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?

Once Harry's book comes out he will be even less popular. Apparently they are going through it to remove negative remarks about the queen as even they recognise it would be going too far.

They as a couple, aren't relevant despite the constant attention seeking, and gradually they can fade into the background and make their own life without constant reference to their royal connections. Hopefully they have a peaceful fulfilling life in America, and stop the constant RF sniping.

The lie about the wedding is two fingers to very supporter who watched the wedding on the streets, on TV, who travelled to see them.

Harry of all people should be able to understand how titles/inheriting titles works.

Exactly. She might be forgiven for incorrectly spouting her mouth off on a topic on which she’s done zero research. For Harry? It’s literally in his DNA. On both sides of the family; he’s grandson of a Queen and an Earl.

Yes, many people say 'married' even if it's not legal, @WimpoleHat . The problem comes from the fact that people in the UK (and I notice this being non-UK) simply cannot conceive of anyone saying they were 'married', even if the marriage isn't legal. In some countries and traditions, the word married is used to denote exchanging vows, regardless of whether paper was signed. In Meghan and Harry's eyes, they were 'married' when they exchanged vows in a private ceremony (the Archbishop denied they were legally married but 'wouldn't comment' on a private ceremony). It is how they see it. Simply because people in the UK don't understand it, doesn't mean they lied. Many people have corrected this 'they lied' myth on here over the last few years, over and over again. I'm surprised people are still running with it, tbh. In their eyes they were 'married'. It doesn't make it a 'lie'.

It’s the difference between heir apparent and heir presumptive. William and George can only get nearer to the throne. Harry, Charlotte and Louis can get further and further away.

There was no 'lie', just an inability of UK people to conceive that people just may consider vows, in the absence of a registry, to be more meaningful to them.

Ah yes. Apologies - I missed ‘a’ King’s grandchildren………

I think H&M will do a 360° turn and come back to the fold. They will now see how important the RF is to the world in particular, M, and H will follow along.

It wasn't a legal wedding so it did NOT have to take place in an authorised venue.

It was two people exchanging vows.

It was not a lie, just racist cultural ignorance.

I’m not a regular follower of all this (came up in Active Threads) but this isn’t true, and I can see how the narrative gets framed easily when this stuff is repeated. I read that Charles and William went back to his house and Harry ate at Balmoral with the rest of his family. We have no reason to know why that happened but it’s entirely possible given that happened over the next few days that this was a working dinner for those two. Or that they didn’t want to be with Harry - who knows? But he didn’t sit by himself away from the other members of his family.

@CatsandFish but neither H nor M are from a culture where this is thing.

Really well put.

The thing about the titles was they were told that once Charles becomes King, they wouldn't have titles, even though though would have. That Charles had decided to remove them. People, once again, misinterpret what they said to mean they thought they'd get the titles while the Queen was still alive. No, they meant after the Queen died. People rush to attack them and get it wrong on at least two things (wedding and the titles).

Having said that… of course Harry and Charlotte and Louis can also get nearer, as they all have just done.

But William and George can only move one way in this game if snakes and ladders.

@Vapeyvapevape It is a thing for many African American families (Meghan is African American).

Regardless, where I am people here say they're married when they aren't legally (DeFacto), why people in the UK make such a massive deal about what people decide to use to define themselves, I don't know. It's utterly bizarre. They felt they were married on exchanging vows (which is a common feeling/belief in many societies going back decades - that you are wed the moment you exchange vows - the paperwork is just the routine stuff, not meaningful compared to the vows), and that is their right to feel that. No one has the right to call someone a liar just because that person is too narrow-minded to think outside their culture.

The Palace are superb at PR and can work anyone's image even if it means playing the long game, slowly working on it for years. Camilla being the perfect example.

But I don't even think they could turn it round for Meghan she did so much damage with that interview.

Harry on his own yes they could probably work people around for him alone.

I think that if they hadn't rejected royal life, then Harry would have been made the Duke of Edinburgh. But seeing as they are non working royals, then the firm really needs to address the line of succession. They can't have somebody who rejects the life, married to somebody who doesn't understand the life, being King and Queen one day, if anything happened to the Wales family.

I think if anything H & M are more important now as they are now the King's son and his wife, but they have said so many hurtful things on tv, and a lot of lies, that there is no coming back from this.

It is their prerogative to walk away from royal life but they do need to understand that it was their choice and that they lose everything that goes with the royal lifestyle such as titles, patronages, security, money etc. Their children now get the titles that go with being the King's grandchildren, but if they detest royal life so much, why do they want titles for their children?

They left so that they could make money out of themselves, so let them go back to the USA and carry on with that, but they can't do it under an HRH umbrella.

He wouldn't have been made DoE. But he would have had an important role to play.

On marriage Edward was apparently offered Earl of Wessex or Duke of Cambridge. He wanted Wessex with the view to getting DoE when it became available. Hence Prince William got Cambridge.

I'd like to see Charles stick with the plan of giving DoE to Edward

They have publicly fallen out with the King and his heir. They never slated the Queen or Prince Phillip they probably thought they had a few more years with the Queen as head of the RF.

They aren't working royals anymore. All of the heads of state came to pay their respects to the Queen and the institution of the RF not Harry and Meghan who have chosen to leave.

Interms of succession Harry is a step closer. His children are now titled. He's slightly more important although it's likely nothing will change

I imagine it's because Boohoo and Primark have even lower prices and H&M straddles that tricky area of low quality so the clothes don't last but not quite cheap enough because they're trying to be ethical.

Oh, did I misunderstand?

On marriage Edward was apparently offered Earl of Wessex or Duke of Cambridge. He wanted Wessex with the view to getting DoE when it became available. Hence Prince William got Cambridge.

Not fully accurate @Dinoteeth
Edward wasn’t offered Earl of Wessex - he asked for the title after a character in Shakespeare In Love.

I think a lot will depend on how snippy the new book H and M are promoting is. I am not sure Charles is fully convinced that he needs to ratify the HRH status of their children, but if I were him and the book is as full of the rumour and whinge predicted , then I would be inclined to deny the HRH status, which of course would push the H and M narrative further down the rankings.

I don’t understand to be honest why H and M are so convinced that a title and HRH status would protect their children, I would have thought that for some people it would be painting a target on their backs , why do you need, or want, a title in a country that prides itself on democracy and bettering yourself by your own efforts and hard work.

Think about it - how many people even know the names of Princess Margaret’s children, or eve remember their names?🤷🏼‍♀️

@CatsandFish It was culturally ignorant of Meghan not to realise that a marriage in the U.K. is a legal act. In fact if conducted by the highest officer of the Church of England ( which the archbishop is ) it is a sacred Christian act.

She should have realised , and he certainly should, that this would be grossly insulting to the U.K. people especially as they had paid for her public wedding. Incidentally the Archbishop had also made a dispensation for her to be married in church as both a divorcee and a convert. (Charles and Camilla only had a blessing and had a registry office wedding and Anne had to go to Scotland to be married)

The Archbishop literally had to make an official public statement denying this ‘wedding’ had happened so seriously is it taken so it’s not just the press tittle tattling. Harry should have realised the hassle and embarrassment this could cause.