Meghan didn’t curtsy to the Queen at her wedding?! That nugget is on page 2 of Meghan and Harry: The Real Story

OFF WITH HER HEAD!!!!!!

Why should Meghan curtsy to the Queen? She's not a British citizen.

I thought she did and many Americans flipped out. I could easily be misremembering...

I hope you get a fatal paper cut, OP

They're rehashing Meghan's mistakes all the way back to 1947? Geez, that's harsh. Liz wasn't even the Queen when she got married.

By page 4. , we’re deep into tiaragate, complete with brief history of the tiara. And I knew exactly which tiaras they were referring to because you DL bitches talk about tiara history in every royal thread. I was so tickled I could identify the tiaras by name. I love you DLers so much! ..... back to the book.....

Americans don't have to curtsy to royalty (though with the sovereign, they should at least give a slight bow to the head out of respect), but once Meghan became a British subject, she should have curtsied.

Other interesting fact: Americans do not have to address royalty or aristocrats by their honorific titles, although they should use "Sir" or "Ma'am."

You only curtesy to HM once a day, the first time you see her. After that it isn’t protocol but a lot of women do it anyway.

I feel for your partner.

Why does anybody have to curtsy though? We are all humans.

The only person this American would ever consider curtseying to is Dolly Parton. Respectfully, this is one aspect of British culture I really do not understand.

R9 - maybe it is a blessing for his partner.

r11, I get that. I’d curtsy to the Queen because Emily Post. Although tempted, I’d even refrain from spitting in Donald Trump’s face. (Sorry, getting carried away by fantasies of meeting famous people. Guess what I’d do meeting Rufus Sewell...)

I thought the official story was that she DID curtsy but the camera timing was off and it wasn’t captured... there were hundreds of people there. What do they say? Why is this even contested?

Nobody has to curtsy to Her Majesty (neither Americans nor anybody else, many of you will be shocked to learn) however as the etiquette guides state, when one is given it is appreciated.

It seems as though her family, knowing on which side their bread is buttered, all bow and curtsy, which they do on first seeing her for the day and on bidding farewell at the end of the day.

You are reading the Lady CC book?

If you accept titles of Duchess and Royal Highness from The Queen, it’s hard to refrain from curtseying on a point of principle, unless you are deluded enough to think that you deserve such treatment without having to abide by the conventions.

R12 So right you are.

r14, that's the official story from Meghan's camp, but there were more than one camera on her so their argument that it was merely a camera angle omission is total bullshit.

She came out and sailed past the Queen without even a glance. She's happy to take the titles and the money, but above showing gratitude by curtsying to the woman giving those things to her (at least she was honest and showed the low level of gratitude that she would continue to show all the way through her marriage so far)

Every other bride stops completely, turns towards the Queen, does not just a curtsy, but a deep, old fashioned curtsy to the Queen before then turning again and heading down the aisle and out of the church.

She’s a hypocrite.

If you think titles and rank are un-American BS, don’t marry it and don’t accept a title and rank for yourself.

She curtsied and Harry bowed from the neck. The camera looked directly down on the tops of their heads when the did so.

Show the video, r21. There really is no evidence for your assertion. There is no visual record of a curtsy.

Oh vey... here’s the video. It’s not a deep curtesy by any means, but you can see it from the view from the ceiling at around 1:18. Now we’ll have a whole round of how discourteous it was because it wasn’t deep.

I don't see a curtsy in that video r23. I see her sailing on by.

R24, then you need eyeglasses.

When did it stop being SOP to walk backwards when leaving the Queen's presence?

[quote] When did it stop being SOP to walk backwards when leaving the Queen's presence?

Long, long before the current Queen was born.

[quote] Why does anybody have to curtsy though? We are all humans.

First of all, no one HAS to curtsy. You're not going to be put in jail even in London if you do not.

Second, the whole framework of a hereditary monarchy and a hereditary aristocracy denies the idea that we are all equal.

[quote] Long, long before the current Queen was born.

Now it wasn't because in The Crown, they show the Prime Ministers walking backwards when they leave her.

R24, I’m wearing glasses. She did not fucking curtsy. She didn’t even slow down. Unless you call a quick turn of her head in the general direction of Prince Philip at 1:34 a “curtsy”. Harry didn’t pause, either.

If there’s a CURTSY in that video, tell us where it is. Because no one else is seeing it.

The Princess Royal, showing the trashy cunts how it's done.

I see Harry bow his frizzy apricot tonsure, but that fidgety bitch doesn’t do anything of the kind. Queen Liz is NOT amused.

Meghan clearly didn't curtsy. Interesting that even the insane Megstans realise how bad this makes her look: hence the bizarre insistence that she did curtsy when its clear to all she did not.

Yeah, she really didn't. This video shows her walking with Harry until they are past the Queen (skip forward to 1:25 to see their progress down the aisle). There is a slight pause and head-turn, but no curtsey. There is a camera cut right after that, but again, she was already past the point where curtsying would have been possible, as she was several feet past where the Queen was sitting.

If you look at the close-up of the family members right after, the Queen looks shockingly grim, and William looks bemused and angry, like he can't quite believe what he's just seen.

I think R30’s “she did not fucking curtsy” is the saddest little sentence I’ve read in a long time. Get a grip.

The year is supposedly 2020. Stop this absolute nonsense. These people are total charlatans.

The money - over 35 million for this wedding alone - and the titles which Meghan is desperate to use at every opportunity, are real enough and Meghan accepted them greedily.

The curtsy is a baseline mark of manners in the world she is attempting to enter. And the least she could do to thank the Queen.

She really showed who she is and what her intentions are in her decision to snub the woman who just gave her all the things for which she was marrying Hapless Harry. Only a psycho would accept that wedding, dress, tiara, titles, and not spend 15 seconds to curtsy to the woman who gave her ALL of it.

[quote] The curtsy is a baseline mark of manners in the world she is attempting to enter. And the least she could do to thank the Queen.

She did curtsy to the queen at the wedding. But it was only shown at a great distance, from a camera at the top of the chapel.

She didn't curtsy. She didn't even look in the Queen's direction. However, to be fair, there were two steps she had to navigate in gown and train and veil without messing anything up. The time to curtsy would have been before she and Harry started moving. Then, curtsy out of the way, she could have paid full attention to those steps. And for anyone who goes "but they're just steps!" try doing it in a full skirted wedding dress with an absurdly long train AND veil. You have no idea how far off balance that stuff will pull you if you're not used to wearing it every day.

It’s not generous if a multi millionaire loans you the use of one of their collection of tiaras for an afternoon you know. Generosity is someone giving you their time or something that they don’t have in extraordinary excess. These people get everything they want for no reason and then they also want you to bow to them? The cheek. The only one of them with an ounce of self-respect or agency seems to be Meghan from what I can see (and its still lacking). Who paid the 35m?

This is what a genuine curtsy from a Royal bride looks like. Had Meghan done this, we would have noticed. There would be no way to miss it, even from a ceiling camera.

Face it. She didn't curtsy, no matter what she and her pathetic worshippers claim now to hide that fact.

So which is it, Meg fans? You guys are giving us too different stories.

“She DID curtsy; the angle was bad”

Or

“She didn’t because it’s a stupid custom”

It’s one or the other. I say she did no such thing. Harry bowed his head but she didn’t do any such thing.

^^ two

I hate Meghan, but she probably forgot in the stress of the moment.

R43, well, Harry certainly knew better.

This is the DL equivalent to the Zapruder film and will be dissected by DLers long for many decades to come. That bitch did NOT curtsy! (Maybe that's why Eugenia performed such a deep and dramatic curtsy at her wedding a few months later. "Bitch tries to steal my tiara?!")

This is the DL equivalent to the Zapruder film and will be dissected by DLers long for many decades to come. That bitch did NOT curtsy! (Maybe that's why Eugenia performed such a deep and dramatic curtsy at her wedding a few months later. "Bitch tries to steal my tiara?!")

Ayayay, she did curtsy. At 1:18-1:20 you can see Harry bow and Meghan doing a small curtsy. It’s from the view at the top of the church, which makes it difficult to view, It’s by no means the type of curtsy seen at other weddings, it’s very slight.

Blow the fucking video up at R34 to fill your screen - if you're on a PC, then whamo! It's completely evident that she curtsied - a quick curtsy, sure - but she still curtsied. You fuckers who constantly want to subvert the truth about ANYTHING as a matter of furthering your own personal agendas are indeed a dangerous lot!

I can't tell whether Markle curtsied to QE II or not.

I engage in pure speculation in raising the possibility that QE II sent official word that Markle is to use her discretion on whether or not to curtsy (and that possibility opens a delicious line of speculation).

Still, whatever.

There should not have been an instant of hesitation by Markle to curtsy. If she didn't, she should have, and I write this as someone who is glad the inherently ridiculous institution of the BRF exists because I adore QE II and, for my entertainment and gossip dollar, they're fun to observe and comment upon.

That she's American, and Americans don't bow or curtsy, is beside the point.

Markle decided to marry Prince Harry. And in marrying an immediate family member of the BRF in their house, no less, there is no half-way, no maybe I'll do this and maybe I won't, no statement-making by signaling that if you don't curtsy you're striking a blow on behalf of some "independence" point.

I rooted for Markle.

I have no doubt that the environment she entered both publicly and behind the scenes, in private family moments with the BRF was difficult, to say the least. It's glaringly obvious that Prince William dislikes Markle. But hate Markle all you want to, however, I don't care who you are in his immediate orbit- to be disliked by him cannot be easy to endure.

I also do not doubt that the BRF wanted to see her succeed at a role within the BRF that she herself decided to take on. They probably were wary of the marriage and not because she's a bi-racial American. Perhaps because they could see trouble for a number of reasons, like, for instance they could see that she didn't realize what she was undertaking and that her expectations were way off.

I believe the accounts that the BRF thought her ethnicity was a good thing; a fresh presence within the ranks.

I've written this before and I'll so so again. The whole Kate v. Markle rumble that occurs between their respective fans and haters is ridiculous because the premise is that in the hierarchy, they are peers. They aren't, of course.

But it always will puzzle and disappoint me that Markle didn't seize the opportunity to carve out a unique role with the BRF, not in competing with Kate, but in developing an image in positive CONTRAST to her- something that I think even Kate would see as a positive thing.

I like to believe Markle curtsied because it was the right thing to do.

[quote] This is the DL equivalent to the Zapruder film

LOL!

Might it have been previously agreed that as an American citizen, she would only do a slight curtsy rather than a full-on one?

When the judge enters the courtroom and the bailiff says “All rise”, would you remain seated? (“The fuck I have to stand up for some prick in a robe? He’s better than me?”) Do you hold the door open for a little old lady with a walker? (“Equal rights, grandma. Women can open a door.”)

People who have an integral sense of dignity and respect for others have no problem making gestures of that respect.

Since Meghan was marrying a British prince and taking on a British title, as well as (at the time) applying for British citizenship, it would have been correct to curtsy to the woman making her new position possible. I can see where it might feel odd to her--notice in the video at R34 that she seems rather uncomfortable singing "God Save the Queen." But that's the problem when you marry into a family and culture you know nothing about. Had she lived in England longer before marrying Harry and gotten to know him, his family, and her expected role as Royal wife better, she might never have walked down that aisle. It's exactly why the BRF advises longer courtship periods for their members, and it's why William advised Harry to get to know Meghan better before popping the question. NOT following this advice is why Harry's life is now the shambles that it is.

How often does Harry have to entertain Tyler Perry to stay in his house?

R52 my understanding is that a judge could hold you in contempt if they don’t like how you act so there is a general threat to your own safety whereas with the queen you’re just annoying a cranky old woman (bonus?). I am resident in a country that I am not a citizen of. I don’t stand for or sing their national anthem. If I have to go to a church for a funeral or wedding I don’t sit or stand or kneel on command for something I don’t believe in. If I met the queen I would treat her like any other person I would meet. Which I believe is respectful, both to me and to her. Respect is a two way street it is not only afforded to one of the parties.

You talk about it being a case of having respect for others but I think it’s about having respect for yourself, or for your own beliefs. If she didn’t feel correct in curtsying then the correct thing to do is not to curtsy. You don’t abandon your self-will because your fiancés weird grandmother wants you to. You might not have any strength of your individuality but that doesn’t mean others don’t. And to judge them for it it is weak.

I absolutely judge someone who is willing to enjoy all the perks of her newfound position while adhering to none of the rules. You want to be a free-wheeling American? Fine. When you marry your handsome Royal duke, don't take his title, don't take the allowance his rich father hands out (which is based in public funds), don't take the grace-and-favour house paid for by the British public.

If you do take all those things, fucking curtsy to his grandmum. To do otherwise is the worst sort of venal hypocrisy.

Ummm, it’s not a rule, r56. And she curtsied, for God’s sake.

R56 haven’t they removed themselves from everything you listed? They’re the only members of the family that aren’t welfare louts. The rest have been on the public purse their whole entire lives. As if they’re in a position to demand respect of anyone. Lazy people.

"They’re the only members of the family that aren’t welfare louts. "

They're officially free-lance moochers now, but the main person they're mooching from is Charles. Millions a year out of his pocket and into theirs.

And Charles gets his money from .......??

Meghan gave the tiniest most microscopic curtsy possible, showing what an ungrateful cunt she is.

R58, they have removed themselves from nothing except the work which justified the perks. They still have the titles, they're still living on Charles' money, and Frogmore is still kept empty in case they ever deign to visit England again. They are the biggest moochers of them all.

No work for the same pay? I’d say someone’s a chump, and it isn’t the Sussexes.

They’ve removed themselves but they are still using their titles and taking the money. Hahahahaha. I can’t wait for their next move. She’s like a soap opera villainess.

Oh, bullshit, r55.

If you take what you wrote to its logical conclusion then the Sussexes should have run off and gotten married on their own, without the hoopla the BRF hosted on behalf of them.

R64 they dropped the HRH non?

R65 They probably should have it probably wasn’t much fun, still doesn’t have any bearing on whether someone should curtsy to another human being just because tradition says so.

If someone (anyone) asked me to curtsy or bow to them where that action would constitute my deferring to their supposed higher importance than mine I would consider that the most disrespectful action. And I wouldn’t do it. And I honestly have zero interest in MM and haven’t watched the video but good for her for not doing it.

If I remember correctly, she curtsied but let out a wet fart as she did it. Etiquette books are clear that if you fart mid-curtsy it doesn't count.

You have zero interest in Meghan Markle, R66? Yet you’re participating in a thread about her. What gives?

R68 I know it seems disingenuous. I can’t stand the royal family (not as people but as an institution) and I find people that are fans of theirs to be really desperate and depressing. How can any rational modern person be enthusiastic about their traditions, nepotism, flamboyance, anti-democratic position etc etc. Therefore while I have no interest in Meghan’s personality, I find her upsetting of the usual order to be entertaining.

I find obsequiousness to be a deeply unattractive trait in people and I hate any institution that makes any person feel like less than. Any royal family (but esp the BRF) does this by nature. They’re gross. And if you’re into them you’re gross. There are no exceptions.

I'm a gay American male who was once invited to a Japanese wedding. I was one of the only Caucasian people present and, during the reception, there was a lot of bowing, back and forth, and I felt enormously flattered and honored, and simply did my best to return the honor. Honoring the courtesies of your hosts is what I try to do, and I've yet to feel demeaned or degraded in the process. MM performed a half-assed curtsy to QEII, as well as a half-assed curtsy to the Queen's friend, the Queen of Tonga. IMO, it betrayed her attitude towards the institution she worked so hard to join. I'd respect her more if she didn't curtsy to anyone, and also refused the titles that were given her.

R70 when you bow to a Japanese person you’re not performing a piece of social power play, it’s an equal social interaction, you’re saying thank you or hello, the bow will often be reciprocal. When you curtsy to the head of the BRF you are acknowledging your lower stature to her. She’s not doing it back to you. They’re two entirely different things. Why does this need explanation?

If you agree to become a duchess and a Royal Highness, you are accepting a place in a social structure. At least in theory, that structure says that you are of a higher social standing than 99.99% of the population. However, by accepting your elevated role in that structure you are also accepting that you are beneath The Queen. And you should act accordingly.

When I was at school, I was introduced to the Queen Mother and I bowed because it was what other people did. Nowadays, as an adult, I wouldn’t bow, but I also wouldn’t accept an award which placed me somewhere in that social structure. It shows a sense of entitlement to accept the elevation in status without showing the tiny amount of humility which it also demands.

Ultimately though, it is just a question of respect toward the Queen. Most people in the UK admire her for her devotion to the country, but we don’t think about the institution as something particularly sacred, and for most the Royal Family is just a real-life soap which people are allowed to take an interest in if they want.

R72 wait a second. You’re bemoaning Meghan’s supposed sense of entitlement as a negative while legitimizing her entitlement as a person. You’re saying she is now a functioning entitled person that is better than thou but she’s a bad person because she has a betTee-than-thou attitude? And the queen is the measure of this? The ultimate entitled person should not be exposed to entitled behaviour?

Do we have to go through the motions of drawing out how it is different to say accept a knighthood or to marry a royal? How one is entirely voluntary and the other is circumstance?

Ultimately it is a question of respect to oneself, not the queen. You clearly understand this (maybe subconsciously) by saying you wouldn’t now bow that you’re older. Meghan maybe thinks the same.

R73, I’m not saying she’s better than me or anyone else. I don’t agree with that social structure, or believe that anyone is inherently better than anyone else.

What I am saying is that she accepted a place in that social structure, and all the admiration and deference which some people accord her because of that social position. Given that she took her place in a system which at the time of her wedding she clearly thought of as a positive (and presumably still does), it is not unreasonable to expect her to abide by the conventions of that system.

Incidentally r73, if Meghan didn’t want the trappings of Royalty and all its titles, she could have made it clear that she didn’t want to use them. She could have persuaded her husband to turn down the dukedom, and requested that the Queen not make her an HRH. She evidently did neither of those things.

Actually, R71, bowing in Japan is almost never an equal social interaction, as the person of lower social status is expected to bow lower than their superior. Why does that need explanation?

R74 One of the worse male attributes is non-thinking reverence for “tradition” or “convention” and a deep anger for people that show irreverence towards this. If you truly don’t believe anyone is inherently better than anyone else as you claim then you should support any undermining of an institution that upholds the opposite. You should be enthusiastic about someone refusing to curtsy. However you are bothered by Meghan. She gets under your skin. She can be as enthusiastic about parts of her fiancés family traditions and as unenthusiastic about others as she wants. She isn’t bound by law to curtsy so why would she? She wants to wear a tiara and take a dumb meaningless title and not bow to her husbands grandmother who cares. She hasn’t broken any laws.

R76 simplistic and not necessarily true. To the onlooker not self evident so is not the same but thank u for ur contribution!

You can't have it both ways, R77. Either the BRF is unworthy of respect, in which case Meghan is the world's biggest hypocrite for using it to build her profile and enrich her coffers, or it's an institution worthy of respect, in which case she should have curtseyed to the Queen. To say that Meghan should do what she feels is right and pick-and-choose her favorite bits of Royal life while discarding the rest is exactly the attitude that led to her and Harry's ignominious departure. They wanted to keep the HRH titles and the sheen of royalty while spending most of the year in California, only coming back to England for high-profile gigs that would further burnish their fame. The Firm made it's clear that's not how it works: You do all of the work and enjoy all of the perks or you leave it all behind and live your own life.

If Harry and Meghan had real integrity, they never would have accepted the Sussex title, the big televised wedding with carriage ride, or Frogmore Cottage. The fact that they used the institution for all that it's worth and then skedaddled shows them to be not just hypocrites but parasites, not willing even to do the fairly easy work the rest of the Firm members perform in exchange for their fabulous lifestyles.

I suspect you know this, hence your unwillingness to acknowledge that Meghan's "meaningless" title is anything but meaningless to her. It's the only reason anybody knows who the fuck she is.

^^^^Excellent post. ^^^^

R79 I don’t think you’ve properly understood what I wrote. The BRF is undeserving of respect, ergo it wouldn’t be hypocritical to use it for your advantage but I didn’t say anything about that? In no case should anyone with an ounce of self respect to the queen or to any extension of the BRF.

I don’t care about Meghan’s integrity and I didn’t colm

(Finger slipped!)- comment on it. It’s immaterial anyway. They don’t get to go around telling anyone how to act.

R78 Simplistic? From some cretin who thinks that “u” and “ur” are words?

Amazing how the Megstans are so desperate for Meghan to be in the right, that minute from minute, they switch between self-contradictory defenses of her in order to twist themselves into a "Meghan was absolutely correct!" pretzels from one minute to another.

"She DID curtsy, liars!"

Then

"Why SHOULD she curtsy? It's only the Queen and the matriarch of the family which has given her everything - titles, money, a mansion, all expenses paid for life, and who will take care of her child in every way. The Queen doesn't DESERVE a curtsy and Meghan is right to take them for all she can get!"

I'm beginning to believe that 'Markleism' ought to be entered in to the DSM as a severe mental illness.

Excellent, correct posts at r72 and r74.

Of course the existence of the BRF is inherently ridiculous, nevertheless however, it exists. It exists with its own norms, hierarchies, gestures (for example, a curtsy or bow which acknowledge those hierarchies), protocols, traditions, etc.

Markle, in making vows to a grandson of QE II, wasn't in a cafeteria line picking out what she wanted to accept and leave alone what she didn't want to accept.

Half-way, or "I'll take some of this, but not that", isn't how it works, if I understand correctly having observed the BRF for decades. Markle, at least, should have known that, among whatever else that was to be learned by her.

And here's another reason that Markle should have bowed to QE II. If reports that Markle was going to seek, or be granted by QE II, citizenship within the UK, remember Queen Elizabeth is the Sovereign; the Head of State of the UK.

r55, in weighing the balance for reasons to curtsy or not, the scales weigh much heavier on reasons for Markle to have done so.

One would think, just out of basic personal and public respect for QE II, that alone would suffice as the only reason to do so.

And let me clarify again- I can't tell whether or not Markle curtsied. I hope those who say she did are correct.

R84, you might hate MM with the fire of a thousand suns, but the rest of us have opinions too, and sometimes they’re nuanced. Yet every time we offer a different opinion, we’re slammed with being stans or “sugars,.” We’re not; there’s a great conversation about curtsies, which might be respectful, but they’re also subservient, but no, offering anything different than your opinion makes people stans.

I’ve never seen a MM hater who didn’t resort to name calling. So I’ll do some myself. You remind me of Trumpsters. Yeah I said it. Resorting to name calling rather than having a conversation.

Hi all, I'm OP. I don't have any strong feelings about Meghan one way or another. If anything, I admire her moxy.

The drama related to Harry and Meghan's missteps (mostly unforced errors) has been a welcome relief/distraction to the current world crisis. And, I thank them for that!

The book is absolutely vicious and written in the prose style of a 1950's club woman (think Joan Crawford's voice in her book"My Way of Life" or Charles Busch in "Die, Mommie, Die"). Thoroughly enjoyable and lots of carefully mined gossip! 5 stars!

I am loving this thread.

I brought up the missing(?) curtsy at the time of the wedding. I always assumed she did curtsy but was suspicious that there was no video of it.

I still think the word went down to those recording the wedding to shift the focus at that very moment to the overhead camera so THERE IS NO VIDEO PROOF OF A CURTSY. Either that or Sparkle and Dim were such a PIA to those recording the wedding, that a bit of vengeance made sure there was no picture of the curtsy (if, indeed it happened.)

Reading this thread after all this time made me smile in recognition.

The curtsy is an iconic moment in royal weddings. Looking on Youtube you can find those curtsy videos for multiple royal weddings. Even the wedding of Elizabeth and Philip, while not visually recorded, was recorded for radio and yes, the mention of the curtsy is there.

Perhaps, sensing the disaster approaching, the RF (or someone else) did not want any visual evidence of that moment

And, one last thing, Meghan never seemed to mind having people curtsy to HER. If she deliberately did not curtsy to the Queen or did a half ass version, and afterward delights if having that gesture given to her, her obvious hypocrisy is on display.

R88. Which book are you referring to? Lady CC or Finding Freedom?

Here are 31 pics of various BRF curtsies, including Diana's:

The Queen offered Harry and Meghan the option of not accepting the titles and for Meghan to keep her acting career before the wedding. They refused and voluntarily took the titles, along with all the responsibility to become working royals that the titles accompanied.

She actively CHOSE a life of precedence, protocol, and yes, curtsies, in exchange for titles, a mansion, and a first class lifestyle all expenses paid. The least she could have done was curtsy.

Meghan and Harry should have taken the Queen up on that offer. Imagine the positive publicity they would have gotten, rejecting an antiquated system in favor of a free and modern life in America. They could have sidestepped all the bullshit of their disastrous 18-month tenure with the BRF. They could have gone to California a good two years before COVID hit, which would have given them much more time to build their brand, and without all of that negative publicity hanging over them. Harry's wife would always have been world-famous, but she could have been famous as Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor, the Woman Who Said No to Being a Princess (or duchess, but princess is more dramatic). That would have gotten her much further along in her goals than the title ever did.

I firmly believe that if they'd taken that path, they'd currently be more rich and more beloved then they ever will be now. A title (and all it implies) can be a curse as much as a blessing.

Agreed, r93. Had they simply been forthright from the beginning that they never really wanted life inside the BRF and went away immediately to California, their story would have been ten times more romantic, more compelling, more admirable. They would have looked like they were so devoted to their 'causes' that they were willing to turn down all the titles and finery. They could have become modern-day folk heroes.

By taking it all, and THEN turning their backs a mere year later, they look sneaky, dishonest, disloyal, and like they were running a heist with the goal of taking everything they could get without being willing to give anything in return except a middle finger. Not a great look when their apparent goal is to make lucrative deals with companies around the world - companies that expect at least basic integrity, honesty and loyalty in the people they do deals with. They've really shot themselves in both feet.

They also would have been financially independent much more quickly. Charles could still have floated them for a year out of his private funds, but there would have been so many people and companies falling over themselves to offer the Meghan and Harry speaking engagements, endorsements, and, yes, acting opportunities for Megs, they wouldn't have needed Daddy's money for very long. What's more, Meghan could have had her lifestyle blog AND merched her pregnancy to her heart's content. They wouldn't have had to borrow Tyler Perry's mansion: They could have bought their own.

R85 omg thank I think I had forgotten that the queen is the head of state in the UK. I suppose that’s one of the thing you’ve “observed” over the course of all these long wasted decades? Oh and just because the subject is the BRF doesn’t mean you have to embarrass yourself with your flowery writing style. One can be a total nightmare in one’s usual language it shall suffice!

As you say the BRF is totally ridiculous and unnecessary - so actually she can do whatever the fuck she wants she doesn’t have to bow to anyone. I hope she didn’t, out of personal disrespect for the queen. Would give her a taste of her own medicine. For everyone here declaring that it’s an opt in / opt out situation and that is apparently self evident, this is not true.

I am not a MM stan I said in R69 my views. What it boils down to is that it’s nobody’s business but their own. They can do what they want because they are human beings with agency. Agency undetermined by other people. And anything that works towards undermining that pack of inbred weirdos is good in my book.

Whatever, R97. They are human beings who are totally supported by the BRF. Spitting on the institution that's paying your bills is just plain tacky. No amount of poorly worded self-actualized bleating on your part is going to change that one iota.

Although MM was privately educated, she comes from working class stock and has typical working class arriviste values. That is why she genuinely believes in her woke pronouncements, insomuch as anyone that shallow can genuinely believe in anything. It is also why she has no respect for BRF protocol or traditions; to her they make no sense and should be updated or discarded.

She also has no concept of what "being royal" means. She stated confidently, "We'll always be royal. Harry and Archie have royal blood." She thinks marrying into or being a child of a royal family is a permanent status that has certain immutable entitlements. Well, she should take a look at deposed royalty or discredited royalty. Clearly royal status is not something immutable or unchangeable like eye color.

Makes them look like they are about to drop a deuce these low cross legged curtsies. Hardly a delicate look without a full floor length skirt.

They look more like ballerina's to me, r100, but to each his own.

R98 the BRF isn’t giving them their own earned money, its taxpayer money that they are assigned. BRF is worth $88bn and they give them $6m last year and they’re supposed to be ever thankful. As I said earlier generosity isn’t generosity if the only thing you give is something you have in extreme never ending excess. Like you giving out bad opinions.

R101 they look like indoctrinated beneficiaries of white supremacy with no evidence of critical thinking to me. With early onset arthritis.

You're so cute, R102. Meghan and Harry should be VERY FUCKING GRATEFUL for that 6 million, which they haven't done a damned thing to earn since they noped the fuck out in January.

But you keep on defending the indefensible, honey. You seem to enjoy making an ass of yourself, and who are we to interfere with that?

R103 who is ‘we’?

"We" is the person who is blocking your annoying, repetitive, semi-literate ass, R104.

R89 I'm referring to Lady Campbell's book: Meghan and Harry: The Real Story. It's fun! Fun! Fun!

R105 no need to be so touchy. If you can’t calm down go buy the enquirer there’s prob some life affirming anti Meghan Markle stories in there for you to slow the blood pressure. Xoxo

I think Diana got it right. After a point, she just let her emotions fly and she mainly seemed to have fun with the press, except in times when she tried to control them and couldn't. (Obviously, their participation in her death was a ghastly and unforgivable consequence of her celebrity.)

She struck me as genuine and fairly transparent. That's what we loved about her: she was a nut. But she was our nut.

Meghan tried to take on the role of The Great Lady early on. We all knew that was bullshit.Better if she had transparently embraced what she achieved not through bloodline but from sheer force of will and smarts: "I'm an aging divorced actress with a middling career, but, hell! I dangled myself into the eyeline of one of the most eligible bachelors in the world, and he asked to marry me. Ain't that something?"

R102 If you're going to try to be so arch, you might want to get your facts straight. There is no way on Earth the personal wealth of the BRF is anywhere near $88bn - you're confusing their personal wealth with the Crown Estate which is owned by the British people and they can't touch it.

Furthermore, the 'taxpayer money' you speak of is called the Sovereign Grant and is nowhere near the $6m you claim Charles is giving them. The money he's giving them comes from his personal income, which is derived from the Duchy of Cornwall. The Sovereign Grant only covers the costs involved in being a working royal and is audited by the Treasury - they'd never get away with giving a penny of the SG to H&M.

You fucking twat.

R109 I totally forgot Charles is self made. Thank you for getting my facts straight I’m committing them to memory as I type. You’re so *emphasis* arch *close emphasis* I’m obsessed.

When you say ‘they’ can’t touch it presumably you mean the British people? Or am I about to get another lesson?!

R110 Would you like another lesson? You're certainly in need of one or two.

Is English not your first language? I'm beginning to get that impression and starting to feel a bit bad.

R111 I don’t know you personally but I’m seeing both lessons and lesions. English is one of my two first languages. I wouldn’t feel bad for someone for whom English is not their first language but I’m not racist so I see why you might be bothered. Royalists and racists go hand in hand in my experience.

Tell me again the part about prince Charles being self made. And go easy on your shift button.

R112 I'm neither a royalist nor a racist. I've also never said that Charles is self-made. Where did you get that from? I said he gets his money from the Duchy of Cornwall - you said his money comes from the taxpayer, which is not true.

I knew the Megstan would call us racist at some point. Stans can't argue successfully because they have neither the intelligence, the education, nor the raw materials (a defensible subject) to argue with, so they start slinging ad hominem insults. "Racist" is their favorite.

Diana got away with as much as she did because she put in 15 years of service before making a real break with the BRF. She also was British, which gave her a better understanding of and reference for the institution of monarchy, however much she hated her husband. In the Panorama interview, She put Charles' throne in jeopardy by saying he was unfit for it, but she wanted the throne itself to endure. She wanted to see William crowned King.

Meghan's mistake was trying to openly profit from an institution she wanted no part of. She should have never tried to become a working member of the BRF. She still would have profited greatly as Harry's wife--you can't buy the kind of fame that brings. But on the surface at least, her hands would have been clean, and she could have spun that initial boost of fame into great things.

R115 wow you’re way too invested in these people. Live your own life. Go outside.

For the umpteenth time I’m not a fan of Meghan, I’m a detractor of the BRF (or any royal family for that matter). The two can coexist.

R113 thinking less of a person because their native language is not English is *newsflash* racist. Which makes you a racist, because you did so.

R166 When did I say I thought less of them because English isn't their first language? I was beginning to feel bad for mocking them and their poor English. If English isn't their first language, I wouldn't have mocked them - but apparently R111 has TWO first languages, which is an amazing impossibility.

I'm pretty sure they meant to say they were bilingual, but I'm willing to let that go.

R117 the thread hasn’t reached 166 comments just yet. First language means a primary language that you learn from birth and is widely spoken in country or origin. I have two. A difficult concept for you maybe but it seems nuance isn’t your strongest suit. And a quick reminder that mocking someone for their language skills is....(you guessed it).....racist!

R118 If your only point here is to call everyone and everything racist, I know all I need to know about you. You're a single-issue idiot still reeling from being called out on your bullshit claims about the BRF's finances and their 'white supremacy'.

No-one apart from you likes Meghan. It's not racist to dislike her (or you). Get over it.

Yes, calling everyone racist is a classic red herring technique. The Megstan knows they have no leg to stand on in their argument, so they deflect attention away from it by calling people racist.

We're not buying what you're selling, R118. It stinks like rotten fish.

R119 I didn’t say anything about what was said about Meghan being racist, it’s your comments about people’s language skills that are. I’m not an expert on their finances, I didn’t claim to be but we can all agree they’re not earned. Their wealth is due to their position. The British royal family are all white (besides Meghan) and believe in their own supremacy. They also exploited Indians, Africans, Asians and Arabs to establish their wealth. I’ll let you join the dots.

Just did a quick glance about the duchy of Cornwall. Deemed to be exempt from corporation and capital gains tax because it’s a crown operation (although it apparently acts as a commercial entity), and income tax only paid for 27 years of its almost 700 years existence. Seems to have originated as a land grab, and makes all of its money from lease arrangements. I see it was investigated in 2013 for being seen to have an unfair advantage against other commercial entities and also accused of a major lack of transparency in relation to its transactional declarations. It also seems that even though Charles voluntarily pays income tax, his expenses and income tax information is not published. It’s funny the company he keeps in not declaring those records. What could Charles have to hide he seems like such an awfully honest chap!

Just wondering out loud but it’s so similar to tax evasion on a major systemic scale, screwing the country out of public funds. Well I suppose you’re right thank god it’s not taxpayers that are footing the bill right?!

Look, R121 is now wandering into straw man! I never said anything about Charles' income being private. In fact, it's not, which is why Meghan and Harry, no longer working Royals, are not entitled to a penny of it. At least Charles and Camilla, William and Kate, etc. do SOMETHING to justify their vast incomes. That doesn't mean their incomes are justified, and you are welcome to start a thread about that if you wish. Here, we are talking about Meghan and Harry and their gross ingratitude, given that they are very much still dependent on Daddy's money (with its origins in public funds).

As for my comments on your writing, I have no idea what color you are, and it doesn't matter. If you're going to play with the big kids at DL, bring your A-game, and that includes a reasonable attempt at good grammar. Might I suggest Grammarly, a reasonably priced grammar-checker that you can install into Chrome? It won't make your arguments any better, but they'll at least be easier to read. And since you were also the one who was calling the Royals "inbred weirdos" upthread, thus making fun of genetic traits they can't do anything about, you're guilty of some rather prejudiced comments yourself, sweetie.

R122 , R121 was talking to me.

I just can't be bothered engaging anymore. He's an idiot who's already decided H&M are being paid by the taxpayers and the Royal Family are white supremacists. Everything he sees is through a prism of race and there's no talking to people like that.

Wait so at R122 we have acknowledgement that the money is public funds, yet at R123 we have a denial that they’re publicly funded, yet you’re both in agreement that I’m incorrect in saying they’re publicly funded? Is this what I’m reading? And I’m supposedly the one with grammar issues (for that matter using ‘u’ for ‘you’ on purpose as an inflection to denote a spoken style isn’t necessarily bad grammar)? To be fixed via an app? Lol R123 you’re a real dumb bitch. One for the ages. Now go back to the daily mail pls & thank u.

Also R122 and R123 don’t think I didn’t notice you both failing to address the clear corruption and tax evasion and Donald-Trump like lack of financial transparency on the part of Charles. And I didn’t even get into the queen’s offshore holdings made public via the Panama papers. But I suppose you’re both in so deep with the royals on a pedestal it might be a bit too much to come to terms with.

R124 I said H&M ie Harry and Meghan. I'm not R122.

You can check quite easily to see we're not the same person. You're making yourself look even more stupid right now. Give it up, please.

R125, that's "whataboutism" at its finest. Even if what you say is true, that makes Harry and Meghan living off of Charles even more heinous. If the money is that dirty, people of real moral fiber would have headed out for California right after the (simple, non-publically funded) wedding and not taken a penny off Charles.

And now I'm officially bored with talking to you. Shoo.

R126 it’s public monies, just because it runs through Charles’ slippy fingers on the way through doesn’t mean much.

R127 For the last time (how many times) I don’t think Meghan has a moral high ground in the slightest, but she’s a sight better than the rest of them being that she’s only been at it a year or two. My original point was that the queen or any member of the BRF was unworthy of respect (curtsy (just happened to be MM’s but could have been anyone)) and this financial corruption just goes to prove my point.

Now off to bed. Both of you. No tiaras for the rest of the week.

"[R70] when you bow to a Japanese person you’re not performing a piece of social power play, it’s an equal social interaction,"

Wrong, R71. Japanese bowing is a constant, ongoing power play and a means of determining social status, and rank in the giant social hierarchy that is Japanese society. The deeper your bow the lower your social status, and to bow deeply is a sign of respect and humility, while a shallow bow indicates that you think you're superior to the person you're bowing to, so it's a great way to deliver snubs and insults in a society that doesn't allow verbal snubs and insults. (BTW Meghan seems to have done exactly this unconsciously, by giving the Queen a half-assed little bob.) And BTW if you enter a large Japanese store and the greeter bows deeply to every costumer who enters, it's the store's way of telling everyone "Here, the customer is king!".

Now of course every foreigner who goes to Japan and does their best to return bows is doing it all wrong, and I do hope everyone in Japan understands the difference between a foreign clod who's trying to show willing, and a foreigner who's delivering a deliberate insult with a too-shallow bow.

The thing that makes me want to slap Meg upside the head is that she's perfectly willing to accept the social rank that comes with being a Royal Duchess, and to insist on the world using her title and treating her as a social superior.

But she's not willing to grant the other people within that Royal social structure the same due.

Being a Royal Duchess means squat without a monarch there to lend weight and power to the title, if you want the status that comes with your title that means acknowledging the even higher status of the person who created the power structure you're using.

R129 & R130 we really passed both of your points around 40 - 60 comments back it must be. Read through (not trying to be rude).

There was an episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm where Larry was told he had received a "shit bow" from a Japanese and he wanted to get to the bottom of that.

Maybe she had gas, diarrhea from nerves that day or a particular heavy period that she was afraid would stinger dress. No way would I curtsy if I was like that.

R91 - I am sorry but those bitches look like pathetic loser bimbos doing that move. Also, I would NEVER courtsy, particularly to that third world trash Maxima who doesn't even know to trim her split ends or that constipated former Nazi supporter...good for Meghan. Fuck them.

‘Constipated former Nazi supporter’ ... I’m afraid I don’t know to whom you are referring.

But Harry had a great laugh once wearing a Nazi armband to a party. Har har har, what a lark! A real Jack the Lad.

I finally watch the curtsy/no curtsy clip above. No indication of a curtsy. However, Megs is robustlyand quite happily singing God Save the Queen, the national anthem and ode to granny moneybags aka the tiara tyrant!!

[quote] your fiancés weird grandmother

What a strange way to refer to the queen.

“Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and of her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, and Supreme governor of the Church of England.”

What a strange way to refer to a person.

R135 - the Queen is who I am referring to and her Stormfront member husband who dreamed of joining Hitler Junge until Queen Mary threatened to pull the allowance if he did it. The Queen, her husband, Anne, Margaret and her parents have been said to be racist, anti-semitic, homophobics. I mean, look at their faces ffs.

That is entirely made up, r139.

If they're so awful in reality, why do you have to make up lies about them?

You come off as psychotic.

R139 Why would Queen Mary be paying Prince Philip an allowance?

You fucking nutcase.

The truth is such a bitch, isn’t it?

No curtsy or effort thereof to the Queen.

However, Just Harry and MeAgain are so more than happy to take all the titles, monies, privileges, etc. that come with a bit actress marrying a bitter traitor in the BRF.

Really, that Just Harry went along with this means he too is complicit in the deceit planned prior to the wedding. He went along with it.

Enough already. Strip the titles. Have Parliament remove Just Harry from the line of succession. Pay them one lump sum and tell them “be gone.”

r139 forget's that QE's "Stromfront" husband bravely served in the British Navy for the entire duration of the War, putting his life on the line for his adopted country. He had already renounced his Greek royal titles by then as well. There was never any moment that he entertained siding with the Nazis.

As OP’s title says, Meghan didn’t curtsy.

Some here defend her choice not to curtsy to the racist Nazi (tee hee). Some think it was rude not to curtsy to the most sovereign.

And a few really believe that her pause (while Harry does his little fumbling bow) qualifies. That’s the most laughable.

And for all the talk of Nazism and racism, makes you wonder why a woke woman married into such a horrible family and hurried (really hurried!) to mingle her blood with them.

[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 more they try to "set the record straight" in that "Freedom" book, the more they showed that all those stories, previously labeled as "gossip' were true. Like the "Kate didn't offer me a ride Boo Hoo" tale and of course, Tiaragate.

Stories that might have faded away were brought back from the edge of oblivion by their own acolyte. So that even their own sugary fans can no longer deny them.

The ineptitude is stunning.

Count me as one who has been following the pair from the beginning as a semi-replacement for the old night time soaps. Trouble is, those soap characters were much smarter than this pair.

And if it is true that Harry reads everything about himself online, I can only ask "WHY?"..

ATTENTION: HARRY. Walk away from social media and read a book. Probably a novel idea for you, but try some Dickens. That might keep you occupied.

So wait, they’re going for ANOTHER book about themselves? That’s funny.

ANOTHER BOOK? BWAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!

They just don't get it, the rest of the world is facing a fucking pandemic and mass unemployment, and they will never, ever, feel sorry for those two spoiled twats.

How many books until they feel satisfied that they’ve hammered home the message?

It is a real problem for the royals, because if they give a lump sum and tell H&M to fuck off, there is no limit to how bad their behaviour might get. And the public will continue to associate them with the royals to some degree. Look at Sarah Ferguson, who has been toilet paper stuck to their shoes for decades.

Well, giving Meghan a large settlement on the condition that she sign a NDA won't save them, she'll spend the rest of her life creatively finding ways to blackmail more money out of them.

Get her to legally agree to give every penny back if she ever says a word against the BRF, and she'll threaten to take Archie to visit James Hewitt and invite the paps along.

They'll never give a lump sum to H&M as a couple, r151.

At best they'll give a lump sum to M in the event of a divorce, possibly a smallish one with an additional monthly stipend on top of that which will be reversible the moment she breaks any one of the many NDAs she will sign in exchange for the money.

They'll likely allow her to style herself Meghan, Duchess of Sussex too, and hang that over her head as another thing to be withdrawn should she act out after her divorce.

Just because YOU wouldn’t curtsy doesn’t mean she’s excused from doing so.

She didn’t.