British Royal Family Gossip: Part 74

Justin bieber and Kim kardashian have more insta followers. Should they be king and queen megstans?

Boring topic

R1 & R2 = Two people who don't follow instructions well.

Op, the closer a thread gets to 600, the harder it is to post. A lot of threads are abandoned before 600. DL is a lumbering, awkward site.

First picture of Archie shows he has Meg's deep set, dark eyes, but his eyes are quite large too. He has Harry's eyebrows and hair.

Meg and H at Balmoral will upset the Skippies.

Just in case anyone missed it on the previous thread. Here is the Sussex Royal photo of Archie.

700k likes for Archie, 210k for Kate's FD pictures.

I'll believe Balmoral when I see it. The article reminds me of all those articles that assured us that Doria was going to be at Sandringham for Christmas. We all know how that turned out.

Given that Meg and H are so popular worldwide, it makes sense for them to undertake plenty of royal tours to all the exotic corners of the earth. Life will be a permanent vacation for them.

What do Rose’s twins look like? Anything like Will? Any suspicion of that could explain Kate going completely scorched earth. That is a threat to her kids, not just her marriage. I’m just hypothesizing about what the juiciest possible scandal would be. On another note, only one of the twins inherits dad’s title? That’s gonna cause some issues, which would be even worse if the title were HRH.

R8 - I was also thinking that City Girl Meghan wouldn't want to spend her birthday in the wilds of Scotland with the in-laws. If they are invited (and it's doubtful), they'll get their own lodge on the estate.

Actually, the rumour was doria was invited but politely turned the invitation down. She decided she wanted to spend her time in California which isn't hard to believe seeing how quickly she bolted out of there after the wedding.

Doria at Sandringham is much more unlikely than HM's grandson and his wife and son at Balmoral. So funny that you can't accept that HM is fond of her.

R11, it says they will have their own wing. They'll probably go to Sardinia as well for some sun, as summer so far here has been cold and rainy, with more forecast.

Some idiot on here seems to think we care how many Instagram likes each royal post is getting. Now, that is fucking pathetic.

R15 So true! anyone who cares so much about instagram likes is either super insecure, under 18 or a narcissist.

[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.]

Hardly a shock that Archie’s first appearance is getting a s-Ton of likes. People love babies.

Won’t change the hierarchy. Cause it’s not a popularity contest.

It's great that M and H are popular on a global scale, unlike the Cambridges, who are only popular in the Uk.

Margaret liked slumming it with Snowdon when they were courting. They would go for rides on his motorcycle.

Diana had pizzazz.

R20, that’s a great photo. Are her hands in his pocket? Saucy minx.

And my other observation is that I never imagined people on a motorcycle managing to look posh, but they do. That’s funny.

Margaret and dog taken by Cecil Beaton. I like the angle of the photo.

R20 snowdon looks extra zesty there

One of the Queen Mum's nieces married a Prince of Denmark.

Did the Queen approve this endeavor and does she get a cut of the profits Head of the Church of England?

R10 Stop with this boring as fuck talk about random chinless Rose, it ceased to be interesting last month. Who cares, this endless speculation is ruining these threads. If they fucked each other and there was proof, the tabloids would print it end of story, that's how the press works in Britain. They obviously don't have proof just gossip that has been passed to them so they try to insinuate a story to get clicks. It's not fucking rocket science for defamation laws in Britain. The tabloids don't give a shit about offending the royals if they have evidence, that is why we heard Charles's voice recording talking about being reincarnated as a pair of Camilla's knickers but knowing his luck he'd end up being a tampon and flushed down the loo.

Some twits on this thread think the Royals have major control over the press, do you seriously think Murdoch cares deeply for the royals lol

R23 I love this photo, look at those pearls Margaret is casually wearing!

The Queen picking out curtain fabric at her official residence at Holyrood House in Edinburgh.

The sentiments of many people in Britain.

R21 Any jewel experts on here who can identify the necklace and earrings Diana is wearing? they are gorgeous

The Archie photo is working those design rules: reverse z pattern, rule of thirds, tonal balance.

I see you Sussex.

You're giving them way too much credit, R32.

[quote] They obviously don't have proof just gossip that has been passed to them so they try to insinuate a story to get clicks.

Is R27 really getting her knickers in a knot because the Rose Cholmondeley story is pure gossip with little proof...on a BRF gossip thread?

On the previous thread there was a question of why baby Archie looks so different than the "Newborn" in the photo where he was supposedly just born. Obviously the surrogate released Archie after nursing him for 45-days per British law. Curious as to Archie's actual birth date.

Not a cute baby just average and pretty skinny looking for a 5 week old. Definitely blonde or red hair.

R33 I credit the Sussexes with hiring a photographer knowledgeable about composition. The image is evidence of that.

I actually don't like the composition of the Archie photo. It looks like the really wanted the predictable "baby hand grasping dad's finger" thing but also wanted to kinda sorta show his face but not really? Is his face partially obstructed for a reason, or is that just their clumsy way of including both? Something is off about it. Skipping the tired cliche of the finger grasping and giving a better look at Archie's face would have been better.

Great comment.

Kate hardly has her queen consort crown. Recent and distant history shows that the BRF men can and will divorce their wives after heirs are produced. And weather the bad PR storm. I think Kate is in this for as long as possible, but might currently be playing her cards wrong. Yes, she appears ok with William cheating here and there, but we’ve seen fallout of her outing him and being upset over his infidelities. I believe the phasing out was real and she does at times feel he might leave. Even if it will be terrible optics. William isn’t very self aware.

R34 Is didums a sad American Megastan who doesn't understand how the tabloids work here let alone how defamation law differs in Britain? No it's the same rehashed boring shite with no proof or new details except her husband maybe gay or bi. This just about covers most of the aristocracy. The only people who try to keep this story alive are Sparkles sad Stans who come here trying to masquerade as sophisticated gay men.

The Archie photo is a good example of what a Hollywood couple would release to the press. It's pretty shabby for a royal photo.

I am so hoping Arrchie is a ginger, with grandmother Doria's facial features and lovely caramel colouring.

Who uses sepia filter? Did they take it at an Old Time Photo store?

I agree that the composition is poor. Too much going on between the baby’s face (looks cute enough to me!), the hands, Harry’s hairy arms, and the wedding ring stuck right at the viewer’s face.

R39 Jesus is this the best you can come up with? Next are you going to tell us that William will leave Kate for Sparkles, he never really disliked her, all along he was trying to fight his feelings for her but he could no longer hold back. "No allowed" really was code for I want to fuck you senseless. Together they will rule and MM will finally be the wokiest of woke Queen's the world has longed for.

It's a shit photo, wish we could actually see the kids face. It's probably not super cute so she would hide it, like all narc mothers who only care about how beautiful their children look

R42 we don't know, he might. He looks bald in the pic so his hair might be/become light or ginger. But it's hard to tell with that filter and I assume that's not by accident. They don't want us to know yet.

Birthday girl in the wilds of Scotland.

Why would Wills want to divorce Kate? They are a successful team going back a decade. He knows the pain for his children, and he would certainly be aware of the likely fallout. I suppose if he insists on screwing around on her and she won't tolerate it, that might be a reason.

R31 - The circular pendant on the diamond strand is the Prince of Wales monogram in diamonds that Diana was given as a brooch as a wedding present. She had it made into a pendand. The diamond strand looks like one she also used to hand the large sapphire pendant she got from one of the Arab sheiks she got as a wedding present. I'm not sure about the smooth drop below the circular pendant or the matching earrings, partly because the colour is a bit off in the photo. I do rememer the dress, which she wore in Italy. I think the earrings and pendant might be amethysts, but not sure.

^*"pendant" and "hang"

R49

R48 If he falls in love with another woman all bets are off and he/kp and the BRF will rain hell on the middleton-goldsmiths and release the hounds. They will bury them with everything they have in their files and will use the media to sully their fragile reputation. Kate will not be spared.

Do any of the morons predicting a Cambidge divorce actually ever look at them together? Do they LOOK like a couple on the verge of a divorce to you? Does Kate look like an unhappy jilted wife? Either she's the best actress in the world or she truly gives zero fucks about the Rose drama.

R44 - Truly. The post is laughable. Frankly, I think a lot of this is to deflect attention from alleged problems already evident in the Sussexx marriage. Isn't it interesting how all this reappeared after Harry snapped at Meghan on the balcony of BP before the eyes of the world, and how sullen and disengaged he looked for most of the TTC?

Bless your heart, r52. You naive child.

The cambs hardly look at EACH OTHER, let alone in love lol

Those strained smiles that don't reach the eyes hide nothing to those who can see.

We shall see...

Really, as suggested in the last thread, the best way to deflect the Wills/Rose affair rumour, is for the Rocksavages and Cambridges to be seen everywhere together.

Worked for Scarlett and Ashley, after a nasty but true rumour started to make the rounds..

R38 The Sussex creates more curiosity about Archie's face under the guise of having sated that curiosity. That's the point.

The image highlights Harry and Archie's joined hands ie the bond of father and son. It highlights Harry's ring: a reminder of Meghan and also of Harry's difference from his father who hides his wedding ring and his brother who does not wear a wedding ring. Finally, it highlight's Harry's bracelet: this works as a sort of stamp to confirm that wherever else you see this image you can be assured this is Harry because of his iconic jewellery (which is also a reminder of his mother).

The composition pulls the viewers eyes to those key elements. Archie's eyes direct you towards the finger hold and sit directly above the wedding ring. Harry's ring finger then directs the viewer towards his bracelet.

As I said at R32, I think the image is working lots of advertising and commercial photography rules and tropes. A more generous assessment would be that it is like old school portraiture in its attention to the inclusion of selected elements to make a statement about the subjects.

R45 - It's a sweet photo, but it is odd that the photo allowed Harry's hand to block out haf the baby's face. About the only think you can tell is that it's very light-skinned (as expected), and so far appears to take after Meghan.

R36 - You need glasses. Blonde or red hair? First of all, it'a black and white photo,, but even so you can tell the baby has (at this point) has fine brown fuzz on top.

Infant hair does rub off and fall out a few times as it grows in, so the rusty hair might still show, but the baby's eyes are already brown. They aren't likely to turn blue in six months or a year.

Turn around, R54. Just turn around.

What the media failed to report was how harry and meg walked out of the balcony hand in hand.

They also failed to post the pics of them smiling at each other and looking genuinely happy.

Correction: The Sussex IMAGE creates more curiosity.... at R56

R42 - If you're looking for "Diana's features" and the image they put up is anything to go by, you're in for a disappointment. WIth only half his face showing it's clear he already looks like his own mother, not Harry's. And which of Diana's features were you hoping the kid would have? Her very large nose? Her huge blue eyes? Her alabaster complexion? Her straight mousey brown hair (which is what Diana had before she started, quite sensible, blonding)? Her fabulous legs?

Now would be the perfect time for an interview with Thomas Markle, sr.

That is one skinny af baby, wtf

R10 Emaciated, amenorrheic woman with non identical twins = IVF.

R17 - The tabloids also aren't famous for their approach to fact checking. The Middlestons had been invited and on more than one occasion - there are photos of them driving to church at Christmas at Sandringham and walking in the royal parade on that path to St. Mary's.

^*Middletons

My point was....they used a sepia filter for a reason.

They don't want us to know archie's colouring yet. Why is anyone's guess.

The baby can have light, ginger, dark hair or brown, blue or green, hazel etc eyes. We don't know because of the sepia filter. It's impossible to say.

Maybe they want people to be curious about it. Who knows.

I'm thinking MM has been deeply wounded by the barrage of criticism of her looks and is defensive about her baby. Can't say I'd blame her.

R67 She uses the sepia filter a lot. I think she thinks it's sophisticated or something. But yeah, I also don't think it's too far fetched to think she also wants some mystery surrounding Archie. Look at the way they handled the birth announcement.

R8 - Oh, I think the Sussexes will show this summmer - not because they were invited any more than the rest of the family is (generally, most everyone is expected at one or another) or because the Queen and Philip just "adore" Meghan and are inviting her up ESPECIALLY! for the dear girl's birthday (like the Queen gives f.a. about Meghan's birthday any more than William's in July or Anne's in August) but because they weren't there last summer. Not showing at Balmoral two consecutive summers would give rise to rumours, which probably have a grain of truth in them, that the Queen is pissed offf at the Sussexes over brand bullshit and Meghan's grandstanding behaviour.

So I'd put money on them showing up this summer to be papped in the back of the limo going to churcn with Gran, just like Kate and Sophie and Bea and Yuge and Autumn Phillips and Lady Sarah Chatto were last summer. This summer, they are also the parents of the Queen's newest great-grandchild, and the BRF, I'm sure, doesn't want to give rise to rumours that whilst HM is delighted to see her other descendants on brief visits up north, the mixed race one is unwelcome.

Which I'm sure isn't the case: it's the poor babe's Mum who isn't welcome. But HM will grin and bear it to keep the side up.

I don['t think they give a fuck about doing right by Markle tho, she isn't popular at all and has pissed off enough in the media that they aren't going to rush to her aid. Not a single soul in that family is going to want to invite someone that leaks everything and fights a PR war to a private place where they can be themselves.

Only victim here is the kid who probably won't have that close a relation with the cambridge kids.

R30 - LOL - including yours truly here.

One of the top comments on the baby pic is criticizing the Sussexes for teasing the public with partial photos to generate hits and likes. It's like she's building some "reveal" campaign, leading up to the full face pic.

Is Archie talking to the hand?

Gosh, if you're going to wish your spouse and a new father a Happy Father's Day, show him and the baby in full. I can't stand these predictable feet and hands shots. Every frau is doing them. So fucking yesterday.

Violet the blue blood aristo girl that set harry and megs up is pregnant!

Archie will have a playmate in the uk! lol

And hopefully euge's incoming baby as well...

R73 - some people know exactly what Meghan is up to. She's so tacky we don't need her to draw us a picture.

Will the full reveal be in Vogue?

The way she's using her child (grand photo op at Windsor, feet photo, hand photo) is much more revealing and conniving than if she released official photos.

I'm sure I'll get flack for linking this former neo-natal nurse's short video but it does give lots of close-up pictures of baby Archie. Also hints at a big secret.

It's all about control and suspense for Meghan. Harry may care about privacy but Meghan sure doesn't. She's playing him like a violin.

R57 you really have no idea how babies eye colours work

Harry can't say he cares about privacy when he married a woman like her and is complicit in her PR games. He owns this outcome.

R78 She's always playing to the folks back home, showing off. All this competition with the Cambridges is her doing.

R51 Christ you actually sound like Meghan herself...be gone troll

R79 - I have no idea what that video is pointing out. None. Someone explain.

As for the "blonde or ginger hair" - the hair on Harry's arm is light reddish-brown. It's at least three shades lighter than the fuzz on the baby's hair. Archie looks like Mum.

R84 - I've had that poster on block for ages now. Can you see why?

R56: “ A more generous assessment would be that it is like old school portraiture in its attention to the inclusion of selected elements to make a statement about the subjects.”

Yes, all those old-school portraits in which a giant hand obscures most of the face...

What?

The ginger hair on Harry's finger looks like Archie has a runny nose.

She fancies herself the next Chrissy Tiegan (sp?) or a minor Kartrashian. Think Kimye played games with photos of at least one spawn.

So predictable.

Young David and his lover buying an apartment in Paris would have been hot gossip, but dude is old now. Clearly the divorce is coming and she would have lost her social place in that set anyway, regardless of Kate. Extra women, even chinless, are not welcome.

MM is about my age. I remember being obsessed with the Guess ads and the Calvin Klein. Covered my walls in them. The coolest ads were in b&w or sepia. That’s also when all the calendars with the babies posed as angels or kids in adult clothes in sepia (with just a rose colored red) - were the rage. My sister got one every year for a while.

That’s probably the vibe/aesthetic that most stuck with her.

A lot of people get stuck on a certain era but markle seems to take it to the extreme

Princess Eugenie's post for Father's Day.

R81 - Please. I'm perfecty well aware that baby's eyes can change colour through early infancy and childhood. But when a baby's eyes turn brown within the first weeks and months it's very rare for them to suddenly turn blue at four. The kid has brown eyes.

Can any British DL posters answer this question:

Why is Father's Day the same day/month in the UK as the US and Canada but Mother's Day falls in a different month than North America? Anyone know what there's a difference for one and not the other?

Yes Captain Butler, most babies eyes are blue.

Some stay blue and others will darken in a few months.

R93 - it's hard to tell what color Archie's eyes are when the photo is in black and white.

The obsession with this child's colouring is creepy at this point...

What is she getting at in the video?

R89, yes, the Kartrashians teased photos of the boy baby. Didn’t show photos of him for a long time. Everyone guessed he had flippers for arms or some birth defect.

R98, I think it was just bait to see what the crazies would come up with. I don’t see anything but the coy game. The baby looks perfectly normal to me.

Why would the chumleys divorce? Doesn't make any sense.

Meghan is lucky she has an infant and will likely still be breast-feeding in August, otherwise she’d have to partake in country sporting activities at Balmoral, which she’d probably find boring af. Man, how badly is she going to want to post Instabrags from the place?

I wonder why the baby has such a massive piece of clothing (pjamas? grow? ) on that it's rolled up so many times at the arms.

I agree, r71. The BRF knows they have the public on their side and that they do damage, now, to appear to cater to MM.

It's interesting that MM is begging for an invite this year when she seemingly didn't care last year. She probably thought she would be a bigger deal by now. Now, they can barely stomach her presence and even Harry is publicly short with her.

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

R87 were you skimming quickly so you missed the rest of the post; is reading comprehension not your thing; or are you being cunty on purpose?

The statement at R56 clearly points to the area of traditional portraiture I'm referencing. I did not say the image is a traditional portrait. I also started out by noting that it was more like commercial and advertising photography.

My generous assessment of your question is that you quickly glanced at the post and missed my point. You are welcome to correct that view.

R85, R98, R100, Please read the comments for more insightful info. Obviously baby Archie is different from "Newborn Darren." Comments give very specific reasons why this is a fact.

Archie's fingers do not look normal. Are 2 of his fingers fused together? His birth weight doesn't match his previously claimed age. Some posters say he might have Down's Syndrome (?) or another birth disorder. Posters are discussing that this may be one of the reasons the photo is Sepia to distract, as well as that we don't see much of Archie's cute little face.

Again the video creator was a former neo-natal nurse and is extremely observant. More info to be revealed .

[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.]

R75, who’s Violet? I thought she met Harry at her husband’s catering gig! Or was it through one of the York girls at SoHo House? Or was it Misha Nonoo? Now it’s some gal named Violet?

One thing about the truth: it never changes.

I guess the truth is a little embarrassing in this case...

I'm Violet.

R101, I don't see why they should divorce, either. Their arrangement seems par the course for their set.

I think Rose is overplaying her hand and reaching for that gold ring.

R104, what makes you so sure they can barely stand Meghan's presence? If you said her writing, yeah...that's garbage (was that recipe really from her blog? Girl, WTF?). But the actual person? I think she's good with the people that matter. No cares what Anne or Andrew think.

[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.]

Top comment at DM wishes Thomas Markle a Happy Fathers Day.

Lol.

I love that people are trying to figure out the video at R79.

That's Danja Zone aka "the royals are reptilians living among us" "look at Harry shape shift before our eyes" "Diana had to do a vaginal blood sacrifice before her wedding to Charles."

Danja Zone makes Skippy sound like an astrophysicist.

R107, just...stop. Meghan is likely being an asshole re: the reveal because 1.) She can; Archie is HER child; 2.) She knows it creates a feeding frenzy in the press; and 3.) She doesn't want people making fun of her child's looks.

You can't really believe that her being a royal supported by British taxpayers means she's some sort of circus act? You'll see the baby at the christening, chill.

No need to attribute disabilities and deformities to a child based on the word of a "former neo-natal nurse" (that likely graduated from the same school as our resident mental health professionals).

R112, I hope the sound of the horses whinnying didn’t wake Master Awwwchie.

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

The Queen's children literally flanked her at TTC so that MM could not approach. Camilla very pointedly looked nauseous in the carriage ride. No one acknowledged her except her husband and one guy on her left. Her husband publicly snapped at her for all the world to see. What kind of fantasy world do her fans live in that they think she's good with people? Her history of interpersonal relationships is a graveyard. They have her number.

The 'sea sick due to carriage' thing was such a funny attempt

R116 - It's more likely all of the frogs croaking. LOL.

Funny, no sea sickness at previous TTCs.

Our resident troll is furiously trying to deflect from the rumor that Me-Gain and her PR was the source of the Rose rumors. Welp, if that does not give it a bit more credibility, lol.

Paid by the post or just in a manic frenzy? The number of posts even since the update is, err, quite voluminous.

Yes, let's wish a Happy Father's Day to Pa Markle. You do remember him, don't you Bean?

Harry and Archie.

The Sussex family as babies.

It's interesting how the Balmoral story about how the Queen loves, loves, loves Meghan appears just after we learn that the Queen is missing the Christening. And Harry is supposed to be her favourite.

I did not see the story that she is missing the christening. Off to look, unless you have a link, R126. She really is predictable.

I don't think this hairstyle was very flattering on Diana.

SUNDAY, JUNE 16, 2019

Blind Item #3

The alliterate former actress turned A list celebrity has taken to posting on social media in the third person. Apparently it has started to seep into her DM conversations to and she refers to herself in the third person and is becoming annoying because in private, she does it to make herself seem more important.

POSTED BY ENT LAWYER AT 8:30 AM 7 COMMENTS

The backlash for the style was so intense she immediately went back

Oh dear. Harry forgot about his own father.

Some people are on to her.

Archie is going to be the spit of Grandpappy Markle. I'll bet he already has a beard, and a bag of take out, which is why he is partially hidden.

Meg has really elevated Kate to a whole other level, it's actually impressive

King George V and Queen Mary with their children. The youngest sickly Prince John was not pictured.

Diana in her tiaras.

Really r132? Did no one see those photos of the Cambridges with the Tindalls? There have been plenty—PLENTY—of photos taken of the Cambridge kids.

R94, The American Mother's Day was created by greetings card companies, as far as I'm aware. In the UK, Mothering Sunday has religious roots dating back hundreds of years. I think it has something to do with returning to your "mother church" (i.e. the church you attended as a child). Over time, it also became traditional to give your mother a bouquet of flowers on Mothering Sunday. Eventually, Mothering Sunday became more and more Americanised, to the point that almost everyone now calls it Mother's Day and the focus is on buying presents for your mother (and people are often surprised to learn that it was originally a religious holiday). However, we still celebrate it in March, not May.

I'm pretty sure Father's Day is an American import with no origins in the UK. So we celebrate it on the same day as Americans.

R133 thanks for today’s spit out my coffee moment!

I think our Rach would have had a hard time working in a homage to Chuck whilst ignoring Thomas.

Chuck is the one with the $ tho, oops.

As usual, long & short game to the Cambrides, by dint of acting a bit more normal that the psycho Suxxes.

Mother's Day in the US has a strange history. Here is a summary of its beginnings, but the article explains in more detail.

[quote] The American incarnation of Mother’s Day was created by Anna Jarvis in 1908 and became an official U.S. holiday in 1914. Jarvis would later denounce the holiday’s commercialization and spent the latter part of her life trying to remove it from the calendar.

Cambridges

Why withhold an edit button?

I haven't got the time to read the 106736427 comments so can someone tell me why Meghan is getting so much hate for posting Archie's pic?

R135 Based on their ages John was probably dead by then. George of Kent is also missing from the picture.

To each his (or more likely her) own, but I can’t be the only one who quickly scrolls past anything about babies, breastfeeding, boob jobs and body shapes.

Me, I’m looking forward to Ascot. 🎶 “Every duke and earl and peer is here...”🎶 Will the Duchess of Sussex attend?

r127 The original source is the Sunday Times but that's under paywall. The tabs have reported it - "One key member - the Queen - will not be there because of prior commitments, the Sunday Times reports."

Nah, R146, but she is going to watch the tennis.

Prior commitments, love it.

Thanks, R147.

R144, she isn't getting hate. Those of us who love the snark are enjoying her sepia basicness. The conspiracy minded are analyzing the 3 available sightings of Archie for differences. The Kate fans are declaring her the winner in the supposed social media battle.

I wonder if HM skipping Archie's christening gives the whole bunch of them the cover they need to not attend. I can't see Doria flying over for it either. Maybe she will. It's clear Will wants nothing to do with them. They'll probably arrange to be out of the country. If they try to do the traditional family portrait what is that gonna look like? Just them and Archie and Chuck and Cam? A low key, private affair would be the proper thing to do in this case. But with Meg who knows what she'll orchestrate.

I could see the Queen avoiding the baptism if H & M ended up choosing one of the tacky hangers-on as a godparent. QEII isn’t going to take a picture at the baptismal font alongside Jessica Mulroney.

"PH dumped MM Christmas 2016 after she was found to be taking photographs of private areas in one of the palaces. Prince William told her to leave. PH was not with her for the best part of 2017, January to the end of September, during which time she stalked him, turning up unannounced and uninvited at various events across the world, from at least two of which she was evicted. Don't ask why he was 'persuaded' to take her back at the IG, Toronto end Sept, when she and her posse swooped."

This was a comment on CDAN. I did not know this; is it true?

R152 To Jessica’s everlasting disappointment.

The Queen has not attended the christenings of most her great grandchildren, so this is not too be unexpected.

The heir and the spare and heir's heir were a whole different matter, given their places in the line of succession.

The Queen did not attend the christening of Prince Louis.

R107 - Oh for God's sake that baby looks absolutely NOTHING like a Down's Syndrome infant. If that's what the video maker is asserting, she's as much a neo-natal nurse as I am. His finters look perferctly normal. This is tinhatter shit.. "More to be reaveled . . ." yes, that the alleged neo-natal nurse is actually Nurse Ratchett.

R153 That's the conspiracy theory that tin-hat Tumblr blogs have pushed. They claim that Meg was just a fling and Harry dumped her but she stalked him and coerced/blackmailed him into marrying her. She supposedly has powerful backers behind her that want to bring down the monarchy or something and noble Harry was taking one for the team when he married her. They are Harry stans who can't accept that Harry was stupid enough to marry Meghan of his own free will so they concocted some elaborate scheme.

[quote] PH dumped MM Christmas 2016 after she was found to be taking photographs of private areas in one of the palaces. Prince William told her to leave. PH was not with her for the best part of 2017, January to the end of September, during which time she stalked him, turning up unannounced and uninvited at various events across the world, from at least two of which she was evicted. Don't ask why he was 'persuaded' to take her back at the IG, Toronto end Sept, when she and her posse swooped."

[quote] This was a comment on CDAN. I did not know this; is it true?

R153 Yes. It's all true. Skippy told us, so it must be true. MM's backers had an inside man at KP who would tell her his schedule so she could show up at his events. He had no way of blocking her. He changed his number a few times to escape but the inside man would keep giving her the new number. Harry's RPOs are clearly not properly trained because they have no ability to stop her from getting access to him in public. The scrubbed the internet of all the photos of Harry running away from her. We should tell the press about the breakdown in security.

R138 & R142 - thanks for the info.

I'm in the Archie-is-not-so-cute camp. He's sort of ugly-cute in ways that only babies can pull off. Large forehead even for a baby, deep-set eyes, and wide and high nose bridge. Dark eyes that look like they're going to be on the close-set side when he's older. Funny enough he has sort of a preemie to him even though he was 1-2 weeks overdue. He looks like that because of bony head, appears to be on the thinner side not chubby.

Meghan predictably basic AF, is she going to do striptease style reveal of Archie or what? First feet then top half of face, what's next half of a buttock?

R153, the story about photos has been written about several places. Harry was known to be seeing others. She kept turning up, even at a wedding that she was not invited to. So, yeah, seems about right. The IG photos from Toronto were strange. Extensive discussion of them got an earlier thread closed. So, yeah.

The staged invictus game pictures with her directing the camera, with doria there, is still so bizarre. Especially considering harry lost his personal secretary right after that.

The skippies have arrived. Cue twilight zone theme music.

What doesn't make sense is the VF article came out on 6 September 2017 and presumably the interview took place sometime before that. Yet the comment says they were broken up til the end of September.So the interview took place when the relationship was effectively over for at least 6 months?

So why did Harry marry her and look so besotted.. He's not a good actor and has confused lust for love imo.

R56, I've read that English aristos (male) don't wear wedding rings. It's seen as bourgeois. Is the reason Harry doesn't wear one, is because he's not important in the line of succession, or because he's dim and on the outs for his crowd, or because Meghan wants him to?

R151 - The TIMES is carrying the story of the Queen missing the Sussex christening due to "prior commitments". I'm somewhat surprised, as I'd have bet that she would have made a point of attending Harry's first child's baptism, even given its distance from the succession, as the child is mixed race and she has attended some of the baptisms of other great-grandchildren.

If the story is true, then the Cambridges are going to have to attend, as otherwise it will be assumed no matter what the BRFsays that the Sussexes are on the outs with the people higher up the food chain, the people who count for the future, and are being left to their celebrity branding.

So expect Will and Kate. Charles is different, he's the grandfather, and Camilla will dutifully be at her husband's side. If the Queen isn't attending, I'm also guessing that someone like Zara Tindall (family) and one of Harry's aristo pals have to be among the godparents. Otherwise, if it's all nonroyal, nonfamily, and non aristos, it nails the Sussex Part of the BRF but Outside it flag to the mast.

Bullcocky!

Every male royal wears one (on the little pinky finger, tradition) except william who didn't even bother having one made!!

That comment on CDAN is not accurate at all. Harry was seeing MM that whole time. However, she was certainly not the only girl he was seeing.

I don't think they'll force the cambridges to go, they'll be on some very important royal engagement

The VF has been spoken of as playing to his white knight need, from his mother, and forcing his hand by manipulating him.

If they were in the US that would be hilarious, R170.

R152 Good call. The Queen probably foresaw that the christening is going to be celebrity-filled and tacky. Best not to be included in the photos. Including Eugenie as a godparent would be a nice touch so it’s doubtful that will happen.

R166 Men didn't traditionally wear wedding bands. This wasn't limited to the aristocracy. WWII is when the practice became popular. Fighting men wore them to remind themselves of their wives. Later, a wedding ring only for the bride became seen as a sign of ownership. An exchange of rings signalled equality.

I have no idea why Harry wears a wedding ring. My guess is because he's always been more of a "man of the people." William's lack of a ring is very traditional. Harry's ring may be seen as more contemporarily commonplace. That's all just conjecture on my part.

R173 - Among likely family members is probaby the sweet-natured Eugenie or Zara Tindall. I doubt Andrew will care for the idea, though. He's been quite ruthless about showing his lack of enthusiasm for Meghan after the maternity coat stunt at Eugenie's wedding. I can just hear Harry begging Inskip or von Staubenzee to serve for the sake of appearances. Wouldn't it be a hoot if one of Charles Spencer's four kids showed up?

r155 Why bring up Prince Louis? He's not the first great grandchild from her grandson, he was the third. This is the first great grandchild from her supposedly favourite grandchild. It's interesting. She attended the private christening for Lena Tindall that someone felt the need to leak to the world's media. It will be interesting to see which other royals have prior engagement. I think that Charles and Cam can't really avoid it but everyone else is fair game.

^*Straubenzee

N79 That video is not credible at all trying to make it seem like there's something wrong with Archie's fingers. What's the nurse trying to infer from it? Because I certainly don't see anything unusual enough to send for some genetics studies to check for syndromes. We used to call these newborn infants FLKs (funny looking kids) because they look syndrome-y. We'd then do genetic tests on them and most of the time our hunches were true. From the photo I don't see any webbed/ fused fingers, I see an infant with large, chubby fingers not that unusual. Also, someone mentioned Archie's size seemed smaller. Well duh, newborn infants can lose up to 10% of birth weight and still be within normal weight loss range. Weight loss is also on the higher end particularly if the baby is strictly breastfed. Lastly, if the person who made the video says she's a neo-natal nurse then I'm not entirely certain of that either. It's neonatal not neo-natal, that's a giveaway something in the milk ain't clean. The comments under that video are all hideous, dumb fraus into conspiracies. I hope none of them have children, people that dumb should not have kids.

Men foregoing wearing rings is NOT traditional amongst their set; signet rings (it's the pinky ring described up thread) are standard for the royal husbands.

No need to lie yourselves into knots.

My American parents were married in the early 60’s and my father never had a ring. My impression is that the practice became commonplace in the US first. The custom has a practical purpose - to identify a married man in a modern world where even lower and middle class people travel frequently and people aren’t limited in their contacts to a small social circle. William doesn’t need one because everyone knows who he is and who he is married to. I think that is a sign of prestige. Harry wearing one seems bourgeois to me. But I am not a reliable judge of social class markers.

People seem to love the babies in the not cute camp. Mini Swamp Thing, I mean Prince Louis,' Insta debut got 1.1M likes. Now Alien vs Predator, I mean Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, has 1.5M likes.

R102 She's not breastfeeding. She wouldn't have been so fat at TTC if she'd been successfully breastfeeding for 5 weeks.

[quote] No need to lie yourselves into knots.

R179 The information with which you disagree isn't necessarily a lie. The BBC disagrees with your claim. I'm not an aristocrat nor did I claim to be one. I posted a link to the source of the information I provided at R174

[quote] A generation or two ago, a British prince choosing not to wear a wedding ring would have barely drawn comment. But the headlines that followed that decision by Prince William show that rings for husbands are now the norm.

[quote] William's decision not to wear a wedding ring isn't unique even in his own family. Prince Charles does wear one - next to a signet ring on the little finger of his left hand - but the Duke of Edinburgh does not.

Why is everyone online so mad that Meghan posted a pic of Archie? I thought they wanted to see the baby. Meghan is so awful but how is it self promotion? We saw the Cambridge kids' pics too.

R184 - there's a difference between posting a photo of Archie head shot and posting a big hairy hand smothering Archie.

Because she keeps doing artsy nonsenses. Instead of just showing us a picture of the baby and father, we have to see these artsy sepia toned finger shots. That's what celebs or instagram influencers do, not royals whose existance is paid for by the taxpayer.

I think Archie looks more like Harry. Well, from what I can see from the baby's half face.

This is Archie's future. Shudder.

Harry wears a wedding ring because Meghan told him to.

End of.

Charles has more wrinkles than his mother the Queen.

I don’t think the CDAN comment was quite accurate, but contained some grains of truth. I think she was not the only woman he was banging, and I do believe she was taking photos where she shouldn’t, and showing up uninvited. Just my two cents. I think she can be unrelenting in her pursuits and shrewd in manipulating men.

Thanks R174

R178 - agree. Not a Megstan by any stretch, but I don't see anything there. Could there be? Perhaps? Who knows - from those photos it's impossible to tell, and the speculation in the comments is pure guano.

For the record, count me in among those who believes that for whatever reason she's not breastfeeding. I don't know why (surgery on her part, developmental issues on Archie's, or just general failure), but she's way too fat for someone whose postpartum period is going well.

It’s always unfortunate when, for whatever reasons, a woman can’t breastfeed her child. For both nurturing and health reasons.

I’m sure Meghan Markle is frustrated and disappointed at her inability to breastfeed her baby Archie (agreed with the other observers stating that MM doesn’t seem to be breastfeeding).

To everyone saying that Archie looks too skinny (He looks normal to me but wtf do I know about babies?) don't worry, the Markle fat genes will kick in soon enough and he'll plump up.

It is absolutely possible to breastfeed and not lose or even gain weight. It is less likely for someone with her resources, but some new moms who are figuratively tied to a newborn 24/7 eat enough out of boredom to offset the caloric requirements of nursing. And if she is breastfeeding and having difficulty producing enough milk, the last thing she would want to do is diet or exercise aggressively. You can lose weight faster by crash dieting than by breastfeeding.

I haven’t seen a full body photo of her, not sure why the consensus is that she’s huge. If she isn’t breastfeeding, maybe the fat face is a combo of weight gain and pre-period bloat. On some women, the bloat is very visible in the face. But I just don’t see a fat woman.

When she turned back towards Harry you could see her stomach sticking way out. She's big af

There are a lot of overweight women who breastfeed exclusively, and yes they're still fucking heifer-like. Breastfeeding isn't going to magically melt away excess weight gained during pregnancy. Sure it burns up more calories but not enough to get you back into pre-pregnancy weight. We had breastfeeding new moms in the ICN where I worked in the mid '00s, from new moms to moms breastfeeding infants under 1 year of age (cut-off age for ICN). The majority is overweight or average-overweight not svelte by any stretch.

Meghan tends to be a little chunky naturally (look at pics from when she was younger) but she starved herself to get really scrawny before the wedding. She must have spent those two months that she was out if sight binging non-stop. Pretty normal after starving for so long and knowing she was not gonna be out in public for a while. Besides, she had the excuse that she was eating for two. A lot of Hollywood types take Adderall to keep their weight down too. If she was doing that, it wouldn't have been an option when she was pregnant. She probably gained more than she expected and thought it would come off easier than it has.

Didn't she have some sort of contract with Trevor that he would pay for her trainer to take off the baby weight if they had kids together? Maybe she should spend a little less time on Instagram and a little more time on the treadmill if her weight is a concern.

If Archie is going to be christened in the first week of July, I think I know where the Queen will be.

It's late and we've moved on but here's the proper link to the TIG Cup recipe. It's understandable that people thought it was a parody; that's just the maraschino cherry of it all!

[quote] Meghan tends to be a little chunky naturally

Is normal body weigh chunky now?

Here is Meghan at her high school prom. There are lost of photos of her as a child, teen, in college and during her Deal or no Deal days. The largest I've seen her is in those awful glamour model photos with the telephone (Oh, my eyes). Her weight has fluctuated over the years but I'm yet to see a "chunky" picture other than during her pregnancy and postpartum period.

When was Meghan chunky?

Show me the receipts! (In my best Whitney-Houston-on-coke voice)

^^^^weight

R201 this stuff is so cringe, I love it. Let's hope she's not like this real life, she'd be unbearable.

The Tig description is also gold:

The TIG is a hub for the discerning palate - those with a hunger for food, travel, fashion & beauty. I wanted to create a space to share all of these loves - - to invite friends to share theirs as well, and to be the breeding ground for ideas & excitement - - for an inspired lifestyle.

This is the TIG, and this is just the beginning.

The fact that Queen will not be attending Archie's christening is absolutely not a snub. She's not going to deliberately skip the christening of her first biracial descendant. She knows how that would look. She must have prior engagements. Remember when she and Philip posed for that photo with the Sussexes and Doria just after Archie was born? She didn't do that for any of her other great-grandchildren, as far as I'm aware.

R202, Meghan looks older than a teenager there. Strange, because she looks pretty young for her age now.

When Archie was born they made it a point of mentioning that Harry's Spencer aunts were among the first to visit. Maybe they or someone on that side. Harry doesn't seem to have any friends left except that Nacho dude.

Meghan is going to get skewered for whomever she picks (rightfully so) unless it is some obscure college pal we haven't seen or heard much from. Mulroney is a logical choice given their history, but she'll look like a over-filled tart. Any of her Johnny-come-lately celeb friends will just emphasize her shallowness. Doubtful any aristos want any association with this. Hopefully Zara, because she would probably be the only one of the whole lot that would try to play an active role in his life.

Poor Archie. His life will either be lonely or filled with whatever revolving, superficial trash surround his parents.

Meg as a chunky kid

Really, prior engagements? That they cannot schedule around or rearrange? Lol, okay.

r205 Who is saying the Queen not attending is a snub? Why do you automatically assume it's a snub then feel the need to deny it? It is interesting though that the Harkles were unable to chose a day when the Queen was available...

Crack, dear. Best Whitney Houston on crack voice. She tried it with that lie; that interview is a classic. Almost up there with the time Wendy was on the radio...sigh.

That prom picture shows an overly eager, harmless cornball not some mastermind in the making. She deserves a pass; high school pictures are rarely forgiving.

A royal reporter is reporting that Charles, Camilla, William, Kate and Doria will be in attendance.

R201 My god that drink looks awful.

“DIRECTIONS 1. Stack a sprinkling of the cucumber/mint/celery/radish/lime into the glass. Fill glass with ice. 2. In a shaker, add a couple ounces of gin and a splash of the maraschino cherry liqueur.”

A stacked salad in a glass with some gin and maraschino cherry liqueur (?) poured on top. It’s like someone invented a Shirley Temple just for vegans.

I can believe The Queen and others are fond of MM and enjoy having her around. In the royal family, there are a lot of awkward personalities, not to mention funds/simmering resentments, so having a new socially adept person around can make things more enjoyable.

"The christening? Why, I wouldn't miss it for the world. (You just know I'm going to look amazing.)"

R206 I think most American teenagers look way older than their age. Kylie Jenner at 17 could pass for 25 IMO.

R208 You can't see her body. Her face is wider than the person she's next to, that's not the same thing as being chunky. That's within the range of normal weight. Give me some rolls and a double chin.

R211 Crack is whack! (Yes that was a classic interview. Absolute must see tv.)

R214 - thanks for the laugh! Now run along and play with your dolls.

I don’t think Jessica or Amal can be a godparent, as they are not Christians. Although I wouldn’t put it past either one of them to convert, solely for the status and photo op.

Which thread was it where someone predicted the Father’s Day pic would be the baby gripping Haz’s fingers in either sepia or B&W? She is so basic. Pinterest chic.

[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.]

R207 - the Godparents of a child born into the CoE, whose Great-grandmother is the Head of the Church, Grandfather is the future Head of the Church, and uncle is the future Head of the Church, should probably be CoE. Can you see why? Americans may think of this as an honor you bestow upon a friend akin to being "Best Man" at a wedding. GB is still a Constitutional Monarchy and the Monarch is still the Head of the Anglican Church. (for the slow: QEII is the equivalent of the Pope!)

So, the godparents need to be up to speed and pass muster for the Church of England. So if the choices are Amal Clooney and George Clooney, however, vaunted their celebrity status - one's a Druze and the other's an atheist. Serena Williams is a Jehovah's Witness.

It would be advisable to stop fucking over the British taxpayer (by the way, "separation of church and state" isn't a thing where the monarch of a constitutional monarchy is head of the national church) and choose some actual Anglicans.

it's pretty guaranteed that markle won't understand the value of godparents, americans see it more as a 'non-relative that i trust to take care of my kid' and not a religious thing

R208 Which one is Meg?

Archie will look a lot like his grandfather.

And I'm not talking about Prince Charles.

A collection of Meghan through the years, complete with wide face, original nose, pre braces/veneers teeth, and giant glasses.

Bitch has no "thick in the middle" photos.

R212, Kate will wear something completely used and recycled and she'll still be the most beautiful woman there. Camilla will wear the best jewels and/or the best hat. Hopefully both. George will be well-behaved, Charlotte and Louis will play for the crowds. William will try not to look like he hates being there (he probably won't succeed). For that matter, Camilla will hate it too, but she probably has a flask and is better at hiding it. Meg will still be fat. Harry will still look like a lost soul.

R227 - no one said anything about the three Cambridge children attending Archie's christening.

R228 You're absolutely correct. They shouldn't - they would steal the show. They attended each other's successive christenings of course, but those were close family affairs. This is more of an obligation. There's not a compelling reason for them to be forced to attend.

[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.]

R227 hope we get more camilla and Kate content, laughing together, talking etc. Those could be a great double act.

Keeping it in the family...Father Dickie Arbiter was the Queen's Press Secretary and now his daughter Victoria is a Royal Commentator.

why would she think that dress was flattering?

You could see the Queen for miles!

Camilla with her ex-husband and his second wife. I think he's a widower now.

I can see the resemblance.

R233 because it displays cleavage (not well, but it's on display, which was the point)

The Valley Girl hard at work.

The Queen and Prince Philip dancing.

The Queen is amused.

Still my favorite of the whole bunch: Sarah, Duchess of York, has personality and pizzazz.

R235, why straight men the world over aren't mad about this woman makes no sense to me: she's laid back and plays well with others (drinks and rides horses and doesn't give AF if you go off to noodle with your guns), she obviously has low standards for her mate's appearance, she's probably quite a free-spirited roll in the hay (she didn't dump Charles when he was jealous of her tampons, though the rest of the world cringed in horror).

I know that not everyone cares about her jewelry and hats, but she was formerly married to a British officer - she's probably quite a blast. And what 60+ year old woman doesn't have saggy tits (ahem, Madonna)? At least they're there.

R239, If William really wanted to take control of the headlines, he'd borrow his Grandfather's kilt & jacket this summer at Balmoral. Someone please message their social minion.

R68. I’d like to count all the people Meg has wounded. There would be enough to fill up Yankee Stadium. Happy Father’s Day, Thomas.

R242 Most straight men find Camilla to be physically repulsive.

R221 Name any actress in Hollywood with their original nose - excluding Babs and SJP.

Halle Berry had a nose like Meghan's a long time ago, and quickly had it nipped and tucked early on in her acting career.

R245, that's my point, dearie. Straight men are stupid.

Look another black female gets a nose job...seems to be a trend among show biz folks!

Tyra did a major chop-chop.

Thank you but please stick to the subject of the thread.

The Queen was well turned out at today's event as always, but her coloring was not her best. Too much foundation, or something. Only notice because she always looks so perfect.

When the subject arises of a biracial actress getting a nose job, the topic of Hollywood, black women and noses is absolutely on topic.

And who made you the hall monitor here?

R247 Most straight men want a beautiful and feminine woman to lust over. They don't want a girlfriend to be one of the boys. Imagine Mick Jagger dating Camilla.

Andrew Parker Bowles was said to be the best fuck around at the time. It’s been reported that Anne never got over him and his magical dick. I bet Camilla is a lot more firey in the sack than she looks.

I wonder if things were ever awkward between Anne and Camilla because of that. But then it seems all aristos fuck around and there never seems to be any hard feelings about it.

R233, the photos of MM from that event are baffling. She looked seven months pregnant. It wasn’t just the dress. Maybe it was PMS bloating.

Baffling, because the rest of her is skinny. But the midsection is big.

Ladies, white women get nose jobs too. (Jennifer Anniston, Paris Hilton). Even Angelina Jolie has had work done.

I'm all in for cattiness, but draw the line at overt racism. A bridge too far and all.

R256, it has been acknowledged that every actress in Hollywood except La Streisand and SJP has had their noses done. Nobody’s being racist about nose jobs here. Is it racist to talk about implants and nonexistent calf muscles, too?

It’s tiresome to be scolded about something that nobody is actually doing.

R257 You may not be doing it, but others on this thread are racist and are quite overt about it.

Hell, even Di had a nose job. What’s remarkable is when some Megstans try to tell people with eyes that she still has her original nose.

Unlike the boob situation there is no debating this.

gossiping about people that have put themselves out there is now overt racism. stop being so fucking pathetic

R253, maybe Mick would've been less randy if he'd had a woman instead of a series of famewhores? Otoh, how else would they have kept up with him?

I don't know. I wasn't there. I don't understand what straight men want - because it appears to be (often but not always) crazy bitches who make them unhappy. Meghan Markle is in that category (most Hollywood types surely are). She was hot. This is an important distinction: she was never beautiful. Never. But she was hot. Now she is neither. She is unlikely to regain her hotness, because middle-aged women aren't hot. She can't regain beauty, because she never had it. Angelina is hot, but she doesn't make anyone happy - including her tribe of children.

Diana was beautiful and a bit crazy, but let's not go there. For the record, she was was beautiful, not hot. Kate is freakishly sane, it must be her "middle class" roots (as if most of us could call ourselves "middle class" with that kind of money, but it's another tangent). Kate isn't hot but she is beautiful. This is why she will continue to age well and Meghan will continue to age poorly.

Beautiful vs. hot? Straight men will always go for hot. In the meantime, as women age some of them seem beautiful and many don't.

"At 50 you have the face you deserve."

Did Princess Diana really have her nose done? It’s not like it was small afterwards.

Lmao, Instagram is on fire tonight

#dropmeoffattgangans

R262 She had the crookedness fixed.

The poster who originally mentioned the nose job only did so because some Megstan nutters claim she's never had plastic surgery.

No one cares that she had surgery. She is either loathed or ridiculed either way. Why don't you Megstans realize you are part of the reason most people despise her?

Diana had a great nose - without it she would have been cute but not beautiful. A big nose can give a face classic structure - look at Marella Agnelli.

I’d say Kate is pretty but not beautiful. She has great eyes from Carole.

I would not be surprised if a lot of Meghan’s anxieties stem from being an apple shape who’s quick to gain weight in her face. You can really puff up overnight. Might be why she’s always trying to position herself for the camera and her clothes are often too baggy (you can get by with something too big, but not something too tight). I still can’t believe the missed opportunity that was her zzzz wedding dress!

"The giant hand and the half-revealed baby: What a strange photo".

One of the comments on this blog mentions DL., lol.

Prince Philip told Harry not to marry Markle. Allegedly. Telling him “One steps out with actresses, one doesn’t marry them”, it is claimed. I have to say the Sun is coming with some interesting negative MM stories.

Samantha Markle has been awfully quiet...and what happened to her book deal.

Interesting R261. I’d say that smart straight guys fuck hot but marry beautiful (if they can.)

That’s the mistake Harry made and what Philip was getting at. Meghan types are fine for fucking but you don’t marry them.

Harry, no about of ginger facial frizz is going to compensate for the fact that you're going BALD. (click through for baldy pics)

(P.S. Your grandfather has unflattering things to say about your wife. But, we all knew that by now.)

R264 - then let's see some photos of BEFORE and AFTER Diana's nose job. You seem to know something that no one has ever revealed before. I'm guessing you're full of shit.

I think Archie is going to look like his father, but with his mother's coloring.

I think he looks more Markle so far. The brown bone area in particular. What we see so far looks Markle to me, especially in the collage photos with all three as babies.

It's hard to tell because Meghan and Harry both have close-set eyes, and the sepia tone makes the baby's coloring impossible to decipher. We'll get better photos at the christening, presumably.

Diana with her original crooked nose.

Diana after she got her nose fixed

Original honker

Improved honker

Well done, William.

Can't see R278 link in the UK.

*moan, moan, moan"

I mean R279, not 8

Here's another with her nose straightened.

If she did have it straightened, why not a better job of it? It was the decade of excess. after all.

I'm not being funny, I don't know whether she did or not. I would probably veer to the side of yes, she did. But if so, it's so subtle. I would have wanted it , well, cuter. It was still broad at the bridge.

R284 I think she was going for subtle. Which is usually best. I think she wanted her basic nose, just straighter.

The baby looks like Harry

Her face was so well known she couldn't risk a major nose job. Subtle was her only option, and it was the right one.

The beady Mountbatten eyes win again. Oh well, at least it's not the Hanoverian pop eyes like poor Bea has, or the terrifying Freddie Windsor.

For the idiots on here who seem to think signet (pinky) rings are wedding rings, they are not wedding rings.

Okay R286, I’m convinced. Judging from the photographs, Diana had a subtle nose job done in the late 1980s. Thank you for providing the photo documentation.

Why is baby Archie in a babygrow that's miles too big for him? so odd. He does look very scrawny which isn't great for a 5 week old, so I'd say he's breastfed but it's not going that great by the looks of his size. Even if he hasn't put on weight you can buy a babygrow that would fit even the tiniest prem baby. These two parents are just odd especially as she knows how many people will look at the photo. Unless it's an old one of Harry's and she is trying to make some sort of statement.

Meant to thank R276 for the photo evidence of Princess Di’s nose job.

Phillip is so handsome in the photo at R288. Harry never came close to that.

R291 It's more practical to get bigger sizes for a newborn because they grow so fast. Newborns are usually scrawny because they are constantly growing. Prince Harry was also pretty scrawny when he was about the same age. Prince Harry was born on September 15, 1984. The picture below was taken on October 11, 1984.

R288, Phil's straight up hot. Harry doesn't look like him, he's more Spencer.

R295 Prince Harry looks more like his red-haired aunt, Lady Sarah Spencer.

most very wealthy don't sweat having to buy a ton of clothes for their newborn, unless the budget has been cut back for the Sussex couple

How many people are we up to who told Harry not to marry her? When pretty much everyone you know is telling you that you are making a huge mistake wouldn't you at least stop and think about it a bit before plowing ahead?

Harry is such a fucking idiot.

R242 Camilla has never been a great or even near, beauty. When SJP ranks above you in looks, you're not even in beauty's front yard.

From what I've read Camilla is one of those rare beings who, because she has a compelling personality, her looks become irrelevant. Supposedly Bette Davis and Aristotle Onassis were the same.

Meghan spent their entire clothing budget on herself so there wasn't any money left to buy anything for Archie.

R297 It's still wasteful to spend a lot of money on clothes for a newborn. A newborn would outgrow the clothes in a matter of weeks.

Who says the photo is current? It could be 3 weeks old

R297 what exactly was her multi-million dollar baby shower for, if not items for her baby?

R299 - Disagree, respectfully. Camilla is better looking than SJP. Certainly SJP wears fashion better, but she has a face like a horse whereas Cam looks like she knows how to get a good ride on one.

I doubt the Cambridge kids will come to Archie's christening - Prince George, perhaps, but not the two scene-stealers, lively Charlotte and adorable baby Louis. You don't usually bring young cousins to a formal royal christening. Siblings, yes - cousins this young, likely not. And IF the Queen is not attending, it's probably plausible that they picked a date on which she couldn't - but it's also plausible that she already made it clear that she didn't want to attend, and they picked a date on which she had other commitments to make it easy for all concerned.

This is Harry's first child. It was fine for the Queen not to attend William's third child;s christening - she went to George's (naturally, Willia's first and a future heir), and Charlotte's, the first Princess in direct line.

But it does say something if she doesn't attend Harry's first child's christening. I think the Queen not only actively dislikes Meghan, but is angry at how she and Harry have behaved over the last year, and just as she refused their child an HRH, is sending a clear message on that IF she doesn't attend the christening. She'll insist that William and Kate take one for the team and represent her, in addition to Charles and Camilla. Especially as Harry and Meghan attended Louis's christening last year.

Of course, if neither the Queen NOR the Cambridges attend, the cat will be well and truly out of the bag. But I'm not expecting that extreme a message.

Cam is a lot of fun.

What was the larger family circle at Louis's christening? Agree with R305. Charles and Cam and William and Kate have to go. But now I'm curious who all attended for Louis (I'm thinking about the Phillips's and Yorks and Wessex, etc.)?

Kate, an amateur photographer, takes her own photos of George, Louis and Charlotte at birthdays, etc.

It would not surprise me if Megan decided she, too, would become her own royal photographer, which is why we (or at least her Bot farm “followers”) were treated to a crappy, sepia-drenched photo of Archie and a man’s hand (a hand that may not even belong to Harry—perhaps his stunt double, Markus?)

After all, in Meg’s fantasy world, Doria (like Ma Middleton) was a flight attendant!

I think Diana is on record as saying that she would like to have a nose job, but couldn’t because, “What of something went wrong?”

Obviously doesn’t mean she didn’t have one.

R308 Of course, Kate is actually educated on the subject of art which presumably includes composition. Certainly more than one would pick up by following Hollywood Instagram feeds, which is really more Meg's oeuvre.

Speaking of money spent on clothing, the annual budget should be released within the next two weeks.

It’s usually the last week of June but if I remember correctly some years it has come a little earlier.

I think that the Queen made it known that she wasn't attending the christening long ago. That's why they got that one-off photo at Windsor at Archie's presentation as a consolation. I don't blame the firm for not wanting the Queen to be immortalized in portraiture with whatever riff-raff MM chooses as godparent.

Harry was in Africa and missed Charlotte was christening. So it is possible the Cambridges could arrange to be away when Archie is christened.

R306, Go Cam! She knows how to move a nice piece of flesh around. Rawr! (SJP would just giggle at the camera, silly twat.)

R306 Cam is a cheating whore.

Thst picture is so odd. The wedding ring is the focal point and everything else is slightly off focus. Such a glum picture for what should be a happy subject. How do you get a baby picture wrong?

Cam is literally tapping that ass. I love her more every day.

Camilla was good friends with Joan Rivers. Kathy Griffins tells a story in her book of Joan inviting her as her +1 to a weekend at Windsor. Barbara Walters was also friends with Camilla and said she had a "bawdy" sense of humor.

Wonder what William will fiddle with at the christening to deflect Meggy's attempts to engage him...it will be too hot for a scarf...maybe his cuff links or jacket buttons?

R316 They are trying to be artsy and different. Does it look like that Harry is giving his enemies the finger? It seems like something that he would do.

Link for the annual review if anyone wants to save it, and keep checking on 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.]

[quote] crappy, sepia-drenched photo of Archie and a man’s hand (a hand that may not even belong to Harry—perhaps his stunt double, Markus?)

The arm in the photo is most likely Harry's. He doesn't wear a signet ring, but his bracelet functions in a similar way. He's worn it for more than 20 years. I can't imagine him handing it over to Markus or anyone else.

[quote] Prince Harry pays sweet tribute to mum Diana as he introduces his son to the world – with bracelet he’s been wearing for the 22 years since her death

I used to feel sorry for Megs and think she was making so many mistakes because she must be so nervous.

Now I’m getting a truly mentally ill vibe from her. That photo of Archie (that fucking name!) is disturbing, depressing, and creepy. The baby looks scared.

R289 R294 Poor Archie inherited ugly baby genes from Harry.

It's not my fault.

^^^^That should be R286

Archie looks Downs. Poor little mite.

Happy Father's Day to everyone but Thomas Markle!

Charlotte and George got the homely inbred genes but Louis is cute.

R317, OMG - Bravo. I salute you.

R307 - Just an FYI on Charlotte's godparents - they included Laura Fellowes (Diana's sister's daughter) and Thomas von Straubenzee. So the Cambridges have already gotten a Spencer and aristo circle godparent that Harry might have wanted.

Re Louis's christening: the royal family guests were the Sussexes, Camilla and Charles, Pippa and her husband, Kate's parents and brother.

The godparents incuded Nicholas van Cutsem and Guy Pelly (allegedly bpt close friends of both William and Harry), Lucy Middleton, Lady Laura Meade (daughter of Julian Marsham, 8th Earl Romsey and the wife of one of William's closest friends), and Mrs Robert Carter.

These are the lineups that Harry would have expected to have for his firstborn. It will be interesting to see if he manages to rope them in. Needless to say, all are white and upper-class to aristocratic. If Harry pulls this sort of lineup (given that Amal Clooney and Jessica Mulroney and Serena Williams aren't even Christians, leaving Meghan somewhat short of celebrity Christians, let alone of colour outside of Oprah), the flack from the minority community will be merciless.

Of course, the irony is that underneath it all, these are exactly the people Meghan really wants - this is the circle she married Harry to get in. So she's kind of backed herself into a corner: either her son gets stuck with the celebrity grandkid that the aristos despise, or she goes for the aristos she really wants so her kid is recognised as One of Them.

My guess is she gets Oprah for the token minority celebrity godparent, and Harry pulls in Inskip and a von Straubenzee and a Spencer coz and Zara Tindall or Eugenie to make things look all right.

R326 - He looks nothing of the kind. Infants with DS are instantly recognisable and if he were the Palace would have announced it.

I doubt George will be there. Don’t think they want the kiddies near Meg. I don’t think Will and Harry can stomach even being in each other’s presence. Wouldn’t shock me if the Cambs didn’t show.

R321 - The Annual Review, which I read, does not give the slightest hint at how much Charles gave either of his sons for their wives wardrobes. It just states that "everything in connection with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex is contained within the expenses for the Duchy or Cornwall [that is, that weren't covered by the Sovereign Grant]".

R329, Thank you for the breakdown. Is Oprah Anglican or Episcopalian though? Whatever the American equivalent of Church of England is?

There are so many more flavors of religion here, but isn't the very entire point of being a godparent to raise a child spiritually if the parents are unable to do so? And given that Archie's father's family is the bedrock of the CoE, shouldn't his godparents be CoE or at least Anglican? What else would be the point?

Someone on the Cambridges' social media team doesn't like Kate, or just sucks at their job. In that photo at R327 Kate looks maniacal. There are better photos of her from TTC. Let's hope that person is still on probation, or is a low level intern who will be moving on soon.

Attention would be her point, R333. Seems to be the case each and every time.

R329, Jehova’s Witnesses are considered Christian.

I honestly don't get the comments saying that Meghan was "hot". She wasnt anything close to that. Even on Suits when she looked her "best" she wasn't. It's mind boggling.

Agree, R337. The burger vid was like a parody, likely why there were so few takers, even among the z list.

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

Ugh, soz

Meghan *was* hot, she was just a very specific kind of hot - the kind most appreciated by straight, skewing young, and not particularly complex men. The kind of hot that is actually harmed by things like that BBQ vid (because it allows a person's manner and body language to interfere with the simple fact of their looks). Meg isn't embarrassing in that video because she's ugly or physically unattractive - she's embarrassing because you can see how awkward she is, how hard she's trying in order to not quite pull any of it off. Straight men generally don't give a fuck about that because, as another poster pointed out upthread, straight men are stupid. They get all mesmerized by shiny hair and boobies and don't even register anything else. Or they're like Harry and they see that BBQ vid and, as well as being mesmerized by boobies, they're unsophisticated enough to think that cringey finger sucking and hair flipping is actually "sexy."

I still want to know who's responsible for Harry being such an easy mark. Did Phil honestly not sit that boy down one day in his mid adolescence and lay out the "you're a Prince, so this is the kind of woman you fuck but don't marry, and this over here is the kind of woman you marry" situation? He married one of the ones you're only supposed to fuck, the gigantic ginger idiot.

Troll Call

Welp Troll

Narc Troll

Fugenie's Wedding Troll

Celebitchy Troll

Tiara Troll

Archie Looks Like Thomas Markle Troll

Catherine the Great Troll

'The burger vid was like a parody, likely why there were so few takers, even among the z list. '

And yet she dated handsome model Oliver Cheshire, a posh Brit, and Ashley Cole, a rich footballer, also wanted to date her but she turned him down because he cheats on all his girlfriends. She also dated the chef. Seems she was never short of boyfriends.

'The burger vid was like a parody, likely why there were so few takers, even among the z list'

How the hell does one equate to the other? Is English your first language? The burger video was why men were put off dating her. You sound so thick.

There is speculation online that the ring is different than the ring Harry has been seen wearing at other times.

A closer look at the ring

R340 She was Maxim magazine "hot" with all of the sophistication and subtlety it entails.

Sorry, that was meant for R337 (R346).

[quote] There is speculation online

Sounds like code for "The tumblr tinhatters are saying..."

Why would he joke, is it mine, while they were in public on official business? Are the drugs that good?

R337, I believe it means Meghan was cartoonishly sexy. She appeals to the sort of man who, given the choice, would prefer Jessica Rabbit to Lauren Bacall.

[quote]Oliver Cheshire, a posh Brit

Hilarious

Well, of course, r350. That’s most men.

Disagree about Diana’s nose. Always when photographed from her right, her nose looked smaller and rather cute; this was the “Harry” side. From her left, the nose looked longer and the bump was more prominent- the “William” side.

‘Twas ever thus, no nose job.

R341 Girl you forgot yourself - the Troll Troll!

R342 I am not surprised Meghan was never short of boyfriends. I dislike her quite a bit but I have eyes and can see that she is (was, maybe, but I think she'll lose the weight and get her looks back for sure - this is an LA girl we're talking about here ffs) physically attractive. She's also, and I'm surprised no one has pointed this out yet, a classic Gillian Flynn "cool girl" targeted right at whoever she had in her sights at the time and all his likes and interests and self-image etc. etc.

Fwiw I think it's wrong to characterize MM as a slut or promiscuous. She wasn't (mainly) trying to bang Matt Cardle or Max George etc., she was specifically in the UK husband/relationship hunting. That's why she went off Ashley Cole when her friend outed him as a dog. If she was just after the British D, his cheating on his wife wouldn't matter. But you don't seek out known cheaters for relationships or marriage.

She shrugged on her woke, cool, humanitarian, foodie, sophisticated and worldly flavour of Cool Girl persona and that poor ginger doofus has no defense.

Agree R353 - I don't think she had a nose job either. I need to see straight-on photos of her face, before and after (and more than 1 of each) in order to believe that, so far all that's been posted are odd angles. I've NEVER heard Di had her nose done.

Speaking of nose jobs, though, I don't think it's any scandal that Meghan had one. It's actually a shock if an actress (of any race *hasn't* had one these day, and for the past ~20 years or so). A well done nose job can drastically improve facial beauty, so I even understand why they do it. On the other end of the spectrum you get Kim K, who has crossed that line from 'improvement' to 'too many procedures, philtrum now looks oddly wide and alien-like.'

[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.]

R356 Philip is right!

R336 - As was pointed out in the previous thread, JWs are considered a very, very way out nonmainstream Christinas, most pointedly because they reject the Trinity. I don't see how you can have as a godparent a child being baptised by the Archbishop of Canterbury, whose grandfather is the next titular head of the Church of England, which most emphatically is rooted in a belief of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, a woman who belongs to a Christian sect, which rejects this cornerstone of mainstream Christianity. The JWs do not celebrate Christmas. I can't see it happening without the CoE admitting that it doesn't even believe its own teachings.

It would basically be admitting that the whole godparenting gig is just a social one. If the Queen is refusing to attend, this might be why. She takes her role as the Head of the Church quite seriously. I cannot imagine her standing by and smiling as a Non-Trinitarian celebrity sports figure stands as godparent to the Prince of Wales's grandson. If Serena is on the list, and Jessica Mulroney, it's small wonder the Queen refuses to sanction it with her presence.

And I wouldn't be surprised, if that's the case, if HM hasn't had a word with My Lord Archbishop to let him know her views on the subject.

There's only so far HM is willing to go for the sake of one wayward grandson if it means betraying the trust she took on with an oath and a service she clearly views as nothing short of sacramental.

^*Christians

[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 can see the progression of MM’s face at the link below and it appears the changes coincided with getting the Suits job.

Straight on, I really like her present nose; in profile, not at all. I do commend her for having such subtle work done and leaving it at that. Without comparing side by side it would never jump out as an obvious rhinoplasty.

R350 Sinatra sure liked both types : Lauren Bacall herself while the love of his life was the curvy and bawdy Ava Gardner.

Lauren Bacall liked them rough around the edges, didn't she. Because she was rough herself.

R352, That's unfair. There are straight men who would rather fuck a live woman than a cartoon.

None of them are on the Jersey Shore or douse themselves in Drakkar. Or read Maxim. Or watch videos of Meg over a grill.

R354, How does the fact that she used to be an "LA Girl" make up for the fact that she's NOW a post-baby middle aged fat woman?

She's fat. If her vag is like her face it might as well be an 8-lane highway: huge. She's old. She's middle-aged and not getting younger. She's an old fat woman with a bitchy attitude, a wide vag, and her best days are OVER. We haven't even seen the saggy tits and veins behind the knees yet. Yuck.

That woman is used up.

Do not hold back, R364! You may well be right, tho.

Even her eyes look tiny from the fat in her face. Kinda like her dad.

Sad that she did not acknowledge him, or even Prince Charles, keeper of the $, in her social media posting.

R358 - Thank you for the note of sanity! Margaret wasn't allowed to marry Peter Townsend because of Elizabeth's titular role in the Church. Now any old pastafarian can be proposed as the godparent of someone in the line of succession?

I think Meghan is attractive. And ever so slightly cross-eyed.

Oprah was raised Baptist. Guessing HM is not so into Super Soul Sunday. (I say that as someone who’d rather be a Winfrey than a Windsor...don’t think the BRF agrees.)

R364 - Jesus, I can't stand the woman but she's 37 not 60. She is, in fact, the same age Harry's mother was when Diana died. Did she look like an old used up middle-aged woman who after two kids had a vagina like an 8 lane highway? Meghan may have gotten fat through pregnancy but you know these days they sew it back up and the vagina is, for obvious reasons, alleged to be a very flexible muscle. It springs back and with a little help from a few stitches, problem solved. The bitchy attitude yeah, and the weight can be lost. But if she's old at 37 most of the rest of womanhood may as well commit mass hara kiri, including my charming and very attractive niece.

Kate Beckinsale is in her early forties. Had a good look at her lately?

As an eldergay I can't pretend to lust after women but I can genuinely admire them and one of the actresses who aged best in the world in my view was Honor Blackman - she looked fabulous at 60. If I'd been otherwise than who I am, she would have been my idea of a pinup.

It isn't youth and a taut arse Meghan lacks - she has the money, time, and resources to get at least the arse back: it's class.

That's what made Blackman look gorgeous at 60.

We all know Meg rejected Ashley Cole because of his pigmentation, not his bad behavior. After all, she didn’t mind dating a porn star. If indeed AC wanted to date her at all. He’s out of her league, IMO.

Women’s sex appeal peaks at 27. Sorry, it’s all downhill from there. Even if you look great, you become invisible to most men by age 45. Maybe it has to do with fertility.

R370 - LOL. That woman has never dated a man of colour in her entire adult life. She leans white as any sistah on Lipstick Alley will tell you.

She also goes for tall, and I don't think Cole is.

No, our Meghan likes 'em tall, white, well-connected, and if possible, famous and rich. Throw in British (by which Meghan of course means "English") and Meghan is in pig heaven.

R371 - You need to get out more. I know women well past 45 who are having a very good time as they totter toward the grave.

R369, Kate Beckinsale is the exception, not the rule. And I'll concede the point for Honor Blackman as well.

Meg isn't at their level. Meg is almost 40, and looking slovenly. The average lifespan of an AA woman is below 80, so let's compromise and agree she is middle-aged.

Most women don't have their 1st baby as geriatrics, but if they do want to lose weight they breastfeed those babies and lose some poundage (the tits will sag anyway from the pregnancy, so might as well feed the child and take off the blubber).

R372 - Sexuality and sex appeal are not the same thing.

R371, perhaps. But I keep hearing about elderly people hooking up like mad at these retirement communities. I’m sure they’d all prefer to be 27 and banging 27-year olds, but they’re still banging other oldies. So I’m not that worried. The odds are good, even if the goods are ancient.

R372. Sure, you can have a good time. But say goodbye to the wolf whistles :)

R375, I think you should bang to your heart's content! I plan to. But let's not pretend anybody looks in the mirror and thinks "Oh, I regret how I looked at 22. Aging is so much better for my ass!"

That baby looks like he’s trapped and signaling with his eyes, “please help!”

Not “hot” but....wow, so beautiful

The christening will likely be delayed because Doria is refusing to travel to London.

R373 - More women are having their first babies at over 30 and in their mid- to late thirties than ever before. Check the statistics on the rise. Women in high professions, particularly, are delaying pregnancy till they've established their careers.

Look, I cannot, obviously, speak for the sexual responses of straight men toward women. But the bottom line is that in one's private life, one may assume that the sexuality IS more important than the "sex appeal". So on the one hand you're saying Meghan can't possibly be attractive to her husband because she's too old to have sex appeal, forgetting that that doesn't mean she still isn't a sexual being and they don't have a sexual connection.

In my view, it's the shift from object of lust to motherhood that causes many men to have emotional difficulties when the former hottie is suddenly Mum - especially if they are immature (which Harry undoubtedy is) and had some serious Mum issues (which Harry undoubtedy did).

Presumably, intimacy replaces hard-core sex appeal in a relationship because passion always fades. Beautiful people get tired of each other. The demands of traditional marriage are absurd, frankly, especially in the modern era.

If Harry's interest in his wife was based on stunted lust and delusions of eternal besottedness, that's why the onset of motherhood would bother him so much, not her vag or her arse, both of which will recover. Lots of straight couples get past the time it takes for women's bodies to recover from childbirth or there'd never be more than one kid in a family.

Yes, of course women like Kate Beckinsale and Honor Blackman are exceptions, that's how they got in. But we ARE talking about actresses. Meghan IS an actress, admittedly hardly in the class of the other two mentioned. Most women don't look like Beckinsale and Blackman even at 25. But that's my point: it's not age and it's not even necessarily beauty. Meghan has no class and no authenticity, and in the end, that's what will drive her husband away.

Agree, R381. Her pushing away his family and friends and trying to devalue the family business will also be issues.

Yeah, the days of wolf whistles are past. It’s all sag and droop now.

R376 - Wolf whistles aren't what make life worth living unless you never progress beyond a mental age of 14, and there are many women who don't particularly attract them even when young. There are lots of things to regret about the loss of youth - including for men. Receding hair lines, jowls, hands covered with veins and spots, and hair coming out of the nose are no less depressing to men than to women. The idea that men remain marketable longer usually means rich men. If you think your aging cabbie is pulling pretty young birds, think again. Harvey Weinstein is the prima facie case.

R381, We can agree that Meg's greatest flaw is not her age. I am of the opinion that her age forced her hand in many ways. In her engagement to Harry she was Icarus at his zenith and now she is crashing.

I have no problem conceding that a person's value and sexuality do not end before the age of 30. I'd have tea with Camilla tomorrow if she'd invite me. However, when someone - such as an actress like Meghan (and I'm harkening to Philip here) sells themself and their image, some ephemeral concept, as opposed to their substance, then they can't complain when their image is over like yesterday's news. And the mocking that follows will be unkind.

R385 - All right, I'll accept your arguments on that basis. She got, I will be the first to admit, lucky at the 11th hour and played her cards handily, but the basic product was less than the sum of its parts and unless you're a hardcore Celebitchy fraustan that is becoming more and more obvious. Dim and immature as Harry is, she's still out of her league in terms of his family and the BRF. Kate made the transition successfully. Meghan is struggling. Kate had the advantage of meeting William much younger, of having time to wait, and of being an English girl who didn't need to figure out the cultural landscape. Even if the marriage goes south, Meghan will still come out with more than she came in with and more than she could have expected as a Suitcase Girl on Deal or No Deal.

As for Philip warning his grandson about actresses - dear me, what happened to the Sun's assertion that Philip and Betty "adore the couple" and are going to extend a very special invite to Meghan to Balmoral for her birthday?

R373, you have no fucking idea of what you are talking about. Most American women don't lose their baby weight. At least not all of it. And I know many women who have breast fed and not lost any weight. Right at this very moment I work with two women (27 and 29 yrs old). They both breast feed. We've had to create a special area for them and have to give them extra time to do that at work and neither of them looks much different from when they were pregnant. They've lost about 20 pounds each. So basically, just their stomach. But they still have the hips and fat asses they got when they were pregnant. The one woman actually doesn't snack at work and parks her vehicle in the farthest spot in the parking lot and walks during her break. She's barely lost anything and it's been over 6 months. And she's breastfed the entire time

Having babies is how most women get fat. They don't lose the weight afterwards

I like you R386. You're persuasive and you're making me do better.

[quote] Don’t think they want the kiddies near Meg.

What kind of an adult says, "kiddies"? Do you have any idea of how utterly fucking stupid you sound? I'm guessing you are a grown man (what a clown) or some middle aged frau. Either way, you are a stupid fool

If an anonymous poster using one word sets you off to that degree, R389, you must have skipped your meds. Get help. Blocked.

We all know that Kate will wear something that she's worn before (so as not to detract from the parents - her sartorial expression will be above reproach).

What will Meg wear?

I think for the first time in his life Harry is facing the consequences of the decisions he's made. Before this he never really had to deal with his fuck ups. After the Vegas incident and Nazi costume ordeal he probably just got a lecture and was told to get his shit together.

Now he made a bad selection for a wife and they thought they could do whatever the fuck they wanted and the public would always adore him and nothing would ever affect his standing with the family. Now he sees the public is not too keen on her drama and antics and the family is freezing them out. Not only by doing things like their position on the balcony but the household and foundation splits and even talk of basically exiling them to another continent. And it must be more serious shit behind it than just her spending and fame whoring. Will wouldn't hold her in such contempt if that's all it was. It's personal, and it makes it pretty clear Meg & Harry were the ones behind the Rose rumors getting started. Of course the rest of the family is going to take Will's side.

I bet when this all started and Meg & Harry were in their "We are gonna rule the world phase" Harry didn't give a shit about harming his family. So he let all of this shit happen. But once they started freezing him out, especially in such public ways, he realized he didn't like it and still wanted to be part of The Firm after all. He also still wants that public adoration and he sees she detracts from that.

I think he's at the point where he blames her for everything. He's immature and has never had to take personal responsibility before and he's not about to do so now. So she gets all of the blame. Not only can he not deal with being around her right now, he really wants to work his way back into the fold. That's why his lazy ass is doing so many events all of the sudden. He couldn't be arsed to work for more than a few days a month before. Now he's freaking out there all of the time. That's why he's snapping at her publicly. I think it's at the point where he knows it's her or his family and at the end of this he's gonna choose his family. It's a lot easier to throw her under the bus and try to make amends than deal with a separation from his family and all that entails.

Anyway, that's my take on the current state of things.

R373 is pulling shit stats out of thin air.

[quote] Meg isn't at their level. Meg is almost 40, and looking slovenly. The average lifespan of an AA woman is below 80, so let's compromise and agree she is middle-aged.

Where is that statistic coming from? What's the sample? AA women are more likely to live in poverty, be at risk of violence and not have health care in a country without universal healthcare. None of those factors apply to Meghan. If you adjust the sample to account for those factors, how does that change life expectancy?

37 is not middle-aged for the developed world, outside of pockets of poverty/crime. People have been calling Meghan middle-aged for 2 years. Kate is the same age and she isn't regularly affixed with the same descriptor.

Meghan was an elderly primigravida. Outside of pregnancy, she is a young woman relative to her society's life expectancy.

So many people thing Kate should have another baby (and why not, if she wants that). If the Cambridges and the Sussexes decided on more children both Kate and Meghan would have geriatric pregnancies. Sophie did it before them and she's just fine.

R393 Turning 38 in August is not a "young woman". It's fine to be a mature woman. Many are beautiful, but let's not pretend Meg's an ingenue or even at her physical peak. She's a decade past it.

She's older than Kate who already has 3 children. If Meg wants another (and can do it, and Harry can stand it) she'll be pushing 40.

Having a baby is one thing. Bouncing back is another thing. Two different things. Meg isn't bouncing - physically or socially. She's a bit of mess from what we have seen.

Christening portrait of Prince Harry in 1984

Meghan Is attractive to Trevor types, physically unattractive men. This they match well in the looks department. Good looking men don't seem to seek out women with huge honker noses and manly jaws. They also don't seem to seek out those with her type of figure, Spongebob body with old lady legs. No, if Meghan were truly "hot" she would have gotten a little further in her career. I also don't see anything resembling cool girl vibes. She reeks of desperation still, and has always presented as basic wannabe.

Archie has a huge head. He looks scared and "special"

R397 Newborns aren't cute.

R394 I did not describe her as an ingenue. I said she's not middle-aged. Outside of pregnancy, no one would describe a 37/38 year old in North America as a "mature woman." She's an adult, but she's not over the hill unless you're talking about models, actresses and certain pro sports. She's moved out of acting. In the rest of society, 37 year-olds are still in the ascent phase of their careers. They are not yet at their peak.

Sophie was older than both woman when she started her family and she had managed to bounce back just fine. These are women with the financial means to achieve whatever bounce back desires they have: be they through diet, exercise, pills, surgery or any combination thereof.

Fergie had the financial means and desire for all of that too R399. Just saying.

I think if Fergie really wanted to be thin she would go in for lap-band surgery. She can afford it. Fergie likes being curvy and wearing clothes that are too tight. It's part of her brand.

I wasn't following super closely, Sophie didn't have to "bounce back" from anything, did she? I don't remember her putting on weight. Kate didn't have to "bounce back" either because she didn't get fat. Meghan got fat.

"Bouncing back" isn't automatic regardless of the resources you have access to. If it was just about having access to resources Oprah wouldn't be on her constant yo-yo. I am sure Meghan will try like crazy to drop the weight but it looks like it's gonna be a slow process for her if she manages it at all.

I like you, R369. R389, try to be more like R369. Love from R354

R396 - If you had clicked the link at R354 you would have seen (read) that "cool girl" is not a compliment. It's a description of a specific "type" of girl from a best selling book that seemed to his a cultural nerve a few years ago.

The baby doesn't look like there's anything wrong with him other than being a little scrawny (normal - look at those photos of Harry as a baby, he was scrawny, too). He's not cute, but he's also, what, about 6 weeks old? It's way too early to make any pronouncements on his cuteness, although I will concede that neither parent was particularly cute as a little kid.

R392 If things go south in the Sussex marriage, and I'm another one who pretty much assumes they will, and probably sooner rather than later, I think they'll go south the way you describe. Harry isn't mature or emotionally intelligent enough to do anything other than blame the other person if he suddenly starts feeling like things have changed in the relationship and he doesn't like it anymore. He totally strikes me as the type to get snappy/mean/spiteful in reaction to his own resentment.

I'm surprised there hasn't been more mention of how active he's been publicly since the baby was born. Like, that's odd, isn't it? Was Will that busy post George's birth? Harry actually seemed busier after Archie's arrival than before it (although I haven't actually done the math there). If he's already feeling the need to get out of the house and away from the domesticity, as men are known to do, then damn. Not a good sign.

R402 You're comparing a person who has been morbidly obese her whole life with someone who got fat during pregnancy. Oprah and Meghan are not the same category of overweight.

I'm not saying Meghan will lose the weight. I don't know her and I can't see into the future. I think it's highly likely that she will given her history and her resources.

Both Harry and Meghan have tiny eyes now and they had tiny eyes as children as well. So does Archie. Small eyes dont make for attractive features

R404 The comparison wasn't about how, when or why they gained weight or how much but rather to counter the argument that access to resources always = weight loss success. It clearly doesn't. Obviously only time will tell how successful Meghan is at dropping the baby weight.

R406 I never claimed

[quote] access to resources always = weight loss success.

My original statement on the topic was

[quote] These are women with the financial means to achieve whatever bounce back desires they have: be they through diet, exercise, pills, surgery or any combination thereof.

My claim has always been more nuanced. Please note that I said "the bounce back desires they have." Different people have different desires and are willing to do different things to achieve that goal. Context matters.

An analogy is stronger when there are more similarities between the items under consideration. Fergie's weight gain was not linked to pregnancy but to emotional eating during her divorce. Oprah has been morbidly obese for most of her life. Meghan is an older first time mother who has a history of being average weight to underweight. Sophie was an older first time mother who gained weight during pregnancy (not as much as Meghan but all pregnant women gain weight). Sophie is more analogous to Meghan than Oprah or Fergie in this situation.

The thread is greyed out.

R54 Love does not consist of gazing at each other, but in looking outward together in the same direction.

Of course that Fathers Day photo of Archie had to have half the poor kid’s face covered. In many ways Markle is such a predictable basic Becky.

She doesn't seem terribly imaginative, R410. Merely derivative.

R291 Kate Middleton does. She did on at least two occasions. If you don't believe me look it up. Also it sounds much better than the American word "kiddos".

Apologies, I meant R389.

Welp Troll at R122, guys! All traits present and correct. Hilarious, I am dying laughing.

🎶 On a Welp Troll thread, a dead end world🎶

'Our resident troll is furiously trying to deflect from the rumor that Me-Gain and her PR was the source of the Rose rumors. Welp, if that does not give it a bit more credibility, lol.

Paid by the post or just in a manic frenzy? The number of posts even since the update is, err, quite voluminous.'

😂😂😂

Sorry, make that the Welp Troll at R122 not R123. Always good for a laugh.

R399, the troll who always says 'kiddies' is the same crackpot who rants on about people who don't hate MM being PR shills who are paid to post. She also talks about 'tweens' and uses words like 'welp', 'meh' and 'oof' in an attempt to sound young. Also says 'not sure that', 'even z listers/ footballers weren't interested' a lot.

How predictable are the new set of projections?

People said meg looked like a teenager in that carriage with kate and have consistently mentioned how meghan looks so much younger than her SIL who is the same age as meg. And now some delusional looneybin claims meghan is sooooo old and tries to scare a half black woman with the threat of old age, not realising ageism doesn't work on black and half black women like meghan lol if "slovenly" means looking like a child then sure. Next to that jowly dried looking hag with the melting collapsing face with wrinkles from here to australia she looks like a fucking infant.

Archie has huge eyes, not beady camb kids eyes. At that age the camb kids eyes were mere slits with permanent eyebags. Your envy and projection cannot beat reality no matter how much you try. If you think repeating a lie will help you, think again. Most of us have working eyes. Now fuck off back to whatever shithole estate you came from.

Ooooooh! Look at R417 being all edgy and mad! I can tell you're not a person who swears very often. But the attempt is highly amusing!

Yep, R417, agree with every word. Camilla looks reptitilian and Kate's eyes are sunk deep into black bags. Fugeorge also has eye bags. Charlotte has William's jowls and Louis looks like a raptor, horribly predatory.

Archie has a sweet tiny face and large dark, expressive eyes.

REPTILIAN, I meant.

Block it R418. Then you won't have to be pulled into dullness.

Will do, R421!

I'm so happy baby Archie looks like Granpa Thomas. Those Markles genes are strong, Meghan and Harry must hate it.

This:

MM didn't date Oliver Cheshire, he's been with Pixie Lott for forever. Well, since 2010. From old reports, MM did try, though. Her agency put her alongside him to present an award at a function, and her eyes must have lit up.

Doesn't do it for me, I hasten to add.

The game is up.

I'm going back into hiding. I've had to close the website down this weekend because of that bungling bitch.

On the subject of Dianas's nose (the original): it was a great nose. It went well with her enormous eyes and the shape of her mouth. It gave her face so much character. I'm baffled by the love of "cute" noses.

Truth hurts lol

Women hate their nose, they do all they can to look like Voldemort.

I think think Meghan is an attractive woman, but that some people are describing her as having been "hot" and straight-man bait is incomprehensible. Of course there's a taste for everything, but she was never in anyway a classic hot girl. She lacks the figure and the charisma for it. Even when she had bigger boobs, she was lacking the waist and hips. Cliche straight guy bait is boobs, long hair, long legs, big waist-to hip ratio. Jennifer Aniston is rather homely, but PH wanted to marry her because of her great (naked) figure.

Having only watched one episode of Suits, I assume she was cast as a cerebral hottie, ie an intelligent woman who was skinny enough to sometimes have sex scenes in a black lace bra. Not as a va-va-voom hottie.

Those little noses don't age well.

I agree R427, Diana's nose fit her face perfectly. Not all women can pull off a large nose, but it was part of her beauty. Jennifer Gray was another one, she looked much better with her pre-nose job larger nose.

All we can see of Archie are his big dark eyes and little nose. We can't even see the shape of his face. The trolls saying he looks like an obese 60 something guy with a heavy grey beard are comedy gold, but we're laughing at you, not with you.

I think she has a cute face, when she doesn't puffy as hell. She doesn't have a good body, she's not hot. Her legs are painfully thin.

But she knows how to manipulate men, and it's not that hard, straight men could fuck anything.

A cute actress who knows how to speak banalities with conviction can seduce them easily.

R433 Archie has Thomas's nose. It's obvious, stay delusional.

"Duke and Duchess of Sussex urged to push for better rights for gay Africans"

The most painful thing about Rachel is when you realize she's really Basic Becky.

This thread is so funny. The Welp, Narc, Celebitchy, Danja Zone and Queen Catherine trolls ALL think the tiny baby looks like Thomas Markle! Demented.

Oh look it's the Bye Fuglicia Troll, from many threads, who set up an Instagram to troll Kate.

Everybody, look at Bye Fuglicia's Insta, she's a Louis Tomlinson fan, too.

R437 Why not? Don't be so pressed, he's his grand-father it's quite normal he looks like him.

Meghan has ghosted her father, not his DNA.

Don't babies change their looks as they grow up? How can you possibly say baby Archie looks like any one particular blood relative? Yes the eyes are very telling, being dark brown/black and deep set.

R439, I hate Louis Floplinson. It's the Welp Troll who loves him. I post pics of him with his girlfriend to annoy Welpie as she thinks he's gay.

R441 Do you often see a baby with such a strong nose? This nose is here to stay, but you can always say it's Meghan's nose and not Thomas's.

One of my friend has a huge nose, her baby is born with the same nose. It's not the ony thing I could see, poor boy.

R441, he has Meg's eyes. Thomas M has hooded blue eyes.

The only royal new motherI saw who looks like she got as fat as Meghan was Fergie when she had Bea. Her face looks pretty fat here, but the body may actually be better?

Tried to post this yesterday but the link failed. Here you go with more of MM’s neurotic behaviour.

https://ibb.co/HBRt1dH

Arrghhh I seem to have forgotten how to post links!!

Here is Fergie with Eugenie. She actually looks surprisingly non-puffy here in her ankles/feet. Didn't she have a C-Section with one of them?

R447 It only proves that Meghan is a Basic Becky without imagination.

You can see the same poses everywhere in Instagram. I don't think she tried to copy Diana, she just imitates all the other Beckies.

R447, That is cray-cray. I can see the advantages of copying Princess Diana's dress style as a cue of how the BRF expect a young woman marrying into "The Firm" should appear. But only to a certain extent and MM overdid it. Copying and posting old photos? Why?

I disagree, R449. There are too many similarities between M's photos and Diana's for it to be coincidental. And it's beyond cray-cray. It's profound psychosis.

They part George's and Louis' hair on the wrong side.

It is looking that way, R451.

The way she looks at Kate would be quite funny if it was not disturbing.

R440: “Meghan has ghosted her father, not his DNA.”

Oooh that’s a truth! And I’ll share this one I heard on MSNBC this morning, because it struck me as hard, and is related:

“People don’t mind being used. They mind being discarded.”

R447 I don’t think it’s coincidence. She was clearly going through old BRF pics (these are pics from before she met Harry) and obsessing over them in a severely neurotic way. Maybe the universe conspired to get them together, or, more likely, she planned her way in..

Not exactly doting on the spawn, is she? Hope the nanny is caring with those 2 as the parents.

And, gawd knows I despise Meghan, but I disagree that she’s intentionally copying Diana. I’m sure if you look, you’ll see that there’s a photo of Kate in a white oxford and khakis and sunglasses. Or in a one-shouldered black dress and stilettos. Or a frumpy black and white polka dot dress.

I do think she’s trying to be as iconic and beloved, though.

The pics in the white shirts is the most obvious of all. No way that one is a coincidence. She was stalker level obsessed.

Diana had such a relaxed graceful way when with the public. That calm vibe is very attractive. Her interpersonal style is the opposite of MM.

Someone asked about the nickname "Bean" on the previous thread, and I forgot about this Father's Day post from The Tig.

Note the date, June 19th 2016.

"Happy Fathers Day, daddy. I'm still your buckeroo, and to this day your hugs are still the very best in the whole wide world. Thanks for my work ethic, my love of Busby Berkeley films and club sandwiches, for teaching me the importance of handwritten notes, and for giving me that signature Markle nose. I love you xo - Bean."

Does Kate copying Diana's clothes on the steps of the hospital for George's and Charlotte's births count as stalker level obsessed? What about copying the same colour outfit for her engagement as Diana? Homage or insanity?

The way Diana connected with people, complete strangers, was rather amazing, really. Those eyes. Who could resist?

Kate and Diana. Homage? Psycho?

Kate and Diana.

Kate and Diana. The homage series continues.

People on celebitchy are saying rose is williams camilla, saying shes more fun and carefree than kate (nobody knows fuck all about what rose is like!) . They just KNOW for a FACT william is a compulsive cheat, his marriage is an arrangement, his bullying of the press didn't work and more will come out and one of them added that William is a terrible father because he was gone for the first sox months of Georges life. I hope vicious William shuts cb and makes kaisers life miserable.

R389 - "Kiddies" is something of a British-ism and can be and often is used sarcastically. Sort of like the, "Children, there will be tears," you sometimes find adults murmuring about a particular situation shaping up. In the British vernacular, it's not as infantile as it looks in print.

Poster upthread who said Meghan reeks of desperation wannabe nails it: that's why Meghan has no class. You can't constantly reshape yourself to social trends and retain any authenticity, and it's authenticity that breathes class. Kate was lucky - her mother did the desperate wannabe identity shift so that the children didn't have to. Kate was already a nice Home Counties girl when William first decided to date her. She didn't have to reinvent her core identity.

Meghan's spent a lifetime reinventing herself, and can't seem to stop. I also don't think the social media popularity obsession will ever stop. She knows she'll always come second to William and Kate, her children are commoners technically and they will recede inevitably as the Cambridge kids grow up into their HRH identities in the hierarchy. It's not that she doesn't get that, it's that she figures the one place she can be "first" is the social media image branding "likes" universe. What she doesn't get is that it doesn't matter. In ten years she'll be pushing fifty and hardly a "youth" model, whilst Prince George is suddenly 15 years old and an object of intense interest, and William and Kate will be stepping into their higher status shoes, increasingly prominent in the one arena in which Meghan, no matter what she does, wears, says, or parades, can never catch up.

My guess is as Meghan heads into real middle-aged status, she will either have exited long before so she can make the most of her shallow fame and image, or have thrown in the towel and realxed a bit, enjoying her status and security and wealth for what it is.

R461, The first 2 aren't the same color. Other than being loose dresses they aren't the same.

There are tons of pics floating around of both Diana and Meg wearing a white shirt and jeans or whatever and that's a basic outfit so I'm not gonna say that's copying. But c'mon. Meghan goes to Africa, and not only dresses but poses the same way Diana did when she was there? That's not a coincidence.

Kate wants to be seen as part of the lineage, that's why she uses Harry's clothes to dress Louis or takes inspiration from Diana, the Queen or even Queen Victoria. And Kate started this game after her wedding.

If Meghan imitated Diana when she was dating Harry, I think it's more creepy because it's not an hommage to British Monarchy. She was playing with Harry's mommy issues, something I think William could not stand.

[quote] Kate Middleton has developed a strange sartorial habit during her time with the royal family. We’re not talking about her unflagging commitment to the nude heel or her penchant for wearing hosiery in the height of summer. Today, we’re here to discuss why, well, it’s a bit weird that Kate Middleton dresses like her dead mother-in-law, Princess Diana.

[quote] Last week marked, by most tallies, the 19th time she’s worn an outfit strongly (some might say eerily) reminiscent of something Princess Diana wore when she was alive. This most recent occasion, a royal family portrait released for Charles’s 70th, was subtle as they go: a navy blue polka-dot dress with a white collar that the internet soon linked to a navy blue polka-dot dress Diana wore in an obscure photo from 1985.

As far as we know, Kate didn't dress like Diana prior to meeting William. She only seems to do it when they present the babies and some balcony appearances. Who knows, but I think her intent is more an homage or using dress to link generations. She understands the theater of their roles. She also does the same things with the kids. They often rewear outfits worn by their father. Kate has often been referred to as the anti-Diana in that her style is so different from Diana's.

To add, until the last few months, I would say that Kate was taking style cues from the Queen Mother and the Queen. She has clearly been trying to cultivate a stable, royal image. I understand she has had a different stylist while her regular stylist is on maternity leave. You can tell the difference in the way she has dressed over the last few months.

Finally, one key difference between Kate and Meghan is that Kate has a stylist and listens to her. Meghan does whatever she wants. There is a continuity to Kate's style. Sure, she probably provides ample input, but do you really think she is advising her stylist to dress her like Diana? Any similarities to Diana, other than baby presentations and balcony events wherein they want to "be seen as part of a lineage" as the poster upthread so aptly put it, is probably just coincidence.

The point of the "homage or psycho" series is that it's open for interpretation. I don't think Kate is psycho based on her her clothing choices, any more than I think Meghan is. Meghan looks like she's choosing simple "classic" looks. She also has an interest in Audrey Hepburn and Jackie O. I doubt she's stalker obsessed with Hepburn's family or the Kennedys. I'm more inclined to side with the poster saying Meghan's a Basic Becky.

One odd thing about MM's clothes is that they often feature some uncommon detail like a huge cowl collar, a swathe of material draped down the side, a cape, little winged epaulets. And other odd details - scrunched up sleeves on a trenchcoat, dresses longer than her coat, strange colour combinations. Absolutely none of this works. And combined with noticeably poor fit, ripped tights, muddy shoes, visible underwear, dangling pricetags, messy hair, she looks like the worst-dressed woman in the world. Yet in just about every photo I have seen of MM in her pre-Harry life, apart from the ripped jeans, a look I despise, she looked good. And quite well-groomed besides.

There are tons of examples like this where I'd probably give the benefit of the doubt and say it's a coincidence. Over the course of time women are gonna wear similar outfits and similar color combinations or whatever. But those Africa pics are a different category. It looks like she's even trying to copy Di's facial expression. And the hands on the hip thing isn't a natural pose. She definitely was copying there.

R474 I agree. Meghan looked a lot better and much more put together in her pre-Harry days. I'm gonna attribute that to the help of the Suits team. They dressed and groomed her well. And after Harry it looks like her "help" is the tasteless Jessica Mulroney.

Meghan enjoys the 90's style, could explain why she looks like Diana.

Hand of hips isn't a natural pose? Did Diana invent hands on hips?

^^Hands ON hips

[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.]

So many of MM outfits are an exact copy of Princess Diana's. Kate always seems to put her own slant on hers, adding a V-neck to a Royal blue dress of a solid colored sweater to tone down the effect of a polka-dot one.

Her newer stylist is modernizing her look which IMHO is more youthful and flattering and less maternal.

[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.]

R478 If you wanna add the hands on hips, the white shirt, the sunglasses and the continent together and come up with a coincidence no one is gonna convince you otherwise.

I wonder if Harry has picked on this bizarre aspect of Meghan's personality, r481? He may be able to overlook or live with her other flaws or general unsuitability for her role, but this would be difficult to swallow as it is so creepy. One day he's going to wake up and realize he has no idea who he married.

R482, Love Queen Maxima's total look & style.

MM posing with her hands on her hips looks very unnatural to me. Not so when Diana does it for a picture.

Wish Kate would look at Queen Maxima and realize she doesn’t have to continue starving herself to look elegant and regal.

The public comments about his stupidity and gullibility must be awful for Harry. He was never lauded for his intelligence, but the chorus of 'ginger dimwit' etc must be humiliating. Nobody thinks they're stupid, even if they are.

The truth hurts, and right now it sucks to be Fozzie Bear Harry because he knows everyone is onto him and what a dunderhead he is.

R471, before Kate met William she wore a high school uniform most days. Don't be ridiculous.

Look people, it's entirely possible that both Kate and Meghan try to copy Diana's style just because Diana looked fabulous all the time (once she got past that unfortunate long skirts and ruffles stage). And nobody else in the BRH is exactly a style icon. Her clothes were all appropriate for royal wear, until after the separation anyway, were extremely stylish and went well with the hats and jewellery you're expected to wear. Kate is a similar height and slenderness: more reasons to look to that style. I think the polka-dots after George's birth was a definite salute to William's birth, but for everything else, see above.

HM looks extra tiny next to those tall royals.

We are definitely going to the christening.

Daddy has instructed me to run up and down the aisle screaming the whole time. I take my duties seriously.

I wonder if all the Royals are here because they fear the Queen may not be there next year.

Time for Ginger to realize he's dumb, he was the only one who didn't know. I don't think Rachel is the genius everybody pretend she is but she's more clever than him for sure.

Since someone brought up Maxima, I’ll digress a bit and share this photo I saw yesterday on Instagram, such a beautiful dress, gorgeous color. Although I do think she overdoes the vivacity at times, she pretty much always looks wonderful.

“Queen Maxima” - now that sounds alpha!

I thought it was crass of Kate (and showed her lack of class and breeding) to steal Harry's baby clothes to dress little Louigie.

Maybe harry wanted those clothes for his own son. Tasteless of her to do and made her look like the desperate climber she is. Just like her tacky family had to cash in on archie by using him for their merch selling tat. I hope harry gave her an ear full and told her to never touch his shit again with her big coalminer hands leaving black fingerprints all over.

R485, I definitely agree however most anorexics and bulimics use their aversion to gaining weight as a way to control just one aspect of their lives. The fact that most praise super thin women adds to their illness.

Interesting that a lot of women in poor Duggar-style Christian fundie homes are also said to be anorexic or bulemic, as they're also very controlled by overbearing parents.

It was William's outfit first.

[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.]

It's probably been a slow realization over the past year for Harry. He was probably hoping the baby would change the course of their plummeting popularity. When it didn't, he had to have realized that it wasn't going to work out and he risks losing the support of his family. Add to that the stories of Meghan chasing other British dudes, and their marriage is probably toast. The question is, when will he feel that it is socially and publicly acceptable for him to leave Meghan? Or, is he waiting on her to make the first move? I would bet that he is trying to make the situation as uncomfortable as possible for her so that she has no choice but to make the first move.

[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.]

R494 Hahaha, too funny.

As if Meghan would dress Archie with this horror. If anything I think she's relieved Archie can't wear it anymore. I doubt Harry gives a fuck because it's Meghan who decides for both of them.

I can't figure out whether William is a villain or not. I can agree with those who say he isn't and is a good but careful and I can agree with those who says he's horrible and he acts like a sweet Prince william. And it's true he happily threw Harry under the bus all these years to make Harry look bad when he was way worse. I wish we'd get more concrete evidence on who they really are.

R494 isn't from the UK and has no knowledge of the extensive wardrobe collections in the palaces, and who is in charge of them, in Buckingham Palace's case it take up a huge corridor of rooms on one floor. Also the small fact that William wore the outfit in question first.

I imagine most of Harry's baby clothes were worn by William first and then put in storage. Some of them were probably worn by Charles and his brothers.

Takes, not take

Andrew had a Chinese official at his house Royal Lodge. He's up to something.

I imagine markle will go full new money and will want to put her kid in only the best branded clothes, rather than old musty clothes.

Beatrice was in Edinburgh.

R502 Harry doesn't need William to look bad.

William was not the one dressed in Nazi or naked at Vegas. Harry's Sugars are sure William is jaleous of Harry when in reality Harry is a mess and has been saved by KP PR's job.

Good grief, r500, Harry looks like he has aged another year just since the TTC. He is aging at warp speed.

I wonder what happened to Harry's paternity leave.

So will meghan do the full exposing of archie on vogue or keep him hidden away until the tour and present him like simba?

R509, Would there be an upper crust equivalent of The Betty Ford Center for addictions in Great Britain? Know heavy drinking and coke use is the norm in certain circles but it looks like Prince Harry is unfortunately hitting a wall, or will be soon.

Photos of the Garter...the Queen was with Charles and William. Edward and Andrew were also there. Anne was in a carriage with her husband.

R513 Army was Harry's rehab center.

Kill two birds with one stone: you look after Harry's bad habits and you create the Heroic Prince image.

A video of the royal ladies watching the Garter procession.

Kate looked elegant in white and black.

Maxima is quite striking. She loves Big Hats!

Harry's paternity leave ended when he decided he wanted to keep his job with BRF.

"Some of them were probably worn by Charles and his brothers."

Yeah, some of that looked dated even back in the 80s. I love Kate and I get why Kate dresses her kids that way but I'm not a fan. Charlotte looks cute, I like her little dresses but I'm not a fan of a lot of the stuff the boys wear. Thankfully George is dressing a bit more normally as he gets older.

I love the way Charlene dresses her twins. They are the coolest little kids despite their dweeb father. Obviously their wardrobe wouldn't work for the BRF but I am loving watching them grow up.

Hello cover with Meghan, Kate and Sophie.

Charlene has more freedom, the Grimaldis are already Europe's most trashy Monarchy.

Charles with his young sons.

Another photo with a kilted Charles and sons.

William really looks like Diana in that photo.

Gosh, Harry was unfortunate looking as a teen, specially compared to young William.

Archie is on the front page of most newspapers in the UK today. Say what you like about Harry and Meghan, they know how to play the media. They've managed to garner this much attention with a slightly weird, sepia-toned photo that doesn't even show Archie's hair colour, skin tone or whole face. So when we do see a colour photo of him (probably when he gets christened) it'll be a surprise.

A black and white shot.

R527 It's the same for all the Royal kids or you missed Georges, Charlotte and Louis pictures.

I still think it's weird seeing how apprehensive the baby looks. That isn't how a young baby looks when around people that take care of him.

Haggard Harry today.

R530 Really? Bit of concern trolling, no?

Diana joking around with a young girl

All the ladies looked fabulous at the Garter ceremony.

Good grief, Harry's eyes are getting closer and closer together.

R492 That might also explain some of the sad/teary looks on the balcony at TTC. Although HM looks very jaunty today in her outfit.

I think Archie looks fearful, too, r 532. It's not odd that he would look fearful from time to time, it's that they choose that particular picture to post. How hard is it to post a happy baby picture?

[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.]

R537 Meghan has trashy Influencer taste. If you look at the picture the focus is not on Archie but on Harry's big hairy hand.

This picture is sad not because Archie is sad but because his mother has shitty taste and couldn't chose a picture where we can him clearly.

I don't get it either R538. She's a mature lady so yeah, she's gonna be a bit saggy. But I am pretty sure most of her wardrobe is custom made for her and you'd think whoever is fitting and making her clothes would suggest better bras? It would make a huge difference.

[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.]

Everyobody looks meh next to Fabulous Queen Maxima.

R483 I thought about your comment.

The image is from World Vision. They do most of their charity work in Africa. It's a huge charity in Canada. All humanitarians feel the need to travel to Africa at some point. The hands on hips don't seem unusual for Meghan. She often puts her hands in her pockets or laces her fingers together in front to the create that shape. Maybe someone told her it looks slimming. White button down shirts are part of her preferred style. She wears them in formal and casual settings. The placement of the sunglasses is however out of character for her. She wears lots of sunglasses but when they're not on her face she usually doesn't hang them from her shirt/top or slide them up to her hair. There's one other photo I've seen where she does that, but generally she's either wearing them or she's put them away out of sight. With all the other elements in the image, I concede that the photo with the hanging sunglasses seems like an intentional Diana reference.

Queen Maxima looks amazing. Queen Letizia looks like a picture of my grandma going to the country club on a Saturday night in the 40s.

[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 like Letizia's look. But poor Sophie....! She looks like she's channeling Ethel Mertz.

Leti usually kills it but I'm not getting the black netting for this particular occasion. It looks funereal.

R543 "The defense rests, Your Honor."

I'm teasing, of course. But as you concede, it is a funny juxtaposition.

Kate and Maxima are a draw, I think. Maxima has her South American vivacious flavor, Kate looks crisp and British.

[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.]

Letizia looks unusually Retro but not in a good way. She looks a wealthy 1940s L.A. matron. Kate looks fabulously British, discreet, well-tailored, beautiful hat and pumps, she wears the ensemble, it doesn't wear her. She looks fantastic. Maxima looks very . . . well, Maxima. God, did her parents know what they were doing when they named her, or what? The belt is over the top, but if anyone can carry OTT it's 5'11" Maxima. She always looks as if she enjoying herself hugely and it never looks phoned in. She was born for this kind of work.

Letizia has a face veil on her hat. I like. They all look great and appear to be having a reasonably good time. Kate's suit is pretty; I like a rounded collar with piping.

R550 - Troll.

She isn't playing a "youth" card - she's playing the beautifully tailored future Princess of Wales Future Queen Consort card. Her hair is up, her heels are high, her hat is gorgeous. It's called great detailing.

Meghan Markle is probably gnashing her teeth and screaming at Harry to vent.

Yeah, Kate's coat dresses get repetitive but I think she's taking a cue from HM and those coat dresses are her uniform the same way HM's outfits are usually basically the same dress and coat over and over again in different colors and fabrics.

You can argue she shouldn't be taking fashion cues from a 90+ year old woman when she's not even 40 but I think that's what she has in mind. She's thinking of presenting herself as the future queen.

R527 - The one thing they don't know how to play is the BRF and the British taxpayers funding their lifestyle. They can play the media from now till Domesday. In ten years Meghan is going to be pushing 50 and a joke. In ten years Kate is going to be Princess of Wales with a handsome 15 year old son now the next Heir. And nothing the Sussexes and their nonroyal kids do to play the media will ever change that.

Disliking Kate's dress makes one a troll R553? Are you in middle school?

Style is subjective. You like it. I don't. There's no need to smack talk. Get over yourself.

If meghan was smart she'd do what kate and camilla do, which is to get cheaper items completely redone in-house, so the 'official' cost appears very reasonable and hides the real work done behind the scenes. But she wants to brag about 'her status' so she does the dumbest thing possible and makes herself a permanent target

Kate’s suit is early 90s, not necessarily in a bad way, but just a little like playing dress up. Reminds me of Julia Roberts post-makeover in Pretty Woman, in 90s Beverly Hills sportswear. An odd combo of childish with the ric-rac and collar but matronly with the shape.

[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.]

R556 - It wasn't so much disliking her outfit, it was accusing of her of playing the youth card.

R560 I have never accused anyone of playing a "card" in my life.

Kate's fascination with dressing like she's in a costume drama isn't one I share. Saying a peter pan collar looks youthful isn't trolling. Peter pan collars are usually on children's clothing. The clue is in the name.

Maxima is a stupid name. Why not call herself XXL? And Letizia looks like she walked out of a medieval convent. I don’t like this trend of wearing sky-high heels during the day. Looks slutty.

The peter pan collar was in style last year. Plenty of adult women were wearing them, particularly last spring. Kate has another dress just like this, sans piping, in another color. She tends to have the same dress made in several colors. She is not trying to be youthful but is a year out of style. Her and Letizia both rode in the same carriage and wore the same colors, so perhaps they coordinated? It mat just be a matter of Kate stylist simply picking out an acceptable black and white outfit for the event.

All the Royal women coordinate their outfit, all but our Rachel.

I like Peter Pan collars. I didn't know they had an age limit.

Our Rachel trues to convince us that sh's not sitting at home sampling christening cakes. 24/7.

Tries! Tries! Not trues.

Collar looks fine, it is in proportion.

Right R564, were she invited today, what would Meg pick? Something heavy in olive drab, with leather gloves, and carrying a hat? And those same sky high heels , teetering around clutching at Haz, talking to nobody.

Harry is not part of the Order, they were not invited.

R563. And all that doesn't mean I'm trolling by saying it looks too youthful. Peter pan collars are classic for children and occasionally they're trendy for adults. This wasn't an event for wearing last year's flash in the pan retro trend IMO.

FWIW I think Peterpan collars are cute on kids and pre-teens. I think early twenties can still get away with it in work wear. I see young Japanese and Korea professional women in the style and I think it works well. I'm not a fan of it on a person over 30. If Lady Louise wore that collar I wouldn't have bat an eye at it.

It's an opinion on an item of fashion.

Diana's hair color, a very cool ash blonde, and hairstyle in R276 link was the most perfect look for her. In the year that she died in 1997, Diana did not look very good. Her hair color was a brassy blonde that says cheap rather than aristocratic. Also bangs did not look great on her as they emphasized the long nose and aging skin around her eyes and on her cheeks. Her nose needed hair volume on the sides to make it look balanced and dramatic at the same time. I think Diana's appearance in that last year was very telling in more ways than one. People experiencing emotional strife or mental health issues often will have them manifest outwardly in how they present themselves.

The late 90s were also a generally very unfortunate time for women’s hair trends...

I heard someone say Di admired Linda Evangelista’s look and used her as inspiration for her hair.

R571 I agree her last hairstyle was harsh. She still looked beautiful in her way but really not the best. I suspect if she were alive she would look something like a more glamorous Tina Brown, who co-opted the Diana look for herself.

I’m thinking Diana might have had a few more marriages.

I bet there would be some kids running around, but im not sure on marriage. Diana would have lost her title.

I remember reading an interview that Diana gave, or was it from one of the books about her, anyways I forgot. But I distinctly remember a bit about Diana saying she believed William would marry a dark-haired girl. Always found her prediction to be interesting, wonder how she knew? Did she ask a young William which female celebs he found attractive, and all or most of them had dark hair? Maybe Diana predicted that Harry would marry a dark-haired social climbing grifter, who knows.

R460, stuff like that makes me wonder how anyone can be a huge fan of Megs. I mean, either she ghosted her dad when he became an embarrassment or that Tig crap was just a pose. It can't be both.

R578 Exactly. She has a documented history thanks to her love of social media, of talking out of both sides of her mouth. It's all out there that she's an inauthentic person, someone with a hidden agenda who's not entirely honest about herself but wants the world to adore her anyways.

R520, omg those kids look atrocious. Eurotrash.

I hope Kate breaks with her own polite tradition of recycling an outfit for Archie's christening. Some people just don't merit common courtesy and consideration.

I also hope the entire family ignores whatever directive Meggy Sharp puts out for the clothing color scheme for the christening and they all wear whatever damn color they please just as she has in the past.

R577 That is an interesting comment. There is a truism in psychology that a heterosexual person either marries someone who is a lot like their opposite-sex parent or the complete antithesis of them. I would argue that dark-haired Kate with the stable, loving, functional family supporting her is the opposite of Diana - for Diana to intuit that her older son would make that choice is very insightful. Also, according to this theory Harry married his Mom: being with Meghan felt "right" because it was so familiar.

Some people can feel like home for all the wrong reasons.

R580, I was going to make the same comment. They’re dressed the way Kardashians dress their kids.

That first video of the women watching the parade at the Garter ceremony - that's the first time I've noticed that Kate and Maxima are the same height. (And, yes, I know they are both wearing high heels).

But they are close in height.

I always look at the pictures of Maxima who never fails to disappoint in her hats and outfits.

R584 - Maxima has at least 2" in height over Kate. Kate runs about 5'9", Maxima is close to six feet tall. Kate also has small feet for a tall girl and is smaller boned than Maxima - Kate wears a size 38 shoe (about an 7-8 in American ladies' show sizes - it was clearly visible on the sole of pumps she wore going up some steps in her first America/Canada tour in 2011), Maxima wears a size 11. Kate is that most enviable of things: a "small tall girl".

Maxima has always had lots of verve, learned Dutch very quickly, and her sunny outgoing persona has endeared her to the Dutch who at first were very wary of her because of her father's ties to the regime in Argentina, and were disappointed in Willem's choice. But she has completely won them over. She has a weak chin, is large and not terribly graceful, and has evidenced a bad skin at times, but she carries herself as a loved and beautiful woman, and that's how she comes across. I really admire her.

Prince Andrew posted a lot of photos of Garter Day.

Carriage rides are always better with sunshine.

Kate and Maxima share a laugh.

The last photo of the Queen shows her very blue eyes.

Photos of Kate, Letizia and Camilla.

New thread is up but please post on this thread before moving to the next one. Thanks.

The Queen looked good today. Swipe for numerous photos of the Garter day.

The Queen looked good today. Swipe for numerous photos of the Garter day.

Sorry for the double post.

Videos of three carriage rides.

Camilla is wearing her enormous choker again.

The Queen looks great. If I didn’t know how old she was, I’d put her at 80.

Diana had a pearl choker with a big honking sapphire in the middle, but it hasn't been seen since her death. Presumably, even Harry or William owns it now. I wonder which of their wives will wear it?

The Queen's robes are cumbersome. It's amazing she can still do these events at her age.

I like Diana's choker better than Camillas. The pearls are more delicate and don't fight with the stone.

Diana was too mentallly unstable to have more kids.

Will there be a new thread or will this discussion finally end?