Meghan Markle and Prince Harry News and Updates Part 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a fan of them, but it’s a gorgeous card!

It would have looked better without ripped jeans and with M in gray or something not black. Red, perhaps? And the kids in colors or prints would have made the picture more textured/interesting.

Roll your eyes all you want, but ripped jeans have no place in a formal picture. This is a formal picture since it was taken for their holiday card for the purpose of promoting their charitable endeavors. Additionally, it was probably intentional: let’s avoid looking too fancy like our British brethren.

Everyone knows that family outfits for such pictures should include a mix of solids and prints to add texture/interest.

Lastly, they intentionally don’t show the kids’ faces. That’s their choice, but it does prompt speculation. Again: probably intentional.

Why does this bother you?

It doesn’t bother me. It’s just noticeable. There are other posters here and elsewhere speculate as to why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a lovely photo but why did they have to drag politics into it?

Like what? I only see humanitarian issues in the causes they supported

Try following the news sometime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a fan of them, but it’s a gorgeous card!

It would have looked better without ripped jeans and with M in gray or something not black. Red, perhaps? And the kids in colors or prints would have made the picture more textured/interesting.

Roll your eyes all you want, but ripped jeans have no place in a formal picture. This is a formal picture since it was taken for their holiday card for the purpose of promoting their charitable endeavors. Additionally, it was probably intentional: let’s avoid looking too fancy like our British brethren.

Everyone knows that family outfits for such pictures should include a mix of solids and prints to add texture/interest.

Lastly, they intentionally don’t show the kids’ faces. That’s their choice, but it does prompt speculation. Again: probably intentional.

DP. LOL these aren’t real rules. And certainly not one that people under 45 care about. I have a fridge full of Christmas cards and many of them have someone wearing jeans in them or kids in swimsuits on vacation etc.

Jeans are fine.

I said ripped jeans are not…and the ripped jeans are probably intentional. Everything they do is curated.

Everybody’s live seem to be carefully curated these days so I’m not sure why this bothers you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a lovely photo but why did they have to drag politics into it?

Like what? I only see humanitarian issues in the causes they supported

Try following the news sometime.

I follow the news just fine. I want to know which charity that they donated to is a political issue, in your view.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a fan of them, but it’s a gorgeous card!

It would have looked better without ripped jeans and with M in gray or something not black. Red, perhaps? And the kids in colors or prints would have made the picture more textured/interesting.

Roll your eyes all you want, but ripped jeans have no place in a formal picture. This is a formal picture since it was taken for their holiday card for the purpose of promoting their charitable endeavors. Additionally, it was probably intentional: let’s avoid looking too fancy like our British brethren.

Everyone knows that family outfits for such pictures should include a mix of solids and prints to add texture/interest.

Lastly, they intentionally don’t show the kids’ faces. That’s their choice, but it does prompt speculation. Again: probably intentional.

DP. LOL these aren’t real rules. And certainly not one that people under 45 care about. I have a fridge full of Christmas cards and many of them have someone wearing jeans in them or kids in swimsuits on vacation etc.

Jeans are fine.

I said ripped jeans are not…and the ripped jeans are probably intentional. Everything they do is curated.

Everybody’s live seem to be carefully curated these days so I’m not sure why this bothers you.

It doesn’t bother me.

I’m just commenting on the celeb’s curated holiday messaging like everybody else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a fan of them, but it’s a gorgeous card!

It would have looked better without ripped jeans and with M in gray or something not black. Red, perhaps? And the kids in colors or prints would have made the picture more textured/interesting.

Roll your eyes all you want, but ripped jeans have no place in a formal picture. This is a formal picture since it was taken for their holiday card for the purpose of promoting their charitable endeavors. Additionally, it was probably intentional: let’s avoid looking too fancy like our British brethren.

Everyone knows that family outfits for such pictures should include a mix of solids and prints to add texture/interest.

Lastly, they intentionally don’t show the kids’ faces. That’s their choice, but it does prompt speculation. Again: probably intentional.

Why does this bother you?

It doesn’t bother me. It’s just noticeable. There are other posters here and elsewhere speculate as to why.

Ok, got you. My take on these things is people are allowed to share as much of their minor kids as they feel comfortable with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are going to get raked over the coals, and rightfully so, for the text "Archie made us mama and papa and Lilibet made us a family."

That is incredibly hurtful for a card that is disseminated to the world. As a mom of one who probably can't have a second, thank you for making me feel worse than I already do.

You can't force people to have the same outlook as you. It's clear that these two people wanted kids. And they wanted at least two kids. After all the stress and a miscarriage they have what they wanted to complete their dream family. Archie was "step 1" and Lili completed it. They are now, in their minds, the family they wanted to be.

There are many different kinds of families. You have yours. They have theirs. And other people have their own families. Each person has a right to appreciate their unique family and shout about it to the world.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with their beautiful statement about their family. And they will not be "raked over the coals"... well, maybe by a very small minority who find any kind of fault in everything they do. But with the holidays and the cuteness of the photo, I think those responses will be ignored.

+1 Beautifully said! Both stated that they wanted two kids and felt that a second child would complete their family. I think some people are inappropriately projecting quite a lot onto the holiday greeting card of a family who is not — in any real or mutual way — a part of their lives.

There are many many cards, articles, books, films, ads and other media “disseminated to the world”. Someone who chooses to focus solely on this one and give it the power of “making (them) feel worse” seems to be —at best — overly invested in something that has no real bearing in the reality of their actual life, which is sad.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a fan of them, but it’s a gorgeous card!

It would have looked better without ripped jeans and with M in gray or something not black. Red, perhaps? And the kids in colors or prints would have made the picture more textured/interesting.

Roll your eyes all you want, but ripped jeans have no place in a formal picture. This is a formal picture since it was taken for their holiday card for the purpose of promoting their charitable endeavors. Additionally, it was probably intentional: let’s avoid looking too fancy like our British brethren.

Everyone knows that family outfits for such pictures should include a mix of solids and prints to add texture/interest.

Lastly, they intentionally don’t show the kids’ faces. That’s their choice, but it does prompt speculation. Again: probably intentional.

Oh dear. Your holiday photo card maybe formal, theirs is casual just like countless other people. Have you never seen a holiday photo card with the entire family is white and denim/khaki?

Sigh.

There’s nothing “casual” about this picture.

It was taken by a famous photog and was posed to avoid showing their kids’ faces straight on.

The outfits were selected to convey a certain image.

Nobody cares what the average family sends out. Everyone has seen the ubiquitous white shirt and jeans or khakis pic. You might be right, though; perhaps this was an attempt to look casual.

I love the amount of indignation you put into this. You sound like you suspect Meghan and Harry of spending 95% of their time swanning around in grand habits de cour that their court have helped them dress in, their morning stools and urine having been inspected by the docteur de royale and that they’re just “pretending” to be casual. Are there any significant numbers of formal people left in the world? Because I don’t think these two are super formal.

[Anonymous]

Cute picture.
I have a softspot for redheads.

[Anonymous]

The word family has different meaning to different people.
I know one family with 3 boys and finally a girl for 4th and stopped, that made their family complete to them.
A dog completes our family.
I would have preferred if they said Lili completed our family versus made us a family.

[Anonymous]

This column about the card from the Telegraph was amusing: https://www.yahoo.com/news/seven-thoughts-shoot-mind-see-175744428.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This column about the card from the Telegraph was amusing: https://www.yahoo.com/news/seven-thoughts-shoot-mind-see-175744428.html

Hysterical! I’m laughing so hard! 🤣

[Anonymous]

LMAO, it’s like they are trying to be made fun of. What a pretentious holiday card. I feel bad for the kids, their parents act so ridiculously.

[Anonymous]

Whoever said that their photographer is ridiculously good looking was right. Man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are going to get raked over the coals, and rightfully so, for the text "Archie made us mama and papa and Lilibet made us a family."

That is incredibly hurtful for a card that is disseminated to the world. As a mom of one who probably can't have a second, thank you for making me feel worse than I already do.

Why would this make you feel bad? Everybody’s family looks different.

Because she has a family with her possible only. That “my family is more real with two” is an absolute asshole sentiment for a public figure to put out.

I didn’t like the wording of that either. Really insensitive

She didn’t say that only families with 2 kids are family. She said for her family two was it. It could be one for you. I think it’s a weird thing to say but she isn’t casting judgment on anyone else. That’s a projection

I wonder why she didn't mention the child she miscarried? She made such a big deal of it in the NYT that it would seem she would at least allude to Lilibet making their family complete after the loss of another child.