Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

DL Royal Sleuths: What do you suppose was the problem with the bridesmaid dresses?

I’m guessing Kate thought they were too plain...or that they should have been a color other than white...?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 180Last Friday at 6:46 AM

Klan Granny thread FF

Kate made mummy cry...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 104/04/2021

No, that is traditional and Charlotte wore white dresses in 3 other weddings the same year. The problem was, as always, MeMe.

Reportedly, Meghan had been unkind to Charlotte and had encouraged Ivy Mulrohney to bully her. Ivy was 7, I believe Charlotte was 2, almost 3. Meghan reportedly did not want to include Charoltte or George in the wedding at all. She reportedly kept chanign her mind about everything, which is why even her dress looked rushed and poorly fitted.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 204/04/2021

What were the other weddings, r2? Are there pictures online?

by Anonymousreply 304/04/2021

I thought the problem was that MM did not want the little girls to wear tights? But the tights are to prevent the children from getting blisters on their feet. So.....

by Anonymousreply 404/04/2021

Yes, there are, both Charlotte and George were in 4 weddings that year.

There may have been conflict over the children being bare legged and not wearing tights or even socks as was done in the other 3 weddings. The shoes were leather and reportedly caused blisters.

After the scene, Charlotte was reportedly pulled from the fittings and thus her dress looked big on her a the wedding.

It is noteable that Meghan did not want to include her soon to be niece and nephew at all. They were similar in age to the other children included.

by Anonymousreply 504/04/2021

I still think that Kate probably asked if Charlotte could wear white tights because that is long-established protocol for bridesmaids, and was rebuked by tights-free-at-all-times Meghan for daring to mention it.

by Anonymousreply 604/04/2021

She just absolutely seethed with uncontrollable jealousy at Kate and the children from the very beginning. It is pathological.

by Anonymousreply 704/04/2021

We are all out of fucks, OP!!!

Instead of stinking up our forum with your countless Meghan and Harry-bashing threads, why don't you racist, raggedy-mouthed Brits do something constructive like - oh, I don't know - maybe book your first appointment with a dentist? Mouths like Al's Junk Yard ... all tore up!

by Anonymousreply 804/04/2021

Oh look, it's Meghan's publicist! Hi, Meghan's incompetent publicist!

by Anonymousreply 904/04/2021

All of those little girls should have worn plain white ankle socks. Tights would have looked stupid, but their bare legs were even worse.

by Anonymousreply 1004/04/2021

Tights looked fine on all the bridesmaids at all the other weddings, r10.

by Anonymousreply 1104/04/2021

R9- I have it on ignore. Makes the threads so much nicer! 😁

by Anonymousreply 1204/04/2021

I don’t follow royal protocol. Why are all her bridesmaids children? Are they all royal kids not from her side of the family? Think it’s weird.

by Anonymousreply 1304/04/2021

That wedding photo looked as if it belonged in an Addams Family movie. Creepy.

by Anonymousreply 1404/04/2021

In Britain, 'bridesmaids' are what Americans refer to as 'flowergirls'. Usually UK weddings have an adult maid of honor, an adult best man, and all the bridesmaids and pages are children. No long line of hideously dressed "Best friends of the bride". That's an Americanism.

by Anonymousreply 1504/04/2021

'Usually UK weddings have an adult maid of honor, an adult best man, and all the bridesmaids and pages are children.'

More proof that you are not British. The bridesmaids are usually the bride's unmarried friends and family members who she's close to. Small children are flower girls.

by Anonymousreply 1604/04/2021

You're weird, R13..

by Anonymousreply 1704/04/2021

This was at Pippa's wedding. Charlotte was 2 here.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 1804/04/2021

Tights also come in handy if the children have “accidents”

by Anonymousreply 1904/04/2021

Traditional UK weddings almost NEVER have grown "bridesmaids". They're always children.

The working class might do this and the Gypsies certainly do it. The Queen did it because she has formal Ladies in Waiting (they were not "bridesmaids") but I have never seen it at any wedding I've been to in the UK.

by Anonymousreply 2004/04/2021

That wedding day turned out to have temps in the 80s at midday so I'm pretty sure Charlotte was pleased to be bare legged. It was the start of a historic heat wave summer in the UK.

by Anonymousreply 2104/04/2021

Thanks R15, I learned something today.

by Anonymousreply 2204/04/2021

What were the previous 4 weddings?

by Anonymousreply 23Last Monday at 12:20 AM

Who are the other kids?

by Anonymousreply 24Last Monday at 12:34 AM

Meghan told Charlotte she was too fat to be in her wedding party. Kate called Meghan a bitch and made her cry. Typical wedding drama. This goes back to why do people even get married when everything is so fraught with stupidity.

by Anonymousreply 25Last Monday at 12:37 AM

Charlotte wasn't even fat as a baby. I find it very hard to believe anyone ever considered this child "fat".

Meanwhile, the rumblings continue about the latest Oprah interview lie to be disproven. The media are not going to let this one go. This was a huge lie. Well, all of their lies were huge lies in that they were about essential elements of their story, but this one will run and run because it shows that they started their plans to leave at least a year before they said, at around six months after they married and took those titles in the name of being 'full working royals'.

The timing of that first meeting in January 2020 heavily implies they were thinking of leaving even as early as at the time of the wedding itself.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 26Last Monday at 1:00 AM

People are openly talking on social media about these threads being daily mail bot and troll threads. Not me I don't do social media. Apparently people are questioning whether using bots and trolls to harass someone is illegal. Twitter and insta sleuths are now involved. Ex hackers, black twitter and retired legal beagles all now on the hunt. I blame covid. People are bored. So far they have analysed the source links, linguistics and compared comments to other social media sites and are logging all info such as replicated comments and source material.

by Anonymousreply 27Last Monday at 1:10 AM

Meghan here, since one of you crazy cunts is onto the fact I post here I want you to know that my own secret Royal army has tracked you down. We know who you are and will now take legal action against you. Reason? Your pussy stinks

Don't believe me? Here's a picture of you captured by one of my drones

You are so busted... Kate made me cry and now I'm going to make you cry

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 28Last Monday at 1:11 AM

The wedding didn't looks as fab as this

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 29Last Monday at 1:23 AM

Probably Anne. Didn't she question the Harry & Meghan's baby's skin colour?

by Anonymousreply 30Last Monday at 1:28 AM

@r29, All the Golden Girls married Leslie Nielsen? Cool

by Anonymousreply 31Last Monday at 1:30 AM

The royal family had a pool on how dark Archie would be. It was in poor taste.

by Anonymousreply 32Last Monday at 1:47 AM

The problem is sMEG is a certifiable cunt, that's all.

by Anonymousreply 33Last Monday at 1:52 AM

Based on multiple accounts, Megs was a major Bridezilla, constantly changing her mind and demanding swift changes - and having a fit when the stodgy, slow moving BRF apparatus didn't adjust. So there was some tiff over the dresses, shoes, whatever, Kate gets tired of the whole thing and tries to tell Markle "How We Do Things Around Here" and Megs melts down, she just wants everything to be perfect for Harry, etc. etc. Kate tries to smooth things over the next day, but Megs isn't having it. Meanwhile, all the palace personnel who've been kicked around by Markle for months advance the story that Megs was the mean girl, not Kate. Because they're primarily Team Kate, but they're also sick of Markle's demands too.

I'm guessing this story isn't so much about Kate vs. Megs as the beginning of Megs vs. The People Who Run Shit at the Palace.

by Anonymousreply 34Last Monday at 2:00 AM

Mooghan's ridiculously long veil still makes me seeth. What a preposterous cow.

by Anonymousreply 35Last Monday at 4:10 AM

They were cheaply made. From a distance they look fine, but upon closer inspection, the fabric was cheap and unlined and the hems were badly sewn. If you’re Tony and Maria from Staten Island, who cares? But a royal wedding should have better quality dressmaking. Even for the little attention-stealing brats. *ahem*

Also, they were not wearing tights and should have been. That woman’s penchant for bare legs is bizarre.

by Anonymousreply 36Last Monday at 4:19 AM

The children also got painful blisters, even socks had been urged and vetoed. Sociopath who enjoys the abuse of power and the pain of others.

She did not even want to include George or Charlotte, she had NO intention of being a postive member of the family.

by Anonymousreply 37Last Monday at 5:47 AM

R7 - You are so full of shit.

by Anonymousreply 38Last Monday at 5:50 AM

[quote]She did not even want to include George or Charlotte, she had NO intention of being a postive member of the family.

Possibly, though my annoying sister-in-law tried to veto my young niece in a wedding (The Queen Mother, my mom, stepped in on that one and reminded her who was paying for this Royal Wedding), primarily because she knew everyone would be clucking over the cute flower girl instead of fawning over the bride. Some women are just like that.

by Anonymousreply 39Last Monday at 5:58 AM

Charlotte was a bridesmaid at at least 4 (perhaps 5) weddings during a relatively short period of time.

Pippa's wedding, the Sussex wedding, wedding of Sophie Carter (Charlotte's godmother and a friend of Kate), and Eugenie's wedding.

Pictures below.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 40Last Monday at 7:50 AM

More pictures.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 41Last Monday at 7:55 AM

^ Ha Ha! Kate wore white to Meghan's wedding which is probably the lowest, tackiest thing a woman can do to another woman. She truly is a mean girl

by Anonymousreply 42Last Monday at 7:55 AM

Kate in her "mean girl" white at Meghan's wedding

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 43Last Monday at 8:02 AM

So MeAgain was the only one who did not have bridesmaids wear tights or socks? The only one who did not care about painful blisters in little girls? Hmmm.

by Anonymousreply 44Last Monday at 8:08 AM

More mean Kate...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 45Last Monday at 8:11 AM

You commoners...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 46Last Monday at 8:21 AM

Kate didn't wear white, she wore pale yellow

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 47Last Monday at 8:47 AM

What ugly shoes the flower girls had.

by Anonymousreply 48Last Monday at 8:48 AM

No socks with leather shoes and ill fitting dress.

by Anonymousreply 49Last Monday at 8:53 AM

The Mulroney children sure are breathtaking.

by Anonymousreply 50Last Monday at 8:55 AM

R50 Is it sarcastic?

by Anonymousreply 51Last Monday at 9:00 AM


[quote] What ugly shoes the flower girls had.

At the time of the wedding it was reported that Meghan's gift to her bridesmaids got it...the shoes they wore.

by Anonymousreply 52Last Monday at 9:17 AM

Kate's pussy must stink too...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 53Last Monday at 9:18 AM

So she thinks she is...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 54Last Monday at 9:20 AM

They look fine. Jesus fucking christ on a cracker. No one wears tights anymore. Bare legs are In but again, who fucking cares?

by Anonymousreply 55Last Monday at 9:22 AM

This wedding was yeeeears ago. And you’re all here talking about blisters and tights? Yeesh you gals are obsessed with this woman! Embarrassing.

by Anonymousreply 56Last Monday at 9:26 AM

When Kate reads anything about Meghan...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 57Last Monday at 9:27 AM

You old bitches have no idea about 3 year old, do you?

What did it cost to Meghan to let those little girls have white socks and be comfortable? Nothing, she just didn't give a fuck.

That's fucking ridiculous but Meghan caused the issue, she could just say yeah whatever put socks on them no one will look at their feet.

by Anonymousreply 58Last Monday at 9:38 AM

R44 - No tights or socks for Zara's bridesmaids either.

by Anonymousreply 59Last Monday at 9:39 AM

R59 Not sure they are leather shoes.

by Anonymousreply 60Last Monday at 9:43 AM

Different type of shoe, R59.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 61Last Monday at 9:44 AM

Was Andrew there?

Maybe Kate felt the young were safer around him with some sort of barrier, like tights (?)

by Anonymousreply 62Last Monday at 9:45 AM

Please tell me they at least had some no-show half socks on. I mean, just a bare foot in a leather shoe?! That just isn’t done.

It’s not like it was sandals in July or something.

by Anonymousreply 63Last Monday at 9:46 AM

An entire thread filled with ladies obsessing over whether little girls wore tights for an hour or so back in 2018.

The mind reels.

by Anonymousreply 64Last Monday at 9:47 AM

Someone post pictures from Di’s wedding. We need old school rules to compare with this new no socks nonsense.

by Anonymousreply 65Last Monday at 9:49 AM

The story s not the socks, it's the battle of power around the socks.

by Anonymousreply 66Last Monday at 9:49 AM

R30 I have it on good authority that the person who questioned the baby's skin color was Camilla.

by Anonymousreply 67Last Monday at 9:50 AM

Charlotte whispered in Meghan’s ear, “My Mommy thinks you’re a cunt.” Clever girl. She WILL reign.

by Anonymousreply 68Last Monday at 9:51 AM

R30 You need to tell more cause Camilla doesn't seem to give a fuck.

by Anonymousreply 69Last Monday at 9:52 AM


We are trying to decide whether or not Meghan was in fact being a diva. That is how we’ll know who to ally with. Mkay?

by Anonymousreply 70Last Monday at 9:53 AM

Here's what she thinks of you...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 71Last Monday at 9:56 AM

There is no story. You've invented a tale where a woman purposely, maliciously made a whole bunch of little girls, including her own relatives, get physically hurt just because she's an evil psychotic bitch. Then you and your friends started yet another thread where someone pretended to be a neutral party, simply curious as to what has happened, all so you guys can post your obsessions repeatedly, over and over again.

It's been five years. You guys started making up stories from the very beginning and you're still doing it. This is insanity.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 72Last Monday at 9:57 AM

R72- Yet here you are, still obsessing over it. Hmmm.

by Anonymousreply 73Last Monday at 10:22 AM

We see you, luv and your family

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 74Last Monday at 7:50 PM

The flower girls story came out a couple of weeks ago when a Givenchy seamstress leaked what had actually happened at the fitting, infuriated with the lies Meghan told Oprah.

Go to bed, Obie Kenobie.

by Anonymousreply 75Last Monday at 7:59 PM

^ Love ya...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 76Last Monday at 8:04 PM

'So far they have analysed the source links, linguistics and compared comments to other social media sites and are logging all info such as replicated comments and source material.'

Meghan sent the person who invented the phrase Klan Granny and got it to catch on a cheque for $10k.

by Anonymousreply 77Last Monday at 8:10 PM

^ It was $15,000 you stupid cunt... Oops! Guess I said something I shouldn't

by Anonymousreply 78Last Monday at 8:12 PM


Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 79Last Monday at 8:13 PM

British gals are so pretty...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 80Last Monday at 8:16 PM

[quote] This wedding was yeeeears ago. And you’re all here talking about blisters and tights? Yeesh you gals are obsessed with this woman! Embarrassing.

You [bold]do[/bold] realize, Toots, that OP is asking about the flower girls simply because that's what Meghan herself OBSESSED about this at GREAT length in the interview with Oprah just a frw weeks ago? SHE is the one obsessed about the flower girl outfits years after the event--not OP nor anyone else here.

But of course you knew that already. You're just pretending you've forgotten it.

by Anonymousreply 81Last Monday at 8:23 PM

R80, that's a picture of Matt Lucas in drag, you moron.

by Anonymousreply 82Last Monday at 8:24 PM

'Toots, that OP is asking about the flower girls simply because that's what Meghan herself OBSESSED about this at GREAT length in the interview with Oprah just a frw weeks ago?'

She didn't even mention them, just that she had an argument with Kate and Kate made her cry.

by Anonymousreply 83Last Monday at 8:25 PM

Love your hair and make up...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 84Last Monday at 8:27 PM

OP isn't truly asking anything, r81, her post is a plant, just like most of these Meghan Markle posts are. Someone pretends to be an innocent, neutral observer who just has, like, a simple question, you guys.

The real purpose of these threads is to act as a springboard for the psychoses of a handful of obsessives.

by Anonymousreply 85Last Monday at 8:28 PM

Here's my guess - it had more to do with Kate than Charlotte

If you recall Kate wore the same dress that she wore for Charlotte's christening. This sort of move always garnered good press for Kate because the tabs felt she was being frugal by daring to wear the same thing twice in public. So, I think at the fitting Meghan casually asked Kate what she was planning to wear and Kate told her that she was repeating an outfit. This angered Meghan, because now she was going to look like she was spending a fortune on a french haute couture gown (by a British designer) and Kate was going to show her up by trying to look as if she cared about tax payer money. Thus, the fight began...

by Anonymousreply 86Last Monday at 8:34 PM

The problem? Charlotte's early menses.

by Anonymousreply 87Last Monday at 8:37 PM

Why is Markle the central person in this wedding picture? It's as if everyone else is a prop, including the husband.

by Anonymousreply 88Last Monday at 8:43 PM

Like many others here, I think it had to do with the legware. Meghan wanted the kids to go bare legged because that's the trend now in the USA (for Adults). Kate probably thought it was trashy not to have the girls in leg ware.

by Anonymousreply 89Last Monday at 8:44 PM

Stay classy, Brits

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 90Last Monday at 8:53 PM

R89-- Agree, and it was trashy, just like MM.

by Anonymousreply 91Last Monday at 8:56 PM

Details have leaked, R96, had nothing to do with your scenario.

by Anonymousreply 92Last Monday at 8:56 PM

Chav boys are so sexy...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 93Last Monday at 9:00 PM

I believe these are the dresses Meghan initially wanted the little girls to wear.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 94Last Monday at 9:12 PM

^ I believe this is the dress you wore to your wedding

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 95Last Monday at 9:17 PM

You Chav girls are HOT!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 96Last Monday at 9:25 PM


by Anonymousreply 97Last Monday at 9:28 PM

I think the original story still stands. Charlotte was acting up at the fitting; perhaps she was tired. MM screamed, 'That kid is going to ruin my wedding,' and yelled at the nanny to get her under control. Kate told her that was unacceptable; it was her staff and she would speak to them. The story goes that Kate was in tears, but it's possible MM was.

by Anonymousreply 98Last Monday at 9:29 PM

Oh, who the fuck CARES?????

by Anonymousreply 99Last Monday at 9:36 PM

^ We are the Klan Grannies of DL and we care...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 100Last Monday at 10:03 PM

How the world sees the BRF...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 101Last Monday at 10:39 PM

We care because it was the beginning of the Meghan Vs The Royal Family War.

by Anonymousreply 102Last Monday at 10:42 PM

The boys are dressed in outfits kids in the capitol of The Hunger Games would wear. Black wool in the summer does not sound fun.

by Anonymousreply 103Last Monday at 11:18 PM

The boys' outfits are gorgeous but with mid-80s temps, it would have been horrid for them. Yet the girls were forced to be bare-legged, in those ugly leather shoes.

MM's charming gift to her little bridesmaids - the shoes!

by Anonymousreply 104Last Monday at 11:27 PM

[quote] It's been five years.

Harry and Meghan have already got married in 2016? So not just three days, but TWO YEARS prior to their public wedding? Wow!

by Anonymousreply 105Last Tuesday at 3:43 AM

^ This post was for the sad dumbass R72.

by Anonymousreply 106Last Tuesday at 3:43 AM

I think both Kate AND Meghan are real pieces of work.

by Anonymousreply 107Last Tuesday at 4:28 AM

There are few if any accounts of diva behaviour from Kate. There aren't any mean girl stories about her and the Cambs have kept staff for years. I read that at the beginning she had terrible panic attacks before public speaking so clearly she hasn't sought the limelight. She is supposed to be the most hands-on mother in the history of the BRF. She has had a hard time of it, with all the Waity Katie jibes and ongoing rejection from the aristos. She hasn't put a foot wrong in her BRF role. Her husband probably cheats on her, because he can. And yet she has never complained, just gets on with things.

Kate deserves credit .

by Anonymousreply 108Last Tuesday at 5:19 AM

Kate's a doormat

by Anonymousreply 109Last Tuesday at 5:23 AM

I really don't think he cheats on her. I think that is BS that jealous MM started because Wills scarfed her ugly ass.

by Anonymousreply 110Last Tuesday at 5:26 AM

I agree to R110 - and even if he did cheat on Kate, he'd be getting himself some hot bird and not that fugly Rose coutness of Whatever.

by Anonymousreply 111Last Tuesday at 5:29 AM

I hope one day when Queen Charlotte & despotic King Oskar rule over all of Europe, Charlotte will tell us of the Affair of the Bridesmaid Dress (explaining, of course, why she had the Harkles killed)

by Anonymousreply 112Last Tuesday at 5:32 AM

M: "Is it true they call you Princess Doormat?"

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 113Last Tuesday at 5:32 AM

K: Hey Meghan, is it true you're a cheap hooker?


by Anonymousreply 114Last Tuesday at 5:35 AM

Not as cheap as you, Waity Katy

by Anonymousreply 115Last Tuesday at 5:37 AM

I hope she whores better than she acts. Yeesh! 😲

by Anonymousreply 116Last Tuesday at 5:39 AM

Hi, cupcake, looking good...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 117Last Tuesday at 5:43 AM

Kate was afraid that she’d be upstaged by her bridesmaids. They were all prettier than her.

by Anonymousreply 118Last Tuesday at 5:45 AM

Kate is a doormat and cheating is a male Windsor family tradition. Harry cheated constantly on Chelsy, and later on Cressida. Rose was an aristo party girl who married a gay man over 20 years older than her who mainly lives in Paris with his lover. No need to repeat stories about Philip and Charles.

Both Kate and Megan are good examples of 'be careful what you wish for'.

by Anonymousreply 119Last Tuesday at 5:47 AM

The only reason I gave some credence to the “Will cheated” story was that it came out right around the time of Louis’s christening. In the photos of that day outside the church, every single one has Kate gazing at Louis (granted, he’s adorable) and it seems like she’s avoiding looking at Will. Even when they were walking as a family, eyes on Louis.

Maybe those were just the photos that ended up being published but it seemed to me that she was giving him the cold shoulder. Happy to be proven wrong and at any rate, they seemed to have gotten past it.

by Anonymousreply 120Last Tuesday at 6:29 AM

What is with the inane Pinterest posts? That poster is either a lost frau or someone with an inverted penis.

by Anonymousreply 121Last Tuesday at 6:47 AM

Typical Sunshine Suchs minion tactic to disrupt the thread, R121. Blocking is best.

by Anonymousreply 122Last Tuesday at 6:48 AM

Oh wow, well, I guess some random nameless Givenchy seamstress who, I'm sure, received a nice little bonus in her bank account after she shared that "story" (Givenchy WANT the BRF as continued clients, ain't gonna mess that gig up). I'm not on ANY team, I think Meghan is an opportunist but I also think the BRF is full of racists and bigots.

by Anonymousreply 123Last Tuesday at 7:08 AM

R123 there were half a dozen seamstresses present to witness our D list actress playing the diva.

by Anonymousreply 124Last Tuesday at 7:14 AM

There were stories on Quora about Meghan's mother's family. The claims were her mother screwed her own brother out of his inheritance. Apparently, their father had money because of a house he owned which had greatly increased in value. Then the brother got mysteriously murdered. They also claimed Meghan lived with her father for years, not with her mother and that Meghan's mother had been feuding with her own family for years. Must be genetic all those family feuds Meghan starts.

by Anonymousreply 125Last Tuesday at 7:30 AM

R125 - There are more liars, trolls, paid posters and people that do not know what they are talking about on Quora than on the DL.

Scary, is it not?

by Anonymousreply 126Last Tuesday at 10:44 AM

But the Meghanhaters are more obsessive.

by Anonymousreply 127Last Tuesday at 11:28 AM

On Datalounge I mean.

by Anonymousreply 128Last Tuesday at 11:28 AM

They're not, bimbo @ R127 & R128.

But you know that.

by Anonymousreply 129Last Tuesday at 11:37 AM

R125 You’ve mixed up the story. Doria’s father owned the house she currently lives in. Alvin Ragland died under weird circumstances; while walking his dog, he tripped on the leash and hit his head on the pavement. Allegedly, Doria had had her father sign the house over to her right before he died. Doria has two maternal half-siblings, but one younger paternal half brothe, Joffrey. That half-brother is alive and well, as is his mother, Alvin’s widow. It was strange that the widow and son didn’t get a share in the house. None of these family members were invited to the wedding, which all three siblings and stepmother publicly confirmed their sadness and disappointment about.

Below is the younger brother and stepmother of Doria:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 130Last Tuesday at 11:54 AM

Doria seems very shady but at least knows how to keep a low profile.

by Anonymousreply 131Last Tuesday at 12:09 PM

Like mother, like daughter. I wonder if a lot of the besotted MegStans on twitter aren't purely motivated by the fact she marrried a white guy. It seems like the majority of black male celebs marry blondes. Hell, even George Floyd's gf was white. Must be infuriating.

by Anonymousreply 132Last Tuesday at 2:03 PM

So are you saying Queen Elizabeth was a doormat? Prince Philip was no prince. Men are dogs. If women don't like it they should become lesbians.

by Anonymousreply 133Last Tuesday at 2:23 PM

Nothing suss there, R130. Yikes. Doria's current biz is quite shady too, she does not have the proper license to run it on her own, wonder who else is involved. It offers health care to wealthy elderly I read, cash only. Doria redefines shady.

by Anonymousreply 134Last Tuesday at 2:37 PM

The markle haters are insane and obsessive. Hatred for someone who is relatively obscure and unimportant is bizarre. Like high school mean girls, they are purely spiteful and jealous.

by Anonymousreply 135Last Tuesday at 2:41 PM

R134 Is Doria the black Rosamond Pike in I Care a Lot?? Hope Doria meets up with her Dianne Wiest.

by Anonymousreply 136Last Tuesday at 3:01 PM

r136 That was the very first thing I thought of when I read r134's post too.

by Anonymousreply 137Last Tuesday at 10:24 PM

This obsession with Doria is weird.

If there was something shady about Doria, Papa Markle or Sammy would have told us long ago.

by Anonymousreply 138Last Tuesday at 10:38 PM

I kind of like that Doria is shady and knows how to be silent and keep a low profile. She was in and out of the UK very quickly. In for the photo ops and then back to LA. Meghan is pure trash. At least Doria is naturally an attractive woman and wore the royal dress code for the photo opps better than Meghan did.

by Anonymousreply 139Last Tuesday at 11:21 PM

You have to admire Doria's self-control. No doubt she has some dodgy things in her past, and it must have been an ordeal being scrutinised, waiting for the other shoe to drop. But now that MM is being vilified, expect some painful revelations.

by Anonymousreply 140Last Tuesday at 11:29 PM

I'm not saying Meghan is like Diana but this reminds me of how the press had all these negative things to say about Diana and all these trash behind the scenes stories emerging, displaying the BRF as fucking SAINTS who have been done wrong and betrayed by Dirty, Demented Diana. Fuck you BRF sycophants!

by Anonymousreply 141Last Wednesday at 5:41 AM

[quote] I'm not saying Meghan is like Diana but [...]

Anything after a "but" is known to be drivel.

by Anonymousreply 142Last Wednesday at 5:48 AM

By the end of her life, Diana was acting so crazy that she kind of confirmed with Charles had been saying about her all along. Likewise, if the Harkles keep complaining about the BRF now that they're out of the fold and the others go on about their business, it will confirm that *they* were the problem, and not the other way around.

by Anonymousreply 143Last Wednesday at 6:47 AM

R141 it has nothing to do with the Royal family and everything to do with the tabloids' Tall Poppy Syndrome: they build some celeb up to better tear them down afterwards. The Brit tabloids acted even worse with Kate and tormenting her lasted for years. The same with Fergie (who is actually the royal spouse who most resembles Meghan) and Sophie, Edward's wife.

Meghan thought she'd get fawning coverage. Never happens. I think this is because she was unknown before Harry and hadn't been put throught the tabloid ringer like an A lister would have.

by Anonymousreply 144Last Wednesday at 7:14 AM

Kate doesn’t seem so innocent.

by Anonymousreply 145Last Wednesday at 10:44 AM

R43 Kate's outfit was pale yellow not white.

by Anonymousreply 146Last Wednesday at 10:50 AM

Doria does shady correctly. Her daughter craves attention too much. It must be exasperating.

by Anonymousreply 147Last Wednesday at 1:58 PM

Markle was NOT "put through tbe tabloid wringer" during her 17 months of "service," not even close to what Camilla and Catherine experienced. Contrary to Sparkles' never ending whining that BP didn't "protect" her, it was confirmed just today by Dan Wootten that BP repeatedly requested the tabs not cover certain experiences and generally bid them to go lightly on her.

In addition BP was covering up her consistent staff abuse and the bitch STILL did nothing but complain about them. Future business partners of the Harkles, you were warned.

by Anonymousreply 148Last Wednesday at 2:15 PM

All the 'acting' jobs Markle ever got were thanks to her ex-husband's connections. She's lazy and a pain in the ass. She'll do nothing now. Harry's dumb and lazy too so these two are headed nowhere.

by Anonymousreply 149Last Wednesday at 2:24 PM

Remember when Meghan let it be known a couple of years ago that she would only consider offers from projects with A List directors? I'm sure she was swamped with offers.

by Anonymousreply 150Last Wednesday at 2:41 PM

I'm ready to trash the social climbing sociopathic narcissistic Meghan as much as anybody but the abuse of staff is a joke. Andrew is notorious for treating staff like garbage and they never went after him. I'm sure books could be written about his behavior. Maybe after the Queen is dead.

by Anonymousreply 151Last Wednesday at 2:51 PM

Get back to us, r151, when Andrew loses 12 employees within two years.

That's 1 every 2 months.

Even Scott Rudin keeps employees longer than that.

by Anonymousreply 152Last Wednesday at 2:55 PM

What do we suppose she’s actually doing to the employees?

by Anonymousreply 153Last Wednesday at 9:42 PM

[QUOTE] Typical Sunshine Suchs minion tactic to disrupt the thread, [R121]. Blocking is best.

Fuck off, PR fixated Welp Troll.

by Anonymousreply 154Last Wednesday at 9:53 PM

[quote] Even Scott Rudin keeps employees longer than that.

Funny you mentioned that. It looks like Rubin is about to be held accountable for his shit over the years. The New York Times allegedly was forced to kill a story about him a year or two ago about his behavior as a producer on Broadway. But now this from The Hollywood Reporter yesterday:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 155Last Wednesday at 9:54 PM

[QUOTE] Get back to us, [R151], when Andrew loses 12 employees within two years.

Shame you think it wise to defend a rapist who fucked sex slaves.

by Anonymousreply 156Last Wednesday at 9:58 PM

For the last time, Andrew was never accused of being a rapist, and the legal-aged whores were not enslaved.

by Anonymousreply 157Last Wednesday at 10:12 PM

R157 actually he was accused of being a rapist by the victim and she also claims she was trafficked for sex with him. And prostitution for anyone under the age of 18 in the UK is illegal sorry! Age of consent as 16 does not apply. Andrew is a scumbag.

by Anonymousreply 158Last Wednesday at 11:03 PM

If this was Virginia Roberts, she did not say that she was raped by Andrew. As for trafficking, it depends what you mean. She was not held captive, her passport taken from her.

by Anonymousreply 159Last Wednesday at 11:10 PM

R159 lol you hate Meghan so much you’re gonna take Epstein & co’s side wtf is wrong with you.

“ Virginia Roberts, who has waived anonymity in her bid to support prosecution against the billionaire financier and convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, claims she was made to have sex with Prince Andrew three times when she was aged 17.”

by Anonymousreply 160Last Wednesday at 11:13 PM

The age of sexual consent in the UK is 16, and in NY, where Virginia Roberts was employed, it is 17. So she was not underaged in her encounters with Prince Andrew. Furthermore, she was a sex worker, not a sex slave. Like any other employee, she was required to do as her employer instructed, in this case, have sex with PA. At no time did she say she was coerced or brutalised.

I am no fan of Prince Andrew or even the BRF, but it is obvious that the only goal of these greedy whores is a chunk of Jeffrey Epstein's large estate.

by Anonymousreply 161Last Wednesday at 11:47 PM

R161 sex workers cannot be under the age of 18 in the Uk, the 16 year is for non sex work sex. She said that she was ‘made’ to have sex with him, that’s non consensual sex, or, rape.

by Anonymousreply 162Last Thursday at 12:08 AM


But kAtE's sKiRRRTsss!!!!

But rAYcIsMMMMM!!!!

Always the same with you Megstans when you want to derail a thread.

by Anonymousreply 163Last Thursday at 1:22 AM

Reportedly throwing hot tea at them, R153.

by Anonymousreply 164Last Thursday at 4:13 AM

R161 - only a pedophile would defend Andrew's perversions and crimes, so I guess you are a pedophile.

by Anonymousreply 165Last Thursday at 4:54 AM

Doria may (or may not) be dodgy.

But - just for a moment imagine if we were in some scifi movie in which Meghan and her mother traded personalities, and it was a reserved, quietly strong Doria personality who had actually walked down that aisle and who then took on that title along with all those serious diplomatic missions, instead of The Greedy Tiara Grasper.

The entirety of the UK would have admired her to the point of mildly worshipping the very ground upon which she walked, and she would've gone down in the history books as one of the most popular members of the BRF ever to have lived.

What a difference a generation makes.

by Anonymousreply 166Last Thursday at 4:57 AM

R152 you STUPID, racist queen. Did it ever occur to you that the staff taking abuse from the royals had it in their minds that this is ok because they're born royals? Maybe they were thinking "who does this half breed outsider commoner black b i t c h think she is to order ME around?" I don't think Meghan is a saint but perhaps she was parroting what the other royals were doing in terms of giving directives to staff, etc.

by Anonymousreply 167Last Thursday at 5:08 AM

Oh, unclench, you tedious uptight frau, R165. Andrew paid a willing 17 year old hooker to fuck him, which she reported he did in a normal ordinary fashion.

by Anonymousreply 168Last Thursday at 5:11 AM

R167 crying RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYSIZM!!! again.

... zzz ...

Btw, calling someone a "queen" on a gay board isn't the smartest idea one can have ...

by Anonymousreply 169Last Thursday at 5:11 AM

R165, you forgot to cry RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYSIZM!!!1!11

by Anonymousreply 170Last Thursday at 5:13 AM

No one gives a flipping flying damn about her endless false cries of RACISM any longer. She overplayed that excuse and now it only pisses people off when she does it. Hehe. Game over, cunts.

by Anonymousreply 171Last Thursday at 5:24 AM

Her moronic fanbase still believes in her and all her lies, but apart from these loons literally ANY black and/or biracial person must have realised by now that they've been had.

by Anonymousreply 172Last Thursday at 5:31 AM

I think her " fans" are her and a Russian bot farm.

by Anonymousreply 173Last Thursday at 5:33 AM

[quote]who does this half breed outsider commoner black b i t c h think she is to order ME around?

Nobody thinks that way. You’d be a bad script writer.

by Anonymousreply 174Last Thursday at 5:36 AM

I hate to be unwoke, but most of Epstein's victims were wannabe hookers to begin with.

by Anonymousreply 175Last Thursday at 7:23 AM

*stepping around the puddle left by the what-about-Andrew troll*

Just as there are those who still support Mango Mussolini, there are those who think Meghan and Harry are justified. For some reason they identify with the butthurt and entitlement. We can’t do anything about it.

I’d love to know more about that “housekeeper” they hired, who used to work for the Beckhams. She doesn’t look like a pushover and she has an interesting background. Rebecca Mostow.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 176Last Thursday at 1:48 PM

That's their housekeeper? Yikes. Well, I'm sure Meghan will hire a lookalike as the nanny.

by Anonymousreply 177Last Thursday at 3:49 PM

[QUOTE] Andrew paid a willing 17 year old hooker to fuck him, which she reported he did in a normal ordinary fashion.

Sad that you are a pedophile AND a Klan Granny! What a grim combination.

by Anonymousreply 178Last Friday at 1:55 AM

Will you fuck off already, R178?

by Anonymousreply 179Last Friday at 1:59 AM

[quote]Maybe they were thinking "who does this half breed outsider commoner black b i t c h think she is to order ME around?"

For.Heavens.Sake. Mary!

by Anonymousreply 180Last Friday at 6:46 AM
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.


Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!