To think Prince Harry should now do whatever it takes to cancel his book contract?

[FromageRouge]

And withdraw his book?

A rapprochement looks possible if he meets the RF halfway.

I can’t see the death of the Queen making a difference to whether the book is released or not. They had no issue with the effects it would have had on a 96 year old woman in ill health who had lost her husband last year when alive so why would they be bothered when she’s dead?

I can't explain why this is but I feel like when the queen was alive Harry and Meghan were more important. Now that she has gone they have dropped down and will presumably now be faded out more.
Does anyone know what I mean? Its weird because if anything you'd think it would be the opposite but that's just the feeling I'm getting, that with the queens death their rank has lessened

I never ever thought I'd hear myself saying this, but I'm starting to feel a bit sorry for The Meghan. Take one unhappy member of our Royal Family, the most famous family on the planet, add an actress who wants nothing more than to be rich, famous and influential, and aforementioned unhappy Prince has got his get-out excuse, he can just blame it on the wife. Their evacuation to America happened SO quickly, one could wonder if it was all pre-meditated. They used the excuse that they wanted privacy from media intrusion, yet The Meghan is milking her Duchess title for all it's worth, appearing on everything that'll have her. Harry on the other hand, is living the life of Riley, using the Prince thing without lifting a finger re Royal duties. He's got what he wants (the life of a Royal without doing anything to earn it) and she's got the fame and fortune she wanted (again, without lifting a finger except to bite the hand that's feeding her). Cut them loose and see how well they do then.

This. I suspect that he doesn't think ahead about anything.

@TheWheeledAvenger because you stated in a pp that Charles needs to present an image of a united family to the world. Antagonising H&M by refusing to give their children HRH is hardly likely to achieve that is it! Im sure they will run straight back to the US and sell their upset to the highest bidder!

Spot on

Anyone who think Charles will strip his own child of his rightful title just because he moved to California and wrote a book is delusional. Using language like "slap Meghan down" is deeply unpleasant. The King does not make major changes that will affect future generations of royals in order to "slap a woman down."

It's like Harry personally betrayed them, and now they're writing revenge fantasy fanfiction. They're convinced Charles is going to enact some triumphant revenge while Harry snivels away with his tail between his legs and is never heard from again, when in reality Charles appears desperate to do everything he can to make the family appear solid and unified. Why else do they keep dragging Meghan out to do these funeral-related events when she looks like she'd rather be having a root canal? Because they need the family to look unified. Charles cannot be a world diplomat if he can't even keep on decent terms with his own child.

Anyway it's not as simple as Charles deciding whether to grant Archie and Lili HRHs or not. If Charles doesn't want them having HRHs then he will have to issue new Letters Patent, and he has to think about the potential ramifications on the younger Cambridge children.

@bloodyplanes I have always been a bit unsure about Charles and if you had asked me two weeks ago who I would prefer as King I would have said William. However, having seen King Charles out and about this week and listened to his speeches, all under extremely difficult circumstances, I have been pleasantly surprised and would have to concur that indeed a blinder has been played.

This thread is full of people making things up.

Speculating that a baby will grow up to become a drug addict.

Keep it classy, Meghan haters.

He’s a grown almost 40 year old man with family. He has a voice. He is his own agent and he has a right to talk about whatever is important to to him. Stop trying to cancel his lived experience.

I'm surprised that so many people on this thread know the Royal family so intimately that they know exactly what's gone on in the past and not only that they are fortune tellers as well that can tell us what's going to happen in the future.

It's none of our business and is down to the Royal family to sort if that is what they all want.

There are a lot of posters I think who can't wait for this book to come out because they are hoping it's going to bring about the downfall of the monarchy but they dress it up as faux concern for Prince Harry, when in reality they couldn't give two hoots about a Prince that comes from the very family they so dislike. He is their useful idiot.

Regarding Archie and Lilibet possibly not being given the address of HRH, Charles has said long before Meghan came on the scene that he wanted to slim down the Royal Family probably as he knows that will give it a better chance of surviving. Only the Norwegian King, Queen and their first born child and children have titles and the address of Crown Prince or Princess and carry out Royal duties as members of the Royal House. The Kings second child is still called a Princess but not Crown Princess and her children have no titles. She is classed as member of the Royal family but not the Royal House.

The King of Sweden in 2019 removed royal titles - Prince and Princess and HRH - from his 5 grandchildren by his second and third child. The grandchildren are still allowed to continue to retain their titles of Duke and Duchess. The grandchildren are no longer expected to do royal duties once they reach adulthood. The King’s 2 affected children recorded no problem with this and publicly said they were glad as they think it is good that their children now have a greater opportunity to shape their own lives as individuals in the future. Zero drama.

Charles now though will probably find it difficult to remove the Prince or Princess titles from Archie and Lilibet if that had been his original intention for any children Harry would have as the Swedish King has done , as some would probably say it was being spiteful and part of the rift rather than it being part of his aim to slim down the Royal Family. It’s completely reasonable if it is confirmed he won’t give A and L the address of HRH as they won’t be doing royal duties as adults and it fits in with his wish to slim down the Royal family.

I've never known a person go low contact with a loving family, ever - doesn't happen, there's always reasons.

People always advise posters on here to go no/low contact with toxic family members - why should harry just put up with it because they're royal? Why should Meghan 'keep her head down'(ffs 🙄) and put up with blatant racism and lies from the press? Fuck that - 2022 and we're still telling women to be fucking kind in the face of abhorrent abuse directed at her.

People are pissed because he didn't marry a silent clothes horse and instead chose a black, vocal, American actress. Just own it.

It'll be those very people that'll be first in line to buy the book though; just so they can fume 😂

Way to miss the point....

It's not really a matter of going low contact though.

People with toxic or dangerous families are not generally encouraged to build their lives around that family or use their membership in the family as the centerpiece of their income.

It wouldn't be healthy for regular people to do that either.

There was a point to bizarre ramblings about Harry becoming fat, Meghan turning into a plastic surgery addict, and a baby growing up to become a cokehead? Really?

Because it looked like unhinged ranting.

The constantly talking over Harry, making it all about her rather than all about them. Its just not the royal way!

Seriously when I read comments like this I imagine older women in the 1950s with their hair-nets on gossiping in hushed tones on the doorstep about the 'loose' woman who lives up the road.

I swear we haven't progressed at all.

"according to half journalists completing PG survey"

I'm not sure what that proves exactly.

People with toxic or dangerous families are not generally encouraged to build their lives around that family or use their membership in the family as the centerpiece of their income.

How have they done that?

The thing with streamlining the monarchy and not giving HRH titles to anyone except the monarch/heir's children is that it is an excellent idea in theory but tricky to implement due to the family dynamics, and there are concerns about ramifications on future generations.

It's a shame the Queen didn't start slimming things a generation ago. It would have been so much simpler if Charles' children were the only ones given HRHs and all three younger children treated the same. It's harder when there are only two because the divide is more stark. If Harry had siblings whose children were also not HRHs it would reduce the impression this is about punishing or not punishing him for leaving. The treatment of the Queen's grandchildren was also a bit of a mishmash due to sexism (Anne's children not automatically getting HRH just because Anne is female) and Andrew's pushiness with his girls.

The other issue is the future. Issuing new LP saying the grandchildren of a monarch are no longer entitled to HRH means that Charlotte and Louis' children likely won't be HRHs. Who knows what William thinks about that precedent being set and whether he would want his future grandchildren to be HRH or not. But the royals do have to think in the long term and to think about precedent. The RF are all about tradition and the longterm. They aren't going to make permanent changes just because one relatively unimportant person left.

The second article is the usual scurrilous shit that every woman who marries into the RF has to put up with.

The first article is more interesting. It says two things. The first is that Megan's genetics will improve the RF's appearance. Provocative, but hardly a criticism. The second is that she leave Harry when she gets a better offer. Well, she has left the RF so the article is accidentally prescient.

Misogyny, not racism, is the issue with those articles.

I'm not interested in the smalldoings of the RF. I think they should be left in peace. Most families would have problems under all that constant scrutiny.

So I don't know what annoys me more: those who dig the dirt on celebrities, ie the press; those who consume the dirt, ie, those who buy the mags, or those who throw others under the bus to monetize it, ie, H & M.

That even many journalists in the UK think she received racist and unfair coverage, while at the same time seeing posts on forums such as MN and social media from the citizens of the UK do not see that the coverage was racist.

I am not saying that the citizens of the UK are racist. I am saying that the media coverage of her has been racist and anyone saying it has not been is blind.