Mail: Duchess Meghan ‘must suspect her days as a duchess are numbered’

We’ve been told endlessly in the past three years that Prince William constantly fantasizes about his first days as (Scooter) King and how he’ll set about punishing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on Day 1. If you ask me, that’s the only thing getting William through the day at this point: daydreaming about all of the ways in which he’ll finally lord over Harry and Meghan, how he’ll take away their titles, how he’ll ban his niece and nephew from his kingdom. At this point, I want Scooter King to take away the Sussex titles on Day 1. I think that will set the tone for his reign of terror, and it will also show the world that Harry, Meghan and their children are completely fine living a title-free life in California. What I cannot stand is this increasingly hysterical commentary about Meghan’s use of her married name (her title) as a slap in the face of the entire royal establishment. An excerpt from Sharon Hunt’s Mail column: “Meghan must suspect her days as a duchess are numbered. The signs are hiding in plain sight. I’ve never been more certain of what she could be planning next…”

Tom Sykes, who also pens The Royalist Substack, theorised that Meghan’s persistent use of the Duchess title makes perfect sense as a savvy branding move – especially with the possibility that one day the title could disappear altogether. ‘Meghan Markle’s frantic insistence on the title of Duchess is an attempt to imprint her family’s royal connections on the public before their inevitable removal,’ Sykes wrote.

It’s a theory I raised last month after the bombshell removal of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s royal titles – including his Duke of York title and associated honours – amid ongoing scrutiny of his ties to the late convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

It’s now clear the Royal Family won’t hesitate to revoke titles when they deem it necessary – a reality that must weigh on the California-based couple’s minds.

With that in mind, the strategy seems simple: roll out ‘Duchess’ as often as possible and keep the Sussex name front and centre – just in case.

Recent moments underscore this approach. On Netflix’s With Love, Meghan, Mindy Kaling introduced her as ‘Meghan Markle’, prompting the Duchess to gently correct her and steer the focus back to her royal branding. ‘It’s so funny too, that you keep saying “Meghan Markle” – you know I’m Sussex now,’ Meghan said in an exchange that appeared to leave Mindy looking rather confused.

Another instance of ‘Sussex’ being used as a de facto last name for Meghan – a part of her personal brand rather than simply a title conferred by the British Royal Family – appeared in her interview with People in March. She explained to her preferred American magazine how the ‘shared name’ bonds her and Harry with their children, Archie and Lilibet.

‘It’s our shared name as a family, and I guess I hadn’t recognised how meaningful that would be to me until we had children,’ Meghan said. ‘I love that that is something that Archie, Lili, H and I all have together. It means a lot to me.’

She did not elaborate on whether she had legally changed her last name to Sussex – a move entirely within her rights under California law.

As I previously noted, the shift from ‘Meghan, Duchess of Sussex’ to simply ‘Meghan Sussex’ cleverly protects her royal link – even if the title is ever officially revoked.

Returning to Harper’s Bazaar, her cover story offers fresh clues into the evolving playbook of Brand Sussex. It was striking how the article adhered to classic celebrity-profile formulas: part of the interview unfolds in a busy Hollywood hotspot, complete with the obligatory lunch at a trendy restaurant. I mention this not to suggest that a duchess eating fries is somehow groundbreaking, but to highlight how Greenidge’s feature – in subtle but unmistakable ways – seemed to position her subject as a celebrity first and royal second.

[From The Daily Mail]

Enough!! “But what if she uses Sussex as a surname, what will do then, how will we threaten her, she’s still trading off her royal connection!?!?” Something else every one of these commentators fails to acknowledge is that Meghan is probably completely done with her maiden name, especially after what her father and her half-sister have done to her. She doesn’t want to be a Markle anymore, and I don’t blame her. In retrospect, the Sussexes really should have adopted the Spencer surname back in 2023 though. That would have changed the nature of this ridiculous campaign.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid. Cover courtesy of Harper’s Bazaar.

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

91 Responses to “Mail: Duchess Meghan ‘must suspect her days as a duchess are numbered’”

  1. Tessa says:

    Harry would have to lose the duke title for this to happen. No Sykes harry won’t come crawling back. Notice Sykes never mentions harry losing title. And comparing Andrew to the sussexes is so vile.

    • Elizabeth K. Mahon says:

      Harry will still be a Prince and Meghan would be Princess Henry so taking away the Sussex title won’t be the flex that Baldemort thinks it is.

      • Carmen says:

        You are right. Meghan will keep on living and Scooter will wake up just as bitter and empty as the day he took away their titles.

      • KitW says:

        It is quite straightforward for a future King William to remove ALL titles from his younger brother.

        King Charles III used ‘Letters Patent’ to strip Prince Andrew of his title as “Prince” and formal address of “His Royal Highness”. Such a process must be initiated by the current Monarch. He or she instructs the UK Lord Chancellor to prepare the necessary legal document to remove titles and styles. It doesn’t take long.

      • Becks1 says:

        It’s straightforward as a legal matter, not as a PR matter.

        and the dukedom is something different entirely. Andrew has not been stripped of that, he’s just not using it.

      • Gewels says:

        She’ll be Princess Meghan. Why would anyone call her by the very misogynistic term the BRF uses? I’ll be calling her Princess Meghan, and I wager I won’t be the only one.

    • Sunniside up says:

      The fact that the writer thinks that what Harry did, i.e. sticking up for his racially abused wife is the equivalent of sexually abusing minors is a really bad reflection on the writer.

  2. SarahLee says:

    This is just so bizarre. Do they really think that the world will forget that Harry Mountbatten Windsor is Prince Harry, the son of Princess Diana? Do they really think that the world will not know that Harry’s children are Princess Diana’s grandchildren? Does anyone really think that these titles matter to their success and happiness? It’s absurd. Take away what you want, but Harry and Meghan will still be Harry and Meghan.

    • Sunniside up says:

      Some Brits will approve of it, but the rest of the interested world will be shocked and our country’s reputation will go down yet another notch.

    • HuffnPuff says:

      No one will forget that she’s connected to royalty. Even people who only halfway pay attention to any of this. I get what he’s saying but if it were true, why didn’t she call her show “With Love, Duchess Meghan”? Why is her company called “As Ever” and not “Sussex Forever” or whatever lame thing he’s thinking? By making a big deal of her being announced as the Duchess of Sussex to two people, they are only helping in this alleged cause.

  3. Dena Landon says:

    Here’s what I don’t think these Rota rats understand – people will always call Prince Harry “Prince Harry” in the US. They will always call her Duchess. People don’t really care – unless they’re that upper class in Britain – if they’re officially stripped of the titles, they will always be called that unofficially.

    • Jay says:

      I think this article is proof that they are just now realizing this! The rota have talked gleefully for years about taking away the Sussex titles, which they also somehow equated to removing their ability to make money? I dunno, it never really made sense and just shows how little they understand.

      Americans always referred to Harry’s mother as “Princess Diana” even after that technically wasn’t her name.

    • Mightymolly says:

      This exactly. Americans are all about defining ourselves, and we applaud people reinventing themselves in mid life. We don’t know about royal protocol. We know that H & M are royalty: Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan.

      • Nicole says:

        This is why I LOVE calling Meghan “Princess Meghan” and then replying “SO? I don’t care” to people who insist “ThAt’S NOT hEr TiTlE” they just crash out so hard. Love it. Long live Princess Meghan.

      • mightymolly says:

        Okay, you’ve inspired me to start calling her Princess! She absolutely is.

  4. Tessa says:

    No outrage by Sykes over long divorced Sarah using the duchess of york title to earn money

    • Beverley says:

      Of course not.
      And we ALL know why.

    • mightymolly says:

      When I was a kid and really didn’t know who was who in the BRF except for the Queen and Diana, I remember seeing Fergie all over the place, tabloid covers, Weight Watchers ads, I’m pretty sure I saw topless photos of her before the Internet made that commonplace. One could really write an entire thesis on the ways in which her existence proves how absurd the entire institution is.

  5. Tina says:

    The obsession with punishing Meghan in particular is so vile. Regular reminder William can’t take the dukedom without parliament. Is the plan just to say he’s been stripped of it and see if Harry fights back? God I hope Harry releases the pettiest statement basically calling his brother a massive loser who is obsessed with him. Start working on it now it needs to drop two seconds after scooter Kings announcement.

    • jais says:

      Yeah, I’m confused bc technically Andrew still has Duke of York title. He’s just not using it but parliament hasn’t done anything with it.

      • Sunniside up says:

        Exactly. Parliament has better things to do with their time, especially when they know that if William really is intent on stripping Harry just how bad it will look.

  6. Dee(2) says:

    They may constantly talk about their titles being stripped, but they do not want for them to lose the use of those titles. Simply because they know that the success that Harry and Meghan receive is because of their hard work and charisma, not because of their proximity to royalty. They still want to have the ability to co-opt any of their successes, intrude into their lives, and butt in on their decisions.

    As I and others have said plenty of times, no one’s going to forget that he’s Queen Elizabeth’s grandson or Charles’s son or Diana’s son or William’s brother if he’s not called the Duke of Sussex. No one is doing business with them because they think that they’ll get in good with Charles or William, that’s silly to even pretend after this nearly decade long media campaign.

    They would still be successful, William will not have anything to hold over them, and the media would have even less of a reason to constantly opine about what the former Duke and Duchess of Sussex are doing, and how it’s breaking royal protocol. They want to be able to finger wag, not spend all their time trying to figure out how to make one day of work per month into daily stories.

    • KC says:

      If I said to my partner, “The Duke of Sussex lives in California,” he would give me a blank look. If I said, “Prince Harry lives in California.” he would know exactly who I am talking about. Losing that title would mean nothing. Except it would make it clear that titles are completely made up silliness that mean nothing. I think the British aristocracy will have something to say about wanting to preserve their silliness as long as possible so stripping Harry of his title would never make it through Parliament.

      I’m nowhere near being an expert on British politics, but I did work in American politics for nearly 20 years and I can tell you, putting an issue like that in front of legislators could have a lot of unintended consequences. Like, “While we’re taking away one Duke’s title, why don’t we have a big national chat about the point of all of these titled nincompoops and just get rid of all the hereditary titles?”, sort of thing. I don’t have any skin in the game, but if William wants to be the one who inadvertently ends titles in the UK, so be it.

  7. Julia says:

    The childish way these commentators talk about titles.Harry won’t stop being Charles and Diana’s son if he has no titles. That’s why people are fascinated with him, he’s the little boy that walked behind his mother’s coffin. Meghan will always be the first woman of colour to marry into to uk royal family. These things won’t change. I’m no fan of Edward and Wallis but I think few would argue that they are famous historical figures and mostly known by their first names. There is more interest in them to this day than Elizabeth’s father. While Harry and Meghan are very different to Edward and Wallis (in personality and in circumstances) one thing remains true the royal family attempted to banish them so they would disappear from public consciousness but it just made them more famous.

  8. SuOutdoors says:

    Yeah, do it. Take these damn titles and watch closely what happens. Will Willnot’s dreams get any rosier? Will Kate’s fashion taste evolve? Will Meghan sell less jam? Won’t Harry earn any more money with paid speeches? Won’t they dissappear from the headlines? Or… NOT??? Royal rota rats will still rely on the Sussexes for their living, British Media will still make their clicks and sell their print editions on all things Sussex. Nothing will change, absolutely nothing. Except that William will have lost the one and only motivation to get up in the morning. That’s about it. So do it. Get the title thing done for good!!!

    • Eurydice says:

      Yes, exactly this.

    • Sunniside up says:

      I wouldn’t be surprised if losing the titles made them more popular and William less, it will be seen as an act of petty revenge for Harry marrying a mixed race women and putting mixed race children into the succession

    • jais says:

      Honestly, someone can just say Meghan and Harry and pretty much everyone knows who they’re talking about. Taking the titles will just make them more iconic really.

  9. MrsCope says:

    If Wills were ever petty enough to remove their titles, Harry and Meghan switching to Spencer-Sussex would be a bold and beautiful move. Honestly I’m fine with them staying Duke and Duchess while Charles is alive but literally day one of Wills’ reign they should unveil that new name have mag covers waiting and everything like right after the coronation and just take the wind all the way out of his sails.

  10. Tessa says:

    Someone in parliament needs to ask scooter to give reasons why sussexes should lose titles. Other than a hissy fit what could he say. That could not be countered and put down.

  11. Amy Bee says:

    I can’t wait for her to become Meghan Windsor or Meghan Spencer. The meltdowns that will ensue. Plus, they will be totally free from the Royal Family and have no obligations to them or the British press.

    • Beverley says:

      As she explained on the first season of WLM, she’s Meghan Sussex now. I understand that to mean that they have already legally secured Sussex as their surname.

  12. NoBS Please says:

    Folks, repeat after me:

    “Scooter King cannot take away Harry and Meghan’s duke and duchess of Sussex titles WITHOUT AN ACT OF THE UK PARLIAMENT. And Parliament would never do that, they will even refuse to discuss it, as they’ve just done with Andrew the Paedo. So the hysterics in the British Media about H&M losing their Sussex titles is just that, hysteria… and rage-baiting”.

    Let’s not fall for this imagined nonsense.

    The only thing Scooter King can do is strip Harry of his princedom, as KC has just done to Paed-Andrew.

    Let’s stop the confusion over this please!

    • jais says:

      Okay, that was my understanding. William can write an LP and take the hrh prince and princess stylings from Harry, Meghan, Archie, and Lili…for whatever reason he claims to give. But only parliament can take the duke/duchess titles and they haven’t even done that with Andrew. So yeah, this feels silly. I really think some of these writers don’t even get it it. Some do but quite a few don’t.

      • Missy says:

        Yes that’s my understanding too, it’s easier to remove the stylings but the dukedom had to involve parliament. People forget Andrew agreed with all the changes so it was easier for Charles.

      • Beverley says:

        I think the rota are well aware of the laws and that Peg can’t do squat about the titles. But writing dozens of articles is still paying their bills. Plus, it’s a huge wet dream for these rabid racists. They salivate just imagining how humiliating they hope it would be for Meghan (who they NEVER accepted “with open arms”).

      • Lauren says:

        I believe it was also reported that Andrew followed the voluntary method of removing the duke of york which means it no longer part of his legal name. But that mechanism is entirely voluntary and there is no precedent for the Monarch to unilaterally remove a peerage

  13. Tuesday says:

    Duchess Meg is no dummy, which is why her branding is now just “Meghan.” No last name necessary.

  14. ABritGuest says:

    Andrew is still the Duke of York legally. For his title to be legally removed needs an act of parliament. The royal warrant Charles issued was basically a fudge that said Andrew cannot be referred to as a DoY & required Andrew to be asked to be removed from the roll of peers. Not sure parliament would vote on removing a peerage without any wrongdoing & Harry writing a book about his life doesn’t count.

    William could remove Prince & HRH styling but again interesting to see the reasoning. doing it just because or for revenge isn’t the best PR & if it was just targeted at Harry & his family adds credibility to the racism claims. Not sure how he does that in a way that doesn’t impact his own bloodline & others in the family & using that working royal crap may be hard to define plus kind of ruins the whole point of royal status which is that it’s conferred by birth or marriage

    Ultimately I’m pro them self inflicting damage to the monarchy though so have at it

    • jais says:

      It will be interesting to see the reasoning. Using the working royal thing won’t make any sense either bc then if one of the Wales kids ends up not being a working royal wouldn’t they too have their hrh stripped. And it does ruin the whole idea of being born a royal if it becomes about who is working or not. But yes, let them self-inflict damage. The Sussex/Spencer family or whatever they go by will be alright.

    • Julia says:

      By stripping the titles of someone who was son of a king William will in effect be saying royals aren’t special, the bloodline is not special and being a royal is just a job. People may then ask if your brother is not special what makes you special? If being royal is just a job let’s open the job up to everyone and have a ceremonial president like Ireland? Much cheaper and with much less controversy and in fighting!

  15. OMG the unhinged insanity continues with this absolute nutter. Seek help Sharon you’re losing it going down this rabbit hole.

  16. Catherine says:

    But her days as a princess are less so. They dont need those titles. I dont think people should use titles in America, especially Americans.

    • Elly says:

      Do you think she should go by “Mrs. Sussex”? Wallace Simpson had the title of Duchess even though Edward abdicated.

  17. Ohn says:

    Any association with the royal family is tarnished and I wish H&M would let go of the dukedom title.

    • Amy Bee says:

      Harry offered to give up the title and the Royal Family said no. If they want him to stop using it they will have to strip him of it.

      • Ohn says:

        And if they’re stripped of their titles, how does it benefit them? It’s hard to justify why fans of H&M want to see them embroiled in further royal entanglements.

      • jais says:

        I don’t know that fans have a desire to see them stripped or not, only in the sense that it’s like listen do it already or stop talking about it incessantly. It’s a favorite talking point of the rota and seemingly William. William will or he won’t. It is what it is. People who support Harry and Meghan, for the most part, are still going to support them either way. People are still going to be interested in them either way. In that sense, the titles don’t make a difference. It’s more about just watching William twist to justify his actions and the rota twist to justify them for him.

    • Amy Bee says:

      It’s not going to make any difference to Harry and Meghan’s lives. He offered to give up the title and the Royal Family refused to take it back. Stripping Harry of the title puts the focus and scrutiny on the Royal Family not Harry and Meghan.

      • Ohn says:

        Actually, no it won’t. Anything to do with Harry and Meghan will always be about Harry and Meghan. No amount of scrutiny will have real world consequences for William.

      • Amy Bee says:

        @Ohn: The ball is in the Royal Family’s court. Their refusal to take back the title when it was offered gave Harry permission to use it and he should use it until it’s stripped from him.

    • MsIam says:

      See this the thing I wonder about and no one has addressed this: It came out in the whole Heritage Foundation persecution that Harry may have some type of high level passport. I wonder if that could be impacted and affect his ability to remain in the US? Everything with immigration is super complicated now. Plus with Invictus being an international organization, how would it affect his ability to travel for that?

      • Sunniside up says:

        Harry has two American children, kicking him out would be bad for Archie and Lilibet, and besides he is white so why would Trump want to do it.

    • NorthernLights says:

      First time commenting, but had to say this:

      It’s not about the titles. If you recall they had no issue with the Duke and Duchess titles initially. They wanted them gone from the UK – they left and they prospered. The first uproar was about their HRH styling – they stopped using it and still they prospered and their popularity soared. So they moved on to Frogmore – if they would just pay it back all would be well and they would leave them alone – they paid back Frogmore – but it didn’t stop because H&M were not destitute and failing, and hated by everyone on the planet. So they moved on to their house – it’s too big and the bathrooms! But still they prospered and continued to soar – So they moved on to systematically trying to destroy their businesses and projects, and relationships and taint their association with Netflix or anything and anyone notable, and still they HAVE NOT STOPPED. And this is all while Harry and Meghan is minding their business in California and NOT talking about the royal family – Meghan especially.

      Do we think giving up the Duke and Duchess titles will somehow caused the British media to back off and the Palace to give up their one sided competition with them? Spoiler alert it will never stop until Meghan is destitute, bedraggled, broken and alone. That is their ultimate fantasy and goal and the more she defies those expectations the harder they come at her.

      Harry cannot unroyal himself no matter what titles they choose to remove or decrees they make. For better or worse, he is no less a royal than his brother and that will never change as long as he is on this earth. Therefore his wife and children through him will always be who they are.

  18. Maxine Branch says:

    I too will be happy for them to remove those titles. The titles are not doing the work. It is the couple. Nothing will change except how they are addressed.

  19. Tired! says:

    Chuck, Will, or whomever DO IT!
    Take away the titles already
    Harry, Meghan, Archie, Lili – let’s all become Harry Spencer, Meghan Spencer, Archie Spencer, and Lili Spencer ( along with Pula Spencer and Mia Spencer)

  20. one of the marys says:

    I wonder what Charles thinks of all this? Will he say or do anything to protect Harry from his brother?

    • QuiteContrary says:

      It’s a nice thought, but I would be shocked if Charles did anything at all to protect Harry, after everything he’s done to endanger the lives of Harry and Meghan and their children.

    • Beverley says:

      Charles doesn’t give a fig about the Sussexes…except how they might reflect on his reign. Especially if he can ride their coattails or throw them under the bus as scapegoats.
      Charles is as empty, soulless, and damaged as Peg.

      • MsIam says:

        Exactly, like father like son. William and Harry grew up with a spoiled tantrum throwing selfish father. They both have that behavior but Harry got help. Remember in Spare when Harry wrote about an argument he had with Meghan and she asked him “Where did you learn to speak to a woman like that?” Arrogant William felt he was entitled to treat people like shit just like Charles does. So I don’t expect anything favorable from either of them towards Harry and his family.

    • Sunniside up says:

      Not a lot he can do once he is dead, Nothing that William can do until his father is dead. It seems in the worse possible taste for William to keep talking about what he will do once it happens.

  21. Monlette says:

    The whole Andrew thing is a farce. The papers report he has been stripped of his titles, but he is still in the lines of Succession. They have removed his patronage, but he is still vice admiral. They have evicted him the the Royal Lodge, except he still lives there, and they have made lame excuses why he can’t move for several months, like it would be awkward to have him living so close to a lame Christmas party you know he is going to be snuck into anyway.
    Truth is Charles likes his baby brother just fine, and is guilty of many of the things Andrew is being punished for, so it’s like one of those old timey comedies where they try to hide someone by putting a lampshade on their head.

    • Sunniside up says:

      I wonder if they can’t take the Vice Admiral bit because it was awarded by the navy rather than the crown. So nothing to do with Charles.

      • Monlette says:

        I really doubt that. Seeing as how Camilla is a vice-admiral, I doubt it’s a job you get through hard work, bravery, leadership, and rock solid qualifications

  22. bisynaptic says:

    These poor people: if she were to go by Mountbatten-Windsor, their hair would be even more on fire. There’s never going to be contentment, for them.

    @Kaiser: agreed they should have adopted “Spencer”… or, even better: “Ragland-Spencer”.

    • Magdalena says:

      Someone further up thread said “Spencer-Sussex” and I quite like the sound of this. It would also REALLY make those arses’ heads explode.

  23. MsKrisTalk says:

    When they make these declarations, they refuse to comprehend that most people associate Harry with Princess Diana who is still one of the most beloved royals decades after her death. He will always be Prince Harry and she will always be Princess Diana. As much as they try to tarnish her legacy and his image, they fail. They are loved not because of their titles. They are loved because of who they are and how they make people feel. Tyler’s generosity to them was because of the love his mother felt towards Princess Diana. The heir does not have the Diana fairy dust. I’ve noticed that after distancing himself from her, he is now trying to remind the people that Princess Diana is his mother also. The people aren’t buying it. At the unveiling of her statute, her sisters’ and brother’s faces lit up when they interacted with Harry. I don’t think Willy has thought it through but it’s obvious that he’s not the brightest bulb in the bunch.

  24. Elly says:

    In America, H&M could legally change their names to Prince Harry Sussex and Princess Meghan Sussex or anything else they desire. Sykes article reeks of racism.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Right! It’s as though they don’t realize their stupid little rules & laws don’t apply in the US!

      • JudyB says:

        Right!! They still think the British Empire exists, and they can control the world! Need to get realistic that they are just a small island with little power these days, and certainly no power in an ex-colony that gained its freedom in 1776!

  25. L4Frimaire says:

    Meghan is the Duchess of Sussex because she is married to the Duke of Sussex. The title is his so why is the focus on her specifically about the titles? They really think this woman couldn’t survive outside their royal bubble but she wasn’t there long enough for them to completely break her, and they hate that about her. You think when they do this that they’ll leave her and her family alone. When Harry was asked about this in one of his Spare interviews, he said what difference would it make. They’ll still obsess over Princess Henry, who everyone will call Princess Meghan, and scrutinize everything she does or says. The title issue is Harry’s concern. They will have to strip it from him and then what? Meghan is just carrying on with her life. The reality is she is the Duchess of Sussex. It’s not about earning or deserving it. It just is what it is. The obsession with her is just growing and you can’t convince me it doesn’t start with KP and William.

  26. Another lurker says:

    Sometime after Archie was born, his birth certificate was updated (at whose request?) to remove Meghan’s name and replace it with Duchess of Sussex. Apparently Meghan was informed of it afterwards and as I recall, was displeased. I would assume her use of the title is informed by this event. Someone needs to be reminded of this every time they start murmuring about removing Meghan’s title.

    • Blujfly says:

      And it was done in spite of the fact that all three Wales children’s state “Catherine Elizabeth, Her Royal Highness, the Duchess of Cambridge.” Archie’s was identical. And we have been never been told the Wales’ children’s were similarly changed.

  27. Isabella says:

    Raging against Harry and Meghan is the only “work” William ever does.

  28. Maja says:

    The pleasure derived from punishing other people is referred to as sadism. The compulsive repetition of the same phrases without reference to the current situation or reality is referred to as echolalia. It occurs in schizophrenia, autism and Tourette’s syndrome.
    Laeppic behaviour, in which the behaviour exhibits exaggerated childish expressions that in no way correspond to what is actually happening, is called parathyme. It is often a symptom of severe mental illness.

    Of course, it may also be that all laeppic behaviour is just part of a greed for money that will do anything to prostitute itself. These people are the yacht girls and yacht boys of the press.

  29. Nerd says:

    I will keep pointing out that Meghan and Harry aren’t the ones not ones who have used the names Duke and Duchess of Sussex when talking about Harry and Meghan for the past five years. This very tabloid (the Daily Fail) and all of the other tabloids and commentators have also called them by those titles and names, while sitting here complaining whenever they use them themselves. All of the articles from this week, including the ones about them volunteering with their children, included the Daily Fail referring to them as “the Duke and Duchess of Sussex”, so if the Fail acknowledges that they are in fact the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in all of the other articles, why then are they pretending to be butt hurt when the Sussexes use their own name also? It looks and sounds as if the Fail is faking outrage like they always do.

  30. Blithe says:

    So, let’s see what this might look like: William seems to need a lot of structure and support to function. When he assumes the throne, he will be doing so without his grandmother the Queen, without his father the King, and without the affection and work ethics that gave stability and tradition to the whole royalty thing. The Queen’s cousins and Anne will probably retire — officially or not. Camilla probably will as well — keeping her destructive hand in through her tabloid press buddies. So William will be very much alone, diffidently alongside fragile Kate, in his new role.

    William won’t be at his best, and probably won’t be seen very much, and will have mostly the unprepossessing Edward and Sophie supporting him as working royals. While William is fumbling gracelessly, that would surely be a great time for him to snatch the titles from the Sussexes — thus reminding the public and the peerage just how fragile these traditions and all that goes with them can be. I’m sure the anti- monarchists will be thrilled — and Harry and Meghan will still be thriving.

    • jais says:

      Aw but don’t forget he’s gonna have his crackerjack team of “young and savvy” experts to help him. The ones who don’t know how to spell veterans and think marketing William as an average Joe isn’t going to actually highlight the hypocrisy of a land-grabbing, multiple home-owning, constant vacationing king.

      • L4Frimairel says:

        This is such a bogus claim. These people are so clueless and think being aware of TikTok, hiring bots and briefing against family members makes them savvy, when they still can’t properly prep their principles or get them to work more than 10 hours a week.

  31. Just a Guy says:

    No titles will be taken away because if they do, Meghan will be known as Princess Henry and they do not want to address Meghan as “Princess”. Besides she is already a Princess, a Princess of Nigeria. Ada Mazi Omu of Arochukwu.

    Here is a side nugget for all you royalist out there, Meghan the Duchess of Sussex is a direct descendant of England’s King Edward III (1327-1377), making Harry and Meghan cousins.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Whatever Meghan’s legal name is here in the US will still be her legal name regardless of what the crazy Brits do or don’t do. I’m assuming it’s Meghan Sussex because of what she herself has said.

  32. BL says:

    I thought it said “Racist moments underscore this approach.” That fits.

  33. Duch says:

    The syntax of “days are numbered” seems like a threat, and I’m not referring only to her losing a title. The most common usage is referring to some life-threatening end. Was this intentional? I don’t know any more with Sykes.

  34. Elly says:

    “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet”, Shakespeare.

  35. Flower says:

    There is a literal Australian Duke born in the outback of Australia, who hasn’t lost his title despite being a career criminal with charges for fraud, burglary, assault etc.

    Billy no mates might want to pay attention to the problematic title holders first before he antagonises his brother.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Montagu,_13th_Duke_of_Manchester

    And don’t get me started on his many nazi supporter ancestors who kept and even handed down their dukedoms and other titles.

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim 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 and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

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

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment