Meghan Markle’s ‘friend’: Meghan ‘doesn’t want to be a lady who lunches’

All together Upfront celebration

The British papers are all abuzz with royal sources and royal-adjacent sources talking about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle and the would-be Operation Princess. I’m glad everyone seems to be on the same page, and I’m glad that my prediction seems to be dead-on: Meg and Harry are most likely engaged already and they’re waiting to announce it until after the Invictus Games. Most people also believe that Meghan and Harry will do their first real “photo op” together at the Invictus Games in Toronto, on September 23rd. Expect an engagement announcement a few weeks after the Invictus Games, I would think. So what else are these royal-adjacent sources whispering about? Some highlights from a Daily Express piece:

The palace is fine with all of this: Aides rubbished reports as “incorrect” that the Queen had been unhappy with the coverage, as one of Meghan’s closest confidantes revealed she spoke to the US magazine with Harry’s full approval. A royal source revealed: “Behind Palace gates everyone is expecting an announcement. It’s a case of when not if. The consensus is there will be a wedding next year.”

Meghan has actually been quiet for a year: The friend, who wished to remain anonymous, rallied against suggestions Meghan was courting publicity, saying: “She hasn’t spoken for a year and all she did say was that she was in a relationship and in love. Any suggestion that she is milking this for publicity is ridiculous. Of course Harry knew all about it, the palace okayed it.” A royal insider also confirmed Harry’s closest aides at Kensington Palace were told about the interview and gave it their full approval. “The Palace knew about it and sanctioned it,” said a well-placed source. Meghan hadn’t done much in the past year. She’d been very quiet but there is an understanding that this is not a sustainable position for her to be in as an actress. She has a career and media work is an inevitable part of that. Although the Palace isn’t speaking for her, she has an agent and a publicist for that, they issued the statement on behalf of Prince Harry in November and are keeping a close eye on the media.”

The VF article: “It was never going to be a tell-all type of thing. Before she met Harry she went on plenty of TV shows and gave lots of interviews but she’s remained silent for the past year. Contrary to seeking the spotlight she’s been shying away from it,” the friend said. “She’s done a few things that are important to her like writing a piece for Time magazine about menstruation in developing countries and how the stigma can hold girls back from an education.”

Meghan is an amazing unicorn: “Meghan is a very dynamic and incredibly intelligent person. She’s spoken at the UN and has travelled to Rwanda and India as a patron for World Vision. But Vanity Fair want to sell magazines so they didn’t focus on that so much. There’s a lot more to her than the article suggests. She went to Northwestern University, which is one of the best schools in the States. After school, she worked at the US Embassy in Argentina. She speaks fluent Spanish and conversational French and she works incredibly hard. In order to make ends meet while she was a struggling actress, she did calligraphy and was a host at restaurants. She has said on numerous occasions she doesn’t want be a lady who lunches. She is actually very low maintenance. She appeared on the front cover of Vanity Fair without any mascara on and insisted there was no airbrushing of her freckles. Most cover girls take hours getting ready for such shoots but Meghan was only in hair and make up for 30 minutes. What you see is what you get with Meghan. She’s not at all Hollywood. Yes, she’s beautiful but she’s got brains, she’s smart and engaged.”

[From The Daily Express]

Dear Meghan’s “friend”: please calm down a little bit. Meghan is a nice woman who will marry a prince. She’s not the second coming! I mean, I get it – Meghan is getting the same glowing rollout as someone like Amal Clooney or Leo DiCaprio’s latest blonde. That’s the problem – she’s not engaged to some movie star, she’s engaged to a prince. A little bit of mystery and silence does work wonders. I’m worried that Meghan has that most American of problems: the habit of overexplaining. Not to mention the problem of getting a little bit crazy about “creating a narrative.” I did think this was kind of shady/funny though: “She has said on numerous occasions she doesn’t want be a lady who lunches.” Translation: she’s not going to spend her time on endless hair appointments and shopping trips like SOME duchesses. Also: “She is actually very low maintenance.” Nothing says low-maintenance like your “friend” completely freaking out to a British paper about how you’re the most amazing unicorn ever.

Royal Foundation Harry and William

Photos courtesy of WENN.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

231 Responses to “Meghan Markle’s ‘friend’: Meghan ‘doesn’t want to be a lady who lunches’”

  1. Island_girl says:

    This friend, that friens…I’m just looking forward to the engagement announcement. I hope for great happiness for Harry and Meghan.

  2. Nicole says:

    Princess Sparkles strikes again. Lord Meghan tell them to put a lid on it

  3. Natalie S says:

    Has Meghan gone from strength to strength and most importantly has she never put a foot wrong? What is her level of keeness? And how does she strike a balance between being normal and completely down-to-earth while also being an extraordinary person/future royal?

    I like Meghan but this is too much fun.

  4. HH says:

    There was some definite over explaining. Of all the things people have said/think about Meghan, I don’t think any of them are “vapid, shallow” or anything of the sort.

    The “lady who lunches” comment seems to be shade at any socialite, but it could aimed at the Duchess. Then again, “I haven’t seen her in a while.” STILL laughing at the inexplicable Harry comment.

  5. Megan says:

    IDK, Harry seems to be making noise about being “normal.” What happens if he wants to hide out in their country pile for a few years like W+K?

  6. CynicalAnn says:

    Her “friend” did her no favors-that interview was eye roll inducing. (And I like her and want a royal wedding.)

  7. dodgy says:

    I like the fact that she speaks Spanish and French with varying degrees of fluency. I’ve always found it a shock that Wills and Harry didn’t take it upon themselves to learn foreign languages (based on what I’ve seen). I think QE and Charles do speak French.

    As a country with the economy slowing down, the last thing we need is another Royal wedding though…

  8. magnoliarose says:

    That is good to hear but friends aren’t always a help.

  9. Giddy says:

    What? Meghan speaks French and Spanish while Kate barely speaks English? This will be interesting.

    • seesittellsit says:

      Whatever her other faults, and people here know my opinion of Kate and her grasping climbing socially ambitious family, she speaks perfectly good English. As for actually being fluent in French and Spanish, lots of people who can get by with a bit of conversational often claim that. I’ll believe it when I hear it.

      I have to say I’m getting totally disgusted with the whole Is She a Good Witch or a Bad Witch? debate. She is neither: she’s the girl who was in the right place at the right time, like many before her, and I haven’t liked most of them – there’s always an element of really wanting it (and I use the word IT advisedly) pretty badly in that success. I like watching but I have massive problems with the whole system, cynic that I am. And I say again, if anyone can marry in, what the heck does being royal mean except being in the right place at the right time?!

      As for “lady who lunches”, I have no doubt that once inside the highly privileged circle she clearly wants into, MM will take full advantage of its perks as well as playing her public role.

      People don’t marry men like Harry so that they can skip the fun stuff, like martyrs. She’ll do plenty of shopping and plenty of lunching, as well as the other stuff.

      • LucyHoneychurch says:

        “Whatever her other faults, and people here know my opinion of Kate and her grasping climbing socially ambitious family, she speaks perfectly good English.”

        She still trips all over her words with her fake, put on accent and hems and haws in speeches. Not to mention hides behind her piles of hair. And this after how long have they been married? Five years at least? It’s not good.

      • Eve says:

        Well said! Let’s not be too polite that Meghan M. does not come off as a big social climber herself, but unlike Kate, Meghan can act a good game. In the end of the day she is a third rate actress who worked very hard to get into the best Canadian and American social circles and now she is going for gold in Britain! And how I know these.., thanks to her many “friends” glowing exposes about Mehgan’s social abilities.

      • PrincessK says:

        @seesittellsit…..Have you really heard Kate speak English? Did you enjoy it? I found the experience both embarrassing and unbearable.

      • Nic919 says:

        Kate barely speaks because her horrible fake posh accent makes her incomprehensible. So she doesn’t really speak English well and there is no chance she really knows French or a Italian behind fashion terms.

    • CynicalAnn says:

      I’m sure Meghan took Spanish in high school (requirement to get into college that you have at least a few years of a foreign language) and maybe she picked up some French along the way–but fluent? I guess we’ll find out-but the “friend” may have been exaggerating.

  10. Kate says:

    She hasn’t done press because she’s the 6th string on a show that’s on it’s last legs. This ‘friend’ makes it sound like she’s been turning down all sorts of Suits related press opportunities, but that’s really not true. The other cast members haven’t exactly been out in full force promoting their show in its last seasons, and with her becoming more and more irrelevant to storylines it’s doubtful she’d have been part of it if they were.

    I’m sure she’s turned down loads of press, but the press wasn’t knocking due to her career.

  11. HeidiM says:

    Just the fact that she has a couple friends puts her light yrs ahead of Kate.

  12. DanielleStl says:

    “In order to make ends meet while she was a struggling actress, she did calligraphy” – oy vey…

    • CynicalAnn says:

      Apparently she did the wedding invitations for Robin Thicke and Paula Patton . . .

    • Carol says:

      I don’t see how one can pay the rent on calligraphy and being a restaurant hostess. Maybe its a cover – rumor has it that lots of beautiful women who are aspiring models/actresses become high end escorts and make very good money from it. I would, if I were beautiful – in London as we speak there are beautiful girls making 6 figures from the oldest profession in the world. My viewpoint is that there’s no shame in it – if the world is gonna objectify me against my will then why can’t I take back my power and charge silly rich white men by the hour for it?

      • CynicalAnn says:

        She is from LA-I’m going to guess that she was living at home while auditioning. Really-an assumption that she was an escort? Come on.

      • Megan says:

        @Carol Suggesting Meghan was a hooker is beyond ridiculous. Read interviews with actors. They all tell stories about how they had 10 roommates and strung together odd jobs between gigs.

      • DanielleStl says:

        I got an impression that she is from LA and from a family that had ties in the business. So she wasn’t just another girl from Kansas.

        I lived in LA for many years and rent is high. When I moved there in 2005 one of my friends was sharing an apartment in Hollywood with another girl and paid $700 for a room minus utilities which usually run another couple hundred bucks. A room in a decent neighborhood now would cost you between $1,200 and $1,500 minimum. Even if you don’t buy a lot of clothes and do your own mani-pedi, you still have to pay for gas and car insurance (lucky, if you don’t have car payments!). Auditioning, staying in shape and going out (because you need to meet people in the industry) requires money. Hostesses make anywhere between $15-$20 per hour and seldom get any tips.

        It’s very difficult. I salut anyone who comes to LA with a dream and doesn’t get discouraged but I think it’s much easier if you are from there. Not to mention your family has some connections in the business.

      • Merritt says:

        Oh please, suggesting she was an escort is disgusting.

        She most likely lived at home or with roommates until getting acting jobs that pulled in enough money. Before Suits she did several commercials and commercials can bring in a decent amount of money. People have paid off student loans from getting jobs in commercials.

      • Mel says:

        “and charge silly rich white men by the hour for it? ”

        What has race got to do with it? Or do you seriously believe that only “white” men hire prostitutes?

      • Olenna says:

        I’m with @Chrissy. Ma Carol (w/o an “e”) is either:
        1) Trying to spread the proverbial seeds of doubt (and scandal), or
        2) She’s decided to think the worst of Meghan rather than face disappointment (like some of us have with Katie) if she fails her Princess-In-Training lessons, or
        3) She’s taking this opportunity to show ignorance and prejudice to the world ’cause it’s just so easy to do on the Internet.

      • Gallilea01 says:

        Carol, I’ve lived all my life in L.A. and most of my friends have done the struggling actress/actor thing while working odd jobs and MOST work as waiters and hostesses because of the flexibility of being able to change shifts for auditions.

        Rent IS high, but most “struggling” or “semi-working” actors do not live in L.A. proper or the “Westside” or in the Hollywood/Sunset area or whatever you see on TV and reality shows like “The Hills.” They live in the significantly more affordable San Fernando Valley which is a hop, skip and a jump from most of the film studios, acting studios, improv theatres and blackbox space rentals where auditions are usually held. With roommates. One of my friends was a former roommate of one of the girls from “Glee” – what did he do? He was a restaurant host AND managed to afford taking acting classes with me (for me it was just a hobby – but I have mad respect for working actors).

        Paramount, CBS and SONY (Culver City) studios are the only ones in L.A. proper. Everything else is in Burbank/Universal City in the SFV. If an actor lives in North Hollywood and has an audition at the Universal Backlot, they can (and DO) take the bus.

        If you frequent the more “posh” or “chi-chi” fitness studios or beauty salons, sure, you can go easily broke, but there are awesome, clean, significantly affordable places to maintain one’s beauty if you step away from what you find in magazines or celeb-heavy areas.

        Assuming she was an escort because L.A. is expensive and struggling actors don’t make a lot of money is ridiculous.

        Not everyone in L.A. makes six-figures, goes shopping at the Beverly Center, spends $350 on a haircut at Christophe, or even has a car. There is a large immigrant, working class population that survives just fine and provides affordable alternatives to what you read in magazines.

      • suze says:

        Oh, can it with the escort nonsense. She is no such thing.

        What is it with these accusations of royals dating/marrying escorts? Yesterday, Letizia, today it’s Meghan.

        Like that wouldn’t be ferreted out immediately.

      • magnoliarose says:

        No way. The ones that were are known already, and she doesn’t fit the type at all.
        You can make money in LA doing things you could never do in other places. Calligraphy would pay because of the amount of entertaining done by invitation there.
        My sister in law had a job as a gift buyer for celebrities. They would give her a budget, and she would shop for gifts and make them beautiful and deliver them.
        Her sister had a job taking care of one dog of the wife of an extremely wealthy movie mogul type. Her whole job was to arrive at the house care for the dog and make homemade dog food. She was paid an insane amount of money to do it, and she traveled with the lady to shop for her yearly wardrobe at fashion shows in Europe.

        It is mean to imply that about someone without some proof or persistent rumor.

      • Aurelia says:

        Gad, I worked at Harrods back in the day and there was a prostitution gang there. I don’t mean the company had anything to do with it but these guys would get other girls who were working for them to hunt for other fresh 18 year old foreign girls, working in harrods, newly arrived in London and offer them a nice flat on Gloucester Road with a bunch of other fresh 18 year olds newly arrived in London.

        The rent and food was virtually all paid for but then you had to start going out on ‘dates’ with their 50 year old, arab ‘good friends’. Then when you refused things got ugly and they threaten these girls and wouldn’t give them back their passports. I girl I worked with on one of the beauty counters was a 19 year old south african who got sucked in. She twigged pretty early and got out with her dignity in the middle of the night. She claimed her passport was lost and got a new one. Funny, I also had a french neighbour in London and when I told her she said there was a prozzy ring in the big department store in Paris too – Gallery Lafayette.

        Anyhoo, I digress.

      • PrincessK says:

        @ Aurelia…..I can believe this went on. Hmmm…the things that happen to vulnerable women tempted by lives treats and comforts.

    • jwoolman says:

      A friend does calligraphy for weddings occasionally. I can imagine she could make a nice chunk of change if her clients were successful Hollywood types (instead of not). But yes, it’s definitely a job and requires artistic talent as well as other things.

      It’s a nice job for people busy doing other things because they can do it on their own schedule, accepting or rejecting jobs depending on their other work.

  13. Sushi says:

    Never believe anonymous sources, never have and never will. How do we not know if it is real or just fiction?. and if you want to chat to tabloid then why not be courageous and own it with your name.

  14. Tan says:

    It seems smart of meghan to play the PR game

    The middletons are formidable PR opponents who have thrown harry under bus so many times
    And there is going to be a clash of wedding and christening probably

    So good of her to make a head start into PR game.

    I still thing the entire marrying a prince being a princess is kinda silly in today’s time

  15. Karen says:

    No matter how many luncheons she doesn’t do, the BRF is not going to push for the soon to be 6th in-line and his wife to be the all stars in the family. They already throw Harry under the bus when Will looks bad, they’ll unfortunately do the same to Megan. That’s why a lot of Harry’s events don’t get counted or get small press packs, because he won’t officially have more #s or press than William.

    Megan’s friend talks a big game, but Waity Katie spent 10 years becoming the most prepared and perfected princess too, and that ended up… well not quite as expected.

    • seesittellsit says:

      @Karen – yes, everyone seems to forget who Harry is now. If MM’s actress ego gets the better of her, they will rein her in in short order. She isn’t marrying the heir to the throne, who has a wife and soon to be three kids. Also, at her age, I imagine MM will rush to get pregnant ASAP. They don’t have time to wait a couple of years while she “gets accustomed to her new role”. They calibrate this stuff pretty carefully, I imagine.

    • Natalie S says:

      I really hope Meghan isn’t swallowed up by the BRF machine. Doing a Vanity Fair cover is a big step in her having an independent image and not just being silent Meghan like silent Kate.

      I think Meghan is going to push for more influence over what is promoted in their social media at least and try to create a narrative despite what the Cambridges or the BRF in general might try.

      It’s good that she so clearly has Harry’s support. I think if the BRF pushes too hard, Harry is going to be the new Mouse that Roared.

      • Karen says:

        I think they can try to push their own narrative. Right now there are a few road blocks, and they’ll have to be a lot more subtle moving forward:
        1) They use the same press office as Will/Kate which has thrown Harry under the bus plenty so far; they would need their own to avoid/counteract this.
        2) Buckingham palace doesn’t really include Harry in major events/ banquets as is (he’s been to 1 state dinner), maybe a couple small tours here and there, but they won’t get any major state events so their royal heirarchy is pretty much set; not much they can do but really fill those tours with non fluff events and show their seriousness.
        3) If they do go out on their own missions the press have already dropped little stories about how its bad the younger royals aren’t promoting their country but only their pet projects (where money gets misdirected from actual charities and redistributed through their charity at its leisure) so they’d have to incorporate more charities within GB and not absorb an issue into their charity without showing where the money is going.
        4) The British public – there will be backlash if theyre seen trying to be more like celebrities (self promoting, no official royal duties, only fun charity events, no local GB promotion), so they’ll just have to slowly test the waters as they try to roll out their mission.

      • Megan says:

        @Karen The suggestion that they are taking money away from charities is based on gossip from a single event. They are fundraising, charities are fundraising, donors are giving where they choose. In my 25 years as a professional fundraiser, I have never seen a charity “take” money from another charity. As the number of charities grows, so, too, do charitable contributions.

        There are plenty of legitimate reason to critize W+K, let’s stick to those.

      • PrincessK says:

        @Karen. I really disagree with you that Harry and Meghan won’t have much to do. The Queen and Prince Phillip are patrons of hundreds of charities and some of those will be passed to Harry and Meghan. I am hoping that Meghan being an actress will get some arts/drama charities to look after. I think it is inevitable that as soon as they can an overseas trip to America will be organised around some kind of charity, probably to do with veterans or orphaned kids of veterans. The Americans will love it and big bucks will be available for charity dinners. The only fly in the ointment could be Trump but they don’t have to meet him, the Vice or Melania, who has rightly grabbed her position back from her step daughter, could do it. Harry and Meghan will be busy and very much in demand as a couple.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Clearly they did take money away from charities with the creation of the umbrella Head’s Together. Their staff were actively directing donors away from connecting with individual charities to donate to their Foundation instead. Those individual connections are important, because one of the most important things in fund raising is to establish connections and relationships with your donors. Now instead of the money going to the charities doing the work, it is sitting in the royal Foundation for W&K&H to dole out when and if they feel like it. Badly done.

    • LucyHoneychurch says:

      Eh isn’t that what the VF was essentially telling us? That Meghan (and Harry by extension) are going to have a strong voice and not just do whatever they’re told? She and Harry are so charismatic, and she’s the new kid on the block, they’re inevitably going to pull attention from Will Not and Can Not.

  16. Jessica says:

    The more press comes out the more I believe it’s not happening. It just seems like too much. One day I may be shocked and wake up to see that they are engaged but until then I think she’s just trying to get as much publicity as she can.

    • seesittellsit says:

      @Jessica – well, I think there’s a chance at that, but only an outside chance. We don’t know who is telling the truth about who cleared all this with whom. I think there’s a very small chance that all this PR has been engineered either to 1) pressure Harry and make it impossible for him to back out of the relationship, or 2) make it impossible for the BRF to refuse permission for the marriage – and it’s entirely possible that #2 is part of Harry’s strategy against the BRF, too.

      But my money is on Harry wanting to marry her and probably having proposed already.

    • Linda says:

      Jessica I agree with everything you said.

    • CynicalAnn says:

      You’ve been pretty doubtful the whole time-so time will tell . . . I’m over here thinking about what I could make to eat for the middle of the night wedding viewing party I’ll be hosting.

      • frisbee says:

        You could go English High Tea, dainty wafer thin cucumber sandwiches, scones with clotted cream and strawberry/raspberry jam (conserves), a lovely Victoria Sponge, some savoury mini sausage rolls, a big pot of proper tea and even lashings of ginger beer if you felt like it.

      • CynicalAnn says:

        @frisbee: I also have to include some champagne! I love your menu. I’m writing that down . . .

      • MeleeOfSloths says:

        psst @frisbee, your suggestion sounds delicious but just so’s you know, that’s afternoon tea – the snacky things and the pot of tea. High tea is a hearty meal i.e. dinner. The ‘high’ part being in reference to the height of the table that it’s served on (or the chairs? maybe? I can’t remember….)

      • frisbee says:

        Champagne! Never thought of that (teetotal so I never do) but what a good idea!

      • frisbee says:

        Meleeofsloths – nope as a Brit this is what I know as High Tea, at least where I come from, a hearty meal is ‘Supper,
        a more formal meal is ‘Dinner’ the there’s a mid morning ‘snack’ not to mention Breakfast. Amongst more Northern parts of the country we do replace ‘Supper’ with ‘Tea’ and that’s usually a savoury meal but High Tea usually means a pile of sweet fattening stuff with a cursory nod to a sarnie or two. This could be regional differences by the way. Oh and for the Hobbity amongst us there’s also ‘second breakfast’ to include in all that lot!

      • notasugarhere says:

        HM’s favorite Chocolate biscuit cake, made with McVities Rich Tea Biscuits (butter cookies). Try the recipe with Sweetened Condensed Milk (not evaporated milk!), because that one doesn’t require raw eggs.

      • Jessica says:

        If they get engaged I will wake up early to watch their wedding.

      • MeleeOfSloths says:

        @frisbee, yayayay, food customs and history is one of my favourite topics!

        I love that you have specific regional references! (Please go on if you have more) I think, over time, the customs and namings of ‘high tea’ and ‘afternoon tea’ have become interchangeable. However, historically, they’re not the same thing and have very different meanings, probably rooted in class. Workers had tea consisting of a heavy, replenishing meal at the end of the working day, seated at a (high) table and chairs. The more leisurely had a frivolous tea in the middle of the afternoon, seated on (low) comfy chairs and sofas.

        There is also some evidence that ‘dinner’ refers to the largest meal of the day whereas ‘breakfast’, ‘lunch’, and ‘supper’ are about the time (morning, mid-day, evening). So you could technically have your dinner at 1:00 in the afternoon and still have supper at 7:00.

        I hope more chime in. Seriously, it’s really fascinating.

      • CynicalAnn says:

        I have really happy memories of Charles and Diana’s wedding. I was only 14, and we were staying with my grandparents over summer break. We all got up in the middle of the night (California time) to watch the wedding-and my darling grandfather (who’s been gone for many years now) served us all champagne while we watched.

      • frisbee says:

        @Meleeofsloths, before the advent of Tea as a crushingly fashionable and enormously expensive drink in the early 18th century ‘Dinner’ was the main meal of the day, usually taken at 3o’clock in the afternoon. The notion of a Tea party, the beginning of Afternoon/High Tea was started by Anna, Duchess of Bedford in 1840 at 4.00pm because by then ‘Dinner’ among the upper classes was being served late at about eight o’clock and the Duchess got too hungry to wait that long! See http://www.afternoontea.co.uk. Also for any Foodie/social history fan I’d recommend ‘Taste (The story of Britain through its cooking)’ by Kate Colquhoun which is packed with information and sounds right up your street.

      • MeleeOfSloths says:

        THanks for the rec – I’ll check that out!

      • PrincessK says:

        I was brought up in a very working class UK environment and it was Breakfast in the morning, Dinner around midday and Tea in the late afternoon. It was only as I got older that I learnt about ‘lunch’ and ‘supper’.

      • PrincessK says:

        @CynicalAnn….what a fantastic memory of your grandfather serving you all champagne in the middle of the night , watching the royal wedding! What a really lovely anecdote.

    • DanielleStl says:

      I actually think that the fact that this interview happened means Harry was OK with it and coincidentally, made it harder for the guy to back out if he wanted to. I think they will get married.

  17. rachel says:

    Well that was breathless. Anyway I’m waiting for THE statement or the first photo op.

  18. whatever says:

    This article is way too sugary, the ‘friend’/ Meghan’s PR needs to tone it down a notch or two other wise people are going to get tired really quickly of being told how totally amaaaaaazing Meghan is.

  19. Abandoned says:

    Swiping at Kate is not a good beginning…

  20. Wow says:

    I loved the little play on words the friends used with saying “Yes, she’s beautiful but she’s got brains, she’s smart and engaged”. Lol “engaged”

  21. Hikaru says:

    This PR run reminds me of Taylor Swift in her squad days. Hell, it reminds me of Taylor Swift today – never saying anything directly just dropping clues and having her industry friends do the dirty work for her.

  22. LucyHoneychurch says:

    “She has said on numerous occasions she doesn’t want be a lady who lunches.”

    Unlike her future sister-in-law? Is that the subtext here? LOL

  23. perplexed says:

    I have a feeling that she’s a perfectly nice woman (she doesn’t look snooty), but she needs to stop hiring Natalie Portman’s publicist. It’s this approach that gets people to not like you. (Although I’m sure others currently like her a lot).

  24. Skylark says:

    We’re going to be bombarded with this type of sycophantic guff until the engagement is announced.

    • Megan says:

      I suspect it will be worse after the engagement is announced.

    • Skylark says:

      You’re probably right, Megan, but I’m hoping once it’s official, the sycophantic friends and sources will feel ‘job done’ and give the ‘sparkliest woman to ever walk the earth’ narrative a rest because it’s (a) unnecessary (b) counter-productive and (c) deeply tedious and off-putting.

      And the media will have new focus to speculate on – the wedding date, babies, living arrangements, etc.

    • magnoliarose says:

      They did this with Kate too making it impossible for her to ever live up to this impossible ideal. I think it was worse with Kate because they turned her into an entirely different person with no evidence. They packaged her wrong, and again her family is no help.
      Kate should have been marketed as a sporty young woman who preferred quiet evenings at home and is somewhat of a homebody. I don’t know who handled it (William), but it did her no favors. He does not help her, and I think he likes it that way.

  25. Mophita121 says:

    My dream is that Meghan actually is all these things and when/if they get engaged she starts doing lots of public events where she speaks out passionately and articulately on human rights issues while wearing anything other than nude pumps and a coat dress.

  26. Hollyweird says:

    Lol. I’m tired of her. That’s all I have. The way she’s been covered on this site; constant comparison to Kate while putting kate down to make her look better, the second coming of Jesus Christ, Jennifer Lawrence+Beyoncé+Rihanna rolled in one is way too much and I’m not sold.
    I side-eye the hell out of the need to tell us that Kate is less than while Meghan is everything by some commenters. All you have to do is say something less than absolutely fawning to get people down your throat. You know what else gets people down your throat? Defending Kate in any way or form. All I did was say chica has a beautiful smile and instantly had women telling me how she wasn’t all that pretty

    • Skylark says:

      Yeah, it is a bit much. Fair enough to criticise Kate for work-shy-related matters – which she certainly deserves – but knocking her for every single thing she does/wears/says is tiresome and comes across as unnecessarily mean. I don’t see the need to compare them and pit them against each other.

    • Ollie says:

      Yes Kate is lazy and not a great beauty but she is very attractive when she smiles and laughs. She doesn’t rock the boat, she stays silent and somehow mysterious and that’s why she will still be a member of the royal family in 50+years.
      People here act as if she ist a criminal. She isn’t. Neither is William. They plus the kids will always win the worldwide PR. Lazy or not. They are and always will be the important ones.

      Harry isn’t the backup anymore. He is the new Andrew. Meghan will end as a minor player with lots of vacations and down time (Harrys lifestyle). She won’t live up to the expectations.

      • Suze says:

        Harry is Princess Margaret and Prince Andrew and will only get more and more so as he ages and the memories of Diana fade further.

        People here refuse to believe it, but he himself has said the exact same thing. I don’t know if he and Markle would be minor, but they will always be secondary to William, Kate and their kids.

        Margaret and Andrew were both insanely popular in their time.

      • Mel says:

        “Margaret and Andrew were both insanely popular in their time. ”

        Margaret was popular – in a very, VERY different, post-war era – mainly because the naive populace of the time bought into the “star-crossed lovers” narrative of her relationship with Peter Townsend. (In reality, she did have a choice. Her choice turned out to be the “royal” perks, not Townsend.)
        As for Andrew, he was very popular in his early 20s mainly because of his participation in the Falklands war. His subsequent marriage to Sarah added to his “popular” appeal… not for long, though.

      • Evie says:

        @Ollie: Co-signing 100% — I wish Harry and Meghan well. I hope the BRF doesn’t suck the life out of her as I said in another thread. You are absolutely correct: Harry is the new Andrew and in another 10 – 15 when he’s in his mid-40s, I don’t think Harry will command nearly as much press attention as he does now. Inevitably, the focus will turn to the next generation of up and coming royals like Prince George and Princess Charlotte & Baby #3.

        It’s going to be very interesting to see what happens when Queen Elizabeth passes and Charles becomes King. At this point, Queen Elizabeth IS the Monarchy. The Queen Mother was 101 1/2 when she passed away in 2002 and HM has inherited her strong constitution. So it’s not out of the realm of possibility that Charles may not become King for another 8 or 10 years. It’s likely that Charles’ reign will be short.

        In some ways Harry will be very lucky when the attention is (eventually) diverted away from him — he’ll still be rich and with a greater measure of freedom than Will.

  27. Eve says:

    I would like her a lot more if her “friends” did not give such cheesy @ss licking media reports of her throughout the year. The reason why Meghan M. stayed so “quite” is because her “friends” more then madeup for her lack of media advertisement about herself 🙄. For this alone, as a British citizen, this relationship feels uneasy and too PR menipulated.

  28. Suze says:

    Keeping in mind that this friend may be non-existent or have met her once, I think Markle needs to send out the word to her social circle to zip it.

    This over the top type of confessional is the kind of thing royal families really hate, particularly the Brits, and most particularly the next couple of CEOs of the operation.

  29. feebee says:

    I think in time esp with Duchess Kate as a contrast, Meghan may indeed turn out to be an amazing unicorn. I’m an old gal who remembers and misses Princess Diana but this one may be the one who truly (but/and not without Harry) steps into her work the best.

    It’ll be one hell of a wedding/party.

    • Sarah says:

      To whom will she be the new Diana? The British people? Do you see that happening? I dont, not ever. Also, Harry is even firther down the line of succession, and in a few years will be the new Andrew. At least Sarah F was liked in the beginning. I dont think the british public will be happy abiut Harry “not finding any woman good enough in England.” People are funny about that. Being American will be held against her. She may do some eventa, but she wont get the public on her side – ever.

      • Tina says:

        Rubbish. There will be a small minority (most of whom seem to comment on the Daily Mail) who won’t like her, but most people in the UK will think she’s just fine and/or ignore her. People here like Americans, for the most part (Trump and gun nuts excepted).

    • notasugarhere says:

      I’m not under the impression that the nearly 70 million people in the UK have a hatred of people from the US. Wallis Simpson was a couple of generations ago, and even then, it wasn’t her nationality but their politics that caused the government to get rid of him.

      I think she’d find it easy to step in to the work, because she already has the public speaking part down. Do your homework, show up, act interested. She and Harry would be required/expected to do at least 200 engagements a year each (and that is a pathetically low number). Whomever he marries, they’d both be working royals for 15-20 years. The media attention may turn to W&K’s kids, but those kids won’t be working royals until they’re late twenties early thirties. They would go on doing their royal role like the Gloucesters, Wessexes, Princess Alexandra, and the Duke of Kent.

      As long as she shows up, acts interested, and doesn’t spend ridiculous amounts on clothes? Those who support the monarchy – the die-hards – would probably like her as long as Harry seems happy. The handful of us on these forums, negative or positive either way, aren’t going to impact how the monarchists view her.

      • Sarah says:

        Do you ever read the comments on stories? And not just the DM. Was reading The Guardian and one other paper tonight. The commenters from England – 90% hate her for not being English. One or two “Aw, leave Harry alone, she is a beautiful, smart woman.” About 1/2 said that if he marries her, it will be the end of the British Royal Family. They hate her. Dont want to support some old American actress, as they describe her.
        I honestly think if she were the same person but born in England, they would love her. But she wasnt. And they resent it like crazy.

      • Tina says:

        Again, rubbish. On the most recent Guardian story, the number two upvoted comment (after the usual BTL stuff about the Guardian being obsessed with race) is: “I hope he does marry her, she’s a lovely lady. And just watch the Daily Mail writers and readers heads explode would be worth it.” Number three is another why does the Guardian care about race comment, and number four is “A beautiful and accomplished woman is a beautiful and accomplished woman. Prince Harry is a lucky man.”

      • Sarah says:

        OK, Tina!! You are picking and choosing. Go look at all the comments, and get back to us. You seriously think this American divorced actress, 36 years old, is the next Princess Diana?? OK. BTW, I have a nice bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

      • Tina says:

        I have read all the comments. You clearly haven’t. I read the Guardian every day (in hard copy as well as online, because I am an old news junkie). I don’t think she’s the next Princess Diana, and no one would want her to be. However, the vast majority of people in the UK don’t resent her. Most don’t care about her at all, and those few who do mostly think she’s a pretty girl and Harry is lucky to marry her. That’s it.

    • perplexed says:

      I think part of Diana’s appeal was her Englishness. People used to emphasize how she was more English than the Windsors. Well, that and the fact that she was 19 with a baby face. Judging from old documentaries, DIana seemed to be popular before she was engaged and before anyone knew she coud be hardworking. Everyone saw her evolution from beginning to tragic end. She fit every archetype of womanhood in transition. Trying to compare anyone to her is futile. People saw her literally grow up before their eyes, and I suspect that’s why her death hit everyone so hard.

      Meghan will be popular in her own way, but I don’t think she’ll be like Diana. I don’t think she’ll be like Fergie either. Fergie always struck me as slightly stupid. Or maybe really stupid. Take your pick.

  30. ArchieGoodwin says:

    Operation Sparkle Markle is in full swing now.

    I’m already bored.

  31. Becks says:

    oh come on now. I “like” Meghan (in quotes bc I’ve never met her obviously lol) and I do think she seems interesting and will probably work harder than Kate, but this article is just so over the top that it actually makes me like Meghan less. really, she’s this amazing unicorn who is so talented and brilliant and involved and charitable and let’s not forget she makes amazing roast chicken! This “friend” isn’t really doing her any favors. I’m not sure she’s hurt per se by this kind of article, but it is eyeroll-worthy.

  32. Katherine says:

    Works hard, has great education, is smart(er, kinder, better than you), is naturally beautiful, is low maintanance.. UH OH everybody’s gonna hate her with that sorta PR, ‘friend’

  33. Joannie says:

    I think she’s being very aggressive in her pursuit of Harry. Six months of dating and she pretty much signed on the dotted line and shut her life down. One would think that being divorced you would be a bit more cautious. It’s only been a year and they’re still in the honeymoon stage of a long distance relationship consisting of vacations and wedding parties. That’s not every day reality. It’s my personal opinion one needs at least two years prior to making a comittment. Time to see the good, the bad and the ugly in the other person. Hopefully they wont cave into pressure from the press and take a bit more time.

    • Eve says:

      Well said, I agree completely!! This is too quick and her and her camp have been too opportunistically agreesive from earlier on to claim her as his future wife, too early for a normal relationship. This is not normal, especially for a long distance relationship and Meghan’s willingness to abonden her career and everything she worked for in such a short time does not scream an independent woman to me like her “friends” desperately try to paint her but more like a major opportunist!

    • CynicalAnn says:

      I think longer dating in your twenties is fine. But mid thirties, you know when you know. I think getting married after a year is totally do-able. I have several friends who did that. (And in their twenties too-my parents got engaged 3 months after they started dating-and have been happily married for 52 years.)

    • Enough Already says:

      Both see in the other what they want/need to see and for different reasons but I will say that in their case it’s probably pretty authentic. I think they could make one another ver happy and are well-suited.

      • magnoliarose says:

        It depends on the people and age. Most people know within 6 months if the other person is for keeps or just fun.

      • maggie says:

        @magnoliarose, she’s been divorced and both come from broken homes. Six months? I don’t agree. They’re in lust not love. And everyone is still on their best behaviour. She’s not marrying a regular guy from a regular family either. She’s thirsty!

      • magnoliarose says:

        @maggie
        I stick by knowing by six months if a relationship is unique or not. I knew my relationship with my husband was different by then and most people I know knew even sooner if they wanted to see a relationship through. A year of dating and months engaged is not uncommon.

        Anyone who marries into a high profile family better like the attention or it is a misery. Diana made it work for her, but she enjoyed the attention which isn’t a crime as long as you do something with it.

        I saw an interview on TV where this wealthy man was discussing his happy marriage, and he was asked did he think his wife married him for his money. He laughed and said she sure wouldn’t have married me if I had none, but I am a rich man it is pointless to pretend it isn’t attractive.”
        You can’t separate Harry from who he is.

    • Alix says:

      This seems rash only if you don’t think about the benefits. The obvious one if she marries. As my grandma used to say “man are all the same” so Harry can make just as good of a husband as any other Joe. The fame and the pressures of a public life that come with being royal won’t bother Markle, she is an actress on a somewhat successful show.
      If he DOES NOT marry her (which I really doubt), she has gained enough momentum to create for herself a bigger career in whatever field she chooses. Heck, she can even write a book about her royal adventures. Literary fiction ;)
      So either way, she will do very well for herself.

    • HoustonGrl says:

      I agree. I’m all for this relationship because she’s a breath of fresh air compared to those aristos he used to date. But this is really fast! They haven’t even lived in the same city, which is huge.

      • Becks says:

        This is what I keep coming back to. Yes, she’s an actress on a relatively successful show. But its not like she is JLaw or Taylor Swift in terms of her media presence, paparazzi photos, etc. Becoming a member of the royal family is STILL going to be an adjustment for her, actress or no. And factor in that she hasn’t seen the hard side of being royal – she’s seen the glamorous vacations, the special service at airports, etc while being “relatively” shielded from the press – and I do wonder if she knows what she is getting into, after only a year of long distance dating. I know I know – “they’re so in love,” and she “spends every free weekend in London,” etc. But….still.

      • notasugarhere says:

        From what we can tell, they’ve lived together for months in between her filming schedule. She was with him at KP for almost a month before Christmas, no? Then she was with him for two months solid Jan & Feb with a week away for the India trip. Back again to London during a break in filming Suits. It appears whenever she isn’t filming, they are together either in London or elsewhere.

      • Sarah says:

        Yes, they do seem to have spent lots and lots of time lazing around Harry’s wee “apartment.” So much for all that charity work she does. What charity work has she done in the past year, folks??

  34. Maum says:

    This overkill is making me like Kate more.

    Brits always like the underdog. 😊

    Seriously as a European-living-in-England neutral this interview is seriously off putting.

    • Helen Smith says:

      Add the comments from the Vanity Fair story like Harry and Meghan are a great love story and Meghan comes across as having an overly inflated view of herself and her importance. Not too mention the tone and quotes come off as trying much too hard.

    • Helen Smith says:

      I hope Ms. Great Love Story remembers that no matter what the press is going to have her play third fiddle to Charles, William and William’s children. She won’t be allowed to outshine them. With the attitude she portrays in this article through her unnamed “friend” and the VF interview it sounds like Meghan believes she is going to be the star of the Royal Windsor Variety Show.

  35. Vinot says:

    I thought she doesn’t read things about herself? How would her “friend” even know what’s being said about her? Also lol at the conversational French; most 8th grade girls speak conversational French. I’m waiting for her to say she’s proficient at Microsoft Word and Excel and types 60 words a minute.

  36. Cat says:

    One minute they complain about privacy and the next they are fine with her discussing her feelings for Harry in Vanity Fair. It is all kind of bizarre, honestly.

  37. Helen Smith says:

    Meghan your PR is showing and sounding kinda desperate to make you the second coming of Diana. FYI, there is only one Diana and never try to compete with a dead woman. You will lose. 😉

  38. bluhare says:

    She did one interview and her friend is speaking out on her behalf (assuming she’s a friend who really knows her; who knows on that one). But even so, there was a post here yesterday and again today with someone (with an amazingly similar name (Cara/Carol) who has pretty much said she’s a prostitute. With those sorts of remarks, I’d be talking to anyone who’d listen to me too if I were her friend. And I haven’t even got to the real hater sites. Haven’t been there and don’t intend going.

    I have no idea if she’ll be good for Harry or good at her job. But the narrative going along with her is pretty funny. She’s either a saint or a sinner.

    • frisbee says:

      ITA, I shall refrain from saying anything about her because I really don’t have enough information to comment and the comments are so rabidly for against I can’t be arsed to discuss (have a humongous argument) about it you know? I think wait and see but to claim she’s a prostitute without any real evidence is outrageous – and discouragingly misogynistic to boot.

      • bluhare says:

        I agree, frisbee. But then again, American, divorced, actress . . . well, what else could she be? *insert eyeroll emoji here*

        I do really want to think she’ll be good for Harry and he’ll be good for her, though. I admit it.

      • frisbee says:

        Well I wouldn’t wish the worst on anyone either, I haven’t much time for the BRF ‘Institution’ as you know but I recognise it’s probably a better option than the alternative, I just wish the William/Harry generation lived up to their obligations. If she’s going to encourage Harry away from Williams baleful influence then more power to her arm, but we shall see. Whatever happens neither she or Harry will be allowed to outshine William and Catherine, so I hope she’s content to do good works in the background a la Sophie/Anne. Quiet, unshowy good deeds will take her a long, long way and she won’t have to tackle any potential Middleton hassle while she’s at it.

  39. phaedra says:

    I think what I love most about Meghan is how she gets redeye in most photos, like a Twilight vampire that’s a non-vegetarian. My eyes do that too in photos. I just came here to say that, and to start the Meghan-is-a-vampire rumor. Carry on.

  40. Elle says:

    Megan Markle has a serious narcissism issue. She said she loves a great love story in VF while talking about herself and Harry. Like you are 36 not 16 — how cringey. She has PR people buttering her up and it’s so over the top. Her friend slammed VF for asking about Harry like Megan is a d list actress on a show nobody I know watches she didn’t get that cover for any other reason other than the man she is with. A long distant relationship between an entitled prince and a shallow overstaring actress is never going to end well. To be honest I can’t stand her or Harry and I’m sick of hearing about two people who offer very little to the world. Oh and Harry needs to release veterans disperse better than being drawn into his kardashian relationship. If he as any sense of decency she’ll stay well away from the Invictus Games.

  41. Jussayin says:

    This is getting so bad. The last paragraph ‘Megan is an amazing unicorn’, sounds like someone I know who is very narcissistic and has mental health problems, trying to sell herself to the latest guy. Is this really Megan’s friend or is this Megan herself?

    • Ravine says:

      It could also be The Daily Express trying to seem like they landed an interview with a real source, while actually just making up all the quotes, for the sake of clicks. After all, everything the “friend” says is either already public knowledge, or impossible to prove/disprove. Whipping up a plausible, harmless story about a popular online topic is an easy way to generate ad revenue.

    • Helen Smith says:

      +1

      In the Vanity Fair article Meghan tried to say her love affair with Harry is a great love story. I thought “Really?” Too hyperbolic for my taste.

      What kind of person says that sort of thing about her relationship? It is as though she wiritng an epic love story screenplay with herself as star when really her relationship doesn’t sound like one. She was in the right place at the right time. That’s all really.

      IMHO Harry is pretty easy pickings right now because he reeks of desperation to marry and start a family. I’ve had girlfriends who married while in that head space. They grabbed the next man who wandered by and looked pretty good. They weren’t as picky as they had been in their twenties. They all lived to regret their decisions. They wonder who else is out there because they aren’t satisfied with their choices. I hope that doesn’t happen to Harry but I wouldn’t be surprised if it did. He seems to be in the same space.

      • Planet Earth says:

        Yep, Meghan was in the right place at the right time.

        The problem with Harry is that the doesn’t really “work” nor has ever really worked in “the real world”. In the latter you go out and meet a lot of different people. Colleagues introduce you to them or you meet them while you are out playing polo / surfing / climbing / hiking … You meet normalos at meetings or at conferences or … all that work-related stuff.
        Harry did none of those things with “normal” people and therefore he didn’t meet many normal people. Actors and Actresses are invited to a lot of social functions .,.. right place right time.

        I kind of think that both Meghan and Harry will live to regret this. Royal life is too restraining and to monotone for Meghan and Harry will regret not finding a wife who fits in better with Royal life and the aristo set and who is as uncultivated as he is: Vegas and all.

        Btw. did I mention that there are a lot of closet-racists in the aristocracy? Those are people who seriously consider your family tree to be a part of your pedigree which in turn is an indicator of your value … . Aristocratic beliefs and racism does match well ideologically as both share the disgustingly racist idea that certain “people” are worth more because of their genetic code.

      • Joannie says:

        Agree! Relationships are about timing.

      • seesittellsit says:

        @Helen Smith – I too have friends who at a certain point in time were desperate to marry and “settle down” and every one of them ended up divorced. There’s a fine line between wanting to get married and wanting to marry the man. Lots of people can’t see that line. I agree Harry looks like he’s at some sort of crossroads and MM was “there”. All that said, there are always two sides to every marriage: the one the world sees from the outside and the one the two people are living on the inside and you can’t ever really know what that is. Both Harry and MM strike me as needy in different ways. Remains to be seen if those needs mesh once the passion of romance fades. Because as anyone who has been in a LTR or marriage knows. passion is the first thing to go. It’s what happens after that, that matters. And absolutely none of us can predict that outcome for these two people.

      • Jussayin says:

        Thats exactly how I felt about VF too. It was very try hard and the way you describe it, like Megan writing an epic love story is spot on.

      • Sarah says:

        What kind of person says their romance is a great love story??
        - an immature one
        - a drama queen
        - an exaggerator
        -a 16 year old
        That is who says this kind of thing. I don’t remember EVER saying that about my marriage to anyone, or even myself. I am just not that amazing!! I did, however, just celebrate my 30th wedding anniversary.

  42. Nimbolicious says:

    Jeez. Why do these pseudo-celebrities who land A-listers have to be portrayed as The Greatest Thing Ever via all these unnamed sources and friends? It would be so refreshing to hear them say ‘look, I get your fascination because of who I’m marrying/in a relationship with but really instead of discussing that let’s discuss things that are meaningful to me and who I am as a person.” I get so tired of all these publicity prisms that make it impossible to know who anyone really is.

  43. jwoolman says:

    The fact that Harry will soon be sixth in line has made it easier for him. It seems previous serious relationships were derailed because the woman balked at the Princess role. That won’t be so much of a problem now. Meghan is also comfortable in front of cameras, which is a major plus. But mainly I think they can have more control over what they do and don’t do than a few years ago. And they’re both older, also a plus.

    Harry might not be all that enthusiastic about being a royal by now, it seems to keep him from doing things important to him. Meghan might be similar. I’m sure they’ve talked to each other about all this in depth.

Commenting Guidelines

Celebitchy aims to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy

Use the "Report this comment as spam or abuse" link to ask the moderators to delete a comment if it's offensive. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please e-mail cbcomments at gmail.com to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment