The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 5: June-July 2021

[AC21091968]

Population Matters charity gave Harry & Meghan a special award for limiting family to two children. The Sussexes will receive £500 to donate to charities or their choice "in the run-up to the UN's World Population Day on Sunday".

Population Matters charity give Harry and Meghan award for limiting family to two children
The couple will receive £500 to donate to charity for making the "enlightened decision" to only have two children.
https://news.sky.com/story/populati...-for-limiting-family-to-two-children-12352738

On a different note, after Harry mentioned about having two children maximum on 30th July 2019 (later featured as an interview with Jane Goodall on Vogue September Issue), Helena de Chair (wife of Jacob Rees-Mogg, Leader of the House of Commons and Conservative MP) spoke to the Mail on Sunday that they are doing best for the environment by stopping at six children. This was also not long after their sixth child turned two (Sixtus is now four years old). I'm not quite sure if Helena is subtly shading the Sussexes, given that Jacob wanted a large family.

Thanks to Prince Harry, the world now knows that having more than two children is bad for the environment.

Unfortunately for Jacob Rees-Mogg’s wife Helena de Chair, this crucial piece of ecological information was delivered just as the couple’s sixth child, Sixtus, turned two.

‘I’m afraid it’s a bit late where we’re concerned,’ Helena admitted last week.

‘But by stopping at six we can now claim to be doing our bit for the environment.’

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...ng-wants-love-rivals-little-boy-best-man.html

Co-incidentally, this segment is under Princess Beatrice's wedding rumours back in 2019.

The article also included a picture of Jacob holding Sixtus in his right arm and ministerial folder & newspapers in his left arm, whilst walking outside their London home.
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/1..._that_having_more_than-a-14_1570377277464.jpg

 

[Lee-Z]

Population Matters charity gave Harry & Meghan a special award for limiting family to two children. The Sussexes will receive £500 to donate to charities or their choice "in the run-up to the UN's World Population Day on Sunday".

Population Matters charity give Harry and Meghan award for limiting family to two children
The couple will receive £500 to donate to charity for making the "enlightened decision" to only have two children.
https://news.sky.com/story/populati...-for-limiting-family-to-two-children-12352738

Wasn't familiar with this charity, so if anyone is interested, this is a link to their website
https://populationmatters.org/

 

[Somebody]

I guess that was the whole point of awarding H&M the money to donate to a charity... So, it worked!

 

[Alison H]

I find that whole discussion about limiting family size "because of the environment" quite offensive. Not everyone is fortunate enough, for medical reasons or because they haven't found the right partner, to be able to choose how many children they have. Some people have one child and then conceive again and it's twins. Sometimes a relationship ends and then someone who already has children meets a new partner who hasn't. I think it's quite insulting for Population Matters to be handing out awards based on how many children people have got, but I suppose it's a publicity stunt!

 

[Biri]

Nobody who planned to have only two children, has already one and conceived again, terminates the pregnancy just because the gynecological examination showed that they were twins.

 

[Heavs]

I agree it's a publicity stunt to award it to the Sussexes. Apart from anything else two children is more or less the average in the UK. And for another thing they haven't actually come out and said they're only having two to protect the environment.

Harry: It does make it different. I think, weirdly, because of the people that I’ve met and the places that I’ve been fortunate enough to go to, I’ve always had a connection and a love for nature. I view it differently now, without question. But I’ve always wanted to try and ensure that, even before having a child and hoping to have children…

Jane Goodall: Not too many! [Laughs]

Harry: Two, maximum! But I’ve always thought: this place is borrowed. And, surely, being as intelligent as we all are, or as evolved as we all are supposed to be, we should be able to leave something better behind for the next generation.

https://www.vogue.co.uk/article/prince-harry-jane-goodall-september-2019-issue

That was it.

And as Alison says there are lots of reasons why people have no children or more than two and aren't able to chose the ideal size of their family.

 

[Biri]

Who knows what it would have been with their family size if he and Meghan had met each other a few years earlier?
Pregnancy at the age 40+ is a risky pregnancy, let's face it.

 

[Granada]

To me, an alleged statement of which I would like to know the TRUTH is, this one supposedly said by Meghan ...."Its not my job to coddle People", in response to complaints that Staff felt they were being treated very unfairly and not up to Meghans "standards".

If that *WAS* her response, then it shows to Me a level of high handedness and a stunningly 'out of touch' superior attitude that would lend credence to the bullying rumours.
About the "Storm in a Teacup" allegation, who knows ? Could it have happened, sure. Could the Staffer have been paid compensation and re assigned ? Of course. Many would take that route. Or was it Meghan dropped a Teacup during a rant and the Story blew up crazily ? That too could have happened.
All I know is that generally where there is smoke, there is fire.

 

[UglyAmerican]

I know loads of people who have two or fewer children. Where can they sign up for this award? And does anyone really believe that Meghan, who just gave birth to her second child at age 39, would have had several more were it not for their concerns about the environment? That hasn't even stopped them from taking private jets. It certainly wouldn't stop them from having another child, if they wanted and were able to have one.

I suspect the carbon footprint and environmental impact of their mansion, as compared to a normal-sized house for a family of four, greatly exceeds the environmental impact of an additional child who lives in a normal-sized house for a family of five.

 

[Erin9]

The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 5: June 2021-

I agree it's a publicity stunt to award it to the Sussexes. Apart from anything else two children is more or less the average in the UK. And for another thing they haven't actually come out and said they're only having two to protect the environment.



https://www.vogue.co.uk/article/prince-harry-jane-goodall-september-2019-issue

That was it.

And as Alison says there are lots of reasons why people have no children or more than two and aren't able to chose the ideal size of their family.

I do agree this award is a publicity stunt and one I don’t care for. As long as you can take care of your children, how many you have (or don’t have) is no one’s business imo.

 

[A-Bik]

Wasn't familiar with this charity, so if anyone is interested, this is a link to their website
https://populationmatters.org/

The charity has got their name in the papers/blogs so mission accomplished.

Great that it's yet another opportunity to bash the Sussexes too.?

 

[LadyGlendower]

Seems like a smallish amount but they are giving out these awards to 10 other recepients that will probably also welcome the publicity.

Maybe it's just me but the concept of giving someone an award for the number of children they did or didn't have is a real reach in terms of prestige.


(no offense to Population Matters itself or its mission)

 

[A-Bik]

And does anyone really believe that Meghan, who just gave birth to her second child at age 39, would have had several more were it not for their concerns about the environment?

Actually there are many, many, women who have children well into their early 40s. This has been very much the case going back to the 50s.

 

[UglyAmerican]

Actually there are many, many, women who have children well into their early 40s. This has been very much the case going back to the 50s.

Sure, it's possible. But most don't, and there are reasons for that.

 

[Claire]

They can simply refuse the award - it is a rather stupid thing anyway.

 

[Lee-Z]

At the very least we finally managed a change of topic for 15 posts in a row

?

 

[Eskimo]

I would venture to guess that if this were a rumor that was positive about Meghan, the tune might change and you would expect us to swallow it hook, line, and sinker with no verification whatsoever.

What we all need to remember is that rumor is rumor whether it's positive or negative. I attempted to independently verify whether or not this rumor was true and said as much in my post. The fact that this particular rumor happens to be negative or, at the least neutral (they're private citizens, they can shill for whatever products they want), means nothing. But let's be cautious about claiming that all negative rumors are accepted as gospel when you'd be fine with them being accepted as gospel as long as they're positive. Rumors are rumors and should be treated as such regardless of the positive or negative spin.

I find it fascinating that some posters expect any rumors posted about M&H, that paints them in a positive light, as the word of the Almighty himself, but any rumors that paint them in a negative light, are to be immediately dismissed and not talked about.

I know loads of people who have two or fewer children. Where can they sign up for this award? And does anyone really believe that Meghan, who just gave birth to her second child at age 39, would have had several more were it not for their concerns about the environment? That hasn't even stopped them from taking private jets. It certainly wouldn't stop them from having another child, if they wanted and were able to have one.

I suspect the carbon footprint and environmental impact of their mansion, as compared to a normal-sized house for a family of four, greatly exceeds the environmental impact of an additional child who lives in a normal-sized house for a family of five.

What happens if H&M decide that they want, and have, a third? Does this “organization” demand the money back?

 

[Alison H]

Probably, because that would be even more publicity, and that's clearly what Population Matters are after! But, hey, hopefully Harry and Meghan will find a worthy cause to donate the money to, so everyone wins!

 

[Osipi]

The real winner in all this is whatever organization or charity that receives the award monies.

A lot of people do stop having children after two but with the "fame name" of the recipients, it's guaranteed to get tongues wagging in the media circus. It's not like Harry and Meghan are doing something super duper extraordinary but rather they have the "fame name".

 

[Sandy345]

It's not an unusual event for royals to have two children only.

 

[TLLK]

The real winner in all this is whatever organization or charity that receives the award monies.

A lot of people do stop having children after two but with the "fame name" of the recipients, it's guaranteed to get tongues wagging in the media circus. It's not like Harry and Meghan are doing something super duper extraordinary but rather they have the "fame name".

Agreed. It's an unusual even strange award considering that the Sussexes could have another baby IMO, but whichever charity receives the funds will be grateful.

 

[MARG]

I'm not 100% positive but I believe the poster is referring to the story of Meghan throwing a cup of hot tea at a staffer in the Governor General's residence in Australia or New Zealand while they were on tour.

I have to say that this would have been lining birdcages for months in both NZ and Australia. It would have been up in lights and headlining every newspaper and magazine for weeks (not counting the filler recycling of royal news) and yet, no. No way.

How can people be so utterly gullible as to believe that Meghan would behave like that in Australasia and we wouldn't mind a bit and never actually tell the newspapers and TV stations? Bare bottoms? We printed them, so come on, we down this way are more likely to call a spade a bl***y great ditch digger and regardless of who the perpetrator was, they would be vilified forever.

I fail to understand the motives or the mindset that says "where there's smoke there's fire" and finds Meghan guilty on all counts. It lacks fairness, research, verification or most probably, truth. And yet this thread is the first and only place I have heard tell of Meghan (or any other royal) losing total control and throwing a tantrum and a teacup, full I presume.

 

[Kataryn]

All I know is that generally where there is smoke, there is fire.

Not necessarily when it comes to the British tabloid's war on Meghan. These papers love to build a fire out of nothing.

 

[TLLK]

I have to say that this would have been lining birdcages for months in both NZ and Australia. It would have been up in lights and headlining every newspaper and magazine for weeks (not counting the filler recycling of royal news) and yet, no. No way.

How can people be so utterly gullible as to believe that Meghan would behave like that in Australasia and we wouldn't mind a bit and never actually tell the newspapers and TV stations? Bare bottoms? We printed them, so come on, we down this way are more likely to call a spade a bl***y great ditch digger and regardless of who the perpetrator was, they would be vilified forever.

I fail to understand the motives or the mindset that says "where there's smoke there's fire" and finds Meghan guilty on all counts. It lacks fairness, research, verification or most probably, truth. And yet this thread is the first and only place I have heard tell of Meghan (or any other royal) losing total control and throwing a tantrum and a teacup, full I presume.

Over the years I have read many verified and unverified stories on this site about royals in reigning and non-reigning royal famiies losing their tempers and acting out ie: Italian royals coming to blows at Felipe and Letizia's wedding. Diana pushing her stepmother down the stairs. Etc... So it's honestly not limited to Meghan.

 

[Alison H]

Even the Queen threw a tennis racket at Prince Philip! Although throwing something at your own husband is very different to throwing something at a member of staff.

 

[ladongas]

Even the Queen threw a tennis racket at Prince Philip! Although throwing something at your own husband is very different to throwing something at a member of staff.

A tennis racket? I heard it was shoes! Or is HM a serial thrower?

 

[Granada]

I qualified my thinking by saying "generally" where there is smoke there is fire. I should have been more specific, as I meant my comment to the broader allegations of bullying. Not the supposed "teacup throwing" incident.
To me, the "Division of the Households" by William over Megan's supposed treatment of Staff. Says much, And Harry I guess not seeing there were issues with Staff feeling put upon and demoralized. Which led to a split in Households.
The other incident being "Tiaragate", are the two I find most telling. And Tiaragate was specifically mentioned in the book the Sussex's authorized.

The Tiaragate Situation, I find very interesting because it shows that Megan thought of Angela Kelly as just the Queens Dresser, a member of Staff. She it appears, did not know that Angela is very, very much more than that. An inner circle confidant. Even Scobie brings up the incident in Finding Freedom, stating that Harry called the Queen saying, " I don't know what the hell is going on, THIS WOMAN needs to make it work for my future wife".
So not to rehash that situation again, but Meghan didn't get what She wanted. So she got Harry involved. And The Queen responded, put Harry and Meghan basically in their place.
FOR they, it seems, viewed Angela Kelly, as a 'staffer' to work around Meghan schedule. Not as she actually is. A very busy prominent Aide, who also functions as companion and confidant, ( especially so during Lockdown ! ) at the Queens right hand .

And it didn't work out the way that The Sussex's wanted. The Queen took Angela's side in this instance.
So again, these two incidents in my mind encapsulate a situation that lead credence to the allegations of bullying. That's what I meant about "generally where there is smoke there is fire".

Taken as a whole, something went wrong. Very wrong in an unbelievably short space of time. May 2018 Fairytale Wedding.The future looks bright for them as Senior valued Royals...."The Commonwealth Couple" ......then.....
To them leaving in November 2019 for Canada to prepare for them Stepping Back with the HIHO failed proposition. Then sadly the vengeful Oprah Interview that truly blew everything apart in March 2021.
I still find the timeline amazing.

 

[muriel]

I qualified my thinking by saying generally where there is smoke there is fire. I should have been more specific, as I meant my comment to the broader allegations of bullying. Not the supposed "teacup throwing" incident.
To me, the "Division of the Households" by William over Megan's supposed treatment of Staff. Says much, And Harry I guess not seeing there were issues with Staff feeling put upon and demoralized. Which led to a split in Households.
The other incident being "Tiaragate", are the two I find most telling. And Tiaragate was specifically mentioned in the book the Sussex's authorized.

The Tiaragate Situation, I find very interesting because it shows that Megan thought of Angela Kelly as just the Queens Dresser, a member of Staff. She it appears, did not know that Angela is very, very much more than that. An inner circle confidant. Even Scobie brings up the incident in Finding Freedom, stating that Harry called the Queen saying, " I don't know what the hell is going on, THIS WOMAN needs to make it work for my future wife".
So not to rehash that situation again, but Meghan didn't get what She wanted. So she got Harry involved. And The Queen responded, put Harry and Meghan basically in their place.
FOR they it, seems, viewed Angela Kelly, as a 'staffer' to work around Meghan schedule. Not as she actually is. A very busy prominent Aide, who also functions as companion and confidant, ( especially so during Lockdown ! ) at the Queens right hand .

And it didn't work out the way that The Sussex's wanted. The Queen took Angela's side in this instance.
So again, these two incidents in my mind encapsulate a situation that lead credence to the allegations of bullying. That's what I meant about "generally where there is smoke there is fire".

Taken as a whole, something went wrong. Very wrong in an unbelievably short space of time. May 2018 Fairytale Wedding.The future looks bright for them as Senior valued Royals...."The Commonwealth Couple" ......then.....
To them leaving in November 2019 for Canada to prepare for them Stepping Back with the HIHO failed proposition. Then sadly the vengeful Oprah Interview that truly blew everything apart in March 2021.
I still find the timeline amazing.

Your point abiout the speed with which things progressed is very valid. Sad, but true. So much promise and goodwill, such little achieved, and so much venom.

 

[Alison H]

A tennis racket? I heard it was shoes! Or is HM a serial thrower?

Both, apparently! But it was on the same occasion. He'd obviously done something that had really annoyed her!

 

[AC21091968]

According to one sentence in The Telegraph (but somehow in the headline), Naomi Osaka has thanked Meghan for her support in mental health. This comes after Osaka's withdrawal from French Open and subsequently Wimbledon.

Naomi Osaka thanks Duchess of Sussex for mental health support
Tennis star says rising Covid cases were ‘a big cause for concern’ for Olympic Games and admits she is ‘not really sure’ they should proceed
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...-thanks-duchess-sussex-mental-health-support/
Archived link: https://archive.ph/FIqi8