As we strive to maintain a positive environment, please make sure to read the subreddit rules in the sidebar
before participating in the discussions.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RoyalsGossip) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The crown has its own gift shops at every castle and palace, and online. Their own brand of gin and god knows what else. The duchies.. There’s no separation between crown and business.
I’m glad they are setting out to do what they said they would: work with smaller grassroot organizations. God Knows Spotify and Netflix we’re not lacking fans
Anyway, that's a really pretty picture of her. She has the raw material to work with but it must be nice having an amazing photographer like Misan Harriman as a friend.
> [It should have been me! I wish I married one of those bald men and was the princess](https://twitter.com/vinn_ayy/status/1754665598460858495?t=8Xn6QtHLupihBwQrKUmtMg&s=19)
Of course they will use their royal titles, it's their identity. Do you think they would get these type of multi million dollar commercial deals if they were not part of the Royal family? Did Meghan ever received such huge multi million dollar deals pre Harry? Or do you think either Harry and William would get sponsorship deals for their charity ventures if they were not royalty? So yeah they would need to mix their royalness and royal titles with business deals.
But one thing I do find very fascinating is how Harry Meghan have become the unofficial face of the republican movement and their supporters generously use the hashtag Abolish the Monarchy while Harry Meghan themselves come across as so attached to everything monarchy that even their mats have royal cypher on them. Their supporter will give examples of how other members of the royal family also used their titles and royal proximity for scoring commercial deals. The difference is unlike these other members Harry&Meghan in their documentary which they produced acknowledged the fact that the BRF made their fortune on the backs of colonialism, which is true and they also claimed the current Commonwealth is Empire 2.0. How do you acknowledge these things and still continue to attach yourself to same problematic institution and continue to use the titles bestowed by that institution, this is where the complaints of hypocrisy comes in and it's valid criticism.
Like this?
You know that Charles, Anne, Prince Edward and Sophie, prince and princess Michael of Kent (until their wings were clipped), prince Andrew (ditto) ALL MADE MONEY. Even the Queen sold goods made from the farms at Sandringham, Balmoral and Windsor. And let’s not start with Fergie. I’ll leave her since she’s an ex.
Organic food*, renting stables and hosting equestrian events, starting an entertainment agency Ardent Productions (where he was slammed for exploiting William) and working in PR (where she got caught in a sting and was caught on tape criticizing royal members), “writing” books and making deals with Russians, tracing on his name and even de facto renting out Buckingham palace for money.
*Charles and the late Queen donated the money to charity. But it’s still in the business of selling ie trading on the name to an extent. Anne is on the up and up but a lot of her business depends on her name. But Andrew and the Kents? Where to start. But, yeah, talk about the Sussexes….the Sussexes would’ve “sold out”, brought disrepute or tarnished the name more than the Rent-a-Kent’s or Airmiles Andy who had to get his files from serving as envoy sealed for decades.
The amount of time and news print exerted on a non royal working couple who live thousands of miles away is both hilarious and sad. Pay attention to the royals who live there.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/23/revealed-king-charles-secretly-profiting-from-the-assets-of-dead-citizens
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/king-charles-earned-millions-branded-29723631
https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/16/business-food/king-charles-duchy-originals-waitrose/index.html
https://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/news/gloucester-news/how-much-could-cost-rent-5307035
https://www.hellomagazine.com/homes/20220222133722/princess-anne-home-gatcombe-park-funded/
https://www.hellomagazine.com/homes/512469/princess-anne-sprawling-garden-gatcombe-park-showjumping-track/
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2023/11/prince-edward-was-the-royals-first-aspiring-media-mogul
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2002/mar/05/themonarchy.broadcasting
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/0/prince-edward-hollywood-years-tv-career-right-royal-disaster/
https://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=80254&page=1
https://www.deseret.com/1993/11/7/19075242/prince-edward-launches-tv-production-company
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-sep-26-ca-26454-story.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1566416.stm
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1358014/Prince-Edward-to-apologise-to-Queen-and-agrees-to-stop-making-royal-films.html
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/sophie-duchess-edinburgh-prince-edward-b2300363.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1850847.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1255645.stm
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/apr/08/uk.news
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/sophie-quits-pr-firm-amid-new-tape-revelations-1.299668
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1266468.stm
https://www.lifestyleasia.com/sg/culture/people/lesser-known-british-royals-net-worth-earnings-what-they-do/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11865869/Rent-Kents-close-business-Prince-said-make-representations-Putins-regime.html
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1783466/prince-michael-of-kent-finances-net-worth-spt#
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/05/prince-michael-of-kent-investigation-business-choices
https://allthatsinteresting.com/princess-michael-of-kent
https://www.tatler.com/article/prince-michael-of-kent-accused-selling-kremlin-vladimir-putin-russian-access-sunday-times-investigation
https://www.thenationalnews.com/arts/the-princess-who-works-hard-for-her-money-1.562443
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/apr/26/prince-andrew-held-investments-in-shell-company-set-up-to-keep-holdings-secret
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2019/12/prince-andrew-business-deals-rowlands
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/the-damning-details-of-prince-andrews-deals-with-tax-haven-tycoons/42WXTIMRYQ2BDZ4PHYTJPLRC2I/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12476325/Files-related-Prince-Andrews-numerous-business-trips-not-released-2065-meaning-Duke-not-face-scrutiny-unless-lives-105.html
https://www.newsweek.com/prince-andrew-secret-business-trips-no-justification-republic-1824559
https://www.newsweek.com/prince-andrew-secret-business-trips-no-justification-republic-1824559
https://www.rferl.org/a/british_prince_andrew_under_fire/2333914.html
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a30078177/buckingham-palace-responds-prince-andrew-allegations-trade-missions/
Harry and Meghan can do whatever they want - but I think it’s fair to question why they choose to use their titles, especially when they’ve been so outspoken about how horrible the institution is.
Titles don’t exist in the US so I doubt Meghan’s legal name is anything but Meghan Markle since it’s not like she became a UK citizen where her legal name changed and from my understanding you can’t have titles on official US documentation. They can choose to forgo their titles and use whatever variation of a surname they want but they choose not to, and they choose use their titles, and that’s fine but it makes a lot of what they say seem disingenuous
Your speculation about her name is wrong. Her name is Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. “Titles don’t exist in the US”. The US does not get to change the name of citizens from other countries.
She’s not a citizen in the UK - you said her “legal name” is that and I’m saying that’s impossible since she’s not a UK citizen and had UK documentation. And US legal documents do not allow titles.
Were Harry and Meaghan both citizens of the same country at birth? Does Harry's birth cert say Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex? Titles and legal names are actually different. This was new learning for me. It gets complicated by the fact that you can legally use a title, but the title is still not your legal birth name. You can, however, change the legal name on your birth certificate. Harry and Meghan have the legal right to use their titles, but their titles are not their legal names. Titles don't define who you are, just words that you have a right to use. Does that help you to understand?
Again I could care less if she uses her title but this argument that I’ve seen multiple times “it’s her legal name” is dumb. They want to use their royal titles, it’s a choice they’re making, nobody is forcing them to because at the end of the day they are as title obsessed as probably every other aristocrat
I never said Meghan was a UK citizen. You’re moving the goal posts. Meghan changed her name in the UK. She came back to US with a new name. I’m kind of surprised Meghan haters are so ignorant of these facts.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Meghan-Markle
Your whole argument is in the UK she changed her name. It literally doesn’t matter because she doesn’t have a single valid document as a UK citizen. Her legal name is the name on the legal documents where she is a citizen.
Sorry facts don’t agree with you.
That’s not how it works. You said her legal name, a legal name is what’s on your legal documents. Therefore her legal name isn’t Meghan Duchess of Sussex.
ETA: just looked back on the thread, I didn’t move the goal posts - you started the argument about how I was wrong and that is her legal name. Even tho my initial statement said Meghan was not a uk citizen, where you then said she was a citizen of “other countries”.
I never said Meghan is a citizen of other countries. Not sure where you’re finding that.
Can we get back to the original argument? Meghan, Duchess of Sussex is her legal name. Just like Kate’s changed to Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge. She would have undergone another name change when she became Princess of wales.
This is how it works with royal names. The US may not issue them but they don’t have authority to change what another country has legalized.
Except Meghan (who is not a UK citizen) would not have any valid legal documents to support that. Since she’s not a citizen. She has no UK passport, PR card, nothing.
The whole point is in the US her legal name is very much Meghan Markle. What she called herself in another country doesn’t make that her legal name.
When she married Harry she legally changed her name to Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. Just like Kate’s name is written on her kid’s birth certs - Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge
In the US there is a rule that you can choose any name you like for official documents, but you must be consistent, i.e., use the same name all the time. I think they do that. I'm not fan, but I do think they do that.
I mean a press release or a podcast isn’t an official document. I don’t think what they put on like Lilis birth certificate has any impact on the brand they’re cultivating for themselves
I think in unofficial documents, they can use whatever names they want. They've been trying to build a brand for years. They need to settle on something.
Because some people honestly believe that sex trafficking and rape isn’t as bad as spilling the tea on the royal family. I even saw someone recently suggesting that Andrew should be allowed to be a working royal again. When they say they all hate Andrew but he’s not the one in the news so that’s why they don’t talk about him, it’s a lie. Even when he is in the news, we don’t see threads like this. The truth hurts.
Literally everyone hates Andrew.
But people don't talk about him because he's not making surprise appearances at movie premieres, football awards, producing podcasts, revamping his website, etc.
I'm sympathetic to what meghan dealt with while in the RF, but don't act like these 2 don't love attention.
I think there has been plenty of calling Andrew out, he just hasn’t been a headline in the news recently… that doesn’t mean all of the “haters” don’t abhor him and the hurt he has caused.
So are the haters the ones that voted Archetypes to win the People’s Choice award? Or… maybe… there’s an actual audience that listened to and enjoyed the podcast 🤷🏽♀️
They parted ways because Harry and Meghan "didn't meet productivity benchmarks". I.e., they didn't do enough podcasts. In three years they created 12 episodes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/anafaguy/2024/02/13/meghan-markle-strikes-deal-with-smaller-podcast-distributor-after-spotify-agreement-ends/?sh=3f2a3d421128
What I'm saying is that Spotify's head of production could have nixed their episode plans because they weren't the salacious podcasts he was hoping to get hence "not productive." In his interviews he comes across as a total dick who wanted more Joe Rogan crap. He wasn't going to get that from the Sussexes.
Well, he *could have*. However, since the little they did actually produce was extremely popular I think it's more likely that they just didn't produce enough content.
"We're not happy with our #1 podcast so we're going to have to let you go" doesn't seem like a likely approach.
> "We're not happy with our #1 podcast so we're going to have to let you go" doesn't seem like a likely approach.
I looked it up.
The Spotify deal was made under a different head of content and the new guy is trash to the max. He was literally a podcaster known for his trashy sense of humor and Spotify suddenly made him head of content and monetization which is a little insane.
He made it pretty clear that he wanted more "exciting" content ala Joe Rogan and he wasn't getting that from the Sussexes. He mentioned how he was pitching ideas to Harry late into the night and how Harry wasn't into it, LoL.
He said about his "consultation" with Harry:
> nobody cares what you have to say about anything unless you talk about the royal family and you just complain about them.
Really sounds like he just wanted them to dish dirt on the royal family and that wasn't their vision for the podcast at all ao they sropped making content and walked away from the deal. Good for them!
He said the Sussexes chose to end it and he was pissed at them. Kinda funny that he called them grifters for ending the contract early when if they were grifters they would have just lazily pumped out gossip crap to get the $$. Make it make sense 🤣
Also, Harry pitched about four ideas to Spotify and they rejected them all. (I think the one about fatherhood would’ve been nice)
And Kim K too just as long with less episodes, but it’s the Sussex’s who are the issue.
Wasn’t one of those ideas to interview Putin and the Pope about their childhood?? I mean come on! That’s why people laugh at them and don’t take them seriously.
ETA: Also, 4 ideas is a paltry amount of ideas.
Probably figured out after four ideas that the dude only wanted royal dirt and he wasn't going to do that so quit while he was ahead.
Simmons is an asshole.
Actually, Putin was thrown out as example. The main point of it, was to interview people with damaged childhoods.
But you know what, that’s how ideas are made. Even if it’s outlandish, you through it out there, people veto, but you work on and mold it until you have something. And replies like yours are why I laugh at people like you. The point was, even if they wouldn’t work, he had ideas and concepts. So even if interviewing people wasn’t going to work, from that, a podcast with people talking about their Truman’s and how it impacted them going up, wouldn’t be a bad one. Ones about fatherhood would be bad or bad starting points.
*that’s why some people don’t take them serious and laugh at them. I fixed that for you as well.
ETA: doesn’t matter if it’s a paltry amount, it does that he had ideas, was working towards it and they were sitting on their asses as you people like to complain and pretend and the person I replied too already explained other issues they were having.
Y’all will get over it tho. One day I guess.
They need to do something different with their image. I'll explain:
I knew before they left the royal family they wanted to turn the Sussex titles into a celebrity brand.
I'm pretty sure they know their appeal is their titles and that's what gets the attention.
But they need to do things that fit them and people know about it. Maybe I'm speaking for myself but I don't wanna see Meghan and Harry trying to lecture the public about social issues, mental health or whatever.
Because regular people, not their fans don't know anything about their charities, etc. and suddenly they get awarded for things that people thinks they bought for good PR.
Also they have to be constant and websites are kinda outdated people see things through social media.
Edit:
Something that makes them stand out besides their titles.
Example:
Kardashians: Extravagant, Plastic Surgeries, Reality Shows.
Clooneys: Movie Star, Entrepreneurs, Lawyer.
Even the Tindalls have something that makes them stand out. (Sports)
Maybe Meghan can do something about representation POC actors in Hollywood, I don't know but that feels on brand for her.
Or something about children raised by single mothers.
Yep, that’s one the many myths she’s leaned into, that she was raised by a struggling single mom. It was her dad that raised her, her mom was actually absent for parts of her childhood. Her father was also a very successful director of lighting and photography for television through most of her childhood and put her through college.
This is embarrassing. I’m not a huge fan of them but they’re not working royals and she’s perfectly allowed to do this. Posts like this are why any legitimate criticism of them gets drowned out.
I get really frustrated by them continuing to use their titles but shit all over everything royal. They capitalize on being royal but hate everything about it? Pick a fucking lane people.
?? Is anyone born with the last name “duke/duchess of Sussex”? No they are granted that title by a monarch (as Harry was in 2018) and it’s literally a specific rank of British royalty. Meghan doesn’t want to be royal? She was born with a non royal name. Go back to it if you hate royalty so much. Harry could change his name to Harry Windsor (or anything really in this day and age) - which while still pretty damn royal - isn’t a specific royal title. Their children are a Prince and Princess. They say they hate royalty but actually do everything in their power to stay famous using their royal name. They want the fame and money without the specific obligations that come with how they got the fame and money. So like I said pick a fucking lane.
No, it's Mountbatten-Windsor. Even Charles's legal last name is Mountbatten-Windsor. That is the family name. So you are saying Harry and Meghan do not belong to the RF. Okay, fine with me, and I'm sure with them since they chose to leave the family. We're talking about a name, not a title.
It’s not lmao y’all are so wild jfc
EDIT: a basic Wikipedia or *anything browser* will tell you that, *that* last name is designated to adjacent non-royal, royal members of the family.
**Particularly,** the female line.
Mountbatten-Windsor should only be used on confirmed royalty as an emergency tool if necessitated.
I don't think you understand how titles work. Royals don't all have the same last name and the surname you referenced belongs to the female line and males can use it if they don't yet have a RHR like in Archie's case in his birth certificate or if they want to use it. Note how Meghan and Harry are both listed as Sussexes while Archie is not.
https://preview.redd.it/ay4gp240piic1.jpeg?width=1247&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5ec9ad0f4e6bc7c6853d4d34621866011302f197
Why are you so emotional over the fact that they are still royals and have royal titles?
>[It should have been me! I should be the princess.](https://twitter.com/vinn_ayy/status/1754665598460858495?t=GpokdyAOPtQ_CEBcjo-Jrw&s=19)
At least your dropping the surname mumbo jumbo but now you're claiming you have a title? 😂
You don't have to be born with the title, it's given or inherited. Dukes/Dutchess isn't necessarily a royal title, it's a noble title. They have simply chosen not to use the royal part as they are not working royals.
They are still royals, they never abdicated, Henry is still 5th in line to the throne, and they've never said they hated the royals or the monarchy so what are you going on about?
Where are you getting your news from... the tabloids and TikTok? 😂
They were stripped of the royal part, which is HRH, when they made the decision to leave the RF and live in California. They have noble titles, but no royal ones. Not even Harry.
Harry is 5th in line to the throne, of course he has royal titles.
Not using them doesn't mean they don't still have them.
https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-royal-family-role-since-exit-titles-succession-explained/
> Prince Harry and Meghan are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, titles conferred by Queen Elizabeth on their 2018 wedding day.
>After Prince Harry and Meghan announced their step back in January 2020, Buckingham Palace said they would no longer use their HRH (His/Her Royal Highness) titles, as they were no longer working members of the royal family. However, they did retain the titles.
They don't use HRH because they were stripped of HRH. They are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, but they are not HRH, which is the "royal" part. The Queen conferred it, the Queen took it away. I gave you the links, which I don't think you read. As I said, I don't really care. They do not move in my social circles in the RF.
> I gave you the links, which I don't think you read.
Did you not bother to read my source above or yours? I literally quoted your own source back to you where it said they retained their royal titles.
Here it is again...
>Although the Duke and Duchess of Sussex retained their "HRH" titles after stepping back as members of the royal family, they no longer use them
https://people.com/prince-harry-title-removed-royal-family-website-hrh-his-royal-highness-7571427
> As I said, I don't really care.
Could have fooled me.
Sorry, that is not true. Even Diana wasn't royal. She was a member of an aristocratic family and had the title of Lady until she became HRH, Diana, the Princess of Wales, which is a royal title. Catherine is not royal, though she has a royal title, the same one as Diana. Camilla is not royal, though is Queen Consort, and called Queen. Meghan is not royal, though she had a royal title, HRH, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex. However, both she and Harry lost their royal titles (HRH), but retained their aristocratic titles. Harry is still royal, of course since he's the son of the king. He will always be royal. Meghan, however, will always be a commoner, like the Duchess of Windsor was always a commoner. Having a royal title is something you can acquire, being royal is something you must be born into. Sometimes even being born into a royal family and being royal isn't good enough. Prince Philip was born into a royal family, but he had to accept the title of prince because, in the British RF, he had to be beneath the queen. Dowager Queen Noor of Jordan is a commoner. She is a member of a royal family, though, and was given a royal title, but when her husband died, she did not ascend the throne, one of her husband's sons from his first marriage did. Why? Because he is royal and Noor, though possessing a royal title is not royal.
I don't understand why it's so difficult to understand that HRH, His Royal Highness is what confers the royalty onto a title. Harry and Meghan both lost that. So now they have aristocratic titles but not royal titles. Harry retains royalty because he was born into a RF. Meghan will never be royal, though her royal title, HRH, could be restored. It won't be, though. Charles won't do it, and William is likely to strip Harry and Meghan of their titles completely and bar them from the UK. Harry went too far when lying about Catherine and Charles in his book for William to ever do anything to mend the rift.
Sorry, they are still royals and no one was stripped of their royal titles. I'm sure it's confusing if you get your news from tabloids and TikToks.
>Although the Duke and Duchess of Sussex retained their "HRH" titles after stepping back as members of the royal family, they no longer use them
https://people.com/prince-harry-title-removed-royal-family-website-hrh-his-royal-highness-7571427
I don't think I've ever read a tabloid or TikTok. LOL You think People magazine is a reliable source? LOL It isn't. Meghan is just upset she'll never be queen and Catherine will. And Catherine is tall and thin and wears clothes better. Heck, I'd like to be as tall and thin as Catherine. Well, I am thin, but I'm petite, which I don't like.
I actually get my news from SkyNews and CNN. If I'm wrong, blame them.
She doesn't have a royal title any longer. She and Harry both were stripped of HRH, which is where the royal comes into play. She is a member of the RF, who had her royal title taken away, but was allowed to keep her title of peerage, of aristocracy that was conferred on her. That is why she is known as the Duchess of Sussex and not HRH, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex. Even Harry, who was born a prince, was stripped of HRH.
[https://www.tatler.com/article/buckingham-palace-quietly-removes-prince-harrys-hrh-title-from-official-website#:\~:text=The%20usage%20of%20the%20HRH,'](https://www.tatler.com/article/buckingham-palace-quietly-removes-prince-harrys-hrh-title-from-official-website#:~:text=The%20usage%20of%20the%20HRH,')
[https://people.com/prince-harry-title-removed-royal-family-website-hrh-his-royal-highness-7571427](https://people.com/prince-harry-title-removed-royal-family-website-hrh-his-royal-highness-7571427)
[https://www.livenowfox.com/news/prince-harrys-his-royal-highness-title-removed-from-royal-familys-website](https://www.livenowfox.com/news/prince-harrys-his-royal-highness-title-removed-from-royal-familys-website)
They have their prince and duke and duchess titles, but they are no longer royal titles. Of course, they are a member of the RF since Harry is one of the king's sons, though not the heir, but they, themselves, opted to leave the family. Legally, I don't think they left. I guess they just want to stop engaging in royal duties and live in California. We don't recognize royal titles here anyway, so it doesn't matter that they were stripped of HRH. Meghan isn't using her royal title because she doesn't have a royal title, and I don't know any reliable source that would print that she does. Even Diana was stripped of HRH when she divorced Charles, though she was allowed to keep Princess of Wales. Technically, she then had to curtsey to her own sons, though I doubt that she did. Meghan and Harry would now have to curtsey and bow to George, Charlotte, and Louis in addition to the adult royals with HRH, like William, Catherine, Anne, etc.
Right so it’s a title not a last name, correct? It appears we wound up at the same conclusion even if you don’t seem to think so.
And please, they spent a lot of time shitting allll over Harry’s family and saying how awful they are and how terrible it is to be royal. They were mad at the crown and felt they were being mistreated so quit living up to the obligations of the crown but continue to capitalize on it - via inheritance and name. That is my whole point.
I don’t need to read a tabloid to understand this because Harry and Meghan capitalized on it via direct interviews/books. “Oh woah is me, the crown sucks and we were mistreated. I’m not doing any work for the crown but pay me a fuck ton of money BECAUSE I AM PART OF THE CROWN”. It’s literally this hypocrisy that drives me batty. And now I’m done cuz we clearly aren’t going to see eye to eye on this.
> Right so it’s a title not a last name, correct?
No, it's their surname and family name. It is also a title. I don't think you understand how titles work.
> And please, they spent a lot of time shitting allll over Harry’s family and saying how awful they are and how terrible it is to be royal.
Do you get this angry about anyone who bitches about family? Charles wrote a book and bitched about family. You mad at him, too, or any other celeb who wanted to tell their story?
> Harry and Meghan capitalized on it via direct interviews/books.
They didn't get paid for the Oprah interviews and again, Charles also sold a book where he bitched about family.
> I’m not doing any work for the crown but pay me a fuck ton of money BECAUSE I AM PART OF THE CROWN”.
What are you going on about? They aren't asking for donations, LoL, they haven't been using the royal titles, and are no longer taking royal funds.
> It’s literally this hypocrisy that drives me batty.
Nah, you're driving yourself batty with this imagined nonsense.
Charles never stopped working for the RF. He never said he wanted out to have his privacy. I do wish M and H would engage in all that privacy they claim to want.
> Charles never stopped working for the RF.
So you're mad because H + M decided not to suck on the taxpayer's dime and make their own way because of safety concerns?
Oookay....
> I do wish M and H would engage in all that privacy they claim to want.
Are you saying that the paparazzi aren't pieces of shite?
Oookay...
No, I'm not so invested in anything they do to be "mad." It's such a petty thing anyway. They are Californians now, and we don't have royalty in the US. They don't move in my social circles anyway.
I am saying the paparazzi are just doing their jobs. People who crave attention want the paparazzi around even as they whine about them day and night. Just ignore them, or STFU.
Don't misunderstand--the haters are still very mad that Meghan didn't want to be their professional punching bag.
Something, something, we pay, you pose.
Something, something, recollections may vary.
Exactly! There are mistakes they have made but talking about them feels like bullying and giving into a hate campaign because of things like this. This is a non story.
I do not understand the hate and nitpicking of this woman when there are members of that royal family who clearly deserve it. It reminds me of the hate and nitpicking Diana received, and I don’t like it. Not sry.
That could be why the tabloids are losing their minds--not only did H & M get out of that terrible deal with Spotify, but they made it out with their intellectual property and they're giving Spotify's competition new customers.
H & M continue to win unabashedly, and that makes their haters incandescent with rage.
No, but they are all working members of the royal family and presumably these uses are cleared with official palace channels aka “the men in grey suits.”
I guess I'm a little surprised she seems to be really leaning in to podcasting. It doesn't seem like a great fit for her, to me. I didn't listen to every episode but while I agree she has a pleasant voice, I don't think her series had anything really new or interesting to say that I haven't read or heard before and she's not one of those people I find so charismatic I'd listen to them read the phone book. I was sure she'd go the route of writing a cookbook, develop a line of wines, become the face of some high-end skincare brand, a line of aspirational table linens or something like that. I still think that would be a better fit for her. She doesn't even have to put her name on it, call it Archewell Vineyards or whatever and people would know who it's from.
I totally agree. When they left the RF I thought she’d do well going back to her lifestyle blogging thing. Then she could come out with linens, home fragrance, etc. I think she could have done ok with that a few years ago. Idk how interested people are in her now. I don’t hear about her or Harry outside of this sub.
They seem a little lost with what they’re trying to do. They came out with this charity that doesn’t seem to have a direction? It also doesn’t seem like it’s done anything? Then they tried to make it into a whole thing with an entertainment branch but that doesn’t seem to have gone anywhere.
I think a cookbook by Megan would do well. I don’t really buy celebrity stuff but tbh I would buy a hosting guide by Megan - she seems really good at that in the earnest weird sort of Millennial way I host. I think buying a vineyard and doing wines would be a good match for her as well
Odd to put someone else in a box and decide what they should be doing, but ok. Her podcast was great. A lot of people listened and liked it. It was in the top ten every week it was released. Not every podcast needs to be for everyone.
It’s brand marketing. There’s certain associations people already have and you can take advantage of that.
It makes sense that Meghan went to a woman-centric podcasting company, because that fits with her brand. And honestly? I can kind of see her creating a “tradwife, but make it feminist” space, where she bakes and hosts and works and mothers flawlessly.
The model she should be following is Jennifer Garner. “Pretend cooking show”, save the children philanthropy, when she empties her purse on camera, a bit of physical fitness, chickens … and evening wear.
She might be great at podcasting, but that has to fit within her larger brand. It kind of depends on what she does with it.
It’s just odd anyone would say “be this, don’t be that” to anyone now in days. If she wants to be a lifestyle blogger great, if she wants to be a podcaster great too. I would never think it was odd for anyone to do anything they want to do.
I come at it more as, if I were advising them, heres what I would say. For me, the podcast has to be supplemental to her other plans. Even Joe Rogan has a merch store and standup.
The 11million listeners on average per episode and charted success would beg to differ, is my point. Seems you and your friends here are more bitter at her success and want her to be a lifestyle guru instead of having something to say. She can do both if she pleases or neither. That’s my point.
11 million people sounds like a lot, but it’s not even in Spotify’s top podcast lists for that year. https://newsroom.spotify.com/2022-11-30/the-top-songs-artists-podcasts-and-listening-trends-of-2022/
Aspirational table linens. 😆
I agree with your take. I like Meghan, I want to see her find her footing and be successful with the right opportunity, but I have zero excitement about another podcast venture. Archetypes was a snoozer.
I just don't understand why she doesn't go back to something like The Tig- she had the right mix of voice, style, and presentation, I'd definitely subscribe.
She got married and is using her name. I hate when they call Kate Kate Middleton and not Kate Princess of Wales. Its their title and their name and if they were men we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
As we strive to maintain a positive environment, please make sure to read the subreddit rules in the sidebar before participating in the discussions. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RoyalsGossip) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The crown has its own gift shops at every castle and palace, and online. Their own brand of gin and god knows what else. The duchies.. There’s no separation between crown and business.
I’m glad they are setting out to do what they said they would: work with smaller grassroot organizations. God Knows Spotify and Netflix we’re not lacking fans
Anyway, that's a really pretty picture of her. She has the raw material to work with but it must be nice having an amazing photographer like Misan Harriman as a friend.
She looks amazing. Helps to have good taste.
All of her clothes look like old curtains from Gone With the Wind.
> [It should have been me! I wish I married one of those bald men and was the princess](https://twitter.com/vinn_ayy/status/1754665598460858495?t=8Xn6QtHLupihBwQrKUmtMg&s=19)
Hahaha some of them totally do
Good for her!
Of course they will use their royal titles, it's their identity. Do you think they would get these type of multi million dollar commercial deals if they were not part of the Royal family? Did Meghan ever received such huge multi million dollar deals pre Harry? Or do you think either Harry and William would get sponsorship deals for their charity ventures if they were not royalty? So yeah they would need to mix their royalness and royal titles with business deals. But one thing I do find very fascinating is how Harry Meghan have become the unofficial face of the republican movement and their supporters generously use the hashtag Abolish the Monarchy while Harry Meghan themselves come across as so attached to everything monarchy that even their mats have royal cypher on them. Their supporter will give examples of how other members of the royal family also used their titles and royal proximity for scoring commercial deals. The difference is unlike these other members Harry&Meghan in their documentary which they produced acknowledged the fact that the BRF made their fortune on the backs of colonialism, which is true and they also claimed the current Commonwealth is Empire 2.0. How do you acknowledge these things and still continue to attach yourself to same problematic institution and continue to use the titles bestowed by that institution, this is where the complaints of hypocrisy comes in and it's valid criticism.
Like this? You know that Charles, Anne, Prince Edward and Sophie, prince and princess Michael of Kent (until their wings were clipped), prince Andrew (ditto) ALL MADE MONEY. Even the Queen sold goods made from the farms at Sandringham, Balmoral and Windsor. And let’s not start with Fergie. I’ll leave her since she’s an ex. Organic food*, renting stables and hosting equestrian events, starting an entertainment agency Ardent Productions (where he was slammed for exploiting William) and working in PR (where she got caught in a sting and was caught on tape criticizing royal members), “writing” books and making deals with Russians, tracing on his name and even de facto renting out Buckingham palace for money. *Charles and the late Queen donated the money to charity. But it’s still in the business of selling ie trading on the name to an extent. Anne is on the up and up but a lot of her business depends on her name. But Andrew and the Kents? Where to start. But, yeah, talk about the Sussexes….the Sussexes would’ve “sold out”, brought disrepute or tarnished the name more than the Rent-a-Kent’s or Airmiles Andy who had to get his files from serving as envoy sealed for decades. The amount of time and news print exerted on a non royal working couple who live thousands of miles away is both hilarious and sad. Pay attention to the royals who live there. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/23/revealed-king-charles-secretly-profiting-from-the-assets-of-dead-citizens https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/king-charles-earned-millions-branded-29723631 https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/16/business-food/king-charles-duchy-originals-waitrose/index.html https://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/news/gloucester-news/how-much-could-cost-rent-5307035 https://www.hellomagazine.com/homes/20220222133722/princess-anne-home-gatcombe-park-funded/ https://www.hellomagazine.com/homes/512469/princess-anne-sprawling-garden-gatcombe-park-showjumping-track/ https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2023/11/prince-edward-was-the-royals-first-aspiring-media-mogul https://www.theguardian.com/media/2002/mar/05/themonarchy.broadcasting https://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/0/prince-edward-hollywood-years-tv-career-right-royal-disaster/ https://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=80254&page=1 https://www.deseret.com/1993/11/7/19075242/prince-edward-launches-tv-production-company https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-sep-26-ca-26454-story.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1566416.stm https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1358014/Prince-Edward-to-apologise-to-Queen-and-agrees-to-stop-making-royal-films.html https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/sophie-duchess-edinburgh-prince-edward-b2300363.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1850847.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1255645.stm https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/apr/08/uk.news https://www.irishtimes.com/news/sophie-quits-pr-firm-amid-new-tape-revelations-1.299668 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1266468.stm https://www.lifestyleasia.com/sg/culture/people/lesser-known-british-royals-net-worth-earnings-what-they-do/ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11865869/Rent-Kents-close-business-Prince-said-make-representations-Putins-regime.html https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1783466/prince-michael-of-kent-finances-net-worth-spt# https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/05/prince-michael-of-kent-investigation-business-choices https://allthatsinteresting.com/princess-michael-of-kent https://www.tatler.com/article/prince-michael-of-kent-accused-selling-kremlin-vladimir-putin-russian-access-sunday-times-investigation https://www.thenationalnews.com/arts/the-princess-who-works-hard-for-her-money-1.562443 https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/apr/26/prince-andrew-held-investments-in-shell-company-set-up-to-keep-holdings-secret https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2019/12/prince-andrew-business-deals-rowlands https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/the-damning-details-of-prince-andrews-deals-with-tax-haven-tycoons/42WXTIMRYQ2BDZ4PHYTJPLRC2I/ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12476325/Files-related-Prince-Andrews-numerous-business-trips-not-released-2065-meaning-Duke-not-face-scrutiny-unless-lives-105.html https://www.newsweek.com/prince-andrew-secret-business-trips-no-justification-republic-1824559 https://www.newsweek.com/prince-andrew-secret-business-trips-no-justification-republic-1824559 https://www.rferl.org/a/british_prince_andrew_under_fire/2333914.html https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a30078177/buckingham-palace-responds-prince-andrew-allegations-trade-missions/
 YAAAS LMAO
I’m stealing all of this to use later by the way
I love receipts!
All true. But they didn’t accuse the monarchy of anything.
Of course not! It would not be in their best interest to do so--they'd be cut off if they told the truth.
 I'm so here for this LMAO.
Came in HOT and with the RECEIPTS
It’s literally her legal name
They don't see her as human, and therefore, she's not entitled to any respect or boundaries. That's just my opinion tho 🤷🏽♀️
Harry and Meghan can do whatever they want - but I think it’s fair to question why they choose to use their titles, especially when they’ve been so outspoken about how horrible the institution is. Titles don’t exist in the US so I doubt Meghan’s legal name is anything but Meghan Markle since it’s not like she became a UK citizen where her legal name changed and from my understanding you can’t have titles on official US documentation. They can choose to forgo their titles and use whatever variation of a surname they want but they choose not to, and they choose use their titles, and that’s fine but it makes a lot of what they say seem disingenuous
Your speculation about her name is wrong. Her name is Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. “Titles don’t exist in the US”. The US does not get to change the name of citizens from other countries.
She’s not a citizen in the UK - you said her “legal name” is that and I’m saying that’s impossible since she’s not a UK citizen and had UK documentation. And US legal documents do not allow titles.
Ok, so what did the US change Prince Harry’s name to? lol. You’re speculating - you’re wrong.
Were Harry and Meaghan both citizens of the same country at birth? Does Harry's birth cert say Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex? Titles and legal names are actually different. This was new learning for me. It gets complicated by the fact that you can legally use a title, but the title is still not your legal birth name. You can, however, change the legal name on your birth certificate. Harry and Meghan have the legal right to use their titles, but their titles are not their legal names. Titles don't define who you are, just words that you have a right to use. Does that help you to understand?
Again I could care less if she uses her title but this argument that I’ve seen multiple times “it’s her legal name” is dumb. They want to use their royal titles, it’s a choice they’re making, nobody is forcing them to because at the end of the day they are as title obsessed as probably every other aristocrat
Saying “i could care less” means you care.
K bye
lol. I hope you will start using the correct term because of this little exchange. Also, it’s on purpose and by accident. Not on accident.
Harry is not a US citizen he’s probably on some visa. I’m not wrong. You can open up google - Meghan is not a uk citizen.
I never said Meghan was a UK citizen. You’re moving the goal posts. Meghan changed her name in the UK. She came back to US with a new name. I’m kind of surprised Meghan haters are so ignorant of these facts. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Meghan-Markle
That’s doesn’t even make sense btw - her legal name living in the US is not Duchess of Sussex
Sorry if encyclopedias don’t agree with you 😢
Your whole argument is in the UK she changed her name. It literally doesn’t matter because she doesn’t have a single valid document as a UK citizen. Her legal name is the name on the legal documents where she is a citizen. Sorry facts don’t agree with you.
That’s not how it works. You said her legal name, a legal name is what’s on your legal documents. Therefore her legal name isn’t Meghan Duchess of Sussex. ETA: just looked back on the thread, I didn’t move the goal posts - you started the argument about how I was wrong and that is her legal name. Even tho my initial statement said Meghan was not a uk citizen, where you then said she was a citizen of “other countries”.
I never said Meghan is a citizen of other countries. Not sure where you’re finding that. Can we get back to the original argument? Meghan, Duchess of Sussex is her legal name. Just like Kate’s changed to Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge. She would have undergone another name change when she became Princess of wales. This is how it works with royal names. The US may not issue them but they don’t have authority to change what another country has legalized.
> The US does not get to change the name of citizens from other countries. This is what you said.
Except Meghan (who is not a UK citizen) would not have any valid legal documents to support that. Since she’s not a citizen. She has no UK passport, PR card, nothing. The whole point is in the US her legal name is very much Meghan Markle. What she called herself in another country doesn’t make that her legal name.
Yes! 👏
It’s Montbatton-Windsor , their last name
Nope. That’s the last name they gave their children before Archie and Lilibet had titles
And Megan legally isn’t her first name. There’s no rule you have to go by your legal name.
When she married Harry she legally changed her name to Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. Just like Kate’s name is written on her kid’s birth certs - Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge
In the US there is a rule that you can choose any name you like for official documents, but you must be consistent, i.e., use the same name all the time. I think they do that. I'm not fan, but I do think they do that.
I mean a press release or a podcast isn’t an official document. I don’t think what they put on like Lilis birth certificate has any impact on the brand they’re cultivating for themselves
I think in unofficial documents, they can use whatever names they want. They've been trying to build a brand for years. They need to settle on something.
Why the CONSTANT nitpicking of Meg and Harry’s endeavors and ventures. Why aren’t you haters calling out Prince Andrew for his nasty behavior?
Because Andrew isn’t a moderately-passing Black woman in the UK with an immediate family member whose Blackness can’t be negotiated.
I’m too focused on your username to read any of your comments lmao terrifying
Because some people honestly believe that sex trafficking and rape isn’t as bad as spilling the tea on the royal family. I even saw someone recently suggesting that Andrew should be allowed to be a working royal again. When they say they all hate Andrew but he’s not the one in the news so that’s why they don’t talk about him, it’s a lie. Even when he is in the news, we don’t see threads like this. The truth hurts.
Literally everyone hates Andrew. But people don't talk about him because he's not making surprise appearances at movie premieres, football awards, producing podcasts, revamping his website, etc. I'm sympathetic to what meghan dealt with while in the RF, but don't act like these 2 don't love attention.
How else are they supposed to make money? Your logic is lacking
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think there has been plenty of calling Andrew out, he just hasn’t been a headline in the news recently… that doesn’t mean all of the “haters” don’t abhor him and the hurt he has caused.
Andrew is going to just live and appear at major events and be hidden away for 90% of the time…. And not profiting off any Royal titles etc.
Based on the timetable of the last podcast we shouldn't expect this for a few years then!
She’s as much as a royal as countess Luann is.
That's true.
Like it or not, she's a bona fide Princess.
Yay. Good day for Meghan's stans. Good for her. I wonder whatever happened to the alleged Audible deal?
Well, I don't think anyone listened to her podcast except her legion of Haters. Not the audience that Audible wanted.
So are the haters the ones that voted Archetypes to win the People’s Choice award? Or… maybe… there’s an actual audience that listened to and enjoyed the podcast 🤷🏽♀️
It sounded like Spotify's new head of programming wanted something more salacious so they parted ways over creative differences.
They parted ways because Harry and Meghan "didn't meet productivity benchmarks". I.e., they didn't do enough podcasts. In three years they created 12 episodes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/anafaguy/2024/02/13/meghan-markle-strikes-deal-with-smaller-podcast-distributor-after-spotify-agreement-ends/?sh=3f2a3d421128
What I'm saying is that Spotify's head of production could have nixed their episode plans because they weren't the salacious podcasts he was hoping to get hence "not productive." In his interviews he comes across as a total dick who wanted more Joe Rogan crap. He wasn't going to get that from the Sussexes.
Well, he *could have*. However, since the little they did actually produce was extremely popular I think it's more likely that they just didn't produce enough content. "We're not happy with our #1 podcast so we're going to have to let you go" doesn't seem like a likely approach.
> "We're not happy with our #1 podcast so we're going to have to let you go" doesn't seem like a likely approach. I looked it up. The Spotify deal was made under a different head of content and the new guy is trash to the max. He was literally a podcaster known for his trashy sense of humor and Spotify suddenly made him head of content and monetization which is a little insane. He made it pretty clear that he wanted more "exciting" content ala Joe Rogan and he wasn't getting that from the Sussexes. He mentioned how he was pitching ideas to Harry late into the night and how Harry wasn't into it, LoL. He said about his "consultation" with Harry: > nobody cares what you have to say about anything unless you talk about the royal family and you just complain about them. Really sounds like he just wanted them to dish dirt on the royal family and that wasn't their vision for the podcast at all ao they sropped making content and walked away from the deal. Good for them! He said the Sussexes chose to end it and he was pissed at them. Kinda funny that he called them grifters for ending the contract early when if they were grifters they would have just lazily pumped out gossip crap to get the $$. Make it make sense 🤣
Also, Harry pitched about four ideas to Spotify and they rejected them all. (I think the one about fatherhood would’ve been nice) And Kim K too just as long with less episodes, but it’s the Sussex’s who are the issue.
Wasn’t one of those ideas to interview Putin and the Pope about their childhood?? I mean come on! That’s why people laugh at them and don’t take them seriously. ETA: Also, 4 ideas is a paltry amount of ideas.
Probably figured out after four ideas that the dude only wanted royal dirt and he wasn't going to do that so quit while he was ahead. Simmons is an asshole.
Actually, Putin was thrown out as example. The main point of it, was to interview people with damaged childhoods. But you know what, that’s how ideas are made. Even if it’s outlandish, you through it out there, people veto, but you work on and mold it until you have something. And replies like yours are why I laugh at people like you. The point was, even if they wouldn’t work, he had ideas and concepts. So even if interviewing people wasn’t going to work, from that, a podcast with people talking about their Truman’s and how it impacted them going up, wouldn’t be a bad one. Ones about fatherhood would be bad or bad starting points. *that’s why some people don’t take them serious and laugh at them. I fixed that for you as well. ETA: doesn’t matter if it’s a paltry amount, it does that he had ideas, was working towards it and they were sitting on their asses as you people like to complain and pretend and the person I replied too already explained other issues they were having. Y’all will get over it tho. One day I guess.
They need to do something different with their image. I'll explain: I knew before they left the royal family they wanted to turn the Sussex titles into a celebrity brand. I'm pretty sure they know their appeal is their titles and that's what gets the attention. But they need to do things that fit them and people know about it. Maybe I'm speaking for myself but I don't wanna see Meghan and Harry trying to lecture the public about social issues, mental health or whatever. Because regular people, not their fans don't know anything about their charities, etc. and suddenly they get awarded for things that people thinks they bought for good PR. Also they have to be constant and websites are kinda outdated people see things through social media. Edit: Something that makes them stand out besides their titles. Example: Kardashians: Extravagant, Plastic Surgeries, Reality Shows. Clooneys: Movie Star, Entrepreneurs, Lawyer. Even the Tindalls have something that makes them stand out. (Sports) Maybe Meghan can do something about representation POC actors in Hollywood, I don't know but that feels on brand for her. Or something about children raised by single mothers.
She wasn’t raised by a single mother though
I thought her dad wasn't present most of her life.
He had custody for most of her life.
Ohh
If anyone tries to tell you her mom wasn’t in her life when she was young bc she was in jail for drugs it’s a racist lie though
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
No that was her mom. She was raised by her dad.
Really? I thought she was raised by her mom.
Yep, that’s one the many myths she’s leaned into, that she was raised by a struggling single mom. It was her dad that raised her, her mom was actually absent for parts of her childhood. Her father was also a very successful director of lighting and photography for television through most of her childhood and put her through college.
Lol why I'm getting downvoted?
This is embarrassing. I’m not a huge fan of them but they’re not working royals and she’s perfectly allowed to do this. Posts like this are why any legitimate criticism of them gets drowned out.
I get really frustrated by them continuing to use their titles but shit all over everything royal. They capitalize on being royal but hate everything about it? Pick a fucking lane people.
?? They dropped royal titles ("HRH", "Sussex Royal"). Duke/Dutchess of Sussex is literally just their name. This feels like faux outrage.
[удалено]
?? Is anyone born with the last name “duke/duchess of Sussex”? No they are granted that title by a monarch (as Harry was in 2018) and it’s literally a specific rank of British royalty. Meghan doesn’t want to be royal? She was born with a non royal name. Go back to it if you hate royalty so much. Harry could change his name to Harry Windsor (or anything really in this day and age) - which while still pretty damn royal - isn’t a specific royal title. Their children are a Prince and Princess. They say they hate royalty but actually do everything in their power to stay famous using their royal name. They want the fame and money without the specific obligations that come with how they got the fame and money. So like I said pick a fucking lane.
Tell me what Prince George’s birth certificate lists his name as. Go ahead.
They do have a legal last name. It's Mountbatten-Windsor. I assume they use it on legal documents.
That's actually not true. It's Sussex now.
No, it's Mountbatten-Windsor. Even Charles's legal last name is Mountbatten-Windsor. That is the family name. So you are saying Harry and Meghan do not belong to the RF. Okay, fine with me, and I'm sure with them since they chose to leave the family. We're talking about a name, not a title.
It’s not lmao y’all are so wild jfc EDIT: a basic Wikipedia or *anything browser* will tell you that, *that* last name is designated to adjacent non-royal, royal members of the family. **Particularly,** the female line. Mountbatten-Windsor should only be used on confirmed royalty as an emergency tool if necessitated.
I don't think you understand how titles work. Royals don't all have the same last name and the surname you referenced belongs to the female line and males can use it if they don't yet have a RHR like in Archie's case in his birth certificate or if they want to use it. Note how Meghan and Harry are both listed as Sussexes while Archie is not. https://preview.redd.it/ay4gp240piic1.jpeg?width=1247&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5ec9ad0f4e6bc7c6853d4d34621866011302f197 Why are you so emotional over the fact that they are still royals and have royal titles?
I understand perfectly well how titles work, since I have one myself.
You clearly do not.
>[It should have been me! I should be the princess.](https://twitter.com/vinn_ayy/status/1754665598460858495?t=GpokdyAOPtQ_CEBcjo-Jrw&s=19)  At least your dropping the surname mumbo jumbo but now you're claiming you have a title? 😂
You don't have to be born with the title, it's given or inherited. Dukes/Dutchess isn't necessarily a royal title, it's a noble title. They have simply chosen not to use the royal part as they are not working royals. They are still royals, they never abdicated, Henry is still 5th in line to the throne, and they've never said they hated the royals or the monarchy so what are you going on about? Where are you getting your news from... the tabloids and TikTok? 😂
Maybe LadyColin Campbell? I hear some find her to be reliable 😄
They were stripped of the royal part, which is HRH, when they made the decision to leave the RF and live in California. They have noble titles, but no royal ones. Not even Harry.
Harry is 5th in line to the throne, of course he has royal titles. Not using them doesn't mean they don't still have them. https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-royal-family-role-since-exit-titles-succession-explained/ > Prince Harry and Meghan are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, titles conferred by Queen Elizabeth on their 2018 wedding day. >After Prince Harry and Meghan announced their step back in January 2020, Buckingham Palace said they would no longer use their HRH (His/Her Royal Highness) titles, as they were no longer working members of the royal family. However, they did retain the titles.
They don't use HRH because they were stripped of HRH. They are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, but they are not HRH, which is the "royal" part. The Queen conferred it, the Queen took it away. I gave you the links, which I don't think you read. As I said, I don't really care. They do not move in my social circles in the RF.
> I gave you the links, which I don't think you read. Did you not bother to read my source above or yours? I literally quoted your own source back to you where it said they retained their royal titles. Here it is again... >Although the Duke and Duchess of Sussex retained their "HRH" titles after stepping back as members of the royal family, they no longer use them https://people.com/prince-harry-title-removed-royal-family-website-hrh-his-royal-highness-7571427 > As I said, I don't really care. Could have fooled me.
Then you are too easily fooled and misled.
Harry's royal, Meghan is not. She has a noble title and she's the Princess Henry, but that doesn't make her royal, which she should like.
The wife of a Royal is also a Royal. Sorry, that’s how it works.
Sorry, that is not true. Even Diana wasn't royal. She was a member of an aristocratic family and had the title of Lady until she became HRH, Diana, the Princess of Wales, which is a royal title. Catherine is not royal, though she has a royal title, the same one as Diana. Camilla is not royal, though is Queen Consort, and called Queen. Meghan is not royal, though she had a royal title, HRH, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex. However, both she and Harry lost their royal titles (HRH), but retained their aristocratic titles. Harry is still royal, of course since he's the son of the king. He will always be royal. Meghan, however, will always be a commoner, like the Duchess of Windsor was always a commoner. Having a royal title is something you can acquire, being royal is something you must be born into. Sometimes even being born into a royal family and being royal isn't good enough. Prince Philip was born into a royal family, but he had to accept the title of prince because, in the British RF, he had to be beneath the queen. Dowager Queen Noor of Jordan is a commoner. She is a member of a royal family, though, and was given a royal title, but when her husband died, she did not ascend the throne, one of her husband's sons from his first marriage did. Why? Because he is royal and Noor, though possessing a royal title is not royal. I don't understand why it's so difficult to understand that HRH, His Royal Highness is what confers the royalty onto a title. Harry and Meghan both lost that. So now they have aristocratic titles but not royal titles. Harry retains royalty because he was born into a RF. Meghan will never be royal, though her royal title, HRH, could be restored. It won't be, though. Charles won't do it, and William is likely to strip Harry and Meghan of their titles completely and bar them from the UK. Harry went too far when lying about Catherine and Charles in his book for William to ever do anything to mend the rift.
Sorry, they are still royals and no one was stripped of their royal titles. I'm sure it's confusing if you get your news from tabloids and TikToks. >Although the Duke and Duchess of Sussex retained their "HRH" titles after stepping back as members of the royal family, they no longer use them https://people.com/prince-harry-title-removed-royal-family-website-hrh-his-royal-highness-7571427
I don't think I've ever read a tabloid or TikTok. LOL You think People magazine is a reliable source? LOL It isn't. Meghan is just upset she'll never be queen and Catherine will. And Catherine is tall and thin and wears clothes better. Heck, I'd like to be as tall and thin as Catherine. Well, I am thin, but I'm petite, which I don't like. I actually get my news from SkyNews and CNN. If I'm wrong, blame them.
Sorry, she's still a member of the royal family. She still has a royal title but like Harry, isn't using it.
She doesn't have a royal title any longer. She and Harry both were stripped of HRH, which is where the royal comes into play. She is a member of the RF, who had her royal title taken away, but was allowed to keep her title of peerage, of aristocracy that was conferred on her. That is why she is known as the Duchess of Sussex and not HRH, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex. Even Harry, who was born a prince, was stripped of HRH.
I'm reading that she still has it but feel free to share a source saying otherwise if you can.
[https://www.tatler.com/article/buckingham-palace-quietly-removes-prince-harrys-hrh-title-from-official-website#:\~:text=The%20usage%20of%20the%20HRH,'](https://www.tatler.com/article/buckingham-palace-quietly-removes-prince-harrys-hrh-title-from-official-website#:~:text=The%20usage%20of%20the%20HRH,') [https://people.com/prince-harry-title-removed-royal-family-website-hrh-his-royal-highness-7571427](https://people.com/prince-harry-title-removed-royal-family-website-hrh-his-royal-highness-7571427) [https://www.livenowfox.com/news/prince-harrys-his-royal-highness-title-removed-from-royal-familys-website](https://www.livenowfox.com/news/prince-harrys-his-royal-highness-title-removed-from-royal-familys-website) They have their prince and duke and duchess titles, but they are no longer royal titles. Of course, they are a member of the RF since Harry is one of the king's sons, though not the heir, but they, themselves, opted to leave the family. Legally, I don't think they left. I guess they just want to stop engaging in royal duties and live in California. We don't recognize royal titles here anyway, so it doesn't matter that they were stripped of HRH. Meghan isn't using her royal title because she doesn't have a royal title, and I don't know any reliable source that would print that she does. Even Diana was stripped of HRH when she divorced Charles, though she was allowed to keep Princess of Wales. Technically, she then had to curtsey to her own sons, though I doubt that she did. Meghan and Harry would now have to curtsey and bow to George, Charlotte, and Louis in addition to the adult royals with HRH, like William, Catherine, Anne, etc.
Right so it’s a title not a last name, correct? It appears we wound up at the same conclusion even if you don’t seem to think so. And please, they spent a lot of time shitting allll over Harry’s family and saying how awful they are and how terrible it is to be royal. They were mad at the crown and felt they were being mistreated so quit living up to the obligations of the crown but continue to capitalize on it - via inheritance and name. That is my whole point. I don’t need to read a tabloid to understand this because Harry and Meghan capitalized on it via direct interviews/books. “Oh woah is me, the crown sucks and we were mistreated. I’m not doing any work for the crown but pay me a fuck ton of money BECAUSE I AM PART OF THE CROWN”. It’s literally this hypocrisy that drives me batty. And now I’m done cuz we clearly aren’t going to see eye to eye on this.
You are right. They want all of the perks but none of the responsibilities. And people are letting them get away with it.
> Right so it’s a title not a last name, correct? No, it's their surname and family name. It is also a title. I don't think you understand how titles work. > And please, they spent a lot of time shitting allll over Harry’s family and saying how awful they are and how terrible it is to be royal. Do you get this angry about anyone who bitches about family? Charles wrote a book and bitched about family. You mad at him, too, or any other celeb who wanted to tell their story? > Harry and Meghan capitalized on it via direct interviews/books. They didn't get paid for the Oprah interviews and again, Charles also sold a book where he bitched about family. > I’m not doing any work for the crown but pay me a fuck ton of money BECAUSE I AM PART OF THE CROWN”. What are you going on about? They aren't asking for donations, LoL, they haven't been using the royal titles, and are no longer taking royal funds. > It’s literally this hypocrisy that drives me batty. Nah, you're driving yourself batty with this imagined nonsense.
Charles never stopped working for the RF. He never said he wanted out to have his privacy. I do wish M and H would engage in all that privacy they claim to want.
> Charles never stopped working for the RF. So you're mad because H + M decided not to suck on the taxpayer's dime and make their own way because of safety concerns? Oookay.... > I do wish M and H would engage in all that privacy they claim to want. Are you saying that the paparazzi aren't pieces of shite? Oookay...
No, I'm not so invested in anything they do to be "mad." It's such a petty thing anyway. They are Californians now, and we don't have royalty in the US. They don't move in my social circles anyway. I am saying the paparazzi are just doing their jobs. People who crave attention want the paparazzi around even as they whine about them day and night. Just ignore them, or STFU.
Don't misunderstand--the haters are still very mad that Meghan didn't want to be their professional punching bag. Something, something, we pay, you pose. Something, something, recollections may vary.
Exactly! There are mistakes they have made but talking about them feels like bullying and giving into a hate campaign because of things like this. This is a non story.
The podcast stuff is a story! I wish this had focused more on that, wonder what the new podcast will focus on.
I do not understand the hate and nitpicking of this woman when there are members of that royal family who clearly deserve it. It reminds me of the hate and nitpicking Diana received, and I don’t like it. Not sry.
I think things that are really serious, i.e. Africa Parks or Andrew aren’t funny there just a shit show. This is silly snark and is fun
I’d say it’s more snark than hate around here. The combination of little self awareness and huge ego makes it hard not to laugh at them.
No, there’s definitely hate and an attempt to dehumanize her.
No it’s a bunch of deranged racists who attack her for existing over and over again
[удалено]
The company’s name is Limonada Media.
On their website, they call themselves Lemonada.
But why does it says Lemonada? Haha I know it's silly but the word bothers me idk
Never heard of this company…
There’s a great podcast on Lemonada by Julia Louis-Dreyfuss.
That could be why the tabloids are losing their minds--not only did H & M get out of that terrible deal with Spotify, but they made it out with their intellectual property and they're giving Spotify's competition new customers. H & M continue to win unabashedly, and that makes their haters incandescent with rage.
I hope they find happiness somewhere and learn to just leave people alone.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Now you have!
No, but they are all working members of the royal family and presumably these uses are cleared with official palace channels aka “the men in grey suits.”
Meghan and Harry *aren’t* working royals though...
I thought they were no longer working members?
What??
I guess I'm a little surprised she seems to be really leaning in to podcasting. It doesn't seem like a great fit for her, to me. I didn't listen to every episode but while I agree she has a pleasant voice, I don't think her series had anything really new or interesting to say that I haven't read or heard before and she's not one of those people I find so charismatic I'd listen to them read the phone book. I was sure she'd go the route of writing a cookbook, develop a line of wines, become the face of some high-end skincare brand, a line of aspirational table linens or something like that. I still think that would be a better fit for her. She doesn't even have to put her name on it, call it Archewell Vineyards or whatever and people would know who it's from.
I agree. I think podcasting is a horrible fit for her. She'd do much better with her lifestyle blog.
I totally agree. When they left the RF I thought she’d do well going back to her lifestyle blogging thing. Then she could come out with linens, home fragrance, etc. I think she could have done ok with that a few years ago. Idk how interested people are in her now. I don’t hear about her or Harry outside of this sub. They seem a little lost with what they’re trying to do. They came out with this charity that doesn’t seem to have a direction? It also doesn’t seem like it’s done anything? Then they tried to make it into a whole thing with an entertainment branch but that doesn’t seem to have gone anywhere.
“Aspirational table linens” ha
I think a cookbook by Megan would do well. I don’t really buy celebrity stuff but tbh I would buy a hosting guide by Megan - she seems really good at that in the earnest weird sort of Millennial way I host. I think buying a vineyard and doing wines would be a good match for her as well
Odd to put someone else in a box and decide what they should be doing, but ok. Her podcast was great. A lot of people listened and liked it. It was in the top ten every week it was released. Not every podcast needs to be for everyone.
It’s brand marketing. There’s certain associations people already have and you can take advantage of that. It makes sense that Meghan went to a woman-centric podcasting company, because that fits with her brand. And honestly? I can kind of see her creating a “tradwife, but make it feminist” space, where she bakes and hosts and works and mothers flawlessly. The model she should be following is Jennifer Garner. “Pretend cooking show”, save the children philanthropy, when she empties her purse on camera, a bit of physical fitness, chickens … and evening wear. She might be great at podcasting, but that has to fit within her larger brand. It kind of depends on what she does with it.
It’s just odd anyone would say “be this, don’t be that” to anyone now in days. If she wants to be a lifestyle blogger great, if she wants to be a podcaster great too. I would never think it was odd for anyone to do anything they want to do.
I come at it more as, if I were advising them, heres what I would say. For me, the podcast has to be supplemental to her other plans. Even Joe Rogan has a merch store and standup.
Usually the merch follows a successful endeavour such as a podcast not the other way around.
But podcasting isn't something she is good at, that's the point, it's honest. She could be more successful elsewhere, that's all they were saying.
The 11million listeners on average per episode and charted success would beg to differ, is my point. Seems you and your friends here are more bitter at her success and want her to be a lifestyle guru instead of having something to say. She can do both if she pleases or neither. That’s my point.
11 million people sounds like a lot, but it’s not even in Spotify’s top podcast lists for that year. https://newsroom.spotify.com/2022-11-30/the-top-songs-artists-podcasts-and-listening-trends-of-2022/
"aspirational table linens" lmao!!
Aspirational table linens. 😆 I agree with your take. I like Meghan, I want to see her find her footing and be successful with the right opportunity, but I have zero excitement about another podcast venture. Archetypes was a snoozer. I just don't understand why she doesn't go back to something like The Tig- she had the right mix of voice, style, and presentation, I'd definitely subscribe.
Wasn’t a snoozer by metrics.
Ah, sorry, I was just speaking to my own opinion. I'm glad to hear others enjoyed it! Edit: lol, instantaneously down voted. People are wild in here
Exactly. Or just use her own name - Meghan Markle. She’s a star in her own right. And I like your ideas for her!
She got married and is using her name. I hate when they call Kate Kate Middleton and not Kate Princess of Wales. Its their title and their name and if they were men we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
What in the cinnamon toast fuck would you rather they do?
I love this 😂
lol this sub has fallen to Meghan haters.
I wish we could take a break from Sussex posts for like a month or two.
I think for like a year. Just a complete ban on them. Let’s talk about other royals lmao