Prince Archie & Princess Lilibet?

[susan12345678]

Surely not?

I look forward to Harry's announcement explaining that they will decline prince and princess titles for their DC, in keeping with their decision to stand down as senior royals and live private lives in the US.

Anything less under the circumstances would be rank hypocrisy

So do not say threads were positive.

I think that poster is referring to the titles of the threads, not the content itself. Cause I have no idea what they are on about.

H&M threads are full of vitriol and are apparently 'balanced' if there are a few that do not call her names, but go on with massive 'criticism' and other snide remarks laced with hatred.

Please provide, oooh, say 5 links to five different occasions where Meghan has referred to herself as "a princess."

Should be extremely easy if it's "frequent" as you claim.

Nonsense. H&M threads are only deleted for two reasons, first if they descend into bunfights, and second if they are full of racial slurs. I've often noticed that if haters make claims that are obviously untrue and get called on those untrue claims (eg asked for proof they cannot provide) the usernames posting the, frankly, lies, will often disappear and suddenly usernames brand new to MN will appear and start flooding the thread with talk guideline-breaking posts, in what appears to be a deliberate effort to get their own threads deleted. First to expunge evidence of them getting their arses handed to them, second so they can play the victim and whinge about censorship.

The vast, vast majority of H&M threads are not deleted even if they are pure hate and started solely to bash Meghan, which would be instantly deleted as "not in the spirit" if it was any other female celebrity.

Libellous posts accusing Meghan and even her mother of outrageous things have been reported yet not deleted.

Yet a thread mildly critiquing Kate for wearing expensive jewellery to meet NHS nurses was full of outraged comments calling the thread "spiteful" and was mass-reported to the point MNHQ were forced to delete it before it had even reached page 2. Another thread asking if anyone had ever met Kate or Meghan was deleted almost immediately just because a couple of people said they'd met Kate and that she was very thin.

Andrew threads are full of posters defending him. The current Andrew thread is full of comments calling anti-Andrew posters "spiteful", "pathetic" "hysterical frothing" accusing them of "obsessive vilification" and multiple comments about "pitchfork-wielding rabble".

Past threads about the rape charges were full of posts defending him, claiming photos were fake (photos not even Andrew has claimed are fake!), accusing Virginia of being a liar and a gold digger, comments saying "Virginia made it all up for attention", comments like "17 girls know exactly what they're doing when they throw themselves at wealthy older men."

Last week Andrew sent out a wide press release announcing that he's taking in the Queen's dogs, to try to score good PR points off her death. The rehabilitation of Andrew PR attempt might be a lot more subtle than H&M's Oprah interview but he has hardly gone away!

By “that poster” do you mean me? You’re very welcome to use my name or tag me.

No I’m not referring to the titles only and not the content, I’m not an idiot.

I also specifically said about the ‘positive’ threads: “or at least started out positive or was intended to be”. it is going to be hard to fine ANY thread in here about any member of the RF that doesn’t have at least one negative post in it. Most of the MM threads involve arguing between posters pro and anti MM.

Having a brief recce of recent threads (NB, in the last few pages on the royals boards):

there’s a thread about H&M’s children coming over that was mostly neutral/positive

A thread having sympathy for MM that was intended to be positive and on a casual glance was at least over 50% so.

A positive MM thread was mainly positive until towards the end of the 1000-post thread.

The PP I was responding to was strongly implying, if they didn’t outright say, that lots of current threads were started to criticise MM. That’s untrue. It would be unfair and duplicitous to include those threads that were intended to be positive or neutral and start out that way.

The only way to ensure no criticism of MM or anyone else in the royal family is to No start a thread about them. You can’t stop people replying to discuss with a viewpoint you find critical.

A positive MM thread was mainly positive until towards the end of the 1000-post thread

That was such a welcome thread and really worth being on, as there was lots of interesting discussion despite some very angry anti MM posters

It's been the only one since years ago we attempted positive threads.
However I can't see another one happening for a while, them just being in the UK inflames some posters too much

There's been very many threads whilst not entitled "Isn't Meghan awful" are started with the sole purpose of a hopeful pile on.

The couple have chosen to do publicity things like The Cut interview MM recently did and their netflix contract etc so they are bound to get a lot of publicity from that. Prince Andrew had a huge amount when he did the ill advised TV interview.

May be they get negative publicity because they say things that are not true or are unwise? I certainly don't hate anyone and was an MM fan until things that were said, on checking were not correct and I cannot understand why she did not check them before saying them given the number of people around to advise her.

There's been very many threads whilst not entitled "Isn't Meghan awful" are started with the sole purpose of a hopeful pile on.

I’m sure there are. But not all.
This thread for example appears to have been started out of genuine sympathy for Meghan. You can tell by looking at several of the OP’s posts in the thread. And it’s a thread with a lot of sympathy for MM, as well as posts by people who are sympathetic towards her.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/the_royal_family/4631928-public-members-rude-to-meghan

My post was to @Roussette

Sorry made a stupid typo by leaving out a word:

“And it’s a thread with a lot of sympathy for MM, as well as posts by people who are sympathetic towards her.”

Should be:

“And it’s a thread with a lot of sympathy for MM, as well as posts by people who are not sympathetic towards her.”

Yes. But it takes nerves of steel to post on some threads 😂
I can't scroll back on this particular one as I'm on a mob
We need more positivity personally speaking

And this thread has a goady-looking title but the OP specifically asks for it not to be a bashing thread, and she had a genuine question. The thread is thoughtful and factually based and neutral, with only 3-4 ‘negative’ posts. So although it might look critical, it isn’t. It also includes a post by someone who misunderstood (she later explained) and said she wasn’t sure what it had to do with the RF, but she thinks H&M are less important know because they’re “fast fashion” and we’re all aware of the environmental impact of that now

www.mumsnet.com/talk/the_royal_family/4635581-why-are-hm-less-important-now?page=2

Early days, there's only just over 200 posts here

I know from experience how it can degenerate into the usual stuff

I’ll be watching to see if mysterious accounts suddenly pop up on there with lots of negativity

My point about that thread was it might appear “bashing” by the title but it’s absolutely not. And 200 posts is a fair amount, longer than sone other threads in this section. And the OP’s Q has been answered repeatedly so not much more to say on there.

Sorry I got confused and thought you were talking about the last thread I linked to @Roussette but I can see you meant this one, although I’m not sure why, unless you thought by “this thread” I meant this one rather than the one I linked to?

@TheWheeledAvenger as you are the one who wants the links about M referring to herself as a princess you can do the work yourself. You might want to take a look at the latest interview in The Cut for starters.

Thanks for admitting that you can't.

Clearly Meghan can't be that bad if people feel the need to make up lies to smear her.

@TheWheeledAvenger hahaha

Meghan is a princess of the United Kingdom so if she wanted to refer to herself as such that would be accurate. It is customary to be "styled as" the title bestowed by the monarch, hence Duchess of Sussex. Harry is no less a Prince as a result of receiving a Dukedom.

Children of a male line heir to the throne are officially Prince/Princess once their grandparent is in the throne. (The rule is different for the children of the heir of an heir, hence Prince George being born a prince; there had to be a special letter patent to give Charlotte and Louis the title otherwise they wouldn't have been born price/princess).

So Archie and Lilibet are now entitled to prince/princess as their grandfather is monarch. (I'm not sure if that comes with HRH or not as the parents are not working royals). But the parents have the choice to style them with those titles. If they don't the child can choose to use the title or not once adult. Prince Edwards children have always been male line grandchildren of a monarch and entitled to be Princess Louise and Prince James but their parents opted to style them with more modest titles. Now Louise is 18 it will be interesting to see if she opts to be known as a princess or not. But even if not, she still is one!

Also I don't agree it was "crass" for William and Kate's website to promptly update with their new titles. Prince of Wales in particular was specifically bestowed by the King the day after the queen's passing. If they had not updated it, many would have said it was crass to ignore the express wishes of the new monarch.

Me neither. It was entirely accurate and it will assist the many people who wanted to know how the titles changed with the Queen's passing. I would have actually seen it as sloppy website/social media/PR maintenance work if they'd let it stay outdated for days.

That's how hereditary monarchy works. It's pretty much the entire point of it. One certainly doesn't have to approve, but if there's a problem, it's with the system itself, not with the members following the established rules. They all know how it works, it's their job.

Me neither. It was entirely accurate and it will assist the many people who wanted to know how the titles changed with the Queen's passing. I would have actually seen it as sloppy website/social media/PR maintenance work if they'd let it stay outdated for days.

I wondered if, after watching King Charles’ first address, the KP team had been so quick to update their social media handles with “Cornwall & Cambridge”precisely because they were aware through William’s conversations with his father that he’d be imminently granted the Prince of Wales title. So they swiftly updated it for day 1 to mark his inheriting an important title and position before it got overtaken on Day 2.

I wish the IT dept at my hospital could channel a bit of that speediness. It drives me nuts that a warning about the SPRING time change still pops up when you log on. As the autumn time change creeps nearer it has now got to the point where I sometimes see it and think Gosh are the clocks going back already? I'm guessing they'll get round to changing it the week before the clocks go back. I don't understand how all the people in IT don't see it when they log in and think FFS and one of them SORT IT. 🤷‍♀️
So sorry for the derail rant but I think the Cambridge team did exactly the right thing. It's not as if William or Catherine will have rushed home to log in to their social media and update their new titles. 🙄

But why don't they use the same speed and professionalism to change A & L though?
After all, that's how it works. As you say.

Well first of all what A & L are titled isn’t an urgent issue upon the death of one monarch and the heir becoming King.

People around the world needed to know how to address William and Kate. That is an important consideration.

The parents can let their preferences be known at whatever point they wish.

A7L became entitled to use the style Prince/ss from the moment of their grandfather's accession. Just like Viscount Severn and Lady Louise were entitled from the moment of their birth.

But for those under age 18, the parents can choose not to use that style. And until the Sussexes choose what will be used for the rest of their DC's childhood, there is no change that can be made (I think it would be utterly wrong for the Palance to ignore precedent eg of the Wessexes and impose the change).

I expect relevant sites will be updated as required once the Sussexes make their wishes known