Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to marry in the spring

[RosalindaA]

Certainly true that the British Royal Family "is like the family Meghan never had"! I hope her family wasn't as dysfunctional as the Windsors! Harry doesn't really do irony, so I think he probably just meant that they have a very structured timetable of coming together at certain places and certain times. Maybe Meghan's were a bit more scattered geographically or didn't meet up altogether very often like a lot of families these days.

Personally, I don't think it is any surprise that William and Harry both chose women who have strong mothers, Carole Middleton and Doria Radlan, who I think Harry said was "amazing" in their engagement interview. When they lost their equally amazing mother it must have been truly devastating and they never got a replacement. Whatever Diana's faults even her detractors never question her very close bond with her sons. She was irreplaceable for them and as a public figure. There really never has been anyone in the UK who even came close before or since in terms of her unique charisma and the way most of the public responded to her.

You only have to look at the reaction when she died, that's never happened before here in modern times and I can't think of any public figure here since who would have received the same level of mourning. When God forbid, the Queen passes away, there will be great sadness as she commands a huge amount of respect for always putting duty first, and because for most of us she has always been there. And because King Charles III and Queen Camilla will never be viewed in the same way. Tbh it will be very "awkward" and I am sure that there are more than a few in the establishment who send up a quiet prayer that the Queen will outlive Charles!

Personally, I think Camilla should just be the Princess Consort or something like that, but I'm pretty sure Charles will be stubborn on that point. I think he would be making a PR mistake and technically of course Camilla has every right to be crowned Queen. But as that crown descends onto her head, all people will be thinking is that Diana should be there, not her. I think Camilla's savvy enough to know that but Charles may hold out, unless he listens to good advice. And William needs to mature a bit and put some more work in.

As for Princess Michael, I'd like to give her the benefit of the doubt about the brooch but I can't, she has a history and she knew damn well that she would be photgraphed arriving. Still Meghan will have the last laugh on her, I wonder if there might not be enough room for certain people come the wedding day. My money's on the Obamas being invited definitely, and Melania being there but not her husband. Or maybe just a lower level US rep as it is only "the spare" getting married.
Hoping for the dress rumours to start soon :clap:

 

[Betty P]

From the Daily Fail , but the book is real:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5222321/Meghan-Markle-volunteered-Skid-Row-13.html

In the book 'The Game Changers: Success Secrets from Inspirational Women Changing The Game and Influencing The World,' Prince Harry's fiancee spoke of her life acting, running her website and volunteering at a young age.

"'I started working at a soup kitchen in Skid Row of Los Angeles when I was 13 years old, and the first day I felt really scared. I was young, and it was rough and raw down there, and though I was with a great volunteer group, I just felt overwhelmed,' explained the former Suits star, 36."

"Meghan was recognized for her work as women's ambassador to the UN and founder of the lifestyle website The Tig as well as as a TV actress"

I read her web site once when she first made the news for her romance with Prince Harry. It was very simple, just a few tips on diet, clothing and lifestyle. Many actresses in Hollywood do these as a means of making extra cash for promoting clothing, make-up, etc. for companies. If the celeb becomes more famous, they develop their own products and sell them to the public ala the Kardashians. When her relationship with Harry became more serious, she was probably told to end the web site as it would be unseemly for a girlfriend of the Prince to be promoting health and beauty products.

Meghan has been working her way up the ladder in the acting profession in Hollywood since she graduated from high school. She knows about having publicists to promote her and groom her image through interviews, etc. Until she began dating Harry, most Americans (myself included) had never heard of her or the tv show she appeared on.

Harry & Wills have publicists on retainer, too. All of this information that comes out is designed to promote the most positive image of them and may or may not reflect reality. I read a few months ago that Harry & Wills developed their own PR staff, separate from those who currently serve the royal family. They now have their own PR program and promote their own news stories and messaging, sometimes at odds with the rest of the royals. Oh, well.

It was interesting the PR folk were busy getting coverage of the Queen & Prince Phillip attending church on New Years without Charles, Wills or Harry crews. I wondered if that was the result of the photo of Meghan sticking her tongue out at the public outside the church on Christmas Day. Big faux pas and very rude to the public who had turned out that morning to greet the Royal Family. The Queen probably didn't like that at all. She would have been upset, as she would have with anyone else in the RF doing the same.They work hard to ensure they don't appear arrogant or condescending to the public. It was shocking and didn't reflect well on Meghan. She's 36 years old, fer chrissakes. What was she thinking?

 

[animlzrule]

I read her web site once when she first made the news for her romance with Prince Harry. It was very simple, just a few tips on diet, clothing and lifestyle. Many actresses in Hollywood do these as a means of making extra cash for promoting clothing, make-up, etc. for companies. If the celeb becomes more famous, they develop their own products and sell them to the public ala the Kardashians. When her relationship with Harry became more serious, she was probably told to end the web site as it would be unseemly for a girlfriend of the Prince to be promoting health and beauty products.

Meghan has been working her way up the ladder in the acting profession in Hollywood since she graduated from high school. She knows about having publicists to promote her and groom her image through interviews, etc. Until she began dating Harry, most Americans (myself included) had never heard of her or the tv show she appeared on.

Harry & Wills have publicists on retainer, too. All of this information that comes out is designed to promote the most positive image of them and may or may not reflect reality. I read a few months ago that Harry & Wills developed their own PR staff, separate from those who currently serve the royal family. They now have their own PR program and promote their own news stories and messaging, sometimes at odds with the rest of the royals. Oh, well.

It was interesting the PR folk were busy getting coverage of the Queen & Prince Phillip attending church on New Years without Charles, Wills or Harry crews. I wondered if that was the result of the photo of Meghan sticking her tongue out at the public outside the church on Christmas Day. Big faux pas and very rude to the public who had turned out that morning to greet the Royal Family. The Queen probably didn't like that at all. She would have been upset, as she would have with anyone else in the RF doing the same.They work hard to ensure they don't appear arrogant or condescending to the public. It was shocking and didn't reflect well on Meghan. She's 36 years old, fer chrissakes. What was she thinking?

Well, she has a history of advocacy and philanthropy that far predates her ever meeting Prince Harry. She even got a major company to change an advertising pitch as a child due it's sexist content. And the royal family seems very happy with her. It's interesting that people would interpret seeing her tongue as "sticking her tongue out at the public." That smacks of desperation to try to find fault. I think it's far more likely she had a piece of hair fly into her mouth and the camera caught her at an inopportune time as she extricated it. Much ado about nothing, as evidenced by the lack of outrage the image produced. Most seem very pleased and supportive of their relationship. I do worry though, because she will be under far more scrutiny than she's used to, even given her previous status as a celebrity. She wasn't one to ever show up in the gossip blogs, and she didn't attract attention to herself via the paparazzi. She also has been independent and in charge of her own career and destiny. Now how she spends her time is going to be dictated by protocol. It's got to be a hard adjustment from her previous life. Hopefully she'll be content to transfer her advocacy work to fall in line with the "royal" agenda.

As far as New Year's services, she and Harry weren't in England at the time, according to new's sources. No scandal there.

 

[animlzrule]

Certainly true that the British Royal Family "is like the family Meghan never had"! I hope her family wasn't as dysfunctional as the Windsors! Harry doesn't really do irony, so I think he probably just meant that they have a very structured timetable of coming together at certain places and certain times. Maybe Meghan's were a bit more scattered geographically or didn't meet up altogether very often like a lot of families these days.

Personally, I don't think it is any surprise that William and Harry both chose women who have strong mothers, Carole Middleton and Doria Radlan, who I think Harry said was "amazing" in their engagement interview. When they lost their equally amazing mother it must have been truly devastating and they never got a replacement. Whatever Diana's faults even her detractors never question her very close bond with her sons. She was irreplaceable for them and as a public figure. There really never has been anyone in the UK who even came close before or since in terms of her unique charisma and the way most of the public responded to her.

You only have to look at the reaction when she died, that's never happened before here in modern times and I can't think of any public figure here since who would have received the same level of mourning. When God forbid, the Queen passes away, there will be great sadness as she commands a huge amount of respect for always putting duty first, and because for most of us she has always been there. And because King Charles III and Queen Camilla will never be viewed in the same way. Tbh it will be very "awkward" and I am sure that there are more than a few in the establishment who send up a quiet prayer that the Queen will outlive Charles!

Personally, I think Camilla should just be the Princess Consort or something like that, but I'm pretty sure Charles will be stubborn on that point. I think he would be making a PR mistake and technically of course Camilla has every right to be crowned Queen. But as that crown descends onto her head, all people will be thinking is that Diana should be there, not her. I think Camilla's savvy enough to know that but Charles may hold out, unless he listens to good advice. And William needs to mature a bit and put some more work in.

As for Princess Michael, I'd like to give her the benefit of the doubt about the brooch but I can't, she has a history and she knew damn well that she would be photgraphed arriving. Still Meghan will have the last laugh on her, I wonder if there might not be enough room for certain people come the wedding day. My money's on the Obamas being invited definitely, and Melania being there but not her husband. Or maybe just a lower level US rep as it is only "the spare" getting married.
Hoping for the dress rumours to start soon :clap:

I thought I had read somewhere that Harry had already indicated that Trump was not welcome at the wedding. Do you know if protocol dictates that a delegate from the US attend? That surprises me. I think given the circumstances it would be completely inappropriate for either of the Trumps to be there unless either Harry or Meghan wanted them to be.

I agree about Camilla. I think it would be a great PR move for her not to be Queen, but I suppose that's a hard precedent to set. It could be down the line that a King loses his beloved spouse and remarries a woman that the public really love, and then they'd want her to be Queen. What do you do then? Hopefully everyone learned a big lesson with the Charles/Diana situation that really you should be marrying for love and not for station. William and Harry seem to have recognized that and have been allowed to choose their partners based on affection, compatibility, etc.

 

[Gardenista]

Revealed: Harry and Meghan 'partied like tycoons' in Monaco after jetting to the millionaires' playground for a romantic New Year's break (but are already on their way home)

Harry and Meghan flew out of Heathrow on New Year's Eve on BA flight to Nice

The loved-up royal couple then took a helicopter flight to Monaco to see in 2018

But it was a quick visit for Harry and Meghan who are already thought to have returned home to London


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...han-Markle-New-Year-Monaco.html#ixzz534cJvUef
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

[animlzrule]

Huh. Wonder if this is true? If it's what she wants I hope no one opposes her...I'm skeptical, I guess, that's there's truly "a source." I wonder if it's really just an attempt on the part of the press to foment family discord.

Meghan Markle Reportedly Wants Her Mom to Walk Her Down the Aisle

"E! News reports the soon-to-be-royal has requested that her mother, California-based yoga teacher Doria Ragland, escort her down the aisle at St. George’s Chapel. Although brides are traditionally walked by their fathers if they’re alive (and Kate Middleton was escorted by her father during her wedding), a “source” said Markle would rather be escorted by Ragland (with whom she’s close) than “her reclusive father” Thomas Markle (the father of her overly chatty half-sister)."

" The move would not only provide a sweet moment between Markle and her mother, but it would also be significant in that Ragland is black — and Markle has faced a racist backlash in the British press since news of her relationship broke."

https://www.thecut.com/2018/01/meghan-markle-mom-doria-ragland-walk-aisle-wedding.html

 

[Betty P]

I thought I had read somewhere that Harry had already indicated that Trump was not welcome at the wedding. Do you know if protocol dictates that a delegate from the US attend? That surprises me. I think given the circumstances it would be completely inappropriate for either of the Trumps to be there unless either Harry or Meghan wanted them to be.

I agree about Camilla. I think it would be a great PR move for her not to be Queen, but I suppose that's a hard precedent to set. It could be down the line that a King loses his beloved spouse and remarries a woman that the public really love, and then they'd want her to be Queen. What do you do then? Hopefully everyone learned a big lesson with the Charles/Diana situation that really you should be marrying for love and not for station. William and Harry seem to have recognized that and have been allowed to choose their partners based on affection, compatibility, etc.

Maybe since Harry is fifth in line for the throne, the wedding will adhere less to protocol. IIRC for Chuck & Di and Wills & Kate's wedding, they usually invite the heads of state of most of England's allies, politics aside. Perhaps they'll bend the rules some for Harry & Meghan's wedding. It seems like it will be a less formal affair, similar to Chuck & Camilla's wedding.

 

[animlzrule]

Maybe since Harry is fifth in line for the throne, the wedding will adhere less to protocol. IIRC for Chuck & Di and Wills & Kate's wedding, they usually invite the heads of state of most of England's allies, politics aside. Perhaps they'll bend the rules some for Harry & Meghan's wedding. It seems like it will be a less formal affair, similar to Chuck & Camilla's wedding.

That's what I wondered too. I would hope that they could circumvent tradition if indeed it's customary for heads of state to attend the royal weddings. It would be a bit of a farce to have Trump of Melania at the wedding. It's pretty bad when the mayor of London says Trump isn't welcome in London! LOL! It's pretty obvious that they don't share Trump's worldview or agenda.

 

[RosalindaA]

Just checking back to Prince Andrew (the then "spare") and Sarah Ferguson's wedding (I watched it but my memory's not that great!) it looks like your First Lady, Nancy Reagan attended without Ronald. I think the issue is that your President is not only head of state but also obviously a political figure as well. I think the US has quite cleverly, evolved the First Lady role to be a symbol of the nation but apolitical in a sense. I'm thinking of the way they stand very prominently at the swearing in ceremony (remembering particularly of course, Jacqueline Kennedy at Lyndon Johnson's) as a kind of moral and spiritual anchor for the president. The same sort of intercessionary role that a queen consort would take on for a king. Of course in a lot of cases, the reality can fall far short of the ideal! British prime ministers' wives and husbands just have to behave themselves and keep quiet.

Animiz, I didn't know that Harry had said he didn't want President Trump at the wedding, it wouldn't surprise me. The choice of venue is key to the sort of wedding that Harry and Meghan want, I think, it's the royal equivalent of having it in your family chapel, or back garden so to speak. It also has a much smaller capacity than Westminster Abbey so it's a good way to not have to invite people you don't really want. Sadly the terrorist threat in London is still really high so I think that was another consideration, God willing, the site should be easier to police. And the age of the Queen and Prince Phillip in their 90s (that huge flight of steps really worries me), you never see either of them take anyone's arm (just like the Queen Mum even when she reached her century).

I'd like to see Doria walk Meghan down the aisle if that's what they want, it's not that unusual here now. And the press I look at in the UK, mainly the Telegraph, Guardian and ok the Daily Fail for gossip didn't strike me as horribly racist unless I missed it, but of course every aspect of any royal bride's background and her relatives will be scrutinised. Kate's family was often sneered at as her mother had been an air hostess and she has an embarrassing Uncle Gary. I have honestly not heard anyone I know express any racist views about Meghan and I think many people are glad that young women here (of any background) will have a positive role model, she seems a hard worker and has a long track record of a social conscience. A welcome change from the endless stream of drunken, surgically "enhanced" airheads that seem to dominate the media and are such a bad example to young girls.

 

[Gardenista]

Just checking back to Prince Andrew (the then "spare") and Sarah Ferguson's wedding (I watched it but my memory's not that great!) it looks like your First Lady, Nancy Reagan attended without Ronald. I think the issue is that your President is not only head of state but also obviously a political figure as well. I think the US has quite cleverly, evolved the First Lady role to be a symbol of the nation but apolitical in a sense. I'm thinking of the way they stand very prominently at the swearing in ceremony (remembering particularly of course, Jacqueline Kennedy at Lyndon Johnson's) as a kind of moral and spiritual anchor for the president. The same sort of intercessionary role that a queen consort would take on for a king. Of course in a lot of cases, the reality can fall far short of the ideal! British prime ministers' wives and husbands just have to behave themselves and keep quiet.

Animiz, I didn't know that Harry had said he didn't want President Trump at the wedding, it wouldn't surprise me. The choice of venue is key to the sort of wedding that Harry and Meghan want, I think, it's the royal equivalent of having it in your family chapel, or back garden so to speak. It also has a much smaller capacity than Westminster Abbey so it's a good way to not have to invite people you don't really want. Sadly the terrorist threat in London is still really high so I think that was another consideration, God willing, the site should be easier to police. And the age of the Queen and Prince Phillip in their 90s (that huge flight of steps really worries me), you never see either of them take anyone's arm (just like the Queen Mum even when she reached her century).

I'd like to see Doria walk Meghan down the aisle if that's what they want, it's not that unusual here now. And the press I look at in the UK, mainly the Telegraph, Guardian and ok the Daily Fail for gossip didn't strike me as horribly racist unless I missed it, but of course every aspect of any royal bride's background and her relatives will be scrutinised. Kate's family was often sneered at as her mother had been an air hostess and she has an embarrassing Uncle Gary. I have honestly not heard anyone I know express any racist views about Meghan and I think many people are glad that young women here (of any background) will have a positive role model, she seems a hard worker and has a long track record of a social conscience. A welcome change from the endless stream of drunken, surgically "enhanced" airheads that seem to dominate the media and are such a bad example to young girls.

She's had more than one cosmetic procedure. I think this is fine in general, but whoever did her nose needs to lose their license.

 

[Betty P]

That's what I wondered too. I would hope that they could circumvent tradition if indeed it's customary for heads of state to attend the royal weddings. It would be a bit of a farce to have Trump of Melania at the wedding. It's pretty bad when the mayor of London says Trump isn't welcome in London! LOL! It's pretty obvious that they don't share Trump's worldview or agenda.

Yes, it seems it will be a smaller and more casual event. Meghan, after all, is a divorcee. If adhering to good taste, the bride doesn't usually celebrate the occasion the same way. I haven't checked up, but is this her second or third marriage? Did she have children in her previous marriages? Does anyone think she and Harry will try to have children of their own?

 

[Ellmau]

Supposedly they do want children asap.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Yes, it seems it will be a smaller and more casual event. Meghan, after all, is a divorcee. If adhering to good taste, the bride doesn't usually celebrate the occasion the same way. I haven't checked up, but is this her second or third marriage? Did she have children in her previous marriages? Does anyone think she and Harry will try to have children of their own?

According to her IMDb bio, Meghan has one previous marriage. No children. I believe that Meghan and Harry will want children of their own. Harry appears to be a doting uncle to his young niece and nephew

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1620783/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm

 

[Betty P]

According to her IMDb bio, Meghan has one previous marriage. No children. I believe that Meghan and Harry will want children of their own. Harry appears to be a doting uncle to his young niece and nephew

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1620783/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm

Well, best wishes and all. I hope things work out for them. Thanks for the link to her IMDB bio. This quote stood out most for me:

My dad's a lighting director. Growing up in Hollywood, I was around the entertainment industry all the time. I knew I'd end up in show business in some capacity, eventually.

And maybe that's what British Royalty is becoming these days - entertainment. Even today the royal family is emphasized as a big part of the UK tourist industry. If you look at it that way, instead of seeing the family in it's political and historic context, it makes more sense. It's a bunch of people performing in a show/PR campaign, unlike in the past when the leaders had actual responsibilities and being King or Queen was a serious, difficult job.. That will probably all disappear once Queen Elizabeth is gone. I've loved watching the Netflix series "The Crown" and studying history and public policy, so it's kind of a let down to realize the institution is changing into something less meaningful. Oh, well. That's the way the world is today - more focused on celebrity than substance. Have to accept it.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

I'm not convinced it will be a traditional wedding dress. She's a divorcee, which I believe is why they are marrying in St. George's Chapel. Had she not been, I am fairly certain they would have had St. Paul's or Westminster Abbey and we'd have had an extra bank holiday. I think it would look rather odd for her to wear a big dress with an enormous train and do the whole virgin bride thing!

I tend to agree about the dress. I'd like to see Meghan wear ivory lace. She would look positively lovely in ivory

 

[Gardenista]

Meghan Markle's future sister-in-law arrested after allegedly assaulting fiance

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...ested-after-allegedly-assaulting-fiancee.html

 

[gregjrichards]

The Queen is probably one of the hardest people to buy a present for - and newly engaged Megan Markle had to do just that this Christmas.

It’s now been revealed that Meghan got her future grandmother-in-law a singing toy hamster – which the Queen’s prize corgis went on to maul to pieces.

The Daily Star reports that her Maj was so happy with the present that she burst out laughing, before remarking: “It can keep my dogs company.”

A source said: “Meghan bought a little hamster that sings with a little rope for Her Majesty.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/meghan-markles-christmas-present-queen-11807919

 

[gregjrichards]

The half-sister of Meghan Markle has attacked the Royal bride-to-be, accusing her of not helping their bankrupt father enough.

Samantha Grant said: “If you can spend $75,000 on a dress, you can spend $75,000 on your dad.”

The 52-year-old was referring to the £56,000 designer dress Meghan wore with Prince Harry in their engagement photos.

Samantha revealed her dad Thomas, 73, is working with a doctor on his “bad leg” so that he can walk Meghan, 36, down the aisle on May 19 at Windsor Castle's St George's Chapel .

http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/meghan-markle-sister-bankrupt-dad-11832717

I’m a bit fed up hearing from this woman now. It is well known Prince Charles pays for the Duchess of Cambridge’s clothing and is probably doing the same for Meghan too.

 

[CoverMeCagney]

This sister needs to watch herself before she ends up in the tower! Presumably she’s doing it for money, shame on her and shame on the mucky tabloids for printing it.

 

[gregjrichards]

This sister needs to watch herself before she ends up in the tower! Presumably she’s doing it for money, shame on her and shame on the mucky tabloids for printing it.

I know she is disabled and needs the money but it is disgraceful the way she is treating Meghan. I don’t think she will be invited to the wedding.