Part 5: Dangling Tendrils, Ill-Fitting Gowns, Is It Time for a Style Intervention for New Royal Duchess Meghan?

A reminder of Meghan at Wimbledon.

I liked the concept, but the execution was pitiful.

If she was supposedly doing Ralph Lauren a favor, they should have made sure it was tailored. I’m surprised they didn’t disavow that outfit. “No, no, that wasn’t ours. I believe it was Raph Lawrence. Different designer.”

Ralph Lauren didn't even post Meghan's look on his twitter. He only posted Emma Watson's look at Wimbledon.

Do you all realize that long trousers really aren't a huge scandal? Neither is her hair. You seem to think it's grounds for beheading. The world is on fire and you think this is a huge deal. Christ this is stupid. Most people look at her clothes and think "I like it" I don't like it" "I'd like it better if it were a little different". Most people probably give it no thought at all.

Incidentally Suits is an American show that was shot in Canada. Canada gives tax breaks to film there, so a lot of shows are made there. It isn't indicative of the prestige level of the show. Suites was on the USA cable network. Cable shows aren't less than broadcast networks. Cable shows often has more viewers and definitely get more awards than broadcast shows do. USA network produces "blue sky" shows. They are entertaining but not edgy and don't get a lot of awards, USA produces shows that are as good as anything on the big 4 broadcast networks. Suits ran for 100 episodes, so obviously enough people were watching it to keep it going for that long. No she wasn't a huge star, but she had a good career as a working actress. That's something most wannabe actors don't accomplish.

Wasn’t the original “Nikita” a USA network show? (Not the original movie, obviously, but the original TV version). It wasn’t a hit, but it had kind of a cult following. Imagine if one of the supporting actors married a royal. Like Alberta Watson marrying Prince Charles. Or the guy who played Birkoff marrying Harry.

And in breaking news, MM's future sister-in-law has been arrested for domestic violence. I really wonder if Harry had anticipated all of this. I agree with the imaginative poster in his view that this marriage is a giant FU to the BRF who he thinks killed his mother.

Well don’t forget that Kate’s trashy uncle was recently arrested for beating his wife.

Kate’s immediate family usually behaves immaculately, however, there are still a few hiccups on occasion. (Carole chewing gum when meeting the queen, Pippa’s fake gun incident in France, her brother’s multiple failed idiotic businesses, etc.)

The Middleton’s are still 1000x better than the Markles.

The people who keep saying that the VF cover article was "totally Palace approved" never produce the slightest proof of that - ow on earth would they know, anyway? The "Palace" kept a deafening silence on the matter. At a maximum, it was "Harry approved" but there is in my opinion zero chance that the establishment's PR machine approved it, let alone the premature announcement of an engagement - do you think VF submitted the article to the Palace for approval before publishing?!

As for Harry saying he knew she was the one the moment they met - yes, that's what he said, but that doesn't mean I believe it. What else did anyone expect him to say on the spur of the moment with hundreds of journalists right there? Charles said he was delighted to be marrying Diana, too.

I think Harry knew it was "time" and was too tired to go on looking for Miss Perfect and knew untangling himself from this one wasn't worth the trouble, he might as well get on with it.

His past history speaks for itself, and anyone who wants to bet on his total fidelity to his marriage vows over the years is welcome to do so.

What will she wear today? Any news info pics?

R8 The only proof needed that the VF interview was "totally palace approved" is that Harry married her after what would seem like a break in protocol. William and Harry are extremely press savvy like their mother was.

Harry loves MM and you just have to accept it. Timing is everything for men, but when it comes to players like Harry or George Clooney it is a matter of timing and the right girl.

R6 The Markle Clan is a mess. I would hate to be judged by the worse of my family. MM gets a lot of flack for cutting people off cold, but that could be in response to seeing people in her family who just won't let anything go. MM ends relationships quick and clean probably because she has seen the toxicity of clingers. The Markle Clan need to learn how to move on.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

They've been married two months but Harry has had two solo trips for his African charity. What the hell is his mixed-race wife doing all day that she couldn't accompany him? Isn't she suppose to be promoting diversity and human rights?

What does she do all day? Does she flick through Vogue magazine to see what fashion disaster she can wear next? Has she already jetted to America to catch up with family and friends? Nutmeg is missing in action.

Who is the straight chick who keeps replying to defend Markle and what is she doing on DL?

R13 it’s Jessica Mulroney

R12 Maybe Harry wanted to travel solo because he likes to sleep around?

Thanks, JESSICA, R4.

"Timing is everything to men." You mean, his cab light was on?

Harry has charisma when he is alone.

R10 - I never suggested he didn't love Sparkle. He loved Chelsey and Cressida, too.

But as for "press savyy - I think the Markle family press disasters are evidence that Harry and William are anything but, although the blame was conveniently laid on now-departing press officers. Harry and William insisted on taking over their own PR, and the result was H&M making an enemy of the tabloids before the engagement was even announced, and the Markle family disaster.

Their press savvy is lousy.

I thought the story was that Sparkle had taken over the Kensington Palace PR?

There was comments on the "American" tone of output being noticeable.

R19 William treats the press as a necessary evil and lives a very private life for the future King of England. Harry spent most of his down time drunk and there are pictures of him online dressed as a Nazi. Despite all of this, both young men are very popular and held in high regard.

They are press savvy. They give the public and the press just enough. The Markle debacle would confound anyone. Why won't these damaged people just go away? Most people go away when they know that they are not wanted. Not the Markles. Their dysfunction cannot be contained. No one can write a check big enough for them to go away. Harry and MM are in a terrible situation with these people.

They can only hope that the press tires of their antics and stops handing Papa Markle a few grand per interview.

R21 He chose to be a *rebel* and marry trash, now he's going to be smeling trash for as long as he lives.

Prince Harry intervenes.

I’m not a fan of dim bulb Harry but those who keep wittering about how there are pics of him dressed as a Nazi - it was a BAD TASTE THEMED FANCY DRESS PARTY. He wasn’t tootling about the Home Counties dressed as Himmler. So his costume actually means he considered the Nazis as bad taste and an object of derision.

She could get away with breaking the fashion rules if she looked good doing it. Instead she looks like shit.

R24 - what he considered at that party is beside the point: what was in bad taste was wearing it at all in anyplace he could have been photographed.

Ah, the DM never lets us down: it now has up an article that excoriates Yuge for being given a wedding JUST LIKE MEGHAN'S AND HARRY's:

"Who the hell does Princess Eugenie think she is? JAN MOIR on the lowly royal given a wedding just like Harry and Meghan whose hunger for glitz and glamour is every bit as monstrous as Mother Fergie's"

Oddly, the headline is phrased so that it looks as if "hunger for glitz and glamour is every bit as monstrous as Mother Fergie's" refers to . . . Meghan, not Yuge.

The article actually suggests that Yuge, who is, of course, a Princess of the Blood and the Queen's granddaughter, niece to the next King of Great Britain, and her fiance should "shuffle off to parts unknown to tie the knot discreetly".

The truth is, the only "lowly royal" in sight is the American wannabe arriviste "married in", whilst Yuge, whatever else her flaws may be, is the real thing, a descendant of Queen Victoria and a bona fide Princess.

R27 You must be Fergie or someone equally as unfortunate. Listen, MM is more in than you will ever be and should she have children with Harry, they will bona find descendants of Queen Victoria.

MM has grown on me, but I was put off by her blushing bride routine. It seemed silly to act demure when it was her second time down the aisle. Having said that, I can't imagine anyone despising MM so much that they try to make those York girls happen. Do you not realize what an uphill battle you are in for? Do you really think that your posts are going to make them catch on as fashion icons and examples of style and grace?

Harry wasn't hoodwinked by MM, but he probably didn't realize how hard life would be with her family. Harry and MM rightly disengaged from them and they still can't get rid of them.

Does anyone have any info on the Markle children's mother?

I thought I read at some point that the Markles' mother had pretty much renounced her offspring.

R29 what?

R28 - Oh, yes, of course, I am absolutely Sarah Ferguson.

By the way, have you seen the Order of Precedent lately? Here's how it works: Kate Middleton, future Queen Consort of Great Britain - has to curtsey to Bea and Yuge if Kate is not accompanied by her husband, from whom she takes her rank. You know why?

Because they are born Princesses of the Blood, so unless her hubby is by Kate's side to throw the cloak of his rank over her - Kate has to curtsey to them.

And so does Meghan Markle.

I don't particularly care for either Sparkle or Yuge, but the fact is: the journo is wrong, and Yuge is as entitled, if not more so, to a "royal" wedding as the L.A. arriviste.

Yeah - technically Bea and Yuge outrank Kate until she becomes Queen. And Bea and Yuge outrank Sparkle unless Harry is standing next to her - because she's only a married in and they are Born to the Purple

R29 - ??? Never heard any such thing.

R31 how would Yuge be more entitled to a big wedding than Harry? He's the Son and brother of the future kings.

R28 - that is *Order of Precedence lately

R33 - no one suggested Yuge is entitled to a "bigger" wedding than Harry. The journalist suggested that she isn't entitled to a royal wedding at all, but should take herself off somewhere and get hitched discreetly.

She IS the Queen's granddaughter, she IS the future King's niece, and she was born royal. She is AS entitled to marry at St. George's Chapel, where for God's sake, Princess Anne's untitled son and his commoner wife got married, and where Prince Edward and HIS commoner wife got married.

The journalist is just stirring the pot.

Harry is sixth in line to the throne, and his wife is a divorced 36 year old American - his wedding displayed the BRF doing its best to throw a low-key royal wedding for this reason.

Suggesting that Prince Andrew's daughter, born and HRH and granddaughter to the Sovereign, deserves less, is just bullshit.

And I don't even like Bea and Yuge.

R30 and R32, go find the Daily Mail for 19 May 2018, where you can see quotes from Roslyn Markle on her adult children's behavior.

Agreed r35. Look at the past history of Jan Moir though, she is toxic. She’s a homophobic cunt, look up the poisonous drivel she wrote about Stephen Gately.

Point being, R27, Bea and Eugenie are themselves descendants of Queen Victoria. Actually I think they resemble her a bit!

Yes, they resemble Vicki's ass.

Eugenie (and Beatrice) are granddaughters of the sovereign and as such are entitled to a Royal Wedding.

One might consider the wedding of the Queen's cousin Princess Alexandra to Angus Ogilvy in 1963. Alexandra, too, was the granddaughter of the sovereign.

Princess Anne, not yet 13, was her chief Bridesmaid. I like the bit around the 7:00 mark where, as the bride and groom left the chapel after signing the registers, Alexandra looks back to check on her long train, and Anne gives her a "move ahead" gesture.

Just for purposes of information, Princess Alexandra's full name is:

Alexandra Helen Elizabeth Olga Christabel

R35 R33 said that the York girls are just as entitled " if not more so" to a royal wedding than MM. I was pointing out that it was Harry's Royal wedding. R33 was comparing apples to oranges. Harry and Eugenie are Royal apples and Megan and the fiancé are commoner oranges. R33 was comparing the ranks of the two women and leaving out the two men.

R36 I thought you meant Megan's mother. Good to know the half siblings' mother is appropriately embarrassed. They must take after their dad. They might have received an invite if they were more like their mother.

Oops R33 should read R31.

Actually, Princess Alexandra was the existing Sovereign's first cousin at the time of her marriage in 1963. She was George VI's niece, and, therefore a granddaughter of George V, a past Sovereign. Just as Bea and Yuge are first cousins of William and Harry, the children of Charles's brother, the granddaughters of the current Sovereign, great-granddaughters of King George VI, and great-great granddaughters of King George V.

They don't need to be made "to happen". No one gives a flying fuck about them, really. But the fact is, they were born royal, and Sparkle and Kate and Sophie Wessex are married-in arrivistes, and therefore "less than" in their own rights, which is why they have to curtsey to Bea and Yuge when their husbands aren't present . . .

Which is why the Queen had the Order of Precedence revised after William married Kate: to be sure a distinction was drawn between her blood granddaughters and the social climbers.

And, yes, Moir is a bitter old queer-hating cunt with a tongue lie horseradish.

Oops again R43 = R33 and R42 not 41.

*like horseradish

R44

R41 - as her mother was Princess Marina of Greece, I expect the "Helen" and the "Olga" refer back to her Greek and Russian roots. Princess Alexandra of Denmark, who married Edward VII, was the sister of the future and last Tsarina of Russia.

F42 - The phrase "If not more so" referred to their rights as royals to a wedding at St. George's Chapel, not that they were entitled so a deliberately larger wedding than Harry and Meghan.

For what it's worth, the raggedy edges and awkward compromises of Harry's and Meghan's wedding show exactly the view of the BRF on his choice: something like a royal wedding but one that took into consideration that he was marrying a divorced foreign actress of 36, and of dubious antecedents.

Prince Andrew, by contrast, who stood in the same relation to Charles that Harry stands to William, got a full-bore royal wedding at Westminster Abbey, complete with carriage ride TO the Abbey for the bride, the carriage ride back to Buckingham Palace through the streets of London, and Ye Olde Balcony Appearances With Whole Royal Family.

Believe me, if he had married Cressida Bonas, it would have been the Abbey, Buck House balcony, and carriage rides to and from the Abbey for the bride.

Everything, in fact, that Harry didn't get because he chose Sparkle.

I have no idea why the word "Abbey" got put into brackets three times in my post above.

R47

R47 I remember the Andrew and Fergie wedding. Wasn't he closer to the crown? He's the second son of the queen. Harry is the second son of the first son of the current queen. I thought the BRF tried to be less openly extravagant in the nineties. I sometimes forget Will isn't the Prince of Wales yet and he won't be the next King.

R47 - Andrew was no closer to the throne when he married Fergie than Harry is - remember, Charles already had two sons by then, and Andrew had moved down to fourth place, not, realistically, much closer than Harry at sixth. When Harry and Meghan announced their engagement, Harry was fifth, but everyone knew Kate was pregnant by then. It's not much of a difference in practical terms.

The extravagance issue I also think was marginal. It didn't stop them from giving William and Kate the full monte, did it, and although he is the next Heir, William wasn't yet even Prince of Wales.

I stand by my opinion that if Harry had married Cressida Bonas, it would have been the Abbey and the Buckingham Palace balcony.

Damn it all, what is it with the word "abbey" that keeps getting it put into brackets?!

R50

There's a good chance that William may become King at a younger age than his father. Charles is 69. If the Queen, who is 92, lives another 5 to 7 years (conservatively speaking), Charles would ascend the throne at around 77 or so years. Given the speculation about Charles' current health, he could live till another 10 years to 15 years. Given all these assumptions, William could find himself King in his 50s.

Will's son George would be in his mid to late 20s. Kate could have yet another child or two after Louis pushing Harry even further down the line.

It'll be interesting to see how successful Harry is in carving out his own identity / role in this ever-evolving tableau of cast of royal characters. He's off to a shaky start right now with Meghan and all the brouhaha surrounding her family. Her clothing and hairstyle challenges are an unfortunate distraction and Harry can't seem to 'right the ship" with a strong PR team and team of stylists. It's truly baffling.

[quote]Princess Alexandra of Denmark, who married Edward VII, was the sister of the future and last Tsarina of Russia.

Dagmar/Marie was the 2nd to last Tsarina. Alix/Alexandra was the last.

It made sense that Andrew got a bigger wedding. He was the second son of the reigning monarch. Harry is the grandson of the reigning monarch. Andrew was 4th in line; Harry was 6th in line. Sarah had never been married, but she had lived with another man before (outside of marriage).

R53 - yes, you're right - Dagmar was Alexandra's sister, Alix was a Princess of Hesse.

Princess Marina (Duchess of Kent, discussed above) was both a Princess of Greece and Denmark. But her mother was a granddaughter of Alexander II of Russia. Hence the "Olga" in her name. The intersection of the royal families of Denmark, Britain,and Greece, with the Romanovs is confusing.

Marina was a great beauty, and none of her children inherited her beauty, including her daughter Alexandra. If you look at her wedding photos, you can see what Sparkle was aiming for her with her pathetic failure of a dress. She should have looked at those photos, at the beautiful draped neckline and sumptuous material, and taken a cue from that.

She too was a "blood princess", and as such looked down on the mere Earl's daughter who had married her husband's older brother (later King George VI). As am example of the difference between Born In and Married In, Marina's sense of herself showed in her interactions with the other royals, including Queen Mary (who was born only a Serene Highness, not a Royal Highness). When Marina showed up one day with newly red nails, Queen Mary reproved her, saying that the King (George V) didn't like women with red nails. Marina serenely replied, "Your George may not like them, but mine does."

It is doubtful that any of the other royal wives would have dared to face off with the redoubtable Queen Mary in that way. The middle son was married to an aristocrat, a Duke's daughter, but that's still technically a commoner.

Marina was the only true royal to marry into the British Royal Family since Alexandra of Denmark married Edward VII.

Sugars are butthurt about Eug's wedding cause it underlines how Meg's wedding was not all that.

She's not the unique special unicorn when "Unpopular Yorkie" has the same kind of wedding, if not better.

That's why they're attacking Eugenie for a fairly common Royal wedding.

That said I doubt Eugenie wedding will be broad-casted, or that she even wants it to be.

There's one difference - Harry is/was a very popular royal with definite royal duties and the York girls are not at all. Every article about them draws comments about what a waste of taxpayers' money they are.

I doubt Charles will be around for 10 years more, let alone 15. Not with those swollen sausage fingers which bespeak a serious health problem.

Eugenie won't get a bigger wedding than Peter and Autumn Philips and this guy has no Title or anything.

She will get the average Royal wedding like Edward and others. People react cause she gets it after Harry, but if Harry didn't marry just before people would think it's the usual stuff.

Thanks, r40. What's the significance of those long trains other than: We're rich and can waste a fortune on fine lace.

The thing is, the monarchy has never been more unpopular that it is right now, and as a result, Charles has announced his intention to drastically reduce the royal beneficiaries to himself and his children and grandchildren. He refused Andrew's request to give Eug and Bea royal roles on this basis. So you may be sure there will be a lot of criticism about whatever taxpayer money is spent on Eug's wedding, eg, for security or anything else.

There was a lot of criticism of the security expense for Harry’s wedding too. The people were outraged at the carriage ride because it was costing something like £20 million to police. The whole Sparkle extravaganza was pushed as a good thing but the Brits in the main were not impressed and not happy about it.

I don't think the York girls are supported by taxpayers. They live on private income. The only sense in which taxpayers contribute to them is if you count what their father gets from the Sovereign Grant as a senior working royal. The girls, however, are not recipients of monies from the Sovereign Grant.

Of course, if we're being technically honest, the entire monarchy is a creation of serfs who allowed them to get rich at the public's expense, by keeping their money, investing it, acquiring land, goods, horses, cars, jewels, and artwork worth fortunes in themselves. The entire system is archaic, and in that sense, none of them, from the Queen down to Yuge and Bea, should be given a farthing, but instead run out of town with 10% of what they've acquired in the last 200 years in their suitcases. That includes the newest shrewd apple to get herself onto the gravy train.

I think Meagain really did her homework. Harry is wealthy at the moment but not super rich. Charles is a billionaire in his own right. Chuck better start checking all stair carpets are firmly nailed down and electrical wires securely wrapped.

According to Jan Moir in DM:

"... like her big sister Princess Beatrice, Eugenie is considered by Buckingham Palace to be a private individual; her name does not appear in the court circular and she gets no income from the Privy Purse.

The couple have moved into a Crown Estate property (Ivy Cottage) at Kensington Palace in London, with all the lovely perks that ensues. Yes, they are paying a ‘commercial rent’ on the cottage, but one suspects it will be a fraction of the true market rate. A similar property in the area would cost around £7,000 a week — £364,000 a year."

R64 Who cares?

The Cottage is part of the "family" and they pay a rent.

Every parents I now would pay their children a house if they could or would rent them a house for a small price.

They're priviledged, we know.

"priv·i·leged', r65.

I hope Huge's place is big enough for her fat ass.

R47

The Christabel in Princess Alexandra's name came because she was born on Christmas Day.

R61 - And the irony is, it wasn't, by royal standards, that much of an extravaganza. As royal wedding go involving a son of the next Sovereign (assuming life and death take the expected course of such things), it was a rather cut-rate affair struggling to look as if it wasn't. Without that carriage ride, the price would have been quite a bit lower. But without that carriage ride, it really would have looked like they were stiffing Harry because of Meghan's less than stellar suitability.

Despite the media doing its damndest, the H&M wedding got the lowest ratings in the UK of every royal wedding broadcast (including taping for later viewing) since that of Charles and Diana, including that of the boring Prince Edward to his unassuming wife, Sophie. There was also an embarrassing paucity of requests for waivers of licence fees to hold street parties to "celebrate" the wedding.

For all the expense and hoop-la, the country itself just didn't give a damn. I doubt it will give a damn about Yuge's wedding, either, although the media will, again, do its damndest to whip up interest in the bridal gown, what tiara the Queen will lend her, the outfits of guests, etc.

The only really fun part of Yuge's wedding will be the central role of Fergie at a formal royal event in which the Queen, Prince Philip (if ever he lives that long), and Prince Charles (who can't stand being in the same room with her) also participate.

And, of course, whatever Sparkle wears. Perhaps the 12 October date will prompt a reappearance of the green suit, hat, and leather gloves she wore to Prince Louis's christening in the heat of early July.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

BTW, you guys are slipping.

Check out Beatrice's hat for the Peter Phillips wedding:

Oh, sweet Jeebus.

R72 - Mother of Sorrows, I'd forgotten that hat!

Sometimes it's tempting to wish you could take the top off Yuge's and Bea's heads and look inside, to get a clue why they appear in the clothes they do.

I like the butterfly hat.

I love the butterfly hat! And interested to see a regular Royal ( and not celeb wannabe) wedding.

R60 Charles hasn't announced anything about reducing the Royal Family . It's a story that started years with unnamed sources and has since become a fact . Nobody really knows what Charles' plans are.

[QUOTE] what tiara the Queen will lend her

No need for a loaner from Granny. Sarah never sold the tiara that The Queen and Prince Philip gifted for her wedding. Huge Euge could wear that one, it’s very pretty. The Yorks are all very close, so I doubt they view the tiara as ‘bad luck’ because for all intents and purposes Andrew and Sarah are basically still together except on paper.

R77 - Well, de gustibus and all that, I though the tiara they bought Fergie was ugly as sin, ditto the necklace that went with it. It didn't have any of the grace and class that the historic jewels do.

And I would guess that there would be a sense that referring back to the Yorks' wedding, given their divorce and the vulgarity surrounding it, would probably not be politic.

I wonder if, also, HM would be keen to remind people that Yuge is a Princess of the Blood and merits a historic tiara just as Sparkle did.

R74 - It might have worked on Lady Kitty Spencer, but on Bea with her bug eyes?!

R76 - Interesting, if this is true. Of course, it isn't likely that Charles would have directly said anything of the kind, is it, but managed to leak it, instead. Wasn't there a fracas on HM's Diamond Jubilee celebration when only the immediate heirs and their wives were on the balcony, and the Yorks and Wessexes and cousins were all left off? If I remember, it was only the Queen, Charles and Camilla, William and Kate, and they as yet unmarried Harry?

R76 - *the as yet unmarried Harry.

It's not that bad, r78.

I'm not really the "marrying kind," but I think I'd go with a dragonfly tiara myself.

I'm sure we'd all look divine in the dragonflies. I know I would.

[quote]Perhaps the 12 October date will prompt a reappearance of the green suit, hat, and leather gloves she wore to Prince Louis's christening in the heat of early July.

Or perhaps she'll just go with her instincts and wear the trendsetting pumpkin-spice tuxedo she'd been planning all along. Southern hemisphere be damned.

The butterfly hat would have been better if they were all one kind of butterfly and or the butterflies were better quality. Those look like a bunch of low cost kids craft store butterflies stuck together.

Anyone else thinking Meghan is locked up in the cold and dank Buckingham Palace basement?

Gee, I wonder who knows where Megs is but isn't talking?

R83 - Ah, confusion of terms: that was the wedding tiara HM bought for Fergie at Garrard's (I think it was Garrard's) - the horrible ruby and diamond tiara with matching necklace that I referred to was also purchased for her and Fergie wore it most of the time, as she came to be identified with rubies because of her engagement ring. She could, it is true, loan either one to Yuge (is she didn't sell them off to fund her "lifestyle"). The Garrard's piece is much nicer, but, either way, harking back to the failed marriage seems to me to be unwise. I don't think either one has been seen since the divorce, not least because Fergie is no longer an HRH.

R77 - How do you know Fergie didn't sell it? But I concur on everything else, especially the "bad luck" factor. Frankly, if I were Kate Middleton, I'd have been dismayed at being handed Diana's engagement ring, and would have much preferred one of my "own" without all the bad juju attached to it.

But I suppose Kate knew better than to protest and slipped it on immediately, admiring it in the campfire flames somewhere in Africa.

The girls really do look like Vicki

R91 - there are some striking resemblances between Charles and Vicki's consort, Prince Albert.

One good feature, at least, that they all seem to have inherited from Queen Victoria and Queen Mary, is beautiful skins - the late Queen Mother, and then Diana, were also gifted with gorgeous complexions, the DNA in this arena was re-enhanced. It's their only reliable claim to inherited beauty.

The daily mail trying to claim that sparkles boring wimbledon outfit that made her look like a boy is better then the gorgeous canary dress kate wore!

Maybe he DM is trolling Sparkle to make her think she's a style icon in the royal family, r93.

the

[QUOTE] I though the tiara they bought Fergie was ugly as sin, ditto the necklace that went with it.

The only part of the tiara I don’t like is the center diamond which pokes up like an antenna, other than that it’s a pretty basic princessey kind of tiara. But I agree that the necklace is ugly and so is the bracelet that goes with it. Sarah’s luggage got stolen once and the lady who found the jewels said that her daughters fake jewelry she wore for her quinceañera was nicer than the real York jewels.

R96 - no, really? I hadn't heard that - how delicious!

T93 - link, please? Could not find any such article.

Can't link DM articles on DL, r98. But r93 is right - I remember reading this same gibbersh as well. And laughed at it.

R99 - Thanks. Not that it matters - I'm sure additional wardrobe malfunctions are headed our way via Yuge's wedding and the Australia tour.

MM never disappoints - we're in for more good shows r100.

I wouldn’t put it past attention whore to wear a long white dress with a 20 foot train to you Eugenie’s wedding. Maybe she will become extremely religious and wear a mantilla as well

But ... but ... she’s so cute! She’s PLU - down to earth, no effort hair. She can’t even determine when a seamstress May be a good idea. She’s the definition of new money - she’s spending like a fat kid at the icecream bar - no self control, and wears oversized pants just in case ...

R102 - it would be hilarious if she wore a light pastel oufit to Yuge's October wedding, while the other women wear autumnal colours, just as she wore an autumnal green suit to an early July christening and that dark Married Woman On Way To Afternoon Tryst At The Ritz dress to a July celebration of the 100th birthday of the RAF. Because . . .

Attention must be paid!

She needs four sheath dresses: pink, light blue, navy blue, grey.

Light colors for soring events. She would look so good in pink and light blue.

The dresses should have a slight v neck to break op her boxy frame. Knee length.

Accessorize to make it interesting.

Done.

That $75,000 dress for the engagement photo told anyone who chose to look all they needed to know about Sparkle's attitude toward her new wardrobe.

It doesn't matter how inappropriate the apparel, as long as it's expensive, that's all that matters.

She could easily choose clothes that flatter her (she's a pretty woman) and hide her figure flaws (most people have them), but neither of those ideas nor the knowledge (as she has undoubtedly been informed by now) of what works for the job she has taken on matter to her. Or that part of her job is to support British fashion.

What matters to Sparkle is very, very expensive high end designer clothes by non-British designers.

She has repeatedly shown what she wants to wear and will continue to do so.

Unless the source of the clothes budget puts their foot down.

People should stop making excuses for her.

And nothing better illustrates your point, r106 than this little Dior 'cocktail dress" worn at the solemn RAF service. We'll have to see if she has had her wings clipped a bit given the public outcry over her shameless spending spree since the moment Harry placed the engagement ring on her finger.

R107 - That Dior cocktail dress to the RAF event was so ridiculously inappropriate that I wondered if it was, perhaps at a subconscious level, a "fuck you" to the British public. The green suit and leather gloves to the July christening, the strapless bra showing through a bespoke Givenchy day dress, unflattering lines, etc., can all be set down to reasonable mistakes. But both the colour and style of that Dior/RAF outfit was nothing short of bizarre (as were the pale colour pumps she wore with it).

I wondered if it was Sparkle suddenly figuring she can allow a bit of claw to show, with the ring at last on her finger. I was reminded of the oh-so-demure Diana showing up in black with plunging cleavage at Goldsmith's in her first evening event with Charles after the engagement was announced.

I stand by my position that Harry has gone straight home to Mother with this marriage, no matter how "different" the two women's ethnic and cultural backgrounds appear.

R107 again it looks black, comparing to Kate and simple but beautiful dress

Cover of French magazine. Those pesky relatives are giving her grief.

Like that the French mag captures the state of her unruly hair, r110.

Is it me or do these two look alike?

MeAgain looks like someone forgot to tell her 'The BP balcony scene is a summer event where royal ladies wear non-funeral or evening attire."

Itching to wipe the smug off her in r113.

Here's Harry 'multi-tasking' on the job again.

R110 and R111 - it's a notably unflattering photo. No one ever accused Point de Vue of being shy about such things.

R112 - Yes, they do rather, especially the nose.

R113 - She managed to grab centre stage that day, too.

R114 - Give it time. As George Eliot quoted in "The Mill on the Floss", character is destiny.

Baby-Envy? Harry and Kate are looking at Wlliam as he speaks except for MeAgain whose eyes are transfixed on Kate's belly.

Not her real nose, you realize that, right r116?

The royal family put on a good show of acting like they’re excited to see that flyover from the balcony. They’ve only watched it every year for the last 60 years, sometimes more than once a year depending on whether there is some other event like a wedding or jubilee. Yet there they are, “wheeeeeeee!” their faces say, and soon as they’re inside they probably say “I’m so fucking tired of this bullshit.”

It's more fun for them when Prince Philip lets out a bad stinker, r119.

R118 - Yes, I am aware of that.

But it's doubtful Harry was.

R116

Harry never looks altogether. I’m not sure if it’s his hair, beard or just his over all look. His shoes always need polished or he is in need of a new pair of shoes.

Dear lord in heaven!!

[quote]“When you loose the greatest person in your life and after few years the person comes back to your life again”.. that for me is Diana, Harry and Meghan ❤️

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[quote] Suspect Harry and Megs, Wills, Kate and the rest of the BRF are all on holiday as well.

Doesn't the whole Royal Family all go off to Balmoral together?

Yup, r125. Although I wouldn't be surprised if Kate and Wills and the kids spend a few weeks with the Middletons. Granny Carole is going to want to 'smother" little Louie and have time with that baby before Pippa births.

Charles has rosacea, as do many people of Celtic origin. Why on earth has he not gotten IPL treatment for it, so people would stop saying he is a lush? It doesn't cost a lot, doesn't hurt, and not many sessions are needed. He had his famous sticky-out ears pinned back, so why not this?

I agree that Harry married a reincarnation of his mother. Both Diana and and Meghan are vulnerable outsiders victimised by the establishment, needing to be protected, as well as being sweet and nurturing.

R128 LOL, that's a good one.

R125, per various press pieces, Kate, Will and children are on Mustique with the Middletons.

R128 - Yes, the heart bleeds, doesn't it?

Re vacays, Harry is in England as he attended the Sentebale charity polo match in the Berkshires, by his supportive loving Duchess - dressed in a navy blue Carolina Herrera dress that looked quite decent as to line and fit, but again totally apposite to the weather: extraordinary heat 0 especially given pairing it with high heels.

If there is a place for a more casual look the polo field is that place - here is where she could have worn more of a "safari" look instead of a dress and shoes she could have worn to welcome guests to an afternoon tea. She looks especially odd next to Harry, who is dressed far more appropriately for the weather in a light coloured suit and open necked white shirt. They look like they got their mutual event calendar dates off.

And, yet again, an expensive American designer.

I don't know what it is, but she seems just to pluck things out of the closet because the outfits intrigue her or make her feel a certain way or fit her idea of playacting as a Duchess - but too often, they seem oddly detached from the actual moment and event.

She managed, with this perfectly nice dress, once again to look . . . out of place.

R125 - they used to all head off to Balmoral, it was the annual summer nightmare for those living in the late 20th century, as opposed HM and her closest staff and husband, who actually belong to the 19th century. But with Diana, the younger set began to rebel, and I believe they make quick visits but don't stay long. And I'd be very surprised if either Kate or Meghan enjoy being immured up there with no beaches, shops, or theatres. I'm not so sure "everyone" heads off there at once any longer. Although, as William's kids get older, he'll want to see to it that they're suitably connected to the place, since they'll be its stewards once Charles is raptured.

I can just see Meghan in waders sucking up to Charles by keeping him company paying eager attention as he gives her tips on fly-fishing in the Dee. Oh wait - this sounds familiar!

At least today’s dress fits but r131 is dead right. She cannot seem to put the clothing together with the occasion for love nor money. The dress is denim and non-British. Has she got any idea that she’s supposed to support British fashion? It’s part of the job. She doesn’t seem to understand that she has to do certain things in return for the wealth and position.

R133 - having had a chance to look more closely at the dress - it appears either to be denim or something approximating denim, so there is an attempt at casual here, with slanted pockets on this hips (cf. Della's explicit no-no's for this) and a very wide belt. It doesn't fit as well as I thought in the first photo I saw, as the arm openings are a bit short and look like they pinch upward and, like so many other dresses of hers, pulls at the bustline. The shoes now seem far too dressy for the dress's look and material. Lastly, there are the dangling tendrils again.

In fairness to Sparkle, I will say that there does appear to be some sort of pinkish-red carpet to walk, in company with another woman who is wearing similar shoes, so I'm inclined to give Sparkle a pass on this.

I just do not understand why none of her clothes seem to fit properly, nor why, even for an event this low-key, she simply refuses to wear a British designer.

This would have been the perfect occasion for that green flowered dress with the frilled low-cut neckline she so ill-advisedly wore to the Stephen Lawrence memorial in London in the spring.

She also looks like she is not having a good time (the heat in England now is at record highs) and her smiles are tired and forced. The heat can't be helping.

The Herrera dress is lovely but looks so hot and out of place for an afternoon summer polo match.

I think all the young royal children enjoy being at Balmoral with their cousins. They ride farm bikes, go fishing, get up to things kids like.

I think MM looked nice at the polo event. How does she walk on the grass with those shoes, though?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

That's actually a cute dress. It's pulling at the bust but that could be because she has her arms behind the people on each side. Shoes could've been more casual, is she allowed to wear sandals? The hair is a mess; she probably thinks it's her signature look though.

R139, certainly. Messy hair and boat necks. What a legacy!

The polo dress. Slut shoes for polo?

Ethel Mertz to MM: Hey, gurl, I want my house-dress back!

MM's Granny Clampett buns do her no favours at all, but neither do the witch-like hanging spirals. Time for a new 'do.

She's going to end up looking like a black SJP, look at her feet

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Is she allergic to wearing anything under $2000?

This would have been the opportunity to wear a 'thrifty' high street design from Zara or something equivalent.

The silhouette is very good for her. Bad choice of fabric. This would’ve been cute in a lighter color or SUBTLE print.

The shoes are completely wrong. Should be lower heel, maybe open toe for a more casual look. And NOT white. Why does she keep wearing these cheap-looking off white shoes?

Really like the dress!! Shoes are hideous/ tacky!

R147 - Yes, and this happens frequently, too: the right silhouette, but executed badly in terms of material weight, amount of cloth, colour, and accessories - especially the wide belt, and the dressy stiletto heels and fussy clutch.

Spectator pumps would be fabulous with a summer outfit like this instead of those absurd shoes. Why doesn't anyone wear them any longer, they are so classic, including the male version.

Della - are you anywhere about to comment?

In that group shot, she has a "Stepford Wife" look on her face.

Wrong shoes as usual.

She looks really hot here - dress is too heavy, but even with that fabric, the tatas are visible.

And carrying that clutch all the time is a pain.

So, do you think KP and other abodes have air conditioning?

The DM talked to Zara's husband Mike about the new baby and he said that because of the heat, they haven't needed to use any of the clothes they bought for the new baby and just keep her in nappies.

The cut of the dress is great on her. V-neck is very flattering also. However, once again as other have posted it looks "off". No matter what designer she wears she has a magical quality to make high end things look cheap.

^^^everything finds its own level.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The couple kissed after the polo match.

Oh those shoes are too much.

Here is a video of their kiss...it’s very quick. Not a passionate kiss as the media is making it out to be...complete exaggeration.

The paper for enquiring minds say the couple are expecting twins. LOL.

She sticks to pale toned shoes because she is hyper-focused on her and Harry looking "balanced" in front of the cameras. She has a complex of being too short against the statuesque younger royals and therefore clings tenaciously to the tired trick of nude heels to elongate her legs whilst giving the illusion of height.

I think spectator pumps would be a fun yet still very classic look too, but I’ve had my eye out for some and they appear to be somewhat hard to find. I mean, I’m sure I could google it, but you don’t run across them in stores.

R151, that’s very true. I think she looks best in casual clothing: a pair of jeans, a white button-down, sneakers.

It’s weird, because she’s not a cheap-looking woman. She looks fresh and natural and doesn’t project an overtly sexy image.

For some reason, though, the clothing looks cheap on her. I assume the designers use good quality fabric and material, but it always looks like H&M on her.

There was one pair of suede shoes she wore that didn’t look cheap. And she was swimming in them.

Pity.

R159, she should wear them! I’ve seen them in thrift shops but not anywhere else recently.

Like many other classic things, they’re actually hard to come by. A friend of mine showed up one day in a very simple camel hair coat. It was beautiful, just buttoned up, no belt, no lapels. She said she’d been looking for that exact coat for years.

Jesus god, if I had Meghan’s resources, I’d have a dressmaker and team working around the clock making me beautiful custom clothing. When the troll crows “you’re all jealous” I AM jealous (envious, actually) of her access. She could have some perfectly tailored sheath dresses and a few pieces of suiting. In the land of bespoke... she walks around looking like she’s panting dress-up in the closet of some larger woman.

At first I thought today's dress fit her well but then I noticed the neckline standing up away from her body, the weird armpit area, and the billowing fabric between those two. While her waist can be cinched in somewhat, there's nothing that can be done for a ribcage that's too wide for the rest of her body. If anyone would benefit from a return to eighties shoulder-pads, it's her.

And then, apropos of nothing, I flashed back to how she managed to look plus-sized in a bespoke Emilia Wickstead which appeared to be made of the bark of a tree removed in once piece and attached to a waistband. Good times.

I really thought the dress was awful - a sundress cut in a heavy denim.

[QUOTE] he'll want to see to it that they're suitably connected to the place, since they'll be its stewards once Charles is raptured.

Doesn’t have to be that way, though. Balmoral isn’t like Windsor in that it’s ancient and historic in its association with the monarchy , it came into the family with Victoria and Albert. Not everyone likes that country life, and if the monarchy gets slimmed down some of those properties like Sandringham and Balmoral might be seen as overly indulgent. Better they be put to better use, maybe as tourist attractions or hospices or schools. I’ve heard it’s ridiculously cold and damp there during their holidays and mosquitoes too.

Why doesn't she do what Diana did? Diana had some meetings with Vogue stylists and they advised her on what to wear. They cleaned her up real good, weaned her off those frilly blouses that was all the style at the time. She became more sophisticated.

Meghan has all of the resources at her fingertips and she still looks a mess.

Diana was about 20 and had no confidence or life experience. MM is a former actress of 37 who would not be inclined to admit she had no style and needed to be told how to dress.

R161 - I have a vague recollection of Diana wearing a pair to Ascot once with a black and white suit with matching hat, but don't quote me, it was a long time ago, and I'm not sure they were real ones.

R159

'Meghan Markle wears something that actually fits her'

-- NY Post Headline.

MM can't get away from the her tiny, box-like body type and horribly skinny legs, r160. Diana could wear a sack of potatoes and still manage to look stunning.

R164 - You know what Diana said when she fled Balmoral that first August after the wedding, "Boring. Raining."

Of course, the summer before when she was up at Balmoral and Charles hadn't proposed yet, she couldn't say enough about its beauty.

Diana didn't have such a great body. She was very round-shouldered, had stooped posture, and a completely flat bottom.

r171 - Hi Camilla!

Something seems off about Diana's chest in that photo at R169.

It would have been interesting to see how menopause affected her body. Would she remain relatively slim?

Smeggy McSmugface

-- DM Comment

R169, that bathing suit isn’t very flattering. The breasts seem smushed down and flattened. They needed to be lifted up and in some nice structured cups.

Her legs were fantastic.

That was slightly before pushup underwires and now foam forms got added to everything-- not to mention fake bolt-on breasts. I'm starting to get tired of that, it's refreshing to see a more natural line ( even if they don't resemble torpedoes or basketballs!)

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R159 - fuck off to Facebook to ask your beige frau mom friends where to buy your fucking shoes.

R175 - I think that photo is post-divorce when Diana was building her "power look". She lost some of that magnetic fragility she had for awhile, the gamboling foal look, for all her majestic height. But, like Sparkle, Diana, too, was boxy and uninteresting between the shoulders and hips with not much of a waist.

But unlike Sparkle, Diana had those legs, those eyes, that hair, and that fabulous complexion.

All that said, those English Rose beauties fade early, it's not a look that survives the loss of youth well. You could see it in Pss. Margaret and the Queen, who were very pretty young English roses. Diana in her late thirties was heading toward being a big, rangy, large-nosed, sharp-chinned English arista - mutating from a young beauty into what they would have called a "handsome woman:" at one time." If you looked at her mother at the time Diana married Charles, that's where Diana was headed.

"How to keep - is there any any, is there none such, nowhere known some, bow or brooch or braid or brace, lace, latch or catch, or key to keep/Back Beauty . . . "

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The guy holding the trophy in R180's photo looks impatient.

"Come on, come on. Take the fucking trophy."

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R176 - no it was NOT before push-up bras, nor underwire! Feckin idiot!

R182 Whatever, Wallis tended to always look absolutely impeccable. She was perfectly groomed and everything was perfectly tailored to fit her. She may have not ever gotten the title, but she made sure she ALWAYS looked the part.

The only time Wallis looked less than perfect was when she wore some the strapless New Look Dior dresses in the 50s. Those only served to highlight her manly shoulders and face.

Bump

Yes, Wallis was beyond chic. She could stand for hours for fittings. And those jewels! Divine in every way.

BTW, someone upthread mentioned Sandringham and Balmoral. The family would never sell those- they own both outright. Completely different from Windsor.

The photos were expertly chosen, I'll say that: especially the ones of the two women in their black dresses with the little belts - too malicious!

You have to hand it to the DM: in the a.m. they're cooing about how the Duchess looked "impossibly elegant" in a Carplina Herrera dress, and in the p.m. they're pointing out her style similarity to the lady who was once the most hated woman in Britain for staining the Monarchy. Just in case Meghan thought she finally had them eating out of her hand . . .

*Carolina Herrera

R187

[QUOTE] BTW, someone upthread mentioned Sandringham and Balmoral. The family would never sell those- they own both outright. Completely different from Windsor.

So? They could sell them. Face it, when The Last Victorian (QEII) dies, a lot of the old traditions might die with her. Who can say that William wants to wake up in muggy Scotland with bagpipes screaming under his window and have rotten grouse for breakfast? These are all old Queen Victoria, Edward VII and George V traditions. They don’t have anything to do with what modern younger people like these days.

Sorry R189, but did you say ‘The Last Victorian’?

Fuck you too. Yes I did say it.

How is Queen Elizabeth II a Victorian? She wasn’t born in the Victorian era, nor does she hail from the Australian state of Victoria.

Fuck you, twat. That’s how I’ll clarify it.

Ha ha ha!! Good come back, you ignorant spunk receptacle.

Are the MM haters in this thread really gushing over the style of a Nazi Sympathizer?

MM looked lovely in her denim dress today. This was her best look so far. When she dresses like a confident woman, she looks good. She is a beautiful 37 year old woman and should embrace what that means. She isn't an ingenue or a gamine.

MM is almost middle-aged. It's time to get rid of the teenage messy bun look and start pulling a suitable style together. She is not there yet as seen by the dark-coloured, heavy denim dress and delicate high heels worn on a very hot summer day at a casual sporting event.

Ha! Wallis accused of being a Nazi sympathizer, but how many of Prince Philip's sisters were married to Nazis? All but one, maybe? And Princess "Blackamoor" Michael with a Nazi father?

Only a moron would think the family would ever sell Balmoral or Sandringham. Who could possibly afford it, but some Russian trash? If it ever comes to divesting, they would be donated. Both properties pay for themselves, so it's highly unlikely in any case.

It's ridiculous that her denim dress cost almost $3K. I've seen versions of it at the Gap for $60. She's a spendy fashion whore living out her dream of having the top designers in the world at her access that she never had as a Z-list 'Suits' actress. And it was still so ill-fitting. Shoulders and chest are pulling fabric. It's amazing how she gets outfits wrong and badly fitted on every outing.

And she was a stage 4 clinger to Harry, glomming on to him at every moment she was with him. Grabbing his hand, caressing his back, kissing him while Nacho was trying to present Harry with a trophy. She's such an embarrassment. She just looks so desperate. Will and Kate don't show that much PDA but are clearly more in love with each other without having to make out for the cameras. Desperate woman.

R183 it was before they were added to bathing suits.

You seem a bit angry R198.

You wanna talk about it?

Wallis Simpson was also nearly middle-aged when she reeled in Edward VIII. The Windsor men, generally, run to weak boys who need strong women, that's why Charles preferred Camilla to Diana, George VI was hugely dependent on the Queen Mother, and Harry appears to be a throwback in his choice of the quite obviously domineering Sparkle.

I think you’re onto something r201. They seem to have been dominated by strong women since Victoria ; Queen Alexandra was no picnic, Mary of Teck was a dragon, Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon had corsets of steel, QE 2 has enough backbone for three, these were the most influential women in their lives and it shows in their choices.

Please, Lizbeth is the Enablers of her good for nothing family.

If anything she has been weak with her children.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Hahahahahahahaha.....

Ok... I didn't know it was illegal to make anti-Royal remarks or embarrass those people.

Dangling tendrils everywhere! At least she's stopped with the spray tan. She has a lot of marks on her face other than freckles. Sometimes it looks like she wears false eyelashes as well.

Her skin doesn't look as dry as few weeks ago.

Whoever did her makeup for the wedding did an excellent job. Very natural looking.

R205 it isn’t illegal, why would you think it was?

R209 I didn't mean illegal like "illegal", just that it's weird so-called free medias would ban people cause they're embarrassing the Royal family.

Megs really should take a cue from Wallis, updated of course. Very simple form-fitting clothing, and statement jewelry.

Some people are acting like the kiss is all that, while I want to remind them that Charles did kiss Diana and we know how that turned out.

Looking at her picture up close. She looks every bit her age.

Yeah, the under-eye concealer ^^^^ is quite visible along with the shadow she is trying to conceal. It could be her makeup was melting in the--for England--sweltering heat. The lipstick on her upper lip is clearly bleeding, and that's some heavy eye makeup for her purported "natural" look.

I see r210. I think they just chose not to go with the very poor taste of exploiting obviously unhinged people.

R198 = fat bitter American gay, furiously typing with his poodle on his non existent lap, determined to save the British monarchy from his mulatto countrywoman.

R203 - I agree. Neither she nor her sister were quite in their mother's mold, the original iron hand in the velvet glove. Wallis's problem was that she was the iron hand in the iron glove.

The Queen is well-known for avoiding confrontation including with her children. The only time she seems to have located a pair was when Andrew Morton's book came out, and she called Charles and Diana in and ordered them to divorce - something the moronic Diana didn't want - she actually thought publishing her "side" of the story would make her the innocent victim, bring the BRF to heel, and force Charles to break it off with Camilla.

And the neck thing, r214, she's getting old lady neck already! About 10 years too soon.

In those candid video tapes that were released not too long ago (she was working with someone to improve her speech-making) Diana says she asked the Queen for advice (about Charles' affair with Camilla) and the Queen basically shrugged and said, nothing can be done about it. Diana was gobsmacked.

Diana grew up in a milieu where clandestine affairs were commonplace and nobody raised an eyebrow. I doubt her story.

All eyes will be on MeAgain when she does her fashion walkabout in Australia.

I can only imagine what this tour will cost in clothing since the 1 day Ireland trip came in at $40,000

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Not to worry, r222 - There's a special 'Cut Out' deal in Brexit to allow for soaring Duchess Meghan clothing costs.

R223 - ah, the eternal troubling issue for the BRF: where does the line beyond which royalty and celebrity is no longer distinguishable?

Speaking of which, the DM has an article up today saying that among thousands of documents held back by Whitehall due to be publicly released under the 20-year rule are ones relating to Charles and Diana. I'd give a good bit to know why.

Priyanka and the Jonas's Brother are so ridiculous.

No wonder she's friend with MeGhan.

As the Mercedes belonged to Mohammed Fayed r25 I don’t think they need worry.

R220 just because affairs were common place, it doesn't mean the people being cheated on were happy about it. Charles and Camilla weren't very discreet. They entertained together. It's one thing to have a partner getting a little strange, but Charles practically had two wives. Diana knew she wasn't even the favorite wife. A lot of people in open relationships need to know that they are the primary, and need to be seen as socially monogamous.

R228 Did she also ask for advice to pass on to all the wives of the many married men she committed adultery with?

She started cheating long after her marriage was dead.

And did that make all those other women feel better about her fucking their husbands?

I think Charles, Camilla and the BRF tipped Diana over. Diana was fragile to begin with. I wonder how things would have gone had she not been killed in the car wreck. Possibly the British would have turned against her for her continuing penchant for Muslim men, considering events over the past couple decades since she died.

They were already sick of her before she died r232. The media stories were incredibly negative mainly because of the howling hypocrisy of eternal victimhood while fucking everything in sight and the narcissism and manipulation obvious in her ‘just turned up at a hospital at 1am and there happens to be a photographer’ schtick. The sainthood wasn’t conferred until after the drunk driver employed by her sleazy coke head boyfriend killed her.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[quote]'Perhaps it would be easier if I was DEAD': Heartbroken Thomas Markle says Meghan is ignoring him and has changed her numbers since she married her Prince... but he WON'T let Palace silence him

Well, yes, Mr Markle. I would be easier if you just croaked.

‘I tell you, I’ve just about reached my limit on Meghan and the Royal Family,’ he said ominously. ‘I’m about to unload on them. ‘They want me to be silent, they want me to just go away. But I won’t be silenced. I refuse to stay quiet.

-- Pa Markle

R233 if everyone hated her as much as you say, far fewer people would have shone up for her funeral. Lots of famous people die. People might stop saying bad things about you for a minute after you die, if they truly didn't like you. The general public isn't going to line the streets and weep in public unless they are truly moved. Obviously you didn't like her and I'm sure you're not alone, but don't pretend to speak for everyone.

I was in the U.K. at that time r237. The media whipped up a frenzy among the dim and easily lead but the stories prior to her death were overwhelmingly negative. That isn’t a matter for conjecture it’s just fact.

R236 - And if that isn't a blackmail letter, I've never seen one. Charles had better find some slush fund amongst the Duchy's revenues from which to draw an annual pension for his opposite number.

Of course, it is intriguing to speculate what Pa Markle means by "about to unload on them". What could he possibly know about her that the BRF hasn't already uncovered in their "due diligence" before the engagement?

I will say this: a threat of that kind reveals more than just opportunism - I think Pa Markle is genuinely hurt and angry. My guess is that at the 11th hour, when it counted most, Sparkle underestimated someone she should have known better, and played some poor moves where he was concerned.

R238 the press writing negative stories doesn't equal the public hating her. I wasn't in the UK then but my former boss was. He said he walked into a room and lots of people were crying and that's how he found out. This was right after her death, not enough time to be whipped into a frenzy by a manipulative media. It's not like it wasn't sad and there are plenty of reasons to find Di more sympathetic than the BRF.

R240 - both truths can co-exist. Death of a charismatic beautiful princess with two young sons tends to override more sanguine appreciations of character. JFK, whose death I am old enough to remember, was hardly a paragon of virtue, either, and his charismatic wife went on to sell herself to Aristotle Onassis, a pig in human form if ever there was one.

Feet of clay is the norm, not the exception - but nothing so redeems a flawed star as an early and tragic death.

I'm probably the only one anywhere who is mildly sympathetic to Meghan's father's sentiments. I haven't followed every single DM interview with the guy but I did read today's article on him. If you stop and take a look behind the words, this is a guy who is hurt. Meghan and her 'PR team' should just reach out to him and have a conversation and put an end to this media coverage or one-sided sling match. That she hasn't done so speaks volumes about her character.

[QUOTE] Because the Royals were so impressed wth her wedding execution!

Catherine isn’t royal. She’s the spouse of a royal and is just styled as if she were one, by courtesy.

r243 = Duchess of York

[QUOTE] I refuse to stay quiet.

He has everything to lose. But go ahead Pa Kettle.

I love how he keeps going on about ‘the palace’ trying to silence him or that he has silenced the BRF. I don’t think they could give a flying fuck about him and his constant bleating shows it. Nobody is paying him any attention, least of all the daughter he spent a fortune educating.

That Pa Markle interview at R234 - WOW! I mean, really, WOW!

I loved this part

[quote]'When Meghan was 11, she moved back in with me up until she was 17 and went to college. .....'I was having my good years then, making good money, and could afford to give her the best, with a good school, good education, good home. .....'She became the woman that she is today thanks to everything I did for her. .....'And did I get any recognition for it? Any thanks? She doesn't even speak to me now. How cold is that?'

She ghosted him, like she ghosted everyone else.

After insulting the Royal Family, especially the Queen, does he still expect to meet them?

To appear at any baby's Christening?

Since he has other grandchildren, was he interested in staying in touch with them at all?

What does he really expect to gain from this?

MM leached off her father for many years and for whatever reasons, then ghosted him. Besides all that, if the BRF had any sense, they'd reach out to silence him. Throw him a bone.

I doubt that a bone would suffice.

Yeah and how's that strategy working out for the BRF so far, r246?

I love how he claims that he loves her so much, but in that same interview he’s also basically threatening her. What a psycho piece of trash, Meghan is better off with the Windsors. She got the prize girls, why can’t you just get used to it.

I’m not sure what point you’re attempting to make r250.

R243 - She is now. That's how it works. Why do you think those men are called "the world's most eligible bachelors"? They create duchesses and princesses at the stroke of an "I Do". True, they are slightly "less than" royals born to the purple, but that HRH in front of Catherine's, Meghan's, and Fergie's names are what make them who they are now. The former Miss Mary Donaldson of Australia is now HRH Crown Princess Mary, future Queen Consort of Denmark. Do you think no one will curtsey because she's only royal through marriage?

Pa Markle seems like a piece of shit, but I'm convinced there's so much more to this story. He was silent for so long (presumably so he could go to the wedding and/or stay in touch), then HE bails on the wedding and NOW won't shut up? It makes no sense. Something happened or is happening behind the scenes that we're not privy to.

R243 - actually, it's MeAgain's title that is strictly "by courtesy". Catherine's title is now hers by right unless it is revoked in the event of a divorce. But Sparkle isn't yet a UK citizen, and as such, her title really is only "by courtesy" - only on the day she becomes a UK citizen does her title become truly hers as Kate's is.

Media - poor darling, r252.

R254 - No one really knows what went on behind the scene, but I don't think he simply "bailed on the wedding". I don't think Sparkle wanted him there in the first place, and he knew it. Remember, in all the time she was dating Harry and sending covert signals to the world that this was done and dusted, she never introduced him to her father. Face it: he had become so "off brand" that she was already putting distance between them before Harry even proposed. That telephone call in which Harry allegedly asked a man he'd never met for the hand of a daughter who was a 36 year old divorced actress former-Deal of No Deal-Suitcase Girl was farcical.

Remember that Sparkle's entire life has been dedicated to one goal: self-reinvention. Pa Markle was no longer useful to that process. Accustomed to jettisoning cargo that slows the ship down, Sparkle figured she could jettison him, too.

The most interesting thing about Pa Markle's recent interview is that he reveals that MM lived with him from age 11 to age 17. It makes you wonder why. I also believe him when he says that Doria taught MM to cut people off if they weren't doing anything for her.

That’s not what I’m saying at all, R253. Of course CP Mary and Catherine and others who marry an HRH get the bow and curtsey. It’s by courtesy. But showing a photo of Beatrice (born a Princess of The Blood) and Catherine (princess by courtesy) that happens to make both look like they were smirking and smizing at Meghan and captioning it ‘the royals’ as if Catherine has superiority because she was born one is crap. She hit the lottery same way Me did.

R257 "I don't think he simply "bailed on the wedding". I don't think Sparkle wanted him there in the first place, and he knew it."

I agree, I was simply commenting on the "official" story. I think she created a sham place for him in her wedding but in reality put conditions on him she knew he couldn't manage. This is his revenge.

The queen didn’t write up an LP to create Meghan a princess, Meghan became one by courtesy. Accepting a title like one created in an LP would be a problem, because I believe our US Constitution forbids citizens from excepting those. But that’s not the case with the marriage.

'Everything that Meghan is, I made her.'

-- Pa Markle quote.

Diana was hardly fucking everything in sight. What a vulgar pig you are.

More from Pa Markle — 'But it’s a concern that the more I’m written about the more kidnappers might consider me a target.’

If Markle was kidnapped, r264 Meghan would be doing cartwheels in her Oxfordshire mansion, r264.

If he's concerned about how much he's being "written about," he could stop trolling for interviews. That's entirely within his control.

Anyway, I can't imagine he'd be of much interest to kidnappers--who would pay the ransom?

MM is half black/half white trash, so she never stood a chance here on dl.

Eh, not a fan of the dude or of extorting your kids, but there is a lot of crime, including kidnapping, in the area of Mexico in which he lives. In that sense, not quite as loony a thing to say as if he lived in Brooklyn or Kansas. Still.

All those Palace PR folks sacked and the mess rolls on unabated? Hmmmm.

More pictures of her terrible clothes, please.

And pictures of Bea and Euge's terrible clothes, too.

I think he's coming close to spilling some tea, or hinting that he might when he's giving specific dates that she lived with him. Things about her childhood situation, parent's marriage, and Doria have been kept pretty nebulous.

I loved Lady Diana in the beginning, but I was getting to really dislike her after the divorce, when she was giving the crazy-eyed interviews and flooding the press with too many photo ops. She was getting truly annoying! Still cried when I heard she died! It was too soon, and you think back to the sweet young bride and all the changes she went through.

Feast on this r269.

R232 - I agree. I think Diana's issues began to make themselves clear as soon as they got back from honeymoon. The BRF was disenchanted with her long before Morton, Hewitt (don't think for a moment they didn't know about Hewitt from the get-go - and she ghosted him, too, quite suddenly when she lost interest), Khan, Fayed, etc. One can imagine them getting the news from Paris and being unable to decide if this was the best or worst news they could have received.

r273 = DL Award for Exceptional Royal Revisionist Storytelling

R273 - so, you think there isn't the slightest chance that it never crossed one of their minds (say, Philip's or the Queen Mother's) minds that however difficult in the short term, the removal of Diana as a constant thorn in their sides might be welcome?

And they would have been right. Charles is married to Camilla, his sons have grown up decently, and for all Earl Spencer's grandstanding in Westminster Abbey, he isn't particularly close to either boy or their families.

Diana's death was a tragedy for her son, but not for her ex in-laws, not in the end. The Windsors won, as they usually do. Sparkle should note that.

Sorry that was meant for R274

R275

R273 - and *a tragedy for her sons

Thanks R272!

Enjoy!, r277.

It was very telling when Meghan’s stepsister started denouncing her immediately after the news came that MM and Harry are dating. Her relatives may be trashy users, but when you come or about to come into a good fortune is typically when such people suddenly remember how they always loved you more than anything. Even when you don’t want anything to do with them, they will try to get something from your new station by pretending to be close to you. It’s only after they lost all hope to get something from you they start badmouthing you in public. That Samanta started smear campaign right after the news came means that her relationship with Meghan had already soured beyond repair. And if they never had any relationship, she wouldn’t have any stories to tell. Same with the dad. Lots of people marry above themselves, lots of parents feel awkward and ill at ease around new in-laws, especially if the in-laws are Queen of England. Most of people though do what Doria did - wear new expensive clothes bought for the occasion and sit around quietly terrified. Pa Markle behaving strangely is a sign of something being truly rotten not only with him but with Meghan as well. Yes, it is strange that he tried to make a quick buck days before the wedding by staging photos for DM, but it is even more strange that when his daughter became rich and famous - and don’t forget, even without Harry she is a millionaire in her own right - she didn’t offer to help him financially so he could move into a better place or afford nicer things. And especially after meeting Harry. She should have realised that her letting her father wallow in a dump - the same father she praised on SM and in interviews - was going to reflect badly on her, shouldn’t she?

R279 - If MM is a "millionaire" in her own right, I've yet to see the proof of it. She was a secondary character, she didn't even own that house she lived in in Toronto, and while she may have saved up virtually, she also spent a lot of money running with the social set in Toronto. That job on Suits was the only real one in acting she ever had, and she had the role for seven years. The rest of her career she earned jack shit. The bit about the five million dollars I think is totally wrong. I'm sure she wasn't starving, but the whole millionaire thing I think is just made up.

And as she's still a US citizen, she has to be very careful about expensive gifts and such, lest the IRS come knocking at her door. She rich now, all right, but not because of a secondary role on a non-network show.

Point taken, r280. Coming back to the theme of this "style-focused" thread, I think we're (the public) seeng the results of this highly inflated PR of Meghan Markle: Disjointed. Awkward. Clingy. Bad style (clothes, hair). Obscene spending.

R280 she would have made at least 20K an episode and did 108 episodes. That's over 2 million.

I never watched Suits. Was she in every episode? Ostensibly she was paid only for the episodes she appeared.

According to IMDb, yes, R283. But it’s not even about how much money she made. For a social-climber, it’s simply a business decision. You left all your family, except your mom, behind, and cut all ties with them? Then don’t wax poetic about being daddy’s girl abd don’t wish your dad a happy father’s day on instagram., because it can and will later bite you in the ass. You think having a good relationship with your dad (and, more importantly, having him on your side in your war with media) is beneficial for you? Then invest in your relationship with him. It doesn’t even mean giving him money. Simply calling him every once in a while would do. She doesn’t need to share her views on Trump or abortions during her calls. “Hi daddy,” “I’m sorry you feel that way daddy,” “bye daddy, love you” would probably be enough if it stopped him from going to the press. Think about the members of William (and Harry)’s inner curcle who made fun of Kate for being a daughter of a former stewardess. Can you imagine what they say and what nicknames they come up with for Meghan?

R284 than inner circle sound like a bunch of assholes. The BRF a just a bunch of frumpy alcoholics. They haven't done anything important for a long time. There's no reason for anyone to think an actress or the daughter of a flight attendant isn't good enough for them.

Can't wait for the dinner of rattling teacups!

[quote]They haven't done anything important.

Fixed that for ya.

R285 and yet both Kate and Meghan fought tooth and nail to get into that circle. It’s true that they all deserve each other though.

[quote]she would have made at least 20K an episode and did 108 episodes. That's over 2 million.

Take that amount and subtract 10% for an agent, 10% for her manager, 35% for taxes. And then take into account the lifestyle she was living (even if she was able to get freebies and free load on her wealthy friends) was NOT cheap. Social climbing and running with the ultra rich and keeping up isn't easy.

R282 - You've forgotten taxes and living expenses and all the rest of it. It's not as if she simply earned $2 million in a lump sum and invested or saved it all. That sum would be over time and less taxes and annual expenses, which in her case for PR managers, clothes, etc., would have been considerable. And if she put them into a 401K or IRA account, she wouldn't be touching those at her age - you can't take money out of those until 60 or something without stiff tax penalties.

She got lucky and I'm sure did nicely with the last job, and the only real acting job, she ever had. But unless her investment advisor was a magician, she's not swimming in millions in liquid assets that allow her, e.g., to wear bespoke Prada, Dior, de la Renta, Herrera, etc., at the rate she's doing.

R295 - That's the catch, you see. It's a very interesting one: the very bedrock concept of royalty is built on a recognition of inherent difference (that what Your Royal HIGHNESS means - that person is HIGHER than everyone else). So the attraction is, "Oh, if I marry X, then I'LL be HIGHER, too!" But if anyone can get to be HIGHER just by marrying in, what does being "royal" really mean other than a set of lucky circumstances?

This is the horns of the dilemma that European royalty has been on since their real power began to wane. One can make an argument for bowing to Henry VIII and perhaps even to George VI and the current Queen, and, at a stretch, the Prince of Wales and next Sovereign, if you want to keep the thing going.

But it's a bit harder to make an argument for bowing and curtseying to every arriviste who marries in.

It's not so much whether the actress or nice Home Counties girl whose great-grandfather was a coal miner is "good enough" for the ridiculous family itself, it's how far they can take the dilution of what royal means without, at last, the Great Unwashed realising that it doesn't mean anything at all, it's a hot air balloon whose time for pricking has come.

Which is why it is interesting to an historian.

Kate Middleton is common as dirt, but she had enough of a Home Counties, nice middle-class English family and life veneer to pass muster; she was part of William's social circle for a long time. Meghan Markle, however, is another kettle of fish. She's not British, she can barely conceal the hard as nails social climbing older actress seizing her last opportunity to hit the A-List core underneath all the clinging and smiling, and they would never, ever, have let William marry her.

Remains to be seen if it all settles down or if MM is a signpost not of reinvigoration of the monarchy, hoping to use her to wave their "We're as diverse as 'modern Britain' is, see?!", but of a further decline in the very essence of their relevance.

And lastly, that's just why women like Markle and Middleton want to marry in: they don't care about the family's dysfuncationality: they care about acquiring that very veneer of specialness themselves.

I didn't forget taxes and expenses. I was just pointing out that she earned over 2 million from that job alone. She has 30 acting credits. Those TV movies may be cheesy, but they pay. Those acting credits don't include Deal or no Deal. It also doesn't include In comercial work she may have done. I don't know how well her blog did. I was being conservative with saying 20,000, that's on the low end. It's absolutely conceivable and in fact likely that she was a millionaire before Harry. There are plenty of not especially famous actors that make really good money. They work a lot and don't spent a lot.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R292 was in response to R290. I'm also going to add that R290 is wrong about Suits being her only real acting job. TV movies are real acting jobs. Playing the victim, perp, patient of the week on procedurals was real acting work. Small parts in movies is also real acting work. Ask any out of work actor.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R296 I think the royal fashion rules limit her opinions. She may also be getting loans. Are there rules against royals getting loaned clothing?

R284 - before things went pear shaped, ‘daddy dearest’ was revealing details of any contact or conversations with the media. Stupid, selfish, self agrandizing, and just not cool. Why would she continue contact with him, knowing too well that he would go straight to the media and disclose?

R299 - Yes, there are rules against any form of acquisition that looks like they are leveraging already huge privilege into even more privilege. They are rich as Croesus compared to the average British family, everyone knows that; for them not to pay for their own clothes is not a good look, and the BRF know it. Whether they always pay full retail is another question. Hence, the terse statement by the Palace after the formal engagement photos that that ridiculously overpriced and not terribly attractive Ralph and Russo gown was "privately purchased". That choice of gown was the first sign of Markle's overweening view of what her new life should get her.

Christ, he's only sixth in line, those photos were so OTT - they really did look like perfume or Tiffany catalogue ads. Even Charles's and Diana's formal photos were far more casual. There was one portrait of Diana in a green gown and borrowed diamond necklace and earrings from Collingwood that went back afterward. She wore the gown later on, albeit altered considerably as by next wearing she had lost the nice roundness she had at the engagement.

I don’t think Meg’s outfit is devastatingly BAD, such as Fergie’s glitzy, cheap looking, nasty fashion atrocities, however, for the amount of money paid for that dress, she doesn’t look great. The sheer ridiculousness of her new wardrobe, is that with ALL the wealth, designers and stylists on hand, Meg looks ‘meh’. Even with all of the available resources, she presents as pretty average, ill fitted, not embracing British design, and clueless for the most part.

I feel we need to backtrack here. How long were Doria and dad married? How old was MM when they got divorced? This article says MM lived with him from 11 to 17. Is that true? That's a long chunk of time, basically all her teenage years. She can't pass it off as I was kid and I don't remember much.

She's already said she basically grew up on the set of Married With Children.

I used to think that the Markles should have been invited to the wedding and then been very carefully managed. The more of seen of them the more I think that wouldn't work. Pa Markle just can't shut up. He likes the attention and the tabloid money. He's also got the angry old white man thing going. I've got a relative like this, just rants and rants and nothing will stop him. That half sister is crazy jealous. Nothing short of Meghan dying and Harry marrying her would appease her. The big thing with her white trash side is that they just don't know how to act normal. They don't know how trashy they are. They can't assess how other people will respond to them.

R302 - Except for the utter disaster of the de la Renta tablecloth dress I think Sparkle has a way to go before catching Fergie and the York girls, who clearly have some sort of psychological, or perhaps even chromosomal issue with body image. I have never seen such fantastically ill-chosen, ugly clothing on two girls with the money to dress well.

MM, on the other hand, often chooses outfits that aren't, in themselves, ugly, but that are either poorly fitted to her, or inappropriate to the occasion. It's a different kind of body dysmorphia, complicated by having a really difficult body to dress in a way that accommodates personal style and royal image.

R291 the concept of royalty is based in the belief in the divine right of the king. Nobody believes in that anymore, hence the monarchy’s crisis. Kates and Meghans are not detrimental to monarchy, they are simply a personification of the Cinderella archetype - not the modern pop-interpretation (a damsel in distress saved by a prince), but in the way it was conceived, an attempt to comprehend monarchy and make it relatable (if you are deserving and lucky you can become royal).

R112 the big joke about Harry is his love for Africa is all about taking his booty calls there. "Insiders" in one of the engagement articles said he's taken at least five women there.

R307 - The divine right of kings is another way of saying "inherent difference". It comes to the same thing. The "Cinderella" bit is a 17th century add-on (Perrault published the story in 1697), and by then royalty of the sort embodied in the Plantagenets, etc., was on its way out, anyway. But it is true that by other names, the Cinderella theme, the poor girl whose fine character and beauty are hidden and unrecognised, was fairly prevalent across Europe. But it does bear remembering that Cinderella herself wasn't a poor girl, but the first child of the wealthy landowner; it is her stepmother who reduces her to penury and hides her away. In fact, that is true in Snow White, as well - she is a king's daughter, nearly destroyed and reduced to seeming penury by a wicked stepmother - but she is "the real deal". Ditto Sleeping Beauty, hidden in the forest and growing up as a peasant girl, unaware of her true birth till her 16th birthday.

And it is true that with the diminishment of royal power and prestige, the rise of "representational monarchy" inevitably had to include the entry of those from the classes being "represented".

But when they come in, they are treated with the deference that was once reserved for those who merited it "by blood". So the question still simmers on the back burner: why bother with it at all? It's more than ever a hot air balloon.

Prince Carl Philip of Sweden is married to truly piece of trash who couldn't wait to get in and start assuming the airs and graces of a princess, and had two babies in quick succession to ensure her position. The Crown Prince of Norway married a single mother he met when she was a waitress and who had a druggie past. Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark is married to a former ordinary middle-class real estate broker from Bondi Beach in Australia (who has done very nicely, in fact), and the Crown Princess of Sweden is married to her former "personal trainer" who owned a chain of fitness gyms. King Felipe of Spain is married to a former journalist whose first marriage was annulled, about whom there are quite a few unpleasant rumours.

The Danes are under the least amount of scrutiny in the group, but in Norway, Sweden, and Spain questions are rising about the monarchy. In Spain, it is still a crime to criticise the monarchy in print.

I don't see all this lasting beyond another century at the outside. Modernity is moving too fast.

R305 - Pa Markle wasn't ranting and ranting until his daughter got involved with a member of the British royal family and saw a shot at becoming royal herself - at which time, she completely ghosted him.

And as for wanting attention - as others have pointed out, Meghan is truly his daughter in that respect. That's the irony.

Not too relatable though, otherwise why support all that privilege for someone who's just like us?

The issue with inviting the white trash relatives to the wedding, if they had been invited and corralled and *afterwards* made stupid comments to the press, people would be MUCH more sympathetic towards MM. "Look, she flew them over for the big ceremony and now they are just being ungrateful".

Not having her father there but inviting a bunch of celebrities who were casual acquaintances at best was just bizarre. There's no hint that he was an abusive father, then or now. He's a drunk? So assign a couple minders to escort him around and make sure he doesn't fall into the reflecting pool. The BRF can manage that.

I think they just handed this off to Harry and afterwards had to cleanup. Harry and William have their own money. The Queen doesn't control the purse strings like she does the Yorks. You see their independence with things like William and Kate ducking out of the royal pilgrimage to Balmoral or Christmas at Sandringham. A token appearance and then they go hang out with the Middletons.

Someone up thread called QEII the last of the Victorians. I think that's correct. Her mantra is Duty and Duty comes before Family. Duty is tradition. Charles will be similar in that It will be "Duty because I've lived my entire life waiting for this moment and now I get to interfere with politics and policies and here are some ideas I have". William and Harry are much more "We'll do some stuff but otherwise please leave us alone, ta".

It was on a saturday and my sister phoned me to tell me the news of Diana’s death . I sat all saturday before my tv and couldnt believe it ! She was no saint but,Charles was no saint either . I have this feeling someone on this board is always putting her in a bad light . Charles is now the angel and she the villain . Still a fan of her .

She can't talk to Pa Markel because he'll tell the press? Call him up and say "Happy Birthday, Dad." "Happy Father's Day, Dad." "Thank you for being there, Daddy." Then he tells the press his lovely duchess daughter called him and wished him happy birthday, etc. Simple. Everyone looks good and you don't spread sordid pain and unhappiness.

A lot of people are "re-framing" Princess Diana's entire existence, I noticed, r312. I don't know if it's the generation that didn't grow up reading about her or the generation that did and are just "piling on' for their own strange reasons.

Adding to r311's comments - William and Harry are 'sucking it up' and doing the apparently unwelcome and distasteful jobs assigned to them by birth. What I find confounding is their media blitz on mental health by shamelessly tacking onto some errant notion that they have some underlying special understanding and empathy for this cause and further making a tenuous link with their mother Princess Diana knowing she was the "humanitarian" star of the staid BRF. They're crafty and it underscores their desperation to remain relevant in an age where we're all potentially stars in our own right due to the power of social media.

Monarchies end when the monarch stops being fit to rule, R309. French and Russian revolutions happened because Louis XVI and Nikolai II did not have what it takes to rule the country, and it didn’t matter that their wives were about as royal as it gets. But for example Henry IV managed to get away with divorcing his royal wife and marrying rich and powerful, but not royal Maria Medici. He also got away with his very sketchy religious background which at that time could be worse than not being royal. All because he was a competent king. Henry VIII got away with marrying whoever he wanted (and creating his own religion to do it with less hussle). Peter the Great married a servant (a glorified prostitute) and had her offspring rule the country, despite already having a legitimate male heir. Carl Philip of Sweden is nothing more than a pretty useless dumbass. His wife does not detract from him even if she doesn’t add him any gravitas. But, fortunately for Swedes, he’s not going to rule, Victoria will, and she seems nice and competent. Already shows more promise than her father. As for BRF, Kate and Meghan or even Camilla is not the problem, the problem is that none of the young royals (and I mean blood royals) can feel QEII’s shoes, let alone walk in them.

Princess Diana was a humanitarian, but she also used that aspect of herself to manipulate the media and public. I will never forget seeing pictures of her watching a child undergoing heart surgery (I think) and she stood there grimacing and looking pained. It was so odd and felt so manipulative. I will always have affection for Princess Diana. However, I do believe that she was troubled emotionally.

Prince Charles gets points for William and Harry turning out alright despite all of the drama of their parents' divorce and the death of their mother. Most people think that Prince Charles can't be all that bad if he stepped up and was a good parent.

MM is a Leo and they are hard working and all about their money. I am willing to believe that MM has an impressive stash of money. Not a lot, but probably far more than you would think. That blog she had probably earned her a pretty penny for featuring various high end items. The house she rented in Canada could have been rented for her by the studio. In which case, she had a very low housing expense for several years. She is smart.

Neither William nor Harry married mentally unstable or broke women. They knew better. Harry was never going to marry Cresida. She didn't seem to have any independent wealth and her career goals were very iffy. They both married women who are tough as granite and have the education/resources to make it if their marriages fail. Kate's parents probably set her up financially years ago. This is why she didn't have to work for all of those years. Harry didn't marry a very rich girl, but he didn't marry a very poor one either.

There's going to be a real shift when QEll dies, even people who are blasé now about having a royal family can respect her just because of her longevity. Most of them anyway. Charles doesn't have that residual good will, he's pompous and whiny but he wants his time in the spotlight but the luvvies who turn out waving flags are dying off.

The surgery she was filmed watching, r316, was performed by her then lover Dr Hasmet Khan. She was criticised, at the time, for being not only in a place where she had no right to be but also for wearing heavy makeup in an operating theatre. All the better to show off those big doe eyes. Princess Di was no angel - she stalked that man.

Very good point, R315. In a sense, the BRF was very, very lucky in the 20th century. Can you imagine what might have come to be if Edward VIII hadn't abdicated given his fondness for Nazis? He was considered intellectually lazy, if not outright stupid, and of weak character. His father, George V, had fretted that his son was not up to snuff for the job. I don't know if he outright said that son Albert, eventually George VI, was more suited to the job. Luckily, Edward abdicated.

Their luck continued by virtue of Elizabeth being the first born. Margaret wasn't monarch material by any stretch of the imagination, but Elizabeth had/has the right temperament and went about things quietly, soberly and with dignity. Charles is OK, Ann would have been better, but imagine if Andrew were the first born. Ditto William and Harry.

Things could have gone so, so wrong for the Windsors.

I would agree with you, r315 with regard to the inability to fill Queen Elizabeth's shoes.

But I would add that Charles hasn't helped his cause by all the "damage" (real, not real or perceived) inflicted on Diana. He was pretty callous and being older than Diana could have managed the fallout a bit better than he did. That she died on foreign soil, in a violent car wreck, with a guy of questionable character and an absent (or some might go so far as to say, indifferent) Queen in the immediate aftermath adds to the pathos of the entire marital saga. It worked out for Charles in the end, but I sometimes wonder that when the day comes and he is crowned King if there won't be some residual element of resentment towards him or the firm.

Does this gin blossomed asshole really think that any part of his relationship with Meghan can be saved now that he’s dragging Diana into it? He’s really delusional. Bravo for Meghan for getting away from him and Samantha. You may think she’s trash but she got a royal husband. Pa and Sam will need to pimp themselves out for 10k here and there for ‘exclusives’ that people will get bored of once they realize there’s nothing new to hear. But it’s really all over for all them.

And Sam looks like she smells like piss.

R311 - Fair points, particularly in your last paragraph - and that description of the young royals' attitudes is the most dangerous one of all: I call it "Romanov It Can't Happen To Us" Syndrome.

It can.

R315 - Peter the Great was an absolute autocrat whose powers Henry VIII might have envied. Nicholas II failed to realise how much was changing in Russia and that the Absolute Autocrat game was over - he was disastrously out of touch as was his Empress. Peter had no such concerns. And, Russia was starving - by the early 20th century, Nicholas could not get away with what his father, Alexander, could, let alone Peter. It is telling that the Windsors only tried half-hearted measures to rescue their Romanov cousins.

By the time Henry VIII came to power, he already had to answer to Parliament, however dishonestly. England evolved differently, and so did its monarchy. And Henry didn't "make up" Protestantism: that conflict was already raging in Europe. What he "made up" was his authority to take England from one state sanctioned religion to another. But the unilateral rejection of the authority of Rome (and with it, the Apostolic heritage) was still a huge display of monarchical power.

So those parallels aren't fully exact. And, yes, Carl Phiilip is an irrelevancy as he will never rule and I believe the Swedes feel affection for Victoria.

Cressida Bonas was from a wealthy family and Harry can't possibly have thought she was only dating him for his money, and she has pursued her show business career quite diligently. She looks like a nice person, come to it, and just as her half-sister didn't need William to put her at the top, Cressida didn't need Harry. Meghan did.

R315 - And oh, yes, re your last sentence: absolutely. None of the younger generation will be able to match QEIIs stature in this role. She is the last of a dying breed. Her Heir might have followed suit, he is basically an Edwardian by taste and breeding, but his marriage to Diana I think threw him off the rails. The whole Duty To Country aura has gotten thinner and thinner with each succeeding generation after WWII, which is why Meghan is playing what I believe is a dangerous game with the, "Fuck you, I can wear what I like now and if they aren't British designers and cost a fortune, who's going to stop me - You?!" It's the Romano - Marie Antoinette attitude.

I wouldn't at all bet on the monarchy surviving past William unless George turns out to be quite extraordinary.

R322

Cressida who?

[QUOTE] , he is basically an Edwardian by taste and breeding,

Oh and it’s ok that you call Charles an Edwardian but when I call Queen Elizabeth a Victorian upthread (meaning, in temperament) I get called out.

R325 - It wasn't I who called you out for calling the Queen a Victorian, so don't come over me with it. I agree with you. Her grandmother, the formidable Queen Mary, was a huge influence on her, and Mary was every inch the Royal Before Everything Else ("I have always to remember that their father is also their King," she said of her hapless children).

One really could feel for those five children.

Meghan is obviously broke. You can't have a "stash" unless you earned, and being basically a non-working, bit part actress for 10 years prior to getting a supporting role on basic cable (through connections) is not going to pull you more than 12k-14k an episode. Over a sixteen episode season where you're not in every episode and you must pay insurance, taxes, percentages, and all the high maintenance required of an actress, you do not have a "stash." In the last year or so of her work on Suits she hooked up with the Mulroneys and that p.r. firm and got a lot more freebies and stuff comped, but that still doesn't give you a secure bank account.

Her sister Samantha implied the father paid off many of Meghan's debts from her struggling actress days - that I believe.

Meghan did not do Tig herself - a p.r. firm did Tig. It raised her profile and made her an "influencer" of a minor sort, which leads to more comps and freebies, but did not earn her a lot of money. Even those at her p.r. firm trying to position her in the influencer and charity sector admit now they had little success getting her to catch on.

Harry was never going to marry Cressida because she just wasn't that into him.

(1) I rather like Princess Victoria of Sweden. She seems like a good sort.

(2) When Edward VIII abdicated and Albert became king, friends privately told him that it was still possible for he and his wife to have a son. But Albert rejected that idea. He knew Elizabeth's temperament and qualities and that Elizabeth could do the job and would do it well.

(3) I remember reading about a situation where the non-white king of another country was paying a formal visit to the King of England (sorry, don't remember which one it was) at Buckingham Palace. One of his friends/advisors was aghast at the idea of this man being received by the British King and treated as a equal. The King replied firmly that regardless of color or home country, a king would always be treated as a king should be treated. Clearly he understood that the idea of monarchy itself must apply equally to any and all who had that title. Once you start qualifying who really is a king/queen, the whole idea comes under question.

Considering that the Queen Mother had to use a turkey baster to get pregnant, I doubt they would have tried for a boy in any case.

I like Princess Victoria too, she's always in the news so I forget that her father is still king. He ought to abdicate, the continental European royal families are more flexible in that regard.

I am sure Megan has plenty saved up from her yatching days

Yachting , r331.

and yet despite all your venom, Meghan is still a Royal Duchess and Samantha is not and Cressida is not and YOU are not.

Ta!

r333 - Jessica triggered!

R310 How would any of us know what Pa was like before H&M got together. He may of been ranting to his bar tender about random shit. It appears he was invited to the wedding and suits were prepared for him. He either backed out himself or behaved in a way that caused him to get kicked out. I'm sure he feels hurt. That doesn't mean he's been wronged.

CDAN (I know, I know) has just posted a blind that claims Meghan and Jess Mulroney are running a scam. Jess gets the clothes for free and then Meghan bills the royals for the full price. They split the proceeds. Oh, and the comment provide some pretty specific details on her yachting days...

Link?

Well, R336, if there’s any truth to that, it would explain why her clothes always fit so poorly.

@R40 Brilliant! Great footage. I bloody love Princess Anne! Not that she would ever want to do it- but she'd make a fantastic Queen.

Here you go.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[quote]Well, if you are this former actress you get clothes from friends that were given to them for free that you will wear. You then have the person in charge of the checkbook buy those clothes at full market value. The friends then split the money with our former actress 50/50.

So in whose name exactly is Prince Charles supposed to be writing checks? Are the clothes accompanied by forged receipts?

R342, that’s what I was wondering. Maybe Jessica herself?

It does make sense as to why the clothing and shoes are always ill-fitting.

I wouldn't put it past Meghan to grift, but that blind is ridiculous (of course it is, it's from CDAN). Charles is a notorious tightwad, no way he's just handing over money to Meghan or her good friend on demand. The royals have direct arrangements with fashion houses and retailers specifically to protect against this kind of scam.

So Prince Charles and his accountant are writing checks in Jessica Mulroney's name for designer clothes that come from luxury fashion houses from around the world? Wouldn't this seem a little shifty, in the very least?

R341, I posted that photo on DL the first time I saw it, and was firmly admonished that a King outranks a Princess, so a curtsy is required. The Royals are very conscious of the protocol among themselves and other Royals.

R346 and R341 - Anne believes wholly and completely in the monarchy, even if she has refused titles for her children. She is, under their own system, required to curtsey to a King or Queen. The depth of her curtsey is an expression of her belief in this system.

R383 - Why is the truth venom? Anyone who doesn't know this woman wouldn't have looked at poor, dim Harry if he weren't the answer to her aging prayers for A-List status before she got too old for it to matter is in denial. Yes, she's a Duchess. So was Fergie, once. Look where she is now.

I wouldn't be so quick to compare MM with Fergie. Fergie is the queen of stupid decisions, plus she was never more than a 5/10 looks-wise at her best and she has gone way downhill since. She didn't have a shady past to overcome when she married her prince.

However, I have a hunch that both duchesses are going to land buttered side up; Fergie back in the royal fold once Prince Philip pops his clogs, and MM either firmly entrenched in the BRF or happily moved on to her next wealthy conquest.

I don't think Charles is writing cheques by the piece. What is likely is that he has given the Cambridges and Sussexes an annual household allowance, including for their wives' "work" clothes. Then their household accounts must be sent on to the Duchy. An itemisation and invoices will be due to Charles and the Duchy, as Charles has to publish a report on what expenses were set against the Duchy revenues. He IS responsible to the residents of the Duchy whose work in land management produces those revenues. That's why everyone knows what Kate's approximate yearly expenditures on wardrobe are.

So, I call bullshit on the CDAN blind. MM is a first-class grifter, but the idea that she's getting free clothes from Jessica Mulroney and then getting Charles to write blank cheques for the pieces after which MM fills in Mulroney's or whomever's name is just idiotic.

R335 please. He was invited to the wedding the way a man with no money is "invited" to his daughter's wedding in England and can't afford the flight, basic transportation, or accomodation, and none is offered. That's the extent he was "invited", but in fact there is no evidence he was. The program said equivocal things like he was "expected", but it seemed more like if he showed up, they'd put him somewhere, but without taking media money, Meghan certainly wasn't inviting him.

In 2016 Meghan wrote this whole gushing tribute to her dad on father's day. Used his supposed nicknames for her and all he taught her. It turns out to be bullshit because he was in Mexico, living on a shoe string, and it was very unlikely he was on instagram, so he never saw it. It was her usual posing.

Nobody thinks of her as a real duchess. It's all a common agreement anyway - can't be forced. The public agrees to think of these people as royal and whatnot. Meghan doesn't dress like one, carry herself like one, move, walk, talk or behave like one, and it's all a joke.

I don't think Charles is paying a penny for Meghan's wardrobe. I think it's a combination of her getting free stuff, but having to take what's sent. Mulroney and Meghan can also hint, like "I LOVE your stuff." but based on what she's been wearing it doesn't look like she can order specific stuff - just take what she gets. Some stuff is failures that aren't going to make it to the stores, others are unsold flops from a previous season. Some of what she wears looks like an initial rendering of something that's going to be improved later before it goes on sale. I have no idea how she's making actual money unless she's also on occasion getting paid (via Jessica) for wearing certain things, such as the jewelry she wears from Birks, and some of the stuff she got from Cartier.

This marriage is not going to end unless Harry kicks her out. She won't leave unless they pay her off to the tune of "She never has to work again, and can live in luxury the rest of her days" and that won't happen. Or she hooks another rich man and I don't see that happening but who knows - maybe Eurotrash or some attention whore rich guy.

I don't think Meghan is bright. I thought she believed being a member of the RF would be instant world wide fame like Diana and the height of luxury. She didn't realize Harry basically has a trust fund, that he has a cottage in KP, and the rest of it is what the queen bestows or invites from friends. I'd bet anything Kate, Will & Family are in Mustique on the dime of the Middletons, who vacation there every winter. Will has plenty of moneyed aristo friends all over Europe, the states, and in Africa, where they are welcome. Harry may be welcome to his circle (which intersects with Will's) but how many invites will he and the awkward missues receive? For instance, to ACTUALLY yacht, on a friend's yacht?

BTW, supposedly Meghan didn't exactly rake it in while yachting. Look at her. Do you think she would have? Maybe she made more on her side hustle, dating on Reya.

R351 - What on earth do you mean "nobody thinks of her as a real duchess"? She's as real a Duchess as possible given that she's still a US citizen so the title is entirely a courtesy, but she's married to the Duke of Sussex and that's all she needs: I doubt most of the public give a tinker's curse one way or the other and think of her as Meghan. The BRF accord her the status of one, that's all that matters. Harry and his trust are still a fine step up for her and she knows bloody well the Queen and Charles will not dare not to set the Sussexes up just as they have the Cambridge's. She'll have a country home, a huge apartment in a historic palace in London (no one expects them to remain in Kensington Cottage once they have kids), a household staff, and an haute couture wardrobe. She'll be living very much like a "real" duchess. So who is the "nobody"?

If you're suggesting that behind the scenes people are sniggering at her to her face, how do you know, and do let us know how you know.

That’s an idiotic blind at CDAN. Neither Jessica Or Meaghan are smart enough to pull of grifting the Royals— She’d be divorced and banished so fast your head would spin if she were doing this

R349 - Fergie and Diana both came in as "breaths of fresh air". They came to grief when it became clear to them that they couldn't be entirely themselves on their own terms and still function as royals. That's what Meghan is going to be finding out before she's any older, if she hasn't already.

R352 - Oh for god's sake, of course he's paying for her clothes. He gives them an allowance - how they spend it over the year is accounted for annually. If Jessica Mulroney is sending her a trunk of clothes every couple of months saying, "Here, darling, these just didn't quite work out for me, so I'm passing them on to you," then of course no one would say anything. But the fact is, at the end of the fiscal year, if Charles has NOT been seen to have spent a large amount on her clothes, especially as the DM is making sure the world knows what each outfit costs, all hell will break loose. Do you really suppose the BRF is that stupid?!

I posted this over on the Peter Philips thread.

Someone linked the interview with Peter Philips and his wife Autumn (link below).

At about the 1:35 mark, Autumn is asked about her experiences when joining the RF. She mentions clothes, in particular.

Harry is stuck with this clingy wife forevermore. Even if Harry suddenly wisened up and kicked her out, any billionaire is looking at 20 year olds, supermodel types, or accomplished super stars that enhance and cater to their own ego. MM has none of these coveted attributes. She turns 37 this week and she's no fashion plate. No ultra successful businessman is going to want her type for a partner.

Harry better make the most of it.

Similar argument could have been made “no prince is going to marry an aging C-list actress, one acting credit shy from a failed career, from a trashy background and with questionable relationship history.” Meghan has been known to eclipse expectations.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Am I the only one who thinks Pa is going to arrange a kidnapping in the hopes of getting ransom money from the BRF. My stepfather's drug addict brother tried that. My stepfather knew it was a scam.

Harry has been trawling for a wife for some time now, r358. No one wanted the job.

R349 Fergie looks really good these days. She has held up well considering all of the public shame and financial failure that she has endured.

If MM is a grifter, she wouldn't waste her time getting money on the low like that. She would play this for the long con. For the record, I don't think that she is a grifter. She is just a lady who wanted to marry well. She starting running with the Canadian elite and liked the lifestyle that the ladies have. She can call herself a feminist, but she had no problem ditching her career to give out Polo trophies. She wanted to be a kept woman and reinvented herself as a humanitarian from second generation Hollywood.

So does that mean that Pa Markle was using drugs while raising MM? I feel very sorry for MM. There is way more to her story and it explains why Harry and Charles are so sympathetic to her.

Meghan would be only too happy to see him disappear, r360.

How do royal sleuths explain the set of clothes, including a suit for the wedding, that MM commissioned for Thomas Markle, as per the BBC story at the link? Some lucky bloke bought the suit for half price and wore it to Ascot.

I could never square this off with other factors that don't make sense in this whole debacle, including the mention of Pa Markle in the official wedding program as giving his daughter away, the fact that Pa recovered very quickly from his medical emergency, etc.

Halfwit Harry has turned the Monarchy into a Jerry Springer episode.

-- DM Comment

it costs a lot of money to look this cheap!

From the Order of Service of the wedding:

The bride, having been greeted by the Dean of Windsor, moves in procession through the Nave where she is joined by her Father, Mr Thomas Markle, to the High Altar.

R364 I'm guessing he was invited and transportation and wardrobe were arranged. At some point very close to the wedding something went wrong. Pa backed out because something wasn't to his liking and he made up the hart attack story. He also may have become so difficult he got uninvited.

I don't believe that Pa Markle was ever invited. I think that the order of the service was for show and that fat suit story is too convenient for me. The wedding was in May so they have had plenty of time to order a suit and sell it off cheap just for show.

Pa Markle has been an embarrassment ever since he stepped into the public eye. Meghan has shown up to entertainment events with her mother, but never her father. She knew better than to invite him to the wedding. He was having chest pains and heart attacks and had TMZ on speed dial. He was issuing public statements to TMZ!

Samantha's ex-husband only had good things to say about MM. Samantha's own mother only had good things to say about MM and Doria, the woman who married her ex-husband! The only people with anything bad to say about MM are her troubled half-siblings and her sideshow father.

There are some people who lash out when they start losing control of other people. These people can be really nice and generous as long as they think they're in control. I think that's what's going on with Pa. He's calling the BRF a cult. Making threats. Behaving in a way that's never going to get him back in her favor. He doesn't care if she talks to him again because if he can't be in charge he'd rather have no relationship. People who do this often appear very hurt by the rejection that they helped engineer.

Oh look, MM and Harry are in love and still in that stage where they want to fuck each other non stop. It happens. I don’t care for the mob mentality surrounding this chick. Everywhere you look she is being gang banged for her age, her looks, her clothes, her hair and her family.

Pa Markle is an abusive parent. he talks about her as if he is an abandoned child wanting mummy’s attention. The entire family is fucked up and it is to MM’s credit that she has managed to make something out of her life given that she spent her formative years with a bitter, stoned, resentful dad. So he paid for her education! Big deal, that is what a responsible parent should do.

Enough if the hate, bitchy observation can be fun but the piling on re MM is just ugly.

R371 It's funny how Sugars always speak about how many sex Harry and Meg have.

Like people here care about their sexual lives or ever talk about it.

Sugars are always crying "YOUR JEALOUS AND THEY HAVE SEXXXXXXXXXX!!!!!!!!"

You're the one obsessed with their sexual lives, people here are just obsessed with her bad fashion choices.

R370 He knows he'll never see her again, so why should he be all nice and quiet?

She uses people, people use her. What goes around comes around.

Thanks, R372. I never noticed that about the Sugars, but you are right. I have seen it in other threads, but it never registered. I just thought it was odd when one of them mentioned it before; really a non sequitur since most everyone else on these threads is talking about her bad and expensive "fashion" choices. Hilarious.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

While I don't agree with what Pa Markle is doing now, it does seem like Meg tried to ghost him like she did to others on her social climbing. Three weeks before she started dating Harry she posted the IG thanking her for making her all that she had, from loving Busy Berklee movies to the perfect club sandwich. She called herself his little buckaroo. Then three weeks later she meets Harry and seems to cut him off.

Thomas Markle is a POS, but he did put his daughter through expensive private schools and colleges. And there's a huge blank space in Meg's life from age 24-30 when she was nothing but a struggling actress and Deal or No Deal suitcase model. Tom made it seem like he helped her financially through those long dark years before she landed Suits at age 30. I have a feeling if Meg ever introduced Harry to Tom, he would have regaled him with stories of Meghan's struggling days, what she did to pay the rent and all about her first wedding to Trevor Engleson, which he apparently was at. He was a great big reminder of Meghan's past as less than someone who would marry into the BRF. Can you imagine the stories he could have told Harry about how he brought his little girl to the Married With Children set to do all her homework and spend all her free time between ages 11-17 when she was living withb him and not social worker "Don't do anything for anyone who can't do something for you," mother?

Thomas knows where the bodies are buried in Meg's past. He stayed quiet until after the wedding fiasco. He played things terribly since. But still, Meg could have at least done a quick intro to Harry during their courtship but she ghosted him like so many other people she didn't need in her life anymore after Harry.

William spent tons of weekends with the Middletons at their home from the time he at Kate were college sweethearts. Will spent 10 years dating Kate before marrying her yet he was so comfortable with her family he spent tons of time with them. Meghan and Harry had a long distance relationship for a brief period of time and he never got to know anyone but her mom Doria. Even Harry after Meg spending Xmas at Sandringham in 2017 he said it was because Meghan never had a family growing up and this was all new to her. That's when Sam and Tom Markle Jr. went on the offensive that Meg was telling him lies about her years growing up, making Harry look like a fool thanks to his "poor me, I'm all alone in this world" fiancee.

R364, that is a traditional three piece suit. The announced dress for men at the wedding was traditional formal morning wear. Megan may have commissioned that suit for Pa Markle but if so, it wasn't for the wedding.

Meanwhile, the lesser gossip sites are saying that the reason Megan went back to her father at age eleven was that Doria was convicted of while class crime and had to serve several years in prison. I have no idea whether that is true. AT ALL. But that is the rumor going around. Google Tiaras and Houseplants Tumbler and scroll back through the posts.

^ White collar class crime, not while class crime. Sorry.

It isn’t uncommon at all for teenage girls to prefer living with their dads. In Meghan’s case, when living with dad provided her with an everyday pass to soap opera sets? It was the time when he could do something for her, and I don’t mean paying for her school. He could have paid for her school while she lived with Doria. Thomas Markle may have been taking drugs, but nothing indicates that it interfered with his functioning at wirk or as a parent during the years Meghan lived with him. Just two years ago, she had only nice things to say about him and her childhood. And she let Harry call him to ask for her hand in marriage, didn’t she? Sure she wouldn’t have done it if they were estranged.

r376

a social worker with a "Don't do anything for anyone who can't do something for you," philosophy?

hmm

R380 It has never been clear what Doria does for a living.

"Social worker" , "yoga instructor", "make-up artist", no one really knows.

I thought Doria left to join a commune. In all the photos of her, she never looks relaxed or confident. She looks as if she's waiting for the other shoe to drop.

I doubt you would feel relaxed if you knew you're being photographed.

I know I wouldn't.

Doria was a grifter like the rest of them. Birds of a feather.....

She just still presents more successfully.

I think it's possible Doria is quiet cause she has things to hide herself.

If she really did go to jail for few years (and we have no proof, just speculations), no wonder she prefer to be discreet and doesn't talk too much. She doesn't want the Daily Fail to dig in her past.

The story was that Doria was a government employed social worker specializing in geriatric care who was going to retire with pension and open her own center for geriatric care. Meanwhile, she was also privately teaching yoga. I have no idea what the truth is.

Guessing Doria's past might be the next line of DM investigation.

The fascinating thing about this saga is that there are grains of truth on every side of the story: MM comes from a seriously dysfunctional family, she probably gets her narcissism from her father, who is clearly deeply disturbed yet took care of her to the best of his ability; she clearly probably once both needed and loved him, but doesn't need him any longer and doesn't want him crowding her newly reinvented persona; she craves attention, too, no one goes into show biz who doesn't, and got used to presenting a variety of faces to the world and even believing each one herself even when they are totally contradictory, i.e., I'm Proud To Be A Woman And A Feminist And A Humanitarian "Activist" But Don't Look Now I'm Seeking Wealth, Security And Status Through A Brilliant Marriage To A Rich Man At The Top Of The Social Pyramid -Now Watch My Closet Grow!

It's all true, is the problem. Her father is a POS, but she did love him and she's oddly like him. Harry is probably nuts about her because her narcissism reminds him so much of his mother, and she likes him well enough; eventually, he'll get tired but MM knows this the best she'll ever do and has to make it last and work; she is an embarrassment to the BRF and whilst dating Harry, she simply crossed her fingers and hoped it would go better than this; she is pushing 40, and her clothes reflect an odd detachment from a sense of place and her own figure.

Eventually the dust will settle and they'll limp along like most other couples, and as the years go by the British public will care less and less and the Sussexes will become both a fixture in the BRF and increasingly irrelevant as the Cambridge kids grow up.

It's all true to some extent, and I'm sure the BRF wishes Harry had found someone else, but are shrugging their shoulders and thanking God he was the Spare and not the Heir.

I agree with most of that R388, but not that her father is a POS. The thing is, Americans fundamentally do not "get" the RF and the extreme amount of respect Brits accord them. The notion of royalty, ie privileged status and treatment because of birth rather than wealth or merit or character, eg the pope, is an alien concept to them. So Thomas Markle is speaking his mind. He is understandably hurt, bitter and angry that his daughter has rejected him due to her new family connections. Her half-sister, on the other hand, is definitely a POS, a jealous, spiteful, vindictive witch.

A positive story from the saccharine Hello mag.

A negative story from the Daily Mirror about Pa Markle.

I never understood the "commissioned a wedding suit for her father" story. To have a suit made to order, you need basic measurements first of all. It's not like you call up a tailor and say "make me one in 42 L" even if that's what her father told her for his US suit size.

There are bespoke tailors who send someone to the US, set up in a hotel suite in a major city and announce it to their customers so they can come in to be measured. So was someone dispatched to his Mexican village?( I know those published photos in which he was being measured were a set up. ) Just imagine a tailor's response to the idea of making a suit using someone's unreliable measurements.

R390 - Unless the subject is caught boiling bunnies for brekkers in front of the kiddies, HELLO never has a bad word to say about any of these people. Treacle is their bread and butter. No matter how hideous the outfit, HELLO will gush and swoon - it's entire approach is to provide an anodyne approach to all of it; HELLO is the karmic opposite of the DM.

^^It’s also cursed. The curse of Hello is when a couple gives a gushing interview about their beautiful home and fabulous lives and unending love and 6 months later he’s caught banging the manny and she sues for divorce.

(The “gushing interview” bit was changed by spellcheck to “ girls be a girl dying”. I’m scared to buy a cursed Hello now)

R391 - What's the most negative about that Daily Mirror article is you can see just how badly that Herrera denim number fit her in the shoulders, bust, and armholes.

I don’t understand why she isn’t employing a seamstress to fix the outfits unless she has to hand them back. I know for a fact there are plenty of clothing alterations places in London because I bought an off the peg suit on sale in John Lewis and took it to a place to be fitted properly.

[quote]Just two years ago, she had only nice things to say about him and her childhood. And she let Harry call him to ask for her hand in marriage, didn’t she? Sure she wouldn’t have done it if they were estranged.

My two cents: I think he was invited and everything was set up and all systems go until he made a deal with the pap who took those ridiculous photos of him looking through a historical book about Britain, getting "measured" for his "wedding suit" by some tailor in Rosarito, and going to L.A. and delivering flowers to Doria before the wedding. The father of the bride was using the occasion of his daughter's wedding to the Queen of England's grandson to make some cash. That's what sparked whatever happened behind the scenes to lead to either a disinvitation or he felt humiliated enough, knowing people in the chapel would be looking down their noses at him, tut-tutting about his vulgarity. Then began the freeze out.

I don't know what KP could have done to prevent it short of giving him cash. Or perhaps, he asked for money in addition to the flight, suit, accommodations, etc. and was refused, got butt hurt and got the loot some other way.

I don’t think he would make that deal if he had been invited to the wedding, R397. I think he’s been getting many offers ever since the news came that MM was dating Harry, but only started accepting them after he finally realised that Meghan had no place for him in her new life. As for the second possibility. If he was invited and he did ask Meghan to pay for his tickets, suits, accommodation, etc - what’s so outrageous about it? She has the money, he doesn't. And if she refused - it’s about the dumbest thing she could have done. The costs of flying him in and putting him up would probably be less than any single one of all the ill-fitted dresses she’s worn after the wedding. And it would have done immeasurably more for her image.

I wonder when the last time Sparkle actually visited her father was? How often did she call him before Harry?

It sounds like she ghosted a lot of people after she got a some fame and success on "Suits". (Dropped the husband and other friends?)

The interviews he's giving now are really ugly.

It's one thing to be really hurt - that I could understand - but those ridiculous accusations that the RF are somehow preventing her from contacting him is preposterous. She's not a princess held in a tower.

And those comments about the Queen. Guaranteed to pollute any sympathetic feelings some might otherwise have for him.

His personal opinions about TQ, Charles and others show him to be beyond clueless. Making it completely impossible that anyone in the RF (except Harry, who has made his bed and must now lie in it) will have anything to do with him in any way, much less publicly. His ignorant crack about the Queen meeting Trump just shows what a complete ignoramus he is, lacking any understanding of the Queen's role.

This whole saga has a massive entertainment value, mixed with a "Whatever next?" wonder.

[quote]If he was invited and he did ask Meghan to pay for his tickets, suits, accommodation, etc - what’s so outrageous about it?

I didn't say this. I said money in ADDITION to having all of his wedding related expenses covered. It wouldn't surprise me if Samantha put the bug in his ear about recovering some of the money he spent on Meghan over the years. Samantha is pulsating and seething envy.

This Meghan obsessed blogger claims Meghan fucked Steve Mnuchin. Yes, that Steve Mnuchin, the U.S, Secretary of the Treasury who got himself a doozy of a social climbing actress himself.

Ew. He's pretty repulsive.

R398– so it was OK for the queen to attend her oldest grandson‘s wedding even after he charged a magazine an arm and a leg for pictures. I guess you’re saying it’s OK for the Royals to make money off their family events but no for anyone else

Color me dispassionate but I fail to see what Pa Markle did before the wedding with the staged pap photos of peering into a book on Britain or getting pretend measured as to warrant a complete freeze-out on communication. Would it hurt for MM to phone her dad for a benign convo with the assumption that it possibly might go "on the record?" She is not so perfumed that it is beneath her to make at least a nominal effort.

It may be the cumulative effect of staging those photos, Samantha's and Thomas Jr's ridiculous encounters with the press, and the fake heart attack that made them throw up their hands in exasperation. She did call him after the wedding and he immediately told TMZ about the conversation; this is what he does. No judgment, no impulse control.

Actually, R403, it wasn't until the pictures were published that the RF knew the extent of the deal at the Peter Phillips wedding.

They were not amused.

MM is not particularly stylish and has a talent for choosing the most unflattering clothes although she is wearing clothing from the latest fashion collection.

unfortunately the color scheme and weight of the fabrications are too heavy for this time of year.

Modifications to her wardrobe will include:

*using a tailor to have the clothing fit her correctly,. *choosing fabrications and colors that are suitable for the event and time of year and the function. *Being seen in an outfit more than once. *choosing to wear British based designers more often.

You can't choose your family and unfortunately for MM she has an extended loudmouthed white trash family who personify the "ugly American" stereotypes.

MM's white trash family antics are amusing for me to read about in the tabloids but I imagine the headlines are mortifying for her and the BRF.

R401 - oh, the Mnuchin rumour has been out there for some time; it was a CDAN blind, as well.

R403 - In fact, the Queen and the inner circle were extremely displeased. Peter Phillips is hardly poor, but he's no prince and has had to make his way in the world to a larger degree than his titled cousins. I'm sure the money came in useful. I remember the issue of HELLO, by the way, and the wedding was very lovely. In fact, it was everything that Harry and Meghan's wedding aimed to be, but wasn't. And the bride, it must be said, wore a dress perfectly designed for her figure and personality (Autumn Kelly has a tendency to, as the French say, embonpoint, and her wedding was the slimmest, albeit still buxom, that she has been seen since). The dress suited her perfectly and fitted her the way almost none of MM's clothes, including her wedding dress, have fit her.

Lastly, the wedding coverage showed a beautiful Kate Middleton of ten years ago, stylishly dressed and composed, and when you see those photos you see why William went for her. Chelsy Davy was also there, looking adorable and incredibly vivacious.

In light of later events, it do make one wonder about Harry. I haven't seen one photo of MM either as attractive or as prettily dressed as Chelsy at that wedding, let alone Kate.

R408

Here's a picture of Kate, Harry and Chelsy at Peter Phillips wedding.

(William was not there as he was at another wedding of a friend in Africa.)

I guess you can wear black at weddings these days? Kate looks tacky AF to me.

Kate was wearing Will's fav little number underneath, r410.

So many odd jackets were worn at that wedding that it appears they had two bins at the door — one with random jackets and one with Sondra Prill’s old dresses. The female guests reached in blindly and wore the first dress and jacket they grabbed.

The noticeable thing to me about the Peter Phillips wedding pictures were the big smiles on everyone's faces.

Quite a difference from Harry's wedding.

R413 I noticed that too. Everyone seems so genuinely happy. I think Chelsy was always the one for Harry. The one he really deeply loved. She just didn't want to take on the royal life. Meghan eagerly was so he settled for her. At 33 it was time for him to find a wife and Megs wanted it BADLY. He even said in their engagement interview how early on in dating he had to have deep conversations about what marrying into the BRF would mean and she was totally on board. He finally found someone up for the challenge. I guarantee he and Chelsy end up having an affair in the next 5 years as he tires of Meghan Antoinette....she'll be his Camilla, getting back together in their later years as someone he should have been with while marrying the wrong woman.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

All the smiles here, too.

Harry and Chelsy broke up due to his persistent cheating as well as her desire to avoid the relentless media scrutiny. They got together again after he broke up with Cressida Bonas. I don't know if Harry has it in him not to stray. But surely between him and Chelsy, they have enough money to live in luxury without the RF. Wouldn't they have been better off for him to "resign" his royal position and live as free private citizens? The ongoing shitshow against MM and therefore against Harry is not going to end until she is gone. It's almost worse than the backlash against Wallis Simpson, although Edward's Nazi association was reason enough for him to abdicate. But people are negative enough about the BRF now and with the internet, this could really tip them over.

Jesus H. Christ! I hat the fuck is up with all the apologists for Meghan’s lard arsed, indolent, corpulent, revolting con artist of a spunk donor? Seriously, unless you have a dog in this fight (either you’re closely related to him; you’re fucking him; your mother is fucking him), just quiet the fuck down! He’s out for what he can get - money, and attention. He’s vile and repugnant.

* I hat = what.

R418 She's really daddy's little girl, so.

Meghan is 100% Markle. She's there for the fame, the money and the clothes.

Pretending she's morally superior to her family is a joke. They're all horrible, Meghan included.

I do not disagree in the least, R420 - Meghan is desperate, thirsty, and rather pitiful. It doesn’t mean that because she’s an arsehole, that this somehow means that her father isn’t one also.

I pity her father more than her.

Clearly he was never seeking for fame before her wedding. He had a strange life for sure but was just a quiet guy living in Mexico.

Her sister on an other hand is a real piece, total psycho.

MM 'source' speaking to the media now - DM reporting:

- "Meghan Markle 'is at her wits' end over her father's public outbursts'"

- "Kate 'has been a pillar of support amid family drama after the pair bonded over tea and tennis'

I'm sure "No Drama" Kate is loving it.

Bet Carole Middleton who so carefully built up Kate, protecting her, advising her will now be at own her own 'wits' end' from having Harry drag Kate into the Markle family drama.

Kate should be careful. Diana befriended Fergie and lived to regret it; can't remember exactly what happened. It's complicated, because Kate and Harry have been close for nearly 20 years and she would want to support him, but not get dragged into the MM debacle.

oh god, the shoe thing. Diana supposedly lent Fergie a pair of shoes and then claimed she got plantar's warts (?) from Fergie.

R410 - Lord, if you think Kate looked tacky af at that wedding, what do you call Eugenie's outfit?! Kate had a beautiful and quietly sexy black sleeveless dress under the jacket, and the photos of her in the church show a very lovely young woman, indeed. The hat was flawless, and the jacket was beautifully tailored and classy, and showed off her tiny waist. I have yet to see MM look a fraction as good in her hugely expensive bespoke and ill-fitting wardrobe. She'd give her eye teeth to look the way Kate looked at that wedding. She keeps trying to make herself over in that image, but it keeps not working.

And, yes, you can wear black at weddings these days, as long as it's not all black. Davy was also wearing a black and cream outfit.

The only really tacky numbers there were Pss. Eugenie's truly horrific choices, and the bridesmaids' dresses, which while inoffensive and of themselves, did no favours to the bosomy big-armed Valkyries getting the bride down the aisle. But Yuge got a run for her money from the groom's mother - you have to look at Princess Anne's outfit outside the church and get the entire impact of her utterly hideous outfit, but be warned: it's something of a shock to the system.

But it was a very youthful, happy wedding, as others have pointed out, even the Queen looked creditable - and the difference between this wedding and the obviously "straining" atmosphere of Harry's is evident even in still photos.

Politically incorrect. Chelsy is from a rich white landowning family in Africa. That sort of goes against Will and Harry’s passion for helping black Africans. She’s good for an affair, but bad optics for a marriage.

That DM comment: "Kate 'has been a pillar of support amid family drama after the pair bonded over tea and tennis'

Soundng like a MM move to enlist a member of the BRF to further 'legitimize" her, side with her, as Harry is defenceless to flght back against his father-ln-law. Harry is hiding behind big brother Will, hoping WilL/Kate willl protect him. 'Little Big Man.'

When i saw sparkles polo outfit in the newsagents i thought "another heavy dark expensive dress with tacky shoes"!

Ginger Dim Wit, in an effort to play the Sympathy Card and cheer Sparkles up, bakes this cake.

R429 - Nonsense. The only thing working against Chelsy was that the tabs painted her as a party girl, Harry just wasn't ready and kept cheating with whatever piece of candy crossed his vision, and she was uncertain. MM was strictly the right woman in the right place at the right time with the right hunger and the right skills. And that's not uncommon in lots of marriages, it should be said: timing is everything. In my opinion, Chelsy was the right girl in the wrong place at the wrong time with not enough hunger and not enough skill. But she was still the right girl on a deeper level, and it remains to be seen how that plays out in the H&M saga. If Harry had been set on her, her white rich landowning South African father wouldn't have been any more of an obstacle than MM's ghastly father, whom Harry hasn't even met, her cheesy background, divorced status, dodgy family, bi-raciality, or glaring social climbing ambitions.

If Harry could get MM past the gates, he would have had no trouble getting Chelsy past them. Charles allegedly found her fun and delightful.

He just wasn't ready.

Chelsy: rode hard and put away wet.

R434 - Indeed. And if she had married Harry, it's likely she would look different now.

Cressida: the other mess

These girls might have come from rich families but I wouldn’t call them classy.

Two country girls. Chelsy and Kate.

R433 you reveal a lot about yourself when you throw being biracial in the list of negatives.

[quote]Meghan’s lard arsed, indolent, corpulent, revolting con artist of a spunk donor?

Are you speaking of Harry whose spunk will soon be penetrating Sparkle's ovum? I'd like to know why you think he's fat.

[quote]The green suit and leather gloves to the July christening, the strapless bra showing through a [bold]bespoke[/bold] Givenchy day dress, unflattering lines, etc.,

[quote]I have yet to see MM look a fraction as good in her hugely expensive [bold]bespoke[/bold] and ill-fitting wardrobe

Is it just me or doesn't "bespoke" refer to made-to-order clothes that should absolutely fit the body for whom the clothes are custom made? Or are we encountering a rare case of DLers.

Hardly any of her clothes fit. Why are you using bespoke for off-the-rack, last season designs? This is Datalounge, FFS. What kind of vulgarians do we have here now?

If not classy how about educated then? Chelsy Davy has a law degree on top of a bachelor's degree in economics. She practiced law for a few years and decided to shift to jewelry design (artistic pursuits perhaps) and further studied at the Gemological Institute of America. You know, versus simply using her connections ala Melania to finagle a spot on say U.K. QVC.

I once read a sugar laughably proclaim that Meghan was the most educated of the bunch because SHE had a bachelor's degree; conveniently overlooking that Kate also has a bachelor's degree and William a master's.

R439, exactly. If she were wearing bespoke clothing, it would goddamn FIT her.

R438 - I was stating the negatives from their point of view, which is what was under discussion. It's irrational to suppose they were all just delighted at her being a half-black in addition to the dodgy family, C-list actress background, older age, and nakedly social ambitious aura. The fact that it's likely they think that way doesn't mean I do. Philip is notoriously racist, so was the Queen Mother, and the Queen is a product of her time and upbringing, as well. My position remains that if Harry could get all that past the gates, he could have gotten Chelsy past the gates, too.

And if nothing else supports it, the whole atmosphere of their wedding does, as it reeked of the BRF making the best of what they considered a less than ideal outcome. I'd give a great deal to have been telepathic so I could have read the minds of the older members of the BRF while that preacher (whom neither MM nor Harry had ever met before) reduced the proceedings to tawdry race pandering. Philip's thoughts probably would have turned the bride's dress blue.

R436 - Cressida looks like what she was in that photo, a wealthy young girl partying; she's not a nun. She's much prettier than either Chelsy or MM and her stage career is actually progressing. And if you think MM didn't get plenty of sex and partying - oh, wait, that's right: MM made her her blog, Working Actress, was taken down before anyone could read about all the sex her profession was saturated with.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

As per the post above, Harry and Chelsy had another go in 2016. No idea if he has overcome his cheating habits, but she has come a long way and any dirt that could be dug up on her now would be from the past. She hasn't been tabloid fodder since they broke up. So there must have a been a good reason why they couldn't put it back together. Maybe she decided he was too limited, not bright enough, too spoiled, or something. But I think MM is a rebound r'ship from this.

R444 - I do think you're right about it being a "What the hell, Chelsy's gone, I might as well take this one" action. Sometimes in relationships no matter how strong the connection is, the trail goes cold, so to speak, and you just know there's no point in pursuing it. I think Chelsy will always have a special place in Harry's heart - MM won't care, she got the A-list status and everything that goes with it. Chapter closed.

R443 - The amount of cheek colour MM has on in that photo looks like it was applied with a trowel. Another outfit with good intentions but poorly carried through.

Men marry when they are ready. Some men get "ready" when they meet the right woman. Chelsy was neither right girl and it wasn't the right time. Harry felt that he needed a wife who enjoyed public life. MM loves the attention. Harry didn't want to deal with a wife who was unhappy all of the time because of public scrutiny.

I think that Harry married the love of his life. The one true thing about that wedding was how obvious it was that Harry is in love with MM.

MM probably gets her clothing free from the design houses. This would explain why she doesn't wear British designers. It is probably against the rules for British designers to give The Royal Family free clothing. American and French designers might not have those restraints.

R447 - yet again, it has to be repeated: the royals are forbidden to get freebies from ANY designers, car manufacturers, horse breeders, jewelers, etc.

She is not getting her clothes free. End of. The sight of a British royal married to the scion of one of the richest men in Britain getting free designer clothes would cause an uproar and be one of the worst optics the BRF could contemplate. It doesn't matter what nationality the designer is.

She doesn't wear British designers because she doesn't like their clothes and now that she's got the ring on her left hand, feels safe flipping the fingers of her other hand up to the British taxpayers.

And if she's the love of Harry's life, he's even dumber than I thought.

Harry made a comment quite a few years back, saying 'Who'd take me on?' with all that implied. Being the wife of the 6th in line, with a truckload of restrictions and really tedious royal duties, as well as never being able to escape the family...to a woman with a career, social life, wealthy background...it doesn't sound all that great, especially since the petty, spiteful, bitter and jealous public will have the knives out for you for every perceived mistake. I recall he also said that he had to find someone already in the media spotlight, since that was a major dealbreaker for his past gfs. Chelsy said it, straight out. Cressida had just finished her performing arts course and wanted to embark on a career. But for MM, marriage to Harry was a giant step up (obviously).

[quote]I think that Harry married the love of his life. The one true thing about that wedding was how obvious it was that Harry is in love with MM.

[quote]MM probably gets her clothing free from the design houses. This would explain why she doesn't wear British designers. It is probably against the rules for British designers to give The Royal Family free clothing. American and French designers might not have those restraints.

If there is anything more amusing than a Sugar on the prowl breaking her back to explain things she does not understand, it's the deluded one who seems to think she implicitly knows how the BRF operates and thinks. Meghan has done herself no favors by trying to evade or bust all of their rules, guidelines, and duties, especially vis a vis patronage, emoluments, and illicit money and other impossible words and concepts Sugars don't understand.

R450 In fairness, Sparkle hasn't been given a patronage of her own yet, so she's just tagging along getting her feet wet behind Harry. It was awhile before Kate got hers, as well. First, the new wives trot along behind the royal husband, getting the feel of things and seeing if their interests dovetail with issues that aren't too controversial and make the family look good.

But patronage, broadly, is the job they invented for themselves when their real power ended. I imagine it's tougher on the men than the women.

So far the only rule MM is busting is an unspoken one, which is that she should be seen to support the British fashion industry - especially in these times of economic uncertainty due to BREXIT. Eventually, that issue will fester if she doesn't see reason and get on board with the programme.

Illicit money and emoluments - any information on that? She may be oblivious but I cannot imagine Harry would be to the implications.

I take with a grain of salt most of those mentions, but I must agree with you that I have a feeling that some point some massive scandal is just a couple of years away with these two.

Perhaps, as someone else suggested, she really is building up a wardrobe that she can take with her when she leaves - which would be after at least one child has been produced.

But - I could be wrong.

R451 - Sparkle's only known (totally implicit) patronages have been to global luxury fashion houses by virtue of her wardrobe, no?

When the scandal bursts - and I’m sure one will - will she have anyone to stand in her corner? She’s ghosted every person who is no longer of use, that does not make for good will when the chips are down.

There's only one other person on this planet who is second to Smegs in desperation for public attention and sympathy. And that is none other than scandal-ridden Fergie herself, r453.

Fergie is already secretly drafting support statements for the (highly-anticipated) moment the MM sandals hit:

"The Duchess of Sussex is my bestest friend IN THE ENTIRE WORLD, and Prince Harry is such a lucky man to have found his woman who loves him and who happens to have all the qualities of his beloved mother, Princess Diana. I was Princess Diana's closest friend and I can state that she would be horrified by the treatmnt of our precious Duchess of Sussex. Horrified!! Disgusted!!! Appalled!!!!! Prince Harry and the Duchess are the best family unit ever and I know them extremely, extremely well. The Duchess of Sussex is a humongously good woman and I won't stand by and watch her being berated and abused by the media.....blah blah blah."

scandals *not sandals*

That Wimbledon photo, trying to clap holding her hat...there's a seat right behind her. Could she not just TURNAROUND and put it down?

She doesn’t know that she has to act as if she’s thrilled to be there. The Duchess of Kent did that role so admirably for decades, even when suffering from mental illness. I’m sure she won’t repeat the mistake, that’s a disasterous photo.

No, 456. MEMEME has to show off her "actressy cool factor" and that she's not one of those stuffy old royals who trot around in boring, flowery frocks, court shoes and old lady handbags. Most of all, she has to show her exotic side by prominently displaying her iconic MM fedora and pricey bag.

Even if it means not clapping.

Everyone is applauding. All eyes are on the court includng Kate's who ignores MeAgain's gaze.

Kate has been a big tennis fan for years as are others of the Middleton family.

The only reference I've read about Sparkle and tennis had to do with her "friendship" with Serena.

So, it does follow that Kate is probably more interested in the game.

I know this is ancient history, but I’ve just discovered that she wore suede to Wimbledon in 2016. SUEDE!

June 27 – July 10

Hey, R461, notice how careful she is to display the big "RL" logo on her bag?

Meghan has had no involvement in war, and impact on physical and mental health, do we expect similar indifference at INVICTUS GAMES, r460?

As other posters have pointed out, r460, Meghan is now in the public eye as a public figure representing the BRF. Doesn't matter if she has zero affinity or personal interest in any particular royal duty she is called upon to perform, experience or participate in.

It's her job to be polite, gracious and humble.

[quote] oh god, the shoe thing. Diana supposedly lent Fergie a pair of shoes and then claimed she got plantar's warts (?) from Fergie

WRONG. Diana gave some expensive shoes to freebie fergie and fergie wrote in her autobiography that she got warts from Diana's shoes

[quote] Chelsy is from a rich white landowning family in Africa

She's from Zimbabwe. Her dad was friends with dictator Robert Mugabe. That is scandalous and when Harry and Chelsy started dating there was plenty of disapproval from the tabloids. Of course her family, NEVER, EVER spoke out against her. Unlike Meghan's piece of shit family, the Davy's didn't want to ruin things for Chelsy

R464 that's a perfect collage of how great Kate is at her job. Smile, appear interested no matter the setting. Be gracious.

Not only that, all of her clothes fit her well, are probably by British designers and her hair looks great. Seeing those pics of Sparkle at Wimbledon still makes my head spin that she attended with such sloppy grooming. She looked like she just got out of bed and pulled her hair back with bad wisps falling out everywhere. And that makeup really does look like she went WAY to heavy on bronzer and blush and didn't blend them properly. She's just a mess next to Kate, who looked lovely and proper for the occasion.

Meghan not even taking her hat and purse out of her hand to applaud Angelique Kerber's win made her seem like a bad sport and pissy that her pal Serena didn't win the final. Royals aren't supposed to take sides, just applaud the winner.

I thought the issue with Fergie and Diana was that Fergie blabbed something Diana had told her.

MM's family must be unique in the history of the world in their trashing of a sibling who was marrying into the aristocracy or a RF. When I read the scurrilous things they said about her, I could hardly believe what I was reading.

DM Reporting:

Palace sources claim the royal family's patience has 'snapped' over Thomas Markle's public outbursts, while one commentator has suggested the Queen may be forced to intervene to prevent further damage.

Why was Meghan too stupid to understand she could have put the hat and other things under her arm and applauded willfully in support of British athletes? She was probably thinking she was more beholden to Ralph than she is to the Charles and she still doesn't seem to understand, as her father doesn't either.

Too many cunts did, indeed, spoil the broth. Papa, Thomas Jr, and Samantha are toe-curling examples of the hide your wife and kids caveat.

Really, what is the BRF going to do? Send the men in black over there to strong-arm Tom? Invite the Markles to tea with the queen? Censor all newspapers?

R469 Lol, yeah. I imagine the Queen doing a phone call to Mexico calling Tom Sr a Meanie cause he talks to free press and uses his freedom of speech to piss off the BRF.

So scary!!!!

He's going to tell Granny to fuck off.

If anything this story proves the BRF has no power at all.

I don’t believe the DM story about the queen. What exactly do they imagine she can do? It’s a bit late to tell Harry to extricate himself from the trashy gold digger.

If only Harry married a white British girl.

I’m an American and I feel it’s my duty to protect the 1000 year old royal institution of another country. My own country is going down the dumper, but I’d rather drag Meghan down than Ivanka or Melana. #teamkateforever

Actually I’m confident Harry or his aides read DL daily and will be taking out advice and throwing Me to the curb, pronto. That’s what Diana would have wanted!!!!

Can't wait for him to dish the real dirt, ie, about MM's mother, who either went to prison or went to live in a commune, and left MM with her father, who had to take her to work with him til all hours.

"There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about."- Oscar Wilde

How spectacularly true.

I agree with both r371 and r372. I'll throw in r388, too.

I take it as a given hardly worth observing in its obviousness that the DoS is a scheming climber. And God bless her for it. Why single her out for it?

She bagged Harry. I give her props. Nothing succeeds like success.

Now what? It's telling of the diminishment of "celebrity" and royalty in this media saturated age that I find the suspense of whether she finally, if ever, corrects her wardrobe as the only compelling aspect of this.

Oops, correction- there is one more thing- the marriage. She better make her divorce as successful and compelling as her success at bagging Harry. That will make that difference between re-marrying an older successful tech-billionaire what would see marrying Harry's cast-off as a reflection of his power, status and money or, otoh, being the interesting, but forgetful "extra" divorced woman at your social event.

Not really seeing any billionaire interested in a Z-list actress, twice-divorced 39 year old (by the time this mess is supposedly over with), disgraced' minor royal, r477.

R477 - Hi, Della - I don't think it's so much that she's a naked social climber and bagged Harry (it's not as if a great many other girls of varied colours and persuasions wouldn't have liked to), it's that she's already exhibiting a regrettable tendency toward biting the hands that are feeding her so exceedingly well - cf. the non-British designers, in clothes that don't even fit well or look that good on her. It's a trade-off: you get in, you play by the rules. She's already indicating she'll gladly take the perks and do a bit of work that gets her in front of cameras and her face on magazine covers, but that's it. There's more to it than that.

They got rid of Diana for bad behaviour, they got rid of Fergie for bad behaviour, and they'll get rid of MM, too, if they have to. No one should underestimate these people's ability, pushed over a certain line, to act in their own best interests. Believe us, Andy didn't want to divorce Fergie, and Diana didn't want to divorce Charles.

If Lilo can reinvent herself, I'm sure MM will do ok. Same with Jerry Hall.

[quote]If Lilo can reinvent herself, I'm sure MM will do ok.

I thought Lilo became a party favor/yacht girl after her acting career, while Meghan did it the other way around. I guess a girl can regress if she needs to.

R477 - I forgot to add, Della, that I totally agree with your point about the diminishing line between celebrity and royalty and the devaluing of both.

As for the focus being on clothes - well, in the absence of the pregnancy announcement or the invevitable TIP stories, and the Australian tour, the DM and the other tabs are doing the best they can.

And DLers are doing our bit, as well.

Re that second marriage to a billionaire - the sloppy seconds of the sixth in line to the British throne who is 1) no great beauty, and 2) would be over 40 by then really isn't the same as attaching the beautiful blonde ex-Princess of Wales or the widow of a charismatic and nearly canonised Leader of the Free World.

Meghan Markle is no Diana Spencer nor Jackie Kennedy. She needs to make this work, and she can start by doing a better job with the British taxpayer and finding clothes she can stand putting on by British designers.

Thank you r465, I misremembered.

I still find it laughable that MM not wearing British designers is compared to Fergie getting her toes sucked while married to Andrew and Diana's blatant intent to destroy Prince Charles and by extension the BRF. Can you imagine the bad publicity from ousting MM because she does not act "royal"?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R484 - no one is going to "oust" MM for "not acting royal". These things, however, tend to accumulate over time and get quietly stored up until Something Bigger tips their hands. Fergie didn't "act royal" for quite some time before the proverbial hit the fan. And then, with the backlog of bad behaviour for ballast . . .

I don't believe the story that the Queen will intervene in the Pa Markle debacle.

She's been like an ostrich with her head in the sand thoughout her reign. She doesn't like to get personally involved in family issues. She stayed out of her OWN children's lives until the situation became intolerable and potentially quite damaging to the monarchy (eg. asking Charles and Diana to divorce when they were going at each other like cats and dogs). Meghan (and to a lesser extent Harry) created this crisis so she/they should fix it. What does this have to do with the Queen? They're not her family and its not her problem to fix it. She's never even met these people. Fuck, Harry hasn't met these people.

You eldergay fashionistas are fuming mad over Meghan. I love it. Give me more, girls. I need more!

R487 - Rather agree about any direct intervention by the Queen and her long history of ostriching. Oddly, her mother was the same way. Every time a crisis hit, the Queen Mum would get bronchitis or something and take to her sickbed.

In any event, these things are all done through private secretaries whose job it is to insulate HM from "difficult conversations". HM will call in her PS, convey her increasing concern with a certain issue, instruct him to speak with Charles's PS, who will convey to Charles that HM is now deeply concerned about a certain issue, and then Charles's PS will send a note to Harry asking him to step around to Clarence House to discuss a delicate matter with his father. What is more, they won't involve Sparkle until after Harry has spoken with Charles - then Harry will head home to Kensington Cottage to tell Sparkle that the Firm is not happy about how this is going and they need to come up with a solution.

That's how things work in those circles. That's as direct an involvement that HM will take.

485 - I'm betting it is true: it indicates that they know they are already having a problem with her lack of self-control. "Settling in" measure is one of the lamest excuses I have ever heard - it's not only lame, it's counterproductive, as it's so lame that no one will believe it. So they've invited speculation as to the real reason, and no one will suppose the real reason is anything favourable about Sparkle.

Sparkle is a narcissist - as was Diana. They are notoriously hard to control, as Charles and the BRF found in short order once she had the ring on.

I remember reading early into the Harry & Sparkle story, that Charles had warned Harry that when you get involved with someone dramatic, the drama never ends.

No way of knowing if this really happened, but it's looking more and more like the idea is true.

I find it so odd that Harry didn't insist on meeting her father before the wedding. That's certainly customary, not just with the RF.

Perhaps Sparkle was doing some fancy footwork to prevent it.

It's not as if the duo didn't take plenty of trips together. What? Can't make a side trip to meet Pa?

I wonder what excuses were given.

R485 - Upon further reading, it is apparently veteran royal journo Richard Palmer who said this was happening but also the one who suggested it might be a "settling in" measure, so the BRF is off the hook on this one. How clever of Palmer to call attention to the maneuver but turn it into something somewhat complimentary so he doesn't suffer banishment from the front lines by Harry and Meghan.

R485 - oh, this is rich - Palmer, pouring even more oil on the waters: "He added: 'My hope is that when they come back from their summer break, Meghan will be given a bit of a freer rein to express herself (within earshot of the media) and get stuck into some of the serious topics she wants to tackle. She has the soft power to help many people in this world.'"

Dear God. So many many many people in the world will be helped by the Duchess of Sussex shooting her mouth off in $10,000 outfits.

She can't even be bothered to help the British fashion industry.

R490-493

Agree, r489 plus who knows what the Queen's health is really behind castle doors preventing her from engaging in so much 'state of the family' oversight. Social media wasn't a factor when Fergie and Diana were having their marital woes so a lot of the bad behavour on all sides was given a pass by the Queen and courtiers.

Those days of comfortable ostriching has largely gone by the wayside with the sheer power of social media (ironically Harry and Megs being the biggest SM proponents) and its ability to sway finicky and fickle public opinion. The U.K. is in a massive transition phase with Brexit, for eg, so courtiers are keeping an eye on external socio-cultural and political events like never before. They just fired a senior PR director:

- Sally Osman, 57, will move on in a series of reshuffles among senior courtiers

- Last year the Queen’s private secretary Sir Christopher Geidt also resigned

According to DM - June 30, 2018: Ms Osman, 57, previously a communications chief at the BBC, Sony and Sky, was hired on a six-figure salary in 2013 as Communications Secretary for the Prince of Wales at Clarence House and was later given the tricky job of co-ordinating the separate media departments at Clarence House, Kensington Palace and Buckingham Palace. She has faced a difficult time as Kensington Palace tried to manage PR calamities around the marriage of Prince Harry to Meghan Markle.

Meghan is entering in an internal transition phase also affecting the BRF with Charles keenly sensitive to optics on many fronts. It may not be the Queen who will be influencing behind-the-scenes events but Charles and his trusty wife/confidante, Camilla. That's why MM is cleverly saddling up to Charles, keeping him sweet.

[quote] why MM is cleverly saddling up to Charles, keeping him sweet

That may be her intent, but my money is on Camilla who is on to Sparkle's tricks.

You know the old saying...

[quote] Age and treachery will always win out over youth and skill.

R495 - I had missed that one in the DM, but am enamoured of their use of the phrase ". . .PR calamities around the marriage of Prince Harry to Meghan Markle."

The DM's current MM installment as seen by this headline may not be that far off, r497:

Desperate palace aides ‘hold crisis meetings’ amid fears Meghan’s estranged father’s behaviour has become so out of control the QUEEN may be forced to intervene.....

R496, you’ve got THAT right. If it were ME, I’d be kissing Camilla’s ass. And all the women in that company.

She probably feels that the women have circled the wagons against her, and prefers manipulating men. It’s less work, that’s for certain. But Charles isn’t going to go up against Camilla, ever.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R500 - What you have to understand is that those "exclusives" are meaningless. No one really inside the circle would ever talk to the press, let alone the DM. So it's half shrewd guesses and half made up. Doesn't mean there aren't grains of truth buried inside (it is likely the BRF are not happy about Thomas Markle ensuring that his daughter gets off on the back foot in her new role, as her back foot is now theirs, as well). But I doubt anyone is leaking accurate info like this and one good reason is that, in my opinion, an attack is likely to set Pa Markle off again so he can get his licks in before the black helicopters appear over Rosaria, and make good his threat to "unload on them". Viz., to wit: some really juicy tidbits about Meghan from her past that will ensure the British public will never see her the same way again.

That is, Rosarita.

R501

R491 - perhaps that’s the draw for Harry. His mother, whom I believe was BPD, lived with perpetual drama surrounding her. She didn’t get the attention she yearned for - abandoned by her mother, ignored by her father, and later by her husband. Harry, as many children, particularly men, of a BPD mother, has sought out someone just like her. And it doesn’t bode well for anyone ...

R501 - I’m not sure I agree with you there. In the past, when it has suited them, the royal family have utilised the media to get their story out, and this has been well documented. Particularly in the aftermath of Charles and Diana. The RF are keenly aware of the power of public opinion and will have people monitoring this on their behalf. I’m just incredulous that no one has yet stepped in regarding Meghan’s exorbitant spending on her wardrobe. The popular opinion, as discussed in this thread, that MM isn’t supporting British design. I’m guessing the short rope she’s been given during her settling in grace period will soon be yanked, and she will be brought to heel.

You know, I always loved those night time soaps - Dallas, Dynasty, etc.

I've missed them.

So the Harry & Sparkle story, co-starring the stalwart old Queen, her son in waiting, his (2nd) wife, the ghost of Diana, the Cambridge family, the Markle family, the bride's irate father fallen on hard time, the bride's Canadian gossip contacts, the mysterious mother, blabbermouth half sister, sleazy tabloid reporters and a mysterious past.

Add in Datalounge's citizens, occasionally invaded by a few stray Sugars.

What more could anyone ask for?

So true, R505....add in one legit ex-husband, one alleged ex-husband, one ex-live-in bf, a celebrity chef, various yachting buddies, various directors who sponsor pay-for-play...

Thanks, R506 for your additions to the cast.

We also have the ghosted childhood friend, and the fame whore pal who is daughter in law of the politician, plus the as yet little heard from State Department uncle who bypassed the queue of applicants to award the job to his late applying niece.

R504 - To be sure they use the media when it suits them, I never supposed they didn't. But it has been a complex and not always well-handled relationship. Re the incredulity re Meghan's exorbitant expenses on a wardrobe with few British designers represented, it is not so incredulous if you factor in their (which really means, Charles's) reluctance to start seeming to interfere in a marriage less than three months old. It would be left to Harry to tell Meghan, "Papa says . . ."

That said, you don't know for sure that no one has raised the issue. Someone may have delicately indicated that this is a problem, and MM may simply be ignoring them. Diana also ignored the courtiers who tried to show her the ropes. God knows, it's surfaced on a number of blogs, the cost causing negative comment even amongst her most fervent supporters on Celebitchy. If she's ignoring the public hints and any from Charles, it's a very bad sign, indeed. It speaks of the exactly the sort of willfulness that eventually corroded Diana's relationship with her husband and his family.

I suppose it's also possible that no one in Charles's press office has dared to raise the issue. Doubtful, but possible.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

I really wonder...if MM's wardrobe had been styled by a BRF stylist, how much uproar would there be anyway? Would her family and her own past be enough to cause all this drama? I personally think her wardrobe is the least of it. So she has no taste or style. Her agenda and lack of integrity should be what people focus on.

R510 - I take your point, but MM's wardrobe in some way that people can sense is connected to her lack of integrity and her agenda. Not using British taxpayer money to support British fashion shows lack of integrity, and her wardrobe choices show her agenda to feed her narcissism and use her privileges to play Fantasy Duchess instead of to Serve in return for those privileges.

The Queen's appearance at a fashion show during London Fashion Week, with Anna Wintour, shows the importance of supporting British designers. Are there really no Stella McCartney or Alexander McQueen frocks that suit her? BTW, as has been pointed out by others, The Queen really does seem to be having a much more relaxed time with her public appearances these days.

R512 - She wore McCartney to her wedding reception; McQueen is deeply associated with Kate, from wedding dress on. But that still leaves Burberry (which she wore before the wedding), Jenny Packham, Wickstead, Catherine Walker (Walker herself died, but the design house carries on with her name with a boutique in Chelsea), Alice Temperley, Amanda Wakeley, Bruce Oldfield, Zandra Rhodes . . .

They're all different but the brands she prefers - Dior, Givenchy, de la Renta, Prada - are all much more recognisable global brands. I wonder if she has this infantile sense that she has to be seen in the top global lines to make herself feel that it has been worth it all.

You'll find lots more people recognising the name Dior than Temperley. She probably looks down on the British desighers: not famous enough, with the possible exception of Vivienne Westwood, Burberrry, and McQueen.

^^^Funniest thing about that is she doesn’t understand that big brand names are irretrievably gauche and the only-those-in-the-know names will forever elude her.

MM had 'big plans" when she got herself a Prince. All this recent Markle family open squabbling in the media is detracting and potentially undoing her vision of being this force for change - Global Change. It has to be annoying and humiliating to see her carefully crafted persona relentlessly stripped back to earlier times, more humble times for all to read. Pa Markle's storyline is in conflict with MM's new 'shiny apple' fashionista, humanitarian, values-laden aspirational storyline.

Meanwhile, Doria is being a good little soldier by remaining quiet. Almost Invisible.

I think that silly "The Family She Never Had" after the Christmas visit was shockingly stupid. And, of course, her family was going to object and call foul.

Sparkle wasn't hatched. She wasn't conceived in a test tube.

She had a family.

That stupid remark - Sparkle to Harry and Harry to the media was really really dumb.

And all these Markle interviews, etc since then are a direct result of that stupidity.

Well if you had a step sister like Samantha wouldn’t you pretend she didn’t exist?

Harry is 33 years old and when you've lived in an exceptionally rarified bubble all your life (with the occasional calculated foray into war zones), publicly adored, needs and every whim catered to, he probably has more of the mentality of a 24 to 26 year old.

Meghan, on the other hand, is 37 this week and has had a far different life. She is 'street-wise' and it would have been effortless on her part to convince Harry to come to her defence and release whatever statements she deemed effective in diverting and deflecting too much scrutiny into her past and silencing future critics, r516.

Harry fell for it.

This photo of Harry with love interest at the time, British pop singer, Ellie Goulding was taken only 2 years ago. At 31. he looked very young, smitten, like a teenager.

Ellie Goulding ? That trick looks like Pete Burns's Doppelganger!

Worth reading this new DL thread for insight into actors' financial situations entitled, " When are actors "set for life"?:

Excerpt:

The thing that is tricky (and I know two people like this.)

They were on a series for a few years and made some money buy now they are auditioning and trying to get another and worry about what kind of job they can get since they are somewhat famous. My one friend says the only other job he ever had was being a waiter. Now he worries he'll have to go back to it and will end up in some tabloid about how desperate his life is.

R509 I saw that too. It was shocking how much better cheaper High Street designs looked on the models than the high-end designers duds to on Meghan. Sparkle has an extraordinary knack for making super expensive clothes look cheap and ill fitting. The DM's lesser priced options to Meghan's $$$ clothes fitted the models so well and flattered them while Meghan has looked like crap in everything she's work on official visits. Girl can't wear clothes right between her boxy figure, skinny bird legs and aspirations to wear clothes that don't flatter her hard to fit body.

R516 that should have been a big red flag to Harry. Obviously she told him some sob story about not having a family growing up so she never had Christmases, which is why she was the first non-married person to be invited to spend Xmas at Sandringham with HM and the rest of the royal family. Poor Megs, no family at all except for Harry's family. Too bad Harry exposed her lie to the world and Samantha and Thomas Jr. called her out for it. She had a family. She had holidays with them. Where was Doria between the years of when she was 11-17 and living with her dad? Her family is a hot mess, but she still had one.

Sparkle is such a lying grifter. Even Kate after dating William for nine years and being engaged to him didn't get to spend Xmas at Sandringham with the royal family until after they wed. But Megs having a year and a half long distance relationship with Harry got the honor.

I actually thought she looked fine before the wedding. She looked cool, modern and relaxed. Some people just look better in jeans than in couture. And I thought her Suits outfits looked great, as if she has a really good body, in her pencil skirts and silk blouses. Now it's a toss-up as to who is the biggest royal fashion disaster, MM or the Yorks.

I am wondering how this bizarre soap opera will play out:

1. MM will bail sooner rather than later due to the scrutiny, pressure and abuse

2. The RF will dig up some undisclosed dirt on MM and have the marriage nullified on that basis

3. Harry will be pressured into resigning his royal role due to public backlash and they will live private lives, either in the UK or US

4. The public will sort of get used to the status quo but continue to ridicule and vilify MM for her faux pas

5. Harry and MM will become a very popular celebrity couple due to their much-publicised humanitarian work.

Any other possibilities?

I see it quite differently. You are taking the "she did not have a famy literally while I now think she meant figuratively". I think she meant her family was fractured with a lot of bickering. In that regard, the behavior of her father and that side of the family has actually proven her side of the story. In fact I would venture that her public fawning over her father in social media may have been for his benefit as a means "to handle him".

I also believe that her sisters had been jealous of Meghan for a long time. Meghan obviously got advantages that neither the brother or the sister got. I suspect the minute she got a chance "to bring Meghan down" she did. As someone pointed out upthread the mother of the two step-siblings only had nice things to say about Meghan.

I also believe that since Harry met Meghan while she was yachting he is very aware of who he married and so does the BRF. I am quite sure members of the BRF are quite displeased but since the Queen gave her blessing they have to grin and bare it so to speak. So you get Princess Micheal wearing her Moor broach and Princess Anne rearranging chairs.

6. MM will not go anywhere and will continue her ill-advised experiments with style and outrageuos spending, the media will continue to dig up dirt on her, her relatives will continue providing the enterntainment, the RF will try to deal with all that behind the scenes, MM will continue leaking to the “friendly” press. It will go on like this until the first major scandal (of many), and at some point, when her relationship with Harry disintegrates, Meghan will do a Diana-style (or, rather, Pa Markle style) interview and will be finally dealt with. Harry, post-divorce, will do another round of Vegas shenanigans and then marry someone equally ill-suited to the royal life.

R523 = #teamsamantha

R523 = #teamamericansforkate

I think what Harry meant was that Meghan never had a DECENT family.

^^^ well THAT’s true

R527 - I think you've nailed the likeliest scenario(s). One other possibility is that after the appearance of a baby, MM will suddenly become much quieter, much duller, retreat into sheltered royal motherhood, and as the Cambridge kids grow up, she and Harry will become more and more irrelevant, so the other possibilities will become more or less moot.

Without a baby, though, MM's prospects for not getting into trouble increase. Bet on an announcement by February at the outside, once the Australia tour is over.

If one of those scandals is lurking somewhere, and I can't imagine there's anything left in the closet by now, they'd better bring it out sooner rather than later. I can absolutely, in the event of a big enough scandal, see Harry making a Duke of Windsor type announcement that after due consideration, he and his wife have agreed that their best chance of happiness lies in private life, and he is surrendering his place in the line of succession blah blah blah . . .

That scenario is much less likely once a child appears. Harry and Meghan are much more likely to protect their child's interests in the royal line than their own.

Which is why I doubt any of those alleged scandals exists or is provable. If there were, the BRF and MI6 would have found it, or those who have it would have brought it out by now, as the longer it waits, the less effective it is - once a baby arrives, it is likely to be moot. That's also assuming the intent of those in possession is bringing the Sussexes permanently down.

Nah - if there's a scandal in the chart, it's yet to happen, not in the past.

R519 - Goulding looks a little like Zara Phillips (Tindall), Harry's cousin, to whom he is reputedly very close. And another sexy blonde, too. How very odd that Harry couldn't get it together with all those blondes and ended up with a biracial woman who looks like a Latina and whose aim in life was to be part of haute white culture.

Obviously the only way this is really going to play to conclusion that will suite all the American pro-Kate/anti-Me contingent is for the British government to execute her.

Btw, Kate and William are NOT popular there. They’re seen as lazy and lacking the common touch and hostile to media. All the makings of a disastrous monarchy, if they even make it that long.

SUGARS GO HOME, Kaiser is waiting for you.

I meant the scandals yet to happen, R532. Meghan is testing the waters with little things and doesn’t seem to get reprimanded, which means she will progress to bigger stuff.

R532 I doubt if position in the line of succession would ever be a factor, there is zero chance of Harry or his heirs gaining the throne. Even if Charles died tomorrow William is next and he has three children who in all probability will be grown with children of their own before William dies. It’s technically possible but highly improbable that Haphazard Harry and his embarrassing wife would ever get near the throne.

This is somewhat OT, but Meghan's story to Harry about her dysfunctional family and the distancing of the press pool made me wonder. When the royals go out in public and do the meet and greet, do they get the occasional people intent on telling a member of the RF their own life story or tale of woe? I'm sure that person is one in a thousand, but surely younger royals get some training about how to deal with them. I imagine Meghan will be a target for these sorts.

R538, good observation. They probably get all kinds of nutjobs. But I suspect narcissist Meghan is practiced at deflecting anything that isn’t about HER.

R532, I have so much trouble imagining Meghan being a mother and settling into quiet seclusion with a baby. Not saying it can’t happen. I just think she’ll be trotting them out for more attention.

Princess Anne giving MM the side eye at Royal Albert Hall.

R534 - see R535.

The former Ms Markle, a 36 year old American divorcee with a rapidly diminishing C-list acting career that consisted of one, ONE, decent job and that a secondary character on a non-network show, has all the earmarks of a grifter for whom Prince Harry was the answer to an emerging life dilemma. If she is eventually "executed", it will be because she has given the BRF all the materiel they need to boot her out. She's already started by taking the perks of being a British royal but refusing to engage in an expected, extremely easy demonstration of her gratitude for her perks and for being let in by supporting the British fashion industry. Clearly, 1) she thinks she's now invulnerable, 2) she doesn't get all the terms of the deal - only the bits that advantage her end, and 3) is so narcissistic that extending a bit of noblesse oblige to the British taxpayer by foregoing her taste for global luxury labels is just too much for her.

It doesn't have anything to do with Kate.

It only has to do with Meghan.

We all know the queen can get rid of troublemakers and how!

Supporting British fashion is such an easy task.

Is it possible she is just clueless? It seems only stupidity could explain why she fails to do this simple task.

Grifters are not 'clueless', r543.

Definition:

“Grifter” is an American invention, dating back to the early 20th century, but appears to be based on the slightly older slang term “grafter,” also meaning “swindler,” “con man” or simply “thief.”

Anyone else seeing OP'S "Carry On'" crossed out as well as grayed out?

R544 - Everyone has blind spots, including grifters, especially if there is a strong component of narcissism thrown into the mix, which I believe is the case with MM.

Remember what the protagonist (Theresa Russell in a very fine performance, in my opinion) said in "Black Widow": "The trick to any of this is knowing when to stop."

Only the character didn't, and got caught. Diana also didn't know when to stop - the Morton book was her downfall. The signs from this particular grifter are that her narcissism has persuaded her she's now so safe she can't be touched, and therefore doesn't have to bother with those pesky Ps and Qs - like wearing British fashion most of the time and indulging her taste for show-off labels only occasionally.

I thought Nutmeg was suppose to "hit the ground running"? Well, she better be careful or she'll take a tumble in those killer heels. So far she's done very little in the line of work.

The next fashion disaster may be on her birthday Aug 4th when she and Harry are to attend another wedding. Oh we remember the horrid dress she wore at the Spencer wedding.

Cameraman 'friend' has conveniently let it be known via DM he wIll be on holiday. So no photos of MM at Aug 4 wedding, r547.

There is only one paparazzo in the whole of the UK capable of taking photos of arriving wedding guests?

Apparently so, r549.

R548 - We may trust that HELLO and Celebitchy and the Express and the Standard will not let us down in the absence of the DM.

I also trust that the DM has more than one "cameramen" on payroll. The idea that they would miss covering a royal wedding is, er, well -

Haven't you seen the great big banners that DM shows?

[quote] WE PAY CASH FOR VIDEOS.

These days, you don't have to be a professional.

It's not a royal wedding, r551. Quotes from camerman in link.

Anyone else seeing OP'S "Carry On'" crossed out as well as grayed out?

Yes r554. Odd.

Thanks, r555. I won't be starting a new thread after this one ends. Thanks to everyone who contributed from Part 1 to Part 5.

R546, good comment. I think they’re giving her enough rope.

Is it possible that BRF or in this case Prince Charles does not have a problem with her spending?

R553 - HRH Princess Eugenie is a granddaughter of the Sovereign, her father is the Duke of York, and the entire British Royal Family will be there. That will include Her Majesty, the current Sovereign; her husband, HRH the Duke of Edinburgh; HRH the Prince of Wales; HRHs the Dukes and Duchesses of Cambridge and Sussex; varied royal uncles and aunts such as the Kents, Gloucesters, and their children, the lower ranking Lord and Lady Windsors. The venue is St. George's Chapel, Windsor (not open for wedding to the Great Unwashed). The presiding bishop will likely be either the Archbishop of Canterbury or the Dean of Windsor, the Rev. John Connor, KCVO and Registrar of the Order of the Garter (who is also the Queen's domestic Chaplain).

HELLO Magazine will be all over it like cheap suit.

That all makes it royal.

The cameraman is either a moron or is in the pay of the Duchess of Sussex.

We were referring to the Aug 4th wedding of Will's and Harry's childhood friend Charlie Van Straubenzee to Daisy Jenks, r559.

R560 - Ah, then, of course, the cameraman has my apologies. My bad.

But it will be a big Society Wedding, so HELLO will still be all over it like a cheap suit, especially as Harry is Best Man, and other cameras as well. So if Sparkle attends, we will have fashion to discuss!

OP - oh ffs, why not?!

LOL!, R562. I'd like to continue the thread, but the graying out and crossing out of my "Carry On' message signals Muriel is trying to dissuade further threads. If folks really want me to continue with Part 6, I will. Let me know.

R563 - yeah, I think you should continue with the thread. It's funny at times and educational as well especially when Della posts. Why not? Muriel should concentrate on other more pressing problems.

Muriel is the culprit lining out so many OP posts? I've noticed it on numerous other threads. I just assume it was a number of people hitting ignore to express annoyance with particular topics, basically being annoying themselves.

R563 - Given that there's an upcoming High Society wedding, an upcoming Royal wedding, and up upcoming lengthy Australian tour for the Sussexes, stopping at Part 5 is just - well, it makes no sense at all! There are simply too many ghastly wardrobe malfunctions on the horizon to stop now!

Thanks, r564 and r565. Glad you are enjoying the thread. Like you, I am also learning a great deal. I like the free flowing of commentary and the overall respect we've been giving each other to express our opinions.

Thank you, r566. I totally agree - so many, many events (read: wardrobe disasters, potential scandals) to keep ourselves apprised of requiring serious and not so serious commentary.

Let's press on, then! Err.....Carry On!

Forgot - And a big shout out to Della, too!

[quote] Anyone else seeing OP'S "Carry On'" crossed out as well as grayed out?

Yes, R545.

I would guess that is from some Sugars expressing displeasure at this continuing discussion and using "FF" for the OP's post to stifle the topic.

^^ That should be R554.

Could Fergie's disastrous 1988 tour of Australia presage the Sussex's upcoming trip? Wasn't Charles and Diana's trip to Australia early in the marriage when things began to come apart for them? He resented her popularity when he saw that the crowds came to see her, he was said to have berated her for it, and she was in her the throes of binging and purging

__________________

Now married for two years, Andy and Fergie are the parents of a 3-month-old daughter, Beatrice, whose headline name is Baby Bea. (Her parents'

desire to name her Annabel was vetoed by Queen Elizabeth, aware that this was also the name of a night club favored by the Fergie Set.)

When Fergie decided to leave Baby Bea, then 6 weeks old, to fly off to Australia for the royal tour with Andy, the tabloids exploded in scandalized self-righteousness. When she decided to stay on for a vacation as long as Andy's ship was in Australian ports, the journalistic megatonnage tripled.

'You're a national disgrace, Fergie,' the Daily Express said of 'this irresponsibly self-centered woman who has abandoned her daughter like an unwanted doll.'

The Sun, whose contribution to journalistic standards is its daily publication of a bare-breasted young woman on Page 3, ran a column by a writer named Fiona Macdonald Hull that called Fergie 'the Dreadful Duchess,'

'Frightful Fergie,' and 'a fat frump.'

'What I'd like to know,' inquired the Sun colunmnist, 'is why the Palace bothers to make excuses for this awful woman when we know how ghastly she is anyway.'

Jesus, that's harsh. Of course the queen left her young children for months' long tours but that was a Different Age.

I am pretty sure that the palace wanted Charles and Diana to take a long tour without baby William and Diana refused.

Re the grayed-out OP, I can't even find this thread, no matter how long I scroll. It's just in my thread watcher.

I think you're right, R573. It was the first time the 1st and 2nd in succession had been on the same flight together.

Please carry on with a partie le sixième.

R572 - She also became Queen whilst still a young mother - she was caught between competing interests. Fergie was heading off on vacay as I remember, as she hadn't seen her husband in some time. One of the problems in the marriage was how often and how long Andrew was away as a serving Naval officer.

Diana, it is said, insisted on taking William with her to Australia on that early tour. She she wouldn't go if he didn't go. It was a long tour, too, and yes, it was Charles's first inkling that Diana was going to eclipse him completely in the public eye, despite the fact that it was he who was Heir, not her.

Naturally, Fergie was brutally compared to the terribly maternal Diana in these two instances.

I think at the age of twelve, two Heirs are not allowed to travel on the same plane together.

Continue, continue, a thousand times - yes dear OP!!

Let's hope MeAgain shows a little more confidence in Australia when greeting Ambassadors. Here's Harry's "hit the ground running Duchess" arriving at a Summer Party at the British Ambassador's residence at Glencairn House in Dublin looking a little jittery and apprehensive.

I think Sparkle was way over-confident in her ability to "hit the ground running" and is coming up against the reality of what her job is, which is not merely wearing ill-fitting couture not made by British designers. I think she has hoisted herself on her own petard.

Her hair. Besides her ill-ftting clothes, she desperately needs a sophisticated, grown up hairstyle to get rid of those nasty tendrils and messy bun looks. And professional makeup advice.

R581, I agree. And I think the same about Kate. Those long sausage curls are dated already.

True, both Kate and MM could do with some proper hairstyling, r582. At least with Kate, when her hair is up, it looks professionally done. Not like an after-thought like MM.

Kate cut about three or four inches off her hair, I noticed it around the time of Harry's wedding. It looks much better, not so heavy-looking. Also she's wearing it off her neck more at formal events. I thought she looked good at Wimbledon.

Not a hair out of place.

I noticed Kate's hair at Wimbledon as well. Shorter, more stylish.

I’m not a Kate fan but I must admit she has spectacularly good hair.

Amateur hour.

Jesus, I'd only seen that coat from the front and didn't appreciate how bathrobe like it is. Couple with the hair, you'd really think Harry dragged her out of bed for the occasion.

I have enjoyed the thread. I have also learned a good deal of new knowledge.

Worst. MM Hair photo. Ever.

Oh my god I’ve just noticed in r591 that she has sock marks on her bird stick legs.

[quote] Re the grayed-out OP, I can't even find this thread, no matter how long I scroll. It's just in my thread watcher.

Used the "Search" Function and Search for "Tendrils" and Click on "Subject Only" and all 5 threads are listed.

At other times one can use Search for threads with other terms in the Subject like "Meghan", "Sparkle", etc.

LOL!!, Good catch, r592!

Willian and Kate still in engagement phase. Not a hot mess like Sparkles.

Tendrils and messy bun.

Part 6 of Dangling Tendrils.

Sparkle needs a more natural style as per when she was a kid. She's already developing bald patches from straightening and weaves.

Photo of Sparkle's single grey hair causes "furious" outcry among her fans.

R575, Thank you for that! I've been secretly wondering if there was a protocol about that, because of the line of succession.