Prince Harry to attend coronation without Meghan

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One reason it's crazy to me that people are so critical of Meghan is that her story is part of a long pattern of the BRF being an absolute nightmare to marry into. People are acting like Meghan is some weird outlier but, ahem, what about Diana and Fergie? What about Margaret's mess of a love life?

If you are looking at this situation with the extremely strained relationship between Harry and his family, and Meghan being completely on the outs with them, and thinking "huh, this must be entirely due to Meghan's actions and personality," then you are unbelievably myopic. It's Kate who is the outlier, and she has done it by completely subsuming herself into her role. This is a system that destroys people, and Meghan is just the latest in a long line of people who have been chewed up and spit out by the BRF.

People called Diana a drama queen too. This family is the problem. Meghan might have her flaws (everyone does) but there is too much of a pattern here to blame her for any of it. The problem is the family, the system, the tabloid press and the family's relationship with it, the family's extreme dysfunction due to their very weird lives and roles. It's a cult.

You conveniently forget about Sophie, married happily to Edward, the Queen's youngest son. Is she an outlier too?

Sophie doesn't get even the tiniest fraction of attention that Meghan and Kate do. It's totally different. Less is expected of her and therefore it is easier for her to perform. She and Edward have far more privacy and independence than Meghan and Harry had when they were still in the UK. I think Sophie even continue to work after she and Edward got married, for a few years. Just apples to oranges.

Meghan's experience is more similar to Diana's or Fergie's -- huge public weddings, lots of press, tons of interest in them as individuals by the public. And it follows a fairly similar script. At first the family is happy to ride on the wave of happy public sentiment over the wedding dress, the wedding itself, and pictures of the bllissful newlyweds -- it feeds a fairytale ending narrative peopel are obsessed with. But the second that person because an actual person trying to live a life within the family, raise children, have some control over their lives, the BRF cracks down and says "no, you belong to us, we make your decisions." And fireworks ensue. Shouldn't it be telling that this has happened three times now?

I will give you that Kate and Meghan get more attention as spouses to the king's sons, but the only difference between Sophie and Fergie is that one got photographed getting her toes sucked and selling access for money, and the other didn't. I doubt it was BRF that took Fergie's shoes off and stuck her toe into someone's waiting mouth. That's all self inflicted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One reason it's crazy to me that people are so critical of Meghan is that her story is part of a long pattern of the BRF being an absolute nightmare to marry into. People are acting like Meghan is some weird outlier but, ahem, what about Diana and Fergie? What about Margaret's mess of a love life?

If you are looking at this situation with the extremely strained relationship between Harry and his family, and Meghan being completely on the outs with them, and thinking "huh, this must be entirely due to Meghan's actions and personality," then you are unbelievably myopic. It's Kate who is the outlier, and she has done it by completely subsuming herself into her role. This is a system that destroys people, and Meghan is just the latest in a long line of people who have been chewed up and spit out by the BRF.

People called Diana a drama queen too. This family is the problem. Meghan might have her flaws (everyone does) but there is too much of a pattern here to blame her for any of it. The problem is the family, the system, the tabloid press and the family's relationship with it, the family's extreme dysfunction due to their very weird lives and roles. It's a cult.

You conveniently forget about Sophie, married happily to Edward, the Queen's youngest son. Is she an outlier too?

Well, she is married o a gay man, so she must really have wanted to have been part of the royal family. If one is willing to enter a sham marriage, letting up with the rest of it is probably just fine. And of course she and Edward have always been out of the limelight and therefore aren’t a threat to Charles or William. Fergie, Diana, and Megan stole the spotlight from the royal family because they are charismatic.

Ha, you have to smear Sophie and Edward to make Meghan look good. Pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One reason it's crazy to me that people are so critical of Meghan is that her story is part of a long pattern of the BRF being an absolute nightmare to marry into. People are acting like Meghan is some weird outlier but, ahem, what about Diana and Fergie? What about Margaret's mess of a love life?

If you are looking at this situation with the extremely strained relationship between Harry and his family, and Meghan being completely on the outs with them, and thinking "huh, this must be entirely due to Meghan's actions and personality," then you are unbelievably myopic. It's Kate who is the outlier, and she has done it by completely subsuming herself into her role. This is a system that destroys people, and Meghan is just the latest in a long line of people who have been chewed up and spit out by the BRF.

People called Diana a drama queen too. This family is the problem. Meghan might have her flaws (everyone does) but there is too much of a pattern here to blame her for any of it. The problem is the family, the system, the tabloid press and the family's relationship with it, the family's extreme dysfunction due to their very weird lives and roles. It's a cult.

You conveniently forget about Sophie, married happily to Edward, the Queen's youngest son. Is she an outlier too?

Sophie doesn't get even the tiniest fraction of attention that Meghan and Kate do. It's totally different. Less is expected of her and therefore it is easier for her to perform. She and Edward have far more privacy and independence than Meghan and Harry had when they were still in the UK. I think Sophie even continue to work after she and Edward got married, for a few years. Just apples to oranges.

Meghan's experience is more similar to Diana's or Fergie's -- huge public weddings, lots of press, tons of interest in them as individuals by the public. And it follows a fairly similar script. At first the family is happy to ride on the wave of happy public sentiment over the wedding dress, the wedding itself, and pictures of the bllissful newlyweds -- it feeds a fairytale ending narrative peopel are obsessed with. But the second that person because an actual person trying to live a life within the family, raise children, have some control over their lives, the BRF cracks down and says "no, you belong to us, we make your decisions." And fireworks ensue. Shouldn't it be telling that this has happened three times now?

I will give you that Kate and Meghan get more attention as spouses to the king's sons, but the only difference between Sophie and Fergie is that one got photographed getting her toes sucked and selling access for money, and the other didn't. I doubt it was BRF that took Fergie's shoes off and stuck her toe into someone's waiting mouth. That's all self inflicted.

Fergie and Meghan belong in the same grifter club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Poor form. She should be there and so should the kids.

The kids weren’t invited and Charles knew full well it was Archie’s bday when selecting the event date. They designed it so she wouldn’t attend. It’s fine, he makes quick appearance then heads straight home. Little to no drama.

They so many family members, the coronation would inevitably fall on someone's bday. Besides, I doubt Archie knows when his birthday is and can wait to celebrate.

Wait, what? Of course he knows when his birthday is. He's almost 4. Do you even have children? Good grief, you are on the wrong website.

I don't know what to tell you. Maybe you have an unusually astute 4-year old. My youngest is almost five and he has no idea when his birthday is. He would gleefully celebrate it whenever he's told.

This is true, and so would any reasonable adult. My birthday fell on a Monday this year. We celebrated with family at dinner the following Saturday. Not traumatizing.

Are you really equating your feelings about when to celebrate your birthday to the feelings of a FOUR YEAR OLD?

A four year old, as PP stated, will celebrate on whatever day you tell him to. He's not going to care if the party doesn't happen on THE DAY. In fact it often does not occur on the day, and everyone survives. 4 year olds are unaware. They don't. care.

So, I don't have a dog in this fight: I doubt very much this day was chosen to somehow inconvenience or spite Harry and Meghan.

However, my kid was absolutely obsessed with her birthday around 4/5 and those were the hardest birthdays to do for her. Specifically, she was obsessed with the idea of the birthday being a specific day. She really wanted the party on the day, and I remember on her 5th birthday we did her party with school friends the day before her birthday and she was horribly disappointed even though we did a family party the next day. She was very intense and fixated on it, and I would have been annoyed at that time if my parents scheduled a huge family event on her birthday because it would have made things especially difficult with her. I mean, that's parenting, but kids that age can just be really tough. They aren't like babies, they don't always just go with the flow, and sometimes they know just enough about things to make life really difficult for you.

Not every kid is as rigid as yours. And my kid has autism so I know what that looks like.

Sure, but you miss the point. PPs have repeatedly said that it's no big deal to move a 4 yr olds birthday because "they don't even know." The point is that some kids know, and sometimes it is inconvenient. Not saying they should schedule a coronation around it, just that I think it should be possible to note that Archie's birthday is the same day and think, as a fellow parent, "oh that could be a PITA to deal with because a coronation is like two solid weeks of events and it could be hard to give my kid a normal birthday party in the midst of that."

It's just funny to me that people immediately jump to "oh whatever that's not big deal at all, I'm sure most children would love to celebrate their birthdays at some other time due to a coronation, who cares." My experience with kids is that often, they care. You'd think this would not be so uncommonly understood on a parenting website, but whatevs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One reason it's crazy to me that people are so critical of Meghan is that her story is part of a long pattern of the BRF being an absolute nightmare to marry into. People are acting like Meghan is some weird outlier but, ahem, what about Diana and Fergie? What about Margaret's mess of a love life?

If you are looking at this situation with the extremely strained relationship between Harry and his family, and Meghan being completely on the outs with them, and thinking "huh, this must be entirely due to Meghan's actions and personality," then you are unbelievably myopic. It's Kate who is the outlier, and she has done it by completely subsuming herself into her role. This is a system that destroys people, and Meghan is just the latest in a long line of people who have been chewed up and spit out by the BRF.

People called Diana a drama queen too. This family is the problem. Meghan might have her flaws (everyone does) but there is too much of a pattern here to blame her for any of it. The problem is the family, the system, the tabloid press and the family's relationship with it, the family's extreme dysfunction due to their very weird lives and roles. It's a cult.

You conveniently forget about Sophie, married happily to Edward, the Queen's youngest son. Is she an outlier too?

Sophie doesn't get even the tiniest fraction of attention that Meghan and Kate do. It's totally different. Less is expected of her and therefore it is easier for her to perform. She and Edward have far more privacy and independence than Meghan and Harry had when they were still in the UK. I think Sophie even continue to work after she and Edward got married, for a few years. Just apples to oranges.

Meghan's experience is more similar to Diana's or Fergie's -- huge public weddings, lots of press, tons of interest in them as individuals by the public. And it follows a fairly similar script. At first the family is happy to ride on the wave of happy public sentiment over the wedding dress, the wedding itself, and pictures of the bllissful newlyweds -- it feeds a fairytale ending narrative peopel are obsessed with. But the second that person because an actual person trying to live a life within the family, raise children, have some control over their lives, the BRF cracks down and says "no, you belong to us, we make your decisions." And fireworks ensue. Shouldn't it be telling that this has happened three times now?

I will give you that Kate and Meghan get more attention as spouses to the king's sons, but the only difference between Sophie and Fergie is that one got photographed getting her toes sucked and selling access for money, and the other didn't. I doubt it was BRF that took Fergie's shoes off and stuck her toe into someone's waiting mouth. That's all self inflicted.

Fergie and Meghan belong in the same grifter club.

Fergie is still hawking children's books and talking about the Queen's corgis with a pet psychic. SMH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One reason it's crazy to me that people are so critical of Meghan is that her story is part of a long pattern of the BRF being an absolute nightmare to marry into. People are acting like Meghan is some weird outlier but, ahem, what about Diana and Fergie? What about Margaret's mess of a love life?

If you are looking at this situation with the extremely strained relationship between Harry and his family, and Meghan being completely on the outs with them, and thinking "huh, this must be entirely due to Meghan's actions and personality," then you are unbelievably myopic. It's Kate who is the outlier, and she has done it by completely subsuming herself into her role. This is a system that destroys people, and Meghan is just the latest in a long line of people who have been chewed up and spit out by the BRF.

People called Diana a drama queen too. This family is the problem. Meghan might have her flaws (everyone does) but there is too much of a pattern here to blame her for any of it. The problem is the family, the system, the tabloid press and the family's relationship with it, the family's extreme dysfunction due to their very weird lives and roles. It's a cult.

You conveniently forget about Sophie, married happily to Edward, the Queen's youngest son. Is she an outlier too?

Well, she is married o a gay man, so she must really have wanted to have been part of the royal family. If one is willing to enter a sham marriage, letting up with the rest of it is probably just fine. And of course she and Edward have always been out of the limelight and therefore aren’t a threat to Charles or William. Fergie, Diana, and Megan stole the spotlight from the royal family because they are charismatic.

Ha, you have to smear Sophie and Edward to make Meghan look good. Pathetic.

I don’t consider saying someone is gay to be a smear, but it hardly surprised me that you do. Goes along with the racism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Poor form. She should be there and so should the kids.

The kids weren’t invited and Charles knew full well it was Archie’s bday when selecting the event date. They designed it so she wouldn’t attend. It’s fine, he makes quick appearance then heads straight home. Little to no drama.

They so many family members, the coronation would inevitably fall on someone's bday. Besides, I doubt Archie knows when his birthday is and can wait to celebrate.

Wait, what? Of course he knows when his birthday is. He's almost 4. Do you even have children? Good grief, you are on the wrong website.

I don't know what to tell you. Maybe you have an unusually astute 4-year old. My youngest is almost five and he has no idea when his birthday is. He would gleefully celebrate it whenever he's told.

This is true, and so would any reasonable adult. My birthday fell on a Monday this year. We celebrated with family at dinner the following Saturday. Not traumatizing.

Are you really equating your feelings about when to celebrate your birthday to the feelings of a FOUR YEAR OLD?

A four year old, as PP stated, will celebrate on whatever day you tell him to. He's not going to care if the party doesn't happen on THE DAY. In fact it often does not occur on the day, and everyone survives. 4 year olds are unaware. They don't. care.

So, I don't have a dog in this fight: I doubt very much this day was chosen to somehow inconvenience or spite Harry and Meghan.

However, my kid was absolutely obsessed with her birthday around 4/5 and those were the hardest birthdays to do for her. Specifically, she was obsessed with the idea of the birthday being a specific day. She really wanted the party on the day, and I remember on her 5th birthday we did her party with school friends the day before her birthday and she was horribly disappointed even though we did a family party the next day. She was very intense and fixated on it, and I would have been annoyed at that time if my parents scheduled a huge family event on her birthday because it would have made things especially difficult with her. I mean, that's parenting, but kids that age can just be really tough. They aren't like babies, they don't always just go with the flow, and sometimes they know just enough about things to make life really difficult for you.

Not every kid is as rigid as yours. And my kid has autism so I know what that looks like.

+1. You need to teach her more flexibility or it just gets worse over time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One reason it's crazy to me that people are so critical of Meghan is that her story is part of a long pattern of the BRF being an absolute nightmare to marry into. People are acting like Meghan is some weird outlier but, ahem, what about Diana and Fergie? What about Margaret's mess of a love life?

If you are looking at this situation with the extremely strained relationship between Harry and his family, and Meghan being completely on the outs with them, and thinking "huh, this must be entirely due to Meghan's actions and personality," then you are unbelievably myopic. It's Kate who is the outlier, and she has done it by completely subsuming herself into her role. This is a system that destroys people, and Meghan is just the latest in a long line of people who have been chewed up and spit out by the BRF.

People called Diana a drama queen too. This family is the problem. Meghan might have her flaws (everyone does) but there is too much of a pattern here to blame her for any of it. The problem is the family, the system, the tabloid press and the family's relationship with it, the family's extreme dysfunction due to their very weird lives and roles. It's a cult.

You conveniently forget about Sophie, married happily to Edward, the Queen's youngest son. Is she an outlier too?

Well, she is married o a gay man, so she must really have wanted to have been part of the royal family. If one is willing to enter a sham marriage, letting up with the rest of it is probably just fine. And of course she and Edward have always been out of the limelight and therefore aren’t a threat to Charles or William. Fergie, Diana, and Megan stole the spotlight from the royal family because they are charismatic.

Ha, you have to smear Sophie and Edward to make Meghan look good. Pathetic.

I don’t consider saying someone is gay to be a smear, but it hardly surprised me that you do. Goes along with the racism.

You said a lot more than that about them. Funny that you thought the gay label was a smear. Shame on you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One reason it's crazy to me that people are so critical of Meghan is that her story is part of a long pattern of the BRF being an absolute nightmare to marry into. People are acting like Meghan is some weird outlier but, ahem, what about Diana and Fergie? What about Margaret's mess of a love life?

If you are looking at this situation with the extremely strained relationship between Harry and his family, and Meghan being completely on the outs with them, and thinking "huh, this must be entirely due to Meghan's actions and personality," then you are unbelievably myopic. It's Kate who is the outlier, and she has done it by completely subsuming herself into her role. This is a system that destroys people, and Meghan is just the latest in a long line of people who have been chewed up and spit out by the BRF.

People called Diana a drama queen too. This family is the problem. Meghan might have her flaws (everyone does) but there is too much of a pattern here to blame her for any of it. The problem is the family, the system, the tabloid press and the family's relationship with it, the family's extreme dysfunction due to their very weird lives and roles. It's a cult.

You conveniently forget about Sophie, married happily to Edward, the Queen's youngest son. Is she an outlier too?

Sophie doesn't get even the tiniest fraction of attention that Meghan and Kate do. It's totally different. Less is expected of her and therefore it is easier for her to perform. She and Edward have far more privacy and independence than Meghan and Harry had when they were still in the UK. I think Sophie even continue to work after she and Edward got married, for a few years. Just apples to oranges.

Meghan's experience is more similar to Diana's or Fergie's -- huge public weddings, lots of press, tons of interest in them as individuals by the public. And it follows a fairly similar script. At first the family is happy to ride on the wave of happy public sentiment over the wedding dress, the wedding itself, and pictures of the bllissful newlyweds -- it feeds a fairytale ending narrative peopel are obsessed with. But the second that person because an actual person trying to live a life within the family, raise children, have some control over their lives, the BRF cracks down and says "no, you belong to us, we make your decisions." And fireworks ensue. Shouldn't it be telling that this has happened three times now?

I will give you that Kate and Meghan get more attention as spouses to the king's sons, but the only difference between Sophie and Fergie is that one got photographed getting her toes sucked and selling access for money, and the other didn't. I doubt it was BRF that took Fergie's shoes off and stuck her toe into someone's waiting mouth. That's all self inflicted.

No, you clearly weren't around back then. Fergie was enormously popular and well known waaaaaaay before that incident. Do you know what Sophie's wedding dress looked like? Well neither does anyone else. Fergie and Diana were royal celebrities back in the 80s. Sure, their divorces got covered breathlessly as did their affairs (though, let's point out that BOTH their husbands were up to some very shady stuff during this time and it did not get covered by the press... interesting, no?). But it's not like Fergie became a household name because of some tawdry photos of her on vacation (a vacation she took with a boyfriend well after her marriage was in the trash, something that Andrew fully participated in). The only reason those photos were taken is because of aggressive interest in Fergie that had been going on for years. Not as much as Diana, but a lot.

Meanwhile, if Sophie had an affair and even if someone got photos of it, it would have a moment in the press but honestly it would not get that much attention because Edward and Sophie have just never really captured the public's imagination. People don't care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Poor form. She should be there and so should the kids.

The kids weren’t invited and Charles knew full well it was Archie’s bday when selecting the event date. They designed it so she wouldn’t attend. It’s fine, he makes quick appearance then heads straight home. Little to no drama.

They so many family members, the coronation would inevitably fall on someone's bday. Besides, I doubt Archie knows when his birthday is and can wait to celebrate.

Wait, what? Of course he knows when his birthday is. He's almost 4. Do you even have children? Good grief, you are on the wrong website.

I don't know what to tell you. Maybe you have an unusually astute 4-year old. My youngest is almost five and he has no idea when his birthday is. He would gleefully celebrate it whenever he's told.

This is true, and so would any reasonable adult. My birthday fell on a Monday this year. We celebrated with family at dinner the following Saturday. Not traumatizing.

Are you really equating your feelings about when to celebrate your birthday to the feelings of a FOUR YEAR OLD?

A four year old, as PP stated, will celebrate on whatever day you tell him to. He's not going to care if the party doesn't happen on THE DAY. In fact it often does not occur on the day, and everyone survives. 4 year olds are unaware. They don't. care.

So, I don't have a dog in this fight: I doubt very much this day was chosen to somehow inconvenience or spite Harry and Meghan.

However, my kid was absolutely obsessed with her birthday around 4/5 and those were the hardest birthdays to do for her. Specifically, she was obsessed with the idea of the birthday being a specific day. She really wanted the party on the day, and I remember on her 5th birthday we did her party with school friends the day before her birthday and she was horribly disappointed even though we did a family party the next day. She was very intense and fixated on it, and I would have been annoyed at that time if my parents scheduled a huge family event on her birthday because it would have made things especially difficult with her. I mean, that's parenting, but kids that age can just be really tough. They aren't like babies, they don't always just go with the flow, and sometimes they know just enough about things to make life really difficult for you.

Not every kid is as rigid as yours. And my kid has autism so I know what that looks like.

+1. You need to teach her more flexibility or it just gets worse over time.

What's the worst case outcome, though? She becomes someone who gives people parenting advice in an internet thread about the British Royal Family based on a single anecdote about a child being upset over their birthday? Wow, that DOES sound bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One reason it's crazy to me that people are so critical of Meghan is that her story is part of a long pattern of the BRF being an absolute nightmare to marry into. People are acting like Meghan is some weird outlier but, ahem, what about Diana and Fergie? What about Margaret's mess of a love life?

If you are looking at this situation with the extremely strained relationship between Harry and his family, and Meghan being completely on the outs with them, and thinking "huh, this must be entirely due to Meghan's actions and personality," then you are unbelievably myopic. It's Kate who is the outlier, and she has done it by completely subsuming herself into her role. This is a system that destroys people, and Meghan is just the latest in a long line of people who have been chewed up and spit out by the BRF.

People called Diana a drama queen too. This family is the problem. Meghan might have her flaws (everyone does) but there is too much of a pattern here to blame her for any of it. The problem is the family, the system, the tabloid press and the family's relationship with it, the family's extreme dysfunction due to their very weird lives and roles. It's a cult.

Meghan was a mid 30's divorcee when she married into that family, not some teenage ingenue. She made a willful choice, despite all of the information available to her. And then tried to bend an institution to her will and whined nonstop when that did not happen.

The "problems" of this family had been long and very publicly documented. When you try to elicit sympathy for walking into a crapshow that people could see from miles away, you lose people.

Plus, everyone knows she just wanted the fame, money and titles.

She saw herself as the next Diana. But was much more obviously opportunistic about it than Diana was. Diana never appeared narcissistic in the same way. I did have sympathy for MM at the beginning though--way too many big life changes in the public eye. She and Harry should have gone off to Wales or its equivalent for their first few years together, like Will and Kate did.

The funny thing is, that option was available to them. They could have played their hand SO much better. But they wanted it all. NOW. They were in discussions with streaming houses like a few months into the marriage. They showed no patience at all.

I agree this was a serious miscalculation.

[Anonymous]

This was a complete damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. If she goes, she's deemed an attention hog when ALL THE PRESS is about her and not boring old King Charles. If she stays home, she's drama llama who can't get along with her bratty inlaws who have served her on a platter to a vicious press corp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One reason it's crazy to me that people are so critical of Meghan is that her story is part of a long pattern of the BRF being an absolute nightmare to marry into. People are acting like Meghan is some weird outlier but, ahem, what about Diana and Fergie? What about Margaret's mess of a love life?

If you are looking at this situation with the extremely strained relationship between Harry and his family, and Meghan being completely on the outs with them, and thinking "huh, this must be entirely due to Meghan's actions and personality," then you are unbelievably myopic. It's Kate who is the outlier, and she has done it by completely subsuming herself into her role. This is a system that destroys people, and Meghan is just the latest in a long line of people who have been chewed up and spit out by the BRF.

People called Diana a drama queen too. This family is the problem. Meghan might have her flaws (everyone does) but there is too much of a pattern here to blame her for any of it. The problem is the family, the system, the tabloid press and the family's relationship with it, the family's extreme dysfunction due to their very weird lives and roles. It's a cult.

You conveniently forget about Sophie, married happily to Edward, the Queen's youngest son. Is she an outlier too?

Sophie doesn't get even the tiniest fraction of attention that Meghan and Kate do. It's totally different. Less is expected of her and therefore it is easier for her to perform. She and Edward have far more privacy and independence than Meghan and Harry had when they were still in the UK. I think Sophie even continue to work after she and Edward got married, for a few years. Just apples to oranges.

Meghan's experience is more similar to Diana's or Fergie's -- huge public weddings, lots of press, tons of interest in them as individuals by the public. And it follows a fairly similar script. At first the family is happy to ride on the wave of happy public sentiment over the wedding dress, the wedding itself, and pictures of the bllissful newlyweds -- it feeds a fairytale ending narrative peopel are obsessed with. But the second that person because an actual person trying to live a life within the family, raise children, have some control over their lives, the BRF cracks down and says "no, you belong to us, we make your decisions." And fireworks ensue. Shouldn't it be telling that this has happened three times now?

I will give you that Kate and Meghan get more attention as spouses to the king's sons, but the only difference between Sophie and Fergie is that one got photographed getting her toes sucked and selling access for money, and the other didn't. I doubt it was BRF that took Fergie's shoes off and stuck her toe into someone's waiting mouth. That's all self inflicted.

No, you clearly weren't around back then. Fergie was enormously popular and well known waaaaaaay before that incident. Do you know what Sophie's wedding dress looked like? Well neither does anyone else. Fergie and Diana were royal celebrities back in the 80s. Sure, their divorces got covered breathlessly as did their affairs (though, let's point out that BOTH their husbands were up to some very shady stuff during this time and it did not get covered by the press... interesting, no?). But it's not like Fergie became a household name because of some tawdry photos of her on vacation (a vacation she took with a boyfriend well after her marriage was in the trash, something that Andrew fully participated in). The only reason those photos were taken is because of aggressive interest in Fergie that had been going on for years. Not as much as Diana, but a lot.

Meanwhile, if Sophie had an affair and even if someone got photos of it, it would have a moment in the press but honestly it would not get that much attention because Edward and Sophie have just never really captured the public's imagination. People don't care.

Fergie was a trainwreck and the opposite of her friend Diana. It wasn't charisma but her being a commoner and relatable because of her flaws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After the interviews and book, neither is welcome but Harry feels obligated to make an appearance and Charles knows it would look bad if his son weren’t present. Each side had to make the smallest of efforts to ensure the bridges aren’t permanently burned. But hard to envision any genuine reconciliation, now or down the road.

I think there will be a reconciliation when Harry and Meghan divorce. It's coming. No one could tolerate being married to her for very long. She is estranged from nearly every member of her family save her mother.

She was an only child. Her father is trash. I would question if she WEREN'T estranged from those wack jobs.

This is not true. In her own words she told everyone that he was a "wonderful father" and how close they were. Now I could only find information that was not behind a paywall was the Daily.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11763051/What-Meghan-Markle-wrote-parents-Thomas-Markle-Doria-Ragland-blog-Tig.html

I found this from the blog:
n a 2014 Father's Day post on her now-defunct blog, The Tig, Meghan wrote: "I think of so many moments with my dad. Our club sandwich & fruit smoothie tradition post my tap & ballet class - classes, which by the way, he religiously took me to on Saturday mornings after working 75+ hours a week as a lighting director.

So weird she couldn’t extend him any grace. Maybe once her kids are a little older she’ll reflect on everything he did for her.

Yep. And preaching to the world about acts of compassion to build community, which is Archewell's mission.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This was a complete damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. If she goes, she's deemed an attention hog when ALL THE PRESS is about her and not boring old King Charles. If she stays home, she's drama llama who can't get along with her bratty inlaws who have served her on a platter to a vicious press corp.

Everyone is happier she is staying home. Less stress on poor Harry.