Omid Scodie says Meghan was wrong about Archie becoming a prince at birth

[artquejtion]

He has publicly stated that Meghan was incorrect about her understanding of the protocol around Archie becoming a Prince.

Considering Omid seems to the M & H unofficial spokesperson, it is more than likely that Meghan now realises this is the case and his skin colour would not have been a deciding factor in it.

it does make you wonder why Harry did not explain it to her ? did he just not have a clue about about Royal protocol and succession, maybe he never needed to understand it. . Or was he so desperate to get her to marry him that he fed her a load of bull, i.e. our kids will be princesses and princes. Did he hope he could convince the queen to change protocol for his family?

Please don't get this thread deleted with comments which MN don't like, I am beginning to suspect there are posters who purposely troll M & H threads to ensure MN will delete them, so there is never a discussion allowed to stand..

@JaniieJones - spot on Janie - calling others racist is not a serious allegation apparently? Just forget and move on, H&M are surprised they're getting the cold shoulder from the RF

I think M deserves ridicule for using the title - she and Harry have publicly lied about easily checkable facts. It is patently obvious to anyone with a brain cell that it is ridiculous to continue to trade on a title associated with the RF.

I expect some slimming down soon will sort that out - sure she can call herself Princess, but she won't be, as I'd imagine Harry might be told he needs to revert to being "Harry" as he always said he was happy to be known once he leaves the RF. Same way they argued the word "royal" didn't belong to the RF and if they wanted to call themselves royal they would (their website etc). So unhappy being royal that one of their first public statements as private citizens was to say "the RF do not own the word "royal") laughable embarrassment.

Slimming down of the monarchy : non-working royals have no need for any titles at all. Goodbye Andrew, Beatrice etc still part of the family, the title exists but not to be used in public any longer. Prince becomes a job title is the way forward. Handed your notice in, no longer a Prince. On his birth certificate etc, but we have any number of names on our birth certificates that we don't use - so Prince reverts to a given name as in Katie Price as that's the sort of royalty they aspire to be - selling their lived experiences and merchandising lifestyle associations.

Sarah's behaviour is in now way a beacon of how to modernise the RF, in fact it is entirely the opposite. To learn from experience and not allow someone to trade off the connection in the future. Charles' book was for the Prince's Trust so not comparable.

No Janie you don't sound worked up at all, usual tactics - I scroll past, boring.

[quote Marmaladeagain]@artquejtion - no nothing defiant, this was all planned since they first married - there are articles in the press in 2019 saying that M had a Hollywood agent on the go that the Palace didn't know about and was running book deals and tv ideas through them.

Any potential book etc would have to go through the team at the Palace as they would need to be in the loop etc and a Hollywood agent whilst saying she also wished to be a full-time working royal. Being a senior working royal required to act according to protocols etc

Dog show ideas and Quibi - being run by her (see links). When I link to articles behind a paywall, some can't see - so I've linked to various sources but just so you know the same news appears across the spectrum - the tabloids everyone is so dismissive of pick up news from the broadsheets and as the article in 2019 shows, everything H&M are doing was started as soon/if not before marriage. I expect the Netflix deal was fairly long in the making too.

So no need to say "do you believe everything you read".... inverted snobbery, sadly - it only reveals you don't read across the spectrum after all.
metro.co.uk/2021/04/26/meghan-markle-offended-over-princess-and-puppy-show-offer-14476726/
www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2021/04/02/harry-meghan-talks-video-platform-year-megxit/

This Sun article is 2019 and foretells all the current plans - there was always the half-in/half-out fantasy they are still trying to achieve:
www.thesun.co.uk/news/9873322/meghan-markle-hollywood-agent-concern/?utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=sunmaintwitter&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1567749684[/quote]
Defiant or definite?

defiant, as per the poster who said it above - act of rebellion. What's your point?

@oneglassandpuzzled
sorry, forgot to quote who my post is to.....waiting with bated breath for the interesting point that was attempting to be made....

I was confused, sorry. I thought you were making a point about the certainty/lack of certainty about the timing of the arrival of the agent.

Janiie

Desperate... haha no. Just think that the 'detractors' are so intent in finding every single thing wrong that it's ridiculous.

I answered the above in my post to you.

You obviously didn't read it.
Here it is again
"I contrast and compare to other Royals and don't see a problem and put things into context unlike some posters who get so worked up that H&M actually speak, move, write and breathe.

SarahF did similar, if not worse.

Whether you like it or not Meghan is Duchess of Sussex. Sarah is Duchess of York. Accept it."

ok, no worries - I have short shrift for the spelling and grammar police on an informal website, s'all.

[quote Marmaladeagain]@oneglassandpuzzled
sorry, forgot to quote who my post is to.....waiting with bated breath for the interesting point that was attempting to be made....[/quote]
You seem, if I may say so, a little touchy, given that I have apologised and explained.

@Marmaladeagain

ok, no worries - I have short shrift for the spelling and grammar police on an informal website, s'all.

Sorry, cross-posted.

I definately get you're point now.

not touchy, I'm happy to make mistakes all over the place and generally never correct them as it's an informal chat.

I just don't like people correcting others on their spelling is all. Some might not be as confident as I am and will refrain from posting because their spelling gets ridiculed. Not nice. Someone getting facts wrong, is a whole other ball game.

I'm sure you must feel the same.

oh ok cross posted again. Over and out - we're on the same page I think so to speak.

'I answered the above in my post to you.You obviously didn't read it.'Here it is again "I contrast and compare to other Royals and don't see a problem and put things into context unlike some posters who get so worked up that H&M actually speak, move, write and breathe. SarahF did similar, if not worse.Whether you like it or not Meghan is Duchess of Sussex. Sarah is Duchess of York. Accept it."

No one gets 'worked up' when the Sussexes speak move or breathe, stop being so childish. Rather people comment when they display their hypocrisy, again.Ferguson didn't do worse, she hadn't made serious unsubstantiated, extremely unpleasant allegations targeting the RF.

It doesn't matter whether I like it or not, the point is Markle herself said in the Oprah gossip 'all the grandeur surrounding this stuff is an attachment I don't personally have, right' so you would think ditching the grandeur of the title would be number one on her list. Oh wait, maybe she likes being a Duchess just not doing the boring work that should accompany it.

Can you not see the utter irony of writing a book about father's relationships with their sons when her own dh's relationship is in tatters with his df as is her own

My 'reading' of the book is that it is a statement that their little nuclear family is not going to make the same mistakes that their parents (fathers) made. That they'll make a better job of marriage, parenting and family.

Which you can interpret as admirable defiance, or impressive emotional intelligence, or hubristic smugness. Only time will tell.

MM definitely, in my personal view, has a lot to feel aggrieved about. But whether she and Harry are handling things well is another narrative, really. The whole thing is a huge mess.

Whatever.

Our views differ. And on this thread, there are many who feel the same as me. And many the same as you. You think you're 'right'. I think I am.

As I said she is Duchess of Sussex. Sarah is Duchess of York. That isn't changing any time soon.

Sarah uses her title and she made unsubstantiated allegations about how she was treated in the RF. She did it in a different way, but in her book she talked of being plotted against, the grey men in suits and blames 'the firm'.

So forgive me if a gentle childrens' book written by Meghan Markle doesn't reduce me to apoplexy.

How come prince Andrews girls are princesses then ..

@Happyd

How come prince Andrews girls are princesses then ..

Because they are grandchildren of the monarch on the male line.

They are Princesses for the same reason William and Harry are princes - their Granny was the Queen when they were born.

If you don't like her writing a book, then don't buy it. Then you are not contributing to the coffers, as such.
Personally, I am not bothered by the book, although I think the subject matter is a bit ironic.
Yes, it irks slightly, that other people trying to get a similar book published would find it more difficult, but this happens all the time, and as others have said, with other members of the RF.

No one really cares about "hypocrisy" or "exploiting royal titles for financial gain" because if they did, they'd be far more furious at other royals who do both far more and far worse. It's just an excuse for hatred and spite.

Meghan has been roundly attacked for literally every tiny thing ever since she was first announced as Harry's girlfriend. Pages and pages of extreme hate and abuse over nail varnish, tights, avocados, scented candles. This was long before she did any of the things people now use as justification for hatred.

If Meghan's really such a terrible person, how come her haters feel the need to endlessly invent lies about her, sockpuppet to make it look like more people hate her than do, abuse and attack anyone who doesn't hate her, use troll tactics to get posts defending her deleted and banned, and obsessively follow her every movement so they can spend every waking moment screeching about it online?

Just sheer obsessive hate for no reason.

She dumped her df years ago
No you've got it the wrong way round. Her abusive money-grubbing father is the one who dumped and ghosted her, because he felt she should be giving him more money. The fact her dad became estranged from all his children and grandchildren strongly points to him being the problem.

'So forgive me if a gentle childrens' book written by Meghan Markle doesn't reduce me to apoplexy.'

Why the constant hyperbole. It doesn't have to reduce you to anything. It has been published, therefore opinions good and bad are to be expected.

'My 'reading' of the book is that it is a statement that their little nuclear family is not going to make the same mistakes that their parents (fathers) made. That they'll make a better job of marriage, parenting and family.'

I think you're probably right @EdwinPootsLovesArchaeology. It is just a shame they can't see the hurt this may well cause her df and his df. They rightly want to do things their own way yet they also seem to want to flick the Vs and rub their families noses in it too. That is without the constant title flogging.

'money-grubbing father is the one who dumped and ghosted her'

Indeed. The apple and the tree etc..

No one really cares about "hypocrisy" or "exploiting royal titles for financial gain" because if they did, they'd be far more furious at other royals who do both far more and far worse. It's just an excuse for hatred and spite

Exactly.
Let's not forget another grandchild, Peter Phillips, flogging milk to the Chinese with an advert of him sat in front a Palace.
A childrens book pales into insignificance.

Why the constant hyperbole. It doesn't have to reduce you to anything

I have a style of writing.
So do you. With dare I say it, just as much hyperbole.

Skim over it if it's so annoying.

But Peter Phillips isn't a Prince nor a working royal, doesn't have a title and doesn't have any income from the Royal Family coffers. Big difference.