Meghan on her relationship with Prince Harry: ‘We’re a couple. We’re in love.’

Meghan on her relationship with Prince Harry: ‘We’re a couple. We’re in love.’

In a surprise move, Meghan Markle has given a cover interview to Vanity Fair about her relationship with Prince Harry, and she participated in a photoshoot for the magazine.

Meghan spoke with Vanity Fair at her home in Toronto in June. According to the article, Meghan wore a “red, knee-length floral dress” by Erdem (ugh) for the interview, and “prepared a lunch of organic greens, a crusty bread to be dipped in olive oil, and pasta tossed with chilies”. Additionally, the article states that Meghan met Harry through friends in London in July 2016.

The article is a bit long because there are quotes from others about Meghan as well as a bit about Harry’s history and supposition about what the Queen thinks. I’ve pulled the quotes from Meghan.

On the media storm since their relationship went public: “It has its challenges, and it comes in waves—some days it can feel more challenging than others. And right out of the gate it was surprising the way things changed. But I still have this support system all around me, and, of course, my boyfriend’s support.”

On doing odd-jobs before landing her role on Suits: “My parents had been so supportive, watching me audition, trying to make ends meet, taking all the odds-and-ends jobs to pay my bills. I was doing calligraphy, and I was a hostess at a restaurant—and all those things that actors do. My father knew how hard it is for an actor to get work, so he above all people was so proud that I was able to beat the odds.”

On her parents and growing up: “Every day after school for 10 years, I was on the set of Married… with Children, which was a really funny and perverse place for a little girl in a Catholic-school uniform to grow up. What’s so incredible, you know, is that my parents split up when I was two, [but] I never saw them fight. We would still take vacations together. My dad would come on Sundays to drop me off, and we’d watch Jeopardy! eating dinner on TV trays, the three of us…. We were still so close-knit.”

On dealing with the tabloids about her and Harry: “I can tell you that at the end of the day I think it’s really simple. We’re two people who are really happy and in love. We were very quietly dating for about six months before it became news, and I was working during that whole time, and the only thing that changed was people’s perception. Nothing about me changed. I’m still the same person that I am, and I’ve never defined myself by my relationship.”

On not reading the press about her: “I don’t read any press. I haven’t even read press for Suits. The people who are close to me anchor me in knowing who I am. The rest is noise.”

On her freckles: “I’ve always loved my freckles. [I was] thrilled to work with Peter [Lindbergh] because he rarely retouches and he believes in such little makeup. I gave him a big hug and said, ‘I am so excited to work with you because I know we will finally be able to see my freckles!'”

On dating Harry: “We’re a couple. We’re in love. I’m sure there will be a time when we will have to come forward and present ourselves and have stories to tell, but I hope what people will understand is that this is our time. This is for us. It’s part of what makes it so special, that it’s just ours. But we’re happy. Personally, I love a great love story.”

[Vanity Fair]

What is Meghan promoting here? I went into the article thinking she was promoting Suits and that the press just focused on the small part where she spoke about Harry. But after reading the whole thing, she doesn’t promote Suits at all. She doesn’t promote her charity work at all either. All she is doing is promoting her relationship with Harry.

I think it is fine for a celebrity to give an interview promoting their relationships if that’s what they want to do – celebrities do it all the time – but I think it is fairly hypocritical that Harry is fine with Meghan giving this interview about their relationship when he and William have said in the past that they don’t want to be seen as celebrities, and in Harry’s Newsweek interview a “royal official” said “The one thing they don’t want is to be seen as a group of celebrities”. Meghan is literally a celebrity giving a celebrity interview about her relationship. This is a celebrity move. So the next time Harry whines about not wanting to be seen as a celebrity, he can have a seat.

Other than that, I don’t have much to say. I was hoping Meghan was going to talk about something interesting, but she didn’t. I could nitpick, but I won’t.

Something positive: I do really like the photoshoot – Meghan look very pretty.

322 thoughts on “Meghan on her relationship with Prince Harry: ‘We’re a couple. We’re in love.’

  1. I agree that it would have been nice for her to talk about something (anything!) other than her relationship with Harry. If she had even given us any new or interesting information about their life together this would get a big thumbs up from me, but it was literally an article about nothing! So boring. So dissapointing!

    I’m curios to see if MMR or any other readers feel like this is a slight to the British press? Giving this interview to VF seems like kind of a slap in the face to me, after all the admonishment they’ve faced when it comes to covering her.

    1. VF hasn’t met a royal or royal adjacent they didn’t like. It’s not trashy PEOPLE mag but could be considered a more highbrow place to do this interview. An interview that’s going to be favorable torwards her nonetheless

      1. Definitely more high-brow, but isn’t there a British equivalent where they could have done an interview like this? Choosing an American magazine seems like a choice that’s worth some dissection…

        1. We get the American version of VF. We don’t have a British-centric version.

          Correction: we get a vaguely British version of the American VF. Meaning, whilst we do not have a standalone British VF like you do Italy or Spain(?), we get a magazine that has been British-ised in some respects either by adding a British-centric supplement or the currency signs have been changed to £ or a one page feature on something British.

          Otherwise it’s American through and through.

          Not such a big deal considering many contributors are British to the magazine so it doesn’t feel too American even if no effort has been made to create a British edition.

      2. Alexandra,

        You wrote “I’m curios to see if MMR or any other readers feel like this is a slight to the British press? Giving this interview to VF seems like kind of a slap in the face to me, after all the admonishment they’ve faced when it comes to covering her.”

        I know this is my legal mind kicking in but one must remember that Vanity Fair is an publication in the USA. This means it is legally out of reach of the British Royal Family’s influence. They can ask nicely not to print something but it will not stop them.

        Did Harry sanction the article? Who knows but we can all speculate. One thing is obvious the article pushes Meghan’s world view and agenda. First it is clear they are adjusting the when they met timeline to make sure it looks like neither parties were cheating. I am going with May as it seems everyone is working hard to discount that timeline. Second she is pushing the image of being a wonderful humanitarian. As respect of her humanitarian activities they are far and few. Some of what she said she has accomplished cannot even be verified. Finally she is pushing the poor me hard done by poor girl who struggled. If she was so poor why discuss how successful her father was? There is no indication that she was a scholarship recipient. She might have been but again who knows.

        If the aim was to become more liked by the British public than she has failed. Though it has been picked up by the UK press there still is a backlash to her and I do not believe it has anything to do with her race and more to do with her over the top pushing herself. British people have odd ideas about their celebrities. In many respects they like to build them up to tear them down but more often than not they like down to earth celebrities who do not take themselves seriously or believe their own hype. Meghan’s nickname is Me-again-Meghan. In a tiny way it is how they show their feelings towards someone. For example Kate was nicknamed “Waity Katie” and I cannot remember if “Doors to Manual” was Kate or Carol. These are my own observations from living here over 15 years. Others might think different.

        People no longer believe the narrative pushed in the papers for the most part. I have no idea if this is a real relationship or not. But ultimately one cannot state time and again they want privacy and then go to the press.

        1. Funny thing, she said they did not lock eyes until July but said they had been dating for 6 months before Oct.Nov which brings us to May.

          So there was definitely cheating involved, on both parts. A great love story isn’t it ?

          1. Yes wasn’t the original thinking they met during Harry’s visit to Toronto to promote Invictus before he went down to Orlando? So that’s the truth, then, though VF corrected themselves at the bottom saying they started dating in July. lol If the May thing is true Meghan definitely cheated; Harry who knows, maybe not if it was just a shagging/fling thing where it’s not a relationship but for funsies/bed warming.

    2. Compared to the treatment chelsy had when she was dating harry Meghan got of lightly all harry and William do is slight the British press its time the gloves come of and they stop pampering them

      1. Harry said in an interview or possibly sanctioned an article to communicate the same before he dated MM that he was shocked and dismayed at the treatment of his other relationships and would do his best to shield his future relationships for as long as possible and keep them as private as possible.(paraphrasing).

        It didn’t receive much attention, but when he broke up with Cressida and some media started to write rude articles about her, he indirectly let it be known that whatever was being written was untrue and false representation.

        If i can find the article, will post later.

  2. This makes harry look so hypocritical if they get married I think she’s opened the flood gates to the press with this I understand she would have to do interviews if she was promoting her work but she isn’t I can’t understand why harry or Kensington palace would be ok with it makes her look fame hungry as for her talking about media attention there barley been any compared to his other girlfriends the only photos we have of her are pap walks

    1. I have a strong suspicion that the reason KP sanctioned this article is because they know something about the relationship that is not public yet. That, perhaps, they are preparing a PR team for Meghan’s very own even as we speak.

  3. I actually really want to like Meghan. In some ways, I think she’s too smart too pro woman to want to belong to an institution that has all sorts of protocols that should go against a lot of her public persona beliefs.
    Having said that, I clearly think she’s promoted this relationship in the media and that’s what has always irked me. But it’s not her actions that necessarily bother me, it’s that Harry is obviously okay with it that irks me. This relationship is almost everything Harry publicly says he doesn’t want. Yet he continues to date the actresses/celebs type so he can’t say he doesn’t want media and interest yet date a type who’s going to court the publicity. It’s just highlighted the downfall of Harry and what I don’t like about him.
    I can’t tell if this is just one step next to the engagement announcement or what but Harry can just shut it the next time he complains.
    I thought she looked lovely in the pics but we learned nothing new about her. Same stories/anecdotes that she’s already put out there. Just add we’re in love and this is our time but I’m still going to talk about it.
    It leaves a bad taste in my mouth

    1. I think both her and Harry have been playing games with the press take the sun exclusives they were so obviously set up by Meghan and harry done by exactly the same writers and photographer it reminds me of princess diana call the paps then make out she was hounded

    2. Same, Sarah.

      I honestly really like Meghan, as much as I can, based on the very little I know about her, and I keep hoping that these interviews she gives will give me more information as to her interests and hopes for the future. Unfortunately, it has been one disssapointment after another with her interviews!

    3. I like Meghan, for the most part, when she’s speaking/writing about women’s issues – although, to be honest, I dislike the way she says some things. But I give no shits about the lifestyle stuff or her cooking – I’m just not into that type of thing – and I get bored with most of the other stuff about her. I really only like her when she’s talking about her charity work/causes, the other stuff bores me. So this interview was very boring for me.

      I agree that this relationship highlights the hypocrisy of Prince Harry. For years he’s claimed he wanted to find the right woman to “take it on” and have kids, yet those same years he’s dated random celebrities (models and actresses) and clearly those types of people aren’t going to be interested in the royal life. Plus, he’s claimed he doesn’t want to be seen as a celeb, yet continues to date celebs. There is just so much hypocrisy there. He does some good stuff with his work, absolutely, but he’s very hypocritical about a lot of stuff, too.

      1. I’m still trying to understand the part time vegan comment! Does that mean she occasionally eats meat/fish/poultry or dairy??! And if so that doesn’t make you vegan! I need clarification!!It sounds like such a Hollywood thing to say. I’m a vegetarian no clarification needed.
        I think when Harry works he does good work. It’s everything else I’m having issues with. Not wanting to be a celeb yet dating one who is, wanting to be a normal bloke yet going off hours to a major museum, saying that being born with privilege comes a lot of responsibility yet works relatively few engagements…

        1. I don’t understand the part time vegan comment. Yes, Harry’s hypocrisy is annoying.

          1. We incorporate some meatless meals into our diet but I would never call myself a part-time vegetarian. I couldn’t even be a part-time vegan because I think not eating honey is more harmful than helpful, especially if you are plant based. So that part about her is confusing. Just say you like a lot of plant based meals in your diet. No need to sound pretentious with “part-time vegan.”

            I want to like Meghan but here lately the facade has been crumbling a little and I’m afraid of Kate 2.0.

        2. Sarah,

          Could the part vegan mean that she is a vegetarian but is transitioning to becoming a vegan? I have no idea what is meant but this is the closest I can come up with the idea of part time vegan.

          1. Hmm. So not really a vegan after all. That’s just irritating! Why say it all?? I had a pt tell me they were vegetarian but in the course of the discussion it turns out she just doesn’t eat red meat and fish!! Gah
            This isn’t even vegetarian. Not that you have to put a label on it but she put it out there

        3. It’s really quite simple, and I feel I can explain it because I am also a part-time vegan: one simply doesn’t eat animal products all the time

          For example just this morning I had a bagel with organic, free-trade, sustainably raised and handpicked almond butter. And then for lunch, I will have a double cheeseburger from in-n-out.

          See? It’s not so hard, really!

          1. So one having an animal product-less meal once in a while or once a day makes one a part time vegan? Then there are loads of part time vegans who have no idea they are part time vegans – like me.

          2. Well I had cereal this morning with gross almond milk, … so obvi I am a part time vegan. A bit of perspective, my boyfriend who is British is in town along with his parents, I asked them how they felt about Meghan, the article etc. while knowing that Harry was dating an American Divorcée, this article was in their word a true introduction to her, not coming from a tabloid … his mom said because W&K were together for such a long time, people kind of knew or were used to her. My point is that most people are vaguely aware of Meghan and didn’t truly have an opinion on her.. so thus the article… I still think it was a bad idea, but they didn’t care they just wanted to go to time square. So, along with having to pretend to like the gross almond milk she made, I was also forced to go to time square… but I digress

        4. She has said that she eats vegan meals during the week when working, differently during weekends when she’s not filming. I don’t recall her claiming to be full-time, 100% vegan, especially as there was some other article about her roasting chicken. She’s saying that most of the meals she eats during the week are vegan; she’s not claiming to be a full-time vegan anywhere. You don’t have to be a full-time vegan to eat vegan meals.

          “I try to eat vegan during the week and then have a little bit more flexibility with what I dig into on the weekends. But at the same time, it’s all about balance. Because I work out the way I do, I don’t ever want to feel deprived. I feel that the second you do that is when you start to binge on things. It’s not a diet; it’s lifestyle eating.”

          I eat in a similar way – vegan most of the time, heavier things like pizza (full gluten, real cheese, meat) on occasion.

          1. To late to edit. Went and looked for this info in response to this discussion; I’m not much for lifestyle or menu blogs/sites either.

        1. Ellana,

          You wrote “And her favorite meal to prepare is roasted chicken. Vegan ? No. Vegetarian ? No.”

          Sorry I forgot she loves to cook chicken and brings it to make friends. My bad! I was just thinking what a normal person meant by part time vegan. I should have tried to enter Meghan think.

  4. Meghan Markle literally gave two, very broad quotes about her relationship. Quotes that basically confirmed what tabloids and the press have been saying for months. It is not her fault if the journalist made the entire article about her relationship. She doesn’t have the clout in Hollywood to say what gets published and what doesn’t; what direction to take the article.

    Also, Prince Harry and KP, more-than-likely, gave the okay for the interview to take place and be published. Also, Go Fug Yourself and LaineyGossip (both great and credible, especially Lainey Gossip) have reason to believe that this is part of a larger rollout of Meghan Markle to the public. To see her as a person and not an actress; hence not talking about Suits. Therefore, there is very good reason to believe that KP had a say in what got published and what didn’t.

    1. If they wanted to present her as something other than an actress, then discussing her charity work or causes would have been nice. But she doesn’t mention those things, just the relationship and a few things about her parents that we already knew – which is very actress-y as actresses discuss their relationships for PR all the time. Absolutely, Harry ok’d the interview. If not, then Meghan would be dumped right now. Harry ok-ing the interview even more makes me think that it is very hypocritical of Harry to claim not to want to be seen as a celeb, yet ok his girlfriend giving a celeb-type interview about nothing more than their relationship.

      1. Absolutely, KMR, agree to the interview if she is allowed to highlight a charity or cause. That happens all the time. Otherwise this interview is pretty pointless, except maybe to confirm that H and W don’t follow any of the old royal rules, number one of which for potential partners is, don’t talk to the press about the relationship.

        1. Sorry, but I think this particular criticism is very unfair. Most of what I’ve seen or heard about Meghan Markle from Meghan Markle herself, aside from Suits, has been entirely centred on her charity work and various social causes that she champions. I’m not going to begrudge her one VF interview where she has actually been given permission to speak about her long-term boyfriend. I know it’s difficult to reconcile, what with Harry being so antagonistic toward the press, but maybe she isn’t? Maybe she’s trying to coach him into a more positive, mutually beneficial relationship with the press. Their existence is necessary to the BRF’s success, so they need to find a better way to coexist. Let’s also not forget that just because stuff about her philanthropic work wasn’t published in the article, doesn’t mean that it wasn’t discussed during the interview. We all know that there’s a lot of politics in the BRF and perhaps there’s unease about presenting MM as this hugely philanthropic person given the rumblings re: W&K seeming to be quite the opposite.

          If KP was happy with the content of the final article, I imagine that she wouldn’t have used this particular moment to complain that there wasn’t enough about HER in the article.

          1. How has she been a positive influence ? Just asking because I don’t see how. If anything, she has damaged more his reputation.

          2. I didn’t say she was a “positive influence”. I said that perhaps she’s trying to steer him toward a more positive relationship with the press. As far as her damaging his reputation, that is 100% a matter of opinion and perception. If you’re really hanging onto the idea that the BRF can only marry other rich, pedigreed, white people than I suppose she has been quite damaging. I think it’s refreshing.

          3. Joannawallace, I don’t think that they have to marry rich, white, pedigreed only. Just not celebrities.

      2. One step at a time. You’re a royal watcher. You know a lot about Meghan and her background. I assure you most people don’t.

        I think Meghan and Harry will be great activists, but first they have to marry. And before they marry, the public must be prepared for Meghan and Meghan must be prepared for greater public scrutiny.

        That’s what is happening in this interview. The subtext is “Meghan is normal. No need to be alarmed that she’s biracial, divorced, a child of divorce, an actress… or whatever.” Those things don’t alarm you or me, but the world is a little crazy. Surely, you’ve seen nasty comments about her.

        Her work on social issues will get plenty of press in the coming years. Right now, the goal is to introduce her: up play normal, downplay attributes some believe disqualify her from marrying a royal.

        I think she’ll do great things someday, but for many reasons this isn’t the time to paint her as a social justice warrior. She hasn’t done enough (yet) and won’t be free to do anything earthshaking (or boat-rocking) until the engagement and wedding insanity subsides.

        One step at a time. I fear you’re going to be horribly disappointed for a while, but I don’t think she’ll let you down.

        1. The voice of reason ! I hope you will stop posting as Anonyma, but I agree with your point of view. I think she’ll be a breath of fresh air in a different way to Diana, but hopefully from within a happy marriage.

    2. She could have said my relationship is off topic. Many celebs do actually put out what they will and won’t comment on before an article. And many have said their relationships are OT

      1. You make a valid point. However, I do think this was really just a light introduction to Meghan Markle. I feel like we will get a lot more later (probably sooner than we think). When we do, I feel that will be a lot more about her charity work; what she’s passionate about; what she hopes to achieve (charity wise), etc…

        I have no problem with the couple of quotes about Harry. They were very vague. She said she had his support and called him her “boyfriend”. Just like he called her his “girlfriend” in that statement in November 2016.

        In that statement, in called out the media and Internet trolls for their sexist and racist comments and undertones in their articles. He said that he understands there is an interest in his private life, and he’s made his peace with that (though sometimes it doesn’t seem like it). The statement was about the sexism and racism, not that people were writing tabloid-junk about his relationship (he’s used to that).

        Does he contradict himself, yes. He’s human. We all contradict ourselves. No one can be 100% consistent all-of-the-time. However, I hope that Meghan will help him sort things out with the press. She seems very grounded and might be able to help him “get over” the anger and hurt that he has. He lets the press in a lot more than his brother. Harry understands that they can be useful.

        Now, as to your comment about Prince Harry not wanting to be seen as a celebrity, I think the younger royals: Princes William & Harry and Kate Middleton are more celebrity than anything else. Some of that is out of their control; with the media (news, social and press) and our celebrity obsessed culture. But some of it is their doing.

        Also, Prince Harry can’t help who he’s attracted to. He can’t help who he likes. Not everyone is Kate. Not every “normal” girl wants to live a life in a fishbowl. By dating an actress, she is used to being in somewhat of a public eye. So marrying into The Firm wouldn’t be that big (it would still be big) of a leap.

        1. The younger royals are more celeb than anything else, but the point is that they themselves have said they want to be seen as more than celebs – it’s one of the reasons they don’t want to do bread-and-butter ribbon cutting royal duties. I think it’s fair to criticize their hypocrisy in their words versus their actions.

          1. The problem with Meghan apparently being media savvy is Hollywood is different to royalty diana thought she was media savvy too look how that turned out if she thinks she can make press narrative she’s kidding herself she’s basically giving them ammunition to invade her privacy now she’s done it herself as for the younger royals coming across as celebrities that’s exactly what they are there’s no mystique anymore they have become pointless if they want to be like everyone else what’s the point of them

      2. Someone on here commented that Meghan has previously said about past relationship that she didn’t want to talk about her relationships. So she could very much say no comment if she wanted to. But she/Harry/KP/whomever wanted to talk about it.

        1. I’m cynical as hell but of course she wants to talk about it. Makes her headline news. People know her for dating Harry; it’s brought her worldwide fame and notoriety, a thing only most actors dream of having.

          1. Ellie – it does make her headline news, but IMO, it could also be part of a bigger strategy and this is her role to play (just like when Harry released his statement confirming their relationship). IMO, the article reconfirms the seriousness of the relationship and prepares people for “there WILL come a time we come forward and tell our story” (i.e. the engagement interview). I also think she stated a long time back (relatively speaking) that she was going to be phasing out of acting and into more humanitarian roles, so I almost don’t even consider her an actor anymore, after Suits ends. Like, she won’t be using this publicity to springboard into more acting roles after this season of Suits. JMO though…

      3. I highly doubt VF (and other mags) would interview her if she did not talk about Harry..that’s the main thing they would want to highlight to sell their mags.

    3. Meghan is very media savvy, so I doubt that she went to the interview thinking one thing and the reporter turned it into another. Imo she’s fully aware that she only got the cover because she’s dating Harry. It’s obvious they would make it all about the relationship. And I agree that this is a rollout, that is why the focus is on both of them rather than only on her.

      1. Exactly! Meghan could not demur on talking about her relationship with Harry. Being the girlfriend of Prince Harry is what got her a photo shoot with Peter Lindbergh and the cover of Vanity Fair.

    4. +100000 Maria. Its exactly what I said. This interview was done in June and it wash’t published/released until today, September 05/2017; that’s 3 a month old interview with a few touch ups to include the Botswana trip etc; but it was sat on for 3 months till someone deemed the time fit for its publication!!. Just goes to show how little Meghan is controlling any of this, these stories are released only when some one in some upper/higher up ranks decides they should be released, Meghan has no say in anything.

      1. Interviews like this are always done months in advance. Meghan, as a celebrity, would know this. Harry, as a royal, would also know this. For example: Harry’s Newsweek interview was released in June, but the interview was given in March. The fact that Meghan’s interview was done 3 months ago means nothing.

        1. Also, it was revealed from very valid sources: royal correspondents, in Britain (people that have an actual relationship with the Palace. Not something like E! News; they aggravate me) confirmed that, not only did Prince Harry and the Palace approve of the interview, but they consulted on it.

          So, everything that was put into the interview has royal approval. Again, could the interview be better, sure. But you get that with almost every celebrity/royal interview. It is very rare that a public figure gives a good interview.

          You know who always gives a good interview, at least to me, George Clooney. He understands the relationship between public figure and press. He knows how to give the reader/journalist what they want, but maintains a great deal of privacy. He is very media savvy. He doesn’t complain. AND when he does it is very valid. For example: photographers scaled a fence (or two), climbed a tree and took photos of his twins INSIDE his home!!! Not on the balcony, not in the backyard, but INSIDE his house.

          I know George Clooney is a celebrity. However, I believe he is far more influential than the younger royals. And respected. He does great humanitarian work. He really tries to learn and understand what is going on. He doesn’t act like he knows everything, like he is better than everyone. There are no “airs or graces” to him. The younger royals (Will, Kate and Harry) could learn a thing or two from him, regarding media relations and charity work.

      2. This. If she weren’t dating Harry then she wouldn’t be on any covers. We’d still have no idea she even exists.

  5. Lame.

    Honestly, it just screams ‘I’m so thirsty for celebrity and to be important and famous’. Which is kind of the vibe I got from day one of this relationship, it’s about Meghan’s profile.

    I want Harry to be happy, and if Meghan makes him happy, good, but I just never got a good feeling from this relationship. I’m cynical, I suppose. I do think she would make a good royal, but the whole “this is private life” then a public roll-out in a magazine like VF is just…trashy? I don’t know, Kate at least was smart: she kept her mouth shut, but then again she’s not a celeb who needs press and to create a Brand to market themselves which is what Meghan has been doing for years with the PR charity stuff, the Tig, etc.

    I don’t know what to think except she seems really quite “look how cool and articulate and intelligent I am”. It’s very calculated. I think Meghan only cares about Brand Meghan The Actress. Harry just does what he wants, he seems impulsive and despite his charisma and compassion I think he’s just as spoiled, out of touch and stupid as his brother, he just is a kinder human being than him. But just as dumb and gullible.

    1. I think Meghan would be a good royal, as she knows how to play the game. What annoys me most is the hypocrisy from Harry about celebrity and privacy. One cannot complain about being seen as a celeb when you (or your girlfriend) have given a celeb-style interview.

      1. I agree. Meghan does know how to play the game. Hopefully, she will give more interviews where she will talk about her charitable work (and that includes after her and Harry, maybe, get married). AND!! Hopefully, she will get Harry to realize his hypocrisy and relax a little bit.

        I mean last year, Kate had an excellent opportunity, when she was on the cover of Vogue, to talk about her charitable work. Instead all we got were bland photos and a statement, from Rebecca (claiming to be Kate). It was very obvious that statement it did not come from Kate. Kate is not that articulate.

        But I agree I think Meghan will make an excellent royal.

      2. Yes, MMR. “my boyfriend” and “we’re in love” is the declaration of an adolescent in this case, IMO. Why? Because these feelings are private and intimate, too precious to be shared with the great unwashed. These are puerile celebrity statements.

        Meghan and Harry, I think, will be a good match. For one, this working woman doesn’t mind that he’s merely a gilded slacker and a welfare prince. Secondly, they both seem emotionally immature.

        She certainly is promising us a show.

      3. Hi, I’m new on this site but want to share my opinions on Meghan Markle since I have some doubts about her motives of marrying Harry.

        Surely she did this interview to promote herself and not many other things. She is not very well received by the public and palace spin doctors are trying to make her more acceptable, preparing the public for an imminent engagement/marriage.

        I think Meghan will not become the royal we hope or wish her to be. I’m afraid all her ambitions about being a great humanitarian will be slammed by palace officials and tradition since she will only marry the 6th. in line to the throne. Therefore she will always have to stay 6 steps behind Kate, who is the future Queen after all. As long as Kate doesn’t step up, Meghan can’t either. In the beginning we will see her out and about but once W&K’s children reach adulthood, Meghan will slowly be degraded into a mere “member of the extended RF”. Charles is determined to scale down the RF and that will effect Harry, Meghan and their offspring (who IMO will not carry titles for that same reason). I’m afraid Meghan will not adapt to royal life very good. She seems to ambitious, to outspoken, to opinionated and to political in her views. Remember that members of the RF (and by extent any royal family of a democratic nation) have to be the exact opposite of that. They can’t express political views, nor can they discuss sensitive subjects. Basically that’s why they are being paid so much money, to keep their mouths shut. The reality for females in royal families still is that they are expected to support their husbands, the family they married into and produce lots of children. They can do some charity work but only approved for by the government and the RF. Kate will always have the first pick, Meghan will have to be happy with what is left. If she is as intelligent like she presents herself, she must know that by now. Harry’s previous girlfriends knew that and that’s why they bolted. This brings up the question why on earth Meghan, the great humanitarian, wants to become a royal in the periphery of things. As an actress she can achieve far more in the areas she is interested in (like George Clooney for ex.) IMO she is blinded by the idea what it means to be royal and here ambitions are far beyond what is realistically possible. I’m afraid we will all be very disappointed once she marries and becomes a Duchess.

        1. Maxima, Letizia, Mary, Daniel, Mathilde, Sophie. All independent, chose to marry a royal, enjoy their roles and get to to charity work that interests them. Or are we to think that all of them are somehow bad too, because they are in a relationship with a royal? Or just Meghan Markle?

          With a marriage to Harry, Meghan Markle would have a global platform for spending her life doing charity work. It isn’t like her sister-in-law has ever shown a desire to work, and continues to do less than the bare minimum. As long as MM followed the family protocols, her work and Harry’s would be pretty much up to them. Harry started his own non-profit (albeit with a few missteps because he was only 19). She could magic up her own non-profit and people would be lined up to participate. See Silvia and Childhood as an example.

          If someone wanted to spend their life having a positive impact, a marriage to a royal would be a positive not negative choice. It isn’t a reason to take on that circus, but it isn’t the detriment some people think.

          1. Maxima, Letitzia, Daniel, Mathilde, Mary,… are either Queens or married to heirs of the throne, it’s a completely different situation and position. Meghan will never be one of them. As for Sophie; she does some charity work and does it pretty well. But she too will, in time, disappear from the spotlight and will only work to support Charles and William. In families like this it just works that way, the hierarchy is very rigid. Why does Prince Andrew feels so frustrated? Because he is subjected to the firsts in line to the throne and already feeling the restrictions his brother puts on him. His daughters can’t become full time working royals although they are titled. The brothers of King Willem Alexander aren’t working royals and have normal day jobs, occasionally doing public engagements to support the throne.Their children aren’t automatically titled and are mere “Earls” or “Countesses”. The husband of Princess Madeleine refused a title in order to keep his job. That’s the evolution and faith of any royal house and monarchy if it wants to survive in modern times.

      4. Yes, he is gullible and can be played by any beautiful woman with tons of flattery. Most men can. I would like to see a happy marriage, but I wonder. Meghan just smacks of self-promotion, if you ask me. And, Harry is so hung up by the fact that it’s nearly impossible to have a normal relationship when you are in The Firm If you want it, you can have it, or close to it, PH. It just seens as if he’s drawn to the drama, too. It’s what he grew up seeing. Look at Sophie. I don’t see any self-promotion from her. Of course, she’s not as high up in the Royal line of succession. I just don’t know what to think about Meghan. She knows how to promote herself, that’s for sure and they always said Diana knew how to manipulate the media. I just don’t see her continuing her theatrical career after her marriage and this woman loves the attention, imo. So, she’s going to keep pushing herself to get just that. And, if it’s not to Harry’s liking, or that of the upper Royals, I think he’s going to have problems.

        One thing I would like to point out is that I hate the snarky comments that come out in may venues about her background. Oh, she’s an American. Oh, she’s a divorcee. Oh, she’s and actress. And, the dreaded, “Oh, she’s biracial.” That’s just ugly and there is no place for it. You can love her or dislike her for her pensonality and her actions, but please, not for other reasons that are considered so nasty by some. When are we ever going to get beyond that?

    2. Kate did a roll out during the intense part of her hunt for the ring, and she definitely did a media tour during the 2007 breakup where she publicly partied at pap heavy nightspots and called paps as well to take her pictures looking fabulous for all those ‘look what William is missing’ articles each day of that breakup.

      Her skirts became shorter and tighter and she was everywhere. It was actually sad to see how desperate she was despite the smile plastered on her face apparently having a good time. The below 3 images are a sample of that crazy media tour.

      It was shocking how public she was and how publicly she campaigned to get back with him AND to get the ring.

      At least MM is on the cover of a prestige magazine. Kate sat for Hello!!!

      After she got back with him, the PR guy they hired started sanctioning articles about why Kate was the perfect princess and William a cad or finished if he didn’t marry her. It was relentless and i actually felt bad for William because he was pushed into a corner in a similar way that his father was pushed except in this context he actually knew Kate unlike his father knowing Diana.

      And once the engagement was announced, this was one of the first articles thst laid out her strategy under the guise of pretending to wish them well.

      If 2007 is an indication, it’s that KM will not go quietly if it ever comes to a fivorce or separation.

      1. Yep. I don’t generally like to compare Kate to Diana but if Diana did that Vogue cover she would know how to use it to highlight whatever cause she was working on at the time and really make the most of it.

        EDIT sorry I was trying to reply to KMR above. I did something wrong. ???

        1. Hi Cookie, I think I’ve done the same thing–on this blog, to reply you click the reply that is next to the person’s name at the top of the comment, NOT the reply that seems to be at the bottom of their comment.

        2. You aren’t the only one. I clicked the reply button where I wanted to post and I’m here. Not where I thought I was going!

          Just discovered the trick is to hit the reply at the *top* of the comment not the bottom.

      2. Always so helpful for things like this to be set out. KM really was on the campaign trail to win the press war.

      3. 100% agree, Herazeus. People forget that Kate did her share of pandering to the media when it suited her. (ha! I made a Suits pun!!)

      4. That was my thought too, Herazeus – Kate absolutely used the media to further her cause. I’d even say it was worse, because she did it without the support/coordination of William or the BRF. And, didn’t she have multiple paparazzi and reporters on speed dial?

        They ALL use the press to try to further their needs and goals. Maybe it’s just because she’s the newest (soon-to-be) addition but it’s weird to me how much flack Meghan is getting for this single completely sanctioned article.

  6. To me it was a very bad move.. certainly, Harry and KP knew about this, and perhaps may be her roll out to the general non watchers.. but still its was a very very bad move. I do like them as a couple.. but this has opened up the door for critcism etc. A question I wonder is what does the Cambridges think of this?

  7. Give me Meghan over Kate every day of the week. She’s not perfect, but she has worked, and she continues to work while in a relationship with a royal. Harry seems to love her, and I think it would be great for them to marry. I much prefer her over the previous two girlfriends. And I like her style, slightly quirky and interesting. People question her charity work, but how much more has she done pre wedding than the sainted Kate? I will give her a break until she proves she doesn’t deserve it, and I hope she and Harry are happy. Their kids won’t be royal workers, I hope they won’t have titles.

    1. I’m honestly so bored with Kate, I don’t even care about her at this point. I like some of Meghan’s causes; I wish she had spoken about them in this interview.

      1. thats what worries me about kate… after the baby luster wears off in a couple of years from now… people will stop caring.. the monarchy needs people to care.

        1. I’m already bored with Meghan and Harry, too.
          Disappointed in Harry, as well. As others have said, I wish he’d stop complaining about all the celeb nonsense the Royals have to endure and then, bam, he starts dating a celeb! Oh, well.

          I am trying to appreciate Meghan more, but I just see a user in her. If she works her tail off and does things to help others, I will appreciate it. I think, in the long run, though, it’s all aboaut her. She wants to be Diana Two. And, you know what, we all wanted Kate to be more altruistic and caring, so if Meghan is, I am torn. If she does it with a pure heart, then good. If she does it to make herself look great, then, it’s tainted, imo. Of course, do we reallly know why Diana did all she did? I like to think she had the best of intentions, but who knows.

          One other thing: Meghan as a struggling actress? I don’t buy it. Her dad has worked in the entertainment industry for years and has more contacts than other aspiring actors’ families have. No, he is not a Hollywood celeb himself, or a top producer or director, but she paints herself as someone who had it really hard breaking into show biz and I don’t buy that? Wasn’t her ex-husband, or a boyfriend, a big wig at the production company of Suits?

          P.S. I really dislike how she talks herself up when discussing what she does. Of course, most actors do that. Still, just say simple things about your “charity” work, or what your childhood was like, without going into how great you are for having done, or gone through what you did. Ugh, that really irks me.

      2. Meghan done like five charity engagements the trip to Rwanda Photoshop in India short writi g piece about periods video for UN woman and event for one young world one for dove and being pictured wearing charity braclets if that makes you a humanitarian we have set the bar very low kate used to show up at fund raising events we weren’t praising her they do it because it gives them publicly I’d be more interested if she was regularly volountering at a homeless shelter or food bank

        1. How do you know what she’s doing? She’s kept a very low profile and the paps have no doubt been after her. We really don’t know that much about her yet.

          1. Birdy : here is the resume of what Meghan did in her charity endeavors :

            1/ 1 week trip to Rwanda for a fashion magazine to talk about water/sanitation. Since then nothing. The title mentions Humanitarian Glam, two things that shouldn’t be together

            2/ 1 week to India for World Vision where she followed a young woman Myna Mahlia who has created a charity who gives pads to young women so they can go to school. Followed by an article about period stigma.

            3/ UN Speech about women

            4/ One Young World event

            And that’s it ? Still believing that she is a great humanitarian ? Here is an awesome research about her involvement with her charities. Be warned it’s long :

            Paps being after her ? Not really. She lives in Toronto (not really the most papped place) and is able to travel back and forth between London and Toronto without being spotted.

          2. Where’s is it written that she needs to do charity work right now!? that’s not her job… she spoke about things she was passionate and cared about. So if she does 100 events or one is besides the point Danielle… I categorize the list of what has she done as a huminitarian as the same boring she is a D-list actor argument. Does those thing disqualify From being his girlfriend? That list is just as boring and repetitive as that Vanity Fair article…

          3. Sunfuntravel : When she came out as Harry’s girlfriend, she was painted as humanitarian/activist, that would bring fresh air to the BRF. People have every right to see what she has done regarding that matter, especially if she is going to be a BRF member.

            The list above shows what she has done in the past 3 years, which is not glorious.

        2. Yeah, that’s the only thing I dislike about Meghan. I get the impression her philantropy is just part of a brand. To people that follow her closely, did she ever mention any ongoing work she does/did locally and out of the spotlight?

          1. @Paula; I agree with you that it is all part of a brand. I really don’t believe her, she doesn’t seem very authentic as a self declared “philanthropist”. Let’s put her next to Queen Mathilde from Belgium who, from a very young age on, volunteered as an assistant for groups of people with physical limitations. I believe she was only 17 at the time when she started doing several trips every year until she started working as a speech therapist. There are pictures from that time and she actually pushes people in wheelchairs. That’s completely different than to go and shout in glossy magazines and social media, dressed in haute couture gowns, that you are oh-so involved.

          2. Not quite got the hang of who to reply to here. But what charity work did Kate do ? She’s a future a Queen , if we judge Kate vs Meghan, MM has had a job and done some charity work. Kate??? Why bash MM so much?

      3. Maybe that’s Kate’s goal? To get people to stop caring about her. Maybe that’s what William and Kate want? I mean it is very clear that they only care about the privilege that comes with being royal, they don’t want to work for it. Maybe their “goal” is to end the monarchy. Continue to “work” to gain more financially, and then…

        I mean it does seem weird, to me, that Prince Harry has taken on engagements, and done royal tours that seem to be geared more towards a future king. I mean Prince Harry’s tours are a lot “harder” and are in more “Republic-friendly” countries.

        I mean in the press release last week, KP said that Harry would be helping out the Queen and attending engagements with her. It just seems odd, that Prince Harry will be “there” for the Queen, more than the future-future king.

        It’s just all interesting. I really would love to be a fly on the wall at KP’s press office.

        1. Harry is also the one who has been seen working on Duchy property management, not William.

        2. @Birdy I don’t bash MM on a personal level and truly believe she looks like a nice person. I admire her interests in many causes and probably she makes Harry very happy at the moment. Although I don’t admire her that much for having a job, 99% of the world’s female population have jobs and often they are less payed for a lot more hard working than MM. But again, I think she is an interesting, modern woman. However, being nice and interesting doesn’t make her suitable as a Princess and member of the BRF. On the contrary, the opposite might be true. Believe me, few people know exactly what it takes and what is required to be welcomed and thrive in those circles. I know a couple of people from noble descend and although they are hardly Royals like Harry, William or Kate, they gave me a good insight into their lives. To most commoners it would be totally weird to live like that: stop talking once an older person starts talking, standing up when an older lady leaves or enters the room, asking permission from the head of the family for basically every single thing you want to do in life (from your choice of spouse to the names of your kids). Since Harry and his wife will be financially supported by his brother (like Andrew is by the Queen and later on Charles) they will be subjected to W&K’s wishes. I don’t think MM is up to that kind of life. Cressida and Chelsea moved in Harry’s circle for some time before they started a relationship with him. They knew what it takes, what they would loose and what was expected of them. Independent and strong woman as they are they choose wisely. Either we like it or not, Kate might be boring for us but the fact she keeps silent, doesn’t outshine her husband and in laws make her the perfect royal spouse.

          1. I’m sorry I totally disagree. Kate may be a perfect 19 th century royal spouse, silent and obedient. Times and expectations have changed. MM perhaps just loves Harry? Let’s hope so. Many people, men and women, give up things for the person they cannot live without. The royal family changed with Diana, they need to keep changing. The world is changing very fast. Kate won’t change she is a subservient wife. I hope MM will challenge he status quo in the same way Diana did.

          2. Cressida and Chelsy didn’t leave Harry because they couldn’t do the royal thing, they have specifically said they couldn’t cope with the British media hounding, harassing and bashing them on a daily basis and also how people online were bashing them non stop just because they were dating Harry. At this point, it seems like Cressida and Chelsy are the angelic nice girls because Harry is dating Meghan whom people just dislike because of reasons I won’t write here, but when they (Cressida and/or Chelsy) were dating Harry they were called all sorts of nasty names and the British media was very cruel to the women. They just had enough of the abuse (plus Harry’s unwillingness and disinterest in settling down, my opinion of course), said enough is enough and drew a line where it all ended.

  8. “All she is doing is promoting her relationship with Harry.” Bingo.
    And IMO, this was tacky and a bad move, PR wise. It would be different if she was doing a promotional interview for Suits and one of the questions was about Harry. But she wasn’t promoting any acting projects, her blog or other writing projects, or her charity work.
    And yes, Harry is a hypocrite. There is no way that Meghan gave this interview without Harry knowing about it first. The conversation probably went something like this:

    Meghan: Darling, what do you think about me doing an interview with Vanity Fair? I could invite them to my home to meet my rescue dogs and tell them about my love of crusty bread.
    Harry: Sure love. That sounds fine.
    Meghan: And while I am at it, should I make a point of saying how happy we are and how we are engaged in a love story of the century together?
    Harry: Jolly good, Meg.

    Harry literally just said he doesn’t want to ruin the mystique of the monarchy by becoming celebrities but let his girlfriend talk about their relationship to one of the biggest celebrity magazines in the world. This looks tacky. And Harry comes out looking like a hypocrite.

    There is absolutely a difference between Meghan being harassed by people and receiving racist comments which is deplorable and unacceptable vs. willingly giving an interview to a publication. I totally get that. And I don’t begrudge Meghan doing her job if she had to give an interview to promote Suits if it was in her comment. But I am having a hard time understanding how Harry can say he wants privacy and not to be seen as a celebrity yet his girlfriend just gave an interview to one of the biggest magazines in the world basically just about him.


    Also, coverage of this couple was starting to get quiet. This interview is going to start a frenzy again. Which leads me to believe that is what they actually want. Maybe the truth is they really like the attention. Because if people wanted to be quiet and lay low, they would give an interview like this. They would just stay silent and lay low, right?

  9. Is this the first acknowledgement that they are in love? After all, dating long term does not necessarily mean love. Now that the love thing has been confirmed does that mean it will lead to marriage, or are they just going to continue to play holiday house? If it all goes belly up in the near future, someone will have egg on her face. Unless to her it’s a sure thing.

  10. This is simply a run up to a future engagement announcement. I am sure Harry and the BRF were aware of what she was going to say. I kind of feel like Meghan is positioning herself to unfortunately become another clothes hanger and baby machine. Her only interest is now her relationship with Harry.
    Very disappointing when she has the potential to use her knowledge and contribute so much more.

    1. Through a marriage to Harry, she’d have a much bigger platform to do charity work than she’d have on her own.

  11. I thought of Kate at this line: “I’ve never defined myself by my relationship.” ha ha.

    Some of it seems rational and a lot of it is Hollywood-speak and by that I mean wishy washy, self aggrandisement, faux humility, new-age claptrap. I don’t blame her for that – it’s the way all actresses deal with the press. I like that in her previous articles she has spoken about women and working and charity which is more than Kate has ever done (did Kate talk about anything in her Vogue article or just pose against a Land Rover, I can’t remember). It’s telling we know more about Meghan’s world view already.
    She is quite confident in their relationship to do this interview and so I’d be surprised if they are not engaged. I guess this is a shot across the bow about an engagement. I wish them both well, they seem very happy.

    1. “I’ve never defined myself by my relationship.”… HAHAHAHA

      Says the women who does an entire interview where she mostly speaks about her “boyfriend” with a cover that reads, “She’s Just Wild About Harry” in HUGE letters and her name all tiny below his. LOL

      Sure Meghan!!!!

      1. Yeah, she “never defined herself by her relationship”, just quit her modelling gig for Reitmans, closed her site and shut down all media only to appear more “suitable” for her boyfriend

        1. I don’t think she quit those things to be “suitable” because those things didn’t make her unsuitable. She quit those things, especially her social media and website, to stop the ridiculous mining of old articles trumped up as new “news”.

          1. No she did not. She quit all of those things because she was told to and it is expected of any member of the RF to be very careful with and stay away of all media-related things.She wouldn’t be the first aspiring royal bride- to -be that gets sacked because of “indiscrete behaviour”. It’s royalty’s core business; stay neutral, don’t upstage the Queen and the direct heirs to the throne, be demure and keep a low profile and out of any scandal and maintain the mystery . As I’am concerned that is not the kind of person she is and the life she aspires.

          2. She is not required to stifle her freedom of speech while she remains a private citizens instead of a member of a royal family. She has a job to do, a job she’ll have to keep doing if these two do not marry. She has to balance that with this relationship, but she remains doing things like PR for Suits because that is needed for her job. The amount of silly articles being spun out of old content from the Tig, the amount of things taken out of context by the anti-Meghan crowd necessitated the shut down to me.

  12. Meghan looks fab. I hope Harry and Meghan stay happy & in love. Bring on the engagement and the ring : )

  13. Heres my two cents on the issue. At the time the news about their relationship came out I was pleasantly surprised by Meghan. She was a working actress who had a role in a well known tv serial, she was well educated, well spoken, spoke in the UN about feminism. At the time it striked me odd that such an independent female would join the royal family; joining a family with old traditions, clearly not supportive of their women. I personally could not understand why she would join this family loosing her sense of independence but also walking behind a man for the rest of her life (I know its protocol to, but I still find it degrading).

    Nowadays I’m getting really irritated by all the extensive press of the relationship. Why can’t they continue keeping this relationship quiet, so that they can find out if they are right for each other? As mentioned by many above Harry and Meghan both demand privacy but they do these frequent pap calls and tacky newspaper and magazine interviews. The royal family have been officially turned into a bunch of celebrities. I have never seen a royal girlfriend give an interview about her wonderful love life, it just seems sooo tacky and sooo “I want to be in the news 24/7” And to be honest I dont find her any different to Kate. Instead of using this new found publicity to garner attention to all her “causes” (because I dont believe doing a pap shoot in Africa makes you a humanitarian) she’s just continuously highlighting the relationship. Let’s face it, she’s gotten this cover for being his girlfriend. To me this shows that she isnt as independent as I once thought she was. She’s happy just being known as his girlfriend. There are sooo many more deserving women who live in the US who deserve to be on this cover. So why dont you Meghan, realise that you have a platform and speak more about feminism, womens rights, poverty? And I am kind of sick of her poor me Im from a middle class background and I’ve worked hard. Well honey, you arent the only one. Most people have to work hard to get where they are today, and most people at some stage of their life have started off working at McDonald’s.

    Basically what Im trying to say is that Harry and Meghan should realise the platform they have and their priorities. Use it well.

    1. I really liked her at first for the reasons you first stated but my opinion changed when she shut down The Tig, gave up the Reitmens deal and basically went into hiding. It feels like if she is willing to give all that up for just a boyfriend then I have no doubt that she will give up her independence and do whatever she needs to do to be accepted into the royal family.

      I have doubts about how hard working she’ll be. She had a job where she had 6 months off and spent that time traveling. Harry loves to travel, If they get married I think they’ll continue the holidays under the excuse that they aren’t the future King and Queen.

      And her charity seems minimal, she hasn’t done anything lately. Like all celebs she has a PR team that bring publicity to their charitable nature but she isn’t doing charity every week or even every month. It now seems like she does charity work a few times a year.

      1. Meghan shutting down her website, giving up lucrative deals, going into hiding,…it’s al part of the royal game and IMO only the start of what will come up next. As much as we would like the RF to embrace independent, strong and outspoken woman, no way that is going to happen in the near future. They are very traditional and very wary of what Diana did (outshining them, being to independent, taking up causes that took the spotlight away from their own charity work,…), they will never let it happen again. William will never allow someone outshining his work shy wife and make her look even more lazy next to a hard working sister in law. On top of that I strongly question Meghan’s very talkative and media savvy family with all their drama and tacky media appearances.The one thing a monarchy is afraid off are scandals and in laws that talk to the press too much.

  14. I so want to cheer on Harry and Meghan. Unfortunately every time she gives an interview, she just comes off as an annoying Hollywood caricature. “I mean, this bread is so good!” she enthuses over the delicious meal she prepared. “It’s that perfect crunch and then the softness.” Gah!! Not asking if her guest is enjoying the bread, just wanting the guest to say, “you are amazing for serving this perfectly crunchy bread.” Then she goes even further by coyly referring to Harry as “her boyfriend” instead of Harry. You just declared your love for him, his name is Harry. She may have been trying to introduce herself as “grounded” and more than an actress, but she just came off as the annoying, self obsessed, character in a movie that everyone cheers when they finally get their due. For someone who says, “I’m still the same person that I am, and I’ve never defined myself by my relationship,” she spent 2/3’s of the biggest interview of her entire career doing exactly this. But then who are we kidding, she only got this interview because she is dating Prince Harry. I guess this is how she plans to enjoy their “special” time – by publicly declaring their love and drawing International attention to their relationship. She did say, “I’m sure there will be a time when we will have to come forward and present ourselves and have stories to tell.” I guess that time is now. As William has said time and again, once you open the door, it is hard to shut.

    1. If she doesn’t define herself by her realationships why is she talking about her boyfriend and not her work sarah vine is saying the young royals are like a reality show ( keeping up with the Kensingtons )

  15. Aah, the power of perception. I guess I just like Meghan and so I’m willing to cut her any slack I can. The interview, to me, revealed nothing we didn’t already know. It was all filler and regurge. I kept rolling my eyes after every paragraph saying tell me something I don’t already know, but there was nothing. The only thing that was really new was her two statements of he expression of love for Harry other than that there was a solution NOTHING new. We already knew they met in London through friends, we already knew what Adams thinks of her, we already knew she has 2 dogs, we already knew she is a self proclaimed foodie, we already knew she went to Botswana, we already knew…people there was nothing new in this article, nothing!! . I think it’s strange how people are saying how they liked Meghan before the interview and how they dislike her now because she comes across and…just fill in the blanks…in this interview. What is new in this article that has made people change their perception of Meghan is what I would like to know. I guess Meghan just can’t win. When she talks about her work it’s perceived as PR bs or her being there for the photo op, self promotion and thirst for the lime light; when she doesn’t mention it, now it’s why doesn’t she talk about her philanthropy, these girls can’t win with some.

    1. I am inclined to see this as a positive step in that Meghan already has a voice and Harry doesn’t have an issue letting her use it. Will and Kate have some bizarre Victorian repressive stuff going on so Harry and Meghan seem like they are from this century.
      Has Harry been a hypocrite on the issue of the press? Totally. But this is Will’s petulant “the press are to blame for all my problems” influence. I think Meghan will be a positive influence in that she has actually worked and understands the real world more than common Kate. And she understands the press. This article doesn’t say much but it wasn’t supposed to. People are still debating on whether or not she is allowed to say anything, so going all out on advocating specific issues would be viewed negatively by many. There is still a strong element of misogyny in society that has a hard time thinking it’s ok for women to speak. Kate made things worse by being a vessel for making babies and having no voice or opinion on anything but seemingly pleasing her husband. Meghan is not like that naturally and so far Harry seems to be ok with that.

      I am skeptical however about the lunch she “made”. I am quite familiar with the Terroni chain and wonder if she got really good take out. I may need to investigate this further.

      1. Nic919 harry a 32 year old perhaps it’s time to stop blaming William for Harry’s antics will never threw punches at the press got naked in Vegas and wore a Nazi uniform yet will still gets the blame and blaming misogyny for the reaction to meghans article when you refer to kate as a vessel for carrying babies as a put down is mysoginistic

        1. William goaded Harry into the ‘Nazi uniform,’ which wasn’t a Nazi uniform at all.

          William was just as bad as Harry if not worse, the media covered it up to protect Diana’s Golden Boy. The must always be the serious, dutiful heir and naughty, bad spare. It started when they were children.

          1. Ellie you claim William goaded him to wear it with no verified proof to back it up he was also old enough to say no if that’s true and he didn’t did William also goad him into calling a solider a paki and a raghead

          2. Maybe Harry did not wear a full German WWII uniform but he sure had a swastika band on his shirt. In my mind there is no excusing that.

          3. Yes, there is proof. The store manager who was there told the story of William goading and bullying Harry into it. Bad decision and stupid on both of their parts, but William was the one who really pushed for it.

            Just like William was the one who got booted from Harry’s Sandhurst party because he got so wasted it was embarrassing to Harry.

            Re: Paki, I understand that the guy who was called that was fine with it. It is the military. They joke and are jerks to each other as part of the humor. It’s not considered a slur and it was a mountain out of a molehill of ‘Look how Bad Harry is and how Perfect William is!’ The guy was fine with it and found it funny because everyone called him that. It was his nickname in the military. I’ve heard way worse from people I know who serve.

          4. Ellie the excuses you go to sticking up for a person who called a man a paki is astounding racism in the milatary is a huge problem you saying the soldier said it was fine is a shitty excuse no way in he’ll would he have been able to say other wise he also called him a r aghead which is what soldiers call the Taliban

          5. Harry apologized for this. It was stated one one army officer that names like these existed in the army but none of the officers uses them with any malice afore thought. Its like calling a fellow American officer a Yank, or a Japanese a Jap. Harry’s fellow workmates have come out in his defines on numerous occasions stating there’s no racist bone in that guy’s body. Harry is no racist, regardless of what he wore when or him referring to his friend as a Paki.

        2. What has Kate done other than have babies? She has no cause of her own and six years later she still barely speaks. Pointing that out is not misogyny. Being critical of a woman who has not done anything with the privileges she has been provided is not misogyny.

          The royals are expected to do charity work and make appearances, which Kate (and William) has not done to any real extent. Kate has not used her voice at all and whether or not that is her decision, the fact that Meghan is being criticized for daring to speak to the press without Harry resent shows how many do not want women to have a voice. Kate remains a cipher for the most part to this day and frankly that is a bit disturbing, especially as the male royals are not as invisible. Meghan’s interview is challenging that and it’s obvious some people have a problem with that. “We want our princesses to be pretty and wear nice dresses but god forbid they have thoughts!!”

          I didn’t bring up any of that other stuff and it is entirely irrelevant to the point I was making.

          1. Nic919: The problem isn’t that she has causes (even if I’m highly skeptical about her work in that regard), the problem is that she TALKED.
            No one had talked to the press while being in a relationship with H/W. No interview about them. Chelsy didn’t. Cressida didn’t. And Kate didn’t.

          2. Cressida had two PR teams working for her during the time she was dating Harry, plus key contacts in media. The Middletons had their favorite pap on speed-dial (Tanna). They hired a PR consultant who now runs the DM/DF Sunday edition. KM posed for a Hello photoshoot, for the race she dropped out of because William took her back again so she no longer needed to campaign for his attention. She was publicly demanding royal discounts on car leases for goodness sake, when he still hadn’t publicly said she was his girlfriend.

            +1 Nic919. As others have written above, I see this as a joint exercise between Harry and Meghan. This is there way of presenting their relationship to the public on their terms, in the face of the ongoing, unprecedented (yes in some cases racially-motivated) attention. I’m glad to see these two as more of a partnership than what we saw out of W&K for a decade+

          3. @Ellana – if the fact that she TALKED isn’t a problem for her, and isn’t a problem for Harry, and isn’t a problem for Charles, and isn’t a problem for the queen – why do you care?! Her talking to VF was sanctioned in advance by the BRF and is not a problem for ANYONE in their family…so why does it bother you so much? (And, by “you” I just mean the general you/people who are so offended and upset.)

            Also, as others (Herazeus, notasugar) have pointed out in detail, Kate most certainly did talk to paparazzi and publicists and reporters during the dating and broken up years, and so did other royal GFs.

        3. She understands the “real world?” I think she understands teh “reel” world. Show biz is a lot different than work in other fields. Still, she has worked. And, she appears to be a go-getter.

          What disappoints me about Kate is the fact that she didn’t work while waiting for William. Just was at his beck and call. Even if she didn’t have a paying job, but got deeply involved in charity work, I would have admired that. She uses her pregnancies and children to get out of work now and in a way, if she wants to be a mother to small children, that’s fine. As long, as she makes the time to do other things too and try to use her position to help others. I would not expect it to be 24/7, but more than it’s been. Of course, with pregnancies, postpartum times and early childhood issues for her offspring, it’s not really a given that she will work more. I think she could and should. But, that’s me.

    2. “What is new in this article that has made people change their perception of Meghan is what I would like to know.” I think the answer to your question is right there – there is nothing new to this article. If there is nothing new to say, why are you on the cover of Vogue? I remember in the past that celebrities would be all over the media, but not have a movie, tv show, album coming out and people would roll their eyes and just say they want attention. I think that is what is rubbing people the wrong way.

      1. @Ellie

        Where is the evidence that William gouded Harry into buying that outfit? You can’t just make accusations like that without proof.

        And even so Harry was an adult and didn’t have to wear it.

        1. I can go on a Google hunt to find it. It was pretty out there that was how it went. Harry I think has no agency. He does anything people tell him. Meghan, William, whoever; he’s definitely under his brother’s thumb, look at the way William speaks to him in public (and how awful William is to Kate too in public!).

          My issue with it is basically this: Harry is always, ALWAYS painted as the bad boy, the naughty one, the awful one, while William did the same if not worse but is the serious, dutiful perfect one…

          1. What Ellie said.

            The shopkeeper who sold the uniform gave an interview to one of the tabloids and discussed the costumes the entire set bought for the party. Theme of the party? Colonials and natives. A strangely popular fancy dress theme amongst the aristo set.

            He said they came into his shop together, William chose the outfit for Harry and goaded him into taking it.

            He also said that William’s choice outfit wasn’t available so he left empty handed.

            Further, regarding the ‘Paki’ incident, the entire regiment called him ‘Paki’. That was his nickname as he later told the media. Out of all the men present, only Harry was pulled to the carpet for using it.

            The soldier told the media he wasn’t offended and took it as an affectionate nickname in the context of his fellow soldiers.

            I guess, like Vegas, this was another incident were Harry was more army than prince, but i remember another video surfacing from that same stolen batch in which a soldier asks Harry if his carpet is as red as his hair and Harry says yes to general hilarity.

            In the past 3-4yrs there has been a concerted effort to cleanse the internet of these incidents as reputations are cleaned up, so it’s hard to google search or you get a 404 error on the link. The other option is to go to one of the hater blogs/ tumblrs which paradoxically are phenomenal at keeping a record of these things by copying and pasting them into their blogs/tumblrs, but you have to wade through ALOT of material to find what you are looking for because it is not tagged in a way that makes it easy to search.

          2. And then you rarely hear about stuff like Harry publicly protecting a friend in the Army who happened to be gay and got lots of abuse for it. It’s all Bad Harry, Good William.

            They both ave done stupid, idiotic things, said stupid, idiotic things; but only one is protected from the consequences of it. Harry having to own up to his dumb crap I think has been good for him. I mean, you have examples of Harry going out with Chelsy, when W&K went out and were drop dead drunk more often than not while Chelsy was in law school but it was Kate who was the perfect angel and Chelsy the party sl*t… Everyone goes out and parties, well, okay, I didn’t, I am boring, but most young people do. That’s fine. But to pin say, it’s bad on one person then ignore it on the other, is annoying to say the least.

        2. Yes, the info was out here at the time. As was the part, if you looked, that William went to the party dressed as an “African Native” – not the “lion” the cover-the-golden-child’s-behind press reported. Shopkeeper admitted that too.

    3. For me this interview just reiterates why Harry has fallen in my esteem in the last 1.5 yrs. and not a statement against Meghan.
      yes it was the same stories. -She loves her freckles, her parents think she’s speicial, the race riots were not only the catalyst for being in side thus the dawn story but also catalyst for her social awareness. Same ol same ol Meghan is doing what a lot of actors and actresses do and that’s fine doesn’t mean we can’t question and side eye certain things.we’re not lemmings and blindly believe/go in the direction of the story being sold. Doesn’t mean we can’t like her despite that. Do I think she’s auditioning for a role of the lifetime? Totes but at least as an actress she’ll be prepared and probably do a better job than others.

  16. Since you all know how I feel about these two, I’m just going to say this: I’m so glad people are seeing the light about Harry and Meghan.

    Should we call them ” The Royal Housewives of Kensington” or ”The royal Kartrashian” ?
    Any help would be appreciated 🙂

    1. Meghan being an actress knows this is all about just promoting herself and her relationship for attention. Whether or not it means something is afoot is another matter, though. I really want to like her but this all is just new agey celebrity psychobabble you hear in every interview these days, combined with “I’m dating Prince Harry!”.

  17. Ellana The royal housewives of Kensington I don’t understand why she’s brought media attention to there relationship when they’ve asked for privacy and the interview tells us nothing why bring speculation for nothing 😑 it just looks attention seeking if they marry its gonna be daily pr about how great she apparently is then complaint about media about intrusion they need to get their shit together

    1. They love the attention. After all, he was considered as the Bridget Jones of the BRF and she was an unknown actress. Now people are paying attention to them.

  18. They did not complain about press attention. The letter stated he realized there is a interest in his private life but racism, sexism, and harassing her mother was not ok.

    They have that right. It is a big difference. Why are people missing that statement?

    1. There’s no winning for the Meghan and Harry in this. Its as if we read these articles to just trash and bash these people, I wonder why we bother to read at all if we don’t like them!! If they advertise what I don’t like, no point in checking it out and then turn on them and bash for advertising!! I have said time and again how I dislike Melania Trump and if you asked me anything about what she does on a regular basis I wouldn’t be able to tell you because anything that has her name on it is a must skip for me, I just read nothing about her, which means I have nothing to comment about her or her life or anything. I like both Harry and Meghan and that’s why when I saw the heading Meghan lays it all out I was like, well gee, its about time she said something. Unfortunately, she didn’t say anything that was of interest to me since everything in that article has been repeated by some pap ad neuseum, so I guess I’m blind for not seeing what many on here see!! I didn’t get any indication that Meg was self promoting, I didn’t see anything that “screamed attention seeking”, I saw nothing that shows Harry as hypocritical, I didn’t see any of that because everything in the article is what has been being repeated for the last one year…I guess to each their own.

      1. I read the article because I was interested in what Meghan had to say. The summary at the top of the VF article said Meghan talked about a lot more than Harry, so I got excited (and I assumed that, in typical press style, the headlines were clickbait based on one small part of a much larger interview). But when I read the whole thing and realized that Meghan’s comments were either stuff we already knew, or about Harry, and that half the article isn’t even quotes from Meghan, I got bored. And then I had a think about it and realized the whole article is nothing but celeb fluff, which made me think about Harry and William saying in the past that they don’t want to be seen as celebs. That was my thought process.

        1. And honestly MMR that’s what baffles me the most!! The comments on here about this article which was nothing but fluff and all the things we have heard before. 95% of that article was either just literally lifted from old newspapers and magazines verbatim or it was the writer’s opinions and nothing about Meghan POV. When she started on how Meghan invited her into her home, I thought okay here it comes, but there came nothing, absolutely nothing!! That’s why I don’t get why people are getting their pants in knots over this NOTHING BURGER!! How are people drawing deep meanings and conclusions about both Meghan and Harry from this article that said nothing that we all didn’t already know? I don’t get it!!

        2. But look at the reaction for her doing an interview and basically saying nothing. She is daring to speak and is being massively criticized for mostly neutral topics.

          1. Exactly NIC19. And they you hear about how Kate didn’t give interviews, Chelsy didn’t and Cressida didn’t, so why is Meghan if she is doing it for reasons abcd…my goodness, we are all created uniquely and IMO that’s the beauty of mankind. We aren’t animals to do things in any similar copy cat fashion, what Kate likes Meghan might not necessarily do. And maybe that’s one reason Harry was attracted to Megs because of her having no fear to express an opinion, maybe he likes a women that speaks for herself and not necessarily fade into Harry’s shadow because he is the man!!!

    2. I agree about the statement, but I don’t think that’s what people are refering to. Harry has complained about privacy and press intrusion many other times.

    3. I cannot speak for others, but I was not referring to the November statement at all anywhere on this post. I was referring to Harry’s Newsweek article and the many other times he and William have claimed they don’t want to be seen as celebrities.

    4. +100 Ashley Tate

      And congrats to the happy couple. The engagement has been officially pre-announced.

      Meghan has been properly introduced. She isn’t an English rose or a 19 year old virgin. A divorced bi-racial American actress requires a carefully crafted narrative. Can’t be flashy. Can’t upstage future in-laws destined for the throne. Meghan must be presented as nice, hard-working, and somewhat boring. Her less-than-ideal background must be casually presented as solid, good enough, driven by the right values.

      Graydon Carter did all right. He and KP totally discussed the image they wished to project. It’s a subtle piece, exactly what it was supposed to be.

      Nothing about this piece was hypocritical. Of course, a future royal is going to be interviewed. Of course, groundwork must be layed for the onslaught of publicity/scrutiny she’s about to encounter. This ho-him interview was a carefully constructed bulwark to protect her from tabloid sensationalism. If

  19. Ashley Tate they claimed intrusion into her private life she’s and actress dating a prince you can expect some photographers at your house when the press find out as for the racism there were like two articles with a racial undertone which were condemned compared to what other royal girlfriends have faced that’s barley anything they stalked screamed abuse at chelsy even tried to ruin her father claiming he was in business with Robert Mugabe don’t bitch about the press then do a mills and boon type article in vanity fair she’s 36 not sixteen and as for the supposed sexism if you do half naked sex scenes dress as a sexy french maid and an implied blow job scene in 90210 expect for it to be writing about

    1. My oh my, so because Meghan did scenes that “implied” so she should just suck it up and take the abuse? Wow, talk about blaming the victim for being raped!!! “She should have known better than to wear a very short revealing skirts around guys” people say!!!! Meghan is an actress, that’s her job, its not her lifestyle, its a job that pays the bills. She auditions for parts and if the nice parts that opeople would approve of are not given to her, she still took what was available and worked, she chose to work and not be dependent on her parents etc, that is a good thing. Would people have rather Meg had just sat at home and waited for some man to marry her? But again, that too would have been problematic, wouldn’t it? it would be lazy waity Meghan sat around waiting for Harry to put a ring on it blah blah blah.
      And how is Harry lack of defense of Chelsy or Cressida, how is that Meghan’s fault? I swear people are just bashing Meghan because she doesn’t fit their type of the “woman we want Harry to marry” (just RME). So bizarre, when Meghan works people take an issue with her job, and interestingly, the same people have an issue with Kate not working either, very confusing!!

      1. Madame the fact that you compare media attention when an actress is dating a prince to victim blaming around rape is out of line having your photos taking and stories writing about you and the roles you have played is no way comparable to an horrific act of violence against a woman’s body if you do half naked scenes people are gonna report on them thats not sexist

      2. You’re out of line. You cannot compare it to victim-blaming rape. Absolutely not.

        Meghan has done raunchy scenes, french-maid outfit, blowjob in a car and the sex scenes in Suits. Of course it was going to be talked about. That’s what her work is. Being the pretty eye-candy to the main character.
        She took these jobs willingly, she knew it would be broadcasted and it would be in her CV. It is not sexist to talk about someone job or past. Look at what people say about Sofia (CP’s wife), people still talk about her pictures to this day.

        It is not the same thing as being raped.

        1. My bad, I should have just its an analogy. Would the analogy of a battered verbally and emotionally abused woman being blamed for the abuse because she’s not leaving the man have worked better? Regardless of how its sliced, IMVHO, its hypocritical to expect Meghan to just sit down and take the media abuse just because of the nature of her job. Meghan’s roles are not just being talked about, she is being bashed for doing those roles. And the same people that are bashing her are the same that are bashing Kate for pre engagement to Mr. William Cambridge, her not doing whatever jobs she could just to show that she at least was motivated but just sat around waiting for him to propose……go figure.

          1. I don’t actually critise kate tough I think she could some times show a but more personality the fact that she doesn’t will probably work in her favour Diana and fergie had big opinions and personality and it was part of the downfall

    2. For goodness sake, she works as a tv actress. She’d not a porn star or porn star in the making.

      1. I have watched Suits since before Harry ever met Meghan and I don’t recall any half naked sex scenes. It is on basic cable not HBO. And for the record trying to slut shame Meghan for her acting roles does in fact fall under the rubric of misogyny.

  20. “She’s just wild about Harry”. What a title.If I would be Harry, I would be highly ashamed to read something about me from my down-to-earth girlfriend,but I guess, he has his rose-tinted glasses on.
    She just promotes herself, from day one to the end..It’s always about her.She could work and ignore such interviews, but she seems much too eager.
    I suppose, it’s preparation for an egagement.

    1. Why would harry feel ashamed? Meghan is a beautiful gal, I would be doing dancing moves if I were Harry and I read Meghan is wild about me!! I would be ashamed if she said she wasn’t really into me, or if she was asked and she said, I really don’t know how I feel about this guy!! I’m sure Harry is (and any man would be) thrilled to hear that she refers to him as “my boyfriend” that is very endearing, IMVHO and nothing to be ashamed of!
      I’m just waiting for that announcement…hm hm, be still my little Harry loving heart…

    2. I read elsewhere that it is a reference to a Peggy Lee song. So there is more than one meaning to the title. Not that Meghan would have been the one to decide that. Magazine editors do that.

  21. Oh this is just an introduction from Meghan “the person” to Meghan”the royal fiancee”,i suspect an announcement this autumn..

  22. “She’s just wild about Harry” is a well-known song and a play on words. I wouldn’t be shocked if it didn’t play at their wedding reception.. Sure, the article may have been regurgitation of what we already know, but I see it as a roll out of Meghan. They are engaged, and people hardly know her. She has been hidden from view–at least in terms of being royal girlfriend–until now.

  23. This is clearly the first move introducing meghan to the UK public who may not know of her from her acting work.
    This is going to end in a wedding next year and I predict a private wedding with some photos released.
    I don’t think Harry and the brf would be wise to have any sort of big bash like we saw for Will and kate because of the cost and the already loud rumblings about continued austerity suffering of the ordinary people as opposed to the cost of the royals. Even on daily mail website the comments ‘re the refurbishment of Buckingham palace and the cost of supporting another member of the royal family ad infinitum, were very negative. The left wing press are positively calling for republic. I know Andrew had a big wedding to fergie and Edward had a semi big wedding to Sophie but times are different now.
    Maybe the guards chapel in London? And a wedding breakfast at the palace rather than Westminster Abbey.

    I think they will get engaged after invictus games and marry in spring, hopefully just about the time kate is due so she can’t go, there are stories the two women don’t get on and I can believe it, I think kate would be incredibly challenged by meghan and her life where she has clearly had a proper job.
    As for those people who don’t think meghan is suitable to marry into the firm because of her background, divorced parents, crazy siblings, divorce etc think on this. Diana married charles despite it being known her mother left her father, as he was physically and emotionally abusive, for another man. Her brother was mixed up with a fraudster ok that was later, her sister had previously dated her husband and presumably had sex with him, and given an interview about him.
    Perhaps the emphasis in this interview about meghans parents amicable divorce is the start of mitigating her past.
    Personally I am for them, they seem happy, she has helped Harry with his emotional issues and I think she will be an asset.
    Those who criticise her thirstiness, are failing to see this in current societal norms. What she is doing is par for the course now. Semi royals like linley and Zara tindall and her brother openly play on their royal connections for work and sponsorship. Every starlet worth her salt has full media coverage and a fashion or make up line. No point expecting anyone to live in the 1950s when low profile and discretion was a virtue, those days long gone.
    I predict this marriage will be a success.

    1. Yes! You guys may all know her because of MMR’s wonderful reviews and your own reading, but most people don’t know her that well. #1

    2. +1 I agree about the people getting to know Harry part, I don’t think there will be a small wedding. I have read other publications where Brits have chimed in. People want a big wedding given how a wedding is a cause for a celebration in hard times. I believe it will be at the Abby.

      1. Kathleen
        I have read very little positive comment on the new baby news, and nothing from anyone wanting a big wedding not even on typical royalist sites. If the firm go for a big wedding in the Abbey while families are struggling mightily in the UK, then they are either completely out of touch with current public opinion of the excesses and poor work ethic of the young royals, or even worse they will be perceived as not caring. The Times where a big wedding was welcomed in hard times, i.e. Charles and Diana are in my opinion long gone.
        Given that public reaction to the meghan interview is 80% negative and to the prospect of her marrying Harry same, I’d say they’ve got a job of work to do and wasting money on a,state wedding won’t help. But we’ll see, never underestimate the tone deafness of KP as we regularly see.

    3. Debra Green,

      People in the UK know Meghan. Just like Kate we cannot get away from articles about her on at least a weekly basis. There is nothing left to the imagination about Meghan. We even know every detail about her family’s dysfunctional dynamics. Just like Kate the only body part of Meghan I have not seen is her vagina. I am not trying to be a prude but not sure that helps. Just the same goes with the pictures of naked Harry (well he was holding himself) but I still know what his body looks like.

      I remember when Clinton’s affair was exposed and a large number of people said it was none of the public’s business as it was a private matter. In many respects that is true but there is one fundamental issue if someone is willing to lie in such a fundamentally hurtful way how can we trust them to not lie, cheat, etc. to the public who (s)he has no obligation other than the duty of their post too?

      Why I am mentioning Clinton? It is because Meghan has lied and implied a number of things about her life that is not true. Then heap on the fact that her family is willing to sell anything and everything about her to the press. Why does that matter? OK maybe she has cut a number of her relatives out of her life. What if she says something to her mother and then her mother mentions it to someone who then passes it on to a family member who cashes in? Do I want that representing me? No. At this point her family has gone quite…my thoughts are they are being paid off. How long does that happen? Until they die? And what would be enough money? Who is paying for this if true? My guess is not Meghan. Why should the UK tax payers pay out to her family?

      I am just saying that the UK public are not stupid and increasingly are not willing to pay for this family’s excessive waste. David Cameron when he introduced the idea of austerity and said we are all in it together lied to the public. At no point where we all in it together. The poor and the middle class were the ones who support and pay for the government and royal family. The poor due to taking away much needed benefits and the middle class in increased taxes. Quit frankly I see no benefit with people who are so hypocritical and pretend to be humanitarians as they go on fake humanitarian trips. Harry will never step down as he loves the benefits too much and Meghan is doing what it takes to get on that benefit train at all costs.

    4. I think if Meghan can’t get that big bash and all the stuff that comes with it I doubt she’d go for it. She wants all the attention it seems, judging by how she promotes herself so hard.

      I think they’ll have an Abbey bash or perhaps St George’s Chapel like Edward and Sophie but it wouldn’t be private, Harry is the son of a future king so he can’t get away from it. It’ll be televised. Wedding fever will whip people up into shape and they’ll be all hysterical like they were for William and Kate when pre-engagement Kate was trashed for being lazy and doing nothing with her life but being a man’s mattress.

  24. Something I found interesting was that one of the main writers from CB, pretends to like MM on the site, (because most of the comments do) but on her Twitter she retweeted someone making fun of this interview.

    1. She appears to have been agreeing with the person making fun of the article’s author and their Dark and Stormy Night-style writing, not making fun of Harry or Meghan.

  25. Off topic but… thoughts and prayers for those in the Caribbean and Florida with the upcoming hurricane.

  26. I think this interview is a sign of a sure engagement. *sigh*. I liked Meghan at first, but then i read her “How to be both” article on the Tig and was absolutely turned off by her saying something about her smile being so genuine when she travels to Arfica that it doesnt need any retouching. This struck me as being the real celebrity Meghan shining through and not the humanitarian she’s claiming to be.

    1. ” These small moments of perspective anchor me to what’s important. And in my industry that is often riddled with superfluous demands, my barometer of what’s valuable is validated on these trips. Not to mention, when I share my photos with my friends, they note that undoubtedly I never look happier than I do when I am on field missions. It’s a different smile than the one for the paparazzi – it’s the one that doesn’t require any retouching.”

      I’m failing to see what’s so objectionable about that quote. Can you please expand?

      1. I just find it very strange to be mentioning your own beauty when you talk about helping people living in poverty…i think she’s doing the whole humanitarian thing as part of her brand. Also, just as eating a vegetarian meal 4 times in 3 years doesnt make you a vegetarian, going to Arfica/India 4 times in 3 years doesnt make you a “humanitarian”. Just saying

        1. She used “looked” instead of “felt” and all you can do hold is on to it to justify your dislike.

          Also, there are many types of vegetarians, sorry purists but in this day and age if you don’t eat red meat but eat chicken and fish you can call yourself a vegetarian, there also dishes that are referred to as vegetarian dishes …more than that, the words vegan and vegatarian have become synonymous despite meaning different things.

          Once again you’re holding onto something to justify your dislike when this is common knowledge.

        2. Jane I disagree, given that most people do absolutely nothing of this kind in their lives means anyone who makes the effort, if only once, are in my book humanitarians.
          I think if she wasn’t dating Harry for the past year she would have done more stuff but avoided it so as not to overshadow the work with a media circus.
          Let’s remember the nearest kate has ever come to any humanitarian work before her marriage, was her gap year stint with Raleigh. Kate has had a massive potential platform for 6 years and totally wasted it imo. Meghan gave a decent speech to the UN, kate struggles to speak coherently to a small room of people and hand picked press.
          Therefore in my book meghan is already streets ahead and I think she will pick a project after she marries into the firm and do a good job with it.

          1. You’ll find out that people do more philanthropic activities than you can imagine. I met a guy while we were both volunteering last week at the same event for the Red-Cross of our city, that had come back from one 1 month in India 2 days before and was up to volunteer before going back to school.

            And Debra, Jane gave the resume of what she did in the years before Harry. Not while dating him, which isn’t enough for her be called a humanitarian.

            And don’t compare her to Kate. Kate never pretended to be interested in anything for that matter. Beating her is not that hard.

          2. Ellana
            Don’t tell me what I can or can’t do.
            My opinion is as valid as anyone’s and I find your response to my comments rude and offensive.
            You as obviously implacably opposed to meghan and Harry and that’s fine, but it doesn’t give you the right to dictate to anyone else what they think.

        3. @Jane – she’s not talking about her own beauty, she’s clearly saying that her friends recognize that she looks genuinely happy on field missions. Her friends are saying that she’s happier doing charitable works than walking a red carpet. In my mind, that makes her LESS of a celebrity wannabe and more of a charitable person wannabe.

  27. Does anyone (else) remember that Marie gave an interview when she first started dating Joachim?

  28. Look it’s easy to be in love and be happy when for the majority of your relationship, you guys have been on exotic and expensive vacations (mostly funded by taxpayers, because really, does Harry have money to afford a succession of luxury vacations with security too?). At this stage, it’s a a globe trotting, world wind romance and it’s all sexy, and exciting and secretive with a hint of untold fame and publicity. I can understand both Meghan and Harry getting carried away with that.

    And with this cover, I can now see how much makeup Meghan actually wears to give the appearance of flawless skin. I thought she was really gorgeous- but now I see that she is pretty, but I have seen features like hers in many a woman. Again, I think that she is no beauty like she was touted as being.

    1. I believe Harry inherited $16 million for his 30 birthday. That was after receiving money for his 18 and 25 (I believe, someone will probably correct me). He’s doing ok for himself since he doesn’t really pay full rent.

      1. Jessica and NotaSugar,

        It is correct he inherited a nice amount of money from his great-grandmother and mother. But lets look at where that money comes from. The money from his great-grandmother came from wealth gained from being the Queen Consort; but she was deep into debt from gambling. Thus the Queen covered her debts and we know that the Queen’s money comes from the Sovereign Grant and monies earned through the Lancaster Estate. Both which are money that are from the people of the UK. Diana’s money came from a very generous divorce settlement. That money again also came from the Duchy of Cornwall. Which is lands that the Prince of Wales obtains and again is from the UK public as they are part of the Crown Estates managed and owned by the UK since George III handed the lands back to the government in exchange for lump yearly sums. Plus the Queen and Charles voluntarily pay taxes since 1992.

        Now lets look at Harry’s expenses. He lives in Notts Cottage for free. If he had to pay rent we are looking at £150,000 plus a year as Kensington Palace is owned by the UK government. He does not pay maintenance, utilities nor staffing to clean and maintain the garden. He also does not pay his other staff such as advisors (financial, secritarial and PR). It has been reported that through his investments he earns about £500,000 a year. He would go through that money very fast if he had to pay for everything himself. All his trips are paid for by the UK tax payers because he does the same thing William does. They organising at most a half hour meeting with a governmental staff person where he is holidaying so that it is paid for by the tax payers as it then becomes an official engagement. Scotland Yard pays for the security costs. It would not surprise me if Harry receives free hotel costs in exchange for the free advertisement by being noted in “news” articles and loads of other things.

        1. The Queen Mum pulled a fast one on the taxman, resulting in her daily expenses being subsidized by HM and Charles likely through a mix of personal and Sovereign Grant money. Items she owned personally were things purchased with her personal money (family inheritance) or gifted to her from her husband (which also came from his personal inheritance not the taxpayers).

          The Windsors are one of the royal families that has significant personal wealth that is separate from their tax funding. One of the things I advocate for is open-access to the books because they should pay personally (out of their personal millions) for everything at the private estates. They are given government housing for their government jobs; they choose to live in a privately-owned residence, they should have to pay all security costs at those residences out of their personal money. Those estates (Sandringham, Balmoral) *are* owned privately by the Windsors not the taxpayers. Anne’s Gatcomb is sticky (paid for with HM’s personal fortune, fixed up with money from Crown Estate), but it is still her private estate.

          Diana’s settlement did not come from The Duchy. That is one of the things that proves that The Duchy doesn’t belong to Charles Windsor. He was cleaned out of his entire personal fortune (personal fortune, not money he took from The Duchy) and he had to borrow from HM’s personal fortune (again, personal inheritance not taxpayer funds).

          Whatever funds any of them has inherited, even if through rooking the taxman, those millions came from personal fortunes and remain personal fortunes.

          Neither William nor Harry could live the lives they have now off their personal fortunes. If they chose to walk away they’d learn that, which is why neither of them will walk IMO.

          1. NotASugarHere,

            Yes the Queen Mother probably had personal inheritance but not the rest of the royal family. They have no true personal wealth. If this family was not royal they would probably have been at least investigated for ill gotten gain through fraud. Their money is based upon receipt of money from the UK citizens. Pure and simply the sovereign grant come from the tax paying citizens as it is money directly from the UK government. The Duchy of Cornwall and Lancaster are part of the groupings of land owned by George III which he gave to the UK Government so that he no longer had to pay for silly things like roads, slurries, wars etc. Everything the UK government now cover. They also are gifted a large amount of really expensive gifts and have been known to sell for the cash. If they had to adhere to government rules for staff on gifts they would have to declare them and would have a right to pay the UK government the going rate of the item so they could keep it personally.

            As for your link to the Times article regarding Charles and Diana’s divorce I bet it is pure PR and no truth. A bank of that calibre would never speak of a client’s financial situation. Wealthy people use private banks so that their wealth is hidden from prying eyes.

            You are free to believe what ever you want but sad to say I doubt any of it is based upon the truth of the situation. The royal family have made it their mission in life to hide and manipulate the public perception of their financial dealings.

      1. Reprimanded by whom? I remember positive and negative fandom attention. I doubt they really broke up as they ended up engaged in October. Seems to me it was more like this article – sanctioned by both parties.

    2. Wow, I am just shaking my head at all this. so you can tell a person’s skin nature just by looking at a bunch of pictures? And what has Meghan’s looks got to do with this article? I find this very appalling!! You “think that she is no beauty like she was touted as being”? What’s Meghan’s looks got to do with anything? Oh well, good thing is Meghan is dating Harry and just Harry, so how other’s judge her looks is irrelevant.

    3. @Red Tulip – beauty is completely subjective because I find her skin amazing (although I also have freckles, so maybe that’s why I don’t find that they detract from a person’s looks). To me, her skin is flawless because she looks great without airbrushing or heavy makeup like has been done in other photos of her.

      I also think they have spent a lot of time together at his or her home, and not just globe trotting. There are recent reports that they have been slipping in and out of the airports in London and Toronto without being seen much more frequently than initially thought. So, I do think they spend a lot of time just hanging out and being homebodies.

  29. I’m late to the party and haven’t read all the comments. But sadly my first thought was, Meghan got to be on the cover of a magazine that she never would have been on before meeting Harry. Actually, she never would have be on any magazine cover because she wasn’t that famous of an actress. So, her relationship really made her famous and got her a coveted Vanity Fair cover which she never would have gotten before. Now all she needs is a Vogue cover, which every actress wants. Whether or not it is true, this really makes it seem like Meghan just wants the fame. Especially since the interview was only about Harry and not about her work.

    1. The topics discussed in this interview were deliberate. This is an interview for the British public and the establishment.

      It is the beginning of the official rollout of MM to the British public. Present her in as wholesome a manner as possible as the relationship is discussed in as positive a manner as possible. Don’t scare the horses with her opinions. Isn’t she lovely? Won’t she make a lovely royal? It’s innocous whilst presenting any hardships / potential objections as uncomplicated character positives. Especially for the public.

      It’s straight up PR to present MM as future royal bride for those who don’t read gossip, aren’t royal watchers per se aka the establishment.

      By comparison, read the one that officially did the same thing for Kate to help whitewash all the negatives of the 8yr wait.

      Kate didn’t give an interview for it, but it’s the same strategy of look how down to earth and lovely future royal is.

      1. Once again Herazeus I completely agree with you. I commented earlier on that this article release is well planned, it came out when the PTB deemed the time was right for it to. In a way, I don’t believe Meghan has control of ALL the cards on this relationship. IMVHO, all the stuff about how she is seeking fame, wants to be in the lime light tada tada tada, can’t be any further from the truth. This is BP meticulously rolling out their thang, this is the Meghan they want the public to see and perceive as the right woman for Harry.

        Bring on that wedding, I’m ready.

        Shout out to my brothers and sisters in Florida and Houston Texas, my prayers are with y’all and I’m hoping and praying that the Lord wraps his loving arms around y’all and keeps y’all safe.

        1. I’m so worried about this hurricane. I have family in Miami including my very elderly grandmother who lives in a fifth floor condo! I’ve called and she seems nonplussed by the whole thing, but I can’t help but be concerned.

        2. This sounds accurate. I hope that they marry, she seems likeable and she’s his choice obviously 😉 I hope once she’s married she talks about women and race and the other things she’s talked about in the past. Kate wasn’t muted by marriage – she’s never had anything at all to say.

      2. Herazeus, wow interesting point. With the Kate Vanity article, I noted that the article is dated November 4th 2010, and the engagement was announced November 16, 2010, interesting.

  30. I see a November or very early December engagement announcement, with a wedding in May or later in the summer, preferably after Kate has the baby; Meghan’s comment- “I’m sure there will be a time when we will have to come forward and present ourselves and have stories to tell….” My thought is: What stories do these 2 possibly have to tell, I am sure they would not divulge anything to the world in an interview about how Harry proposed or any details about their relationship, like their favorite restaurant, since they want to be so private, nor would I expect them to. It would just be a bunch of fluff and talking about how they want to do good works and carry on Diana’s work. I guess I just am feeling that they are going to end up being as self-indulgent and ridiculous as William and Kate.

    1. “stories to tell” = their love story? Meghan said in this interview that she loves a good love story.

    2. It’s that part that makes me think they’re engaged or at least plan on it. Why else would they “have to come forward to to their story”
      And I’m sure it’s the story they want out there for public consumption vs the real if the comments up thread are true about them being with others when they 1st met/started dating

      1. None of these “cheating” claims are true. It has been stated in numerous prints that Meghan was not in Toronto in May when Harry was here promoting the Invictus games, she was in Mexico visiting her father and she posted pictures of that trip in insta and on the Tig at the time. The Harry and Meghan met in Toronto in May claims have been debunked on numerous occasions, so I believe there is no truth to any of that. Also there was a article from a reliable writer that stated, they met in London in July.
        People claiming Meghan was still dating Cory when she hooked up with Harry are just ignoring the facts.

        1. MASAMF,

          I know you are using the Daily Mail article to point out that they did not meet each other in May but I do not see any true pinpointed timeline of the actual time they started “seeing” each other. Therefore, would you please outline why you believe what you believe? I just do not see it.

    3. I have never understood why everyone was so in love with Kate and don’t understand why everyone is so in love with Meghan. This article was for sure approved by a palace…..However it would be KP not BP. Over the last 5 years KP and BP have been at odds over media releases.

      I am having a hard time even understanding all the hype over this relationship. I lived in Toronto until recently and probably could have walked by her a hundred times and didn’t know because no one in Toronto knew her until she dated Harry. IMO she is the type of woman who reinvents herself to suit the situation she is in. When she dated Cory she was a foodie! Now when a reporter goes to her home, she serves a lunch of organic greens, bread and pasta with chillies? Really. I could so make that, who knew I was a foodie!

      She doesn’t define herself by a relationship but shuts down her blog and her clothing deal because she’s dating Harry? It makes no sense.

      Add to that, they have never dated. They have been “together” a year but how many actual days have they been together, and I don’t count the northern lights trip or 3 weeks in Africa. Like actual days as in whos taking the trash out, what do u want to have for dinner days, and what are we watching on Netflix kind of days.

      I understand that Kate and William as lazy as they are don’t have a lot of wiggle room in their lives because he will be king. But Harry will become a minor royal. He will be Prince Andrew.

      At this point my favourite royal spouses are Sophie Wessex, Mike Tindall and Autumn Phillips.

      1. Meghan has always referred to herself as a self proclaimed foodie, Cory or not. She dated Cory for 2 years or so but she’s been o suits for over 7 years and her character has always been written as Rachel a self proclaimed foodie, that didn’t come with dating Cory. And why is serving organic greens make her less of a foodie, I don’t get that at all. Whether Cory is/was a nice guy is a moot point to debate, Meghan dated him and she is the one that knows how he treated her and she treated him, so if she said she started dating Harry after breaking up with Cory well, that’s what it is.
        I’m still baffled at the claims Meghan was a not known actress before Harry. For people that watched suits from years ago, Meghan was a very well known actress and her character was much loved by us that watch her show. And yes, it is a hit show with very good ratings, otherwise it would have been cancelled after the first couple of seasons. So, just because people didn’t watch this show and didn’t know the actors on there don’t mean they aren’t known. I remember my son and I were at the Yonge-Dundas square one summer and my son recognized a rapper (name withheld) that I had never even heard of before. My son ran up to the guy and asked for an autograph and a picture with him, so the guy wrote something on my son’s baseball cap and my daughter took a picture of my son and this rapper. My son posted pictures on Facebook and was instant celebrity. Turns out this was some famous rapper but because I don’t listen to hip hop, I had no idea who he was!!
        And if living with a person pre marriage is the measuring tool for a successful marriage, then all the love at first sight and marriage within the first month is myths, right? Wrong! There’s lots of people that marry after dating for just a few months and never really actually live together before marriage and those marriages last years. Meghan and Harry might be one of those. People are judging this couple based on what they believe is the “recipe” for a success marriage, the point they seem to miss is that we are all created uniquely and what works for one couple might not necessarily work for another couple.

        1. That’s my quibble with them as well : they didn’t live together long enough to know each other. They might have surprises because of that.

        2. @Masamf, + a million. I also think they are together a lot more than is publicly known. Maybe not full-time living together, but together for weeks or a month at a time. For some people, that is enough. Not everyone needs to follow the same path to a successful marriage.

      2. From what we’ve seen, they’ve lived together for months between work schedules. She was living with him in London for about two months, punctuated with her trip to India. It appears that whenever she has filming breaks (like now), she lives with him in London. Makes sense, because the security of him going to Toronto is more difficult to handle. It isn’t like the handful of dates then engagement that both Diana and Fergie described.

    4. The timeline from online before the Harry news hit had her and the chef breaking up in May after a final vacation. That was what was out in social media and Toronto news, and before the fan fictions that started being spun in November trying to push the date earlier. She was in London in July for work which would time with their meeting then.

      1. Notasugarhere : Before being edited, the VF said “by Oct/Nov we had been dating quietly for 6 months” which brings us to May. “We locked eyes in July”.
        Changed to “dated in July”.

        She was dating Cory in May. They met at the event promoting Invictus in Toronto before Orlando Games. Cory was the caterer at time, which is how she got to meet him.

        It is being changed because cheating looks bad for a “great love story”. And if you must know, Harry was dating a model/actress at the same time.

        1. Again, that is not what was in social media at the time. The anti-Meghan, must have been cheating rewrite came in November after the facts were already out there. Ended with chef in May.

          Either Harry or Meghan could have been dating multiple people by July. She said something to Piers Morgan about different options. What matters is that they were together by November for that statement and are together now.

          BTW, Letizia was said to be dating another journalist when she met Felipe. Are we supposed to attack her too, because she chose to stop dating one man and started dating another instead? I don’t think so.

          Mathilde lived with her boyfriend for three years, and the timeline of her and Philippe meeting has never made clear if she and that boyfriend had broken up when M&P met at the tennis club. I *will* continue to side-eye Fred for his one-night stand with Mary, cheating on his long-time girlfriend, and going back to that girlfriend for months afterwards. Ditto William cheating with Kate behind his girlfriend’s back for months in college.

          1. I am only talking about others because I don’t know about them (Letizia, Mathilde, Mary). If it were true, I would criticize them as well.

            I knew about William and Kate.

            You cannot say the anti-crowd rewrote the timeline of Harry and Meghan, when multiple papers wrote about it and this crowd, as you say don’t have that kind of power. They both had other partners when they met and got together. To me it is wrong and I won’t change my mind about that.

            Oh, don’t get me wrong. I know that they were together by November and still are. But I don’t think cheating is a good foundation for a relationship and supposed to represent a great love story.

          2. Again, what was on their social media accounts and news out of Toronto May/June was that they had broken up. Anything else I’ve seen trying to re-write that came after Oct/Nov, and came from royal-fandom social media from what I’ve seen.

          3. Alright, how about you give proof ? I’ve shown articles to make my point, and I’d appreciate for you to do the same. Once you’ll do that, I’ll believe you.

          4. What you’ve “shown” is the VF article in which she states they started dating in July.

            Why does it feel like this was so long ago, even though is was c16 mos or so? From what I remember, it was that the chef was caught cheating on her, vacation was a make-or-break, they ended it after that final vacation. Part of that may have come from one of her Suits co-workers who since deleted his accounts because of the backlash he got about posting a picture of her.

          5. The VF was edited to say that they started to date in July instead of May. I was not the only one who has seen it.

            There are no proof that Vitello was cheating or that the trip in Mexico was a break or make deal kind of one. Give me some proof, I’ll believe you. Might be sexist to you but I believe in proofs, not rumors.

            Why does it feel so long ? Because they have been playing with the press, with us watching this uncover. Not believing me ? Her friends are Lainey (queen of blind gossips), Ben Mulroney (E!News anchor) who told us in advance that they were going (and got many scoops), Jess Mulroney (stylist to the rich and according to her own wiki, her PR). Friendly with the Sun who got many exclusives.

            I wanted to end this convo by adding this : you cannot say that antis are making up lies and changed the narrative when the narrative has been constructed by the newspapers.

          6. Again you’re referencing an interview that she gave in which she says July. Could just as easily have been her misspeaking, but has been jumped on as proof of this or that. The rumors of him cheating were throughout the relationship, no not going to go back 2-3 years to find them including on the deleted social media accounts.

            The tabloids use whatever they can, including anything spun by the anti crowd, because they’re throwing sh*t at the wall to try to make it stick. It has been shown how often they lift stories and story ideas directly off of royal forums and the speculation therein. No proof of anything, and the frequent inaccuracies from E! and Lainey show no sign of insider knowledge. Lots of guess work, hoping to be right, but too inaccurate to me.

            The fact is, this is their relationship. Whether they marry or not, whatever we discuss or not, doesn’t matter. If they marry and if she turns out to be useless as a royal, that’d be a whole different ballgame.

          7. It’s clear that the two of us are not going to agree on that cheating and tabloids parts. I think it’s best to stop here because we’re getting to a moot point.

            As for the marriage or not. I’m placing a virtual bet on it. As you say, we’ll see. So I’m gonna wait. Have a nice weekend notasugarhere.

          8. Where did you read or hear the story of Mathilde and her boyfriend lived together for 3 years? It is absolutely not true since she is an extremely devout catholic and probably even never slept with a man until the first wedding night. Her Roman catholic family, nor her background would have allowed that. She lived with her sisters in an flat that was purchased for them by her father right after she finished school and started dating Philippe. Before that she lived with her parents in their castle. Living with a man that is not your husband is just something that is totally unacceptable in those conservative circles.They still see it as “living in sin”. P & M didn’t meet at a tennis club but at a ball in the castle of mutual friends of the Belgian nobility. Philippe told the story himself in a television interview.

          9. The story at the time of their wedding, which has clearly been tidied up, was that she lived with a boyfriend for three years prior to Philippe. It may have been right before, or several years before (age 19-21). iirc it may have been her father who came out and said they’d met at a sports club, because there was talk it was an arranged match and he wanted it “out there” that they’d met like everyday people.

            We’re supposed to avoid religions here, so I’ve leave it at plenty of Catholic monarchies are less Catholic in private than public.

          10. NotASugarHere,

            You claim that the social media proves that Harry and Meghan did not start dating till well after May. Would you please prove by giving links?

      2. And she was in Mexico visiting her father in May, she posted pics of that trip for those of us that were following her pre-Harry.

        1. Too much logic for some people, MASAMF. She was out of the country when he was in Canada in May, but still some will insist it happened then.

          1. X100. It has been reported ad mortem that Harry and Meghan did not know each other (at least not personally even though some royal biographer claimed that Harry has had a 2 year crush on Meghan) in May when Harry came here to promote/launch the Invictus games. Numerous articles have reported (and the most latest in July 2017 by sunday mail a rag that is hostile to Meghan) that they met at Soho house London through friends and that was in June/2016. That same article reported that they met June, Harry was the one pursuing the actress and “bombarding her with text messages” to agree to a date and that by late July they were a couple. This was published before this VF article and they said “it was coming to their one year anniversary”. Again as I have said, its easy to claim cheating on Meghan’s part because some people have made it a mission to trash and smear her the moment the relationship was outed, but Meghan was NOT in Toronto in May when Harry came here. There have also been stories quoting her friends saying that when Harry “bombarded her with texts” she was breaking up with her boyfriend and she was flattered that a prince was relentlessly pursuing her (I’m paraphrasing here), this all reported in November last year. It is very inaccurate to come here and repeatedly promote the Meghan cheated on Cory, Meghan cheated on Cory, Meghan cheated on Cory idea, its simply not true…
            Rumours were that Cory was the player and he cheated on her but Im not sure how true those rumours are. The facts though are that Meghan was in Mexico in May 2016 when Harry came here to launch the Invictus games, those are unrefutable facts.

  31. The “chef’s” name is Cory, very nice guy. I said nothing about timing of relationships. Just mentioned that her interests seem to be very fluid.

  32. This is simply a comment for MMR/KMR: the formatting in this blog (MMR) is much better than over at KMR. When I’m reading comments through my mobile, the comments of comments of comments get strung out such that they are a single column of letters on top of one another. It’s impossible to read. I’m not sure what you’ve done with MMR to make all comments legible, but perhaps the same can be applied elsewhere? Just a small suggestion.

  33. The VF interview is a very bad move, it’s just so un-elegant/trashy if your intention is to become a classy/respectable royal. Plus it shows a lot of fame hunger. It’s obvious she loves the press attention. She used to collaborate in a blog uploading pics about her travels, outfits… I mean Is pretty obvious that she’s a fame seeker. However it was kind of justified since that was her world. In the end she is an actress.
    I’m sure there’s an intention behind, perhaps an imminent engagement ” there will be a time when we will have stories to tell”
    I mean you don’t release that kind of statements if you are not 100% sure that you’ll have a ring soon, unless you are a completely stupid. and she’s definitely not.
    I’m sure that she’s got and ambitious personality, always wanting to become someone important, so she tried her best to do “relevant actions” (job in EU Embassy in Argentina, humanitarian work, acting…) Until he got what she really dreamed about. I would also say they didn’t meet randomly and that she used some contacts to get to know him. It seems crazy? well Truth is stranger than fiction…

    There’s 2 things I don’t really get here
    1.Why PR is needed if in the end Harry is not going to be a king. Why the begging for the establishment acceptance. I think The roll-out is useless, unless the RF is planning a big role for
    2. In case its a roll-out,why they used a celebrity magazine that actually enhances Meghan’s celebrity profile?. Not to mention how childish it sounded ” we are in love” ” love great stories”.

    Last thing to say, this was a big revenge for her stepsister! Meghan literally called her noise 😀

    1. Technically speaking it was an internship at the embassy.
      It’s not crazy that she met him through contacts … she is a celebrity and Harry lives/loves in that world.

      Why PR ?

      To raise her profile. To get her accepted as she has a bad reputation.

      1. Give it up Ellana… it’s boring… move on, we get it you don’t like her for Harry… cool… next topic

        1. I’m just correcting a few mistakes, no need to take it personally. I get that you like her. I’m free to comment here as well.

          1. But Ellana, you really don’t know anymore that the rest of us do, so there are really no mistakes for you to accurately correct. You take your biased opinions and post them here like its the truth and you continuously pretend to post from some position of authority on these matters.
            I understand that Meghan has haters, everyone does, but to state that you know exactly why she did this VT article and “Why PR ? To raise her profile. To get her accepted as she has a bad reputation” is just crazy!!!!

          2. But she did say that she did an internship and not a job at the embassy in Argentina. I’m not inventing things.

            I wouldn’t say that I’m a hater but I’m extremely skeptical of her and that I don’t like her.

            The last part about PR was indeed a suggestion from my part. I said that she wanted to get accepted because let’s face it, she doesn’t have a good rep in UK. If you read the press online, comments are negative about her. Just check the articles posted about the VF interview. And I wasn’t the only who suggested it. Some here said that this was a roll-out to make her known and accepted.

          3. I don’t know, maybe my understanding of the English language is my main weakness but in my view, an internship is still a job. My daughter just finished her internship with Rogers as part of her graduation coursework, but we still say she worked at Rogers as an intern, I mean its still working!!! And to say that she has a bad reputation? C’mon now, what bad reputation? I understand that people distrust others (why one would have distrust and dislike of this magnitude for a person they have never even met, is beyond me but oh well) but this much vitriol is just sad!! I believe there are many negative comments and opinions about Meghan but from what I have read, there as many positive as there are negatives. Of course generalizing that Meghan is so hated (or loved) in the UK just because one reads some DM online posts is just plain misleading since there are a lot of people posting online under multiple names, and can actually post from numerous countries. One this is for sure, the British tabloids have gone out of their way to trash Meghan like they did Kate pre-engagement to William. It makes more sense to me now that Meghan (and to some extent Harry and even William) is choosing the more friendly American media over the British. Just MVHO.

          4. Alright, first, let me congratulate your daughter on graduating. I’m in my last year of studies as well and will graduate next year hopefully. About internship. To you it is work, to future bosses, it is not. I’ve been told so by my teachers and people working as head-hunters (got help from them to work on my CV) and believe me it saddens for my and other students’ future that people don’t think of internships as work. But internships and jobs do not have the same value on a CV.

            Bad reputation: it is not only her that is getting bad reputation, Harry is as well. The problem, if they want to smooth things over, they should have chosen British newspaper. Harry is a British prince not American. By going American with that VF and Newsweek interview, they’re snubbing the British press, that doesn’t like it and are going to be harsher on them. The outcome from the VF was bad in every newspaper I saw, even in the Guardian which is generally more neutral towards her.

            Last question to you : you use MVHO quite a lot. What does that mean ?

          5. Aaaaaah, I see. So the biggest issue is that both Meghan and Harry chose American mags over British ones? Must they be compelled to chose British just because Harry is a British prince? And the support the tabs are getting from their hateful readers plus the online onslaught Meghan is being subjected to by some is because Meg chose VF over a British mag? Very interesting indeed. So technically none of y’all claims have any truth to them but they’re just a way of punishing both Harry and Meghan for 1) Denial of the British media to access anything related to their relationship.
            2) Reaching over the pond to give access to a more friendly media than the British.
            But who could even blame them? Considering the barrage of assault, negativity and cruel criticisms these two have been subjected to by the British media and by some people, I am not surprised!! And if this sort of abuse continues, believe me, Harry isn’t gonna back down in any way shape or form, he ain’t gonna be pushed into submission to any tabloid; he and whomever he chooses to marry (I’m hoping its Meghan) will continue to go to people they believe have their backs and the haters together with the British media are just gonna have to eat their hearts out!!

      2. What bad reputation does Meghan have that you are talking about? What I’m getting from all this negativity is that people are just mad there is NOTHING they have on Meghan that they can pull out and say “look, the did this and that or she is this and that” etc etc. That’s why all people can pull out are roles she did on this and that show and slut shaming the actress for just doing her job!! I mean, this is an actress that has been acting on a hit show—and YES its a hit show, its been around for more that 7 years and has been getting very good ratings thus being renewed every year for 7 years, a lot of shows don’t even survive the 2 season—for 7 years but there are only 2 guys that she has dated, 2 guys. I’m sure it would have thrilled the nay sayers to know that she’s been around quite a bit but its hurts because one has nothing to throw back at Meghan, LOL. No wonder Harry put out that letter defending “his girlfriend”, this obsession with trying sink Meghan is just nuts.
        Look, I love Harry, I really do. But all this jealousy over a guy like him, to a point of posting such vitriol on Meghan just because Harry is dating her and not someone else is just ridiculous!!!

    2. Those “contacts” is just as likely to have been his cousin Eugenie, who also introduced him to his previous girlfriend. That is her circle of friends/employers who seem to have been part of this.

      I think this VF interview was planned by both of them, as others have suggested. Their opportunity to put down some of the more ridiculous notions out there, including the ongoing insistence by a handful that this whole relationship is fake. I think that’s why she made such obvious statements about them being together and being a couple. Much like the Westminster Abbey statement about how they’d be happy to marry these two in a full church wedding. That shut down a lot of online comment about how they’d have to get married quietly and not in an church event.

      VF if an odd choice to me, but they would have been torn apart even more if they used Hello or Majesty. She’d have been accused of playing at being royal while not being one.

  34. I have reading everyone comments for a long time now. I have nothing against MM & P.H! To be honest i think MM makes me nervous! All my instincts tell me that she is not a sincere person. I could be wrong! The constant pushing forward & hunger for fame raises alarm bells for me! People are saying she cheated on her lover chief Cory. By this behavour i get the impression M does not understand the rules the royals live with! MM is divorced this does not sound to promising, The british in the past did not allow Edward & Margaret to marry divorced partners. I have nothing against divorced people or Americans! The statics show that a 2nd marriage has just as high as a 2nd divorce!
    Harry & Bill & Cathy do come across as have limited intelligence! Bill did not read the warning signs about the middletons! I doubt Harry’s father & grandmother are happy about the V.F. interview. I could be wrong! I sincerely wish happiness for H! Astrologer Marjorie Orr has a report on MM & P.H.

    1. Im just gonna beg to differ on a number of points here:
      1) What makes Meghan appear not sincere? For starters, Meghan is an actress so the anti-Meghan rhetoric of “she is publicity or fame hungry” is just a very bizarre point people are trying to make, the girl is an actress on a hit show, she is and has been in the lime light BEFORE doe started dating Harry. Just because some people did not watch her show doesn’t mean she was not well known by everyone else.
      Secondly, the Meghan is a divorcee and royal family in the same paragraph makes me laugh out loud. Prince Charles is a divorcee married to Camila a divorcee, princess Diana was a divorcee, prince Andrew and Sarah are divorced, and they all have a great relationship with each other and the queen so….what’s the point of this “Meghan is divorced” again?
      3)”Harry & Bill & Cathy do come across as have limited intelligence!”? Wow, just….wow…no words, just…..SMH.

    2. I see her doing PR for her job, shutting down her social media in the face of people trolling those sites, and not saying anything for 10 months about this relationship. That isn’t pushing forward to me. There are loads of stories and articles out there about these two, 99 percent of which are from tabloids making stuff up. That is what ends up being so tiring. It isn’t anything substantive, just a lot of noise from tabloids and sites hungry for clicks.

      Why do you choose to believe the one person who is insisting she cheated on her boyfriend, when all they have is their personal belief that it happened? No insider information, just wants to believe it.

      As MASAMF points out, plenty of divorced and remarried people in the British Royal Family. Times are changing. 40 percent of marriages in the UK end in divorce. The Church of England has allowed divorced persons to marry in church since 2002. Should those people not be allowed to get married, because you don’t think their marriages will last? 3 out of 4 of Her Majesty’s children are divorced, two remarried. Were their marriages banned because they might not last?

      We are all outsiders and many of us understand the rules the royals live by. It isn’t like they are anything stressful, burdensome, or difficult to learn. Show up, do your job, act like you enjoy it, follow the dress code, curtsy to the right people. These are not difficult rules to learn.

      1. I’m surprised you don’t mind her doing pr notasugarhere your comments about women living in the public eye are usually different you only have to look at your comments on celebitchy about amal Clooney to see that why is it you hold meghan in higher self esteem when you think the same actions from amal are fame hungry

    3. Too late to edit.

      I’m not going to base possible relationship success on astrology. After all, astrologers would tell you a Taurus woman and a Gemini man could never work. Don’t tell Her Majesty (Taurus) and Prince Philip (Gemini) as they approach their 70th wedding anniversary.

      In general, I wish “we” (society as a whole? Christian-influenced society?) would set aside the idea that divorce means failure. This moralistic attitude about “till death do us part” is a relatively new concept, as is the idea in some parts of the world that marriage is about romantic love. In many cultures, marriage is a time-limited economic choice and has nothing to do with morals, religion, or romantic love.

      Louis and Tessy of Luxembourg recently divorced. They married very young after a teen pregnancy. They tried hard but after10 years, they filed for divorce. I don’t consider that a failure. They had a good, happy life together for a decade and have two healthy sons. Better they live apart then continue to be miserable together. Likewise Joachim and Alexandra (Denmark) who along with Marie have shown a good model of a happily blended family.

  35. I have a question, they have been together for 15 months. She did the interview in July. She talks about marriage after 13 months? She had the agreement of Queen Elizabeth and the firm? The Princess Charlène visited Monaco for a year to better know the inhabitants. I also read a lot of seeing there are two issues: there will be no marriage or divorce in 5 years

  36. Everyone has a right to their opinion! I am just stating mine. MM will have to live a more restricted life, it is difficult for people to marry in to the british royal. If Harry & MM marry then i wish them the very best!

    1. IMO, this story was lifted from Lainey’s gossip and/or gofugyoself and other sites and embellished by the writers own opinions, I could be wrong but that’s what it looks like to me. And Meghan is NOT Catholic she identifies as “Jewish” I believe but she is not Catholic. Her parents sent her to a catholic private school but she is not Catholic and I don’t believe any of her parents are (could be wrong tho). It could be that this was the only private school close to them that they believed in at the time Doria and Tom decided their child was going to attend private school, I don’t know. And WA officials already stated there is nothing stopping Harry and Meghan from marrying at WA if they wanted, and the insistence that they can’t marry there is just foolish. My guess is they both might choose a more low key location but the reason for that won’t be because they can’t wed at WA, it will be because they might just prefer a much smaller place.

    2. I read that article with increasing incredulity.

      There are so many things wrong with the details which is so annoying when DM (and other tabloids) decides to write a clickbaity article because the palace has given the go ahead to roll out a potential new storyline in the ongoing soap opera of the royals that keeps them in power.

      There is no bar to her based on the reasons listed in that article eg American, divorced, catholic, actress especially because there are already people within the family that have passed those tests and no one cared.

      As for not marrying at Westminster, the Abbey spokesman has already announced that they are happy to marry them at the abbey if they want to marry there, so DM is misinforming the public on this and the other points.

  37. Here’s an interesting piece fro Camilla Tominey. Camilla is the one that first broke the Harry Megha story in the UK and also Harry agreed to an interview with her (refused everybody else) when he while he was in Bardados. But Camilla said, the catch to that agreement was that she would not ask any Meghan related questions, and she didn’t. Anyways, here it is:
    Its a nice read, and Camilla is believed to her her research well before publishing anything.

  38. On a superficial note, i am really happy with the MM cover. A woman who understands that she is on the cover of a prestige magazine and doesn’t waste it like Kate did the Vogue cover.

  39. She doesn’t read her press. Never. Not even for Suits even before “When Harry met Meghan”? I don’t believe that and I don’t even understand why she would say say it. She is an actress so her popularity/ earning power is based on press. Whenever a celebrity goes all easy breezy yoga coconut water I can’t care what people think because I love myself too much and I’m above it good bad or ugly- my lip curls. Narcissists all, to some degree. Of course you read it, you’re still a human being and the rest of us are not idiots.

    I thought she looked quite pretty on the VF cover, but her interview was a bit airy fairy. I eat white bread and really really love my boyfriend. Ok.

    Also the timing was quite something, dovetailing unexpectedly with the baby news!

    1. Meghan said she doesn’t read any press stuff about her, she said so way before she started dating Harry. She mentioned how when she first started out on her career how people trolled her online with such negative and unkind things to her so she stopped reading this stuff. And, I’m not sure why people are getting their noses twisted out of shape because Meghan said she doesn’t read this stuff, A LOT of actors have said they don’t read the press, too much negativity and just plain evil vitriol from people that don’t even know them posting cruel stuff so they don’t. I can name 15 actors that I have read that said they don’t read any of the press but that’s too much time.

      All the negativity about the VF article is pointless now since it’s been revealed that Harry team and KP palace were all on board with the article and the timing, it had absolutely nothing to do with the Cambridge baby news. And IMO, the Cambridges would be happy to know that the attention was taken off of them for a bit since they got a lot of flack about this Camb baby #3 and Kate cancellation of all her appointments for the foreseeable future.

      1. Right. And I still don’t believe it from any of them. It’s like when celebrities say their unbelievably youthful glowing skin is all due to a bar of Dove and 8 glasses of water a day. It’s what they wish us to believe, imo, but of course you are entitled to disagree. The rest of the article is pretty thin. I thought the best part of it were the photos. And I think her freckles are really cute- I’m glad to hear she won’t let them be airbrushed.

        All I was saying about the timing is what a coincidence- nothing else. I’d appreciate you not reading anything negative into my mention of it- thanks.

        1. Dame Helen Mirren recently said that moisturizer does f-all for her skin. She’s a L’Oreal spokeswoman or one of those companies. Some folks were shocked but seriously, celebs don’t use that crap. It’s all words in exchange for copious amounts of money.

          The timing is definitely strange. Harry and Meghan’s whole approach to this relationship in terms of PR has been odd.

          1. Yes, Ray. I agree with you. Actors may not read some of their press, but they do read much of it. It’s a given, if you ask me.

            I have not been paying attention to the news stands, but I see two different cover photos on the internet for Meghan on Vanity Fair. Is one the British version and the other the U.S. one?

            The photo of her leaning forward in a strapless evening gown and with bare feet is a cheap imitation of an iconic photo taken of Marilyn Monroe by the esteemed photographer (and Marilyn’s close friend), Milton Green. He was an amazingly talented photographer and the stars of the 50s adored being photographed by him. With Monroe, he was a genius. He put together so many amazing looks that few other photographers of his day could imitate so well. Was this Meghan photo an attempt to compare her even most subtly to another MM? Monroe’s star still shines so brightly even now in 2016. I just think this was cheap way to photograph Meghan in a way that smacked of copying two legends: Marilyn Monroe and her photographer. Meaghan, you are beautiful, but it’s rather presumptuous to put yourself in the same iconic company as Monroe. Even if it was the photographer’s idea, or that of the magazine’s art director to do so. Come up with another pose, next time,guys. Please. THe MM comparison and the choice of her MM stage name (Meghan’s that is) seem that she is eager to copy that beauty all too well.

        2. Just want to say that a lot of actors don’t read their press, not any of it. They get exposed to it sometimes, of course, but it is not unusual for those in the industry to actively avoid entertainment news and reviews.

        3. There’s a difference between not reading press about yourself and not having a clue what the press is saying about you. A lot of these celebs have assistants and publicists who monitor their image for them so they read the press. I really believe Meghan doesn’t spend time everyday reading about herself, I really don’t. Doing that would turn even the most sane person absolutely crazy. It’s just like having someone read the celeb’s fan mail and maybe even respond back.

    2. @Ray

      I would imagine it’s hard to read negative things about yourself online. I get a little upset when my FB friends throw shade without naming names so I could only imagine what it would feel like to have someone writing entire negative articles and comments about me. I wouldn’t be able to read it for my own sanity. I would imagine she has gossip blogs blocked so she doesn’t accidentally stumble on it.

      1. I agree Jessica, but I didn’t take her statement to mean social media. To me, press is industry. Maybe I misinterpreted what Meghan was saying. I hope she doesn’t read the cruel and awful things people write about her on the internet nor Kate. I’ve seen some pretty terrible stuff- it’s way too easy to hide behind a screen and a keyboard for these nasty angry people.

        1. Press too can be a double edged sword sometimes can be favourable to one but many a time they are cruel people hiding behind their printers on a mission to destroy others just to make them feel good about themselves. If actors say they don’t read any press I believe them, of course you and I will just agree to disagree. Case in point: DM published a article about her being almost straight outta Compton, that was character assassination and it was done by the press. The British tabs in particular have embarked on a mission to trash this woman and possibly bring her to her knees, her mother became a target because of her dreadlocks, her exes were all approached to get them to dish about her (they both declined f course), both her parents have been dragged through the mud as if filing for bankruptcy is a crime, stuff posted on the fig have been lifted off and made ridiculous stories out of, she was accused by the press of being a porn star because some porn site has a picture of her on there, the list is endless and none of that came from individual posters like any one on here, they came from the press and were printed in national newspapers. So, when she says she doesn’t read the press, that’s the stuff she tries to shield herself from. Of course you can choose not to believe her, many anti-Meghan have accused her of being a liar in that aspect, but the truth is, the press is cruel and if she says she don’t read it, then I believe her, she don’t.

      2. I worked in the film industry for over six years in publicity. I promise you most actors do read their press. And, they try to manipulate journalists, too. So do their agents and publicists. I was sent out to interviews that many of the studio’s actors did with major publications to publicize their films. When certain areas the star did not wish to discuss were brought up, the subject was changed. I would jump in and if the journalist wanted the story, he/she usually complied. But sometimes, the points still made it in print, coming from an un-named source. Even before interviews were booked, journalists knew: “Don’t bring up A B or C!”. Of course, that’s the biggest named stars. But, the studios try to protect other lesser known talent, too. It was that way when I worked in the field and it still is.

        Stars can often go ballistic after seeing things in print that they don’t like. And, it may just be something so simple and not unflattering, yet they balk. So, they do read their PR. They read their reviews. They get out there whenever they can to talk up their latest roles, or just keep the attention on them It is totally ridiculous to say they don’t read their press. Most love seeing themselves in print. And, yes they can appreciate the flattering points and get mad as hell at the others.

        1. MelineJane,

          Thank you very much for the inside view of this particular part of the industry. I would think that even normal everyday people attempt to manage their online presence etc. I know I do as I am in an occupation that requires a measure of propriety and gravitas.

  40. I think every person in the public eye reads what’s online about themselves the reason they say they don’t is because people would say they are narcissistic and full of themselves even in every day life we all want to know when people are talking about us its human nature its like when you are at school and someone starts a rumour about you and you kid yourself by saying you will rise above but you still decide that you need to know because everyone else knows

    1. So, if she says she doesn’t read about herself, she’s a liar…and if she says she does read about herself, she’s a narcissist? Sounds like she really can’t win then.

      I definitely believe famous people who say they don’t read what others say about them because a) they are probably too busy making movies, running countries, writing novels, traveling, raising children, living their busy lives, etc., and b) it would be soul-sucking! Who wants to read comments or articles from a ton of people who don’t even know you trashing your looks, talents, intentions, beliefs, family members, etc. etc. I certainly wouldn’t!

      1. I assume she reads what people say about her. I’ve read actors who say they try not to, and if they do, take it with a grain of salt; people you don’t know, don’t matter, so ignore it.

        Meghan though likes to talk herself up a lot and I’m sure she’s aware of what people say and think about her on blogs like this.

  41. I’m having the Kate Effect with Meghan and I don’t mean her clothes. Getting beneath the PR spin and seeing how fluffed up Meghan’ s humanitarian/charitable efforts are has left me underwhelmed and irritated that I bought into it again. I didn’t think Meghan would be good for the RF before and I still don’t now. She’s too fame hungry and pretty tone deaf, just like the royal trio. Another Stepford Wife in the making but she might be a little more difficult to wrangle than Kate in the beginning. If she and Harry wed I don’t think it’ll last long. I just don’t get that feeling, especially in the rare photos of them together. Something’s off and my gut is usually right. *yawn* These kids are so boring I’d rather watch paint dry.

    1. @Meghan; I’m having the exact same feeling. Something isn’t just quite right about MM and the way she presents herself. As I said before; she will increasingly disappoint us and probably even more than Kate does at this point. And for her relationship with Harry; it will all end in tears. She’s not the right person for the job. She might be an actress that can be “on”, but maybe that’s what are guts are telling us: that she is fake and it is all about image and branding. And you can’t keep on acting for the next 50 years or so without people noticing. I work in entertainment and I have seen hundreds of girls like MM over the last years. If they can draw attention to themselves and boost their fragile ego’s by being a DJ they become one overnight. If it has to be charity work, they visit a hospital in their designer outfits and proclaim they are humanitarians.I also don’t believe her “Cinderella Story” which might be a popular thing to do in the US, but won’t work in Europe. Private school? Daddy who works in Hollywood? Spending your free time as a child on a television set surrounded by famous actors?That hardly sounds like a normal upbringing.She claims to be a victim of racial abuse? Maybe she experienced some confusion about her background but I think she exaggerates it gladly to sell the “from dirt to the top” fairy tail. Like she said, she loves a great love story. I think she is creating one for herself by dramatising certain facts about herself. Kate might be work shy and doesn’t show few signs of ambition; at least she stayed dedicated and out of the spotlight for 10 years out of love for her husband, her family never talked to the press in a bad way about their daughter or son in law (take notice Markle family!) and she was modest enough to admit on the day she got engaged that she still had a lot to learn.

      1. Clearly you were not following Kate if you think she stayed quiet, in the background and or didn’t push herself forward as the girlfriend de jour during the dating years.

        The hunt for the ring was a family effort and every single member of the immediate Middleton family was employed in getting it for Kate.

        There are paps AND editors on record confirming the media campaign for that ring and how they were made aware that Kate would be available at certain events to be photographed, if not being interviwed.

        Then there was the whole kerfuffle about Kate using her hirlfriend status to score freebies, including free luxury car from Audi using the royal discount to get one. The free clothing from such brands as Issa – did you think it was a coincidence that she wore the label at every public event right upto and including her engagement? Demanding first class treatment everywhere she went on the basis of being his GF.

        Then there is the well known fact that the damily hired the current editor of the Mail on Sunday as their media advisor whikst he was still editing Tatler magazine. That hire resulted in multiple glowing articles and photos of the Middleton sisters.

        The idea was to campaign for the ring whilst appearing not to do so for the uninitiated into the tactics being used.

        As for Kate laying low? Not bloody likely. Tales anound of how the various stores, clubs, even her one job with Jigsaw tried to help her keep a low profile and especially to protect her from paps, only for her to refuse their offers of help or use the low key, obscure entrances. She often re-did her make up before walking out in full glare of the paps from the front door despite being offered the backdoor pap free exits that other celebs used or private shopping services that are on offer for anyone who asks. Her Jigsaw boss even mentioned how she would walk outside twice so the paps could get their shots.

        And as for that mefia tour of 2007?!?! Talk about refusing to lay low. Harry broke up with Chelsy afew times and not once did she do a media tour like that. Paps were called to take pictures of Kate which went into the next day’s papers.

        All the better to play on William’s well known paranoia of the paps harrassing his family.

        There used to be hundreds, if not thousands of photos of Kate online falling drunk out of clubs, crotch shots of her getting in/ out of cars, partying, vacationing, shopping. At one particularly intense period she was clubbing 4nights every week!!

        Once Kate got the ring, all that was whitewashed away, and lots of people worldwide started paying attention to her. And she played the demure card to perfection. Once she was married, by a combination of intimidation by lawyers AND RPOs, there are very few pictures of her in the media. Nevermind that she is still caught in London shopping or living with her family at Middleton towers.

        Whitewashing happens to ALL new royals and only people who weren’t following the story buy into the new pristine image because there is an assumption that the royals pick women (or men) with unracy, boring, clean backgrounds and therefore don’t research any further than the presented new image.

        The same thing will happen to MM as it happened to Kate and Diana, Fergie, Sophie, Sofia, Daniel, Mary, Marie, Maxima, Alexandra etc.

        1. Absolutely Herazeus. People don’t know or chose to forget how Kate behaved. And the comments abound about how she may lack work ethic but at least she keeps quiet. I’m horrified. Do we want someone who does nothing and stays silent as a future queen consort? I want someone who will stand up for her causes and be counted, that’s what the good side of Diana did. Kate is happily married isn’t she so the dark side of Diana should not be revisited.

          1. Y’all have been so spot on about Kate, even down to predicting her 3rd pregnancy and its timing. I’m still neutral about Meghan except to wonder why she would would hook up with a gilded slacker if she is everything she says she is and does; I would think with that value system and her purported intelligence, Harry would not be a good match for her. I marvel at the distrust of her.

            Anyone have any predictions of what her life will be like and what she will be like if she marries Harry? The only thing I’m pretty sure of is that she will be preggers soon after. And how will things be between her and Kate? Mind you, anyone who topples the ever dull one off the front page is a step up.

          2. So I gave in and bought Vanity Fair even while realizing I would have been better off flushing my $6.99 down the toilet. I knew this article would be nothing but fluff, but I couldn’t help myself. I really did not go for how Harry’s bad behavior was glossed over as being a part of growing up, in particular the dressing as a Nazi at the “Colonials and Natives” costume party. Just the name of the party is horrifying. I agree that this article is the beginning of the revisionist version of Meghan’s life story. At this point I cannot figure out if Meghan is an opportunist and much like Kate and Pippa, chose the right friends to put herself into Harry’s or some other well connected and wealthy aristo’s sights or if she is really genuine and likeable. I have no doubt she is intelligent, but this is the start of the dumbing down of Meghan.

        2. I caught a lot of this before it was hard scrubbed from thr net, including one of her coworkers at Jigsaw spilling the beans about how Kate didn’t do any actual work and spent more time in her car crying over William than anything. I’m still learning lots about the family job of getting Kate the Ring of Doom and some stuff is still out there if you know how to find it.

          Meghan still just screams fake. She only talks about herself even when she’s speaking about those humanitarian trips, which were nothing more than African photo ops for her self-branding. Fake, fake, fake. No more real than Kate’s hair and teeth.

          1. I think it’s kind of rude of her co-worker to say she spent most of her time crying the car about William. That seems petty to me.

    2. She surely does like to talk herself up. It’s so common in many actresses/actors. I am so tired of hearing her tell how she wrote a letter here and there as a child to protest sexism in commercials. Or, many other comments that she makes calling attention to her causes by also calling great attention to herself.. Of course, she should point out the causes she is interested in helping, but when she talks about what she does to help in such glowing a way, it irks me. I am trying to think of an example, but I am so tired this AM, that I can’t. But, I know they are out there.

      Meghan has much going for her. She is beautiful, smart and a hard worker. She loves Harry, I guess and I know that he is probably head over heels in love with her. She should let others tell that story. She does not need to keep promoting herself. She will be giving up show biz and won’t have that to add to her agenda anymore. Anything and everything she does of any merit, if and when she marries Harry will surely speak for itself. But, it’s hard to let go of such a huge ego, it’s such a part of one’s make-up. Once an actress, for the most part, always one.

      It’s the perennial actress in her that irks me. It bothers me with so many other people in that profession, too. It is very rare to find someone in that world. who is more relaxed about who they are and not living and breathing for positive and glowing accolades. Harry doesn’t know what he’s in for. Or, maybe he does. He’s looking for a bright star on his arm. And, he’s a pretty bright star, himself. Will be hard for them to deal with one another’s bright light. Stars and fairy tale love stories seem to burn out and I hate to say it, and hope I am wrong, but I see a big burnout coming down the pike.

      1. I’m personally tired if hearing about that damn soap commercial. You’d think she singlehandedly brought that one down as much as she loves to hang onto it. She has nothing of real value to give. It’s the same 3 or 4 things repeated ad nauseum all about her. Nothing about these actual projects she’s supposedly so passionate about.

  42. I’m hoping a qualified royal watcher can help me out. I was under the perception that no one knew Prince Felipe was dating anyone until he announced his engagement to Letizia. Is this true? If so, how on Earth was it possible to keep that a secret; don’t the press follow him almost wherever he goes? Were there any hints at all besides the fact that he was a super eligible bachelor.

    1. I think this is true. I recall reading it a few times – they even met in public and had to fake not knowing one another! It came out of the blue that they were engaged, and a lot of criticism was levied at Letizia who was a divorced woman. And we all know she is an excellent royal, queen, wife, and mother.

      I’d imagine he was left alone more than the British royals are? Most people don’t know there are other royals!

      1. Well I’ve heard the Spanish press is pretty aggressive. Because I’m not British I don’t care who he marries but it would be a cool surprise if he popped up with a fiance and we didn’t have to deal with all of this. I want to see the wedding.

        1. I’ve read of all sorts of rumors plaguing Letizia trying to paint her as some villain in the Spanish yellow press, it sounds pretty awful.

    2. It is true that nobody knew of Felipe’s and Letitzia’s relationship until the very day they got engaged. I think there are various reasons why they could keep that a secret. To begin with she obviously knew how the game was played and was surrounded by a supportive circle of friends and family. Unlike MM’s family and friends who can’t keep their mouths shut. IMO they are even ordered to give away details about her and the relationship, MM clearly is on a mission here. Although the Spanish press is hard on them these days, before Juan Carlos abdicated the Spanish Royal family was greatly admired and loved by the press and the public. It was only when the country was affected hard by the financial crisis and Juan Carlos, princess Cristina and her husband appeared to be involved in many (financial) scandals the public view and the press turned on them. Both the economic crisis and the scandals that conveniently came to light at the same time were used by the nationalist north of the country to stir up anti monarchy feelings. These days the Spanish royals will never be free to do as they did in the past. Contrary to Juan Carlos (who was seen as a hero before his fall from grace) they have to work hard to preserve the throne. It is remarkable to read how loved Letitzia is in the UK and the US and at the same time read all the bad Spanish press she gets. That said; the Spanish press might be aggressive , the British tabloids are amongst the hardest in the world.

  43. How is everyone in Florida doing? I hope everybody is okay! <3 Been thinking about all of you here and on KMR too.

  44. If they actually get married, I don’t think MM really knows what will happen.
    I don’t think she undertands that she will always be less thank Kate. She won’t have the same clothing budget, the same treatment from the press.
    The press will probably first play nice, but after a while it will be Diana and Fergie all over again.
    Because Kate has been a huge disappointment, MM is never allowed to look like a royal success.
    She can never out do Kate.
    I don’t think MM understands this. She now sees all the press she is getting, but after the wedding after a few years it will change, rather quickly. The spotlight will be on Kate, George, Charlotte and Number 3.
    In my opinion she will feel mistreated, like prince Henrik, after a while.
    MM give me a bad vibe. Due to her acting ‘abilities’ she knows how to play Harry. Harry doesn’t have a clue that he has been manipulated.
    I have had the same bad vibe with Mette Maarit and Sofia. Altough it looked like Mette Maarit had changed, it has lately been clear that this has not been so.
    I have been also wrong. I didn’t like Chris at all. At the wedding I saw what Madde saw in him. She married someone who was genuinely in love with her. Altough I am not sure if Madde was in love with him. I remember also being furious when Charles married Camilla, but with age I have changed my mind. I thought Stefanie was a good choice to Lux royal family, sadly she has been a huge disapointment.
    So I have has a few hits and a few misses as well, I hope for Harry’s sake that my gut feeling of MM is wrong.

    1. “I don’t think MM understands this. She now sees all the press she is getting, but after the wedding after a few years it will change, rather quickly. The spotlight will be on Kate, George, Charlotte and Number 3.
      In my opinion she will feel mistreated, like prince Henrik, after a while.”

      I think she’ll turn out more like Princess Marie of Denmark. I think they are fine with their second tier status because it gives them more freedom.

  45. Someone may have already touched on this but what I find interesting is that the article states they met in July 2016 while she was in London (she spent like a month in Europe last summer and documented it on Instagram). But then, when she speaks about the months they had before it became news, she said it was about 6 months. If I remember correctly, it was around Halloween (so we’ll say early November) that it was released which would make 6 months be May, not July. Also, she said she was working during that whole time they were dating but, again, she documented a “summer of wanderlust” all over her Instagram. Just odd that the story doesn’t seem to really add up.

    1. It has been all over the place when they met. At first it was May then they realized oh it looks like Meghan is cheating let’s change it! I mean, they did it with Carl Philip and Sofia, he cheated on Emma with Sofia for awhile before dumping Emma. All part of whitewashing. They all do it…

    2. I may have been a mistake or just rounding off. Honestly I couldn’t tell you when I started dating my fiance; so I just say spring time.

      1. Phew, I’m so glad to someone else can’t remember exactly when they started dating their significant other, thanks Jessica!! I am noticing that folks seem to skip over the word “about”, Meghan said it was “about 6 months”. It’s quite possible that they met in May or June but didn’t start dating until July.

    1. And he just put a bullet through the relationship and undermined, yet again, the few chances his sister had to become a royal. Harry can’t marry this girl, it’s as simple as that. She and her family will be an embarrassment to the RF,they already are, it will be one after the other spilling the beans. They are too talkative, too media hungry, too trashy. I bet they are being paid for these kind interviews and will keep cashing in. Media Markles, Sparkles Markles…the girl’s increasingly unpopular in the UK and the British tax payers are already fed up. I bet Her Majesty, The Prince Of Wales, the royal press offices, senior courtiers are mortified by all of this.

      1. ‘An embarrassment to the RF’

        No just no; her brother talks too much but it’s hardly that serious. The royal family embarrasses themselves without the Markles being involved. Not sure why she would be punished for her brother making a light-hearted comment.

        1. I do think Meghan’s brother and sister are an embarrassment. But then again I think Andrew is a much bigger embarrassment. I think Meghan’s family need to STFU, but I’d take Meghan’s family drama over Andrew’s alleged sexual misconduct any day.

          1. Her sister is terribly bitter but I don’t think it’s fair to judge her because of an estranged sibling. I don’t think she’s that close with her older brother either. I’m not a big Meghan fan but I don’t think she should be negatively judged because of them.

          2. I’m not judging Meghan; I’m judging her brother and sister. Her brother and sister are a mess and need to stop talking because they come across terribly.

          3. You can prefer the Markle drama over the Andrew stories but I doubt the Queen thinks the same about it. He is her (favourite) son after all. Andrew was born royal where Meghan still needs to earn her credits before she can officially become one. Up until this point she is an outsider and the same rules don’t apply to her.

            @Jessica “Hardly that serious”? You don’t seem to realise the brother caused some serious harm to his sisters public profile and to her chances of a royal wedding.Don’t be surprised this wedding is not going to happen because of it.

            For me it is clear Americans don’t have a realistic view on what is happening here. Maybe they want this marriage to happen so hard and/or don’t really understand (especially the younger generation) what it truly means to marry into a royal family and to be accepted by the subjects of a monarchy ruled country.

            I don’t think it is fair the Middletons get slammed all the time whereas they never talked about Kate in this way and conducted themselves with much more grace. Whatever they did behind the screens nobody knows for sure but it was they did in the public eye that matters in the end. And never ever did they do something like this. Americans bring out the racist thing over and over again whenever somebody has some critical thing to say about Meghan often without any proof of racism. How can you not see this is a bad match?

          4. @Maya

            “@Jessica “Hardly that serious”? You don’t seem to realise the brother caused some serious harm to his sisters public profile and to her chances of a royal wedding.Don’t be surprised this wedding is not going to happen because of it.”

            Again this is what I was saying with KMR earlier, she shouldn’t be judged by the actions of her brother. I don’t think his comment will affect her chances; she’s either already engaged or it’s not going to happen period (apparently she turned in her car but that could be unrelated). And honestly at this point Harry’s reputation isn’t that great he’s just more liked because he is seen as fun. The Queen only seems to care about Harry’s happiness now that Catherine has given birth to a heir and spare. She’s not nearly as controlling as she was 20 years ago. I don’t care for the BRF and I’m not a big fan of Meghan but I’m only interested in a royal wedding. I think him marrying a biracial American is more interesting than marrying a Kate Middleton type.

          5. I’m sorry but I totally disagree with you on the point that Her Majesty is only caring about Harry’s happiness regardless of who he marries. The Queen’s main duty (and believe me, she takes it very seriously) is preserving the throne and the institution for the next generations. That’s why she will never abdicate and will carry on until the day she dies. If there is one thing that can undermine any royal house (in a constitutional democratic monarchy) are scandals. And as a grandmother she will want her grandchildren and children to be happy but as a monarch the Crown will always take precedence over personal gain or happiness. On top of that the British monarch will also automatically become the Head Of The Church Of England and therefore the preserver of moral and religious values. They are servants of the people, all their actions are held accountable through the democratic elected government. If it will not be like this, the monarchy will not last and everybody who is born royal knows that.It is instilled in them from birth. Yes, Her Majesty opened up but allowing commoners, catholics and divorcees into the royal fold, she abolished primogeniture (she was also strongly advise to do so by Tony Blair since it was the will of the people). However, this kind of behaviour is a step too far, discretion is and will always be top priority.
            If Meghan can’t silence her family, it will undermine her’s and Harry’s position in the royal family and they will have to be held accountable for for any scandal, big or small that pops up over time. It’s the way things work, either we like it or not.

            I’m with you regarding a new royal wedding. Don’t we all like them ç’w! I even want Andrew to settle down and be happy! But the British taxpayers don’t want it at any cost. They want a royal marriage with someone who is worthy of the title AND who makes Harry happy. Someone who can represent the state (and therefore the people who are the state) with dignity and grace. Someone who they can be proud of. They truly care about the royals and just like with anybody you care for you wish a good marriage, not only a nice wedding.

            Truly nobody cares about Meghan’s nationality, neither do they care about her skin tone. The UK are one of the most multiracial countries in the world. Maybe you can’t relate that much with posh Kate but it is the kind of woman who fits into these circles. I’am sure there are many American girls suitable as members of the royal family. Only not this one.

          6. First, regarding the Markle family it is embarrassing seeing the siblings and wider family members air their laundry in the public for money. I also see it more about their personality and action than Meghan’s. We cannot control family but only suffer in the shame through guilt by association. How would this translate to the British Royal Family if they were to marry? I think it would mean that the tax payers would have to start paying off family members to keep quit if it has not been occurring already. Though it is a reflection of their actions I would think it would be too distracting with their constant antics. I also believe that giving hush money to this family is not in the UK citizens best interest but only for the BRF’s.

            Meghan’s half-brother held a gun and has been accused of abusing his partner. He was even brought into police custody. This will always be a shadow on Meghan. Also her parent’s bankruptcies will also be there in the minds of the public. As we are not allowed to see the full financial accounting of the BRF I would always question what money are we having to give to her family. It has been reported that William gave money to Kate’s family for their new home. Kate’s family also relies heavily on the royal connection for freebies and great discounts and deals. In respect of bad behaviour Pippa and a group of friends were driving in Paris and causing disruptions and waving a gun. There are pictures of the instance. It would not surprise me if the BRF intervened to make sure no one was arrested.

            Illegal and bad behaviour is well documented for the royal family but Andrew has taken it to an all new height. It was also bad form for the BP press to release the woman’s name who claimed in an affidavit in the USA of having underage sex (by USA standards) with Andrew. Not only did BP denounce the claims but said she was lying. Turns out there is photographic evidence to prove the claim at least that Andrew did indeed meet her. Going off the information in the press (sound sources) if I had to argue the case via the prosecution office I would think there was a strong chance of a win. I personally have no doubt that something shady went on. Plus Andrew makes his money through less than upstanding governments. He sells his royal connection at every turn.

            None of these families are the perfect model so requiring a higher standard for those marrying in is a ridiculous idea. We have no control over what others do but only of ourselves. There are issues with Meghan but her family is not one of them as long as the UK citizens do not have to pay the blackmail price to keep them quite. As long as they go to the press and sell stories the more they look ridiculous and soon they will have nothing left to sell.

          7. Why should Meghan try to silence people who she doesn’t even have a relationship with. She hasn’t spoken to these half siblings in years. Unlike uncle Gary who is still close to the Middletons and has loaned them money, Meghan’s hands are clean because she refuses to have anything to do with her rogue relatives.

            The royals have been besieged with scandal after scandal so they are not in a position to throw stones at others. The Queen has many good qualities but her family are a mess. She preferred to turn a blind eye at their indiscretions. I doubt she will get involved where Meghan is concerned.

      2. Why do people make broad statements like the British people etc…. what polls have you taken Maya? You are projecting your personal opinion on an entire nation… have we forgotten the scandal that royal born have been involved in? Meghan family needs to shut up yes, but gee, no rape allegations, no tampon gate….no love child, no abdication here. I mean people questioned Harry’s paternity- that is telling…. Whether or not they get married ( which I doubt) there will be scandals with or without making Meghan. Maya you of course have every right to not like her but let us not pretend that the royal family is angelic and that somehow Meghan and her cray family is going to be the downfall of the BRF

Comments are closed.

Back To Top