Prince Harry: Relationship Suggestions and Musings 2016-2017


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
My problem is if she would give up her acting because we know that trying to continue a career just doesn't work. We have seen that fail before. Anyway big IF at the moment.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
I see a lot of parallels between acting and performing royal duties. I'm not saying performing royal duties is "false" in any way - just that there is a performance aspect to it. It might suit someone with an acting background.
 
It does appear that Meghan & Harry are at least friends. They do follow each other on IG & it is interesting that at least two of his closest friends (Arthur Landon and Adam Bidwell) are following Meghan on IG.
 
Geez, why can't the media let the boy be and have a private love life like anyone else ?
I am old enough to remember the treatment his mother got from the media and i fear the same thing happen again. This gives me stomach pain...

I think they need to solve the "working question" anyway in the British Royal Family. In 1916 you could expect that someone who married into the Royal family would take a title and accept being a Duchess or Countess for the rest of your life, give up the whole life you had before, do Royal engagements for the rest of your life and that's it.

You can't expect that in 2016 unless you is or are going to be the wife/husband to the monarch. Harrys wife is not going to be that.
There are modern times now when people are making careers, having private interests etc. Even the Royal family needs to have a plan for that. That's how i see it. If not, there won't be many adult people in the end who would want to marry into the Royal family.


Going back to another thread, if Charles really wants a slimmed-down Royal Family, Harry's wife will have to be a full-time royal. There is a minimum number of working royals who are needed to keep up with the Firm's engagements, even if Charles decides to cut them down substantially.

Of course, Beatrice at least is more than willing to pitch in and help the family, but Charles and William continue to make the illogical decision to shut her out.
 
Yes, another version of the 'poor desperate Harry' stuff the tabloids, especially the DM regularly come up with. I remember them stating that Harry was anxiously phoning Cressida all the time, when he was in Afghanistan of all places, because he was worried about her ex beau, Harry Wenworth Stanley hanging around. Then there was Chelsy, he was always texting her, as well! :lol:
 
Personally, to quote Shakespeare, its all "much ado about nothing" at this point. If Harry befriends or knows someone that is female, they've got him in a white hot romance and headed to the altar. Members of the opposite sex are quite capable of forming and enjoying friendships without there being any romantic attachments to them and I seriously think that, at this point, that is all this is.

He may prove me wrong though. :D
 
And you probably would not have ever her seen her blog if she wasn't linked to Harry 🤔


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
No, that's quite true, but that's the case with a lot of actors, actresses and other people in and out of show business who try to do some good for others in their own country and elsewhere, isn't it?
 
Lots of the showbiz people do good in the community but don't toot their horn about it and don't run a lifestyle website which needs traffic to go it.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
I don't consider it tooting her horn. I thought it was a nice blog which was why I posted it. Blogs are just a part of life now.

Many charities and causes need publicity and wouldn't get it without it. After all, that's what royals do a lot of the time, isn't it, try to bring publicity to their causes? They talk about it and their visits to Africa etc as well. So do some celebrities. Meghan has tooted her horn at the UN as well.
 
Whether Meaghen is Harry's friend, girlfriend, or it's all a load of made-up rubbish, I was impressed after reading this from her blog.

How to Be Both - The Tig


On the other hand, being overtly "political" is a negative for a prospective royal bride given the principle of political neutrality of the monarchy. I'm not sure that Meghan, being used to US-style activism, would adjust to the type of neutrality that is expected from the royals especially in the UK (in other countries , royals are allowed to be more outspoken on public issues, but not in Britain).
 
being overtly "political" is a negative for a prospective royal bride given the principle of political neutrality of the monarchy.

Indeed the LAST thing they need is a 'lippy, free Spirit'...
 
I didn't find anything the political. She said nothing that many young royals including the yorks, Harry and the Cambridges havent said. Her speaking about her influence growing up in fact sounds like Harry or will when they talk about their mum. The work she does with world vision and the UN woman are certainly things one could continue as a royal. It would certainly be great to see a member of the BRF as an UN ambassador as some continental royals are. Bea has been doing some work, the award she presented in New York recently. Perhaps a root for her if not officially not a full working Royal. But I think Meghan could likely carve out a nice niche.

That said, I think her and Harry would have troubles staying home. They both have such a draw to Africa and less fortunate areas. And if Charles does slim down the family, Harry and his wife will be needed in the uk mainly.
 
Last edited:
I don't get how she's not Princess material. From all that I've read about Meaghan, she seems lovely...smart, hard-working and dedicated to her charity work. That sounds like princess material to me.

Now whether they're actually dating is something that only time will tell.

Is there an age limit to date and/or marry Harry that I missed that makes Meghan ineligible?

If any of this is true, she is only 3 years older than him. Yes she is divorced but guess what...so is his father, stepmother, aunt and uncle. Is it 1978 and divorcees need not apply for the position of royal girlfriend?

Yes, she is an actress. Yes, she is no Cate Blanchett or Helen Mirren but she isn't Koo Stark either.

She is not sitting around eating bon bons by the fire, when not working [and blogging] she is apparently trying to make a difference via her work with the UN.

So how exactly is she not Princess Material?

I am thinking its true though...Kensington Palace did their usual...we don't comment on personal lives but she has said nothing like deny they are dating or say they are just friends with mutual interests and that might be telling.

But I guess we shall see.

Totally agree with all of this.
 
I didn't find anything the political. She said nothing that many young riyals including the yorks, Harry and the Cambridges have said. Her speaking about her influence growing up in fact sounds like Harry or will when they talk about their mum. The work she does with world vision and the UN woman are certainly things one could continue as a royal. It would certainly be great to se a member of the BRF as an UN ambassador as some continental royals are. Bea has been doing some work, the award she presented in New York recently. Perhaps a root for her of not officially not a full working Royal. But I think Meghan could likely carve out a nice niche.

That said, I think her and Harry would have troubles staying home. They both have such a draw to Africa and less fortunate areas. And if Charles dies doom down the family, Harry and his wife will be needed in th uk mainly.

I was not referring to that blog entry specifically, but rather to her broader profile as a self-styled "activist".
 
And what are royals but activists for a cause? Besides their ceremonial roles. Hey ad all patrons of causes, trying yo advance them. She is a bit more hands on. It isn't like she is involved in political matches and rallies. Her work is certainly comparable to any humanitarian work done by royals. Nothing self proclaimed either, when she works for both the UN and world vision, she has earned the title. Activist is simply anothervwrr for humanitarian, more hands on than patron.
 
She apparently posted pictures of 'remain' posters when in the London during the referendum for UK independence from the EU in June. That's fairly blatantly political and might be sen as problem.

I worry at the number of posts saying Harry wouldn't be interested as she's 35 and therefore too old to to give him the kids he's desperate for. Terribly worrying for us single girls on the wrong side of 30!
 
:previous:

The only time I ever thought 35 years was truly old was when I was in grammar school. :lol:

And yes it's wild that some people think 35 is late in the day to have a child in this age of medical advances, even a first child.

Tell that to Sophie Wessex!
 
.. well, 35 IS late for starting a royal romance, courtship, wedding and then trying for a baby, pregnancy - she would be at least 38 when having her first child....
 
Are we not 'getting ahead of ourselves' ? Not only is there NO CONFIRMATION these two individuals are 'an item', let alone 'serious'.
The Prince has said he wants children, but do we know the Lady does?
 
Unless the wedding is next month, in which case she has plenty of time...
 
Guys,

There's no reason to even think of a wedding for Harry right now. This guy won't be marrying anyone for some time.

Even if he's actually dating right now. He won't be introducing a young lady to his father unless he's sure his relationship is stable and going somewhere.

There's some years to go folks.
 
And yes it's wild that some people think 35 is late in the day to have a child in this age of medical advances, even a first child.

Tell that to Sophie Wessex!

Or Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester.

Re Harry and Meghan; i'm not inclined to believe anything until there is a photo of them together at least.
 
Everyone with half a brain stays away from the Star, Enquirer and others of that ilk, though!

I'm inclined now to think there is something in it, I don't mean an engagement or anything near to it, but simply because Harry and KP would not have allowed this amount of publicity and speculation about Meghan and H if the pair didn't know each other and nothing has been going on. Even the broadsheets in England have got into it.

It's been a frenzy, and now People magazine has started. The women's weekly and monthly magazines in the English-speaking world may well follow with articles. People magazine has contacts with the KP Press office.

However, if this romance thing has no legs at all and it's all just simply a made up thing by Camilla Tominey, it's odd that Harry at least hasn't shut it down. He, after all, made sure the Press knew that he and Pippa weren't dating, and was behind the statement issued by KP at the end of the Cress romance.

He and Meghan are either having a huge joke on the tabs for some reason, in which case they're definitely friends, or something odd is going on that we don't know about.

I'm much less sceptical about these two not knowing each other and it all being a load of twaddle than I was 24 hours ago. However, I'm not booking a plane ticket to see Harry married yet, either!
 
Last edited:
:previous:



The only time I ever thought 35 years was truly old was when I was in grammar school. :lol:



And yes it's wild that some people think 35 is late in the day to have a child in this age of medical advances, even a first child.



Tell that to Sophie Wessex!


I don't think anyone is saying 35 is to old it's the 2 year dating 12 months engagement then the 12-18 months settling in to royal life. And IVF doesn't work for everyone check the stats. But I don't think we need worry about it all can't see it developing into anything two busy people living in different places living very different lives


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom