Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Harry and Meghan are expecting their second child

907 replies

Standrewsschool · 14/02/2021 19:43

Wishing them all the best

OP posts:
Thread gallery
10
Mockolate · 19/02/2021 14:49

@Motherdare

Wow, their statement was so passive aggressive.
?
SageandBlackPepper · 19/02/2021 14:59

I thought their statement was very snarky. They don't help themselves. It sounds like the sort of email we all send when we are angry and later wish we had held off until we had calmed down a bit.

SageandBlackPepper · 19/02/2021 15:06

Maybe a rebranding of Harry, Humanitarian, formerly known as Prince would work.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about this subject:

ARoseDowntown · 19/02/2021 15:06

@AKissAndASmile

But can anyone tell me what it is that this Meghan Markle did that she gets more stick than Prince Andrew

I wonder. It is qwhite perplexing.

I cannot imagine that MM in her entire life has done anything anywhere near as unconscionable as Andrew has. However one might malign her for the things she is routinely criticized for, NOTHING approaches knowingly continuing to befriend a pedophile for personal financial and/or social gain, as the holder of royal privilege (or otherwise). And that’s just what we know about re Andrew and Epstein, nevermind what we don’t know about that relationship and the many others Andrew has and has had.

There is just no equivalence and no credible argument otherwise.

The ways in which members of the royal family have repeatedly got away with immoral and illegal acts, and continue to leech off the public, is literally unbelievable. How the British public (or indeed any supporters of royal families anywhere in the world, because there’s nothing democratic or accountable about any of them, by definition) so willingly turn a blind eye is beyond me. It’s interesting on a certain level. Why do royalists do this? How can they un-know all the ugly truths?

And in that vein, why on Earth would someone want to marry into the royal family? Just why?? This family’s past is all out there to be seen by anyone with access to Google. There are over 7bn people in the world. Why choose these members of this family? The very same goes for Kate, Eugenie’s husband, Mike Tindall....all of them (at least the ones that aren’t equally tarnished, where you might think like attracts like).

Anyone who chooses to align themselves with the RF has to have a serious lapse in intelligence or morality or something. Or an extreme hunger for wealth or fame or status, so extreme that it blinds them to all the ugliness.

To repeat, this applies to ALL outsiders who marry in, not just MM.

SageandBlackPepper · 19/02/2021 15:17

See i don't think anyone would try and argue that Meghan has done anything near what Andrew is accused of. I don't know a single person who is not disgusted by Andrew. I am not aware of a single supporter.

The reason he is not in the press on a daily basis is because he is in exile - he has no public persona anymore. In the absence of fresh allegations or something new, there is nothing really to report. They can't just rehash the same stuff as it wouldn't sell. Any public sighting is reported though - even grainy long distance images of him on a horse with the Queen...

Whereas with Harry and Meghan, they are the gift that keeps on giving as far as the media is concerned. Every week there is a press release, a new court action, an interview, a zoom call, a self penned article , a released photo, a podcast, a multi million dollar deal, comments from sources close to the Sussex camp...

This is why they are constantly in the press. If they 'disappeared from view' the press would peter out too. I am not suggesting they should do this - completely their choice. They do like to pull the tigers tail though.

Roussette · 19/02/2021 15:20

A very interesting post Rose and I agree. I know I'm old very and wiser than I used to be, but I think there would've been no time I would entertain marrying in to that family.

I suppose the likes of Beatrice and Eugenie's husbands can fly under the radar somewhat, as can Mike Tindall. They are not so much under the microscope in their day to day lives. (pre Covid)

To me, the whole family is pretty toxic, some of that toxicity through no fault of their own but because of the microscope they live under, but some of it... bad decisions, greed (Andrew), awful connections with vile people and some unpleasant relatives like the Kent woman.. I would want to run a mile from a family like that!

isitspringyet · 19/02/2021 15:49

Yes rose you’re right! why anyone would want to marry into the royal family?

Anne1958 · 19/02/2021 15:58

@SageandBlackPepper

See i don't think anyone would try and argue that Meghan has done anything near what Andrew is accused of. I don't know a single person who is not disgusted by Andrew. I am not aware of a single supporter.

The reason he is not in the press on a daily basis is because he is in exile - he has no public persona anymore. In the absence of fresh allegations or something new, there is nothing really to report. They can't just rehash the same stuff as it wouldn't sell. Any public sighting is reported though - even grainy long distance images of him on a horse with the Queen...

Whereas with Harry and Meghan, they are the gift that keeps on giving as far as the media is concerned. Every week there is a press release, a new court action, an interview, a zoom call, a self penned article , a released photo, a podcast, a multi million dollar deal, comments from sources close to the Sussex camp...

This is why they are constantly in the press. If they 'disappeared from view' the press would peter out too. I am not suggesting they should do this - completely their choice. They do like to pull the tigers tail though.

Spot on.
rosetylersbiggun · 19/02/2021 16:10

Wow, there's a lot to unpick here: Dredging up some long-past 'sin'; putting all the blame on Meghan; pretending the occasional raised-eyebrow type comment about another royal remotely compares to the tidal wave of hate Meghan has received.

I don't know why the graveyard photos are being dredged out yet again, but are people really so naive to not realise this is about money? (Okay racism plays a part but a big part is money.)

The reason Harry and Meghan were dragged for the photos isn't because they posed for them, it's because they used their own photographer rather than allowing the RR access. A great deal of the press vitriol has been over their refusal to engage with the Royal Rota.

Other senior and minor royals do stuff like be photographed looking sad in graveyards all the time, and it's applauded by the press. The reason is because they make money from it. Images of royals sell for huge amounts, a single pap photo of Meghan and Archie could easily sell for over a million pounds.

A few journalists and photographers have explicitly spoken about the loss to their income from Meghan leaving, and one photographer has been very active in tweeting that he was planning to put his kids through private school off Meghan's back and whining that he's now broke thanks to her decision to leave the UK.

I'm not sure if people realise how much money other people make off of Meghan. Meghan sells: you might not like it, but she does. Massively. A lot of people working in the British press were rubbing their hands with glee with the expectation that Meghan would make them very wealthy. Her refusal to do the royal rota or to permit photographers access to Archie has cost them a ton of money.

That's the main reason she became public enemy #1: because she lost them money. Forget all the rest, like most things it all comes down to ££££££££.

That's why they kicked up such a fuss and pretended Meghan not posing on the hospital steps was disrespectful to royal history or to Diana or to Kate or whatever: because she cost them SO much money by releasing her own photos rather than posing for photos the paparazzi would own the rights to.

Kate is mostly beloved by the press because she and her family have had a policy of cooperating with the press and specifically cooperating with the paps since she first started dating William. Meaning the press always knew they could make money off her. Even when she was being attacked by the press during the early years of her marriage, she never denied them access. I will give Kate credit, she's a very smart cookie and cool-headed enough not to piss off people with the power to damage her, and it must have hurt like hell to 'play nice' with the same people writing misogynistic and classicist trash about her and her mother.

The irony is that Kate actually has somewhat gone down the same path as Meghan in trying to control ownership and financial rights to images of herself and the Cambridge children. The reason KP's publicity department has worked so hard to push the image of Kate as a dedicated amateur photographer is largely financial and to do with control and copyright. And it's a lot harder for the press to attack "devoted loving mum who just enjoys taking pics of her own kiddies" than "Duchess hires posh photographer like some twat who thinks she's special." There actually was a pushback in the press over Kate doing this, the press were not happy at all and when she first started releasing her own copyrighted images there were a few out of nowhere Kate-negging articles published to send her a message to knock it off. That's why the Cambridges so frequently release photos and news and why they publicise their Zooms so much, to try to strike a balance between keeping the press happy, and retaining control of their own images.

There's definitely a valid criticism to make about Meghan's decision to burn bridges and be so gung ho in punishing the press (even though the press have been vile and racist towards her, and I can understand her not wanting to let racist bullies profit from her child).

But please remember that the press have an agenda, and that the press lie. If Harry and Meghan had done what the other royals do and phoned up the British press prior to doing their 'looking sad in a graveyard' thing, they would not have received this criticism. The ONLY reason they are being punished is because the press were counting on a huge payday and feel Meghan has taken that away from them.

DeRigueurMortis · 19/02/2021 16:29

@SageandBlackPepper

See i don't think anyone would try and argue that Meghan has done anything near what Andrew is accused of. I don't know a single person who is not disgusted by Andrew. I am not aware of a single supporter.

The reason he is not in the press on a daily basis is because he is in exile - he has no public persona anymore. In the absence of fresh allegations or something new, there is nothing really to report. They can't just rehash the same stuff as it wouldn't sell. Any public sighting is reported though - even grainy long distance images of him on a horse with the Queen...

Whereas with Harry and Meghan, they are the gift that keeps on giving as far as the media is concerned. Every week there is a press release, a new court action, an interview, a zoom call, a self penned article , a released photo, a podcast, a multi million dollar deal, comments from sources close to the Sussex camp...

This is why they are constantly in the press. If they 'disappeared from view' the press would peter out too. I am not suggesting they should do this - completely their choice. They do like to pull the tigers tail though.

Wholly agree with this.

What irks me about H&M is not what they have done but how they have gone about it.

Why do an interview with Oprah? What's it going to achieve other than to inflame tensions further? What more is to be said than they've already put out there in press releases, leaks from friends and that awful book?

I can't help feel they keep lobbing bombs and then complain about getting hit by the self created shrapnel.

I totally understand why they want a life outside the constraints of the royal family.

I don't have an issue with them using the platform Harry birthright brings to make money.

I just can't help feel that they could have generated far less criticism and far more goodwill if they'd gone about things differently.

PretendSpeedGun · 19/02/2021 16:40

@rosetylersbiggun spot on and completely agree. It is a choice though isn't it and choices have consequences that we can't always control.

Kate has made the choice to largely co-operate with the press, she is also quite careful to be non-controversial. As a result she largely gets favourable press - but lets be fair it is all pretty boring stuff. No-one is going to have strong opinion about it.

Meghan has gone to war with the press, she is by nature more controversial, she is not going to keep quiet if she has something she wants to say. As a result she gets negative press but she is very interesting to watch. I guarantee articles about Meghan and Harry get tonnes more views than articles about William and Kate.

If Kate suddenly did a Tom Bradby interview in a third world nation insinuating the Queen does not have her back, you can guarantee fireworks would go off in exactly the same way.

Likewise if Meghan became 'beige' the interest would wain.

The mistake Harry and Meghan are making is to think they can control both what they put out and how it is reported and perceived. They can't.

Skiptheheartsandflowers · 19/02/2021 17:04

Her refusal to do the royal rota or to permit photographers access to Archie has cost them a ton of money.

I get the second point here. But I don't understand the first part. The royal rota, if I'm understanding correctly, is the pool system where one outlet from the approved list covers a royal engagement and they take turns at doing this and sharing their footage with the others. So how does an individual photographer make money from it, since the system is about sharing the results? I'd like to have a better picture of this.

Also, I don't understand your point about the anger because the royal rota wasn't allowed to cover the cemetery visit. The royal rota participation stopped after March last year, I thought, so it would never even have been on the cards, would it?

one photographer has been very active in tweeting that he was planning to put his kids through private school off Meghan's back and whining that he's now broke thanks to her decision to leave the UK.

Go on, name and shame!

Mummy195 · 19/02/2021 17:29

Invictus, Mayhew, Smartworks have all confirmed that H&M will remain their patrons.

Don't understand why people think they should stop charity work just because they left the RF firm. They probably will do most work for these charities anyway.

anewdispensation · 19/02/2021 17:37

@LetMeBubble

I’m going to be controversial and say..

Imagine if Diana was alive.. and she saw the world speak this way of her son and daughter in law?

It wouldn’t have happened, guess why? Because most people doing this amount of scrutiny are doing it because they feel they owe it to Diana to step in her place and be protective of her little Harry. In their eyes that mother son bond hasn’t matured yet because we are all stuck in that zone of Diana abd the little boy who wrote “mummy”. Because nothing else we have seen of him has been as traumatic.

But let’s stretch our imaginations further now... if all of you are letting your maternal instincts kick in abd be protective of that little Harry that you haven’t yet accepted has moved on from his mother’s death and matured (unlike the rest of us)...

Let’s say, Diana didn’t die. And she had that attitude of intense scrutiny that the majority of posters have of Meghan and Harry...

You know what.. the world would probably be disappointed with Diana. Because we will be able to relate to Meghan and her ordeal with entering a newborn family.

This is why those who are obsesses with the royal family aren’t able to accept Meghan. Because they’re emotionally invested so much so that they’re still totally emotionally stuck at that point in time when Harry is still a 9 year old boy.. and they refuse to accept that he doesn’t need the nation to act like a maternal figure for him any longer as it is quite smothering at this stage.

I think many do need to find better purpose for their lives!!!

It’s natural biology for women to be weary of a stranger and want to give things time for the stranger to prove themselves before they let them have input into the dynamics of the family.

She is an outsider .. ok we get it.

But can’t we just be bloody neutral. I know you wanted to totally love Harry’s wife and have full disclosure of her wardrobe secrets so you can continue to live your princess fantasies .. but he doesn’t really need you to do that for him.. and Diana would want you to respect her sons privacy..

Diana had a vision that the royal family would offer something else to the world other than parading.. a royal family that would be more down to earth and empathetic.

Allow the son that she raised be just that.. a normal human being who wants to choose a wife without the interference of the whole nation and its wife.

What utter nonsense? Carefully conferring respectability on what is overt and covert racism. Didn’t William also lose his mother? Why was Kate not subjected to this level of nastiness.

Let’s call it what it is... it is sexism and racism. People expected her to suck up and swallow the utter bile of the gutter press and mediocre people with not much going on in their own lives because as a brown woman surely she must be grateful and when she said fuck this I don’t have to debase myself for the validation of idiots, they hated her more.

All of you tying yourself into twists with your nastiness towards these people who are just trying to live their lives should be ashamed.

Yes they want to earn money. When has that ever being a criminal offence... this from a website full of many women who take pride in being looked after by a man! I’m reeling

somethingonthecarpet · 19/02/2021 17:51

I agree Motherdare - their statement is passive aggressive.

It's not so much the last sentence, but the one before - "We can all live a life of service". You can read the sneer in there.

The Queen has consistently ended her statements saying that they remain much-loved members of her family, but they seem unable to bring themselves to say the same back.

FWIW I think the Oprah interview will just be a bit more 'poor me', and a lot of showcasing MM's potential as a political candidate.

ARoseDowntown · 19/02/2021 17:53

People expected her to suck up and swallow the utter bile of the gutter press and mediocre people with not much going on in their own lives because as a brown woman surely she must be grateful and when she said fuck this I don’t have to debase myself for the validation of idiots, they hated her more.

I’m a WOC. MM was the subject of awful racism, no question.

I don’t agree with the above. People expected her to suck up and swallow the bile because she was about to enter a world of the kind of privilege others can only dream of. They see it as the price of entry.

AKissAndASmile · 19/02/2021 17:55

A few journalists and photographers have explicitly spoken about the loss to their income from Meghan leaving, and one photographer has been very active in tweeting that he was planning to put his kids through private school off Meghan's back and whining that he's now broke thanks to her decision to leave the UK.

This is fantastic! Grin
Do you have a link?

Coronateachingagain · 19/02/2021 18:13

@Mummy195

Invictus, Mayhew, Smartworks have all confirmed that H&M will remain their patrons.

Don't understand why people think they should stop charity work just because they left the RF firm. They probably will do most work for these charities anyway.

@Mummy195 what work? showing up to events and getting press attention? I agree the charities may benefit from it (that is if they indeed want to continue the association, I would not be surprised if some of them are sighing about why they did not get on the cross out list), but sure they will make sure they benefit too. This "Foundation" is just a division arm of a for profit company and should be called the PR & marketing department, which is what it is called in normal for-profit companies like theirs. All cost, publicity, for a benefit. I don't have a problem with it, as long as you are upfront with people. If I was at a charity, I would cautiously stay away from them for a while, if I could.
Mockolate · 19/02/2021 18:14

It's not so much the last sentence, but the one before - "We can all live a life of service". You can read the sneer in there

How?
How is that a sneer?
It just goes to show that you can read anything into everything if you try hard enough.

I see the headlines on the Daily Hate Rag has people picking the statement to pieces "what it really meant"

eg

  • As evidenced by their work over the past year" means thumbing their noses Confused Grin

They and others have just seen their arse as they've had the common sense to move away lol.
apparently really says "thumbing their noses

Mockolate · 19/02/2021 18:14

Don't know why that sentence has posted twice!

stairway · 19/02/2021 18:15

Anewdispensation why are you reeling. Meghan has done very well out of the press and the royal associations from this country. It has catapulted her to celeb status. She’s living a life of luxury and celebrity thanks to the titles given to her by this country.

stairway · 19/02/2021 18:22

The bbc have given an interesting take on the new press release. I think the timing is interesting too. I think the royal family are getting nervous about the Winfrey interview and Netflix production.

Coronateachingagain · 19/02/2021 18:45

@Mockolate

It's not so much the last sentence, but the one before - "We can all live a life of service". You can read the sneer in there

How?
How is that a sneer?
It just goes to show that you can read anything into everything if you try hard enough.

I see the headlines on the Daily Hate Rag has people picking the statement to pieces "what it really meant"

eg

  • As evidenced by their work over the past year" means thumbing their noses Confused Grin

They and others have just seen their arse as they've had the common sense to move away lol.
apparently really says "thumbing their noses

The thing that gives it away is the way they ended the communication - with a bit of a slap. H&M are clearly and really pissed off Grin Grin Grin. I can see her pen all over it Confused bad move and very public. And not very regal Grin. I wonder who is advising them at all!!
Coronateachingagain · 19/02/2021 18:47

and what charity would like to be associated with them if they react to adversity with a communication like that... Confused

Coronateachingagain · 19/02/2021 18:47

@Coronateachingagain

and what charity would like to be associated with them if they react to adversity with a communication like that... Confused
PS their marketing costs just went up!
Swipe left for the next trending thread