Spare

[Anonymous]

Harry does not look happy at all in these interviews.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did Meghan marry Harry, it seems like he had a lot of issues going on and she was doing pretty well for herself, with her modest acting career and blog etc? Is there a piece of the puzzle missing here?

Why did any of us marry the people we married?

It's not that hard to figure out. She wanted more. Fame. Status. Money.

Apparently she wanted it A LOT, because her man child husband is a walking red flag.

She had to scrape and hustle for a decade to get that side role on Suits and was already being written out. Harry was her ticket.

. So you married for money and status. That’s what you’re saying. And so because that’s why you married you think that’s why she married her husband. Very shallow of you don’t you think.

Yawn, do better. She was a known clout chaser. Tried to get with any rich British man she could and landed the biggest, most gullible doofus.

Hope she's enjoying it!

But you admit you married for money.

[Anonymous]

Looking at the sheer breadth and wtf-ness of things he disclosed in the book, he seems….unwell in the head. No one with intact judgment would do this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
2) Meghan was never cut out to be an obedient princess. She was/is a nice but ambitious and hard working woman with a vision of what she wants out of life, a clear feeling about what she believes is wrong and right, and an unwillingness to compromise herself entirely for anything or anyone. And in the end, this clashed with the institution and doomed her. She was never going to not fight back. And if you admire that quality overall you support her, and if you think she should have been thanking the gods for landing her a prince and keeping her mouth shut as she enjoyed the trappings of the royal life than you hate her.

Meghan thought that the whole institution of the BRF should be bent to suit her because she's so special. And when it didn't, she cried. She was fighting back against what she perceived as slights, but is in fact just reality: you, Meghan, are NOT as important as Kate, because hierarchy. And this hierarchy will not change based on how fabulous or glamorous or popular you are. That's why they get priceless art and you get IKEA. Both of you live in places you do not own and never will.

That’s where you are wrong. Meghan is no less important than Kate or anyone else. I agree with the poster before you, Meghan was never going to take a backseat to anyone. And she shouldn’t. It’s unAmerican. And it should be unBritish as well. Kate, William, Harry, Charles did nothing important in their life or helped others. They were just born into an institution that should have been dissolved a long time ago. She should bow to no man or woman. WTF. Do you teach your children that they are less important than others simply because of their birth.

For the love of god, why marry into the system you despise?

Hmmn...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who are appalled at how Harry is airing his “family’s” dirty laundry, this isn’t a family. At best this is a dysfunctional business that is desperate to hang into its position. While many of us would operate under different norms when it comes to our own families, those norms have never applied to the BRF.

We all know it’s ugly and unfair. But apparently no one wants to see it in print or hear it said out loud.

See, that's part of the charm of the royal family. It is a family, including family squabbles and family laundry. But still, family laundry doesn't need to be public.

Yes it does. The dysfunctional royal institution survives off the tit of the taxpayers. Make it transparent

Are you saying that while Trump was in office, we should have heard more about his little orange twig?
We heard plenty about his orange twig.
I'll have a little less transparency, thanks lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Changing the subject:

Will the Palace respond to the stories from the book?

I don't see why they would need to. Everyone is doing the work for them. Seems like they are the winners in this.

I agree. The coverage has been exceedingly negative in all published sources - read the comments with each excerpt. The Taliban revelation has been regarded with serious alarm in multiple broadsheets.

I hope we can actually talk about the book and actual, linkable coverage of same and just report the posts attacking those who are putting in relevant comments. The coverage has been universally unflattering to Harry, so some posters who can’t accept that have been attacking. It’s pathetic and weird.

I wonder if Harry will put out is own statement distancing himself from this disaster saying things were taken out of context, misrepresented, unclear, etc. Will he take full responsibility or try to shift blame?

Only if public opinion turns against him.

My money is on a public announcement that he’s in a fancy wellness rehab dealing with exhaustion or some such in the next 6 months.

This is what will happen. But he will be out in time to make it to dear old dad's coronation. He will ultimately blame drugs or booze or something.

He’s never taken responsibility for anything. Why would he start now? The bad pre-Megexit press was due to racism and his family leaking stories to make W&K look better. He’ll likely blame the current negative press on his ghost writer who he’ll say took things out of context and distorted the truth. Perhaps he’ll find a way to try to blame his family for the negative press on his book.

Now that H&M have sold all the dirt they have, there’s nothing left to sell. The docuseries Live to Lead that they produced was a total flop, indicating the public’s only interest in them is the BRF drama. But as this thread and numerous news stories show, the public is getting tired of their schtick. Their window to cash in on their BRF fame is closing fast. I predict, when it’s all said and done, they’ll blow through most of their money and get divorced (let’s face it, if there’s no fortune, no social connections and a tank reputation, Meghan will lose interest with her child-like husband). Harry will then blame Meghan for orchestrating the breakup from his family and manipulating him into saying everything he has in his book and interviews. He’ll beg his family to take him back. They will, but he will live a life in public banishment like Andrew.

It was very misogynistic for the tabloids and followers to deem it Megxit and not Hegxit. It was Harry’s country and he decided to exit and leave. Meghan simply returned home. As always, blame the woman.

You are trying extra hard.

"Meg" is short for "Meghan" and rhymes (sorta) with Brex...."Heg"...is just dumb and not catchy lol.

Meghan is also the external factor that entered the picture and after which Harry left his country (though he did probably want to do something like that all along).

Harry had also always talked about a quiet life in Africa or something, not the Hollywood lights.

It's not that deep.

Yeah, I think that was the weird part. I always assumed he'd marry some cute aristo and live a quiet life in Botswana, enjoying his family and doing light charity work. It does seem he wholesale adopted his partner's vision for his life. If he's happy, great, but I don't think anyway saw him making that particular choice for himself.

Yeah he's under her spell blah blah blah . Internalized misogyny is something else . Like, the guy HAD to have an aristo ( no telling if they'd want him to begin with , just ask his brother) and, since anything absent of that is proof that something went wrong .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harry does not look happy at all in these interviews.

Ok, armchair therapist .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11602551/Prince-Harrys-book-William-pointed-finger-Meghan-called-rude.html
I hope Spare is clearer than this DailyMail article. Meghan makes a comment about hormones that sets Kate off at the bridal salon, but then somehow (at a different point in time?) William shows up and waves a finger in her face and that makes Meghan cry?

The way I read this is that there was a confrontation after the bridal salon exchange.

Man if someone I barely knew told me I had "baby brain" I would be LIVID. Is anyone else seeing this as William defending his wife?

Yeah, but I thought there was crying during the bridal salon exchange, so I guess I'm just not understanding the sequence. Anyway, I can see how some people would get pissed at that kind of offhand remark being made, especially Kate with her tough pregnancies. But many many many others would just laugh it off.

yeah. i joke about mommy brain and baby brain with my friends (who are also mothers). it's definitely not up there with the worst things you could say to an in-law.

Not the worst thing. But it can be used as an insult. And getting a finger wag in response seems appropriate.

Not a great relationship among in-laws. But not the worst. Or at least not then - now it is. SMH

How could the money and revenge possibly have been worth the end of your relationship with your only brother? I don't care how much you resented being "the spare," it is simply not worth it.

What did Harry actually want of William? To change their birth order? In every aspect of life (like it or not), there is a hierarchy.

I think he wanted his family/the institution to protect him in the same way William was protected. It's an understandable desire, if not realistic.

Of course he didn't want to "change the birth order." God, I don't think he envies William in any way and barely tolerated his royal duties, given what happened to his mother. And after finding other things that gave him more happiness: his military service, his philanthropies, and now his wife/kids. He absolutely expected his brother and father to protect his family and they didn't, going as far to remove their security detail once they decided to step away. Were they entitled to pull it back? Sure. But it makes them look petty and vindictive, and left them open to security breaches. Jesus, Tyler Perry had to step in to help them when their own family couldn't be magnanimous enough to keep them safe. It's absolutely grotesque.

While there are not doubt different recollections on the two sides re: some of the details, I 100000% believe Harry and Meghan. There are plenty of examples of hideous behavior by the Royal family to know what they are saying is true. Good for them for stepping away. Protecting their family. And of not longer sitting back and being the punching bags and telling their side.

H&M could have stayed in England (even as non-working Royals) and lived at Frogmore House and had security. They chose to move to the US, out of the jurisdiction of the British government. If they didn’t think through the consequences of that, that’s on them. They said they wanted to be independent and make their own way (except for the titles, and the police protection, and the Royal family sticking up for them in the press…). Choices have consequences.

Well, they're making more money now than in Britain. So, yeah! You're right, choices have consequences .

Security alone was worth more than they have made by cashing in all their cards.

Yet at some point, had they stayed, their financial well-being, possibly where they lived, and legal custody of their children would have been in William’s hands. That’s reason enough for leaving while they still had multiple options for making money — and possibly better options for the well-being of their kids.

This nonsense was floated as a justification for Meghan to take Archie and run. It was nonsense then and it's nonsense now.

Also, Beatrice and Eugenie may not have everything they desire but they are doing just fine. "Better option for the well-being of their kids"? Being raised as the idle rich in California is healthier for them than being raised in England among family? I suppose anything is possible.

Blood does not make one family. Blood relatives can be toxic. Sometimes it’s best to disconnect and make your own family. Isn’t that’s what is touted in the relationship section of DCUM and self-help forums.

Your entire family on all sides except for one mother?

Well most people only have one mother, so there’s that. She is very close to her niece from her father’s side. The niece was in the Netflix documentary. The institution would not allow or highly discouraged Meghan to disinvite the niece because Meghan would not invite Samantha, the niece’s bio-mom. And Meghan’s mom was raised an only child, so I guess there are no cousins to speak of from that side. That’s not uncommon for onlies who then only have an onlie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who are appalled at how Harry is airing his “family’s” dirty laundry, this isn’t a family. At best this is a dysfunctional business that is desperate to hang into its position. While many of us would operate under different norms when it comes to our own families, those norms have never applied to the BRF.

We all know it’s ugly and unfair. But apparently no one wants to see it in print or hear it said out loud.

See, that's part of the charm of the royal family. It is a family, including family squabbles and family laundry. But still, family laundry doesn't need to be public.

Yes it does. The dysfunctional royal institution survives off the tit of the taxpayers. Make it transparent

Are you saying that while Trump was in office, we should have heard more about his little orange twig?
We heard plenty about his orange twig.
I'll have a little less transparency, thanks lol.

To the extent we did, we were begging for it to stop!!

Yes, we like transparency...but not like this

I will forever curse Chris Steele and his golden shower.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11602551/Prince-Harrys-book-William-pointed-finger-Meghan-called-rude.html
I hope Spare is clearer than this DailyMail article. Meghan makes a comment about hormones that sets Kate off at the bridal salon, but then somehow (at a different point in time?) William shows up and waves a finger in her face and that makes Meghan cry?

The way I read this is that there was a confrontation after the bridal salon exchange.

Man if someone I barely knew told me I had "baby brain" I would be LIVID. Is anyone else seeing this as William defending his wife?

Yeah, but I thought there was crying during the bridal salon exchange, so I guess I'm just not understanding the sequence. Anyway, I can see how some people would get pissed at that kind of offhand remark being made, especially Kate with her tough pregnancies. But many many many others would just laugh it off.

yeah. i joke about mommy brain and baby brain with my friends (who are also mothers). it's definitely not up there with the worst things you could say to an in-law.

Not the worst thing. But it can be used as an insult. And getting a finger wag in response seems appropriate.

Not a great relationship among in-laws. But not the worst. Or at least not then - now it is. SMH

How could the money and revenge possibly have been worth the end of your relationship with your only brother? I don't care how much you resented being "the spare," it is simply not worth it.

What did Harry actually want of William? To change their birth order? In every aspect of life (like it or not), there is a hierarchy.

I think he wanted his family/the institution to protect him in the same way William was protected. It's an understandable desire, if not realistic.

Of course he didn't want to "change the birth order." God, I don't think he envies William in any way and barely tolerated his royal duties, given what happened to his mother. And after finding other things that gave him more happiness: his military service, his philanthropies, and now his wife/kids. He absolutely expected his brother and father to protect his family and they didn't, going as far to remove their security detail once they decided to step away. Were they entitled to pull it back? Sure. But it makes them look petty and vindictive, and left them open to security breaches. Jesus, Tyler Perry had to step in to help them when their own family couldn't be magnanimous enough to keep them safe. It's absolutely grotesque.

While there are not doubt different recollections on the two sides re: some of the details, I 100000% believe Harry and Meghan. There are plenty of examples of hideous behavior by the Royal family to know what they are saying is true. Good for them for stepping away. Protecting their family. And of not longer sitting back and being the punching bags and telling their side.

H&M could have stayed in England (even as non-working Royals) and lived at Frogmore House and had security. They chose to move to the US, out of the jurisdiction of the British government. If they didn’t think through the consequences of that, that’s on them. They said they wanted to be independent and make their own way (except for the titles, and the police protection, and the Royal family sticking up for them in the press…). Choices have consequences.

Well, they're making more money now than in Britain. So, yeah! You're right, choices have consequences .

Security alone was worth more than they have made by cashing in all their cards.

Yet at some point, had they stayed, their financial well-being, possibly where they lived, and legal custody of their children would have been in William’s hands. That’s reason enough for leaving while they still had multiple options for making money — and possibly better options for the well-being of their kids.

This nonsense was floated as a justification for Meghan to take Archie and run. It was nonsense then and it's nonsense now.

Also, Beatrice and Eugenie may not have everything they desire but they are doing just fine. "Better option for the well-being of their kids"? Being raised as the idle rich in California is healthier for them than being raised in England among family? I suppose anything is possible.

Blood does not make one family. Blood relatives can be toxic. Sometimes it’s best to disconnect and make your own family. Isn’t that’s what is touted in the relationship section of DCUM and self-help forums.

Your entire family on all sides except for one mother?

Well most people only have one mother, so there’s that. She is very close to her niece from her father’s side. The niece was in the Netflix documentary. The institution would not allow or highly discouraged Meghan to disinvite the niece because Meghan would not invite Samantha, the niece’s bio-mom. And Meghan’s mom was raised an only child, so I guess there are no cousins to speak of from that side. That’s not uncommon for onlies who then only have an onlie.

I mean...at least do a little bit of research. There are pictures out there of her with maternal cousins that she ghosted. Yikes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The royal life sounds perfectly ghastly, which is why Chelsy and Cressida had the good sense to run away.

Chelsy and Cressida are rich heiresses, they had better options. It was not the Royal life, it was Harrold, he was an ass to both women.

IDK. Will also was keen to marry a blonde aristochick and dumped Kate multiple times to try to get with them, but they didn't want a Royal life and yes, had other options. Both boys were basically going to have to marry commoners who viewed the marriage as a big step up. I don't see Harrold as being an ass unless you apply the same to William who was roundly rejected.

He finally "did the right thing" after being told to shit or get off the pot.

There is zero comparison between a relationship over a decade between two same aged people who met at 20 and a quick let’s get mawwied relationship between a no-college-cheat halfwit and frigging late 30s divorcee. Try again.

Why are you and others bent on the non-college degree talking point. Is this the same DCUM crowd who constantly post in the college Dorothy’s every person should not attend college, and Trade schools pay better than non-stem college attendees. Now you guys are using it as an insult. His trade was the royal institution. Now his trade is invictus and writing memoirs. Obviously he did not need to go to college to make money doing either. And BTW, if you are thirty-five and older and you need more than a year to decide that you want to marry or walk away, something is wrong with you. You should know yourself by that age. You’re no spring chicken.

Yeah, b/c Harry was a real Thiel Fellow.

It's not just the fact that he didn't go to college., it's that he's super dumb.

What do you have to show for your so-called smarts? $100 million Netflix deals, $20 million book deal plus royalties and more on the way . Not bad for a dumb dude. By the way, can you point who's conventionally smart in that family? Please don't talk to me about his brother and his degree in geography or, his father with his history, archeology and anthropology nonsense .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
2) Meghan was never cut out to be an obedient princess. She was/is a nice but ambitious and hard working woman with a vision of what she wants out of life, a clear feeling about what she believes is wrong and right, and an unwillingness to compromise herself entirely for anything or anyone. And in the end, this clashed with the institution and doomed her. She was never going to not fight back. And if you admire that quality overall you support her, and if you think she should have been thanking the gods for landing her a prince and keeping her mouth shut as she enjoyed the trappings of the royal life than you hate her.

Meghan thought that the whole institution of the BRF should be bent to suit her because she's so special. And when it didn't, she cried. She was fighting back against what she perceived as slights, but is in fact just reality: you, Meghan, are NOT as important as Kate, because hierarchy. And this hierarchy will not change based on how fabulous or glamorous or popular you are. That's why they get priceless art and you get IKEA. Both of you live in places you do not own and never will.

That’s where you are wrong. Meghan is no less important than Kate or anyone else. I agree with the poster before you, Meghan was never going to take a backseat to anyone. And she shouldn’t. It’s unAmerican. And it should be unBritish as well. Kate, William, Harry, Charles did nothing important in their life or helped others. They were just born into an institution that should have been dissolved a long time ago. She should bow to no man or woman. WTF. Do you teach your children that they are less important than others simply because of their birth.

Then. Why. Marry. Into. It?!?

She could have made it a condition of marriage that Harry move to the U.S. and join her if they loved each other so much.

Nothing adds up. And you do not get to tell the British what is UnBritish. They can decide for themselves. How presumptuous.

I’m American. I make a lot of presumptions. It is my God given right. Lots of people marry and don’t get along with their in-laws. NBD. How many of whiners come onto DCUM complaining about your in-laws. Why do you marry into it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The royal life sounds perfectly ghastly, which is why Chelsy and Cressida had the good sense to run away.

Chelsy and Cressida are rich heiresses, they had better options. It was not the Royal life, it was Harrold, he was an ass to both women.

IDK. Will also was keen to marry a blonde aristochick and dumped Kate multiple times to try to get with them, but they didn't want a Royal life and yes, had other options. Both boys were basically going to have to marry commoners who viewed the marriage as a big step up. I don't see Harrold as being an ass unless you apply the same to William who was roundly rejected.

He finally "did the right thing" after being told to shit or get off the pot.

There is zero comparison between a relationship over a decade between two same aged people who met at 20 and a quick let’s get mawwied relationship between a no-college-cheat halfwit and frigging late 30s divorcee. Try again.

Why are you and others bent on the non-college degree talking point. Is this the same DCUM crowd who constantly post in the college Dorothy’s every person should not attend college, and Trade schools pay better than non-stem college attendees. Now you guys are using it as an insult. His trade was the royal institution. Now his trade is invictus and writing memoirs. Obviously he did not need to go to college to make money doing either. And BTW, if you are thirty-five and older and you need more than a year to decide that you want to marry or walk away, something is wrong with you. You should know yourself by that age. You’re no spring chicken.

Yeah, b/c Harry was a real Thiel Fellow.

It's not just the fact that he didn't go to college., it's that he's super dumb.

What do you have to show for your so-called smarts? $100 million Netflix deals, $20 million book deal plus royalties and more on the way . Not bad for a dumb dude. By the way, can you point who's conventionally smart in that family? Please don't talk to me about his brother and his degree in geography or, his father with his history, archeology and anthropology nonsense .

Remove his link to the BRF and what is left?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11602551/Prince-Harrys-book-William-pointed-finger-Meghan-called-rude.html
I hope Spare is clearer than this DailyMail article. Meghan makes a comment about hormones that sets Kate off at the bridal salon, but then somehow (at a different point in time?) William shows up and waves a finger in her face and that makes Meghan cry?

The way I read this is that there was a confrontation after the bridal salon exchange.

Man if someone I barely knew told me I had "baby brain" I would be LIVID. Is anyone else seeing this as William defending his wife?

Yeah, but I thought there was crying during the bridal salon exchange, so I guess I'm just not understanding the sequence. Anyway, I can see how some people would get pissed at that kind of offhand remark being made, especially Kate with her tough pregnancies. But many many many others would just laugh it off.

yeah. i joke about mommy brain and baby brain with my friends (who are also mothers). it's definitely not up there with the worst things you could say to an in-law.

Not the worst thing. But it can be used as an insult. And getting a finger wag in response seems appropriate.

Not a great relationship among in-laws. But not the worst. Or at least not then - now it is. SMH

How could the money and revenge possibly have been worth the end of your relationship with your only brother? I don't care how much you resented being "the spare," it is simply not worth it.

What did Harry actually want of William? To change their birth order? In every aspect of life (like it or not), there is a hierarchy.

I think he wanted his family/the institution to protect him in the same way William was protected. It's an understandable desire, if not realistic.

Of course he didn't want to "change the birth order." God, I don't think he envies William in any way and barely tolerated his royal duties, given what happened to his mother. And after finding other things that gave him more happiness: his military service, his philanthropies, and now his wife/kids. He absolutely expected his brother and father to protect his family and they didn't, going as far to remove their security detail once they decided to step away. Were they entitled to pull it back? Sure. But it makes them look petty and vindictive, and left them open to security breaches. Jesus, Tyler Perry had to step in to help them when their own family couldn't be magnanimous enough to keep them safe. It's absolutely grotesque.

While there are not doubt different recollections on the two sides re: some of the details, I 100000% believe Harry and Meghan. There are plenty of examples of hideous behavior by the Royal family to know what they are saying is true. Good for them for stepping away. Protecting their family. And of not longer sitting back and being the punching bags and telling their side.

H&M could have stayed in England (even as non-working Royals) and lived at Frogmore House and had security. They chose to move to the US, out of the jurisdiction of the British government. If they didn’t think through the consequences of that, that’s on them. They said they wanted to be independent and make their own way (except for the titles, and the police protection, and the Royal family sticking up for them in the press…). Choices have consequences.

Well, they're making more money now than in Britain. So, yeah! You're right, choices have consequences .

Security alone was worth more than they have made by cashing in all their cards.

Yet at some point, had they stayed, their financial well-being, possibly where they lived, and legal custody of their children would have been in William’s hands. That’s reason enough for leaving while they still had multiple options for making money — and possibly better options for the well-being of their kids.

This nonsense was floated as a justification for Meghan to take Archie and run. It was nonsense then and it's nonsense now.

Also, Beatrice and Eugenie may not have everything they desire but they are doing just fine. "Better option for the well-being of their kids"? Being raised as the idle rich in California is healthier for them than being raised in England among family? I suppose anything is possible.

Blood does not make one family. Blood relatives can be toxic. Sometimes it’s best to disconnect and make your own family. Isn’t that’s what is touted in the relationship section of DCUM and self-help forums.

Your entire family on all sides except for one mother?

Well most people only have one mother, so there’s that. She is very close to her niece from her father’s side. The niece was in the Netflix documentary. The institution would not allow or highly discouraged Meghan to disinvite the niece because Meghan would not invite Samantha, the niece’s bio-mom. And Meghan’s mom was raised an only child, so I guess there are no cousins to speak of from that side. That’s not uncommon for onlies who then only have an onlie.

Yes, most people have one mother. Most people also have at least a fairly close or loving relationship with someone -- from both sides of their family-- other than just one parent. Glad she also is close to a niece. That makes two family members.

[Anonymous]

The Times reports Harry has been written out of coronation plans. No role in the ceremony but he’s welcome to attend and sit in the peanut gallery.