Interesting analysis on social media about Meghan

[Why2why]

Interesting analysis but who could be paying for this concerted effort? It’s suggested that not only is it coordinated but the people doing it are paid to do so.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.buzzfeednews.com/amphtml/ellievhall/bot-sentinel-meghan-markle-prince-harry-twitter

I think people are forgetting the US is not the UK. Meghan can call who ever she wants as a private US citizen. She is not using her title HRH. She is using her married name Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. Diana was similarly Diana, Princess of Wales and got involved in all sorts. She too was accused of meddling in politics when she sought to do good deeds such as her work to rid places of land mines. Today, these same people hold her up as a saint.

Meghan is doing good. Most in the US, where she lives, have no problem with it. The people in the UK complaining are pathetic. They make excuses for Andrew but how dare Meghan try to help disadvantaged women.

Some will even claim ridiculously that Americans will think she is acting on behalf of Britain. Seriously?!!!

Duchess is a title.
Her married name is Meghan Mountbatten Windsor, not Meghan Duchess of Sussex. Harry was given the title of Duke of Sussex on marriage for being a working royal and she obtained the title Duchess because she married Harry

It’s fair to say her calls have not been uncontroversial in the US though, Why2why. Have they forgotten they’re in the US too?

he people in the UK complaining are pathetic

YES. Darren Grimes (yuk) Piers Morgan (double yuk) and the ghastly GB News

Sally Are you saying she isn't Meghan, Duchess of Sussex?

She is.

Diana was similarly Diana, Princess of Wales

She was “HRH the Princess of Wales”when she was married. She was “Diana, Princess of Wales” after her divorce. Meghan’s married name is Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor. The Duchess of Sussex is her title.

Roussette no one is saying she isn’t the Duchess of Sussex. But it’s not her “married name”. It’s a title that she got through marriage. Not quite the same thing.

And what's the matter with her using her title? I hope she keeps it.

Diana, Sarah kept theirs. SF uses hers all the time.

Yes, it is her title and yes, other British (citizen) royals use them all the time. There’s no denying through that there are plenty of Americans who bristle at people using foreign royal titles to assert their status in the US, since it quite determinedly hasn’t had royals since 1776.

(I tend to not be very bothered by this, to be honest - I figure that since she’s not getting involved in British politics, its for the Americans to decide if they are happy with her actions or not. Using her title in the US is one thing that may very well get people’s backs up though!)

I didn’t say she shouldn’t use it. I was just pointing out that it is her title. Not her married name. And also that she is not “Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex”. That would be a title used after divorce. She is just “the Duchess of Sussex”.

SF uses hers all the time

And she hasn't been married to the person through who she got her title... for over 25 years

I have worse than that for you, Roussette. Her Majesty the Queen Mother kept using her title for 50 years after her husband died!

If you don’t remarry, your title stays your title, though the style will change slightly as smileys says.

Lol Serenster exactly!

No idea where this married name thing has come from!

I have never seen anyone complain about Sarah using hers! Apart from me complaining maybe

why2why said:

"I think people are forgetting the US is not the UK. Meghan can call who ever she wants as a private US citizen. She is not using her title HRH. She is using her married name Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. "

posters are correcting that misunderstanding.

As a private citizen, she is either Meghan Markle or Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor.

She is the duchess of Sussex, she is married to the duke of Sussex.
Maybe she should just call herself princess,

'There’s no denying through that there are plenty of Americans who bristle at people using foreign royal titles to assert their status in the US, since it quite determinedly hasn’t had royals since 1776'

Yes. Tone deaf as is their MO.

Fwiw I also cringe at Fergie pushing the Duchess thing but she hasn't been quite so critical about all things royal has she so it doesn't jar quite as much.

@SallyLockheart

why2why said:

"I think people are forgetting the US is not the UK. Meghan can call who ever she wants as a private US citizen. She is not using her title HRH. She is using her married name Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. "

posters are correcting that misunderstanding.

As a private citizen, she is either Meghan Markle or Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor.

She is Meghan, Duchess of Sussex as a private citizen. Opinions about how she should style herself is neither here nor there. When Diana became an ordinary citizen, she was Diana, Princess of Wales rather than Princess Diana of Wales.

Beside opinions about what her name is as a pet citizen, can any of you show categorically that she can’t be Meghan, Duchess of Sussex in a private capacity?

Once again there will be wailing about stripping her of title. Once again that will go nowhere because there is no title to be stripped.

So when Meghani is named as a member of:

"The 30-minute-long panel, titled "Minding the Gap", will take place on November 9 at 6pm GMT (2pm ET).

The description of the event read: "How can women reach economic and professional parity?"

will she extol the virtues of getting ahead and getting heard by marrying a prince and obtaining a royal title as a way of getting ahead? ie not using her own name, married or otherwise?

Yeah, and she's only done it for 25 years. And has, of course, done an OW interview and written a book about her time in the RF and the men in grey suits plotting against her

why2why. you talk about names and titles but don't able to distinguish between the two - they are different.

'The description of the event read: "How can women reach economic and professional parity?" will she extol the virtues of getting ahead and getting heard by marrying a prince and obtaining a royal title as a way of getting ahead? ie not using her own name, married or otherwise?'

Yes. What an achievement!

So you're saying she only got married to Harry to get a royal title. What an unpleasant comment.
Very nasty.
Can't be arsed to report it.
Let it stand.

I didn’t say she only married Harry to get a royal title. That is what you have stated - what an unpleasant comment and assumption to make that she didn’t marry for love.

I can see exactly what you said. Plain as anything

@Roussette

I can see exactly what you said. Plain as anything

You yourself Rousette , have just been listing names and then putting "yuk" in brackets after the names. That could be construed as being very unkind and perhaps a bit nasty.