anyone watching Harry and Megan

[Member869894]

on tv now?

Now thats a lot to me but after taxes, agent's cut, living costs, etc I doubt there'd be enough left over to invest to turn it into real wealth

Her role in Suits was only one job. As a very successful actress she was also appearing in films, doing PAs, speaking engagements, endorsements etc and at the time she gave it up to marry Harry she was still on the up. I saw her personal fortune estimated at between $5m - $10m and on an upward trajectory. Interestingly I saw the higher estimates in the US, the lower estimates in the UK tabloids.

So no billionnaire but if she was marrying for money there are plenty of wealthy men who don't come with the circus.

She also had to earn her own money, rather than being a trust fund kiddie who could lurk around waiting for her potential partner to make his mind up.

@MissEliza
I thought that remark was a joke, I now see that was what she actually said? Is that true? If so it’s gobsmacking in its condescension.

Be nice folks!

'but if she was marrying for money there are plenty of wealthy men who don't come with the circus.'

No I think she wanted the circus/fame. They have both just been very misguided and are now unpopular which wasn't the plan.

Just looking at some of the footage. Harry looks utterly miserable and like it’s the last place he wants to me. He really looks so desperately unhappy.

I can't imagine she will stay around for long - in the marriage or the country. She's just not suited to playing the royal wifey and what would be the point when Kate has already won the oscar for it?

They just needed to ride it out MM had enormous goodwill compared to the Middletons. Remember how Kate was vilified for being "waity Katey", the grand daughter of a coal miner, how her mother was an arch strategist who had delayed Kate going to uni and changed Uni so that Kate would be at St. Andrews on the same course with PW and thrown into his path . How the Middletons were dreadful "commoners" and social climbers and aspersions were cast about how "party pieces" in a crowded market could make enough money to sustains the lifestyle and property they lived in. Look at "golden girl" Kate now.

I agree MM and H seem very immature given their ages. Diana was only 19 getting married to a much older guy perhaps in order to please her father/family be noticed etc but I think they have handled everything wrongly of late.

Talking about what "people" should be doing to help the environment or pontificating on "equality" is tone deaf and patronising in the extreme. H should stick to being the face of the Invictus games and other things that can't really be criticised.

Personally, I think the whole RF are all just a drain of the welfare state, we should all be well past the time when we fawn over people because they happen to be born into wealth and privilege (or marry into it).

They've got a new electric car. A fancy Audi costing over 70 grand.

Discuss.

“Very rich people buy very expensive car”
Hold the front page....

'They've got a new electric car. A fancy Audi costing over 70 grand. Discuss.'

It's lovely that they are finally practising what they've preached re the environment. Shame we paid for it but that's the royals for you, scroungers the lot of them

'you can't have a discussion about female empowerment without having a man present so thankyou for letting him crash the party'

Completely cringeworthy. Makes her sound like she's trying to be smart, ends up sounding ridiculous.

She’s positioning herself as the Lead Player whilst he fades into the background. The car no doubt is intended to show their green credentials to all their detractors.Its a good move, pity the car is so high end as to be completely out of the reach of most people

“ 'you can't have a discussion about female empowerment without having a man present so thankyou for letting him crash the party'”
I don’t have a problem with the way she said it-it’s just a casual, jokey way of putting it.

I do have a problem with they concept though- you do not bring a man to a women only gathering without getting prior agreement. And yes you bloody can talk about female empowerment without men present!

'you can't have a discussion about female empowerment without having a man present so thankyou for letting him crash the party

Sorry, but the lack of insight is just downright staggering. I'd have thought there'd been enough tone-deafness during the Africa visit without adding more

The 6 week break really can't come soon enough ...

To be fair- that is a view held by many feminists. In fact, it’s a view held by very many Mumsnet feminists.

If Meghan was on MN she'd be one of the posters saying how it is vital for hubby to come along to a breastfeeding support group or sleep on the antenatal wards.

I do have a problem with they concept though- you do not bring a man to a women only gathering without getting prior agreement. And yes you bloody can talk about female empowerment without men present!

“
If Meghan was on MN she'd be one of the posters saying how it is vital for hubby to come along to a breastfeeding support group or sleep on the antenatal wards“
Yep. That is most of Mumsnet though. I wonder how many new minted radical feminists will be outraged by this pronouncement of Meghan’s but back to their liberal ways the next time there’s a “what about the men” thread!

I would be really annoyed if I was at a meeting re gender equality and someone brought their husband along with that remark. Harry must be one of the least qualified men in the world to talk about gender equality.

it is certainly true that you can have and should have conversations about gender equality without involving men. However, given the patriarchy, you can't achieve gender equality, or rather for me, women's liberation, without involving men.

It's the way female empowerment is used though Seneca

When people talk about empowering other people, they are often referring to giving power, which is patronising and frequently patriarchal.

Think about when management talk about empowering their workforce. Are they actually giving them any real power or just trying to sound like they are?

True empowerment comes through achieving and exercising power. I really don't see Meghan taking her husband to a female group as benefiting the women concerned.

Hang in- there are other men there- it’s not an all woman group! I take it all back!

Changing tack, this thread has made me think about the differences between Harry and William.

One difference is that the only time either of them have had anything approximating to a proper job, Harry chose to do something which involved killing people, and William chose to do something which involved saving people’s lives.

Unfortunately, charm and glamour are generally more admired than dull morality.

They both joined the army- William was only not deployed because he is heir to the throne, not because he didn’t want to be.

It's clear William's time with the air ambulance was very fulfilling from the way he talks about it. Shame he had to give it up in favour of 'royal duties'.