The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Current Events Archive (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f166/)
-   -   Duke and Duchess of Sussex, General News Part 1: May 2018 - December 2018 (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f166/duke-and-duchess-of-sussex-general-news-part-1-may-2018-december-2018-a-44861.html)

JessRulz 04-23-2018 08:43 AM

Duke and Duchess of Sussex, General News Part 1: May 2018 - December 2018
 
https://i66.tinypic.com/og9nvd.pnghttps://i64.tinypic.com/9hsaiq.png
Coat of Arms of TRH The Duke and Duchess of Sussex

Welcome to The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's
General News, Part One

Commencing May 19, 2018

The previous thread can be found here.

Please take a look at the
TRF Community Rules & FAQs

∑ Only pictures that you have written permission to share can be posted here. You can post links to any pictures.
∑ It's a copyright violation to post translations of entire articles, so no more than 20% of an article
text should be posted, along with the link to the original article.
∑ We expect our members to treat each other, and the royals and persons in these threads, with respect.
∑ The Report Post button is for reporting inappropriate content in a post if no moderators or administrators are online.
∑ Threads should remain on topic. Posts which are irrelevant or disruptive
will be deleted or moved by one of the moderators.

***

Tatiana Maria 05-19-2018 08:22 PM

Here is the new? profile of the Duchess of Sussex on the official website.
https://www.royal.uk/duchess-sussex

Quote:

About The Duchess of Sussex

The Duchess of Sussex, born Meghan Markle, married Prince Harry at St George's Chapel, Windsor in May 2018. The couple's official residence is Kensington Palace. As well as undertaking royal duties in support of The Queen, both in the UK and overseas, The Duchess devotes her time to supporting a number of charities and organisations.

From a young age, The Duchess had a keen awareness of social issues and actively participated in charitable work. Aged 11 she successfully campaigned for a company to alter their television advert that had used sexist language to sell washing-up liquid. Her Royal Highness also volunteered at a soup kitchen in Skid Row, Los Angeles from the age of 13-17. She continued to volunteer at the soup kitchen when she would return home to Los Angeles until the age of 22.

Marengo 05-20-2018 07:39 AM

The BBC reporter mentioned at the end of the broadcast that several official trips abroad are planned for this year. One of them will be to The Netherlands.

Curryong 05-20-2018 07:45 AM

Excellent news and great experience for Meghan. I look forward to hearing more about it and other trips planned in coming months.

An Ard Ri 05-20-2018 07:46 AM

The BBC also mentioned a trip to Dublin being planned?

W.Y.CII 05-20-2018 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marengo (Post 2112646)
The BBC reporter mentioned at the end of the broadcast that several official trips abroad are planned for this year. One of them will be to The Netherlands.

I am surprised as I thought they will focus on commonwealth countries and trips to non-commonwealth countries won't happen that soon. But I am very looking forward to that.:flowers:

Can I see it as a sign that they will take over/share Wessexes' role and attend foreign royal events in future? simply a wild guess:lol:.

tommy100 05-20-2018 09:54 AM

They will be visiting Auz for Invictus Games 2018 and its said they will visit New Zealand and Fiji on the way there/back turning it into a Commonwealth tour. A Dublin and/or Netherlands tour would only be a day or two, Kate did her visit to Netherlands in hours.

Empress Merel 05-20-2018 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marengo (Post 2112646)
The BBC reporter mentioned at the end of the broadcast that several official trips abroad are planned for this year. One of them will be to The Netherlands.

I heard that too! I better start clearing my agenda for the coming date then. :rofl:

Mbruno 05-20-2018 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marengo (Post 2112646)
The BBC reporter mentioned at the end of the broadcast that several official trips abroad are planned for this year. One of them will be to The Netherlands.


Interesting. Any rough date (month) ?

Pranter 05-20-2018 10:25 AM

Has anything actually been confirmed by KP? I've seen reports of a Netherlands/Nordic trip and a big tour this fall (Oz, NZ etc etc).



LaRae

Marengo 05-20-2018 04:00 PM

I fear I forgot all the other countries the BBC reporter mentioned but there were quite a few. She did not mention any dates. It was towards the end of the live broadcast, after they left the chapel IIRC. I can't find the entire BBC report online as they cut it up in xx pieces.

Nico 05-20-2018 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria (Post 2112252)
Here is the new? profile of the Duchess of Sussex on the official website.
https://www.royal.uk/duchess-sussex

A detail but i'm surprised that her divorce is not mentioned. Not a big deal if you ask me but , for exemple, it's the case for the Duchess of Cornwall.

jacqui24 05-20-2018 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nico (Post 2113027)
A detail but i'm surprised that her divorce is not mentioned. Not a big deal if you ask me but , for exemple, it's the case for the Duchess of Cornwall.

I think it’s the same logic as her wedding. With Camilla, there was no way of avoiding it and it was significant given her kids and the situation caused them not to be married in the Church. In Meghan’s case, it’s insignificant and treated as a nonissue in terms of getting married in church and wearing white (meghan’s Dress really couldn’t be any whiter).

Countessmeout 05-20-2018 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nico (Post 2113027)
A detail but i'm surprised that her divorce is not mentioned. Not a big deal if you ask me but , for exemple, it's the case for the Duchess of Cornwall.

Likely because of the obvious difference: kids.

Camilla's previous marriage is mentioned, because her kids are. Andrew is only mentioned briefly. The inclusion is just to include her children and grandkids.

Since Meghan and Trevor had no children, really no reason to include him.

jacqui24 05-20-2018 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marengo (Post 2112987)
I fear I forgot all the other countries the BBC reporter mentioned but there were quite a few. She did not mention any dates. It was towards the end of the live broadcast, after they left the chapel IIRC. I can't find the entire BBC report online as they cut it up in xx pieces.

How many countries? I canít imagine it being THAT much more. There is already an Australian trip for IG at the minimum. There has been rumors about extending that. Iíd be surprised if they donít visit Canada next year though. Iíve heard some hopes from Canadians that theyíd visit soon bc the bride lived there for so long.

Gawin 05-20-2018 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Countessmeout (Post 2113033)
Likely because of the obvious difference: kids.

Camilla's previous marriage is mentioned, because her kids are. Andrew is only mentioned briefly. The inclusion is just to include her children and grandkids.

Since Meghan and Trevor had no children, really no reason to include him.

Exactly. And while Camilla was Mrs. Parker Bowles when she married Charles, Meghan was Ms. Markle (not Mrs. Engelson) when she married Harry.

Marchesina 05-20-2018 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Countessmeout (Post 2113033)
Likely because of the obvious difference: kids.

Camilla's previous marriage is mentioned, because her kids are. Andrew is only mentioned briefly. The inclusion is just to include her children and grandkids.

Since Meghan and Trevor had no children, really no reason to include him.

Another detail: her previous wedding had been only performed civilly, and the Church doesn't acknowledges it.

M. Payton 05-20-2018 05:58 PM

Beautiful site for Meghan and it says a great deal about the young girl learning about social responsibility and the strong intelligent woman she became today. I think she will be a perfect match for the BRF and most of all she and Harry share a deep love between them and that will provide the basis for their commitment to doing great things in the future.

queenvic29 05-20-2018 07:10 PM

I can't wait for their first official visit to Meghan's homeland! It'll be so exciting.

soapstar 05-20-2018 09:48 PM

The discussion about the wedding coverage and ratings have been moved to the 'Wedding of Harry and Meghan' thread.

wyevale 05-21-2018 06:05 AM

Surely it’s not accurate to suggest Megan Markle will bring feminism to the Royal family . Princess Anne has very successfully done so for years .

#JustSayin'

Osipi 05-21-2018 07:14 AM

I'd actually be very hard pressed to define Meghan as a "feminist". To me, that word is too constricting and boxes a person into a certain mold. Meghan most certainly isn't a run of the mill, easy to put into a box kind of person. She embraces her femininity but its like her ethereal veil and highlights a woman comfortable in her own skin.

For me, the true feminist is the one that can see humanity as a whole and strive for balance in how all people are to be respected, cared for and loved as the unique people they are. This, too, I think was Bishop Curry's message. "Love your God, love your neighbors and also love yourself."

Terri Terri 05-21-2018 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marengo (Post 2112646)
The BBC reporter mentioned at the end of the broadcast that several official trips abroad are planned for this year. One of them will be to The Netherlands.

I have been watching the repeat coverage on BBC America....this is what I heard....trips to Dublin, the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, the Fiji Islands and Tongo.

ACO 05-21-2018 10:53 AM

Queen Elizabeth is a great example of strength and feminism. I feel like people try to force their own definition onto Meghan. She is not bringing something foreign, just adding something different. There is nothing wrong with that but folks will twisted it to suit whatever agenda they are going for.

jacqui24 05-21-2018 12:15 PM

Anyways, as for the feminism thing. I'm glad the royal family included that in her official bio. I remember her being a feminist was an issue for some as they thought that's political. The reality for a lot of Western country isn't the lack of laws in these cases, but the traditional male and female gender role that we grow up with and then goes on to shape how we behave. Things like teaching girls to drown out voices that tell them they have to be a certain way, and teach them it's ok if they like math more than literature. It's the way people behave.

wyevale 05-21-2018 01:01 PM

I wonder if the Sussexes will join the Royal party at the Chelsea Flower show 'Private view', this evening ?

An Ard Ri 05-21-2018 01:03 PM

The trip to Ireland will be a private 1 day visit as per the Irish media.

https://www.independent.ie/style/cel...-36929893.html

Lumutqueen 05-21-2018 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wyevale (Post 2113568)
I wonder if the Sussexes will join the Royal party at the Chelsea Flower show 'Private view', this evening ?

The Queen has just arrived so no. :flowers:

Juliette2 05-21-2018 09:51 PM

Today I read this article by Piers Morgan on the DM: Piers Morgan : Meghan Markle can't lecture about equality | Daily Mail Online

I know many people have issues with him. I don't follow him on tv so I can't say whether I like him or not but, truth to be told, I have found myself agreeing with some of his articles. I also agreed with most of what he wrote today (though I'm sure many here won't) but I don't want to discuss that. One thing really, REALLY struck me. At one point, commenting Meghan's new bio on the Royals' website reporting her washing-up liquid "success" he writes:

"I remember discussing that very subject with you when we met for a drink in my local Kensington pub during the week you first met Harry."

Ok. I don't believe in coincidences. Why would Meghan meet with Morgan the same week she met Prince Harry? The meeting seemed to have been pre-arranged, not casual, and since it occurred in "his" pub probably requested more by her rather than him?. During the evening they discussed her story (the dishwasher incident and her views on women empowerment, etc. ). Why? It sounds like something you would tell during an interview! It all looks to me quite odd AND on the same week someone set her with Prince Harry? Who was using whom? Seems someone (who?) was doing a lot of PR/networking to me...but Piers Morgan seems a strange choice.

(I don't doubt this was true btw or he would be shut up by KP (privately or publicly) in a nano-second.)

He then goes on saying that they had already corresponded by email in previous months discussing gun control, etc. Ok...at that point she was neither famous nor influential (not even remotely, so, please, don't answer me that she was a humanitarian etc. etc.!). I would love to know how this acquaintance was formed and when (and if!) the correspondence ended!

To that, add that Violet von Westenholz, the now famous matchmaker, is in PR (and so are about a million society girls in London you'll say - true...). I don't know, but something doesn't compute to me. It all sounds very unnatural. I have no doubt that eager posters will enlighten me on the matter.

Has Morgan already discussed his acquaintance with Meghan? Maybe he has and I'm just ignorant but I was incredibly surprised I have to say!

O-H Anglophile 05-21-2018 09:59 PM

I believe Piers was acquainted with many of the actors on "Suits" so not surprising Meghan knew him and would meet up with him while in London.

However--
https://www.iol.co.za/entertainment/...harry-13531898


Once she met Harry and began her relationship she became unavailable to Piers. He is still bitter.

hel 05-21-2018 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juliette2 (Post 2113874)
Today I read this article by Piers Morgan on the DM: Piers Morgan : Meghan Markle can't lecture about equality | Daily Mail Online

I know many people have issues with him. I don't follow him on tv so I can't say whether I like him or not but, truth to be told, I have found myself agreeing with some of his articles. I also agreed with most of what he wrote today (though I'm sure many here won't) but I don't want to discuss that. One thing really, REALLY struck me. At one point, commenting Meghan's new bio on the Royals' website reporting her washing-up liquid "success" he writes:

"I remember discussing that very subject with you when we met for a drink in my local Kensington pub during the week you first met Harry."

Ok. I don't believe in coincidences. Why would Meghan meet with Morgan the same week she met Prince Harry? The meeting seemed to have been pre-arranged, not casual, and since it occurred in "his" pub probably requested more by her rather than him?. During the evening they discussed her story (the dishwasher incident and her views on women empowerment, etc. ). Why? It sounds like something you would tell during an interview! It all looks to me quite odd AND on the same week someone set her with Prince Harry? Who was using whom? Seems someone (who?) was doing a lot of PR/networking to me...but Piers Morgan seems a strange choice.

(I don't doubt this was true btw or he would be shut up by KP (privately or publicly) in a nano-second.)

He then goes on saying that they had already corresponded by email in previous months discussing gun control, etc. Ok...at that point she was neither famous nor influential (not even remotely, so, please, don't answer me that she was a humanitarian etc. etc.!). I would love to know how this acquaintance was formed and when (and if!) the correspondence ended!

To that, add that Violet von Westenholz, the now famous matchmaker, is in PR (and so are about a million society girls in London you'll say - true...). I don't know, but something doesn't compute to me. It all sounds very unnatural. I have no doubt that eager posters will enlighten me on the matter.

Has Morgan already discussed his acquaintance with Meghan? Maybe he has and I'm just ignorant but I was incredibly surprised I have to say!

There are about six pages of posts discussing Piers Morgan and Meghan Markle's pub discussion. How it came about (they were connected on twitter because of gun control and she was going to be in the UK), when it came about (either one or two days before she met Harry), and the wide ranging discussion they had (including the information that she was, at the end of June 2016, "recently single").

Here's a link to the six pages of posts, starting at the oldest: The Royal Forums - Search Results

Loveshine 05-21-2018 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juliette2 (Post 2113874)
Today I read this article by Piers Morgan on the DM: Piers Morgan : Meghan Markle can't lecture about equality | Daily Mail Online

Has Morgan already discussed his acquaintance with Meghan? Maybe he has and I'm just ignorant but I was incredibly surprised I have to say!

He talks about it every chance he gets.

He's one of his times.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1XDdjO6yag

Frelinghighness 05-21-2018 10:18 PM

Interesting to read the article about him, “the 52 year old known for his acid tongue”. The daily fail is bad enough but to subject yourself to nastiness by choice?

Juliette2 05-21-2018 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hel (Post 2113883)
There are about six pages of posts discussing Piers Morgan and Meghan Markle's pub discussion. How it came about (they were connected on twitter because of gun control and she was going to be in the UK), when it came about (either one or two days before she met Harry), and the wide ranging discussion they had (including the information that she was, at the end of June 2016, "recently single").

Here's a link to the six pages of posts, starting at the oldest: The Royal Forums - Search Results

Thank you so much Hel! I was sure I was missing something!! I'll go and read about it. Very generous of you to provide the link! :flowers:

Curbside 05-21-2018 11:03 PM

I saw that article! And he must have written around the same time he was slamming Samantha/Yvonne on TV for trash talking Meghan. I have no idea what point he was trying to make by quoting Meghan's email to him about gun control in a UK publication. Correct me if I'm wrong, but is gun safety a big deal in the UK?

Juliette2 05-21-2018 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curbside (Post 2113917)
I saw that article! And he must have written around the same time he was slamming Samantha/Yvonne on TV for trash talking Meghan. I have no idea what point he was trying to make by quoting Meghan's email to him about gun control in a UK publication. Correct me if I'm wrong, but is gun safety a big deal in the UK?

I'm thinking maybe it's the only bit of all the emails that had some substance so he published that, but he has written I think numerous articles pro gun control. It's an issue close to his heart.

Rudolph 05-22-2018 08:41 AM

ďIn accepting the tiara, Meghan also accepted her place in the royal family, and I mean that literally. A tiara isnít a crown. That belongs to the monarch and after The Queen, it will pass to Charles then to William and straight past Harry on to Prince George. Meghan doesn't just fall behind those in the direct line of succession but also Harry and even her sister-in-law, The Duchess of Cambridge. It's a top-down system and itís the glue that keeps the monarchy intact.

Meghan might be the biggest star in the royal family right now and indeed the western hemisphere but her wedding day was the first and last time The Queen waits for her in church and Kate tries to make herself invisible. The reality of that will already be setting in but I know Americans who have lived in the UK for decades who are still baffled by the class system here. Itís what separates the two cultures. Americans are brought up being told they can be president while we Britons are told thereís no point in even trying to be king or queen because you have to be born to it. ď

Max Foster CNN: Royal Reality for Meghan Markle

Cocoasneeze 05-22-2018 08:52 AM

I think it's getting tiring to read article after an article after article what Meghan has to get used to, how she wont be accepted, how horribly the Britons in their class system will treat her, how she simply never will understand it, because she's American, how she will get a horrible wake up call soon, how she will learn her place, how the protocol this and that..

Meghan has spent much of her adult life in the sexist, demeaning, belittling, racist, classist system of the acting world. She's an adult woman, who has lived and experienced life all over the world. Sure, she will experience new, and unpleasant things while learning her new role as the newest member of the BRF, but that happens everywhere, not just Britain. And most of her time won't be spent in the midst of these 'oh so stuffy aristos' but doing actual charity work, and that's an entirely different scene.

Marengo 05-22-2018 08:55 AM

Max Foster & CNN Europe has done non-stop (over-)reporting for months now. No wonder he is running out of topics to discuss & starts writing drivel like this. Quite shocking for a news station, especially considering all the newly created crises by Russian stooges, kleptocrats and fascists everywhere are setting much of the world on fire. This could be considered more important for a news channel to report than to write the 101th article about the royal wedding of that day. The way it is now CNN has become an entertainment channel, one step up from the Daily Mail.

O-H Anglophile 05-22-2018 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudolph (Post 2114052)
“In accepting the tiara, Meghan also accepted her place in the royal family, and I mean that literally. A tiara isn’t a crown. That belongs to the monarch and after The Queen, it will pass to Charles then to William and straight past Harry on to Prince George. Meghan doesn't just fall behind those in the direct line of succession but also Harry and even her sister-in-law, The Duchess of Cambridge. It's a top-down system and it’s the glue that keeps the monarchy intact.

Meghan might be the biggest star in the royal family right now and indeed the western hemisphere but her wedding day was the first and last time The Queen waits for her in church and Kate tries to make herself invisible. The reality of that will already be setting in but I know Americans who have lived in the UK for decades who are still baffled by the class system here. It’s what separates the two cultures. Americans are brought up being told they can be president while we Britons are told there’s no point in even trying to be king or queen because you have to be born to it. “

Max Foster CNN: Royal Reality for Meghan Markle


Britons can aspire to be Prime Minister.

jacqui24 05-22-2018 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudolph (Post 2114052)
“In accepting the tiara, Meghan also accepted her place in the royal family, and I mean that literally. A tiara isn’t a crown. That belongs to the monarch and after The Queen, it will pass to Charles then to William and straight past Harry on to Prince George. Meghan doesn't just fall behind those in the direct line of succession but also Harry and even her sister-in-law, The Duchess of Cambridge. It's a top-down system and it’s the glue that keeps the monarchy intact.

Meghan might be the biggest star in the royal family right now and indeed the western hemisphere but her wedding day was the first and last time The Queen waits for her in church and Kate tries to make herself invisible. The reality of that will already be setting in but I know Americans who have lived in the UK for decades who are still baffled by the class system here. It’s what separates the two cultures. Americans are brought up being told they can be president while we Britons are told there’s no point in even trying to be king or queen because you have to be born to it. “

Max Foster CNN: Royal Reality for Meghan Markle

This is quite funny to me because Meghan, having attended many engagements during her engagement, seems to always do her homework. This seems to only be news to those reporting it. Knowing the couple, I think they are fully aware they won’t ever be king and queen and I think that’s just the way they’d prefer.

And I know people were upset with Harry when he said no one wants to be King and Queen, but was he wrong? Is the weight of the crown really worth the tiaras? Or is it more of duty they were born into? I think if anyone asked any of the spares in the last four generations if they wanted to be king or queen, the answer would’ve been no. But it was a duty that one of them couldn’t avoid.

wyevale 05-22-2018 09:09 AM

That article by Max Foster is the very pinnacle of vacuity.. it says NOTHING of interest, let alone give any insight into the new life opening up to the Duchess, as part of the BRF.

Of course there will be critics [as there are for ANYONE joining a family at the epicentre of our national life], but the VAST majority of people [of all classes and ages] will joyously welcome her, since she is the chosen spouse of a MUCH LOVED Prince.

EVERYONE wants Harry to be happy, and clearly his wife makes him so..

I cannot understand why anybody worries quite so much.. [other than for 'column inches']

Osipi 05-22-2018 09:10 AM

That's about the gist of it with all mainstream news channels in the US these days, Marengo. The fine art of impartial journalism has taken a back seat to "personalities" and ratings and just a whole lot of "fake" news or blowing things out of proportion.

I want the real stuff back. Who, what, when, how and why.

O-H Anglophile 05-22-2018 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wyevale (Post 2114059)
That article by Max Foster is the very pinnacle of vacuity.. it says NOTHING of interest, let alone give any insight into the new life opening up to the Duchess, as part of the BRF.

Of course there will be critics [as there are for ANYONE joining a family at the epicentre of our national life], but the VAST majority of people [of all classes and ages] will joyously welcome her, since she is the chosen spouse of a MUCH LOVED Prince.

EVERYONE wants Harry to be happy, and clearly his wife makes him so..

I cannot understand why Americans worry quite so much.. [other than for 'column inches']

Since Max Foster is not an American I don't understand your last sentence. You can keep him!;)

wyevale 05-22-2018 09:18 AM

Quote:

Max Foster is not an American
Oops, my mistake.. i'll edit accordingly. Foster may not be but CNN is, and has no 'reach'in the UK..

ACO 05-22-2018 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudolph (Post 2114052)
“In accepting the tiara, Meghan also accepted her place in the royal family, and I mean that literally. A tiara isn’t a crown. That belongs to the monarch and after The Queen, it will pass to Charles then to William and straight past Harry on to Prince George. Meghan doesn't just fall behind those in the direct line of succession but also Harry and even her sister-in-law, The Duchess of Cambridge. It's a top-down system and it’s the glue that keeps the monarchy intact.

Meghan might be the biggest star in the royal family right now and indeed the western hemisphere but her wedding day was the first and last time The Queen waits for her in church and Kate tries to make herself invisible. The reality of that will already be setting in but I know Americans who have lived in the UK for decades who are still baffled by the class system here. It’s what separates the two cultures. Americans are brought up being told they can be president while we Britons are told there’s no point in even trying to be king or queen because you have to be born to it. “

Max Foster CNN: Royal Reality for Meghan Markle

Okay? Max not saying anything new here. Harry and Meghan know their role. Harry has zero interest in being King. They will use their influence in other ways which suits them much, much better in the long run. It is the best thing, honestly.

Rudolph 05-22-2018 09:20 AM

Think he wrote this piece in response to one of the American networks referring to Harry and Meghan as the next king and Queen.

This article provides context on the realities of being married to the 6th in line.

O-H Anglophile 05-22-2018 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudolph (Post 2114068)
Think he wrote this piece in response to one of the American networks referring to Harry and Meghan as the next king and Queen.

This article provides context on the realities of being married to the 6th in line.

Well, American "news" people are not known for their veracity when it comes to things Royal. And they probably meant king and queen colloquially rather than King and Queen in actuality.

Cocoasneeze 05-22-2018 09:37 AM

I think Meghan is fully aware of the realities of being married to the 6th in line.

W.Y.CII 05-22-2018 09:52 AM

:previous: Perfect comment and much appreciated.

I don't think someone mis-refers Harry and Meghan as the next king and queen deserve that much discussions. Pretty sure no one really think they will be king and queen someday considering BRF's high profile, let alone Harry and Meghan.

Curbside 05-22-2018 09:53 AM

I think Meghan knows the expectations of her new position. I'm sure she considered all of those things--upsides and downsides--before she agreed to marry Harry.

jacqui24 05-22-2018 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudolph (Post 2114068)
Think he wrote this piece in response to one of the American networks referring to Harry and Meghan as the next king and Queen.

This article provides context on the realities of being married to the 6th in line.

What American network referred to them as the next king and queen? All the major news network coverage I've seen is well aware they won't likely be king and queen. Megyn Kelly even mentioned how don't people think that's what Harry'd prefer when they were doing the review of their royal coverage experience.

Loveshine 05-22-2018 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudolph (Post 2114052)
ďIn accepting the tiara, Meghan also accepted her place in the royal family, and I mean that literally. A tiara isnít a crown. That belongs to the monarch and after The Queen, it will pass to Charles then to William and straight past Harry on to Prince George. Meghan doesn't just fall behind those in the direct line of succession but also Harry and even her sister-in-law, The Duchess of Cambridge. It's a top-down system and itís the glue that keeps the monarchy intact.

Meghan might be the biggest star in the royal family right now and indeed the western hemisphere but her wedding day was the first and last time The Queen waits for her in church and Kate tries to make herself invisible. The reality of that will already be setting in but I know Americans who have lived in the UK for decades who are still baffled by the class system here. Itís what separates the two cultures. Americans are brought up being told they can be president while we Britons are told thereís no point in even trying to be king or queen because you have to be born to it. ď

Max Foster CNN: Royal Reality for Meghan Markle

This whole statement doesn't take into account that Meghan is a very intelligent woman, who's been around all these people for a little while now, and knows what her spot is on the totem pole.

People love to under estimate her, but she hasn't not showed respect to all those individuals.

ashelen 05-22-2018 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudolph (Post 2114052)
ďIn accepting the tiara, Meghan also accepted her place in the royal family, and I mean that literally. A tiara isnít a crown. That belongs to the monarch and after The Queen, it will pass to Charles then to William and straight past Harry on to Prince George. Meghan doesn't just fall behind those in the direct line of succession but also Harry and even her sister-in-law, The Duchess of Cambridge. It's a top-down system and itís the glue that keeps the monarchy intact.

Meghan might be the biggest star in the royal family right now and indeed the western hemisphere but her wedding day was the first and last time The Queen waits for her in church and Kate tries to make herself invisible. The reality of that will already be setting in but I know Americans who have lived in the UK for decades who are still baffled by the class system here. Itís what separates the two cultures. Americans are brought up being told they can be president while we Britons are told thereís no point in even trying to be king or queen because you have to be born to it. ď

Max Foster CNN: Royal Reality for Meghan Markle

My husband is British and we use to live in England, Now we live in the US and when we went to see our daughter at 5 years old to school recital celebrating July 4th, made my husband really upset in what this kids were saying, they were having a script by the teachers and the kids memorized. The main point that make my husband upset was when one of the kids said something in the lines :" We are better because we can choose a president instead of a queen" Well you could see my husband getting really upset, saying how do you know? we are happy with our Queen! the concept here in America between royalty and presidents it is so far away from reality. And this was in a private school! there are not better or worst each country use to live different way and we should all respect that

Nico 05-22-2018 11:30 AM

:previous:

I think this article is just a quiet reminder not to Meghan but to some of her die hard fans that, for now of course, the Sussexes are the "it couple" of the BRF and all is fun and nice but in a soon to be future they will be englobed in a far more large working institution where, it's a fact, they will not have THE predominant role.

Of course they will have a MAJOR role , but not the first, and a day to day Monarchy is , let's face it, far to be THAT glamorous. I clearly recall the very high expectations for Will and Kate back in 2011 : "modern", "young", "breath of fresh air" ... now they are seen by many as "stiff", "dowdy" if not "boring" because they are precisely doing the job : more community visits than film premieres.

We are still so excited by last days incredible events, and rightly so. And this article is maybe bordeline "raining on parade" , but yes Meghan has to toe the line, and as pointed out, she seems to perfectly know where her place is.

Missy- 05-22-2018 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osipi (Post 2114060)
That's about the gist of it with all mainstream news channels in the US these days, Marengo. The fine art of impartial journalism has taken a back seat to "personalities" and ratings and just a whole lot of "fake" news or blowing things out of proportion.

I want the real stuff back. Who, what, when, how and why.*

*Where? LOL ;)

And I agree.

Cocoasneeze 05-22-2018 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nico (Post 2114120)
:previous:

I think this article is just a quiet reminder not to Meghan but to some of her die hard fans that, for now of course, the Sussexes are the "it couple" of the BRF and all is fun and nice but in a soon to be future they will be englobed in a far more large working institution where, it's a fact, they will not have THE predominant role.

Of course they will have a MAJOR role , but not the first, and a day to day Monarchy is , let's face it, far to be THAT glamorous. I clearly recall the very high expectations for Will and Kate back in 2011 : "modern", "young", "breath of fresh air" ... now they are seen by many as "stiff", "dowdy" if not "boring" because they are precisely doing the job : more community visits than film premieres.

We are still so excited by last days incredible events, and rightly so. And this article is maybe bordeline "raining on parade" , but yes Meghan has to toe the line, and as pointed out, she seems to perfectly know where her place is.

The thing is, there's no 'quietly pointing it out' to anyone. There has been tens of articles like this, and every Meghan fan is aware of this. It's been bombarded for nearly 2 years now.

I personally find the tone of 'showing Meghan her place' borderline offensive. She has shown no indication, that she thinks she's some sort of star, or that she's marrying a royal in a higher position, than 6th in line. She cones across as hard working, and actually enjoys the behind the scenes work a lot, always has. And this wasn't aimed at you, or anyone else here, but these never ending articles of Meghan needing to learn her place, there has been so many of them.

Gawin 05-22-2018 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ashelen (Post 2114116)
My husband is British and we use to live in England, Now we live in the US and when we went to see our daughter at 5 years old to school recital celebrating July 4th, made my husband really upset in what this kids were saying, they were having a script by the teachers and the kids memorized. The main point that make my husband upset was when one of the kids said something in the lines :" We are better because we can choose a president instead of a queen" Well you could see my husband getting really upset, saying how do you know? we are happy with our Queen! the concept here in America between royalty and presidents it is so far away from reality. And this was in a private school! there are not better or worst each country use to live different way and we should all respect that

It's an outdated view based on the British class system. At one time the aristocracy held the political power in the UK and you couldn't grow up to be Prime Minister unless you belonged to the upper-class. In the U.S., on other and, we celebrate presidents like Abraham Lincoln, a "common man," who was born in a log cabin to an illiterate farmer. When the Boston Brahmin Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. campaigned for vice-president in 1960 he had to downplay his patrician background and manner.

Some Americans still view Britain that way. They also tend to lump the monarchy with the aristocracy, with the monarch at the top. That's where the statement "in the U.S. you can grow up to be President but in the UK you can't grow up to be Queen" comes from, ignoring the fact that the two positions aren't parallel.

And the class system does exist in the UK today, at least to some extent, which continues to confuse the issue for some Americans. My great-uncle and his wife lived in the UK in the 1950s and were taken aback by it. Mary Robertson, the American who hired Lady Diana Spencer as her children's nanny in 1980, was surprised at an acquaintance's reaction when she suggested she pair the two together. Diana was an earl's daughter, he was NOT her equal, that could never happen! And I believe the press made snobbish comments about the middle-class Middletons when their daughter dated Prince William.

jacqui24 05-22-2018 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gawin (Post 2114184)
It's an outdated view based on the British class system. At one time the aristocracy held the political power in the UK and you couldn't grow up to be Prime Minister unless you belonged to the upper-class. In the U.S., on other and, we celebrate presidents like Abraham Lincoln, a "common man," who was born in a log cabin to an illiterate farmer. When the Boston Brahmin Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. campaigned for vice-president in 1960 he had to downplay his patrician background and manner.

Some Americans still view Britain that way. They also tend to lump the monarchy with the aristocracy, with the monarch at the top. That's where the statement "in the U.S. you can grow up to be President but in the UK you can't grow up to be Queen" comes from, ignoring the fact that the two positions aren't parallel.

And the class system does exist in the UK today, at least to some extent, which continues to confuse the issue for some Americans. My great-uncle and his wife lived in the UK in the 1950s and were taken aback by it. Mary Robertson, the American who hired Lady Diana Spencer as her children's nanny in 1980, was surprised at an acquaintance's reaction when she suggested she pair the two together. Diana was an earl's daughter, he was NOT her equal, that could never happen! And I believe the press made snobbish comments about the middle-class Middletons when their daughter dated Prince William.

You know, it's interesting. I was watching The View on Monday on their coverage of the royal wedding. Meghan McCain was going on and on about how she couldn't do it because she has paintings of the Founding Fathers in her living room and how they fought against the monarchy. Someone told her the Founding Fathers might be over it at this point. :lol: Yea, things have definitely changed.

Curbside 05-22-2018 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacqui24 (Post 2114186)
You know, it's interesting. I was watching The View on Monday on their coverage of the royal wedding. Meghan McCain was going on and on about how she couldn't do it because she has paintings of the Founding Fathers in her living room and how they fought against the monarchy. Someone told her the Founding Fathers might be over it at this point. :lol: Yea, things have definitely changed.

Not to mention the fact that Britain is one of our closest allies.

Juliette2 05-22-2018 01:15 PM

Well, I think the roles are reversed now...who's colonizing who..?? The cultural Americanization of Europe (and I'm not referring to MM marrying into the BRF!) has been well under way for more than 50 years now. Just look around!

wyevale 05-22-2018 01:53 PM

Quote:

The cultural Americanization of Europe
This is VERY true, and pertinent, most Europeans have 'issues' with this , and have done so for decades.
Whist many know and appreciate America, [and American's as individuals] the OVERWHELMING 'Americanisation' of almost every sphere is a fact..and fiercely resented by millions.

One English example [for which America will NEVER be forgiven] is what happened to Cadbury. {You mess with our favourite Chocolate 'at your peril'}.

soapstar 05-22-2018 02:30 PM

Let's get back on topic. The discussion about the state of the media, the Founding Fathers, the relationship between Britain and America, etc. is off-topic. Any further off-topic posts will be deleted.

alvinking 05-23-2018 05:27 AM

Since Prince Harry has been appointed Captain General Royal Marines, as the successor of Prince Philip, and since the uniform and insignia worn by the Captain General are those of a field marshal, Will Prince Harry as a Royal Duke also ride now behind The Queen at the next Trooping of Colour?

Minister of Court 05-23-2018 06:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alvinking (Post 2114519)
Since Prince Harry has been appointed Captain General Royal Marines, as the successor of Prince Philip, and since the uniform and insignia worn by the Captain General are those of a field marshal, Will Prince Harry as a Royal Duke also ride now behind The Queen at the next Trooping of Colour?

Nope. Royal Marines are not part of the Household Division and only the Household Division takes part in the Trooping.

Rudolph 05-23-2018 06:24 AM

Had they wanted Harry on horseback during Trooping he would have taken over The Grenadier Guards from Prince Philip rather than the marine appointment.

Weíll see The Duke of York this year

alvinking 05-23-2018 06:54 AM

Well last year, Field Marshal HRH The Duke of Kent, did not ride behind The Queen, but rather was in a carriage with the Duke of Gloucester. Probably because of his age, he is now 83 i believe. He didn't even wear his uniform but he rather was in morning suit. Since he has been the Regimental Colonel of the Scots Guards, maybe the position will open up in the near future for The Duke of Sussex.

Rudolph 05-23-2018 06:55 AM

:previous:

Youíre probably on to something there

Rudolph 05-23-2018 07:11 AM

“Dear Meghan, or should I say Dear Duchess, First, congratulations on a stunningly successful wedding.

You couldn’t have scripted a more perfect day, though of course, that’s probably exactly what you did. And frankly, who can blame you? What’s the point in being a professional actress if you can’t turn in an Oscar-winning performance for the biggest role of your life? I loved it all.

So it’s fair to say that Season One of your new life ended in a spectacular triumph, with US TV ratings higher than those for William and Kate’s wedding. (In Britain, ratings were down 30% but don’t take that personally – William and Kate are going to be our King and Queen and you guys aren’t.)

However, the real challenge starts now. If you thought being a royal girlfriend was difficult, just wait until you see how hard it is being a royal wife.

This morning, you’ll have awoken next to your handsome Prince at Kensington Palace, giddy with joy and hope – especially if your butler brought you the newspapers in bed.

The media that alarmed you by going so erratically off-message, and occasionally being downright offensive, as your romance progressed has now come together as one to sing your praises from the rafters.

It would be impossible to see all the ecstatic headlines and not get slightly carried away with one’s own sense of self-worth.”

Read more : Piers Morgan : Meghan Markle can't lecture about equality | Daily Mail Online

Meghan’s old friend piers Morgan, has some advice for Meghan.

JessRulz 05-23-2018 07:15 AM

Posts with pregnancy speculation have been removed.

Cocoasneeze 05-23-2018 07:40 AM

Piers isn't Meghan's old friend though.

Adding this article to the pile of tens of exactly the sane nature written by people who don't have any clue.

alvinking 05-23-2018 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudolph (Post 2114535)
:previous:

Youíre probably on to something there

yes, I think

Colonel of the Welsh Guards, Prince Charles
Colonel of the Irish Guards, Prince William
Colonel of the Blues and Royals, Princess Anne
Colonel of the Grenadier Guards, Prince Andrew, replacing Prince Philip
Colonel of the Scots Guards The Duke of Kent

lallyvee 05-23-2018 08:15 AM

I think it had higher ratings because it was on Saturday and it started later in the day than most royal weddings and people didn't have to get up before dawn to watch it.

O-H Anglophile 05-23-2018 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudolph (Post 2114538)
ďDear Meghan, or should I say Dear Duchess, First, congratulations on a stunningly successful wedding.

You couldnít have scripted a more perfect day, though of course, thatís probably exactly what you did. And frankly, who can blame you? Whatís the point in being a professional actress if you canít turn in an Oscar-winning performance for the biggest role of your life? I loved it all.

So itís fair to say that Season One of your new life ended in a spectacular triumph, with US TV ratings higher than those for William and Kateís wedding. (In Britain, ratings were down 30% but donít take that personally Ė William and Kate are going to be our King and Queen and you guys arenít.)

However, the real challenge starts now. If you thought being a royal girlfriend was difficult, just wait until you see how hard it is being a royal wife.

This morning, youíll have awoken next to your handsome Prince at Kensington Palace, giddy with joy and hope Ė especially if your butler brought you the newspapers in bed.

The media that alarmed you by going so erratically off-message, and occasionally being downright offensive, as your romance progressed has now come together as one to sing your praises from the rafters.

It would be impossible to see all the ecstatic headlines and not get slightly carried away with oneís own sense of self-worth.Ē

Read more : Piers Morgan : Meghan Markle can't lecture about equality | Daily Mail Online

Meghanís old friend piers Morgan, has some advice for Meghan.

I think Piers is bitter he didn't get invited to the wedding. But then this is why!

jacqui24 05-23-2018 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lallyvee (Post 2114557)
I think it had higher ratings because it was on Saturday and it started later in the day than most royal weddings and people didn't have to get up before dawn to watch it.

Don't know about not having to get up at dawn. It was just an hour later than the Cambridge wedding, and all the coverage started around 4:30AM - 5AM EST. Around 2AM west coast. If that's not crack of dawn, I'm not sure what it is. And as for the weekend thing, it's actually easier to get people waking up early on the weekday as they likely had to get up for work anyways. Saturday is about the only day to sleep in for a lot of people.

RoyalHighness 2002 05-23-2018 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alvinking (Post 2114556)
yes, I think

Colonel of the Welsh Guards, Prince Charles
Colonel of the Irish Guards, Prince William
Colonel of the Blues and Royals, Princess Anne
Colonel of the Grenadier Guards, Prince Andrew, replacing Prince Philip
Colonel of the Scots Guards The Duke of Kent

I think Edward would fill in a vacant colonel position before Harry. And while yes he didn't serve in the military, he already holds a few honorary military appointments so that isn't a problem.

Curbside 05-23-2018 09:53 AM

Piers Morgan=Debbie Downer.

ACO 05-23-2018 10:02 AM

Piers calling Meghan his old friend is amusing. His desperation to latch in to her is truly comical. And he hasn't let up for almost 2 years.

Bryony Gordon wrote about her private meeting with Meghan a new months back. She reveals that Meghan has a project that will be launching in a few months and that she feels that her focus will be on female issues. She posted about it on her Instagram.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BjB_1wslgSv/?hl=en

Link to article: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/li...-things-right/

cepe 05-23-2018 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alvinking (Post 2114556)
yes, I think

Colonel of the Welsh Guards, Prince Charles
Colonel of the Irish Guards, Prince William
Colonel of the Blues and Royals, Princess Anne
Colonel of the Grenadier Guards, Prince Andrew, replacing Prince Philip
Colonel of the Scots Guards The Duke of Kent

There are 2 other regiments:

the Life Guards (other half of Household Cavalry with Blues and Royals) - Colonel is FM The Lord Guthrie of Craigiebank

Coldstream Guards (one of Foot Guard Regiments) - Colonel is L-Gen Sir James Bucknell

jacqui24 05-23-2018 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ACO (Post 2114605)
Piers calling Meghan his old friend is amusing. His desperation to latch in to her is truly comical. And he hasn't let up for almost 2 years.

Bryony Gordon wrote about her private meeting with Meghan a new months back. She reveals that Meghan has a project that will be launching in a few months and that she feels that her focus will be on female issues. She posted about it on her Instagram.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BjB_1wslgSv/?hl=en

Link to article: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/li...-things-right/

If I remember correctly, Bryony Gordon is the journalist that Harry first spoke to about his own struggles with grief over his mother's death and how he kept it in for 20 years. Right?

As for Piers, yes it is amusing. Especially since he's admitted that she's been ghosting him since then. :lol: It's time to take a hint, Piers.

Curbside 05-23-2018 01:29 PM

That Telegraph article is probably the best one I've read about Meghan.

duchessrachel 05-23-2018 01:57 PM

I was watching "Megyn Kelly" and she was talking about Meghan's curtsey to the Queen that the cameramen did not get a good shot of during the wedding. She was debating about whether Meghan should have curtseyed to the Queen since she is American and Megyn said she would not curtsey to the Queen. It was a stupid discussion. Of course Meghan should curtsey to the Queen. She is a member of the British Royal Family now. I just had to get that off my chest.

Dman 05-23-2018 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duchessrachel (Post 2114669)
I was watching "Megyn Kelly" and she was talking about Meghan's curtsey to the Queen that the cameramen did not get a good shot of during the wedding. She was debating about whether Meghan should have curtseyed to the Queen since she is American and Megyn said she would not curtsey to the Queen. It was a stupid discussion. Of course Meghan should curtsey to the Queen. She is a member of the British Royal Family now. I just had to get that off my chest.

Yeah, itís okay. I too get a bit frustrated by some of my fellow Americans ignorance on royal facts.

Cocoasneeze 05-23-2018 03:00 PM

That Telegraph article was really good. Now I'm curious to read what the project she's been working on, is.

wyevale 05-23-2018 04:08 PM

The Birth Chart of the Duchess Of Sussex was mentioned on another thread..and that has lead me to consult a tome, i've long had in my Library, and which has proved remarkably accurate over many years..

I thought this may be of interest, but IF it offends, please 'don't shoot the messenger', these are NOT my words

'The secret Language of birthdays' [Gary Goldschneider & Joost Elffers]. A guide to personality, based on pyschology, history, numerology. tarot and astrology.

This [in part] is what it has to say of those born on August 4th...

'THE DAY OF THE GUIDING LIGHT'

Those born on August the 4th are often the guiding light to whatever social group, political movement, family or business to which they belong. Not always 'cut out' to be leaders they must nevertheless occupy a principal position, indeed they make their influence felt and philosophy known to all with whom they associate. Often they are useful to their group in a largely symbolic role, as they may perfectly represent its aspirations and embody its ideals in their external appearance or lifestyle.

Being able to go their own way is important to these restless and active people. Too often they are hot-headed and somewhat irascible when encountering resistance. Because of these traits as well as their tendency to be in revolt against established systems they can only remain central to a group for a limited time, [unless that group is also about activity and revolution itself].
Being strong willed and strong minded they do best in a position where they are free to speak and do as they wish. Being able to shine to radiate their ideas and ideals to those about them, is of the utmost importance.

Quick and clever, they are masterly at sizing up their environment, nothing in their surroundings is lost on them and they generally respond to it quickly, as they have decisive, if not impulsive mentality.
Their tendency to think themselves invulnerable, however, can lead them into delicate and dangerous situations.

If they can maintain a precious balance August 4th people have a determined strength that is formidable. However, if off centre they can cause great harm [usually to themselves] but also to the ideals they serve.It is crucial they remember to act in a responsible manner, since so many people may be depending on them.

Interesting , yes ?

Curbside 05-23-2018 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duchessrachel (Post 2114669)
I was watching "Megyn Kelly" and she was talking about Meghan's curtsey to the Queen that the cameramen did not get a good shot of during the wedding. She was debating about whether Meghan should have curtseyed to the Queen since she is American and Megyn said she would not curtsey to the Queen. It was a stupid discussion. Of course Meghan should curtsey to the Queen. She is a member of the British Royal Family now. I just had to get that off my chest.

Yet, if a new immigrant to the US failed to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance or the National Anthem, what would Megyn Kelly's reaction be?

jacqui24 05-23-2018 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wyevale (Post 2114731)
The Birth Chart of the Duchess Of Sussex was mentioned on another thread..and that has lead me to consult a tome, i've long had in my Library, and which has proved remarkably accurate over many years..

I thought this may be of interest, but IF it offends, please 'don't shoot the messenger', these are NOT my words

'The secret Language of birthdays [Gary Goldschneider & Joost Elffers]. A guide to personality, based on pyschology, history, numerology. tarot and astrology.

This [in part] is what it has to say of those born on August 4th...

'THE DAY OF THE GUIDING LIGHT'

Those born on August the 4th are often the guiding light to whatever social group, political movement, family or business to which they belong. Not always 'cut out' to be leaders they must nevertheless occupy a principal position, indeed they make their influence felt and philosophy known to all with whom they associate. Often they are useful to their group in a largely symbolic role, as they may perfectly represent its aspirations and embody its ideals in their external appearance or lifestyle.

Being able to go their own way is important to these restless and active people. Too often they are hot-headed and somewhat irascible when encountering resistance. Because of these traits as well as their tendency to be in revolt against established systems they can only remain central to a group for a limited time, [unless that group is also about activity and revolution itself].
Being strong willed and strong minded they do best in a position where they are free to speak and do as they wish. Being able to shine to radiate their ideas and ideals to those about them, is of the utmost importance.

Quick and clever, they are masterly at sizing up their environment, nothing in their surroundings is lost on them and they generally respond to it quickly, as they have decisive, if not impulsive mentality.
Their tendency to think themselves invulnerable, however, can lead them into delicate and dangerous situations.

If they can maintain a precious balance August 4th people have a determined strength that is formidable. However, if off centre they can cause great harm [usually to themselves] but also to the ideals they serve.It is crucial they remember to act in a responsible manner, since so many people may be depending on them.

Interesting , yes ?

This is a birth chart on this forum for the Duchess? Link please?

And you know, we don't know much about Meghan's role in the new family and how she'll navigate that yet. However, a lot of this does remind me of another woman in the BRF that was born on Aug. 4th. The strength and guiding light does describe the Queen Mother to a tee, doesn't it? One hopes that Meghan can be a pillar of strength and a source of wisdom for her own family once she and Harry have child(ren). Although, I do have to caution that just because it's Aug 4, there are still distinctive difference that can make great changes based on the year and the time of birth as well.

Can you tell me which book you use?

Moonmaiden23 05-23-2018 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duchessrachel (Post 2114669)
I was watching "Megyn Kelly" and she was talking about Meghan's curtsey to the Queen that the cameramen did not get a good shot of during the wedding. She was debating about whether Meghan should have curtseyed to the Queen since she is American and Megyn said she would not curtsey to the Queen. It was a stupid discussion. Of course Meghan should curtsey to the Queen. She is a member of the British Royal Family now. I just had to get that off my chest.

Do you now understand why I avoid American news anchor discussions about the BRF like the proverbial plague? I remember when William was born, there was a highly regarded anchorwoman from a prestigious network who rolled her eyes and inquired why it was necessary to christen the child since he had already been named. I kid you not.:ohmy:

Just too embarrassing.

Curbside....excellent point about the expectation of immigrants to this country vs. what Meghan should do now that she is, for all intents and purposes, a British subject (if not in fact then in every other way that matters)

wyevale 05-23-2018 04:54 PM

Quote:

Link please?
No this isn't the DoS' chart, and I have not seen one, on this forum or elsewhere. As I explained my post above it taken from a book that uses numerous sources including birth charts to assess likely personality traits, in the same manner as birth charts do..

Osipi 05-23-2018 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacqui24 (Post 2114744)
This is a birth chart on this forum for the Duchess? Link please?

As wyevale did give the name of the book, I did a quick search and found it for cheap at abebooks.com if you're interested.

https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/Sea...days&kn=&isbn=

jacqui24 05-23-2018 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curbside (Post 2114737)
Yet, if a new immigrant to the US failed to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance or the National Anthem, what would Megyn Kelly's reaction be?

TOTALLY agree. Wish someone would ask her that and let her actually really think about it from a different perspective.

Mbruno 05-23-2018 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duchessrachel (Post 2114669)
I was watching "Megyn Kelly" and she was talking about Meghan's curtsey to the Queen that the cameramen did not get a good shot of during the wedding. She was debating about whether Meghan should have curtseyed to the Queen since she is American and Megyn said she would not curtsey to the Queen. It was a stupid discussion. Of course Meghan should curtsey to the Queen. She is a member of the British Royal Family now. I just had to get that off my chest.




That is the same discussion as whether Meghan should sing "God Save the Queen" or not because she is American. As a member of the Royal Family, she has no choice really. I don't think she minds it though.


I also expect Meghan to give up her American citizenship eventually, although she has been known to do things "differently" in the past.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Curbside (Post 2114737)
Yet, if a new immigrant to the US failed to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance or the National Anthem, what would Megyn Kelly's reaction be?


Well, a friend of mine who is now a Canadian citizen told me once that, during the naturalization ceremony, he/she (I don't want to identify his/her gender) just "pretended' to be swearing the oath of allegiance to the Queen along with the rest of the crowd, but didn't really say it. I think that actually happens a lot and must happen with the US pledge of allegiance too.

jacqui24 05-23-2018 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mbruno (Post 2114763)
I also expect Meghan to give up her American citizenship eventually, although she has been known to do things "differently" in the past.

I think for practicality, she will. She'll always be American as part of her identity, but with the US tax law, it's a pain.

tihkon2 05-23-2018 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wyevale (Post 2114731)

Those born on August the 4th are often the guiding light to whatever social group, political movement, family or business to which they belong.....
Interesting , yes ?

Eh. My step-mother is an August 4th baby and has almost none of the traits mentioned in your book for people born on that day. Like she's almost the polar opposite of the things mentioned. So, I personally don't put any stock in that sort of thing....

Dman 05-23-2018 06:13 PM

Meghan will always be an American and she’s our real Princess.

Curbside 05-23-2018 06:17 PM

I think she'll give up her American citizenship, but maybe only when her children are old enough to give up theirs.

Curbside 05-23-2018 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dman (Post 2114787)
Meghan will always be an American and sheís our real Princess.

She's our American Princess-to-be!:whistling:

Moonmaiden23 05-23-2018 06:19 PM

Even the Fail reported that the new Duchess of Sussex was sticking out her hand at yesterday's Garden Party trying to block people who tried to curtsey to her by shaking their hands instead.

Yes, that sounds like an over ambitious parvenu who "doesn't know her place" doesn't it?:cool:

I am not a giddy Meghan fan but I really wish some folks would cut it with the snide passive aggressive digs and let the poor girl get on with it. She has been a Royal Duchess for barely four days! Give her a chance to get her bearings.:sad:

Frankly if I'd had to navigate the family drama that Meghan did in the runup to the wedding I'd be in bed huddled under the covers at KP right now with a bottle of vodka for company.

And that whining Piers Morgan can just zip it anytime. Someone pass him some whipped cream to go with those sour grapes he's been nibbling ever since the engagement was announced and Meghan(rightfully) cut him off at the knees.:bang:

Empress Merel 05-23-2018 06:31 PM

:previous:
I saw people commenting on her walk when she and Harry left the garden party. It was too model-esque and too Hollywood. :rofl: A woman can't even walk these days without some people having to critique it.

Madame Verseau 05-23-2018 06:49 PM

I think the reason Meghan was waiving off the curtsies & bows is because it's finally sinking in: she is officially royalty. She wants to signal she really hasn't changed, but let's face it, there is a change. I am happy to see after all that vile mess that has been heaped on her some are willing to afford her the bow and curtsy out of respect. She'll still get the stick because that is standard for a royal but it was very nice to see.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:24 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises