Why are H&M "less important" now?

[thefoggiest]

Let's not make this a bashing thread!
But in another thread yesterday it occured to me that the way I see it, I just get the sense that with the queens death they almost drop a rank. But that doesnt make sense? If anything shouldn't they now feel more important? Now that her majesty has gone it just feels like they become more distant somehow. Could it be to do with the passing of a generation, so they are no longer "the youth"?

By the way this isnt based on any facts or anything I've read, just a feeling on it. Can anyone explain? Am I right or wrong?

Our vicar still won't marry a divorcee if the marriage ended for no real reason 😳 he will conduct a "blessing" but not a full marriage.

Sometimes he will look into the reasons why the first marriage failed, so say your first husband had an affair and you left, then he may be inclined, but if you just seperate and both agreed without ill terms to end the marriage he won't do it. He asks for the terms that a divorce was issued.

I don't think he would have agreed to marry Meghan to Harry, as Meghan's first marriage ending was simply them "parting ways" amicably.

I can just imagine the uproar if Harry and Meghan had insisted on a smaller wedding
The DM headlines would go on about how the public were entitled to a big Royal wedding.
That the wedding of Princess Diana’s youngest son was something that so many people wanted to see
Look how the media went on about the lack of access to Archie’s christening . The couple were lambasted for wanting a more intimate affair.
it doesn’t matter what they do they will be criticised so they may as well do as they please.
The media’s obsession with them shows little sign of abating . They will always be of interest to people.

Sidenote- I must say that Meghan looked absolutely stunning at the funeral .
Very beautiful woman

The media don't generally have much access to Royal Christenings. Harry has deliberately stirred up curiosity by hiding his kids almost completely. I expect partly because the only picture of Lilibet shows that she is very like her maternal grandfather. Hard to show Archie, who looks like a much happier blend of his parents, alone in that case.

I disagree with your first point and in fact remember they were already being feted in the media for the possibility of having an intimate, private wedding.

Meghan did look beautiful at the funeral, she usually does!

Look how the media went on about the lack of access to Archie’s christening

But they’d set the precedent of the huge wedding at that point! To be fair, media have never had access to christenings, but they have had photos before and after. It was the whole “secret squirrel, we’re not saying who the godparents are” bit which did feel a bit discordant after the massive wedding which brought the whole of Windsor to a halt.

it doesn’t matter what they do they will be criticised so they may as well do as they please.

I do agree they are reaching the point where everything they do is wrong - but I don't think that was true at time of their wedding.

The media’s obsession with them shows little sign of abating . They will always be of interest to people.

They need better PR people - and possibly to go quiet for a bit regroup - but I think they're trying something else not quite life but to be US celebrities and to do that they need to leverage their royal connections.

Look how the media went on about the lack of access to Archie’s christening . The couple were lambasted for wanting a more intimate affair.

I think saying they were 'lambasted' is the usual melodramatic exaggeration here.

But in any case, lambasting or no, they did go ahead and have the christening the way they wanted.

If they both hated the idea of all tha designer dress, military uniforms, carriage ride, celebrity guests, historic church nonsense, why couldn't they have stood their ground?

What a strange comment about little Lillibet
So you are suggesting that
the reason that they hide Lillibet is because she looks like her maternal grandfather.
Now you yourself must know that your comment is ludicrous
You suggest that Harry has deliberately stirred up curiosity by hiding his children .
When the truth is that he is probably trying to protect his children particularly given some of the evil comments that have been made about them.
Employ some critical thinking ffs

Unfortunately when it comes to Harry and Meghan it is not exaggeration.

They could have stood their ground… yeah right

There is absolutely no proof whatsoever that Meghan (or Harry for that matter) didn't want the Dumbarton title because of the 'dumb' bit. You are posting tabloid conspiracist bs as if it were true.

And we wonder why they left the UK when people truly believe that rubbish.

It wasn’t “tabloid conspiracy bs” as you frame it, it was first reported in the Telegraph who went to the trouble of letting us know they had two sources for the comments, not just one.

It doesn’t matter what they do they will be criticised so they may as well do as they please.

I imagine that works for the Royal Family here too.

Big wedding with all various Hollywood celebrities attending = a spectacle that we never wanted.

Small private wedding =Likely to have been described as other members of the family had big public celebratory weddings. “That was not something that was offered to me”. (That last line was an actual quote of Meghan’s from the interview, just in relation to something else. Or perhaps it would have been “there was some real obvious signs before we even got married that this was going to be really hard” - again, another actual quote from their interview).

Nobody has been able to give a remotely convincing explanation as to why they were 'forced' to go along with official engagement announcements, BBC interviews, engagement portraits and of course a full royal wedding with all the usual pomp, ceremony and expense. All the while looking very pleased about the whole thing.

The obvious explanation is that they wanted it all very much.

Look how the media went on about the lack of access to Archie’s christening . The couple were lambasted for wanting a more intimate affair.

You’re ignoring here that at that point the couple had effectively entered into a full-on battle with the UK media. First they had said that the birth of their baby would be an entirely private event, against usual practice of the Royal family (and because they were negotiating an exclusive with a US broadcaster behind the scenes…). Then they backtracked and said fine, they’d announce when they the Duchess was in labour. They intentionally only made this announcement however after Archie had in fact been born, and as soon as the media started up their media cycle they dropped the news of his birth on their SussexRoyal instagram account.

You openly show two fingers to the press like that, is it any wonder they’re not exactly supportive of your next move?

I don't think my comment about Lilibet is that ludicrous. They may well want to hide/protect her for that reason, not just from her father's family and the gutter British press, but also from her mother's family. Who are well known to be pressing for access to grandchildren. Lilibet's parents have made it very obvious that for their own probably very good reasons they don't want M's father in contact. 'The little girl is the image of me etc..' coming from Grandpa Markle might not be what they are happiest to hear.

Well he did say his father had cut him off financially and had stopped taking his calls. This turned out to be untrue.

MM took a swipe at Kate which really riled William.

They accused someone in the RF as racist and have made no secret of their disliking and wanting nothing to do with the racist institution.

*Nobody has been able to give a remotely convincing explanation as to why they were 'forced' to go along with official engagement announcements, BBC interviews, engagement portraits and of course a full royal wedding with all the usual pomp, ceremony and expense. All the while looking very pleased about the whole thing.

The obvious explanation is that they wanted it all very much.*

Absolutely. And no reason why not; lots of people would like a wedding like the one they had. But to claim that they were some victims of a wicked system is bonkers. Yes - there would always have been media interest and attention; they couldn’t have been completely anonymous. But the “spectacle” element will have been entirely of their own choosing - so seems very odd (and yes, ungracious) to complain about it after the event.

'Cats andfish

Charles was THE heir to the throne when he had a very quiet private non-public wedding to Camilla.

Harry stopped being a credible heir to the throne long before he married Meghan.
William had already married and produced three children, all of whom precede Harry in line of succession.

BEFORE Harry married Meghan, he was already out of the picture as an heir to the throne. The line of succession AHEAD of him was

Charles, William, George, Charlotte and Louis

BEFORE HARRY MARRIED MEGHAN.

Any Brit knows this.

Gullible Americans can be excused for swallowing a load of fantasies fed to them by other Americans, and/or Walt Disney.

H&M are less important royals because they wanted to be less important royals surely.

Harry stopped being a credible heir to the throne long before he married Meghan.

Agreed. That was why there was so much hoo haa about the birth of Prince George - a child born to be king. I remember someone interviewing Prince Harry at the time and saying something a bit crap like “How does it feel now you definitely won’t be King?” and he laughed uproariously and said “Great!”. He’s no longer very important in succession terms.

Gullible Americans can be excused for swallowing a load of fantasies fed to them by other Americans, and/or Walt Disney.

Yes - I do find all the “King Harry” and “Queen Meghan” stuff that’s all over social media more than a little odd. Even if they’d had the absolute best experience ever in the royal family, that was never realistically on the cards.

I think this perception that they stepped down as working royals to be more private/out of spotlight is misleading and to be fair - I don't think they have explicitly said this was the reason either.

In my mind it was always about control. As working royals they lacked control which they hated. Especially as those in 'control' were always going to favour/prioritise more senior Royals. There was no opportunity to climb the pole either.

They had wanted a half in half out model - in return for becoming financially independent they wanted full control over what they did.

This was shot down by the RF and by that time it was too late to back track (they had made their own public announcement) - so they had no choice but to step down completely.

I don't think they thought through what this would mean in reality. I think they thought it would be like when Diana got divorced. Massive stardom but outside of the control of the 'grey men'.

In reality they are in this weird limbo where they are behaving like Royals (doing tours, being patrons, giving speeches) but are not Royals. But what else do they do now?

Yes I think they rushed the move to America without actually discussing and negotiating with the Queen, Charles etc

Maybe they had good reasons, or maybe they just wanted to present the Palace with a fait acomplis.

But they didn't seem to have a clear strategy for going forward and have ended up in a bit of a mess, no real role, estranged from Harry's family and very unpopular with many of the British public.

Hopefully they can all navigate a way forward.

Harry could definitely have had a quieter wedding, Edward and Sophie were married at Windsor and although it was televised it was much more low key: It was just another case of Harry wanting what William had .

But they didn't seem to have a clear strategy for going forward and have ended up in a bit of a mess, no real role, estranged from Harry's family and very unpopular with many of the British public.

Not really in a mess. I bet Meghan could go back to acting if she had to do. And Harry could see to things at home. Chickens etc.

I agree and it is clear all the Royals (apart from direct Heirs) have quite a lot of control over their weddings. Beatrice had a tiny affair whereas Eugenie had the full monte, completely with Windsor carriage ride etc.

Bea had apparently planned a much bigger affair, but then lockdown happened.

From what we've seen of it, it's one of my favourite royal weddings. Her dress choice was inspired.

If Harry and Meghan had wanted to do something similarly low key, with just a few photos released after the event, nobody could have stopped them.