
![]() ![]() |
Yeahhhhhh....two things: 1. The show isn't based on the premise of her marrying a prince. It's based on the premise of her being a basic aging millennial who likes easy recipes and crafts. As the other poster said, she had an entire blog about it. 2. If she showed Harry and the kids, you would accuse her of monetizing titles, monetizing her royal connections, monetizing the kids....and frankly, I can see WHY she does not show you her kids. You are insane. I wouldn't film at my house so that creeps like you could see the layout. And yes, you are a creep. It's really, really weird to be hyperfixated on wanting to see kids you don't know. You are really having a difficult time grasping the concept of fame. And that's okay, I don't think you're bright so we can walk you through it! Here's how it works. People get famous from an avenue - acting, singing, marrying into royalty - and then they parlay that fame into other money making opportunities. Meghan Markle isn't any less "qualified" to give cooking advice than any of the actresses who have parlayed fame into a "lifestyle influencing career." You can not like her, for sure! I myself find her a little cringey and awkward. But to imply that she's less qualified to bake some treats and make floral arrangements than Gwyneth Paltrow and Pamela Anderson of all people based on some flimsy argument that "she's not an expert" is just because you don't like her. Okay, so Meghan's not enough of an expert but Pamela Anderson is a Michelin-starred chef? |
Exactly. She is Black, like her mom! Why is this so hard for you to grasp? And nice judgment on her straightening her hair. I would imagine it's not as textured as most Black hair due to her being biracial. See Kamala Harris. (Although I somehow suspect you were one of Trumps little dancing monkeys getting all riled up when he said there's no such thing as being biracial while his own running mate had biracial kids.) |
+1 so many reality and d listers have shows. It's not like she's getting some kind of special treatment. The reality is she doesn't need to be authentic. All she needs is bring enough views/profits and have a big enough following. It was never going to be groundbreaking or different |
Yep. Drew Barrymore is terrible on her talk show, but she’s still there! |
I thought she declared 'Meghan Markle' is no more? |
The point is she would never have this show if she weren't married to Prince Harry.She was not a recognized lifestyle expert. The Tig did not have a national following. |
Yep. She looks just like Samantha Markle but with dark hair. They have the exact same eyes and smile. It must be weird for them since they hate each other. |
It's so funny you keep saying Meghan Markle, you know she's Sussex now. ![]() |
That is what I know her as so I’m not changing it. It’s like how I still call the other one Kate Middleton. |
Such a smart point. If these were random new neighbors and the topic of extended family casually came up and both of them were crickets when it came to siblings, parents, nieces and nephews I’d be so sketched out. Nothing makes it more obvious you’re dealing with creepy toxic messy people than, “Oh, we’re both estranged from all sides of our families…” |
O-okay? Gwyneth would never have Goop and Pamela Anderson would never have her show if they weren’t actresses. Honestly Martha Stewart probably wouldn’t even have a show if she hadn’t been married to a rich guy who was able to bankroll her catering jobby. You really aren’t getting this, are you? |
They’re not estranged from all sides of their families. They both still speak to their mothers’ sides of the family. |
Someone made a good point above. What gracious hostess trashes family on tv? |
Dear god, Jeff, I'm begging you buddy, please look into these sock puppets. |