The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Royal Highlights > Royal Library
Click Here to Login

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1781  
Old 08-14-2020, 04:24 PM
duchessrachel's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Birmingham, United States
Posts: 1,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
I roll my eyes whenever I see the ďwell hey, the BRF isnít perfect....Ē because..who cares? No one ever said they were perfect; that isnít relevant, and itís a poor defense of the Sussexes. Meghan and Harry have behaved badly. As far as Iím concerned, the BRF tried their best to make those two happy, but it was an impossible task. I donít ascribe to the ďthere must be a middle ground hereĒ; for me, this mess is primarily on H and M.
I totally agree. What Meghan and Harry failed to understand is that their job as working royals was not to promote their own "woke" agenda but to carry out duties on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen. Also, they were to function within the established hierarchy. It's not about them. It's about the Queen and the UK- not about working out the world's problems. They Monarchy is supposed to be a unifying force within the UK. H&M have only caused division. That Harry does not understand the function of the Royal Family is baffling to me given that he was born into it. I am an American and I believe I understand it better than him.
__________________

  #1782  
Old 08-14-2020, 04:25 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
i DOUBT if the RF was either rude to her or all gushy over her in the way that Harry described it. But H can't have it both ways. First he was saying that they were all adoring her, that they were the family she never had.. then its all" William was a snob and told Harry to be careful".. and "Some royal called her a showgirl" (I can guess who)...
I suspect they were polite enough overall but soem were indifferent..
And as they got to know her, I suspect some began to dislike her...
__________________

  #1783  
Old 08-14-2020, 05:25 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
i DOUBT if the RF was either rude to her or all gushy over her in the way that Harry described it. But H can't have it both ways. First he was saying that they were all adoring her, that they were the family she never had.. then its all" William was a snob and told Harry to be careful".. and "Some royal called her a showgirl" (I can guess who)...
I suspect they were polite enough overall but soem were indifferent..
And as they got to know her, I suspect some began to dislike her...
Well going on the book and how she essentially presents herself I cannot see any of Anne's family even having time for her. Andrew caring...ever anyway. Beatrice and Eugenie maybe would have been the target but after the wedding announcement, I can see them giving her a wide space. Why would Edward and Sophie care anyway...different generation. And we know William and Kate were a no no.

Showgirl 100 percent Phil. And if not him Anne. And it would be their humour.

She is too fake for any of them to take to her. And that is her own description of herself in the book.

I forgot in the book she felt the moor brooch was a personal attack against her. No sweetie you are not the centre of Princess Michael's world, and seeing her own son married an actress, she made an unfortunate fashion choice.

I just see the entire family being very uninterested in Meghan and anything Meghan had to say or was interested in. They like the outdoors and horses and live rather boring lives. Dogs would be a link.
  #1784  
Old 08-14-2020, 06:56 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Oakland, United States
Posts: 576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
True but some of my family on the Isle of Wight are moaning both that the "grockles" aren't coming *and* that they are right now. The island depends on tourism, and they never talk about tourists using any other expression. It seems a lot of people who need tourists and taxpayers take pleasure in being ever so slightly disdainful about them, go figure.

It wouldn't be surprising that some of them might have been snobby or snarky about her or possibly ignored her at family events, hell it happens in non royal families all the time. That's quite rude and I don't blame her for being annoyed about it. However for me it also gets lumped in with the "that's it?" complaints. That's part of why you quit the way you did? I'm sure there were a lot of eyebrows raised about Kate and her coal mining ancestry and flight attendant self made parents at one point.

To me thatís quite interesting for Meghan to feel slight over, since she has essentially seems to ignore her entire family, except her mom, even exists for nearly 20 year now.
  #1785  
Old 08-14-2020, 06:57 PM
duchessrachel's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Birmingham, United States
Posts: 1,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
FWIW...no one in the BRF is alleged to have called Meghan a showgirl. It was said to have been a courtier who referred to her as "Harry's showgirl" and another who suggested that she was untrustworthy.

Other than the ridiculous (imo) Princess Michael, everything I have read points to the family from HMQ and the PoW bending over backwards to welcome Harry's beloved. If they didn't bend far enough to suit Harry that is for another topic.

The tabloids and online comments were mean
So what? Meghan should have asked Sarah how she handled being compared to a horse looks wise and being called lazy and a "bad mum". (Apparently it decimated her already low self esteem).

After William and Kate married in 2011, i saw Beatrice and Eugenie mocked as the Ugly Cinderella Stepsisters in both American AND British tabloids.

Why did Meghan believe she would receive kid glove treatment, if she ever did believe that?

Final question..WHY were Meghan and Harry reading tabloid articles in the first place? Especially when we were assured via her anonymous posse in People magazine that she was tuning out all the "noise" and concentrating on her new life?
And they said in their engagement interview that they didn't read the press
  #1786  
Old 08-14-2020, 07:08 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by evolvingdoors View Post
To me thatís quite interesting for Meghan to feel slight over, since she has essentially seems to ignore her entire family, except her mom, even exists for nearly 20 year now.
I can't say I blame her re her family. Her siblings are horrible.. and clearly hate her. Her father is unreliable...Apart form her mother I cant see whom she would be close to...
  #1787  
Old 08-14-2020, 07:29 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,533
Without going down the rabbit hole too much, the book doesn't really talk all that much about Thomas, I wondered if it would shed light on why they drifted apart but didn't really get much new from it.

I do wonder if Thomas is like he is because of the way Meghan has behaved or if she is the way she is with him because of the way he is (if that makes sense).
  #1788  
Old 08-14-2020, 07:32 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
Without going down the rabbit hole too much, the book doesn't really talk all that much about Thomas, I wondered if it would shed light on why they drifted apart but didn't really get much new from it.

I do wonder if Thomas is like he is because of the way Meghan has behaved or if she is the way she is with him because of the way he is (if that makes sense).
To be fair to Meghan, I thin that he's a difficult odd man. Sounds like he was rather neglectful of his first children, and was very close to Meg for a time.. Then her relationship with him began to unravel. In his defence I think he's not that smart, he does not understand the family she's married into.. and he's in bad health which may make him more difficult.
  #1789  
Old 08-14-2020, 07:36 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
Well going on the book and how she essentially presents herself I cannot see any of Anne's family even having time for her. Andrew caring...ever anyway. Beatrice and Eugenie maybe would have been the target but after the wedding announcement, I can see them giving her a wide space. Why would Edward and Sophie care anyway...different generation. And we know William and Kate were a no no.

Showgirl 100 percent Phil. And if not him Anne. And it would be their humour.

She is too fake for any of them to take to her. And that is her own k.
I would imagine that the RF may think that Megan led a boring life.. acting in some small time show... and if she doesn't like horses and dogs, its possible that they may find THAT Boring... and if she finds that sort of lifestyle boring well it IS the lifestyle that harry and many of the RF enjoy, so... room for a bit of give and take?
But Peter and Zara Phillips were kind to Harry when he was a little boy who had just lost his mother, so I hope that he remembered that about them....
I would guess that maybe it was Philip who called her H's showgirl but he might or might not have meant it as humour.
  #1790  
Old 08-14-2020, 07:48 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
She did and DOES have a lot of baggage! So did Diana and Sarah.

Heck...Harry and William have BAGGAGE.

What kind of baggage (in the sense the word was used in the book) did Diana have (other than her parents having had an unhappy marriage)?



Diana was an 18-year virgin who, to use her own words, "grew up in a big house" and was an earl's daughter from an old family of courtiers and aristocrats. I don't think her "baggage" compares to anything that was alleged against Meghan when she started dating Harry.
  #1791  
Old 08-14-2020, 07:51 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
What kind of baggage (in the sense the word was used in the book) did Diana have (other than her parents having had an unhappy marriage)?



Diana was an 18-year virgin who, to use her own words, "grew up in a big house" and was an earl's daughter from an old family of courtiers and aristocrats. I don't think her "baggage" compares to anything that was alleged against Meghan when she started dating Harry.
She referred to herself as having baggage after her separation.. as in believing that a lot of men would be put off by the baggage she had, of being the ex wife of the Prince of Wales... and the Spencers were a stormy family....
Megan had a divorce, and a difficult embarrassing family at least her half brother and sister were hostile to her and difficult.

Its true everyone has SOME kind of baggage. Harry clearly is carrying issues from his mother's death.. William too tho' I think he's managed to get over it better....
  #1792  
Old 08-14-2020, 08:11 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by duchessrachel View Post
I totally agree. What Meghan and Harry failed to understand is that their job as working royals was not to promote their own "woke" agenda but to carry out duties on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen. Also, they were to function within the established hierarchy. It's not about them. It's about the Queen and the UK- not about working out the world's problems. They Monarchy is supposed to be a unifying force within the UK. H&M have only caused division. That Harry does not understand the function of the Royal Family is baffling to me given that he was born into it. I am an American and I believe I understand it better than him.
Good points! Well, that's what happens when you're two self-absorbed people who don't know how to be team players. They don't like to be told "no"; they don't like to be told what to do. They just don't want anyone to be "boss" over them - that means HM, that means Charles - as PoW, not as pa - and that means, at some point, William. The fact that they, several times, made announcements (including the one about H and M seeing each other as referenced in the book) that conflicted with Royal engagements speaks volumes. H and M have this need to be the center of attention. I could give other examples, but I won't. I'm not sure Harry doesn't understand it as much as he chafes under it - because he JUST can't deal with the fact that when it comes to "the Firm"/the Institution (not the family, of course), he's relatively low down on the totem pole.
  #1793  
Old 08-14-2020, 08:16 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by evolvingdoors View Post
To me thatís quite interesting for Meghan to feel slight over, since she has essentially seems to ignore her entire family, except her mom, even exists for nearly 20 year now.
I wasn't sure where to mention this, but since the subject of slights came up.......My parents and I were finished watching Jeopardy, and I always flip it right away to ET because (a) my father can't abide any part of Wheel of Fortune and (b) my mother loves ET. So anyway, they periodically have H and M stuff (Katie Nicholls reports for them), and today they had Omid on. I didn't hear what he said, but I'm guessing it had to do with Meghan feeling slighted by the BRF, because the ET reporter narrating the story spoke about how the BRF gave M the "side eye" when she married H. Let's just say I expressed my frustration vocally in the kitchen, lol. It's clear Omid was going on about M's feeling snubbed or the like.....and I had to escape ASAP before I lost my dinner, lol
  #1794  
Old 08-14-2020, 08:36 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muhler View Post
The first thought that went through my mind when reading about, especially the first nanny, was that someone had an "emotional (and protective) fit" and fired the nanny in a fit of anger.
Because normally it has to very extreme to fire someone on the spot. And doing that only to praise that persons skills afterwards suggest an overreaction.

Booting one nanny on the spot happens. Booting two is unfortunate, but if it happens more often then it says more about the parents than the nannies.
Having said that quite a number of parents are nuts when it comes to their children. I have been elbowed often enough in the ribs by Mrs. Muhler at parent-meetings in the schools to have that fact confirmed...

It is my firm opinion, that while you still have to be the boss, if the work-climate is bad and the turn-over rate of your employees is high then it's almost always down to bad management.
To me this suggest that H&M at best were inexperienced parents, who saw things differently than their experienced nanny and overreacted by firing her - and that something similar happened to the second nanny.
I wonder where they found the first nanny - the one who was apparently fired on the spot?

I think members of royal families have a few options for nannies. They can use family, they can use a highly qualified nanny recommended by family or very close friends or they can use a highly qualified nanny from an agency used to placements with high profile families. So Iíll take it for granted the woman was in one of the latter two categories and also that she would have been thoroughly vetted by their security team before she was able to start the job. Given that, itís hard to imagine what sort of unprofessional or dangerous thing she would do that would warrant her being let go in the middle of the night. Meghan and Harry may not have liked her much or she could have been a poor fit in general but itís unlikely the caliber of nanny they would be dealing with would make an egregious mistake in the care of an infant.
  #1795  
Old 08-14-2020, 09:14 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
I think very few people here think the BRF acted or have ever acted perfectly, but back to the book! it shows very little of what horrendous things the RF did (Princess Michael wearing that brooch, Kate not being as warm and welcoming as Meghan "expected" her to be, the Queen not including H&M in her pics at Christmas (along with the rest of her family are all pretty trivial things, Princess Michael is no favourite of the Queen or RF so even though her actions were wrong it doesn't show anything about the rest of the family)

As ever the answer lies somewhere in the middle IMO, both sides failed to understand the other and both sides were left disappointed. This book though is not showing that, according to this book Meghan (and to a lesser extend Harry, not my opinion but if you have read the book you'd agree) can not and did not do anything wrong either. Again, I'd say the answer lies in the middle.
If youíre the new person whoís married into not only a big family, but also a very big, ancient institution thatís bound to the history, politics and general way of life of an entire nation, the onus is you as the newcomer to adapt to the institution and if needed make changes for it, not the other way around.

No doubt the BRF is full of egos and eccentricities and touchy personalities, (but Iíd say thatís true of most big extended families), but in the end they are who they are. Theyíre not likely to make major changes for someoneís new wife. The Royal Family adapts, but does so on its own schedule.

I can think of several instances where individual members of the family made kind gestures towards Meghan when they didnít have to. Charles walked her down the aisle at the wedding, for heavenís sake, and he was either genuinely happy to do it or he put on a really good show.
  #1796  
Old 08-14-2020, 09:52 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Oakland, United States
Posts: 576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I can't say I blame her re her family. Her siblings are horrible.. and clearly hate her. Her father is unreliable...Apart form her mother I cant see whom she would be close to...
Notice I said ďentire familyĒ not ďher father side of the familyĒ
Weíve spoken of this already: Meghan has estranged herself from both sides of her family.
  #1797  
Old 08-14-2020, 10:07 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
I love this review so much....read the whole thing..

Quote:
For what emerges over 24 chapters is a partial and one-sided account, a story of score- settling and swipes at Harry's family, at the institution of monarchy, royal aides and the media.

And those admirable charitable endeavours? They are simply swamped by bitter recriminations.

I fear it will backfire horribly on them, inviting both ridicule and scorn with the only real winners being the authors cashing in on the hype it has created.

There are some truly cringe-making moments: how on their romantic break to the African bush in Botswana Harry was 'delightfully surprised' by his then girlfriend's 'down to earth attitude.' Why so? Because while camping she cleaned her face with baby-wipes and 'happily wandered into the woodlands if she needed a bathroom break'.
.....

Because for a couple so obsessive about their privacy, the book is all the more remarkable because it is, from start to finish, an extraordinary invasion of their own privacy.

At the same time it is laced with a special sense of grievance.

This is a couple who can take offence from the set of someone's face at a public event to refusing to go to a wedding because a newspaper had speculated about Meghan's bottom.



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...g-Freedom.html
  #1798  
Old 08-14-2020, 10:22 PM
tihkon2's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Stafford, United States
Posts: 452
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
The other side might not be greener but sometimes itís worth the risk to try.

I know around these parts the BRF are perfect and never said or did anything bad toward Meghan or Harry. Not one rude remark or action ever. Anything bad or confrontational that happened was 100% on her. If she was ever offended it was her imagination. Yada yada.

So frankly it was really for the best they left for the sake of everyone...
I haven't seen anybody say that. So nice straw man.....
  #1799  
Old 08-14-2020, 10:24 PM
duchessrachel's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Birmingham, United States
Posts: 1,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by camelot23ca View Post
If youíre the new person whoís married into not only a big family, but also a very big, ancient institution thatís bound to the history, politics and general way of life of an entire nation, the onus is you as the newcomer to adapt to the institution and if needed make changes for it, not the other way around.

No doubt the BRF is full of egos and eccentricities and touchy personalities, (but Iíd say thatís true of most big extended families), but in the end they are who they are. Theyíre not likely to make major changes for someoneís new wife. The Royal Family adapts, but does so on its own schedule.

I can think of several instances where individual members of the family made kind gestures towards Meghan when they didnít have to. Charles walked her down the aisle at the wedding, for heavenís sake, and he was either genuinely happy to do it or he put on a really good show.
This, exactly!
  #1800  
Old 08-14-2020, 10:27 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
I love this review so much....read the whole thing..




https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...g-Freedom.html
Great review. Careful Betsy, this may be more than 20% of the article and you may get a ticking off...
__________________

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 asian baby names baptism britannia british british royal family british royals camilla camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese commonwealth countries coronation crown jewels customs duchess of sussex duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family tree fashion and style gemstones genetics george vi gradenigo gustaf vi adolf harry and meghan hereditary grand duchess stťphanie highgrove history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs jack brooksbank japan history kensington palace king edward vii king juan carlos liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers luxembourg meghan markle monarchist movements monarchists mongolia pless politics prince harry princess eugenie queen consort queen elizabeth ii queen victoria royal ancestry royalty of taiwan st edward suthida swedish queen taiwan thai royal family tradition unfinished portrait united states of america welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:10 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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