to their jobs we see her home and suddenly she apparently has no relationship with her daughter? Fascinating. It is always interesting how people constantly try to belittle their relationship despite Doria being the one person through all her milestones who has been there for her. Can't even say that about the father people love to judge her for not having in her life. And I am talking pre Harry stuff.
  #1850  
Old 01-12-2020, 08:50 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
What if the "trademark" and the "brand" is directly related to the Sussex Royal Foundation though. We've seen it time and time again where incentives (such as Invictus Games and United for Wildlife) are on the global scale and not confined to the UK.
Their trademark application covers a wide range of products and services from stationery, clothing, sports goods and alcoholic beverages to books and self-supporting groups/courses. Whether those are meant to be for profit or philanthropic only is immaterial. What matters is that they are planning to monetize their royal title and style.

I suspect that Meghan and her North American advisers see the Royal Family as a business and, as a business, they think it is being held back by the old ways of the courtiers. Their “ new progressive role” is their way of saying how much more profitable the business can be iif developed as a global “brand”.

Of course, that is totally what a monarchy is not, but we are seeing a typical case of cultural misunderstanding.
  #1851  
Old 01-12-2020, 08:50 PM
Eskimo's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Becoming a US citizen does not require renouncing foreign titles of nobility. There are actually several US citizens who hold foreign titles of nobility. The only thing is that those titles are not legally recognized inside the US and, therefore,, won’t appear in any US document for example.

The only people in the US who are barred from accepting foreign titles of nobility are actually people holding a public office under the United States ( according to the emoluments clause in the US constitution).

Upon becoming a US citizen, Harry would have, however, to renounce allegiance to ” any foreign prince”, including in this case his grandmother and, in the future, his father. That is part of the citizenship oath.
Part 12, Question 4 of the N-400 (Application for Naturalization)

a. Do you know, or did you ever have, a hereditary title of nobility in any foreign government?

b. If you answered Yes, are you willing to give up any inherited titles or orders of nobility that you have in a foreign country at you naturalization ceremony?
  #1852  
Old 01-12-2020, 08:52 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 1,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Heather_ View Post
I think we've actually discussed this several pages back but yes, I completely agree that this type of family background is so incredibly important for the success of those marrying into the family. Truthfully I'm not 100% convinced that Meghan is as close to her mother as some of the press has led us to believe but maybe she is. It's definitely clear, though, that the family background and stability or lack thereof has been a huge factor in the comfort, adaptability, and success of those marrying into the BRF.


It also really depends on the personality and values of the person marrying in. I’m sure a stable background is very helpful when marrying into the RF, but look at Philip. His upbringing was less stable than anyone’s. But he made it work for 70 years.
  #1853  
Old 01-12-2020, 08:57 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,237
The Cambridges also trademarked a lot of similar things around the same time that Sussexes claim was filed. I am sure if people dig deep the royals likely own many trademarks and copyrights. It is done for protection.

I am not claiming to know what Harry and Meghan have planned but simply trademarking one's name means very little. Any lawyer worth their salt would protect their client's intellectual property.
  #1854  
Old 01-12-2020, 09:01 PM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Their trademark application covers a wide range of products and services ...

I suspect that Meghan and her North American advisers see the Royal Family as a business...
You forgot to include Harry in this. As well, there's the Duchy Originals trademark that Prince Charles had, and whatever else he currently has trademarked related to his enterprises on behalf of community projects and charitable endeavors. In addition, the Cambridges have trademarked the Royal Foundation.

HM the Queen sees the royal family as a business too, as do all the royals, otherwise they wouldn't refer to it as the 'royal firm.'
  #1855  
Old 01-12-2020, 09:01 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Their trademark application covers a wide range of products and services from stationery, clothing, sports goods and alcoholic beverages to books and self-supporting groups/courses. Whether those are meant to be for profit or philanthropic only is immaterial. What matters is that they are planning to monetize their royal title and style.

I suspect that Meghan and her North American advisers see the Royal Family as a business and, as a business, they think it is being held back by the old ways of the courtiers. Their “ new progressive role” is their way of saying how much more profitable the business can be iif developed as a global “brand”.

Of course, that is totally what a monarchy is not, but we are seeing a typical case of cultural misunderstanding.
Tell me then, how is this different (but perhaps on a bigger scale) than Charles and the Duchy of Cornwall having Duchy Original products on the market through Waitrose where profits gleaned trickle back into the Prince's Trust endeavors? Hmmmmm?

This is hardly something *new* the Sussexes are doing.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...e-biscuit.html

ETA: "There is a risk of confusion among stakeholders over the scope and role
of the Duchy of Cornwall; for example, it must be differentiated from
Duchy Originals (now known as Waitrose Duchy Organic), an organic
food brand set up by The Prince of Wales in 1990 and a separate entity."

https://duchyofcornwall.org/assets/p...allIAR2018.pdf
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #1856  
Old 01-12-2020, 09:03 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 1,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by evolvingdoors View Post
I have a lot to say about her father, and her treatment of him since she met Harry let alone the wedding.
Like she fled the U.K. choosing to not deal with the “family she never had” after she has disrespected them and have done the equivalent of throwing mud in their face, for welcoming her into the fold despite, quite accurate, concerns, she has by all accounts did the same to her father (the father she spend year praising in interviews and social media...)

Any truly loving daughter would have gotten her ass on a plane the second after the wedding and gone to see her post surgery ill father and clear everything face to face. And don’t get me started on the letter she send him.

In other words, Rather than act in a grown up respectful manner - which means actually dealing with things. That’s what being made of steel is all about.
So she once had a loving relationship with her father..what changed?

I can’t speak as to the details, but I agree completely that Meghan’s “my way or the highway” attitude is not conducive to forging good relationships with anyone. I’m disgusted with how she’s treated her new family - and I’m tired of reading about how they haven’t supported her. We know HM and Charles have for sure - and Camilla. I wonder if Meghan doesn’t make it easy for anyone to help her.
  #1857  
Old 01-12-2020, 09:04 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
Part 12, Question 4 of the N-400 (Application for Naturalization)

a. Do you know, or did you ever have, a hereditary title of nobility in any foreign government?

b. If you answered Yes, are you willing to give up any inherited titles or orders of nobility that you have in a foreign country at you naturalization ceremony?
The citizenship oath .as you may see below, does not mention renunciation of any title of nobility. It mentions, however, renouncing allegiance to foreign princes.

Quote:
I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."
You are right, however, that a renunciation , in addition to the citizenship oath, is indeed required of naturalized citizens who hold titles or orders.

Quote:
"

The Code of Federal Regulations (8 CFR 337.1) accordingly provides the following:

A petitioner or applicant for naturalization who has borne any hereditary
title or has been of any of the orders of nobility in any foreign state shall,
in addition to taking the oath of allegiance prescribed in paragraph (a) of
this section, make under oath or affirmation in public an express renunciation
of such title or order of nobility, in the following form:
(1) I further renounce the title of (give title or titles) which I have
heretofore held; or
(2) I further renounce the order of [....]
Thanks for pointing that out. It is actually oddly asymmetric because US citizens can inherit titles of nobility or acquire them by marriage without losing their citizenship ( Meghan is an example) , but a person who has a title and wants to be a naturalized citizen has to renounce it.

I assume the legislator probably made the inference that receiving an order or title from a foreign monarch implies allegiance to that prince and, thus, mandated the renunciation .
  #1858  
Old 01-12-2020, 09:06 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Mokane, United States
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
Wasn't this parent also apparently with them for many weeks? It has been 2 months of non Doria sighting and now when most people have return to their jobs we see her home and suddenly she apparently has no relationship with her daughter? Fascinating. It is always interesting how people constantly try to belittle their relationship despite Doria being the one person through all her milestones who has been there for her. Can't even say that about the father people love to judge her for not having in her life. And I am talking pre Harry stuff.
I have no idea if she was with them for several weeks or not and neither do any of you. We have no photographs and no public statements about their break or who was with them. Maybe she was and maybe she wasn't. I'm simply saying that I, like any of you here, am entitled to my own opinion and my opinion is that she may not be as close to her as people have previously thought. And, that only entered my mind when pictures emerged that made it clear that she's now at her own home in LA while all of this upheaval is happening. Meghan herself constantly tells us how she's "not okay" but then when things are literally in chaos all around her and her family and she feels the need to run to another continent in order to escape it all her mother that is supposedly so incredibly close to her carries on as though it's all incredibly normal? That, like much of the world surrounding Harry and Meghan, makes very little sense. As for her father, as someone who has a toxic father myself I've never and would never judge the fact that Meghan removed him from her life. I even have a father that provided quite well for me during my childhood but when it boiled right down to it he was toxic and it was better for myself and my children not to have him in our lives. It sucks but it happens. That doesn't mean, though, that you have to cut yourself off from both sides of your family. And it's hard to believe that every single relative on both sides of her family are so incredibly toxic that you can't allow yourself to be associated with them in any way. But, we just simply don't know enough about all of them to judge that.

I just find it very strange that this mother than she's supposed to be so incredibly close to doesn't go to her only child in the middle of all this. That's odd.
  #1859  
Old 01-12-2020, 09:09 PM
texankitcat's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 1,014
[QUOTE=Eskimo;2282124]That will never happen. Becoming a US Citizen requires one to renounce foreign titles of nobility. If he and Meghan really wanted to renounce his titles, they would have done so quietly

It would be impossible to renounce their titles quietly and I doubt they would do it willingly. They already have a patent on the Sussex Royal name for their branding.
  #1860  
Old 01-12-2020, 09:11 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Mokane, United States
Posts: 644
[QUOTE=texankitcat;2282151]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
That will never happen. Becoming a US Citizen requires one to renounce foreign titles of nobility. If he and Meghan really wanted to renounce his titles, they would have done so quietly

It would be impossible to renounce their titles quietly and I doubt they would do it willingly. They already have a patent on the Sussex Royal name for their branding.
Trademark, not patent. Yes it's a small thing but they really aren't the same thing at all. But, for what it's worth, I agree. They'd never willingly renounce those titles even if they could, though I'm given to understand that it's not so easy to do, and I very much doubt they'd do it quietly even if they could.
__________________

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Duke of Sussex and The Invictus Games: 2014 and 2016-2018, 2020 Dman The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family 1150 09-06-2020 07:30 PM




Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes abu dhabi american history ancestry armstrong-jones baptism british british royals chittagong countess of snowdon cover-up daisy dutch dutch royals family life family tree games gustaf vi adolf haakon vii heraldry hill history house of glucksburg interesting introduction israel jack brooksbank jewelry jumma kids movie king willem-alexander książ castle list of rulers mailing maxima nepal nepalese royal family norwegian royal family popularity prince charles prince constantijn princess ariane princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn princess dita princess elizabeth pronunciation queen consort queen maud queen maxima royal balls royal events royal family royal jewels royal spouse royalty royal wedding russian court dress spain speech startling new evidence stuart swedish queen taiwan thailand tracts unsubscribe videos von hofmannsthal wedding gown


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:23 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×