Ok, I will answer your points.
The real issue with the royalists isn’t that Meghan married Harry, it’s that she didn’t play the submissive role they scripted for her.
You call yourself a journalist and Meghan calls her self a person with a degree in international relations. Do you understand the concept of hierarchy that is at the heart of the BRF? If not, you shouldn't be writing about it and Meghan shouldn't have been marrying into it and wanting to "hit the ground running" as a working royal.
They wanted Meghan to be obsessed with Kate, instead, it’s painfully clear it’s the other way around.
In 17 pages of this thread, not one single bit of proof has been provided that here is any truth in this. On the other hand, @Serenster has provided a whole board of pictures of Meghan in near identical outfits to ones Catherine wore first. So where is your proof?
According to her friend, Omid Scobie, in Finding Freedom, the only person Meghan wanted help from was Catherine. Why is that? Why would Meghan want Catherine to look after her mental health needs? Take her shopping? And if Catherine was obsessed with Meghan, wouldn't she have jumped at the chance of doing these things?
she wanted to he a Thundercats instead of a Royal.
Some journalist you are. She said she wanted to be She-Ra. Thundercats is an entirely different cartoon about cats. The clue is in the name.
reports of Kate being a big fan of Suits
The only "reports" come from Prince Harry. He's hardly a reliable witness, is he? And why would Meghan be Catherine's focus in Suits? She averaged 90 seconds per episode and was a minor character. The other female characters had much more prominent roles, much more interesting storylines, and much better wardrobes.
She wasn’t meant to stand beside Kate; she was meant to keep, to gush, to flatter, to validate Kate’s ego by acting beneath her.
Once again, do you understand the concept of hierarchy within the royal family? She was meant to observe those customs. As for the gushing etc, please do provide your proof.
Funny how they don't show this same reverence for Camilla, or any other consort in history.
Queen Camilla is becoming quite the national treasure, actually, particularly as she has carried on like a trooper to support her ill husband with all her engagements, and her sterling work on causes helping women who have suffered DV. Oh and her book club, which has quite the fan base.
Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, consort to King George VI, was also revered and beloved, especially by the wartime populace of London, whom she refused to abandon when she could have.
Princes Albert and Philip, consorts to Victoria and Elizabeth II respectively, were both revered in their own ways. Albert for his interest in industry, innovation and public health. Loads of places in London and beyond are named after him. Philip for his heroism during WW2 and his unfailing loyalty to his wife and years of public service. The Duke of Edinburgh Award was funded and is named in his honour.
Do you remember a woman called Diana who, pre divorce, would have been consort to the future King Charles. Do you know how revered she was?
Are you sure you are a journalist?