Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family
Original poster

Why have Harry and Meghan chosen titles for their DC?

138 replies

ReUseRepeat · 13/04/2023 21:54

I genuinely don't understand their reasoning behind them decision to make Archie and Lilibet Prince and Princess - they hate the monarchy, it drive Meghan to suicidal thoughts, in their doc they describe the commonwealth as Empire 2.0 etc etc.

Can someone please enlighten me?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Bluebells1970 · 14/04/2023 11:29

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

That's all those parents are interested in.

GettingThereCharleyBear · 14/04/2023 11:34

Why are they any different to all the other sponging royals? I love the idea that those in the UK are simply a better breed 🙄. They’re all the same - none of them in the least deserving of their status, power and wealth. The idea that H&M are only in it for the ££ while the others are living a life of dutiful servitude is so fucking laughable.

But that’s what the RF PR machine want the subjects to think - and man have they done a good job 🙄.

Isiteveningyet · 14/04/2023 11:40

I agree op, it’s an unusual decision, the parents do not need to use the titles as witnessed by other senior royals and can even reject them for them. For a couple who abhor the monarchy and wanted their kids to grow up normally, they could easily have not used but let the kids decide on adult hood.

the fact they didn’t is very telling. They also use their own titles exclusively as well. As in everything is issued from the duke or Duchess of Sussex.

I think everyone realises though thay all they have is being royal, it’s how they make their money and they generally are huge attention seekers. So in that regard teeing rheir kids up like this is not a surprise.

custardbear · 14/04/2023 12:08

StellaGibson2022 · 13/04/2023 22:07

I think future proofing income streams.

(Tbh - I cant get over their decision to use the Queen’s nickname for their daughter (Lilibet) when they had probably caused a lot of personal upset in the grandparent/child relationship. Appreciate no one owns a name and all that but it is quite unique!)

Completely agree!

Viviennemary · 14/04/2023 12:12

As the rules stand it's their birthright to have the titles. And up to the parents wheter they use them or not. Then the child's choice at the age of 18. Since Harry views his experiences as a royal in a very negative light it is a bit baffling as to why he chose to inflict the same on his children.

gettingoldisshit · 14/04/2023 12:13

Creamcrackersandricecakes · 13/04/2023 22:42

Yawn.
As the grandchildren of the reigning monarch, they are automatically prince and princess.
But I suspect you already knew that and this is just yet another boring, goady thread to bring all the frothing Meghan haters out.
Jeez...have a day off.

They didn't have to accept the titles on behalf of their children! They did because they are a pair of attention seeking hypocrites!

NurseCranesRolodex · 14/04/2023 12:17

StellaGibson2022 · 13/04/2023 22:07

I think future proofing income streams.

(Tbh - I cant get over their decision to use the Queen’s nickname for their daughter (Lilibet) when they had probably caused a lot of personal upset in the grandparent/child relationship. Appreciate no one owns a name and all that but it is quite unique!)

Agree, absolutely it's future proofing. This more than anything else has proved their motives. It's so cynical and says everything about who MM is. H will be back at some point, sadly and full of regret. He's easily led but will probs have his DC at state events in future, he' ll be using his HRH Prince title too.

custardbear · 14/04/2023 12:17

GettingThereCharleyBear · 14/04/2023 11:34

Why are they any different to all the other sponging royals? I love the idea that those in the UK are simply a better breed 🙄. They’re all the same - none of them in the least deserving of their status, power and wealth. The idea that H&M are only in it for the ££ while the others are living a life of dutiful servitude is so fucking laughable.

But that’s what the RF PR machine want the subjects to think - and man have they done a good job 🙄.

At least the RF in the UK do all the boring drudgery that H&M no
Longer wanted to do - they'd be doing all the glitzy glam stuff of course

GettingThereCharleyBear · 14/04/2023 13:02

@custardbear but most of their lives aren’t boring or drudgery are they - not compared to what the vast majority of us have to do to get by. If they think attending a state banquet is boring drudgery then they need to check their fucking privilege.

michaelmacrae · 14/04/2023 15:09

It's about fairness and acknowledging that the kids are part of the family and in the line of succession, regardless of wherever the parents have chosen to live or whatever their own issues are with the family.

H&M don't have the right to take that away from them, it's their birthright, they are separate people from H&M and can do with it what they please when they're older. I don't know why this is so hard to understand?

AskMeMore · 14/04/2023 15:29

They explained why. They said they wanted the titles as it is up to the children as adults to decide whether they want to reject them. They did not want to take that choice away.

wordler · 14/04/2023 15:51

The bit that is hypocritical for me is they didn’t use the lesser titles the children were already entitled to before the Queen died. Which made it look as though they had decided to give the kids a more normal ‘civilian’ life in the USA.

LadyMuckingabout · 14/04/2023 16:07

The children would be able to choose to use the titles when they came of age. Their choice. This is H&M’s choice. I can’t imagine how it is possible to spin it as anything other than opportunism to use the titles now (as per Christening announcement).

Whaeanui · 14/04/2023 16:17

There are plenty of ‘titled’ people living in the US & around the world who are officially known by those names but don’t use them day to day. If they were to take them away now then the children would have the focus on them as adults if they chose to adopt them for whatever reason. People would do to them what you’re doing to their parents. Asking endless meaningless questions about the use of their titles despite it having no bearing on your life. There isn’t a list of jobs or roles to perform before using them. They are theirs from the moment their grandfather became King. Their parents have chosen to give them the easier option of dropping it later if they wish.

purpledalmation · 14/04/2023 16:31

AskMeMore · 14/04/2023 15:29

They explained why. They said they wanted the titles as it is up to the children as adults to decide whether they want to reject them. They did not want to take that choice away.

But the titles are theirs regardless. No matter what age they decide to opt into them. They could have made a choice as adults. The point people are making is their parents have removed that choice.

caringcarer · 14/04/2023 16:36

To cash in on them.

AskMeMore · 14/04/2023 16:48

But lots of Royals use their titles. Do they cash in on them too?
(Actually I think they do)

michaelmacrae · 14/04/2023 16:54

If the kids grow up without titles now they will get criticised for 'wanting' to use them at 18. At least this way they have them without using them every day, and so can carry on this way when they're older, or do away with them completely if they choose. H&M have given them the choice.

michaelmacrae · 14/04/2023 16:55

LadyMuckingabout · 14/04/2023 16:07

The children would be able to choose to use the titles when they came of age. Their choice. This is H&M’s choice. I can’t imagine how it is possible to spin it as anything other than opportunism to use the titles now (as per Christening announcement).

They said they weren't going to use the titles every day. All they've done is assert their children's rights.

Viviennemary · 14/04/2023 16:56

Even the royals without titles cash in. I was a bit shocked to,see how Zara and Mike Tindall earn. Millions a year. Not overkeen on those two.

Newyeardietstartstomorrow · 14/04/2023 17:01

I find it odd too. You can't cherry pick the privilege of the titles whilst activity trying to discredit them and distance yourself from the institution.

Whaeanui · 14/04/2023 17:03

You can't cherry pick the privilege of the titles

That doesn’t make sense? They are automatic titles when their grandfather became King. They don’t need to do anything to have them.

If they chose to remove them from the children they absolutely would have been criticised for denying their British heritage. Same thing with coronation decision.

michaelmacrae · 14/04/2023 17:04

How are H&M supposed to 'cash in' on their children’s titles anyway?

Puzzledandpissedoff · 14/04/2023 17:07

If the kids grow up without titles now they will get criticised for 'wanting' to use them at 18

Why? AFAIK nobody's got anything against the kids, and unless they too go on to make fools of themselves I see no reason for anyone to criticise them for using titles they're entitled to

It would still be a pretty strange thing to do in the US though, so who knows - if they remain there they may even to come to them as an embarrassment

Anyway, as so many have said it's not about the children choosing but H&M choosing for them, and I've yet to see a rational explanation of that beyond the obvious

UWhatNow · 14/04/2023 17:07

They’re class A narcissists. What everyone else does is evil. What they do is righteous.