Queen's fury over naming of baby Lilibet: Aide says monarch was 'as angry as I'd ever seen her' after Harry and Meghan claim

[royalwatcherr]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12962667/queen-elizabeth-II-fury-prince-harry-meghan-markle-baby-lilibet.html

I'm not surprised, choosing that name was so brazen

I don't need your say so to do so and yes I have.

Spot on.

When you reflect back then yes this is what happened. It's shocking really.

Yes it is called respect.

Is that photo at the top the one where Harry told Meghan to be quiet on the balcony when she was talking through the event?

As I always maintain on a mn name thread No one owns a name or gets to veto its use.
They liked Lilibet. Apparently queen wasn’t bothered. It subsequently became another embellished and manufactured story in the press

Who knows what's true but at the time I thought it was a poor choice, to use someone's very personal childhood nickname. You'd have to be very very close and have a conversation about it beforehand, if you wanted to do that. Can't Imagine that would have happened given the circumstances. You'd almost think it was yet another attention seeking move ..

Gosh, how prescient of the publishers to commission the book, the author to research and write it and for it to be published just in time to be in the press after the Epstein redactions were released. Which wasn’t known about more than a few weeks in advance.
**
Or, it’s just a coincidence in timing.

Why did they pick this story in particular from a book about Charles?

For the same reason as usual probably. A useful distraction from what is going on elsewhere - say, with another RF member. Or, at best, because there isn’t much interest in a book about Charles or the serialised version of it, and this story is most likely to raise some interest.

It’s Manufactured Outrage to make a buck. Or as David Olusoga calls it, The Outrage Industrial Complex.

Either way they’ve ultimately done a disservice to the Queens memory, imo.

Firstly it's not at all clear that HMQ "wasn't bothered". The fact the Palace didn't comment on H&M's claims and threats of legal action that she was "supportive" yet reputable news outlets such as the BBC refused to pull the story that they had not asked for her blessing to use this name is highly suggestive.

Secondly, the "no one owns a name" is true and oft quoted on MN but it doesn't make it a nice thing to use a name when you suspect or know it might cause upset.

Lastly there is a significant upping the ante in selecting a very personal nickname from a person whose life's work you've denigrated "service is universal" and whose family you've slagged off in order to cash in on the connection in comparison to situations such as "I'm pregnant and my best friend called her DD Anna when she knew that was my preferred name".

Of course they may simply have liked the name but it was a crass choice regardless of what HMQ thought about it and not a good one when you're in the midst of being criticised for monetisation of your heritage irrespective of the hurt/fallout. Fuel to the fire but they seem determined to keep turning up the heat whilst claiming victimhood for being burned.

If she is to be known as Lilli then just call her that (it's a lovely name and I very much like Archie also) because the only other reason to use Lilibet is to stress the family relationship - one which whatever you think of either the RF or H&M was in absolute tatters.

As is they have given their DD a name that will bring to mind for many people how shabbily they treated HMQ in her final years.

It was not a good choice, but the last few years have demonstrated they have a profound inability to read the room (or maintain any semblance of credibility over "their truth").

And posters clutching pearls about comments being mean to Lilli are off the mark. Push the ire back at the people who chose a name that had the certainty possibility of being perceived controversial/disrespectful.

Lastly there is a significant upping the ante in selecting a very personal nickname from a person whose life's work you've denigrated ...

You really don't "get" how Harry might have felt he was carrying on her work modernizing the monarchy?

Sorry, duplicate.

😂😂😂😂

He left the Royal Family. He wasn't interested in "modernising" it only monetising his connection to it.

Being "modern" to be fair was quite hard in respect to his children when his Aunt beat him to the punch before he was born in refusing titles for Zara and Peter Phillips.

Honestly what I don't get is this slavish devotion to H&M that means defending every proven lie and spin they put out in based on the catalyst they were told "no" to being half in/half out (don't forget they loved the RF prior to that) and have not stopped acting like toddlers since in response.

Or the bloody whataboutary. It's perfectly normal to hold a view that H&M have behaved poorly and also think Andrew is beyond the pale and have doubts about monarchy (and it's transparency - or lack of re: power/influence and finances).

Most people aren't "on a side". They just see a general shit show where nobody comes out of it looking great (even HMQ re: her pandering to Andrew for all of her life).

Well I see that Harry and Megan. The great self proclaimed fighters against media untruths , have as yet put out no statement or no refutal of the claim. Generally they act very very fast, lightening speed. So I doubt they will refute it,

and if they don’t refute it, then it validates its true, she was pissed about it, because let’s face it, Harry makes threats and corrects anything he thinks puts him in a bad light, or is even remotely untrue. And this impacts his child. But silent they remain….

Given it came from a couple who had felt the need to publicly clap back at statements made by the Queen herself that she didn’t own the word “Royal” and that “service is universal” it’s also quite possible that it was a vindictive choice to show her she didn’t own her family nickname either

I really think this bears repeating. The level of public disrespect by a family member to the Queen was unprecedented. They say that past behaviour is the best predictor of future behaviour.

It also bears repeating that not one of the Queen’s granddaughters or great-granddaughters even has the name Elizabeth as a first name. Occam’s Razor suggests that it wasn’t the done thing within the family.

I can certainly believe that the Queen was upset about her childhood nickname - a link to the past and to her parents, sister and husband - being used. However, surely anyone can understand being upset at it being made public that you were supportive of something when you weren’t. Especially if you weren’t even consulted, or best case scenario, you went along with a fait accompli from a loved grandchild with whom you had a strained relationship because you were sensible enough to accept that ‘nobody owns a name’. The Queen was elderly and recently widowed. I think a bit of emotion in all the circumstances is pretty understandable.

I think that's probably right, @Sussurations . People are trying to simplify this to a grandchild's name issue, but there's context, a whole complicated back story and there was estrangement, anger and resentment going on which makes the choice - such a very specific and personal one - a very odd one.

The Brandreth account is not necessarily incompatible with the Hardman account. The Queen may have had a negative immediate reaction in private, followed up by a public facing positive one. And by public, I include when addressing her family. I imagine there was a lot of private anger/frustration/exasperation on the part of the Queen regarding her family - probably expressed to Philip. But juggling trying to be a supportive mother, head of the family firm and head of state meant she had to be outwardly diplomatic - even with her own family. The two writers have two different sources who saw two different things.

The real key to her feelings is the refusal of the palace to back up Harry sabre rattling libel.

I also think it's possible the whole race accusations would have left the queen very wary of how she handled the information that they were going to use her nickname for their daughter. An outright refusal could have blown up in all manner.

It’s also quite possible that it was a vindictive choice to show her she didn’t own her family nickname either.

I can absolutely see this.

Oh I have seen a couple of commentators say refusal of the name would have proven racism. It’s utterly disgusting.

BreadinCaptivity, Sussurations (and Serenster)

Thank you for your great posts, which express the situation perfectly. Yes, it's funny that so many people on here cling to the 'nasty people who froth at H & M' when no-one is frothing - just expressing dismay at their behaviour since their £27m nuptials.

They've (either deliberately or through stupidity) denigrated the monarchy and Harry's family, alienated his brother and sister-in-law in a way that will be impossible to mend and made vague (and therefore hard to refute) accusations of racism which they later retracted - so that's OK, then. Meghan is NC with nearly all her relations and now Harry is too. Funny, that.

How could they ever imagine in whatever fantasy world of LA they live, that their behaviour wouldn't impact the Queen (and the DofE) as well as the family members they really wanted to attack? Whatever posters here think of the Queen, she believed in her role and had dedicated her life to it, only to see it trashed by her grandson. Are they so naive that they think the Oprah interview would be OK with the Queen? To me it seemed an act of terrible spite.

It seems that Harry expected to keep his (real? imagined?) special relationship with the Queen despite his choices, and genuinely believed she would accede to his demands in terms of money and the role he wanted for himself and Meghan. I don't know why he thought that would work after what he'd done. So to then use a very personal, family nickname (and btw - to copyright it so no-one else could use it!!) seems unbelievably crass - off the scale in terms of insensitivity.

Their only selling point is their RF connection and they've wrecked it. I suppose by trying to push the connection with their children they are hoping to keep things going in the future. It's not about 'hating H & M' - it's about cringing at their tone-deafness and...well, vulgarity is the only word I can find to express the way they have monetised their RF connections.

And they've chosen to live in a republic, so why, why do they think being royal and using their silly titles will cut any ice, I just don't know.

To be honest, if this was the thing that made her angrier than anything else-maybe she lacked a little perspective, no?

Good points, @CoffeeCantata . I don't know why people either don't read the article, or don't understand all the context with what was happening at the time. When this occurred, a lot had gone on, a lot was going on, and M&H had poor relationships with the family.

This was the official birth announcement from Harry and Meghan, they called her Lili.

On Sunday morning, Meghan and Harry announced that their daughter was born on Friday at 11:40 a.m. in Santa Barbara, California. The couple’s spokesperson revealed in a statement, “She weighed 7 lbs 11 oz. Both mother and child are healthy and well, and settling in at home. Lili is named after her great-grandmother, Her Majesty The Queen, whose family nickname is Lilibet. Her middle name, Diana, was chosen to honor her beloved late grandmother, The Princess of Wales.” The new baby is Queen Elizabeth’s eleventh great-grandchild and is now eighth in line for the British throne, behind her brother Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, her father, her grandfather Prince Charles, her uncle Prince William, and her cousins Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis.

CurlewKate

if this was the thing that made her angrier than anything else-maybe she lacked a little perspective, no?

No.
I don't think it's been claimed anywhere* that it made her "angrier than anything else".

*Well, apart from people posting here.

Angrier than one aide had personally seen her doesn’t equate to angrier than anything else ever. A moment of heightened emotion from an elderly, potentially ill and recently widowed woman at the end of her tether with her stupid arse of a grandson, does not equate to lacking perspective. It’s the sort of straw that breaks the camel’s back that people used to holding it together all the time can have from time to time.

Thank you, @LaMarschallin .
Very odd that people keep repeating this.