British Royal Family Gossip: Part 21

Yes, Kate looked great. Here is a video of her Mental Health In Education speech.

Camilla's mother died 25 years ago of osteoporosis.

The Queen is back at work having audiences.

Meghan appears to be sweating in the dead of winter. I don't know why she enhances her puffy face with blush that looks like bruises on her cheeks.

Grumpy Harry and Bronzed Meghan.

Meghan seems to be turning into Chrissy Teigen with those chipmunk cheeks.

Again, looking at the camera at R5.

She has her camera radar on.

God but I adore Kate's long dark swingy mane. I especially love that Will chose the polar opposite – but equally strong look– to his late mother's blonde bob. Dominant hair is essential to powerful women (which Kate will be one day, if you don't think she is already). And I'm glad Kate's likewise tall.

I think Meghan is wearing a product called "Pregnancy Glow" out of the Moonbump catalog.

R9, I was just formulating a similar suspicious thought. That is, makeup intended to produce “glowing” headlines.

The Duchess of Cambridge is definitely beautiful, but she also has an endearing quality that is part of her charm which makes her seem approachable and down to earth and easygoing. No wonder children are so drawn to her.

Meghan's bronzer fetish really needs addressing. And her legs looked positively oily in that last appearance.

Kate's doing well.

George Clooney's rant has received nothing but jeers and articles calling him out for comparing her media "issues" to Diana's. Like the PEOPLE Five Friends article, it did little to nothing except make her look 1) defensive, and 2) like the famewhore she is.

Kate looks like her dark brown hair has had a reddish rinse. Suits her colouring. It's a great length now and she's gotten rid of the sausage curls. She looks extremely comfortable in her skin these days.

Harry hasn't got a chance in Meghan's light. She'll always be sucking the air out of any space they're in together. Maybe he doesn't mind it.

I see Kate as someone fundamentally insecure, who has, as she has grown up, shown discipline, compassion, loyalty, and has forged a strong and admirable character.

In contrast, Meghan is overly secure in herself, having too much self awareness and no other awareness.

Kate's vulnerability and kindness is appealing to normal humans. Meghan by contrast is shrewd and off-putting, and she is judging and blaming others with her need to be at the top of the pile.

Meagain is really getting fat. The kind of figure ruining fat that you don’t bounce back from. Harry may be stuck with her. She’ll be to broad in the beam to be an actress and if a Russian billionaire wants a fatty he can just marry local.

Kate's brother James Middleton channeling King George V and Czar Nicholas.

This is the weirdest 7-month pregnancy stomach I've ever seen.

Sparkle is either:

(1) pregnant with multiples

(2) padding her belly. I’ll be kind and assume it’s a security measure.

(3) more than 7 months along.

I do not want to see this woman’s belly button. How can that be ok for a royal?!

Meghan was using botox injections on her masseter muscles to slim her jawline, the before/ after photos suggest that. It's worn off and that, coupled with weight gain, has lent her face a chipmunk shape. We know she's prone to weight gain because in her teen years she was on the chubby side. She looked oily not glowing yesterday. Probably wanted the greasy look to distract from her weight gain showing up on her face. Don't even get me started on her blush application skills.

You know how all the royal couples have separate bedrooms? I wonder if Harry and William actually keep to this tradition with their wives? Do they just come in to get laid and go back to their own beds after? I can see that w the older generations but not with younger ones. I know it's an odd question but I'm stuck at airport w nothing to do but good ole DL.

Harry coasted on a paper popularity bolstered by a palace conscious to protect him from his worst tendencies and foolish nature. The military gave him -some- discipline, that is until the qualifications became too rigorous for him to continue. He thought he would impress his family and the public with his dumb idea of a prize for a wife; now he is in full defensive mode. Yet as time wears and her novelty fades, I wonder how he will cope with her overbearing personality? He may just be weak and infantile like his great uncle and needs a bossy, dominant, mommy figure to criticize and belittle him and from whom he will constantly seek approval. If they go the distance that will be my impression because someone as self-absorbed as Bean will never change her spots. Her every conduct loudly proclaims, "This is who I am people, a quintessential narcissist." I for one believe her.

Very true R11, There is nothing offputting about the duchess at all. And yet she knows how to hold herself in reserve and maintain that mild air of mystery.

Kate in a two tone dress tonight. The dinner is for "100 Women In Finance".

My mistake. It's a three tone dress.

R21 I’ve been wondering what the future holds for HazBean too.

Harry is very, very invested in his public image & being “The People’s Prince”. That popularity is definitely waning - but worse, he is looking increasingly weak and pathetic. If he sticks with her, that will only get worse and I don’t think he’ll be able to cope. He’ll just morph into Prince Andrew - bitter, seedy and unpopular.

I have a suspicion, though, that their marriage will end with a bang not a wimper. I don’t think they’ll hang on for appearances sake like most royal couples try to - something will happen & shortly afterwards they’ll announce they’re separating. He’ll be caught with his hands on someone’s tits again..something like that.

Life with her must be utterly unbearable. I almost feel sorry for him.

Kate's dress is by Gucci and it flows like the white BAFTA beauty.

R25 - it could also be Nutmeg who is caught in her own toe-sucking scandal like Fergie. Cuckolded a male royal is the best way to get kicked out of The Firm. Both Harry and Meghan are cheaters in the past.

[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 think it's a rare fail for Kate. The Gucci dress makes her look like she's bandaged up like a mummy. And the overload of shiny, greasy orange bronzer is just sad. It's the wrong colour for her skin tone.

>>>Do they just come in to get laid and go back to their own beds after?

Your interest in royal protocol is truly touching.

[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 crazy about the pink gown, it looks like her boobs are bound. It's just okay.

Yeah, her boobies are all squished.

I can’t honestly say that bump is real!! It looks weird. Is it padding? It goes from a completely flat upper stomach to this great, protruding lump! No other fat on the woman 😳 But then why pretend? Is it a surrogate situation? Is she gonna have an accident? What would be the purpose?

I thought Harry is still in the military or am I missing something? I know he's cut back on his time but didn't know he was completely out.

R34 He hasn’t been in the military for years. He’s unemployed.

But I thought he's going on that training exercise with his troop on 2/14?

I think Meghead should pay per view her widening , blood oozing cervix up close so we can all view the crowning head of this beloved gift from god and St. DIEanna

Meghan gonna eat dat placenta.

With an Insta pic of it being voluptuously served on the delinquently pertinacious SoHoBébé crockery so ineluctably designed to honor the miraculous event r38?

Harry can't coast on leftover goodwill from Diana forever. Especially with a younger generation which doesn't even remember his mother. Within 10 years he'll be almost totally irrelevant to the firm, as Charles becomes King and William and Kate become the Prince and Princess of Wales. A big divorce scandal is just about the only way he'll stay in the headlines. He really reminds me of Margaret more than Andrew, with the disastrous marriage to a grifting commoner who doesn't give a damn about him. At least Fergie and Andrew seemed to love each other when they got married, and they're still friends.

[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]Harry is very, very invested in his public image & being “The People’s Prince”. That popularity is definitely waning - but worse, he is looking increasingly weak and pathetic. If he sticks with her, that will only get worse and I don’t think he’ll be able to cope. He’ll just morph into Prince Andrew - bitter, seedy and unpopular.

Not just waning... It's quite remarkable how quickly and precipitously Harry's popularity has fallen. When I first read comments from the article about William's involvement with the charity linked at R600 in previous thread, I thought "Jesus, pathetic Meghan-stans have taken over the thread" until I realized the comments are three years old long before the public became aware of her. Note Invictus Games references. I don't think Harry ever in his worst nightmares could have imagined that the marriage would cause so much damage among those who care about the monarchy and presumably loved him to bits pre-Meghan.

[quote]WE WANT KING HARRY King Harry has done a fantastic job with the Invictus Games.

[quote]His smile always seems forced. He doesn't smile with his eyes unlike Harry.

[quote]He's no Prince Harry, that's for sure.

[quote]I have always loved Harry, but after being fortunate enough to meet him while he was in Toronto last week, he has my complete respect. Harry was sincere, warm, self effacing, had a great sense of humour, and genuinely seems to enjoy meeting people. He was incredibly supportive of the Invictus Athletes, and a complete natural with children. Harry may have had a rough start, but he has turned into a stellar young man, and , after the Queen, is rapidly becoming the Monarchy's greatest asset and only hope for the future. Love, love Harry !

[quote]Weak attempt to copy Harry Prince of Hearts in order to boost Bill's popularity...

[quote]don't like the Middletons including Bill. Harry for King!!!

[quote]Harry has been so popular with the Invictus Games, that they've trotted out Billy three days in a row now to work. Amazing huh ;)

[quote]Why feel sorry for him?? Harry works and really means it. This puppet is firmly on the strings of the Middletons.

[quote]Billy is a workshy pampered little layabout. We Want King Harry

R34 - Harry hasn't been in the military for awhile now.

[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.]

Kate's gown looks better in some lights than others - but I agree with others upthread that the bandaid wrap bosom looks a little uncomfortable. The bottom is beautiful and in the video you can see how it floats, but in stills the top emphasises the little stoop she can't seem to overcome. She looks nice - attractive, princess-y, and appropriate - but not stunning as she did on Sunday night.

The "English Rose" title of the DM's article, however, after this morning's "Demure Duchess", shows which way the PR wind is blowing - and it's not in Meghan Markle's direction.

Camilla is looking at you MM..skinny vegan lizzie lol!!!

Harry at a sport Q&A.

Kate made a speech in the evening as well.

Will you look at that? Harry smiley, happy, and his hair is combed. When's the last time he was spotted with combed hair.

What's missing from the picture?

She really does have gorgeous hair.

I like the way the dress wraps at Kate's shoulders. Maybe not my favorite but lovely nonetheless. She still looks impeccable.

Harry is indeed out of the military. Everybody and his brother (to include ginger dimwit) knew he was incapable of passing the boards for promotion to major, and he could neither remain an army captain in perpetuity nor could the system be gamed by simply handing him the rank, so he separated and it was then his grandmother awarded him the rank of major as an honorific.

Harry is not participating in training exercises. Rather he is attending as an observer, much like when he attends Invictus.

[quote]In 2017, Prince Harry replaced the Duke of Edinburgh as ceremonial head of the Royal Marines.

The 34-year-old former Army Captain will spend several days observing the multi-million pound war games, with his appearance signed off by Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson.

[quote]A military source last night confirmed that Prince Harry would be attending the war games on an official visit.

‘He won’t be in uniform, it is a visit. He’s going to show his support for the troops’, the source told the Mail.

The post at R52 was meant in response to R34 and R36.

Is it ME, or does Harry look happier and healthier when his albatross isnt TAGging along?

Lol readers comment from. Daily Fail:' "He is THRILLED to be out for an evening alone: He can have a drink or two and eat what he wants without clinging and grasping bony fingers gripping his arm like iron talons!"

BONY FINGERS!!

Oh, and for those unfamiliar with military promotion systems which includes the British Army and both the U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force (Royal Air Force has variants),

2nd Lieutenant, 1st Lieutenant and Captain are prescribed ranks which means they are automatic through time in service. It is beginning with major onward that personnel must then compete with their peers, test, fulfill requirements and pass certain boards in order to earn their rank.

[quote]It goes from a completely flat upper stomach to this great, protruding lump!

It's not uncommon in short women with stumpy torsos. The pressure of a growing baby can cause diastasis recti regardless of a woman's size/shape but with a torso like Bean's there isn't much room for vertical expansion and there's nowhere to go but out. When the hormonally loosened linea alba starts separating, the baby's bottom drops down and juts out even more causing a pronounced conical bump.

A picture or an artist depiction says a 1000 words

So lets see:

Charles sucks, Wills sucks, and Harry sucks .and the point of this instituttion these days is what? ... Tourist dollars..thats the argument?

So her bump is odd? Well, fuck, I've seen origami get less work. The kid's head probably has more dimples than a golf ball.

r42 is right. Harry is reeling from his dramatic drop in popularity from the public's favourite to nearly hated, or at least a source of public frustration. He thought that marrying a woke woman who was half-black would raise his status even further, but he forgot that in reality, Britain isn't a racist country. They don't care what colour she is. They only care that she comport herself with the dignity and discretion and modesty becoming a member of the Royal Family. And she is doing the exact opposite of all that. The public hate to watch her seeking out the cameras, they hate the obscene belly clutching, the near-obscenely tight clothes and the belly button protruding, the PDA of the hand-grasping whenever she is with Harry. She is unbelievably unseemly, and they hate that. They hate that they pay for her and her way-overpriced yet always inappropriate wardrobe. They loathe her, with good reason. They now hate him for inflicting her on their Royal Family - with good reason. None of that will change unless she does a complete 180 in nearly all of her ways, and I don't see that happening.

[quote]I can’t honestly say that bump is real!! It looks weird. Is it padding? It goes from a completely flat upper stomach to this great, protruding lump!

On the previous BRF thread there was a side-by-side comparison of a previous appearance and since then her bosom and bump have shrunk. So weird.

Will repeat my assessment of Kate's BAFTA dress since it also fits her latest outing. One could write the copy for most of the DoC's evening dresses before she arrives. Simply throw in "Grecian-inspired gown" and wait to update it with the colour.

Boring dress aside, I approve of her reinvigorated work habit. Three outings in one week and it's only half way through. I won't mention it again for a while for fear of jinxing it.

Thank you R15. More of this level of silliness.

R59 The BRF provide a fake sense of stability, unity and grandeur. They're mostly for entertainment and pomp these days. They can also give a lesson or two on ruthlessness and resilience to those who have the stomach for it.

[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 kind of feel like if the British royal family “works” too much in public, they get overexposed. I still like mystery, don ’t need to see their mugs every other day. Just my lil ole 2c.

[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.]

Wow Jennifer Garner's new boyfriend is HOT!!

Kate has cornered the chiffon market which means MM aims for the opposite: more structured or minimalist looks. But being short and pregnant means she'd actually look better in flow-y gowns that don't bunch up over her bump.

I really don't understand how some, not all, Black women look to Meghan as some sort of barrier-breaking, woke person. She's done nothing but downplay the more prominent features reflective of Blackness. Straightening her naturally kinky hair, nose job, and she'd never dated Black men. She only pays superficial lip service to being biracial when it suits her agenda such as upping her woke/ SJW creds.

I didn't know that Harry quit the military and now the reasons stated here, it totally makes sense. He's someone who's never had to work hard or earn his marks. Military promotions merit-based once past certain ranks, not worth the efforts for someone like Harry. So now he's dealing with unpopularity by proxy via Meghan, true character exposed by relationship with Meghan, and too much time on his hand being manipulated by Meghan. Only respite now is a quick duck into the pub hoping his wife doesn't find out.

[quote] He thought that marrying a woke woman who was half-black would raise his status even further, but he forgot that in reality, Britain isn't a racist country. They don't care what colour she is.

R61 must be thinking of a mythical Britain. The British have a long history of racism, xenophobia and nativism. For some Brits, Meghan being American is more upsetting than her race. Some Brits object to her foreignness and all things they associate with foreignness, including her race.

That's not to say all criticism of her is nativist or racist. The rest of R61's post may indeed reflect popular sentiment, but it's incorrect to say Britain isn't racist.

Sorry, r72, but most Britons were excited about Meghan at first, and part of their excitement was *because* she was half-black. Everyone thought it was fantastic that Harry had found someone who he loved and who also broke that barrier for the RF.

Britain *was* racist, but has not been racist for around 15 years. They aren't excited about foreigners who won't adapt to British ways, but that is not down to colour, no matter what the Guardian says. People object to the Poles speaking Polish in their enclaves as much as they object to the Muslims wearing un-British niqabs in their enclaves. It is culturism, not racism.

But I agree with you that they might object to Meghan being American, but mainly because she seems to be bringing Americanesque Kardashian values to the Royal Family, where those values are deeply out of place. Again, they don't care about her race. They care about her culture and her refusal to assimilate.

[quote] He thought that marrying a woke woman who was half-black would raise his status even further, but he forgot that in reality, Britain isn't a racist country. They don't care what colour she is.

Yes, English people are classy and elegant. They are not racist like Americans. They also speak with a sophisticated European accent and drink tea. If England could take over other countries, maybe they could teach us all how to comport ourselves with dignity and non-racist grace.

r74, Britons speak in a variety of BRITISH accents. To be British is the antithesis of being European. European refers to those who live on the continent of Europe. That continent encompasses a variety of different countries, each of which speaks a different language. There is no such thing as "a European accent".

If someone said “European accent” isn’t assume it was something like German, Belgian, French, etc. Anything not English.

Of course the British are not racist.

r75 and r76: I was being sarcastic in about five different ways.

r74 r78 Sarcasm only lands if there is some truth to it. Not if the speaker is malinformed.

I disagree with some of the posters above. The pink Gucci gown is gorgeous and looks fabulous on Kate.

R72 - What absolute shite. Britain is one of the most tolerant, welcoming countries in existence. Virtually the whole of the Western world has a long history of racism so that’s hardly an indictment. We are extremely multicultural and proud of it.

I am British and a fairly standard one - and I can honestly say that I don’t know one single person who cares a damn that Markle is a bi-racial, divorced, American actress. In terms of making the RF more interesting, all of those things are a positive plus.

People dislike her because she comes across as a pretentious, posturing fake who has married Harry for worldwide fame and an enormous clothing allowance.

We may be ambivalent about our royal family, but we won’t stand for it being used to advance someone else’s agenda in that way. And we expect the Queen to be respected because she’s our head of state and, as sovereign, the literal living embodiment of our nation.

Everytime Markle is seen in public she is there to represent the Queen, but she’s too fucking arrogant to understand that. She thinks she’s a worldwide superstar just because she’s special - and watching that is intolerable.

The ONLY people who ever, ever mention Markle’s skin colour are those who are desperate to to call others racist.....either because they’re insane sugars or virtue-signallers wanting to prove their own saintly characters. Nobody else cares.

Brexit, incidentally, didn’t happen because of racism...it happened because of the unjustified and unwarranted accusation of it.

Of course there are some racists about - there always are in human societies. But the notion the British people have racism sewn into our national identity is offensive bullshit. We are one of the least racist nations ever.

There are two layers of sarcasm there: responding to the expressed notion that "Britain isn't racist" and subtext, which runs through all these threads, that Americans know nothing about Europe or Britain.

Of course Americans aren’t all obsese warthogs stuffing burgers into their mouths all day long.

Of course Americans aren’t all arrogant, ignorant, sexist narcissists with stupid hair and fake teeth.

Well said, r81

Of course Americans aren’t all Bible-thumping cretins who think baby Jesus played with real dinosaurs.

R81 Survey says nativism was a major factor in Brexit. Brits (and others) may want to believe their racism and intolerance are in the past, but that isn't supported by the evidence.

BTW, I fully expect the "that survey is wrong, skewed and fake news" squad to pipe up. For the record, Dornsife was the only supposedly "leftist" poll that was predicting a Trump win in 2016. It has a history of following the data more than the ideology.

R74's sarcasm landed immediately for the rest of us, R79. This is Datalounge, not Mumsnet.

Britain is the America of Europe.

Everybody feeling better now?

R74 was an obvious caricature. The sarcasm was funny and not nearly as biting as many I've seen on DL.

R74 has stated her boundaries

R71 Haz is not allowed to drink or smoke, did you know? Bean is abstaining for the children, so Haz must as well.

It is always creepy as fuck when husbands “abstain” along with pregnant wives.

Less creepy if it’s because husband wants to get fit (the better to stay up all night with new baby.)

But when wife “decrees” that husband must abstain from drinking during pregnancy... trouble ahead.

The articles from a few years ago support that the public are equal opportunity haters as far as the BRF is concerned and this Meghan hate is par for the course, not a special new phenomenon.

The surrogacy/fake pregnancy link has multiple comments from years past saying Kate faked her pregnancy. Lots of hate against her family too.

Kate and her family had the dating years to develop a thick skin - or at the very least realize it’s more critique than adoration.

Meghan’s quick courtship didn’t adequately prepare her for all the animosity.

I think the US aspect also clouded her perception of how it’d be. In the US everything is about race- even things that really aren’t are. Being publicly known as racist is pretty much the worse thing that can be leveraged at someone. The average publication in the US, at least the ones MM would want to be in, would never publish anything that could be accused of being rooted in racism. When the negative UK press started, many of the US articles immediately started responding with the “it’s only because of her race” articles. In the US, that’s enough to get people to shut the hell up for fear of boycot, financial loss.

More troubling, R93, is what appears to be Sparkle isolating Harry from old friends (not invited to the wedding bash, for example) and causing discord between Harry and his brother.

Abusive spouses like to isolate their other half to make it "us against the world" until the abused one finds themselves alone. Cut off from family and friends - sound familiar?

R87 Nativism is not racism. The amount of immigration the UK has seen over the past few years has been enormous & infrastructure and services have been hugely affected. People wanted a say on that one issue & were called “racist”. It wasn’t about race or nationality it was about numbers.

If I want to visit the US, I need a visa. Why? If I want to move there to work I need a green card. Why? Because you’re all racist bigots who want to keep America American? Or Is there a more sensible, pragmatic reason than that?

Wanting some say on how many people come to live on our small island because in places it’s impossible to get a doctor’s appointment for six weeks now is a million miles from “Yuck. We don’t want a bit of extra melanin in our precious royal family, thanks” - and only the pig-ignorant would suggest it isn’t.

R94 That’s not altogether true. Kate was subject to the usual sneers and remarks that members of the royal family have to put up with - but she never faced the level of personal hatred that Meghan is getting.

This is more on a level of the Camilla hatred.

I thiink people assume that because Kate was criticised it’s all the same old same old. But the tenor of the comments is very, very different & I genuinely don’t think Meghan can come back from that.

She’s still riding a “let’s give her a chance” wave with the majority of the public, who largely don’t give a fuck one way or the other - but she’s one mistake away from losing even that.

I don’t personally know a single soul who thinks she married for love. Not one. Not even people who think she’s OK actually believe that. And that is a serious, possibly insurmountable, problem going forward.

R70, I agree. It’s not like she’s done anything for civil rights but if you listen to Twitter, she’s Angela bloody Davis.

I think Meghan looks like Punky Brewster

Okay, R57, thanks for that info.

I guess it’s also because she’s so damn skinny.

She looks like she swallowed a pea!! 😛

I'm not seeing it at all, R99. Do you mean because of the brown hair and freckles?

MM can't do much about her family but what I don't get about her is that clearly she is aware of the recurring specific criticisms leveled at her in the media, and she does nothing to change.

Yes r102 it’s like starting a new job and your manager pulls you aside the first week and says, “We are so happy to have you. You’re going to be great. Just so you know the CEO hates polos. It may seem old fashioned, but it’s a big thing for him so it’s important you wear a dress shirt if you want to make a good impression.” — and then you keep coming to work every day in khakis and a golf polo and can’t understand why you’re not progressing on the career path or why the CEO gives you that look in the monthly meeting.

But, R103, I LIKE POLOS.

And I WILL WEAR POLOS.

I KNOW BEST.

I AM MEEEE!!

R56, Think about this, then consider Harry. I'm snipping this from another thread. But what a life he's been sentenced to. (Yes,I know that Britain and the US are different).

[quote]MM can't do much about her family but what I don't get about her is that clearly she is aware of the recurring specific criticisms leveled at her in the media, and she does nothing to change.

Maybe, she does nothing to change, because she did nothing wrong, other than rubbed the wrong person the wrong way. It's obvious someone is out to get her in the media.

[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.]

He needs to moisturize but otherwise, he looks like he normally does.

Prince Harry is in his element when he’s with the boys without his wife

Isn't any man?

[quote]Maybe, she does nothing to change, because she did nothing wrong, other than rubbed [bold]the wrong person[/bold] the wrong way. It's obvious [bold]someone[/bold] is out to get her in the media.

R106, I'm sure she likes to imagine herself as the victim of a lone, shadowy enemy, but the prosaic truth is that Markle's shallowness, pretentiousness, and greed have been apparent since even before the engagement, and she has been judged accordingly. British and American, rich and poor, liberal and conservative: we are united in our dislike of her.

Thank you, R111.

[quote]I'm sure she likes to imagine herself as the victim of a lone, shadowy enemy, but the prosaic truth is that Markle's shallowness, pretentiousness, and greed have been apparent since even before the engagement, and she has been judged accordingly.

Okay, so it is HAS BEEN MADE APPARENT that she is all things evil just because trolls say so, got it.

Don't be obtuse, R113. Evil, no. Widely unappealing, yes.

It's not rocket science. All she had to do is watch what Kate and Sophie do and wear, and do and wear the same. And there are plenty of advisers available as well.

I really do not see the sexual chemistry between PH and MM. With that said, very Earlier in Will and Kate relationship I could see the chemistry. Its still there sort of..like give me a quick.blow.job kind of way. Not with the Sucksex duo.

There never was sexual chemistry between PH and MM . Never was never will be . A contract like I always said .

[quote]I don’t personally know a single soul who thinks she married for love. Not one. Not even people who think she’s OK actually believe that. And that is a serious, possibly insurmountable, problem going forward.

Disagree. Even if people do believe it she's evolved into a different perception now because she's doing her work. She doesn't appear to be flaunting and she acts and dresses consistent with what most people want and or expect from someone in her role. There is a huge distinction between Kate and Meagain: Kate has grasped when she shows up to do an engagement, even a glam one, it's not about her, whereas you watch Meagain and its all about her... the engagement is simply a backdrop for her to hold hands, rub her belly, wear her expensive clothes badly and mug for the camera.

Bullshit R94. I know people in Britain and they say NO ONE likes Meghan whatsoever and want her sent packing. They’re decidedly (and rightfully) Team English Rose and support Kate fully. Meghan has no one on her side, not even her husband. She has Oprah and George Clooney, for the good that does. The frostiness from the family will finally make her realize nobody loves her, nobody wants her, and she’s be best to just end the charade and go home. No one will even remember her name.

Even if The Queen makes a personal appearance with Meghan, and survives long enough to even give Meghan her personal family order (never!) I will NEVER believe that these are anything but PR acts and that The Queen does, in fact, hate Meghan as much as everyone else in the family. You know, Princess Michael is not a stupid woman, she saw what was coming. Wearing the Moor brooch was her little way of saying I see you you are you little grifter. The family never punished her for doing so. That speaks VOLUMES how much they hate the mulattress from the US.

I can’t quite believe they are married. They barely know each other. Life just seems to happen to Harry. He’s so adrift, with little education and no career.

Seems royals might be happier if required to have professional careers. Give their lives some focus.

R120 She's a very respectable and higly educated,intelligent woman but didn't she also name her dogs Venus&Serena?I do think she's a tad racist.She's harmless though.

Princess Michael has a MANY centuries of family lineage going back to the princely houses of The Holy Roman Empire. Her pedigree is impeccable.

If R120 wasn't such an obvious racist I'd take that rubbish apart. And I think Meagain is at very best hopelessly unsuited to her role.

R81 - Well said.

No one I know gives a tinker's curse about Meghan Markle's skin shade. And Britons don't get out of bed every morning thinking about the royals, contrary to what the tabloids would have you think.

But she has come across as unbearably pretentious, interested in being a global trendsetter and using her marriage as the platform for that, oblivious to the needs of the institution that has given her the only thing she's ever really wanted.

Getting a "friend" to drop the Archbishop of Canterbury's name in a PEOPLE Magazine article??!!! And talk about her "close relationship with God"?! Getting her mundane little private tea photographed and put on Instagram to send her pals at Soho Farmhouse a little pottery sale business??!!

And Britons are called racist for thinking her a self-promoting shallow opportunist who just doesn't get that this isn't Hollywood?!

R118 Forgive me if I’m being dim, but I’ve read your post three times & I am not sure what you’re disagreeing with me about.

My experience is that no one I know (as a fairly standard, middle-England type Brit) thinks Meghan married Harry because she loved him. Even people who thinks she’s OK will say stuff like, “She wouldn’t have gone anywhere near him if he wasn’t a prince”. And that’s always been the prevailing thought, even before the wedding.

For some people, active dislike for her as grown because of all the reasons you’ve given but even the;”Who cares? She seems OK” people are still fairly cynical regarding her motives. And that, imo, is a far bigger problem than the Daily Mail commentators who despise her because it won’t take very much to tip over from “Meh” into “Bitch”.

I don’t, of course, know everyone in the UK so my data is limited, but that’s my take on things.

I agree re: Kate. She’s doesn’t give the impression that she’s an ego-maniac there for the photo ops. She’s never lost her inherent reticence & slight shyness and I hope she never does.

Meghan will never get it right because narcissism is what drives her every thought. There probably isn’t a non-narcissistic Meghan so we’ll never see her being anything other than self-aware, self-aggrandising, self-obsessed show off.

R124 - I tend to agree with you - there are some racist undertones to that post, and Meghan Markle, in her obliviousness to the danger of assuming you can be yourself on your own terms in this institution is unsuited to her role. For that matter, I think Harry is unsuited to his and both of them would have been much happier taking the money from his Da and going back to America.

But I have to agree with R120 that the Queen's gestures where Meghan is concerned are at this point PR only, and that the Queen, like everyone else in the family, got Meghan's number very quickly and is trying to keep a public lid on private personal dislike.

[quote]I'm sure she likes to imagine herself as the victim of a lone, shadowy enemy, but the prosaic truth is that Markle's shallowness, pretentiousness, and greed have been apparent since even before the engagement

To R111's point, the royal victimhood has been good for business but maybe it's time to "reign" it in...

The Queen looks great in blue!

Harry in Norway with the troops.

Seeing a double Queen.

Harry has grown old all of a sudden.

William visited a couple of charities today.

If this story is true, we know why she married Harry. Meghan supposedly has a skincare line coming out and she forgot to tell her husband or his family. Using her fame as a royal family member to sell her product is one of the biggest NO-NO's.

The Queen and some of her family on the Royal Yacht Britannia. Notice the beard on Andrew who is holding Zara's hand.

Meghan will have a flower named after her. This will do wonders for her ego. Oh wait, like her head isn't swollen enough.

Stoical silence and restraint should have been Meghan's response to the criticism. Is Meghan harassed like Diana? There's no comparison say the experts and the press.

[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.]

Perhaps Meghan would care for a Diana, Princess of Wales maternity dress.

R140 - that was the style in the 1980's.

R132 I don't think redheads tend to age very well in general, one of my best friends who has red hair, as does her whole family, even admits this. Their skin get more sun damage than other colorings. But Harry became dour and old-looking in such a short period of time, that's no surprise considering who his wife is.

She sucked the life right out of him. His eyes seem dead, too.

So many rumors, let me get this right, so Meghan had a skincare line and RF found out about this in November and that's when they threw shade at her? Better late than never I guess.

That illustration at R128 is priceless.

She Hoovered the hair right off of his head, along with sucking the life out of him.

R145 , Thank-yew!

You see what I must put up as the star of yet another dreadful family!

R135 Andrew was hot as FUCK there.

R134 - I hope the Royal Family gives Mega an ultimatum: you're either with the family (no skincare line) or you want to make money (get yourself a good divorce lawyer because you're outta The Firm). If this story is true, it would just confirm what most of us has been saying about this bitch. If MEagain thinks she's getting grief now wait 'til this shit hits the fan!

How can that skincare story possibly be true?

Is Blind Gossip considered fairly trustworthy?

[quote]These two rich and famous female celebrities are related by marriage. There’s been some tension between the two, and suggestions to resolve it have only made things worse. The newest suggestion? That one should take the lead in throwing a baby shower for the other! That “suggestion” is coming from other members of the family. It’s only caused more problems because the two are not really friends. If [the non-pregnant one] acquiesces, it will look phony and staged, and if she refuses, she looks petty and cold. In other words, the non-pregnant one will come out looking either phony or mean no matter what she does. That can’t be helping the situation!

The "other members of the family" would be Haz (at the instigation of Bean) and probably his idiot father period. If Charles does feel so strongly about it then he can ask Camilla to throw it--not that she fucking likely ever would. Besides, "showers" are just not a done thing among the blue bloods. It is considered vulgar and undignified to make a show of a gift grab when one is in such a privileged and wealthy position, not to mention the unseemliness of such fuss. But Sparkless can't help herself. She probably spends hours green with envy stalking L.A. celeb baby showers on social media.

I hope Kate doesn't give in.

Because Kate would be married to William if he wasn't going to be king??? Yeah

Would no one tell Sparkle that showers are considered tacky? Surely SOMEONE would be willing to clue her in. Camilla doesn’t seem shy.

The real question is how would Sparkle respond? Just not care?

Yeah he was such hard work to look at r153....

i'm tardy to the party but may I ask what does Haz and Bean mean? Thanks

R155 God he was beautiful. What a damn shame!

I don’t give much credence to Blind Gossip, generally. Seems to me they go through headlines and come up with bland enough items that might be true. I much prefer CDAN - although I don’t think you can rely on any of them that much.

Baby showers are considered really tacky in the UK....and I find it impossible to believe that any member of the RF would be encouraging Kate to throw one.

Blind items these days are usually (but not always) stuff that's already been reported and SLIGHTLY vagued up.

For R156

Haz is one of the nicknames used here for Harry. Dim is another. There are others as well.

Bean was the nickname Meghan Markle's father used to call her. Sometimes it is used here. Other nicknames for MM are Sparkle, MeMe, MeAgain, etc, etc, etc.

When they were dating MEghan and her friends gave Harry the nickname Hazza, or Haz for short. He was said not to particularly care for it but he tolerated the name.

Bean was the nickname given to her by her father, along with Buckaroo. We know this from her sundry social media posts and how she signed off when she wrote her dad sentiments.

Hence the portmanteau "HazBean." It doesn't hurt that it can also be a perjorative.

Haz is the pet name Megz gave Harry.

Thank you R160 R161 R162

R139 I love some of the comments on that article.

It really is a shame about Will's hair. He would be achingly gorgeous if he had a full head of luscious locks.

He had his moment in the sun R165

“Hair? What do I need hair for? I’m literally going to be wearing a solid gold crown someday!”

^ Peince Edward was damned handsome when he was early 20s but they all just hit the wall so hard. William still handsome but yes, w full head of hair he would be stunning still I think.

R167. You just made me realize that all our lives we have only seen a Queen wearing a crown. I wonder what the male/king crowns look like.

Meghan did to Harry what Angelina did to Brad, lookswise and more. Succubi for sure.

Speaking of crowns. Do you know what kind of crown the wife of a prince gets to wear at a coronation? GOLD PLATED.

Megs will be basicallu wearing junk jewelry while Catherine wears some of the world’s largest diamonds in her platinum crown.

It’s the same crown r169. They don’t make a new one for each monarch.

They do alter them for fit though. The Queen has the crown made lower because it was too high.

The skincare line rumour has been around for almost two years, no sign of it.

Baby showers are an American thing, not a UK thing and are considered gauche and greedy here.

Blind Gossip doesn't know that or it wouldn't have made up such an absurd story.

Neither story has legs.

[quote]It’s the same crown [R169]. They don’t make a new one for each monarch.

That's not entirely true. Sometimes they do, especially for particular events or for particular royals. When Charles was invested as Prince of Wales, a new crown was made for him (very ugly, btw. Looks like '60s science fiction.) There are several crowns among the Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom.

By the way, Elizabeth can no longer wear the Monarch's Imperial State Crown. It's simply too heavy for her now. At the last formal opening of Parliament in 2017, it was borne on a pillow in front of her as she and Philip entered and during the ceremony it sat on a chair beside her.

Maybe she might wear it again, I think that Parliament session had a quickie opening for whatever reason. They didn’t have the time planning maybe. But at 5 kilos I’m sure it’s a hassle to wear that thing. In the coronation documentary she said I the interview that if you don’t keep your head straight your neck will snap off!

She's not going to wear it again. She physically can't. And that opening of Parliament wasn't a quickie, it was a formal state occasion. They don't do that every year. They didn't do it last year, for example.

Jesus, Harry looks so much livelier and happier up north with the boys than he EVER does out with Sparkle these days.

R175 Charles’ PoW crown is not the same thing as the sovereign symbol. Yes there are several crowns used for different occasions but the coronation crown is the St. Edward’s Crown which is the image used on coats of arms, monograms etc. This is the crown that George VI wore.

Did Markle really get ejected from Wimbledon? What's the story there?

R180 Of course she didn’t. This is one of those ridiculous stories put out by people like Skippy, who I can only assume at this stage is mentally ill.

She didn’t get ejected from Wimbledon, or the polo, or Kensington Palace. She really is pregnant and they really are married.

It's a UK/Commonwealth way of nicknaming people. Murray - Muzza, Jerry - Jezza, Harry - Hazza, etc. I don't know if Harry has been called Hazza by his army mates, but it's not unlikely. Bean has already been explained. HazBean - HasBeen - so over.

There is a photo of a white girl asking to see Markle's credentials while they are seated in a VIP area. Even the crowd looks embarrassed for Markle. She looks pissed.

I doubt PW would be gorgeous with a full head of hair. He is a pleasant and friendly looking chap, but his nose has gotten so big and his lower face so full that he cannot be called handsome. The yellow horse teeth could benefit from whitening however.

I don't think this is the same crown. But HM is very comfortable with the Crown. She treats it very informally. Most people would be hugely intimidated.

R183 No, there isn’t. There’s a photo of someone talking to her...that’s it.

I am embarrassed for people who buy into this shit, I really am.

Who Meghan Markle has revealed herself to be is bad enough without all of this childish, conspiracy theory nonsense. Grow up.

Meghan Markle's bizarre, over the top handwriting deserves its own thread. WTF is going on there? It looks like a script font with weird dramatic flourishes.

Yes, the handwriting convinced me she’s not just immature— she’s full on cray.

Any bets on how this will play out? Time frame? Will MM just leave? Will she and PH go and live in the US? Will she settle into her role and fade into the background? One thing that will not happen - the current situation will not be allowed to carry on.

There is a whole set of photos of Sparkle from Wimbledon in 2016. (Search for "images Markle Wimbledon 2016".)

She was there wearing a V neck black dress for a photo shoot and there are pictures of her wearing a white lanyard with very large credentials. There are also photos of her taken at the shoot.

Other photos of seated guest Anna Wintour show her (AW) also wearing a lanyard, but a green one and much smaller credentials. Still other guests have lanyards of different colors.

Still other photos show Sparkle seated among the other guests but she has removed the white lanyard and her credentials are not seen.

Sorry, I can't find the picture of a woman leaning in talking to Sparkle. As I recall, Sparkle appeared to be looking in her bag (for her credentials) and people seated around her have turned and are watching. Perhaps someone else can find that picture.

R190 And? Different coloured lanyards then Markle looking in her bag = she was thrown out of Wimbledon?

Ever been to Wimbledon? I have. You don’t get to even sit in those seats without the right ticket. And Markle was there as a guest of Ralph Lauren, by the way. Why would she need to be sneaking into a box she wasn’t welcome in?

Royal followers have a reputation of being sad, desperate morons divorced from reality - and it’s because of people like you. Grow a few brain cells - please.

And, for the record:

NYCRealRoyal - she of the poor spelling and absent grammar - was not a PR professional hired by Prince Charles to blacken the name of Meghan Markle.

Skippy and Felix are so obviously deranged no genuine insider would ever reduce themselves to engage with them.

JerseyDeanne is a a fat, unemployed loser living in a Florida trailer park with a toothless husband - pretty much the last person Prince Harry would send secret messages to regarding his private life.

AnonymousHousePlantFan js an expert Googler but precisely nothing else. She knows nothing whatsoever about how the royal family and the British press actually works. The misinformation she’s put out there is immense, even if it isn’t quite as tinhat as the other morons.

That you have clearly bought into all of their incoherent, crazy, unevidenced bullshit doesn’t say much for your thinking capacity.

Just stop. Some of us have sensible reasons for disliking Markle yet we’re all being lumped in the same wagon as you turds.

Markle is exactly what she seems to be - a vain, plastic-faced, self-promoting liar desperate for the attention she didn’t get from Mummy & Daddy growing up. Prince Harry was love bombed by a narcissist who said all the right things when her mouth wasn’t full of his dick and he believed every word. He isn’t the first dimwitted man to fall for that shit and he won’t be the last.

That’s all there is to this, so stop embarrassing yourself and stop infecting DL with this crap because this is one of the very few places left where you can have a sensible conversation & gossip.

R174 the baby shower story was reported last year as a kite flown by someone. It came to nothing so far because it is not a British custom as yet.

Marry me R191

For R8:

Not in love with Kate's dusty rose number. It would have been so much better without the bizarre, unnecessary crisscross over the chest. Her flirty, swingy little miniskirt suit was fresh and delightful.

R194, I loved that article.

[quote]...William mentioned problems arising from how “long and thick” Kate’s hair is.

Let me play him a song on my tiny violin!

Seriously, Kate's hair is ravishing, and you know her husband loves it. People used to poke fun at her carefully set sausage curls, but I really think it took her some time to figure out how to wear her hair down, in a way that made her look like herself, while also looking sleek and neat for her highly-scrutinized public appearances. In its natural state, Kate's hair is big, wild, and quite sexy.

When my grandmother found out that my grandfather had a secret mistress, she had her long flowing hair cut off short. He had loved running his face through her long, full, flowing locks.

Family secret I wasn't supposed to know about. Years later it was explained to me why they had separate bedrooms. But I loved his mistress, "Aunt Muriel." She was sharp and cool for an old lady.

Grandma was otherwise a wonderful woman and I still love her memory deeply. Pop was a brilliant and loving man -- too loving I guess, Grandma never forgave him -- who collected guns and swords but raised orchids in his greenhouse. He delivered over 3,000 babies over the course of his career.

Roundabout way of saying you never know the full story of what's going on behind the scenes. Or I'm still trying to process my family history.

Whatever.

Kate's got hair that frizzes up in humidity. People have said she wears extensions. Way better than MM's hair, no matter what.

You could dip Kate's fascinator in cow shit, set it on fire, then put it back on her head and her hair would STILL look better than the other bitch's.

How scandalous would it be if Wills and Kate divorced? If they no longer wanted to be together, are they more stuck than Charles and Di considering all the political unrest and monarchy weirdness playing out in public theae days? Do you think they would just live separately and pretend ? How would we know if trouble is at the door in the marriage of W &K?

[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.]

R200, they both strike me as people of duty, above all. I don't think they would consider divorce to be an option. Rather, they would work toward a peaceful private arrangement, and continue on as supportive public partners.

Having said that, not only do I think they genuinely love each other, I also think they're well-matched. The latter starts to matter more and more as the years pass, and youthful sexual excitement gives way to a deeper bond. With their shared values and goals, and their compatible personalities, I think they're going to have a long and happy marriage.

Do you think William has had extramarital flings or has had a mistress?

I've wondered about that, too, R203. I've decided that no, he hasn't fucked around behind Kate's back YET. He honestly doesn't seem the type, which may be just about the frau-iest thing I've ever said.

Wasnt William photographed at some party a couple of years ago with his hand on some blondes ass?

I wonder how Kate feels first fucking a hot William and now to lay down with this bloodhound jowl horseteeth crerin he turned out to be. On the other hand, she hasnt aged bad . She was pretty/cute in her day. BUT she does look like she has facial Bells Palsy in some pictures. Not as symmetrical anymore.

R206 *cretin

Jesus Christ, R206. They both look pretty damned great to me.

All about the angles R208

From GoFugYourself (she's commenting on his outfit in R208's picture):

I wish Wills would wear either a vest or a cummerbund with this tux because he always looks slightly half-assed in it. Like...not totally half-assed, but neither does he look fully-assed. He's quarter-assed.

Hey guys, lets bring this conversation back to ME, Shannon Watts! I mean MM..get so confused...all these dead and alive narcs..

R206 you’ve never had a long relationship. The guy who gives you butterflies in your stomach when you’re 25 is not going to look the same when he’s 45 but he does know every little thing about you, makes you laugh, makes you breakfast in bed and is still giving you butterflies 20 years on.

At least that’s my experience. And I sure as hell don’t look the same either.

R206 She's still pretty/cute,in fact simply gorgeous.You don't stop looking pretty just because you're not 26 anymore.She was a girl then,she's a woman now.IMO she looks much better than she did when she was 21-22.

[quote]but he does know every little thing about you, makes you laugh, makes you breakfast in bed and is still giving you butterflies 20 years on.

I'd love to know what sort of stuff Wills and Kate are into when it comes to what's going on in their bedroom ... I don't give a fuck about making each other breakfast in bed, I want to know the real deal.

At least in terms of procreation, whatever they love to do in bed, they've proven to do it pretty successfully.

A nice article about the Duke of Edinburgh... some real insights. And in the Telegraph, so probably credibly sourced. An obvious PR effort by the Palace but not spin so much as context, at least in my view.

*I don't give a fuck about THEM making each other breakfast in bed

Unfortunately William inherited the Windsor teeth and the Spenser nose. Add in a balding head and you have a recipe for ugly.

I wonder if tbeir sex life is vanilla or kinky? I can see Kate spicing it up to keep his interests.

Granted, William could do something about those teeth. They don't need to be blinding white, a bit of whitening would do. Kate got herself new gnashers prior to the wedding.

However, when it comes to him getting bald, William couldn't do much about it. First of all, it's a genetic thing. To make things worse, he couldn't use some hair restoring stuff as it tends to mess up one's ability to father a child. And let's not forget who William is: He is the heir to the throne and expected to make sure there will be another heir (and at least one spare) in the Windsors' main bloodline - you know, the relevant one, the one securing the dynastical wellbeing which is accounted for by its continuance, that is.

I thought she was known to go to Eyes Wide Shut type parties prior to marriage. Doubt it is always vanilla.

[quote] Royal followers have a reputation of being sad, desperate morons divorced from reality - and it’s because of people like you. Grow a few brain cells - please.

If royal followers are sad and desperate, what does that make royal follower-follower r191? The irony is overpowering.

R191 - I agree. As I've said before, Skippy and Felix and JerseyJeanne are the clones of the Cumber Crazies still insisiting the Cumberbatches aren't married, their children are secretly adopted or photoshop creations, and the Missus is a former people trafficker - in fact, I'm convinced that they actually may be a couple of the most notorious of the Cumber Crazies, because it's the same m.o.: cute animal photos interspersed with patholocially outlandish conspiracy theories about the legality of their marriage, her fake pregnancy, her criminal past, etc., etc.

Poster upthread is also correct that there is quite enough about Meghan Markle within the realm of reality to question without bringing in the theories of the deranged.

She's a golddigger, an opportunitist, a narcissist, and in her refusal to take advice or reset her behaviour, totally unsuited to this position.

And, yes, she really is pregnant, they areally are married, she isn't launching a skincare line, and she isn't going anywhere any time soon. She'll walk when and if she feels she can do better, and not one moment earlier. And that time is far in the distance.

First, the kid, the move to her newly renovated 10-bedroom home with Windsor Castle half a mile away, then another kid . . .

And then we'll see.

R220

Please do tell!

I don't know why she dresses like shit. Obviously, she is merching her ass off so she can only wear what she gets. But her mentor/bff/stylist Jessica Mulroney also dresses like shit. Very very tacky. Meghan also seems stuck in the 1990s, which are making (another) comeback, so maybe her taste and trend will start to merge. Her taste is Real Housewife. She probably thinks this is classy. She loves hooker shoes. She loves ripped jeans with heals and a french tucked boyfriend shirt - that is SOOOOO classy. Throw on the straw fedora hat she wore incessantly on instagram and she thinks she's Princess Di on her days off.

It's easy to see her self-image when you read the stuff her "friends" (really her - meaning she told them what to say) said in People. She loves the impression of cozy consideration. A candle. A robe. Hand warmers. A mug. She's doing the sexy religious thing - she's graceful and close to God. She can't help having that sexiness. That's the main thing I see in her and Mulroney - I'm expensively dressed. I'm groomed. Each "piece" I'm wearing is respectable. But you see that sexiness, right?

She's not sure we do so she pushes it. No tights ever, greased up legs, hooker heels, pounded on bronzer. In fact that's the hallmark of a narc. They always push it. They don't feel what it is they're projecting, so they're not sure WE get it. They're always a bit OTT and extra when trying to make a point. You can see it in Miss Megs.

Just did a bunch of paragraphs on her in this post, but you know the one I really hate - Harry. He's skating because so many of his "fans" think she coerced the poor little boy into this thing. He's a dick. He's clearly a lazy dick, arrogant, entitled asshole. Worse than she is, because at least you see her coming.

She's not going to stay long. Once she has St Diana's grandkid, she ensures that the press will always be interested in her, no matter where she goes (kind of like Jackie O). Then she'll divorce Harry because a college-educated "artiste" must be bored silly by a lesser educated, less sophisticated, non-creative type man who's not really good-looking enough for her to overlook his shortcomings.

She'll go back to LA, push her way into charity events, have photo-ops of Diana's grandkid working in a soup kitchen, vacation with her new celeb friends from the marriage. And since she's always being papped at these events, she can keep merching.

R221 I don’t think you understand what “irony” actually means...and your reading comprehension skills could use some work.

I didn’t say royal followers ARE sad & desperate, now did I? I said they have that reputation.

Never mind .....you tried, eh?

You list several royal followers who you claim give all royal followers a bad name. You don't merely list them, you go into detail about their supposed failings. If you both follow the royals, and know enough about other royal followers to have such a strong opinion, then it stands to reason that you too might fall in the category of the sad and desperate from which you seek to distinguish yourself.

I am happy to explain sarcasm and irony to all who need it.

[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.]

Do Wills and Harry sleep in separate beds/bedrooms like the older generation of royals do? I mean, they obviously sleep in the same bed sometimes to get it on but most of the royals have separate bedrooms. I wonder about trivial things like this.

^ (I mean separate from their wives. Not the two brothers!)

Can exhibitionists be shy?

Sneaky pics of Kate in Kensington Gardens with Louis.

Video of Kate and Louis looking at the birds near Kensington Palace.

Princess Anne in a bow tie. Shame about that hair.

InTouch mag has a great headline: Meghan Kicked Out Of The Palace (correction: she currently lives in a cottage on the GROUNDS of a palace).

Favorite and More Accurate Headline: "She's A Fame Hungry Liar". Yep, they finally got something right.

R227 No, dear.

I said royal followers have a reputation & it’s because of people like....

At no point did I say that ALL royal followers are anything, merely that they have a certain reputation;- one which has arisen because of the batshit crazy theories put about by the Tumblr tossers.

No, you don’t know what irony means - either that or you don’t know how to use it correctly. You also seem to be struggling with the defintion of “reputation”.

Anyway, I shall leave it there. I know people like you...stung and embarrassed at being wrong without the integrity to admit it. So go bore someone else.

DL wont let me post links. The dressed down 2017 Parliament had nothing to do with The Queen advancing years. From The Telegraph:

Hannah Furness 27 APRIL 2017 • 5:53 PM The Queen will undertake a dressed-down State Opening of Parliament for the first time in more than 40 years, as ceremonial plans suffer major disruption because of the general election.

“The Queen will not wear her Imperial State Crown or robes for this year’s State Opening, with the annual service of the Order of the Garter also cancelled for the first time since 1984.

The changes to the Royal schedule, announced by Buckingham Palace today, will see the State Opening of Parliament take place on June 19, with the Order of the Garter service previously in the diary for the same day now cancelled.

Some observers were quick to note that the timing would allow the Queen to attend Royal Ascot, which runs from June 20th to 24th.

Sources said the 19th was the first suitable date after the election, with a quick turnaround of 11 days agreed to maintain continuity.

For only the second time in her reign, the Queen will wear “day dress” and a hat for the State Opening of Parliament, abandoning the traditional Robes of State.

She will travel in car rather than by carriage, with her heavy crown being carried by an officer of state along with the Sword of State and Cap of Maintenance, symbols of her power and authority.

The Duke of Edinburgh will accompany the Queen wearing a morning coat rather than full naval uniform.

The Queen's procession to the Chamber of the House of Lords, where she takes the throne and delivers her speech, will also be reduced, with no heralds present.

It is the first time since March 1974 that such a scaled-back ceremony has taken place, with the only other occasion following Labour leader Harold Wilson defeating Edward Heath in a snap election.

The changes, sources said, were down only to timing, with the Trooping of the Colour now falling on June 17 just two days before the State Opening of Parliament.

Both events usually feature a Sovereign's Escort from the Household Cavalry Regiment, with the Queen’s route flanked by hundreds of servicemen acting as street liners.

The proximity of the two major events would make the logistics of a normal State Opening too difficult, it is claimed, leaving too little time for rehearsal for an event of that scale.

The Order of the Garter annual service will be cancelled entirely; the third time it has happened in the Queen’s reign following a rail strike in 1955 and a 1984 date where there was no vacancy for a new knight to be appointed.

It is understood that postponing or rearranging the day was not considered possible, due to the number of dignitaries expected to attend.

The annual event staged at St George's Chapel at Windsor Castle usually attracts hundreds of well-wishers who gather to watch the colourful spectacle of Garter Knights processing to the service.

The announcement immediately led to speculation that the changes would suit the Queen, who at 91 would have to endure wearing the famously heavy 2.5lb crown.

Last year, the Queen used a House of Lords lift for the first time, avoiding 26 stairs, in what was seen by many as a concession to her age.

But Royal sources insisted this year’s decisions were merely down to logistics, with a return to business as usual planned for next year.

A spokesman for Buckingham Palace said: “To allow Her Majesty to attend in support of the parliamentary and constitutional process, The Queen's programme of engagements has been revised.

“As a result, the annual service for the Order of the Garter, which had been due to take place on 19th June, has been cancelled. Knights of the Garter and others due to attend have been informed.

“Additionally, owing to the revised calendar, the State Opening of Parliament will take place with reduced ceremonial elements.”“

[QUOTE] silly by a lesser educated, less sophisticated, non-creative type man who's not really good-looking enough for her to overlook his shortcomings.

Well there’s truth to this. None of the Windsor men are particularly intelligent or interesting. They’re good for money and position though, if one is willing to put up with their wonky yellow teeth, falling hair, and the smell of horse shit on their holey shoes.

R225 - You really think she's suddenly going to give up living a half mile from Windsor Castle after a three million quid reno on the backs of the UK taxpayers?

Not a chance. And anyway, she needs that second kid almost as badly as she needed the first one.

She has to build equity here before she leaves, and that's going to take at least five years.

The BRF stans are in love with what they THINK the family should be about...unlimited expense accounts to buy gowns, chauffeured limos, maids, nannies, elegant dinners with heads of state and eligible spouse material, cutting ribbons and what have you. The reality, clearly, is quite different. The press stalks them, they are restricted as to what they can say in the press. They’ve got rigid schedules and basically, their lives are not their own.

Wishful thinking.

R241 that picture was on the cover of the KKG magazine. The issue was about our sorority geeking out over the royal wedding.

R240 - Being interested in the BRF doesn't necessarily translate to a "stan" and for those who aren't quite stans but think the institution has a use, there is a middle ground here.

Trying to assert that we're living in Disneyland and are unaware they have to make a few accommodations to earn their astronomical perks is specious.

The art collections, the landholdings, the race horses, the cars, the 10-bedroom homes, the investment portfolios, the designer clothes, the jewels, the nannies, the chefs, the personal trainers . . .

The heart bleeds for their constrained circumstances.

R240 - I've been following the Royal Family since Princess Anne's wedding in 1973. I call myself a Royal Watcher because I'm too logical to be a Royal Stan. I can't relate to what you're saying here. The "reality" of the British Royal Family is ALL that you described in your post - the GOOD, the BAD and the UGLY.

The GOOD: money, fame, clothes, jewels, travel, meeting interesting people, pomp and circumstance etc...

The BAD: lack of privacy, lack of freedom, press intrusion, public scrutiny & criticism etc...

The UGLY: infidelity, personality flaws, pettiness and jealousy between family members, divorce, scandals etc..

Do you think people who follow the royals don't know these facts or are you just posting about the casual observers who believe in fairy tales and unicorns? Anyone with a brain cell should know that Royal life isn't all it's cracked up to be.

I wish Muriel would nuke these threads so all of you frau cunt stans would GTFO DL.

What I mean by "following" the Royal Family = keeping scrapbooks in youth, studying British history in school, reading biographies, newspapers and magazines for over 40 years. I like to think that I'm well informed about the Royal Family and judging by some posts I've read on DL, I am not alone. There are many knowledgeable people here and no matter how informed I am, there is always something new I learn from others. Learning is a life long pursuit.

I remember clearly right before The Royal Wedding (That's the Charles and Diana wedding) seeing Joan Collins on The Tonight Show.

For those too young to remember, the lead up to this wedding was huge excitement.

When asked how she viewed the proceedings, Joan said of the bride "I don't think she knows what she's getting into."

The host was shocked. (I'm not sure who it was that night. But I don't think it was Carson.)

It was the only remark I remember hearing or reading that perhaps most people were wearing rose colored glasses about the marriage. I was really surprised. That's why I remember it so clearly.

I don't think she will leave or come back to U.S. after the divorce. That's the point of the FrogCott exile, when the divorce happens and she refuses to budge (she is tungsten you know) at least she'll be out of the way and not underfoot at KP like Diana was. She'll actually have the best of the both worlds then, still living within they royal bubble with all its perks yet free to make tv appearances and rep and merch and give interviews and social media like a celeb.

R248

Shes got ot made in the shade

R247 - I remember that Joan Collins' quote too. Meanwhile, the delusional Archbishop was talking about "fairy tales" during the ceremony.

On that note R248, I wonder, accident aside, how long Diana would have remained at KP? AWKWARD.

The look between Claire Foy (who played The Queen in The Crown) and William at the Baftas was amusing.

R252 I went to a screening/Q&A of Claire's "Stand by your Broken Husband" movie and she's REALLY funny. I was surprised.

The Google difference between Kate vs. Meghan.

The person getting their knickers in a twist obviously doesn't understand what it means to be a member of the Royal Family. This individual thinks that royals should behave like a Hollywood celebrity and go after their enemies. Oh dear.

R250 - Robert Runcie, then Archbishop of Canterbury, was anything but delusional. He knew from his first meetings with the couple that they were badly mismatched, and that Diana was something of an "actress", and in his journals from the time expressed the hope that she would "grow into the role".

So, no, he wasn't delusional. But he'd hardly have been able to state that at the wedding, would he? I remember the speech - he used the line "this is the stuff of which fairy tales are made)" but he went on to try to point up the dangers of such a view.

For what it's worth, his son went on to become the author of the Grantchester novels on which the TV series was based.

Enquirer Headline is a Harry Confession To William: "It's Hell At Home! This was the Biggest Mistake of My Life".

Of course I don't believe it because I don't think Will and Harry are speaking to each other very much anymore.

R254 - You're right - the person writing this hasn't a clue.

And she evidently has forgotten that Meghan and Harry opened this PR war a year before they were formally engaged by threatening the British press with lawsuits based on completely unproven accusations, in a transparent move to cut off any negative press toward Meghan Markle, and to establish her as Harry's serious GF publicly, making it more difficult for him to end the relationship or for the royal family to refuse permission. It was Meghan's first play of the race card and, as with so many of her efforts to portray herself as an entitled victim, it backfired.

Odd how people like that and George Clooney forget who opened this press war.

I wonder who the baby's godparents will be. The logical choices would be Diana's siblings; this is their late sister's grandchild. Meghan only has one relative she gets along with. Will William and Kate appear in the christening photo?

The Sun's Arthur Edwards weighs in and offers his advice.

Meghan Markle, lighten up. You're not the new Princess Diana and it's time you and Prince Harry ended this phoney media war.

R256 - Well, certainly no one believes the Enquirer, but as with so much else about Meghan and Harry, its very appearance, as with the Daily Mail's "English Rose!" headline about Kate's recent gown," is an indication of which way the PR wind is blowing - it also indicates what a total and complete failure Meghan's new PR guru's little "fightback" article was.

No one in the UK gives a tinker's curse what George Clooney, Jessica Mulroney, a D-list Suits actor, or Serena Williams think.

Harry and Meghan have blown this so badly in one year that even those of us cynical about his choice of wife from the get-go are taken aback.

To do this badly, this soon, you're either trying or living on Jupiter.

I knew this was doomed when Meghan invited that fiery soulful down-home preacher to speak at her wedding. All that hootin and hollerin, and Oprah and Serena fannin theyselves in the gallery like they was in church in Mississippi. What an unprecedented fuck up.

Those pictures of Anne above in the bow tie and uniform look just like Cloris Leachman as Nurse Diesel. "No fruit cup for you"

R258 - William and Kate will be there if the Queen has to get them there on pain of beheading. Harry is William's brother and this is his first child. They will be there come hell or high water.

As to godparents, family members are rarely called upon. The Spencer cousins are of course a possibility given that Harry and Meghan want to play up the Diana angle as much as possible, but the Spencers didn't treat Diana that well and may not even be interested.

Look for the von Straubenzees, friends of Harry and William, Jessica Mulroney, and some obligatory high-profile celebrities like George and Amal Clooney. They'll also absolutely have to have at least on POC so I'm betting on Serena Williams.

The Queen will also attend. Any significant absence of HM, William, and Kate will be instantly construed as proof of the enmity and division Meghan brought into the family. They can't afford that optic any longer.

At this point I’m convinced even if QEII publicly embraced ME in public, gave her The Garter, and gave her important jewelry from Queen Mary, and even if the marriage survives 20 years and produces multiple children, that the whole thing is a sham and they hate ME. As said above, it’s all optics. It’s so obvious that she’s more despised even than The Duchess of Windsor. That’s a fact.

[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.]

Why do people forget that a Christening is a religious event and has religious significance.? In this case, an event held by the Church of England.

I would expect that people chosen as godparents are expected to be of the same religion as the one the baby is being Christened into.

Doubtful that either of the Clooneys qualify, among others.

[quote] It’s so obvious that she’s more despised even than The Duchess of Windsor. That’s a fact.

I've been on DL for so long that I can no longer tell if this is meant to be sarcasm

[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.]

Besides the Queen, who in the BRF do we think has the most reverence for the monarchy, like considers it something from God?

R262 “Gimme a cookie!” - Anne at tea

Have to laugh at the National Enquirer’s use of out-of-context cover photos. I love Meghan’s expression: “Yeah, and?”

[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.]

R264 - The Queen didn't have them up to Balmoral this summer and Meghan is a long way from doing or getting any of the things you suggest in your post, except multiple children. She hasn't behaved that well so far, so the not too veiled suggestion that everyone started out hating her is absurd. Posts like yours always omit the "mistakes" she's made all on her own.

The Duchess of Windsor had to leave Britain in the back seat covered with a rug. She didn't get an HRH, she didn't get a royal wedding with the Queen present, she wasn't welcomed into the family and given patronages, etc., etc.

Stop the crying bullshit. Meghan is reaping what Meghan has sowed by threatening the press through Harry, getting herself a Vanity Fair cover interview before the engagement was even announced, refusing to support British fashion, ad nauseam. Her latest is dropping Justin Welby's name through the mouth of a friend in a PEOPL Magazine article.

Meghan's earned her current press coverage.

Let me know when the Queen bestows the family orders, the Garter, et al., on the snotty L.A. grifter whose wailing to the skies about her horrible position comes just before she moves into a 10-bedroom home renovated on the backs of the British taxpayer.

I heard Meghan funds ISIS.

Enjoying the pictures of Diana's clothes at R268.

Markle is certainly not copying Diana's maternity style. I had forgotten how much of 80's fashion was homage to the Victorian era or in the US, the Prairie look, with all the ruffles and puffy sleeves, and billowy skirts.

Soho House is a money laundering front for Isis, so you are right R274. Meghan has contracts and contacts with very wealthy middle eastern royals, and she may go off on a yacht one day and never come back.

I agree R273. She’s not endearing herself to the family, the nation, that’s press, etc. She’s Wallis Windsor 2.0

[R241] Well that would be a nice hairstyle for Meghan at any rate. Kind of an early 60s Natalie Wood.

I wonder if attending an event such as that at the school makes Charles feel a little wistful. Such a cheerful setting is a must be such a contrast for someone who appeared to be such a lonely and forlorn little boy.

R272 - Charles probably sees Camilla's grandchildren far more than he sees William's kids. He's probably closer to them as a result. Since he has interactions with the grandchildren, he seems more relaxed around children in general.

I don't know if they sleep in the same bed as their wives but the two brothers slept together whenever they were both home from boarding school. Charles groused about this privately to friends but didn't intervene.

R281 - There were rumours aplenty that Camilla's grandchildren are also partly Charles's.

R274 - If they promised to get her a spot as a presenter at the Oscars, she probably would.

That is, if she enough money, which she doesn't. It's all Harry's and Charles's money, and not nearly enough of same as she would like.

R280 Doesn't Camilla only see her Grandchildren at her private home Ray Mill House (where she hides out most weekends), not sure Charles ever goes there?

R284 Chuck with one of Camilla's grandchildren

Perhaps for Charles, he knows that with children that little, he is just a man. They are not impressed with his title, rank, etc.

Wasn't there a story from Sophie about Louise only realizing that her grandmother was Queen because someone told her that when she started school?

So, with little kids, whatever interaction Charles has with kids is totally on him as a person. You can't fake it.

I think Charles was a better parent than he was given credit for, and that Diana wasn't as fabulous a parent as she was given credit for.

Diana was extraordinarily needy, emotionally, and leant on her sons as much as she did on her friends and lovers. William, particularly, was called upon for emotional support - a fabled story is of her sobbing in the bathroom at Kensington Palace and William stuffing tissues under the door for her.

No young child should have to do that - and yet, because she made such a public display of her touchy-feely tactile approach, who would criticise her?

Her sons' issues did not just stem from a marriage that didn't work.

[quote]I knew this was doomed when Meghan invited that fiery soulful down-home preacher to speak at her wedding.

Who she'd never met.

How did she find this preacher? Did she Google "prominent black Episcopalian clergy?" It sure sounds like something she'd do.

Funny, he was so OTT in his use of the word "love" which is likely the furthest thing from Meghan's mind.

I always thought that many posters here were a little paranoid about the number of fraus alleged to be here. Even I, however, am disturbed about R242, however.

R289 Yeah, Googling was sufficient. She was one of those “spiritual, earthy types.” She’s only now trying to play religious. Leading up to the wedding she wouldn’t have cared what the guy represented spiritually, it was about what he represented visually.

She wanted to reinforce the brand she’s crafting. She knows “non white girl breaking into racist BRF, a real black princess” is a huge part of her appeal in the US. Projecting their own experiences of racism, feeling the Barbie blonde was the only ideal, etc. is what endears her to many of her US fans - like Chrissy Tiegen’s statement she feels protective of MM even though they’ve never met.

The preacher went along with the angle that she was there to shake things up and make the monarchy current and relevant. Feminist changer of the world.

[quote] I always thought that many posters here were a little paranoid about the number of fraus alleged to be here.

There is no way that gay men are responsible for the obsessive, long posts about this woman. She's just not that interesting.

R292, I'm a gay guy, not a frau. I read these threads for news about the BRF, not the Sussexes. But these threads are clearly identified, and easily ignored.

At the time the time Diana died her sons were shifting from her "side" to Charles' "side" , although I think at that point they were compatible co-parents. It's just that Diana was stuck at KP, while Charles had acres upon acres of private land where his kids could hang out free from any intrusions. I also think her drama may have been wearing on them, although they seemed happy enough spending time on the first leg of her yacht vacation with Dodi.

I think William loves his mother, and her memory, and understands her, but also has a grasp of her issues and shortcomings. Harry may as well, but is more interested in exploiting being Diana's son for his own self aggrandizement.

The photo mentioned upthread of Meghan from Wimbledon in 2016, where she apparently horned into the wrong box.

R295 Yeah..as expected, doesn’t show (or even hint) that she’s being “thrown out of Wimbledon”. And nobody is staring at her “looking embarrassed”.

I swear these trolls are working overtime with their reaching.

I heard that she brought an Orange Julius into Wimbledon and spilled it in the stands. Someone complained and they asked her to leave for a few minutes so they could clean the area. She was offended and the next thing you know there are stories that she'd been ejected.

Give it a fucking rest, this is a gossip site. If people want to post bitchy shit about this grifter, they can. Do you really think that people come here for facts? No. They come here for "pointless bitchery." For fun. You seem to be waiting in the wings to jump on anyone who insults this woman. All the while pretending to hate her as much as the people you describe as pathetic and lonely. You write a fucking book about these so-called royal watchers then try to play it like you are so above them. Why is this story about getting kicked out of Wimbledon affecting you so much? Who gives a shit if it's true or not? I, for one, laughed my ass off at the thought of this phony attention whore being escorted off the premises. I couldn't care less if it's true because it doesn't directly affect me. I come here to laugh, not to be lectured by some nobody who thinks he/she is smarter than everyone on this thread. You're not. Constantly lecturing strangers to "grow up" and remarking on their brain cells/reading comprehension doesn't make you a clapback queen. It makes you sound deranged. Let people gossip and have a fucking laugh, will ya? Don't take it so seriously.

I'm not who you are referring to but I come here for facts or something close to it. I don't need fiction. I can watch better made up drama on TV.

I think with Wimbledon from what IIRC, someone posted a picture of her in a number of different seats in the royal box, which implied she hadn't actually got a ticket for said box. She was working for Ralph Lauren but had talked her way into the box.

I'm so digging the Orange Julius story. Lol!

How does a Z-list actress get a job repping for Ralph Lauren at Wimbledon? And what exactly was the job?

Not whoever triggered R299 but there's a reason some posters respond strongly crazy stories.

The trolls start with "Mega was thrown out of Wimbledon" and it seems innocuous. They often post as a question, recollection, or a stand alone tale they read (they never mention tumblr, which is the main source of the crazy). See R301. This invites the crazier frau who've been lurking and the thread then quickly slides down the rabbit hole into "Mega is a stalker with international backers who has incriminating stories on the BRF so Harry had to marry her to save his family. We must save the royal family by exposing her. God is with us as we fight the evil." Along the way there is pillow baby, drug dealing, cults and prostitution.

Personally I prefer my gossip to be logical and have a bit of credibility. There's a difference between pointless bitchery a la "Are Kate and Big Willie frisky in bed?" vs "We have proof of an international crime ring targeting the BRF and they chose Mega as their inside woman. Not to worry, anonymous sources on tumblr have given us the proof and we will take her down."

The tumblr frauen get very intense and they can't understand why everyone doesn't share their illogical view. Left to their own devises they start multiple threads and Muriel takes a hard line and shutters them. (Play a tiny violin for Dangling Tendrils.) This BRF thread has managed to survive partly by keeping the craziest stories in check. While R229 may enjoy it, some of the long time BRF posters would prefer not to entertain the trolls.

What is a Muriel?

I posted the photo at R295 because someone requested it. I had to locate it in one of the closed Dangling Tendrlis threads. I normally try to post a source or a link, but wasn't able to locate one. I just remember at the time, it was discussed here on DL. R301 is also trying to remember the story, which is pretty much what i remember. I have no idea what actually happened. But Anna Wintour loaned her her cardigan when it began to rain (in 2016) and in 2018, she and Kate attended Wimbledon together. So it doesn't seem like anything particularly nefarious took place.

We should start a petition at Change.org to warn Harry about the merching grifter cunt. He needs to know! Also he needs to know we've got his back.

Pussy moves mountains. Harry isn't going anywhere but down.

[quote]Harry isn't going anywhere but down.

A W&W and standing ovation from this DL lez, R308.

R299 I am smarter than anyone who laps up a story without caring whether it’s true or not. Considerably so. Now fuck off back to your own people & read up on blackmail, pillow babies and photoshopping. That’s clearly where your intellectual level is, you tedious ranting old cunt.

(Or reopen your Tumble and pretend and start your obsessive Googling again).

*Tumblr.

I don't have his back, R307. I did at one time, but no longer. He's repulsive to me now. And his wife is SUCH AN ASSHOLE.

Markle got the Vanity Fair cover even before the engagement was announced? What on earth possessed them to profile this Deal or No Deal briefcase girl?

When they were told “in confidence” she intended to marry the dimwit r313.

[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.]

You know, every time I start to feel sorry for this woman I have to tell myself that she created this shitstorm all by herself, and now she's getting exactly what she wanted: ATTENTION.

How did she create it?

R317 Sit down Laura Louise.

+r304. Word for word with you.

Gossip based upon credible info is which then sparks "pointless bitchery" is why I've always enjoyed DL Royals threads; really, all DL celebrity threads.

"The Duchess of Sussex was spotted on the grassy knoll" is a turn-off. It's also unnecessary. The gossip and speculation based upon what is actual requires no embroidery.

One can agree that the DoS is a scheming climber, whose missteps are entertaining and, God bless her for it. She's created suspense about how she will play her cards.

A healthy, bemused detachment from HATING her prevents the boring "she's carrying an alien baby" shit. Some filters are necessary.

Oh, and r310, you've invested a lot of hatred in the DoS and it's pushed your cheese way off the cracker.

Now, go ahead, name-call me. I've been flamed by the best and you don't come close to that level.

Ooops, my post at r319 should have been:

"Oh, and r299, you've invested a lot of hatred in the DoS and it's pushed your cheese way off the cracker."

[quote] Harry may as well, but is more interested in exploiting being Diana's son for his own self aggrandizement.

I think his wife is taking advantage of his vulnerability where Diana is concerned, not that he's exploiting it. I don't think he's smart enough to do that and I don't think he was mature enough when she died. He was only 12. A boy. I am sure he sees his mother as only to be admired, not used.

If it werent for Ms. ReMARKLEble, this thread would have died by part 12.

She is breathing new, albeit controversial, new life to this dreary, stogy (sic) family story. In that way.she is a Diana and that girl knows it and will use it.

Hey guys its meeee from the grave, hey girl, hey Meg! Keep calm and THRIVE on!

"In that way.she is a Diana"

She is a sub-standard Wallis Simpson married to an ever-more insignificant royal. When the Queen dies, Charles becomes King, William becomes the heir and William's family will become the centre of attention.

Like it or not, Catherine is the new "Diana" - Mother to the future King - and it's precisely because she isn't like poor Diana that she has that role today.

In 10 years time Meghan and Harry will be slipping into the relative insignificance that Prince Andrew and his (ex) wife, Sarah Ferguson, enjoy. Harry, like Andrew is almost certainly happy to benefit from such relative anonymity. Meghan, like Sarah, craves the attention and will do everything she can to keep it. With one difference: Meghan is smarter than the vapid fool that is Sarah Ferguson.

Harry will never be as insignificant as his uncles..why..because he is Diana's son. A dead iconic heroine forever young and beautiful in the minds of the British. Edward and Andrew parents did not die horrifically or young or tragic. They are not so important..Harry by virtue of Diana will always be elevated moreso than a typical 6th in line. People are invested in him emotionally. Part of the reason why MM is so unliked.

R325 "Harry will never be as insignificant as his uncles..why..because he is Diana's son. "

In America (and amongst some Brits) that will be true for the next little while.

But by the time he's 60 I'm afraid he'll be utterly insignficant and all those who wailed over the death of Diana will be dribbling into their soup.

By the time he's 60 I'd hope he would have more important things to focus 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.]

She is not a new Walils. She has neither the style nor poses a significant enough threat.

She, is however, the next Princess Michael.

R315 - No kidding. And farther down the DM's page is a prominent article screaming that Harry ran up a 30,000 bill at that notorious Vegas place where he was photographed naked playing strip poker, but owner Steve Wynnn "wiped the slate clean", with a photo of Harry in the back seat of a car looking like he's nodding out.

Between the slutty photos of the now Duchess of Sussex in her hitherto unknown 2011 acting job (which was a reboot of the original. not the one that won some Indie awards) and the article about Harry, the DM makes it clear that they aren't going to let up.

They've kept their hands off Harry, for the most part and targeted Meghan, so the resurrection of the Vegas episode and the images of spoilt privilege getting away with it, together with the unseemly images of Meghan, don't bode well.

And, yet again, the coverage does wonders for the Cambridges.

*£30,000 not $30,000

R330

In the stills, she really is not all that attractive.

Anyone think the Queen is privately very angry with Theresa May and her government for the crisis they have lead them into on the brink of national calamity of crashing out of the EU without a deal? The UK Parliament has never been so dysfunctional and so much a laughing stock.

No, R333.

[quote] The role could show the Duchess pregnant as her character Rachel Zane, in a two minute clip, shot in the UK.

[quote] A NBC source told the Daily Star: 'We could be done in half a day or less.

[quote] 'No final figure has yet been arrived at but negotiations are likely to be opened in the very near future.

So basically NBC hasn't opened negotiations with Mega's people but keeps trying to float the lead balloon that she's returning for the final episode. That's one way to get publicity for the finale and any possible spinoffs.

[quote] The role could show the Duchess pregnant as her character Rachel Zane, in a two minute clip, shot in the UK.

[quote] A NBC source told the Daily Star: 'We could be done in half a day or less.

[quote] 'No final figure has yet been arrived at but negotiations are likely to be opened in the very near future.

So basically NBC hasn't opened negotiations with Mega's people but keeps trying to float the lead balloon that she's returning for the final episode. That's one way to get publicity for the finale and any possible spinoffs.

R329, she’s also not a racist Nazi loving Hitler fan like Wallis either.

[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.]

These threads serve a lot of different purposes, including:

(1) the sharing of trivia about the British Royal Family

(2) critiquing fashion choices of the royals

(3) mindless trollery

(4) and yes, criticism of, and elaborate scenarios involving, Meghan Markle

The contingent responsible for (4) seems unable to understand this, and insists that everyone except for themselves is a PR shill or fangurl. That just encourages (3). Most people probably enjoy the fact that the thread is a little of everything. If you don't then you probably should start a forum dedicated to your pet cause and restrict membership to others who share your passion.

[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.]

Who knows what happened at Wimbledon, but it is amusing that there exists a photo of Meghan in her seat, watching Cressida Bonas leave hers. It's probably reasonable to speculate that Meg was perhaps putting herself in the right places in order to meet the right people in Harry's circle, with a goal of getting to him. I for one would love to know the real story behind her climb. It would make for great fan fiction, at least.

R333 - There are BREXIT threads. Go there.

R325 - Not really. When the Queen dies and Charles takes over, there aren't going to be riots in the streets over Queen Camilla, nobody really gives a damn anymore except hardcore fraus. Charles's reign is going to be a "bridge" one, and those who care about this show are going to be looking toward Kate and William and their kids, who will already be coming on the public scene more. Kate and William and their kids are the future of the BRF, not Meghan and Harry and the children they are so anxious to raise away from the public eye.

In twenty years, Diana will have been dead for half a century, Charles will be dead or doddering, and no one in Britain will have two fucks to give about Harry.

[QUOTE] Meghan is smarter than the vapid fool that is Sarah Ferguson.

But at least Sarah understands the trappings of royalty, having been raised in the polo fields with royals and nobles, and being a great grandchild of peers on both sides of her family and a descendant of Charles II as Camilla and Diana.

R335 - The media really are a bottom feeding lot. I can just see the BRF face-palming now. That's all Meghan would need to seal her increasing reputation of a limelight obsessed famewhore.

Let's be some DM headlines on the off-chance Meghan is foolish enough to do this:

"Duchess's Small Scrreen Swan Song"

"Meghan Takes One last Bow"

"Art Imitiates Life as Duchess Gives Birth on Stage Set"

Sassy Lady Diana Spencer as a young girl.

R322 - And we know how well Diana worked out for that dull, dreary family in the end, don't we?

No one seems to get that the long game goes to those who know that what keeps royalty alive isn't glitz and drama, but stability, continuity, the appearance of Duty To A Higher Tradition, and observance of certain memes.

And Meghan gets this least of all.

She's unable to see more than two steps ahead.

The family resemblance between King George V, Czar Nicholas of Russia and Prince Michael of Kent.

It is not that Megan does not see, she does not care. Her actions are consistent with raising her own profile/brand, that is her goal. The RF are a means to an end. If she fit in, etc, no one would be talking about her. Girl did not stay with Sunshine Sachs and rope in daddio and half sis for the PR drama team to fade into the woodwork. Girl aint got time for that, she is pushing 40 and her Soho days are numbered.

In all her Hollywood photos, she looks so cheap and desperate.

She also seems to have a blank, slack-jawed look most if the time.

Drugs?

[quote] And we know how well Diana worked out for that dull, dreary family in the end, don't we?

R349 It worked out better to have had her, even for a little, than not to have had her at all. The shit she stirred has kept them relevant.

Had it been Charles and Cam from the start, can you imagine the hideous looking children they would have produced? Merde

No one would care about the wife of the 6th in line because no one would care about any of them. And poor, unfortunately nicknamed, Euge would not have had her spectacular wedding as payback for being leapfrogged to the altar. It would have been a quiet country wedding for her and a fire sale of the photos as was done by the Tindalls.

I loved Diana, and also thought she was a major handful. My favorite line of hers, from one of those Squidgygate tapes, was "After all I've done for this fucking family!" Yikes. Beware of people who wield the "all I've done for you" line.

Saccharine Hello mag has another Royal cover. Why don't they change their name to "Hello Royals". Every week it's either Kate or Meghan on the cover.

R322 is right! Lord knows I'm enjoying the soap opera. It's like the time they introduced a new character on "Dynasty," one Alexis Carrington.

"There's a heavy baby in there" - Harry. BLECH, I hate that kind of talk, so vulgar.

Some photos and a short biography of the Queen's fourth child, Prince Edward, Earl of Sussex.

R358 - Er, I think you meant Earl of Wessex?

R359 - you're right. Silly me.

[QUOTE] Girl did not stay with Sunshine Sachs and rope in daddio and half sis for the PR drama team to fade into the woodwork.

Are you saying ME! is actually working in cahoots with Pa and Sam? That’s an angle I never considered. She’s really a piece of work.

Of course Pa Markle, Sam and MeAgain are in cahoots. When it all goes quiet, up pops Pa Markle or Sam with another tidbit that meAgain, via her “friends”, has to rebuke. Any normal person would have resolved the Pa Markle/Sam drama long ago but despite marrying in to the most famous family in the world, maybe after the K-slags, she hasn’t. It’s too obvious but MeAgain thinks she’s intelligently superior to everyone else!

R361 is the same troll who was asking why someone doesn't "lynch the hooker," and has the lovely chestnut "mulattress" as part of his/her vocab.

The BNP may be its natural home. I doubt even the Tumblr squad will tolerate it.

I think she thinks that slack jawed look is sexy. She looks like a moron and unless carefully posed and lit she is not that attractive. Her face is kinda like a potato. This kid is gonna be fug, apart from hair issues, and this is AFTER she has had plastic surgery.

R357 That Harry is a fucking Sherlock, so astute and smart that one.

R364, Meghan takes after her dad more than her mom, that Markle gene is strong. Harry and Meghan will have a kid that inherits chipmunk cheeks, bulbous/ sloping nose, propensity for weight gain, kinky hair, and slightly crossed, dark eyes from Meghan. From Harry, the poor child will get the baldness genes, bulbous/ long nose, and close-set eyes. Not gonna be an attractive child.

The Cambridge children are a nice balance of both parents, thanks no small part to Kate's side. Prince George has brown eyes which are clearly from Middleton side (Kate has green-hazel eyes herself) but has blond hair like William. Both Charlotte and Louis have blue eyes from William and brown hair from Kate. They dodged the Windsor horsey face and close-set eyes genes.

R365 - I think Charlotte is the only one of the Cambridge children with blue eyes. George and Louis have brown eyes like the Middleton side of the family.

Given her age and upbringing I'm not entirely sure she knows who Hitler was.

Hitler. Is that in Nevada?

[quote]It's like the time they introduced a new character on "Dynasty," one Alexis Carrington.

Sammy Jo Dean, surely? Alexis knew what she was doing. Sammy Jo was just good at identifying things she wanted to possess.

"Royal Baby Countdown: Two Months to Go!"

FFS, that baby is neither the next king or queen nor the second coming.

She looks very like her father but she is also beginning to look like Lynn Curtin from RHOC

This will be quite unpopular, but I am beginning to have sympathy for Meghan. She has made so many missteps and apparently she doesn't understand that. I disagree that she doesn't care. I don't think anyone wants make all the mistakes she has made. Even is she is a narcissist as so many her claim, that would mean she has far too much pride to do the things she has done. She simply doesn't get it, I think.

I guess it depends on how much guidance she has received. We don’t really know everything going on behind the scenes. If she made a few early gaffes and the couriers decided to go hands off of let her fail, that’s a bit cruel.

If she’s been a stubborn “I’ll do as I please” asshole the entire time, then no sympathy.

The refusal to wear British fashion does seem quite deliberate, willful, and stupid. If she handles everything this way....

I have a feeling she would not be able to merch the clothes she wears if they were British. She must be keeping up some business deals that she had going before, and as such is unattractively opportunistic and lacking in integrity.

R370 no she looks more like Stacey Dash but Stacey is older (52 looks 40)r, tanner/ darker, and way prettier.

I'm surprised that there have been no comparisons to Heather Mills. Didn't Heather alienate Sir Paul from his kids and throw water or something in some divorce attorney's face? Bean has already alienated him from his brother and I see any divorce proceedings involving her turning into a Real Housewives of Frogmore type scenario.

This is all an elaborate scheme by Carole Middleton to make Kate and the family look good! She found the trashiest American family she could and hitched them to Harry

Why else would the Middletons be at the wedding? To make sure Meg got it done!

Was she any good as an actress? I've never seen any of her work.

No..

"Hhhhhhhwhy ! This might as well be Romania!"

Charles is the real father of Meghan's baby and he's going to make it king and tear down all the Diana memorials!

Charles wouldn't touch that skank with William's dick. He's pretty satisfied being Camilla's tampon.

Not anymore, R382. They live apart and vacation separately.

Not trying to be rude, but why Camilla? She wasn't as attractive as Diana. She seemed old and uninteresting.

Diana was nuts and exhausting and the old narc did not want to be bothered about it. How many people would want to have a relationship with someone so batshit that they threw themself down stairs whilst pregnant? And that was AFTER psychiatric care.

W384 you seem inexperienced, shallow and dull. Can you really not understand that looks aren’t everything?

Camilla wasn’t hideous when she was young and she was typical of that era: the drinks, the smokes, the country set. She understood the life and was (and is) apparently a piss to be around.

[quote] A poll last year found that two out of three Britons do not want Camilla to become queen but the official believes she will overcome any remaining hostility to her as they become more familiar with her.

[quote] Camilla is in a way the best thing about Charles. She’s very straightforward, she’s down to earth, she likes a joke, she’s got that great, rasping smoker’s cough, she likes a drink. She’s in a sense the person who’s made Charles much less weird

Camilla may need an image revamp if that's the best one can say about her.

THE REAL REASON BEHIND THE FEUD WITH DIANA'S PRECIOUS BOYS

Sources close to Kensington Palace have EXCLUSIVELY revealed to this reporter the truth behind the strain between Wills and Harry, who the world mourned with when they lost Their Precious Mum, Princess Di at 15 and 12.

Wills, heir to the throne after his father, has begun making moves to annul his marriage to Princess Kate. The whispers are, and this reporter can confirm, Wills is IN LOVE WITH MEGHAN. Notes found in his office claim that "he has never known love" before meeting the former A-List, Emmy-snubbed actress who is currently his sister-in-law. He has a fondness for the once and future Kate Middleton, but he sees now that Meghan is his destiny. Sources even claim that Prince Louis was conceived during a marathon of the smash TV hit Suits. It was the last time the Cambridges made love, as Kate was disturbed how Wills couldn't take his eyes off the telly.

Wills seeks to annul his marriage to Kate, wiping it from the history books, and their three children from the line of succession. He claims he has the fondness of a friend for Kate, but wants Meghan by his side after the Queen dies and he leapfrogs Charles and the vile Camilla, who he has never forgiven for replacing Saint Di. As is proper, Wills wants his and Meghan's children to inherit his throne. The shocker, Meghan is currently three month's pregnant with their first. She's been padding her bump to conceal their affair and pass the child off as Harry's.

The only problem? Harry has never been happier since he met Meghan and won't let her go so easily!

R389 what?!

It's a troll post from the "everyone is a conspiracy theorist from tumblr!" bore.

Charlotte looks like her dad, minus the horsey teeth. Diana's genes weren't enough to eliminate all of the worst of the Windsor side from her and Charles' kids, but adding in the Middletons has finally done it for the generation down.

why r344 when it is not brexit per se that I am discussing but her majesty's possible feelings of anger towards the prime minister of her country who is arguably doing the UK huge damage in a gambling game of political brinkmanship? The subject of what her majesty thinks of her prime ministers is and has been a subject of legitimate speculation for years. In fact there was /is a very good play on it at one point it starred Helen Mirren as her majesty and it was brilliant.

The Queen went through the war. Brexit is just something to be seen through to her (though she's a Brexiteer, apparently.)

Apparently according to who r394?

So the Queen has no angry opinion on anything unless its worse than world war two? Anyway its not about the fact of brexit happening but the chaotic way it is increasingly likely to be done? The Queen was very concerned apparently about unemployment in the 1970s but now there could be a big rise in unemployment as a result of a no deal brexit you tell me she's fine with it because its not as bad as world war two?? Sure...

Course she is, R394, she is not a brainwashed Millenial.

R396 the weak and pathetic line of argument that anyone who disagrees with me must be brainwashed!!

There are plenty of non millenials opposed to a no deal brexit.

R389 Poor Kate and Harry!

Ah, but Kate and Harry have always been in love, so this situation is no conundrum.

I wonder what Meghan will name her baby?

Soho Justice Diana of course

Victoria Diana if it's a girl. Charles Philip if a boy. I'm sure she thinks her kids will be able to get in front of William's kids.

Diaria, to combine their mothers' names.

Or, perhaps Wallis Camilla

Hopefully she will give the baby a name that reflects her AA heritage.

R404 Most of them have biblical names so I guess Mary or Joseph?

Camilla is such a broad

R392 She has beady little slit eyes like her gran Ma Middleton-Goldsmith.

Keen has some strong genes.

R406 - Which is why she got laid so oftern in her heyday and why she managed to see off a younger and far more beautiful woman.

I will give credit to Camilla. She went from being 'that wicked woman' (HM herself) to being awarded the Queen's Royal Family Order. In those visits to South Asia, in great heat, she conducted herself perfectly. She's, at they say, a good sport.

About the Queen's views on her Prime Ministers, they've been very mixed, even though she's supposed to remain neutral. She didn't agree with Thatcher on her government's attitude towards Apartheid, for example, and celebrated the end of Apartheid. so I think the question about her point of view is legitimate. I have no idea what her opinion is, but she did give a nice speech about trying to find common ground between the various political factions.

For a non-political figure, the Queen well understands her political significance. Her visit to Ireland several years ago was a moving demonstration of moving past a very tragic past. When she starts her speech at Dublin Castle with a few words of Irish, she impressed her audience with her openness. Because of my age, I remember seeing reports on 'The Troubles' almost every night on TV, so i never expected things to move forward.

R404 - Like what? Lady Tameka Mountbatten-Windsor?

Lord Adobowale Dumbarton?

Look, Meghan Markle isn't interested in her AA heritage. Those kids will sound as traditionally royal as Meghan can make them.

The only heritage she's interested in reflecting is that of Diana Spencer.

R408 I bet she knows a trick or two

R395, relax. I'm sure you'll be unemployed even if Brexit doesn't happen.

Maybe go for the nod to Charles / connect with the royal past and go with Caroline Alice Helena or Charles Arthur Henry r410.

R413 - Well, for starters, Kate and William already did the "Honour Granddad with Charlotte" for a girl.

A boy, of course, would give them more scope to pander to Charles.

Diana will have to figure for a girl in some spot; then there's the Queen . . . Elizabeth. That would leave one or two spots for personal indulgence.

The only "name" question of any importance is whether, if it's a girl, they would saddle the child with "Diana" as a first name.

When's that trip to Morocco, then?

Imagining Harry going down on Sparkle is grotesque. She likely warns him not to get saliva on the bed sheets.

thetimes.co.uk edition news oh-my-god-meghan-takes-aim-at-male-pale-and-stale-universities

"The Duchess of Sussex has supported a campaign by black academics and students to “decolonise the curriculum” and confront the legacy of empire and racism on university campuses in her first apparently political intervention since joining the royal family."

Oh my god is right.

Can you pls post the text, R417? TIA!

If that is true, I can't imagine that postcolonial historians will welcome the input of a representative of the British Royal family.

I read that ME! wants to name the baby Dutrell if it’s a boy and Shalyce if it’s a girl.

Decolonizing the curriculum isn't that controversial in the wider commonwealth. Many academic institutions have been doing that. In former settler colonies line Canada and Australia this is an ongoing process. Former extraction colonies in South Asia, Africa and the Caribbean have a stronger movement that also includes critical race studies.

Mega's postcolonial subjectivity is complicated by more than her royal connection. Since she just entered The Firm and didn't grow up rich, she isn't implicated in its history the way Harry or William would be. However, as an American she is complicated because her country has been postcolonial for such a long time and its curriculum hasn't been as foreign as it has been in places like India. She is also from a former settler colony so her voice is complicated further by that in a way that Margaret Atwood's would be and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie's would not.

The postcolonial academics are used to complexity and infighting. She'll just be part of the fray.

My predictions for Harry & Meghan's baby name: Arthur Philip William or Alice Diana Doria. I think they'll go with traditional royal first names (although my main reason for thinking that is that Meghan played it so safe with her wedding dress, which suggests to me that she wants to fit in).

I think we can safely say Samantha is ruled out.

I hope they don't go with Elizabeth - it's already been used for too many of her granddaughters and great-granddaughters. Zara, Beatrice, Lady Louise, Isla Phillips, Charlotte and Lena Tindall all have Elizabeth as a middle name. She doesn't need any more tributes - she's already the frigging Queen! Life is one long tribute to her.

R418 - Paywall - that was all I could get.

R421 - The fray may this that or the other but Meghan Markle is now a member of the BRF who are enjoined to stay out of frays like these. We could have an entire thread about calling many of the West's greatest artists, writers, poets, and philosophers "stale" and have a jolly time on it - but in terms of this thread, Meghan Markle has no business associating herself with the characterisation of Shakespeare, Yeats, Sir Isaac Newton, Edmund Burke, C.S. Lewis - never mind beyond British shores throughout Europe - as "pale and stale".

Identity politics are doing quite enough damage without Meghan Markle taking it upon herself to add to it after one of the oldest, palest, most male-dominated institutions in the world heaped upon her a level of privilege, wealth, social status, and fame that most of pale male stale giants never enjoyed.

Mozart was buried in a pauper's grave.

[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.]

r412 I'm fully employed now and have been for years so put your petty malicious nasty tongue away. There is such a thing as having concern for others welfare and if you acknowledge the nuances of brexit you'd grasp that unemployment is just one of many problems a a no deal brexit would cause.

R424 Cry me a river for all the long dead white guys who have populated the curriculum and could be replaced by living and recently dead white guys, women, and people of colour. Recent scholars are influenced by the long dead guys. It's not like the knowledge will be lost. I'm sure they're all devastated that they may soon occupy a smaller section of the curriculum.

[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.]

R427 - Please, spare me. "Replacement" is idiotic. Addition, yes; replacement?'

Jesus - it's not just the absolute content of their work, the "knowledge", it's understanding it, mining it, exploring it. That's what will be lost.

Imposing socio-political ideology on art and thinking is what Stalinist Russia did.

You build on the giants, not throw them out.

Only fools do that.

And Meghan Markle is nothing if not a fool.

"It was felt Meghan had adopted a high-risk strategy in apparently sanctioning her friends’ interview."

She didn't "sanction it", she engineered it.

And the strategy wasn't so much "high-risk" but typically reckless, short-sighted, and poorly judged by someone incapable of any view longer than the end of her nose.

R429 Who said the postcolonial theorists have a mission to replace Shakespeare? It is making room for other recent voices to add to the canon.

You seem to be fighting against something you have very little knowledge about.

And when has art ever been devoid of socio-political context? I give you David's "The Death of Marat." Enjoy.

R431 - I beg your pardon - did I not see this in your original post:

"all the long dead white guys who have populated the curriculum and could be replaced by . . ."

So is there a time limit? Say, three centuries? Four? Is it the worth of the work they did or the distance in time?

The phrase "long dead white guys" gives you away. You aren't really interested in the work.

There is a tendency in these threads to slag off something because Mega happens to take an interest. Mega goes to a charity and writes on a couple bananas. Some posters get on DL and start mouthing off about how the charity workers are irresponsible for handing out poor quality food to the homeless. There were comments about the fairy cakes being vaginas. How dare they hand out bananas? Why are they handing out sugary drinks?

Mega may or may not be interest in decolonizing the curriculum but one story seems enough to hate that work without knowing what the actual theorists have been doing. These theorists include a diverse group of people with diverse views on the way forward.

R432 That was a thread post on a gossip site. It's not a peer-reviewed treatise. Don't parse every word as representative of the post colonial project.

I’ve posted here before... just a little bit of gossip that’s serious. Kate and William are not getting along . By and large, they do love each other. But there have been some rough patches recently. In fact, nothing to do with the Sussexes but more to do with three kids and no more sex. Millions of couples can relate I’m sure. The d-word was dropped. It was definitely not serious but it was dropped in front of a few non royals.

R431 - I didn't say art was devoid of socio-political context, and I'll see your The Death of Marat with Guernica and and Dialogues of the Carmelites (is Poulenc dead a short enough time to remain in the music curriculum?).

Imposing socio-political agendas on art - which, as you well know, was a hallmark of culture in the Soviet era) is the objection.

Don't go simple on us. You knew perfectly well what I meant.

The son of Princess Margaret is the Earl of Snowden now, not Viscount Linley anymore.

R434 - That's bullshit and you know it. They would no more be thinking of divorcing than throwing themselves off the turrets of Windsor Castle.

Your "little bit of gossip" is, I think, one you've stated before on these threads, it has no legs, and no reliable source whatsoever.

But it does serve to deflect attention from the Sussex mess, I suppose.

Not getting along is something quite different from the "d" word.

R435 You introduced Soviet era art. That's your argument not mine.

Art is made and understood in a socio political context. That has always been the case in Western society. Applying that lens isn't new and isn't limited to the Soviet Union. A attempt to reevaluate the canon by one group of scholars doesn't mean academia is becoming communist or fascist or that the scholars doing that reevaluation are.

There is no way that the Windsor’s are divorcing I’m sure. The issue is more that it was thrown out there. My understanding is that the problems arise from very normalproblems related to three kids and the sex winding down.

[quote] So is there a time limit? Say, three centuries? Four? Is it the worth of the work they did or the distance in time?

[quote] Poulenc dead a short enough time to remain in the music curriculum?

For what it's worth, I think these are important questions and are a valid part of a postcolonial discussion on what constitutes the canon and in what courses.

R428, I would actually like to read that. I know that the stories I've read about her seem over the top. Yet, her children and grandchildren seem to be among the most down-to-earth Royals. I've always felt there was some huge disconnect. At the same time, the comment about her 'washing her own chandeliers', is absolutely bizarre.

I imagine that most of us who know something about postcolonial theory aren't going to bother getting involved in this one. Thank you r433 for saying something sensible for the crazies to gnaw on for a while.

Do "ordinary" Brits give their children three or four names?

Nope, R444. Most Brits have one middle name (occasionally two).

[QUOTE] long dead white guys

Oh hi, SJW!

Viva Boris! Vive l'angleterre libre!

I don't want to derail this thread, honestly. Most (white Americans} don't have more than one middle name), either. But Catholics (like me) pick up another name when we undertake the sacrament of confirmation. The young person chooses that name themselves. It's not like it's used on legal documents, so it's sort of moot. You typically choose your sponsor's name( ( a family honor) s your third name: I didn't like my sponsor's name, so I chose my Dad's name (who could argue against that?)), so I'm Mark, James, Roger. xxxxxx..

When you are confirmed, you attend a ceremony where you are lined up at a kneeling rail, and the Archbishop goes down the line, and slaps you in the face, to proclaim you a 'Warrior of Christ' . II's somewhat traumatic. I very much doubt the BRF engages in such practieces). In the old days, I was told that kids were smacked to the ground. But I still remember that smack, from at least 40 years ago. I don't know the Anglican Church's practices, so I'll shut up now.

My comment above isn't racist. I just know that many Latin-American familiies use more names than are usually used in the US or the UK..

I thought the BRF used more names, though.

R446 What's the name for a troll who advocates lynching? Hmmm

I know a lot about f British people and probably half have two or three middle names. It’s not uncommon.

^^^ “about f” = of. WTF autocorrect?

Apparently, I've just been banned at R449. I don't know what I posted that was considered so offensive. I'll gitve a day or two, but I then I'll term the membership. I only true to offer honest comments, and links, and I don't troll, bur if you're going to kick me off, then okay.

Refrain from threats of bodily harm (to include the word lynching and other racist vernacular) R452. It's not rocket science.

R452 is mistaken or may have a typo. He isn't the poster at R449. That comment was pointing out that a previous poster is a troll who uses racist vernacular. If 452 is banned, it's not because of that post.

[quote] Princes William and Harry are set to split their household within weeks, The Sunday Times can reveal.

The story is behind The Sunday Times' paywall but The Sunday Sun has a summary.

It's amusing how much time is spent basically saying "They've just drifted apart." It's interspersed with shady statements like

[quote] “When William becomes the Prince of Wales, he will take on a lot of extra responsibility, including the Duchy of Cornwall.

[quote] "Harry and Meghan have none of that, and seem ambitious about forging their own paths.

If I had to guess, I say these sources are employed by or loyal to Will and Kate. Ambitious. lol

R434

How could it not be serious if they threatened divorce? And, how do you know this?

The attempts to deflect from MM and PH are in full mode . I never heard of a divorce rumour about Kate and William . They seem quite happy with each other and have a lot of chemistry togheter ! Something you cant say from Harry and Meghan . I heard of Charles and Camilla a divorce rumour not from the Cambridges .

This is kind of sweet. I know - I'm an asshole. However, Huh and Me don't look at each other like that.

EVER.

R458 Those pics are from 2011 2012! Plus all public outings require a phony happy facade!

"Plus all public outings require a phony happy facade!"

Nutmeg knows all about that shit.

That divorce rumour is rubbish. Total fiction. If there was the slightest chance of it being true it wouldn't have seen the light of day as a piece of gossip. The next king after the next king, son of the spectacularly divorced next king, doing the same? Not likely even if they used each other to practise axe throwing. In the event of unhappiness or unpleasantness the Queen's happy place is take six months and let's talk about it then.

from the Sun article: The division is believed to have been brought forward amid the fallout from Meghan’s pals defending her in a US magazine.

If there's any truth in it - beyond the two families are structuring their own offices to reflect they're all married grown ups - it might be that. I've read enough to suggest William hates the press and leaking. This was something right out of the Diana playbook. I can imagine he'd be very unhappy to see it, given his history with people waging media wars. Furthermore, given how fond he is of the Middleton family zen, I imagine Meagain and her trailer trash relations have huge ick factor for him.

Anyone who has followed the BRF for forty plus years is a Stan. Judas Priest.

[quote]Tormenting Meghan Markle has become a national sport that shames us

[quote]In the period when the acquisition of the former Meghan Markle was depicted as little short of a national triumph, much was written in the British press about her various accomplishments. These are, after all, roughly as common in royal spouses as successful independent careers. Meghan, the actress and blogger and charity worker, is also, it emerged, a skilled calligrapher.

r434, Finally some good gossip, thank you.

Most Dlers, including me, predicted that after the lust settles and the children are born, William and Kate will, discreetly, but with mutual full knowledge and their close set knowing too, take on sex partners other than each other. Nobody needed Madame Cleo to know that.

That's business as usual, especially among "those people."

Your nugget of dish, however ,was a welcome diversion from the Dook &Dookess of Sussex

Forgot to add, and I could take a running start, flap my arms, and fly over Lake Michigan before Will and Kate divorce.

R439 - yeah, and we all BREATHE in a socio-political context, that doesn't reduce every psyche to that context. Shakespeare had to paint Richard III as a villain because of the Tudors, but the extraordinary language and craft belongs to the writer himself. Beethoven didn't write music because he wanted to change the world - he wrote music because he was born to do so and he couldn't help it. And by the way, Oswald Spengler credits the decline of Europe from Beethoven's championing of the rights of the individual against the needs of the social group as a whole.

Pale male and stale reduces a huge and extraordinary canon across music, painting, literature, poetry to cheap of the moment politically correct meme. You judge art on its own merits - period, end of.

And to return to the source of this discussion, Meghan Markle's home is being renovated to the tune of three million quid on the backs of British taxpayers. How about we take a poll and ONLY take that money from people who agree with her political statement?

That's the problem, to return to the original argument: royalty is supposed to represent everyone, not just the people who share the socio-political posturing of a woman who owes everything she's got to an institution that knows from bitter experience the wisdom of keeping your fucking trendy political statements to yourself.

The BRF were utter fools to let this woman in. She'll do more damage to the fabric of the institution than two Dianas.

She just doesn't care what anyone else thinks or have the remotest understanding of why a constitutional monarchy needs to keep itself above the fray. To Meghan Markle, getting in was just a stepping stone to being able to set herself up as a global Wise Woman complete with 10,000 daytime outfits, a 10-bedroom home built on other people's pennies, and a father in law worth 400 million personally who couldn't be bothered to shell out the three million for his younger son's home.

Please. We can table the curriculum argument for another time. For the record, all art for the most part stands on the shoulders of giants that went before them. You add on as new artists emerge - you don't "replace" the giants as if new art has nothing to do with old art, and because the were white and male and died more than 50 years ago.

This is about the BRF. They were fools to let her in and the sooner they get rid of both of them, the better. I doubt they will. Fuck, maybe she'll help the British taxpayer realise what they've REALLY been paying for all this time and wake up to the scam.

R465 - Infidelity is hardly the purview of royals, and the irony of this silly piece of gossip is that William and Kate have seldom looked happier together, and even the fraus on Celebitchy are forced to admit that since the birth of the third child, Kate has looked more at ease, happier and more relaxed than ever before.

Romance fades quickly in most LTRs. Infidelity sets in if it isn't replaced with a warmth and intimacy that brings its own value to the marriage. From what I can see, Kate and William are in that latter phase, not that they're on the point of taking up new sex partners because, well, they can.

Harry and Meghan look like a far bigger risk than the Cambridges do. She's a controlling bitch and he looks exhausted and somewhat shell-shocked. New babies are fascinating but also terrifying and bring their own echoes of childhood anxieties to new parents. When the former object of lust and passion turns into Mum - especially for immature men, the transition can bring confusion and difficulty.

The Cambridges look like they've already made their signficiant adjustments and are focused on stepping up their work as the Reaper draws ever closer to HM.

Remains to be seen how Harry does - he hasn't got William's steel; he's actually rather pathetic, if you ask me.

Your points are well taken, r468.

But, I enjoy a "silly piece of gossip" if it has even a tangential relationship to reality; not the "Meghan was spotted at the grassy knoll" variety that some of the Meghan-haters traffic in.

R469 - Well, I won't argue with the enjoyment of gossip bit. And I completely agree about the Grassy Knoll Fake Bump Surrogate Meghan-and-Pa-And-Sam Are All In It Together shit. It's tiresome. There's enough meat here without those to keep a savannah full of gossip lions happy.

[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.]

MM is welcome to entertain whatever views she wants but while the taxpayer pays substantial amounts (or indeed any) for her maintenance then she must keep those views to herself. We have elected politicians paid for by the taxpayer who can say what they like in that role. MM is not paid as a politician and was not elected. Any argument about the merits of her theories is irrelevant in the face of that fundamental point. This is what the Queen and the rest of the BRF know and abide by. If she wants to become a politician/ pundit she is more than welcome to do so but she must stop accepting taxpayers' money.

My information is admittedly third hand but it’s through private sources; I’m in the hospitality indistry, which is how I know the train of people, but the person who overheard it is not. don’t know much more than the post says, but the d-word was not thrown out there as a real threat, but in a way that was hurtful. We know these two are never getting divorced. Not surprisingly, if you know people with kids, the real crux of their problems is the same stuff that happens to married people over time... lack of sex, romance is fading, etc. It isn’t hard to believe it—it has happened to every long-term couple I know.

^ meant to sign r473 as r434.

R473 - I've observed the same phenomenon in long-term couples, hence my post about the Cambridges looking as if they've successfully crossed this Relationship Rubicon. Admittedly, this is also from a distance. And, people forget that William got to know Kate and her family over nearly a decade. Harry dated Meghan long-distance over a year or so, was kept by Meghan carefully away from all other family but her mother, accepted all Meghan's representations about herself without questioning, allowed her to goad him into threatening the British press, and then jumped into marriage and then, because of her age, into fatherhood.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised at the passivity of the BRF here, but it appears the only person with the spine even to ask Harry any questions, his older brother, is paying the price for it with a widening divide between the two. I imagine Harry being squeezed between the brother he probably loves deeply and what he owes to his blood family, and his wife, wasn't pleasant.

He certainly isn't the only man to have experienced this conflict. It's just that in his case it's so public.

I'd be more likely to believe the gossip about Will and Kate if they hadn't already been together for 10 years prior to the marriage, and that includes years of cohabitation. They already had plenty of time to see each other's good and bad sides, and for lust to fade into a romantic friendship. Even if they don't stay entirely sexually faithful for their entire relationship, I don't see them ever divorcing or even separating. They're too well-matched and too well-aware of the stakes to do that. Also, I can't imagine the intensely private and mistrustful William having a row with his wife in front of staff, especially one that includes the word 'divorce.'

I did not realize William had actually earned a Masters Degree with upper second class honours from St. Andrews University; whereas Harry barely skated by with a high school equivalency (in American parlance) ASSISTED.

[quote]One of Harry's former teachers, Sarah Forsyth, has asserted that Harry was a "weak student" and that staff at Eton conspired to help him cheat on examinations.

[quote]While a tribunal made no ruling on the cheating claim, it "accepted the prince had received help in preparing his A-level 'expressive' project, which he needed to pass to secure his place at Sandhurst.

R477 - this is one of the reasons Harry is known as "The Dimwit Duke", "Dimwit" or just "Dim" for short. Another reason is breaking MEagain into the Royal Family.

R476, it wasn’t staff (sorry if I implied that). Without going into detail, I think the hurtful comments were shared, not actually said in front of people. At least I think that was the case. I get a few tidbits now and then, but just a few...it is through people who hear this stuff, then it gets shared to someone I know—like I said, third hand for sure, so take everything with a grain of salt.

My what a difference two years can make...

Actually, R473, the thing that tears apart most couples with kids isn’t sex. It’s MONEY. And the Cambridges have more than enough of that.

If the Cambridge rumor were true (and I seriously doubt it, since these sorts of “rumors” only began to surface with the arrival of the ambitious, competitive Z-list actress), I doubt it would really be about the sex. I WOULD believe that Harry’s bride (as per her long, established track record of “grift ‘n ghost”) is driving a wedge between the brothers that is perhaps having a spillover effect on the Cambridge’s marriage. Having to keep up the public facade of a sisterly relationship with a woman who leaks shit to her gossip columnist buddy on the one hand while on the other hand whines that the media is bullying her would turn the sanest person batshit crazy. And it wouldn’t surprise me if K felt Will or the family wasn’t doing enough to rein in Sparky. And I would sure as hell agree with her.

THAT kind of anger and resentment toward her husband could certainly spill over into the bedroom. Sort of like how audiences that used to love Harry now boo him and his bride.

It always annoys me to see Meghan described as “ambitious.” Ambitious people study hard and go to medical school. They don’t try to make a living by skanking around with their (nonexistent) tits and (overly wide) asses hanging out.

R467 see R431 and R433

Perhaps letting Mega into the BRF was a bad idea. I don't know. I'm entertained by her, as I am by the rest of them. I'm waiting to see what madness develops next.

I'm not of the opinion that those who "rule" by divine of traditional "right" represent everyone. They can't and they don't try to. The BRF support sport-hunting in general and fox-hunting in particular even though 67- 85% of Brits are opposed to the practice. Charles is known as the meddling prince because of his many letters to the government on his pet projects. William recently complained about the emotional baggage from the postwar generation which he thinks has snowballed into the current mental health crisis. HM has made her fair share of political statements. And Phillip. Kate has worn real fur repeatedly, which is a political statement in fashion rather that words. Mega isn't of the same level as HM, William, Charles, Phillip in their stupid hereditary system, but she's not the first "royal" to wade into a political issue that doesn't represent everyone.

Mega is not damaging the fabric of a 1000 year old institution. It is, and should be, more resilient than that. Mega is a small character having a moment on the stage. Her spending is OTT. I'm interested to see how Charles handles that in the next budget. The odds do not favour the Sussexes marriage: quickly married, baby within the first year, significant cultural differences. If Mega is around in 3-5 years and still making this big a splash I may convert to your dismay about her.

I can’t picture Will & Kate ever getting divorced. Not because it’s all sunshine and passion but because they both seem very aware of what a public drama fest would do to their children and the institution. William seems more of the sort who’s family dysfunction matured him early with a resolution never to do that to his own children. He hasn’t played out as the other sort that repeats the family dysfunction over.

They’re very much both “for the good of the children” types and with their income, they could very much live quite separate private lives while remaining united publicly.

Isn't this the same William notorious for dropping tidbits of gossip whether true or no within his circle to see what gets out and thereby parse whom he can trust?

R485, yes. Phony, innocuous bits of gossip. When they appeared in print, he would know who in his circle was untrustworthy.

That test was probably unnecessary w/Ms. Grift ‘n Ghost. When you want to know who someone really is, look at their history of behavior.

Fair enough, R434--and I agree with your POV that whatever rows they might have, the marriage is here to stay.

R477 William has a Scottish MA. As does Kate. It's closer to a BA in the the USA (4 years plus dissertation) but more than the standard 3 years of uni in the UK.

With the Diana history and story allegedly so important to Meghan - I wonder how Meghan gets on with Camilla who was /is enemy and troublemaker number one for Diana according to the Canon and cult of Diana?

Kate is a talented artist. She drew the church on her sister Pippa's wedding invitation.

Is excessive blinking a sign of something?

Lots of sneaky park pics of Kate, the nannies and the Cambridge kids.

That nanny is unbelievably plain and mannish. Good call on Kate's part.

Nice to see Kate apparently reused George's pram with Charlotte and Louis.

She should! That pram was 4000 dollars.

R495 - Do you need glasses? The pram Kate is pushing in R492 is different from the one in your photo @R495. The pram that Kate had for Charlotte's christening is similar to the one in your post but it may have been a loan from the Queen who would have an old pram or two in storage for anyone to borrow. Look at those wheels!

[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.]

R496 Kate reported had a Silver Cross Balmoral specially made for George similar to R495's link. In 2015 George's pram cost about £1600. That's not the one pictured at R492. It was used for the christenings of all three Cambridge children.

The family has multiple strollers/buggies/prams.

At least Kate doesn't use a tacky pram like the one in the linked pic.

Gag. I could be the richest person on earth and I’d still not want all that gold and crystal chandelier shit in my home. It’s so ugly.

Thank you, R498, for saving me having to type all of that. The main thing to take away from all this is no matter how many off-the-rack dresses Kate wears for the sake of optics (all of which have been custom fitted so they don't FIT like OTR clothes), these people are filthy rich and their accoutrements are insanely expensive.

That blank, mouth hanging open, can’t move my face because it’s stuffed with fillers look on MM’s face at r491 really makes me want to slap some sense into her.

Fuck, she’s annoying.

R491 I feel like she thinks she’s looking genuinely interested. She’s also probably concentrating hard on what to say once the other person stops talking. If you’re one who prefers to talk about yourself and make everything about you, coming up with things to ask to pretend you’re interested in others takes a lot of effort. She may also be doing some counting or self talk to avoid talking over them and making it about her thoughts and her great ideas on the important matter.

MY EYES, R499

I thought this was Kate at first. Never would have thought they look alike before.

Looks like some kind of photoshop to me.

That be Kate? Looks like the definition of "tendrils" to me.

R505 I hope you don't drive because you are BLIND

You should see the comments btl in the Daily Mail coverage of Meghan supporting "decolonisation" of the curriculum - the woman is totally clueless and I'm beginning to believe some of the posters who believe she's only planning to stay married to Harry long enough to set herself up as some Global Activist. She obviously has no interest in Great Britain as it relates to her role as a member of the monarchy, doesn't care about letting the BRF know she doesn't give a flyinhg fuck what they think, or about the institution, and clearly isn't afraid of any repercussions.

It's the latter point that interests me. Why isn't she afraid of any repercussions?

Remember the old days - the three month mark - when all there was to chew on was bad hair and worse clothes?

We bullied away her tendrils.

R491 I think she blinks a lot because of the 20 layers of mascara she wears. When my sister cakes it on she blinks a lot too. Or it could be this

[quote]Scientists find blinking eyes mean the mind is wandering. ... Now you can tell for certain – because scientists have found a way to prove whether someone is listening to you. All it takes is a look into their eyes. When a person blinks, it is a sign that their mind is wandering, a study shows

r505 MASSIVE Photoshop, and incredibly poorly done. Jesus. Why do people do ridiculous shit like this?

I'm sort of puzzled by the photoshop comments about R505. That's not the only photo.

i'm sure will and kate fight like any married couple and it's probably a sign the relationship is healthy, meaning that kate just doesn't do whatever he says/wants. i don't think william could survive without kate and her family. i don't think there is any chance they divorce, but even just discussing it for the sake of gossip, i think william would completely fall apart. kate could survive, but i think william would be lost without her. maybe he resents that or feels stuck sometimes, but its not like he's the first person to have a tough time with relationships.

Wills and Kate will NEVER divorce. Harry and his whore will!

I can't imagine Will and Kate will ever divorce. There's too much at stake. I think R515 has it right. Will needs the normalcy Kate and her family bring to his life. Harry gets absolutely no normalcy from Meghan and her family: just the opposite. It's a shame, since Diana tried to give both of her sons an exposure to ordinary life. I mean, she was already a 'Lady' before she met Charles, but she still took her boys out for McDonalds at times. And I always read about how Will and Kate have all these servants and nannies, but remember when Will was caught dozing off in church after a rough couple of nights with the new Prince Louis, so they're apparently not that hands-off.

With Meghan’s entering the curriculum debate, seems she now officially has her own endgame that does not involve the BRF.

Are we to assume she’s just going to drag sohobebe along with her on her adventures?

Do you suppose it even occurred to her to try to stay put for the baby’s sake? So s/he could have a father?

From the way she spoke so nastily to Harry at Euge’s wedding, she either never could stand him, or got sick of his dim ways very quickly.

Although MM shows a “certain low cunning,” (quoting another poster) she doesn’t seem very bright.

In fact, she seems to show willful stubbornness, cluelessness, lack of social intelligence and social graces, and just plain stupidity. The only reason she’s at all interesting is because SHE. DO. NOT. CURR.

It’s kind of hilarious.

[quote]SHE. DO. NOT. CURR.

What on earth does this mean? That she does not curtsy appropriately? That she hasn't the intellectual ability to deal with such lofty issues as curriculum in the post-colonialist world? Or that she really is worse than a "cur" and you cannot spell in your imitation of a near illiterate Trump-mouth breathers, but only on the other side of the Atlantic?

BTW, I think Meghan is a grasping climber and worse who used the "race" construct so effectively early on that she became intoxicated with her own power and its ability to hold people at bay and withhold criticism that she would really rather not have heard or have dismissed as offensive to her pricked up, woken ears.

Does anyone have any thoughts on the Cambridge nanny, Maria Teresa Turrion Borrallo?

R493 jokes that she is "mannish," but, in all seriousness, she has pinged my gaydar (I'm one of DL's lesbians, so I say this affectionately) since the first time I saw her. Some comments from her friends to reporters back in 2014:

[quote]"We all thought she would end up becoming a nun because she was such a different girl to the rest... She hardly had any friends and she didn't show any interest in boys."

[quote]Family hairdresser Antonio Robledo told Spanish daily El Mundo: "She is very special and shy and I've never known her to have had a boyfriend..."

Raising a future heir and spares is not just any nannying job; I'm sure there is a mutual understanding that Borrallo will not leave until all of the children are grown. As an experienced Norland nanny, she is surely making over $100,000 per year, but that's still an extraordinary sacrifice of some of the best years of her own life.

My theory is that she is very conservative (in her values, if not her politics) and very quietly gay.

My understanding is nanny's grow to love their charges, they don't just leave for more money. The only exception is if the parents make their working lives untenable. The rumour that MM is trying to lure the nanny away shows a funadamental misunderstanding about the relationship. A good nanny becomes a member of the family, you don't lure a family member away with money. They may leave before the children are grown but it is highly unlikely anyone would leave William's family to go and work for Harry's. This gossip again puts MM on the same level as Kate. She is not. There is nothing that MM could offer the nanny that would induce her to leave her current position, especially given her issues with staff leaving imo.

R365 The bald gene is passed through the mother. Harry wouldn't pass the bald gene to a son.

[quote]My understanding is nanny's grow to love their charges, they don't just leave for more money. The only exception is if the parents make their working lives untenable.

Wasn't Diana famous for firing nannies if she perceived them as getting too close to Will or Harry? This was when they were still quite small and long before Tiggy Legg-Bourke came on the scene when William was a preteen and the Wales had already separated. Diana's animosity toward Legg-Bourke stemmed from her belief that she was Charles' mistress, but the early nanny firings stemmed from her insecurity when other women became close to her children.

I thought Norland nannies wore a uniform.

Okay I did some googling. She wore her uniform for Charlotte 's christening but otherwise they usually wear ordinary clothes. She's 40 years old, somehow I thought she'd be n younger.

I must agree R519 she do not curr, and is profoundly narcissistic.

Nanny Maria is only 40?I thought she was a lot older.

R520

Diana did fire a nanny or two. Rumour was because was threatened by the closeness. Given her track record, seems likely.

I can't believe Meagain would try to steal Kate's nanny. Is that an actual rumour? I can't imagine Meagain wanting a nanny. Too much ego. She'll probably drag the child to every engagement she goes to, clawing at it like she claws at her belly. Besides, she would probably think Kate's nanny, if she could steal it, would spy.

I don't believe the Nanny stealing rumor. Wasn't the Nanny the "Staff" MEghan reprimanded and Kate had to have a word with her about how she spoke to the Cambridge staff.

Charles was rumoured to have been devastated when his long-time beloved Nanny died.

I think the nanny in question was Mabel Anderson, by the way.

And the Queen Mum, when she was still Duchess of York, lifted Margaret MacDonald (Bobo) from one of her sisters, I think, for the two little princesses - Macdonald remained close to the Queen, later on becoming her dresser and confidante, for the rest of her life.

R530 - Why would the Cambridge nanny, working for a future Prince and Princess of Wales and future King and Queen, leave to work for the sixth in line and his imperious bitch of a wife? It isn't likely the Sussexes are going to pay more! With the Cambridges, the nanny is in the center of London in a grand living space, and at the Norfolk mansion. With the Sussexes, she's stuck in a boring suburb. And then, of coures, there's MeAgain's reputation for being so wonderful to work for. I can just see an experienced Norland nanny getting 5AM memos from the Duchess on the latest childrearing trends, straight from the mouth of her pal, Jessica Mulroney.

Doubt it highly.

Interesting tidbit: The Queen's favorite flower is the primrose which comes in a variety of colors.

Princess Eugenie of York at the Stop The Traffik organization. She's involved in anti-slavery charities.

With Hello mag, it's either Kate or Meghan on the cover but sometimes it's both Duchesses.

The busiest royal, Princess Anne, was in York last Friday.

R536 - That checked suit Eugenie has on is quite snazzy, and isn't her usual look. She looks great.

For you royal fashionistas, here are some photos of the intricate design of Queen Elizabeth's coronation gown designed by Norman Hartnell.

Some lovely old photos of the Queen Mum with her two daughters, Elizabeth and Margaret Rose.

We know from whom Nutmeg got her "holes in jeans" look. Yuck!

[quote]The Duchess of Cambridge is definitely beautiful

No, she's not. She's passably attractive. But far from a beauty.

I don't think Meghan wants some nanny whose crafted her skills for the aristocracy. Awhile back the tabloids were suggesting that she wants an LA-style nanny, and that she was asking Clooney for recommendations.

The Gurkhas are on guard at Buckingham Palace today.

[QUOTE] Macdonald remained close to the Queen, later on becoming her dresser and confidante,

This was not a kindness, at least in terms of fashion. The young Queen briefly courted aspects of the New Look with wide A line skirts and high heels, but then settled into something very basic and boring by the 60s. By the late 80s into the 90s her look was hopeless, particularly her hats. It really has only been in the 21st century that The Queen has been enjoying more fun colors, and fun hats. She’s morphing into late-era Queen Mother in some ways. MacDonald kept the Queen in a very dull pattern for way too long, the period where HM’s hair wasn’t fully gray yet was the worst.

R546 - I think the Queen's "look" was deliberately crafted to form a uniquely identifiable look. The New Look suited both the Queen's and Margaret's small waisted by buxom look. They're both quite short, Margaret even more petite, so it worked well on them. The sixties looked dreadful on Margaret and the Queen, sensibly, realised that the stability of her look was more important than how fashionable or flattering it was. I think Angela Kelly has helped the Queen in the 21st century have a bit more fun with her look but she hasn't, wisely, interfered with its basic gestalt.

I was having lunch with a friend in Liberty's many years ago (plaice and limp leek, what else?) and as we looked around at the matrons having lunch in the room, we realised that the Queen's genius is that she could have come in, sat down at any one of those tables, pushed her coat off against the back of her chair, and fit in comfortably (despite the fact that her coat would have cost a great deal more) chatting away with women with whom she had more in common than might be supposed from the wealth gulf.

So, to me, the Queen's "look" throughout those years achieved its aim and its "hopelessness" was more endearing than anything else. I think it ended up being treasured.

She's a smart old bird - it's a pity Meghan Markle can't look at the Queen and see why so many think the monarchy should go when HM goes.

*but buxom look

R547

What is a "LA style nanny"?Anyone care to explain?Sexy?Free-spirited?Ridiculously young?

An LA style nanny will sleep with the children's father, but dump him for a reality star. She will borrow the mother's ripped jeans while the parents are away and not return them. She will feed the children chia bowls and drink the good wine at the back of the cupboard. She and her boyfriend will have sex in the parent's bedroom using the sex toys in the nightstand. They will find the playboy magazines, and read diaries, and eat all the marshmallow pinwheels. And when they meet the queen they will say "I'm from LA, we don't curtsy."

[quote]An LA style nanny will sleep with the children's father

As if MEGalomaniac cared about Harry and who he's having it off with.

Ok, she would care about him shagging someone else - because she could use it to present herself as the BIG VICTIM of oh-so-nasty Harry and his oh-so-even-nastier family.

George and Louis resemble each other.

Louis looks like a little sweetie.

Wonder if that’s why Kate seems so happy? Maybe she finally got an easy, happy baby.

Love George and Charlotte, but they can seem a bit intense.

A young Charles and Anne.

Wow R553 siblings look alike

Why are you here R556 if it pains you so?

R547, here is an example of the dreadful period that I’m referring. Granted, 80s styles were easy to wear and even Diana had her share of turkey looks. But the hats were just so ugly, and they were also powdering her face too much. But yes you are right, she wanted a sturdy and consistent uniform.

Angela Kelly has HM looking like a lovely spring daffodil now, everything she picks flatters the Queen.

were *NOT easy to wear, I meant

Get the BRF stans and how heavily they’re invested in a family that couldn’t care less about their existence. Losers all.

“Oh, think Kate ith tho sthunning in that dreth. Meghan, ith tho thtacky In comparithon. Tsk, tsk.

R541, those photos aren’t lovely. Take away that title, that old white cunt could barely pass for an Applalachian housewife, fixing vittles her her kin. And those TEETH! Hahahahahaha

Didn't read the whole thread, sorry if already posted. The whore is having her baby shower in NYC, upper east side hotel. ---

Meghan Markle has touched down in the Big Apple to celebrate her pregnancy.

Page Six has learned that Markle is in New York City for her baby shower, which will take place on Tuesday. Markle’s best friend and stylist, Jessica Mulroney, is also in town to shower the mom-to-be. The exclusive party, we’re told, will take place at a hotel on the Upper East Side, with Mulroney taking charge of coordinating everything.

And many thought I was daft thinking that sudden unscheduled Morocco trip wasn't hastily created to keep a very pregnant MEghan from jetting all the way to L.A. to present at the Oscars.

Flying trans Atlantic and transcontinental is inconsequential for this attention seeking cunt.

Wasn't^^^ meant to be read as was.

R562 - If the story is true, it is, of course, classic Meghan: God forbid she should cloak her greed, given her newfound wealth, and skip a custom that is viewed in the country that has given her all her new privileges as a tacky, gauche, nouveau riche one and show more interest in the optics for her One Day To Be Nation. Has she thought about what the taxpayers shelling out three million to renovate her little cottage might think at seeing her fly off ( at taxpayer expense, no doubt) to NYC's fleshpots to pick up a load of expensive gifts because, as they all know, she and Harry can't afford a mobile for the crib and a few onesies?

Setting it in New York City in one of its most luxurious areas will, of course, worsen the optics. Cannot WAIT to see the hay the DM make of THIS. I can see modest, demure, private Kate smiling from ear to ear

Why don't they just bite the bullet now and send her and Harry and the baby to L.A. where they clearly all belong?

And, yes, I think sending them off to Morocco for Oscar weekend was a smart move.

Who exactly are her "friends" who will attend this shower? Mulrooney, Serena, Priyanka (doubt she'd pass up a photo op), her mother and who else ???

Baby Louis looks so serene and even has a "wise old man" aura about him.

Well, it will be a prime opportunity to "merch" all the goodies at the party. Maybe they will sell the pics to a mag like "hello" or similar.

She will be getting everything free for the baby.

No class. Maybe she isn't getting a lot from Harry at all, he gives her an allowance right? Maybe this is for her rainy day fund.

I was gagging at the merching possibilities, a la Star Jones and her gay wedding.

"Mulroney was also in town for an exclusive HarpersBazaar.com shoot for New York Fashion Week."

Probably a few feature articles as well, and perhaps a revelation of her SoHo Bébé line.

She amuses me.

Baby Louis looks like a changeling.

Louis is adorable, and he has the calm demeanor of a kid who already knows he'll always live the life of Riley while never having to deal with the pressures of the heir OR the spare. Talk about the lucky sperm club . . .

Anne looked very smart today. Love the red buttons.

I like to think Louis will become a good-natured bon vivant.

Louis is adorable. Kate seems so crazy about him. The look on her face on the Lindo stairs and at his christening are pure joy.

Louis is fug, like most of the Windsor spawn.

R565 - She really does NOT have a clue about her role and what being a royal entails. She keeps digging herself into a bigger hole.

Meghan had no intention of missing an opportunity to be “celebrated.” American women live for these kind of girl parties, it’s part of “Real Housewives” culture. Can’t you just hear all the high-pitched cooing: “oh my god that little princess onesie is adorrrrrable!!!”

Here is the new thread to use when this one reaches 600 posts.

R572 - Please see R538. Try and keep up.

I agree that the baby shower is sickening. She's living it up on the public teat, and she still wants more. Greedy bitch.

I beg your pardon, R579. Meantime, I just saw this on Instagram. Can anyone say if the queens lovely dress is a Liberty pattern?

None of those children are as attractive as some of you stans purport them to be. Unfortunately for Meghan and Harry, history will repeat itself.

I think it’s fair to say George is an ideal little golden boy. Be interesting to see how his looks develop. He has wonderful coloring, great expressions, and the Diana “gaze.”

William had the Diana gaze too, now he looks like Nosferatu.

If George can just hold onto that gorgeous mop of golden hair....

I think it's safe to say that William and Kate's children will turn out more handsome than William and Harry. They have Kate's sturdy middle-class genes further diluting the Windsor horsiness, something the aristocratically gorgeous Diana couldn't quite do. Perhaps because she had a lot of horses in her family tree, too.

Harry and Meghan's child is a toss-up. Mixed race children are usually highly attractive, but occasionally those vastly heterozygous genes don't mesh well.

It is terribly poignant to think that Diana never got to enjoy her grandchildren. Especially when you think back on those old photos of her as a nursery school assistant. She was a natural with kids, and grandmotherhood would have been a perfect role for her. I wonder how often such thoughts cross Prince Charles’ mind.

I loved it when Charlotte only 2 yo at the time, yawned and covered her mouth.

Hopefully, he'll have Michael Middleton hair, but I'm afraid he'll wind up as bald as a cue ball like his Uncle Gary. If familial balding is passed down through the mother's side of the family, I'm afraid that the picture of his Uncle James posted at R15 is George's future foretold. James does bear quite a resemblance to Tsar Nicholas, but he's a young facsimile of Goldsmith. Top that off with the balding genes from the Windsor side of the family...

R586 Tamera Mowry's son is one of the most beautiful biracial kids I've ever seen

North American woman has baby shower with her North American friends in North America. Shocking!

I think it's fine for the DoS to go to the US for a culturally-acceptable gathering to bless the child (you know they're going to talk about best wishes and positivity for the baby). It's her first child,

Where she needs to cut back is on her clothing budget. Some of her similarly-bland coats could fund a few transatlantic trips.

R560 - Do any of the film stars or athletes with more than 20 threads dedicated to them care anything about any DL posters?

Genes are a real crapshoot. You never know how people will blend.

Plus she's had work done. who knows what she really looks like? And all her siblings are fug. her parents too.

Louis is on the fast track to Alexei Sayledom.

R586 Race isn't "genetic." There is more genetic diversity within racial groups than there is between one racial groups and another.

Biracial children may be beautiful or ugly based on their genetic combo but not because the racial difference of their parents means they are more genetically different than two same race parents.

To be fair, we Meghan probably does need a little break and some downtime with her girly friends.

R591 - You're missing the point. She's a member of the British Royal Family and has applied for UK citizenship. Along with, as you mention, the astronomical price tags on many of the things she appears publicly in, it would have been a politic gesture to forego this tradition. Just the way she should have foregone an orgy of humble-bragging in PEOPLE Magazine, totally oblivious to the deep distaste for such self-promotion (as we all know it was engineered by her) that her new country harbours.

If it didn't come on top of all her other missteps it wouldn't be so bad. But to the taxpayers paying millions to renovate her home, despite the wealth of her father in law, it is bound to strike a sour note.

Sometimes all it takes is one careless gesture to bring down a structure.

Is the baby shower supposed to be before or after Morocco?

MM and Harry have the same nose so I’ll be very surprised if the kid doesn’t end up with it. Other than that, I’ll say freckles. THey both have freckles.

R598. You think she should forgo it. I think a first time North American mother should enjoy celebrating or blessing her baby with her friends.

I didn't miss the point. I disagree with you.

R596 - The leftwing scientific community and the sociologists have been trying to impose their "race is just a construct" mantra on any attempts to explore questions raised by the decoding of the human genome for some time. As that unravelling continues, any questions arising that challenge ideological science (and don't think for a moment there isn't any) will be slapped down.

Given that the people presenting those papers have a clear bias, and a large number of them aren't in fact geneticists, I would guess that the jury is still far out on what the human genome is going to reveal. But it's a safe bet that if the findings are incompatible with politically correct ideology, the findings will be rejected regardless of any proofs

R601 - Fair point, we will have to disagree. And she's American. Mexicans, Canadians, and Americans, one assumes, are not interchangeable culturally.

[quote] "Essentially, I could not agree more with the authors," said Svante Pääbo, a biologist and director of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Germany, who worked on the Neanderthal genome but was not involved with the new paper.

[quote] "What the study of complete genomes from different parts of the world has shown is that even between Africa and Europe, for example, there is not a single absolute genetic difference, meaning no single variant where all Africans have one variant and all Europeans another one, even when recent migration is disregarded," Pääbo told Live Science. "It is all a question of differences in how frequent different variants are on different continents and in different regions."

[quote] In one example that demonstrated genetic differences were not fixed along racial lines, the full genomes of James Watson and Craig Venter, two famous American scientists of European ancestry, were compared to that of a Korean scientist, Seong-Jin Kim. It turned out that Watson (who, ironically, became ostracized in the scientific community after making racist remarks) and Venter shared fewer variations in their genetic sequences than they each shared with Kim.

For the genetics expert at R602.

R594 - Early teen and childhood photos make it perfectly clear what she looks like. If you want to take guesses at what the blend will product, you need to factor in how she looked before the nose job and hair straightening.

She is North American. I prefer not to give citizens of the United States the simple "American" identifier. All citizens of the Americas are American for me. Another topic on which we disagree I suppose.

I never claimed to be a genetics expert. I claimed to distrust a group demonstrating a clear bias toward their findings. And, as we have seen with so much else in, for example, the medical community - they keep changing their minds as new information emerges.

If race is only a social construct, how come a forensics lab can pick up a hair or a blood sample from a crime scene and identify the owner as Asian, Caucasian, black, Native American, etc.?

There is a genetic component to race. Is it all defining and limiting of any individual's life? No. Is it totally a social construct?

I don't think so, and the obvious biases in the group presenting the paper are quite clear.

I think we'll know more over the next twenty years.

R607 Science is always being updated. The current position within the research community is that race is not a useful genetic category. The original comment was about genetic heterogeneity between races. That is not supported by the data. Perhaps that will change in 20 years. Or not.

Soooo...MM is heavily pregnant and her so-called friends, who are wealthy, think that forcing her to come across the ocean for a baby shower is a good idea? Wouldn't they just visit her in London? This makes no damn sense.