Confessions of a Female Flounder part 2

[foreverblowingbubbless]

I've embarrassed for Meghan saying that her arranging takeaway food on a plate is the same thing as what Figs Heather Hasson has done 😬

And I completely agree with this too, by the way.

I think what has become obvious, is that both H&M have become somewhat dependent on getting the headlines and the clicks. Whether positive or not. It's as if they just need to be talked about, as we're doing now. The idea of living a low key life is an anathema to them. So, stoke controversy, fan it's flames.

Meghan was pregnant with both children. Apart from the fact that she is very obviously pregnant, as others have stated above, to be in the Line of Succession children have to be heirs of the body. Surrogate pregnancies do not qualify. If anyone here thinks that the State and the Monarchy would be prepared to allow such a deception I have a bridge to sell you.

I really wish mumsnet would delete these ridiculous, easily debunked rumours but since they allowed disgusting rumourmongering about Catherine to stand I don't expect these will be removed either.

I was referring to posters in this thread. Not some internet sleuth obsessives who are pre-disposed to see things confirming their beliefs.

As MrsLeon says above, this level of subterfuge would not be possible within the monarchy. Those who say it is “normal” in Meghan’s world seem to be forgetting that she wasn’t in her world while she was pregnant with Archie.

As I said previously, the ridiculous shenanigans surrounding the time of Archie’s birth really didn’t help matters and I agree that she seems to be the one who is currently stirring this issue with her Instagram post. Nevertheless, this doesn’t mean that this speculation is acceptable in any way. There are children involved

This.

The stupid games they played around about Archie's birth have added unnecessary fuel to a fire that didn't need to be set. They shouldn't have released a statement that she had gone into labour when she had already given birth and was at home. It invited controversy.

The stupid games they played around about Archie's birth have added unnecessary fuel to a fire that didn't need to be set.

This was intended to generate maximum media frenzy. However, IIRC the media response around Archie and lili's births was relatively muted. There was nothing like the intense interest that surrounded Catherine. Sussex babies are not that important in the royal hierarchy. They are spares of spares. The only thing that sparks interest is their enfant terrible brand, it's mildly provocative, and in today’s polarising social media landscape, controversy does generate interest and engagement even if short lived. They're essentially like soap opera baddies.

It's a waste. Had they styled themselves as ‘just call me Harry’ kind of royalty, they could have carved out a discreet and distinct Californian arm of British royalty. But they didn’t handle it wisely.

I don’t for a second believe she wasn’t pregnant with both children. How she got pregnant and gave birth is less certain.

Frozen eggs, elective and timed C sections and sex selection from fertilised embryos to get that all important boy girl order seem
like distinct possibilities, and not at all
unusual in her world.

I don’t think anything would have stopped them if they had wanted to use a surrogate.

I just don’t believe they did.

Yes, and the multiple coat flipping in front of cameras so her bump was as visible as possible for a good photo, also fuelled the conspiracy theories that she needed to 'prove' she was pregnant,

She really has a very bizarre persona, her using Insta and doing shows to promote herself, has illuminated that to an even great extent.

I don't think the coat flipping was bizarre as much as it was Hollywood. It looked strange because of the context but if we bear in mind that she is first and foremost a celebrity then it isn't strange at all. That's just what celebrities do, make sure the photos look good because they last forever, rather than worry about how it looks at the time in person.

I wonder if Harry is happy with the mood board tribute to their 7 years of marriage. It doesn’t really seem to be address to him at all. There are some really intimate family images that she has leaked for the world’s consumption, knowing exactly how they would be blown up and picked apart. I can’t see how that really fits with his prioritising privacy above all else, especially for the children. I wouldn’t even be happy if my husband put something as personal as that on Facebook.

This is an excellent point. Carrying a royal baby would have been every bit as important to MM as producing one. She was proud of her pregnancies, and why wouldn’t she be?

The TIME 100 philanthropists list has just come out. Catherine and William included, MM and Harry not. There will probably be a new vision board appearing imminently about "showing up and doing good" with hugs.

I don't deny playing daft games with the Press in the name of "privacy" hasn't helped with speculation but I would compare "moon bump" with the Moon landings. The level of conspiracy and risk of disclosure if faked would have been astronomic (sorry) and they'd have never got key players (read the RF for the Soviets) to go along with it.

In the same way having Prince Charles (soon to be King) walk her down the aisle rather than her own mother, father, uncle or a long time close male friend.

I somehow think his opinion or thoughts on the matter are completely irrelevant to her.

"This is one of the issues I have some sympathy with Meghan about: not wanting to serve her baby up to the media. "

But she sold the exclusive rights to footage of Archie in public for the first time to Gayle King for prime-time American TV. Was that not serving her baby up to the media?

Of course it was.
She didn’t want to let the occasion pass without filling her pockets, nothing to do with privacy (or dignity, it seems).

I wouldn't call it a 'contract with the media'. It's plain common sense that if you are in the public eye, it's a sensible idea to have a good working relationship with the media. But obviously 'common sense' and Harry don't go together.

And I also wouldn't say Meghan 'rebelled' so much as tried to have things all her own way. As a working royal she was essentially a high level public servant, and as such can't only work with media outlets who fawn all over her. She and Harry try to do that now, but it doesn't work as you can't control the media, and attempting to do so only backfires. Which comes back to my previous point about how it makes perfect sense for famous people to cultivate a good working relationship with the media.

M did serve her baby up to the media but she ‘elevated’ it. Instead of the boring old steps of the Portland hospital, she had Windsor castle as a backdrop. Then she had the coup of having the only photo of the Queen meeting one of her dggc for the first time. HMQ must have wisened up because they weren’t allowed to do it with Lillibet. This was all about strengthening brand Meghan in the American market. Don’t forget that the announcement she was going into labour was 8am Eastern time in the US, so perfect timing for the presenters on the morning shows to get all excited and talk about it. I was in the US when Diana went into labour and remember watching the presenters on the Today show talking about and as a 9 year old, being bemused that they were so interested.

I agree with all of this and would add that it was also a bit of an insult to the public she was supposed to be serving that they tried to control how and which media outlets were told of Archie’s birth. It came across like they were trying to deceive the public as well as the media with their silly games. Much like with the getting married before the actual wedding stuff. I have to say, the birth announcement was when I first sort of went “eh?” about the Sussexes

@smilesy I agree. The timings of the announcement of the birth was weird. We had had three royal babies in the previous few years so we had seen how flawlessly the palace handled them so it looked strange. It was the first inkling we got that H and M didn’t want to do things the palace way.

Yeah, they thought they were being so clever 'getting one over' on the press, the 'institution' and the public. So we had that Tweet about her going into labour when Archie had already been born, and Harry making that 'announcement' in front of the horse stables in Windsor, for some reason. Then we had the 'reveal' two days later in front of hand picked photographers, all of whom were supposedly told to dress in suit and tie.

I have no problem with a postpartum woman not wanting to appear in front of cameras, but that's not what happened here. It was all about controlling access, which is one thing if you are a celebrity flogging baby photos to Hello, quite another if you're a public servant whose child is quite high up in the LoS.

And then they went on to show photos of Archie in the bath!!

And maximised the impact of the Platinum Jubilee celebrations when the worlds media were focused on the BRF and H&M released a series of photos of Lilibet for her first birthday including their guests and their children at their 'back yard' party. V smart of HMTLQ to refuse to be 'merched' by Markle in photos with Lili.

I wonder if any other extended family members attended that event? Was that when the Wales' were 'needed' in Cardiff?

They didn’t want to do things the palace way but they still expected 24/7 security , funding etc

“And then they went on to show photos of Archie in the bath!! “

Anyone else remembering the supporters shooting down anyone (including me) who dared suggest H and M would only use their DC for monetary gain?