Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This won’t bode well for them. There is nothing they can do to turn the tide of dislike against them. She will always remain ME-Gan, who happens to look a lot like Wallace Simpson, another divorcee that married into the royal family. And she happens to be living in the same house she did too. Go figure.

You just compared her to an actual Nazi. But sure you're totally a reasonable person.

PP compared Meghan to Wallis Simpson, "another divorcee that married into the royal family". You're the one who jumped to "actual Nazi".

Wallis was villified for her Nazi connections and the British government moved to exile her husband to the Bahamas because they received damning proof that he was collaborating with the Third Reich and had agreed with Hitler to rule England if the Nazis took it in a campaign.

So yeah, comparing Meghan to Wallis is pretty uncalled for.

Not to mention the fact that the Prince of Wales is *shocker* a divorcee. So his is wife. He's also a stepfather though no one seems to acknowledge that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This won’t bode well for them. There is nothing they can do to turn the tide of dislike against them. She will always remain ME-Gan, who happens to look a lot like Wallace Simpson, another divorcee that married into the royal family. And she happens to be living in the same house she did too. Go figure.

You just compared her to an actual Nazi. But sure you're totally a reasonable person.

PP compared Meghan to Wallis Simpson, "another divorcee that married into the royal family". You're the one who jumped to "actual Nazi".

Anonymous wrote:This won’t bode well for them. There is nothing they can do to turn the tide of dislike against them. She will always remain ME-Gan, who happens to look a lot like Wallace Simpson, another divorcee that married into the royal family. And she happens to be living in the same house she did too. Go figure.

You just compared her to an actual Nazi. But sure you're totally a reasonable person.

Anonymous wrote:Is the same person just responding to this thread saying the same thing? Team Sussex? Sounds like junior high.

MM always needs to play the victim - first it was her dad, now the media. The other royals have endured bullying (Sarah, Charles, even Kate) by the media and somehow got through it without whining. You’re a public figure- you can’t force everyone to be nice.

She's a narcissist, and Harry's her co-dependent.

typical behavior

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the thing British press, you criticize Meghan and Harry for things you allow other royals to skate past on.

You can't lecture us that 'every footprint counts' then jump on private jets every two minutes.

You can't get the public to pay £2.4 million ($2.9 million) to refurbish your luxury (free!) home then refuse to let them take photos of you at Wimbledon.

You can't throw decadent $500,000 baby showers in New York with your celebrity mates, and blag a lift home on the Clooneys' plane, then tweet at the exact same time about the urgent need to combat poverty.

You can't enjoy all the global fame and attention from a royal wedding then refuse to share basic details, or photos, of your baby when he was born.

That's not how being a royal works.

I beg to differ.

Scenario A - Charles has been lecturing on the environment since the 60s. Meanwhile he as Prince of Wales he has his own private jet and two private helicopters to hop between his three homes at leisure.
Scenario B - Plenty of photos were taken. You don't get to push up into Meghan's face while she's seated, just like there are no close-ups of Kate in Kensington Park while she's out running.
Scenario C - The british didn't pay for any of that? Why are you complaining? How about William spending thousands of pounds to buy his MIL a mansion? $1M on a driveaway? $8M on refurbishing a flat he's barely at.
Scenario D - The Queen is guilty of this and her wedding was far more extravagant than the Sussex's. The public didn't see the royal's firstborn for FOUR MONTHS after his birth in privacy at the palace. People started to wonder if he was disabled.

There are examples for everything you've criticized Meghan over and the public isn't blind to your hypocrisy.

I think the major difference is that all of these people you've used as examples are direct heirs to the throne. With William's growing family and Harry's marriage it has become apparent that Harry is so far down the line now that his status is almost negligible. Add to the fact that MM flaunts her newfound wealth around and it's a recipe for the general public losing their collective patience with the actions of royals as a whole. In regards to how outdated the entire notion of royalty is, Harry and his family won't get a free pass the way the current Queen, direct heir (Charles) and next likely King (William) do. PH and MM are basically at the same level as their cousins (Beatrice, Eugenie, Zara, etc) in terms of importance so there is less tolerance for their hypocrisy and missteps. You can see the way even DCUM decries Andrew, Beatrice and Eugenie living off of the RF and British public so it's no surprise that the same sentiment is shared for a royal whose place in line is practically the same with a wife who, at the very least, doesn't seem to respect their current culture or traditions. I think it is a tough pill for PH to swallow realizing that he is not as important as he once was.

Here's my response: SO. WHAT.

The only thing standing between William and Harry is three toddlers. The British Royal Family is using Harry and Meghan as secondary heirs. They're sending them to meet face-to-face with Prime Ministers, Kings, and Presidents.

To be perfectly honest, the people they are meeting with, the speeches they're making, the tours they've take on - those should be the sole purview of Prince William and his wife.

But the Cambridges seem unwilling to step up. If the BRF want the Sussex's to work and take on the responsibilities of a heir to the throne, they can't have it both ways.

I mean...unless you're going to send a 4-year-old to meet with the King of Morocco or Nelson Mandela's widow.

Honestly, you're comparing Harry to Beatrice/Eugenie/Zara etc but I think he realized last year that he's not only the most important royal actually working (with Prince Phillip officially retired and the Queen stuck to a 5-mile radius of her house because of age) but also the most popular.

He can do what he wants and if the British continue to ask him to take on duties above-and-beyond those of a 6th-in-line to the throne, they can deal with it.

DP. What the Sussex's seem to want is to have it both ways. They've declared their intention of living abroad for the next few years, raising their child/children outside of England. Harry wants to quit being a royal and Meghan wants to keep being not-British, but they also want attention and adulation and respect and to continue "royal duties".

It's very strange.

They didn't say anything such thing. Prince William wanted them exiled to Africa (and legitimate reporters are the ones that say this came direct from Kensington Palace) but neither Meghan nor Harry said they were interested in leaving.

I would be pleased if they do settle down in England and raise their children British. But they keep hinting that they're going to move to LA, or wherever. Maybe those are just fantasies that the're saying out loud. It doesn't engender sympathy for them in me, an American, but maybe British people see it differently.

Anonymous wrote:Good for them—and dang, that is one cute baby!

He looks SO MUCH like Harry

Anonymous wrote:Get 'em Sussex!!

From Sussex Household: “Her Royal Highness, the Duchess of Sussex has filed a claim against Associated Newspapers over the misuse of private information, infringement of copyright and breach of the Data Protection Act 2018.”

She is a bully.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the thing British press, you criticize Meghan and Harry for things you allow other royals to skate past on.

You can't lecture us that 'every footprint counts' then jump on private jets every two minutes.

You can't get the public to pay £2.4 million ($2.9 million) to refurbish your luxury (free!) home then refuse to let them take photos of you at Wimbledon.

You can't throw decadent $500,000 baby showers in New York with your celebrity mates, and blag a lift home on the Clooneys' plane, then tweet at the exact same time about the urgent need to combat poverty.

You can't enjoy all the global fame and attention from a royal wedding then refuse to share basic details, or photos, of your baby when he was born.

That's not how being a royal works.

I beg to differ.

Scenario A - Charles has been lecturing on the environment since the 60s. Meanwhile he as Prince of Wales he has his own private jet and two private helicopters to hop between his three homes at leisure.
Scenario B - Plenty of photos were taken. You don't get to push up into Meghan's face while she's seated, just like there are no close-ups of Kate in Kensington Park while she's out running.
Scenario C - The british didn't pay for any of that? Why are you complaining? How about William spending thousands of pounds to buy his MIL a mansion? $1M on a driveaway? $8M on refurbishing a flat he's barely at.
Scenario D - The Queen is guilty of this and her wedding was far more extravagant than the Sussex's. The public didn't see the royal's firstborn for FOUR MONTHS after his birth in privacy at the palace. People started to wonder if he was disabled.

There are examples for everything you've criticized Meghan over and the public isn't blind to your hypocrisy.

I think the major difference is that all of these people you've used as examples are direct heirs to the throne. With William's growing family and Harry's marriage it has become apparent that Harry is so far down the line now that his status is almost negligible. Add to the fact that MM flaunts her newfound wealth around and it's a recipe for the general public losing their collective patience with the actions of royals as a whole. In regards to how outdated the entire notion of royalty is, Harry and his family won't get a free pass the way the current Queen, direct heir (Charles) and next likely King (William) do. PH and MM are basically at the same level as their cousins (Beatrice, Eugenie, Zara, etc) in terms of importance so there is less tolerance for their hypocrisy and missteps. You can see the way even DCUM decries Andrew, Beatrice and Eugenie living off of the RF and British public so it's no surprise that the same sentiment is shared for a royal whose place in line is practically the same with a wife who, at the very least, doesn't seem to respect their current culture or traditions. I think it is a tough pill for PH to swallow realizing that he is not as important as he once was.

Here's my response: SO. WHAT.

The only thing standing between William and Harry is three toddlers. The British Royal Family is using Harry and Meghan as secondary heirs. They're sending them to meet face-to-face with Prime Ministers, Kings, and Presidents.

To be perfectly honest, the people they are meeting with, the speeches they're making, the tours they've take on - those should be the sole purview of Prince William and his wife.

But the Cambridges seem unwilling to step up. If the BRF want the Sussex's to work and take on the responsibilities of a heir to the throne, they can't have it both ways.

I mean...unless you're going to send a 4-year-old to meet with the King of Morocco or Nelson Mandela's widow.

Honestly, you're comparing Harry to Beatrice/Eugenie/Zara etc but I think he realized last year that he's not only the most important royal actually working (with Prince Phillip officially retired and the Queen stuck to a 5-mile radius of her house because of age) but also the most popular.

He can do what he wants and if the British continue to ask him to take on duties above-and-beyond those of a 6th-in-line to the throne, they can deal with it.

Well to (probably) quote you from a few pages back:

Great, you think something and suddenly it should be law. Well wishes and fairies don't exist. Please shut up.

If Harry doesn't like what's being expected of him or how he's being treated he's more than free to walk away from it all (a la King Edward).

I think he's stepped up admirably. Hit it out of the park with his tours and championing his causes like Invictus. All he's asking for is the British press to stop going after his wife like rabid dogs.

And the public agrees with him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the thing British press, you criticize Meghan and Harry for things you allow other royals to skate past on.

You can't lecture us that 'every footprint counts' then jump on private jets every two minutes.

You can't get the public to pay £2.4 million ($2.9 million) to refurbish your luxury (free!) home then refuse to let them take photos of you at Wimbledon.

You can't throw decadent $500,000 baby showers in New York with your celebrity mates, and blag a lift home on the Clooneys' plane, then tweet at the exact same time about the urgent need to combat poverty.

You can't enjoy all the global fame and attention from a royal wedding then refuse to share basic details, or photos, of your baby when he was born.

That's not how being a royal works.

I beg to differ.

Scenario A - Charles has been lecturing on the environment since the 60s. Meanwhile he as Prince of Wales he has his own private jet and two private helicopters to hop between his three homes at leisure.
Scenario B - Plenty of photos were taken. You don't get to push up into Meghan's face while she's seated, just like there are no close-ups of Kate in Kensington Park while she's out running.
Scenario C - The british didn't pay for any of that? Why are you complaining? How about William spending thousands of pounds to buy his MIL a mansion? $1M on a driveaway? $8M on refurbishing a flat he's barely at.
Scenario D - The Queen is guilty of this and her wedding was far more extravagant than the Sussex's. The public didn't see the royal's firstborn for FOUR MONTHS after his birth in privacy at the palace. People started to wonder if he was disabled.

There are examples for everything you've criticized Meghan over and the public isn't blind to your hypocrisy.

I think the major difference is that all of these people you've used as examples are direct heirs to the throne. With William's growing family and Harry's marriage it has become apparent that Harry is so far down the line now that his status is almost negligible. Add to the fact that MM flaunts her newfound wealth around and it's a recipe for the general public losing their collective patience with the actions of royals as a whole. In regards to how outdated the entire notion of royalty is, Harry and his family won't get a free pass the way the current Queen, direct heir (Charles) and next likely King (William) do. PH and MM are basically at the same level as their cousins (Beatrice, Eugenie, Zara, etc) in terms of importance so there is less tolerance for their hypocrisy and missteps. You can see the way even DCUM decries Andrew, Beatrice and Eugenie living off of the RF and British public so it's no surprise that the same sentiment is shared for a royal whose place in line is practically the same with a wife who, at the very least, doesn't seem to respect their current culture or traditions. I think it is a tough pill for PH to swallow realizing that he is not as important as he once was.

Here's my response: SO. WHAT.

The only thing standing between William and Harry is three toddlers. The British Royal Family is using Harry and Meghan as secondary heirs. They're sending them to meet face-to-face with Prime Ministers, Kings, and Presidents.

To be perfectly honest, the people they are meeting with, the speeches they're making, the tours they've take on - those should be the sole purview of Prince William and his wife.

But the Cambridges seem unwilling to step up. If the BRF want the Sussex's to work and take on the responsibilities of a heir to the throne, they can't have it both ways.

I mean...unless you're going to send a 4-year-old to meet with the King of Morocco or Nelson Mandela's widow.

Honestly, you're comparing Harry to Beatrice/Eugenie/Zara etc but I think he realized last year that he's not only the most important royal actually working (with Prince Phillip officially retired and the Queen stuck to a 5-mile radius of her house because of age) but also the most popular.

He can do what he wants and if the British continue to ask him to take on duties above-and-beyond those of a 6th-in-line to the throne, they can deal with it.

DP. What the Sussex's seem to want is to have it both ways. They've declared their intention of living abroad for the next few years, raising their child/children outside of England. Harry wants to quit being a royal and Meghan wants to keep being not-British, but they also want attention and adulation and respect and to continue "royal duties".

It's very strange.

They didn't say anything such thing. Prince William wanted them exiled to Africa (and legitimate reporters are the ones that say this came direct from Kensington Palace) but neither Meghan nor Harry said they were interested in leaving.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the thing British press, you criticize Meghan and Harry for things you allow other royals to skate past on.

You can't lecture us that 'every footprint counts' then jump on private jets every two minutes.

You can't get the public to pay £2.4 million ($2.9 million) to refurbish your luxury (free!) home then refuse to let them take photos of you at Wimbledon.

You can't throw decadent $500,000 baby showers in New York with your celebrity mates, and blag a lift home on the Clooneys' plane, then tweet at the exact same time about the urgent need to combat poverty.

You can't enjoy all the global fame and attention from a royal wedding then refuse to share basic details, or photos, of your baby when he was born.

That's not how being a royal works.

I beg to differ.

Scenario A - Charles has been lecturing on the environment since the 60s. Meanwhile he as Prince of Wales he has his own private jet and two private helicopters to hop between his three homes at leisure.
Scenario B - Plenty of photos were taken. You don't get to push up into Meghan's face while she's seated, just like there are no close-ups of Kate in Kensington Park while she's out running.
Scenario C - The british didn't pay for any of that? Why are you complaining? How about William spending thousands of pounds to buy his MIL a mansion? $1M on a driveaway? $8M on refurbishing a flat he's barely at.
Scenario D - The Queen is guilty of this and her wedding was far more extravagant than the Sussex's. The public didn't see the royal's firstborn for FOUR MONTHS after his birth in privacy at the palace. People started to wonder if he was disabled.

There are examples for everything you've criticized Meghan over and the public isn't blind to your hypocrisy.

I think the major difference is that all of these people you've used as examples are direct heirs to the throne. With William's growing family and Harry's marriage it has become apparent that Harry is so far down the line now that his status is almost negligible. Add to the fact that MM flaunts her newfound wealth around and it's a recipe for the general public losing their collective patience with the actions of royals as a whole. In regards to how outdated the entire notion of royalty is, Harry and his family won't get a free pass the way the current Queen, direct heir (Charles) and next likely King (William) do. PH and MM are basically at the same level as their cousins (Beatrice, Eugenie, Zara, etc) in terms of importance so there is less tolerance for their hypocrisy and missteps. You can see the way even DCUM decries Andrew, Beatrice and Eugenie living off of the RF and British public so it's no surprise that the same sentiment is shared for a royal whose place in line is practically the same with a wife who, at the very least, doesn't seem to respect their current culture or traditions. I think it is a tough pill for PH to swallow realizing that he is not as important as he once was.

Here's my response: SO. WHAT.

The only thing standing between William and Harry is three toddlers. The British Royal Family is using Harry and Meghan as secondary heirs. They're sending them to meet face-to-face with Prime Ministers, Kings, and Presidents.

To be perfectly honest, the people they are meeting with, the speeches they're making, the tours they've take on - those should be the sole purview of Prince William and his wife.

But the Cambridges seem unwilling to step up. If the BRF want the Sussex's to work and take on the responsibilities of a heir to the throne, they can't have it both ways.

I mean...unless you're going to send a 4-year-old to meet with the King of Morocco or Nelson Mandela's widow.

Honestly, you're comparing Harry to Beatrice/Eugenie/Zara etc but I think he realized last year that he's not only the most important royal actually working (with Prince Phillip officially retired and the Queen stuck to a 5-mile radius of her house because of age) but also the most popular.

He can do what he wants and if the British continue to ask him to take on duties above-and-beyond those of a 6th-in-line to the throne, they can deal with it.

Well to (probably) quote you from a few pages back:

Great, you think something and suddenly it should be law. Well wishes and fairies don't exist. Please shut up.

If Harry doesn't like what's being expected of him or how he's being treated he's more than free to walk away from it all (a la King Edward).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the thing British press, you criticize Meghan and Harry for things you allow other royals to skate past on.

You can't lecture us that 'every footprint counts' then jump on private jets every two minutes.

You can't get the public to pay £2.4 million ($2.9 million) to refurbish your luxury (free!) home then refuse to let them take photos of you at Wimbledon.

You can't throw decadent $500,000 baby showers in New York with your celebrity mates, and blag a lift home on the Clooneys' plane, then tweet at the exact same time about the urgent need to combat poverty.

You can't enjoy all the global fame and attention from a royal wedding then refuse to share basic details, or photos, of your baby when he was born.

That's not how being a royal works.

I beg to differ.

Scenario A - Charles has been lecturing on the environment since the 60s. Meanwhile he as Prince of Wales he has his own private jet and two private helicopters to hop between his three homes at leisure.
Scenario B - Plenty of photos were taken. You don't get to push up into Meghan's face while she's seated, just like there are no close-ups of Kate in Kensington Park while she's out running.
Scenario C - The british didn't pay for any of that? Why are you complaining? How about William spending thousands of pounds to buy his MIL a mansion? $1M on a driveaway? $8M on refurbishing a flat he's barely at.
Scenario D - The Queen is guilty of this and her wedding was far more extravagant than the Sussex's. The public didn't see the royal's firstborn for FOUR MONTHS after his birth in privacy at the palace. People started to wonder if he was disabled.

There are examples for everything you've criticized Meghan over and the public isn't blind to your hypocrisy.

I think the major difference is that all of these people you've used as examples are direct heirs to the throne. With William's growing family and Harry's marriage it has become apparent that Harry is so far down the line now that his status is almost negligible. Add to the fact that MM flaunts her newfound wealth around and it's a recipe for the general public losing their collective patience with the actions of royals as a whole. In regards to how outdated the entire notion of royalty is, Harry and his family won't get a free pass the way the current Queen, direct heir (Charles) and next likely King (William) do. PH and MM are basically at the same level as their cousins (Beatrice, Eugenie, Zara, etc) in terms of importance so there is less tolerance for their hypocrisy and missteps. You can see the way even DCUM decries Andrew, Beatrice and Eugenie living off of the RF and British public so it's no surprise that the same sentiment is shared for a royal whose place in line is practically the same with a wife who, at the very least, doesn't seem to respect their current culture or traditions. I think it is a tough pill for PH to swallow realizing that he is not as important as he once was.

Here's my response: SO. WHAT.

The only thing standing between William and Harry is three toddlers. The British Royal Family is using Harry and Meghan as secondary heirs. They're sending them to meet face-to-face with Prime Ministers, Kings, and Presidents.

To be perfectly honest, the people they are meeting with, the speeches they're making, the tours they've take on - those should be the sole purview of Prince William and his wife.

But the Cambridges seem unwilling to step up. If the BRF want the Sussex's to work and take on the responsibilities of a heir to the throne, they can't have it both ways.

I mean...unless you're going to send a 4-year-old to meet with the King of Morocco or Nelson Mandela's widow.

Honestly, you're comparing Harry to Beatrice/Eugenie/Zara etc but I think he realized last year that he's not only the most important royal actually working (with Prince Phillip officially retired and the Queen stuck to a 5-mile radius of her house because of age) but also the most popular.

He can do what he wants and if the British continue to ask him to take on duties above-and-beyond those of a 6th-in-line to the throne, they can deal with it.

DP. What the Sussex's seem to want is to have it both ways. They've declared their intention of living abroad for the next few years, raising their child/children outside of England. Harry wants to quit being a royal and Meghan wants to keep being not-British, but they also want attention and adulation and respect and to continue "royal duties".

It's very strange.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the thing British press, you criticize Meghan and Harry for things you allow other royals to skate past on.

You can't lecture us that 'every footprint counts' then jump on private jets every two minutes.

You can't get the public to pay £2.4 million ($2.9 million) to refurbish your luxury (free!) home then refuse to let them take photos of you at Wimbledon.

You can't throw decadent $500,000 baby showers in New York with your celebrity mates, and blag a lift home on the Clooneys' plane, then tweet at the exact same time about the urgent need to combat poverty.

You can't enjoy all the global fame and attention from a royal wedding then refuse to share basic details, or photos, of your baby when he was born.

That's not how being a royal works.

I beg to differ.

Scenario A - Charles has been lecturing on the environment since the 60s. Meanwhile he as Prince of Wales he has his own private jet and two private helicopters to hop between his three homes at leisure.
Scenario B - Plenty of photos were taken. You don't get to push up into Meghan's face while she's seated, just like there are no close-ups of Kate in Kensington Park while she's out running.
Scenario C - The british didn't pay for any of that? Why are you complaining? How about William spending thousands of pounds to buy his MIL a mansion? $1M on a driveaway? $8M on refurbishing a flat he's barely at.
Scenario D - The Queen is guilty of this and her wedding was far more extravagant than the Sussex's. The public didn't see the royal's firstborn for FOUR MONTHS after his birth in privacy at the palace. People started to wonder if he was disabled.

There are examples for everything you've criticized Meghan over and the public isn't blind to your hypocrisy.

I think the major difference is that all of these people you've used as examples are direct heirs to the throne. With William's growing family and Harry's marriage it has become apparent that Harry is so far down the line now that his status is almost negligible. Add to the fact that MM flaunts her newfound wealth around and it's a recipe for the general public losing their collective patience with the actions of royals as a whole. In regards to how outdated the entire notion of royalty is, Harry and his family won't get a free pass the way the current Queen, direct heir (Charles) and next likely King (William) do. PH and MM are basically at the same level as their cousins (Beatrice, Eugenie, Zara, etc) in terms of importance so there is less tolerance for their hypocrisy and missteps. You can see the way even DCUM decries Andrew, Beatrice and Eugenie living off of the RF and British public so it's no surprise that the same sentiment is shared for a royal whose place in line is practically the same with a wife who, at the very least, doesn't seem to respect their current culture or traditions. I think it is a tough pill for PH to swallow realizing that he is not as important as he once was.

Here's my response: SO. WHAT.

The only thing standing between William and Harry is three toddlers. The British Royal Family is using Harry and Meghan as secondary heirs. They're sending them to meet face-to-face with Prime Ministers, Kings, and Presidents.

To be perfectly honest, the people they are meeting with, the speeches they're making, the tours they've take on - those should be the sole purview of Prince William and his wife.

But the Cambridges seem unwilling to step up. If the BRF want the Sussex's to work and take on the responsibilities of a heir to the throne, they can't have it both ways.

I mean...unless you're going to send a 4-year-old to meet with the King of Morocco or Nelson Mandela's widow.

Honestly, you're comparing Harry to Beatrice/Eugenie/Zara etc but I think he realized last year that he's not only the most important royal actually working (with Prince Phillip officially retired and the Queen stuck to a 5-mile radius of her house because of age) but also the most popular.

He can do what he wants and if the British continue to ask him to take on duties above-and-beyond those of a 6th-in-line to the throne, they can deal with it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Meghan thought she could have her cake and eat it too. She wanted the fame and attention and funds that come with being a royal but she wanted to control her image and the press and maintain her privacy when she wanted to.

I can imagine this has been a massive adaptation for her and I don't think she has handled it well. Most of what I have seen in the Daily Mail is pretty factual. From what I can tell they are happy to air dirty laundry but usually have the evidence to back it up.

It isn't clear if they are suing saying things weren't factual or just that it has been an invasion of privacy.

I imagine Meghan has been very difficult - big culture shift on top of everything else and she isn't one to not get her way.

OMG the whole royal family is DIFFICULT. The problem here is they're singling Meghan out.

William sent legal notices to multiple papers over his 'human right' to have an affair. Charles sued over the papers getting a hold of his secret conversation with Camilla declaring he wanted to be a tampon.

The only reason Phillip's philandering ways have stayed out of the major press is because the Royal family isn't above threats.

So please...stuff it with how the newest princess is spoiled. They all are.

No one is singling her out. Did you miss the entire part of the lawsuit where her own FATHER sold her letter to DM? You're only proving my point that the press latches on to her because her family and ex-friends seem to directly provide them with constant fodder. No one else in the RF has friends and family doing that so of course there is more negative press on MM. I know she's your hero, but quite honestly, when your own family, friends and likely your own in-laws don't like you...well you know what they say about the common denominator. The only people coming to MM's defense are either anonymous, new friends gained through her relationship with Harry (Clooneys, Oprah, etc) and those who stand to profit from their association with her (Misha, Jessica, Gayle, etc). If someone is constantly being trashed than you need to wonder why. Where there is smoke, there is fire. But everyone she's encountered up until she met Harry must just be trashy/jealous/wrong, right? Poor MM.

Anonymous wrote:Here's the thing British press, you criticize Meghan and Harry for things you allow other royals to skate past on.

You can't lecture us that 'every footprint counts' then jump on private jets every two minutes.

You can't get the public to pay £2.4 million ($2.9 million) to refurbish your luxury (free!) home then refuse to let them take photos of you at Wimbledon.

You can't throw decadent $500,000 baby showers in New York with your celebrity mates, and blag a lift home on the Clooneys' plane, then tweet at the exact same time about the urgent need to combat poverty.

You can't enjoy all the global fame and attention from a royal wedding then refuse to share basic details, or photos, of your baby when he was born.

That's not how being a royal works.

I beg to differ.

Scenario A - Charles has been lecturing on the environment since the 60s. Meanwhile he as Prince of Wales he has his own private jet and two private helicopters to hop between his three homes at leisure.
Scenario B - Plenty of photos were taken. You don't get to push up into Meghan's face while she's seated, just like there are no close-ups of Kate in Kensington Park while she's out running.
Scenario C - The british didn't pay for any of that? Why are you complaining? How about William spending thousands of pounds to buy his MIL a mansion? $1M on a driveaway? $8M on refurbishing a flat he's barely at.
Scenario D - The Queen is guilty of this and her wedding was far more extravagant than the Sussex's. The public didn't see the royal's firstborn for FOUR MONTHS after his birth in privacy at the palace. People started to wonder if he was disabled.

There are examples for everything you've criticized Meghan over and the public isn't blind to your hypocrisy.

I think the major difference is that all of these people you've used as examples are direct heirs to the throne. With William's growing family and Harry's marriage it has become apparent that Harry is so far down the line now that his status is almost negligible. Add to the fact that MM flaunts her newfound wealth around and it's a recipe for the general public losing their collective patience with the actions of royals as a whole. In regards to how outdated the entire notion of royalty is, Harry and his family won't get a free pass the way the current Queen, direct heir (Charles) and next likely King (William) do. PH and MM are basically at the same level as their cousins (Beatrice, Eugenie, Zara, etc) in terms of importance so there is less tolerance for their hypocrisy and missteps. You can see the way even DCUM decries Andrew, Beatrice and Eugenie living off of the RF and British public so it's no surprise that the same sentiment is shared for a royal whose place in line is practically the same with a wife who, at the very least, doesn't seem to respect their current culture or traditions. I think it is a tough pill for PH to swallow realizing that he is not as important as he once was.

This won’t bode well for them. There is nothing they can do to turn the tide of dislike against them. She will always remain ME-Gan, who happens to look a lot like Wallace Simpson, another divorcee that married into the royal family. And she happens to be living in the same house she did too. Go figure.