Meghan and Prince Harry are moving to the U.S./Canada - OFFICIAL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:British press is racist, yes. No, Meghan was not friends with Trudeau or Serena Williams before Harry. Sheesh.

Come again?

This is Serena Williams and Meghan Markle in 2014.



Sure looks like friendship to me. But maybe Harry's a time traveler and knew Meghan before they officially met on a blind date in 2016?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
+100

Philip also has a ton of family ties to Nazi Germany which presumably would not be a good thing for the BRF.

The Edo story is especially noteworthy since there are not only no negative stories about him and they describe as some sort of property tycoon when there’s really no evidence that he is.

What do you mean would not? Nothing about Prince Philip is news. Whatever his ties are, it's been a known quantity a long time ago.

Edo is marrying someone who isn't a working royal and isn't important in the grand scheme of things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
+100

Philip also has a ton of family ties to Nazi Germany which presumably would not be a good thing for the BRF.

The Edo story is especially noteworthy since there are not only no negative stories about him and they describe as some sort of property tycoon when there’s really no evidence that he is.

What do you mean would not? Nothing about Prince Philip is news. Whatever his ties are, it's been a known quantity a long time ago.

Edo is marrying someone who isn't a working royal and isn't important in the grand scheme of things.

Yawn. The BRF itself has ties to Nazi Germany, as does every single royal house in Europe, given all the inbreeding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Meghan having no real friends, no family outside of mother, broke D list divorced actress, the sketchy gal who allegedly introduced them, their entire courting process, the jet-setting dating, quick marriage, quick baby at 36 years old, quick move to US/Canada feels, sketchy people in their (read: her) orbit all feels really, really inauthentic. Who knows, maybe Meghan is a Mossad asset.

Why do you need to believe she has no friends?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The article headlines above looking down on Meghan are just plain mean. I never saw those before. I understand, she is a poor commoner, and not royalty. But still. It's wrong.

I can't imagine the racism she dealt with there, or the snobbery. She married for love, not status. You could tell the entire time leading up to the wedding that she was camera nervous.

She seems down to earth. Too down to earth to sit on the perch of the British Empire, I guess.

But who cares? Seriously? They are living their best liife. Good for them.

Is there some type of political or larger implication of this that I am missing that impacts anyone but the royal family?

Racism? Nobody sees a black woman when they see MM. She's trying to appropriate and weaponize blackness that she does not actually possess. She didn't grow up hard knocks, either; she was a privileged private school gal from K through age 22. Then she was a layabout actress for 15 years. Now she's a layabout royal interloper. Her woe is me minority shtick falls flat. This is one of THE most privileged persons on Earth.

[Anonymous]

The meeting of the 'Queen and the Three Princes' is over. Only took 2 and half hours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The article headlines above looking down on Meghan are just plain mean. I never saw those before. I understand, she is a poor commoner, and not royalty. But still. It's wrong.

I can't imagine the racism she dealt with there, or the snobbery. She married for love, not status. You could tell the entire time leading up to the wedding that she was camera nervous.

She seems down to earth. Too down to earth to sit on the perch of the British Empire, I guess.

But who cares? Seriously? They are living their best liife. Good for them.

Is there some type of political or larger implication of this that I am missing that impacts anyone but the royal family?

Racism? Nobody sees a black woman when they see MM. She's trying to appropriate and weaponize blackness that she does not actually possess. She didn't grow up hard knocks, either; she was a privileged private school gal from K through age 22. Then she was a layabout actress for 15 years. Now she's a layabout royal interloper. Her woe is me minority shtick falls flat. This is one of THE most privileged persons on Earth.

The press sees a black woman, as do black Brits and Americans. Jeez, PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The article headlines above looking down on Meghan are just plain mean. I never saw those before. I understand, she is a poor commoner, and not royalty. But still. It's wrong.

I can't imagine the racism she dealt with there, or the snobbery. She married for love, not status. You could tell the entire time leading up to the wedding that she was camera nervous.

She seems down to earth. Too down to earth to sit on the perch of the British Empire, I guess.

But who cares? Seriously? They are living their best liife. Good for them.

Is there some type of political or larger implication of this that I am missing that impacts anyone but the royal family?

Racism? Nobody sees a black woman when they see MM. She's trying to appropriate and weaponize blackness that she does not actually possess. She didn't grow up hard knocks, either; she was a privileged private school gal from K through age 22. Then she was a layabout actress for 15 years. Now she's a layabout royal interloper. Her woe is me minority shtick falls flat. This is one of THE most privileged persons on Earth.

Um, black woman here--most people in my mostly AA social circles see her as black or biracial. The fact that she didn't grow up hard knocks says nothing about whether her blackness is authentic--it does, however, say something about you and your stereotypes about black Americans. Plenty of us grew up middle class or even upper middle class. Smh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The article headlines above looking down on Meghan are just plain mean. I never saw those before. I understand, she is a poor commoner, and not royalty. But still. It's wrong.

I can't imagine the racism she dealt with there, or the snobbery. She married for love, not status. You could tell the entire time leading up to the wedding that she was camera nervous.

She seems down to earth. Too down to earth to sit on the perch of the British Empire, I guess.

But who cares? Seriously? They are living their best liife. Good for them.

Is there some type of political or larger implication of this that I am missing that impacts anyone but the royal family?

Racism? Nobody sees a black woman when they see MM. She's trying to appropriate and weaponize blackness that she does not actually possess. She didn't grow up hard knocks, either; she was a privileged private school gal from K through age 22. Then she was a layabout actress for 15 years. Now she's a layabout royal interloper. Her woe is me minority shtick falls flat. This is one of THE most privileged persons on Earth.

Um, black woman here--most people in my mostly AA social circles see her as black or biracial. The fact that she didn't grow up hard knocks says nothing about whether her blackness is authentic--it does, however, say something about you and your stereotypes about black Americans. Plenty of us grew up middle class or even upper middle class. Smh.

I think the point that the previous poster is making is that she grew up privileged, but go ahead and be offended.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The article headlines above looking down on Meghan are just plain mean. I never saw those before. I understand, she is a poor commoner, and not royalty. But still. It's wrong.

I can't imagine the racism she dealt with there, or the snobbery. She married for love, not status. You could tell the entire time leading up to the wedding that she was camera nervous.

She seems down to earth. Too down to earth to sit on the perch of the British Empire, I guess.

But who cares? Seriously? They are living their best liife. Good for them.

Is there some type of political or larger implication of this that I am missing that impacts anyone but the royal family?

Racism? Nobody sees a black woman when they see MM. She's trying to appropriate and weaponize blackness that she does not actually possess. She didn't grow up hard knocks, either; she was a privileged private school gal from K through age 22. Then she was a layabout actress for 15 years. Now she's a layabout royal interloper. Her woe is me minority shtick falls flat. This is one of THE most privileged persons on Earth.

Um, black woman here--most people in my mostly AA social circles see her as black or biracial. The fact that she didn't grow up hard knocks says nothing about whether her blackness is authentic--it does, however, say something about you and your stereotypes about black Americans. Plenty of us grew up middle class or even upper middle class. Smh.

I imagine the point about her not really appearing "black" remains valid, as it's the whole point of the black/racism argument. I would nave never assumed Meghan Markel was black or even biracial. She could easily pass for Mediterranean. Does it make a difference? Sure, if she's walking down the streets or browsing the stores, people aren't seeing her as black, which is a major part of the racism problem.

That aside, I do now know she is definitely biracial and identifies as one.

[Anonymous]

Harry is protecting his wife & child from the hounding by the media that killed his mother.

Harry is profoundly damaged from the loss of his mother and his chaotic childhood; this cannot be understated. Any decision that he and MM take must be viewed through this prism - protecting their immediate family and privacy.

The Queen doesn't understand it, as she views everything through the horror of WW2. Charles probably harbors quite a bit of guilt about his son's childhood, but is caught between pleasing his mother and his own son. Still, Charles shoulders a TON of blame here - this reckoning is three decades in the making.

Frankly, Harry is completely rational in wanting to move out of the Royal orbit. The attention in the coming years will be on the succession to Charles, then William, and the newest heirs under William.

It's bizarre to me that Harry is getting this degree of vitriol when the Royals keep talking about wanting to "slim down" the entourage. When is Harry supposed to step away? When he's 50 and is too old to start an independent career? They are in their late 30s and need to make moves NOW to establish a future for themselves.

Frankly, the BRF has no idea what it wants to be in a post-Elizabeth future. The messaging is discombobulated and that's not the fault of Harry/MM. A 90 year-old Queen kicks and screams when anyone tries to update the institution and doesn't communicate. We are in an era of radical transparency, but the Queen still acts as if people sit by the radio waiting for her address. The BRF is at a very risky inflection point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harry is protecting his wife & child from the hounding by the media that killed his mother.

Harry is profoundly damaged from the loss of his mother and his chaotic childhood; this cannot be understated. Any decision that he and MM take must be viewed through this prism - protecting their immediate family and privacy.

The Queen doesn't understand it, as she views everything through the horror of WW2. Charles probably harbors quite a bit of guilt about his son's childhood, but is caught between pleasing his mother and his own son. Still, Charles shoulders a TON of blame here - this reckoning is three decades in the making.

Frankly, Harry is completely rational in wanting to move out of the Royal orbit. The attention in the coming years will be on the succession to Charles, then William, and the newest heirs under William.

It's bizarre to me that Harry is getting this degree of vitriol when the Royals keep talking about wanting to "slim down" the entourage. When is Harry supposed to step away? When he's 50 and is too old to start an independent career? They are in their late 30s and need to make moves NOW to establish a future for themselves.

Frankly, the BRF has no idea what it wants to be in a post-Elizabeth future. The messaging is discombobulated and that's not the fault of Harry/MM. A 90 year-old Queen kicks and screams when anyone tries to update the institution and doesn't communicate. We are in an era of radical transparency, but the Queen still acts as if people sit by the radio waiting for her address. The BRF is at a very risky inflection point.

great points!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harry is protecting his wife & child from the hounding by the media that killed his mother.

Harry is profoundly damaged from the loss of his mother and his chaotic childhood; this cannot be understated. Any decision that he and MM take must be viewed through this prism - protecting their immediate family and privacy.

The Queen doesn't understand it, as she views everything through the horror of WW2. Charles probably harbors quite a bit of guilt about his son's childhood, but is caught between pleasing his mother and his own son. Still, Charles shoulders a TON of blame here - this reckoning is three decades in the making.

Frankly, Harry is completely rational in wanting to move out of the Royal orbit. The attention in the coming years will be on the succession to Charles, then William, and the newest heirs under William.

It's bizarre to me that Harry is getting this degree of vitriol when the Royals keep talking about wanting to "slim down" the entourage. When is Harry supposed to step away? When he's 50 and is too old to start an independent career? They are in their late 30s and need to make moves NOW to establish a future for themselves.

Frankly, the BRF has no idea what it wants to be in a post-Elizabeth future. The messaging is discombobulated and that's not the fault of Harry/MM. A 90 year-old Queen kicks and screams when anyone tries to update the institution and doesn't communicate. We are in an era of radical transparency, but the Queen still acts as if people sit by the radio waiting for her address. The BRF is at a very risky inflection point.

Fair points, but again - neither Harry nor Meghan want less attention. They want just as much attention or more; they just want to dictate what kind of attention they will get. Which is obviously impossible because we have a free press. Moving to Canada won't lessen the attention.

Becoming private citizens and living a quiet life would give them the privacy they supposedly crave. But again, not what they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harry is protecting his wife & child from the hounding by the media that killed his mother.

Harry is profoundly damaged from the loss of his mother and his chaotic childhood; this cannot be understated. Any decision that he and MM take must be viewed through this prism - protecting their immediate family and privacy.

The Queen doesn't understand it, as she views everything through the horror of WW2. Charles probably harbors quite a bit of guilt about his son's childhood, but is caught between pleasing his mother and his own son. Still, Charles shoulders a TON of blame here - this reckoning is three decades in the making.

Frankly, Harry is completely rational in wanting to move out of the Royal orbit. The attention in the coming years will be on the succession to Charles, then William, and the newest heirs under William.

It's bizarre to me that Harry is getting this degree of vitriol when the Royals keep talking about wanting to "slim down" the entourage. When is Harry supposed to step away? When he's 50 and is too old to start an independent career? They are in their late 30s and need to make moves NOW to establish a future for themselves.

Frankly, the BRF has no idea what it wants to be in a post-Elizabeth future. The messaging is discombobulated and that's not the fault of Harry/MM. A 90 year-old Queen kicks and screams when anyone tries to update the institution and doesn't communicate. We are in an era of radical transparency, but the Queen still acts as if people sit by the radio waiting for her address. The BRF is at a very risky inflection point.

I don't agree with this. The BRF has evolved, is evolving. Both Q and PC are flexible.

Harry seems to be quite reactive and Meghan seems unhinged. Bad combo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harry is protecting his wife & child from the hounding by the media that killed his mother.

Harry is profoundly damaged from the loss of his mother and his chaotic childhood; this cannot be understated. Any decision that he and MM take must be viewed through this prism - protecting their immediate family and privacy.

The Queen doesn't understand it, as she views everything through the horror of WW2. Charles probably harbors quite a bit of guilt about his son's childhood, but is caught between pleasing his mother and his own son. Still, Charles shoulders a TON of blame here - this reckoning is three decades in the making.

Frankly, Harry is completely rational in wanting to move out of the Royal orbit. The attention in the coming years will be on the succession to Charles, then William, and the newest heirs under William.

It's bizarre to me that Harry is getting this degree of vitriol when the Royals keep talking about wanting to "slim down" the entourage. When is Harry supposed to step away? When he's 50 and is too old to start an independent career? They are in their late 30s and need to make moves NOW to establish a future for themselves.

Frankly, the BRF has no idea what it wants to be in a post-Elizabeth future. The messaging is discombobulated and that's not the fault of Harry/MM. A 90 year-old Queen kicks and screams when anyone tries to update the institution and doesn't communicate. We are in an era of radical transparency, but the Queen still acts as if people sit by the radio waiting for her address. The BRF is at a very risky inflection point.

great points!

[phone], agree 100%.